Chapter CDIV: Section CCCLXV (8)

1487. The sense is that as the maintenance of wives and children is painful, one should withdraw from the world and retire into solitude.

1488. The sense seems to be this: Is it a life of domesticity that thou wouldst lead? There is no harm in thy doing this, provided thou behavest in the way pointed out. Is it Emancipation that thou wouldst pursue (in the usual way), i.e., by retiring into solitude and betaking thyself to Sannyasa? Thou mayst then behave in the way pointed out, and, indeed, that is the way of Sannyasa which leads to Emancipation.

1489. The planet Venus is supposed to be the sage Usanas or Sukra.

1490. The commentator explains the allusion by saying that formerly Vishnu, induced by the deities, used his discus for striking off the head of Usanas' mother. Hence the wrath of Usanas against the deities and his desire to succour their foes, the Danavas.

1491. The construction of this verse is very difficult. The order of the words, is--Indrotha jagatah prabhuh. Dhanada, etc., tasya kosasaya prabhavishnuh.

1492. Persons crowned with Yoga-success are competent to enter the bodies of others and deprive the latter of the power of will. Indeed, the belief is that the latter then become mere automata incapable of acting in any other way except as directed by the enlivening possessor.

1493. The etymology of Pinaka is panina anamayat. The initial and final letter of pani (pi) and the middle letter of anamayat (na), with the suffix ka make Pinaka.

1494. The last half of the last line may be taken as applying to Usanas.

1495. The vriddhim that Mahadeva saw could not be his own, for the greatest cannot be greater. The commentator, therefore, is right in holding that vriddhim refers to the greatness of Usanas within Mahadeva's stomach.

1496. The sa refers to Usanas and not to Mahadeva, as the commentator rightly points out.

1497. i.e., the religions of all the orders and all the modes of life.

1498. The scriptural injunctions are that one should sacrifice in honour of the gods, pour libations on the sacred fire, make gifts etc. In these exists Righteousness.

1499. The grammar of the third line is a little involved. Tasmin refers to Dharme. Supply nisthavantah after tasmin. The sense, of course, is that believing in the efficacy of righteousness, people of all modes of life accomplish the duties of their respective modes.

1500. The sinful become intermediate animals. The virtuous attain to heaven. They that are both virtuous and sinful attain to the status of humanity. They that acquire Knowledge become Emancipated.

1501. Destiny here means the result of the acts of past lives.

1502. The reading I adopt is jatikritam karma etc. Hence, this Verse also represents the arguments of the sceptic or the Charvakas. The four kinds of acts are Nitya, Naimittika, Kamya, and Nishiddha. If, however, for 'jatikritam karma, etc.,' the reading yantyakritam karma be adopted, the meaning would be--'In one's next life one does not meet with fruits that are not the results of one's acts of past life.' This must be so, for the opposite opinion would imply the destruction of acts and their consequences. Then again, such an opinion would conflict with the received opinion of mankind, for men, when they obtain the fruits of any act, always recollect the four kinds of acts of a past life for explaining the accession of those fruits.

1503. Verses 12 to 14 represent the theory of the sceptic, and I have rendered them as such. Only by reading verse 13 as 'yantyakritam karma, etc.,' the commentator points out that it may be taken as an observation of Parasara himself. As regards verse 15, it represents the ipse dixit of the speaker. He does not think that the sceptic is at all entitled to a reply. It is scarcely necessary to say that the Burdwan translator makes a thorough mess of these verses. K.P. Singha gives the substance correctly.

1504. The commentator shows that this is an answer to the sceptic's averment about Nature being the cause of everything. Fire is hot by nature, therefore, it does not become hot at one time, cold at another, and _lukewarm_ at another time. One becomes either wholly happy or wholly unhappy or wholly happy and unhappy at the same time. Man's nature should not be such. The difference of state is produced by difference of causes.

1505. A Brahmana is precluded from eating many things. Many things again that he is competent to eat on all days of the year. In fact, there are many rules for regulating the fare of a Brahmana. To this day, an orthodox Brahmana abstains from many kinds of food. A Brahmana, therefore, who is unscrupulous in respect of his food, is no Brahmana and deserves to be pitied. Similarly, a man who cooks food for himself is an object of pity. Raw food, such as fruits, etc., one may take without offering a share thereof to guests and others. But cooked food can never be taken without a share thereof being given to others. Yati cha Brahmachari cha pakvannaswaminavubhau, hence he that takes cooked food without giving a share to these is said to eat Brahmaswam or that which belongs to a Brahmana.

1506. This is a very abstruse verse. The grammatical construction of the first line is asritena manasa vrittihinasya seva sasyate. Asritena is niralamvanena. By seva is meant homage paid to the Supreme in the form of devotion and concentrated meditation. It implies, of course, a thorough reliance on God. Vrittihina is one who has cast off the means of livelihood, implying one who abstains from worldly objects. In the second line, dwija is a vocative. Nirvritta is nishpanna, qualifying seva. Atihastat is 'from one who has transcended the use of the hand,' i.e., the necessity of acts. Atihastanirvritta, means 'obtained from a competent preceptor.' In brief, what is stated here is that such seva should be learnt from competent preceptors and not by discussion among persons in the stage of spiritual progress.

1507. The object of this verse, the commentator points out, is to show the desirability of practising that seva soon or without loss of time.

1508. In the discourse of Sanatkumara to Vritra, these six colours have been mentioned, and the nature of the acts by which one attains to a superior colour or falls down from a superior to an inferior one. Vide Sec. 280, ante.

1509. A particular kind of Chandala is called kusalin.

1510. Pratyapannasya is viparita-drishteh. Natma is dehadih. Tatah is papaddhetoh. Virochate, is viseshena atmatwena rochate.

1511. Pratyapattih is Vairagyam or Renunciation. As regards Prasthitasya it may be taken either as implying one that is dead or one that has betaken himself to Yoga. In the latter case, the verse would mean that that man who betakes himself to Yoga without adopting Renunciation meets with much sorrow.

1512. The object of this verse is to show that conscious sin can never be destroyed by expiation. The only means by which sin can be destroyed is by enduring its fruits.

1513. The Burdwan translator makes utter nonsense of this verse. Guna-yuktam is explained by the commentator as equivalent to punyakarma. Prakasam is equivalent to budhipurvakam prakasya or jnatwa. It is formed by the suffix namul.

1514. Yathatatham is sthula-sukshma-taratamyena. The sense is that all acts done knowingly produce fruits according to their nature. If gross, the fruits produced are gross; if subtile, the fruits produced are subtile.

1515. The speaker's opinion is that all acts are productive of fruits. If good, the fruits are good. If bad, the fruits are bad. There is this difference, however, between acts done knowingly and those done in ignorance: the former produce commensurate fruits i.e., if gross, their fruits are gross; if subtile, the fruits are subtile; but the latter produce fruits that are not so, so that even if heinous, the fruits do not involve a large but only a small measure of misery. There is no other difference between the two kinds of acts.

1516. The object of this verse is to show that such acts form the exception and they are kept out of my sight in this discourse on acts. The Rishi Viswamitra caused the death of the hundred sons of Vasishtha, and yet he had not to go to hell for it.

1517. The sense seems to be that when even such near relatives are cast off if found to be wanting in affection, the fact cannot be gainsaid that people never do good to others except when they hope to benefit themselves by such acts.

1518. What is intended to be said is that the acceptance of a gift from a superior person is equal in point of merit to a gift made by a poor person. A wealthy man, by making a gift, earns greater merit than by accepting a gift.

1519. i.e., by Dhyana and Dharana.

1520. This has reference to Usanas' attaining to the status of a planet (Venus) in the firmament.

1521. Nadantah is one word. It means Hinsa-sunyah. Danti cchinatti iti danta. Its reverse is Nadantah.

1522. Nirdishta refers to Seva.

1523. i.e., they take the hues of the society they keep. Hence, it is very desirable for them to live with the good.

1524. This son of Dhatri is the god of the clouds.

1525. The Burdwan translator gives a most ridiculous version of the expression Dhigdandasasanah. Unable to catch the sense, which however is certainly very plain, he actually interprets the words to mean 'living under the sway of king Dhigdanda.' K.P. Singha gives the correct meaning.

1526. In this verse also, the Burdwan translator takes Dhigdanda as the name of a king. He gives an equally ridiculous version of the second line. Abhyagachchan is explained by the commentator as having vishayan understood after it. The sense is that they began to enjoy all objects of the senses to an excess. Both Devan and Brahman are accusatives governed by Avamanya. K.P. Singha translates both the lines correctly.

1527. This verse is taken as a metaphorical statement. The three Asuras are, of course, Kama, Krodha, and Lobha. Gaganagah (staying in the firmament) is interpreted as 'existing in Maya'. Sapurah as 'with their gross, subtile, and potential forms;' 'felled on the earth is explained as 'merged into the pure chit.' The whole is taken to imply a spiritual destruction of all the evil passions and a restoration of man to his original state of purity.

1528. This chief of the Asura passions was Mahamoha or great Heedlessness. The word Devas here is taken to mean the senses. Of course, if verse 16 be not taken metaphorically, then may Devas be taken in its ordinary sense of the deities.

1529. The genius of the two languages being different, it is very difficult to render the phraseology of the first line. Literally rendered, the line would read 'they remain or stay on those acts, and establish them.' Besides being unidiomatic, the sentence would be unmeaning. 'To stay or remain on any act' is to adhere to it. 'To establish it' is to regard it as a precedent and cause it to be regarded by others as a precedent.

1530. Samsiddhadhigamam is explained by the commentator thus: Samsiddhah is nityasiddah, i.e., atman; tadadhigamam is atmajnanam.

1531. The very gods are subject to prosperity and adversity, and their effects of loves and hates. There is no mode of life in which these may not be found.

1532. After sukham supply bhavati or some such verb. Tyajatam stands by itself and refers to kamya karma, meaning they that abstain from such acts as are not nitya but as are only kamya or optional.

1533. The sense is that those who betake themselves to penances as the consequence of despair, are many. Those men, however, are very rare who adopt penances, being at once impressed that the happiness of domesticity is unreal and ends in misery.

1534. i.e., their penances of past lives.

1535. I am not sure that I have correctly understood the second line of this verse. Akrita-karmanam is explained by the commentator as anut-pannatattwajnanam and upabhogavarityagah is Renunciation or Vairagyam phalani has tapasah understood before it. But why phalani instead of phalam?

1536. The second line of this verse concludes the argument. The tasmat has reference to all the statements before, and _not_ to only the first line of 26. The statement in the second line is the same as the second line of verse 13 above.

1537. I expand the second line a little for making it intelligible.

1538. By 'stainless penances' is meant nishkamam tapah or penances undertaken without desire of fruit.

1539. Tyaktwa has nishkalmasham tapah understood after it. The order of the words is Phalarthi apriyani etc., vishyatmakam tat phalam prapnoti. The distinction between nishkamam and sakamam tapah is this; through the former one attains to happiness. Even the earthly wealth he earns becomes fraught with happiness; through the latter, however, one meets with diverse kinds of sorrow resulting from the earthly possessions he succeeds in obtaining.

1540. The grammar of the first line is this: Dharme tapasi dane cha (sati avihitakarme) vidhitsa, etc. If vidhitsa be taken with 'dharma, etc.,' the verse would be unmeaning.

1541. The first line is difficult to construe. Tatah means 'inconsequence of the pain that attends the gratification of the senses.' Sarvasya refers to vivekinah; jyayase phalartham is 'for the sake of the highest fruit,' which, of course, is Emancipation. Gunah is 'same', 'dama, etc.'

1542. The commentator points out that the object of this verse is to show that everything one owns or does is not the result of the past acts. Spouses, food, drink, etc., one obtains as the result of past acts or praravdha karma. In respect of these, purushakara or Exertion is weak. Hence, to put forth Exertion for their acquisition would not be wise. As regards the acquisition of righteousness, however, there Exertion is efficacious. Hence, one should, with Exertion, seek to conform to one's own duties as laid down in the scriptures. Without such a distinction between destiny (praravdha) and Exertion (purushakara), the injunctions and interdictions of the Scriptures would be unmeaning. The Burdwan translator, citing portions of the commentary without at all understanding them, makes utter nonsense of the verse. K.P. Singha gives the meaning correctly.

1543. Sacrifices and all other acts undertaken from a sense of vanity, are destructible as regards their consequences, for heaven is terminable. Penances, however, that are undertaken without desire of fruit are not so, for these lead to Emancipation. Tesham refers to those mentioned in the first line of verse 37. It should not be taken to mean men in general, as the Burdwan translator wrongly does.

1544. Kam is Brahmanam. The commentator explains that Brahmana (the Creator) is equivalent to Brahmana; and that Vishnu is equivalent to Kshatriya. What is said, therefore, in this verse (according to him) is that a Sudra, by practising the common duties of all the four orders, succeeds in his next life in becoming a Brahmana. Thus say Brahmanas learned in the scriptures; but the opinion of Parasara is that such a Sudra, in his next life, takes birth as a Kshatriya.

1545. I am not sure that I have understood these two verses correctly. Verse 33 is evidently a cruce.

1546. Yathakarman means 'from one stage to another.' Karmapatham is yogam. The stages here referred to are vichara, vitarka, Ananda, and Asmita. What is stated in this verse is that one who casts off all attachments, and who devotes himself to Yoga, succeeds in attaining to the felicity of Emancipation.

1547. The Burdwan translator wrongly renders the second line of this verse. All the texts read this line in the same way.

1548. Snigdhais implies affectionate seniors such as mothers, etc.; karmani is explained by the Commentator as abhyanga-karmani, i.e., the rubbing of oil, etc., Such acts, when children are ill, are often done unto them by mothers. This is forbidden, for they are menial offices which seniors should never be permitted to perform.

1549. Vinasamabhikankhatam is explained in the alternative by the commentator in a very fanciful way. Kriyavatam is explained as 'observant of the duties of Tirthavasins.'

1550. The commentator is for explaining the second line exoterically.

1551. Dehat is Deham prapya. Yena is yena pumsa. Upapaditam has reference to panchatwam in the previous verse. The sense of the verse is this: he who meets with a sudden death in a tirtha or sacred place, does not become emancipated but obtains another body in his next life similar to the one he loses. Adhyanam gatakah is that though set or placed on the path of Emancipation, yet he becomes a traveller: his state is due to the inglorious manner of his dissolution.

1552. The object of this verse is to show that the man dying in a sacred place becomes reborn as a Rudra or a Pisacha and quickly attains to Emancipation in consequence of his contiguity to Siva. Mokshabhuteshu is Moksha-yogyeshu. The neuter form of taddeham is arsha.

1553. Gunanancha in the second line of verse 14 refers to the objects of the senses, which, as explained in previous Sections, have no independent existence, for they exist only as they exist in desire. The compound of the primal essences and the other things mentioned assumes different shapes through the force of the desires of previous lives.

1554. Acts are all perishable in respect of their consequences.

1555. It is difficult to give foreigners an idea of what is called Apamrityu. All deaths that are caused by such accidents as involve ignominy are called Apamrityu. Death from snake-bite, from a fall, by drowning, at the horns of an animal, etc., are instances of Apamrityu.

1556. Both yasya and sa refer to the foe called Ignorance. Rajaputra is a vocative. Paraiti is nasyati.

1557. Vanchate is preceded by kamena understood.

1558. It has been explained in previous sections that sreyas or nisreyas means good or excellent as applied to moral merit.

1559. By buddhiman is meant the man who is freed from attachment. Similarly, by durbuddhih is meant the man who is the slave of attachments.

1560. Karanapekshi is thus explained by the commentator: karanaphaladanatmika kriya tannirvittyapekshi. The sense is that sin can never be destroyed except by endurance of its fruits.

1561. The sense is that after the manner of the fabulous gem, Jiva attracts to itself, through Yoga, the status of Brahma.

1562. The Burdwan translator, without understanding the commentary, makes utter nonsense of this verse. K.P. Singha is not far wrong, but he does not bring out the principal point which is sought to be inculcated here. Sesame seeds are repeatedly mixed with fragrant oil. The more they are so mixed the more fragrant do they become. After the same manner, men acquire the quality of Sattwa by associating with persons of cleansed souls. The measure of Sattwa is dependent on the measure of the association.

1563. The track is that of Knowledge. Vide verse 3 above.

1564. Having used the words vistaran (Diverse) and samkshepah (Few), in the second line of this triplet, the speaker explains their meaning in the third. By 'Diverse' is meant all those fruits that consist of unstable enjoyments; hence, the diverse acts laid down in the Vedas and other scriptures. By 'Few' is meant Renunciation, or abstention from acts. What is said, therefore, in this verse is this: they that betake themselves to acts, which for their fruits all sorts of enjoyment, meet with misery; while they that abstain from acts or practise Renunciation meet with happiness. Both the vernacular versions are incorrect.

1565. It is difficult to understand what is meant by this verse. By progress in Yoga, the Soul can certainly cast off the mind and other attributes by which it is invested. The simile is unintelligible. The stalk of the lotus has its roots in mire. Does the first line mean, therefore, that the stalk speedily springs upwards and leaves the mire at its roots?

1566. The commentator explains that the intention of this verse is to explain that the universe which is created by the mind is destroyed afterwards by the mind itself.

1567. The sense is that one who has cast off objects of enjoyment and become emancipated, does not obtain rebirth.

1568. I follow the commentator in his exposition of this verse. The practice of fishermen (in India) is to sink their boats when they leave them for their homes, and to raise them again when they require them the next day. They do not leave their boats afloat for fear of the injury the waves may do to them by tossing them too much.

1569. By Prakriti here is meant the harmony of Sattwa, Rajas, and Tamas. As long as these three qualities are in harmony with one another, i.e., as long as there is no preponderance in any of them over the other two, so long there cannot be creation or the operations of the buddhi or understanding.

1570. In this verse the word Prakriti is used in an entirely different sense. It means here Ignorance.

1571. Sariragriha-sanjnasya is 'of one who regards his body to be an accompaniment of the Soul instead of regarding it to be the Soul.' 'Who regards purity as its sacred water', i.e., who, without resorting to the sacred waters whither others go for cleansing themselves, thinks that purity, both internal and external, is capable of cleansing him.

1572. Vide note to verse 21 above.

1573. The object of the verse is to show that one should not, for the sake of friends and kinsmen and spouses and children, abstain from pursuing one's true end. The practice of charity again is the true diet which supports a man.

1574. Astapadapada is a weight of gold. The word, as used in this verse, means a quantity of gold. Whether the reading be mudreva or sutrena, the sense remains unchanged. What is said here is that the mother, etc., are like lines traced with gold by the side of real gold; i.e., the mother, etc., are of no value or use in the acquisition of prosperity. K.P. Singha misses the meaning. The Burdwan translator, however, makes a most ridiculous exhibition of himself. Without understanding the commentary at all, in fact, not having been able to read the words of the commentary aright, he has produced a ridiculous jargon that is utterly unintelligible. Daksha is a vocative, meaning 'possessed of cleverness.' The words he daksha yatha, etc., of the commentator are read by the Burdwan Pundit as: deha-kshaya, etc.

1575. Apariharavan is incapable of being resisted. Samagatih as wind. Asmasara-vihitam is 'made by means of iron or the saw.' Asmasara stands here for krakacha or karapatra.

1576. The commentator explains that by tapah is meant the practice or observance of one's own duties. Damah is restraining the senses. Satyam is truthfulness of speech, and atmaguptih is subjugation of the mind. The knots are attachments and desires, etc.

1577. i.e., the assailant, finding his victim forgiving, himself burns with repentance.

1578. Vishayena yami is the correct reading; i.e., then here is palatal, and vishayena is in the instrumental case. The Bengal reading is vicious, for it reads Vishaye nayami.

1579. The Moon is endued with nectar, and, therefore, might have been such a man's equal; but the Moon waxes and wanes; therefore, the Moon cannot approach to an equality with such a man who is the same under all changes. Similarly, the wind, though unstained by the dust it bears is not the equal of such a man; for the wind is changeful, having slow, middling and quick motion. The Burdwan translator makes utter nonsense of the reference to the Moon and the wind. K.P. Singha gives the sense correctly.

1580. The commentator explains that the object of this verse is to show the merits of that man whose ignorance has disappeared.

1581. i.e., when Brahmanas incur obloquy they are said to become impure; they are again regarded as possessing the status of humanity only because they die.

1582. The examples of Viswamitra and others may be cited in this instance.

1583. Dharana is holding the soul in self-reflection, preventing it the while from wandering. Samadhi is complete abstraction.

1584. Akhandam is Sarvakalam; uposhya is tyaktwa. K.P. Singha wrongly translates this verse. He takes mansam for masam; but no difference of reading occurs between the Bengal and Bombay texts.

1585. The ten properties included in Sattwa or Goodness are gladness, cheerfulness, enthusiasm, fame, righteousness, contentment, faith, sincerity, liberality, and lordship. The nine properties included in Rajas or Passion are belief in the deities, (ostentatious) charity, enjoyment and endurance of happiness and sorrow, disunion, exhibition of manliness, lust and wrath, intoxication, pride, malice, and disposition to revile. The eight qualities included in Tamas or Darkness are unconsciousness, stupefaction, excess of stupefaction, muddiness of the understanding, blindness (of results), sleep, heedlessness, and procrastination. The seven incidents of Buddhi or the Understanding are Mahat, consciousness, and the five subtile essences. The six incidents of Mind are Mind and the five senses. The five incidents appertaining to Space are space, water, wind, light, and earth. According to a different school of philosophy, Buddhi, or the Understanding is said to have four incidents appertaining to it, viz., doubt, ascertainment, pride, and memory. Tamas (darkness) also is otherwise regarded to have only three incidents, viz., inability of comprehension, partial comprehension, and totally erroneous comprehension. Rajas (Passion) is (according to this school) regarding as having only the two incidents of inclination (to act) and sorrow. Sattwa has but one incident viz., Enlightenment.

1586. 'Durga' is an inaccessible region such as a forest or wilderness which cannot be passed through except with great pain and danger.

1587. The correct reading seems to be sthira-vratati-samkulam.

1588. Udadhi is, literally, a water-jar. In this country most people, while swimming, use water jars as buoys. The mouth of jar being dipped into the water the air confined within it serve to support heavy weights. I have heard that the most rapid currents are crossed by milkmaids in this way, all the while bearing milk pails on their heads.

1589. In the second line of 72, dustaram janma means janma-yuktam dustaram.

1590. The sense seems to be that by practising the Sankhya doctrine men cease to have any regard for even their gross bodies. They succeed in realising their existence as independent of all earthly or heavenly objects. What is meant by the Sun bearing them in his rays and conveying to them all things from every part of the universe is that these men acquire great puissance. This is not the puissance of Yoga but of knowledge. Everything being regarded as unsubstantial and transitory, the position of Indra himself, or of Brahman, is looked upon as desirable and unworthy of acquisition. Sincere conviction of this kind and the course of conduct that is confirmable to it is literally puissance of the highest kind, for all the purposes of puissance are capable of being served by it.

1591. This is taken as meaning that the Sankhyas are conveyed to the firmament of the heart. Perhaps, what is intended by it is that they become withdrawn from external objects and even the impressions of all external things.

1592. Perhaps, this means the pleasures of heaven.

1593. i.e., they who have identified themselves with Brahma.

1594. Yudhishthira's question seems to be this. Is there or is there not consciousness in the emancipate state? Different scriptures answer this question differently. If it be said that there is consciousness in that state, then why discard heaven and its pleasures, or the religion of Pravritti or acts which lead to those pleasures? Where is the necessity then of Sannyasa or the religion of Nivritti or abstention from all acts? On the supposition of there being consciousness in the emancipate state, the Religion of Pravritti should be taken as superior. If, on the other hand, the existence of consciousness be denied, that would be an error. Dnkshataram is ayuktaram.

1595. Although I make use of the word 'perceive' yet remembering that the mind is included among the senses and regarded as the sixth sense, the functions of recollection, representation, etc., are also implied by the word pasyati. The Burdwan translator gives a ridiculously erroneous version of this verse.

1596. The commentator explains that the simile of the froth is introduced in consequence of its disappearance with the disappearance of water. K. P. Singha is incorrect in taking the instance of froth as illustrative of the quickness of the destruction.

1597. Sarvatra does not mean 'through every part of the sleeper's body' as K. P. Singha takes it, but sarvavishaye as the commentator correctly explains it.

1598. Iha is sapne Anisah is nasti isah or pravartaah yasya.

1599. For the Soul, in dreams, sees and hears and touches and smells etc., precisely as it does while awake.

1600. The sense seems to be that a person who becomes emancipate in this life becomes so in Samadhi. When the state of Samadhi is over, his mind and senses return; and returning they do the bidding of the Supreme, i.e., bring about both happiness and misery, which, of course, are the consequences of the acts of past lives though that happiness and misery are not felt. In the next verse is said that these men very soon leave their bodies and become freed from rebirth.

1601. There are two kinds of Emancipation: one is attainable here, in this body, it is Jivan-mukti; the other is Videha-kaivalya or that which becomes one's when one is bodiless. In 98, Jivan-mukti has been spoken of. In this verse, the observations apply to Videha-kaivalya.

1602. Vadanti is stuvanti. Such men hymn its praises by regarding it as Supreme Deity possessed of attributes. Those attributes, of course, are the result of illusion, for in its real nature there can be no attributes in Brahma.

1603. Brahma is knowledge without duality i.e., knowledge without the consciousness of knower and known. The knowledge or cognition of an object, when object is annihilated, assumes the form of that knowledge which is called Brahma.

1604. The commentator explains that the object of this verse is to show that among mobile creatures those endued with knowledge are superior, and among all kinds of knowledge, the knowledge occurring in the Sankhya system is the highest.

1605. i.e., if in consequence of any defect of practice or Sadhana, the Sankhyas fail to attain to Emancipation, they at least become translated into gods.

1606. i.e., it is everything.

1607. That Narayana who does all this is the embodiment of the Sankhya system.

1608. The commentator explains the compound Adhyatmagatinischayam differently.

1609. Both the vernacular translator render this verse wrongly.

1610. Vasyante is explained by the commentator as implying Brahmanah ante and not 'at the end of that night'. The line occurs in Manu (Chap. 1. 74) where ante refers to Brahmana's day and night. Vasishtha here refers to Mohapralaya and not any intermediate Pralaya.

1611. In the creation of Mahan or Prajapati or Virat, and of Consciousness, the element of Tamas or ignorance predominates.

1612. This is a very abstruse verse. I am not sure that I have understood it correctly, What is said here seems to be this from Akshara arose Hiranyagarbha: from Hiranyagarbha arose Virat. This, that or the other is worshipped by ordinary men, while persons possessed of real insight do not invest any of them with attributes worthy of worship. The speaker says that the ascription of attributes, called Ignorance, and the non-ascription for destruction of that ascriptions called Knowledge, (with respect to Virat or Hiranyagarbha or Akshara) then arose. It might be asked that when there were no men as yet to worship or to condemn such worship, how could the two arise? The answer is that the two, in their subtile forms, came into existence and were afterwards availed of by men when men come into being.

1613. From Akshara or the Indestructible is Hiranyagarbha. From Hiranyagarbha is Mahan or Virat and Consciousness. From the last are the subtile elements.

1614. The meanings of such verses depend upon the grammatical significations of certain words that are used. They can scarcely be rendered accurately into any other language not derived from Sanskrit. What is said here is that it is Prakriti which must be said to be the Adhishthatri of the universe. Vishnu is not so. Vishnu, Brahma, Akshara, or the Indestructible, however, is said to cover or _pervade_ the universe (vyapnoti). Vishnu is Vyapka but not Adhishthatri.

1615. In the previous section it has been said that through Tamas he takes birth among the intermediate orders, through Rajas among human beings, and through Sattwa among gods. The root kshi in Gunakshayat means aisarvya or puissance.

1616. The soul weaves a cocoon with attributes (or, acts which result from attributes), and though free deprives himself of freedom.

1617. Made of Chit and Not-Chit combined.

1618. The sense seems to be that the obligation to explain a treatise in the midst of a conclave always stimulates the best faculties, and if it is a conclave of the learned the friction of intellects is sure to bring out the correct sense.

1619. For enables them to conquer Ignorance.

1620. When Pranayama is performed with the aid of mantras or yapa, it is said to be saguna or sagarbha or endued with substance. Concentration of mind, however, is made without the aid of such yapa.

1621. The two and twenty sanchodans of Preranas are the two and twenty modes of transmitting the Prana breath from the toe of the foot to the crown of the head. That which transcends Prakriti is the Supreme Soul.

1622. The reading I adopt is na-kathyate.

1623. Atmanah is Iswarat parah.

1624. Parisankhyadarsanam is explained by the commentator thus: Parisankhyanam, is parivarianam, i.e., the gradual pravilapam of errors; Lena darsanam or sakshatkaram.

1625. The commentator explains that nistattwah means nirgatam tattwam aparoksham yasmat.

1626. Param Aparam, and Avyayam are theirs in consequence of Ajksharabhavatwa. Aparam means satyakamatwa, satyasamkalpatwa, etc. i.e., puissance. Param is the indescribable felicity of Samadhi. The Srutis declare that knower of Brahma becomes Brahma.

1627. Hence, as the commentator explains, by knowing what is called the Unmanifest one is capable of attaining to omniscience.

1628. What is stated here is this, the Unmanifest or Prakriti, by modification, produces Mahat and the other principles. But the agency of Purusha also is necessary for such production, for Prakriti can do nothing without Purusha, and Purusha also can do nothing without Prakriti. The principles of Mahat and the rest, therefore, may be said to have their origin as much in Purusha as in Prakriti. Beside, the two being naturally dependent on each other, if Prakriti be called Kshara, Purusha also may be so called.

1629. i.e., Jiva or Purusha.

1630. High, such as gods, middling, such as human beings and low, such as animals.

1631. Budha is Bodha or pure Knowledge. Abudha is the reverse of Budha. The Supreme Soul is Knowledge, while Jiva is Ignorance.

1632. In consequence of Jiva's union with or attachment to Prakriti. Jiva takes this object for a vessel; that for a mountain, and that other for a third. When knowledge comes, Jiva succeeds in understanding that all his impressions are erroneous and that the external world is only a modification of Self. In consequence of Jiva's capacity to comprehend this, he is called Budhyamana or Comprehender.

1633. Drisya and Adrisya, are the Seen and the Unseen, that is the gross and the subtile, or effects and causes. Swabhavena anugatam is inhering (unto all of them,) in its own nature, that is, Brahma pervades all things and unites with them without itself being changed as regards its own nature. Vudyate has manishibhih understood it.

1634. Tattwa is explained by the commentator as anaropitaruom, i.e., invested with any form in consequence of Ignorance; Not-Tattwa is nityaparoksham i.e., always within the ken of the understanding.

1635. That indication is 'I am Brahma.' Such conviction or knowledge even which characterises those that are awakened or Buddha, is cast off by the twenty-sixth.

1636. These examples are often used to explain the difference between the Jiva-soul and the Supreme Soul. The Udumvara is the fruit of the Ficus glomerate. When ripe and broken, the hollow centre is seen to contain many full-grown gnats. The gnat lives in the fruit but is not the fruit, just as the fish though living in the water is not the water that is its home. Jiva, after the same way, though living in the Supreme Soul, is not the Supreme Soul.

1637. Parah is Anyah or Chidatman. Paradharma means 'partaking' of the nature of Kshetra in which he resides. Sameyta is 'kshetrena iva ekebhya.'

1638. This is a simile very often used for illustrating the danger of pursuing objects of the senses. Collectors of honey used to rove over mountains, guided by the sight of flying bees. These men frequently met with death from falls from precipices.

1639. The Burdwan translator renders this verse incorrectly.

1640. This has been repeatedly laid down in the Hindu scriptures. Gifts produce no merit unless made to deserving persons. If made to the undeserving, instead of ceasing to produce any merit, they become positively sinful. The considerations of time and place also are to be attended to. By failing to attend to them, sin is incurred where merit is expected. Truth becomes as sinful as a lie, under particular circumstances; and a falsehood becomes as meritorious as truth under circumstances. The Hindu scriptures make circumstance the test of acts.

1641. These, including Mind, form the tale of sixteen called Vikriti or modifications of Prakriti.

1642. These are the subtile principles or Tanmatras and not the gross elements.

1643. Mahat is sometimes called Buddhi hence the creation of Consciousness from Mahat must be creation relating to Buddha.

1644. Arjjava mean 'relating to straight paths or courses,' so called from the straight course of these winds or breaths. By reference to these breaths is intended the other limbs of the physical system besides those already indicated.

1645. Rishi here means Mahan or Great. Consciousness is said to have an excellent essence, and is also a Bhuta because of its capacity to produce the Great Bhutas, five in number.

1646. These, the commentator explains, are Mind, Buddhi or Understanding Consciousness, and Chitwa, considered as Vyashti instead of as Samashthi. These are the sires of the primeval sires, i.e., from these sprung the Mahabhutas or Great creatures (viz., the five primal elements).

1647. Devah's is explained by the commentator as meaning the Senses and the four inner faculties. Devaih he thinks, refers to the Bhutas or Great elements. Literally rendered, the verse would read as 'the Devas are the Children of the Pitris; with the Devas, all the worlds of Mobile Being have been covered.' It is not safe to reject the learned commentator.

1648. These two verses refer to the power of the attributes of sound etc., over Jiva. Loves and hates, and all kinds of relationship of Jiva are due to the action of the attributes named.

1649. The duration here given has reference to the day and the night of the Mahabhutas.

1650. Prakritisthah means 'in his own Prakriti or nature.' The sense of the line is that Purusha, even when residing in the case that Prakriti provides him with, does not partake of the nature of Prakriti but continues to be undefiled by her.

1651. I expand this verse for bringing out the meaning. A verbal rendering will become unintelligible.

1652. This is a difficult verse, I am not sure that I have understood it correctly. The sense to be that Prakriti, which is really unintelligent and incapable of enjoyment or endurance, becomes intelligent and capable of enjoyment or endurance in consequence of being united with Purusha who is intelligent. Thus when pleasurable or painful sensation are felt, it is the body that seems to feel it only in consequence of the Soul that presides over it.

1653. The first line of 7 is the same in sense as the second line of 8. In the Bombay text, only the second line of 8 occurs, while the first line of 7 has been justly omitted. In fact, Tattwa and the Prakriti are the same thing.

1654. This refers to the opinion of the atheistic Sankhyas.

1655. By the word Rudra is meant Prana and the other breaths. The commentator explains that the etymology is utkramana kale dehinam rodayanti iti Rudrah Pranah. By regulating the vital breaths and the senses, Yogins attain to Yoga puissance and succeed in roving wherever they please in their linga-sarira or subtile bodies.

1656. The eight limbs of Yoga are Pranayama, Pratyahara, Dhyana, Dharana, Tarka, Samadhi, with the two additional ones of Yama and Niyama.

1657. In the first line of 9 the word Pranayama is used to mean regulation of the vital breaths. In the second line, the same word implies the ayamah or nigraha of the senses with the mind. By Dharana is meant the fixing of the mind, one after another, on the sixteen things named in treatises on Yoga. By ekagrata of the mind is meant that concentration in which there is no longer any consciousness of difference between Dhyatri, Dhyeya, and Dhyana.

1658. It is difficult for those who do not practise Pranayama to understand this fully. The fact is, Saguna Pranayama, when the breath is inhaled, the inhalation is measured by the time taken up in mentally reciting a well-known mantra. So when inhaled breath is suspended, the suspension is measured by the time taken in mentally reciting a particular mantra. When therefore, the suspended breath should be exhaled, it should be done by similarly measuring the time of exhaling. For beginners, this Saguna Pranayama is recommended. Of course only exhalation has been spoken of but it applies equally to inhalation and suspension. These three processes, in Yoga language, are Puraka, Kumbhaka, and Rechaka.

1659. Ekantasilin means a Sannyasin, Atmarama is one who takes pleasure in one's soul instead of in spouses and children.

1660. The pole-star.

1661. Chakre literally means 'I made'. The commentator explains it as equivalent to swayam avirbhut.

1662. Vipriya evidently means 'what is not agreeable.' There was evidently a dispute between Yajnavalkya and his maternal uncle Vaisampayana, the celebrated disciple of Vyasa. This dispute is particularly referred to in the next verse. Vaisampayana had been a recognised teacher of the Vedas and had collected a large number of disciples around him. When, therefore, the nephew Yajnavalkya, having obtaining the Vedas from Surya, began to teach them, he was naturally looked upon with a jealousy, which culminated (as referred to in the next verse) into an open dispute about the Dakshina to be appropriated in the Sacrifice of Janaka. The Burdwan translator incorrectly renders the word vipriya which he takes to mean as 'very agreeable.' In the Vishnu Purana it is mentioned that a dispute took place between Yajnavalkya and Paila. The latter's preceptor, Vyasa, came, and taking his side, asked Yajnavalkya to return him the Vedas which he had obtained from him. Yajnavalkya vomited forth the Vedas. These were instantly devoured by two other Rishis in the form of Tittiri birds. These afterwards promulgated the Taittiriya Upanishads.

1663. This shows that I was then regarded as the equal of Vaisampayana himself in the matter of Vedic knowledge. Sumanta and Paila and Jaimini, with Vaisampayana, were the Rishis that assisted the great Vyasa in the task of arranging the Vedas.

1664. This is called the fourth science, the three others being the three Vedas, Axis culture, and the science of morality and chastisement.

1665. Prakriti is regarded as something in which Sattwa, Rajas, and Tamas reside in exactly equal proportion. All the principles of Mahat, etc. which flow from Prakriti, are characterised by these three attributes in diverse measure.

1666. By Mitra is meant here the deity giving light and heat. By Varuna is meant the waters that compose the universe.

1667. Kah, the commentator explained, is anandah or felicity.

1668. The comparison lies in the folly of the two persons indicated. One churning ass's milk for butter is only a fool. Similarly, one failing to understand the nature of Prakriti and Purusha from the Vedas is only a fool.

1669. Gives a literal rendering of this verse for showing how difficult it is to understand the meaning. The commentator correctly explains the sense which is as follows: anyah or the other is the Soul as distinguished from its reflection upon Prakriti, that is the Soul in its real character as independent of Prakriti. What is said here is that when the Soul, in its real character beholds, or acts as a witness of everything (i.e., as exists in the states of wakefulness and dream), becomes conscious of both itself (the Twenty-fifth) and Prakriti (the Twenty-fourth) when, however, it ceases to behold or act as such witness (i.e., in the state of dreamless slumber of Yoga-samadhi), it succeeds in beholding the Supreme Soul or the Twenty-sixth. In simple language what is said here is that the Soul becomes conscious of both itself and Prakriti in the state of wakefulness and dream. In Samadhi alone, it beholds the Supreme Soul.

1670. What is said here is that the Twenty-sixth or the Supreme Soul always beholds the Twenty-fifth or the Jiva-soul. The latter, however, filled with vanity, regards that there is nothing higher than it. It can easily, in Yoga-samadhi, behold the Twenty-sixth. Though thus competent to behold the Supreme Soul, it fails ordinarily to behold it. The commentator sees in this verse a repudiation of the doctrine of the Charvakas and the Saugatas who deny that there is a Twenty-sixth Tattwa or even a Twenty-fifth which they identify with the Twenty-fourth.

1671. Tatsthanat is explained by the commentator as Varasya avaradhisrhanat, i.e., in consequence of vara overlying the avara. The instance of the string and the snake is cited. At first the string is erroneously taken for the snake. When the error is dispelled, the string appears as the string. Thus the Supreme and the Jiva-soul come to be taken as one when true knowledge comes.

1672. The ordinary doctrine is that the Jiva-soul is indestructible, for it is both unborn and deathless, its so called births and deaths being only changes of the forms which Prakriti undergoes in course of her association with it, an association that continues as long as the Jiva-soul does not succeed in effecting its emancipation. In this verse the ordinary doctrine is abandoned. What is said here is that the Jiva-soul is _not_ deathless, for when it becomes identified with the Supreme Soul, that alteration may be taken as its death.

1673. This is a very difficult verse. Pasya and apasya are drashtri and drisya, i.e., knower and known (or Soul and Prakriti) Kshemaya and Tattwo are drik and drisya, i.e., knowledge and known. One that sees no difference between these that is, one that regards all things as one and the same, is both Kevala and not-Kevala, etc, meaning that such a person, though still appearing as a Jiva (to others) is in reality identifiable with the Supreme Soul.

1674. This may mean that as men speak, and as speech is Brahma, all men must be regarded as utterers of Brahma. If, again, Brahma be taken to mean the Vedas in special, it may imply that all men utter the Vedas or are competent to study the Vedas. Such an exceedingly liberal sentiment from the mouth of Yajnavalkya is compatible only with the religion of Emancipation which he taught.

1675. The doctrine is that unless acts are destroyed, there can be no Emancipation.

1676. Literally, 'these are not obstacles by external nature,' and are therefore irremovable by personal exertion of the ordinary kind.

1677. Sanchodayishyanti implies questioned. Here it means questioning the king internally or by Yoga power.

1678. Utsmayan is explained by the Commentators as 'priding himself upon his own invincibleness.' Ayaya bhavam implies her determination to make the king dumb. Visesayan is abhibhavan.

1679. Sammantum is explained by the Commentator as equivalent to samyak jnatum.

1680. It is difficult to say in what sense the word vaiseshikam is used here. There is a particular system of philosophy called Vaiseshika or Kanada; the system believed to have been originally promulgated by a Rishi of the name of Kanada. That system has close resemblance to the atomic theory of European philosophers. It has many points of striking resemblance with Kapila's system or Sankhya. Then, again, some of the original principles, as enunciated in the Sankhya system, are called by the name of Visesha.

1681. The mention of Vidhi indicated, as the commentator explains, Karmakanda. The value of Karma in the path of Emancipation is to purify the Soul.

1682. K. P. Singha wrongly translates this verse.

1683. There is equal reason in taking up etc., implies that the bearing of the sceptre is only a mode of life like that of holders of the triple-stick. Both the king and the Sannyasin are free to acquire knowledge and both, therefore, may attain to Emancipation notwithstanding their respective emblems. In the emblems themselves there is no efficacy or disqualification.

1684. The object of this verse is to show that all persons, led by interest, become attached to particular things. The littleness or greatness of those things cannot aid or bar people's way to Emancipation. 'I may be a king, says Janaka, and thou mayst be a mendicant. Neither thy mendicancy nor my royalty can aid or obstruct our Emancipation. Both of us, by Knowledge, can achieve what we wish, notwithstanding our outward surroundings.'

1685. Hence, by changing my royal life for that of a bearer of the triple-stick I can gain nothing.

1686. Yukte in the first line means in the Yogin. The Bombay reading Tridandanke is a mistake for Tridandakam. The Bombay text reads na muktasyasti gopana, meaning that 'there is no relief for one that has fallen down after having arisen in Yoga.' The Bengal text reads vimuktasya. I adopt the Bengal reading.

1687. What the king says is that he, the king, had made no assignation with the lady is consequence of which she could be justified in entering his body. The word Sannikarsha here means sanketa. Both the vernacular translators render this word wrongly.

1688. These faults and merits are set forth in the verses that follow.

1689. Saukshmyam, is literally minuteness. It means ambiguity here. I have rendered verse 81 very closely to give the reader an idea of the extreme terseness of these verses. For bringing out the meaning of the verse, the following illustration may serve. A sentence is composed containing some words each of which is employed in diverse senses, as the well-known verse of Parasara which has been interpreted to sanction the remarriage of Hindu widows. Here, the object indicated by the words used are varied. Definite knowledge of the meaning of each word is arrived at by means of distinctions, i.e., by distinguishing each meaning from every other. In such cases, the understanding before arriving at the definite meaning, rests in succession upon diverse points, now upon one, now upon another. Indeed, the true meaning is to be arrived at in such cases by a process of elimination. When such processes become necessary and or seizing the sense of any sentence, the fault is said to be the fault of minuteness or ambiguity.

1690. To take the same example; first take the well-known words of Parasara as really sanctioning the remarriage of widows. Several words in the verse would point to this meaning, several others would not. Weighing probabilities and reasons, let the meaning be tentatively adopted that second husbands are sanctioned by the Rishi for the Hindu widow. This is Sankhya.

1691. Having tentatively adopted the meaning the second husbands are sanctioned by the verse referred to, the conclusion should be either its acceptance or rejection. By seeing the incompatibility of the tentative meaning with other settled conclusions in respect of other texts or other writers, the tentative meaning is capable of being rejected, and the final conclusion arrived at, to the effect, that the second husband is to be taken only according to the Niyoga-vidhi and not by marriage.

1692. By prayojanam is meant the conduct one pursues for gratifying one's wish to acquire or avoid any object. Wish, in respect of either acquisition or avoidance, if ungratified, becomes a source of pain. The section or conduct that one adopts for removing that pain is called Prayojanam. In the Gautama-sutras it is said that yamarthamadhikritya pravartate, tat prayojanam. The two definitions are identical.

1693. By occurrence of these five characteristics together is meant that when these are properly attended to by a speaker or writer, only then can his sentence be said to be complete and intelligible. In Nyaya philosophy, the five requisites are Pratijna, Hetu, Udaharana, Upanaya, and Nigamana. In the Mimansa philosophy, the five requisites have been named differently. Vishaya, Samsaya, Purvapaksha, Uttara, and Nirnaya.

1694. These characteristics, the commentator points out, though numbering sixteen, include the four and twenty mentioned by Bhojadeva in his Rhetoric called Saraswati-kanthabharana.

1695. Parartham means, as the commentator explains, of excellent sense. It does not mean Paraprayojanam as wrongly rendered by the Burdwan translator. The latter's version of the text is thoroughly unmeaning.