The Tattva-Muktavali

Excerpt

1. Victorious is the garland-wearing foster-son of Nanda,—the protector of his devotees,—the destroyer of the cruel king,— dark-blue like the delicate tamâla blossoms,—formidable with his many outspread rays,—mighty with all his attendant powers, [Footnote: The Bengali translation explains these as the internal powers (__antara"ngâ__) Hlâdinî, etc., and the external (__bahira"ngâ__) Prahvâ, etc.]—and having his forehead radiant like the moon.

2. This follower of the Purâ.nas, who holds by his own belief, reads to his heart's content the Purâ.na in the morning, and he listens devotedly with profound meditation, his whole mind intent on the meaning of the book.

3. Having abandoned the doctrine of the oneness of the individual and the Supreme Soul, he establishes by argument their mutual difference; having used Šruti and Šm.riti as a manifold proof, he employs Inference in many ways in the controversy.

4. This individual soul must be different from Brahman because it is always circumscribed,—many are the similar arguments which are to be acknowledged in the course of our reasonings.

5. "Might we not say that a jar and a web could be called identical because both are cognizable?" [Footnote: There is a favourite Naiyâyik example of a __kevalânvayi__ middle term, "a jar is nameable because it is cognizable as a web is."] But we cannot say so in regard to these two things in question, for Brahman alone is that which cannot be cognized.

6. The sentence "Thou art That" (__tat tvam asi__) which is understood in its primary meaning as referring to the object of the Veda, [Footnote: Or __vedavishaye__ may perhaps simply mean __vede__, cf. šl. 112.]—the author thus explains its meaning, as he knows his own doctrine, and has fixed his mind on the system of Duality; since the word 'that' (__tat__) is here indeclinable and implies a difference, and the word 'thou' (__tvam__) means that which is to be differentiated, the sign of the genitive case has been elided; [Footnote: The author here explains the sentence __tat tvam asi__, as really meaning __tasya tvam asi__ "thou art Its."] "thou only," such is not the meaning of the sentence [Footnote: In "Thou art that," 'thou' and 'that' would refer to the same subject (__sâmânâdhikara.nya__)].

7. He is all-knowing, all-seeing, Himself the three worlds, in whose belly thou art thyself contained,—He causes at once by a movement of the brow the creation, preservation, and absorption of all beings! Thou art ignorant, and only seest relatively, He is the adorable, the one Witness of all worlds; thou art changing, He is One; thou art all dull and stained, not such is He.

8. As for the text "I am Brahman," you must take the nominative case as only used there for the genitive by the licence of an inspired speaker. How, if it were otherwise, would there be a genitive in the illustration, [Footnote: This is often used as an illustration in Vedânta works, as __e.g.__ B.rihad Âra.ny. Up. ii. 1. 20, "as the spider proceeds with his web, as the little sparks proceed from fire, so from this Soul proceed all vital airs, all worlds, all gods, all beings."] as in the sentence "as the sparks of the fire"?

9. The poets call a lad fire (from his hot temper), the face the orb of a full moon, the eye a blue lotus, the bosom mount Meru, and the hand a young shoot; by a confusion of the superimposed appearance we may thus have the idea of identity where there is still a real difference; and so too must we deal with those words of Šruti "I am Brahman." [Footnote: This is another suggested method of interpreting the words "I am Brahman." It may be only a common case of "qualified superimponent indication," as "the man of the Panjâb is an ox" (cf....