|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
40. Modi 1956, vol. II, pp. 187-214. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41. That is to say, one must think like a Mimamsaka. Coordination is the extension to the upanisads of a Mimamsa practice whereby rules were spelled out as to how ritual performers could "borrow" details of ritual performance from the texts of other schools. For more on coordination, see Chapter 3 and Clooney, forthcoming c. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42. The UMS III in general is a reflection on the presuppositions of meditation, including the order of the world (UMS III.1), the nature of human self and Brahman (UMS III.2), and the orthodox identity of the meditating person. (UMS III.4.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43. Here I follow Appaya Diksita's comments on UMS III.3.1. Modi, interested in retrieving Badarayana's system and in a consequent critique of Sankara's version of the sutras, offers a different explanation of the pada's structure. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44. Vacaspati distinguishes between qualities which always attest to Brahman's nature ("being," "truth," "bliss," etc.) and those which do pertain only as posited in specific contexts ("being that toward which all blessings go," or ''whose desires are true"). The former belong everywhere, the latter only where introduced. Appaya Diksita adds the point, significant for the Advaitins, that even the basic qualities are more of the nature of boundaries than essential characteristics. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45. Tr.21. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46. A more elaborate description is of course needed. Modi broke new ground by building an interpretation of the UMS beginning from UMS III.3, which in his view "holds the key of the Sutrakara's scheme of arranging the Srutis for discussion in the first three Padas of the first Adhyaya of the Brahmasutra." (1956 vol. II, p. 187); see the whole of volume II, ch. 9, especially 196ff. Although Modi is sharply critical of the Advaita reading of UMS III.3, his sense of where one's attention to the Text ought to begin is useful even in interpreting the Advaita. See also Nakamura (1983, pp. 429-34) who adheres to the view that the core text was originally dedicated to an organization of meditations and claims generated by the Chandogya Upanisad. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47. The Advaitins, from Sankara on, argue that UMS IV.1.1-12 completes UMS III; Govindananda says that whereas in UMS III.4 treats explicit statements regarding renunciation, UMS IV.1.1-12 considers what can be extrapolated from statements about the results of renunciation. |
|
|
|
|
|