Verse 6.75

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

अहिंसयेन्द्रियासङ्गैर्वैदिकैश्चैव कर्मभिः ।
तपसश्चरणैश्चौग्रैः साधयन्तीह तत्पदम् ॥ ७५ ॥

ahiṃsayendriyāsaṅgairvaidikaiścaiva karmabhiḥ |
tapasaścaraṇaiścaugraiḥ sādhayantīha tatpadam || 75 ||

By abstention from injuring, by the non-attachment of the senses, by the acts prescribed in the Veda, by the rigorous practising of austerities, they attain the position of That Being.—(75)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

These two verses are indicative of the doctrine that Liberation is attained by Knowledge and Action combined. The preceding verse spoke of Knowledge and the present one speaks of Action.

Question:—“What are those acts ‘prescribed in the Veda,’ whose result is here spoken of as the ‘attaining of the position of That Being’? As for the voluntary acts, the results of these are already mentioned in those very texts that enjoin the acts themselves; and if they were to assume results other than those, there would be carrying the matter to an absurd length; and it would give rise to the great evil that the results of the acts would become mixed up and confused. Further, since the injunctive text would have all its syntactical needs supplied by the mention of the single result, how could any connection be established between that text and the additional words that would have to be thrown in if we were to connect the acts with the further result of ‘attaining the position of That Being’? As a matter of fact, the needs of the injunction having been supplied by what is directly mentioned in the text, it does not stand in need of anything else.”

Our answer to the above is as follows:—In fact in the Esoteric Section (of the Veda) we have a distinct text to the effect that ‘one attains That by means of sacrifice.’ So that by a proper adjustment there would be both kinds of results accomplished by means of Action; and there would be nothing incongruous in all the voluntary acts leading to the more limited results, as also to the attainment of ‘the position of That Being’; as two distinct sacrifices performed at two different times would lead to two distinct results The present text moreover has not specified any particular sacrifice, which could justify the conclusion that th.e result here spoken proceeds from the obligatory acts, and not from the voluntary ones.

The following argument might be raised against us:—“In as much as no results have been spoken of in the Vedic texts regarding any results following from the obligatory acts, it is only right that what is mentioned in the present text should be connected with those acts, and not with the voluntary ones; because there would be no difficulty in connecting it with them; and what the Esoteric text just quoted has declared regarding ‘sacrifice’ leading to That would also be amply justified by this construction.”

Why should any importance be attached to the mention of results in Vedic texts? Vedic Texts are purely injunctive in their character; their function lies in laying down what should be done; and that a certain act should be done is made known to us by such terms as ‘as long as one lives’ and the like, without the help of any words speaking of results; so that (even when the result is actually mentioned) the word expressive of the result is not needed at all by the sentence; so that in cases where it is assumed (and not directly mentioned) it would be entirely superfluous, and hence could not be construed along with the injunctive text. Thus then, the conclusion is that the esoteric text quoted above speaking of ‘sacrifices’ not being capable of being restricted to any particular kind of sacrifice, must be taken as including all kinds of sacrifices, obligatory as well as voluntary.

Further, the result spoken of in the present text cannot proceed from the voluntary acts; as none of then has been enjoined as to be done by ‘one desirous of Liberation’. In fact it was with reference to this that the text declared (under 2.2) that ‘being given up to desires is not commendable’; and also in the Mahābhārata—‘May thy acts not be done simply with a view to results. May thou not be addicted to inaction,” (Bhagavadgītā 2.47).

The conclusion thus is that so long as the actor has his mind beset with notions of diversity, is under the influence of Desire and Ignorance, and is not free from the notions of ‘I’ and ‘mine’,—the results obtained by him are just the narrow ones that he had bargained for (on the strength of the Vedic texts); while the other kind of actor, who undertakes an act without reference to any results, and simply because it has been enjoined by the Veda and as such should be done, attains Brahman Itself, which consists of the highest boundless bliss.

It will not be right to urge against this the following argument:—“There are one hundred and seventy-one sacrifices; in as much as it would be impossible for anyone to perform all these, the text would be enjoining an impossibility (if it meant all kinds of sacrifices)”.—Because in the present context the performance of the acts is meant to be accomplished by the attainment of true insight itself. The meaning is that all sacrifices are to be accomplished by the said insight. This is what is meant by such texts as—‘Other Brāhmaṇas offer sacrifices by means of Knowledge itself’.

Or, the particular position or region spoken of in the present text as attained (by non-injury &c.) may be taken to be just those whose special character would be determined by the man’s desires—according as he may be desirous of heaven or sons &c. &c. In fact persons who have their minds still beset with notions of such diversity as those of ‘past’, ‘present’ and so forth, are prompted by false longings, even when betaking themselves to acts leading up to the highest ends of man; just as when a child is tempted to drink a nutritious medicine by the false hope (set up before it) in the form that by drinking it it would have long hair.

Another theory on this subject is as follows:—The acts referred to in the present text are the obligatory ones. It is these whose omission is sinful, and acts as an obstacle to liberation. And it is the fact of these being properly performed, the obstacle being thereby removed, that is spoken of by the expression ‘by the acts prescribed in the Veda’:—even though these have not been enjoined as leading to liberation.

‘Rigorous’—powerfully conducive to the emaciation of the body.

‘Of that Being’—of Brahman.

‘Position’—place, region.

‘Attain’—Acquire.

Or, the ‘position of that’ may mean that character of Brahman which may be in accordance with his desire; i.e., being the Lord of all beings, or self-sufficiency, or the attaining of its very essence, and so forth.—(75).

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

‘Vaidikaiḥ karmabhiḥ’—‘the compulsory acts prescribed in the Veda’ (Medhātithi, Govindarāja and Kullūka);—‘the compulsory and occasional acts prescribed in the Veda’ (Nārāyaṇa and Nandana).

‘Tat padam’—‘The region of Brahman’ (Medhātithi);—‘Union with Brahman’ (Govindarāja, Kullūka and Rāghavānanda).

 

Comparative notes by various authors

(verses 6.74-75)

See Comparative notes for Verse 6.74.