English
Whether Iswara is the Feflected shadow in such individual unit of knowledge produced from memory? Or in its collective aggregate? if they maintain 104 PANCHADASI. 157. ‘And that reflex intelligence dependent on Maya or subservient to it, full of illusion, Is the Supreme Jawara, Internal Knower, Omniscient, and the Universal Cause.” (Sruti.) 158. Beginning with the ‘blissful sheath’ in the state of profound slumber, the Sruéi says “ That blissful sheath is the Lord of all.” Therefore the Vedas denote it to be Iswara. [But objection may be taken to it, for in waking and dreaming, the predicate of the grosser condition of materiality with the reflected shadow—the internal organ—is called the cognitional sheath, The knowing or cognitional Jiva merges into a subtle condition in profound slumber (and that is the blissful) which if regarded as Iswara, then in the absence of that merging of the internal organ in waking and dreaming conditions into the state of blissfulness, there will be a corresponding want of Iswaratoo, Then again, there must be es many Iswaras as there ace men in profound tilumber, and as there are five such sheaths or sacs recognised in the human body by all authors, the admission of ‘blissful’ as Iswara will render the utterances concerning the rest un- necessary and futile; hence it is said, the Blissful sac is not Iswara. This is what a Prabhakar says, but it is cleared the first mentioned opinion, then as knowledge originating from the individual's intellect finite in variety, Iswara for his being the reflected shadow in each unit of such knowledge must necessarily be infinite in number, and as each knowledge is parviscient, the reflected shadow in it will also necessarily be parviscient. Then again, in regard to the second opinion of Tswara as the refiected shadow in the collective aggregate of ail knowledges it is necessary to mention, that save and during the Pralayic period it can never be and that in proportion to the number of associates there is a similar number of reflected shadows, consequently there cannot be one refiected shadow in all knowledges. Thus then, Ignorance alone is the associate of Tnwara. PANCHADAS!. tog thus:—tIf a dull persan would receive no benefit from ‘ascertaining the indication of the transcendental phrase, it is better that he should consfder and ponder well on the meaning of Om, 28 laid down in the Mandukya Upanishad, where like- wise the ‘Blissful sheath’ is mentioned, the Omniscient and ‘Universal Lord. Now as the above Upanishad had its object in so saying, to establish non-duality, similarly our author had been actuated to establish the oneness of Jiva and Iswara. He had no desire to make the ‘ Blissful,’ Iswara; for it will be found elsewhere in a subsequent part of the work (Sect. XI) that He terms the ‘Blissful’ as a particular condition of the individual, Therefore, only with the view of establishing non-duality to persons of dull intellect, that the Blissful sheath is here referred to as Iswara, otherwise there will be a con- tradiction between what is stated here and in the above Section.) 159. It is not impossible for the ‘Blissful sheath’ to have omniscience and a paramount control over all, nor is it proper that this should create any dispute or contention ; for the utterances of the Sruff are beyond cavil and dispute, and they tend that way. Then again, concerning Maya it is said, every thing is possible. [That is to say, it is the nature of Mlusion to create unceal, real ; like things shown in perform- tance of magic.} 160. But as the utterances of the Srufz in the absence of supporting arguments to establish their truth may be set at naught like the expression “a boat made of stone’? they are now being cited :—Since there is no one capable of undoing the creation of Iswara He is called the Lord Paramount. ‘That is to say, what is created by Isware, the objective world end the rest, cannot be destroyed in any manner, hence be is the Paramount or Supreme Lord. 161. His omniscience is established in the following wise : The perception [conception] of all beings originating from their intellect rests in ignorance in the condition of profound 14 106 PANCHADASI. slumber, and by thet conception makes the whole universe its subject; and for its being the associate of ignorance, the predicate of perception proceeding from intellect (the blissful sheath) is eaid to be all-knowing.* 162, Bat then it may be asked, if it is all-knowing what prevents our experiencing it? Therefore it is said:—As intellectual impressions, associate of that blissful (Iswara) are invisible, hence his all-knowingness is not perceived. How is it then known? From their presence in all intellects, conclude omniscience to be present, inasmuch as they are only a prodact of intellect which is their cause and whose property it is to create perception. In the same way as the property of yarn— the cause of a cloth—is present in its product, the cloth, 163. The blissfut “ Iswara is the internal knower.” Srest, Because resting inside the cognitional and other sacs, and in every other thing besides, he employs them in due order. 164. Regarding Iswara as the internal knower the Antaryami Brahman of Brthadaranyaka Upantshad saya :-— “ Residing in the intellect, yet he is different from it, nor can he be seen by that intellect, which constitutes bis physical body, and of which he is the internal controller.” In this manner Iswara is mentioned in the Vedas. 165. Now from 2 fear of ite lengthiness I refrain from entering Into an explanation of all the indications cited in the Antaryamt Brahman, but will content myself with “ Who tesides in all elements” and illustrate it by an example. As yarn constitutes the proximate or formal cause of a cloth and teata in it, so is Isware the formal cause of all elements and rests in them. 166. But the question is, If Iswara is the formal cause why is He unseen? The reply is, what is most intrinsically * The reader need not be reminded what the blissful sheath means after what has been said in Verse 158 and note. It refers to Iswara. Therefore, plainly speaking, it is meant here to shew Iswara is omniscient. PANCHADASI. 107 situated cannot be seen. As for instance, the threads of a cloth are internal, and their filaments are internal to them ; #0 where that intrinsicality finally rests consider that to be the the Iswara. 167, Thus for His being most intrinsically situated he cannot be seen, because he is formless ;—and of concentric intrinsicalities only two or three comparatively external are capable of being determined by the sight, but as he ia inner- most He is hence unseen, and can only be ascertained by Sruéi texts and proofs derived from analogy. 168, “The elements form that Iswara’s body” Is thus explained, As sfter yarn has been turned into a cloth the body of yarn is the cloth, similarly for Iswara’s residing every< where in all objects, the objective world is His body. 169. “Who resides internally in alt objects, controls and employs them.” This passage is illustrated by examplo in the following manner. As by contracting or expanding the threads, [of which @ cloth is made] or shaking them, etc., the cloth must of necessity be similarly affected, and there is not the slightest mark by which the cloth can show its distinction 5 170. So this internal knower Iswara has been transformed according to the impulse of his desires, That is to say, this objective world, has been produced through his consciousness, aad cow, horse, man, mountain, river, and an infinite variety of objects which fill the universe sre changed conditions of Him, and they are necessarily His works. 171. After baving explained the Syufi text referring to Inwara as an internal knower, the evidence of the Gia is now cited. Krishna says to Arjuna “Iswara® is situated in the Says the Commentator of the Bombay Edition. The word ‘Iswara’ isa singular noun of the first declension, hence He is one and not many; consequently as an internal knower He is one and not many as asserted by the followers of Vishnu Swami. 108 PANCHADASI, heart of all elementary bodies, and mounted on the mechaniem of that organ makes all the elements wander through illusion.” (Chap. XVIII, v. 51.] They assert that as caste is singular number, for it is a collective noun, so Iswara for His being situated inside all hearts, may be taken as a collective noun of the singular number: but this does not hold true; for Iswara is never regarded in that light either in the Syuti, Smrits, or the Puranas; no where is He mentioned except as one; popular experience alike tends that way. Hence it is impossible ta construe Him into a collective noun. Then again, if Iswara were so many distinct as there are individuals, there will be created a discord in the harmony of nature, for each Iswara dwelling inside each individual will refuse to be acted upon by the same natural laws which may affect another person and vice vers. Tobe more explicit, the pre- sence of many Iswaras in one universe will create discord by a difference of desires in them, one may be actuated with a wish to create, another to destroy, and so the two will be acting in the extreme ends, consequently synchcronism, and order will be upset, But it may be alleged, like a king having several servants there needs be no discord; for several Iswaras are all particles of the secondless Supreme Iswara, a form of Brahma and con- trolled by it. It may be asked of those who entertain this view whether that Supreme Iswara is endowed with or without almighti- ness and omniscience?