Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
14. (Scripture) also declares this. The Veda also declares the identity of the vidyas ; for all Vedanta-texts represent the object of knowledge as one ; cp. e.g. Ka. Up. I, 2, 15, 'That word which all the Vedas record ;' Ait. Ar. Ill, 2, 3, 12, 'Him only the Bahyrtkas consider in the great hymn, the Adhvaryus in the sacrificial fire, the K/iandogas in the Mahavrata ceremony.' — To quote some other instances proving the unity of the vidyas : Ka. Up. I; 6, 2, mentions as one of the Lord's qualities that he Ill ADHVAYA, 3 PADA, 5. I9I causes fear; now this very same quality is referred to in the Taitt. Up. II, 7, in order to intimate disapprobatfon of those who are opposed to the absolute unity of that which is, ' For if he makes but the smallest distinction in it (the Self), there is fear for him. But that fear is only for him who knows (A difference) and does not know (the oneness).' — Similarly the Vaij'vanara, who in the Va^asaneyaka is imaginatively represented as a span long, is referred to in the K/2andogya as something well known, ' But he who worships that Vaij-vanara Self which is a span long,' &c. {K/i. Up. V, 18, i). And as, on the ground of all Vedanta-texts intimating the same matters, hymns and the like which are enjoined in one place are employed in other places (where they are not expressly enjoined) for the purposes of devout meditation, it follows that all Vedanta-texts intimate also (identical) devout meditations.
25. In the case of (a devout meditation) common (to several ^'akhas) (the particulars mentioned in each ^'akha) have to be combined, since there is no difference of essential matter ; just as in the case of what Is complementary to Injunctions. [This Sutra states the practical outcome of the discussion carried on in the first four Sutras.] It having been determined that the cognitions of Brahman are equally intimated by all Vedanta-texts, it follows that as long as the cognition is one and the same its specific determinations mentioned in one text are to be introduced into other texts also where they are not mentioned. For if the matter of these determinations subserves some particular cognition in one place, it subserves it in another place also, since in both places we have to do with one and the same cognition. The case is analogous to that of the things subordinate to some sacrificial performance, as, e. g. the agnihotra. The agnihotra also is one performance, and therefore its subordinate members, although they may be mentioned in different texts, have to be combined into one whole. — If the 192 vedanta-sCtras.
3cognitions were separate, the particulars mentioned in different texts could not be combined ; for they would be confined each to its own cognition and would not stand to each other in that relation in which the typical form of a sacrifice stands to its modifications *. But as the cognitions are one, things He differently. — The above Sutra will be explained and applied at length further on, in Sutra 10 ff. 6. If it be said that (the udgitha vidya of the Br/. Up. and that of the AV^and. Up.) are separate on account (of the difference) of the texts ; we deny this on the ground of their (essential) non-difference.
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.
14. (Scripture) also declares this. The Veda also declares the identity of the vidyas ; for all Vedanta-texts represent the object of knowledge as one ; cp. e.g. Ka. Up. I, 2, 15, 'That word which all the Vedas record ;' Ait. Ar. Ill, 2, 3, 12, 'Him only the Bahyrtkas consider in the great hymn, the Adhvaryus in the sacrificial fire, the K/iandogas in the Mahavrata ceremony.' — To quote some other instances proving the unity of the vidyas : Ka. Up. I; 6, 2, mentions as one of the Lord's qualities that he Ill ADHVAYA, 3 PADA, 5. I9I causes fear; now this very same quality is referred to in the Taitt. Up. II, 7, in order to intimate disapprobatfon of those who are opposed to the absolute unity of that which is, ' For if he makes but the smallest distinction in it (the Self), there is fear for him. But that fear is only for him who knows (A difference) and does not know (the oneness).' — Similarly the Vaij'vanara, who in the Va^asaneyaka is imaginatively represented as a span long, is referred to in the K/2andogya as something well known, ' But he who worships that Vaij-vanara Self which is a span long,' &c. {K/i. Up. V, 18, i). And as, on the ground of all Vedanta-texts intimating the same matters, hymns and the like which are enjoined in one place are employed in other places (where they are not expressly enjoined) for the purposes of devout meditation, it follows that all Vedanta-texts intimate also (identical) devout meditations.
25. In the case of (a devout meditation) common (to several ^'akhas) (the particulars mentioned in each ^'akha) have to be combined, since there is no difference of essential matter ; just as in the case of what Is complementary to Injunctions. [This Sutra states the practical outcome of the discussion carried on in the first four Sutras.] It having been determined that the cognitions of Brahman are equally intimated by all Vedanta-texts, it follows that as long as the cognition is one and the same its specific determinations mentioned in one text are to be introduced into other texts also where they are not mentioned. For if the matter of these determinations subserves some particular cognition in one place, it subserves it in another place also, since in both places we have to do with one and the same cognition. The case is analogous to that of the things subordinate to some sacrificial performance, as, e. g. the agnihotra. The agnihotra also is one performance, and therefore its subordinate members, although they may be mentioned in different texts, have to be combined into one whole. — If the 192 vedanta-sCtras.
3cognitions were separate, the particulars mentioned in different texts could not be combined ; for they would be confined each to its own cognition and would not stand to each other in that relation in which the typical form of a sacrifice stands to its modifications *. But as the cognitions are one, things He differently. — The above Sutra will be explained and applied at length further on, in Sutra 10 ff. 6. If it be said that (the udgitha vidya of the Br/. Up. and that of the AV^and. Up.) are separate on account (of the difference) of the texts ; we deny this on the ground of their (essential) non-difference.
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.