Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
178, note 4. * Cf. Gita, p. 82, and fsopanishad, p. 12. ® Sce Gitd, p. 78, note 3. * Cf. Gitd, p. 113; Kasha, p. 99. 7 So Nilakantha. The original word ordinarily means ‘ worlds.’ ° Cf. Svetasvatara, p. 347. * Cf. the famous passage in the Taittirfya, p. 123: and also Mundaka, p. 289. ** The explanations of the commentators are not quite clear as to the word ahn§, ‘in the form of light.’ Probably the meaning is; The universe depends on the Brahman, and is, as it were, the light of the Brahman. Sankara compares the passages referred to at Gita, p. 112, note 1. * “Not by means of action,’ says Sankara, CHAPTER V, 3. 181 CuHapter V'. Grief and wrath, and avarice, desire, delusion, laziness, want of forgiveness, vanity, craving, friendship*, censoriousness, and reviling others—these twelve great enormities are destructive of a man’s life. These, O king of kings! attend on each and every man. Beset by these, a man, deluded in his understanding, acts sinfully. A man full of attachments, merciless, harsh (of speech), talkative, cherishing wrath in his heart, and boastful—these are the men of cruel qualities; (such) persons, even obtaining wealth, do not always enjoy (it)*. One ' The whole of this chapter is wanting in one of our copies of Sankara’s commentary. In the copy published in the Mahabh4rata (Madras edition) there is, however, this passage: ‘Wrath &c. have been already explained, still there are some differences here and there, and those only are now explained.’ The chapter is for the most part a repetition of what we have already had. For such repetitions cf. Brihadiranyaka, pp. 317-1016; 444-930. The same copy of Sankara’s commentary gives this general statement of the object of this and the next chapter: ‘The course of study of the science of the Brahman, in which knowledge is the principal thing, and concentration of mind &c. are subsidiary, has been described. Now is described the course of study in which concentration of mind is principal, and knowledge subsidiary. The first mode consists in understanding the meaning of the word “ you” by means of concentration of mind, and then identifying it with the Brahman by means of a study of the Upanishads ; the second, in first intellectually understanding the identity of the individual self and Brahman, by such study of the Upanishads, and then realising the identity to consciousness by contemplation, &c. In both modes the fruit is the same, and the means are the same; and to show this, the merits and defects already stated are here again declared.’ This explanation is verbatim the same in Nilakan/ha’s commentary. ? The original is ‘pity, which is explained to mean ‘friendship’ by Sankara and Nilakan/ha. * ‘Owing to there being in it no enjoyment for the self,’ says one 182 SANATSUGATIYA.
2? The original is ‘pity, which is explained to mean ‘friendship’ by Sankara and Nilakan/ha. * ‘Owing to there being in it no enjoyment for the self,’ says one 182 SANATSUGATIYA. whose thoughts are fixed on enjoyments, who is partial’, proud’, boastful when he makes a gift, miserly, and devoid of power*, who esteems the group (of the senses), and who hates (his) wife— thus have been stated the seven (classes of) cruel persons of sinful dispositions. Piety, and truthfulness, and penance, and self-restraint, freedom from animosity, modesty, endurance, freedom from censoriousness, liberality, sacred learning, courage, forgiveness—these are the twelve great observances of a Brahmama. Whoever does not swerve from these twelve may govern this whole world. And one who is possessed of three, two, or even one, of these, must be understood to have nothing of his own‘. Self-restraint, abandonment, freedom from delusion, on these immortality depends*. These are possessed by those talented Brahmazas to whom the Brahman is the principal * (thing). A Brahmama’s speaking ill of others, whether true or false, is not commended. copy of Sankara’s commentary. Another reading, which is in the Madras edition and in Nflakan/ha, may be rendered, ‘even obtaining benefits, they do not respect one (from whom they obtain them).’ 1 The commentary says the meaning is the same as that of the expression used in the corresponding place before, viz. one who prospers by injuring others. 2 One copy of Sankara’s commentary takes this to mean one who thinks the not-self to be the self. I adopt the other meaning, however, as agreeing with that of atiminf, which is the reading of some copies instead of abhim4nf. * Nilakansha reads durbala and does not explain it. See p. 167. * One commentator says this means that he should not be supposed to have incurred the demerit of having any attachment to this world. Nflakansha says, he gives up everything in the pursuit of even one of these observances. * See p. 168. * Le. the goal to be reached. The commentary takes Brahman to mean the Vedas, and the whole phrase to mean those who devote themselves to the performance of actions stated in the Vedas. CHAPTER V, I3. 183
3* See p. 168. * Le. the goal to be reached. The commentary takes Brahman to mean the Vedas, and the whole phrase to mean those who devote themselves to the performance of actions stated in the Vedas. CHAPTER V, I3. 183 The men who act thus have their places in hell. Frenzy has eighteen defects—as already described here—hatred of men, factiousness !, censoriousness, untruthful speech, lust, wrath, want of self-control *, speaking ill of others, backbiting, mismanagement in business *, quarrelsomeness, animosity, troubling living creatures, want of forgiveness, delusion, flippancy, loss of reason‘, censoriousness*; therefore a wise man should not be subject to frenzy, for it is always censured. Six characteristics should be understood as (belonging) to friendship—that one should rejoice at (anything) agreeable; and feel grieved at (anything) disagreeable; that with a pure heart one, when asked by a deserving (man), should give to him who asks what can ® certainly be given, (though it) may be beneficial to oneself, and even though it ought not to be asked, (namely) one’s favourites, sons, wealth, and one’s own wife; that one should not dwell there where one has bestowed (all one’s) wealth, through a desire (to get a return for one’s liberality) ; that one should enjoy 3 One copy of Sankara’s commentary says this means ‘ obstructing other people’s acts of piety,’ &c. * One copy of Sankara’s commentary says this means ‘being given up to intoxicating drinks,’ &c.; another copy says, ‘doing another's bidding without thought.’ * One copy says this means ‘inattention to any work undertaken;’ another renders the original by ‘ destruction of property, i.e. squandering it on dancers,’ &c. ‘ T.e. discrimination between right and wrong. * This seems to be some error, for ‘censoriousness ’ has occurred before. But neither the texts nor the commentaries give any help to correct the error. Perhaps the latter is to be distinguished as referring to the habit, and the former only to sporadic acts, of censoriousness. These qualities, I presume, constitute frenzy ; they are not the ‘defects.’ * Le. where the power to give exists. 184 SANATSUGATIYA. (the fruit of one’s? own) toils (only); and that one should forego one’s own profit®, Such a man, possessed of wealth, and possessed of merits, is a liberal man of the quality of goodness; such a one diverts the five elements from the five * (senses). This * pure penance, acquired out of desire ® by those who are fallen off from the truth, even though developed, leads upwards’; since sacrifices are performed owing to a misapprehension of the truth®. (The 1 Not a friend’s. 2 For a friend. * See Gftd, p. 120. ‘ The commentators take this to mean objects of sense, and they interpret ‘elements’ before to mean senses. ® ‘Viz. the turning away of the senses from their objects,’ says one copy of Sankara. * Scil. to enjoy the higher enjoyments of superior worlds.
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.
178, note 4. * Cf. Gita, p. 82, and fsopanishad, p. 12. ® Sce Gitd, p. 78, note 3. * Cf. Gitd, p. 113; Kasha, p. 99. 7 So Nilakantha. The original word ordinarily means ‘ worlds.’ ° Cf. Svetasvatara, p. 347. * Cf. the famous passage in the Taittirfya, p. 123: and also Mundaka, p. 289. ** The explanations of the commentators are not quite clear as to the word ahn§, ‘in the form of light.’ Probably the meaning is; The universe depends on the Brahman, and is, as it were, the light of the Brahman. Sankara compares the passages referred to at Gita, p. 112, note 1. * “Not by means of action,’ says Sankara, CHAPTER V, 3. 181 CuHapter V'. Grief and wrath, and avarice, desire, delusion, laziness, want of forgiveness, vanity, craving, friendship*, censoriousness, and reviling others—these twelve great enormities are destructive of a man’s life. These, O king of kings! attend on each and every man. Beset by these, a man, deluded in his understanding, acts sinfully. A man full of attachments, merciless, harsh (of speech), talkative, cherishing wrath in his heart, and boastful—these are the men of cruel qualities; (such) persons, even obtaining wealth, do not always enjoy (it)*. One ' The whole of this chapter is wanting in one of our copies of Sankara’s commentary. In the copy published in the Mahabh4rata (Madras edition) there is, however, this passage: ‘Wrath &c. have been already explained, still there are some differences here and there, and those only are now explained.’ The chapter is for the most part a repetition of what we have already had. For such repetitions cf. Brihadiranyaka, pp. 317-1016; 444-930. The same copy of Sankara’s commentary gives this general statement of the object of this and the next chapter: ‘The course of study of the science of the Brahman, in which knowledge is the principal thing, and concentration of mind &c. are subsidiary, has been described. Now is described the course of study in which concentration of mind is principal, and knowledge subsidiary. The first mode consists in understanding the meaning of the word “ you” by means of concentration of mind, and then identifying it with the Brahman by means of a study of the Upanishads ; the second, in first intellectually understanding the identity of the individual self and Brahman, by such study of the Upanishads, and then realising the identity to consciousness by contemplation, &c. In both modes the fruit is the same, and the means are the same; and to show this, the merits and defects already stated are here again declared.’ This explanation is verbatim the same in Nilakan/ha’s commentary. ? The original is ‘pity, which is explained to mean ‘friendship’ by Sankara and Nilakan/ha. * ‘Owing to there being in it no enjoyment for the self,’ says one 182 SANATSUGATIYA.
2? The original is ‘pity, which is explained to mean ‘friendship’ by Sankara and Nilakan/ha. * ‘Owing to there being in it no enjoyment for the self,’ says one 182 SANATSUGATIYA. whose thoughts are fixed on enjoyments, who is partial’, proud’, boastful when he makes a gift, miserly, and devoid of power*, who esteems the group (of the senses), and who hates (his) wife— thus have been stated the seven (classes of) cruel persons of sinful dispositions. Piety, and truthfulness, and penance, and self-restraint, freedom from animosity, modesty, endurance, freedom from censoriousness, liberality, sacred learning, courage, forgiveness—these are the twelve great observances of a Brahmama. Whoever does not swerve from these twelve may govern this whole world. And one who is possessed of three, two, or even one, of these, must be understood to have nothing of his own‘. Self-restraint, abandonment, freedom from delusion, on these immortality depends*. These are possessed by those talented Brahmazas to whom the Brahman is the principal * (thing). A Brahmama’s speaking ill of others, whether true or false, is not commended. copy of Sankara’s commentary. Another reading, which is in the Madras edition and in Nflakan/ha, may be rendered, ‘even obtaining benefits, they do not respect one (from whom they obtain them).’ 1 The commentary says the meaning is the same as that of the expression used in the corresponding place before, viz. one who prospers by injuring others. 2 One copy of Sankara’s commentary takes this to mean one who thinks the not-self to be the self. I adopt the other meaning, however, as agreeing with that of atiminf, which is the reading of some copies instead of abhim4nf. * Nilakansha reads durbala and does not explain it. See p. 167. * One commentator says this means that he should not be supposed to have incurred the demerit of having any attachment to this world. Nflakansha says, he gives up everything in the pursuit of even one of these observances. * See p. 168. * Le. the goal to be reached. The commentary takes Brahman to mean the Vedas, and the whole phrase to mean those who devote themselves to the performance of actions stated in the Vedas. CHAPTER V, I3. 183
3* See p. 168. * Le. the goal to be reached. The commentary takes Brahman to mean the Vedas, and the whole phrase to mean those who devote themselves to the performance of actions stated in the Vedas. CHAPTER V, I3. 183 The men who act thus have their places in hell. Frenzy has eighteen defects—as already described here—hatred of men, factiousness !, censoriousness, untruthful speech, lust, wrath, want of self-control *, speaking ill of others, backbiting, mismanagement in business *, quarrelsomeness, animosity, troubling living creatures, want of forgiveness, delusion, flippancy, loss of reason‘, censoriousness*; therefore a wise man should not be subject to frenzy, for it is always censured. Six characteristics should be understood as (belonging) to friendship—that one should rejoice at (anything) agreeable; and feel grieved at (anything) disagreeable; that with a pure heart one, when asked by a deserving (man), should give to him who asks what can ® certainly be given, (though it) may be beneficial to oneself, and even though it ought not to be asked, (namely) one’s favourites, sons, wealth, and one’s own wife; that one should not dwell there where one has bestowed (all one’s) wealth, through a desire (to get a return for one’s liberality) ; that one should enjoy 3 One copy of Sankara’s commentary says this means ‘ obstructing other people’s acts of piety,’ &c. * One copy of Sankara’s commentary says this means ‘being given up to intoxicating drinks,’ &c.; another copy says, ‘doing another's bidding without thought.’ * One copy says this means ‘inattention to any work undertaken;’ another renders the original by ‘ destruction of property, i.e. squandering it on dancers,’ &c. ‘ T.e. discrimination between right and wrong. * This seems to be some error, for ‘censoriousness ’ has occurred before. But neither the texts nor the commentaries give any help to correct the error. Perhaps the latter is to be distinguished as referring to the habit, and the former only to sporadic acts, of censoriousness. These qualities, I presume, constitute frenzy ; they are not the ‘defects.’ * Le. where the power to give exists. 184 SANATSUGATIYA. (the fruit of one’s? own) toils (only); and that one should forego one’s own profit®, Such a man, possessed of wealth, and possessed of merits, is a liberal man of the quality of goodness; such a one diverts the five elements from the five * (senses). This * pure penance, acquired out of desire ® by those who are fallen off from the truth, even though developed, leads upwards’; since sacrifices are performed owing to a misapprehension of the truth®. (The 1 Not a friend’s. 2 For a friend. * See Gftd, p. 120. ‘ The commentators take this to mean objects of sense, and they interpret ‘elements’ before to mean senses. ® ‘Viz. the turning away of the senses from their objects,’ says one copy of Sankara. * Scil. to enjoy the higher enjoyments of superior worlds.
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.