Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Up. VIII, 12, 3). — Against the contention that the text ' I enter the hall of Pra^apati, the house' shows that he who proceeds on the path be- ginning with light aims at the effected Brahman, the next Sutra argues. 13. And there is no aiming at the effected (Brahman). The aim of the soul is not at Hira^yagarbha, but at the highest Brahman itself. For the complementary sentence ' I am the glorious among Brahma^as ' shows that what the soul aims at is the condition of the universal Self, which has for its antecedent the putting off of all Nescience. For this appears from the preceding text, ' As a horse shakes his hairs and as the moon frees herself from the 75 2 VEDANTA-S^JTRAS. mouth of Rahu ; having shaken off the body may I obtain ■ — the uncreated Brahman-world' declares that the Brah- man-world, which is the thing to be reached, is something non-created, and explicitly states that reaching that world implies freedom from all bondage whatsoever. — It is for these reasons that Gaimini holds that the deities speeding the soul on its way lead on him only who has the highest Brahman for the object of his meditation. Now the Reverend Badaraya^a declares his own view, which constitutes the final conclusion in this matter. 14. Those not depending on symbols he leads, thus Badaraya^a thinks ; there being a defect in both cases ; and he whose thought is that. Badaraya/za is of opinion that the deities lead those not depending on symbols, i.e. all meditating devotees other than those depending on symbols. That is to say, the view that those are led who meditate on the effected Brahman cannot be upheld ; nor is there an exclusive rule that those only should be led on who meditate on the highest Brahman. The truth is that those are led who meditate on the highest Brahman, and also those who medi- tate on the Self (soul) as different from matter (Prakrzti) and having Brahman for its true Self. Souls of both these kinds are led on to Brahman. Those on the other hand whose object of meditation is such things as name and so on, which fall within what is a mere effect of Brahman — such things being viewed either under the aspect of Brah- man, just as some valiant man may be viewed under the aspect of a lion (which view expresses itself in the judgment ' Devadatta is a lion ') ; or by themselves (without reference to Brahman) — all those are not led on to Brahman. Why so? ' Because there is a defect in both cases/ i.e. in both the views rejected by Badaraya/za. The view that those are led who meditate on the effected Brahman is in conflict with texts such as ' having risen from this body and reached the highest light' (Kk. Up. VIII, 12, 3) — for the nature of the fruit depends on the nature of the meditation ; and IV ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 1 4. 753
2The view that those are led who meditate on the effected Brahman is in conflict with texts such as ' having risen from this body and reached the highest light' (Kk. Up. VIII, 12, 3) — for the nature of the fruit depends on the nature of the meditation ; and IV ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 1 4. 753 the view that those only are led to the highest Brahman who meditate on the highest Brahman, would stultify texts such as the one which expressly declares Agni and the rest of the deities to lead on those who possess the knowledge of the five fires (' Those who know this, viz. the Vidya of the five fires, and those who in the forest meditate on faith and austerity go to light — there is a person not human, he leads them to Brahman,' Kh. Up. V, 10). Both these views thus being defective, we adhere to the conclusion that the deities lead on to Brahman the two classes of souls men- tioned above. — This the Sutra further declares in the words * he whose thought is that ' (tatkratu^), the sense of which is that he whose thought is that reaches that, i.e. that the nature of what is reached depends on the nature of the meditation. This argument is founded on the text, * According to what his thought is (yatha-kratu^) in this world, so will he be when he has departed this life ' {Kh. Up. Ill, 14), which implies the principle that what a soul after death attains is according to its thought and medita- tion in this life; and moreover we have direct scriptural statements to the effect that those who possess the know- ledge of the five fires proceed on the path of the Gods, and that those who proceed on that path reach Brahman and do not return. Analogous reasoning proves that medita- tion on the soul as free from matter and having Brahman for its true Self also leads to the highest Brahman. In the case of those, on the other hand, who rely on the symbols (in which they meditatively contemplate Brah- man), beginning with name and terminating with pra/za (' He who meditates on name as Brahman/ Kh, Up. VII, 1 ff.), the meditation is not proved by texts of the two kinds previously mentioned to lead to Brahman ; it rather is contaminated by an element not of the nature of intel- ligence, and hence — according to the principle that the result of a meditation is the same in nature as the medi- tation itself — the soul of the inferior devotee practising such meditation does not proceed by the path of light and does not reach Brahman. — That this distinction is declared by Scripture itself, the next Sutra shows. [48] 3 c 754 VEDANTA-stfTRAS. 15. And Scripture declares the difference.
3— That this distinction is declared by Scripture itself, the next Sutra shows. [48] 3 c 754 VEDANTA-stfTRAS. 15. And Scripture declares the difference. The text, ' He who meditates on name as Brahman, for him there is movement as he wishes as far as name ex- tends/ &c. (Kh. Up. VII, 1 ff.), declares that those who meditate on the series of symbols beginning with name and ending with pra//a attain to a result of limited nature and not depending on any particular path. Those there- fore who meditate on the Intelligent either as mixed with the Non-intelligent or by itself, viewing it either under the aspect of Brahman or as separated from Brahman, are not led on by the conducting deities. On the other hand, it remains a settled conclusion that the deities speed on their way those who meditate on the highest Brahman and on the soul as separated from Prak^'ti and having Brahman for its true Self. — Here terminates the adhikara^a of < the effected.' TV ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, I. 755 FOURTH PADA. 1. (On the soul's) having approached (the highest light) there is manifestation ; (as we infer) from the word ' own/ The Sutras now proceed to consider the kind of superior existence (alrvarya) which the released souls enjoy. — The text says, 'Thus does that serene being, having risen from the body and having approached the highest light, manifest itself in its own form' {Kk. Up. VIII, 12, 3). Does this passage mean that the soul having approached the highest light assumes a new body, to be brought about then, as e. g. the body of a deva ; or that it only manifests its own natural character? — The text must be understood in the former sense, the Purvapakshin holds. For otherwise the scriptural texts referring to Release would declare what is of no advantage to man. We do not observe that its own nature is of any advantage to the soul. In the state of dreamless sleep the body and the sense-organs cease to act, and you may say the pure soul then abides by itself, but in what way does this benefit man ? Nor can it be said that mere cessation of pain constitutes the well-being of the soul which has approached the highest light, and that in this sense manifestation of its own nature may be called Release; for Scripture clearly teaches that the released soul enjoys an infinity of positive bliss, ' One hundred times the bliss of Pra^apati is one bliss of Brahman and of a sage free from desires ' ; ' for having tasted a flavour he experi- ences bliss' (Taitt. Up. II, 7). Nor can it be said that the true nature of the soul is consciousness of the nature of unlimited bliss which, in the Sa^sara condition, is hidden by Nescience and manifests itself only when the soul reaches Brahman. For, as explained previously, intelli- gence which is of the nature of light cannot be hidden ; hiding in that case would be neither more nor less than destruction. Nor can that which is mere light be of the nature of bliss ; for bliss is pleasure, and to be of the nature 3 C 2
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.
1Up. VIII, 12, 3). — Against the contention that the text ' I enter the hall of Pra^apati, the house' shows that he who proceeds on the path be- ginning with light aims at the effected Brahman, the next Sutra argues. 13. And there is no aiming at the effected (Brahman). The aim of the soul is not at Hira^yagarbha, but at the highest Brahman itself. For the complementary sentence ' I am the glorious among Brahma^as ' shows that what the soul aims at is the condition of the universal Self, which has for its antecedent the putting off of all Nescience. For this appears from the preceding text, ' As a horse shakes his hairs and as the moon frees herself from the 75 2 VEDANTA-S^JTRAS. mouth of Rahu ; having shaken off the body may I obtain ■ — the uncreated Brahman-world' declares that the Brah- man-world, which is the thing to be reached, is something non-created, and explicitly states that reaching that world implies freedom from all bondage whatsoever. — It is for these reasons that Gaimini holds that the deities speeding the soul on its way lead on him only who has the highest Brahman for the object of his meditation. Now the Reverend Badaraya^a declares his own view, which constitutes the final conclusion in this matter. 14. Those not depending on symbols he leads, thus Badaraya^a thinks ; there being a defect in both cases ; and he whose thought is that. Badaraya/za is of opinion that the deities lead those not depending on symbols, i.e. all meditating devotees other than those depending on symbols. That is to say, the view that those are led who meditate on the effected Brahman cannot be upheld ; nor is there an exclusive rule that those only should be led on who meditate on the highest Brahman. The truth is that those are led who meditate on the highest Brahman, and also those who medi- tate on the Self (soul) as different from matter (Prakrzti) and having Brahman for its true Self. Souls of both these kinds are led on to Brahman. Those on the other hand whose object of meditation is such things as name and so on, which fall within what is a mere effect of Brahman — such things being viewed either under the aspect of Brah- man, just as some valiant man may be viewed under the aspect of a lion (which view expresses itself in the judgment ' Devadatta is a lion ') ; or by themselves (without reference to Brahman) — all those are not led on to Brahman. Why so? ' Because there is a defect in both cases/ i.e. in both the views rejected by Badaraya/za. The view that those are led who meditate on the effected Brahman is in conflict with texts such as ' having risen from this body and reached the highest light' (Kk. Up. VIII, 12, 3) — for the nature of the fruit depends on the nature of the meditation ; and IV ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 1 4. 753
2The view that those are led who meditate on the effected Brahman is in conflict with texts such as ' having risen from this body and reached the highest light' (Kk. Up. VIII, 12, 3) — for the nature of the fruit depends on the nature of the meditation ; and IV ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 1 4. 753 the view that those only are led to the highest Brahman who meditate on the highest Brahman, would stultify texts such as the one which expressly declares Agni and the rest of the deities to lead on those who possess the knowledge of the five fires (' Those who know this, viz. the Vidya of the five fires, and those who in the forest meditate on faith and austerity go to light — there is a person not human, he leads them to Brahman,' Kh. Up. V, 10). Both these views thus being defective, we adhere to the conclusion that the deities lead on to Brahman the two classes of souls men- tioned above. — This the Sutra further declares in the words * he whose thought is that ' (tatkratu^), the sense of which is that he whose thought is that reaches that, i.e. that the nature of what is reached depends on the nature of the meditation. This argument is founded on the text, * According to what his thought is (yatha-kratu^) in this world, so will he be when he has departed this life ' {Kh. Up. Ill, 14), which implies the principle that what a soul after death attains is according to its thought and medita- tion in this life; and moreover we have direct scriptural statements to the effect that those who possess the know- ledge of the five fires proceed on the path of the Gods, and that those who proceed on that path reach Brahman and do not return. Analogous reasoning proves that medita- tion on the soul as free from matter and having Brahman for its true Self also leads to the highest Brahman. In the case of those, on the other hand, who rely on the symbols (in which they meditatively contemplate Brah- man), beginning with name and terminating with pra/za (' He who meditates on name as Brahman/ Kh, Up. VII, 1 ff.), the meditation is not proved by texts of the two kinds previously mentioned to lead to Brahman ; it rather is contaminated by an element not of the nature of intel- ligence, and hence — according to the principle that the result of a meditation is the same in nature as the medi- tation itself — the soul of the inferior devotee practising such meditation does not proceed by the path of light and does not reach Brahman. — That this distinction is declared by Scripture itself, the next Sutra shows. [48] 3 c 754 VEDANTA-stfTRAS. 15. And Scripture declares the difference.
3— That this distinction is declared by Scripture itself, the next Sutra shows. [48] 3 c 754 VEDANTA-stfTRAS. 15. And Scripture declares the difference. The text, ' He who meditates on name as Brahman, for him there is movement as he wishes as far as name ex- tends/ &c. (Kh. Up. VII, 1 ff.), declares that those who meditate on the series of symbols beginning with name and ending with pra//a attain to a result of limited nature and not depending on any particular path. Those there- fore who meditate on the Intelligent either as mixed with the Non-intelligent or by itself, viewing it either under the aspect of Brahman or as separated from Brahman, are not led on by the conducting deities. On the other hand, it remains a settled conclusion that the deities speed on their way those who meditate on the highest Brahman and on the soul as separated from Prak^'ti and having Brahman for its true Self. — Here terminates the adhikara^a of < the effected.' TV ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, I. 755 FOURTH PADA. 1. (On the soul's) having approached (the highest light) there is manifestation ; (as we infer) from the word ' own/ The Sutras now proceed to consider the kind of superior existence (alrvarya) which the released souls enjoy. — The text says, 'Thus does that serene being, having risen from the body and having approached the highest light, manifest itself in its own form' {Kk. Up. VIII, 12, 3). Does this passage mean that the soul having approached the highest light assumes a new body, to be brought about then, as e. g. the body of a deva ; or that it only manifests its own natural character? — The text must be understood in the former sense, the Purvapakshin holds. For otherwise the scriptural texts referring to Release would declare what is of no advantage to man. We do not observe that its own nature is of any advantage to the soul. In the state of dreamless sleep the body and the sense-organs cease to act, and you may say the pure soul then abides by itself, but in what way does this benefit man ? Nor can it be said that mere cessation of pain constitutes the well-being of the soul which has approached the highest light, and that in this sense manifestation of its own nature may be called Release; for Scripture clearly teaches that the released soul enjoys an infinity of positive bliss, ' One hundred times the bliss of Pra^apati is one bliss of Brahman and of a sage free from desires ' ; ' for having tasted a flavour he experi- ences bliss' (Taitt. Up. II, 7). Nor can it be said that the true nature of the soul is consciousness of the nature of unlimited bliss which, in the Sa^sara condition, is hidden by Nescience and manifests itself only when the soul reaches Brahman. For, as explained previously, intelli- gence which is of the nature of light cannot be hidden ; hiding in that case would be neither more nor less than destruction. Nor can that which is mere light be of the nature of bliss ; for bliss is pleasure, and to be of the nature 3 C 2
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.