sanskrit
stringlengths 4
615
| english
stringlengths 2
1.3k
|
|---|---|
tattvadṛṣṭinibandhatvād atyantāpacayaḥ kvacit / bāhyasyevāsya tamasa āntarasyāpi gamyate // | In some cases, there is absolute deterioration of things that obstruct the perception of truth, as is found in the case of the external as well as internal darkness. |
tasya cāpacaye jāte jñānamavyāhataṃ mahat / svātantryeṇa pravarteta sarvatra jñeyamaṇḍale // | when there is deterioration of this, true knowledge appears untrammelled and proceeds to apply to the whole circle of knowable things. |
athavā ye tattvadarśananibandhakāriṇas te sambhavadatyantāpacayāḥ, yathā bāhyaṃ śārbaraṃ tamaḥ tattvadarśananibandhakāriṇaś ca kleśajñeyāvaraṇādaya iti svabhāvahetuḥ / | Or, things that serve as obstacles to the Perception of Truth are liable to absolute deterioration, e.g. the external and nocturnal darkness, and Afflictions and Wrong notions of things, etc, are obstacles to the perception of Truth; so that this is a Reason based upon the nature of things. |
nacāsyānaikāntikateti darśayann āha tasya ceti / tasyāntarasya tamasaḥ // | That this Reason is not ‘Inconclusive’ is pointed out by the words ‘when there is deterioration of this, etc. etc.’ ‘of this’ of the internal darkness (of Ignorance). |
ye vā sthirāśraye vṛttāḥ kathañcid api cāhitāḥ / tadbhāvāyāpunaryatnavyāpekṣā bādhake 'sati // saṃskārotkarṣabhedena kāṣṭhāparyantavṛttayaḥ / | Or, those that subsist in a lasting substratum, having come about in it somehow, and so long as there is no force to the contrary, they do not need any further effort towards bringing them about again, these, by the excellence of the treatment they receive, reach the highest stage of perfection; |
te sambhavanti vispaṣṭaṃ śātakumbhaviśuddhivat // | as for example, the purification of gold; |
yathābhihitadharmāṇa ime matidayādayaḥ / | knowledge, mercy and such qualities are all of the said kind; |
teṣāṃ paryantavṛttau ca sarvavittvaṃ prabhāsvaram // | so that when these have reached the highest state of perfection, there is brilliant omniscience. |
laṅghanodakatāpābhyāṃ naceha vyabhicāritā / na hi tallaṅghanād eva laṅghanaṃ balayatnayoḥ // | nor can this reason be held to be fallible (false) in view of the two cases of jumping and water-heating; because jumping follows not from the jumping itself, but from strength and effort. |
athavā ye sthirāśrayavartinaḥ sakṛc ca yathākathañcid āhitaviśeṣāḥ santo 'sati virodhipratyaye tadbhāvāyā punar yatnāpekṣiṇaḥ, te saṃskārotkarṣabhedena sambhavat prakarṣaparyantavṛttayaḥ. | Or, if there are things that subsist in a lasting substratum, and have had some peculiarity produced in them somehow, if there is no force to the contrary, they do not stand in need of further effort for their production; and if they receive excellent treatment, they proceed to the highest stage of perfection; as is found in the case of the purification of Gold and such things; |
tad yathā kanakaviśuddhyādayaḥ yathoktadharmāṇaś ca prajñākṛpādaya iti svabhāvahetuḥ / | Knowledge, Mercy and such things (i.e. those under discussion) have the character just described hence this is a Reason based upon the nature of things. |
laṅghanodakatāpābhyāṃ na ceha vyabhicāriteti / | ‘Nor can this Reason be said to be fallible, in view of the cases of Jumping and Water-heating’; |
saviśeṣaṇatvādityabhiprāyaḥ / | i.e. by reason of the qualifications that have been added in the above statement of the Reason. |
na hi laṅghanodakatāpau sakṛd āhitau punar ādhānāya yatnādinirapekṣau vartete / | Neither Jumping nor Water-heating is produced only once; nor do they not need another effort for producing them again; |
nāpi sthirāśrayau yadi vātrāpi samānajātīyabījavṛttitve satīti viśeṣaṇāpekṣaṇādavyabhicāro laṅghaneneti manyamāna āha na hi tallaṅghanād eveti / tallaṅghanaṃ nahi laṅghanād eva jāyate / | nor do they subsist in a lasting substratum. Or, it may be said that there is no ‘fallibility’ in the Premiss because of the further qualification that ‘it should proceed from a seed of the same kind’ (see Text 3414). This is what is pointed out by the words ‘Jumping follows, not from the jumping itself, etc. etc.’, i.e. the Jumping is not produced by the Jumping. |
kasmin sati nāma jāyate ity āha laṅghanaṃ balayatnayor iti / | Question: “From what then, does it proceed?” Answer: ‘Jumping proceeds from strength and effort’; |
bale yatne ca sati laṅghanaṃ bhavati, na tu laṅghane sati. | i.e. when there is strength, and also effort, then there comes Jumping; it does not come when there is Jumping itself. |
tayoś ca balayatnayoḥ sthitaśaktitayā laṅghanasyāpi [p.893] sthitātmateti bhāvaḥ. | These two Strength and Effort have their capacities restricted and fixed; consequently, the Jumping also has its character restricted and fixed. |
syād etadyadi balayatnābhyām eva laṅghanaṃ bhavati na laṅghanāt, evaṃ saty ābhyāse yādṛśaṃ laṅghanaṃ puruṣasya bhavati, tādṛgabhyāsāt prāgapi prāpnotīti. | The following might be urged “If Jumping proceeds from Strength and Effort, not from Jumping itself, then, the Jumping-capacity that comes to man after practice, should be his even prior to that practice”. |
naiṣa doṣaḥ. | This does not affect our position. |
prāktanasya śleṣmādinā dehasya viguṇatvāt paścād ādvan na laṅghanam upajāyate. paścāt tu śanaiḥ prayatnena dehavaiguṇye 'panīte sati yathābalamevāvatiṣṭhate laṅghanam / | What happens is that before the practice, the body was disabled by the presence of too much fat, and hence the same degree of Jumping could not be attained. Subsequently however, by repeated effort, the said disability gradually disappears, and the Jumping is attained exactly in accordance with the man’s strength. |
avaśyaṃ caitadevaṃ vijñeyam / | That such is the case must be admitted; |
anyathā yadi laṅghanādeva laṅghanaṃ syāt tadā laṅghanasya vyavasthitotkarṣatā na syāt // | as otherwise, the Jumping would proceed from the Jumping itself, and in that case there could be no fixity in its degree of excellence. |
yadi vā laṅghanasyāpi kāṣṭhāparyantavṛttitā / samādhibalagatyādiviśeṣāt syāt svahetutaḥ // siddhir manojavāsaṃjñā tathāca śrūyate pramā / yathā cintitamātreṇa yāti dūram api prabhuḥ // | Or, the jumping also is something that is capable of reaching the highest stage of perfection, which would proceed from its own causes, through concentrated effort and strength: this capacity is named ‘manojava’ (mind-force). It is in connection with such capacity that we hear (and read) of such facts as that the lord reaches remote places by merely thinking of it. |
nacāpyadṛṣṭimātreṇa tadabhāvaḥ prasiddhyati / | The mere fact that such power is not seen cannot prove that it does not exist; |
nacātra bādhakaṃ kiñcid vaktumatra paraḥ kṣamaḥ // | nor can the opponent put forward any reason that could annul such an idea. |
tathā hi samādhibalaviśeṣaprayogāllaṅghanasyāsmābhir iṣyata evātyantaprakarṣavartitvam yathā bhagavato manojavā nāma siddhiḥ paṭhyate, yasyāṃ sthitasya manasa iva javo bhavati / | For instance, we also admit that, through Concentration of Mind and the use of great strength, Jumping reaches the highest degree of perfection; as for instance, we read of the Lord having the power called ‘Mind-Force’, by means of which one becomes as swift in his movement as the Mind; |
ata eva sā manojaveti prakhyātā / | that is why it has been named ‘Mind-Force’. |
nacāsyā bādhakaṃ pramāṇam asti / nāpyadarśanamātreṇa pratikṣepo yukto 'tiprasaṅgāt // | Nor is there any reason annulling the possibility of this Power. Nor can mere non-perception of it justify its denial; as in that case, great incongruities would result. |
rājahaṃsaśiśuḥ śakto nirgantuṃ na gṛhādapi / | The young rāja-haṃsa (swan) is unable to move out of the house even; |
yāti cābhyāsabhedena pāramambhaḥpater api // | but through practice, it becomes able to go beyond the ocean also. |
āśrayopādhikābhyāsabhedād asya gatir yathā / tādṛśī tādṛśād eva kiṃ na sambhāvyate 'dhikā // bodhisattvadaśāyāṃ hi na śaktas tādṛśīṃ gatim / | Just as this movement of his is the result of the exercise of the particular conditions of the receptacle (i.e. the body), similarly, why cannot similar, or even higher, powers be possible (in the blessed lord)? at the preceding stage of the ‘Bodhisattva’, however, he is notable to attain such power of movement; |
prāptuṃ prāpte samādhau tu viśiṣṭe śaknuyān muniḥ // | but the great sage would certainly attain it on his reaching the highest state of ‘communion’. |
yathā ca rājahaṃsaśāvaḥ prāk svakulāyād api nirgantumaśaktaḥ paścād alpīyasyapya [p.894] bhyāse sati samupajātapakṣo jaladher api pāramutpatati, tadvadanyo 'pyāśrayaviśeṣopādhikādabhyāsād viśiṣṭām api gatimāsādayatīti sambhāvyam / | This is what is shown in the following [see verses 3428-3430 above] The young one of the Swan, in the beginning, is finable even to go out of its nest; but later on, after even slight practice, its wings having grown, it flies even beyond the seas. In the same manner, it is quite possible that other people, through the exercise of the conditions attaching to the body, attain similar process of movement. |
pakṣaviśeṣalābhād evāsau dūrataradeśagāmī bhavatīti nābhyāsabaleneti cet / | “That the bird is enabled to go to distant places, is due to the growth of wings, not to Practice”. |
nahi sañjātapakṣo 'pi sahasaivoḍḍīya gacchan dṛśyate śakuniśāvaḥ, kiṃ tarhi śākhāntarācchākhāntaragamanakrameṇābhyasya kiyan mātraṃ gamanaṃ paścād apāstaśaṅko dūrataram api deśaṃ vrajati / | Even after the wings have grown, the young bird is not found to fly up into the air all on a sudden. What happens is that when it begins to fly from one branch to the other of the tree, it flies, at first only to a short distance, then, having got rid of all fear and doubt, it flies to remoter regions. |
kiñca āśrayaviśeṣalābhe sati yathā haṃsādeḥ prāgaśaktasyāpi sataḥ paścād gatir viśeṣyate tathā bhagavato 'pi bodhisattvāvasthāyām aśaktasyāpi sataḥ paścāt samādhiviśeṣalābhād āsāditāśrayaviśeṣasya tathāvidhā gatiḥ sambhāvyata ityevam parametat / | Then again, just as in the case of the swan, after it has acquired a particular substratum, it acquires the powers of movement that it did not possess before, similarly in the case of the Blessed Lord also, it is quite possible that, though He did not possess the particular power at the stage of the ‘Bodhisattva’, yet, when He attained a particular stage of Communion, He secured a particular substratum which enabled Him to acquire the movement in question. This is all that is meant by the Text; |
abhyāsagrahaṇamatantram / | the mention of ‘Practice’ has no significance. |
prayogaḥ yaḥ sambhavadāśrayaviśeṣopādhirabhyāsaḥ sa sambhavadatyantadūragamanaphalaḥ yathā rājahaṃsaśiśorabhyāsaḥ, sambhavadāśrayaviśeṣopādhir manuṣyāṇām abhyāsa iti svabhāvahetuḥ // | The argument may be formulated as follows: That Practice which is related to the receptacle of a particular condition leads up to the power of going very very far, as is found in the case of the Practice by the young Swan; the Practice of human beings also is capable of being related to the receptacle of a particular condition; |
yaduktaṃ daśahastāntaramityādi tadapāstam iti darśayati daśetyādi / | hence this is a Reason based upon the nature of things. |
daśahastāntaravyomnas tadyadutplutya gacchati / śaktiḥ syād īdṛśī hetos tasya dūragatāvapi // sthirāśrayatve satīti viśeṣaṇopādānād udakatāpena nānaikāntika iti darśayati uṣṇatām | If a man is able to jump to the height of 15 feet, he could certainly acquire the capacity to jump to greater heights, through similar means. It has been argued above, by the other party, under Text 3168, that “The man who can jump into the sky to the height of 15 feet, can never jump to the height of 8 miles, however much he may practise jumping”. The answer to this is as follows; |
ityādi / | [see verse 3431 above] |
uṣṇatāṃ nīyamānasya kṣayo bhavati cāmbhasaḥ / | While the water is being heated, it is gradually undergoing destruction (evaporation); |
syād etat, prajñādes tu sthirāśrayatvam eva kathaṃ siddham ity āha mānasānām ityādi / | thus the substratum being not ‘lasting’, what and where would the ‘perfection’ lie? (3432) |
mānasānāṃ guṇānāṃ tu cittasantatirāśrayaḥ / | Of mental qualities, the substratum consists in the ‘chain of consciousness’; |
sādhārayogato vṛttān na kathañcinnivartate // | and this never ceases to function through its connection with its receptacle. |
seti / | [verse 3432]: |
cittasantatiḥ / | ‘This’ i.e. The Chain of Consciousness. |
ādhārayogato vṛttād iti / bodhisattvāśrayalakṣaṇādhārasambandhena pravṛtter ity arthaḥ / | ‘Function through, etc. etc.’ i.e. from functioning through its connection with its receptacle, in the shape of the Bodhisattva; because what is meant is a particular ‘Receptacle’. |
viśiṣṭasyādhārasya vivakṣitatvāt / | What is meant is as follows: It has been proved that there is another ‘Region’ (Plane); |
tathā hi paralokasya prasādhitatvād bodhisattvānāṃ ca sātmībhūtamahākṛpāṇām āsaṃsāramaśeṣasattvoddharaṇāyāvasthānāt tadāśrayavartinī cittasantatiratitarāṃ sthirāśrayā / | the Bodhisattvas are persons thoroughly imbued with great Mercy, and they live for the sole purpose of saving all beings from the meshes of Birth and Rebirth; the ‘Chain of Consciousness’, therefore, that subsists in them is all the more ‘lasting’. That ‘Chain of Consciousness’, on the other hand, which subsists in the Disciples is not so ‘lasting’; |
yā tu śrāvakādīnāṃ santānavartinī sā na sthirāśrayā teṣāṃ śīghrataraṃ parinirvāṇān mandatvāt kṛpāyās teṣām avasthāne yatnābhāvād iti bhāvaḥ // | because these latter enter into Nirvāṇa sooner, and hence their Mercy is not so intense; which fact leads them to make no effort to continue to live on (for the benefit of living Beings). As the flow of qualities goes on appearing in the ‘chain of consciousness’, so it goes on becoming more and more luminous. |
[p.895] dvitīyam api viśeṣaṇaṃ kathaṃ siddham iti ced āha yāvadityādi / | [verse 3434]: Question: “How is the second qualification (being brought about somehow, under Text 3421) known to exist?” |
etad eva kathaṃ siddham ity āha prabhāsvaram ityādi / | Answer: [see verse 3434 above] Question: “How is this also known?” Answer: [see verse 3435 above] |
etacca pūrvam eva vyākhyātamasmābhiḥ / ete ca prakṛtyā tattvadarśanātmakatayā cittasya svabhāvabhūtāḥ prajñādayo viśeṣā iti pratipāditam iti svabhāvatvena prajñādīnāṃ sakṛdāhitānāṃ svarasata eva prakṛtir bhavatīti siddham // | All this has been explained by us already, that all these, Wisdom, Mercy and the rest, by their very nature, are of the same essence as the Perception of Truth; and as such they constitute the nature of ‘Consciousness’, It thus becomes established that, as these Wisdom, etc. are of the very essence of Consciousness when they have been once brought about, they continue to function automatically. |
parabodhātmaniyataṃ ceto yadi hi sambhavet / tadāsiddhopalambhatvād arthavittir na sambhavet // | If consciousness were restricted to the cognition of something apart from itself, then, as it itself would not be cognised, there could be no cognition of things. |
tasmāt svasaṃvedanātmatvaṃ cetaso 'sti prakāśanāt / | Consequently consciousness has to be regarded as essentially ‘self-cognised’, specially because it is illuminative. |
anāropitarūpā ca svasaṃvittir iyaṃ sthitā // | Hence this consciousness remains as something free from all imposition. |
mukhyaṃ hi tāvaccittasya svasaṃvedanam eva rūpam ityavaśyaṃ sarvavādibhir abhyupeyam, anyathā yadi pareṇa jñānāntareṇa budhyata iti syāt tadāprasiddhopalambhatvenārthavittir na siddhyet / | Primarily, the most important form of Consciousness consists in self-cognition; this has to be admitted by all parties. Otherwise, if Consciousness were cognised by another cognition, then, as its own apprehension would be impossible, there could be no cognition of things. |
tasmān mukhyaṃ cetasa ātmaprakāśanam eva rūpam / | Consequently ‘self-illumination’ is the most important character of Consciousness. |
sa cātmā tasyānityādirūpa iti sāmarthyāt tattvadarśanātmakam eva cittaṃ siddham iti bhāvaḥ // | This‘self’ of the Consciousness is something entirely ephemeral; hence, by implication, it follows that Consciousness is of the nature of the ‘Perception of Truth’. |
mārge sātmyamato yāte teta{taista---}syābhibhavo na hi / rāgadveṣādibhir doṣais te hi prāgeva durbalāḥ // | When, thus, the ‘path’ has become identified with him, there can be no suppression of it by love, hatred and other defects, since they had been already feeble before. |
sātmībhāvāc ca mārgasya sarvāpakṣālanāśinaḥ / | The ‘path’ which is destructive of all defects, having become thus identified, there can be no loss of it without effort; |
na yatnena vinā hānir yatno na guṇadarśanāt // | and there can be no such effort, as its good points have been perceived. |
ato nirmalaniṣkampaguṇasandohabhūṣaṇaḥ / doṣavātāvikalpyātmā sarvajño gamyate jinaḥ // | Thus it is that Jina is understood to be the omniscient person adorned by a pure and firm host of good qualities, whose soul cannot be shaken by the storm of defects. |
[p.896] mārge{rga---}sātmīyabhāvāt prāgapi yadā rāgādayo malā āgantukatayā durbalatvāt mārgamabhibhavitum asamarthās tadā sātmībhāvagate mārge kathaṃ tamabhibhaviṣyanti / | The answer to this is as follows: [see verses 3438-3440 above] Even before the identification of the ‘Path’, the impurities of Love, etc., already feeble on account of their adventitious character, are unable to suppress that Path; how then can they suppress the Path when it has become identified and absorbed? |
kiñca sātmībhāvamupagatasya cetoguṇasya śrotriyasya jodiṃganairghṛṇyavan na yatnamantareṇa prahāṇaṃ śakyaṃ kartum / naca guṇavati vastuni tattvadarśinaḥ prahāṇāya yatnaḥ sambhavati / | Further, when the quality of the Mind has become absorbed, it cannot be removed without effort; just as the cruel nature of the Vedic sacrîficer and the Demon (?) cannot be removed. Nor is it possible for any wise man to make an effort to get rid of what has been found to be possessed of good qualities. |
kasmāt guṇadarśanāt / | ‘Why?’ Because its good points have been perceived. |
etac ca pūrvamāveditam eva / | This has been already explained before. |
apakṣālaḥ doṣaḥ // | ‘Apakṣāla’ is Defect. |
kiñca ye ye ti {vi---}bhāvyante te te bhrā{bhā---}nti parisphuṭam / | Whatever things are conceived become clearly manifest, at the completion of the conception; |
bhāvanāpariniṣpattau kāmādiviṣayā iva // | as is found in the case of the objects of desire; |
sarvadharmāś ca bhāvyante dīrghakālamanekadhā / śūnyānātmādirūpeṇa tāttvikena mahān matiḥ // | all things are conceived by great sages, for a long time and several times, in their real form, as ‘void’, ‘no-soul’ and so forth. |
śūnyānātmādirūpasya bhāvikatvaṃ ca sādhitam / | That the ‘void’, ‘no-soul’ and the rest are the real forms has been proved before. |
bhūtārthabhāvanodbhūtaiḥ pramāṇaṃ tena tanmatam // | Hence as arising out of the conception of really existent things, the said conception has been rightly regarded as right and valid. |
tatrāyaṃ maulaḥ prayogo vakṣyamāṇaḥ / | In order to show this, the Author proceeds to point out the Invariable Concomitance of the said characters (with Omniscience): [see verses 3441-3443 above] |
ye vastutvajñeyatvādidharmayoginas te sambhavadbhāvanāprakarṣaparyantavarttyekajñānasphuṭaprakāśanāḥ tadyathā kāminīputracorādayaḥ kāmādyupaplutair bhāvyamānāḥ sarvadharmāś ca vastutvādidharmayogina iti svabhāvahetuḥ / | The principal argument to be expounded later on, may be formulated thus: Things that are possessed of the characters of ‘being entity’, ‘being cognisable’ and so forth are those that become clearly manifest in a single cognition which forms the highest stage of conception; e.g. the loved woman, the son and the thief who are conceived of by men who are obsessed by the feelings of love, etc., all things are possessed of the said characters of ‘being entity’ and the rest; hence this is a Reason based upon the nature of things. |
nacāyam anaikāntikaḥ / | The Reason adduced here cannot be said to be ‘Inconclusive’; |
tathā hi yadi // | e.g. the man in love has the clear cognition of the woman he loves; |
etac ca śūnyādijñānaṃ pratyakṣapramāṇaṃ sādhayann āha pratyakṣam ityādi / | hence this is a Reason based on the nature of things. This shows that Conception is invariably concomitant with the resultant dear cognition. Question: The clear cognition of things is independent of other things; |
pratyakṣaṃ vyaktabhāsitvāt pramāṇaṃ vastusaṅgateḥ / | The cognition in question is vouched foe by ‘perception’, because it is clearly manifest, and is in keeping with the real nature of things; |
cakṣurādyāśrayodbhūtanīlādipratibhāsavat // | just like the appearance of blue and other things, arising from the contact of the eye and other sense-organs. |
sambhavatyekavijñāne sakṛt spaṣṭāvabhāsanam / | The single clear appearance of all things in a single cognition is quite possible, which please understand; |
tathā vibhāvyamānatvād aṅganātmajacoravat / | also because things are so conceived of, like the woman, the son and the thief; |
icchāmātramukhībhāvā bhāvanāpi na durlabhā // | conception too is not difficult to get at, as it can present itself before one by merely wishing for it. |
sphuṭapratibhāsitvenāvikalpatayā pramāṇaprasiddhārthaviṣayatvenāvisaṃvāditayā cakṣurādijṇyānavat pratyakṣapramāṇam etat / | As it is clearly manifested, it cannot be merely fanciful; as it envisages things vouched for by means of Right Cognition, it cannot be incompatible with the reality; hence it must be regarded as a valid form of Perception, like the Visual and other perceptions. |
tataś ca bhāvanāmātrabhāvini sphuṭapratibhāsitve siddhe siddham eva sarvadharmāṇām ekajñāne yugapat sphuṭapratibhāsanam iti siddhā vyāptiḥ sambhavatyekavijñāne sarvadharmāṇāṃ sakṛtspaṣṭāvabhāsanam iti / | Thus it having been proved that it arises from mere conception and is clearly manifest, it also becomes proved that all things become clearly manifested simultaneously in a single cognition; and thus the Invariable Concomitance becomes established, and we get the Premiss that‘all things can appear clearly in a single cognition at one and the same time’. |
prayogaḥ ye ye vibhāvyante te sambhavat sakṛdekavijñānasphuṭapratibhāsanā yathāṅganādayaḥ / | The argument may be formulated as follows: Things that are conceived of are capable of being clearly manifested in a single cognition; e.g. the Woman and other things; |
sarvadharmāś ca vibhāvyante iti svabhāvahetuḥ / | all things are conceived of; hence this is a Reason based upon the nature of things. |
nacāyam asiddho hetur mantavya ityādarśayann āha icchetyādi / pūrvaṃ ca vistareṇa bhāvanāsambhavasya pratipāditatvād iti nāsiddho hetuḥ // | The Reason cannot be regarded as ‘Inadmissible’; this is pointed out by the next sentence ‘Conception too is not, etc. etc.’ That is, the possibility of conception having been proved before, the Reason cannot be regarded as ‘Inadmissible’. |
bhāvanotkarṣaniṣṭhaikabuddhispaṣṭaprakāśanāḥ / vastusattvādihetubhyaḥ sarvadharmāḥ priyādivat // | All things must be regarded as clearly manifested by the one cognition that represents the highest stage of the conception, because of such reasons as ‘being entities’, ‘being existent’ and the like, like the beloved woman and others. |
evaṃ ca yasya vastutvasattvotpādādilakṣaṇāḥ / niścaye hetavaḥ śaktāḥ ko na taṃ sādhayiṣyati // | Similarly, when the certainty regarding a thing is capable of being proved by such reasons as ‘being an entity’, ‘being existent’, ‘being produced’ and the like, who is there who will not regard it as well-established? |
ekajñānakṣaṇavyāptaniḥśeṣajñeyamaṇḍalaḥ / | The highest stage of the development of the Conception is represented by the cognition in question. |
gamakatvādvaiyadhikaraṇye 'pi bahuvrīhiḥ / | Even in the absence of co-ordination, the Bahuvrīhi compound is based upon the sense of the words. |
bhāvanotkarṣaniṣṭhāyām ekabuddhau spaṣṭaṃ pratibhāsanaṃ yeṣāṃ te tathoktāḥ / | The meaning thus is that all things are such as are clearly manifested in the single cognition that represents the highest stage of the Conception. |
yasya ca jñāne te tathā bhāsante sa sakṛdekajñānavyāptāśeṣajñeyamaṇḍalaḥ sakalasurāsuracūḍāmaṇibhūtaḥ siddhaḥ sarvajña iti // | And the Person in whose one cognition all things become clearly manifested in this way is one ‘whose single cognition comprehends all that is knowahle’, and who is ‘the crest-jewel of all Suras and Asuras’; and this Person is thus proved to be ‘omniscient’. |
jñātā dharmādayo vai te kenacid vacanādṛte / satyātmanopadiṣṭatvāt kanakādiviśuddhivat // | Dharma and other things must have been known to some person, without any verbal expressions, because they have been taught by truthful men, like the purity of gold and such things. |
athavā ye satyātmanopadiṣṭās te kenacid viditāḥ, yathā kanakaviśuddhyādayaḥ, satyātmanā copadiṣṭā dharmādaya iti svabhāvahetuḥ // | Or, things that have been taught by truthful men must have been known to some one, like the purity of gold and such things; and Dharma and other things have been taught by truthful men; hence this is a Reason based upon the nature of things. |
vedānāṃ pauruṣeyatve siddhe siddhaṃ na sādhanam / ajñātasyopadeśo 'sti tathyo yādṛcchiko naraḥ{hi---} // | It having been proved that the Veda is the work of a human being, our argument is not proving what is already proved (and hence futile). Mere random teaching of what is not known cannot be always true. |
pūrvaṃ śrutiparīkṣāyāṃ vedānāṃ pauruṣeyatvasya prasādhitatvān na siddhasādhyatā / | The following might be urged “It is possible that the Teachers have taught Dharma, etc. after learning it from the Veda; hence your argument is futile”. |
Subsets and Splits