Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1’ For this verse, see Taitt. Samh. IV, 1,1, 2,1; Vag.Samh. XI, 5: Atharva-veda XVIII, 3, 39; Rig-veda X, 13,1. The Vagasaneyins read vi sloka etu for vi sloka yanti; sireA for siréhk; srzmvantu for srinvanti; and the Rig-veda agrees with them. The dual vam is accounted for by the verse belonging to a hymn celebrating the two sakatas, carts, bearing the offerings (havirdhane); most likely, however, the dual referred originally to the dual deities of heaven and earth. I prefer the text of the Rig-veda and the Vagasaneyins to that of the Taittiriyas, and have translated the verse accordingly. In the Atharva-veda XVIII, 39, if we may trust the edition, the verse begins with svdsasthe bhavatam indave nah, which is really the end of the next verse (Rv. X, 13, 2), while the second line is, vi sloka eti pathyeva sfirid srzmvantu visve amrzidsa etat. I see no sense in pathyeva sfirt/. Sankara explains pathyeva by pathi sanmarge, athava pathy4 kfrtiZ, while his later commentary, giving srimvantu and putra sfrdtmano hirazyagarbhasya, leads one to suppose that he read sfireh sr/nvantu. SAyana (Taitt. Samh. PV thar, 2) explains pathyad sGrd iva by gfrvazam4rga antarikshe sfiryarasmayo yatha prasaranti tadvat. The same, when commenting on the Rig-veda (X, 13, 1), says: pathy4-iva sQref, yatha stotu’ svabh&ta pathya parizimasukhavahahutir visvin devan prati vividham gakkhati tadvat. Mahidhara (Vag. Samh. XI, 5) refers sre (panditasya) to slokah, and explains pathyeva by patho ’napeta pathya yaefamargapravrittahutiz. ? Yugé cannot stand for yufge; as all commentators and trans- Jators suppose, but is a datival infinitive. Neither can yufgate in the following verse stand for yunkte (see Boehtlingk, s. v.), or be explained as a subjunctive form. A. reads adhirudhyate, B. abhirudhyate, with a marginal note abhinudyate. It is difficult to say whether in lighting the fire the wind should be directed towards it, or kept from it. * That is, at the Soma sacrifice, after the fire has been kindled and stirred by the wind, the poets, on partaking of the juice, are
2II ADHYAYA, IO. 241 7. Let us Icve the old Brahman by the grace of Savitrz; if thou make thy dwelling there, the path will not hurt thee’. 8. If a wise man hold his body with its three erect parts (chest, neck, and head) even?, and turn his senses with the mind towards the heart, he will then in the boat of Brahman‘ cross all the torrents which cause fear. 9. Compressing his breathings let him, who has subdued all motions, breathe forth through the nose with gentle breath*. Let the wise man without fail restrain his mind, that chariot yoked with vicious horses. 10. Let him perform his exercises in a place®
3inspirited for new songs. Sankara, however, suggests another explanation as more appropriate for the Upanishad, namely, ‘Where the fire, i.e. the Highest Self, which burns all ignorance, has been kindled (in the body, where it has been rubbed with the syllable Om), and where the breath has acted, i.e. has made the sound peculiar to the initial stages of Yoga, there Brahman is produced.’ In fact, what was intended to be taught was this, that we must begin with sacrificial acts, then practise yoga, then reach samadhi, perfect knowledge, and lastly bliss. 1 We must read krinavase, in the sense of ‘do this and nothing will hurt thee,’ or, if thou do this, thy former deeds will no longer hurt thee. 2 Cf. Bhagavadgita VI, 13. Samam k4yasirogrivam dh&rayan. Sankara says: trizy unnatany urogrivasiramsy unnatani yasmin sarire. ’ Explained by Sankara as the syllable Om. ‘ Cf. Bhagavadgtta V, 27. Pran4panau samau kriiva nasabhyantara karinau. See Telang’s notes, Sacred Books of the East, vol. viii, p- 68 seq. 5 A similar metaphor in Ka¢h. Up. III, 4-6; Sacred Books of the East, vol. xv, p. 13. ¢ The question is whether sabdagalasrayadibhi’ should be referred to mano ’nukflle, as I have translated it, or to vivargite, as Sankara seems to take it, because he renders sabda, sound, by noise, and [15] R 242 SVETASVATARA-UPANISHAD.
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.
1’ For this verse, see Taitt. Samh. IV, 1,1, 2,1; Vag.Samh. XI, 5: Atharva-veda XVIII, 3, 39; Rig-veda X, 13,1. The Vagasaneyins read vi sloka etu for vi sloka yanti; sireA for siréhk; srzmvantu for srinvanti; and the Rig-veda agrees with them. The dual vam is accounted for by the verse belonging to a hymn celebrating the two sakatas, carts, bearing the offerings (havirdhane); most likely, however, the dual referred originally to the dual deities of heaven and earth. I prefer the text of the Rig-veda and the Vagasaneyins to that of the Taittiriyas, and have translated the verse accordingly. In the Atharva-veda XVIII, 39, if we may trust the edition, the verse begins with svdsasthe bhavatam indave nah, which is really the end of the next verse (Rv. X, 13, 2), while the second line is, vi sloka eti pathyeva sfirid srzmvantu visve amrzidsa etat. I see no sense in pathyeva sfirt/. Sankara explains pathyeva by pathi sanmarge, athava pathy4 kfrtiZ, while his later commentary, giving srimvantu and putra sfrdtmano hirazyagarbhasya, leads one to suppose that he read sfireh sr/nvantu. SAyana (Taitt. Samh. PV thar, 2) explains pathyad sGrd iva by gfrvazam4rga antarikshe sfiryarasmayo yatha prasaranti tadvat. The same, when commenting on the Rig-veda (X, 13, 1), says: pathy4-iva sQref, yatha stotu’ svabh&ta pathya parizimasukhavahahutir visvin devan prati vividham gakkhati tadvat. Mahidhara (Vag. Samh. XI, 5) refers sre (panditasya) to slokah, and explains pathyeva by patho ’napeta pathya yaefamargapravrittahutiz. ? Yugé cannot stand for yufge; as all commentators and trans- Jators suppose, but is a datival infinitive. Neither can yufgate in the following verse stand for yunkte (see Boehtlingk, s. v.), or be explained as a subjunctive form. A. reads adhirudhyate, B. abhirudhyate, with a marginal note abhinudyate. It is difficult to say whether in lighting the fire the wind should be directed towards it, or kept from it. * That is, at the Soma sacrifice, after the fire has been kindled and stirred by the wind, the poets, on partaking of the juice, are
2II ADHYAYA, IO. 241 7. Let us Icve the old Brahman by the grace of Savitrz; if thou make thy dwelling there, the path will not hurt thee’. 8. If a wise man hold his body with its three erect parts (chest, neck, and head) even?, and turn his senses with the mind towards the heart, he will then in the boat of Brahman‘ cross all the torrents which cause fear. 9. Compressing his breathings let him, who has subdued all motions, breathe forth through the nose with gentle breath*. Let the wise man without fail restrain his mind, that chariot yoked with vicious horses. 10. Let him perform his exercises in a place®
3inspirited for new songs. Sankara, however, suggests another explanation as more appropriate for the Upanishad, namely, ‘Where the fire, i.e. the Highest Self, which burns all ignorance, has been kindled (in the body, where it has been rubbed with the syllable Om), and where the breath has acted, i.e. has made the sound peculiar to the initial stages of Yoga, there Brahman is produced.’ In fact, what was intended to be taught was this, that we must begin with sacrificial acts, then practise yoga, then reach samadhi, perfect knowledge, and lastly bliss. 1 We must read krinavase, in the sense of ‘do this and nothing will hurt thee,’ or, if thou do this, thy former deeds will no longer hurt thee. 2 Cf. Bhagavadgita VI, 13. Samam k4yasirogrivam dh&rayan. Sankara says: trizy unnatany urogrivasiramsy unnatani yasmin sarire. ’ Explained by Sankara as the syllable Om. ‘ Cf. Bhagavadgtta V, 27. Pran4panau samau kriiva nasabhyantara karinau. See Telang’s notes, Sacred Books of the East, vol. viii, p- 68 seq. 5 A similar metaphor in Ka¢h. Up. III, 4-6; Sacred Books of the East, vol. xv, p. 13. ¢ The question is whether sabdagalasrayadibhi’ should be referred to mano ’nukflle, as I have translated it, or to vivargite, as Sankara seems to take it, because he renders sabda, sound, by noise, and [15] R 242 SVETASVATARA-UPANISHAD.
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.