Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1term '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. Nor can we admit the contention that the term * ag&. ' is meant to teach that Prakrzti should metaphorically be viewed as a she-goat ; for such a view would be altogether purposeless. Where — in the passage ' Know the Self to be him who drives in the chariot ' — the body, and so on, are compared to a chariot, and so on, the object is to set forth the means of attaining Brahman ; where the sun is compared to honey, the object is to illustrate the enjoyment of the Vasus and other gods ; but what similar object could possibly be attained by directing us to view Prakrzti as a goat ? Such a metaphorical view would in fact be not merely useless ; it would be downright irrational. Prakrtti is a non-intelligent principle, the causal substance of the entire material Universe, and constituting the means for the experience of pleasure and pain, and for the final release, of all intelligent souls which are connected with it from all eternity. Now it would be simply contrary to good sense, metaphorically to transfer to Prakrzti such as described the nature of a she-goat — which is a sentient being that gives birth to very few creatures only, enters only occasionally into connexion with others, is of small use only, is not the cause of herself being abandoned by others, and is capable of abandoning those connected with her. Nor does it recommend itself to take the word aglL (understood to mean ' she-goat ') in a sense different from that in which we understand the term * a^*a ' which occurs twice in the same mantra. — Let then all three terms be taken in the same metaphorical sense (a^a meaning he-goat). — It would be altogether senseless, we reply, to compare the soul which absolutely dissociates itself from Prakrzti (* Another aga. leaves her after having enjoyed her ') to a he-goat which is able to enter again into connexion with what he has abandoned, or with anything else. — Here terminates the adhikara^a of * the cup.' I ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, II. 37 1 1 1. Not from the mention of the number even, on account of the diversity and of the excess.
2— Here terminates the adhikara^a of * the cup.' I ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, II. 37 1 1 1. Not from the mention of the number even, on account of the diversity and of the excess. The Va^asaneyins read in their text * He in whom the five " five-people " and the ether rest, him alone I believe to be the Self ; I, who know, believe him to be Brahman ' (Bri. Up. IV, 4, 1 7). The doubt here arises whether this text be meant to set forth the categories as established in Kapila's doctrine, or not. — The Purvapakshin maintains the former view, on the ground that the word ' five-people/ qualified by the word ' five/ intimates the twenty-five cate- gories of the Sankhyas. The compound ( five-people ' (pa^a^ana^) denotes groups of five beings, just as the term pa#£a-pulya/& denotes aggregates of five bundles of grass. And as we want to know how many such groups there are, the additional qualification 'five* intimates that there are five such groups ; just as if it were said 'five five- bundles, i. e. five aggregates consisting of five bundles each.' We thus understand that the c five five-people ' are twenty- five things, and as the mantra in which the term is met with refers to final release, we recognise the twenty-five categories known from the Sankhya-smr/ti which are here referred to as objects to be known by persons desirous of release. For the followers of Kapila teach that ' there is the funda- mental causal substance which is not an effect. There are seven things, viz. the Mahat, and so on, which are causal substances as well as effects. There are sixteen effects. The soul is neither a causal substance nor an effect' (San. Ka. 3). The mantra therefore is meant to intimate the categories known from the Sankhya. — To this the Sutra replies that from the mention of the number twenty-five supposed to be implied in the expression 'the five five- people/ it does not follow that the categories of the Sankhyas are meant. ' On account of the diversity/ i. e. on account of the five-people further qualified by the number five being different from the categories of the Sankhyas. For in the text { in whom the five five-people and the ether rest/ the ' in whom ' shows the five-people to have their abode, and hence their Self, in Brahman ; and B b 2 372 vedanta-s6tr as.
3For in the text { in whom the five five-people and the ether rest/ the ' in whom ' shows the five-people to have their abode, and hence their Self, in Brahman ; and B b 2 372 vedanta-s6tr as. in the continuation of the text, 'him I believe the Self/ the ' him ' connecting itself with the preceding ' in whom ' is recognised to be Brahman. The five five-people must therefore be different from the categories of the San- khya-system. ' And on account of the excess.' Moreover there is, in the text under discussion, an excess over and above the Sankhya categories, consisting in the Self denoted by the relative pronoun ' in whom/ and in the specially mentioned Ether. What the text designates there- fore is the Supreme Person who is the Universal Lord in whom all things abide — such as he is described in the text quoted above, ' Therefore some call him the twenty- sixth, and others the twenty-seventh.' The ' even ' in the Sutra is meant to intimate that the 'five five-people ' can in no way mean the twenty-five categories, since there is no pentad of groups consisting of five each. For in the case of the categories of the Sankhyas there are no generic characteristics or the like which could determine the ar- rangement of those categories in fives. Nor must it be urged against this that there is a determining reason for such an arrangement in so far as the tattvas of the San- khyas form natural groups comprising firstly, the five organs of action ; secondly, the ^ive sense-organs ; thirdly, the five gross elements ; fourthly, the subtle parts of those elements ; and fifthly, the five remaining tattvas ; for as the text under discussion mentions the ether by itself, the possibility of a group consisting of the five gross elements is precluded. We cannot therefore take the compound ' five people ' as denoting a group consisting of five con- stituent members, but, in agreement with II, i, 50, as merely being a special name. There are certain beings the special name of which is ' five-people/ and of these beings the additional word ' pa/z£a ' predicates that they are five in number. The expression is thus analogous to the term ' the seven seven-rzshis ' (where the term ' seven- r/shis ' is to be understood as the name of a certain class of rzshis only). — Who then are the beings called ' five-people ?* — To this question the next Sutra replies. I ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, I 3. 373 12. The breath, and so on, on the ground of the complementary passage. We see from a complementary passage, viz. ' They who know the breath of breath, the eye of the eye, the ear of the ear, the food of food, the mind of mind/ that the * five- people ' are the breath, and eye, and so on, all of which have their abode in Brahman.
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.
1term '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. Nor can we admit the contention that the term * ag&. ' is meant to teach that Prakrzti should metaphorically be viewed as a she-goat ; for such a view would be altogether purposeless. Where — in the passage ' Know the Self to be him who drives in the chariot ' — the body, and so on, are compared to a chariot, and so on, the object is to set forth the means of attaining Brahman ; where the sun is compared to honey, the object is to illustrate the enjoyment of the Vasus and other gods ; but what similar object could possibly be attained by directing us to view Prakrzti as a goat ? Such a metaphorical view would in fact be not merely useless ; it would be downright irrational. Prakrtti is a non-intelligent principle, the causal substance of the entire material Universe, and constituting the means for the experience of pleasure and pain, and for the final release, of all intelligent souls which are connected with it from all eternity. Now it would be simply contrary to good sense, metaphorically to transfer to Prakrzti such as described the nature of a she-goat — which is a sentient being that gives birth to very few creatures only, enters only occasionally into connexion with others, is of small use only, is not the cause of herself being abandoned by others, and is capable of abandoning those connected with her. Nor does it recommend itself to take the word aglL (understood to mean ' she-goat ') in a sense different from that in which we understand the term * a^*a ' which occurs twice in the same mantra. — Let then all three terms be taken in the same metaphorical sense (a^a meaning he-goat). — It would be altogether senseless, we reply, to compare the soul which absolutely dissociates itself from Prakrzti (* Another aga. leaves her after having enjoyed her ') to a he-goat which is able to enter again into connexion with what he has abandoned, or with anything else. — Here terminates the adhikara^a of * the cup.' I ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, II. 37 1 1 1. Not from the mention of the number even, on account of the diversity and of the excess.
2— Here terminates the adhikara^a of * the cup.' I ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, II. 37 1 1 1. Not from the mention of the number even, on account of the diversity and of the excess. The Va^asaneyins read in their text * He in whom the five " five-people " and the ether rest, him alone I believe to be the Self ; I, who know, believe him to be Brahman ' (Bri. Up. IV, 4, 1 7). The doubt here arises whether this text be meant to set forth the categories as established in Kapila's doctrine, or not. — The Purvapakshin maintains the former view, on the ground that the word ' five-people/ qualified by the word ' five/ intimates the twenty-five cate- gories of the Sankhyas. The compound ( five-people ' (pa^a^ana^) denotes groups of five beings, just as the term pa#£a-pulya/& denotes aggregates of five bundles of grass. And as we want to know how many such groups there are, the additional qualification 'five* intimates that there are five such groups ; just as if it were said 'five five- bundles, i. e. five aggregates consisting of five bundles each.' We thus understand that the c five five-people ' are twenty- five things, and as the mantra in which the term is met with refers to final release, we recognise the twenty-five categories known from the Sankhya-smr/ti which are here referred to as objects to be known by persons desirous of release. For the followers of Kapila teach that ' there is the funda- mental causal substance which is not an effect. There are seven things, viz. the Mahat, and so on, which are causal substances as well as effects. There are sixteen effects. The soul is neither a causal substance nor an effect' (San. Ka. 3). The mantra therefore is meant to intimate the categories known from the Sankhya. — To this the Sutra replies that from the mention of the number twenty-five supposed to be implied in the expression 'the five five- people/ it does not follow that the categories of the Sankhyas are meant. ' On account of the diversity/ i. e. on account of the five-people further qualified by the number five being different from the categories of the Sankhyas. For in the text { in whom the five five-people and the ether rest/ the ' in whom ' shows the five-people to have their abode, and hence their Self, in Brahman ; and B b 2 372 vedanta-s6tr as.
3For in the text { in whom the five five-people and the ether rest/ the ' in whom ' shows the five-people to have their abode, and hence their Self, in Brahman ; and B b 2 372 vedanta-s6tr as. in the continuation of the text, 'him I believe the Self/ the ' him ' connecting itself with the preceding ' in whom ' is recognised to be Brahman. The five five-people must therefore be different from the categories of the San- khya-system. ' And on account of the excess.' Moreover there is, in the text under discussion, an excess over and above the Sankhya categories, consisting in the Self denoted by the relative pronoun ' in whom/ and in the specially mentioned Ether. What the text designates there- fore is the Supreme Person who is the Universal Lord in whom all things abide — such as he is described in the text quoted above, ' Therefore some call him the twenty- sixth, and others the twenty-seventh.' The ' even ' in the Sutra is meant to intimate that the 'five five-people ' can in no way mean the twenty-five categories, since there is no pentad of groups consisting of five each. For in the case of the categories of the Sankhyas there are no generic characteristics or the like which could determine the ar- rangement of those categories in fives. Nor must it be urged against this that there is a determining reason for such an arrangement in so far as the tattvas of the San- khyas form natural groups comprising firstly, the five organs of action ; secondly, the ^ive sense-organs ; thirdly, the five gross elements ; fourthly, the subtle parts of those elements ; and fifthly, the five remaining tattvas ; for as the text under discussion mentions the ether by itself, the possibility of a group consisting of the five gross elements is precluded. We cannot therefore take the compound ' five people ' as denoting a group consisting of five con- stituent members, but, in agreement with II, i, 50, as merely being a special name. There are certain beings the special name of which is ' five-people/ and of these beings the additional word ' pa/z£a ' predicates that they are five in number. The expression is thus analogous to the term ' the seven seven-rzshis ' (where the term ' seven- r/shis ' is to be understood as the name of a certain class of rzshis only). — Who then are the beings called ' five-people ?* — To this question the next Sutra replies. I ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, I 3. 373 12. The breath, and so on, on the ground of the complementary passage. We see from a complementary passage, viz. ' They who know the breath of breath, the eye of the eye, the ear of the ear, the food of food, the mind of mind/ that the * five- people ' are the breath, and eye, and so on, all of which have their abode in Brahman.
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.