FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   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   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   >>   >|  
y means of meditation on his Self, recognises the Ancient who is difficult to be seen, who has entered into the dark, who is hidden in the cave, who dwells in the abyss, as God, he indeed leaves joy and sorrow far behind,') the same two beings are distinguished as thinker and as object of thought. The highest Self is, moreover, the general topic. And further, the clause, 'Those who know Brahman call them,' &c., which brings forward a special class of speakers, is in its place only if the highest Self is accepted (as one of the two beings spoken of). It is therefore evident that the passage under discussion refers to the individual soul and the highest Self. The same reasoning applies to the passage (Mu. Up. III, 1, 1), 'Two birds, inseparable friends,' &c. There also the Self is the general topic, and hence no two ordinary birds can be meant; we therefore conclude from the characteristic mark of eating, mentioned in the passage, 'One of them eats the sweet fruit,' that the individual soul is meant, and from the characteristic marks of abstinence from eating and of intelligence, implied in the words, 'The other looks on without eating,' that the highest Self is meant. In a subsequent mantra again the two are distinguished as the seer and the object of sight. 'Merged into the same tree (as it were into water) man grieves at his own impotence (ani/s/a), bewildered; but when he sees the other Lord (i/s/a.) contented and knows his glory, then his grief passes away.' Another (commentator) gives a different interpretation of the mantra, 'Two birds inseparable,' &c. To that mantra, he says, the final decision of the present head of discussion does not apply, because it is differently interpreted in the Pai@ngi-rahasya Brahma/n/a. According to the latter the being which eats the sweet fruit is the sattva; the other being which looks on without eating, the individual soul (j/n/a); so that the two are the sattva and the individual soul (kshetraj/n/a). The objection that the word sattva might denote the individual soul, and the word kshetraj/n/a, the highest Self, is to be met by the remark that, in the first place, the words sattva and kshetraj/n/a have the settled meaning of internal organ and individual soul, and are in the second place, expressly so interpreted there, (viz. in the Pai@ngi-rahasya,) 'The sattva is that by means of which man sees dreams; the embodied one, the seer, is the kshetraj/n/a; the two are therefore th
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   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   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

individual

 

highest

 

sattva

 

kshetraj

 
eating
 

mantra

 

passage

 

rahasya

 
characteristic
 

discussion


interpreted
 
inseparable
 

distinguished

 

general

 

beings

 

object

 

Another

 

passes

 

commentator

 

grieves


contented
 

impotence

 

bewildered

 

interpretation

 

settled

 

meaning

 
remark
 
denote
 

internal

 
dreams

embodied

 

expressly

 
objection
 

present

 

decision

 
According
 
meditation
 

differently

 

Brahma

 

recognises


speakers

 

special

 

brings

 
forward
 

hidden

 
evident
 

entered

 

spoken

 

accepted

 
dwells