Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1the highest Self free from all evil, Naraya^a. — Here terminates the adhikara/za of ' the internal Ruler.' 22. That which possesses the qualities of in- visibility, &c, on account of the declaration of attributes. The Atharvamkas read in their text, ' The higher know- ledge is that by which that Indestructible is apprehended. That which is invisible, unseizable, without origin and qualities, &c, that it is which the wise regard as the source of all beings ' ; and further on, ' That which is higher than the high Imperishable' (Mu. Up. I, i, 5, 6; II, 1, 2). The doubt here arises whether the Indestructible, possessing the qualities of imperceptibility, &c, and that which is higher than the Indestructible, should be taken to denote the Pra- dhana and the soul of the Sankhyas, or whether both denote the highest Self. — The Purvapakshin maintains the former alternative. For, he says, while in the text last discussed there is mentioned a special attribute of an intelligent being, viz. in the clause ' unseen but a seer/ no similar attribute is stated in the former of the two texts under discussion, and the latter text clearly describes the collective individual soul, which is higher than the imperishable Pradhana, which itself is higher than all its effects. The reasons for this decision are as follows : — Colour and so on reside in the gross forms of non-intelligent matter, viz. the elements, earth, and so on. When, therefore, visibility and so on are expressly negatived, such negation suggests a non-sentient thing cognate to earth, &c, but of a subtle kind, and such a thing is no other than the Pradhana. And as something higher than this Pradhana there are known the collective souls only, under whose guidance the Pradhana gives birth to all its effects, from the so-called Mahat downwards I ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 23. 283 to individual things. This interpretation is confirmed by the comparisons set forth in the next j-loka, 'As the spider sends forth and draws in its threads, as plants spring from the earth, as hair grows on the head and body of the living man, thus does everything arise here from the Inde- structible.' The section therefore is concerned only with the Pradhana and the individual soul.
2This prima facie view is set aside by the Sutra. That which possesses invisibility and the other qualities stated in the text, and that which is higher than the high In- destructible, is no other than the highest Self. For the text declares attributes which belong to the highest Self only, viz. in I, 1, 9, ' He who knows all, cognises all/ &c. Let us shortly consider the connexion of the text. The passage beginning 'the higher knowledge is that by which the Indestructible is apprehended ' declares an inde- structible being possessing the attributes of invisibility and so on. The clause 'everything arises here from the Indestructible ' next declares that from that being all things originate. Next the .yloka, ' He who knows all and cognises all/ predicates of that Indestructible which is the source of all beings, omniscience, and similar qualities. And finally the text, ' That which is higher than the high Indestructible/ characterises that same being — which previously had been called invisible, the source of beings, indestructible, all- knowing, &c. — as the highest of all. Hence it is evident that in the text ' higher than the high Indestructible ' the term 'Indestructible' does not denote the invisible, &c. Indestructible, which is the chief topic of the entire section ; for there can of course be nothing higher than that which, as being all-knowing, the source of all, &c, is itself higher than anything else. The ' Indestructible ' in that text there- fore denotes the elements in their subtle condition. 23. Not the two others, on account of distinction and statement of difference. The section distinguishes the indestructible being, which is the source of all, &c, from the Pradhana as well as the individual soul, in so far, namely, as it undertakes to prove 284 VEDANTA-S^TRAS.
323. Not the two others, on account of distinction and statement of difference. The section distinguishes the indestructible being, which is the source of all, &c, from the Pradhana as well as the individual soul, in so far, namely, as it undertakes to prove 284 VEDANTA-S^TRAS. that by the cognition of one thing everything is known; and it moreover, in passages such as ' higher than the high Indestructible,' explicitly states the difference of the inde- structible being from those other two. — The text first relates that Brahma told the knowledge of Brahman, which is the foundation of the knowledge of all, to his eldest son Atharvan : this introduces the knowledge of Brahman as the topic of the section. Then, the text proceeds, in order to obtain this knowledge of Brahman, which had been handed down through a succession of teachers to Angiras, 6aunaka approached Angiras respectfully and asked him : ' What is that through which, if known, all this is known? ' 1. e. since all knowledge is founded on the knowledge of Brahman, he enquires after the nature of Brahman. An- giras replies that he who wishes to attain Brahman must acquire two kinds of knowledge, both of them having Brahman for their object : an indirect one which springs from the study of the ^astras, viz. the Veda, *Siksha, Kalpa, and so on, and a direct one which springs from concentrated meditation (yoga). The latter kind of knowledge is the means of obtaining Brahman, and it is of the nature of devout meditation (bhakti), as characterised in the text * He whom the Self chooses, by him the Self can be gained ' (III, 3, 3). The means again towards this kind of know- ledge is such knowledge as is gained from sacred tradition, assisted by abstention and the other six auxiliary means (see above, p. 17); in agreement with the text, 'Him the Brahma^as seek to know by the study of the Veda, by sacrifice, by gifts, by penance, by fasting ' (Bri Up. IV, 4, 22). — Thus the Reverend Panuara also says, ' The cause of attaining him is knowledge and work, and knowledge is twofold, according as it is based on sacred tradition or springs from discrimination.' The Mu^aka-text refers to the inferior kind of knowledge in the passage ' the lower knowledge is the i?/g-veda,' &c, up to ' and the dharma- jastras ' ; this knowledge is the means towards the intuition of Brahman ; while the higher kind of knowledge, which is called ' upasana,' has the character of devout meditation (bhakti), and consists in direct intuition of Brahman, is I ADHYAYA, 2 PAD A, 23. 285
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.
1the highest Self free from all evil, Naraya^a. — Here terminates the adhikara/za of ' the internal Ruler.' 22. That which possesses the qualities of in- visibility, &c, on account of the declaration of attributes. The Atharvamkas read in their text, ' The higher know- ledge is that by which that Indestructible is apprehended. That which is invisible, unseizable, without origin and qualities, &c, that it is which the wise regard as the source of all beings ' ; and further on, ' That which is higher than the high Imperishable' (Mu. Up. I, i, 5, 6; II, 1, 2). The doubt here arises whether the Indestructible, possessing the qualities of imperceptibility, &c, and that which is higher than the Indestructible, should be taken to denote the Pra- dhana and the soul of the Sankhyas, or whether both denote the highest Self. — The Purvapakshin maintains the former alternative. For, he says, while in the text last discussed there is mentioned a special attribute of an intelligent being, viz. in the clause ' unseen but a seer/ no similar attribute is stated in the former of the two texts under discussion, and the latter text clearly describes the collective individual soul, which is higher than the imperishable Pradhana, which itself is higher than all its effects. The reasons for this decision are as follows : — Colour and so on reside in the gross forms of non-intelligent matter, viz. the elements, earth, and so on. When, therefore, visibility and so on are expressly negatived, such negation suggests a non-sentient thing cognate to earth, &c, but of a subtle kind, and such a thing is no other than the Pradhana. And as something higher than this Pradhana there are known the collective souls only, under whose guidance the Pradhana gives birth to all its effects, from the so-called Mahat downwards I ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 23. 283 to individual things. This interpretation is confirmed by the comparisons set forth in the next j-loka, 'As the spider sends forth and draws in its threads, as plants spring from the earth, as hair grows on the head and body of the living man, thus does everything arise here from the Inde- structible.' The section therefore is concerned only with the Pradhana and the individual soul.
2This prima facie view is set aside by the Sutra. That which possesses invisibility and the other qualities stated in the text, and that which is higher than the high In- destructible, is no other than the highest Self. For the text declares attributes which belong to the highest Self only, viz. in I, 1, 9, ' He who knows all, cognises all/ &c. Let us shortly consider the connexion of the text. The passage beginning 'the higher knowledge is that by which the Indestructible is apprehended ' declares an inde- structible being possessing the attributes of invisibility and so on. The clause 'everything arises here from the Indestructible ' next declares that from that being all things originate. Next the .yloka, ' He who knows all and cognises all/ predicates of that Indestructible which is the source of all beings, omniscience, and similar qualities. And finally the text, ' That which is higher than the high Indestructible/ characterises that same being — which previously had been called invisible, the source of beings, indestructible, all- knowing, &c. — as the highest of all. Hence it is evident that in the text ' higher than the high Indestructible ' the term 'Indestructible' does not denote the invisible, &c. Indestructible, which is the chief topic of the entire section ; for there can of course be nothing higher than that which, as being all-knowing, the source of all, &c, is itself higher than anything else. The ' Indestructible ' in that text there- fore denotes the elements in their subtle condition. 23. Not the two others, on account of distinction and statement of difference. The section distinguishes the indestructible being, which is the source of all, &c, from the Pradhana as well as the individual soul, in so far, namely, as it undertakes to prove 284 VEDANTA-S^TRAS.
323. Not the two others, on account of distinction and statement of difference. The section distinguishes the indestructible being, which is the source of all, &c, from the Pradhana as well as the individual soul, in so far, namely, as it undertakes to prove 284 VEDANTA-S^TRAS. that by the cognition of one thing everything is known; and it moreover, in passages such as ' higher than the high Indestructible,' explicitly states the difference of the inde- structible being from those other two. — The text first relates that Brahma told the knowledge of Brahman, which is the foundation of the knowledge of all, to his eldest son Atharvan : this introduces the knowledge of Brahman as the topic of the section. Then, the text proceeds, in order to obtain this knowledge of Brahman, which had been handed down through a succession of teachers to Angiras, 6aunaka approached Angiras respectfully and asked him : ' What is that through which, if known, all this is known? ' 1. e. since all knowledge is founded on the knowledge of Brahman, he enquires after the nature of Brahman. An- giras replies that he who wishes to attain Brahman must acquire two kinds of knowledge, both of them having Brahman for their object : an indirect one which springs from the study of the ^astras, viz. the Veda, *Siksha, Kalpa, and so on, and a direct one which springs from concentrated meditation (yoga). The latter kind of knowledge is the means of obtaining Brahman, and it is of the nature of devout meditation (bhakti), as characterised in the text * He whom the Self chooses, by him the Self can be gained ' (III, 3, 3). The means again towards this kind of know- ledge is such knowledge as is gained from sacred tradition, assisted by abstention and the other six auxiliary means (see above, p. 17); in agreement with the text, 'Him the Brahma^as seek to know by the study of the Veda, by sacrifice, by gifts, by penance, by fasting ' (Bri Up. IV, 4, 22). — Thus the Reverend Panuara also says, ' The cause of attaining him is knowledge and work, and knowledge is twofold, according as it is based on sacred tradition or springs from discrimination.' The Mu^aka-text refers to the inferior kind of knowledge in the passage ' the lower knowledge is the i?/g-veda,' &c, up to ' and the dharma- jastras ' ; this knowledge is the means towards the intuition of Brahman ; while the higher kind of knowledge, which is called ' upasana,' has the character of devout meditation (bhakti), and consists in direct intuition of Brahman, is I ADHYAYA, 2 PAD A, 23. 285
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.