Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1e firm holding back of the senses, is what is called Yoga ; ' ' Having received this knowledge and the whole rule of Yoga5 (Ka. Up. II, 6, 18) ; and so on. And in the Yoga-^astra itself the passage, { Now then Yoga, the means of the knowledge of truth/ &c. defines the Yoga as a means of reaching perfect knowledge. As thus one topic of the ^astra at least (viz. the practice of Yoga) is shown to be authoritative, the entire Yoga- smrtti will have to be accepted as unobjectionable, just as the Smrzti referring to the ash/akas 2. — To this we reply that the formal extension (to the Yoga, of the arguments primarily directed against the Saiikhya) has the purpose of removing the additional doubt stated in the above lines ; for in spite of a part of the Yoga-smrzti being authoritative, the disagreement (between Smrzti and 5ruti) on other topics remains as shown above. — Although3 there are many Smrztis treating of the soul, we have singled out for refu- tation the Sarikhya and Yoga because they are widely known as offering the means for accomplishing the highest 1 In which passage the phrase 'to be meditated upon' (nidi- dhyasa) indicates the act of mental concentration characteristic of the Yoga. 2 The ash/akas (certain oblations to be made on the eighth days after the full moons of the seasons hemanta and sis'ira) furnish the stock illustration for the doctrine of the Purva Mim. that Smr/ti is authoritative in so far as it is based on *Sruti. 3 But why — it will be asked — do you apply yourself to the refutation of the Sarikhya and Yoga only, and not also to that of other Smmis conflicting with the Vedanta views ? 298 VED ANTA-S#TR AS. end of man and have found favour with many competent persons. Moreover, their position is strengthened by a Vedic passage referring to them, 'He who has known that cause which is to be apprehended by S&nkhya and Yoga he is freed from all fetters ' (Sve. Up. VI, 13). (The claims which on the ground of this last passage might be set up for the Sankhya and Yoga-smrztis in their entirety) we refute by the remark that the highest beatitude (the highest aim of man) is not to be attained by the know- ledge of the Sankhya-smrzti irrespective of the Veda, nor by the road of Yoga-practice. For Scripture itself declares that there is no other means of obtaining the highest beati- tude but the knowledge of the unity of the Self which is conveyed by the Veda, * Over death passes only the man who knows him; there is no other path to go' (5ve. Up. Ill, 8).
2ure itself declares that there is no other means of obtaining the highest beati- tude but the knowledge of the unity of the Self which is conveyed by the Veda, * Over death passes only the man who knows him; there is no other path to go' (5ve. Up. Ill, 8). And the Sankhya and Yoga-systems maintain duality, do not discern the unity of the Self. In the passage quoted ({ That cause which is to be apprehended by Sankhya and Yoga ') the terms * Sankhya ' and ' Yoga ' denote Vedic knowledge and meditation, as we infer from proximity1. We willingly allow room for those portions of the two systems which do not contradict the Veda. In their description of the soul, for instance, as free from all qualities the Sankhyas are in harmony with the Veda which teaches that the person (purusha) is essentially pure ; cp. Bri. Up. IV, 3, 16, ' For that person is not attached to anything.' The Yoga again in giving rules for the con- dition of the wandering religious mendicant admits that state of retirement from the concerns of life which is known from scriptural passages such as the following one, ' Then the parivra^aka with discoloured (yellow) dress, shaven, without any possessions/ &c. (Cabala Upan. IV). The above remarks will serve as a reply to the claims of all argumentative Smrztis. If it be said that those Smrztis also assist, by argumentation and proof, the cogni- tion of truth, we do not object to so much, but we maintain 1 I.e. from the fact of these terms being employed in a passage standing close to other passages which refer to Vedic knowledge. II ADHYAYA, I PADA, 4. 299 all the same that the truth can be known from the Ved&nta- texts only ; as is stated by scriptural passages such as * None who does not know the Veda perceives that great one ' (Taitt. Br. Ill, 12, 9, 7) ; £ I now ask thee that person taught in the Upanishads ' (Br/. Up. Ill, 9, 26); and others. 4. (Brahman can)not (be the cause of the world) on account of the difference of character of that, (viz. the world) ; and its being such, (i.e. different from Brahman) (we learn) from Scripture. The objections, founded on Smrzti, against the doctrine of Brahman being the efficient and the material cause of this world have been refuted ; we now proceed to refute those founded on Reasoning.
3ing such, (i.e. different from Brahman) (we learn) from Scripture. The objections, founded on Smrzti, against the doctrine of Brahman being the efficient and the material cause of this world have been refuted ; we now proceed to refute those founded on Reasoning. — But (to raise an objection at the outset) how is there room for objections founded on Reasoning after the sense of the sacred texts has once been settled? The sacred texts are certainly to be considered absolutely authoritative with regard to Brahman as well as with regard to religious duty (dharma). — (To this the purvapakshin replies), The analogy between Brahman and dharma would hold good if the matter in hand were to be known through the holy texts only, and could not be ap- proached by the other means of right knowledge also. In the case of religious duties, i. e. things to be done, we indeed entirely depend on Scripture. But now we are concerned with Brahman which is an accomplished existing thing, and in the case of accomplished things there is room for other means of right knowledge also, as, for instance, the case of earth and the other elements shows. And just as in the case of several conflicting scriptural passages we explain all of them in such a manner as to make them accord with one, so 5ruti, if in conflict with other means of right knowledge, has to be bent so as to accord with the latter. Moreover, Reasoning, which enables us to infer something not actually perceived in consequence of its having a certain equality of attributes with what is actually perceived, stands nearer to perception than vSruti which conveys its sense by tradition merely. And the knowledge 300 VEDANTA-S^TRAS. of Brahman which discards Nescience and effects final release terminates in a perception (viz. the intuition — Sakshatkara — of Brahman), and as such must be assumed to have a seen result (not an unseen one like dharma)1. Moreover, the scriptural passage, 'He is to be heard, to be thought,' enjoins thought in addition to hearing, and thereby shows that Reasoning also is to be resorted to with regard to Brahman. Hence an objection founded on Reasoning is set forth, ' Not so, on account of the difference of nature of this (effect).' — The Vedantic opinion that the intelligent Brahman is the material cause of this world is untenable because the effect would in that case be of an altogether different character from the cause.
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.
1e firm holding back of the senses, is what is called Yoga ; ' ' Having received this knowledge and the whole rule of Yoga5 (Ka. Up. II, 6, 18) ; and so on. And in the Yoga-^astra itself the passage, { Now then Yoga, the means of the knowledge of truth/ &c. defines the Yoga as a means of reaching perfect knowledge. As thus one topic of the ^astra at least (viz. the practice of Yoga) is shown to be authoritative, the entire Yoga- smrtti will have to be accepted as unobjectionable, just as the Smrzti referring to the ash/akas 2. — To this we reply that the formal extension (to the Yoga, of the arguments primarily directed against the Saiikhya) has the purpose of removing the additional doubt stated in the above lines ; for in spite of a part of the Yoga-smrzti being authoritative, the disagreement (between Smrzti and 5ruti) on other topics remains as shown above. — Although3 there are many Smrztis treating of the soul, we have singled out for refu- tation the Sarikhya and Yoga because they are widely known as offering the means for accomplishing the highest 1 In which passage the phrase 'to be meditated upon' (nidi- dhyasa) indicates the act of mental concentration characteristic of the Yoga. 2 The ash/akas (certain oblations to be made on the eighth days after the full moons of the seasons hemanta and sis'ira) furnish the stock illustration for the doctrine of the Purva Mim. that Smr/ti is authoritative in so far as it is based on *Sruti. 3 But why — it will be asked — do you apply yourself to the refutation of the Sarikhya and Yoga only, and not also to that of other Smmis conflicting with the Vedanta views ? 298 VED ANTA-S#TR AS. end of man and have found favour with many competent persons. Moreover, their position is strengthened by a Vedic passage referring to them, 'He who has known that cause which is to be apprehended by S&nkhya and Yoga he is freed from all fetters ' (Sve. Up. VI, 13). (The claims which on the ground of this last passage might be set up for the Sankhya and Yoga-smrztis in their entirety) we refute by the remark that the highest beatitude (the highest aim of man) is not to be attained by the know- ledge of the Sankhya-smrzti irrespective of the Veda, nor by the road of Yoga-practice. For Scripture itself declares that there is no other means of obtaining the highest beati- tude but the knowledge of the unity of the Self which is conveyed by the Veda, * Over death passes only the man who knows him; there is no other path to go' (5ve. Up. Ill, 8).
2ure itself declares that there is no other means of obtaining the highest beati- tude but the knowledge of the unity of the Self which is conveyed by the Veda, * Over death passes only the man who knows him; there is no other path to go' (5ve. Up. Ill, 8). And the Sankhya and Yoga-systems maintain duality, do not discern the unity of the Self. In the passage quoted ({ That cause which is to be apprehended by Sankhya and Yoga ') the terms * Sankhya ' and ' Yoga ' denote Vedic knowledge and meditation, as we infer from proximity1. We willingly allow room for those portions of the two systems which do not contradict the Veda. In their description of the soul, for instance, as free from all qualities the Sankhyas are in harmony with the Veda which teaches that the person (purusha) is essentially pure ; cp. Bri. Up. IV, 3, 16, ' For that person is not attached to anything.' The Yoga again in giving rules for the con- dition of the wandering religious mendicant admits that state of retirement from the concerns of life which is known from scriptural passages such as the following one, ' Then the parivra^aka with discoloured (yellow) dress, shaven, without any possessions/ &c. (Cabala Upan. IV). The above remarks will serve as a reply to the claims of all argumentative Smrztis. If it be said that those Smrztis also assist, by argumentation and proof, the cogni- tion of truth, we do not object to so much, but we maintain 1 I.e. from the fact of these terms being employed in a passage standing close to other passages which refer to Vedic knowledge. II ADHYAYA, I PADA, 4. 299 all the same that the truth can be known from the Ved&nta- texts only ; as is stated by scriptural passages such as * None who does not know the Veda perceives that great one ' (Taitt. Br. Ill, 12, 9, 7) ; £ I now ask thee that person taught in the Upanishads ' (Br/. Up. Ill, 9, 26); and others. 4. (Brahman can)not (be the cause of the world) on account of the difference of character of that, (viz. the world) ; and its being such, (i.e. different from Brahman) (we learn) from Scripture. The objections, founded on Smrzti, against the doctrine of Brahman being the efficient and the material cause of this world have been refuted ; we now proceed to refute those founded on Reasoning.
3ing such, (i.e. different from Brahman) (we learn) from Scripture. The objections, founded on Smrzti, against the doctrine of Brahman being the efficient and the material cause of this world have been refuted ; we now proceed to refute those founded on Reasoning. — But (to raise an objection at the outset) how is there room for objections founded on Reasoning after the sense of the sacred texts has once been settled? The sacred texts are certainly to be considered absolutely authoritative with regard to Brahman as well as with regard to religious duty (dharma). — (To this the purvapakshin replies), The analogy between Brahman and dharma would hold good if the matter in hand were to be known through the holy texts only, and could not be ap- proached by the other means of right knowledge also. In the case of religious duties, i. e. things to be done, we indeed entirely depend on Scripture. But now we are concerned with Brahman which is an accomplished existing thing, and in the case of accomplished things there is room for other means of right knowledge also, as, for instance, the case of earth and the other elements shows. And just as in the case of several conflicting scriptural passages we explain all of them in such a manner as to make them accord with one, so 5ruti, if in conflict with other means of right knowledge, has to be bent so as to accord with the latter. Moreover, Reasoning, which enables us to infer something not actually perceived in consequence of its having a certain equality of attributes with what is actually perceived, stands nearer to perception than vSruti which conveys its sense by tradition merely. And the knowledge 300 VEDANTA-S^TRAS. of Brahman which discards Nescience and effects final release terminates in a perception (viz. the intuition — Sakshatkara — of Brahman), and as such must be assumed to have a seen result (not an unseen one like dharma)1. Moreover, the scriptural passage, 'He is to be heard, to be thought,' enjoins thought in addition to hearing, and thereby shows that Reasoning also is to be resorted to with regard to Brahman. Hence an objection founded on Reasoning is set forth, ' Not so, on account of the difference of nature of this (effect).' — The Vedantic opinion that the intelligent Brahman is the material cause of this world is untenable because the effect would in that case be of an altogether different character from the cause.
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.