Indian Antiquary Vol 62

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

Page 221

NOVEMBER, 1933]
A CRITICAL STUDY OF SOPANISAD
209
finally, holds out liberation to those who understand the teaching of st. 13: they are liberated through vináša or becoming non-existent to the world and through sambhúti or becoming existent as to their true nature.91
Turning hence to the second triplet (the first in the current editions), I shall begin by trying to explain it as immediately connected with the first, i.e., as referring to one more problem of the very nature of the first but subsidiary to it and therefore dealt with in the second place only in the Madhyandina (=original ?) recension. I mean the problem raised, in Bphadåranyaka Up. II, 4, 12, by Yajñavalkya's statement na pretya samjñüsti. It is clear that here again not ordinary death is the topic, but the "Great Departure" of the liberated. Now, does this event mean cessation of consciousness in the absolute sense ? Undoubtedly not a few philosophers have understood it like that, though, as a rule, without denying the post-mortem existence of the liberated. I need only mention the jadátmaváda attributed to the Mimamsakas and others, and the asaññiváda recorded among other heresies in Pali texts; and even in Buddhism itself the death of the liberated implies the complete cessation of consciousness. But Yajñavalkya did not understand it in this way. For him the liberated becomes so to speak Superconscious: he loses wh:t we understand by consciousness and obtains instead the "mere" or unlimited consciousness of the One which, being “ without a second," can have no objects of consciousness. And after Y. also all Vedântic systems agree in teaching that in final death limited consciousness is exchanged for unlimited consciousness. Assuming, then, for the moment that vidyd can, and in our triplet dces, mean consciousness, everything is clear: the Absolute is different from both consciousness and unconsciousness, i.e., in the usual meaning of these words (st. 10); a man believing it to be unconscious will sink down in the samsåra, while the one who believes it to be conscious (and thus not the Absolute but only a highest person) will sink to still deeper depths (st. 9); but he who understands the teaching of st. 10 (excluding from God, the superconscious, both unconsciousness and limited consciousness) will "cross death" through the loss of his individual consciousness and “enjoy immortality " through superconsciousness (st. 11).
This interpretation of the vidyA-avidyå triplet is, apart from its starting point,22 essentially that of Balakrsna, who, while explaining the vidya-upasakas to be those who look at their Self as an object of knowledge (svútmânam jñanavisayatvenopdeale), declares the avidya-upasakas to be such people as avidyam jñánábhavam átmánam upåsate, the result being some sort of sûnyavada or jad&tmavâda. For, an atman that has no other than the empirical consciousness (vidyam-pramánaprameyádivyavaháram, B.) belongs through it to the world of experience. But can vidyd mean “consciousness”? This meaning is not known to me from any other passage; yet, considering the fluctuating use, in the older and even later language, of most words denoting " to know " or "knowledge "28. I consider it possible, indeed, that our poet has here taken the liberty to make vidya a synonym of samvid.
21 Change of term or meaning, respectively, in third stanza of triplet (see above, p. 207, last para) : “becoming non-existent" (vindóa) for non-existence" (asambhuti), and " becoming existent." (sambhúli) for "existence" (do.).-All commentators understand saha as one word. But, the particle ha " verily, indeed " being exceedingly frequent in the older language, we should rather road sa ha.
23 Which is with B. : yon manasd na manute (Kena Up. 5).
23 Rominding one of the English "to know " which moans both German erkennen and wissen, to come to know and to have a knowledge of. Sanskrit vid also, though generally used as a present perfect, may as well mean to come to know, to become aware, to be conscious; compare, e.g., the frequent vidám cakdra, or Bhadâranyaka Up. I, 3, 2 te 'viduh, or ibid. IV, 3, 21 na bdhyam kimcana veda ndntaram "is not conscious of anything external or internal,"