English
Kk4 aceording to the adaptability of time and Jocality—circumstan. ces favouring their development, and known by their action.} 20, “Ram, whenever the eternal, manifested and infinite Self, through @ modification of the Afayaic force assumes the force of intellection, it is called mind.” 2x. In this way, is the mind first evoluted in the form of Hiranayagarbha—the collective aggregate of minds ;-—next follows the perception of bondage aud emancipation; and next the several abodes contained in the universe; which though imaginary and unreal appear tangible and substantial, Tf it be asked how can unreal appear substantial? Just as tales concocted for the amusement of children appear real to. them and are believed so. 22. The nurse with a view of amusing the children under her charge repeats the following tale :—“ In a certain country there resided three handsome princes. 23. “Of whom two have not been born yet, while the third has not been conceived in its mother’s womb. All the three brothers were endowed with good qualities, and they lived in a city which existed not. 24. ‘* Their minds were unerring too; as they went out of the city on 2 certain occasion, they found trees laden with fruits in the ether. 25, “Now they were desirous of sport, and armed as they were with bow and arrows, they give chase toa horned rabbit, killed and partook of the flesh and arrived at a future city where they are living in happinces.” 26. “Ram, when the children heard this tale from the nurse, they believed it to be true, for they were too young to exercise any judgment.” 27. Similarly the composition of this tangible universe appears real to dull and ignorant persons incapable of judg- ing ; and its reality is as firmly implanted in their mind as the reality of the incidents of the above story in the boys. 504 PANCHADASI. a8, Thus does Baswista expound the nature of Mayare force. Its unreality is now being ascertained. ag. Maya is distinct both from its product, the world, and its site or receptacle, Brauma; just as the force of fire is distinct both from its action or product, sparks, and its seat or receptacle, charcoal: inasmuch as they are visible while the presence of force is only to be inferred from its action or product. 30. A jar with its thickness and round cavity is a product; and earth with its properties sound, form, smell, touch and taste fs its receptacle; but the force which produces the jar is distinct from both.* 3t. Force has neither thickness, nor roundness of cavity, {properties of the product); nor has it sound, form, smell, touch and taste—properties belonging to the receptacle (earth) —hence it ia distinct from both; and for this distinction, it is unthinkable and indescribable. 32. Priorto the production of jar, the force present in earth remained datent, for which it could not then be dis. covered; with the help of potter, his turning rod and wheel, that force undergoes mutation and is modified into jar. 33- Indiscriminate persons regard the properties of the product (its grossness and round cavity), and those inherent in the cause (sound, form, taste, touch and smell) as identically one, and give the name ‘jar’ to mark to that oneness. 34- No jar exists prior to a potter's mouldiag a lump of clay with the help of his stick and wheel, so that to speak of this prior condition of earth asa form of jar, is only an ins stance of indiscriminate thinking. That jar, is only a subse- quent product when its thick form and round cavity are deve- loped ; then only ie it fit to be called so. ® Force has neither thickness nor roundness of cavity like the jar, nor has it the properties,—sound, etc., therefore it is distinct from the product and its receptacle earth, in short, indescribable. PANCHADASI. 405 39. A jar is not distinct from earth, inasmuch as it i never found without it; nor is it identical with carth, inas- much as it is never seen in a lump of clay. 36. Therefore like force, ‘jar’ is equally indescribable ; for which, it is a product of force. If it be asked since ‘force’ and its ‘product’ are equally indescribable, what necessity ia there for retaining their separate use? The reply is, ‘force’ is used to express invisibility; while visible condition is ex- pressed by the word ‘jar.’ 37. To remove misapprehension about the invisibility of Mayaic force being subsequently visible it is said :— Io a magical performance, the force of illusion remains invisible till the usual spells, mansras, and re-agents are used ; subsequent to which, it succeeds in creating charmed fruits, trees, etc, 38. “For their being material, all changed or trans- formed products are liable to destruction; but their site or receptacle (as earth the receptacle of jar) is real.” (Sruti.) 39. ‘‘Change’ isa mere name, having no reality, ines much as excepting its name there is nothing real in jar; but its receptacle earth is real.” (Chhandagya Upanishad.) 40. Regarding visible products [jar and the rest}, their invisible cause, force, and their receptacle, earth, the first two (product and force) for their relation to time (existing in one condition of time and not always in the three) are said to be destructible. But their receptacle, earth, as il exists always in the three conditions of time, is real. 41. Visible products [jar, etc.,] are naturally unreal and discovered so; likewise for their being results of action, they are destructible. And subsequent to production as they are used by name, that also is another cauge of their destruc~ tibility—[for name and form are subject to destruction.) 42. Moreover, after their destruction, their name only Temains in use among, or is pronounced by, men. And for phenomena being ascertained by name [inasmuch as itis 306 PANCHADASI, eer the means of distinguishing one object from another] they are of the same nature as name+ for name is pronounced by the tongue which produces sound, and as visible products are distinguished by name, consequently they resemble it. 43. For the disappearance of their actual condition, liability to destruction, and natural resemblance with name— pronounced by the organ of speech, like the elements earth, vitc,,--form of visible prodacts is not even partially real. {In short, no part of a far which is a product of earth, thick with a round cavity, is real, Because the actual condition of earth has undergone modification to produce it; it is destructible; ‘and a product of sound only. “ Like the earth” is an exclu- sive example in regard to the three causes of unreality. Now the inference is :—the product of earth, jar, is fit to be con- sidered unreal (1) for its being a transformed result ;—-what fs not unreal is also not transformed, as for instance, the material cause earth of jar.—(2) Similarly for its destructibility, ajar is unreal;—what is not unreal fs indestructible— (3) Likewise for its being a creation of the organ of speech it resembles sound only in nature, and is unreal; what fs not unreal never resembles articulate sound only, as Self, 44. But during the period of action [when a jar is being formed), and both prior to its origin and subsequently, [when {thas not been destroyed yet]; earth, for its uniform ap- pearance, preserving its real nature, and indestructibility, is real, Hlere the inference is, that earth is fitto be regarded real, for its uniform appearance in all the three conditions of time like Self, and preserving its real nature, 45. Now for the contention of the Vedantin’s antagonist. He asks, If what you have expressed by the three words * visible,’ ‘ jar,’ and ‘transformed productj’ are unreal, how is it that knowledge of carth does not cause their destruction? [Like the destruction of the unreal snake from the knowledge of its site, rope.) PANCHADASI. 307 46. Ithas already been destroyed by the same cause which has removed from you the idea of reality of jar. If it be contended, in the illusory attribution of silver in nacre, the actual nature of sacre is only not perceived, but no destruction of its reality is ever seen to follow; then as that is an unassocia- ted illusion, while this is ‘associated,’ therefore, here destruc- tion of the perception of reality from correct knowledge of site should be regarded as ‘destruction’ and not impercep- tion, of actual substance.* © There are two sorts of illusions, unassociated and associated ; those produced from ignorance only are called ‘ unassociated,' as the illusion of snake in rope and silver in nacre. Now in regard to these illusions, the instrumental causes are:—(1) Impression of similarity, (2) Defective sight, (3) Defect in the witness, (4) Defect in the subject of demonstration, and (5) Partial (ordinary) knowledge of the site on which illusion is projected or super= imposed [portion represented by ‘this’}; and as they help the ignorance concerning the rope consequently they are “associated.” But for a difference in the modification of the period of action, and its prior interval, instrumental causes are divisible into two varie ties, via., from whose contiguity an action is produced, and without which no action results ; it is called the instrument modifying the period of action, For example, a pot of water placed close to a wall where the sun's rays have been reflected, and the instrument different from it, is the modification prior to the period of action : as for instance, the wheel and turning rod of a jar. The word “associate” has for its meaning the instrument in the form of modification of the time of action.