Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1but altogether independent of it, is untenable. The influence of the leading subject-matter rather compels us to conclude that the instruction given by the text about the agni made of mind and so on, enjoins some particular mode of the same agni which the preceding sections describe as the outcome of a real act ^. — But are not indicatory marks stronger than the leading subject-matter ? — True in general ; but indicatory marks such as those contained in the passages quoted above are by no means stronger than the general subject-matter. For as those passages are of the nature of glorifications of the fanciful fire-altars, the liiigas (have no proving power in themselves but) merely illustrate some other matter (viz. the injunction to which those passages are arthavadas) ; and as they are of that nature they may, there being no other proof, be taken as mere gu;^avadas. and as such are not able to sublate the influence of the prakara;/a. On the ground of the latter, therefore, all those fanciful agnis must be viewed as forming parts of the sacrificial action.
2The case is analogous to that of the ' mental ' (cup). On the tenth day of the Soma sacrifices occupying twelve days — which day is termed avivakya — a soma cup is offered mentally, the earth being viewed as the cup, the sea as the Soma and Pra^apati as the divinity to which the offering is made. All rites connected with that cup, viz. taking it up, putting it down in its place, offering the liquid in it, taking up the remaining liquid, the priests inviting one another to drink the remainder, and the drinking, all these rites the text declares to be mental only, i.e. to be done in thought only-. Yet this mental quasi-cup, as standing under the heading of a sacrificial act, forms part of that act. — The same then holds good with regard to the quasi-agnis made of mind and so on. 46. And on account of the transfer (of particulars). That those agnis enter into the sacrificial action follows ^ I.e. of the agni made of bricks which is the outcome of the agni;^ayana. — An. Gi. explains vikalpavi^esha by prakarabheda. ^ Cp. Ta.fidya. Brah. IV, 9; Taitt. Sa;«h. VII, 3, i. 262 VEDANTA-SUTRAS.
3moreover from the fact that the text extends to them (the injunctions given about the agni made of bricks). Compare the passage, 'Thirty-six thousand shining Agnis ; each one of them is as large as the previously mentioned Agni.' Such extension of injunctions is possible only where there is general equality. The text therefore by extending the determinations relative to the previous agni, i.e. the agni built of bricks, which forms a constituent element of the sacrificial action, to the fanciful agnis, intimates thereby that they also form part of the sacrificial performance. 47. But (the agnIs rather constitute) a vidya, on account of the assertion (made by the text). The word ' but ' sets aside the purvapaksha. — The agnis built of mind and so on are to be viewed not as complementary to a sacrificial action, but as independent and constituting a vidya of their own. For the text expressly asserts that 'they are built of knowledge (vidya) only,' and that ' by knowledge they are built for him who thus knows.' 48. And because (indicatory marks of that) are seen (in the text). "
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.
1but altogether independent of it, is untenable. The influence of the leading subject-matter rather compels us to conclude that the instruction given by the text about the agni made of mind and so on, enjoins some particular mode of the same agni which the preceding sections describe as the outcome of a real act ^. — But are not indicatory marks stronger than the leading subject-matter ? — True in general ; but indicatory marks such as those contained in the passages quoted above are by no means stronger than the general subject-matter. For as those passages are of the nature of glorifications of the fanciful fire-altars, the liiigas (have no proving power in themselves but) merely illustrate some other matter (viz. the injunction to which those passages are arthavadas) ; and as they are of that nature they may, there being no other proof, be taken as mere gu;^avadas. and as such are not able to sublate the influence of the prakara;/a. On the ground of the latter, therefore, all those fanciful agnis must be viewed as forming parts of the sacrificial action.
2The case is analogous to that of the ' mental ' (cup). On the tenth day of the Soma sacrifices occupying twelve days — which day is termed avivakya — a soma cup is offered mentally, the earth being viewed as the cup, the sea as the Soma and Pra^apati as the divinity to which the offering is made. All rites connected with that cup, viz. taking it up, putting it down in its place, offering the liquid in it, taking up the remaining liquid, the priests inviting one another to drink the remainder, and the drinking, all these rites the text declares to be mental only, i.e. to be done in thought only-. Yet this mental quasi-cup, as standing under the heading of a sacrificial act, forms part of that act. — The same then holds good with regard to the quasi-agnis made of mind and so on. 46. And on account of the transfer (of particulars). That those agnis enter into the sacrificial action follows ^ I.e. of the agni made of bricks which is the outcome of the agni;^ayana. — An. Gi. explains vikalpavi^esha by prakarabheda. ^ Cp. Ta.fidya. Brah. IV, 9; Taitt. Sa;«h. VII, 3, i. 262 VEDANTA-SUTRAS.
3moreover from the fact that the text extends to them (the injunctions given about the agni made of bricks). Compare the passage, 'Thirty-six thousand shining Agnis ; each one of them is as large as the previously mentioned Agni.' Such extension of injunctions is possible only where there is general equality. The text therefore by extending the determinations relative to the previous agni, i.e. the agni built of bricks, which forms a constituent element of the sacrificial action, to the fanciful agnis, intimates thereby that they also form part of the sacrificial performance. 47. But (the agnIs rather constitute) a vidya, on account of the assertion (made by the text). The word ' but ' sets aside the purvapaksha. — The agnis built of mind and so on are to be viewed not as complementary to a sacrificial action, but as independent and constituting a vidya of their own. For the text expressly asserts that 'they are built of knowledge (vidya) only,' and that ' by knowledge they are built for him who thus knows.' 48. And because (indicatory marks of that) are seen (in the text). "
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.