Chapter II, Section III, Adhikarana I

Adhikarana summary: Ether is not eternal but created

Brahma-Sutra 2.3.1: Sanskrit text and English translation.

न वियत्, अश्रुतेः ॥ १ ॥

na viyat, aśruteḥ || 1 ||

na—Not; viyat—Akasa; aśruteḥ—(as it is) not so stated by the Sruti.

1. Akasa (is) not (created), (as it is) not so stated by the Sruti.

To start with, the texts dealing with creation are taken up, and Akasa (ether) is first dealt with. In the Chhandogya Upanishad, where the order of creation is given, the text says, “It thought, ‘May I be many, may I grow forth.’ It sent forth fire” (6. 2. 3). Here there is no mention of Akasa being produced by the Sat or Brahman. Hence Akasa has no origin, it is eternal.

 

Brahma-Sutra 2.3.2: Sanskrit text and English translation.

अस्ति तु ॥ २ ॥

asti tu || 2 ||

asti—There is; tu—but.

2. But there is (a Sruti text which states that Akasa is created).

The opponent in this Sutra anticipates a possible objection against his arguments advanced in Sutra 1, and explains it away in Sutra 3. The text referred to here is, “From that Self (Brahman) sprang Akasa (ether)” etc- (Taitt. 2. 1).

 

Brahma-Sutra 2.3.3: Sanskrit text and English translation.

गौणी, असंभवात् ॥ ३ ॥

gauṇī, asaṃbhavāt || 3 ||

gauṇī—Used in a secondary sense; asaṃbhavāt—on account of the impossibility.

3. (The Sruti text dealing with the origin of Akasa) is to be taken in a secondary sense, on account of the impossibility (of Akasa being created).

The Taittiriya text referred to in the previous Sutra, the opponent holds, should be taken in a secondary sense, as Akasa cannot be created. It has no parts and hence cannot be created. Moreover, Akasa is all-pervading, and therefore it can be inferred that it is eternal—without origin.

 

Brahma-Sutra 2.3.4: Sanskrit text and English translation.

शब्दाच्च ॥ ४ ॥

śabdācca || 4 ||

śabdāt—From the Sruti texts; ca—also.

4. Also from the Sruti texts (we find that Akasa is eternal).

In the last Sutra Akasa was inferred to be eternal. Heie the opponent cites a Sruti text to show that it is eternal. The text referred to is, “(And the formless are) Vayu and Akasa—these are immortal” (Brih. 2. 3. 3). Being immortal or eternal, it cannot have a beginning.

 

Brahma-Sutra 2.3.5: Sanskrit text and English translation.

स्याच्चैकस्य ब्रह्मशब्दवत् ॥ ५ ॥

syāccaikasya brahmaśabdavat || 5 ||

syāt—Is possible; ca—and; ekasya—of the same (word ‘sprang’); brahmaśabdavat—like the word ‘Brahman’.

5. It is possible that the same word (‘sprang’ be used in a primary) and (secondary sense) like the word ‘Brahman’.

The opponent in the Sutra answers a weak point in his argument, viz. how can the same word ‘sprang’ in the Taittiriya text,

“From that Self (Brahman) sprang Akasa; from Akasa sprang Vayu (air), from air sprang fire” etc. (2. 1),

be used in a secondary sense with respect to Akasa and in the primary sense with respect to air, fire, etc ? He does this by referring to other Sruti texts, where the word ‘Brahman’ is so used. “Try to know Brahman by penance, for penance is Brahman,” where Brahman is used both in a primary and in a secondary sense in the same text; also “Food is Brahman” (Taitt. 8. 2) and “Bliss is Brahman” (Taitt. 3. 6), where Brahman is used in a secondary and primary sense respectively in two complementary texts.

 

Brahma-Sutra 2.3.6: Sanskrit text and English translation.

प्रतिज्ञाहानिरव्यतिरेकाच्छब्देभ्यः ॥ ६ ॥

pratijñāhāniravyatirekācchabdebhyaḥ || 6 ||

pratijñā-ahāniḥ—Non-abandonment of proposition; avyatirekāt—from non-distinction; śabdebhyaḥ—from the Srutis.

6. The non-abandonment of the proposition (viz. by the knowledge of one everything else becomes known, can result only) from the non-distinction (of the entire world from Brahman). From the Sruti texts (which declare the non-difference of the cause and its effects, this proposition is established).

This Sutra refutes the opponent’s view set forth so far, and gives the conclusion. The proposition that from the knowledge of one (Brahman) everything else is known, can be true only if everything in the world is an effect of Brahman. For the Sruti says that the effects are not different from their cause, and consequently the cause being known, the-effects will also be known. If Akasa is not created from Brahman, then the proposition in question falls through; for after knowing Brahman Akasa still remains to be known, on account of its not being an effect of Brahman. But if it is created, then no such difficulty arises. Hence Akasa is created; otherwise the authoritatn eness of the Vedas would be gone. The Chhandogya text in which Akasa is not mentioned is accordingly to be interpreted in the light of the Taittiriya text; that is, Akasa and Vayu have to be inserted, and the text would mean that after creating Akasa and Vayu, “It created fire.”

 

Brahma-Sutra 2.3.7: Sanskrit text and English translation.

यावद्विकारं तु विभागो लोकवत् ॥ ७ ॥

yāvadvikāraṃ tu vibhāgo lokavat || 7 ||

yāvat-vikāraṃ—Extending to all effects whatsoever; tu—but; vibhāgaḥ—separateness; lokavat—as in the world.

7. But in all effects whatsoever (there is) separateness, as (is seen) in the world.

The word ‘but’ refutes the idea that Akasa is not created. We see in the world that all created things are different from each other. A pot is different from a piece of cloth and so on. In other words, everything which has a separateness about it is created. We cannot conceive of a thing as separate from others and yet eternal. Now Akasa is distinct from earth etc., and hence it cannot be eternal, but must be a created thing. It may be objected that the Atman also is divided from ether and so on and therefore It too is an effect. But that is not possible, for all things are created from the Atman, which is their Self, and so not separate from them ; therefore It is not an effect. The all-pervasiveness and eternity of Akasa are only relatively true; it is created and is an effect of Brahman.