________________
III ADHYAYA, 3 PÂDA, 43.
667
of the Highest; within that there is a small space, free from sorrow-what is within that should be meditated upon (Mahânår. Up. X, 23). Now, as the lotus of the heart is mentioned only in section X, the Narayana-section' (the heart resembling the bud of a lotus, with its point turned downwards,' XI, 6), we conclude that that section also is concerned with the object of meditation to which the daharavidya refers. — Against this view the Satra declares itself, on account of the majority of indicatory marks'; i.e. there are in the text several marks proving that that section is meant to declare characteristics of that which constitutes the object of meditation in all meditations on the highest being. For that being which in those meditations is denoted as the Imperishable, Siva, Sambhu, the highest Brahman, the highest light, the highest entity, the highest Self, and so on, is here referred to by the same names, and then declared to be Narayana. There are thus several indications to prove that Narayana is none other than that which is the object of meditation in all meditations on the Highest, viz. Brahman, which has bliss and the rest for its qualities. By 'linga' (inferential mark) we here understand clauses (vakya) which contain a specific indication ; for such clauses have, according to the Parva Mimamså, greater proving power than leading subject-matter (prakarana). The argumentation that the clause the heart resembling the bud of a lotus flower,' &c., proves that section to stand in a dependent rela. tion to the daharavidya, is without force ; for it being proved by a stronger argument that the section refers to that which is the object of meditation in all meditations, the clause mentioned may also be taken as declaring that in the daharavidyâ also the object of meditation is Närayana. Nor must it be thought that the accusatives with which the section begins (sahasrasirsham, &c.) are to be connected with the 'meditating' enjoined in the previous section ; for the 'meditating' is there enjoined by a gerundive form (tasmin yad antas tad upasitavyam'), and with this the subsequent accusatives cannot be construed. Moreover, the subsequent clause (“all this is Nara
Digitized by
Digitized by Google
