Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1For the first place which there is assigned to fire rests only thereon that no mention is made of the creation of Ether, and this has no force to negative the creation of Ether as positively stated in other texts. 7. But the division (origination) extends over all effects ; as in ordinary life. The { but ' has the sense of * and/ As the clause ' In that all this has its Self and similar ones directly state that Ether also is a creation of Brahman, the division, i. e. the origination of Ether from Brahman, is implicitly de- clared thereby. As in ordinary life. When in ordinary life somebody has said 'all these men are the sons of II ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, IO. 535 Devadatta,' it is known that any particulars which may afterwards be given about the descent of some of them are meant to apply to all. — In accordance with this our con- clusion we interpret the text ' Air and Ether, this is the Immortal/ as asserting only that air and Ether continue to exist for a long time, as the Devas do. 8. Hereby air is explained. The same argumentation explains the origination of air also. That a special Sutra is devoted to the origination of air — instead of disposing in one Sutra of Ether and air — is for the sake of Sutra 10, which states that ' hence (i. e. from air) there originated fire.' 9. But there is non-origination of that which is (only) ; on account of impossibility. The 'but' has an affirmative sense. There is non- origination of that which is, i. e. of Brahman only ; of whatever is different from Brahman non-origination cannot possibly be established. This means — the origination of Ether and air has been proved only in order to illustrate a general truth. Only that which is, i. e. Brahman, which is the general cause, cannot originate. Whatever is other than Brahman, i. e. the entire world comprising the Unevolved, the great principle (mahat), ahankara, the tanmatras, the sense-organs, the Ether, the air, and so on, cannot possibly be shown to be non-originated, since its being an effect is proved by the text declaring that everything is -known through one thing, and in other ways. — Here terminates the adhikara/za of ' the Ether.' 10. Fire (is produced) thence, for thus Scripture declares. It has been stated that everything different from Brah- man is the effect of Brahman. The doubt now arises whether the more remote effects of Brahman originate, each of them, only from that substance which is their imme- diately antecedent cause or from Brahman in the form of that substance. — The decision is that they originate from those 536 vedanta-sCtras. substances only ; for the text * from air fire ' directly states the origination of fire from air. 1 1. Water (from fire). Water also originates ' thence/ i. e. from fire ; for so the texts declare ' From fire water ' (Taitt. Up. II, i, i) ; ' that sent forth water' (Kk. Up. VI, 2, 3). 1 2. Earth (from water).
21 1. Water (from fire). Water also originates ' thence/ i. e. from fire ; for so the texts declare ' From fire water ' (Taitt. Up. II, i, i) ; ' that sent forth water' (Kk. Up. VI, 2, 3). 1 2. Earth (from water). Earth originates from water ; for so the texts declare ' From water earth5 (Taitt. Up. II, 1, 1). ' It (water) sent forth food ' (Kk. Up. VI, 2, 3). But how can the word ' food ' denote earth ? — To this the next Sutra replies. 13. Earth on account of the subject-matter, the colour, and other texts. That the word ' food ' denotes the earth is to be inferred from the fact that the section in which the word occurs has for its subject-matter the creation of the elements ; as everything eatable is a product of the earth, the term denoting the effect is there applied to denote the cause. In the same chapter, where the colour of the elements is mentioned (' The red colour of a flame is the colour of fire, the white one that of water, the black one that of food '), the collocation of words clearly shows that * food ' means something of the same kind as fire and water, viz. the ele- ments of earth. And there are other texts also which treat of the same topic and declare the origination of earth from water, cp. Taitt. Up. II, 1, c from fire sprang water, from water earth.' All this proves that the term ' food ' denotes earth, and that hence earth originates from water. Fire and the other substances, the origination of which has been detailed, are mentioned merely as instances, and it must be understood that also other entities, such as the ' Mahat,' and so on, originate only from the immediately preceding cause, in agreement with scriptural statements. And texts such as * From him is born breath, mind, and all organs of sense, ether, air, light, water, and the earth, the support of all' (Mu. Up. II, 1, 3); 'From him is born that II ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 1 5. 537 Brahman, name, form, and food ' (Mu. Up. I, 1, 9) ; ' From that Self there sprang ether ' (Taitt. Up. II, 1, 1) ; 'It (i. e. that which is) sent forth fire' (Kh. Up. VI, 2, 3) — (which seems to teach the direct origination from Brahman of the different elements, and so on) — may be interpreted on the understanding of Brahman being their mediate cause also. — This prima facie view the next Sutra disposes of. 14. But he; from the inferential mark supplied by their reflection.
3— This prima facie view the next Sutra disposes of. 14. But he; from the inferential mark supplied by their reflection. The ' but ' indicates the setting aside of the prima facie view raised. Of all effected things, the Mahat, and so on, the highest Person himself, in so far as embodied in the immediately preceding substance, is the direct cause. — How is this known ? — ' From the inferential mark supplied by the reflection of them/ By ' reflection ' the Sutra means the resolve expressed in the recurring phrase, ' May I be many ' ; ' That fire thought, may I be many ' ; ' That water thought, may I be many ' (Kh. Up. VI, 2, 3 ; 4). As these texts declare that there was thought — in the form of a re- solve of self- multiplication — which thought can belong to a Self only, we conclude that also the Mahat, the ahankara, the Ether, and so on, accomplish the sending forth of their respective effects only after similar thought, and such thought can belong only to the highest Brahman em- bodied in the Mahat, ahankara, and so on. That the highest Brahman is embodied in all beings and constitutes their Self, is directly stated in the antaryamin-brahma^a, ' He who abiding in the earth ; abiding in water ; abiding in fire,' &c. &c. (Br/. Up. Ill, 7, 3 ff.) ; and likewise in the Subala-Up., ' Whose body is the earth/ &c &c, up to ' Whose body is the Unevolved/ — The Purvapakshin had maintained that the creation, from Brahman, of breath, and so on, which is declared in texts such as ' From him are born breath, mind/ &c, may be understood as a mediate creation. This point is taken up by the next Sutra. 15. But the order of succession (which is stated) in reverse order (of the true one) is possible, (only 53^ VEDANTA-SUTRAS. if the origination of all effects is) thence (i.e. from Brahman). The c but ' has an asseverative sense. The direct origina- tion from Brahman of all effects — which in passages such as the one quoted by the Purvapakshin is stated in a form the reverse of the (true) order of origination accord- ing to which the Unevolved, the Mahat, the ahankara, Ether, and so on, succeed each other — is possible only on the supposition of the origination of each effect being really from Brahman itself in the form of a special causal substance. To understand the causality of Brahman as a merely mediate one would be to contradict all those statements of immediate origination. Texts such as the one quoted thus confirm the conclusion that everything originates from Brahman directly. „■ 16. If it be said that knowledge and mind (which are mentioned) between (breath and the elements) (are stated) in order of succession, owing to an inferential mark of this ; we say, not so, on account of non-difference.
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.
1For the first place which there is assigned to fire rests only thereon that no mention is made of the creation of Ether, and this has no force to negative the creation of Ether as positively stated in other texts. 7. But the division (origination) extends over all effects ; as in ordinary life. The { but ' has the sense of * and/ As the clause ' In that all this has its Self and similar ones directly state that Ether also is a creation of Brahman, the division, i. e. the origination of Ether from Brahman, is implicitly de- clared thereby. As in ordinary life. When in ordinary life somebody has said 'all these men are the sons of II ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, IO. 535 Devadatta,' it is known that any particulars which may afterwards be given about the descent of some of them are meant to apply to all. — In accordance with this our con- clusion we interpret the text ' Air and Ether, this is the Immortal/ as asserting only that air and Ether continue to exist for a long time, as the Devas do. 8. Hereby air is explained. The same argumentation explains the origination of air also. That a special Sutra is devoted to the origination of air — instead of disposing in one Sutra of Ether and air — is for the sake of Sutra 10, which states that ' hence (i. e. from air) there originated fire.' 9. But there is non-origination of that which is (only) ; on account of impossibility. The 'but' has an affirmative sense. There is non- origination of that which is, i. e. of Brahman only ; of whatever is different from Brahman non-origination cannot possibly be established. This means — the origination of Ether and air has been proved only in order to illustrate a general truth. Only that which is, i. e. Brahman, which is the general cause, cannot originate. Whatever is other than Brahman, i. e. the entire world comprising the Unevolved, the great principle (mahat), ahankara, the tanmatras, the sense-organs, the Ether, the air, and so on, cannot possibly be shown to be non-originated, since its being an effect is proved by the text declaring that everything is -known through one thing, and in other ways. — Here terminates the adhikara/za of ' the Ether.' 10. Fire (is produced) thence, for thus Scripture declares. It has been stated that everything different from Brah- man is the effect of Brahman. The doubt now arises whether the more remote effects of Brahman originate, each of them, only from that substance which is their imme- diately antecedent cause or from Brahman in the form of that substance. — The decision is that they originate from those 536 vedanta-sCtras. substances only ; for the text * from air fire ' directly states the origination of fire from air. 1 1. Water (from fire). Water also originates ' thence/ i. e. from fire ; for so the texts declare ' From fire water ' (Taitt. Up. II, i, i) ; ' that sent forth water' (Kk. Up. VI, 2, 3). 1 2. Earth (from water).
21 1. Water (from fire). Water also originates ' thence/ i. e. from fire ; for so the texts declare ' From fire water ' (Taitt. Up. II, i, i) ; ' that sent forth water' (Kk. Up. VI, 2, 3). 1 2. Earth (from water). Earth originates from water ; for so the texts declare ' From water earth5 (Taitt. Up. II, 1, 1). ' It (water) sent forth food ' (Kk. Up. VI, 2, 3). But how can the word ' food ' denote earth ? — To this the next Sutra replies. 13. Earth on account of the subject-matter, the colour, and other texts. That the word ' food ' denotes the earth is to be inferred from the fact that the section in which the word occurs has for its subject-matter the creation of the elements ; as everything eatable is a product of the earth, the term denoting the effect is there applied to denote the cause. In the same chapter, where the colour of the elements is mentioned (' The red colour of a flame is the colour of fire, the white one that of water, the black one that of food '), the collocation of words clearly shows that * food ' means something of the same kind as fire and water, viz. the ele- ments of earth. And there are other texts also which treat of the same topic and declare the origination of earth from water, cp. Taitt. Up. II, 1, c from fire sprang water, from water earth.' All this proves that the term ' food ' denotes earth, and that hence earth originates from water. Fire and the other substances, the origination of which has been detailed, are mentioned merely as instances, and it must be understood that also other entities, such as the ' Mahat,' and so on, originate only from the immediately preceding cause, in agreement with scriptural statements. And texts such as * From him is born breath, mind, and all organs of sense, ether, air, light, water, and the earth, the support of all' (Mu. Up. II, 1, 3); 'From him is born that II ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 1 5. 537 Brahman, name, form, and food ' (Mu. Up. I, 1, 9) ; ' From that Self there sprang ether ' (Taitt. Up. II, 1, 1) ; 'It (i. e. that which is) sent forth fire' (Kh. Up. VI, 2, 3) — (which seems to teach the direct origination from Brahman of the different elements, and so on) — may be interpreted on the understanding of Brahman being their mediate cause also. — This prima facie view the next Sutra disposes of. 14. But he; from the inferential mark supplied by their reflection.
3— This prima facie view the next Sutra disposes of. 14. But he; from the inferential mark supplied by their reflection. The ' but ' indicates the setting aside of the prima facie view raised. Of all effected things, the Mahat, and so on, the highest Person himself, in so far as embodied in the immediately preceding substance, is the direct cause. — How is this known ? — ' From the inferential mark supplied by the reflection of them/ By ' reflection ' the Sutra means the resolve expressed in the recurring phrase, ' May I be many ' ; ' That fire thought, may I be many ' ; ' That water thought, may I be many ' (Kh. Up. VI, 2, 3 ; 4). As these texts declare that there was thought — in the form of a re- solve of self- multiplication — which thought can belong to a Self only, we conclude that also the Mahat, the ahankara, the Ether, and so on, accomplish the sending forth of their respective effects only after similar thought, and such thought can belong only to the highest Brahman em- bodied in the Mahat, ahankara, and so on. That the highest Brahman is embodied in all beings and constitutes their Self, is directly stated in the antaryamin-brahma^a, ' He who abiding in the earth ; abiding in water ; abiding in fire,' &c. &c. (Br/. Up. Ill, 7, 3 ff.) ; and likewise in the Subala-Up., ' Whose body is the earth/ &c &c, up to ' Whose body is the Unevolved/ — The Purvapakshin had maintained that the creation, from Brahman, of breath, and so on, which is declared in texts such as ' From him are born breath, mind/ &c, may be understood as a mediate creation. This point is taken up by the next Sutra. 15. But the order of succession (which is stated) in reverse order (of the true one) is possible, (only 53^ VEDANTA-SUTRAS. if the origination of all effects is) thence (i.e. from Brahman). The c but ' has an asseverative sense. The direct origina- tion from Brahman of all effects — which in passages such as the one quoted by the Purvapakshin is stated in a form the reverse of the (true) order of origination accord- ing to which the Unevolved, the Mahat, the ahankara, Ether, and so on, succeed each other — is possible only on the supposition of the origination of each effect being really from Brahman itself in the form of a special causal substance. To understand the causality of Brahman as a merely mediate one would be to contradict all those statements of immediate origination. Texts such as the one quoted thus confirm the conclusion that everything originates from Brahman directly. „■ 16. If it be said that knowledge and mind (which are mentioned) between (breath and the elements) (are stated) in order of succession, owing to an inferential mark of this ; we say, not so, on account of non-difference.
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.