Parabrahma Sutras-Part-1

dattaswami2's picture



Average: 2.7 (3 votes)

1. Use of word Brahman & Para Brahman

Athaatah Parabrahma Vyakhyaasyaamah. -–Sutra.

(Then and therefore, we will discuss about Parabrahman)--Translation of Sutra.
The word Brahman is used for God and for non-God items also, which are greatest among their categories. Hence, confusion about the meaning of the word Brahman arose, which led to a number of splits in the arguments. After this confusion (then) and since the confusion is to be solved (therefore), the word Para Brahman is introduced by the author of these sutras, Shri Datta Swami, to mean God only and not the other non-God items.--- Explanation of Sutra.

Praamanikaabhyaam Prayujyate .

(The word Parabrahman is used by two authorities i.e., Krishna and Shankara)

Krishna used this word in Gita (Anaadimat Param Brahma….) and Shankara also used in His prayer (Maunavyaakhyaa Prakatita Para Brahma…) and hence this word is quite ancient. You need not reject this word because it is used by a modern person like Datta Swami. Generally, people give value to the ancient sages and not to the modern preachers. However, this is not correct. We should analyze the concept and decide its value. A modern preacher like Sri RamaKrishna Paramahamsa is a good authority. The ancient sage, Charvaka, is not an authority, who propagated atheism. The author tries to satisfy the blind psychology of people regarding their taste for ancient sages through this Sutra, though analysis of the concept is the real ultimatum.

2. Brahman means greatest according to its root word

Param Bhede Shreshthapunarukteh.

(The word Param in Gita means different and not great, since the latter results in the mistake of repetition)

The word Param in Gita is generally interpreted to mean great. But this interpretation is not correct, because the word Brahman already means greatest among the category. If you say that the word param again means great, it results in the mistake of repetition of same sense of the word Brahman. Brahman means greatest according to its root word. Hence, here, the word param means different. Param has both the meanings. Here the word Brahman is restricted to imaginable greatest items in their respective categories. The word Para Brahman means the unimaginable greatest God, who is different from the imaginable greatest items, which are represented by the word Brahman. The word Para Brahman is also a combination of two words- Param and Brahman. Both these words combined become the single word Para Brahman. Hence, in Gita the two words are separately represented which can be combined to give the word Para Brahman.

3. In Veda God is said to be both Sat (existing) and Asat (non-existing)

Ubhayatra Sadasat Samanvayah.

(In Veda and Gita the words Sat and Asat are used in contradicting sense, but they can be correlated to mean the same by logical discussion.)

In Veda God is said to be both Sat and Asat (Sadeva Somya.., Asadvaa…). But in Gita God represented by Para Brahman is said to be neither Sat nor Asat (Nasat Naasaduchyate). This appears to be a contradiction between Veda and Gita. Sat means existence. Asat means non-existence. Let us take Veda. When God is Sat, it means God is not Asat. Similarly, when God is Asat, it means God is not sat. Hence, the resulting concept in each statement of Veda combined gives the concept of Gita. Thus, Veda and Gita are correlated because Gita is said to be the essence of all Vedas.

4. God can be said as an item not having the existence of worldly items

Jneyapurvaastitvaabhaavashcha Vidyate cha Shruteh.

(The existence of Para Brahman is not the existence of non-God items in which the knowledge of the non-God items is a prerequisite condition. Para Brahman exists as per the statement of Veda).

All the non-God items are worldly objects, which are parts of creation. All these items are known first and then only their existence is mentioned. When you say that a pot exists, it means that you are stating the existence since you know the pot already. Hence, the existence of any worldly item requires the knowledge of that item already. If you do not know anything about an item, you will not say that it exists. Hence, the existence always requires the prior knowledge of the item. But God is beyond world and is unimaginable since God is not known. Hence, the existence of God is not similar to the existence of the worldly items. Since the existence of worldly items, which requires prior knowledge of the item, is absent in the case of God, God can be said as an item not having the existence of worldly items and hence God is non-existent (Asat) in this sense. This does not mean that God is really non-existent because God really exists as per Veda (Astityeva….) and hence God exists (Sat).

5. God is known to God

Aatmajneyam Mahimevaasti.

(God is known to God and hence the prerequisite condition is fulfilled. For human beings, the unimaginable God can exist like the unimaginable miracle).

Veda says that the knower of God is God Himself (Brahmavit Brahmaiva…). Hence, though God is unknown to human beings, He is known to Himself. If you say that the existence of anything must satisfy the prior condition of its knowledge, the rule is not violated since God is having His knowledge. Then, you may say that God exists for God only since the prior condition is limited to God only. This is not correct because you are agreeing the existence of an unimaginable miracle also in the world. When the miracle is demonstrated, it is unimaginable but its existence in the world is accepted. Hence, the existence of unimaginable item like miracle exists in the case of human beings.

Jneyatvaashritamajneyam.

(The concept of unimaginable nature requires the relative existence of the concept of imaginable nature).

To recognize day, night should relatively exist. Similarly, to recognize the existence of unimaginable nature, relatively the imaginable nature must exist. If everything is unimaginable there is no significance of the very concept of unimaginable nature. Therefore, the world with imaginable items exists, so that the unimaginable nature of God can be recognized significantly through relativity.

6. God is known as unknown
Amatam Matamiti Shruyate Giyate cha.

(God is known as unknown. This is said in Veda and in Gita also)

Veda says that angels and sages came to know only one point about the God after long hectic discussions. That single point is that God is unknown (Yasyaamatam Tasyamatam…). Even Gita says that no body knows anything about God (Mamtu veda Nakaschana.). Therefore, the unimaginable nature of God is clearly established by the sacred scriptures.

7. The unimaginable nature of God is elaborated in Veda by various statements

Aamnaaya Vistarat cha.

(The unimaginable nature of God is elaborated in Veda by various statements).

Veda clearly elaborates the unimaginable nature of God through the following statements: Words cannot give knowledge of God (Yatovaachah, Na tatra vaak…). Even mind cannot touch God (Apraapya Manasaa Saha). Intelligence cannot reach God (Namedhayaa, Yo Buddheh Paratah..). You cannot understand God through logic (Naishaa Tarkena…, Atarkyah..). Senses cannot grasp God (Nachakshushaa…, Aprameyah…, Atindriyam….). All these statements have elaborated the concept of unimaginable nature of God by any means.

8. Brahman is created by God

Brahma Yogat Vedaadishu Gitam Shrutam cha.

(The word Brahman is used in imaginable items like Veda through its root meaning i.e., greatest. Such usage is found in Gita and its usage in other items is seen in Veda also.).

In Gita it is said that Brahman is created by God (Brahmaakshara Samudbhavam). Here Brahman cannot mean God. It means the Veda, which is greatest among all the scriptures due to absence of additions and deletions, since Veda is protected by oral recitations from generations together. The word Brahman is used in Veda to mean other greatest items like food (Annam Brahmeti…). Therefore, the word Brahman is not restricted to the unimaginable God and hence God is confused to be any greatest worldly item in its corresponding category. For this reason only, the author would like to restrict the word Para Brahman to the unimaginable God only and avoid the confusion.

9. Inability of sages to understand the context in using the word Brahman

Aarshaprakaranasaamarthyaabhavat Kalahah.

(The present confusion and split are due to the absence of ability of the sages to take the meaning of the word Brahman according to the context).

The ancient sages were having the divine ability to take the correct meaning of the word Brahman as per the context. Therefore, there was no confusion in the case of sages and hence the word Brahman was used to mean both the God and other greatest worldly items. According to the context, either God or the worldly item was perfectly selected by the sages in the Veda. Hence, there was no necessity of using a separate word like Para Brahman for God. But, today, the human beings are not having such divine ability due to fall in their standards. Hence, there is a real need for restricting God by an isolated word i.e., Para Brahman.