Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: May 25, 2025
In the next sentence then, 'But this one in truth is an ativadin who makes a supreme statement by means of the True, the clause 'But this one is an ativadin' refers back to the previously mentioned person who knows the Prana, and the relative clause 'who makes, &c., enjoins on him the speaking of the truth as an auxiliary element in the meditation on Prana.
The conjunction 'but' shows that the section gives instruction about a new ativadin, and does not merely declare that the ativadin previously mentioned has to speak the truth.
The text, after having declared that he who knows the Prana is an ativadin, goes on, 'But really that one is an ativadin who makes a supreme declaration by means of the True. The 'but' here clearly separates him who is an ativadin by means of the True from the previous ativadin, and the clause thus does not cause us to recognise him who is ativadin by means of Prana; hence 'the True' which is the cause of the latter ativadin being what he is must be something different from the Prana which is the cause of the former ativadin's quality.
'He who is an ativadin by the True, i.e. he who is an ativadin characterised by the highest Brahman as the object of his meditation.
The teacher on the other hand, holding that even that knowledge is not the highest, spontaneously continues his teaching, and tells the pupil that truly he only is an ativadin who proclaims the supremely and absolutely beneficial being which is called 'the True, i.e. the highest Brahman.
For the same reason the pupil entreats, 'Sir, may I be an ativadin with the True! and the teacher replies, 'But we must desire to know the True! Moreover, the text, VII, 26, I, 'Prana springs from the Self, declares the origination from the Self of the being called Prana; and from this we infer that the Self which is introduced as the general subject-matter of the section, in the clause 'He who knows the Self passes beyond death, is different from the being called Prana.
The text at first declares that he who knows Prana, i.e. the individual soul, is an ativadin, in so far as the object of his devout meditation surpasses the objects from name up to hope; and then goes on to say that, as that object also is not of supreme benefit to man, an ativadin in the full sense of the term is he only who proclaims as the object of his devotion the highest Brahman, which alone is of supreme unsurpassable benefit to man.
In the text under discussion, on the other hand, we have the term 'the True', which makes us apprehend that there is a further ativadin different from the preceding one; and we know that that term is used to denote the highest Brahman, as e.g. in the text, 'The True, knowledge, the Infinite is Brahman. The ativadin who takes his stand on this Brahman, therefore, must be viewed as different from the preceding ativadin; and a difference thus established on the basis of the meaning and connexion of the different sentences cannot be set aside.
And this soul, there called Prana, is what the text later on calls Bhuman; for as there is no question and reply as to something greater than Prana, Prana continues, without break, to be the subject-matter up to the mention of bhuman. The Prana section closes with the remark that he who fully knows Prana is an ativadin, i.e. one who makes a final supreme declaration.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking