Reconciliation of Sāṅkhya & Pūrva-mīmāṁsā with the Vaiṣṇava-siddhānta & interpretation of Yoga-sūtras in the Vaiṣṇava light.
Query shared on 20th February 2017 AD — 6:00:53 AM – PST —
Sir Nagendra Sharma Rao ‘Advaitin’ (Flushing, New York, USA):
a) Now I have some questions TO LEARN for you. You are very well versed and traditionally trained, I could see that instantly from the manner and content of your responses. That is why it is such an honor, pleasure, enriching and ennobling experience to interact with you.
I do not have to qualify or give a lot of explanation.
How do you reconcile the two avowedly atheistic schools out of the six astika darsana scholars, namely Purva Mimamsa and Nirisvara Samkhya with the avowedly dualistic, theistic Dvaita Vada?
b) This other question is related to details of upasana, dhyana, samadhi, vide pratyahara-dharana-dhyana-samadhi iti samyama continuum from the Yoga Sutras.
There are two Sutras from the Yoga Sutras:
There is a Sutra in Patanjali, prātibhādvā sarvam [Yoga Sutra 3.34], on which Vivekananda comments: “Everything comes to him [to a man with Pratibha] …
ऋतम्भरा तत्र प्रज्ञा ॥४८॥
The knowledge in that is called “filled with Truth”.
The next aphorism will explain this.
श्रुतानुमानप्रज्ञाभ्यामन्यविषया विशेषार्थत्वात् ॥४९॥
49. The knowledge that is gained from testimony and inference is about common objects. That from the Samadhi just mentioned is of a much higher order, being able to penetrate where inference and testimony cannot go.
How do you include or integrate this with astika Dvaita Vada theory anc practice?
Reply by Gurupādācārya Svāmī ‘Acintya-bheda-abheda-vādī’ –
A) The avowedly atheistic school of Pūrva-mīmāṁsā (including three of its Bhāṭṭa, Murārīya & Prabhākarīya sub-divisions) is reconciled by a Rāmānujīya Viśiṣṭādvaitīya work known as Seśvara-mīmāṁsā of Veṇkaṭanātha. Since, all vaiṣṇava schools have a common ground of dvaita to some extent, no separate treatment has been given from each vaiṣṇava school concerning the pūrva-mīmāṁsā.
The atheistic school of nirīśvara-sāṅkhya is reconciled by adopting the sāṅkhya-darśanam as propounded by bhagavad-āvatāra Kapiladeva in the 3rd Canto of Śrīmad-bhāgavatam.
B) The Pātañjala-yoga-sūtra 3.49 – “श्रुतानुमानप्रज्ञाभ्यामन्यविषया विशेषार्थत्वात्॥४९॥“ / “śrutānumāna-prajñābhyām anya-viṣayā viśeṣārthatvāt /” – This applies to scriptures which have not arose from the jnana/yoga-samādhi or the bhakti-samādhi. Both Mahābhārata (Gītā included) and Śrīmad-bhāgavatam have been manifest from samādhis. The first chapter of Mahābhārata confirms this – “puṇye himavate pāde madhye giri-guhālaye…..” and Śrīmad-bhāgavatam – “bhakti-yogena manasi samyak praṇihite ‘male….”. Hence, the above aphorism from Yoga-sūtra is inapplicable to the knowledge assimilated from the samādhi-labdha-granthāni viz. Mahābhārata and Śrīmad-bhāgavatam.
Yoga-sūtra 3.48 (ऋतम्भरा तत्र प्रज्ञा ॥४८॥ / ṛtambharā tatra prajñā) is reconciled with the following phrase of Bhagavad-gītā – “…dadāmi buddhi-yogaṁ taṁ yena mām upayānti te…”.
Yoga-sūtra 3.34 (प्रतिभावाद्वा सर्वम् / pratibhāvād vā sarvaṁ) is reconciled with the Nārada-pañcarātra statement cited in Bhaktirasāmṛtasindhu 1.1.34 – “hari-bhakti-mahādevyāḥ sarvā mukty-ādi-siddhayaḥ / bhuktayaś cādbhutās tasyāś ceṭikāvad anuvratāḥ //”
— Gurupādācārya Svāmī