Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1was said to be mentioned in the passage about the creation, ' Fire is his head,' &c. is not mentioned there but) is stated only later on in a passage subsequent to that which refers to the creation, viz. ' The Person is all this, sacrifice/ &c. (II, i, 10). — Now, we see that jruti as well as smrzti speaks of the birth of Pra^&pati, whose body is this three- fold world; compare Rzg-veda. Sa^h. X, 131, 1, ' Hira^ya- garbha arose in the beginning ; he was the one born Lord of things existing. He established the earth and this sky ; to what God shall we offer our oblation?5 where the expres- sion ' arose ' means ' he was born.5 And in snm'ti we read, ' He is the first embodied one, he is called the Person ; as the primal creator of the beings Brahman was evolved in the beginning.5 This Person which is (not the original Brahman but) an effect (like other created beings) may be called the internal Self of all beings (as it is called in II, 1, 4), because in the form of the Self of breath it abides in the Selfs of all beings. — On this latter explanation (according to which the passage, ' Fire is his head,5 &c, does not describe the nature of the highest Lord, and can therefore not be referred to in the Sutra) the declaration as to the Lord being the ' nature 5 of all which is contained in the passage, ' The Person is all this, sacrifice,' &c, must be taken as the reason for establishing the highest Lord, (i. e. as the passage which, according to the Sutra, proves that the source of all beings is the highest Lord 1.) 1 The question is to what passage the ' rupopanyasat ' of the Sutra refers. — According to the opinion set forth first it refers to Mu. Up. II, 1, 4 ff. — But, according to the second view, II, 1, 4 to II, 1 , 9, cannot refer to the source of all beings, i. e. the highest Self, because that entire passage describes the creation, the inner Self of which is not the highest Self but Pra^apati, i. e. the Hira/zya- garbha or Sutratman of the later Vedanta, who is himself an I ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 24. 1 43 24. Vaisvanara (is the highest Lord) on account of the distinction qualifying the common terms (VaLrva- nara and Self). (In Kh. Up. V, 11 ff.) a discussion begins with the words, ' What is our Self, what is Brahman?' and is carried on in the passage, ' You know at present that Vauvanara Self, tell us that;' after that it is declared with reference to Heaven, sun, air, ether, water, and earth, that they are con- nected with the qualities of having good light, &c, and, in order to disparage devout meditation on
2u know at present that Vauvanara Self, tell us that;' after that it is declared with reference to Heaven, sun, air, ether, water, and earth, that they are con- nected with the qualities of having good light, &c, and, in order to disparage devout meditation on them singly, that they stand to the VaLrvanara in the relation of being his head, &c, merely; and then finally (V, 18) it is said, 'But he who meditates on the Vauvanara Self as measured by a span, as abhivimana \ he eats food in all worlds, in all beings, in all Selfs. Of that VaLrvanara Self the head is Sute^as (having good light), the eye Vuvarupa (multiform), the breath Przthag- vartman (moving in various courses), the trunk Bahula (full), the bladder Rayi (wealth), the feet the earth, the chest the altar, the hairs the grass on the altar, the heart the Garhapatya fire, the mind the Anvaharya fire, the mouth the Ahavaniya fire.' — Here the doubt arises whether by the term 'VaLsva- nara' we have to understand the gastric fire, or the elemental fire, or the divinity presiding over the latter, or the embodied soul, or the highest Lord. — But what, it may be asked, gives rise to this doubt ? — The circumstance, we reply, of ' VaLrva- nara ' being employed as a common term for the gastric fire, the elemental fire, and the divinity of the latter, while 'Self is a term applying to the embodied soul as well as to the highest Lord. Hence the doubt arises which meaning of the term is to be accepted and which to be set aside. Which, then, is the alternative to be embraced? — Vai- jvanara, the purvapakshin maintains, is the gastric fire, because we meet, in some passages, with the term used in ' effect,' and who is called the inner Self, because he is the breath of life (pra/za) in everything. — Hence the Sutra must be connected with another passage, and that passage is found in II, 1, 10, where it is said that the Person (i. e. the highest Self) is all this, &c. 1 About which term see later on. 1 44 VEDANtA-S^TR AS. that special sense; so, for instance (Br/. Up. V, 9), 'Agni VaLrvanara is the fire within man by which the food that is eaten is cooked.5 — Or else the term may denote fire in general, as we see it used in that sense also ; so, for instance {Rig- veda Sa/7zh. X, 88, 12), ' For the whole world the gods have made the Agni Vauvanara a sign of the days.5 Or, in the third place, the word may denote that divinity whose body is. fire. For passages in which the term has that sense are likewise met with ; compare, for instance, 7^/g-veda Sa^h.
3whole world the gods have made the Agni Vauvanara a sign of the days.5 Or, in the third place, the word may denote that divinity whose body is. fire. For passages in which the term has that sense are likewise met with ; compare, for instance, 7^/g-veda Sa^h. I, 98, i, ' May we be in the favour of Vauvanara ; for he is the king of the beings, giving pleasure, of ready grace ; ' this and similar passages properly applying to a divinity endowed with power and similar qualities. Perhaps it will be urged against the preceding explanations, that, as the word Vairvanara is used in co-ordination with the term ' Self,5 and as the term ' Self alone is used in the intro- ductory passage (' What is our Self, what is Brahman?5), Vauvanara has to be understood in a modified sense, so as to be in harmony with the term Self. Well, then, the purvapakshin rejoins, let us suppose that Vauvanara is the embodied Self which, as being an enjoyer, is in close vicinity to the Vairvanara fire,1 (i. e. the fire within the body,) and with which the qualification expressed by the term, c Measured by a span,5 well agrees, since it is restricted by its limiting condition (viz. the body and so on).— In any case it is evident that the term Vauvanara does not denote the highest Lord. To this we make the following reply. — The word VaLsva- nara denotes the highest Self, on account of the distinction qualifying the two general terms. — Although the term ' Self/ as well as the term ' VaLrvanara,5 has various meanings— the latter term denoting three beings while the former denotes two — yet we observe a distinction from which we conclude that both terms can here denote the highest Lord only ; viz. in the passage, ' Of that VaLsvanara Self the head is Sute^-as,5 &c. For it is clear that that passage refers to the highest Lord in so far as he is distinguished by having heaven, and so on, for his head and limbs, and in so far as 1 Sarire laksha;zajra vauvanara^abdopapattim aha tasyeti. An. Gi. I ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 25. 1 45 he has entered into a different state (viz. into the state of being the Self of the threefold world) ; represents him, in fact, for the purpose of meditation, as the internal Self of everything. As such the absolute Self may be represented, because it is the cause of everything; for as the cause virtually contains all the states belonging to its effects, the heavenly world, and so on, may be spoken of as the members of the highest Self. — Moreover, the result which Scripture declares to abide in all worlds— viz.
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.
1was said to be mentioned in the passage about the creation, ' Fire is his head,' &c. is not mentioned there but) is stated only later on in a passage subsequent to that which refers to the creation, viz. ' The Person is all this, sacrifice/ &c. (II, i, 10). — Now, we see that jruti as well as smrzti speaks of the birth of Pra^&pati, whose body is this three- fold world; compare Rzg-veda. Sa^h. X, 131, 1, ' Hira^ya- garbha arose in the beginning ; he was the one born Lord of things existing. He established the earth and this sky ; to what God shall we offer our oblation?5 where the expres- sion ' arose ' means ' he was born.5 And in snm'ti we read, ' He is the first embodied one, he is called the Person ; as the primal creator of the beings Brahman was evolved in the beginning.5 This Person which is (not the original Brahman but) an effect (like other created beings) may be called the internal Self of all beings (as it is called in II, 1, 4), because in the form of the Self of breath it abides in the Selfs of all beings. — On this latter explanation (according to which the passage, ' Fire is his head,5 &c, does not describe the nature of the highest Lord, and can therefore not be referred to in the Sutra) the declaration as to the Lord being the ' nature 5 of all which is contained in the passage, ' The Person is all this, sacrifice,' &c, must be taken as the reason for establishing the highest Lord, (i. e. as the passage which, according to the Sutra, proves that the source of all beings is the highest Lord 1.) 1 The question is to what passage the ' rupopanyasat ' of the Sutra refers. — According to the opinion set forth first it refers to Mu. Up. II, 1, 4 ff. — But, according to the second view, II, 1, 4 to II, 1 , 9, cannot refer to the source of all beings, i. e. the highest Self, because that entire passage describes the creation, the inner Self of which is not the highest Self but Pra^apati, i. e. the Hira/zya- garbha or Sutratman of the later Vedanta, who is himself an I ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 24. 1 43 24. Vaisvanara (is the highest Lord) on account of the distinction qualifying the common terms (VaLrva- nara and Self). (In Kh. Up. V, 11 ff.) a discussion begins with the words, ' What is our Self, what is Brahman?' and is carried on in the passage, ' You know at present that Vauvanara Self, tell us that;' after that it is declared with reference to Heaven, sun, air, ether, water, and earth, that they are con- nected with the qualities of having good light, &c, and, in order to disparage devout meditation on
2u know at present that Vauvanara Self, tell us that;' after that it is declared with reference to Heaven, sun, air, ether, water, and earth, that they are con- nected with the qualities of having good light, &c, and, in order to disparage devout meditation on them singly, that they stand to the VaLrvanara in the relation of being his head, &c, merely; and then finally (V, 18) it is said, 'But he who meditates on the Vauvanara Self as measured by a span, as abhivimana \ he eats food in all worlds, in all beings, in all Selfs. Of that VaLrvanara Self the head is Sute^as (having good light), the eye Vuvarupa (multiform), the breath Przthag- vartman (moving in various courses), the trunk Bahula (full), the bladder Rayi (wealth), the feet the earth, the chest the altar, the hairs the grass on the altar, the heart the Garhapatya fire, the mind the Anvaharya fire, the mouth the Ahavaniya fire.' — Here the doubt arises whether by the term 'VaLsva- nara' we have to understand the gastric fire, or the elemental fire, or the divinity presiding over the latter, or the embodied soul, or the highest Lord. — But what, it may be asked, gives rise to this doubt ? — The circumstance, we reply, of ' VaLrva- nara ' being employed as a common term for the gastric fire, the elemental fire, and the divinity of the latter, while 'Self is a term applying to the embodied soul as well as to the highest Lord. Hence the doubt arises which meaning of the term is to be accepted and which to be set aside. Which, then, is the alternative to be embraced? — Vai- jvanara, the purvapakshin maintains, is the gastric fire, because we meet, in some passages, with the term used in ' effect,' and who is called the inner Self, because he is the breath of life (pra/za) in everything. — Hence the Sutra must be connected with another passage, and that passage is found in II, 1, 10, where it is said that the Person (i. e. the highest Self) is all this, &c. 1 About which term see later on. 1 44 VEDANtA-S^TR AS. that special sense; so, for instance (Br/. Up. V, 9), 'Agni VaLrvanara is the fire within man by which the food that is eaten is cooked.5 — Or else the term may denote fire in general, as we see it used in that sense also ; so, for instance {Rig- veda Sa/7zh. X, 88, 12), ' For the whole world the gods have made the Agni Vauvanara a sign of the days.5 Or, in the third place, the word may denote that divinity whose body is. fire. For passages in which the term has that sense are likewise met with ; compare, for instance, 7^/g-veda Sa^h.
3whole world the gods have made the Agni Vauvanara a sign of the days.5 Or, in the third place, the word may denote that divinity whose body is. fire. For passages in which the term has that sense are likewise met with ; compare, for instance, 7^/g-veda Sa^h. I, 98, i, ' May we be in the favour of Vauvanara ; for he is the king of the beings, giving pleasure, of ready grace ; ' this and similar passages properly applying to a divinity endowed with power and similar qualities. Perhaps it will be urged against the preceding explanations, that, as the word Vairvanara is used in co-ordination with the term ' Self,5 and as the term ' Self alone is used in the intro- ductory passage (' What is our Self, what is Brahman?5), Vauvanara has to be understood in a modified sense, so as to be in harmony with the term Self. Well, then, the purvapakshin rejoins, let us suppose that Vauvanara is the embodied Self which, as being an enjoyer, is in close vicinity to the Vairvanara fire,1 (i. e. the fire within the body,) and with which the qualification expressed by the term, c Measured by a span,5 well agrees, since it is restricted by its limiting condition (viz. the body and so on).— In any case it is evident that the term Vauvanara does not denote the highest Lord. To this we make the following reply. — The word VaLsva- nara denotes the highest Self, on account of the distinction qualifying the two general terms. — Although the term ' Self/ as well as the term ' VaLrvanara,5 has various meanings— the latter term denoting three beings while the former denotes two — yet we observe a distinction from which we conclude that both terms can here denote the highest Lord only ; viz. in the passage, ' Of that VaLsvanara Self the head is Sute^-as,5 &c. For it is clear that that passage refers to the highest Lord in so far as he is distinguished by having heaven, and so on, for his head and limbs, and in so far as 1 Sarire laksha;zajra vauvanara^abdopapattim aha tasyeti. An. Gi. I ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 25. 1 45 he has entered into a different state (viz. into the state of being the Self of the threefold world) ; represents him, in fact, for the purpose of meditation, as the internal Self of everything. As such the absolute Self may be represented, because it is the cause of everything; for as the cause virtually contains all the states belonging to its effects, the heavenly world, and so on, may be spoken of as the members of the highest Self. — Moreover, the result which Scripture declares to abide in all worlds— viz.
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.