Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1e. abounds in food. And this may be its sense in ' anandamaya ' also ! — Not so, the Purvapakshin replies. In * annamaya,' in an earlier part of the chapter, -maya has the sense of ' made of/ ' consisting I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 1 4. 23 1 of ' ; and for the sake of consistency, we must hence ascribe the same sense to it in ' anandamaya.' And even if, in the latter word, it denoted abundance, this would not prove that the anandamaya is other than the individual soul. For if we say that a Self ' abounds ' in bliss, this implies that with all this bliss there is mixed some small part of pain ; and to be ' mixed with pain ' is what consti- tutes the character of the individual soul. It is therefore proper to assume, in agreement with its previous use, that ' Anandamaya ' means ' consisting of bliss.' In ordinary speech as well as in Vedic language (cp. common words such as ' mnnmaya,' ' hira/zmaya ' ; and Vedic clauses such as ' par/zamayi ^uhM' ) -maya as a rule means 'consisting of,' and this meaning hence presents itself to the mind first. And the individual soul may be denoted as ' made of bliss ' ; for in itself it is of the essence of bliss, and its Sa^sara state therefore is something ' made of bliss/ The conclu- sion therefore is that, owing to the received meaning of -maya, the anandamaya is none other than the individual soul. — To this prima facie view the next Sutra refers and refutes it. 14. If, on account of its being a word denoting an effect, (dnandamaya be said) not (to denote the highest Self); (we say) no, on account of abundance. We deny the conclusion of the Purvapakshin, on the ground of there being abundance of bliss in the highest Brahman, and ' abundance ' being one of the possible meanings of -maya. — Since bliss such as described in the TaittUp. — bliss which is reached by successively multiplying by hundred all inferior kinds of bliss — cannot belong to the individual soul, we conclude that it belongs to Brahman ; and as Brahman cannot be an effect, and as -maya may have the sense of ' abounding in/ we conclude that the anandamaya is Brahman itself; inner contradiction obliging us to set aside that sense of -maya which is recommended by regard to * consequence ' and frequency of usage. The regard for consistency, moreover, already has to be set aside in the case of the * pra^amaya ' ; for in that term 232 VEDANTA-S^TRAS.
2The regard for consistency, moreover, already has to be set aside in the case of the * pra^amaya ' ; for in that term 232 VEDANTA-S^TRAS. -maya cannot denote c made of.' The * pra/zamaya ' Self can only be called by that name in so far as air with its five modifications has (among others) the modification called pra^a, i. e. breathing out, or because among the five modifications or functions of air pra^a is the ' abounding/ i. e. prevailing one. — Nor can it be truly said that -maya is but rarely used in the sense of 'abounding in': expres- sions such as { a sacrifice abounding in food ' (annamaya), ' a procession with many carriages ' (j-aka/amayi), are by no means uncommon. — Nor can we admit that to call some- thing * abounding in bliss ' implies the presence of some pain. For 'abundance' precludes paucity on the part of that which is said to abound, but does not imply the presence of what is contrary. The presence or absence of what is contrary has to be ascertained by other means of proof ; and in our case we do ascertain the absence of what is contrary to bliss by such means, viz. the clause 'free from evil/ &c. Abundance of bliss on the part of Brahman certainly implies a relation to paucity on the part of some other bliss ; and in accordance with this demand the text says 'That is one measure of human bliss,' &c. (II, 8, i). The bliss of Brahman is of measureless abundance, com- pared to the bliss of the individual soul. — Nor can it be maintained that the individual soul may be viewed as being an effect of bliss. For that a soul whose essential nature is knowledge and bliss should in any way be changed into something else, as a lump of clay is made into a pot, is an assumption contradicted by all scripture, sacred tradition, and reasoning. That in the Sa^sara state the soul's bliss and knowledge are contracted owing to karman will be shown later on. — The Self of bliss therefore is other than the individual soul ; it is Brahman itself. A further reason for this conclusion is supplied by the next Sutra. 15. And because he is declared to be the cause of that. ' For who could breathe, who could breathe forth, if that bliss existed not in the ether ? He alone causes bliss ' I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 1 6. 233 (Taitt. Up. II, 7). This means — He alone is the cause of bliss on the part of the individual souls. — Some one is here designated as the cause of bliss enjoyed by the souls ; and we thus conclude that the causer of bliss, who must be other than the souls to which bliss is imparted, is the highest Self abounding in bliss. In the passage quoted the term c bliss ' denotes him who abounds in bliss, as will be shown later on. — A further reason is given in the next Sutra. 16. And because that (Brahman) which is referred to in the mantra is declared (to be the anandamaya).
3In the passage quoted the term c bliss ' denotes him who abounds in bliss, as will be shown later on. — A further reason is given in the next Sutra. 16. And because that (Brahman) which is referred to in the mantra is declared (to be the anandamaya). That Brahman which is described in the mantra, ' True Being, knowledge, infinite is Brahman/ is proclaimed as the Self abounding in bliss. And that Brahman is the highest Brahman, other than the individual soul ; for the passage 'He who knows Brahman attains the Highest1 refers to Brahman as something to be obtained by the individual soul, and the words ' On this the following verse is recorded ' show that the verse is related to that same Brahman. The mantra thus is meant to render clear the meaning of the Brahma^a passage. Now the Brahman to be reached by the meditating Devotee must be something different from him. The same point is rendered clear by all the following Brahma/za passages and mantras : ' from that same Self sprang ether/ and so on. The Self abounding in bliss therefore is other than the individual soul. Here an opponent argues as follows : — We indeed must acknowledge that the object to be reached is something different from the meditating Devotee ; but the fact is that the Brahman described in the mantra does not substantially differ from the individual soul ; that Brahman is nothing but the soul of the Devotee in its pure state, consisting of mere non-differenced intelligence, free from all shade of Nescience. To this pure condition it is reduced in the mantra describing it as true Being, knowledge, infinite. A subsequent passage, ' that from which all speech, with the mind, turns away, unable to reach it ' (II, 9), expresses this 234 vedanta-sOtras. same state of non-differentiation, describing it as lying beyond mind and speech. It is this therefore to which the mantra refers, and the Self of bliss is identical with it. — To this view the next Sutra replies, 17. Not the other, on account of impossibility.
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.
1e. abounds in food. And this may be its sense in ' anandamaya ' also ! — Not so, the Purvapakshin replies. In * annamaya,' in an earlier part of the chapter, -maya has the sense of ' made of/ ' consisting I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 1 4. 23 1 of ' ; and for the sake of consistency, we must hence ascribe the same sense to it in ' anandamaya.' And even if, in the latter word, it denoted abundance, this would not prove that the anandamaya is other than the individual soul. For if we say that a Self ' abounds ' in bliss, this implies that with all this bliss there is mixed some small part of pain ; and to be ' mixed with pain ' is what consti- tutes the character of the individual soul. It is therefore proper to assume, in agreement with its previous use, that ' Anandamaya ' means ' consisting of bliss.' In ordinary speech as well as in Vedic language (cp. common words such as ' mnnmaya,' ' hira/zmaya ' ; and Vedic clauses such as ' par/zamayi ^uhM' ) -maya as a rule means 'consisting of,' and this meaning hence presents itself to the mind first. And the individual soul may be denoted as ' made of bliss ' ; for in itself it is of the essence of bliss, and its Sa^sara state therefore is something ' made of bliss/ The conclu- sion therefore is that, owing to the received meaning of -maya, the anandamaya is none other than the individual soul. — To this prima facie view the next Sutra refers and refutes it. 14. If, on account of its being a word denoting an effect, (dnandamaya be said) not (to denote the highest Self); (we say) no, on account of abundance. We deny the conclusion of the Purvapakshin, on the ground of there being abundance of bliss in the highest Brahman, and ' abundance ' being one of the possible meanings of -maya. — Since bliss such as described in the TaittUp. — bliss which is reached by successively multiplying by hundred all inferior kinds of bliss — cannot belong to the individual soul, we conclude that it belongs to Brahman ; and as Brahman cannot be an effect, and as -maya may have the sense of ' abounding in/ we conclude that the anandamaya is Brahman itself; inner contradiction obliging us to set aside that sense of -maya which is recommended by regard to * consequence ' and frequency of usage. The regard for consistency, moreover, already has to be set aside in the case of the * pra^amaya ' ; for in that term 232 VEDANTA-S^TRAS.
2The regard for consistency, moreover, already has to be set aside in the case of the * pra^amaya ' ; for in that term 232 VEDANTA-S^TRAS. -maya cannot denote c made of.' The * pra/zamaya ' Self can only be called by that name in so far as air with its five modifications has (among others) the modification called pra^a, i. e. breathing out, or because among the five modifications or functions of air pra^a is the ' abounding/ i. e. prevailing one. — Nor can it be truly said that -maya is but rarely used in the sense of 'abounding in': expres- sions such as { a sacrifice abounding in food ' (annamaya), ' a procession with many carriages ' (j-aka/amayi), are by no means uncommon. — Nor can we admit that to call some- thing * abounding in bliss ' implies the presence of some pain. For 'abundance' precludes paucity on the part of that which is said to abound, but does not imply the presence of what is contrary. The presence or absence of what is contrary has to be ascertained by other means of proof ; and in our case we do ascertain the absence of what is contrary to bliss by such means, viz. the clause 'free from evil/ &c. Abundance of bliss on the part of Brahman certainly implies a relation to paucity on the part of some other bliss ; and in accordance with this demand the text says 'That is one measure of human bliss,' &c. (II, 8, i). The bliss of Brahman is of measureless abundance, com- pared to the bliss of the individual soul. — Nor can it be maintained that the individual soul may be viewed as being an effect of bliss. For that a soul whose essential nature is knowledge and bliss should in any way be changed into something else, as a lump of clay is made into a pot, is an assumption contradicted by all scripture, sacred tradition, and reasoning. That in the Sa^sara state the soul's bliss and knowledge are contracted owing to karman will be shown later on. — The Self of bliss therefore is other than the individual soul ; it is Brahman itself. A further reason for this conclusion is supplied by the next Sutra. 15. And because he is declared to be the cause of that. ' For who could breathe, who could breathe forth, if that bliss existed not in the ether ? He alone causes bliss ' I ADHYAYA, I PADA, 1 6. 233 (Taitt. Up. II, 7). This means — He alone is the cause of bliss on the part of the individual souls. — Some one is here designated as the cause of bliss enjoyed by the souls ; and we thus conclude that the causer of bliss, who must be other than the souls to which bliss is imparted, is the highest Self abounding in bliss. In the passage quoted the term c bliss ' denotes him who abounds in bliss, as will be shown later on. — A further reason is given in the next Sutra. 16. And because that (Brahman) which is referred to in the mantra is declared (to be the anandamaya).
3In the passage quoted the term c bliss ' denotes him who abounds in bliss, as will be shown later on. — A further reason is given in the next Sutra. 16. And because that (Brahman) which is referred to in the mantra is declared (to be the anandamaya). That Brahman which is described in the mantra, ' True Being, knowledge, infinite is Brahman/ is proclaimed as the Self abounding in bliss. And that Brahman is the highest Brahman, other than the individual soul ; for the passage 'He who knows Brahman attains the Highest1 refers to Brahman as something to be obtained by the individual soul, and the words ' On this the following verse is recorded ' show that the verse is related to that same Brahman. The mantra thus is meant to render clear the meaning of the Brahma^a passage. Now the Brahman to be reached by the meditating Devotee must be something different from him. The same point is rendered clear by all the following Brahma/za passages and mantras : ' from that same Self sprang ether/ and so on. The Self abounding in bliss therefore is other than the individual soul. Here an opponent argues as follows : — We indeed must acknowledge that the object to be reached is something different from the meditating Devotee ; but the fact is that the Brahman described in the mantra does not substantially differ from the individual soul ; that Brahman is nothing but the soul of the Devotee in its pure state, consisting of mere non-differenced intelligence, free from all shade of Nescience. To this pure condition it is reduced in the mantra describing it as true Being, knowledge, infinite. A subsequent passage, ' that from which all speech, with the mind, turns away, unable to reach it ' (II, 9), expresses this 234 vedanta-sOtras. same state of non-differentiation, describing it as lying beyond mind and speech. It is this therefore to which the mantra refers, and the Self of bliss is identical with it. — To this view the next Sutra replies, 17. Not the other, on account of impossibility.
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.