Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1' Maya/ in such passages, really denotes that which produces various wonderful effects, and it is in this sense that Praknti is called Maya. This appears from the passage (Svet Up. IV, 9) ' From that the " mayin " creates 126 VEDANTA-SUTRAS. all this, and in that the other one is bound up by maya.' For this text declares that Prakrzti — there called Maya — produces manifold wonderful creations, and the highest Person is there called 'm&yin' because he possesses that power of maya ; not on account of any ignorance or nescience on his part. The latter part of the text expressly says that (not the Lord but) another one, i. e. the individual soul is bound up by maya ; and therewith agrees another text, viz. 'When the soul slumbering in beginningless Maya awakes ' (Gauaf. Ka.). Again, in the text ' Indra goes multiform through the Mayas' [Ri. Sa^h. VI, 47, 18), the manifold powers of Indra are spoken of, and with this agrees what the next verse says, che shines greatly as Tvash/rz ' : for an unreal being does not shine. And where the text says ' my Mayd is hard to overcome ' (Bha. Gi. VII, 14), the qualification given there to Maya, viz. ' consisting of the gu/^as/ shows that what is meant is Prakrzti consisting of the three gu/zas. — All this shows that Scripture does not teach the existence of a { principle called Nescience, not to be defined either as that which is or that which is not.5 Nor again is such Nescience to be assumed for the reason that otherwise the scriptural statements of the unity of all being would be unmeaning. For if the text ' Thou art that,5 be viewed as teaching the unity of the individual soul and the highest Self, there is certainly no reason, founded on unmeaningness, to ascribe to Brahman, intimated by the word ' that ' — which is all-knowing, &c. — Nescience, which is contradictory to Brahman's nature. — Itihasa and Pura;za also do not anywhere teach that to Brahman there belongs Nescience. But, an objection is raised, the Vishnu Pura;za, in the .yloka, ' The stars are Vish/zu,' &c. (II, 12, 38), first refers to Brahman as one only, and comprising all things within itself ; thereupon states in the next .rioka that this entire world, with all its distinctions of hills, oceans, &c, is sprung out of the ' a^yz&na ' of Brahman, which in itself is pure '^/zana,' i. e. knowledge ; thereupon confirms the view of the world having sprung from a^/zana by referring to the fact that Brahman, while abiding in its own nature, is free I ADHYAYA, I PADA, I. I 27
2e. knowledge ; thereupon confirms the view of the world having sprung from a^/zana by referring to the fact that Brahman, while abiding in its own nature, is free I ADHYAYA, I PADA, I. I 27 from all difference (si. 40) ; proves in the next two jlokas the non-reality of plurality by a consideration of the things of this world ; sums up, in the following jloka, the un- reality of all that is different from Brahman ; then (43) explains that action is the root of that a^/zana which causes us to view the one uniform Brahman as manifold ; there- upon declares the intelligence constituting Brahman's nature to be free from all distinction and imperfection (44) ; and finally teaches (45) that Brahman so constituted, alone is truly real, while the so-called reality of the world is merely conventional. — This is not, we reply, a true repre- sentation of the drift of the passage. The passage at the outset states that, in addition to the detailed description of the world given before, there will now be given a succinct account of another aspect of the world not yet touched upon. This account has to be understood as follows. Of this universe, comprising intelligent and non-intelligent beings, the intelligent part— which is not to be reached by mind and speech, to be known in its essential nature by the Self only, and, owing to its purely intelligential character, not touched by the differences due to Prakrzti— is, owing to its imperishable nature, denoted as that which is ; while the non-intelligent, material; part which, in consequence of the actions of the intelligent beings undergoes manifold changes, and thus is perishable, is denoted as that which is not. Both parts, however, form the body of Vasudeva, i.e. Brahman, and hence have Brahman for their Self. The text therefore says (37), ' From the waters which form the body of Vishnu was produced the lotus-shaped earth, with its seas and mountains ' : what is meant is that the entire Brahma-egg which has arisen from wTater consti- tutes the body of which Vishnu is the soul. This relation of soul and body forms the basis of the statements of co-ordination made in the next .yloka (38), ' The stars are Vishz/u,' &c. ; the same relation had been already declared in numerous previous passages of the Pura/za (' all this is the body of Hari,' &c). All things in the world, whether they are or are not, are Vishnu's body, and he is their soul. Of the next ^loka, ' Because the Lord has knowledge for his 128 VEDANTA-S<JTR AS.
3All things in the world, whether they are or are not, are Vishnu's body, and he is their soul. Of the next ^loka, ' Because the Lord has knowledge for his 128 VEDANTA-S<JTR AS. essential nature/ the meaning is ' Because of the Lord who abides as the Self of all individual souls, the essential nature is knowledge only — while bodies divine, human, &c., have no part in it — , therefore all non-intelligent things, bodies human and divine, hills, oceans, &c, spring from his knowledge, i. e. have their root in the actions springing from the volitions of men, gods, &c, in whose various forms the fundamental intelligence manifests itself. And since non-intelligent matter is subject to changes corres- ponding to the actions of the individual souls, it may be called ' non-being,' while the souls are ' being.' — This the next j-loka further explains ' when knowledge is pure,' &c. The meaning is ' when the works which are the cause of the distinction of things are destroyed, then all the dis- tinctions of bodies, human or divine, hills, oceans, &c. — all which are objects of fruition for the different individual souls — pass away.' Non-intelligent matter, as entering into various states of a non-permanent nature, is called ' non-being ' ; while souls, the nature of which consists in permanent knowledge, are called ' being.' On this differ- ence the next ^loka insists (41). We say cit is' of that thing which is of a permanently uniform nature, not con- nected with the idea of beginning, middle and end, and which hence never becomes the object of the notion of non-existence ; while we say ' it is not ' of non-intelligent matter which constantly passes over into different states, each later state being out of connexion with the earlier state. The constant changes to which non- intelligent matter is liable are illustrated in the next doka, e Earth is made into a jar,' &c. And for this reason, the subsequent ^loka goes on to say that there is nothing but knowledge. This fundamental knowledge or intelligence is, however, variously connected with manifold individual forms of being due to karman, and hence the text adds : ' The one intelligence is in many ways connected with beings whose minds differ, owing to the difference of their own acts y (si. 43, second half). Intelligence, pure, free from stain and grief, &c, which constitutes the intelligent element of the world, and unintelligent matter — these two together constitute the I ADHYAYA, I PADA, T. I2g world, and the world is the body of Vasudeva ; such is the purport of .yloka 44. — The next .rioka sums up the whole doctrine ; the words ' true and untrue ' there denote what in the preceding verses had been called ' being ' and ' non-being ' ; the second half of the jloka refers to the practical plurality of the world as due to karman.
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' Maya/ in such passages, really denotes that which produces various wonderful effects, and it is in this sense that Praknti is called Maya. This appears from the passage (Svet Up. IV, 9) ' From that the " mayin " creates 126 VEDANTA-SUTRAS. all this, and in that the other one is bound up by maya.' For this text declares that Prakrzti — there called Maya — produces manifold wonderful creations, and the highest Person is there called 'm&yin' because he possesses that power of maya ; not on account of any ignorance or nescience on his part. The latter part of the text expressly says that (not the Lord but) another one, i. e. the individual soul is bound up by maya ; and therewith agrees another text, viz. 'When the soul slumbering in beginningless Maya awakes ' (Gauaf. Ka.). Again, in the text ' Indra goes multiform through the Mayas' [Ri. Sa^h. VI, 47, 18), the manifold powers of Indra are spoken of, and with this agrees what the next verse says, che shines greatly as Tvash/rz ' : for an unreal being does not shine. And where the text says ' my Mayd is hard to overcome ' (Bha. Gi. VII, 14), the qualification given there to Maya, viz. ' consisting of the gu/^as/ shows that what is meant is Prakrzti consisting of the three gu/zas. — All this shows that Scripture does not teach the existence of a { principle called Nescience, not to be defined either as that which is or that which is not.5 Nor again is such Nescience to be assumed for the reason that otherwise the scriptural statements of the unity of all being would be unmeaning. For if the text ' Thou art that,5 be viewed as teaching the unity of the individual soul and the highest Self, there is certainly no reason, founded on unmeaningness, to ascribe to Brahman, intimated by the word ' that ' — which is all-knowing, &c. — Nescience, which is contradictory to Brahman's nature. — Itihasa and Pura;za also do not anywhere teach that to Brahman there belongs Nescience. But, an objection is raised, the Vishnu Pura;za, in the .yloka, ' The stars are Vish/zu,' &c. (II, 12, 38), first refers to Brahman as one only, and comprising all things within itself ; thereupon states in the next .rioka that this entire world, with all its distinctions of hills, oceans, &c, is sprung out of the ' a^yz&na ' of Brahman, which in itself is pure '^/zana,' i. e. knowledge ; thereupon confirms the view of the world having sprung from a^/zana by referring to the fact that Brahman, while abiding in its own nature, is free I ADHYAYA, I PADA, I. I 27
2e. knowledge ; thereupon confirms the view of the world having sprung from a^/zana by referring to the fact that Brahman, while abiding in its own nature, is free I ADHYAYA, I PADA, I. I 27 from all difference (si. 40) ; proves in the next two jlokas the non-reality of plurality by a consideration of the things of this world ; sums up, in the following jloka, the un- reality of all that is different from Brahman ; then (43) explains that action is the root of that a^/zana which causes us to view the one uniform Brahman as manifold ; there- upon declares the intelligence constituting Brahman's nature to be free from all distinction and imperfection (44) ; and finally teaches (45) that Brahman so constituted, alone is truly real, while the so-called reality of the world is merely conventional. — This is not, we reply, a true repre- sentation of the drift of the passage. The passage at the outset states that, in addition to the detailed description of the world given before, there will now be given a succinct account of another aspect of the world not yet touched upon. This account has to be understood as follows. Of this universe, comprising intelligent and non-intelligent beings, the intelligent part— which is not to be reached by mind and speech, to be known in its essential nature by the Self only, and, owing to its purely intelligential character, not touched by the differences due to Prakrzti— is, owing to its imperishable nature, denoted as that which is ; while the non-intelligent, material; part which, in consequence of the actions of the intelligent beings undergoes manifold changes, and thus is perishable, is denoted as that which is not. Both parts, however, form the body of Vasudeva, i.e. Brahman, and hence have Brahman for their Self. The text therefore says (37), ' From the waters which form the body of Vishnu was produced the lotus-shaped earth, with its seas and mountains ' : what is meant is that the entire Brahma-egg which has arisen from wTater consti- tutes the body of which Vishnu is the soul. This relation of soul and body forms the basis of the statements of co-ordination made in the next .yloka (38), ' The stars are Vishz/u,' &c. ; the same relation had been already declared in numerous previous passages of the Pura/za (' all this is the body of Hari,' &c). All things in the world, whether they are or are not, are Vishnu's body, and he is their soul. Of the next ^loka, ' Because the Lord has knowledge for his 128 VEDANTA-S<JTR AS.
3All things in the world, whether they are or are not, are Vishnu's body, and he is their soul. Of the next ^loka, ' Because the Lord has knowledge for his 128 VEDANTA-S<JTR AS. essential nature/ the meaning is ' Because of the Lord who abides as the Self of all individual souls, the essential nature is knowledge only — while bodies divine, human, &c., have no part in it — , therefore all non-intelligent things, bodies human and divine, hills, oceans, &c, spring from his knowledge, i. e. have their root in the actions springing from the volitions of men, gods, &c, in whose various forms the fundamental intelligence manifests itself. And since non-intelligent matter is subject to changes corres- ponding to the actions of the individual souls, it may be called ' non-being,' while the souls are ' being.' — This the next j-loka further explains ' when knowledge is pure,' &c. The meaning is ' when the works which are the cause of the distinction of things are destroyed, then all the dis- tinctions of bodies, human or divine, hills, oceans, &c. — all which are objects of fruition for the different individual souls — pass away.' Non-intelligent matter, as entering into various states of a non-permanent nature, is called ' non-being ' ; while souls, the nature of which consists in permanent knowledge, are called ' being.' On this differ- ence the next ^loka insists (41). We say cit is' of that thing which is of a permanently uniform nature, not con- nected with the idea of beginning, middle and end, and which hence never becomes the object of the notion of non-existence ; while we say ' it is not ' of non-intelligent matter which constantly passes over into different states, each later state being out of connexion with the earlier state. The constant changes to which non- intelligent matter is liable are illustrated in the next doka, e Earth is made into a jar,' &c. And for this reason, the subsequent ^loka goes on to say that there is nothing but knowledge. This fundamental knowledge or intelligence is, however, variously connected with manifold individual forms of being due to karman, and hence the text adds : ' The one intelligence is in many ways connected with beings whose minds differ, owing to the difference of their own acts y (si. 43, second half). Intelligence, pure, free from stain and grief, &c, which constitutes the intelligent element of the world, and unintelligent matter — these two together constitute the I ADHYAYA, I PADA, T. I2g world, and the world is the body of Vasudeva ; such is the purport of .yloka 44. — The next .rioka sums up the whole doctrine ; the words ' true and untrue ' there denote what in the preceding verses had been called ' being ' and ' non-being ' ; the second half of the jloka refers to the practical plurality of the world as due to karman.
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.