|
Page1
26. Or the consequence of the entire (Brahman entering into the effect), and stultification of (Brahman's) being devoid of parts.
'Being only was this in the beginning'; 'This indeed was in the beginning not anything'; 'The Self alone indeed was this in ihe beginning'--these and other texts state that in the beginning Brahman was one only, i.e. without parts--that means: Brahman, in its causal state, was without parts because then all distinction of matter and souls had disappeared. This one, non-divided, Brahman thereupon having formed the resolution of being many divided itself into the aggregate of material things--ether, air, and so on--and the aggregate of souls from Brahma down to blades of grass. This being so, it must be held that the entire highest Brahman entered into the effected state; that its intelligent part divided itself into the individual souls, and its non-intelligent part into ether, air, and so on.
This however stultifies all those often-quoted texts which declare Brahman in its causal state to be devoid of parts. For although the cause is constituted by Brahman in so far as having for its body matter and souls in their subtle state, and the effect by Brahman invested with matter and souls in their gross state; the difficulty stated above cannot be avoided, since also that element in Brahman which is embodied is held to enter into the effect. If, on the other hand, Brahman is without parts, it cannot become many, and it is not possible that there should persist a part not entering into the effected state. On the ground of these unacceptable results we conclude that Brahman cannot be the cause.--This objection the next Sutra disposes of.
|
