Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1To this we make the following reply. ' There is nonrestriction of the assertions concerning them.' That means : the assertions which the text makes concerning the nature of certain subordinate members of sacrificial acts such as the udgitha and so on — as e. g. that the udgitha is the best of all essences [Kh. Up. I. i, 3), the fulfiller of desires (I, I, 7), a gratifier of desires (I, i, 8), the chief pra//a (I, 2, 7), Aditya (I, 3, i) — cannot be permanently connected with the sacrificial acts in the same way as other permanent members are, 'because that is seen,' i.e. because scripture shows that they are not so permanently connected. For scripture allows also such as are not acquainted with the details mentioned above to perform the sacrificial actions (cp. the passage I, i, 10, ' Therefore both he who knows this, and he who does not. perform the sacrifice'), and declares that even those priests, Prastotr/ and so on, who are devoid of the knowledge of the divinities of the prastava and the like, do perform the sacrifices ■ Prastotrz, if you without knowing the deity which belongs to the prastava are going to sing it.' &c. (I, 10, 9 and ff.). — The sacred text moreover declares that the vidyas founded on certain elements of sacrificial acts have results of their own, apart from those acts, viz. * non-obstruction ' in the accomplishment of the fruit of the sacrifice, i. e. a certain additional success of the sacrifice, cp. the passage I, i, 10, 'Therefore he who knows this and he who does not perform the sacrifice. But knowledge and ignorance are separate. The sacrifice which a man performs with knowledge, faith, and the Upanishad is more powerful.' The declaration made in this passage
2that the performances of him who knows and of him who does not know are separate, and the employment of the comparative form {' more powerful ') show that even the sacrifice destitute of the vidy^ is powerful. But how would that be possible if the vidya formed a permanent necessary part of the sacrifice ? In the latter case a sacrifice devoid of that vidya could never be admitted to be powerful ; for it is an established principle that only those sacrifices are effective which comprise all subordinate members. Thus the text also teaches definite results for each meditation, in the section treating of the meditation on the Saman as the worlds and others : ' The worlds in an ascending and in a descending line belong to him,' &c. (K/i. Up. II, 2, 3). — Nor must we understand those declarations of results to be mere arthavadas ; for in that case they w^ould have to be taken as stating a secondary matter only, while if understood to teach certain results they may be taken in their principal (i. e. direct, literal) sense ^. The case of the results which scripture declares to be connected with the praya^as e. g. is of a dift'erent nature. For the praya^as are enjoined with reference to a sacrifice (viz. the darj-apur«amasa) which requires certain definite modes of procedure (such as the offering of the praya^as and the like), and hence subserve that sacrifice ; so that the passage stating a fruit for the praya^as has to be considered as a mere arthavada-passage 2. In the case again of the quality of consisting of parwa-wood — which quality is stated ex abrupto, not under a definite heading — no special result can be assumed ; for as a quality is not an act it cannot be connected with any result unless it be joined to something to abide in. The use of the godohana indeed may have its own injunction of
3^ The statement as to the result of an action is a 'statement of a principal matter' if it is really meant to inform us that a certain result will attend a certain action. It is a statement of a 'secondary matter' if it is only meant to glorify the action. ^ Not as a passage enjoining a special result for the praya^as; for the latter merely help to bring about the general result of the darjapur;zamasa and have no special result of their own. 2^6 VEDANTA-sC'TRAS.
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.
1To this we make the following reply. ' There is nonrestriction of the assertions concerning them.' That means : the assertions which the text makes concerning the nature of certain subordinate members of sacrificial acts such as the udgitha and so on — as e. g. that the udgitha is the best of all essences [Kh. Up. I. i, 3), the fulfiller of desires (I, I, 7), a gratifier of desires (I, i, 8), the chief pra//a (I, 2, 7), Aditya (I, 3, i) — cannot be permanently connected with the sacrificial acts in the same way as other permanent members are, 'because that is seen,' i.e. because scripture shows that they are not so permanently connected. For scripture allows also such as are not acquainted with the details mentioned above to perform the sacrificial actions (cp. the passage I, i, 10, ' Therefore both he who knows this, and he who does not. perform the sacrifice'), and declares that even those priests, Prastotr/ and so on, who are devoid of the knowledge of the divinities of the prastava and the like, do perform the sacrifices ■ Prastotrz, if you without knowing the deity which belongs to the prastava are going to sing it.' &c. (I, 10, 9 and ff.). — The sacred text moreover declares that the vidyas founded on certain elements of sacrificial acts have results of their own, apart from those acts, viz. * non-obstruction ' in the accomplishment of the fruit of the sacrifice, i. e. a certain additional success of the sacrifice, cp. the passage I, i, 10, 'Therefore he who knows this and he who does not perform the sacrifice. But knowledge and ignorance are separate. The sacrifice which a man performs with knowledge, faith, and the Upanishad is more powerful.' The declaration made in this passage
2that the performances of him who knows and of him who does not know are separate, and the employment of the comparative form {' more powerful ') show that even the sacrifice destitute of the vidy^ is powerful. But how would that be possible if the vidya formed a permanent necessary part of the sacrifice ? In the latter case a sacrifice devoid of that vidya could never be admitted to be powerful ; for it is an established principle that only those sacrifices are effective which comprise all subordinate members. Thus the text also teaches definite results for each meditation, in the section treating of the meditation on the Saman as the worlds and others : ' The worlds in an ascending and in a descending line belong to him,' &c. (K/i. Up. II, 2, 3). — Nor must we understand those declarations of results to be mere arthavadas ; for in that case they w^ould have to be taken as stating a secondary matter only, while if understood to teach certain results they may be taken in their principal (i. e. direct, literal) sense ^. The case of the results which scripture declares to be connected with the praya^as e. g. is of a dift'erent nature. For the praya^as are enjoined with reference to a sacrifice (viz. the darj-apur«amasa) which requires certain definite modes of procedure (such as the offering of the praya^as and the like), and hence subserve that sacrifice ; so that the passage stating a fruit for the praya^as has to be considered as a mere arthavada-passage 2. In the case again of the quality of consisting of parwa-wood — which quality is stated ex abrupto, not under a definite heading — no special result can be assumed ; for as a quality is not an act it cannot be connected with any result unless it be joined to something to abide in. The use of the godohana indeed may have its own injunction of
3^ The statement as to the result of an action is a 'statement of a principal matter' if it is really meant to inform us that a certain result will attend a certain action. It is a statement of a 'secondary matter' if it is only meant to glorify the action. ^ Not as a passage enjoining a special result for the praya^as; for the latter merely help to bring about the general result of the darjapur;zamasa and have no special result of their own. 2^6 VEDANTA-sC'TRAS.
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.