śāstra-yonitvāt - The Lord can be known only through the sastras.

The Supreme Brahman can be understood not by just mere logic and inference, but through the sastras. By this knowledge, the original consciousnesses of the soul can be uncovered.

« Vedānta-sūtra: The Govinda-bhāṣya of Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa

Sūtra 1.1.3 - The Lord is known through the sastras

śāstra-yonitvāt

sastra: the Vedic scriptures; yonitvat: because of being the source, origin or, womb.

He, the Absolute Truth, cannot be known merely by reasoning; He is known only through the śāstras.

Commentary: After understanding that Brahman is a personality, where can we find out more about Him? This is answered in the third śutra, “śāstra-yonitvāt“, meaning that the Supreme Brahman can be understood not by just mere logic and inference, but through the sastras. By this knowledge, the original consciousnesses of the soul being simultaneously one and different from the Lord can be uncovered. As Śrīla Prabhupāda explains in his purport to SB 3.32.28:

“It is confirmed in the Vedānta-sūtra, śāstra-yonitvāt: one has to acquire pure knowledge from the authorized scriptures. So-called speculative arguments about the Absolute Truth are therefore useless. The actual identity of the living entity is his consciousness, which is always present while the living entity is awake, dreaming or in deep sleep. Even in deep sleep, he can perceive by consciousness whether he is happy or distressed. Thus when consciousness is displayed through the medium of the subtle and gross material bodies, it is covered, but when the consciousness is purified, in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, one becomes free from the entanglement of repeated birth and death.

When uncontaminated pure knowledge is uncovered from the modes of material nature, the actual identity of the living entity is discovered: he is eternally a servitor of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The process of uncovering is like this: the rays of sunshine are luminous, and the Sun itself is also luminous. In the presence of the Sun, the rays illuminate just like the Sun, but when the sunshine is covered by the spell of a cloud, or by māyā, then darkness, the imperfection of perception, begins. Therefore, to get out of the entanglement of the spell of nescience, one has to awaken his spiritual consciousness, or Kṛṣṇa consciousness, in terms of the authorized scriptures.”

Śāstra-yonitvāt simultaneously indicates that the Supreme Lord is the author of all revealed scriptures, and that all revealed scriptures are for knowing the Supreme Lord. Superficially, Veda means “knowledge”, but in a deeper sense, Veda means knowledge that leads us to the Lord. The Vedas were composed by the Lord specifically to revive the forgotten spiritual consciousness of the conditioned souls. Even parts of the scriptures that appear to discuss other topics exist only to gradually lead us to this ultimate conclusion. This is further emphasized by Kṛṣṇa on Bg 15.15:

“By all the Vedas, I am to be known. Indeed, I am the compiler of Vedānta, and I am the knower of the Vedas.”

The previous sūtra already established that everything emanates from the Lord, and thus śāstra-yonitvāt further contradicts the idea that Brahman is an impersonal, undifferentiated mass, since He is the source of all the Vedas. The most important meaning, however, is that although transcendental, Brahman can be understood by us. However, He is understood not through our limited imagination, but by the study of the guidebooks He himself left in the form of the sastras, which include books such as the Purāṇas and Upaniṣads, culminating with the Bhagavad-gītā and the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. This is confirmed by many passages from the Upaniṣads:

sac-cid-ānanda-rūpāya kṛṣṇāyākliṣṭa-kāriṇe

namo vedānta-vedyāya gurave buddhi-sākṣiṇe

“I offer my respectful obeisances to Sri Kṛṣṇa, whose form is of existence, consciousness, and bliss (sat-cit-ānanda). Although performing actions, he is fully transcendental, completely aloof to material karma and entanglement, and can be understood by the conclusions of the Vedas. He is the supreme spiritual master, the witness in everyone’s heart who reveals himself by guiding one’s intelligence.” (Gopāla-tāpanī Upaniṣad 1.1)

tam tv aupaniṣadam puruṣam pṛcchāmi

“I ask you about that Supreme Person (Puruṣa), who is described in the Upaniṣads, and who is the creator and maintainer of all planets and universes.” (Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upanisad 3.9.26)

The process for understanding the Absolute Truth

All conditioned souls share four defects: having imperfect senses and intelligence, being propense to make mistakes, cheating others, and being illusioned. We gather imperfect information by using our limited senses, and this imperfect information is further processed using our imperfect intelligence. Because we tend to be illusioned, we often process information under an incorrect framework, which increases the opportunities for mistakes. Not only that, but we may also be cheated by others who want to take advantage of us, or we may cheat ourselves by finding excuses to believe whatever we want to believe. Due to all these factors, it is impossible to reach perfect knowledge through mere logic and speculation. Perfect knowledge has to come from outside the material universe, from the transcendental world, which brings us to the Vedic scriptures.

Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa mentions that the word “not” should be understood to be present at the beginning of this sūtra, even though it is not directly expressed. In this way, athāto brahma-jijñāsā indicates the necessity of inquiring about the absolute truth, janmādy asya yataḥ establishes Brahman as the Supreme Person, who controls multifarious energies and possesses creative intent, even though not touched by the material energy, and adding “not” to the beginning of śāstra-yonitvāt negates the possibility of understanding the absolute truth by mental speculation, reinforcing the point that He can be understood only through the sastras. Two ideas are present: one negative (he can’t be understood by logic) and one positive (He can be understood through the sastras). Just like the cause of the birth of a child is the pregnant mother, the cause of understanding the Lord is the Vedic literature, as indicated by the word “yonitvat”, which comes from the word yoni, or womb.

Amongst the different books that comprise the Vedic literature, the Upaniṣads directly describe the Supreme Personality of Godhead. It is said that “aupaniṣadam puruṣam“ (the Supreme Person is understood through the revelation of the Upaniṣads). The Vedānta-sūtra brings the conclusions of the Upaniṣads, and the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the natural commentary to the Vedānta-sūtra. Therefore, if we can study and understand these two books, or if we can just study and understand the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, we will understand the conclusions of all Upaniṣads.

The limitations of material logic

One could argue that the best method for understanding anything, including the Supreme Lord, is the process of logical examination, and thus we should listen to great logicians, such as Gautama Ṛṣi, who composed the Nyāya-sūtras. To support this view, one could quote the teachings of Yājñavalkya to Maitreyī in the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upanisad (4.5.6):

ātmā vā are draṣṭavyaḥ śrotavyo mantavyo

The word “ātmā” in the verse indicates the Supreme Lord, but if ātmā is taken as simply meaning “the Self”, then the verse appears to support this viewpoint: “The Self should be investigated, heard, contemplated, and meditated upon.”

However, the process of logic and examination described in this verse by the word mantavyo (to be understood by logic) should be used to understand the revelation of the scriptures, and not as a process by itself. This is confirmed by the context of the passage: Yājñavalkya is instructing Maitreyī on transcendental knowledge and telling her to meditate on this knowledge and thus realize the Supreme Lord. In this way, the passage ends up contradicting the argument instead of supporting it. In this way, ātmā vā are draṣṭavyaḥ śrotavyo mantavyo means that the Supreme Lord should be investigated, heard, contemplated, and meditated upon as part of the process of studying the scriptures from the spiritual master.

This is confirmed by the following statement of sruti-sastra:

pūrvāpara-virodhena, ko ‘rtho ‘trābhimato bhavet

ity ādyam ūhanam tarkaḥ, śuṣka-tarkam vivarjayet

“By examining discrepancies between earlier and later parts of a text, one should find what meaning is intended, resolving such apparent contradictions. This is the proper function of reasoning (tarka). Dry logic and speculation (śuṣka-tarka) should be avoided.”

Often, there are apparent contradictions between different passages of the scriptures. When this happens, reasoning should be employed to solve these contradictions and find the correct interpretation through the filter of the conclusions of other passages, the general meaning of the text, and the conclusions of past ācāryas. This verse emphasizes that we should avoid dry-reasoning (suska-tarkam), avoiding rigid, dry interpretations of the texts based on literal interpretation, and should instead consider the broader context, taking into consideration the previous and subsequent passages, as well as the broader conclusions of the text, using thoughtful and nuanced reasoning (tarka) to understand the various layers of meaning and the general purpose of the text.

When the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upanisad mentions that the Absolute Truth should be understood by logic, it simply refers to this process. These points are also confirmed in sūtras 2.1.11 and 2.1.27. After understanding the Supreme Person by study of the Upaniṣads, one should become absorbed in meditation on Him.

The goal of the Vedas is not to just speculate endlessly about the absolute truth, but to understand the Lord’s names, form, qualities, pastimes, and so on, in order to gradually become rapt in meditation on Him. The Lord is absolute, and thus His name, His form, His qualities, His pastimes, and paraphernalia, etc., are all non-different. He is the witness of all living entities, He is the resting place of a host of transcendental qualities. He is the creator of the material universes, and still, He remains unchanged eternally. By hearing about His transcendental glories, one may worship Him perfectly. That’s the ultimate goal of the scriptures.

Further arguments

Another argument that could be raised is that Vedānta philosophy doesn’t give positive orders or negative prohibitions, but simply describes the Absolute Truth. People in general are interested in practical knowledge, a series of instructions that tell them what to do to achieve a certain result. Since the Upaniṣads don’t give such a series of instructions, how can they be considered useful?

One could argue that what is the use of giving a description such as “On the Earth, there are seven continents“? It’s more useful to give a series of practical orders like “one desiring wealth should approach the king,“ or “one suffering from indigestion should restrict his intake of water,“ or like ordered in the Vedas, “svarga-kāmo yajeta“ (one desiring to enter the celestial planets should worship the demigods), “suram na pibet” (no one should drink wine), and so on. He could argue that the Upaniṣads don’t give us a string of orders and prohibitions, but just descriptions of the Supreme Lord. For example, the Upaniṣads tell us “satyam jñānam“ (the Supreme Personality of Godhead is truth and knowledge), but this is of little help to help us understand what to do.

This idea appears to be confirmed by Jaimini Muni:

āmnāyasya kriyārthatvād anarthākhyam atadarthānām

“The scriptures teach us pious duties. Any scriptural passage that does not teach us our duty is declared to be meaningless.” (Purva-mimamsa 1.2.1)

tad-bhutanam kriyarthena samamnayo ‘rthasya tan-nimittatvat

“Just as a verb gives meaning to a sentence, in the same way, instructions for action give meaning to the statements of the scriptures.” (Purva-mimamsa 1.1.25)

To this objection, Sri Baladeva replies:

“Do not be bewildered. Even though the Upaniṣads do not give us a series of orders and prohibitions, they still teach us about the Supreme Brahman, the most important and valuable object to be attained by any living entity. Just as if in your house there was a hidden treasure, and a description of its location were spoken to you, those words would not be useless simply because they were a description. In the same way the Upaniṣads’ description of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is the greatest treasure to be attained by any living being, whose form is eternal, full of knowledge and full of bliss, who is perfect and beyond any criticism, who is the friend of all living entities, the Supreme Lord who is so kind that He gives Himself to His devotees, and the supreme whole of all existence, of whom I am a tiny part, is not useless, but of great value to the conditioned soul. The descriptions of the Supreme Brahman in the Upaniṣads are valuable, just as the description “your son is now born” is useful and a source of great joy, and the description “This is not a snake, but only a rope partly seen in the darkness”, is also useful and a great relief from fear.”

Common people are more attracted to a series of steps, rules, and prohibitions to attain certain specific material results because they are more attracted to the temporary, searching for knowledge that can help them solve their immediate material problems and obtain a better material situation in the future. This is as true today as it was in previous ages. From the descriptions of the scriptures, we learn that even in Treta-yuga, people were mainly interested in performing sacrifices to obtain material results. Only a minority would inquire about transcendental knowledge to stop the process of birth and death.

That’s why the Vedas deal mainly with fruitive activities, offering a gradual path of advancement for common people. The Upaniṣads, however, offer something more valuable, a permanent solution for the problem of birth and death. Instead of merely teaching us how to adjust to conditioned life under the three modes of material nature, they teach us to become transcendental to them, reattaining our eternal position as pure souls. As Kṛṣṇa indicates in Bg 2.45:

trai-guṇya-viṣayā vedā, nistrai-guṇyo bhavārjuna

nirdvandvo nitya-sattva-stho, niryoga-kṣema ātmavān

“The Vedas deal mainly with the subject of the three modes of material nature. O Arjuna, become transcendental to these three modes. Be free from all dualities and from all anxieties for gain and safety, and be established in the self.”

Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa quotes another verse, this one from the Taittirīya Upanisad (2.1.2), which elaborates further on the specific benefits of understanding the Supreme Brahman:

satyam jñānam anantam brahma

yo veda nihitam guhāyām saḥ aśnute sarvān kāmān

“The Supreme Brahman has no limits. He is eternal and full of knowledge, and He is the eternal transcendental reality. The liberated soul, who knows this Brahman, who is hidden inside the cave of the heart, enjoys the fulfillment of all his desires in the company of the Supreme Lord.” (Taittirīya Upanisad 2.1.1)

Although attractive to the common man, fruitive work (karma) has very little value, for the results are not only limited but also temporary in nature. No one can say that the Upaniṣads teach about ordinary fruitive action. Rather, the Upaniṣads aim to completely uproot karma by describing the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is the original creator, maintainer, and destroyer of all the universes, whose spiritual form is eternal, and who is a great ocean of unlimited auspicious transcendental qualities.

Jaimini is the proponent of the philosophy of Pūrva-mīmāmsā, which emphasizes fruitive activity. However, Sri Baladeva argues that in reality he was a faithful devotee of the Lord, who was fixed in the transcendental platform, despite writing instructions to common people who lacked the qualification for anything higher than the path of fruitive action.

According to Sri Baladeva, Jamini’s apparent criticisms of the Upaniṣads in texts like the two verses quoted above, where he mentions that verses that don’t describe fruitive action are a waste of time are just part of his commentaries on the karma-kanda sections of the Vedas, where the purpose is to teach about fruitive activities and where verses that don’t fulfill this goal have limited utility. The Upaniṣads, on the other hand, speak on a different subject, being concerned about Brahman alone. In this way, these passages from Jaimini are not a critique of the Upaniṣads or Vedānta philosophy, which is just outside the scope of the Karma-mīmāmsā philosophy propounded by him.

Exercise

Now it’s your turn. Can you answer the following arguments using the ideas from this section?

Opponent: “The sage Gautama and others maintain that Brahman can be understood by logical examination. We find it quite reasonable since through logic and reason, all advancements are made, such as in the areas of sociology, economics, mathematics, and all scientific areas. Logic and reason are the main processes for obtaining knowledge.

For example, we infer fire from smoke. Even if we can’t directly see the fire, we can understand that fire is there because smoke is seen at a distance. Smoke is then the seen effect of an unseen cause (fire). In the same way, by observing order and causality in the universe, as well as other effects, we infer an ultimate cause, even though the ultimate cause itself is unseen. In this way, Īśvara or Brahman is an inferable entity, not something that can be understood from scripture alone.

This is also corroborated in the Vedic aphorism “ātmavāre mantavyo”, from the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad, which tells us that “The Self is to be considered and reasoned about.” Therefore, the Vedas also agree on this point. To rely on scripture alone, without the checks and balances of logical examination risks inconsistency and is not in harmony with the teachings of the Vedas themselves.”

By logic and reason, we can understand the world, and by the same process, we can understand the Self. All sciences depend on reasoning. Mathematics, medicine, politics, astronomy, they all progress only by logical analysis. If reason can penetrate such vast subjects, why deny its capacity to understand Īśvara, or Brahman? To just argue that logic fails to understand transcendental topics is an arbitrary argument without a solid basis. We therefore conclude that if there is a God, logic and reason are the tools by which we can harmonize the contradictory statements of the Vedas and come to understand him.”

Description: This purvāpakṣa represents a student of Nyāya (logic), who claims that even God can be inferred, believing in the universal usage of logic. Just as the Pūrva-mīmāmsa, Nyāya is one of the six classical systems (ṣaḍ-darśanas) of Indian philosophy, founded by the sage Gautama. In Nyāya, the sāstras are accepted as one of the four means of obtaining knowledge. In total, four methods are accepted: pratyakṣa (direct perception; what we can see, hear, etc.), anumāna (inference, supported by logic), upamāna (comparison, analogy), and śabda (testimony from the scriptures and great teachers). The Vedas are thus accepted as a reliable source of knowledge, but not as a divine revelation. In practice, Nyāya subordinates śāstra to inference and perception as an epistemic authority.

The Vedānta school of Vyasadeva, on the other hand, sustains that although logic and reasoning are valid tools to understand the empirical reality, they are ineffective to understand the Supreme Lord, who is beyond logical inference.

« Vedānta-sūtra: The Govinda-bhāṣya of Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa