694. The meaning seems to be this: ordinary men regard all external objects as possessing an independent existence, and their attributes also as things different from the substances which own them. The first step to attain to is the conviction that attributes and substances are the same, or that the attributes are the substances. This accords with the European Idealism. The next stage, of course, is to annihilate the attributes themselves by contemplation. The result of this is the attainment of Brahma.
695. Antaratmanudarsini is explained by the commentator as “that which has the Antaratman for its anudarsin or witness. The Burdwan translator is incorrect in rendering the second line.
696. The first ‘knowledge’ refers to the perception of the true connection between the Soul and the not-Soul. ‘Fruits’ mean the physical forms that are gained in new births. The destruction of the understanding takes place when the senses and the mind are withdrawn into it all of them, united together, are directed towards the Soul. Jneyapratishthitam Jnanam means, of course, knowledge of Brahma.
697. The commentator explains that sorrow arises from the relation of the knower and the known. All things that depend upon that relation are transitory. They can form no part of What is eternal and what transcends that relation.
698. I take the obvious meaning, instead of the learned explanation offered by Nilakantha.
699. The very Yogins, if led away by the desire of acquiring extraordinary powers and the beatitude of the highest heaven do not behold the Supreme.
700. Gunam, literally, attributes; hence objects possessed of attributes.
701. That which is called the external world has no objective existence. It is purely subjective. Hence, it is the mind that sees and hears and touches the mind itself.
702. This verse is a cruce. There can be no doubt that Nilakantha’s explanation is correct. Only, as regards budhyavara I am disposed to differ from him very slightly. The grammar of the first line is this; ‘Gunadane manah sada budhiyaraya; viprayoge cha tesham budhyavaraya.’ Now ‘Gunadana’ means the ‘adana’ (destruction) of ‘guna’. (This root da means to cut). What is meant by the destruction of ‘guna’ or attribute or earthly objects is merging them in the buddhi by yoga; in other words, a withdrawal of the senses into the mind, and the senses and the mind into the understanding. “Viprayoga cha tesham” means ‘in their separation,’ i.e., when these objects are believed to be real and as existing independently of the mind. The result of this would be the acquisition of ‘budhyavara,’ implying the acquisition of those very objects. In the case of yogins, whose minds may be in such a frame, the powers called ‘asiswaryya’ are acquired. There is no especial necessity, however, for taking the case of yogins.
703. What is said here is that Happiness and Sorrow have an end, though it may not be seen, and the Soul will surely come to its final resting place. This accords with the doctrine of infinite spiritual improvement.
704. Rishavam sarvattwam literally means ‘the bull of Sattwatas’. Ordinarily, it is an appellation of Krishna, the prince of the Sattwatas or Yadavas. Here, however, the word is used to signify persons prizing the attribute of Goodness; hence righteous persons.
705. Prajapati literally means ‘lord of creatures.’ It is a name applied to those sons of Brahman who begat children.
706. Samavartin is another name for Yama the punisher of the wicked.
707. Nirapekshan is explained by Nilakantha as nirayameva ikshante tan, i.e., those who have their gaze directed towards hell alone. The Burdwan translator takes it as indicative of houseless or nomadic habits, upon what authority, it is not plain.
708. K.P. Singha takes Naravara as the name of a tribe. Of course, it is a careless blunder.
709. I think K.P. Singha misunderstands this verse. All the texts agree in reading it in the same way. To take it, therefore, as implying that the sinful races, by warring with one another, suffered destruction is doing violence to the word Rajanath. There can be no doubt that Sandhyakala means the period of junction between the two ages (Treta and Dwapara). It is called terrible. It was at this time that, that dreadful famine occurred which compelled the royal sage Viswamitra to subsist on a canine haunch. Vide Ante.
710. The correct reading is Mahatmana (instrumental) implying Krishna. The Bengal reading Mahatmavan is vicious. K.P. Singha has rendered the verse correctly. The Burdwan translator, with Nilakantha’s note before him (for he uses the very words of the commentator), adheres to the vicious reading and mistranslates the verse.
711. This verse evidently shows that there was dispute about Krishna’s supremacy, as Professor Weber guesses The Krishna-cult was at first confined among a small minority, Sisupala’s and Jarasandha’s unwillingness to admit the divinity of Krishna distinctly points to this.
712. This is certainly a very fanciful etymology of the word Sanatana
which ordinarily implies eternal.
713. Atma Atmanah is explained by Nilakantha as jivasya paramarthikam swarupam.
714. Swamatmanam is Pratyathatmyam.
715. The sense is that when all men are equal in respect of their material cause, why are such differences in the srutis and the smritis about the duties of men?
716. The meaning seems to be this: in the beginning of every celestial yuga, i.e., when the Supreme Being awaking from sleep desires to create creatures anew, an creatures or beings start again into life. With such starting of every being, the rules that regulate their relations and acts also spring up, for without a knowledge of those rules, the new creation will soon be a chaos and come to an end. Thus when man and woman start into life, they do not eat each other but combine to perpetuate the species. With the increase of the human species, again, a knowledge springs up in every breast of the duties of righteousness and of the diverse other practices, all of which help to regulate the new creation till the Creator himself, at the end of the yuga, once more withdraws everything into himself.
717. i.e., the body.
718. What is meant seems to be this: there can be no river without water. A river cannot exist without water. When a river is mentioned, water is implied. The connection between a river and water is not an accident but a necessary one. The same may be said of the sun and its rays. After the same manner, the connection between the Soul and the body is a necessary one and not an accident. The Soul cannot exist without a body. Of course, the ordinary case only is referred to here, for, by yoga, one can dissociate the Soul from the body and incorporate it with Brahma.
719. The mind his no existence except as it exists in the Soul. The commentator uses the illustration of the second moon seen by the eye in water, etc., for explaining the nature of the Mind. It has no real existence as dissociated from the Soul.
720. Swabhavahetuja bhavah is explained by the commentator as the virtuous and vicious propensities. (Swabhava purvasamskara; sa eva heturyesham karmanam layah bhavah). ‘All else,’ of course, means Avidya or Maya, which flows directly from Brahma without being dependent on past acts. The meaning, then, is this: as soon as the Soul takes a new form or body, all the propensities and inclinations, as dependent on its past acts, take possession of it, Avidya or Maya also takes possession of it.
