The Bhagavadgîtâ, with the Sanatsugâtîya and the Anugîtâ — SBE Vol. 8 (trans. K. T. Telang, 1882)
The translator’s English as printed (K. T. Telang). The original-language text is not held; names are romanised as the translator printed them.
The Brâhmaṇa’s wife said:
How did speech come into existence first, and how did the mind come into existence afterwards, seeing that words are uttered (after they have been) thought over by the mind? By means of what experience does intelligence come to the mind, and (though) developed, does not comprehend ?? What verily obstructs it?
The Brâhmaṇa said:
The Apâna becoming lord changes it into the state of the Apâna in consequence. That is called the movement of the mind, and hence the mind is in need (of it)*, But since you ask me a question regarding speech and mind, I will relate to you a dialogue between themselves. Both speech and mind went to the self of all beings* and spoke (to him thus), ‘Say which of us is superior ; destroy our doubts, O lord!’ Thereupon the lord positively said to speech, ‘Mind (is superior). But speech thereupon said to him, ‘I, verily, yield (you) your desires 4,’
1 This, again, is to my mind very hard to understand. : The original word for ‘intelligence’ is mati, which at Khândogya, p. 514, Sankara interprets thus: ‘ intelligence is pondering, application to (literally, respect for) the subject of thought” The original for ‘ developed,’ Arğuna Miśra renders by ‘ mixed or assimilated with ;’ and ‘does not comprehend,’ he takes to mean ‘ does not understand—speech or words.’ This question appears to be suggested by the last words of the previous speech.
2 These two sentences are again very obscure. Nîlakaṇṭha, as usual, deserts his original, giving peculiar meanings to the words without producing any authority. Arğuna Miśra is very meagre, and besides the MS. is very incorrect. See p. 264, note 5 infra.
5 Je. Pragâpati, says Arğuna Miśra, which seems to be justified by the sequel. Nîlakaṇṭha takes it to mean the individual self, which doubtless is its meaning elsewhere, e. g. Maitri, p. 56. + J.e, speech conveys information on all matters, Arğuna Miśra;
The Brâhmaṇa’s wife said:
How did speech come into existence first, and how did the mind come into existence afterwards, given that words are uttered only after they have been thought over by the mind? Through what kind of experience does intelligence come to the mind, and yet, even when fully developed, fails to comprehend? What exactly stands in its way?
The Brâhmaṇa said:
The Apâna becoming lord changes it into the state of the Apâna as a result. This is called the movement of the mind, and for that reason the mind stands in need of it. But since you have asked me about speech and mind, I will tell you of a dialogue between them. Speech and mind both went to the self of all beings and said to him, "Tell us which of us is superior; put our doubts to rest, O lord!" The lord then declared plainly to speech that Mind is superior. But speech replied to him, "I, for my part, yield you your desires 4."
1 This, again, is very hard for me to understand. : The original word for 'intelligence' is mati, which at Khândogya, p. 514, Sankara interprets as follows: 'intelligence is pondering, application to—that is, respect for—the subject of thought.' The original word for 'developed' is rendered by Arjuna Miśra as 'mixed or assimilated with,' and 'does not comprehend' he takes to mean 'does not understand speech or words.' This question seems to be prompted by the closing words of the preceding speech.
2 These two sentences are again very obscure. Nîlakaṇṭha, as usual, abandons his original, assigning peculiar meanings to the words without citing any authority. Arjuna Miśra is very thin, and the manuscript is also very corrupt. See p. 264, note 5 infra.
5 That is, Prajâpati, says Arjuna Miśra, which the sequel seems to justify. Nîlakaṇṭha takes it to mean the individual self, which is doubtless its meaning elsewhere, e. g. Maitri, p. 56. † That is, speech conveys information on all matters, Arjuna Miśra;