Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1number, seven pra7?as have to be assumed, but rather that there are eleven pra;zas, in deference to the higher number. This conclusion is confirmed by one of the passages quoted, ' Ten are these pra;^as in man, and Atman is the eleventh.' By the word Atman we have to understand the internal organ, on account of its ruling over the organs. Should it be objected that scripture also mentions numbers higher than eleven, viz. twelve and thirteen, we admit that, but remark that there are no objective effects in addition to the eleven (well-known) objective effects on account of which additional organs would have to be assumed. There are five distinctions of buddhi having for their respective objects sound, touch, colour, taste, and smell, and on their account there are the five intellectual organs ; again there are five classes of action, viz. speaking, taking, going, evacuation, and begetting, and on their account there are the five organs of action ; finally there is the manas which has all things for its objects and extends to the past, the present, and the future; it is one only but has various functions. On account of the plurality of its functions we find it designated by different terms in different places, as manas or buddhi or aha;;zkara or -^itta. Thus scripture also after having enumerated the various functions such as desire, &c., says at the end, 'All this is manas only.' — That passage again which speaks of the pra;/5s of the head as seven means four prawas only, which on account of the plurality of their places may be counted as seven ; viz. the two ears, the two eyes, the two nostrils, and speech. — Nor can it be maintained that there are in reality only so many (i.e. seven), the other pra7/as being mere functions of the seven ; for the functions of the hands and so on are absolutely different (from the functions of the seven senses admitted by the purvapakshin). — Again, in the passage ' Nine prawas indeed are in man, the navel is the tenth,' the expression ' ten pra/zas ' is used to denote the different openings of the human body, not the difference of nature of the pra;?as, as we conclude from the navel being mentioned as the eleventh. For no pra;za is known that bears the name of navel ; but the navel as being one of the special abodes of the chief pra;za is here enu- [38] G
282 vedanta-sOtras. merated as a tenth pra//a. — In some places so and so many are counted for the purpose of meditation ; in other places so and so many for the purpose of illustration ^. As the statements concerning the number of the pra;/as are of so varying a nature we must therefore distinguish in each case what the object of the statement is. Meanwhile it remains a settled conclusion that that statement which makes the pra;/as to be eleven is authoritative, on account of the objective effects (being eleven also). The two Sutras (referring to the number of the pranas) may be construed in the following manner also. The prawas are seven because scripture mentions the going (gati) of seven only, ' When he thus departs life departs after him, and when life thus departs all the other pr^^zas ^ depart after it ' (Br/. Up. IV, 4, 2). — But, it may be objected, this passage says 'all the other pra;/as ; ' how then does it declare the going of seven only? — The Sutra replies, 'on account of their being specified.' Seven senses only, from seeing up to feeling, are specified there because so many only are under discussion ; as w'e see from the enumeration given in the passage, ' When that person in the eye turns away then he ceases -to know any forms. He has become one they say, he does not see ' &c. The word ' all ' refers here only to what is under discussion, i.e. only to the seven pra;^as mentioned before, not to any other. Analogously
3when we say ' all the Brahmawas have been fed,' we mean only those Brahma;/as who have been invited and concern us at the time^ not any other. — If it be objected that the passage quoted mentions understanding (vi^;7ana) as the eighth thing departing, and that we therefore have no right to speak of the departing of seven only, we reply that manas and understanding differ not in essential nature but only in function, and that on this account we are entitled to speak of seven pra;/as only. — The answer to this ^ Sapta prawaA prabhavantity ader gatim aha kva/'id iti, ash/au graha ityader gatwi sfi/tayati gatim iti. An. Gi. '^ I.e. seeing, smelling, tasting, speaking, hearing, feeling, and the manas. II ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 6.
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.
1number, seven pra7?as have to be assumed, but rather that there are eleven pra;zas, in deference to the higher number. This conclusion is confirmed by one of the passages quoted, ' Ten are these pra;^as in man, and Atman is the eleventh.' By the word Atman we have to understand the internal organ, on account of its ruling over the organs. Should it be objected that scripture also mentions numbers higher than eleven, viz. twelve and thirteen, we admit that, but remark that there are no objective effects in addition to the eleven (well-known) objective effects on account of which additional organs would have to be assumed. There are five distinctions of buddhi having for their respective objects sound, touch, colour, taste, and smell, and on their account there are the five intellectual organs ; again there are five classes of action, viz. speaking, taking, going, evacuation, and begetting, and on their account there are the five organs of action ; finally there is the manas which has all things for its objects and extends to the past, the present, and the future; it is one only but has various functions. On account of the plurality of its functions we find it designated by different terms in different places, as manas or buddhi or aha;;zkara or -^itta. Thus scripture also after having enumerated the various functions such as desire, &c., says at the end, 'All this is manas only.' — That passage again which speaks of the pra;/5s of the head as seven means four prawas only, which on account of the plurality of their places may be counted as seven ; viz. the two ears, the two eyes, the two nostrils, and speech. — Nor can it be maintained that there are in reality only so many (i.e. seven), the other pra7/as being mere functions of the seven ; for the functions of the hands and so on are absolutely different (from the functions of the seven senses admitted by the purvapakshin). — Again, in the passage ' Nine prawas indeed are in man, the navel is the tenth,' the expression ' ten pra/zas ' is used to denote the different openings of the human body, not the difference of nature of the pra;?as, as we conclude from the navel being mentioned as the eleventh. For no pra;za is known that bears the name of navel ; but the navel as being one of the special abodes of the chief pra;za is here enu- [38] G
282 vedanta-sOtras. merated as a tenth pra//a. — In some places so and so many are counted for the purpose of meditation ; in other places so and so many for the purpose of illustration ^. As the statements concerning the number of the pra;/as are of so varying a nature we must therefore distinguish in each case what the object of the statement is. Meanwhile it remains a settled conclusion that that statement which makes the pra;/as to be eleven is authoritative, on account of the objective effects (being eleven also). The two Sutras (referring to the number of the pranas) may be construed in the following manner also. The prawas are seven because scripture mentions the going (gati) of seven only, ' When he thus departs life departs after him, and when life thus departs all the other pr^^zas ^ depart after it ' (Br/. Up. IV, 4, 2). — But, it may be objected, this passage says 'all the other pra;/as ; ' how then does it declare the going of seven only? — The Sutra replies, 'on account of their being specified.' Seven senses only, from seeing up to feeling, are specified there because so many only are under discussion ; as w'e see from the enumeration given in the passage, ' When that person in the eye turns away then he ceases -to know any forms. He has become one they say, he does not see ' &c. The word ' all ' refers here only to what is under discussion, i.e. only to the seven pra;^as mentioned before, not to any other. Analogously
3when we say ' all the Brahmawas have been fed,' we mean only those Brahma;/as who have been invited and concern us at the time^ not any other. — If it be objected that the passage quoted mentions understanding (vi^;7ana) as the eighth thing departing, and that we therefore have no right to speak of the departing of seven only, we reply that manas and understanding differ not in essential nature but only in function, and that on this account we are entitled to speak of seven pra;/as only. — The answer to this ^ Sapta prawaA prabhavantity ader gatim aha kva/'id iti, ash/au graha ityader gatwi sfi/tayati gatim iti. An. Gi. '^ I.e. seeing, smelling, tasting, speaking, hearing, feeling, and the manas. II ADHYAYA, 4 PADA, 6.
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.