Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1imates, 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. 93 mentioned in a not distant passage can have the power of divorcing from its natural object and transferring to another object the direct statement about light implied in the word i light/ may be answered without difficulty. The passage under discussion runs 1, ( which above this heaven, the light/ The relative pronoun with which this clause begins intimates, according to its grammatical force2, the same Brahman which was mentioned in the previous passage, and which is here recognised (as being the same which was mentioned before) through its connexion with heaven; hence the word ^yotis also — which stands in grammatical co-ordination to ' which '—must have Brahman for its object. From all this it follows that the word 'light' here denotes Brahman. 25. If it be objected that (Brahman is) not (denoted) on account of the metre being denoted ; (we reply) not so, because thus (i. e. by means of the metre) the direction of the mind (on Brahman) is declared ; for thus it is seen (in other passages also). We now address ourselves to the refutation of the asser- tion (made in the purvapaksha of the preceding Sutra) that in the previous passage also Brahman is not referred to, because in the sentence, ' Gayatri is everything whatsoever here exists,' the metre called Gayatri is spoken of. — How (we ask the purvapakshin) can it be maintained that, on account of the metre being spoken of, Brahman is not denoted, while yet the mantra 'such is the greatness of it,' &c, clearly sets forth Brahman with its four quarters? — You are mistaken (the purvapakshin replies). The sentence, ' Gayatri is everything,5 starts the discussion of Gayatri. The same Gayatri is thereupon described under the various forms of all beings, earth, body, heart, speech, breath ; to which there refers also the verse, ' that Gayatri 1 If we strictly follow the order of words in the original. 2 Svasamarthyena sarvanamna^ sannihitaparamamtvava^ena. 94 VEDANTA-S<JTRAS. has four feet and is sixfold.' After that we meet with the mantra, ' Such is the greatness of it/ &c.
2rse, ' that Gayatri 1 If we strictly follow the order of words in the original. 2 Svasamarthyena sarvanamna^ sannihitaparamamtvava^ena. 94 VEDANTA-S<JTRAS. has four feet and is sixfold.' After that we meet with the mantra, ' Such is the greatness of it/ &c. How then, we ask, should this mantra, which evidently is quoted with reference to the Gayatri (metre) as described in the preceding clauses, all at once denote Brahman with its four quarters ? Since therefore the metre Gayatri is the subject-matter of the entire chapter, the term ' Brahman ' which occurs in a subsequent passage ('the Brahman which has thus been described') must also denote the metre. This is analogous to a previous passage (Kh. Up. Ill, n, 3, ' He who thus knows this Brahma-upanishad'), where the word Brahma- upanishad is explained to mean Veda-upanishad. As therefore the preceding passage refers (not to Brahman, but) to the Gayatri metre, Brahman does not constitute the topic of the entire section. This argumentation, we reply, proves nothing against our position. ' Because thus direction of the mind is declared,' i. e. because the Brahma^a passage, ' Gayatri indeed is all this,' intimates that by means of the metre Gayatri the mind is to be directed on Brahman which is connected with that metre. Of the metre Gayatri, which is nothing but a certain special combination of syllables, it could not possibly be said that it is the Self of everything. We therefore have to understand the passage as declaring that Brahman, which, as the cause of the world, is connected with that product also whose name is Gayatri, is ' all this ; ' in accordance with that other passage which directly says, 'AH this indeed is Brahman' (Kh. Up. Ill, 14, 1). That the effect is in reality not different from the cause, we shall prove later on, under Sutra II, 1, 14. Devout meditation on Brahman under the form of certain effects (of Brahman) is seen to be men- tioned in other passages also, so, for instance, Ait. Ar. Ill, 3, 3, 12, 'For the Bahvr^as consider him in the great hymn, the Adhv^ryus in the sacrificial fire, the -Oandogas in the Mahavrata ceremony.' Although, therefore, the previous passage speaks of the metre, Brahman is what is meant, and the same Brahman is again referred to in the passage about the light, whose purport it is to enjoin another form of devout meditation. I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 26.
3mony.' Although, therefore, the previous passage speaks of the metre, Brahman is what is meant, and the same Brahman is again referred to in the passage about the light, whose purport it is to enjoin another form of devout meditation. I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 26. 95 Another commentator1 is of opinion that the term Gayatri (does not denote Brahman in so far as viewed under the form of Gayatri, but) directly denotes Brahman, on account of the equality of number ; for just as the Gayatri metre has four feet consisting of six syllables each, so Brahman also has four feet, (i. e. quarters.) Similarly we see that in other psssages also the names of metres are used to denote other things which resemble those metres in certain numerical relations; cp. for instance, Kh. Up. IV, 3, 8, where it is said at first, 'Now these five and the other five make ten and that is the Krzta,' and after that 'these are again the Vira^ which eats the food.' If we adopt this interpretation, Brahman only is spoken of, and the metre is not referred to at all. In any case Brahman is the subject with which the previous passage is concerned. 26. And thus also (we must conclude, viz. that Brahman is the subject of the previous passage), be- cause (thus only) the declaration as to the beings, &c. being the feet is possible. That the previous passage has Brahman for its topic, we must assume for that reason also that the text designates the beings and so on as the feet of Gayatri. For the text at first speaks of the beings, the earth, the body, and the heart 2, and then goes on ' that Gayatri has four feet and is sixfold/ For of the mere metre, without any reference to Brahman, it would be impossible to say that the beings and so on are its feet. Moreover, if Brahman were not meant, there would be no room for the verse, ' Such is the great- ness,' &c. For that verse clearly describes Brahman in its own nature ; otherwise it would be impossible to represent the Gayatri as the Self of everything as is done in the words, ' One foot of it are all the beings ; three feet of it are what is immortal in heaven.' The purusha-sukta also {Rik 1 The vrz'ttikara according to Go. An. in his /ika on the bhashya to the next Sutra. 2 Concerning the difficulty involved in this interpretation, cp. Deussen, p. 183, note. g6 VEDANTA-SUTRAS. Sa^h. X, 90) exhibits the verse with sole reference to Brahman. Smrzti likewise ascribes to Brahman a like nature, ' I stand supporting all this world by a single portion of myself (Bha. Gita X, 42).
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.
1imates, 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. 93 mentioned in a not distant passage can have the power of divorcing from its natural object and transferring to another object the direct statement about light implied in the word i light/ may be answered without difficulty. The passage under discussion runs 1, ( which above this heaven, the light/ The relative pronoun with which this clause begins intimates, according to its grammatical force2, the same Brahman which was mentioned in the previous passage, and which is here recognised (as being the same which was mentioned before) through its connexion with heaven; hence the word ^yotis also — which stands in grammatical co-ordination to ' which '—must have Brahman for its object. From all this it follows that the word 'light' here denotes Brahman. 25. If it be objected that (Brahman is) not (denoted) on account of the metre being denoted ; (we reply) not so, because thus (i. e. by means of the metre) the direction of the mind (on Brahman) is declared ; for thus it is seen (in other passages also). We now address ourselves to the refutation of the asser- tion (made in the purvapaksha of the preceding Sutra) that in the previous passage also Brahman is not referred to, because in the sentence, ' Gayatri is everything whatsoever here exists,' the metre called Gayatri is spoken of. — How (we ask the purvapakshin) can it be maintained that, on account of the metre being spoken of, Brahman is not denoted, while yet the mantra 'such is the greatness of it,' &c, clearly sets forth Brahman with its four quarters? — You are mistaken (the purvapakshin replies). The sentence, ' Gayatri is everything,5 starts the discussion of Gayatri. The same Gayatri is thereupon described under the various forms of all beings, earth, body, heart, speech, breath ; to which there refers also the verse, ' that Gayatri 1 If we strictly follow the order of words in the original. 2 Svasamarthyena sarvanamna^ sannihitaparamamtvava^ena. 94 VEDANTA-S<JTRAS. has four feet and is sixfold.' After that we meet with the mantra, ' Such is the greatness of it/ &c.
2rse, ' that Gayatri 1 If we strictly follow the order of words in the original. 2 Svasamarthyena sarvanamna^ sannihitaparamamtvava^ena. 94 VEDANTA-S<JTRAS. has four feet and is sixfold.' After that we meet with the mantra, ' Such is the greatness of it/ &c. How then, we ask, should this mantra, which evidently is quoted with reference to the Gayatri (metre) as described in the preceding clauses, all at once denote Brahman with its four quarters ? Since therefore the metre Gayatri is the subject-matter of the entire chapter, the term ' Brahman ' which occurs in a subsequent passage ('the Brahman which has thus been described') must also denote the metre. This is analogous to a previous passage (Kh. Up. Ill, n, 3, ' He who thus knows this Brahma-upanishad'), where the word Brahma- upanishad is explained to mean Veda-upanishad. As therefore the preceding passage refers (not to Brahman, but) to the Gayatri metre, Brahman does not constitute the topic of the entire section. This argumentation, we reply, proves nothing against our position. ' Because thus direction of the mind is declared,' i. e. because the Brahma^a passage, ' Gayatri indeed is all this,' intimates that by means of the metre Gayatri the mind is to be directed on Brahman which is connected with that metre. Of the metre Gayatri, which is nothing but a certain special combination of syllables, it could not possibly be said that it is the Self of everything. We therefore have to understand the passage as declaring that Brahman, which, as the cause of the world, is connected with that product also whose name is Gayatri, is ' all this ; ' in accordance with that other passage which directly says, 'AH this indeed is Brahman' (Kh. Up. Ill, 14, 1). That the effect is in reality not different from the cause, we shall prove later on, under Sutra II, 1, 14. Devout meditation on Brahman under the form of certain effects (of Brahman) is seen to be men- tioned in other passages also, so, for instance, Ait. Ar. Ill, 3, 3, 12, 'For the Bahvr^as consider him in the great hymn, the Adhv^ryus in the sacrificial fire, the -Oandogas in the Mahavrata ceremony.' Although, therefore, the previous passage speaks of the metre, Brahman is what is meant, and the same Brahman is again referred to in the passage about the light, whose purport it is to enjoin another form of devout meditation. I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 26.
3mony.' Although, therefore, the previous passage speaks of the metre, Brahman is what is meant, and the same Brahman is again referred to in the passage about the light, whose purport it is to enjoin another form of devout meditation. I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 26. 95 Another commentator1 is of opinion that the term Gayatri (does not denote Brahman in so far as viewed under the form of Gayatri, but) directly denotes Brahman, on account of the equality of number ; for just as the Gayatri metre has four feet consisting of six syllables each, so Brahman also has four feet, (i. e. quarters.) Similarly we see that in other psssages also the names of metres are used to denote other things which resemble those metres in certain numerical relations; cp. for instance, Kh. Up. IV, 3, 8, where it is said at first, 'Now these five and the other five make ten and that is the Krzta,' and after that 'these are again the Vira^ which eats the food.' If we adopt this interpretation, Brahman only is spoken of, and the metre is not referred to at all. In any case Brahman is the subject with which the previous passage is concerned. 26. And thus also (we must conclude, viz. that Brahman is the subject of the previous passage), be- cause (thus only) the declaration as to the beings, &c. being the feet is possible. That the previous passage has Brahman for its topic, we must assume for that reason also that the text designates the beings and so on as the feet of Gayatri. For the text at first speaks of the beings, the earth, the body, and the heart 2, and then goes on ' that Gayatri has four feet and is sixfold/ For of the mere metre, without any reference to Brahman, it would be impossible to say that the beings and so on are its feet. Moreover, if Brahman were not meant, there would be no room for the verse, ' Such is the great- ness,' &c. For that verse clearly describes Brahman in its own nature ; otherwise it would be impossible to represent the Gayatri as the Self of everything as is done in the words, ' One foot of it are all the beings ; three feet of it are what is immortal in heaven.' The purusha-sukta also {Rik 1 The vrz'ttikara according to Go. An. in his /ika on the bhashya to the next Sutra. 2 Concerning the difficulty involved in this interpretation, cp. Deussen, p. 183, note. g6 VEDANTA-SUTRAS. Sa^h. X, 90) exhibits the verse with sole reference to Brahman. Smrzti likewise ascribes to Brahman a like nature, ' I stand supporting all this world by a single portion of myself (Bha. Gita X, 42).
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.