Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1VIII, 7) ; 'He who knows him becomes a muni' (Brt. Up. IV, 4, 22) ; ' He who dwelling within the Self pulls the Self within' (Br/. Up. Ill, 7, 23); which all of them refer to a difference (between the highest and the individual Self) would be inappropriate, if there were no difference. — But, it may be said, these statements of difference would agree better with a relation similar to that of master and servant. — Hence the sutrakara adds, 'and otherwise also.' That the soul is a part (of the Lord) we learn not only from the passages declaring their difference, but there are other statements also which teach their non-difference. The members of a certain jakha of the Atharva-veda record in a Brahma-sukta that ' Brahman are the fishermen, Brahman the slaves, Brahman these gamblers,' &c. Here low creatures such as fishermen, and slaves depending on their masters, and gamblers are called Brahman ; whence it appears that all individual souls which have entered into aggregates of effects and instruments (i. e. bodies) depending on name and form are Brahman. The same view is set forth in other passages such as ' Thou art woman, thou art man ; thou art youth, thou art maiden ; thou as an old man totterest along on thy staff, thou art born with thy face turned everywhere ' (5ve. Up. IV, 3), and 'The wise one who, having produced all forms and made all names, sits calling (the things by their names)' (Taitt. Ar. Ill, 12, 7). Passages such as ' There is no other seer but he ' and other similar ones establish the same truth. — Non-differenced intelligence belongs to the soul and the Lord alike, as heat belongs to the sparks as well as the fire. — From these two views of difference and non-difference there results the comprehensive view of the soul being a part of the Lord. — The following Sutra supplies a further reason.
244. And on account of the mantra. A mantra also intimates the same view. ' Such is the greatness of it ; greater than it is the Person. One foot of it are all beings, three feet of it are the Immortal in heaven' (K/i. Up. HI, 12, 6). Here the word 'beings' I II ADIIYAYA, 3 PADA, 46. 63 denotes all moving and non-moving things, among which the souls occupy the first place ; in accordance with the use of the word in the following passage, ' Not giving pain tc^ any being (bhuta) except at the tirthas' [Kh. Up. VIII, 15). Herefrom also we conclude that the individual soul is a part of the Lord. — And again from the following reason. 45. Moreover it is so stated in Smrzti. In the Ijvaragitas (Bhagavad-gita) also it is said that the soul is a part of the Lord, ' an eternal part of me becomes the individual soul in the world of life ' (Bha. Gi. XV, 7). With regard to the assertion made above, viz. that in ordinary life the relation of ruler and ruled is known to hold good in the case of master and servant &c. only, we remark that, although that may be the case in ordinary life, we ascertain from scripture that the relation of part and whole and that of ruler and ruled may go together. Nor is there anything contradictory in assuming that the Lord who is provided with superexcellent limiting adjuncts rules the souls which are connected with inferior adjuncts only.
3Here the purvapakshin raises another objection. If we admit that the souls are parts of the Lord, it follows that the Lord also, whose part the soul is, will be afflicted by the pain caused to the soul by its experience of the sa;;zsarastate ; as we see in ordinary life that the entire Devadatta suffers from the pain affecting his hand or foot or some other limb. Herefrom it would follow that they who obtain Brahman obtain a greater pain ^ ; so that the former sawsara-condition would be preferable, and complete knowledge be devoid of purpose. — To this the following Sutra replies. 46. (As the soul is affected by pleasure and pain) not so the highest (Lord); as in the case of light and so on. We maintain that the highest Lord does not feel the pain of the sa;;zsara-state in the same way as the soul does. The soul being engrossed by Nescience identifies itself as it were ^ Viz. by participating in all pain. 64 vedanta-sCtras.
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.
1VIII, 7) ; 'He who knows him becomes a muni' (Brt. Up. IV, 4, 22) ; ' He who dwelling within the Self pulls the Self within' (Br/. Up. Ill, 7, 23); which all of them refer to a difference (between the highest and the individual Self) would be inappropriate, if there were no difference. — But, it may be said, these statements of difference would agree better with a relation similar to that of master and servant. — Hence the sutrakara adds, 'and otherwise also.' That the soul is a part (of the Lord) we learn not only from the passages declaring their difference, but there are other statements also which teach their non-difference. The members of a certain jakha of the Atharva-veda record in a Brahma-sukta that ' Brahman are the fishermen, Brahman the slaves, Brahman these gamblers,' &c. Here low creatures such as fishermen, and slaves depending on their masters, and gamblers are called Brahman ; whence it appears that all individual souls which have entered into aggregates of effects and instruments (i. e. bodies) depending on name and form are Brahman. The same view is set forth in other passages such as ' Thou art woman, thou art man ; thou art youth, thou art maiden ; thou as an old man totterest along on thy staff, thou art born with thy face turned everywhere ' (5ve. Up. IV, 3), and 'The wise one who, having produced all forms and made all names, sits calling (the things by their names)' (Taitt. Ar. Ill, 12, 7). Passages such as ' There is no other seer but he ' and other similar ones establish the same truth. — Non-differenced intelligence belongs to the soul and the Lord alike, as heat belongs to the sparks as well as the fire. — From these two views of difference and non-difference there results the comprehensive view of the soul being a part of the Lord. — The following Sutra supplies a further reason.
244. And on account of the mantra. A mantra also intimates the same view. ' Such is the greatness of it ; greater than it is the Person. One foot of it are all beings, three feet of it are the Immortal in heaven' (K/i. Up. HI, 12, 6). Here the word 'beings' I II ADIIYAYA, 3 PADA, 46. 63 denotes all moving and non-moving things, among which the souls occupy the first place ; in accordance with the use of the word in the following passage, ' Not giving pain tc^ any being (bhuta) except at the tirthas' [Kh. Up. VIII, 15). Herefrom also we conclude that the individual soul is a part of the Lord. — And again from the following reason. 45. Moreover it is so stated in Smrzti. In the Ijvaragitas (Bhagavad-gita) also it is said that the soul is a part of the Lord, ' an eternal part of me becomes the individual soul in the world of life ' (Bha. Gi. XV, 7). With regard to the assertion made above, viz. that in ordinary life the relation of ruler and ruled is known to hold good in the case of master and servant &c. only, we remark that, although that may be the case in ordinary life, we ascertain from scripture that the relation of part and whole and that of ruler and ruled may go together. Nor is there anything contradictory in assuming that the Lord who is provided with superexcellent limiting adjuncts rules the souls which are connected with inferior adjuncts only.
3Here the purvapakshin raises another objection. If we admit that the souls are parts of the Lord, it follows that the Lord also, whose part the soul is, will be afflicted by the pain caused to the soul by its experience of the sa;;zsarastate ; as we see in ordinary life that the entire Devadatta suffers from the pain affecting his hand or foot or some other limb. Herefrom it would follow that they who obtain Brahman obtain a greater pain ^ ; so that the former sawsara-condition would be preferable, and complete knowledge be devoid of purpose. — To this the following Sutra replies. 46. (As the soul is affected by pleasure and pain) not so the highest (Lord); as in the case of light and so on. We maintain that the highest Lord does not feel the pain of the sa;;zsara-state in the same way as the soul does. The soul being engrossed by Nescience identifies itself as it were ^ Viz. by participating in all pain. 64 vedanta-sCtras.
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.