The Mahabharata of Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa (4 vols., libros 1–18) · 3 · 104

929. The commentator explains that for ascertaining who are uttama or foremost, the middling, or intermediate ones are first spoken of and their distinctions mentioned in the following verses. Of course, the foremost are foremost, and the intermediate ones can never be superior to them. For all that, intermediate ones are observers of the duties of caste; the foremost ones are not so, they having transcended such distinctions; hence, tentatively, the ignorant or popular opinion is first taken, to the effect that the observers of caste are superior to those who do not observe Jatidharma.

930. This probably means that as the Vedas had not been reduced to writing, their contents rested or dwelt in memories of men versed in them.

931. To understand what is birth and what is death, and to avoid birth (and, therefore, death), are the highest fruits of knowledge of the Soul. Those that have no knowledge of the Soul have to travel in a round of repeated rebirths.

932. i.e., of power that comes of Yoga.

933. The word para (the locative form of which is used here) always means that which is high or foremost. It is frequently employed to mean either Brahma or the Soul, and as Soul is regarded to be a part of Brahma, para has but one and the same meaning. The Burdwan translator takes it for 'Scriptures other than the Vedas.' K.P. Singha skips over it. Of course, savda-Brahma stands for the Vedas.

934. To look upon everything in the universe as one's own. Soul is the highest aspiration of a righteous person. It is yoga that enables one to attain to this highest ideal of existence. One who realises this is said to be a true Brahmana, a really regenerate person, in fact, a god on Earth. Adhiyajna and Adhidaivata are words that signify the Soul.

935. What the distinction is between anta and nidhan is not obvious. The commentator is silent. K.P. Singha translates the verse correctly. The Burdwan translator makes utter nonsense of the words in the second line.

936. Whether karma is swabhava or jnanam means (as the commentator explains) whether it is obligatory or optional. Jnanam, of course, means here jnana-janakam, i.e., leading to knowledge. Knowledge is essential to success or emancipation. If acts become necessary for leading to knowledge, the doubt may then arise that they cease to be obligatory, for knowledge may be supposed to be attainable otherwise than by acts. K.P. Singha translates this verse correctly, the Burdwan translator incorrectly, and, as usual, misunderstands the gloss completely.

937. The first line of this verse is exceedingly terse. The construction, as explained by the commentator, is Tatra (samsaye) purusham prati Jnanam (jnanajanakam) chet (karma) syat, (tarhi) sa (eva) Vedavidhih. One cannot help admiring Nilakantha for his patience and ingenuity.

938. Daiva is explained by the commentator as Grahah or Kalah. I think, it is used to signify some kind of blind force whose origin is untraceable. Hence, I render it necessity. Vritti in verse 5 is evidently Exertion, for the word implies course of conduct, Avivekam is samuchchayam or a combination of all the three.

939. 'Inspired with doubt,' with reference to the declarations of the Srutis. 'Possessed of tranquil souls,' i.e., not penetrated by doubts of any kind.

940. In the Treta and the other Yugas people are seen professing attachment or devotion to one only of the Vedas and not to the others, be it the Richs, the Samans, or the Yajuses. The speaker, dissatisfied with this refers to the Krita age as one in which such difference of faith were not observable. The men of that age regarded all the Vedas equally, and, in fact, as even identical.

941. Jiva or Chit becomes puissant and succeeds in creating the universe by means of penance. By penance one attains to Brahma, and, therefore, universal puissance. This has been sufficiently explained in the previous Sections.

942. This is one of the most important verses in this section, for, as the commentator explains, this furnishes the answer to the question proposed in the previous section, viz., 'what is that knowledge?' In the Vedas both acts and knowledge have been spoken of. In the province of acts, Brahma has been represented as Indra and the other gods. Brahma, therefore, as spoken of there, is 'gahana', or hidden to (or inconceivable by) even those that are conversant with that province or sphere of the Vedas. In the Vedanta, again, knowledge or Vidya has been spoken of as the means by which to attain to Brahma. The knowledge or Vidya, therefore, which is the subject of the question, is not what is implied by Pravritti dharma or by Nivritti as used in the previous section.

943. The second line of this verse corresponds with the second line of verse 87 of Chapter II of Manusmriti.

944. They are seen and not seen is an idiomatic expression for 'becoming invisible.'

945. i.e., kine do not yield copious and sweet milk; the soil ceases to be fertile; water ceases to be sweet; and the medicinal and edible herbs lose their virtues of healing as also their flavour.

946. The commentator thinks that Swadharmasthah is connected with asramah in the first line. I prefer the more obvious construction.

947. Varshati means pushnati. Angani means the observances necessary for the practice of Yoga as also all kinds of rites and vows. The Vedas cause these to grow, and they, in their turn, aid all students of the Vedas in achieving their purposes.

948. Prabhavah is uttpattih, or origin; sthanam is poshanam. Both the Vernacular translators skip over the last word, thinking that prabhavasthanam, is one word. The commentator notices them as separate. In the beginning of the second line, yatra is understood, Swabhavena, is explained by the commentator as Brahmabhavena, natu vikritena rupena. I think the explanation is correct, and have adopted it accordingly in the text.

949. Yatha in the first line of verse means, as the commentator explains, yat prakarakam.

950. The commentator points out that by these four words the four modes of life are indicated.

951. The commentator explains that this means that amongst embodied creatures they that are ignorant take those great entities which are really non-ego for either the ego or its Possessions.

952. The commentator explains that the object of this verse is to show that the Yoga view of the Soul being only the enjoyer but not the actor, is not correct. On the other hand, the Sankhya view of the Soul being neither the enjoyer nor the actor, is true. The deities, remaining in the several senses, act and enjoy. It is through ignorance that the Soul ascribes to itself their enjoyments and their actions.

953. I render Bhutatma by knowledge, following the commentator who uses the words buddhyupadhirjivah for explaining it.

954. Niyama and Visarga are explained by the commentator as 'destruction' and 'creation.' I prefer to take them as meaning 'guiding or restraining,' and 'employing.' Practically, the explanations are identical.

955. What is meant by the objects of the senses residing within the bodies of living creatures is that (as the commentator explains) their concepts exist in 'the cavity of the heart' (probably, mind) so that when necessary or called for, they appear (before the mind's eye). Swabhava is explained as 'attributes' like heat and cold, etc.

956. This is a very difficult verse. I have rendered it, following Nilakantha's gloss. In verse the speaker lays down what entities dwell in the body. In the rest he expounds the nature of Sattwa which the commentator takes to mean buddhi or knowledge. He begins with the statement that Sattwasya asrayah nasti. This does not mean that the knowledge has no refuge, for that would be absurd, but it means that the asraya of the knowledge, i.e., that in which the knowledge dwells, viz., the body, does not exist, the true doctrine being that the body has no real existence but that it exists like to its image in a dream. The body being non-existent, what then is the real refuge of the knowledge? The speaker answers it by saying Gunah, implying that primeval Prakriti characterised by the three attributes is that real refuge. Then it is said that Chetana (by which is implied the Soul here) is not the refuge of the knowledge for the Soul is dissociated from everything and incapable of transformation of any kind. The question is then mentally stated,—May not the Gunas be the qualities of the knowledge (instead of being, as said above, its refuge)? For dispelling this doubt, it is stated that Sattwa is the product of Tejas (Desire). The Gunas are not the product of Tejas. Hence the Gunas, which have a different origin cannot be the properties of Sattwa. The Gunas exist independently of Desire. Thus the knowledge, which has Desire for its originating cause, rests on the Gunas or has them for its refuge. In this verse, therefore, the nature of the body, the knowledge, and the Gunas, is expounded. The grammatical construction of the first line is exceedingly terse.

957. Such men behold Brahma in all things. Abhijanah is explained by the commentator as sishyakuladih. This seems to be the true meaning of the word here.

958. In rendering this word tatam (where it occurs in the Gita), it has been shown that to take it as equivalent to 'spread' is incorrect. In such connections, it is evident that it means 'pervaded.'