52 passages · ~59 min read
Tap any verse to open it — original, meaning & audio.
Not Ether; on account of the absence of scriptural statement.
We have demonstrated that the Sânkhya-system and other systems standing outside the Veda are untenable since they res…
But there is.
But there is origination of Ether. For Scripture, which is concerned with matters transcending sense perception, is a…
It has a secondary sense, on account of impossibility and of the text.
It is reasonable to assume that in passages such as 'From that Self there sprang Ether.' the origination of Ether is …
There may be (a double sense) of the one (word), as in the case of the word 'Brahman.'
Since in the clause 'from that Self there sprang Brahman,' the word 'sprang' cannot be taken in its literal senbe, it…
The non-abandonment of the promissory statement (results) from non- difference.
It is not appropriate to assume, from deference to the Chândogya-text, a secondary meaning for those other texts also…
(As follows also) from (other) texts.
That Ether is an originated thing follows from other clauses also in the Chândogya: 'Being only this was in the begin…
But the division (origination) extends over all effects; as in ordinary life.
The 'but' has the sense of 'and.' As the clause 'In that all this has its Self' and similar ones directly state that …
Hereby air is explained.
The same argumentation explains the origination of air also. That a special Sûtra is devoted to the origination of ai…
But there is non-origination of that which is (only); on account of impossibility.
The 'but' has an affirmative sense. There is non-origination of that which is, i.e. of Brahman only; of whatever is d…
Fire (is produced) thence, for thus Scripture declares.
It has been stated that everything different from Brahman is the effect of Brahman. The doubt now arises whether the …
Water (from fire).
Water also originates 'thence,' i. e from fire; for so the texts declare 'From fire water' (Taitt. Up. II, 1, 1); 'th…
Earth (from water).
Earth originates from water; for so the texts declare 'From water earth' (Taitt Up. II. 1, 1). 'It (water) sent forth…
Earth on account of the subject-matter, the colour, and other texts.
That the word 'food' denotes the earth is to be inferred from the fact that the section in which the word occurs has …
But he; from the inferential mark supplied by their reflection.
The 'but' indicates the setting aside of the primâ facie view raised. Of all effected things, the _Mahat_, and so on,…
But the order of succession (which is stated) in reverse order (of the true one) is possible, (only if the origination of all effects is) thence (i.e. from Brahman).
The 'but' has an asseverative sense. The direct origination from Brahman of all effects—which in passages such as the…
If it be said that knowledge and mind (which are mentioned) between (breath and the elements) (are stated) in order of succession, owing to an inferential mark of this; we say, not so, on account of non- difference.
'Knowledge' in the Sûtra denotes the means of knowledge, i.e. the sense- organs.—An objection is raised against the c…
But that which abides in the things movable and immovable, i.e. the terms denoting those things, are non-secondary (i.e. of primary denotative power, viz. with regard to Brahman); since (their denotative power) is effected by the being of that (i.e. Brahman).
The 'but' sets aside the objection raised. (The primâ facie view here is as follows.) As Brahman, which has all thing…
Not the Self, on account of scriptural statement, and on account of the eternity (which results) from them.
The Sûtras so far have stated that this entire world, from Ether downwards, originates from the highest Brahman. It n…
For this very reason (the individual soul is) a knower.
It has been shown that, different therein from Ether and the rest, the soul is not produced. This leads to the consid…
On account of (its) passing out, moving and returning.
The Self is not omnipresent, but on the contrary, of atomic size (anu).— How is this known?—Since Scripture says that…
And on account of the latter two (being effected) through the Self.
The 'and' has affirming power. The 'passing out' might somehow be reconciled with a non-moving Self (such as the omni…
If it be said that (the soul) is not atomic, on account of scriptural statement of (what is) not that; we say no, on account of the other one being the topic.
The passage 'He who is within the heart, surrounded by the Prânas, the person consisting of knowledge' (Bri. Up. IV, …
And on account of the very word, and of measure.
Scripture directly applies the word 'anu' to the individual Self, 'By thought is to be known that atomic Self into wh…
There is no contradiction, as in the case of sandal-ointment.
As a drop of sandal-ointment, although applied to one spot of the body only, yet produces a refreshing sensation exte…
Should it be said (that this is not so) on account of specialisation of abode; we say no, on account of the acknowledgment (of a place of the Self), viz. in the heart.
There is a difference. The drop of ointment can produce its effect as at any rate it is in contact with a definite pa…
Or on account of its quality as light.
The 'or' is meant to set aside the view previously stated. The Self extends through the whole body by means of its qu…
There is distinction as in the case of smell; and thus Scripture declares.
Just as smell, which is perceived as a quality of earth, is distinct from earth; thus knowledge of which we are consc…
On account of the separate statement.
Scripture even states quite directly that knowledge is something distinct from the knowing subject, viz. in the passa…
But (the Self) is designated as that because it has that quality (viz. knowledge) for its essential quality; as in the case of the intelligent (prâjña) Self.
The 'but' discards the objection. Because that quality, viz. the quality of knowledge, is the essential quality, ther…
And there is no objection, since (the quality of knowledge) exists wherever the Self is; this being observed.
Since knowledge is an attribute which is met with wherever a Self is, there is no objection to the Self being designa…
Since there may be manifestation of that which exists; as in the case of virile power and so on.
The 'but' is meant to set the raised objection aside. The case may be that while consciousness is present also in dee…
There would result permanent consciousness or non-consciousness, or else limitative restriction to either.
On the other view, i.e. on the view of the Self being omnipresent and mere knowledge, it would follow either that con…
(The soul is) an agent, on account of Scripture (thus) having a purport.
It has been shown that the individual Self is a knowing subject and atomic. Now the question arises whether that Self…
On account of taking and the declaration as to its moving about.
The text beginning 'And as a great king,' &c., declares that 'the Self taking the pranas moves about in its own body,…
And on account of the designation (of the Self as the agent) in actions. If not so, there would be change of grammatical expression.
Because in the text 'Knowledge performs the sacrifice, it performs all works' (Taitt. Up. II, 5) the Self is designat…
(There would be) absence of definite rule, as in the case of consciousness.
The Sûtra points out a difficulty which arises on the view of the Self not being an agent. Sûtra 32 has declared that…
On account of the inversion of power.
If the internal organ were the agent, then—since it is impossible that a being other than the agent should be the enj…
And on account of the absence of samâdhi.
If the internal organ were the agent, it would be such even in that final state of meditation, called samâdhi, which …
And as the carpenter, in both ways.
The Self, although always provided with the instruments of action, such as the organ of speech, and so on, acts when …
But from the highest, this being declared by Scripture.
Is the activity of the individual soul independent (free), or does it depend on the highest Self? It is free; for if …
But with a view to the efforts made (the Lord makes the soul act) on account of the (thus resulting) non-meaninglessness of injunctions and prohibitions and the rest.
The inwardly ruling highest Self promotes action in so far as it regards in the case of any action the volitional eff…
(The soul is) a part, on account of the declarations of difference and otherwise; some also record (that Brahman is of) the nature of slaves, fishermen, and so on.
The Sûtras have declared that the individual soul is an agent, and as such dependent on the highest Person. The follo…
And on account of the mantra.
'One part (quarter) of it are all beings, three feet (quarters) of it are the Immortal in heaven' (Ch. Up. III, 12, 6…
Moreover it is so stated in Smriti.
Smriti moreover declares the individual soul to be a part of the highest Person, 'An eternal part of myself becomes t…
But as in the case of light and so on. Not so is the highest.
The 'but' discards the objection. 'Like light and so on.' The individual soul is a part of the highest Self; as the l…
And Smriti texts declare this.
That the world and Brahman stand to each other in the relation of part and whole, the former being like the light and…
Permission and exclusion (result) from connexion with a body; as in the case of light and so on.
Although all souls are essentially of the same nature in so far as they are parts of Brahman, knowing subjects and so…
And on account of non-connectedness there is no confusion.
Although the souls, as being parts of Brahman and so on, are of essentially the same character, they are actually sep…
And it is a mere apparent argument.
The argumentation by which it is sought to prove that that being whose nature is constituted by absolutely uniform li…
On account of the non-determination of the adrishtas.
As the adrishtas also which are the causes of the series of upâdhis have for their substrate Brahman itself, there is…
And it is thus also in the case of purposes and so on.
For the same reason there can be no definite restriction in the case of purposes and so on which are the causes of th…
Should it be said (that that is possible) owing to the difference of place; we deny this, on account of (all upâdhis) being within (all places).
Although Brahman is one only and not to be split by the several limiting adjuncts with which it is connected, yet the…