|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
demarcation of the result connected with an injunction is not known, then all the details connected with that result must be organized precisely according to the injunction [since there is no other standard by which to make sure that they contribute properly]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By contrast, truth, knowledge, etc. serve to ascertain the essence of the object; wherever the essence of that object is pertinent, there they are to be introduced . . . |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
He then faces the objection that a multiplication of words is pointless: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Objection:] Regarding what is "without qualities" [Brahman] words other [than that single marker "without qualities"] are useless, and so should not be introduced [from other meditation contexts.] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On the contrary, he responds, it is useful to introduce all those words which are judged everywhere applicable, since they cooperate in correcting wrong ideas of Brahman: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Response:] [i] Truth, [ii] consciousness, [iii] bliss, [iv] infinity and [v] self are terms which mutually qualify one another, [respectively] overturn the flaws of [i] falsity, [ii] nonconsciousness, [iii] sorrow, [iv] limitedness and [v] lack of self, and so define that single bliss which is the common basis for truth, etc. It is just like when the words "existent," "material thing," and "pot" [all define] a single pot. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If only one term is used to designate Brahman, Brahman may be too narrowly defined, or that one term may be misunderstood merely to indicate a preponderance of that quality in Brahman, and not Brahman's absolute transcendence of the implied limitation: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The definition that Brahman is of this sort cannot occur due to one word alone, since if only one word is used there will be no conflict [of meanings] and hence no indirect signification. Hence, other words must be used. Insofar as errors are possible, a whole string of words capable of ending the errors must be introduced; in order to end those errors [in every case], the string of word-meanings must be everywhere introduced.
26 |
|
|
|
|
|