________________
CHAPTER II, 31.
159
to those in whom there is no emulation about (their) piety, that (piety) is a means of (acquiring) knowledge . Such Brahmanas released from this (world), go to the heaven which is free from the threefold source of pain. People who understand the Vedas call his conduct good. (But) people closely connected, as well as strangers, do not pay much regard to him. Wherever he may believe food and drink for a Bråhmana to exist in abundance, like water on grass in the autumn, there would he live and not be vexed. (To him) only that person is good, and no other (as a companion), who does nothing in excess, and who occasions fear and injury to a taciturn man. And his food is acceptable to the good, who does not vex the self of a taciturn man, and who does not destroy the property of a Brahmana. A Brahmana should hold, that living in the midst of kinsmen, his actions should be always unknown?; and he should not
According to the Vedāntic theory, the acts of piety purify the inner man, and are thus a stepping-stone to knowledge. See Introduction, p. 147 supra. Cf. Gitá, p. 122; and Brihadaranyaka, p. 899.
.e. physical, mental, and such as is caused by superhuman agency. This is Sankara's explanation. It is somewhat far. fetched, but I can find none better. Cl. Gitá, p. 49. And see also Brihadaranyaka, p. 876, and the commentary of Sankara there with Anandagiri's gloss.
"E.g. wise, children, &c. • I.e. vexed as to how his livelihood is to be eamed, &c.
• Excess, c.8. 100 much obsequiousness towards a 'lacituma man,' owing to his holiness, &c. Taciturn man = ascetic. Injury = disrespect, &c. Perhaps the protest against worldliness is here carried to an extreme. Sankara cites Manu as a parallel, 'A Brahmara should be asraid of (worldly) respect as of poison.'
• E.g. the Kusa grass, deerskin, &c., mentioned at Gita, p. 68.
'I.c. he should not parade his actions Sankara compares Vasiablka and a l'edic text See, too, the quotation at Taitt. Aran.p.903.
Digitized by Google