Charaka-Samhita — trans. Kaviraj Avinash Chandra Kaviratna

cannot be causes of birth. Nor does the mind, after the dissolution of the body, enter into the womb. First, the mother and the father are not agents in production, for there are many women and men who are childless although they long for children. Nor can they beget either sons or daughters according to their desire. Birth is, therefore, independent of their will or desire. Secondly, the Self cannot beget Self. This is made out as follows : a Self already born cannot beget itself, for it is already in existence ; a Self, again, that is not born, cannot beget itself, for one that is unborn has no existence. The argument seems to be like a verbal quibble.

If, again, the Self can beget itself, why does it not beget itself in an auspicious order of being ? Why does it take birth in undesirable orders ?

It cannot be that it does not desire to have a superior order of existence. If, in spite of a desire for a superior order of existence, it takes birth in inferior orders, it follows that birth is independent of the inclinations of the Self.

The other assertions of Punarvasu are taken up by Bharadwaja in the subsequent portions of the Lesson. — T,

* “The reverse fs seen of both those propositions.” This implies that amongst those who take proper food and drink, people are seen that lave no children, and amongst those who do not take' proper food and drink, people are seen that have children. — T.

p. 718

CHAR AKA SAM HIT A.

those who live upon grains such as Qyamd, Kovara, KockMlaka and Koradushaka, as also bulbous roots and such other roots as garden radishes, would all be childless.

The fact, however, is that the reverse is seen of both these.7

Nor is it true that the Mind, coming from the next world, descends into the foetus. If, indeed, it really came from the other world and" descended into the foetus, nothing relating to its former body (or existence) would remain unknown, unheard, or unseen. As a matter of fact, the mind remembers nothing (of its former existence).

Hence we would say that conception is derived neither from mother, nor from father, nor from Self, nor from assimilation of agreeable food and drink, nor from the juices. Nor is the mind the uniting agent.

Thus said Bharadwaja.

The illustrious son of Atri said — No, conception sets in from all these existent conditions united together and in a state of maturity. The conception is, verily, born of the mother ; since, without a mother, there can be no occurrence of conception ; no birth of viviparous animals.

Those which the foetus has from the mother, — those which are derived by it from the mother, — we shall now lay down.

They are : — skin, blood, flesh, adeps, navel, heart, lungs, liver, spleen, the two breasts, pelvis, the intestines which hold the stools, the upper stomach which holds the food after deglu¬ tition, the lower stomach where digestion goes on, the upper rectum, and the lower rectum, the finer and the grosser entrails, marrow, and the ducts which bear the marrow.

These are born of the mother. 9

This conception is, verily, born of the father ; since there can be no occurrence of conception without the father. Indeed, no viviparous animal can take birth without a father.

Those possessions of the foetus which are verily born of the father, — those which are probably derived from the father, —

CIIARAKA SAMHITA

p. 719

we shall lay down below. These are — hair. (of the head), nails, bristles of the body, teeth, bones, nerves, sinews, arteries, and semen.

These are derived from the father10

This conception is born of Self; for the Self that attaches to the foetus is the Inner Self (of ours). That Inner self is called Jiva

That Inner Self is Eternal, free from disease, above decrepitide ; immortal, above decay, incapable of being pierced, incapable of being cut (into pieces) ; incapable of being burnt,* having the universe for its form, creator of the universe, unmani¬ fest,' having- no begining, having no end (or indestructible), and immutable.

He, entering into the uterus and coming into union with the semon (of the father) and the blood (of the mother) begets his own Self for purposes of conception.

The conceived foetus, in the uterus, receives the name of Self. Otherwise, in consequence of its existence being without beginning, the Self cannot properly be said to have birth.

Hence, though he is himself unborn, he begets the conceived foetus that is born. Then, again, taking birth (in this way) he begets that which was before unborn.

That conceived foetus, according to the câurse of time, assumes the conditions of infancy, youth, and advanced age.11f t Bharadwaja’s objection was this : if the Self begets Self, how does it do so ? Does the Self that is born beget Self ? Or, does the Self that is not born beget Self? If the first be the case, then being itself born, it cannot beget itself. If the second be the case, being itself unborn, it cannot beget Itself.

* The correct reading seems to be ‘ adâhyam ’ and not ‘ alehyam.’ — T.