Kartr adhikaraNa

- Part I

||Sree gurubhyO namaha harihi OM || ||Sree vedavyaasaaya namaha sree gurubhyO namaha harihi OM || ||Sreemat hanumabheemamadhwaantargata raamakrishnavedavyaasaatmaka lakshmee hayagreevaaya namaha harihi OM || ||Sreemadaananda theertha bhagavat paadaachaarya gurubhyO namaha || ||Sree Jayatheertha teekaachaarya gurubhyO namaha || ||Sree vyaasaraaja theertha gurubhyO namaha || ||Sree Raaghavendra theertha gurubhyO namaha || || Guru paramparaa, asmat gurubhyO namaha || harihi OM || NaaraayaNam guNaihi sarvaihi udeerNam doshavarjitam || Jneyam gamyam guroomschaapi natvaa sootrartha uchyate || Brahma-sutra-bhashya (Having bowed to Narayana, complete with reference to every attribute, free from all defects, the object of knowledge, the goal to be attained and also to the teacher, the position of Sutra will be stated). Jayatheertha Teekaacharya introduces Brahman as follows: Suddhaanandoru Samvidytibala bahula Audaarya Veeryaadideham Chintaa santaapa lepodbhava mrtimukharaashesha dosaatiduram Sadbihi vairaagya bhakti srutimatiniyatadhyaanaja Jnanayogaat Gamyam Vande Mukundaabhidam alam amalam brahma vedaanta vedyam || Brahman is complete ( Purna). Uru means Purna. Every attribute of It is complete and absolute ( Svatantra). In this sense It is bliss ( Ananda) It is pure consciousness (samvit) . It is illumination ( Dyuti). It is Energy (bala) It is generosity ( Audaarya) and it is Power( Veerya). It consists of these attributes. These attributes therefore constitute its form i.e., body (deha). It is absolutely free from all defects, such as anxiety(chinta). Pain ( santaapa) responsibility (lepa) birth ( udbhava) and death (mrti). It is apprehended, realized or attained by those that are devoted to It. The only means for attaining It is knowledge ( jnana). This knowledge is produced by the process of a disciple consisting of the stages, viz., correct understanding of Shastra (Shruti) reflection over what is understood ( mati) and the corresponding application to that which Is the result of reflection (Niyatadhyaana). This discipline is necessarily that which emerges from detachment from that which is not Brahman (vairaagya) and devotion to that which is Brahman (Bhakti). It is understood only through vedaanta i.e., Brahma Mimamsa. It is Brahman in the purest sense. It is this Truth that goes by the name Mukunda, the giver of Moksha, the highest good. It is to this Truth that I bow now at the commencement of the

study of Brahma Mimamsa. This is the gist of the very first passage of his work by Jayateertha Tikaacharya entitled Tattvaprakashika, a commentary on Brahma Sutra Bhashya of Sriman Madhwaacharya. There are four adhyaayas in Brahma-meemaamsaa shaastra. 1. samanvaya 2. avirodha 3. saadhana and 4. phala Kartr adhikaraNa This kartr-adhikaraNa is the 17th adhikaraNa in the second chapter viz., avirodha adhyaaya. Adhyaaya samgati: The functionality of avirodha adhyaaya in shaastra is to establish that Hari is defectless. This is done by examining those reasonings which appear to prove that Hari may have defects, and showing that those reasonings are fallacious and thereby establishing that Hari is defectless. The four chapters of Brahma miimaamsaa shaastra Tattva Prakaashikaa

Adisutre Bhagavataha prasatyaa purushaartho bhavati iti soochite adhikaariNaha shankaa unmishati. PurushaantarE anupalabhya maanam purushaartha-pradatvam tasya chEt kiidrshaha asau ? iti By the first sutra (OM AthaathO brahma jignyaasaa OM) it is indicated that by the grace of Bhagavaan the Good of man occurs. To one who has adhikaara i.e, who follows the implication of this indication a question occurs If Bhagavaan has the state of giving or effecting the good of man when any other being is devoid of this state, Then What is He? I.e, what is His nature? Tam nivaarayat adi adhyaayasya arthaha gunaihi sarvaihi udeernaMiti The position of the first adhyaaya of Brahma-Mimaamsaa that He is Gunaihi Sarvaihi UdeerNam ( Complete in all attributes ) is expounded to meet this difficulty. Tatra hi aparyaayaananta shabdaanaam mahaa-yoga vrittyaa Harau samanvaya samarthana dvaaraa sarvaguNodeerNataa eva varNyate. Tatra hi, What is really expounded in the first chapter (samanvaya adhyaaya) is the state of being complete in all attributes sarvaguNodeerNataa eva varNyate) This is done by means of establishing the absolute and complete application ( samanvaya samarthana dvaaraa) to Hari of the infinite number of sounds articulate and inarticulate (anantha

shabdaanaam). Each of which is unique in its meaning (aparyaaya ) Samanvaya is effected on the basis of that relation (vrtti) between a word and its meaning which is signified as mahaayoga. sa cha yuktyaadibhihi ukta samanvayE nirodhite doshavaanapi syaat iti aashamkaam pariharatO dviteeyaadhyaayasyaarthO doshavarjitamiti | The samanvaya thus expounded (ukta samanvayE) is beset with difficulties based on reasoning and so on(yuktyaadibhihi nirodhite), then it follows that, Hari ought to have defects also. (doshavaan api syaat). This difficulty is removed by (iti aashamkaam pariharatO) the second chapter (avirodhaa adhyaaya). The position of thie chapter is stated by Bhashya as "dosha-varjitam" ( free from defects) tatra yuktyaadeenaam aabhaasatva varNanEna nirdOshatvasyaiva bhaashitavaat | For, in this chapter reasoning etc,( tatra yuktyaadeenaam) that appear to prove that Hari has defects are shown to be fallacious ( aabhaasatva varNanEna) and this circumstance results in establishing the state of Hari being Defectless (nirdOshatvasyaiva bhaashitatvaat). Evam vidhasya cha prasaadah kayaa vidhayaa bhavishyati iti aashamkaam poorayataha trteeyasya arthaha jneyam iti Next appears the question, How does the Grace of the entity thus defined (evam vidhasya cha prasaadaha) occur? ( kayaa vidhayaa bhavishyati). In answer to this, the third chapter (saadhana adhyaaya) appears. The position it expounds is stated as Jneyam ( that which is the object of knowledge). Tatra viraktyaadibhihi tat prasatyartham tasya jneyataayaaha kathitatvaat For in this chapter, Haris attribute, the state of being the one object of all knowledge is established. ( jneyataayaaha kathithatvaat). The realization of this truth occurs on the basis of detachment and devotion viraktyaadibhihi). It is the one case of spiritual discipline. With it, Its grace takes place Prasannascha keedrisham pumartham prayachchati iti aashamkam poorayataha tureeyasya arthaha Gamyam iti Next appears another question what is the nature of the Good that Hari who is pleased gives?. In answer to this question, the fourth chapter appears phala adhyaaya) . The position of this chapter is stated as Gamyam ( the Goal to be attained). Tatra jnaaninaha bhagavat praapti lakshaNa mokshasya uditatvaat For in this chapter, Moksha, the highest Good is defined and it is shown to be the same as attainment of Bhagavaan by the person who has knowledge

jnaaninaha bhagavat praapti). ( to be continued )

===

Kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part II Each adhyaaya has 4 quarters (or paadas ). Kartr-adhikaraNa is the 17th adhikaraNa in third paada of the avirodha adhyaaya. Let us understand the shaastra-samgati here. Shaastra-samgati: In part I, we learnt that the avirodha adhyaaya has come about to bring out the fallaciousness of those reasoning etc ( etc here includes the so-called conflicting shruti texts, confusing something for something else, having only one or two kinds of praamaaNya, veda apapaaTa i.e, wrong rendering of a vedic text, wrong interpretation of a vedic text .to name a few) which seem to establish that Hari may have defects. Such reasoning etc are technically called the position of poorvapaksha and the knowledge that gets established after their examination and rejection is called siddantha. This position of poorvapaksha can be because of virOdhaschaturvidhaha | yukti virOdhaha samaya virOdhaha shruti virOdhaha nyaayOpEta shruti virodhasheti | ( this virOdha is of four types. VirOdha due to logic, samaya, shruti, and shruti with logic) Accordingly we have 4 paadas dealing with each type in each paada. 1. yukti-virOdha - 2. samaya-virOdha 3. shruti-virOdha and 4.nyaayOpEta-shruti-virOdha Thus the third paada in this avirOdha adhyaaya deals with shrutivirOdha. For the lack of a better word in English, we may call virOdha as contradiction or disagreement. 1. yukti-virodha is due to : falsity in logic. This kind of contradiction

many reasons. Smrti virOdha i.e, conflicting texts found in smritis. Reasoning based on empirical experience. There is no need for Jnaana to obtain moksha, karma and bhakti also are means for moksha, if a form of God that we like is concentrated upon in our mind, then we can see God, even if Jnaana is the means for moksha, it is not in the form of jigyaasaa and brahma-jigyaasaa is not kartavyaa i.e., there is no need to do brahma-jigyaasaa to get this jnaana, mahatmas, bhaktas, people who have seen god, the knowledge that we get from their words is itself the Jnaana, Paramaatma need not be mere transcendental, just as there are rulers in this world, God is the ruler of this whole world, He can be pleased with upachaara and material-comforts, We dont need Vedas for any of this, anything else that gives the same meaning as Veda is itself enough, By pleasing Him this way one can obtain all purushaarthas . Ideas like this are the ones which are opposed to jigyaasaa. These ideas have appeared and re-appeared from time immemorial and become popular to get predominance at certain times. Some of the texts which expound such ideas have become popular smritis. Srimad Achaarya makes it clear in Bhaagavatha tatparya, Arthoyam Brahma-SutraaNaam Srimat Bhaagavataabhidah - Bhagavatha tatparya NirNaya ( It is that meaning which is derived from Brahma-sutras that is called Bhagavatha in this grantha ) Sootraanusaree cha yat sarvam shaastramiti ati mangaLam yukti mallikaa of Vaadiraja theertha (the shaastra which follows brahma-mimaamsaa is the one which can be considered as auspicious) So, what is vedaanukoola smriti?. That which does not provide an alternative to Veda, But instead, that smriti which shows that Veda is the only means for Tattva-Jnaana. The smritis listed above, clearly oppose Jnaana in one form or the other and therfore are not vedaanukoola i.e, not conformable to Veda. These ideas have come about because of the ajnaana and bhranti they have about jnaana-tattva-vishaya. Among the various reasoning or yukti that is based on empirical experience, some belong to the yoga-shaastra and some others are the imaginations of a

few famous people who are popularly considered as praajnas. What is supposed to be achievable and realizable by strictly following what is prescribed in Yoga may or may not be actually achievable and realizable in reality. An examination of the Yoga-shaastra reveals that the same realization could happen to one who is not following the Yoga path, and for the one who is following, it need not happen always as a rule. From these, it follows that it is only a myth that realization will happen only through Yoga. After observing that the results that are reaped are due to his own efforts and doing, man thinks that he is the doer, thereby ignoring the all-doership (sarva-kartrtva) of Parabrahman. This is also an illusion. Kartrtva means sarva-kartrtva. The notion of alpa-kartrtva is self-contradictory. If there is kartrtva regarding a certain thing, then it must apply to all things. But what is observed is that man does not have sarva-kartrtva. This indicates that the kartrtva that is observed in a man does not belong to him. Because of this reason, all the empirical logic that seem to prove that man has kartrtva are illusory. They are not capable of contradicting the sarva-kartrtva of parabrahman. Let us examine samaya-virodha next. 2. samaya-virodha : falsity due to samaya. What is samaya? A group of systematic empirical reasoning which are together to support a certain position is called a samaya. But the root cause for all these empirical reasoning is a convention or samketa. This is why teekaacharya insists that we make Parabrahman as jnaanavishaya or subject matter for enquiry and words like NaraayaNa should not be made as a conventional word like Devadatta etc. NaitaannaraayaNa padam devadattadi padavat saanketikam bhavati. Tattva Prakaashika ( This word NaraayaNa is not conventional even as the words Devadatta and so on. are ) The same way other words like Purushottama also are not Saanketika. In Mayaavaada Khandana Teeka Jayatheertha says, Na punaha ashva karNaadivat samjnyaamaatratvena ityarthaha (The word pushottama should not be taken as a mere convention like we would

say, this is a horse, this is my ear, etc.) But on examination, one can see that every school of thought apart from Uttara Miimaasaa of BaadaraayaNa and following it Brahma-Meemaasaa shaastra of Srimad Ananda Theertha, has made Parabrahman into a mere convention in form or the other, and for this reason they are called samaya. To give an example, in the saamkhya school, prakrti is considered kartree even though it is jada, and based on that they have build their entire school of thought thus ignoring sarva-kartr parabrahman. But kartrtva is in rachanaa-roopa, rachanaa is through intellect and it is a dharma of a chetana. It can not be applied to an achetana prakrti. For this reason, prakrti is not kartree and for this reason Saamkhya is not valid either. Similar reasoning applies to all samayas and thereby the illusion that there is samaya-virOdha to shrutykta-brahma-tattva is removed. Bhraanti moolatayaa sarva samayaanaam ayuktitaha aNu bhaashya Bhranti is confusing what it is for what it is not and vice-varsa and owing to this bhranti or illusion, various schools of thought have come about. "anaadi vaasanaayogaat asuraanaam bahutvataha duraagraha nimittatvaat vartamte samayaah sadaa" - anuvyaakhyaana (This hatred is caused by the tendency developed from the beginningless time with beginningless disposition. There are in great number persons, asuras, who take joy in wrong thinking. There is prejudice created by this circumstance. For this reason, samayas, the philosophical systems always endure.) "anaadikalato anuvritta Prateeti Sundaraanam" - Nyaaya Sudhaa ( having their continuity from the beginningless time and attractive enough by their mere appearance). On the other hand, there is Brahma-Miimaamsaa-shaastra,

PraamaaNyam Trividham mahat drishyate brahma-sutraanaam Ekadhaanyatra sarvashah - Anuvyaakhyaana Only the Brahma-sutras have validity in 3 ways. Therefore they have the highest validity. In all other valid literature there is validity in a single or two ways only. a. Apta-vaakyatayaa - From the fact that it is from a reliable person, source b. Shruti-Moolatayaa - From the fact that it has its root in Shruti which is Apourusheya and therefore all human related defects are non-existent. c. Yukti Moolatayaa From the fact that it has its root in reasoning.

Ato Naitaadrisham kinchit pramaaNa tamamishyate

Anu Vyaakhyaana

Nyaya Sudha : Ishyate praamaanikaihi iti sheshah. Tathaa cha anya-parihaareNa asyaiva vyaakhyaanam yuktam iti hrdayam. The word ishyate must read along with Pramaanikaihi. So the meaning of Anu Vyaakhyaana is For the reason stated so far ( ato ) by those that follow the path of validity ( praamaaNikaihi) no other work is taken to be valid In the highest sense as this Shastra is taken (naitaadrisham kimchit pramaaNa tamamishyate). For this reason, having rejected other works, to expound this thought alone is justified. ( asyaiva vyaakhyaanam yuktam). This is the heart of the author of Anu-vyaakhyaana i.e, Srimad Ananda theertha ( iti hridayam) we will discuss next email. shruti-virOdha and nyaayOpEta-shruti virOdha in the

=====
kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part III

3. shruti-virOdha : In the third quarter Shruti-virodha i.e, disagreements due to shruti-texts are dealt with and the fallasiousness of such disagreements are brought out, thus establishing the fact that the Shrutyukta Brahman has no defects. Shruti-virOdha primarily is due to the understanding of a shruti-text that one gets when studied without brahma-miimaamsaa i.e, when the meaning of shruti has come from outside of Brahma-jigyaasaa. For example, anaadirvaa ayam aakaashaha ( this space has no beginning, for certain) the apparent meaning of this shruti seems indicate that it did not have utpatti or space was not made or created. This is in direct conflict with the sarva-kaaraNatva thereby opposing or in disagreement with (shruti-virOdha) the shrutyukta parabrahman. If this text is understood with brahma-miimaamsaa or if this text becomes miimaamsita then we learn that even though the space is anaadi ( existing from eternity) it has vikaara ( change of form or natural state) in the form of Ghataakaasha and

MaTaakaasha and so the definite meaning that emerges out of brahmajigyaasaa is that space has its utpatti and thereby the disagreement from the shruti-text anaadirvaa ayam aakaashaha is removed. From this, it becomes certain that there is nothing like shruti-virOdha to shruti which is brahma-para i.e, every word in shruti talks only about Brahman and nothing else. This can be understood only thro samanvaya, which is what the first chapter of brahma-sutras describe and hence the name samanvaya adhyaaya. We will not get into the details of samanvaya here, but we will do so may be in some other occasion. In the present example, if the word aakaasha becomes brahma-para, then the property or attribute (vishEshaNa ) called anaadi establishes the truth that Brahman, without the need of any kaaraNa is the sarva-kaaraNa (cause of all ) and thereby effecting the shrutyukta brahma-tattva in a special way. 4. nyaayOpEta-shruti-virOdha: or yukti-sahita shruti-virOdha is dealt with the fourth quarter of avirOdha adhyaaya. What do we mean by yukti sahita shruti?. It is a shruti text which seems to be arguing (or reasoning) for a certain subject-matter against shrutyukta-brahman. For example, nityam manaha anaaditvaat ( manas is nitya ( eternal or perpetual), because it is anaadi ( beginningless). Now this shruti text establishes the eternality of mind (manas) thereby denying or contradicting the sarva-samhaara-kartrtva of parabrahman and because of that denying the sarva-kaaraNatva ( cause of all) of parabrahman. The sutra ||OM tatpraak shrutEshcha OM || as confirmed by the shruti text manas sarvEndriyaaNi cha ( manas and all indriyaas) clearly establishes that manas is also created just as indriyaas are created and thereby corroborating the sarva-kaaraNatva of parabrahman. That covers shaastra-samgati, adhyaaya samgati and paada samgati.

We still need to study the adhikaraNa-samgati and shruti-samgati. The shruti-samgati will be indicated for each sutra as we study each sutra in this adhikaraNa. As this paada deals with shruti-virOdha, we need to understand which shruti-text is being discussed in each of these sutras. We will study the adhikaraNa samgati next. adhikaraNa samgati:

atra brahmaNi shruti samanvayasiddyartham jeevakartrtvavishayashrutivirodhaha parihriyate In this adhikaraNa ( atra), the contradictions due to shruti texts (shruti virodhaha) in the matter of jeeva kartrtva are removed (parihriyate) so as to be able to achieve the absolute and complete application to Hari of those shruti texts. ( brahmaNi shruti samanvaya siddhyartham). Actually we should have a clear understanding of pumstvaadhikaraNa to understand what is being said in kartraadhikaraNa, this is why prameya-jnaana without proper shaastra-adhyayana is of no use. It only adds confusion and confusion and does not give knowledge of any kind. This is the reason why all conclusions have to be arrived at only thro a study of shaastra. But we will discuss pumstvaadhikaraNa only to that extent which is necessary to understand this adhikaraNa. Note that pumstvaadhikaraNa may refer to another adhikaraNa and so on and obviously we can not cover all here) JigyaasOththa jnaanajaat tat prasaadaadEva muchyate - Srimad Acharya (One is released only by means of Prasaada of paraBrahman which results from the knowledge caused only by Jignaasaa) These are not mere words. Atra poorvaadhikaraNeshu yat karma kurutE tad abhisampadyate ityaadinaa kartrtvaroopa vikaaravataha jeevasya paramaatmanaha sakaashaat utpattyaadimatvaroopam paaratantryam samarthitham | In the previous adhikaraNa, namely PumstvaadhikaraNa by shruti texts such as yat karma kurute tad abhisampadyate - brihadaaranyaka and other shruti texts, jeeva whose state changes (vikaara) in the form of kartrtva (kartrtvaroopa vikaaravataha jeevasya) and who has the appearance of paramaatma (paramaatmanaha sakaashaat). Such a jeevas dependency for his utpatti, sthithi... etc on the svatantra principle is established. (utpattyaadimatvaroopam paaratantryam samarthitham). Anaadi vikaaraaparaparyaaya kartrtvavajjeevasattaapradatvaroopa kartrtvEna hi paramaatmanaha svechchaanusaaritva roopam svaatantryam saadhitam. The Jivas change of state is beginningless ( anaadi vikaara) which is not expiring in any duration of time ( aparaparyaaya ). This vikaara of Jeeva is in the form of kartrtva ( kartrtvavat ). Parabrahmans doership is

established as the giver of existence (sattaa ) to Jiva who has such a kartrtva ( kartrtvavat jeeva sattaapradatvaroopa). The svaatantrya of parabrahman is indeed established by this Parabrahman's doership which is according to His Will. (kartrtvEna hi paramaatmanaha svechchaanusaaritva roopam svaatantryam saadhitam). Paramaatma svaatantryam asahamaanaha prativaadee paramaatmanaha svaatantrya aparaparyaayakartrtvam niraakartum paramaatma svaatantryOpapaadaka vikaaraatmaka Jeevakartrtva nishedhaartham gooDhAbhisandhihi poorvapakshayati | Not tolerant of this svaatantrya of parabrahman, the prativaadin argues paramaatma svaatantryam asahamaanaha prativaadee) to refute this freedom and beginningless and non-exhausting doership of parabrahman paramaatmanaha svaatantrya aparaparyaaya kartrtvam niraakartum). The doership of Jiva is in the form of change ( vikaaraatmaka jiva kartrtva). This kartrtva is there actually to establish the svaatantrya of parabrahman ( paramaatma svaatantryOpapaadaka vikaaraatmaka jeeva kartrtva). In order to negate this jiva-kartrtva the prativaadin comes up with the position of poorva-paksha which is in the form of a hidden argument. jeeva kartrtva nishedhaartham gooDhaabhisamdhihi poorvapakshayati). We will see what this position of poorva paksha is, in the next email. === Kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part IV After going thro the shaastra-samgati, adhyaaya-samgati, paada-samgati and adhikaraNa-samgati we are now in a position to study the kartr-adhikaraNa. As mentioned earlier there are 10 sutras in this adhikaraNa, and the shruti-samgati will be brought out for each sutra as we go. "OM "OM "OM "OM "OM "OM "OM "OM "OM "OM kartA shAstrArthavattvAt.h OM" II.3.33 vihaarOpadeshaat OM" upaadaanaat OM" vyapadeshaatcha kriyaayaam na chennirdeshaviparyayaha OM" upalabdhivadaniyamaha OM" shakti viparyayaat OM" samaadhyabhaavaatcha OM" yathaa cha takshObhayathaa OM" paraattu tatshrutEhe OM" II.3.41 kritaprayatnaapEkshastu vihitapratishedhaavaiyarthaadibhyaha OM " II.3.33

First sutra in kartr-adhikaraNa

In the last email, we mentioned about the poorvapaksha to encounter which

the first sutra in this adhikaraNa has come about. We will first study the poorva-paksha which may be stated as follows: Poorvapaksha: vishNoh kartrtvam uktam | yat karma kurute tad abhisampadyate iti jeevasyaapi kartrtvam shrooyate | asyaaha shrutehe eeshwarakartrtvavaachishrutitO Baadhaat apraamaaNyaat na vishNou kaaraNatvEna shruti samanvaya iti praapte siddantayat sootram | || OM kartaa shaastraarthavatvaat OM || ( You are saying the all-doership of VishNu. But in shruti texts like yat karma kurute tad abhisampadyate - brihadaaraNyaka ( what one does, that one becomes ) in such shruti texts we hear the kartrtva of jeeva also. In this shruti text ( asyaaha shruteh) by kartrtva if shruti means kartrtva of Eeshwara eeshwara kartrtva vaachi shrutitO), then there is sublation (baadhaat) and because of this incapability to produce knowledge ( apraamaaNyaat) we say that shruti samanvaya is NOT showing vishNu sarva-kartrtva and therefore sarva-kaaraNatva. Under this circumstance ( iti praapte) BaadaraayaNa demonstrated the conclusion of this argument by this sootra as (siddantayat sootram) ||OM kartaa shaastraarthavatvaat OM|| shruti-samgati: brihadaaraNyaka yat karma kurute tad abhisampadyate -

kartaa vidhi-nishEdha baddhaha | kartaa : jiva is vidhi-nishedha baddha ( jiva is bound by what is ought-to-be-done (vidhi) and by nishEdha what is ought-not-to-be-done ) vidhi yathaartha jnaana vishayikaha ( that which is related to yathaartha jnaana) nishEdha ayataartha jnaana vishyikaha ( that which is related to ayathaartha jnaana) yathaartha jnaana is that which reveals the object as it is. This yathaartha jnaana is possible thro brahma-jigyaasaa only. Shaastraarthavatvaat shaastrasya arthavatvaat. (shaastraarthavatvaat means the importance or significance (arthavatva) of shaastra) Jeevasya akartrtvE shaastrasya vyyarthyaat jeevOpi kartaa angeekaaryaha | atra shaastram naama vidhi-nishEdha roopam | ( if jeeva did not have kartrtva then this vidhi-nishEdha-roopa-shaastra would be futile and therefore we need to aceept that jeeva is also a kartr

in the sense that jiva is bound by vidhi-and-nishedha. Here shaastra means that which is in the form of dos and donts (vidhi-nishEdha)) vidhihi yathaarthajnaana vishayakaha | nishEdhastu ayathaarthajnaana vishayaka ityapi jneyam | kartrtvam cha vidhinishEdha badhdhatvam | tachcha prativaadinaa angeekaaryamEva ityarthaha | ( vidhi is that which is related to correct knowledge and niShedha is that which is related to wrong knowledge. This is the meaning of nidhivishedha. Doership is the state of being bound by this vidhi-nishEdha. The prativaadi has to agree with this doership of jiva. This is the meaning of this passage). One may recall from tantrasaara that Smarthavyaha satatam vishNuhu vismartavyO na jaatuchit | SarvE vidhi nishEdhaah syurEtayOrEva kinkaraaha || - tantrasaara We will take up the next sutra namely next email. "OM vihaarOpadeshaat OM" in the

==== Kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part V 2.3.33 .. contd Teeka: astyEva jeevasyaapi kartrtvam | tad abhaavE vidhi-nishEdha shaastra vaiyyarthya prasamgaat | na hi kartaaramantarENa araNyarOdanaayamaana shaastrasya saarthakyam bhavati | The doership of Jeeva is in the form of vidhi-nishEdha baddhatva being bound by shaastra. If not, the shaastra which is in the form vidhinishEdha becomes futile. If there is no doer, the usefulness of shaastra is like crying loud in a forest where nobody is there to hear. Na cha jadam prati tau bhavatO naapi eeshwaram prati | tathaa sati puNyapaapalepaprasamgEna aneeshwaratvaapattehe | ato jeevasya kartrtvaamgeekaare shaastrasya arthavatvasiddhehe so api kartaa amgeekaaryam iti bhaavaha. This vidhi-nisHedha-shaastra is applicable neither towards jada nor towards eeshwara. If it is towards Eeswara ( tathaa sati), because of stains from

good and bad ( puNya paapa lepa prasamgEna) such an entity fails to be Eeshwara ( aneeshwaratva aapattehe). >From the position that doership of Jiva is agreed-upon the position that shaastra is useful is effected. Because of this reason, we need to agree that jeeva is also a kartaa, doer. Bhaashya: jeevasya kartrtva abhaavE shaastra aprayOjakatvapraaptehe jeevOpi kartaa (Because from the position that there-is-no-doership-of-jiva we get the position that shaastra-is-futile, jiva has doership) In the light of the Teekaa above, note how closely the usefulness-of-shaastra and the doership-of-jiva are related to each other. To do shastra-adhyayana is the doership. This shaastra is in the form of vidhi-nishedha and is therefore neither applicable to Eeshwara nor to jada. 2.3.34 Second sutra in kartr-adhikaraNa In the previous sutra, it is stated that shaastra becomes significant only if jeeva has kartrtva. The poorvapaksha to this may be in the form, vidhi-nishEdha discrimination ability is given to jeeva and for such a jeeva this shaastra has its usefulness, and so how can we say that shaastra becomes useless if jiva is not the doer? To answer this, BaadaraayaNa formulated the next sutra as || OM vihaarOpadEshaat OM || 2.3.34

Shruti samgati : streebhirvaa yaanairvaa jnaatibhirvaa ajnaatibhirvaa chandOgya Teekaa: Jeevasya svataha kartrtva abhaavEpi paragatakartrtvE vivEkaagrahO astyEva atah taadrsham kartaaram prati shaastram pravartataam iti Ashamkaam parihart sootram Upanyasya vyaachaSte (Although jeeva has no independent kartrtva or doership ( jeevasya svataha kartrtva abhaave api) he indeed has doership which is in the form of the ability to discriminate between vidhi and nishEdha that is given to him by another and therefore towards that kind of a doer the shaastra has its usefulness. To answer this, the sutra was interpreted by Bhaashyakaara as:

Bhaashya: streebhirvaa yaanairvaa jnaatibhirvaa ajnaatibhirvaa ityaadi mokshE api. Teekaa: Na jeevasya kaalpanikam kartrtvam kim tu paaramaarthikamaiva This kartrtva of jeeva is not imaginery or fictitious but it is indeed related to the highest spiritual truth. vihaarOpadeshaat kartrtva shravaNaat jeeve kartrtvam paaramaarthikam | Jiva-kartrtva such as vihaara in moksha must be understood only in terms of the highest spiritual truth. ( and not in the mundane sense like going for a walk in moksha). (to be continued..)

=== Kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part VI 2.3.35 Teekaacharya introduces the next sutra : || OM upaadaanaat OM ||

astu mokshE jeevasya svaabhaavikam kartrtvam pramaaNikatvaat | samsaarE tu kaalpanikamEva kim na syaat taavataapi cha shaastra saarthakyaaditi aashamkaam pariharat sootram paTitvaa vyaachashte | (Let there be doer-ship (astu kartrtvam) which is of the nature-of-self itself (svaabhaavikam) as established by evidence (praamaaNikatvaat ) to jeeva in the highest liberated state ( mokshE jeevasya). But in this world ( samsaarE tu) why should it be not imaginery? ( kaalpanikamEva kim na syaat?), even in that case ( taavataapi cha) the significance of shaastra is still intact. To answer this doubt, Bhaashyakaara having understood this sutra, interpreted it as: Bhaashya: saadhanaadyupaadaana prateetescha |

Tattva-prakaashikaa: Na jeevasya samsarE api kartrtvam kaalpanikam. Upaadaanaat:

Mokshaadyartham saadhanaadyupaadaana prateetehe tatascha phala darshanaat | The jeeva-kartrtva that is of the nature-of-self-to-do-brahma-jigyaasaa is not imaginary even in the case of this world. Because of the demonstrated result produced by such a jeeva kartrtva. (tatascha phala darshanaat). This is proved by the apprehension that (prateetehe) the highest good ( mokshaadyartham) is caused by saadhana etc saadhanaadyupaadaana). Na hi paraanuSTita saadhanEshu AtmeeyataakalpanamaatreNa phalaabhisambandhO bhavati atiprasamgaat iti bhaavaha | The mere consideration of someone elses sadhaana as ones own, will not have any relationship to the result due to that saadhana because of atiprasaanga. This is the idea. Note : For this reason, brahma-jigyaasaa does not come in the form of upadesha i.e, every adhikaari is on his own. It comes only in the form of shravaNa-manana-nidhiddhyaasana, and what we hear as upadekshyanti te jnaanam jnaaninaha tattva darshinaha in the Geetha etc, we are really talking about the ShravaNa part of Brahma-Jigyaasaa and based on this ShravaNa, manana and nidhidhyaasana will take place. ( to be continued)

=== Kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part VII

2.3.36 || OM vyapadEshaachcha kriyaayaam na chennirdEsha viparyayaha || Shruti-samgati: aatmaanameva lOkamupaaseeta - brihadaaraNyaka

Teekaacharya introduces the next sutra as: Evam upapatyaa pratyakshEna cha saadhita jeevakartrtvam shrutyaa api samarthayat sootram upanyasya vyaachaSte | ( The jeeva kartrtva that has been so far established and proved by pratyaksha (evam upapatyaa pratyakshEna cha saadhita jeeva kartrtvam) ( in the form of brahma-jigyaasaa-saadhana by the previous sutra) is also established by shruti. To show this Bhaashyakaara interpreted this sutra || OM vyapadEshaachcha kriyaayaam a chennirdEsha viparyayaha ||

as: Bhaashya: AtmaanamEva lOkamupaaseeta iti kriyaayaam vyapadeshaat cha | anyathaa aatmaiva lokamiti nirdEshaha syaat | vyapadEshaachcha kriyaayaam : AtmaanamEva lOkamupaaseeta iti jeevasya kriyaayaam vyapadeSho vartate | ( where it says atmaanamEva lOkamupaaseeta the activity (kriyaa) of jeeva is mentioned there. ) na chennirdEsha viparyayaha : anyathaa aatmaiva lOkamiti syaat | atO jeevasya upaasanaadi kartrtvam pramaaNikamEva. Atra upaasanaa kriyaa. Kriyaa na kartr rahitaa. Jadam na kartr. Paramaatmaa upaasanaa vishayaha. AtO jeeva eva kartaa iti bhaavaha | (Otherwise, aatmaa itself should mean lOka. Therefore, the jeevakartrtva in the form of nidhidhyaasanaa or upaasanaa is correct indeed. Here the activity is upaasanaa (nidhidhyaasanaa). Activity is not without a doer. Jada is not doer. Paramaatma is the subject matter of this BrahmaJigyasaa activity. Therefore, jeeva is indeed the kartr for Brahma-jigyaasaa. This is the meaning. Note that in JigyaasaadhikaraNa, it is shown that whenever Nidhidhyaasanaa (which is also termed as upaasanaa or dhyaana at places) is mentioned individually, ShravaNa-Manana-Nidhidhyaasanaa-roopa Brahma-jigyaasaa is automatically implied, because there is no nidhidhyaasanaa without manana, and there is no manana without ShravaNa. Therefore in the present context, although only nidhidhyaasanaa (upaasanaa) is mentioned, what is implied is shravaNa-manana-nidhidhyaasanaa-roopa brahma-jigyaasaa. Going back to teeka, AtmaanamEva lOkamupaaseeta ityaadaavupaasanaadikriyaayaam kartrtvenaatmanO vyapadEshaat tasyaapi kartrtvamastyEva | In shruti texts like atmaanamEva lOkamupaaseeta etc ( ityadou) the activity of the form nidhidyaasana or upaasanaa (upaasanaadi kriyaayaam) there is mention of atman as having doership ( kartrtvena atmanO vyapadeshaat) thus his doership in the form of nidhidhyaasana is present indeed (tasyaapi kartrtvam asti eva). Atra jeeva upaaseeta ityuktyabhaavaat katham ayam jeevasya kartrtva vyapadEsha iti | maivam |

One may say In this shruti text, there is no mention of jeeva ( as it only mentions atman and Loka) then how can you say this shruti has mentioned nidhidhyaasanaa-roopa-jeeva- kartrtva? It is not like that. (maivam) Na hi taavat kriyaa kartr shoonyaa yuktaa | na taavat jadam kartr | jeevasyaatra kartrtvEna shrutyanabhimatatvE paramaatmaabhiprEtaha syaat | anyathaa shruti vaiyyarthyaapaataat | (The position that there is activity without a doer is not correct. Jada is not a kartr. If jeeva-kartrtva is not meant by this shruti text, then it must mean paramaatma when it says atman. Otherwise this shruti is apparently wasteful. But paramaatma is the subject matter of this nidhidhyaasanaa-roopa-jeeva-kartrtva. And therefore jeeva must be the kartr for nidhidhyaasana) ( to be contd.. )

=== Kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part VIII 2.3.37 || OM upalabdhivadaniyamaha OM || Shruti samgati:ya atmaanamantarO yamayati- brihadaaraNyaka (maadhyandina paaTa) Teekaacharya introduces the next sutra as: Nanu evam jeevasyaapi kartrtvE katham eeshwarasyaiva kartrtvam poorvam samarthitam katham cha shrutirupapadyEta | atah tat virOdho astyEva iti AshayEna aashamkya tat parihaaraaya sootram avataarya vyaachaSte || tarhi iti || ( A difficulty arises. (nanu) If Jeeva has this nidhidhyaasanaa-roopa kartrva (evam jeevasyaapi kartrtvE) then how is the previously established position (poorvam samarthitham) that Eeshwara only has kartrtva is justified? (katham eeshwarasyaiva kartrtrvam) How is this position reconciled with shruti?. Therefore, there is shruti-virOdha indeed ( ato tat virOdho asti eva). To answer this difficulty, Srimad Acharya interpreted this sutra as tarhi etc Bhashya: tarhi katham Eeshwarasyaiva kartrtvam ityatO vakti (in the case that Jeeva has nidhidhyaasana kartrtva, then how can we say Eashwara only has kartrtva?. TO answer this, sutrakaara said:

|| OM upalabdhivat aniyamaha OM || yathaa jnaane idam jnyaasyaameeti aniyamaha prateeyate evam karmaNyapi jeevasya. ya atmaanamantarO yamayati iti cha shrutihi. Upalabdhivat yathaa jeevasya jnaane evameva jyaasyaami iti. (upalabdhi means perception or understanding - Just as in the case of 'knowing' one can ascertain that ' I am going to know this in this way'. aniyamaha - niyamO naasti. tathaa karmaNi api na niyamaha | ata eeshwarasyaiva niyamEna kartrtvam na jeevasya | 'ya atmaanamantarO yamayati' iti shrutehe | svechchaanusaaritvam eeshwarasya | eeshwarEchchaaniyatatvam jeevasya iti bhaavaha | (there is no rule that he will know it that way. Similarly, there is no rule that he will do what he wills. THerefore, only Eashwara has kartrtva as a rule and not jeeva. Jeeva is controlled by God's will. This is the meaning of the passage. Idam vastu aham jyaasyaami ityEvam niroopitEpi yathaa jeevasya na jnaanE niyamO asti | svechchaanusaarEna na jnaanalaabhaha | "I am going to understand this thing" ( idam vastu aham jyaasyaami iti) even after this ascertainment( evam niroopitEpi) the Jeeva or knower may not get the knowledge of that thing.(jeevasya jnaane na niyamO asti). Just by following one's free will ( svechchaanusaarENa) there is no gain in knowledge ( na jnaanalaabhaha). i.e.,Knowledge is not obtained by ascertainment and free will in the case of jeeva. tathaa karishyaami iti niroopite api karmaNi niyama abhavaat | same way, although there is the ascertainment that "I am going to do this" there is no rule that it will happen that way. i.e, things won't happen the way jeeva wills it. Eashwarasya tu tat bhaavaat | Because of the reason that what God wills, will happen. sa eva kartaa na jeeva ityuktam praang na tu sarvathaa kartrtva abhaavaat iti bhaavaha | therefore what was said previously that ( ityuktam praang) "God is the only doer and not the Jeeva" (sa eva kartaa na jeeva) does not mean there is no doership of Jiva altogether (na tu sarvathaa kartrtva abhaavaat) this is the meaning. (iti bhaavaha) na cha ayam driShTaantaha saadhyasamaha | na hi jigyaasuhu jnaanakriyaayaamEva saakshaad vyaapriyatE kim tu tat saadhana eva iti | THis example is not equivalent to something that needs to be established

either, i.e., this is something that is in common experience to everyone. The experience that things dont happen in this World according to mans will and wish. For, the jigyaasu ( jeeva ) does not engage himself (na hi vyaapriyaTE) in jnaana and kriya without an object. But, he engages himself in them only as saadhanas or only as means for accomplishing something) Eeshwarasyaiva niyamEna kartrtvam na jeevasya ityatra pramaaNamaaha | ya iti | Only Eeshwara has doer-ship as a rule ( i.e, what he wills will happen without exceptions and not jeeva. Bhaashyakaara quoted a shrutipramaaNa for this as Bhaashya: " ya atmaanamantarO yamayati " iti cha shrutihi God is described by Shruti as "one who controlls the self from within" ( to be continued..) ===== Kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part IX || OM shakti viparyayaat OM || 2.3.38 Teekaacharya introduces the next sutra as: nanu ubhayOho kartrtvaavisheshE api eeshwarasyaiva niyamEna kartrtvam na jeevasya ityetat kim nibhandanam vailakshaNyamiti prichchati? | kuta iti | ( A difficulty arises. If both jeeva and Eashwara have kartrtva without any differences, even then why the restriction and distinction that Eashwara only has doership as a rule and not jeeva?. Bhaashyakaara raises this question as: Bhaashya: kutaha? ||OM shakti viparyayaat OM || alpashaktitvaat jeevasya. Teeka : Svaatantrya paaratantrya nimittau niyama-aniyamau iti parihaaram vaktum eesha-jeevayOho svaatantrya-paaratantryE saadhayat sootram paTitvaa vyaachaSte | shakti iti | ( Owing to the Independence of Eashwara and the dependence of jeeva on Eashwara, what god wills will happen as a rule and not so in the case of jeeva. After having read the sootra which establishes this solution viz ||

OM shakti viparyayaat OM || Bhashyakaara interpreted it as: alpashaktivaat jeevasya ( because jeeva has alpa-shakti ( what jeeva wills does not happen )) Eeshwarasya poorNashaktihi | ataha svaatantryam | jeevasya alpashaktihi | ata asvaatantryam | jeevasya asvaatantryam naama eeshwarechchaaniyatakartrtvaghatitam iti bhaavaha | (Eeshwara has completeness in terms of power. Therefore His Independence. Jeevas power is tiny. Therefore his dependence. Jeevas dependence by definition involves having doership which is controlled by the will of God. This is the meaning of this passage.) So, this sutra has come about for explaining this distinction between jeeva and eashwara Kartrtva. Eashwara kartrtva has svechchaanusaaritva where as jeeva kartrtva has eeshwarechchaa niyatatva. i.e., Eeshwara kartrtva is according His own free-will and jeeva kartrtva is controlled by the will of God. ( to be continued)

===== Kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part X 2.3.39 || OM samaadhyabhaavaachcha OM ||

yuktyamtarENa etat pratipaadayat sootram upanyasya vyaachaShTe | samaadheeti | Bhashyakaara interpreted the next sutra which establishes the same position through another reasoning as: Bhaashya: | Teekaa: Samaadhaanam alam budhdhihi asti eeshwarasya iti tasya svaatantryam jeevasya cha tad abhaavaat asvaatantryam prateeyate | Svatantrasya poorNa kaamatvaat iti bhaavaha| Samaadhaana means wanting-nothing. Because eeshwara has this samaadhaanaa(samaadhya)bhaavaat cha asvaatantryam prateeyate

fulfillment, he is svaatantra and in the case of Jeeva, because of the absense of this contentment, he is ever dependent on svantratra. This is because svatantra has the state of having all wishes fulfilled. (poorNa-kaama) Evam chet kim tarhi ityata aaha | ata iti | yata evam eesha jeevayOho svaatantrya-paaratantryE prateeyEtE atah svaatantrya-paaratantraabhyaam niyama-aniyamou iti bhaavaha | If it is like this, then what does it imply? The cha shabda in sutra and bhashya translates into ata. Bhaashya describes the implication with the letter cha (ata). The Independence and Dependence are observed in Eesha and Jeeva in this form i.e, (Easha: PoorNa-shakti and PoorNa-Kaama jeeva : Alpa-shakti and absense of alam-buddhi ) The niyama-aniyama i.e, every-wish-becoming-true-as-a-rule and having-no-such-rule, are observed in svantantra and paratantra due to this. This is the implication. ( to be continued)

===== Kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part XI 2.3.40 || OM yathaa cha takshObhayathaa OM || II.3.40

Tattva prakaashikaa of Jayatheertha Teekaacharya introduces the next sutra as: Nanu evam jeevasya na svaatantrENa kartrtvam api tveeshwarachchyaiva katham tarhi kartOchyatE | Svatantraha khalu kartaa ityaashamkaam pariharat sootram upanyasya vyaachaSTe || yathEti || (Another difficulty arises. If in this way, jeeva has no kartrtva on his own and his Kartrtva is only due to the will-of-God, then how can the jeeva be called a kartr? In such a case, indeed only the svatantra can be called kartr. To answer this difficulty, bhashyakaara interpreted this sootra as: Bhashya: atah

|| OM yathaa cha takshObhayathaa OM || yathaa takshNaha kaarayitrniyatatvam kartrtvam cha vidyate evam jeevasyaapi | Teekaa: Yathaa takshaa praasaada kaarayitr niyatO api kartaa uchyate tathaa eeshwara niyatO api jeevaha kartaa iti vyapadeshtum shakyata ityarthaha | Just as the carpenter (yathaa takshaa) is said to be the doer (kartaa uchyate) although his action is controlled ( niyatO api) by the person who is getting a palatial mansion built (praasaada kaarayitr), same way although controlled by Eeshwara, (tathaa eeshwara niyatO api) it is possible to designate Jeeva as kartr. This is the meaning of Bhashya. Atra idam avadhaaryam | jeevasya Eeshwara niyatatvadyOtanaaya kartaa iti vyapadEshaha | atah paraadheena kartrtvam tasya vartatE iti na sidhyati | This is (idam) what is to be understood (avadhaaryam) here (atra). Jeeva is indicated to be the doer, kartr (jeevasya kartaa iti vyapadEshaha) to illustrate the fact that he is controlled by Eeshwara. ( Eeshwara niyatatva dyOtanAya). Therefore ( atah) it does not mean ( na siddhyati) that he has (tasya vartatE) Kartrtva which is dependent. ( paraadheena kartrtvam) tasmaat jeevE driStam kartrtvam parsyaiva.| Jeevasya kartrtvam naama tasya vikaara eva | vikaarakartaa tu paramaatmaa | tataha vikaarO jeevasya | svaatantryam paramaatmanaha | Therefore (tasmaat) the kartrtva that is seen in Jeeva ( jeevE driStam kartrtvam) belongs to God only.( parasyaiva). What is meant by jeevas kartrtva (jeevasya kartrtvam naama) is his vikaara or change only. ( tasya vikaara eva). The author of this change is God. ( vikaarakartaa tu paramaatma). Because of God, change happens to jeeva (tataha vikarO jeevasya ) and paramaatma is Independent. ( svaatantryam paramaatmanaha ) ayam cha takSNaha kaarayitr niyatatvam iti bhaashya paryaalochanayaa labdhOrthaha | tata eva eeshwara niyatO api jeevaha kartEti vyapadESTum shakyata ityarthaha iti teekaayaam sootraarthaha upasamhritaha |

This is the meaning arrived at ( ayam cha labdhOrthaha) by a careful study of the Bhaashya ( bhaashya paryaalochanayaa) that the carpenters doership is under the control of the one who is getting the work done takSNaha kaarayitr niyatatvam. That is the reason why (tata eva) in the Teeka the meaning of this sootra has been concluded as( teekaayaam sootrarthaha upasamhritaha) : although Jeeva is controlled by God, it is possible to call jeeva as a kartr. (eeshwara niyatO api jeevaha kartEti vyapadESTum shakyata ityarthaha Yadi kartrtvE paraadheenamiti vishEshaha amgeekriyatE tarhi ekaikakriyaanirvaahaartham kartrdvayasaapEkshataa syaaditi kalpanaagouravam | sarvopetEti sootravirudhdhachcha | jeevE svaadheenashakti amgeekaaraha Eeshwaraswaatamtrya nirAkaraNe paryavasateeti bhaavaha | If we agree on the position ( yadi agmgeekriyatE) that Jeeva has Kartrtva kartrtvE), and qualify it as paraadheena ( paraadheenamiti vishEshaha) then (tarhi) we get into the fallacy which is against the Law of economy of thought ( kalpanaa gouravam) that it needs two doers ( kartr dvaya saapEkshataa) to perform each and every single work ( ekaika kriyaanirvaahaartham). Also this position is against the teaching of the sutra || OM sarvOpEtaa cha tad darshanaat OM || II.1.31 ( 4th sutra in shrutyadhikaraNa , where it is shown that shrutyukta Brahman is sarvashakta. There are 5 sutras in this adhikaraNa, we will go thro this one may be sometime in future). ( sarvOpEteti sootra virudhdhaat cha ). To posit that Jeeva has any kind of ability or power that is his own, (jeevE svaadheena shakti amgeekaaraha) will result in the denial of Independence or svatantratva of shrutyuka-Brahman ( Eeshwaraswaatamtrya niraakaraNe paryavasati ). This is the meaning of the passage. ( iti bhaavaha).

==== Kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part XII 2.3.41 || OM paraattu tat shrutEhe OM ||

Background: in the previous sutra, the example that just as a carpenter works under the control of the palatial builder so also jeeva has doership (kartrtva) under the control of God is given. But in this example one may say:

God is like a supervisor, and jeeva is a subordinate working under him. Supervisors role is to assign a job to a jeeva and jeevas role is that of a carpenter-worker to execute what is assigned to him. Supervisor will be pleased if the job gets done well and accordingly will compensate the worker for a job well done. If the job is not done properly, the supervisor gets angry and he will not be good to the worker. He may fire him and get another worker i.e, the Supervisor is using the worker as a tool only. karaNa or saadhana) Note how close this comes to the popular notion of God that comes from outside of brahma-jigyaasaa. How did this worker get his ability to perform? ( kartrtva shakti). The supervisor only directs the worker to get this strength ( like telling him to go to a gym etc) but it is upto the worker to do the actual workout in the gym. So, one may say that the carpenter has obtained the ability (kartrtva shakti) on his own. This ability that the worker has earned on his own also gives him freedom to decide either to follow the orders and do what is assigned to him. We see 3 kinds of such workers 1. some carpenters may go the extra mile on their own while doing their job (good workers) 2. and others may decide just to do their job ( normal workers) 3. and some may screw it up intentionally or unintentionally ( bad workers). Or he may decide not to follow the orders of the builder at all but perform according to his own wish, although he may come under the wrath of the supervisor and loose his job in the process. Ex: If the supervisor tells him to make a window, the carpenter may decide to make a door instead or decide not to do anything and sit quiet. These workers have varied levels of skills which they have earned from their previous job assignment experiences ( karma ). The supervisor keeps an inventory of all this skill sets somehow, and therefore he knows what each one is capable of accomplishing and accordingly assigns them a role to play like that of a carpenter, mason, cobbler, etc. He won't bother re-training a cobbler into a carpenter etc. because he can't change the nature ( svabhaava) of these workers, and if he did he will be considered as being 'partial' to some and so fails

to be an impartial supervisor in the eye of some other workers. Some other workers may not even be aware of the existence of such a supervisor and will do their job anyway, not knowing what they are doing and why they are doing. They don't seem to be any less happy than the good workers. Some workers although hate their supervisor, may still be very kind and good to other co-workers. These workers are classied as 'good' or 'bad' depending upon who is classifying them. Some workers although somehow are aware that there is a supervisor, would care less about the supervisor while doing their job. Some of the good workers think that it is upto them to keep this supervisor happy all the time so they can move up in their pursuit. In other words, Jeeva also has kartrtva on his own. But it is a tiny, puny and insignificant kartrtva compared to that of the supervisor, because the supervisor can get the whole universe built, where as the carpenter can build only a few doors and windows. Same way, the supervisor has the ability to destroy the whole universe, whereas the worker has the ability to screw up on a few doors and windows at the most. Having said all these ideas and rejecting them because the source of these ideas is not Brahma-jigyaasaa and therefore these ideas are incapable of producing the correct knowledge of Shrutyukta parabrahman, we need to move on and study brahma-miimaamsaa-shaastra. jeevaha kartEti vyapadEshE yat kimchit shaktiriti jeevE yaa bhaasatE saa api shaktihi na jeevaadheenaa kimtu eeshwaraadheenaa iti pratipaadayat sootram | ( When it is indicated that Jeeva is the doer, ( jeevaha kartaa iti vyapadEshe) the puny ability to perform that is seen in jeeva (yat kimchit shaktihi iti yaa bhaasatE) even that puny little ability of jeeva ( saa api shaktihi) is not under the control of jeeva ( na jeevaadheenaa) but that little ability of jeeva to perform is under the control of Eeshwara (kimtu eeshwara adheenaa ). The next sutra has come about to propound this. ( iti pratipaadayat sootram) || OM paraattu tatshrutEhe OM || II.3.41

( to be continued..) === Kartr-AdhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa - XIII || OM paraattu tatshrutEhe OM || II.3.41

Tattva prakaashikaa of Jayatheertha Teekaacharya introduces the next sutra as: Nanu kim takshNa iva jeevasya kartrtvashaktihi jeeva adheenaiva eeshwara adheenataa tu vachanavEtanadaanaadivaduta kartrtvashaktirapeeshwaraadheenaa | (A question arises. shakti ? How should we understand this jeeva kartrtva is

If jeevas ability (shakti) to perform ( jeevasya kartrtvashaktihi) said to be like that of a carpenter ( takshNa iva) and that shakti is controlled by Jeeva himself ( jeeva adheenyaiva) and by being controlled by Eeshwara it is meant ( eeshwara adheenataa tu ) directing the carpenter ( vachana) , distributing wages to him, etc (vEtanadaana aadivat) OR does it mean the (kim uta) ability of the carpenter to perform (kartrtva shaktirapi ) belongs to and is controlled by Eeshwara? eeshwara adheenaa ).

also

yadyaadyastarhi Eeshwarasyaiva kartrtvamiti gataha pakshaha | dviteeyE na jeevasya kartrtvam ityaashamkaam pariharat sootram upanyasya vyaachaSte || paraaditi || ( if the first one is true (i.e, if kartrtva shakti however miniscule it may be still is Jeevas) is true then ( yadi aadyaha tarhi) the position (pakshaha) that Eeshwara only has doership (Eeshwarasyaiva kartrtvam iti) is gone (gataha). If the second one is true (dviteeyE ) ( i.e, if Eeshwara adheenataa is found to be true even in the case of tiny miniscule kartrtva shakti that jeeva seems to possess) then there is no doer-ship at all on the part of the jeeva ( na jeevasya kartrtvaam iti). Srimad Aananda Theertha having noticed that this sutra has come about to answer this difficulty, interpreted it as || paraat iti || Bhaashya : || OM paraattu tat shrutEhe OM ||

saa cha kartrtva shaktihi paraadEva | ( this ability to perform (saa cha kartrtva shaktihi) only (paraat eva) kartrtvam karaNatvam cha svabhaavaschetanaa dhritihi | yat prasaadaadime santi na santi yadupEkshayaa iti hi shrutiti | is because of God

paingi-

( Doership, instrumentality, nature of things, consciousness or jeevas, will-power of jeevas, all get their existence because of His will, there is no will of His, then they do not exist ) We can recall another similar one that Srimad Acharya has quoted elsewhere:

if

Dravyam Karma cha kaalascha svabhaavo jeeva eva cha | Yat prasaadaat ime santi na santi yadupekshayaa || (matter, Action, Time, Nature of things, souls all get their existence because of His will, if there is no will of His, then they do not exist). Teekaa: Na asmaabhistatkartrtvasaamarthyam jeevaadheenamuchyatE yena apasiddhaamtaha syaat kim tu paramaatma adheenamEva | tathaa shruteriti bhaavaha | (We do not agree that ( na asmaabhihi uchyatE) the doer-ship ability ( Tat kartrtva saamarthyam) belongs to jeeva ( jeevaadheenam). If we say the doership is that of Jeeva,(yena) then it will be against the truth established by BaadaraayaNa and Srimad Ananda Teertha ( apasiddamtaha syaat). However, ( kim tu ) the doership ability of Jeeva indeed is under the control of paramaatma ( paramaatma adheenam Eva ). The shruti that is quoted here by Srimad Acharya is expounding this truth. (tathaa shrutehe) This is the meaning of the passage (iti bhaavaha)

===== Kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part XIV Etaavat paryantam jeevasya na kartrtvam, kartrtvavyapadeShamaatram tadaakshiptaa shaktirapi eeshwaraadheenaa iti uktam | tathaatvE tasya akartrtvam viShNOrEva kartrtvam iti punaha shaastra vaiyarthyam praaptam iti aashamkaam pariharat sootram | In the sutras studied so far ( etaavat paryantam that ) it was established

( iti uktam) Jeeva has no doership ( jeevasya na kartrtvam) and that he is merely said to have doership ( kartrtva vyapadEsha maatram) and also it was described that the observed ability to perform is also (aakshipta shaktirapi) not due to Jeeva but that it was due to and under the control of Eeshwara ( eeshwaraadheenaa iti). If that is the case ( tathaatvE) then jeeva has no doership ( tasya akartrtvam) and the doership is only that of VishNu. (VishNOrEva kartrtvam). Then again we end up in the position that shaastra is futile ( iti punaha shaastra vaiyarthyam praaptam). This difficulty is answered by sutrakaara in the the next sutra ( iti aashamkaam pariharat sootram) ||OM kritaprayatnaapEkshastu || II.3.42 vihitapratishEdha avaiyarthaadibhyaha OM

vihitapratishEdha avaiyarthaadhibhyaha vidhi nishEdha shaastra avaiyarthaayaiva svasya vaishamyanairghrNyaparihaaraaya | vihitapratishEdha avaiyarthaadhibhyaha means in order to make shaastra which is in the form of dos and donts non-futile (vidhi nishEdha shaastra avaiyarthaayaiva ) and also to exclude Himself from the defect ( svasya parihaaraaya) called inequality and pitilessness or being kind to some and being harsh to some other. Krita prayatnaapEkshaha ayam paramaatmaa jeevasya anaadikarmaprayatnayOgyataapEksha eva prErayati | na tvanapEkshaha ityarthaha | Krita prayatnaapEkshaha means the Shrutyukta parabrahman so far established ( ayam paramaatmaa) directs the jeeva based only on the jeevas beginningless karma, endeavor and fittedness. He does not do so (na tu) regardless of anything i.e, orbitrarily. ( anapEkshaha). This is the meaning. ( iti bhaavaha). Jeevashaktihi eeshwaraadheenaa | tathaapi shaastram na vyartham | vishNuhu anaadikarmaprayatnayOgyataapEksha eva jeevam prErayati | tena shaastra avaiyarthyam vaishamya-nairGhrNya abhaavascha vishNoho siddhyati iti bhaavaha | ( Jeevas ability to perform (jeeva shaktihi) is under the control of Eeshwara. (eeshwaraadheenaa). Even then (ththaapi) that does not mean shaastra is futile. (shaastram na vyartham). Why? Because, shrutyukta parabrahman as established by brahma-miimaamsaa shaastra ( vishNuhu) commands the jeeva based only on the beginningless karma, effort and

fittedness. Because of this (tena) it gets established that (siddhyati) 1. shaastra in the form of dos and donts is not futile ( shaastra avaiyartham) 2. and Parabrahmans state of being without the defect called inequality and pitilessness (vaishamya-nairGhrNya abhaavaha cha VishNOho) This is the meaning of the passage ( iti bhaavaha). ( to be continued) NOTE: We need to be careful while understanding the qualities of shrutyukta parabrahman which is called VishNu in shaastra. Let us take for example, karunaa - Kindness or compassionate. friend of mine brought this one up recently) (A good

When we talk about the compassion that a person such as Mother Teresa has, we say that she had great kindness towards the injured, kindness towards the poor, etc which is fine. Can we say God is also a kind-hearted person like Mother Teresa, and add to it that where as Gods compassion is unlimited, Mother Teresas compassion is limited because she is human and this is what is being described by Srimad Acharya in dwaadasha stotra as karuNaapoorNa varaprada charitam jnyaapaya mE tE... The answer is NO because of the following reason: To understand the kindness of Mother Teresa, we need neither Shruti nor Brahma-Jigyaasaa. But the knowledge of kindness of VishNu must come from Brahma-Miimaasaa only. So to describe a kind-hearted God outside of Jigyaasaa is to deny the fact that it is only through Veda that one can understand God. TO deny veda is to deny Brahman itself. Because to Srimad Acharya the word Brahman means Veda. Brahma Vedaha tadarthaha parabrahma vaa. Tasya sutraaNi brahmasutraNi. Sakala vedaartha bhootasya para-brahmaNo vishnoh svaroopa nirnayaarthaani sutrani iti yaavat - NyayaSudha The position that Brahma means para-brahman emerges from the position that Brahma means Veda. So, without enquiry into Veda Para Brahman, The ground of all, can never be comprehended. It is the discussion and elucidation of this truth that forms the content of Brahma Mimamsaa. Mimamsaa means enquiry into the meaning of Veda. Interchangeably we use BrahmaVichara,

Brahma-Jignaasaa, Brahma-Mimamsaa and call it as Shaastra. To understand Veda is to understand para-Brahman , the highest Brahman, higher than the highest, that is ever so far conceived in Vedantha philosophies. ( sakala vedaartha bhootasya para-brahmaNo vishNOho). This is the concept of VishNu that Srimad Acharya calls Brahma Shabdascha VishNaavEva and describes it in all his 37 works. That is why whenever the word VishNu is used we need understand it as Shrutyukta parabrahman. Brahma-Miimaasaa shastra makes this very clear in || OM shaastra yOnitvaat OM || and Veda makes it explicitly clear in na avEdavin manutEdam brihantam, Vedaahyaivainam vedayanti , Vijneyam Paramam Brahma Jnaapikaa paramaa Shrutihi, Teshaam Duhkha Prahaanaaya Shrutireshaa pravartate etc So when Srimad Acharya describes parabrahman in dwaadasha stotra as Karunaa poorNa varaprada charitam. although the same word karunaa with which we may already be familiar with is used, but when it is applied to Parabrahman, the comprehension that God is complete with the attribute called karuNaa can only come from Brahma-Jigyaasaa. Not recognizing this fact leads one to believe that the kind hearted personal God who is somehow made familiar to us from outside of jigyaasaa is the same God that Srimad Acharya describes in dwaadasha stotra. Teekaacharya calls such notions that come outside of Jigyaasaa as avichaarita ramaNeeya ( concepts which have come from outside of jigyaasaa, but are very pleasing) and shows how they do not lead to the correct knowledge of Parabrahman. ( More on this some other time) Veda makes this position clear by: Na avedavin manutedam brihantam. (one who does not know veda can never comprehend Brahman which is complete). Without Veda Brahman is inconceivable and without Brahman, the highest Veda is not conceived. To define Brahman as the highest signifies that nothing short of unconditioned completeness is the meaning of the word Brahman. Vedaahyaivainam vedayanti this Truth i.e, Brahman Only the vedas give us the knowledge of

Vijneyam Paramam Brahma Jnaapikaa paramaa Shrutihi ( That which is really known is Brahman and that which causes this knowledge is Shruti) Teshaam Duhkha Prahaanaaya Shrutireshaa pravartate The veda has appeared to remove the misery of those that are after the knowledge of Brahman. === Kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part XV Before we go further, for the sake of clarity and continuity of thought, last para from posting part XIII on II.3.41 is repeated here. We do not agree that ( na asmaabhihi uchyatE) the doer-ship ability( Tat kartrtva saamarthyam) belongs to jeeva ( jeevaadheenam). If we say the doership is that of Jeeva,(yena) then it will be against the truth established by BaadaraayaNa and Srimad Ananda Teertha(apasiddamtaha syaat). However, ( kim tu ) the doership ability of Jeeva indeed is under the control of paramaatma ( paramaatma adheenam Eva ). Teekaacharya introduces the next sutra (II.3.42) as follows: Nanu asminnapi pakshE dOsha uktaha | kartrtva shaktEhe eeshwara adheenatvE tasyaiva kartrtvam na jeevasyEti punaha shaastravaiyarthyamityetaamaashamkaam pariharatsootram paTitvaa vyaachashTe || kritEti || Is nt there a fault (dOsha uktaha) in this position (asmin pakshE) as well?. ( api) Why? Because, If the doer-ship ability belongs to and is under the control of Eeshwara (kartrtva shaktEhe eeshwara adheenatvE ) then it means only Eeshwara has kartrtva and not jeeva )( tasyaiva kartrtvam na jeevasya iti). Then again there is the difficulty that shaastra becomes futile ( punaha shaastra vaiyarthyam). Srimad Achaarya having understood this sootra which has come about to answer this difficulty interpreted it as: ( iti etaam ashamkaam pariharat sootram paTitvaa vyaachasTe) || OM krita prayatnaapEkshastu vihitapratishEdha avaiyarthyaadhibhyaha OM | - II.3.42 Bhaashya: tato aprayOjakatvam shaastrasya na aapadyate | kritaprayatnaapEkshatvaat tatprErakatvasya | aadi shabdena avaishamyaadi | Teekaa:

YatO ayam parO vidhi-nishEdhashaastra avaiyarthyaayaiva svasya vaishamyanairghrNyaparihaaraayacha jeevasya anaadikarma prayatnayOgyataa apEksha eva jeevam prErayati na tu anapEkshO ato na jeevashaktEhe eeshwara adheenatvEpi shaastra vaiyarthyam | Because (yatO) VishNU , the highest that has been established so far, ayam parO) for making the vidhi-nishEdha shaastra to be non-futile for certain (vidhi-nishEdha shaastra avaiyarthyaayaiva) and also to exclude Himself from ( svasya parihaaraaya cha) being pitiless and partial, (vaishamya-nairghrNya ) based on jeevas beginningless karma, prayatna and yOgyataa only ( jeevasya, anaadi karma prayatna yOgyataa apEksha eva) directs and controls jeeva ( jeevam prErayati) and not orbitrarily ( na tu anapEkshO). Therefore ( ato) the ability of the Jeeva to perform ( jeevashaktEhe) although belongs to and is controlled by Eeshwara ( eeshwara adheenatvEpi ) the shaastra in the form of dos and donts is not futile ( shaastra vaiyarthyam) anapekshayaa preraNe hi tat syaaditi bhaavaha | avaishamyaadi samgriheetamiti shEshaha | ukto api dOshaparihaaraha smaarayitum punaratrOktaha | sootraarthE smritisammatimaaha | | Poorveti || ( If directing the jeeva were to be orbitrary ( anapEkshayaa preraNe) then only the futility of shaastra would happen ( hi tat syaat). This is the meaning ( iti bhaavaha). The pitilessness, partiality etc ( avaishamya aadi) are to be appended (shEshaha) because they are grasped along with vidhi-nishEdha shaastra avaiyarthya. ( samgriheetam iti). Although the defectlessness has already been established in the earlier sutras ( ukto api Dosha-parihaaraha ) for the reminding of the same smaarayitum) it has been repeated here ( punaha atra uktaha). To show the sameness of opinion of smriti (smriti sammatim) in the meaning arrived at by sutra ( sootraarthE) Bhaashyakaara quoted the smriti ( aaha): Bhaashya: Poorvakarma prayatnam cha samskaaram cha api apEkshya tu | Eeshwaraha kaarayEt sarvam tachcha Eeshwarakritam svayam ( matam) | Anaaditvaat adOshashcha poorNashaktitvatO harEriti bhavishyatparvaNi | ( to be continued) == Kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part XVI Jeevasya kartrtvam ( vikaaraha ) evam praamaaNikam | tachcha na svaatantryENa |

The doership of jeeva ( i.e, change or vikaara) is thus valid, founded on evidence or proof. This doership is not due to jeevas freedom either. Bhaashya: Poorvakarmaprayatnam cha samskaaram chaapekshya tu | Eeshwaraha kaarayEt sarvam tachcha eeshwarakritam svayam | Anaaditvaat adOshascha poorNashaktitvatO harehe | iti bhavishyatparvaNi Teekaa: SamskaarO yOgyataa | karma apekshayaa prErakaTve na tat karmakartrtvam eeshwarasya ityata aaha || tachchEti || tarhi tatPreraNaapEksha abhaava ityata aaha || anaaditvaat iti || tarhi karmaNaam aanamtyaat katham tat kaarayitrtvam eeshwarasya iti tatra aaha || poorNeti || adhikaraNaarthE smritim cha aaha || Etaditi || SamskAra means Yogyataa ( fittedness). If the directing of the jeevas to perform (prErakatve) is based on previous karma ( karma apekshayaa) then the doership of that previous karma is not Eeshwaras. ( i.e, that previous karma must have already existed somehow ) ( na tat karmakartrtvam eeshwarasya ). If Eeshwara needs a prior Karma to direct the current performance of Jeeva, then the prior karma must have been there already. Then how can we say Eeshwara is the doer of that previous karma? To answer this Bhaashyakaara said (Ityata aaha ) even that previous karma is also due to and done by Eeshwara Himself ( tachcha Eeshwarakritam svayam ) In that case, ( tarhi) the dependency to direct jeevas based on Karma is not there ( tat prEraNa apEksha abhAva iti) (because is is said that original Karma of the Jeevas was done by Eeshwara Himself, where is the question of dependency on Karma there? To answer this, Bhaashyakaara said ( ityata aaha) : because of beginninglessness ( anaaditvaat iti) In that case ( tarhi), if Karma is eternal ( karmaNaam aanamtyaat ) How can we say that making the jeevas do these Karmas belongs to eeshwara? (kaarayitrtvam eeshwarasya iti) ( because for the Karma to be eternally present from beginningless time, does it mean nobody did it and it existed somehow? In that case how can we say it is Eeshwara that makes jeevas do karma? If karma can exist on its own, then how can we say Eeshwara is the all-doer?) To answer this, Bhaashyakaara said ( ityata aaha) : Because of His completeness of Power, ability ( poorNa-shaktitvatO harehe).

To summarize the meaning of this kartr-adhikaraNa ( adhikaraNaarthE) Srimad Achaarya also quoted the smriti text as ( smritim cha aaha ) : || Etaditi || Bhaashya: EtadEvam na chaapyEvam Etadasti cha naasti cha iti cha mOkshadharme || Teekaa: Etat jeevasya kartrtvamEvam praamaaNikam | na chaapyevam eeshwaravat svaatantryENa ata Etadasti na cha asti cha ityuchyata ityarthaha | This jeevas ( Etat jeevasya) kartrtva in this form ( evam) is valid i.e, Jeeva kartrtva in this form is established to be valid thro pramaaNaas. pramaaNikam). Even in this form the Kartrtva is not because of Independence ( svaatantryENa) like that of Eeshwara ( Eeshwaravat). Therefore (ata) Jeevas kartrtva is ( Etat) said (uchyata) to be there asti cha ) and also said not to be there ( na cha asti). This is the meaning of the passage. Let us go back to the beginning of began: Refer to Part-III Kartr-adhikaraNa and see how it all

Atah shruti avirOdhEna jeevasya kartrtva siddehe yuktO bhagavati shrutisamanvaya iti siddham | Therefore ( atah) because of the reason that jeeva-kartrtva is established in this way without any opposition from Shruti (shruti-avirOdhEna) and therefore Shruti samanvaya in Bhagavaan is (bhagavati shruti samanvaya) conclusively established ( iti siddham) ( For reference I have included the following from Part III) Poorvapaksha: vishNoh kartrtvam uktam | yat karma kurute tad abhisampadyate iti jeevasyaapi kartrtvam shrooyate | asyaaha shrutehe eeshwarakartrtvavaachishrutitO Baadhaat apraamaaNyaat na vishNou kaaraNatvEna shruti samanvaya iti praapte siddantayat sootram | || OM kartaa shaastraarthavatvaat OM || ( You are saying the all-doership of VishNu. But in shruti texts like yat karma kurute tad abhisampadyate - brihadaaraNyaka ( what one does, that one becomes ) in such shruti texts we hear the kartrtva of jeeva also. In this shruti text ( asyaaha shruteh) by kartrtva if shruti means kartrtva of Eeshwara eeshwara kartrtva vaachi shrutitO), then there is sublation (baadhaat) and because of this incapability to produce knowledge ( apraamaaNyaat) we say that shruti samanvaya is NOT showing vishNu sarva-kartrtva and therefore

sarva-kaaraNatva.

===== || Sree gurubhyO namaha harihi OM || Kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part XVII Our study of Kartr-adhikaraNa will not be complete without the study of aNu-bhaashya as well. So, we will go thro Tattva-manjaree of Sri Raghavendra Tiirtha which is considered tiikaa on aNu-bhaashya. ANu-bhaashya: NaraayaNam gunaihi sarvaihi udeerNam dOsha-varjitam | Jneyam gamyam guroomschaapi natvaa sootraartha uchyate || VishNurEva vijigyaasyaha sarva-kartaa aagamOditaha | SamanvayadeekshatEshcha poorNaanandOntarah khavat || Tattva-manjaree of Sree Raghavendra Tiirtha: SamastaguNasampoorNam sarvadOshavivarjitam | LakshmeenaaraayaNam vandE bhaktaabheeShTa phalapradam || There is a very important point that Raghavendra Swaamin brings out in the beginning of this work which is, Sootraartham hridi kritvyaiva bhaashyaartham samprakaashaye | AvikshEpENa bodhaartham budhyantaam tad vivEkinaha || (Only after keeping in mind (hridi kritvaa Eva) the meaning taught by brahma-sootras (sootraartham)the meaning of bhaashya i.e., aNu-bhaashya (bhaashyaartham)will be brought out by me( samprakaashaye). This is being done for a consolidated ( avikshEpENa) understanding of bhaashya(bOdhaartham). Wise people with a discerning ability ( vivEkinaha) should observe (budhyantaam) this fact(tad) ) What is Sri Raghavendra Tiirtha teaching us here?

He is teaching us the proper methodology to study bhaashya (adhyayanakrama) Normally we assume that it is Bhaashya that will bring out the meaning of the sootras. But RaghavEndra tiirtha makes it clear that bhaashyavaakyaas must be understood in the light of sootra-teaching. That is the proper way. So, when we interprit Achaarya-vaakyas we should remember that the sarva-aagama nirNaayaka is brahma-sootras. This is why bhaashya is

described as having un-fathomable meaning (ati-gahanaartha) by Teekaachaarya and by Sree Raghavendra-tiirtha in Bhaavadeepa ( which is a work on Tattva-prakaashikaa of Teekaacharya which is the teeka on Brahma-sutra-bhaashya Of Srimad Ananda Tiirtha). Bhavadeepa describes Bhaashya as: .iti kartavyataabhoota brahma-sootraaNaam yathaavadartha vivakshayaa pravrttam ati gahanaartham bhaashyam vyaachikhyaasuhu gramthaadou mangalamaacharati Jayatheertha munihi shuddhaanandOru iti (Brahma-sutras are really indispensable ( kartavyataa-bhoota). To explain the meaning of these sutras as it is, i.e, not to mix-up what is taught by sutras with ideas that have come from outside of sutras (yathaavad artha vivakshayaa), Bhaashya has come about for this sole purpose (pravrttam). This bhaashya is unfathomable in its meaning (ati gahanaartham ). Jayateertha Teekaachaarya (Jayatheertha munihi) desirous of expounding this bhaashya ( vyaachikhyaasuhu) at the commencement of his work ( gramthaadou) does mangalaacharaNa ( mangalamaacharati) as shuddhaanandOru) So the interpretation that we find normally in translated books on Srimad Achaaryas vaakyaas such as vandE vandyam sadaanandam vaasudEvam - dvaadasha stotra (I bow to vaasudEva who is ever-blissful and who is to be worshipped) jiivasya kartR^itvaabhaave shaastrasyaaprayojakatvaapatte Anuvyaakhyaana (The jiiva must indeed be a real doer; otherwise shaastra would have no scope) translations such as these become questionable. That does not mean that they are literally incorrect or that the scholarship or dedication of those who translated them is questionable. But, looking at it from the point of view that any Bhaashya-vaakya must be understood only in the light of the teachings of Brahma-sutras, such meanings and translations that one may be already familiar with even before a commencement of a study of shaastra become questionable. Therefore, they are inadequate in expounding the unfathomable depth in the meaning of those bhaashya vaakyaas. The point to note here is that whenever a Maadhwa pramEya is given to us, in the form of a translated Bhaashya-vaakya, the immediate question one should ask is "where is Brahma-Miimaamsaa shaastra here?". This is a disposition or outlook of the mind

that is needed for correct understanding of shaastra. When this outlook is not there or is not strong enough, one is happy with knowing just pramEyas, and that is what Teekaacharya calls "avichaarita ramaNeeya". Recognising these factors, Sri Vaadiraaja Tiirtha in yukti-mallikaa, one of the greatest works in Madhwa Siddantha says, Sootraanusaaree cha yat sarvam shaastramiti ati mangaLam yukti mallikaa of Vaadiraaja theertha (the shaastra which follows brahma-mimaamsaa (sootra anusaaree) is the one which can be considered as something that is very auspicious (ati mamgaLam) So, a good student of shaastra, does not go after prameyas or conclusions that are thrown at him like jeeva must indeed be a real doer, but instead concentrates on a serious study of brahma-miimaasaa shaastra to understand the bhaashya vaakya. This was the intention with which this series on kartr-adhikaraNa started. I do not have expertise and 100% control over either Samskrit or English language. So, you WILL find unsatisfactory translation here and there in these postings. This is why inclusion of moola text is a must in any translation. One or two cases of ridiculing with an attitude has been very discouraging. But clarifications even if it is in the form of dis-agreement are always welcome if it leads to a further study of Brahma-miimaasaa-shaastra because such a study is what is MamgaLa or auspicious, and can take us somewhere. But arguments and ridicule don't take us anywhere. So what we should do as students of shaastra is to question ourselves first whether the idea that has been thrown at us is a product of Brahma-Miimaamsaashaastra or not. If it is not, we can as well ignore it, for it is not MamgaLa. But at the same time, go to

a study of shaastra proper. This study of shaastra will happen according to one's adhikaara. It is the Adhikaara ( or fittedness) that decides the level of jigyaasaa. This is why the very beginning word of the very first sootra viz "OM athaatO brahma-jignyaasaa OM" i.e, the word "atha" is interpreted by Srimad Achaarya as indicating "auspecious disposition of mind" and "after having the necessary qualification". "atha shabdO mamgaLaarthO adhikaaraanamtaryaarthascha" Brahma-sutra-bhaashya The notion of commencement of a study of brahma-miimaamsaa-shaastra itself indicates mamgaLa. We will continue with tattva-manjaree on kartr-adhikaraNa in the next email. Harihi Om Tatsat, Jayakrishna Nelamangala

===== || Sree gurubhyO namaha harihi OM || Kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part XIX Tattva-manjaree: nanvathaapi yatkarma kurutE tadabhisampadyata iti jeevakartrtva shrutehe naanyaha kartaa iti tad akartrtva shrutyaa itaravyapadeshaadityatra hitaakaraNaadinaa tadakartrtva uktyaa cha viruddhatvEna amaanatva praaptehe ityataha praaptam ||OM kartaa shaastraarthavatvaat OM || ityaadisootranavakam | ( Even then (Sri Raghavendra tiirtha is referring to PumstvaadhikaraNa here) (athaa api ) a difficulty arises ( nanu). In the shruti text yat karma kurutE tad abhisampadyata (what one does, that one becomes ) which spells out the doership of jeeva (jeeva kartrtva shrutEhe) and in the shruti text naanyaha kartaa ( none apart from Brahman is the doer) which spells out that jeeva has no doership ( tad akartrva shrutyaa) and also in itaravyapadEsha adhikaraNa it is shown that if jeeva has doership then there will be nothing like effecting what is comfortable and what is hostile

( hitaakaraNaadinaa ) and therefore jeeva has no kartrtvaa ( tad akartrtva uktyaa cha). Opposite views that jeeva has doership and jeeva does not have doership are both put forth ( viruddhatvEna). Because of this reason the validity of shruti as producing yathaarthajnaana is lost. (amaanatva praaptehe). To answer this difficulty the sootra has come about (ityataha praaptam) ||OM kartraa shaastraarthavatvaat OM || and the nine sootras that follow this one (ityaadi sootra navakam). NOTES: The bhaashya in itaravyapadEsha adhikaraNa: jeeva kartrtva pakshE hitaakaraNamahitakaraNam cha na syaat (If jeeva has the all-doership, then there wont be things that cause hita and ahita) Everyone would have full control of their lives and there wont be anything like ahita to anybody because everyone would have effected only what is hita to themselves. We can also recall Dvaadasha stOtra here: yadi naama na tasya vashEssakalam kathamEva tu nityasukham na bhavEt ( If all was not in His control, then how come we dont see happiness everywhere?) Tattva-manjaree: tasyaapyarthaha | jeevastadvashagassadaa iti | The meaning of this adhikaraNa is also given by Srimad Achaarya as jeevastadvashagassadaa iti. Let us examine what this jeevastadvashagassadaa means for a moment. If we read mere translations of this text, we may find something like jeeva is ever-dependent on Him. The translation is perfect and straightforward and simple enough to be understood by even a child. And how can we say that this Bhaashya-vaakya has unfathomable depth in its meaning, when we have already understood all that it could mean namely that we are under the control of God. This is where the absolute necessity of Brahma-Miimaamsaa shaastra comes into picture. Every bhaashya-vaakya has to be understood ONLY in the light of the teachings of Brahma-sootras. Let us study Tattva-Manjaree further to see how the same Bhaashya-Vaakya becomes unfathomable in its meaning to Sree Raghavendra Tiirtha because he looks at it in the light of the teaching of Brahma-sootras.

Tattva-Manjaree brings out that fact that Srimad-Achaarya has interpreted the following adhikaraNas as jeevaha tad vashagaha sadaa. They are in order: utkraanti adhikaraNa - 7 sootras in it vyatirEka adhikaraNa - 1 sootra in it prithagupadEsha adhikaraNa 2 sootras in it yaavad adhikaraNa - 1 sootra in it pumstva adhikaraNa 2 sootras in it kartrtva adhikaraNa - 10 sootras in it So unless we have an idea of what Vedavyaasa and following him Srimad Achaarya has taught in all these 6 adhikaraNas comprising of 23 sootras, we have no clue as to why Srimad Acharya is saying jeevastad vashagassadaa. We may translate it as jeeva is under the control of God and we can get this idea even outside of Brahma-Jigyaasaa, all religions say we are under the control of God dont they?. Does it need Vedavyaasa and Srimad Acharya to establish the same thing? Or are we missing something here? So, when we read translations of this jeevastad vashagassadaa into English as jeeva is ever-dependent on God, no matter how great the author is in the laukika world, we should still ask where is BrahmaMiimaamsaa in this?. Then only and only then we have a chance to get a glimpse of the depth of the meaning of the Bhaashya. I hope the reader is able to appreciate why I say this when I say this. So, reading a translation by itself is alright only if it leads to a further study of Brahma-Miimaamsaa-Shaastra, otherwise we get the idea that all that Srimad Acharya means by jeevastad vashagassadaa is Jeeva is ever dependent on God because it has been translated so by someone whom we consider as an authority in Madhwa-siddantha. But as shown above, to understand the depth of the meaning of "jeevastad vashagassadaa" one needs to start a study of the above mentioned six adhikaraNas, Bhaashya, Teekaa, TippaNi granthas on those as well. The same logic applies to all other Bhaashya Vaakyas and translations like, vandE vandyam sadaa aanandam vaasudEvam (I bow to the blissful vAsudEva who is always vandya ) "karuNaapoorNa varaprada charitam jnyaapaya mE tE" OR OR

jiivasya kartR^itvaabhaave shaastrasyaaprayojakatvaapatte Anuvyaakhyaana (The jiiva must indeed be a real doer; otherwise shaastra would have no scope) Srimad Acharya makes this point clear as: (JigyaasOththa jnaanajaat tat prasaadaadEva muchyate - Srimad Acharya (One is released only by means of Prasaada of paraBrahman which results from the knowledge caused only by Jignaasaa) Note that the above translation which I did just now, may give some idea of what Srimad Acharya is saying. But to understand its real significance, one need to start a study of Brahma-Miimaasaa-shaastra. This is how, Brahma-Miimaasaa is sva-pratishTaapaka i.e, makes itself indispensable and becomes self-established without the help of anything outside of it. We will get into the details of this aspect of Brahma-miimaamsaa may be sometime in future. ==== ||Shree gurubhyO namaha harihi OM || Kartr-adhikaraNa in Brahma-Miimaamsaa part XX || OM kartaa shaastraarthavatvaat OM || tasyaapyarthaha aNuBhaashya: jeevastadvashagassadaa ityaadi sootra navamakam |

TattvaManjaree: kartEtyanvEti | jeevaha sadaa tadvashagaha san kartaa na tu Eeshavat svatantrassan kartEyarthaha | kartaa is to be read along with vashagassadaa i.e, bhaashya is to be read as jeevaha tad vashagaha sadaa kartaa ( kartaa iti anvEti ). Jeeva being perpetually ever-dependent on Eesha has doership ( jeevaha sadaa tad vashagaha san ) and not (na tu ) being Independent (svatantrassan) and having Kartrtva (kartaa) like Eeshwara (Eeshavat). This is the meaning of Bhaashya ( ityarthaha). naanyaha kartEtishrutihi poorvOktischa svatantra kartrtva nirOdhaparEti bhaavaha | The shruti which says Naanyaha kartaa i.e, no one else is the doer but

Him, ( Naanyaha kartEtishrutihi ) and the Shruti that was mentioned earlier (poorvOktihi cha) are against the position that Jeeva has Independent doership (svatantra kartrtva nirOdha para). This is the intended meaning of shruti ( iti bhaavaha). atra sadaa ityuktihi jakshan kreedan iti muktaavapi kartrtva shravaNEna na kadaachit nivartata iti kartrtvam taatvikamiti vaktum | Bhaashyakaara used the word sadaa here ( atra sadaa iti uktihi) to mean iti vaktum) that when we hear doership ( kartrtva shravaNena) even in the state of Mukti (muktau api) in shruti texts like jakshan kreedan ramamaaNaha that he enjoys playing in and injesting his svaroopa-bhoota Ananda ( jakshan kreedan iti ) it is meant that there is no return from the state of Mukti ( na kadaachit nivartata iti ) and to assert that doership in this form is real (kartrtvam taatvikam iti) ( i.e, doership in the form of svaroopa-bhoota kartrtva is real both here and here-after) We can also recall Srimad Acharyas definition of kartrtva here, kartrtvam dvividham prOktam vikaarascha svatantrataa | vikaaraha prakrtErEva vishNorEva svatantrataa | (Doership is said to be of two kinds : Transformation-kind-doership and Independence-kind-doership. The Independence-kind belongs only to VishNu and the transformation-kind belongs only to Prakrti or Nature. Since Jeeva is not VishNu and is part of nature, he can only have the Transformation-kind doership. This is why, in some of the earlier translations, wherever, jeeva-kartrtva is talked about, doership in the form of change or vikaara is mentioned. I hope it is clearer now. kartrtvam tu svatantratvam tadEkasya harErbhavEt | tachchaavyayam tasya jaanan katham kartaa svayam bhavEt Doership means being in the state of Independence. That doership is only Haris. One who understands (jaanan) that this doership ( tat cha) is complete (avyayam i.e, poorNa) in Hari ( tasya) how can that person think that (katham) he himself is the doer (svayam bhavet) Note how closely doership and state are connected. The state of being Independent itself is the all-doership of Hari. Kartrtva means svatantrtva. Harihi Om tatsat

====