Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Up. X, 4, 16); < That light which shines beyond heaven' (Kk. Up. Ill, 13, 7). 'She begins with light ' thus means ' she has Brahman for her cause.' — ' For thus some read in their text,' i. e. because the members of one .Sakha, viz. the Taittiriyas read in their I ADHYAYA, 4 PAD A, 9. 367 text that this ' a^a ' has Brahman for her cause. The Mahanaraya/m-Upanishad (of the Taittiriyas) at first refers to Brahman abiding in the hollow of the heart as the object of meditation. ' Smaller than the small, greater than the great, the Self placed in the hollow of this creature ' ; next declares that all the worlds and Brahma and the other gods originated from that Self ; and then says that there sprung from it also this aga. which is the cause of all ' The one a^a (goat), red, white and black, which gives birth to numerous offspring of the same shape, one a^a (he-goat) loves and lies by her ; another one forsakes her after having enjoyed her.' The subject-matter of the entire section evidently is to give instruction as to the whole aggregate of things other than Brahman originating from Brahman and thus having its Self in it ; hence we con- clude that also the a^-a which gives birth to manifold crea- tures like her, and is enjoyed by the soul controlled by karman, while she is abandoned by the soul possessing true knowledge is, no less than vital airs, seas, mountains, &c, a creature of Brahman, and hence has its Self in Brahman. We then apply to the interpretation of the 6VetcUvatara-text the meaning of the analogous Mahana- raya/za-text, as determined by the complementary pas- sages, and thus arrive at the conclusion that the a^a in the former text also is a being having its Self in Brahman. That this is so, moreover, appears from the 6Veta.yvatara itself. For in the early part of that Upanishad, we have after the introductory question, ' Is Brahman the cause ? ' the passage ' The sages devoted to meditation and concen- tration have seen the person whose Self is the divinity, hidden in its own qualities ' (I, 1, 3); which evidently refers to the a^a, as being of the nature of a power of the highest Brah- man. And as further on also (viz. in the passages ' From that the Mayin creates all this, and in this the other is bound up through Maya ' ; ' Know then Yrakriti to be Maya and the Great Lord the ruler of Maya ' ; and ' he who rules every place of birth/ V, 9-1 1) the very same being is referred to, there remains not even a shadow of proof for the assertion that the mantra under discussion 368 vedanta-sOtras. refers to an independent Prakrzti as assumed by the Sankhyas. But a further objection is raised, if the Prakrz'ti denoted by aga, begins with, i. e. is caused by Brahman, how can it be called a^-a, i. e. the non-produced one ; or, if it is non- produced, how can it be originated by Brahman ? To this the next Sutra replies.
2But a further objection is raised, if the Prakrz'ti denoted by aga, begins with, i. e. is caused by Brahman, how can it be called a^-a, i. e. the non-produced one ; or, if it is non- produced, how can it be originated by Brahman ? To this the next Sutra replies. to. And on account of the teaching of formation (i. e. creation) there is no contradiction ; as in the case of the honey. The { and ' expresses disposal of a doubt that had arisen. There is no contradiction between the Prakrzti being aga. and originating from light. On account of instruction being given about the formation (kalpana), i. e. creation of the world. This interpretation of * kalpana' is in agree- ment with the use of the verb k/zp in the text, * as formerly the creator made (akalpayat) sun and moon/ In our text the j-loka 'from that the Lord of Maya creates all this ' gives instruction about the creation of the world. From that, i.e. from matter in its subtle causal state when it is not yet divided, the Lord of all creates the entire Universe. From this statement about creation we understand that Prakrzti exists in a twofold state according as it is either cause or effect. During a pralaya it unites itself with Brahman and abides in its subtle state, without any distinction of names and forms; it then is called the ' Unevolved,' and by other similar names. At the time of creation, on the other hand, there reveal them- selves in Prakrzti Goodness and the other gu/zas, it divides itself according to names and forms, and then is called the ' Evolved,' and so on, and, transforming itself into fire, water, and earth, it appears as red, white, and black. In its causal condition it is a^a, i. e. unborn, in its effected condition it is ' caused by light, i. e. Brahman ' ; hence there is no con- tradiction. The case is analogous to that of the ' honey.' The sun in his causal state is one only, but in his effected state the Lord makes him into honey in so far namely as he then, for the purpose of enjoyment on the part of the Vasus I ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, IO. 369 and other gods, is the abode of nectar brought about by sacrificial works to be learned from the Rik and the other Vedas ; and further makes him to rise and to set. And between these two conditions there is no contradiction. This is declared in the Madhuvidya (Kk. Up. Ill), from ' The sun is indeed the honey of the Devas,' down to * when from thence he has risen upwards he neither rises nor sets ; being one he stands in the centre ' — ' one ' here means ' of one nature/ — The conclusion therefore is that the Svetct- jvatara mantra under discussion refers to Prakrzti as having her Self in Brahman, not to the Prakrzti assumed by the S&nkhyas.
3Others, however, are of opinion that the one a^a of which the mantra speaks has for its characteristics light, water, and earth. To them we address the following ques- tions. Do you mean that by what the text speaks of as an a^, consisting of fire, water, and earth, we have to understand those three elements only ; or Brahman in the form of those three elements ; or some power or principle which is the cause of the three elements ? The first alter- native is in conflict with the circumstance that, while fire, water, and earth are several things, the text explicitly refers to one a^-a. Nor may it be urged that fire, water, and earth, although several, become one, by being made tripar- tite (Kh. Up. VI, 3, 3); for this making them tripartite, does not take away their being several ; the text clearly showing that each several element becomes tripartite, ' Let me make each of these three divine beings tripartite/ — The second alternative again divides itself into two alternatives. Is the one a^a Brahman in so far as having passed over into fire, water, and earth ; or Brahman in so far as abiding within itself and not passing over into effects ? The former alternative is excluded by the consideration that it does not remove plurality (which cannot be reconciled with the one a^a). The second alternative is contradicted by the text calling that a^-a red, white, and black ; and more- over Brahman viewed as abiding within itself cannot be characterised by fire, water, and earth. On the third alter- native it has to be assumed that the text denotes by the [48] B b 3 7° vedanta-s^tr as. term 'a^a ' the three elements, and that on this basis there is imagined a causal condition of these elements; but better than this assumption it evidently is to accept the term 'a^a' as directly denoting the causal state of those three elements as known from scripture.
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.
1Up. X, 4, 16); < That light which shines beyond heaven' (Kk. Up. Ill, 13, 7). 'She begins with light ' thus means ' she has Brahman for her cause.' — ' For thus some read in their text,' i. e. because the members of one .Sakha, viz. the Taittiriyas read in their I ADHYAYA, 4 PAD A, 9. 367 text that this ' a^a ' has Brahman for her cause. The Mahanaraya/m-Upanishad (of the Taittiriyas) at first refers to Brahman abiding in the hollow of the heart as the object of meditation. ' Smaller than the small, greater than the great, the Self placed in the hollow of this creature ' ; next declares that all the worlds and Brahma and the other gods originated from that Self ; and then says that there sprung from it also this aga. which is the cause of all ' The one a^a (goat), red, white and black, which gives birth to numerous offspring of the same shape, one a^a (he-goat) loves and lies by her ; another one forsakes her after having enjoyed her.' The subject-matter of the entire section evidently is to give instruction as to the whole aggregate of things other than Brahman originating from Brahman and thus having its Self in it ; hence we con- clude that also the a^-a which gives birth to manifold crea- tures like her, and is enjoyed by the soul controlled by karman, while she is abandoned by the soul possessing true knowledge is, no less than vital airs, seas, mountains, &c, a creature of Brahman, and hence has its Self in Brahman. We then apply to the interpretation of the 6VetcUvatara-text the meaning of the analogous Mahana- raya/za-text, as determined by the complementary pas- sages, and thus arrive at the conclusion that the a^a in the former text also is a being having its Self in Brahman. That this is so, moreover, appears from the 6Veta.yvatara itself. For in the early part of that Upanishad, we have after the introductory question, ' Is Brahman the cause ? ' the passage ' The sages devoted to meditation and concen- tration have seen the person whose Self is the divinity, hidden in its own qualities ' (I, 1, 3); which evidently refers to the a^a, as being of the nature of a power of the highest Brah- man. And as further on also (viz. in the passages ' From that the Mayin creates all this, and in this the other is bound up through Maya ' ; ' Know then Yrakriti to be Maya and the Great Lord the ruler of Maya ' ; and ' he who rules every place of birth/ V, 9-1 1) the very same being is referred to, there remains not even a shadow of proof for the assertion that the mantra under discussion 368 vedanta-sOtras. refers to an independent Prakrzti as assumed by the Sankhyas. But a further objection is raised, if the Prakrz'ti denoted by aga, begins with, i. e. is caused by Brahman, how can it be called a^-a, i. e. the non-produced one ; or, if it is non- produced, how can it be originated by Brahman ? To this the next Sutra replies.
2But a further objection is raised, if the Prakrz'ti denoted by aga, begins with, i. e. is caused by Brahman, how can it be called a^-a, i. e. the non-produced one ; or, if it is non- produced, how can it be originated by Brahman ? To this the next Sutra replies. to. And on account of the teaching of formation (i. e. creation) there is no contradiction ; as in the case of the honey. The { and ' expresses disposal of a doubt that had arisen. There is no contradiction between the Prakrzti being aga. and originating from light. On account of instruction being given about the formation (kalpana), i. e. creation of the world. This interpretation of * kalpana' is in agree- ment with the use of the verb k/zp in the text, * as formerly the creator made (akalpayat) sun and moon/ In our text the j-loka 'from that the Lord of Maya creates all this ' gives instruction about the creation of the world. From that, i.e. from matter in its subtle causal state when it is not yet divided, the Lord of all creates the entire Universe. From this statement about creation we understand that Prakrzti exists in a twofold state according as it is either cause or effect. During a pralaya it unites itself with Brahman and abides in its subtle state, without any distinction of names and forms; it then is called the ' Unevolved,' and by other similar names. At the time of creation, on the other hand, there reveal them- selves in Prakrzti Goodness and the other gu/zas, it divides itself according to names and forms, and then is called the ' Evolved,' and so on, and, transforming itself into fire, water, and earth, it appears as red, white, and black. In its causal condition it is a^a, i. e. unborn, in its effected condition it is ' caused by light, i. e. Brahman ' ; hence there is no con- tradiction. The case is analogous to that of the ' honey.' The sun in his causal state is one only, but in his effected state the Lord makes him into honey in so far namely as he then, for the purpose of enjoyment on the part of the Vasus I ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, IO. 369 and other gods, is the abode of nectar brought about by sacrificial works to be learned from the Rik and the other Vedas ; and further makes him to rise and to set. And between these two conditions there is no contradiction. This is declared in the Madhuvidya (Kk. Up. Ill), from ' The sun is indeed the honey of the Devas,' down to * when from thence he has risen upwards he neither rises nor sets ; being one he stands in the centre ' — ' one ' here means ' of one nature/ — The conclusion therefore is that the Svetct- jvatara mantra under discussion refers to Prakrzti as having her Self in Brahman, not to the Prakrzti assumed by the S&nkhyas.
3Others, however, are of opinion that the one a^a of which the mantra speaks has for its characteristics light, water, and earth. To them we address the following ques- tions. Do you mean that by what the text speaks of as an a^, consisting of fire, water, and earth, we have to understand those three elements only ; or Brahman in the form of those three elements ; or some power or principle which is the cause of the three elements ? The first alter- native is in conflict with the circumstance that, while fire, water, and earth are several things, the text explicitly refers to one a^-a. Nor may it be urged that fire, water, and earth, although several, become one, by being made tripar- tite (Kh. Up. VI, 3, 3); for this making them tripartite, does not take away their being several ; the text clearly showing that each several element becomes tripartite, ' Let me make each of these three divine beings tripartite/ — The second alternative again divides itself into two alternatives. Is the one a^a Brahman in so far as having passed over into fire, water, and earth ; or Brahman in so far as abiding within itself and not passing over into effects ? The former alternative is excluded by the consideration that it does not remove plurality (which cannot be reconciled with the one a^a). The second alternative is contradicted by the text calling that a^-a red, white, and black ; and more- over Brahman viewed as abiding within itself cannot be characterised by fire, water, and earth. On the third alter- native it has to be assumed that the text denotes by the [48] B b 3 7° vedanta-s^tr as. term 'a^a ' the three elements, and that on this basis there is imagined a causal condition of these elements; but better than this assumption it evidently is to accept the term 'a^a' as directly denoting the causal state of those three elements as known from scripture.
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.