Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1And we accordingly hold, that unless L2 148 SANATSUGATIYA. other and further evidence requires a reversal of this judgment, the Sanatsugatiya may be treated as a work nearly contemporary with the Bhagavadgit4, and occupying generally the same point of view. One word, finally, about the translation. As stated already, the text adopted is that which appears to have been before Sankard#arya. And the translation follows mainly his interpretations in his commentary. Sometimes we have followed Nilakaztha, whose commentary has been consulted as well as a very incorrect copy of apgother commentary by one Sarvag#a Narayana, contained in the MS. from Puvza lent me by Professor Bhandarkar. In some places even the commentators have failed to clear up obscurities, and there we have given the best translation we could suggest, indicating the difficulties. There has been an endeavour made here, as in the case of the Bhagavadgita, to keep the translation as close and faithful to the text as the exigencies of the English language permitted. The exegetical notes are mostly taken from the commentaries, even where the name of the commentator is not specified ; while the references to parallel passages have been collected, mostly by myself, in the same way as in the case of the Bhagavadgita. SANATSUGATIYA. Cuapter I. DhritarAsh/éra said: If, O Vidura! there is anything not (yet) said by you in (your) discourse, then do impart it to me who wish to hear, for you have spoken marvellous (things). Vidura said : O Dhritardshéra! the ancient youth Sanatsugata, (otherwise called) San4tana’, who declared that death exists not—he, O descendant of Bharata! the best of all talented men, will explain all the doubts of your mind, both those (which are) secret *, and those openly declared. Dhrttardshéra said: What, do you not yourself know more about this (subject), that SanAtana should explain (it) to me ? Explain (it) yourself, O Vidura! if there is any remnant of intelligence (left) in you. * So Nilakantha. Sankara says Sanatsugita is Sanatkuméra, and the component parts of the name he paraphrases by ‘born from Brahman.’ For Sandtana, see Brihaddramyaka, p. 506, and note 1, p. 141 supra. * Le. relating to subjects which may be freely discussed by all, and those which may not. Nilakan/ha adopts a different reading, which he interprets to mean ‘doctrines exoteric and esoteric,’ e.g. self-resiraint, &c. and the acquisition of mystic power, &c., respectively. The expression ‘doubts of the mind’ occurs, however, further on. 150 SANATSUGATIYA. Vidura said : I am born of a Sidra womb, and do not like to say more than what (I have said). But the intelligence of that youth, I believe to be eternal’. He who has come of a Brahmaza womb, even though he may proclaim a great mystery, does not thereby become liable to the censure of the gods. Therefore do I say this to you. Dhritarash/¢ra said :
2But the intelligence of that youth, I believe to be eternal’. He who has come of a Brahmaza womb, even though he may proclaim a great mystery, does not thereby become liable to the censure of the gods. Therefore do I say this to you. Dhritarash/¢ra said : Do you, O Vidura! speak to the ancient San4tana for me, so that there may be a meeting even here, between (myself in) this body (and him). Vaisampayana ? said : (Then) Vidura meditated on that sage whose vows are laudable*. And he, too, O descendant of Bharata! knowing of such meditation, made his appearance. And he‘, too, received him with the ceremonies prescribed in the ordinances. After he had been comfortably seated, and had taken rest, Vidura then spoke to him: ‘ Venerable sir! there is some doubt in Dhrttardshéra’s mind, which cannot ' Le. I suppose, never-failing, and such as can deal with all sorts of topics. Sanatkum4ra, it need scarcely be stated, is the teacher of N&rada in the famous dialogue in the XAandogyopanishad, p. 473. * Vaisampayana is the narrator of the grand story of which pieces like the present form parts. * The reading is sometimes different, so as to mean ‘of rigid vows,’ as at Gita, p. 61 supra. * The pronouns here are too numerous. Does ‘he’ here refer to Dhrstarash/ra? Vidura seems more likely, though the express mention of him in the next sentence might be treated as pointing the other way. CHAPTER II, 2. 15! be explained by me. Do you be pleased to explain (it) tohim. Hearing it (explained), this lord of men may cross beyond all misery, so that gain and loss}, (what is) agreeable and (what is) odious, old age and death, fear and vindictiveness, hunger and thirst, frenzy and worldly greatness, disgust and also laziness, desire and wrath, ruin and prosperity, may not trouble him.’ Cuapter II. Vaisampayana said : Then the talented king, Dhrztarash/ra, bowed ! to those words uttered by Vidura, and, in a secluded place *, interrogated Sanatsugdta regarding the highest knowledge‘, wishing to become (a) highsouled (man) °. Dhrttardsh/ra said : O Sanatsugata! which of the two is correct, your teaching *, about which I have heard, that death exists not, or that’ the gods and demons practised * Comp. Gft4 passim; disgust, scil. that resulting from a general dissatisfaction with everything. As to ‘ruin and prosperity,’ Nilakantha adds, ‘and their causes, sin and merit.’ * Literally ‘respected.’ Nflakanfha says it means ‘rejoiced over,’ for Dbritarishéra thought, that in spite of his treachery he was safe, as death was taught by Sanatsug4ta to have no existence. * Ie. free from the presence of ignorant and vulgar people. Cf. Gita, p. 68 supra. * Le. knowledge concerning the supreme Self. * Sankara’s construction seems different, but is not quite clear. He says, ‘ wishing to become—Brahman—the meaning is wishing to acquire the self Jost through ignorance.’ * Le. imparted to your pupils, Sankara adds; ‘heard,’ scil. from Vidura.
3* Le. knowledge concerning the supreme Self. * Sankara’s construction seems different, but is not quite clear. He says, ‘ wishing to become—Brahman—the meaning is wishing to acquire the self Jost through ignorance.’ * Le. imparted to your pupils, Sankara adds; ‘heard,’ scil. from Vidura. * The construction is imperfect, but the sense is clear. Is your 152 SANATSUGATIY A. the life of Brahmaé4rins', for freedom from death ? Sanatsugata said : Some (say), that freedom frem death (results) from action?; and others that death exists not. Hear me explain (this), O king! have no misgiving about it *. Both truths, O Kshatriya! have been current from the beginning‘. The wise maintain what (is called) delusion (to be) death. 15 verily call heedlessness death, and likewise I call freedom from heedlessness immortality. Through heedlessness, verily, were the demons* vanquished; and through freedom view correct, or the view involved in the practice of gods and demons? 1 See Gitd, p. 69 supra; Ka/Aopanishad, p. 102; Prasna, p. 162. As to the gods being afraid of death, see KhAndogya, p. 50; and Nrisimha T4pinf, p. 32; and as to gods and demons practising the life of Brahmafirins, see XAAandogya, p. 571; and cf. Brrhadfranyaka, p. 964. * T.e. action prescribed in the Vedas. * I.e. as to how I shall be able to reconcile the seeming contradiction between the ‘two truths.’ * T.e. of creation. * Sanatsugata says he differs from ‘the wise ;’ delusion=thinking the not-self to be the self; heedlessness=falling off from one’s natural condition as the Brahman—which is the cause of delusion (Sankara). See p.153 infra; Kasha, p.152; and Taittiriya-upanishad, p. 80. * Sankara suggests that demons might mean creatures attached to worldly objects; and gods those who are pleased in their own self; and he cites a stanza in support of this suggestion. The allusion, however, seems to be plainly to the story at A’Adndogya, P- 571 seq., where the idea and expression of ‘ being vanquished’ also occurs (p. 583). That word Sankara interprets in connexion with his suggested interpretation to mean ‘are born in lower species.” See Ahaindogya, p. 585, and Maitrt, p. a11, about asuras or demons. It is interesting to note that in the Introduction to the Mah4bhishya, there is an allusion to a story of the ‘demons’ being ‘ vanquished ’ in consequence of their grammatical blunders. CHAPTER II, 9. 153
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1And we accordingly hold, that unless L2 148 SANATSUGATIYA. other and further evidence requires a reversal of this judgment, the Sanatsugatiya may be treated as a work nearly contemporary with the Bhagavadgit4, and occupying generally the same point of view. One word, finally, about the translation. As stated already, the text adopted is that which appears to have been before Sankard#arya. And the translation follows mainly his interpretations in his commentary. Sometimes we have followed Nilakaztha, whose commentary has been consulted as well as a very incorrect copy of apgother commentary by one Sarvag#a Narayana, contained in the MS. from Puvza lent me by Professor Bhandarkar. In some places even the commentators have failed to clear up obscurities, and there we have given the best translation we could suggest, indicating the difficulties. There has been an endeavour made here, as in the case of the Bhagavadgita, to keep the translation as close and faithful to the text as the exigencies of the English language permitted. The exegetical notes are mostly taken from the commentaries, even where the name of the commentator is not specified ; while the references to parallel passages have been collected, mostly by myself, in the same way as in the case of the Bhagavadgita. SANATSUGATIYA. Cuapter I. DhritarAsh/éra said: If, O Vidura! there is anything not (yet) said by you in (your) discourse, then do impart it to me who wish to hear, for you have spoken marvellous (things). Vidura said : O Dhritardshéra! the ancient youth Sanatsugata, (otherwise called) San4tana’, who declared that death exists not—he, O descendant of Bharata! the best of all talented men, will explain all the doubts of your mind, both those (which are) secret *, and those openly declared. Dhrttardshéra said: What, do you not yourself know more about this (subject), that SanAtana should explain (it) to me ? Explain (it) yourself, O Vidura! if there is any remnant of intelligence (left) in you. * So Nilakantha. Sankara says Sanatsugita is Sanatkuméra, and the component parts of the name he paraphrases by ‘born from Brahman.’ For Sandtana, see Brihaddramyaka, p. 506, and note 1, p. 141 supra. * Le. relating to subjects which may be freely discussed by all, and those which may not. Nilakan/ha adopts a different reading, which he interprets to mean ‘doctrines exoteric and esoteric,’ e.g. self-resiraint, &c. and the acquisition of mystic power, &c., respectively. The expression ‘doubts of the mind’ occurs, however, further on. 150 SANATSUGATIYA. Vidura said : I am born of a Sidra womb, and do not like to say more than what (I have said). But the intelligence of that youth, I believe to be eternal’. He who has come of a Brahmaza womb, even though he may proclaim a great mystery, does not thereby become liable to the censure of the gods. Therefore do I say this to you. Dhritarash/¢ra said :
2But the intelligence of that youth, I believe to be eternal’. He who has come of a Brahmaza womb, even though he may proclaim a great mystery, does not thereby become liable to the censure of the gods. Therefore do I say this to you. Dhritarash/¢ra said : Do you, O Vidura! speak to the ancient San4tana for me, so that there may be a meeting even here, between (myself in) this body (and him). Vaisampayana ? said : (Then) Vidura meditated on that sage whose vows are laudable*. And he, too, O descendant of Bharata! knowing of such meditation, made his appearance. And he‘, too, received him with the ceremonies prescribed in the ordinances. After he had been comfortably seated, and had taken rest, Vidura then spoke to him: ‘ Venerable sir! there is some doubt in Dhrttardshéra’s mind, which cannot ' Le. I suppose, never-failing, and such as can deal with all sorts of topics. Sanatkum4ra, it need scarcely be stated, is the teacher of N&rada in the famous dialogue in the XAandogyopanishad, p. 473. * Vaisampayana is the narrator of the grand story of which pieces like the present form parts. * The reading is sometimes different, so as to mean ‘of rigid vows,’ as at Gita, p. 61 supra. * The pronouns here are too numerous. Does ‘he’ here refer to Dhrstarash/ra? Vidura seems more likely, though the express mention of him in the next sentence might be treated as pointing the other way. CHAPTER II, 2. 15! be explained by me. Do you be pleased to explain (it) tohim. Hearing it (explained), this lord of men may cross beyond all misery, so that gain and loss}, (what is) agreeable and (what is) odious, old age and death, fear and vindictiveness, hunger and thirst, frenzy and worldly greatness, disgust and also laziness, desire and wrath, ruin and prosperity, may not trouble him.’ Cuapter II. Vaisampayana said : Then the talented king, Dhrztarash/ra, bowed ! to those words uttered by Vidura, and, in a secluded place *, interrogated Sanatsugdta regarding the highest knowledge‘, wishing to become (a) highsouled (man) °. Dhrttardsh/ra said : O Sanatsugata! which of the two is correct, your teaching *, about which I have heard, that death exists not, or that’ the gods and demons practised * Comp. Gft4 passim; disgust, scil. that resulting from a general dissatisfaction with everything. As to ‘ruin and prosperity,’ Nilakantha adds, ‘and their causes, sin and merit.’ * Literally ‘respected.’ Nflakanfha says it means ‘rejoiced over,’ for Dbritarishéra thought, that in spite of his treachery he was safe, as death was taught by Sanatsug4ta to have no existence. * Ie. free from the presence of ignorant and vulgar people. Cf. Gita, p. 68 supra. * Le. knowledge concerning the supreme Self. * Sankara’s construction seems different, but is not quite clear. He says, ‘ wishing to become—Brahman—the meaning is wishing to acquire the self Jost through ignorance.’ * Le. imparted to your pupils, Sankara adds; ‘heard,’ scil. from Vidura.
3* Le. knowledge concerning the supreme Self. * Sankara’s construction seems different, but is not quite clear. He says, ‘ wishing to become—Brahman—the meaning is wishing to acquire the self Jost through ignorance.’ * Le. imparted to your pupils, Sankara adds; ‘heard,’ scil. from Vidura. * The construction is imperfect, but the sense is clear. Is your 152 SANATSUGATIY A. the life of Brahmaé4rins', for freedom from death ? Sanatsugata said : Some (say), that freedom frem death (results) from action?; and others that death exists not. Hear me explain (this), O king! have no misgiving about it *. Both truths, O Kshatriya! have been current from the beginning‘. The wise maintain what (is called) delusion (to be) death. 15 verily call heedlessness death, and likewise I call freedom from heedlessness immortality. Through heedlessness, verily, were the demons* vanquished; and through freedom view correct, or the view involved in the practice of gods and demons? 1 See Gitd, p. 69 supra; Ka/Aopanishad, p. 102; Prasna, p. 162. As to the gods being afraid of death, see KhAndogya, p. 50; and Nrisimha T4pinf, p. 32; and as to gods and demons practising the life of Brahmafirins, see XAAandogya, p. 571; and cf. Brrhadfranyaka, p. 964. * T.e. action prescribed in the Vedas. * I.e. as to how I shall be able to reconcile the seeming contradiction between the ‘two truths.’ * T.e. of creation. * Sanatsugata says he differs from ‘the wise ;’ delusion=thinking the not-self to be the self; heedlessness=falling off from one’s natural condition as the Brahman—which is the cause of delusion (Sankara). See p.153 infra; Kasha, p.152; and Taittiriya-upanishad, p. 80. * Sankara suggests that demons might mean creatures attached to worldly objects; and gods those who are pleased in their own self; and he cites a stanza in support of this suggestion. The allusion, however, seems to be plainly to the story at A’Adndogya, P- 571 seq., where the idea and expression of ‘ being vanquished’ also occurs (p. 583). That word Sankara interprets in connexion with his suggested interpretation to mean ‘are born in lower species.” See Ahaindogya, p. 585, and Maitrt, p. a11, about asuras or demons. It is interesting to note that in the Introduction to the Mah4bhishya, there is an allusion to a story of the ‘demons’ being ‘ vanquished ’ in consequence of their grammatical blunders. CHAPTER II, 9. 153
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.