Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1' We see throughout the constant change from the masculine to the neuter gender, in addressing either the lord or his true essence. * This is again one of the famous verses of our Upanishad, because it formed for a long time a bone of contention between Vedanta and Sankhya philosophers. The Sankhyas admit two principles, the Purusha, the absolute subject, and the Prakriti, generally translated by nature. The Vedanta philosophers admit nothing but the one absolute subject, and look upon nature as due to a power inherent in that subject. The later Sankhyas therefore, who are as anxious as the Vedantins to find authoritative passages in the Veda, confirming their opinions, appeal to this and other passages, to show that their view of Prakriti, as an independent power, is supported by the Veda. The whole question is fully discussed in the Vedanta-sfitras I, 4, 8. Here we read rohitakrishna-suklam, which seems preferable to lohita-krzshna-varndim, at least from a Vedanta point of view, for the three colours, red, black, and white, are explained as signifying either the three gumas, ragas, sattva, and tamas, or better (KAand. Up. VI, 3, 1), the three elements, tegas (fire), ap (water), and anna (earth). A. reads rohitasuklakrzshvam ; B. lohitasuklakrishz4 (sic). We also find in A. and B. bhuktabhog4m for bhuktabhogy4m, but the latter seems technically the more correct reading. It would be quite wrong to imagine that aga and aga are meant here for he-goat and she-goat. These words, in the sense of unborn, are recognised as early as the hymns of the Rig-veda, and they occurred in our Upanishad I, 9, where the two agas are mentioned in the same sense as here, But there is, no doubt, a play on the words, and the poet wished to convey the second meaning of he-goat and she-goat, only not as the primary, but as the secondary intention.
2IV ADHYAYA, 9. 251 6'. Two birds, inseparable friends, cling to the same tree. One of them eats the sweet fruit, the other looks on without eating. 7. On the same tree man sits grieving, immersed, bewildered, by his own impotence (an-isd). But when he sees the other lord (tsa) contented, and knows his glory, then his grief passes away. 8%. He who does not know that indestructible being of the Azg-veda, that highest ether-like (Self) wherein all the gods reside, of what use is the Rig-veda to him? Those only who know it, rest contented. 9. That from which the maker (mayin*) sends forth all this—the sacred verses, the offerings, the sacrifices, the panaceas, the past, the future, and all
3’ The same verses occur in the Muzdaka Up. III, 1. * It is difficult to see how this verse comes in here. In the Taitt. Ar. II, 11, 6, it is quoted in connection with the syllable Om, the Akshara, in which all the Vedas are comprehended. It is similarly used in the Nrisimha-pfrva-tapani, IV, 2; V,2. In our passage, however, akshara is referred by Sankara to the paramatman, and I have translated it accordingly. Rzkah is explained as a genitive singular, but it may also be taken as a nom. plur., and in that case both the verses of the Veda and the gods are said to reside in the Akshara, whether we take it for the Paramatman or for the Om. In the latter case, parame vyoman is explained by utkrzsh/e and rakshake. $ It is impossible to find terms corresponding to maya and mayin. Mé4y& means making, or art, but as all making or creating, so far as the Supreme Self is concerned, is phenomenal only or mere illusion, maya conveys at the same time the sense of illusion. In the same manner mfyin is the maker, the artist, but also the magician or juggler. What seems intended by our verse is that from the akshara, which corresponds to brahman, all proceeds, whatever exists or seems to exist, but that the actual creator or the author of all emanations is Isa, the Lord, who, as creator, is acting through m4ya or devatmasakti. Possibly, however, anya, the other, may be meant for the individual purusha.
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' We see throughout the constant change from the masculine to the neuter gender, in addressing either the lord or his true essence. * This is again one of the famous verses of our Upanishad, because it formed for a long time a bone of contention between Vedanta and Sankhya philosophers. The Sankhyas admit two principles, the Purusha, the absolute subject, and the Prakriti, generally translated by nature. The Vedanta philosophers admit nothing but the one absolute subject, and look upon nature as due to a power inherent in that subject. The later Sankhyas therefore, who are as anxious as the Vedantins to find authoritative passages in the Veda, confirming their opinions, appeal to this and other passages, to show that their view of Prakriti, as an independent power, is supported by the Veda. The whole question is fully discussed in the Vedanta-sfitras I, 4, 8. Here we read rohitakrishna-suklam, which seems preferable to lohita-krzshna-varndim, at least from a Vedanta point of view, for the three colours, red, black, and white, are explained as signifying either the three gumas, ragas, sattva, and tamas, or better (KAand. Up. VI, 3, 1), the three elements, tegas (fire), ap (water), and anna (earth). A. reads rohitasuklakrzshvam ; B. lohitasuklakrishz4 (sic). We also find in A. and B. bhuktabhog4m for bhuktabhogy4m, but the latter seems technically the more correct reading. It would be quite wrong to imagine that aga and aga are meant here for he-goat and she-goat. These words, in the sense of unborn, are recognised as early as the hymns of the Rig-veda, and they occurred in our Upanishad I, 9, where the two agas are mentioned in the same sense as here, But there is, no doubt, a play on the words, and the poet wished to convey the second meaning of he-goat and she-goat, only not as the primary, but as the secondary intention.
2IV ADHYAYA, 9. 251 6'. Two birds, inseparable friends, cling to the same tree. One of them eats the sweet fruit, the other looks on without eating. 7. On the same tree man sits grieving, immersed, bewildered, by his own impotence (an-isd). But when he sees the other lord (tsa) contented, and knows his glory, then his grief passes away. 8%. He who does not know that indestructible being of the Azg-veda, that highest ether-like (Self) wherein all the gods reside, of what use is the Rig-veda to him? Those only who know it, rest contented. 9. That from which the maker (mayin*) sends forth all this—the sacred verses, the offerings, the sacrifices, the panaceas, the past, the future, and all
3’ The same verses occur in the Muzdaka Up. III, 1. * It is difficult to see how this verse comes in here. In the Taitt. Ar. II, 11, 6, it is quoted in connection with the syllable Om, the Akshara, in which all the Vedas are comprehended. It is similarly used in the Nrisimha-pfrva-tapani, IV, 2; V,2. In our passage, however, akshara is referred by Sankara to the paramatman, and I have translated it accordingly. Rzkah is explained as a genitive singular, but it may also be taken as a nom. plur., and in that case both the verses of the Veda and the gods are said to reside in the Akshara, whether we take it for the Paramatman or for the Om. In the latter case, parame vyoman is explained by utkrzsh/e and rakshake. $ It is impossible to find terms corresponding to maya and mayin. Mé4y& means making, or art, but as all making or creating, so far as the Supreme Self is concerned, is phenomenal only or mere illusion, maya conveys at the same time the sense of illusion. In the same manner mfyin is the maker, the artist, but also the magician or juggler. What seems intended by our verse is that from the akshara, which corresponds to brahman, all proceeds, whatever exists or seems to exist, but that the actual creator or the author of all emanations is Isa, the Lord, who, as creator, is acting through m4ya or devatmasakti. Possibly, however, anya, the other, may be meant for the individual purusha.
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.