Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Although the text enumerates different qualities, such as freeness from sin, &c., these qualities rest only on fanciful conceptions due to difference of words; for what the text intimates is only absence in general of all qualities such as sin and the rest. Intelligence alone constitutes the nature of the Self, and hence it is proper to conclude that it manifests itself in a nature consisting of that only. This conclusion will also agree with other scriptural texts, such as BW. Up. IV, 5, 13, 'Thus this Self has neither inside nor outside, but is altogether a mass of knowledge.' — Qualities, on the other hand, such as having true wishes, are indeed mentioned by the text as real (positive) attributes, the meaning being that his wishes are true, i.e. truly existent ; but all the same they, as depending on the connexion with limiting adjuncts, cannot constitute the true nature of the
2Upanyasa is the reference to something known (established elsewhere), which reference is made with a view to a vidhi, i. e. the establishing of something not yet known (upanyaso namoddeja,^ sa X'a^^nyatra ^Mtasya^-rnyavidhanayanuvadaA). Thus here the qualities — freeness from sin — are referred to as known, for the purpose of establishing the vidhi, ' That it is which we must search out.' — The passage, ' He there wanders about,' &c., is a vidhi ; for it teaches what is not already known from elsewhere. — -The mentioning of such qualities as omniscience and omnipotence is vyapade.ra, i.e. simple expression of something known without reference to a vidhi. 4 I O VEDANTA-SU TR AS. Self, as intelligence does. For all manifoldness of character has to be denied of Brahman, as we have shown under III, 2, II. For the same reason the mention made of eating and so on, means only the absence of all pain in general, and aims at glorification, just as the passage about ' loving the Self {Kh. Up. VII, 25, 2), For love, play, and the like cannot in their literal sense be ascribed to the action of the Self, because they presuppose something second (beyond the Self). Hence the soul manifests itself in the nature of pure intelligence, free from all manifoldness, calm, not capable of being expressed by any terms. This is the view of the teacher Aurt'ulomi.
37. Thus also, on account of the existence of the former (qualities), (admitted) owing to reference and so on, there is absence of contradiction, (as) Badaraya;^a (thinks). Thus also, i. e. although it be admitted that intelligence only constitutes the true nature of the Self, also the former nature, i.e. lordly power like that of Brahman, which is intimated by reference and the rest, is — with a view to the world of appearances — not rejected ; and hence there is no contradiction. This is the opinion of the teacher BadarAya«a. 8. But by mere will (the released effect their purposes) ; because scripture states that. In the meditation on Brahman within the heart we read as follows : ' If he desires the world of the fathers, by his mere will the fathers rise,' &c. {Kk. Up. VIII, 2, i). — A doubt here presents itself whether the will alone is the cause of the rising of the fathers, or the will joined with some other operative cause. — The purvapakshin maintains that although scripture says '' by his mere will,' some other cause must be supposed to co-operatCj as in ordinary life. For as in our ordinary experience the meeting with one's father is caused by one's will, and, in addition, by the act of going and so on, so it will be in the case of the released soul also ; and IV ADIIYAYA, 4 PADA, lO. 4II
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.
1Although the text enumerates different qualities, such as freeness from sin, &c., these qualities rest only on fanciful conceptions due to difference of words; for what the text intimates is only absence in general of all qualities such as sin and the rest. Intelligence alone constitutes the nature of the Self, and hence it is proper to conclude that it manifests itself in a nature consisting of that only. This conclusion will also agree with other scriptural texts, such as BW. Up. IV, 5, 13, 'Thus this Self has neither inside nor outside, but is altogether a mass of knowledge.' — Qualities, on the other hand, such as having true wishes, are indeed mentioned by the text as real (positive) attributes, the meaning being that his wishes are true, i.e. truly existent ; but all the same they, as depending on the connexion with limiting adjuncts, cannot constitute the true nature of the
2Upanyasa is the reference to something known (established elsewhere), which reference is made with a view to a vidhi, i. e. the establishing of something not yet known (upanyaso namoddeja,^ sa X'a^^nyatra ^Mtasya^-rnyavidhanayanuvadaA). Thus here the qualities — freeness from sin — are referred to as known, for the purpose of establishing the vidhi, ' That it is which we must search out.' — The passage, ' He there wanders about,' &c., is a vidhi ; for it teaches what is not already known from elsewhere. — -The mentioning of such qualities as omniscience and omnipotence is vyapade.ra, i.e. simple expression of something known without reference to a vidhi. 4 I O VEDANTA-SU TR AS. Self, as intelligence does. For all manifoldness of character has to be denied of Brahman, as we have shown under III, 2, II. For the same reason the mention made of eating and so on, means only the absence of all pain in general, and aims at glorification, just as the passage about ' loving the Self {Kh. Up. VII, 25, 2), For love, play, and the like cannot in their literal sense be ascribed to the action of the Self, because they presuppose something second (beyond the Self). Hence the soul manifests itself in the nature of pure intelligence, free from all manifoldness, calm, not capable of being expressed by any terms. This is the view of the teacher Aurt'ulomi.
37. Thus also, on account of the existence of the former (qualities), (admitted) owing to reference and so on, there is absence of contradiction, (as) Badaraya;^a (thinks). Thus also, i. e. although it be admitted that intelligence only constitutes the true nature of the Self, also the former nature, i.e. lordly power like that of Brahman, which is intimated by reference and the rest, is — with a view to the world of appearances — not rejected ; and hence there is no contradiction. This is the opinion of the teacher BadarAya«a. 8. But by mere will (the released effect their purposes) ; because scripture states that. In the meditation on Brahman within the heart we read as follows : ' If he desires the world of the fathers, by his mere will the fathers rise,' &c. {Kk. Up. VIII, 2, i). — A doubt here presents itself whether the will alone is the cause of the rising of the fathers, or the will joined with some other operative cause. — The purvapakshin maintains that although scripture says '' by his mere will,' some other cause must be supposed to co-operatCj as in ordinary life. For as in our ordinary experience the meeting with one's father is caused by one's will, and, in addition, by the act of going and so on, so it will be in the case of the released soul also ; and IV ADIIYAYA, 4 PADA, lO. 4II
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.