Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1' He who has learnt (lit. " read ") the Veda from a family of teachers, according to the sacred injunction, in the leisure time left from the duties to be performed for the Guru ; who after having received his discharge has settled in his own house, studying his sacred texts in some sacred spot' {KJi. Up. VIII, i^); such passages also show that those who know the purport of the whole Veda are qualified for sacrificial action, and that hence knowledge does not independently bring about a result. — But the expression 'who has read' directly states only that the Veda is read, not that its purport is understood ! — Not so, we reply. The reading of the Veda extends up to the comprehension of its purport, as thus the reading has a visible purpose ^. 7. And on account of definite rules. * Performing works here (i. e. in this life) let a man wish to live a hundred years ; thus work will not cling to thee, man ; there is no other way than that ' (Ij-a. Up. 2) ; ' The ^ For the instrumental case ' vidyaya ' directly represents knowledge as a means of work. ^ According to the Mima;«sa principle that, wherever possible, actions enjoined must be understood to have a visible purpose (a supersensuous result being admitted only where no visible resuk can be made out), [38] U 290 VEDANTA-SUTRAS.
2Agiiihotra is a sattra lasting up to old age and death ; for through old age one is freed from it or through death ' (Sat. Bra. XII, 4, J, i); from such definite rules also it follows that knowledge is merely supplementary to works. Against all these objections the Sutrakara upholds his view in the following Sutra. 8. But on account of (scripture teaching) the additional one (i.e. the Lord), (the view) of Badaraya?^a (is valid) ; as that is seen thus (in scriptural passages).
3The word ' but ' discards the purvapaksha. — The assertion made in Sutra 2 cannot be maintained ' on account of the text teaching the additional one.' If the Vedanta-texts taught that the transmigrating embodied Self which is an agent and enjoyer is something different from the mere body, the statements as to the fruit of the knowledge of the Self would, for the reasons indicated above, be mere arthavadas. But what the Vedanta-texts really teach as the object of knowledge is something different from the embodied Self, viz. the non-transmigrating Lord who is free from all attributes of transmigratory existence such as agency and the like and distinguished by freedom from sin and so on, the highest Self. And the knowledge of that Self does not only not promote action but rather cuts all action short, as will be declared in Sutra 16. Hence the view of the reverend Badarayawa which was stated in Sutra i remains valid and cannot be shaken by fallacious reasoning about the subordination of knowledge to action and the like. That the Lord who is superior to the embodied Self is the Self many scriptural texts declare ; compare ' He who perceives all and knows all' (Mu. Up. I, i, 9) ; ' From terror of it the wind blows, from terror the sun rises' (Taitt. Up. II, 8); 'It is a great terror, a raised thunderbolt' (Ka. Up. II, 6, 2); 'By the command of that imperishable one, O Gargi ' (Bri. Up. Ill, 8, 9) ; ' It thought, may I be many, may I grow forth. It sent forth fire ' (K/i. Up. VI, 2, 3). There are indeed passages in
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.
1' He who has learnt (lit. " read ") the Veda from a family of teachers, according to the sacred injunction, in the leisure time left from the duties to be performed for the Guru ; who after having received his discharge has settled in his own house, studying his sacred texts in some sacred spot' {KJi. Up. VIII, i^); such passages also show that those who know the purport of the whole Veda are qualified for sacrificial action, and that hence knowledge does not independently bring about a result. — But the expression 'who has read' directly states only that the Veda is read, not that its purport is understood ! — Not so, we reply. The reading of the Veda extends up to the comprehension of its purport, as thus the reading has a visible purpose ^. 7. And on account of definite rules. * Performing works here (i. e. in this life) let a man wish to live a hundred years ; thus work will not cling to thee, man ; there is no other way than that ' (Ij-a. Up. 2) ; ' The ^ For the instrumental case ' vidyaya ' directly represents knowledge as a means of work. ^ According to the Mima;«sa principle that, wherever possible, actions enjoined must be understood to have a visible purpose (a supersensuous result being admitted only where no visible resuk can be made out), [38] U 290 VEDANTA-SUTRAS.
2Agiiihotra is a sattra lasting up to old age and death ; for through old age one is freed from it or through death ' (Sat. Bra. XII, 4, J, i); from such definite rules also it follows that knowledge is merely supplementary to works. Against all these objections the Sutrakara upholds his view in the following Sutra. 8. But on account of (scripture teaching) the additional one (i.e. the Lord), (the view) of Badaraya?^a (is valid) ; as that is seen thus (in scriptural passages).
3The word ' but ' discards the purvapaksha. — The assertion made in Sutra 2 cannot be maintained ' on account of the text teaching the additional one.' If the Vedanta-texts taught that the transmigrating embodied Self which is an agent and enjoyer is something different from the mere body, the statements as to the fruit of the knowledge of the Self would, for the reasons indicated above, be mere arthavadas. But what the Vedanta-texts really teach as the object of knowledge is something different from the embodied Self, viz. the non-transmigrating Lord who is free from all attributes of transmigratory existence such as agency and the like and distinguished by freedom from sin and so on, the highest Self. And the knowledge of that Self does not only not promote action but rather cuts all action short, as will be declared in Sutra 16. Hence the view of the reverend Badarayawa which was stated in Sutra i remains valid and cannot be shaken by fallacious reasoning about the subordination of knowledge to action and the like. That the Lord who is superior to the embodied Self is the Self many scriptural texts declare ; compare ' He who perceives all and knows all' (Mu. Up. I, i, 9) ; ' From terror of it the wind blows, from terror the sun rises' (Taitt. Up. II, 8); 'It is a great terror, a raised thunderbolt' (Ka. Up. II, 6, 2); 'By the command of that imperishable one, O Gargi ' (Bri. Up. Ill, 8, 9) ; ' It thought, may I be many, may I grow forth. It sent forth fire ' (K/i. Up. VI, 2, 3). There are indeed passages in
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.