Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1denote [34] F 66 VEDANTA-stjTRAS. the secondary Self (the Sa^sarin), because it forms a link in a series of secondary Serfs, beginning with the one consisting of food, is of no force, for the reason that the Self consisting of bliss is the innermost of all. The 3astra, wishing to convey information about the primary Self, adapts itself to common notions, in so far as it at first refers to the body consisting of food, which, although not the Self, is by very obtuse people identified with it ; it then proceeds from the body to another Self, which has the same shape with the preceding one, just as the statue possesses the form of the mould into which the molten brass had been poured ; then, again, to another one, always at first representing the Non-Self as the Self, for the purpose of easier comprehension ; and it finally teaches that the innermost Self1, which consists of bliss, is the real Self. Just as when a man, desirous of pointing out the star Arundhati to another man, at first points to several stars which are not Arundhati as being Arundhati, while only the star pointed out in the end is the real Arundhati ; so here also the Self consisting of bliss is the real Self on account of its being the innermost (i. e. the last). Nor can any weight be allowed to the objection that the attribution of joy and so on, as head, &c, cannot possibly refer to the real Self; for this attribution is due to the immediately preceding limiting condition (viz. the Self consisting of understanding, the so-called vi^anako^a), and does not really belong to the real Self. The possession of a bodily nature also is ascribed to the Self of bliss, only because it is represented as a link in the chain of bodies which begins with the Self consisting of food, and is not ascribed to it in the same direct sense in which it is predicated of the transmigrating Self. Hence the Self consisting of bliss is the highest Brahman. 13. If (it be objected that the term anandamaya, consisting of bliss, can) not (denote the highest Self) on account of its being a word denoting a modifica- 1 After which no other Self is mentioned. I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 15. 67 tion (or product) ; (we declare the objection to be) not (valid) on account of abundance, (the idea of which may be expressed by the affix maya.) Here the purvapakshin raises the objection that the word anandamaya (consisting of bliss) cannot denote the highest Self. — Why ?— Because the word anandamaya is understood to denote something different from the original word (i. e.
2e expressed by the affix maya.) Here the purvapakshin raises the objection that the word anandamaya (consisting of bliss) cannot denote the highest Self. — Why ?— Because the word anandamaya is understood to denote something different from the original word (i. e. the word ananda without the derivative affix maya), viz. a modification ; according to the received sense of the affix maya. 'Anandamaya ' therefore denotes a modification, just as annamaya (consisting of food) and similar words do. This objection is, however, not valid, because c maya. ' is also used in the sense of abundance, i. e. denotes that where there is abundance of what the original word expresses. So, for instance, the phrase ' the sacrifice is annamaya ' means ' the sacrifice is abounding in food ' (not ' is some modifica- tion or product of food '). Thus here Brahman also, as abounding in bliss, is called anandamaya. That Brahman does abound in bliss follows from the passage (Taitt. Up. II, 8), where, after the bliss of each of the different classes of beings, beginning with man, has been declared to be a hundred times greater than the bliss of the immediately preceding class, the bliss of Brahman is finally proclaimed to be absolutely supreme. Maya therefore denotes abundance. 14. And because he is declared to be the cause of it, (i. e. of bliss ; therefore maya is to be taken as denoting abundance.) Maya must be understood to denote abundance, for that reason also that Scripture declares Brahman to be the cause of bliss, ' For he alone causes bliss ' (Taitt. Up. II, 7). For he who causes bliss must himself abound in bliss; just as we infer in ordinary life, that a man who enriches others must himself possess abundant wealth. As, there- fore, maya may be taken to mean ' abundant,' the Self consisting of bliss is the highest Self. 15. Moreover (the dnandamaya is Brahman be- f 2 68 VEDANTA-sftTRAS. cause) the same (Brahman) which had been referred to in the mantra is sung, (i. e. proclaimed in the Brahma^a passage as the anandamaya.) The Self, consisting of joy, is the highest Brahman for the following reason also \ On the introductory words * he who knows Brahman attains the highest' (Taitt. Up. II, i), there follows a mantra proclaiming that Brahman, which forms the general topic of the chapter, possesses the quali- ties of true existence, intelligence, infinity ; after that it is said that from Brahman there sprang at first the ether and then all other moving and non- moving things, and that, entering into the beings which it had emitted, Brahman stays in the recess, inmost
3s of true existence, intelligence, infinity ; after that it is said that from Brahman there sprang at first the ether and then all other moving and non- moving things, and that, entering into the beings which it had emitted, Brahman stays in the recess, inmost of all ; thereupon, for its better comprehension, the series of the different Selfs (' different from this is the inner Self,' &c.) are enumerated, and then finally the same Brahman which the mantra had proclaimed, is again proclaimed in the passage under discussion, ' different from this is the other inner Self, which consists of bliss.' To assume that a mantra and the Brahma/za passage be- longing to it have the same sense is only proper, on account of the absence of contradiction (which results therefrom) ; for otherwise we should be driven to the unwelcome in- ference that the text drops the topic once started, and turns to an altogether new subject. Nor is there mentioned a further inner Self different from the Self consisting of bliss, as in the case of the Self con- sisting of food, &c.2 On the same (i. e. the Self consisting of bliss) is founded, ' This same knowledge of Bhrzgu and Varu/za ; he understood that bliss is Brahman ' (Taitt. Up. Ill, 6). Therefore the Self consisting of bliss is the highest Self. 1 The previous proofs were founded on lihga ; the argument which is now propounded is founded on prakarazza. 2 While, in the case of the Selfs consisting of food and so on, a further inner Self is duly mentioned each time. It cannot, there- fore, be concluded that the Selfs consisting of food, &c, are likewise identical with the highest Self referred to in the mantra. I ADHYAVA, I PADA, 1 7. 69 16. (The Self consisting of bliss is the highest Self,) not the other (i. e. the individual Soul), on account of the impossibility (of the latter assump- tion). And for the following reason also the Self consisting of bliss is the highest Self only, not the other, i. e. the one which is other than the Lord, i. e. the transmigrating in- dividual soul. The personal soul cannot be denoted by the term ' the one consisting of bliss/ Why ? On account of the impossibility. For Scripture says, with reference to the Self consisting of bliss, ' He wished, may I be many, may I grow forth. He brooded over himself.
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.
1denote [34] F 66 VEDANTA-stjTRAS. the secondary Self (the Sa^sarin), because it forms a link in a series of secondary Serfs, beginning with the one consisting of food, is of no force, for the reason that the Self consisting of bliss is the innermost of all. The 3astra, wishing to convey information about the primary Self, adapts itself to common notions, in so far as it at first refers to the body consisting of food, which, although not the Self, is by very obtuse people identified with it ; it then proceeds from the body to another Self, which has the same shape with the preceding one, just as the statue possesses the form of the mould into which the molten brass had been poured ; then, again, to another one, always at first representing the Non-Self as the Self, for the purpose of easier comprehension ; and it finally teaches that the innermost Self1, which consists of bliss, is the real Self. Just as when a man, desirous of pointing out the star Arundhati to another man, at first points to several stars which are not Arundhati as being Arundhati, while only the star pointed out in the end is the real Arundhati ; so here also the Self consisting of bliss is the real Self on account of its being the innermost (i. e. the last). Nor can any weight be allowed to the objection that the attribution of joy and so on, as head, &c, cannot possibly refer to the real Self; for this attribution is due to the immediately preceding limiting condition (viz. the Self consisting of understanding, the so-called vi^anako^a), and does not really belong to the real Self. The possession of a bodily nature also is ascribed to the Self of bliss, only because it is represented as a link in the chain of bodies which begins with the Self consisting of food, and is not ascribed to it in the same direct sense in which it is predicated of the transmigrating Self. Hence the Self consisting of bliss is the highest Brahman. 13. If (it be objected that the term anandamaya, consisting of bliss, can) not (denote the highest Self) on account of its being a word denoting a modifica- 1 After which no other Self is mentioned. I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 15. 67 tion (or product) ; (we declare the objection to be) not (valid) on account of abundance, (the idea of which may be expressed by the affix maya.) Here the purvapakshin raises the objection that the word anandamaya (consisting of bliss) cannot denote the highest Self. — Why ?— Because the word anandamaya is understood to denote something different from the original word (i. e.
2e expressed by the affix maya.) Here the purvapakshin raises the objection that the word anandamaya (consisting of bliss) cannot denote the highest Self. — Why ?— Because the word anandamaya is understood to denote something different from the original word (i. e. the word ananda without the derivative affix maya), viz. a modification ; according to the received sense of the affix maya. 'Anandamaya ' therefore denotes a modification, just as annamaya (consisting of food) and similar words do. This objection is, however, not valid, because c maya. ' is also used in the sense of abundance, i. e. denotes that where there is abundance of what the original word expresses. So, for instance, the phrase ' the sacrifice is annamaya ' means ' the sacrifice is abounding in food ' (not ' is some modifica- tion or product of food '). Thus here Brahman also, as abounding in bliss, is called anandamaya. That Brahman does abound in bliss follows from the passage (Taitt. Up. II, 8), where, after the bliss of each of the different classes of beings, beginning with man, has been declared to be a hundred times greater than the bliss of the immediately preceding class, the bliss of Brahman is finally proclaimed to be absolutely supreme. Maya therefore denotes abundance. 14. And because he is declared to be the cause of it, (i. e. of bliss ; therefore maya is to be taken as denoting abundance.) Maya must be understood to denote abundance, for that reason also that Scripture declares Brahman to be the cause of bliss, ' For he alone causes bliss ' (Taitt. Up. II, 7). For he who causes bliss must himself abound in bliss; just as we infer in ordinary life, that a man who enriches others must himself possess abundant wealth. As, there- fore, maya may be taken to mean ' abundant,' the Self consisting of bliss is the highest Self. 15. Moreover (the dnandamaya is Brahman be- f 2 68 VEDANTA-sftTRAS. cause) the same (Brahman) which had been referred to in the mantra is sung, (i. e. proclaimed in the Brahma^a passage as the anandamaya.) The Self, consisting of joy, is the highest Brahman for the following reason also \ On the introductory words * he who knows Brahman attains the highest' (Taitt. Up. II, i), there follows a mantra proclaiming that Brahman, which forms the general topic of the chapter, possesses the quali- ties of true existence, intelligence, infinity ; after that it is said that from Brahman there sprang at first the ether and then all other moving and non- moving things, and that, entering into the beings which it had emitted, Brahman stays in the recess, inmost
3s of true existence, intelligence, infinity ; after that it is said that from Brahman there sprang at first the ether and then all other moving and non- moving things, and that, entering into the beings which it had emitted, Brahman stays in the recess, inmost of all ; thereupon, for its better comprehension, the series of the different Selfs (' different from this is the inner Self,' &c.) are enumerated, and then finally the same Brahman which the mantra had proclaimed, is again proclaimed in the passage under discussion, ' different from this is the other inner Self, which consists of bliss.' To assume that a mantra and the Brahma/za passage be- longing to it have the same sense is only proper, on account of the absence of contradiction (which results therefrom) ; for otherwise we should be driven to the unwelcome in- ference that the text drops the topic once started, and turns to an altogether new subject. Nor is there mentioned a further inner Self different from the Self consisting of bliss, as in the case of the Self con- sisting of food, &c.2 On the same (i. e. the Self consisting of bliss) is founded, ' This same knowledge of Bhrzgu and Varu/za ; he understood that bliss is Brahman ' (Taitt. Up. Ill, 6). Therefore the Self consisting of bliss is the highest Self. 1 The previous proofs were founded on lihga ; the argument which is now propounded is founded on prakarazza. 2 While, in the case of the Selfs consisting of food and so on, a further inner Self is duly mentioned each time. It cannot, there- fore, be concluded that the Selfs consisting of food, &c, are likewise identical with the highest Self referred to in the mantra. I ADHYAVA, I PADA, 1 7. 69 16. (The Self consisting of bliss is the highest Self,) not the other (i. e. the individual Soul), on account of the impossibility (of the latter assump- tion). And for the following reason also the Self consisting of bliss is the highest Self only, not the other, i. e. the one which is other than the Lord, i. e. the transmigrating in- dividual soul. The personal soul cannot be denoted by the term ' the one consisting of bliss/ Why ? On account of the impossibility. For Scripture says, with reference to the Self consisting of bliss, ' He wished, may I be many, may I grow forth. He brooded over himself.
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.