Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1he should reach, with his individual Self so qualified, the place of Vishnu, i.e. Brahman. — But how can the term 'the Un- evolved' denote the evolved body? — To this question the next Sutra furnishes a reply. 2. But the subtle (body), on account of its capa- bility. The elements in their fine state are what is called the ' Unevolved,' and this entering into a particular condition becomes the body. It is the ' Unevolved ' in the particular condition of the body, which in the text under discussion is called the * Unevolved.' ' On account of its capability/ i.e. because unevolved non-sentient matter, when assuming certain states and forms, is capable of entering on activities promoting the interest of man. But, an objection is raised, if the ' Unevolved ' is taken to be matter in its subtle state, what objection is there to our accepting for the explanation of our text that which is established in the Sankhya- system ? for there also the ' Unevolved ' means nothing else but matter in its subtle state. To this the next Sutra replies — 3. (Matter in its subtle state) subserves an end, on account of its dependence on him (viz. the Supreme Person). Matter in its subtle state subserves ends, in so far only as it is dependent on the Supreme Person who is the cause of all. We by no means wish to deny unevolved matter and all its effects in themselves, but in so far only as they are maintained not to have their Self in the Supreme Person. For the fact is that they constitute his body and He thus constitutes their Self; and it is only through this their relation to him that the Pradhana, and so on, are capable of accomplishing their several ends. Otherwise the different essential natures of them all could never I ADHYAYA, 4 PAD A, 4. 359
2Otherwise the different essential natures of them all could never I ADHYAYA, 4 PAD A, 4. 359 exist, — nor persist, nor act. It is just on the ground of this dependence on the Lord not being acknowledged by the Sankhyas that their system is disproved by us. In Scripture and Smrzti alike, wherever the origination and destruction of the world are described, or the greatness of the Supreme Person is glorified, the Pradhana and all its effects, no less than the individual souls, are declared to have their Self in that Supreme Person. Compare, e.g. the text which first says that the earth is merged in water, and further on ' the elements are merged in the Mahat, the Mahat in the Unevolved, the Unevolved in the Imperish- able, the Imperishable in Darkness ; Darkness becomes one with the highest divinity/ And ' He of whom the earth is the body/ &c up to ' he of whom the Unevolved is the body; of whom the Imperishable is the body; of whom death is the body; he the inner Self of all beings, free from all evil, the divine one, the one God Naraya^a/ And £ Earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, intellect, egoity — thus eightfold is my nature divided. Lower is this nature ; other than this and higher know that nature of mine which has become the individual soul by which this world is supported. Remember that all beings spring from this; I am the origin and the dissolution of the whole Universe. Higher than I there is none else ; all this is strung on me as pearls on a thread ' (Bha. Gi. VII, 4-7). And * the Evolved is Vishnu, and the Unevolved, he is the Person and time. — The nature (prakrzti) declared by me, having the double form of the Evolved and the Unevolved, and the soul — both these are merged in the highest Self. That Self is the support of all, the Supreme Person who under the name of Vishnu is glorified in the Vedas and the Vedanta books.' 4. And on account of there being no statement of its being an object of knowledge. If the text meant the Non-evolved as understood by the Sahkhyas it would refer to it as something to be known ; for the Sankhyas, who hold the theory of Release resulting from the discriminative knowledge of the Evolved, the 360 vedanta-s6tras. Non-evolved, and the soul, admit that all these are objects of knowledge. Now our text does not refer to the Un- evolved as an object of knowledge, and it cannot therefore be the Pradhana assumed by the Sankhyas. 5. Should it be said that (the text) declares (it) ; we say, not so ; for the intelligent Self (is meant), on account of subject-matter.
3Now our text does not refer to the Un- evolved as an object of knowledge, and it cannot therefore be the Pradhana assumed by the Sankhyas. 5. Should it be said that (the text) declares (it) ; we say, not so ; for the intelligent Self (is meant), on account of subject-matter. * He who has meditated on that which is without sound, without touch, without form, without decay, without taste, eternal, without smell, without beginning, without end, beyond the Great, unchangeable ; is freed from the jaws of death ' (Ka. Up. II, 3, 15), this scriptural text, closely follow- ing on the text under discussion, represents the ' Unevolved ' as the object of knowledge ! — Not so, we reply. What that .rloka represents as the object of meditation is (not the Un- evolved but) the intelligent Self, i. e. the Supreme Person. For it is the latter who forms the general subject-matter, as we infer from two preceding passages, viz. * He who has knowledge for his charioteer, and who holds the reins of the mind, he reaches the end of his journey, the highest place of Vishnu ' ; and ' That Self is hidden in all beings and does not shine forth, but it is seen by subtle seers through their sharp and subtle intellect.' For this reason, also, the clause ' Higher than the person there is nothing ' can- not be taken as meant to deny the existence of an entity beyond the ' purusha ' in the Sankhya sense. That the highest Self possesses the qualities of being without sound, &c., we moreover know from other scriptural texts, such as Mu. Up. I, 1, 6 ' That which is not to be seen, not to be grasped/ &c. And the qualification * beyond the Great, unchangeable ' is meant to declare that the highest Self is beyond the individual Self which had been called 'the Great ' in a previous passage ' beyond the intellect is the Great Self/ 6. And of three only there is this mention and question. In the Upanishad under discussion there is mention I ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 6. 36 1
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.
1he should reach, with his individual Self so qualified, the place of Vishnu, i.e. Brahman. — But how can the term 'the Un- evolved' denote the evolved body? — To this question the next Sutra furnishes a reply. 2. But the subtle (body), on account of its capa- bility. The elements in their fine state are what is called the ' Unevolved,' and this entering into a particular condition becomes the body. It is the ' Unevolved ' in the particular condition of the body, which in the text under discussion is called the * Unevolved.' ' On account of its capability/ i.e. because unevolved non-sentient matter, when assuming certain states and forms, is capable of entering on activities promoting the interest of man. But, an objection is raised, if the ' Unevolved ' is taken to be matter in its subtle state, what objection is there to our accepting for the explanation of our text that which is established in the Sankhya- system ? for there also the ' Unevolved ' means nothing else but matter in its subtle state. To this the next Sutra replies — 3. (Matter in its subtle state) subserves an end, on account of its dependence on him (viz. the Supreme Person). Matter in its subtle state subserves ends, in so far only as it is dependent on the Supreme Person who is the cause of all. We by no means wish to deny unevolved matter and all its effects in themselves, but in so far only as they are maintained not to have their Self in the Supreme Person. For the fact is that they constitute his body and He thus constitutes their Self; and it is only through this their relation to him that the Pradhana, and so on, are capable of accomplishing their several ends. Otherwise the different essential natures of them all could never I ADHYAYA, 4 PAD A, 4. 359
2Otherwise the different essential natures of them all could never I ADHYAYA, 4 PAD A, 4. 359 exist, — nor persist, nor act. It is just on the ground of this dependence on the Lord not being acknowledged by the Sankhyas that their system is disproved by us. In Scripture and Smrzti alike, wherever the origination and destruction of the world are described, or the greatness of the Supreme Person is glorified, the Pradhana and all its effects, no less than the individual souls, are declared to have their Self in that Supreme Person. Compare, e.g. the text which first says that the earth is merged in water, and further on ' the elements are merged in the Mahat, the Mahat in the Unevolved, the Unevolved in the Imperish- able, the Imperishable in Darkness ; Darkness becomes one with the highest divinity/ And ' He of whom the earth is the body/ &c up to ' he of whom the Unevolved is the body; of whom the Imperishable is the body; of whom death is the body; he the inner Self of all beings, free from all evil, the divine one, the one God Naraya^a/ And £ Earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, intellect, egoity — thus eightfold is my nature divided. Lower is this nature ; other than this and higher know that nature of mine which has become the individual soul by which this world is supported. Remember that all beings spring from this; I am the origin and the dissolution of the whole Universe. Higher than I there is none else ; all this is strung on me as pearls on a thread ' (Bha. Gi. VII, 4-7). And * the Evolved is Vishnu, and the Unevolved, he is the Person and time. — The nature (prakrzti) declared by me, having the double form of the Evolved and the Unevolved, and the soul — both these are merged in the highest Self. That Self is the support of all, the Supreme Person who under the name of Vishnu is glorified in the Vedas and the Vedanta books.' 4. And on account of there being no statement of its being an object of knowledge. If the text meant the Non-evolved as understood by the Sahkhyas it would refer to it as something to be known ; for the Sankhyas, who hold the theory of Release resulting from the discriminative knowledge of the Evolved, the 360 vedanta-s6tras. Non-evolved, and the soul, admit that all these are objects of knowledge. Now our text does not refer to the Un- evolved as an object of knowledge, and it cannot therefore be the Pradhana assumed by the Sankhyas. 5. Should it be said that (the text) declares (it) ; we say, not so ; for the intelligent Self (is meant), on account of subject-matter.
3Now our text does not refer to the Un- evolved as an object of knowledge, and it cannot therefore be the Pradhana assumed by the Sankhyas. 5. Should it be said that (the text) declares (it) ; we say, not so ; for the intelligent Self (is meant), on account of subject-matter. * He who has meditated on that which is without sound, without touch, without form, without decay, without taste, eternal, without smell, without beginning, without end, beyond the Great, unchangeable ; is freed from the jaws of death ' (Ka. Up. II, 3, 15), this scriptural text, closely follow- ing on the text under discussion, represents the ' Unevolved ' as the object of knowledge ! — Not so, we reply. What that .rloka represents as the object of meditation is (not the Un- evolved but) the intelligent Self, i. e. the Supreme Person. For it is the latter who forms the general subject-matter, as we infer from two preceding passages, viz. * He who has knowledge for his charioteer, and who holds the reins of the mind, he reaches the end of his journey, the highest place of Vishnu ' ; and ' That Self is hidden in all beings and does not shine forth, but it is seen by subtle seers through their sharp and subtle intellect.' For this reason, also, the clause ' Higher than the person there is nothing ' can- not be taken as meant to deny the existence of an entity beyond the ' purusha ' in the Sankhya sense. That the highest Self possesses the qualities of being without sound, &c., we moreover know from other scriptural texts, such as Mu. Up. I, 1, 6 ' That which is not to be seen, not to be grasped/ &c. And the qualification * beyond the Great, unchangeable ' is meant to declare that the highest Self is beyond the individual Self which had been called 'the Great ' in a previous passage ' beyond the intellect is the Great Self/ 6. And of three only there is this mention and question. In the Upanishad under discussion there is mention I ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 6. 36 1
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.