The Mahabharata of Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa (4 vols., libros 1–18) · 2 · 53

280 (return) [ Upwards and downwards i.e., from the highest to the lowest of created things. Enlarged by the qualities, i.e., the qualities appearing as the body, the senses, etc. The sprouts are the objects of sense, being attached to the senses themselves as sprouts to branches. The roots extending downwards are the desires for diverse enjoyments. Thus Telang, following the commentators.]

281 (return) [ Joined to the qualities, i.e., perceiving objects of sense or experiencing pleasure and pain.]

282 (return) [ “Atmani” in the first line is “in the body” as explained by Sreedhara and others: “in the understanding” as explained by Sankara. It seems, however, to be used in the general senses of “themselves”, without particular reference to either body or understanding. An Akritatman is one whose soul is not made or formed; generally, “a person of unsubdued passions.”]

283 (return) [ There can be no question that Soma here means the moon and not the Soma juice quaffed in sacrifices, or sap. It is the moon that supports, nourishes all herbs and numerous passages may be quoted from Hindu sacred literature to show this. Mr. Davies, therefore, clearly errs in rendering Soma as “the savoury juice.”]

284 (return) [ The four kinds of food are: that which is masticated, that which is sucked, that which is licked, and that which is drunk.]

285 (return) [ Apohanam is loss or removal. It is a well-known word and its application here is very natural. I am memory and knowledge (to those that use them for virtuous acts). I am the loss of these faculties (to those that engage in unrighteous acts). Mr. Davies erroneously renders it as “The power of reason.”]

286 (return) [ Kutashtha is rendered by K. T. Telang as “the unconcerned one”, by Mr. Davies as “the lord on high.” I incline to the scholiasts who explain it as “the uniform or the unchangeable one.”]

287 (return) [ Sarvabhavena is explained by Sankara by Sarvatma-chintaya (thinking Me to be the soul of everything). Sreedhara explains it as Sarvaprakarena. Why may it not mean “with the whole soul” or “with excess of love.”]

288 (return) [ I adopt Sankara’s explanation of the last compound of the first line of this sloka. Sreedhara explains it differently.]

289 (return) [ Prabritti I render “inclination” and Nivritti as “disinclination.” The inclination is, as all the commentators explain, towards righteous actions, and the disinclination, consequently, is about all unrighteous actions. K. T. Telang renders these words as “action” and “inaction”. Mr. Davies, following the French version of Burnouf, takes them to mean “the creation and its end.”]

290 (return) [ Sankara seems to connect the genitive Jagatas with achitas Sreedhara connects it (which is natural) with Kshayaya, which I accept.]

291 (return) [ ‘That’ evidently refers to sacrifice, penance, and gift, in the clause before. The commentators, however, suggest that it may, besides, refer to Brahma. I am myself not sure that it does not refer to Brahma.]

292 (return) [ What the author wishes to lay down in these verses is that the words OM, TAT, and SAT, have each their respective uses. When used as directed here, such use cures the defects of the respective actions to which they are applied, it being understood that all three denote Brahma.]

293 (return) [ Sanyasa I render Renunciation. K. T. Telang does the same. Mr. Davies renders it “abstention.” So ‘Tyaga’ I render “abandonment.” Mr. Davies renders it “renunciation.” What the two words, however, mean is explained fully in the verses that follow.]

294 (return) [ Both Sankara and Sreedhara explain the second line consisting of two propositions, the connecting verb bhavet being understood.]

295 (return) [ I have used “when” for “whatever” to make the sentence grammatical.]

296 (return) [ Davies, giving the sense correctly, does not follow the true order of the subject and the predicate. Following Lassen, he renders kusala and akusala as “prosperous” and “unprosperous;” for medhabi K. T. Telang has rendered “talented” which has not the sanction of good usage.]

297 (return) [ That is, as Sreedhara explains, one who hath renounced the fruit of actions.]

298 (return) [ Kritante Sankara takes it as an adjective of Sankhye and thinks that the reference is to the Vedanta. Sreedhara also seems to be of the same opinion.]

299 (return) [ The substratum is the body. The agent is the person that thinks himself to be the actor. The organs are those of perception etc. The efforts are the actions of the vital winds—Prana, etc. The deities are those that preside over the eye and the other senses. The deities have no place in Kapila’s system. Hence, if it is not the Vedanta, some system materially based upon Kapila’s and recognising the interference of the deities, seems to be indicated. Atra is explained by Sreedhara as equivalent to “among” or “with these.” I think, however, it means, “are here”, i.e., are enumerated here, or, in this connection.]

300 (return) [ Hath no feeling of egoism, i.e., doth not regard himself as the doer, sullied, i.e., by the taint of desire of fruit.]

301 (return) [ Mr. Davies, I think, is right in rendering Samgrahas as “complement.” K. T. Telang renders it as equivalent to “in brief.”]

302 (return) [ In the enunciation of qualities i.e., in the Sankhya system.]

303 (return) [ Full of affections, i.e., for children, etc., as Sreedhara.]

304 (return) [ Prakrita which I have rendered “without discernment” following Sreedhara, may be, as Mr. Davies renders it, but “malicious.”]

305 (return) [ Mr. Davies makes “unswerving” an adjective of ‘devotion.’ This is wrong, for Avyabhicharinya (unswerving) is a feminine instrumental, and must qualify Dhritya.]

306 (return) [ Atma-budhi-prasadajam. K. T. Telang, following an alternative explanation offered by Sankara, renders it “clear knowledge of the self.” Mr. Davies renders the “serenity of one’s own mind.” I follow Sreedhara.]

307 (return) [ Asamsayas is the reading that occurs in every text, and not Asamsayam. Mr. Davies, therefore, is incorrect in rendering it “doubtless” and making it an adverb qualifying “come to me.”]

308 (return) [ Bhuti is explained by Sreedhara as gradual abhivridhhi, i.e., growth or greatness. Niti is explained as Nyaya or justice.]

309 (return) [ Varayudham is according to Nilakantha, the excellent bow. Yena in verse 8 is equivalent to Yatra.]