Aphorisms on Brahman 12.22

12.22

3-4-23,24
|pratardano ha vai daivodāsiḥ| ityādayo vedānteṣvākhyānaviśeṣāḥ kiṃ pāriplavaprayogārthāḥ, uta tatratatra vidyāviśeṣapratipādanārthāḥ iti saṃśayaḥ| |ākhyānāni śaṃsantīti pāriplave viniyogāttadarthāḥ iti pūrvaḥ pakṣaḥ| rāddhāntastu- |ākhyānāni śaṃsantītyuktvā |manurvaivasvato rājā|iti manvādyākhyāne viniyogasya viśeṣitatvāt, |taṃ māmāyuramṛtamityupāssya |ātmā vā are draṣṭavyaḥ|ityādividhinaikavākyatvācca, so'rodīt|ityādivadvidyāvidhyarthā eva| sūtradvayamapi vyākhyātam|| iti pāriplavārthādhikaraṇam||

3-4-23, 24
Concerning specific stories in the Upaniṣads, such as ‘Pratardana, the son of Divodāsa, indeed...’, there is a doubt: Are they for the purpose of the cyclical ritual recitation, or for the purpose of expounding specific meditations in their respective contexts? The prima facie view is that they are for that purpose because of their application in the cyclical recitation, as in ‘They recite the stories’. But the established conclusion is: because the application is specified in stories such as that of Manu, stating ‘They recite the stories’ and then ‘Manu Vaivasvata was king...’, and because of syntactical unity with injunctions such as ‘Meditate on me as life, as immortality’ and ‘The Self, my dear, should indeed be seen...’, like ‘He wept...’, they are for the purpose of injunctions of knowledge alone. Both aphorisms have also been explained. Thus ends the topical section on the purpose of the cyclical recitation.

12.22.p1

3-4-25