Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1'he who abides within earth, within the soul, within the eye, within the seed,' &c, Bri. Up. Ill, 7, 3). Of this prima facie view the Sutra disposes by saying — * Not even from place, such as earth, soul, &c, is there possible for the highest Self a shadow even of imperfection ; since everywhere in Scripture as well as Smrz'ti Brahman is described as having characteristics of a double kind ; viz. on the one hand freedom from all imperfections, and on the other possession of all blessed qualities. For Scripture says that the Supreme Person is free from evil, free from old age, free from death, free from grief, free from hunger and thirst ; that all his wishes realise themselves, that all its purposes realise themselves' [Kh. Up. VIII, 1, 5). And Smrzti says, ' He comprises within himself all blessed qualities, by a particle of his power the whole mass of beings is supported. In him there are combined energy, strength, might, wisdom, valour, and all other noble quali- ties. He is the Highest of the high, no pain or other imperfections affect him, the Lord of all, high or low, From all evil he is free, he whose name is Vishnu, the highest abode.' These and other passages teach that Brah- man possesses the double characteristics stated above. 12. Should it be said 'on account of difference'; not so, because with reference to each the text says what is not that. But, an objection is raised, we observe, that the individual soul also, although in reality possessing the same twofold attributes, viz. freedom from all evil and so on, as we learn from the teaching of Pra^apati (Kh. Up. VIII, 7), yet is affected with imperfections owing to the fact that it is Ill ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 12. 609
2freedom from all evil and so on, as we learn from the teaching of Pra^apati (Kh. Up. VIII, 7), yet is affected with imperfections owing to the fact that it is Ill ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 12. 609 connected with bodies, divine, human, and so on, and thus undergoes a variety of conditions. Analogously we cannot avoid the conclusion that the inner Ruler also, although in reality possessing those same twofold attributes, is also affected by imperfection, because through its connexion with those different bodies it likewise undergoes a variety of conditions. — This objection the Sutra sets aside in the words, ' not so, because with reference to each the text says what is not that/ i.e. what is contrary. For where the text says that the inner Ruler dwells within the earth, within the soul, within the eye, and so on, it concludes each clause by saying, ' that is thy Self, the inner Ruler, the immortal one/ i.e. declares the inner Ruler to be immortal, and thus denies of him any imperfections due to his connexion with the bodies which he voluntarily enters in order to rule them. The true (perfect) nature of the individual soul, on the other hand, is obscured as long as it is connected with a body, as we have explained under III, 2, 5- — But, as the Purvapakshin has pointed out, even if the highest Self voluntarily enters into bodies, it cannot escape connexion with the imperfections which depend on the essential nature of those bodies. — Not so, we reply. The fact is, that not even non-sentient things are, essen- tially or intrinsically, bad ; but in accordance with the nature of the works of those beings which are under the rule of karman, one thing, owing to the will of the Supreme Person, causes pain to one man at one time and pleasure at another time, and causes pleasure or pain to one person and the opposite to another person. If the effects of things depended on their own nature only, everything would at all times be productive for all persons, either of pleasure only or of pain only. But this is not observed to be the case. In agreement herewith Smrzti says, ' Because one and the same thing causes pain and pleasure and envy and wrath, the nature of a thing cannot lie in itself. As the same thing which erst gave rise to love causes pain later on, and that which once caused anger now causes satisfaction, nothing is in itself of the nature either of pleasure or of pain.' To the soul therefore which is sub- [48] R r 6 1 0 VEDANTA-sftTR AS. ject to karman the connexion with different things is the source of imperfection and suffering, in agreement with the nature of its works ; while to the highest Brahman, which is subject to itself only, the same connexion is the source of playful sport, consisting therein that he in various ways guides and rules those things. 13. Some also (teach) thus.
313. Some also (teach) thus. Moreover, the followers of one ^akha explicitly teach that the connexion with one and the same body is for the individual soul a source of disadvantage, while for the highest Brahman it is nothing of the kind, but constitutes an accession of glory in so far as it manifests him as a Lord and Ruler, 'Two birds, inseparable friends, cling to the same tree. One of them eats the sweet fruit, the other looks on without eating' (Mu. Up. Ill, 1, 1). — But the text, * Having entered by means of that ^iva-self I will differ- entiate names and forms/ teaches that the differentiation of names and forms depends on the entering into the elements of the ^iva-soul whose Self is Brahman, and this implies that Brahman also, as the Self of the individual soul, possesses definite shapes, divine, human, and so on, and is to be denominated by the corresponding names. Brahman thus falls within the sphere of beings to which injunctions and prohibitions are addressed — such as ' a Brahma/za is to sacrifice' — and hence necessarily is under the power of karman. — To this the next Sutra replies. 14. For (Brahman is) without form merely, since it is the principal agent with regard to that. Brahman, although by entering into bodies, human, divine, and so on, it becomes connected with various forms, yet is in itself altogether devoid of form, and therefore does not share that subjection to karman which in the case of the soul is due to its embodiedness. — Why? — Because as it is that which brings about names and forms it stands to them in the relation of a superior (pradhana). For the text, * The Ether (Brahman) indeed is the accom- Ill ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 1 5. 6ll plisher of names and forms ; that which is without these two is Brahman/ teaches that Brahman, although entering into all beings, is not touched by name and form, but is that which brings about name and form. — But, an objec- tion is raised, if Brahman is the inner ruler of beings in so far as he has them for its body, how can it be said that it is altogether destitute of form ? — There is a difference, we reply. The individual soul is connected with the shape of the body in which it dwells because it participates in the pleasures and pains to which the body gives rise ; but as Brahman does not share those pleasures and pains, it has no shape or form. And the scriptural injunctions and pro- hibitions apply to those only who are under the power of karman. The highest Brahman therefore is like a being without form, and hence, although abiding within all things, free from all imperfection and endowed with all blessed qualities.
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'he who abides within earth, within the soul, within the eye, within the seed,' &c, Bri. Up. Ill, 7, 3). Of this prima facie view the Sutra disposes by saying — * Not even from place, such as earth, soul, &c, is there possible for the highest Self a shadow even of imperfection ; since everywhere in Scripture as well as Smrz'ti Brahman is described as having characteristics of a double kind ; viz. on the one hand freedom from all imperfections, and on the other possession of all blessed qualities. For Scripture says that the Supreme Person is free from evil, free from old age, free from death, free from grief, free from hunger and thirst ; that all his wishes realise themselves, that all its purposes realise themselves' [Kh. Up. VIII, 1, 5). And Smrzti says, ' He comprises within himself all blessed qualities, by a particle of his power the whole mass of beings is supported. In him there are combined energy, strength, might, wisdom, valour, and all other noble quali- ties. He is the Highest of the high, no pain or other imperfections affect him, the Lord of all, high or low, From all evil he is free, he whose name is Vishnu, the highest abode.' These and other passages teach that Brah- man possesses the double characteristics stated above. 12. Should it be said 'on account of difference'; not so, because with reference to each the text says what is not that. But, an objection is raised, we observe, that the individual soul also, although in reality possessing the same twofold attributes, viz. freedom from all evil and so on, as we learn from the teaching of Pra^apati (Kh. Up. VIII, 7), yet is affected with imperfections owing to the fact that it is Ill ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 12. 609
2freedom from all evil and so on, as we learn from the teaching of Pra^apati (Kh. Up. VIII, 7), yet is affected with imperfections owing to the fact that it is Ill ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 12. 609 connected with bodies, divine, human, and so on, and thus undergoes a variety of conditions. Analogously we cannot avoid the conclusion that the inner Ruler also, although in reality possessing those same twofold attributes, is also affected by imperfection, because through its connexion with those different bodies it likewise undergoes a variety of conditions. — This objection the Sutra sets aside in the words, ' not so, because with reference to each the text says what is not that/ i.e. what is contrary. For where the text says that the inner Ruler dwells within the earth, within the soul, within the eye, and so on, it concludes each clause by saying, ' that is thy Self, the inner Ruler, the immortal one/ i.e. declares the inner Ruler to be immortal, and thus denies of him any imperfections due to his connexion with the bodies which he voluntarily enters in order to rule them. The true (perfect) nature of the individual soul, on the other hand, is obscured as long as it is connected with a body, as we have explained under III, 2, 5- — But, as the Purvapakshin has pointed out, even if the highest Self voluntarily enters into bodies, it cannot escape connexion with the imperfections which depend on the essential nature of those bodies. — Not so, we reply. The fact is, that not even non-sentient things are, essen- tially or intrinsically, bad ; but in accordance with the nature of the works of those beings which are under the rule of karman, one thing, owing to the will of the Supreme Person, causes pain to one man at one time and pleasure at another time, and causes pleasure or pain to one person and the opposite to another person. If the effects of things depended on their own nature only, everything would at all times be productive for all persons, either of pleasure only or of pain only. But this is not observed to be the case. In agreement herewith Smrzti says, ' Because one and the same thing causes pain and pleasure and envy and wrath, the nature of a thing cannot lie in itself. As the same thing which erst gave rise to love causes pain later on, and that which once caused anger now causes satisfaction, nothing is in itself of the nature either of pleasure or of pain.' To the soul therefore which is sub- [48] R r 6 1 0 VEDANTA-sftTR AS. ject to karman the connexion with different things is the source of imperfection and suffering, in agreement with the nature of its works ; while to the highest Brahman, which is subject to itself only, the same connexion is the source of playful sport, consisting therein that he in various ways guides and rules those things. 13. Some also (teach) thus.
313. Some also (teach) thus. Moreover, the followers of one ^akha explicitly teach that the connexion with one and the same body is for the individual soul a source of disadvantage, while for the highest Brahman it is nothing of the kind, but constitutes an accession of glory in so far as it manifests him as a Lord and Ruler, 'Two birds, inseparable friends, cling to the same tree. One of them eats the sweet fruit, the other looks on without eating' (Mu. Up. Ill, 1, 1). — But the text, * Having entered by means of that ^iva-self I will differ- entiate names and forms/ teaches that the differentiation of names and forms depends on the entering into the elements of the ^iva-soul whose Self is Brahman, and this implies that Brahman also, as the Self of the individual soul, possesses definite shapes, divine, human, and so on, and is to be denominated by the corresponding names. Brahman thus falls within the sphere of beings to which injunctions and prohibitions are addressed — such as ' a Brahma/za is to sacrifice' — and hence necessarily is under the power of karman. — To this the next Sutra replies. 14. For (Brahman is) without form merely, since it is the principal agent with regard to that. Brahman, although by entering into bodies, human, divine, and so on, it becomes connected with various forms, yet is in itself altogether devoid of form, and therefore does not share that subjection to karman which in the case of the soul is due to its embodiedness. — Why? — Because as it is that which brings about names and forms it stands to them in the relation of a superior (pradhana). For the text, * The Ether (Brahman) indeed is the accom- Ill ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 1 5. 6ll plisher of names and forms ; that which is without these two is Brahman/ teaches that Brahman, although entering into all beings, is not touched by name and form, but is that which brings about name and form. — But, an objec- tion is raised, if Brahman is the inner ruler of beings in so far as he has them for its body, how can it be said that it is altogether destitute of form ? — There is a difference, we reply. The individual soul is connected with the shape of the body in which it dwells because it participates in the pleasures and pains to which the body gives rise ; but as Brahman does not share those pleasures and pains, it has no shape or form. And the scriptural injunctions and pro- hibitions apply to those only who are under the power of karman. The highest Brahman therefore is like a being without form, and hence, although abiding within all things, free from all imperfection and endowed with all blessed qualities.
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.