The Vedânta-Sûtras, Part II, with the Commentary by Sankarâkârya — SBE Vol. 38
The text is shown on its own: no facing layer is held for this issue.
The translator’s English as printed (George Thibaut). The original-language text is not held; names are romanised as the translator printed them.
Because that Self is of the nature of intelligence, devoid of all difference, transcending speech and mind, to bep. 158 described only by denying of it all other characteristics, therefore the Moksha ^"astras compare it to the images of the sun reflected in the water and the like, meaning thereby that all difference in Brahman is unreal, only due to its limiting conditions. Compare, e.g. out of many, the two following passages : ' As the one luminous sun when entering into relation to many different waters is himself rendered multiform by his limiting adjuncts ; so also the one divine unborn Self;' and 'The one Self of all beings separately abides in all the individual beings ; hence it appears one and many at the same time, just as the one moon is multiplied by its reflections in the water.' The next Sutra raises an objection.
19. But there is no parallelism (of the two things compared), since (in the case of Brahman) there is not apprehended (any separate substance) comparable to the water.
Since no substance comparable to the water is apprehended in the case of Brahman, a parallelism between Brahman and the reflected images of the sun cannot be established. In the case of the sun and other material luminous bodies, there exists a separate material substance occupying a different place, viz. water ; hence the light of the sun, 6cc., may be reflected. The Self, on the other hand, is not a material thing, and, as it is present everywhere and all is identical with it, there are no limiting adjuncts different from it and occupying a different place. — Therefore the instances are not parallel.
The next Sutra disposes of this objection.
20. Since (the highest Brahman) is inside (of the limiting adjuncts), it participates in their increase and decrease ; owing to the appropriateness (thus resulting) of the two (things compared) it is thus (i.e. the comparison holds good).
The parallel instance (of the sun's reflection in the water) is unobjectionable, since a common feature — with reference to which alone the comparison is instituted — does exist.
Ill ADHYAYA, 2 PA DA, 21. 1 59
Whenever two things are compared, they are so only with reference to some particular point they have in common. Entire equality of the two can never be demonstrated ; indeed if it could be demonstrated there would be an end of that particular relation which gives rise to the comparison. Nor does the sutrakara institute the comparison objected to on his own account ; he merely sets forth the purport of a comparison actually met with in scripture. — Now, the special feature on which the comparison rests is ' the participation in increase and decrease.' The reflected image of the sun dilates when the surface of the water expands ; it contracts when the water shrinks ; it trembles when the water is agitated ; it divides itself when the water is divided. It thus participates in all the attributes and conditions of the water ; while the real sun remains all the time the same. — Similarly Brahman, although in reality uniform and never changing, participates as it were in the attributes and states of the body and the other limiting adjuncts within which it abides ; it grows with them as it were, decreases with them as it were, and so on. As thus the two things compared possess certain common features no objection can be made to the comparison.
2 1, And on account of the declaration (of scripture).
No commentary for this page under the selected tracks.
There is commentary on page 1.