SrI: SrImathE satakOpAya nama: SrImathE rAmAnujAya nama: SrImadh varavaramunayE nama:
sUthram 56
ஶ்ருதி, ஒளபாதி3கபே4த4த்தைச் சொல்லுகிறதென்னவொண்ணாது.
Sruthi aupAdhika bhEdhaththaich chollugiRadhenna oNNAdhu.
Meaning
It cannot be said that the Sruthi teaches only differences arising from upAdhis (limiting adjuncts).
Explanation
The opponent’s argument
If the previous Sruthi teaches Athma-bhEdha, then it would appear to contradict many other Sruthi passages which are interpreted as teaching the oneness of the jIvA, such as:
भोक्ता भोग्यं प्रेरितारं च मत्वा
bhokthA bhOgyam prErithAram cha mathvA
“Having considered (understood) the enjoyer, the object of enjoyment, and the impeller (the one who prompts).”
पृथगात्मानं प्रेरितारं च मत्वा
pruthak AthmAnam prErithAram cha mathvA
“Having considered the individual self as distinct, and (also) the impeller (the one who directs).”
ज्ञाज्ञौ द्वावजावीशनीशौ
gyAgyau dhvAv ajAvISa anISau
“The knower and the non‑knower — the two unborn ones — the ruler and the non‑ruler.”
अन्योऽन्तर आत्मा विज्ञानमयः
anyO’nthara AthmA vigyAnamaya:
“There is another inner self, the one made of knowledge (the vijñānamaya ātman).”
Therefore, the opponent argues that the Sruthi speaking of Athma-bhEdha should be understood as referring only to aupAdhika-bhEdha – differences caused by limiting adjuncts (upAdhis) – and not to any real distinction among souls.
Refutation
pi|LLai lOkAchArya rejects this interpretation.
The Sruthi does not teach merely aupAdhika-bhEdha.
Here, aupAdhika-bhEdha refers to distinctions such as:
- differences among dhEvas, humans, and other embodiments, and
- differences such as kAma (desire), krOdha (anger), and other qualities associated with the body and mind.
These are incidental distinctions arising from upAdhis, not the real distinction intended by the Sruthi.
adiyen vAsudhEva rAmAnuja dhAsan
archived in https://granthams.koyil.org
pramEyam (goal) – https://koyil.org
pramANam (scriptures) – https://granthams.koyil.org
pramAthA (preceptors) – https://acharyas.koyil.org