|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a. Badarayana's Statement of the Problem regarding Taittiriya 2.1-6a |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We begin with Badarayana's sutras which, as sutras, are not readily communicative and are difficult even to translate intelligibly. I render each somewhat freely,
14 and to each I append my own comment, relying for the most part on Sankara's first elucidation: |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
12: On account of repeated references to "bliss," the "one consisting of bliss" must be Brahman. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My comment: "Ananda," "bliss," is frequently repeated in Taittiriya 2 and 3, and so identified as its key thematic word;15 when cited, it is connected with Brahman, which is key in Taittiriya 2.1-6a, because mentioned at its beginning (2.1) and end (2.5-6a); hence, it is reasonable to assume that the referent of the conclusive "ananda-maya," "consisting of bliss," is Brahman, bliss. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13: If one objects that Brahman cannot be ananda-maya because "-maya" implies liability to change, we say the objection does not hold, since "-maya" can also mean "abundant in." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My comment: -maya"consisting of"does not always indicate what is changeable and quantifiable, but can also mean "abundance," and so may be applied to Brahman without implying that it is composed of measurable quantities. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14: Moreover, Brahman is mentioned as the cause of bliss. My comment: Taittiriya 2.7 says that Brahman "makes [others] blissful," and it is reasonable for this bliss-maker to have already been called "ananda-maya." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15: The same Brahman mentioned in the mantra portion is also mentioned in the brahmana portion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My comment: The text's first prose (rubrical) section (brahmana)refers to Brahman"one who knows Brahman reaches the highest"and so too the first mantra section: "Brahman is reality, knowledge, infinite;" the concluding mantra section refers to Brahman"He who knows Brahman as non-existent becomes as it were non-existent;" it is |
|
|
|
|
|