yadātamas, tan na divā na rātrir; na san na cāsac, chiva eva kevalaḥ | Analysis ▾ Analysis ▴
tad akṣaraṃ, tat savitur vareṇyaṃ; prajñā ca tasmāt, prasṛtā purāṇī ||18|| Analysis ▾ Analysis ▴
The Bhāṣya attributed to Śaṅkara relates the verse to dualism cancelled by knowledge. Where Avidyā and its effects have been burnt, neither day and night nor being and non-being remain as opposites; what remains is not emptiness but Śiva as pure, undifferentiated reality.
Śaṅkarānanda explains darkness as Avidyā with concealing and projecting power. After it is removed, the self-luminous Self of joy remains without a division between knower and known. Alternatively, the verse describes a realm beyond day, night, cause and effect; ancient knowledge proceeds from this Śiva.
Nārāyaṇa reads the removal of darkness as the cancellation of all pairs of opposites: day and night, cause and effect, being and non-being. Only immutable Śiva remains; even the ancient knowledge originating in scripture proceeds from him.
Vijñānabhagavat offers both an epistemological and a cosmological reading. In knowledge, the opposites sustained by Avidyā disappear; in dissolution, the world exists only as undifferentiated Prakṛti. In both cases Śiva remains non-dual, and the ancient transmission of knowledge or the Veda comes from him.
<1: Vgl. Chānd. 3,11,3. 8,4,1–2 (oben S. 105. 192).>
<2: Vgl. Bṛh. 2,4,10 und Śvet. 6,18.>
<1: tamas, perhaps metaphorically as well as literally. That is: when the darkness of ignorance and illusion has been removed, then all fluctuations and distinctions are also overpassed. Undifferenced bliss only remains. Compare the similar descriptions at Chānd. 3. 11. 3 and 8. 4. 1–2.>
<2: The first phrase of the famous Gāyatrī Prayer, RV. 3. 62. 10.>
<1: Vgl. Chānd. 3,11,3. 8,4,1–2 (oben S. 105. 192).>
<2: Vgl. Bṛh. 2,4,10 und Śvet. 6,18.>
<1: Atamas, no darkness, i. e. light of knowledge.>
<2: See on the difficulty of translating sat and asat, τὸ ὄν and τὸ μὴ ὄν, the remarks in the Preface.>
<3: Referring to the Gāyatrī, Rig-veda III, 62, 10; see also Śvet. Up. V, 4.>
The Bhāṣya attributed to Śaṅkara derives the Lord's incomprehensibility in every direction from his limitlessness and absence of parts. Because no second being possesses the same limitless joy, he has no likeness; his glory is limited by neither space nor time.
Śaṅkarānanda denies any spatial findability or comparability of the Self. No one grasps it above, across or in the middle; “great glory” can denote its universally known splendour or even an expression that names it.
Nārāyaṇa explains that the ten directions proceed from the Lord and therefore cannot encompass him. No person has grasped him anywhere; here “Pratimā” expressly means a comparable counterpart.
Vijñānabhagavat grounds directionlessness in eternity, non-duality and the absence of parts. The Lord cannot be captured above, across or in a middle. Since there is no second being of equal joy, no comparison exists; his name is glory unlimited by space and time.
<1: = Vāj. Saṃh. 32,2–3 (Gesch. d. Phil. I, 292).>
<1: This stanza = VS. 32. 2 c, d + 32. 3 a, b; TA. 10. 1. 2; Mahānār. 1. 10.>
<1: = Vāj. Saṃh. 32,2–3 (Gesch. d. Phil. I, 292).>
<1: See Muir, Metrical Translations, p. 198; Maitr. Up. VI, 17.>
hṛdā hṛdi-sthaṃ, manasā ya enam; evaṃ vidur, amṛtās te bhavanti ||20|| Analysis ▾ Analysis ▴
The Bhāṣya attributed to Śaṅkara distinguishes sensory perception from knowledge of the Self. No eye or other organ can make formless, self-luminous consciousness its object. In the heart it is directly known through purified Buddhi as one's own Brahman-Self; further embodiment thereby ends.
Śaṅkarānanda compares the revelation in the pure inner organ with the sun in water or space in a vessel. Although the Self shines by itself, it is known in a completely clear mental activity conformed to the Self; this is what the knowledge of the knowers of Brahman means.
Vijñānabhagavat stresses the non-objectifiability of the Lord: as qualityless consciousness he is nowhere available to the senses. Negative instruction and purified Buddhi know him in the inner awareness of “I” as one's own Self; no mortal bodily bondage then returns.
<1: = Kāṭh. 6,9. Mahānār. 1,11 (verändert); vgl. oben zu 3,13.>
<1: This stanza = Kaṭha 6. 9 and Mahānār. 1. 11 with slight variation.>
<1: = Kāṭh. 6,9. Mahānār. 1,11 (verändert); vgl. oben zu 3,13.>
<1: B. reads hṛdā manīṣā manasābhikḷpto, yat tad vidur; A. hṛdi hṛdistham manasāya enam evaṃ vidur.>
The Bhāṣya attributed to Śaṅkara has the seeker frightened by perishable Saṃsāra take refuge in the unborn Lord. Rudra's right or southern, encouraging and joyful form is to protect the seeker at all times; this remains the interpretation of the transmitted Bhāṣya.
Śaṅkarānanda connects the right face with the gateway of hearing located on the right side of the heart. It is to turn towards hearing Vedānta and protect the seeker so that the seeker is never separated from the liberating instruction.
Nārāyaṇa understands the right face as Rudra's side skilled in instruction. The Jīva seized by fear of birth takes refuge in it and asks to be permanently protected and liberated through this teaching presence.
Vijñānabhagavat interprets Rudra's undivided face capable of liberation as the side beyond limited forms. The prepared seeker flees to it from birth, death and delusion; protection means that knowledge of unity arises, burns the root of Saṃsāra and keeps the seeker's own joy manifest.
<1: Dakshiṇa is explained either as invigorating, exhilarating, or turned towards the south.>
<1: “Dakshina,” according to Śankara, means either “auspicious,” or “southern” (right), that is, which is turned to the south.>
mā nas toke, tanaye mā na āyuṣi; mā no goṣu, mā no aśveṣu rīriṣaḥ | Analysis ▾ Analysis ▴
|
mā
|
do not | |
|
naḥ
|
us | |
|
toke
|
in respect of our child | |
|
tanaye
|
in respect of our descendant | |
|
mā
|
do not | |
|
naḥ
|
us | |
|
āyuṣi
|
in respect of life | |
|
mā
|
do not | |
|
naḥ
|
us | |
|
goṣu
|
in respect of cattle | |
|
mā
|
do not | |
|
naḥ
|
us | |
|
aśveṣu
|
in respect of horses | |
|
rīriṣaḥ
|
do not seek to injure |
vīrān mā no, rudra bhāmito vadhīr; haviṣmantaḥ, sadam it tvā havāmahe ||22|| Analysis ▾ Analysis ▴
The Bhāṣya attributed to Śaṅkara extends the prayer for protection to children, grandchildren, lifespan, cattle, horses, bodies and valiant relatives. Even if Rudra is angered, may he spare them; those offering sacrifice continually call upon him for protection.
Śaṅkarānanda calls the verse a path of grace for householders. Rudra is to preserve descendants, an unharmed long life, livestock and vigorous helpers. The sacrificers possess domestic and wild plants, milk and other gifts, and perform Homa for him.
Nārāyaṇa explains the plea to spare relatives through Rudra's grace: one favoured by him need not fight destructive powers personally. The worshippers call him with oblations into the sacrificial hall so that he accepts his share and protects them.
Vijñānabhagavat reads preservation in two ways. Seekers of knowledge ask protection for pupils, grandchildren, vital powers, Vedas and senses until knowledge becomes possible; the worldly ask for family, life, livestock and helpers. In both cases, continuous sacrifice means calling Rudra for protection.
<1: = Ṛgv. 1,114,8. Taitt. Saṃh. 4,5,10,3. Vāj. Saṃh. 16,16 (mit Varianten).>
<1: This stanza = RV. 1. 114. 8; TS. 4. 5. 10. 3; and VS. 16. 16 with variations.>
<1: = Ṛgv. 1,114,8. Taitt. Saṃh. 4,5,10,3. Vāj. Saṃh. 16,16 (mit Varianten).>
<1: See Colebrooke, Miscellaneous Essays, I, p. 141; Rig-veda I, 114, 8; Taitt. Saṃh. IV, 5, 10, 3; Vāg. Saṃh. XVI, 16. The various readings are curious. Āyuṣi in the Śvet. Up., instead of āyau in the Rig-veda, is supported by the Taitt. Saṃh. and the Vāg. Saṃh.; but Vijñānātman reads āyau. As to bhāmito, it seems the right reading, being supported by the Rig-veda, the Taitt. Saṃh., and the Śvet. Up., while bhāvito in Roer’s edition is a misprint. The Vāg. Saṃh. alone reads bhāmino, which Mahīdhara refers to vīrān. The last verse in the Rig-veda and Vāg. Saṃh. is haviṣmantaḥ sadam it tvā havāmahe; in the Taitt. Saṃh. haviṣmanto namasā vidhema te. In the Śvet. Up. haviṣmantaḥ sadasi tvā havāmahe, as printed by Roer, seems to rest on Śaṅkara’s authority only. The other commentators, Śaṅkarānanda and Vijñānātman, read and interpret sadam it.>
<1: This verse, according to Weber, occurs in the Vāj. Sanh. xvi, 16., in the Taitt. S. v, 10, 11, and in the Rig. V. S. i, 114–18.>
Continue with AYI Free
Illustrations: AI-generated.
Please log in to write a message. Go to login
No messages yet.