English
, for the organs themselves, they are the external appendages merely. The seats of the sensory organs, or centres, are the several ganglia with which each especial nerve is connected and which carry the impressions to the sensorium. these are looked upon as the ' internal organ.” 3 8 PANCHADASI. g. The mind ascertains the quality or defect of an object, after it has been covered (taken possession of) by the senses. Tt has three qualities, the good or pleasant, the active or med- dlesome, and the dark or plainful. They induce changes om it, to, The changes induced by the good quality are indiffer- ence to earthly pursuits, forgiveness and large mindedness. Passion, anger, temptation and atraggle for worldly benefits, &c., are the products of the active quality. Idleness, error, sleep (lassttude) &c., are due to darkness. 11, From the good quality of the mind arises virtue, from the active are produced the passions, anger &c., which in their tarn lead to sin and other bad actions; from the third or bad are derived sloth, lassitude and sleep, hence an individual under its influence spends his time in doing nothing and keeps himself atoof from virtue and vice. What attaches personality to the individual functions of the several organs fn connection with the mind is the agent or instrument, Aa in common parlance one who does a thing is known as the doer or subject (?) agent, or instrument, so the internal organ or mind is the agent, for it is resort of individuslity. 12, The objective world can easily be determined to have derived its origin from the elements, for their specific proper- ties sound and the rest are the attributes of ether and the other elements, thus incontestibly establishi: their elementary composition, hence further consideration is not needed. Not so with the organs. Here an analysis based on reason, and the teachings of the Shastras are required to show that they are derived from the same elements, 13. Now there are five organs of sense, five organs of action, both controlled by the mind {which also must be reckoned as an organ, as it belps cognition). Whatever is known by the aid of these organs, reason, and Shastras is indicated by the word ‘Edam’ (all this) in the phrase “ Sadena somaya edam,” and it means the universe. PANCHADASI. 19 14. Before the evolution of ‘all thie’ (universe) there was present one, secondiess, existence (Sat) without a name or form. Such is laid down in the Chandogeya Upanishad by Odatika. 15. The three expletives ‘one,’ ‘secondiless,’ and ‘Exist- ence’ are used to differentiate It, from bodies similar and dissimilar. That is to say, 28 a tree has its branches, leaves, flowers and fruits differing from each other,—a leaf resemblea not a flower, nor does a flower its fruit, nor either, a branch— thus constituting its distinguishing individuality or segregate units, for though the tree is one, yet it has its composite units different ; and as such a tree is recognised from another of a different class by its family characteristica—a difference in its leaf, fiower, fruit, growth, bark and stone, (its family character- istics)~and as it is easily known from other things as stone &c., it has therefore a third characteristic which serves to distinguish it from bodies dissimilar. (This may be termed contrast), 16, So im the case of the secondless Reality, no such apprehension needs be entertained as to the presence of the three aforesaid characterising traits. For sueh a purpose the three expletives (“Edam, Ebam, Aditiam”) one, sure,. and secondless are prefixed. Thus is non-duality established. 17. Moreover, it must be remembered that, as the Para. brahma is without form, and has no distinguishing individual- ity as noticed in the instance of the tree and its fruit &c., you cannot aasign any form or name to It, for It existed prior to them, 18. Name and form are indications of creation, hence what existed prior to it cannot have a name ; consequently the Supreme Self which is eternal and formless has no differen- tiating individual trait like the ether. 19. If there were two or more existences (Sat) then to individu: or identify them as separate entities there must exist family distinctions, but as it is secondless and one, It has 20 PANCHADASL. only one indication and not many, consequently there does not exist another body of Its kind. Virtually then, without the difference of Its associates in name and form, it haa no dis- tinguishing trait in Itself, therefore to describe the difference of associates and to admit them as belonging to It, is only conducive of error. ao Nor can contrast be instituted here. For It is exis- tence, hence contrast or dissimilarity will fix on non-existence (Asat) as dissimilar or different from It. But what is non- existent has no shape, hence the Parabrahma cannot be cleared by contrast. at. Thus is established the oneness of Parabrahma which ig eternal, Intelligence, and bliss without a second ; but to establish it more firmly a consideration of the arguments ad- daced by the opponents of this doctrine, is now being given. Some amongst them erroneously assert that before the evolu- tion of thia universe there existed (Asat,)‘non-being’ and therefore imply the non-existence of the secondless Reality which is (Sat) ‘ being’ and essentially existent. 22. As a drowned man is bereft of bis senses and loses the capacity of expressing himself, but is subject to extreme fear and hence is powerless, so these dissenters lose their senses and become bewildered when hearing the precepts and doctrines of non-duality and are overtaken by fear. 23. In the state of meditation without recognition of subject and object (worshipped) a certain dread is felt, by those persons who are given to the worship of a personal God, such is asserted by the religious teachers of Gour [Bengal] who have laid it down in their works. 24. Another name for the above variety of meditation ia ‘untouchable Yoga.’ Because the followers of personal worship can never acquire it, in spite of the hardships enjoined for its practice, hence it is untouchable and though there is no cause for fear yet like little children evincing dread when left alone, without any substantial ground for it, these PANCHADAS!. 2: devotees are unreasonably affected by imaginary dread, when actually there is none whatever in it, from the ‘untouchable Yoga.’ 25. The venerable Sankarachary2 looks upon such followers of personal worship, (Madhyamic Buddhists,}—a set of controversialists who discard reason and anology from their arguments—as totally ignorant of meditation without subject and object, for the cognition of the unthinkable, essentially existent Supreme Self. [They are unacquainted with such a meditation in which the person meditating loses his personality and is unconscious of the object of his meditation, the two are blended into one—a non-dual condition] a6, They [such Buddhists] discard the Sruéi either from Ignorance, or from want of comprehension, and drawing their inferences from possible cause and effect, they promulgate atheism and deny the existence of Self, a7. (Now the atheistic doctrine of ‘ non-being’ is being critically examined in the way of queries and and answers.) Oht ye Buddhists! you assert there was ‘non-being’ before the objective world was ushered into existence. What do ye mean by it? How can the meaning of the two words ‘was’ and ‘none-being’ be reconciled. ‘Was’ indicates existence, and ‘non-being’ non-existence, therefore two opposite conditions, Hence such an expression is full of contradiction. 28. You cannot ascribe darkness to the sun or say he is dark; to say so will be illogical and untenable, because the sun is the very opposite of darkness—light—this you know surely, and as light and darkness cannot by any means be looked upon as one or same substance, how can you pos- sibly look upon as one and the‘same substance what is implied by the contradictory epithets ‘was’ and ‘non-being’ in your expression “there was non-being in the beginning”? 29. The Vedania teaches the doctrine that the elements ether and the rest, potentially existed in the Parabrahma, and their separate designation and form are simply the result of 22 PANCHADASI. Wlusion, if you attach a similer signification to your ‘non- being’ and fancy its existing potentially in the essentially exis- tent Self, through the same Maya, then your ‘non-being’ is transformed into Self and may you live long for it. 30. If you say, that like your ‘non-being’ our attribution of name and form to the essentially existent Parabrahma is imaginary, for in It, we do not admit name and form and if such attribution is due to Illusion, then that Illusion must rest on something (real), for an Iilusion means a mistake for some- thing real, [as in the familiar example of a snake in a rope] and without some reality resting in the back-ground no error can arise. Hence, how can it be possible for your ‘non-being’ to convey a similar attribution to that of name and form. 31. Ifyou contend that our Vedantic expression in the beginning ‘there was existence’ is alike faulty, inasmuch as existence is twice implied by the two words ‘was’ and ‘exis- tence’ when they are considered separate, and tautological when otherwise, and therefore though “There was nothing” ig alike faulty, it is passable. No, ye Buddhists! do not say 80, for repetition of a word is sanctioned by usage :— 32. As doing right, telling a word, holding the ascertained, &c, These words have familiarised repetition to all pupils. The Sruéi has likewise adopted the same practice in its mode of instruction when it says, ‘Before the evolution of the universe there was existence.