Anubandha-Catuṣṭaya

While I was going through the commentary of Rāmatīrtha in Maitāyaṇī (Āraṇyaka) Upaniṣad I came across the phrase incorporating siddhāntanubandhacatuṣṭaya. It comes in the context of the passage that establishes the anubandha-catuṣṭaya not merely as a formal introductory convention, but as the logical framework connecting the preceding karma-kāṇḍa with the subsequent jñāna-kāṇḍa. 

The commentary says,

"Thus, through the relation of cause and effect between the preceding and the succeeding, the connection of the ritual section (karma-kāṇḍa) and the knowledge section (jñāna-kāṇḍa) is established. By this, the subject-matter, purpose and qualified aspirant of the subsequent section that is to be explained have been indicated. Since the subject-matter—the reality of one’s own Self—is established by other Vedāntic texts, and is the meaning to be established by the text under explanation, the fourfold preliminary connection (anubandha-catuṣṭaya) is thus established. We shall therefore explain this text section by section according to our understanding."

Anubandha-catuṣṭaya (अनुबन्धचतुष्टय)

This refers to the fourfold introductory factors (or preliminary connections) that every traditional śāstra or text is expected to state at the beginning. They are:

• Adhikārī – the qualified student
• Viṣaya – the subject-matter
• Prayojana – the purpose / goal
• Sambandha – the connection (between the text and the subject, or between the means and the end)

Anubandha-catuṣṭaya (अनुबन्धचतुष्टय) sets out the four essential connections of the teaching: Adhikārī, the qualified aspirant who seeks liberation; Viṣaya, the reality of the innermost Self (pratyagātman) as Brahman; Prayojana, the attainment of the highest human goal, namely liberation and supreme bliss; and Sambandha, the relation by which the teaching of the Self serves as the means to that goal. The Maitrāyaṇīya Upaniṣad presents this knowledge after the ritual section, explaining that ritual action, when performed appropriately and without attachment to its fruits, purifies the inner organ and prepares the aspirant for Self-knowledge. Thus, karma-kāṇḍa functions as a preparatory means, while jñāna-kāṇḍa directly reveals the ultimate reality. The fourfold connection thereby identifies who is qualified, what is to be known, why it is to be known, and how the teaching is related to its purpose.

~R

Icchā and a Realised Person

A realised person is not without Icchā, but one whose Icchā aligns with dharma, whose prayatna is effortless, whose action leaves no residue.

That’s why the Gītā doesn’t say “don’t act.”

It says: act without distortion.

~R

The purpose of Darśana-Śāstra

Darśana-Śāstra is a serious act to do a philosophy. Acts something like kāka-danta-parikṣā or jala-tāḍana are useless exercise without any purpose, and therefore there has to be some purpose-prayojana. In the absence of intention even a stupid person won’t commence any activity. 

प्रयोजनम् अनुद्दिश्य न मन्दोऽपि प्रवर्तते।

यावत् प्रयोजनं नोक्तं तावत् तत् केन गृह्यते ।

And all these systems were having vāda within and with each other. There are so many philosophical systems, and thats the beauty of different worldview and debate on the same text. So, the philosophical system which is called the Darśana-Śāstra is divided into two — Darśana and Śāstra. Darśana gives goal of life, it makes us realize and discover of what we are. Goal is of total transformation. Śāstra is the means of achievement of goals, it provides method, path and model to the world views.

तत्  शास्त्रं पुरुषश्रेयस् अभिधत्ते।

सर्वो हि शास्त्रार्थः पुरुषार्थपर्यवसायी।

All system of thoughts ultimately must terminate in showing puruśārtha which is the ultimate goal of life. So, philosophy is to be done for a purpose.

Focus of Pūrvamīmāṃsā

 Pūrvamīmāṃsā focussed on two factors

1. Value of Culture and Traditions
2. System of Interpretation

Pūrvamīmāṃsā developed a tool for interpretation of text in context of Vedic rituals. Ancient India was ritual based culture, for the enactment of value education. What is value? The values were not of accumulating but there was a culture of giving and sharing, from where it gets reflected? This can be seen from small clauses. There are beautiful and meaningful thoughts in the text like out of sixteen priests the leader Adhvaryu says, “idam agnaye” (this is for the fire), “idam na mama”, this clause means, “this is not mine” i.e. sacrifice is the message of rituals, bhoga is not the message. But a man cannot live without bhoga, like for Upanishad says, 

कुर्वन्नेवेह कर्माणि जिजीविषेत् शतं समाः। 

एवं त्वयि नान्य था अस्ति न कर्म लिप्यते नरे।। ईशोपनिषद्-2

Doing verily works in this world one should wish to live a hundred years. Thus it is in thee and not otherwise than this; action cleaves not to a man.     

jijīviṣet śataṁ samāḥ, which means live for hundred years. kurvanneveha karmāṇi, do whatever you want to live for hundred years, but this thought is attached with a clause. This thought comes with tena tyaktena bhuñjita where tyāga-sacrifice is the message. This message becomes the philosophy of life. This is the best form of Yoga, i.e., niṣkāma karma yoga found in Bhagvad Gita. The origin of the idea of niṣkāma karma yoga in Bhagvad Gita comes from rituals of Rg Veda. 

There had been many hinderances in passing down the necessity and context of the rituals. On the onset of revivals there may have been many questions on the rituals of the texts. There was a necessity to comprehend them. The necessity to comprehend the context of Vedic rituals, on the other hand, led to the development of an interpretation system. This tool was developed by the Pūrvamimāṃsā and eventually this tool was used by everyone to suit their worldview. It became a universal tool. 

How should I attempt to realize myself

 How should I attempt to realize myself—

 आत्मा वा अरे द्रष्टव्यः श्रोतव्यो मन्तव्यो निदिध्यासितव्यो मैत्रेयि। बृहदारण्यकोपनिषद् २।४।१५

1. श्रोतव्यः—श्रुति—Authentic information—श्रुति वाक्येभ्यः—listen to आप्तवाक्य (sentence of a reliable person, one who knows the truth. आप्त is यथार्थ वक्ता (तर्कसङ्ग्रह). आप्त cannot be any Human being because inadvertently he may incur error. He suffers from limitations. By definition Human being is किञ्चिज्ज्ञः (with limited knowledge and limited capacity. मनुष्यवाक्य; Human sentence is not dependable; आप्त वाक्य is the वाक्य of ईश्वर, ईश्वर is defined as नित्यज्ञान अधिकरण). Our knowledge is अधीत्य—acquired—comes by acquisition. नित्यज्ञान is non-fallable and therefore 'this entity-यथार्थ वक्ता-in this case ईश्वर' is postulated for the realization of  ज्ञान, so they are dependable.
2. मन्तव्यः—मननश्च उपपत्तिभिः—analyze logically, examine and reflect and conclude 
3. निदिध्यासितव्यः— meditate upon the reflections
4. आत्मा वा अरे द्रष्टव्यः —Final injunction—one should realize oneself.

And this is of course not easy...

The structure of a discourse in the Science of Interpretation

Mīmāṃsā process of establishing principles of interpretation is named as adhikaraṇa. A universal model of discussion was developed— ‘अधिकरण पद्धति’. 

Adhikaraṇa consists of five things. 

The structure of a discourse in this Science of Interpretation will have the following five components: (a) विषय; a problem, issue or topic (b) विशय; doubt (c) पूर्वपक्ष; opponent’s view (d) उत्तरपक्ष; proponent’s view (e) सङ्गति; rationality, cogency, the coherence among them. 

This understanding comes from Kumārila Bhaṭṭa in his Ślokavārtika which explains this method.

    विषयविशयोश्चैवपूर्वपक्षस्तथोत्तरः। सङ्गतिश्चेति पञ्चाङ्गं शास्त्रे अधिकरणं मतम्॥

Somehow this is what is lacking in every field of discourse in our contemporary times. Not only contemporary but lots of books are written failing to understand the science of interpretation to be followed especially with the Indic texts. This includes not only western academia but is also not followed by the Indian researchers. 

School of Prabhākara—Development

School of Prabhākara—Development

Prabhākara is Kumārila’s student and yet he is called Guru. Tatvacintāmaṇī elaborates, Kumārila while teaching Prabhākara and other students, came across the sentence which was not properly translated by Kumārila himself. In his view the sentence has retained an ambiguity. The sentence was

तत्रापिनोक्तमत्रापितुनोक्तम्  [तत्र तु नोक्तम् अत्रापि नोक्तम्]

अतो द्विरुक्तम्

Kumārila was unable to make any sense out of it, since he translated as, “Here also is not said, there also is not said, but it is said twice.” For this same verse Prabhākara dissolved the sandhi in another way,

तत्र अपिना उक्तम्

अत्रापि तुन उक्तम्

He helped his guru to decipher. तत्र तुना उक्तम् (this is stated by the word “तु” previously), अत्र अपिना उक्तम् (this is stated by the word “अपि” here”). Therefore, it has been stated twice. 

Thus the story elucidates the authority of student Prabhākara upon Kumārila. Another story is ; debate of social custom to be followed. Both were having opposite views.

Kumārila is now no more propagated, Prabhākara takes up from there.