________________
III ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, I.
629
THIRD PÅDA.
1. What is understood from all the Vedanta-texts (is one), on account of the non-difference of injunction and the rest.
The Satras have stated whatever has to be stated to the end of rousing the desire of meditation-concluding with the fact that Brahman bestows rewards. Next the question is introduced whether the vidyas (i.e. the different forms of meditation on Brahman which the Vedanta-texts enjoin) are different or non-different, on the decision of which question it will depend whether the qualities attributed to Brahman in those vidyas are to be comprised in one act of meditation or not.—The first subordinate question arising here is whether one and the same meditation-as e.g. the vidya of Vaisvanara-which is met with in the text of several såkhâs, constitutes one vidya or several. - The vidyas are separate, the Pārvapakshin maintains; for the fact that the same matter is, without difference, imparted for a second time, and moreover stands under a different heading-both which circumstances necessarily attend the text's being met with in different såkhâsproves the difference of the two meditations. It is for this reason only that a restrictive injunction, such as the one conveyed in the text, 'Let a man tell this science of Brahman to those only who have performed the rite of carrying fire on their head' (Mu. Up. III, 2, 10) which restricts the imparting of knowledge to the Atharvanikas, to whom that rite is peculiar-has any sense ; for if the vidyàs were one, then the rite mentioned, which is a part of the vidya, would be valid for the members of other såkhas also, and then the restriction enjoined by the text would have no meaning.-This view is set aside by the Satra, What is understood from all the Vedanta-texts' is one and the same meditation, because there is non-difference of injunction and the rest.' By injunction is meant the
Digitized by
Digitized by Google
