Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1arrow, we merely mean that he moves fast, not that he moves at the same rate as an arrow. This remark explains that scriptural passage also in which Brahman is declared to be infinite like ether. — On the other hand, such passages as ' It is greater than ether ' prove that the extent of ether is less than that of Brahman ; passages like ' there is no image of him ' [Sve. Up. IV, 19) show that there is nothing to compare Brahman to ; and passages like ' Everything else is of evil ' (Brt. Up. Ill, 4, 2) show that everything different from Brahman such as ether, &c. is of evil. — All which serves to refute the assertion that the passage which declares ether to have originated has to be taken in a secondary sense, as the word Brahman actually has to be taken in some passages. Scripture and reasoning in combination rather show that ether has an origin, and the final conclusion therefore is that ether is an effect of Brahman. 8. Hereby air (also) is explained.
2The present Sutra extends the reasoning concerning ether to the air of which the ether is the abode. — The different views about air also are to be arranged in an analogous manner. The piirvapakshin maintains that the air is not a product, because 'it is not mentioned in that chapter of the isT/^andogya which treats of the origination of things. — The opposite opinion is, that the air is mentioned in the parallel chapter of the Taittiriyaka (' from the ether sprang the air '). — The two scriptural passages being of a conflicting nature, the purvapakshin maintains that the passage which declares the air to have originated must be taken in a secondary sense ; firstly on account of the impossibility (of the literal sense being adopted), as shown (in the adhikarawa treating of the ether) ; secondly on account of that passage which denies that it ever sets, ' Viyu (the air) is the deity that never sets' (Br/. Up. I, 5, 22); and thirdly on account of those passages which declare it to be immortal. The final opinion on the other hand is, that air is a product ; in the first place because this conclusion is conformable to the general tendency of scripture ; and, in the second place, because it is generally admitted that whatever II ADHYAYA, 3 PA DA, Q. 1 9
3is divided is an effect. — The denial of its ever setting refers to the lower knowledge (apara vidya ^) and is merely a relative one, Vayu not setting in the same way as fire, &c. The statement as to the immortality, &c. of air has already received its reply (in the adhikara/^a treating of the ether). — Here it maybe asked why, ether and air being equally mentioned and not mentioned in the chapters treating of the origin of the world, one adhikara;^a is not considered to suffice for both, and why instead of that there is made a formal extension of the former reasoning to the latter case, although there is no difference between the two cases. — To this we reply that there is indeed some reason for the question ; that, however, the formal extension is made for the purpose of removing any doubts which might possibly be engendered in the minds of slow-witted people by mere words ^. For as, in the Saw^vargavidya and other passages, the glory of Vayu is referred to as an object of worship ; and as scripture says that he never sets, &c., some men might think that he is eternal. 9. But there is no origin of that which is (i.e. of Brahman), on account of the impossibility (of such an origin).
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.
1arrow, we merely mean that he moves fast, not that he moves at the same rate as an arrow. This remark explains that scriptural passage also in which Brahman is declared to be infinite like ether. — On the other hand, such passages as ' It is greater than ether ' prove that the extent of ether is less than that of Brahman ; passages like ' there is no image of him ' [Sve. Up. IV, 19) show that there is nothing to compare Brahman to ; and passages like ' Everything else is of evil ' (Brt. Up. Ill, 4, 2) show that everything different from Brahman such as ether, &c. is of evil. — All which serves to refute the assertion that the passage which declares ether to have originated has to be taken in a secondary sense, as the word Brahman actually has to be taken in some passages. Scripture and reasoning in combination rather show that ether has an origin, and the final conclusion therefore is that ether is an effect of Brahman. 8. Hereby air (also) is explained.
2The present Sutra extends the reasoning concerning ether to the air of which the ether is the abode. — The different views about air also are to be arranged in an analogous manner. The piirvapakshin maintains that the air is not a product, because 'it is not mentioned in that chapter of the isT/^andogya which treats of the origination of things. — The opposite opinion is, that the air is mentioned in the parallel chapter of the Taittiriyaka (' from the ether sprang the air '). — The two scriptural passages being of a conflicting nature, the purvapakshin maintains that the passage which declares the air to have originated must be taken in a secondary sense ; firstly on account of the impossibility (of the literal sense being adopted), as shown (in the adhikarawa treating of the ether) ; secondly on account of that passage which denies that it ever sets, ' Viyu (the air) is the deity that never sets' (Br/. Up. I, 5, 22); and thirdly on account of those passages which declare it to be immortal. The final opinion on the other hand is, that air is a product ; in the first place because this conclusion is conformable to the general tendency of scripture ; and, in the second place, because it is generally admitted that whatever II ADHYAYA, 3 PA DA, Q. 1 9
3is divided is an effect. — The denial of its ever setting refers to the lower knowledge (apara vidya ^) and is merely a relative one, Vayu not setting in the same way as fire, &c. The statement as to the immortality, &c. of air has already received its reply (in the adhikara/^a treating of the ether). — Here it maybe asked why, ether and air being equally mentioned and not mentioned in the chapters treating of the origin of the world, one adhikara;^a is not considered to suffice for both, and why instead of that there is made a formal extension of the former reasoning to the latter case, although there is no difference between the two cases. — To this we reply that there is indeed some reason for the question ; that, however, the formal extension is made for the purpose of removing any doubts which might possibly be engendered in the minds of slow-witted people by mere words ^. For as, in the Saw^vargavidya and other passages, the glory of Vayu is referred to as an object of worship ; and as scripture says that he never sets, &c., some men might think that he is eternal. 9. But there is no origin of that which is (i.e. of Brahman), on account of the impossibility (of such an origin).
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.