Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1In the third pada it has been shown that a conflict of Vedic passages as to ether, &c., does not exist. The same is now done in this fourth pada with regard to the vital airs. On the one hand the chapters treating of the origin of things do not record an origin of the vital airs ; so e.g. {Kh. Up. VI, 2, 3) ' It sent forth fire,' &c. ; and (Taitt. Up. II, i) ' From that Self sprang ether,' &c. On the other hand it is said expressly in some places that the vital airs were not produced. The following passage, e. g. ' Nonbeing indeed was this in the beginning ; they say : what was that non-being? those rz'shis indeed were the non-being in the beginning ; they say : who are those rz'shis ? the vital airs indeed are the rz'shis ' (vSat. Br. VI, i, i, i), states that the vital airs existed before the origin of things. — In other passages again we read of the origin of the vital airs also, so e.g. 'As small sparks come forth from fire, thus do all vital airs come forth from that Self (Brz. Up. II, I, 20); 'From that is born the vital air, mind, and all organs of sense' (Mu. Up. II, i, 3) ; 'The seven vital airs also spring from him' (Mu. Up. II, i, 8) ; ' He sent forth the vital air ; from the vital air j-raddha, ether, air, light, water, earth, sense, mind, food ' (Pr. Up. VI, 4). Hence as there is a conflict of scriptural passages, and as no reason can be made out for deciding in favour of either alternative, the purvapakshin thinks that either no opinion can be formed, or that the passages relative to the origin of the vital airs must be taken in a metaphorical sense, since scripture expressly states the prawas to have existed before the creation.
2pra;/as.' — What then, it will be asked, is the fitness of the word ' thus,' as there is no point of comparison with the matter under discussion ? The matter under discussion at the conclusion of the preceding pada was the refutation of those who maintain a plurality of omnipresent Selfs, and with this no comparison can be instituted because there is no similarity. For a comparison is possible only where there is similarity ; as when we say, e.g. ' as a lion so is Balavarman.' Possibly it might be said that the comparison is meant to intimate similarity with the admh/a ; the meaning being that as the adr/sh/a is not limited because it is produced in proximity to all Selfs, so the pra;^as also are not limited with regard to all the different Selfs. But, on that explanation, the Sutra would be an idle repetition, as it has already been explained that that absence of limitation is due to the non-limitation of bodies. — Nor can the pra;zas be compared with the individual soul, because that would be contrary to the conclusion about to be established. For it has been shown that the individual soul is without an origin, while the intention is to declare that the pra^as have an origin. Hence it appears that the word ' so ' is devoid of connexion. — Not so, we reply. A connexion may be established by means of a comparison based on the exemplifying passages. Under that category fall those passages which state the origin of the pra;^as, as e. g. ' From that Self come forth all prawas, all worlds, all gods, all beings' {Bri. Up. II, I, 20) ; which passage means that as the worlds and so on are produced from the highest Brahman so the pri/^as also. Such passages also as (Mu. Up. II, i, 3) ' From him are born pra«a, mind and all organs of sense, ether, air, light, water, and the earth the support of all,' are to be considered as intimating that the origin of the pra;/as is analogous to that of the ether, &c. — Or else, as a connexion with a somewhat remote object of comparison is resorted to in such cases as the one treated of in Pu. Mi. Su. Ill, 4, 32 (' and the accident in drinking Soma, in the same manner')^, we may construe our Sutra in the following
3^ The ' tadvat ' in the quoted Sutra refers not to the immediately preceding adhikarawa but to SQtra III, 4, 28. 76 VEDANTA-SUTRAS. way: in the same way as ether and so on, which are mentioned in the beginning of the preceding pada, are understood to be effects of the highest Brahman, so the pra;/as also are effects of the highest Brahman. And if it be asked what reason we have for assuming the pra;/as to be so, we reply : the fact of this being stated by scripture. — But it has been shown above that in some places the origin of the pra;^as is not mentioned. — That is of no weight, we reply, as it is mentioned in other places. For the circumstance of a thing not being stated in some places has no power to invalidate what is stated about it in other places. Hence, on account of equality of scriptural statement, it is proper to maintain that the pra;?as also are produced in the same way as ether and so on. 2. On account of the impossibility of a secondary (origin of the pra;2as).
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.
1In the third pada it has been shown that a conflict of Vedic passages as to ether, &c., does not exist. The same is now done in this fourth pada with regard to the vital airs. On the one hand the chapters treating of the origin of things do not record an origin of the vital airs ; so e.g. {Kh. Up. VI, 2, 3) ' It sent forth fire,' &c. ; and (Taitt. Up. II, i) ' From that Self sprang ether,' &c. On the other hand it is said expressly in some places that the vital airs were not produced. The following passage, e. g. ' Nonbeing indeed was this in the beginning ; they say : what was that non-being? those rz'shis indeed were the non-being in the beginning ; they say : who are those rz'shis ? the vital airs indeed are the rz'shis ' (vSat. Br. VI, i, i, i), states that the vital airs existed before the origin of things. — In other passages again we read of the origin of the vital airs also, so e.g. 'As small sparks come forth from fire, thus do all vital airs come forth from that Self (Brz. Up. II, I, 20); 'From that is born the vital air, mind, and all organs of sense' (Mu. Up. II, i, 3) ; 'The seven vital airs also spring from him' (Mu. Up. II, i, 8) ; ' He sent forth the vital air ; from the vital air j-raddha, ether, air, light, water, earth, sense, mind, food ' (Pr. Up. VI, 4). Hence as there is a conflict of scriptural passages, and as no reason can be made out for deciding in favour of either alternative, the purvapakshin thinks that either no opinion can be formed, or that the passages relative to the origin of the vital airs must be taken in a metaphorical sense, since scripture expressly states the prawas to have existed before the creation.
2pra;/as.' — What then, it will be asked, is the fitness of the word ' thus,' as there is no point of comparison with the matter under discussion ? The matter under discussion at the conclusion of the preceding pada was the refutation of those who maintain a plurality of omnipresent Selfs, and with this no comparison can be instituted because there is no similarity. For a comparison is possible only where there is similarity ; as when we say, e.g. ' as a lion so is Balavarman.' Possibly it might be said that the comparison is meant to intimate similarity with the admh/a ; the meaning being that as the adr/sh/a is not limited because it is produced in proximity to all Selfs, so the pra;^as also are not limited with regard to all the different Selfs. But, on that explanation, the Sutra would be an idle repetition, as it has already been explained that that absence of limitation is due to the non-limitation of bodies. — Nor can the pra;zas be compared with the individual soul, because that would be contrary to the conclusion about to be established. For it has been shown that the individual soul is without an origin, while the intention is to declare that the pra^as have an origin. Hence it appears that the word ' so ' is devoid of connexion. — Not so, we reply. A connexion may be established by means of a comparison based on the exemplifying passages. Under that category fall those passages which state the origin of the pra;^as, as e. g. ' From that Self come forth all prawas, all worlds, all gods, all beings' {Bri. Up. II, I, 20) ; which passage means that as the worlds and so on are produced from the highest Brahman so the pri/^as also. Such passages also as (Mu. Up. II, i, 3) ' From him are born pra«a, mind and all organs of sense, ether, air, light, water, and the earth the support of all,' are to be considered as intimating that the origin of the pra;/as is analogous to that of the ether, &c. — Or else, as a connexion with a somewhat remote object of comparison is resorted to in such cases as the one treated of in Pu. Mi. Su. Ill, 4, 32 (' and the accident in drinking Soma, in the same manner')^, we may construe our Sutra in the following
3^ The ' tadvat ' in the quoted Sutra refers not to the immediately preceding adhikarawa but to SQtra III, 4, 28. 76 VEDANTA-SUTRAS. way: in the same way as ether and so on, which are mentioned in the beginning of the preceding pada, are understood to be effects of the highest Brahman, so the pra;/as also are effects of the highest Brahman. And if it be asked what reason we have for assuming the pra;/as to be so, we reply : the fact of this being stated by scripture. — But it has been shown above that in some places the origin of the pra;^as is not mentioned. — That is of no weight, we reply, as it is mentioned in other places. For the circumstance of a thing not being stated in some places has no power to invalidate what is stated about it in other places. Hence, on account of equality of scriptural statement, it is proper to maintain that the pra;?as also are produced in the same way as ether and so on. 2. On account of the impossibility of a secondary (origin of the pra;2as).
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.