Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
We conclude therefore that the manifoldness of cognitions is due solely to the manifoldness of things. From all this it follows that external things are not non-existent. The next Sutra refutes the opinion of those who attempt to prove the baselessness of the cognitions of the waking state by comparing them to the cognitions of a dreaming person.
Of this view the Sutra disposes by saying 'that which abides in the moving and the non-moving, &c. The meaning is the terms which abide in, i.e. are connected with, the different moving and non-moving things, and hence denote those things, possess with regard to Brahman a denotative power which is not 'bhakta, i.e. secondary or figurative, but primary and direct.
It must indeed be admitted that such individual souls as possess only a moderate degree of merit are unable to accomplish the creation of the world by their mere wish, to enjoy supreme bliss, to be the cause of fearlessness, and so on; but why should not beings like Aditya and Prajapati, whose merit is extraordinarily great, be capable of all this? Of this suggestion the next Sutra disposes.
There is thus no conflict between the eternity of the Veda and the fact that the Rishis are the makers of its sections, hymns, and so on. A further objection is raised. Of this difficulty the next Sutra disposes. On account of the sameness of names and forms, as stated before, there is no difficulty in the way of the origination of the world, even in the case of total pralayas.
But the devout followers of Nichiren claim that after death their bodies will remain perfectly flexible; and the dead body of an uguisu, they affirm, likewise never stiffens, for this little bird is of their faith, and passes its life in singing praises unto the Sutra of the Lotus of the Good Law. I have already become a little too fond of my dwelling-place.
The soul, therefore, is an enjoyer only, while all agency belongs to Prakriti To this the Sutra replies, 'an agent, on account of Scripture thus having a meaning. The Self only is an agent, not the gunas, because thus only Scripture has a meaning.
For example, in coming to the study of a book, we think of the author, his period, the school to which he belongs. The second stage, set forth in the next Sutra, goes directly to the spiritual meaning of the book, setting its traditional trappings aside and finding its application to our own experience and problems.
For it is on this ground that Scripture teaches the Self to be Brahman. And that upadhi must not be said to be a mere erroneous imagination, for on that view the distinction of bondage, release, and so on, would be impossible. Against all these views the Sutra declares that the soul is a part of Brahman; since there are declarations of difference and also 'otherwise, i.e. declarations of unity.
This prima facie view is set aside by the Sutra. The whole text refers to the Supreme Lord only; for on this supposition only a satisfactory connexion of the parts of the text can be made out. Up.
But if the released soul, no less than the soul implicated in the Samsara, experiences enjoyments belonging to the sphere of change, it follows that the sum of its enjoyments is finite and limited, and that hence the released soul is no better off than the soul in the state of bondage! Of this doubt the next Sutra disposes.
Word Of The Day