2023-03-01 15:22:00 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
lxxix
aranyaka. He is, in the first place, wrong in
thinking that section ii introduces "an altogether
new topic." For, in section 10, the question is
asked, Is there a mrityu (destroyer) to Mrityu,
the destroyer of all sense-organs (grahus) and
their objects (atigrahas)? Yajnavalkya's answer
is put in highly terse and enigmatic language as
follows:-"Mrityu (death) is Agni (fire); he is
overcome by water; so (he) overcomes Mrityu
(death)." Sankara explains this passage to
mean that the Supreme Brahman is the destroyer
of the universal destroyer, Death. Death
is like fire which, though it consumes all,
is itself put out by water. The reference
to fire and water is only brought in by
way of illustration. The topic of section 10
is therefore the Supreme Brahman, and the
argument is the same as that discussed in the
Sutras of Vyasa, I. 2, 9 with reference to Katha-
Upanishad, I. 2, 25. Thus, Dr. Thibaut's idea
that a new topic is introduced in section 11 has
no foundation. Dr. Thibaut passes on to section
13 where the expression "ayam purusha"
again occurs and insists that it should also refer
to the Supreme Brahman. But it expressly
-
aranyaka. He is, in the first place, wrong in
thinking that section ii introduces "an altogether
new topic." For, in section 10, the question is
asked, Is there a mrityu (destroyer) to Mrityu,
the destroyer of all sense-organs (grahus) and
their objects (atigrahas)? Yajnavalkya's answer
is put in highly terse and enigmatic language as
follows:-"Mrityu (death) is Agni (fire); he is
overcome by water; so (he) overcomes Mrityu
(death)." Sankara explains this passage to
mean that the Supreme Brahman is the destroyer
of the universal destroyer, Death. Death
is like fire which, though it consumes all,
is itself put out by water. The reference
to fire and water is only brought in by
way of illustration. The topic of section 10
is therefore the Supreme Brahman, and the
argument is the same as that discussed in the
Sutras of Vyasa, I. 2, 9 with reference to Katha-
Upanishad, I. 2, 25. Thus, Dr. Thibaut's idea
that a new topic is introduced in section 11 has
no foundation. Dr. Thibaut passes on to section
13 where the expression "ayam purusha"
again occurs and insists that it should also refer
to the Supreme Brahman. But it expressly
-