Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1— The discussion of this matter will be completed later on 1. 25. Also beings above them (i.e. men), Badara- ya^a thinks, on account of possibility. In order to prove that the highest Brahman may be 1 The ' pramitadhikarawa ' is resumed in Sutra 41. I ADHYAYA, 3 PAD A, 25. 327 viewed as having the size of a thumb, it has been declared that the scriptural texts enjoining meditation on Brahman are the concern of men. This offers an opportunity for the discussion of the question whether also other classes of individual souls, such as devas, are qualified for knowledge of Brahman. The Purvapakshin denies this qualification in the case of gods and other beings, on the ground of absence of capability. For, he says, bodiless beings, such as gods, are incapable of the accomplishment of meditation on Brahman, which requires as its auxiliaries the seven means enumerated above (p. 17). This must not be objected to on the ground of the devas, and so on, having bodies ; for there is no means of proof establishing such embodiedness. We have indeed proved above that the Vedanta-texts may intimate accomplished things, and hence are an authoritative means for the cognition of Brahman ; but we do not meet with any Vedanta-text, the purport of which is to teach that the devas, and so on, possess bodies. Nor can this point be established through mantras and arthavada texts ; for these are merely supplementary to the injunctions of actions (sacrificial, and so on), and therefore have a different aim. And the injunc- tions themselves prove nothing with regard to the devas, except that the latter are that with a view to which those actions are performed. In the same way it also cannot be shown that the gods have any desires or wants (to fulfil or supply which they might enter on meditation of Brahman). For the two reasons above we therefore conclude that the devas, and so on, are not qualified for meditation on Brahman. — This view is contradicted by the Sutra. Such meditation is possible in the case of higher beings also, Badaraya/za thinks ; on account of the possibility of want and capacity on their part also. Want and wish exist in their case since they also are liable to suffering, springing from the assaults, hard to be endured, of the different kinds of pain, and since they also know that supreme enjoyment is to be found in the highest Brahman, which is untouched by the shadow even of imperfection, and is a mass of auspicious qualities in their highest perfection. 328 vedanta-s£tras.
2328 vedanta-s£tras. ' Capability/ on the other hand, depends on the possession of a body and sense-organs of whatever degree of tenuity ; and that the devas, from Brahma downward, possess a body and sense-organs, is declared in all the Upanishads, in the chapters treating of creation and the chapters en- joining meditation. In the A^andogya, e.g. it is related how the highest Being having resolved on creation, evolved the aggregate of non-sentient matter with its different kinds, and then produced the fourfold multitude of living creatures, each having a material body corresponding to its karman, and a suitable name of its own. Similarly, all the other scriptural accounts of creation declare that there are four classes of creatures — devas, men, animals, and non- moving beings, such as plants — and the difference of these classes depends on the individual Selfs being joined to various bodies capacitating them to experience the results of their works, each in that one of the fourteen worlds — beginning with the world of Brahma — which is the suitable place for retribution. For in themselves, apart from bodies, the individual Selfs are not distinguished as men, gods, and so on. In the same way the story of the devas and Asuras approaching Pra^-apati with fuel in their hands, staying with him as pupils for thirty-two years, &c. (Kk. Up. VIII, 7 ff), clearly shows that the devas possess bodies and sense-organs. Analogously, mantras and arthavadas, which are complementary to injunctions of works, contain unmistakeable references to the corporeal nature of the gods (' Indra holding in his hand the thunderbolt ' ; ' Indra lifted the thunderbolt/ &c.) ; and as the latter is not con- tradicted by any other means of proof it must be accepted on the authority stated. Nor can it be said that those mantras and arthavadas are really meant to express some- thing else (than those details mentioned above), in so far, namely, as they aim at proclaiming or glorifying the action with which they are connected ; for those very details sub- serve the purpose of glorification, and so on, and without them glorification is not possible. For we praise or glorify a thing by declaring its qualities ; if such qualities do not exist all glorification lapses. It cannot by any means be I ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 25. 329
3For we praise or glorify a thing by declaring its qualities ; if such qualities do not exist all glorification lapses. It cannot by any means be I ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 25. 329 maintained that anything may be glorified by the proclama- tion of its qualities, even if such qualities do not really exist. Hence the arthavadas which glorify a certain action, just thereby intimate the real existence of the qualities and details of the action. The mantras again, which are pre- scribed in connexion with the actions, serve the purpose of throwing light on the use to be derived from the perform- ance of the actions, and this they accomplish by making statements as to the particular qualities, such as embodied- ness and the like, which belong to the devas and other classes of beings. Otherwise Indra, and so on, would not be remembered at the time of performance ; for the idea of a divinity presents itself to the mind only in connexion with the special attributes of that divinity. In the case of such qualities as are not established by other means of proof, the primary statement is made by the arthavada or the mantra : the former thereby glorifies the action, and the latter proclaims it as possessing certain qualities or details ; and both these ends are accomplished by making statements as to the gods, &c, possessing certain qualities, such as embodiedness and the like. In the case, again, of certain qualities being already established by other means of proof, the mantras and arthavadas merely refer to them (as something already known), and in this way per- form their function of glorification and elucidation. And where, thirdly, there is a contradiction between the other means of knowledge and what mantras and arthavadas state (as when, e. g. a text of the latter kind says that c the sacrificial post is the sun'), the intention of the text is metaphorically to denote, by means of those apparently unmeaning terms, certain other qualities which are not excluded by the other means of knowledge; and in this way the function of glorification and elucidation is again accomplished. Now what the injunction of a sacrificial action demands as its supplement, is a statement as to the power of the divinity to whom the sacrifice is offered ; for the performance which scripture enjoins on men desirous of certain results, is itself of a merely transitory nature, and hence requires some agent capable of bringing about, 3 30 VEDANTA-SUTR AS.
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 discussion of this matter will be completed later on 1. 25. Also beings above them (i.e. men), Badara- ya^a thinks, on account of possibility. In order to prove that the highest Brahman may be 1 The ' pramitadhikarawa ' is resumed in Sutra 41. I ADHYAYA, 3 PAD A, 25. 327 viewed as having the size of a thumb, it has been declared that the scriptural texts enjoining meditation on Brahman are the concern of men. This offers an opportunity for the discussion of the question whether also other classes of individual souls, such as devas, are qualified for knowledge of Brahman. The Purvapakshin denies this qualification in the case of gods and other beings, on the ground of absence of capability. For, he says, bodiless beings, such as gods, are incapable of the accomplishment of meditation on Brahman, which requires as its auxiliaries the seven means enumerated above (p. 17). This must not be objected to on the ground of the devas, and so on, having bodies ; for there is no means of proof establishing such embodiedness. We have indeed proved above that the Vedanta-texts may intimate accomplished things, and hence are an authoritative means for the cognition of Brahman ; but we do not meet with any Vedanta-text, the purport of which is to teach that the devas, and so on, possess bodies. Nor can this point be established through mantras and arthavada texts ; for these are merely supplementary to the injunctions of actions (sacrificial, and so on), and therefore have a different aim. And the injunc- tions themselves prove nothing with regard to the devas, except that the latter are that with a view to which those actions are performed. In the same way it also cannot be shown that the gods have any desires or wants (to fulfil or supply which they might enter on meditation of Brahman). For the two reasons above we therefore conclude that the devas, and so on, are not qualified for meditation on Brahman. — This view is contradicted by the Sutra. Such meditation is possible in the case of higher beings also, Badaraya/za thinks ; on account of the possibility of want and capacity on their part also. Want and wish exist in their case since they also are liable to suffering, springing from the assaults, hard to be endured, of the different kinds of pain, and since they also know that supreme enjoyment is to be found in the highest Brahman, which is untouched by the shadow even of imperfection, and is a mass of auspicious qualities in their highest perfection. 328 vedanta-s£tras.
2328 vedanta-s£tras. ' Capability/ on the other hand, depends on the possession of a body and sense-organs of whatever degree of tenuity ; and that the devas, from Brahma downward, possess a body and sense-organs, is declared in all the Upanishads, in the chapters treating of creation and the chapters en- joining meditation. In the A^andogya, e.g. it is related how the highest Being having resolved on creation, evolved the aggregate of non-sentient matter with its different kinds, and then produced the fourfold multitude of living creatures, each having a material body corresponding to its karman, and a suitable name of its own. Similarly, all the other scriptural accounts of creation declare that there are four classes of creatures — devas, men, animals, and non- moving beings, such as plants — and the difference of these classes depends on the individual Selfs being joined to various bodies capacitating them to experience the results of their works, each in that one of the fourteen worlds — beginning with the world of Brahma — which is the suitable place for retribution. For in themselves, apart from bodies, the individual Selfs are not distinguished as men, gods, and so on. In the same way the story of the devas and Asuras approaching Pra^-apati with fuel in their hands, staying with him as pupils for thirty-two years, &c. (Kk. Up. VIII, 7 ff), clearly shows that the devas possess bodies and sense-organs. Analogously, mantras and arthavadas, which are complementary to injunctions of works, contain unmistakeable references to the corporeal nature of the gods (' Indra holding in his hand the thunderbolt ' ; ' Indra lifted the thunderbolt/ &c.) ; and as the latter is not con- tradicted by any other means of proof it must be accepted on the authority stated. Nor can it be said that those mantras and arthavadas are really meant to express some- thing else (than those details mentioned above), in so far, namely, as they aim at proclaiming or glorifying the action with which they are connected ; for those very details sub- serve the purpose of glorification, and so on, and without them glorification is not possible. For we praise or glorify a thing by declaring its qualities ; if such qualities do not exist all glorification lapses. It cannot by any means be I ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 25. 329
3For we praise or glorify a thing by declaring its qualities ; if such qualities do not exist all glorification lapses. It cannot by any means be I ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 25. 329 maintained that anything may be glorified by the proclama- tion of its qualities, even if such qualities do not really exist. Hence the arthavadas which glorify a certain action, just thereby intimate the real existence of the qualities and details of the action. The mantras again, which are pre- scribed in connexion with the actions, serve the purpose of throwing light on the use to be derived from the perform- ance of the actions, and this they accomplish by making statements as to the particular qualities, such as embodied- ness and the like, which belong to the devas and other classes of beings. Otherwise Indra, and so on, would not be remembered at the time of performance ; for the idea of a divinity presents itself to the mind only in connexion with the special attributes of that divinity. In the case of such qualities as are not established by other means of proof, the primary statement is made by the arthavada or the mantra : the former thereby glorifies the action, and the latter proclaims it as possessing certain qualities or details ; and both these ends are accomplished by making statements as to the gods, &c, possessing certain qualities, such as embodiedness and the like. In the case, again, of certain qualities being already established by other means of proof, the mantras and arthavadas merely refer to them (as something already known), and in this way per- form their function of glorification and elucidation. And where, thirdly, there is a contradiction between the other means of knowledge and what mantras and arthavadas state (as when, e. g. a text of the latter kind says that c the sacrificial post is the sun'), the intention of the text is metaphorically to denote, by means of those apparently unmeaning terms, certain other qualities which are not excluded by the other means of knowledge; and in this way the function of glorification and elucidation is again accomplished. Now what the injunction of a sacrificial action demands as its supplement, is a statement as to the power of the divinity to whom the sacrifice is offered ; for the performance which scripture enjoins on men desirous of certain results, is itself of a merely transitory nature, and hence requires some agent capable of bringing about, 3 30 VEDANTA-SUTR AS.
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.