Book 14 edition notes 1–100

Mahavahu occurs twice in this passage. One of the epithets is left out on the score of redundancy.

i.e., human sacrifice. From this it appears that the sacrifice of human beings was in vogue at the time.

King Marutta celebrated a sacrifice in the Himalayas, bestowing gold on Brahmanas. Not being able to carry the entire quantity, they had carried as much as they could, throwing away the remainder.

Digambara, i.e., in naked state.

Nityada always, left out on the ground of redundancy.

Bhutanam etc. is explained by Nilakantha as no swasya, and the vocative vibho is taken as Paramatman.

Agatagamam implies, as explained by the commentator, praptasastrarahasyam.

Nirakarasritena is explained by Nilakantha as Asamprajnatas-samadhi-samadhigamya Brhamabhavasritena, implying reliance on Brahman by having recourse to Samadhi or a suspension of all functions of both body and mind (through Yoga) and arrival at that state which is one of perfect unconsciousness.

The dissolution here spoken of is the Mahapralaya and not the Khanda or Avantara Pralayas. Till then, the sage will look upon all beings, i.e., their repeated migrations.

The commentator explains that altogether seven questions are asked. The first is about the dissolution of the body. The second relates to the manner of re-acquiring a body. The third has reference to the manner in which rebirth may be avoided. The fourth relates to the causes that operate for giving a body to Jiva. By Prakriti is meant Nature or that Nescience which is the cause of body. The fifth relates to the Anyat or Param, viz., how final Emancipation or absorption into Brahman takes place. The sixth pertains to the manner in which the fruits of acts are enjoyed or endured. The seventh enquires after the way in which acts attach to Jiva even when devoid of a body.

Kala here means both the season of the year and the age of the person. Food that is beneficial in summer is not so in winter, or that which is beneficial in youth is otherwise at old age. All the texts that I have seen have viditwa and not aviditiwa which Telang takes in his version for the Sacred Books of the East. Kala is always interpreted by the commentators of Charaka as referring to either period of life or period of the year. This, as well as the following verses, relates to the laws of health as expounded by Charaka.

The faults are three, viz., Wind, Bile, and Phlegm. When existing in a state of harmony, they produce health. When one is excited or two, or all, indisposition sets in. They are called dosha or faults, because of their liability to be excited and produce disease. Telang, not suspecting that the whole passage is a reproduction of a passage in the ancient work edited by Charaka, misunderstands some expressions and wrongly renders doshan into 'disorders.'

Jivitam in the second line seems to be an objective of sariram in the first.

Garbha-sankramane is explained by Nilakantha as entering the foetus in the womb after casting off the body appertaining to the other world. I think Telang is not correct in his version of 19 and 20. Atisarpana can never imply 'exhaustion'; hence, karmanam can never be the reading he adopts. Besides tadrisam seems to settle the question. The tortures felt at death are similar to those at birth.

Sambutatwam is sanhatatwam. Niyachachati is nasyyati. Vayu is understood in the second line, or that in the first line of the next verse may be taken as the nom. of niyachachati.

Pachante is phalam prayachhanti.

Nilakantha explains this verse in a different way. According to him it means,--'in consequence of his subtlety and imperceptibility, Jiva does not become attached to anything. For this reason, one possessed of a knowledge of Brahman, having become cognisant of Brahman and attained the great object of his desire, succeeds in becoming so (i.e., dissociated from all things).' This interpretation seems to be a little far-fetched.

Chetasa indicates upadhibhutena, for previously, Jiva was without upadhi. Pranasthaneshu implies Indriyagolokeshu or those vital parts which constitute the seats of the senses. Chetana does not, I think, mean 'consciousness.' It implies mind.

Causes them to grow. I do not follow Nilakantha here.

Nilakantha points out that one of the cha's indicates the reason or cause. Hence, the use of 'therefore' in the text.

Vikrita does not necessarily mean degraded. It implies 'changed or altered.' Jiva, who is pure and immaculate, takes birth in this world, falling away from his true status of Brahman owing to his acts. Acts, again, are eternal, no beginning being conceivable.

Parantwa-maritam-aksharam indicates two things, viz., Amritam and Aksharam. The first line speaks of Kshara, or the material case, or body; then of that which is para or other. This other is of two kinds, viz., Amritam or suddha-chaitanyam, implying Brahman in its condition of purity; and Aksharamt or Jiva as existing in the material case. In the second line, trayanam refers to Kshara, Amrita, and Akshara. Mithunam is duality, referring to that which is composed of Kshara and Akshara. What is stated in this verse is that every Purusha is a duality, made up of Kshara and Akshara. Telang gives a different version of the verse. He ignores the word trayanam totally, and takes Mithunam as implying a couple (male and female). All the texts I have seen contain trayanam.

Atra purvajamnani (vishaye) yatha kaschit Medhavi etc., (vadet), seems to be the correct order of the words. Telang translates the first line differently.

Ekayana is the one receptacle of all things, viz., Brahman. Tushni implies ahamevedam sarvamasmityabhimanamapyakurvan i.e., 'without even retaining the consciousness of his own identity with everything.' Kinchikachintayan--i.e., not even thinking that he is existing. Purvam purvam parityajya implies the gradual merging of the grosser in the subtler, i.e., the successive stages of Yoga before absorption into Brahman. I follow Nilakantha.

The first half of the second line of 8 is read differently in the Bengal texts. Aswasthamavasam mudham implies 'without ease or happiness, endued with slavery and ignorance.'

The Soul being destitute of these becomes Chinmatra, i.e., a pure Chit without the attributes superinduced upon it by Nescience or ignorance.

Formlessness implies subtlety. 'Without cause' implies increate or as identical with eternal Brahman. Dissociation from attributes while enjoying them implies an emancipate condition.

Nirvana, according to orthodox commentators, implies the annihilation or cessation of separate or individual existence by absorption into universal and eternal Brahman.

The impressions caused by objects outside self are destroyed by those belonging to contemplation. The latter, again, should be destroyed before absorption into Brahman can occur.

Siddham is explained as 'destitute of the errors due to Nescience.'

Attnanam is Chittam; atmani is dehe; charayan is antarmukham kritwa; nityam is adyantasunyam. So Nilakantha.

'Fixing the mind upon the soul' is that concentration which leads to Emancipation. This becomes possible in consequence of severe austerities undergone previously.

I expand the verse a little to make it intelligible. The sense is this: having seen the supreme Soul in Samadhi, upon awaking from it, he recognises it in the universe, i.e., regards the universe to be nothing else than the Supreme Soul.

This may also mean 'he has none superior to him; not even he that is the Lord of the universe.'

The first line seems to be doubtful. The sense, as I understand it, is,--such a person becomes the god of the very gods. The causal verb karayate may be taken as equivalent to karoti.

I follow Nilakantha in rendering the second line. The sense is clear, viz., that one should not fall away from the practice of Yoga, tempted by the puissance that Yoga brings. Telang renders the line 'one practising concentration should never become despondent.' I think, Nilakantha is right.

Nilakantha notes that this indicates that only that Yogin who has not advanced much may be tempted by the desire of enjoyment. He, however, who has adequately devoted himself to Yoga feels no regard for Indra himself but can turn him away like Diogenes dismissing Alexander the Great.

I have endeavoured to render verses 33 to 37 as literally as possible, under the guide of Nilakantha, omitting his inferences. The passage relates to the mysteries of Yoga. In the second line of 33, drishtapurvam disam, which has been rendered 'that point of the compass which has the Sun behind it,' means the instructions laid down in the Vedanta as based upon Srutis. Drishtam implies 'Sruti', for it is as authoritative as anything seen. 'Pura' implies a city, a citadel, or a mansion. Here it refers to the body. The avasatha within the pura refers to the chakra or nervous centres beginning with what is called the muladhara. At the time when Brahman is realised, the whole universe appears as Brahman and so nothing exists, besides Brahman, upon which the mind can then dwell. Telang, I think, is not correct in rendering manaschasya ... vahyatah as 'his mind should not any way wander outside'. The correct version would 'the mind is then nowhere,' implying that at that time the mind has nothing else to dwell upon. Kayamabhyantaram is kayamabhi and antaram, i.e., both within and without the body. The several parts of the body named, beginning with teeth, etc, refer to eating and other operations, all of which influence the mind and dispose it for purity and otherwise.

i.e., that from which the entire universe has been created.

Probably, 'by any of the senses'. The plural form occurs in the original.

This answers the questions respecting the form of the Soul, says Nilakantha.

I render this verse, following Nilakantha's gloss. The second line of 50, according to that commentator, refers to the ascension of the Yogin from Brahma vested with attributes to Brahma divested of all attributes. The tam does not refer to body, as Telang takes it, but to Brahma as endued with hands and feet on all sides, etc. Deheswam dharayan means 'restraining the mind within the body'. Kevalam Brahma is Brahma without attributes.

The speaker here is the regenerate visitor of Krishna. The latter is repeating the words of that visitor. In this verse, Krishna, forgetting that he is merely reciting the words of another, refers to himself as the Supreme Brahman in whom one must merge for attaining to Emancipation.

The second line of 56 is read variously.

Heaven is the reward of those who follow the religion of Pravritti or acts, such as sacrifices, religious observances, etc. The followers, however, of the religion of Nivritti or inaction, i.e., they who betake themselves to the path of knowledge, become emancipated. The deities derive their sustenance from the former and become even jealous of the latter, for the emancipate state is higher than that of the deities themselves.

Avichakshanam is undiscerning, in the sense of the husband's not knowing that the interrogatrix as wife, has no other refuge than her lord with all his defects.

I follow Nilakantha. Telang adopts the views of Arjuna Misra and renders the first line as 'whatever acts are seized (by the touch, or seen, or heard, etc.') Grahyam, according to Nilakantha, implies those acts, like Diksha, etc, which are adopted with the aid of others.

This seat, says Nilakantha, is called Avimukta and lies between the eyebrows and the nose.

Nilakantha interprets this mystically. By Soma he understands the artery or duct called Ida, and by Agni the duct called Pingala. Dhira is Buddipreraka; vyavayam is sancharam. Dhirobhutani dharayan nityam vyavayam kurute is the order of the words. The sense is this: in this spot is seated Brahman; there Ida and Pingala meet; and there also is Vayu which urges the understanding and upholds all living creatures.

Yatra is not to be taken as a locative here. It is equivalent to yatah or for which.

Tasmin is taken, by Nilakantha as Apana sahite Prane.

Utkarshena anayati, hence Udana, says Nilakantha. The sense of the whole passage seems to be this. Worldly life is regulated by the life-breaths. These are attached to the Soul and lead to its individual manifestations. Udana controls all the breaths. Udana is controlled by penance. It is penance then that destroys the round of rebirths and leads to absorption into Brahman.

The meaning seems to be this: they who renounce sensuous objects can create them when they like. One casting off smell that has earth for its object can create earth when he likes.

What is stated in this passage is, shortly, this: the ear, etc, are the Hotris or sacrificing priests who are to pour libations on the sacrificial fire. The perceptions and functions of those organs constitute the Havi or libations that are to be poured. The points, wind, etc, are the Agni or sacred fires on which they are to be poured. These statements are recapitulated in verse 5. The objects of the senses, of the same as those in verse 3, are the fuel, previously described as Havi or libations, which are to be burnt off by being cast into the fires.

The Hridaya or heart is the Garhapatya fire. From it is produced another fire, the Ahavaniya, viz., the mind. 'The heart was pierced. From the heart arose mind, for the mind arose Chandramas,' is the declaration of the Sruti cited by Nilakantha. The Ahavaniya fire or mind is the mouth. Asyam ahavaniya is the Sruti. Annamayam hi Somya manas, apomayah pranah, tejomayi vak is the Sruti that bears upon this. Food or fire, poured into the mouth develops into speech or word. Vachaspati implies the Veda or word. First arises the word, the mind sets itself upon it, desirous of creation. This corresponds with the Mosaic Genesis.--'God said, let there be light, and there was light.' The word was first.

The last question seems to be this: in dreamless slumber, the mind disappears totally. If it is the mind upon which Prana rests, why does not Prana also disappear? It is seen to separate itself from mind, for it continues to exist while mind does not exist. If so, i.e., if existing, as it must be admitted to do, why does it not apprehend objects? What is it that restrains its powers of apprehension?

Bhutatmanam is ordinary Prajapati. Nilakantha takes it to mean here individual Jiva or self.

It is through words that desirable fruits, visible and invisible, are acquired. Of course, word means both ordinary speech and Vedic Mantras.

The speaker is the Brahmana, which Nilakantha explains to mean 'the Brahmana named Manas or Mind'. Instead of such a learned interpretation, we may take it as implying that the Brahmana is repeating the answer which Bhutatman, i.e., Prajapati or Jiva, made to Word. The Brahmana is the real speaker. He recites the words of Jiva. Immovable, according to Nilakantha, means 'that which is seizable by the external senses'; and 'movable', that which is beyond the ken of the senses, such as heaven, etc. The external world being only a manifestation of the mind, it is spoken of here as identical with it. So, the ideas in the mind which are not due to the senses, are only the mind. This is the movable mind. That mind depends on word or the scriptures.

Telang gives a different version of this verse. I offer a verbal rendering, without attempting to explain it.

i.e., as noisy or noiseless.

I have given as close a verbal rendering of the passage as possible. The sense, however, is not very intelligible to me. The gloss of Nilakantha is as unintelligible as the text. Telang also has given a verbal rendering which differs from the above slightly. His foot-notes do not, I think, bring out the meaning at all. As regards the two vernacular versions, both are useless.

The correct reading is cha after arthan and not twam after it. Hence, the Senses say that, 'without ourselves and without those which are our objects, thou canst not have thy enjoyments.'

Thus creatures may exist through us, even though mind may be out of order.

Both mental purposes and dreams having failed to gratify him.

The reading sarvam in the second line is incorrect, though Nilakantha adopts it. The different portions of the fire are indicated as the different attributes. The smoke is of the form of Darkness (Tamas); the ashes are the attributes of Passion; while the blazing flame, that into which the oblation is thrown, is the attribute of Goodness.

I give a close rendering of these verses, without endeavouring to bring out the sense as explained by the commentators. The printed texts are not correct. The text adopted by Nilakantha differs from that of Arjuna Misra. The very order of the verses is not uniform in all the texts.

'These' refers to action, agent and instrument. The qualities of which they are possessed are goodness, passion, and darkness.

What is stated in these two verses is this: it is the Senses that enjoy and not the Soul. This is well known to those that are learned. On the other hand, those that are not learned, regard this or that to be theirs, when in reality they are different from them. They are their selves, and not their senses, although they take themselves for the latter, ignorantly identifying themselves with things which they are not.

What is stated here is this: Restraining the senses and the mind, the objects of those senses and the mind should be poured as libations on the sacred fire of the Soul that is within the body.

i.e., truth is the Sastra of the Prasastri.

Narayana is taken by Nilakantha to stand here for either the Veda or the Soul. The animals offered up to Narayana in days of old were the senses offered up as sacrifices.

Srota here means preceptor or dispeller of doubts. Amaratwam is the status of the immortal head of all.

I think Telang is not correct in his rendering of this verse. What is stated here is plain, viz., that it is He who is the preceptor and the disciple. Ayam srinoti,--'prochyamanam grihnati,--tat prichcchatah ato bhuyas anye srinanti' is the grammar of the construction. The conclusion then comes--'gururanyo na vidyate'.

One who understands the truth.

The seven large trees are the five senses, the mind, and the understanding. The fruits are the pleasures and pains derived from or through them. The guests are the powers of each sense, for it is they that receive those pleasures and pains. The hermitages are those very trees under which the guests take shelter. The seven forms of Yoga are the extinctions of the seven senses. The seven forms of initiation are the repudiation, one after another, of the actions of the seven senses.

The correct reading is bhavantyanityah and vahuswabhavan.

Swabhava is explained by Nilakantha as sutaram abhava.

The sense seems to be this: the life-winds indicate the operations of the several organs of action; the tongue, which stands here for all the organs of perception, of the sensual perceptions; the mind, of all the internal operations; the quality of goodness, of all pleasure; and the quality of passion, of all kinds of pain. These, therefore include the whole external and the internal worlds. He that is free from these, transcends sin, for sin is destroyed by freedom from these, knowledge being the means of attaining to that freedom.

'I have no fault etc.'--The sense seems to be that by doing these rites with the aid of Mantras I have done that which has been approved from ages past by those who have always been regarded wise. My eyes, however, have now been opened by thee. I should not be held responsible for what I did while I was ignorant.

Kshatriyas always require Brahmanas for assisting them in their acts. These particular Kshatriyas, through fear of Rama, fled to the forests and mountains. They could not, accordingly, find Brahmanas for assisting them. Their children, therefore, fell away from the status of Kshatriyas and became Vrishalas or Sudras.

Kshatriya-bandhu always implies low or inferior Kshatriyas, as Brahma-bandhu implies low or inferior Brahmanas. The expression, very probably, is similar to Brahman-sangat in current Bengali. It does not surely mean 'kinsmen of Kshatriyas'.

The vocative, 'O foremost of regenerate ones' applies to Jamadagni's son. The narration is that of the Pitris. All the copies, however, represent this as the Brahmana's speech to his wife. Indeed, the Brahmana is only reciting to his wife the speech of the Pitris to Rama. The Yoga here spoken of is, as Nilakantha explains the Raja-Yoga. Previously, Alarka had been bent upon Hatha-Yoga which frequently ends in the destruction of the person practising it.

Praharsha, rendered 'exultation', is explained by Nilakantha as the joy that is felt at the certainty of attaining what is desired. Priti is that satisfaction which is felt when the object desired is attained. Ananda is what arises while enjoying the attained object.

The sense seems to be this. Having first conquered the internal foes mentioned, the man of intelligence, bent on effecting his deliverance, should then seek to vanquish all external foes standing in his way.

Nilakantha explains that dosha here refers to attachment, cupidity and the rest; while Sadhu implies not men but the virtues of tranquillity and the rest.

I think Telang renders this verse wrongly. Samhatadehabandhanah does not mean 'with bodily frame destroyed' but 'with bodily frame united.' If samhata be taken as destroyed, the compound bhinna-vikirna-dehah in the second line would be a useless repetition. The meaning is that with bodily frame or the bonds of body united, he takes birth. When he dies, that frame becomes dismembered and scattered.

The conditions referred to are affluence and indigence, as explained by Nilakantha.

This is, rather, obscure. Nilakantha observes that the Vedic text referred to is: 'Do not covet anybody's property.' What Janaka says seems to be this: Thinking of this prohibition about coveting other people's property, I thought how could it be ascertained what belongs to others.

The sense seems to be this: the property of smell attaches to earth. I do not desire smell for my own enjoyment. If it is perceived, it is perceived by the organ of smell. The earth, therefore, is subject to me, not I to the earth. I have transcended my sensations, and, therefore, the objects to which they inhere. The whole world represents only the objects of the sensations. The latter being mastered, the whole world has been mastered by me.

i.e., I live and act for these and not my own self.

Nilakantha's reading is erroneous, Brahma-labhasya should be Brahmana-bhasya. So also durvarasya is incorrect. Nemi may also mean the line or track that is made by a wheel as it moves. If taken in this sense, it would mean 'that is confined to, or that cannot deviate from the track constituted by goodness'. The nave, Brahman, is, of course, the Vedas.

The sense seems to be this. The sovereignty of the whole Earth or of Heaven, and this knowledge of my identity with the universe--of these two alternatives, I would freely choose the latter. Hence, he says--'This knowledge is my wealth.'

These are different modes of life.

The sense is this: the knowledge to be acquired is that all is one. Diverse ways there are for acquiring it. Those, again, that have attained to tranquillity have acquired it.

Actions are perishable and can lead to no lasting result. It is by the understanding that that knowledge, leading to what is permanent, is to be attained.

I expand this verse a little for making it intelligible. A literal version would run as follows: Good means may be seen, perceived as by bees. Action is (cleansed) understanding; through folly it is invested with the symbols of knowledge. Karmabudhhi never means 'action and knowledge' as rendered by Telang. Abudhitwatt means 'through ignorance.' This ignorance is of those persons whose understandings have not been cleansed by action.

What is stated here is this. In the matter of achieving Emancipation, no ordinances have been laid down, positive or negative, like those in respect of other things. If one wishes to attain to Heaven, he should do this and abstain from the other. For achieving Emancipation, however, only seeing and hearing are prescribed. Seeing implies contemplation, and hearing, the receiving of instructions from the preceptor. Nilakantha explains hearing as Vedantadisravanam (vide his comment on the word 'srutam' in verse 3 above).

The speaker wishes to inculcate that one should first contemplate an object of direct perception, such as earth, etc. Then on such 'unperceived' objects as operations of the mind. Such contemplation will gradually lead to that which is Supreme. The abhyasa or practice referred to in the second line is the practice of sama, dama, etc. I do not think that Telang's version of 8 and 9 brings out the meaning clearly.

The sense is that when her individual soul became merged into the Supreme soul, she became identified with Brahman. This, was, of course, due to the knowledge of Kshetra as something separate from Kshetrajna.