Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 1.2
कालः स्वभावो नियतिर्यदृच्छा भूतानि योनिः पुरुष इति चिन्त्यम् |
kālaḥ sva-bhāvo, niyatir yadṛcchā; bhūtāni yoniḥ, puruṣa iti cintyam | Analysis ▾ Analysis ▴
|
kālaḥ
|
time | |
|
sva
|
own, inherent | |
|
bhāvaḥ
|
nature, being, state | |
|
niyatiḥ
|
necessity, fixed order | |
|
yadṛcchā
|
chance | |
|
bhūtāni
|
elements, beings that have arisen | |
|
yoniḥ
|
source, origin | |
|
puruṣaḥ
|
Puruṣa, person, spirit | |
|
iti
|
thus, as | |
|
cintyam
|
to be considered, conceivable |
संयोग एषां न तु आत्मभावादात्मा ह्यनीशः सुखदुःखहेतोः ||2||
saṃyoga eṣāṃ, na tu* ātma-bhāvād; ātmā hy anīśaḥ, sukha-duḥkha-hetoḥ ||2|| Analysis ▾ Analysis ▴
|
saṃyogaḥ
|
conjunction, union | |
|
eṣām
|
of these | |
|
na
|
not | |
|
tu
|
but, however | |
|
ātma
|
of the Self | |
|
bhāvāt
|
because of existence, nature | |
|
ātmā
|
the Self | |
|
hi
|
for, indeed | |
|
anīśaḥ
|
powerless, not the lord | |
|
sukha
|
pleasure, happiness | |
|
duḥkha
|
pain, suffering | |
|
hetoḥ
|
because of the cause, for the reason |
Metre: Pāda 1: Triṣṭubh with Vajrā ending; Pāda 2: Triṣṭubh — 12 syllables; irregular cadence; Pāda 3: Triṣṭubh with Vajrā ending; Pāda 4: Triṣṭubh with Vajrā ending
Time (kālaḥ | nom sg), inherent nature (svabhāvaḥ | nom sg), necessity (niyatiḥ | nom sg), chance (yadṛcchā | nom sg), the elements (bhūtāni | nom pl), the source (yoniḥ | nom sg), or Puruṣa (puruṣa | nom sg)—so (iti) it is to be considered (cintyam | nom sg n pfp). It is not (na) the conjunction (saṃyogaḥ | nom sg) of these (eṣām | gen pl n), however (tu), because of the existence of the self (ātmabhāvād | abl sg); for (hi) the self (ātmā | nom sg) is not lord (anīśaḥ | nom sg m) of the cause of pleasure and pain (sukhaduḥkhahetoḥ | gen sg).
Should time, inherent nature, necessity, chance, the elements, the source or Puruṣa be regarded as the cause? Their mere combination is not sufficient either, because a self is present. Yet the self cannot be the ultimate cause, for it is not sovereign over pleasure and pain.
The Bhāṣya attributed to Śaṅkara defines time, inherent nature and the other candidates for causation, but rejects both each one separately and their conjunction. What is composite serves another's purpose and is not sovereign. The Jīva, too, depends on merit, demerit, pleasure and pain and therefore cannot be the cause of the world.
Śaṅkarānanda treats the series as competing causal hypotheses. Their conjunction is partly impossible and, in any event, remains unconscious; the Jīva as experiencer of pleasure and pain is also not sovereign. The explanation therefore requires an independent, conscious ground.
Nārāyaṇa explains the terms from time through Puruṣa one by one. The material entities and their conjunction are insufficient because they are unconscious and dependent upon the experiencing self. That self is in turn excluded because it does not control pleasure and pain.
Vijñānabhagavat assigns the positions to historical schools of thought: proponents of time, Lokāyatas, Mīmāṃsakas, atheists, eternalists, doctrines of Prakṛti and Śakti, and Yoga. They all remain dependent upon the self as objects; the Jīva, dependent on karma and suffering, is likewise not sovereign.
puruṣa iti LV1958 ] puruṣeti conj. LV1958
cintyam LV1958 ] cintyā ASS1927; cintyāḥ LV1958-app
ātmā hy anīśaḥ LV1958 ] ātmāpy anīśaḥ ASS1927
tu* ātmabhāvād conj. ed. ] tv ātmabhāvād LV1958
cintyam LV1958 ] cintyā ASS1927; cintyāḥ LV1958-app
ātmā hy anīśaḥ LV1958 ] ātmāpy anīśaḥ ASS1927
tu* ātmabhāvād conj. ed. ] tv ātmabhāvād LV1958
Sind Zeit, Natur, Notwendigkeit, der Zufall, Grundstoffe, Geist, ist die Verbindung dieser Als Urgrund denkbar? Doch nicht! — Denn ein Selbst ist! Doch auch das Selbst schafft frei nicht Lust und Unlust!<1>
<1: Alle aufgezählten Prinzipien können nicht für sich allein, sondern nur als Bestimmungen an einem Selbste (ātman) gedacht werden, welches daher unter allen Umständen der Urgrund ist. Aber das empirische Selbst kann dieser Urgrund nicht sein, da es nicht Herr ist, Lust und Schmerz zu schaffen, sondern ihnen unterworfen ist.>
<1: Alle aufgezählten Prinzipien können nicht für sich allein, sondern nur als Bestimmungen an einem Selbste (ātman) gedacht werden, welches daher unter allen Umständen der Urgrund ist. Aber das empirische Selbst kann dieser Urgrund nicht sein, da es nicht Herr ist, Lust und Schmerz zu schaffen, sondern ihnen unterworfen ist.>
Time (kāla), or inherent nature (sva-bhāva), or necessity (niyati), or chance (yadṛcchā), Or the elements (bhūta), or a [female] womb (yoni), or a [male] person (puruṣa) are to be considered [as the cause]; Not a combination of these, because of the existence of the soul (ātman). The soul certainly is impotent over the cause of pleasure and pain.
It should be considered whether Time, Nature, Law, Chance, the Elements, or the Soul can be the cause (of the Universe). (None of these can be the cause) nor can their combination be the cause; owing to the existence of the soul; the soul also is incapable (of being the cause), on account of its being subject to happiness and pain.
Sind Zeit, Natur, Notwendigkeit, der Zufall, Grundstoffe, Geist, ist die Verbindung dieser Als Urgrund denkbar? Doch nicht! — Denn ein Selbst ist! Doch auch das Selbst schafft frei nicht Lust und Unlust!<1>
<1: Alle aufgezählten Principien können nicht für sich allein, sondern nur als Bestimmungen an einem Selbste (ātman) gedacht werden, welches daher unter allen Umständen der Urgrund ist. Aber das empirische Selbst kann dieser Urgrund nicht sein, da es nicht Herr ist, Lust und Schmerz zu schaffen, sondern ihnen unterworfen ist.>
<1: Alle aufgezählten Principien können nicht für sich allein, sondern nur als Bestimmungen an einem Selbste (ātman) gedacht werden, welches daher unter allen Umständen der Urgrund ist. Aber das empirische Selbst kann dieser Urgrund nicht sein, da es nicht Herr ist, Lust und Schmerz zu schaffen, sondern ihnen unterworfen ist.>
Should time, or nature,<1> or necessity, or chance, or the elements be considered as the cause, or he who is called the person (puruṣa, vijñānātmā)? It cannot be their union either, because that is not self-dependent,<2> and the self also is powerless, because there is (independent of him) a cause of good and evil.<3>
<1: Svabhāva, their own nature or independent character.>
<2: Union presupposes a uniter.>
<3: Ātmā is explained by Saṅkara as the gīvaḥ, the living self, and as that living self is in his present state determined by karman, work belonging to a former existence, it cannot be thought of as an independent cause.>
<1: Svabhāva, their own nature or independent character.>
<2: Union presupposes a uniter.>
<3: Ātmā is explained by Saṅkara as the gīvaḥ, the living self, and as that living self is in his present state determined by karman, work belonging to a former existence, it cannot be thought of as an independent cause.>
Is time Bramha (as cause) or the own nature of things, or the necessary consequences of work, or accident, or the elements, or nature (Yoni)<1> or the soul? This must be considered.—It is not the union of them,<2> because the soul remains; the soul (the individual soul) also is not powerful (to be the author of the creation) since there is (independent of it) a cause of happiness and unhappiness (viz. work).<3>
<1: Śankara, who is well aware of the above explanation, yet in preference to it, adopts another, which tallies better with Vedāntic doctrines, viz. he connects Yoni (which means either origin,—or cause) with all the members of the above series, so that the sense would be:—Is time the cause, or the own nature of the things, or the necessary consequences from work, or accident, or the elements, or the soul? If his view were correct, Yoni would probably not have been placed between two of the members of the series, and the explanation followed in our translation agrees also better with the doctrine of the Sānkhya which, within the limits set forth in the introduction, prevails throughout this Upanishad.>
<2: Here is, according to Śankara, an omission in the argument which he thus supplies:—If the mentioned things are the cause, they are so either individually or collectively, but not individually, because this would be at variance with our perception.>
<3: Hereby, then, all the above suppositions are denied. Bramha is neither cause, nor non-cause, nor both, that is to say, not by his own nature. How then can he be a cause? The answer is given in the next verse.—Ś.>
<1: Śankara, who is well aware of the above explanation, yet in preference to it, adopts another, which tallies better with Vedāntic doctrines, viz. he connects Yoni (which means either origin,—or cause) with all the members of the above series, so that the sense would be:—Is time the cause, or the own nature of the things, or the necessary consequences from work, or accident, or the elements, or the soul? If his view were correct, Yoni would probably not have been placed between two of the members of the series, and the explanation followed in our translation agrees also better with the doctrine of the Sānkhya which, within the limits set forth in the introduction, prevails throughout this Upanishad.>
<2: Here is, according to Śankara, an omission in the argument which he thus supplies:—If the mentioned things are the cause, they are so either individually or collectively, but not individually, because this would be at variance with our perception.>
<3: Hereby, then, all the above suppositions are denied. Bramha is neither cause, nor non-cause, nor both, that is to say, not by his own nature. How then can he be a cause? The answer is given in the next verse.—Ś.>
Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 1.3
ते ध्यानयोगानुगता अपश्यन्देवात्मशक्तिं स्वगुणैर्निगूढाम् |
te dhyāna-yogā,nugatā apaśyan; devātma-śaktiṃ, sva-guṇair nigūḍhām | Analysis ▾ Analysis ▴
यः कारणानि निखिलानि तानि कालात्मयुक्तान्यधितिष्ठत्येकः ||3||
yaḥ kāraṇāni, nikhilāni tāni; kālātma-yuktāny, adhitiṣṭhaty ekaḥ ||3|| Analysis ▾ Analysis ▴
Metre: Triṣṭubh with Vajrā ending
They (te | nom pl m), devoted to the yoga of meditation (dhyānayogānugatā | nom pl m ppp), saw (apaśyan | 3p pl act pret) the divine power of the Self (devātmaśaktiṃ | acc sg), hidden (nigūḍhām | acc sg f ppp) by its own qualities (svaguṇaiḥ | ins pl). He (yaḥ | nom sg m) who rules (adhitiṣṭhati | 3p sg act pres) all (nikhilāni | acc pl n) those (tāni | acc pl n) causes (kāraṇāni | acc pl) that are connected with time and the self (kālātmayuktāny | acc pl n ppp) is the One (ekaḥ | nom sg m).
In deep meditation the sages recognised the divine power of the Self, hidden by its own qualities. This one divine power rules every cause associated with time and the self.
The Bhāṣya attributed to Śaṅkara understands the divine power of the Self as the dependent Māyā of the one Paramātman. Not Brahman in itself but this power mediates material and efficient causality. Alternatively, the commentary connects it with the guṇas and with Brahmā's, Viṣṇu's and Śiva's functions of creation, preservation and dissolution.
Śaṅkarānanda has meditation lead beyond the limits of mere debate. Avidyā or Māyā is the divine power of the Self, hidden by Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. Only through this power does the one ground appear in manifold forms and control every cause.
Nārāyaṇa equates the power of the Self with the power of the Paramātman. Avidyā and the three guṇas hide it from the Jīva without making it independent. The one Lord remains the guide of all the causes previously considered.
Vijñānabhagavat defines Māyā as the cause of the world's transformation, dependent upon unchanging consciousness. The guṇas and the functions of creation, preservation and dissolution conceal it. The one Paramātman sustains Māyā and every cause as being, consciousness and joy.
adhitiṣṭhaty ekaḥ LV1958, ASS1927 ] adhitiṣṭhat ekaḥ TO1995
Nachdenken und Hingebung (yoga) übend, sah’n sie Gottes Selbstkraft, verhüllt in eignen Guna’s<2>; Er ist’s, der allen den genannten Gründen, Nebst Zeit und Seele, vorsteht als der Eine.
<2: Die individuelle Seele besteht nicht aus dem Purusha und der von ihm unabhängigen Prakriti (Çakti) nebst deren Guna’s (Sattvam, Rajas, Tamas), sondern es ist Gottes eigene Kraft (ātma-çakti), welche, in ihre eigenen Qualitäten (sva-guṇaiḥ) verhüllt, als Seele erscheint. — Schärfer kann der Gegensatz gegen die Sāṅkhyalehre wohl nicht ausgesprochen werden.>
<2: Die individuelle Seele besteht nicht aus dem Purusha und der von ihm unabhängigen Prakriti (Çakti) nebst deren Guna’s (Sattvam, Rajas, Tamas), sondern es ist Gottes eigene Kraft (ātma-çakti), welche, in ihre eigenen Qualitäten (sva-guṇaiḥ) verhüllt, als Seele erscheint. — Schärfer kann der Gegensatz gegen die Sāṅkhyalehre wohl nicht ausgesprochen werden.>
Those who have followed after meditation (dhyāna) and abstraction (yoga) Saw the self-power (ātma-śakti) of God (deva) hidden in his own qualities (guṇa). He is the One who rules over all these causes, From ‘time’ to ‘the soul.’
Resorting to yoga in the form of mental concentration, they beheld, extremely hidden by its own attributes (or effects), the power of the self-luminous soul, who, alone, governs all those causes including time and the individual soul.
Nachdenken und Hingebung (yoga) übend, sah’n sie Gottes Selbstkraft, verhüllt in eignen Guna’s<2>; Er ist’s, der allen den genannten Gründen, Nebst Zeit und Seele, vorsteht als der Eine.
<2: Die individuelle Seele besteht nicht aus dem Purusha und der von ihm unabhängigen Prakriti (Çakti) nebst deren Guna’s (Sattvam, Rajas, Tamas), sondern es ist Gottes eigene Kraft (ātma-çakti), welche, in ihre eigenen Qualitäten (sva-guṇaiḥ) verhüllt, als Seele erscheint. — Schärfer kann der Gegensatz gegen die Sāṅkhyalehre wohl nicht ausgesprochen werden.>
<2: Die individuelle Seele besteht nicht aus dem Purusha und der von ihm unabhängigen Prakriti (Çakti) nebst deren Guna’s (Sattvam, Rajas, Tamas), sondern es ist Gottes eigene Kraft (ātma-çakti), welche, in ihre eigenen Qualitäten (sva-guṇaiḥ) verhüllt, als Seele erscheint. — Schärfer kann der Gegensatz gegen die Sāṅkhyalehre wohl nicht ausgesprochen werden.>
The sages, devoted to meditation and concentration, have seen the power belonging to God himself,<1> hidden in its own qualities (guṇa). He, being one, superintends all those causes, time, self, and the rest.<2>
<1: Devātmaśakti is a very important term, differently explained by the commentators, but meaning a power belonging to the Deva, the Īśvara, the Lord, not independent of him, as the Sāṅkhyas represent Prakriti or nature. Herein lies the important distinction between Vedānta and Sāṅkhya.>
<2: Kālātmyābhyāṁ yuktāni, kālapuruṣasaṁyuktāni svabhāvādīni. Ātman is here taken as synonymous with puruṣa in verse 2.>
<1: Devātmaśakti is a very important term, differently explained by the commentators, but meaning a power belonging to the Deva, the Īśvara, the Lord, not independent of him, as the Sāṅkhyas represent Prakriti or nature. Herein lies the important distinction between Vedānta and Sāṅkhya.>
<2: Kālātmyābhyāṁ yuktāni, kālapuruṣasaṁyuktāni svabhāvādīni. Ātman is here taken as synonymous with puruṣa in verse 2.>
They who followed abstract meditation (Dhyāna) and concentration (Yoga) beheld (as the cause of the creation) the power (Śakti) of the divine soul,<1> concealed by its own qualities, of the divine soul, which alone superintends all those causes, of which time was the first, and soul (the individual soul) the last.<2>
<1: For devātmaśaktiṁ svaguṇairnigūḍhāṁ Śankara offers several explanations.—1. Devātmaśakti (deva-ātmaśakti) is either the own power of god, that is to say, a power which is dependent upon god. Here is the power (Śakti) the Māyā, delusion, or nature as the root of all things (Prakriti, natura naturans), and its qualities are goodness (Sattva), activity (rajas), and darkness (tamas);—or 2. Devātmaśakti (devātmani avasthitāṁ śaktim) is the power, which is constituted in the likeness with god. Here are the “own qualities” (svaguṇāḥ) to be referred to god (Deva), as his omnipotence, omniscience, &c.; or 3. the power is of the same nature with god (deva), and his likeness with Bramha, Vishnu, and Śiva, is the cause of the creation, preservation, and destruction of the world. The “own qualities” (svaguṇāḥ) denote, according to this view, the three supreme deities, viz. goodness represents Bramha, activity Vishnu, and darkness Śiva, by which, however, the supreme god is concealed, not adequately expressed; or 4. devātmaśakti (deva, ātma, śakti) means the supreme ruler, the individual soul, and nature, which represent the power of god, and the “own qualities” (svaguṇāḥ), are the different allegations of a nature, &c., by which Bramha is concealed; or 5. devātmaśakti (devātma śakti) is the power, the omnipotence of god, his overruling of the creation, preservation, and destruction of the world, which is concealed by his special qualities.>
<2: Viz. the causes, named in verse 2.>
<1: For devātmaśaktiṁ svaguṇairnigūḍhāṁ Śankara offers several explanations.—1. Devātmaśakti (deva-ātmaśakti) is either the own power of god, that is to say, a power which is dependent upon god. Here is the power (Śakti) the Māyā, delusion, or nature as the root of all things (Prakriti, natura naturans), and its qualities are goodness (Sattva), activity (rajas), and darkness (tamas);—or 2. Devātmaśakti (devātmani avasthitāṁ śaktim) is the power, which is constituted in the likeness with god. Here are the “own qualities” (svaguṇāḥ) to be referred to god (Deva), as his omnipotence, omniscience, &c.; or 3. the power is of the same nature with god (deva), and his likeness with Bramha, Vishnu, and Śiva, is the cause of the creation, preservation, and destruction of the world. The “own qualities” (svaguṇāḥ) denote, according to this view, the three supreme deities, viz. goodness represents Bramha, activity Vishnu, and darkness Śiva, by which, however, the supreme god is concealed, not adequately expressed; or 4. devātmaśakti (deva, ātma, śakti) means the supreme ruler, the individual soul, and nature, which represent the power of god, and the “own qualities” (svaguṇāḥ), are the different allegations of a nature, &c., by which Bramha is concealed; or 5. devātmaśakti (devātma śakti) is the power, the omnipotence of god, his overruling of the creation, preservation, and destruction of the world, which is concealed by his special qualities.>
<2: Viz. the causes, named in verse 2.>
Continue with AYI Free
Illustrations: AI-generated.
Please log in to write a message. Go to login