VEDANTA-PARIJATA-SAURABHA NIMBARKA VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA

SRINIVASA (COMMENTARIES ON THE BRAHMA-SOTRAS)

ROMA BOSE, M.A, D.Phil (Oxon )

Votume I

PRINTED AT THE BAPTIST MISSION PRESS FUBLISHED BY THE ROYAL ASIATIO SOCIETY OF BENGAL CALCUTTA 1940

PREF AOK

Numbérka's commentary on the Brahma-Stitras known as the Vedanta Paryéta Saurabha, and that of bs 1661906 disciple Srimvisa styled the Vedinta Kaustubha are the chief works of the school of philosophy associated with the name of Nmmb&rka ‘The latter 18 not, however, 8 mere commentary on the former, 88 18 80716 times wrongly supposed, but 9 full exposition of the views expressed in the Vedanta Parte Saurabha which 1s very terse and concise and 18 not always clear Both the treatises are therefore essential for the proper understanding of the doctrine of Nambaérka

Hitherto no translation of either of these works was available 10 the English language, and the task was undertaken by Dr Rome Bose (Chaudhuri) at the suggestion of Prof 7 W Thomas, Boden Professor of Sanskrit 1) the Univermty of Oxford, under whose super- vision 1t was carried out durimg 1934-1936, as part of the theazs for the Degree of D Phil of that University

Thus authortetzve Hnglsh Edition of the Vedinta-Pirijata- Saurabha has been prepared after carefully comparing the manuscripts Nos E164, 2480, 2481 and 3278 of the India Office Labrary and the- printed Sanskrit texia of the क्ष, Brmdiban and Chowkhimbé Series The translation of the Ved&nta Kaustubha was based on the Sanskrit texts of the Ka and Brmd&ban editions Dyfferonces of readings of the various manuscripts and printed texta of both the treatises have been noted 17 the footnotes

Asis well known the doctrine of Advarta, as developed by Samkara, was the earliest of the Vedintic systems, and 17 the great efflorescance of philosophic thought m India durmg the 9th-16th centuries, various 80110018 of thought arose, mostly aa protests against the extreme views held by the Advaita 80001 There 18 no doubt that by reason. of 18 great metaphysical appeal and the mgid application of logical canons, Samkara’s Advaita vide exercised the most profound mfluence on Indian thought and marked him out as the greatest philosophical genius born in this country His inmstence, however, on the sole reality of “Abheda’ or non dzfference and the unreality of Bheda or difference evoked strong reactions, the foremost of which was the Viistidvaita-vida of Rim&nuja, whose mportance was only second to that of Samkara According to him the reality 1s not an abstiact

Vi PREFAOEH

concept mn the Samkarite sense 171 which the non difference completely loses 1ts identaty, but 1s ® synthetic unity of both—the relation between the two being that of the substance attmbute Thai 18, the atimbute 18 difterent from the substance in the sense that 1t mheres in 1t though the latter cannot be equated with any particular atimbute and 18 not ® mere assemblage of them all, but 1s something over and above In other words, the substance and the attribute, or the unity and plurality are both real and form an organic whole, and the relation between them 18 the relation of non difference, and not of absolute identity R&émAnvja's docirme 18 hence known aa Vidigtidvaita vada or qualrfied moniam as agamst the absolutism of Samkara , who followed R&mfnuja, agreed that the relation between the Brahman and the Universe was that of non-difference, but while the latter identufled Brahman with Vignu, according to Srikantha 7 waa Siva His theory 18 therefore called Vitigha Sivadvaita vida The school of Bhiskara holds that both the unity and plurality are real The relation between the two 18 one of difference-non-drfference during the effected state of Brahman,1e durmg the cosmic existence and creation, but one of complete identaty durmg the causal state of Brahman,1e during salvation and dissolution In other words, the individual Soul or Jiva, during the state of Samsira, 18 different from Brahman due to the presence of the Upidhis (Imutmg adjuncts) such as the body, the sense organs, eto , but when these are not present and 1t 18 Mikts, the Jiva becomes absolutely identical with Brahman of which 1t 1s only the effect Simularly, the world 1s both different and non-different from Brahman during creation, but identical with Him in Pralaya (dissolution) Hence Bhiskara’s view 18 known as ‘Aupaidhika Bhedibheda १६08, 16 the Bhed&ibheda relation between Brahman and the Untverse 18 only Aupddivka or due to the lmiting adjuncts only and therefore lasta as long as these adjuncts last But when the Samaiira is over and the Up&dhis are no more, there 18 no longer any Bheddbheda between Brahman and the Universe, the former alone becomes the reality and no separate soul or matter oan then exist Baladeva's school also adxhutted the reality of both the unity and plurality 10 ॐ sense, both the Jiva and the Jagat are different from Brahman bot m another they are non-different as effecta of Brahman This relation of ग sad mtb ered en and cannot be comprehended b and must be accepted on the authority of the Sorzptures ( taon) His dootrme goes, therefore,

PREFACE Vill

under the name of “Acmtya Bhed&ébheds-vada’, 16 the Bheddbheda relatjon of Brahman and the Universe 18 Acsnéya or incomprehensible by reason.

The doctrine of Nimb&rka, which developed in the atmosphere of general reaction against Samkara’s Advaitism, shared the views of the above schools m their insistence on the reality of the Many According to Nimbarksa, Brahman and Jiva-Jagat are equally real as was also held by R&émf&nuya, but the difference between them 1s not superseded by non difference as the Jatter supposed In fact, the difference between the two 1s just as signifloant as ther non difference While 1t 18 true, a8 R&ém&nuja thought, that the Jiva-Jagat or the entare universe 11110688 in the unity of Brahman as an organio whole and as such can lay no claim to separate existence, ‘yet as the effect 1s different from the cause, 170 the same sense 18 the Many different from the One, and their difference 18 as fundamental ag thew non difference Numb&rka’s system has therefore been called the Suidhkdurka-Bhedd- bheda-vdda in which the relation between Brahman and the Jiva-Jagat 18 regarded as one of eternal difference-non difference during Sams&ra or the cosmic existence as well as Pralaya or dissolution, and not only during the former state as Bhdiskara thought Aocording to his view even the freed Soul (Mfikta-Jivitman) 18 both different and non different from Brahman and even in Pralaya does the Jagat mhere mn Brahman 88 & distinct entity

In her Enghsh rendering of the Vedinta Pairy&ta-Saurabha and Vedanta Kaustubha, Dr Bose has not only given Nimbé&rka’s reading and interpretation of each Siitra, but has compared them with those of Samkara, RamAnuja, Srikanths, Bhiakara and Baladeva belonging to the antagomistzo and alled schools of the Vedanta Philosophy Dufferences from the religious and ethical grounds have not exther been ignored The present work therefore 18 not to be considered as a mere translation, but 1t gives also reviews of the main tensta of the post-Samkara theustac schools which arose m oppoattion to Advaita Vedintasm, though the full philosophical expoaraon of Nimbarka’s doctrme and the comparative study of the development of Indian thought durmg this period has been discussed by her in 8 separate wotk which will form the third and concluding volume of this series

The work oconmsts of four chapters In Chapter I (Samanvayidhydya), 1t 18 sought to establish that Brahman 1s the sole subject of all Soriptures ‘The nature of Brahman, His attributes and

vii PREYAOS

the souroes of our knowledge of Him are discussed m this chapter In Chapter Ii (Avwodhddhydya), Nimbérka first refutes the rival views of Sémkhya Yogs, NySya एषा, Buddhem, Jemem, Sarvaiem and स्तथा, and considers the problema of Jiva and Jagat, पिः natures and atimibutes and the manner m which they are related to Brahman ‘Thess two chapters are purely metaphysical and supply the philosophical foundations of the doctrme of Nimbarka The remamming ones are obiefly of devotional and ethical interests In Chapter III (Sddhkanddhydyc), for example, the means of attammg Mokea (salvation), the nature and importance of meditations a8 71610760 in the Upanishads are discussed In Chapter IV (Phaladhspiya), Nimba&rka grves his views on Mokga, the fruxt and the conditions of the Miikta (released) JivGéiman or soul, eto Accordmg to hom Mokga or salvation implies two conditions, namely, the atta ment of qualities and nature sunilar to Brahman (Brahma Svariipa lfbha), and the full development of one’s own individuality (Atma Svariipa-labhe) This full development means the complete mantfeata- tion. of one’s real nature 88 consmousness (Jfiina Svariipa) and bliss (Ananda), untamted and unimpeded by matter whioh screens 1t durmg Samaira, and decerves 1४ mto belevmg that rt 1s self-suffinent and mdependent of Brahman When, however, Mokga 1s attamed, 1b 18 realized that 1t 18 dependent on Brahman ag His organic part and in thet sense non-different from Him It mmplhes the destruction of narrow egoity, but not the anniulation of individuality as 1s the goal of the Advazta school Nimbarka’s ideas on Mokes or salvation therefore are the logical outcome of his theistic mind which seeks to find & place for the devotional soul without completely merging 16 in Brahman

The first two chapters contammg the metaphysical portion of the work 1s now issued as Volume I conmstang of 474 pages Volume II will compre the remaming two chapters and indexes for both the volumes The latter 18 expected also to be published during this year

8 8 GUHA, 20h February, 1940 General Secretary, Royal Anate Socely of Bengal

FIRST CHAPTER (Adhyays) FIRST QUARTER (P&da) Adhikarana | The section entitled ‘Enquiry’ (३१४२७ 1) SUTRA 1

“THAN, THEREFORE, AN HNQUIRY INTO BRAHMAN ” THH EXPLANATION OF THA BRAHMA SUTRAS HNTITLAD VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA, COMPOSED BY THH RHVEREND NIMBIBEA

An enquiry 1s to be instituted, at all times, mto the Highest Person,—Ramii’s Husband, denoted by the term “ Brahman”, the greatest of all because of His infinite, mooncervable and mnate nature, qualities, powers and so on,—by one who has studied the Veda with its sx parta!, who has been assailed with doubt, anaing from texts which teach? that the fruits of works are both transitory and eternal ®, who has, for that very reason, enquired into the science which 1s concerned with the consideration of rebgious duties, * and has, thereby, gained the knowledge determined therem 5 regarding works, ther kinds and ther fruta, m whom, 98 & conse quence, there arisen a disregard (for worldly objects), that us the result of a discrimmation between the finrtude and eternity of the

+ The srx perta are*—~-(a) Sifted or the science of proper articulation and pronuncetion comprimng the knowledge of letters, accents quantity, the use of the organs of pronunciation, and phonetics generally, but especially the laws of euphony peculiar to the Veda, (8) Chandahs or treatises on metre (c) Vydbaraga or treatises on grammar, (2) Nerukia or treatuses on the explanation of difficult words, (6) Jyotga or treatuses on astronomy, and {f) Kalpa or treatises on ceremonials The first and second of these Veddagas are said to be intended to secure the correct recitainon of the Veda the third and fourth the understandmg of 19 the fifth and वि 178 proper employment atsactiiice MW,p 1016

8 Prakrgena baron 1h prabaranam, tad-vad vdbyam

४ 1.8 Whose mind 28 assailed with doubt owmg to the contradictory teachings regardmg the frurta of works, some texte declaring that the frurts of works are tranmtory, while others declaring that they are eternal Of VE,111

Te the Pairva-mindned

6 7 © the Pirva-mindned

[88 1 1 1 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA apy 1]

of the knowledge of works and Brahman respectively, the

being surpassable, the latter non surpassable?, who wishes for the grace of the Lord, who 16 covetous of having & vision of Him, to whom the spiritual preceptor 18 the only God, who has whole hearted devotion for the holy spiritual teacher, and who 18 dearous of final release—this 18 the sense of the mtroductory text

i

The commentary entitled ‘Vedanta kaustubha’, composed by the reverend teacher Srinivasa

Panegyric

1 JI worshrp the holy Swan?, Sanaka and others ४, the Divine Sage + and Nimbabbiskara5 May a devotzon for Lord Krgna arise in us through their grace

2 Ibow down to the feet of Lord Krsna, m reference to whom 8105 the mass of scmptural texts does not come into mutual conflict, whom those who are engaged in meditation and Yoga obtam, and who 1s to be worshipped constantly by Varuna and Indra with mind and speech

Fimding that the people on earth were being deluded by various sorts of false arguments, Lord Vasudeva, the Highest Person, the Lord of all, and the one identical material and efficient cause of the enture universe, assumed the form of the son of Parigara ° and com posed the Ved&nta treatise, called the ‘S&riraka-mim&msi’’, with 9.

1 Te in whose mind has arwen a dusguet for all worldly pursuits and objects, anos he hes apprebended the great distmotion between the fruits of works, vin ordinary worldly objecta and heaven, and the fruxt of the knowledge Brahman, vit salvation Hven heaven bas an end, but Tidt ao salvation, and even heaven 18 not the highest end, but salvation ww 35७ VE 111

2 The Swan Incarnation of Brahmd uw supposed to be the Founder of the sect of Nunbdrka

3 The Four Kumdras Sanaka and others the second spiritual teachera of the seat

4 Ie Né@rada supposed to be the third spiritual teacher of the sect and the immediate guru of Nenbdrka

® 18 Neunbdrka

© Pardéara is supposed to be the father of 7552, the reputed author of the Bradma sitiras

7 There 15 difference of opimion as to why the Veddnia-siiras or the Brahma-stiraa are called the ‘ Stirfraka-memdmnsd' According to the Ratna

[80 1 1 1 apo 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 3

view to augmenting in the people knowledge and devotion १५८५५१११. ing Himeelf and estabhshmg the Highest Brahman mn muni} beyond doubt ‘Then, the supremely meroiful reveronl Nimibvirka the founder of the sect of the reverend Sanatkumiia, campeud a commentary, very difficult to understand, celled the ‘Vecdant: pir jéta saurabha’ (Bragrance of the Heavenly Flower of the \edlant 1) as an, explanation of the texts of the Sariraka-minimst ‘Then, again, through lus command, and with a view to benefitiue the wise, the ‘Vedinta-kaustubha’ (Gem of the Vedinta), which is unay, concise and explams the sense of the ‘Vedinta parijAta-naurahin , ४ being composed by me, his discrple, following the path recommuntded by him and wishmg to obtam his favour

If 2४ be argued our purpose being served through an enquiry into rehgious duties aumply, what 1s the wee of an enqury inte Brah man *—we reply since religious duties yield non permanont fruity an enquiry into Him 1s to be undertaken for the sake of obtaminy unsurpassed and infinite bliss

Here the word “then” implies ‘succession’, and not any other sense, there bemg no previous distnot mention It cannot hw nal that in, confornuty with the statement, viz ‘ The word “om ” aml the word “stha’’ formerly issued forth from the throat of Brahman, and hence both are auspicious’, (the word “atha”’) hore indicates ate piclousness,—because this treatise bamg auspicious by itaclf in, वतात्‌ as well as m meaning, does not await any other auspiiousnen, because good luck 1s obtamed through the mere hearing of it , antl because m the very same way, the other meanmgs of the term “then”, vis special prerogative and the rest? are not appropriate here Moreover, a word, pronounced with one particular enue i view, should not be employed m any other sense Hers the mtendad sense 18 “succession,’, stance the word “ therefore’ refers to something

prabha commentary on 8B they are so called because tron Brakenan hood of the embodied soul (* SUrfrabo seas 1

Accordmg to Baladeva however Brahman ws ° बद्वह oor omboduil universe is the body of the Lond

१ S@rivaha-mimdmaa , beos deal with Brahman the éérira (the embodied) GB, 1 1 12 _

1 Yor the different meanmgs of the term ‘aiha vide AK,p 31, line 8

60 1 1 l 4. VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH 1]

previous Hence, the word “then” has the sense of ‘succession only, the word “ therefore” mples the reason

The reality which 18 obtamable by one who 18 devoted to the sound Brahman,—m accordance with the followmg and other scriptural and Smyti texta, viz ‘He who does not know the Veda does not know Him, the Great’, ‘There are two Brahmans to be known, the sound Brahman and what 1s Higher Those who know the sound Brahman go to the Higher Brahman’ (Mautri 6 22),— and which 18 possessed of the characteristics to be mentioned here after, 18 the object denoted by the term ‘Brahman’ The word “enquiry” denotes a desire for the knowledge of the demred Brahman

Although the supplial of the verb (m the mdicative mood, viz ‘ares `) 18 appropriate here thus ‘‘Then”,1e afterwards, “ there 1008", 16 for this reason, an “ enquiry into Brabman”’ arsses, 17 being possible for people with mmght to have a spontaneous desre for enquiring imto a particular object (viz Brahman) (without being definitely told or enjomed by Scripture to do so), yet m concordance with the text ‘O, the self verily 1s to be seen, to be heard, to be thought, to be meditated on, 1t 18 to be enquired 1100 ` (अ 2465, 4 6 6), we must understand here a grammatical concordance with a word mplying injunction, viz ‘should are’! In accordance with the scriptural text ‘Desirmg for release, one should see the self in the self alone’ (Brh 4428), the words ‘one who demres for release’ m the mstrumental case, are mplied here—such 18 the construction of the words (m the siitra) >

Here the term ^" then”, implymg “succesmion’, means After the knowledge regarding the nature of religious duties, the means thereto, the mode of performmg them and ther frorta—which form the subject of the enqury mto religous duties > Thus, having studied the Veda with = 108 parts,*—bemg first properly

1 That i; we can of course make the ठ complete thus Then, there fore, en enquiry into Brahman (ensen)’, but 29 28 better to complete 10 thus ‘Then therefure an enquiry into Brahman (should anse)' and make the siira an myunction and not a plain statement

9 Thus, the ontire siira really means: ‘(Mumukgunpd) athdio Brahma jyhded (ताण) + or ‘(By one who demres salvation) then, therefore an enquiry into Breiman (should be made)

2 le tho Pirva mimdmed

4 Sco footnote (2), p 1

{fst 1 1 1 ADH 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 5

inttasted, as enjomed by the text ‘One’s own scripture should bo studied’1, having found, in 8 general way, the texta which are mutual ly contradictory, some depicting the non permanence and others the permanence of the frurts of works thus ‘Undeosayiny, (तन्म, 18 the good १७७१ of one who performs the Catur mAsya* 89९ १११५८५' (27 88 8119}, ‘We have drunk the soma juice, we have 0000110 ummortal’ (Rg V 8 4884), ‘Where there would be no heat, no cold, no weakness, no opponents’ and so on 6, and, ‘Just as here the world, obtamed through merit pemah’ (Chind 861), ‘That (work) of hu has an end’ (एद 38810), “The permanent, verily, cannot ba obtained through the non permanent (Katha 1210), ‘ What 1 not made 18 not (obtamed) through what 18 made’ (Mund 1 2 12), ‘Frail, indeed, are these boats of sacrifices’ (Mund 1 2 7), and so on, 9 bemg thereby assailed with doubt, and unable to determine (the exact nature of the fruits of works) m partioular, one, with a view to ro moving it (viz the doubt), proceeds to make an enquiry into religious daties, and having, through such an enquiry, determined properly the nature of works, the mode of performimg them and their fruits, one comes to have such a knowledge,—ajter that, this 18 the senac 7 The word “ therefore” means ‘because of the reason’ That 24, the enquiry 1000 Brahman should be undertaken, because the fruit of works are ascertamed to be finite and surpassable from the scriptural passage ‘Just as here the world acquired by work pershes, so exactly hereafter, the world acquired by mertt perishes’ (Chind 8 1 6), and from the Smyta passage ‘ “‘ The worlds begmning with the world of Brahm& come and go, O Arjana”’ (Git&é 816), secondly, because

1 A श्क्षा passage 29 found in Tax) Ar 215 p 158

9 Name of the three sacrificea performed at the beginning of the thne seasons 07 four months Vide Ved In, p 259, vol 1

3 P l,vol lI

<P 199, lme 8

¢ These texta denote the permanence of the fruits of work

¢ These texts danote the non permanence of the fruits of work:

१ That 28, firstb @ man studies (a) the Veda and finds mutually contra dictory statements about the frurts of works (6) This leads him to study the Pilrva mimémed, with @ view to learning the real nature of works and their frurte, and he finds that the fruits of works are not everlastmg (6) Thuy leads hrm to study the Veddnia with a view to attammg what 1s permanent, vis salvation Hence the term atta’ means that the Veddnia 1s to be studied after the study of the Veda and the Pilrva-mimdmea

[st 1 1 ¢ VEDINTA-KAUSTUBHA + 1

that the knowledge of Brahman has a frmt which 18 unsurpas and endless 18 ascertamed from the followmg sermptural and Sn passages “Knowmg him alone, one surpasses death, there 18 other road to salvation’ (Svet 38), ‘When men will roll up the | hke a piece of leather, then there will be an end of musery, (ev without knowing the Detty’! (Svet 620), ‘Knowmg the De they are free from all fetters’ (Svet 18, 216), ‘He who, hay searched. the self, knows 29, attams all the worlds and all object dorirea’ (Chand 8 ¶ 1 8), ‘The person, of the mze of a thumb o abides in the self’ (Katha 412), ‘Knowmg him one surpasses de there 18 no other path to salvation ’, ‘‘‘ Many people, punfied by penance of knowledge, have come to be of my nature’’’ (Gia 4 “He who possesses knowledge attains me’ (Gita 7 19), ‘ “ Knowme one attams peace ’”’ (Git& 5 20) and 80 on, and, finally, because we that one who 18 unacquamted with the self has been censure Scripture as a wretched fellow and 9 self याश, m the passa; ‘Venly he who, O G&rgi, departs from this world, without kno this Imperuhable, 18 a vile and wretched creature’ (Brh 318 ‘Those worlds are sald to be sunlesa, surrounded by bimd dark To them they go, after death, whosoever are destroyers of the ॥ (188 3) and so 029 ॐ

Anticpatmg the question By whom (18 this enquiry t undertaken) ? (we reply) By one, who has grown maifferent i fruitx of works and. 80 on, because of those reasons (stated abx wha, on hearmg that the direct vision, of the Lord 18 the speaial ¢ of univation, has come to be seized. with 9 strong inclmation to have # chract vision, which mnalmation 1s generated by proper discrmmina itnelf generated through it (viz hearmg), whos desirous of the gra the Highest Person alone, who looks upon the spiritual preceptor 8 only Gol, who has approached the spinitual teacher, who has w hearted devotion for the spiritual teacher, and who 1s desirous of

— wa

2 {© When the unposstble will be possible, the sense bemg the knowledge of Brakman in the only means of putting an end to museries

@ That in, tho enquiry into Brahman 18 to be undertaken because of ronson, Vis 3 (1) becaune the frurta of works are not lasing and unsury (2) hecanne the knowledge of Brahman leads to mfinite bliss, 1¢ saly and (3) beeausa those who do not know Brahman, ther self, are censu wurthtem creatures ‘The word “‘atah” (w= therefore) m the eiiira umphes

three re atts

[80 1 1 1 ADH 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA प

release,—such 18 the constructaon,—in accordance with the followmg scriptural passages viz ‘Having examined the worlds acquired by work, let a Brihmans be mdrfferent to them’ (Mund 1 2 12),“When the seer sees the golden coloured Creator, the Lord, the Person, the source of Brahm&, the wise man, havmg discarded merit and demert, and stainless, attams supreme identaty’ (Mund 381 3), “When he sees the other, the Lord who 18 propitious and His great ness, he comes to be freed from sorrow’ (Mund 31 2, Svet 417), “Thmking itself and the Mover as different, then favoured by Him, it goes to immortality’ (Svet 16), ‘The knot of the heart 23 broken, all doubts are solved and his works perish, when He, who 1s high and low, 18 seen,’ (Mund 228), ‘He can be obtamed by hum alone whom He chooses To him this self reveals ita own form’ (Katha 2 23), “One who has come to be freed from sorrow sees Him who 1s without active will and His greatness, through the grace of the Lord ’ (Svet 8 20), ‘For the sake of this knowledge, let him, with fuel 7 hand, approach the teacher alone, who 18 versed. m Sampture, and devoted to Brahman To bm, who has approached him, whose mind 18 completely calm, and who 1s endowed with tranquillity, the wise teacher truly told that knowledge of Brahman, through which he knows the Impenshable, the Person, the True’ (Mund 1 212 13), “Be one to whom the preceptor 18 a God’ (व 111), “To one who has the highest devotion for the Lord, as for God so for his teacher, to that great souled one these matters which have been declared become manrfest’ (Svet 6 23)

The compound “ Brahma 1110485," 18 to be explamed as ‘The enquiry concernng Brahman! The genttive case ‘concernmg Brahman’? expresses the object, m accordance with the rule “The subject and the object (take the genrtive case) when they are used along with a word ending with ७ krt affix’ (Pan 2365,8DK 623) 3 “The enquiry concernmg Brahman’ 18 a compound with the object genitive,“ m accordance with the rule “The genitive 1s compounded, when used along with a word endmg with the itt affix (and the compound comes under the category of the Sagtbi tat purusa)’ (ए VS 1817, quoted m SDK 708) 5

1 Brahmano syfded ० Brahmanah 9 &© 452, vol | # Ie a genitave denoting an object SP 496, vel 1

[st 1 1 1 8 VEDANTA EKAUSTUBHA ADH 1 |

Brahman 18 none but Lord Krsya, the substratum of m concervable, infinite, unsurpassed, natural and greatest nature and qualities and so on, omniscient, omnipotent, the Lord of all, the cause of all, without an equal or a superior, all-pervading, and the one topic of all the Vedas, as known from the followmg scriptural and Smrti passages, viz ‘He grows and causes to grow, hence He 18 called the supreme Brahman’, ‘ Who 18 omniscient, all knowing’ (Mund 119, 227), ‘Supreme 1s his power, declared to be of various kmds, and natural 18 the operation of his knowledge and strength’ (Svet 6 8), ‘This 18 the Lord of all’ (Brh 4422), ‘Him, the supreme and great Lord among the lords , Him, the great God among the gods’ (Svet 8 7), ‘He has no work or organ, nothmg 1s seen to be equal or superior to Him’ (Svet 68), ‘The Lord of matter and soul, the Lord of the attributes’ (Svet 616), ‘The One God 1s hidden m all bemgs, all pervading, and the mner soul of all bemgs’ (Svet 611), ‘Krene alone alone 28 the Supreme Deity Let one meditate on Um’ (GQ 7 1), ८.“ am the source of all, everything omginates from 106 ° ’ (Qrt& 10 8), ‘ ^ There 1s nothing else higher than me, 0 Dhanafi- jaya”’ (Gité 7 7), «IT alone am to be known through all the Vedas” * (५१६ 16 16) and soon (This explams the term ^“ Brahman ” )

(Now, the explanation of the term “jfiisi’’) Knowledge with regard to Him (viz such Brahman) 81076; 1 © the demre with regard to the knowledge of one so desired (viz Brahman),—this 18 the sense Soripture declares this in the BrhadBranyaka passage ‘QO, the self 18 to be seen, to be heard, to be thought, to be meditated on’ (Brh 245, 456), as well as m the OhSndogya passage ‘ But the Plenty alone 1s to be enquired into’ (Chind 7231) ‘In the passage ‘Q Maitreyl, the self 18 to be seen’ the suffix ‘tavya’ has the sense of ‘fitness’ simply, m accordance with the aphonsam ‘The suffixes "प ` and “tro” are used in, the sense of fitness’ (Pin 3 8 169, ND.K 2822 4), because the direct vision of Brahman 18 not something to be enjomed,® 16 bemg established to be the mtmmate and inner means to salvation by the followmg texts —‘The knot of the heart 18 broken, all doubta are solved and his works perish, when the soul,

1P 206 a2 P 699

9 That 18, the above quotation mmply means that the Self (Brahman) 1s ji or worthy to be seen, and not that the Self ehould be seen,—n0 mjunction here with regard to शर्ध Bee\p 0, footnote 4

[so 1 1 1 ADH 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 0

the 1. 1 18 seen’ (Mund 228), ‘Stamless, he attams a supreme identity’ (Mund 313), ‘When he sees his glory, he becomes freed. from grief’ (Mund 812, Svet 4'7), ‘‘‘'Then knowmg me m truth, he forthwith enters mto that’’’ (अछि 1855), and soon Thus, with & view to having an access to “seemg’,2—which 1s known from another text, which consists im @ direct vision of the Lord, and which 1s the unique means to salvation,—it 1s ‘ meditation’,2—which 18 an intamsate and inner means to it (viz ‘seemg’),—that 1s enjomned here* By the term ‘knowledge’, the reverend Badarfiyana deagnated, m the aphorisms, the very same thing (viz meditation), which 1s a synonym for the words ‘contemplation’, ‘knowledge’, ‘supreme devotion’, ‘steadfast remembrance’, the rule bemg that the aphorism and the text mdicating the subject-matter (viz the Upanisad texts) must both have the same meanmg Now, here also, the texta denotmg the subject matter are of a greater weight, as they, as the primary object, are authoritative by themselves, and hence, the meaning of the aphomsms is to be mterpreted im accordance with them alone, otherwise they cannot stand in a relation of subject matter and what treata of the subject-matter 5 In Scripture, ‘hearmg’ 6 and ‘thmkmg’ 7 are laid down as means to ‘meditation’,® amce these two also are indirect means to the attamment of salvation ‘Thus, having ascer

tamed that the Vedinta texts are concerned with demonstrating the nature, attributes and the rest of the Lord, one approaches a preceptor, who has directly mtuited the nature and the rest of Brahman, the object to be worshipped demonstrable by the Vedfintdé texts, and learns the meaning of those texts from him who has himself realzed.

> Oorrect readmg Tasnun drefe pardvare’ or when he, who 28 high and low seen Vide Mund 228, p 31,0U p 5328

® Sravena 3 Neudidhydsana

^ That is 27 the above text (Brb ), the Lord is not anjomed to be sssn but to be meditated on, meditatnon leadmg to seemg or direct vimon which is the mmmediate cause of salvation

5 Thatis the Veddnia-siliras lay down what 1s contained in the Upaniwads Hence the Veddnia-siiras are the vigoytn or what treat of the subject matter, and the Upantsad-texts are the wigaya or the subject treated Now, the vyayin and the vipaya must, evidently, refer to the same thmg And here, the usaya bemg of a greater force the wseayin must be understood m accordance with the wuigaya, or the esiiiras are to be understood in the hght of the Upanwade Hence as the latter enjom meditation the former must also do so

© Sravana ग iManana सपर ~ Nididhydeana

RG66972,5xl, 4 < 9 {£ 24144 { ०५) N40

[80 L1l 10 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ang 1 1

that meanmg directly This 1s ‘hearmg’! ‘Thimking’ 18 a 100. of reflection, by means of argumenta which are m conformity with Scripture, with a view to making the meanmg of what has been ‘heard’ and taught, the object of one’s own realization? ‘Meditating’ means & ceaseless contemplation on the object of ‘thmkmng’, which (contemplation) 1s the unique cause of a direct vision (of the Lord) Accordingly, this (viz the above Brhad&ranyaka text) 1s an apurva wmd® concernng ‘meditation’, smoe (salvation, 1s) absolutely unobtamable (without meditation) «

The explanation of the (above quoted Chindogya) text ‘The Plenty’, etc , may be seen under the explanation of the aphorism ‘The Plenty’, 806 (Br Sa 137)

The resulting meaning 1s that salvation can be obtamed by an individual, eternally fettered, and desirmg for salvation, who was by chance, looked upon (with favour) by Madhusiidana at the tame of his birth,5 who has practised the group of means (to salvation), who has worshipped the feet of 218 preceptor, and who has a direct vision of Brahman, obtamed through the hearing of, thmkng upon and meditatmg on Him, knowable through the Vedanta

> That 38, @ man first ascerbtams that the Veddnia texts demonstrate the Lord and then approaches a teacher and jearns the meaning of those texta from hrm

> That 18 for realmng directly for himself what he has so far accepted on the authority of ns preceptor

ॐ An apirva-mdis' 1a > ods which enjoms something that 1 absolutely necessary and mdispensable for the production of the demred reanit eg when 1# 18 enjomed ‘The rice grains are to be sprinkled over with water’ 16 1s meant that without this sprinkimg the demred result viz the samekdra of these moe grains or making them fit for bemg used m a sacrifice cannot be attamed by any other means Hence, here the vidi with regard to the sprinkling 1s an ‘apiirva edit In the very same manner, the above Brhadéronyaks text ‘The self should be seen, be heard, be thought be meditated on lays down an ‘apiires vids regarding meditation, amce without meditation, the desired result, viz ~ salvation, cannot be attiamed by any other means

For the different kmds of vidhu—viz apiirva, myoma and pari samkhyd, see VR.M,pp 41-43

= This finwhes the explanation of the Brhaddranyaka text ‘O fmend, the self should be seen’ eto

¢ Vide VR.M,p 188, also p 142, where rt 1s said that only one man m & thousand 18 looked at with favour by Madhueiidana ab the tmme of lus birth, and that not by chance, but because of the ments accumulated through thousands of previous births

[so 1 1 ] ADH 1 ] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ll

Salvation means attaming the nature of the Lord, resultmg from the cessation of the bondage of matter mm its causal! and effected. forms,* a8 known from the sormptural text ‘Havmg attamed the form of supreme light, he 18 completed m his own form” (Chand 834, 812 2, 3), as well as from the aphomsms ‘Because release 18 taught of him who tekes hus stand upon, 1b’ (Br Si 117), ‘And (Sermpture) teaches m 16 the union of this with that’ (Br Si 11 20) and 80 on, and from the Smrti passage, viz ‘The attamment of the Lord, characterized by a feehng of unsurpassed joy and happmess, exclusive and absolute, 18 supposed to be an antadote (to the disease of transmigratory exstence)’, ‘ “Many people, purified by the penance of knowledge have come to attam my nature”’ (Git& 410) and so on The word “nature’® has been explamed by the Lord पण्णा m the passage ^ “ Resortang to this knowledge, they have come to have sumilardy with me”’ (Gitk 142) ‘This we shall expound moro clearly in the chapter dealing with, the froxt é

Then, m answer to the enquiry —Of what nature 1s the individual, demring salvation! Of what nature 18 his bondage *—the errptural truth 1s bemg considered now, m order that those who demre for salvation may have an easy soceas to Scripture

Now, there are three kands of reahty, chstamguished as the sentient, the non sentient and Brahman, because m the aphorisms aa well, & trinity of reals has been mentioned, viz the object to be enquired mto (ie Brahman), the enquirer (16 the sentient), and miy& (ie the non sentient) which conmsta mn the three gunas and 1s the origmal cause of his (viz the enquirer’s) nescence, as otherwise the very enquiry will be impossible, and 8180 becanse of the following scriptural and Smrii texta, viz “By knowing the enjoyer, the object enjoyed and the Mover, everythmg has been said ‘This 1s the three fold Brahman,’ (Svet 1.21) ‘Pershable are all bemgs, the changeless 18 called the Imperishable’* (Gité 1516), ‘But the Highest Person 18 another, declared to be the supreme self’ (Git& 16 17) and 80 on

Among these, the sentient substance 18 different from the claas of non sentient substances, 18 of the nature of Enowledge , possessed of the attributes of bemg a knower, bemg an agent and 80 on, of the eee

1 Ie pradhana, the primal matter

"Ie the body, an effect of pradhdna

° Bhawa ^ Vis the fourth chapter

[80 1 1 1 12 VEDANTA KAUSTU श + ADH 11

form of an Ego, has ita very nature, existence and activity under the control of the Lord, 1s atomic 17 size, different m every body, and subject to bondage and release As has been said “Tho mdividual soul 18 of the nature of knowledge, under the control of the Lord, fit to be associated with and dissociated from a body, atomic, different m, every body, possessed of the quality of bemg a knower and that which they call, endless But through the grace of the Lord, veri they know 1t, the form of which 1s associated with, beginningleas Miya + The (ever ) free, the bound and the bound freed,® (such are the three broad. classes of souls), and then again 1t should be known that there 18 a multitude of divisions (of these, viz the ever free, etc )* (DS 1 2) 8 There are scriptural and Smrti texts, as well as aphoiwins to this effect, viz ‘Verily, different from this (soul) consisting of the mind 1s another mternal soul, consisting of intelligence’ (Tait 2 4) ‘Just as a lump of salt 18 without an meide and an outaido, and 1H entarely a mass of savour simply, so, verily, O! this self 18 without an, inside or an outside, and 1s entarely a mass of mntelhgence simply (Brh 4813), ‘Here thus person becomes self illummating’ (Brh 4.39 14),‘O! undeoaying, verily, 1s this self, posseasing indestructible neas as its attribute’ (Brh 4514), ‘Now he who knows “ Let mo amell this”, which self 18 he?’ ‘This person who among the aenses 18 made of knowledge, who 1s the hght withm the heart’ (Brh +3 7) “This, verily, 28 the person of the essence of mtelligence who sos, hears, tastes, smells, thmks and knows’ (Prasna 4 {)),4 ‘There 18, verily, no cessation of the seemg of the soer, because it (16 the soul) 18 indestructible , there 18, vernly, no cessation of the hearing of the hearer, because 1t 1s indestructible, there #, verily, no ceseation of the thinking of the thinker, because 1t 15 indostructible , there 1s, verily, no cessation, of the knowmg of tho knowor, because :t 18 indestructable’ (Brh 48 23), "^ By whom, 0 | should the knower be known?” ' (Brh 2414, 4515), “Thus person simply knows’, “The seer does not see death, nor disease, nor, again, suffering’

1 That 1s, the real nature of the soul w distorted through ite connection with myi or matter and karma, yeb individuals can know the real nature of their selves through the grace of the Lord See VRM,pp 20 21

४ Thats the souls which were bound once, but are freed now

7 For details see VRM

¢ Quotationmoomplete The correct quotation is‘ who seen touches hears, smells, tastes thmks Imows and acts’ Vide Preéna 49, pp 41-42

fst 1 1 1 ADE 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 19

(01610 7 26 2) ‘Hes the best person not remembering this appendage of the body’ (Ch&nd 8123), ‘So exactly do the seer’s sixteen parts, gomg to the Person, on, attammg the Person, mherge in (Him) ’ (Praéna 6 5), ‘ “Just as the one sun manifests the entire world, so O Bharata, does the owner of the field (viz the mdivi dual soul) manrfest the whole field (viz the body)”’ (Gité 13 34), “A knower, for that very reason’ (Br Si 2319), “An agent, on account of scripture havmg a sense (Br Si 2332)1 ‘I am thou, verily, 0 Deity ! he 18 I, I am Brahman, thus I bow down to the Death of death’, ‘He shinmg alone, everythmg shines after him, through his hght all this shines’ (Katha 2216), ‘He alone makes lim, whom he wishes to lead upwards from these worlds, do good deeds He alone makes bim, whom he wishes to lead downwards from these worlds, do evil deeds’ (Kaug 8 8), ‘Whether He may make him do good or evil, not even thereby 1s the Lord m fault’, ‘ The mdrvidual soul 1s small in power, not mdependent and isignificant’,4 = (40716, verily, 18 this soul ‘These two, merit and dememt, bind 1%’, ‘The individual soul should be known as the hundredth part of the tap of a hai, divided a hundredfold, yet 1t 1s capable of infinity (Svet 59), ‘Verily, (the soul) 18 percerved to be hke the tap of the spoke of a wheel only, and insignificant, through 1ta quality of buddhi, and through 108 own attrbutes (Svet 58), ‘(There 18 the mention of departing, gomg and returnmg’ (Br Sf 2819), ‘If 28 be said not atomic, because Scripture declares what 18 not that, (we reply ) no, becanse the topic 1s something else’ (Br Si 23 21), ‘That demgna tion 18 on account of havmg that qualty for 108 essence, as in the case of the Intelligent soul’ (Br Si 29 28), ठ ‘The Eternal among the eternal, the Conscious among the conscious, the One among the many, who bestows objecta of desire’ (Katha 518), ‘A part, on account of the designation of ® pluralty’ (Br Si 23 42),¢ “There 18 mdeed another different soul, called the elemental soul,—

1 These texte and aphonema set forth the essenizal nature of the Individual soul, viz that 1b 1s knowledge by nature a knower an agent and an enjoyer

9 These texts also set forth the easentzal nature of the soul, viz its dependence on the Lord for ita activity and 119 non difference from Him in that pense

¢ These texte and eitirae set forth the axe of the soul, vis ite atomuotty

¢ These texts and aphoriams set forth the number of the souls, viz that there 18 a plurality of souls

[8८ lil 14 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA +र 1]

he who bemg overcome by the white or dark fruits of works, attains 9 good. or bad birth. Because of beg deluded, he does not see the Lord, the causer of action and dwelling within the self He 18 borne along and defiled by the properties of matter’ (Maztri 3 2), ‘An, unborn, one, verily, 168 by, enjoying Another unborn one discards her, who has been enjoyed’ (Svet 4165), ‘ Stamlesas, he attains 9 supreme 10600 ` (Mund 318), “He does not return agam,’ (KR 2), “Non, return, on account of scriptural texte’ (Br Sti 4 4 22) 3 and 80 on

The non sentient substance 18 of three kmds, viz what 1s derived. from matter, what 1s not derived from matter and time 9 As 088 been. said. —‘ What 1s derived from matter, what 1s not derived from matter and time,—these are held to be the non sentaent (The second 18) denotable by the term, “m&y&’, “pradhiina’ and the rest, and there are distinctions of white and the rest m 1t, although it 1s the same’ (DS 8) Among these, the substance which 18 the substratum of the three gunas 18 the prékrta It 18 eternal as well as subject to changes hike transformation and 80 on, as declared by the following scmptural texts —‘A cow she 28 white, black and red, without begmnmg and. end,“ the progenttresas, and the source of all bemgs, milling all wishes for the Lord’ (Cail 5), “There 1s an unborn one red, white and black, producmg many progeny of the same nature’ (Svet 45) and so on, by the Smrta passages, viz ‘This, consisting of the three gunas, 18 the source of the world and 1s without begmning and end’ (V P 1 2 219),5 ‘Nonsentient, for the sake of another, ever changing, consisting of the three gunas, the fleld of works—such 1s said to be the form of prakyi1’ and so on, 88 well as by the followmg aphonsms "It has © sense, on account of 268 subordmation to Him’ (Br Si 143), “Asm the case of the saornficial ladle, for want of any specifi- cation’ (Br Si 148), ‘But that which has light for its cause, because thus, m fact, some read’ (Br Si 149) and soon The

1 Quotation moorrest Vide Matt, pp 3869, 871 Correct quotation. translated

a These texts and aphoriums get forth the Labikty of the souls to bondage

8 Prdbria, aprdkria and, bila

“ Correct reading ‘andda-vatl’ or without sound For correot ta vide 031 5 ¬ 230 —

¢ ए 14

and

[80 1 1 1 ave 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 16

gunas are sattva, rajas and tamas That very prakrti, bemg trans- formed, through its own gunas, into the body, the sense-organs, the mind and mtelhgence of the mdividual souls, and through bemg o hindrance to salvation, 18 said to be the cause of the bondage of the wndividual soul It 18 the cause of the universe, begimning with the mahat and ending with the cosmic egg, and 108 products are to be known, a8 1201 permanent

Next, the aprakyta 18 a non sentient substance, absolutely different from prakrti consisting of three gunas and time, occupies ® region different from the sphere of एण्ड, and 18 denoted by the terms ‘eternal manifestation’, “the region, of Visnu’, ‘the supreme void’, ‘the supreme place’, ‘the world of Brahman’ and 80 on, a8 declared by the following scriptural texts and aphorams —‘ Of the colour of the sun, beyond darkness’ (Svet 38, GIté 89), ‘He who 18 ita Master in the supreme void’, “That supreme region of Visnu the wise see always’ (Nr Pir 510, Skanda 16, Mukti 277, Vasu 4), ‘But the man, whose charioteer 18 untelligence, and the 20100, the rems, attoms the end of the road, the supreme place of Vignu’ (Kaths $ 9), ‘Having obtained the soul, I become united with the uncreated world of Brah- man’ (Chind 8131), “He does not retum agam’ (K BR 2), ‘Non return, on account of soriptural texts’ (Br Si 4422) and so on, as well as by the followmg verses m the MabA bbirata—vzz, ‘Whom they oall prakytu, the eternal, because He 1s the original source of all bemgs—the Divinity, without begimming and end, the Lord Né&ri- yans, Hari His supreme place 1s manifested beyond the abode of Brahm& That celestial, lammous place which the gods do not see, more brilliant than the sun, and fire, 18 the place of Visnu the Great, and through 1ta own rays, O king! 16 18 difficult to be seen by gods and demons The 28069708 endowed with penance, mfused with aus picious deeds, perfected by Yoga, great souled, and devoid of ignorance and delusion, go there to Lord Narayana, Har, the adorable Having gone there, they do not, O Bhirata, return to this world agam Ths place 18; O king, eternal and undecaying, for this, O Yudhisthira, is always the proof of the Lord. Higher than the seat of Brahmi 18 that supreme place of Vignu, which some people who are endowed with knowledge and mtelhgence, and want to reach the supreme place, know to be pure, eternal, lummous and the supreme Brahman That place is immensely holy, full of holy famihes, gomg where men do not grieve, do not return, do not feel pam But those Sattvatas attam

80 lll 16 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1]

here the place of Brahman’ The same thmg 18 found m the Gita Compare, eg the statement by the Lord, vz ‘“‘Through His grace, you shall obtam supreme peace and an eternal placo”’ (अ 18 62) And through the begimningleas demre of the Lord, 16 13 manifold m forma, 88 the 0016008 of His enjoyment and of His ever free souls, and not hable to any alternations of evolution and the rest, ance 1t 18 beyond time, m accordance with the text “That manifestation, of which time, composed of Kalis? and minutes, 18 not the cause of transformation Your eight fold attributes and lordship, O Lord, are natural and supreme’ Next, time 1s a species of non sentient sub stance, different from both the prikrta and the aprakrta, eternal and all pervading, m, accordance with the scriptural text, ‘Now, eternal, verily, are the soul, matter and time’, and also because 70, the text ‘“Hixstent alone, my dear, was this m the begmnmg”’ (Chand 621), the existence of time, denoted by the term ‘begmnmg’, 18 declared, as well as on account of the Smrti passage — The Lord Time 18 beginningless, and has, 0 Brahmm, no end’ (VP 1 2 269 3) ‘There can be no apprehension, inthe world which does not mvolve time ” It 28 the special cause of the conventional uses (of such terms) as ‘past’, ‘fature’, ‘present’, ‘mmultaneous’, ‘lasting’, ‘quick’ and #0 on, assisting in the creation, and the rest, and the special cause of the con ventional use (of different measures of tame), begmumg with the paraménu and énding with the parirdha® Since it 18 well known from the Purfinas, no detailed account 18 given, here All objecta derived. from prakrti are dependent on time But although time 18 the regulator of everything, 16 18 1taelf regulated by the Supreme Lord, im accordance with the text ‘Who 1s 4 knower, the Time of time, possessor of atimbutes, omniscient’ (Svet 6 2)

The meaning of the word ‘‘ Brahman ” has already been expounded above He 18 Lord Kyma, an abode of groups of qualitues like Creator sbyp of the world and the reat, to be mentioned hereafter, and 1s denoted by the words ‘Supreme Brahman’, ‘ N&r&yana’, ‘Vasudeva’ and so on As has been said ‘Let us meditate on Krsna, on Han, with eyes lke eee

° Correct quotation éat-prasddat’ and nob ‘mad prasdddt’

, 2०8 & एनपा drvimon of ime MW,p 261

* A paromdpu 15 the time taken by the mum to traverse past an atom of matter and 80 07 Vide VRM p 38 for details

[80 1 1 1 ADH 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 17

lotus, on Brahman, supreme and adorable, free by nature from all faults, and one 20888 of infinite auspicious qualities, and having the vyiibas 1 as His lmbe’ (DS 4)

The mutual differences among these (three) substances, viz the sentient, the non sentient and Brahman are taught by the texts contamed respectively m the different chapters (treatmg of theso three) and mdicating the respective peculiarities of their qualities and nature The non difference of the sentient and the non sentient 18 taught in the followmg texts —‘“Eixstent alone, my dear, was this m the beginnimg, one only, without a second’”’’ (Chand 621), ‘The self, verily, was this m the begimumg, one only’ (Ait 111), ‘Thou art that’ (Chind 687, 698, 6108, 6113, 612831, 6133, 6143, 6153, 6163), ‘This soul 18 Brahman’ (Brh 445), “All this, verily, 18 Brahman’ (Chind 3141), ‘I am you, verily, O reverend Deity’, “Then he knows the self alone “I am Brahman”’

In this way, the two kinds of texts bemg both authontative in thew primary and literal mmport, the sentient and the non sentient, though of different natures (from Brabman), yet are non different from Brahman, because they have their exmstence and activity under His contro],—just as the sense organs, though of different natures (from the vital breath) are yet non different from the vital breath, because they are under its control, as 28 well known from the dialogue between the vital breath and the sense organs im the OhSndogys ‘Verily, they are not called speech, eyes, or mind, but called the vital- breath alone’ (Chind 5 115) Hence the view of the author of the aphorisms 18 that Brahman, the object to be enquired into, 1s both different and non different from the sentient and the non sentient For that very reason, there 1s no necessity for enquirmg mto the two realities (viz the sentient and the non sentient), and the doctrine that through the knowledge of one, there 18 the knowledge of all? fits in well As has been said ‘Hence, all knowledge concerning all objects 18 true, since they, as dedlared by Scripture and Smrti, have Brahman

1 The vyihas are Vdsudeva, Sambkargana, Pradyumna end Amruddha Vide VRM, pp 47-49, for details

2 Vide Chind © 1 # The sense w that the efiiras recommend an enquiry into Brahman alone, and not into the sentient and the non sentient not because these two are unreal, but simply because by enquiring into Brahman the Cause wa come to know of the sentient and the non sentient too the effects, and hence 200 separate enquiry is necessary

2

[श ill 16 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1 |

for ther easence,—this 18 the view of those who are versed in the Vedas, and the Trinity of Reals too 1s established by Scripture and aphonsms ' (D § 7) The following aphoriams may be referred to ‘A part, on account of the mention of variety, and otherwise, some even read the status of a fisherman, © knave and so on’ (Br Si 2342), But on account of the mention of both, as im the case of a anake and ita coil’ (Br Si 3227), ‘Or, lke the substratum of lght, because of being hght’ (Br Si 3228) andsoon Detailed explanations may be seen, further on

Smoe 118 aphonsm (Br Si 111), ascertaming the meaning of Scripture, 18 of the nature of an introduction, the dispensable fac tors (in the study of a particular subject) are 8180 mentioned virtually by 1४, with a view to encouraging people with insight to (the study of) Sempture ‘These are the person, entitled (to the study), the topic, the relation and the purpose! Among these, one who 1s desirous of release and possessed of the stated marks 9 1s the person entitled (to the study of the Vedinta) The topic 1s the Lord Vasudeva, the Highest Person, denoted by the term ‘Brahman’ and the rest, omnis agent, the substratum of natural, mconcervable and infinite attmbutes and powers persisting as long os He Himself does, the Contioller of Brahm&, Rudra, Indra, matter, atoms, time, karma, and Nature, who 18 absolutely untouched by faults and who 18 the substratum of a natural difference—non, difference from the sentient and the non sentient The relation 18 that between a topic and what treata of the topic ® ‘The purpose here 18 salvation, characterized by attaming tho state of the Lord

Here ९0.08 the seotion, entitled ‘The enquiry’ (1)

Oomparison of Nembdrka’s readvag and yniierpretation with the readings and snierpretaiions of Samkara, Ramdnwa, Bhdskara, Srikantha and Baladeva «

Samkara

Interpretation, different Accordig to Nimbfrka, the term “athe” (then) signifies ‘after the study of the Veda and the Piirva-

1 Adiukirwn vwaya, sambandha prayojana » See above pp 11-14 ® See above, p 9 of the book and footmote ¢ there ¢ Only the pomts of differences will be noted

[श 1 1 1 ADH 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 19

mimaims&’ But according to Samkara, this 1s not the case He pomts out that the study of the Parva mimAmsi 1s by no means an essential pre requisite to the study of Brahman! There 18 no essential connection between the enquiry into religious duties and that into Brahman On the contrary, there 18 an absolute difference between, them as regards the result and the object of enqury?2 The result of the former 18 the attamment of worldly and heavenly enjoyment, which 1s something to be accomplished, while the result of the latter 18 salvation, which 18 not something to be accomplished, being eternal and ever accomplished This bemg so, the easential pre requusite to the enquiry into Brahman 18 not the enquiry into religious duties, but the acquisitien of the four qualifications 8,—viz (1) discmmmation between eternal and non eternal objects, (2) aversion to the enjoyment of the objects of sense, here or hereafter, (3) possession of self restraint, tranquillity and the rest +" and (4) the demre of emancipation 5

Ramanuja

Reading and interpretation same, only much more elaborate Raéménuja pomta out that the two Mimimsis—viz the Karma- mimaimsa and the Brahma mimfmsé constitute one connected whole, the first naturally leadmg to the second,® and omtucizes at length, in this connection, the Samkante view that the enquiry ito Brahman does not necessarily presuppose the enquiry into religious duties 7

Bhiskara

Interal interpretation same, but smport different Bhiakara develops here his pecular doctrine of jnina karma samuccaya, or

1 883 111 ‘Dharmayyfidsdydh तथा am adhita Veddniasya Brahma jyfdsopapatish p 71

28B 111 #£Dharma brahma-jyfdeayoh phala syftdeya bheddoca (p 74)

8 Sddhana catugiaya

4 Ie dama (control of the mternal organ, viz the mind), dama (control of the external sense-organs), uparat (indifference to worldly pursurta) tsisked (endurance of the oppomte extremes, like heat and cold pleasure and pam eto } draddhd (faxth in the sermpture and the spiritual teachers), and samadhana

deep concentration) 6 8 8 111 ‘Natydnsiya-vastu-vwekah, shdmuirariha phalabhoga-vwdgah éama damddt-sidhana mumukeuteas ca

sampat,

9 §न B 111 Vakgyat oa Karma-brahma-mimameayor atkaddetryam eto p 2, vol 1 (Madras ed) 7 Op ov, pp 5&I13, vol I

[so 1 1 1 120 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1 ]

combmation of knowledge and work Thus, accordmg to both Nimmbirka and. Bhdskara, the enquiry mto Brahman should be under- taken afier an, enquiry into religious duties, but for dsfferent reasons According to Nimbirka, the prior study of the Karma mim&imsa convinces us of the transitory nature of the fruits of karmas, and this naturally leads us to the study of the Brabma mim&ms&, with a view to attaming a permanent fruit therefrom, viz salvation Yor this reason, we study first the Pirva mim&msa, and then the Uttara mimmémss or the Vedinta

But accordmg to Bhiskara, we enquire mto Karmas before enquirmg mto Brahman for quite different reasons, viz (1) We do not enquire into Karmas first and then mto Brahman, because the former are tranmtory, the latter not, but we enquire mto both Karmas and Brahman, for the very same reason, viz because we know that they both play an equal part 11 the attamment of salvation Salvation can be obtamed through a proper combination of knowledge and works, and unless we firet know the nature of the works themselves, we cannot possibly decide which kinds of works are to be resorted. to and combined. with knowledge, and which kinds to be avoided and not to be ao com. bined It 18 for this reason, that we first study the Karma mimimai, and then the Brahma-mimims&, and combme the obligatory works with knowledge, avoiding those that are undertaken for selfish ends

(2) Further, the Vedinta deals with various kinds of meditations on the subordinate parta of sacmilcesa—, eg the meditation on the udgitha and so on But unless we are first acquamted with the nature of those sacrifices themselves, such meditations are not posable Tt 18 for this reason also that we first study the Karma mimémai, and then the Brahma mimimaé 1

Bhiskara also cnticises here the Smkarte interpretation of the term. “ atha `` 3

Srikantha

Interal wterpretation same, but swmport different That 18, Nimbarka and Srikantha both agree that the Brahma mimimaé 18 to be studied, after the study of the Karma mimams&, but the reason for this, as given by Srikantha, 1s different from that given by Nim bitka We have already seen the reason grven by Nimbarka But

1 Bh B 111, p 2 ४ @ of pp 3-5

[80 1 1 1 ADH I] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 21

according to Srikantha, we must first study religious duties and then Brahman, because the two stand in a relation of worship (Araédhan&) and the worshipped (Gradhya),} cause (hetu) and effect 2 moans (sidhana) and end (sdidhya)® The proper performance of Karmas purifieathemind But unless we first know the nature, ete of Karmas, we cannot perform them properly, 1 6 choose the mght ones (nitya and naimittaka ones) and avoid othera (kimya 0788), and unless we perform jxarmas properly, our mind 18 not pumfied, and unless our mind 18 purified, there can, be no rise of knowledge mit It 1s for this reason that we should first study the Karma mim&imsé and then the Brahma mimimsé¢ Like R&mAnuja, Srikantha holds that the Karma mimaims& and the Brahma mim&msé form one and the same treatise 5

Baladeva

Interpretation different According to Baladeva also, the word ५ atha’’ means ‘ immediate sequence’, but he pomts out that 1t cannot be said that the study of the Karma mimims& 18 an essential pre requisite to the study of the Brahma mim&msé, for 1t 18 often found that even, one who knows the Karma mimiimsaé by heart, but who 18 deprived of the company of the good, has no demre to enquire into Brahman, while one who does not know the Karma mimaima&, but 18 purified by truthfulness, prayer, eto and assomates with the good, has a natural melmation to enqwre ito Brabman It cannot be said also that the term ^ atha ” means that the enquiry into Brahman. can be undertaken only after the acquisition. of the four fold qualifica tions, viz discrimmation between the eternal and the non eternal and. the rest, as held by Samkara, for these cannot be acquired unless one first associates with the good and the holy °

Henooe, what the term “ atha '* means 18 as follows —A man who has properly studied the Veda and has understood its meaning In 4 general way, who has fasthfully performed the duties moumbent on

18KB 111, p 34, Part 1

2 Op ot pp 37, 39 Part 1

2 Op ov, pp 389, 43, Part 1

‘SEB 111 pp 88, 39, 43 50, 68 70 Parb1 Of course Sitkonjha is not a JAdna karma-samuccaya-vadiun like Bhé&skara

6 88 111 p 98 Part 1

¢ 28 111 pp 234265, chap 1

[80 1 1 2 29 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 2]

his own stage of life, who 18 truthful and 80 on, whose mind has become purified by the performance of duties in a disintorested spint and who has come into contact with a knower of truth, should then commence an enquiry ito Brahman, for then be 18 convinced that the fruits of works undertaken with selfish ends m view are but transitory, while Brahman alone 1s the cause of eternal happiness 1

Thus, the five pre requisites to the enquiry into Brahman are — (1) Study of the Veda (2) Proper performance of the duties mcum bent on one’s own stage of life (3) Purification of the mmd by such performance of works 10, 8 disinterested spirit (4) Association with the good and the holy (6) The consequent acquirement of the faculty of discriminating between the permanent and the non permanent, disgust for non permanent worldly objects and demre to know the permanent in details

All the commentators agree 70 holdmg that the word ^ अ ` means ‘because the fruits of Karmas are transitory, while the know ledge of Brahman alone leads to eternal bliss’

Adhikarana2 The section entitled ‘The Origin’ (8 ६८9 2) SUTRA 2 ‘‘ (BRanMAN IS THAT) FROM WHOM (ABISH) THE ORIGIN AND THE REST OF THIS (WORLD) ”

Vedainta-parijita-saurabha

Now, with regard to the charactenstics of Brahman, the author states the correct conclusion,

That very Lord—the substratum of infinite attmbutes lke omniscience, eto and the ruler of Brahmd, Siva tame and the rest,—— from whom anse the ongination, subsistence and dissolution, ‘‘ of this’”’, 16 of the universe,—endowed with manifold combinations, the abode of mnumerable peculianties of names and forms and the like, and the form of which 1s mconcervable,—is Brahman, the object of the above statement (viz 808 111)}—ths 18 the meaning of the oharacterimng text

+ @ ot pp 1920, chap 1

(st 1 1 2 ADH 2] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 23

Vedanta-kaustubha

Brahman, called Lord Krgna, great in qualities, powers and nature, has been established in the previous section Now, with reference to the enqury What are His characteristics ’—the same Being (viz Brahman) 18 beg demonstrated, as having the qualities of ‘ bemg the agent of the omgin and the reat of the world’, ‘bemg omniscient’, “pemg true’ and so on

Here the words ‘of this” denote the effect, viz the world, and. the words “from whom’’ denote the cause The word ‘Brahman’ 18 to be supphed here from the previous aphoriam And, there bemg an, universal correlation between the terms ‘yat’ and ‘tat’, the term ‘tat’ too must be supplied here +

(Next the compound “ janmfdi” 18 explamed —) ‘That of which “orgin” 18 the beginnng’—is “ janmidi”’, 16 creation, aub sistence, dissolution and salvation This 18 a Bahuvrihi compound of the tad guna sam)fiina type *

That ‘from whom”,—ie the Lord, the Highest Person, the Lord of all, ommuscient, omnipotent, the supreme cause and the ruler of all,—arse the orgination, submstence, dissolution, and salvation ‘of this’’,16 of the world, which 18 manifested by names and forms connected with enjoyers (viz the souls) divided variously, which 1s the constant abode of the enjoying of place, tame and frwts, and the composition of which 1s beyond the grasp of reasonmg—isa Brahman. He alone 18 to be enquired into by those who desire for salvation,— this 1s the construction of the words m the aphorism

> Thus the construction of the siira is — Janmddy asya yatah Brahmogah tata} > There are two kinds of Bahuertit vis iad guna sanyfdna and atad guna- न्वी In the former case, the compounds the noun (veesya) has direct connection with and umples the words compounded (videsanas),e हि when 10 18 said ‘Bring the man with long ears ' (Lamba barnam dnaya), the bringing of the man mmples the bringing of his atimbute viz the ears as well and the man (videgya) and his ears (wiéeganas) are directly connected In the latter case there is no such direct connection between the compound and the words compounded, 8 g when 19 18 said ‘Brng the man who haa seen the sea’ (Drea sdgaram dnaya) the bringing of the man doss not imply the bringmg of lua attribute, viz the sea, and there 19 no direct connection between the two Now ‘Janmdds' 18 a Bahuertin of the first land and hence 10 includes in 108 meaning sanma’ too

[st 1 1 2 24 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 2]

There are scriptural texts to this effect,—beginning —'‘Bhrgu, the son of Varuna approached his father, (with the request) “Sr, teach me Brahman” ’ (Tait 31), and contimung —‘ “From, whom, verily, all these bemgs arise, by whom they, so born, live and to whom they go forth and enter,—enqwre into that, that 18 Brahman” ’ (Tart 31), ‘Brabman एह truth, nowledge and infimte’ (Tait 21) and so ou, (The meaning of the first of the above two texta 18 —) ‘from whom’, 16 from Lord Purugottama, ‘all thase bemgs’,1e all objects from the mahat down to a tuft of grass, ‘arise’,—hereby the ongmaton (of the world from the Lord) 1s mdicated “By whom, they, 80 born, live’,—hereby the submstence (of the world in Brahman) 18 mdicated ‘They enter’,—hereby the dissolution, (of the world into the Lord) 1% shown ‘To whom they go forth,’—meanmg— whom they attam, after the destruction of all karmas’,—hereby salvation, (of the souls) 18 mdicated Here ‘omgmation’ means the oxpansion of the manifold consciousness of the sentient being, due to its conneo tion with a body and the rest, and ‘dissolution’ means its ontrance into the Cause (viz Brahman), resuliing from the contraction of ita consciousness Thus will be made clear under the explanations of the two aphorisms, viz ‘Dependent on the movablo and the immovable’ (Br 88 2316) and so on The distimction (betweon the xentiont and the non sentient) 1s that the non sentient 1s more primary, having a different form at the begmning of creation 1

The meaning of the second text, on the other hand, 18 that Brahman possesses the attmbutes of truth, knowledge and mfintude Here, the word ‘truth’ distinguishes the Lord from what is not true, the word ‘knowledge’ from the group of the non rentiont, and the word ‘infinite’ from the group of the sentient

And, thus 16 18 established that the charactemstu. mark of Brahman 18 that He, bemg the one non distmcot matenal and efficient cause of the universe, 18 possessed of truth and the reat He 8 the matenal cause ° in the sense of bemg the manzfestor, in & gross form, of His own

1 That 18, the non-sentient 18 more primary than the sentient mn the sense that 20 28 prior to the sentient m pomt of time Right m tho begmning of creation, the mdrvidual goul does not exust, in the sense that thore is nobody with which 10 may be connected but pradhdna dosa, though not m the form of particular non sentuent substances like stones end houren, ste and the body comes to be evolved later on Of Sambkhya theory of ey olution

9 Upddinaiva

[st 1 1 2. ADH 2 | VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 25

natural powers, denoted by the terms ‘higher , ‘lower’ and 80 on, and reduced to a subtle state, as well as of the effects, existent and wherent 1 them respectively He 18 the efficent cause 1 170 the sense of bringing about a union of the sentient beings,—whose attnbute of knowledge 18 आ & state of absolute contraction being under tho m fluence of the past umpressions of their own, Karmas which are begin ningless, and 18, thereby, unfit for brmgmg about the recollection (1 therr minda) of the retributive experiences (to be undergone in the present birth),—with their respective karmas, and the respective instrumenta for experiencing them, through manzfestmg (m them) knowledge, enabling them to experience the fruits of karmaa 2

There 1s a Smyti passage too, conformable to the text dealmng with the topic m hand, (1e the above Tartturtya text, 31) m the Moksa dharma ® It begms ‘The Sanpture which was mentioned by Bhrgu to Bh&radvija, who asked’ (Maha 12 67697 4), and con tmues ‘He, verily, 1 the Lord Visnu, celebrated to be mfinite, abiding as the वडाः Soul of all bemgs, and difficult to be known by those who have not obtamed the self, who 1s the creator of the principle of egoity for the production of all beings, from whom arose the universe, about whom I have been asked by you here”’ (Mah& 12 6784b— 6786a 5)

1 Nemitiatva

> The Lord is the material cause of the universe in the sense that creation means the manifestation of His mubtle powers of the sentient and the non sentient into gross effecta That is durmg disolution, the entire universe of the sentient and the non-sentient merges in the Lord and axsta in Him na subtle state ag His natural powers Then, in the begimnmg of 9 new creation, the Lord manifests these powers of the sentiant and the non sentient (6४ dak and aoté-dakn), developing them into grosser effects and producing thereby, the universe of names and forms

And the Lord 8 the efficient cause of the universe in the sanse that He unites individual souls with their respective karmas the resulta of these karmas and the instruments for experiencing thera—that 1s, the Lord mw the efficient cause in the sense that He regulates the ceatinies of dividual souls in accordance with strict justice Dumng dissolution, the begmnmglesa m pressions of past karmas get dimmed and confused and at the time of a new creation the Lord revives these mpreesions m particular individuals, thereby making each individual undergo the fruits of his past works VideV RM p 63

3 Mokga dharma’ 19 the name of 9 section of the twelfth book of the Mahé bhérata from adhyaya 174 to the end

“P 604 lme7 vol 8 6 Op ov. lines 22-24

[st 1 1 2 26 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 2 ]

If xt be objected —In the Svet&évatara Upanisad, a multatude of causes 78 spoken, of in the passage ‘Time, nature, destmy, accident, elements and the Person should be known as the Cause’ (Svet 1 2), 80 what authornty 18 there for separating specifically Vasudeva, the Highest Person alone as the cause of the world —(then we reply ) Listen A multatude of scriptural and Smrti passages 1s our authority for specifying the cause of the world Compare the followmg — ‘Ho, the One, who governs all these causes, connected with tmme and soul’ (Svet 13), ‘He who 18 a knower, the Time of tame, possessed of attributes, ommacent' (Svet 62), ‘Of whom there 1s neither a creator, nor a lord’ (Svet 69), ‘Venly, Nar&éyana was One’ (Mahi Up 1 2), ‘Then there was Visnu, Ham alone, without parts’, ‘From Narfiyans 18 born Brahm&, from Ni&rfiyana 38 born Rudra’ (Nar 1), ‘From the forehead of this bemg, wrapt up withm himself in meditation, was born the Person, with three eyes, trident 17. hand’ (Mahi Up 17), ‘Krsna, the One, the ruler, moving everywhere, 18 an, object of worship, He who, though one, yet appears a8 many’ ‘““* Ka’ 18 the name of Brahman, I am the ‘Iéa’,106 the Lord, of all bemgs We two have sprung up from your body, hence you have the name ‘ Keéava’”’, ‘I, Brahmi, the primary Lord of people, am born from Him, and you have sprung up from me’, ‘Krena alone 18 the source of the worlds, and of their dissolution, too ’, ‘ Bemg created. by Krsna the universe consisting of the sentient and the non sentient has origmated’ ‘In the Vedas, and m Rémdéyana, venly, m the Bharata and 1, the Pafica ritra, Han 18 celebrated everywhere, 190 the begmning, in the end, and m the middle’ (Han V 162321) ˆ ^ { am the ongin of the entire world, dissolution similarly”’’ (Gite 7 6), ˆ “ˆ There 1s nothimg else higher than me, O Dhanafijaya”’ (Gita 7 7), ““ I am the souroe of everything, everything origmates from me” ’ (७ 108) and so on The terms ‘ Hiranyagarbba’ and the rest, which we find sometimes mm certain texts concerning the origin and 80 on of the world, should be known to be referrmg to Brahman Hence it 18 established that Lord Krsna, the Soul of all, the Lord of all, the one topic of all the Vedas, 1s the cause of the world

Here ends the section entitled ‘The Ongin’ (2)

1 P 1002 vol 4

[so 1 1 3 ADH 3 | VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 27

COMPARISON Samkara

Reading and interpretation same Of course, conuistently with his doctrme, Samkara must hold that here the term ‘ Brahman’ denotes ‘Iévara’ or the lower Brahman

Adhikarana 3 ‘The section eontitled ‘That which has Scripture for 1068 source’ (Sitra 3 ) SUTRA 3 ०८ Brosauseh (BRAHMAN HAS) SoRIeTURE FoR His 90080 ” Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

With reference to the enquiry What 1s the proof of His emstence ¢ The author states the correct conclusion —

Of Whom °" Sorpture”’ alone 18 “the source’, 1 © the cause of knowing,—that very reality, characterized as having the statod marks, 18 denoted by the term ‘Brahman’

Vedanta-kaustubha

Thus, 1t has been pomted out by the aphoniam concerning enquiry ४ that Brahman 18 the object to be enquired into, and 2४ has been pointed out by the aphomsm concerning characteristic mark? that the characteristio mark of Brahman 1s to be the cause of the ongin and the rest of the world and possess truth, etc Now, with reference to the enquiry What 1s the proof with regard to Him—the proof 1s bemg stated.

On the doubt, viz whether Brahman, having the stated marks, 18 to be arrived at through inference, or has the Veda alone for His proof,—the prima facre view bemg that He 1s to be arnived at through inference, since we know from the scriptural text ‘From whom speech turns back’ (Tait 24, 29) that Brahman cannot be known through speech (16 texts),—

1 This explains the compound ‘édsira-yont’ 2Viz Br Si 111 3 Vu Br 38 112

[st 1 ] 99 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 8

(We reply ) Brahman cannot be armved at through mferen but has the Veda for His proof Why? ° Because (Brahman 7 Scripture for His sources” That means “Scripture + 16 the Ve 18 the “gsource’”’,1¢e the cause, the informant, the proof, with rege to whom,—that object 18 ‘“‘Sastra yon”, and ^ Sastra yonttva ” the state of beg ‘' ra yon.”’—on account of that, 16 on accot of having Scripture for His proof! The correct conclusion 18 tl Brahman has the Veda alone for His proof Tfit besaid For the sake of sumpheity, 1 18 well said that Brahm has Sorzpture for His source, and thus to aay that Brahman ft Scripture for His source, 1e has the Veda for its proof, serves € purpose, (16 18 not m conflict with our view),—(we reply) } Brahman, cannot be arrived at through inference, because the phras ० Because (He has) Sampture for (His) source” mdicates o reas which excludes any other proof except Scripture If1t be said How 1s 10 known that He cannot be arrived at throu, inference *—({we reply ) There has been some room for the suspicu that Brabman can be arrived at through inference, since the mudd term. (or the reason), viz: “the state of bemg an, effect’ 2, stated abov proves the world to be due to a creator? With a view to removu it, that significant word ^ 18 used here (7. this sitra), in accordan. with the followmg scriptural texts —Viz ‘The word which all t Vedas declare’ (Katha 215), ‘That with regard to which all t Vedas become one’ (Tat Ar 31115), ‘ “I ask you about Brahma set forth in the Upanwads” ’(Brh $ 9 265), ‘He who does not knc the Veda, does not know Him, the great’ (Tait Br 3 12947१7) ax so on, and the followmg Smrti passages ‘ “By all the Vedas, I alo: am to be known,” ` (Gité 1515), “ ‘In the Veda, m the Ramayan

1 Thus explams the compound disira-yomivds’ 2 Karyyaiva ठ That is 20 has been laid down m Siira 1 1 2 that the world 18 an offer ‘Thus suggests the mference -—Whatever 18 an effect has a creator The world is an effect the world has a creator (viz Brahman) Thu suggestion is negatived by Sara 1 13 which explicitly sayy that tl Brahman has Scripture alone for His proof and never mwference Vis dédsira yon

7 P 292 vol 3

fst 1 1 38 apn 3.] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 20

verily, m the Bh&rata and m the Pafica ritra, Hari 1s celebrated everywhere, m the begmning, in the end and in the middle’ ” (Harv 162821), ‘We bow down, to that wherem lies the eternal basis of all speech’ and 80 on

If 1t be said On the ground of the inference ‘All objects having parts, hke the earth and the rest, have a cause, because they are effects, hke pots and the reat’, Brahman 1s established to be the cause of the world, ance none else can be such 8 cause, and this bemg so, why trouble about the Veda f—{we reply ) no, because, the very fact that the elements ike the ether and the rest have an ongin, being not known by anyone without the Veda, that they are effecta 18 not eatab- lnshed, and hence the reason > 18 1teelf unestablished 3

It cannot be 88त also that the origm of the elements 18 to be known through the Veda, and the fact that they are effecta bemg proved through this, the reason 418 not unestablished—, for, mn, that case too, Brahman, the cause of the world bemg known through the Veda alone, the inference becomes futile, and you virtually come to our ade ‘Thus, even in the case of well known effects like a house or a shoot, Brahman, cannot be inferred from the reason, ‘produciblenesa’, 1t bemg possible to suppose the earth, the seed, wate:, men and so on. to be their causes, and unreasonable to 1magme an unseen cause (viz Brahman)

This should be understood here wherever something is found to be an effect, there 1t is possible also to arrive, by means of inference, at an individual soul, corresponding to effect, as the agent But that the entire universe 18 an effect 18 not known without the help of the Veda Hence, the creator of the world, too, can be known through the Veda alone, and. never through a thousand mferences Further, Brahman cannot be known through the evidence of perception, since the ordinary sense organs are mcapsable of grasping Him, as declared

1P 1002 9 Vis Kdryyaiva or state of bamg an effect 3 That is, 1) has been argued ~ Whatever is an effect has a cause The world 28 an effect the world has a cause Now we cannot know that the world w an effeot unless we have recourse to Sempture and hence Sorspture is needed even here too “Vis KGryyaive or produablenees

[80 118 30 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 3]

by the soriptural texta ‘Not the sense organs, nor mference,’ ‘ ^“ Thi knowledge 18 not attamable through inference, dearest! It leads tc proper knowledge only beg told by another’’* (Katha 29) That 18, ‘Dearest!’ ‘thu knowledge’ concernmg Brahman, 1s not to be overthrown by reason, or, 1s not capable of bemg attamed thereby ‘Told’ by ‘another’,1e by an omniscient teacher who 1s versed in the Vedas, 2४ leads to mght knowledge, as declared by the aphorism ‘On account of reasonmg having no ground’ (Br Si 2111), by the Manu Smrt ‘One should not apply reasonmg to those conceptions which. are राया षट imconcervable’, and by the Mah& bhiérata ‘QOne should not arrive at those conceptions which are verily mconcolvable through reasonmg There can be no ascertainment of any deep meaning through reasoning which 1s without a bass’ Moreover, who but a mad man should say that Brahman, the cause of the world, who 18 not known entirely and m every way even by omniscient mantras and sages, who 18 difficult to be understood and who 28 possessed. of mfimte mconceivable quahties and powers, can be known through inference

It 1s not to be apprehended what then, wil become of such, texta as ‘From whom speech turns back’ (Tait 24,29) and so on ?—for the meaning of these 18 that Brahman, 18 not limited aa bemg so much This the author will state under the aphonsm ‘For the so muchness of the topio mentioned’ and so on (Br त 9 2 22)

(An alternative explanation of the sitra ) If the compound “Sastra yom” be disjomed as ‘The source of Scripture’, then, too, the very same meaning 18 arrived at! The resultmg meaning 1s that Brahman can be known through the Vedas alone,—breathed forth by Him, the omusoent, and (as such) standmg m an intimate and internal relation with Him,—and not through any external inference and the rest, magmed by others In that case, (1 6 on the second interpretation), the topic of this aphomsm. will be the scriptural text, viz “Breathed forth by this Great Bemg 18 the Rg veda, the Yayur- veda and the Sima-veda’ (Brh 2410, Maitrt 682) And, on this mterpretation, the eternity of the Vedas are not negatived, for what we admit 18 the issumg forth only (and not new creation) of what 1s eternally established, in accordance with the followmg scriptural

1 ¢ SB 113

[st 1 1 4 ADH 4] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 31

and Smrti passages, viz ‘By means of speech, which 18 devoid of form and eternal’ (Rg V 87561, Tait Sam 261122), ‘Speech, without beginning and end, eternal, consisting of the Veda and celestual, was created by the Self born m the beginning, whence proceeded all activities’ (Maha 1285348) Hereby, the eternal and non clerived form of Brahman, 18 mdicated, 81706 the Veda, which 18 pnor to all dertvative creation, was breathed forth by Him‘* ‘This we shall explain later 00. 6 ‘Hence, it 15 established that Brahman has the Veda as His sole proof

Here ends the section entitled ‘ That which has Sempture for 18 source’ (3)

Adhikarana 4 The section entitled ‘Concord ance’ (Stitra 4)

SUTRA 4

“Bor THaT (viz THAT BRAHMAN HAS SCRIPTURE 4S His 801. PROOF) FOLLOWS FROM THE CONCORDANCE (OF ALL SORIPTURAL TEXTS WITH REGARD TO BRAHMAN) ”

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

If an objection be raised, viz In os much as the entire Veda 18 concerned. with action (18 myunctions and prohibitions), the VedAnta texta too, which are concerned with a different topo, are solely concerned with injunctions by way of establishmg the excellence of the agent, who 18 a part of sacrifices,—yjust as the artha vide texts 5 are indirectly unanimous with the mjunctive texta, by way of estab- luhmg their excellence Hence, how can Brahman have Scripture a8 His sole proof? 7—the correct conclusion 1s 88 follows

1P 162 2P 241 vol 1

3 © 688 1776 22 vol 9

¢ That 18 uf Brakman were to breathe forth the Vedas, He must have a body (nore etc), but this body 38 not evidently composed of matter, but 14 non material, 81006 when He breathes forth the Vedas, thare 1s no matter

‘See VE 13 35-30

¢ An artha-vdda 19 the explanation of the meauing of a precept, or eulogism

7 The sense of the objectionis All Vedas set forth injunctions or prohibstione with regerd to action But besides the texts which directly or expliorily seb forth the above, there are in the Vedas some texts which ere merely smatcanve

[st ll 4 92 VEDANTA 27121. SAURABHA ADH 4]

‘That’, 1e Brahman alone the object of enqury and the cause of the universe, has Scripture for His proof, and not action and the reat, smoo the entire Veda 18 m concordance in proving Him alone (The word) ‘‘ samanvay&t " 18 to be explained thus ‘“ Sama nvaya”” means concordance in respect of the primary mmport,—on account of that—‘ samanvay&t’’ Or else, because there 18 concord ance among the Vedas 171 point of proving Him alone,—s0o much m brief

Tt cannot be said that such a concordance exista with regard to actions, since actions fulfil ther purpose by simply giving rise to a desire for knowledge! To say that Brahman 18 © subsidiary factor of sacrifices 18 > mere childish prattle, mance He 1s an mdependent Bemg as the regulator of all works, ther agents and, 80 on, and ther instruments, and 18 the giver of frmta On the contrary, works themselves are in concordance (with regard to Brahman) as aasisting madrrectly the mse of knowledge—which 18 8 means to attaimmg Him,— by way of generating a desire for knowledge > Thus 1s ascertamed from the text concernmg the desire for knowledge 8

If 1t be objected It bemg established im, Scrpture that Brahman 18 not an, object of the proof, viz Word, just as He 18 not an object of the proofs, viz perception, and the rest,—Brahman has not Scripture as His sole proof,—we reply Brahman, the object of enqmry, has Soripture alone as Eis proof and not anything else, on account of the concordance of all the scriptural texts, directly or mdurectly, with regard to Him alone Among these, there 18 a direct concordance among the texta concernmg His characteristic marks, proof and the

and nob wyunciwe And, these latter kmd of texts are to be explamad, not literally bub as euloging the direct mjunctive texts and thereby formmg & part of myunctions eto otherwise the mtegnty of the Vedas cannot be maintamed Hence, the Veddnia texts too must be taken as not establahmg Brahman but as simply extollmg the sacrifieer by identufymg him with the Supreme Soul and so on, and as such really concerned with sacrificial 008

1 That is the proper fonction of karmas 18 उपाङ्ग to pumfy the mind and thereby create a demre for knowledge Karma, thus, 18 8 means and not an end, the way to truth and not truth itself Hence the Veddnia texts, dealing aa they do with the Supreme Truth, cannot be concerned with mere karmas Vide VPS 3436

# Te knowledge 18 not an avga of karma on the contrary karma w an aiga of knowledge Vide VPS 848

8 Vis Brh 4422

[8८ lil 4 ADH 4 ] VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA 33

rest, since they are (directly) concerned with Him, and there is an indirect concordance among the texts concerning the Sandilya. vidyii,1 the Paficign: vidyé,® the Madhu vidy& 3 and so on, as well as among those which are symbolic m nature‘ Or rather, there is a direct concordance alone among all the texta whatsoever, though leading to different procedures,5 since the topica of all these different texts being equally Brahman m essence, they are all to be understood im their primary and literal sense® It 18 not to be feared that m that 0886) the texts which are concerned with the demal of the object (viz Brabman) will be precluded,’ amoe they too, as bemg concerned with denymg any Imit with regard to Brahman’s nature, atimbutes and the rest, refer to the very same topic (viz Brahman) §

Moreover, we ask your Worship Do you or do you not mean that Brahman 18 the object of the statement “Brahman 18 not an object of knowledge’? If the first, then Brahman 18 proved to be desaribable and hence the proposition that He 1s not desombable 1s set amde If the second, then Brahman 18 descmbable all the more Hence, the object of enquiry 1s Lord Vasudeva alone, omniscient, possessed of all meooncervable poywers, the cause of the orgm and the rest of the untverse, known through the evidence of the Veda alone, different and non different from all and the soul of all All Semptures are n concordance with regard to Him alone—thus 18 the settled conclumon of the followers of the Upanisads (viz the Ved&ntaris)

1 Vide Brh 561, 08207 3 1é 1-4

2 Vide Chéind 564-10 Also VE $11

* Vide Brh 251-19 (whole section), Chfind $ 1-11

4 Vide © g Brh 57-9 ete , Chind 3 18-21, 7 1-12, ete

5 The sense 18 that the vamous kinds of texts may mmpel a man to different procedures Some may lead a man to maditate on Brahman directly as the self, others to meditate on Him as the sun and 20 on.

® That 18, even the texts concerning the various meditations and symbola, are to be understood aa directly referrmg to Brahman, 1 8 to be interpreted literally, and not as referrmg to Brahman indirectly 18 to be mterpreted figuratively, a8 suggested before This modnfies the statement made unmediately before thab some texte are direct and primary, some indirect and secondary, and takes all to be equally direct and pmmary

7 Vis ‘Net, nei” (Beh 28 6) and so on

6 That 18, the view that afl texts are concerned with Brahman directly mn no way precludes the negairve texte, mnce these negative texte also are concemed with Brahman equally

[श 1 } 4 24 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]

Vedinta-kaustubha

Thus, 1b has been said that Lord Krsna, the substratum of great qualities and powers and the non distinct material and efficent cause of the world, has the Veda alone for His proof Now, with a view to confirming 29, the author, by showing the concordance of the entire Veda with regard to that very Brahman, refutes the followmg objection, viz , The entire Veda has been 888001916त with action by Jaimm: who holds ‘Smce Scripture 1s concerned with action, there 18 purport- lessness of what does not refer to ut (viz action)’ (Pi Mi Sa 1817) Hence, what 18 not concerned with action being laid down as purport- less, the Ved&nta texts, too, all refer to action (otherwise they will all become purportless) Consequently, how can Brahman have the Veda as His sole proof ¢

The term “but” disposes of the (above) prima facie view “That”, 16 Brahman alone, the object of enquiry and the cause of the world, has Sorupture for His sola proof Why? “On account of conoord- ance”, 1 © because there '1s concordance among all the Vedas with regard to Him alone (The word “samanvayét”’ 1s to be explained as follows ) “Samanvaya”’ means ‘Concordance m pomt of entirety of. statement’,—on account of that,—‘“samanvayit”,1¢e the entire Veda 18 m concordance with regard to denoting Brahman entirely or Lord Kysns, the object to be enquired 11100 by one who desires salvation, the one identical maternal and efficient cause of the world, havmg Sarrpture as His source (16 proof), the controller of matter, soul, tume and works, having His footstool honoured by the crowns (16 the bowed. heads) of Brahm&, Rudra, Indra and the rest, having His greatness untouched by any odour of fault, the abode of infinrte qualities hke ommniscience and the rest and to be approached by the freed The followmg groups of texts are m concordance with regard to Him alone — From whom. verily all these bemgs arise’ (Tait 31), ‘From bles alone, verily, do these beings amse’ (Tait 36), ‘From Him arise the vital breath, the mmd, and all the sense organs’ (Mund 213), ˆ 06 exstent alone, my child, was this m the begmning One only, without a second” (Chand 621) “He thought May I be many, may I procreate”’ (Chind 628), ‘Brom N&rtyana arwes. the vital breath from Né&riyana anses Brahmi, from

1P 36, vol |

(so 1 1 4 ADE 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 96

Narayana arises Rudra’ (पिदा 1), “There was vorily, Nirdyana alone, neither Brahm& nor Iéina (Mahi Up 1 2), ‘Brahman, verily, was this m the begimnmg, one only’ (Brh 141011) ‘Brahman, verily, was this m the beginning, he knew that self alone thus “I am Brahman”’’, “From Him arose all this’, “Tho self, verily, was this m the beginning, one only’ (Ait 111), “From thus self, very, the ether origmated’ (श 21), ‘The word which all the Vedas record’ (Katha 2 15), “That, mn regard to which all the Vedas are unanmous’ (Tat Ar 31114), ‘Entered withm, the ruler of man’ (Tait Ar 98 11 1 2 9}, “To whom all the gods bow down’, ‘Brahman 1s truth, knowledge and infinite’ (Tait 21), ‘Knowing the 01188 of Brahman’ (Tart 29), “Brahman 8 knowledge and bliss’ (Brh 39 28), ‘All this, verily, 18 Brahman’ (Chind 3141), ‘Tho self that 18 free from ams, without decdy, without death, without gmef, without hunger, without thirst’ (Ohind 8713), ‘Who 1 omnuscient, all knowmg’ (Mund 119, 227), “The knower of Brahman attams the highest’ (Taxt 21), “Brahman, verily, 1 all this’ (Brh 251-14, 14 tues) and 60 on

(Prima fac view )

An objection may be raised here —The entire Veda 1s but 9 collec tion of flve kids of texta, called, myunction, prohibition, explanation or eulogy, sacred formule and name? Of these, “One, who desires heaven should perform the Jyotusjoma* sacrifice’ and so on, are myunctive texta ‘A Br&éhmana should not be nlled’ and so an, are probibiizve texta ‘The wind, verily, 1 the quickest deity’ (Tait Sami 2115), and go on are explanations or eulogisms ‘Qblation to you’ (Tart Sam 1115), ‘O, heavens, havimg the fire as your head’ (Rg V 8 44 169, ? Sat Br 284 118 8), and so on are sacred formule ‘Tyotastoma’,® ‘Aéva medha’10 and the rest are names,—thus we distmguish them ‘Thus, m the begimnmg, m the aphorism “Then,

1P 19 Readmg ‘Yairastan’

2P 181

» Vedhi, mgedha, ariha-cdda, manira, ndmadheya

4 Name of a Soma-sacriice, consisting divimons, Agnigjoma and the reat

MW,p 437 5 > 126, lmes 1 2, vol 7 € P 1, lnel, vol 1 १ ए 182, lme 7 8 P 168, lme 16

® See footnote 4, above 10 The horse-sacrifies

(so 1 1 ¢ 36 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]

therefore, an enquiry into religious dutsea’ (Pa Mi Sai 1117), 1४ 18 said that the Veda has meanmg as possessing the frurt to be attamed through the myunctions regarding conceptions which are instrumental to the Vedic studies In the second aphoriam which w concerned with mark, vw ‘A rehgious duty has mjunction for its mark’ (Pi Mi Sa 1122), 1 18 establshed, on the ground of the vyiptz “What- ever has the Veda for rts proof, refers to action’, that m the sphere of religious duties, myunction 18 the authority® Here a doubt arses as to whether the artha vida texts hke "The wind 18 the swiftest deity’ (Tart Sam 2114) are authoritatave m the sphere of religious duties, or not With regard to it, the prima facie view 1s as followsa We have a text ‘Smee Scripture 18 concerned with action, there 1s

of what does not refer to 7 (viz action)’ (Pi Mi Si 1215) (+ means }—Scrpiture,1e the Veda, 1s ‘knyirtha’, 16 has ‘action’ alone as 298 ‘purport’, or subject-matter or topic,—for this reason, the artha vida texts are not authontatave What then are they ?—anticrpatang this question, the text goes on to say that “there 18 purportleamess of what does not refer to 1t’,1¢6 let there be वाग “purportiesmess’ or ‘meanmglessness’ of that which has not ‘action’ for ite ‘purport’, viz of artha-vida and the rest, and m the very same manner, of the Vedinia texts as well Even those (Ve dinta ) texts which comprise injunctions regarding study viz ‘One's own text should be studied’, cannot be reasonably said to be autho- ritative, ance they are (really) concerned with Brahman, leading to no frut® (Here ends the prima facie view within the omginal prima face view) With regard to this, we state the correct conclusion ‘Because of thar unanimity with the myunctions, let (them be authoritative) through having the glorification of injunctions as their

iP 1, vol 1

2P 3 vol 1

3 That 1s, the mference is as follows — Whatever has the Vede for rts proof refers to actuon

A religious duty has the Veda for rts proof & religious doty refers to action, 2 8 18 concemed wrth imyunctions and prohibrtaons 4 P 126 lnes 12 vol J 9 P 39, vol 1

¢ That 1s, there are some Veddnia texts, which do refer to action, 3 © to injunction, yet they are not to be taken as authoritatrve, mnoe they really refer to Brahman who 1s outmde the sphere of actions and frurta

[80 1 1 4 ADH 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 37

purport’ (Pi Mi Si 127+) That 18, since the artha vidas are unanimous with the injunctive texts, let them be authoritative ‘through having glorification as ther purport’,1e by way of glonfymng the matters to be enjomed Similarly, im order to prevent the absolute purportlessnees of the Vedanta texts which are wanting in mjunction and prohibrtion and teach an accomplished object (viz Brahman), 1t 18 reasonable to take them too as mdirectly connected with action,— which 18 something to be accomplished,—as moluded under the very mantras and artha viidas, since they (viz the Ved&nta texts) admit myjunctions regarding the study of the Veda But rf they be taken, to be independent (of action) they would lead to no frmt, and hence they must be understood to have fulfilled their purpose through establishing the agent, who 1s a part of a sacrifice (and not to be mdependent of action) Among these, the texts concernmg the ‘that’ (viz Brahman) and ‘thou’ (vi the mdrvidual soul)? glorify the deity and the agent of the sacrificial act, and the knowledge concerning 7 (viz the ‘that’) called the ‘higher knowledge’,? glonfy thefruit (Thus, weconclude ) The Vedanta texts are not concerned. with Brahman, but are like the artha vids texts, ance they are con, cerned. with, proclaimmg the excellence of the agent, who 1s a subord nate factor in a sacrifice (Here ends the orginal prima facse view *)

(Author’s conclusion }

To this we reply ० No, because this 18 8 mere imagination, m vented by you, and because (on the contrary), works, being generative of knowledge which, 1s a means to salvation, indirectly refer to Brahman alone, as declared by the soriptural text —‘The Brihmanas desire to know this self through the study of the Veda, through sacrifice, through penance, through fastmg’ (अ 4422) Here, if im the statement “They desire to know through sacrifice’, there be a direct connection, of the Instrument, viz ‘sacrifice’, with the meanmg of the root," as m the sentence ‘He deamres to go by the horse’, then the sacrificial act should be known to be serving the purpose of knowledge © helping the rise of knowledge), and thereby referrmg to Brahman

1P 42 vol 1

® Of the famous text 'Thou art that’ (Chand 687 eto )

> Videeg Mund 1145

4 It beganonp 35

4 The correct conclusion begs here 6 Vis ‘eid’ =to know

{st 1 1 4 38 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]

If, on the other hand, owing to the primacy of the demderative suffix, there be 9 connection with the meanmg of the suffix, 1t should be known to be serving the purpose of desire, {16 helpmg the mse of a desire for knowledge), to be a subordinate factor of knowledge through that desire and to be referrmg to Brahman thereby And, the fact that action 18 a part of knowledge will be stated under the aphornsm ‘ And, there 18 dependence on all, on account of the text concerning sacrifice, a8 m the case of a horse’ (Br Sa 3 ¢ 26)

Tt cannot be said, also, that the reality to be known from the Vedanta (viz Brahman) 1s a subordmate factor of sacrifices,—simce Ho 18 self dependent as the controller of all works, their agenta and ther mstruments Nor can it be said that the Vediinta texts are subsidiary parts of myunctions like the artha vidas, smce the former have been referred to in & different context and are not m, proximity to injunctions Nor can 1४ be said that the Vedinta texta lead to no fruit, teaching, as they do, somethmg which 1s neither an injunction nor & probibrtion,—smece the knowledge of Brahman, who 18 to be known from the Vedinta, leads to a supremely excellent fruit, viz salvation

If 1t be said As we read in texts hke ‘ Undecaymg, verily, 18 the geod deed of one who performs the Odtur misya? 8907066 ° (Ap

8 8111 9) that works too have the same fruit hike xt (viz knowledge), so there 1s nothing objectaonable (m takmg the scriptural texta) to be referrmg to works,—

(We reply ) No, because the scriptural text ‘ Just as here, the world gamed through work perishes, so exactly does hereafter tho world gamed through merit perish’ (Chind 8164) 1s of a greater force, 18 m conformity with the inference, vi ‘The world gamed through mere work 18 non permanent, because it 18 gamed through work along, as mn the cage of पाण and the rest’, and 1s confirmed by another scriptural text ag well, vm ‘ Hrail, 17056, are these boats of sacrifices’ (Mund 127), because the text ‘Undecaymg, verily ’ (Ap SS 8 1 1) and so on 1s a weaker one, and because 1t 1s mmproper to (take the scriptural texts) to be referrmg to works, which form the object of such texts wantmg m force On the other hand, the

1 Viz ‘san, implymg demre’

9 See footnote 2 p 5 9 2 1, र] 1

* Correct quotation Kerma-ova’ and not ‘kerma-+ua’, which 1s translated here Vide Chind 816,p 415

[st 1 1 4 ADH 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 89

texta ‘Those who know thus, become mmortal’ (Brh 4414, Katha 629, Svet 8311018, 417 20), ‘The knower of Brahman attams the highest * (Tait 21), are not contradicted by any scrptural text, and cannot be set amide by a thousand mferences Further, the text ‘Undecaymg, mdeed’ and so on (Ap SS 811) ws not really set aside, since it refers to the relatave (permanence of works)1, and ance the holy Bhigavate-smrti (16 the Bhigavad द), which 1s & version of the Veda, 18 the authority 17 both the cases (viz regardmg the non permanence of karma, and the permanence of Brahman) thus — ‘The worlds, begmmumg from the world of Brahman, come and go, O Arjuna | But, on attammg me, 0 Son of Kuntt! there is no re-birth”’’ (Gta 8 16)

If1t be objected It may be that the Upanigadio portion 18 somehow or other concerned with Brahman, since we see 1 to be 80 अण the prior portion (viz the Karma ka&nds) 18 known from the texta ‘He performs the Agnihotra? as long as he lives’, ‘One who desires heaven, should perform the Jyotustoma sacmfice’ (Ap 688 1021) and so on, to fulfil 1t8 purpose by enjommg obligatory and optional works and the rest, and hence how can they be concerned with Brahman 1-

(We reply ) Not so ‘The entare Veda 1s concerned only with Brahman, and although some part of 1t 1s found to refer to action somehow, 18 complete concordance 1s found m Brahman alone Among these the Upanisadic portion refers directly to Brahman, directly concerned, as 10 18, with demonstratmg His nature, atimbutes and the rest Among these, agam, the statements of difference refer to Brahman by way of bemg concerned with the nature of the sentient, the non sentient and Brahman, the statements of non difference, by being concerned with proving that everythmg has Brahman for re essence, the statements of creation, and the rest, by bemg concerned with proving attributes hke ¢qreatorship and the rest, the statements that Brahman 28 non-qualified, by bemg concerned with the denial of the qualities due to miy3, the statements that Brahman 1s quahfied, by bemg concerned with provmg the natural qualities of the Lord,

1 Thad 1s, this text amnply shows that the deeds of one who performs the sacrifice are relatrvely more permanent than the deeds of one who does not, and not that they are a permanent ४ Sacriflomg to Agns Of Athar V 6971,p 1380

[Ist Ll 1 4 40 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]

and the statements hke ‘That which 1s not manifested through speech’ (Kena 1 4), by bemg concerned with proving that Brahman 1s not limited by so muchness

The texts, concerned with the daily and occasional duties,! too, refer to Brahman alone, by way of effecting the purification of the nature of the person, entitled (to the study of Brahman) and bemg thereby 00 operative towards the rise of knowledge and so on concern ing Brahman, while (the texts) concerned with the optional duties,® by way of bemg an, atomic bit of the bliss of Brahman, 8106 the text ‘Other bemgs subast on a portion only of His bles alone’ (Brh 4 8 32) declares even, worldly pleasure to be an atomic portion, of the एड of Brahman Moreover, the optional duties are in concordance (with regard to Brahman), smoe they are concerned with the knowledge of Brahman by way of giving mse to & pure body, like that of a god and. the rest, entatled to salvation Moreover, just as in accordance with the maxim of ‘connection and disconnection’,? curd, used in connection with daly duties (nitya),—as laid down m, the passage ‘He performs © sacrifice with curd’,—brngs about the attainment of objects of sense,—as laid down m the passage “One who dearres for objects of sense should perform a sacrifice with curd’ (Taxt Br 215 6*),—so the sacrifimal acts, though bringimg about heaven and the reset, should yet be known to be serving the purpose {19 helpmg the mise) of knowledge5 And (finally) texta hke ‘Golden mght from. the tap of His nails’ (Chind 166°) refer to Brahman as bemg concerned with His divine body ॥ Or else, शआ008 the entire mass of 0016008 bas Brahman for ite essence, the mass of texts, denoting them, directly refer to Him 7

1 The daily or siya karmas are ablution, prayer and so on, to be performed every day while the oocasional or nawnitiaka harmas are the ceremony in honour of the dead and so on, to be performed on spemaloccamsions Both of these knnds are obhgatory

2 The optional or bdmya karmas are sacrifices and the reat undertaken with special objecta in view, viz heaven and the reat

3 A term epplied to expreas the.disconnechon of what 1s optional from what in @ necemary constituent of anythmg Vide Pi Mi Si 435, and Shbara's commentary pp 493 and ff vol 7

« P 180 Ime ॐ, vol 2 6 Vide VK 3 426

¢ Correct quotation Apranakhdi sarva eva suvarnah Vide Chand 166,p 43

? That is instead of the laborious explanation given above, 16 1s aumpler to accept this alternaizve explanation

[0 1 1 6 ApH 6] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA dl

Hence it 18 estabhshed that the entire Veda 18 im concordance with regard to Brabman alone or Lord Krsna the Highest Person, omnisment, possessing infinite natural and imoonceivable powers, the cause of the world, and different and non different from the sentient and the non sentient, as declared by the Lord Himself m the passage ‘“By all the Vedas, I alone am to be known,”’’ (Gita 15 16)

The four aphorisms constituting the basis of Scmpture are hereby explained This treatise (vi the Vedinta) 18 but an expounding of these

Here ends the section entitled ‘Concordance’ (4)

Here ends the explanation of the four aphorisms m the first quarter of the first chapter m the commentary Vedinta-kaustubha, composed by the reverend teacher Srinivasa, the moarnation, of the Paficajanya and dwelling under the lotus feet of the reverend Lord Numb&ditya, the founder of the sect of the reverend Sanstkuméra

Adhikarana 6 The section entitled ‘He sees’

(8 ६४८४8 56-12) SOTRA 5

“BHOCAUSH (कात OREATOR OF THH WORLD) 8058, (PRADHANA IS) NOT (THR CAUSH OF THE WORLD) (SINCE) 77 18 NON SORIPTURAL ””

Vedinta-parijaita-saurabha

But pradhina, admitted by the Samkhyas, 18 “non somptural”’, 16 18 devoid of scriptural evidence 09006 it 18 “not” the cause of the world, as m Scripture seemg, which. 1s a characteristic of a sentient hemg, 18 predicated of the cause of the world

Veddnta-kaustubha

Thus, 1t has been pomted out that Brabman, great m attributes, powers and nature, omniscient, and the one object of all the Vedas, 18 the cause of the origin and the rest of the world Now, the Sém- khyas,— who hold that Brahman 18 not the cause of the world, since He 1s of a dissimilar form, while the non, sentient pradhina, consisting of the three gunas, 18 the cause of the world, since 1t 18 of a form

[ऽ 11 8 42 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADE 5]

mmular to the effect—also relate the Vedinta texts like ‘“The existent, alone, my dear, was this im the beginning”’ (Chind 621) and so on, to 1t alone (viz pradhina) The reverend author of the aphorisms 1s now refuting this view

Pradh&na, which 1s derived through inference,! 1s not fit to be the cause of the origm and the rest of the world Why? Becaune 1# 18 “non scriptural”, 16 that with regard to which there w no “word”’,106 Scripture, asauthonty This adjective denotes the reagon

If 1t be objected that in the Oh&ndogya, pradhiina 1s meant by the term ‘existent’ in the passage =^ ८ The existent alone, my dear, was ths 10 the begmumg”’ (Chind 621) Heroe, how can 26 be said that pradhina 1s non soriptural?—we reply “‘ Because (ithe creator) sees”, 1 © because from the text, begmnmg =" ^ Huustent alone, my dear, was this im the begmmmg”* (Chand 6 21), and con tmumg ‘He thought, ‘May I be many, may I procreate*’’ (Chand 6 23), we find that the creator of the world percerves The same thing 18 mentioned m the Aitareya as well m the passage ‘The self, verily, was this m the beginning, one only Nothing else was apparent He thought “Let me create worlds*’ He created these worlds’ (Axi 1 1 1) Here the word "8668 °", denotative of the root, must be understood, by indirect apphoation, to be referrmg to ‘seemg’, which. 1s the meaning of the root ‘Seemg’ means deliberating, 168 deter mination, and that, bemg the attmbute of a conscious bemg, 18 not appropriate on the part of the pradhina Hence, pradhina, devoid of perception, 1s not mentioned by Scripture Acoordingly, 1t has been rightly said by 018 Holmeas that 1t 1s “non soriptural’’ There fore, 10 18 neither the cause of the world, nor knowable through the Veda

It cannot be said also that pradhfna possesses the power of knowledge through ita attribute of sativa, and as such, percatving 18 appropriate on 108 part,—smee rt 18 ummpossible that a non sentient substance and & nov, sentient attribute can possess knowledge, and be knowledge (respectively) Nor should 1% be said that thus 1s appro- priate through the connection, of pradhina with puruga,—because there bemg (at hand) Brahman, mentioned before and possessed of

1 That 18 we cannot directly percexve the pnmary matter, bub we argue that every effect must have a cause, that cause too another cause and 80 on, and thus finally we must admit a primary cause which has no cause This is the pradhdna

[so 115 apH 5] VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA 43

ever present knowledge, as a simple (explanation of the fact m band),— it volves unnecessary comphcations to drag in something which 18 the substratum of knowledge, only through its conjunction with another, (and not by itself), because such a view 18 utterly neghgible, and, finally because during ite state of equilibrium, 1t does not possess that atimbute1 30 stop labourmg the pomt Henos, the cause corresponding to the effect, viz the cause of the omgm and the rest of the world, 1s none but Brahman, who 1s denoted by the term ‘existent’ and 18 capable of perceiving, possessed as He 1s of natural, mooncervable and infinite powers, as declared by the scmptural text ‘ Supreme 18 His powers, declared to be of various kmds, and natural 18 the action of His knowledge and power’ (Svet 68) and so on

COMPARISON Samkara Reading and interpretation same, but Samkara develops, mm this connection, his doctrme of upidhi, or lmtimg adjunct, viz —that there 1s really nothmg besides Brahman, the individual soul and the rest being due to the limiting adjuncts of body, and the rest, hke the all pervading ether, lmnited by 0008 and the rest Hence difference 18 mithyi through and. through * Ramdnuja Reading and interpretation same, but RiméAnuyja also develops

bis own. view, viz that the universe of the sentient and the non sentient constitutes the body of the Lord > 1

Baladeva

Reading same, mnterpretation different,—viz ‘ Because (Brahman 18) seen (16 designated by Scripture), (Hoe 18) not mexpresatble ` 4

1 That 18, 1f knowledge arises through the pre dommance of the satiwa-guna, then prior to creation, all the gupas bemg m a state of equilibrium, no knowledge CAD). Gree 10

9 82116, 208

8 उत्‌ ए 116, 160 एष्लः]1

“ ए 116, pp 46 47, Chap 1

Ist 116 44. VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ANH 5]

SUTRA 6 “Tr IT BH 847 THAT (THE WORD ˆ SERING' IN THE ABOVE CHAN

DOGYA TEXT) IS SHOONDARY, (THEN WH REPLY) No, BROAUSE OF THE THERM ‘SEL’ (BEING APPLIED TO THE CAUSH OF THE WORLD) ”

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

Tt 18 not reasonable to say that the ‘seemg’ 18 (only) “secondary” Why? “On account of the term ‘self’ *”

Vedinta-kaustubha

Anticipating the objection, viz —

As we often find the metaphorical transference of the qualitiss of a sentient bemg to non sentuent objects lke a bank or tllmg, eg when referrmg to a bank about to fall, 1 18 said ‘The bank 18 about to शा "+" or when referrimg to the tillmg of dry soll, 1४ 18 said ‘Tillng 1s awaiting rain’, and as we read in Scripture about perception on the part of non sentuent objects hke water and light, in the passages ‘That hght percerved’ (Chand. 623), ‘Those waters peroelved’ (Chand 6 2 4),—there may very well be a metaphorical perception on the part of pradh&ina in the very same manner,—the author disposes of 1t here

If 1t be said. that the attribute of perception, belonging to pradhina 18 “secondary”, (we reply) “No” Why? “On account of the term “self’’’, 1e on account of the scriptural mention of the term ‘self’ which, estabhshes the absence of perception on the part of pradhana Thus, if by takmg the term ‘existence’ to mean the non sentient pradhina, a metaphorical perception, be admitted on ita part, then m the texts ‘All this has that for ita self, that 1s true, that 28 the self’ (Chind 678, 694, 6103, 6113, 61238, 6183, 6143, 6158, 0 16 3), the term ‘self’ must refer to the non sentient substance, which 18 the meaning of the terms ‘existent’ and ‘perceiver’, mentioned before in the texts ‘‘‘The existent, alone, my dear!’’’ (Chand 6 21), “He percerved’ (Chind 623) That 18, on the view, viz ‘He alone 18 the existent and the perce:ver, the self which 1s pradhAna’,—the identaty between the terms ‘exstent’ and the rest denoting the non sentient and bearmg a different sense and the term ‘self’ denotang the

1 Here the demderative suffix does not umply ‘wish but ‘mmmment danger’ (déamkd), in accordance with E V8 1707 quoted in SD K 2622, pp 336, vol 2

[8 1 1 7 ADE &] VHDINTA PABIJATA SAURABHA 45

Supreme Self and bearmg a different sense, will mvolve a contradiction, it bemg xmposaible for the term ‘self’ denotative of the Supreme Lord, to refer to pradhina Hence, to say that the perception 18 even meta phorical is unreasonable And owimg to the entering of the Deity (mto them), (the perception) on the part of water and light 1 not metapborical —this 18 the sum and substance

COMPARISON Baladeva

Reading same, interpretation different, viz —‘If 1b be said (that the creator of the world 1s) the gauna (or the Saguna Brahman, connected with the gunas of prakrii, possessing the sativa guna 88 his veature), (then we reply,) No, on account of the term “self”’ Thats, the term ‘self’ has been used m Scripture m connection with the creator of the world, and this term can be apphed only to the infinite Nirguna Brahman, unconnected with the gunas of prakyii 9

SOTRA 7

“(PRADHANA CANNOT BE MBANT BY THE THRM “SHLF’,) BECAUSE SALVATION 28 TAUGHT OF OND WHO RELIBS UPON THAT”

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha As salvation, characterized by the attamment of His (ie Brah- man’s) nature, 1s taught of a knower, who relies on the cause, the meanmg of the terms ‘extent’, ‘percerver’, ‘self’ and the rest,— 80 pradhina cannot be denoted by the terms ‘exstent’ and ‘self’

Vedainta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz 1m that case, let the term ‘self’ atand equally for the sentient and the non sentient, hke the term ‘light’® which

1 That is, 30 is nob water or fire that really percerves, but tha Lord who has entered into them, as mentioned in the pessage ‘That Divinity thought— “Come, let me enter these three divmities ’ (io, fire, water and food)" and so on (Chand 632)

> 25 11600 48 Ohap 1)

= ४४०६

[80 117 46 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]

denotes equally a sacrifice’ and fire, hence, no imconsistency 28 m, volved here,—the reverend Badaréyana replies here

The non sentient pradhane 1s not the object denoted by the term ‘self’ Why? “Because salvation 1s taught of one who relies on Him” 168 of one who has reliance (or devotion), otherwise called ‘meditation’, with regard to Him, 1e with regard to one who 18 denoted by the terms ‘existent’ and the rest, who 18 & perceiver and who 1s the creator of fire, water and food? Thus, after having taught an investigation, by one who 18 desirous of salvation, into the effect as consisting of the Cause (viz Brahman) m, essence, in the text “Thou art that’ (Chind 68 7,69 8,6103,611 3,6 123,618 38,6143, 6158, 61638), Seripture goes on to teach salvation, charactermed by the attamment of the nature of Brahman, m the text ‘For hm there 1s delay, so long as I am not freed, then I shall attam (Brahman)’ (Chind 6142) (The meanmg of this text 1s ) So long as & person, who desires for salvation, 18 not freed from his body and 18 mmpedaed, bamg compelled to undergo the fruits of works which, have already begun, to produce results, there 1s delay for him, but when the fruis of works will be fully enjoyed, he will attam the nature of Brahman at 0008; owing to the absence of impediments The use of the first person m both the cases, viz ‘I shall be free’, and ‘I shall attam’ should be known to be implymg the third person m accordance with Vedic use

If in the text “He 1s the Self’ (Chind 6 8 7, eto), the term ‘self’ 18 to refer to pradhina, then in the text ‘Thou art that’ (Chind 6 8:7,eto ), the very same thing must be referred to by the term ‘that’ Henoé the text “Thou art that’ would mean ‘Thou hast pradhina for th soul’, whereby 9 great mishap would take place, smce through, the mediation ‘I have the non sentient as my soul’, one would be obstructed from salvation for ever In the present case, on the other hand, Brahman, having the stated charaéterstaca, 18 denoted by the tetim ‘that’, arid the meanmg of the term ‘thou’ 1s the individual soul, Hi6 part, otherwise called Hig power, and possessed of the stated, marks Here, between the part and the whole, there 18 a relation of difference and non diffarence,—well-known everywhere m ordmary if amd m the Vedi “hs between the attmbute and ate substratum.

1 ‘Vix Jyoteioma 9 This explams the compound fan-nigfhasya'

[80 1 1 8 ADH 5] VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAURABHA 47

Although the mdividual soul 1s different from Brahman m nature, it 18 also non different from Hm, having no existence and activity apart from Him On account of bemg enveloped by the beginingless miyé, the mdrvidual soul has no knowledge of such a non difference Hence rt 18 said ‘Thou art that’, 1e you are non different from the object dencted by the term ‘that’ Even durmg the state of salvation, one who has attamed the nature of Brahman 1s of a different nature (from Brahman), but should yet be known to be non different from Him, because of having no existence and activity separately from Him, because from the text ‘He attams the bighest identity’ (Mund 318) we learn that Brahman alone 1s one that 1s to be approached, while the individual soul only one that approaches, and, finally, because we find the words ‘together with’ 10 the text ‘He enjoys all objects of destre together with Brahman, the all knowmg’ (Tait 21) Hence, Brahman alone 18 denoted by the terms ‘existent’, ‘self’ and the rest

COMPARISON Baladeva

Readmg same, mterpretation different—viz —'(The creator of the world 1s not the Saguna Brahman, but the Nirguna Brahman 2), for salvation, 1a taught of him who relies on Him (viz the Nirgune Brahman)’ 2

SUTRA 8

“AnD (PRADHANA GANNOT BE DENOTED BY THE TRRMS ‘HXISTENT’, “SEL” AND THE REST), BROAUSH THERE IS NO (SORIPTURAL) STATEMENT OF ITS HAVING TO BE ABANDONED ”

Vedainta-parijaita-saurabha

That the non sentient substance, tanght by the terms ‘existent’ and the rest and to be abandoned in salvation, 18 to be abandoned, as

well aa the purpose of the teachmg > ought to have been pomted out

1 For the explanation of the terms Sagunea end Nirguna, see © B

22GB 117, pp 4950 Ohap |

8 That is, if pradhdna be denoted by the terms ‘extent’, ‘self’ and the rest, then evidently such a self, eto cannot serve the purpose of salvation Hence there must be some other purpose for the teachmg of pradigna, ance. Sorrptare does not teach anythmg which does not fulfllan end But there is no indipation. 17 Serspture what this other purpose 18 न

[Ist 1 1 8 48 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 5]

by Seripture, omniscient and the well wisher of men Because of the absence of these two kinds of texta, pradh&na 1s not denoted by the terms ‘existent’ and the hke

Veddnta-kaustubha

If the non sentient pradhina alone were taught as that which 18 denoted by the terms ‘existent’, ‘percerver’ and the lke, then, m order to prevent reliance upon that, Sormpture, omnuisaent, well wishing, and mtending to instruct Brahman, should have told that it 18 to be rejected, just as a mother says to her son, about to take something not good, ‘Son, this is not good’ But there 18 no statement that 10 18 to be rejected, on the contrary, an identity with 16 18 taught m the passage “Thou art that’ (Chind 687, 698, 6103, 6118, 6 12 8, 6183, 6143, 6158, 6168) The term “and” 1s meant for भाता (another reason, viz ) the absence of statement mdicatmg

the purpose of such a teaching

COMPARISON Samkara

Readmg same, intérpretation same on the whole Only, while Nimbarka interprets the term “Ca” to mean ‘the purpose of such a teachmg’, Samkara takes 1t to mean ‘the contradiction of the intial proposition’, viz the cause bemg known, the effecta are also known 1 Evidently, through the knowledge of the non sentient pradh&na, there can be no knowledge of the sentient souls Hence pradh&na cannot be the cause of the universe #

RamdAnuja

Readmg and interpretation same He gives no special meanmg of the term “oa”, but takes 1t to mean simply ‘also’, and not 9 second reason 3

Bhaskara

Readmg and interpretation same on the whole Bhfskara inter prets this stitra exactly after Samkara, taking the term “ca” to mean “contradiction of the गण्ड propoattion’ ४ nnn ---- ~~~

1 Vide 0080 6 1 9 87 11 209

9 इत B118,p 168 vol 1 ब २1.

[इ 1 1 9 ADH 0 | VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 49

Baladeva

Reading same, interpretation different, viz And because there 18 70 statement of the rejectability (of the Saguna Brahman)’ That 18, Scrrpture declares the inferionty and worthlesaness of all saguna 0016018; or objecta connected with the gunas of prakrii, viz, all worldly objecta Hence, if the Saguna Brahman were the creator of the world, then Scripture would have demgnated him as mferior and fit to be rejected 2

SOTRA 9

“(PRADHANA OANNOT BE THE CAUSE OF THH WORLD), ON ACCOUNT OF THE CONTRADICTION OF THE INITIAL PROPOSITION ”

Vedanta-padrijata-saurabha

Moreover, “on account of the contradiction of the mitzal propos 1100 "` as well, viz through, the knowledge of one, there 1s the know ledge of all *,—the doctrine of the causality of the non sentient 18 not right

Vedinta-kaustubha

Pradhina is not the cause of the world Why? “On account of the contradiction of the mutial proposttion”, viz that through the knowledge of one, there 18 the knowledge of all Thus, the sorptural text ‘Did you ask for that struction whereby the unheard becomes heard, the unthought becomes thought, the unkmown becomes known?”? “What is that instruction, my reverend Sir?’’’ (Chand 619 2), mtroduces the doctrine that through the knowledge of one, there 18 the knowledge of all, and this will be contradicted Although, through the knowledge of pradh&na, there may be knowledge of ita effects, yet the proposition that there 18 knowledge of all the effecta, consisting of the sentient and the non sentient, 13 not established, emoe the sentient not bemg the effect of pradh&na, 1ts knowledge 18 not possible (through the knowledge of pradhina)

1GB 118, pp 60 51, Chap 1 > ‘Vide Ohind 61

4.

(st 1 1 10 50 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 5]

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhaskara

This siltra 18 not found m ther commentaries The argument contamed herem 18 included by them, as we have seen, m the previous sutra

Baladeva This siitra 8 not found m his commentary as well

SUTRA 10

“(BRAHMAN ALONE GAN BH THE GAUSH OF THE WORLD), OF ACCOUNT OF (THH INDIVIDUAL SOUL'S) BNTRANOE INTO ITSELF (DURING DEEP SLEEP)”

Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

As rt 18 mmposaible that the object,—mentioned m the passage referrmg to the cause of the world which 1s denoted by the term ‘existent’, viz ‘ Understand from me, my dear, the state of deep sleep When, 9 person sleeps here, 98 we say, my dear, then he has become united with the Hmstent’ (Chind 6811), can be understood as a non sentient cause,? 1t 18 reasonable to hold that Brahman alone 1s the cause of the world

Vedanta-kaustubha

On account of the (roul’s) “entrance”, 16 dissolution, into “rtaelf’’,2 1 8 mto 108 own cause, viz Brahman, introduced m the text ‘“The existent alone, my ०९७८ 1 "` ` (Chind 621), Brahman alone 28 denoted by the terms ‘existent’ and the rest, and not pradhéns Hf tt be the cause, then the text concerning dissolution would be contradicted Thus, there 18 a somptural text to this effect, vis

1§R Bh &k \

SA shghtly different readmg 18 gmven m the 088 ed—which, when tranalated, is as follows —As the ‘entermg' which relates to a sentuent bemg and 18 mentioned in the passage referring to the cause of the world denoted by the term existent’—vis Understand from me my dear, "5 possible in the cage of Brahman alone eto. (P 8 )

® This explains the word svdpyaydi

[st 11 11 ADH 6] VEDANTA PABLJATA SAUBABHA 51

*** When this person sleeps here, as we say, my dear, then he has become united with, the ixistent, he has entered mto hisown Hence they say of him “ He sleeps’, for he has entered into his own ”’’ (Chind 681) Theres also another scriptural text, vz ‘ Just as a man, when embraced by his dear wife, knows nothmg external or mternal, so this person, when embraced by the mtelligent soul, knows nothing external or mternal’ (Brh 4 3 21)

COMPARISON Baladeva

This 18 sitra 9 m bis commentary JKeading different—viz ‘Svipyat' Interpretation too different, viz ‘(The creator of the world 18 not the Saguna Brahman), because the Creator merges 1000 himself, (not so the Saguna Brahman, who merges 1000 something other than himself) ’ 1

SUTRA 11

“ (BRAHMAN ALONE IS THE ©^ एषा OF THE WORLD), ON ACOOUNT OF THE UNIVERSALITY OF KNOWING (HIM 4S THI CAUSE) ”

Vedanta-pdrijata-saurabha

As ao sentient cause 18 known from all the Vedi&ntas, the doctrine of 9 non-sentient cause 1s untenable

Vedanta-kaustubha

For this reason, too, pradhfina 18 not denoted by the term ‘existent’, vig on account of the universalty of ‘knowmg’,ie apprehending One sentzent cause of the world beg known from all the Upangads, the sentient Brahman alone 1s the cause of the origin and the rest of the world Nor, agam, even, the slightest moonsistency 1s found m the Vedintas, such, as, 17; some places a sentient cause 18 taught, mm others 8 non sentient The sense 18 that 11 here 4 non sentient object be understood by the term ‘existent’, the multatude of texts, speaking of a sentient cause, will come to be contradicted.

1 & 8 119,pp 5152 Chsp 1

[st 1 1 12 52 VEDANTA PABRIJATA SAURABHA ADH 6]

COMPARISON Raméanuja

Readmg same Interpretation too 18 same, since although according to Riminuyjs, the word ‘ gat: * means ‘ pravptta’ or primary meaning and not ‘avagati’ or apprehension as held by Numbarka, yet the ultzmate meaning 1s the same, viz the meanmg or mport of all the scriptural texts 18 uniform, 18 from all of them Brahman alone 78 known and nothmg else, and hence Brahman alone 18 the cause 1

Srikantha

Reading same, interpretation different He connects this siitra more particularly with the precedmg one, thus ‘On account of the universality of knowmg (the term ^ emstent”’ as denotmg the Supreme Lord)’ That 18, just as im ths Upanisad, viz the Oh&ndogya, the term ‘existent’ 2mphes the Lord, and none else, so mn all other Upam 8808 as well Hence it can never stand for pradhina According to bm also, thus, the word ‘ gat’ means ° avagati’ 9

Baladeva

This 18 stitra 10 17, this commentary Reading same, mterpre tation different, viz —‘On account of the universahty of knowmg {the Nirguna Brahman from all Semptures)’ That 1s, Sormptore uniformly teaches the Nirguja Brahman, and never the Saguna Hence the Nirguna Brahman alone 1s the cause of the world Accord mg to him also, the term ‘ gati’ means ‘ avagati * 3

SUTRA 12 “(BRAHMAN ALONE 78 THE CAUSE OF THE WORLD), ALSO BECAUSE THIS 18 DHFINITELY STATED In SogteruReE ”’ Vedinta -parijdta-saurabha Hence, the causality of the Universal Lord,—a sentient Bemg, denoted by the terms ‘emstent’ and the rest, omniscient, and. the

हल B 1111 p 165 vol 1 > अर B1111,p 202 Part 3 3 1110,p 58, Chap 1

[80 1 1 12 ADH ©] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 53

controller of all,—being definitely stated in Scripture, pradhfina can by no means be accepted as such @ cause

Vedanta-kaustubha

(Brahman alone 1s the cause of the world), because ए this Upanisad (viz Chindogya) that which is denoted by the term ‘extent’ “us defintely stated ˆ` to be the cause of all as the self of all, 1 the passage ‘ All this, verily, 1s from the self’ (Chind 7 261), and also because,— ag denoted by the term “and”,—the same thing 18 mentaoned m other Upanigads too Thus, there 18 a passage 17, the mantra upanigad of the Svet&4vataras ‘Who 1s a knower, the tame of time and omnis cent’ (Svet 6 2 16), ˆ He 18 the cause, the Lord of the lord of sense organs Of him there 1s no progenitor, nor lord’ (Svet 69) The Kaugtakins declare ‘ From this self all the vital breaths depart to their respective places, from the vital breaths the gods, from the gods the worlds’ (Kaus 33,420) = भ्वर्‌, m other places too We stop here for fear of increasing the bulk of the book Hence, the non sentient pradhins, which 18 an object of mference,* 1s not the cause of the world, simoe xt 18 unfit to be the cause of collocation without an mtelligent ruler, and because if pradh&ina be admitted to have the power of bemg such a ruler, you come over to our side 8 00 the contrary, 10 1s established that Lord Krsna, denoted by the words “ Brahman’ and the rest, the one topic of all the Vedas, omnis aent, omnrpotent, the non distinct maternal and efficient cause of the world, and denoted by the term. ‘existent’, 18 the cause of the world

Here ends the section entitled “ He sees’ (5)

1 Correct quotahon ‘Kdrond-diipddhipaf which 1s tranalated here Vide 89७ 69

9 Bee footmotel,p 42

8 That is, then pradhdna will become Brahman, and cease to be non santient, as held by the Sdimkiyas

4 Note the difference between the interpretations of Namnbdrhe and StTintwdaa According to Nimbdrke, the word ‘ éruéaiedi'’ means ° because this 18 mentioned 17 Serprpture and he attaches no special and separate meanmg to the word Oa But accordmg to Srinivasa, the word ‘drufatedé means ‘becanse this 18 Mentioned m fue Upanigad (viz OChdndogya) and the word Ca” means because this is mentioned in other Upanisades (viz SteHisvatara, Kaumiaki and the reat) ’

[st 1 1 18 64 VEDINTA PABIJATA SAURABHA ADH 6]

COMPARISON Ramanuja Reading and inteipretation same Réminuja poimts out m conclusion that this adhikarana 1s also a refutation of the theory of the Nirguna Brahman, since it asserts ˆ perceiving ` or ` willing’ on the part of the creator of the world, and ‘willing’ means bemg possessed of the quality of intelligence +

Baladeva

This 18 siitra 11 in hiscommentary Reading same, interprotation different, viz ‘And because (the Nirguna Brahman) 1s mentioned m Serrpture’ ‘That 18, Scripture proves the Nirguna Brahman to be the creator, and not the Saguna Brahman >

The difference 28 that while according to Nimbirka (and others too), this section 18 concerned with the question as to whether Brahman, or pradhfna 18 the creator of the world, according to Baladeva, the question 1s as to whether the Nirguna Brahman or the Saguna Brahman 18 the creator of the world

Adhikarana 6 The section entitled ‘That which consists 07 bliss’ (Sfitras 18-20)

SUTRA 13 “ (BRAHMAN IS) THAT WHIOH CONSISTS OF BLISS, ON ACCOUNT OF REPETITION ” Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

“ That which consista of blias ” 18 the Supreme Soul alone, but not the mdividual soul Why? On account of the repetition (m Somp ture) of the word “bliss’ with reference to the Highest Self

Vedanta~kaustubha

Thus, by way of refutung the doctrme of pradhina, it has been shown that scriptural texts like ‘‘‘ The extent alone, my dear!” ।

1 &t B 1112,p 166 vol 1 2GB 1111 pp 5455, Chap 1

[श 1 1 18 ADH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 55

(Chind 621) and the rest, all refer to Brahman Now, the author 18 Showing that the texts about that which consists of bliss and the rest 8180 refer to Brahman who, as possessed of unsurpassed bliss, 18 different m nature from the class of sentient beings also

In the Ta:ttinya, four sheaths, viz that which consists of food, that which consists of the vital breath, that which consists of mind, and that which consists of understanding, are spoken of 70 a succesalve order, and after that 1t 18 said ‘ Verily, other than and withm that which consists of understanding 1s the self which consista of bliss By that this 18 filled’ (Tart 25) Here a doubt ansos, viz whether by the words ‘consisting of bliss’, the mdividual soul 8 denoted or the Supreme Soul What 18 reasonable here? If 17 be suggested As m the passage ‘ Of him 1s this very embodied soul which belongs to the previous one’ (Tait 2 5), an embodied soul 1s mentioned, as m another scriptural text ‘May my (sheaths) conmsting of food, con asting of the vital breath, consisting of the mind, consisting of unde standing and consisting of bliss, be purified’ (Mah&nar 20 21) 16 18 said that what consists of 0188 18 something to be purified, and as it 18 umpossible for the ever pure Supreme Soul to be somethmg to be purified, so that which consists of bliss 18 the dividual soul,—

We reply “that which consists of bliss” 1s the Highest self alone, possessed of unsurpassed 0188 Why? ‘On account of repetition’, 16 because the word ‘bliss’ has been repeated many tzmes (17 Sorip ture) m reference to the Highest Self alone, the Highest Person, m texts hke ‘If there were not bliss in the ether, for this alone causes blias*® (Tart 2'7),1 ‘He knows that Brahman is bliss’ (Tart 3 6) and 80 on, and because, bogmning thus ‘This 18 an mvestigation into 0088 ’ (Tait 2 8), the concluding text ‘ Knowing the 0188 of Brahman, he does not fear from anythmg’ (Tait 28), mw found to end by estabhshing that the bhss of Brahman alone 1s unsurpassable and 1090186

If 1 be said that here there 18 the repetition of the word “ 01188 ` 3 only, and not of the words ‘consisting of bliss’ ®—(we reply) no, be cause just as in the passage ‘In sprmg, he performs the jyot: sacrifice’

1 QComplete quotatzuon ‘For who indeed would breathe, who would livo if there were not this bliss in the ether’ andsoon Vide Tat 27, p 70

> Ananda

3 Ananda-maya

(st 1 1 14 56 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADE 6]

the word ‘yyots’ stands for the word ‘jyotistoma’, so here the word ‘bliss’ stands for the words ‘consisting of bliss’

To your allegation that as an embodied soul is mentioned m Soripture, the Highest Self 1s not that which consists of bliss,—{we reply ) the designation of the embodiedness of the Supreme Self fits m, smoe He abides within all, viz that which consista of food and the rest, as ther controller On the other hand, the text about that which consists of bhas, viz ‘Of him 28 this very embodied soul which belongs to the previous one’ (Tait 2 6), shows that it (viz that which, consists of bliss) has no other (पालाः) soul? The expresaon ‘Let them be pumfied’ (m the above Mah&narayana passage) moans ‘Let them be embellished. ’

SUTRA 14 “If IT BE SAID THAT ON ACOOUNT OF THE WORD (‘ANANDA MAYA’)

DENOTING MODIFICATION, (THH Hignast अक्रा 1s) Not (DENOTED BY THIS WORD), (WH REPLY ) NO, ON ACOOUNT OF ABUNDANOB ”

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

If xt be said that on account of the mention, of (the suffix) ‘mayat’ 1 the sense of ‘modification’, the Highest Self 1s not that which consists of blsas,—({we reply )no Why* On account of the mention m Smrti of (the suffix) ‘mayat’ as having the sense of ‘abundance’ 88 well

Vedanta-kaustubha

Tf rt be objected That which consists of bliss cannot be the Highest Self Why! “On account of the word denoting 70001009 ticn "¬, 16 on account of the mention of the suffix ‘mayat’ as having the sense of ‘modification’,—begmnmng ‘Mayat 18 used optionally 7 the olassical language after any base (to mdicate “product” and

1 That w the soul conmstyng of food has the soul conmsting of the vital breath as 106 mner soul this latter again haa the soul consisting of mind as its inner soul this latter again, has the soul consisting of understanding aa ite mner soul and this latter agam hea the soul consisting of bls as ita mner soul But the last one viz the soul conmsting of bliss has nothing else an ita soul, but 18 the nmost soul of all

[80 1 1 Id ADH 6} VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 57

“part”’) when, food and dress are meant’ (Pin 43143, 8D K 1523 1), Smrti goes on, to designate (the suffix) ‘mayat’ m the sense of modifica tion thus — (The suffix “mayat” 1s used) mvanably after words 10. which the vowel has been lengthened and after “daia’ and the rest’ (Pin 43144, SDK 16242),—and also because the suffix ‘mayat’ 18 found used in, the sense of ‘modification’ m ordinary life m expres sions like ‘An earthen 9 pot* and 80 on, 98 well as im the Veda, m passages like ‘A large branch of the parna * wood 5 1s the sacrificial ladle’, and so on,—

(We reply) “No” Why? “On account of abundance’’, 16 because Smrti depicts (the suffix) ‘mayat’ m the sense of ‘ abundance’ as well, in the passage ‘Mayat’ 18 added in the sense of ‘made thereof’ 6 and in the sense of ‘having a great portion of’ 7 (Pin 5 421, SDK 2089 8), and because the suffix ‘mayat’ is found used 10 the sense of ‘abundance’, too, mm ordinary expressions hke ‘A sacmiice abounding 79 food.’ 9 and so on

It cannot be said also that mnce Brahman 18 admitted to be consisting of bliss, there may be some want of bliss m Him,}°—because here ‘abundance’ 18 but a synonym for ‘very muchneas’ Thus, among (all the effecta of prakrti) beginning with mahat and ending with the body, the body bemg a transformation of food,!! 18 said to be the person, ‘consisting of food’ Other than and the supporter of 1 18 ‘that which conssts of the vital breath’ Othe: than and the supporter of these two 18 ‘that which consists of mid’ Other than and the controller of these three is the madividual soul, called ‘the person consisting of understandmg’ That which 1s of the nature of knowledge and has understanding as 108 atimbute (viz the individual soul) 18 the controller of the three non sentient persons ‘That this

1P 786, vol 1 2P 786 vol 1 2 Mrn maye

4 Porna is @ large leaved sacred tree whose wood 1n used for making sacred. vessele, later generally called palida MW,p 606

® Parna mayt 0 Tad vacana

१ क, - °," क ~, . 1 1. // 1.6.111 (ह. 11१... 1/1... 6 SD K 2089, 921, vol 1

8 Op ow 9 Anna maya

19 That 28, when 1t 18 8810 ‘Anna maya yaya’, 1t 14 moant that the sacrifice conmsta शष्ठ of food but notenmrely Similarly it might be thought that the expression ‘Ananda maya Brahman’ means that Brahman wi postly blixa but not entirely bliss 1 8 there is eome non, bling in Brahman

11 That 1s, tt 18 food which being asaumulated produces and keeps the body

[80 1 1 16 58 VEDANTA PARIJATA IAUBABHA ADE 6]

possessor of the attribute of understanding 1s of the natme of know ledge, will be made clear m the second chapter? But why, then, has the attmbute alone been indicated in the text `

performs @ sacrifice ° ` (Tait 26) Listen The very nature, too of the knowoer 18 self manifesting, and the use of the term ‘understand ing’ or the nommative case ending should bo understood to be referrmg 0 1६ The use of the neuter gender? 1s meant for denoting a thing 3 For this very reason, 71 the Kanva recension, viz “Who abiding m understanding’ (Brh 37 22), and m the M&dhyandma recenmon, viz ‘Who abiding in the self’ (Sat Br 1467 30 *), im spite of the difference of words, the meanmg, viz the mdividual soul, 1s the very same And for this very reason, the statement ‘“Understandmg performs a sacrifice, and deeds too’ (Tart 25) 18 perfectly justrfable, it bemg umposaible for the mere attnbute of understanding to be an

agent And, it, the mdividual soul, the knower, should be known to be possessed of bliss, m accordance with the text “That 1s one

human 0188 ` (Tat 28), as well as another scriptural text ‘For verily, on gettmg this essence, one becomes blissful’ (Tait 27) The Supreme Person, an ocean of ummense bliss in contrast to tts (viz the mdividual soul’s) little bliss, 18 the controller of all, referred. to in, the text ‘Verily, other than and within that which consists of understandimg, 18 the self which consists of bliss’ (Tait 25) More over, the Supreme Person, the One, 38 indeed establshed in all the Vedaintas as free from all faults by nature, so there is not even an odour of shghtest non bliss in Hmm,—so much m bnef

SOTRA 15 “AND ON ACCOUNT OF THR DESIGNATION OF THE CAUSE OF THAT”

Vedainta-parijaita-saurabha

On account of bemg the cause of the bliss of the individual soul too, the Highest Self alone 1s that which conmsta of bliss

1 Vide VK 2318 2 Vis ‘viflanam 1n the text 8 That 19 the word ‘understandmg does not stand for a mere abstract

attribute here but for a concrete thmg, viz the mdividual soul possessed of the attribute

= P 861 Ime 19

{४ 1 1 16 apn 6] VEDANTA PARIJETA SAURABHA 59

Vedanta-kaustubha

Scripture designates that He (viz Brahman) alone 18 the “cause” of the 01188 “of that’, viz the individual soul,—which, according to the prima facie view, was suspected to be that which consists of bhes.—thus —‘For, verly, this alone causes bliss’ (Tait 27) Here the term “finandayati’’ means ‘inandayati’ The senseus that as he who gives riches and knowledge to others 18 himself of ynmense riches and ummense knowledge, so the statement that the Highest Self, too, causes bliss to mdividual souls means that He 18

of mmmense 0188 Just as the term ‘conmsting of lght’ 18 apphed to Lord Sun, whose very nature 18 to remove all dark 7888, 80 exactly the application of the term ‘consisting of bliss’ to the Lord, the topic of the present discussion, the cause of all, without an equal or & superior, and devoid of even a tinge of non 0188 of any sort, 18 perfectly reasonable

SUTRA 16

“AND THH MANTRA DESORIBED (भय BRAHMAN) IS CELEBRATED (10 BE CONSISTING OF BLISS) '"

Vedainta-parijata-saurabha

That which 1s stated in the mantra text viz ‘ Brahman 38 truth, knowledge and infimte’ (Tart 21),1 8 “mantra deaornbed” 3 That alone 18 celebrated. by the term “ consisting of bliss”

Vedinta-kaustubha

That which 28 stated in the mantra text which bemmnmeg thus ‘The knower of Brahman attains the highest’ (Tat 21), contmues ‘He who knows Brahman as trath, knowledge and mfinite, mtuated m the cave’ (Tait 21) w the ‘ mantra described’’, 1 9 Brahman alone, the cause of the ongin and the rest of the wold He 1s cele brated wn the followmg Br&ihmana text as well—viz ‘Verily, other than and within, that which conasta of understanding 18 the self which consists of bliss’ (‘Tart 25), smce the mantra and the Brahmana,

1 §, R, Bh, AK, B 3 Manira varaskam,

[80 1117 60 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 6]

the object to be explained and the explanation, refer to the same topic Hence that which consists of bliss 18 the Highest Self alone

SOTRA 17 “NoT THE OTHER, ON ACOOUNT OF INAPPROPERIATENESS ”’

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

The qualties peculiar to the Lord, which are mentioned m Sempture as relating to that which 1s signified by the term ‘conastmg of 71088 °, bemg “mappropriate’ on the part of anything else, “the other”,1¢ the mdividual soul, 1s not signified by the term ‘consisting of bliss’

Vedinta-kaustubha

“The other’, 1e the individual, soul 18 not to be understood here by the term ‘consisting of 01188 Whyt “On account of mappropriateness”’, 16 the creatorslup of the entire world and the hke, mentioned as relatmg to that which conmasta of bliss m the serrptural text ‘““He wished ‘May I be many, may I procreate’ He created all this” (Tait 26), are not appropriate on the part of the individual soul Hence that which consists of 01188 18 Brahman. alone

Or else, the following construction (of the siitra) may be under stood —The individual soul, “other than’’ Brahman, 18 not “mantra- described”’, because the qualities which are peculiar to the “mantra described”’, viz bemg the object to be attamed by the wise and so on, are ^ mappropriate”’ on, the part of anything else

COMPARISON Ramaénuja Readmg same, mterpretation different—‘ The other (viz the individual) (1s) not (the object of the text ‘Truth, knowledge and infintte’, Tart 21), on account of imappropmateness’ That 16, Réménuje takes this sitra as contmung more particularly the theme of the preceding siitra where it has been shown that Brahman 1s designated by the text ‘Truth, knowledge and mfinmte’ (Tait 21) Here 1# 1s shown, he pomts out, that none else than the Lord, not

[80 1 1 18 aDE 6] VEDANTA PABRIJATA SAURABHA 6]

ever. the freed soul, can be the object of the above text, for even the freed. soul 18 not absolute 1 knowledge in the sense the Lord 18, as even the freed soul cannot wish to be many and soon 30 1t 18 not appro pnate that the individual soul can ever be the object of the abovo text and be identical with Brahman >

Srikantha

Reading same, interpretation different, viz The other (viz Hiranyagarbha) (1s) not (the cause of the world), on account of in appropriateness’ According to Srikantha a new adhikarana begins with this siitra (sitras 17-20), concerned with the question whether the Lord is the cause of the world, or someone else, viz Hiranya- gatbha °

SUTRA 18 ‘AND ON ACCOUNT OF THH DESIGNATION UF DIBFERENGOS >

Vedanta-pirijata-saurabha

“On account of the designation of a difference” between the obtamer and the object obtained in the text ‘Hor, verily, on obtammng ths essence, he becomes कणि (Lait 2'7)4 the mdividual soul 1s not that which consists of bliss

Vedanta-kaustubha

For this reason, too, that which consists of bliss or the ‘mantra- described’ one 18 not the individual soul Why? Because the mdividual soul and the Supreme Bemg are demgnated as different Thus, the text ‘He 1s, verily, the essence एणाः, verly, on sttammeg the exgence, he becomes blissful’ (Tait 2'7), designates a difference between, the Highest Self, conmsting of bliss and mantra described, aa the object to be obtaimed, and the individual soul, as the obtamer, ames the obtainer cannot be the object obtamed There 1s & difference of nature between the individual soul and Brahman, otherwise an

+ Nirupddhtka

9 इल B 1117, pp 198 194 Part 1 3 SK B 1117 pp 230-237 Part 3 + 8, Bh

[st 1 1 19 62 VEDANTA PARIWJATA SAUBRABHA ADH 6)

intermuxture of qualities will rosult,—-this 1s the meaning of the two aphorisms COMPARISON Samkara

This 18 sitra 17 mn 118 commentary Reading and literal inter pretation same, quotes the same passage, but m conclusion adds his own View, viz that really and transcendentally, there 1s no difference between the soul, the obtainer, and Brahman, the obtamed 1

Ramanuja

Reading and interpretation same, but refers to a different passage, viz. Taittimya upanisad, 2 6 >

Srikantha

Reading same, nteipretation different, viz ‘(If 1t be said that Hiranyagarbhs 18 identical with the Supreme Lord, then we reply, no), on account of the designation of difference’ 3

SUTRA 19

‘‘AND ON ACOOUNT OF DESIRE (THROUGH WHICH SIMPLY THR LORD IS ABLE TO BBALIZE His PURPOSES), THERE IS NO DHPEN DEROE (07 THE LORD) ON (WHAT IS AN OBJEOT OF) INFERENCE (vIZ PRADHAWA) ”

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

Lf the mdividual soul be admitted to be the cause, 16 must depend on a material cause, viz on pradh&ina which 18 an (object of) “m ference’’, just a8 © potter has to depend on clay and the rest 111 creating pots and the hke But the Highest Person, non materal, consisting of bliss and omnipotent, has to depend on nothmg Why? “On acoount of demre”’,16 on account of intention, as declared by the scriptural text - 06 demred ‘‘May I be many”’ (Tait 26)*

1 88 1117, pp 221 22 2 Of also Chind 623 ‘Sa astkeata balu सकाः ete 8 & B 1119 pp 287 8 Part 1 48 R, Bh,B

[st 1 1 19 ADH 6 | VEDSNTA KAUSTUBHA 63

Hence that which conmsts of bliss 18 different from that (viz the mdrvidual soul)

Vedanta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz 0८500878 may very well be denoted by the term ‘consisting of bliss’, as it contams the quality of sativa which 18 the cause of bliss, and as 1t corresponds to the effect 1,—we reply —

The term ‘consistimg of bhses’ contams no “reference” to “in ference”,1e to that which 18 ferred, viz pradhina Why? “On account of destre’’, 1e because the text, which refers to that which consists of bliss, viz “He demred ‘May I be many”’ (Tait 2 6), mentions one who desires The sense 1s that desire means volition, and that 1s not possible on the part of the non sentient pradhdna, but 18 possible on the part of the omniscient Lord of all Although pradhina has already been set aside by the aphorism ‘Because~{the creator) 9668, not, non acriptural’ (Br Si 1 1 5), 1४ 28 once more set aside here with a view to confirming the ‘universality of knowing’ > and hence there 18 no fault of repetition

Or else, (an alternative explanation of the sfitra )—zf the md:vi- dual soul be denoted by the term ‘conmsting of bles’, the topic of the present discussion, 16 must be the cause of the world as well, and in that case, just as potters have to depend on clay and the rest for creating pots, etc so the mdividual soul too must depend on pradhbina, which 18 8 synonym for ‘inference’? But 1f the ommpotent Brahman be the cause of the world, no such fault arises,—this 18 the sense

COMPARISON Samkara and 20881852

This 1s siitre 18 in ther commentames Reading same, mnterpre- tation different, viz ‘And on account of desiring, there 1s no reference

2 Thats pradhdna the non-sentnent couse 18 mmular to the effect, the non pentient world Vide VK 116

2 Vide Br 83 1111 where 1b has been said that Bratman uw universally known from all texta to be the cause of the world

8 That uw, pradhdna hes been called ‘inference’ (anwmndna) in the siira, because 1b 18 an object of inference

[st 1 1 20 64. VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 6]

to (what 16 an object of) mference (viz pradhiina) (17) the term “ Ananda maya”) ‘That 18, Scmpture predicates willing on the part of the Snanda maya, and willing 1s posatble on the part of a conscious bemg alone 7

Srikantha

Reading same, mterpretation different—viz And, (even) on account of desire, (16 10 spite of the fact that Hiranyagarbha 18 said to have desired to create the world,) (his bemg the creator) 1 not dependent on reasoning © 6 does not stand to reason,) (because it 18 the Lord Himself who created the world in the character of Hiranyagarbha) ` 3

SUTRA 20 “AnD (SCRIPTURE) THACHES THE UNION WITH THAT (VIZ 81.788) OF THIS (VIZ THE INDIVIDUAL SOUL) IN THIS (Viz THE LogD) ”

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

Sorrpture “teaches’’ the “union with that”,16 the union with bliss, in the passage —‘ Verily, he 1s an essence, for verily, on attammg the essence, he becomes blissful’ (Tait 27) Hence it 1s establahed that He, on attammg whom the individual soul comes to be united with 01188, 18 different from 1t

Vedanta-kaustuobha

For tlus reason also that which 00081808 of 01188 18 nexther the individual soul, nor pradh&na, but Brahman alone, mnce Soripture “teaches” the “union with that’’,1e6 the “union” or ‘connection’, with “that”, or the Highest Self—ie salvation, charactemzed by the attammg of His nature,2—‘of this’, 16 of the individual soul, relymg on Him, “m this”, 16 m the Highest Person, the Highest

188 1118 p 292 BhB 1118, p 26 Note that this in adopted as an alternative explanation of the siira by StHinwdea but not by Nimbdrka See above

9 8K B 1119 (pp 240 241 Part 8)

9 Note that while according to Nimbdrka the word iad yogam means union with bliss’ accordmg to Sriniwdsa, 1b means ‘union with the Highest Self’, or salvation though ultumately these two mterpretations come to the fame thing

(st 1 1 20 apH 61 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 65

Self, consisting cf bles and mantra desciilbed And the senptural text to this effect 28 as follows —‘For, ध पाड, when he finds fear lessness a8 & foundation in that which 1 invisible, mcorporeal, un defined, and unsupported, then he 1s gone to fearlessness When, however, he makes the smallest distmotion therem, then ho comes to have fear’ (cat 2'7) ‘The meaning of this 18 as follows ‘When

16 when at the tame of birth which took place at a tume when there was a causeless laondly glance by the Lord, as mentioned m sacred. texts, thus ‘But should Madhusiidana glance at a person, when he 18 born, he should be known to be pure and given to the thought of salvation’ ““Through my grace, he attaims an eternal and un changeable place” ’ (Git& 18 56) and so on, (116 २, 16 & knower, devoid of any desire for enjoymenta here or hereafter, restormg to the feet of the Lord alone and possessed of the charactemstios as stated im Scripture thus ‘“I am easily attainable by one, 0 Partha, by the ever free 8809110, who constantly remembers moe, not thmkmg ever of another” (Git® 1814), ‘He who departs, discarding the body, uttering the one syllable “om” and remombermg ma, goes to a supreme goal’, ‘“‘Knowmg me, he goes to peace” ` (कीक 5 29), “The knower of Brahman sattams the highost’ (Iuit 21), and so on, becomes fearless, he ‘finds’, 16 attams, ‘a foundation’, 168 unfailing, devotion (or reliance) through His grace alone ‘Then’, 1e mm mediately after, ‘he 18 gono to fearlessness’, on account of the absence of any devotion {on lis part) to anyone else, which (alone) w ithe cause of fear In whom? ‘In the invimble’, 16 m that which 18 different from the group of the non sentiont which 1s visible Agan, 12 whom? ‘in the iicorporeal’, 1e m the supremely conscious Being, who 1s different from the group of souls or conscious baings,—that He 1s the supremely consaious Bomg 1s stated mm the Kathavalli, thus ‘Consaioux among the conacious’ (Katha 518, 980 Svet 6 13),—‘m the undefined'’,10 in that which 18 not estab

bshed as having so muchnow and the nature and qualhties of which aro to be known from the Vedanta alone, ‘in the unsupported’, 1.8 10. that which has no baw, which 18 possessed of infinite, incon

cavable powers,—this mw the sense And ‘vhen’, io when during the period of nescience, ‘he’, 16 « non-knower, ‘makes’ even the amallest ‘distinction’, 1 8 relies on something else, viz one or othe: of the ends, connected with meann (other than a complete resort to the Lord alone), ‘then he comes to bave fear’ Hence, it 1

5

[st 1 1 90 66 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADE 6]

estabhshed that that which consists of bliss 1s Brahman, different from all the sentient and the non sentient 7

Here ends the section entitled “That which conmste of bliss’ (6)

COMPARISON Samkara

This 18 stitra 19 un his commentary Reading and mterpretation game, quotes the passage quoted by Srinivasa But here Samkara changes his pomt of view all of a sudden, and after having given, at length the very same interpretation as given by Nimbérka, viz that the ‘ananda-maya’ referred to m the Tarttirlya upanigad (Tait 25) 18 the Highest Self,? and not the mdividual soul or pradhana, he finally 2816008 1t, at the end of this शात, m favour of another, viz that the word ‘Brahman’ im the immediately followmg phrase ‘Brahma puccham, pratasthi’ (Tait 26), refers to Brahman pr cipally, and not as a member of the ‘Ananda maya’, for the ‘inanda maya’ would refer to the quahfied Brahman, and never to the non qualified Brahman, which 18 called ‘dnanda’, and not ‘ dnandamaya’®

Bhaiskara

This 18 siitra 19 m bis commentary too Readimg same, mier pretation, of the word ‘tad yogam’ slightly different—viz ‘union with Him (the Lord)’, 16 salvation’ (Cf Srinivasa ) Quotes a different portion of the same passage (viz the portion quoted by Srinivas)

Srikantha

Reading same, interpretation different—vi ‘Herem (viz m the Mahi-nairiyans upanisad) (Scnpture) teaches his (16 Huranya-

* Note that here Nuwnbarka and अन्व understand the word ‘dda’ as referring to iwo different portions of the same passage, viz Tait 37, Nembirka to the first part, Srumedisa to the lest

9 Vide 8B 1112 p 217 ‘Para evdimd dnanda-mayo bhavium arhah In thw very नमै also, 1) 13 8526 --- Tasmdd dnanda-mayah paramdimé tw shian' 8B 1119 p 228

8 Vide SB 1119, pp 225 26

4 Bh B 11189, ४ 26

(st 1 1 2! ADE 7 | VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 67

garbha’s) connection with that (viz the Supreme Lord)’1 While according to Nimbarka, siitras 13-20 form one section, concerned with the question of the ‘dnanda maya’, according to artkantha, Sitras 13-16 form one section, while sitras 17-20 form another different section, concerned with, the question, a8 noted above, whether Hiranya garbha is the creator of the world, or the Supreme Lord (viz Siva)

Baladeva

This is stitra 191m his commentary Readmg same, nterpretation of the word ‘tad yogam’ different, viz ‘union with fearlessness’ Quotes the passage quoted by Sriniviisa 2

Adhikarana 7 The section entitled ‘That whioh 18 within’ (SG&tras 21 22)

SUTRA 21

“ [8 + 7 WHICH IS WITHIN (THH SUN AND THE BYE) (8 NONE BUT Tom Hichast रणा); ON ACCOUNT OF THE TRACHING OF HIS QUALITIES ˆ

Vedanta-pirijata-saurabha

He who sbides “ withm °" the sun and the eye and 18 to be wor shipped by one demring salvation, 1s, truly, the Highest Self alone, and not ® particular individual soul Why? “On account of the teaching of the qualities belongmg to Him” alone, viz qualtties lke ‘freedom from. sins’, “bemg the soul of all’ and so on

Veddnta-kaustubha

In this manner, 1t has been shown mm a general manner m the two sections that the stated texts all refer to Brahman, who 18 (hfferent from pradhina as well as from the imdividnal soul and 18 the cause of the ongm and the rest of the world Now, after having mentioned the peculiar quahties of the Lord, such as, possess ng an, eternally present, non celestial body and 80 on, and then by showmg the concordance of those texts (with regard to the Lord), tha author denotes, up to the end of the section, the dzfference

18K B 1120 pp 240 241, Pars 3 2GB 1119 pp 76-77, Chap 1

[st 1 1 2] 68 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7]

of Brahman from particular individual souls who have attamed eminence by virtue of supreme merit, as well as from particular non sentient objects, hke tume and the hke

In the Chindogya, we read ‘Now, this golden Person, who 18 seen withm the sun, has a golden beard and golden hair, and 1s golden through and through, nght to the finger nal tips His eyes are hke the full blown lotus His name 1s High, (because) he has risen above alles Verly, he who knows thus rises above allmns His singers are the Ro and the S&iman 1 §So much with reference to the gods’ (Chind 166-168), ‘Now, with reference to the self’ (Chind 1171), ‘Now, this person, who 18 seen withm the eye’ (Chind 1 7 5) and 80 on

Here, a doubt amses, viz whether this Person, mentioned mn Sorpture as abiding within the sun and the eye, 18 & particular indivi dual soul, or the Supreme Lord? What 18 reasonable here? If 1 be suggested An mdividual soul who has attained emmence Why Because the person within the sun and the person withm the eye are declared by Scripture to be possessed of a form in the passages (respectively) ‘Having a golden beard, golden hair’ (Chand 1 66), ‘The form of this one 1s the very same as the form of that onp’ (Chind 1175), because a limit to the lordship of both 1s declared respectively by the texta —‘He rules these worlds which are beyond that, as well as the demres of gods’ (Ohand 16 8), “He rules these worlds which are under that, as well as the demres of men’ (Chand 1 7 6), because the dependence of both on something 6188 18 declared (respectively) by the texts =" भाण the sun’ (Chand 1 6 6), ‘Wrthin the eye’ (Chand 1 7 6), and because the Supreme Self 18 declared to be just the opposite by the texta ‘Without sound, without touch, without form’ (Katha 3 15), ‘““On what, my reverend 917, 18 1t based ?” “Qn rts own greatness”’ (Chind 7 24 1), ‘This 18 the Lord of beings’ (Brh 4 4 22), eto —

We reply The Person, mentioned m Scripture as “ withm” the sun and the eye 18 the Highest Selfalone Why? ^ On account of the teaching of his qualities,” 16 because of the “teachmg”’, m, this text, of the qualities “of him”, viz of the Highest Soul alone, such as, being free from sms in every way, being the remover of all the sins

1 Quotation moomplete—vis — His mngers are the Rc and the Sdman Therefore (they are called) the udgitha’ and ao on 886 footnote 1 p 69

श 1 1 21 ADH 7] VEDANTA EAUSTUBHA 69

of His own devotees, and so on, as well as, bemg the soul of all and the rest, thus “He, venly, 18 the Ro, the Siman, the Uktha, the Yajus, He 1s Brahman’1 (Chind 1 7 6), because m accordance with the scriptural texts “When the seer sees the golden coloured person’ (Mund 318), ‘Of the colour of the sun, beyond darkness’ (Svet 9 8, Git& 89), “That on which all these powers are based, O king, 18 another great form of Har, different from the form of the world’, and so on, like His natural qualities of possessing true desires and the rest, His possessing a form too, involves no contradiction, and because the text ‘Without sound, without touch, without colour’ (Katha 315) 28 concerned with denying sound and the like belonging to the material world Nor 18 Brahman depicted here as possessed of @ Imuted lordship, smoe the text setiang forth such a limit 1s concerned with an arrangement of presiding deities Nor can Brahman be said. to be dependent on something else, 81006 He 18 the support of all, m accordance with the following scmptural and Smrt: texts, viz ‘Entered with, the ruler of men’ (Tat Ar 3111, 23), ‘The Inner Soul of all begs’ (Katha 69, 10, 11, 512, Svat 611, Mund 214), “Who, abidmg within the earth’ (Brh 373), ` “And, I am situated within the hearta of all’’’ (Gita 15 16), ‘“I abide, supporting the entire universe with a part of mme”’ (Git& 10 42), and 80 on Here, by the Vedic text,—which is omniscient, mdependent of all proofs and authoritative by iteelf with regard to its own matter,— viz “This golden person who 18 seen within the sun, having a golden, beard’ (Chind 166) and so on, the body also of Brahman, the topic of discussion, suitable to Him, 18 mentioned, on the bass of direct perception alone, as evident from the statement ‘is seen’ From this 1t 18 Known, that the Highest Self 18 to be meditated on by one who desires salvation as possessed of a body And, meditation too, to be mentioned, hereafter,3 1s possible only if the Highest Self be possessed of a body The multitude of scriptural and Smrt texts, referrmg to the body of the Lord, 1s not quoted here for fear of proluuty

1 Row © sacred verse, which 1s recited in praise of a deity Sdman 18 a verse which 13 sung, Yajue is a sacred formula which 18 mudered Ukiha w ao nnd of recitation in sacrifices Brahman 19 © sacred text or mantra, distinct from Be, Sdman and Yaue MW,pp 172 225 787

> ¬ 181

ठ Vide ए 88

(at 1 1 22 70 VIDINTA PABLIATA SAUR ABH ५ AD 7 |

COMPARISON Samkara

This 18 सि 20 in 1४ commentary Roadmy and interpret shiun same, quotes the name [त्तव = 1 conclumon, 1४ adds that aul ductal the Supreme Lord is really arfipa or tormleas, yot He may wexxunic various mAy inaya rips to: [४९ काह His dovotees2 That m ull theso passes, tuahimg the workhip of the Person with the xu und 80 on, refer to the qualified! Brahman only, and nat to the hugh +t Brahman, which of course Nimbiirh s cloow not admut

— ie

SOTRA 22

“AND ON ACCOUST GF THR DAMIUNATION OF DIFEPRENCH (TH! पात्र AFLA 1५) OTHER THAN (THR INDIVIDUAL SOULS OF THI SUN AND) THE REST) “

Vedainte-pirijita-saurabha

Tho Highest Self ५ “oth: * than the goup of miividual Haus of the sun and the rost® Why? “On account of the demgnution at difference” m the text ‘Abuling m the sun' (Brh $794) antl ~ On,

Vedinta-kaustubha

For this rewon ton, the Highest Self, त “othor” than, ie विकलता by nature from, the nul प्राप saulk of the san and the rest within which He abules Why? “Qn aceount of the demgnation of difler- ence” between the individual soul aucl Brahman, m the teat ‘Whe abiding within the sun ix othor than the sun, whom the aun does tut know, of whom the anni the body, who rules the min from within he 18 your soul, the mne: controller, immortal’ (Brh 370) Thus

Lg | ee म

818 112) p 282) ‘Sale panunedraramplptechd vadin mdydimunman ripam atddhakinugriedhdirthean *

> (१9 od xwhghtly differnt vie ‘Iie Highent Self im other than tly group of tho Individual souls of the aun भातं the rest within which He alade- (p 5)

$S,R Bh B

[st 1 1 23 ADH 8] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHS |

the difference of Brahman, from the individual soul, within which He abides, 1s established.

Here ends the section entitled “That which 1s within’ (7)

Adhikarana 8 The section entitled ‘The ether (87६7० 28) SUTRA 23 “(BRAHMAN IS DENOTED BY THH WORD) ETHER, ON ACCOUNT OF HIS OHARAOTHRISTIO MARKS ”

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

In the text ‘“ What 1s the final refuge of this world?” ‘“ The ether”, said he’ (Ohind 1 9 1 +), that which 18 denoted by the tam “ether” 18 the Highest Self Why? “On account of hus characterstec marks,” such as, bemg the creator of all, and the lke, mentioned in the text ‘All these things, verily, arse from the ether alone’ (Chind 1919)

Vedanta-kaustubha

In this manner, 1+ has been shown, on the ground of the peouhar quairties of Brahman, the topic of discussion, that the text ‘Now, this golden person who 18 seen withm the sun’ (Chind 18 8) and 80 on, refers to Brahman, the topic of discussion Now, 16 28 bemy shown that the text ‘“‘ What 18 the final refuge of this world?" ° and 80 on too (OhAnd 1 9 1) refers to Him, on the ground of the character 1806 marks of Brahman

In the Ohindogya, we read the following under the dialogue between Salavatya and Jarvah ‘What 16 the final refuge of thw world ?”’ ‘The ether,” said he, “All these bemgs, verily, arise from the ether alone, disappear into the ether, for the ether alone 15 greater than these, the ether 1s the supreme refuge”’ (Chand 191) Bere ® doubt arwes, viz whether tho elemental ether 1s meant by the term ‘ether’, or the Highest Self What 18 reasonable here ? If 1t be sug gested As 16 18 80 well known im the world and as 16 18 declared also by Scripture to be the cause of the elements beginnmg with the aur,

वि > atenlemnsc delice cibsatencets aden’. ¢ aa anes cntectiasinon 1 8 R BL, SK B 18 R Bh, SK, B

[80 1 1 23 19 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 8 |

and 80 on, m the passage ‘rom the “ether”, the “ar”? (Tart 2 1), the elemental ether (1s meant here)—

We reply In this text “the ether”, 16 the object meant by the term ‘ether’, 18 the Highest Self alone Why* “On account of his characteristic marks,” 16 “his”, or the Highest Self’s, “charactenstic marks”, viz bemg the creator of all bemgs, bemg superior, bemng the supreme refuge, and 80 on,—on account of that.) 16 on account of the र्गाः qualities of the Highest Self It cannot be said, also, that m accordance with the rule ‘When, there 1s @ collocation, of scriptural statement, mark, text, topic, place and name, each following one 18 weaker (than each preceding one), on account of 108 remote ness from the meanmg’ (Pi Mi Si 331434), the scnptural state ment 18 of © greater force than the mark,—for m accordance with the Tule ‘The strength and weakness of those which are spoilt by meanmg- leasness are in the opposite proportion’, the scriptural statement ‘the ether’, 18 set aside by the mark mentioned m the text ‘All 0688 bemgs, verily, arse from the ether alone’ (Chind 191) If the word “ether” were to refer to the elemental ether, then no sense would follow, for such 8 mark (viz bemeg the creator of all) 18 not possible on the part of the elemental ether, on the contrary, the elemental ether 18 declared by Sormpture to be created by the Highest Self, m the passage ‘From this soul, verily, the ether arose’ (Tait 21) Further, on the ground of the etymologecal interpretation too (of the word ‘ether’ or व), viz ‘The ether 1s that which shines everywhere’, 9 as well as on the ground of its conventional meanmg, given m the passages ‘If there were not this 0788 m the ether’ (Tart 2'7), “The ether, verily, 18 the revealer of names and forma’ (यत 8 14 1) and 80 on, 2) 1s established that by the term “ether’’, the Supreme Self alone 1s denoted

Here ends the section entitled ‘The ether’ (8)

1 This explams the compound ial inigté' 9 P 284 vol 1 Vide Shbara bhdaya $ A samanidtt bifaia ws 00८४

[80 1 1 24 ADH 9] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 73

Adhikaransa 9 The section entitled ‘The vital

breath’ (Stitra 24) SUTRA 24

“FoR THIS VERY RHASON (BRAMAN IS DENOTED BY THH WORD) VITAL BREATH °

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

In the text also ‘All these bemgs, verily, enter mto the vital breath alone, amse from the vital breath (Chind 11152), the vital breath is none but the Highest Self, on account of the character istic marks of Brahman, viz entermg into and coming out of Him

Vedanta-kaustubha

In this manner, 10 has been pomted out that the text referring to the ether denotes Brahman, and not the elemental ether Now, by declarmg that the text about the udgitha,? viz ‘O Prastrot;!’§ (Chind 1109, 1 11 4) and so on, also refers to Brahman, the author extends here the same principle regarding the ether

In the Chandogys we find the followmg concernmg the udgttha 4 under the dialogue between Cakriyana and the Prastrotr 0 Pras- troty | 1f you shall sing the prastiva® without knowing the Deity who 1s connected with the piastiva, then your head will fll off * * (Chind 1109, 1 11 4), ‘“‘ Which 1s that Deity?” “The vital breath,” said he, “‘All these bemgs, verly, enter mto the vital breath alone, arise from the vital breath This 18 the Dexty connected with the prastiva’’’ (Chind 1114-5) Here a doubt amses, viz As the entare world is found to exst as dependent on the vital breath, and as 1# 18 80 well known 17) the world, so by the term ‘vital breath’ a modification of the ar too may be meant, and as m the text ‘““For the mmd, my dear, has the vital breath aa its fastening”’ (Chand 6 8 2) and go on, the term ‘vital breath’ 1s apphed to Brabman, 80 Brahman may 8180 be meant What 18 reasonable here? If it be suggested Since everythmg 18 found to be dependent on the vital

15 R Bb, 87, 23

> The word ‘udgtthe' 18 not included under the quotation

> A Prastroir um an asmatant of the Udpdir, and mnga the praaffva or tho introductory eulogy or the prelude of a sdman MW,p 609

¢ The word ‘udgitha’ 1s not included under the quotation

® The prastGva 18 the introductory eulogy or the prelude of & siman See footnote 9 above

fst 1 1 26 74. VEDANTA PABIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 10]

breath, since popularly the term ‘vital breath’ 1s well known to be a modification of the air, and since in the text “When, verily, a person sleeps, his speech goes to the vital breath, bis eye to the vital breath, his ear to the vital breath When he wakes up, from the vital breath alone they arise again’ (Sat Br 103361), the entrance mto a modification of the air and 80 on are Mentioned, the chief vital breath alone, which 18 a modification, of the air and has five modes, 18 under stood here by the term ‘vital breath ’,—

We reply “For this very reason”, 16 on account of the very characteristic marks of the Supreme Lord, viz the entering mto and coming out (of Him) of all the great elementa, 16 18 reasonable to hold that the object denoted by the term “vital breath” 18 the Supreme Lord, the Highest Person alone The characteristic marks of the Supreme Lord, viz the entering into and the mang from Him of all the meat elements, as mentioned in the text ‘All the elements enter mto, 1e merge into, and arise from, 1e come out towards, Him’, are not possible in the case of a modification of the ar In the text ‘When, verily, ® person, sleeps’ (Sat Br 103 3 6), there 18 no mention of the entermg and so on of the great elements, but sumply of the entermg and the rest of the sense organs Henoe, on account of the marks of the Supreme Lord, as well as on the ground of the etymological interpretation (of the term ‘vital breath’ or prina), viz ‘In whom the entare world breathes excellently, ie finds a basis’, 1t 18 establshed that the Highest Self alone 28 denoted by the term ‘vital breath’

Here ends the section entitled “The vital breath,”’ (9)

Adhikarana 10 The section entitled ‘The light’ (SSitras 25-28) SUTRA 25

“(BRAMAN IS DENOTHD BY THE WORD) LIGHT, ON ACCOUNT OF THR MENTION OF Fue ”’ Vedinta-parijdta-saurabha

“The lght”, mentioned in the passage ‘The hght (higher) than the heaven,’ (Chand 31374) 1s Brahman alone, “on account of the

1 P 778, limes 8-11 © > simular passage m Chand 433 9 8 R Bh SK,B

[श 1 1 26 apa 10] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 76

mention of feet”, m the passage ‘One foot of him are all the ele menta” ` (Chind 31261)

Vedanta-kaustubha

In this manner, 1t has been pointed out that the term ‘ether , as well as the term ‘vital breath’ refer to Brahman, all pervading, untouched by any fanlt and the canse of all life Now, the author 18 showing that the term ‘light’ also refers to Brahman

In the Chindogya, 1t 1s recorded ‘Now, the light which shines higher than this heaven, on the backs of all, on the backs of everything, in the highest worlds than which there are no higher,—that, verly, 18 the same light which 18 within this person’ (Chind 3137) Here, a doubt arises, viz whether the term ‘light’ denotes the well

- known hght of the sun and so on, or the Highest Self What 18 reason able 268 ४ The prema facte view 18 98 followa It denotes the hght of the sun and the rest Why? Because that 18 well known to be a remover of darkness, because Scripture mentions a limit in the passage ‘The hght which shimes higher than this heaven’ (Chind 3137), because no Init 1s possible on the part of Brahman, because Scripture speaks of a mmor fruit m the passage “He who knows this becomes agreeable to the eyes, and renowned’ (Chind 318 8), and, finally, because from the passage “That, venly, 18 the same lght, which 1s within, this person’ (Chind 3137), 108 identaty with the fire withm the belly 1s known

On this suggestion, we reply Here the object denoted by the term “hght”’ 1s the Supreme Brahman alone, possessed of unsurpassed splendour Why? “On account of the mention of feet” Thus, m the text, which precedes the text about the ‘hght’, viz ‘So much 18 His greatness, and the Person 1s higher than this One foot of hm are all hemes, three feet of him, the 1mmortal in the heaven’ (Rg V 10103, Chand 3126), Brahman 18 mentioned as having four feet Thus, all bemgs consiatute His one foot Having all bemgs as one foot 1s possible on the part of the Supreme Brahman alone, and never on, the part of any one else Nor 1s any contradiction mvolved in, the declaration of His havmg the heaven as Has limit, because, as the word ‘higher’ m the passage ‘What 1s higher than this’ (Chand 3 137) denotes superiority, 16 18 not meant to denote non comprehensiveness,

1§ R,SE,B

[80 1 1 26 76 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 10]

and because from the passage ‘That the gods worship as the laght of lights, as Life’ (Brh 4416) the term ‘light’ 18 known to be referring to Brahman Nor 18 any contradiction involved m the declaration of a mimor fruit, because Brahman 1s the giver of fruits m accordance with the fitmess of persons As it 18 declared in the ‘Mystery of Fire’! of the Vajasaneymsa ‘As one worships him, so he becomes’ (Sat Br 105210%), and by the Lord Himself, m the passage —‘““Whosoever, 70 whatever way, resorta to me, him, m that same way, do I favour” ’ (Gité 411) And, the purpose of the meditation on the identity (of the Lord) with the fire within, the belly 18 to be known from the text ‘“I, having become the Vaisvinara 3, abide within the bodies of hving bemgs, and united with, the

and the apéina,* I digest the four kinds of food” * (Git& 16 14)

SUTRA 26

“IF IT BB OBJROTRD THAT ON ACCOUNT OF THH MENTION OF THE METRE, (BRAHMAN IS) NOT (DENOTED), (THEN, WE REPLY ) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF THE DECLARATION OF THE APPLICATION OF THR MIND (TO BRAHMAN) THUS, FOR THUS IT 78 SHEN (IN OTHER PAS 8.4.88 TOO) ”

Vedinta-padrijata-saurabha

If 1t be objected that “on account of the mention,” of the metre called ‘Gayatm’ m the preceding text, the text referrmg to the feet may refer to that and not to Brahman,—(we reply ) “No, on account of the declaration of the application of the mimd”’ to the Lord, who 18 denoted by the term ‘Gayatri’ owimg to the connection of the latter with certam qualties5 Compare the word ‘virdj’ which illustrates a parallel case 9

1 Agni-rahasya 18 the title of the tenth book of the Sutapatha brakmdna

2 P "126, 1108 18 Of avery mmular passage in Mudg 3,p 384, linea 8 9

® That is, the fire of digestion

# The préga 18 one of the five modes of the chief vital breath and apdna wenother The first goes upwards the nose, the second goes downwards through theanuzs Vide VRM

9 That 18 the Gdyairl 1s said to posseas cerbam qualities, which can belong to the Lord alone Hence the Lord 18 really demoted by the term ‘ Gdyatri See V EK below

6 We find that in other passages, too a word, prrmanly denoting a metre may atand for something elae,eg the word virdy' pmmanily denotes a kind of

fst 1 1 26 aspx 10} VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 77

Vedanta-kaustubha

If xt bo objoctod As the Gayntri metre is reforred to m the preced ing passago viz ‘Tho (ityati1, verily, 38 all thin’ (Chand 3 121) the designation of beings as the foot, viz ‘One foot of lim are all bemgs’ (Chand 3126), may कणि to this very metre It 18 not reasonable to hold that this text establishos Brahman,-—

(We reply ) “No” Why? “On account of the declaration ot the application, of tho mind thus,” 10 on account of the mention of the faimg of the mma “thus” to Brahman who 18 denoted by the term ‘Gayatri’ smnco the lattor 18 prodicted to be the soul of all, m the passage ‘Tho Giyairl, vouly, 1s oll th (Chand 3121) Hers, the term ‘GiiyatrI donotes Biahman who inheres m the metre, it bemg impossible fo. « metro, which 14 a mere collection of letters, to be the soul of all = कठा thus 1t 1s geen,” 18 m very same manner, a parallel case 18 mentioned i, the A:tarzya upangod, m the passage — ‘The Bahvreas consider Him in the great hymn, the Adhvaryus in the sacrificial firo, the Chandogas m the Mahi vrata ceremony’ 1 (Ait Ar 223,12) Tho senso is that those who are conversant with the Rg vods, thoxe who are convorsent with the Siima veda, and those

metre, yot 1b denutus the dria or the group of tan substances m Chind 43 8 Similarly though the word ‘ Gftyutrs’ donotis © kind of metro, yot 16 may denote Brahman too 800 VK षाक

088 od rends ‘Apte pura -—mvaning comos to the samo, viz the word wird? stands for thy Apis

2 A Bahorca 1 one com ersant with tho By veda, a preat of 16, or the Hotr pricut who representa xb in the sa mficial coromonus MW,p 726

An Adhrurjyu 14 & pricat of « particular class, as dustingmahed from the Hotp, the Udydaiy and the BrdAmana clawe: He has # measure the ground build the altar and so on, and while cnyaged in theo duties, be haa to repeat the hymns of the lapyurvedu Viluop of p 24

A Qhandoga wa chanter of the Sdma-vedn, an Udytir pmost Videop oi, ए 405

The Makai ubtha (great hymn) or the Brhai-ukifia formx © series of verse, in three sections, coach contamng cighty Z'yoas or triple vorses, recited at the end of the Agni cayuna An Uktha wa verse which 1s reoied, as distinguizhed from the Sdman verso which fs sung, apd the Yayua or sacred formula which is muterod It forms @ subchyision of tho Sastras Vide op ov, p 178 See footnote 1, pn 78

Mahd-vraia wm the name of = great roligwus observance It 28 also the name of a Sdman or Stoira, appornted tu be sung on the last day but one of the Gavdm ayana Video MW,p 800

[8 1 1 26 78 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 10]

who are conversant with the Yajur veda consider, respectively m the chief Sastra 1, sacrificial fire, and the Mah& vrata, Brahman who mheres in them severally, hke tus, Brahman mheres m the (Gayatri)

metre Or, (an alternative explanation of the sitra,) Just as the Gayatri

18 9 Claas of metre which conssta of four feet, each consisting of ax syllables 2, so Brahman, too, has four feet 71 accordance with the text ‘One foot of him are all bemgs, three feet, the mmortal m the heaven” (Chind 3126) Accordingly, on account of the mention of the fixng of the mind to Brahman who 18 metaphorically denoted. by the word ‘Géayatri’ in virtue of the fact that both possess the quality of having four feet, the G&yatri 18 not recognized here, but Brahman alone “Yor thus xt 18 seen,” 1 © 10 the very same manne, a term denoting a meire 1s found apphed,—m a literal (as opposed to a metaphorical) sense,2—even, to a different object im virtue of the fact that both possess a common quality Thus, begmnmg ‘These 098 and the other five make ten, and that 18 the krta’4 (Ohand 4 9 8), the text goes on tosay ‘That 18 the Virij, the cater of food’ (Chind 488) Here under the samvargavidyd 5, the term ‘Vird)’,

1 A Sustra 18 9 verse recifed by the Hofr and his agsistanta Vide MW p 1044

9 Vide the verse ‘Indrad कष्ठ paiu/ Balena piduah | duscyavano ured /samiisu गव०० ५ | §न B 1126 p 216 Part 1

3 See end of footnote & below

# Kria 18 the name of the die marked with four points

6 The Samvarga iidyd or the knowledge concernmg the snatcher unto iteelf taught by fashbva to Jdnadruds Vide Chind 48 The wind 18 the ematcher unto rteelf among the gods, the vital breath mu the snatchor unto iteelf among the sense organs The wind absorbs fire, the sun, the moon and water The vital breath absorbs speech, the eye, the ear and the mind And, the wind, together with ite four lunds of food, viz fire, the sun, the moon and water—theae five and the vital breath together with its four londs of food viz 8066009» the cye the ear and the mmd—these five, make ten or the ‘Aria which 18 called the *Verdy Here, the Kria has actually ben constituent parts, just aa the Verdy metre has actually ten syllables Hence these two are said to resemble each other i © (षन sense, and not in © figurative one as opposed to the caze of Brahman and Gdyairi, since when 1b 1s said that Brahman has four feet, 10 15 not meant that He has actually four feet, but only mefaphorically while Gdyatrt has actually four feet or parta Hence, here the term ‘gaura haa been used mm connection with the latter 08.86, and the term dakya m con nection with the former Vide VK above

[sa 1 1 27 apa 10] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 79

which 18 a class of metre of ten syllables, 18 found applied to a collection of ten objects or the krta

COMPARISON Samkara

This 1s शी 9 25 m his commentary Reading same He gives two alternative explanations of the sitra Under the first, he pomta out that the passage ‘The Gayatri, venly, 18 all this’ (Chand 3121) intunates that by means of the metre Gayatri, the mind 18 to be directed. to Brahman who 1s connected with the Giyaitr! as ite cause, just as devout meditation on Brahman under the form of certam, effecta of Brahman, 1s mentioned in other passages, wiz Aitereya Eranyaka (See Srinivisa above) Under the second, he pomts out that accordimg to some, the term Géyatri directly denotes Brahman, smce both possess four feet, and quotes a Chandogya passage as an example (Seo Srinivasa above )!

Ramégnuja

Reading slightly different—viz ‘nigmit’ m place of ‘nigadit’

Interpretation, same * Baladeva

This 18 8098 25 m his commentary too Keadmg and interpre tation same, only the mterpretation of the phrase “Tath& bi darfanam’ different He does not take it as referrmg to one specific parallel instance as Nimb&rka does but understands ‘darfanam’ in the sense of ‘consistency’, and the phrase means, according to hm, ‘for by such an explanation alone the above passage gives a consistent meaning ’ 4

SUTRA 27

‘“AND BEOAUSH THE DESIGNATION OF THE BHINGS AND 80 ON AS THE FEET IS APPROPRIATE (ONLY 17 BRAHMAN BE DENOTED BY THE एका “GAYATRT’’), THIS 75 80”

Vedainta-piarijata-saurabha

We hold that the Gayatri 1s Brahman not only ‘on account of the declaration, of the apphoation of the mmd thus’ (last part of Br

18B 1136 aft B 1126, 216 vol 1 2 GB 1125, pp 91 92 Chap 1

[so 1 1 27 apH 10] VEDANTA PARIJETA SAURABHA 79

which 18 © 01888 of metre of ten syllables, 1s found appled to a collection of ten objects or the Erta

COMPARISON Samkara

This 1s sitra 25 m bis commentary Reading same He gives two alternative explanations of the siitra Under the first, he pomts out that the passage ‘The Gayatri, verily, 18 all this’ (Chind 3121) intimates that by means of the metre Gayatri, the mind 1s to be directed to Brahman who 1s connected with the G&yatri as 108 cause, just as devout meditation on Brahman under the form of certain offecta of Brahman 18 mentioned m other passages, viz Aitereys dranyake (See Srintvisa above) Under the second, he points out that according to some, the term Gayatri directly denotes Brahman, ance both possess four feet, and quotes a Chaindogya passage as an example

(See Srinrviisa above )1 Ramanuja

Reading shghtly different—viz ‘nigm&t’ m place of ‘nigadat’ Interpretation, same ४ Baladeva

This 18 809 25 m bis commentary too Readme and interpre tation same, only the mterpretatzon of the phrase ‘Tath& hi daréanam’ different He does not take 1t as referrmg to one specific parallel mstance a8 Nimb&rka does but understands ‘darfanam’ in the sense of ‘consistency’, and the phrase means, according to hm, ‘for by such an explanation alone the above passage gives a consstent meaning * 9

SOTRA 27

“AND BEOAUSH THE DESIGNATION OF THE BHINGS AND 80 ON AS

THE FRET IS APPROPRIATH (ONLY If BRAHMAN BH DENOTHD BY THE

THRM ““GivatTRt’’), THIS 15 sO ”

Vedinta-pirijata-saurabha

We hold that the G&yatri 1s Brahman not only ‘on account of

the declaration of the application of the mind thus’ (last part of Br

1 8 8 11305 2S B 1126,p 216 vol 1 ¢ 028 1125, pp 91 92, Chap 1

[80 1 1 28 80 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 4DH 10]

8 11 26), but “this 15 so also because” (the four feet, viz) एश earth, body and heart,! are “appropriate” on the part of Brahman, the Lord (alone)

Vedanta-kaustubha

For this reason “also”, m the text “The Gayatri, verily, 18 all this’? (Chand 3 19 1), the object denoted by the term ‘Gayatri’ 18 Brahman ‘For what 7688070 £ “Because the designation of bemgs and so on as the feet 18 appropriate”’,1e also because the designation, viz that the Giyatn has four feet,—called bemgs, earth, body and heart,—is appropriate on the part of Brahman alone, and not on the part of the G&yatri metre which 18 but a collection of letters

SUTRA 28

‘Tr rr BE OBJECTED THAT ON ACOOUNT OF THE DIFFERENOH OF TRAOHING, (BRAHMAN IS) NOT (REOOGNIZHD), (WE REPLY ) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF THERE BEING NO CONTRADICTION EVEN IN BOTH OASES ”

Vedanta -pirijata-saurabha

If 1t be objected that first the heaven. 18 referred to as 9 ‘locus’, and then agai, as ७ ‘limit’, and there being such “a difference of teaching”’, Brahman 28 “not” recognized,—

(We reply ) “no” Why! “Because there 1s no contradiction,” in both the cases, with regard to the oneness of Brahman (ie m point of proving the very same Brahman)

Vedanta-kaustubha

If 1t be objected —The heaven 1s referred to as a ‘locus’, by the locative case ending, m the previous case, viz ‘The three feet of him are the ummortal m the heaven (div1)’ (Chind 3126), but as a “lhmit’, by the ablative case endmg, im the text ‘Now, the hght that shines higher than the heaven ({divah)’ (Chind 3187) ‘Thus, “on account of the difference of teachmg’”’, resultang from the difference of the case endings, Brahman 18 not recognized in the text concermmg the hght (viz Chand 3 13 '7)—

1 Vide Chind 3 12 1-4

[so 1 1 29 ADH ll | VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 81

(We reply ) Such an objection cannot be rased Why? “In both the cases’’, 1 68 mm the case of the locative as well as m the case of the ablative, the oneness of the root meaning, which 18 the main thing, 18 not set aside by the meaning of the case endings, which 1s submdiary only, just as the expressions ‘A hawk on the top of the tree’, ‘A hawk above the tree’ (mean the same thmg) Hence, it 18 established that the object denoted by the term “hght”’ 18 the Supreme Brahman alone, possessed of unsurpassed splendour

Here ends the section entitled “The hght’ (10)

Adhikarana ll The section ontitled ‘Indra and the 1४91 breath’ (Sitras 29-82)

SUTRA 29

“(BRAHMAN JS DENOTED BY THA WORD) VITAL BREATH, ON ACOOUNT OF INTELLIGIBILITY IN THAT Way ”’

Veddnta-parijata-saurabha

In the text ‘I am the vital breath’ (Kaus 821) and so on, the object denoted by the term ‘vital breath’ and the rest, the Highest Self, because the qualities of highest auspicioumness, endless प and so on are intelligible only य the Highest Self be understood

Vedanta-kaustubha

Now, by showing, in the followmg four aphorsams, that the Kausitak: texts all refer to Brahman, the author refutes the view that words hike ‘vital breath’, “Indra’ and so on mean the mdividual soul.

In the Kaugttak: brihmana upanisad, the Pratardana-vidyai 38 recorded, beginning ‘Pratardana, verily, the son of Divodisa, arnved by fighting and valour at the beloved abode of Indra’ (Kaug 8 1) 1४ 28 said here Beimg told by Indra ‘I will give you a boon”’’ (Kaus 81), Pratardana said ‘‘‘Do you yourself choose (a boon) for me, # what you consider to be the most beneficial for mankmnd’’’ (Kaus

18 R, Bh SK, 5 3 The word ‘varam 18 not cluded in the ongimal text

[so 1 1 29 82 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 11]

8 1), 16 havmg considered the boon ‘yourself’, ‘choose’,1e give that ‘to me’ Thus told by Pratardana, Indra said ‘“I am the vital breath, the mtellgent Self Worship me, as hfe, a8 immortality” ’ (Kaus 32), and agam, later on ‘“‘ The vital breath, verily, 1s the in telhgent self that takmg hold of this body, makes it stand up”’ (Kaus 3 3), ‘“‘Let none desire to enquire after speech, but let him know the speaker”’ (Kaus 3.8), and mm conclusion also ‘ “Now, this vital breath itself, forsooth, 18 the mtellgent self, 01188, ageless and ummortal”’ (Kaug 38) Here, the doubt 18, viz whether a certain, mdividual soul 18 denoted by the words ‘Indra’ and ‘vital breath’, or the Highest Self? What 18 reasonable here 1

The prima facse view 18 As the word ‘Indra’ 1s well known to be denotimg an individual soul entrusted with a certam, office, and as there 28 a text regarding the object denotable by the term ‘Indra’, viz ८८० am the vital breath”’ (Kaus $ 2),—the word ‘vital breath’ also denotes ‘Indra’ From the text ‘““Worship me as 1108, as 1717107 tality ` (Kaus 32), he alone 18 known here as the object to he worshipped.

With regard to thus, the correct conclumon 16 as follows “The vital breath’, 16 the meanmg of the word ‘vital breath’ and what 18 denoted by the words ‘Indra’ and the rest accompanying 10, are the Highest Self alone Why? ‘“On account of mtelligibility m that way, 1e because qualities lke “highest auspiciousness’, ‘bemg the mtelhgent self’, “bhss’, ‘agelesaness’ and the rest are intelligible ‘im, that way’’,1e only if the Highest Self be understood Thus, first, it 18 said in the begimnmg “The son of Divodisa went to the beloved abode of Indra’ 1 (Kaus 31), where Indra, conceiving the dependence of hus own, self 07, Brahman for its existence and activity, did not thmk ‘I am Indra’, but, bemg merged m the 01185 of Brahman and concelving that the sentient and the non sentient objects have Brahman as ther self, reflected ‘Brahman, alone, 1s all this, I am Brahman’, and looked upon even those who had commutted sins as his own self And, the object to be attamed by the Self (viz Indra) and by those who were equal to the Self (viz all other bemgs whom Indra looked upon as his self) was Brahman alone, the means thereto bemg amply the worship of His feet Indra told to Pratardana, who had arrived there, 16 at his so beloved place ‘Choose a boon’ And, thus

1 The word ‘idvaé’ 1s not included m the quotation

(st 11 30 apa 11 ] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 83

requested, Pratardana too, wishing for the highest goal of men, said. to bim, who was very modest, free from puide, and desirous of mta matmg the means to the highest goal of men, ‘Do you yourself choose a boon for me”’’ and 80 on Thereupon, the vital breath was taught to Pratardana as the object to be worshipped, im the passage ***T am the vital breath’’’ (Kaus 32) and so on How aan the vital breath, taught thus as the highest goal of men, be an individual goul* How can the text ‘“‘Worship me”’ (Kaug 3 2) be mtelhgible except as designating the worship of the Supreme Brahman? The individual soul, the witness of the three states 1, bemg a part and not fit to be attamed by another individual soul, 12 not attamable through the mtuition of a knower And (the adjective) ‘most beneficial’ (आ the text ‘What you consider to be the most beneficial for mankmd’’’) does not apply to anything else except to the attamment of Brahman (The qualities ke) ‘bemg the intelligent self’, ‘bliss’, ‘agelessness’, and ‘immortality’, mentioned m the passages ‘“‘Worship me as life, as immortality” ’? (Kaus 23), This alone, verily, 28 the intelligent self, bliss, ageless, ummortal’ (Kaug 38), fit m only if Brahman be understood, and not otherwise Henoe, the words ‘Indra’, ‘vital breath’ and so on were used by the celebrated Indra with a view to designating Brabman, and not his own self

SUTRA 30

“Tr It BH OBJEOTED THAT (BRAHMAN 28) NOT (DENOTED), ON

ACCOUNT OF THE SHLF OF THE SPEAKER BRING TAUGHT, (WH BHPLY )

BEOAUSE THHRE IS + MULITTUDE OF REFERHNOHS TO THR SHLF IN

rr”?

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

If 1t be objected The object denoted by the words ‘vital-breath’ and the rest cannot be Brahman Whyf Because in the text ‘Know me 91076 '" ' (Kaug 314), the very self of the speaker 18 taught,—

1 Viz waking dream, deep aleep 9 Correct quotation translated ‘tam mdm ’§ R Bh SK,B

[80 1 1 30 84. VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 11]

(We reply ) ‘ “In this”’ chapter, there 18 a multitude of references to the Highest Self Hence, the object denoted by the words ‘vital breath’, ‘Indra’ and the rest 18 the Highest Self alone

Vedanta-kaustubha

If 1b ba objected In the aphorism ‘The vital breath, on account of mtelligibihty in that way’ (Br Si 11 29), 1t has been said that the object denoted by the words ‘vital breath’, ‘Indra’ and 80 on, 18 Brabman That 18 not the caso Why? ‘“On account of the self of the speaker being taught,’’’1e because the very self of the speaker, viz Indra, who says at first ‘“Know me alone”’ (Kaug 3 1), and later on ‘“T am the vital breath, the intelligent self’’’ (Kaug 3 2),— his very individual character, well known from the passage ‘“I killed the three headed son of Tvastr, I delivered the Arunmukhas, the 88081708, to the wolves’’’ (Kaus 3 1),—as taught as the object to be worshipped ‘Thus, the introductory text here refers to the individual soul This bemg so, the concludmg text too, viz ‘Bliss, ageless, immortal’ (Kaus 3 8), should refer to 1t,—

We reply ‘“ Because there 18 a multitude of references to the self mit”’,1e “because”,1e certamly, “m 1t”’, viz 1 this chapter, there 18 “a multitude of references to the self”, 1 © numerous references to that which 1s above the (mdividual) self, viz the Highest Self, that means, 17. this chapter there are (mentioned) © great many attributes of the Highest Self Henoe there cannot be any reference to any individual soul like Indra here,—this 18 the resultmg meanmg ‘Thus, the worship of what 18 the most beneficial, mentioned in the introduo tory text ‘““What you consider to be the most benefiaal for mankmd”’ (Kaug 31), 18 nothmg but the worship of the Highest Self, because He alone 18 the most auspicious Bemg, as declared by another scriptural text “By knowmg Him alone, one surpasses death, there 18 no other way to salvation’ (Svet 615) Sumilarly, making one do good or evil deeds as declared by the text ‘He alone makes one, whom he wishes to lead up from these worlds, perform good action He 91076 makes one, whom he wishes to lead downwards from these worlds, perform evil action’! (Kaug 38), 18 & quality of the Highest Seif alone Likewise, bemg the support of all sentient and non sentient

1 Correct quotation translated ‘Hga ht eva enam 694 & eva enam क karma kdraya tam yam adho कमं Vide Kaug 3 8,p 130

[80 1 1 31 ApH 11 ] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA 86

objecta,—depicted by the term ‘elements of mtelhgence’ m the text which, begmning thus ‘The vital breath alone uw the mtelligent self that, taking hold of the body, makes 10 stand up’ (Kaus 3 3), goes on ‘As of 9 chanot the mm of the wheel 18 fixed on the spokes, and the spokes are fixed on the nave, even so these elements of being are fixed on the elements of intelligence, and the elements of intelligence are fixed on the yital breath’ (Kaug 3 8) —as well as bliss and the rest, Mentioned m the text ‘Now, this vital breath, forsooth, 15 the intelligent self, 71188, ageless, xmmortal’ (Kaug 3 8), are qualities of the Highest Self alone ‘Bemg the Self’ and ‘bemg the object to be known’, mentioned in conclusion in the text ‘“‘Let one know “He 18 my self”’ (Kaus 3 8), are also qualities of the Highest Self Hence, a great many attmbutes of the Highest Self bemg mentioned here, the Bighest Self alone 18 denoted by the terms ‘Indra’, ‘vital breath,’ and the rest

SUTRA 31

“BUT THH INSTRUCTION (GIvHN BY INDEA ABOUT HIMSELF) (IS JUSTIFIABLE) THROUGH SORIPTURAL INSIGHT, AS IN THA 04.82 OF VAMADEVA ”’

Vedanta-pdrijata-saurabha

Reahzmg that everything had Brahman for its soul, Indra properly said “through scriptural msight” ‘Know me alone”’ (Kaus 3114)—the sormptural text to this effect 1s ‘What sorrow, what delusion 1s there of him who perceives the unsty’ (18 72)—, just as Vamadeva said ^" was Manu and the sun”’ (Brh 1410, Rg V 426 123)

Vedinta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz Why then, did Indra bemg one, (vm an individual soul) taught himself as another (viz Brahman) m the passage ‘““Worship me”’ (Kaug 3 2) ?—it 1s replied here —

No such objection can be raised Just ase highly favoured royal servant says to the subjecta, even lke the kmg himself, ‘I am your

1§ R Bh, SK,B 9 §, R, Bh, SK, B 9 P 285, 116 8 Not quoted by others

[80 11 31

86 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 477 11]

ruler to be worshipped by you’, so 18 the case here ‘But through soriptural insight” That 18, m the passages, ‘Know me alone” (Kaus 31), ‘“Worship 706" * (Kaus 32), and so on, Indra, who 18 only an, individual soul, taught the Highest Self as his own self, conse quent of knowmg, “through scriptural insght”, 16 from soriptural texts, that the Supreme Brabman, 18 the mner controller and the soul of all The scmptural texts are the followmg —‘ All this has that for 108 self, that 18 true, that 18 the self, Brahman’, (Chand 67 8, 694, 6108, 6113, 6128, 6133 6148, 6163, 6163), ‘All this, verily, 18 Brahman, emanating from him, disappeamng into bum, breathing m bum’ (द्यत 314), (एणा havo, truly, attamed freedom from fear, 0 Janaka ` [` (Brh 424), ‘Who knows himself ‘Tam Brabman”’? (Brh 1 410), ‘Entered within, the ruler of men, the soul of all’ (Tart Ar 31124), ‘This 18 your soul, the mner con troller, ummortal’ (Brh 873, eto) and 80 on Compare the case of Vamadeve, who intuitang the Highest Self, the Inner Controller of all, through scriptural maght, spoke of Him alone, when he said ‘Seemng this, the sage Vimadeva understood ‘I was Manu and the sun”’’ (Brh 1410), ‘I am the wise Kaksgiviin sage’ (Rg V 4 26 1*) Hence the teachmg ‘Know me alone”’ (Kaus $1), eto 18, indeed, proper

COMPARISON

Srikantha

He gives two alternative explanations, the last of which tallies with the explanation, given by Nimbé&rka 5

+ The word ‘Brahman 18 not included m the ongmal texts

9 Correct quotation ya evam veddham Brahmderm Vide Erh 1410 p ५0

४ 181

¢ The fall quotation in Rg V ia ‘I was Manu and the sun I am the wise Kakgwin sage'—said by Indra

6 SK 1181 (p 388 Part 3)

(st 11 32 ADH 11] VEDANTA-PABIJATA SAUBABHA 87

SUTRA 32

“Ty IT BE OBJHOTHD THAT ON ACCOUNT OF THD CHARACTERISTIO MARKS OF THH INDIVIDUAL SOUL AND THH तपा VITAL-BREATH, (BRAHMAN 18) NOT (MEANT), (WH REPLY ) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF THE THREEFOLDNESS OF MEDITATION, ON ACCOUNT OF BEING REFERRED TO (ELSEWHERE), ON ACCOUNT OF (ITS) SUITABILITY HERE ”

Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

If 16 be objected On account of the characteristic marks of the individual soul, mentioned in the passages —Let none desire to enquire into speech, but 160 him demre to know the speaker’ (Kaus 3 8 2), ‘I slew the three headed son of Tvastr’ (Kaus 312), as well as on account of the characterstico marks of the chief vital breath, mentioned 10 the passage—‘The vital breath alone 1s the mtelligent self that taking hold of the body makes it stand up’ (Kaug 3 3 §), Brahman, 1s not referred to here,—

(We reply ) No, “because of the threefoldneas of the meditation ’”’ on, Brahman, m accordance with the different grades of meditating devotees, viz (meditation on Brahman) as the Inner Controller of the group of individual souls, as the Inner Controller of the non sentient objects, and as different from them both, “because 29 1s referred to” (elsewhere), “because 1t 1s suitable here” also

Here ends the first quarter of the first chapter m the Vedfnta panjita saurabha, an interpretation of the S&riraka mim&melii texts, and composed by the reverend Nimb&rka

Vedainta-kaustubha

If 1t be objected Brahman cannot be denoted here by the words “vital breath’ and the rest Why* “On account of the character istic marks of the mdividual soul and the chief vital-breath ' First, the characteristio marks of the individual soul are stated m the passages “Let none desire to enquire after speech, but let him desire to know the speaker’ (Kaug 38), "न delivered the Arunmukhas, the

॥ 8, 5 BhB 9 7 SK, Bh B a8,R Bh B

[80 11 32 88 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 4DH 11]

88061108, to the wolves’’’ (Kaus 31) and so on, and the charactenstic marks of the chief vital breath are stated m the passage ‘Now, verily, the vital breath alone 1s the yntelhgent soul that takmg hold of this body makes 16 stand up’ (Kaug 31) Hence 16 18 not possible that Brahman 1s referred to here,— =

(We, reply) “No” Why?! “On sccount of the threefoldness of meditation, on, account of bemg referred (elsewhere), on account of (1ts) suitability here’ That 18, the demgnation of Brahman by such and such terms (viz Indra and the vital breath) 1s for the sake of teaching the threefoldness of meditation, just as elsewhere three kinds of meditation on Brahman are referred to There (viz in the Taittarfya upanisad) Brahman 1s recommended to be meditated on. in His own, nature m the passages “Brahman 1s truth, knowledge and mfinite’ (Tait 21), ‘Brahman is bliss’ (Taxt 36), and to be med1- tated on, as the mner soul of the sentient and the non sentient, as well as the soul of all m the passages “Having created that, he entered mto that very thmg Havmg entered 1t, He became real and that, defined. and undefined, based and non based, knowledge and non knowledge’ (Tart 26) In the same manner “on account of ite suitability’, 168 on sccount of the suttabihty of such a threefoldness, “here’’, 16 m the Pratardanavidy& as well, there 18 no divergence among the texta, the whole group of texts referring to one and the same Brahman This should be understood here If a text be ascertamed from the introduction and the rest to be referrmg to Brahman, then, if there be marks of anything else therem, those, too, affould be referred to Brahman, who 1s the mner controller of that thing, who possesses 1t as His power, and who 18 the object to be meditated on = 57068, it 1s established that the object mdicated by the words ‘Indra’, ‘vital- breath’ and the rest 1s the Highest Self

Here ends the section entitled ‘Indra and the vital breath’ (11)

Here ends the first section of the first chapter in the Vedanta kaustubha, @ commentary on the Sartraka mimimsé, and composed. by the reverend teacher Srinrvisa, dwelling under the lotus feet of the reverend Nimbérks, the founder and teacher of the sect of the reverend. Sanatkumfra

[80 1 1 82 apy 11] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 89

COMPARISON Samkara

This 18 siitra 31 m bis commentary Readmg same He gives two alternative explanations of the second part of the siitra viz the reply to the objection, thus —

(1) ‘If 16 be objected , (then, we reply )—On account of the threefoldness of meditation, (1e your mterpretation would imvolve the assumption of devout meditation of three kinds, viz on the mdzvidual soul, on the chief vital breath and on Brahman, but one and the same section cannot teach three different kinds of things) (Moreover, the word ^" vital breath’’ must denote Brahman here,) on account of (that meanmg) being accepted (elsewhere), on account of connection here (16 im the passage itself characteristic marks of Brahman are mentioned) (Hence the conclusion 1s that Brahman 1s the topic of the whole chapter)” This mterpretation 18 different from Nimb&rka’s interpretation

Or, ‘If rt be objected. , (then, we reply ) (the charac teristic marks of the individual soul and the chief vital breath, are not out of place m ® chapter which deals with Brahman) on account of the threefoldness of meditation (16 because this chapter aims sumply at advocating thereby the three ways of meditatimg on, Brahman, viz under the aspect of the prana, under the aspect of prajfid, and m itaelf, accordmg as Brahman 18 viewed either with reference to the two limiting adjuncts, or m itself), because (m other passages also we find that meditation on Brahman 1s) made dependant (on Brahman bemg qualified by णाह adjuncta—cf Chind $142), because (the hypothems that Brahman 1s meditated on under three aspects) 18 perfectly conmstent here (168 m the prina chapter!) This mter pretation too does not tally with Nimb&rka’s mmterpretation, for Nunb&rka does not hold that the sentuent and the non sentient— under the aspects of which Brahman is meditated on—are lLmitmeg adjuncts of Brahman

Raminuja

Reading and interpretation same According to RimdAnuja, the three kinds of meditation are — (1) Meditation on Brahman m His own nature as the cause of the world, (2) meditation on Brahman as

18B 1181, pp 255 ff

[80 1 1 32 90 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADE 111

having the totality of the enjoying souls as His body (16 as the inner soul of the sentient), and (8) meditation on Brahman as having the objects and means of enjoyment 0 His body (16 as the mner soul of the non sentient) 7

Bhaskara

This 1s sitra 31 m his commentary Readmg different—vuz omits the portion ‘Aémtatvid iba tad yogét’ Two alternative interpretations given, the first (the author's own view) exactly like

ras first explanation, the second (the view of 0098 ‘apare tu’, ete ) hike Nimb&rka’s explanation >

Srikantha

Reading and interpietation same He pointy out, exactly after RémAnujs, that the three kinds of meditations on the Lord are— svarupens, bhokty sarirena and bhogya riipena २

Baladeva

This 18 siitra 31 7 Baladeva His intorpretation 1s hke Samkara’s first interpretation 4 Résumé The first quarter of the first chapter contains — (1) 32 siitras and 11 adhikaranas, according to Nimbirka, (2) 31 siitras and 11 adhiknranas, according to Samkara, (8) 32 stitras and 11 adhkaranas, according to Rimanuyja, (4) 31 stitras and 11 adhikaranas, according to Bhiskara, (5) 32 aiitras and 12 adhikaranas, according to Srikantha, (6) 31 siitras and 11 adhikaranas, according to Baladeva

Samkara, Bhiskara and Baladeva omut afitra 9 m Nimb&rka’s commentary

181 8 1182 p 324 vol 1 —Nskhtla kdranatlhitiasya Brahmanah evarupeninusandhdnam, bhokir-varga-dantakatvdnuseandhdnam, bhogya bhogopa karana-danrakaivinusandhdnaA ost irwnidham anusandhanam upadesum १४ artha),’

£ Bh B 1181 pp 865 36

8 SK B 1182 pp 20192 Pert3

“ 028 1131

FIRST CHAPTER (Adhyéya) SECOND QUARTER (P&da)

Adhikarana 1 The section entitled ‘Celebrity everywhere’ (30788 1 8)

SOTRA 1 “(THAT WHICH CONSISTS OF MIND 18 BRAHMAN), BHOAUSE OF THE THAOHING OF WHAT 18 OBLEBRATED EVERYWHEER ”’

Vedinta-pfrijaita-saurabha

Beginning ‘All this, verily, 28 Brahman, emanatmg from hm disappearing into him and breathing in him ,—tranqull, let one medi tate on him thus’ (Chind 3 14 1 1), Serpture contmucss ‘Conmsting of mind, having the vital breath for his body’ (Ohand 314 29) Here, the object which 18 to be meditated on as consisting of mind 18 to be understood as the Highest self, the cause of all, and not as the individual soul Why! Because the highest self alone, celebrated im all the Ved&ntas, 18 taught mm the above passages, viz ‘All this veruy, 18 Brahman,’ (Chand 3 141)

Vedanta-kaustubha

Thus, एप the first section, the concordance of the scriptural texts with regard to the holy Lord Vasudeva has been shown,—He who 1s the object of enquiry, the greatest Being, the cause of the ong and. the rest of the world, havmg Senpture for His sole proof, omniscient, without an equal or & superior and the one mass of infinite auspicious quahitzes Now, in the following two seotions, the reverend teacher of the Veda 18 showing that those texts,—some of which indistinctly indicate the mdividual soul and the rest, and some of which distanctly do 80,—all refer to Him alone

The Chandogas record the followmg ‘All this, verily, 1s Brahman, emanating from him, disappearing into him, and breathing m him ,— tranquul, 166 one meditate (on him) thus Now, a person consists of

1§ RB, BhB ४ 8 R, BhSK B

[80 1 2 1 92 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH | |

determmation Accordmg to what 118 determmation, 1s in this world, 80 0068 he become on departing hence Let him form a determination He who consists of mind, has the vital breath for his body, 1s of the form of hght’ (Chand 314121) and so on Hore, a doubt arises, viz whether the mdividual soul? should be understood as the object to be meditated on, possessed of the attmbutes of consisting of mind and the rest, or the Highest self What 1s reasonable here ¶

(Pruma face view )

If 1t be suggested The individual soul Why? Because the individual soul 1s well known to have the mmd and the vital breath as ita instruments, because Scripture declares that Lord Brahman, the Supreme Bemg, has no connection with mind and the vital breath, m the passage ‘Without the vital breath, without 00100, pure* (Mund 212), and, finally, because having the heart for 1ta abode as well as bemg atomic, stated m the passage ‘This is the soul® withm the heart, smaller than a gram of rice, or & barley corn’ (Chind 3 14 3), are possible in the case of the limited dividual soul alone [If 1t be objected of the mx proofs, viz scriptural statement, mark text, topic, place and name, each succeeding one 18 weaker than the preceding one Of these, sormptural statement means an mdependent statement, and mark means the power cf words (to indicate some meaning) Now, here, the scriptural statement, viz ‘All this, verily, 13 Brahman’ (Chand 3141), 18 of a greater force than the mark of the mdividual soul, viz consisting of पात and the rest, 1t bemg mentioned first, (the rule bemg that of these mx, each preceding one 18 of & greater {10706 than each succeeding one) Hence, Brahman, alone, mentioned. above, 18 to be construed here as the object to be meditated on,—({we reply } no, because as that text fulfils 708 purpose simply by teachmg, a8 # means to the attamment of tranquillity, that everything has Brahman, for 1ts soul, thus ‘Tranquil, let one meditate’, so 1t 18 not concerned with laying down any injunction, regarding the meditation on, Brahman (here ends the ongmal Prima facte view)

1 This passage occurs 2150 in Sat Br 10 6 3 It forms > part of the famous SGadsizya-vsdyd, or tha Doctrme of SUaddya For a further account see footnote (5), p 1078 f

i * Kesirajfia, means Knower of the field’, or the body 16 the soul, the conscious prmerple in the corporeal frame

8 Oorrect quotation ‘Rea ma dind > Vide Chind 3143, p 158

{jst 1 2 1 ADH 1] VEDANTA hAUSTUBHA 93

(Correct conclusion )

We reply —The highest soul alone, possessed of the attmbutes of consisting of mind and the rest, 18 the object to be meditated on Why? “Because” the cause of the ong and the rest of the would, “celebrated everywhere’’,1e 1m, all the Vedintas, “1s taught” as the cause of all, as the soul of all, here in the text ‘All this, very, 18 Brahman (Chand 8141) Or, else, “because” the attributes of ‘sonsisting of mind’ and the rest, “celebrated” 1n all the Vediintas as belonging to the Supreme Brahman, thus ‘Conmsting of mind, leader of the vital breath and the body (Mund 227), ‘Thus ether that 28 within the heart,—therein 18 the person, consisting of mind (Tait 1 6), and so on, “are taught” Of these, ‘conmstmg of mimd’ means ‘capable of bemg apprehended by a pumfied mind’, ‘havmg the vital breath for the body’ means “beimg the support and the लाभ of even the vital breath’, ‘without the vital breath’ means ‘abiding प्रा dependently of the vital breath’, and “without mind’ means ‘havmg knowledge not dependent on the mind’

Or, else, the text ‘All this, venly, 18 Brahman, omanatmg from hm, disappearing into him, and breathing mm him ,—tranguul, let one meditate (on him) thus’ (Chand 3141) enjoms meditation, thus ‘Let one meditate on Brahman, the soul of all, 12, a tranquil spit’ The text ‘Let him form a determmation’ (Chand 3 14 1) 18 © repeta tion. (of the same injunction), with 8 view to proving that the atimbutes of ‘consisting of mind’ and the rest belong to the very same Being, mentioned above, (viz Brahman) Let one meditate on Brahman, the soul of all and possessed of the attributes of consistmg of mind and the Test,—this 18 the sense of the text Here, 9 doubt arises, viz whether Brahman, mdicated as the soul of all, 1s the mndividual soul, or the Highest self What 218 reasonable here? If 1t be suggested The individual soul Why?! Because, 1t alone can possibly assume the forms of all kinds of bemgs, Brahms and so on, dus to karmaa, based on, beginningless nescience, while 1t 1s never 0088016 for the Supreme Brahman, to assume identity with all sorta of low or vile forms, mince He 18 endowed with (the attmbutes of) omniscience, omnipotence, freedom from suns, freed on by nature from all faults andsoon The word ‘Biahman’ too, apples to the mndividual soul alone, 1+ being endowed with great qualrties (1116 knowledge and the hke) And the origin and the rest of the world bemg due to karmas, 1t 18 reasonable to indicate the individual soul as thew cause,—

[श 1 2 1 94 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADE 1]

We reply “Because of the teachmg of what 1s celebrated every where”,1e the meaning of the word ‘Brahman,’ who 18 designated as the soul of all and as the cause of the ongin and the rest of all, 1s the Highest Self alone for this very reason, “everywhere”, 1 © m, the Vedintas, he 18 “taught”’ to be “celebrated” as the cause of the origin and the rest of the world—because of this, and also because it 15 impossible that the origin and. the rest of the world can, be due to the individual soul, since 170. the passages—‘‘Hoe desired ‘May I be many, may I procreate’ He created all this” (Tait 26) and so on, the Supreme Lord alone 1s celebrated to be the cause of the world This 1s stated m the ‘Law of salvation’! Beginning ‘ “Whence has arisen this entare world, consisting of the ummovable and the movable, and to whom does 1t go during universal dissolution 1 Tell me that, O grandfather! By whom has thi world, together with the oceans, the aky, mountaims, cloud, lands, flre and ar, been made?”’ (Mahi 126765 66%), havmg stated “The scripture which was related by Bhrgu to Bha&radvija, who asked’ (Mah& 12 6769C 3), having stated the omgin of all bemgs thus ‘Of him who 18 called Naér&iyana, who 18 unchangeable, the mmpermshable soul, who 18 Unmanifest, unknowable, higher than prakrti,’“ and baving stated ‘Then, a lustrous, celestial lotus was created by the self born From that lotus arose Brahm&, the Lord, consisting of the Veda’ (Mahé 126779 C-89A 5),—the text designates Lord Krena, Narayana, Brahman, 98 the cause of all sentient bemgs and non sentient objects, thus “For 06 1s difficult to be Known, undoubtedly meonceivable m nature even by the perfected souls He, verily, 1s Lord Vignu, cele brated to be infinite, abidmg as the mter controller of all bemgs, difficult to be known, by those who have not obtamed the self,—who 1s the creator of this prmncple of egosm for the production of all bemgs, from whom arose the universe, about whom I have been asked by you here’ (Mah& 12 6784-86A°) Hence, the Highest Self

1 Mokga dharma 18 the name of © section of the 12th book of the Mahd bhdraia, from Adhydya 174 to the end

® P 604, 17.698 8 4, vol 8 9 Op ov, line 7

« This 1s not traceable 1n any of the three editions, Amatnc Society Variga vist and Bombay

5 P 604 1०28 17 18 (vol 3) Thu verse is not found m the Bombay

9 © 604 Imes 22-24

[80 1 ~ £ ADH 1 | VEDANTA KALSTUnHA 06

alone 19 denoted by the word ‘Brahman here and not the mdzvidual soul ` COMPARISON Raimiénya

Reading samo Hb paves two alternative mtorpretations, which tally with the last two explunetions of Sina २86 2

SOTRA 2

“AND BL(AUSH (9 LHP APEROLRIATRNPSS QF THE ATTRIBUTES INTENDED TO RP STATI

Vedinta-pirijitu-saurabha

And becavae the attubutes viz commsting of mind,’ ‘haymg true revolves’ and the rest, “intended to bu stuted’’ m the text ‘Consisting of पतो) having the vital breath fo: the body, of the form of lycht, having true mewlyes (Chind 31428) and so on, are ‘approprindo on the put of Broluman alone

Vedinta-kaustubha

As the attuibutes of hasan truc resolves and the rest, ‘untended to be stated’ as the pocuhar attmbutes of Brahman m the passage ‘Conmsting of mind, having the broath for the body, of the form of hght, huwsings trae resolves, having the ethor as the soul, having all derired, having all कान 4 having all tustes, pervading all thin, unspeskuys, indifferent (Chiind $ 142) and #o on, are “appro priate” on the part of Brahman alone, so Brabman alone 18 under stood in the wbave teat Phe adjective ‘pervadmy all this’ means that He has necopte d ‘all चाण ~न 6 the sontient and the non sentient objects, ending with tate’, ~ an His own, ‘ungspeaking’ moans that He abides in silent a bees of Hus unsurpassed gravenoss , ‘indifferent ’ moans that ‘He hus ne concern,’

॥ 11 rae त 1 D oe | 1

1 कोद्य maven altogether three explanations of this इताः tho first ai which tallion with the oxplanation of Nanbdrka

984 13 121 Pp 291 श्‌ Part)

7K, 13

4 The कल्यत] text racks कदल Aarma’ aftcr this

[80 1 2 8 96 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 1]

SUTRA 3

“But on ACCOUNT OF INAPPROPRIATENESS, NOT THE EMBODIED (SOUL) "° Vedanta -parijata-saurabha

He who 18 possessed of the atinbutes of consisting of mind and the reat 18 the Supreme Being alone, and not the individual soul, because (the attributes hke) ‘ consisting of mind’, ‘having true re solves and 80 on, are “imappropriate”’ on 15 part

Vedinta-kaustubha

Brahman alone 1s to be understood as consisting of mind, for the purpose of meditation, and not “the embodied”, 1 6 the indivi dual soul, possessing a body Why? Because the attmbutes of ‘having true resolves’ and the 116 are “imappropmate”™ on the part of the individual soul Moreover, the attributes of ‘consisting of mind’ and the reat too, are inappropriate on the part of the एता dual soul ‘Thus, the text says ‘Let him form a determimation’ (Chind 3141) Of what kindishe? ‘ Consisting of mind’, again, ‘having the vital breath for his body’ These adjectives are not appropriate on the part of the mdividual soul, because no such implication 18 involved here, nor any purpose But all these are appropriate on the part of the Highest self Thus, when 10 18 said Let the worshipper, whether be desires for salvation, or for any particular froit, ‘form a determination’, 1 6 perform meditation or action, in & ‘calm’ spirit, the question arises In reference to whom 18 he to perform meditation or action? and in reply, the Highest Person, the soul of all, and indicated above in the passage ‘All this, verily, 1s Brahman’ (Ohind 3141), 1s pomted out as the object to be meditated on And, this text ‘Consisting of mind, having the vital breath for the body’ (Chind 3,142) and so on refers to Brahman Hence the attributes of ‘ consisting of mind’ and the rest are not appropriate on the part of the individual soul

COMPARISON Srikanthe

Reading same, interpretation different According to Srikantha, a new adhikarana begins with this siitra (sitras 3-8), concerned with

fet 1 24 apH 1] VIDANTA LARTIATA SAURABRHA 97

the question whothcr a pussage in the Maha nfriyana upaniged

113) refers tao Nariyana or to Siva Thus —‘ (The refors to Siva, and not (to) the embodied (ie N&rfiyana), becatwe (the attmbutes of buimg the Lord of the universe and the rest) are not approprixte (on the part of NixByana) ’ 1

SUTRA 4 “ AND BECAUYF OF TH DESIGNATIQN OF OBJECT AND AGENT ”

Vediinta-padrijita-saurabha

For this roaton too, the abject qualified by the adjectives ‘con, asting of nund* andl the rest im not the embodied soul, “ because of the

deagnation of object and agent" in the teat ‘On departing 1167108, Tahall reach him (Child 4 144 ®)

Vedintu-kaustubha

Fao: this roaxon, too, that which consists of mmd and has breath for its body us not to he understoul as the embodied soul Why! “Because of thus designation “ ef the embodied soul as the “agent २०, 16 asthe worshipper, and’ bec ate of the designation ” of the Highest Self an tho ‘ehjoct', ia usa the object to he meditated on and obtamed, m the passage ‘On departing hones, 7 shall reach bum’ (Chind 8144) That m, ‘1°’, or one cdenring jor salvation, ‘shall reach’, 16 shall obtain, hun’,:0 Brahman, mentioned before as possessed of the attributes of (भप of mind and ihe rest, ‘hence’, 1e after the fall of the holy, aiter the cuatruction of the works which have begun. to bear fruits ५ worshipper who m endowed with such 9» nght insight attains Brahman

COMPARISON Srikantha

Reading xame interpretation different, viz ‘(The supreme soul, vis Siva, the object to be moditatad on, 18 othor than N&rfiyana), because of the deaymetion of the object and the agont, (16 because

18K 1 11५ pp क्त्यन Part

ॐ 8, R, Bh, {१

भुं

(st 128 98 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBRABHA ADH 1}

Siva 18 designated to be the object to be worshipped, Narayana, the worshipper) ’ 1

SUTRA 5

“ON ACCOUNT OF THH DIFFERENCE OF WORDS ”’

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

That which possesses the attributes of ‘conmsting of mind’ and the lke 18 the Highest Self, different from the embodied soul, because in the text “This soul of mme within the heart’ (Chind 3 14 38, 49) the mdividual soul and the Highest Self are denoted by different words, viz the genitive and the nominative respectively

Vedinta-kaustubha

For this reason, too, that which, possesses the attributes of con- sisting of mind and so on, 18 the highest self, different from the embodied soul Why? ‘On account of the difference of words”’,1e because of another scriptural passage of kondred subject matter, viz “Like a grain of rice, or a barley corn, or a gram of mullet, or the kernel of a gram, of millet, such 18 the Golden Person, within, the self’ (Sat Br 10 6 9 2), there 18 ^ difference of words”, viz the locative ‘ within the self’ denotes the embodied self, while the nomimative ‘the Golden Person,’ denotes the Highest self 3

COMPARISON Srikantha

Reading same, imterpretation different, wiz (‘Brahman, viz Siva, 1s other than and superior to Nar&yana) on account of a particular word (or sonptural passage) (to that effect’) *

18K B 124, pp 322-324 Part 4

2R 28

¢ Note that Nembdarka and Stinwdaea refer to two different passages here

48K 8 1985 (Pp 324-25 Part4)

[80 1 2 6 ADH 1 ] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 99

SUTRA 6

‘“AND ON ACOOUNT oF रित्‌ ”

Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

“And on sccount of the Smrta” text —‘The Lord abides, 0 Arjuna! in the heart-region of all bemgs’ (018 186114), there 18 a difference between, the individual soul and the Supreme Soul

Vedanta-kaustubha

‘ He who 8668 me everywhere, and sees everything m me, of him I will never lose hold, and he shall never lose hold of 716 " ` (Gité 6 30), ‘He who, established im unity, worships me as abiding within all bemgs, that ascetic abides m me, under whatever arcumstances he may 1156 ` ` (105 631), ‘“‘There 18 nothing higher than me, 0 Dha- nafijaya! All this 1s strung on me, lke gems on a इन्त (अहि 77), ‘“And I abide within, the heart of all, and from me memory, knowledge and their absence”’’ (Git& 1615), ‘“‘The Lord abides, 0 Arjuna! in the heart region of all, causmg all bemgs to revolve by His mysterious power, as if mounted on a machine””’ (Gita 18 61), ‘Because I excel the perishable and am. superior even to the mperish able, I am calebrated m the world, and m the Veda as the Highest Person”’ (1४8 16 18) The following scrptural texts too are referred to by the term “‘and ’’ (mn the sitra) 2 “The two unborn ones, the knower and the non knower, the Lord and the non Lord’ ag 1 9), ‘The Lord of matter and souls, the ruler of the attmbutes’ (Svet 6 18), ‘The eternal among thp eternal, the conscious among the conscious’ (Svet 613, Katha 513) and so on From such Smpti and scrip tural texts, 1t 18 to be known that there 18 a difference between the wdividual soul and Brahman ‘Thus, wm this section, the difference between, the mdividual soul and the Supreme Soul 18 indicated by the reverend author of the aphorams 1 four aphoriame, ® and this view 18 most reasonable, smce 1t 18 established by both Smyti and Scripture The Highest Self 1s ever-free, omniscient, mdependent, all pervading

+ 8 R Bh,B

9 Note the different interpretations of the word Ca’ m the silira 88 grven by Nunbdrka and Stinwdsa According to thea former 1b mmply means algo + while according to the latter, ‘on account of sorsptural texte

$ Vis Br 80 123-6

[तं 1 2 7 100 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 1]

without an equal or a superior, the soul of all and the controller of all The individual soul, on the other hand, though of the nature of eternal knowledge, has, as 18 well known, 108 attribute of knowledge enveloped by the beginnmgless miy&, 18 subject to bondage and release, possessed. of little knowledge, a part of Brahman, but through its aversion to the Lord, revolves through many births owmg to the works done by staelf Non difference also, established by the scmptural texta ke ‘He 18 the self, thou art that’ (Chind 694, 6103, eto), ‘All this, verily, 18 Brahman’ (Chind 3 141), “This soul 1s Brahman’ (Brh 445) and 80 on, 18 most reasonable Thus, the reverend author of the aphorisms will speak about the nature of difference and non- difference, az held by himself, under the aphomsm ‘A part, on account of the demgnation of vanety’ (Br Si 2342) and so on We shall speak of 1+ m, detail in the same place }

COMPARISON

Samkara Reading and interpretation same But m conclusion, he adds his own view, viz that this difference between the mdividual soul and Brahman 1s not real, but due to limiting adjuncts only 3

Srikantha Reading same, interpretation different, viz ‘On account of शण (viz 0768 119) N&riyana 28 the worshtpper—ie different from Siva 8

SUTRA 7

" [क Iv BE OBJEOTHD THAT ON ACOOUNT OF ITS OOCOUPYING A SMALT, ABODE, AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION OF THAT, (BRAHMAN 18) NOT (THE OBJECT OF MEDITATION), (WH REPLY )} NO, 27204087 (BRAHMAN) IS TO BH OONCHIVHD THUS, 4S IN THE O4SH OF THE ETHER ”

Vedainta-parijata-saurabha

If 1t be objected that on account of its havmg a small abode, as mentioned mm, the text “This soul of mmp with the heart’ (Chand

२ Vide VK 2342 28B 127, p 266 88K B 127 pp 325 26, Part 4

[9 1 2:7 ADH 1 ] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 101

8 14 3), also on account of the designation of 108 smallness im the text ‘Smaller than & grain of rice, or’ (Chind 3148, Sat Br 106323), (the object of meditation) here 1s not Brahman,—

(We reply ) “ Not so’, because Brahman 1s to be meditated on in that way Minuteness on the part of a great thmg, however, fits 10, 98 1 the case of a window and the ether

Vedanta-kaustubha

If 1t be objected —Brahman cannot be understood here as the object of meditation Why? ‘On account ofits oocupymg a small abode and on account of the designation of that ’’ That 1s, that which has a small abode, 1e 01908, viz the mdividual soul which 18 like the tap of the spoke of a wheel, 18 ‘arbhakaukas’, the state of that 18 ‘arbhakaukastvam’, on account of that,2—the resulting meanmg bemg ‘on, account of the characterisino mark of the individual soul’ That 1s to say, occupymg & muted place, viz the heart, 1s the attribute of the mdividual soul only, and not the attmbute of Brahman More over, “on account of the designation ° of smallness by that very term. (viz ‘small’), wn the passage ‘Smaller than @ gram of roe, or & barley corn’ (Chand 3148, Sat Br 10632), the mdividual soul alone 18 to be understood here, and not Brahman,—

(We reply) “No” Why? It 1s “because (Brahman) 18 to be concarved thus”,—ie “ Because (Brahman) 18 to be conceived ”’, or to be medxtated on, “thus ०, 16 as abidmg within the heart, small 17, s1ze,-——that the Highest Self 1 demgnated m that way And, hereby His omnipresence 18 not contradicted or, He 28 demgnated to be minute with the object of designatmg a particular kmd of medita tion on Him as very subtle Nor, agam, does He become small m mize (16 small like the heart) hereby, since the text ‘Greater than the earth, greater than the sky’ (Ohind 3143) speaks of the great neas of the Lord An analogous case 18 the followmg Just as the ether, though all-pervasive, 18 spoken of as occupymg a small place and as small im reference to the eye of a needle, so 1s Brahman, the topic of discussion,—this 18 the sense

1 P 806 lme 18 3 Thus explams the compound ‘arbhakaubastvdt'

[st 12 8 102 VEDANTA PARIJATA-SAURABHA ADH 1]

COMPARISON Samkara

Reading and mterpretation same He poimts out that just as the Lord of the entire universe may be appropriately said to be the Lord. of Ayodhya, so the Supreme Soul, abidmg everywhere, may very well be denoted as abiding within, the heart 1

Ramanuja

Reading same, interpretation of the word ‘vyomavac ca’ different, viz — (The Lord 1s described to be) lke the ether as well (© all pervading as well, nm that very passage, viz. Chind 3 148%)’ Hence the Lord 18 not really mmute by nature, but 1s simply designated to be so for the purpose of meditation,

Srikantha

Reading and literal mterpretataon same, though this topic 18 different, as noted above 8

Baladeva

Reading same, interpretation of the word “vyomavac oa’ different, viz ‘(The Lord though atomic as abiding withm the heart of men, 18 yet all pervading) hke the ether (as declared by the same passage, vz Chind $1434)’ And this 1s possible because the Lord 1s possessed. of inconceivable powers

SUTRA 8

^" {# IT BE OBJECTED THAT (IF BRAHMAN WEBE TO DWELL WITHIN THH HART, THEN) THERE FOLLOWS EXPERINNOS (OF PLEASURES AND PAINS), (WH REPLY ) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENOE `°

Vedanta-périjita-saurabha If 16 be objected that owing to His connection with all hearts, “there will follow experience” of pleasure and pam, on the part of

1 8 127 966 9 इल B 127 p 287, vol 1 28K B 127 p 327 Part 1 ^ 028 187 ¢ 114 Chap 1 Note the difference from Rdmdnuja

{fst 1 2 8

ADH 1] VEDSNTA KAUSTUBHA 103 Brahman, 88 on the part of the individual soul —(we reply ) no such objection, can be raised, because there 1s an, absolute difference between, the mdividual soul and Brahman, as the soul 18 an enjoyer of the fruits of the works done by itself, while Brahman 18 ever free from ANS

Vedainta-kaustabha

If it be objected Owing to 1ta connection with a amgie heart, there results experience of pleasures and pams on the part of the mdividuel soul Owing to His connection with all hearts amul taneously, there certamly resulta experience of all pleasures and. pains everywhere on the part of the all pervading Highest Self If this be ao, then, the Highest Self, as the enjoyer of pleasures and pais, will mevitably become subject to all sorts of faults, as the mdrvidual

soul itaelf 13 Hence even the Supreme Being will be subject to karmas,——~

(Wereply ) “No” “On account of difference (vaiéesyit)” The word “vaisesyat’’ 1s formed by adding the suffix ‘syafi’ to the word ‘videsa” in an identical sense, (viz difference) or to mducate excessive difference That the mdividual soul 1s an enjoyer of the froita of works performed by itself and the Supreme Soul 1s just the opposite 18 eatablished m, Scripture, m accordance with the Smrta passage ‘Of these, He who 1s the Supreme Self 18 said to be eternal and free from the properties of matter 1 He is not affected even by the fruit, as a lotus leaf 18 not touched by water The active self, on the other hand, 1s another, who 18 lable to release and bondage’ (Mah& 18 13764 18766 >}, and the declaration of the Lord Himself ‘Works do not affect me, I have no desire for fruits of works’ (Gité 414) Thus, on account of an absolute difference between these two, 1४ follows that the mdividual soul alone experiences pleasures and pams, and not the Supreme Soul Hence 1b 18 estabhshed that that which conasta of mimd and has the breath for xta body, 28 none but the Highest Self

Here ends the section, entatled ‘Celebrity everywhere’ (1)

1 One 16 omrtted, wiz ‘San Ndrdyana sfeyah sarvdéimd purugo hs sats 2 P 852 119059४ 9 10 vol 8

[80 12 8 104 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1 ]

COMPARISON Samkara

Reading and literal mterpretation same Here, too, he 18 forced to add his usual explanation that the difference between the dividual soul and Brahman 18 not real, but only phenomenal 1

Ramanuja

Interpretation of the word “vaidesy&t’ different Accordmg to Nimbarka, ‘vaiéesyit ’ means ‘on account of the difference of nature between, the mdividual soul and Brahman’, while according to Raémfnuya, 1+ means ‘on account of the difference of the cause of enjoyment’*, 16 it 18 not abidmg withm the body which 18 the 09086 of undergomg pleasure and pam, but bemg subject to karmas, which 18 never possible in the case of the Lord 8

Bhiskara

Reading and interpretation same The example cited 1s appro- priate—Sumply because the Lord abides withm the heart, 16 does not follow that He shares ita experiences, for there 18 no rule that oo- existence and the consequent miter relation umply the shammg of the same attributes The ether,eg though m connection with a burnmg place, does not burn itself 4

Srikantha

Reading and literal mterpretation same, though the topo 18 different, as noted. above 9

1§B 128 p 968

9 ‘Hetu-varcdenyit *

8 {ति B 128 p 288, vol 1

«Bh B 128, p 40

8 8K B 128, pp 327 e seg, Part 4

[st 12 9 ADE 2] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 105

Adhikarana 2 The section ontitled ‘The eater’ (Sitras 9 10)

SUTRA 9

“THR HATER (18 BRAHMAN), ON ACCOUNT OF THE COMPREHENSION (08 TAKING, IB DREVOURING) OF THH MOVABLE AND THE IM MOVABLE ”’

Vedanta-périjata-saurabha

In the text ‘He to whom both the Br&ihmana and the Kgatriya are the food and death the condiment, who thus knows where He 16?’ (Katha 2 251), the eater 1s the Lord, the Highest Person, “on account of the comprebension, (or taking, 16 devouring)” ४ of the food which has death for ita condiment, 1e of the Universe, conmstmg of the movable and the 1mmovable, mplied by the terms ‘Brahmans’ and ‘Keatriya’

Vedanta-kaustubha

In the precedmg section, after having shown that the text “All this, venly, 18 Brahman’ (Chind 3141) and so on refera to Brahman, the author has shown also the absence of any experience of pleasure and pam due to karma on the part of Brahman Now, by showing that the text ‘He, of whom the Brahmana’ (Katha 225) and so on refers to Him, he removes the suspicion that, as before, He cannot be an eater of the movable and the mmmovable 8

In the Katha valli 1b 1s recorded ‘He, to whom both the Br&h mana and the Ksatriya are the food and death the condiment, who thus knows where He 18 १ ` (Katha 225) Here by the word ‘food’ edible objects are understood, and by the words ‘of whom’, indicatmg connection, an eater 18 understood A doubt arwes, viz whether the eater here 18 fire, or the dividual soul, or the Supreme Soul, since here all the three have been referred to before What 1s reasonable

15K B 128 pp 397 ® seq, Part 4

9 It 18 not clear what Nenbdrka means exactly by the term ‘grahana here It may mean appropriately both understandimg and taking or devour ing वह) Brahman 18 the eater because the movabie and the mmmovable are understood as the food hare or because the movable and the ummovable are devoured 88 the food here

The same remarks apply to Srinwdsa’s mterpretation

9 Ie it may be thought thet amce Brahman not an enjoyer, as shown above He cannot be an eater too

[7 1 2 10 106 VEDANTA PABRIJATA SAURABHA ADH 2]

here? If1t be suggested First, let fire be the eater here, because 1४ 18 well known to have the power of burning the Brihmana and the Ksatnya and because the scnptural text —‘Fire 18 the eater of food’ (Brh, 146) declares so Or, let the mdividual soul be the eater, because 1t 18 well known to be an enjoyer, because the scmptural text ‘Of the two, the one tastes sweet berry’ (Svet 46, Mund 311) declares so, and finally, because 17, the preceding section, (viz Br St 1 2 8) 1t alone has been established to be an enjoyer In accordance with, the negative text ‘Without eatmg’ (Svet 46, Mund 31 1), as well as on the ground of the negation of experience in the preceding section (viz Br Sa 1 2 8), the Highest Self cannot be understood as the eater here,—

We reply Here the eater can posmbly be the Highest Self alone Whence 18 thisknown? ‘“ On account of the comprehension (or taking, 16 devouring +) of the movable and the mmmovable,” 16 because here the movable and the rmmovable are understood to be the food If 1t be objected that the words ‘movable’ and ‘immovable’ are not found here,—{we reply ) It may be 80, (yet that does not falafy our view), because by the terms ‘Brihmana’ and ‘Ksatriya’, the movable and the ummovable are understood metaphorically, and because there bemg & natural connection between death and the movable and the mmovable, that food which has death for 108 condiment, viz the movable and the ummovable, 1s understood here Hence the eater 18 the Highest Self, the destroyer of the Universe,—this 18 the resulting meaning, for neither fire, nor the individual soul, can possibly be the eater of the entire world The text ‘Without eating’ (Svet 46, Mund 311) denies any experience of the fruits of works on the part of the Lord

SOTRA 10 “AWD ON ACCOUNT OF THE TOPIO”’

Vedanta-piarijata-saurabha

The eater 18 the Lord, the Highest Person, because He alone 18 mentioned as the topic of discussion in the text ‘The great, the all pervading ` (Katha 2 22 3)

2 See footnote (2), previous page 2R SE.

fst 1 2 11 ADE 3] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 107

Vedinta-kaustubha

As the Highest Self 18 mentioned as the topio of discussion m the texts “Knowmg the great, all pervasive self’ (Katha 2 22), ‘By him 18 (He) attamable, whom alone he chooses’ (Katha 228 Mund 8 223), and as a peculiar mark of the Lord, viz unmtelhgibleness, 18 mentioned in, the passage ‘Who thus knows where He 18?’ (Katha 2 25), 10 18 established that the eater 1s the Highest Self alone

Here ends the section entitled “The eater’ (2)

Adhikarana 3 The section entitled ‘The cave’ (Sitras 11-12)

SUTRA 11

^ THR SOULS ENTERED INTO THE CAVE (ARH THE INDIVIDUAL SOUL 4ND THE SuPeREME Soul), BECAUSE THAT IS SEEN”

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

In the text “There are two, drmking of mghteousnesa in the world of good deeds, entered mto the cave’ (Katha 311), the two souls, entered into the cave, should be known to be two sentient bemgs, viz the individual soul and the Supreme Soul Why! “ Be cause that 18 seen’’, 16 because 1t 18 found that this section desig nates the entermg of these two alone,—of the Supreme Soul in, the passage ‘Him, who 18 difficult to see, who has entered into the hidden, who 18 hidden in the cave’ (Katha 2122) and of the mdividual soul in the passage ‘She, who arises with the vital breath, who 1s Adit, who 18 made of the dertzes, who, entering into the cave, abides theremn, who was manifested through the elements ` (Katha 4 7 3)

Vedanta-kaustubha

It has been pointed ont above that the Supreme Soul, the topic of discussion and the object to be meditated on, 1s the eater of the movable and the mmmovable, and that He 1s difficult to be known, as declared by the text ‘Who thus knows’ (Katha 226) Now, by

18 R Bh AK B #8 R, Bh, SK, 3 $ ए 2

[st 1 2 11 108 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 4775 3]

teaching the following attributes of the Lord—viz ‘bemg easily attamable’, ‘bemg easly knowable’ and the rest—which result from His close assomation (with the individual soul1),—to one who desires for salvation, who desires to attam, His nature, who desires to know Hm, and who 18 submerged mm the pit of mundane existence consisting of the movable and the mmmovable, the author 1s showing that the text ‘Righteousness’ (Katha 3 1) and so on refers to the Lord

Immediately after the above quoted text, we find the following 7 the Katha valli ‘There are two, drinking of righteousness in the world of good deeds, entered 17000 the cave, m the highest upper region Those who know Brahman, speak of them as “lght” and “‘ahade’’, as well as those who maintam the five sacred. fires,? and. those too who thrice kmdle the Naciketas fire’® (Katha 31) Here a doubt arses as to whether here buddhi and the individual soul are designated as entered mto the cave, or the individual soul and the Supreme Soul? What 1s reasonable here? If 1t be suggested. Buddhi and the mdividual soul,—because m accordance with the statement ‘“Hntered mto the cave’ (Katha 31), entermg into a cave 18 mpossible on the part of the Supreme Soul who 18 all pervasive, because 10 18 umposaible for the Supreme Bemg who has all His desires fulfilled to be the enjoyer of the fruits of works, as stated m the passage ‘Drinking of mghteousness’ (Katha 31), because any connection with the “world of good deeds’,—1e with the world where one enjoys the fruits of the works done by one’s self, viz the body generated by works,—is impoasible on His part, and, finally, because a question 18 found, seeking to know the individual soul as different from एतत, viz ‘“There 1s this doubt when a man 18 dead some saying, ‘He 1s’, others, “He 18 not’ This I should know, as taught by you”’ (Katha 120) Henose, these two alone (viz buddh and mdrvidual soul) are established by this text,—

1 Ie the Lord abides with the mdrvidual soul in the same place wiz the heart, and as such 18 easily knowable and atbamable by 1b

2 "एक Anvdidrya-pacana or Dakgya Gérhapatya, Ahavantya Sabhya, and Avasthya MW p 577, Col 8

2 VideMW,p 458, 001 2

^ The sense 18 Nacwkeid wanta to know here what happens to the soul after death, 1 8 he wants to know the self as 0187158 from the body buddhi and so on Hence, m reply Yama must speak of the mdrvidual sovl and buddh:, and aa such the passage 70. question must deal with these two alone

fat 1 2 11 ang 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 109

We reply ‘The souls entered mto the cave, viz the heart, are two sentient bemgsalone IJf1t be objected The entarmg of the individual soul stands to reason, since 16 1s atomio, but entermg mto a cave 18 not appropriate on the part of the Supreme Soul who 18 all pervaave, and hence the above objection remams m force,—(we reply ) No Because that is seen” That 18, because m this very Upanisad, the text ‘The Person, of the swe of merely a thumb, abides withm the soul, the Lord of the past and the future’ (Katha 412) enjoins the Supreme Soul to be looked upon as abiding withm the caves (1e hearta) of His sincere devotees m accordance with, their wishes, though He Himself 18 all pervading, because this 1s found m the texts “Hidden m the cave, dwellmg im the abyss’ (Katha 212), ‘He who knows him, hidden in the cave’ (Tait 211), and, lastly, because 7) the text ‘She, who arses with the vital breath, who 18 Adit, who 18 made of the deitues, who, entermg into the cave abides therem, who was manifested through the elaments’ (Katha 4 7), the mdividual soul 18 designated as entermg into the cave Moreover, 1m, the text ‘Dunking of mghteousness’ (Katha 31), one bemg ascertamed to be a sentzent bemg as the enjoyer of the fruzts of works, the other too must be understood to be a sentient bemg alone, because we find that in, ordinary life whenever s number 18 mentioned, bemgs of the same class are meant When, og it 1s said ‘Look out for a second for this cow’, people look out for a cow only, and not for a horse or an ass This 1s established in, the Mah’ bhasya

To the objection, viz that > question 18 found which seeks to know the imdividual soul ag driferent from buddhi,—({we reply ) the reply to this question, 1s something else, and not this text It cannot be said also that there 28 anythmg mcoonmstent m the ‘drinking of righteousness’ (Katha 3 1); since the statement ‘Drninng of nghteousness’ (Katha 31) 18 justifiable, just like the statement ‘Moen, with umbrellas are gomg’, + since 1t 18 possible to say that while the mdividual soul drmks, the other (viz the Lord) causes 10 to drink,

1 That is referrmg to a crowd of hurrying people we often say Men with umbrellaa are going’, though really only some of them are carrying umbrellas and not all Sznularly, here too, when 20 28 8610 ‘Thetwodmnkng ete what 18 really meant 18 that only one (viz the individual soul) 28 drinkmg, and not the other (viz Brahman)

[std 1 2 12 110 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 3]

and 18 as such, the causative agent, + and since 1t 18 well known every where that the Supreme Lord first experiences the fruits of the works which are performed by one who 18 whole heartedly devoted to Him, and are entrusted to Him Hereby, 1t 28 explaimed also how the Supreme Being can, abide m 9 body generated by works The sense 18 that just as ‘shade can be removed by ‘light’ and not ‘hght’ by ‘shade’, 80 the ‘light’ and the ‘shade’ (im the above text) are none but Brahman and the individual soul, the independent and the dependent

Samkara and Bhaskara

Interpretation of the phrase ‘tad darsanit’ different, viz ‘ Because 17 18 seen (that numerals denote beings of the same nature) 2

SUTRA 12 < AND ON ACCOUNT OF SPECIFICATION ”’

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

The individual soul and the Supreme Bemg alone are understood here as entered into the cave, because 11 this section those two alone are specified as the object to be worshipped and the worshipper, as the object to be known and the knower, and so on, in the texts ‘By knowing the knower of what 18 born from Brahman,? the deity to be worshipped, by revering (bim), he goes to everlasting peace (Katha 1 17 *), ‘The bridge for sacrificers’ (Katha 3 25) and 80 on

Vedanta-kaustubha

The individual soul and the Supreme Soul are to be understood. as entered within the cave “also because of the specification ”’ of those two alone The sense 18 that m this treatise (viz the Katha upanisad), the individual soul and the Supreme Soul alone are specrfied as that which approaches and the goal approached, as the thinker

1 Thatis Brahman 18 not really an agent or drinker here, but only instigates the other to drink, He 1 saad to be drmking m this sense alone

988 1212,p 272 BhB 13919, 41

8 Correct quotation Brahmajajyfa Vide 088 ed, p 8 ‘Brahkmaja ठ" may be interpreted also as Brahmajyad cdsau jfasceis

éR 5 On ot

(st 1 2 19 ADH. 4 | VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA Ill

and the object thought, mm the passages ‘Know the soul to be the charioteer, and the body the chariot’ (Katha 33), ‘He reaches the end of the road, that supreme place of Vienu’ (Katha 8 9), ‘Him, who 18 difficult to be seen, who has entered into the hidden, who 1s hidden in a cave, who dwells m the abyss, ancient,—by thmking him God, through the study of the Yoga of what relates to the self, the wise man discards joy aud sorrow’ (Katha 212) and so on Hence, 1# 18 established that the individual soul and the Supreme Soul alone are to be understood here as entered into the cave, and not buddhi and the individual soul

Here ends the section entitled ‘ The cave’ (3)

Adhikarana 4 The section entitled ‘What 18 within’ (Satras 13-18)

SUTRA 13

“THAT WHICH IS WITHIN (THE BYE 78 BRAHMAN), ON ACCOUNT OF HITTING In” Vedainta-parijita-saurabha

In the passage ‘That person who 18 seen withm the sye’ (Chand 41514), the Person “‘ withm’”’ the eye 1s the Highest Person alone, and not any one else Why? Because the attmbutes of “being the self’, ‘bemg fearless’, “being the uniter of all lovely things’, and 80 on,—mentioned in the passages = "ˆ He 18 the self”, said he, “५ This 1s the mmortal, the fearless, this 1s Brahman ” ’ (Chind 4 15 1%), ‘They call 1t the “ uniter of lovely things ` ` ` (Chand 415 2),—“ fit m” m the case of the Highest Person, alone

Vedanta-kaustubha

Now, by showing that the text “That Person who 1s seon within. the eye’ (Chind 4151) and so on refers to Brahman, the author removes the doubt, viz —In the previous passage (viz Katha 31), the individual soul and the Supreme Soul may be understood, since the dual number 1s found used But here, smoe the amgular number

18 R Bh, SK B 9 6, R Bh

[87 1 2 13 112 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]

18 used, who (viz the individual soul or the Supreme Soul) 18 to be understood ?

We read under the Upakodala vidy& 117, the Chindogya —* ‘That Person who 18 seen within, the eye, he 18 the soul’’, said he, “* This 1s the immortal, the fearless, that 18 Brahman 6608, even if they pour clamfied butter or water on 1t, 1b goes away to both sides’ (Chand 4151) and so on Here, a doubt arises as to whether the person, taught as abiding within the eye, 1s the reflected self (16 the image of a person reflected on the eye of another), or the dividual soul, or the presidmg deity of the sense organ (viz the eye), or the Supreme Soul ‘The prima face view 18 88 follows In accordance with the statement ‘1s seen’, he may be the reflected self, because the reflected self alone 1s well known to be percervable, while the individual soul and the rest are not percelvable If 1t be said that here ‘seemg’ means scriptural insight (and not actual, physical perceiving),—then the mdividual soul may be that which 1s ‘within’ the eye, snce it, as the perceiver of colour and the reat, 18 in proximity to the eye 4 Or, the presiding deity of the eye 18 denoted by the word ‘person’ In accordance with the scriptural passage ‘Through his rays he 18 stationed herem’ (Brh 6 6 2), and because the all pervasive Bemg cannot possibly abide withm, the eye

With regard to it, we reply “That which 18 withnm”,1e the bemg who 1s withm the eye, 18 the Supreme Soul alone Why? “On, account of fittimg m”,1e because the attmbutes of “bemg the self’, ‘fearlessness’, and 80 on, “fit m,’’ m the case of the Supreme Soul alone Although ‘bemg the Self’ and the rest are not mcompatible with the real nature of the dividual soul, yet when the term ‘Brah man,’ (in the text) can be understood in 18 primary 86786; 1४ 18 not proper to take 10 as implymg some other sense Moreover, ‘fearless ness ’, too, 18 not appropriate in the case of any one, other than Brahman, as known also from the text ‘Through fear of Him the wind blows, through fear of Him the sun mses, through fear of Him fire and Indra, and death as fifth, speed along’ (Tart 281), and further because the attributes of “bemg the uniter of all lovely things’ and the

1 Te 1t 18 the soul which really perceives colour eta and not the eye rtaelf but the soul percerves them. through the eye and 18 as such im close proxmuity to the eye Hence as the soul 1s mtuated very near to the eye 16 18 called the person within the eye

fst 1 2 14 ADH 4] VEDANTA PABLIJATA SAURABHA 118

rest, mentioned m the sacred text ‘They call this “the uniter of all lovely thmgs’’+, because all lovely things come together to hun’ (Ohind 4 16 2), “He 1s also “the leader to all blesmng’’? because he leads to all blessings’ (Chind 4153), ‘He also 18 “the leader to hight ’’8, because he shines 1n all the worlds’ (Chand 4 16 4), “fit m’’ m the case of the Supreme Soul alone ‘Samyadvaima’ implies one from whom the ‘vimas’, 1e the fruits of karmas ‘come together’, 1 6 one who 1s the cause of the mse of all frmta of karmas This very thing 18 stated mm the above text thus —‘Because’, 16 since, ‘the lovely things’ ‘oome together’, 1 6 arise from ‘this’,1e the Person witbin the eye, the cause In the text ‘He 18 also the ‘vAamant’, the ‘viman!’ imples one who ‘leads’, 1 6 causes people, to attam the ‘vimas’ or auspicious objects This very thing 1s stated in the passage ‘Because he 16868 to all blessmgs’ In the text “He also is the bh&mani’, the ‘ bhimani’ mmphes one who leads to the ‘bhiimas’,1e one who manifesta all objecta ‘This very thing 18 stated in the text ‘Because he shines m all the worlds’,—this 1s the meanmg of the text

SUTRA 14 “‘AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION OF PLACE ’”’

Vedainta-paérijata-saurabha

“And on account of the demgnation of the place”’ of the Supreme Soul, m the text “He who abiding within the sun’ (Brh 37 184), the Person within the sun 18 none but He

Vedanta -kaustubha

To the objection, viz How can an all pervadmg bemg be deagnated as ocoupying a small locality, the reverend author of the aphorisms rephes here

The Person within the eye oan be the Supreme Soulalone Why? “On, account of the designation of place”,1e because of the designa taon of the abode of the Lord, the Highest Person alone, the cause of all causes, the inner soul of all, and the object to be meditated by all, because one who occupies one part cannot properly dwell m another

~ Samyadvdma = Vdmant — 4 8, R, Bh, SK, B

[80 1 2 16 114 VEDINTA PABIJETA SAURABHA ADH 4]

If 1t be objected How can an all pervadmg bemg abide m ॐ small localty,—({we reply ) No moonmstency whatsoever 18 involved here Just as fire, though all pervading, becomes viable in clouds and the rest m the form of hghtnmg and so on through 108 own, greatness, so the Lord, though all pervadmg, becomes visible m the eye and the rest through His own spemal powers, for the sake of falfillmg the desire of His devotees The words “and so on” mean — On, account of the designation of the form of the Supreme Soul, suitable to Him, and fit for alidmg im place,! celebrated m, the followmg passages — ‘Now, this Golden Person who 18 seen, within, the sun, has & golden beard, golden hair’ (Chind 1 6 6), ‘He sees the Person, lymg im, the crty, who 1s higher than the highest aggregate of souls’ (Prana 55) “The Person, of the mze of merely & thumb, smokeless ke hght’ (Katha 413) and so ०६, 16 on account of the designation of the form of the Lord by the expreasion ‘The Person who 18 seen’ 2 (Chind 4151) By the term “and” His power of manifestang Himself in forms, a8 desired, 171, the eye, m the heart and the like, 18 mdicated

SUTRA 15 “ON ACCOUNT ALSO OF THE MENTION ONLY OF WHAT 78 OHARAG THRIEHD BY PLEASURE ”

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

That which 1s within the eye 1s the Supreme Being alone, “on account also of the mention of what 1s characterized by pleasure” in the passage “Pleasure 1s Brahman, the ether 1s Brahman’ (Chand 41043)

Vedinta-kaustubha

The Person withm the eye is the Highest Person alone, the cause

of the world, and not any one 6196 Why! “Qn account also of the mention of what 1s characterized by pleasure’ That 1s, m the

+ Te unless the Lord has © form, He cannot abide anywhere Hence the body of the Lord enahlea Him. to abide in the eye and so on

> le that Person within the mum has a form 1s evident from the word ‘seen for a bodileas bemg cannot be seen

8 8 R Bh, 4k B

[st 1 2 16 ADH 4] VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAUBABHA 116

introductory text ‘The vital breath, 18 Brahman, pleasure 18 Brahman, the ether 18 Brahman’ (Chind 4104), pleasure that 1 Brahman, 1e Brahman charactemzed by pleasure, 28 mentioned, and that alone 18 referred to here

SUTRA 16 “ALSO FOR THAT VERY REASON, THAT 18 BRAHMAN ””

Vedanta -parijata-saurabha

“That”,1¢6 pleasure, 18 “Brabman”’,16 Brahman, alone 18 charac- terized by pleasure Why? On account also of the text, establshmg their mutual specification 1, viz “What, verily, 1s pleasure, that 18 the ether , what 18 the ether, that 1s pleasure’ (Chind 4 10 69)

Ved&inta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz: The word ‘pleasure’ conventionally denotes wordly pleasure, 80 how can 1t be said that Brahman 18 characterzed by pleasure {—the reverend teacher of the Veda replies here

“That 1s Brahman `` This means that in that mtroductory text, Brahman alone, charactenzed by pleasure, 18 mentioned and not worldly pleasure Why? “Also for that very reason,” 16 on account also of the text mtmmatmg thex mutual specafication, viz ‘What, verily, 18 pleasure that 1s the ether, what 1s the other, that 18 pleasure’ (Chand 4105), for worldly pleasure cannot consstently refer to an all pervading substance—denoted by the term ‘etber’—as non different from itself

COMPARISON

Samkara, etc This Siitra 1s omitted by Samkara, Bhiskara and Baladeva

Ramfinuja

Reading different, viz ‘Ata ova ca 89 Brahma’ Interpretation too different, viz ‘Hor that very reason (1e because the ether 18 characterized. by pleasure), that (viz the ether) 1s Brahman,’ ®

1 1 8 ha (pleagure) qualifies kha (ether) and vice versa 9 R, SK

8 St B 126 pp 252 258, Part ]

[8८ 1 2 17 1168 VEDANTA PABLIATA SAURABHA ADH 4]

Srikantha

Reading different, viz ‘Ata eva sa Brahma’ Interpretation too different, viz exactly hke R&mé&nuja’s 7

SUTRA 17 “ALSO ON ACCOUNT OF THE MENTION OF THE PATH OF ONE WHO HAS HEARD THE UPANISAD ``

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

“The path’, called ‘the path of gods’, “‘of one who has heard the Upanigad.”’ 16 celebrated 1n another scriptural text, viz “Now those who seek the soul by austerity, chastaty, faith and knowledge, win the sun by the northern path ‘That, verily, 1s the abode of the vital breaths, that 18 1mmortal, that 18 fearless, that 1s the highest goal From that they do not return’ (Prasna 110%) “On account also of the mention” of that very “path” here m the text ‘They pasa over to light’ (Chand 415 6 8), the Person within the eye 18 none but the Highest Person +

Vedanta-kaustubha

For this reason, too, the person within the eye 1s the Supreme Soul,—so says the reverend author of the aphorisms

That through which bondage 1s broken 18 Upammad, the know ledge of the Supreme Soul, or that which leads one to attam the Supreme Soul 28 Upanisad, the knowledge of the Supreme Soul The treatase relating to that 18 also Upamisad “Srutopanwatka” 1s one by whom the Upanwad has been directly heard from a teacher, he 18 a knower of Brahman, the Mysterious “The path’”’ which, as cele brated mm another Scripture and im the अपप, belongs to him, 16 18 his way to attaming Brahman who 1s establshed in thé Upanigads,— that very path 1s mentioned here too as belongmg to one who knows the person withm the eye Jor this reason too,1e “on account

18K 2 1216 p 360, Part 4

» 8, R, Bh 9 8 R 21, 2

That 18, the worshipper of the person within the eye follows the same path followed by the worshzpper of Brahman This proves thet the person withm the eye 18 Brahman

[इत 1 2 17 ADH 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 117

of the mention of the path of one who has heard the Upanjsad”, the person, within the sun 18 the Supreme Self,—this 16 the sense

Thus, the path, which 1 said to be followed by a knower,—so that he may attam Brahman,—in another scriptural text, viz ‘Now, those who seek the soul by austerity, chastity, faith and knowledge, win, the sun by the northern path That, verily, 18 the abode of the vital breaths, that 18 immortal, that 15 fearless, that 18 the highest goal From that they do not return’ (तक 110), 88 well as m the Smrta passage, viz “Wire, ight, day, the bnght fortmght, the six months of the sun’s northern progress,—through these do the knowers of Brahman go to Brahman on departing’ (Gita 8 24),— that very path 18 said to belong to one who knows the person within the eye, in the followmg passage ‘Now, whether they perform obsequies in the case of such 9 person, or not, (the dead) pass over to hight, from hght to the day, from the day to the waxmg fortnight, from the waxing fortnight to the mx months during which the sun moves northwards, from the months to the year, from the year to the sun, from the sun, to the moon, from the moon to lghtnmg Then there 18 © non human Person, He leads them to Brahman This 1s the path of the gods, the path to Brahman Those who go by it do not return to this human, whirlpool,—they return not’ (Chand 41556) Hence, the person withm the sun 18 none but the Supreme Soul

The meaning of the text (viz Praéna 1 10) 18 as follows — ' Now’, 16 after the fall of the body, they ‘wm’, 168 attam the sun, “by the northern path’, 1e through the path beginning with hght and 80 on Then, through the moon and the rest, m the order to be demgnated hereafter, they attam the nature of Brahman By domg what? Through the three kinds of ‘austemty’, mentioned by the Lord,* or else through the ‘austerity’ which 1s the special duty of a Vana prastha 8 and a Samny&sin,‘ both bemg primarily given to austerity,

1 See below, p 119 Videalso VE 435

2 Vide Gité 17 14-16, where three kinds of austerity (fapas) are spoken of viz Sirira, Vdn-maya and Mdnasa These, agai may be of three kmds, viz sdiimka rdjasa and ईन 5176 17 16-22

3 A Brahmm m the third stage of life who has passed through the stages of © student and. house holder and has abandoned. his hfe and family for an ascetic 1178 m the forest

« A Brahmm mm the fourth stage of hfe a religious mendicant, who has given up all earthly concerns

[st 1 2 17 118 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]

‘through faith’,1e through vidyé, which 1s a mental disposition given to the worship of the feet of the teacher, 16 through meditation, aniaing from the hearmg and the thmking of the Ved&nta, and men tioned m the text ‘The self should be meditated on’ (Brh 245, 456),—one should, seeking the self, meditate on 1t,—this 1s the grammatical construction By the phrase ‘through chastity’, the text shows the particular stage of life which 1s congenial to the hearing, the thinkmg and the rest of the Vedinta By chastity and the hke, not only the duties, incumbent on, special stages of life, are to be understood That those who are destatute of any devotion for Brah man, but merely belong to one or other of the stages of life and are devoted to the duties, mcumbent thereon, return once more and attam the world, 18 declared by the reverend Par&idara in & passage, which begins ‘The Pr&jipatya 18 for the Brabmanas’ and ends “The Brihma 18 declared m अत to be for the Samnyaemns’ That those who, among these, are devoted to the Supreme Brahman, attam His world, 18 mentioned im the passage “Those ascetics who are devoted to Brahman alone, who ever meditate on Brahman, to them belong that supreme place, which, verily, the wise see’ 6008, the V&na-prastha and the rest should be understood as mmplymg devotion to the Supreme Brahman, (and not as mere dutses incum bent on different stages of life) By ‘chastity’ 18 meant here the religious duties pursued by the Naisthikas 7 who lead a life of chasinty and are absolutely free from all demres for enjoyment, here or here after The sense 18 that the search for Brahman should properly be made through such 9 permanent vow 9 of ‘chastity’

The sacred duty called ‘chastity’ 18 stated by the all knowmg ‘Law of Salvation’ 2 under the section called ‘Vargneya-adhy&tma’, thus “This unbroken chastity which 1s the form of Brahman 18 higher than all reigious practices By 1t, (people) reach the highest goal’ (Mab& 1277704) Under the section treatmg of mstruction,

1 A Noasgiiska 16 ॐ perpetual religious student, who observes the vow of ohashty MW,p 570, 00 1

Sle ° Brahme-odrya’ (= chastity) in the ordinary sense of the term means temporary chasitty which 9 student has to observe ao long as he has not entered the stege of a house holder But here the term means permanent chastity which © Naswtka, e g practines

ठ Mokea-dharma

# P 640 line 40, vol ॐ, Amiatic Somety ed

fst 1 ॐ 17 apH 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 119

it 18 sald ‘Lasten, O Father Yudhisthira, to the ments of chastity He who leads a life of chastaty from birth to death, and practises the “Great Vow”, there 1s nothing, know, O King, that 1s unattamable by him Many milhons of Vrgs dwell m the world of Brahman, those who are truthful, ever self controlled, leading © life of chastaty Chas tity 18 a supreme duty, honoured in all stages of 118, and 1f resorted to, chastity burns, 0 King, allems’,andsoon In accordance with the scriptural text, viz ‘Desirmg which people practice chastity, that word I tell you m bmef’ (Katha 215), as well as m accordance with the statement by the Lord, vz ‘“ Demrmg which people practise chastaty, that word I will tell youm bref” ’ (08 8 11), chastity alone 18 the chief means to the supreme region ‘The repetition of the means, to be mentioned hereafter m the aphorsm ‘Repetition, more than, once, because of teaching’ (Br Si 411), may also be resorted to by a Naisthike

The text ‘This verly’ (last portaon of Prana 110) and so on indicates Brahman, who 18 to be attaimed through the path which begms with light, and to be enquired mto

(The meanmg of the text—Ohbind 4155 6—18 as follows ) ‘Now’, 16 when he 18 dead, whether people perform proper funeral ceremonies or do not perform them, m either case, the wise, un obstructed m, their progress, and wishing to attam the nature of the Lord, attain the premdmmg deity of light, through that the day, after that, they successively attam, the presidmg derties of fortnight, the six months of the northern progress of the sun, the year, the wind or the world of gods, the sun, the moon, bghtumg the worlds of the king of water (16 Varuna) and Indra, then the world of Prajipati After that, breaking through the sphere of prakrti, they atiam, the Viraj&, the best of rivers and formmg the boundary of the supreme place After having crossed that river and having entered the world of Vigmn,—oalled ‘supreme void’, ‘supreme place’, ‘world of Brah man” asd so on, havmg the stated marks,’ and unapproachable by those who are averse to the Lord,—they roam about, attammg the nature of Brahman,—this 18 the resulting meanmg This we shall expound in details m the fourth chapter? ‘This 1s the path of Gods’, because 1t 18 characterized by having Gods as the conductors It 18 the ‘path to Brahman’, because 16 18 the way to Brahman, the object

i Vide VE 111 8vVideVE 435

[80 1 2 18 120 VEDANTA PLRIJATA SAURABHA ADH 4]

to be enquired into and the object to be attained ‘Those who go by rt’‘do not return’,1e do not enter any more, through the mfluence of Kkarmas, mto ‘this human whirlpool’, 1e the material world, figuratively implied by the creation, of mankind, and subject to re currence (which 18 indicated by the term ‘whirlpool’), —as declared by the Lord Himself m the passage ‘“The worlds, beginnmeg from tho world of Brahma, come and go, 0 Arjuna But, on attammg mo, O son, of Kuni, there 18 no rebirth”’’ (Gita 816) The difference of the world of Brahman from the sphere of matter 1s stated m the Moksa dharma under the dialogue between Jaigiga and Vy&sita in, the passage which begms ‘A man of what nature, of what conduct, of what Jearning, of what valour does attam the place of Brahman which 18 higher than prakri, and eternal’’?’, and ends “He attams the place of Brahman which 1s higher than prakrti, and eternal’’’ (1818 12 9968 9969 ?)

SUTRA 18 “ON ACCOUNT OF NON ABIDING, AS WELL 4S ON ACOOUNT OF IMPOSSIBILITY, NOT THA OTHER ”’

Vedainta-parijata-saurabha

That which 1s withm, the eye cannot be any one “other’’ than the Highest Self Why? Because any one other than Him does not regularly abide therem, and because mmmortality and the rest are not possible on rts part

Vedinta-kauatubha

“The other’’,16 the reflected self, or the mdrvidual soul, or the presiding de1ty of the eye, m short, any one other than the Supreme Soul,—ais not the Person withm the eye Why? “On account of non-ebiding 7, 1e because any one other than the Supreme Soul, does not regularly abide m, the eye, since the presence of the reflected. soul in the eye depends on, the nearness of another person, to the oye, (and hence when, the person, moves away, there 1s no reflection any longer), smce the individual soul 1s connected with all the sense organs (and cannot, therefore, abide withm the eye only), and since the

1 © 716, lmes 23 23, vol 8 For full quotation see under VK 1318

[st 1 2 19 ADH 6] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 121

presiding deity 18 declared to abide m the eye through the rays, (and hence does not hrmself abide withm the eyes1), and finally, because ummortality, fearlessness, “bemg the uniter of lovely things’ and the reat are not possible on the part of any one other than Him Hence, it 18 established that the Highest Soul alone 18 to be worshipped as the person withm the eye

Here ends the section entitled ‘That which 1s within’ (4)

COMPARISON Srikantha

Interpretation, different, viz he takes this sitra as formmg an. adhikarana by itaelf, concerned with the question, whether the Person, of the mze of a thumb merely, (Mah&n&r 16 3) 18 the Lord or someone elso Thus ‘(The person, of the size of a thumb, 1s the Lord), because of the instability (16 unsuitableness), as well as because of the impossibilty (of the attributes of “having the entire world as the body’’, “bemg the devourer of the entire world”’, and so on, on, the part of any one else)’ 9

Adhikarana 6 The section entitled ‘The inner controller’ (Stitras 19-21)

SUTRA 19

‘Ta INNER CONTROLLER IN THH PRESIDING DEITIES AND THE REST, AND IN THE WORLDS AND THE REST (18 THE Higuast SHELF), ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION OF His QuaLriiss ** 8

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

The inner controller,—mentioned repeatedly m all the versions in reference to the presidimg deities of the earth and the rest, m the passage which begms ‘He who, abiding withm the earth’, and

1 Vide अल B 1118, p 854, Part 1

SK 2 1118, ए 364-66, Part 4

8 Of the different readings—EK SS ed and Bmndaban ed read ‘adhs devids O8S ed reads ‘adhsdawddhs’

[80 1 2 19 122 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 5]

continues ‘He 1s your soul, the mner controller’ (Brh 37 3*),— 18 the Highest Self alone Why? “On account of the designation of His qualtties”’ here, viz “bemg the controller of all’ and so on

Vedanta-kaustubha

Now, the author pomta out that just as the text about the Person within the eye refers to Brahman, so the text about the mner controller, too, refers to Brahman, and to none else

The inner controller, 1e the controller who abides within, who 18 repeatedly mentioned m the Brhadiranyaka, under the section treating of the mner controller, पा all the versions 1) reference to the presiding deities of the earth, the sky, the ether and the rest, ण the passage which beginning ‘Who controls from within this world and the other world and all bemgs’ (Brh 371), contamues ‘He who, dwellmg within the earth, 18 other than the earth, whom the earth does not know, of whom the earth 16 the body, who controls the earth withm—He 18 your soul, the inner controller, mmmortal 2’ (Brh 3 7 3), and so on, aud who 18 taught, after that,—m the text which begms ‘He who abiding 1n all the worlds’ (Sat Br 1467178) and onds ‘He who abiding withm the soul’ (Sat Br 1467 804),—by a section, which enjoms him with m reference to the worlds, the Vedas, the sacrifices and. the soul 5.—15 such an, muer controller, a deity, or an individual soul, or the Highest Self, the one topic of all the Vedas? What 18 reasonable here? He may be 9 presiding deity, or an indtv1 dual soul, because these two abide everywhere

With regard to this, we reply The mnef controller mentaoned im all the versions 171 reference to the presidimg deities of the earth, fire, sky, ether, air, sun and the rest, can be the Highest Self alone

18 R Bh, SK,B 9 This 28 repeated at the end of each verse from Brh 8 7 3-8 7 23 3 P 107 lme & 4 Op ot, line 18

५ The Kdnve branch demgnates a bemg abiding within the earth and the reat (vide Beh 873-28) The Mddhyandina branch, after designating a bemg abiding withm the earth and eo on (vide Sat Br 1467716) reads three additonal texts, viz "He who dwells m all the worlds , ‘He who dwells m all the Vedas’ and He who dwells in all the sacrfices, and m place of He who dwells m mtelligence (Brh $722) > text He who dwells m the soul’ (Vide Sat Br 146717-80) Note that Nembdrka makes no reference to this Mdadhyandsa addition. in lug commentary, although 16 8 alearly indicated im the eilira by the word lokddsgu’

[at 1 2 19 ADH 5] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 123

Wherefore? “On account of the demgnation, of His quahties”’,1e on account of the designation here of the peculiar qualities of the Highest Self, viz “bemg the governor of all worlds, Vedas, sacrifices, bemgs, vital breaths, soul and the rest’, “bemg the mmer controller of all’, ‘bemg immortal’ and soon Hence a deity cannot be understood, because a deity, too, 18 but an mdividual soul and the stated qualities are not appropriate on his part, and because 111 that case, the statement that the mner controller 13 unknowable by the earth god, yz “Whom the earth does not know’ (Brh 373), becomes mconsustent The individual soul, too, 18 not the mner controller, for the stated qualities are not appropriate on 108 part as well, and because m the passage ‘He 18 your soul, the mner controller’ (Brh 377 3, etc ), rt 18 declared to be different from the mner controller by the use of the genetive case ( = “your’), designating difference

COMPARISON Samkara This 18 siitra 18 m Samkara bhisya ‘Reading different, viz ‘ Antaryamyadhidaiviidigu * 1, 16 omits ‘lok&disn’ Ramanuja

Reading lke the Chowkhamba edition? Interpretation different, viz exactly hke Srintvisa’s Nimbirka reads ‘lokidign’ m the siitra, hke Ram&nuja, but gives no meaning of the word “lokAdigu’

Bhaskara and Srikantha

This 18 sutra 18 m bs commentary Reading lke the Chow khamba edition, 9 Baladeva

Ths 18 sfitra 18 10 his commentary Readmg different, viz hke Samkara’s ¢

1§B 1218, p 282

2 उत B 1219, p 257, vol 1

‡ Bh B1218,p 48 SK B 1310 p 868 Part 4 «GB 1218(p 128 Chap 1)

[st 12 20 124. VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 5]

SUTRA 20

“AND (THE INNER CONTROLLER 78) NOT THAT WHICH IS DESIGNATED IN THH SMRTI, ON ACCOUNT OF THE MHNTION OF QUALITIES NOT BELONGING TO IT”

Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

And, pradhina 18 not denoted by the term “imner controller”, “on account of the mention,” of the qualties of a sentient bemg, viz ‘beg the controller of all’, ‘bemg the seer of all’ and so on

Vedanta -kaustubha

Although pradhina has already been, set aaide unde: the apho- riam ‘Because (he) sees, not, it 18 non somptural’ (Br Si 1158), yet it 1s bemg set aside once more appiehending the posabibty of the attributes of invisibility the rest (belonging to the mner controller alone) on 108 part 1

“That which 1s designated m the Smrta”,1e pradhinsa established. by the Samkhya Smrti, 18 not denoted by the term “immer controller” Why? “On account of the mention of qualities not belonging to it”’,—"“the qualities not belonging to 10" mean the qualities which belong to a sentient bemg,—‘‘on account of the mention”,16 declara- aon, of such qualities, mm the concluding text ‘He is the unseen seer, the unheard hearer, the unknown knower’ (Brh 3723) On account of the designation of the quahties of a sentaent bemg, vz ‘bemg the soul of all’, “bemg the governor of all’ and so on, pradhina cannot be accepted here

COMPARISON Ram&nuja and Srikantha

Reading different, viz add ‘Siriraica’, and extends the same argument to the case of the individual soul as well 2

1 That 1s pradidna 18 mvimble and the mner controller too w said to be invinble, eto (Brh 38728) Hence 1b might be thought that pradidna 1s the inner controller This w beme refuted hare

9 St B 1220,p 250, एष्ट] SE B 1220, p 372, Part 4

[80 1 2 21 ADE 5] VEDANTA PARIJITA SAUBABHA 125

SUTRA 21

“AND THRE BMBODIED ONE (IS NOT THE INNER OONTROLLER), BEOAUSH BOTH ALSO DEPICT IT AS DIFFERENT”

Vedanta -parijata-saurabha

“And”? the mdtvidual soul 1s not the mner controller, because “both” the Kanvas, ‘as well as’ the Madhyandmas depict “it” “as different’ from the mner controller, respectively mm the passages “He who abiding in intelligence’ (Brh 37 221), ‘He who abiding in the soul’ (Sat Br 1467 802)

Vedanta-kaustubha

To the objection Let then the mdividual soul, and not pradhina, be denoted by the term “imner controller’’, smce the qualities of bemg @ seer and the rest are appropriate on, the soul’s part—the author replies here

The word ‘not’ 1s to be supplied here from the preceding aphorism And the “embodied one”’,1e the soul which has entered ito a body, its abode for enjoying the fruits of 1ts own actions, 18 not denoted by the term. “imner controller’’, on account of the mention of qualities not belonging to 1t, viz ‘bemg the soul of all’, “bemg the governor of all’, ‘bemg the seer of all’ and so on, ‘for both’ the Kanvas, ‘as well as’ the Madhyandmas “depict” ‘this’, 16 the embodied one, “as different ’’ from the inner controller, mnce the embodied self 1s an abode lke the earth and the rest, and 18 an object to be governed® The Kanvas read ‘He who abidimg within intelligence’ (Brh 37 22), the Maédhyandmas read “Whom the soul does not know, of whom the soul 1s the body, who controls the soul from withiwn—He 18 your soul, the mner controller, immortal’ (Sat Br 1457380) There bemg the denial of any other seer m the passage “There 18 no seer other than Him’ (Brh 87 23), the seer of everythmg 18 the Highost Férson alone, the sense bemg that none other than, the Lord 18 the seer of everything The imdividual soul, known from the text ‘'The person alone 18 a seer, ॐ hearer’, 18 the seer of only a few thmgs m

18 R Bh दह. 28 9 2 1016, 1175 18 8, R, Bh,SK B ॐ Ie the individual soul 1s the abode, while the mner controller 28 one who abides therem, just as He abides withm the earth and the rest Agaim, the

individual soul 1s the object governed, the mner controller the governor Hence the two are different

[st 1 2 21 126 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]

contrast to Brahman, (the seer of everythmg),—such 1s the distanction (between, Brahman, and the soul, though both are seers) Here too, the difference of nature between, the individual soul and Brahman is esteabliahed by Scripture and aphorism This difference should not be understood m the sense the logimans understand 1t to exist between the mdrvidual soul and the Lord, (16 as absolute difference), but (1 omphes that the mdividual soul) 1s a part of Brahman who 18 One alone, a8 Mentioned m the text ‘Brahman,! one, without a second’ (Chand 621), without an equal or © superior, the governor, possessed. of mfinite powers and an ocean of auspicious qualities Although here in, the mtroduotory chapter, the individual soul, possessed of the stated marks, 18 said to be different from the Lord, because of 108 own peculiar qualities, mentioned in the Veda, viz “bemg an object to be controlled’ and so on,—yet just as an attribute 18 different from its substratum (yet non different from 10), so 1t 15 non different from ite own. controller, aa 1t 18 incapable of having an independent exstence or activity, and as 1t does not contradict the attributes, such as, ‘bemg one’, ‘being without a second’ and so on, belonging to the Whole of which 10 18 a part? Thus, the qualities of ‘bemg subject to bondage and release’, ‘havmg litle knowledge’ and the rest, pertam to the part, (viz the dividual soul), while the qualities of ‘bemg ever free’, “being omniscient’, “bemg unenveloped (by nescence)’, “bemg the object to be approached by the freed’ and the reat, are peculiar to Brahman, Hence, no fault of an mtermixture of qualities arises here Similarly, ‘materiality’, ‘mutability’ and the lke are the peculiar qualities of the non sentzent, a power of Brahman, while‘ omnipotence’, ‘omniscience’ and the reat, are peculiar to Brahman, the possessor of the power Although prakrti 1s different from Brahman as 9 power, yet 17 18 non. different from Brahman, as a power has no separate activity, etc Thus, a relation of difference non differance between the three realities 18 the view of the followers of the Upanisads (16 VedAntins)

Here ends the section entitled ‘The mner controller’ (5)

1 The word Brahman’ not meluded in the onginal text

ॐ Ie if the mdvidual soul were different from Brahman then 1) would have been a second principle besides Brahman and would have thereby contra 0160650 Eis Oneness But as it does not do ao, 7 musth be non different from Him

[st 1 2 22 ADH 6] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA 127

COMPARISON Ramf@nuja and Srikantha

Readmg different, viz omits ‘s&riraéca” m the begmnmg, interpretation same + Thus, accordmg to Nimb&rka, Samkara, Bhiskara and Bala deva — ‘Na 09 smirtam atad dharm&ibhiuipit’ (One siitra ) ‘Sartrascobhsye’p1 hi bhedenamam adhfyate ° (One sutra )

According to Raéménuja and. Srikantha — ‘Na ca smirtam atad dharmf&bhiliip&t इल त 09 ' (One sttra ) “Ubhaye’p1 hi bhedenamam adhiyate’ (One siitra )

Adhikarana 6 The section entitled ‘Invisibi lity’ (७१४८०७8 22-24)

SUTRA 22

“ToaT WHICH POSSHSSES THE QUALITIES OF INVISIBILITY AND 80 ON (78 उ+ ध +ल); ON ACCOUNT OF THE MENTION oF (His)

QUALITIRG ” Vedanta -padrijata-saurabha

That which 13 mentioned by the Atharvanikas in the text ‘Invisible’ (Mund 116%) and 80 on, 48 ‘possessed of the qualziies of mvisibility and the rest’, 18 the Highest Self alone Why? “On account of the mention’’ of His “qualrties’’ m the passage ‘He who 18 omniscient’ (Mund 11 9 3), eto

Vedanta-kaustubha

1 like “hemg a seer’ and the like which belong to a sentient being only Now, by showmg that the text ‘Now, the higher 18 that whereby that Imperuhable’ (Mund 115), and so on refers to Brahman, the author 18 dusposmg of the objection, viz Let pradhina

1 Si B 1222, p 260 PartI SK 2 1222 p $74, Part 1 9 8 R, Bh, SK, B 9 Op ov

[0 1 2 22 128 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]

be understood here (in, the above text), owing to the absence of that (18 owing to the fact that the above text contains no reference to the quahties of 8 sentient bemg)

In the Atharvana, 1t 18 821 ‘There are two knowledges to be known’ (Mund 114) Among these, the knowledge of works, viz the Rg veda and the rest, 18 the lower4 With a view to teaching the higher, viz the knowledge of Brahman, in contrast to 10, 1t 15 said ‘Now, the higher 1s that whereby the Imperihable 1s appre hended, that which 18 invisible, mcapable of bemg grasped, without family, without caste, without eye, without ear, 1t 28 without hands and feet, eternal, all pervasive, omnipresent, excessively subtle, 16 18 unchangeable, which the wise percerve as the source of beings’ (Mund 115 6), “Without the vital breath, without mind, pure, higher than the ligh Impernshable* (Mund 2112) and soon Here a doubt arises as to whether here the Impemshable, the source of begs and possessed of the qualities of invimbilty and the rest, 18 pradh&na, or the mdividual soul, or the Highest Self The prima facie view 18 98 follows —As mnvisibilty and such, other qualities are possible on the part of pradbina and. the individual soul, as pradh&na is established to be the source of beings, and as the individual soul too, the cause of the body and the rest through 1ts own works, can be so,—let one of these two be the Imperishable

With regard to this, we reply The Impermshable, the source of beings and possessed of the qualities of invisibility and the rest, 18 the Hughest Selfalone Why! “On account of the mention of quahties”’, 1e because in the passage “He who 18 all knowing, ommacient, whose penance consists of knowledge, from Him alone Brahman, name and form, and food arse’ (Mund 11 9), the permanent attributes of the

Self, viz omniscience, etc are stated, with a view to laying down the attributes of the imperishable, the source of beings

If 16 be objected This wew is not reasonable Having referred to the Impershable m the passage “The imperishable 1s apprehended ’ (Mund 115), then agam havymg designated the Imperishable as a पा in the passage ‘Higher than the high Impermhable’ (Mund 212), the text next goes on to designate the meaning of the word. ‘higher’ as the Highest Self, m, the passage ‘He who 18 all knowing’ (Mund 119) If here the Highest Self be understood by the word

2 Vide Mimd 115

[80 1 2 22 ADH 6] VEDANTA EAUSTUBHA 129

“Im perishable’ mm the first passage, then how can the text ‘Higher than the Impernshable, the Light’ (Mund 212) be possible, 1t bemg impossible for one to be higher than one’s own, self, and there bemng no reality higher than Brahman, the Impemshable, the cause of the world and the topic of discussion, 98 evident from the declaration by the Lord Himeelf, viz ‘“There 18 nothmg else, higher than me, 0 Dhanafijaya”’!’ (१४ ¶ 7), as well as from the scriptural text ‘There 18 nothing higher than the Person’ (Katha 311)% Hence, let either pradhina or the mdividual soul be the meanmg of the word “Impernsh able’, mentioned first, (Mund 115), and let the Highest Self, higher than that high Impenshable, be omniscient,—

(We reply ) Not so, because the word ‘Impenshable’, mentioned. for the second tre, (Mund 21 5) does not refer to the Highest Self Thus, from the knowledge, called ‘higher’,—mentaoned 1n the passage ‘The higher 1s that whereby that Impenshable 1s apprehended’ (Mund 1 1 5),—uit 18 gathered that the Impemshable 18 the Highest Brahman alone, since no other knowledge, except that of Brahman, can be high ‘Thus, having begun, with the Highest Self, denoted by the word ‘Impenshable’ and celebrated in the texts ‘He teaches in trath that knowledge of Brahman whereby one knows the Imperish able, the Person, the True’ (Mund 1213), ‘As the hams and the body hairs anwe from ® living person, so from the Imperishable arses this Universe’ (Mund 1177), ‘As from a well lit fire thousands of sparks of a mmular form emit forth, 80 do, my dear, manifold existences from the Impenshable’ (Mund 211) and so on, and with the Imper whable, possessed of the attributes of invisibility and the rest, 17 the passage ‘Now, the higher 18 that whereby that Imperishable 18 known’ (Mond 1 1 6), Serrpture, with a view to demonstratang His qualities and nature, designates Him once more as ‘higher’ than the ‘Imperish, able’,1e@ than the mdrvidual soul which 1s His own part, as well as than the ‘high’,1e pradhfina which His own power,—ie designates Hin ag their source and controller Or, else, the ‘Impermshable’ 18 that which pervades the mass of its own modifications, ‘higher’ than that mperishable 1s pradhina which 1s superior to 108 own, 7007909 tions, and ‘higher’ than this pradh&na 18 the Highest Self Or, else, the Supremes Person 1s ‘higher’ than the Person, withm the aggregate (or Hhranyagarbha) who 1s higher than the Impenshable, viz pradh&na, —this 18 the sense

[80 1 2 28 130 VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA ADE 6]

SUTRA 23

«° ATSO ON ACOOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION OF ATTRIBUTES AND DIFFERHNCH, NOT THH TWO OTHERS `

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

Pradhina and the individual soul are not denoted by the words ‘Impershable, the source of bemgs’, “on account of the designation. of attmbutes and difference’ The demgnation of atimbutes 18 "All pervading’ (Mund 1 1 6 4), and the designation of difference 18 ‘Higher than the high Impermhable’ (Mund 21 23)

Vedanta-kaustubha

«The two others ”’,1e pradhina and the soul, are not mdicated as the Impershable, the source of bemgs, but the Highest Self alone Why? “ Also on account of the demgnation of attributes and differ ence” That is, the attribute ‘All pervadmg’ (Mund 116) m the text concerned excludes pradhina and the mdzvidual soul from bemg the Impershable, the source of bemgs,—on, sccount of that, m, the text ‘Higher than the high Impernshable’ (Mund 21 2), the difference of the Imperuhable, the source of bemgs, from these two 18 designated,—on account of that as well

COMPARISON Raminuja and Srikantha

They interpret this siitra m, the same way ‘The word ‘videsana’ interpreted differently, viz “Because this section distinguishes the Imperishable from pradhdna and the individual soul, ance 1t ams at proving that through the knowledge of one there 18 the knowledge of all’ 3

1 Not quoted by others

9 &, 7, Bh, SK

3 St 2 1223 p 364 एषः] &K B 1228 p 383, Part 4

[ग 1 2 24 ADH 6] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 191

SOTRA 24 ‘ALSO ON ACOOUNT OF THE MENTION OF (His) FoRM ”’

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

* Also on account of the mention of the form” of the Highest Self in the passage ‘Fire 18 his head’ (Mund 2141) and 80 on, not the other two

Vedainta-kaustubha

The very same Bemg who 1s this Impemshable, the source of bemgs, the Cause of all causes and has the sentient and the non sentient as His powers, abides also as the mner controller of the sentient and the non sentient, the powers, and as His effects, and should be meditated on by one who desires salvation and 18 free from the faults of envy and malice,—with a view to showing this, the author here states that the universe 1s the form of the Lord

The Impershable, the source of bemgs, 18 the Highest Self alone, and not the other two Why?! =“ Onaccount of the mention of (His) form ' In the passage ‘Fire 18 his head, his eyes, the sun and the moon, the regions his ears, his utterances the Vedas, wind his breath, his heart the Universe, from his feet the earth (amnses), truly, he 18 the Inner Soul of all bemgs’ (Mund 21 4), the entire expanse of the universe, consisting of the sentient and the non sentient, 1s demgnated. as the form of the Highest Self alone, the mner Controller of all If pradhfng snd, the individual soul be understood here, the designation of such 9 form 18 not posaible for this reason also, 1) 1s established that the Impenshable, who 1s the source of beings, 1s the Highest Person

Here ends the section entatled ‘Invisibility’ (6)

COMPARISON Baladeva

After thia इतिप he reads a siitra ‘prakaranét’, not found m other commentarios

1 §, BR, Bh, SE.

[st 1 2 25 132 VEDANTA PARIJITA SAURABHA ADH 7]

Adhikarana 7 The section ontitled ‘Vaiiva- nara’ (9377788 25-83)

SUTRA 25 ५८ VaIsSVENARA (18 THE LORD), ON ACCOUNT OF THE DISTINCTIVE ATTRIBUTES OF THH COMMON TERM”

Vedanta -parijaita-saurabha

‘Vaiivanara’ 18 the Highest Self alone, because that the word ‘Vaiévinare’, though a common term, denotmg (both) fire and Brahman, 18 to be understood as implying Brahman here, follows from the fact that we know ita ‘distinctive attributes”’ through the designa- tion, of 1ts parts, auch as the heaven as tis head and so on

Vedinta-kaustubha

Thus, 1t has been pomted out that the Lord 18 to be meditated on, as the Soul of the movable and the mmmovable Now, by poimting out that the Lord 1s to be meditated on, m the very same manner, as Vaiévanare also, the author shows that the text ‘““Who 18 our soul } What is Brahman” ?’ (Chand 6 11 1) refers to the Lord

In the Chandogya, the followmg passage 18 found, begmning ‘*“Who 18 our soul? What 1s Brahman” ?’ (Chind 6 111), “"You know now that Vaiéviinara Self, tell us about Him alone” ’ (Chand 5116), and continumg ‘But he who meditates on the Vassévinara Self as of the measure of a span, only, and as of an, unlimited dimension, —he eats food m all the worlds, in all beings, in all nelves Verily, of this Vaiévinara Self, the head, mdeed, 18 the brightly (heaven), the eye the multsform (sun), the breath that which m various paths (16 the wind), the body the extended (space), the bladder, indeed, wealth (16 water), the feet the earth mdeed, the breast, indeed, the sacrificial altar, the hairs the sacrificial grass, the heart the G&rhapatya fire, the mind the AnvahSryapacans, fire, the mouth, the Ahavantya fire’ (Chand 61812) A doubt arses as to whether here VaiSvinara 18 the gastric fire, or the elemental fire, or the presidmg deity of fire, or the Highest Self The prema facie view 18 @ follows The word ‘Vaiévinara’ 18 9 commonterm Why? Because 7४ 1s apphed to the gastric fire, as m the passage ‘This 18 the Vaisvinara fire which 18 within this person, by means of which

0 1 2 26 ADH 7] VEDANTA KAUNTUBHA 133

this food that 1s eaten 1s digested Ite nome w that which one he we on, covering the ears When one 18 on the point of departing ono doe» not hear this sound’ (अ 591), bocause it is applic also to the elemental fire, as m the passage ‘For the whole world, tho gods made Agni Vaiévanara 9 sign of the day’ (Rg ४ 10 98 121)

bocauso 1# 18 apphed to the fire god {00 as 10 the pustage Mav we be in the favour of Vauivinara, for verily, he 18 the king: of the worlds, bliss, lustrous’ (Rg V 19813), and because it 18 applied to the Highest Self, as 11 the passages “Hoe threw 1६ in tho olf, mdeed, in the hoart m Agni Vasévinara’ (Tat 3 31875) ‘Ths Vanvi

nara amses as having all forms, naa the vital bienth, a4 fire (Pratna 1 7)

With regard to it, we reply Vaisvanara 1s the Hyrhest Person alone Why’? “On account of the distinctive attributes of the common word ”’,1e because thore are distinctive attiibutes for taking the common term ‘Vaisvinara’,—applied, oquaily, to the gastric fite, the elemental fire, the fire god and tho Highest Self,—as denoting specifically the Haghest Self alone The sense 1s that the distinctive attmbutes by reason of which the Highost Person slone may be taken as the primary meanmg of the word ‘Varvinaia , aro present hers, as we know them from the text ‘Of this \Vaimvauara Nolt, the head indeed 18 the bnghtly shmimg (heaven)’ (Chind 518 2) and 0 on Henoe, the word ‘Vaisvadnara’, though commonly applicable to all (the tour), here denotes the Highest Self (alone), on account of such. distinctive attributes The gastric fire and the rest cannot possibly have limbs, like the heaven, and the rest down to the earth,—nmnco they are not the soul of all, and snes m, this section, the common, term 16 qualified by the special attributes of the Lord such as, ‘bemg the soul of all’ and the rest, mentioned m the mtroductory text =“ Who 18 our soul? What 18 Brahman” ?’ (Chand 5 11'1)

1 P 8347 lnes 78

9 P 81, lines 3 4

3 P 265, lmes 34, (vol 3) Correct quotation T'ad hrdaye ajnau vatéednare prdeyat’

[9 1 2 26 134. VEDINTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 7]

SUTRA 26

“THAsT WHIOH IS STATED BY SMRTI MUST BR AN INDICATION, THUS ” Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

The form, stated m Smrti as well, im the passage ‘Of whom, fire 1s the mouth, the heaven the head’ (Mahé 12 1656 61), “must” be a decustve factor m proving that Vaiévinara 1s the Highest Self

Vedanta-kaustubha

The word “thus” mmples the reason For this reason, too, Vaisvinara 78 the Highest Self alone,—because “ that which 1s stated by Smrta must be an mdication.” of the fact that the word ‘Vaiévinara’ denotes the Highest Self The phrase “That which 1s stated by Smrti”’ means that the form, characterized by having the heaven for the head and the rest, denoted by the scriptural text ‘The head, indeed, 18 the brightly shimmg (heaven)* (Chind 6 18 2) and so on, 18 mentioned also by a Smrt: which follows Senpture That very thing must be “‘an indication”, 1e a& decisive factor here,—this 18 the sense The अतप passages are the following ‘Of whom fire 1s the mouth, the heaven the head, the sky the navel, the earth the feet, the sun the eye, the regions the ear,—obeisance to Him, the Soul of the world’ (Mab& 12 16560-1657a%), ‘Of whom the heaven 18 the head, the wise declare, the sky, venly, the navel, the sun and the moon the eyes, the regions the ear, the earth the feet,—He 28 the inconcervable Soul, the maker of all bemgs’ Wor this very reason, 10 has been said ‘Sarpture and Smyti are celebrated to be the two eyes of the wise Deprived of one, one 18 said to be “one syed”’, deprived of both “bhyd” ’

Or, (an alternative explanation of the siitra ) the phrase “That which 218 stated by Smytz”” means as follows (The form) which 18 recognized, m the followmg manner thus What is celebrated in another scriptural text, viz “Bure 18 his head, the eyes the sun and the moon’ (Mund 21 4), and so on, as well as m the stated Smyti passages as the form of the Highest Self, that alone, 1s stated here (m (क्षणत्‌ 6 18 2),—that form must be an mdication,ie 9 sign, that Vaisvinara 18 the Highest Self

1 8 ए 2 P 424 1168 2 3, vol 3

"सिचि I TE

[श 1 2 27 ADH 7 ] VEDANTA-PABIJEATA SAUBABHA 135

SOTRA 27

[ऋ IT BB OBJHOTED THAT (VAISVENARA 78 THE GASTRIO FIRB) ON ACCOUNT OF WORD AND THH REST, ON ACCOUNT OF ABIDING WITHIN, XOT (THE Higuest Sur), (WH REPLY ) No, on account OF THACHING THE VISION (OF THE LORD) THUS, ON ACOOUNT oF IMPOSSIBILITY, AND (BECAUSE) THEY READ HIM ALSO AS A PERSON *’1

Vedinta-parijita-saurabha

If 06 objected that smce the word ‘Vaisvinara’ conventionally denotes the gastric fire, mnce there 1s the designation of a tmad of fires, since 1t 18 mentioned as the abode of the offermg to the vital breaths, and since 1t 18 declared by Sarpture to be abiding withm, Vaiévinara 18 not the Highest Self, byt the gastric fire,—

(We reply ) “No”, ‘‘as”’ the Supreme Lord 18 “taught to be viewed.” *thus”’,1e m the gastric fire, “for” if the Supreme Lord be not understood here, then having the heaven as the head and the rest “1g not possible’, and 1t 1 declared by Scempture to be a person,—so Valsvanara is none but the Highest Self

Vedanta-kaustubha

If 1t be objected The Highest Self cannot be denoted by the word ‘Vaisvinara’ here, but the gastmc fire Why? ‘On account of words and the rest,” 10 the reasons which begin with ‘word’ are ‘reasons bemmning with word’,i—‘on account of those’? Those reasons are aa follows Jurst, the ‘word’ here 1s ‘Vaisvainara’, and that conventionally denotes the gastric fire, and when a literal meaning 18 possible, it 18 umproper to suppose any other meaning Secondly, there 18 the word ‘fire’,16 there 18 8 co ordiation between Vaisvinara and the word ‘fire’ 17 the Vijasansyaka text, viz ‘This 1s the Vausvinara fire’ (Sat Br 1061114) ‘Thirdly, a tmad of fires 18 designated in the text, ‘The heart 1s the G&rhapatyea fire, the mind the Anvaihirya’ (Chand 5182) and so on Fourthly, Vaiévanara ४8 declared by Scripture to be the support of the offermg to the

> The © 8 8 ed omits +» 0929 702 , 2 11

2 Shbdddayah

ठ This explams the compound ‘dabdddsbhyah <P 805 lne 17

[8 1 2 28 136 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 7]

vital breaths m, the passage ‘Therefore, the first food which one may come across should be offered’ (Chand 6191) And, finally Vaiéva nara abides ^ withm”, which, more particularly, 1s a charactemstio mark of the gastric fire,—the VAjasaneyins declare that Vai4svinara abides withm im the passage ‘For he who knows this Vaisvanara fire to be lke a man, abiding withm a man’ (Sat Br 106111) On account of such reasons lke “words and the rest’’, and ‘on account of abiding within ’*, the Highest Self cannot be understood,—

(We reply ) “No’, “on account of teachmg the vision (of the Lord) thus”, 16 since such an object (viz the gastric fire) 18 taught to be meditated on under the aspect of the Lord,1e since the Supreme Lord 1s enjoined. to be meditated on as qualified by the gastric fire, 1e since the above mentioned Supreme Soul, who 1s Vaisvanara (or the universal soul) being the soul of all, 1s taught to be m the gastric fire and the rest as their soul If 1t be objected In that case let gastric fire itself be Vaiivanara primarily,—we reply no, ‘because that 18 umposaible’’,1e because having the heaven as the head and the rest 18 umpossible on the part of the gastric fire This means, it 18 possible on the part of the Highest Self alone, who 1s the soul of all, and not on the part of any one 6188 ‘ And also’’, the Vajasa neyins ‘“‘read”’ “‘him’’,1e Vaisvainara, “as 9 person”’ in the passage ‘That Vaiévinara fire 1s the person’ (Sat Br 106111) It 8 possible for the Highest Self to be a Person, He bemg the soul of all, but this 1s not possible 1f the mere gastric fire be understood here The word “and”! denotes that this 18 universally known, 198 that the Highest Self 13 a Person 18 well known from soriptural texta like ‘The Person, verily, 18 all this’ (Svet 315), ‘There 18 nothmg higher than the Person’ (Katha 3 11) and so on

SUTRA 28

“Tor THAT VERY REASON, NOT THE DRITY, NOR THE ELEMENT ”

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

On account of those “ very ” reasons stated above, “the deity and the element’’ are “not” to be understood by the word ‘ Vaiévanara’

1 Ga’ in the siiira

[8 1 2 29 ADE 7] VEDANTA PABIJSTA SAURABHA 137

Vedanta-kaustubha

“Wor that very reason”, 16 on account of the very reasons stated above, the presiding ‘‘deity’’ of fire 18 not to be understood the word ‘VaiSvinara’, and the “element”, 16 the elemental fire, also 18 not to 08 understood

SUTRA 29

५५ (Teme 18) NO CONTRADICTION, EVEN (IF THE WORD “ VAISvVE. NARA” DENOTES THE LORD) DIRECTLY, J AIMUNI (THINKS 80) °

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

The Lord Vaisvinara 18 ‘all and man’, 16 the soul of all,—to be meditated on “directly’’ as such,—this, the teacher ^" Jamun” thinks, involves ^" 20 contradiction, ’

Veddanta-kaustubha

Thus, the word ‘Vaisvanara’ has been proved to be referring to Brahman, flist on the ground of the reasons like ‘distinctive attributes of a common term’ (Br Si 1225) and the rest Agam, there bemg a doubt,—viz_ on account of words and the rest, as well as on account of abiding within, 1t refers to the gastric fire,—it has been once more proved, for the sake of removing compatability, to be referring to Brahman alone, qualified by the gastric fire, on the ground of the reasons like ‘because of teaching the vision (of the Lord) thus’ (Br ॐ. 1227) ands00n Now, by showing that the word ‘Vaisvanara’ denotes Brahman etymologically too, so that He may be directly worshipped as such, the author shows that another teacher too (viz Jaimini) confirms his own view

The teacher “Jamun” thinks that as the word ‘Vausvinara’, even, without bemg viewed as denoting the Lord, only so far as He 18 quahfied by the gastric fire, refers directly to the Highest Self, m tendmg to designate as 1t does His speaal qualities—so Vaisvinara 18 to be meditated on ‘‘directly’”’ as the Highest Self mdeed This view involves ‘no contradiction” 1

1 Io 2# has been saad in the previous भीक that Vawrdnara stands for the Lord only 90 far as the Lord 1s qualified by the gastric fre But now 2b us said that Voiésdnora stands for the Lord directly, without any qualrfiication

[Ist 1 2 30 138 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 7]

Etymologically, ‘Vaisvinara’ mmplies ‘he who 18 all and man’, He being the Universal Soul, or ‘one who 1s the man, 1 6 the maker of all’, He bemg the Universal Cause, or ‘one by whom all men are to be controlled’, He bemg the Universal Controller The long vowel {16 ‘&’mthe word ‘Vaiévinara’) follows from the rule ‘when “ nara ^ follows “ viéva”’, the “‘a” in the latter 1s lengthened to designate 9 name’ (Pin 6 3 129, 87 & 1048+) The taddhite suffix (by which the word ‘Vaiévinara’ 1s demved from the word ‘Vailévanara’) 18 added without changmg the meaning, as in the oase of ‘rikgasa’ (derived from ‘raksas’), “vaiyass’ (derived. from ‘vayas’) and. 80 on >

The co otdimation of the words ‘Agni’ and ‘Vaisvinare’, too, 18 appropnate ‘Agni’ 18 ‘one who goes, 1 © goes to or manifests himself in the heart lotus’,—the ‘na’ (m, the root “ang’) 18 elided m accordance with the rule ‘And, the “na” of “anga”’ 18 elided’ > (हता siitra 490) “—, or ‘one who causes one to go, 1 © causes the first birth of the Universe

SOTRA 30 ‘ON ACCOUNT OF MANIFESTATION, ASMARATHYA (THINKS 80) ”

Vedinta -pirijata-saurabha

With a view to favourmg His worshippers who are devoted to Him alone and to none else, the Highest Self though infinite, manifests Himself in accordance with the respective capacities of His devotees As such, He oan fittmgly be regarded as of the size of merely 9 span, —this 18 80 “‘on account of manifestation’’, so the sage "" Afmarathye”’ thinks

Vedinta-kaustubha

(The author) explains, in accordance with the approbation of Aémarathya, the text about that which 1s of the size of merely a span

In the text ‘But who meditates on the Vaisvinara Self as of the measure of @ span only and as of an unlimited dimension’ (Chand.

1 P 654 vol 1

9 Vide Pin 41104 SD EK 1106, p 682 vol 1, and Pin 54388, 8D ए 2106 p 936 vol 1

3 And m 15 added, aa mentioned m the siira 488 Thos, adg = ag-+-ns =

#8D K p 684 vol 2

jst 1 2 31 ADH 7 ] VEDANTA PARLJATA SAURABHA 199

5 18 1), 161s perfectly justifiable to hold that even, one whose ‘measure’ or mrt, has disappeared ‘on all mdes’ or enturely1,1e even the Highest Pergon, who 1s unlimited, can be of the measure of a span merely, 18 of the extent measured. by the thumb and the forefinger How? ‘On account of manifestation’ That 18, with © view to favouring those who are devoted to none else except to Him, the Lord manifests Himself 70 the heart lotus m a form, which 1s eternal, bhsasful and non, material, which 1s of the size of a span and 18 the fulfiller of the desire of His own devotees, just as He manifested 07708911 m the lmited space of a pillar as a man lion® This 1s the view of the teacher Asmarathya

Or, (an alternative explanation of the siitra), with a view to favouring the dull witted devotees (16 who can grasp gross objects only), the Lord squeezes Himself, as 1t were, into gross regions only, though all pervading, He limita Himself m accordance with their respective intelligence and manifests Himself m those respective places Thus, “on, account of mamfestation”, He can, very well, be of the measure of merely a span,—so thmks “ Asmarathya’”’,—this 18 the sense

COMPARISON Ramfnuja and Srikantha

Interpretation of the word ‘sbhivyakteh’ different, vz ‘on account of definiteness’,1e the texta speaks of the Lord of a definite extent with a view to rendering the thought of the meditating devotee more definite 8

SUTRA 31 ° (षष ACOOUNT OF REMEMBRANCE, BADARI (THINKS SO) ”

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

The imagination, of a body from head to foot 1s “on account of remembrance”, 1e for the purpose of recollection (or meditation),— #0 thinks the teacher ‘‘Badam”’

1 Abhitah ngaiah minah = abhuwevwndnah

# The reference 1s to the Inllmg of Hiranyakassypu by the Lord m the form 0 च 709 1100 Vide Mahi 9 15835, eto

8 St 5 1880, 274 Partl SK B 1830, 2 802 Part]

fst 1 2 32 140 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 7 |

Vedanta-kaustubha

On the enquiry What purpose 18 served by such a manifestation of a Bemg,—who 18 of the mze of merely a span,—im the heart lotus of the sharp witted (1e those who are capable of graspmg subtle things)? On the enquiry What purpose is served by such worship of a Bemg,—who 18 lmited as having limbs lke head and the rest in, the heaven, and 80 on,—on, the part of the dull witted (16 those who are capable of grasping gross things) *—1t 18 8810 here

The manifestation, m the heart lotus, of the Highest Self as of the size of merely a span , similarly the magination of His body, from head to foot, mm the regions of the heaven and. the rest, are “on account of remembrance”, 168 serve the purpose of recollection, or meditation in that way, for attaming the Supreme Lord This 1s the view of the teacher ‘‘ Badan”

SUTRA 32 “ ON ACCOUNT OF IDENTIFICATION, 80 JAIMINI THINKS, FOR THUS (SORIPTURE) SHOWS `

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

The imagination of their] breast and the rest as the sacrificial altar and so on 1s for the purpose of effecting “an identification” of Agni hotra with the offermg to the vital breaths, which 1s a sub aidiary element of the Vaiévinara vidyf, practised by a worshipper of Vaisvinara,— so”’ the teacher “Jamum1’ thinks That very thing the scriptural text ‘Now, he who offers the Agni hotra, knowing this thus’ (Chind 5 24 28), ‘shows’

Vedanta-kaustubha

If 17 be asked If the Highest Self, having thus the three worlds as His body, be denoted by the term ‘Vai4évinara’, then, what 18 the purpose of magming the breast and the rest of the worshipper as the sacrificial altar and so on thus ‘The breast 18 the sacrificial altar, the hairs the sacrificial grasa, the heart the Girhapatya fire, the mind the Anvihiryapacana fire’ (Chind 5182)%—the author replies here

1 Te of those who meditate on Vawudnara 8 8 R SK

[st 1 2 33 ADH 7] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 14}

The umaginmg of the worshippers as the sacrificial altar and the rest 18 for the purpose of effectang an “identification” of Agni hotra with the offermg to the vital breath, which 18 © subsidiary element of the Vaisvinara-vidy&, practised by the worshippers of Vaisvanara, --८८ a”? the teacher “Jazmim1” thmks “Hor thus”, 1९ this very identafication of the offermg to the vital breath and the Agni hotra, “Sorpture shows” m the followmg passage ‘Now, he who offers the 4 णा hotra knowmg this thus, his offermg 1s made to all the worlds, to all beings, to all selves’ (Chand 6 24 2)

COMPARISON Baladeva

The interpretation of the word ‘sampatteh’ different, viz ‘on account of mysterious power or lordlimess’ Hence the sitra ‘(The Lord 1s said to be of the measure of a span) on account of (His) mysterious power, 80 Jaimini (thinks), for thus Scripture shows (viz that the Lord 1s possessed of such powers) ` 1

SUTRA 33 ५ AWD THEY RECORD THIS IN THAT”

Vedainta-parijata-saurabha

“And they record” “‘ths”,ie Vaisvinara havmg the heaven as his head and so on, a8 a Person in the body of the worshipper

Here ends the second quarter of the first chapter mm the Vedinta p&rijéita saurabha, an interpretation of the Sériraka-mimémsad texta and. composed by the Reverend Nimb&rka

Vedanta-kaustubha

And moreover, the Vays “‘record’’ ० thu’’,i1e the Lord Vazivit nara, “im that’’,1e m the body of the worshipper, m the passage ‘He who knows this Vaiévinara fire as a man, abidmg withm man’ (Sat Br 106111) That to say, these too, viz his bemg a person,

1GB 1282, p 142, Chap 1

[so 1 2 33 142 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7 ]

as well as his abiding within, are indicative of the fact that Vaisvanara. 18 Brahman ‘The sense 1s that rf the gastric fire be understood here, then the circumstance of abiding within 2 person will, of course, be possible, but not that of beng hke a person Hence, 1t 1s established that Vaiévanara 1s the Highest Self

Here ends the section entitled ‘Vaisvinara’ (7)

Here ends the second quarter of the first chapter m the commentary, the holy Vedanta kaustubha

COMPARISON Baladeva

Interpretation different, viz ‘And they (viz the Atharvan1 kas) record this (viz the exstence of such mysterious powers) 1n that (viz m the Lord)’ 1

Résumé The second quarter of the first chapter contaims — (1) 33 siitras and 7 adhikaranas, according to Nimbéarka , (2) 32 sitras and 7 adbikaranas, according to Samkare. , (3) 33 stitras and 6 adhikaranas, according to Ramanujs , (4) 32 sutras and 7 adhikaranas, according to Bhaskara , (5) 33 sitras and 9 adhikaranas, according to Srikantha , (6) 33 siittras and 7 adhikaranas, according to Baladeva

Samkara and Bhiaiskara and Baladeva omit the siitra 16 im Nimbarka’s commentary Nimbarka omits the sttra 24 im Bhis kara’s commentary

[SEE

1 QB 1288 p 148 Chap 1

FIRST CHAPTER (Adhydya) THIRD QUARTER (Pada)

Adhikarana 1 The section ontitled ‘The heaven, the earth,and 80 on’ (Sitras 1 7)

SUTRA 1

‘Trg SUPPOBT OF THH HEAVEN, THH HARTH AND THE REST (19 BranMmaw ALONE), ON ACCOUNT OF THE THEM ‘OWN’ ”’

Vedanta-parijita saurabha

“The support of the heaven, the earth and the rest’, stated in the passage ‘In whom the heaven’ (Mund 2 2 6 2) and ao on, 18 Brahman, “on account of the term ‘own’”,1e on account of the word ‘soul’ and the reat which are denotative of Brahman.

Vedanta-kaustubha

Now the reverend author of the aphomsms 18 showing that to be the support of the three worlds, too, 18 possible on, the part of the Lord alone who has the heaven for His head and so on and 18 the soul af the three worlds

In the Mundaka, we read ‘He m whom the heaven, the earth and the sky are woven, and the mind together with all the vital- breaths,—Eim alone know as the one soul, give up other worlds He 18 the bmdge to immortality’ (Mund 225) Here a doubt arises—viz whether that which 18 mdicated as the support of the heaven and the rest by the locative ‘m whom’ 18 pradbana or the mdividual soul, or the Supreme Soul, the cause of the birth and the rest of the world What 1s suggested here to begm with! The prima face view 18 88 follows Let pradhina be the support As it 18 found that an effect arses from and dissolves into ita own, cause, 70 18 reasonable to hold that 1t has 108 own cause asita support (‘This 18 80), also on account of the scriptural mention of ‘bridge’ To be a bridge means to be limited, but Brahman 18 not lmuted as declared

1 8, ए, Bh, SK, B

[80 1 3 1 144 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH | |

by the text Infinite, boundless’ (Brh 2412) The term self’ too may be applied to pradhaina thus —

Pradhéna 18 the self, because of bemg the benefactor of the soul Whoever 18 the benefactor of some one else 18 his self, yust as (when it 18 said, ) ‘Very, Bhadrasena 18 my self’ Or, else, let the mdrvidual soul be the support, as there 18 the mention of the word ‘soul’ im the text,—the word ‘soul’ denotes the mdzvidual soul primarily, since 26 18 a sentient bemg.—as the soul 1s mentioned 17 Scrmpture as the support of sense organs like mind and the rest, as the soul 18 said to be connected with the vem, as well as to be born, mm the passage “Where the vems have congregated together like the spokes in the nave of a wheel, he moves about withm, becoming manifold’ (Mund 226), and, finally, to be the support of the entire universe, the object to be enjoyed, fits m on the soul’s part, 1t bemg an enjoyer

We reply ‘‘The support of the heaven, and the earth and the rest”’ 18 none but the Supreme Brahman That 18, ‘dyau’ and ‘bhu’ (make) ‘dyubhuvau’, that which begms with ‘dyu bhuvanu’ 18 ‘dyu bhuviu &di’, 16 all the things beginning with the heaven, and ending with, the vital breath,—their support 1s the Highest Self Why? “On sccount of the term ‘own’”,1e on account of the term ‘soul’, denotative of rtself, viz of the Supreme Soul, the topic of dis cussion, and charactemzed by an adjectave as stated m the passage “Him alone know ss the one soul, give up other worlds’ (Mund 2 2 5),—here, from the adjective ‘one’ which denotes the Lord, the soul of all, 1॥ 18 Known that the ‘soul’ 18 the Supreme Soul ,—also on account of the word ‘bridge’, mentioned m the passage ‘The bridge to immortahty’ (Mund 225), 16 the ‘bridge’ or the support meaning the cause of attammg ‘immortality’ or salvation In another scriptural text, viz ‘By knowimg him thus, one becomes mmortal on earth’ (Tart. Ar 3121), He alone 18 celebrated to be the cause of the attamment of immortality Oonnection with the artery, too, 18 possible on the part of the Supreme Soul, 17 accordance with the scriptural text ‘But surrounded by the vems he hangs lke a sheath” (Mah&hfr 119) In accordance with the followmg scrp tural and अपि texta, viz “Not born, he 18 born m many ways’ (Vj 8 811694, Tat Ar 31818), ‘Though unborn, the unchange able soul’ (Gité 46), 1t 28 also possible for Him to be born m many

1P 199 2 P 857 Ime 17 2P 201

[80 1 3 2 +” 1] VEDANTA PARLJITA SAUBABHA 145

ways Jinally, to be the support of the struments of the mdividual soul, too, 18 possible on the part of the Supreme Soul who 18 the support of all The followmg aphomsms1, secondary m nature, are but amplifications of this primary aphorism

SUTRA 2

“ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION (OF BEAHMAN) THE OBJECT TO BE APPROACHED BY THE FREED ”’

Vedainta-parijita-saurabha

The support of the heaven, the earth and the rest 18 Brahman alone Why? “On socount of the designation,” of such a support alone as “the object to be approached by the freed ”’, in, the passage “When the seer sees the golden coloured Creator, the Lord, the Person, the source of Brahm&, then the knower, having discarded ment and demerit, stamless, attams the highest identity’ (Mund ॐ 1 13 >) and 80 on,

Vedinta-kaustubha

The support of the heaven, the earth and the rest 18 none but Brabman Why? ‘“‘On account of the designation (of Brahman) as the object to be approached by the freed’’ That which 18 to be approached, 1 © obtaimmed, by those who are freed from the fetter of mundane existence 18 “ the object to be approached by the freed”, on account of the “‘demgnation’’, 1e indication, of that? The sense 18 The reality that 1s admitted to be the support of the heaven, the earth and the rest, to be one, to be the bridge to ummortality, and 18 celebrated elsewhere also as the object to be approached by the freed,—that very same reality, the one topic of all the Vedas and without an, equal or > superior, 1s designated as the object to be obtamed by the freed, m the passages ‘The knot of the heart 18 undone, sll doubts are out off, and bis works perish, when he, who 18 high and low, 28 seen’ (Mund 228), ‘Just as the flowmg mvers disappear into the ocean discarding name and form, so the knower, freed. from name and form, goes to the Person, who 1s Higher than,

1 Vis Br Si 138 2-7 2 8, 87, 2 * This explains the compound ‘mubkiopasrpya-vyapadedat" 10

[80 18 8 146 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 11

the high’ (Mund 328) ‘The ‘ugh and low’ means One to whom the high,1e Brahmi, le ation cae The phrase ‘higher than the hgh’ means the Person who 18 higher than the high, 16 the individual soul or prakrin 1

COMPARISON Ra&minuja and Srikantha Readmmg shghtly different, viz adds a ‘ca’ 17 the end 2

SUTRA 3

° Nov THE INFEBENOE, ON ACCOUNT OF THE ABSENOB OF THETS TO THAT 0 १

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

Pradhina, which 1s armved at through mference, 18 not that support, on account of the absence of texte denotang 16

Vedainta-kaustubha

The support of the heaven, the earth and the rest cannot be ^^ the inference” The non sentient cause which 1s without any connection with Brahman, viz pradhina, mferred by the S&mkhyas on, the ground of non, sentuent effects, like the elamenta and the rest 8, 18 881d. to be “ the inference ^", and that 1s not the support of the heaven, the earth and the rest Why? = ^" On account of the absence of texts to that effect” That is, the “text to that effect” 18 ‘tac chabda’, “absence of text to that effect’ 1s ‘atao chabda’, on account of that *, or on account of the absence, here, of texts denotmg the

1 Note that Nunbdrka and Srinwdea understand the word ' Vyapadadsdi? as referring to different passages

9 Sri B1238,p 288, Part] SK B182,p 401 Part4

8 Hirst, we infer that every effect must have 9 cause that cause another cause and ao on, and finally there must be an uncaused first cause Secondly, we infer that this uncaused first cause must be non sentient mnce the affects which we perceive are non senizent, and the effect and 19 onuse must be smular mnature ib 28 im this way that the Sdmkhyas arnmve ab non sentient first cause OF pradhdna

¢ This explams the compound aiuc-chabdds’

[80 1 3 4 ADE 1] VEDINTA PARIJiTA SAUBABHA 147

infermble pradhana On the contrary, there are texte denoting ॐ sentient bemg, such as, ‘He who 1s omniscient’ (Mund 119,227) and 80 on COMPARISON RaémAnuja and Srikangtha

Readmg different, viz take this stitra and the next as one sutra 7

SUTRA 4 ‘ AyD THR BEARER OF THE VITAL BREATH ”’

Vedanta -parijata-saurabha

“The bearer of the vital breath” also 18 not the support of the heaven, the earth and the rest Why? On account of the very same absence of texts to that effect

Vedinta-kaustubha

The words ‘not, on account of the absence of texts to that effect’ are to be supplied from the precedmg aphomam ‘The bearer of the vital breath =, 16 the mdividual soul, too, 13 not the support of the heaven, the earth and the rest, on account of the absence of texts to that effect,—that means although the term ‘soul’ 1s equally applicable to the individual soul and the Supreme Soul, yet just as in this section there are texts hke ‘Him alone know aa one —He 18 the bridge to immortality’ (Mund 2 2 5), ‘He whois omniscient’ (Mund 119, 22 7) and so on, establishing the peculiar qualities of the Supreme Soul, so there are no texta here, establishing the pecuhar व्याप of the individual soul,—also because ह 18 impossible for the mdividual soul, which 18 atomic by nature, to be the support of the heaven, the earth and the rest This aphorism 1s taken, separately, because of ita association with the followmg aphonsms 9

1 ल B 133, p 283, Part 1 SK B 138,p 408 Part 4 4 That 18 16 would not have been mecessary to wwtroduce @ special silira for the individual soul,—which hke pradhdina is precluded in the preceding silira, —af rb wére not for the reagong given in the followmg three sitras which apply only to the mdividual soul, and not to pradhdna

[st 1 3 5-6 148 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH | ]

COMPARISON All others ताह the ‘ca’ m the end 1

SUTRA 5 “AND ON AQCOUNT OF THH DESIGNATION OF DIFFERENCE ””

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

Moreover, “on account of the demgnation of difference”? also between the knower and the object to be known, the support of the heaven, the earth and the rest 15 not the bearer of the vital breath, (or the individual soul)

Vedainta-kaustubha

The bearer of the vital breath 18 not to be understood 98 the support of the heaven, the earth and the rest Why? ‘On account of the demgnation of difference’, 16 0608186 the difference between the two, vis between the mdividual soul—which 1s possessed of Itttle knowledge and 1s subject to bondage and release through the Lord’s mBy& oonsistmg of the three gunas—and the Ommnsuent Lord, as the knower and the object to be known, 18 designated by the holy Scripture itself in the passage ‘Him alone know as one’ (Mund 425) The purpose of this repeated declarations of difference 18 to point out that with a view to attammg His nature, one should practise meditaizon on Him, based on a true knowledge about Him

SUTRA 6 “ON ACCOUNT OF THH TOPIO”

Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

The Supreme Self bemg the tome, the mdrvidual soul 18 not to be understood as the support of the heaven, the earth and the reat

18B 186, 810 St B 134 p 283, Part Bh B 185 p 52 SK B184 p 404, Parté BB 186

[80 137 ave 1] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 149

Vedinta-kaustubha

It 18 not that the mdividual soul constitutes the topic so that 10 may be understood here None but the Supreme Soul 18 the topic here, as evident from the mtroductory passage ‘“““What, my reverend Sir, bemg known, all this comes to be mown” t’ (Mund 113),—all thimgs do not become known when the mdividual soul 18 known, 81008 all things have not the mdividusl soul as ther soul— and as established by the fact that m the passage ‘Now, the higher 18 that whereby that Impemshable 18 apprehended’ (Mund 1 1 5) and so on, the Supreme Soul alone 1s referred to

SUTRA 7

“AND ON ACCOUNT OF ABIDING AND EATING ”

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

“On account of the abiding ` of the Highest Self as a non easter, 98 woll as ‘on, account of the eating’ of the mdividual soul, as laid down, mm the text ‘Two birds’ (Mund 311, of also Svet 462), the mdividual soul 1s not the support of the heaven and the earth

Vedanta-kaustubha

The author 1s once more explammg statements regarding the difference between the individual soul and Brabman

The mdividual soul 1s not the support of the heaven, the earth and the rest Why?! ‘On account of abiding and eatmg”’, “ ति and ^“ 00879 ˆ“ (make) “sthityodane ’—on account of that? “On account of the abiding” of one bird m the tree, ie the body, without eating the fruit of work and shinmg, and “‘ on account of the eating” of the frat of work by the other as subject to karmas,—as laid down m the text which refers to the support of the heaven, the earth and the rest, viz ‘Of these two, one tastes the sweet berry, the other 100४8 on without eatmg’ (Mund 11 8),—the difference between, the mdividual 8001. and Supreme Souls known Hence, 10 1s established

1 8 ©, Bh, SK, B = This explams the compound ‘sthtiyodandbhydrm’

fst 13 8 150 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADE 2 |

that the independent and omniscient Supreme Soul alone 18 the bridge to immortality, and as the soul of all, He 1s also the support of the heaven, the earth and the rest

Here ends the section entitled “The heaven, the earth and the reat’ (1)

COMPARISON Samkara Readmg and interpretation same, but pomts out at the end m his usual manner that the distmction between the mdividual soul

and Brahman 18 no more real than that between the ether within a pot and the universal ether and so on 1

Adhikarans 2 The section 6291४196 ‘The plenty’

(8788 8 9) SUTRA 8

“Tos Pranty (78 THE LORD), BECAUSE OF THE THACHING (OF IT) 48 ABOVE SHEENITY (VIZ THE VITAL BREATH) ”’

Vedinta-pirijaita-saurabha

The Plenty, taught by the highest teacher, the venerable Sanat kuméra, to our preceptor, the reverend Narada, m the passage “But the Plenty alone should be enquired after’ (Chand 7 22 1 >), 18 not the vital breath, but the Highest Person Why? “ Because of the teaching ’’ of the Plenty as “above” the vital breath

Vedainta-kaustubha

Now, the reverend author of the aphorisms 1s showing that the text “But the Plenty alone should be enquired after’ (Chand 7 22 1) and so on, refers to Brahman

t§B1387,p 31 2S R, Bh, Sk, B

{so 1 3 8 ADH 2] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 151

The followimg 1s recorded by the Chandogas ‘“‘It has been heard by me from men like you that one who knows the soul crosses over sorrow J am such a sorrowing one, reverend sir! Cause me, arr, to cross over the sorrow’ (Chind 71983), thus asked by Narada, his preceptor, the reverend Sanatkumiara, the teacher of the doctmne of salvation, taught “The name is Brahman’ (Chind 715) Agam, asked thus ‘““Is there, ar, more than name” ?’ (Chand 71 5), he taught ‘“Speech, verily, 18 more than name’’’ (Chand 721) In this way, fifteen objects, begimnmg with name and endmg with the vital breath, were taught1 After havig taught the vital breath, he, without bemg asked any further question, taught the following *“But he, verily, speaks superiorly who speaks superiorly through truth’’’ (Chind 7161), ‘“‘But the Plenty alone should be enquired after” “1 enquire, sir, after the Plenty " ‘ Where one does not see another, does not hear another, does not know another, that 18 the Plenty But where one sees another, hears another, knows another, that 18 the small”’ (Chind 7231-241) Here the term ‘plenty’ (bhiiman) denotes ‘muchness’ It 18 der1ved m the following manner The suffix (78710 " 18 added to the word ‘bahu’ (much) m the sense of ‘the nature thereof’2, m accordance with the mle ‘The (suffix) “Imanic”’ 18 optionally added to the words “ prthu ” and the reat’ (Pan 61122, SD K 17848) (m order to 10010806 the sense ‘the nature thereof’ —Pin 51119, SD K 1781) Then the root (viz bahu) and the suffix (viz manic) undergo a change in accordance with the rule ‘After “babu”, the first letters of “iman” and “1yas" affixes are elided, and ^“ bahu ”’ 1s replaced by the word ^ bhii”’ (Pan 6 4 164, 168, SD K 2017*) Here ‘muchness’ means ‘immensity’ (1 6 quantitative greatness), and not numeroarty (1 © numencal greainess), because just as the term ‘bahu’ denotes number, 98 mm ths examples ‘In expressmg numeromty the plural case affix 18 used’ (Pan 1421, SD K 1875), ‘Many, purified by the penance of knowledge’ (01४६ 410), ‘After many births’ (Git& 719) and so on, so 1# 18 seen to be applied m the sense of ‘immensity’ also, m contrast to smaliness, ag im the example ‘He who renders service, be it great or small, to cone who has heard Scrpture’ Hore, too, the term ‘plenty’ being used eee ~ >

1 Vide Ohind 7 1 ef seg 9 Tasya bhdvah 9 P 894 vol 1 Correct quotation translated ‘Prtheddubhya wmane vd' «P 908 vol 1 Thatw, bahu-+-imanio = bhi-+-man = bAdsnan

¢ © 114 vol 1

[st 1 3 8 152 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 2]

im contrast to smaliness 77) the passage “There 1s no pleasure mm the small’ (Chand 17231), its meanmg 18 nothing but “zmmensity” Thus, there 1s no pleasure m the small, but the Plenty alone 1s pleasure Hence ‘The Plenty alone 18 to be enquired mto’ (Chand 7 23 1) That 1s, the Plenty, or the Supreme Soul alone, who 18 of the form of pleasure characterized by unsurpassed greatness, should be enquired after by one desiring salvation and wishmg to attam pleasure charac terized by unsurpassed greatness When the reverend Sanatkumire said this, the reverend Narada said ‘I enquire, sir, after the Plenty”’” (Chand 7231) ‘That 28, ‘Sir’, meanmg, O reverend teacher! I deare to know the Plenty alone m particular Thorefore, Sanat kumara told hmm the characteristic marks of the Plenty by means of & positive (mdicating what 1t 18) and a negative (indicating what rt 1s not) proposition, thus “where’ (Chind 7241) and so on,—4this 1s the sense of the text

Here, a doubt arses, viz whether the Plenty 1s the vital breath or the Supreme Soul The vital breath, holds the prema facie view, because in the previous passage ‘The vital breath 1s more than hope’ (Chind 71651), the vital breath alone 1s mdicated, and because after the teaching about the vital breath, there are no further question and answer (as there were mm the previous cases), viz ‘“‘Is there, ar, more than name”’?’ (Chand 715), ^ 8106600, verly, 18 more than mame”’ (Chind 721) By the term ‘vital breath’, the mdzvidual soul, endowed with the vital breath, 18 to be understood, and not merely a kind of air,—because, from the passage “The vital breath 18 the father, the vital breath the mother’ (Chind 7151), the vital breath 1s known, to be a sentient bemg, and because in the mtroductory text, viz ‘One who knows the soul crosses over sorrow’ (Chand 7 1 3), a8 well 98 m the concluding text “To the soul alone belongs all this’ 1 (Chand 7 25 2), the term ‘soul’ 18 found employed The passage ‘Where one does not see another’ (Chind 7241) and 80 on, too, fittmgly apples to the individual soul, because all rts activities hke seeing and the rest cease during 108 state of deep sleep, and further, because all 168 practical activities hke external perceptions and the rest cease when its own real nature, different from the body, the sense organs, buddhi and the rest, 18 known Hereby, 1t should be known, that texts hke ‘Venly, the Plenty w pleasure’ (Chind 7 23 1),

1 Correct quotataon ‘“Aimawedam sarvam Vide Chind 7252 p 402

[80 1 9 8 ADH 2] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 153

“Verily, the vital breath 18 1mmortal’ (Brh 163) and 80 on, aro all to be explamed as referrmg to the individual soul, possesamg the | vital breath

With regard to 1t, we reply The Plenty 1s the Supreme Soul alone and not the imdividual soul, posseasmg the vital breath Why? "Because of the teachmg (of it) as above serenity” ^ Seremty ” means one m whom there 18 complete serenity, 1e the md.vidual soul, celebrated in, the Somptural text ‘This serenity, havmg amsen, from. this body, having attamed the form of highest hghi, 1s completed in its own form’ (Chind 834) and so on (The above phrase means because of the teaching of 1t as) “ above ° that which 1s denoted. by the term “vital breath’ In the text ‘But he speaks superiorly who speaks through truth’ (Chind 7261) from the term ‘but’, the difference between the subsequent teachmg about the Plenty and the prior one about the vital breath 18 known The sense 1s that 08 the teaching about the Plenty 18 different from the teaching about the vital breath, the meanmg of the word “ plenty ” 13 different from the meanmg of the term “ vital breath ”

(An alternative explanation of the siitra) Or, else, (the phrase means ) because of the teaching of the worshipper of truth as higher than the worshipper of the vital breath, m the passage ‘But he, verily, speaks superiorly’ (Ohind 7161), 16 owmg to a difference between the worshippers, there 1s a difference between the objects to be worshipped aa well ‘The sense 18 this If xt be objected In accordance with your statement, viz that the Plenty 1s that alone, which 18 denoted by the term truth, demarcated as higher than the individual soul,—yust as each of the fifteen objects, begmnmg with name and ending with speech, 1s taught as successively higher by the reverend Sanatkumira, asked by the reverend N&rada,-how do you. know that truth 18 taught as something higher,—(we reply ) Having stated that a knower of the vital breath 18 9 superior speaker 7) the passage ‘Verily, by seemg thu, by thimkmg this, by knowing thu, ons becomes a superor speaker’ (Chind 7154), and having dustan guished the worshipper of truth from the worshzpper of the vital breath by the term ‘but’ m the passage “But he, verily, speaks superiorly, who speaks superiorly through truth’ (Ohind 716 1), Scripture teaches truth, the cause of bemg a superior speaker m, this case (Chind 7161), as higher than the vital breath, the cause of bemg @ superior speaker im the previous case (Chind १ 16 4)

[so 1 9 8 154: VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 2]

The mstrumental case ‘through truth’ (satyena) follows the rule "The third case ending 18 added to s word denoting a mark or an attribute which indicates the existence of a particular state or condi- tion,’ (Pin 2821, SD K 65661) ‘The olause ‘who speaks’, eto means who speaks superiorly through trath which figuratively imphes the Supreme Brahman, the object to be worshipped. The word ‘truth’ 28 well known to be denotmg Brahman, as in the

“Verily, the name of this Brahman 1s truth’ (Chand 8 3 4), “Brahman 18 truth, knowledge and imfinite’ (Tait 21) and so on ‘Bemg a superior speaker’ means being the speaker of the supremacy of one’s own, object of worship, and this amounts to declaring the unsurpassed ness of the Deity to be worshipped The suffix ‘éatr’ in ‘by seemg this’ and the rest follows the rule ‘The present partiaple 1s used to denote the manner or the cause of an action’ (Pin 3 2 126, 87 K 31032) That 18, the direct vision of the Dety to be worshipped 1s the cause of being © superior speaker The sense 18 that 1t becomes possible for one to be such a superior speaker only through the grace of the Deity worshipped by him, and apprehended through direct vision, Moreover, the very permission to speak the truth, givmg up bemg # superior speaker through merely the vital breath, asked for mm the passage ‘“‘May J, mr, speak supemorly through truth”’’ (Ohind 7 16 1), ndicates the termmation of the section, of the vital- breath Here, the term ‘soul’, too, can have a consistent meaning only if the Supreme Soul be understood, since to be the cause of all, mentioned in the passage ‘To the self alone all this belongs’ (ChAind 7 261), 18 impossible on the part of any one else His 0117688 will speak of this in subsequent aphonsms +

COMPARISON Baladeva

He gives two alternative explanations of the sitra the last of which agrees with the explanation given by Nimbarka The first explanation 18 ‘The Plenty (08 Brahman), because 1t 18 immense joy, and because 17 18 taught as the highest’ 5

1 P 423 vol 2 2 P 558 vol 2 9 For correct quotation see 0017006 1 p 152 ¢ Vide Br Su 214-35 6GB 138

[80 1 89 ADH 2] VEDANTA PARLJATA SAURABHA 155

SUTRA 9 ‘© AWD ON ACCOUNT OF THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE ATTRIBUTES >”

Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

"५ And” because attributes hke “bemg of the form of unsurpassed. pleasure’, ‘bemg mmmortal’, “bemg estabhshed on one’s own great 7988 ' and the rest are ‘‘ appropriate ” on the part of the Highest Self alone, the Plenty 1s none but the Highest Self

Vedanta-kaustubha

The attributes, mentioned im the section of the Plenty, which are not possible on the part of any one else, bemg “ appropra m, reference to the Highest Self alone, 1t 18 known that the Plenty 18 the Highest Self Thus, the passage “Where one does not see another’ (Chind 7241), means ‘where’ one, unmersed m, pleasure characterzed by unsurpassed greatness, ‘does not see’, 16 notice another’, 16 petty worldly pleasure, the contrary of the pleasure which 18 characterized by greatness,—just as one who has drank the nectar, does not notice any other drmk Moreover, ‘where’ one, plunged 1 pleasure, ‘does not see’ any sorrow, the contrary of pleasure, 16 comes to be endowed with every pleasure and delivered from every sorrow The term ‘where’ moans ‘by being attached to whom’ Such atimbutes of “bemg the giver of unsurpassed pleasure’, ‘bemg the remover of all sorrow’ and the rest are appropriate on the part of the Highest Self alone, and not on that of the individual soul, denoted by the term ‘vital breath’ Further, as the atimbutes of “being unmortal by nature’, “bemg established on one’s own great ness’, ˆ 06106 the creator of all’ and the rest,—mentioned im the pas sages ‘*‘ That which 18 the Plenty 18, vernly, the mmortal’—‘ Sir, On what 18 1t established?’ ‘On 108 own greatness’” (Chiind 7 241), “He alone 18 below”’ (Chand 7251), ‘From the soul the vital breath,” (Chind 7261) and so on,—are appropmate on the part of the Highest Self alone, 80 16 18 estabhshed that the Plenty is none but the Highest Self

Here ends the section entitled ‘The Plenty’ (2)

[80 1 3 10 156 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 8]

Adhikaransa 8 The section entitled ‘The 1m perishable’ (Sfitras 10-12)

SUTRA 10

“Ton ImPERISHABLE (78 BRAHMAN), BECAUSE OF SUPPORTING THH END OF THE ETHER ”’

Vedainta-parijata-saurabha

The Imperishable 1s Brahman Why? ^ Because of 108 support- mg’ the ether, dicated. as the support of the effects m. past, present and future

Vedinta-kaustubha

Now, the reverend author of the aphorisms 1s showing that the Brhadiranyaka passage “Hesaid “That, verily, 1s the Impershable’’’ (Brh 3 8 8) and so on, refers to Brahman

In the Brhadiranyaka we read ‘“‘In whom 1s the ether woven, warp and woof?” He said “That, verily, 0 Gargl, the Brihmanas call the Impenshable, non gross, non-atomic, non short, non long, non-red, non lubricous, without shadow”’’ (आ) 3888) and so on A doubt arises, viz whether here pradhfins 1s understood by the term “Imperishable’, or the individual soul, or the Supreme Brahman What 1s suggested, to begin with? The pruna face view 1s as follows Let pradhiinsa be denoted by the term ‘Impershable’ because, to be the supporter of 108 own effecta fita m on ita part, and because non grossness and the rest, too, fit m on 108 part, फ bemg admutted to be without form Or, let the mdividual soul be mplied by the term “Imperishable’, smce 1t 18 possible for 1t to be the supporter of all non sentient 07016008, the objecta of 108 own enjoyment

With regard to it, we reply The Impershable is the Supreme Brahman Why? “On account of supporting (all thmgs) ending with the ether ”’,1e on account of supporting that which, ends with the ether, viz the group of effects begmnmng with the earth, or the group of effects, bogmnmg with the earth and endmg with the ether To the query ‘“ That, 0 Yajfiavalkya, which 1s above the heaven, that which 18 beneath the earth, that which 18 between these heaven and the earth, that which 1s past, present and future 1, m whom 18 all that woven,

1 Omuts doakgaia’, vide Brh 386, p 168

[80 1 3 10 ADH 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 157

warp and woof!”’ (Brh 886), the answer bemg given ‘“In the ether alone all that 1s inter woven, warp and woof”’ (Brh 387), G&rgi asked again ‘“‘In whom, verily, 18 the ether mterwoven, warp and woof’’?’ (Brh 387) Then, the answer given was that the support of (all things), begmmnimng with the earth and endmg with the ether, 18 the Impershable, in the passage “He said “That, venly, 18 the Impermhable”’ (Brh 888) and so on Thus, on account of supporting the group of effecta, begmning with the earth and endmg with the ether, known from the above question and answer, the Imperishable 18 none but Brahman

Or else, (an alternative explanation of the sfitra,) ““The end” 16 the mit or the cause, of the “ ether”, meanmg the atmospheric ether 1, 18 the non manifest pradhina,—" on account of supporting 1” That 18, the Imperishable,—mentioned as the support of that which 18 dicated as the support of all objects im past, present and fature, in the passage beginnmg ‘That which 18 above’ (Brh 377), which 18 denoted by the term ‘ether’, and which has the names ‘non manifest’, ‘subtle’, ‘pradhins’ and the rest,—18 not pradh&na, but Brahman. alone >

COMPARISON

Samkara and Bhiskara

Interpretation of the term ‘ambarfinta’ different, viz ‘(all thmgs) ending with the ether’® Samkara uses the term ‘Brahman here *, although evidently from 018 pont of view Brahman cannot be such a support, but Iévara

1 Ie the ether, in the ordmary sense, aa distmguished from the ether which denotes pradhdina

2 Note that the first explanation given by Stinwdec talles with the expla nations of Samkara and Bhdskdra, the second with those of Rdmdnwa and Nunbérka and others

3 828 1310, % 318 Bh B1310,p 66 See SHnwdiec above

“ © 319 Na ca ayam ambardnia dhrhh Brahmano'nyaira sambhavait’ eto

[st 1 3 1112

168 VEDANTA PARLJATA SAUBABHA ADH 3] SUTRA 11 “AND THIS (SUPPORTING) (BELONGS TO THE LORD), ON ACCOUNT OF COMMAND ”

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

“And this” supporting belongs to the Highest Person alone Why? Because (the Impermshable, the supporter) 1 mentioned by Scripture to be a commander, in the passage “Verily, at the command of this Imperishable, Gargi, the sun and the moon stand held apart’ (Brh 38 9 4)

Vedanta -kaustubha

To the objection, viz Very well, let pradhbfina be not denoted by the term ‘Impenshable’ Bnt, as, to be such 9 support fita m on the part of the individual soul, the enjoyer of material objects, as, possess ing the attributes of non grossneas and the rest too fita m on 118 part, and, as, finally, uf the mdividual soul be understood, then an etymo logical meaning (of the term ‘Imperushable’) 18 possible, viz “The Impershable 1s that which does not pemsh,1e the mdividual soul,— let the individual soul alone be umplied by the term ‘Impenshable’,— the author reples here —

The supporting of the body and the rest alone,—the abode where the imdividual soul expemences the fruits of 18 own works,—is possible by the individual soul ^" And this” supporting 1s the work of the Highest Self alone, and not of any one elas Why? “On account of command”, 16 because of the mention of command m the passage ‘Verily, at the command of this Impenshable, Garg the sun and the moon stand held apart’ (Brh 389) and so on Prakrste’, 16 unrestricted, “Sigana’ 18 ‘prasisana’,1e unrestricted commanding *

SUTRA 12 ‘‘ AND ON ACOOUNT OF THE EXOLUSION OF ANOTHER NATURE ”

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

Here, by the term “Impershable’ netther pradhiina or the mdrv1 dual soul can be understood The Supreme Bemg alone 1s the meaning

+ 6 R Bh, 87, 3 2 This explama the word prasasandi im the siltra

[st 1 3 18 ADH 4] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 159

of the term ‘Impermhable’ Why? ‘On account of the exclusion of another nature’, 1 the passage ‘Verily, that Imperishable, Gargi, 13 the unseen seer, the unheard hearer, the unthought thinker, the unknown knower’ (Brh 38 11 4)

Vedanta-kaustubha

For this reason, too, the Highest Self alone 18 denoted by the term ‘Impershable’ Why* “On account of the exclumon of other nature”, 16 the “nature” “of another”, viz of pradhina or the individual soul, or the “‘ nature ’’ ^ of another two ` (make) “‘ another nature ’’,2 ‘“‘on account of the exclusion” of that ® The concluding passage, viz ‘Verily, that Imperishable, Gargi, 1s the unseen seer, the unheard hearer, the unthougbht thinker, the unknown knower None but 1t 18 @ seer, 4, none but 10 18 a thmker, none but 1 18 8 knower Verly mm this Impenshable, Girgi, the ether 18 mter woven, warp and woof’’’ (Brh 3 8 11), excludes 4 nature other than Brahman ‘Thus, pradhina 1s excluded on the ground of the atimbutes of a sentient bemg, viz bemg a seer and the rest, and the individual 80] 18 excluded on the ground of the teachmg that the Bemg who 18 unseen by all 18 the seer of all, and so on 76108, 1t 18 established that by the term ‘Impershable’ the Highest Self alone 1s understood.

Here ends the section, entitled ‘The mpershable’ (3)

Adhikarana 4 The seotion ontitled ‘One sees’ (8 7५२८४ 13) SUTRA 13

“On ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION (oF His Qua Lrrrms), He 18 THH OBJEOT WHICH ONE SEES”

Vedadnta-pirijaita-saurabha

The object which one sees, mentioned in the passage “He 8668 the Person, lymg m the aty’ (Pradna & 55), 1s not Brahma, residmg

1 8 B Bh SK,B 2 Anya bhava

3 This explams the compound anya bAdva-vydertieh"

4 Omitted portion None else other than 29४ 18 a hearer" Vide Brh 3 8 11, p 171

6 8 R Bh, SK, B

[80 1 3 18 160 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]

in the Brahma world and moluded withm the Brahmfindal But the Highest Self alone, the topic of discussion, the Lord of His own, special and non material Brahma world, 18 “the object which one 8668 ` Why! “On account of the demgnation”’ of His qualities, im the passage ‘That which 15 tranquil, ageless, fearless’ (Praéna 5 7 2) and so on

Vedanta-kaustubha

Thus, 1t has been said that prakrt: and the individual soul are not understood by the word ‘Impershable’ which denotes Brahman Now it 18 beg pomted out,—by means of this aphorism, as well as by the text dealmg with that topic.—that prakrti (or the matemal sphere) 18 rejectible, while the world of the Highest Self 1s acceptable, and that the mdividual soul 18 the worshipper, one who 1s approaching (a goal), while the Highest Self 1s the object to be worshipped and the goal to be resorted to

We find the following text in the Praéna upanisad of the Athar- vanas, introducmg the topic of discussion thus ‘Verly, that, O Satyakima, which 18 the syllable “om”, 18 the higher and the lower Brahman, Hence a knower, through this very support, reaches one of these two’ (Praansa 6 2), and contmumng ‘“ Agam, he who meditates on the Highest Person with this very syllable ‘om’ of three elements comes to the hght m the sun As 8 snake 1s freed from 108 skin, so, verily, he 18 freed from sms He 1s led by the Siman verse to the world of Brahman He sees the Person, lying in the city, and higher than the highest mass of souls” (Praina 55) Here a doubt arises, viz whether “‘the object which one sees”.—ie the Realty which one sees, 10 accordance with the declaration, viz that through the meditation on Him, the worshipper of the three elements, freed. from all sins, having come to the sun, and having been led by the S&man verses to the world of Brabman, 8668 that very Person, lymng im the Oity,—s the four faced Brahm&, the premding derty of all souls, and indicated before as the ‘lower Brahman’, or whether the object which. one sees 18 the Highest Person, denoted by the term ‘Supreme Brah- man’, the cause of the whole world and the topic of Scripture The orma {0006 view 8 a8 follows Let the four faced Brahma be the

1 — ee pp 82 e¢ seg aR B

[st 1 3 1d ADH 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 161

object which one sees As! 1t has been, stated before that the wor shipper of the prapava (= om) of one element and the worshipper of the pranava of two elements respectively attam the world of man and the world of the ether as frutta, so the world of Hiranyagarbha,— who represents the individual souls m their collective aspect,—higher than the ether, should be understood as designated as the fruit belong ing to the worshipper (of the pranava) of three elements The object of the perception of a person, who has come to that world, 18 he (the four faced) alone, the ruler of that world It 1s quite appropriate to hold that the person, residing m that world and representing the mdividual souls mm thew collective aspect, 1s superior to those discrete souls which are embodied bemgs, yet are superior to the body, the sense organs, etc Hence the object which one sees 18 the four faced Brahma

On this suggestion, we reply The Highest Self alone, the topic of discussion and the cause of the world, 1s the object which one sees Why? ^ Onaccount of designation”,1e on account of the designation of the qualities of the Highest Self, such as, ‘bemg the object to be attained by the wise’, ‘bemg tranquil’, ‘bemg ageless’, ‘bemg mmor tal’, ‘bemg fearless’ and the rest, mentioned in tho passage Through this very syllable “om” as the support, a knower reachos that which 18 tranquil, ageless, immortal, fearless, the supreme, the supreme goal’? (Prasna 67) “A mass of souls’ implies one who has connec tion with the body and the rest, generated by karmas, and that (viz connection with the body, etc ) 1s declared by Scripture to be pertaining to the four faced Brahma too, m the passage ‘He who first creates Brahms’ (Svet 618) Nor 28 the world of the four faced Brahma higher than the ether, 1t being mcluded among the heaven and the rest The world, mentioned in the passago He sees the Person, lymg within the city’ (Praéna 5 5), 18 not the world of Brabm&,— otherwise called the ‘world of truth’ and an abode for the enjoyment of the fruits of works, but 1s the world of Brahman,—who 18 the 0006 of digcussion and the object which one sees,—to be approached by the freed, 1t bemg mdicated. as the sleeping place of the Person, higher than even the ‘masa of souls’ which itself 18 higher than all worlds

1 Here the dair sugiz rmplies reason in accordance with Pin 8 2 126, SD K 3108 4‘ Pardyanam' not mcluded under the original text 11

[80 1 8 18 162 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]

This very world of the Supreme Brahman 1s declared as the object to be attamed by the wise by another Upanigad of the same Athar

vanas, beginning ‘““The place which, all the Vedas record, that which all the austerrties declare, wishing what people practise chastity, that place I tell you in brief’’’ (Katha 215), and contimumg ‘That 18 the best support, that 1s the supreme support By knowing that support

one rejoices i the world of Brahman’ (Katha 217) That very Upanisad declares the unattamableness of this (world of Brahman) by the non knower, and ita attamableness by the knower, as well as its difference from mundane existence m the passages “But he who has not understanding, who 1s inattentive, and ever impure, does not reach that place, and goea to transmigratory existence But he who has understanding, who 18 attentive and ever pure, reaches that place, whence he 18 not born agam Aman, however, who has unde

standing as his charioteer, the mind as the rem, reaches the end of the journey, that highest place of Visnu’ (Katha 37-8) In the Santi

parva, It 18 said in the beginning of the Harita mt& ‘Yudhisthira said

“A man of what nature, of what conduct, of what knowledge, of what resort, attams the place of Brahman, that 1s higher than prakria and eternal?” Bhigma said ^ He who 1s engaged in the religious duties m connection with salvation, who 18 abstemious, who has conquered the senses, attains the supreme place that 18 higher than prakrti and eternal”’ (Meh& 129968 9969) 7 From such question and answer by the wisest men, the superiority of thea world of Brahman—the object of enquiry—to prakrti, 108 attamableness only through the religious duties in connection, with salvation, and 108 eternity, are established Hence, 1t 1s established that the object which, one sees 18 Brahman, lyimg in the वकि, and higher than prakrti, in ita effected and in, 1t8 causal conditions

Here ends the section entitled ‘One sees’ (4)

COMPARISON Samkara

Interpretation different, viz according to him, the question 28 whether the higher or the lower Brahman 1s meant here, and not

1 P 716 1168 22 28 vol 8

[so 1 3 14 ADH 6] VEDANTA PARLIATA SAUBABHA 163

whether Brahman or Brahmé, the four faced The conclusion, of course, 18 that the higher Brahman 18 meant 1

Adhikarana 6 The section entitled ‘The small’ (8१४८०४७ 14-28) SUTRA 14

“THE SMALL (ETHER) 18 BRAHMAN, ON AGOOUNT OF WHAT FOLLOWS ° Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

The ‘small’ ether, mentioned in the passage ‘In this city of Brahman 18 9 small lotus, a chamber, small 18 the ether within it’ (Chind 8113), can be the Highest Self alone Why? ‘On account of what followa’’, 1e on account of the peculiar qualities of the Highest Self, which are designated subsequently im the passage ‘As large 1s this ether, so large 18 that ether within the space In 1t both the heaven, and the earth are contamed ‘This soul 18 free from sins, ageless’ (Chand 8 1 83) and 80 on

Vedanta-kaustubha

Thus, on, the giound of the text “He sees the Person lymg m the aty’ (Praéne 5 6), ‘lymg withm, the aty’, as well as ‘bemg the object which one sees’, fit m on the part of the Highest Self as possessmg a manifest auspicious form In the very same manner, smallness, too, fits in on His part as residing in the abode, viz the heart lotus With this in his mind, the reverend author of the aphorisms says now

We find the followmg text m the Chindogya mmedistely after the doctiine of the Plenty * ‘Now what 1s within this city of Brahman 18 a small lotus, ® chamber, small 1s the ether within 1t What 18 withm that should be searched for, that, verily, should be enqured mto’ (Chand 811) The meanmg of the text, according to us, 18 a8 follows ‘what 1s’ within ‘this aty of Brahman’,—ie withm, the body which 1s the abode where the individual soul, a part of Brahman, enjoys the fruit of 1te karmas and which 1s the place where 1t realizes

188 1313 p 331 ‘Kun aamin vdkye param Brahma abladhydtavyam upadigyaia ahasvit aparam th 28 R, Bh, SK, B 9 Op ov «VE 1388

fso 1 3 lt 164. VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ApH 6 |

Brahman,—is a “small °, 1 © a tiny ‘lotus’, viz the heart, well known from Scripture, that very thing 18 a chamber asit were In that same chamber, there 15 a “‘small’’,1e a tiny, or one who has manifested himself in a subtle form in accordance with the wish of his own devotees who are devoted to none else, ‘ether’, 1e one who 1s pervasive by nature In that heart lotus, the small Brahman who 1s denoted by the term ‘ether’ ‘should be searched for’,1e should be disarmunated. as different from the enquirer, a8 well as from the body, and ‘should be enquired into’, 16 should be meditated on repeatedly through the ‘hearmg’ of the Vedanta

Here a doubt amses, viz whether by the term ‘small ether’ the elemental ether 18 to be understood, or the Highest Self If it be suggested The elemental ether, because the term ‘ether’ 18 well known to denote the elemental ether, and because the term ‘small’ too, a8 mmplymg a subtle object, may be applied to 1b It cannot be gaid thatin the text ‘As large 18 this ether, so large 18 the ether with, the heart’ (Chand 813), one and the same thing (viz the ether) cannot reasonably be both the object compared and the object (upa- meya and upamfna) with which, 1t 1s,—because it can appropriately be so on the ground of the distmction, of the external and the internal + Or, let the embodied soul, like the pomt of a spoke only, be the small ether, because 1t, too, 18 known from the passage ‘Now this serenity (ie serene bemg) having arsen from this body’ (Ohind 8 8 4) Being 9007010 by nature, it can, be fittingly termed ‘small’, and, bemg undefiled by the body, the sense organs and the rest, 1t can be fittingly eompared to the ether *—

We reply “The small”, 16 the amall other, 18 none but the Highest Self Why? ‘On account of what follows ”,1e on account of the reasons contamed m, the concludimg text,1e on account of the peculiar qualities of the Highest Self, viz “bemg comparable to the ether’, ‘bemg the support of all worlds, beginnmg with the earth’, “pemg the soul’, “bemg free from ams’—and the rest Thus, m the passage ‘As large 18 this ether, so large 1s that ether withm the

1 That 1s, es the external ether 10 1s the upamdna, aa the mnternal ether the upameya Hence no contradichon 18 mvolved.

2 That 18 as the ether remams aloof from the mmpumtses of the world, though connected with 1t, so the soul remams aloof from the mpunties of the body and the rest, though connected with them Hence the latter may be compared with the former

[st 1 3 10 ADH 6 | VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA 165

heart’ (Chind 8 1 3) the small ether, 1e the Supreme Bemg alone, 18 compared to the well known ether, smce when two different things can be reasonably held to be the object with which the thing 1s com

pared and the object compared, 1t 18 unreasonable to suppose one and the same thing to be both (viz upamfns and upameya) ‘Bemg the supporter of all effecta’ too, mentioned m the pasaage ‘In it both the heaven and the earth are contamed’ (Chind 813), fits m on the part of the Highest Self alone The attributes lke “bemg the soul’, “bemg free from sms’ and the rest, mentioned 1s the passage

‘This soul 18 free from sins, ageless, deathleas, sorrowless, without hunger, without thirst, possessed of true desires, possessed of true resolves’ (Chind 8 1 6), fit 17 only uf the Highest Self be understood

Moreover, after having designated the non permanency of the fruita of woiks and ther incapacity of knowmg Him m the passage ‘As here the world won by work perishes, so hereafter the world won by merit perishes’ (Chind 816), Scripture concludes ‘Now, those who depart, having known the soul here and those true desires, come to have free movement in all the worlds’ (Chind 816) That 38, those worshippers who ‘depart’ to the other world, ‘havmg Imown’, 16

having realized ‘the soul’,1e the Supreme Lord called ‘the small’, and "10088 , 1 6 His qualities, come to have free movement in all the worlds Accordingly, the small ether 18 the Highest Self, mnce then alone free movement 18 explicable on, the part of those who know the nature and qualities of the ‘small one’

SUTRA 15 “Qn ACCOUNT OF GOING AND OF WOED, FOR THUS IT IS SEEN, THERE 78 A MARK AS WELL ”’

Vedanta-parijdita-saurabha

The “gong” 18 mentioned m the text ‘All bemgs are gomg day by day’ (Chand 8 321), and the “ word” 18 ‘The world of Brahman’ (Chind 8 3 2%),—on account of these two, the ‘small one’ 18 ascer- tained to be the Supreme Bemg The daily going 1s “seen thus’’ m another scriptural text too, viz ‘Then, my dear, he comes to be

‡ 8 R, Bh, SK, ए ० Op cit

fsc 1 3 15 166 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]

united with the Exmstent”’ (Chand 6812) If the karmadhiaraya compound be understood,? then Brahman alone ए ‘the mark’, 1 © the primary meaning of the word ("Brahma loka’) “ as well "ˆ

Vedinta-kaustubha

For this reason too, says the author, the small ether 18 the Highest Self

The subsequent reasons are bemg amplified now In the text about the small ether, viz ‘Just as those who do not know the place move again and agam over a hidden treasure of gold, but do not find 1t, 80 these bemgs are gomg day by day to that world of Brahman but do not find 1४, for they are carmed away by untruth’ (Chand 8 3 2), the phrase ‘are going day by day’ states the “‘gomg’’, and the “word” 18 ‘this world of Brahman’, (Brahma loka)}—on account of these two, 10 15 known that the small ether 1s the Highest Self The sense 18 that because of the gomg of the mdividual souls, mdicated by the term ‘bemgs’, to Brahman daily during deep sleep when all the sense organs are dissolved, and because of the word ‘world of Brahman’, the small ether 18 ascertained to be none but the Highest Self, 98 the individual soul 1s one who approaches (and hence cannot be the goal approached), and as going 1s not appropriate on the part of the elemental ether “For thus 16 18 seen ”’,16 the gomg of all bemgs to the Highest Self alone day by day during the state of deep sleep, as well as their return therefrom, are found, m the very same manner, 1n other passages too, viz ‘“So exactly, my dear, all these bemgs, bemg united with the Existent, do not know, we have become united with the Existent”’’ (Chand 692), ‘““Hayimg come back from the Exs tent, they do not know We have come back from the Exstent”’ (Chand 6101) Im the very same manner, the term ‘world of Brah man’, too, 18 found apphed to the Highest Self, as m the passage ‘This 18 the world of Brahman, 0 king,” said he’ (Brh 48 39) The phrase ‘that’ (Chind 832) mdicates the going of all bemgs there (viz to Brahman) That 15, the term ‘world of Brahma’ (Brahma loka),—stated to be m apposition with the word ‘that’ which denotes the ‘small one’, and explained as a karmadhiraya compound thus “the world which 1s Brahman’,—is “a mark”’,106 a convincing proof, that the small ether 1s the Highest Brahman

1 Op ott § Bee below V K

fat 1 3 16 +त 6 | VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 167

SOTRA 16 ‘‘AND ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPORTING (THE LoRD 18 THR SMALL

ETHER), BHCAUSH THIS GREATNESS IS OBSERVED iy Him (पषति ANOTHER SORIPTURAL PASSAGR) ”’

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

The holding apart, mentioned m the passage ‘He 18 the bndge, a lhmatary support of these worlds’ (Chind 8 4 1 1), fits m 1६ the small ether be the Highest Self, because “this greatness 18 observed” “in him १, 18 m the Highest Self alone who 1s called ‘a support’? on the authority of another seruptural passage, viz "67 the command of this Imperishable, Girgi, the sun and the moon stand, held apart’ (Brh 893)

Vedanta-kaustubha

On account of the following reason, viz = On account of snpport- ng’, by the word ‘small ether’, the Highest Self alone 1s to be under atood here Compare “Now, he who 28 the soul is the bridge, a imitary sopport for keepimg these worlds apart’ (Chand 841) The sense 18 (The soul 1s) ‘a bmdge’,—or, the cause of the non miter muxture,—and a ‘limstary support’,—or that which separates,—‘for keeping apart’—1e for preventing the intermixture or splittmg asunder ‘of these worlda’, or of the worlds separated from one another as relating to the soul (1e internal), and as relatmg to the gods (16 external) The senge 1s that as ‘‘ this greatness”, viz supporting, 4418 observed’’ in, the Highest Self m another scriptural passage, 80 here, too, the small ether, the hmitary support of all the worlds, 18 known, to be the Highest Self The other scriptural passage is to the effect ‘At the command of this Impenshable, तह, the sun and the moon atand held apart’ (Brh 389) Simularly, there 1s ® passage “Hoe w the Lord of all, he uw the Lord of the worlds, he 1s the bndge, the lmitary support for keeping these worlds apart’ (Brh 4 4 22 4)

1§ R, Bh, SK, B

$088 ed ahghtly different, p 14 viz ‘Aaya ca mahimno dhrtyd khyasya ? 8, 8 Bh

4 Correct quotation Kea sarvedvara esa bhitddhapanr esa क्थ pdiah ea eatul + Vide Brh 4422, p 246

(80 1 3 17 168 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 5]

COMPARISON Ramfnuja, Srikantha and Baladeva

This 18 stitra 16 17 the commentanes of RAmaénuja and Srikantha Resulting meaning same, although the meaning of words different, viz ‘asya’ means ‘of the Lord’ and ‘asmm’ means in the small ether Hence the sitra ‘Because supporting, which 18 a greatness of him (viz the Lord), 18 observed 179 1t (viz 17), the small ether)’ 1

SUTRA 17

‘ AND BHOAUSE IT IS WHLL ENOWN ”’

Vedainta-parijata-saurabha

And because the word ‘ether’ 1s well known to be denoting the Highest Self as well,—as m, the passages “The ether, verily, 1s the revealer of name and form’ (Chind 81413), ‘All these begs, forsooth, arise from the ether alone’ (Chind 1 9 1 8),—the small ether 18 none but the Highest Self

Vedanta-kaustubha

Again, the small ether should be understood to be none but the Highest Self Why? Because the word ‘ether’ 1s well-known to be denoting the Highest Self as well Where? In the passages ‘The ether, verily, 18 the revealer of name and form’ (Chand 8 141), ‘All these beings, forsooth, arise from the ether alone’ (Chand 19 1)

COMPARISON Srikantha

Interpretation different, viz ‘Because (the Lord) 18 celebrated (in, other Upanwads, viz Mahopanisad, Kaivalya upanigad and the rest), to be an object to be worshipped as abiding m the small lotus, (the small ether 1s the Lord)’ 4

1 इल B 1315, pp 3089 Part 1 अ+ 1815 pp 4878 PartS BB 1316 a

$ 68 R Bh “SK 1316 p 488 Part 6

[श 1 3 1819 ADH 5] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 169

SUTRA 18

“Ty rt BE OBJROTHD THAT ON AOQOOUNT OF A REFHRENOE TO THE OTHER, (VIZ THH INDIVIDUAL SOUL), HH (IS THE SMALL ETHER), (WH REPLY ) NO, BROAUSE OF IMPOssIBILiry "°

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

If 1t be objected that ^< on account of a reference’ to the individual soul as well m the middle of the text about the ‘amall one’, viz m the passage “This serene bemg having arisen from this body, having attamed the form of highest hght, 18 completed nits own form ‘This 18 the soul, said he’ (Chfind 8 8 & 1), let the mdividual soul be the ‘amall one ’,—

(We reply ) ‘no’, “because of the mposaibility ” of the qualities of freedom from sins and the rest,? on the part of the individual soul

Vedanta-kaustubha

If 1t be objected that ^ on account of a reference * to the mndividual soul by the term ‘serene bemg m the middle of the text about the amall ether, viz in the passage “This serene bemg, having arisen from this body, having attamed the form of highest light, 18 completed. mitsownform ‘Thiswthesoul,sadhe Ths 18 mmortal, fearless’ (Chand 8 3 4), let “him ”’ alone be the small ether,—

(Wereply )‘No’ Why? ‘Because of mmpossibility”’,1e because the above mentioned qualities of freedom from sms and the rest are impossible on the part of the individual soul

SUTRA 19

“Ty It BH OBJECTED THAT FROM WHAT IS SUBSEQUENT, (THE INDIVIDUAL SOUL MAY BE MHANT HERE), (WE REELY ) BUT (THAT SUBSEQUENT P4SSaGH REFERS TO THH SOUL SO FAB ONLY) IT HAS ITS REAL NATURH MANIFEST ^

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

If # be objected that “from what 1s subsequent 7, 196 from Prajapati's statement referrmg to the mdividual soul, the eight fold

18 R Bh, SE, B 2 Vide Ohind §15

[so 1 ॐ 19 170 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA apg 65]

qualtiea of freedom from ams and the rest are known to belong to the mdrvidual soul as well, hence let 1t alone be the small ether,—

We reply The Highest Self, endowed with the above mentioned qualities and having His real nature ever mantfest, 18 the ‘small ons’ , but not the mdividual soul, havmg ita real nature mantfest, (not always, but only durmg release)

Vedainta-kaustubha

Here the word ‘small’ 18 to be supplied from the mam, aphor1sm,* and the words ‘he, no’ from the precedimg one® If it be objected This 18 impossible ‘From what 1s subsequent’ to the doctrme of the ‘small’,1e from the statement of PrajApati, the mdividual soul should be known as endowed with the attributes of freedom from ams and the rest 06008, here too let 1t alone be the ‘small one’, endowed. with the qualities of freedom from sms and the rest,—

(We reply )‘“‘No” There, viz m the passage ‘Having attained the form of Highest hght, 1+ 18 completed im xta own form’ (Chand 834), the mdividual soul which has 18 real nature manifest, 18 mtended to be designated The word “but” (m the sitra) dearly indicates the great difference between that which has tts real nature manifest and the ‘small one’ the real nature of which 18 ever unveiled and which 1s ever beyond the conventional distmctions of bondage and release Thus the statement of Prajipaii (Chind 871) teaches the individual soul as possesamg the attributes of freedom from 87708 and the rest,—the soul which has 188 real attributes concealed by the states of walang and the rest, rooted on karmas, meritorious or non. meritorious, and existent from all eternity, and which has 108 real nature manifest through the attamment of the Highest Self, caused by meditation on Him But the text about the ‘small one’ (Chand 8 1 5) teaches the Highest Self as possessing the attributes of freedom from sins and the rest,—the Self who has His nature and attmbutes ever manifest, and who 1s denoted by the term ‘amall ether’ 8

i The contrast 15 between, the nifyduwbhilia evaripa Paramdiman and the aurbhiita svaripa jivdiman See VK below

४ Viz Br Sa 1814 ॐ Viz Br अ 1318

® Thats the Highest Self 1s always possessed of the attributes of freedom from sins and the rest while the ndividual soul 18 not always possessed of them, but only when ite real nature comes to be manifested Hence the amall one’ which 18 altaya posseased of these atinbutes cannot be the madrvidual soul

[50 1 3 19 ADH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 171

The meaning of the scriptural text (Chand 8 3 4) 18 as follows Just as the eye,—enveloped im deep darkness and hence unable to perform 178 own special function of making known objects like clothes, ornaments and the‘rest,—havmg attamed the ever unenveloped sun, 18 completed mm its own form and able to perform ita own special fonction, of manifestang 168 own objects,—so the mdividual soul, ‘having attamed’, 16 having completely attamed, near rteclf, the ‘highest’, 16 the Bemg different from the sentient mdrvidual soul and the non sentient, ‘hght’, 16 the real nature of the Whole the revealer of all, 18 ‘completed’ im its real nature as knowledge, different from the body, the sense organs and the rest and endowed with ita own blise,—as such 1t 18 said to have 108 real nature manifest (हषः bhiita svaripa) The word ‘&virbhita svariipa’ 18 to be explained. as ‘one whose real nature has become manifest’ Moreover, as ‘hems a bridge’, ‘bemg the hmitary support of all worlds’, and ‘bemg the controller of the sentaent and the non sentient’ are not possible even, on, the part of the dividual soul which bas 178 real nature manifest, so the small ether can never be supposed to be the mdzvidual soul In the doctrine of the ‘small’ (Chind 8 1 6), the attmbutes of freedom from sins and the rest, which are special to one who has this real nature ever manifest, are mentioned, while in the doctrine taught by Prajapati (Chind 871), only those that are special to that which has its nature manifest (and not ever manifest) Henoe, the reason “because of impossibility’ (mentioned m Br Si 1318) remams m

force

COMPARISON Samkara

Interpretataon different, viz ‘If 1t be said + (then we reply) No, but (the passage im question refers to the soul only so far) as ita real nature haa become manifest (1e so far 10 has become Brahman)1 Thus, accordmg to Samkara, the statement of Praj&pati (Chind 8 ¶ 1) does not really refer to the mdividual soul, but to Brahman, Accordmg to Nimbi&rka, however, as we have seen, 10 refers to the freed soul, which too 18 different from Brahman

1 8 8 1319 pp 338 ef seg

[8 1 9 20 172 VEDANTA PABLJATA SAUBABHA ADH 6 |

Bhaskara

He, too, points out that the statement of Prajipati does not refer to the individual soul as such, but to the soul which has become the Supreme Soul in nature !

SUTRA 20 ‘‘ AND THE REFERENOH HAS A DIFFERENT PURPOSE °

Vedanta -parijita-saurabha

“The reference” to the mdividual soul 18 for showing that the Supreme Soul 18 the cause of the manjfestation of the real nature of the individual soul

Vedanta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz If the small ether be the Supreme Soul having His real nature ever manifest, then the reference to the 1060 चा dual soul 77, the text about the ‘small one’, viz in the passage ‘Now, this serene being, haying amsen from this body’ (Chand 8 8 4), must have a purport,—the author replies here

The word “and `` (in the sttra) umples possibility Just as on. attaming the sun, the eye, overpowered so long by darkness, 18 com pleted m ita real form, so on, attammg the highest light,1e the small ether, the wndividual soul, havimg 80 long 108 real nature and qualities like freedom from. sins and the rest hidden by the beginningless miyi, 18 completed n1ts own specialform Thus, the reference to the individual soul m the statement of Prajipati 1s simply for showmg that the small ether 18 the cause of the manzfestation of the real form of the individual soul, and not for proving that the small ether 1s the mdividual soul itself

COMPARISON

Samkara and 21128128.

Interpretation different, viz: ‘And the reference (to the individual soul) has s different purpose (viz the determmming of the nature of Brabman)’2 According to Nimb&rka, however, as we have seen,

1 Bh B 1319 p 58 » 88 1320 p 339 Bh B 1820 p 58

[so 1 3 21 22 ADH 6 | VEDANTA PARIJITA SAURABHA 173

the purpose is to show that Brahman 1s the cause of the manifestation of the real nature of the soul

SUTRA 21 “Ilr IT BE OBJHCTED THAT ON AOCOOUNT OF THE SORIPTURAL

DECLARATION OF WHAT IS SMALL (THH LORD IS NOT THY SMALL ETHER), (WH REPLY ) THAT HAS BREEN SAID”

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

“Tf 1 be objected, that on account of the scriptural declaration of what 18 small’, the all pervamve Bemg cannot be understood here,— (we reply ) the answer to this has already been given 1

Vedanta-kaustubha

«Tf it be objected that on account of the scmptural declaration of whatis small *’ im the passage ‘Small 18 the ether within 1t’ (Chand 8 1 1), let the mdividual soul alone, which 1s atomic m, 8126, be the ‘small one ’,—

(We reply ) The answer to this has been given under the aphorism ‘Because (Brahman) 18 to be concerved thus, as m the case of the ether’ (Br Si 1 27)

SUTRA 22 ‘AND BHOAUSE OF THH IMITATION OF THAT °

Vedinta-pairijaita-saurabha

“And because of the imitation”’ “of that’, 16 of that which has its real nature ever manifest, m accordance with the passage “He alone shiwmg, everything shines’ (Katha 515, Mund 2210, Svet 6 149), the mduvidual soul, the पणाः, cannot be the ‘small one’, having 108 real nature ever manzfeat

Vedinta-kaustubha

The author says that for this reason, too, the mdividual soul 18 not the small ether

1 Vide Br Si 127 2 8, Bh

[80 1 3 23 174. VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 5]

Because of the umitation “‘of that”’,1e of the small ether having the eight fold attributes ever manifest, by that which has 108 attributes of freedom from mns and the rest manifest (and not ever manifest) the ‘small one’ 18 none but the Highest Self Just as in the Mundaka, declaring the imitation of the Lord by all m the passage ‘He alone shining, everythmg shines’ (Mund 2210), and declaring further thai everything 18 to be manifested by the Lord m the passage ‘Through his ght all this shines’ (Mund 2210), all thmgs which are imitators and objects to be manifested cannot be the object which 18 imitated and the object which manifests,—so the dividual soul, mentioned by Praj&pati, and an umitator, cannot be Brahman, denoted by the term ‘small’, and object to be imitated.

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhdskara

Interpretation different, viz according to them, the siitras 22 23 form. a new adhikarana, designating that the passage Mundaks 2 2 10 refers not to a lummous substance, but to the Supreme Soul! But according to Nimb&rka, they form parts of the preceding adhikarana, setting forth additional arguments as to why the ‘small ether’ 18 none but the Supreme Soul

Raménuja, Srikantha and Baladeva

According to all, the word ‘anukrteh’ means “because of simi lanty’ Thats, the mdividual soul 18 not the ‘amall one’ or Brahman, because it 18 only simular to Him ॐ

SOTRA 23 °" MoREOVES (THIS I8) DECLARED BY Smprr”’®

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha Also Smrti declares ‘They have come to attam equality of attributes with me’ (Git& 14 2 4)

18B 1323, pp 3407 Bh B 18 22 pp 58 ef seg 9 (57 B 1321 p $13, Part 1, Tad anubdras tat aimyam’

SK B 182] pp 4445 2970 6, © 28 18 22 $ 088 ed,p 16 reads Aps amaryyais 4R,B

[७0 1 3 24 ADH 6] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 175

Vedanta-kaustubha

Smyti declares the equality of the mdividual soul, freed from all bondage, with the Supreme Soul, in the passage ‘They have come to attam, equality of attmbutes with moe’ (Gité 142) Hence, 1 18 estabhshed that the amall ether 1s none but the Supreme Soul

Here ends the section, entitled “The small’ (6)

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhiaskara

Reading different, viz ‘Api oa smaryyate’ Interpretation different, viz —* Further, Smrta (viz Git&é 1612, etc) declares (the Soul to be the cause of the manifestation of all)’ 1

Ramanuja and Baladeva Reading ‘Api smaiyyate’ 2

Srikantha

‘Api ca smaryyate’, 1e ‘Moreover Smrti declares (that the Lord 18 to be meditated on as abiding in the heart lotus 8) °

Adhikaransa 6 The seation entitled ‘What 18 measured (Sititrags 24 25)

SUTRA 24 Qm ACOOUNT OF THE TEXT ONLY, WHAT IS MHASURED (18 THE LOED) 99 Vedinta-parijata-saurabha ‘What 16 measured”’,1e what 1s of the size of a thumb, 18 none

but the Highest Person, ‘on, account of the text” ‘The Lord of past and future’ (Katha 4 13 +)

1§ B 1338 p 948 Bh B 1323 p 59 28:1 B 19 98, p 318, 29201, 628 13 23 28K B 1328 p 445 Parts

५ 8 R Bh, SK B

[80 1 $ 24 176 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6}

Vedanta-kaustubha

Thus, 1t has been established that Brahman 18 to be meditated on as the ‘small one’ Now, the author pomts out that Brahman 18 to be meditated on, as of the size of merely a thumb

In the Katha valli, we read ‘The Person, of the aize of merely a thumb, dwells in the midst of the soul’ (Katha 412), agam ‘The Person, of the size of merely a thumb, smokeless like hght’ (Katha 413) again ‘The Person, of the mze of merely a thumb, the mner soul, 18 ever seated m the heart of bemgs’ (Katha 617) Here, a doubt arises as to whether the Person of the mize of merely a thumb 18 the mdividual soul or the Highest Person The prima face view 18 a8 follows The Person of the size of merely a thumb 18 the mdividual soul m accordance with the Svet&évatara text, viz ‘The lord of the vital breaths, who 18 of the size of merely a thumb and of a form hke the sun, moves about through his own works’ (Svet 6 7d-8a), as well as m accordance with the Smrti passage, viz ‘Then Yama drew forth, by force, from the body of Satyav&na, the person, of the size of merely a thumb, taed to the noose and brought under his control’ (Maha 3 16763 1)

With regard to this, we reply “What 18 measured”,10e the Person of the size of merely a thumb, mentioned in the Katha valh, 18 none but the Supreme Soul Why? ‘On account of the text”, 16 on account of the text “The lord of past and future’ (Katha 413) The sense 18 this Although ‘bemg of the mze of merely © thumb’, mentioned m the above Scnpture and Smrt: texts, 18 here perceived to be a characteristic mark of the mdividual soul, yet that mark 18 set aside,*—this 1s the sense

If 1b be objected It bemg umposmble for the mdividual soul, which 1s by nature atomic in mze, to be of the mze of a thumb, and there being the mark ‘tied to the noose’, the individual soul can, be of the mze of merely a thumb only xf 208 subtle body be meant® But 1t

1 © 806 lme 5, vol 1

> That 1s, although in the above scriptural and Smrtr texta the mdividual soul has been designated as of the mze of a thumb yet in other numerous passages 1b 19 demgnated as of the mize of an aiom meraly Hence the above desemptzon 18 seb acide

2 Thetis mnce the mdividual soul cannot be of the mze of a thumb being declared to be afomtiain. mze the designation of 10 as of the size of a thumb merely means that ita subtle body 1s 80 and not that 1t rtaelf 15 so

[भ 1 8 26 + 6] VEDANTA 22274 SAUBRABHA Li7

18 umpossible for Brahman, the topic of discussion, to be of the size of merely a thumb, even though repeatedly taught by Saripture,—

(We reply ) No, 1b bemg possible for Brahman to be so, 17, accord ance with, the wish of His devotees, and on account of His connection, with place (viz the heart) With regard to this pomt, a preceding aphorism (viz Br Si 127) may be consulted Moreover, on account also of a text referrmg to the Person, of the size of merely a thumb, viz ‘Let one draw him forth from his own body with firmness, as a pith from a reed Let one know him’ (Katha 617), the Supreme Soul alone 18 of the mze of merely a thumb Thus, the meanmg of the text 1s as follows The mdividual soul, entitled to know Brahman, the agent, endowed with a mght discrimimation between the soul and the non, soul,—amplied by the phrase ‘from his own body’,— should draw forth’, 1e should hft up or put outade,—through mtense prayer agam,— him’, 1e the Person, of the mze of a thumb, the object and known, first through meditation to be within the heart, ‘from his own body’, 1e from the body known as his own, ‘as the pith from ® reed’, then “he should know him with firmness’ If this be so, the Person of the size of merely a thumb, the object to be worshipped, must be other than the worshipper himself

SUTRA 25 «‹ Bor (ree Logp 28 8772 TO BE OF THR SIZE OF MERELY 4 THUMB)

IN REFERENCE TO THE HEART (OF MEN), BECAUSE MEN (4LONB) ARE ENTITLED (TO SORIPTURE) ”

Vedanta-parijdta-saurabha

The Lord can very well be of the size of merely a thumb, ^ reference to the heart” of the worshippers To the objection, viz The size of the heart m animals being not fixed, how can Brahman be of the mze of a thumb m reference to the heart ?—the author 7601168 ‘‘ Because men (alone) are entitled (to Soripture) ”

Vedanta-kaustubha

The author 18 justifymg the contention that Brahman can be of the size of merely a thumb 12

[st 1 3 26 178 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]

Even an all pervasive Bemg can, be of the size of merely a thumb, ‘‘unth reference to the heart’’, 16 with reference to the heart, or the heart lotus which 1s of the size of merely a thumb, of His own devotees, devoted to Him alone and to none else The sense 18 that this designation 18 mdeed proper like the demgnation of the Lord as ‘one who makes three strides’ (Trvikrama), in reference to the three worlds 1

Or else, (an alternative explanation of the word ‘‘ hrdyapeksa- ya”)

As from the word “heart ” (‘‘ hrd ”’) alone the mze of that which 18 within it (viz the Lord) 1s known, the words “in reference to” (“apekgayé*’) are to be understood as ‘im reference to the worshippers’, 16 m, accordance with, ther wish >

To the objection, viz As the 6128 of the beart differs m accordance with, the difference of hymg creatures, the text about (the Person of the size of merely) a thumb cannot be explamed in reference to the heart,—we reply ‘‘ Because men (alone) are entatled’’ to Scripture This 18 the meanmg ठ ‘That to which men are entitled’ (make ‘ manusySidhikara ’), ‘the state of that’ (make ‘manugyidhikiratva’), on, account of that (make ‘manusyidbikaratvit’) The meaning of the sariptural text concerning (ihe Person of the mze of merely) a thumb 18 explicable m reference to the heart of men Although Scripture 18 Of & universal application,“ yet as men alone can, be worshippers and seekers, they alone are entitled to it Hence, no contradiction arises here even, if the hearts of elephants and lice be not of the mze of merely a thumb, as they are not entitled to works enjoined in, Sorip ture and Smrti, as established m the mxth chapter, determming the conditions of bemg entitled to sacrifices and so on5 Thus, it 18

1 Trunkrama i an epithet of Vesnu, who paced the three worlds in three steps in His Vdmana or Dwarf incarnation The sense 18 that just as the all- pervading Lord 1s said to have three strides only so He may be said to be of the mze of a thumb only

2 Ile the Lord manifesta Humself as of the mze of a thumb to please his devotees

8 The compound manugyddhsktdraied? 18 to be explamed ag follows

¢ That 28 sorptural mandates are to be followed by all

6 Vide Pi Mi 8G 6145 pp 504-7 Part 1

fst 1 3 26 ADH 7 ] VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA 179

established that the Supreme Soul alone 18 the Person of the mze of merely a thumb

Here ends the section entitled ‘What 1s measured’ ! (8)

Adhikarana’7 The seotion entitled ‘The deity’ (Statras 26-30)

SUTRA 26

“ KVEN THOSH WHO RH ABOVE THEM (7 7 MEN) (ARB ENTITLED TO THE WORSHIP OF 384 पा ^ त), (80) BADARIYANA (HOLDS), BHOAUSH OF POSSIBILITY ”’

Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

The gods and the rest also, who are above men, are entitled to such 8 worship of Brahman,—so thinks the reverend “ Badariyana ””

Vedanta-kaustubha

It has been said im the last section that the text about the Person of the size of merely a thumb 18 explicable im reference to the heart of men, a8 men are entitled to Senpture Now, modentally, the question as to whether or not gods too are entitled to the worship of Brahman, 1s being considered

In the BrhadBranyaka, we read. “Whoever among the gods was awakened, to this, he alone became that, hkewise among the sages’ (अ 1410) (The sense ) Whoever among the gods, and smularly among the sages ‘was awakened’, 1e directly percerved Brahman, ‘he alone’ attained the nature of Brahman Here, on the doubt, viz whether or not the gods are entitled to the worship of Brahman, which 18 & means to attammg His nature, if the suggestion be As men are entitled to Scripture, and as Indra and the rest are incapable of practsamg meditation,—seemg that they, whose bodies consist of sacred texts, are not posseased of physical bodies,2—the worship of Brahman 18 not possible on the part of the gods,—we reply Such 4 worship of Brahman 18 posable on the part of gods as well, who are ‘above’ men,—so the reverend “ Bidariyana”’ thmks Why?

1 The section entitled What is measured’ 1s resumed m stitra 1 8 40 2 That us, mm order that one might carry op medrtatnen, one must have a phymeal body which 4 godlacks Hence a god cannot practise meditation

[st 1 ॐ 26 180 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7]

‘Qn acoount of possibibty,”1e because the worship and the like of Brahman, leading to salyatzon which 18 characterized. by the attamment of Brahman and 1s preceded by the cessation of all retmbutive experience due to their own works, 1s possible on their part as well Thus, although they have supermundane and celestial enjoyment, yet since such an enjoyment is subject to the faults of non permanency, surpassa bility and the rest, 1ts cessation, one day or other, 18 possible, hence, a desire for salvation, too, 18 possible on their part, by reason of their learning the unsurpaassability, supreme blisafulness and perma- nency of the attamment of the nature of Brahman, and finally through this desire for salvation, a worship of Brahman, too, 1s possible on their part 1 there bemg proofs establishing their nght to the worship of Brahman, viz the texts ‘For one hundred and one years, forsooth Indra dwelt with Prajipati, practusing chastaty’ (Chind 8 113), “Verily, Bhrgu, the son of Varuna, approached his father Varuna, (with the request) “Sir, teach me Brahman” ˆ (Tart 311) and so on Simularly, corporality, too, 1s possible on their part mn accordance with text about the evolution of name and form,* as well as 1n accord- ance with, sacred formulg, explanatory and glorificatory passages and. tradition 3 Thus it 1s declared by Scmpture “When about to say ^ एड °, he should meditate on that deity for whom the offermg 18 taken’ (Ait Br 1184) Here, no meanmg of the text being posable unless the god referred to, be possessed of s body,5 the god must be understood to have a body In tradition too, the sun, the moon, Vasu and the rest are well known to have bodies The sons of Kuntl were born from gods like Dharma and the rest, possessed of bodies 6

1 That 18, jusb es m the case of a man, the non permanency of the earthly enjoyment leada him to seek for salvation, which yields a permanent fruit and that agam, leads him to worship the Lord as a means thereto so exactly the non permanency of the heavenly enjoyment leads a god to seek for salvation, which leads him to worship the Lord

4 Vide Oh&nd 68 9 2-4 9 Moniras artha-vdda and tithkdsa

4 Ananddérama ed p 805

These are manira and ariha vada

5 Because we cannot meditate on the deity unless he possesses a body To meditate 18 to meditate on a certain definite form Of उल B 1825 Na ht mireesa-devata dhyam adiurohat '

9 Kuni, the wife of Pandu, had with his approval, three sons, Yudhtgura, Bhima and Arjuna, by the three derties, Dharma, Vayu and Indra respectively Vide Mah&. 1 4760 ef seg (chap 128), pp 174 @ seg, vol 1

[श 1 3 27 ADH 7 ] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 181

In the Puri&nas, too, there 18 a multitude of legends of vanous kinds about them, possessing bodies The verses from those chapters are not quoted here for fear of increasing the bulk of the book

SUTRA 27

५ [7 rr 37 OBJHOTED THAT (IF THE GODS BE POSSESSED OF BODIES) ¢ GONTRADIOTION WITH REGARD TO WORKS (WILL 2BESUIL4), (WH REPLY ) NO, BEOAUSE OF THH OBSERVATION OF THE ASSUMPTION OF MANY (BODIES BY THH GODS, Eto ) ”

Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

If 1t be objected Since the worship of Brahman 18 not possibile without a body, their corporality must surely be admitted But if that be so, 1t will grve mise to a “‘ contradiction with regard to works *’,—

(We reply ) ‘‘no” such objection can arse Why’ ‘“ Because of the observation of the assumption ° amultaneously of many bodies even by one and the same deity

Vedanta-kaustubha

If 1t be objected Although, the corporality of the gods, as of us, 18 an mevitable conclusion, as the activitaes in connection with the repeated practice of ‘hearing’, ‘thmking’ and ‘meditating’ are possible only on the part of one who 1s endowed with & body, sense organs and mind, and as in that way alone it 18 possible for them to be the bene- factors of sacrifices, through ther actual presence, hke sacrificmg priests and the rest,.—yet 17 they be possessed of bodies, there will be “a contradiction with regard to works”, viz sacrifices and the reat, since the simultaneous presence of one body (16 of one god) In many sacrifices 18 mpossible,z7—

(Wereply )‘‘No” Why? ^ Because of the observation of many worships "8 ‘ Many”,1e of various forms, ^" worship ”’, ^ on account

1 That 1s, if gods be possessed of bodies, then they may themselves be present ab sacrifices like the pmesta and conduce to their proper performance, ete

9 That 18, one and the same god 1s aaultaneously mvyoked in many sacrifices but evidently he cannot be armultaneously present m many places

8 The compound ‘anska-pratpaiter dardandt’ 1s explained as follows

[87 1 3 27 182 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7]

of the observation of that” Thus, just as one and the same teacher 18 found to be saluted sunultaneously by many saluting dis ciples, just as one and the same sun 18 found to be worshipped simul tansously by many worshippmg men, 80 there 18 no inconsistency 1n supposing that different sacrificers offer their own 0016618 to one and the same corporal deity who abides m his own place Hence no harm 1s done to sacrifices

Or else, there may be another construction of the phrase “ aneka. pratipatter daréanSt*’ If 1t be objected that there will be ^ & con tradiction with regard to works” m the stated way,—(we reply ) ‘*No” Why! “On account of the assumption of many”,1e6 on account of the assumption of many forms, or on account of the attamment of many bodies, by one and the same person who 18 perfected by Yoga Why? ^" Because of the observation” of 10 m Scripture Thus, in the Moksa dharma,! a question bemg put forth concerning the Simkhya and the Yoga thus =" ^ Reverend father, it behoves you to tell me in particular about the SAmkhya and the Yoga Everything, O knower of sacred duties, 18 known to you, O best among the Kurus”’!’ (Mah& 19 11087 8), the text, having set forth an eulogy of the Samkhya and the Yoga, goes on =“ ^" Those who &re endowed with the power of the Yoga and are self controlled and majestic, enter, © Partha, through Yoga mto Prajipatis, sages, gods and the great elements Neither Yama, nor the angry Antaka,® nor the supremely mighty Mrtyu lords 1t, O king, over the Yoga of unmeasured might A yogm, O mghtiest of the Bh&ratas, can, by reason of attaming strength,“ create many bodies for himself, and move about the world by them all By some he may attam (16 enjoy) objecta, by others, he may practise a severe penance, and he may again contract them, as the sun does the multitude of 108 rays’ (Maha 12 11060-64 5)

1 Name of a section of the twelfth book of the Mahdbhdraia, from chap 174 to the end

2 P 764, ine 27 vol 3

ठ Name af Yama, the god of Death

« Here the éatr-suifiz implies reason

5 © 755, lines 20-28, vol 8

[so 1 8 28 ADH 7 | VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAURABHA 183

SUTRA 28

““T¥ IT BH OBJECTED THAT (4 CONTRADICTION WILL BESULT) WITH BHGAED TO WORD, (WE REPLY ) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF THE ORIGIN (OF HVERYTHING) IROM IT, ON ACCOUNT OF PRROEPTION (1 ग SORIPTURE) AND INFERENCE (IB Smet) ”

Veddnta-parijaita-saurabha

If 1t be objected thai if the corporality of the gods be admutted, a contradiction will result with regard to the Vedia words denoting them, aa these words will become meaningless prior to the origin of the 0016008 (viz the gods) denoted by them and subsequent to ther destruction,—

(We reply ) No such contradiction resulta, “‘on account of the origin”? of the objects (viz the gods and the reat) “from it”, 16 from the words alone, denoting eternal prototypes or forms, and serving ॐ reminders to the thonght of Praj&pati, wm, accordance with the followmg scriptural and Smyta texts ‘He evolved name and form by means of the Veda’ (Tait Br 2623 ),‘A celestial word, without beginmng and end, eternal, and composed of the Vedas was omutted by the self born m the beginning, whence proceeded all activities’ (Mah 12 8534 4)

Vedanta-kaustubha

Here, the word ‘contradiction’ 1s to be supplied from the preced- ing aphorism If it be objected Very well, there may not be any contradiction, with regard to works 11 the gods be possessed of bodies, still there may be contradiction ^ with regard to the words” denoting gods and the rest, 16 with regard to the Vedio forma That 18, on account of the non eternity of the bodies of the gods,—they being due to karmas—as well as on account of the eternity of the Vedic texte, the eternal relation between a word and its meanmg will be

1P 275 08 9 vol ॐ Reading ripe R, 8K 2 FP 666, ima 22, 501 $ 8, R, Bh Reading <Andds-nidhand स्व * Vadgavdst ed reads ‘Anddt- mdhand vidyd Adou deva-mayi vuiyd P 1696, vol 2 Stambara, Rdmadnya and Bhdskara too read Anddt-nidhand niiyd

like Nimb&rka

[so 1 8 28 184 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7]

mmpossible, and hence a contradiction will result between the object which 18 hmited m timo and the word which 1s true for all times If 1 be said that owing to the force of the word, the object too is eternal,—-then a contradiction will result with regard to the texts which prove tts non eternity if rt be said that for the sake of the object, the word 18 non eternal,—then there will arise a contradiction with regard to the texts which prove its eternity —

(Wereply )‘‘'No” There 18 no contradiction with regard to the word as well Why? ‘On account of the ongmn from 1t”’,16 on account of the origin, or the mse, of the gods and the rest from this, 1e from the Vedic words, denotmg the eternal prototypes of gods, eto and serving as 9 reminder to the thought of the creator regarding the forms of gods, etc to be created at the time of each particular creation Thus, when 8 certain great personality, who has acoumulated. a mass of ment and desires to become Praj&pati, comes to attam lordahip through the grace of the Lord, he 18 called ‘Prajipati’ At the time of creation when mdividuals like the former gods and the rest are no more, Prajéipati, having learnt the Veda m a manner to be designated hereafter,1 and having apprehended, like a man arisen from sleep,* the particular prototypes of the gods and the rest by means of the lamp like Veda, 1 © from the Vedic words alone which denote those particular prototypes, creates the later gods, etc m accordance with those prototypes Hence there 18 no room for the alleged contradiction,

If + be objected What proof 1s there that Prajipati creates objects after haymg known thew particular forms from the Vedio words t—we reply ‘ On account of perception andinference’’ ‘* Per- ception `" means Scripture, stnce 1t 18 mdependent of any other proof ^ Inference ** means Smrti, smce 19 demonstrates the meanmg of Sarip- ture,—on account of these two, 1e on account of Scmpture and Smyti Virst, the scrzptural passage 18 the following, viz ‘Praj&ipat. evolved name 8 and form the existent and the non existent, by means of the Veda’ (Tat Br 2628), lkewmwe ‘He uttered “bhiir’’, he

1 Vide Br 8u 18 80

= That is when & men arisea from sleep at night he can 866 nothing until he lights a lamp Sumularly at the begmning of creation the creator knows partcular 0016008 from the lamp like hght of the Veda,1e knows the forms of those objects and creates tham anew accordingly

ॐ The text omits ‘ndma’

(st 1 $ 28 ADH 7] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 166.

created the earth’ (Tart 22421), ‘He uttered “bhuva”, he created the ether’ (Tait Br 224284) and so on The Smrti passage 16. contained in the Moksadharma 8, and begmning ‘The sages read the Vedas day and night by penance’ (Mab& 12 85330 *), contimues ‘A celestial word, without begimnmg and end, eternal and composed of the Vedas, was emitted by the self born m the beginning, whence- proceeded all activities ® The Lord created the names of the sages and the creations which are 71 the Vedas, as well as the various forms. of bemgs and the procedure of acts, from the Vedio words alone m the beginning At the end of the mght, the Unborn One bestowed the names of sages and the creations which are m the Vedas to others The thmgs that are celebrated m the world, namely, difference of names, austerity, work and sacrifice’ §

Smmularly, there are other passages, viz ‘In the beginning the Supreme Lord. created the names and forms of bemgs, as well as the procedures of actions, from the Vedic word alone’? (VP 1 5 62), ‘In the beginning, he created the names and actions of all as separate, as well as the different established orders,? from the Vedic word

alone’ (Manu 1 21 ०} and 80 on 10

1 P 195 5४ 78 vol 2 2 Op ow 1768 9 10 9 See footnote 1, p 182 « P 663, lme 22, vol 3 5 For correct quotation, see footnote 2, p 183 6 P 666, lmes 23-26 vol 3 Reading ‘Nama riipat oa bhiidndm karmdinda oa pravartayan

Varigavdn ed reads provarianam sujgdtdindm P 1685, vol 2 7 © 50 Variant readings Devddindryn cakdra eal,

8 Of Kulluka bhajja’s Commentary on the Manu अभि (p 10) Prihak- samsthdé cat §=Lauksbid ca vyavasthdh luldlasya ghata-urméinam kuvmdasya pata mirmdnam tiyddika-ribhdgena mirmiuavdn '

®P9

10 The sum and mibstance of the argument 18 aa follows The prima face view 18 that 17 the gods be possessed of bodies, then, since these bodies, are non eternal the gods must be so But the Vedic words which denote the gods are eternal Hence there cannot be any eternal connection between the non etemal gods and the eternal Vedio words,1e these Vedic words cannot denote gods and the rest and must be meanmgleas

The answer to this objection 8 as follows The individual gods are wndeed. non eternal but this does not prove that the eternal Vedic words are meanmgleas for what they denote 18 not the indtudual (vyakis) which ig non eternal but the

[श 1 8 29 186 VEDINTA PARLJATA SAUBABHA ADH 7 ]

SUTRA 29 ५ FoR THIS VARY BHASON, THH ETERNITY (OF THE VEDAS FOLLOWS) ”

Vedainta-parijita-saurabha

The creation by Prajipatz 1s preceded by the (Vedic) word < For this ” reason the “ eternity ” of the Veda 18 established

Vedanta-kaustubha

Having apprehended the objection, viz In spite of the eternity of the Veda,—it not bemg mentioned as something created,—the Vedio words, denoting the forms of gods and the rest, are concerned. with non eternal objects, and having removed the consequent false notion regarding the non eternity of these ag well, the author 18 confirming, mncidentally, the eternity of the Veda

‘The eternity” of the word,1e of the Veda, follows “for this very reason”’,1e also because of 18 priority to the creation by Pra- japati Words like ‘Vaisvimutra’, ‘Kathaka’ and so on etymologically mean simply what has been uttered by them Thus ‘what has been said by Viésvimitra is Vaisvimitra’, ‘what has been said by Katha 18 Kéthaka’, and so on At the end of the universal dissolution, Prajipat, havmg conceived the forms, powers and the rest of Viiva mitra and others from the Vedic words ‘Vidvimuira’, etc mentioned in texta like ‘He chooses the maker of sacred formula’, ‘This 1s a hymn of Visvémitra’ (Tart Sam 523%) and so on, and having created them as endowed with those particular forms and. those part: cular powers, appoints them to the task of revealing those particular sacred formuls (mantras)

Thus given the powers by him, they too, havmg practased. suitable penances, read. the sacred. formulss,— which form portions of the Veda, which are eternally existent, and which were revealed by Visvamutra and others of former ages,—perfect in their sounds and accents without having read them or learnt them from the recitation of a teacher

Sype (dkris) which 198 eternal It mm m accordance with these eternal types, denoted by the eternal Vedic words, that the non eternal individuals are created anew &t the beginning of each creation.

1 That is mince the Vedic words denote non eternal objects 14 might be thought that theae words themselves are non eternal

2 P 24 lmes 21 22 vol 2 ~

[st 1 3 30 477 7 | VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 187

As such, though they are makers of the sacred formuls, the eternity of the Veda 1s perfectly justafiable 1

SUTRA 30

“AND ON ACCOUNT OF HAVING THE SAME NAME AND FORM, (THERE 78) NO CONTRADICTION EVEN WITH REGARD TO THE RECURRENCE (OF THH WORLD), ON ACCOUNT OF PHROEPTION (IB रित्य) AND ON ACCOUNT oF Sumer ’

Veddnta- pairijata-saurabha

Thus, there 1s “no contradiction even with regard to the recur rence’, or the creation and destruction of the matenal world Why ? Because the objecta which are to be created m the beginning of each age have the same names and forms as those in the paat ages, “on account of perception "’ (1e scriptural text), viz “The creator fashioned the sun and the moon as he did before’ (Re V 1019033), and ‘on account of Smyti’, viz ‘Just as the various signs of the seasons are seen to be the very same in their regular recurrence, 80 are the bemgs 1m the successive ages’ (# P 15 644)

> That 18, the Vedic manérae are said to be composed by different sages like Vesedentira and go on and hence 210 may be thought that these sages bemg non eternal, the mantras composed by them must also be so, 18 the Veda must be non eternal But the fact ७ that the sages are not really the composers of the manirae, which are really eternal, but when they are aaid to be the composers of those maniras, 1b is amply meant that they ubter 1e reveal the eternally existent manira in different ages Thus,eg एण्य m one partacular age utters © manira which is then said to be Vawudenwra Then m course of time, किध perishes, but the manira remams intact and in the next age a new एक 28 deputed to utter and reveal the very same maniraandsoon Thus, the manira itaelf remaims unchanged from all eternity, only rte revealers change from age to age Hence the Vedio maniras are really sternal and so 19 the Veda

2Pp 1494

8 Bh SK, 2

8 P 50

8 Bh Of @ very amular pamege m Mahi 12 8660, ए 667 lines 9 10 vol 3, which 1s the same as the above pagsage only reads ‘Tathd Brahma horadsqu' m place of Tathd bhdud yugddsgu '

[st 1 3 30 188 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7]

Vedanta-kaustubha

To the objection, vz The view that Prajipatz, having known the particular forms of object by means of the Vedsa,—in accordance with the maxim of a person arsen from sleep,—! creates them as he did before, fits in the case of the periodical dissolution® But since in the case of the total dissolution ठ there 1s destruction of everything, how can the priority of the Veda to creation be possible? How can also 108 eternity be possible? How can again the world be preceded by 16% The author replies here

The word “and” (in the siitra) 1s meant for removing the doubt The word “even” imphes possibility That 18 to say, there 18 no contradiction whatsoever “even with regard to the recurrence” consisting In a contimuous stream. of creation and dissolution of the material world, 1e with regard to the first creation at the end a great dissolution Why? ^ On account of having the same name and form’’ ‘Thus, during the total dissolution, the Lord Vasudeva, the one 71888 of a multitude of attributes which are special to Hin, eternal, infinite and natural, and possessing the sentient and the non sentient His powers, having drawn im all the effects, consisting m His own powers (Sakti) of the sentient and the non sentient, as a tortoise draws in ita 17008 , and having placed them m Himself im a successive order, opposed. to that of creation, abides m silence, lkea boy who has gathered. up his toys At that time, the Vedas, the objecta denoted by them, as well as the forms of the latter, exist in Him, all blended together with Him Thus, the entare Universe always exists m 108 cause, viz VWAsudeva or Brahman, possessing the sentient and the non sentient as His powers There 78 no such thing as absolute destruction, in accordance with the scriptural text ‘“‘The exsatent alone, my dear, was this in the beginning, one only, without a second ”’ ’” (Chind 621) That 18, ‘My child!’ ‘this’,1e the Universe, ‘was existent alone’,1e was non different from 108 cause, “im the beginning’,

1 See footnote 2, p 184

9 Nawnitiba pralaya

8 Prdkrta-pralaya

Nawmthke pralaya means the dissolution. of the three worlds when one day of the Kdryya brahman or Heranyagarbha comes to anend while prdkria pralaya means the dissolution of all objects together with the Kdryya brahman himeelf Vide Ved Pan, 7th chap for the four knnds of pralayas miiya natwntitska, prékria and diyaniska

{80 1 3 JO ADH 7] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 189

16 prior to creation, and that, viz the cause, denoted by the term. ‘existent’, 18 ‘one only, without a second’ He 1s without an equal or & superior, indicated respectively by the words ‘only’ and ‘without a second’, and He 1s to be known also as manifold by nature indeed, emcoe He 16 the substratum of the sentient and the non sentient which. are His powers Dissolution means the exstence of the effect m the cause in a subtle form, while creation means amply the manrfestation of such an effect At the end of dissolution, the omniscient and all knowing Lord, having wished first ° "८ May I be many”’’ (Chind 628, Tart 261), having then separated the mass of enjoying souls and the ०016608 of enjoyment, so long merged m Him aa His subiile powers, having created all objecta from the mahat down to the four faced Brabma& as He did before, having manrfested the eternally existent Vedas, having taught them mentally to Brahm&, and having deputed him to the creation of the Universe, consisting of gods, men and the rest, as 1t was before, Himeelf exists as his (Brahmé’s) mner aoul, as declared by the text ‘Having created 1४, he entered into that very thing’ (Tat 261) Brahma too, who has attamed lordship through His grace, having apprehended thex forma from the Vedic words, creates gods and the rest As such, there 1s no contradiction even with regard to the recurrence,—this 18 the sense Just m this consists the non human omgin of the Veda, 1t having an eternally exstént form like the Supreme Brahman And ita eternity means that one, having remembered a particular order of succession, through the mpreasions generated in his mind by his prior recitations of the Veda in & fixed order, should recite the Veda m that very order +

If 1t be asked Whence 1s this known Wereply “ Brom percep tion and from Smrtz”’ ‘' Perception” means that which destroys the darkness of the hoart,1e Serpture, viz ‘He who first creates Brahma and he who, forsooth, delivera the Vedas to him, to that Deity, who 18 the light of self knowledge, I, demrous of release, take shelter’, (Svet 618), smularly ‘The creator fashioned, as he did before, the sun and the moon, the heaven, the earth and the ether, and then the sky’ (Rg V 1019038) There 18 a Smrti passage as well, viz ‘Then

1 That 28 tho Veda iu said to be apaturuseya or of non human ongin and miye or sternal Now, the Grset means that the Veda w eternally ematent and 18 amply reveaied and not created, ab the tume of each new creation The second means that 1# 18 reoited m exactly the same order of succession m different ages all throughout

[0 13 3 190 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 8]

8 lotus sprang forth from the navel of the sleeping Deity In that lotus, 0 holy one, BrahmS was born, fully versed m the Vedas and their parts He was told by Him “Create bemgs, O highly learned one’’!’ ‘Just aa the various signs of the seasons are seen to be the very same m their regular recurrence, 80 are the beings 17 the successtve stages’ (VP 1564), ‘Whatever were the names of the sages and (ther) knowledge of the Vedas, the same the Unborn One gives to them when they are born at the end of the mght Simularly, the past mdrvidual gods are equal to the present gods in names and forms’, and so on Hence, शा006 the gods too may be seekers, there 18 nothing contradic tory 170. their bemg entitled to the knowledge of Brahman Therefore 1t 18 established that the gods are entitled to the knowledge of Brahman

Here ends the section entitled “The deity’ (7)

Adhikarana 8 The section ontitled ‘The honey and the rest’ (Sitras 31-33)

OPPONENT'S VIEW (Stitras 31-32)

SUTRA 31

© Om ACCOUNT OF DMPOSSIBILITY, (THE SUN AND THS BEST HAVE) NO RIGHT TO THE (MEDITATIONS ON) THE HONEY 4ND THE RBST, (80) JADMINI (THINKS) ”

Vedinta-parijfta-saurabha

It being umposaible that the object worshipped can be the wor shipper himself, the sun and the rest are not entitled to the medtta- tions on the honey, etc —so ^ Jamin” thinks

Vedainta-kaustubha

Thus, 1t has been said that the gods are entitled to the knowledge of Brahman Now, the question 18 bemg considered whether or not they are entitled to meditations on the honey and the rest

The meditation on the honey 1s mentioned in the Chindogya “This sun, verily, 18 the honey of the gods’ (Chand 311) and so on By the phrase “‘and so on” (m the sfltra) other meditations m which the gods are the objects worshipped are to be understood Here a

[80 1 8 32 ADH 8] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 197

doubt arises, viz Whether or not the gods are entitled to the med tations on the honey and the rest What 1s reasonable here’ Gods like the sun, Vasu and others have “no nght” to the meditation on the *‘ honey and the reat *’,—a0 the teacher “‘ Jaumm1” thnks Why? ५ (07 account of impossibility,” 1e because 1t 18 umposaible that the sun and the rest which are accepted as the objecta to be worshipped in those meditations, can be themselves worshippers

OPPONENT'S VIEW (concluded) SUTRA 32

०८ AND BEOAUSH OF (THEIR) BEING (WORSHIPPERS) WITH RHGARD- TO THE LIGHT (IE Braman)’

Vedanta -parijita-saurabha

* And because of (ther) bemg’’ worshippers “‘ with regard to’” Brahman, they are not entitled to the honey meditation and the reat,— this 1s the prima facie view

Vedinta-kaustubha

But २६ 18 not to be thought that this bemg the case the gods are without a Lord, because then they, bemg all of a mutually equal status, will come to be annihilated through vying with one another, and also because the text ‘Through fear the sun arses’ (Tait 28 1) will come to be contradicted The fact 1s that they are the worshippers of the Highest Self and are themselves worshipped by others 30, the opponent pomta out here The gods and the rest, who are the objecta to be worshipped in the honey meditation and the hike, bemg worshippers ‘‘ with regard to the hght”’,1e of the Supreme Brahman, are not to be taken as the worsluppers in the honey meditation, eto — this 1s the sense, as declared by the passage ‘That the gods worship as the Light of lights, as life, as immortal’ (Brh 44 16)

COMPARISON

Samkara and Bhiaskara

Interpretation of the word ‘jyotim’ different The stitra means, according to them And because (the words ‘sun’, ‘moon’, and the

[so 1 ॐ 38 192 VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 8 |

rest) refer to the Laght That 18, the sun and the rest are not sentient detties, possessed of bodies, but are mere non sentient spheres of hight, and what 18 non sentient cannot be, evidently, entatled to any meditation +

CORRECT CONCLUSION (Sitra 38)

SUTRA 33

“Bor BIDABRAYANA (MAINTAINS) THE EXISTHNOE (OF RIGHT ON THE PART OF THE GODS), FOR THEEH IS (POSSIBLE LONGING FOR BRABMAN ON THEIR PART) ”

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

With regard to it, the author states the correct conclusion “( Bidariivana ° mamtains “ the existence ” of mght on the part of the sun, Vasu and the rest, to the honey meditation and the like as well, ० because ” & longing for Brahman ^ 18 ”’ posable on them parts, conse quent on the attainment by them of their respective offices in © future age aa well, through the worship of Brahman, their Inner Controller

Ved&anta-kaustubha

Having thus set forth the view of Jamin, his Holimess, wishing to refute 1b, 18 statmg his own view

The word ^ but” precludes the prema face view The reverend ५ BEdarfiyans *’ maintains “ the existence”,1¢6 the existence of right on the part of the sun, Vasu and others, to the honey meditation and. the like as well, ‘ because” a longing for Brahman 1s possible on the part of even the sun and Vasu and the rest m the present age, consequent on their attamment of sun hood, Vasu hood and the rest in a future age as well, through the worship of Brahman, their Inner Controller Thus, here the worship of Brahman being enjomed both m His effected and causal states, the words ‘sun’ and the rest, mply Brabman, their Inner Controller, and hence it 18 possible for the very same Vasu and others to be the objects to be worshipped and attamed, since the concluding text ‘He who knows this Brahma Upanigad’ (Chand 3113) proves that the words ‘sun’ and the rest, imply

1 8B 18382, pp 336 67, Bh B 1382, p 66

{80 1 8 33 4DH 8] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 198

Brahman Thus, Brahman alone bemg the object to be worshipped even in the honey meditation and the hke, the text ‘That the gods worship as the hght of hghts, as life, as mmmortahty’ (Brh 446) 18 perfectly consistent It cannot be said 9180 that as the frost of the honey meditation 1s the attamment of Vasu hood and the rest, and as Vasu and the rest have already aitamed that, they cannot be seekers, or wish, for these again,—because in ordimary experience, 9 desire for wealth, 17. & future hfe 18 found on the part of those who are rich in the present hfe Hence, it 18 established that the gods are entitled to the honey meditation and the hke 1

Here ends the section entitled ‘The honey and the rest’ (8)

1 The Madhu-edyd, or the representation of the gun as the honey extracted from all the Vedas as taught first to Prayapah by Brakmd then to Manu by Prajapats and then to his descendants by Manu, and to Uddalaka Arum: by his father (Vide Ohand 811] 4) 1s grven im Chand 31811 It begs Venly the sun. is the honey of the gods Ita cross beam 1s the heaven ‘The ether w the honey comb ‘The rays are the sons (1 © the sons of Dees) (Chand 811) and goes on to represent the eastern rays of the mun, ita red form, as extracted from the Rg-veda the southern rays of the sun ite white form, from the Yayur-veda the western rays of the gun, ita dark form from the Sdma-veda the northern raya of the sun, ita exceedingly dark form, from the Aiharva-veda and the up wards rays of the gun, 1ts centre from the Upaniwads (Ohind $1-85) After that the drfferent forms of the sun are demgnated as the objects of enjoyment for Vasus, Rudras, Adtiyae, Morus and Saddhyas who respectively enter mto and arise from those forms (Chind 36-310) Finally in the concludmg sectnon the sun 18 represented aa standmg in the middle without rising or setting, and ae neither rismg nor settimg for one knows this Bra/fma-upanwad ( = secret of Brahman) (Chand 8 11)

(1) Here the opponent's view 18 that Yasus and the rest are enjomed here as the objects of worship (Chand 3 6-8 10) and hence they themselves cannot be the worshippers

The answer to this objection 18 that the Madhu-wdyd bas two sections The first sectaon (viz (0820 86-310) demgnates Brahman m Fis effected state 1 6 as appearing m the forms of Vasus and the rest ‘The second section (wax 00825. $11) designates Brahman m His causal state, 1e aa abidmg m the san as xts Inner Self And the concludmg demgnaton of the Madhu-vdyd ase Brahma-upanyad proves that the meditations on the Vaeus and the rest too are really meditations on Brahman as abiding withm them Hence Brahman. 18 really the object to be meditated throughout m the Madhu-mdyd, and as such Vasus and the rest can be worshippers here, 1 © oan practise the Madhu-eidyd

18

[st 1 8 84 194. VEDANTA-PIRIJATA SA URABHA ADH 9]

Samkara

Interpretation different, viz “Badaréyane (mamtams) the exis- tence (of mght on the part of the gods), for (although the gods have no nght to the Madhu vidy& and the reat, mm which they themselves are mmpleated, yet there 28 (ther mght to the pure knowledge of Brahman’)1 Thos, Samkara does not admit that the gods are entatled to the Madhu vidy&é as Nimb&rka does The view of the latter as we have seen, 18 that the gods are entitled not only to the knowledge of Brahman in general, but also to those vidy&és in which they themselves are umplicated.

Bhaskara

Interpretation of ‘asta hi’ different, viz for there 28 (serrptural evidence that the gods are enitiled to the Madhu vidyé and the rest) ` 9

Adhikarana 9 The sectionentitied ‘The exolu- sion of the Siidras’ (8०१८०8३ 84-41)

SUTRA 34

His GRIM (AROSE) ON ACCOUNT OF HEARING ITS DISEESPECT, ON ACCOUNT OF HASTHENING aT THAT TOME, FOR THIS IS WHAT 78 INDICATED (BY THR THEM ‘“‘StpRs’’) ”

Vedanta -parijata-saurabha

Tt 28 not to be supposed, on the ground 8 that m the Chindogya the term ‘Siidra’ 1s applied by a preceptor to one desirous of salvation,

(2) The opponent resumes Iiven if Brahman and none else, be the object of medrtefion here, yet Vasus cannot be held to be practimng the Madhu-mdyil since the frurt of Madhu-mdyd is the attammentof Vasu hood, ete and why should those who are already Vaeus etc strive to beso again

The answer 15 that they may be Vasus ancl go on im the present age but at the same time be desirous of holdmg the same position m a foture age also,

88 1333 p 367 १ Bh B 1888 p 66 3° Here the éair suffix implies reason

[st 1 38 34 4DH 9] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 195

that a Sidra + 18 entitled to the knowledge of Brahman Because of “his’’21e of Jénaéruti’s, demre for salvation, on hearing the dis- respectful words used by the swan, and because of his hastenmng towards, for that reason, to the preceptor at that very moment,— "“ 1# 18 indicated `° that his grief had arsen and that was what was meant by the address ‘Stidra’

Vedinta-kaustubha

Now the followimg question 18 bemg considered Just as 1 has been. said that the gods are entitled to the knowledge of Brahman, as the term ‘God’ 1s mentioned in the text ‘Then, whosoever among the gods 18 awakened’ (Brh 1410), so whether or not ® Sidra too 18 entitled to the knowledge of Brahman, seemg that in the Chin dogya, the word "6678 * 18 mentioned m reference to Janaéruta who demred for salvation

If 1t be suggested The word ‘éiidra’ bemg mentioned m the Chindogys under the Samvarga-vidyf m the passages ‘“‘ Oh! the necklace and the carnage be yours, 0 Sidra, together with the cows” ’ (5०१ 42), ‘““You have brought these, 0 Sidra” | ' (Chand 428), a Siidra too must be entitled to the knowledge of Brahman, 16 being posmble for him also to be a seeker® And, he may gam the know ledge of the nature, eto of Brahman through the hearmg of tradition and the rest, 1 accordance with the statement of the ancient onea ‘He should make the four castes hear, ‘begining with the Brihmana’ Mahf 12 1289600 4}, and, the statement of Ham Vaméa ‘One who 18 fidra by birth should attam a good end through hearing’, which lays down an myunction with regard to the hearmg of Brahman by him also The prohibition contamed m the passage ‘Hence, 6 Sidra 18 not to be mnitaated to ® sacrifice’ (Tar Sam 7115), 15 concerned emply with his dusqualfication with regard to acts lke sacrifices to be performed by means of fire, but 1s not ® cause of bis

1 The fourth and the lowest caste

9 Here the gentirve cage implies an agent (hari) m accordance with Pax 28 65,8D K 628

> That 18 just es 1b has been shown that gods are entitled to the knowledge of Brahman, smce they demre (arthms) for salvation, ao the Siidras too destre for satveinion and are as such entitled to the same knowledge

4 © 8] lme # vol 3 8 P 24), Ime 91, vol 2

[st 1 3 34 196 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 9]

disqualification for knowledge, as knowledge 1s mental, and as Vidura 1 and the rest, as well as women 1178 Sulabh& > and so on are found to possess the knowledge of Brahman,—

We reply A Sidra 1s not entatled to the knowledge of Brahman for the followimg reasons (first, he lacks the requisite fitmess, not having the knowledge of the nature of Brahman and the method of worshipping Him Secondly, although the worship of Brahman may be accomplished mentally, yet the knowledge of the nature, eto of Brahman 18 generated by the study of the Veda, preceded by the investiture with the holy thread Jimally, 9, Sidra bemg excluded from investiture, 18 not fit for knowing Brahman and as such, his seeking 18 of no great value As the mjunctions regarding work hold good in the case of the first three classes, the prohibition holds good equally with, regard to knowledge as with regard to work Also, as in accord anos with the statement ‘The Veda 1s to be confirmed by tradition and Purfina’ (Mahé 1 260 8), tradztion and Purina, too, confirm the knowledge established by the Veda, a 60078 cannot attam knowledge from that too The injunction about the ‘hearing’, on the other hand, smply means that auch a ‘hearmg’ has the effect of destroying a Sidra’s sms and securmg prosperity for him, here or hereafter , and not that he 1s entitled to meditation or knowledge The possession of knowledge by Vidura and the rest should be known to be due to the non destruction of the knowledge which they attamed im another birth, and their such low births should be known to be due to their works which had begun to bear fruits Hence a Sidra 1s not entitled to the knowledge of Brahman

On the other hand, the term ‘Sidra’, mentioned m Scrpture, 18 to be explained thus This the reverend author of the aphorisms states in the words “gmef”, and so on “For” mplies the reason, and “his”, means J&nadrut: Pautriyanas That 18, on hearing the disrespectful words used by the swan for his want of knowledge of Brahman, thus ‘“O, who 18 that man of whom you speak, as if he were Raikva, with the cart”?’ (Chand 413), J&naéruti at once

1 Vedura was the younger brother of Dhrtardsfra and Pdndu He waa the son of Vydea and @ slave girl who was dressed 88 one of the widows of Viotire viryya, and mistaken by Vyasa assach ‘Vide Mahé 1 4301, etc

9 Sulabhd waa female mendicant who entered into a highly learned discourse with Janaka Vide Maha 12 11854 & seq (Chap 321)

9 P 10 175 11 vol I

[st 1 3 34 ADH 9] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 197

hastened to Raikva, the man with the cart and a knower of Brahman From, this, 1t is “ indicated” that his “gmef’’ had ansen Hence, the address ‘Stidra’ was apphed by the sage to a non Sidra, with a view to intimating his own ommiacience, thinking ‘This Jinoéruti has come to Jearn the knowledge of Brahman from me, tempting me with the offermg of riches He docs not know me, that I have performed all my duties and am omniscient’ Thus, (the whole story goes ), Jinaéruti Pautriiyana wax a royal samt, versed in religious duties Certain divine sages pleased with bis multitude of qualities, and intending that having heaid their conversation, and having thereupon approached Raikv.i, the knower of Brahman, Jinasruti, too, would become & knower of Biahman, assumed the forms of swans and began to fly mm a circle over the king who was lying on the roof of his palace in summo. ‘Then, the swan which waa followmg said with surprise to the one which was leading ‘O Bhuallfikea, ग्नि, do you not see the light of the king Jiinusrut: which has pervaded the remon of the heaven? That hght will buin you, so do not cross it On hearing these woids of the one following 1t, the leading swan rephed. *“Q, who 1s that man of him you speak as if he were Raikva, with the cart’ १ ` (Chind 413) 16 you apoak of this Jénwruti as 1f he were Raikva with the cart, meanmg, the reverend Raikva who has a ‘yugve’ or 0 cart and 13 a knower of Biahman By the adjective ‘with a cart’, Raikva’s mark was indicated, mn order that he might be easly found out and approached Then, on hearmg the disres pectful words used by the swan, Jinaéruti too, ascertained, in the morning, the whereabout of Ratkva through his man, and repaired to the sage Raikva, taking with him mx hundred cows, a necklace and a chariot yoked with horses, and having approached him, said ‘O Raikva! Take all these cows and the rest, and teach me, O reverend याः ` Raikva replied ‘ “QO, the necklaco”’’ (Chind 423) and 80 on, 16 ‘O Sidra, the heap of wealth, hke the chariot and the rest, together with the cows be yours’ And he addressed hm as ‘O Sidra’ more than once (viz again in Chind 4 2 5) A ‘Stidra’ 18 one who gneves (&008&0), and the word 18 formed m accordance with the rule

‘When the root “ duc” 18 followed. by the suffix ८८ कष, ११, the “oa” 15 replaced by “‘da”’ (SD K Un&di siitra 176+), and the vowel ‘u’ 1s lengthened (in accordance with the unfidi siitra 1752) Hence “hus”’,

1 P 699, vol 2 2 Thus, fic-+ra = did-++ra = Hidra

[st 1 3 26 198 VEDINTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADE 9]

१९ J&naéruta’s grief alone “‘ was indicated’ by Raikva, with a view to pointimg out J&nadruta’s fitness for recerving instruction, and not his eonnection with any caste,—this 1s the sense 1

SUTRA 35

“(JaxasRUTI WAS NOT A STDRA) ALSO BECAUSE WH KNOW OF (His) KgaTRIYAHOOD FROM THE INDICATION, (VIZ THA FACT OF HIS BEING MENTIONED) LATHR ON Wits CarTRanaTHa ”

Vedinta-parijdta-saurabha

““ Because we know of the Kgatriyahood >` of J&nadruta "from the indication” viz that ‘later on’ he was mentioned together with Caitraratha Abhipratarm, Kegatriya, in the passage ‘Now, when Saunaka Kapeya and Abhipratirm Kfikgasen. were bemg served food, a 0 ee (Chind £365 2), Jinaérut was not a Sidra

Vedainta-kaustubha

From this reason also, the author, pomts out, the Ksatrryahood of J&nasrut 18 known

His grief alone has arisen, hence he was called & ‘Sidra’ by the sage, this being 80, the Siidrahood of Janaéruta was not due to this caste Why? “ Because we know of (bis) Ksatrryahood”,1¢ also because we know of his Ksatriyahood from the fact that m the mtro ductory passage, viz A plentiful giver, one preparing many food’ (Chand 411), he 18 known to be & Jord of gifts and a giver of much well cooked food, from the fact of his sendmg the door keeper, known from the passage ‘He said to the door keeper’ (Chand 415) and from the fact of his giving golden ornaments, chariot and daughter to Raikva Having, thus, stated the marks contamed in the introduc tory text and proving the Kgatriyahood of Jénaéruti, the author goes on to show the mark, contamed in thy concluding text of the samvarga vidy#, according to the mamm of the ‘crow’s eyo ’,2—the term ^ and ” eee

1 ‘Vide Chind 41-42

9 8, R, Bh, Sk, B

9 The maxm of the crow’s eye’ means as follows Crows are supposed to have only one eye, which & ocoaaon requires moves from the cavity on one ade into that of another The maxun 1s used of a word which appears only once

{st 1 3 35 ADE 9 ] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 199

(mm the stitra) referrmg to both—,1n the words “ And from the mdica- taon, (viz the fact of his bemg mentioned) later on with Ca:traratha ११, 16 “from the indication’, viz that Janaéruta was mentioned together with Caitraratha who 18 ascertained to be a Ksatriya from the fact of his association with a well known priest of Kgatriyas Thus, m the concluding text, viz ‘Now, when Saunaka Kapeya and Abhi pratarin Kiikgaseni were being served food by a cook,! a religious student begged of them’ (Chind 435), Caztraratha, named Abhi एकह). 18 mentioned This 18 the sense On the engmry ‘who were the two that were being served’ ‘by the cook’,1e by one who superin tends over the oven *'—the text says Sunaka’s descendant, the prest of the Kapi alan, and Kaksasena’s descendant, named Abhipratinn, the kng When these two sat down to eat, they were asked for alms

If 1+ be asked Whence do you know that Abhipratimn was o Caitraratha ? (a descendant of Citraiatha),—we reply He was ao, because of his connection with Kipeya, (10 descendant of Kap), the priest of Citraratha From the text ‘The Kapeyas made Citra ratha perform sacrifice by this’ (Tand Br 20 12 6 *), 1t 18 well known that the Kipeyas were the prieata of Citrarnatha The term ‘by this’ means ‘by the Dvi riitra `

If 1t be objected Very well, let Abhipratinn be Caitraratha because of his connection with a priest of Citra, but what proof 1s there of lus Keatriyahood *‘—(we reply) The text ‘From him was born a king of Kaatriyas, named Caitraratha’,1s the proof The words ‘from him’ mean. ‘from Oitraratha’

A Kegatriya being referred to in the end, Jinaéruti, mentioned in the begmning, too, must be a Kastriya, 81106 in one and the same vidy& there 18 the mention, as a rule, of parsons of the same class,— this 18 the meanimg of the aphonsam Moreover, the Kgatrryahood af Abbipratirm bemg ascertamed in the end on the ground of his

in. @ sentence, but which applies to two portions of 1b or to two persons or things fulfillmg a double purpose The maxon may be said to approxmate to the Enghsh one of ` पणां two birds with one stone’ Vide LN Partl, pp 13 13 Lakewise, here the phrase ‘ Kaairyyaivdvagaish falfils a double purpose, meanmg both ‘on account of knowmg the Kegairwyahood of Oastroratha Abhupraténn’, and ‘on account of knowing the Keatryyahood of Janafruts’ Seep 200 = 1

1 The word eildena not found im the origmal text Vide Chind 435 p 189

2 P 687 vol 2

[80 1 3 36 200 VEDANTA PARLIATA SAUBABHA ADH 9]

association with K&peya, a Brihmana, the Kgatriyahood of Jénaérut1, too, 18 ascertained m the begining on the ground of his association with Raikva,—this 18 the sense 4

COMPARISON RAmanoja and Srikantha

Reading different, vz They break xt into two different sitras ‘Keatmyatvil gated ca’ (8009 $4), and ‘uttaratre ling&t ’ (afitra 3b >)

Bhaskara

different, viz ‘“Kesatriyatvii gates ca 3 instead. of ‘Ksatriyatva avagates oa

SOTRA 36 “ON ACCOUNT OF THH BHFERENGE TO FURIFICATORY BITES, AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE DROLABATION OF THEIR ABSENCE (IN TH CASH OF A SUDRa), (+ SUDRA 18 NOT ENTITLED TO THE KNOWLEDGE or BEanMAN) °"

Vedainta-pirijita-saurabha

“On account of the reference to the purrficatory mtes "’ of mvesti- ture with the holy thread in the section concerned with knowledge,

i Thus, altogether three reasons are advanced—why J dnaéruis 23 to be taken es 8 Beals — (a) In the beginning, Jdnadérits 18 said to be practimng charity, feedmg people on 4, large scale, which proves him to be a Keairya (४) In the end, AbMpratdiren 19 mentioned, and Abhupraidrin bemg a Keairwe, Jdnasrats must be so amce persons of the class are entitled to the same Vidyd (9) AbAspratirm, mentioned im the end, 19 said to be a Kaatruya, because of hus connection with a Briimana (vis Kdpeya), and hence Jdnaérué, mentioned ब because of his connection with a Brdhmana (vis a B 183485 pp 837888 Part 1 Madras ed Some edrions read * Keairiyaiva-qvagateioa’® + Vide Bombay ed,p 826 The Benares of VD reads ‘ Keairsyaiva-gaied ca (p 60), but the Brm davan ed of VS, reads Kaairwaiva avagaied ca (p 46) Sk 183485 pp 488 480, Part 5 > Bh B 1834 p 67

[807 1 3 86 ADH 9] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 201

thus ‘He mvested him, forsooth, with the holy thread’ (Sat Br 11581814) and so on “and on account of the declaration of ther absence” thus ‘A Sfidra, belongs to the fourth caste and 1s once- born (© 78 10502), ‘And be 28 not fit for a puniicatory mite’ (Manu 10 126 8),—a Sidra 18 not entitled to knowledge

Vedinta-kaustubha

In the previous aphorism, the disqualrfication of a Sidra for the knowledge of Brahman has been established on the ground of reason. Now, his disqualification 28 being proved on the ground of Scripture, eto as well

A Sidra 18 not entitled to knowledge Why? “On account of the reference to purificatory 768," 16 on account of the reference to the purificatory mites of mvestiture with the holy thread m sections concerned with knowledge, thus “He mvested him, forsooth, with the holy thread’ (Sat Br 115818) But, then, 1s 1b to be supposed that a Siidra, too, 18 entitled to nvestature® To this it 18 replied “On. account of the declaration of their absence”, 16 on account of the depiction of the absence, in the case of a Sidra, of purifloatory rites like investiture with the holy thread and the rest, m the passages ‘In a Sidra there 1s no sm and he 18 not fit for a purflcatery mte’ (Mann 10126) ‘A Siidra belongs to the fourth caste and 1s once- born’ (GDS 1050) and so on ‘The imvestature with the holy thread 28 designated m the case of others m the passage ‘Let one invest a Brahmans with the holy thread at the age of eight, a Ksatriya at eleven, and a Vaisya at twelve’ (Ad GS 17138 44)

Hence, the reference to investiture with the holy thread fits in 11. the sections concerned with knowledge

(4a 1 4 37 202 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH ¢ ]

SUTRA 37

“AND 2204 एण OF (GAUTAMA’S) PROOREDING (TO INITIATES JABALA} ON THE ASOHRTAINMENT OF THR ABSENOR OF THAT (VIZ पापि Stppanoon), (+ 60784 78 NOT ENTITLED 70 THE KNOWLEDUE 01 BrabMAn) ”

Vediinta-parijadta-saurabha

Moreover, “because of” Gautama’s “proceoding ' tu mest J&bBla with the holy thread and to teach him, only “on thi weer tamment of the absence” of his Sfidrahood,—heon 16) 1 Sudri 1 not indeed enittled to the knowledge of Br dunan

Vedanta-kaustubha

For thus reason too, says the author, a अपिता as not ontith प te the knowledge of Brahman

Fatherless पद्या, dewrous of suly ition, and about to xpprich & preceptor, asked his mother with a view {fo earning dua fine aye ‘Of what hneage am J?’ Sho too, waaware of hia lincage ॥ 10५ 4 “I do not know’ पद्मक too, having approached (iuutama, said * Reverend Sir । I wish to stay 1 your place as a etudent कि तत्‌ know ledge’ ‘Then, being asked by lum ‘O! what lmenge an you’ यढ said ‘Sir, I do not know of what linea [ am,' aul se on Thus, when J&bila had spoken tho truth, and whon, thereby, the absence of J&éb&la’s Siidrahood had been axertamed thus “A not Brihmana cannot speak thus”’ (‘hind 44614), then only (ताक proceeded to invest J&b&la with the holy thread and teach him with the words ‘“Hetch the fuel, my child. I shall invest you with the holy thread You have not deviated from truth'*’ (Chand 445%) Henoe, 9 Sidra 1s not ontatled to knowledge

Fa

oe न [मि | Lae]

1 Correct quotation ‘ ध्न) erhak' Side (hind $44

4 Vide Ohind 4 4 for the whok stury

{s0.1 9 38 ADH 9] VEDANTA PARIJATA-SAURABHA 203

SUTRA 38

“ON ACCOUNT OF THH PROHIBITION OF HEARING, STUDYING, AND (LRARNING) THE meANING (07 THE Vana), (+ 67774 78 NOT ENTITLED TO THH KNOWLEDGE 07 Branman) ^"

Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

A Stidra 1s not entztled to the knowledge of Brahman, “on account of the prohibition of the hearmg ” and 80 on of the Veda on his part, in the text ‘One should not study (the Veda) m the viamity of 4 Sidra’ (V Sm 18 9 1) and 80 on

Vedanta-kaustubha

For this reason, too, 8 Sidra 1s not entitled to the knowledge of Brahman For what reason?! ‘On account of the prohibition of hearmg”’ and the rest on the part of a Sidra, m the passage ‘A cemetery, endowed with, feet, 18, verily, 9 Sidra 2 Hence one should not study (the Veda) in the vicinity of a Siidra’ (V Sm 18 9), ‘Hence a Sidra 18 a beast,® not fit for sacrifices’ and on 80 The sense (of the first passage) 1s <A ‘cemetery’ that 8 ‘endowed with feet’, 16 capable of moving, ‘1s a Sidra’, m whose presence one should not even study the Vedas ‘The sense 18 that the hearmng of the Veda, the study of 1t, the performance of the religious duties mentioned thereim, are prohibited, all the more, to a Sfidra

COMPARISON Samkara, Bhiskara and Baladeva They treat this siitre and the next as one sitra * 1 P 216 15 20 8, R, Bh SK, ए

2 Readmg shghtly differs viz "ठ vat tac chmaddnam *(p 216)

3 ‘Bahu-pasuh padu sadgéa vis orthah' सत B 1388 p 389, Part I + 8 5 1888 p 876 Bh B 1838 p 68 GB 1888

[st 1 3 30. VEDINTA PARIJETA SAUBABHA ADH 6 resumed |

SUTRA 39 “AnD ON s0COUNT oF सिना ”

Vedinta-pirijita-saurabha

८ And on account of the Smrta”’, viz ‘One should not teach hint sacred duties ° (Manu 4 806 1, VSm 18 125)

Vedinta-kaustubha

“And on account of the Smrti”’, viz ‘One should ned de ich arn sacred duties, nor sacred vows’ (Manu 4806, Vm 1५ 1.) Om should not mpart knowledge to a Sfidra (Manu + ७९४३ ९ Sin 18 12) and go on

Here ends the section entitled ‘The caclusion of जित ` (i)

Adhikarana 6 resumed The soation entitica ‘Whatis measured’resumed (Sitias £0 £1)

SUTRA 40 “On ACCOUNT OF THR SHAKING ”

Vedanta -pirijata-saurabha

What 1s measured, 18 to be known as tho Suprome Person, EH: being the shaker of the entire universe, and. because the words ‘greut’ and the rest are found used

Vedinta-kaustubha

After having completed the incidental discussion about qualifien tion. (adhikBra) in connection with the discussion about the Porson, measured 88 the size of merely a thumb, begun in the aphorism On acoount of the text only, what is measured (8 the Lord)’ (3: S& 1 3 24), the author 1s finishing the original discusmon

eee Gente = क ` ह +

146

1 a 217 11108 l

i tg "छ

[st 1 3 41 ADB G6resumed] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA 205

The words ‘what 1s measured’ are to be supphed In the Katha ‘walll, we find the followmg im the section of the Person, of the mse of Imerely a thumb ‘Whatever there 1s, the whole world, emanated (from the vital breath), trembles m the vital breath alone, the great fear, a thunderbolt about to be hurled Those who know that become immortal’ (Katha 62) Here, what 1s measured as of the mze of ® thumb and 1s denoted by the term ‘vital breath’ 1s none but the Supreme Bamg Why? For the followmg reasons Furst, “on .ocount of the shaking’,1¢e the Lord alone 1s the cause of the shakmg of the entire universe, emanated from Himself Secondly, the term ^ great’, which 1s 8 synonym for Brahman, has been used Thirdly, the term ‘fear’ proves that the vital breath 1s Brahman, for He alone ia the cause of the fear of all, as declared by the text ‘Through fear Of hmm the fire burns, through fear the sun shmes, through fear Indra, ‘Wind and Death, the fifth, speed on’ (Katha 6 9), and finally, the Lord alone 1s the cause of the mmortality of one who possesses know ledge of Him

COMPARISON

Samkara, Bhaiskara and Srikantha

Interpretation different, viz they take this siltra as formmg 9 mew adhikarana by itaelf, concerned with the question whether the term. ‘prina’ in Katha upanwad (6 2) denotes Brahman or not But #ccording to Nimbarka, this siitra does not begin a new adhikarana, but only resumes adhikarans 6

Baladeva

Interpretation different, viz he also begins a new adhikarana here, concerned with the question whether the term “vajra’ m Katha upanigad (6 2) denotes Brahman or not

SUTRA 41 ‘Because OF PERCEIVING LicuT ° Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

Because in the text ‘Through his light’ (Katha 5164), ‘hght’ 13 mentioned, the measured Person 18 the Supreme Bemg

iR B

[at 1 J 42 206 VEDANTA PARIJATA-RAURAHHA १1, 10]

Vedinta-kaustubha

In the very sume Kntha-v ull, in the xe ¢ lien ot the Pe raon ine anuty ५ as of the size of a thumb, itm प प प्ते prior ta the text abont the vital breath, (viz Kathe 62) ‘The sun doe net shine the re, nor the moon. and the stars, nor do these lightniys shine, muh less this fire He shinmg, everything else shines after hun All thin slumes throupsh his ght? (Katha 62) “ Becauns” im thin text, Hphi, fe [गाए exolustvely to the Supreme Soul who w denoted by the term ‘lydht “15 geen” (ie declared), 1b 1s eatablubed that what ॐ of the size of merely a thumb 1s none but the Supreme Soul

Here ends the section ontutled, ‘ What Is Mensured ` (t)

COMPARISON Samkara, Bhaskara and Srikantha Interpretation different, viz they take thi wiitra ax forming a

new adbikarana by itself, concorn.d with the quustion whother the term, ‘light’ in the Chindogyopammad (8 126) donutes Brahmin oo

not + Baladeva

Interpretation different, wis ‘(The word “‘viajie ' im the Kathe panigad must mean the Lord), because it w seen (that in ५ pree edi passage He 18 called) hght’ 9 Adhikarana 10 The 8690101 untitloud ‘Nene thing different’ (837४५८५४ 42-44)

SUTRA 42

“THe कापः (8 BRAMAN), ON AQUOUNT UF THY UBSIONATION (OF IT) 48 SOMETHING DIFFERENT, AND HO ON

Vedanta-piarijita-saurabha

In the passage “The ether, verily, w tho produ of sunt aril form’ (Chand 8 14 1 8), the object denoted by the term ‘ether ia tu a

i योव नि

+ 3.8 1 3 #0, ए 380 & 5० , Bh 13 1340, p dB ४ ft ११) qu Atty 9४ ०80 Part 5

9 (1.28 1840 > 8, & Kh &k, i

[80९ 1 ॐ 42 ADE. 10] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 207 Highest Person Why? “On sccount of the designation” of ¢ Supreme Soul “as something different’ from even. the freed once He bemg the producer of all objecta possessmg names and form~ mphed by the term ‘name and form’,—aa well as on account of th designation of Brahmanhood, immortality and the rest on 11 part

Vedanta-kaustubha

Thus, by means of the aphorism ‘On account of the text only what 18 measured (8 the Lord)’ (Br Si 13 24), the text regardiny the Person of the size of merely & thumb has been shown to be referriny to Brahman, and this has been confirmed once more mmmedintely after the end of the motdental sections Now, with a view to dea nating the non attachment and the omnipresence of the Supreme Self, 16 15 bemg shown that the text about the etlier, too, refera to Him.

In the Chandogya, we read ‘The ether, verlly, 28 the producer of name and form That withim which they are 1s Brahman, that 1- mmortal, that 1s the soul’ (Ghind 8141) Here a donbt arises viz whether by the term ‘ether’ the elemental ether 1s to be under stood. here, or the soul freed from the bondage of mundane exatence or the Supreme Soul If 1t be said that the elemental ether 10 to be understood, since the term ‘ether’ 18 well known to denote that alone,—(we reply ) no, on account of the term ‘soul’ What then should be understood? If zt be suggested the freed soul, Why ! For the followmg reasons Yurst, the freed soul alone has been men tioned previously as the tomo of discussion, m the passage ‘Shaking off (evila) as a horse shakes off 1118 hairs’ (Chind 8 15 1),—the phrase ‘That within which they are’ means That soul, freed from mundant exstence, from which ‘they’, 1e name and form ‘are different (antara),1e outede Further, the discarding of the well known nam and form 18 posable on the part of the soul in ita state of release, ax declared by the passage ‘Just as the fowmg rivers, discarding name and form’ (Mund 828) And, finally, the term ‘other’, too, & appropnste with regard to the freed soul, 1t bemg possessed of folly manrfeat knowledge ‘The phrase ‘Thats Brahman, thet 1s immortal denotes the state of salvation.

(Author’s conclusion ) गा भ The meanmg of the term ‘ether’ here can tting)s ॥ ete makes Why 7 “On account of the designation

[न 1 3 45 208 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA भा 10]

{of 1t) aa something different”, 16 on account of the derygnntion of the object denoted by the term ‘ethe:’,—whith >? untow ind by mime and form, as evident from the phrase ‘That within whih they ane’ and 18 the producer of name and form, on evident from the pli ine ‘The producer of name and form’,—uos different from thie objet which 18 devoid of the power of bemg a producor, sme during its xtate of bondage, the soul, partaking of name and form as subject to harm 13 not itself capable of producmg, 16 revealing, nemo and form,- to do so being all the more mmposaible on its part पप्य its भ्ण of telease That tho activities in connection with (the ¢rewtion and (1 rest) of the Universe, are mpossible on ite part, will be expressly stated later on On the other hand, that the Supreme Soul, an adept in the creation of the enture Universe, 28 such ९ producor, 4 we lla nt ih ished by Seripture iteelf, thus ‘“‘ Having entered with the living soul, let me evolve name and form”’ (Chind 6 4 2), ‘Irom hum arose—* this name, form and food’ (Mund 119) "The Wine One who abides concerving all forms, mvig names, and declaring (them) (Text Ar 3 12178) The ‘ether’ 18 Brahman also on account of the designation, in the text, of the exclusive qualities of the Lord, such as, bemg eternally manifest, greatness, mmortality and dhe rent mphed by the term “and so on” (in the atitra) Nor low the fred soul been mentioned before os the topic of discumion, the Supreme Soul alone bemg the topic, as evident from the pnasngeu ‘1 atta the world of Brahman’ (Chind 8131), and the term ‘ether’, tou being well known to denote the Supreme Soul alone, 2t bang all ‘pervasive and non attached

SUTRA 43

“(AND ON ACCOUNT OF THH DESIGNATION 07 BRAHMAN) aS DIFFARENT (FROM THH INDIVIDUAL SOUL) IN DEEP ALERP AND DHPARTUBR ”

Vedinta-pirijata-saurabha

And on account of the designation of the omnixciont “ as different from the non knower “in deep sleep and departing *’

1 Vide Br 3 4417 2 Correct quotation ‘Tasndd stat Brahma Vide Mui 134

{st 1 3 43 478 10] VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA. च

Vedanta-kaustubha

If ४ be objected Since 1t 18 found from & conaideratio meaning of the text “Thou art that’ (Chind 6 87, etc 1) म cannot possibly be anything different from Brahman, how can it kk said ‘On account of the demgnation (of Brahman) as somethmer different and 80 on”? (Br Si 13 42)—

(Wereply) True In apuite of there bemg non difference between the individual soul, which 1s a part of Brahman, and Brahman, owing to the fact that the mdividual soul has no existence, activity and the reat apart from Brahman,—ate difference from Thm, too, 18 inevitable PORKCABING 48 10 does ita own peculiar qualtties,—#0 says the reverent author of the aphorisms

The words ‘on account of the demgnation” are to be supphud {The mdzvidual soul and Brahman are different from each other } on account of the designation of the Supreme Soul, the omniscient ५8 “different” from the mdividual soul, the non knower, “1m deep siaep”, 0. the passage ‘Bmbraved by the Intelhgent Soul, he does not know anything external, nor anythmg mternal’ (Brh 43 23) and ‘in departure”, m the passage ‘Mounted by the Intelligent 0४, 1+ goea groanmg’ (Brh 453 36) ‘Mounted’ means superin tended, ‘groaning’ means making fmghtful sounds, or gounds of hiccough It 1s not posable that the non-knowing soul, sleeping or departing, can st the same time, becoming intelhgent, embrace oF mount itself, or that another wdividual soul can do #0, OMAIUSCIENCE beung imposaible on the latter’s part aa well

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhiskara Interpretation. different, Viz according to them, this adhikarans

१ eonosrned with the question whether the Brhadiranyake text 4.37 refers to the Supreme S00" -------- as refera to the Supreme Soul, or not 9

1 Aly coun in कणत 694, 61038, 61138 6 198, 81858 6148, 6 15.3,

8 16.3 268 1343, pp 389 Bh & 1342,p 70

छ ७ रिं

1#

[४९ 1 9 44 210 VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA avH 10}

SOTRA 44

“Ow ACCOUNT OF WORDS LIKE ‘LORD’ AND 1H REST

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

On account of the demgnation ot the Supreme Soul as different from the indrvidual soul by the texts ‘The Lord of all’ (Brh 44 22, 8611), ‘The ruler of all’ (Beh 44224), 1¢ ४ vxtablishod that He alone 1s the ether

Here ends the third section of the first nee lin Ve diinta pinjSte-saurabha, an unterpretation of the lea, पा texts composed by the reverend Nimbirka

Vedanta -kauatubha

The author dwells on the differenco between the medividual soul and Brahman

There 18 indeed a difference botweon the individual soul and the Supreme Soul Why? “On account of words lke ‘lord’ and the तछा“, 16 on account of texts like ‘Tho Lord of all’ (Brh 44 ॐ, 661), ‘The oontroller of all’ (अ 4422), ‘The ruler of all’ (Brh 4423), ‘He rulea all this’ (Brh 561), ‘Ho w the Lard at all’ (Brh 4 4 22) and so on

Though already shown above, we shall sm 1k of thin diflerence non difference m detail later on 5 6008, 1b w entabluhid that on account of the designation of the Lord as something different und wo on, the meaning of the term ‘ether’ ए vone but the Supreme Lord

Here ends the section entitled ‘Something different” (10) Here ends the third section of the first chapter in tho Vedanta kaustubha, & commentary on the Sariraka mimimasi,, and composed by the reverend teacher Srinivizea

18 R Bh, SK, 2 9 Op ov

> Videeg VK 149,1420 1421,21 13,31 31, oto

[sd 1 3 44 ADH 10 |

VHD ANTA-EKAUSTUBHA Sit

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhaskara Interpretation different, mz the same topic continued 1

Résumé The third section of the first chapter contams

(1) 44 stitras and 10 adhikaranas, accordmg to Nimbiarka (2) 43 siitras and 13 adhikaranas, according to Samkara (3) 44 sittras and 10 adhikaranas, according to Rimfnuja (4) 43 stitras and 13 adhikaranas, according to Bhiskara (6) 44 siitras and 11 adhikaranas, accordmg to Srikantha (6) 43 sitras and 10 adhikaranas, according to Baladeva Samkara, Bhaskara and Baladeva read the sitras 38 and 39 317 Nimbiairka’s commentary as one sitra R&aménuja and Srikanthe read the siitras 2 and 3 1m Nimb&rka’

commentary 88 one siitra, while breakmg the siitra 35 in the same as two different sutras

1 85 1343 p 385, Bh B 18 48, p 70

FIRST CHAPTER (Adhyéya) FOURTH QUARTFR (Pada)

Adhikarana 1 The scotion cutitlod ‘What is derived from inforoncy [४8६५८५१ 1-7)

SUTRA 1

“Ty TT BH OBJHOTED THAT WHAT If DERIVED FRUM INFERENOX (प्ट PRADBANA), TOO, (18 MENTIUNND IN THE TRXTS) OF BOMX (BRANOHES), (WH REPLY) NO, BROCAUSE OF UNDERSTANDING WHAT 18 PUT DOWN IN THH SIMILE OF THE BODY, AND (THE TEXT) SHOWS (THIS) ”

Veddnta-parijata-saurabha

If 1t be objected that in a text of tho Katha branch, viz ‘Higher than the great (mahat) 8 the unmanzfest (avyakta), higher than the unmantfest 1a the Person (puruga)’ (Katha 3 1) 1), “ What m derived from inference’ 9, 16 pradhana, “too”, 1s found moentioned,*—

(We reply ) “No”, because 171 accordance with the taxt ‘Know the soul to be the lord of the chamot and the body to be the chant’ (Kathe 3 $ ५), the body, which 1 put down in tho mmile of the chariot, 18 understood by the term ‘unmamfest’ ^ And” having demon strated the mode of subdwng the sense organs, the text “shows”, in the concluding portion 5, that what had been previously contrived through the mmile® (viz the body), w understood here, thus ‘A wise man should reatraim speech in the mind, that he should restrain in the intelhgent soul, the utelhgent soul m the great (mahat), that he should restrain m the tranquil soul’ (Katha 3 137)

1 8 R, Bh 87, 2 9 For, why pradh&ns w called ‘anumanika’, see footnota 1

p a $ Of Br 8i 116, which contends that pradhina is ‘afabda’ or not mentioned in Sarpture

५ 6, BR, Bh, SK, B ° O88 od reads vikys-degah’ (p 19) Riapaka-parskalpvam ig

एकु grahanam is evidently @ musprint All other + ial de i lita

[80 1 ¢ 1 ADH 1]

VEDAN'TA-KAUSTUBHA 213

Vedinta-kaustubha

In this manner, 1t has been shown above, under three sections, that the scmptural texte all refer to Brahman, possessing the sent nt and the non sentient as His powers, an ocean of natural, finite ane inconcalvable auspicious qualities, untouched by any material quality + and the cause of the world Now agai, m the fourth section bs showing + that those texts too which apparently seem to extablixh pradhina—which 18 demonstrated by the doctrme of Kapila and 1

14 the Person (purusa)’ (Kathe 9 11) Here, a doubt arses viz

with the Person der, beginning with the great (mahat) and ending be 7 नी which, 18 well-known. m the Kapila शप्र If it be objected The concordance of the entare Veda with regard to Brahman, the ng (640 world, bea been estabbshed duly, hence i: ००६ posse

radhine, ‘* derived from inference”; (mentioned 10 the नु pm: schools, be the cause of the world 80 here पा the म of tbe Kajhakes pradbAne 1 understood by the term ‘un navifost’ (Here ends the orginal prema facre vie" | ro conclusion. ) ^ No” Wherefore! Because of under

‘Know certain sumularity Thus, compare the म oh ho lord of the chant, he DY shanot, the body to be the chatio¥, know inte

1.7 1 4 I 214 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ann | |

to be the cbarioteer, and tho mind to be the rummy ‘The se nae ofp

they aay, are the horses, the 01५८ ol tho senses their roudis, the self connected with the sense orgins wid the mind, is the enjayar, Ko the wise say He who 15 dovoid of understanding and over mattentive

his sense organs are uncontrollable, hke the wicked horas of a chu

rioteer But he who 18 possessed of intelligence and ever nfte ntive, his sense oigans are controllable, like the good horses of a chariot oor

He, however, who 18 devoid of undcrstancding, ४ mettentive and ove: impure, does not attain that place, and uttainag mundany evant ne

But he who 18 possessed. of undoistanding, ws attentive aml over pure, attains that place whence he 1s not bornagam A mun, however, who has understanding as hua chaziotoe: and the mind as jus reins, attains the end of the road, that supreme placo of Vianu’ (Kotha 33, 3 9)

In these passages, a map—who 18 demrous of the place of Vieni, thi end of the road of transmigiutory existence, and who heang the ¢njoye t 18 the principal agent—1s firat metaphorically repronented as the lord of a chariot , his body,—which 1s subordimate to lnm as the able of 118 enjoyment,—as the chanot, and the senso organs, inte Tle ४ ane the reat, as the charioteer and the rewt, as fur aa pomnble, = which shows that just &8 17 18 possible for ५ potter to be the creator of pots, et

only when he is connected with the wheel, the stick wad the rust, so the attributes of the soul, wz ‘being an agont’, ‘buing an enjoyer

and the rest, are found to belong to 1t, only when 16 24 connec ted with the body, the sense organs, eto and not when 16 18 devoul of attributes

since 1t 18 impossible for 19 then to be the realzing ayent —one who 18 approaching a goal After that, the qualitaes of a sentiont ४" ing, lke ‘“bemg an agent’, ‘bemg o realiing agent who is appron hing towards a goal’ and 80 on, umphed by 168 quality of ‘being an cujoyer’ are stated Immediately after, tho hability of » non knower, wher

sense organs are unrestrained, to transmigratory exutenco, and the fitmess of a knower, whose sense-organs are reatramedd, for tho place of Vignu are designated, and then the place of Vusnu 1s pointed ont a8 the object to be reached Immediately after thu, Scripture goon on to declare those objects which have superorty to others in ae far as these latter are to be controlled, in the passage ‘Highi than the sense organs are the objects of senses, higher than the objecta is the mmd, higher than the mind 18 intellect, higher than mtollect in the greatsoul Higher than the great (mahat) 1a the unmanifest (avvakta), higher than the unmanifest 18 the Person (puruga), nothing 1s higher

(80 1 4 1

than the Person, He 18 the goal, the highest +

$11) Here, the objecta, incall before as the lord aan. Protech and the reat, arc mentioned irrespective of the smile for the sak: of making the intended meanmg olear 9 And the soul and the rest

metaphorically represented as the lord of the chamot and so on, ars here referred to by those very terms (‘soul’ and so on) pitied

and the body, metaphorically represented as the chariot, bemg left over, 18 denotud by the term ‘unmanifest’® Thus, the objects of senses, metaphorically represented as the roads, are ‘higher than’

16 superior to, the sense-organs, metaphorically represented aa the horses, 7) #0 far na these latter are to be controlled, smce when m proxmuty to 0016018 of senses, the sense-organs of even a self-controlled man uro found to incline to them once more Higher than those even 18 the rand, metaphorically represented 88 the reins, amce the proximity to 0४010018 of भश too 18 of little avail if the mind be not inchned to thom Higher than that even 18 mtellect, metephorocally represented. as the charlotec:, since the mind, too, 18 of little avail im the absence of apprehemuon Hagher than that even uw the soul, metaphorically reprewontad ५१ the lord of the chariot, because of 108 superiority as an धा Since all these depend upon ite will, 2 alone 18 specified 4 tho ‘great’ Figher than that even 18 the body, metaphorically representa aa the chariot, sce all the actrvities of the individual youl in connection with all the means to salvation depend on the hody Higher than that even 18 the Person, the soul of all and the end of the road of transmuigratory existence, since everything else, mentioned previously, are under His control When He 1s won by

= = षणे ee a ne a ० ि

४ A krame wi & kuad of smile in which the comparisons exhibited correspond to sank uther m rezular succession MW ,p 319, Col 2 ४ That iy, in ordur thab the intended meanmg may be clearly conveyed to

216

lanly भवते ५ Tho angumant 28 98 follows In Kaths 8 8-8 0 the soul, the body and the

ria aro uuocemuvely corapared to the lord of 9 chanot, & chariot and #0 on vhivoun Katha 3 10-8 11 the same objects, vis the soul and so on, are mentioned once more, nub metaphorically, bab directly and plamly ee vareew, the कणा, etc are demoted by those very words, Only १०० ot only mention of thea hody Hence, when everything else fits m, the body ए remaining ons on this side must be denoted by the term unmenzfeat

remaining une un thet ade

[st 1 4 1 216 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1]

means of meditation,as directed, all the ends of a man are accomplished, as declared by the passage ‘Whatever verily, be the means resorted to for the sake of the four ends of a man, a man, who haa taken refuge m N&r&iyans, attams them without 1t’ Hence, here the mabat, an effact of pradh&na, 18 not understood by the term ‘great’, nor pradh&na, 108 cause, by the term ‘unmanzfest’, nor puruga, admitted by the Samkhyas, the twenty fifth prmople m contrast to the twenty four material ones, by the term ‘Person’ The entare Veda is im oon- cordance with regard to this very Person, the object which one should deare to enquire into, and an ocean of infinite, auspicious attributes, there being nothing higher than Him, m accordance with the sarip tural text ‘There 1s nothmg higher than the Person’ (Katha 3 11); the Smyti passage ‘There 18 nothing else higher than me, O Dhanafi jaya” (Gité 7'7) The Person 81016 18 the object to be attaimed, in accordance with the sormptural text ‘That 1s the goal, that 1s the highest course’ (Katha 311), as well as with the declaration by the interpreter of the texts (viz Nimb&rka) ‘There 1s no other goal except the lotus feet of Krsna’ (D8 80)

Having shown that the Supreme Person 1s difficult to be attamed by one who 18 not self controlled, while easy to be attamed by one who 18 self controlled, and havimg shown the mode of subduing the sense organs, the text “ shows”, in the concluding portion, that what had appeared previously in the amule 18 understood here, (and not the Simkhya pradhina), thus ‘This soul, hidden im all bemgs, 18 not manifest, but 18 percetved by subtle seers through highest, subtle intellect A wise man should restrain speech m the mimd, that he should restrain m the intelhgent soul, the mtelligent soul in the great, that he should restram m the tranquil soul’ (Katha 312318) (The text meana )‘'This’,1e Vasudeva,—omniscient, to be approsohed. by the freed souls, and without an. equal or a superior, as stated in the text “There 1s nothmg higher than the Person, that 18 the goal, that 18 the highest course’ (Katha 8 11),—though present im all beingr, 1s not manifest’, 1 6 1s not peroerved. by all, since they are not entitled to perceive Him for this very reason, He 1s ‘hidden’,—the com- pound (viz ‘girdho’ tm&’) 18 mm accordance with Vedic use,—ns declared by the Lord Himself ^ ^“ am not manifest to भा” ` (Gita 7 26) If one is entatled to perceive the Lord, then alone He comes to be perceived, hence 1t 18 said "18 perceived’ and so on All the sense organs, inphed by the term ‘speech’, should be restraimed in the

ist 1 4 2 ADE 1 |

mind,—the long vowel (व m ‘manaat’) 1s in accordance with Vedic ux the ne in the intelligent soul, 16 m intellect, 87008 ‘bemg intelli: nt and ‘bemng the soul’ are posable on the part of intellect, owing to itn connection with the mduividual soul, intelligence in the great soul ie m the mdividual soul, and that m the tranquil,re m Brahman the Universal Cause ‘The sense 18 that if 1 the previoun cane (vu Katha 811), because of understandmg! the prncple ‘mahat’ bs the term ‘great’, we understand 118 cause,—viz pradhine whauh 1s demved. from inference,—~by the term ‘unmanzfest’ on the ground ot ita immediate proximity to it, then, hare, too, that may be understood by the term ‘great’, and hence (the mjunction ) ‘One should restram the great m the tranquil’ should lead to undesired. conclusions > Hence the concluding text, too, shows that what bad pre viously appeared 7. the smule of the body 1s understood here

SOTRA 2

Roy ए SUBTLE (BODY 78 DENOTED BY THE THEN “UNMANIFEST } BHOAUSH OF TTS FITNESS (TO BE DENOTED 80)

Vedinta-parijita-saurabha

If it be said that the word ० nmanifest'’? denotes somethmg xubtle,—(we reply 1t may denote the body too,) since the body too, the meaning (of the term,“ unmanifest’’), 18 & grosser state of something aubtle indeed.

understood by the term “wamanti#) "= by the term ^ unmanifest”’, फ bemg something maniteut शै

suffix 100701168 reason ; ange Be case the mahat would. be dependent on Brahman a gorichi

trary to the Sdmkhys view ग्ण रि oe मो of the subtle body are the five tan-matras the ten acme

Vide VRMP 30 organs, the mind, and the vitel breath Vv

[भौ 1 4 9 218 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA. ADH 1]

We reply The word “ but” पाठा emphasis The borly ४ tha gross effect, pradhAns 18 the subtle cause, and that nione w to be understood, so the term ‘‘unmanifest” may very wellrefertoit Why? ‘Because of ita fitness”, 16 because of the fitnexa of the subtle pradhina to assume the form of the effect, or bocause of the fltnews of the effect to assume the form of the cause Just asin the toxt ‘All this verily, 18 Brahman, emanating from Him, disappearing into Him and breathing in Him’ (Ohfind 3141), the umverse, though driterent from Brahman as His effect, having been omanated from Him, ४५ yet declared to be non-different from. Him, so 18 this body, which ४ तक्रा different from. pradh&na.

Or 6186; (an alternative explanation ,) because of the fitness of that word “unmanifest”, denotang the cause, to denote the efit too | &8 17) the example ‘Mix the soma with cows’ (Rg ४ 940 45)

COMPARISON Réimfnuja

Interpretation of ‘tad arhatvit’ diftcrunt, viv भान the tnmanifest matter alone, when 1t has assumed the form of the effet (viz body), 18 fit to undertake activities, promoting the cml of men like a chariot 3

SUTRA 3 “ (PBADHENA) HAS A MBANING ON AQGOOUNT OF (LEH) DEPANDENGE on Him ” Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

Pradhana, taught m the Upanisads, “hrs a mowing ot wt count of ita dependence” on the Supreme Cause, while that adnutted by others 18 meaningless, such 18 the distinction (betwean our [वपी and that of others, viz of the Simkhyas)

1 The argument m that the cause sod the effect being non-diffiun nt, a terres denotang the one, can very wull denote the other Hane thn term ‘dumanitent the cause, can denote the body, its affuct au wull ® P 208, 106 16 That is, the Some ts to be mixed, uot with the ouw, the cause, but with the milk, ita effect Here a word, donntuy the osu, really stands for the offect ‘Sr B 142, p 357 Chap 1

{80 1 4 8 ADH 1 ] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 219

Vedanta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz In that case, be happy by falling m with the Simkhyas, since you admit the doctrine of the causality of pra dhina,—the author replies here

In ordinary experience, a non sentient object, having no connec tion with a sentient principle, can have no meaning, incapable aa 16 18 of giving rise to an effect Never does a lump of clay assume the form of & pot by iteelf Similarly, pradhina, admitted by the Samkhyas, having no connection with a sentient prnaple and itself non sentient, is not able to give rise to effects, hence, 1t 1s simply meaningless Pradhéns, taught m the Upanisgads, on the other hand, “has a mean mg” ‘That has a meaning which serves the ‘meanmg’, or the purpose, of giving mse to all effects, beginning with the mahat and ending with a tuft of grass Why? “On account of (1ta) dependence on Him”? 1 ‘That which 1s dependent on Him,16 on Brahman or Lord Vasudeva, sentient and the Supreme Cause, 1s ‘tad adhina’, viz pradhina, the atate of bemg that (tad adhinatva), on account of that (tad श्त natvat)

But the dependence of pradhina on Brahman 18 not like the dependence of atoms on Iévara, as held by the logicans, but 1s due to the relation between 9 power and the possessor of the power,? as established by the scnptural text like' ‘The own power of the Derty, hidden by bis own qualities’ (Svet 1 8) and 80 on ‘The scriptural texts, establishing pradhina as taught im the Upanisads, have been quoted above 2

COMPARISON Bhaskara

He gives two alternatave explanations of the afitra, the first of which, tales with the explanation gven by Nimb&rka The second 1s as follows ‘But (the subtle causal body 1s demgnated as) subtle (m reference to the gross body), because of the fitness (of the word ““onmanrfest ” to denote 1t)’ (Siitra 2) (‘ Bondage and release) have meaning a8 dependent on it (viz the subtle body)” (Stitra 3) ¢

1 The compound tad-adhinaivdt' 1s to be explamed as follows

# That 18, not an external and accidental relation, but an mternal and emential one

2Videog VE 111 4 Bh B 148,p 73

[ऋ 1 । 45 220 VEDANTA PARIJSTA SAURABHA ADH 1 ]

Srikanthe

Interpretation different, vis ‘(Tho soul, the body and tho ist) have a meaning as dependent on Him (viz the Lord)’ ॥

SUTRA 4

“ALSO BHOAUSE OF THE ABSBNOE OF AN STATEMENS (1 (TT) BRING AK OBJHOT TO BH KNOWN "`

Vedainta-piarijita-saurabha

The word ‘unmanifest’ doea not denote pradhina of the Tin trikas (1e the SAimikhyas), “also because of the absence of any ntute ment of 165 bemg an object to be known ’

Vedinta-kaustubha

Hor this reason aleo pradhina w not denotid by the term `प्र manifest’ here Why? ‘Because of the absence of any xtatemer १ of its bemg an object to be known” The Simkhyns, weolu rently prattlng that salvation arses from a nght disemmination 14 twern prakyti ( = matter) and purusa ( = soul), say that with a yew te the attamment of salvation, prakyii, too, should be known by one desiring for salvatzon But pradhina 15 not montiond by the Kathas

४8 an object to be known, thero bemg the mention of the word ‘un- manifest’ smmply

SOTRA 5

“If IT 87 OBJECTED THAT (SORIPTURE) SPFAKS (OF PRADHANA 45 4N OBJEOT TO BE KNOWN), (WH REPLY ) NO, FOR THE INTELL!

GHNT SOUL (I8 THE OBJECT TO BE KNOWN), ON ACLOUNT OF FEE TOPIO °

Vedinta-parijita-saurabha

Ifit be objected that the text ‘By duscernmyg him, who in without beginning, without end, higher than the great (mahnt) eternal, one i delivered from the jaws of death’ (Katha 3 169), ^" भभम ` of pradhina as an object to be known,—

18K B 118 p S14 Parté 28 ए Bh 8, छ

[श 1 4 6

ADH 1] VEDANTA PARLJATA SAURABHA 291 (We reply ) ‘No’ “The intelligent soul’, 18 the Supreme Soul, 18 here indicated as the object to be known, He being the ५५ topio”

Vedanta-kaustubha

It may be objected The following text “speaks” of pradhina 88 an object to be known, vz ‘What 1s without sound, without touch, without form, unchangeable, hkewise without taste, constant, and without odour, without begining, without end, higher than the great (mahat), eternal, by discerning that, one 1s delivered from the jaws of death’ (Katha 315) It means that ‘by diwocarnmg’, 1 6 by knowing, pradhina,—the cause of and higher than ‘the great’, 168 than the prmople mahat, the second prmcaple called buddhi, and an effect of pradhina,—one 1s delivered from the jaws of death, 18 from the jaws of mundane existence

(We reply ) “No”, “for the intelligent soul” alone 1s mdicated. here as the object to be discerned Why? ‘On account of the topic”, 16 because the Supreme Soul 18 the topic here, as evident from the texts ‘That supreme place of Visnu’ (Katha 39), “ Nothmg 18 lughe: than the Person’ (Katha 311), ‘The soul, hidden m ail bemgs, 18 not manifest’ (Katha 312) andsoon And by the phrase ‘Higher than the great (mahat)’, the superiority of the Supreme Soul to the indzvidual soul,—mentioned. previously in the passage ‘Higher than buddha 1s the great soul’ (Katha 3 10),—3s denoted.

SUTRA 6

८ AwD THUS THREE ARE STATHMBNT AS WELL 4.8 QUESTION ABOUT THREE ALONE *”

Vedinta-parijaita-saurabha

That in tha Upanwad, “there are statement aa well as question about three”,—viz the means, the end, and the realming agent,—is Known from 9 consideration of the meanmg of the pmor and later texts Here, there 1s no room for determmmg & prinaiple which 1 derrved from inference (viz pradhina)

9 1 ¢ 6 222 VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH 1 |

Vedanta -kaustubha

Here pradhina cannot be understood by the term ‘unmanifest’, smoe here m the Katha रध्या, ^" there is statement about three ulone"’,— viz the Supreme Soul, the worslup of Hm, and the worshipit,-— 88 the objects to be demgnated, “as well as questaun” about them as the objects to be known, but not about pradhiie and the rest, estab hahed by the Samkhya tanira Thus, when three boons were promied to Naciketas by Death with the words ‘‘‘Since you have pasted thre days in my house without eating, O Brihmana, o guest to be nalutel, salute to you, © Bribmana, may 10 be well with me, thereture तपत three boons for each (mght)”’’ (Katha 1 9), the former axked fin the propitiatzon of his father as the first boon thus ‘“May Gautama be tranquil minded, well disposed, with anger appeased towards in, 0 Death! May he cheerfully greet me, when disminied by you, this I choose as the first boon among the three”’ (Katha 110) ‘Then, bemg granted the propitiation of his father with the words’ ‘ “Aud d&laka Arum, dismissed by me, will be cheerful as before, he will sleep happily at mghta, with lus anger appeased”? (Katha 1 11) ane 80 on, he asked for the knowledge of fire, called Naviketis und a means to salvation, thus ‘You know, O Death, the heavenly fire, tell 1t to me, who has faith Those who hve wm the honven-work! partake of immortalty—this I ask as the second boon”? (Kathu I IJ) The construction of the above text 18 as tollows ‘O Donth!’ ‘Yon know’, 1e remember and know, the ‘heavenly fire’, 1e the fre which Jeads to salvation So ‘tell that to mo’, dewrous ax | am of salvation I choose aa the second boon that knowledge of the fin whereby “those who hve m the heaven world’, 10 thos: tu whom belong the heaven world, viz the world to ba approached by the trod souls through the path begmnmg with light as stated in the tourth chapter 2, or the Vedintins, ‘partake of’, 16 attain, “immortahts or salvation Here the word ‘heaven’ applies to aalvation equally , this bemg well known from other texta us wall, such as, ‘The world of heaven 18 > golden sheath, covered with hght’, ‘The knowers «at Brahman go to Brahman, to the world of heaven’ (Brh 4483)

° ‘That 28, commended by me Vide 8B on Katha ' Matprasystab sac san * 9 Vide Br Si 43 1 of seg

४ Correct quotation ‘Zena dhirah apwyant: brake गदे Vide Bph 448, p 397 a haat

[st 1 4 6 aDH 1 } VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 293

and soon Then, having obtaimed the knowledge of the fire, taught thus ˆ ^ tell 1t to you, learn 16 from me, knowing the heavenly fire, ONaciketas! The atiamment of the mfinite world, and the support” * (Katha 114) and 80 on, he,—by means of 8 question regardmg the real nature of salvation, charactermed by the attamment of the Supreme Soul, the highest end of men,—asked, as the third boon, about the real nature of the object to be attamed, the real nature of the attamer and the real nature of meditation, the means, thus ‘“When a man 1s dead there 1s this doubt, some saying that he 8, others that he 18 not This may I know, taught by you, this 18 the third among the boons”’’ (Katha 120) (णऽ, when the real nature of salvation was asked thus, the reply given by Yama, preceded by an examination of Nacikete’s fitness for that teachmg, was aa follows ‹ ‘Hun, who w difficult to be seen, who 18 hidden, who has entered within, who 18 hidden in the cave and who dwells m the abyss, by knowing Him as God through the knowledge of the Yoga relaiang to the soul, a wise man discards joy and sorrow”’’ (Katha 2 12)

Having been thus taught, in a general manner, Nacketas with a view to understanding clearly the real nature of the object to be attamed, udicated by the word ‘God’, the real nature of the means, viz knowledge, demonstrated by the phrase ‘by knowing’, and the real nature of the attamer, demonstrated by the words ‘wise man’, once more asked about meditation, different from means like ment and demerit, thus ‘“Drfferent from the mght, different from the non right”? (Katha 214), about the object to be approached, not lmuted by time, thus ‘“Dufferent from what has been done and what has not been done, different from what has been and what will be’’’ (Katha 214), and aluo about the attaimer, 88 this latter question 28 a question about the altainor, the sentient being as well, the latter, too, bemg eternal and mcluded. among the objects to be attamed +

Or else, this text 18 concerned with a queation about the object to beapproached Luke the oo-ordination of the two words ‘different’, mentioned m the text ‘** Drfferent from the right, different from non right” (Katha 214), there 1s also a co ordination between the two words ‘different’, mentioned subsequently, and so m this question

1 Theat 18, the last portion of Kathe 2 1415 © quastion about both Brahman the object to be atteamed, and the individual soul, the attamer since the latter boo, ia eternal and an objeot to be abtamed like the former

[st 1 4 6 224 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA apa 1}

about the object to be approached, the approaching agent and of the means too have been meluded, and henoe really no less than three

questions were asked +

Then, having praised the pranava by way of demonatrating Brahman, having depicted the real nature of the attamer, denoted by the pranava, and the real nature of the means, denoting the pranave end haying taught the pranava once more, Yama taught the real nature of the attamer, im the passage ‘“‘A wise man is neither born, nor dies He has not arwen from anythmg, has not become anything Unborn, eternal, constant 18 this anment one, who 18 not Inlled when. the body 18 killed”? (Katha 225), the real nature of the object to be attamed, im the passage beginning ‘“‘ Smaller than the amaill, greater than the great 18 the soul placed in the cave (1e heart) of this creature Him one who 18 free from. active will sees, fread from sorrow, through the grace of the Creator, (and) the glory of the soul"’ (Katha 2 20), and ending ^ ^ Who knows thus?’ (Katha 2 25), and meditation that 1s of the form of devotion, mn the middle m the passage ‘” This soul 18 not attainable by the study of the Veda”’ (Katha 2.23) anc! soon Then, having stated that the Supreme Soul 28 eamly attamable

7 The entire passage २8 Aanyaira dharmdd anyatra adharmdd anyatra asmdi bridkrtds Anyaira bhiidd bhavydo ca yat tai pasyas tad vada’ (Kathe 9 14)

The author 28 here trying to show that thu क not a question about a single thing, but about three different thmgs, vis Brafvnan, the mdrvidual soul, and the means to salvation

He offers two explanations

(a) The portion Dufferent from the right and different from the non mght refers to the msans, vis knowledge, different from ordmary mem and demerit And, the portion ‘Different from what has been done and what has not been done, differant from what hag been and what will be refers equally to Brahman and the mdryidual soul, to both of wham, who are eternal the above... description fittingly applies Hence the above question means Tell ma about {1) ponies (2) the individual soul and (3) Brahman

whole text 1s really > questzon about Brahman, bub soludes questaons about the other iwo as well Thus the portion ‘different from the right

Hence the above quesiion means Tell me about (1) Brahman, who is differant from, (2) the means and (3) the madrridua!} नुन मुन Boul As such it 18 really > question

(श 1 4 7 ADH } | VEDANTA EAUSTUBHA 226

by the dividual soul,—since the Person worshipped and the wor- shipper have entered 17100 the same cave (Katha 311),—and the mode of worship, 08 well as the attamment of the place of Visnu by the worshipper, in the passage which begins ‘“‘ Know the soul to be a Jord of chanot’’’ (Katha 3 3), and ends ‹ “his the wise declare’” ’ (Katha 314), he concluded with the words ‘"‘Invimble”’ (Katha 815) and so on Hence, this Upanigad contains a statement about the three alone as the objects to be known, as well as a question about them, there 18 no reference to pradh&na, established by the Tantra, (viz the S&amkhyas)

SUTRA 7

‘AWD 48 IN THER 0/8 OF THE GREAT +»

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

Just as, although the word ‘great’ (mahat) has been applied by the Samkhyas to the second principle called ‘buddhi’, yet xt 18 found. apphod elsewhere ax well in Vedic texta like, ‘I know this great Person’ (भ्र) 8 18122, Svet 3),—so the word “unmanifest’ (avyakta) may refer to the body

Vedinta-kaustubha

Just as the word ‘great’, mentioned in the Veda, 1s applied to the individual soul and to Brahman,—as in the passages “Higher than intellect 14 the great soul’ (Katha 3 10), “The soul which 1s great and all pervading’ (Katha 2 22, 44) and so on,—and not to the second principle, called buddlu, admitted by the Samkhyas, and cannot be applied eluewhere even by a hundred S&imkhyas, so it 18 established that the word ‘unmanifcst as well, beng mentioned mm the Veda, does not apply to pradhina, but denotes the body

Here ends the section entitled ‘What 18 derived from inference * (1)

aa eee!

1 Vide Br Sd 1221 12 2 P 357, me 10 6 Bh

15

[श 148 226 VEDANTA PABWIATA SAUBABHA ADH 2]

Adhikesrane 2 The seotion entitled ‘The cup’ (8८४२८४8 8-10)

SUTRA 8

५५ (Tm WORD ‘ UNBORN’ DOES NOT DENOTE THH SiMKHYA PRAKBTT) ON ACCOUNT OF NON SPHOLFIOATION, AS IN THER 0487 OF THE CUP "”

Vedinta-parijaita-saurabha

On the prema face view, viz Let prakrti, mentioned in the sacred. text ‘One unborn female (aj&)’ (Svet 461), be the one estabhshed. in (the S&mkhya) Smrti, the author mdicates the nght conclusion The unborn one, mentioned in the sacred text, must have Brahman for 1ta soul?, because there 18 no specification guaranteemg the prema face view 8, as in the case of the cup, mentioned in the sacred text There 18 & cup with 1ta mouth below’ (Brh 228 *)

Vedanta-kaustubha

Thus, xt has been shown that 10) the Katha valli pradhina, whick 18 not mentioned in the Veda, 18 not denoted by the term ‘unmanifest’, as it, through denotimg the cause, viz pradhfina which 1s mentioned 1 the Veda, denotes ita effect, viz the body It bas also been shown that as pradhAna has Brahman for ita soul, the text, thereby, refers to Brahman Ina hke manner, it 18 beg shown now that the text about the unborn one, too, refers to Brahman alone

In the Mantropanwad of the Svet&évataras, we find the following ‘By an unborn female (aj&),5 red, black and white, bringing forth manifold offspring tf a like nature, there hes an unborn male (aja)®, enjoying Another unborn male (aja) leaves her who has been en joyed’ (Svet 46) <A doubt arises, viz whether im this sacred text prakrta, estabhshed by the Sdamkhya smrta, 18 recognized by the term “unborn one’ (४2), or whether the meaning of the sacred text

1§ R Bh, &7, 2

2 Ie be dependent on Brahman

9 1 6 There 1s nothmg here to guarantee us m selecting pradhdna of the opponents as the unborn ane

« 8 2 Bh, Sk, B

5 * 430° means a she goat too © SB 1410 p 40¢

# Aja means @ he goat also

[at 1 4 8 ADH 2] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 22¢

18 (थप having Brahman for its soul On the prema face view, viz The ‘unborn one’, etymologically demved as ‘one who 1s not born’, self supporting, mdepandently bringing forth, by nature, offspring of a like nature, consisting in the three gunas, the cause of the distinction between bondage and release, and admitted by the S&mkhyas, should be understood to be mentioned by the sacred text 98 well

We reply The ‘unborn one’, which has Brahman for its soul, 18 mentioned by the sacred text Why? “On account of non specification ^, 1 6 because there 1s no special circumstance for under- standing pradhana which 18 demved from inference Our (ie Upanigadic) (prakpti),t00,1sunborn Since asariptural text 1s authori tative only 170 reference to its own explicit meaning, 16 only m refer- ence to what 1 actually states, a self supporting one 1s not recognized. here, because the word. ‘self supporting’ 18 found nowhere, and also because 16 18 zmposetble for a non sentient object to have an independent existence An example illustrating the absence of any specification, such, as ‘This 18 so’, with regard to & common term, 18 grven in the words “Asim the case of a cup” Inthetext ‘Thereisa cup with 118 mouth below, and bottom above’ (Brh 223), the word ‘cup’ (camasa) conveys only the idea of an implement used in eatmg, m accordance with the etymology (A ‘coamasa’ 18 that) whereby one dmnks (camyate anena), and so no accurate specific determination, that a cup (camasa) 18 such, 18 possible, on account of non specification, —(the marks of) having the mouth below and the reat being possible elsewhere too! Similarly, mm the sacred text under discussion also, there can be no speafymg out that this prakrii, sumply because 1 18 unborn, 18 the one established by the Simkhya amrti

1 Ie in the above text about the त there are no special marks which justify us in selecting out the Sdmkhya prahris here out of other possible meanings of the term a7’ just as in the text about the camasa , there are no special marks for fixing what exactly a camasa denotes here until we are told specifically in the complementary passage that 1t denotes the head

jst 1 4 9 228 VEDINTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 2]

SUTRA 9

‘Bur (त्ष UNBORN ONE 25) THAT WHICH HAS LIGHT (IB Baar 24 त) FOR ITS BEGINNING (IH OAUBE), FOR THUS SOME BREAD

Vedainta-parijita-saurabha

If + be objected that in the sacred text about the cup (camasa), 16 18 known from the complementary text ‘It 18 the head’ (Brh 223) that the cup isthe head , now what 1s the convincmg reason for mnderstandmg a particular meanmg m the sacred text about the unborn one #—

We reply That of which “hght ”,1e Brahman, 18 the “ begin- ning ”’,1e cause, 1s here denoted by the sacred text about the unborn one, for “thus” alone ‘some read”, viz ‘From him arose Brahma, name, form and food’ (Mund 11 9)

Vedainta-kaustubha

Just as from the complementary passage “This 18 the head, for there 1s & cup with 1ts mouth below’ (Brh 223), 16 18 known that nothing but the head 1s the cup, so there 18 no ground. here for spearfymg out the unborn one, established by the Simkhyas On the contrary, that unborn one which has Brahman for its soul 18 to be understood in the sacred text about the unborn one (Svet 45), on the ground. of prior and later texta,—so holds the author

The term “but’’ mmphes certamty Prakri, “which has hght for tta beginning”, 18 to be understood definitely m the sacred text about the unborn one The compound “which has hght for ita beginning `" means That of which the ‘begimning’,1e the mstituting cause, 18 ‘hght’,1e Brahman, celebrated m scriptural texta bke “That the gods worship es the hght of hghts’ (Brh 4416), ‘Now the ght which shines higher than thu heaven’ (Chind 318 7) and so on,—i6 16 should be understood to be that which has Brahman for its soul In the Veda, the peculiar nature, qualities and the rest of Brahman alone bemg specially determined, no other topic has been dealt with, and hence, that alone which has Brahman for ite cause 18 to be understood The 86186 18 Beginning ‘The speakers of Brah- man easy “what 18 the cause”?’ (Svet 11) and 80 on, and rejecting the views of those who take tame to be the first cause, of the Bauddhas, the Mim&msakas, the Jains and the logicians, suggested in the passage

[so 149 ADH 2] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 220

“Time, nature, destiny, accident’ (Svet 12), the text goes on “Those, followmg meditation and concentration, saw God’s self-power, hidden by His own qualities’ (Svet 18) On account of this mtro- ductory text, m the sacred text about the unborn one (Svet 45), that unborn one alone which has been established by the Veda and. which & power of Brahman,-—-the cause of the Universe and denoted by words like ‘light’ and the rest,—is to be understood, smooe subse quently also in the passages ‘From this, the M&yin creates this universe, and m it the other 18 bound up with Miy&’ (Svet 49), ‘But let one know थपु to be Mayé&, and the Great Lord to be the Miyin’ (Svet 410), “The Ono, who rules over every source’ (Svet 411) and so on, that alone which has Brahman for its soul 18 estab- 18080. or that very reason, 1t 1s declared m the same Upamssad that although this, as a power, 1s different from the possessor of powers, yet 16 18 non different from Brahman, because of having no existence and activity apart from the possessor of powers, thus ‘On knowing the enjoyer, the object enjoyed and the Mover, all has been said, this 18 the three fold Brahman’ (Svet 112) Here, the enjoyer 1 the individual soul, denoted. by the term ‘higher prakriu’, the object enjoyed 1s the non sentient 17 118 causal and effected states, denoted by the term ‘lower prakyii’, and the Mover 18 the Highest Person, possessing the two prakytis, and denoted by the term ‘Brahman’ Thus, the phrase ‘All 1s this Brahman’ establishes the non difference of Brahman and the two prakrts, the 0016008 to be controlled,—sunoce the existence and activity of the latter two depend on their Controller, —ain spite of there being a difference of nature between them and the Lord.

With a view to confirming that unborn one which 1s mentioned in the Veda, by that very Veda, the author establishes this once more in the words ^" For thus some read ’’, that means, because thus some schools, ie the Atharvanikas, “read” m the Mundakopamsad that

name, form and food’ (Mund 119), and because 1४ 18 declared by the Lord Himself, mn the passage ‘“My womb 18 the great Brahman In 1t I place the germ’”’’ (Gité 143) In the Tatttriyaka, too, having mtroduced Brahman in the passage ‘Smaller than the small’ (Mahi- nar 6 81), having, then, designated the omgin of the entire universe,

1 ‘This verse ocours also 17. Katha 2 20 and Svet 8 20

[at 1 4 10 280 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADE 2]

umphed by the vital breath, m the passage ‘Seven vital breaths arise from hum’ (MahinBr 8 4), the text goes on to read after that ‘Fy an unborn female, red, white and black, brmging forth manifold offspring of a like nature, 1168 an unborn male, enjoying Anothor unborn male discards her, who has been enjoyed’ (Mah&nfér 9 2) And since this sacred text 18 to be taken as referring to prakrti, which. has Brahman for 108 soul, and since here, too, the same must inevitably be the case, that prakrti alone which haa Brahman for 108 soul is the object to be established by the sacred text about the unborn one

COMPARISON Samkara

The mterpretation of ‘jyotir upakrama’ different, viz ‘(The unborn one 18) the begmning (ie the matemal cause) of light (9 of the four Innds of material objects, consistimg in light, 16 fire, water, and 80 on)’ 1

SUTRA 10

“AND ON ACOOUNT OF THE TEACHING OF THE FASHIONING (OF THH UNIVHRSS), THERE IS NO CONTEADIOTION, AS IN THE CASH OF THW HONBY ( MEDITATION) ””

Vedanta -pirijita-saurabha

No contradiction 1s involved in taking one and the same subs tra- tum of qualities as unborn and having, at the same tame, Brahman for ita matenal cause 00 account of the teaching of the creation of the universe from Brahman, the cause of the world and possessing subtle powers, both fit im, “asim the case of the honey meditation "

Vedainta-kaustubha To the objection, viz How can an unborn one be something generated, the author replies The word “‘and” 18 for disposing of the objectton There 18 no contradiction mm taking an unborn one as something generated Why } ~ On account of the teaching of fashionmg” The word “fashioning ””

828 149 p 403

i

fst 1 4 10 ADH 2] VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA 231

means Making or creation, on account of the teaching of that1, 16 on account of the teaching of the creation of the universe from Brah man, possessing subtle powers, in the passage ‘From this, the Mayin creates this universe’ (Svet 4 9) The unmanrfest prakrta, subtle in form and a power of Brahman, 18 said to be unborn because of being non different from Brahman as His power That very same prakrii, emanated from the possessor of powers or Brahman and a in the form of effects, 18 said to have Brahman for 1ta beginning or cause, and 1167008 there 18 no contradiction Here the author states 8 parallel case in the words “As in the case of the honey meditation” In the honey meditation,® which begs ‘Verily, this sun 18 the honey of the gods’ (Chind 3 1 1), m the concluding text ‘Then, having risen up from thence, 1t will neither mse nor set, 16 will remaim alone 10 the middle’ (Chind 3111), the very same thing, which m 1a causal state abides in 9 subtle form and 18 not, as such, demgnable as honey, 18, 1 ite effected state, umagined to be the honey, enjoyable by gods lke Vasu and the rest, and to be possessed. of meng and setting, without giving mse to any contradiction fSuimularly, the very same eternally existent prakrti 18 designated by the sacred text in 108 causal form in relation to the bondage and release of the eternally emstent individual soul Here, the individual soul, mdicated by the term ‘unborn one’ (aja),—eternal by nature, carried away by the current of beginningless karmas, and hence devoid of a true Knowledge of the real nature of itself or of the Supreme Bemg,—having identified itaelf through nescience with the bodies, such as of men, gods and the rest which are the evolutes of prakyt, hes by, enjoymg sounds and the rest, the parts of prakyta , such a one, devoid of the bliss of Brahman, 18 said to be ‘bound’ But one, who having attamed by chance the grace of the Lord through humbleness and the lke, and having attamed the bliss of Brahman by means of the repetition of the means,— bearing’ (fravana) and the rest of the Vedinta,—learnt from a boly spiritual preceptor, discards prakrti, 1s said to be ‘freed’ 17 in accordance with the etymology ‘An unborn one (aj&) 18 one that 18 not born’, 1४ 18 said that the unborn one 18 not prakru, eternally existent and having Brahmian for ita soul, then the conventional dis tanction between the bondage and release of the created souls cannot

1 This explains the compound ‘kalpanopads& 2 Vide VE 1881-338 See 20012009 1, p 198

fst 1 4 11 282 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABBA «प्र 3]

be explamed by the non sentaent एरका, devoil of any connection with Brahman Hence it 18 estabhahed that the unborn one, men- tioned -7 the sacred text, has Brahman for 108 soul

Here ends the section entitled ‘The cup’ (2)

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhiskara

Interpretation different viz ‘On account of the teaching of an mmagmation (16 > metaphor), there 1s no contradiction’ That 28, the word ‘aj&’ here does not stand for one who 18 literally unborn, but sunply metaphorically represents prakri, the source of all things, as a she goat, just as the sun, though not really honey, 1s metapho- rically represented as such in the Chindogys *

Adhikarana 9 The section entitled ‘The collection of number’ (Stitras Ll1-13)

SOTRA 11 “Not ON ACOOUNT OF THE COLLECTION OF NUMBER EVEN, OW AOOOUNT OF DIVHRSITY, AND ON ACCOUNT OF BxoRss”’

Vedanta -parijata-saurabha

“Even on account of the collection of number” in the text ‘In whom the five people and the ether ary based’ (Brh 4417, Sat Br 147 2 194), 16 18 not to be said that the twenty flve pnnorples, begin- ning with pradhfina, are based on Senpture, 80 what dispute can there be regardmg the knowability of one pradhfna from Sompture ? ॐ Why? “On account of diversity,” 16 because the objects which are based on Brahman, established in Sampture and denoted by the

18B1110,pp 4045 Bh B1110,p 76 Of Rdménwa's ontiasm ‘of this interpretaizon

me 1090 Ime 8 RB, Bh, SK, B

ॐ 2, all the twenty five prmoiples of the म्र can be known from Sertpture, not to speak of pradhdna alone

(st 1 4 11 ADH 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 233

term, ‘mm whom’, are different from the objects established in the Tantra. (16 the Samkhya-smrt1), since the former are found to have Brahman for ther soul, ^ and on account of the excess "’ of Brahman, the support, and hkewise of the ether

Vedinta-kaustubha

In the previous aphorism, 1t has been shown that the text about the unborn one, not referable to pradh&na, as admitted by the Saim- khyas on the ground of texts like "The self power of the Deity’ (Gvet 1 8), refers to Brahman on the ground that it refers to His power, viz pradh&na, as admitted by the Vedntins In the very same manner, by showing that} the text about the ‘five five people’ refers to the vital breath and the rest, based on Brahman, on the ground of the pronoun. (‘1m whom’) and 80 on, leadig to the null fication of the number admitted by the Simkhyas, (viz twenty five), the reverend author of the aphorisms 18 confirming his contention that pradhina bas never been mentioned in Seripture

In the sixth chapter? of the Brhadiranyaka, mmediately after the mtroduction ‘That the gods worship as the hght of lights, 88 hfe, as womortahty’ (Brh 4416, Sat Br 1479 20 8), we read the followmg ‘In whom tbe five five people and the ether are based, him alone I, the knower, the immortal, know as the soul, the ummortal Brahman’ (दृ 4417, Sat Br 147219) Here 9 doubt arises, viz whether by the phrase, ‘five five people’, meaning five groups of five, the twenty five prmoples, admitted by the S&mkhyas, are denoted, or the vital breath and the rest, five 1 number and called ‘five people’ (pafica jana) The grima fane view 18 88 follows We get here the twenty five principles, mentioned in Sorzpture and, determmed more specially in the Samkhya amrta In the Sasi! sambité *, we read the followimg,—beginning ‘Bemg struck 5 by the three kinds of sorrow, (one undertakes) an enquiry into the cause of their removal’ (Sim Ka 1), and contmunmg ‘The primal cause एप 18 not an effect, the seven objects begimnmg with the mahat are causes as well as OO

1 Here the éaiy-suffix mmplies reason.

9 Ought to be fourth chapter ॐ © 1000, line 5

५ "That 15 & Sémkhyo treatise or & sarphité or treatuse dealing wrth the mxty 10688 peculiar to the Sdmkhyas

[50 1 4 11 224 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA 478 9 |

effects, sixteen objects are effecta (only), puruga 8 neither a cause nor an effect’ (Sim Es 3 7)

With regard to1t, wereply =“ Not even on account of the colle tion of number”, The word “even” 17001168 possibility 8 In spite of the fact that the number twenty five 18 found in this text, prakrti and the rest have not Scripture as their authomty Why? “On account of diversity ’’,1e because the twenty five principles, mentioned 1m Smrta, cannot be arranged in five groups of five each, they being of various kinds There can be numeration or groupmg of objects only with reference to & class, a common quality and so on, eg when we Hay ‘A group of five cows’, ‘a group of five learned men’ But here we find no common cause for grouping five objecta under cach pontad In such cases as ‘seven are causes as well as effects’, ‘axteen are effecta (only)’ and so on, on the other hand, there do emst causcs for such, groupings 8

Or, else (an alternative explanation of the word ‘nfin&ibhavit ), ‘on account of the absence of plurality’ That 18, all the objocta mentioned in the Vedanta having Brabman for their soul, there 14 no absolute pluralty, m accordance with the statement ‘All thin has that for 18 soul’ (Chind 687, 694, 6103-6168), and also m gccordance with the teaching contained here, vz ‘In whom the five five people and the ether are based’ (Brh 4417) The sense w that if the twenty five prnciples, admitted by the SAmihyas, bo accepted here then, they not having Brahman for their soul, plurality will result, contradicting Scripture

Or, rather, the principles, admitted by our opponenta and indo pandent of Brahman, bemg distinct from those that are band on Brahman, 7 accordance with the text ‘In whom the five five people ’ (Brh 4417), ^“ and on account of excess °, there 18 not even the numbor twenty five here On the contrary, “on account of the excess”, 1.6 surplus, viz the Supreme Soul, the support of all, mdicated

५24 ae

‡ 7 6 oven 4 1) be posmble to understand bere the number mtended by the Sdmbhyas sl then the Sdenkhya view cannot be said to be referred to here It will be shown later that rb 1s not really even posmble to understand here the number twenty five intended by the SamkAyar

¢ Le A group consists of a certam number of sundar chjecta But here य is impossible to drvide the twenty five Sdmkhya prmoiplea into five groups, each containing five ewmlarprmomples Henoext cannot be saad that ‘five five people means 5X5 = 25 principles of the Sdmkhyas

fs0 1 4 12 ADH $] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 235

by the pronoun ‘in whom’, and the ether, twenty five principles are not denoted

The meanmg of the text 1s as follows ‘The gods worship that’, viz Brahman What 1s that? ‘That which 18 the hght of lights’, 16 of sun and the rest, ‘life’, 1e the cause of the longevity of its own devotees, ‘“immortal’,1e the object to be attamed durmg the state of release, this 28 the sense of the introductory text (Brh 4416, etc) ‘In whom’,1e m Brahman, ‘the five five people are based” The compound ‘five people’ (pafica jana) 1s to be explamed in accordance with the rule “Words indicating a quarter or a number are compounded (with words in the same case 1) to designate a name (and the compound 28 a tat puruga)’ (Pin 2 1 60, SD K 7272) ‘The word ‘five people’ 18 here understood as a name, smoe the meanmg of the component parta (1e the number five) 18 not mtended to be designated Just 88 by the expression ‘seven sages’ each of the seven sages 1s denoted, 80 by the word ‘five people’ as well On the enqury How many five people are there? the adjective ‘five’ 18 added® As Y&jfiavalkya says ‘In whom the ether 18 based that alone 18 Brahman, the support of all and mmortal He who knows the Highest Self, to be approached by the freed, the soul, the cause of all existence and activity, becomes immortal, so I thnk He who does not know Him does not become free’

SUTRA 12

०“ (Tos ‘¥IVE PHOPLE’ ARE) THE VITAL BREATH AND THE RAST, ON ACCOUNT OF THE COMPLEMENTARY PASSAGE ”

Vedainta-parijita-saurabha

‘On account of the complementary passage”’, viz “Those who know the breath of breath, the eye of eye, the ear of ear, the food of

1 In accordance with the previous Pan -sutra 2 1 40

ॐ P 609 vol l

8 Ie the expreasion five people’ denotes the name of @ certain class of beings and the expression ‘five five people’ denotes that there are jive claases of such bemgs just ag the expression seven sages’ denotes a certam clasa of Sages, (1 © stars) and the expression seven seven-sagea’ denotes that there are seven classes of such begs What these classes of bemgs called five people are is indicated m the next siitra.

fat 1 4 13 236 VHDANTA KAUSTURHA ADH 3]

food, the mmmd of mind’ (Sat Br 1472211), ११८५० “hve people” (pafica jana) are to be known aa the vital breath and the rast

Vedainta-kaustubha

To the question Who, then, are the five people, the anthor replies here

*On account of the complementary passe", vir “Those who know the breath of breath, the oye of 0१८, the aar of ear, the mind of mind’ (Sat Br 147 2 21), the vital-breath and the rest, five m num ber, having Brahman as their soul, and denoted by the term ` five people’, are meant by tho sacred text

SUTRA 13 “ (गष NUMBUES FIVE IS TO BH OOMPLFTED) BY LIGHT, FOOD BEING WOM PEMSENT (IB NOT MENTLONMD) (IN THR TEXT) OF SOMP "

Vedinta-parijita-saurabha

“Food bemg non present (16 non montioned)", on the other hand, in the complementary passage of tho Kiinvan®, the numixer five 18 to be completed “by hight”, montioned in the beginning

Vedanta-kaustubha

Apprehending the objection, vir Lot the vital breath and tho rest, five in number, be the “five people * on the ground of the comple- mentary passage, subsequent to the sacred text nbout the ‘five peaplo’ mm the MAdhyandina branch In the KAnva branch, too, there mt « text about the ‘five people’ There the word ‘food’ ५ not found in the complementary passage Hence, how ¢an the number five be completed here ‘the author replies here

Tt has been said that the MSdhyandinas complete the numbor five by means of food But “there bemg the absence or non mention of food ^” m the reading “of some”, 1 6 of the Kanvas, the number five 1s completed “by hght’, mentioned in the introductory passage “That the gods worship as the hght of hghts’ (Brh 4 4 16),—ths

ae Bie lle [~ 1

1 2 1090, 1068 6 6 8 > Bh SK, 2 4 Viz ॐ 4418, which omits ‘annasys annan'

[st 1 ¢ 14 ADH 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 237

18 the sense Hence, it 18 established that pradhAns, devoid of any connoction with Brahman, 18 not an object to be known from Scripture

Here ends the section entitled ‘The collection of number’ (8)

Adhikarana £ The section entitled ‘Being the cause’ (Siitras 14 15)

SUTRA 14 “AND (प्ण LORD 4LONE IS TO BH UNDERSTOOD) AS THR CAUSE

WITH REGARD TO THR ETHER AND THH BEST, ON ACCOUNT OF THE DEOLARATION OF (BRAHMAN) 48 DESIGNATED ”

Vedinta-parijata-saqurabha

Omniscient and omnipotent Brahman alone 1s to be understood evarywhere in the texts abont the creation of the ether and the rest, because the very same Brahman, “as designated” in the charactensz ing aphorism? and the followmg, 1s demonstrated “as the cause” of the ether and the rest

Vedanta-kaustubha

An objection may be raised here That view, too, which rejectmg prudhiina, estabhshed by Smrta, as the cause of the world, takes the universe to have Brahman 8.8 ita sole cause, 18, indeed, a doubtful one, mnce in the Vedinta texts, demonstratimg the cause, creation 18 stated. to be due to mamfold causes Thus, 1n 8 certam text ‘“The exstent alono, my dear, was this in the beginning” ` (Chand 6 2 1), creation 18 sul to be due to the exsatent, mm a certain other text ‘From this soul the ether has arisen’ (Tait 21), to be due to the soul alone, again in another text, on the other hand ‘The non existent, vemly, was this in the beginning, from that, forsooth, the extent arose’ (Tart 2'7), likewise in the text ‘The non exstent alone was this m the beginning, 1b was extent’ (Chénd 319 1), to be dus to the non- existent, mm another text ‘‘' What 15 108 final goal?” “The ether” said he’ (Ghand 191), to be due to the ether, m q certain other text again ‘“‘ All these bemgs, verily, enter unto the vital breath” ’

1 Viz Br 9 1 1 2, ete

[80 1 4 14 238 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4 |

(Chind 111 5), to be due to the vital breath, and in some paasages in the Brhadfranyaka ‘The soul alone was this in the begining’ (णा). 1417), ‘Brahman, vernly, was this in the beginning’ (Brh 14 10), to be due to the soul and to Brahman Such being our know ledge of the cause of the universe, 1t 18 not possible to asceitam definitely that Brahman alone 1s the cause of the universe But 1 18 possible to sacertain definitely that pradhfina, mdependont of Brahman, 1s the canse of the universe Thus, in the text ‘Vorily, at that time this was unmanifest (avyéikrta), 10 became manifest amply by name and form’ (Brh 147), by the word ‘unmanifest’ pradhina, mdependent of a sentzent principle, 18 declared to bo the cause of the universe The meaning of the text 18 that ‘this’, 16 the manifest world, was ‘at that time’,1e pmor to creation, ‘unmantifest’ and ‘it’, viz pradhina, ‘became manifest by name and fom’ ‘The mass of texts demonstrating the cause of the universe should be taken to be referring to pradhina alone

With a view to disposing of the above view, his Holiness 18 showing that the mass of texta deaignating the cause of the universe all refer to Brahman

The word “and” 18 for disposing of tho objection The word “fas” smples the kind It 18 posmble to ascertain defimtely that the Highest Person alone, omnipotent, endowed with the attibutes of omnigcience and the rest and the Lord of all, 1 the Cause of the Unmverse How? “On account of the declaration” of the very same Brahman, “demgnaied” in the characterumng aphorism and. the reat, “as the cause ” of effects like the ether and the rest Thus, Brahman alone, mentioned previously mm the passage Biahman 1s truth, knowledge and infinrte’ (Tart 21), 1s designated as the cause in the passage ‘From him, verily’ (Tart 21) and s0 on = Lakewise, Brahman alone, indicated by the passages, ‘“‘The existent alone, my dear”’’ (Chand 621), “He thought “May I be many”’ (Chand 623), 18 degignated in the passage ‘He created leht’ (Chand 623) The same 18 to be understood with regard to other Upanisad texts too

COMPARISON

Samkara

General umport same, hteral mterpretation duferent, viz ‘(Al though there may be a conflict among the Vedinta texts) with regard

[st 1 4 16 ADH 4 ] VEDANTA PABLIATA SAUBABHA 239

to (the order of the things created, hke) the ether and the rest, (there 18 no conflict among them with regard to the creator,) because as- (Brahman) 15 designated as the cause (in one Vedanta) so (He) 16. mentioned (in other VedAntas 7007

Srikantha

Interpretation different He does not begin a new adhikarana here, but continues the same topic Hence the siitra ‘And just as on account of the declaration (16 understanding) (of Brahman) as the vause (in all the Ved&nta texts) with regard to (all the effects lke) the ether and the rest, (as well as m all other general texts), (pradhina. of the Simkhyas 18 not understood, so the Samkhya prinaples are not understood here)” ‘That is, just as we interpret the vague and general text ‘verily at that time, 1t was unmanrfest ' (Brh 1 477) in the hght of the specific text “The soul alone waa this m the begmnmg’ (Brh. 141), and understand thereby the first text as denoting Brahman and not the Simkhya unmanifest or pradh&na, so exactly, here we should interpret the vague and general text about the ‘five five people’ (Brh 4417, etc) m the lght of the specific passage about the vital- breath and the rest (Brh 4418, eto), and understand, thereby, the ‘five five people’ as the vital breath and the rest, and not as the Samkhya principles >

SUTRA 15 “On aCCOUNT OF THER DRAWING In”

Vedanta-parijaita-saurdbha

“Qn account of the drawing n”’of Brahman That 18, the very same Brahman, mentioned previously in the passage “He wished’ (Tait 265%), 18 referred to in the passage ‘The non exstent, verily’ (Tart 274) too Simularly the very same Brahman, mentioned pre viously in the passage “The sun 18 Brahman’ (Chand 3 19 1 5), 18 also. referred to un the passage ‘The non existent alone was this * (Chind ॐ 19 19} Hence, Brahman alone, who 18 ever existent, 18 denoted

18B 1414 p 414 SK B1114,p 580 Part 6. 3 §,R, Bh, SK B ¢ Op on 5 Not quoted by others 68 ए Bh 2

[ग 1 4 16 240 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ApH 4]

by the word ‘non existent’, since there being no distamction of names and forms prior to creation, He has then no existence in so far as connected. with these names and forms In the same manner, what 18 denoted. by the term ‘unmantfest’ m the passage ‘Verily, at that tame, this was unmanifest, 10 became manifest smmply by name and form’ (भ 1471), 18 referred to mm the subsequent passage as well “He 18 entered here as far as the finger nail tips’ (Brh 1 47%) and so on It 18 also impossible for the non sentient pradhina to be a controller by entermg with Hence, the unmanifest, 188 controller, 28 said to be Brahman ‘The sense 18 that im the texts, demonstrating the cause of the universe, Brahman alone, established by the defining aphoriam and the rest, 1s to be understood,—there 18 not even the shghtest possibility of pradhins being so understood

Vedanta-kaustubha

“Qn account of the drawing in” of Brahman That 1, the very same Brahman, omniscient, and creating the universe subsequent to His resolution to be many, as mentioned previously in the paxaage “He wished’ (Tait 26), 18 also referred to m the passage ‘The non existent, verily, was this in the begmming, from that the existent arose’ (Tait 27) Here, Brahman as possessed of subtle powers mm His causal state 18 denoted by the term ‘non existent ’,—which 18 but & synonym for the word ‘subtle’,—in contrast to Brahman aa possessed of manifested powers 10 His effected state, fit to be denoted by the term ‘existent’,—which 1s but a synonym for the word ‘gross’ In the very same manner indeed, 1t should be known that Brahman, mentioned previously in the passage ‘The sun is Brahman’ (Chand 5 19 1), 18 referred to m the passage too ‘The non oxstent alone was this in the beginning, 1t was extent’ (Chand 3 19 1) in the valy same manner, in the text about the unmanzfest as well, 1t 7४ the mner controller of the unmanifest that 1s denoted by the word ‘unmanii at ॥ as here the pronoun ‘he’ refers to Brahman, denoted by the term *unmanifest’, m the passage ‘He 1s entered here as far as the finger nail taps When seeing, the eye, when hearing, the ear, when think ing, the mnd Let one worship (Him) 88 the soul’ (Brh 147) In spite of there bemg a separate agent of manifestation, tho expreaxion "It became manifest (vyiknyata)’ should be understood as denoting ee eesesessssssseSSsi“‘“(<;#;SSC NS

1 §,R Bh, 8 ४ 8, 7; §K, 2

fst 1 4 16 ADH 4] VEDANTA EAUSTUBHA 241

an ‘object agent” (16 the reflexive pasmve form) Or else, the present indicative should be understood mmply in the passive! Hence, everywhere the cause 18 one and the same mdeed The objections with regard, to the cause are refuted in this section We shall dispose of the objections with regard to the effects, on the other hand, in the third quarter of the second chapter, under the aphomams ‘Not the ether, because of being non scriptural’ (Br SG 231) and the follow ing Hence, it 25 established everywhere that the cause of the universe

8 Brahman alone, a sentient Bemg and possessed of omnisaience and the Test

Here ends the section entitled ‘Being the cause’ (4)

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhaskara

The general purport (of the sfitras 14-15) same, but while Nm barka connecta this adbikarana more directly with the topio of the preceding part of the pada, viz with the refutation of the Simkhya view 9, Samkara and Bhiskara do not do 80, but take 1t to be concerned with the general question of the concordance of all texts with regard to Brahman 9

Srikantha

Interpretation different The same topic contmued ‘On account of the drawing in’ ‘That 1s, Just as the very same Brahman mentioned in the prior passage ‘He wished’ (Tait 2 6) 1s understood m the subsequent passage too ‘The non existent alone was this mm the beginnmg’ (Tait 2717), because the two passages involve each other, s0 exactly, the ‘five five people’, mentioned in the prior passage {प £417, eto) are understood as the vital breath and the reat,

> Ie as having reference to a necessarily unplied agent, aa 770. the expregsion ‘The village is bemg approached’ VideS B 1415 p 417

4 This 28 evident from the concluding sentence of his explanstaon of the sutra 15 ‘““Na pradhdna-fankd gandko' pin bhdeah' VPS 14165, p 181 ह 8 8

8 This us evident from the beginnmg of the adiikerana ‘Taira च्व, aparam dfiakkaie Na janmd di-karanaivam Brahmono, preg ae | ow gat siminyam veddnia-vakydndm prahpatium dakyam’, etc Vide SB 1114, pp 41212 Bh B 1114, pp 76 77 16

(80 1 4 16 242 VEDANTA PAEIJATA SAURABHA, ADH 5]

mentioned m the subsequent passage (Brh 4418, eto), because the two passages involve each other *

Adhikarana 6 The section 6 71४1४194 “Denoting the world’ (8४788 16-18)

SUTRA 16 ‘BecauUsSh OF DENOTING THH WORLD ”

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

It 18 not to be supposed that in the text ‘“He verily, O Balan, who 18 the maker of these persons, of whom this 1s the work”’ (Kaus 39%), the object to be known 18 the person, mentioned m the Tantra (viz m the Simkhya dootrme) and the enjoyer of the र पाड of merit. and dement None but the Supreme Soul 1s here indicated as the object to bo known Why? Because Brahman 18 the topic, as known from the text ‘“Let me deolare Brahman to you”’’ (Kaus 41 8), because the word ‘work’, meaning ‘something thai 18 done’, denots the world which 1s an effect, because by the pronoun ‘thus’ the workd, estabhshed. by the evidence of perception and tha rost, 18 suggested , and, lastly, because the person, mentioned 2n the Tantra, is not the topic here

Vedinta-kaustubha

The S&amikhyas hold that prakrti 18 the agent and puruga the enjoyer The mpossibility of prakria to be the cause has beon ahown. in various ways Now, although 1b has been shown in the section regarding Pratardana + that the Kaugitaki brihmana texts refer to Brahman, yet by showing that the text ‘“‘Of whom. this 1s the work.’ (Kang 419), too, refers to Brahman, the author 1s now dispoamg of the objection, viz the person (puruga), admitted by the Sdmkhyas, is accepted by the Vedinta, on the ground of 28 bemg an enjoyer, and prakrta, supermtended by 1t, 28 the cause of the world

We read of a dialogue between B&laki and Aj&teéatru m the Kaugtaki brahmans There, 9 sage, called Balak Gargya havmg न cand cae cate ae

1 8४ B 1114, pp 682 88, Part 6

° 6, R, Bh SK, 2 9 8, २२, Bh B * Vide ‘Indra-prigddhkaraga , siliras 1 1 29-32

fst 1 4 16 ADH 5} VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 243

promised the king Ajatagatru ‘Let me declare Brahman to you (Kaus 41), baving then designated various persons as

thus ‘He who 18 the person within the sun’’ (Kaug 4 3), cre person within the moon”’ (Kaug 44) and so on!, became mlent Then, Ajétafatru, who knew Brahman®, havimg condemned hm with the words ‘“In vain, did you tell me”’3 (Kaug 419), said ‘“He who, verily, © B&lik, 1s the maker of these persons, and 4 of whom this 1s the work, he, verily, 1s to be known””’ (Kaus 419) Here a doubt arises, viz whether puruga, established in the Simkhya tantra, the superintendent of prakrti and the enjoyer, 28 taught here as the object to be known, or the Supreme Soul The prima facte view 18 a8 follows It was purusa, unconnected with prakru, as estab- hshed mn the Tantra, that was mdicated, by the royal sage, as the object to be known, because of the mention of a connecizon with works mm the phrase ‘“and of whom this 18 the work”’ (Kaug 419), because works, consisting in mert and demerit, are possible on the part of the mndividual soul alone, entitled to works, because a connec tion with work 18 not admitted on the part of the Supreme Soul, and, because the origin of the world 1s due to the works of the respectzve enjoyers Moreover, here Im accordance with the text ‘They two went to a sleeping person’ (Kaug 419), 0 was the enjoying soul alone which was demonstrated by Ajitadatru to BalAk Jakewnse, m the passage ‘Just as 8 merchant enjoys with his own people, and as his own people enjoy hun, so exactly this mtelhgent self enjoys with these selves, 80 exactly these selves enjoy 1t’ (Kaug 4 20), the characterstio mark of the enjoying soul alone 1s found The meaning of the text 28 as follows ‘Just as a merchant’,1e a lord who 18 the chief, enjoys “with his own people’, 16 with umplements hke servanta and the rest, and “his own people’, 16 the servants and the rest, ‘enjoy’ the merchant, 1e depend on him for food and clothmg, ‘so

1 The sage wanted to teach the king about the person withm the sun, that withm the moon, that withm the bghtmmg that wrthm the cloud and so on, altogether about acxteen persona but m each case, the king begged to be spared of the teaching as he was already acquainted with the person m question Fmally, the kug himself taught the sage about Brahman Vide Haug 4

# The word BrajenayAa' 28 not really cluded m the text

$ Correct quotation ‘Myed var hhalu md saqwddaygfhd' m winch case 10 would mean m vam, vamly did you make metelk’ Vide Kang 419 p 138

4 Correct quotation od" and not ‘os’

[80 1 4 16 apH 5] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 248

promised the king Ajatadatru ‘“Let me declare Brahman to you”’ (Kaug 41), having then designated Various persons as Brahman, 11178 नि ~ who 18 the person within the sun?’ (Kaug 4 3), («The person within the moon”’ (Kaus 44) and ao on!, became शान

Then, Ajatasatru, who knew Brahman®, havmg condemned him with the words ‘ ‘In vam, did you tell me’”’’® (Kaus 419), sad

° "म्‌ who, verily, O Balik, 1s theo maker of these persons, and * of whom this 18 the work, he, verily, 18 to be Imown”’ (Kaug 419)

Here a doubt arises, viz whetber purusa, established in the Samkhya- tantra, the superintendent of prakrti and the enjoyer, 18 taught here as the object to be known, or the Supreme Soul The prima facte view 18 88 follows It was puruga, unconnected with praky, as estab- iahed in the Tantra, that was indicated, by the royal sage, as the object to be known, because of the mention of a connection with works in the phrase ‘ “and of whom this 1s the work”’’ (Kaus 419), because works, consisting in mert and demerit, are possible on the part of the individual soul alone, ontitled to works, because a connec- tion with work 18 not admitted on the part of the Supreme Soul, and, because the origin of the world 1s duc to the works of the respective enjoyers Moreover, here in accordance with the text ‘They two went to a sleeping person’ (Kaun 410), 16 was the enjoymg soul alone which was demonstrated by Ajitagatru to Balin Likewise, m the passage ‘Just as a merchant enjoys with his own people, and as 118 own people enjoy him, so exactly this intelligent self enjoys with these selves, so exactly these selves enjoy 1t’ (Kang 4 20), the oharacteristio mark of the enjoying soul alone 18 found The meaning of the text 18 88 follows ‘Just as a merchant’,1e a lord who 18 the chief, enjoys “with his own people’, 10 with mplementa hke servants and the rest, and ‘his own people’, je the servanta and the reat, ‘anjoy’ the merchant, 16 depend on hum for food and clothing, ‘so

i The sage wanted to teach the ling about the person within the sun, that within the moon, that withm the lightning, that withm the cloud and so on, altogether about sixteen persons, but in each case, the king begged to be spared. of the teaching, as he was already acquainted with the person in question. Fimally the kmg himaelf taught the sage about Brahman Vide Kaug 4

» The word * Braimayfa’ is not really inaluded in the text

* Correct quotation ‘ Afrgd vas khalu ma samyddayswghd’ in which case it would mean in vam venly did you make metelkk’ ‘Vide Kaug 419, p 138

€ Correct quotatzon ‘ud’ and not ‘ag’

(st 1 4 16 244 VEDINTA KAUSTUSHA ADH 5]

exactly this intelligent self ‘enjoys with these’,1e6 with the persons within the sunand the rest And 17 cannot be said that amce the word ‘work’, mentioned in the concluding text ‘“ Of whom this 18 the work"’ (Kaug 419) denotes action, the vital breath, possessing the activity of motion as his substratum, mentzoned in the concluding text ‘In this vital breath alone, he becomes one’ (Kaus 4 20), 18 to be under stood, but puruge, established m the Tantra and tho enjoyer of the frarts of works, 18 not to be accepted here as the object to be known,— for the term ‘vital breath’ refers to the bearer of the vital breath or the तारत पन्न soul, such a construction, viz ‘m this vital breath’, meaning ‘mm puruasa, the bearer of the vital breath’, bemg possible Tf, m accordance with the explanation ‘In the vital-breath which 18 present in this,1e m the soul’, the two locatives (viz ‘in this’ and ‘m the vital breath’) are to refer to different objecta 4, then although the word ‘vital breath’ will refer to the chief vital breath, yet as 10 18 naturally an mplement of the individual soul, none but the individual soul 18 the object to be established here And hence the meaning 18 ‘He who 1s the maker’, 16 the cause, ‘of these persons’,1e of the persons dwelling m the orb of the sun and tho rest, and ummplements of the enjoyment of the individual soul, ‘and of whom tlus 1s the work’, 16 ment and demerit, the cause of ita boing the cause 3, 18 to be known as unconnected with prakrt1 And henco Brahman, mtroduced as the object to be depicted in the text ‘ ‘Let me declare Brahman to you”’ (Kaus 41), 18 none but puruga, there bemg no proof of any God other thanit As the qualities of perceiving and the rest, belonging to the cause, afe posable on ita part, possessing as It does the quality of consciousness, prakyta alone, suporintended by the puruga, the enjoyer, 18 the cause of the world (Here ends the proma face view ) (Author’s conclusion )

With regard to 1t, we reply Here, the Highest Person alone, the maker of the persons, 1s the object to be known Why? For the following reasons Furst, the term ‘work’ denotes the world, and the

1 ‡ 8 standing m a vysdiskarana relation and not m a samdnddinkaraga relation, or in. a relation of noun and an adjective referring to the same locus, as the first explanation takes them to be

० Te the works (barmas) of the soul lead to the creation of the world the sun and the rest

{so 1 4 16 ape 5] VEDANTA KAUSTU BHA 246

creatorship of the world 1s not possible on the part of any one other than the Supreme Soul A ‘work’ 18 what 1s done, 16 the world, conmsting of the sentient and the non sentient Secondly, the creator- ghip of the world 18 not posable on the part of the sentient individual soul which has entered into the world as an onjoyer, and wluch 38. never admitted to be ४ creator Thirdly, the creatorsliup of the world 18 umposaible also on the part of prakrti, supermtended by the indivi

dual soul of little knowledge and little power In ordmary hfe, what Irttle 1s done by non sentient objocta, like chariots and the rest superin- tended. by sentient beings, 1s due to the sentient beingx alone And, there bemg no purpose in rejecting the primary agent, the promary agent 18 none but the Supreme Bemg, celebrated in a masa of scriptural texts The world, known through perception and the rest, in referrod to by the pronoun ‘thw’ Work conswtng in merit and demerit simply 18 not denoted by the term ‘work’ here Nince the mxteen persons, indicated as Brahman by Balik who had promised ‘“ Let me declare Brahman to you”’ (Kaus 41), were not really Brahman, Ajétegatru, baving condemned hun who could not tell him about Brahman, thus ‘“In vain, verily, did you tell me! ”’ (Kawi 4 14), taught the Supreme Soul,—not known by the sage, and the maker of the persons indicated by hun,—ts the objact to be known, with the words ‘“ Ho who, venly, O Balaiki'’ (Kans 419) Otherwise, the persons connected with wmks, 16 momt or demerit, beng already known to Balilhn, the tenclung of them as the objects to be known would be meaningless Hence, the word ‘work’ simply denotes that the univerne consisting of the « ntient and the non sentient 18 an 62800, and doex not deanate mero merit and demerit, or more action This being no, the word ‘thin’ too, haw a purpos aince, referring as 10 does to the entire workl, consmting of the sentient and the non sentient and known through the evidence of perception and the rest, 1t serves to preclude the supposition of ita heng due to a mere person Thus, the meaning of the text ‘He who, venly, © Baléin, 1s the maker of theae persona”’ (Kaug 119) is ax follows

0 Balan, he who 1s the maker of the persons within the aun and the rest, designated, by you au Brahman, and who w not tho maker of the persons only, but of whom. thus entire universe, consisting of the sentient and the non sentient, w an effect,—that Supreme houl, the soul of

A न्नादण्ण्या Set गणी [रि | eT Al

1 For correct quotation ace footnote 8, p 245

[st 1 4 17 246 VEDINTA-PARLJATA SAURABHA ADH 5]

all, the Lord of all, 1s the object to be known Here, although the persons, being included within the world, are proved to have the Supreme Soul as their cause, their separate mention 1s to be known for the purpose of rejecting ther Brahman hood, claimed by Balan 1

SUTRA 17

“Ty mr BR OBJECTED THAT ON ACOOUNT OF THR CHARACTERISTIC MARK OF THE INDIVIDUAL SOUL AND THE OHIEI VITAL BREATH, (वप LORD 18 NOT DENOTED HERE), (WE BEPLY ) THAT HAS BREN EXPLAINED *’

Vedinta-padrijata-saurabha

If 1+ be objected that on account of the charactenstic mark of the individual soul, contamed in the passage ‘This intelligent self enjova with, these selves’ (Kaus 4 20 9), ax well as on account of the characteristic mark of the chief vital breath, contained in the passage ‘Now, 1m ths vital breath alone he becomes one’ (Kaun 338, 4 20 8), one of these two 18 to be understood, and not Brabman,—

(We reply ) “that has been explained” in the section treating of Pratardana * ‘The sense 18 that the charactemsatic marks of the mdividusl soul and the rest have been explained there as referring to Brahman, and should be known to be so here as well

Vedanta-kaustubha

If 1t be objected On account of the charactenstic mark of an wdividual soul, contamed in the passage ‘Just aa a merchant enjoya with, his own people, and as his own people enjoy him, so exactly this untelhgent self enjoys with these selves, so exactly do these selves enjoy it’ (Kaus 420), as well as on account of the charactenstic mark of the chief vital breath, contamed im the passages ‘Then m

1 Ie in the text He who ia the creator of these persons, of whom this us the work’, the phrase of whom this uw the work’ implies that the entire universe—imoludimg the sun and the rest—1 the effect of Brahman In spite of this the persons withm the sun and the rest are mentioned separately once more as the effects of Brahman, because the lang wanta to point out partculariy

9 6, R, Bh, SK 4 Vide Br Sil 1 1 20-32

[st 1 4 18 ADH 5 ] VEDINTA PABIJATA SAUBABHA 247

this vital breath alone he becomes one’ (Kaus 33, 420), one of these two 18 to be understood, and not the Supreme Soul, —

(We reply ) “that has been explained” in the sub section, begin ning with the aphorism ‘The vital breath, on account of mmtelhgr tility 10. that way’ (Br Si 1129) There, the text bemg ascer tained to have Brahman for its object on the ground of the begmnmng and the end, the marks of the mdrvidual soul and the rest, too, have been described as referrmg to Him alone In the very same manner, here, too, m the beginning, in the passage =" ^“ Let me declare Brahman to you”’ (Kaus 41), Brahman 18 mentioned as the object In the middle, too, 1n the text ‘“‘Of whom this 18 the work”’ (Kaus 4 19), Brahman 18 mentioned. as the agent of the “work’ or the entire universe The end as well refers to none but Brahman, smoe the text ‘He who knows thus, having Overcome all evils, attains supremacy, independent role and lordship among all bemgs’ (Kaug 420), declares that excellent resulta pertam to His worshippers Thus, this text bemg ascertained to be refermmg to Brahman, the charactemstic marks of the individual soul and the rest, too, are 70 be taken as referring to Him And, 1t 18 not to be said that there 1s any repetztion here (ol what has already been said under Br 8i 1 1.29-32), since that section about Pratardana d.ces not determme the meaning of the text ‘Of whom. this 18 the work’ (Kaug 419), which the present section does

COMPARISON

Bhiskara

Reading different, viz he reads this siitra and the next one as one stiitra >

SUTRA 18

“Bot प ^ प्प (THINKS THAT THE MANTION OF THE INDIVIDUAL SOUL) HAS A DIFFERENT PURPOSB, ON ACCOUNT OF QUESTION AND HXPLANATION, AIND THUS SOME (BHAD) ”

Vedinta -parijata-saurabha

Jaimini thmks that the mention of the mdividual soul m this section has the purpose of suggestung Brahman, other than the

1 Bh B 1114, 2 78

[st 1 4 18 248 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 5]

individual soul, on account of the question ‘“ Where, O Balak, did this person lie? What did he become? Whence did he come back?” (Kaug 4191), and on account of the reply ‘When the sleepmg person sees no dreams whatsoever, then in this vital breath alone he becomes one”’’ (Kaug 419%) The Vajasaneyins, too, thus record the Supreme Soul as other than the mdividual soul There too, there are question and answer The question 18 ‘“*What did he then be- come? Whence did he retwmn’?’ (Brh 2 1 16 2), and the answer ए ‘“That which 1s this ether within the heart, m that he lea’’’ (Brh 2117 4) Vedanta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz since m the text ‘In this vital breath alone he becomes one’ (Kaug 419), entering by the md:vidual soul 18 mentioned, and since the term ‘vital breath’ 3s apphed to Brahman, who alone 1s fit to be the substratum: of the mdvidual soul's entermg, let the charactenstic marks of the vital breath refer to Brahman ए) ए seams very difficult to take the charactenstio marks of the mdividual soul as referring to Brahman, since here m. the passage ‘They two went to a sleeping person’ (Kaus 419), the exclusive mark of an imdividual soul 18 found,—the author rephes here

The teacher Jaumm thinks that the mention of the individual soul in this section “has a different purpose”, vi the purpose of demonstrating that the Supreme Soul,—posseased of the qualities of being a support and the rest,—is different from the individual soul, possessed of the qualities of “bemg the object to be supported ’, etc Why? “On account of question and explanntion” Thus, Ajita- Satro, a knower of Brahman, approached a sleeping person with Balain, demrous of enquiring mto Brahman, and called that person thus ‘“O Soma, the kng”’ (Kaus 419) But when the sleeper did not hear him, Ajitadaira thereby demonstrated the fact that enjoyer 18 different from the vital breath and the rest which are not enjoyers After that, when the sentient soul, different from those non sentient, was awakened by the push of the stick, AjStagatru himself asked the followmg questions with a view to demonstrating Brahman once more as different from the sentaent and the non-sentient

1§ R Bh, 8, 2 9 ४ 8, छ, Bh, SK, ए 4 Op on

180 1 4 18 948 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 61

individual soul, on account of the question ‘“‘Where, O Balila, did this person 16 ¶ What didhe become? Whence did he come back? *” (Kaus 4191), and on account of the reply ‘‘*When the sleeping person sees no dreams whateocever, then in tlus vital breath alone he becomes one™’ (Kaus 419%) The Vajasansying, too, thus record the Supreme Soul as other than the individual soul There too, there are question and answer The question is ‘°“ What dul he then be- come? Whence did he return”?’ (Brh 21165), and the answer 18 ‘“That which 1s this ether withm the heart, in that he les”’ (Brh 21174) Vedinta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz since in the text ‘In this vital breath alone he becomes one’ (Kaug 419), entering by the imdividual soul 18 mentioned, and since the term ‘vital breath’ + apphed to Brahman, who alone 1s fit to be the substratum of the individual soul's entering, let the characteristic murky of the vital broath refer to Brahman Bot it seems very difficult to take tho charnoatenutic marks of the individual soul as referrmg to Brahman, aince here in the passage ‘They two went to a aloeapmg person’ (Kaw 419), the exclusive mark of an mdividual soul 18 found,—the author rephes here

The teacher Jammin thinks that the mention of tha md:vidual soul in this section “has © different purpose”, viz the purpose of demonstrating that the Supreme Soul,—possossed of the qualities of being a support and the rest,—1s different from the individual soul, possessed of the qualitues of ‘bemg the object to be aupported ’, ete Why? “On account of question and explanation” Thus, Ajita- Satru, a knower af Brahman, approached ५ sleepmg person with Balin, desirous of enquring into Brahman, and called that porson thus ˆ ^" 0 Soma, the kng”’ (Kaug 419) But when the sleeper did not hear him, Ajitadatru thereby demonstrated the fact that enjoyer 18 different from the vital breath and the rest which are not enjoyers After that, when the sentient soul, different from those non- sentient, was awakened by the push of the stuck, Aj&tadatru himself asked the followmg questions with a view to demonstratung Brahman once more as different from the sentient and the non sentient

18,R Bh 8 B 9 Op of ४ 6, फ Bb, 8K, B 4 Op ow

[so 1 4 18 ADH 5] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 249

‘Where, O Balin, did this person lice? What, verily, did he become ? Whence did he return” ¶ ` (Kaus 419) As Balaln was unable to answer the question, Ajaétasatru himself rephed ‘‘'When the sleeping person sees no dream whatsoever, then 10 this vital breath alone he becomes one , when he wakes up, then from this soul all the vital breaths proceed, each towards 118 place, from the vital breaths the gods, from the gods the worlds”’ (Kaus 4 20) On account of such question and answer the Supreme Soul, different from the mdividual soul, 18 to be understood here The sense 18 this During the period of deep sleep, the soul, having drawn forth the whole group sense organs, and having entered into the Supreme Soul,—denoted by the term ‘vital breath’ which stands 17 apposition with the pronoun ‘this’ m the text ‘In this vital breath’ (Kaus 4.19),—becomes self abiding and tranquil Then, when time comes, 16 goes out from that very vital breath for undergoing retmbutive experiences This Supreme Soul, celebrated to be the substratum of deep sleep! and the rest, and different from the mmdrvidual soul, 18 the object to be known,—such 18 the view of Jaimimi as well The mention of Jaimini 1s for the purpose of clearly mdicatang that the meaning stated above by us 1s highly commendable

“And thus some”, 16 the Vajasanoyms designate the Supreme Soul as different from the individual soul, conmsting of mtelhgence There, too, a dialogue between BAlikn and Aj&tadatru has been miro duced, contaming a question and an answer The question ‘“He who consists of intelligence, what did he become then? Whence did he come*”’ (Brh 2116), and the answer 18 ‘“‘That which 18 the ether withm the heart, in that he hes”’ (Brh 2117%) That the ether 1s the Supreme Soul has been established under the section, concerned with the text ‘Small 1 the ether within that’ (Chand 8118} This difference between the individual soul and the Lord has been demonstrated before by the author of the aphorisms In many aphorisms like ‘And on account of the designation of difference’ (Br ॐ 11184), etc Incidentally ४ 8 confirmed here too as beng

1 Vide Br अ 327

9 The Bdéldki Ajdtasairu-samvdda in Brh 2 1 1s exactly mmilar to that in Kaug 4 only the lather makes no mention of the ether

8 Vide DoAera adhibarana, Br SO 13 14-24

4 Vide also Br Si 1133, 124, 1231 18393, 186, eto (The num bering 1 Nunbérke « )

[७0 1 4 18 260) VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA apni 61

held by Jamu as well, with the words “But Jamun (thinks पणं the mention of the mndividnal soul hae a different purpose” With o view to showing that 1t 1s confirmed all tho more strongly an being based on the Veda, 1# 28 sald “On account of question and ¢<plana tion”, and for suggestang that xt 18 celobrated im all the Upanoautn, 161s said “and thus some” Thenon difference betwoon tho individual soul and Brahman, too, has been mentioned before,} and we ऋणि] speak of it carefully later on* Hence, none but the Supreme boul 18 taught as the object to be known It 1s established that He alone 18 the cause of the omgin and the rest of the universe, anc not purnyi, estabhsehed in the Tantra, or pradhina, superintended by it

Here ends the section entitled ‘“Denotang the work’ (5)

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhiaskara

General import same, only while Nimbirke, as before, connedts this adhikarana more directly with the topic of the protecting part of the pida, viz fefutation of the Simkhya view, Sumkara ant Bh&skara do not do 80, but take 1b to be concerned with the general question of the concordance of all texte with regard to Brahmun ¥

Srikantha

General import same, but he too does not take thin adlukurins as concerned with the refutatzon of the Samkhya doctrine, but with the question of the difference between the individual soul and Brah man“ Hence according to hm, the problem here 1 whether the

Sage nly

^ 966 VE 111, p 11 ५17, 25,1386 53, 66 (Page referencia are to the ए 8 8 ed) aie

“oe VE 1420, 2 139, 1431, 140,2116,p 161, ०४ (KH 9 This 1s evident from the fact that while according to तभाव ठ the quention s whether in Kans 4 19 the obyect to be known w the Sdpmkhya yuruec or the Supreme Bonl (vide VY PS 1816), according to Stupkara and BAdakura, tho question ॐ whether m the same text the object to be known is the vital brat or the Supreme Soul VideS B 1416 p 418, Bh. ए 1416,p 78

^ Punar ap कणि paromsivarasya onya-bhivam upapddayati BE B 16 16,

{808 1 4 19 ane 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 251

object to be known in Kausitak text (419) 1s the mdividual soul or the Supreme Soul, and so on 1

Adhikarana 6 The section entitled ‘The caon nection of texts’ (87११2८88 19-22)

SUTRA 19 “AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE CONNECTION OF पच °

Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

In the text ‘“O! the self, verily, should be seen”’ (Brh 2465, 4563), the Suprome Soul should be understood as the object to be seen, ‘on account of the connection”’ of the text with Him alone

Vedinta-kaustubha

Now, by showing once more the concordance of the sorrptural texts with regard to Brahman, the author 28 disposing of puruga, admitted by the SAmkbyas

We find the following text 1n the Brhad&ranyake under the Maitreyl bribmana, beginning ‘He aud “O, not for the love of the husband, very, 18 a husband dear, but for the love of the soul is a husband dear” ’ (अ 245, 456), and contimuing ‘“O, the self, verily, should be seen, should be heard, should be meditated on” ’ (भ 248,486) Here the doubt w, viz whether the soul, the twenty fifth prinople of the Simkhyas, 18 taught as the object to be seen, or the Highest Person, Lord Vasudeva? What 1s reasonable here? The prima face objector thinks The soul, the twenty fifth prmciple established by the Tantra, 1s taught as the object to be seen. and so on, 88 16 18 possible for 19 alone to be the object of the acts of perception and the rest, as 1४ 1s umpossible for Brahman, admitted by the defendant, to be properly an object of an act, He bemg unluuted by so muchness, as the connection of the Self with the dearness of husband, wife, son and the rest, mentioned m the beginning, 28 possible on the part of only puruga, mentioned by the Tantra, as in the middle, too, 101 the text ‘This great Bemg, 1000106 and endless, 1s but a

* Op cv, pp 686 ef seg 9 §, R, Bh, SK, B

(५0 1 4 19 253 VEDANTA KAUHTURHA ADH 6]

mass of intelligence Having risen from thom elem nts, one vanmhes into thamelone After death, theres no consciousness” (श्रि 2412, 4.618), puruga 16 laid down aa subject to transnigratory ¢xutence as connected with origin and destruction—purin Whit h उ mentioned in the Tantra, the very one, भप्त dwells with the body aa indicator by the word ‘this’, which 14 induated hy the word great being with a view to maling ita datinction from the mate क beuys char which 1s indicated by the word ‘infimte’ with a view to mtking ite [पभ ness 10 tame clear, which + endless, 1 © innumerubh, and which wa mass of intelligence, and as, finully, tewarda the end an well, tho text ‘O, whereby one should know the knewer 7° (अ) 24 14, 46 16}, declares 1t to be a knower

With regard to 1t, we point out the दत क्ण [दलका Nene but the Highest Person 1s here taught ax th object te he seen ane ao on Why? Because the text hua connottion with the Supreme Notl alone,1e becausa from ५ consleration of the be द्यौ anel the end, the connection of the group of teata, intending to (१४१९५५९ the sume meaning, a8 referrmg to the Suprome Soul is known = ‘Thus, when from Yajfiavalkya’sstatoment, vir‘ ‘tt bnmortalty, howe v1 ¢, there 18 no hope through wealth”’ (आ 242 454) Mater yi came to know definitely that work, to be accomplished by means ot wealth 18 Dot a means to salvation,—w well known trom uther st rptural texts too, viz ‘ Frail indeed are thea boats of sacrifices (Mund 127), ` What 8 not made in not व्रात through what is mude’ (Mund 1212) and so on,—#he, desiring for aalvation, asked about the means to salvation, thun ‘ ‘What shall Liles with that whereby I may not be mmortal? Whatever, bir, you know, toll me that'’’ (अ 243,454) Thus osked, Yajfiavalkyn taught the Supreme Soul alone, the soul of all, as the object of the acta ot neous बत the rest, thas ‘“‘O, the self, verily, should be ween" (Brh 243, 464), salvation being posable through the meditation on Him alone ‘Tho knowledge of all, too, 28 possible through the knowlege of Him In the end, too, the attnbute of ‘being the self of all’, mentioned in the passage ‘“ All this is the soul” (Beh 246, 45 7), fan charac- teristic mark of the Supreme Soul alone

fet 1 4 20 ADE 6] VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA. 253

SUTRA 20 “(LHR BRGINNING WITH THE INDIVIDUAL SOUL IS) 4 MABE OF THE

ESTABLISHMENT OF THH INITIAL PROPOSITION, ASMARATHYA (THINKS 80) ”

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

To the question Why, then, 18 there the begining with the wdividual soul? we reply the fact that the Supreme Soul 18 designated by © word denoting the individual soul,—the latter being non dzfferent from the former as His effect,—is a convincing proof “ of the estab hahment of the initial proposition’’, vz that through the knowledge of one, there 18 the knowledge of all So “Admarathya” thmks

Vedanta-kaustubha

If 1t be objected The individual soul alone 1s apprehended as connected with the deainess of husband and the rest in the beginnmg, in the passage (८0, not for the love of the husband, verily, 1s a husband. dear, but for the love of the soul 3s a husband dear”’ (Brh 245, 466) and so on, as well as connected with omg and destruction 11 the middle, in the passago ‘“ Having arisen from these bemgs, one vanishes into them alone After death there 28 no consciousness” ° (प 2412, 45 18),—

(We reply ) Troe Still, by the term “individual soul” the Supreme Soul 18 to be understood here No such objection can 08 raised. im view of the fact that He, being the cause of all, can be denoted by all words ‘The author 18 showing thu with the approval of another teacher

In sccordance with the toxt ‘From whom, vemly, all these elements arise’ (Tait 3 1), the dividual soul, too, entered into the elements, 18 reckoned among the effects, and Brahman 1s the cause These two bemg the effect and the cause, there 1s, undoubtedly, a promary difference between them Thus the texts demgnating dualty are correct Since the effect ४ non different from the cause, bemg born from 1t and. 80 on, non difference between the two, too, 1s equally 2 fact Thus, the texts designating non duality, foo, are correct In this way, both the kinds of texts bemg authoritatave In ther own senses, ihere 18 a natural relation of difference and non difference between the individual soul and Brahman Hence, 1t 1s possible for words denoting the effecta to denote the causes as well, just as in the

[80 1 4 21 264 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 6 j

case of the pot and the clay, standing in the relation of effect and cause, the word ‘pot’ refers to the clay as well ‘This beimg so, the initial proposition too, viz that through the knowledge of one, there 18 the knowledge of all, 1s eatabliahed,—such 1s the view of Afmarathyn, The meanmg of the words of the aphorism 18 as follows This, really, 18 “a mark” or & convinemg proof “of the establahment of the mitial proposttiion”’, vm that through the knowledge of one, there 18 the knowledge of all What mark? Listen! The mdividual soul being non different from the Supreme Soul as His effect, by the word. “yndividual soul” the Supreme Soul 1s demgnated,—so the teacher Agmarathya thmks

SUTRA 21

“ON ACCOUNT OF SUCH A CONDITION OF ONE WHO IS ABOUT 70 f DEPART, AUPULOMI (काऽ 80} ”

Vedanta -pairijaita-saurabha

On account of the union of the mndividual soul, about to depart from the body, with Brahman, Brahman 18 denoted by a word denotmg the mdrvidual goul,—so Audulom thinks

Vedanta-kaustubha

“On account of such & condition,” 16 on account of the union of the individual soul with the Supreme Soul,—of the soul which “1s about to depart” from the aggregation of the body and the sense- organs, In accordance with the text ‘As the flowing mvers disappear into the sea, leaving names and forms, so a knower, freed from name and form, attains the celestial Person, higher than the high’ (Chand. 8 3 4), which is endowed with the hearmng, the thinking, the meditation and the direct vision of Brahman , and which 28 well known to be unborn from the sormptural and Smri texts hke ‘A wise man 18 neither born, nor dies’ (Katha 218), ‘This 18 unborn, eternal, constant’ (Git& 220), 16 on account of ita attammeg the state of Brahman, the Supreme Soul 18 denoted by a term denoting the individual soul,—so thmks the teacher Audulom: On this view, there 18 9 difference between the mdividual soul and Brabman dumng tho soul’s state of bondage, and non difference during ita state of

[st 1 4 22 ADH 6] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA 266

release In this manner, there are both difference and non difference between the individual soul and Brahman Thus, the meaning of the text 1s difference and non difference,—such 18 the view of the teacher Audulom1 Snch difference and non difference are admitted by the reverend Audulom for the benefit of the dull witted But really even during the state of bondage, the individual soul, which 18 atomic in size and. possesses little knowledge, though different from Brahman who 18 all pervasive non deviating in nature and omniscient, 18 yet non different from Him, amce it has no separate existence and activity,—Just as 2 leafs non different from the tree, the ray from the lamp, the attribute from ita substratum and the sense organs from the vital breath Likewise, though 1n release it 18 non different from Fim, it having no separale existence and activity, at the same time, it 18 undoubtedly different from Him, in accordance with the text ‘It 18 completed m its own form alone’ (Chind 884) Otherwise, the umperishableness of the respective natures of both must come to be jeopardized The view of Aumarathya, too, should be known to be the same COMPARISON

The commentators ae different meanings of the word ‘evam bhfivit’ According to kara and Bhitakara 10 means ‘on account of attaming identity with the Suprome Soul’, 2 accordmg to Raménuja ‘and Srikantha, ‘on account of attamning the state of the Supreme Soul’ ,? ond according to Baladeva, ‘on account of becoming dear to all, etc ’é

SUTRA 22 “On AOOOUNT OF ABIDING, 80 Kasaknrena ”

Vedainta-parijita-squrabha

“On account of the ubiding”’ of the Supreme Lord,—celebrated m the passage ‘Entered within, the ruler of men’ (Tait Ar 3 11 1, 25)

1 ठ ia not included in the original text Vide Chand 834, p 421

icine ee | 81 1421, 9 425, Bh B 1421 p 81

8 Parsndima bhdvdi' 8 B 1421 p 394, Part 1 Madrased Sk B 1421] p 548, Part 6

Gb 1421 ८ 7 181 R

fat 1 4 2 256 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]

and 80 on,—in the individual soul aa the controller, in the beginning and m what follows, by a term denoting the 0०01०0६ to be vontrolled the controller 1s understood—so thinks 64 1 हाना

Vedanta-kaustubha

“On acoount of the abiding” of the Supremo Soul tn the individual soul,—an object to be controlled by ताऽ its soul, mn accordance with the texta ‘He who abiding in the voul w other than the soul, whom the soul does not know, of whom the soul i the hadly, who rules the soul within, he 18 your soul, the inner सपं णा ए mmmortal’ (Bat Br 14677, 301), ‘Entered withm, the लाता of nun, the soul of all’ (Tat Ar 3112), by a term denoting tho individual soul, the Supreme Soul 18 denoted,—so thinks the tanchor Kasukrtsna a knower of the object controlled, 1s well os of the controller Thus, by means of the views of the three sages the nattre of difference and non difference has been incdentally shown hy his Holness And with a view to romoving the contradse tion umenge the scriptural texts by his own theory, he will clearly previ the mural relation of difference non difference beiween thea andiviudual seul and Brahman in the aphormums ‘A part, on account of the designation of variety’ (Br Si 2 3 42) and vo on

Here, the word ‘soul’ in the bojnnning rm firs to the Suprema boul alone The worship of that very Suprome नका w ceaimatid as a means to salvation m the passage “O, the soul, verily’ ' (Brh 245, 456) andsoon The text “Having irwon from thos beings, one vanishes into them alone’ (Brh 2412, £613), rice ates trans migratory existonce pertauung to ont who w aver te the Supreme Soul, and the text ‘There ऋ no consciousness after denth’ (Brh 2412, £513) mdicates salvation pertammg to Hw worshippes Hence, 1b 18 established that the texts of the Martrey! brihmann all agree mn referring to Brahman, differant and non different from the

Sentient and the non-sentient, the canse of all, to he approached by the freed and the controller of all

Here ends the section entitled ‘Tha connection of te tts (+)

कहिन ee ll [ष ५५ ० Spas ee ii nchdy

1 P 1074, line 18

fst 1 4 28 ADH 7 ] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 257

COMPARISON Samkara, Bhaiskara and Srikantha

Here too, as before, the general import 1s the same, but while Nunb&rka 1 takes this adhikarana to be connected more directly with the refutation of the S&mkhya doctrme, Samkara, Bhiakara and Sri kanthea do not Further, Samkara and Bhiskara interpret the word ‘avasthiteh’ differently To them, 10 means ‘because of (Brah man’s) abiding as the mndividual soul’ (पुति bhivena) ॐ

Adhikarana 7 The section entitled ‘The materialcause (8८02८88 23-27)

SUTRA 23 “ (BRAHMAN IS) THH MATERIAL CAUSE, AND (THE EFFICIENT CAUBB),

ON AGCOUNT OF THE ABSENGE OF CONFLIOT WITH REGARD TO THE INITIAL PROPOSITION AND THE ILLUSTRATION ”’

Vedinta-parijita-saurabha

‘The material cause,” as well as the efficient cause,—indicated by the particle ‘‘and”’ (in the afitra),—is none but the Supreme Soul, because then. alone the initial propomtion ‘Did you ask for that m struction whereby the unheard becomes heard, the unthought becomes thought, the unknown becomes known ?”’’ (Oh&nd 6 18 2), as well as the illustration ‘ “Just as, my dear, through a lump of olay, all objects made of clay may be lnown”’’ (Chand 61 44) are exphcable

Vedanta-kaustubha

Having thus refuted the athewstic sahool of the Simkhyas, now the author, by refuting the thezstic school of the Samkhyaa, 1s confirm ing the view, mentioned above, that the Lord 2s the non different material and efficient cause of the world

It may be objected that, properly, this section ought to have been inserted immediately after the aphoram ‘From whom (amse)

1 Vide VK 1411, p 187, हमे ed

४ 82 1431,p 486; Bh B 1421,p 81

3 8, R, Bh, SK, B 4 Op cx 17

[80 1 4 23 268 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7 |}

the omgm and the rest of thus’ (Br Si 11 2), demonstrating the characteristic marks of Brahman, establishing the nature of the cause of the world (To this we reply) No One sees 168 appropriateness here indeed ‘Thus, on the enqury viz Of what mark 18 Brahman? with, regard to the njunction, viz ‘An enquiry into Brahman should be undertaken’,—the mark of Brahman was stated m the aphorism ‘From whom (arse) the omgin and the reat of this’ (Br ॐ 11.2) There 1४ was certamly established, on the ground of scriptural and Smria texta, that Brahman 1s both the matenal and the efficent cause After that, there being no enquiry as to whether He 1s only the material cause, or only the effiaent canse, the topic was not further amplified But there those who take everything to be the transformation of prakrti (and take Brahman to be the efficient cause only) are being refuted separately

Thus, some theistic SAmkhyas hold In the world of ordmary experience, sentzent bemgs like potters and the rest are found to be the efficient cause alone, and not the material cause In the passages ‘He thought’ (Brh 125, Ait 11), ‘He thought’ (Praéna 6 8), creation 18 said to be preceded by thinking Hence let the Supreme Lord, the thinker, be, somehow or other, only the efficient cause of the world, but the material cause of mahat and the rest 1s nothing but pradhina, supermtended by Him, just as clay 1s the भकलम cause of pots and the like, n accordance with the text ‘He thinks of her who 1s the mother of all changes, non knowing, having eight forms, and eternal Ruled by him she manifesta herself, again mated. and superintended by him alone! ahe gives birth to the world for the benefit of the soul She 1 ॐ cow, without begmning and end, the progenitress, the source of all beings’ (Cil 30-622)

With, regard to 1t, we reply Brahman alone 1s ‘prakris’,1¢e the material cause of the world, as well as ta effiaent cause, indicated by the particle ^“ अवात” (mm the siitra) Why? ‘'On account of the absence of conflict with regard to the mutzal proposition and illus tration,” 1e on account of the non contradiction or conmatency of

1 Incorrect, ought to be ‘adAyvisitd, which is tranglated here > Readme different, viz

‘ VWskGrasananim miydm asa-ripdm dhruvim

purd Gaur anddavah a4 tu jantirt bhita-thdewmt" Vide Cail 8-5 p 230

[80 1 4 28 ADH 7 } VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 259

the initial propomtion and the illustration The muitial proposition, to begin with, 18 asfollows ‘‘ Did you ask for that instruction whereby the unheard becomes heard, the unthought thought, the unknown known ¶ '' ` (Chind 613) The meanmg of this text 18 as follows 0 son Svetaketu! Did you ask for that ‘mstruction’, 16 that mmstructor, vis the Supreme Soul, ‘whereby’, 16 through hearmg of whom from the preceptor, even what 18 unheard becomes heard, what 1s unthought becomes thought, what 1s unknown becomes known? It 1s known from this mitial propomtion that the Supreme Soul 18 the material cause, since the hearing and the rest of the effects 18 yustzfiable only through the hearing and the rest of the matenal cause Tho illustration givenisasfollows ‘“ Just as, my dear, through a lump of clay, all objects made of clay may be known”’ (Ohf&ind 614) and soon It1s known from thus lustration that the Supreme Soul 18 the maternal cause of the object illustrated as well (viz clay) A potter has not been cited in the illustration, and through a potter being known, 9 pot cannot beknown Butalump of olay being known, all objects made of clay, ike pota and the rest, may, 10560, be known To the contention, viz that in the world of ordimary experience sentient bemgs lke pottera and the rest are found to be efficient causes merely,—we reply We do not arrive at the cause of the world by means of inference and the rest, and so, for us, there 1s no need for the illustration of a potter But discarding all evidences contrary to the Veda, we follow what 18 mentioned by Sompture and the pre ceptor! Moreover, in the world of ordinary experience, too, we see that a sentient person 18 the maternal cause of the effects hke hairs, body-hairs and the rest, that a spider 18 the material cause of the web,and soon We read in Scrpture, too ‘Just aa hairs and hairs (arise) from a person, just as 8 spider creates and takes’ (Mund 1173) If xt be objected that m the above cases, the material causes contammg elements, surtable for giving mse to the effecta,—(we reply ) in the subject of our discussion, 000, there 18 God’s self power, called prakrti

1 Vide VK 118

9 Correct quotation ‘ Yaihd irna-ndbMh भु grhpate oa Yathd priiwwydm opgadhayah

sambhavanitt Yathd saiah purupit keda lomine’, eto 55 Mund 1 4 7, p 9

[st 1 4 24 36 260 VEDINTA PARWATA SAURABHA ADE 7]

SUTRA 24 “ON ACCOUNT OF THE TRACHING OF BREFLEOTION "’

Vedanta -pfirijaita-saurabha

“Qn account of the teaching of reflection” m the text ‘He perceived (16 thought) ‘“ May I be many”’ (Chind 6 2 3), the fact that Brahman 18 the orpator (18 the effiaent cause) and the matenal cause 18 established

Vedinta-kaustubha

‘Qn account of the teaching of reflection,’’ 16 on account of the teaching of resolution, m the passage ‘He wished’ (Tait 26), a8 well as on account of the teachmg of resolution in tho passage ‘“May I be many”’ (Tat 26, Chand 623), the Supreme Soul alone can appropriately be the creator (or the efficient cause) and the material cause respectively)

COMPARISON All others read ‘ca’ in the end 2

SUTRA 25 “AND ON AQOCOUNT OF THE DIREOT MENTION OF BOTH IN THE SAORED Text ”’

Vedinta-pairijata-saurabha

On account of the direct mention of Brahman aa tho effiuent and maternal cause in the sacred text ‘Brahman was the wood, Brahman the tree from which they carved out the heaven and th: earth O wise men, ask through the mind whereon 1b stood. supporting the worlda’* (Tat Br 289678), Brahman alone 28 of the two fold forms eee

1 The readmg m the 088 ed of VPS, however adds ‘ca’ at tho ond P 29 But the Brndaban ed (vol I)omitathe oa p 354

= Last line of the quotation correct or the correct quotation sev below

VK 1106088 ed gives the correct quotation p 28 whichis translate! bore ¢ P 360 1088 5-7 vol 2

R, Bh, B

[st 1 4 26 ADH 7] VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA 261

Vedinta-kaustubha

The particle ‘‘and” implies affirmation Brahman 18, mmdeed, both the matemal and the efficient cause Why? ‘On account of the direct mention of both m the sacred text’ Thus, to the question, viz ‘What was the wood, what was the tree from which they carved out the heaven and the earth? O wise men, ask through the mind whereon 1t stood supporting the worlds’ (Tat Br 28961, Re V 10 81 42), the answer ‘ Brahman was the wood, Brahman the tree from which they carved out the heaven and the earth O wise men, I tell you through the mind, 1t stood on Brahman supporting the worlds’ (Tait Br 2896 7), directly records ‘both’, 16 the fact that Brahman 18 both the efficent and the matemal cause

COMPARISON Bhaskara

This 18 Sittra 24 m his commentary Interpretation different, viz ‘ On account of the direct mention of both (viz omgin and dissolu tion) by the sacred text’ That 18, 10 ChAndogya 1 9 1 16 18 said that all beings arise from and disappear into the ether Now, here the term ‘ether’ stands for Brabman (as shown in Br Si 1122) Hence the above passage means that all things are from and disappear into Brahman JBut things disappear 1100 their material cause from which they have arsen Hence the above passage proves that Brahman 18 the material cause of everything 8

SUTRA 26 ‘Qw ACCOUNT OF ORHATING HIMSELF, ON ACOOUNT OF TRANS

FORMATION ° Vedinta -parijata-saurabha

Brahman alone 18 the efficient and the material cause of the world Why! ‘On account of creatzng Himself,” as known from the passage ` That rtaelf created itself’ (Tait 2174) If it be objected Now can the Creator be Himself the object of creation ’—(We reply ) ‘ On

1 P $60, lmes 2-5 vol 2 £ P 336, nes 8-10 3 ठ) B 1424p 85 8 R, Bh, SK,B

[st 1 4 26 262 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7]

account of transformation’ ‘The ommscient and omnipotent Brah man, having transformed Himself mto the form of the would by the projection of His power, becomes transformed, indeed, through His own nature, undeveloped, and possessing powers like creatorship, cto

Vedanta-kaustubha

Brahman alone 1s the effiaent aud the material cause Why? On account of creating himself” That 18, in the text ‘That 1teelf created rtaelf’ (Tart 2'7), He Himself 18 indicated as the creator of Himself, the object of creation,—the word ‘ krt1’ means droation,— on account of this If 1t be objected How can the fact that the Creator Himself is the object of His own creation be reconeilable ~ the author replies “On account of transformation” The omnucient and omnipotent Supreme Soul, non deviating: in nature, transforms Himself into the form of the world through, the projection of His own powers, conmstang m His own self and supermtended by Him, on acoount of such 9 transformation everything 18 faultless पअ powers are infinite and natural, as established by tho following sorptural and भपप texts, viz ‘ His supreme power 18 declared to be of various kmds indeed, and natural 1s the operation of his knowledge and power’ (Svet 68) ‘The ancient Person 1s possessed. of a vanity of powers, and. the powers of others cannot be hke them’, ‘ Hundreds of positive powers, like creation and the rest, which are inconceivable to tho oom prehension of all bemgs, may belong to Brahman, O best among the 8806108, as heat to fire’ (VP 1821) Heo projeots them in the beginning of creatzon The best among the sacred texts of the Sveté évataras proves His non dependence on another at the beginning of creation, as well as His beg without an equal or a superior, thus “Hus action and organ do not exist, His equal or superior 18 not seen’ (Svet 6 8) And the following soriptural and Snort: texts are evidences with regard to His transformation or the projection of powers ‘Just a8 & spider creates and takes’ (Mund 1177), ‘Havmg entered into pradhina (1e matter) and puruga (1e soul) through, 628 own wish, Han stirred up the mutable (viz matter) and the zmmutable (viz soul) when the tame of creation armved’ (VP 1 2 29 9), ‘Just ase tortowe, having stretched forth ite hmbe, draws them im agem, so the

ee ee EEE

a 2P 16

(st 1 4 27 ADH 7] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 263

eoul of bemgs swallows up agam the created bemgs’ (Mahé 12 7072b—7078a1) COMPARISON

Raménouja and Srikantha They break the atitra into two different stitras, viz ‘Atmakrteh’ and, ‘Parinimét’ 9

SUTRA 27 “AND BECAUSE (BRAHMAN) IS CELEBRATED TO BE THE SOURCE ”’

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

And im the texts ‘The source of bemgs which the wise see’ (Mund 1 1 68 9), ‘The creator, the Lord, the person, the source of Brahmé’ (Mund 3134), Brahman “1s celebrated” by the word " 8017068 Hence, Brahman alone 28 the maternal cause

Vedainta-kaustubha

^ Because” in the texts ‘The source of bemgs which the wise seo’ (Mund 11 6), ‘The areator, the Lord, the person, the source of Brahmi* (Mund 3143), ‘This 18 the source of all’ (Mind 6), Brahman “1s celebrated.” by the word ^° source”’, denoting the material cause,—the material cause 18 none but Brahman,—this 1s the sense Hence, the doctrme of the Simkhyas 18 nob to be accepted, bemg opposed asit isto the Veda It1s established that Lord Krams alone, the sole topic of all the Vedas, different and non different from the universe, the Highest Person, the Lord, and the Lord of all, 18 to be meditated on by one demrous of salvation aa the non different material and efficient cause of the un1verse

Here enda the section entitled ‘The material cause’ (प)

1 2 615, limes 2425, vol 3 Reading ‘Hoarais' instead of ‘grasata’ प्रभ्वी दभर ed too reads ‘harais', p 1571

9 ईत्‌ Bp 404 Partb1,Ak B,pp 564 65, Part 6

38, R, Bh, 2 £0Onp ow

fst 1 4 28 264 VEDINTA PIRIJATA SAURABHA ApH 8]

COMPARISON Samkara and Srikantha

As before they do not take ths adhikarana to be directly connected with the refutation of the Simkhya view, as Nimbirka does *

Adhikerana 8 The seotion entitled ‘The expla- nation ofall’ (8६४८४ 28)

SUTRA 28 ¢" HanEsy 471, 18 BXPLAINED, RXPLATNED ”

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha Hereby”, 16 by the totality of the sections, ‘all’ the Vedintas ‘are explained’ as referrmg to Brahman, “ explamed”’

Here ends the fourth quarter of the first chapter of the Vedanta

périjata saurabha, an interpretation of the SSriraka mimAmsa texts, and composed by the reverend Numbarka

Vedfinta-kaustubha

Now, the reverend author of the aphomsms 18 showimg the con- cordance of all the Vedintas with regard to Brahman by means of extended and analogical apphcation* ‘‘Hereby”, 16 through the abave mode of concordance, “all” Vedintas, mentioned or non- mentioned, should be known to be “explained” as referring to Brahman It should be known that the Vedas also are m concordance with regard to Brahman alone, m accordance with the soriptural text “The word which all the Vedas record’ (Katha 2 15), and m accordance with the Smrfa text ‘I slone am to be known through all the Vedas”’ (Gité 1515) ‘The repetition shows the end of the chapter Hence it 1s estabhshed that Lord Krena, the cause of the Origin. and the rest of the universe, the 8016 topic of all the Vedas, aud ~~~

i Vide ए ए 1438 2 149 920 1427 p 145 88 od ® Adela For the explanation of 10560 ' see VK 218

[so 1 ¢ 28 ADH 8] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 265

denoted by the terms ‘Brahman’, ‘N&riiyana’ and the rest, 16 to be worshipped by one, demrous of salvation, through hearing, thinking, meditating and 80 on

Here ends the section entitled “The explanation of all’ (8)

Here ends the fourth quarter of the first chapter of the Vedinta kaustubha, a commentary on the S&riraka mimimss, and composed. by the reverend teacher Srinivasa, dwelling under the holy lotus feet of Nimbarka, the founder and teacher of the sect of the venerable Sanatkuméra

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhiskara

Interpretation different, viz thoy connect this adhikarana more directly with the refutation of the Simkhya doctrine, which Nimb&rka does not Thus, the meanmg of the अपि according to Sumkara and Bhiskara w ‘Hereby’ (6 by the mode of refutung the Saimkhyna view), all (6 other doctrine hke Atom1im, and the rest) are explamed

as negated), explained * 1 | म Baladeva

Interpretation different, viz “Hereby (viz by the method mdi cated above) all (the words like pradhina, Stva and the rest) are explamed. (as denoting Brahman alone), explained’ +

Thus, we find that Nimb&rka, Ramanuja and Baladeva direct the entire pidas, except the last adhikarana, to the refutation. of the Simikhya view, but surprisingly enough make no reference to the Simkhya view mn the last adbukarana, bringing in different topice Nimb&rka and R&manuja speak of the general concordance of the Vedinta texts in the last section, while Baladeva speaku of the signi- ficance of all names

No less surprising 1s the procedure of Samkara and Bh&skara

finishes with the refutation of the Simkhya doctrine m adhikarana 3, and takes the intervening four adhikarana as concerned, not with the refutation of the S&mkhya doctrine, but with the general concordance of the Vedanta texts, etc ‘Then, all of a sudden, he refers to the S&mkhya doctrine in the last adhikarana

18B 1428 p 436 Bh B 1437 p 86 ॐ @ 5 1438

isu A & ZB 266 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 8]

Bhiaskara closely follows Samkara He too finishes with the refutation of the Samkhya doctrine in adhikarana 3, takes the inter vening three adhikaranas as concerned with the general concordance of texts, but takes the last two adhikaranas as referring to the Samkhya doctrine

Srikantha, 1s the most consistent of all He finishes with tho refutation of the Samkhys doctrine m adhikarana 3, once for all, and directs the remaimmg adhikaranas to other topzos

Résumé

The fourth section of the first chapter consists of —

28 sutras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Nimbirka 28 sitras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Samara 29 sutras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Raménuja 27 sutras and 8 adhikaranas, acoording to Bhiskara 29 siitras and 8 adhbikaranas, according to Srikantho. 28 sitras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Baladeva

RamsSnuja and Srikantha split stitra 26 in Nimbirka bhisya mto two separate siitras, while Bhaskara takes the sutras 17 and 18 m Nimbarka bhisya as one siitra

Oa # 6 ¢ =

SECOND CHAPTER (Adhyéya) FIRST QUARTER (Pada)

Adhikarana I The section entitled ‘Smrti’ (87४००३1 2) SUTRA 1 “Ty 7 32 OBJHOTED THAT THERE WILL RESULT THH FAULT OF

NOT LBAVING A BOOM FOB SMBTI, (WH REPLY ) NO, FOR THERE WILL RESULT THE FAULT FOR LEAVING NO BOOM FoR (oTHHE) Smeqtis ”

The interpretation of the Brahma-siitras entitled ‘ Ved&inta-pin 1808 saurabha ', composed by the reverend Nimbirka

Now, 1४ 18 being demonstrated in details how the stated concord ance 18 free from all contradictions If 1t be objected There does exist a need for Smrtis for confirming Scripture Among these, the Simkhya Smyti 18 to be accepted It 18 not to be said that it, designating as 17 does 9 non sentient cause, 1s not to be accepted for that reason—for, then, “‘ there will result the fault of leaving no room for Smrti1"—{we reply ) ‘no’, for, then, there will result the contra diction of other Smrtis which deal with a sentient cause mentioned in the Veda-—such, 1s the meanmg of the text

The commentary entitled ‘ Vedinte-kaustubhs’, composed by the reverend teacher Srinivasa

With a view to induomg one desing salvation to the repeated practice of the hearing, thinking and. the like of the Vedanta, revealing the qualities, nature and so on of Brabman,—which, practice 18 con duave to the meditation on Brahman, the exclusrve cause of a direct vision of Him,—the concordance of the somptural texts with regard to Brahman,—the Highest Person, different and non different from all, free by nature from all faulta, the one abode of a maas of auspicious qualraes and the cause of the world,—has been shown in the previous chapter Now, in this second chapter, contradictions are bemg removed Thus, in the first quarter, the faults found by the opponents with, our own view are refuted In the second quarter, faults are found with the views of the opponents, hased on 9 semblance of reason, (and not on real reason), with a view to ducing people to our own view In the third quarter, it 28 shown 1n details how the scriptural

[80 2 1 1 268 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1 ]

texts, regarding the origm of the great elements hike the ether and the rest, are all free from contradictions, and, further, the order of creation and destruction, and the nature of the individual soul, are determined. In the fourth quarter, again, the contradictions among the texts, demonstrating the organs of the dividual soul, are removed Now, first, 10 18 bemg demonstrated that our view 18 consistent with the Smrtis as well

It has been stated in the section treating of proof + that Brahman, the cause of the world, has the Veda as His sole proof, since He cannot be known through any other source And in the section, treating of concordance 9, 1t has been estabhshed that there 1s concordance of all the Vedas with regard to Brahman alone And, likewise, the meaning of the Veda being very difficult to be grasped without the help of Smrtis, composed by those who are versed in the Veda, there 1s a need for Smrtis as well It has been declared by Smrti iteelf that one, who 18 without the Smrti, to be a one eyed man, thus ‘Serpture and Smt. are celebrated to be the two eyes of the wise Deprived of one, one 18 8910. to be “one eyed’, deprived of both, ^ 0706 ˆ` * Hence, on the doubt, vm whether the Samkhya Smyta and the rest are to ba accepted as true for the sake of making the Veda clear, or the Manu Smyia and the bke,—if 1t be argued The Samkhya Smrti is to be accepted for the sake of makmg the Veda clear, the aim of the Veda bemg to unpart self knowledge to all If unable to give mse to self- knowledge, the collected Vedio texts must all be amply frurtless like ® cow yielding no milk 30 why should a Smrti, which 1s concerned with, teaching self knowledge, be disregarded by amy seeker after knowledge* The Manu Smrta and the rest, on the other hand, aim वणा at demonstrating the works which lead to resulta, here or hereafter The Svetdévataraa record the omniscience of Kapila in the passage “Who, in the begmning, bears m his thoughts the sage Kapila, the born, and sees him while bemg born’ (Svet 52) Hence the Smyta which 1s composed by an omniscient person must be accepted for knowing the prinorple of the soul That part of Veda which teaches the principle of the soul should be understood 1n accordance with the Samkhya Smrti alone Thus, as the Samkhya Smrti teaches a non sentient cause, the doctrine of a sentient cause cannot be accepted. Otherwie, “there will result the fault of leaving no room for the Smrti”’,

i Vide Br 84 113 4 Vide Br Si 114

fat 211 4DB 1} VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA 260

16 there must result the fault of leaving no room for a Smrti which designates & non sentient cause and is composed by an omniscient sage, celebrated in the Veda,—

(We reply } ‘no’, such a prima facie view 18 not reasonable Why? ‘“ Because there will result the fault of not leavmg room for other Smrtis"’, 1e because there will result the fault of leaving no room for the Smrtsa other than it, viz the Manu Smrti and the rest which establish Brahman to be the sole canse and are based on Serrpture The opponent who 18 shouting on the ground of Smri can be silenced by that very Smrti itaelf Thus, the reverend Manu says ‘He appeared as possessing effective powers, lke the great elements and the rest, dispelling darkness’ (Manu 161), ‘He having intended (to be many), and demrous of creating various knnds of beings, created water in the beginning and left his power in it’ (Manu 18%) Apastamba too says ‘Laying bemgs are the abode of him who dwells in all caves (viz hearts), who 18 not killed and who 18 stainless’ (Ap DS 1 2248), ‘From him anise all bodies He alone 18 the source, constant, he 18 eternal’ (Ap DS 12824) It 1s said ए the Bharata (16 Mahé bh&rata) m the Raja dharma ‘You are its ong and the dissolution, O Krena! You alone create this unmverse mn the begmnimng And this universe 18 under your control, 0 Source of the Universe! Obeisance to you, O (Lord) with the bow, disc and sword in hands!”’ (Mah&B 1216145) In the Moksa-dharma 6, 16 18 said ‘Hor he 18 the imner soul of bemgas, and called the knower of the field? He 18 Nar&yana, having the universe as his form, infinite, constant 8 From him arose the un manifest, having three gunas, 0 best among the twice born!”’’ (Mah& 1212680%) In that very section, to the question ‘“‘O reverend Father! O supremely wise one! I wish to hear, m truth,

1P 6 2P & ॐ P 80 lmes 8 4

4P 40, line 2 6 P 419, le 5, vol 3

€ The nama of a section of the 12th book of the Mahé bhdrata, from Chap 174 to the end

7 Le the knower of the body

6 Thi line 18 not found eather in the Amatic Society ed , or in the Vatgivaal ed Both read instead the ime ‘Triguna-vyatwikio vas purugad cet kalpiiah’ Vide Amatic Society ed, p 819, 106 ¢ vol 8 Vatgavésled,p 1800 limes 14-15

9 P 812 lines 6 6, +0] 3, Amatic Soosty ed

fat 211]

VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1]

with eyes ke lotus, unchangeable, the creato: who x ननू न the pe and dissolution of bemgs, about Niiriiyana, Hirukeéa, Govinda, the unoonquered, about Kedava, O host among the Bharates!”’ (Mah& 12 7618 19 1), (the answer g1vol was} ‘The Highest Person, the great-souled one, the soul of bemgs, fualuon ed the great elementa, the air, the hght and hkewise the wilor, and the ether and the sky”’ (Mahi 1278252) In the Dana-dharma, Siva says ‘"‘ Higher than even the reverend Father (10 Brahmi) 1a Han, the eternal Person, Kyens, of a golden appearance and aren like the sun m the cloudless sky, demgnated 88 Srivatsa, Hretkeds worshipped by sll the dertaea Brahmé& bas sprung up from his belly,— hkewise 7 from his forehead, the hghta from the hairs on his head, the gods and the demons from his body hairs, the sages have arisen from his body, likewise, the eternal worlds He 1s the veritable abode of the reverend Father (16 Brahmi), as well as the abode of all the gods Hoe 18 the creator of this entare world, the Lord of all the threo worlds, the destroyer of all bemgs, of the immobile as well ns of the mobile He 1s directly perceived ait all trmes indeed by ono who has conquered his passions He 18 the Lord of the gods and higher than the high, ommuscent, connected with all, moving overywher and, turned towards all He 1s the Supreme Soul, Hrstkeun, all pervading, the Supreme Lord”’ (MahA 18 6507-6512%) In that very section, the omnuaent Devavrata, too, says, bosmning =° "^ For 1 know Kygpa m trath”’ (Mah& 18 71669 +) and continumg ‘Know everything, the movable, as well as the :mmovable, all souls and the universe as Krapa5 Whatever is honoured m the worlds os a

270

the middle, the begmumg and the end of the unrverse Which existed, knowable by all, the omgm as well as the dissolution of beungs”’

631, Imes 18 19 vol ॐ > Op ov, Line 26 287 238, vol 4 Readmg different m some places, viz “Sa hi deva

enam " FP 968, lne 7

[80 211 ADE I] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 271

(Mahé 1317391, 7399-74007) And the statements by Him whose feet are worshipped. by all the composers of Smpiis are as follows ‘“T am the source of all, from me everythmg amses”’ (Git& 10 8), ‘“T am the source, likewise, the dissolution of the entare untverse’”’” (Gita 7 6) Parfdara, too, declares ‘The universe has अतथा from Visnu, and 7) Him alone 17 18 grounded He 1s the cause of the sub- gistence and control of the universe and He 18 the universe”’ (V.P 11352) ‘The sense 18 that if the view of Kapila be accepted as conducive to the Vedanta, then all those above and other texta muat be contradicted But the Manu Smrti and others are acceptable, amoe they establish religious duties, which are meant to the knowledge of Brahman, designated m the Veda, smoce they establish the qualities, nature and the rest of Brabman, and since they are composed by those who know the Veda And m the Veda the cause of the world 1 designated to be ® sentient prmoiple, 17 fact, none but Brahman Because of their opposition to this, the Simkhya अपति and the rest are not acceptable As the reverend Manu says ‘Whatever Smrtas. are outaide the pale of the Veda, whatever heterodox doctrmes there are,—all of tham are fruitless after death, these Smrtas are given to ignorance’ (Manu 12 95%) urther, the composer, too, of the Smrt which 16 opposed to the Veda (viz the Samkhya Smrti) 78 & certam sage, Called Kapila, lke 6811608 and the rest, but 1s not the lord Kapila, called Vasudeva Asis declared by the Padma purina ‘Kanula, called Vasudeva, told the principle of the Simkhya, supported by the meanmg of all the Vedas, to the gods 6 Brahma and the rest, and hkewise to Bhrgu and others, likewise to Asuri Another Kapila told the Simkhysa, opposed to all the Vedas and supported by false arguments, to another Asuri’ ‘Kapila, mentioned in the scriptural text, should be known to be Hiranyagarbha

1P 258 1068 7, 1819 Readmg ‘Widdrdah, Kedavo tad ca bhilyo Ndrd- ण्ड sambabhilsatin १ ‘Vatgavasal ed exactly suniler only ‘dubAdgaiden’ m place of ‘sambabhiigatdm 2 2017

9 2 8

8 ‰ 483

[श 21 2 279 VEDINTA PARIJETA SAURABHA apy 1]

SUTRA 2

८५ ॥ व ON ACCOUNT OF THH NON PERCEPTION ON THE PART OF oTHERS °° Vedinta-parijata-saurabha ‘‘ And on account of the non perception on the part of others”, 16 on the part of Manu and the rest, that the Veda 1s concerned with, pradhins, Smrti which 1s opposed to the Veda 1s unauthentic

Vedainta-kaustubha

‘And on account of the non perception on the part of others’’,— 16 on the part of men like Manu and the rest, other than Kapila and beat among those versed mm the Vedas,1—that the Veda 18 concerned with pradbfna, the SSmkhya Smrti 18 to be disregarded Hence, it 18 established that the rejection of the Smrta which 18 opposed to the Veda 18 not 17 conflict with the stated concordance

Here ends the section entitled ‘Smyta’ (1)

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhaskara

Interpretation different, viz ‘On account of the non-perception {in त्वपर and ordimary experience) of others (viz of the principles of mahat and the rest, other than pradhina), (the S&mihya-Smrti

18 not to be accepted) * 2 Baladeva

His interpretation too 18 very similar to the above one, viz “On account of the non perception (in Sompture) of others (viz of many other doctrnes found m the Samkhya system, such as, the

doctrine that the souls are pure consciousness and all pervasive, and 80 on)* >

* Ie as men hke Mann and others reject pradhina, pradhina cannot be the cause of the world

"SB 212 p 448, Bh B 212 p 88 *G@B 212 p 11 Chap 1

[808 21 8 ADE 2] VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA 278

Adhikarana 2 The section entitled ‘The re futation of the Yoga’ (37०५7८8 8)

SUTRA 3 “Hersey THe YoGA I8 BEFUTED 2

Vedainta-parljita-saurabha

By the refutation of the Samkhya Smyti, the Yoga षु, too 18 refuted. Vedanta-kaustubha

Now, the author pomts out the unauthenticaty of the Yoga- Smt

This aphorism 18 of the form of a formal extension (atadedga) A formal extension means the intimation of similamty when such a smilanty 18 not known Thus, at first, the Yoga Smrt: 18 taken to be concerned with making the Veda clear, acceptang aa 1t docs the word ‘Yoga’, which 18 accepted by Scmpture, too, m the text “This they thmk to be the Yoga, the firm holding back of the senses’ (Katha 611), and hence tte sunilarity to the Samkhya-Smrta 18 not known ‘Therefore, this aphorism intumates the simulamty of the Yoga Smrti to the Simkhya Smyta “Hereby”, 168 by thus very refutation of the Saimkhya Smrti which establishes a non sentient cause, the Yoga-Smrti, too, should bo known to be refuted In the statement “The Yogs 18 refuted”, by the term “ yoga”"’, the Smriz which establishes 10 18 underatood The purpose of the mention of the term “Yoga” m the statement “The Yoga Smrti 1s refuted’ 18 this Although the Lord 1s admitted m the Yoga doctrme, yet He 18 not establshed primarily, as He 18 in the aphorism and texts hke ‘Then, therefore, an enquiry into Brahman’ (Br Si 111), 0, the soul, verily, should be seen”’ (Byh 245, 456) The prmacy of the Yoga alone 18 found in the begmning ‘Now, an instruction with regard to the Yoga’ (Y 8 11), andin the aphorism, laying down 108 definition, viz ‘The Yoga 1s the suppression of the functzons of the mind’ (¥8 121) And, this mere suppression of the functions of the mind, devoid of any connection with the Lord, 1s, mdeed, of no avail in crossing the world, any more than a dog's tal 1s n crossing the ocean

> 2 4 18

[st 214 274. VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 3]

So, 1t 18 to be rejected, opposed. as 1t 18 to Scriptural and Smrta texts like ° “0, the soul, verily, should be seen”’ (Brh 245, 45 6), ‘The knower of Brahman attams the highest’ (Tait 21), ‘“ By knowmg me, one atiams peace”’’ (Gité 529), ‘The bmder with the noose of the world, and the lberator from the noose of the world’, ‘This one thing 18 well established that the object to be worshipped 18 NirSyana, Han’ and so on Salvation bemg impossible through ® mere suppression of the functions of the mind, the Yoga doctrme which, deals with the primacy of that only 18, mdeed, non acceptable Ita view 18 that pradhne, devoid of any connection with Brahman, 18 the material cause of the world, and the Lord 1s merely the efficient cause of the world, and this, too, bemg opposed to the Veda, 18 certamly unreasonable There are many other faults m the Yoga doctrine, but they are not quoted here needlessly And the term ‘Yoga’ found m Seripture and Smrti, refers to the meditation and the reat on the Lord The eulogizmg statement m the Moksa dharma, ९00 , on the contrary, 1s intended only for referring to that portion of Yoga, ete which 1s not opposed to Scripture Hence, it 1s established that the stated concordance, mndicatmg the causality of Brahman, 18 not contradicted, by the Yoga Smrtz

Here ends the section entitled “The refutation of the Yoga’ (2)

Adhikarana’ Thesection entitled ‘Difference’ (80788 4-11) Prima facie view (87५८884 5)

SUTRA 4

“ (THERE 78) NO (HAVING BRAHMAN 4S THE CAUSE) ON ITS PART, ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENOR, (ITS) BEING SO (IS KNOWN) FEOM res Tex +

Vedinta-pirijaita-saurabha

We object! to your view on the ground of reason The world has not Brahman as 108 maternal cause “on account of difference ”

+ Correct readmg ‘pratyavaingjhats which is translated here Vide 08 8 ed p 24 and Brmdabaned p 378

[9 21 4 ap 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA. 6

And the difference 18 to be known also “from the text”, viz ‘He became knowledge and non knowledge’ (Tait 2 61)

Vedanta -kaustubha

Thus, the objection based on Smytis has bean disposed of by the preceding two sections Now, the objection based on reasoning 1s bemg disposed of

It has been stated under the aphorsam ‘From whom (arse) 108 orign and the rest’ (Br Sti 112) that 1b (viz the world) has Brahman for rie material cause The prima facie objector objects to 10 on the ground of reason thus ‘no’ This world has not Brahman for ita matemal cause Why? “On account of difference” That 18, Brahman possesses the attributes of sentience, non grossnens, infimty, purity, and the rest, while the world possesses just the opposite attributes of non sentience, grossness and so on,—on. account of such a dissimilarity between the two Whatever 1s different from something has not that for 108 material cause, just as the pot, which 1s different from the ether, has not the ether as its matenal cause, just as the pot, the dish and the rest, which are different from the potte:, have not the potter as their material cause

If + be objected It 1s found that the attmbutes of a maternal cause recur 100 218 effectsas well Sumularly, im the 0988 under discussion, too, Brahman 28 the matemal onuse, and the universe, His effect, consisting of sentaent bemgs like men, animals and the rest, must bestmilarto Him Hence the reason (viz ‘“ On account of diffarence °} does not hold good,—

(We reply) No, because that there do exist the atimbutes of non sentience, grossness and. the rest 1n the effect, viz 17 stones, wood and the rest, 18 known from the evidence of direct perception

If 1t be objected It 1s possible to umagme that there 1s sentience in them, too, though unmantfest , 06706 there 1s no difference

(We reply ) No, because 1t 18 unreasonable to take what 18 known through direct perception to be otherwise on the ground of mere imagination.

The difference 18 known “from the text” as well,—this 1s stated. by the phrase “‘1ts bemg so”, 1e ‘“‘ita bemg so”, or 108 difference, 18 known “from the text’’ as well, 16 from the following texta ‘He

1 8 R, Bh 8K

fst 2 1 6 2716 VEDANTA PARIJITA SAURABHA ADH 3]

became Knowledge and non knowledge’ (Tait 26), ‘On the same tree, & person, immersed, greves for bis impotence, bewildered’ (Mund 312, Svet 47), ‘And the soul, which 1s without the Lord, 18 bound, because of bemg an enjoyer’ (Svet 1 8) and so on

COMPARISON Baladeva

Interpretation. absolutely different He takes this sutra as forming one adhikarana by itself, concerned with demonstrating the eternity and iunfalhbihty of the Veda He thus does not take this श as representing a prima fane view Thus, this sutra moans,— according to him,—'‘(The Veda 1s) not (unauthomtative like the Samkhya and the rest), on account of (1४8) difference (from them), (18 because 16 18 a non human onmgin unlike the SAmkhysa and the rest), (08) bemg so (1e 108 eternity) (1s known) from the text `

PRIMA FACIE VIEW (concluded) SUTRA $

“Bur (THERE 78) THH DESIGNATION OF THR PRESIDING (DEITIES) ON ACCOUNT OF SPROIALITY AND FOLLOWING -

Vedinta -parijata -saurabha

^" But’ in the texts ‘The earth spoke’ (Tait Sam 6552, 3%), “These sense organs, disputing about self supremacy, went to Brahma’ {Brh 6 1 73) and so on, there 1s ‘the demgnation of their premding’ + deriiea, ‘on account of the specification’, mentioned in the passage ‘Very well, let me enter mto these three divmities”’’ (Chand 63.25), and ‘on account of the following’, or entermg, mentioned in the passage ‘Hire, becommg speech, entered the mouth’ (Ait 246

Vedainta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz From the sonptural texts ‘The earth spoke to him’ (Tait Sam 5652, 3), ‘The earth spoke’ (Sat Br

1 08 214,p 18, ए 2

> 2 76, hne 9 vol, 2 968. 7 B #088 ed reads ia iat’, meanmg ther respective तथा” p 24

५ ए, SK, B 18, B, Bb, 8K

[jst 215 + प्त 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA O77

6 1 3, 41), ‘The waters spoke’ (Sat Br 613, 23), ‘ These sense organs, disputang about self supremacy, went to Brahm&’ (Brh 6177), ‘They said to speech “Do you mng for us”’ (Brh 132) and go on, it 18 known that of the effects too are sentient, and hence they have no difference from the maternal cause—

We reply The word “but” disposes of the stated objection There 1s no demgnation of sentience on the part of the effects, and 80 they cannot have Brahman for their matemal cause, but there 15 the designation of only the premdimg deities of earth and the rest m the passages, ‘The earth spoke to him’ (Tait Sam 55 2, 8) and soon Why* “On account of spemalty and followmg”, 1९ on, account of the specification of the earth and the rest by the word. ‘derty’ in the passage ‘““Very well, let me enter mto these three deiizes”’ (Chind 6 3 2), and on account of the specifications of the sense organs by the word ‘deity’ m the passages ‘These 6111688, verily, disputing about self supremacy’ (Kaug 214), ‘These 06798, verily, having known superiority m the vital breath’ (Kaug 2 14), as well as ‘on account of the followmg’ of fire and the rest aa the presiding deities of speech, and the rest, 1 8 on account of the scrip tural mention of following, or entering, 1n the passage ‘Fire, becommg speech, entered the mouth,—the sun, becoming mght, the eyes (Axt 24) Henoe the world being different from Brahman, Brahman 18 not its material cause

COMPARISON Baladeva

Literal interpretation same, but mmport different, since he takes this Sitra as an adhikarana by itself, not laymg down a prima face view, but the correct conclusion ‘Thus, the Sitra means accordmg to him “(If 1t be objected How to reconale the absurd sayings of the Vedas, such as‘ Wire willed to be many’ and soon?) Wereply (In those passages) there 1s the demgnation of the presiding (derties) (of fire and the rest), on account of speciality and followmg (1e entering into) "° ॐ

[8 2 1 6.7 278 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 3]

CORRECT CONCLUSION (Sutras 6 7)

SUTRA 6 ‘“‘ Bor (rr) 18 SHEN ”

Vedanta-paryata-saurabha

With, regard to 1t, we reply “It 28 seen” that there w the ongin of hairs on the head and so on from a person from whom they are different, nnd of dung beetles from the cow dung from which, they are different Hence it 18 not to be said that the universe, because of beang different from Brahman, has not Him aa 1ts material cause

Vedinta-kaustubha

The author pomta out that such a prima facie view 18 basod on 9 fallacious reason (viz ‘on account of difference’)

The word “but” 18 for disposmg of the prima facie view The statement that this universe has not Brahman as its maton! cause on. account of being different from Him, 18 not tennble, since 1b “ms seen” that there 18 the omgin of nails, body hairs and tho rost from a person from whom they are different, and that of the dung boeotles from the cow dung, from which they are differcnt,—on account ot this,—this 18 the sense

COMPARISON Baladeva Interpretation same, but he takes this श्र as forming an adhikarana by itself CORRECT CONCLUSION (end) SUTRA 7

“Te 17 BH OBJHOTED THAT (IN THAT CASH THE BFFEOT MUST BH)

NON BXISTENT (WE REPLY ) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF THERE BRING A NEGATION MERELY ”

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

If it be objected If the effect be different from its material cause, rt must be “non existent” prior to 1ta origination,—(we reply ) No suoh objection can be raised, “on account of there bemg a negation

fst 2 1 7 apH 31 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 279

merely ”, m the previous aphorism, of the rule that there 1s a similarity between the materia) cause and ite effect m every respect

Vedanta-kaustubha

If 1t be objected Having admitted an absolute mmularity between the material cause and its effect in the aphoriam ‘(There 1s) no (havmg Brahman for 108 cause) on 108 part, on account of difference ’ (Br 87 214), 1t has been objected by the opponent that the world being different from Brahman, He 18 not its maternal cause with ® view to disposing of that objection, it haa been estabhshed in the aphoram ‘But (10) 18 seen’ (Br Si 216) that there can be a cause effect relation even between two different objects With regard to 10, the question 18 whether prior to creation the universe was non different from its cause, or different Whatis your opmon? If you say Non different,—then, just as the origin of a different world 18 admrtted, hike the omgin of haira on the head and body hairs from a person from whom they are different, 80 why there may not be the origin of a sunilar world, like the origin of a gold bracelet and the rest from gold?

If you say Dhfferent,—then, the world must have a material cause different from Brahman, and hence pradhina must be the cause of the world If 1t be said that this cannot be admitted, as pradhina has been already refuted,—{we poimt out) m the texts ‘Brahman! 18 one only, without second’ (Ohind 621), ‘There was, verily, Narfiyana, the one’ (Mab& Up 1 2), “Then there was Vignu, Hari alone, without parta’,—there 1s the mention of a smngle realty, and hence, 1t follows that there was the absence of anythmg else prior to creation Therefore, the world must be non extent prior to creation

(Here ends the onginal prima facie view )

(Author’s conclusion )

(We reply) ‘No’ Why? ‘On account of there bemg a negation merely’ The aphomsm ‘But (st) 18 seen’ (Br Sai 216) negates merely,—by way of mentioning the difference between the material cause and 18 effect,—the rule, admitted. by the opponent, viz that there 1s ammulanity between a material cause and ite effect m every

1 The word ‘Brahman’ w not moladed in the onugma) text

[st 218 280 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 3]

respect, but 10 never establishes any difference between the two in every respect Hence, because of having Brahman as ita soul, the universe 18 existent even during ita causal atate

Or an alternative explanation of the phrase “On account of there beng a negation merely” The atatement, viz “The universe 18 non-existent’ 18 a negation merely, 1e without any meaning, in accordance with the scriptural text ‘“‘ The existent alone, my dear, was this in the beginnmg’”’’ (Chind 62 1)

COMPARISON Samkara

Interpretation different, viz ‘If 1b be said that (the effect) इ non existent (prior to ita actual creation), (we reply) No, since (rt) 18 & mere negation (without an object to be negatived)’ That 1, the negation by the opponent, vz ‘The world 18 non existent’ has no object, for 1t certainly cannot have for 1ta object the exrstence of the effect prior to 108 actual creation, as the effect always oxistes in rts cause, whether before or after ita actual creation 1

PRIMA FAOLE VIEW (Sitra 8)

SUTRA 8

“ON ACOOUNT OF THEBH BEING THE CONSEQUENCE OF (BECOMING) LIKE THAT DUBING DISSOLUTION, (THE DOCTRINE OF THE CAUSALITY OF BRAMAN) IS INCONSISTENT ”’

Vedinta-parijita-saurabha

An, objection 18 raised As at the tame of dissolution, the cause, hike the effect, will become non sentient, the view that Brabman 1s the material cause of the universe 18 ^ nconatstent ”

Vedinta-kaustubha An objection 18 raised 0008 more It 18 objected “Inoonmstent’’, indeed, 18 the view which admuts Brahman to be the materml cause of the world—Brahman who

॥ 217 ‘Pratwedham hidam ndsya praipedhasya pratigedhyam ०, , p

[st 21 9 ADH 3 | VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA 281

possesses the attributes of sentience, infinity, freedom from sins and the rest, and 28 established by the sorptural texts “Brahman 18 प्रप, intelligence, infimte” (Tait 21), “Free from ans, ageless, deathleas”’ (Chand 816, 871, 3, Maztrt 7'7), “ Who 18 ommacent, all knowmg” (Mund 119,227) and soon Why? “On account of there bemg the consequence of (becoming) lke that durmg dissolu- tion” That 18, because “ during dissolution”, or during reabsorption, non sentience, limitedness, impurity and the rest will ocour on the part of the material cause as well, “hke that”’,1e as on the part of the effect The sense 18 that during dissolution, the world, possessing non-sentience and the rest, and merged into its matemal cause m an order reverse to that of creation,1¢ merged mto Brahman, possessing the attribute of sentience and the rest, 1s sure to defile Him with ita own attributes, as does butter milk dropped in milk

CORRECT CONCLUSION (Sitras 9-10) SUTRA 9

“Bor NO, ON ACCOUNT OF THEBH BEING PARALLEL IN- STANCES ”

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

The reply 18 as follows There 18 mdeed no “ consequence of (be- coming) hke that” Just as the evolutes of the earth do not defile tt when dissolved mto 1t, so the universe, the evolute of Brahman, also does not

Vedinta-kaustubha

The author refutes the objection

“But no”, 16 no such consequence follows, and hence our view does not mvolve any moonsmstency Why? An effect does not defile 1s material cause with 1ts own attmbutes when dissolved into 1b, there being parallel instances to this effect Just as the evolutes like bracelets, ear rmgs and. the rest, when dissolved, do not defile the Inmp of gold with ther own attributes, and just as the evolutes of the earth, when dissolved mto the earth, do not defile the earth with ther own attributes, so this universe, consisting of the sentient. and the non sentient, when dissolved mto Brahman, does not, mdeed,

[st 2 1 10 282 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA aDH 3]

defile Brahman, possessing the sentient and the non sentient as His powers

CORRECT CONCLUSION (end) SUTRA 10 “AND ON ACCOUNT OF OBJECTION TO HIS OWN VIEW”

Vedainta-parijita-saurabha

The Saéspkhya, maitamung a doctrme opposed to the Veda, cannot raise any objection, 806 the stated objections apply to his OWN View 88 well

Vedanta-kaustubha

The author pomta out that the Simkhya cannot even object that there 18 any inconsistency 1n our view which 18 based on the Veda

There 18 no moonsistency in our view based aa 10 18 on Scripture 1 has been alleged by the SAmkhya, unacquamted as he 18 with the settled conclusion of the Vedfnta, firstly, that a cause effect relation between Brahman and the world 1s mappropriate, as there 18 & difference between the cause and the effect im this case, secondly, that, n our view, the effect becomes non existent prior to areation, and thirdly, that Brahman becomes like the word during the tame of dissolution All these objections are of equal force agamst the Sémkhya doctrine as well The sense 18 The omgin of the effect,— which possesses colour and the rest and possesses parte,—from pra dbéna, which 18 colourless and devoid of parts, 1s admitted Henoo, a cause effect relation between pradhina and its effects 18 Imappro priate, there bemg here a difference between the cause and the effect There beg nothimg groas pmor to creation, the effect itself becomes non existent, and during dissolution, prakyia, hke the world, becomes gross

COMPARISON

All others, except Baladeva, read “sapakga-dogfic ca”? +

1 828 2110, p 887 &ल B 2110 p 13 29 Bh B 2110, p 91, SK B 2110, p 14 Parta 7and 8

{ऽ 2 1 11 ADE 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 283

SUTRA 11

“Ty It BE SAID THAT ON ACOOUNT ALSO OF BEASONING HAVING NO SOLID GROUND, IT 78 TO BE INPHREED OTHER WISR, (WH RHPLY ) “Tt, THAT WAY, TOO, THERE WILL BE THR CONSEQUENCH OF NON RELHASE ”’

Vedanta -parijata-saurabha

On account also of the stability of reasonmg, there 1s no inconsistency in the stated conclusion, smnoce, if pradhina and the reat be inferred. to be the cause of the world by means of a strong reasoning, then a counter argument is possible by means of another equally strong reasoning As there will be the “consequence of non release thus also”, owing to disagreement among the logicians, 80, that alone which 1s mentioned 10 the Veda 18 acceptable—this 1s established.

Vedanta-kaustubha

The word “api” means ‘and’ There 18 no inconsistency in the stated conalumon, which 18 based on Scripture There 18 mconsstency an the Samkhya conclusion iteelf which 1s based on reasoning, amoe the atated objections apply thereto, ‘on account also of reasonmg having no solid ground”’,1e on account of the instability of reasonmg The sense 18 that the thing inferred by one expert logician 18 seb aside by another, proved to be otherwise by another,—on account of the instability of reasoning 10 this way But the thmg menizoned m the Vedinta m the begimnmg and the end cannot be refuted even by hundreds of reasonings

If 1t be objected Even though reasonings like ‘on account of difference’ 1 be refutable, having no sold ground, yet m order that there may not be any infinite regress, 10 18 perfectly proper to infer, m that way, a non sentient matemal cause of the non sentient effecta, hke the ether and the rest—

(We reply ) “in that way too”, the primacy of reasoning 18 upheld, and hence the conclusion atated in the Veda 1s regarded as bat of a secondary importance As & consequence, non release will result owing to the mutual opposition among Kapila, Kandda and the rest It cannot be said that if victory be won by one of them at some time or other, there will be no non release 88 @ consequence,—

1 Vide Br Su 214

[st 2 1 12 284 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 4]

1t bemg mmpossible for one among many persons to be ever victorious If 1t be said. that the Supreme Soul 1s such, you fall m with our view, so be happy by giving up reasoning which 1s opposed to the Veda

Thus the Lord Vésudeva, the sole topic of all the Vedas, bemg established to be the material cause of the world, no opposition, based. on reasoning which 1s opposed to the Veda 18 of any avail—this 18 established.

Here ends the section entitled “Difference” (3)

COMPARISON Samkara He reads “Vimoksa prasanga” mstead of “Anirmokga pra- 8979 ' * Ramnuja and Srikantha They break 16 into two different sitras—viz ‘“Tark&pratasthinad ap.” and “Anyathaé prasangah ` ` +

Adhikarana 4 The 8680४100 entitled “The Non- acceptance oftherest” (Sittra 12)

SUTRA 12

“HaRESY THH REMAINING (PHESONS) TOO WHO DO NOT ACOEFT (man VEDA) ARE EXPLAINED (IE BHEUTED) ”

Vedanta-padrijata-aaurabha

“Hereby”, 1e by the refutaizon of the S&mkhya view, the remaining ones, 1 6 others who maintam 6 cause which 1s opposed to the Veda, “too’’, are refuted.

Vedinta-kaustubha

Now, the author 1s extending the above refutation to the remaming views

“Hereby”, 1e by the above refutation of the doctrme of pra- dhins aa the cause of the world, “the remamimg (persons) who do not

1 88 9111, 458 9 उलि 2, 18 Part? SK B p 1४ Parts 7and 8

[0 2 1 13 aDH 5} VEDANTA PARLIATA SAURABHA 285

accept (the Veda)”, too, should be known to be refuted The word “Mstih” means “the remaining ones’,1e persons other than Kapila 1 and Patafijali? The word “pamgrab&h” means all who do not accept the Veda ®

It 18 thus established that the doctrine of the causality of Brahman १8 not contradicted by their views as well

Here ends the section entitled “The Non acceptance of the rest ” (4)

OOMPARISON Samkara, Bhaskare and Srikantha

According to them the word “st&pargrahBh” means (the doc trines hike Atomism and the rest) which are not accepted by the wise ५

Adhikarana 5 The 8690100 entitled “Becoming theenjoyer’ (8०८०9 18)

SUTRA 13

“It 17 BE OBJEOTED THAT ON ACCOUNT OF (BRAHMAN) BECOMING 4N ENJOYER, (THERE WILL BE) NON DISTINCTION, (BRETWHEN BRAHMAN AND THH INDIVIDUAL SOUL), WH BEPLY IT MAY BH 48 IN ORDINABY LIFE ”’

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

If 1t be objected that uf Brahman be the material cause, then Himself will become an enjoyer of pleasures and pais in the form of the mdividual soul, so that there will be no distinction

1 The founder of the Sémsbhya doctrme

9 The founder of the Yoga doctrme

‡ Thus explams the compound “#égfdparigrahdh’

“ Hence they explain the compound as “Stamh aporwrahah” and nob as digihdd ea apangrahdé ca" as done by Nenbdrha Svinwisa, Rdmdmya and Baladwo Vide SB 2111, p 461 Bh B 3112, 2 93, 87 23 9118,p 18 Parts 7 and 8

[so 2 1 19 286 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADE 5]

between the enjoyer (viz the individual soul) and the controller (vz Brahman) es well known from the Veda,—

(We reply ) In spite of there being « non distinction, there 18 a distanction as well between the two, as between the soa and the wave, and between the sun and 108 ray

Vedanta-kaustubha

Now, havmg apprehended an objection once more, the author 18 disposing of that here

If it be objected If Brahman who 14 without an equal or a superior be the material cause of the world, thon there must be no distinction between the enjoyer and the object enjoyed Why? “On account of becoming the enjoyer * That 1, all effects whatsoever bemg non different from their causes, the enjoyer, 16 the individual soul, will become the object enjoyed, and the object enjoyed, 1e the body, the sense organs and the 80780 objects, will become the enjoyer, and 6008, the distinction between tho enjoyo: and the object enjoyed, well known 1n ordinary life and in the Voda, will not be posuble on this doctmne of the causahty of Brahman Morcovor, there will not be any distaunction between tho enjoyer and the controller, because the group of enjoyers bemg non differont from the controller, the enjoyer will become the controller, and the controller, the Supreme Soul, will become the enjoye: In ordimary life, to begin with, the distanction between the enjoyer and, the objcot enjoyed 28 well known, thus “The mndividual soul 1s the enjoyer, the body and the rost are the objects enjoyed’, and in the Veda too, thus ‘Hats the sweet berry” (Mund 311, Svet 46) Similarly, the distmction between the enjoyer and the controller, too, 1s well known im ordinary hfe, as 18 evident from, the conduct of the good who always regard thour pleasures and pains as dependent on the Lord, and im the Veda too, thus “He alone makes one do good deeds” (Kaus 38), “The soul which ४ without the Lord 1s bound, because of being an enjoyer” (Svet 1 8) and soon ‘Thus, “on account of becoming an enjoyer, there 15 non distinction”, and hence the doctrine of the causality of Brahman cannot be accepted,—

The author states the correct conclusion mn the words ‘‘It may be, as in ordimary hfe* That is, on our view, too, there may, indeed, be a distinction between the enjoyer and the object enjoyed, as well as between the enjoyer and the controller, “as m ordmary hfe” In

[st 2 1 13 aDH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 287

ordmary hfe, although pots, dishes and the rest, having the lump of olay as ther material cause, bracelets, ear rings and. the rest, having gold aa ther material cause, foams, waves and the rest, havmg the sea as their material cause, and leaves, fruits and the rest, having the tree as their material cause, are all non different from their respective causes, there 28 stall a mutual distinction amongst the particular effects themselves In exactly the same manner, there may be a mutual distanctton between the enjoyer and the object enjoyed, although they are non different from Brahman, havmg Brahman ४8 their material cause Similarly, m spite of ther non distmetion, there may still be a distinction between the enjoyer and the controller , just as pots, dishes and the reat, though by nature non different from the clay, as having no existence and actavity apart from the clay, are yet by nature different, too, from the clay possessing as they do their own peculiar attributes which the olay lacks The same should be known. to be the case with, the gold and bracelets and the rest too Likewise, there 18 a natural relation of difference—non difference between Brahman and the individual soul There 18, indeed, no moonsistency here Hence 1 28 established that the doctmne of the causality of Brahman 18 not open to the above objections 1

Here ends the section entitled “Becoming the enjoyer”’ (5)

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhaskara

Interpretation different, viz they interpret the siltra like Srini- visa, although while Srinivasa understands the word “ bhoktri- patteh”’ to mean ‘because the enjoyer will become the object enjoyed. and ₹106 versa, as well because the enjoyer will become the controller and vice versa’, they understand 1t to mean only “because the enjoyer will become the object enjoyed and vice versa” Hach develops his own pecuhar theory in connection $

1 Note the different mterpretations given by Nembdrka and Srimvdsa 9 828 2118, pp 4619० , 5 B 2113 p 92

80 2 1 14 288 VEDANTA PARLJATA SAURABHA ADE 6]

Adhikarana 6 The sectioneantitied “The begin ang” (Stitras 14-19)

SUTRA 14

“(Taaen 18) NON DIFFERENCE (OF THH EFYEOT) FROM THar (viz, THE CAUSA), ON ACCOUNT OF (THH TEXTS) BKGINNING WItH THH WORD ‘BEGINNING’ AND THE REST”

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

There 18 “non difference” between the effect and the caune, and not absolute difference Why? On account of the toxta ‘“*The effect having 108 beginning in speech, 1s a name, the reality 18 just the clay”?’ (Chand 6141), ‘“‘All this bas that for its soul That m +ना Thou art 00 (हतत 687, 694, 9109 6 16 8 9), “ All this, verily, 18 Brahman” (Chind 314 1 3)

Vedainta-kaustubha

In the first chapter, Brahman has been decribed many times as different from the sentient and the non sentient, 70 orde. that there toay be & proper discrimmation between the peculiar: natures of these three realities respectively* Here, on the other hand, the non difference of the world, the effect, from Brahman, tho cause, resulting from the absence of separate existence, actuavity and the rest (on the part of the former), has been established under the aphorum “If it be objected that (in that case the effect must be) non existent, (we reply ) no, on account of there being 0 negation merely” (Br आ 217) and &0 on § Now, with a view to confirming the stated conclusion, the author 18 refuting the view of the Vaiféerukax who hold that the effect 1s not non different from the cause, but 1s something which originates (16 1s an absolutely new creation) 5

The compound (“tad ananyatvam’”’) 18 to be explamed as follows ‘There 18 non difference between the two, viz the cause and, the effect, or, there 1s non difference of that, viz the world, the effect, from

1 8, R, Bh SK, B 286 R Bh SK,B 2 4 Videeg VE 111, ४ 11 1118, p 32,1123 p 36,123 &0, ste क 8 8

® This 18 the doctrme of Asat-kéryya vada

fat 2 1 14 ApH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 239

Brahman, the cause, or, there 1s non difference of the effect from that, viz thecause That 18, the effect, which 1s of the form of the sentient and the non sentient, which 18 limited, has many names and. forms, and 18 dependent, 1s non different from Brahman, the Supreme Cause, possessing the sentient and the non sentient as His powers, unhmited, denoted by words like ‘one’, ‘withont a second’ and so on, capable of abiding voluntarily in the causal state and in the effected state, and prior to the entire universe The author states the proof with regard to 16 m the words “on account of (the texts) begmnumg with the word ‘beginning’ and the rest” (The compound “dram bhana dabdBdibhyah” 18 to be explamed thus ) The texta of which the begmning 1s the word “beginning’, on account of them That 28, on account of the texts ‘““The effect, having its beginning in speech, 18 © name, the reality 18 just the clay”’’ (Chind 61 4), ‘“ The ems tent alone, my dear, was this in the begmning, one, without a second.”’ {Chand 621), ““He thought, ‘May I be many’, may I procreate”’ He created the hght’ (Ohind 6 2 3), ° "411 that has this for rts soul That true That 18 the soul Thou art that”’ (Chind 687, eto ), “All this, verily, 13 Brahman, emanating from Him, disappearmng into Him and breathmg m Him” (OhSnd 3141), “That was unmanifest then It becams manifest by name and form” (Brh 147) andsoon ‘There are many texta of such kinds which establish the non difference of the world, the effect, from Brahman, the cause, buat which are not quoted here for avoidmg prolixity

Among these, the meaning of the text beginnmg with the word ‘beginning’ (frambhana) 18 as follows

The Chandogaa, having made an initial statement to the effect thet through the knowledge of the material cause there arises the Enowledge of all the effecta, m the passage ‘“Whereby the unheard becomes heard, the unthought thought, the mnknown known”’ (Chind 6 1 3), state a parallel instance to establish 1t, m the passage ““Just as, my dear, through one lump of clay, everythmg made of alay may be known,—the effect, having 18 begmnmg 17. speech 18 8 name, the realty 18 just the olay”’ (Chind 6141) That 18, jusb as ‘through one lump of clay’ bemg known as clay, ‘everything made of clay’,1e the group of the evolutes of clay, may be known, since

1 The pamage 18 ` Yathd saumya/ ekena mri-puidena sarvam vightiam sydi, vdodrambhanam wibdro nimadheyam mrlivkity eva satyam" 19

[fst 2 1 14 290 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]

they are all made of clay,—for such a group of evolutern ‘has its beginning m speech’, 16 18 designated by 810906४ Speech 1s of two Innds ‘effect’, 18 meaning, and (19708 ', 16 word The functon of speech, rests on these two, viz Meaning antl word, eg we say ‘Fetch water by the pot’ Hence, ‘the tiuth’ 1s that the evolute, characterized. by having a broad bottom and resembling the shape of a belly, having the name ‘pot’, and conducive to the function of fetching water and so on, 1s ‘just clay’ Thut 1s, the view that the effect 1s different from the cause, on account of the difference of individuality and conception, 1s incorrect, for 1t 2 not posusble to attribute the individuality or the conception of a pot to the wind and the rest which are difforent from clay 1 If the offect 38 to originate from the non existent simply, then that would lead to the गाद्वा. of everything everywhere, as well as to the futility of the activity of the agent So demat from further arguments

COMPARISON Samkara

Each commentator develops his peculiar thoory 1m this connection Samkara understands the word “Ananyatva” aa obsolute identity, interpreta the word ‘viciirambhana’ to mean ‘that whuch begins from speech only, but does not exist in reality’, and thereby develops his theory of Vivarta at great length >

Ramanuja

He understands the word “ananyutva” as non diffcrence, like Nimbfarka, but connects 1t with his peculiar doctrine of the soul-body relaizson between Brahman and the universe? He mtoerprets the phrase “vioSrambbansa” as follows ‘vic’ means on account of speech, 1e on account of activity preceded by speech , ‘rambhana’ means what 18 touched Hence the text means On account of speech, (© for the sake of certain activities, like the tetching of

1 If the effect were abeolutely different from its causc then any and every thing, © g wimd, might very well have bean conceived to bea pot But thu yw never the case, since clay alone and nothme alge 18 conceived to be £0

2 “ Vioatea khevalam ast natu vastu-vriiena mkdrah Laserd asit ec SB 2114,p 404

3 St B 8116, pp 39, 42 Part 3

[80 2 1 16 ADE 61 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 291

water and the rest,) there 18 touched (by the olay) an effect and 8

name,1¢ clay 1s transformed into @ particular effect having 8 special name, 7). order that a certain activity may be acoomplhshed 1

Bhaskara He, too, understands the word “ananyatva’”’ as non difference He criticizes the Samkarite view at length and masts on the reahty of difference,? and interprets the phrase “vicSirambhana’ ike

Srinrviise Srikantha

He, too, understands the word “ananyatva” as non difference 8 He explains the phrase “vacirambhans” m the next sitra, and gives two alternative explanations, viz “That which 18 the beginning, 1 6 the cause, of speech, 16 of speech and practical activity” “ Hence, the text means that an effect (vikira) 1s © name (nima dheya) which 18 the cause of speech and practical activity, 1e of such expressions ‘Fetch water in a pot’ andsoon ‘The second explanationis “That which, has speech, for 1ts begining’ 5 Hence the text means that an effect (vik4ra) 18 simply the object of such expressions ‘This 18 a pot’, 16 & special condition the alay has assumed for practical purposes, but 18 not a separate substance from the clay

SOTRA 15

“AND BECAUSE OF THH PHROEPTION (OF THH HFFROT) ON THE HXISTHNGH (OF THE OAUSH) ` `

Vedinta-parijaita-saurabha

There 18 non difference between. the cause and the effect, because the effeot 18 percerved, only when the cause 1s existent

1 * Trabhyate Mlabhyaie epréaie,” obo अल B 2115,p 40, Part 3

2 Bh B 2114 pp 93 & seg

४ 4K B 2115,p 22, Parts 7 and 8

4 ' एन्व्‌ ablildpirtha-knyd-ripa-vyavahdrsya wppddakam bhavah 0 of 3 1 16, क 28 Parts 7 and 8

5 Vdgdrambha-tgaya-mdiram @ od

[st 2 1 16 292 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]

Vedainta-kaustubha

For this reason also, says tho anthor, there ॥ non difference between the effect and the cause

Whence 18 1t known that there 18 non difference between the effect and the cause? Becauso the offect 1s perce:ved, only when the cause 18 existent, m accordance with the scmpturv text ˆ “These beimgs, my dear, have the existent as their root’ (Chiind 6 8 4)

COMPARISON Ramanuja, Srikantha and Baladeva

They interpret the इत्र in just the opposito way, viz ‘And because of the perception (of the cause) on the cawtenes (of the effect)” That 18, the gold, which 18 the cause, 18 percerverl when the ear mng

is present That 18, the gold alono 1s perceived 11 the car mng, and not the clay 4

SOTRA 16 “AND ON ACOOUNT OF THH BXISTDONON OF THE POSTERIOR `

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

“On account of the exstence ” of the effect,—belonging to a pos- terior tame,—an the cause, owing to the demgnatiion of their co mherence in the text “Brahman, verily, was this in the beginning” (Brh 1 4 10 >), there 1s non difference between the 60006 and. the cause

Vedanta-kaustubha For this reason too, there 1s non difference between the effect and the cause “On account of the existence” of the effect,—whuich 1s “postenor” and denoted by the term ‘this’,—im the cause, owing to the designation of their co mherense, in the texts ‘The existent alone, my dear, was this in the begmning”’ (Chand 621), “Brahman, verily, was ths

18 B2116,p 46, Part 9, 8६ B 2116 p 22, Parte 7 and 8, GB 2115, p 45, Chap 2

9 Not quoted by others

[80 2 1 17 ADH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 293

in the beginning” (Brh 1410), the non difference between the ररि and the cause 18 definitely ascertamed.

COMPARISON Raimanuja and Srikantha

This 18 हतप 17 m both They read “aparasya”’ in place of “avarasya”” and take 1b to mean ‘an effect’ 1

SUTRA 17

“Iv It BH OBJECTED THAT ON ACOOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION OF

WHAT 18 NON HXISTENT, (THE BFFEOT 18) NOT (EXISTHNT PRIOR

TO ORHATION) (WH REPLY ) NO, (SUCH 4 DESIGNATION 18) ON

AOOOUNT OF A DIFFERENT ATTRIBUTH, THIS 78 KNOWN FROM THE

COMPLEMENTARY THXT, FROM BHASOMING AND FROM ANOTHER

THXT *’

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

“If 1t be objected that on account of the demgnation of what 1s non, existent’’ m the passage “The non existent, venly, was this in the begmnmng” (Chind $ 19 1 9), the effect does not exist pmor to crea 111८911

(We reply ) “no” There 18 such a demgnation because of the subtieneas (of the world prior to creation) Whence 1s this known? “From the complementary passage,” viz “That was existent’ (Chind $1915), “from the reasoning”, viz if 9 previously non existent effect does indeed arise, why 18 there no origin of a barley sprout from fire? “and from another text”, viz “The existent alone, my dear, was this in the begining’ (0500. 6 2 1 4)

Vedinta-kaustubha

If 1t be objected The doctrme of pre existent effect 1s not 9 more reasonable one Why! On account of the demgnation of its

=

2 &t B 2117, p47, Parts 2,8K B 81117, p 28, Parta 7 and 8

28, R, Bh Correct quotahon “Asad eva" Vide Chind 3191,p 175 9 68, Bh a

8, R, Bh, B

[87 21 17 204. VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA apn 6 1

non existence prior to creation, in the text “The non existent, verily, was 11118 in the begmning”’ (Chand 319 1),—

(We reply ) “no”, why? Because there 18 “such a designation” * on account of a different attmbute” Thats, the attribute of having name and form unmanifest 1s different from the atimbute of having name and form manrfest, and 1t 18 because of this different attmbute that the world 1: demgnated thus in the text “The non existent, verily, was this in the begmning” (Chand 3191), but 18 neve denoted to be non existent by nature

If 1t be asked Whence 18 this known? We reply ‘From the complementary passage’ For the complementary passage “That was existent’’ (Chand 3191), refers to the topic of our discussion, viz the world, by the term ‘that’ and from this 1t 1s known that the term ‘non existent’ m the beginnmg denotes the subile reality with name and form unmanrfest

The author states another reason for the pre existence of the effect, viz “From reasonmg” ‘That 18, the existence of the effect 18 ascertained from reason as well ‘To the question Whait 18 that reason whereby the existence of the effect 18 ascertained? We reply On our view, names and forms, knowable by means of the evidence of direct perception and the rest, are all real, on account of bemg perceived An agent, viz a potter, makes a pot out of a lump of clay that 18 existent Here, like the lump of alay, the existence of the pot, too, 18 kmown from direct perception Hence, the activity of the agent, too, 1s not useless If1t be objected that as the pot already exigta, like the lump of clay, the activity of the agent has no meaning,— (we reply ) not so, since 108 purpose 1s amply manifestation The pot which was unmanifest before 1s made manifest, hence the activity of the agent 18 not useless The names and forms, mentioned 17 the Veda, are used just as they were before! Jt should be known thai, on our view, the conventional usage of names and forms 18 not on precedented ‘The origin of a non extent effect, on the other hand, does not fit in, smoe the origi of a barley sprout from fire 18 never seen It cannot be said that although fire has no power of producng such. an effect, 1t has, nonetheless, the power of produang sparks,— for, 1n an effect, produced from gold and the rest of a known weight,

1 Vide V E 18 2880

[et 21 17 ADH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 295

e different weight 18 never found: Likewise, the sparks of fire, which are 108 evolutes and known through the evidence of direct perception, are perceived by all,—there bemg no evidence for the mnaginary doctrme of a power producing unprecedented 07016608 Hence the doctrme of a non existent effect 2 18 unreasonable The activity of the agent, too, 18 meaningless on this view, amoe the activities of an agent mn connection with the making of a pot,—viz digging earth, pounding it, placing 16 and so on,—all relate to the matenal cause In the absence of the matenmal cause, with regard. to what should the agent act, seeing that the effect, viz the pot and the rest, are not produced then, and that, 10 that case, the conse quence will be the origin of the pot through more activity, even in the absence of the lump of clay? All this should be considered by tho Wise

The manifold controversies with regard to this pomt are not mentioned, here fo. fear of unduly tirmg those who deaire for release In the case under discussion, on the other hand, amce Brahman

89०8868 infinite powers, everything 18 unobjectionable

The author states once moro another reason for the exstence of the effect, thus “And from another text” The other text 1s the text aptly teaching the pro existenco of the effect, wz ‘ “The existent alone, my dear, was this in the beginning”’’ (Chind 621), which 1s other than the above quoted text, vz “The non existent, very, was the beginning” (Chind 3191) Because of thw too, it is the (pre ) existent effect alone that omginates,—thus 18 the sense

COMPARISON

Samkara, Bhaskara and Baladeva

They break this stitra into two different sitras, viz “Asad- vyapadedsat पए, 86680 °" and “Yukteh dabdantar&c ca’’ > Interpretation same

1 Ie the weght of the gold ear ring us the name as thad of the gold from wich 1s made ‘This shows that the cause and the effect are non different

2 Asai kirya-vdda

36828 3117 end 18, p 475, Bh B 2117 and 18 100, 101,G@B 2117 and 18

[80 2 1 1819 206 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 6 |

SUTRA 18 “AND LIK a रात OF OLOTH”

Vedanta -parijata -saurabha

Just as 9 piece of cloth 18 at first rolled up, and afterwards spread. out, 80 18 the universe

Vedanta -kaustubha

The sense 18 Just as a piece of rolled up cloth, although not known to be a piece of cloth, does not, for that reason, become non existent, but 18 indeed existent, existing m a different form, and when spread out once more, 18 known to be a piece of cloth,—so, mdeed, prior to creation, the universe remains existent 1705896, though not known to be a universe, having its name and form unmeantfeat, and 18 clearly known as the universe at the tame of creation, having its name and form manifest Just as the drawn forth lmbs of a tortoise are not percerved, even. though extent, but do not become non exustent thereby and are known when atretobed out again, and just as the banyan. tree, existent in the seed. at all trmes indeed in 8 subtle form, 18 Mantfegted mm, a gross form, 80 1t 1s the pre existent universe alone which originates, m accordance with the Mah& bh&rata passage “Just as a tortowe, havmg stretabed out 108 lambs, draws them m again, 80 the soul of bemgs, having created bemgs, destroys them भक्त (Mah& 12 70728 707821) and the Visnu-purina passage “Just as & gigantio banyan tree 1s contamed in a small seed, so 18 the entire universe in you, the seed, during (the state of) contraction (viz dissolution)” (VP 1 12 666-67c2 )

SUTRA 19 “‘AND JUST LIKE THR VITAL-BEEATH AND THE BRST”

Vedanta -parijata-saurabha

Just as the vital breath, having the prina, apGna and the rest, controlled by breath exercises, eto remains im its real form, and

1 P 615 Imes 24-25 vol ॐ Reading ‘ ereiim harate” Vavgaviasl ed also p 1571

2 P 108

[0 2 1 20 ADE 7 | VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 297

when the control removed, 1s instantly known im those respective forms,—so here too Vedanta -kaustubha

The sense 18 Just as the vital breath, havmg modes hke the praéna, apna and the rest, controlled by breath exercises, 28 existent mdeed, though not known in the special forms of the prana, ap&na and the rest, and when freed from the control 1s known clearly m those respective forms,—so the effect, with 118 name and form un manifest prior to creation, 1s not known through those respective names and. forma Hence 1t 18 established that the world 1s true hke Brahman, having Him for 1ts matemal cause, and 18 non different from Brahman, though different from Hm

Here ends the section entitled “‘ The beginning” (6)

Adhikarana7 The section entitled “The desig netzon of another” (87०८०४8 20-22)

PRIMA FACIE VIEW (Siitra 20) SUTRA 20

“ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION OF ANOTHER, THERE IS THE OONSEQUBNOE OF FAULTS LIKE NOT DOING WHAT IS BENEFICIAL AND THE EEST ”’

Vedanta-parijata -saurabha

An objection 1s raised Since on the doctrme of the causality of Brahman the individual soul 1s established to be Brahman m the pass age “This soul 1s Brahman” (Brh 2691), there result “faulta hke not doing what 18 beneficial and the rest” by reason of Brahman’s creating the world, which, 1s an abode of all miseries

Vedanta-kaustubha

The view that there 1s an absolute difference between the cause and the effect has been disposed of above Now, smoe there oan be no

1R SK

[st 2 1 % 298 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7]

suspicion of an absolute non-differance between the Sontiont Bemg and the non sentient, the autho: is here refuting only the view of those who suppose that there 18 an absolute identity botween Brahman and the mdividual soul 7

It may be objected If Brahman be the cteator ot the world which 18 the aite of the three kinds of miserics, thor. must be the “consequence of the fault of not domg what 1s beneheml" By the term “and the rest”’ (in the siitra) tho fault of domg what 1 not bene- 968 18 understood Why! “On account of the designation of another,” 1e on account of the demgnation of the individual soul as Brahman m the passage ‘“Thou art that”’ (Chind 687, 094 ete ), “ This soul 1s Brahman” (Brh 259) and so on The senses that the transmigratory soul, performimg good and bad deeds ond undergoing threefold pais, 28 not other than Biahmin Henos the stated faults must result on the part of Brahman, not subject to tranamigratory existence

COMPARISON Baladeva

This 18 siitia 21 in bis commentary Like Nimbirka, Baladeva too bemns a new adhikarana here, but unlike Nimbfirkn ¢ontinnes 1४ up to siitra 33 (82 1 Nimbiirka) He takes thin adhikarana as concerned with showing that the Brahman, and not the mdtividual soul, 1s the cause of the world Thus, firat, ho takes thw afitra as settang forth the correct conclnaion and not + prima facse view (98 according to Nimbarka), thus “There will be the consequences of faults like not domg what 18 beneficial and tho rest from the denignation of another (1e if the mdividnal soul be demgnated as the creator of the world)” 2 That 3a, 1f the mdividual soul were the creator of the world, 16 would not have created a world so full of misorica = Hence, Brahman, not the individual soul, must be the creator

‡ Ie the author 18 not trying to remove tho suspicion of an absolute non driference between Brahman and the material world,—amco none w so foolish a8 to suppose thad s Sentient Bemg and non-sentaent object may be absolutely identical—but he 18 dispomng only of the not unnatural bolief of an absolute adentity between Brahman and the ind:vidual soul

2 GB 2121, pp 652 58, Ghap 2

{sé 2 1 2] ADE 7 ] VEDANTA EAUSTUBHA 299

CORRECT CONCLUSION (8४७ 21 22) SUTRA 21

“Bor (BRAHMAN 78) SOMETHING MORE, ON ACOOUNT OF THR INDIOATION OF DIFFERENOH ”

Vedanta -parijaita-saurabha

The refutation of this 18 as follows

We hold that the creator of the world 1s Brabman, who 1s “some thing more” than, 16 superior to, the embodied soul, the enjoyer of pleasure and pam कलम faon of difference ” mn the passage “Who rules the soul within” (Sat Br 1467, 30 +), there 18 no absolute non-difference between the two 86008 there cannot resulé the fault of not domg what 18 benefiaal

Vedanta-kaustubha

With regard to this prima face view, the author states the correct oonalusion

The word “but” disposes of the prima facie view Since we hold that Brahman,—omniscent, omnipotent, the Lord of all, without an equal or © superior, and the one identical matemal and efficent cause of the worlds “something more”, 1e superior to the embodied soul, the question of not domg what 18 beneficial does not arise The reason of His bemg something more 1s stated in the phrase “On account of the mdication of difference”,1e on account of the indication of a difference between Brahman and the imdrvidual soul in the passages ˆ ^“ 0, the self, verily, ahould be seen” * (Byh 245, 456), “The knower of Brahman attains the bighest” (Tart 21), ‘Who rules the soul withm’ (Sat Br 1467, 30) ‘The sense 18 this Just as im the passage ‘All this, verily 1s Brahman’ (Chand 3141), 1b bemg impossible for the group of the non sentient to be non different from Brahman, ita difference from Brahman 1s admitted by the phrase ‘emanating from Him’? so 7 bemg impossible for the

1 FP 1074, 158 18 छ ४ The passage 15 ‘ All this verily 1s Brahman, emansimg from Him, disappearing into Him and breathmg m Him ' (Chand 3 14 1)

[st 2 1 22 300 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 7 ]

individual soul, too, to be by nature non different from Brahman on the authority of the stated sorptural text demgnating difference, 1४ 18 declared to be non different from Brahman, by such texta like ‘“Thou art that’’’ (Chind 687, etc), only as having no existence and activity mdependently of Brahman, but not by nature Thus, on, account of the designation of difference, m spite of there bemg & non difference between the two, faults hke domg what 1s not bene-

ficial do not ame COMPARISON

Samkara Interpretation same, but in conclusion he adds, as usual, the explanation that 16 78 only from the empirical point of view that we can speak of crealion of a difference between the individual soul and Brahman, but from the transcendental pomt of view no question of creation arises at ali 1

CORRECT CONOLUSION (end) SUTRA 22

“AND (THE INDIVIDUAL SOULS ARH) LIKE STONES AND THE BEAT, THERE IS IMPOSSIBILITY OF THAT”

Vedanta -parijate-saurabha

Like the diamond, the lapis Jazuh, the ruby and the rest which are the modifications of the earth, the mndrvidual soul, though non different from Brahman, 18 also different from Him, possesang, as it does, some peculiar qualities of 1४8 own Henoe, the allegation by the opponent 1s an “impossible” one

Vedénta-kaustubha

Moreover, just as in ordimary 1188, the stones like the diamond, the lapis laguh, the ruby and the rest which are modifications of the earth, though non different from the earth as consstang m earth, are yet different from the earth, possessing, as they do, their pecuhar natures,—so 18 the 0988 [1678 By the term “and the rest’ the

deg nt m0 TaN, Ieuto! wt heta karanddayo dopth?’ 88 21 22, p

[so 2 1 22 ADH 7} VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA S01

modifications of the tree, such as the leaf and so on, are to be understood That 1s, Just as the leaf, though non different from the tree, 18 yet not the tree, 80 18 the case here Or else, by the term “and the rest’, the ray of the diamond and the rest 1s understood, for the ray, though non different from the diamond, etc, 28 yet found to be different Hence, just as the ray, though non different from tis substratum, 1s yet different from 10, so 10 18 appropriate to hold that the embodied soul 18 by nature different from Brahman, though rt 1s at the game time non different from Him as having Him 07 118 soul Hence, the respective difference between what 1s subject to transmigratory existence (viz the individual soul) and what 18 not, (viz Brahman) bemg thus established, there 1s no inconmstency here Hence “there 78 imposaibilty of that”, 16 there 18 no possibilty of faults like not domg what 1s beneficial and the rest, as alleged by the opponent Thus, 1t 18 established that there no contradiction 18 involved mm our view

Hence ends the section entitled “The deagnation of another ” (7)

COMPARISON RamaAnuja

This 1s sutra 28 in Ram&nuja’s commentary fom. different, viz “Just (as 16 18 umpossible for non sentient objecta) hke stones and the rest (to be identical with Brahman, so) there 18 the mmpossibility of that (viz of an identity between the indrvidual soul end Brahman)” 1

Srikantha

This 18 80078 23 m Srikantha’s commentary too ‘(Since the individual soul, possessed of httle knowledge, 1s declared to be belonging to an absolutely different category from Brahman, the omnuscient), just as (non-sentient 0016608) 1118 stones and the rest, there 18 the mmposslbilrty of that (viz of an absolute identity between the mdividual soul and Brahman) ” >

1 St B 2128, p 68, Part 2 "SK B 2123, p 32 Parts 7 and 8

[87 2 1 28 302 VEDAINTA-PARITATA SAUBABHA ADH 8]

Baladeva

This 18 sittra 23m his commentary ‘(Since the individual soul, though sentient, 18 dependent) lke (non sentient objects like) stones and. the rest, there 18 the impossibility of that (viz of the mdividual souls being the creator of the world) "1

Adhikarana8 The sectionentitled “The Obser vationof Qollection” (80४८०98 28-24)

SUTRA 23

“Tr IT BH OBJHOTSD THAT ON ACOOUNT OF THE OBSERVATION OF COLLECTION, (BRAHMAN IS) NOT (THE OBBATOR OF प्प WORLD), (WH REPLY ) NO, FOR (HE TRANSFORMS HiwsHLr) LIKE MILK”

Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

If it be objected that “on account of the observation of the col lection” of many implementa by potters and others, Brahman, who 18 without any external implement, 18 not the cause of the world— (we reply ) “no”, smce Brahman transforms Himeelf “like milk”, possessing, a8 He dues, powers peculiar to Him alone

Vedanta -kaustubha

The objection, viz if the universal Lord, possessing the sentient and the non sentient as His powers, the soul of all, and without an equal or a superior, be the creator of the world, there 8868 the fau!ta hike not doing what 1s beneficial and the rest, has been refuted above on the ground that the individual soul, though non different from Brahman as havmg Him, as 18 soul, 18 yet subject to transmigratory existence as subject to beginningless karmas, and thus different from Him by nature Now, the author 18 disposing of the followimg objec tion, viz that Brahman 18 not the oreator of the world on account of the absence of the collection of external umplements

The words “and. the rest” are to be suppled from the last aphoram The word “for” denotes the reason

1 GB 2128, p 56, Ghap 2

[80 2 1 23 +त 8] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 303

If 1t be objected. In ordmary 1108, 16 18 always found that external implements hke stzok and so on are employed for the production of effects like 008, etc Henoe, Brahman who has no helpers, 28 not the creator of the world To the question Whence 28 this known? We reply That Brahman 1s without any helpers 1s defimtely ascer tamed from the following texts, designating the impossibility of the existence of any kind of agent in the beginning ‘“‘ The existent alone, my dear, was this mn the beginning, one only, without a second” ’ (Ohind 621), ‘There waa, verily, Narfiyana, the one’ (Mahi Up 1 2), “Then there was Vimu, Hari alone, the absolute ”,—

(We reply ) “no” Why? “Because” Brahman 8 “hke milk” Just as m ordinary hfe milk, water and the rest are transformed. into the form of effects hke sour milk, 1ce and so on,—there 18 no external implement here,—#o0 Brahman, possessed of the sentient and the non sentient as His powers, 18 capable of being the one identical material and effiment cause of the world through His very nature Hoe has not to depend on the collection of accessories for creatang the world, as declared by the text “Supreme is His power, declared to be mani fold, natural 18 the operation of His knowledge and power” (Svet 6 8)

Whey, on the other hand, 1s sometimes mixed with milk, sumply for giving a certain flavour to it, and not for making 16 tum sour,! because we find that milk turns sour even when whey 1s absent from it, and that water and the rest do not turn mto sour milk even when. whey 18 present in them

Tt 18 because the potters and others are mere effiment causes that they have to depend on olay, etc for making pots, eto , and 1t 1s because they lack the requaite power that they have to depend on the stick, the wheel and s0 on.

Although the facts mentioned in the Veda are ever established, yet objections are bemg raised against them agai and agam for removing the doubts of those who are entatled to the study of 1%, for mlencing the opponent and for malang one understand the meaning of the Veda without # vestige of doubt

1 This rephes to the objectyon, vis that the above example of milk 39 not to the goint, amoe mlx is not transformed into sour milk by riself, but has to depend on whey

[st 2 1 24 304 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURALHA ADH 8]

COMPARISON Baladeva

This 18 78 24 711 108 commentary Intorpret won diferent, vz “Tf 1# be objected that on account of the observation of the completion. (of a piece of work by the individual soul,) (11 cannot be hkened to mert stones and the rest, but 1s a free agent), (we reply) no, for (the soul’s power of action 18) lke (the cow's pow. of producing) milk” 1 That 1s, although the soul 18 an agent and can as such bring works to completion, yet 1b 18 not an independent agent, but has to depend on the Lord for 18 activities, just as the cow cannot by herself produce mulk, but has to dependson the hfe energy

SUTRA 24

“AS IN THH O4SH OF THE GODS AND THE REST TOO IN (THEE WORLD ”” Vedinta-pirijita-saurabha

Just as the gods and the rest create what thoy want through a mere wish, 80 does the Lord too

Vedanta -kaustubha

Lo the objection, viz Milk and the rest are non rentacnt, while Brahman 1s sentient, as such, the examples cited are not to the point,— the author rephes here ;

The word “too” suggests the posmbility of an analogy with the sentuent The case in hand 18 analogous not meraly to that of non sentient objects, hke milk, eto aa shown above, but 1s aleo analogous to that of the sentient, known from Sampiture to be the power of the Lord Justas “inthe world”,:e6 1 the world ofthe gods and the rest, or m. Scripture,—the cause of the beholdimg of all objects,—the gods, the fathers, the sages, the Nagas and the rest, celebrated to be possessed of great powers, are found to create the objects which they want, as befitting time and need, through a mere wish, just as a spider acts by xtself alone independently of any external mplement, so the Highest Person, celebrated i all the worlds and Vedas as possessed of great

ia Be " 8 214, pp 66 57, Chap 1

{80 2 1 26 aDEz 9 | VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURARHA 305

powers, ommacient, omnrpotent and having true resolves, creates the whole group of effects through a mere wish Hence, it 18 establuhed that no contradiction 1s involved in our view amply because certam well known mmplements are found employed m ordinary creations

Here ends the section entitled “The observation of collection” (8)

COMPARISON Baladeva

This 18 siitra 26 in his commentary Interpretation different, viz (The Lord though mvimble, 28 the creator of the world,) just as the gods too (though mmvimble, are seen to work) m the world, (16 to produce rain and 80 on) +

Adhikarans 9 The section entitied “The oon sequence of the entire” (Sitras 25-30)

PRIMA FACIE VIEW (86४० 25) SUTRA 25

“(iy BeanMAy BE THE MATHRIAL 0408 OF THE WORLD, THERE WILL BA) THH CONSHQUENOCE OF THR ENTIRE (BRAHMAN BEXNG TRANSFORMED INTO THE WORLD), OB THE VIOLATION OF THE TEXT ABOUT (BRAHMAN’S) HAVING NO PABTS "

Vedanta-pdrijaita-saurabha

An objection 18 raised —

Tf Brahman be the maternal cause of the world, then if He be admitted to be without parts, there will be the “consequence of the entire” (Brahman bemg transformed mto the world), xf possessed of parta, then the scriptural texts about His having no parts will be contradicted.

+" 8 21%

[st 2 1 26 206 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 9]

Vedinta-kaustubha

Antampating the objection,—viz_ If Brahman be transformed into the form of the world absolutely mdependently of any external mm- plement, then let Him not depend on His own powers as well But ance the view that Brahman 1s the maternal cause through His mere nature leads to the horns of a dilamma, He cannot reasonably be the materal cause, and hence pradhana alone must be the material cause,—the author 18 replymg to 26 by pomting out that in the case of Brahman, external implementa cannot be admutted, as they are not mentioned in Scriptures, and as they will make Brahman a dependent creator, and that His own powers, which are non different from Him, may very well be admitted, as they have Soripture for their authority

The prema facie view 18 a8 follows Is Brahman,—knowable from the scriptural texts hke =" "^ 1106 existent alone, my dear, was this m the beginning, one only, without a second” ` (त 621), ˆ The soul, verily, was this in the begmnmg, one only’ (Brh 147) and 80 on, and transformed into the form of the effect,—without parts, or possessed of parta* 11 7 besaid without parts, (we reply ) then the consequence will be that the entire Brahman will become the effect, as in the case of milk, there will not remaim a transcendent Brahman, beyond tranemigratory existence and to be approached by the freed, the scriptural texte designating Brahman as unintelligible will be con- tradicted, universal release will result, and Brahman will come to possess the attributes of grossness and the rest If on the other hand, He be admitted to have parta, then there will not arise faults hike the entire Brahman being transformed into the world, but the scriptural texta demgnating that Brahman, the cause of the world, has no parts will come to be contradicted, viz the texts ‘Without parta, without action, tranquil, faultless, stainless” (Svet 6 19), ‘For He 1s the celestial, moorporal Person, the outeide and the msde, unborn” (Mund 212) and 80 0 So none but pradh&na can be the the cause of the world

COMPARISON Baladeva

This 18 sfitra 26 m his commentary He reads “vyakopa”’ 68 9 ॐ y व instead of “Kopa Interpretation, too, 18 different, viz he takes this siltre as setting forth the correct conclumon and not a prima

[श 2 1 26 ADH 9] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 307

fac view, thus ‘(If the individual soul be the creator of the world), then there will be the consequence of entire (absorption), or the contradiction of the texts (designating its) bemg without parts’ That 18, uf the mdzvidual soul be the creator, we must conclude that, in as much as it 18 without paris, ita entire self 28 present m every act But this 18 not really the case,eg while lifting a blade of grass, the mdividual soul does not employ rts entire force to the act Or, else we must conclude that the individual soul must be possessed of parta, which also goes against scriptural authority Hence, we must conclude that the md1vidual soul cannot be the creator 1

CORRECT CONCLUSION (8४०३ 26-30) SUTRA 26

“Bur (THB ABOVE OBJECTION HAéS NO FOROR) ON ACCOUNT OF ScrretuRn, SINCE (THH FACT THAT BRAHMAN IS THH OAUSH OF THR WORLD 78) BASED ON SaRIPTURE ”

Vedanta-padrijaita-saurabha

The stated objection does not hold good As the truth mentioned 1 the texts ‘He wished “May I be many” ` (Tait 263), ‘He Himself created Himself’ (Tart 27%), “He became exstent and that’ (Tat 264), ‘So much 18 His greatness, higher than that 18 the Person’ (Chind 31265), ‘Just as a spider creates, so from the Person ® the Universe omginates’ (Mund 1 1 ¶ 7) and so on, 18 based. on Sompture rteelf—anything 8188 bas no basis to stand upon

Vedanta-kaustubha

The author states the correct conclusion

The word “but”’ 1s for dispomng of the pruma fame view The entire Brahman 1s not transformed, nor 1s there any Violation of texts Why? “Qn account of Scmpture * That 18, on account of the mass

1GB 2126 pp 58 58 (ण्णः 2 & Not quoted by others 2 Op ow 4 Op ow 88 9 Correct quotation ‘Tathd akgardd bhava tha स्ह" Vide Mund 117 p 9 7 Not quoted by others

[न 2 1 34 308 VEDANTA KAUNTURIA ADT ५1

of texta which declare that Brilimin w the non diflere nt पदिन and effiaent cause of the world, difftrent from the world, posse कत्‌ of powers which are transformed and so on = such weuplurel texts are ‘Ho wished “Muy I be many”? (Tait 26), “He तपो It created Himself’ (Tait 27), ‘Ho एताः extent and that’ (Tut 2 4), ‘Having created 1t, he entered mto that very thing’ (Tart 26), ‘That diyvimity thought ‘Very well, kt me enter into thes threo divinities””’ (Chind 632), ‘Having entered by thus living xoul’ (Chind 682), ‘Who abiding within tho earth, fiom tho earth does not know’ (Brh 373), Entered within the rulkr of men’ (Tat Ar 3111, 24), ‘So much iw His prentnens, loghor than that 18 the Person’ (Chind $126) andro on There ix प जपि text as well, viz ‘Having voluntarily entered mto prakyt: (matter) and purusa (goul), Ham shook the mutable and the immutable at the tame of dissolution and creation’ (VP 1499) ike + spider, Brahman 18 transformed into the form of the world, without warting for external helpers Hence there 18 no violation of the texts dong nating Him to be without parta The scriptural text to this effect 18 98 010३ ‘Just as a spider creates and taker, yust as hairs on tho head and body hairs amse from a person, and medicinal herbs from the earth, so this universe aries from the Impermhabl.’ (Mund 117) There wa Smt text as well, viz ‘Just aw a 601 0140, having stretched. out 1ta hmbs, agam draws them im, so the Soul of bemyn, having created beings destroys them ayam’ (Mahi. 12 10725 -7073a*) Brahman, possessing the sentaent and the non sentiont as Has powers, 18 declared to be without parta and. without limbs, betcauso He has no parts and lombs as His material cause, ay throuds are of a piece of cloth

If 1t be objected If 1t be admitted that transformation means the projection of power, then there beng no transformation of the real nature of the qreator, what 18 the differenco of this view from the views of the Simkhyas and the rest “—(we reply ) Listen Tho

iP 191 2P iG

४ P 615, Imes 24265 vol 3 Reading “‘srgidnt karate’ Vangav dat od, also p 1571

Ie accordmg to the Siénkhyas, pradhdna 1 transformed into tho world while eccording to the Vedintine also nob Brahman Himnelf, but His power uf

the non-sentient (actochakt)—which 1s pradhana—is troneformed into the world 68008 the two views come to the same thing

[80 21 26 ADH 9] VEDANTA EAUSTUBHA 809

Saimkhyas hold that the material cause of the world 18 a substance which 1s different from the puruga (or the soul) just as a lump of clay 18 different from a potter, which does not possess 1t (viz purusa) as ite soul, and which 1s possessed. of independent existence and activity But Brahman, as admitted by the VedAntins, 1s One alone He transforms Himself mto the form of non sentient objects lke the ether and the rest by projectaung Ehs power of the enjoyed (ie the act इ), having projected the sentuent power of the enjoyer (16 the crt इभ) m the form of gods and the rest, and havimg entered. withm as their inner controller, makes them undergo the frurta of their respective works, and. contracts them durmng the tame of dissolution, as 8 tortoise does its limbs, and the sun 118 rays

To the obyectaon, viz even if there be the collection of external helpers by Brahman, no contradiction arises mn the case in hand, and hence pradhina, established by the Tantra may be the external implement, suitable for the production of the world, just as clay 1s for the production of a pot What is the use of a transformation consisting mm the projection of powers t—the author reples On this view, there will be contradiction of scriptural texta This he says m the words “Because of being based on Soripture”’ Transformation consisting in the projection of powers 1s accepted, based as rt 18 on Scripture Jf mmplements lke pradhins and the rest be admutted, that view will have no basis to stand upon, and the consequence will be that Brahman will have to depend on another for His creation Further, the following texts will come to be contradicted, viz ‘ All this has that for its soul’ (Chind 687 ch), ‘All this, verily, 18 Brahman’ (Chind 3141), ‘Which bemg known, all comes to be known’ and so on,—-this 1s the sense

COMPARISON Samkara

This 18 sitra 27 m lus commentary Interpretation same, but he adds his usual explanation in conclusion that from the transcen- dental pomt of view, no question of creatzon arses at all and hence no question as to how, Brahman, who 18 partiess 18 yet not transformed. in His entirety 1

6 8 2127,p 491

[शौ 2 1 > 310 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH ॥ |

Raiménuja

Interpretation of the word “sabda miilatvat”? different ~ vi (The fact that Brahman 18 possessed of various powers) 38 braved on Soripture1 According to Nimbarka, 1t means, as wo have seu “(The fact that Brahman creates the world, yet remama untranstonin« (|) 28 based on Scripture” 3, while according to दिता, (The tact that transformation meana nothing but projection of powers) m4 1५५ el on Soripture

Baladeva

This 18 siitra 27 in his commentary, vz “(But the above obj ¢ tion does not apply to the case of the Lord, the renal creator) on me count

of Scripture, because (the knowledge of Brahman) 14 bared on Scrip ture 8

CORRECT CONCLUSION (continued) SUTRA 27

“ AND SINGE THESE VABIOUS (MODIFICATIONS) (ARK SbEN) IN THF SOUL ALSO ” Vedanta -parijata-saurabha

When various modifications are appropriate on the purt of indiv! dual souls, like gods and the reat, how can they posaibly be imappre

pnate on the part of the omnzpotent Lord of all, the cause ¢t the universe f

Vedanta-kaustubha

The author 78 confirming the stated view on the rule of ‘how mich more’ 1

No wonder that if the creation of the world be due to one who 14 possessed of true resolves, of inconceivable and infimte powers anil 18 unchangeable by nature, then faulta hike entire creator beg trun formed and 80 on never result,—‘“amce”, 1 © because “m the xoul too", 1e m the mdividual sonl which has come to uttam lordship, “this”, 16 without there resulting any faults hke enture transtomnn 070, “various” creations are seen In accordance with ita own power

a

1 St B 2129 p 60, Part 2

® This 28 the interpretation of Simkara as well 7 GB 2127, p 60, Chap 2

{ist 2 1 27 apH 9] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 311

The second “and” (“‘ca”’) 18 indicative of ‘how much more’? (16 obviousness) 1

To begin with, the forms of swans and the rest, assumed by 10019 dual souls, are well known 1n Soripture >

The followmg अण passages are mdicative of the power of the king of gods ‘Now he changes into those particular forms repeatedly He becomes a bearer of the crest and the thunder bolt, armed with a bow, and wearing the ear mngs, then in an instant, he comes to look like a Candaila® ‘Then, agai, my son, he comes to be clad in bark, with a tuft of hair on the top of 018 head and matted hair Then he comes to have a large body, becomes 778, hkewise stout or thin Agam he changes himself as fair, dark, hkewise black, ugly or hand. some, hkewise young or old, learned, dull or ignorant, hkewise short or long Then the performer of a hundred sacrifices becomes 9 Ingh caste or a low caste He assumes the forms of a parrot or a crow, man or cuckoo, and again assumes the forms of a hon, a tiger or an elephant’, and 80 on

The Smrti passages concerned with power of the sun are as folows ‘The abode of many wonders 18 the revered Sun, from whom arise all bemgs, honoured 10 the three worlds’, andsoon अपण्य; the creaizve power of other gods may be mown from Scmpture itself

The followmg अपि passage 18 mdicative of the power of gods ‘They may make a non god god, anda god non god When incensed, they may create rulers of worlds and other worlds’

The followmg Smyta passage dempnates the power Cyavana ‘Q, the power of the Brahma sage Cyavana, the great soul! The ascetac can create other worlds, simply by wishing, through the power of austerrties '

The followmg Smyti texts refer to the power of Vaéstha’s cow, vz ‘The cow, with her head and neck raised, look termfic, her eyes reddened. with anger, and lowing repeatedly Her body, blazing with anger, shone 178 mid day sun The cow created the Palhavas from her tail in great frequency m the form of the piling up of the

1 Ie 1? mdividual souls are capable of assuming vamous forms without themselves undergoing modifications, how muocb more so this must be the case with the Lord, the omnipotent Being Aawnuiyaka-nydya

४ Video eg Chind 4132, where certam dive sages are said to have assumed the form ofswans (or fuller accomnt of this story see V K 18 34

® An outcaste born from a स्वा father and a Brdimana mother

[शि 2 1 27 312 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 4DH 9]

charcoal, as 1t were 1, the Dravidas from her tail, the Sakas from he r urine, the Yavanas from her womb, numorous Sabaras from het dung, the Cicukas, the Pulindas, the Cinas, the Hiinas, the Sakelaras from her foam as well as the Mlecchas of various kinds’ (Maha 1 66797 66800, 6682 6688, 6685) and &0 on

Suomularly, other individual souls, too, possess the power of variour kinds of creations, which are not quoted here for avoiding prolzit;, and also because they are not suitable here Even un emiment ind. 1- dual 80718, the power of creating object 1s insignificant, befitting their own. powers and only given by the Lord It 18 not posable for even the freed soul to be the creator of the emitre universe This will be made clear in the aphomsam “Devoid of the actrvity regardings the universe’ (Br 8a 4417)

COMPARISON Riménouja and Srikantha

This 18 इति 28 1m their commentanes Interpretation different. viz And thus in the soul (the attmbutes of the non sentient are not found), for there are manifold (powers) (um different objects) That 18, we find that the sentient individual soul, which w different from. non sentient objects, does not possess ther attributes Simulaly, these non sentient 00160४8 themselves, fire, water and the rest, which. are different from one another, do not share one another's atimbuter, but have manifold attmbutes In the very same manner Brahma who 15 different from both the sentient and the non sentient does not possess their attributes, but numerous others not found m them 2

Baladeva

This 18 वत्त 281n his commentary Interpretation different, viz And thus (there are mysterious powers) in the soul (viz Brahman), because various (powers) (belong to the tree of all desires, or to the philogopher’s stone) That 18, we believe, on the ground of Sonp- ture alone, that the tree of all demres and the philosopher's stone possess Inysterious powers, capable of giving mse to elephants, horses

1 Angor-vre--namul Here the suffix ‘namud’ umplies companson m accord ance with the rule Pan 3445 SD K 8366 7 714 vol ॐ 4 Grr B 2128, pp 6061 Part? SK B 1228 p 39, Parts 7 and 8

[st 2 1 28 ADH 9] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 219

and the rest So why should we not 0611658, on the very same ground, that the Lord 1s possessed of mysterious powers † 1

CORRECT CONCLUSION (continued) SUTRA 28 “AND BEOAUSE THREE 78 FAULT IN BIS OWR Vinw 3

Vedanta -parijaita-saurabha

Let our view stand Since the faults mentioned by you rebound to your own view, 16 18 proper for you to keep silent

Vedanta-kaustubha

The particle “and”’ (“‘oa”’) 18 meant for disposmg of the doctrines which are opposed to the Vedanta The S&mkhyas and the rest, who maintam doctrimes opposed to the Ved&nta, cannot find fault with our determmation of the cause of the world Why! “Because there 18 fault in their own views” Thus, the Simkhyas admit that pradhins, conmsting of the three gunas, and without parta, 1s trans- formed. into mahat and the rest ‘This bemg so, the consequence 1s that faults hke entare pradhaina bemg transformed and 80 on must pertain to their view a8 well Since what 1s without parts cannot be transformed, pradhfna cannot also be the cause, otherwise there will result transformation. on the part of puruga as well

If 1+ be argued There are parts of pradhina, viz sativa, rajas and tamas, and hence the above fault does not result,—({we reply ) In that case, according to your view, pradhina must be an effect, hke a piece of cloth, and sativa and the rest, which are 18 parts, must be rts cause, like threads

If 1t be argued again We do not admit that pradhbfina has no form before, but 1s brought into exstence by ite parta, sattva and the rest, as 8 piece of cloth by the threads What we holds that pradhana, already existent im rts peculiar form, 18 the aggregate of sativa and the rest in & state of equilibmum,—{we reply ) This does not stand ४0 reason If this be so, then too, 1t must be admutted, accordmg to

7 GB 2128, pp 63 64 Chap 2

(fst 23 1 > 3lt VFDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 0]

your view, that when in a state of equilibiium, watt. and the rest are pradbana, and when in a state of non ¢qulibrium, the v gtve rise to the world

Moreover, 1f each of these be posseaned of parts, there must follow infinite regress, but if they be without parts, there must result the violation of the respective difference between the cause and the effect, soe there will be no distinction between the causal and the effected states of the uggregate of the anttva and the reat, which are devoid of parts

Hereby, the doctrme of Atomiam too should bo known to be refuted

COMPARISON

All othera, except Baladeva, read “Sapnlesa dose cv”? 1 Intor

pretation same Baladeva

This is sfitra 29 आ) lus commentary Interpretation different, viz he does not take this sitia to be referring to the Simkhya view, but to the view that the individual sonl, and not the Lord, us the creator of the world Hence the sfitra means, according to hun, “And because there 28 fault 1m 118 own view” Thats, the objection raised by the opponent to our view, viz if Brahman be the craatoi, the question arises whether He creates with His entire energy or 4 portion of it only, apphes equally to the view that the mdividual soul

18 the creator, and while we can answer this objection, the opponent cannot 9

CORRECT CONCLUSION (contmued) SUTRA 29

“AND THAT (DIVINITY) IS ENDOWED WITH ALL (POWERS), BEOAUAE 7 IS sHEN ” 9

Vedanta -parijata-saurabha

In accordance with the scriptural text ‘Supreme 18 His power, declared to be manifold, natural 18 the operation of His knowledge

1GB 2120 “QB 2138 > CSS ed leaves ont the “oa p 20

{87 21 29 ADE 9] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA, 315

and power’ (Svet 681), “that” divimty is “endowed with powers”, 16 18 able to do everything ्

Vedanta-kaustubha

The author 1s demonstrating the omnipotence of the Highest Person.

The cause of the world, as admitted by the Simkhyas and others, vis pradhina and the rest, devoid of a multitude of powers, suttable for the production of the diverse and multaform world, does not stand to reason But 17 the case in hand, the Divmity, worshipped by His own devotees who resort to none else, 18 “endowed with all”, 16 endowed with all powers, “and”, 1e hence, He alone 1s capable of bemg the cause, and not pradh&na and the rest Why? ‘Because tt 18 seen,—”, 1e (because) Scmpture (“daréana”’) demonstrates 11 {“tad”),2 viz the divmity who 18 endowed with all powers,—ie because of the scriptural texta hke ‘The own power of the divinity, 1067 by his own qualzties’ (Svet 1 3), ‘Supreme 1s His power, declared to be manifold, natural 1s the operation of His knowledge and action’ (Svet 6 8), ‘ Possessed of true demres, possessed of trus resolves’ (Ohind 815, 871, 3) and so on, and because of the णपा passage ‘Hundreds of positave powers like creation and the rest, which are inconcelvable to the comprehenaton of all bemgs, may belong to Brahman, O best among the ascetics, as heat to fire’ (VP 1328)

COMPARISON

All others read ‘“Sarvopeté ca tad dardanit”, omitimg si” Samkara and Bhiskara, begin a new adhikarana here, (ending with the next sitra)

1 R, Sk, B ¢ Tins explains the compound fad dardandi” $ P 32

[so 2 1 30) alb VEDANTA PARISATA YAURABH 4 ADM 9]

CORRECT CONCLUSION (endl) SUTRA 30 4 [क IT BF OBJHOTED THAT (BRAHMAN 14 NOT Th UAUNP OF Tilly

WORLD) BROAUSE OF THE ABSHNOE OF SENSE-ORGANS, (Wi E REPLY } THAT HAS BEEN SAID "

Vedainta-parijata-saurabha

If 1t be objected that on account of the denial of His som orguus in the text ‘No action or sense organ of Him exusta’ (Svet 6 44), 1४ 18 not possible for one who 16 endowed with all powers to he the creator of the world—({we reply ) the anawer to thik has alrcady been given > Vedanta-kaustubha

If 1b be objected Let Brahman be endowed with all power, stall, hike milk, without mplementa such as basm, pot and the rest, hke the seed, without 2mplements, such aa earth, water, and 80 on, and like gods and others without mmplements befitimg particular places and tames, He cannot consistently be the creator of effouts, though possessed of powers, “because of the absence of sense organs’ on His part,1e because He 18 known to be devoid of sense organs from the text ‘No action or sense organ of Him exists’ (Svet 6 8)—

(We reply ) The reply to this has been given in the aphorwm “Because of being based on Sompture” (Br Sit 21126) The meaning of the above scriptural text 18 as follows ‘There exet ‘no action’,—ie that which 1s to be done for the purpose of obtaming bliss,—and ‘sense organ” for the production of desired for action, ‘of him’, 168 of the Supreme Lord who 1s one masa of ever present bliss, the Lord of all and the Creator of the world ® There are sorip- tural texta to this effect, viz ‘The soul, which conmsts of blisy’ (Taxi 25), ‘Filled with Hibs own self alone’, ‘A flavour, verily, us He’ (Tart 27), “Having all desires, having all odours, having all tasks’ (Chand 3142, 4), “Without hands and feet, he ws swift and 9 8612617, without eyes, he sees, without ears he hears’ (Svot 3 19) and 80 on The declaration by the Lord Himself, too, 18 98 follows

1R SEK, 8 4 Vide Br Si 21 86 3 7 8 the Lord, who 18 ever blaesful does not need to act for attaming any forthe: एण and He has nof to depend on the senso-organs for His action

{0 2 1 3) ave 10} VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA 817

९५० have no duties, whatsoever, O P&rtha, m the three world, nor anything unattamed to be attamed, yet I abide m action”’ (कद्व $22) Hence 1t 18 established that the above mentioned faulta

pertam to the opponent's view alone, but not to the oonclumon estab hshed by the Vedanta

Here ends the section entitled “The consequence of the entare”’ (9)

COMPARISON Baladeva

This 78 siitra $1 m his commentary The imterpretation of the phrase “tad uktam” different, viz “that has been answered (by Scripture rtaelf)” That 18 the very same Upanisad (viz Svet&éva- tara) which has been quoted by the opponent im support of 1118 allegataon that the Lord, devoid of sense organs (viz Svet 6 8), cannot act, answers to the objection by pointing out that though devoid of sense organs, He can yet act (viz Svet 8 192)

Adhikarana 10 The section entitled “Having a need” (Siitras 31-86) PRIMA FACIE VIEW (Sitra 31) SUTRA 31

“(BRsoMaw IS) NOT (THR GAUSE OF THE WORLD), ON ACCOUNT OF (THE AOTIVITY OF AN AGENT) HAVING A NEED ”

Vedinta-parijita-saurabha

It may be objected The Supreme Bemg who has all His demres eternally fulfilled, 1 not an agent Why? “On account of the activity of an agent having a need ”

1 08 21831, p 67, Chap 2

[st 2 1 82 818 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 40H 10 |

Vedinta-kaustubha

Now, a doubt 1s raised Let this be so, yet there being no need on the part of Brahman,—who has His demres eternally fulfilled by themselves,—for creating the world, 1t 1s not created by Him

The prima facte view 18 as follows Creatorship of the world does not fit mm on the part of Brahman Why? “On account of the activity of the agent having a need”, and on account of there bemg no need on His part for creating the world, as He has His desires eternally fulfilled

CORRECT CONCLUSION (Sfitras 32-35) SUTRA 32 “Bur, 48 IN OBDINARY LIFE, (CREATION IS) A MBRE SPORT (TO

Branman) * Vedinta-parijita-saurabha

Wrath regard to 1t, we reply Such creation and the rest of the Supreme Being are like the mere sport of kings and so on, well known m. ordinary life

Vedinta-kaustubha

The author 1s atating the correct conclusion

The particle “but” 18 for dispoamg of the prima face view Just as, in ordimary hfe, the play of a universal monarch, who has attamed lordship, with various kmds of dice, wooden balls and the Test, 18 & Mere aport, without any desire indeed for fruit.—so this 18

& mere sport on the part of Brahman as well,1e a mere play witb the creation of the universe. and so on

COMPARISON Baladeva

This 1s अड 33 in his commentary Interpretation same, but the phrase ‘“lokavat’” explamed a litle differently, thus As im ordinary life a man, full of cheerfulness or on awakening from a sound. sleep, dances about without any motive or need, but mmply from the fulness of spirit, so 18 the case here! Here Baladeva critaczes the

1GB 2183,p 71, Chap 2

[80 2 1 33 ADH 10] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 919

Vitstadvarta illustration of a prince engaged im a game of balls (which 18 the Ulustration given us by Nimb&rka as well as we have seen) by pomimng out that such a game 28 not altogether motiveless, snoce

the prince gets some pleasure from 1t 2

CORRECT CONCLUSION (continued) SUTRA 33 “(Tomek ARB) NO INEQUALITY AND ORUBLTY (ON THD PART OF

BRAHMAN), BEOAUSS OF (HIS) HAVING REGARD (FOE THE WORKS OF SOULS), FOR 80 (ScRIPTUED) SHOWS ”

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

Inequality and cruelty, due to unequal creation, destruction and the rest, depend on the works of the indrvidual souls themselves, and 80 they do not pertam to the creator of the origin and the rest of the world, as 17. the case of the cloud “So” exactly the sorptural text “One becomes good by good action, bad by bad action” (Brh 8 2199) “shows”

Vedanta -kaustubha

It may be objected If Brahman creates the universe im mere sport, He must be open to the charges of mequalty and oruelty He must be open to the charge of “imequality”,1e of creating an unequal world, creatmmg as He does different grades of bemgs like gods, men, animals and soon And, He must be open to the charge of “cruelty”, 1e of heartlessness, creatang os He does the universe which 18 an abode of three kinds of sufferings, making the indzvidual souls, not attached to matter, enter mto connection with 16 at the tame of dissolution, and thereby causing them sufferings like old age, death, and the rest

(We reply) No ‘There cannot be any mequality and cruelty on the part of Brahman Why? “Qn account of (His) having regard ”,1e@ because in producing different bemgs hke gods and the rest at the begmmming of the creation of the universe, Brahman has regard. 07, 1 6 takes 1700 account, their respective works or karmaa,.

1 Op ov, p 72 9 6, 2

[st 2 1 34 320 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ape 10 |

just as the cloud m produamg different kinds of shoots depends on therr respective seeds

If xt be asked Whence 1s this known? The author rephes “shows”,16 the holy Sorrpture shows this thus ‘Vor he alone makes one, whom he wishes to raise up from these worlds, do good deed, he alone makes one, whom he wishes to lead down, do bad deed” (Kaus 38), ‘One becomes good by good deeds, bad by bad deeds’ {Brh 8218), ‘The doer of good deeds becomes good, the doer of bad deeds becomes bad’ (Brh 4 4 5)

COMPARISON Samkara, Srikantha and Baladeva begin a new adhikarana here

CORRECT CONCLUSION (continued) UTRA 34

“IF If BH OBJECTHD THAT THIS IS NOT (POSSIBLE), ON ACCOUNT OF THA NON DISTINCTION OF WORKS, (WE EREPLY ) NO, ON ACOOUNT OF BEGINNINGLESSNESS, AND (THIS) FITS IN, AND IS OBSERVED ATSO 39

Vedanta -parijata-saurabha

If 1t be objected that mnoe the text ‘*“The exstent alone, my dear, was this in the begmning”’ (Chind 6211) declares the ‘non-distinction” of works prior to creation, the Supreme Being’s dependence on the works does not fit m,—(we reply ) “no”, as works exist even then, the works done by the mdividual souls in previous Taurths bamg eternal And 4 pmor creation “fita m”, as a sudden subsequent creation 1s unreasonable 2 And this 18 “observed 2180 2 an the text “The creator fashioned the sun and the moon as he did before’ (Rg V 10 190 3 3) and so on

> §, B, 8K, B

2 Te since a subsequent creatton cannot anse all on a sudden we have 10 admit that ts arises from a prior creainon

Pp 418 l¢

(fet 21 59 aDH 10 ] VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA 32]

Vedanta-kaustubha

If 1 be objected The reason, vis ‘on account of dependence’, does not 2617 Why? ‘“Onaccount of the non distinction of works ” That 1s, the non distinction of the entire world pnor to creation being ascertained from the text ‘“The emstent alone, my dear, was thus m the begimnmg, one only, without a second”’ (Chind 621), the non-distinctaon of the works of the mdividual souls, too, 1s ascertamed Hence, pridr to creation, there are no works as the cause of the diver srties of the objects to be created, on which Brahman might depend,—

(We reply ) “‘no” Why? “On account of the begmmingless” of all That 18, the works, good and bad, done by the mdividual sows m a previous creation, become the cause of the diveratties m a subsequent creation. “And” the contmurty of creation “fita m”’ 17 accordance with the maxim. of “the seed and the shoot’,! and m accordance with the above mentioned difference between the manrfest and unmanifest effect. as well as because a sudden subsequent creation without a prior creation 18 mexphosable, this Jast reason bemg indicated by the particle “and” (mm the sfitra) Ths 28 “observed also” m Sompture That 18, since the text “The creator fashioned the sun and the moon as he did before’ (Rg V 101903), teaches the emstence of a prior creation, the eternity of the flow of creation 78 established And in the soriptural and Smrii texts luke ‘ With roots above, branches below 1s this eternal fig tree’ (Katha 61), ‘With roots above, branches below, the fig tree 28 indestructible, they say’ (GItA 16 1), the reality as well of mundane existence, as having the Exustent aa 108 root, and as having the form of a contimuous stream, 18 established Previously, the effect has deed been deter mmed to bereal® Inthe texts ‘Without begimnmg and without end’ (Cal 54), ‘A wise man 18 not born, nor dies’ (Katha 2185), ‘Know prakria (matter) and puruga (soul) to be both begmmuingless’ (Gita 18 19), the eternity, too, of the sentaent and the non sentuent sub stances, which are the powers of the Supreme Cause, 1s estabhahed

1 1 9 just ag it is umpossble to say whether the seed 1s earlier or the shoot, 80 16 1g imposmble to aay whether harmas are the earlier or the samaira सिपक they are taken to be beginnmgless 4 Vide V EK 211718 3 Vide VK 21147 ¢ Correct quotation “Anddavaii Videp 230 ¢ Of a very amular passage in 01708 2 20 21

ist? 2 1 35

922 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 10] COMPARISON Samkara He breaks this 80018 into two different sfitras—thua “Na anddktvit”’, and ‘upapadyate cy”? t 80881918

He also breaks 1t into two different siitras Further he rvads the first portion differently, thus ‘“Asmid vibhagiid 111 con niinddstvit”,

(stitra 36), “upapadyate ca”? (siitra 36) 2 Baladeva He also breaks 1t into two different siitraa exactly after Sumkara But he takes the first portion only, wz “Noa anddit vit” as indicated withm the previous adhikarana beginning a new adbikarana with the second portion “upapudyate 08,

concerned with, showing that the grace of the Lord 18 not partial Hence 1b means, according to hnn And (the especial grace shown by the Lord to his devotees) fits im (since 1t is not arbitrary, but depends on the devotion of the souls themselves), and it 18 observed alao (m Scripture) 8

OORREOT CONCLUSION (and) SUTRA 35 “AND BROAUSH OF THE FITTING IN OF ALL ATTRIBUTES >

Vedinta-parijita-saurabha

“And because of the fittmg m of all the attmbutes’’ of a cause on the part of Brahman alone, 16 18 established that our view 18 free from all contradictions

Here ends the first quarter of the second chapter of the VedAnta एकु हन saurabha, composed by the reverend Nimbarka

18B pp 408 499 ® Bh B p 107 ’GB 21386, pp 76 77, Obap 2

[80 2 1 36 aDH 10] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA $35

Vedianta-kaustubha

‘And on account of the fittmg in * That 18, all the attributes, mentioned or not mentioned, befitting the cause of the world and wmappropriate on the part of pradh&na and the reat,—fit m on the part of Brahman alone Hence, 1) 18 established that the concordance of Sormptures with regard to Brabman 1s not contradicted by any means whatsoever

Here ends the section entitled “Having a need” (10)

Here ends the first quarter of the second chapter m the holy Ved&nta kaustubhsa, commentary on the Sariraka mfimAmsa, and composed by the reverend. teacher Srinrvisa

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhiskara

This 18 sitra 37 xn both the commentaries They teke thus इत प्छ, to be a new adbikarana by tiself

Baladeva

This 1s stra 37 m 018 commentary Interpretation different, viz the same theme contanued thus And on account of the fitting m of all attributes (harmonious in themselves or not) (on the part of the Lord) Thats, the Lord 1s possessed of paradoxical and myste rious powers, and. hence 10 16 possible for Him to possess, along with the attmbutes of perfect justice and impartiality, the attmbute of showing special favour and partialhty for his devotees as well 1

Résumé

The first section of the second chapter contains— 96 stitras and 10 adhikaranas, according to Numbfrka,

97 sitras and 12 adhikaranas, according to Bhiskara 96 siitras and 11 adhikaranas according to Srikantha $7 sittras and 11 adhikaranas, accordmg to Baladeva,

1 QB 2137,p 78, 0097 2

ao © mm G be

[so 2 1 35 324 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ApH 10 |

Samkara, Bhiskara and Baladeva divide each of the sitras 17 and 35 m Nimbarka’s commentary into two separate siitras, while Rémaénuja and Srikantha divide siitra 11 m Nimb&rka’s commentary

into two separate sutras

SECOND CHAPTER (Adhyaya) SECOND QUARTER (Pada)

Adhikarana 1 The seotion entitled “the im possibility of arrangement” (Sfitras 1-10)

SUTRA 1

“AnD ON ACCOUNT OF THH IMPOSSIBILITY OF ARBRANGHMENT ALSO, NOT THE INFERENCE *

Vedanta-parijata-saurabba

Pradhina, knowable through inference! 18 not the cause of the world Why? “On account also of the mposability” of a vaned ‘‘ arrangement” from it, not acquainted with the arrangement of the objects to be created

Vedanta -kaustubha

Thus, with a view to inducing those who desire for salvation to the hearmg, thmking and the like of the nature, atimbutes and the rest of the Supreme Person, 1t has been firmly estabhshed above by the reverend author of the aphorisms that Lord Vasudeva, the Highest Person, omnipotent, the Lord of all, and the Supreme Person, is the cause of the origin and the rest of the world, and that the views of the opponents arise not supported by Scripture has been shown under the aphorum “Because (the creator of the world) sees, (pradhfina 1s) not (the creator), (1t 18) non-somptural” (Br त 115) Now, witha view to establishing the acceptability of the conclusion of the Vedin tans, the reverend autho: of the aphomams ४ exposing, in this section, the fallaciousness of the arguments put forward by the opponents It 1s not to be said that those who desire for release bemg benefitted through 9 mere expoartion of the conclusion of the Vedintims, what 18 the use of villifying the views of the opponents! Smoe just as when ® man, giving up the moat benefiois) food, 18 about to take injurious poison and the like, people try to induce him to food and to

1 Bee footnote 1, p 48 of the book

[x0 22 1 326 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1]

dissuade him fiom poison, eto by pomting out the unwholewoment ss of the latter, 80 the villrfication of the view ot the opponcnts is yustitiahle for the purpose of preventing people from accepting the viown which are opposed to the Vedas, and for inducing thove desu my for cmang pation to our own View

Now, the Samkhyas, discarding the Highest Person omnipotent and omumuascient, as the cause of the ongin and the rest of the world, hold prakrti, devoid of any connection with Him, non # ntient and the equilibrium of the three gunas, to bo the cause of the world Thins has been said in the treatwo treating of the sity (categories) 1 “The prmary prakyti (.e matter) 1s not an effort There are seven, beginning with mahat, which are (both) causes and ल ८१५ There are mxteen which are effects (only) ‘Purusn (16 soul) 18 nelther a canse, nor an effect’ (Sim Ki 32) Thy state the five reasons for tho existence of prakyt1 thus The cause w pradhiinn, “(1) on account of the transformation of the divisions 3, (2) on account of ¢ onc ordande 4, (3) on account of the actavity preceding from power ० (4) on account of the distinction between the cause and the ५८८६ ०, (6) on account of the non-distinction of what 18 pouscsscd of all form’ (Naim Ka 157) The word ‘Vaiéva ripa’ means tho samo as ° Visva-ripa’ or what 18 possessed of all forms,1e the unrverse of varied configurations Whatever 18 lumited 18 due to a common cause, like pota and the rest

श्व tee Ee ~ ति Po ee ee

1 Peculiar to the Sémkhyaa sp 4 9 Ie on account of the lunitedness (parindma) of tha offic ta (bhevin) like mahat and the rest Thus Whatever 28 limited hax ५ cause, like tho pot The effects are 1711060 they have a cause, vis pradhiina Te all the effecta possews the common qualities cf pleasure (agtire) pam (rayae) and delumon (वव) Hence they inust haye a common (का which possesses ali these qualities viz pradhidna “Te the cause can give rise to the effect only if 1t haa tho reunite power Now pradhdéna alone has the power to give rise to mehai and tho revit 5 The difference of the effect from the snuac proves tho axistence of the cause Thus tbe difference of the pot from a lump of clay vis the fir can fetoh water, the second not—provea that the pot has clay fur ita common cause Similarly from the mahat and the rest we argue tw pradhina, differ nt from them ® Ie the whole universe mergea m 9 common cause during disolution, and such © cause wpradhdna Vide Candnkd चप्यं of Sam BA pp 18 19, also Gaudapdda bhdsya on same, pp 13 1¢ 7P 18

[st 2 2 1 ADH 1] VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA $27

Similarly, a mahat and abamkéra, the five pure essences, the eleven 86188 organs, and the five great elements which are limrted are ‘div1 sions’, they are due to one cause which 18 unlimited im space and tame and the common substratum of three gunas1 Whatever 1s observed to be connected with something else, 18 due to that one cause, 88 dishes and the rest, connected with the clay, are due tort Similarly, the external and internal divisions, connected with pleasures (sathva), pain (rajas) and delusion (tamas) should properly be due to a common cause consisting 10 pleasure, pain and delusion? Similarly, just aa there 18 the origin of pota and the like from the power of the cause, 80 the ongm of the effects hke mahat and the reat, too, must be held to be due to the power of the cause This being 80, the cause, possessed of such a power, 18 pradhina 8 Moreover, it 18 observed that there 18 8 distinction betweeen the effecta, hke ear mngs and the rest, and the cause, simular to them, such as gold and the rest, as well as a non- distinction Similarly, there 18 both distunctaon and non distanctaon on the part of the mamfold universe Through these two, a cause, viz the unmanifest which 18 the substratum of all begs and consists of the three gunas 70 a state of equilibrium, 18 inferred 4

On this suggestion, the author reples ‘The inference”, 1 8 what 1s inferred, viz pradhina, not havmg Brahman as ita common cause, 28 not the cause of the world Why? “On account of the impossibilty of arrangement,”’ 18 because it 1s mmposmble that the arrangement of the world,—variegated by the aggregate of manfold objects of enjoyment, conforming to the diverse works of the souls,— can arse from pradbina, not having Brahman for xts cause, an object of mference, non sentient and devoid of any knowledge of the ob jecta to be created, as we see in ordinary life that the arrangement af manifold and variegated palaces, chariots, ornaments and the rest 18 due to one who 18 possessed of the knowledge of the 0019008 to be created.

The particle ‘‘and”’ (7. the गो) mdicates that the reasons, mtended for proving the existence of pradh&na, can very well be set amide by valid opposite arguments, ance the followmg mference

1 This explams the first reason

9 Thw explams the second reason

® This explains the third reason

* Thi explems the fourth and the fifth reasons

[so 22 2 828 VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 1]

establahes the non validity of the object establish cl (by the Samkhya, viz pradhina ) —

Pradhiina as admitted by the SAmkhyas and not havmg Brah man for 108 soul, 18 non existent,

because 19 18 not perceived

Whatever 1s this (1e not percerverl) 14 that (16 non eastent),

like the sky flower

Whatever 1s not thin (ie not non peromved) ४ not that (io not non existent),

hke the sun

COMPARISON

Ramfnuja and Srikantha They take this and the next alitra as one aiitra

SUTRA 2

“AND ON AGOOUNT oF ACTIVITY ”

Vedinta-pirijita-saurabha

And on account of the impossibihty of spontancous activity (on 708 part), not the inference (1e the infermble pratlhdna)

Vedinta-kanetubha

The phrase beginning with ‘on account of imyxxuubility’ ia to be supphed here And because activity,—vir apomtancous fallmg away from the state of the equilibrium of the three gunas,—is impossible on the part of pradhana which 18 non sentient ond an object of mferenco Thus, pradhina, knowable through infeicnee, is not the cause of the world, since 1t 18 observed im ordinary life that non-sentient objects like chariota and the rest, are moved to action only when supermtended by conscious beings

[et 223 anu 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 329

SUTRA 3

“AND If If BH ARGUHD THAT (PRADHAWA ACTS SPONTANBOUSLY) LIKE MILK AND WATER, (WH REPLY ) THERE TOO (LORD 18 THR INCITER) °

Vedanta -parijaita-saurabha

Tf 1t be argued that hke muik, etc pradhina acts for the omgin and the rest of the world by itself, (we reply ) that “there too” the Supreme Being 18 the maiter 1s learnt from the scriptural text “Who abiding within water” (Brh 3'7 41)

Vedanta-kaustubha

If 10 be argued How can 1t be said that on account of the m possibihty of spontaneous activity on 108 part the non sentient pra dhina 18 not the cause of the world? Just as milk, though non sentient, 18 by itself transformed into the form of sour milk, and flows spontaneously for the nourshment of the calf, and just as water discharged. from the cloud 18 transformed into the form of various saps of the earth, aa well as into the forms of 108, bubble and the reat, and pours down spontaneously for the growth, of plants and the reat, as well as flows on, so exactly pradhaina too, mdependent of a sen tuent bemg, having entered into a state of mutual mequality of the

reat too, no activity 1s possible mdependently of a sentient bemg On the contrary, milk and the rest attam the form of sour milk and so on only when supermtended by a sentient bemg It 18 the cow herself, fond of her calf, that makes the milk flow out of fihal affection, and bemg liquid the milk oozes oub If 1t be argued that even when the calf 18 dead, the presence of the milk 1s observed, and. hence to say that 1t 1s the cow that makes the milk flow out of filal affection does not stand to reason,—(we reply ) there 18 the flow of the milk then by reason of her remembrance of the calf, or else 1t 18 exphcable on the ground. of her love for her master >

1§ R, Bh # 1 © the cow gives milk even when the calf is dead because she still remem bers the oalf, or because she loves her master and wants to be of benedit to ham

[7 2 2 4 990 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBRABHA ADH 1]

Water, too, comes to have the form of 108, bubble and the rest only when supermtended by a conscious being, appears to be of the form of various saps through its contact with the earth, and flows on ag dependent on & low ground 1 and on account of bemg liquid lHvery thing being supemntended by a sentient bemg, the above examples all fit in, in accordance with the scriptural texts ‘Who abiding withm water’ (Brh 374) ‘“At the command of this Impershable, Garg, some rivers flow to the east’ ’ (Brh 3 8 9) andsoon Hence the 17 ference (1e the infernble pradhf&na) 18 not the cause of the world

SUTRA 4

“AND ON ACCOUNT OF THI) NON EXISTENCE OF A SEPARATE (40 OCESSORY), (PRADHANA 78 NOT THH CAUSE), ON ACCOUNT OF NON DEPENDENOE ”’

Vedainta-parijaita-saurabha

Pradhfina, not supermtended by an intelligent pmnciple, 1s not the cause of the world Why? “On account of the non existence” of an accessory other than it, since according to you 1t does not de pend on anything else

Vedanta -kaustubha

For this reason, too, the cause of the world 18 not the mference (16 the infermble pradhina) Why? “On account of the non existence of what 18 different ** That 1s, 1f pradhina,—which, 18 not superintended by an intelhgent principle, but 1s independent, non sentient and an object of wnference,—be the cause of the world, there will be activity on ita part at all tumes, and this being 80, there would not be, at any time, what 1s different from activity, 16 mactivity on 108 part > Or (an alternative explanation), the 86086 18 On account of the absence of an object to be instigated or of an instigator other than The resson for this, again, 18 “‘on account of non depen dence”, 16 asccording to your view, as the creator of the world,

1 Ie the fowmg of the water depends on ita bemg on a sloping ground > le there would be eternal creation and no dissolution

lst 2265 4DH 1] VEDANTA PABLIATA SAURABHA 331

pradhiina does not depend on an accessory It cannot be said also that the vanegated works are the instigator of pradhina,—because works will then become the cause of the world, because the mde pendence of pradhina 17 creating the world will be set aside, and, finally, because this 18 umpossible Works, on the other hand, are not able to give even fruits like merit or demerit, pleasure or pam, their agent, too, does not obtain the fruit by himself Hence, how can those works, performed by the individual souls who are vitiated by their contact with prakrtii or matter, be able to instigate pradhina ? ‘The fact is that the works bear fruits through the wish of the Lord, and thus ther agent obtams fruits, as declared by the Lord Himself ‘ “Pleasure, pain, existence, non existence, fear and absence of fear, non violence, equanimity, contentment, penance, charity, fame and absence of fame,—the various states of beings arise from me 81078 ` ` (Gra 10 40-56) + 18 not to be said that pradhina acta through ita prommuity to purusa,—for ita proximity 00 purnsa being eternal, ita activity, too, must be eternal This will be made clear m details under the aphorism “As in the case of a man and stone” (Br Sa 2 2 7)

COMPARISON Ramdnuja and Srikantha

This 1s sitra 3 m ther commentanes Their explanation 18 simular to the first explanation given by Srinivasa, viz “Because of the non existence of what 18 different (from creation, viz dis solution), on acoount of (its) non dependence (to anything else), (pradhfna 18 not the cause of the world)”’ 1

SUTRA 5

“* AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE NON BXISTHNOH ELSEWHERE, NOT LIKE GR4SS AND THE EEST ”’

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

Smee there 18 no transformation of the grass and the rest, eaten by an ox, into the form of milk, 1t cannot be said that just as the grass

1 तित. B 228, p 74 Part? SK B 228, pp 57 58, Parte 7 and 8

[श 2 2 6 982 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA apy 1 |

and the rest, eaten by cows, eto become milk by themselves, 80 the unmantfest, too, 18 transformed into the form of mahat and the rest

Vedainta-kaustubha

If 1t be objected Just as grass, water, eto are transformed into the form of milk, so the unmanifest 1s transformed into tho form of mahat and the rest, mdependently mndeed of another efficient cause, —the author replies “No” This cannot be sad Why? “On ac- count of the non existence elsewhere,” 16 because “elsewhere”, or in the case of oxen and the rest, other than that of cows, eto there 18 no transformation of the grass, water and so on, eaten by them, into the form of mik The particle “and” imphes that mnoe the transformation of the grass, eto , eaten by cows, mto the form of milk 18 admutted to be due to an intelligent principle, bkewise pradhina, too, 18 transformed 1700 the form of mahat and the rest as supenntended by an intelligent prmcple alone, and not by itself

COMPARISON

Raméanoja and Srikantha

They change the order of the stitras 5-9 which will be noticed at the end of sitra 9 Interpretation same

SUTRA 6

“]iVEN IF THHES BH THE ADMISSION (OF ACTIVITY ON THE PABT OF PRADHANA, STILL THEN IT CANNOT BE THR OAUSH), ON ACCOUNT OF THE ABSENOR OF A PURPOSE”

Vedinta -pirijita-saurabha

° पकड if there be the admission” of activity on the part of pradhina somehow or other, still pradhina cannot be the cause, since 9 purpose for such an activity 1s mmposaible on ita part, it bemg non-sentient

Vedinta-kaustubha It has been said under the aphomam “And on account of acti vity’’ (Br Sti 222) that pradhina has no power of mdependent activity, and hence 1s not the cause of the world Now the author

[80 227 ADH 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 3338

points out here that “even if there be the admission of activity on ita part per force 1, stall then pradh&na 18 not capable of bemg the cause Why? “On account of the absence of a purpose,” that 18, because there 18 no purpose for the creation of the world, seeing that the souls, merged in their own bliss, prior to creation, have no regard for en joyment or emancipation, while pradhina, bemg non sentient, 18 not capable of having enjoyment and the rest It cannot be said What purpose can the Highest Person, who has all His demres ful filled, have m creatang the world i—snce that has already been. pomted out under the aphoriam “But as im ordinary hfe, a mere sport” (Br Si 21 82)

Or (an alternative explanation of the phrase “arth&bhavat’’ ) the sense 18 On account of the absurdity of the statement, made per force (and not on the ground of reason), पाह =" Pradhiéina acts by 1taelf’, just bike the statement ‘The ether 1s running’

COMPARISON

Ramfnuja and Srikantha

They change the order of sfitras, which will be noticed at the end of sitra 9

SUTRA 7

‘Ivy 7 BH ARGUED 4S IN THR GASH OF A MAN AND ASTON, (WH BEPLY ) THEM ALSO

Vedainta-prijaita-saurabha

If 1t be argued that just as a blind man makes © lame man move, or the stone (1e the magnet) the 10, so does puruga move pradh&na, —(we reply ) in that case, the assumption of the non activity (of puruga) will be contradicted, and pradhana bemg something to be instigated by another will cease to be the primary cause of the world

Vedinta-kaustubha

If rt be argued just as > lame man,—who has the power of vision, but 1s devoid of the power of motion,—lost acedentally from Ins caravan

1 Ie somehow or other

(st 227 394 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADE 1 |

and wishing to go to & desired place, on finding a blind man,—who has the power of motion, but 1s devoid of the power of vison,—makes him move by mountmg on him, and just as the magnet makes the iron move, 80 exactly, though devoid of the power of action, the soul, possessed of the power of vision, makes pradhina, devoid of the power of vision, move by ita mere proximity Hence, m spite of the non sentence of pradhiina, the activities of creation and the rest, are possible 00.108 part,—the answeris “Thenalso”,1e even onthe ground of such examples, no actrvity 1s posmble on the part of the object exemplrfied, viz pradhina Thus, if puruga be admitted to be the mover of pradhina, then the mitral proposition, viz that puruga 18 not an agent, will come to be contradicted If pradh&na be an object to be moved by puruga, then the initial propomtion, viz that pradhine 18 by itself the cause of the world, will come to be contradicted Although the power of motion 18 not manifest 17 a lame man, he being without legs, yet he directs the man, who has the power of motion, by means ofspeech And the ao directed man, though not having the power of vision manifest because of his blindness, yet bemg a sentient beng, moves m accordance with his (viz the lame man’s) words The stone (viz the magnet), on the other hand, moves the iron (only) when brought mto connection with 1t by a man, and the णा does not move by nature Moreover, 7४ has been said under the aphoneam “If it be argued hke milk and water, there too” (Br Sti 2293), that everywhere and at all tames the Omnzpotent and Omniscient Bemg abides as the mover ofall Further, the proxmuity of puruga and एभि being eternal, there was no absence of such 8 proximity before 06006 the order of creation and dissolution, as well 98 the respective difference between bondage and release,—due to the prommuty of prakri and puroga—, are not possible, and there must result eternal activity and absence of dissolution In the case in hand, on the contrary, there 1s no defect whataoever, since 1b has been said that “And that (divmity) 18 endowed with all (powers)”’ (Br 97 2 1 29)

[श 22 8 ADH | | VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 835

SUTRA 8

“AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF BEING PRHPON DHRANT *’

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

As 1t 18 rmpossible for the gunas, which are m a state of equ hbrum at the tume of dissolution, to enter in a relation of mutual subordination and preponderance, 80 the inference (1e the infer 018 pradha&na) 1s not the cause of the world

Vedanta -kaustubha

For this reason also the inference (1e the mfernble pradhina) 18 not the cause of the world Why? “Qn account of the umposm bility of beng preponderant '' Thus, 1s predhina,—consisting of the three gunss 10. a state of equilibrium, not regulated by an intelhgent principle and estabhshed by mference aa admitted by you,—trans formed into the form of the world by means of entering into a state of mutual subordination and preponderance (of the gunaa), or mde pendently of any such state? If the first, then the preponderance of one among (these three gunas) sativa, rajas and tamas, which are in ® state of equilibrium prior to creation and are mutually inde pendent, bemg impossible, 10 18 nob posmble for pradhina to be the cause of the world If the second, then pradh&na, consistmg of the three gunas 19. © state of equilibrium and immutable, 15 not trans formed. mto the form of the world al) the more,——there being no state of mequahty conmsting 70 a mutual subordmation and preponder ance (of the gunas)

It cannot be said also that at the tame of creation there 18 a lapse from the state of equilibrium and the gunas entering mto a state of mutual subordination and preponderance, thereby the world arises,— for this leads to the horns of a dilemma ‘Thus, 18 10 admutted by you that the lapse from the state of equilibrium, at that time, 1 sponte- neous, or that 10 18 due to the Omnuaent Bemg? The first alter native 18 not valid because of the umpossibility of a spontaneous lapse without a cause, and also because of the following

Whatever has a cause has lapse, hke seeds and the rest

Whatever has no cause has no lapse, hke the soul

[st 2 2 9 336 VEDANTA PARIJATA-SAUBABHA aDH 1]

The second alternative, too, 1s not valid, because that 18 not admitted and because that will be fallmgin with the view of your opponents

SUTRA 9

‘‘AwD IF THERE BE AN INFHRENOH IN ANOTHER WAY, (PBADHANA CANNOT STILL BH THE CAUSE) ON ACOOUNT OF THE ABSENOB OF THE POWER OF BRING 4 ENOWER ”’

Vedanta-p&irijata-saurabha

“And if there be an inference” with regard to pradhAns “in another way "°, stall then ^" 0) account of the absence of the power of being a knower” on the part of pradhfna, the world 18 not due to 1t

Vedainta-kaustubha

Just as there may be the ongin of effecta, preceded by (pradhfina's) entering into a state of mutual subordination and preponderance in & way other than the stated, 80 प an inference be made with regard. to pradhina, stall then “on account of the absence of the power of bemg a knower”’,1e on account of pradhina berng devoid of the power of being a knower, the objections, viz impossibility of arrangement and the rest, mentioned above, must remam in 008 Hence the inference @ 8 the mfernble pradhfna) 1s not the cause of the world

COMPARISON

Raimfnuja and Srikantha

Interpretation same, but they read sfitras 5-9 70. a different order Thus —

Nembdrka, etc Rdmanwa, etc ०८. Anyatra-bhivéic ca "(Si 5) “Anyatra bhivic 08 " (Sai 4) "‘ Abhyupagame * (80 6) “Purugiémavat ` (Si 6) “Purusiémavat ` (ॐ 7) “Angitva ” (Sf 4) ‘Atgitva "` (Si 8) “Anyathinumitan '' (ति 7)

“Anyathinumitan = (ॐ 9) “Abbyupagame ” (Si 8)

[80 2 2 10 avxH 1] VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA 337

SUTRA 10

“Awp ON ACCOUNT OF CONTBADIOTION, (THH SAMEHYA DOCTRINE 78) INCONSISTENT *”

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

The view of Kapila 18 “inconsistent”, because of the opposition between its prior and subsequent (statements)

Ved&anta-kaustubha

The view of Kapila 1s “moonmstent’” m every way Why? Because of rts opposition to the Vedinta,-—that 18, the Vedintas, independent of all proofs, authoritatzve by themselves and eternally establshed, estabhsh the omniscient and omnipotent Lord of all as the cause of the omgin and the rest of the world, and the admisson of the doctrme of 9 non sentient cause 18 opposed to this,—because of that ,—because of the rejection of a doctrine based on mere reasoning in the passage ‘This knowledge 1s not attamable through reasonmg’ (Katha 29), and because of the oppomtion. between 108 pmor and. subsequent (statements) Thus, they hold that puruga (or the soul) 18 all pervading, devoid of attributes, mere consciousness, isolated (from prakri1) by nature, non attached like a lotus leaf! and imactrve Then again, they maintam also that prakria 1s an agent through ite mere proximity to purugs, and that through the super mnposition of nescience that very same (puruga) comes to have the attributes of ‘beng an agent’, ‘bemg an enjoyer’ and so on, to be afflicted by the three kmds of museries,? and to be subject to tranamigratory emstence Again, they teach that the salvation of purusa proceeds from the knowledge of prakyta and purusa Thus, a moltatude of moonsistencies between prior and subsequent (statements) may be found there

In the case under discussion, on the other hand, since in accordance with the Smrti passages ‘‘‘ The evil doers, the deluded, and the vileat men do not attam me,—they whose wisdom 1s destroyed by nescience and who have resorted to demoniacal nature’”’’ (GIt& 7 15), ‘Know ledge 18 enveloped by non knowledge, thereby beings are deluded’

1 Te yust as > lotus leaf 8 not wetted by water, so the soul ig not attached to anythmg 4 ‘Viz phymeal, mental and elemental 22

[80 2 2 11 338 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 2 ]

(४8 615), १.५४ the end of many births, one who 16 possessed of knowledge attams me”’ (Qité 719), ‘“ Those who attam me cross over this miy&"’ (Gité 714), ‘Many, punfied by the penance of knowledge come to attam my nature”’ (Gita 410), the causes of bondage, as well as of salvation,—lberating the bound soul from ita bondage, unprecedented, and characteruzzed by the attammoent of His nature,—is well established, there 1s not even a ahadow of any contradiction among prior and subsequent (stutements) Hence it 1s estabhahed that there 18 no contradiction of the concordance of the scriptural texta (with regard to Brahman) by the view of Kapula, which 18 opposed to the Veda and 1s set forward by means of fallacious reasoning

Here ends the section entitled “The mposability of arrange- ment” (1)

COMPARISON

While Nimb&rka adduces two reasons as to why the Simkhya doctrine 18 ‘inconsistent’, viz (1) oppositon to the Vedanta, (2) internal contradictions,—others adduce only one, viz Ram&nuja, Srikantha and Baladeva adduce the second,! Bhiskaro adduces the first® Hence they do not attach any special meanng to the particle “ca’’ in the siitra

Adhikarana2 The section entitled “The great andthe long” (Sttras 11-17)

SUTRA 11

“FoR, JUST 48 THE (OBIGIN) OF THE GREAT AND THH LONG FROM THH SHORT AND THE SPHERICAL (18 UNTENABLE) (SO EVERYTHING 18 UNTHNABLE IN THE VAISESIKA THEORY) ”

Vedanta-parijdta-saurabha Since if they be possessed of parta, then there will result an infinite regress , and. 1f without parta, then 1t will be mposstble for them. 2 88 2210 p 513 St B 229 pp 78 #, 25४2, AE B 229, p 61,

Parte 7and 8 GB 2210, p 96, Chap 2 Bh B 2210 p 112

(st 2 2 11 ADH 2] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 380

to be the producer of other evolutes 1,—there 1s moonsistency ग the origin of the bmary compounds from the atoms, and there 1s all the more consistency 710 the origin of ternary compounds from these (bmary compounds) Jake this, everything admitted by the main {81188 of the atomic view 18 consistent

Vedanta -kaustubha

Apprehending the objection, vz Let pradbAna, not superm tended by an mitelligent principle, be not the cause of the world, but let the groups of atoms, under the control of the wish of the Supreme Lord, be the cause of the world,—the author 1s now pointing out the moonsistencies in the atomuc doctrine as well

The procedure of the atomusts is the following A substance produces another substance, a quality another quality, and the pro duction of the effect proceeds from three causes, viz the mberent, the non mherent and efficient 8 , just as an effect, viz a piece of cloth, 1s produced by the threads which are the inherent cause, by ther mutual conjunction which 18 the non inherent cause, and by the shuttle, the loom, the weaver and the rest, which are the efficient cause Like wise, there are four kmds of atoms, distingwished as earth atoms, water atoms, fire atoms and air atoms, and they are eternal, without parts, possessed. of colour and the rest, and spherical m extension, and remain without producmg effects at the tame of dissolution At the tame of creation, the atoms become the mherent cause for the production of the effect (viz the world), their conjunction, the non- inherent cause, and the unseen principle » the efficient cause Thus, through the wish of the Lord, first motion arises in the air-atoms, then & conjunction (between them) and thereby an effect, viz a bmary compound, arises from two atoms, a ternary compound arises from. three binary compounds, a quaternary compound arises from four ternary compotinds, and so on, and through this process, finally, the great air arises and remaims trembling in space In the very same manner, fire arises from the fire atoms and remama shining im the form of earthly fire and 80 on In the very same manner, the great

1 O88 ed reads “parimina” mstead of “yartndma”,p 31 9 Samavdyin, asamavdyin, numnstia *Ie the ment or demert attachmg to a mans conduct m ona utete of

exatence and the correspondimg reward or punixhment with which he 1s visited m another

[st 2 2 11 340 VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH 2]

ocean arses from the water atoms and remains flowing In the very same manner, the great earth arises from the earth atoma and remams immobile in the form of clay, stones and the rest Again, the qualities of the effects arise from the qualities of the cause Justas the qualities of a piece of cloth amse from the qualitaes of the thread,—a red cloth bemg found to anse from red threads,—so the qualities of whitencas and the hke, mbermg m the bmary compounds and the rest, arise from the qualities of whiteness, etc mbhenng in the atoms Bat the combination of two ample atoms, producing a bmary compound, produces different measures, viz muinuteness and shortness, in the binary compound, but do not produce spheriatty, the measure of the emple atoms themselves,—because, then, there will result an mtense fineness (on the part of the bmmary compound which 1t has not) Smnilarly, at the tame of dissolution, too, through the wish of the Lord, there 18 motion m the atoms, thereby the dissolution of ther conjunction, thereby the dissolution of the bimary compounds and 80 on, and in this manner, finally, there 1s the dissolution of the earth and the rest

‘hus view 1s being refuted here The particle “or’’ m the aphorism, 28 meant for unplying the aggregate (of defects m the atomic doctrine) left unsaid The word ‘moonsistent’ 1s to be supplied from above The phrase “from the short and the sphencal” 18 to be apphed by dividing 16 17 a compatable manner Thuis beimg so, lke the doctrine of the omgin of a short binary compound from two smple spherioal atoms, and hke the doctrme of the ongin of the great and long ternary compounds from the short (bmary compounds), everything else too, maintained by them (viz the atomusta), 18 moonsstent—this 18 the construction of the words of the aphorism

The sense 18 this The ompim of bimary compounds from atoms 18 impossible That bemg impossible, the omgm of the ternary com pounds from the bmary compounds 18 all the more mposable In exactly the same manner, whatever 1s mamtamed by the atomusts 18 simply inconsistent Thus, 16 1s observed that the parta, viz the threads and the rest, produce a whole, viz a piece of cloth, only by bemg conjomed (with one another) by means of their six sides which are their own parts An atom, too, 18 established to have aix parts through its connection with the mx quarters As haa been said ‘An atom has sx parts because of 108 senultaneous connection with the mx (quarters)’ Hence, even the atoms must be productive of effects

[st 2 2 12 ADH 2} VEDANTA PARITATA SAURABHA 341

as possessed of parts indeed If they be so, then they themselves will become effects hke the binary compounds because of possessing parta And the parts of the atoms too,—oonjomed (with, one another) by means of their stx sides which are their own parts, and eatabliahing thet the atoms have parts,—must have parts, that parts, again, farther parts and 80 on, and thus there must be an infinite regress If the atoms be admutted to be without parts, then uf there be the conjunction of even a hundred atoms which fill no space, there will not be any extension different from that of a mangle atom, and hence there will never be (different kinds of extensions lke) mmuteness, shortness and the rest Thus, the omgin of the binary compounds 18 Impossible, 170. their absence, the ongm of the ternary compounds 18 impossible, and hence the origin of the world must be umpossible

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhiskara

Interpretation different ‘They take ths sittra as constatutng an adhikarana by itself, concerned with refutang the Vaifemka objec tion, viz that the qualities of the cause must mhere 170 the effect Hence if the intelligent Brahman be the cause of the world, then the quality of intelligence must be found in the world But mnce this 18 not the case, He 18 not 178 cause! The answeris Or just 88 (there 18 the omgm of) big and long (ternary compounds) from minute and short (bmary compounds) so there 1s the ongin of the non mntelligent world from the intelligent Brahman 2

SOTRA 12

“EVEN IN BOTH WAYS THERE IS NO ACTION (ON THE PART OF THE ATOMS), HENGE THHRH IS THE ABSHNOE OF THAT (VIZ CEHATION) ”

Vedanta-piarijita-saurabha

Because it 18 umpossaible for the unseen prmarple to mhere m the atoms, 98 well as because 1t 1s mpossible for 1t, connected with the

1 Note that an exactly sumiar objection has been put forward and refuted under Br Si 214-11 85106 there 18 no sense m repeating ib here As such Nimbdrka's way of interpreting seems preferable

£8B 2211 pp 51819, Bh B 2211, pp 118 14

[so 2 2 12 342 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 2]

soul, to be the instigator of the motion of the atoms,—thus “even in both ways” the first motion of the atoms 18 not possible ‘Hence there 18 the absence”’ of the creation of the world through the successive order of binary compounds and the rest, due to conjunction, which again 18 due to the motion of the atoms

Vediainta-kaustubha

The author 18 elucidating the statement (made in the last aphorism), viz Like the (ongm of) the great and the long, everything else, too, maintained by them, 18 nconmstent

“Even 7 both ways’’, no motion 18 possible in the atoms at the tame of creation ‘“‘Hence”,1e6 for this reason, viz on account of the umpossibility of motion, “there 18 the absence of that”, 1 © of the origin and the rest of the world through the successive order of binary compounds, ternary compounds and so on, due to the conjuncthon ofatoms The phrase “in both ways’? means Does the first motion (of the atoms) amse by itself, or through the atoms? The first alter native 18 not tenable, beng mmpossble Never does motion, ansing by itself, proceed to brmg water mm a pitcher It cannot be said also that 1t arises through a cause, because at that time (16 at the tame of creation) there exist no human effort, vibration, umpact and the rest (which might have been such ® cause) The second alter native, too, 18 not tenable, because then the atoms must become sentient, 1t beg umpossible for non sentaent atoms to be the wnstagator of motion In the building of a palace and the hike, the stones and the reat do not themselves act in conjunction with other works (connected with the building)

Or 1, (1 1t be saad that) the motion which arises m the atoms at that time 1s caused by the unseen principle, (we reply) There 1s negation of motion “in erther way’’ ‘Thus, does the unseen prinaple which causes the motion of the atoms inhere 17 the atoms, or in the individual soul? ‘The first alternative 18 not tenable, because the unseen principle, being originated by the good and evil deeds of the individual souls, cannot reside in something non sentient, because beung non senizent, 1t 18 not possible for the unforeseen principle to be the cause of motion, because the performance of good and evil

1 An alternative explanation of the word ‘ Ubhayathd'

[st 2 2 13 ADE 2] VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA 343

deeds beng 1mposaible on the part of atoms, the unseen principle must be necessarily admitted to be natural (to them), and in that case there will result the omgin of motion at 8] 068 The second alter native, too, 18 not tenable, because 1t 18 all the more mmposmble for the unseen princrple, mhermg in the individual soul, to urge the motion of the non sentient (atoms) ‘Thus, there 1s no motion “even 10 beth ways”

“Or 1 else no motion 18 possible, whether 1t be due to the dividual soul, or due to the Lord Thus, does the dividual soul give mse to the first motion through its own destiny (adpsta), or through 108 prox mity, or through 1ta attribute of consciousness? ‘Not the first, because of the above mentioned fault Not through ite proxmity also, because the proxmmity of the individual soul to the atoms bemg eternal, the consequence will be that 1t will ever give mse to the world Nor even through consciousness, because of the absence of conscousness then And motion does not proceed from the Lord as well Is the Lord, according to your view, demgnated in the Veda or established by inference and the rest* If 1t be said Demgnated in the Veda, then have faith in the procedure mentioned by Scripture thus ‘Every thing has that for its soul’ (Chand 6 8 7, etc ), ‘He became existence and that’ (Tait 26), and bemg overwhelmed with the sentiment of love for Him, be free from affiction,—what 1s the use of your doctrine of atoms? If 1t be said Hstablished through mference and the reat,—(we reply ) that 1t (viz imference) 18 not even established has been proved above #

SUTRA 13

“(Tae VasEgikKA DOCTRINE IS UNTENABLE) ALSO ON ACCOUNT OF THE ADMISSION OF THE RELATION OF INHEBENOH, ON ACCOUNT OF AN INFINITH REGRESS (ARISING THEREFROM) RHCAUSE OF SAMENESS '

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

“On account also of the admission of the relation of nherence,”’ the doctrine of atoms 18 not posaible, since just as 8 bmary compound 18 connected with 18 own cause by the relation of mherence, bemg

+ A thred alternative explanation of the word ‘Ubhayathad” ‘Vide VE 118

[st 2 2 18 344 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 2]

absolutely different therefrom, eo the relation of mnherence itaelf, too, 18 to be connected with the two related objects by another relataon of inherencs, ris absolute difference (from the two related objects) being the same, that, too, by another relaizon, and so on—thus there will be an infimte regress

Vedinta-kaustubha

The phrase ‘on account of the absence of that’ 18 to be supplied

For this reason also, the orgm and the rest of the world 1 the auocesarve order of the creatzon of binary compounds and the rest, due to the conjunction of the atoms 18 not posmble Why? “On account of the admission of the relation of mherence” Among separable objects, there 1s & relation of conjunction,! as between & rope and & pot Among inseparable objects, on the other hand, there 18 ॐ relation of mherence,? just as © piece of cloth exsts m the threads by the relation of inherence, a pot in the two pot sherds, 00 688 IN & cow and whiteness and the rest 17 & piece of cloth The relation between objects which are causes and effects 18 just this relation of inherence, snd this relation 18 proclasmed to be one, eternal, and all pervading like the ether —on account of the admission of such & relation of mherence—this 18 the sense

If it be asked What objection 1s there xf such a relation of m herence be admittedi—(the author) reples ‘On account of an infimte regress because of sameness’’ That 18, just as a bimary compound, absolutely different from its mbherent cause (viz the two mmple atoms), necessanly awaita a relatzon of mherence (for bemg connected with them), 80 the relation of mherence iteelf, bemg absolutely different from the two related objecta, 18 to be connected with them by means of another relation of mherence,—“ because of the samenesa”’ of absolute difference (1 © because there 18 absolute difference equally in both the cases, also because what 18 rteelf unrelated is never observed to be a relation)—that, too, by another relation of mberence, and that, too, and so on, thus “on account of finite regress’’, the atomic theory defeats rteelf

1 Samyoga 2 Samavdya

[st 22 1415 ADH 2] VEDANTA PARIJITA SAURABHA 845

SUTRA 14

“AND ON ACOOUNT OF THE EXISTHNOH (OF) BTBENAL (ACTIVITY AND INACTIVITY) ALONE ”’

Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

If the atoms be active by nature, there beng the exstence of (eternal) activity, there will result eternal creation, otherwise there will result eternal dissolution, and hence there 1s the absence of that (viz, creation)

Vedanta-kaustubha

For this, too, the atomic theory 18 untenable Why? If the atoms be admitted to be active by nature, then there bemg eternal actayity alone, there cannot be dissolution. If, they be admutted to be inactive by nature, there bemg eternal imactivity alone, the absence of creation will necessarily result—this 18 the sense

COMPARISON Raménuja, Srikantha and Baladeva

This 18 sutra 13 m the commentames of the first two Interpre tation different, viz “(Lf the samaviya be admitted to be eternal, the terms related by 20, viz ternary compounds, eto, 1e the world too must be) eternal indeed, on account of the existence ie eternity of the samavaya)’’ 1

SUTRA 15

“AND ON ACCOUNT OF (THH ATOMS) HAVING COLOUR AND 80 OF,

THH RHVERSE (VIEW WOULD FOLLOW), BEHOAUSH OF OBSERVA

TION *’

Vedainta-parijata-saurabha

And on account of the atoms having colour and the rest in accord ance with the respective effects, there must be non-eternity, which 18 the “‘reverse’’ of eternity, (on their part), since 0008 and the rest, posseased of colour and so on, are observed to be non-eternal Other wise, the effects must be devoid of colour, etc

18 B 2218 p 86 Part2, SK B 2218 p 75, Parta 7 and 8, GB 2214,p 107 Ghap 2

[st 2 2 16 346 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 2]

Vedanta-kaustubha

Since the effects are possessed of colour, etc, the atoms, too, are admutted to be possessed of colour and so 07 1 ‘Thus, amoe the four kinds of atoms are possessed of colour and 80 on, 16 possessed of colour, taste, amell and touch,—non eternity, the “reverse”’ of eternity, resulta, aa pota and the reat, possessed of colour and so on, are found to be non eternal If they be not admitted to be possessed of colour and the 1118, then the fact that the effects are possessed of colour and 80 on will come to be contradicted, and the imitial propostzon “Pos sessed of parts and eternal’ too will come to be contradicted For this reason too, there 18 the absence of that (viz creation),—this 18 the meaning of the particle “and” The sense 18 that an unseen object cannot be determined mm accordance with whatis seen Hence

the cause of the world 18 to be understood mm accordance with Scrip ture

SUTRA 16

“AND ON ACCOUNT OF FAULT IN BOTH WAYS”

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

If the atoms be possessed of more numerous qualities,* then the earth, water, fire and air will become similar If they be possessed. of less numerous qualities,® then, too, all the different 008 of atoms bemg connected with one quahty each, the earth and the rest too, having qualities corresponding to their causes, must be connected with one quahty each,—this ‘on account of fault m both ways”, there 18 indeed the absence of that (viz creation)

Vedanta-kaustubha

For this reason also, the procedure admitted by the atomusts 18 not posable Why* Because whether the atoms be admitted to be possessed of more numerous qualities, or to be possessed of less numerous qualities, “im both ways’, too, there 1s fault Since the

1 An effect oan have no qualities which the cause has not

9 Te every kmd of atoms are possessed of the five qualitues of colour and the rest

ॐ Te each be posseased of 1ts peculiar qualities

[80 2 2 16 ALDH 2] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 347

qualities of the effect are due to the quahties of the cause, all the qualities of the cause, euch 88 colour, taste and the rest, must attach to all the effects As ९ result, there must be smell and taste m fire, colour, taste and smell 11 air, and the grossneas on the part of the atoms, since the earth, which has the most numerous qualities, 18 observed. to be gross If they be possessed of less numerous qualities, then all must have one quality each If this be so, then there must be touch 77. fire, colour and touch in water, colour, touch and taste in earth, because, those particular qualities are absent from those pertioular atoms Otherwise, there will result everything every where

Tf 1t be argued that the earth 1s observed to be possessed of colour, taste, smell and touch, water to be endowed with the attributes of colour, taste and touch, the fire to be posseased of colour and touch, and the arr 18 to be possessed of touch Corresponding to these qua 1०68, some atoms are supposed to be possessed of more numerous quahties, others less numerous Hence the above objection cannot be raised,—

(We reply ) No, for 10 that case, too, those that have more numerous qualitaes will be deprived of their atomimty+ In the case in hand, on the other hand, there 18 no fault whatsoever, snoe the world has the ommscient and omnipotent Lord of all as its matenal 006

COMPARISON Raimgnuja, Srikantha and Baladeva

This 18 sutra 16 in the commentanes of the first two

Interpretation different—viz an eluadation of the previous siitra, viz “Because there 18 fault m both ways’’, 1e either if the atoms be possessed of colour, etc , or if they be not On the first, they cannot be eternal, on the second, their effects cannot be pos sessed of colour and the reat ४

‡ Since mersase 770. qualities cannot take place unless there is & amnultaneous INCreeass I ZS

9 त B 2215, pp 8687, Part 2 SK B 2215 p 77, Parte 7 and 8, GB 2216,p 107, Chap 9

[80 2 2 17-18 948 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA aDH 3]

SUTRA 17

“AND BHOAUSE OF NON ACOEPTANOE, (THERE MUST BH AR) ABSOLUTE DISREGARD (FOR THE ATOMIO THHORY) ”

Vedainta-parijaita-saurabha

Because of the rejection of atomism by the wise, “an absolute disregard.” for 1t 18 to be shown by those who are desirous of salvation

Veddanta-kaustubha

Certam portions,—suoh as the doctrine of a pre existent cause and the rest,—of the doctrme of the causality of pradh&na, though rejected on the ground of 18 opposition to Serpture and reasoning, has been accepted by those who are versed in the Veda But “because of the non acceptance”, 16 rejection, by the wise, m toto, of the doctrine of the causality of the atoms, mmagined by the Vaisesikas, because of 108 opposition to reasoning, and because of ita opposition to the Veda, “there 18 an absolute disregard”,—ie the doctrme of the causality of atoms 1s to be disregarded by those who wish for the highest

Hence 10 18 established that there 18 no contradiction of the

doctrine of the causality of Brahman by the doctrine of the causality of atoms which 18 to be rejected from a distance

Here ends the section entitled “The great and the long” (2)

Adhikaranas 3 The section entitled “The aggregate (Sitras 18-27)

SUTRA 18

“EVEN If THE AGGREGATE HAVING TWO CAUSES (BE ADMITTED), (THERE IS) THH NON BSTABLISHMENT OF THAT (VIZ OF THE AGGREGATES) ”

Vedanta -parijata-saurabha

The author 1s refutang the view of Sugata 1 Kiven if the aggregates of the element and the elemental, the mind and the mental be admutted, still then, on account of the non

1 Ie of the Buddhists

[80 2 2 18 ADH 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 349

sentence of the objects aggregated, as well as on account of non admuasion of another cause of the aggregation, the aggregates are not poasible

Vedanta-kaustubha

Kapila, the mamtamer of the doctrme of pre existing effeota, holds that pradh&na, not having Brahman for ita soul, 28 the cause of the world He has been refuted by reason of mamtammg what 18 opposed to the doctrine of the causality of Brahman and the Vedic doctmme Kanda, inferior even to him im intelligence and the maintainer of the doctrine of non existing effects, holds the cause of the world to be of various kinds 1, and hence he has been refuted by reason of mamtammg what 28 opposed to the ‘great’? Now, the doctrme of the Buddhists, mferior to that even, 1s being refuted, on account of 108 similarity to that ®

The doctrme taught by the Buddha being interpreted differently, four views were propounded by his four classes of 0801168 These followers are called, (1) श्यावा, (2) Sautrintuke, (8) Yogictra, and (4) Midhyamika Among these, the first two mamtain the realty of external objects Among them, agam, the first mamtais that external objecta are directly percervable According to hm, external 0016008, hke pots and the rest, are knowable by the evidence of direct perception The other maintams that external objects are inferrible through cognitions According to him, external objects hike pots and rest, which are not directly perceived, are wnferred through coguttions, produced m the forms of potas and so on and directly percerved The third mamtamas the reality of cognitions alone without any substratum He holds that external objecta are lke dreams All of them maintam that the objects admitted by them are momen tary The view of the fourth 1s that everything 18 void He holds that the contanuous stream of cognitions, freed from object and subject forms, persista from moment to moment of the bams of past impressions, like a lamp in 8 place sheltered from wind But when past impressions are destroyed, 16 attams a complete extinction hke the lamp itself, this attamment of non-existence 18 salvation The others, on the other hand, hold that there 18 no mterruption m the

1 Viz the four kmds of atoms 2 Vide Br Si 2217 9 The Buddhusts too admit the aggregainon of atoms like the Vardenkas

80 2 2 18 350 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 3]

contmuous stream of cognitiong Among them, the views of the # ०8088 and the Madhyamika will be refuted Inter But in this section, the views of the realists, viz the Vaibh&saikas and the Sautrintikas, are bemg refuted together

Thus, they speak of five groups,! viz colour, cognition, feeling, name and ympression 2 Among these, the colour group conmsts 11) the four elementa, lke the earth and the rest, and the elemental m the form of the body, sense organs, and sense objects Among these, the earth atoms, possessed of colour, taste, smell and touch, and hard by nature, are aggregated into the form of the earth, the water atoms, possessed of colour, taste and smell, and viscid by nature, are aggregated into the form of water, the fire atoms, possessed of colour and touch, and hot by nature, are aggregated mto the form of fire, likewise the air atoms, possessed of touch and mobule by nature, are aggregated into the form of air, and the four elements, like the earth and the rest, are aggregated into the form of body, sense organs and Rense-objects In this way, these four kmds of momentary atoms are held to be the cause of the aggregation of the elements and the elemental The colour group, consisting of the elements and the elemental and due to the atoms, 1s the external aggregate The cognition group consists m a stream of cognitions like the cognition of a pot, cognition of a piece of cloth, and so on, based on the internal cognition of the ‘I’, and subsistmg unmterruptedly This alone 18 the agent, the enjoyer and the soul, and from xt alone all ordinary practical transactions proceed The feelmg group consista in pleasur able or painful experiences The name group consists m the cognition of secondary marks, eg (in the cogmtion ) ‘a cow possessed of auspiciousness’, the cow 1s distinguished by the secondary mark of auspiciousness ‘The impression group consists mm the mental qualities of attachment, aversion, delusion, pnde, maloe, fear, grief, depression and 80 on These last four kinds of groups are said to be the mmd and the mental Among these, the cognition group 18 said to be the mind. or the soul, others mental , and thus they are mternally aggregated im such a way as to be the substratum of ordimary practical transactions This 18 the internal aggregate, due to the four groups, begmnng with the cognition group The soul and the ether, other than the

1 Skandha > Ripa, vyfidna vedand, sanyAd and samebira

(at 2 2 19 ADH 3] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 361

two aggregates, are non existent by nature These two aggregates make the course of mundane existence possible, and practical hfe bemg thus made posable, there 18 no need, 1t 18 thought, of an eternal soul

(Correct conclusion ) With regard to1t wereply Evenif there be the admission, mn the above way, of aggregates,1e of groups having two causes, still then “there 18 the non establishment of that’”’,—ie establshment “of that’, viz of that which has two causes, too, 1s mdeed impossible The 86288 18 because the spontaneous aggregation of non sentient objects, mutually mdependent, 18 not posable, and. also because of ther momentarimess, the aggregate of the elements and the elemental, as well as the aggregate of the mmd and the mental, are not possible Further, because of the non admismon of a permanent enjoyer, of a sentient controllear—one who brings about the aggregation, of an omniscient and universal Lord, as well as because of the consequence of the world becoming super sensible by reason of the super sensibleness of the atoms themselves, the course of mundane existence must disappear The sense 18 that this view 19 faulty, since it rejects Brahman, taught by the beginnmgleas Veda, 81705 10 admuita the aggregates of atoms, unseen and unheard, and since a cause for the aggregation 18 impossible

SUTRA 19

“IT? IT BH OBJBOTED THAT (ON ACCOUNT OF THE MUTUAL CAUSALITY (OF NHSCIENOE AND THE REST), (THE AGGREGATION) 78 POSSIBLE, (WE BEPLY ) NO, 21004089 OF (THEIR) NOT BEING THE OAUSH OF AGGEBGATION "°

Vedinta-padrijaita-saurabha

It cannot also be that no account of the mutual causahty of 0980808, past Impressions, cognition, name and form, six supports 1 and the rest, the aggregation and the reat, are possible,—for they, too, are not the causes of aggregation

1 Amdyd samskdra, vyfidna nima-ripa, gaddyaiana, etc For explanation, see below V K

[so 2 2 19 352 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 3]

Veddinta-kaustubha

If 1t be objected. In sprite of the non admussion of a sentient and omniscient bemg as bringing about the aggregation, no harm 18 done, gince our View admita the mutual causality of nescience and the rest That which goes towards the effect aa 108 cause 1s ‘pratyaya’,ie the cause, the state of that, no account of that,! all aggregation and the rest become possible Thus, nescience and the rest, fanotsonmg from all eternity, are admyrtted to be the causes of the contmuous stream of cognitions Among these, the word ‘nescience’ 18 denotative of error, such as, taking the non permanent as permanent, taking what 18 not the way (to salvation) as the way and 80 00 Through it past impressions, consisting 1 attachment and so on to sense objecta hke colour and the like, arises It1s through thus that activity springs forth when occasion amses Activity conmsts mm good and bad deeds, m, accordance with the declaration by the Buddha ‘There 18 action, there 18 result’ ‘Through this alone cognition arises Thence the four (elements like) the earth and the rest, the cause of the aggregate, viz the body, arise, and that very thmg 18 said to be name because of bemg the substratum of name From them amses the body, from 7 the mx supports, viz the five organs of knowledge and the mmd, from them. touch, from 2४ feelmg, viz pleasure, pam and the rest, from 1t nescience and the reat once more Thus, the objects revolving unceasingly lke water wheels, aggregation 78 posable therefrom Hence, everything 1n our doctrine 18 indeed conmstent,—

(We reply) “no” Why? “Because of (ther) not bemg the cause of aggregation,” 1 6 because nesmence and the rest are not the causes of aggregation, for 1b can by no means be said that nescence, consisting in the error of taking a person at & distance to be a post, 18 the cause of the aggregation of the already existing person Lakewine, attachment and the rest too, caused by 1t (viz nescience), are not the cause of aggregation.

OOMPARISON

Samkara and Baladeva

Readmg different, viz “Itaretara pratyayatvid 1t1 cen notpatta mitra nimrttatvat’’ Interpretation different acoordmgly viz “If 16 be said that because of the mutual causality (of nescience and the

1 Tins explams the compound “pratyayateds >

[80 2 2 20 ADH 8] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 63

rest), (aggregation 1s possible), (we reply ) no, because of (their) bemg the causes of the omgin only (of the 1mmediately subsequent effects, and not of aggregation) ˆ 7

Bhaskara

Reading slightly different, viz ‘“Itaretara pratyaya manyat vat ie

SUTRA 20

“Agp BECAUSE OF THE ORSSATION OF THE PRIOR OWN THE PRODUCTION OF THE SUBSEQUENT °

Vedanta-pirijata-saurabha

For this reason, too, this doctrme 18 not reasonable,—ance “on the production of the subsequent”, thare resulta the destruction of the prior, it bemg momentary

Vedanta-kaustubha

Tf 1b be argued that as the prior 18 the cause of the production of the later, so our doctrme 1s conmstent,—{we reply ) no “Because of the cessation of the prior on the production of the subsequent "°

In ordmary life, causality 1s observed to belong only to an existent lump of clay, the prior, at the time of the production of a pot, the subsequent But on your view, on account of the momentarmess of all existing objects, the prior moment 18 destroyed and cannot, there fore, be the cause of the subsequent moment Here a momentary existence 18 said to be ‘moment’ Now, to begm with, doas the pror moment of the pot 8 give mse to the subsequent effect which ests at the same time, or as iteelf unompmated, or as itself destroyed ¢ The first alternative 18 not tenable, because that (viz the effect) also (will give rise to) another effect existing at the same tame, that, toc, to another and so on, and thus everythmg will last only for a moment sunultaneously, and because the conventional distmmction between the pmor and the subsequent will come to an end The

18B 2219 p 587 GB 2219, pp 118 114, Chap 2 2 Bh B 2.219, p 117 9 Ie the pmor momentary existence pot

23

[st 2 2 @ 354 VEDANTA PARIJATA-SAURABHA ADH 3]

second alternatzve, 400, 18 not tenable, that bemg impossible More over, to say that (the cause) 1s unonginated 1s to umply nothing but 108 non-existence, and if 10 (viz non existence) be a cause, then by reason of the absence of obstructions, there may be the omgm of everythmg everywhere The third alternative, too, 1s not tenable because the prior bemg destroyed, there will be agam the origm of everythmg everywhere It cannot be said that the prior momentary existence persista up to the omgin of the subsequent momentary existence, for then, 1ts momentamness will come to be abandoned

SUTRA 21

“(LF It BE ADMITTED THAT THE EFFHOT ORIGINATES) WHEN (THE OAUSE IS) NOT RXISTENT, (THEN THERE IS) THE OONTRADIOTION OF

THE INTTIAL PROPOSITION, OTHBRWISH THERE IS SIMULTANEOUS wag ”’

Veddnta-parijaita-saurabha

On the admuiseion of the orgin of the effect when the cause 1s non existent, there must result the “contradiction of the muztial propos tion”, viz that there 18 the origin of cognitions from four causes, Viz sense organs, hght, direction of the mind and sense objects On the admission of the ongin of the effect when the cause 1s existent, there must be the omgm of another momentary existence when the prior momentary existence 1s still present, and thus there must be

“‘amultaneousness” according to your view, the mamtaimers of the doctrine of momentarmess !

Vedanta-kaustubha

The author condemns the causeless origm of effects

If 1t be argued that let there be the production of the subsequent (effect) without a cause, and this being so, the above objection cannot be raused—then we reply If1t be admitted that there 8 the ong of the effect even when the cause 1s non existent, then there must be the “contradiction of the mutial propomtion” Thus, there must be the “contradiction”, 16 abandonment, of your inztial proposition that in the production of cogmtions, there are four causes, the maim cause, viz the sense organs like the eyes and the rest, the auxhary cause, viz light, the immediate cause, iz the direction of the mind,

[st 2 2 22 ADH 3] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 366

and the supporting cause, viz the sense objecta! Moreover, even if the causeless origm of effect be admutted, the above mentzoned fault, vis the orgin of everythmg everywhere, remains unavoidable If, again, to avoid this difficulty, the case be admitted to be “otherwise”, 1 © 1£1t be admitted that the effect origmates when the cause 1s existent, then there must be “mmultaneousness”,1e there must be sumulta- neous existence of the cause and the effect That 1, the above mentioned objection remainsinforce Thus, does the prior momentary existence pot come to be the cause of another momentary existence pot at the tre when 16 (the prior) iteelf exusta, or does 1 become the cause of the subsequent moment,—which 18 bemg generated,—by lasting tall the time of ita production? In exther case, there 1s simul taneousness On the first alternative, all the momentary existences will come to be perceived at the same time, and the conventional distanction between the prior and the subsequent will come to an end On the second alternative, their momentarmess will be abohshed, and owing to the persistence of two momentary extences, there must follow @ simultaneous perception of two momentary existences in the same place

COMPARISON Baladeva

The meaning of the phrase “pratiyfioparodhah” different, viz contradiction of the initial proposition (viz that the world omgmates from the skandhas) 2

SUTRA 22

“(THERE 78) THE NON ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CONSCIOUS AND UNCONSOIOUS DESTRUCTION ° ON ACCOUNT OF THE NON INTHRRUP TION (OF THE STREAM OF COGNITIONS) ”

Vedainta-parijata-saurabha

There 18 no possibility for the causal or causeless destruction,* because there 18 no possibility of an imterruption of the contmnuous series and because there 1s a recognition of the members of the series

i sahakdrin samanantara Glambana * 8 2221,pp 116 16, Chap 2

: and aprah samkhyd

* For explanation, see below V K

80 2 2 22 356 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA. ADH 3]

Vedinta-kaustubha

Thus, first the (doctrine of) omgm, admitted by the opponents, has been disposed of Now the (doctrime of) destruction too, admitted by them, 18 bemg disposed of

The destruction which is preceded by an act of thought 1s

‘conscious destruction” , destruction not so preceded 18 “unconscious destruction’’ These two kinds of destruction are admitted by them Among these, the destruction of emsting objecta,—which 18 caused by the blow of a hammer and the rest, which consiste of the termination of a seTies of similar momentary existences, and which 1s percervable and gross,—is 8810. to be preceded by an act of thought The destruc tion of existent objects,—which 18 not percervable, subtle, causeless and. takes place m a series of similar momentary existences at every moment,—is said to be non preceded by an act of thought There 1s the “non estabhshment’’, 1e wnpossbility, of these two kinds of destruction with regard to the continuous series and the single members of the series Why? “On account of the non mterruption of the series’ ‘First, no causal destruction of the series 18 possible Thus, 1t bag admitted by you that there 1s the destruction, at every moment of existing objects with regard to a prior member of the series, 1t 18 admitted that in spite of bemg destroyed, there 1s the ongin from 1t of a subsequent (member) which 1s caused by 1t and 1s non exstent indeed The sense 18 that m spite of a momentary member of the series being destroyed, at that moment, by the blow of a hammer and. the rest, the origm of a subsequent member 18 possible, no account of the absence of umpedimenta, and thereby a subsequent series being possible, the causal destruction of the 86168 18 not possible In the cage under discussion, on the other hand, omgmation and destruction. are said to be the different states of clay and the rest that are indeed. existent But, on your view, the mterruption of the continuous series 18 not possible even by the blow of a hundred hammers at all tumes— this 1s the sense

Moreover, 1f there be the destruction of the last member of the series through © cause, then there cannot be properly the destruction of others, too, without causes, and hence there must result the percep tion of many [0008 m the place of one pot It cannot be said also that they are subject to a causeless destruction, taking place at every moment in 9 series of mmilar momentary existences, and as such the

[80 2 2 23 avy 3] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA 95'7

above objection cannot be raised,—for then such & destruction bemy 7088715 on the part of the last member of the series, a causal destruction becomes meaningless It cannot be said also that there ४ the ongin of e series of dissimilar momentary existences through (the blow of) a hammer and the rest too, and as such the above objection cannot be 78960 ,-- 0609786 when the prior member 18 destroyed by a hammer and so on, too, there reaultang the omgm of a subsequent one, simular to xt, by reason of the absence of contrary circumstances, there 18 no possibikty for 9 series of dissimilar existences, and because of the absence of any reason for the ormgmation of a series of dissumilar existences

A causeless destruction of the senes, too, 28 not possible, for then the disappearance of the entire Universe Wil result

In the same manner, these two (viz the causeless and causal destructions) ate not possible with regard to the angle mambera of the series,—for if here the causeless destraction of partacular members be admitted, then the destruction once more of the momentary members by the hammer and. the rest will be imposable A causeless destruction, too, cannot become the annihilator of exstent objects, amnce single members of the series, like pots and the rest, are recognized 1

COMPARISON Bhaskara Reading different, viz “asambhavah” in place of “‘avicchedSt” >

SUTRA 23

“AND ON ACOOURT OF FAULT IN BOTH WAYS”

Vedainta-parijata-saurabha

Because the series has no existence beyond the single members of the series, and because single members themselves are momentary,

॥ ~ ` श | eg व

1 + © there can be no complete destruction of that wluch m, og when a vessel of clay 18 smashed to preces, we stil] pereai\o and recognize the inaterial viz olay which contunues to exist

° Bh B 2222, p 120

[80 2 2 23 358 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 3]

ther view, viz that salvation 18 the cessation of nescience, too, 8 inconastent

Vedainta-kaustubha

For this reason also, the Buddhistio view 18 inconmstent Why? Because there 18 “fault” in ther view of salvation even “im both ways ‘Thus, salvation 18 held by them te be the cessation of nescience and the rest 18 thos (a. cessatzon) of the series or of the smgle members of the series? Not the first, because as the semes has no existence beyond the mngle members, 1t (viz the cessation of the series) 18 meapable of (bringing about) salvation Not the second, because the single members are momentary

Moreover, 1s salvation, consisting in the cessation of nescence and the rest, due to a cause or not! If the first,1e on the view Salvation arises from the repeated practice of four fold truths, viz the truth that there 1s a cause, the truth that there 1s cessation, the truth that there 1s suffermg and the truth that there 18 ® path! The truth that there 18 & cause means the knowledge, 1e ascertainment, that everything has anongm The truth that there 18 cessation means that everything 1s momentary The truth that there 18 suffermg 7168708 that everything 1s full of suffermg The truth that there 18 a path means that everything 28 void, everything 18 soulleas,—on this view, the cessation. of attachment and the rest being admitted to arise from these, the initial propomtion, viz that there 18 a causeless destruc

tion, wsetaside If the second, the teaching of the means will become futile And thus there 1s fault m both the ways

COMPARISON Raminuja

This 18 sitra 22 in his commentary Interpretation different, viz ‘Because there 1s fault im both ways’”’,1e the Buddhistic views

of ongmation ftom nothmg and passmg away mto nothing are both open to objections *

Bhiskara This siitra 1s not found m the commentary of Bh&skara

1 Samuddya mrodha, dubkha mdrga a irr B 2222,p 08

[श 2 2 24 4DH 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 359

Srikantha

This 18 stitra 22 1n his commentary too His interpretation 1s also very similar to that of R&iminuja, viz on the Buddhist view, the origmated. effect 18 unreal, (since 1t passes away as soon as 16 arises), also the effect arises from non existent cause (emcee the cause which 18 momentary 18 no more, when the effect comes to be) Hence the Buddhist view 18 untenable 1

——

SUTRA 24 ‘AND IN THE ETHER TOO, ON ACCOUNT OF THE NON DISTINCTION २

Vedanta-piarijata-saurabha

And the imitial proposition enunciated by them was that there 18 non-existence “in the ether’’,® and this 18 not reasonable, “on account of (1ta) non distinction” from the earth and the rest

Vedainta-kaustubha

They maintain that the destruction of existing 0016608 which 18 preceded. by an act of thought, the destruction which is not preceded by an act of thought, and the ether,—these three are non-entities, and as such, non definable, causelesa and unreal Among thease, the two kinds of destruction have been disposed of Incidentally, salva- tion, consisting 17 the cessation of nescience, has been condemned Now, the reverend author of the aphorisms, maintaming the demon- strated conclumon of Sarnpture, 13 condemning the (doctrme of) the non definableness of the ether, the remamung one

The mutual proposition of the non substantiality of the ether 18 not reasonable, “on account of the non distinction” of the ether, mn point of substantiality, from the earth and the rest,—and just as terrestrial ammmals move on the earth, and the acquatic animals m water, 80 do the flying animals in the aky,—and also on account of the scriptural declaration of the producbleness of the ether, 176 other positive entities,—this 18 indicated by the particle “and” (m the stitra),—2m the passage “From him amse the vital breath, the

168K B 2222, p 86, Parts 7 and 8 2Ie the ether w 9 non entuty

[st 2 2 26 26 360 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 3]

mind, and all the sense organs, the ether, the air, the hght, water and the earth, the supporter ofall” (Mund 213) Thesubstantzality of the ether was approved by the Buddha as well, who said out of compassion ‘As long as there 1s the existence of the ether, and as long as there 18 the existence of the world, so long may there be the existence of me, the destroyer of the suffermgs of the world ’

COMPARISON a Bhaskara

This 18 sitra 23 in Bhaakara! Interpretatuon of the word. “avidesit” different, viz “from the same (scriptural text, viz Tait

21)” 1t 18 known that the ether hke the arr and the yest, arses from the soul 2

SUTRA 25 “AND ON AGOOUNT OF REMEMBRANCE ° Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

And on account of the recognition, viz “This 28 that’, this doctrme 18 untrue

Vedinta-kaustubha For this too the doctrne of momentarmness 18 not reasonable Why? “On account of remembrance”,1¢6 on account of the remem- brance of an entaty, percerved by one Hence an eternal soul, the

experiencer, must of necessity be acknowledged, otherwise the cessation. of all practical activities will result

SOTRA 26 ^ (गषत GOAN BE NO ORIGINATION) FBOM THE NON EXISTENT, BECAUSE OF NON OBSERVATION ' Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

An entity does not amse from a non entity, “‘on account of non- observation”

1 Wrrtten as sutra 2 2 24 in conformity with Samkara a number > Bh B 2223,p 121

[80 2 2 27 ADH 3] VEDANTA-PABIJATA SAURABHA 361

Vedadnta-kaustubha

It 18 assumed. by the Buddhists that there 1s the omgm of an entity from a non-entity This 1s not reasonable Why? Because the ongin of potas and the rest from non existent olay, eto 1 never observed,—on the contrary, their omgm from emstent clay and the rest alone 1s observed

COMPARISON

Srikantha and Baladeva

This 1s siitra 25 in the commentary of Srtkantha He begins ® new adhikarana here, ending with the next siitra, concerned with the refutation of the Sautrantaka school of the reahst Buddhista According to him, the preceding siitras are concerned with the refutation of the Vaibhiaka 80100} only But Nimbérka refutes these two schools together

Baladeva also takes this sfitra as concerned speaally with the refutation of the Sautrantaka school, though he does not begin a new adhikarana 8006 he takes the next siltra to be refermng to both the schools equally

They mterpret the stitra in the same manner, viz (‘'There 15 no origin of things from) the non exstent, on account of non perception ” That 1s, the Sautrantika view that an object 1s mwferred from the impressions left on our mind by it 1s absurd, for a momentary, and as such & non existent, something cannot produce any umpressions 2

SOTRA 27 “AND THUS (THERE WILL BE) ACCOMPLISHMENT ON THE PART OF THE INACTIVE AS WELL"

Vedinta-parijita-saurabha

Otherwise, there may be the “accom ° of ends hke knowledge and the rest on the part of one who has not resorted to any means

18K B 2225,p 09, Parta 7and8,@B 2226,p 122, Ohap 2

[80 2 2 28 362 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4

Vedinta-kaustubha

Moreover, just as 1t 18 admitted by you that there 18 the ongm of entity from non entity, so there will result the “accomplishment” of the demred for effects, through the more non existence of implementa, even “on the part of the mactive”,1e on the part of those who have 1809060 the implements leading to their demred ends But there 18 never any attamment of knowledge and the rest by one who 18 Inactive, and > perpetual relgious student, leadmg a hfe of chastaty! and unmarried, never gets a son Hence, 1४ 1s established that the demonstrated conclusion of Scripture 18 not contradicted by the views of the Vaibhimkas and the Sautrintikas, based on a mere semblance of (and not real) reason

Here ends the section entitled ‘‘ The aggregate ”’ (8)

Adhikarana 4 The section entitled ‘“Percep tion” (Sutras 28-81)

SUTRA 28

“(THBRE 18) NO NON EXISTHNOH (OF EXTERNAL OBJECTS), ON ACOOUNT OF PHROBPTION ”’

Vedainta-parijaita-saurabha

There 18 “no non existence” of external objecta as held by the Taintainers of the reality of consciousness alone, but they are, indeed, existent Why? “Qn account of perception ”

Vedainta-kaustubha

Now, the view of the Yogtic&ra 1s being disposed of

The Yogi&icira Buddhist, the mamtamer of the reality of consciousness alone, holds that those objecta which are other than consciousness are all nonexstent Thus, to think that manifold external objects exist is an error There are only manifold cognitions which are momentary, variegated, perceptible and have definite forms Only cognitions lke ‘blue’, ‘yellow’, which have definite forms, are revealed (directly to the mmd) It must be admitted certamly even by the maintamers of the reality of external objects that the cognitions arising from the contact of sense organs with those particular objects

1 Narsfhika

[8 2 2 28 ADH 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 363

have forms of those objecta respectively If this be so, then all practical transactions being possible through those forms alone, what 18 the use of umagining external objecta? It (viz a cognition) bemg self manifesting like a lamp, 18 directly perceived If what 1s non percetved be cognized, then there will be non distinction between one’s own cognitions and the cogtition of others But there 18 1058 a distinction (between them) A man acta or reframs from acting on the basis of his own cognitions ‘This has been declared by Viprabhikeu as well thus ‘There is no understanding of the meanmg of what 18 non percerved The cognitive self, though non divided, 18 yet looked. upon by men of perverted understanding to be possessed of the differences of object percerved, the percerver and consciousness ’ Thus, the object form 1s the object to be known, the percerver form 18 the act of knowledge, and his consciousness 1s the result, and thus these three are 1magined in one and the same process of conamousness Hence there are no external objecta

For this reason also (there are no external objecta—viz) On account of being uniformly perceived together, there 18 no difference between ‘blue’ and 1t8 cognition Whenever there 1s the cognition of blue, blue, too, 18 cognized at the very same moment Hence, there 18 no difference between. these two

For this reason, too, (there are no external objecta, viz ) The cognitions in our waking state are devoid of ( © do not correspond to) external objects, because they are mere cognitions, like the dream cognitions and the rest

If 1t be asked How can there be a variety of cognitions im the absence of external 0016008 1 We reply owing to the vanety of the past impressions The vanety (of cognitions) 18 explicable by reagon. of the fact that the cognitions and the past impressions stand m the relation of mutual causes and effects, hke the seed and the shoot

(Correct conclumon) On this suggestion, we reply The non existence of external objects 18 not possible Why? “On account of perception,”’ 16 because of the direct perception of external objects, other than cognitions Although the idrvidual soul, having the stated marks, 1s eternal knowledge by nature and 2४8 attribute of knowledge, too, 18 indeed eternal like the ray of the sun, yet mnoe it haa its knowledge veiled by 76801608 due to the begmningless m&yé,1

1 Ile व्व or matter

[st 2 2 20 26४ VEDANTA PARLIATA SAURABHA ADH 4]

1# errs 11 cogmizing objects in birth after birth, na well as m one birth even And 1t knows once more the sun and the rest, installed by the Highest Self, as well & the objects collected by 108 father and fore fathers, which are all already existent, from the surrounding company of people The sense 18 that, henco, therd 18 no non-existence of the 0016608 which are different from knowledge, the sun and the moon, fire, mountain, the carth, water, cow, horse and the rest bemg established on the ground of direct perception

The argument,—viz It 18 to be admitted certamly even by the mamtaimers of the reality of external objects that cognitions anmng from the contact of sense organs with those particular objects have the forms of those objecta respectively If this be so, then all practical transactions being [00881016 through those forms alone, what 18 tho use of 1magining external objects !—21s not tenable, mance 17 the absence of objects, the cognztiona of the objecta cannot have forme similar to them ‘Thus, an external object is other than knowledge and 1ts knowledge 18 other than 1t

The argument—viz_ that owing to their being uniformly perceived. together, there 18 no difference between blue and 168 perception,—too, 18 not tenable, for there 8 an admussion of difference through this very admission of a simultaneous perception 1

SUTRA 29

“AND ON ACCOUNT OF DISSIMILARITY, (THE WAKING COGNITIONE ABE) NOT LIKE DEEAMS AND THE BEST ”’

Vediinta-parijata-saurabha

The baselessness of the cognitions of the walang state cannot be established on the analogy of the dream cognitions and the rest, on account of there bemg no parallelism between the two cases, as well 88 on account of dream consciousness too, having s basis

1 That ws to say that A and B are perceived together 18 to say that there 28 & difference between them Otherwise there is no sense 17 saying that A and. B are porcerved together

[sa 2 2 30 ADH 4] VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA 966

Vedanta-kaustubha

To the argument, viz The cognitions m the waking state do not correspond to external objects, because they are mere cognitions, like the dream cognitions and the rest, we reply

Tt cannot be said that the cognitions m the waking state are without a basis “lke dreams and the rest”, 16 hke the dream cognitions and the illusory cognitions Why? “On account of disamilanity,”1e because there 18 disaumulanty between the cognitions m the waking state and the dream cognitions, as the former are due to attentive sense organs, while the latter to inattentive sense-organs, also because—as indicated by the particle “and” (m the stitra)— even the dream cognitions have bases

SUTRA 30

“Tm EXISTHNGH (OF PAST IMPRESSIONS) NOT (POSSIBLE), ON ACOOUNT OF NON PEROEPTION ”

Vediainta-pirijaita-saurabha

Moreover, the “existence” of past umpressions 18 admitted by you i order that there may be varmety m knowledge, this w not posmble, 8006 according to your view, external objecta are not perceived.

Vedinta-kauetubha

Moreover, 1£ knowledge be without a basis, then ita varieties, such as the knowledge of a pot, the knowledge of blue, the knowledge of yellow and so on, are not possible = be said that past impressions are the cause of the variety of knowledge,—{we reply) ‘“‘the existence” of past impressions 1s not poamble on your view Why? “On account of non-perception.”’,1e6 because of the non perception of the cause of past impressions, or, because no such cause 18 possible on your view The direct perception of external objects 1s the cause of past impressions, and that is not possible in your case, owing to your non admission of external objecta

fst 2 2 3) 366 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 4] COMPARISON R&mnuja and Srikantha

This 1s siitra 20 in their commentanes Interpretation slightly different, viz “The emstence (of cognition devoid of corresponding thmgs) 1s not (possible), because of non perception” >

मी 1 रि

SUTRA 31 “Ont ACCOUNT OF MOMENTARINESS ”’

Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

There 18 no existence of past impressions, “on account of the momentariness’’ of their substratum on your view

Vedanta-kaustubha

For this reason, too, the existence of past impresmons 28 not possible Why? “On account of the momentarmess” of their sub stratum, the receptacle consciousness,* viz the ‘I’, as well as of the single members of the uninterrupted semes Hence, the variety of knowledge 18 due to the variety of 0016008 Therefore, 11 18 estabbshed that the settled conclusion of Sompture 18 not contradicted by the Yogtotira view which 1s but a childish prattle

Here ends the section entztled “Perception” (4)

COMPARISON Samkara and Baladeva They add a “ca” at the end 8

1 अल B £229,p 109, Part 2,SK B 2229, pp 9708 Parts 7 and 8 The Vtffdna ekandha conmsta of vyfidnas or cognitions of two Innds dlayo-wyfidna and pravriii-vyjfdna The former conmste of cogn tions which refer to the ‘I the ego while the latter those that refer to the s0 called external 07100608

28.5 2281 p 6467, ५8 39331

[st 2 2 32 4DH 5] VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA 987

1801490 0]8, Bhdskara and Srikantha This sutra 18 not found mn their commentaries

Adhikarana 6 The section entitled “Incon- sistency inevery way” (3१४५८९४ $2)

SUTRA 32

“AnD BROAUSH OF THE INCONSISTHNOY (OF THE DOCTRINE OF A UNIVERSAL VOID) IN EVERY Way ”’

Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha The doctrine of void, too, 1s erroneous, because 10 1s moonmatent “mm every way”, bemg opposed to the evidence of direct perception. aid the reat Vedinta-kaustubha

Now the doctrme of universal void, as held by the Midhyamukas,. 18 bemg disposed of

(The view 18 a8 follows ) All the objects mentioned m the sacred works composed by the omniscient one (viz the Buddha), are mmply for the sake of suiting the intellectual capacities of his disarples, but- are not really existent, owmg to the umpoasibility of the origm and. destruction (of thigs) The ong of entaty from non entity 1 mappropnate (And if an entity amses from another entity, the question 18 ) Is the entaby which amses from another entity disamular to the Jatter or mmular? If the first, then there will be the ongn of everything everywhere If the second, then frurtlessness would result hke the grinding of what has already been ground! Owing to auch mexplicability of origin, destruction, too, 18 mexplicable 66708, the doctmme of vod 1s to beaccepted Thus, salvation conmsta in attamme a state of vo1d,—such isthe view ofthe Buddha And this1s perfectly reasonable, smoe void 18 not proved by anything else, (but 18 self- proved) The conventional distinctions of percerver and the object percetved and 80 On are mere errors

1 Te on the first alternative a gold ring may arse from clay, on the second, there 18 210 sense In producmg somethmg already exatent, gold (rmg) from gold.

[80 2 2 39 368 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 5]

With regard to 10 we reply The doctmne of universal void does not stand to reason Why! 2609086 11 the mamtamer of the doctrme of universal void be unreal, then there will result the reality of all, if real, then there will result the abandonment of the initial proposition “And on account of the mcoonsstency, in every way,” of the doctrme of universal void, the view that everything 18 void 18 unreasonable,— because the entire world 1s perceived to be true both by the disputant and the respondent, because there 18 no proof of void, and because 1t 18 7 conflict with the Buddha’s doctrine, establishing the easience of momentary objects The sense 18 that the view of the Midhyamuikas who maintam that everything 18 void, who are unacquainted with the process of origination and destruction, and who are just like an owl not perceiving the sun by reason of defecitve eyesight, 1s erroneous inevery way It 18 estabhshed, thus, that there 18 not even an odour of contradiction in the view of Scripture

Here ends the section entitled “Inconsistency m every way”’ (5)

COMPARISON

Samkara Interpretation different He takes 1t as a refutatzon of the Buddhists doctrine m general, not particularly of the doctrme of universal void He pomts out at the end of sitra 31 that the third school of Buddhism, viz the doctrne of universal void, 18 set amde by all evidence, and as such requires no special and separate

refutation + Bhaskara

This stttra too 1s not found in his commentary He pointe out at the end of siitre 29 (stitra 30 according to Nimb&rka) that the doctrine of universal void 1s refuted through the refutation of the doctrine of the sole reality of cognitions 2

1 Vide SB 22381 p 668

* Bh. B 2220 (wntten 88 2280 m conformity with Stmkara’s number) ॐ 196

[st 2 2 98 ADH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 969

Adhikarana 6 The section entitled “Impossible inone” (Sfitras 33-3 6)

SUTRA 33

“(Tam JAINA DOCTRINE IS) NOT (TENABLE), ON ACOOUNT OF THE IMPOSSIBILITY (OF CONTRADICTORY ATTRIBUTES) IN ONH (AND THE SAME THING) `

Vediainta-p&rijata-saurabha

The Jaimas ascribe contradictory atimbutes lke exstence and non-existence and so on to all thmgs This does not stand to reason, because the co existence of contradictory atiributes, like existence and non-existence and the rest, 1s umpossible, lke that of shadow and hght

Vedianta-kaustubha

The view of the Buddhists, who leave the hem of their lower garment loose and untucked, has been disposed of Now the view of the Jamas, the naked, are bemg disposed of

They hold that the mniverse comprises souls and non souls, and 18 Without a Lord They mamtam also that atoms are the causes of the world They imagine couples of contradictory attributes, like existence and non existence, in all the categories Thus, according to them, there are seven categories, summing up all somptural teachings, viz soul, non soul, mflux (of foreign matter 1710 the soul), (ris) stoppage, freedom from decay, bondage and release 1

Among these, the souls are sentient, and endowed with the attributes of knowledge, perception, happiness and strength Thus, knowledge means the apprehension of the real nature of objects through the nght discrimination between the souland the non soul Perception means cognizing objects, bemg free from attachment and detachment The souls in bondage have worldly happiness, while the freed souls have the happmess which mberes 17. themselves Likewise means proper endurance These souls are possessed of parta, and are of the mze of the body Among them, some are souls m bondage, some are freed souls, some are ever perfect The freed souls are omniscient and possessed of unsurpassed happiness

1 Jiva, ajtva, कच्छ) samwara niryara, bandha and mokga 24

[80 2 2 88 270 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]

The non soul 1s the group of objecta to be enjoyed by the souls It 18 divided mto ment, demerit, matter, tume and space! Thus, merit 18 a special kind of substance, mfermble from proper actions Demerit 1s the cause of the existence of the non freed Matter 28 8 substance posseased of colour, smell, taste and touch It 1s of two kinds, viz atoms, and their aggregates The atoms are the causes of the earth and the rest, and they are not of four kinds, as held by the logimans, but are identical in nature ‘The distmotions of the earth and the rest are due to the modifications of these atoms The four fold elementa begmning with the earth, as well as the body, the worlds and so on, are their aggregates ‘Time, on the other hand, 18 ॐ special kind of substance which 1s the cause of the conventional distinctions of long, quick and fast and so on, and 18 atomic m form Space 18 the absence of covermg It 1s of two kinds, vz worldly- pace which 1s mundane, and non worldly space,? which 1s the abode of the freed souls

Influx means the activity of the sense organs which causes 8 person to know ॐ sense objects Or else, influx means karma which comphes to,£1¢ follows after, pervadmg the agent (16 pertains to him)

Stoppage means that which stops 5 the activities of the sense organs, 1e the stoppage of the sense organs, consisting m © deep meditation

Hreedom from decay means that which destroys ® the prior- accumulated sms, 16 austerities known from the teaching of the Arhatas, consisting m not bathmg, not speaking, squatting on the thighs with the lower legs crossed over each other,’ eating what 18 sprt out from the mouth, mounting on heated stone, plucking out the hairs on the head and so on

Bondage means karma, and 18 of eight 1068 Among these, there are four destructive karmas,28—viz relatmg to the obscuration of knowledge, relating to the mental blimdness of perception, relatmg to delusion, and relating to what bmders °—which obstruct the attmbutes of the souls, viz knowledge, perception, happmess and strength

9 Lokdbdéa and alokdbisa 8 Aérdvayah sh déraca 4 Afravah tt dérava 5 Samernots st samwvara 9 Nejarayatt itt Nirjara १ Virdeons

8 Ghd barma

[so 2 2 33 ADH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 871

And, there are four non destructave karmas,J—vyiz relating to the knowable, relating to the name, relating to family descent and relating to hfe,*—which are the causes of the body, ita sense of egoity, regard and disregard for the happimess and the reat due thereto

On the cessation of bondage, there 18 salvation, or the manifestation. of the natural and real nature of the soul through the grace of the ever- perfect Arhatas

They have also a set of different categories, consistmg in five ontological categories,® viz. the category of the soul, the category of matter, the category of merit, the category of demertt and the oategory of space * The term ontological category (astikfya) 1s denotative of conventional objects occupymg many places (Ihe compound ° [ष्क 18 to be explamed as) a Karma dhiraya thus The soul 18 the category, and 80 on m all other cases too To all these, they apply the system of seven paralogisms,® viz May be 10 18, may be 16 18 not, may be 17 1s not predicable, may be 10 16 and 1s not, may be rt 18 and 18 not predicable, may be 1# 18 not and 18 not predicable, may be 1 18, 16 18 not, and 18 not predicable? (The compound ‘Sapta bhangi naya’ 18 to be explained thus ) The aggregate of the seven dialectacal formula 18 ‘sapta bhangi,® rts reasonmg’ (sapta-bhang! naya) The word ‘may’ (sy&t) 1s an mdeclinable represented by a verbal endmg, and should be understood to have the meaning of ‘littleness’ Thus, th 18 to be construed as—It exsts partly and does not exst partly, andsoon The sense 18 this The whole 70888 of object, consisting of substances and modifications 918 variable The form of the substance being one, permanent and conceivable as existent, exstence, oneness, permanence and the rest are justifiable in reference tort The modifica tions are the particular states of the substance, having the forma of pots, pieces of cloth and the rest And they being many,

1 Aghdt-barma.

4 Vedaniya, ndemka, gotrika, dyugka 3 Astikdya

५ Jivdsikdya, pudgaldsnkdya, adharmdshkdya, dkdddehkdya.

® Jivad ofecu ashkdyad oa ® Sapia bhafigi-nayo

१ Sydd ash, sydn ndsh, sydd avyakiavya, sydd asti oa कद on sydd ash cdvyakiavyad ca, sydn ndsh codvyakiavyad oa sydd ast oa ndsh

¢ Here the ending ‘1' 18 m accordance with Pin 2417, SD EK 8&2l, modified by the Vdrttika-slira of Kdiydyana 1666, “Akdrdniottarapado deiguh adriyom jah” Vide B.M,p 648, vol 1

* Dravys and paryydya

[80 2 2 33 872 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]

non permanent and conceivable as non existent, non existence, non permanence and the rest are justifiable m reference to them

With regard to 1t we reply This cannot be said Why? Because the sevenfold reasonmg, lke partly existent, partly non-existent and the rest, 13 not possible “im one object” The srmultaneous co existence of darkness and light 1s never seen 07 heard In the same manner, couples of contradictory attributes like existence and non-existence and so on are mdeed impossible m the same place

If xt be objected Your own view, too, admits couples of contradictory attributes m one and the same substratum, eg im the text “All this, venly, 18 Brahman” (Chand 3141), Unity 18 established, while m the texts ‘The Lord of matter and soul, the Controller of the gunas” (Svet 616), “Two birds” (Mund 311, Svet 46), plurahty 1s establshed,—{we reply ) No, because this view 18 not based on reasoning, since the real view can be determined, as mutually non contradictory, through Scmpture alone Thus, 1t bemg impossible for the enture universe, consisting of the sentient and the non-sentzent, to be non different from Brahman by nature, it 18 non different from Him only as having ita existence and activity under His control (and not by nature), as indicated by the phrase ‘emanating from Him’ and so on® But there 18 indeed a difference of nature between the categories, viz the sentient, the non sentient and Brahman, because the texta designating duality, too, are no less authomtative,— just as leaves, flowers and the rest are different by nature from the tree and are non different from 16 on account of having no separate existence, and just as m spite of the difference of the sense organs from the vital breath by nature, their non-difference from 1t, as being under its control, + not mcompatable In the same manner, the difference and non difference between the Universe and Brahman are natural and established m Scripture and Smrta What contradiction 18 there? In the very same manner, the complementary passage confirms the relation of difference non difference between the Universe and Brahman The phrase ‘emanating from Him" (tajjSit&n) 28 denotaizve of the reason, (meaning) because 1t emanates from that

1 So that 1t might be controverted by reason

2 The text 18 “All this, verily, 18 Brahman, emanatmg from Him, dis appearing into Him and breathmg m Him ° (Chand 2 14 1)

(st 2 2 34 ADH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 873

Supreme Cause (tajj&), disappears in Him (talla) and breathes, ie acta in Him (tadana) The elision of the parta is m accordance with Vedic use

Moreover, & single cause of the world bemg established by correct evidence, the causality of a plurality of atoms does not stand to reason, because that would involve unnecessary cumbrousnass and also because causality 1s impossible on their parta, owimg to their non sentence

Further, the one reality, knowable from the Veda, bemg the giver of salvation, 1t 18 difficult for salvation to result from the grace of the perfect souls, that bemg umposmble Does the grace of the perfect souls depend on meditation ornot? Ifthe first, then, salvation cannot arise through the meditation on one perfect soul among many perfect souls of the same nature, for there will be the fault of du- regarding many other equally perfect souls If there be meditation on all, that would mvolve unnecessary complication If 1t be said that there 18 one great (soul higher than the others), then you fall m with a 16806 view On the second alternsizve, the consequence would be a universal release Moreover, there bemg no evidence of direct perception and the rest for the existence of perfect souls, 10 18 mm possible that salvation can result from their grace

SOTRA 34 “AND THUS (IF) THE SOUL (BE OF THE OF THE BODY) THER Is NON ENTIRETY ”

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha “Thus”, there must be mcompleteness on the part of the soul, assumed to be of the suze of the body, when 1¢ attama a large body

Vedanta-kaustubha

Just as their view 18 open to the objection that contradictory attmbutes are impossible on the part of one and the same substratum, so their view that the soul 1s of the size of the body, too, 18 open to

+ Siddhae or semi diyme beings, supposed. to be of great purity and holiness and characterized by the eight supernatural atimbutes

[st 2 2 85 36 374 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 6]

serious objections What objection? Lasten! When the soul, which 18 of the size of the body, having left the body of an ant, attains the body of an elephant through the mfluence of 108 karmas, then must be “non entsrety” on ita part, 18 16 would not be able to fill up the whole of the elephant’s body And when the soul comes out of the body of the elephant, and enters into a small body, 1t would fail to be amall hike 7

SUTRA 35

“Nom ALSO IS THERE NON CONTRADICTION ON ACCOUNT OF MODIFICATION, ON ACOOUNT OF CHANGE AND THH REST ”’

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

It cannot be said also that the soul 1s possessed of parts which are subject to mcrease and decrease and hence there 1s no contradiction, —for then there will result the faults of change and the rest (on the

part of the soul) Vedinta-kaustubha

If 1t be said The soul, accordimg to us, 18 possessed of parts There 1s aX. morement of rts parts in the body of an elephant, and decrement ma small body Thus “on account of modification”, there 18 no contradiction”,—(we reply ) This cannot be said Whyt “On account of change and the rest,”’ 1e because there will then result faults hke change and the rest If the soul be possessed of parts, on your view, then 1t must be mutable like the body and the rest and also non eternal,—-such and other faults would arise

SUTRA 36

“AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE PEBMANENOY OF THE TWO (PRECEDING SIZHS OF THE SOUL) OWING TO THE FINAL (SIZE), THERE 78 NON DISTINCTION (OF THE शद) ”

Vedanta -parijata-saurabha

If xt be said We admit that the “final” mze of the soul 18 constant, and hence the mitial and the intervening s1zes too must be so,—{we Toply ) then, there must be “non distinction” everywhere, (and

[श 2 2 36 ADH. 6 | VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 375

hence) the doctrime (that the soul 1s of the) mze of the body 1s set

aside Vedanta-kaustubha

The ze as well as the real nature (which the soul attams) durmg ita state of salvation, after the destruction of the final body, are eternal At that tume there 18 no assumption of ® subtle or gross body (by the soul), so there 18 no contraction orexpanmionofit Thus, “on account of the permanency of the final” size, as well as of the real nature (of the soul), the permanency of both the mitaal and mtervening (mzes) too 18 meant by the Arhatas, and hence there must be “non distinction” everywhere,—this 18 the sense In short, the soul must have © permanent and constant size 10 9 gross body as well as 10 a subtle body, in its state of bondage as well as m rts state of release, and the doctrine that 10 18 of the mze of the body must be but a childish prattle Hence, 16 18 established that our conclusion 18 not contradicted. by the view of the naked (1e the Jamas), based on error

Here ends the section entitled “Impossible m one” (6)

COMPARISON Baladeva

Interpretation different, viz “On account of the non-distmotion of the final state, (viz salvation) (from the mundane state), both bemg permanent” That 18, 00 the Jama view, there 18 no difference between the state of release and the mundane state, because the former 18, s0cording to them, & constant progress upward, or remaming 7 the alokikiéa Now, motion, whether in the world or upward 18 always Mundane, and no one can possibly feel any pleasure m the state of constant motion, or 1n standing still m @ place without any support Hence there 1s no difference between release and bondage on this view 1

1 G.B 9 2 86, pp 145 146, Chap 3

[st 2 2 87 376 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 7]

Adhikarana’? The section entitled “Paéupati” (SSitras 37-41) SUTRA 37

“(THE DOCTRINE) 07 THH LORD (I8 UNTENABLE), ON ACCOUNT OF INOONSISTHNOY ”

Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

The Paéupata doctrine 1s to be rejected, because 1b 18 opposed to the Veda, which establishes a non distinct efficent and matenal cause, and because it un1tiates a false farth

Vedainta-kaustubha

Now, the Paéapata doctrine 18 being disposed of

The mamtamers of doctrines opposed to the Veda have been refuted above The M&hefvaras, too, are such They are of four Ionds, viz KSpBlas, Kaélimukhas, Pééupatas and Sarvas The beams of ther doctrmes is the treatise composed by Padéupat The ‘Paficidhya&yi’ + 1s celebrated to be composed by the great Lord Pasupat: Himself Five categomes are mentioned there, viz cause,

supposed to be the maternal cause, the Lord the effiaent cause The effect 18 mahat and the reat Concentrated meditation 1s stated mm the passage, “Through the meditation on the Om kara once, one should hold (one’s self)" Injunction consists m secret mtuals hke three ablutions and the rest The end of suffermg 1s salvation Among these, the Pisupatas and the Kap&las hold that dunng ita state of bondage, the soul becomes (non-sentient) hke a stone And the Sarvas hold that the freed soul 18 consciousness They have minor treatises of ther own, demgnatig their mutual differences These M&hesvaras, with their imteligence deluded by the Miy& of the Lord, mamtam and practise, just as they hke—as the means to the highest end—what 1s “opposed.” to the Veda and not practised by the wise As the K&p&las say “He who knows the mx mudris, he who 28 versed in the supreme mudré, he atiams nirvéna by

1 Or having five chapters 2 Kdrana, Kdryya Yoga, Vidht Duhkhdnia

fat 2 2 97 ADH 7 ]

VHDANTA KAUSTUBHA 877

meditating on humself as in the posture of bhagisana The necklace, the gold ornament, the ear ring, head jewel, ashes, and the holy thread. are said to be the sux mudris He whose body 18 marked with (mudris) 18 not re born on earth” and 80 00 Lukewise, the Kalamukhas hold. “Qemg 9 skull (as the drmking vessel), besmearimg one’s self with the ashes of a dead body, eating the flesh of such a body, carrying a heavy stack, अपिण up a hquor jar, worshippmg the gods placed on it, and the rest, 878 means to obtaming all demred results in thu world, as well as in the next’? In the treatsse of the Sarvas, too, 16 18 8810 “A bracelet made of the Rudraiksa beads on the arm, matted hai on the head, a skull, beamearig one’s self with ashes’’, and so on

Moreover, 1 18 clearly demonstrated m the Mah&bhirata in the story of the M&tanga, distressed by the sharp words of a she 888 1 and so on, that 16 18 very difficult for a man of another caste to obtam Brihmana hood even by means of penance accumulated through thousands of years But they hold that 1 1s easly obtamable by a man of 8 different caste thus “By merely entermg m the mittatory ceremony, one becomes 8 Brihmana at once By understanding the Kapals rte, a man becomes an ascetic”

(Correct conclusion ) With regard to this, we reply “Of the Lord” and 80 on The term ‘no’ 1s to be supplied “Of the

1 The story of Mdtariga and the she ass 28 89 follows Once Mdianga who was endowed with all qualiues and equal to a Brdimana by all means while traveling on 9 swift chariot drawn by a young ass and 108 mother meroleasly pierced the young ass mm the nose agamandagain Thereupon ite mother, bemg much grieved, said to bum that such an act certainly behoved a parson who was born of a Brdfiynana mother and a Oanddia father, but had he been the son of a Brakmancs father bis act would bave been otherwise Much aggnoved at this painful mformation, Mdianga determined to attam 2PrdAmana hood, left home mmedately and engaged himself in a gsvere penance ‘Therefore Indra bemg pleased personally appeared before lim to offer him a boon Mdianga asked for Brdimana hood, which however Jndra deslined to grant by reason of the fact that he waa the son of a Canddla In. spite of Indra’s straight denial, Méaiga went on performmg sustereties for a hundred years, standmg on one leg only Very much pleased, Indra appeared once again only to go back after saying that 1b was mmpossible for a Cangdia to acquire Brdhmanea hood and that Mdianga wes most unwise to undergo penance forit This tyme Aldiariga wend on perfomming penance for © thousand years in the same way D.sappomnted once more, he performed the severest penance by standing on one finger only But in spite of this he was never able to attain his heart's demre, simply because he was a Canddia by birth Vide MahS 13 1870, pp 85%, vol +

[st 2 2 38 378 VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 7 |

Lord,” 16 the view of Pasupati 18 not justifiable Why? “On account of moonmstency,’”’1e because of the moonsmstency 10. their view by reason of eatabliahmg two causes 1 in direct contradiction to the soriptural texts like “He thought ‘May I be many’” (Chand 623), ‘He became exstent and that’ (Tart 26), ‘All this has that for ita soul’ (Chind 6 8 ¶, etc) Moreover, since the practices hike meditation preceded by the pranava, beamearing one’s self with the ashes of a corpse and so on, are mutually contradictory, their View 18 indeed consistent

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhiaiskara

This 18 siitra 34 170 Bhiakara’s Commentary They do not take this adhikarans as a refutation of the Pidupata doctrine only, but of the Sémkhya yoga as tell, in fact of all the doctrimes generally, which maintam the Lord to be the efficient cause only and not the material cause of the world 8

Srikaptha

He takes this adhikarana to be concerned with the refutation of the doctrme of the Ekadeé! TSntrikas only or of those 89588 according to whom the Lord 1s the effiaent cause only, while May& 1s the matenal cause, dakti the instrument 3

SUTRA 38

“AWD ON ACCOUNT OF THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF BELATION ’’

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

“And on account of the umposaibility of relation” between Pasupati, the mstigator who 18 ‘without a body, and pradhfna and the rest, to be instigated, Pasupaita 18 not the cause of the world

1 Ie two causes of the world maternal and efficient, drfferent from each other 8B 2287 p 566, Bh B 22 84 (written as 2237 m conformrty with

Samkarea's number), p 127 9 ई. B 28 37

[st 2 2 39 ADH 7] VEDINTA-KAUSTUBHA 370

Vedanta-kaustubha

For this reason, too, the doctrme of Paéupata 18 not justifiable Why? A relation between Paéupati, the efficient cause, the mstigator and pradhina and the rest, to be imstigated, must be admutted,— and this 18 1mpossible Thus, the M&hesvaras are to be asked the following Do you, srs, follow Scripture or follow what 1s observed f If the first, then the stated conclusion, bemg opposed to Sompture, must be rejected If the second, then 1t 1s observed that there 1s a relation between potters and the rest only who are possessed of bodies, and clay and so on Hence no relataon can be establshed between Paéupata who 28 without a body and pradhfna and the rest, by you, followmg what 1s obeerved Hence 1 being not posmble for > bodiless एश to have any relation with pradhfina and the rest, to be ther mstigetor and 80 on, he 1s not the osuse of the world

COMPARISON Raimadnuja, Bhiskara and Srikantha This siitra 18 not found in their commentaries

SUTRA 39

“AWD ON ACOOUNT OF THH IMPOSSIBILITY OF A SUBSTRATUM ([H A BODY) (ON THH PART OF THE LORD) "

Vedainta-pa4rijita-saurabha

“On account of the rmpossibility”’ of an eternal body—since 16 18 opposed to what 1s observed,—as well as of a non eternal one—smce 1 arises later—Paéupati 18 not the cause of the world

Vedinta-kaustubha

If it be argued Let him then have a body, and hence the above objection cannot be raised—(the author) replles —

“The substratum” of all practical transactions 18 the body— on acoount of the impossibility of that, their view 18 not jusiafiable Thus, the body of Pasupaia cannot be eternal, because that 1s opposed. to what 18 observed Otherwise the 2000468 of potters and the rest, too, must become eternal Agaim, his body cannot be non eternal,

[श 2 2 40 880 VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAUBRABHA ADH 7]

because a non-eternal body 1s not possible on the part of the cause of the world, because all the non-sternal objects arise later as effects, and because Paéupati, the cause, 18 prior to everything 1

COMPARISON Samkara

Interpretation different, viz “Because rulership (of pradhf&na) and the rest 18 impossible (on the part of the Lord)” Thatis, pradhins which 18 non perceived and devoid of colour and the rest, cannot be ruled by the Lord, since 17 18 found that clay and the reat alone, which are possessed of colour and so on, are ruled by potters, etc *

Rimanuja, Bhaiskara, Srikantha and Baladeva Interpretation different, viz “Because rulership (of pradhfns) 18 not posalble (on the part of the Lord)” That 18, Pasupati, who 18 bodiless cannot be the ruler of the pradhina, for only embodied bemgs like potters and the rest can be rulers $

SOTRA 40

“If ITBH ARGUED 4S LN THE OASE OF SENSE ORGANS, (WA REPLY ) NO, ON ACOOUNT OF ENJOYMENT AND THE BRST ”’

Vedinta-parijita-saurabha

It 18 not possible to suppose that the Lord has sense organs and body lke the individual soul, for there will result enjoyment and the rest (on the part of the Lord)

Vedainta-kaustubha

If it be argued Just as the bodiless mdividual soul, existing from all eternity, has a relation with subsequent sense organs and body, due to preceding sense organs and body, 80 like 1t, Pasupati may have a

1 Ie non eternal objects arse after creation Hence Pasupat: who 28 present before creation cannot possess s non-eternal body

£8.58 2289,p 570 Seep 656 under Somkara

8 St B 32 86, % 118, Partl1,Bh B 9 235 (written as 2288), pp 127 128, Sk B 2286 p 107, Parta 7and8 G.B 2239

(80 2 2 41 ADE 7 | VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 981

relation with a body, and no objection can be ramed here,—({we reply )no “On account of enjoyment and the 1650 ` ‘The sense 18 {118 If lke the individual soul, the Lord, too, has such a relation with a body, then all the faults lke experiencing pleasure and pam, and thereby bemg the agent of good or bad actions and the resi must pertain to Him also

COMPARISON Samkara and other

Interpretation different, viz “If1t be argued As in the case of sense organs, (we reply ) no, on account of enjoyment and the rest” That 18, 1f 1t be argued that the Lord rules over pradhfina m the same way as the individual soul rules over its sense organs,—vwe point out In that case the Lord Himself must undergo pleasure and pain 1

At the end of this siitra, Samkara gives an alternative explanation

of this and the immediately preceding siltras and this explanation tales with that of Numb&rka

SUTRA 41

“(Tomek WILL RESULT ON THIS VIEW) FINITUDE OR NON OMNISOLENOE *”

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

If there be a connection between Him and the unseen prinaple,*

consisting m merit and the rest, then there must be “finttude” and “non-omniscience”’ (on His part)

Vedanta-kaustubha

It cannot be said also What objection can there be 17 enjoyment and the rest result on the part of the Lord? What can a mow flake do when fallen on the sun §—for 1t 1s unreasonable On acoount of performing good and bad deeds, due to 06806006 and the cause of transmigratory exstence, and of undergomg them consequences, there must of course result “finitude”’,1e hability to bemg created,

18B 2240, p 570, ल B 2287, p 119, Part 8, Bh. B 2286 (written as 2 3 99), p 128,S8k B 2237,p 108 Parts’ 7and8, GB 2240 8 Adreja.

[st 2 2 42 989 VEDANTA PARIJSTA SAURABHA ADH 8]

as well as “non-ommiscience” on the part of the Lord, otherwise the individual soul, too, must cease to be subject to transmigratory existence,—s0 much in brief Henoe, it 18 established that the stated conclusion 1s not contradicted by the doctrine of the M&hesveras

Here ends the section entitled "एकप > (7)

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhdskara

According to them, the particle “v&” means ‘or’ and not ‘and’ as held by Nimb&rke, Interpretation different, viz ‘‘(There must be) erther finittude or non ommscience” That 1s, the Lord must exther define the measure of the mdividual souls, pradhAna and Humself, or not define them If He does, then they become finite, 11 he does not, then the Lord becomes non ommnuiscient 1

Adhikarana 8 The section entitled “Imposal bility of origin” (Sfitras 42-483)

SOTRA 42 “ON ACCOUNT OF THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF OBIGIN ”’

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

Smoe the ongin of the world from Sakta without Puruga 1s umposaible, the doctrme, too, which mamtainas 16 as the cause 15 not valid

Vedanta-kaustubha

Now, the author 18 refuting, incidentally, the erroneous view of the S&ktas, viz that Sakt: alone 1s the producer of the world

The particle ‘no’ 1s to be supphed.

Sakti 18 not the cause of the universe Why? Because the origin of the unrverse from Sakia, without any connection with Poruga, 18 umpossible The consequence would be that the Saktss, bemg independent of Puruga, would come to be percerved everywhere

18B 9341, 7 S71, Bh B 2287 (wntten as 2.2 40),p 128

[श 2 2 48 apg 8] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 383

Or else,1 because the omgin of the world 1s impossible, it एक eternal, Sakt: cannot be ita cause, there bemg 70 proof that the world 18 something produced If 1t be said that the Veda 1s the proof— (we reply ) Let then the cause of the world be Brahman who 18 estabhshed by the Veda ‘The doctrme of the causahty of Sakti which 18 without any bas 28 to be rejected

COMPARISON Samkara, Bhiskara and Srikantha

They take this adhikarana aa concerned with the refutation of the Pafica-rétra system Thus, according to them this तिक means On account of the impossibility of origm’’ That 28, the Pafice-réitra doctrine holds that Samkargana (the individual soul) springs from Vasudeva (the Highest self), Pradyamna (the mind) from Samkargans and Amruddha (the principle of egoity) from Pradyumna, 18 not tenable, for the mndividual soul, which 1s eternal, cannot spring from the Highest soul 2

RamAnuja

Raéminuys also takes this adukarana as dealmg with the Pafica

rétra doctrme, but not refuting, but establishing, 11 Accordingly, he takes this and the next stitra as laying down the prema facse

view, the rest the correct conclusion Interpretation ke Samkara and the rest

SUTRA 43

“AND THE SHNSE ORGAN OF THE CREATION (18) NOT (POSSIBLE) °>

Vedinta-parijaita-saurabha

If 1t be said, there 18 & connectaon (between Sakti and Purnga,)— (we reply ) No “sense organ”’ 1s possible on the part of Puruga at that tame

1 An alternatuve explanatuon of the silira

£8.58 2242 pp 572%, Bh B 2238 (written as 2241),p 128, 8K B 2239,p 115 Parts 7 and 8

[st 2 2 44 ddd VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 8]

Vedinta-kaustubha

(If 1+ be argued ) There w a creator helpmg Sakti, and the fact {hat the world 18 somethimg produced, too, 1s inferred on the analogy of what 18 directly percerved, hence the above objection cannot be rained,—then (we reply ) No “sense organ” 1s posmble on the part of the creator, since there 18 no sense organ prior to creataon In ita absence, it 18 not possible for Purusa to be a helper Moreover, mnce there 14 no mmularity of the ether and the rest with pots and so on, the fact that the former are somethmg produced (like the latter} 18 by no means established The term “and” (in the sitra) umphes that it there be Puruga as the creator, Sakta 18 no longer the cause

COMPARISON Samkara, Bhaskara and Srikantha

Critiasm of the Pafica-ritra view contunued “(There oan be) no (omgin) of the organ (viz the mind) from the agent (viz the individual soul)’’ 1

Ramanuja This 1s attra 40 in his commentary As poimted out above, he

takes this stitra as laying down 9 prima facie view against the Pafica ritra doctrme Interpretation like Samkara and others 2

SUTRA 44

“Or Of THERE BE THH BXISTENCH OF INTELLIGHNOR AND 80 OX, THERE IS NO DENIAL OF THAT”?

Vediainta-parijata-saurabha

If there be the existence of natural intelligence and so on (on. the part of Saktz), what contradiction can there be in its being the cause of the world? The doctrme of Sakti 1s set aside by iteelf through the admission, of Brahman

1§B 2243, p 574 Bh B 2380 (wrrtten as 2243),p 129,8k B 22 40, p 116 Parts 7 and 8 2&1 B 2240,p 116, Part?

{st 2 2 44 apH 8] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 385

Vedainta-kaustubha

The term “or” has the meaning ‘but’ Salta 1s the abode of a mass of natural attributes bke knowledge, strength and the rest, yndependent by nature of anything else, and selfrelying “If there be the exstence,’’1e admussion, “of knowledge and so on”, mn this manner, on the other hand, then “there is no demial of that’”’,106 its causality 18 not demed In this aphomam “And endowed with all (attributes) `` (Br 8G 21 29), there 18 demgnated a Deity, knowable through all the Vedintaa, and 1t 18 He thatis admitted by yon Hes not the power (Saktn) of any one, He 1s the Highest Deity, denoted by the word ‘Brahman’ and 80 on ‘The sense 18 that the dootrme of Sait defeate iteelf

COMPARISON

Samkara and Bhaskara

The criticism of the Pafica ritra doctrine contanued viz “(Even) 17 there be the existence of knowledge, there 18 no settang aside of that (viz, of the above objection)” Thats, evenif be said that Samkargane and the rest are not the mdividual soul and 80 on, but divme bemgs, endowed. with supreme knowledge and the rest, stall then the objection. stated before, रण्ड the umpossibility of origmation, remains in force 1

Ramanuja

This 18 sdtra 411m his commentary According to him this sitre and the next set forth the correct conclumon agamst the above prima fone view, and defend the Pafica ritra dootrme Thus, 1t means “Tf (Samkaresana and the rest be) of the nature of knowledge and so on (16 of the Highest Lord), there 18 no contradiction of that” That 18, the Pafica rétra dootmne 18 not that mdrvidual soul amses from the Lord, the mind from the individual soul, and 80 on, but simply that the Highest Lord, viz Vasudeva, out of kindness for people, abides in a four fold form, so that He may he easily accessible to His devotees 9

Srikantha

This 18 siitra 41 2 018 commentary as well He takes 1 to be a nme fae view, viz “If there be the assumption of intelhgence and

1 6 8 3244,pp 574, Bh B 22 40 (wntten 23 44), ए 129 ४ §4.B 2241, pp 116 127, Part 2

25

[st 2 2 45 886 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 8]

80 on (1 68 of the forms of the mdividual soul and so on), there 18 no contridiction of that’’ That 1s, the opponenta point out that they do not hold that there 1s the ongin of the dividual soul and the reat, but amply that Samkarsana and the reat assume the forms of the individual soul, etc, 1e rule them Hence the above objection cannot he raised 1 Baladeva

Interpretation different “If (the body of the Lord be of the) nature of mntelhgence and the rest, there 18 no contradiction of that” That 1, 1f the pruma facte objector pots out that although the Lord cannot have & maternal body, yet He may have a non maternal body म भन of knowledge and so on, then we reply that uf the Lord of the Saktas be posseased of such a body, then we have no objection to their view, श006 1) becomes identical with our doctrine of Brahman

SUTRA 45 “AWD ON ACOOUNT OF CONTRADIOTION °

Vedanta-piirijita-saurabha

And on account of beg opposed to Scmpture and Smrti, the doctrine of Sakti 1s unauthoritative

Here ends the second quarter of the second chapter in the Vedanta- pinjata saurabha, an mterpretation of the Sarirake-mimimes texte, and composed by the reverend Nimb&rka

Vedanta-kaustubha

And because of bemmg opposed to the followmg sorptural and Smrti texts ‘Person, verly, 18 all this’ (Svet $15), ‘Supreme 1s His power, declared to be of manrfold, natural 18 the operation of His knowledge and strength’ (Svet 68), ‘“I am the omgm of all, everything onginates from me * ’ (Gité 10 8), and so on, the doctrine of

1 Sk B 2241,p 116, Parts 7 and 8

[st 2 2 45 ADH 8] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 387

the causality of Sakti 1s not to be accepted by one who 1s demrous of salvation Hence, it 18 established that the concordance of the

sonptural texts with regard to Brahman, Lord Krgna, the lord of all and the soul of all, 8 not contradicted by anythmg whatsoever

Here ends the section entitled “Imposaibihty of omgm” (8)

Here ends the second quarter of the second chapter m the Vedanta- kaustubhe, a commentary on the Sartraka mimims&, and composed. by the reverend Srinrvaes, dwellmg under the lotus feet of the holy Nunbérks, the teacher and founder of the sect of the venerable Senotkuméra,

COMPARISON Samkara (प्रवद of the Pafica raétra doctrine concluded “(The Pafica-

ritre, doctrine 18 to be rejected), because 1t 18 full of (mner) contradio- 10708, abd (because 1t contams passages opposed to the Veda)” +

Ramanuja

Rught conclumon, m defence of the Pafica rétra doctrine, ends here ‘‘(The above objection cannot be raised) on account of the contradiction (1 © becasue the Pafica rétra doctrine itself controverta. that the mdzvidual soul has an origin”’ 9

Bhaiskara This stitra 18 not found in his commentary

Srikantha

Critaciam of the Pafica rétra doctrine concluded “(In reply to the above pruna facte view, we point out although the contradicixon with regard to the omgin of the individual soul and the rest set aside by the above view, yet the Pafica ratra doctrine 28 not to be accounted) on account of 1#8 opposition (to Sorpture) 3

8 8 2245, pp 575 76 241 B 2242, pp 1174, Part 2 2 Sic B 2.942, pp 116-119 Parta 7 and 8

[st 2 2 46 388 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 8]

Résumé

The second section of the second chapter contains —

45 stitras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Nimbarka, 45 siitras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Samkara, 42 stitras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Ramanuje, 40 siitras and 8 adhikaranas, accordmg to Bhiskara, 42 stitras and 8 adhikaranas, accordmg to Srikantha,, 45 stittras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Baladeva

Ramanuja and Srikantha read siitras 1 and 2 m Numbarka’s commentary as one siitra, and omit sitras 31 and 38 in Nimbarka

bhaésya

ara th WW =

SECOND CHAPTER (Adhydya) THIRD QUARTER (Pada)

Adhikarana 1 The section entitled “The ether’ (ॐत ४८०8 1-6)

PRIMA FACIE VIEW (Sitra 1)

SUTRA 1

“Ten BHTHER (DODS) NOT (ORIGINATE), ON ACCOUNT OF NON MENTION IN SCRIPTURE ”’

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

That there 18 no contradiction 170. our own view has been proved by means of the views of the opponents Now, 2४ 18 bemg proved that there is no mutual non contradiction among the acrzptural texta

“The ether’? does “not’’ omgimate Why? Because mm the Chandogys 1४8 origin 18 not mentioned

Vedanta-kaustubha

Thus, having demonstrated that the views of the opponents are based on a mere semblance of (and not real) reason, now with a view to generating intense reverence for Brahman, the cause of the world, on the part of those who are desirous of salvation, (the author) 1s demonatratang the origin of *+hoo-éhee.1nd the rest, His effects, as well as the mutual conmstency az nong the criptural texts (about them)

On the doubt, viz whe-_kbher_the_cher ormginates or not, the prima fame view 1s aa follows “The ether’? does not originate Why ए “On account of non-mention in Scripture - Thus in the Chandogya, the creation. of three only—viz lght, water and food, without the ether and. the air, 1s mentioned in. the seation concerned about creation. in the passage beginning ‘He created that Light’ (Chand 6 2 3)

[st 23 23 390 VHDANTA PABLJITA SAURABHA ADH 1]

CORRECT CONCLUSION (Sitra 2)

SOTRA 2 “Bur (THERE) 18 (A TEXT DESIGNATING THH ORIGIN 07, THE ETHER) ” Vednta-parijita-saurabha

In the Taitturlyaka, there “1s” 8 text demgnating the origm of the cther, viz ‘From the soul the ether ongmated’ (Tait 2 11)

Vedanta-kaustubha To this we reply The term “but” umphes the acceptance of the correct conclusion If 1t be objected that m the OhSndogya there 18 no text about the origin of ether, (we reply ) 1n the Tartturfya there “1s” a text demgnat- ing the origin of the ether, wz “From this soul, verily, the ether originated (Tait 21)

PRIMA FACIE VIEW (Sitras 3 4) SUTRA 3

“(IE TEXT ABOUT THE ORIGIN OF THH HTHER IS) METAPHORICAL,

ON AGCOOUNT OF IMPOSSIBILITY, AND ON ACOOUNT OF SCRIPTURAL TExT `

Vednta-parijaita-saurabba

Because the omgm of the ether, which 1s without parts, 18 impossible, and also because of the scriptural text ‘The air and the atmosphere—this 1s mortal’ (Brh 233%)}—the text ‘The ether ongnated’ (Tait 21) 18 “metaphorical”

Vedinta-kaustubha

Thus, mtending to remove the apparent contradictions among those scriptural texts which deagnate the origin of the ether and those which do not, His Holiness here raises a doubt based on the view of those who hold that the ether does not onginate

An objection may be raised The scriptural text demgnatmeg the omgin of the ether, viz ‘From this soul, verily, the ether originated’ (Tart 21), can be (only) “metaphorical”’, just as m ordmary hip,

1 § R, Bh, Sk, B a§ R, Bh, Sk B

[88 2 9 4 apH I] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 2391

the statement ‘The ether acta’ 18 metaphorical The reason for this 18 “407. account of mposalbility”,1e because the ongin of the ether which without parts 1s umpossible, seemg that the earth and the rest alone, which are possessed of parts, oan origmate from the atoms of the same class ‘The second reason 18 “on account of scmptural text’’,1e on account of the scriptural text ‘The air and the atmos phere—this 18 ummortal’ (Brh 2 3 3)

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhiaiskara

They divide this siitra into two different sfitrasa—viz “Gauny asambhavét” and “Sabdio ca” ¬

PRIMA FACIE VIEW (concluded) SUTRA 4

“AND THERE MAY BH (THE USE) OF THE SAMS (THEM ‘ORIGINATED’

IN TWO DIFFERENT SENSES), 4S IN THE GASH OF THE WORD

‘BRAgMAN ` `

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

But the same term ‘ongmated’ “may be” used m a metaphorical sense with reference to the ether, and 1n a literal sense with reference to the subsequent (elements),? as in the case of “Desire to enquire after Brahman by austerity, austermty 18 Brahman” (Tait 3 2 3)

Vedanta-kaustubha

If 1t be objected How can one and the same word ‘originated’ be used 770. a metaphorical sense with reference to the ether, and in a literal sense with reference to what follows, we reply

Justasinthetext ‘“Demreto know Brahman by austerty, austerity 15 Brahman’ (Tait 32), the word ‘Brahman’ 18s used in a figurative sense 1n reference to austerity, but m a literal sense as the object to be

ee)

18B,pp 679 80 Bh B,p 130

9 Viz the ar fire, water, carth, eto mentioned in Tart 21 subsequently to the ether Theat is, the expreamon The ether omgmates’ is to be understood ~~. CC CS

38 Bh, B

(st 23 5 392 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADE 1]

enquired into, 80 one and the same word ‘origmated’ may be used in & figurative sense m reference to the ether, and 17 a literal sense m reference to what follows

CORRECT CONCLUSION (Sfitra 6) SUTRA 5

“(THEBH 78) NON ABANDONMENT OF THE INITIAL PROPOSITION, ON ACCOUNT OF NON SEPARATION (KNOWN) FROM SCRIPTURAL THXT `

Veddinta-parijita-saurabha

“On account of the non separation”’ of the mass of 0016008, beginning with the ether, from Brahman, there 18 no contradiction of the “initial propomtzon”, viz that there 18 the knowledge of all through the knowledge of one But xf the ether be something non originated, then 16 must be outaide the sphere of knowable 00166४8, and thereby the imtial propoartion will be set aside The non separation of everything from Brahman 18 known “from the soriptural text”’, v1z ‘Everything has that for 1ta soul’ (Chiind 6 8 71), and 80 on

Vedainta-kaustubha

The author states the correct conclusion

The Tarttiriya text, designating the origin of the ether, 18 literal and not figurative for the following reason If the ongin of the universe, beginning with the ether, be admitted, then “on account of the non separation.” or non difference of the effect, or of the entare expanse of the universe beginning with the ether, from the object to be known, the cause, viz Brahman,—as of the leaf from the tree,—-then alone, there will be “non abandonment” or acceptance of the mitial pro position, viz that there 18 the knowledge of all through the knowledge of one, stated m the passage ‘Whereby the unheard becomes heard, unthought becomes thought’ (Chand 618) otherwise, the mitial proposrtion will be abandoned.

The cause of non separation 18 ‘ On account of scriptural text”, te onaccount of the texts ‘The existent alone, my dear, was this 17 the beginning, one only, without a second’ (Chind 621), “Kvery- thing has that for 1ts soul’ (Chind 6 87, etc ), and 80 on

1§ Bh B

इतं 2 3 6 ADH 1] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA 393

The allegation stated under the aphoram Metaphorical, on wecount of impossibility and on account of scriptural text’ (Br Si +33), viz that the origin of what 1s without parts bemg imposable, ihe soriptural text designating the ongin of the ether 1s metaphoncal.— 8 not tenable, since reasoning has no scope with regard to matters which are beyond the cognizance of the senses and are determined. by Scripture Buthowcanthenthetext ‘The ar and the atmosphere— this 18 immortal’ (Brh 2338) be accountable? In this passage the permanency of the ether 1s established on the analogy of the statement 'The gods are immortal’, and henos the immortahty of the ether 008 17

The allegation made under the aphonsam “And there may be (the use) of the same (term mm two different senses), as in the case of the word ‘Brahman’” (Br Si 234), too, 28 not tenable, ance the word ‘Brahman’ being mentioned twice, the example 18 not to the

out 1 . COMPARISON Raimfnuja and Srikantha

They break this sitra into two parts—viz “ Pratayflahaimr se and “Sabdebhyah” The meanmg of the last portion 1s different, viz (That the ether has an origin 18 known) from scriptural text (also) >

CORRECT CONCLUSION (end) SUTRA 6 “Bor «aS FAR AS THERE 18 EFFECT, THERE IS DIVISION, AS IN ORDINARY LIFE ””

Vedanta- parijata-saurabha

The author concludes It bemg established by the texta ‘All this has that for rts soul’ (Chand 6 87, eto 8) and the rest that the

1 In Tart 21, the term ‘omgmated 1s mentioned only once, while in the analomosl passage quoted the term Brabman 18 mentioned twice separately Hence, while:t may be said that of the two separately mentioned words ‘Brahman’, one 18 Ixteral, the other figurative, 1b cannot be said that the word. ‘ongmated. which is mentioned only once 29 simultaneously hteral and figurative

s इल 8 125 Part? Sk. B,pp 124125 Parta7and8

2 R, Sk, B

fst 2 3 6 304 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ApH 1]

entire expanse of the universe, beginning with the ether, has Brahman for its soul, 1t 18 definitely ascertamed that the ether 18 an effect Likewise, 1t 18 known that “as far as there 18 effect”’ there 1s origin indeed! The non mention of the ether and the mention of light and the rest as objects to be created m the text ‘He created that light’? (Chind 628) fit m, “as 17 ordimary bfe’? In ordmary hie, when referrmg to the group of Devadatta’s sons the ongin of some of them 1s mentioned, thereby the omgm of all the rest 18 mentaoned

Vedainta-kaustubha

To the objection, v1z nce 17 the ChAndogya there 18 no indication of the ompn of the ether, the scmptural text demgnatmg orgm 18 nictaphorical,—(the author) rephes

The term “but” 1s for dispomng of the objection “As far as there 18 effect’, 16 the entire expanse of the umverse, there 18 “thyimion’ indeed The Chandogys texts, viz ‘“‘ The exstent, alone, my dear, was this in the beginning”’ (Ohind 6 21), and ‘“ Whereby the unheard becomes heard, the unthought becomes thought, the unknown known”’ (Qhind 613) demgnate (respectively) that everything, beginning with the ether, and denoted by the term ‘this’ conmsted of the cause mm essence prmor 0 creation, and 18 knowable through the knowledge of the cause Hence, in the OhAndogya the “division”, 18 the ongin, of the entare expamse of the universe, beginning with the ether, from the cause, 18 indeed stated

To the enquiry Why then the omgm of the hght and the reat alone 18 mentioned, without any mention of the ether and the air *— we reply ‘As in ordmary hfe’ Just as m ordinary life, through the mention of the origin of some sons of © person, there may be the mention of the omgm of all the rest, so through the statement of the ongin of hight and the rest, the origin of the ether and so on, too, 18 10068 mentioned Hence, 1t 18 established that the ether has Brahman for 1ta material cause

Here ends the section entitled “The ether” (1)

1 Ile whatever is an effect has an omgin

{fst 2 3 7 ADH 2] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 295

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhiskara

This 18 sitra 7 1m their commentanes The interpretation of the word. “vibhiga”’ 1s different According to them 1t means ‘division’, and not “omgin’’ as held by Nimbaérka ‘Thus they argue — Whatever 1s an effect 1s divided. The ether 18 divided (from the earth and 80 on)

the ether 18 an effect 1

But Nimbérks argues — Whatever 1s an effect has an origin The ether 18 an effect

the ether has an ongin

Thus, they establish what Nimb&rka assumes (viz that the ether 1s an effect)

The interpretation of the phrase “As in ordmary Ife” too 18 different, viz they connect 1t with the preceding part of the sittra, meanmg—In ordinary hfe we observe that whatever 18 an effect 18 divided

Adhikarans 2 The section entitled “The Air” (Sitra 7) SUTRA 7

"तकण (THE ORIGIN OF) THE ATE (TOO) IS EXPLAINED "

Vedanta-parijdta-saurabha By this pmaciple of the origin of the eather, the air, too, 18 explammed

Vedinta-kaustubha

Some may attribute eternity to the air on the ground of the texta ‘The ar and the atmosphere—this 1s immortal’ (Brh 238 2), “The divinity which does not set 18 the aur’ (Beh 1522) 87 80 on For disposing of this (view), the author says now

“Hereby”, 16 by the establishment of the orig of the ether, the ongm of the “air”, too, should be known to be “explaimed”,

1 88 237,p 586, Bh 8 237,p 181

[80 23 8 396 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA. apa 3]

the refutation of the prima facse view bemg the same (in both cases) The denial of the dissolution (of the air) by the phrase ‘does not set” 18 (only) relative Hence, 1t1s established that the air has an origin

Here ends the sectaon entitled “The Air” (2)

Adhikarana 3 The section entitled “Non- origination” (87४८8 8)

SUTRA 8

“BUT THERE 78 HON ORIGINATION OF THE BEXIYTENT BRING, ON AGOOUNT OF IMPOSSIBILITY ">

Vedainta-parijata-saurabha

There 28 indeed “non ongination”’, 16 non production, “of the existent bemng”’’,1e of Brahman, because the onigm of the cause of the world 18 17010088 716

Vedinta-kaustubha

Now the author 1s removing the suspicion, viz If even the ether and. the air, demgnated by Soripture as mortal, be omgmated, then there may be the origin of Brahman too

There 1s mdeed “non ongm’’, 16 no birth, of Brahman, the Highest Person Why! ‘On account of mmposabilty,” ie because the origin of the cause of all 1s amposmble,—otherwise, there must be & cause of that too, a cause of that too and so on, and there must be an infinite regress ,—because (He) 18 declared to be the cause of all by the text ‘He 1s the cause, the cause of the Jord of causes’? (Svet 69), and because any other cause 1s excluded by the passage ‘Of him there 18 no producer and lord’ (Svet 69) For thia very reason, it 18 establahed that there 1s no omgin of the Supreme Person, who 18 ever present and unborn indeed, though declared by Scripture to be

1 Correct quotation “Kargddhipddhipa"’, meaning ‘The Lotd of the lord of sense organa, (vis the mdividual soul)’ Vide Svet 6 9, p 70

fst 2 3 9 ^+ प्र 4] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 397

manifold for the sake of producing effects, thus ‘Bemg unborn, he appears manifold’ (Vj 8 311951, Tart Ar 313153)

Here ends the section entitled “Non origmation”’ (3)

COMPARISON Bhaskara

This 18 sitra 9 mm his commentary Interpretation absolutely different, viz But (xf 1t be objected that qualities like touch, sound, etc , 88 well as space, tyme, number, size, etc , are not declared by Sompture to have an origin, and hence they must all be eternal,— then we reply The eternity of what 18 exstent (viz qualities, eta ) 18 umpossible, because of the non fittzng im (16 non utihty) (of the scriptural texts to declare ther ongm) That 18, 1t 18 not at all necessary for Sorrpture to demgaate separately the ongm of these quahhes, eto since 1b 18 quite sufficient to designate the ongim of the objects alone, that umplying the omgin of the qualities amultaneously Sumilarly, tame 18 nothmg but the motion of the sun and hence its origin, though not mentioned separately, 1s umphed by the mention of the orign ofthe sun Likewise the other things are to be explamed In conclasion Bhiskara oritiazes Samkara’s mterpretation of the sutra,—which 18 identical with Nimbarka’s 3

Adhikarana 4 The seation entitled “The light” (8१४०८४१५ 913) PRIMA FACIE VIEW (Sitras 9-12) SOTRA 9 “त्रत THR LIGHT (ORIGINATES FROM THA AIR), FOR THUS (SGRIPTURE) DECLARES " Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

“The hght” orgmates from the air, mm accordance with the sonptural text ‘Fire from the ar’ (Tat 2 1 +)

५ 861, 1:28 1¶ Readmg ‘vydyaie' 9 % 201 Reading op off ° Bh B 239, pp 131 82 ¢ 8, R, Bh, Sk, B

[80 2 3 10 398 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]

Vedinta-kaustubha

It has been pointed ont above that everythmg except Brahman has origin, and that Brahman 18 untouched by the faulta of produable 7888 and the rest Now, the problem 1s bemg considered, viz whether each precedmg object, or Brahman, its mner soul, 18 the cause of each succeeding object, to be produced successively

On the doubt, viz whether the bght omgmates from the am or from Brahman, 108 (viz the 9718) 10767 soul,—the prima face view 18 as follows The lght 1s an effect Hence, 10 omgimates from the immediate cause air The prema facie objector ponte out the authority for this thus The Tazttirlya text ‘Hrom the air fire’ (Tait 21) “declares that”’ alone

COMPARISON

Samkara, Bhdskara and Baladeva

This 18 sitra 10 m the commentaries of the first two They do not take this stitra as laying down a prema facie view, but as the correct conclusion It means, therefore “The light (does not arise directly from the Lord, but from the air), for thus (Scripture) declares” 1

PRIMA FAOIE VIHW (continued) SUTRA 10

^“ प ^ ताः (ORIGINATES FROM THR LIGHT) "

Vedinta-pirijata-saurabha “Water” ongmates from light, m accordance with the scmnptural text ‘Water from fire’ (‘Tait 213) Vedanta -kaustubha

The phrase “Hence, for thus’ 18 to be supplied here Hence,1¢ on account of the very proxumity, water onginates from lght The somptural text ‘Water from fire’ (Tat 21%) declares that very

0५, 8 B 3 8 10, 2 182 GB 889

‰ ५ > Fr OF

[so 2 3 11 19 ADH 4] VEDANTA PIRLJATA SAURABHA 399 COMPARISON Samkara, Bhaskara and Baladeva

This 18 sitra 11 m the commentaries of the first two As before they do not take this as a prema facse sutra, but as a addhfnta one, meaning “Water (omgimates from hght)’’ 1

PRIMA FACIE VIEW (continued) SUTRA 11 “TH HARTH (ORIGINATES FROM WATER)”

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

The earth originates from water, mn accordance with the soriptural text “They (viz waters) created food’ (Chand 6 2 43)

Vedinta-kaustubha

The earth onginates from water The scriptural text ‘Those waters thought ‘May we procreate’ They created food’ (Chand 624) declares this Similarly, 1b should be known that everywhere the omgin of the effect takes place from the ummediately preceding 09289

COMPARISON

Samkara, Bhiskara and Baladeva This sitra 18 not found in their commentanes

PRIMA FACIE VIEW (concluded) SUTRA 12 “(THE WOBD ‘FOOD’ DENOTES) THE HARTH, ON ACCOUNT OF SUBJECT MATINR, COLOUR AND ANOTHER SORIETURAL TEXT "’ Vedainta-pirijata-saurabha

By the term ‘food’ “the earth” 18 denoted, because the subject- matter 18 the (creation of the) great elements, because ita colour 18

1" 828 9311 p $96; Bh B 2811 p 182 GB £310 १ BR, Sk

[80 2 8 19 400 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4}

declared by the scmptural text ‘What 18 black is of the food’ (Chand 6411), and, finally, because of another scmptural text “The earth from water’ (Tait 2 1 2)

Vedainta-kaustubha

Incidentally, the meaning of the word ‘food’, mentioned in the scriptural text ‘They created the food’ (Chind 624), 1s bemg indicated through the prema facse objector himself In accordance with the complementary text, viz ‘Wherever 1t rams, then there 18 plenty of food’ (Ohand 624), 706, barley, and the like are not ment by the word ‘food’, but the earth alone 18 the object denoted by the word ‘food’ Why? ‘Qn account of subject matter, colour, and another scriptural text,’ that 1s, because m accordance with the text “He created that light, He created that water’ (Chind 6 2 3), the subject matter here 1s the omgin of the great element, because m the complementary passage ‘That which 1s the red colour of fire 18 the colour of the light, that which 18 white 18 of water, that which 18 black 18 of the 1006 ` (Chind 641) the colour (of the earth 18 men taoned), and because there are other scemptural texta occurrmg in connection with the same topic, yz “Water from fire, the earth from water’ (Tait 21), “What was the froth of the earth became solidified ‘That became the earth’ (Brh 1 2 2)

COMPARISON Samkara, Bhaiskara and Baladeva

This 1s sitra 12 m the commentaries of the first two, and stitra 11 च the commentary of the last Interpretation same, though not a4 pruma facts View

CORRECT CONOLUSION (Sfitra 13) SUTRA 13 “Burt ON ACCOUNT OF HIS DESIRE, ON ACCOUNT OF HIS MARK, Ha (1s THH CRHATOR) ˆ Vedanta-périjata-saurabha The author states the correct conclusion “On account of His desire,” viz ‘“‘ May Ibe many”’ (Chand 6 2 3), as well as on account

1 6, R, Bh, Sk, B 9 R, Bh, Sk, B

[so 2 3 13 ADH 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 401

of the scriptural text teaching Him,—the Supreme Person, the:r mner soul, 1s the creator of their effects

Vedinta-kaustubha

The author states the correct conclusion The prima facie view 1s rejected by the term “but” “He” alone,1e Lord Vasudeva, the supreme cause and the Lord of all and. the 17167 soul of the air and the rest, 18 the creator of the effecta like hghtandtherest Why? “Onaccount of His deamre,’’16 on account of the desire, or resolve, of Him, or of the Highest Person, viz. ‘“May I be many”’ (Chand 623), (and) “On account of His mark”, 16 on account of the group of texts teachmg Hm, vw ‘Abiding within the earth’ (Brh 373), ‘He who abiding withm water’ (Brh 374), ‘He who abidmg withm the hght’ (Brh 3714), ‘He who abidmg within the arr’ (Brh 377) ‘He who abiding within the ether’ (Brh 3712), “That riself created itself’ (Tait 27)andsoon Hereby 1४ should be known thatim the passages ‘That hght thought’ (Chind 6253), ‘Those waters percarved’ (Chind 624) and so on too, the thmking of the Supreme Bemg alone (18 mentioned) Hence, 1t 1s established that no mdependent creatorship

belongs to anything else,—it 18 the Supreme Soul alone who 1s the primary creator everywhere

Here ends the section entitled “The light” (4)

COMPARISON All others read “Tad-abhidhyfinid eva प, adding an “eva”

Samkara, Bhiskara and Srikantha

Interpretation same, though they do not take this siitra 88 answering to a prima facie view ‘This sittra, according to them, removes the suspicion, that might have arisen from the above demgna tion of the successive production of elements, viz that the elements give rise to other elementa by themselves The fact 1s that xt 18 the Lord himself abidmg within those elements that grves mse to the next effect 1

५ & 8 2 3 13, pp 508, Bh B 2313,p 138, ५8 2312

[st 2 3 14 402 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 6]

Adhikarana 65 The section entitled “The reverse (Sttra 14)

SUTRA 14

“But THe ORDER (OF DISSOLUTION) (8) BEVEBSH TO THAT, AND (THIS) FITS ON ”’

Vedanta -parijita-saurabha

The order of dissolution 18 reverse “to that’’,1e to the order of creation”’, 170. accordance with the scriptural text ‘The earth merged m water’ (Subile 241) “And’’ this “fits im” on the prnaple of salt and, water

Vedainta-kaustubha

‘Thus, the order of the orgin of elements has been determined in bref Now, madentally, thes order of dissolution 18 being determined.

On the doubt as to whether the order of dissolution 1s the same as the order of creation, or reverse, the suggestion bemg Since even when the prior created. object 1s destroyed, the posterior one 1s 2088016, (dhysolutaon takes place) through the same order as that of ongmation alone —

(The author) states the correct conclumon “But the order 18 reverse to that’’ The order of dissolution must be understood to be the “reverse’” “to that’’,1e to the order of the ongmation of objects, which 1s mentioned m Scripture m the text ‘From this soul, venly, the ether orgmated, from the ether the ar, from the ai the fire, from the fire water, from water the earth’ (Tait 21), ‘““What was, then, existent?” He said, to them ^" Nesther being, nor non bemg, nor bemg and non bemg rom hrm darkness arises, from darkness bhitéd1,2 from bhit&di the ether, from the ether the ar, from the ar the fire, from the fire water, from water the earth That egg arose”’ (Sub&la 11-3), and which 1 established by a thousand Smrti passages, viz “The divinity 18 without beginning and without end, hkewise, indivisible, ageless, rmmortal, celebrated to be unmantfest, constant, likewise undecaymg, and mmortal, sprung up from whom bemgs are born and die That divinity first created what 1s called mahat from name, the great abhamk&ra as well. Mahat

1P 465 2 Or the Mnasa ahamkdra 9108 VR.M,p 25

[st 2 3 14 ADH 5] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 403

created ahamk&ra Then the Lord, the Master, who 18 the support of all elementa, (created) what 1s celebrated to be the ether rom the ether origmated water, from water fire and arr, then from the conjunc tzon of fire and air the earth originated’, and 80 on And this “fits 10 °» on the ground of the scriptural text “The earth merges in water, water merges 1n the fire, the fire merges in the air, the air merges m the ether, the ether mto the sense-organs, the sense organs in the subtle essences, the subtle essences in bhittaédi, फणिता m mahat, mahat in the unmanifest’ (Subéla 2 4), on the ground of the followmg Smrt passage, viz “The earth, the support of the world, merges, divine sage, 10. water, water merges in the fire, the fire merges m the air’ , and on the ground of observing salt, 106 and the lke to be desolved into water What 18 not mentioned, by the text about creation, 7 the order of the origmation of prakria, mahat, ahamkira, the ether and so on, 18 to be supplied from the text about dissolution, 1e the construction 18 ‘The ether (merges 70) the sense organs, the sense organs in the subtle essences, the subtle essences in bhfitdd:’ The ether merges in the subtle essences, the subtle essences merge in bhittadi,1e in témasa shamkdra, the sense organs 1n sense Organs, 1 6 m the raéjasa abamk&ra,—smoe here by the word ‘sense-organ’ ahamk&re is understood there being non difference between cause and effect The plural number, viz ‘subtle essences’ 1s meant for showmg that the dissolution of the earth and the reat takes place through the subtle essences of smell and the rest On account of the three foldness of ahamkara, the plural number, viz ‘In the sense organs’, has been used Thus, 10 18 established that dissolution, taking place in the above inverted order, 18 not contradicted by anything whatsoever

Here ends the section entitled “The reverse”’ (5)

COMPARISON Ramanuja and Baladeva

This 18 stitra 16 17 Rim&nuja’s commentary He does not begin a new adhikarana here, concerned with the order of dissoluizon, but comtanues the topic of the order of evolution Thus the sfitra means according to him And the order (of the orgimation of the vital- breath and the rest), on the contrary, (stated) 170 a reverse order (to

[80 23 18 404 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 6}

the real order of 80068807) fits in (only 1 there be the ongination of all effects directly) from thence (1¢ Brahman)

That 18, in Soripture we have many passages which designate the vital breath and the rest as msing directly from Brahman, in opposition to the real order of evolution, viz prakrti, mahat, and so on, and these texts are explioable only on the supposition that everything really arises from Brahman. directly 1

This 18 sittra 18 in Baladeva’s commentary, who follows Raménuja exactly with the difference that he takes this siitra as constituting an adhikarana by itself 9

Srikantha

This 18 sitra 15 m his commentary, reading different, viz substitutes “pairamparyens’’, in place of ‘viparyyayena”’ Interpre tation too different, viz be begins a new adhikarana here, ending with the next sfitra, and concerned with the question of the origin of sense organs, mind and the like,—which according to Nimbarka begina with the next sitra 3

Adhikarana 6 The section entitled “Knowledge whichintervenes” (87४८७ 15)

SOTRA 15

“Ty If BE OBJHOTED THAT KNOWLEDGH AND MIND (MUST BR PLACED) BETWHEN (BRanMAN AND THE HLEMENTS) ON ACCOUNT OF 20S INDICATION (IN SCRIPTURAL TEXT), (AND THAT THH ABOVE ORDER OF CBBATION 78 SHT ASIDE) BY (THIS) ORDER, (WH BEPLY ) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF NON DIFFERENCE ”’

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

If rt be objected “On account of the indication”, viz ‘From him arise the vital breath, the mind, and all the sense organs’ (Mund 2134), “knowledge and mind” must be between Brahman and the elements, and “by the order” obtamed in this way the above- mentioned order 18 contradicted,—

+ ft ॐ 2316, 2 131, Part 2 9 73 2818, 9 177, Chap 2 8 Sk B 28165, pp 186 36, Parts 7 end 8 ¢ 8, R, B, 8k, B

[80 2 $ 16 ADH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 405

(We reply } “no”, because the above text 1s not concerned with a specific order, and because the text ‘From him arse the vital breath, the mind and all sense organs’ (Mund 218) (1 concerned with laymg down only) “the non difference”’ of the origin of knowledge and mind as well as of the ether and the rest from Brahman alone 1 In the text under discussion, viz ‘From this soul, verly, the ether originated’ (96 21%), establishing the order of the creation of 618 ments,—in between the soul and the ether, the categories of the unmani fest, mahat and ahamké&ra, well known from texts concerned with the orders of creation and dissolution and figuratively umphed by the

phrase “knowledge and mind”’ (in the siltra), are to be known,—s0 much in bnef

Vedinta-kaustubha

With a view to encouraging meditation, and generating reverence for Brahman, Lord Vasudeva, the place from which the world emanates and into which it enters, as well as for generating an, aversion to the world, the orders of creation and dissolution have been determmed Now, the order of the ongin of knowledge and mind, which promote meditation, 13 bemg established in harmony with the order of the origin of elements

If 1t be objected The above mentioned order of the omgin of elements 18 set aside by the order of the origin of knowledge and mind Thus, knowledge 1s that through which a thing 1s known, 1 8 sense organ. The sense organs and the mind must be m between Brahman and the elements Why? “On account of ita indication” An indication (linga) or a mark 1s that through which something 1s pamted,® 18 known, an indication of that,1e of creation, on account of that, 4 that 28, on account of the scmptural text undicatmg their creation, viz ‘From him 87186 the vital breath, the mind, and all sense organs, the ether, the au, the fire, water and the earth, the support of all’ (Mund 218) Hence the above mentioned order 18 set aside by 1b —

1 Ie the above Mung text simply shows that yust asthe ether ete risefrom Brahman, so exactly do the sense-organs, the mind, etc too,—-but does not lay down. a definite order of creation See V E below

> Not quoted by others in this connection

ॐ Root,/lnig = to paint

4 This explams the compound “ital वची"

[st 2 3 16 400 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]

(We roply) “No” Why? “On account of non difference,” 16 because of the non differc nes of the omgin of knowledge and mind, as woll as of the othe: and the rest, from Brahman alone The text ‘From hm ane tho vital breath’ (Mund 213) and so on amply pomts out that there 1s the origin of ell from Brahniun, and 1 not set amde by the above mentioned order In tho vory saine manner scriptural texts hke ‘Hoe creatid the vital breath, from the vital breath reverence, the other, the ai, the fire, water, the earth, the sense organs, the mind, food’ (Prasna 6 4) and so on, domgnate that every thing arizos from Brahman, and do not set forth a particular order The meaning of the word ‘vital breath’ m the passage “From him arise the vital breath, the mmd and all sense organx’ (Mund 21 8) Will bocome clear late: on! And, thus it 1 cxtabhshed that in the aphorsam “But there w” (Br 9 232), only a portion (of the real 0061 of creation) has been montioned by the author of tho aphornems So, m the abmdged texts demguatmg the order of the ongination of elements, such an ‘rom tho soul the ether originated’ (Tart 21) and so on, the portions not mentioned, viz prakrti, mahal and the reat, eatublushed by other texts concerned about creation and ताण tion, and figuratively implied by the phrase “knowledge and mind” (7) the sittra), are necessarily understood, but thore is no contradiction whatsoever of tho texts deaignatung the order of the omgmation of elements by other texta

Here ends the section entatled “Knowledge which intervenes” (6)

COMPARISON

Samkara The interpretation of the word “avidesit” different, viz “On account of the non difference (of the organs from the elemonts)”’ That 18, the organs bomg of the same nature as the elements, the

origmation of the former 1s the same as that of the latter, and not different >

1 Vide Br Si 249 ४ 383 2915 p 602

[st 2 3 16 ADH 7] VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA 407

Adhikerana 7 The section entitled “The soul”

(8 १४८७8 16-17) SUTRA 16

“BUT THAT DESIGNATION (OF THE SOUL AS BHING BORN OR DYING) MUST DEPEND ON (18 REFER TO) THE MOBILE AND IMMOBILA (2071708), (IT 18) MHTAPHORICAL (IN REFHEENCH TO THH SOUL), BECAUSE (THHREH 18} THE EXISTHNOE (OF BIRTH AND DEATH) IF THERE BE THH EXISTENCE OF THAT (IH THE BODY) ”

Vedinta-parijita-saurabha The nature of the individual soul 18 bobmg determmed now “The dempnation” like ‘“Devadatta 16 born and dead’ 1s metaphorical, and as such “depends on the mobile and the mmmobuile”,—there bemmg the “existence” of birth and death when there 1s the “existence” of the

body Vedinta-kaustubha

It has been pomted out above that the ether and the rest omginate from Brahman, the unborn, the highest Now the problem 38 bemg considered, viz, whether lke them the mdrvidual soul, too, 18 some thing to be produced or not

The word ‘soul’ 1s to be suppled from the ummediately followmg aphoriam On the doubt, viz whether the ‘soul’,1e the mdividual soul, onginates or not, the pruna face view viz In conformity with the demgnation, viz ‘Devadatta 18 born and dead’, the soul is born and dies,—is disposed of by the term “but” This conventional designation of the orgimation and dissolution of the soul “must be metaphorical”, 1 © 18 figurative m reference to the individual soul To the enqury In reference to what then 15 1 literal !—{the author) replies “Dependent on the mobile and the mmobile”,1¢e 1% refers to the bodies of the movable and the immovable Why? “Because (there 1s) existence, 1f there be the existence of that,” 16 because there can be origmation and dissolution only if there be the existence of that, 18 the body, m accordance with the scmptural text “Tlus

person beng born and obtamimg a body He departing and dying’ (Brh 4 3 8) COMPARISON RéAmanula

This 18 sitra 17 17 his commentary He 0088 not begin a nen adhikarana here, but concludes the topio of the order of evolution

[श 2 3 17 408 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 7]

He reads both “bhakta” and “abhikta”’ and gives two explanations accordingly Thus (1) But the demgnation which depends on (1 © refers to) the movable and the mmovable must be secondary, because of being permeated by the bemg of that (wiz Brahman) (Here he reads “bhikta”’) That 1s, all the words denotang movable and immovable objects are only secondary with regard to those objects, but really denote Brahman, mnce all objects are modes of Brahman, (2) or, all the terms denotang movable and immovable objects are primary with regard to Brahman, because the denotative power of all terms depends on the bemg of Brahman (Here he reads

| । 1 871) द BS ) | Srikantha

This 18 stitra 17 m 018 commentary as well He reads “abhikta”’,

takes this sfitra as an adhikarana by itself, and mterpreta 1t exactly hike R&aminuja > Baladeva

This 18 उति 15 m his commentary He also reads “abhakta”’, takes 1t as an adhikarana by 10991 and mterprets on the whole like R&émf&nuja Only the mterpretation of the word “tad bh&va bh&vitvit” is different, viz “But the demgnation dependent on (1 6 referrmg to) the movable and the immovable must be prmary (with regard to the Lord), because that fact (tad bhiva) (viz the fact that all words really denote the Lord) 1s somethmg that follows m future (16 28 not directly Known at once, but 1s a matter which one comes to know after studymg Scripture)” ®

SUTRA 17

“Tam 807, (098) NOT (ORIGINATE), ON ACCOUNT OF NON- MENTION IN SORIPTURE, AND ON AOCOUNT OF ETEENITY (KNOWN) THEREFROM (I FROM SORIPTURAL THXTS) ”

Vedinta -parijaita-saurabha

The mdividual “soul” does not omgmate Why! Because there 18 no text about 108 having omgm by nature, and because from ¬ ल B 2317 pp 182 33, Part 2

2 & B 3317, pp 188 30, Parts 7 and 8 3 GB 2315, pp 181 89, Chap 2

[st 23 17 ADH 7] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 409

the scriptural texts ‘A wise man 18 neither born nor dies’ (Katha 2181), “Eternal among the eternal’ (Katha 5183), ‘An unborn one, verily, hes by, enjoying’ (Svet 45%) and so on, the eternity of the individual soul 1s known

Vedainta-kaustubha

If it be argued In conformity with the texts ‘One desirous of heaven should perform sacrifices’ (Tait Sam 2 6 54), eto, which lay down the means to attaming lordship im the next world, let the demgna {10 ‘Devadatta 18 born and dead’ refer to the birth and death of the body But like the ether and the rest, birth and death must एवा to the individual soul as well at the tame of creataon and dissolution (respectively) Thus there 1s no conflict whatsoever with

Sarpture” The smgular nomber ‘soul’ implies the class,5 m acoordance with the scriptural text teaching the plurality of souls, viz ‘Eternal among the eternal, consmous among the conscious’ (Katha 518, Svet 6 13), and m accordance with the aphomam, to be mentioned hereafter, viz “And on account of non-contunuity, there 18 no confusion” (Br ७ 2348) ‘The soul 18 not born, nor dies Why? ‘On account of non mention m Scripture’, 1e because there are no scriptural texts designatimg the birth and death (of the soul) at the time of creation and dissolution, and, because on the contrary, “the eterntty’’ of the soul 28 known “therefrom”, 18 from the scriptural texts like ‘“* Impershable, verily, O | 38 this soul, possessing the virtue of bemg indestructable”’ (Brh 4514), “A wise man 18 neither born, nor dies’ (Katha 2 8), ‘Eternal among the eternal, the conacious among the conscious, the one among the many, who bestows objecta of desires’ (Katha 618, Svet 6 13), ‘The two unborn ones, the knower and the non knower, the lord and the non lord’ (Svet 19), ‘One unborn one, verily, hes by, enjoyimg Another unborn one leaves her who has been enjoyed’ (Svet 45) and so on, aa well as from the following Smrti passages, viz ‘ “ Nor at any tame, verily, was

18 > Sk B aR, Sk, B 8 Not quoted by others é P 208, hne 27, vol 2 ® And not that there 1s only one soul

[8808 23 17 410 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7 |

I not, nor you, nor these lords of men, nor, verily, shall we ever not be hereafter” ’ (Git& 212), ‘“‘ Unborn, eternal, constant and ancent, he 18 not killed when the body 8 nlled”’’ (Gita 2 20), ‘ ““ Who knows him to be imperishable, eternal, unborn and ummutable, how can that man kill one, 0 P&rtha, or cause one to be killed ?”’ (Gita 2 21) and 80 on

If 1b be objected There are scriptural texts demgnatang the origm of the world together with the sentaent, such as, “All come forth from this soul’, “Born of whom, the progenitreas of the universe 16 loose the souls with water on the earth’ (Mahinaér 14), “The lord of bemgs created bemga’ (Teast Br 1110,11) ‘All these bemgs, my dear, have Being as their root, Beng as ther abode, Bemg as their support’ ˆ (Chand 684), “‘Hrom whom, verly, these beings arse, through whom they live when born, to whom they go and enter” ’ (Tart 31) and 80 on Henoe, the demal of birth and death of the individual soul is not reasonable Jor this very reason, the iuitial proposition that through the knowledge of one there 18 the Knowledge of all, 15 establshed,—

(We reply ) “No”, because the quoted texts teach that individual soul has an origm, which (1s not actual origin, but mmply) consists in the expansion of 708 knowledge, caused by 1ts connection with the body, subsequent to 208 giving up ita real nature at the tame of dissolution. Lf this be so, then the mdrxvidual soul too being an effect of Brahman, the above तचा propomitzon 1s established. And hence, 7 18 established that Brahman, who 170 His causal state possesses the non divided names and forms 88 His powers and 18 without an equal or 9 superior,—in accordance with the text ‘The exstent alone, my dear, was this m the begmmning, one only, wrthout a second’’”’ (Chand 6 2 1),—comes Himself, a8 possessed of the manfest names and forms as His powers at the tue of the production of effects, to abide as three- fold, viz 1m the forms of the enjoyer (16 the at), the object enjoyed (18 the aat) and the controller (1 8 Brahman) ‘There is no con- tradiction here by any text whatever

Here ends the section entatled “The soul”’ (7)

+ P 28, 78 16 vol 1

[st 2 3 18 ADH 8] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 411

COMPARISON Raménuja, Srikantha and Baladeva They read “fruteh” instead of “agruteh”’! Interpretation same

Adhikarana 8 The section entitled “The Enower (Stra 18)

SUTRA 18 “(THH SOUL 28) A KNOWBE, FOR THAT VERRY BHASON ”

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha The soul, which 18 an ego, 18 a knower

Vedanta -kaustubha

Thus, 1t has been pomted out that the soul does not ongmate like the ether and. the reat, since 1t 18 eternal, as established by Soripture Nov, mmadentally, 1ts nature, etc are bemg determmed.

The word ‘soul’ 18 to be supphed from the preceding aphornsm By the phrase “for this reason”’, the reason mentioned by the term ‘therefrom’ (1 the preceding siitra) 18 referred to On the doubt, viz whether the soul 1s non-sentent by nature, but possessed of the attmbute of knowledge or mere consciousness, or knowledge by nature yet possessed of (the attribute of) beng a knower,—the Vaifionkas* and the like hold that 1t 1s non sentient, yet posseased of the attmbute of knowledge, while the Samkhyas and the rest hold that the soul 1s mere conscloushess

With regard to 1t we reply “A knower”,16 the mdividual soul 18 nothing but a knower,1e nothing but knowledge by nature, yet possessed of (the attmbute of) being a kmower Why? On the ground of the following scriptural texta, viz ‘Hero this person becomes selfilluminating’ (Brh 439, 14), ‘The person who is made of knowledge among the vital breaths, who 18 the hght in the heart’ (ॐ 437), “There 18 no annihilation of the knowledge of

18 B 2818, p 186, Part 2, Sk 23 3818 p 140 Parts 7 and 8, GB $816

§ Vide V Si 81 18, and Stenkara Mitra s commentary, p 161

[st 2 3 18 412 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 8]

the knower, because of his mperishabilty’ (Beh 4 8 30), ' " Whereby should one know, 0 | the knower?”’ (Brh 2414, 4516), ‘This person simply knows’, ‘Hor he 18 the one who 6668, 1 hears, smells, ४ thinks, concervea, does, the mtelhgent self’ (Pradna 4 9) and 80 on

The doctrine of the non sentient soul, on the other hand, 18 to be rejected,—because then the attribute of knowledge by 11861, bemg the effector of all practical transactions, will come to attam primacy, and hence the non sentient substratum of the atimbute (viz the soul), bemg non hable to salvation or bondage, virtue or vice, will come to be non primary or useless hke the mpple on the neck of 8 goat, ° and finally, because of 1ts opposttzon to Scripture

The doctrine of mere consciousness, too, 18 to be rejected, because if consciousness be all pervading, then there will be no perception of the pleasure and the lke pertaiming to the entare body, but if xt be atomic in aize, then there will be no experience of the pleasure and the hke pertammg to hands, feet and 80 on

Hence it 18 established that this soul, known through self- consciousness, 18 knowledge by nature and a knower

Here ends the section entitled “The knower” (8)

COMPARISON Samkara

Interpretation different—viz he interpreta the word “jfia” as eternal consciousness and not as 9 knower 4

1 Touches

9 Tastes

9 An emblem of any useless or worthless object or person. ५ 82 2218 p 609

[8 2 3 19 ADH 9] VEDANTA-KAUSTIUBHA 413

Adhikarana 9 The section entitled “Depar ture” (Sitras 19-31)

SUTRA 19

“ (THE INDIVIDUAL SOULIS ATOMIO ON ACCOUNT OF THE SORIPTUEAL MENTION) OF DHPAETURE, GOING AND RETURNING ”’

Vedainta-parijata-saurabha

The individual soul 1s atomic, because in the texts ‘By that hight this soul departa through the eye, or through the head, or through other parta of the body’ (अ 44214), ‘Whoever, verily, depart from tha world, all go to the moon alone’ (Kaus 1 2%), ‘Havmg come back from that world to this world for action’ (Brh 4463) and so on, there is the mention “‘of departure, gomg and returning”’

Vedanta-kaustubha

Thus, 1t has been proved that the mndzyidual soul 1s eternal and a knower Now 108 mze 18 bemg determined.

On the doubt, viz whether this soul 18 of a middle mze,* or of an all pervading size, or of an atomic aize,—if 7४ be suggested Jt must be of a middle mze, since pleasure and. the rest are experienced all over the body Or, 1b must be of an all pervading mze,—

We reply The individual soul is capable “of departmg, gomg and returmng” These three are not possible if 1+ be all pervading Moreover, if 1t be all-pervading, then experences of pleasure and the hke will result everywhere If, on the other hand, 1t be of a middle maze, then 1t must be non-eternal Hence, the atomicity of the soul 18 the only remaiing alternative In the passage ‘When he departs from this body, he departs together with all these’ (Kaus 8 $5), 208 departure 1s mentaoned In the passage ‘Whoever, verily, depart from this world, all go to the moon alone’ (Kaug 1 2), rts gomg 18 Mentioned And, m the passage ‘Having come back from that world to this world for action’ (Brh 4: 4 6), 1te returning is mentioned

1R 8४, B

॥ 8, Bh, Sk.

28 R Sk, B

4 7 8 of the alse of the body

5 Note that Nunbddrke quotes a different text here

[st 2 3 20 21 414 VEDINTA-PABLJETA SAUEBABHA 4DH 9]

COMPARISON Samkara

He takes sitras 19-27 as laymg down the prema facie view Lateral interpretation. same

SUTRA 20

“AND (THERE IS POSSIBILITY) OF THA SUBSEQUENT TWO (VIZ GOING AND BETURBNING) THROUGH ONR’S SELF”

Vedanta-piarijdta-saurabha

Sometimes departing may be possible on the part of even one who 18 not moving, as 170. the case of the cessation of the rulership of a village? But, mnoe there 18 posmbility “of the subsequent two through one’s self” alone, the individual soul 1s atom1o

Vedainta-kaustubha

As m the case of the cessation of the rulership of a village, departmg, which consists in the cessation of the rulership of the body, may sometimes be possible on the part of the soul even when 7४ 18 not moving But, amnoe there oan be the accomplahment “of the subsequent two”, wiz gomg and returnmg’’, “through one’s self”’ alone, 1b 15 established. that the mdrvidual soul 18 atomic

SUTRA 21

“Ty I~ BR OBJHCTHD THAT (THE SOUL गड) NOT ATOMIO, BECAUSE OF THE SORIPTURAL MANTION OF WHAT IS NOT THAT, (WH EHFLY ) RO, ON ACCOUNT OF THE TOPIO BEING SOMETHING HLSE ”

Vedinta-parijita-saurabha

If 1b be objected In accordance with the text, referrmg to the individual soul and deaignstmg “what 1s not that”, viz “He, verly, 18 the great’ (Brh 44224), the mdividual soul 18 “not atomic”,—

1 7 8 when somebody ceases to be the ruler of a yillage he may be said to * go out” 9 8, R, Bh, Sk, B

[80 2 3 22 ADH 9] VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA 416

(we reply } “no”, because m the middie, the tome 78 the Supreme Soul

Vedanta-kaustubha

If 1t be objected. The mdividual soul w “not atomic” Why? “Because of the scriptural mention of what 38 not that,”—‘“that” means atomicity, “what 18 not that’ means non atomicity, on account of the scrzptural mention of that,.—i e because 170. connection with the discourse on the individual soul, viz “He who 1s made of knowledge among the vital breaths, who 1s the ght within the soul’ (अ 4 8 7), there 18 the mention of greatness m the scriptural text ‘He, verily, 18 the great, unborn soul’ (Brh 4 4 25),—

(We reply) “No” Why? “On aocount of the topic bemg something 6186; ' 1 6 because the topic 18 here something other than the mdividual soul referred to in the begmning,ie the Supreme Soul, who 18 the topic to be established in the middle of the section, 1m the text ‘By whom the soul has been found and reahzed’ (Brh 4 4 18)

SUTRA 22 “AND ON ACOOUNT OF THE WORD ITSELF AND OF MEASUEDS ”

Veddnta-parijata-saurabha

“On account of the word itself (viz ‘atomio’) and of measure,” mentioned (respectively) m the texta “This atomic soul’ (Mund $194), ‘An mdividual soul 18 & part of the hundredth part of the tap of 9 hair, divided a hundredfold’ (Svet § 9 8), the individual soul 1 atomic

Veddnta-kaustubha

The phrase “the word itself” means the word which 18 denotative of 18 own atomicity The word “measure” means the measure which 18 separated from * all gross measures,1e an mtensely mmnte measure On account of these two, the mdividual छता is atomic The word 1186118 mentioned in the text ‘This afore soul m which the five fold vital breath has entered 1s to be known by means of thought’ (Mund

1 This explams the compound “ atacohruteh" 9 6, R, B, Sk, B a 68, 7, Bh, B & Uddhriya minam = Unmdnam

[80 2 ॐ 28 24 416 VEDANTA PARIJTATA SAURABHA ADH 9]

319) The measure 18 mentioned in the text ‘An individual soul 18 & part of the hundredth part of the tap of a harr, divided a hundred fold’ (Svet 59) ‘For the lower one 1s seen to be like the pomt of the spoke of a wheel only’ (Svet 5 8)

SUTRA 23 “NoN CONTEADIOTION, 4S IN THH GASH OF THA SANDAL-PASTE sid

Vedinta-parijdta-saurabha

Just as a drop of sandal paste, though occupymg one spot of the body, refreshes the entire body, so exactly does the soul illuminate Hence, the experience of pleasure and the hke over the whole body 18 707 inconsistent

Vedinta-kaustubha

If 16 be objected If the soul be atomic in mze, then how can pleasure and the like be experienced over the whole body !—we reply There 38 no such contradiction Just as one drop of yellow sandal paste, occupying one spot of the body, produces, through ita own quality, a pleasurable sensation extending over the entare body, so the soul too, occupying one spot of the body, experiences, through 108 own quality, the pleasure and the hke extending over the entire body, in accordance with the अणा passage ‘This soul, though only atomic, abides pervading 108 own body, as does a drop of yellow sandal paste, pervading the body’ for this very reason it has been said by the Lord too ‘“Just as one sun uUlummates this entare world, so the field owner (1e the soul) illummates the entire field (1e the body), O Bharata !*’* (Gita 18 33)

SUTRA 24

“I? IT BE OBJHOTED THAT (THE TWO O4SHS ARH NOT PARALLEL) ON ACOOUNT OF THE SPHOIALITY OF ABODB, (WE REPLY ) NO, ON ACOOUNT OF THE ADMISSION (OF AN ABODE, VIZ ) IN THE HHABT CERTAINLY ””

VedAnta-parijaita-saurabha

If 1b be objected The example of the sandal paste is not appropriate, “on account of the speciality of abode”’,—xt 18 directly

[st 2 3 26 ADE 9 |] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 417

observed that the drop of sandal paste occupies one spot of the body, but 1¢ 13 not known that the individual soul occupies ons part of the body, since consciousness 18 experienced. everywhere,—on acoount of such a difference of abode between the two,—

(We reply ) “No” Why? “On account of the admission,” viz that the soul, atomic m size, abides 7 one part of the body,1e “in the heart”, by the scriptural text ‘He who 18 made of knowledge among the vital breaths, who 1s the hght withm the heart’ (Brh 4422) The meaning of the term “certainly” 18 that 1४ 28 the

attribute of knowledge (and not the atomic soul rtself) which abides in the whole body

SUTRA 25 ‘Or THROUGH ATTRIBUTE, LIKH LIGHT ”

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

The Hloumination of the body takes place only through the attribute of the soul, like the light of a lamp and the 1४8 mm a room

Veddanta-kaustubha

To the objectzon, viz the doctrine that there 18 © relation of attmbute and substratum (between knowledge and the soul) 18 not proper, since our purpose 28 served by the very nature only (of the soul),—(the author) reples

The term “or’’ 78 for disposing of the objection The sense 18 that the experience of the pleasure and the hke, pertammg to the entire body, by the atomic soul, occupying one part of the body, 18 posable through rts attribute of knowledge which 18 all pervading “Ag 77) ordmary hfe” In ordmary 1118, a gem, the sun, a hght and so on, though occupying one place, illuminate many places, aa the case may be, through their atimbute alone Or else, (the combination) may be disjomed as “as m the case of hght”,16 like the hght of gems and the rest The doctmne of an attrbuteless soul, as admitted by the Samkhyas, has been disposed of above +

COMPARISON Samkara reads “‘lJokavat”, all others “dlokavat”

1 Vide V.K 1318 27

[st 2 8 26 27 418 VHDANTA-PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 9]

SUTRA 26

“Tau BXTHNDING BEYOND (OF KNOWLEDGE) IS AS IN THE 048 OF SMELL, FOR THIS (SORIPTUBH) SHOWS "

Vedainta-parijdta-saurabha

But the “extending beyond” of the attmbute of knowledge fits in “as 110. the case of smell” The scriptural text ‘He has entered here up to the body hairs and finger nails’ (Kaug 420+) “shows” the individual soul to be the substratum of such an attribute

Veddnta-kaustubha

“The extendmg” of the attmbute of knowledge beyond the soul, 108 substratum which 1s situated within the heart, 1e 208 occupying 9 larger space, 18 “as m the case of amell”, 16 18 just lke amell occupying a larger space than the flower which occupies a amaller space The scriptural text ‘He has entered here up to the body hairs and finger nails’ (Kaug 420) “shows” the soul's pervason over the entire body by means of ita attribute of knowledge, extending over © larger space

COMPARISON

Samkara and Bhaskara

They break this siitra mto two different ones, viz “Vyatireko gandhavat” and “Tath& oa darfayati”’ 3

Raimanuja He too reads “ca”? m place of “hi”, but does not break 1t into two sutras

SOTRA 27 “Own ACCOUNT OF THE SHPARATE TRACHING °”

Veddanta-parijaita-saurabha

Although there 1s no distanction between the soul and its knowledge m respect of bemg knowledge, yet a relation of substratum and

+. 2_Not quoted by.others ~ Jor-correct-quotation vide Kaug,p 141 9 825 pp 61516 Bh B p 186

fet 2 3 28 ADH 9] VHDANTA PARLIATA SAUBABHA 419

attribute (between them) 1s indeed proper Why? “On account of the separate teaching,” viz “Having mounted the body by means of intelligence” (Kaug 3 61)

Vedainta-kaustubha

Apprehending the objection, viz Let Knowledge be the essence of the soul Hence here the distinction,—viz the subsiratum 18 atom, the attribute all pervading—is not proper,—(the author)

here

“On account of the separate teaching”’ of the atimbute from the substratum, the soul, m the passages ‘Having mounted the body by means of intelhgence’ (Kaug 3 6), ‘Having taken by hus intelligence the mtelhgence of these > (Brh 2117) That 1s, m spite of there beng no distinction between the two 1n respect of being know ledge, there can very well be ® relation of substratum and attribute between them, since 1t 18 mentioned. m Sempture LHdquality of nature 0088 not necessarily mean identity, since 16 1s found that 10 sprte of there beng no distinction between light and ita substratum,—both being equally hght,—there 1s stall & difference between them

COMPARISON Baladeva This 18 sitra 26 10. his commentary, mterpretation different It answers to the objection that mtelligence 18 not a permanent attnbute of the soul Hence the sitra “Intelligence 18 a permanent atimbute

of the soul) mmoe there 1s a separate (1e distinct) statement (in Sormpture to that effect)’’ 9

SUTRA 28 “Bur THERE 18 THAT DESIGNATION ON AOCOUNT OF (THE SOUL'S) HAVING THAT ATTRIBUTE AS ITS ESSENOH, 4S IN THE CASE OF THE INTELLIGHNT BHING *” Vedinta-parijata-saurabha “As m the 0886 of the intelligent one,’ 1 © (just as Brahman 18 said. to be great, because He is possessed of great attributes, on the

14 9 GB 2826,p 197, Ohap 2

[st 2 3 28 420 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 9}

ground of etymology thus) "Brahman’ 1s one in whom there are great qualities,’ so the soul has been designated as “Hternal, all pervading” (Mond 1162), because of possessing great attributes In the first case, the Initelhgent Bemg, great by Himself, 18 great by reason of His attributes too In the second case, on the other hand, the mdzvidual soul, atomic in size, 18 great by reason of ita attribute only,—this 18 the distinction Vedanta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz If the individual soul be atomic by nature, then the texts which establish ita all pervasiveness must be con tradicted, such as ‘Hternal, all pervasive, omnypresent, extremely subtle’ (Mund 116), ‘Eternal, all pervasive, rmmobile’ (Gita 2 24) and so on,—the author replies No

The term “but’’ 18 for dispomng of the objection On account of having an all-pervasrve attribute as 108 very essence, “that deaigna- tion”, viz the designation of the all pervasrveness of the soul, such as ‘Hternal, all pervasive’ (Mund 11 6), fits in “As m the case of the mwnteligent bemg’’ Greatness 18 said to belong to the Intelbgent Bemg through His connection with great attimbutes as well, n accord. ance with the saying ‘Brahman’ is one m whom there are great attributes The Intellbgent Bemg bemg great dy nature as well, the example holds good only partaally ® Sumularly, there 1s this demgnation. of the all-peryasiveness (of the soul) on the ground of 1ta all pervasive attribute only, and not dy nature This should be understood here Vasudeva, the Highest Person, 1s without an equal and a superior and. all pervasive, 171 accordance with the scriptural text ‘Nothmg 28 observed to be exther equal to Him or higher than Him’ (Svet 6 8) The all pervasiveness of others, such as, prakrii, tume, and the attribute of the mdividual soul (viz knowledge), 18 relatrve (and not absolute) There are contraction and expansion of even such an stimbute which 18 peculiar to the mdividual soul, and eternal, m accordance with the declarations by the Lord Himself ‘“ Knowledge 18 enveloped by

1 Drh--man.

१ Not quoted by others

8 Te the case of Brahman and the mdvidual soul are not parallel in ail respects but m some respecia only The former is great by nature, as well as great by attmbutes, while the latter 24 atom by nature yet great by attributes

Fence the two cases are parallel only mm respect of the second pomt, and not of the first as evident

[80 2 3 28 ADH 9] VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA 421

06806708 Thereby beings are deluded ° ’ (Git& 5 15), ‘ “‘ In whom that nescience has been destroyed by knowledge, m them knowledge shines forth lke the sun, O Bhirata!’’’ (Gita 5 16 4)

COMPARISON Samkara

This 1s stitra 29 mn lus commentary Interpretation absolutely different He takes this and the following three शी ड as laying down the correct conclusion, viz that the soul 18 all pervasive, m answer to the prima facte view set forth in ten siitras above Thus, this siitra means, according to him “But there 18 that desgnation (of the atomicity of the soul) on account of 108 having that atimbute (viz buddh1) as 1ta essence, a8 in the case of the mtelligent bemg’’ That 18, Just as Brahman, though all pervading, 1s demgnated to be atomic for the purpose of meditation, so the imdividual soul, though all pervading, 18 designated to be atomic through ita lmitang adjunot of buddhi >

RamAnuja, Srikantha and Baladeva

This 18 80८8 29 in the commentaries of the first two, and इति 27 in the commentary of the last Baladeva leaves out “tu” Inter pretation different—viz “But there 18 that demgnation (16 the deagnation of the soul as knowledge) on account of ita having that attmbute as 108 easence, 98 77. the case of the intelhgent one” Thats, yost &8 the Lord, though a knower, 1s sometimes demgnated as know ledge, so the individual soul too, though a knower, 1 sometimes designated as knowledge, 8008 1t possesses Knowledge aa its essential atimbute They contunue the same tomo m the following four sitras, although hteral interpretation 18 the same

Bhéskara

This 18 उत्क 29 m his commentary Interpretation absolutely different Here he points out that the atomuaty of the soul, considered. 80 long, 18 not the real form of the soul, but only its transmigratory

1 Correct quotation. ‘ PraldéayaiYaiparam” Vide Cité, 6 16, p 303

४ 878 2320, pp 616 ff

8s B 2329 p 144, Pat? Sk B 2339 p 147, Parts 7 and 8, GB 2827 p 108, Chap 2

[st 2 3 29 429 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 9]

form Here he follows Samkara, and pomta ont that just as the all pervading Brahman 1s said to be atomic m reference to His abode,

viz the heart, so the all pervading soul 18 said to be atomic through 1४8 attributes of passion and the rest 1

SUTRA 29

“ALSO BEGAUSH OF LASTING AS LONG AS THE SOUL DOES, THERE 18 NO FAULT, BECAUSE IT 18 SEEN ”

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

The demgnation of the soul’s all pervasrveness, due to ita attr bute, 18 not inconmstent “Also because of’ the attmbute lasting ss long as the soul does, there 1s no fault, because xt 18 seen”, 216 because it 1s found im the passage ‘“For there 18 no coasation of the knowledge of the knower, because of his umpemshabihty Impensh able, ndeed 01218 this soul”’ (Brh 48 303)

Vedainta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz The attribute of the soul bemg sometimes present and sometimes not, ita all pervasiveness due thereto vanishes, and as such the demgnation of 11a all pervasiveness 28 open to objections -——(the author) rephes

The term “also” 18 meant for dispoamg of the objection The goul 18 indeed eternal As 108 attribute too “laste as long as the soul ००९8०, 1 8 18 an aternal attmbute accompanying the soul, so the designation of the soul’s all pervasiveness 18 not open to objections, because we find that there are texts designating the attmbute as lasting as long as the soul does, such as ‘“For there 18 no cessation of the knowledge of the knower, because of his impershabihty Impersh- able, verily, 01 18 1718 soul’’’ (Brh 43 80)

1 Bh B 23 20, p 137

2 (088 ed,p 440, omits the whole sentence which 1s but a repetituon of the sutra itself The other edrtion retains it

8 Not quoted by others

[at 2 8 30 ADH 9] VEDANTA PARIJATA BAUBABHA 423

COMPARISON Samkara This 18 sitra 30 m 1118 commentary Interpretation different

Samkara contanues the same theme, and points out that the soul’s connection with buddhi laste so long as the tranamigratory state does 1

Raménuja and Srikantha

This 18 stitra 30 in their commentaries as well The interpretation of the word “tad darfan&t’’ different, viz because it 1s seen that all cows, hornless and 80 on, are called ‘cow’ (since they all possess the generic character of cowneas) 9

Bhiskara

This 18 808 30 17 bis commentary too Interpretation different, vis like Samkara’s 3 Baladeva

This 18 siitra 28 m his commentary Interpretation of the word. “tad daréanit”’ different, viz because rt 18 seen that the sun and ita ght are oo eternal, and that the sun 28 both hght and the illummator 4

SUTRA 30

“But ON ACCOUNT OF THE APPROPRIATENESS OF MANIFESTATION OF THAT WHICH IS EXISTHNT, AS IN THE CASH OF VIRILITY AND 80 on ””

Vedainta-parijita-saurabha

During the waking state there 18 the “mamfestation” “of this”, 16 of knowledge, which 1s “existent’’ mdeed durmg the states of deep sleep and so on Hence, the atirbute of knowledge does laat so long as the soul rtaelf does, just as in youth there 1s the manzfestation of राक्र and 80 on, which are existenth mdeed durmg childhood

1§.B 2830 pp 619 ff

2&1 B 23380 p 144 Part?, Sk B 9 8 20, 147, Parts 7and 8 9 Bh. B 2330, pp 187 38

‘GB 2328

[80 2 8 31 VEDANTA EAUSTUBHA ADH 9]

Vedainta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz if knowledge, the attmbnute of the soul, be eternal, then why should there be no perception of 1t durmg the states of deep sleep and the rest {—(the author) replies

The term “but” mmples emphams Knowledge, the attribute of the soul, does last 88 long as the soul iteelf does Why? “On account of the appropriateness of the manifestation of that which 1s existent ˆ` That 1s, the attmbute of knowledge, which 1s “existent indeed ' "3 3 6 18 present indeed, 77 © non manifest form during the states of deep sleep and the rest 1s mamfested during the waking state,— just as mm youth there 18 the manifestation of “vimlity and so on” which are existent indeed durmg childhood By the phrase “and 80

on”’ the natural qualties of magnanumity, good conduct and the lke are to be understood. COMPARISON

Samkara and Bhaskara

This 18 8078 31 17. therr commentanmes Interpretation different, they contmue the same theme—viz the soul’s connection with buddhi

exists potentially m the state of deep sleep, eto and 18 manifested in the state of waking 4

SUTRA 31

“OTHERWISE THERE (WILL BH) THE CONSEQUENCE OF BIHBNAL PERCHETION AND NON PHROHPTION, OB A BSSTBIOTION WITH REGARD TO THH ONE OB THE OTHER ”’

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

On the doctrine of an all-pervasive soul, the perception and the non-perception, the bondage and the release of the soul must all become eternal The soul will be erther eternally fettered or eternally free,—thus there must be “a restriction with regard to the one or the other”

Vedinta-kaustubha

This aphomsem is meant for mdicatmg the defects in the visw of those who mamtam the all pervasrveness of the soul which 18

1§B 28381,p 621,Bh B 2381,p 188

68 2 8 81 ADH 9] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 425

consciousness 9“QOtherwise,”’1e on any view other than our view, viz that the soul 1s possessed of the essential attributes of bemg a knower, knowledge by nature and atomic in mze,1¢6 on the doctrine that the soul 18 consciousness merely and all pervading, there must be the “consequence of eternal perception and non perception” On account of the all pervadmg soul being ever unenveloped, there will be perception, on account of the existence of mundane existence, non- perception In this way, there will result sumultaneous bondage and release, “07 8 restriction with regard to the one or the other” On our view, on the other hand, the individual soul beimg of the mze of an atom, going and returning, bemg enveloped and bemg unenveloped, the object to be approached and the one approaching, are all posable, and hence the respective difference between bondage and release, too, 8 possible But on your view, there will result one or the other only of bondage and release, haying the stated marks There must be eternal bondage alone on the part of the soul which 1s consciousness merely and ummobile, or there must be salvation slone,—such & restriction will result Hence, 1t 1s establshed that the mdividual

soul 18 possessed of the attribute of bemg a knower, 18 knowledge by nature and atomic in size

Here ends the section entitled “Departure” (9)

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhiskara

This 18 sutra $2 1n their commentanes Interpretation different as before They adduoce here an argument for the existence of 0066701; bemg connected with which the all pervading soul becomes atomio Thus (The existence of buddhi must be admitted) otherwise there will be the consequence of eternal perception and non perception. 1

1 8.8 2382,p 622 Bh 2 9889, 9 188

[st 2 3 82 426 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 10]

Adhikarana 10 The section entitled “The agent” (8४८98 32 39)

SUTRA 32

“([HR INDIVIDUAL SOUL IS) AN AGENT, BEOAUSH OF SORIPTURE HAVING A SENSE ”

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

The soul mdeed 18 “an agent’, because the scrptural texts, informing us about the means to enjoyment and salvation, such 88 “One desiring heaven should perform a sacrifice’ (Tart Sam 25 651), “One desurmg salvation should worship Brahman’® and so on, have & 86786

Vedinta-kaustubha

Now incidentally, the problem whether the soul 18 an agent 18 being discussed.

-On the doubt, viz whether the mdividual soul 18 an agent or not,—if the prima facse view be as follows In the Katha रधा if 78 demed that the individual soul 18 an agent, thus ‘If the killer thinks to एणा], xf the killed thmks himself 1166, both these do not know ‘This one does not lull, nor 18 killed’ (Katha 219), and 1b has been declared by the Lord too ‘“‘All actions are done by the ganas of prakyii The soul, deluded by egomum, thmks ‘I am the agent’”’’ (Git& 327) Hence, the gunas alone are agents, but never the soul,—

We reply The soul alone 18 the agent Why! “Because of Scerpture having a sense”, 1e because the scrptural texts, teaching the means which are dependent on sentient beings, subject to enjoyment and salvation, viz ‘Only doing works here, let one demre to lve a hundred years’ (188 2), ‘One dearrmg heaven should perform sacrifices ’ (Tart Sam 266), ‘One desiring salvation should worship Brahman’, ‘Let one worship calmly’ (Chand 3141) and so on, have a sense Tf those non sentient objects (viz the gunas) be the agent, the soriptural texta teaching the means must be senseless

The (above quoted) scriptural text, on the other hand, shows that the soul bemg eternal cannot be killed, but 7 1s not by any means

1 R, B, p 208, line 27, vol 2 2R B

{80 2 3 33 ADE 10] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 427

concerned with denying that the soul 18 an agent The Smrt passage, too, shows only that the soul, which 1s deluded by the gunas of prakyii, 18 an agent of mundane activities through those gunas And, this has been stated by the Lord Himself thus ‘ “^ Those deluded by the gunas of prakri are attached to the actrvities of the gunas”’’ (१६ 9 2 9) If the gunas be the agent and not the soul, then the following statements will be nullfled viz ‘But 1f you will not carry on this mghteous warfare’’’ (108 2 33), ‘For through action slone Janaks and the rest have attaimed to perfection Havmg an eye to the good of the world also, you should perform 96007." (Gitta 8 20), ‘Whatever you do, whatever you eat, whatever you offer, whatever you give, whatever you practise as penance,—make that an offering to me”’ (QGIt& 9 27), ˆ“ am firm, with my doubta removed I-willdo according to your word”’’ (Git& 18 78) and so on.

COMPARISON

Samkara and Bhaskara

This 18 8778 38 in their commentaries Literal mterpretation same, but they hold that the soul’s state of bemg an agent 18 not natural, but due to limiting adjunctse+ The same remarks apply to the followmg three stitras also, which will not be noted separately

SUTRA 33 “On ACCOUNT OF THR THACHING OF (THE SOUL’S) MOVING ABOUT”

Vedainta-parijata-saurabha

“On account of the teachmg of (the soul’s) moving about,” in the passage He moves around in his own body as 0881786 ° (Brh 2 1 18 2); 10 18 an agent

Vedainta-kaustubha “On account of the teaching” of the soul's “moving about”, 16 of 18 roammg around, m the passages ‘He, the ummortal, goes 1 828 2882,p 629 Bh B 2882,p 188 or the drfferent senses of the

Trora ‘ कि pee Bh B, eto 28, R, Bh Sk

[st 2 8 3436 438 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 10]

wherever he wishes’ (अ 4312), ‘He moves around in his own

body as desired’ (Brh 21 18), the individual soul 1s an agent,—+this is the sense

COMPARISON Rimanuja and Srikantha

They take this sfitra and the next as one sutra by reversing the order and adding a “oa” thus “Up&déndt vihBropadedic oa” 1

SUTRA 34 “ON ACOOUNT OF TAKING ”

Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha

Because of the scrptural mention of the taking (by the soul} thus “So exactly he, having taken the senses’ (Brh 2 1 18)

Vedanta-kaustubha

On account of the sor:ptural mention of the taking (by the soul} m the passage which introduces the topic thus ‘Just as a king’, and contanues ‘So exactly does he, having taken these senses’ (Brh 2118), ‘Havmg taken by his intelligence of these senses’ (Brh 2 1 1.7), the mdividual soul 18 an agent

SUTRA 35

“ATSO ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION (OF THE SOUL AS AN AGENT) WITH REGARD TO ACTIONS, OTHEBWISH, (THERE WILL BE) REVERSAL OF DHSORIPTION *”

Vedinta -parijata -saurahha

“Also on account of the designation (of the soul) as an agent” thus ‘Understandimg performs a sacrifice’ (Tait 2 6 5), the soul 1s an agent If by the word ‘understanding’ buddhi be understood and not the individual soul, the mstrumental case would have been used 8

1 &ल B,p 169, २8 8 Sk,B p 158 Parts 7 and 8 9 8, R, Bh, Sk, B 3 Jo the wnstromental cage ‘vyfdnena’ would have been used.

{80 2 3 96 477 10] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 429

Vedgnta-kaustubha

“Also on account of the demgnation” of the individual soul, denoted by the term ‘knowledge’, as an agent of ordmary and Vedio “actons” thus ‘Understanding performs a sacrifice, performs ४0008 88 well’ (Tait 2 5), the individual soul 18 an agent

Lf 1t be objected By the term ‘understandmg’ buddhi 18 to be understood and not the individual soul,—{the author) reples “Other wise, 1e if by the term ‘understanding’ the mdividual soul be not understood, but buddhi 1s understood, then there must be “reversal of the description”’, 1e buddhi bemg the mstrument, there must have been the demgnation of an mstrument thus ‘by understanding’ But there 1s no such designation Henoe, here 1s & designatzon of an agent by the stated case ending, viz ‘Understandmg’ Hence the individual soul 1s an agent

SUTRA 36 “'T eR IS NO RESTRICTION AS IN THE CASH OF PERORBPTION ”

Vedainta-padrijaita-saurabha

“‘ There 18 no restriction’ with regard to the actiona based on the perception of their fruxta

Vedanta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz if the individual soul be the agent, then having taken into consideration the good and the evil which are the frorta of good and evil works, and bemg diagusted with the evil, 1, with 9 view to obtaining the good, ought to do what 1s conducive to the latter,—(the author) rephes

‘As 77 the case of perception ˆ Just as there 1s the perception of the good and the evil which are the fruits of good and evil works performed previously, so there 18 “no restriction ' with regard to works, amos we find that people are by chance sometimes inclmed to what 16 beneficial and sometames to what 1s not beneficial ¬

1 1 © although a man percerves the good and evil resulta of his past acta yot there 18 no fixed rule that he always afterwards does what 18 good and avoids what ia bad Aa he is ruled by external circumstances, he may sometimes be

inchned to what 1s bad, fhough knowing from his past experiences that such acts lead to harmful consequences

[at 2 3 87 430 VEDANTA PAELJATA-SAUBABHA 4DH 101

COMPARISON Samkara

This 18 sitra 37 m his commentary Interpretation different, viz “Asin the case of perception, there 18 non restriction (with regard to actions)” Thai 18, just as the soul, though free with regard to perceptions, sometimes percerves what 1s good, and sometimes what 18 bad, so the soul, though free to act, sometimes does what 1s good, and sometmmes what 18 bad 1

Ramfanuja, Srikantha and Baladeva

This 18 sittra 36 in the commentaries of the first two, but siltra 35 in the commentary of the last They mterpret it as followmg (If prakria were the agent and not the individual soul, then there would be) non restriction (of actions) as in the case of perception”’ That 18, just 88 1† has been shown ? that if the soul be all pervasive no definite perception. will be possible, so 1f prakrta be the agent, no definte activity will be poamble, mmnce prakrt: bemg all pervading and common to all, all activities would. produce resulta in the case of all souls, or produce no resulta 1n the case of any one *

SUTRA 37 “Ow ACCOUNT OF THR REEVEBSAL OF POWER”

Vedanta -parijata-saurabha

If buddhi be the agent, then 1ts mstrumental power will cease, and 1t must come to have the power ofanagent Hence the individual soul 18 the agent

Vedinta-kaustabha

To the objection, viz m the text ‘Understanding performs a sacrifice’ (Tart 25), by the word ‘understanding’ buddhi alone 1s to be understood, and 1४ 28 the agent Hence there mstrumental case has not been used “—(the author) replies

1§ 2, 8397 p 626

2 Under &न B 2882 Sk B 3882, GB 2830

9 fr B 2836, p 158 Part 2, Sk B 2886 p 169, Parta 7 and 8, G.B 2 $ 36, p 208 Chap 3

4 Vide VPS 283865 above

[st 2 3 38 ADH 10 | VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA 43

The individual soul alone 18 the agent If buddhi be admitted to be the agent, then “‘on account of the reversal of power”, 208 instru- mental power will 06986; and 17 must come to have the power of an agent Moreover, 1f buddhi be the agent, then the power of enjoyment, too, must pertain to 10 alone ‘This bemg so, bondage and release must result on the part of buddh: alone

COMPARISON RaémAnvja, Srikantha and Baladeva This 18 sutra 37 in the commentaries of the first two, but sfitra 36 in the commentary of the last Ther interpretation 18 smular to the

last portion of Srintvfsa’s interpretation, viz that xf buddhi or prakria be the agent, the power of enjoyment too must belong to 101

SUTRA 38 “AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE ABSENCE OF DEEP CONCENTRATION ”

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

If the soul be not an agent, then “the absence of deep concentration”, due to something which 18 absolutely driferent from the non sentient,* will result, and hence the soul is the agent

Vedanta-kaustubha

“Deep concentration”’ means abiding as having Brahman for one’s soul, after meditating on one’s own form,—distinot from the body, pense-Organs, mind and intelligence,—preceded by the stopping of the functions of the mind. As the “‘absence of such a deep concentration”, the means to aalvation, will result, rf the dividual soul be not an agent,—it 18 known that the individual soul alone 18 the agent

1g 8 2887 p 158, Part 2 Sk B 2837,p 154, Parta7and& GB 2386, pp 208 9, Chap ॐ 9 Acciana-mdirdt,1e from even the shghtest portion of the non-sentient

[st 2 3 39 432 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 10]

SUTRA 39 “AND LIKE A CARPENTER, IN BOTH WAYS”

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

The soul scte or does not act according to 1ta own wish, “hke 8 carpenter’’, and as such a situation 1s possible “in both ways” If buddhi be the agent, then there bemg the absence of demre and the like on ita part, there will be the absence of such a situation

Vedainta-kaustubha

The soul,—the nature of which 18 to act or abstam from acting, and which 18 possessed of the attributes of ‘bemg an agent’ and 80 on, Jastng 80 long as 11 1tself does,—though connected with a group of instruments like speech and the like, performs action or does not perform action according to 1ts wish, and thus if the soul be an agent a situation is possible “in both ways’’,—yjust as 8 carpenter, though provided with mstrumenta like axe and the rest, constructs chariots, eto , according to his wish ‘But acting or reframmmng from action 18 not posmble on the part of buddhi, which 1s an instrument lke the axe, by reason of its non sentzence On account of the etermty of its proxumity to 4 sentient bemg, as well as on account of the absence, on its part,—of any demre—the cause of action or maction,—there must be either eternal activity or eternal non activity, on rts part Hence, it 18 estabhahed that the soul alone 18 the agent

Here ends the section entitled ‘' The agent” (10)

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhiaiskara

This 18 sutra 40 in their commentaries Interpretation absolutely different ‘They take 1t to be formimg an adhikarana by rteelf, con- cerned with the question whether the mdividual soul 1s an agent by nature or as connected with [णक adyuncta, and accept the second alternatrve Hence the parallel mstance “ie yathi ca taksa”’ 18 interpreted differently by them thus In ordmary 8 a carpenter 18 miserable and so long as he 18 an agent,1e works with his tools,

{80 2 3 40 ADH 11 | VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 433

eto But when he returns home, lays sade his tools and 1s no longer an agent, he becomes happy In the very same manner the soul suffers 80 long as 1t 18 aN agent through nescience, but when 1 returns 1018, 1 © realizes 1ts real state, frees 1taclf from sense organs and so on, and ceases to be an agent, 1t becomes happy 1

Baladeva

This 18 sutra 38 m his commentary He takes 1t to be an adhikarana by riself Interpretation different, viz “And hke the carpenter (the soul 18 active) in two ways’? That 18, the carpenter 18 an mdirect agent through the medzum of its wnstruments, and also a drect agent mm handling those instruments themselves f§imilarly, the soul 18 an indirect agent through 108 sense organs, and 1s also a direct agent in the act of controlling those sense organs 2

Adhikarana 11 The 8680107 entitled “Under the control of the Highest” (87४२८88 40 41)

SUTRA 40 “But (THE AGHNTSHIP OF THE SOUL PROOHEDS) FROM TH HicHusT, BHOAUSE THAT IS TAUGHT BY SORIPTURR ”

Vedanta -parijaita-saurabha

The agentahip of that nd1vidual soul proceeds “from the Highest” as 118 cause, in accordance with the scnptural text “Entered within, the ruler of men” (Lait Ar 311 1, 2 8)

Vedainta-kaustubha

Now the problem 1s being discussed whether the mdividual soul 18 an agent as controlled by the Ehghest Soul, or independently

On the doubt, viz whether the stated agentshzp of the individual soul 18 under 208 own control or under the control of the Highest Soul, if the prema facte view be Under its own control alone In ordimary

88 2840, pp 628 29, Bh B 2340,p 139 9 428 2838 p 120, Ohap 2 3 ए; 181

28

[st 2 8 41 434 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBRABHA ^ 11]

018, a man engages himself to tilung and the hke by himself out of demre for crops, but does not wait for the Highest,—

We reply The agentahrp of the mdividual soul proceeds “from the Highest” as its cause Why? On the ground of the following scriptural texta ‘Yor he alone makes one, whom he wishes to raise up from these worlds, do good deeds He alone makes one, whom he wishes to lead down from these worlds, dp bad deeds’ (Kaug 9 8), ‘Hntered withm, the ruler of men’ (ग्या; Ar 3111, 2), “Who rules the soul with’ (Sat Br 1467, 302) and 80 on, as well aa on the ground of the Smrti passages, viz =" “And J am mtuated withm the heart ofall From me proceed memory, knowledge and their absence” ° (Gita 15 15)

COMPARISON

Samkara and Bhiskara

Literal interpretation same, although as before they are speaking of the soul’s agentahip bemg due to lmiting adjuncts The same remarks apply to ther interpretation of the next sitra

SUTRA 41

“Bow (rae LORD MAKES THE SOUL ACT) HAVING REGARD TO THR BEFORTS MADE, ON ACCOUNT OF THE FUTILITY OF WHAT 18 ENJOINED AND WHAT IS PROHIBITHD AND 80 ON ””

Vedainta-parijita-saurabha

The term “but” 18 meant for disposing of the fault of mequalty. The Highest Bemg, who has “regard” for the works done by the undividual soul, makes 1t do good deeds and the rest mn another birth too, “on account of the futahty of what 1s enjomed and what 1s pro- hibtted ”

Vedinta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz if the Supreme Soul be the matigator, then He must be open to the charge of mequality and rest,—the author, rephes

1 P 1074 lune 18

[st 2 3 41 ADE 11] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 435

The term “but” 18 meant for disposing of the above objection The Supreme Soul, who has “ regard” for, 16 takes into account, the efforta made by the individual soul, 16 for 15 good and bad deeds, makes 1# do good deeds and the rest m another birth too, and gives it pleasure and the like accordmgly Hence, He cannot be charged with partiality, ete

if 1t be asked Why should the Supreme Bemg take into account the efforts made by the individual soul*—the author reples “On account of the futality of what 1s enjomed and what 1s prohibited” If the Highest Person takes into account the efforts made by the soul, then alons, injunctions and prohibitions, such as, ‘One who desires for heaven should perform the Jyotistoma sacrifice’ (Ap 8 8 10211), “A Brabmana must not be killed” and so on, do not become futile The meanmmg of the phrase, “and 80 on” 18 that faults hke suffermg arising from good deeds, and happmess arising from bad deeds, and 80 on, result Simcoe the Supreme Soul takes mto account the works done by souls, He cannot, by any means, be charged with mequality, eto , though He 1s the imstagator of what 18 enjomed and what 1s pro hibited, and 1s, thereby, the bestower of favour and disfavour Under the aphoram “(There are) no mequality and cruelty (on the part of the Lord), because of (His) haying regard (for the works of souls)” (Br 98. 21 83), 1t has been said that no mequality and the rest pertamn to the Highest m His creation of the variegated world—this 1s the dustmeotion? Hence, the Highest Person, omnipotent and the Lord of all, 1s the mstigator of good deeds and the rest im accordance with the good and bad deeds performed before, and 1s the giver of fruits accord- ugly to them ‘Thus, 16 18 estabbshed that the wndividual soul 18 an agent as controlled by the Highest

Here ends the section enfatled “The Highest’’ (11)

1 P 209 vol 2

9 1 © there 18 no repetition here, amce under Br 8G 21 83 1b bas been shown that the Lord 1s not partial as a creator whereas 10 19 bemg shown here that He 1s not partual as an snaiigaior to action

[st 2 3 42 436 VEDANTA PARLJATA SAURABHA ADH 12]

Adhikarana 12 The section entitled “A part” (Sttras 42-62)

SUTRA 42

“(Tam INDIVIDUAL 78) ^ PART (OF BRAMAN), ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION OF VARIETY, AND OTHHRWISE, ALSO SOME READ (THAT BranManN IS OF) THE NATUBH OF FISHERMEN, GAMBLERS AND THE REST”

Vedinta-pairijata-saurabha

The individual soul 1s a part of the Supreme Soul, m accordance with the desgnation of difference m texta lke ‘The two unborn ones, the knower and the non knower, the lord and the non lord’ (Svet 19) and so on}, and on account of the designation of non difference m texts like ‘Thou art that’ (Ohind 686, eto) And “also” the Atharvanikas “read” that Brahman 18 of “the nature of fishermen, gamblers and the rest”, thus “Brahman are the fishermen, Brahman are the slaves, Brahman are these gamblers”’ >

Vedanta-kaustubha

It has been pointed out that the agentahip of the mdividual soul 18 under the control of Brahman Now, the author 18 pomting out the relation between the two, consstently with the scmptural texts designating both difference and non difference

On the doubt, vz whether the individual soul 18 different from Brahman or non different from Him, or a part of Brahman and as such both different and non different from Him,—zf 1b be suggested. The imdividual soul must be different from Brahman, as a man 18 from the king, because the texts designating non difference are figura- tive and because a non difference between the non knowing and the all knowing 18 mmposaible Or, 10 must be non different only (from Brahman), because the scriptural texts designating difference are figurattve There bemg a mutual oppomtion between difference and non difference, of erther the texts about difference or the texts about non difference must certamly be metaphorical,—

IR ४ 8, R Bh, Sk, B

[st 2 3 42 ADH 12] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 437

We reply The individual soul 1s neither absolutely different from the Highest Person, nor absolutely non different from Hm, but 18 & part of the Highest Self, m accordance with the sarptural text “For he 1s a part of the Highest” A ‘part’ means a ‘power’, m accordance with the scriptural text “This individual soul, a power of the Highest, 18 small m power and not mdependent” A ‘part’ should not be understood here as ® portion, actually severed hke a portion of wealth and the rest, for rf the mdrvidual soul be & portion cut off from Brahman, then texts lke ‘Without part’ (Svet 6 19) and the like, will be contradicted, and because if 1t be like a portion of wealth, there will result an absolute difference (between Brahman and the soul) and hence the texta hke ‘Thou art that’ (Chind 68 6, etc ) will be set aside (The true view 218 ) The mdividual soul 18; by nature, different from the Supreme Person, predicated to be the whole, and the ocean of a mass of attmbutes like 0701118 06008 and the rest,—aimoe it 18 predicated to be a part, and 1s subject to bondage and release But 1t 28 yet non-different from Him, as 108 existence and activity are under the control ofthe whole Why* “On account of the designation of variety”, 16 on account of the demgnation of difference, “and otherwise’’,1e and on account of the designation of non difference The sense 18 that the two 008 of texta being of equal force, there 18 a uatural difference—non difference between the madiyidual soul and the Supreme Soul ‘The following are deagnations of duference ‘Who rules the soul withm’ (Sat Br 1467, 30%), ‘Entered within, the ruler of men’ (Tat Ar 3111, 2%), ‘The soul, verily, 18 supreme, self dependent, possessed of superior qualities’, ‘The mdividual soul 18 possessed of httle power, not self dependent, lowly’, “The two unborn ones, the knower and the non knower, the lord and the non lord’ (Svet 19) and so on ‘The following are dempnations of non difference “Thou art that’ (Chand 686, etc), ‘Tins soul 1 Brahman’ (Brh 26519, 4465), ‘I am Brahman’ (Brh 1410) and 80 on And “also” the followers of one branch, viz the Atharvamkas, “read” that Brahman 18 of the “nature of fishermen, gamblers and the hike” thus “Brahman are these fishermen, Brahman are the slaves, Brahman are these gamblers”

1 P 1074 hns 18 > 2 181

[80 2 3 4344 438 VEDINTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 12]

COMPARISON

Samkara lateral interpretation same, although as usual Samkara holds

that the soul 1s not a real part of Brahman, but a part as st were 7 The same remarks apply to the followmg two siitras

SUTRA 43

“On ACCOUNT OF THE WORDING OF 4 SACRED TEXT ”

Vedinta-pirijaita-saurabha

“On account of the wording of the sacred text,’’ viz “A foot of him are all bemga’ (2 V 10 908 *, Chand 3126), the md:vidual soul 18 & part of Brahman

Vedinta-kaustubha

The imdrvidual soul 1s nothing but 9 part of the Supreme Soul Why? Also “on account of the wording of the sacred text’? ‘A foot of him are all bemgs, three feet of him are smmortal in the heaven’ (Rg V 10908, Chand 3126) A ‘feet’ means a ‘part’

SOTRA 44

“AWD, MOBHOVER, (TT 18) DECLARED BY Super”

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

Tt 18 declared by Smrti also that the dividual soul 18 & part ot Brahman thus ‘“A part of my own self, m the world of men, has become the mdrvidual soul, the eternal "` ` (Gité 15 7 8) त्क श ण्म

1 8 8 2 8 48, © 636

2 P 340, line 19

6 R Bh 61, 8

9 68, 2, Bh, Sk, B

[st 28 45 ADE 12] VEDINTA-KAUSTUBHA 439

Vedinta-kaustubha

Tt has been declared m a Smpii passage by the Highest Person Himself that the dividual soul 1s a part of Brahman, thus ‘“‘A part

of my own self, in the world of men, has become the mnd:vidual soul, the eternal’ ` (Gita 15 7)

COMPARISON Ram4nuja He omits the “ca”’ 1

SUTRA 45 “Bur LIX LIGHT AND THE REST, NOT 80 THE HigHasst ”’

Vedanta -parijita-saurabha

Though the individual soul 1s a part of the Supreme Person, yet the whole (.e the Lord) does not experience pleasure and pain, just as “light and the rest’’ are devoid of the virtue or vice inhering 1n their

parta 7 Vedinta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz then the virtue or vice pertaming to the individual soul may belong to the Sapreme Soul too, seemg that a part has no separate existence from the whole,—the author replies here

“The Highest,” 16 the Supreme Soul, does “not” become “so”,1e does not come to share the virtue and vice pertammmg to the mdividual soul The author states a parallel mstance “Like hghit and the rest”, 1 8 just as “lght”’,1e the sun and the rest, are not touched. by the attributes of their rays which are their parta,ie by ther contact and the rest with pure and impure objecta By the phrase “and the rest”, the ether and the like are understood, 1¢ just as the ether and the like are not touched by the good qualities found im the sound of conch-shell, cackoos and so on, nor by the bad qualities found in the sound of crows and the hke The term “but” 18 Suggestive of the absence of an intermixture of the attmbutes of the part and the whole ‘The objections, resulting from the apprehension

1 SB 2344 p 161, Part 2

[st 2 8 46 440 VEDANTA EAUSTUBHA ADH 12]

that the Highest Bemg 1s subject to karmas by reason of His connec- tion with the hearta of mdividual souls which are subject to Kkarmas, have been disposed of, on the ground that the Lord 18 not subject to Karmas, under the aphomem “Enjoyment resulta” (Br Si 12 8) Under the aphomsm “Not even on account of place” (Br अ 321), we shall dispose of (the objection based on Brahman’s being connected. with “places’, viz the hearts) on the ground that the Lord, having the ‘places’ by nature, 18 yet not subject to karmas Here, on the other hand, xt should be known that the objections ramwed on the ground of His own parts are disposed of 1

COMPARISON Samkara

This 18 sitra 46 1 018 commentary The general import of the siitra, as well as the interpretation of the phrase 1e “prakAéidivat”’ different He develops ४18 doctmne of upaidhi here Thus, the शपि means, according to him Just as the hght of the sun and the moon, pervading the entire expanse of the ether, appears to be straight or bent accordingly as the lmmitmg adjunct with which 1t 1s in contact, viz finger, eto are straight or bent, but does not become so really, or just as the ether, though mmagmed to move when jars are moving, 0068 not really move, or just as the sun does not really tremble when 1t8 images on water tremble, so although the individual soul undergoes pleasure and, pain, Brahman does not, since the soul 18 but a fictatious part of Brahman, due to limiting adjuncts, and not > real part 9

Ramanuja and Srikantha

They too develop here their peculiar theory of Viéistidvarta Thus, the इतित means, according to them “(The mdzvidual soul 18 a part of Brahman) as light and the rest (of the sun, etc 28 of the sun and so on), not so the highest (1e Brahman 18 not of the same nature

1 Ie there 18 no शश्वत्तव, here Under Br अ 1 2 8, rb has been shown that Brahman, though connected with the hearts of individual souls 18 not subject to their pleasures and pam in this sutra 10 w shown that Brahman, though connected with the mdividual souls as their whole is not yet subject to their pleasure and pam And under Br Su 3 21,16 will be shown that Brahman, though the ener controler, 12 not subject to the states and faults of souls

3 828 28 46, pp 688 639

[st 2 8 46 «+त 12] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 441

as the soul)” That 1s, the soul 18 a part of Brahman in the sense of beng an attribute (visegana) of Brahman, and just aa the attmbute and its substratum are not identical, so the soul and Brahman are not 1 They continue the same topic mm the following two अति पड

Baladeva

This 18 इतिप 44 m his commentary Interpretaizon absolutely different He begins a new adhikarana here (five 80198) concerned with the question of the Lord’s mcarnations Thus, this sitra means, aocording to him ‘But supreme (carnations of the Lord are) not 80 , (16 parts of the Lord as the mdividual souls are), as in the case of hght” That 1s, just aa though the sun and the fire fly are both called ‘ght’, yet the word. has a different meanmg when apphed to the sun, so though the moarnations and ordimary individual souls are both called “parta’ of the Lord, yet the word has a different meanmg when applied to the incarnations,1e 1t means then the entare Lord 2

SUTRA 46

५.७7 SMBTIS DECLABE ”

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

“And Smrtis declare” ‘Of these, He who 18 the Supreme Soul 18 declared to be eternal and free from the properties of matter, and He 18 not touched by the fruits too, just aa & lotus leaf 18 not touched by water’ The active self, on the other hand, 1s something different, who 18 subject to bondage and release’ (Mah& 12 18754-13755 4)

Vedainta-kaustubha

The sages also declare that the part alone 18 subject to the fruita of action done by rteelf, but not the whole, thus ‘Of these, He who 18 the Supreme Soul 1s declared to be eternal and free from the properties of matter, and He 18 not touched by the fruita too, just as a lotus leaf is not touched by water —Thbe active self, on the other hand,

1 §ल B 2845 pp 161 62, Part2,8k B 23848, pp 161 62, Parts 7 and 8 2GB 2844, pp 328 24, Chap 2 8 One line omitted 4 P 852, hnes 9 10 vol 3

[st 2 8 47 442 VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA ape 12]

18 something different, who 18 subject to bondage and release He 1s subject to seventeen क्वाह (Mahi 1213754-56a) It has been declared by Scripture, too, thus ‘Of the two, one eats the sweet berry, the other, without eatmg looks on’ (Svet 46, Mund 3 1 1)

COMPARISON RamAnuja and Srikantha

They quote from अणा to show that the soul 1s the attribute of the Lord 1 Baladeva He quotes from Smrta to show that the mcoarnations are not parta of the Lord m the same sense the mdividual souls are >

SUTRA 47

“INJUNCTION AND PROHIBITION (FIT IN) ON ACCOUNT OF (THE

SOULS’) CONNEOTION WITH BODIES, AS IN THE CASE OF FIRE AND

80 ON ”?

Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

“Inyuncfaon and prohibition” like ‘One who 1s desirous of heaven. should perform sacrifices’ (Tat Sam 2553),‘A Sidra 18 not to be mutiated to 9 sacrifice’ (Tart Sam 711) and so on do indeed fit in, on. account of the connection of the individual souls with different bodies, m sprte of their being an equality among them as parts of Brahman, just as fire 18 brought from the house of a Srotmya,5 but not from the crematory, or just as water and the like, touched by clean. persons, pots and so on are accepted and not others

Vedanta-kaustubha

Tf the individual souls be all equal as parte and the rest of Brahman, then to whom can the imjunctions and prohibitions refer? 1456670 | In spite of ther sameness, myjunctions and prohibitions hke ‘One

1 St B 2346,p 162 Part 2,Sk.B 28 46, 7 160, Parts 7 and 8 24GB 2345

8 P 208 108 27 vol 2 Not quoted by others

4 P 24] line 21, vol 2 Not quoted by others

9 A Brdimana versed in the Veda

{st 2 3 48 ^+ 12] VEDANTA PABIJATA SAUBABHA 4.43

demrous of heaven should perform sacrifices’ (Tart Sam 2655), ‘Hence a Sidra 18 not to be inituated to 9 sacrifice’ (Tait Sam 71 1) fit in on account of their connection with different bodies, “as m the 0888 Of fire and 80 on”’, 1 6 कमेनत brought from the house of a ya, but one from crematory and the hke 18 rejected, and just as the urme and exorement of cows and the hke are enjoined as holy, but those very things of different animals

are rejected. COMPARISON

Samkara and Bhiskara

He develops m this connection his doctrme of Adhyiaa 1 Bhaiskara too speaks of his peculiar doctrme of Up&dhi

Baladeva

This 18 sitra 46 m 718 commentary He contmues the same theme,—viz the distmction between imoarnations and ordinary individuals He interprets the sitra thus (In the case of individual souls there are) injunctions and prohibitions, on account of (their) connection with bodies, as in the case of light (1e the eye)? That 18, the individual soul, though a part of the Lord, is yet connected with neacience and, a body, and 18 as such under the control of the Lord for rta activity and ynactivity and soon But an mcarnation, though a part of the Lord, 18 not under His control, just as the eye or the power of vision, though a part of the sun, depends upon the per mission,1e the presence, of the sun for ita activity or otherwise, but a ray of the sun, as & part of the sun, 18 identical with 1t, and does not depend upon any permission and the like of the sun

SUTRA 48 “AND ON AOCOUNT OF NON HXTHNSION THERE IS NO EXTENSION ”’

Vedainta-pairijdta-saurabha

In spite of the fact that the mdividual souls are parts of the all pervasive Bemg, and in spite of the fact that they themselves are

1 88 2848,pp 640 Bh B 2348 p 142 SGB 2346 pp 226 27,Chap 2

[80 2 8 49 4A4. VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 12]

all pervasive by reason of their (all pervasive) attribute (of knowledge),1 the mdividual souls, bemg atomic by nature, are not all pervamve, and as such there 1s no confusion among karmas

Vedinta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz On your view, too, on account of beng parts of the all pervasive Bemg, aa well 88 on account of posseamng an all pervaarve atimbute, all the souls come to experience the pleasures and the hke in all the bodies, and as such ® confusion among karmas, a8 well 88 a confusion among the enjoyments of their fruita. will result Hence, as the view that the soul 1s a part of the all pervading Brahman, 1s atomio by itself and 1s all pervasive by reason of its attribute, mvolves unnecessary complications, so Kapila’s doctrine of the soul, viz that the soul 18 all pervamve by itself, 18 more acceptable,—the author rephes here

“On account of the non extension,” 16 non all pervasiveness of the souls,—mutually distanct by reason of being atomic, and distinct also from the Whole (1e the Lord) by bemg predicated as parts,— “there 1s no confusion” ‘The term “and” indicates the contraction of the soul’s knowledge during 108 state of bondage

COMPARISON

Baladeva

This 1s sitra 47 in his commentary The same topic continued “And on account of the non extension (1e mcompleteness of the mdividual soul, there 38) no (possibility of) a confumion (between x6 and an incarnation)’’ That 18, the soul 1s atomic and not full and perfect hke an mecarnation, hence different from him 3

SOTRA 49

“AND (THH DOCTRINES OF THH ALI-PERVASIVHNESS OF THE SOUL) AEH FALLACIES MERELY ”

Vedainta-pdrijaita-saurabha And the doctrines of an all pervasive soul and the rest of the opponents lke Kapila and others are “fallanous merely’, amoe,

1 Vide VPS 38 98 *GB 2347, p 227, Chap 2

fst 28 49 ADE 12] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 445

on those views, there resulta a confusion (among karmas and so on of the souls) Vedainta-kaustubha

But the doctrines of an all pervasive soul and the rest of Kapila, Kanda and so on are “fallacious merely’’, as they have no (scriptural) bess, and as, on these views, there a confusion among all practical transactions will resuli By the term “and” 1i 1a mdicated that such teachers sumply delude people

COMPARISON Samkara This 18 इति 501n his commentary 0616808 “abbisah’’ in place of “&bhasih’” Interpretation absolutely different, viz “(The mdrv1 dual soul 1s) only a reflection (of Brahman)*’ Thus, here he develops his doctrine of Pratabimba 1

Ramanuja He reads “a&bbdsah’’, and interprets the sitra thus “(The view that Brahman 1s obscured. by limrtang adjunct or nesmence) 18 mmply a fallacy” He accepts the alternative reading “A&bhasih” too and ponta out that in that case the 8009 will mean “(The various reasons advanced by the supporters of the above doctmne) are sumply fallacies” 2 Bhaskara This 18 sitra 60 in his commentary He substitutes “va” m place of “‘ca’? He, also, hke Ram&nouja, directa this sitra agamat the Samkarite view, thus ‘‘(Nesaenoces are) sumply fallacies” >

Srikantha He too directs this sfiitra against the Samkante view, interpreting 10 hke Ramaénuja’s second interpretation * Baladeva

This 18 stitra 48 1n his commentary He reads “‘ibhaisah’? The same topic conlanued, viz “(The reason adduced by the prema facte

1 8 8 2850,pp 642 9 St B 2349 p 163, Part 2 ४ 20. B 2380 p 142 4 अ B 3 8 49, 7 161 Parta 7 and 8

[st 2 $ 60 446 VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA ADH 12]

objector to prove the mmulanty of the soul with the incarnation) 15 ॐ mere fallacy” That 18, the argument The soul 1s a part of the Lord The incarnation 1s a part of the Lord the soul 1s equal to the incarnation,

evidently involves the logical fallacy of undistributed middle +

SUTRA 50

““BROAUSH OF THE NON BESTRIOTION WITH REGARD TO TH UNSEEN PRINOIPLE ”

Vedanta -parijita-saurabha

On the doctrine of an all pervastve soul, confusion 18 unavoidable even if recourse be taken to the unseen pmnaiple, “because of the non restriction with regard to the unseen pmnciple’’

Vedanta-kanustubha

To the argument, viz there 18 no confusion among all practical transactions on our view too, since the unseen principle 1s the regulator, —the author replies

Confumon resulta undeed on the view of the opponents, ‘‘ because of the non-restriction with regard to the unseen principle’’, viz to whom may the unforeseen prinaple, generated 1 the vicmty of all the all pervasrve souls, belong and to whom not

COMPARISON RamfAnuja and Srikantha

Interpretation same, only they direct this and the remaimmng एत ४8 to the refutation of the Samkarite view, and not to the view of Kapila and others

Baladeva

This 18 हर्त क 60 1n his commentary He begins a new adhikarana here (three stitras), concerned with proving the mutual driference among the individual souls Thus, this sitra means, according to

1 @ 75 2848 p 288, Chap 2

[st 2 3 61 ADH 12] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 447

him “(The mdividual souls, though emmular m ther essential nature, are yet different from one another) on account of the non determinate ness (16 non similarity) of (ther) deatumes” 1

SOTRA 51

“AND IT IS SO EVEN WITH REGARD TO DETERMINATION AND THD LIKE ”’ Vedainta-parijita-saurabha

There 1s no restriction “even with regard to determmmations and. the hke”, such as ‘I shall do this and not that’

Vedanta-kaustubha

To the argument, viz A restriction 18 possible, viz the unseen. principle belongs to one who has the determmation ‘I shall do this and not that’,—the author replies here

“Determination’’ means resoluion By the phrase “and the hke” reverence and 80 on are understood ‘There 1s, indeed, no restriction with regard to the unseen principle even in the case of resolution, reverence and the rest

COMPARISON Baladeva

This 18 8078 51 17 his commentary He contanues the same theme, viz “And thus (the mdrvidual souls are different) with regard to (ther) 068 and the rest also” 1090 18, adrgta or the unseen principle 18 the ultzmate cause which determines the difference between the souls, and not their desires, mclmations and the hke, which are only

the secondary causes >

1GB 2849 p 220, Chap 2 9 © 5 2350,p 280, Ohap 2

[80 2 9 52 448 VEDANTA PABLJATA SAURABHA ADH 12]

SUTRA 52

“Iz If BH OBJECTED ON ACCOUNT OF PLACE, (WE BEPLY ) NO, ON AOCOUNT OF INGLUSION ”’

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

If 1t be argued that “‘on account of the place”’ of the self, mtuated within ita own body, everything 1s conmstent,—(we reply ) “no” “On account of the mclumon” therem of the places of all the souls

Here ends the third quarter m the second chapter of the Vedanta parte saurabba, an interpretation of the Sariraka mim&imsd texts, and composed by the reverend Nimb&rka

Vedainta-kaustubha

If + be objected A definite restriction 18 possible with regard to determinations and the rest, “on acoonnt of 70180817, 1 6 1018 17 the region of the soul, stuated within 108 own body alone, that the conjunction of the mind (with the soul) takes place,—on account of such a place of the soul,—({we reply ) “no’’, “on account of the molumon”’ therein of the places of other souls too The sense 18 this Since all the souls are connected with one and the same mind, the determunations and the rest, due to the conjunction of the mind (with the soul), must be common to all, and hence the nnseen principle, due to them, must indeed be common to all This being so, the confumon among all practical transactions remains as before Hence, rt 1s established: that the imdividual soul 1s a part of Brabman, Lord Vasudeva, is atomic in aize, knowledge by nature, possessed of the atimbutes of “bemg an agent’, “bemg © knower’ and so on and different in every body

Here ends the section entitled “A part” (12) Here ends the third quarter of the second chapter in the holy Vedanta kaustubha, a नूलवतलाः fam the Sariraka mim&msa and

composed by the reverend teacher visa, dwelling under the lotus feet of the holy Nimb&rka

(s0 2 3 52 ADH 12] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 449

COMPARISON Baladeva

This 18 sfitra 51 1n his commentary The same topic continued “Tf 1t be objected (that the difference among the individual souls 1s) due to the difference of (their) environments, (we reply ) no, because (the difference of environments, such as heaven, hell, and different 0४8 in the world) are moluded under (1e due to) भता ` That 1, finally, adrgta or the unseen prinaple 1s the cause of the difference among the souls +

Résumé

The third quarter of the second chapter contamns—

52 siitras and 12 adhikaranas, according to Nimbairka 58 siitras and 17 adhikaranas, according to

62 siitras and 7 adhikaranas, according to Raémé&nuja, 69 sittras and 17 adhikaranas, according to Bh&skara 52 sittras and 12 admkaranaa, according to Srikantha 51 siitras and 11 adhikaranas, acoordmg to Baladeva

Samkara and Bhi&skara break each of the stitras 3 and 26 m Nimbérka’s commentary into two different ones, and omzt sttra 11

Ramanuja and Srikantha break sitra 5 m Nimbérka’s com mentary mto two different sfitras, and take sfitras 33 and 84 m 10 as

one stitra, reversing the order Baladeva omits siitra 11 in Nimbé&rka’s commentary

aan Pr G be

1GB 23651,p 280, Chap 2

29

SECOND CHAPTER (Adhyiya) FOURTH QUARTER (Pada)

Adhikarana 1 The seotionentitled “The origin of the sense organs” (Stitras 1 - 4)

SUTRA 1

*LIZEWISH THE SENSE ORGANS >°

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

The origin of the organs 18 beimg considered The sense organs originate hke the ether and the rest

Vedanta -kaustubha

In the preceding quarter, the absence of any contradiction among the scriptural texts regarding the ether and the rest has been shown Now, the author 1s showing the non contradictory nature of the seruptural texts regarding the organs of the individual soul

On the doubt, viz whether the sense organs omgimate or not, the prema facte view 1s as follows In the discussions about origin, © @ im the scriptural text ‘From this soul the ether has origmated ’ (Tait 21), there 1s no mention of the origin of the sense organs, and im the scriptural text ‘“'TThe non existent, venly, was this in the beginning’’ ‘Then they said ^" What was that non-existent = ¶ ‘“‘'The Bapes, verily, were the non existent in the beginning’ Then they

said “° Who were those sages’’ “The sense organs, verily, were the

Bepres’’” (Sat Br 611, 11), the sense organs are declared to exst prior to creatzon, hence they do not origmate

With regard to 1t, we reply Just as the elements lke the ether and the rest, mentioned in the passage ‘ Hrom him arise the vital- breath, the mind and all the sense organs, the ether, the aur, fire’ (Mund 21 3), omgmate, “so the sense organs’’, too, onginate

1 > 499 11788 1 2

[80 24 2 ADH 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 451

COMPARISON Srikantha

Interpretation different, viz he takes 1t to be settang down the prema face view thus ‘(Just as the individual soul 18 eternal) so are the sense organs 1 (as declared by Scripture 9)

SUTRA 2 “On aCCOUNT OF THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF A SEOONDARY (ORIGIN) °"

Vedainta-pdarijita-saurabha

It cannot be said also that 1n the section concerned with creation, eg in the passage “Brom the self the ether has ongmated”’ (Tait 21), there bemg no mention of the omgm of the organs, the text regarding the omgin of the organs 1s secondary,—“on account of the impossibility of a secondary” (orgm) That is, the sense-organs must have omgin, as the majority of scriptural texts deagnate such an origin, and as, otherwise, the 1101941 proposition that there 18 the knowledge of all through the knowledge of one will come to be con

tradicted. Vedanta-kaustubha

Having rejected the doubt,—viz by reason of 1#8 oppomtion to the scriptural text ‘“The non exstent, verily, was this in the beginning’’* (Tait 2'7), the scriptural text about the orgin of the sense organs 18 secondary,—the author states the reason for the view that the sense organs, too, omginate

The compound “gaunyfisambhava”’ 18 to be explained as ‘mmpos ability of a secondary (origm)’, 1e the acriptural text about the orig of the sense organs cannot be secondary Hence the sense organs do omgmate If 2४ be asked Why mmpossble i—({we reply ) Because the scriptural text about origi can be understood hterally, because there are numerous sorrptural texta regarding such an omgin, and because otherwise the आ proposttion will come to be con tradicted, 1e because there are numerous scriptural texts designat mg origination, such as ‘From him 82186 the viial breath, the

18k B 3 4.1, 7 168 8 7 9 Sat Br 61 1, 1—quoted by SHinivdes

[st 2 4 9 452 VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH 1]

mind and all the sense organs’ (Mund 21 3), ‘Just as small sparks come forth from fire, so exactly do all the sense organs from this soul’ (Brh 2120), ‘Seven sense organs amse’ (Mund 217) Having made the initial assertion, viz that there 1s the knowledge of one through the knowledge of all thus ‘ “What bemg known, ar, all this comes to be known?”’ (Mund 2 1 8), the text goes on to deolare, in order to prove it, that ‘From him amse the vital breath, the mind aud all the sense-organs’ (Mund 213) and so on ‘This mral propomiaon 1A proved only if all the effects, hke the sense-organs and the rest, aro admitted to have Hum as ther matemal cause The

text ‘The non-existent alone was this in the begmnmg’ (Sat Br 611, 1), on the other hand, 18 to be explamed as referring to the cause Hence there 18 no contradiction

COMPARISON Ramanuja He takes thus and the next sfitra as one sfitra Interpretation chfferent, viz “(The plural number m the text) 1s secondary, be cause of impossibihty”’,1e because prior to creation Brahman alone exists 2 Srikantha He regards this sfitra aa answering the prema face objection He too bke Ramfnuja takes this and the next siltra aa forming 4 single attra, and mterprete 1४ yust 86 Ram&nuja

Baladeva Interpretation just like Ramfnuja's

1 Vis Mat Br 611, 1 866 Sttnwaea above It bas been stated under the previous siléra that the words ‘sense organs and ‘sages’ in that passage denote Brahman But bow then to account for the plural number ?—to this question she present eilira replies

adc B 2432, p 170, Part 2

fst 24 34

ADH 1] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 458 SOTRA 3 “AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE DIRECT MENTION (IN) THAT OF WHAT 78 PRIOR ”’

Vedanta -parijata-saurabha

“Qn account of the direct mention,” m that text, of the varb,— used in 108 primary sense 17 connection with the ether and the rest,— in reference to the sense organs as well, the omgin of the sense-organs 18 primary

Vedinta-kaustubha

For this reason, too, the origin of the sense organs 18 prmary,— 80 says the author

“On account of the direct mention,” m “that’’,1e 1 the text “Hrom him arise the vital breath, the mind and all the sense organs, the ether, the arr’ (Mund 2153), of the word ‘amses’,—used 1n its primary sense with reference to the ether and so on,—with reference to the sense organs, mentioned even prior to the ether and the rest,— the scrptural text demgnating the ongin of the sense organs 18, indeed, primary It 38 not possuble that one and the same word ‘arises’ 18 used in & secondary sense with reference to the sense organs, and in 9 primary sense with reference to the ether and the rest for thus reason too, rt 18 used 1n & primary sense alone 77 both the cases

COMPARISON Baladeva

Interpretation exactly hke R&ém&nuja’s second half of the preced ing sitra ~

SUTRA 4 “Ox ACOOUNT OF SPEECH BEING PRECEDED BY THAT ”’

Vedinta-parijata-saurabha

The sense organs originate like the ether and the reat because of the mention of speech, the vital breath and the mind as preceded by hght, water and food m the passage ‘“The mind, my dear, 18

1GB 243 p 234 Chap ॐ

[80 244 4%. VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1]

composed of food, the vital breath 1s composed of water, speech 1s composed of hght”’ (Chind 6 6 41)

Vedinta-kaustubha

To the allegation, viz that in the section treating of creation, a origin of the sense organs 1s not mentioned,—the author replies

On account of the mention in the Chindogya of speech, the vital breath and the mind as preceded by hght, water and food respectively, having Brahman for ther matemal cause, thus ‘“The mmd, my dear, 18 composed of food, the vital breath 1s composed of water, speech 18 composed of hght’’’ (Chand 6 & 4), there 1s ongm (of the sense-organs) Hence it 18 establshed that the sense organs do onginate on the ground of the following reasons, viz there 18 the mention of the omgi (of the sense organs) m the section treating of origin too, there are also numerous texts designating the orgin of the sense organs, and, finally, the mutaal assertion too that there 18 the

knowledge of all through the knowledge of one 1s established only on this view

Here ends the section entitled “The ongin of the sense organs” (2)

COMPARISON Ramanuja

This 18 stitra 3 m 08 commentary Interpretation different He continues the same topo, viz that the word “priina’ m the above passage does not stand for the sense organs, but for Brahman Hence the atitra ‘Because of speech (1 6 names of objects) being preceded by that (viz the exstence of those objects)” That 18, names of 0019608 pre suppose the existence of objects But prior to creation there were no objects, and hence no speech or organs of speech and 80 on ®

Srikantha

This 1s siitra 3 17 018 commentary too Interpretation smular to R&mé&nuja’s, viz “Because of speech (1 6 names and forms) being preceded by that (1 © by the cre&ataon by the Lord) ®

1 8, 2 ४ त B 248 pp 17071 Chap 2 9 & B 243 p 167 Parts 7 and 8

[80 245 ADH 2] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 455

Baladeva

He also contanues the same topic thus “Because of speech (16 Brahman) being prior to that (viz pradhdna and reat)’ 1

Adhikarana 2 The section entitled “The going of the seven” (8१४78७8 5 6)

PRIMA FACIE VIEW (80६८७ 5) SUTRA 5

“QN ACCOUNT OF THE GOING OF THE SHYBN, AND ON ACCOUNT OF BHING SPHOLFIMD ”’

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

On the doubt, viz whether they are seven or eleven, the prima face view 18 as follows Because of the gomg (of the sense organs), mentioned m the passage ‘The vital breath goimg out all the sense organs go out’ (Brh 4 4 23), and because of their bemg specified. 88 seven only m that very passage ‘He 0068 not see,—does not emell,—does not taste,—does not speak,—does nob hear,—does not thmk,—does not touch’ (Brh 4428), the sense organs are seven only aad Vedinta-kaustubha

Now, desirous of determming the number of the sense organs, the author 18 stating the prema face view with a view to removing the contradictions among the texta about 0

On the doubt, viz whether these sense organs are seven or eleven, (the prama facts objector replies ) “Because of the going of seven”, mentioned in the passage ‘The vital breath gomg out, all the sense organs go out’ (Brh 442), they are seven only How 1s 1t known that seven alone go out? “Because of (them) bemg speafled,” 18 because m the passage “When the person in the sun moves about back, then he becomes non knowing of forms, he becomes one,

1QB 244 p 285, Ohap 2

#

3 Not quoted by others The phrase “sis Ghuh कन bhavan" is to be supphed in each dotted portion

[श 2 4 6 456 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA aDH 2]

he does not see, does not amell, does not taste, does nob speak, does not hear, does not think, does not touch’ (Brh 441 2), only seven, hike the eye, eto, are specified

COMPARISON Samkara

According to him “gateh” = avagateh,1e because of under standing +

OCORREOT CONCLUSION (80४ 6) SUTRA 6 “Bor (THERE ABE) HANDS AND THE RUST, (THESE ADDITIONAL SHNSE ORGANS) BRING HSTABLISHED, THEREFORE (THAT) IS NOT 80 9% Vedainta-parijata-saurabha

The correct conclusion 18 as follows It bemg definitely ascertamed from the passage ‘The hand, venly, 18 an organ of sense’ (Brh 3.2 8 2) and go on, that there are more than seven, 16 18 not to be thought there are only seven sense-organs In accordance with the scriptural ‘There are ten sense organs 17 a person, the soul 18 the eleventh’ (Brh 9 9 48), there are eleven sense organs

Vedainta-kaustubha

The author states the nght conclusion

The term “but"’ mtmmates the blindness of the prima facte opponent In the scmptural text “The hand, verily, 1s an organ of sense It 18 seized by action as an over sense organ, for by the hands one performs actzon’ (Bfh 328), “the hands and the rest”, over and above the seven, are mentioned =^" Therefore” the hands and the rest, over and above the seven, “ bemg establshed”’, and in the pas sage ‘All the sense organs go out’ (Brh 4 & 2) the gomg ont of all the sense-organs being not specified, 1+ cannot be thought that there are only seven of them But the fact 18 that there are eleven sense organs 1m accordance with the somptural and Smrta texte “There

1§.B 245,p 653 a8, Bh, B 8 Op ow

[8 2 4 7 ADH 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 457

are ten sense organs 17 a person, the soul 18 the eleventh’ (Brh 3.2 8), “The sense organs sare ten and one’ (Gita 155) Among these, five are organs of knowledge, viz ear, akin, eye, tongue and nose They have five objecta, viz sound and the rest Jive are organs of action, viz speech, hands, feet, organ of elmmmation and organ of generation They have five 0016008 like word and the rest The internal organ 18 the mind, the cause of resolution and the rest In this way it 1s established that there are altogether eleven sense-organs

Here ends the section entitled “The going of the seven” (2)

COMPARISON RaméAnuja, Srikantha and Baladeva This 18 sitra 5 m the commentaries of the first two, but siitra 6

m the commentary of the last Interpretaizon of the word “sthite’’ different, viz. “because of abiding (in the body and asmsting the soul) 3

AdhikaranaS The 886४107 8701016 “The atom- 1city of the sense organs (Sttra 7)

SUTRA 7 “AND saTOMIC ”’

Vedinta-piarijaita-saurabha

In sccordance with the scriptural text regardmg gomg out, viz ‘All the sense organs go out’ (Brh 44253), the sense organs are “atomic”

Vedainta-kaustubha

Now the author 18 showing the maze of the sense organs

On the doubt, viz whether the sense organs are atomic or all pervading, the Simkhyas maintain that they are all pervasive, beng effects of the unlimited ahamkérea In accordance with the scrptural

1 इम्‌ B 245 p 178, Part 2 Sk B 246, p 169, Parts 7 and 8, GB 246

2 R, &, 5

[60 2 4 8 408 VEDANTA PARLJATA-SAURABHA ADH 4]

text also ‘These are equal and infinite’ (एता 1 5 19), they are certainly all pervading, this 18 the prima facie view

The correct concluson 18 that m conformity with the soriptural text about their gomg out, viz ‘The vital breath gomg out, all the yense-Organs go out’ (Brh 442), they are atomic There 18 10 fixed rule that unlimited effecta amse from what 18 unlimited, + beng found thot a small flower arises from a huge tree and 80 on The above quoted scriptural text, on the other hand, amply lays down that tho sense-o1gans are inumerable, or serves the purpose of medi tation, mentioned m the soriptural text ‘Now who, verily, meditates on these, the infimte’ (Brh 1518) Hence 1t 18 establshed that the sense organs are atomic

Here ends the section entitled “ The atomiaty of the sense organs” (3)

Adhikarana 4 The section entitled “The origin of the chief vital breath” (8०१८४ 8)

SUTRA 8 ““Awp THE BEST”

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha “The best,’ 1 6 the chief vital breath, mentioned mm the scrip- tural text ‘The vital breath, verily, 18 the oldest and the best’ (Chind 5111), origmmstea like the great elements Why? In conformity with the same scrptural text, viz ‘Hrom him anse the vital-breath’ (Mund 21 3)

Vedanta-kaustubha

Now, meaidentally, the orgm of the obief vital breath 18 bemg considered.

On the doubt, viz whether the chief vital breath, the cause of the subsistence of body and mentioned im the soriptural text, viz ‘The vital breath, verily, 15 the oldest and the best’ (Ohind 511), originates hke the great elements,—if 1t be suggested It does not originate Whyi Because in the text ‘There was neither death, nor the mmmortal, nor then a magn of mght or day That one breathed

1 8

180 249 ADH 5] VEDANTA PARLJATA SAURABHA 459

without wind by ita self power There was, verily, nothmg whatso ever other than it, or higher’ (Rg V 1012921), by the words ‘was ‘breathing’, meanmg ‘He existed breathng’, the motion of the vital breath at the tame of the universal dissolution 18 designated.

We reply “The chief too”, 16 the clef vital breath, too, originates hike the elements and the rest, since 1n the scriptural text "From him arse the vital-breath, the mind and all the sense organs, the ether, the air’ (Mund 21 $), like the omgin of the great elements and the rest, the origm of the chief vital breath, too, 18 mentioned, and «ince 1t 18 known that prior to creation there was umty alone and no diversity

The meaning of the text ‘There was neither death’ (Rg V 10 129 2), on the other hand, 18 as follows ‘Then’,1e at the time of the universal dissolution, ‘there was no death’, the killer There was ‘no immortal with self power’, 1e there waa no food of the gods (amrta) together with the food of fathers (svadh&i) There was neither the moon, the mgn of the mght, nor the sun, the mgn of the day ‘That one,’ 16 Brahman alone, the seed of the universe, “breathed’, 1e existed Of what nature was He? ‘ Breathless,’ 168 without effecta hke the air and the rest, viz 1m His causal state ‘There was nothing other than Him,1e Brahman

Henoe 1 18 established that like the ether and the rest, the chief vital breath too omginates from Brabman

Here ends the seotaon entitled “The omgm of the chief vital- breath ” (4)

Adhikarana & The section entitled “The air andfunoction” (8१५४८९६ 9-1 2)

SUTRA 9

“(Tae VItal-BREATH 18} NOT AIR AND FUNOTION, OM ACCOUNT OF THE SEPARATE THACHING ”

Vedanta-parijata-saurabha

The vital-breath 1s “not’’ mere “air’’, nor 8 sense organ, nor & “‘fanction” (of the sense organs) But we hold that the vital breath

1 P 887 ता 21-28

[80 249 460 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADE 5]

18 nothing but ar that has assumed a different condition, “on account of the separate teachmg”, viz ‘From him arise the vital-breath, the mind and all the sense-organs, the ether, the air’ (Mund 21 8)

Vedanta-kaustubha

Now the author 18 stating the nature of the chief vital breath.

On the doubt, viz whether the vital breath, the oldest, 18 the ar, one of the great elementa, or the general function of the sense organs, or nothing but the great element air that has assumed a different condition, if 1t be suggested In accordance with the statement, viz “What 1s the vital breath that 18 the ar Thus air 1s five fold, pr&na, apina, vyains, तक्ष, samfna”,! 1 1s nothing but the ar Or else, the vital breath 18 the common function of the sense organs as held. by the Samkhyoas > and is of five kinda,—

We reply The vital breath is “not the air” mmply, nor a general mode consisting in the function of the sense organs Why! “On account of the separate teaching,” 18 because mm the text ‘From him arise the vital breath, the mind and all the sense organs, the ether, the ar’ (Mund. 218), the vital breath 18 taught as something different from the second. great element air and from the sense organs If the vital breath be mere air, then this separate demgnation would besetamde And, 17 1# be ® mere mode of the sense organs, then, too, its separate designation from the possessors of the mode (viz the pense-organs) would be futile, as what arises separately being itself an object, cannot be the function of other objecta like the sense organs The vital breath, thus, 1s nothimg but the great element air that has assumed a different condition, this bemg the only alternative left Hereby, any conflict with the text ‘What 1s the vital breath that 18 the a’, too, 18 avoided

1 For the nature and fancizon of these five modes, see V R M 9 Vide Sam 90 2381

{80 2 4 10-11 ADH 5] VEDANTA PABIJITA SAURABHA 461

SUTRA 10

“BUT LIK THH BYBS AND THE REST, (THR VITAL BREATH 18 AN INSTRUMENT OF THE SOUL), BEGAUSE OF BHING AN OBJECT TO BE TAUGHT TOGHTHER WITH THEM AND 80 ON ”’

Veddnta-parijaita-saurabha

Though the best, the vital breath 1s but & spemal instrument of the individual soul, “lke the eyes and the rest” Why? “On account of bemg an object to be taught and so on,’ 16 on account of the teaching of the vital breath together with the eyes and the rest 10 the dialogue among the sense organs and 80 on

The author shows that the vital breath, bemg under the control of the individual soul, 1s serviceable to the soul like the eyes and the rest

Vedinta-kaustubha

The meaning of the term “but’’ 18 that im spite of 1ta supenonity to the sense organs, no independence 1s possible on the part of the vital breath, as 1s possible on the part of the individual soul The vital breath 18 “like the eyes and the rest’? That 18, just as the eyes and. the rest are instruments of the individual soul, so the vrtal-breath 18 & special mstrument of the mdividual soul To the question Whence 18 1 known that 0 1s an instrament of the soul /—We reply “Because of bemg an object to be taught together with them”, 1 6 because of the teaching of the vital breath together with them, ie together with the eyes and the rest, in the dialogue among the sense organs By the phrase “and so on’’, reasons lke non sentience, mncapabihty of self dependence and the rest are mphed

UTRA 11 “AND (THERE IS) HO FAULT ON THE GROUND OF (18) NOT BEING A SENBE ORGAN, FOR THUS (SCRIPTURE) SHOWS ”’

Voedinta -pfirijita-saurabha If 1t be objected If the vital-breath be an instrument of the individual soul, then there bamg no activity suitable to 1t, there must be fault “on the ground of (1ts) not bemg a sense-organ’’,—

[80 2 4 11 462 VEDANTA KAUSTIUBHA ADH 5]

(We reply ) “no”, smoe the somptural text ‘“I alone, dividing myself five fold, support and hold the body”’ (Praéna 2 81), “shows ”

that the holding up of the body 1s the pecuhar fanction of the vital breath

Veddnta-kaustubha

If 1t be objected Just as one oan be a perceiver only if there be some object to be percerved, so a thing may be an imstrument only if there be some function to be accomplshed by 1t, and this 18 not found Hence the vital breath cannot be a senseorgan Thus, as the vital breath 18 not a sense organ, 80 1f 1t be an unstrument of the individual soul, 16 18 but a futile one,—

We reply “No” ‘There 1s no such fault “For,” 16 mnce, in order that the vital-breath may be serviceable as an mstrument of the individual soul, the holy Scripture “shows*’, under the dialogue among the sense organs, that & purpose 18 served by the vital breath aa well—one that cannot be served by the sense organs,—viz the holding up of the body and the sense organs ‘The cluef vital breath 8010. to them “Do not fall m delumon It 18 I alone who, dividing myself five-fold, support and hold the body’’’ (Prana 2 3)

COMPARISON Samkara and Bhiskara

According to them the word “skaranatvat’’ answers the prema facte, viz that uf the vital breath be an organ of the soul, then there must be # sense object for 1t, lke colour for the eyes andsoon ‘The answer 18 thai there need be no sense object, mmoe the vital-breath 18 not an organ like the eyes and the rest Stl 1t 1s not devoid of a function, the holding of the body being its spemal function >

Raiménuja, Srikantha and Baladeva

According to them, the word “akaranatvit” means “On account of not having a function” That is, no objection can be raised on

> 8 9 828 8411, 662 68,Bh © 2411,p 148

[se 2 4 12 ADH 5] VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA 463

the ground that the vital-breath has no special activity, for 1# does have a special function 1

SUTRA 12

“(THB VITAL BRHATH) HAVING FIVE MODES IS DESIGNATHD LIKD THH MIND ”’ Vedanta-parijita-saurabha

Just as the mimd having many modes serves the individual soul through its own modes hke desre and the rest, so the vital breath, too, “having five modes, 1s deaignated”’ as serving the soul through 108 modes like ap&ina and the rest

Vedinta-kaustubha

The author points out that the same vital breath 1s deagnated as manifold through the difference of modes, but these latter are not separate entities The yital-breath does not serve the soul by only holding up the body, but by other functions too

Just as in conformity with the text ‘Demre, resolution, doubt, faith, —*, firmness, lack of firmness, basahfulness, meditation, fear,— all these are the mind alone’ (Brh 1 5 3), the mind alone, possessed. of demre and the rest as 1ts modes, serves the individual soul through ita own modes, but desire, resolution and the rest are not special kinds of entuties, 80 by the text ‘The prina, apina, vyinas, udina, amaina—all these are the vital breath’ (Brh 146 8), the vital-breath alone “1s designated. as having five modes” The apina and the rest are the modes of the vital-breath itself, but not separate entitzes, and 19 serves the soul through 108 own modes,—this 18 the sense This being 80, 1t 18 established that the vita! breath 1s the air 1teelf that haa assumed © different condition, an instrument of the individual soul, possessed. of many modes and 1s the best

Here ends the section entitled “The air and function” (5)

1 ईत 8 2410,p 177, 2८ 9, Madrased, Ak B 2410,p 174 Parte 7 and8;GB 2411 8 “Taok of farth *

[st 2 4 12-14 464 VEDANTA PABLJZTA SAURABHA ADH 67]

Adhikarana 6 The section entitled “The atom 101 of the best” (Siitra 13)

SUTRA 13

“AND atomic”

Vedanta-p&rijaita-saurabha

In accordance with the scmptural text designating departure, the vital breath, too, 1s “atomic”

Vedainta-kaustubha

Now the size of the chief vital breath 1s being considered.

On the doubt, viz whether the chief vital breath 1s great m mize or atomic,—if the suggestion be In accordance with the sarptural texts ‘Hverything 18 installed in the vital breath’ (Praéna 26), * For all this 18 covered by the vital breath”, 1b 18 great 17 mze,—

We reply The vital breath, the best, too, should be known to be “atomic”, un accordance with the scriptural text “He gommg out, the vital breath goes out after him’’ (Brh 442) ‘The above scrip tural texts, on the other hand, refer to the vital-breath in 708 collective aspect Hence, it 18 established that the best (viz the chief vital breath) 18 atomic

Hare ends the section entitled “The atomicity of the best’’ (6)

Adhikarana 7 The section entitled “The super- intending of fire and the rest” (Stitras 14-18)

SUTRA 14 ‘But THE SUPHRINTHNDING OF FIRE AND THS REST, ON ACCOUNT OF THE DHOLARATION OF THAT `

Vedanta -parijaita-saurabha The sense organs proceed to them respective functions as mitiated by the drvinities hike fire and the rest, m sccordance with the sorip tural text ‘Hie becoming speech entered into the mouth’ (Art 124%)

18s ©

[४0 2 4 ld ADH 7] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 465

Vedanta-kaustubha

Now, the activity of the sense organs 1s bemg disonssed

On the doubt, viz whether the sense organs like the eye and the rest proceed to their respeotive objects through ther own power alone, or as initiated by their respective presiding divinities,—the suggestion beang Through their own power, 111 accordance with the scrmptural text ‘Hor by the eyes ons 8068 colours’ (Brh 3 9 20),—

We reply “Fire and so on” ‘The term “but” is meant for disposing of the pruna face view Speech and the rest function only as superintended by fire and so on, 1e by the divimmues hike fire and soon The word “supermtending” means that which 1s super- intended or umtaated,1e an object to be mitiated Just as chariots and the rest move as supermmtended by charioteers and others, 80 18 the case here Why? “On account of the declaration of that”’, 16 “on account of the declaration”, or mention, in the sacred text, “of that” or of the fact of ther bemg supermtended by fire and the rest, thus ‘Hire becoming speech entered mto the mouth, the air becoming the vital breath entered mto the nose, the sun becoming mght entered into the eyes’ (Ait 124) If there be no relation of the inttiated and the initiator, fhe entemng of the fire and the rest must become meaningless The gormptural text ‘For by the eyes’ (Brh 9 9 20) and so on should be known to have served its purpose by proving sumply that the eyes and the rest are sense-organs

COMPARISON Raiménuja and Srikantha

They read this and the next sitra as one siitra, mmterpretang it differently thus “ But the rule of the fire and the reat with the bearer of the vital breath (16 the mdividual soul) (over the sense organs 28) on acoount of the thinking of that (viz the Lord), m accordance with soriptural text ** That 1s, we learn from Scripture that the fire god and the rest, as well aa the individual soul rule over the sense-organs, but their rule depends on the will of the Lord?

> This explains the compound “iad-imananit"’ a §ल B 2414, pp 181 89, Part 1 Madras ed Sk B 2414, p 178, Parts 7 and 8

30

[st 2 4 15 466 VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAURABHA 4DH 7]

Baladeva

Interpretation different, viz “ But the hght (jyotah) 1s the prime ruler (id.yadhisthina), on account of the declaration of that" That 18, the Lord 1s the pmmary imrator of the sense organs, while the fire god and the rest, and the individual soul are secondary initiators +

SUTRA 15

“WITH THH POSSBSSOR OF THE VITAL-BRHEATH, ON ACCOUNT OF SORTPTURAL Text °

Vedanta -parijata-saurabha

There 1s & servant-maater relation between the sense-organs and the mdividual soul alone The soul 1s the enjoyer, “an account of the aoriptural text”’ ‘Now where the eye has entered mto the ether, that 1s the seeing person the eye 1s for seeing’ (तकत, 8 12 44)

Vedainta-kaustubha

If this be so, then enjoyment, too, may pertam to the gods,—to this the author rephes

The possessor of the vital-breath 1s one who has the vital-breath, the cause of the holding up of the body and the sense organs The pense-organs have क servant-master relation “with the posseasor of the vital breath”, 16 with the mdividual soul This bemg so, the possessor of the vital breath alone 18 the enjoyer of objects through the sense organs,—thisisthe sense 9 Why? “On account of scriptural text”, 16 on account of the scriptural text “Now, where the eye has entered mto the ether, that 18 the seemg person, the eye 1s for seeing’ (OhAnd 8 12 4)

1G.B 2414,p 249 Chap 2 # 8,

[80 2 4 16 4DH 7} VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 467

SUTRA 16 “On ACOOUNT OF THS BTERNITY OF THAT” Vedinta-parijita-saurabha

“On account of the eternty"’ of the above relatzonship with the individual soul alone, but not with the preaiding dexties

Vedanta-kaustubha

For this 7898070, too, the enjoyer of the frmts, acoomplishable by the sense organs, 1s ther master, the possessor of the vital-breath alone, but their prealding deities are not such enjoyers, “on account of the eternty of that”,1e because there 28 an eternal relation between the sense-organs and the possessor of the vital breath alone, as proved by the scriptural text “He gomg out the vital-breath goes out after bim The vital breath gomg out all the sense organs go out after it’ (Brh 442) The gods, on the other hand, abide m lghest lordship, and not im what 1s wretched (vm the body), m accordance with the scriptural text ‘Evil, verily, does not approach the gods’ (Brh 1 6 201)

COMPARISON All others add a “oa’’ in the middle thus “Tasya ca mtyatvat”

Samkara The interpretation of the word “tasya”’ different, viz “Because of the etermty of that (viz of the mdrvidual soul)” That is, the individual soul alone abides permanently m the body aa the enjoyer, but the deriies cannot do so?

Ramfnuja and Srikantha

This 18 sitra 14 10 their commentaries Interpretation different On account of the etermty of that (vim of the atimbute of bemg ruled by the Lord) That 18, all objects are eternally ruled by the Lord alone Hence 1t follows that the rule of the sense-organs by the dexties and the individual soul really depends upon the will of the Lord 8

Readmg: ‘ pdpam ` and not ‘anagham" Vide Brh 165 20,p 70 16, pp 667 68

i > 85 24 agri B 2414, 72 182 Part Sk B 2414 pp 178 70 Parte 7 ७० 8

[st 2 4 17 468 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 7]

Baladeva

Interpretation different, viz And on account of the etermty of that, (1e of the relationship between the Lord and the gods) That 18, there bemg an eternal relation between the gods and the Lord, the real ruler, the gods rule the sense organs and so on, through the mere will of the Lord 1

SUTRA 17

“THEY (4BE) SENSH ORGANS, ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION OF THOSE 4S OTHER THAN THE BEST ”’

Vedinta-p&rijita-saurabha

“Qn account of the demgnation of those,” 1 8 of sense organs, as different from the chief 10 the passage ‘From him amse the vital breath, the mind and all the sense organs’ (Mund 2 1 39), “they”, te the sense organs, are different entities called ‘sense organs’, but not particular modes of the chief ”

Vedanta-kaustubha

Apprehending the objection, viz m conformity with the scrip tural text ‘ “Come, let us all become a form ofhiun” Of him alone, they became a form’ (Brh 1 6 21 9), other sense organs, like the eye and the rest, are different modes of the chief vital breath They are nob separate entities and cannot, therefore, have a separate re latzon with the possessor of the vital breath (viz the mndividual soul), our purpose bemng served if they have a relation with the vital-breath alone,—the author replies here

* On account of the demgnaton of those,”’1e of them “as duferent from the chief” vital breath m the passage “Hrom him arise the vital breath, the mind and all the sense organs’ (Mund 213), separate entities indeed are demgnated by the scriptural text ‘Those prinas

2

ॐ Vide Brh. 1 5.2) for the story When the different sense organs were created by Prasdpan, death came and overcame them all, with the exception of the vital breath. Thereupon, the sense organs decided to assume the form of the vital breath.

1G.B 2416, p 250, Chap ॐ 8 Bh, ©

[80 2 4 18 ADH 7] VEDANTA PARIJATA-GAURABHA 469

other than the vhiof, are the sense organs’ Otherwise, the eye and the rest too bemg understood—lke apina and so on—smply by the phrase ‘From him arse the vital breath’, the separate mention ‘and all the sense-organs’ must be meammgless Hence the sense organs being soparate entaties, their relation with the possessor of the vital broath or the mdividual goul must be depicted to be certamnly different from their relation with the vital breath

It cannot bo said also that the mind too, which 18 separately designated, cannot be a 86088 organ,—since in accordance with the Smrti passages, viz “The sense organs of which the mind 1s the axxth”’ (Git 16 '7), “The sense organs are ten and one” (Gité 13 6), as well as 10 accordance with the sorzptural text ‘There are ten sense-organs in & person, the soul 18 the eleventh’ (Brh 394), the mid as well 18 admitted to be a sense organ The separate designation of the mmd, too, is not futule, soe the mind bemg the leader of the sense-organs in conformity with the text ‘“And of the sense organs, I am the mind’’’ (अह 10 22), such 9 separate mention has a meamng By the soriptural text ^^ Come let us assume all become a form of hm alone’’’ (Brh 1 6 21), on the other hand, 77 18 denoted aumply that the activities of the sense organs are under the control of the vital-breath The sense-organs, also, bemg under the vital breath, are called ‘vital breaths’,2 just as in the text ‘All this vernly, 18 Brahman’ (Chand 8141), the term ‘Brahman’ has been applied to the world, 1t being under His control

SUTRA 18

‘‘Ow ACCOUNT OF THE SORIPTURAL THXT REGARDING DIFFERENOE AND ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFEEENOS ”

Vedinta-piarijita-saurabha

“On account of the scriptural mention of the difference’’ of the chief vital breath from speech and the rest at the end of the section treating of speech, eto thus “Then, verily, they said to the breath 10 the mouth’ (Brh 1 37 2), “and on account of the difference”’ of the sense-organs, the apprehenders of sense objecta, from the beat vital-breath, the cause of the submstence of the body, the sense-organs and the rest,—they are separate entities

2 Prana, 9 6, Bh

[so 2 4 19 4:70 VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH 8]

Vedainta-kaustubha

Having begun thus ‘They said to speech’ (Brh 192), and having concluded the section treating of speech and the rest, destroyed. by the demons, Scripture goes on to declare the chief vital breath as different from the sense-orgams hke speech, eto mm > passage In ® different section ‘Then, verily, they said to the breath in the mouth’ (Brh 187) ‘There 18 also ao great difference between them, such as the best vital breath 18 the oause of the holding up of the body, the sense organs and so on, while the sense organs have speech and the rest for their objects, and so on 06008, the sense organs are different from the chief vital breath,—this 18 the sense Thus 1t 18 established that the sense organs 1,—premded over by the gods, connected with the individual soul, and denoted by the term “sense Organ’,—are different from the best vital breath

Here ends the section entitled “The supermtending of fire and the reat’ (7)

COMPARISON Samkara, Bhaskara and Baladeva They divide this sitra into two different siitras, thus ‘‘Bheda érutehn” and “Vailaksanfic ca”’

Adhikarana 8 The section entitled “The making of name and form” (80४५८९8 19-21) SUTRA 19

“BUY THH MAKING OF NAMH AND FORM (78 THE FUNCTION) OF HIM WHO BHNDHES TRIPARTITE, ON ACOOUNT OF THACHING ”’

Vedanta-parijaita -saurabha

The evolution of names and forms too,—mentioned 1m the texts ‘That divinity thought ‘‘Come, let me, having entered into these

1 Prénas

[so 2 4 19 ADH 8 ] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 471

three deities with this lymg soul, evolve name and forms’’’ (Chand 63214), ‘Let me make each of them tripartte”’ (Chand 6 3 3#)— 18 the work of the Supreme Bemg alone “who renders trmpartite” He alone who made each of the deities trpartate 1s the creator of names and forms hike fire, sun and the rest Why? Because beginnmg thus “That divimty’ (Chiind 6 8 2), the text goes on to teach that the evolution (of names and forms) 1s due to the Supreme Deity thus “Let me, having entered with this lvmg soul, evolve name and form,”’’ 8 (Chind 6 8 2)

Vedanta-kaustubha

Thus, there bemg an enquiry with regard to the characteristio marks of the object which one should desire to enquire into (viz Brahman), 1t has been estabhahed m the preceding chapter *, that He 13 the cause of the world Here, on the other hand, with a view to confirming 1b and demonstrating the cause of the world as held by ua, 10 has been firmly establshed, after an examimation of the cause as designated by others,5 that the ether and the rest are created by Brahman ‘Then, the author 8, now, removing 9 doubt as to whether the evolution of name and form 18 due to the Supreme Brahman—s, doubt arisimg from the word ‘individual soul’ mm the scriptural text to be 01#60 hereafter

The evolution of name and form 18 mentioned m the Chandogya, under the section teaching of the Hxustent, in the passages “That divimty thought “QOome, let me, havmg entered into these three dextaes with the ltvmg soul (jIvatman), evolve name and form’”’’ (Ohind 63 2), “‘ Let me make each of them tmpartate”’ (Ohind 633) The questions 8 this evolution due to the imdrvidual soul or to the Supreme Soul? 1 1 be suggested To the indrvidual soul alone, as indicated by the phrase ‘having entered with this living soul’ —

We reply The word “but” 1s meant for dispomng of the prima fase view “The making of name and form,” ie the evolution of name and form, can be the work “of one who renders tripartite”, 1e of the Supreme Soul alone, omniscient and omnipotent who made

1 8, R, Bh, Sk, B 9 Op cit 9 8 RB, Bh, Sk, © 4 Vide Br 83 112 6 In the Ind pada of the 2nd chap

[80 ॐ 4 20 472 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 8]

each of the deities triparate Why! Having begun thus “That divimty thought” (Chind 632), the text goes on to designate,— through the use of the first person ‘ “Let me evolve name and form’”’’ (Chand 68 2),—the Lord’s resolve to evolve names and forms thus ‘Let me make each of them tmpartate’’’ (Chind 633) Then, for fulfiling this desire, having made each of the dextaes tripartite prior to the creation of the egg, having then created the egg, and having then entered therein, He made names and forms The somptural text about trpartztion secondanly umplies the process of malnng each element five fold Thus, as the Supreme Brahman alone, who renders tripartite, has been designated aa the creator of names and forms, and 98 the individual soul 18 capable of creatang names and forms, the evoluizon 18 due to the former alone The motive for usng the term “mdividual soul’ (jIvatman) here will be made clear by the aphorsm “For (Brahman 1s) without form” (Br 88 3 2 14)

SUTRA 20

“WiLESH AND THH REST ABE OF AN EARTHLY NATURE, IN ACCORD 4NOH WITH SORIPTURAL THXT, AND THE OTHER TOO ”

Vedanta-parljaita-saurabha

That in the body there are the evolutes of fire, water and food, made tripartite, may be ascertamed from scriptural text 14961 viz ‘Brom the earth the excreta, flesh and the mind, from water uri, blood and the vital breath, from fire the bones, marrow and speech’ 1

Vedinta-kaustubha

“fs. ॥

With a view to exhibiting the worthlessness of flie physical body, the author 1s demonstrating that the evolutes of the fire, water and earth, made tripartite, pertain to the body

“Flesh and the rest” should be known, “im accordance with scriptural text’’, “to be of an earthly nature”’,16 to be श्वा from, the earth, made trmpartate, and of the form of 106; barley and so on consumed by the embodied soul By the phrase “and 80 on’’, the excreta and the mind are to be understood The scriptural text 18 to the effect ‘The food which 1s consumed becomes three fold

1 Not quoted by others

[st 2 4, 21 ADH 8] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 473

That which 18 1t8 grossest portion becomes the excreta, that which 18 the medium, the flesh, that which 18 the finest, the mind’ (Chand 661) f&mularly, the three evolutes of each “of the other two also”, 168 of water and fire, are to be understood The urine, blood and the vital breath,—these are the evolutes of water The bones, marrow and speech,—these are the evolutes of fire Here, the vital breath 18 taken to be an evolute of water, only because 14 depends on water for its existence, the vital breath bemg really but a specal state of the air 10887 1 Likewise, the demgnation of the earthly nature of the mind 18 only meant for showing that its well bemg depends to the consumption of food? The evolutes of fire, too, are to be under stood im & similar manner

SUTRA 21

“BUT ON ACCOUNT OF SPECIALITY, (THERE IS) THAT DRBSIGNATION, THAT DESIGNATION ”’

Vedanta-parljata-saurabha

“But” they are regarded as different 18 on the ground of the preponderance of parts

Here ends the fourth quarter of the second chapter in the Vedinta एण क्रा saurabha, the explanation of the Sariraka mimAmsa texts by the reverend Nimbarka

Vedanta-kaustubha

To the objection, viz What 18 the ground of distunguishmg among the evolutes of these three elements, made trmpartite,—the author replies

The term “but” 1s meant for disposing of the objection On account of the preponderance of one element, “the designation’, viz that this 18 an evolute of this, this of that and 80 on, 28 proper

1 Vide Br Su 249

9 Vide the story of Svetakeiu who failed to remember and recite the Ry-verses and so on when he was fasting but remembered and answered everything when he took food Vide Chind 6 87

* This explains the compound Vaisegyat’

[80 2 4 £] 474, VEDINTA KAUSTUBEA ADH 8]

The repetition mdicates the conclusion of the chapter Hence it 18 established that there 1s no contradiction whatsoever among the scriptural texts which are 17 concordance with regard to Brahman, Lord. Vasudeva

Here ends the section entatled ‘‘ The makmg of name and form” (8) Here ends the fourth quarter of the second chapter of the holy Vedanta kaustubha, a commentary on the Sarfraka-minimed by the reverend teacher Srin:visa, dwellmg under the lotus feet of the holy

Nimb&rka, the founder and the teacher of the sect of the venerable Sanatkuméra

Here ends the second chapter entitled “Non contradiction”

Résume The fourth quarter of the second chapter contams—

21 sfitras and 8 adhikaranass, acoording to Nimbirka, 29 शी 88 and 9 adhikaranas, according to Samkara,

19 siitras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Rimaénuja, 22 sittras and 9 adhikaranas, according to Bhdskara, 19 sftras and § adhikaranas, according to Srikantha, 22 60798 and 15 adbikaranas, according to Baladeva

Samkara, Bhiskara and Baladeva divide stfitra 18 m Nimb&rka’s

commentary into two separate sitras द्वाद] and Srikanths take stttras 2 and 3 im Nimbé&rka’s commentary ps one gitra, also pitras 14 and 16 as one sutra

@ © †# ©@9 ¢< ^~

END OF VOLUME I