Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1le and audible proof (Kh. Up. Ill, 13, 7; 8), which declares that entirely separated from the other elements, and therefore bounded by the latter. 1 So as to justify the assumption that such a thing as non-tri- partite light exists at all. 90 VEDANTA-stjTRAS. the fire is characterised by the noise it makes, and by heat ; and likewise from the following passage, ' Let a man meditate on this as that which is seen and heard.' The same conclusion may be drawn from the passage, { He who knows this becomes conspicuous and celebrated,' which proclaims an inconsiderable reward only, while to the devout meditation on Brahman a high reward would have to be allotted. Nor is there mentioned in the entire passage about the light any other characteristic mark of Brahman, while such marks are set forth in the passages (discussed above) which refer to pra^a and the ether. Nor, again, is Brahman indicated in the preceding section, ' the Gayatri is everything whatsoever exists,5 &c. (Ill, 12); for that passage makes a statement about the Gayatri metre only. And even if that section did refer to Brahman, still Brahman would not be recognised in the passage at present under discussion ; for there (in the section referred to) it is declared — in the clause, 4 Three feet of it are the Immortal in heaven ' — that heaven constitutes the abode ; while in our passage the words ' the light above heaven ' declare heaven to be a boundary. For all these reasons the word ^yotis is here to be taken in its ordinary meaning, viz. light. To this we make the following reply. The word ^yotis must be held to denote Brahman. Why ? On account of the feet (quarters) being mentioned. In a preceding passage Brahman had been spoken of as having four feet (quarters). ' Such is the greatness of it ; greater than it is the Person (purusha). One foot of it are all the beings, three feet of it are the Immortal in heaven.' That which in this passage is said to constitute the three-quarter part, immortal and connected with heaven, of Brahman, which altogether comprises four quarters ; this very same entity we recognise as again referred to in the passage under discussion, because there also it is said to be connected with heaven. If therefore we should set it aside in our interpretation of the passage and assume the latter to refer to the ordinary light, we should commit the mistake of dropping, without need, the topic started and introducing I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 24. 9 1 a new subject.
2therefore we should set it aside in our interpretation of the passage and assume the latter to refer to the ordinary light, we should commit the mistake of dropping, without need, the topic started and introducing I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 24. 9 1 a new subject. Brahman, in fact, continues to form the subject-matter, not only of the passage about the light, but likewise of the subsequent section, the so-called vSa^lya- vidya (Kh. Up. Ill, 14). Hence we conclude that in our passage the word ' light ' must be held to denote Brahman. The objection (raised above) that from common use the words ' light ' and ' to shine ' are known to denote effected (physical) light is without force ; for as it is known from the general topic of the chapter that Brahman is meant, those two words do not necessarily denote physical light only to the exclusion of Brahman1, but may also denote Brahman itself, in so far as it is characterised by the physical shining light which is its effect. Analogously another mantra declares, * that by which the sun shines kindled with heat' (Taitt. Br. Ill, 12, 9, 7). Or else we may suppose that the word ^yotis here does not denote at all that light on which the function of the eye depends. For we see that in other passages it has altogether different meanings ; so, for instance, Brz. Up. IV, 3, 5, ' With speech only as light man sits,' and Taitt. Sa. I, 6, 3, 3, ' May the mind, the light, accept,' &c. It thus appears that whatever illuminates (in the different senses of the word) something else may be spoken of as { light.' Hence to Brahman also, whose nature is intelligence, the term ' light ' may be applied ; for it gives light to the entire world. Similarly, other scriptural passages say, ' Him the shining one, every- thing shines after ; by his light all this is lighted ' (Kau. Up. II, 5, 15); and ' Him the gods worship as the light of lights, as the immortal' (Brz. Up. IV, 4, 16). Against the further objection that the omnipresent Brahman cannot be viewed as bounded by heaven we remark that the assign- ment, to Brahman, of a special locality is not contrary to reason because it subserves the purpose of devout medita- tion. Nor does it avail anything to say that it is impossible to assign any place to Brahman because Brahman is out of connexion with all place. For it is possible to make such 1 Brahma^o vyava^idya te^a^samarpakatvaw vlreshakatvam, tadabhavo*vireshakatvam. An. Gi. 9 2 VED ANTA-SlJTR AS. an assumption, because Brahman is connected with certain limiting adjuncts.
3n is out of connexion with all place. For it is possible to make such 1 Brahma^o vyava^idya te^a^samarpakatvaw vlreshakatvam, tadabhavo*vireshakatvam. An. Gi. 9 2 VED ANTA-SlJTR AS. an assumption, because Brahman is connected with certain limiting adjuncts. Accordingly Scripture speaks of different kinds of devout meditation on Brahman as specially con- nected with certain localities, such as the sun, the eye, the heart. For the same reason it is also possible to attribute to Brahman a multiplicity of abodes, as is done in the clause (quoted above) ' higher than all.' The further ob- jection that the light beyond heaven is the mere physical light because it is identified with the gastric fire, which itself is a mere effect and is inferred from perceptible marks such as the heat of the body and a certain sound, is equally devoid of force ; for the gastric fire may be viewed as the outward appearance (or symbol) of Brahman, just as Brah- man's name is a mere outward symbol. Similarly in the passage, ' Let a man meditate on it (the gastric light) as seen and heard,' the visibility and audibility (here implicitly ascribed to Brahman) must be considered as rendered possible through the gastric fire being the outward appear- ance of Brahman. Nor is there any force in the objection that Brahman cannot be meant because the text mentions an inconsiderable reward only ; for there is no reason com- pelling us to have recourse to Brahman for the purpose of such and such a reward only, and not for the purpose of such and such another reward. Wherever the text represents the highest Brahman — which is free from all connexion with distinguishing attributes — as the universal Self, it is understood that the result of that instruction is one only, viz. final release. Wherever, on the other hand, Brahman is taught to be connected with distinguishing attributes or outward symbols, there, we see, all the various rewards which this world can offer are spoken of; cp. for instance, Br/. Up. IV, 4, 34, ' This is he who eats all food, the giver of wealth. He who knows this obtains wealth.' Although in the passage itself which treats of the light no charac- teristic mark of Brahman is mentioned, yet, as the Sutra intimates, the mark stated in a preceding passage (viz. the mantra, ' Such is the greatness of it,' &c.) has to be taken in connexion with the passage about the light as well. The question how the mere circumstance of Brahman being I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 25.
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.
1le and audible proof (Kh. Up. Ill, 13, 7; 8), which declares that entirely separated from the other elements, and therefore bounded by the latter. 1 So as to justify the assumption that such a thing as non-tri- partite light exists at all. 90 VEDANTA-stjTRAS. the fire is characterised by the noise it makes, and by heat ; and likewise from the following passage, ' Let a man meditate on this as that which is seen and heard.' The same conclusion may be drawn from the passage, { He who knows this becomes conspicuous and celebrated,' which proclaims an inconsiderable reward only, while to the devout meditation on Brahman a high reward would have to be allotted. Nor is there mentioned in the entire passage about the light any other characteristic mark of Brahman, while such marks are set forth in the passages (discussed above) which refer to pra^a and the ether. Nor, again, is Brahman indicated in the preceding section, ' the Gayatri is everything whatsoever exists,5 &c. (Ill, 12); for that passage makes a statement about the Gayatri metre only. And even if that section did refer to Brahman, still Brahman would not be recognised in the passage at present under discussion ; for there (in the section referred to) it is declared — in the clause, 4 Three feet of it are the Immortal in heaven ' — that heaven constitutes the abode ; while in our passage the words ' the light above heaven ' declare heaven to be a boundary. For all these reasons the word ^yotis is here to be taken in its ordinary meaning, viz. light. To this we make the following reply. The word ^yotis must be held to denote Brahman. Why ? On account of the feet (quarters) being mentioned. In a preceding passage Brahman had been spoken of as having four feet (quarters). ' Such is the greatness of it ; greater than it is the Person (purusha). One foot of it are all the beings, three feet of it are the Immortal in heaven.' That which in this passage is said to constitute the three-quarter part, immortal and connected with heaven, of Brahman, which altogether comprises four quarters ; this very same entity we recognise as again referred to in the passage under discussion, because there also it is said to be connected with heaven. If therefore we should set it aside in our interpretation of the passage and assume the latter to refer to the ordinary light, we should commit the mistake of dropping, without need, the topic started and introducing I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 24. 9 1 a new subject.
2therefore we should set it aside in our interpretation of the passage and assume the latter to refer to the ordinary light, we should commit the mistake of dropping, without need, the topic started and introducing I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 24. 9 1 a new subject. Brahman, in fact, continues to form the subject-matter, not only of the passage about the light, but likewise of the subsequent section, the so-called vSa^lya- vidya (Kh. Up. Ill, 14). Hence we conclude that in our passage the word ' light ' must be held to denote Brahman. The objection (raised above) that from common use the words ' light ' and ' to shine ' are known to denote effected (physical) light is without force ; for as it is known from the general topic of the chapter that Brahman is meant, those two words do not necessarily denote physical light only to the exclusion of Brahman1, but may also denote Brahman itself, in so far as it is characterised by the physical shining light which is its effect. Analogously another mantra declares, * that by which the sun shines kindled with heat' (Taitt. Br. Ill, 12, 9, 7). Or else we may suppose that the word ^yotis here does not denote at all that light on which the function of the eye depends. For we see that in other passages it has altogether different meanings ; so, for instance, Brz. Up. IV, 3, 5, ' With speech only as light man sits,' and Taitt. Sa. I, 6, 3, 3, ' May the mind, the light, accept,' &c. It thus appears that whatever illuminates (in the different senses of the word) something else may be spoken of as { light.' Hence to Brahman also, whose nature is intelligence, the term ' light ' may be applied ; for it gives light to the entire world. Similarly, other scriptural passages say, ' Him the shining one, every- thing shines after ; by his light all this is lighted ' (Kau. Up. II, 5, 15); and ' Him the gods worship as the light of lights, as the immortal' (Brz. Up. IV, 4, 16). Against the further objection that the omnipresent Brahman cannot be viewed as bounded by heaven we remark that the assign- ment, to Brahman, of a special locality is not contrary to reason because it subserves the purpose of devout medita- tion. Nor does it avail anything to say that it is impossible to assign any place to Brahman because Brahman is out of connexion with all place. For it is possible to make such 1 Brahma^o vyava^idya te^a^samarpakatvaw vlreshakatvam, tadabhavo*vireshakatvam. An. Gi. 9 2 VED ANTA-SlJTR AS. an assumption, because Brahman is connected with certain limiting adjuncts.
3n is out of connexion with all place. For it is possible to make such 1 Brahma^o vyava^idya te^a^samarpakatvaw vlreshakatvam, tadabhavo*vireshakatvam. An. Gi. 9 2 VED ANTA-SlJTR AS. an assumption, because Brahman is connected with certain limiting adjuncts. Accordingly Scripture speaks of different kinds of devout meditation on Brahman as specially con- nected with certain localities, such as the sun, the eye, the heart. For the same reason it is also possible to attribute to Brahman a multiplicity of abodes, as is done in the clause (quoted above) ' higher than all.' The further ob- jection that the light beyond heaven is the mere physical light because it is identified with the gastric fire, which itself is a mere effect and is inferred from perceptible marks such as the heat of the body and a certain sound, is equally devoid of force ; for the gastric fire may be viewed as the outward appearance (or symbol) of Brahman, just as Brah- man's name is a mere outward symbol. Similarly in the passage, ' Let a man meditate on it (the gastric light) as seen and heard,' the visibility and audibility (here implicitly ascribed to Brahman) must be considered as rendered possible through the gastric fire being the outward appear- ance of Brahman. Nor is there any force in the objection that Brahman cannot be meant because the text mentions an inconsiderable reward only ; for there is no reason com- pelling us to have recourse to Brahman for the purpose of such and such a reward only, and not for the purpose of such and such another reward. Wherever the text represents the highest Brahman — which is free from all connexion with distinguishing attributes — as the universal Self, it is understood that the result of that instruction is one only, viz. final release. Wherever, on the other hand, Brahman is taught to be connected with distinguishing attributes or outward symbols, there, we see, all the various rewards which this world can offer are spoken of; cp. for instance, Br/. Up. IV, 4, 34, ' This is he who eats all food, the giver of wealth. He who knows this obtains wealth.' Although in the passage itself which treats of the light no charac- teristic mark of Brahman is mentioned, yet, as the Sutra intimates, the mark stated in a preceding passage (viz. the mantra, ' Such is the greatness of it,' &c.) has to be taken in connexion with the passage about the light as well. The question how the mere circumstance of Brahman being I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 25.
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.