Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1— The next Sutra supplies a further reason. 2. And on account of its being declared that to which the released have to resort. The Person who is the abode of heaven, earth, and so 298 vedAnta-s^tras. on, is also declared by the text to be what is to be reached by those who are released from the bondage of Sawsara existence. ' When the seer sees the brilliant maker and Lord as the Person who has his source in Brahman, then possessing true knowledge he shakes off good and evil, and, free from passion, reaches the highest oneness ' (Mu. Up. Ill, 1, 3). ' As the flowing rivers disappear in the sea, losing their name and form, thus a wise man freed from name and form goes to the divine Person who is higher than the high ' (III, 2, 8). For it is only those freed from the bondage of Sa^sara who shake off good and evil, are free from passion, and freed from name and form. For the Sawsara state consists in the possession of name and form, which is due to connexion with non-sentient matter, such connexion springing from good and evil works. The Person therefore who is the abode of heaven, earth, &c., and whom the text declares to be the aim to be reached by those who, having freed themselves from good and evil, and hence from all contact with matter, attain supreme oneness with the highest Brahman, can be none other than this highest Brahman itself. This conclusion, based on terms exclusively applicable to the highest Brahman, is now confirmed by reference to the absence of terms specially applicable to the individual soul. 3. Not that which is inferred, on account of the absence of terms denoting it, and (so also not) the bearer of the Pr&^as (i. e. the individual soul). As the section under discussion does not treat of the Pradhana, there being no terms referring to that, so it is with regard to the individual soul also. In the text of the Sutra we have to read either anumanam, i. e. ' inference/ in the sense of 'object of inference/ or else anumanam, ' object of inference ' ; what is meant being in both cases the Pradhana inferred to exist by the Sankhyas. 4. On account of the declaration of difference. 'On the same tree man sits immersed in grief, be- I ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 7. 299 wildered by " anua " ; but when he sees the other one, the Lord, contented, and his glory ; then his grief passes away ' (Mu. Up. Ill, 1, 2). This, and similar texts, speak of that one, i. e. the one previously described as the abode of heaven, earth, &c, as different from the individual soul. — The text means — the individual soul grieves, being be- wildered by her who is not 'foa,' i. e. Prakrzti, the object of fruition. But its grief passes away when it sees him who is other than itself, i. e. the beloved Lord of all, and his greatness which consists in his ruling the entire world. 5. On account of the subject-matter.
2e. Prakrzti, the object of fruition. But its grief passes away when it sees him who is other than itself, i. e. the beloved Lord of all, and his greatness which consists in his ruling the entire world. 5. On account of the subject-matter. It has been already shown, viz. under I, 2, 31, that the highest Brahman constitutes the initial topic of the Upanishad. And by the arguments set forth in the pre- vious Sutras of the present P&da, we have removed all suspicion as to the topic started being dropped in the body of the Upanishad. 6. And on account of abiding and eating. c Two birds, inseparable friends, cling to the same tree. One of them eats the sweet fruit ; without eating, the other looks on ' (Mu. Up. Ill, 1, 1). This text declares that one enjoys the fruit of works while the other, without enjoying, shining abides within the body. Now this shining being which does not enjoy the fruit of works can only be the being previously described as the abode of heaven, earth, &c, and characterised as all knowing, the bridge of immor- tality, the Self of all ; it can in no way be the individual Self which, lamenting, experiences the results of its works. The settled conclusion, therefore, is that the abode of heaven, earth, and so on, is none other than the highest Self. — Here terminates the adhikara/za of 'heaven, earth, and so on.' 7. The bhfiman (is the highest Self), as the instruction about it is additional to that about serenity. The iT^andogas read as follows : ( Where one sees nothing 300 VEDANTA-stfTRAS. else, hears nothing else, knows nothing else, that is fulness (bhuman). Where one sees something else, hears some- thing else, knows something else, that is the Little ' {Kh. Up. VII, 23, 24)- The term ' bhuman ' is derived from bahu (much, many), and primarily signifies ' muchness/ By ' much ' in this connexion, we have however to understand, not what is numerous, but what is large, for the text uses the term in contrast with the * Little ' (alpa), i. e. the ' Small/ And the being qualified as ' large/ we conclude from the con- text to be the Self ; for this section of the Upanishad at the outset states that he who knows the Self overcomes grief (VII, i, 3), then teaches the knowledge of the bhuman, and concludes by saying that ' the Self is all this ' (VII, 25, 2).
3The question now arises whether the Self called bhuman is the individual Self or the highest Self. — The Purva- pakshin maintains the former view. For, he says, to Narada who had approached Sanatkumara with the desire to be instructed about the Self, a series of beings, beginning with ' name ' and ending with c breath/ are enumerated as objects of devout meditation ; Narada asks each time whether there be anything greater than name, and so on, and each time receives an affirmative reply (' speech is greater than name/ &c.) ; when, however, the series has advanced as far as Breath, there is no such question and reply. This shows that the instruction about the Self terminates with Breath, and hence we conclude that breath in this place means the individual soul which is associated with breath, not a mere modification of air. Also the clauses ' Breath is father, breath is mother/ &c. (VII, 15, 1), show that breath here is something intelligent. And this is further proved by the clause c Slayer of thy father, slayer of thy mother/ &c. (VII, 15, % ; 3), which declares that he who offends a father, a mother, &c, as long as there is breath in them, really hurts them, and therefore deserves reproach ; while no blame attaches to him who offers even the grossest violence to them after their breath has de- parted. For a conscious being only is capable of being I ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 7. 3OI
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.
1— The next Sutra supplies a further reason. 2. And on account of its being declared that to which the released have to resort. The Person who is the abode of heaven, earth, and so 298 vedAnta-s^tras. on, is also declared by the text to be what is to be reached by those who are released from the bondage of Sawsara existence. ' When the seer sees the brilliant maker and Lord as the Person who has his source in Brahman, then possessing true knowledge he shakes off good and evil, and, free from passion, reaches the highest oneness ' (Mu. Up. Ill, 1, 3). ' As the flowing rivers disappear in the sea, losing their name and form, thus a wise man freed from name and form goes to the divine Person who is higher than the high ' (III, 2, 8). For it is only those freed from the bondage of Sa^sara who shake off good and evil, are free from passion, and freed from name and form. For the Sawsara state consists in the possession of name and form, which is due to connexion with non-sentient matter, such connexion springing from good and evil works. The Person therefore who is the abode of heaven, earth, &c., and whom the text declares to be the aim to be reached by those who, having freed themselves from good and evil, and hence from all contact with matter, attain supreme oneness with the highest Brahman, can be none other than this highest Brahman itself. This conclusion, based on terms exclusively applicable to the highest Brahman, is now confirmed by reference to the absence of terms specially applicable to the individual soul. 3. Not that which is inferred, on account of the absence of terms denoting it, and (so also not) the bearer of the Pr&^as (i. e. the individual soul). As the section under discussion does not treat of the Pradhana, there being no terms referring to that, so it is with regard to the individual soul also. In the text of the Sutra we have to read either anumanam, i. e. ' inference/ in the sense of 'object of inference/ or else anumanam, ' object of inference ' ; what is meant being in both cases the Pradhana inferred to exist by the Sankhyas. 4. On account of the declaration of difference. 'On the same tree man sits immersed in grief, be- I ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 7. 299 wildered by " anua " ; but when he sees the other one, the Lord, contented, and his glory ; then his grief passes away ' (Mu. Up. Ill, 1, 2). This, and similar texts, speak of that one, i. e. the one previously described as the abode of heaven, earth, &c, as different from the individual soul. — The text means — the individual soul grieves, being be- wildered by her who is not 'foa,' i. e. Prakrzti, the object of fruition. But its grief passes away when it sees him who is other than itself, i. e. the beloved Lord of all, and his greatness which consists in his ruling the entire world. 5. On account of the subject-matter.
2e. Prakrzti, the object of fruition. But its grief passes away when it sees him who is other than itself, i. e. the beloved Lord of all, and his greatness which consists in his ruling the entire world. 5. On account of the subject-matter. It has been already shown, viz. under I, 2, 31, that the highest Brahman constitutes the initial topic of the Upanishad. And by the arguments set forth in the pre- vious Sutras of the present P&da, we have removed all suspicion as to the topic started being dropped in the body of the Upanishad. 6. And on account of abiding and eating. c Two birds, inseparable friends, cling to the same tree. One of them eats the sweet fruit ; without eating, the other looks on ' (Mu. Up. Ill, 1, 1). This text declares that one enjoys the fruit of works while the other, without enjoying, shining abides within the body. Now this shining being which does not enjoy the fruit of works can only be the being previously described as the abode of heaven, earth, &c, and characterised as all knowing, the bridge of immor- tality, the Self of all ; it can in no way be the individual Self which, lamenting, experiences the results of its works. The settled conclusion, therefore, is that the abode of heaven, earth, and so on, is none other than the highest Self. — Here terminates the adhikara/za of 'heaven, earth, and so on.' 7. The bhfiman (is the highest Self), as the instruction about it is additional to that about serenity. The iT^andogas read as follows : ( Where one sees nothing 300 VEDANTA-stfTRAS. else, hears nothing else, knows nothing else, that is fulness (bhuman). Where one sees something else, hears some- thing else, knows something else, that is the Little ' {Kh. Up. VII, 23, 24)- The term ' bhuman ' is derived from bahu (much, many), and primarily signifies ' muchness/ By ' much ' in this connexion, we have however to understand, not what is numerous, but what is large, for the text uses the term in contrast with the * Little ' (alpa), i. e. the ' Small/ And the being qualified as ' large/ we conclude from the con- text to be the Self ; for this section of the Upanishad at the outset states that he who knows the Self overcomes grief (VII, i, 3), then teaches the knowledge of the bhuman, and concludes by saying that ' the Self is all this ' (VII, 25, 2).
3The question now arises whether the Self called bhuman is the individual Self or the highest Self. — The Purva- pakshin maintains the former view. For, he says, to Narada who had approached Sanatkumara with the desire to be instructed about the Self, a series of beings, beginning with ' name ' and ending with c breath/ are enumerated as objects of devout meditation ; Narada asks each time whether there be anything greater than name, and so on, and each time receives an affirmative reply (' speech is greater than name/ &c.) ; when, however, the series has advanced as far as Breath, there is no such question and reply. This shows that the instruction about the Self terminates with Breath, and hence we conclude that breath in this place means the individual soul which is associated with breath, not a mere modification of air. Also the clauses ' Breath is father, breath is mother/ &c. (VII, 15, 1), show that breath here is something intelligent. And this is further proved by the clause c Slayer of thy father, slayer of thy mother/ &c. (VII, 15, % ; 3), which declares that he who offends a father, a mother, &c, as long as there is breath in them, really hurts them, and therefore deserves reproach ; while no blame attaches to him who offers even the grossest violence to them after their breath has de- parted. For a conscious being only is capable of being I ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 7. 3OI
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.