2023-05-31 04:00:46 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
BHAGAVAD GUNA DARPANA
If it is
Reality is the void". For this statement is later.
replied that this arises from the delusion of Buddhists and
cannot affect anything established by the Vedas, the reply is
not acceptable. For, according to you, the Veda itself ariees
from the delusion of the Brahman. And what distinction can
be made between these two delusions ?
Moreover, if looked into carefully, the scriptural
passages affirming qualities (in God) should be regarded as
later. Passages like "He is sinless, free from old age......
(Chh. Up. VII.1.4) prove that the mandatory declarations.
(of the Vedas) regarding the presence of auspicious qualities
(in God) are later, being preceded by the negation of evil
qualities (in Him) by passages which deny attributes (to Him)
and mean only that He is free from all impurities of the soul
and the body.
It is also argued that the defence of the (co-existence) of
passages affirming and denying attributes (to God) lies in their
being distinguished as false, and true (respectively). Even this
is misleading talk. For there is stultification of the authority
(of the Vedas as a source of knowledge), when it deals with
false matters, as when there is false perception of silver
(in lead or mother of the pearl) perception loses its authority
(as a source of knowledge). If it is your opinion that
passages in the Vedas affirming attributes to God are to be
ignored as false, why not ignore as false the passages denying
attributes? Enough of this useless talk.
What then is the true position? The Vedic texts
ascribing knowledge, power, etc., to the Brahman mean that it
is possessed of all beneficent and good qualities; and the
texts that deny attributes mean only that it is devoid of bad
qualities such as attachment, hate, etc.
Passages like "His wishes are true, His resolves are
fulfilled" (Chh. Up. VIII. i. 5) illustrate auspicious quali
ties. While the denial in general terms of attributes can get its
full meaning by confining it to another subject (namely, evil
qualities), there is no necessity to say that the Brahman is not
possessed of good qualities. This rule (that the general yields
48
If it is
Reality is the void". For this statement is later.
replied that this arises from the delusion of Buddhists and
cannot affect anything established by the Vedas, the reply is
not acceptable. For, according to you, the Veda itself ariees
from the delusion of the Brahman. And what distinction can
be made between these two delusions ?
Moreover, if looked into carefully, the scriptural
passages affirming qualities (in God) should be regarded as
later. Passages like "He is sinless, free from old age......
(Chh. Up. VII.1.4) prove that the mandatory declarations.
(of the Vedas) regarding the presence of auspicious qualities
(in God) are later, being preceded by the negation of evil
qualities (in Him) by passages which deny attributes (to Him)
and mean only that He is free from all impurities of the soul
and the body.
It is also argued that the defence of the (co-existence) of
passages affirming and denying attributes (to God) lies in their
being distinguished as false, and true (respectively). Even this
is misleading talk. For there is stultification of the authority
(of the Vedas as a source of knowledge), when it deals with
false matters, as when there is false perception of silver
(in lead or mother of the pearl) perception loses its authority
(as a source of knowledge). If it is your opinion that
passages in the Vedas affirming attributes to God are to be
ignored as false, why not ignore as false the passages denying
attributes? Enough of this useless talk.
What then is the true position? The Vedic texts
ascribing knowledge, power, etc., to the Brahman mean that it
is possessed of all beneficent and good qualities; and the
texts that deny attributes mean only that it is devoid of bad
qualities such as attachment, hate, etc.
Passages like "His wishes are true, His resolves are
fulfilled" (Chh. Up. VIII. i. 5) illustrate auspicious quali
ties. While the denial in general terms of attributes can get its
full meaning by confining it to another subject (namely, evil
qualities), there is no necessity to say that the Brahman is not
possessed of good qualities. This rule (that the general yields
48