2023-03-01 15:21:53 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
Iviii
adjuncts (upâdhis), so also in the case of Jiva
(prajna) the attribute of anutva is ascribed on
account of his being influenced by the quality
of his upâdhi, viz., buddhi (mind). Prajna is
also called "arga: "he who faces the mind",
for it is through his chitta(or buddhi) that the soul
returns to the ordinary or waking state from
the state of dream or sleep, and so the chitta or
buddhi is his upâdhi and determines his condi-
tion and qualities. It is the illustration-
prajnavat-that determines the meaning of tat
in the Sutra. Dr. Thibaut's difficulty arises
from his attempts to determine the purport of
the sutra after "leaving out the non-essential
word prajnavat". Nothing is non-essential in a
sutra; and in this sutra, the illustration-
prajnavat-contains the essential and necessary
clue to its correct interpretation. Dr. Thibaut's
second argument in this connection is equally
flimsy. He says :-"It is more than doubtful
whether on Sankara's own system the qualities
of the buddhi-pleasure and pain, desire and
aversion, &c, can with any propriety be said to
constitute the essential of the soul even in the
samsara state. The essential of the soul in
adjuncts (upâdhis), so also in the case of Jiva
(prajna) the attribute of anutva is ascribed on
account of his being influenced by the quality
of his upâdhi, viz., buddhi (mind). Prajna is
also called "arga: "he who faces the mind",
for it is through his chitta(or buddhi) that the soul
returns to the ordinary or waking state from
the state of dream or sleep, and so the chitta or
buddhi is his upâdhi and determines his condi-
tion and qualities. It is the illustration-
prajnavat-that determines the meaning of tat
in the Sutra. Dr. Thibaut's difficulty arises
from his attempts to determine the purport of
the sutra after "leaving out the non-essential
word prajnavat". Nothing is non-essential in a
sutra; and in this sutra, the illustration-
prajnavat-contains the essential and necessary
clue to its correct interpretation. Dr. Thibaut's
second argument in this connection is equally
flimsy. He says :-"It is more than doubtful
whether on Sankara's own system the qualities
of the buddhi-pleasure and pain, desire and
aversion, &c, can with any propriety be said to
constitute the essential of the soul even in the
samsara state. The essential of the soul in