87 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.
88 The conditions referred to are affluence and indigence, as explained by Nilakantha.
89 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.
90 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.
91 i.e., I live and act for these and not my own self.
92 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.
93 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.’
94 These are different modes of life.
95 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.
96 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.
97 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.
98 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).
99 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.
100 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.
101 Their origin is Brahman or Truth. They live, dissociated from their origin, in consequence of their acts. When their acts cease, they return to and become merged in Brahman.
102 i.e., that course of life which has for its object the acquisition of knowledge relating to the soul. This, of course, includes the knowledge that is needed for achieving identification with the Supreme Soul or Brahman.
103 The specific characteristics of the five elements are, as frequently referred before, smell attaching to earth, sound to ether, taste, to water, etc. The deities referred to in the last verse are probably the senses.
104 The total eleven is made up of the three qualities, the five elements, the group of organs and senses as one, egoism and understanding.
105 Anyatha pratipannah is explained by Nilakantha as ‘born in other orders’. Telang takes it as ‘Behaving in a contrary way.’ ‘How can goats and sheep behave otherwise?’ The sense seems to be that those born as goats, succeed in ascending upwards through the efficacy of the religious acts of the Brahmanas. By becoming sacrificial victims they regain their true position.
106 Qualities abiding in Darkness etc, imply those qualities that are permanently attached to Darkness.
107 Some texts read Santapah and not Sanghatah. The meaning then will be grief or sorrow.
108 This may refer to the exposure of other people’s weaknesses by tearing open their veils or covers.
109 Vibhajanti implies enjoyments in this connection. Telang starts a needless objection to this word.
110 ‘From even a distance’ implies that upon even a cursory view; without even being examined minutely.
111 What is said here is this: the three qualities exist in even the immobile objects of the universe. As regards Darkness, it predominates in them. As regards Passion, it dwells in such properties of theirs as pungency, sourness, sweetness, etc, which change with time or in consequence of cooking or through admixture. Their only properties are said to appertain to Goodness. Tiryagbhavagatam is explained by Nilakantha as adhikyam gatam. Telang thinks this is unwarrantable. His own version, however, of the first line is untenable. What can be the tiryagbhava or ‘form of lower species’ of immobile objects? Telang frequently forgets that Nilakantha represents a school of interpretation not founded by him but which existed from a time long anterior to him.
112 ‘Conjunctions’ are evidently the periods joining the seasons, i.e., the close of one season and the beginning of another.
113 This probably implies that the mind, through the aid of the senses, enters into all things or succeeds in knowing them.
114 The sense seems to be that through these one succeeds in taking birth as a Brahmana.
115 A repetition occurs here of about 5 verses. The passage is evidently an interpolation originally caused by carelessness.
116 Nilakantha explains that this implies that one should regard these as really undistinguished from the mind. Indeed, created by the mind itself, these should always be taken as having no real existence beyond the mind.
117 ‘That’ here refers to the attenuation of all things by absorption into the mind.
118 Gunagunam is treating the qualities as not qualities; i.e., regarding bravery, magnanimity, etc, as really not merits, for these lead to pride. Ekacharyyam is ekantavasam, i.e., life in seclusion, or living without depending upon others. Anantaram is nirastasamastabheda or non-recognition of all distinctions. Some texts read Brahmamatah meaning ‘existing among Brahmanas’. Ekapadam sukham is samastasukhagarbham, i.e., the source or fountain of all happiness.
119 The two deities are Jiva and Iswara.
120 The correct reading, in 53 seems to be samsargabhiratam and not samsayabhiratam.
121 In the second line, the correct words are martya and sarva. The sense of the second line seems to be that this body is ceaselessly revolving, for Emancipation is difficult to achieve. Hence this body is, as it were, the wheel of Time. Nilakantha’s explanation does not seem to be satisfactory.
122 I do not think that Telang is correct in his version of this verse. What is said here seems to be this. The body is, as it were the wheel of Time; the body is the ocean of delusion; the body is the creator, destroyer and reawakener of the universe. Through the body creatures act, and hence creation, destr
uction, and re-creation are due to the body. This accords with what is said elsewhere regarding the body.
123 It would be wrong to take satah as implying ‘the good,’ the finite verses in every text being singular.
124 The correct reading seems to be atmana as the last word of the first line, and not atman.
125 What is said here is that the quality of passion predominates in these.
126 Nyagrodha is the Ficus Bengalensis, Linn. Jamvu is Eugenia Jambolana, Lamk. Pippala is Ficus religiosa, Linn. Salmali is Bombax Malabaricum. Sinsapa is Dalbergia Sissoo, Roxb. Meshasringa is Asclepia geminata, Roxb. Kichaka is a variety of mountain bamboo. Here however it evidently implies the Nimba or Melia Azadirachta, Linn.
127 Nilakantha is for taking the second line as consisting of two propositions. It would be better to take satinam as referring to strinam, and vasumatyah, as an adjective of Apsarasah.
128 The sense seems to be that good men never allow others to know what their acts are. They are strangers to ostentation.
129 The sense seems to be that the knowledge of one’s own identity and of things as discriminated from one another is presided over by Prakriti. If the question is asked whence is the knowledge— ‘I am so,’ and that ‘this is so,’ the answer is that it comes from Prakriti or Nature.
130 As explained by Nilakantha, the word Savitri is used here to imply all forms of worship observed by Brahmanas, etc, and the Mlecchas as well. This turning back to explain a word used before is said to be an instance of “looking back like the lion.”
131 Telang, I think, renders this verse wrongly. In the first line it is said that Brahman is superior to the Prajapatis. In the second it is pointed out that Vishnu is superior to Brahman.
132 It is difficult to understand which part of the wheel is intended to be expressedly ‘bandhanam’ or the bond; I take it for the spokes. Pariskandha is Samuha or the materials that together compose an object. Here it may be taken for the nave or centre. Home is called the circumference, because, as the circumference limits the wheel, even so home (wife and children) limits the affections and acts of life.
133 The words Kalachakram pravartate have been rendered in the first verse of this lesson. In verse 9, the words asaktaprabhavapavyam are explained by Nilakantha differently. Manas-krantam, I take, is equivalent to ‘be bounded by the mind,’ I do not know whence Telang gets ‘never fatigued’ as the substitute of this word.
134 Implying that he should go to the house of his preceptor, study and serve there, and after completing his course, return for leading a life of domesticity.
135 The sense seems to be that these last three duties are productive of merit and should, therefore, be performed. The first three however, are sources of living.
136 Havishya is food cooked in a particular way and offered to the deities. It must be free from meat. There may be milk or ghee in it, but the cooking must be done in a single pot or vessel continuously; no change of vessels is allowed.
137 Vilwa is the Aegle marmelos, and Palasa is the Butea frondosa of Roxburgh.
138 At first he should live on fruits and roots and leaves, etc. Next on water, and then on air. There are different sects of forests recluses. The course of life is settled at the time of the initiatory rites.
139 What is stated here is this. The Sannyasin should not ask for alms: or, if he ever seeks for alms, he should seek them in a village or house where the cooking has been already done and where every one has already eaten. This limitation is provided as otherwise the Sannyasin may be fed to his fill by the householder who sees him.
140 He should never plunge into a stream or lake or tank for bathing.
141 Kalakankhi implies, probably ‘simply biding time’, i.e., allowing time to pass indifferently over him.
142 The sense seems to be this: the self or soul is without qualities. He who knows the self, or rather he who pursues the self with the desire of knowing it, should practise the truths of Piety laid down above. They constitute the path that leads to the self.
143 ‘That which has Brahman for its origin’ implies the Vedas.
144 Commentators differ about what is implied by the ten or the twelve. Nilakantha thinks that the ten mean the eight characteristics of Yoga, viz., Yama, Niyama, Asana, Pranayama, Pratyahara, Dharana, Dhyana, Samadhi, and Tarka and Vairagya. The twelve would imply the first eight, and these four, viz., Maitri, Karuna, Mudita, and Upeksha. If ten plus twelve or two and twenty be taken, then that number would be made up by the five modes of Yama, the five of Niyama, the remaining six of Yoga (beginning with Asana and ending with Samadhi), the four beginning with Maitri, and the two, viz., Tarka and Vairagya.
145 What is said in this Lesson seems to be this: the Unmanifest or Prakriti is that condition in which all the three qualities of Goodness, Passion, and Darkness exist in a state of combination. The unmanifest is the condition existing before creation. When one particular quality, viz., Goodness prevails over the others, there arises Purusha, viz., that from whom everything flows. The relation of Purusha and Nature is both unity and diversity. The three illustrations of the Gnat and the Udumbara, the fish and water, and water drops and the lotus leaf, explain the relation between Purusha and Nature. He is in Nature, yet different from it. There is both association and dissociation.
146 The doubts appertain to duties, that is whether they should be done or not, and whether they have any effects here and hereafter.
147 The thinking or enjoying agent is subject, and that which is thought or enjoyed is object. Subject and object an two well known words in Sir W. Hamilton’s philosophy. I follow Telang in adopting them.
148 Sattawa pradipa, rendered ‘light of Nature,’ implies, as Nilakantha explains, knowledge, which is a manifestation of Nature. Arjuna Misra’s interpretation seems to be better. He says that knowledge, — that is, knowledge of truth, — is acquired by the self through Nature.
149 The sense seems to be this: one who proceeds, on a journey must provide oneself with the necessary means, otherwise one is sure to feel discomfort or meet with even destruction. So, in the journey of life, one must provide oneself with knowledge as the means. One may then avoid all discomfort and danger. Action does not constitute the proper means. It may or may not produce fruits.
150 i.e., one should not care for the external.
151 i.e., one need not do acts enjoined by the scriptures after one has attained to knowledge which is the highest seat.
152 The sense is this: riding on a car may not always be comfortable. As long as there is a car path, one should travel on one’s car. If, however, the road be such as not to be fit for a car to proceed along it, one should avoid a car in going over it, for the car instead of conducing to comfort, would, on such a path, be productive of only discomfort.
153 i.e., first action with desire; then action without desire; then knowledge, according to Arjuna Misra. Nilakantha explains that action is first, then Yoga, then the state of Hansa or Paramahansa.
154 Katu is not bitter but pungent or sharp, as that which is attached to chillies.
155 These are the notes of the Hindu Gamut.
156 The understanding operates on what is placed before it by the mind. The understanding, therefore, is, as it were, the lord exercising power or sovereignty, being served by the mind.
157 Sarvan srijati i.e., creates all things by attaining to the condition of the universal cause, for the unmanifest is the universal cause. Between such a one and the Supreme Soul there is no difference. Even this is said in the last sentence.
158 The man who reads the book called Veda is not truly conversant with the Veda. He, however, who knows Kshetrajna, is regarded as truly knowing the Veda.
159 The argument is that Mrityu or death being of two syllables, the correspondence is justifiable between it and Mama or mineness which also is of two syllables. So in the case of Brahman and na-mama. Of course, what is meant by mineness being death and not-mineness being Brahman or emancipation, cannot be unintelligi
ble to one who has carefully read the preceding sections.
160 i.e., the five great elements, four organs of knowledge with mind, and the four organs of action.
161 The word Purusha here is used in the sense of dehabhimani Jiva or individual self with consciousness of body. True knowledge destroys this condition of Jiva, for the man of knowledge identifies himself with the universe and thereby assimilates himself to Brahman. By eaters of Amrita are meant they who never take any food without offering portions thereof to the deities, Pitris, and guests. Of course, Yogins of piety are implied by it.
162 Purusha here implies Jiva divested of consciousness of body.
163 The meaning is this: in a dream what is seen is all unreal. So, when tranquillity has been attained, all the surroundings become unreal. Nilakantha gives a slightly different interpretation; it is this: when tranquillity has been attained, the Soul lives without attachment to the body and all external objects. Indeed, the Soul then lives completely in itself even as it works in course of a dream.
164 The sense is that they behold all worldly objects, present, past and future, which are, of course, due to development of previous causes.
165 This line is rather obscure. The sense seems to be this: no one can know the Supreme Deity if it is not the latter’s pleasure to be known. One, therefore, understands Him in exactly that measure in which it is His pleasure to be known.
166 Krishna’s father Vasudeva is maternal uncle. Yudhishthira asks Krishna to worship Vasudeva and Valadeva on his behalf, i.e., he charges Krishna to bear to them a message of respect and love from him.
167 The city of Hastinapura is sometimes called Nagapura, both Hasti and Naga being words expressive of the elephant. ‘The city called after the elephant’ is the usual description of the Kuru capital.
168 Mahyam is equal to ‘mam uddisya’ i.e., referring to my divine nature.
169 An ascetic loses his penances by cursing another rightly or wrongly. Hence, forgiveness was always practised by the Brahmanas who were ascetics. A Brahmana’s strength consisted in forgiveness. The more forgiving he was, the more powerful he became.
The Sanskrit Epics Page 902
