Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: June 5, 2025
How then is it possible that this Brahman should form the purpose of becoming, and actually become, manifold, by appearing in the form of a world comprising various sentient and non-sentient beings all of which are the abodes of all kinds of imperfections and afflictions? To this question the next Sutra replies. Owing to modification.
The Chandogya-text then further teaches that all sentient and non-sentient beings have their Self in Brahman 'in that all this has its Self; and further inculcates this truth in 'Thou art that. Up. Up. Up. Up. Up. Up. Up. Up. It is in this way that we prove, by means of the texts beginning with arambhana, that the world is non-different from the universal cause, i.e. the highest Brahman.
Prakriti, consisting in the equipoise of Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas is one, itself non-sentient but subserving the enjoyment and final release of the many sentient beings, eternal, all-pervading, ever active, not the effect of anything, but the one general cause.
Against all this the Sutra declares 'for this very reason a knower. This Self is essentially a knower, a knowing subject; not either mere knowledge or of non-sentient nature. Why? 'For this very reason, i.e. on account of Scripture itself. 'For this reason' refers back to the 'on account of Scripture' in the preceding Sutra. Up. Up. Up. Up. Up.
This is the purport of the clause 'it became the real and the unreal': although undergoing a change into the multiplicity of actual sentient and non-sentient things, Brahman at the same time was the Real, i.e. that which is free from all shadow of imperfection, consisting of nothing but pure knowledge and bliss.
For these texts prove the non- difference from Brahman of the world consisting of non-sentient and sentient beings. This is as follows.
That comparison, on the other hand, is quite in its place, if we understand by Prana the individual soul, for the whole aggregate of non-sentient matter which stands to the individual soul in the relation of object or instrument of enjoyment, has an existence dependent on the individual soul.
It therefore remains a settled conclusion that the Brahman to be known is nothing else but the highest Person capable of the thought 'of becoming many' by manifesting himself in a world comprising manifold sentient and non-sentient creatures. Here terminates the adhikarana of 'seeing'.
In the case of the Lord, on the other hand, who is in the enjoyment of self-established supreme bliss, it can in no way be maintained that he must be joined to a body, consisting of all sentient and non-sentient beings, for the purpose of enjoyment. That view also according to which a 'body' means no more than a means of enjoyment is refuted hereby.
The meaning is clear, we reply; the text teaches that the entire Self, different from all that is non-sentient, is self-illumined, i.e. not even a small part of it depends for its illumination on something else.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking