Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1bides within man, not that it i s man. But, as a matter of fact, the Va^asaneyins speak of him — in their sacred text — as man, ' This Agni Vauvanara is man ; he who knows this Agni VaLsvanara as man-like, as abiding within man/ &c. (5at. Bra. X, 6, 1, 1 1). The highest Lord, on the other hand, who is the Self of everything, may be spoken of as well as man, as abiding within man. — Those who, in the latter part of the Sutra, read ' man-like ' (puru- shavidham) instead of ' man ' (purusham), wish to express the following meaning : If Vauvanara were assumed to be the gastric fire only, he might be spoken of as abiding within man indeed, but not as man-like. But the Va^asaneyins do speak of him as man-like, ' He who knows him as man-like, as abiding within man.' — The meaning of the term man-like is to be concluded from the context, whence it will be seen that, with reference to nature, it means that the highest Lord has the heaven for his head, &c, and is based on the earth ; and with reference to man, that he forms the head, &c, and is based on the chin (of the devout worshipper *). 27. For the same reasons (the VaLrvanara) cannot be the divinity (of fire), or the element (of fire). The averment that the fanciful attribution of members contained in the passage 'His head is Sute^as,' &c. may apply to the elemental fire also which from the mantras is seen to be connected with the heavenly world, &c, or else to the divinity whose body is fire, on account of its power, is refuted by the following remark: For the reasons 1 I. e. that he may be fancifully identified with the head and so on of the devout worshipper. I ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 28. I49 already stated VaLsvanara is neither the divinity nor the element. For to the elemental fire which is mere heat and light the heavenly world and so on cannot properly be ascribed as head and so on, because an effect cannot be the Self of another effect. — Again, the heavenly world cannot be ascribed as head, &c. to the divinity of fire, in spite of the power of the latter ; for, on the one hand, it is not a cause (but a mere effect), and on the other hand its power depends on the highest Lord. Against all these interpretations there lies moreover the objection founded on the inapplicability of the term 'Self.5 28. 6aimini (declares that there is) no contradic- tion even on the assumption of a direct (worship of the highest Lord as Vaisvanara).
2est Lord. Against all these interpretations there lies moreover the objection founded on the inapplicability of the term 'Self.5 28. 6aimini (declares that there is) no contradic- tion even on the assumption of a direct (worship of the highest Lord as Vaisvanara). Above (Sutra 26) it has been said that Vauvanara is the highest Lord, to be meditated upon as having the gastric fire either for his outward manifestation or for his limiting condition; which interpretation was accepted in deference to the circumstance that he is spoken of as abiding within — and so on. — The teacher £aimini however is of opinion that it is not necessary to have recourse to the assumption of an outward manifestation or limiting condition, and that there is no objection to refer the passage about VaLyv&nara to the direct worship of the highest Lord. — But, if you reject the interpretation based on the gastric fire, you place yourself in opposition to the statement that Vauvanara abides within, and to the reasons founded on the term, &c. (Su. 2,6).— To this we reply that we in no way place ourselves in opposition to the statement that Vauvanara abides within. For the passage, ' He knows him as man-like, as abiding within man,' does not by any means refer to the gastric fire, the latter being neither the general topic of discussion nor having been mentioned byname before.— What then does it refer to?— It refers to that which forms the subject of discussion, viz. that similarity to man (of the highest Self) which is fancifully found in the members of man from the upper part of the head down to the chin ; the text therefore says, ' He knows him as man-like, 1 50 vedAnta-s6 tr as. as abiding within man/ just as we say of a branch that it abides within the tree1. — Or else we may adopt another interpretation and say that after the highest Self has been represented as having the likeness to man as a limiting condition, with regard to nature as well as to man, the passage last quoted (' He knows him as abiding within man ') speaks of the same highest Self as the mere witness (sakshin ; i. e. as the pure Self, non-related to the limiting conditions). — The consideration of the context having thus shown that the highest Self has to be resorted to for the interpretation of the passage, the term ' Vauvanara ' must denote the highest Self in some way or other. The word ' Vi^vanara ' is to be explained either as ' he who is all and man (i. e.
3ving thus shown that the highest Self has to be resorted to for the interpretation of the passage, the term ' Vauvanara ' must denote the highest Self in some way or other. The word ' Vi^vanara ' is to be explained either as ' he who is all and man (i. e. the individual soul)/ or ' he to whom souls belong ' (in so far as he is their maker or ruler), and thus denotes the highest Self which is the Self of all. And the form ' Vauvanara ' has the same meaning as ' VuvAnara/ the taddhita-suffix, by which the former word is derived from the latter, not changing the meaning ; just as in the case of rakshasa (derived from rakshas), and vayasa (derived from vayas). — The word ' Agni ' also may denote the highest Self if we adopt the etymology agni = agra/zi, i.e. he who leads in front. — As the Garhapatya-fire finally, and as the abode of the oblation to breath the highest Self may be represented because it is the Self of all. But, if it is assumed that VaLrvanara denotes the highest Self, how can Scripture declare that he is measured by a span ? — On the explanation of this difficulty we now enter. 29. On account of the manifestation, so A^mara- thya opines. The circumstance of the highest Lord who transcends all measure being spoken of as measured by a span has for its reason * manifestation.' The highest Lord manifests 1 Whereby we mean not that it is inside the tree, but that it forms a part of the tree. — The Vauvanara Self is identified with the different members of the body, and these members abide within, i. e. form parts of the body. I ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 3 1. 151 himself as measured by a span, i. e. he specially manifests himself for the benefit of his worshippers in some special places, such as the heart and the like, where he may be perceived. Hence, according to the opinion of the teacher Aj-marathya, the scriptural passage which speaks of him who is measured by a span may refer to the highest Lord. 30. On account of remembrance ; so Badari opines. Or else the highest Lord may be called ' measured by a span ' because he is remembered by means of the mind which is seated in the heart which is measured by a span. Similarly, barley-corns which are measured by means of prasthas are themselves called prasthas. It must be ad- mitted that barley-grains themselves have a certain size which is merely rendered manifest through their being connected with a prastha measure ; while the highest Lord himself does not possess a size to be rendered manifest by his connexion with the heart.
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.
1bides within man, not that it i s man. But, as a matter of fact, the Va^asaneyins speak of him — in their sacred text — as man, ' This Agni Vauvanara is man ; he who knows this Agni VaLsvanara as man-like, as abiding within man/ &c. (5at. Bra. X, 6, 1, 1 1). The highest Lord, on the other hand, who is the Self of everything, may be spoken of as well as man, as abiding within man. — Those who, in the latter part of the Sutra, read ' man-like ' (puru- shavidham) instead of ' man ' (purusham), wish to express the following meaning : If Vauvanara were assumed to be the gastric fire only, he might be spoken of as abiding within man indeed, but not as man-like. But the Va^asaneyins do speak of him as man-like, ' He who knows him as man-like, as abiding within man.' — The meaning of the term man-like is to be concluded from the context, whence it will be seen that, with reference to nature, it means that the highest Lord has the heaven for his head, &c, and is based on the earth ; and with reference to man, that he forms the head, &c, and is based on the chin (of the devout worshipper *). 27. For the same reasons (the VaLrvanara) cannot be the divinity (of fire), or the element (of fire). The averment that the fanciful attribution of members contained in the passage 'His head is Sute^as,' &c. may apply to the elemental fire also which from the mantras is seen to be connected with the heavenly world, &c, or else to the divinity whose body is fire, on account of its power, is refuted by the following remark: For the reasons 1 I. e. that he may be fancifully identified with the head and so on of the devout worshipper. I ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 28. I49 already stated VaLsvanara is neither the divinity nor the element. For to the elemental fire which is mere heat and light the heavenly world and so on cannot properly be ascribed as head and so on, because an effect cannot be the Self of another effect. — Again, the heavenly world cannot be ascribed as head, &c. to the divinity of fire, in spite of the power of the latter ; for, on the one hand, it is not a cause (but a mere effect), and on the other hand its power depends on the highest Lord. Against all these interpretations there lies moreover the objection founded on the inapplicability of the term 'Self.5 28. 6aimini (declares that there is) no contradic- tion even on the assumption of a direct (worship of the highest Lord as Vaisvanara).
2est Lord. Against all these interpretations there lies moreover the objection founded on the inapplicability of the term 'Self.5 28. 6aimini (declares that there is) no contradic- tion even on the assumption of a direct (worship of the highest Lord as Vaisvanara). Above (Sutra 26) it has been said that Vauvanara is the highest Lord, to be meditated upon as having the gastric fire either for his outward manifestation or for his limiting condition; which interpretation was accepted in deference to the circumstance that he is spoken of as abiding within — and so on. — The teacher £aimini however is of opinion that it is not necessary to have recourse to the assumption of an outward manifestation or limiting condition, and that there is no objection to refer the passage about VaLyv&nara to the direct worship of the highest Lord. — But, if you reject the interpretation based on the gastric fire, you place yourself in opposition to the statement that Vauvanara abides within, and to the reasons founded on the term, &c. (Su. 2,6).— To this we reply that we in no way place ourselves in opposition to the statement that Vauvanara abides within. For the passage, ' He knows him as man-like, as abiding within man,' does not by any means refer to the gastric fire, the latter being neither the general topic of discussion nor having been mentioned byname before.— What then does it refer to?— It refers to that which forms the subject of discussion, viz. that similarity to man (of the highest Self) which is fancifully found in the members of man from the upper part of the head down to the chin ; the text therefore says, ' He knows him as man-like, 1 50 vedAnta-s6 tr as. as abiding within man/ just as we say of a branch that it abides within the tree1. — Or else we may adopt another interpretation and say that after the highest Self has been represented as having the likeness to man as a limiting condition, with regard to nature as well as to man, the passage last quoted (' He knows him as abiding within man ') speaks of the same highest Self as the mere witness (sakshin ; i. e. as the pure Self, non-related to the limiting conditions). — The consideration of the context having thus shown that the highest Self has to be resorted to for the interpretation of the passage, the term ' Vauvanara ' must denote the highest Self in some way or other. The word ' Vi^vanara ' is to be explained either as ' he who is all and man (i. e.
3ving thus shown that the highest Self has to be resorted to for the interpretation of the passage, the term ' Vauvanara ' must denote the highest Self in some way or other. The word ' Vi^vanara ' is to be explained either as ' he who is all and man (i. e. the individual soul)/ or ' he to whom souls belong ' (in so far as he is their maker or ruler), and thus denotes the highest Self which is the Self of all. And the form ' Vauvanara ' has the same meaning as ' VuvAnara/ the taddhita-suffix, by which the former word is derived from the latter, not changing the meaning ; just as in the case of rakshasa (derived from rakshas), and vayasa (derived from vayas). — The word ' Agni ' also may denote the highest Self if we adopt the etymology agni = agra/zi, i.e. he who leads in front. — As the Garhapatya-fire finally, and as the abode of the oblation to breath the highest Self may be represented because it is the Self of all. But, if it is assumed that VaLrvanara denotes the highest Self, how can Scripture declare that he is measured by a span ? — On the explanation of this difficulty we now enter. 29. On account of the manifestation, so A^mara- thya opines. The circumstance of the highest Lord who transcends all measure being spoken of as measured by a span has for its reason * manifestation.' The highest Lord manifests 1 Whereby we mean not that it is inside the tree, but that it forms a part of the tree. — The Vauvanara Self is identified with the different members of the body, and these members abide within, i. e. form parts of the body. I ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 3 1. 151 himself as measured by a span, i. e. he specially manifests himself for the benefit of his worshippers in some special places, such as the heart and the like, where he may be perceived. Hence, according to the opinion of the teacher Aj-marathya, the scriptural passage which speaks of him who is measured by a span may refer to the highest Lord. 30. On account of remembrance ; so Badari opines. Or else the highest Lord may be called ' measured by a span ' because he is remembered by means of the mind which is seated in the heart which is measured by a span. Similarly, barley-corns which are measured by means of prasthas are themselves called prasthas. It must be ad- mitted that barley-grains themselves have a certain size which is merely rendered manifest through their being connected with a prastha measure ; while the highest Lord himself does not possess a size to be rendered manifest by his connexion with the heart.
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.