Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
11 7. Should it be said that this is not so on account of the inferential marks of the individual soul and the chief vital air ; we reply that this has been explained before. With reference to the plea urged by the Purvapakshin 382 vedanta-sCtras. that, owing to inferential marks pointing to the individual soul, and the circumstance of mention being made of the chief vital air, we must decide that the section treats of the enjoying individual soul and not of the highest Self, the Sutra remarks that this argumentation has already been disposed of, viz. in connexion with the Pratardana vidya. For there it was shown that when a text is ascertained, on the ground of a comprehensive survey of initial and concluding clauses, to refer to Brahman, all inferential marks which point to other topics must be interpreted so as to fall in with the principal topic. Now in our text Brahman is introduced at the outset 'Shall I tell you Brahman ? ' it is further mentioned in the middle of the section, for the clause ' of whom this is the work ' does not refer to the soul in general but to the highest Person who is the cause of the whole world ; and at the end again we hear of a reward which connects itself only with meditations on Brahman, viz. supreme sovereignty preceded by the conquest of all evil. ' Having overcome all evil he obtains pre-eminence among all beings, sovereignty and supremacy — yea, he who knows this.' The section thus being concerned with Brahman, the references to the individual soul and to the chief vital air must also be interpreted so as to fall in with Brahman. In the same way it was shown above that the references to the individual soul and the chief vital air which are met with in the Pratardana vidya really explain themselves in connexion with a threefold meditation on Brahman. As in the passage 'Then with this pra^a alone he becomes one ' the two words ' this ' and ' pra/za ' may be taken as co-ordinated and it hence would be inappropriate to separate them (and to explain 'in the pra^a which abides in this sour), and as the word 'pr&Tza' is ascertained to mean Brahman also, we must understand the mention of pra/za to be made with a view to meditation on Brahman in so far as having the pra//a for its body. But how can the references to the individual soul be put in connexion with Brahman ? — This point is taken up by the next Sutra. 18. But Gaimini thinks that it has another purport, I ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 1 8. 383 on account of the question and answer ; and thus some also.
2But how can the references to the individual soul be put in connexion with Brahman ? — This point is taken up by the next Sutra. 18. But Gaimini thinks that it has another purport, I ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 1 8. 383 on account of the question and answer ; and thus some also. The 'but' is meant to preclude the idea that the mention made of the individual soul enables us to understand the whole section as concerned with that soul. — The teacher Gaimini is of opinion that the mention made of the individual soul has another meaning, i.e. aims at conveying the idea of what is different from the individual soul, i. e. the nature of the highest Brahman. ' On account of question and answer/ According to the story told in the Upanishad, A^ata^atru leads Balaki to where a sleeping man is resting, and convinces him that the soul is different from breath, by addressing the sleeping person, in whom breath only is awake, with names belonging to pra^a 1 without the sleeper being awaked thereby, and after that rousing him by a push of his staff. Then, with a view to teaching Balaki the difference of Brahman from the individual soul, he asks him the following questions : * Where, O Balaki, did this person here sleep? Where was he? Whence did he thus come back?' To these questions he thereupon himself replies, 'When sleeping he sees no dream, then he becomes one in that prkna, alone. — From that Self the organs proceed each towards its place, from the organs the gods, from the gods the worlds/ Now this reply, no less than the questions, clearly refers to the highest Self as something different from the individual Self. For that entering into which the soul, in the state of deep sleep, attains its true nature and enjoys complete serenity, being free from the disturbing experiences of pleasure and pain that accompany the states of waking and of dream ; and 1 The names with which the king addresses the sleeper are Great one, clad in white raiment ', Soma, king. The *Sru. Pra. com- ments as follows : Great one ; because according to *Sruti Pra^a is the oldest and best. Clad in white raiment) because *Sruti says that water is the raiment of Pra«a; and elsewhere, that what is white belongs to water. Soma ; because scripture says ' of this prawa water is the body, light the form, viz. yonder moon/ Xing ; for -Sruti says ' Pra«a indeed is the ruler/ 384 VEDANTA-stiTRAS,
3Soma ; because scripture says ' of this prawa water is the body, light the form, viz. yonder moon/ Xing ; for -Sruti says ' Pra«a indeed is the ruler/ 384 VEDANTA-stiTRAS, that from which it again returns to the fruition of pleasure and pain ; that is nothing else but the highest Self. For, as other scriptural texts testify (' Then he becomes united with the True,' Kk. Up. VI, 8, 1 ; ' Embraced by the intelligent Self he knows nothing that is without, nothing that is within/ Bn. Up. IV, 3, 31), the abode of deep sleep is the intelligent Self which is different from the individual Self, i.e. the highest Self. We thus conclude that the reference, in question and answer, to the individual soul subserves the end of instruction being given about what is different from that soul, 1. e. the highest Self. We hence also reject the Purvapakshin's contention that question and answer refer to the individual soul, that the veins called hita are the abode of deep sleep, and that the well-known clause as to the pra^a must be taken to mean that the aggregate of the organs becomes one in the individual soul called pra^a. For the veins are the abode, not of deep sleep, but of dream, and, as we have shown above, Brahman only is the abode of deep sleep ; and the text declares that the individual soul, together with all its ministering organs, becomes one with, and again proceeds from, Brahman only — which the text designates as Pra/za, — Moreover some, viz. the Va^asaneyins in this same colloquy of Balaki and A^ata.ratru as recorded in their text, clearly distinguish from the vi^ana-maya, i.e. the individual soul in the state of deep sleep, the highest Self which then is the abode of the individual soul. 'Where was then the person, consisting of intelligence, and from whence did he thus come back? — When he was thus asleep, then the intelligent person, having through the intelligence of the senses absorbed within himself all intelligence, lies in the ether that is within the heart/ Now the word 'ether' is known to denote the highest Self; cf. the text ' there is within that the small ether ' (Kk, Up. VIII, 1, 1). This shows us that the individual soul is mentioned in the Va^asaneyin passage to the end of setting forth what is different from it, viz. the pra^/za Self, i.e. the highest Brahman. The general conclusion therefore is that the Kaushitaki-text under discussion proposes as I ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 1 9. 385 the object of knowledge something that is different from the individual soul, viz. the highest Brahman which is the cause of the whole world, and that hence the Vedanta- texts nowhere intimate that general causality belongs either to the individual soul or to the Pradhana under the soul's guidance. Here terminates the adhikara/za of ' denotation of the world/ 19. On account of the connected meaning of the sentences.
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.
11 7. Should it be said that this is not so on account of the inferential marks of the individual soul and the chief vital air ; we reply that this has been explained before. With reference to the plea urged by the Purvapakshin 382 vedanta-sCtras. that, owing to inferential marks pointing to the individual soul, and the circumstance of mention being made of the chief vital air, we must decide that the section treats of the enjoying individual soul and not of the highest Self, the Sutra remarks that this argumentation has already been disposed of, viz. in connexion with the Pratardana vidya. For there it was shown that when a text is ascertained, on the ground of a comprehensive survey of initial and concluding clauses, to refer to Brahman, all inferential marks which point to other topics must be interpreted so as to fall in with the principal topic. Now in our text Brahman is introduced at the outset 'Shall I tell you Brahman ? ' it is further mentioned in the middle of the section, for the clause ' of whom this is the work ' does not refer to the soul in general but to the highest Person who is the cause of the whole world ; and at the end again we hear of a reward which connects itself only with meditations on Brahman, viz. supreme sovereignty preceded by the conquest of all evil. ' Having overcome all evil he obtains pre-eminence among all beings, sovereignty and supremacy — yea, he who knows this.' The section thus being concerned with Brahman, the references to the individual soul and to the chief vital air must also be interpreted so as to fall in with Brahman. In the same way it was shown above that the references to the individual soul and the chief vital air which are met with in the Pratardana vidya really explain themselves in connexion with a threefold meditation on Brahman. As in the passage 'Then with this pra^a alone he becomes one ' the two words ' this ' and ' pra/za ' may be taken as co-ordinated and it hence would be inappropriate to separate them (and to explain 'in the pra^a which abides in this sour), and as the word 'pr&Tza' is ascertained to mean Brahman also, we must understand the mention of pra/za to be made with a view to meditation on Brahman in so far as having the pra//a for its body. But how can the references to the individual soul be put in connexion with Brahman ? — This point is taken up by the next Sutra. 18. But Gaimini thinks that it has another purport, I ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 1 8. 383 on account of the question and answer ; and thus some also.
2But how can the references to the individual soul be put in connexion with Brahman ? — This point is taken up by the next Sutra. 18. But Gaimini thinks that it has another purport, I ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 1 8. 383 on account of the question and answer ; and thus some also. The 'but' is meant to preclude the idea that the mention made of the individual soul enables us to understand the whole section as concerned with that soul. — The teacher Gaimini is of opinion that the mention made of the individual soul has another meaning, i.e. aims at conveying the idea of what is different from the individual soul, i. e. the nature of the highest Brahman. ' On account of question and answer/ According to the story told in the Upanishad, A^ata^atru leads Balaki to where a sleeping man is resting, and convinces him that the soul is different from breath, by addressing the sleeping person, in whom breath only is awake, with names belonging to pra^a 1 without the sleeper being awaked thereby, and after that rousing him by a push of his staff. Then, with a view to teaching Balaki the difference of Brahman from the individual soul, he asks him the following questions : * Where, O Balaki, did this person here sleep? Where was he? Whence did he thus come back?' To these questions he thereupon himself replies, 'When sleeping he sees no dream, then he becomes one in that prkna, alone. — From that Self the organs proceed each towards its place, from the organs the gods, from the gods the worlds/ Now this reply, no less than the questions, clearly refers to the highest Self as something different from the individual Self. For that entering into which the soul, in the state of deep sleep, attains its true nature and enjoys complete serenity, being free from the disturbing experiences of pleasure and pain that accompany the states of waking and of dream ; and 1 The names with which the king addresses the sleeper are Great one, clad in white raiment ', Soma, king. The *Sru. Pra. com- ments as follows : Great one ; because according to *Sruti Pra^a is the oldest and best. Clad in white raiment) because *Sruti says that water is the raiment of Pra«a; and elsewhere, that what is white belongs to water. Soma ; because scripture says ' of this prawa water is the body, light the form, viz. yonder moon/ Xing ; for -Sruti says ' Pra«a indeed is the ruler/ 384 VEDANTA-stiTRAS,
3Soma ; because scripture says ' of this prawa water is the body, light the form, viz. yonder moon/ Xing ; for -Sruti says ' Pra«a indeed is the ruler/ 384 VEDANTA-stiTRAS, that from which it again returns to the fruition of pleasure and pain ; that is nothing else but the highest Self. For, as other scriptural texts testify (' Then he becomes united with the True,' Kk. Up. VI, 8, 1 ; ' Embraced by the intelligent Self he knows nothing that is without, nothing that is within/ Bn. Up. IV, 3, 31), the abode of deep sleep is the intelligent Self which is different from the individual Self, i.e. the highest Self. We thus conclude that the reference, in question and answer, to the individual soul subserves the end of instruction being given about what is different from that soul, 1. e. the highest Self. We hence also reject the Purvapakshin's contention that question and answer refer to the individual soul, that the veins called hita are the abode of deep sleep, and that the well-known clause as to the pra^a must be taken to mean that the aggregate of the organs becomes one in the individual soul called pra^a. For the veins are the abode, not of deep sleep, but of dream, and, as we have shown above, Brahman only is the abode of deep sleep ; and the text declares that the individual soul, together with all its ministering organs, becomes one with, and again proceeds from, Brahman only — which the text designates as Pra/za, — Moreover some, viz. the Va^asaneyins in this same colloquy of Balaki and A^ata.ratru as recorded in their text, clearly distinguish from the vi^ana-maya, i.e. the individual soul in the state of deep sleep, the highest Self which then is the abode of the individual soul. 'Where was then the person, consisting of intelligence, and from whence did he thus come back? — When he was thus asleep, then the intelligent person, having through the intelligence of the senses absorbed within himself all intelligence, lies in the ether that is within the heart/ Now the word 'ether' is known to denote the highest Self; cf. the text ' there is within that the small ether ' (Kk, Up. VIII, 1, 1). This shows us that the individual soul is mentioned in the Va^asaneyin passage to the end of setting forth what is different from it, viz. the pra^/za Self, i.e. the highest Brahman. The general conclusion therefore is that the Kaushitaki-text under discussion proposes as I ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 1 9. 385 the object of knowledge something that is different from the individual soul, viz. the highest Brahman which is the cause of the whole world, and that hence the Vedanta- texts nowhere intimate that general causality belongs either to the individual soul or to the Pradhana under the soul's guidance. Here terminates the adhikara/za of ' denotation of the world/ 19. On account of the connected meaning of the sentences.
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.