1511. Pratyapattih is Vairagyam or Renunciation. As regards Prasthitasya it may be taken either as implying one that is dead or one that has betaken himself to Yoga. In the latter case, the verse would mean that that man who betakes himself to Yoga without adopting Renunciation meets with much sorrow.
1512. The object of this verse is to show that conscious sin can never be destroyed by expiation. The only means by which sin can be destroyed is by enduring its fruits.
1513. The Burdwan translator makes utter nonsense of this verse. Guna-yuktam is explained by the commentator as equivalent to punyakarma. Prakasam is equivalent to budhipurvakam prakasya or jnatwa. It is formed by the suffix namul.
1514. Yathatatham is sthula-sukshma-taratamyena. The sense is that all acts done knowingly produce fruits according to their nature. If gross, the fruits produced are gross; if subtile, the fruits produced are subtile.
1515. The speaker’s opinion is that all acts are productive of fruits. If good, the fruits are good. If bad, the fruits are bad. There is this difference, however, between acts done knowingly and those done in ignorance: the former produce commensurate fruits i.e., if gross, their fruits are gross; if subtile, the fruits are subtile; but the latter produce fruits that are not so, so that even if heinous, the fruits do not involve a large but only a small measure of misery. There is no other difference between the two kinds of acts.
1516. The object of this verse is to show that such acts form the exception and they are kept out of my sight in this discourse on acts. The Rishi Viswamitra caused the death of the hundred sons of Vasishtha, and yet he had not to go to hell for it.
1517. The sense seems to be that when even such near relatives are cast off if found to be wanting in affection, the fact cannot be gainsaid that people never do good to others except when they hope to benefit themselves by such acts.
1518. What is intended to be said is that the acceptance of a gift from a superior person is equal in point of merit to a gift made by a poor person. A wealthy man, by making a gift, earns greater merit than by accepting a gift.
1519. i.e., by Dhyana and Dharana.
1520. This has reference to Usanas’ attaining to the status of a planet (Venus) in the firmament.
1521. Nadantah is one word. It means Hinsa-sunyah. Danti cchinatti iti danta. Its reverse is Nadantah.
1522. Nirdishta refers to Seva.
1523. i.e., they take the hues of the society they keep. Hence, it is very desirable for them to live with the good.
1524. This son of Dhatri is the god of the clouds.
1525. The Burdwan translator gives a most ridiculous version of the expression Dhigdandasasanah. Unable to catch the sense, which however is certainly very plain, he actually interprets the words to mean ‘living under the sway of king Dhigdanda.’ K.P. Singha gives the correct meaning.
1526. In this verse also, the Burdwan translator takes Dhigdanda as the name of a king. He gives an equally ridiculous version of the second line. Abhyagachchan is explained by the commentator as having vishayan understood after it. The sense is that they began to enjoy all objects of the senses to an excess. Both Devan and Brahman are accusatives governed by Avamanya. K.P. Singha translates both the lines correctly.
1527. This verse is taken as a metaphorical statement. The three Asuras are, of course, Kama, Krodha, and Lobha. Gaganagah (staying in the firmament) is interpreted as ‘existing in Maya’. Sapurah as ‘with their gross, subtile, and potential forms;’ ‘felled on the earth is explained as ‘merged into the pure chit.’ The whole is taken to imply a spiritual destruction of all the evil passions and a restoration of man to his original state of purity.
1528. This chief of the Asura passions was Mahamoha or great Heedlessness. The word Devas here is taken to mean the senses. Of course, if verse 16 be not taken metaphorically, then may Devas be taken in its ordinary sense of the deities.
1529. The genius of the two languages being different, it is very difficult to render the phraseology of the first line. Literally rendered, the line would read ‘they remain or stay on those acts, and establish them.’ Besides being unidiomatic, the sentence would be unmeaning. ‘To stay or remain on any act’ is to adhere to it. ‘To establish it’ is to regard it as a precedent and cause it to be regarded by others as a precedent.
1530. Samsiddhadhigamam is explained by the commentator thus: Samsiddhah is nityasiddah, i.e., atman; tadadhigamam is atmajnanam.
1531. The very gods are subject to prosperity and adversity, and their effects of loves and hates. There is no mode of life in which these may not be found.
1532. After sukham supply bhavati or some such verb. Tyajatam stands by itself and refers to kamya karma, meaning they that abstain from such acts as are not nitya but as are only kamya or optional.
1533. The sense is that those who betake themselves to penances as the consequence of despair, are many. Those men, however, are very rare who adopt penances, being at once impressed that the happiness of domesticity is unreal and ends in misery.
1534. i.e., their penances of past lives.
1535. I am not sure that I have correctly understood the second line of this verse. Akrita-karmanam is explained by the commentator as anut-pannatattwajnanam and upabhogavarityagah is Renunciation or Vairagyam phalani has tapasah understood before it. But why phalani instead of phalam?
1536. The second line of this verse concludes the argument. The tasmat has reference to all the statements before, and _not_ to only the first line of 26. The statement in the second line is the same as the second line of verse 13 above.
1537. I expand the second line a little for making it intelligible.
1538. By ‘stainless penances’ is meant nishkamam tapah or penances undertaken without desire of fruit.
1539. Tyaktwa has nishkalmasham tapah understood after it. The order of the words is Phalarthi apriyani etc., vishyatmakam tat phalam prapnoti. The distinction between nishkamam and sakamam tapah is this; through the former one attains to happiness. Even the earthly wealth he earns becomes fraught with happiness; through the latter, however, one meets with diverse kinds of sorrow resulting from the earthly possessions he succeeds in obtaining.
1540. The grammar of the first line is this: Dharme tapasi dane cha (sati avihitakarme) vidhitsa, etc. If vidhitsa be taken with ‘dharma, etc.,’ the verse would be unmeaning.
1541. The first line is difficult to construe. Tatah means ‘inconsequence of the pain that attends the gratification of the senses.’ Sarvasya refers to vivekinah; jyayase phalartham is ‘for the sake of the highest fruit,’ which, of course, is Emancipation. Gunah is ‘same’, ‘dama, etc.’