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.
CHAPTER XXXIII.
Brahman said:
Some (think of) the Brahman as a tree; some (think of) the Brahman as a great forest; and some (think of) the Brahman as unperceived; and some as transcendent and without misery*; and they‘ think all this to be produced from and absorbed into the unperceived. -He who even for (the space of) a (single) exhalation, at the time of the termination (of life) becomes equablef, attaining to the self, becomes fit for immortality. Restraining the self in the self*, even for (the space of) a wink, he repairs to the inexhaustible acquisition* of those who have knowledge, through the tranquillity of the self*. And restraining the life-winds again and again by control of the life-winds*, of ten or twelve* (modes), (he repairs to) that which is beyond the twenty-four*. Thus having first a tranquil self, he obtains whatever he desires. When the quality of goodness predominates in the unperceived*, that fits one for immortality. The men of knowledge extol nothing else beyond goodness. By inference* we understand the (attainment of the) being to depend on goodness. It is not possible otherwise* to attain that being, O best of the twice-born! | Forgiveness, courage, harmlessness, equability, truth, straightforwardness, knowledge, abandonment’, and also renunciation are laid down as (constituting) conduct of the quality of goodness. By this very inference the wise verily believe in the Being and nature as one, there is no doubt of that. Some learned men, who are devoted to knowledge, assert the unity of the Kshetragña and nature’, But that is not correct. That they are always distinct (from one another) is also (said) without (due) consideration 2. Distinction and also association® should be accurately understood. Unity and diversity‘ are likewise laid down. Such is the doctrine of the learned. Between the gnat and the udumbara® there is observed unity and diversity also. As a fish is in water distinct (from it), such is their relation; (such is) the relation of the drops of water with the leaf of the lotus.
! See p. 351 supra. 2 See Gita, p. 109.
* As to the first two clauses comp. pp. 284-371 supra; the last two are said by Arguna Misra to represent the Sankhya and Yoga doctrines respectively.
* I presume this means all teachers. But Nîlakaṇṭha takes it to mean the Sankhyas, and he takes the preceding words as indicating _ two views based on Sruti texts, viz. the first, that the world is a development of the Brahman, and the other that the Brahman does not undergo any development or change. Anâmaya he takes to mean changeless, and Brahmamaya he takes to mean developed from the Brahman. ® Cf. Gita, pp. 77, 78.
* One who sees the supreme as the only real entity, Arguna Misra. Nîlakaṇṭha takes it to mean one who identifies himself with everything. See Gita, p. 63, and note 4 there. T See p.344 supra. * Le. the goal to be acquired.
* «Tranquillity —the original may also be rendered by ‘ favour,’
CHAPTER XXXIII.
Brahman said:
Some think of the Brahman as a tree; some think of it as a great forest; some think of it as unperceived; and some as transcendent and without misery; and they think all this to be produced from and absorbed into the unperceived. He who becomes equable, even for the space of a single exhalation, at the moment of death, attaining to the self, becomes fit for immortality. Restraining the self in the self, even for the space of a wink, he reaches the inexhaustible acquisition of those who have knowledge, through the tranquillity of the self. And restraining the life-winds again and again by control of the life-winds, of ten or twelve modes, he reaches that which is beyond the twenty-four. Thus, with a tranquil self to begin with, he obtains whatever he desires. When the quality of goodness predominates in the unperceived, that fits one for immortality. The men of knowledge extol nothing beyond goodness. By inference we understand the attainment of being to depend on goodness. It is not possible otherwise to attain that being, O best of the twice-born! Forgiveness, courage, harmlessness, equability, truth, straightforwardness, knowledge, abandonment, and also renunciation are laid down as constituting conduct of the quality of goodness. By this very inference the wise truly believe in Being and nature as one — of that there is no doubt. Some learned men devoted to knowledge assert the unity of the Kshetrajña and nature. But that is not correct. To say that they are always distinct from one another is also said without due consideration 2. Distinction and also association should be accurately understood. Unity and diversity are likewise laid down. Such is the doctrine of the learned. Between the gnat and the udumbara there is observed both unity and diversity. As a fish in water is distinct from it, such is their relation; such is the relation of drops of water with the leaf of the lotus.
! See p. 351 supra. 2 See Gita, p. 109.
* For the first two clauses, compare pp. 284–371 above; Arjuna Misra says the last two represent the Sankhya and Yoga doctrines respectively.
* I take this to mean all teachers. Nîlakaṇṭha, however, reads it as referring to the Sânkhyas, and understands the preceding words as presenting two views grounded in Śruti texts: the first, that the world is a development of the Brahman, and the second, that the Brahman undergoes no development or change. He reads Anâmaya as meaning changeless, and Brahmamaya as meaning developed from the Brahman. ® Cf. Gita, pp. 77, 78.
* One who sees the supreme as the only real entity, Arjuna Misra. Nîlakaṇṭha takes it to mean one who identifies himself with everything. See Gita, p. 63, and note 4 there. † See p. 344 supra. * I.e. the goal to be acquired.
* «Tranquillity»—the original can also be translated as 'favour,'