Indian Antiquary Vol 62

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Charles E A W Oldham, S Krishnaswami Aiyangar, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarka
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 220

208
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
NOVEMBER, 1933
Now, from (1) it follows that vidyaya and avidyaya, respectively, of stanza 10, which are parallel to sambhavát and asambhavát in 13, have been preferred here merely for the sake of the metre to vidyâyáh and avidyayah, respectively (which are, indeed, the Madhyandina readings), and that it is wrong, therefore, and unnecessary to assume with Prof. Deussen
a bold ellipsis." We have here the instrumental of comparison which, though absent from classical Sanskrit, is known from archaic and epical literature. 14 Our third point also is in conformity with actual usage, as every Sanskritist knows. The two remaining points will come out in the course of our inquiry.
Of the two triplets, the one on sambhúti and asambhúti is the less problematical, because it gives us synonyms, and we may, therefore, expect to facilitate our further task by taking it up first. In doing so we follow the Mâdhyandina recension, which has the two triplets in the reverse order to that found with the Kanvas and in most editions of the Upanişad. Which order is the original one can, of course, if at all, not be decided as long as we are in doubt as to the original meaning of the stanzas.16
In my opinion stanzas 12 to 14 Kånva counting refer to the nature of the Absolute (brahma-svarúpa) or, respectively, the condition of the liberated. They are an answer to the doubt expressed in Kathaka Up. I, 29: yeyam prete vicikiteå manusye : astity eke nayam astiti caike.10 The Absolute, says st. 13, is different from both sambhava "existence" and asambhava "non-existence."17 which can only mean that in regard to the common meaning of the word existence (jayate 'sli vardhate viparinamate 'paksiyate nasyati) the Absolute is neither (merely) "existent" nor (merely) "non-existent." Accordingly, in st. 12 those may be meant who (without being materialistsi) adhere to (wpásate) some sort of súnyavada, 1' and (2) those one-sided pantheists who believe God to be the world and nothing more... Stanza 14,
16 Soe Speijer, Sanskrit Syntax, § 107, and compare especially the instrumental connected with the Vedic preposition paras " beyond " (o.g., in paro mátray) and with anyatra "except " in Buddhist Sanskrit (and in Pali), with thidyate "keeps aloof from," and (occasionally) with adhika ; also the instrumental with sama, samána, etc.
15 It might be conjectured that either recension had originally but one triplet, viz., the one te which it now gives the first place; that is to say, that the Upaniçad started with a single triplet ; that this was modified in a later school, and that finally either school added to its triplet the one of the other school. But this is such a complicated hypothesis that it could be only accepted if we had still a trace of this evolution, e... if manuscripts of one of the two recensions would have but one triplet, which is not the case.
16 Which passage does not refer to ordinary death, as Sankara would make us believe, but (as already noticed by Deussen) to what the Upanipad calls the Great Passage (mahún sámparáyah), viz., from the ea msåre to what is beyond it. See B. N. Krishnamurti Sarma's paper "A Critique of Sankara's Rendering Yeyam prete" in the Annamalai University Journal, vol. I, No. 2.
17 Sambhawa means, indeed, "birth, production," etc., but then also "existence" in a quite general sense, as can be proved by many passages. Sambhúti, again, meens primarily “birth, origin," etc., but in the Brahmana period also "growth, increase" and thus may also stand for existence generally.
18 Materialists are, no doubt, the dtmahano jandh of st. 3, the villamohena mudhdh of Kathaka Up. 11. 6 (comp. 14A Up. 1: ma grelhah kasyasvid dhanam). For, to them our Upanipad holds out the asurya lolah : and the Asura, as is well known, is the typical materialist denying immortality in any senge : "avam loko, nasti parah" iti mani (Kathaka Up. II, 6; comp. Bhag. Gita XVI, 8 and 20).
19 Comp. Balakrepadora : ye.... pra pañcábhávam brahmábhyu pagacchanti te andham tamah pravidanti .... na hi kevalavimvdbhavatmakam brahma kimtu bruh maita svasaktyd nánákáram avalam. bate. The present-day Southern Buddhists seeing only the negative side of Nirvana also belong to this clase.
20 1. e.: who do not see that God is also sarvasyasya báhyatah, viz., with his transcendent "three quarters." They are worse than the Besambhuti-upasakas, because they confine God to his worldly " quarter." Balakrena is inconsistent here in explaining: ye sambhútycim tutpattyán ratah karyamatram eva vastu manyante na karanardpam iti. Considering his definition of the asambhůtivada he ought to have said : ye daktirú pam eva vastu manyante saktiman paramefvaro nástity avadhdrayantah. For, even materialism, exrepting perhaps its crudest form, admits of some sort of karanarúpam vastu (evabhdra).
--To understand with Sankars and most other commentators asambhúti as the avyákrta prakrti (whose worshippers are the ak para-upasakas of Bhag. Gita XII) is tempting, indeed; but then sambhúti must be explained as God Brahma (so Sankara) or the devas, which is far from convincing and moreover Tenders st. 14 unintelligible.