Adhik. XI (15). — The non-operation of works stated in the two preceding adhikara/zas holds good only in the case of anarabdhakarya works, i. e. those works which have not yet begun to produce their effects, while it does not extend to the arabdhakarya works on which the present existence of the devotee depends.
Adhik. XII (16, 17). — From the rule enunciated in Adhik. X are excepted such sacrificial performances as are enjoined permanently (nitya) : so, for instance, the agnihotra, for they promote the origination of knowledge.
Adhik. XIII (18), — The origination of knowledge is promoted also by such sacrificial works as are not accom- panied with the knowledge of the upasanas referring to the different members of those works.
Adhik. XIV (19). — The arabdhakarya works have to be worked out fully by the fruition of their effects ; whereupon the vidvan becomes united with Brahman. — The ' bhoga ' of the Sutra is, according to vSahkara, restricted to the present existence of the devotee, since the complete know- ledge obtained by him destroys the nescience which other- wise would lead to future embodiments. According to Ramanu^a a number of embodied existences may have to be gone through before the effects of the arabdhakarya works are exhausted,
Pada II.
This and the two remaining padas of the fourth adhyaya describe the fate of the vidvan after death. According to vSankara we have to distinguish the vidvan who possesses the highest knowledge, viz. that he is one with the highest
1 Nanu vidushoxpi setikartavyatakopasananirvrzttaye vWshfyannadiphala- nisltfany eva kathaw tesham virodhad vina^a u>£yate. Tatraha pate tv iti. .Sarirapate tu tesham vinasa/i j-arirapatad urdhvaw tu vidyanuguwadmh^a- phalani sukn'tani na-syantity artha/£.
INTRODUCTION. lxxix
Brahman, and the vidvan who knows only the lower Brah-
man, and have to refer certain Sutras to the former and
others to the latter. According to Rctmclnu^a the vidvan
is one only.
Adhik. I, II, III (1-6).— On the death of the vidvan (i.e. of him who possesses the lower knowledge, according to 5ankara) his senses are merged in the manas, the manas in the chief vital air (prd^a), the vital air in the individual soul (^iva), the soul in the subtle elements. — According to R&m&niig-a the combination (sampatti) of the senses with the manas, &c. is a mere conjunction (sa/^yoga), not a merging (lay a).
Adhik. IV (7). — The vidvan (i.e. according to Sankara, he who possesses the lower knowledge) and the avidv&n, i.e. he who does not possess any knowledge of Brahman, pass through the same stages (i.e. those described hitherto) up to the entrance of the soul, together with the subtle elements, and so on into the n&dis. — The vidv&n also remains connected with the subtle elements because he has not yet completely destroyed avidya, so that the immor- tality which Scripture ascribes to him (amr/tatva;/z hi vidvan abhya^nute) is only a relative one. — Ramanu^-a quotes the following text regarding the immortality of the vidvan :
c Yad& sarve pramu^yante k&ma ye*sya hrz'di sthita^ atha martyo * mrito bhavaty atra brahma sama^nute/ and explains that the immortality which is here ascribed to the vidvan as soon as he abandons all desires can only mean the destruction— mentioned in the preceding pada — • of all the effects of good and evil works, while the ' reaching of Brahman ' can only refer to the intuition of Brahman vouchsafed to the meditating devotee.
Adhik. V (8-li) raises, according to 6ankara, the ques- tion whether the subtle elements of which Scripture says that they are combined with the highest deity (te^-a^ parasyaw devatay&m) are completely merged in the latter or not. The answer is that a complete absorption of the elements takes place only when final emancipation is reached ; that, on the other hand, as long as the sa^sara state lasts, the elements, although somehow combined with
lxxx VEDANTA-S^TRAS.
Brahman, remain distinct so as to be able to form new bodies for the soul.
According to Ramanu^a the Sutras 8-n do not con- stitute a new adhikara«a, but continue the discussion of the point mooted in 7. The immortality there spoken of does not imply the separation of the soul from the body, * because Scripture declares sa#/sara, i. e. embodiedness up to the reaching of Brahman ' (tasya tavad eva kiratn y&van na vimokshye atha sampatsye) (8). — That the soul after having departed from the gross body is not disconnected from the subtle elements, is also proved hereby, that the subtle body accompanies it, as is observed from authority1 (9). — Hence the immortality referred to in the scriptural passage quoted is not effected by means of the total destruction of the body (10).
Adhik. VI (13-14) is of special importance. — According to Sankara the Sfitras now turn from the discussion of the departure of him who possesses the lower knowledge only to the consideration of what becomes of him who has reached the higher knowledge. So far it has been taught that in the case of relative immortality (ensuing on the apara vidya) the subtle elements, together with the senses and so on, depart from the body of the dying devotee ; this implies at the same time that they do not depart from the body of the dying sage who knows himself to be one with Brahman. < — Against this latter implied doctrine Sutra 12 is supposed to formulate an objection. ' If it be said that the departure of the pra^as from the body of the dying sage is denied (viz. in Bri. Up. IV, 4, 5, na tasya pra^a utkramanti, of him the pra/zas do not pass out) ; we reply that in that passage the genitive "tasya" has the sense of the ablative "tasmat," so that the sense of the passage is, " from him, i.e. from the gtva, of the dying sage, the pra^as do not depart, but remain with it." ' — This objection 5ankara supposes to be disposed of in Sutra 13. 'By some there is given a clear denial of the departure of the pra^as in the case of the
1 Upalabhyate hi devayanena pantha ga.kMa.to vidushas tam pratibruyat satyam brfiyad iti ^andramasa sawvadava/^anena jarirasadbhava^, aiak sukshma- jariram anuvartate.
Introduction. 1
dying sage,' viz. in the passage Bri. Up. Ill, 2, 11, where Ya^Tzavalkya instructs Artabhaga that, when this man dies, the pra/zas do not depart from it (asmat ; the context showing that asmat means ' from it/ viz. from the body, and not ' from him,' viz. the £"iva). — The same view is, moreover, confirmed by Smrz'ti passages.
According to R&manu£*a the three Sutras forming vSari- kara's sixth adhikara^a do not constitute a new adhikara^a at all, and, moreover, have to be combined into two Sutras. The topic continuing to be discussed is the utkranti of the vidvan. If, Sutra 12 says, the utkranti of the pra/zas is not admitted, on the ground of the denial supposed to be contained in Bri. Up. IV, 4, 5 ; the reply is that the sense of the tasya there is £ jarirat ' (so that the passage means, ' from him, i. e. the £"iva, the pra^as do not depart ') ; for this is clearly shown by the reading of some, viz. the Madhyandinas, who, in their text of the passage, do not read ' tasya ' but ' tasmat' — With reference to the instruc- tion given by Ya^avalkya to Artabhaga, it is to be remarked that nothing there shows the ' ayam purusha ' to be the sage who knows Brahman. — And, finally, there are Smrzti passages declaring that the sage also when dying departs from the body.
Adhik. VII and VIII (15, 16) teach, according to Sankara, that, on the death of him who possesses the higher know- ledge, his pra;zas, elements, &c. are merged in Brahman, so as to be no longer distinct from it in any way.
According to Ramanu^a the two Sutras continue the
teaching about the pra;zas, bhutas, &c. of the vidvan in
general, and declare that they are finally merged in Brah-
man, not merely in the way of conjunction (sawyoga), but
completely1.
Adhik. IX (17). — 5ankara here returns to the owner of the apara vidya, while Ramanu^a continues the description of the utkranti of his vidvan. — The £*iva of the dying man
1 When the £"iva has passed out of the body and ascends to the world of Brahman, it remains enveloped by the subtle body until it reaches the river Vi^ara. There it divests itself of the subtle body, and the latter is merged in Brahman,
lxxxii vedanta-s6tras.
passes into the heart, and thence departs out of the body by means of the nadis ; the vidvan by means of the naaft called sushum^cl, the avidvan by means of some other nadt
Adhik. X (18, 19). — The departing soul passes up to the
sun by means of a ray of light which exists at night as well
as during day.
Adhik. XI (20, 21). — Also that vidvan who dies during the dakshkayana reaches Brahman.
Pada III.
Adhik. I, II, III (1-3) reconcile the different accounts
given in the Upanishads as to the stations of the way which
leads the vidvan up to Brahman.
Adhik. IV (4-6).— By the ' stations' we have, however, to
understand not only the subdivisions of the way but also
the divine beings which lead the soul on.
The remaining part of the pada is by Sankara divided into two adhikara/zas. Of these the former one (7-14) teaches that the Brahman to which the departed soul is led by the guardians of the path of the gods is not the highest Brahman, but the effected (karya) or qualified (sagu/za) Brahman. This is the opinion propounded in Sutras 7-1 1 by Badari; and, finally, accepted by .Sankara in his commentary on Sutra 14. In Sutras 12-14 Gaimini defends the opposite view, according to which the soul of the vidvan goes to the highest Brahman, not to the karyam brahma. But Gai- mini's view, although set forth in the latter part of the adhikara^a, is, according to Sankara, a mere purvapaksha, while Badarfs opinion represents the siddhanta. — The latter of the two adhikara^as (VI of the whole pada ; 15, 16) records the opinion of Badaraya/za on a collateral question, viz. whether, or not, all those who worship the effected Brah- man are led to it. The decision is that those only are guided to Brahman who have not worshipped it under a pratika form.
According to Ramanu^a, Sutras 7-16 form one adhikara/za
only, in which the views of Badari and of Caimini represent
two purvapakshas, while Badaraya/za's opinion is adopted
INTRODUCTION. Ixxxiil
as the siddhanta. The question is whether the guardians of the path lead to Brahman only those who worship the effected Brahman, i. e. Hira?/yagarbha, or those who worship the highest Brahman, or those who worship the individual soul as free from Prakrzti, and having Brahman for its Self (ye pratyagatmana/^ prakrztiviyukta/^ brahmatmakam upa- sate). — The first view is maintained by Badari in Sutra 7, ' The guardians lead to Brahman those who worship the effected Brahman, because going is possible towards the latter only;' for no movement can take place towards the highest and as such omnipresent Brahman. — The explana- tion of Sutra 9 is similar to that of Sankara ; but more clearly replies to the objection (that, if Hira^yagarbha were meant in the passage, 'purusho*manava^ sa etan brahma gama- yati,' the text would read {sa etan brahma^am gamayati') that Hira^yagarbha is called Brahman on account of his nearness to Brahman, i.e. on account of his prathama^atva. — The explanation of 10, 11 is essentially the same as in 6an- kara; so also of 12-14. — The siddhanta view is established in Sutra 13, ' It is the opinion of Badaraya^a that it, i. e. the ga/za of the guardians, leads to Brahman those who do not take their stand on what is pratika, i. e. those who worship the highest Brahman, and those who meditate on the indi- vidual Self as dissociated from prakrz'ti, and having Brahman for its Self, but not those who worship Brahman under pratikas. For both views — that of Gaimini as well as that of Badari — are faulty/ The karya view contradicts such passages as ' asma£ Marirat samutthaya para/^ ^yotir upa- sampadya,' &c. ; the para view, such passages as that in the pa^agni-vidya, which declares that ya ittha^ viduA, i. e. those who know the pa^agni-vidya, are also led up to Brahman.
Pada IV.
Adhik. I (1-3) returns, according to 6ankara, to the owner of the para vidya, and teaches that, when on his death his soul obtains final release, it does not acquire any new characteristics, but merely manifests itself in its true nature. — The explanation given by Ramanu^a is essentially
lxxxiv vedanta-sOtras.
the same, but of course refers to that vidvan whose going to Brahman had been described in the preceding pada.