Satapatha Bramhana Part 05

SR No.: 007680
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Julius Eggeling
Publisher: Oxford
Publication Year: 1900
Total Pages: 2017
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 44 MB

Page 1827

III ADHYÂYA, 2 PÂDA, 27.
619
the entire non-sentient universe is the outward form of Brahman. For the purpose of proving Brahman's freedom from all imperfection, an enquiry is now begun into the particular mode in which the world may be conceived to constitute the form of Brahman. Is the relation of the two like that of the snake and its coils; or like that of light and the luminous body, both of which fall under the same genus; or like that of the individual soul and Brahman, the soul being a distinguishing attribute and for that reason a part (amsa) of Brahman ?-On the assumption of this last alternative, which is about to be established here, it has been already shown under two preceding Sätras (I, 4, 23; II, 1, 14), that from Brahman, as distinguished by sentient and non-sentient beings in their subtle form, there originates Brahman as distinguished by all those beings in their gross form.
Which then of the alternatives stated above is the true one ?—The material world is related to Brahman as the coils to the snake, 'on account of twofold designation.! For some texts declare the identity of the two: 'Brahman only is all this'; 'The Self only is all this.' Other texts again refer to the difference of the two: 'Having entered into these three deities with this giva-self, let me differentiate names and forms. We therefore consider all nonsentient things to be special forms or arrangements of Brahman, as the coils are of a coiled-up snake or a coiledup rope.
27. Or else like light and its abode, both being fire.
The or sets aside the other two alternatives. If Brahman itself only appeared in the form of non-sentient things-as the snake itself only constitutes the coils—both sets of texts, those which declare difference as well as those which declare the unchangeableness of Brahman, would be contrary to sense. We therefore, adopting the second alternative, hold that the case under discussion is analogous to that of light and that in which it abides, i.e. the luminous body. The two are different, but at the same time they are
Digitized by Google
Digitized by