Verse 12.19

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

तौ धर्मं पश्यतस्तस्य पापं चातन्द्रितौ सह ।
याभ्यां प्राप्नोति सम्पृक्तः प्रेत्येह च सुखासुखम् ॥ १९ ॥

tau dharmaṃ paśyatastasya pāpaṃ cātandritau saha |
yābhyāṃ prāpnoti sampṛktaḥ pretyeha ca sukhāsukham || 19 ||

Those two together carefully look into his merit and demerit, invested with which both, he obtains happiness or unhappiness, here and after death.—(19)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

“If the ‘two’ be meant to be the ‘Great Principle’ and the ‘Conscious Being,’ then, for whom does the term ‘his’ stand?”

Some people hold that this latter term stands for the ‘Soul’ (Jīva).

But it has already been said that the ‘Soul’ is the same as the ‘Conscious Being.’

Another view is that ‘his’ stands for the Subtle Body. But this also is the same as the ‘Great Principle.’

The third view is that it stands for the Internal Organ, consisting of the ‘Intelligence’ (Buddhi) and the rest.

But in this case, it will have to be explained what connection there is between this Internal Organ and ‘Merit—Demerit.’ For the said organ is nothing more than a subtle form of Matter; as was made clear under 1.19.

For all these reasons what we think is that the right explanation is to take the term ‘two’ as standing for the ‘Great Principle’ and the ‘Supreme Self,’ in accordance with the explanation provided by some people of the term ‘two’ (in Verse 18); as it is only for these two that the act of ‘looking into’ is possible;—the ‘Great Principle,’ which is really an instrument (of perception) being figuratively spoken of as the nominative agent; just as in the case of such expressions as ‘Fuels are cooking.’ And the term ‘his’ would, in this case, refer to the ‘Conscious Being,’ as apart from the ‘Great Principle’ and the ‘Supreme Self.’

And when the ‘Supreme Self’ is spoken of as ‘looking into’ the ‘merit and demerit’ belonging to the ‘Conscious Being,’ what is meant is that all experiencing of pleasure and pain is under the control of that Supreme Being. This is what has been asserted in the following passage:—‘Impelled by the Supreme Lord one may go either to Heaven or to the bottomless pit’;—where ‘impelling’ can stand only for ‘wish as regulated by the merit and demerit of the man.’

“But if the man’s merit and demerit were to regulate the wish of God, then this would deprive God of his very character of the Supreme Lord.”

This has been explained in the Śārīraka that the ease of God a warding happiness and unhappiness in accordance with the merit and demerit of the man stands on the same footing as the King bestowing his rewards in accordance with the nature of the services rendered by each man,—which fact does not deprive him of his kingly power. This is what is meant by the ‘Great Principle’ and the ‘Supreme Self’ ‘looking into’ the merit and demerit—of the ‘Conscious Being.’

“This cannot be right; as it would be inconsistent with what follows—‘invested with which he obtains, etc.’ Because no one is ever spoken of as ‘invested’—connected—with the Supreme Self. In fact, there can be no sort of connection with the Supreme Self.”

It is for this reason that the phrase ‘with which both’ of the text should he taken as referring, not to the ‘Great Principle’ and the Supreme Self, but to Merit and Demerit; and these latter also form the subject-matter of the context (and as such can be referred to by the pronoun in question) as is clear from the sentence—‘they look into his merit and demerit.’

If the term ‘Great Principle,’ (‘mahat’), be taken as standing for the Internal Organ, then there would certainly be an incongruity, as the Supreme Self does not stand in need of an Instrument for his perceptions.

“Under Verse 18, however, the Supreme Self, which is of the nature of true Consciousness, has been spoken of as being approached;—now what sort o f approaching would this be? If it meant becoming one with him, then this could not be brought about merely by the destruction of sins. If, on the other hand, it meant capability of reaching him, then this could not be possible for one who has become deprived of his body by the dissolution of the constituent material particles.”

It is for this reason that in the sentence ‘the two look into his merit and demerit,’ the term ‘his’ must be taken, as shown above, as standing for the Self (personal).—(19)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

‘Paśyataḥ.’—‘Examine’ (Medhātithi and Kullūka);—‘by their presence, cause to be performed’ (Raghavānanda).