FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221  
222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   >>   >|  
te 80: Whence it follows that it is not something to be avoided like transitory things.] [Footnote 81: That, for instance, in the passage 'he is to sacrifice with Soma,' the word 'soma,' which does not denote an action, is devoid of sense.] [Footnote 82: I.e. for the purpose of showing that the passages conveying information about Brahman as such are justified. You have (the objector maintains) proved hitherto only that passages containing information about existent things are admissible, if those things have a purpose; but how does all this apply to the information about Brahman of which no purpose has been established?] [Footnote 83: It is 'naturally established' because it has natural motives--not dependent on the injunctions of the Veda, viz. passion and the like.] [Footnote 84: Elsewhere, i.e. outside the Veda.] [Footnote 85: The above discussion of the prohibitory passages of the Veda is of a very scholastic nature, and various clauses in it are differently interpreted by the different commentators. /S/a@nkara endeavours to fortify his doctrine, that not all parts of the Veda refer to action by an appeal to prohibitory passages which do not enjoin action but abstinence from action. The legitimacy of this appeal might be contested on the ground that a prohibitory passage also, (as, for instance, 'a Brahma/n/a is not to be killed,') can be explained as enjoining a positive action, viz. some action opposed in nature to the one forbidden, so that the quoted passage might be interpreted to mean 'a determination, &c. of not killing a Brahma/n/a is to be formed;' just as we understand something positive by the expression 'a non-Brahma/n/a,' viz. some man who is a kshattriya or something else. To this the answer is that, wherever we can, we must attribute to the word 'not' its primary sense which is the absolute negation of the word to which it is joined; so that passages where it is joined to words denoting action must be considered to have for their purport the entire absence of action. Special cases only are excepted, as the one alluded to in the text where certain prohibited actions are enumerated under the heading of vows; for as a vow is considered as something positive, the non-doing of some particular action must there be understood as intimating the performance of some action of an opposite nature. The question as to the various meanings of the particle 'not' is discussed in all treatises on the Purva
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221  
222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

action

 

passages

 

Footnote

 

Brahma

 
prohibitory
 

nature

 

information

 

purpose

 
positive
 

passage


things
 
joined
 

established

 

considered

 

appeal

 

instance

 

interpreted

 

Brahman

 

kshattriya

 

explained


enjoining
 

killed

 

killing

 

determination

 

understand

 

quoted

 
forbidden
 
formed
 

opposed

 
expression

entire

 

enumerated

 
heading
 

understood

 

intimating

 
discussed
 
treatises
 

particle

 

meanings

 

performance


opposite

 

question

 

actions

 
prohibited
 

negation

 
denoting
 

absolute

 

primary

 

attribute

 
purport