Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1a mere additional statement meant further to glorify the result of the sacrifice — of which the ladle made of panza wood is a subordinate instrument). 64. And because (Scripture) shows it. A scriptural text, moreover, shows that the meditation is necessary for, and restricted to, the sacrificial performance. For the text * A Brahman priest who knows this saves the sacrifice, the sacrificer, and all the officiating priests ' — which declares that all priests are saved through the know- ledge of the Brahman — has sense only on the understanding that that knowledge is not restricted to the Udgatrz, and so on (i. e. not to those priests who are engaged in carrying out the details of the sacrifices which are the ' bases ' of the meditations). — The conclusion, therefore, is that those meditations are not restricted to the sacrifices, subordinate members of which serve as their * bases/ — This terminates the adhikara/za of c like the bases/ 686 VEDANTA-SUTRAS. FOURTH PADA. i. The benefit to man results from thence, on account of scriptural statement ; thus Badaraya^a thinks. We have concluded the investigation into the oneness or diverseness of meditations — the result of which is to indicate in which cases the special points mentioned in several medi- tations have to be combined, and in which not. A further point now to be investigated is whether that advantage to the meditating devotee, which is held to accrue to him from the meditation, results from the meditation directly, or from works of which the meditations are subordinate members. — The Reverend Badaraya^a holds the former view. The benefit to man results from thence, i. e. from the meditation, because Scripture declares this to be so. * He who knows Brahman reaches the Highest ' (Taitt. Up. II, i, i) ; 'I know that great Person of sun-like lustre beyond the darkness. A man who knows him truly passes over death ; there is no other path to go' (5vet. Up. Ill, 8) ; 'As the flowing rivers disappear in the sea, losing their name and their form, thus a man who possesses knowledge, freed from name and form, goes to the divine Person who is greater than the great' (Mu. Up. Ill, 2, 8). — Against this view the Purvapakshin raises an objection. 2. On account of (the Self) standing in a com- plementary relation, they are arthav&das, as in other cases ; thus Gaimini opines. What has been said as to Scripture intimating that a beneficial result is realised through the meditations by themselves is untenable. For texts such as ' he who knows Brahman reaches the Highest ' do not teach that the highest aim of man is attained through knowledge ; their purport rather is to inculcate knowledge of Truth on the part of a Self which is the agent in works prescribed. Knowledge, Ill ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 2. 687
2For texts such as ' he who knows Brahman reaches the Highest ' do not teach that the highest aim of man is attained through knowledge ; their purport rather is to inculcate knowledge of Truth on the part of a Self which is the agent in works prescribed. Knowledge, Ill ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 2. 687 therefore, stands in a complementary relation to sacrificial works, in so far as it imparts to the acting Self a certain mystic purification ; and the texts which declare special results of knowledge, therefore, must be taken as mere arthavadas. 'As in the case of other things; so Gaimini thinks,' i.e. as ^aimini holds that in the case of sub- stances, qualities, and so on, the scriptural declaration of results is of the nature of arthavada. — But it has been shown before that the Vedanta-texts represent as the object to be attained, by those desirous of Release, on the basis of the knowledge imparted by them, something dif- ferent from the individual Self engaged in action ; cp. on this point Sti. I, 1, 15 ; I, 3, 5 J I, 2, 3 ; I, 3, 18. And Su. II, 1, 22 and others have refuted the view that Brahman is to be considered as non-different from the personal soul, because in texts such as * thou art that ' it is exhibited in co-ordination with the latter. And other Sutras have proved that Brahman must, on the basis of numerous scriptural texts, be recognised as the inner Self of all things material and immaterial. How then can it be said that the Vedanta-texts merely mean to give instruction as to the true nature of the active individual soul, and that hence all meditation is merely subservient to sacrificial works ? — On the strength of numerous inferential marks, the Purvapakshin replies, which prove that in the Vedanta- texts all meditation is really viewed as subordinate to knowledge, and of the declarations of co-ordination of Brahman and the individual soul (which must be taken to imply that the two are essentially of the same nature), we cannot help forming the conclusion that the real purport of the Vedanta-texts is to tell us of the true nature of the individual soul in so far as different from its body. — But, again it is objected, the agent is connected no less with ordinary worldly works than with works enjoined by the Veda, and hence is not invariably connected with sacrifices (i. e. works of the latter type) ; it cannot, therefore, be maintained, that meditations on the part of the agent necessarily connect themselves with sacrifices in so far as they effect a purification of the sacrifice's mind ! — There 688 VEDANTA-SUTRAS.
3e. works of the latter type) ; it cannot, therefore, be maintained, that meditations on the part of the agent necessarily connect themselves with sacrifices in so far as they effect a purification of the sacrifice's mind ! — There 688 VEDANTA-SUTRAS. is a difference, the Purvapakshin rejoins. Worldly works can proceed also if the agent is non-different from the body ; while an agent is qualified for sacred works only in so far as he is different from the body, and of an eternal non- changing nature. Meditations, therefore, properly con- nect themselves with sacrifices, in so far as they teach that the agent really is of that latter nature. We thus adhere to the conclusion that meditations are constituents of sacri- ficial actions, and hence are of no advantage by themselves. — But what then are those inferential marks which, as you say, fully prove that the Vedanta-texts aim at setting forth the nature of the individual soul ? — To this the next Sutra replies. 3. On account of (such) conduct being seen. It is seen, viz. in Scripture, that those who knew Brahman busied themselves chiefly with sacrifices. — A^vapati Kaikeya had a deep knowledge of the Self ; but when three i?/shis had come to him to receive instruction regarding the Self, he told them ' I am about to perform a sacrifice, Sirs ' (Kk. Up. V, 11). Similarly we learn from Smrz'ti that kanaka and other princes deeply versed in the knowledge of Brahman applied themselves to sacrificial works, ' By works only kanaka and others attained to perfection ' ; * He also, well founded in knowledge, offered many sacri- fices/ And this fact — that those who know Brahman apply themselves to works chiefly — shows that knowledge (or meditation) has no independent value, but serves to set forth the true nature of the active Self, and thus is sub- ordinate to work. — An even more direct proof is set forth in the next Sutra. 4. On account of direct scriptural statement. Scripture itself directly declares knowledge to be subor- dinate to works, ' whatever he does with knowledge, with faith, with the Upanishad, that is more vigorous.' Nor can it be said that this text refers, on the ground of leading subject-matter (prakara^a), to the Udgitha only; for direct scriptural statement (iTUti) is stronger than subject-matter, Ill ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 8, 689 and the words { whatever he does with knowledge ' clearly refer to knowledge in general. 5. On account of the taking hold together. The text * then both knowledge and work take hold of him ' (Br/. Up. IV, 4, 2) shows that knowledge and work go together, and this going together is possible only if, in the manner stated, knowledge is subordinate to work. 6. On account of injunction for such a one.
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.
1a mere additional statement meant further to glorify the result of the sacrifice — of which the ladle made of panza wood is a subordinate instrument). 64. And because (Scripture) shows it. A scriptural text, moreover, shows that the meditation is necessary for, and restricted to, the sacrificial performance. For the text * A Brahman priest who knows this saves the sacrifice, the sacrificer, and all the officiating priests ' — which declares that all priests are saved through the know- ledge of the Brahman — has sense only on the understanding that that knowledge is not restricted to the Udgatrz, and so on (i. e. not to those priests who are engaged in carrying out the details of the sacrifices which are the ' bases ' of the meditations). — The conclusion, therefore, is that those meditations are not restricted to the sacrifices, subordinate members of which serve as their * bases/ — This terminates the adhikara/za of c like the bases/ 686 VEDANTA-SUTRAS. FOURTH PADA. i. The benefit to man results from thence, on account of scriptural statement ; thus Badaraya^a thinks. We have concluded the investigation into the oneness or diverseness of meditations — the result of which is to indicate in which cases the special points mentioned in several medi- tations have to be combined, and in which not. A further point now to be investigated is whether that advantage to the meditating devotee, which is held to accrue to him from the meditation, results from the meditation directly, or from works of which the meditations are subordinate members. — The Reverend Badaraya^a holds the former view. The benefit to man results from thence, i. e. from the meditation, because Scripture declares this to be so. * He who knows Brahman reaches the Highest ' (Taitt. Up. II, i, i) ; 'I know that great Person of sun-like lustre beyond the darkness. A man who knows him truly passes over death ; there is no other path to go' (5vet. Up. Ill, 8) ; 'As the flowing rivers disappear in the sea, losing their name and their form, thus a man who possesses knowledge, freed from name and form, goes to the divine Person who is greater than the great' (Mu. Up. Ill, 2, 8). — Against this view the Purvapakshin raises an objection. 2. On account of (the Self) standing in a com- plementary relation, they are arthav&das, as in other cases ; thus Gaimini opines. What has been said as to Scripture intimating that a beneficial result is realised through the meditations by themselves is untenable. For texts such as ' he who knows Brahman reaches the Highest ' do not teach that the highest aim of man is attained through knowledge ; their purport rather is to inculcate knowledge of Truth on the part of a Self which is the agent in works prescribed. Knowledge, Ill ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 2. 687
2For texts such as ' he who knows Brahman reaches the Highest ' do not teach that the highest aim of man is attained through knowledge ; their purport rather is to inculcate knowledge of Truth on the part of a Self which is the agent in works prescribed. Knowledge, Ill ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 2. 687 therefore, stands in a complementary relation to sacrificial works, in so far as it imparts to the acting Self a certain mystic purification ; and the texts which declare special results of knowledge, therefore, must be taken as mere arthavadas. 'As in the case of other things; so Gaimini thinks,' i.e. as ^aimini holds that in the case of sub- stances, qualities, and so on, the scriptural declaration of results is of the nature of arthavada. — But it has been shown before that the Vedanta-texts represent as the object to be attained, by those desirous of Release, on the basis of the knowledge imparted by them, something dif- ferent from the individual Self engaged in action ; cp. on this point Sti. I, 1, 15 ; I, 3, 5 J I, 2, 3 ; I, 3, 18. And Su. II, 1, 22 and others have refuted the view that Brahman is to be considered as non-different from the personal soul, because in texts such as * thou art that ' it is exhibited in co-ordination with the latter. And other Sutras have proved that Brahman must, on the basis of numerous scriptural texts, be recognised as the inner Self of all things material and immaterial. How then can it be said that the Vedanta-texts merely mean to give instruction as to the true nature of the active individual soul, and that hence all meditation is merely subservient to sacrificial works ? — On the strength of numerous inferential marks, the Purvapakshin replies, which prove that in the Vedanta- texts all meditation is really viewed as subordinate to knowledge, and of the declarations of co-ordination of Brahman and the individual soul (which must be taken to imply that the two are essentially of the same nature), we cannot help forming the conclusion that the real purport of the Vedanta-texts is to tell us of the true nature of the individual soul in so far as different from its body. — But, again it is objected, the agent is connected no less with ordinary worldly works than with works enjoined by the Veda, and hence is not invariably connected with sacrifices (i. e. works of the latter type) ; it cannot, therefore, be maintained, that meditations on the part of the agent necessarily connect themselves with sacrifices in so far as they effect a purification of the sacrifice's mind ! — There 688 VEDANTA-SUTRAS.
3e. works of the latter type) ; it cannot, therefore, be maintained, that meditations on the part of the agent necessarily connect themselves with sacrifices in so far as they effect a purification of the sacrifice's mind ! — There 688 VEDANTA-SUTRAS. is a difference, the Purvapakshin rejoins. Worldly works can proceed also if the agent is non-different from the body ; while an agent is qualified for sacred works only in so far as he is different from the body, and of an eternal non- changing nature. Meditations, therefore, properly con- nect themselves with sacrifices, in so far as they teach that the agent really is of that latter nature. We thus adhere to the conclusion that meditations are constituents of sacri- ficial actions, and hence are of no advantage by themselves. — But what then are those inferential marks which, as you say, fully prove that the Vedanta-texts aim at setting forth the nature of the individual soul ? — To this the next Sutra replies. 3. On account of (such) conduct being seen. It is seen, viz. in Scripture, that those who knew Brahman busied themselves chiefly with sacrifices. — A^vapati Kaikeya had a deep knowledge of the Self ; but when three i?/shis had come to him to receive instruction regarding the Self, he told them ' I am about to perform a sacrifice, Sirs ' (Kk. Up. V, 11). Similarly we learn from Smrz'ti that kanaka and other princes deeply versed in the knowledge of Brahman applied themselves to sacrificial works, ' By works only kanaka and others attained to perfection ' ; * He also, well founded in knowledge, offered many sacri- fices/ And this fact — that those who know Brahman apply themselves to works chiefly — shows that knowledge (or meditation) has no independent value, but serves to set forth the true nature of the active Self, and thus is sub- ordinate to work. — An even more direct proof is set forth in the next Sutra. 4. On account of direct scriptural statement. Scripture itself directly declares knowledge to be subor- dinate to works, ' whatever he does with knowledge, with faith, with the Upanishad, that is more vigorous.' Nor can it be said that this text refers, on the ground of leading subject-matter (prakara^a), to the Udgitha only; for direct scriptural statement (iTUti) is stronger than subject-matter, Ill ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 8, 689 and the words { whatever he does with knowledge ' clearly refer to knowledge in general. 5. On account of the taking hold together. The text * then both knowledge and work take hold of him ' (Br/. Up. IV, 4, 2) shows that knowledge and work go together, and this going together is possible only if, in the manner stated, knowledge is subordinate to work. 6. On account of injunction for such a one.
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.