English
As regards dualism: if Brahma were conscious there would be objects of consciousness, thus there would be @ relation,* and wherever there is relation there is dualism. Therefore Brahma or Self is knowledge, as an abstract.] From the absence of the cognitive subject and objects of cogs tion it is not known, not because it does not exist. 34. As sugar imparte sweetness to a substance when tized with it, but does not depend upon any thing else for its sweetness, because such sweet-imparting-substance there i= none, 15. And as from want of such another substance impart- ing its sweetness to sugar, its own sweetness is self-evident, 80 from an absence of a subject and object of cognition, the Atma though unperceivable, is yet evidently Intelligence and eternal, * Says the Mundukya Upanishad, “ Brabma is neither inter+ nally nor externally cognitive, neither conscious nor unconscious.” Verse 7. * Pr) PANCHADAS!. 16, [And we bave Sraif testimony also confirming it} :-= Self is self-illumined ; before the evolution of all the worlds, He alone was. existing, they follow the train of his illumina- tion, and by him every thing is illumined or discovered. 17. That Intelligence which cognises the phenomenal world cannot be cognised by any other object. The several ‘organs are powerless to cognise it, because they are prone to cover objects of cognition, and are incapable of holding the cogniser himself. 18, The proofs are:—" All objects of cognition are known to the Supreme Self, but no one can know Him. He {a different from ali known objects and is yet separate from unknown. He is the Supreme God, eternal and Intelli- gence.” ; tg. He who fails to conceive of the Supreme Brahma after understanding Its difference from known and unknown, as knowledge itself, ts merely a Jump of clay in human shape, that is to say, itis impossible to make 80 dull-headed a person, ‘understand the proofs cited in the Shasiras. 20, To say “I have no knowledge of the eternal Self” is ae unreasonable, as it is shameful to say “I know not whether I have a tongue,” and yet a tongueless individual cannot speak, similarly He is knowledge and not to know him will amount to a perfect want of knowledge, a clear impossibility. 21. Whatever objects you come to know of, in ordinary use, leaving the the things aside, fix upon that knowledge as Brahma, and it can be termed knowledge of Brahma, for there is not another thing resembling It. 22, Though such knowledge, without the objects (asin ths aforesaid paregraph) os Parabrahma, is reaily entitled to be called knowledge of the Supreme Self, yet a consideration of the ‘five saca’ is not unnecessary, because when they are left out by close thinking, the residue of knowledge as a witness , Tepresents the Supreme Self, that is never absent, This is ia explained as follows: ‘ PANCHADASi. 4r 23, Intelligence as indicated by the word Self can credte tio misapprehension with regard to one's Self, that is to say nd one can be so misguided as to contend that he is not in exis- tence, this is impossible. And who will be his antagonist in such a contention ? 24. Such a misapprehension with regard to his personal- ity or existence never arises unless one is subject to a wild phantasy, hence the Srusi says ‘ There is not one person who disbelieves his own existence.” 25. He, who contends that the Supreme Self is non-exise tent, ia himself so, for nis dual intelligence is identical - with self, and as that has aiready been pointed out to be imper- ceptible, then he is forced to admit his existence and with it,- Self. 26. The filumination of Self is now determined by the following queries and auswers. What is the A/ma like? That which cannot be determined as resembling this or that, heace what is neither this uor that, is Self. 27, ‘This’ refers to objects visible to the eyes, and ‘that’—invisible objects. But Self is not a subject of cogni- tion by sight, nor is he invisible, for He is eternal, self- illuminated, knowledge. Thus though unknowable, Self is determined to be eternal, and visible. 28, Therefore we find, though self is imperceptible, yet he is visible, and the same arguments will establish his self- illumination; moreover the Sruéfi indications of truth, know. ledge, and infinity to Parabraima are also applicable to Self. 29. What is not liable to destruction is called truth, hence after the dissolution of the objective world, who alone remaing aa @ witness, is the Intelligence known as the eternal, indes- trugtible, Supreme Self, go. As after the dissolution of visible objects, ether (space) alone romains, so what remains after the destruction of 6° : 42 PANCHADASI. ether (and the rest] is knowledge, and that knowledge is called Self. 31. If it be said, nothing remains dfter the desttuction of visible objects, and therefore we cannot call Self to be residue of destruction. [The answer is] Self is that unindi- cated something which you say remains of after destruction. Hence our difference is merely in words, the unindicated, and unascertainable residuum, left efter the destruction of the world is alike admitted by both of us, (you say it to be nought, and I gay it to be Self.) 32. With this object the Srusf secks to differentiate the Witnessing Intelligence from all visible objects, “‘ For even after their destruction he is indestructible, and is therefore called a residuum of destruction and eternal knowledge.” 33 The Srusi has in the aforesaid manner established @ twain condition in all impermanent objects, one of which is determinable as liable to destruction, the other undetermin- able portion is the residue left after it. Now this residuary portion of destruction represents the undeterminable, eternal, infinite Supreme Self, who is imperishable, 34 In this manner is established his trath,* while that of knowledge has already been determined (Vide Ver. 19 ante.) 35. “He is infinite” because Self cannot be demarcated by place, time or object. He is present every where, hence it is impossible to fix a boundary line as to his locality ; as He is eternal, time cannot affect him, and as he pervades every object, it is impossible to confine him in one thing. Thus then, as He is unrestricted by place, time or object, He is infinite. 36. The Srufi is not alone in saying Self to be infinite, analogy alike establishes it,—for our conceptions of place, © Truth is indestructible, and it is one, therefore it is. Brahrna, for Brahma is secondless. PANCHADASI. 43 ime and object are illusion,® they cannot limit bim, hence He is infinite. 37. It bas already been shewn that the attribution of insentient material objects to Self cannot be true, inasmuch as in that cage the infinite and eterna! Self,—unassociated con. sciousness—will be reduced to the condition of the finite, Neither can he be limited by Iswara and ¥foa for their associates are illusory, then again consciousness present in both of them is non-different from the consciousness of Brahma, hence they are powerless to distinguish it. 38. [Now the associates of Iswara and the individual are being set forth.) The force of the Supreme Brahma is centred In every object, from the ‘blissful sac’ to the rest, and as it controls them sll, it is the associate of the Lord (lawara,) 39. If that force were not to control the lawa which govern the universe, they will act against one another and seduce every thing into chaos and disorder. 40. This force of the Supreme Brahma (which is eternal is intelligent, hence it is not impossible for it to exercise that sway which keeps the universe in order; combined as an associate with the Intelligence of Brahma it is called Iswara; that is to say when Intelligence is unasso- ciated it is called the Supreme Brahma, and,when associated with the force Maya, it is Iswara. 4x. And Intelligence associated with the ‘five sacs’ (already mentioned), is designated Fi0a.! As in every-day life, wo find the same man standing in the relation of a father to * “Because the sense illusion is common and necessary law with all the senses,—external light and colors and sounds are all illusions, the cold in the hand, or in the ice, heat in the fire, pain in. the foot, taste in the tongue, scent in the nose, is all illusory throughout and yet essential to existence.”"—H.G. ATKINSON, in The Phil, Ing. Vol. VIL p. 63- 44 PANCHADASI. his son and grandfather fo his grandson, [so the one Intelli- gence for a difference of associates is designated Iswara and Siva. 43. As in the absence of a son and grandson, the same man is neither a father nor grandsire, so the one Intelligence when associated differently with Maya and the ‘five aca’ is designated Jswara and Jiva, and when not associated, it is the Supreme Brahma Intelligence. 43. Thus when by the help of the aforesaid considera- tions about the ‘five sacs,’ an individual knows the Supreme Brahma, he attains the blissfulness of the Supreme Brahma, and after death is subjected to no more re-births; in other words, for one engaged in contemplating the Brahma, with fixedness of the mind, there are no more births and deaths. He is freed. SECTION. IV. Tue creatorship of Iswara and contrivance of the indivi, dual (¥1v2) will form the sabject of my present consideration. For in such a dual condition, the subjects that will have to be left out by him will be rendered apparent, the more so, that he may henceforth disregard them. a. The Shvetashvetaro panishad mentions, that the force Maya is no other than Prakrifi (Matter in its undifferentiated cosmic condition, without its three attributes) and Conscious- ness associated with it is Iswara.