Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1— The meditation therefore has to be performed on the entire Vauvanara Self only, not on its parts. This, moreover, Scripture itself intimates, in so far, namely, as declaring the evil consequences of medita- tion on parts of the Self only, 'your head would have Ill ADHYAYA, 3 pAdA, 56. 6j<) fallen off if you had not come to me'; * you would have become blind/ and so on. This also shows that the reference to the text enjoining meditations on name, &c, proves nothing as to our passage. For there the text says nothing as to disadvantages connected with those special meditations ; it only says that the medi- tation on plenitude (bhuman) has a more excellent re- sult. The section, therefore, although really concerned with enjoining the meditation on the bhuman, at the same time means to declare that the special medita- tions also are fruitful ; otherwise the meditation on the bhtiman could not be recommended, for the reason that it has a more excellent result than the preceding medita- tions.— The conclusion, therefore, is that the text enjoins a meditation on the collective VaLsvanara Self only. — * Here terminates the adhikara;za of 'the pre-eminence of plenitude.' 56. (The meditations are) separate, on account of the difference of words, and so on. The instances coming under this head of discussion are all those meditations on Brahman which have for their only result final Release, which consists in attaining to Brahman — such as the meditation on that which is, the meditation on the bhuman, the meditation on the small space within the heart, the Upako^ala meditation, the Sandilya. meditation, the meditation on VaLyvanara, the meditation on the Self of bliss, the meditation on the Im- perishable, and others — whether they be recorded in one jakha only or in several ^akhas. To a different category belong those meditations which have a special object such as Pra/za, and a special result. — The doubt here arises whether the meditations of the former class are all to be considered as identical, or as separate — The Purvapakshin holds that they are all one ; for, he says, they all have one and the same object of meditation, viz. Brahman. For the nature of all cognition depends on the object cognised ; and the nature of the meditations thus being one, the medita- tions themselves are one. — This view the Sutra controverts. 68o vedanta-sOtras.
2Brahman. For the nature of all cognition depends on the object cognised ; and the nature of the meditations thus being one, the medita- tions themselves are one. — This view the Sutra controverts. 68o vedanta-sOtras. The meditations are different, on account of the difference of terms and the rest. The c and the rest ' comprises re- petition (abhyasa), number (sawkhya), quality (gu/za), sub- ject-matter (prakriya), and name (namadheya ; cp. Pu. Mi. Su. II, 2, i ff.). We meet in those meditations with differ- ence of connexion, expressing itself in difference of words, and so on ; which causes difference on the part of the medi- tations enjoined. The terms enjoining meditation, c he knows,' ' he is to meditate ' (veda ; upasita), and so on, do indeed all of them denote a certain continuity of cognition, and all these cognitions have for their object Brahman only, but all the same those cognitions differ in so far as they have for their object Brahman, as variously qualified by special characteristics mentioned in the meditation ; in one meditation he is spoken of as the sole cause of the world, in another as free from all evil, and so on. We therefore arrive at the decision that clauses which describe special forms of meditation having for their result the attainment to Brahman, and are complete in themselves, convey the idea of separate independent meditations, and thus effect separation of the vidyas. This entire question was indeed already decided in the Purva Mima/^sa-sutras (II, 2, i), but it is here argued again to the end of dispelling the mistaken notion that the Vedanta-texts aim at know- ledge only, and not at the injunction of activities such as meditation. The meditations, therefore, are separate ones. — Here terminates the adhikara^a of ' difference of words and the rest/ 57. Option, on account of the non-difference of result. It has been proved that the meditation on that which truly is, the meditation on the small ether within the heart, and so on — all of which have for their result the attainment to Brahman — are separate meditations. The question now arises whether all these meditations should be combined by each meditating devotee, on account of such combination being useful to him ; or whether, in the absence of any use of such combination, they should be Ill ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 58. 68 1
3The question now arises whether all these meditations should be combined by each meditating devotee, on account of such combination being useful to him ; or whether, in the absence of any use of such combination, they should be Ill ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 58. 68 1 undertaken optionally. — They may be combined, the Purvapakshin holds ; since it is observed that different scriptural matters are combined even when having one and the same result. The Agnihotra, the Dar^apur^amasa oblation, and other sacrifices, all of them have one and the same result, viz. the possession of the heavenly world ; nevertheless, one and the same agent performs them all, with a view to the greater fulness of the heavenly bliss aimed at. So the different meditations on Brahman also may be cumulated with a view to greater fulness of in- tuition of Brahman. — This view the Sutra rejects. Option only between the several meditations is possible, on account of the non-difference of result. For to all meditations on Brahman alike Scripture assigns one and the same result, viz. intuitive knowledge of Brahman, which is of the nature of supreme, unsurpassable bliss. ' He who knows Brahman attains the Highest' (Taitt. Up. II, 1, i), &c. The intuitive knowledge of Brahman constitutes supreme, unsurpassable bliss ; and if such intuition may be reached through one meditation, of what use could other meditations be ? The heavenly world is something limited in respect of place, time, and essential nature, and hence a person desirous of attaining to it may cumulate works in order to take possession of it to a greater extent, and so on. But an analogous proceeding cannot be resorted to with regard to Brahman, which is unlimited in every sense. All medi- tations on Brahman tend to dispel Nescience, which stands in the way of the intuition of Brahman, and thus equally have for their result the attaining to Brahman ; and hence there is option between them. In the case, on the other hand, of those meditations which aim at other results than Brahman, there may either be choice between the several meditations, or they may be cumulated — as one may also do in the case of sacrifices aiming at the attainment of the heavenly world ; — for as those results are not of an infinite nature one may aim at realising them in a higher degree. This the next Sutra declares. 58. But meditations aiming at objects of desire 682 ved anta-s£jtr as. may, according to one's liking, be cumulated or not ; on account of the absence of the former reason. The last clause means — on account of their results not being of an infinite nature. — Here terminates the adhi- kara/za of ' option.' 59. They belong to the constituent members, as the bases.
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— The meditation therefore has to be performed on the entire Vauvanara Self only, not on its parts. This, moreover, Scripture itself intimates, in so far, namely, as declaring the evil consequences of medita- tion on parts of the Self only, 'your head would have Ill ADHYAYA, 3 pAdA, 56. 6j<) fallen off if you had not come to me'; * you would have become blind/ and so on. This also shows that the reference to the text enjoining meditations on name, &c, proves nothing as to our passage. For there the text says nothing as to disadvantages connected with those special meditations ; it only says that the medi- tation on plenitude (bhuman) has a more excellent re- sult. The section, therefore, although really concerned with enjoining the meditation on the bhuman, at the same time means to declare that the special medita- tions also are fruitful ; otherwise the meditation on the bhtiman could not be recommended, for the reason that it has a more excellent result than the preceding medita- tions.— The conclusion, therefore, is that the text enjoins a meditation on the collective VaLsvanara Self only. — * Here terminates the adhikara;za of 'the pre-eminence of plenitude.' 56. (The meditations are) separate, on account of the difference of words, and so on. The instances coming under this head of discussion are all those meditations on Brahman which have for their only result final Release, which consists in attaining to Brahman — such as the meditation on that which is, the meditation on the bhuman, the meditation on the small space within the heart, the Upako^ala meditation, the Sandilya. meditation, the meditation on VaLyvanara, the meditation on the Self of bliss, the meditation on the Im- perishable, and others — whether they be recorded in one jakha only or in several ^akhas. To a different category belong those meditations which have a special object such as Pra/za, and a special result. — The doubt here arises whether the meditations of the former class are all to be considered as identical, or as separate — The Purvapakshin holds that they are all one ; for, he says, they all have one and the same object of meditation, viz. Brahman. For the nature of all cognition depends on the object cognised ; and the nature of the meditations thus being one, the medita- tions themselves are one. — This view the Sutra controverts. 68o vedanta-sOtras.
2Brahman. For the nature of all cognition depends on the object cognised ; and the nature of the meditations thus being one, the medita- tions themselves are one. — This view the Sutra controverts. 68o vedanta-sOtras. The meditations are different, on account of the difference of terms and the rest. The c and the rest ' comprises re- petition (abhyasa), number (sawkhya), quality (gu/za), sub- ject-matter (prakriya), and name (namadheya ; cp. Pu. Mi. Su. II, 2, i ff.). We meet in those meditations with differ- ence of connexion, expressing itself in difference of words, and so on ; which causes difference on the part of the medi- tations enjoined. The terms enjoining meditation, c he knows,' ' he is to meditate ' (veda ; upasita), and so on, do indeed all of them denote a certain continuity of cognition, and all these cognitions have for their object Brahman only, but all the same those cognitions differ in so far as they have for their object Brahman, as variously qualified by special characteristics mentioned in the meditation ; in one meditation he is spoken of as the sole cause of the world, in another as free from all evil, and so on. We therefore arrive at the decision that clauses which describe special forms of meditation having for their result the attainment to Brahman, and are complete in themselves, convey the idea of separate independent meditations, and thus effect separation of the vidyas. This entire question was indeed already decided in the Purva Mima/^sa-sutras (II, 2, i), but it is here argued again to the end of dispelling the mistaken notion that the Vedanta-texts aim at know- ledge only, and not at the injunction of activities such as meditation. The meditations, therefore, are separate ones. — Here terminates the adhikara^a of ' difference of words and the rest/ 57. Option, on account of the non-difference of result. It has been proved that the meditation on that which truly is, the meditation on the small ether within the heart, and so on — all of which have for their result the attainment to Brahman — are separate meditations. The question now arises whether all these meditations should be combined by each meditating devotee, on account of such combination being useful to him ; or whether, in the absence of any use of such combination, they should be Ill ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 58. 68 1
3The question now arises whether all these meditations should be combined by each meditating devotee, on account of such combination being useful to him ; or whether, in the absence of any use of such combination, they should be Ill ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 58. 68 1 undertaken optionally. — They may be combined, the Purvapakshin holds ; since it is observed that different scriptural matters are combined even when having one and the same result. The Agnihotra, the Dar^apur^amasa oblation, and other sacrifices, all of them have one and the same result, viz. the possession of the heavenly world ; nevertheless, one and the same agent performs them all, with a view to the greater fulness of the heavenly bliss aimed at. So the different meditations on Brahman also may be cumulated with a view to greater fulness of in- tuition of Brahman. — This view the Sutra rejects. Option only between the several meditations is possible, on account of the non-difference of result. For to all meditations on Brahman alike Scripture assigns one and the same result, viz. intuitive knowledge of Brahman, which is of the nature of supreme, unsurpassable bliss. ' He who knows Brahman attains the Highest' (Taitt. Up. II, 1, i), &c. The intuitive knowledge of Brahman constitutes supreme, unsurpassable bliss ; and if such intuition may be reached through one meditation, of what use could other meditations be ? The heavenly world is something limited in respect of place, time, and essential nature, and hence a person desirous of attaining to it may cumulate works in order to take possession of it to a greater extent, and so on. But an analogous proceeding cannot be resorted to with regard to Brahman, which is unlimited in every sense. All medi- tations on Brahman tend to dispel Nescience, which stands in the way of the intuition of Brahman, and thus equally have for their result the attaining to Brahman ; and hence there is option between them. In the case, on the other hand, of those meditations which aim at other results than Brahman, there may either be choice between the several meditations, or they may be cumulated — as one may also do in the case of sacrifices aiming at the attainment of the heavenly world ; — for as those results are not of an infinite nature one may aim at realising them in a higher degree. This the next Sutra declares. 58. But meditations aiming at objects of desire 682 ved anta-s£jtr as. may, according to one's liking, be cumulated or not ; on account of the absence of the former reason. The last clause means — on account of their results not being of an infinite nature. — Here terminates the adhi- kara/za of ' option.' 59. They belong to the constituent members, as the bases.
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.