The Bhagavadgîtâ, with the Sanatsugâtîya and the Anugîtâ — SBE Vol. 8 (trans. K. T. Telang, 1882)
The translator’s English as printed (K. T. Telang). The original-language text is not held; names are romanised as the translator printed them.
Sanatsugata said :
Some (say), that freedom from death (results) from action”; and others that death exists not. Hear me explain (this), O king! have no misgiving about it*.. Both truths, O Kshatriya! have been current from the beginning.* The wise maintain what (is called) delusion (to be) death. 15 verily call heedlessness death, and likewise I call freedom from heedlessness immortality. Through heedlessness, verily, were the demons* vanquished; and through freedom heedlessness the gods attained to the Brahman. Death, verily, does not devour living creatures like a tiger ; for, indeed, his form is not to be perceived. Some? say that death is different from this, (named) Yama, who dwells in the self?; the (practice of the) life of Brahmakârins (being) immortality. That god governs his kingdom in the world of the Pitṛis, (being) good to the good, and not good to (those who are) not good. That death, (or) heedlessness, develops in men as desire, and afterwards as wrath, and in the shape of delusion*. And then travelling in devious paths‘ through egoism, one does not attain to union 5 with the self. Those who are deluded by it®, and who remain under its influence, depart from this (world), and there again fall down’. Then the deities* gather around them. And then he undergoes death after death °. Being attached to the fruit of action, on action presenting itself, they follow after it !°, and do not cross beyond death. And the embodied (self), in consequence of not understanding union! with the real entity, proceeds on all hands? with attachment to enjoyments. That®, verily, is the great source of delusion to the senses ; for by contact 4 with unreal entities, his migrations® are (rendered) inevitable ; because having his inner self contaminated by contact with unreal entities, he devotes himself to objects of sense on all sides, pondering on them (only). (That) pondering, verily, first ruins* him: and soon afterwards desire and wrath, after attacking him. These? lead children to death. But sensible men cross beyond death by their good sense. He who pondering (on the self) destroys® (the) fugitive (objects of sense), not even thinking of them through contempt (for them), and who being possessed of knowledge destroys desires in this way, becomes, as it were, the death of death (itself), and swallows (it) up* The being who pursues desires, is destroyed (in pursuing) after the desires’. But casting away desires, a being gets rid of all taint? whatever. This body, void of enlightenment °, seems (to be) a hell for (all) beings. Those who are avaricious run about *, going headlong to a ditch. A man, O Kshatriya! who contemns everything else® learns nothing. To him (the body is) like a tiger made of strawf. And this internal self (joined to) delusion and fear” in consequence of wrath and avarice, within your body,— that verily is death. Understanding death? to be thus produced, and adhering to knowledge, one is not afraid of death !‘ in this (world). In his province death is destroyed, as a mortal (is destroyed) on arriving in the province of death.
view correct, or the view involved in the practice of gods and demons?
* See Gita, p. 69 supra; Kaṭhopanishad, p. 102; Prasna, p. 162. As to the gods being afraid of death, see Khândogya, p. 50; and Nrisimha Tapini, p. 32; and as to gods and demons practising the life of Brahmaʼarins, see Khândogya, p- 571; and cf. Bṛihadâraṇyaka, p. 964. ? L.e. action prescribed in the Vedas.
* Le. as to how I shall be able to reconcile the seeming contradiction between the ‘two truths,’
* Le. of creation.
* Sanatsugata says he differs from ‘the wise;’ delusion = thinking the not-self to be the self; heedlessness=falling off from one’s natural condition as the Brahman—which is the cause of delusion (Sankara). See p.153 infra; Kasha, p.1523; and Taittirîya-upanishad, p. 80. ° Sankara suggests that demons might mean creatures attached to worldly objects; and gods those who are pleased in their own self; and he cites a stanza in support of this suggestion. The allusion, however, seems to be plainly to the story at Khândogya, P- 571 seq., where the idea and expression of ‘being vanquished ’ also occurs (p. 583). That word Sankara interprets in connexion with his suggested interpretation to mean ‘ are born in lower species” See Khandogya, Pp. 585, and Maitri, p. 211, about asuras or demons. It is interesting to note that in the Introduction to the Mahâbhâshya, there is an allusion to a story of the ‘demons’ being ‘vanquished’ in consequence of their grammatical blunders.
Sanatsujâta said:
Some say that freedom from death comes through action, and others that death does not exist at all. Hear me explain this, O king — have no misgiving about it. Both truths, O Kshatriya, have been current from the very beginning. The wise hold what is called delusion to be death. 15 I call heedlessness death, and equally I call freedom from heedlessness immortality. Through heedlessness the demons were indeed vanquished, and through freedom from heedlessness the gods attained to the Brahman. Death does not devour living creatures like a tiger, for his form cannot in fact be perceived. Some say that death is something other than this — named Yama, who dwells in the self — and that the life of Brahmakârins is immortality. That god governs his kingdom in the world of the Pitṛis, being good to the good and not good to those who are not good. That death, which is heedlessness, develops in men first as desire, then as wrath, and then in the shape of delusion. Travelling afterwards in devious paths through egoism, one does not attain to union 5 with the self. Those who are deluded by it and who remain under its sway depart from this world and there fall down again. Then the deities gather around them, and he undergoes death after death. Being attached to the fruit of action, whenever action presents itself they follow after it and do not cross beyond death. The embodied self, through not understanding its union with the real entity, moves on all sides in attachment to enjoyments. That is truly the great source of delusion for the senses, for through contact⁴ with unreal entities his migrations are rendered inevitable; having his inner self contaminated by contact with unreal entities, he devotes himself on all sides to objects of sense, pondering on them alone. That pondering first ruins him, and soon afterwards desire and wrath attack him as well. These lead children to death. But sensible men cross beyond death by their good sense. He who, pondering on the self, destroys fugitive objects of sense — not even thinking of them, out of contempt for them — and who, being possessed of knowledge, destroys desires in this way, becomes as it were the death of death itself and swallows it up. The being who pursues desires is destroyed in pursuing after them. But by casting away desires a being gets rid of all taint whatever. This body, void of enlightenment, seems to be a hell for all beings. Those who are avaricious run about, going headlong into a ditch. A man, O Kshatriya, who contemns everything else learns nothing; to him the body is like a tiger made of straw. And this internal self joined to delusion and fear, through wrath and avarice, within your body — that truly is death. Understanding death to be thus produced, and adhering to knowledge, one is not afraid of death in this world. In his province death is destroyed, as a mortal is destroyed on arriving in the province of death.
view correct, or the view involved in the practice of gods and demons?
* See Gita, p. 69 supra; Kaṭhopanishad, p. 102; Prasna, p. 162. As to the gods being afraid of death, see Khândogya, p. 50; and Nrisimha Tapini, p. 32; and as to gods and demons practising the life of Brahmaʼarins, see Khândogya, p. 571; and cf. Bṛihadâraṇyaka, p. 964. ² I.e. action prescribed in the Vedas.
* That is, as to how I shall be able to reconcile the seeming contradiction between the 'two truths.'
* That is, of creation.
* Sanatsujâta says he differs from 'the wise;' delusion = thinking the not-self to be the self; heedlessness = falling off from one's natural condition as the Brahman—which is the cause of delusion (Sankara). See p. 153 infra; Kasha, p. 1523; and Taittirîya-upanishad, p. 80. ° Sankara suggests that demons might mean creatures attached to worldly objects, and gods those who are pleased in their own self, and he cites a stanza in support of this suggestion. The allusion, however, seems plainly to be to the story at Khândogya, p. 571 seq., where the idea and expression of 'being vanquished' also occurs (p. 583). That word Sankara interprets, in connection with his suggested interpretation, to mean 'are born in lower species.' See Khandogya, p. 585, and Maitri, p. 211, about asuras or demons. It is interesting to note that in the Introduction to the Mahâbhâshya there is an allusion to a story of the 'demons' being 'vanquished' in consequence of their grammatical blunders.