Chapters and quarters followed by sutra groups:
The Brahma Sutras, also called Vedanta Sutras, is one of the three canonical texts of the Vedanta school. The text is an early work that goes into teachings related to the Upanishads, summarising their key teachings.
Vyasa and Badaranyana. The Brahma Sutras are attributed to Krishna Dwipayana Vyasa, and also the name of Badarayana. Since Vyasa lived with his disciples and son Shuka at the Badari in the Himalayas, he might have used the name "Badarayana".
'Sutra'. The word "sutra" means literally "thread", and translates to 'aphorism'. Sutras are terse and may therefore be interpreted in many ways. The Brahma Sutras are said to be quite incomprehensible without the aid of commentaries.
At a very early time in history there were differences of opinion among interpreters of the Vedanta. Opinions ascribed to Vyasa are among them. The sutras are of the jnanakanda (path of wisdom) of the Veda. They form statements, arguments, and so on.
The Brahma Sutras consist of 555 aphorisms or sutras. They are found in four chapters, and each chapter is divided into four quarters. Each quarter consists of several groups of sutras that are topical sections. Such sections usually consists of several sutras, but some have only one sutra.
Through the Chapters
1. The Ultimate Reality, Brahman, is the source of the world. Knowing how the Innermost Source really is, is possible, and may be rewarded with great inner freedom, freedom from future births, or moksha.
2. Vedanta philosophy is not said to be opposed a scripture like the Bhagavadgita and tarka (logic and reasoning).
3. How to get free while living is told of in the third and longest chapter. Many topics are handled.
4. The state that is achieved in final emancipation is talked of. The fare of the soul after death and upwards into the highest heaven (Brahmaloka) is termed "the path of shining ones", "the path of light or of gods".
Commentaries on the Brahma Sutras
Many Brahma Sutras commentaries have been written. The earliest extant one is by Adi Shankara (Gambhirananda 1965; Sivananda 2008; Thibaut 1896). Adi Shankara stands for a non-dualistic (Advaita) interpretation. Other commentators on the Brahma Sutras, belonging to other schools of Vedanta, include Nimbarka (Bose, 1940).
Brahma Sutras' Role in Vedanta
A thorough study of Vedanta calls for great humility, since Shankara said, "When the Great Reality is not known the study of the scriptures is fruitless; when the Great Reality is known the study of the scriptures is also fruitless."
Nonetheless, in the Brahma sutras are set forth the inherited teachings of Vedanta, where what matters the most, is to get help to realise all this - how God (Brahman) is, how one's core is, and the world. Practice of progressively deep meditation is the way. It is also called higher yoga or yoga-meditation.
In the following is George Thibaut's translation of the Brahma Sutras (book references are at bottom of the page). It was one of the earliest translation of the Brahma Sutras along with the work of Paul Deussen. Shankara's commentary in Thibaut's two-volumed translation is based on Shankara's commentary - the earliest there is. But the commentary, bhasya, is left out here. Thus, you may read for yourself and see what this work looks like with no commentary added, and also compare with other likable translations (with commentaries) as you like.
Accents to indicate where to put the stress(es) are added to some words, but spuriously.
etc. (et cetera), and so on.
Gaimini > Jaimini
Italics have been dropped.
viz. (from videlicet), namely.
Yogin > yogin.
The 'Words' link in the bottom left corner of the window opens a little dictionary of old Sanskrit terms.
1. Then therefore the enquiry into Brahman.
2. (Brahman is that) from which the origin, etc. (i.e. the origin, subsistence, and dissolution) of this (world proceed).
3. (The omniscience of Brahman follows) from its being the source of Scripture.
4. But that (Brahman is to be known from Scripture), because it is connected (with the Vedánta- texts) as their purport.
5. On account of seeing (i.e. thinking being attributed in the Upanishads to the cause of the world; the pradhána) is not (to be identified with the cause indicated by the Upanishads; for) it is not founded on Scripture.
6. If it is said that (the word 'seeing') has a figurative meaning, we deny that, on account of the word Self (being applied to the cause of the world).
7. (The pradhána cannot be designated by the term 'Self') because release is taught of him who takes his stand on that (the Sat).
8. And (the pradhána cannot be denoted by the word 'Self') because there is no statement of its having to be set aside.
9. On account of (the individual Soul) going to the Self (the Self cannot be the pradhána).
10. On account of the uniformity of view (of the Vedánta-texts, Brahman is to be considered the cause).
11. And because it is directly stated in Scripture (therefore the all-knowing Brahman is the cause of the world).
12. (The Self) consisting of bliss (is the highest Self) on account of the repetition (of the word 'bliss,' as denoting the highest Self).
13. If (it be objected that the term ánandamaya, consisting of bliss, can) not (denote the highest Self) on account of its being a word denoting a modification (or product); (we declare the objection to be) not (valid) on account of abundance, (the idea of which may be expressed by the affix maya.)
14. And because he is declared to be the cause of it, (i.e. of bliss; therefore maya is to be taken as denoting abundance.)
15. Moreover (the ánandamaya is Brahman because) the same (Brahman) which had been referred to in the mantra is sung, (i.e. proclaimed in the Bráhmana passage as the ánandamaya.)
16. (The Self consisting of bliss is the highest Self,) not the other (i.e. the individual Soul), on account of the impossibility (of the latter assumption).
17. And on account of the declaration of the difference (of the two, the ánandamaya cannot be the transmigrating soul).
18. And on account of desire (being mentioned as belonging to the ánandamaya) no regard is to be had to what is inferred, (i.e. to the pradhána inferred by the Sánkhyas.)
19. And, moreover, it (i.e. Scripture) teaches the joining of this (i.e. t he individual soul) with that, (i.e. the Self consisting of bliss), on that (being fully known).
20. The one within (the sun and the eye) (is the highest Lord), on account of his qualities being declared.
21. And there is another one (i.e. the Lord who is different from the individual souls animating the sun, etc.), on account of the declaration of distinction.
22. The ákása, i.e. ether (is Brahman) on account of characteristic marks (of the latter being mentioned).
23. For the same reason breath (is Brahman).
24. The 'light' (is Brahman), on account of the mention of feet (in a passage which is connected with the passage about the light).
25. If it be objected that (Brahman is) not (denoted) on account of the metre being denoted; (we reply) not so, because thus (i.e. by means of the metre) the direction of the mind (on Brahman) is declared; for thus it is seen (in other passages also).
26. And thus also (we must conclude, viz. that Brahman is the subject of the previous passage), because (thus only) the declaration as to the beings, etc. being the feet is possible.
27. The objection that (the Brahman of the former passage cannot be recognised in the latter) on account of the difference of designation, is not valid because in either (designation) there is nothing contrary (to the recognition).
28. Prána (breath) is Brahman, that being understood from a connected consideration (of the passages referring to prána).
29. If it be said that (Brahman is) not (denoted) on account of the speaker denoting himself; (we reply that this objection is not valid) because there is in that (chapter) a multitude of references to the interior Self.
30. The declaration (made by Indra about himself, viz. that he is one with Brahman) (is possible) through intuition vouched for by Scripture, as in the case of Vámadeva.
31. If it be said (that Brahman is) not (meant), on account of characteristic marks of the individual soul and the chief vital air (being mentioned); we say no, on account of the threefoldness of devout meditation (which would result from your interpretation); on account of (the meaning advocated by us) being accepted (elsewhere); and on account of (characteristic marks of Brahman) being connected (with the passage under discussion).
1. (That which consists of mind is Brahman) because there is taught what is known from everywhere.
2. And because the qualities desired to be expressed are possible (in Brahman; therefore the passage refers to Brahman).
3. On the other hand, as (those qualities) are not possible (in it), the embodied (soul is) not (denoted by manomaya, etc.)
4. And because there is a (separate) denotation of the object of activity and of the agent.
5. On account of the difference of words.
6. And on account of Smriti.
7. If it be said that (the passage does) not (refer to Brahman) on account of the smallness of the abode (mentioned), and on account of the denotations of that (i.e. of minuteness); we say, no; because (Brahman) has thus to be contemplated, and because the case is analogous to that of ether.
8. If it is said that (from the circumstance of Brahman and the individual soul being one) there follows fruition (on the part of Brahman); we say, no; on account of the difference of nature (of the two).
9. The eater (is the highest Self) since what is movable and what is immovable is mentioned (as his food).
10. And on account of the topic under discussion. That the highest Self only can be the eater referred to is moreover evident from the passage (Ka. Up. I, 2, 18), ('The knowing Self is not born, it dies not'), which shows that the highest Self is the general topic. And to adhere to the general topic is the proper proceeding. Further, the clause, 'Who then knows where he is,' shows that the cognition is connected with difficulties; which circumstance again points to the highest Self.
11. The 'two entered into the cave' (are the individual soul and the highest Self), for the two are (intelligent) Selves (and therefore of the same nature), as it is seen (that numerals denote beings of the same nature).
12. And on account of the distinctive qualities (mentioned).
13. The person within (the eye) (is Brahman) on account of the agreement (of the attributes of that person with the nature of Brahman).
14. And on account of the statement of place, and so on.
15. And on account of the passage referring to that which is distinguished by pleasure (i.e. Brahman).
16. And on account of the statement of the way of him who has heard the Upanishads.
17. (The person within the eye is the highest), not any other Self; on account of the non- permanency (of the other Selves) and on account of the impossibility (of the qualities of the person in the eye being ascribed to the other Selves).
18. The internal ruler over the devas and so on (is Brahman), because the attributes of that (Brahman) are designated.
19. And (the internal ruler is) not that which the Smriti assumes, (viz. the pradhána,) on account of the statement of qualities not belonging to it.
20. And the embodied soul (also cannot be understood by the internal ruler), for both also (i.e. both recensions of the Brihad Áranyaka) speak of it as different (from the internal ruler).
21. That which possesses the attributes of invisibility and so on (is Brahman), on account of the declaration of attributes.
22. The two others (i.e. the individual soul and the pradhána) are not (the source of all beings) because there are stated distinctive attributes and difference.
23. And on account of its form being mentioned.
24. Vaisvánara (is the highest Lord) on account of the distinction qualifying the common terms (Vaisvánara and Self).
25. (And) because that which is stated by Smriti (i.e. the shape of the highest Lord as described by Smriti) is an inference (i.e. an indicatory mark from which we infer the meaning of Sruti).
26. If it be maintained that (Vaisvánara is) not (the highest Lord) on account of the term (viz. Vaisvánara, having a settled different meaning), etc., and on account of his abiding within (which is a characteristic of the gastric fire); (we say) no, on account of the perception (of the highest Lord), being taught thus (viz. in the gastric fire), and on account of the impossibility (of the heavenly world, etc. being the head, etc. of the gastric fire), and because they (the Vájasaneyins) read of him (viz. the Vaisvánara) as man (which term cannot apply to the gastric fire).
27. For the same reasons (the Vaisvánara) cannot be the divinity (of fire), or the element (of fire).
28. Jaimini (declares that there is) no contradiction even on the assumption of a direct (worship of the highest Lord as Vaisvánara).
29. On account of the manifestation, so Ásmarathya opines.
30. On account of remembrance; so Bádari opines.
31. On the ground of imaginative identification (the highest Lord may be called prádesamátra), Jaimini thinks; for thus (Scripture) declares.
32. Moreover they (the Jábálas) speak of him (the highest Lord) in that (i.e. the interstice between the top of the head and the chin which is measured by a span).
1. The abode of heaven, earth, and so on (is Brahman), on account of the term 'own,' i.e. Self.
2. And on account of its being designated as that to which the Released have to resort.
3. Not (i.e. the abode of heaven, earth, etc. cannot be) that which is inferred, (i.e. the pradhána), on account of the terms not denoting it.
4. (Nor) also the individual soul (pránabhrit).
5. On account of the declaration of difference.
6. On account of the subject-matter.
7. And on account of the two conditions of standing and eating (of which the former is characteristic of the highest Lord, the latter of the individual soul).
8. The bhúman (is Brahman), as the instruction about it is additional to that about the state of deep sleep (i.e. the vital air which remains awake even in the state of deep sleep).
9. And on account of the agreement of the attributes (mentioned in the text).
10. The Imperishable (is Brahman) on account of (its) supporting (all things) up to ether.
11. This (supporting can), on account of the command (attributed to the Imperishable, be the work of the highest Lord only).
12. And on account of (Scripture) separating (the akshara) from that whose nature is different (from Brahman).
13. On account of his being designated as the object of sight (the highest Self is meant, and) the same (is meant in the passage speaking of the meditation on the highest person by means of the syllable Om).
14. The small (ether) (is Brahman) on account of the subsequent (arguments).
15. (The small ether is Brahman) on account of the action of going (into Brahman) and of the word (brahmaloka); for thus it is seen (i.e. that the individual souls go into Brahman is seen elsewhere in Scripture); and (this going of the souls into Brahman constitutes) an inferential sign (by means of which we may properly interpret the word 'brahmaloka').
16. And on account of the supporting also (attributed to it), (the small ether must be the Lord) because that greatness is observed in him (according to other scriptural passages).
17. And on account of the settled meaning.
18. If it be said that the other one (i.e. the individual soul) (is meant) on account of a reference to it (made in a complementary passage), (we say) no, on account of the impossibility.
19. If it be said that from the subsequent (chapter it appears that the individual soul is meant), (we point out that what is there referred to is) rather (the individual soul in so far) as its true nature has become manifest (i.e. as it is non-different from Brahman).
20. And the reference (to the individual soul) has a different meaning.
21. If it be said that on account of the scriptural declaration of the smallness (of the ether) (the Lord cannot be meant; we reply that) that has been explained (before).
22. On account of the acting after (i.e. the shining after), (that after which sun, moon, etc. are said to shine is the highest Self), and (because by the light) of him (all this is said to be lighted).
23. Moreover Smriti also speaks of him (i.e. of the práj˝a Self as being the universal light).
24. On account of the term, (viz. the term 'lord' applied to it) the (person) measured (by a thumb) (is the highest Lord).
25. But with reference to the heart (the highest Self is said to be of the size of a span), as men are entitled (to the study of the Veda).
26. Also (beings) above them, (viz. men) (are qualified for the study and practice of the Veda), on account of the possibility (of it), according to Bádaráyana.
27. If it be said that (the corporeal individuality of the gods involves) a contradiction to (sacrificial) works; we deny that, on account of the observation of the assumption (on the part of the gods) of several (forms).
28. If it be said (that a contradiction will result) in respect of the word; we refute this objection on the ground that (the world) originates from the word, as is shown by perception and inference.
29. And from this very reason there follows the eternity of the Veda.
30. And on account of the equality of names and forms there is no contradiction (to the eternity of the word of the Veda) in the renovation (of the world); as is seen from Sruti and Smriti.
31. On account of the impossibility of (the gods being qualified) for the madhu-vidyá, etc., Jaimini (maintains) the non-qualification (of the gods for the Brahma-vidyá).
32. And (the devas, etc. are not qualified) on account of (the words denoting the devas, etc.) being (used) in the sense of (sphere of) light.
33. Bádaráyana, on the other hand, (maintains) the existence (of qualification for Brahma-vidyá on the part of the gods); for there are (passages indicatory of that).
34. Grief of him (i.e. of Jánasruti) (arose) on account of his hearing a disrespectful speech about himself; on account of the rushing on of that (grief) (Raikva called him Súdra); for it (the grief) is pointed at (by Raikva).
35. And because the kshattriyahood (of Jánasruti) is understood from the inferential mark (supplied by his being mentioned) later on with Kaitraratha (who was a kshattriya himself).
36. On account of the reference to ceremonial purifications (in the case of the higher castes) and on account of their absence being declared (in the case of the Súdras).
37. And on account of (Gautama) proceeding (to initiate Jábála) on the ascertainment of (his) not being that (i.e. a Súdra).
38. And on account of the prohibition, in Smriti, of (the Súdras') hearing and studying (the Veda) and (knowing and performing) (Vedic) matters.
39. (The prána is Brahman), on account of the trembling (predicated of the whole world).
40. The light (is Brahman), on account of that (Brahman) being seen (in the scriptural passage).
41. The ether is (Brahman), as it is designated as something different, etc. (from name and form).
42. And (on account of the designation) (of the highest Self) as different (from the individual soul) in the states of deep sleep and departing.
43. And on account of such words as Lord, etc.
1. If it be said that some (mention) that which is based on inference (i.e. the pradhána); we deny this, because (the term alluded to) refers to what is contained in the simile of the body (i.e. the body itself); and (that the text) shows.
2. But the subtle (body is meant by the term avyakta) on account of its capability (of being so designated).
3. (Such a previous seminal condition of the world may be admitted) on account of its dependency on him (the Lord); (for such an admission is) according to reason.
4. And (the pradhána cannot be meant) because there is no statement as to (the avyakta) being something to be cognised.
5. And if you maintain that the text does speak (of the pradhána as an object of knowledge) we deny that; for the intelligent (highest) Self is meant, on account of the general subject-matter.
6. And there is question and explanation relative to three things only (not to the pradhána).
7. And (the case of the term avyakta) is like that of the term mahat.
8. (It cannot be maintained that ajá means the pradhána) because no special characteristic is stated; as in the case of the cup.
9. But the (elements) beginning with light (are meant by the term ajá); for some read so in their text.
10. And on account of the statement of the assumption (of a metaphor) there is nothing contrary to reason (in ajá denoting the causal matter); just as in the case of honey (denoting the sun) and similar cases.
11. (The assertion that there is scriptural authority for the pradhána, etc. can) also not (be based) on the mention of the number (of the Sankhya categories), on account of the diversity (of the categories) and on account of the excess (over the number of those categories).
12. (The pa˝kajanáh are) the breath and so on, (as is seen) from the complementary passage.
13. In the case of (the text of) some (the Kánvas) where food is not mentioned, (the number five is made full) by the light (mentioned in the preceding mantra).
14. (Although there is a conflict of the Vedánta-passages with regard to the things created, such as) ether and so on; (there is no such conflict with regard to the Lord) on account of his being represented (in one passage) as described (in other passages), viz. as the cause (of the world).
15. On account of the connexion (with passages treating of Brahman, the passages speaking of the Non-being do not intimate absolute Non-existence).
16. (He whose work is this is Brahman), because (the 'work') denotes the world.
17. If it be said that this is not so, on account of the inferential marks of the individual soul and the chief vital air; we reply that that has already been explained.
18. But Jaimini thinks that (the reference to the individual soul) has another purport, on account of the question and answer; and thus some also (read in their text).
19. (The Self to be seen, to be heard, etc. is the highest Self) on account of the connected meaning of the sentences.
20. (The circumstance of the soul being represented as the object of sight) indicates the fulfilment of the promissory statement; so Ásmarathya thinks.
21. (The initial statement identifies the individual soul and the highest Self) because the soul when it will depart (from the body) is such (i.e. one with the highest Self); thus Audulomi thinks.
22. (The initial statement is made) because (the highest Self) exists in the condition (of the individual soul); so Kásakritsna thinks.
23. (Brahman is) the material cause also, on account of (this view) not being in conflict with the promissory statements and the illustrative instances.
24. And on account of the statement of reflection (on the part of the Self).
25. And on account of both (i.e. the origin and the disso lution of the world) being directly declared (to have Brahman for their material cause).
26. (Brahman is the material cause) on account of (the Self) making itself; (which is po ssible) owing to modification.
27. And because Brahman is called the source.
28. Hereby all (the doctrines concerning the origin of the world which are opposed to the Vedánta) are explained, are explained.
1. If it be objected that (from the doctrine expounded hitherto) there would result the fault of there being no room for (certain) Smritis; we do not admit that objection, because (from the rejection of our doctrine) there would result the fault of want of room for other Smritis.
2. And on account of the non-perception of the others (i.e. the effects of the pradhána, according to the Sánkhya system).
2.1.3. Thereby the Yoga (Smriti) is refuted.
4. (Brahman can) not (be the cause of the world) on account of the difference of character of that, (viz. the world); and its being such, (i.e. different from Brahman) (we learn) from Scripture.
5. But (there takes place) denotation of the superintending (deities), on account of the difference and the connexion.
6. But it is seen.
7. If (it is said that the effect is) non-existent (before its origination); we do not allow that because it is a mere negation (without an object).
8. On account of such consequences at the time of reabsorption (the doctrine maintained hitherto) is objectionable.
9. Not so; as there are parallel instances.
10. And because the objections (raised by the Sánkhya against the Vedánta doctrine) apply to his view also.
11. If it be said that, in consequence of the ill-foundedness of reasoning, we must frame our conclusions otherwise; (we reply that) thus also there would result non-release.
12. Thereby those (theories) also which are not accepted by competent persons are explained.
13. If it be said that from the circumstance of (the objects of enjoyment) passing over into the enjoyer (and vice versá) there would result non-distinction (of the two); we reply that (such distinction) may exist (nevertheless), as ordinary experience shows.
14. The non-difference of them (i.e. of cause and effect) results from such terms as 'origin' and the like.
15. And because only on the existence (of the cause) (the effect) is observed.
16. And on account of that which is posterior (i.e. the effect) being that which is.
17. If it be said that on account of being denoted as that which is not (the effect does) not (exist before it is actually produced); (we reply) not so, (because the term 'that which is not' denotes) another quality (merely); (as appears) from the complementary sentence.
18. From reasoning and from another Vedic passage.
19. And like a piece of cloth.
20. And as in the case of the different vital airs.
21. On account of the other (i.e. the individual soul) being designated (as non-different from Brahman) there would attach (to Brahman) various faults, as, for instance, not doing what is beneficial.
22. But the separate (Brahman, i.e. the Brahman separate from the individual souls) (is the creator); (the existence of which separate Brahman we learn) from the declaration of difference.
23. And because the case is analogous to that of stones, etc. (the objections raised) cannot be established.
24. If you object on the ground of the observation of the employment (of instruments); (we say), No; because as milk (transforms itself, so Brahman does).
25. And (the case of Brahman is) like that of gods and other beings in ordinary experience.
26. Either the consequence of the entire (Brahman undergoing change) has to be accepted, or else a violation of the texts declaring Brahman to be without parts.
27. But (this is not so), on account of scriptural passages, and on account of (Brahman) resting on Scripture (only).
28. For thus it is in the (individual) Self also, and various (creations exist in gods etc.).
29. And because the objection (raised against our view) lies against his (the opponent's) view likewise.
30. And (the highest divinity is) endowed with all (powers) because that is seen (from Scripture).
31. If it be said that (Brahman is devoid of powers) on account of the absence of organs; (we reply that) this has been explained (before).
32. (Brahman is) not (the creator of the world), on account of (beings engaging in any action) having a motive.
33. But (Brahman's creative activity) is mere sport, such as we see in ordinary life.
34. Inequality (of dispensation) and cruelty (the Lord can) not (be reproached with), on account of his regarding (merit and demerit); for so (Scripture) declares.
35. If it be objected that it (viz. the Lord's having regard to merit and demerit) is impossible on account of the non-distinction (of merit and demerit, previous to the first creation); we refute the objection on the ground of (the world) being without a beginning.
36. (The beginninglessness of the world) recommends itself to reason and is seen (from Scripture).
37. And because all the qualities (required in the cause of the world) are present (in Brahman).
1. That which is inferred (by the Sánkhyas, viz. the pradhána) cannot be the cause (of the world), on account of the orderly arrangement (of the world) being impossible (on that hypothesis).
2. And on account of (the impossibility of) activity.
3. If it be said (that the pradhána moves) like milk or water, (we reply that) there also (the motion is due to intelligence).
4. And because (the pradhána), on account of there existing nothing beyond it, stands in no relation; (it cannot be active.).
5. Nor (can it be said that the pradhána modifies itself spontaneously) like grass, etc. (which turn into milk); for (milk) does not exist elsewhere (but in the female animal).
6. Even if we admit (the Sánkhya position refuted in what precedes, it is invalidated by other objections) on account of the absence of a purpose (on the part of the pradhána).
7. And if you say (that the soul may move the pradhána) as the (lame) man (moves the blind one) or as the magnet (moves the iron); thus also (the difficulty is not overcome).
8. And, again, (the pradhána cannot be active) because the relation of principal (and subordinate matter) is impossible (between the three gunas).
9. And although another inference be made, (the objections remain in force) on account of the (pradhána) being devoid of the power of intelligence.
10. And moreover (the Sánkhya doctrine) is objectionable on account of its contradictions.
11. Or (the world may originate from Brahman) as the great and the long originate from the short and the atomic.
12. In both cases also (in the cases of the adrishta inhering either in the atoms or the soul) action (of the atoms) is not (possible); hence absence of that (viz. creation and pralaya).
13. And because in consequence of samaváya being admitted a regressus in infinitum results from parity of reasoning.
14. And on account of the permanent existence (of activity or non-activity).
15. And on account of the atoms having colour, etc., the reverse (of the Vaiseshika tenet would take place); as thus it is observed.
16. And as there are difficulties in both cases.
17. And as the (atomic theory) is not accepted (by any authoritative persons) it is to be disregarded altogether.
18. (If there be assumed) the (dyad of) aggregates with its two causes, (there takes place) non- establishment of those (two aggregates).
19. If it be said that (the formation of aggregates may be explained) through (Nescience, etc.) standing in the relation of mutual causality; we say 'No,' because they merely are the efficient causes of the origin (of the immediately subsequent links).
20. (Nor can there be a causal relation between Nescience, etc.), because on the origination of the subsequent (moment) the preceding one ceases to be.
21. On the supposition of there being no (cause: while yet the effect takes place), there results contradiction of the admitted principle; otherwise simultaneousness (of cause and effect).
22. Cessation dependent on a sublative act of the mind, and cessation not so dependent cannot be established, there being no (complete) interruption.
23. And on account of the objections presenting themselves in either case.
24. And in the case of space also (the doctrine of its being a non-entity is untenable) on account of its not differing (from the two other kinds of non-entity).
25. And on account of remembrance.
26. (Entity) does not spring from non-entity on account of that not being observed.
27. And thus (on that doctrine) there would be an accomplishment (of ends) in the case of non- active people also.
28. The non-existence (of external things) cannot be maintained, on account of (our) consciousness (of them).
29. And on account of their difference of nature (the ideas of the waking state) are not like those of a dream.
30. The existence (of mental impressions) is not possible on the Bauddha view, on account of the absence of perception (of external things).
31. And on account of the momentariness (of the álayavij˝ána, it cannot be the abode of mental impressions).
32. And on account of its general deficiency in probability.
33. On account of the impossibility (of contradictory attributes) in one thing, (the Jaina doctrine is) not (to be accepted).
34. And likewise (there results from the Jaina, doctrine) non-universality of the Self.
35. Nor is non-contradiction to be derived from the succession (of parts acceding to and departing from the soul), on account of the change, etc. (of the soul).
38. And on account of the permanency of the final (size of the soul) and the resulting permanency of the two (preceding sizes) there is no difference (of size, at any time).
37. The Lord (cannot be the cause of the world), on account of the inappropriateness (of that doctrine).
38. And on account of the impossibility of the connexion (of the Lord with the souls and the pradhána).
39. And on account of the impossibility of rulership (on the part of the Lord).
40. If you say that as the organs (are ruled by the soul so the pradhána is ruled by the Lord), we deny that on account of the enjoyment, etc.
41. And (there would follow from that doctrine) either finite duration or absence of omniscience (on the Lord's part).
42. On account of the impossibility of the origination (of the individual soul from the highest Lord, the doctrine of the Bhágavatas cannot be accepted).
43. And (it is) not (observed that) the instrument is produced from the agent.
44. Or (if) in consequence of the existence of knowledge, etc. (Vásudeva, etc. be taken as Lords), yet there is non-exclusion of that (i.e. the objection raised in Sútra 42).
45. And on account of contradictions.
1. Ether (does) not (originate), on account of the absence of scriptural statement.
2. But there is (a scriptural statement of the origination of ether).
3. (The Vedic statement concerning the origination of ether) has a secondary sense, on account of the impossibility (of the origination of ether).
4. And on account of the word (of the Veda).
5. The one (word 'sprang') may be (taken in its secondary as well as in its primary sense), like the word ' Brahman.'
6. The non-abandonment of the promissory statements (results only) from the non-difference (of the entire world from Brahman), according to the words of the Veda.
7. But wherever there are effects, there is division; as in ordinary life.
8. Hereby air (also) is explained.
9. But there is no origin of that which is (i.e. of Brahman), on account of the impossibility (of such an origin).
10. Fire (is produced) thence (i.e. from air); for thus (the text) declares.
11. Water (is produced from fire).
12. The earth (is meant by the word 'anna'), on account of the subject-matter, the colour, and other passages.
13. But on account of the indicatory mark supplied by their reflecting (i.e. by the reflection attributed to the elements),' he (i.e. the Lord is the creative principle abiding within the elements).
14. The order (in which the elements are retracted into Brahman) is the reverse of that (i.e. the order in which they are created); this is proved (by its agreement with observation).
15. If it be said that between (Brahman and the elements) the intellect and mind (are mentioned; and that therefore their origination and retractation are to be placed) somewhere in the series, on account of there being inferential signs (whereby the order of the creation of the elements is broken); we deny that, on account of the non-difference (of the organs and the elements).
16. But the designation (as being born and dying) abides in the (bodies of beings) moving and non-moving; it is secondary (metaphorical) if applied to the soul, as the existence (of those terms) depends on the existence of that (i.e. the body).
17. The (living) Self is not (produced) as there is no scriptural statement, and as it is eternal according to them (i. e. scriptural passages).
18. For this very reason (the individual soul is) intelligent.
19. (On account of the scriptural declarations) of (the soul's) passing out, going and returning, (the soul is of atomic size).
20. And on account of the two latter (i.e. gohig and returning) being connected with their Self (i.e. the agent), (the soul is of atomic size).
21. If it be said that (the soul is) not atomic, on account of scriptural statements about what is not that (i.e. what is opposed to atomic size); we deny that, on account of the other one (the highest Self) being the subject-matter (of those passages).
22. And also on account of direct statement, and of inference.
23. There is no contradiction, as in the case of sandal-ointment.
24. If it be said (that the two cases are not parallel), on account of the specialisation of abode (present in the case of the sandal-ointment, absent in the case of the soul); we deny that, on account of the acknowledgment (by scripture, of a special place of the soul), viz. within the heart.
25. Or on account of (its) quality (viz. intelligence), as in cases of ordinary experience.
26. The extending beyond is as in the case of odour.
27. And thus (scripture also) declares.
28. On account of the separate statement (of soul and intelligence).
29. But it is designated thus (i.e. as atomic), on account of its having for its essence the qualities of that (i.e. the buddhi); as in the case of the intelligent Self (i.e. Brahman).
30. The objection (raised above) is not valid, since (the connexion of the soul with the buddhi) exists as long as the soul; It being thus observed (in scripture).
31. On account of the appropriateness of the manifestation of that (connexion) which exists (potentially); like virile power.
32. Otherwise (if no manas existed) there would result either constant perception or constant non-perception, or else a limitation of either of the two (i.e. of the soul or of the senses).
33. (The soul is) an agent, on account of scripture having a purport (thereby).
34. And on account of (the text) teaching its wandering about.
35. On account of its taking.
36. (The soul is an agent) also because it is designated as such with regard to actions; if it were not such, there would be a change of designation.
37. The absence of restriction is as in the case of perception. 38. On account of the reversal of power.
39. And on account of the impossibility of meditation (samadhi).
40. And as the carpenter, in double fashion.
41. But from the highest (Lord there result samsara and moksha). because scripture teaches that.
42. But with a view to the efforts made (by the soul) (the Lord makes it act), on account of the (otherwise resulting) purportlessness of the injunctions and prohibitions, etc.
43. (The soul is) a part of the Lord, on account of the declarations of difference, and (because) in a different way also some record that (Brahman) is of the nature of slaves, fishers, and so on.
44. And on account of the mantra.
45. Moreover it is so stated in Smriti.
46. (As the soul is affected by pleasure and pain) not so the highest (Lord); as in the case of light and so on.
47. And the Smritis state (that).
48. (The possibility of) injunctions and prohibitions (results) from the connexion (of the Self) with bodies; as in the case of light and so on.
49. And on account of the non-extension (of the individual soul), there is no confusion (of the results of actions).
50. And (the individual soul is) an appearance (reflection) only.
51. On account of the unseen principle being non-limitative.
52. And this is also the case in resolutions, etc.
53. (Should it be said that distinction of pleasure, pain, etc., results) from (difference of) place; we say no, on account of the (Self's) being within (all things).
1. Thus the vital airs.
2. On account of the impossibility of a secondary (origin of the pranas).
3. On account of that (word which indicates origin) being enunciated at first (in connexion with the pranas).
4. Because speech is preceded by that (viz, fire and the other elements).
5. (The pranas are) seven, on account of this being understood (from scriptural passages) and of the specification (of those seven).
6. But (there are also, in addition to the seven pranas mentioned,) the hands and so on. This being a settled matter, therefore (we must) not (conclude) thus (viz. that there are seven pranas only).
7. And (they are) minute.
8. And the best (i.e. the chief vital air).
9. (The chief prana is) neither air nor function, on account of its being mentioned separately.
10. But (the prana is subordinate to the soul) like the eye, etc., on account of being taught with them (the eye, etc.), and for other reasons.
11. And on account of (its) not being an instrument the objection is not (valid); for thus (scripture) declares.
12. It is designated as having five functions like mind.
13. And it is minute.
14. But there is guidance (of the pranas) by fire, etc., on account of that being declared by scripture.
15. (It is not so) (because the pranas are connected) with that to which the pranas belong (i.e. the individual soul), (a thing we know) from scripture.
16. And on account of the permanence of this (viz. the embodied soul).
17. They (the pranas) are senses, on account of being so designated, with the exception of the best (the mukhya prana).
18. On account of the scriptural statement of difference.
19. And on account of the difference of characteristics.
20. But the fashioning of names and forms belongs to him who renders tripartite, on account of the teaching (of scripture).
21. The flesh, etc., originates from earth, according to the scriptural statement; and (so also) in the case of the two other (elements).
22. But on account of their distinctive nature there is a (distinctive) designation of them.
1. In obtaining a different (body) (the soul) goes enveloped (by subtle parts of the elements), (as appears from) question and explanation.
2. But on account of (water) consisting of three (elements) (the soul is enveloped not by water merely; the latter alone is, however, mentioned) on account of preponderance.
3. And on account of the going of the pranas.
4. If it be said (that the pranas do not go) on account of the scriptural statement as to entering into Agni, etc., we deny this on account of the metaphorical nature (of those statements).
5. If an objection be raised on the ground of (water) not being mentioned in the first fire, we refute it by remarking that just It (viz. water) (is meant), on the ground of fitness.
6. (Should it be said that the souls are not enveloped by water) on account of this not being stated by scripture, we refute the objection on the ground of those who perform ishtis, etc., being understood.
7. Or (the souls' being the food of the gods is) metaphorical, on account of their not knowing the Self. For thus (scripture) declares.
8. On the passing away of the works (the soul redescends) with a remainder, according to scripture and Smriti, as it went (i. e. passing through the same stations) and not thus (i.e. in the inverse order).
9. Should it be objected that on account of conduct (the assumption of a remainder is not needed), we deny this because (the scriptural expression ' conduct') is meant to connote (the remainder); so Kárshnágini thinks.
10. If it be said that purposelessness (of conduct would result therefrom), we deny this on account of the dependence (of work) on that (conduct).
11. But (karana means) nothing but good and evil works; thus Badari opines.
12. Of those also who do not perform sacrifices (the ascent to the moon) is stated by scripture.
13. But of the others, after having enjoyed the fruits of their actions in Samyamana, ascent and descent take place; as such a course is declared (by scripture).
14. The Smritis also declare this.
15. Moreover there are seven (hells).
16. On account of his activity there also no contradiction exists.
17. But on (the two roads) of knowledge and works, those two being under discussion.
18. Not in (the case of) the third place, as it is thus perceived.
19. It is, moreover, recorded in the (ordinary) world.
20. And on account of observation.
21. The third term comprises that which springs from heat.
22. (On the part of the soul's descending from the moon) there is entering into similarity of being (with ether and so on); as this (only) is possible.
23. (The soul passes through the stages of its descent) in a not very long time; on account of the special statement.
24. (The descending souls enter) into (plants) animated by other (souls), as in the previous cases, on account of scriptural declaration.
25. Should it be said that (sacrificial work is) unholy; we deny this on the ground of scripture.
26. After that (there takes place) conjunction (of the soul) with him who performs the act of generation.
27. From the yoni a (new) body (springs).
1. In the intermediate place there is (a real) creation; for (scripture) says (that).
2. And some (state the Self to be) the shaper (creator); sons and so on (being the lovely things which he shapes).
3. But it (viz. the dream world) is mere illusion (maya), on account of its nature not manifesting itself with the totality (of the attributes of reality).
4. (Not altogether) for it (the dream) is indicative (of the future), according to Sruti; the experts also declare this.
5. But by the meditation on the highest that which is hidden (viz. the equality of the Lord and the soul, becomes manifest); for from him (the Lord) are its (the soul's) bondage and release.
6. Or that (viz. the concealment of the soul's powers springs) from its connexion with the body.
7. The absence of that (i.e. of dreams, i.e. dreamless sleep) takes place in the nadis and in the Self; according to scriptural statement.
8. Hence the awaking from that (viz. Brahman).
9. But the same (soul returns from Brahman); on account of work, remembrance, text, and precept.
10. In him who is senseless (in a swoon, etc.) there is half-union; on account of this remaining (as the only possible hypothesis).
11. Not on account of (difference of) place also twofold characteristics can belong to the highest; for everywhere (scripture teaches it to be without any difference).
12. If it be objected that it is not so, on account of the difference (taught by the Veda); we reply that it is not so on account of the declaration of (Brahman) being not such, with reference to each (declaration of difference).
13. Some also (teach) thus.
14. For (Brahman) is merely devoid of form, on account of this being the main purport of scripture.
15. And as light (assumes forms as it were by its contact with things possessing form, so does Brahman;) since (the texts ascribing form to Brahman) are not devoid of meaning
16. And (scripture) declares (Brahman) to consist of that (i.e. intelligence).
17. (This scripture) also shows, and it is likewise stated in Smriti.
18. For this very reason (there are applied to Brahman) comparisons such as that of the images of the sun and the like.
19. But there is no parallelism (of the two things compared), since (in the case of Brahman) there is not apprehended (any separate substance) comparable to the water.
20. Since (the highest Brahman) is inside (of the limiting adjuncts), it participates in their increase and decrease; owing to the appropriateness (thus resulting) of the two (things compared) it is thus (i.e. the comparison holds good).
21. And on account of the declaration (of scripture).
22. For (the clause 'Not so, not so') denies (of Brahman) the suchness which forms the topic of discussion; and (the text) enounces something more than that.
23. That (Brahman) is unevolved; for (thus scripture) says.
24. And in the state of perfect conciliation also (the yogins apprehend the highest Brahman), according to Sruti and Smriti.
25. And as in the case of (physical) light and the like, there is non-distinction (of the two Selves), the light (i.e. the intelligent Self) (being divided) by its activity; according to the repeated declarations of scripture.
26. Hence (the soul enters Into unity) with the infinite (i.e. the highest Self); for this scripture indicates.
27. But on account of twofold designation, (the relation of the highest Self to the individual soul has to be viewed) like that of the snake to its coils.
28. Or else like that of light to its substratum, both being fire.
29. Or else (the relation of the two is to be conceived) in the manner stated above.
30. And on account of the denial.
31. Beyond (Brahman, there is something) further, on account of the designations of bank, measure, connexion, separation.
32. But (Brahman is called a bank etc.) on account of (a certain) equality.
33. (The statement as to Brahman having size) subserves the purpose of the mind; in the manner of the four feet (quarters).
34. (The statements concerning connexion and difference) are due to difference of place; in the manner of light and so on.
35. And because (only such a connexion) is possible.
36. (The same thing follows) from the express denial of other (existences).
37. Thereby the omnipresence (of Brahman is established), in accordance with the statements about (Brahman's) extent.
38. From him (i.e. the Lord, there comes) the fruit (of works); for (that only) is possible.
39. And because it is declared by scripture.
40. Jaimini (thinks) for the same reasons that religious merit (is what brings about the fruits of actions).
41. Badarayana, however, thinks the former (i. e. the Lord, to be the cause of the fruits of action), since he is designated as the cause (of the actions themselves).
1. (The cognitions) intimated by all the Vedanta-texts (are identical), on account of the non-difference of injunction and so on.
2. (If it be said that the vidyas are separate) on account of the difference (of secondary matters), we deny that, since even in one and the same vidya (different secondary matters may find place).
3. (The rite of carrying fire on the head Is an attribute) of the study of the Veda (of the Atharvanikas); because in the Samakara (it is mentioned) as being such. (This also follows) from the general subject-matter, and the limitation (of the rite to the Atharvanikas) is analogous to that of the libations.
4. (Scripture) also declares this.
5. In the case of (a devout meditation) common (to several Sakhas) (the particulars mentioned in each Sakha) have to be combined, since there is no difference of essential matter; just as in the case of what Is complementary to Injunctions.
6. If it be said that (the udgitha vidya of the Bri. Up. and that of the Khand. Up.) are separate on account (of the difference) of the texts; we deny this on the ground of their (essential) non-difference.
7. Or rather there is no (unity of the vidyas), owing to the difference of subject-matter.
8. If it be said (that the vidyas are one) on account of (the identity of) name; (we reply that) that is explained (already); moreover that (identity of name) is (found in the case of admittedly separate vidyas).
9. And on account of the (omkara) extending over the whole (Veda), (the view that the term udgitha expresses a specialisation) is appropriate.
10. Those (qualities which are attributed to the subject of a vidya in one Sakha only) (are to be inserted) in other places (also), since (the vidyas) are non-different on the whole.
11. Bliss and other (qualities) as belonging to the subject of the qualities (have to be attributed to Brahman everywhere).
12. (Such qualities as) joy being its head and so on have no force (for other passages); for increase and decrease belong to plurality (only).
13. But other (attributes are valid for all passages relative to Brahman), the purport being the same.
14. (The passage, Kathaka I, 3, 10, gives information about the person) for the purpose of pious meditation, as there is no use (of the knowledge of the objects being higher than the senses and so on).
15. And on account of the word ' Self.'
16. The (highest) Self has to be understood (in Ait. Ar. II, 4, i), as in other places; on account of the subsequent (qualification).
17. Should it be said that on account of the connected meaning (of the whole passage) (the highest Self cannot be meant); (we reply that) it is so, on account of the assertion.
18. As (scripture where speaking of the rinsing of the mouth with water) makes a reference to an act (established by Smriti), (that act is not enjoined by Sruti, but rather) the new (act of meditation on the water viewed as the dress of prana).
19. In the same (Sakha also) it is thus (i.e. there is unity of vidya), on account of the non-difference (of the object of meditation).
20. Thus in other cases also, on account of the connexion (of particulars with one and the same vidya).
21. Or this is not so, on account of the difference (of place).
22. (Scripture) also declares that.
23. And for the-same reason the holding together and the pervading the sky (attributed to Brahman in the Ranayaniya-khila) (are not to be inserted in other vidyas).
24. And as the record of others (viz. the Taittiriyaka) is not such as in the purusha-vidya (of the Khandogya), (the two purusha-vidyas are not to be combined).
25. Because the matter (of certain mantras) such as piercing and so on is different (from the matter of the approximate vidyas) (the former have not to be combined with the latter).
26. Where the getting rid (of good and evil) is mentioned (the obtaining of this good and evil by others has to be added) because the statement about the obtaining is supplementary (to the statement about the getting rid of), as in the case of the kusas, the metres, the praise and the singing. This (i.e. the reason for this) has been stated (in the Purva Mimamsa).
27. At the (moment of) departing (he frees himself from his works), there being nothing to be reached (by him, on the way to Brahman, through those works); for thus others (declare, in their sacred texts).
28. And because (on the above interpretation) there is no contradiction to both (i.e. man's making an effort to free himself from his deeds and actually-freeing himself) according to his liking.
29. A purpose has to be attributed to the going (on the path of the gods) in a twofold manner; otherwise there would be contradiction of scripture.
30. (The twofold view taken above) is justified because we observe a purpose characterised thereby (i.e. a purpose of the going); as in ordinary life.
31. There is no restriction (as to the going on the path of the gods) for any vidya; nor any contradiction (of the general subject-matter), according to scripture and inference (i.e. Smriti).
32. Of those who have a certain office there is subsistence (of the body) as long as the office lasts.
33. But the (denials of) conceptions concerning the akshara are to be comprehended (In all meditations on the akshara), on account of the equality and of the object being the same, as in the case of the upasad; this has been explained (in the Purva Mimamsa).
34. On account of (the same) number being recorded.
35. As the Self is within all, as in the case of the aggregate of the elements, (there is oneness of vidya).
36. If it be said that otherwise the separation (of the statements) cannot be accounted for; we reply that it is (here) as in the case of other instructions.
37. There is exchange (of meditation), for the texts distinguish (two meditations); as in other cases.
38. For the True and so on are one and the same (vidya).
39. (Having true) wishes and other (qualities) (have to be combined) there and here, on account of the abode and so on.
40. On account of (the passage showing) respect, there is non-omission (of the pranagnihotra) (even when the eating of food is omitted).
41. When (eating) is taking place, (the pranagnihotra has to be performed) from that (i.e. the food first eaten); on the ground of the passage declaring this.
42. There is non-restriction of the assertions concerning them (i.e. the assertions made concerning certain sacrificial acts are not permanently connected with those acts), because this is seen (in scripture); for a separate fruit, viz. non-obstruction (of the success of the sacrifice), (belongs to them).
43. As in the case of the offerings, (Vayu and Prana must be held apart). This has been explained (in the Purva Mimamsa-sutra).
44. On account of the majority of indicatory marks (the fire-altars built of mind, etc. do not form elements of any act); for this (i. e. the indicatory mark) is stronger (than the general subject-matter); this also (has been explained in the Pu. Mi. [Purva Mimasa] Sutras).
45. (The agni built of mind, etc.) is a particular form of the preceding one (i.e. the agni built of bricks), on account of the leading subject-matter; it is (part of) the act; as in the case of the manasa cup.
46. And on account of the transfer (of particulars).
47. But (the agnis rather constitute) a vidya, on account of the assertion (made by the text).
48. And because (indicatory marks of that) are seen (in the text).
49. (The view that the agnis constitute an independent vidya) cannot be refuted, owing to the greater force of direct enunciation and so on.
50. On account of the connexion and so on (the agnis built of mind, etc. are independent); in the same way as other cognitions are separate. And there is seen (another case of something having to be withdrawn from the leading subject-matter); this has been explained (in the Purva Mimamsa-sutras).
51. Not also on account of its resembling (the manasa cup) (can the fires constitute parts of an action); for it is observed (on the ground of Sruti, etc., that they are independent); as in the case of death; for the world does not become (a fire) (because it resembles a fire in some points).
52. And from the subsequent (Brahmana) it follows that being of that kind (i.e. injunction of a mere vidya) (is the aim) of the text. The connexion (of the fanciful agnis with the real one) is due to the plurality (of details of the real agni which are imaginatively connected with the vidya).
53. Some (maintain the non-existence) of a (separate) Self, on account of the existence (of the Self) where a body is (only).
54. There is separation (of the Self from the body) because Its existence does not depend on the existence of that (viz. the body), but there is not (non-separation); as in the case of perceptive consciousness.
55. But the (meditations) connected with members (of sacrificial acts are) not (restricted) to (particular) Sakhas, according to the Veda (to which they belong).
56. Or else there is no contradiction (implied in our opinion); as in the case of mantras and the like.
57. There is pre-eminence of the (meditation on) plenitude (i.e. Agni Vaisvanara in his aggregate form), as in the case of sacrifices; for thus scripture shows.
58. (The vidyas are) separate, on account of the difference of words and the like.
59. There is (restriction to) option (between the vidyas), on account of their having non-differing results.
60. But (vidyas) connected with wishes may, according to one's liking, be cumulated or not; on account of the absence of the former reason.
61. With the (meditations on) members (of sacrificial acts) it is as with their abodes.
62. And on account of the teaching.
63. On account of the rectification.
64. And because the text states a quality (of the vidya) to be common (to the three Vedas).
65. (The meditations on members of sacrificial actions are) rather not (to be combined), as the text does not state their going together.
66. And because (scripture) shows it.
1. 1. The purpose of man (is effected) thence (i. e. through the mere knowledge of Brahman), thus Badarayana opines.
2. On account of (the Self) standing in a supplementary relation (to action), (the statements as to the fruits of the knowledge of the Self) are artha-vadas, as in other cases, thus Jaimini opines.
3. On account of scripture showing (certain lines of) conduct.
4. Because scripture directly states that.
5. On account of the taking hold together.
6. And because scripture enjoins (works) for such (only as understand the purport of the Veda).
7. And on account of definite rules.
8. But on account of (scripture teaching) the additional one (i.e. the Lord), (the view) of Badarayana (is valid); as that is seen thus (in scriptural passages).
9. But the declarations (of scripture) are equal (on the other side).
10. (The direct statement is) non-comprehensive.
11. There is distribution (of the work and knowledge) as in the case of the hundred.
12. Of him who has merely read the Veda (there is qualification for works).
13. There being no specification (the rule does) not (specially apply to him who knows).
14. Or else the permission (of works) is for the glorification (of knowledge).
15. Some also by proceeding according to their liking (evince their disregard of anything but knowledge).
16. And (scripture teaches) the destruction (of the qualification for works, by knowledge).
17. And (knowledge belongs) to those who are bound to chastity; for in scripture (that condition of life is mentioned).
18. Jaimini (considers that scriptural passages mentioning those stages of life in which chastity is obligatory, contain) a reference (only to those stages); they are not injunctions; for (other scriptural passages) forbid (those stages).
19. (The other stage of life) is to be accomplished, (according to) Badarayana; on account of the scriptural statement of equality.
20. Or (the passage rather is) an injunction, as in the case of the carrying (of the firewood).
21. If it be said that (texts such as the one about the udgitha are) mere glorification, on account of their reference (to parts of sacrifices); we deny that, on account of the newness (of what they teach, if viewed as injunctions).
22. And on account of the words expressive of becoming.
23. (The stories told in the Upanishads) are for the purpose of the pariplava; we deny this on account of (certain stories only) being specified.
24. This follows also from the connexion (of the stories with the vidyas) in one coherent whole.
25. For this very reason there is no need of the lighting of the fire and so on.
26. And there is need of all (works), on account of the scriptural statement of sacrifices and the like; as in the case of the horse.
27. But all the same he (who is desirous of knowledge) must be possessed of calmness, subjection of the senses, etc., since those (states) are enjoined as auxiliaries to that (viz. knowledge), and must (on that account) necessarily be accomplished.
28. And there is permission of all food, (only) in the case of danger of life; on account of this being shown (by scripture).
29. And on account of the non-sublation.
30. And this is said in Smriti also.
31. And hence also a scriptural passage as to non-proceeding according to liking.
32. The works of the asramas (are incumbent on him) also (who does not desire release); because they are enjoined.
33. And through the cooperativeness (of the works towards the origination of knowledge).
34. In any case the same (duties have to be performed) on account of the twofold indicatory marks.
35. And scripture also declares that (those performing works) are not overpowered (by passion and the like).
36. But also (persons standing) between (are qualified for knowledge); for that is seen (in scripture).
37. This is stated in Smriti also.
38. And the promotion (of knowledge is bestowed on them) through special acts.
39. Better than this is the other (state of belonging to an asrama), on account of the indicatory marks.
40. But of him who has become that (i.e. entered on a higher asrama) there is no becoming not that (i.e. descending to a lower one), according to Jaimini also, on account of restrictive rule, absence of such like (i.e. statements of descent), and nonexistence (of good custom).
41. And not also (can the expiation take place) prescribed in the chapter treating of qualification, because on account of the inference of his lapse from Smriti he (the Naishthika) is not capable of it.
42. But some (consider the sin) a minor one, (and hence claim) the existence (of expiation for the Naishthika also); as in the case of the eating (of unlawful food). This has been explained (in the Purva Mimamsa).
43. But (they are to be kept outside) in either case, on account of Smriti and custom.
44. To the lord (of the sacrifice) only (the agentship in meditations belongs), because scripture declares a fruit; this is the view of Atreya.
45. (They are) the work of the priest, this is the view of Audulomi; since for that (i.e. the entire sacrificial work) he is feed.
46. And on account of scriptural statement.
47. There is the Injunction of something else cooperating (towards knowledge) (which is) a third thing (with regard to balya and panditya), (which injunction is given) for the case (of perfect knowledge not yet having arisen) to him who is such (i. e. the Samnyasin possessing knowledge); as in the case of injunctions and the like.
48. On account of his being all, however, there is winding up with the householder.
49. On account of there being injunction of the others also, in the same way as of the state of a Muni.
50. (The passage enjoining balya means that the ascetic is to live) not manifesting himself; on account of the connexion (thus gained for the passage).
51. In this life also (the origination of knowledge takes place) if there is no obstruction of what is ready at hand; on account of this being seen (in scripture).
52. No such definite rule (exists) as to the fruit which is release, on account of the assertions as to that condition, on account of the assertions as to that condition.
1. Repetition (of the mental functions of knowing, meditating, etc., is required) on account of the text giving instruction more than once.
2. And on account of an indicatory mark.
3. But as the Self (scriptural texts) acknowledge and make us comprehend (the Lord).
4. Not in the symbol (is the Self to be contemplated); for he (the meditating person) (may) not (view symbols as being the Self).
5. A contemplation of Brahman (is to be superinduced on symbols of Brahman), on account of the exaltation (thereby bestowed on the symbols).
6. And the ideas of Aditya and so on (are to be superimposed) on the members (of the sacrificial action); owing to the effectuation (of the result of the sacrifice),
7. Sitting (a man is to meditate), on account of the possibility.
8. And on account of thoughtfulness.
9. And with reference to immobility (scripture ascribes thought to the earth, etc.).
10. And Smriti-passages say the same.
11. Where concentration of mind (is possible), there (meditation may be carried on), on account of there being no difference.
12. Up to death (meditations have to be repeated); for then also it is thus seen in scripture.
13. On, the attainment of this (viz. Brahman) (there take place) the non-clinging and the destruction of later and earlier sins; this being declared (by scripture).
14. Of the other (i.e. good works) also there is, in the same way, non-clinging; but at death.
15. But only those former (works) whose effects have not yet begun (are destroyed by knowledge); because (scripture states) that (i. e. the death of the body) to be the term.
16. But the Agnihotra and the like (tend) towards the same effect; scripture showing this.
17. For (there is) also (a class of good works) other than this, according to some. (There is agreement) of both (teachers) (as to the fate of those works.)
18. For (the text) 'whatever he does with knowledge' (intimates that).
19. But having destroyed by fruition the two other (sets of work) he becomes one with Brahman.
1. Speech (is merged) in mind, on account of this being seen, and of the scriptural statement.
2. And for the same reason all (sense-organs) (follow) after (mind).
3. That mind (is merged) in breath, owing to the subsequent clause.
4. That (viz. breath) (is merged) in the ruler (i. e. the individual soul), on account of the (statements as to the pranas) coming to it and so on.
5. To the elements (the soul, with prana, goes), on account of the subsequent scriptural clause.
6. Not to one (element) (the soul goes); for both (i. e. scripture and Smriti) declare this.
7. And common (to him who knows and him who does not know) (is the departure) up to the beginning of the way; and the immortality (of him who knows) (is relative only) without having burned (nescience and so on).
8. This (aggregate of the elements) (continues to exist) up to the (final absolute) union (with Brahman); on account of the declarations of the samsara state (made by scripture).
9. And (heat is) subtle in measure; as this is thus observed.
10. For this reason (it is) not (destroyed) by the destruction (of the gross body).
11. And to that same (subtle body) that warmth (belongs), on account of the proof (which observation furnishes).
12. Should you say that on account of the denial (made by scripture) (the soul of him who knows Brahman does not depart); we deny this, (because scripture means to say that the pranas do not depart) from the embodied soul.
13. For (in the text) of some (the denial of the soul's departure) is clear.
14. And Smriti also says that.
15. Those (elements, etc.) (are merged) in the highest Brahman; for thus (scripture) says.
16. (There is absolute) non-division (from Brahman, of the parts merged in it); according to scriptural declaration.
17. (There takes place) a lighting up of the point of its (the soul's) abode (viz. the heart); the door (of its egress) being illuminated thereby; owing to the power of knowledge and the application of meditation to the way which is part of that (knowledge); (the soul) favoured by him in the heart (viz. Brahman) (passes upwards) by the one that exceeds a hundred (i. e. by the hundred and first vein).
18. (The soul after having passed forth from the body) follows the rays.
19. (Should it be said that the soul does) not (follow, the rays) by night; (we reply) not so, because the connexion (of veins and rays) exists as long as the body; and (scripture) also declares this.
20. And for the same reason (the departed soul follows the rays) also during the southern progress of the sun.
21. (These details) are recorded by Smriti with reference to the yogins; and both (Sankhya and Yoga) are Smriti (only).
1. On the road beginning with light (the departed soul proceeds), on account of that being widely known.
2. From the year to Vayu; on account of the absence and presence of specification.
3. Beyond lightning (there is) Varuna, on account of the connexion (of the two).
4. (They are) conductors, this being indicated.
5. (There are personal conductors) because that is established on the ground of both (i. e. road and travellers) being bewildered (i. e. unconscious).
6. From thence (the souls are led) by him only who belongs to the lightning; the sacred text stating that.
7. To the effected (Brahman) (the souls are led); (thus opines) Bádari; because going to him is possible.
8. And on account of (the Brahman to which the souls are led) being qualified (in another passage).
9. But on account of its proximity (to the higher Brahman) there is designation (of the lower Brahman) as that.
10. On the passing away of the effected (world of Brahman) (the souls go) together with the ruler of that (world) to what is higher than that; on account of scriptural declaration.
11. And on account of Smriti.
12. To the highest (Brahman) (the souls are led); Jaimini (opines); owing to this being the principal sense (of the word 'Brahman').
13. And because scripture declares that.
14. And the intention of entering (can) not (be referred) to the effected (Brahman).
15. Those who do not take their stand on symbols he leads, thus Bádaráyana (opines); there being no fault in the twofold relation (resulting from this opinion); and the meditation on that (i. e. Brahman) (is the reason of this twofold relation).
16. And scripture declares a difference (in the case of meditations on symbols).
1. (On the soul's) having entered (into the highest light), there is manifestation (of its own nature); (as we infer) from the word 'own.'
2. (The Self whose true nature has manifested itself is) released; according to the promise (made by scripture).
3. (The light into which the soul enters is) the Self; owing to the subject-matter of the chapter.
4. (The released soul abides) in non-division (from the highest Self); because that is seen from scripture.
5. By (a nature) like that of Brahman (the soul manifests itself); (thus) Jaimini (opines); on account of reference and the rest.
6. By the sole nature of intelligence (the soul manifests itself), as that is its Self; thus Audulomi (opines).
7. Thus also, on account of the existence of the former (qualities), (admitted) owing to reference and so on, there is absence of contradiction, (as) Badaranayana (thinks).
8. But by mere will (the released effect their purposes); because scripture states that.
9. And for this very same reason (the released soul is) without another lord.
10. The absence (of a body and sense-organs, on the part of the released) Bádari (asserts); for thus scripture says.
11. The presence (of a body and senses) Jaimini (asserts); because the text records option (of the released person multiplying himself).
12. For this reason Badarayana (opines that the released person is) of both kinds; as in the case of the twelve days' sacrifice.
13. When there is no body, (the process) may take place as in the dreaming state.
14. When there is (a body), (it may be) as in the waking state.
15. The entering (of one soul into several bodies) is like (the multiplication of) the flame of a lamp; for thus scripture declares.
16. (What scripture says about absence of all specific cognition) refers either to deep sleep or union (release); for this is manifested (by the texts).
17. With the exception of world-business (the released possess all lordly power), (the Lord) being the topic (where world-business is referred to), and (the souls) not being near (to such business).
18. (Should it be said that the souls must possess unlimited power) on account of manifest teaching; we reply No, because scripture states him who, entrusted with office, abides in the spheres (of the sun and so on), (to be that one on whom the soul's obtaining lordly power depends).
19. And (there is also a form of the highest Lord) not abiding in effected things; for thus scripture declares his abiding.
20. And thus perception and inference show.
21. And on account of the indications of equality of enjoyment only.
22. (Of them) there is non-return, according to scripture; non-return, according to scripture.
English translations and commentaries:
Bose, Roma, tr. Vedanta-Parijata-Saurabha of Nimbarka and Vedanta-Kaustubha of Srinivasa. Calcutta: Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1940. 〰⊱〰 Nimbarka's commentary on the Brahma-Sutras and that of his immediate disciple Srinavasa are the chief works of the school of philosophy associated with the name of Nimbarka. I wouldn't be without it.
Gambhirananda, Swami. Brahma Sutras. Mayavati, Uttarakhand: Advaita Ashrama, 1965. 〰⊱〰 A favourite translation to some, and also myself since the 1970s. The book includes word for word meaning of each aphorism under its Sanskrit text, followed by a running translation, with additional words in brackets for clarification.
Sivananda, Swami, tr. Brahma Sutras: Text, Word-To-Word Meaning, Tra[n]slation and Commentary. 4th ed. Shivanandanagar, Uttarakhand: The Divine Life Society, 2008. 〰⊱〰 Each sutra contains a word-by-word and a running translation as well as a succinct commentary.
Thibaut, George, tr. Vedanta-Sutras with the Commentary by Sankaracharya. Part 1. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1896. 〰⊱〰 A pioneering work in its time. A fine thing about Thibaut's translation is that he too shows clearly (by round brackets) what is translated and what is interpolated into the aphorisms to make sense of at least some of them.
Thibaut, George, tr. Vedanta-Sutras with the Commentary by Sankaracharya. Part 2. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1896. 〰⊱〰 This said, the reading is demanding, since the Sanskrit text is terse and difficult.
USER'S GUIDE: [Link]|
© 2015–2016, Tormod Kinnes, MPhil. [Email] ᴥ Disclaimer: [Link]