Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1176. * J.e. on the supreme self, as above explained. * Cf. Sanatsugatiya, p. 161; SvetGsvatara, p. 290; and Brihadiranyaka,p.218; KAandogya, p.§23; Aitareya, p. 26; Kaushitaki, p. 126. 250 ANuGITA. has acquired concentration of mind, and who is selfrestrained, creates for himself even the divinity of the gods'; and abandoning the transient body, he attains to the inexhaustible Brahman. When (all) beings are destroyed, he has no fear; when (all) beings are afflicted, he is not afflicted by anything *. He whose self is concentrated, who is free from attachment, and of a tranquil mind, is not shaken by the fearful effects of attachment and affection °, which consist in pain and grief*. Weapons do not pierce him®; there is no death for him; nothing can be seen anywhere in the world happier than he. Properly concentrating his self, he remains steady to the self; and freed from old age and grief, he sleeps at ease. Leaving this human frame, he assumes bodies at pleasure. But one who is practising concentration should never become despondent *. When one who has properly achieved concentration perceives the self in the self, then he forthwith ceases to feel any attachment to Indra himself? 1 I do not quite understand the original. The other reading, dchatvam for devatvam, is not more intelligible. But comparing the two, the meaning seems to be, that the divinity of the gods, i.e. their qualities and powers as gods, are within his reach, if he likes to have them. * Cf. Gita, p. 107. * Affection is the feeling that a thing is one’s own; attachment is the feeling of liking one has for a thing acquired with difficulty, Arguna Misra. * Pain appears to be the feeling immediately following on hurt or evil suffered ; grief is the constant state of mind which is a later result. * Cf. Yoga-sdtra Bhashya, p. 208. * Cf. Gita, p. 70. Despondency is the feeling that one has not acquired ‘concentration’ after much practice, and that therefore the practice should be abandoned. * The other reading here may be rendered, ‘Then forthwith Indra himself esteems him highly.’ CHAPTER Iv, 36. 251 Now listen how one habituated to exclusive meditation attains concentration. Thinking? of a quarter seen before, he should steady his mind within and not out of the city in which he dwells. Remaining within (that) city, he should place his mind both in its external and internal (operations) in that habitation in which he dwells. When, meditating in that habitation, he perceives the perfect one, his mind should not in any way wander outside. Restraining the group of the senses, in a forest? free from noises and unpeopled, he should meditate on the perfect one within his body with a mind fixed on one point. He
2When, meditating in that habitation, he perceives the perfect one, his mind should not in any way wander outside. Restraining the group of the senses, in a forest? free from noises and unpeopled, he should meditate on the perfect one within his body with a mind fixed on one point. He ? This is all rather mystical. Nilakan/ha takes ‘city’ to mean ‘ body,’ and ‘habitation’ to mean the m@l4dh4ra, or other similar mystic centre within the body, where, according to the Yoga philosophy, the soul is sometimes to be kept with the life-winds, &c. ‘ Thinking of a quarter,’ &c., he explains to mean ‘meditating on the instruction he has received after studying the Upanishads.’ I do not understand the passage well. ‘City’ for ‘body’ is a familiar use of the word. Cf. Gité, p. 6g. The original word for habitation occurs at Aitareya-upanishad, p. 199, where Sankara explains it to mean ‘seat.’ Three ‘seats’ are there mentioned,— the organs of sight, &c.; the mind; and the Ak4sa in the heart. There, too, the body is described as a ‘city,’ and Anandagiri explains habitation to mean ‘seat of amusement or sport.’ Here, however, the meaning seems to be that one should work for concentration in the manner indicated, viz. first fix the mind on the city where one dwells, then on the particular part of it oftenest seen before, then one’s own habitation, then the various parts of one’s body, and finally one’s own heart and the Brahman within it. Thus gradually circumscribed in its operations, the mind is better fitted for the final concentration on the Brahman, As to external and internal operations, cf. note 8, p. 247. The perfect one is the Brahman. Cf. Sanatsug4tiya, p. 171. As to Avasatha, which we have rendered by ‘habitation, see also MAndukya, p. 340; Brihadaramyaka, p. 751; and the alternative sense suggested by Sankara on the Aitareya, loc. cit. * Cf. Maitri-upanishad, p. 100. 252 ANuGiTA.
3247. The perfect one is the Brahman. Cf. Sanatsug4tiya, p. 171. As to Avasatha, which we have rendered by ‘habitation, see also MAndukya, p. 340; Brihadaramyaka, p. 751; and the alternative sense suggested by Sankara on the Aitareya, loc. cit. * Cf. Maitri-upanishad, p. 100. 252 ANuGiTA. should meditate on his teeth', palate, tongue, neck, and throat likewise, and also the heart, and likewise the seat of the heart. That talented pupil, O destroyer of Madhu! having been thus instructed by me, proceeded further to interrogate (me) about the piety (required) for final emancipation, which is difficult to explain. ‘How does this food eaten from time to time become digested in the stomach? How does it turn to juice and how also to blood? And how, too, do the flesh, and marrow, and muscles, and bones—which all (form) the bodies for embodied (selfs)—develop in a woman as that (self) develops ? How, too, does the strength develop? (And how is it also) about the removal of non-nutritive (substances) *, and of the excretions, distinctly ? How, too, does he breathe inwards or outwards? And what place does the self occupy, dwelling in the self? ? And how does the soul moving about carry the body? And of what colour and of what description (is it when) he leaves it? O sinless venerable sir! be pleased to state this accurately to me. Thus questioned by that Brahmaza, O Madhava! I replied*,‘O you of mighty arms! O ‘ Nflakansha cites numerous passages from works of the Yoga philosophy in illustration of this. He takes ‘heart’ to mean the Brahman seated in the heart (cf. A/Zandogya, p. §28), and ‘the seat of the heart’ to mean the one hundred and one passages of the heart. The latter expression Arguna Misra seems to render by ‘mind.’ See also generally on this passage, Maitrt-upanishad, p- 133, and Yoga-sfitra III, 1 and 28 seq., and commentary there. * Literally, ‘those which are void of strength.’ I adopt Arguna Misra’s reading. The other reading literally means ‘ obstructions.’ * ‘The self here means the body, I take it. See p. 248 supra. « The reply does not appear here. Nilakaw/ha says that the succeeding chapters contain it. Arguna Misra scems to say that the answer has been already given. The context here is obscure. CHAPTER IV, 51. 253
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.
1176. * J.e. on the supreme self, as above explained. * Cf. Sanatsugatiya, p. 161; SvetGsvatara, p. 290; and Brihadiranyaka,p.218; KAandogya, p.§23; Aitareya, p. 26; Kaushitaki, p. 126. 250 ANuGITA. has acquired concentration of mind, and who is selfrestrained, creates for himself even the divinity of the gods'; and abandoning the transient body, he attains to the inexhaustible Brahman. When (all) beings are destroyed, he has no fear; when (all) beings are afflicted, he is not afflicted by anything *. He whose self is concentrated, who is free from attachment, and of a tranquil mind, is not shaken by the fearful effects of attachment and affection °, which consist in pain and grief*. Weapons do not pierce him®; there is no death for him; nothing can be seen anywhere in the world happier than he. Properly concentrating his self, he remains steady to the self; and freed from old age and grief, he sleeps at ease. Leaving this human frame, he assumes bodies at pleasure. But one who is practising concentration should never become despondent *. When one who has properly achieved concentration perceives the self in the self, then he forthwith ceases to feel any attachment to Indra himself? 1 I do not quite understand the original. The other reading, dchatvam for devatvam, is not more intelligible. But comparing the two, the meaning seems to be, that the divinity of the gods, i.e. their qualities and powers as gods, are within his reach, if he likes to have them. * Cf. Gita, p. 107. * Affection is the feeling that a thing is one’s own; attachment is the feeling of liking one has for a thing acquired with difficulty, Arguna Misra. * Pain appears to be the feeling immediately following on hurt or evil suffered ; grief is the constant state of mind which is a later result. * Cf. Yoga-sdtra Bhashya, p. 208. * Cf. Gita, p. 70. Despondency is the feeling that one has not acquired ‘concentration’ after much practice, and that therefore the practice should be abandoned. * The other reading here may be rendered, ‘Then forthwith Indra himself esteems him highly.’ CHAPTER Iv, 36. 251 Now listen how one habituated to exclusive meditation attains concentration. Thinking? of a quarter seen before, he should steady his mind within and not out of the city in which he dwells. Remaining within (that) city, he should place his mind both in its external and internal (operations) in that habitation in which he dwells. When, meditating in that habitation, he perceives the perfect one, his mind should not in any way wander outside. Restraining the group of the senses, in a forest? free from noises and unpeopled, he should meditate on the perfect one within his body with a mind fixed on one point. He
2When, meditating in that habitation, he perceives the perfect one, his mind should not in any way wander outside. Restraining the group of the senses, in a forest? free from noises and unpeopled, he should meditate on the perfect one within his body with a mind fixed on one point. He ? This is all rather mystical. Nilakan/ha takes ‘city’ to mean ‘ body,’ and ‘habitation’ to mean the m@l4dh4ra, or other similar mystic centre within the body, where, according to the Yoga philosophy, the soul is sometimes to be kept with the life-winds, &c. ‘ Thinking of a quarter,’ &c., he explains to mean ‘meditating on the instruction he has received after studying the Upanishads.’ I do not understand the passage well. ‘City’ for ‘body’ is a familiar use of the word. Cf. Gité, p. 6g. The original word for habitation occurs at Aitareya-upanishad, p. 199, where Sankara explains it to mean ‘seat.’ Three ‘seats’ are there mentioned,— the organs of sight, &c.; the mind; and the Ak4sa in the heart. There, too, the body is described as a ‘city,’ and Anandagiri explains habitation to mean ‘seat of amusement or sport.’ Here, however, the meaning seems to be that one should work for concentration in the manner indicated, viz. first fix the mind on the city where one dwells, then on the particular part of it oftenest seen before, then one’s own habitation, then the various parts of one’s body, and finally one’s own heart and the Brahman within it. Thus gradually circumscribed in its operations, the mind is better fitted for the final concentration on the Brahman, As to external and internal operations, cf. note 8, p. 247. The perfect one is the Brahman. Cf. Sanatsug4tiya, p. 171. As to Avasatha, which we have rendered by ‘habitation, see also MAndukya, p. 340; Brihadaramyaka, p. 751; and the alternative sense suggested by Sankara on the Aitareya, loc. cit. * Cf. Maitri-upanishad, p. 100. 252 ANuGiTA.
3247. The perfect one is the Brahman. Cf. Sanatsug4tiya, p. 171. As to Avasatha, which we have rendered by ‘habitation, see also MAndukya, p. 340; Brihadaramyaka, p. 751; and the alternative sense suggested by Sankara on the Aitareya, loc. cit. * Cf. Maitri-upanishad, p. 100. 252 ANuGiTA. should meditate on his teeth', palate, tongue, neck, and throat likewise, and also the heart, and likewise the seat of the heart. That talented pupil, O destroyer of Madhu! having been thus instructed by me, proceeded further to interrogate (me) about the piety (required) for final emancipation, which is difficult to explain. ‘How does this food eaten from time to time become digested in the stomach? How does it turn to juice and how also to blood? And how, too, do the flesh, and marrow, and muscles, and bones—which all (form) the bodies for embodied (selfs)—develop in a woman as that (self) develops ? How, too, does the strength develop? (And how is it also) about the removal of non-nutritive (substances) *, and of the excretions, distinctly ? How, too, does he breathe inwards or outwards? And what place does the self occupy, dwelling in the self? ? And how does the soul moving about carry the body? And of what colour and of what description (is it when) he leaves it? O sinless venerable sir! be pleased to state this accurately to me. Thus questioned by that Brahmaza, O Madhava! I replied*,‘O you of mighty arms! O ‘ Nflakansha cites numerous passages from works of the Yoga philosophy in illustration of this. He takes ‘heart’ to mean the Brahman seated in the heart (cf. A/Zandogya, p. §28), and ‘the seat of the heart’ to mean the one hundred and one passages of the heart. The latter expression Arguna Misra seems to render by ‘mind.’ See also generally on this passage, Maitrt-upanishad, p- 133, and Yoga-sfitra III, 1 and 28 seq., and commentary there. * Literally, ‘those which are void of strength.’ I adopt Arguna Misra’s reading. The other reading literally means ‘ obstructions.’ * ‘The self here means the body, I take it. See p. 248 supra. « The reply does not appear here. Nilakaw/ha says that the succeeding chapters contain it. Arguna Misra scems to say that the answer has been already given. The context here is obscure. CHAPTER IV, 51. 253
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.