B.G 3.14, 15 and 16
अन्नाद् भवन्ति भूतानि पर्जन्यादन्नसम्भवः। यज्ञाद् भवति पर्जन्यो यज्ञः कर्मसमुद्भवः ॥१४॥
कर्म ब्रह्मोद्भवं विद्धि ब्रह्माक्षरसमुद्भवम्। तस्मात् सर्वगतं ब्रह्म नित्यं यज्ञे प्रतिष्ठितम् ॥१५॥
एवं प्रवर्तितं चक्रं नानुवर्तयतीह यः। अघायुरिंद्रियारामो मोघं पार्थ स जीवति ॥१६॥
From food comes beings, and food becomes possible from rains. The rains are produced from 'Yajna' and it is 'Yajna' that is the source of the prescribed duties. The actions have their origin in Brahman, and understand that the Vedas also arose simultaneously from that same Brahman. Therefore, the all pervading Brahman is always situated in the 'Yajna'. O Partha, he who does not adhere to the cycle thus set in motion, who only delights in the senses, is sinful, and lives in vain.
Gīta Bhāshya 3.14, 15 and 16
Why person should engage himself in 'Yajna' is further elaborated. It is 'Yajna' that sustains the food cycle. The actions and the natural duties are born from the Brahman. It is incorrect to apply secondary meaning when primary meaning applies. Hence 'Brahma' means the Brahman, and 'Akshara' means the Vēdas. To state Vēdas stem from unconscious activity of the lord, and thus are inferior is against the basic purport of scriptures. The omniscience lord is ever conscious. For entities and principles that are eternal (e.g. Vēdas, beings, etc), when words like creation and destruction are used, it implies manifest and unmanifest. In comparison to silo statements, authoritative texts have superior weight. Hence, following Brahmasutras "He from whom the creation and such activities are caused" (B.S.1.1.2), and Vēdas are authority on the origin of the universe (B.S.1.1.3) establish the authority of Vēdas. The Brahman being ever established in 'Yajna', and the expression of Vēdas by beings completes the cycle. 'Aghayu' - One who does'nt adhere to the cycle set in mothion and thus sinful.
हेत्वन्तरमाह - अन्नात् इति।
Another reason (why one must continue to perform ones prescribed duties) is provided by 'annat' verse.
यज्ञः पर्जन्यान्नत्वात् तत्कारणम् उच्यते। पूर्वयज्ञविवक्षायां चक्रप्रवेशो न भवति। तद्धि आपाद्यं कर्मविधये। न तु साम्यमात्रेण इदानीं कार्यम्।
'Yajna' results in rain, which in turn results in food. Underlying cause is explained here. Original entry into the cycle of 'Yajna' at the beginning of creation is not the topic of discussion. Indeed, it is intended to explain the duties to be performed in the future. It is not just because of similarities (in these cycles of duties performed by the Devas) that the activities are prescribed.
मेघचक्राभिमानी च पर्जन्यः। तच्च यज्ञाद् भवति।
The rain occurs from the cloud system. And clouds are formed because of 'Yajna':
"अग्नौ प्रास्ताहुतिः सम्यगादित्यमुपतिष्ठति। आदित्याज्जायते वृष्टिर्वृष्टेरन्नं ततः प्रजाः॥"
इति स्मृऽतेश्च।
"A properly given offering into fire raises up and reaches the Sun. Rain is formed from the Sun. From rain food comes forth, and from food the beings are born."
-states the Vēdic testimonial.
उभयवचनात् आदित्यात् समुद्राच्चाविरोधः। अतश्च यज्ञात् पर्जन्योद्भवः सम्भवति। यज्ञो देवताम् उद्दिश्य द्रव्यत्यागः। कर्म इतरक्रिया ॥१४ ॥
The sentences 'from the Sun' and 'from the Ocean' may appear contradictory. Hence, it is told 'from Yajna formation of rain becomes possible'. Yajna is sacrificing material substances addressing the Devas. 'Karma', i.e. prescribed duties, refers to other activities.
कर्म ब्रह्मणो जायते।
The actions and the natural duties are born from the Brahman.
"एष ह्येव साधु कर्म कारयति"(कौषीतकि ब्राह्म ३.९), "बुद्धिर्ज्ञानम्"(का॰वृ॰ ३.२.१८८)
इत्यादिभ्यः।
"He only causes virtuous action to happen", "Wisdom and knowledge are from Him"
-there are such testimonials.
न च मुख्ये सम्भाव्यमाने पारम्पर्येण औपचारिकं कल्प्यम्। न च जडानां स्वतः प्रवृत्तिः सम्भवति।
Without the primary source as testimonial, the orthodox practices cannot be justified. Tendency to act does not take place from inert matter on its own.
"एतस्य वा अक्षरस्य"
इत्यादि सर्वनियमनश्रुतेश्च।
"From Him only are the Vēdas."
-such testimonials indicate, everything is under His governance.
"द्रव्यं कर्म च"
इत्यादेश्च अचिन्त्यशक्तिश्चोक्ता। जीवस्य च प्रतिबिम्बस्य बिम्बपूर्वैव चेष्टा। "न कर्तृत्वम्"(५.१४) इत्यादिनिषेधाच्च।
"Even the actions and material substances (are under His governance)."
All these indicate His inconceivable power. The activities of the individual being are driven (by the lord) similar to the relationship that exists between the reflected image and the original object. The Gita verse 5.14 by stating "no doer ship or agency", rejects agency to (the individual soul).
अक्षराणि प्रसिद्धानि। तेभ्यो ह्यभिव्यज्यते परं ब्रह्म। अन्यथा अनादिनिधनम् अचिन्त्यं परिपूर्णमपि ब्रह्म को जानाति।
'akṣara' is well known (as alphabets, i.e. Vēdas). From it, indeed, is realized the supreme Brahman. Otherwise, how can that Brahman be known who is without beginning, who is inconceivable, and who is complete.
न च रूढिं विना योगाङ्गीकारो युक्तः। परामर्शाच्च-
Providing technical interpretation alone, while discarding common usage, is not appropriate. Also, one must base the argument on comprehensive analysis.
"तस्मात् सर्वगतं ब्रह्म"
इति।
"Therefore, the all pervading Brahman..."
- stated thus.
न ह्येकेन शब्देन द्विरुक्तेन भेदश्रुतिं विना वस्तुद्वयं कुत्रचिदुच्यते।
Indeed, in the same context, for the same word, two different interpretations are not appropriate. There is no precedence for such interpretation unless mentioned explicitly.
तानि च अक्षराणि नित्यानि-
The following sentences are conveying the Vēdas to be eternal-
"वाचा विरूप नित्यया", "अनादिनिधना नित्या वागुत्सृष्टा स्वयंभुवा ", "अत एव च नित्यत्वम्"
इत्यादि श्रुति-स्मृति-भगवद्वचनेभ्यः।
"Vēdas are without form and eternal", "Without beginning or end, eternal, self created by speech, i.e. Vēdas are self-existent without beginning or end", "Therefore, indeed, (his creation cycle) is said to be eternal"
- such are testimonials from Vedas, texts, and proverbs.
दोषश्चोक्तः सकर्तृकत्वे। न च अबुद्धिपूर्वमुत्पन्नानि। तत्प्रमाणाभावात्। निःश्वसितशब्दस्तु आक्षेपाभिप्रायः नाबुदि्धपूर्वाभिप्रायः। "सोऽकामयत" - इत्यादेश्च। "इष्टं हुतम्" - इत्यादि रूपप्रपञ्चेन सह अभ्यधानाच्च।
We may have to attach defects to Vēdas, if we say it is created through human agency or if we say it is created without His knowledge. There are no testimonials to support such arguments. The word 'niḥśvasita', i.e. 'like breathing', is intended to convey the ease with which the lord brings forth the existing Vēdas, and does not indicate His ignorance in the matter. "He thus desired and created..." - this testimonial indicates the lord's intention, thus his conscious action. "The desires are sacrificed.." - and such statements indicate, even the manifestation of the world happens along with (Vēdas as a conscious activity of the lord).
महातात्पर्यविरोधाच्च। तच्चोक्तं पुरस्तात्। न ह्यस्वातन्त्र्येण उत्पत्तिकर्तुः प्राधान्यम्। अस्वातन्त्र्यं च तदमतिपूर्वकत्वेन भवति। यथा रोगादीनां पुरुषस्य तज्जत्वेऽपि।
It is contradictory to the main purport (of the lord being the independent and supreme principle) as well; as explained previously (2.24). Indeed, engaging in creation activities without being independent is not superiority. Not being independent can happen only with previously existing cause. Such experiences such as diseases and such miseries are limited to beings as birth has a cause.
उत्पत्तिवचनानि अभिव्यक्त्यर्थानि अभिमानिदेवताविषयाणि च। "नित्या" इत्युक्त्वा "उत्सृष्टा" इति वचनात्। अभिव्यञ्जके कर्तृवचनं चास्ति-
The statements that refer to the creation of the universe are implicitly point to the governing deities as well. In this context, words "eternal" and "born" must be reconciled to mean "eternally existing principles re-manifests" at the time of creation. Sometimes statements indicate agency to mean "remanifestation of principles". There are testimonials to this effect:
"कृत्स्नं शतपथं चक्रे"
इति।
"He constructed a section of the Brahmana named 'śatapatha'"
- described thus.
कथं आदित्यस्था वेदाः तेनैव क्रियन्ते।
How can the Vēdas that were already stationed in the Sun be described as created (by Yajnavalkya)?
वचनमात्राच्च निर्णयात्मकशारीरकोक्तं बलवत्। शास्त्रं योनिः प्रमाणं अस्येति तु शास्त्रयोनिम्। "जन्माद्यस्य यतः" इत्युक्ते प्रमाणं हि तत्रापेक्षितम्। न तु तस्य जातत्वं वेदकारणत्वं वा। नहि वेदकारणत्वं जगत्कारणत्वे हेतुः। न हि विचित्रजगत्सृष्ठेः वेदसृष्टिः अशक्या सृज्यत्वे। न च सर्वज्ञत्वे। यदि वेदस्रष्टा सर्वज्ञः किमिति न जगत्स्रष्टा। तस्मात् वेदप्रमाणकत्वमेवात्र विवक्षितम्। अतो नित्यान्यक्षराणि।
In comparison to a mere single statement, the section of literature that conveys conclusive knowledge has weight. Textual testimonials, i.e. Vēdas are authority on the origin (of the universe) is the right interpretation for 'śāstrayōnim' (Brahmasutra 1.1.3, and not 'Brahman is the cause of Vēdas'). Because the previous brahmasutra, 1.1.2, 'janmādyasya yataḥ' i.e. "He from whom the creation and such activities are caused" provides the context (and includes creation of Vēdas as well). Indeed, His i.e. Brahman's birth is not due to Vēdas. Certainly Vēdas cannot be the reason for the cause of the Universe. It is not impossible to comprehend the creation of the Vēdas by the Brahman, along with the creation of such a diverse and variegated universe. Attributing omniscience to the Brahman only because he is the cause of Vēdas is also not appropriate. Therefore, in the current context, the authority of the Vēdas as testimonials is only sought to be understood. Thus, the 'aksharani' i.e. Vēdas i.e. Knowledge is eternal.
यत एवं परम्परया यज्ञाभिव्यङ्ग्यं ब्रह्म तस्मात् तत् नित्यं यज्ञे प्रतिष्ठितम्।
Indeed, through the Disciple lineage as well, the Brahman is said to be expressed through 'Yajna'. Therefore, in that eternal 'Yajna' the Brahman is ever established.
तानि च अक्षराणि भूताभिव्यङ्ग्यानि इति चक्रम् ॥१५॥
From those beings the Vēdas are expressed. Thus is the cycle of universe.
तदेतत् जगच्चक्रं यो नानुवर्तयति सः तद्विनाशकत्वात् अघायुः। पापनिमित्तमेव यस्यायुः सः अघायुः ॥ १६ ॥
Therefore, one who does not adhere to this universal cycle, because of his destructive nature, is called 'aghāyu'. One who spends his life span in sinful causes is called 'aghāyu'.
