639. Picking solitary grains from the crevices in the fields after the crops have been gathered and taken away.
640. He gave me the merit he won by giving away one cow. I wish to give him in return the merit I have won by giving away two cows.
641. Verses 107 and 108 are rather obscure. What the king says in 107 seems to be that you two have referred your dispute to me who am a king. I cannot shirk my duty, but am bound to judge fairly between you. I should see that kingly duties should not, so far as I am concerned, become futile. In 108 he says, being a king I should discharge the duties of a king, i.e., I should judge disputes, and give, if need be, but never take. Unfortunately, the situation is such that I am obliged to act as a Brahmana by taking what this particular Brahmana is desirous of offering.
642. This verse also seems to be very obscure. The king's natural inclination, it seems, prompts him to oblige the Brahmana by accepting his gift. The ordinances about kingly duties restrain him. Hence his condemnation of those duties. In the second line, he seems to say that he is morally bound to accept the gift, and intends to make a gift of his own merits in return. The result of this act, he thinks, will be to make both courses of duty (viz., the Kshatriya, and the Brahmana's) produce the same kind of rewards in the next world.
643. This is not Emancipation, but merely terminable felicity.
644. Attains to Emancipation or Absorption into the essence of Brahma.
645. These are Direct knowledge (through the senses), Revelation, Inference, and Intuition.
646. The first six are Hunger, Thirst, Grief, Delusion, Disease, and Death. The other sixteen are the five breaths, the ten senses, and the mind.
647. I think, K.P. Singha misunderstands this verse. Three different ends are spoken of. One is absorption into Brahma; the other's enjoyment of ordinary felicity, which, of course, is terminable, and the last is the enjoyment of that felicity which is due to a freedom from desire and attachments; 126 speaks of this last kind of felicity.
648. In the second line saraddham is not an indeclinable; or, if it be taken as such, the sense may still remain unaltered. What the monarch does is to call upon the Brahmana to share with the monarch the rewards that the monarch had won.
649. The sense seems to be that yogins attain to Brahma even here; whereas Reciters attain to him after death.
650. The fact is, I do not know anything of Him, but still I profess to worship him. This is false behaviour. How shall I be rescued from such falsehood? This is what Vrihaspati says.
651. The Chhandas are the rules of Prosody as applicable to the Vedic hymns. Jyotish is astronomy. It forms an Anga of the Vedas. Nirukta furnishes rules for interpreting obscure passages of the Vedas, and also gives the meanings of technical or obscure words used therein. Kalpa is the description of religious rites. Siksha is the science of pronunciation as applied to Vedic hymns and mantras.
652. They who believe that happiness is not eternal and that, therefore, they should not pursue it, withdraw themselves from pious acts which lead to that happiness. They seek Knowledge as the best means for avoiding all that is transitory and changeful. They seek moksha or complete Emancipation which has been described in the previous sections.
653. The meaning of 'hell' as applied in such passages has been explained before.
654. This is a highly aphoristic line. I give the sense by expanding the words. By 'acts' here is meant 'sacrifices and other religious observances.' The intention of Vrihaspati is to enforce the propriety of acts, for without acts, the ends of life cannot, he maintains, be secured.
655. The sense is that one should devote oneself to acts as a sort of preparation. Afterwards one should abandon them for obtaining the higher end. Acts, therefore, have their use, and help one, though mediately, in the acquisition of Brahma.
656. The mind and acts have created all things. This has been explained in the last verse of section 190 ante. Both are good paths, for by both, good end may be attained, viz., the highest, by drilling the mind, as also (mediately) by acts (as explained in verse 14 above). The fruits of actions must be mentally abandoned if the highest end is to be attained; i.e., acts may be gone through, but their fruits should never be coveted.
657. Nilakantha explains the grammar of the first line differently. His view is yatha chakshurupah praneta nayako, etc. A better construction would be yatha chaksha pranetah (bhavati) etc.
658. This verse may be said to furnish the key of the doctrine of karma or acts and why acts are to be avoided by persons desirous of Moksha or Emancipation. Acts have three attributes: for some are Sattwika (good), as sacrifices undertaken for heaven, etc., some are Rajasika (of the quality of Passion), as penances and rites accomplished from desire of superiority and victory; and some are Tamasika (of the quality of Darkness), as those undertaken for injuring others, notably the Atharvan rites of Marana, Uchatana, etc.: this being the case, the Mantras, without acts, cannot be accomplished, are necessarily subject to the same three attributes. The same is the case with rituals prescribed. It follows, therefore, that the mind is the chief cause of the kind of fruits won, i.e., it is the motive that determines the fruits, viz., of what kind it is to be. The enjoyer of the fruit, of course, is the embodied creature.
659. There can be no doubt that Nilakantha explains this verse correctly. It is really a cruce. The words Naro na samsthanagatah prabhuh syat must be taken as unconnected and independent. Na samsthana gatah is before death. Prabhuh is adhikari (jnanphale being understood). K.P. Singha gives the sense correctly, but the Burdwan translator makes nonsense of the words.
660. The subject of this verse as explained by the commentator, is to inculcate the truth that the result of all acts accomplished by the body is heaven where one in a physical state (however subtile) enjoys those fruits. If Emancipation is to be sought, it must be attained through the mind.
661. The sense depends upon the word acts. If acts are accomplished by the mind, their fruits must be enjoyed by the person in a state in which he will have a mind. Emancipation cannot be achieved by either recitation (japa) or Dhyana (meditation), for both these are acts. Perfect liberation from acts is necessary for that great end.
662. viz., Taste, etc.
663. Existent, line atom; non-existent, line space; existent-nonexistent, line Maya or illusion.
664. Aswabhavam is explained by the commentator as Pramatri-twadi vihinam.
665. i.e., one sees one's own soul.
666. i.e., which, though one, divides itself into a thousand form like the image of the moon in a quantity of agitated water.
667. The analogy consists in this: good and evil fruits, though incompatible, dwell together; similarly, knowledge, though not material, resides in the material body. Of course, knowledge is used here in the sense of the mind or the understanding.
668. It is difficult to understand why the idea of lamps set on trees is introduced here.
669. The analogy is thus explained. Fire, when fed, bursts into flames. When not fed, it dies out, but is not destroyed, for with new fuel the flames may be brought back. The current of the wind ceases, but does not suffer extinction; for if it did, there would be no current again. The same is the case with the rays of the Sun. They die in the night, to reappear in the morning. The rivers are dried up in summer and refilled during the rains. The body, once dissolved, appears in another form. It will be seen that the weakness of the reasoning is due only to incorrect notions about the objects referred to.
670. Exists in its own nature, i.e., unaffected by attributes and qualities and accidents.
671. Some of the Bengal texts read sumahan and subuddhih in the second line. Of course, this is incorrect. The true reading is samanah and sabuddhih, meaning 'with mind and with understanding.' In the Bombay edition occurs a misprint, viz., sumanah for samanah. Nilakantha cites the correct readings.
672. The Burdwan translator misunderstands the word Linga as used in both 14 and 15. K.P. Singha also wrongly renders that word as it occurs in 15. The commentator rightly explains that Linga has no reference to Linga-sarira or the invisible body composed of the tanmatra of the primal elements, but simply means the gross body. In 14, he says, Lingat sthuladehat, Lingam tadeva dehantaram. In 15, anena Lingena Savibhutena. Adristhah means alakshitah. A little care would have removed such blunders.
673. The commentator cites the Gita which furnishes a parallel passage, viz., Indriyani paranyahurindriyebhyah param manah, etc.
674. This verse seems to show that the Rishis had knowledge of spectacles, and probably also, of microscopes. The instrument that shewed minute objects must have been well known, otherwise some mention would have been made of it by name. The commentator calls it upanetra.
675. By death on sleep.
676. Yugapat means simultaneous; atulyakalam means differing in point of time in respect of occurrence; kritsnam qualifies indriyartham; Vidwan means Sakshi; and ekah, independent and distinct. What is intended to be said here is that when the soul, in a dream, musters together the occurrences and objects of different times and places, when, in fact, congruity in respect of both time and place does not apply to it, it must be regarded to have an existence that is distinct and independent of the senses and the body.
677. The object of this is to show that the Soul has only knowledge of the pleasures and pains arising in consequence of Sattwa and Rajas and Tamas and in connection with the three states of the understanding due to the same three attributes. The Soul, however, though knowing them, does not enjoy or suffer them. He is only the silent and inactive Witness of everything.
678. The object of the simile is to show that as wind is a separate entity although existing with the fire in a piece of wood, so the Soul, though existing with the senses is distinct from them.
679. The Bengal texts read indriyanam which I adopt. The Bombay edition reads indriyendriyam, meaning the sense of the senses, in the same way as the Srutis declare that is the Prana of Prana, the eye of the eye, the ear of the ear, etc., Sravanena darsanam tatha kritam is 'apprehended by the ear,' i.e., as rendered above, 'apprehended through the aid of the Srutis.'
680. The commentator uses the illustration of a tree. Before birth the tree was not; and after destruction, it is not; only in the interim, it is. Its formlessness or nothingness is manifest from these two states, for it has been said that which did not exist in the past and will not exist in the future cannot be regarded as existing in the present. Tadgatah is explained by the commentator as udayastamanagatah or taddarsinah.
681. Both the vernacular translators render the second line incorrectly. The first line is elliptical, and would be complete by supplying asannam pasyanti. The paraphrase of the second line is Pratyayannam Jneyam Jnanabhisamhitam(prati)ninisante. Jneyam is explained by the commentator as prapancham. Jnanabhisamhitam means that which is known by the name of Knowledge, i.e., Brahma, which has many similar names some of which the commentator quotes such as Satyam (truth), Jananam (knowledge), Anantam (infinite), Vijnanam (true knowledge), Anandam (joy or happiness).
682. Tamas is another name for Rahu. The first line, therefore, refers to the manner in which an eclipse occurs. There is no absolute necessity, however, for taking it as an allusion to the eclipse. The meaning may be more general. Every day, during the lighted fortnight, the moon gains in appearance, as, indeed, every day, during the dark fortnight, it loses in appearance. It may, therefore, be said that darkness approaches it or leaves it for eating it away or discovering it more and more. The actual process of covering and discovering cannot be noticed. This circumstance may be taken as furnishing the simile. In verse 21, similarly, tamas is capable of a wider meaning. In 22, the word Rahu is used. It should be explained, however, that Rahu is no imaginary monster as the Puranas describe but the descending node of the moon, i.e., a portion of space in and about the lunar orbit.
683. This is a very difficult verse and the distinction involved in it are difficult to catch. Of course, I follow the commentator in rendering it. What is said here is that in a dream, Vyakta (manifest body) lies inactive, while the Chetanam (the subtile form) walks forth. In the state called Sushupti (deep slumber which is like death) the indriyasamyuktam (the subtile form) is abandoned, and Jnanam (the Understanding), detached from the former, remains. After this manner, abhava (non-existence, i.e., Emancipation) results from destruction of bhavah or existence as subject to its known conditions of dependence on time, manner of apprehension, etc., for Emancipation is absorption into the Supreme Soul which is independent of all the said conditions. The commentator explains that these observations become necessary to show that Emancipation is possible. In the previous section the speaker drew repeated illustrations for showing that the soul, to be manifest, depended on the body. The hearer is, therefore, cautioned against the impression that the soul's dependence on the body is of such an indissoluble kind that it is incapable of detachment from the body, which of course, is necessary for Emancipation or absorption into the Supreme Soul.
684. Caswasasya is an instance of Bhavapradhananirdesa, i.e., of a reference to the principal attribute connected by it.
685. Indriaih rupyante or nirupyante, hence Indriyarupani.
686. The objects to be abandoned are those which the senses apprehend and those which belong to primordial matter. Those last, as distinguished from the former, are, of course, all the linga or subtile forms or existents which are made up of the tanmatras of the grosser elements.
687. Or, regains his real nature.
688. I adopt the Bombay reading aptavan instead of the Bengal reading atmavit. Pravrittam Dharmam, as explained previously, is that Dharma or practice in which there is pravritti and not nivritti or abstention.
689. The sense is this: by abstaining from the objects of the senses one may conquer one's desire for them. But one does not succeed by that method alone in totally freeing oneself from the very principle of desire. It is not till one succeeds in beholding one's soul that one's principle of desire itself becomes suppressed.
690. The separate existence of an objective world is denied in the first clause here. All objects of the senses are said here to have only a subjective existence; hence the possibility of their being withdrawn into the mind. The latest definition of matter, in European philosophy, is that it is a permanent possibility of sensations.
691. Te is explained by the commentator as Brahmabhigatah. K.P. Singha wrongly renders the last foot of the second line. The Burdwan version is correct.
692. Te in the first line is equal to tava.
693. I follow the commentator in so far as he is intelligible. It is evident that the words Jnanam and Jneyam are used in the original not consistently throughout.
694. The meaning seems to be this: ordinary men regard all external objects as possessing an independent existence, and their attributes also as things different from the substances which own them. The first step to attain to is the conviction that attributes and substances are the same, or that the attributes are the substances. This accords with the European Idealism. The next stage, of course, is to annihilate the attributes themselves by contemplation. The result of this is the attainment of Brahma.
695. Antaratmanudarsini is explained by the commentator as "that which has the Antaratman for its anudarsin or witness." The Burdwan translator is incorrect in rendering the second line.
696. The first 'knowledge' refers to the perception of the true connection between the Soul and the not-Soul. 'Fruits' mean the physical forms that are gained in new births. The destruction of the understanding takes place when the senses and the mind are withdrawn into it all of them, united together, are directed towards the Soul. Jneyapratishthitam Jnanam means, of course, knowledge of Brahma.
697. The commentator explains that sorrow arises from the relation of the knower and the known. All things that depend upon that relation are transitory. They can form no part of what is eternal and what transcends that relation.
698. I take the obvious meaning, instead of the learned explanation offered by Nilakantha.
699. The very Yogins, if led away by the desire of acquiring extraordinary powers and the beatitude of the highest heaven do not behold the Supreme.
700. Gunam, literally, attributes; hence objects possessed of attributes.
701. That which is called the external world has no objective existence. It is purely subjective. Hence, it is the mind that sees and hears and touches the mind itself.
702. This verse is a cruce. There can be no doubt that Nilakantha's explanation is correct. Only, as regards budhyavara I am disposed to differ from him very slightly. The grammar of the first line is this: 'Gunadane manah sada budhiyaraya; viprayoge cha tesham budhyavaraya.' Now 'Gunadana' means the 'adana' (destruction) of 'guna'. (This root da means to cut). What is meant by the destruction of 'guna' or attribute or earthly objects is merging them in the buddhi by yoga; in other words, a withdrawal of the senses into the mind, and the senses and the mind into the understanding. "Viprayoga cha tesham" means 'in their separation,' i.e., when these objects are believed to be real and as existing independently of the mind. The result of this would be the acquisition of 'budhyavara,' implying the acquisition of those very objects. In the case of yogins, whose minds may be in such a frame, the powers called 'asiswaryya' are acquired. There is no especial necessity, however, for taking the case of yogins.
703. What is said here is that Happiness and Sorrow have an end, though it may not be seen, and the Soul will surely come to its final resting place. This accords with the doctrine of infinite spiritual improvement.
704. Rishavam sarvattwam literally means 'the bull of Sattwatas'. Ordinarily, it is an appellation of Krishna, the prince of the Sattwatas or Yadavas. Here, however, the word is used to signify persons prizing the attribute of Goodness; hence righteous persons.
705. Prajapati literally means 'lord of creatures.' It is a name applied to those sons of Brahman who begat children.
706. Samavartin is another name for Yama the punisher of the wicked.
707. Nirapekshan is explained by Nilakantha as nirayameva ikshante tan, i.e., those who have their gaze directed towards hell alone. The Burdwan translator takes it as indicative of houseless or nomadic habits, upon what authority, it is not plain.
708. K.P. Singha takes Naravara as the name of a tribe. Of course, it is a careless blunder.
709. I think K.P. Singha misunderstands this verse. All the texts agree in reading it in the same way. To take it, therefore, as implying that the sinful races, by warring with one another, suffered destruction is doing violence to the word Rajanath. There can be no doubt that Sandhyakala means the period of junction between the two ages (Treta and Dwapara). It is called terrible. It was at this time that, that dreadful famine occurred which compelled the royal sage Viswamitra to subsist on a canine haunch. Vide Ante.
710. The correct reading is Mahatmana (instrumental) implying Krishna. The Bengal reading Mahatmavan is vicious. K.P. Singha has rendered the verse correctly. The Burdwan translator, with Nilakantha's note before him (for he uses the very words of the commentator), adheres to the vicious reading and mistranslates the verse.
711. This verse evidently shows that there was dispute about Krishna's supremacy, as Professor Weber guesses. The Krishna-cult was at first confined among a small minority, Sisupala's and Jarasandha's unwillingness to admit the divinity of Krishna distinctly points to this.
712. This is certainly a very fanciful etymology of the word Sanatana which ordinarily implies eternal.
713. Atma Atmanah is explained by Nilakantha as jivasya paramarthikam swarupam.
714. Swamatmanam is Pratyathatmyam.
715. The sense is that when all men are equal in respect of their material cause, why are such differences in the srutis and the smritis about the duties of men?
716. The meaning seems to be this: in the beginning of every celestial yuga, i.e., when the Supreme Being awaking from sleep desires to create creatures anew, and creatures or beings start again into life. With such starting of every being, the rules that regulate their relations and acts also spring up, for without a knowledge of those rules, the new creation will soon be a chaos and come to an end. Thus when man and woman start into life, they do not eat each other but combine to perpetuate the species. With the increase of the human species, again, a knowledge springs up in every breast of the duties of righteousness and of the diverse other practices, all of which help to regulate the new creation till the Creator himself, at the end of the yuga, once more withdraws everything into himself.
717. i.e., the body.
718. What is meant seems to be this: there can be no river without water. A river cannot exist without water. When a river is mentioned, water is implied. The connection between a river and water is not an accident but a necessary one. The same may be said of the sun and its rays. After the same manner, the connection between the Soul and the body is a necessary one and not an accident. The Soul cannot exist without a body. Of course, the ordinary case only is referred to here, for, by yoga, one can dissociate the Soul from the body and incorporate it with Brahma.
719. The mind has no existence except as it exists in the Soul. The commentator uses the illustration of the second moon seen by the eye in water, etc., for explaining the nature of the Mind. It has no real existence as dissociated from the Soul.
720. Swabhavahetuja bhavah is explained by the commentator as the virtuous and vicious propensities. (Swabhava purvasamskara; sa eva heturyesham karmanam layah bhavah). 'All else,' of course, means Avidya or Maya, which flows directly from Brahma without being dependent on past acts. The meaning, then, is this: as soon as the Soul takes a new form or body, all the propensities and inclinations, as dependent on its past acts, take possession of it, Avidya or Maya also takes possession of it.
721. Both the vernacular translators have wrongly rendered this verse, notwithstanding the help they have derived from Nilakantha's gloss. The fact is, the gloss itself sometimes requires a gloss. Verses 3 and 4 and connected with each other. In verse 3, the speaker mentions two analogies viz., first, that of iron, which is inanimate, following the loadstone, and, second, of Swabhavahetuja bhavah (meaning, as already explained, all such consequences as are born of the acts of previous lives), as also anyadapi, i.e., all else of a similar nature, meaning, of course, the consequences of 'Avidya' or 'Maya' which flow directly from Brahma instead of former acts. In verse 4, reference is again made to avyaktajabhavah, meaning propensities and possessions born of 'Avidya' or 'Maya'. This is only a repetition, in another form, of what has already been stated in the second line of verse 3. The commentator explains this very clearly in the opening words of his gloss. After this comes the reference to the higher propensities and aspirations that are in the Soul. The grammar of the line is this: Tadvat Kartuh karanalakshanah (bhavah) karanat abhisanghathah. The plain meaning, of course, is that like all the darker and indifferent propensities and possessions that come to the Soul in its new life, born of the acts of past lives, all the higher aspirations also of the Soul come to it from Brahma direct. The word karana is used in both instances for Brahma as the Supreme Cause of everything.
722. The sense is this: In the beginning there was nothing save the Chit-Soul. Existent objects exist only because of Ignorance having defiled the Soul. Their connection again with the Soul is not absolute and necessary. That connection may be destroyed without the Soul losing anything. What is intended to be conveyed by this verse is that at first, i.e., before the creation, there was nothing, except jiva or the Soul with Knowledge alone for its indicating attribute. The things mentioned, viz., earth, etc., were not. Nor do they inhere to jiva with even Ignorance or Delusion for its indicating attribute, i.e., to the born Soul. The born Soul may seem to manifest all those attributes, but it is really independent of or separate from them. Their connection with the Soul, as already said, is neither absolute nor eternal. In the next verse, the speaker explains the nature of those manifestations.
723. The connection between earth, etc., with the Soul has before been said to be neither absolute nor eternal. Whence then that connection? In 6, it is said that all the apprehensions of the Soul with regard to earth, etc., are due to Ignorance or Delusion flowing directly from Brahma and assailing it thereafter. The apprehension of the Soul that it is a man or an animal, that it has a body, that it is acting, etc., are to borrow the commentator's illustration, just like that of one's being a king in a dream who is not, however, really a king, or of one's being a child who is not, however, really a child. Being eternal or without beginning its first existence under the influence of Delusion is untraceable. As long, again, as it has Knowledge alone for its attribute, it remains indestructible, i.e., free from the mutations of existence. It occurs in every creature, i.e., in man and beast.
724. The sense seems to be this: In consequence of desires the Soul manifests itself in some form of existence. In that state it acts. Those acts again lead to desires anew, which, in their turn, bring on new forms or states of existence. The circle of existence or life thus goes on, without beginning and without end.
725. The Cause is ignorance. The Effect is the body and the senses of a particular form of existence. When the creature, in consequence of this union, engages in acts, these latter become causes for new states of existence.
726. The object of this verse is to reiterate the doctrine that the possession of the body and the senses, etc., does not alter the state of the Soul. The Soul is really unattached to these though it may apparently exist in a state of union with them, like the wind, which existing in a state of apparent union with the dust it bears away is even at such times pure by itself and as a substance, exists separately.
727. The Vedas contain declarations of both kinds, viz., they urge to action as also to abstention from action. The former is necessary as a stepping stone to the latter. Such men are rare as understand the declarations of the Vedas in this way and as conform by their conduct to those declarations thus. What is seen, on the other hand, is that some betake themselves to acts and some to abstention from acts. The second line of the verse has been expanded a little in the translation, following Nilakantha's gloss.
728. Deha-yapanam means destruction of the connection the body has with the soul. In the second line, the performance of acts is prescribed only as a preparation, for they contribute to purity of the Soul. Acts should not, the speaker says, be performed from desire of fruit, viz., heaven, by one desirous of Emancipation. K.P. Singha omits the first line of the verse, but gives the sense of the second line correctly. The Burdwan translator mis-understands the gloss he quotes and makes nonsense of the verse.
729. Vipakram is explained by Nilakantha as pakahinam; and apakvakashayakhyam as apakva-kashaye pumsi akhya upadesah yasya lam etc.
730. Anuplavan is anusaran; akramya means upamridya.
731. Vijnana here means the loss or absence of knowledge.
732. Yathartham, i.e., for the true objects of life, viz., for acting righteously and accomplishing emancipation.
733. At first there was only jiva or the Soul having knowledge alone for its attribute. When it became clothed with Ignorance, the universe sprang up around it. Consciousness is due to that union of the Soul with Ignorance. Hence, all things rest on Consciousness, and Consciousness is the root of all sorrow.
734. The sense of this verse seems to be this: if all things rest on Consciousness which is an attribute of Ignorance or Delusion, why then this uniformity instead of the irregularity that characterises all perceptions in dreams? The answer is that the uniformity is the result of past acts, of acts which are due to Consciousness. These produce uniformity of perceptions even as time, subject to its own laws, produces the phenomena of the seasons with uniformity.
735. I have expanded the last line for bringing out the meaning of the word nasyati clearly. Of course, I follow Nilakantha's explanation of the simile.
736. In the Srutis it is said that Brahma has two attributes, Vidya (Knowledge), and Avidya (Ignorance) with Maya (delusion). It is in consequence of this Maya that chit-souls or jivas become attached to worldly things. It is in consequence of this Maya that persons, even when they understand that all is nought, cannot totally dissociate themselves from them.
737. Mana is explained by the commentator as worship of one's own self; Darpa is freedom from all restraints; and Ahankara is a complete disregard of others and centering all thoughts on ones own self. Here Ahankara is not Consciousness.
738. Kritalakshanah is explained by the Commentator as Kritaswikarah.
739. The force of the simile lies in this: Prakriti binds Kshetrajna or the Soul and obliges it to take birth, etc. Women are Prakriti, men are Souls. As the Soul should seek to avoid the contact of Prakriti and strive for emancipation, even so should men seek to avoid women. It should be added that women, in almost all the dialects of India derived from Sanskrit, are commonly called Prakriti or symbols of Prakriti, thus illustrating the extraordinary popularity of the philosophical doctrine about Prakriti and Purusha.
740. Kritya is mantra-power or the efficacy of Atharvan rites. What is said here is that women are as frightful as Atharvan rites which can bring destruction upon even unseen foes. Rajasi antarhitah means that they are sunk so completely in that attribute as to become invisible, i.e., completely enveloped by that attribute.
741. The sense is this: parasitical vermin spring from sweat and other filth emitted by the body. Children spring from the vital seed. In the former case, it is Swabhava (nature) that supplies the active energy. In the latter, the undying influence of previous acts and propensities supply the active force. One's offspring, therefore, are like parasitical vermin on one's body. Wisdom should teach disregard or indifference for either.
742. This is a repetition of what has been asserted in various forms before. Rajas (passion) is the cause of Pravritti or propensity for acts. Sattwa (goodness) is enlightenment or the higher aspirations that lead to Brahma. Both rest on Tamas (Darkness), the first immediately, the last mediately. Chit or Jiva is pure Knowledge. When overtaken by Tamas or Avyakta, it becomes clothed with that existence which is called life or which we realise in the world, the conditions of that life being Consciousness and Intelligence.
743. The Chit or Soul is all-Knowledge. When overspread with Ignorance or Darkness, it becomes manifested by Intelligence and Consciousness, i.e., assumes a form or body. Knowledge overspread by Darkness, therefore, or Knowledge with the attributes of Intelligence and Consciousness, is the cause of Chit or soul or Jiva assuming a body. Such knowledge, therefore, is called the seed of the body. Then, again, the tadvijam (the second expression), i.e., the foundation on which knowledge overspread by ignorance (or knowledge with the attributes of intelligence and consciousness) rests, is, of course, pure Knowledge or chit or jiva or Soul as it existed before life. It is only another form of repeating a statement made several times before. Both the vernacular translators have misunderstood the last half of the second line.
744. The meaning, of course, is that while in the mother's womb, the Soul remembers the acts of past lives, and those acts influence and determine the growth of its senses as also the character it will display in its new life.
745. I do not follow Nilakantha in his grammatical exposition of the second line. That exposition seems to be very far-fetched. Besides tebhyah tyagat for tesham tyagat is no violence to grammar, the use of the ablative in this sense not being infrequent in these writings.
746. Women have before (vide verse 9 of this section) been said to be the embodiment of the senses and as antarhitah in Rajas or Passion. The senses, therefore, are, it is concluded here, originated in Rajas. By the destruction, again, of Rajas, they may be destroyed. What is wanted, therefore, is the conquest of Rajas or Passion. This may be effected with the aid of the eye whose vision has been sharpened by scriptural knowledge.
747. After indriyartham, as explained by the commentator, prapyapi is understood. There are two classes of indriyas, viz., those of knowledge and those for the performance of acts. Escapes the obligation of rebirth, i.e., attains to Emancipation.
748. Arthasamanyam is explained by Nilakantha as Phalasamyam Mokshakhyam niratisayam. The Burdwan translator, while using the very words of the commentator, mistranslates this verse: The speaker desires to show the difference between the religion of Pravritti or acts and that of Nivritti or abstention from acts. Those that follow the former cannot attain to Emancipation. What they gain are certain good qualities mentioned in the next verse, which, however, are equally gained by the followers of the religion of Nivritti.
749. The vow of Krichcchra consists of certain fasts. Pass three days in water, i.e., stand in tank or stream with water up to the chin.
750. The three Riks begin with Ritancha, Satyancha etc. Every Brahmana who knows his morning and evening prayers knows these three Riks well.