English
252. That unreality of the phenomenal world, and ita 123 PANCHADAS!. Vlusory nature can only be found out by argument, analysis and deduction, and not by experience. But objection may be taken to it, for the experience of the exquisitely beautiful com- position of the universe, which is quite unthinkable® and for its being a subject of cognition for the witness, it cannot be maintained that its unreality is alone capable of being deter- mined by arguments and not experience. And that is now being removed as follows :—It is not to be said, that the discri- mination of unreality proceeds from argument only, where the witness has an experience of the unthinkable composition [of the phenomenal.] 253- That unthinkable (composition) is an indication or sign of the falsity of an object; but a dissenter seeks to con- nect it with the pervasion of intelligence of self, and says, intelligence is endowed with it. To this, the reply is, from a want of prior contact or combination, the unthinkable com- position, is one indication or sign of non-duality ; and the Vedantin admits the unthinkable source of self, because be must be either that or its reverse; in the latter contingency, ‘his origin must be capable of being conceived with ease, which is not a fact, because eternal; hence there is no other alternative but to call him (Achin/yarachana) unthinkable, etc, 254. How can intelligence said to be eternal? Because nothing can be conceived anteceding it. If any one were to say, intelligence has @ prior condition; he is to be asked, ‘What it is? Whether it is conceived by intelligence or by insentiency? Now then of the two prior conditions either of intelligence or insentiency, insentiency cannot be the instru ment of discovering intelligence, and hence cannot precede it; * Literal construction of achintyarachana is what has been . given here, that would signify either the worthlessness of thinking about the source of the world, for being outside of self and a duality ; or what cannot be accurately surmised from thinking— so vast and unknown. PANCHADAST. 1p With feference to the first view, the question is whether intelli- gence ia perceived by the same intelligence or by another intelligence to constitute a prior condition; of them, if ft be ‘said in reply, that the prior condition of intelligence is quite distinct from the same intelligence, it will then amount to an admission of two intelligences,a duality—and as non-duality does not recognise another intelligence, and even for argu- ment’s sake admitting its existence, there will yet be wanting a ‘co-operation (pratiyog?) of that intelligence, without which its knowledge or perception will be clearly impossible. Then again, with that perception by another (prior) intelligence this one (intelligence) will be reduced to the condition of insentioncy like that of a jar, etc. Thus then, there remaing ‘that other consideration which sets forth inteHigence being manifested by the same intelligence. Even that is, untenable, for want or absence of a thing cannot be perceived by iteelf, Moreover, in regard to phenomena, owing to a difference in ‘the demonstrator—~the interna! organ and the rest,—-and for ‘an utter impossibility of perceiving an absence of that duality (the world) by iteelf, and foran absence of another instra- ment,—~a prior agent of that duality—it may as well be said that like the waat of prior condition of intelligence, the phe- nomenal has also no prior condition, of another substance preceding it. Therefore it is said, the prior condition of duality is conceived by intelligence. 255. The phenomenal with a prior condition [in intelli- gence] is merely a product just as 2 jar is, yet its composition fs unthinkable, and for the matter of that, false and unreal ike phantasmagoria. 256. Thus then, having shewn [anfe 242-254] the mani- featibility of intelligence in the beginning, it is consequently ‘eternal and visibly perceptible; save and beyond it, every other thing is unreal, and that unreality is perceived throngh the same intelligence. But then objection may be taken as to the tangibility or visibility of the non-daal secondless Reality, 7 130 PANCHADASI. Hence the author proceeds to clear it away. In- telligence is visible, and through it unreality of phenomena is conceived, consequently the assertion that the secondless entity!Brahmea is not visible, would imply contradiction. 357. If it be said, notwithstanding the explanation above given after the Vedanta, there are yet many Vedantins who have no faith in it, and why so? The reply is not difficult to find: for in the case of Charvats many of whom are well versed in logic and sound reasoning, yet are they found mis- taking sclf with the physical body, and why is this? 258. If you say from want of aclear intellect they are unable to disctiminate properly, then I may as well conclude from a want of proper study or right interpretation of the Shastras, those Vedantins shew no faith in the explanation about the visibility of the secondless Reality. 259. When by a proper ascertainment of the secondless Reality, desires seated in the mind and‘passions are all des- troyed, then an individual attains deliverance in life; and in his present life he enjoys supreme felicity. This effect of self- knowledge is mentioned in the Srus, and it is impossible to deny it, for it is a visible result. 260. As for instance—* When knowledge of self arrives maturity, the joints of the heart are all destroyed” Sruft. ‘Joints’ refer to desires and passions. 261. But here ‘desires,’ refer to the mistaken identity of egoism (Ahankera) and intelligence, as instanced in the use of the first personal pronoun I and its deflections, mine, etc. 262. Though the above ‘desires’ are sources of evil, yet in reference to egoism, if intelligence be kept apart and separ- ate and not mized up with it, and in that condition of sliena- tion of intelligence kept distinctly in view, millions and tens of millions of desires, will not be prejudiciat to knowledge [of self]; for the matarity of knowledge has already destroyed the 4oints’ of the heart {as has been mentionsd already]. 263. Asfor a preponderance of de-merits in you, the PANCHADAS!. 131 perception of the secondless Reality brings you no satisfaction and comfort, so even with the destruction of the desires and passions [joints of the heart}, if as a result of fractescent worke—works which have already began to bear fruit—desires do come afterwards.* 264. They {desires originating with egoism or belonging to it] cannot in any way affect the Supreme Self who is intelli- gence; just as a disease of the physical body or the growth and decay or destruction of a tree cannot affect self, for he is quite unrelated, similarly after the destruction of illusory attribution of egoism to self, any desire originating in the first is quite incapable of distressing, causing pain or affecting him in any way. * With refiex intelligence, physical body, and self, egoism is apt to be mistaken by @ gradual consecutive difference of which there are three varieties, vis., ordinary, active, and erroneous, The identity or oneness of egoism with the reflex intelligence is ordinary or natural, for it comes and goes with reflection of in~ telligence ; then again, identity of egoism with the physical body is called active [Karma] as it is a result of fructescent works, because the conception or experience 1 am a man,” etc., of all individuals fasts so long as fructescent works continue ; with their destruction there is no more any attachment or conceit for the physical body. And the mistaken identity of egoism with the witnessing inteltigence which is quite unrelated is called erroneous, as it is conceived in ignorance,—because with the destruction of ignorance a wise person destroys that identity, and he is never found to say “I am an agent,” "I ama doer, an eater, happy or miserable,” Sankaracharya :has in this way, illustrated the mis- taken identity of egoism. In regard to the first and the second, they are seldom found to be the subject of perception in the wise: from a destruction of ignorance and error or mistake, the wise are exempt from the third variety, so that the property of egoism in the shape of ceflex intelligence and desires, cannot militate against the Witnessing Intelligence, so far as a theosophist is concerned. 143 PANCHADASE. a65. If you s@y, prior to the destruction of desires and passions of the heart, there is no possibility of any connection of desires with the unrelated blissfulness of the Supreme Self, hence there will be no more forgetfulness about it, for it means the same thing as destruction of the heatt’s joints, and that shall constitute your enccess. 266. If you say ignorant persons know it not, hence it is the name for a heart's joint, for the difference between 2 wise and ignorant is known by the presence or absence of those joints (desires):* 267. Between the ignorant and wise there is no difference whatever, so far as an attachment or its reverse, for the physt- cal body, organ, and intellect is concerned. 268. As for example, between one who has the sacred thread, and one who hes it not—though belonging to tha same caste, there is no difference 90 far as the rules of food fire concerned, but their actual difference consists in the qualification of the former for the study of the Vedas to which tho latter is dis-entitled. 269. Destructions of passions and desires in the heart of the wise is proved by a reference to the Gita (Chap. XIV.