Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1And Taitt. Up. Ill, 6, ' This is the knowledge of Bhrzgu and Varuzza, founded on the highest ether (vyoman).' And again, ' Om, ka is Brah- man, ether (kha) is Brahman' (Kk. Up. IV, 10, 5), and 'the old ether ' (Br/. Up. V, 1) 2. And other similar passages. On account of the force of the complementary passage we are justified in deciding that the word ' ether,' although occurring in the beginning of the passage, refers to Brahman. The case is analogous to that of the sentence, c Agni (lit. the fire) studies a chapter,' where the word agni, although occurring in the beginning, is at once seen to denote a boy 3. It is therefore settled that the word ' ether' denotes Brahman. 23. For the same reason breath (is Brahman). Concerning the udgttha it is said (KL Up. I, 10, 9), ' Prastotrz, that deity which belongs to the prastava, &c.,' and, further on (I, 11, 4; 5), 'Which then is that deity? He said : Breath. For all these beings merge into breath alone, and from breath they arise. This is the deity belonging to the prastava.' With reference to this passage doubt and decision are to be considered as analogous to those stated under the preceding Sutra. For while in some passages — as, for instance, ' For indeed, my son, mind is fastened to prazza,' Kk. Up. VI, 8, 3; and, 'the prazza of prazza,' Bri. Up. IV, 4, 18 — the word 'breath' is seen to denote Brahman, its use 1 Viz. as intimating it. Thus An. Gi. and Go. An. against the accent of rik&h. Saya/za explains rikih as genitive. 2 Ozzzkarasya pratikatvena va^akatvena lakshakatvena va brah- matvam uktam, om iti, kazzz sukhaz/z tasyarthendriyayoga^atvazzz varayitu;?z kham iti, tasya bhutaka^atva/^ vyaseddhum purazzam ity uktam. An. Gi. 3 The doubt about the meaning of a word is preferably to be decided by means of a reference to preceding passages ; where that is not possible (the doubtful word occurring at the beginning of some new chapter) complementary, i. e. subsequent passages have to be taken into consideration. I ADHYAYA, I PAD A, 23. 85 in the sense of a certain modification of air is better estab- lished in common as well as in Vedic language. Hence there arises a doubt whether in the passage under dis- cussion the word pra/za denotes Brahman or (ordinary) breath.
2ADHYAYA, I PAD A, 23. 85 in the sense of a certain modification of air is better estab- lished in common as well as in Vedic language. Hence there arises a doubt whether in the passage under dis- cussion the word pra/za denotes Brahman or (ordinary) breath. In favour of which meaning have we then to decide ? Here the purvapakshin maintains that the word must be held to denote the fivefold vital breath, which is a peculiar modification of wind (or air); because, as has been re- marked already, that sense of the word pra/^a is the better established one.— But no, an objector will say, just as in the case of the preceding Sutra, so here also Brahman is meant, on account of characteristic marks being mentioned ; for here also a complementary passage gives us to understand that all beings spring from and merge into pra;za ; a process which can take place in connexion with the highest Lord only. — This objection, the purvapakshin replies, is futile, since we see that the beings enter into and proceed from the principal vital air also. For Scripture makes the fol- lowing statement (Sat. Br. X, 3, 3, 6), 'When man sleeps, then into breath indeed speech merges, into breath the eye, into breath the ear, into breath the mind ; when he awakes then they spring again from breath alone/ What the Veda here states is, moreover, a matter of observation, for during sleep, while the process of breathing goes on uninterruptedly, the activity of the sense organs is interrupted and again becomes manifest at the time of awaking only. And as the sense organs are the essence of all material beings, the com- plementary passage which speaks of the merging and emerging of the beings can be reconciled with the principal vital air also. Moreover, subsequently to pra/za being mentioned as the divinity of the prastava the sun and food are designated as the divinities of the udgitha and the pratihara. Now as they are not Brahman, the pra^a also, by parity of reasoning, cannot be Brahman. To this argumentation the author of the Sutras replies : For the same reason pra/za — that means : on account of the presence of characteristic marks — which constituted the reason stated in the preceding Sutra — the word pra^a also 86 VEDANTA-StJTRAS. must be held to denote Brahman. For Scripture says of pra/^a also, that it is connected with marks characteristic of Brahman. The sentence, ' All these beings merge into breath alone, and from breath they arise,' which declares that the origination and retractation of all beings depend on pra;za, clearly shows pra;za to be Brahman.
3it is connected with marks characteristic of Brahman. The sentence, ' All these beings merge into breath alone, and from breath they arise,' which declares that the origination and retractation of all beings depend on pra;za, clearly shows pra;za to be Brahman. In reply to the assertion that the origination and retractation of all beings can be reconciled equally well with the assumption of pra^a de- noting the chief vital air, because origination and retractation take place in the state of waking and of sleep also, we remark that in those two states only the senses are merged into, and emerge from, the chief vital air, while, according to the scriptural passage, ' For all these beings, &c.,' all beings whatever into which a living Self has entered, together with their senses and bodies, merge and emerge by turns. And even if the word ' beings ' were taken (not in the sense of animated beings, but) in the sense of material elements in general, there would be nothing in the way of interpreting the passage as referring to Brahman. — But, it may be said, that the senses together with their objects do, during sleep, enter into pra/za, and again issue from it at the time of waking, we distinctly learn from another scriptural passage, viz. Kau. Up. Ill, 3, 'When a man being thus asleep sees no dream whatever, he becomes one with that pra/za alone. Then speech goes to him with all names,5 &c. — True, we reply, but there also the word pra/za denotes (not the vital air) but Brahman, as we conclude from characteristic marks of Brahman being mentioned. The objection, again, that the word pra/za cannot denote Brahman because it occurs in proximity to the words ' food ' and ' sun ' (which do not refer to Brahman), is altogether baseless ; for proximity is of no avail against the force of the complementary passage which intimates that pra?za is Brahman. That argument, finally, which rests on the fact that the word pra;za com- monly denotes the vital air with its five modifications, is to be refuted in the same way as the parallel argument which the purvapakshin brought forward with reference to the word ' ether.' From all this it follows that the pra/za, which is the deity of the prastava, is Brahman. I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 24. 87 Some (commentators)1 quote under the present Sutra the following passages, ' the pra/za of pra/za ' (Bri. Up. IV, 4, 18), and ' for to pra^a mind is fastened ' (Kk. Up. VI, 8, 2).
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.
1And Taitt. Up. Ill, 6, ' This is the knowledge of Bhrzgu and Varuzza, founded on the highest ether (vyoman).' And again, ' Om, ka is Brah- man, ether (kha) is Brahman' (Kk. Up. IV, 10, 5), and 'the old ether ' (Br/. Up. V, 1) 2. And other similar passages. On account of the force of the complementary passage we are justified in deciding that the word ' ether,' although occurring in the beginning of the passage, refers to Brahman. The case is analogous to that of the sentence, c Agni (lit. the fire) studies a chapter,' where the word agni, although occurring in the beginning, is at once seen to denote a boy 3. It is therefore settled that the word ' ether' denotes Brahman. 23. For the same reason breath (is Brahman). Concerning the udgttha it is said (KL Up. I, 10, 9), ' Prastotrz, that deity which belongs to the prastava, &c.,' and, further on (I, 11, 4; 5), 'Which then is that deity? He said : Breath. For all these beings merge into breath alone, and from breath they arise. This is the deity belonging to the prastava.' With reference to this passage doubt and decision are to be considered as analogous to those stated under the preceding Sutra. For while in some passages — as, for instance, ' For indeed, my son, mind is fastened to prazza,' Kk. Up. VI, 8, 3; and, 'the prazza of prazza,' Bri. Up. IV, 4, 18 — the word 'breath' is seen to denote Brahman, its use 1 Viz. as intimating it. Thus An. Gi. and Go. An. against the accent of rik&h. Saya/za explains rikih as genitive. 2 Ozzzkarasya pratikatvena va^akatvena lakshakatvena va brah- matvam uktam, om iti, kazzz sukhaz/z tasyarthendriyayoga^atvazzz varayitu;?z kham iti, tasya bhutaka^atva/^ vyaseddhum purazzam ity uktam. An. Gi. 3 The doubt about the meaning of a word is preferably to be decided by means of a reference to preceding passages ; where that is not possible (the doubtful word occurring at the beginning of some new chapter) complementary, i. e. subsequent passages have to be taken into consideration. I ADHYAYA, I PAD A, 23. 85 in the sense of a certain modification of air is better estab- lished in common as well as in Vedic language. Hence there arises a doubt whether in the passage under dis- cussion the word pra/za denotes Brahman or (ordinary) breath.
2ADHYAYA, I PAD A, 23. 85 in the sense of a certain modification of air is better estab- lished in common as well as in Vedic language. Hence there arises a doubt whether in the passage under dis- cussion the word pra/za denotes Brahman or (ordinary) breath. In favour of which meaning have we then to decide ? Here the purvapakshin maintains that the word must be held to denote the fivefold vital breath, which is a peculiar modification of wind (or air); because, as has been re- marked already, that sense of the word pra/^a is the better established one.— But no, an objector will say, just as in the case of the preceding Sutra, so here also Brahman is meant, on account of characteristic marks being mentioned ; for here also a complementary passage gives us to understand that all beings spring from and merge into pra;za ; a process which can take place in connexion with the highest Lord only. — This objection, the purvapakshin replies, is futile, since we see that the beings enter into and proceed from the principal vital air also. For Scripture makes the fol- lowing statement (Sat. Br. X, 3, 3, 6), 'When man sleeps, then into breath indeed speech merges, into breath the eye, into breath the ear, into breath the mind ; when he awakes then they spring again from breath alone/ What the Veda here states is, moreover, a matter of observation, for during sleep, while the process of breathing goes on uninterruptedly, the activity of the sense organs is interrupted and again becomes manifest at the time of awaking only. And as the sense organs are the essence of all material beings, the com- plementary passage which speaks of the merging and emerging of the beings can be reconciled with the principal vital air also. Moreover, subsequently to pra/za being mentioned as the divinity of the prastava the sun and food are designated as the divinities of the udgitha and the pratihara. Now as they are not Brahman, the pra^a also, by parity of reasoning, cannot be Brahman. To this argumentation the author of the Sutras replies : For the same reason pra/za — that means : on account of the presence of characteristic marks — which constituted the reason stated in the preceding Sutra — the word pra^a also 86 VEDANTA-StJTRAS. must be held to denote Brahman. For Scripture says of pra/^a also, that it is connected with marks characteristic of Brahman. The sentence, ' All these beings merge into breath alone, and from breath they arise,' which declares that the origination and retractation of all beings depend on pra;za, clearly shows pra;za to be Brahman.
3it is connected with marks characteristic of Brahman. The sentence, ' All these beings merge into breath alone, and from breath they arise,' which declares that the origination and retractation of all beings depend on pra;za, clearly shows pra;za to be Brahman. In reply to the assertion that the origination and retractation of all beings can be reconciled equally well with the assumption of pra^a de- noting the chief vital air, because origination and retractation take place in the state of waking and of sleep also, we remark that in those two states only the senses are merged into, and emerge from, the chief vital air, while, according to the scriptural passage, ' For all these beings, &c.,' all beings whatever into which a living Self has entered, together with their senses and bodies, merge and emerge by turns. And even if the word ' beings ' were taken (not in the sense of animated beings, but) in the sense of material elements in general, there would be nothing in the way of interpreting the passage as referring to Brahman. — But, it may be said, that the senses together with their objects do, during sleep, enter into pra/za, and again issue from it at the time of waking, we distinctly learn from another scriptural passage, viz. Kau. Up. Ill, 3, 'When a man being thus asleep sees no dream whatever, he becomes one with that pra/za alone. Then speech goes to him with all names,5 &c. — True, we reply, but there also the word pra/za denotes (not the vital air) but Brahman, as we conclude from characteristic marks of Brahman being mentioned. The objection, again, that the word pra/za cannot denote Brahman because it occurs in proximity to the words ' food ' and ' sun ' (which do not refer to Brahman), is altogether baseless ; for proximity is of no avail against the force of the complementary passage which intimates that pra?za is Brahman. That argument, finally, which rests on the fact that the word pra;za com- monly denotes the vital air with its five modifications, is to be refuted in the same way as the parallel argument which the purvapakshin brought forward with reference to the word ' ether.' From all this it follows that the pra/za, which is the deity of the prastava, is Brahman. I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 24. 87 Some (commentators)1 quote under the present Sutra the following passages, ' the pra/za of pra/za ' (Bri. Up. IV, 4, 18), and ' for to pra^a mind is fastened ' (Kk. Up. VI, 8, 2).
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.