12. Up to death; for there also it is seen.

The question now arises whether the meditation described which is the

means of final Release is to be accomplished within one day, or to be

continued day after day, until death.--The view that it is accomplished

within one day, as this will satisfy the scriptural injunction, is

disposed of by the Sûtra. Meditation is to be continued until death. For

Scripture declares that meditation has to take place 'there,' i.e. in

the whole period from the first effort after meditation up to death,

'Acting thus as long as life lasts he reaches the world of Brahman.'--

Here terminates the adhikarana of 'up to death.'

13. On the attainment of this, there result the non-clinging and the

destruction of later and earlier sins; this being declared.

Having, so far, elucidated the nature of meditation, the Sûtras now

begin to consider the result of meditation. Scripture declares that on

the knowledge of Brahman being attained a man's later and earlier sins

do not cling to him but pass away. 'As water does not cling to a lotus

leaf, so no evil deed clings to him who knows this' (Ch. Up. IV, 14, 3);

'Having known that he is not sullied by any evil deed' (Bri. Up. IV, 4,

23); 'As the fibres of the Ishîkâ reed when thrown into the fire are

burnt, thus all his sins are burnt' (Ch. Up. V, 24, 3); 'All his works

perish when He has been beheld who is high and low' (Mu. Up. II, 2, 8).--

The doubt here arises whether this non-clinging and destruction of all

sins is possible as the result of mere meditation, or not.--It is not

possible, the Pûrvapakshin maintains; for Scripture declares, 'no work

the fruits of which have not been completely enjoyed perishes even in

millions of aeons.' What the texts, quoted above, say as to the non-

clinging and destruction of works occurs in sections complementary to

passages inculcating knowledge as the means of final Release, and may

therefore be understood as somehow meant to eulogize knowledge. Nor can

it be said that knowledge is enjoined as an expiation of sins, so that

the destruction of sins could be conceived as resulting from such

expiation; for knowledge--as we see from texts such as 'He who knows

Brahman reaches the Highest,' 'He knows Brahman and he becomes Brahman'--

is enjoined as a means to reach Brahman. The texts as to the non-

clinging and destruction of sins therefore can only be viewed as

arthavâda passages supplementary to the texts enjoining knowledge of

Brahman.--This view the Sûtra sets aside. When a man reaches knowledge,

the non-clinging and destruction of all sins may be effected through the

power of knowledge. For Scripture declares the power of knowledge to be

such that 'to him who knows this, no evil deed clings,' and so on. Nor

is this in conflict with the text stating that no work not fully enjoyed

perishes; for this latter text aims at confirming the power of works to

produce their results; while the texts under discussion have for their

aim to declare that knowledge when once sprung up possesses the power of

destroying the capability of previously committed sins to produce their

own evil results and the power of obstructing that capability on the

part of future evil actions. The two sets of texts thus refer to

different matters, and hence are not mutually contradictory. There is in

fact no more contradiction between them than there is between the power

of fire to produce heat and the power of water to subdue such heat. By

knowledge effecting the non-clinging of sin we have to understand its

obstructing the origination of the power, on the part of sin, to cause

that disastrous disposition on the part of man which consists in

unfitness for religious works; for sins committed tend to render man

unfit for religious works and inclined to commit further sinful actions

of the same kind. By knowledge effecting the destruction of sin, on the

other hand, we understand its destroying that power of sin after it has

once originated. That power consists, fundamentally, in displeasure on

the part of the Lord. Knowledge of the Lord, which, owing to the supreme

dearness of its object is itself supremely dear, possesses the

characteristic power of propitiating the Lord--the object of knowledge--

and thus destroys the displeasure of the Lord due to the previous

commission of sins on the part of the knowing Devotee; and at the same

time obstructs the origination of further displeasure on the Lord's part,

which otherwise would be caused by sins committed subsequently to the

origination of such knowledge. What Scripture says about sin not

clinging to him who knows can however be understood only with regard to

such sins as spring from thoughtlessness; for texts such as 'he who has

not turned away from evil conduct' (Ka. Up. I, 2, 24) teach that

meditation, becoming more perfect day after day, cannot be accomplished

without the Devotee having previously broken himself off from all evil

conduct.--Here terminates the adhikarana of 'the reaching of that.'

The Vedanta-Sutras with the Commentary by Ramanuja Sacred Books of the East, Volume 48 · 第 303 / 339 题