Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1small ether within the lotus of the heart mentioned in Kh. Up. VIII, 1 is the elemental ether or the individual soul or Brahman ; the last alternative being finally adopted. In favour of the second alternative the purvapakshin pleads the two passages Kh. Up. VIII, 3, 4 and VIII, 12, 3, about the serene being (samprasada) ; for by the latter the individual soul only can be understood, and in the chapter, of which the latter passage forms part, there are ascribed to it the same qualities (viz. freeness from sin, old age, death, &c.) that were predicated in VIII, 1, of the small ether within the heart. — But the reply to this is, that the second passage refers not to the (ordinary) individual soul but to the soul in that state where its true nature has become manifest, i. e. in which it is Brahman ; so that the subject of the passage is in reality not the so-called individual soul but Brahman. And in the former of the two passages the soul is mentioned not on its own account, but merely for the purpose of intimating that the highest Self is the cause through which the individual soul manifests itself in its true nature. — What Ramanu^a understands by the avirbhava of the soul will appear from the remarks on IV, 4. The two next Sutras (22, 23) constitute, according to vSankara, a new adhikara^a (VII), proving that he ' after whom everything shines, by whose light all this is lighted ' (KaMa Up. II, 5, 15) is not some material luminous body, but Brahman itself. — According to R&manu^a the two Sutras do not start a new topic, but merely furnish some further arguments strengthening the conclusion arrived at in the preceding Sutras2. 1 Sutras 14-2 1 are divided into two adhikara/zas by the Adhikara/mratnamala, but really constitute a simple adhikara^a only. 2 Itaj ^aitad evam. Anukrztes tasya £a. Tasya daharakaj-asya parabrahma/zo mukarad ayam apahatapapmatvadigu/zako vimuktabandha^ pratyagatma na daharaka^a^ tadanukaras tatsamyaw tatha hi pratyagatmanoxpi vimuktasya INTRODUCTION* XXXV11 Adhik. VIII (34, 25) decides that the person of the size of a thumb mentioned in Ka#5a Up. II, 4, 12 is not the individual soul but Brahman. The two next adhikara/zas are of the nature of a digres- sion. The passage about the angush/^amatra was explained on the ground that the human heart is of the size of a span ; the question may then be asked whether also such individuals as belong to other classes than mankind, more particularly the Gods, are capable of the knowledge of Brahman : a question finally answered in the affirmative.
2human heart is of the size of a span ; the question may then be asked whether also such individuals as belong to other classes than mankind, more particularly the Gods, are capable of the knowledge of Brahman : a question finally answered in the affirmative. — This discussion leads in its turn to several other digressions, among which the most important one refers to the problem in what relation the different species of beings stand to the words denoting them (Sutra 38). In connexion herewith 5ankara treats of the nature of words (^abda), opposing the opinion of the Mimawsaka Upavarsha, according to whom the word is nothing but the aggregate of its constitutive letters, to the view of the grammarians who teach that over and above the aggregate of the letters there exists a super- sensuous entity called ' spho/a,' which is the direct cause of the apprehension of the sense of a word (Adhik. IX ; Sutras Adhik. X (34-38) explains that £udras are altogether disqualified for Brahmavidya. Sutra 39 constitutes, according to 5ankara, a new adhi- kara^a (XI\ proving that the pra/^a in which everything trembles, according to Ka/fa Up. II, 6, 2, is Brahman. — According to Ramanu^-a the Sutra does not introduce a new topic but merely furnishes an additional reason for the parabrahmanukara^ mvyate yada pasyaA pajyate rukmavama;;/ kartaram isa.m purushaw brahmayoniw tada vidvan pu/zyapape vidhuya nira^anaA paramaw samyam upaitity ato*nukarta pra^apativakyanirdish/a^ anukaryaw paraw brahma na daharaka\fa/$. Api ka. smaryate. Sawsari/zo * pi muktavasthaya;^ paramasamyapattilakshawa/fc parabrahmanukara^ smaryate idaw ^anam upamtya, &c— Ke/Sdd anukrztes tasya Hpi smaryate iti ka. sutradvayam adhi- karawantarazw tarn eva bhantam anubhati sarvaw tasya bhasa sarvam id&m vibhatity asya/fc srutek parabrahmaparatvanirwayaya pravWtta/» vadanti. Tat tv adwyatvadiguwako dharmokte/fc dyubhvadyayatanazra sva^abdad ity adhi- kararcadvayena tasya prakarawasya brahmavishayatvapratipadanat gyotiska.- rawabhidh&nat ity adishu parasya brahma^o bharupatvavagatej kz. purvapaksha- nutthanad ayuktaw sutraksharavairupya/& ka,. xxxviii vedanta-sOtras. decision arrived at under Sutras 24, 25, viz. that the angush- /^amatra is Brahman. On this supposition, Sutras 24-39 f°rm one adhikara^a in which 26-38 constitute a mere digression led up to by the mention made of the heart in 25. — The angush/^amatra is referred to twice in the Ka/^a Upanishad, once in the passage discussed (II, 4, 12), and once in II, 6, 17 (' the Person not larger than a thumb ').
326-38 constitute a mere digression led up to by the mention made of the heart in 25. — The angush/^amatra is referred to twice in the Ka/^a Upanishad, once in the passage discussed (II, 4, 12), and once in II, 6, 17 (' the Person not larger than a thumb '). To determine what is meant by the angush^amatra, Ramdnu^-a says, we are enabled by the passage II, 6, 2, 3, which is intermediate between the two passages concerning the angush^amatra, and which clearly refers to the highest Brahman, of which alone everything can be said to stand in awe. The next Sutra (40) gives rise to a similar difference of opinion. According to Sankara it constitutes by itself a new adhikara/za (XII), proving that the ' light ' (,£*yotis) mentioned in Kh. Up. VIII, 12, 3 is the highest Brahman. - — According to Ramanu£*a the Sutra continues the pre- ceding adhikara^a, and strengthens the conclusion arrived at by a further argument, referring to Ka^a Up. II, 5, 15 — a passage intermediate between the two passages about the angush/^amatra — which speaks of a primary light that cannot mean anything but Brahman. The Sutra has in that case to be translated as follows : ' (The angush/^a- matra is Brahman) because (in a passage intervening be- tween the two) a light is seen to be mentioned (which can be Brahman only).' The three last Sutras of the pada are, according to »Sankara,to be divided into two adhikara^as (XIII and XIV), Sutra 41 deciding that the ether which reveals names and forms [Kh. Up. VIII, 14) is not the elemental ether but Brahman ; and 42, 43 teaching that the vi£7?anamaya, ' he who consists of knowledge,' of Brz. Up. IV, 3, 7 is not the individual soul but Brahman. — According to Ramanu^a the three Sutras make up one single adhikara/za discussing whether the Khandogya. Upanishad passage about the ether refers to Brahman or to the individual soul in the state of release ; the latter of these two alternatives being suggested by the circumstance that the released soul is the subject of the passage immediately preceding (' Shaking off INTRODUCTION. XXXIX all evil as a horse shakes off his hair,' Sec). Sutra 41 decides that ' the ether (is Brahman) because the passage designates the nature of something else/ &c. (i.e. of some- thing other than the individual soul ; other because to the soul the revealing of names and forms cannot be ascribed, &c.) — But, an objection is raised, does not more than one scriptural passage show that the released soul and Brahman are identical, and is not therefore the ether which reveals names and forms the soul as well as Brahman ? — (The
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.
1small ether within the lotus of the heart mentioned in Kh. Up. VIII, 1 is the elemental ether or the individual soul or Brahman ; the last alternative being finally adopted. In favour of the second alternative the purvapakshin pleads the two passages Kh. Up. VIII, 3, 4 and VIII, 12, 3, about the serene being (samprasada) ; for by the latter the individual soul only can be understood, and in the chapter, of which the latter passage forms part, there are ascribed to it the same qualities (viz. freeness from sin, old age, death, &c.) that were predicated in VIII, 1, of the small ether within the heart. — But the reply to this is, that the second passage refers not to the (ordinary) individual soul but to the soul in that state where its true nature has become manifest, i. e. in which it is Brahman ; so that the subject of the passage is in reality not the so-called individual soul but Brahman. And in the former of the two passages the soul is mentioned not on its own account, but merely for the purpose of intimating that the highest Self is the cause through which the individual soul manifests itself in its true nature. — What Ramanu^a understands by the avirbhava of the soul will appear from the remarks on IV, 4. The two next Sutras (22, 23) constitute, according to vSankara, a new adhikara^a (VII), proving that he ' after whom everything shines, by whose light all this is lighted ' (KaMa Up. II, 5, 15) is not some material luminous body, but Brahman itself. — According to R&manu^a the two Sutras do not start a new topic, but merely furnish some further arguments strengthening the conclusion arrived at in the preceding Sutras2. 1 Sutras 14-2 1 are divided into two adhikara/zas by the Adhikara/mratnamala, but really constitute a simple adhikara^a only. 2 Itaj ^aitad evam. Anukrztes tasya £a. Tasya daharakaj-asya parabrahma/zo mukarad ayam apahatapapmatvadigu/zako vimuktabandha^ pratyagatma na daharaka^a^ tadanukaras tatsamyaw tatha hi pratyagatmanoxpi vimuktasya INTRODUCTION* XXXV11 Adhik. VIII (34, 25) decides that the person of the size of a thumb mentioned in Ka#5a Up. II, 4, 12 is not the individual soul but Brahman. The two next adhikara/zas are of the nature of a digres- sion. The passage about the angush/^amatra was explained on the ground that the human heart is of the size of a span ; the question may then be asked whether also such individuals as belong to other classes than mankind, more particularly the Gods, are capable of the knowledge of Brahman : a question finally answered in the affirmative.
2human heart is of the size of a span ; the question may then be asked whether also such individuals as belong to other classes than mankind, more particularly the Gods, are capable of the knowledge of Brahman : a question finally answered in the affirmative. — This discussion leads in its turn to several other digressions, among which the most important one refers to the problem in what relation the different species of beings stand to the words denoting them (Sutra 38). In connexion herewith 5ankara treats of the nature of words (^abda), opposing the opinion of the Mimawsaka Upavarsha, according to whom the word is nothing but the aggregate of its constitutive letters, to the view of the grammarians who teach that over and above the aggregate of the letters there exists a super- sensuous entity called ' spho/a,' which is the direct cause of the apprehension of the sense of a word (Adhik. IX ; Sutras Adhik. X (34-38) explains that £udras are altogether disqualified for Brahmavidya. Sutra 39 constitutes, according to 5ankara, a new adhi- kara^a (XI\ proving that the pra/^a in which everything trembles, according to Ka/fa Up. II, 6, 2, is Brahman. — According to Ramanu^-a the Sutra does not introduce a new topic but merely furnishes an additional reason for the parabrahmanukara^ mvyate yada pasyaA pajyate rukmavama;;/ kartaram isa.m purushaw brahmayoniw tada vidvan pu/zyapape vidhuya nira^anaA paramaw samyam upaitity ato*nukarta pra^apativakyanirdish/a^ anukaryaw paraw brahma na daharaka\fa/$. Api ka. smaryate. Sawsari/zo * pi muktavasthaya;^ paramasamyapattilakshawa/fc parabrahmanukara^ smaryate idaw ^anam upamtya, &c— Ke/Sdd anukrztes tasya Hpi smaryate iti ka. sutradvayam adhi- karawantarazw tarn eva bhantam anubhati sarvaw tasya bhasa sarvam id&m vibhatity asya/fc srutek parabrahmaparatvanirwayaya pravWtta/» vadanti. Tat tv adwyatvadiguwako dharmokte/fc dyubhvadyayatanazra sva^abdad ity adhi- kararcadvayena tasya prakarawasya brahmavishayatvapratipadanat gyotiska.- rawabhidh&nat ity adishu parasya brahma^o bharupatvavagatej kz. purvapaksha- nutthanad ayuktaw sutraksharavairupya/& ka,. xxxviii vedanta-sOtras. decision arrived at under Sutras 24, 25, viz. that the angush- /^amatra is Brahman. On this supposition, Sutras 24-39 f°rm one adhikara^a in which 26-38 constitute a mere digression led up to by the mention made of the heart in 25. — The angush/^amatra is referred to twice in the Ka/^a Upanishad, once in the passage discussed (II, 4, 12), and once in II, 6, 17 (' the Person not larger than a thumb ').
326-38 constitute a mere digression led up to by the mention made of the heart in 25. — The angush/^amatra is referred to twice in the Ka/^a Upanishad, once in the passage discussed (II, 4, 12), and once in II, 6, 17 (' the Person not larger than a thumb '). To determine what is meant by the angush^amatra, Ramdnu^-a says, we are enabled by the passage II, 6, 2, 3, which is intermediate between the two passages concerning the angush^amatra, and which clearly refers to the highest Brahman, of which alone everything can be said to stand in awe. The next Sutra (40) gives rise to a similar difference of opinion. According to Sankara it constitutes by itself a new adhikara/za (XII), proving that the ' light ' (,£*yotis) mentioned in Kh. Up. VIII, 12, 3 is the highest Brahman. - — According to Ramanu£*a the Sutra continues the pre- ceding adhikara^a, and strengthens the conclusion arrived at by a further argument, referring to Ka^a Up. II, 5, 15 — a passage intermediate between the two passages about the angush/^amatra — which speaks of a primary light that cannot mean anything but Brahman. The Sutra has in that case to be translated as follows : ' (The angush/^a- matra is Brahman) because (in a passage intervening be- tween the two) a light is seen to be mentioned (which can be Brahman only).' The three last Sutras of the pada are, according to »Sankara,to be divided into two adhikara^as (XIII and XIV), Sutra 41 deciding that the ether which reveals names and forms [Kh. Up. VIII, 14) is not the elemental ether but Brahman ; and 42, 43 teaching that the vi£7?anamaya, ' he who consists of knowledge,' of Brz. Up. IV, 3, 7 is not the individual soul but Brahman. — According to Ramanu^a the three Sutras make up one single adhikara/za discussing whether the Khandogya. Upanishad passage about the ether refers to Brahman or to the individual soul in the state of release ; the latter of these two alternatives being suggested by the circumstance that the released soul is the subject of the passage immediately preceding (' Shaking off INTRODUCTION. XXXIX all evil as a horse shakes off his hair,' Sec). Sutra 41 decides that ' the ether (is Brahman) because the passage designates the nature of something else/ &c. (i.e. of some- thing other than the individual soul ; other because to the soul the revealing of names and forms cannot be ascribed, &c.) — But, an objection is raised, does not more than one scriptural passage show that the released soul and Brahman are identical, and is not therefore the ether which reveals names and forms the soul as well as Brahman ? — (The
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.