Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1As might be the prima facie conclusion from the particle ' but '* introducing the sentence ' but he in reality/ &c. M 2 1 64 VEDANTA-SUTRAS. likewise refer to the vital air ; for another scriptural passage says, ' Pra^a is immortality ' (Kau. Up. Ill, 3). — But how can the view according to which the bhuman is the vital air be reconciled with the fact that in the beginning of the chapter the knowledge of the Self is represented as the general topic (' He who knows the Self overcomes grief,5 &c.) ? — By the Self there referred to, the purvapakshin replies, nothing else is meant but the vital air. For the passage, ' The vital air is father, the vital air is mother, the vital air is brother, the vital air is sister, the vital air is teacher, the vital air is Brahma/za' (Kh. Up. VII, 15, i), represents the vital air as the Self of everything. As, moreover, the passage, * As the spokes of a wheel rest in the nave, so all this rests in pra/za,' declares the pra;za to be the Self of all — by means of a comparison with the spokes and the nave of a wheel — the pra^a may be conceived under the form of bhuman, i. e. plenitude. — Bhuman, therefore, means the vital air. To this we make the following reply. — Bhuman can mean the highest Self only, not the vital air. — Why? — ' On account of information being given about it, subsequent to bliss/ The word ' bliss ' (samprasada) means the state of deep sleep, as may be concluded, firstly, from the etymology of the word ('In it he, i.e. man, is altogether pleased— samprasi- dati')— and, secondly, from the fact of samprasada being mentioned in the Brzhadara/zyaka together with the state of dream and the waking state. And as in the state of deep sleep the vital air remains awake, the word ' sampra- sada ' is employed in the Sutra to denote the vital air ; so that the Sutra means, 'on account of information being given about the bhuman, subsequently to (the informa- tion given about) the vital air.5 If the bhuman were the vital air itself, it would be a strange proceeding to make statements about the bhuman in addition to the statements about the vital air. For in the preceding passages also we do not meet, for instance, with a statement about name subsequent to the previous statement about name (i. e. the text does not say ' name is more than name '), but after something has been said about name, a new statement is i adhyAya, 3 pada, 8. 165 made about speech, which is something different from name (i. e.
2ent to the previous statement about name (i. e. the text does not say ' name is more than name '), but after something has been said about name, a new statement is i adhyAya, 3 pada, 8. 165 made about speech, which is something different from name (i. e. the text says, ' Speech is more than name '), and so on up to the statement about vital air, each subsequent state- ment referring to something other than the topic of the preceding one. We therefore conclude that the bhuman also, the statement about which follows on the statement about the vital air, is something other than the vital air. — But — it may be objected — we meet here neither with a ques- tion, such as, ' Is there something more than vital air ? ' nor with an answer, such as, ' That and that is more than vital air.5 How, then, can it be said that the information about the bhuman is given subsequently to the information about the vital air ? — Moreover, we see that the circumstance of being an ativaldin, which is exclusively connected with the vital air, is referred to in the subsequent passage (viz. ' But in reality he is an ativadin who makes a statement surpassing (the preceding statements) by means of the True '). There is thus no information additional to the information about the vital air. — To this objection we reply that it is impos- sible to maintain that the passage last quoted merely con- tinues the discussion of the quality of being an ativadin, as con- nected with the knowledge of the vital air; since the clause, * He who makes a statement surpassing, &c. by means of the True/ states a specification. — But, the objector resumes, this very statement of a specification may be explained as referring to the vital air. If you ask how, we refer you to an analogous case. If somebody says, ' This Agnihotrin speaks the truth,' the meaning is not that the quality of being an Agnihotrin depends on speaking the truth ; that quality rather depends on the (regular performance of the) agnihotra only, and speaking the truth is mentioned merely as a special attribute of that special Agnihotrin. So our passage also (' But in reality he is an ativadin who makes a statement, &c. by means of the True ') does not intimate that the quality of being an ativadin depends on speaking the truth, but merely expresses that speaking the truth is a special attribute of him who knows the vital air ; while the quality of being an ativ&din must be con- sidered to depend on the knowledge of the vital air. — This 1 66 VEDANTA-stiTRAS.
3ds on speaking the truth, but merely expresses that speaking the truth is a special attribute of him who knows the vital air ; while the quality of being an ativ&din must be con- sidered to depend on the knowledge of the vital air. — This 1 66 VEDANTA-stiTRAS. objection we rebut by the remark that it involves an aban- donment of the direct meaning of the sacred text. For from the text, as it stands, we understand that the quality of being an ativadin depends on speaking the truth ; the sense being : An ativadin is he who is an ativadin by means of the True. The passage does not in anyway contain a eulogisation of the knowledge of the vital air. It could be connected with the latter only on the ground of general subject-matter (prakara^a) 1; which would involve an abandonment of the di- rect meaning of the text in favour of prakara^a2. — Moreover, the particle but (' But in reality he is,' &c), whose purport is to separate (what follows) from the subject-matter of what precedes, would not agree (with the pra^a explanation). The following passage also, c But we must desire to know the True' (VII, 16), which presupposes a new effort, shows that a new topic is going to be entered upon. — For these reasons we have to consider the statement about the ati- vadin in the same light as we should consider the remark — made in a conversation which previously had turned on the praise of those who study one Veda — that he who studies the four Vedas is a great Brahma^a ; a remark which we should understand to be laudatory of persons different from those who study one Veda, i.e. of those who study all the four Vedas. Nor is there any reason to assume that a new topic can be introduced in the form of question and answer only ; for that the matter propounded forms a new topic is sufficiently clear from the circumstance that no connexion can be established between it and the preceding topic. The succession of topics in the chapter under discussion is as follows: Narada at first listens to the instruction which Sanatkumara gives him about various matters, the last of which is Pra^a, and then becomes silent. Thereupon Sanatkumara explains to him spontaneously (without being 1 It being maintained that the passage referred to is to be viewed in connexion with the general subject-matter of the preceding part of the chapter. 2 And would thus involve a violation of a fundamental principle of the Mima^sl I ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 8.
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.
1As might be the prima facie conclusion from the particle ' but '* introducing the sentence ' but he in reality/ &c. M 2 1 64 VEDANTA-SUTRAS. likewise refer to the vital air ; for another scriptural passage says, ' Pra^a is immortality ' (Kau. Up. Ill, 3). — But how can the view according to which the bhuman is the vital air be reconciled with the fact that in the beginning of the chapter the knowledge of the Self is represented as the general topic (' He who knows the Self overcomes grief,5 &c.) ? — By the Self there referred to, the purvapakshin replies, nothing else is meant but the vital air. For the passage, ' The vital air is father, the vital air is mother, the vital air is brother, the vital air is sister, the vital air is teacher, the vital air is Brahma/za' (Kh. Up. VII, 15, i), represents the vital air as the Self of everything. As, moreover, the passage, * As the spokes of a wheel rest in the nave, so all this rests in pra/za,' declares the pra;za to be the Self of all — by means of a comparison with the spokes and the nave of a wheel — the pra^a may be conceived under the form of bhuman, i. e. plenitude. — Bhuman, therefore, means the vital air. To this we make the following reply. — Bhuman can mean the highest Self only, not the vital air. — Why? — ' On account of information being given about it, subsequent to bliss/ The word ' bliss ' (samprasada) means the state of deep sleep, as may be concluded, firstly, from the etymology of the word ('In it he, i.e. man, is altogether pleased— samprasi- dati')— and, secondly, from the fact of samprasada being mentioned in the Brzhadara/zyaka together with the state of dream and the waking state. And as in the state of deep sleep the vital air remains awake, the word ' sampra- sada ' is employed in the Sutra to denote the vital air ; so that the Sutra means, 'on account of information being given about the bhuman, subsequently to (the informa- tion given about) the vital air.5 If the bhuman were the vital air itself, it would be a strange proceeding to make statements about the bhuman in addition to the statements about the vital air. For in the preceding passages also we do not meet, for instance, with a statement about name subsequent to the previous statement about name (i. e. the text does not say ' name is more than name '), but after something has been said about name, a new statement is i adhyAya, 3 pada, 8. 165 made about speech, which is something different from name (i. e.
2ent to the previous statement about name (i. e. the text does not say ' name is more than name '), but after something has been said about name, a new statement is i adhyAya, 3 pada, 8. 165 made about speech, which is something different from name (i. e. the text says, ' Speech is more than name '), and so on up to the statement about vital air, each subsequent state- ment referring to something other than the topic of the preceding one. We therefore conclude that the bhuman also, the statement about which follows on the statement about the vital air, is something other than the vital air. — But — it may be objected — we meet here neither with a ques- tion, such as, ' Is there something more than vital air ? ' nor with an answer, such as, ' That and that is more than vital air.5 How, then, can it be said that the information about the bhuman is given subsequently to the information about the vital air ? — Moreover, we see that the circumstance of being an ativaldin, which is exclusively connected with the vital air, is referred to in the subsequent passage (viz. ' But in reality he is an ativadin who makes a statement surpassing (the preceding statements) by means of the True '). There is thus no information additional to the information about the vital air. — To this objection we reply that it is impos- sible to maintain that the passage last quoted merely con- tinues the discussion of the quality of being an ativadin, as con- nected with the knowledge of the vital air; since the clause, * He who makes a statement surpassing, &c. by means of the True/ states a specification. — But, the objector resumes, this very statement of a specification may be explained as referring to the vital air. If you ask how, we refer you to an analogous case. If somebody says, ' This Agnihotrin speaks the truth,' the meaning is not that the quality of being an Agnihotrin depends on speaking the truth ; that quality rather depends on the (regular performance of the) agnihotra only, and speaking the truth is mentioned merely as a special attribute of that special Agnihotrin. So our passage also (' But in reality he is an ativadin who makes a statement, &c. by means of the True ') does not intimate that the quality of being an ativadin depends on speaking the truth, but merely expresses that speaking the truth is a special attribute of him who knows the vital air ; while the quality of being an ativ&din must be con- sidered to depend on the knowledge of the vital air. — This 1 66 VEDANTA-stiTRAS.
3ds on speaking the truth, but merely expresses that speaking the truth is a special attribute of him who knows the vital air ; while the quality of being an ativ&din must be con- sidered to depend on the knowledge of the vital air. — This 1 66 VEDANTA-stiTRAS. objection we rebut by the remark that it involves an aban- donment of the direct meaning of the sacred text. For from the text, as it stands, we understand that the quality of being an ativadin depends on speaking the truth ; the sense being : An ativadin is he who is an ativadin by means of the True. The passage does not in anyway contain a eulogisation of the knowledge of the vital air. It could be connected with the latter only on the ground of general subject-matter (prakara^a) 1; which would involve an abandonment of the di- rect meaning of the text in favour of prakara^a2. — Moreover, the particle but (' But in reality he is,' &c), whose purport is to separate (what follows) from the subject-matter of what precedes, would not agree (with the pra^a explanation). The following passage also, c But we must desire to know the True' (VII, 16), which presupposes a new effort, shows that a new topic is going to be entered upon. — For these reasons we have to consider the statement about the ati- vadin in the same light as we should consider the remark — made in a conversation which previously had turned on the praise of those who study one Veda — that he who studies the four Vedas is a great Brahma^a ; a remark which we should understand to be laudatory of persons different from those who study one Veda, i.e. of those who study all the four Vedas. Nor is there any reason to assume that a new topic can be introduced in the form of question and answer only ; for that the matter propounded forms a new topic is sufficiently clear from the circumstance that no connexion can be established between it and the preceding topic. The succession of topics in the chapter under discussion is as follows: Narada at first listens to the instruction which Sanatkumara gives him about various matters, the last of which is Pra^a, and then becomes silent. Thereupon Sanatkumara explains to him spontaneously (without being 1 It being maintained that the passage referred to is to be viewed in connexion with the general subject-matter of the preceding part of the chapter. 2 And would thus involve a violation of a fundamental principle of the Mima^sl I ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 8.
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.