________________
214
VEDANTA-SUTRAS.
by the purvapakshin on the circumstance that, in the Bri. Up., the verb 'to rinse' is found in the injunctive form ('therefore a man, &c., is to rinse '), is already refuted by our showing that the act of rinsing the mouth is not a new one (and therefore requires no Vedic injunction).
For the very reason that the text does not aim at enjoining the rinsing of the mouth, the Kânvas (in their recension of the Bri. Up.) conclude the chapter with the clause, 'They think,' &c., and do not add the concluding clause of the Mâdhyandinas, 'Therefore a man,' &c. From this we have to conclude that what is enjoined in the text of the Mâdhyandinas also is 'the knowledge of that,' i.e. the knowledge of the water being the dress of the previously mentioned prâna.-Nor finally can it be maintained that in one place (i.e. the Madhyandina-sâkhâ) the rinsing of the mouth is enjoined, and in other places the knowledge of water as the dress of prâna; for the introductory passage, 'Water is the dress,' is the same everywhere. We are therefore entitled to conclude that what is enjoined in all Sâkhâs is the cognition of water being the dress of the prâna.
19.
In the same (Sakhâ also) it is thus (i.e. there is unity of vidyâ), on account of the non-difference (of the object of meditation).
In the Agnirahasya forming part of the Vâgasaneyi-sâkhâ there is a vidyâ called the Sândilya-vidyâ, in which we meet with the following statement of particulars, 'Let him meditate on the Self which consists of mind, which has the prâna for its body and light for its form,' &c.-In the Brihad-âranyaka again, which belongs to the same Sâkhâ, we read (V, 10, 6), 'That person consisting of mind, whose being is light, is within the heart, small like a grain of rice or barley. He is the ruler of all, the Lord of all-he rules all this whatsoever exists.'-A doubt here presents itself whether these two passages are to be taken as one vidyâ in which the particulars mentioned in either text are to be combined or not.
The purvapakshin maintains that we have to do with two separate vidyâs whose particulars cannot be combined. For
Google
Digitized by