Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1— Because, we reply, the whole aggregate of sentient and non-sentient II ADHYAYA, 2 PAD A, 34. 519 beings constitutes the body of the Supreme Person, om- niscient, omnipotent, and so on. And that the body and the person embodied and their respective attributes are of totally different nature (so that Brahman is not touched by the defects of his body), we have explained likewise. — Moreover, as your six substances, soul, and so on, are not one substance and one paryaya, their being one substance, and so on, cannot be used to prove their being one and also not one, and so on. — And if it should be said that those six substances are such (viz. one and several, and so on), each owing to its own paryaya and its own nature, we remark that then you cannot avoid contradicting your own theory of everything being of an ambiguous nature. Things which stand to each other in the relation of mutual non-existence cannot after all be identical. — Hence the theory of the Cainas is not reasonable. Moreover it is liable to the same objections which we have above set forth as applying to all theories of atoms constituting the universal cause, without the guidance of a Lord. 33. And likewise non-entireness of the Self. On your view there would likewise follow non-entireness of the Self. For your opinion is that souls abide in num- berless places, each soul having the same size as the body •which it animates. When, therefore, the soul previously abiding in the body of an elephant or the like has to enter into a body of smaller size, e. g. that of an ant, it would follow that as the soul then occupies less space, it would not remain entire, but would become incomplete. — Let us then avoid this difficulty by assuming that the soul passes over into a different state — which process is called paryaya, — which it may manage because it is capable of contraction and dilatation. — To this the next Sutra replies. 34. Nor also is there non-contradiction from paryiya ; on account of change, and so on. Nor is the difficulty to be evaded by the assumption of the soul assuming a different condition through contraction or dilatation. For this would imply that the soul is subject 5 20 VEDANTA-sfiTRAS. to change, and all the imperfections springing from it, viz. non-permanence, and so on, and hence would not be superior to non-sentient things such as jars and the like. 35. And on account of the endurance of the final (size), and the (resulting) permanency of both ; there is no difference.
2to change, and all the imperfections springing from it, viz. non-permanence, and so on, and hence would not be superior to non-sentient things such as jars and the like. 35. And on account of the endurance of the final (size), and the (resulting) permanency of both ; there is no difference. The final size of the soul, i. e. the size it has in the state of Release, is enduring since the soul does not subsequently pass into another body ; and both, i. e. the soul in the state of Release and the size of that soul, are permanent (nitya). From this it follows that that ultimate size is the true essential size of the soul and also belongs to it previously to Release. Hence there is no difference of sizes, and the soul cannot therefore have the size of its temporary bodies. The Arhata theory is therefore untenable. — Here terminates the adhikara//a of ' the impossibility in one.' 36. (The system) of the Lord (must be disre- garded), on account of inappropriateness. So far it has been shown that the doctrines of Kapila? Ka^ada, Sugata, and the Arhat must be disregarded by IneJntesiiOTsro^ those doctrines are all alike untenable and foreign to the Veda. The Sutras now declare that, for the same reasons, the doctrine of Pa^upati also has to be disregarded. The adherents of this view belong to four different classes — K&palas, Kalamukhas, Pa^upatas, and 6aivas. All of them hold fanciful theories of Reality which are in conflict with the Veda, and invent various means for attaining happiness in this life and the next. They maintain the general material cause and the operative cause to be distinct, and the latter cause to be constituted by Pa^upati. They further hold the wearing of the six so-called 'mudra' badges and the like to be means to accomplish the highest end of man. Thus the Kapalas say, ' He who knows the true nature of the six mudras, who understands the highest mudrd, meditating on himself as in the position called bhagasana, reaches Nirv&#a. The necklace, the golden ornament, the II ADHYAYA, 2 PAD A, 36* 52 I
3Thus the Kapalas say, ' He who knows the true nature of the six mudras, who understands the highest mudrd, meditating on himself as in the position called bhagasana, reaches Nirv&#a. The necklace, the golden ornament, the II ADHYAYA, 2 PAD A, 36* 52 I earring, the head-jewel, ashes, and the sacred thread are called the six mudras. He whose body is marked with these is not born here again.' — Similarly the Kalamukhas teach that the means for obtaining all desired results in this world as well as the next are constituted by certain prac- tices— such as using a skull as a drinking vessel, smearing oneself with the ashes of a dead body, eating the flesh of such a body, carrying a heavy stick, setting up a liquor- jar and using it as a platform for making offerings to the gods, and the like. ' A bracelet made of Rudraksha-seeds on the arm, matted hair on the head, a skull, smearing oneself with ashes, &c/ — all this is well known from the sacred writings of the »Saivas. They also hold that by some special ceremonial performance men of different castes may become Brahma^as and reach the highest iyrama : 'by merely entering on the initiatory ceremony (dikshd) a man becomes a Brahma^a at once ; by under- taking the kdpala rite a man becomes at once an ascetic/ With regard to these views the Sutra says ' of pati, on account of inappropriateness/ A 'not* has here to be supplied from Sutra 33. The system of Pa^upati has tq be disregarded because it is inappropriate, i.e. because the different views and practices referred to are opposed to one another and in conflict with the Veda. The different practices enumerated above, the wearing of the six mudras and so on, are opposed to each other ; and moreover the theoretical assumptions of those people, their forms of devotion and their practices, are in conflict with the Veda. For the Veda declares that Naraya^a who is the highest Brahman is alone the operative and the substantial cause of the world, ' Naraya^a is the highest Brahman, Naraya/za is the highest Reality, Naraya^a is the highest light, Ndraya^a is the highest Self'; 'That thought, may I be many, may I grow forth ' {Kh. Up. VI, 2, 3) ; ' He desired, may I be many, may I grow forth ' (Taitt. Up. II, 6, 1), and so on. In the same way the texts declare meditation on the Supreme Person, who is the highest Brahman, to be the only meditation which effects final release ; cp. 'I know that great Person of sunlike lustre beyond the 522 ved£nta-s6tras.
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— Because, we reply, the whole aggregate of sentient and non-sentient II ADHYAYA, 2 PAD A, 34. 519 beings constitutes the body of the Supreme Person, om- niscient, omnipotent, and so on. And that the body and the person embodied and their respective attributes are of totally different nature (so that Brahman is not touched by the defects of his body), we have explained likewise. — Moreover, as your six substances, soul, and so on, are not one substance and one paryaya, their being one substance, and so on, cannot be used to prove their being one and also not one, and so on. — And if it should be said that those six substances are such (viz. one and several, and so on), each owing to its own paryaya and its own nature, we remark that then you cannot avoid contradicting your own theory of everything being of an ambiguous nature. Things which stand to each other in the relation of mutual non-existence cannot after all be identical. — Hence the theory of the Cainas is not reasonable. Moreover it is liable to the same objections which we have above set forth as applying to all theories of atoms constituting the universal cause, without the guidance of a Lord. 33. And likewise non-entireness of the Self. On your view there would likewise follow non-entireness of the Self. For your opinion is that souls abide in num- berless places, each soul having the same size as the body •which it animates. When, therefore, the soul previously abiding in the body of an elephant or the like has to enter into a body of smaller size, e. g. that of an ant, it would follow that as the soul then occupies less space, it would not remain entire, but would become incomplete. — Let us then avoid this difficulty by assuming that the soul passes over into a different state — which process is called paryaya, — which it may manage because it is capable of contraction and dilatation. — To this the next Sutra replies. 34. Nor also is there non-contradiction from paryiya ; on account of change, and so on. Nor is the difficulty to be evaded by the assumption of the soul assuming a different condition through contraction or dilatation. For this would imply that the soul is subject 5 20 VEDANTA-sfiTRAS. to change, and all the imperfections springing from it, viz. non-permanence, and so on, and hence would not be superior to non-sentient things such as jars and the like. 35. And on account of the endurance of the final (size), and the (resulting) permanency of both ; there is no difference.
2to change, and all the imperfections springing from it, viz. non-permanence, and so on, and hence would not be superior to non-sentient things such as jars and the like. 35. And on account of the endurance of the final (size), and the (resulting) permanency of both ; there is no difference. The final size of the soul, i. e. the size it has in the state of Release, is enduring since the soul does not subsequently pass into another body ; and both, i. e. the soul in the state of Release and the size of that soul, are permanent (nitya). From this it follows that that ultimate size is the true essential size of the soul and also belongs to it previously to Release. Hence there is no difference of sizes, and the soul cannot therefore have the size of its temporary bodies. The Arhata theory is therefore untenable. — Here terminates the adhikara//a of ' the impossibility in one.' 36. (The system) of the Lord (must be disre- garded), on account of inappropriateness. So far it has been shown that the doctrines of Kapila? Ka^ada, Sugata, and the Arhat must be disregarded by IneJntesiiOTsro^ those doctrines are all alike untenable and foreign to the Veda. The Sutras now declare that, for the same reasons, the doctrine of Pa^upati also has to be disregarded. The adherents of this view belong to four different classes — K&palas, Kalamukhas, Pa^upatas, and 6aivas. All of them hold fanciful theories of Reality which are in conflict with the Veda, and invent various means for attaining happiness in this life and the next. They maintain the general material cause and the operative cause to be distinct, and the latter cause to be constituted by Pa^upati. They further hold the wearing of the six so-called 'mudra' badges and the like to be means to accomplish the highest end of man. Thus the Kapalas say, ' He who knows the true nature of the six mudras, who understands the highest mudrd, meditating on himself as in the position called bhagasana, reaches Nirv&#a. The necklace, the golden ornament, the II ADHYAYA, 2 PAD A, 36* 52 I
3Thus the Kapalas say, ' He who knows the true nature of the six mudras, who understands the highest mudrd, meditating on himself as in the position called bhagasana, reaches Nirv&#a. The necklace, the golden ornament, the II ADHYAYA, 2 PAD A, 36* 52 I earring, the head-jewel, ashes, and the sacred thread are called the six mudras. He whose body is marked with these is not born here again.' — Similarly the Kalamukhas teach that the means for obtaining all desired results in this world as well as the next are constituted by certain prac- tices— such as using a skull as a drinking vessel, smearing oneself with the ashes of a dead body, eating the flesh of such a body, carrying a heavy stick, setting up a liquor- jar and using it as a platform for making offerings to the gods, and the like. ' A bracelet made of Rudraksha-seeds on the arm, matted hair on the head, a skull, smearing oneself with ashes, &c/ — all this is well known from the sacred writings of the »Saivas. They also hold that by some special ceremonial performance men of different castes may become Brahma^as and reach the highest iyrama : 'by merely entering on the initiatory ceremony (dikshd) a man becomes a Brahma^a at once ; by under- taking the kdpala rite a man becomes at once an ascetic/ With regard to these views the Sutra says ' of pati, on account of inappropriateness/ A 'not* has here to be supplied from Sutra 33. The system of Pa^upati has tq be disregarded because it is inappropriate, i.e. because the different views and practices referred to are opposed to one another and in conflict with the Veda. The different practices enumerated above, the wearing of the six mudras and so on, are opposed to each other ; and moreover the theoretical assumptions of those people, their forms of devotion and their practices, are in conflict with the Veda. For the Veda declares that Naraya^a who is the highest Brahman is alone the operative and the substantial cause of the world, ' Naraya^a is the highest Brahman, Naraya/za is the highest Reality, Naraya^a is the highest light, Ndraya^a is the highest Self'; 'That thought, may I be many, may I grow forth ' {Kh. Up. VI, 2, 3) ; ' He desired, may I be many, may I grow forth ' (Taitt. Up. II, 6, 1), and so on. In the same way the texts declare meditation on the Supreme Person, who is the highest Brahman, to be the only meditation which effects final release ; cp. 'I know that great Person of sunlike lustre beyond the 522 ved£nta-s6tras.
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.