On the other hand) the (all-pervading) is not the embodied soul, as it is quite impossible (to predicate omnipresence of him).

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 531 из 723Следующая ⇒

3. (On the other hand) the (all-pervading) is not the embodied soul, as it is quite impossible (to predicate omnipresence of him).

(That is), it is impossible and against fact and reason that one and the same individual soul could be in all the bodies (at the same time).

4. And because there is the denotation of the one (Brahman) as the object, and (of the soul) as the agent.

In such passages, as, “To him who expounds (the nature of) Atman to another that is ineligible, (the Vedas cease to give milk i.e., to produce the desired results) (A. A. iii. 2. 3.)

5. On account of the emphatic use of the word (Brahman) and of the particle of emphasis being used to restrict the word (Brahman).

As in “Him alone they call (A. A. iii. 2. 3.) Brahman”.

For the individual soul is not spoken of as Brahman emphatically. “This Vishnu is indeed Brahman; this Vishnu is indeed Atman; this Vishnu is indeed the creator; this Vishnu is indeed Indra; this Vishnu is indeed Hari who accepts our offerings in sacrifices and cleanses the good (of their sins), who is of perfect bliss”, says also the Indradyumna Sakha.

6. And on account of Smriti:

Such as “O Arjuna (who hast overcome sleep), I am the Atman that abides in the heart of all beings”, “I appear on the earth, and by My own might support the beings”, and so on (Gita).

No (other thing, i.e., absolute identity) should be assumed, in the absence of, or against, authority.

7. If it be said that the passage does not refer to the all-pervading Brahman, on account of the smallness of abode, and on account of the reference to the same (soul) we say ‘no’, because Brahman has thus to be contemplated and because the case is analogous to that of space.

(That is, the thing which is said to abide) in all beings may appear different from Brahman, on account of the smallness of the abode, viz., the heart of beings; so also from the reference appropriate to the individual soul as dwelling in (presiding over) the eye and other organs of sense. But this view is not correct; for the text intends that Vishnu, though all-pervading unlike the soul, is to be contemplated as abiding in the narrow heart, and as the ruler of the senses.

Further omnipresence is consistent with residence in a point of- space as in the case of space itself. “Vishnu is the Lord of all the senses. As such He dwells in all beings. He is declared by all names and words and He is loudly sung by all the Vedas” (Skanda).

Познавательные статьи:



Как правильно слушать собеседника

Типичные ошибки при выполнении бросков в баскетболе

Принятие христианства на Руси и его значение

Средства массовой информации США