Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1thus we do not assume something contrary to observation. When the text says ' by his mere will,' it implies, as in the case of a king, the whole apparatus of other easily procurable instrumental causes by which the desired object is obtained. Besides, if the fathers and so on rose owing to a mere wish, they would be of unstable nature, like the imaginary representation of some desired object, and thus not be able to procure any solid enjoyment. — To this we reply that the rising of the fathers and so on is due to the will only. — Why so? — Because scripture declares this. If any other cause were required, the direct scriptural statement 'by his will only' would thereby be contradicted. And even if we admit some other cause accompanying the act of will, it cannot be a cause to be realised by an effort ; for therefrom it would follow that before the realisation of that cause the will would be barren. Nor can the analogies of ordinary experience be applied to something to be learned from scripture. For as the will of the released differs in nature from the will of ordinary men, it may have the power of effecting something that possesses as much stability as the special purpose requires. 9. And for this very same reason (the released soul is) without another lord.
2For this very same reason, i. e. owing to the fact of the will of the released person not being barren, he who knows has no other lord over himself. For not even an ordinary person when forming wishes will, if he can help it, wish himself to be subject to another master. And scripture also declares this when saying, ' Those who depart from hence, after having discovered the Self and those true desires, for them there is freedom in all worlds' [Kh. Up. VIII, i, 6). 10. The absence (of a body and sense-organs, on the part of the released) Badari (asserts) ; for thus scripture says. The passage, ' By his mere wish the fathers rise,' shows that the released possesses a mind (internal organ, manas) whereby he wills. A question however arises whether he 4 I 2 VEDANTA-SUTRAS. who knows, after having reached lordly power, possesses a body and senses, or not. Here the teacher Badari is of opinion that the glorified possessor o{ knowledge is without body and sense-organs. — Why so ? — Because scripture declares this, ■ With the mind seeing those wishes he rejoices * (K/i. Up. VIII, 12, j). If he rejoiced with the mind, the body, and the senses, scripture would not specially say ' with the mind.' Hence there are neither body nor senseorgans in the state of release. 11. The presence (of a body and senses) 6^aimini (asserts); because the text records option (of the released person multiplying himself).
3The teacher 6^aimini is of opinion that the released person possesses a body and sense-organs as well as a mind. For passages like ■ He is onefold, he is threefold ' (K/i. Up. VII, 26, 2) declare that the Self has the option of manifold existence which cannot be brought about without manifoldness of bod}-. — The capability of optionally multiplying one's self is, indeed, mentioned in the knowledge of plenitude (bhuman) which refers to Brahman as devoid of qualities, but this lordly power which is valid only for the qualified state is there mentioned only in order to glorify the knowledge of the (unqualified) plenitude ; and it therefore presents itself as constituting the fruit of qualified knowledge ^. 12. For this reason Badaraya/^ia (opines that the released person is) of both kinds ; as in the case of the twelve days' sacrifice. The teacher Badarayawa, again, thinks that for this reason, i.e. because scripture contains indications of both kinds, the proper conclusion is that the released person exists in both ^ Manifoldness of the Self is mentioned in a vidya referring to the highest Brahman ; but its introduction there is not due to the wish of teaching something about that state, but merely of, rhetorically, glorifying it. We, therefore, are entitled to view that passage as teaching something about him who possesses the lower knowledsre. IV ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 1 5. 413
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.
1thus we do not assume something contrary to observation. When the text says ' by his mere will,' it implies, as in the case of a king, the whole apparatus of other easily procurable instrumental causes by which the desired object is obtained. Besides, if the fathers and so on rose owing to a mere wish, they would be of unstable nature, like the imaginary representation of some desired object, and thus not be able to procure any solid enjoyment. — To this we reply that the rising of the fathers and so on is due to the will only. — Why so? — Because scripture declares this. If any other cause were required, the direct scriptural statement 'by his will only' would thereby be contradicted. And even if we admit some other cause accompanying the act of will, it cannot be a cause to be realised by an effort ; for therefrom it would follow that before the realisation of that cause the will would be barren. Nor can the analogies of ordinary experience be applied to something to be learned from scripture. For as the will of the released differs in nature from the will of ordinary men, it may have the power of effecting something that possesses as much stability as the special purpose requires. 9. And for this very same reason (the released soul is) without another lord.
2For this very same reason, i. e. owing to the fact of the will of the released person not being barren, he who knows has no other lord over himself. For not even an ordinary person when forming wishes will, if he can help it, wish himself to be subject to another master. And scripture also declares this when saying, ' Those who depart from hence, after having discovered the Self and those true desires, for them there is freedom in all worlds' [Kh. Up. VIII, i, 6). 10. The absence (of a body and sense-organs, on the part of the released) Badari (asserts) ; for thus scripture says. The passage, ' By his mere wish the fathers rise,' shows that the released possesses a mind (internal organ, manas) whereby he wills. A question however arises whether he 4 I 2 VEDANTA-SUTRAS. who knows, after having reached lordly power, possesses a body and senses, or not. Here the teacher Badari is of opinion that the glorified possessor o{ knowledge is without body and sense-organs. — Why so ? — Because scripture declares this, ■ With the mind seeing those wishes he rejoices * (K/i. Up. VIII, 12, j). If he rejoiced with the mind, the body, and the senses, scripture would not specially say ' with the mind.' Hence there are neither body nor senseorgans in the state of release. 11. The presence (of a body and senses) 6^aimini (asserts); because the text records option (of the released person multiplying himself).
3The teacher 6^aimini is of opinion that the released person possesses a body and sense-organs as well as a mind. For passages like ■ He is onefold, he is threefold ' (K/i. Up. VII, 26, 2) declare that the Self has the option of manifold existence which cannot be brought about without manifoldness of bod}-. — The capability of optionally multiplying one's self is, indeed, mentioned in the knowledge of plenitude (bhuman) which refers to Brahman as devoid of qualities, but this lordly power which is valid only for the qualified state is there mentioned only in order to glorify the knowledge of the (unqualified) plenitude ; and it therefore presents itself as constituting the fruit of qualified knowledge ^. 12. For this reason Badaraya/^ia (opines that the released person is) of both kinds ; as in the case of the twelve days' sacrifice. The teacher Badarayawa, again, thinks that for this reason, i.e. because scripture contains indications of both kinds, the proper conclusion is that the released person exists in both ^ Manifoldness of the Self is mentioned in a vidya referring to the highest Brahman ; but its introduction there is not due to the wish of teaching something about that state, but merely of, rhetorically, glorifying it. We, therefore, are entitled to view that passage as teaching something about him who possesses the lower knowledsre. IV ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 1 5. 413
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.