365bet娱乐

Sanskrit text and transliteration:

啶掂た啶溹�嵿�炧ぞ啶ㄠぞ啶ㄠ�嵿い啶班�椸ぎ啷嵿く啶� 啶むう啶�啷嵿く啷佮お啷囙く啶� 啶�啶侧ぞ啶︵お啶� 啷�
啶� 啶氞�囙う啷嵿さ啶距�曕�嵿く啷嬥い啷嵿ぅ啶掂た啶溹�嵿�炧ぞ啶ㄠ�椸�嵿ぐ啶距す啷嵿く啶� 啶�啷嵿ぐ啶灌�嵿ぎ啶距き啷嵿く啷佮お啷囙く啶む�� 啷�
啶ㄠぞ啶�啷嵿え啶距く啶距ぐ啷嵿ぅ啷� 啶�啶掂�囙い啷嵿い啶班�嵿す啶� 啶ㄠ�堗さ啶� 啶掂�囙う啶距ぐ啷嵿�� 啶忇さ 啶� 啷� 啷�啷�啷� 啷�

vij帽膩n膩ntaragamya峁� tadabhyupeya峁� bal膩dapi |
na cedv膩kyotthavij帽膩nagr膩hya峁� brahm膩bhyupeyate |
n膩mn膩y膩rtho bhavettarhi naiva峁� 惫别诲腻谤迟丑补 eva ca || 643 ||

English translation of verse 2.643:

鈥淲e are thus compelled to admit that Brahman is comprehended by another knowledge (different from that produced by a sentence).鈥�

Notes:

(Objection:) If it is not admitted that Brahman can be comprehended by the knowledge which arises from a sentence, then Brahman is not the subject-matter of the Veda. (The 狈颈测辞驳补惫腻诲颈苍 replies:) 鈥淚t is not so. (Brahman) is assuredly the subject of Vedic teaching.鈥�

It may be objected that the argument of the 狈颈测辞驳补惫腻诲颈苍 will lead him to say that Brahman is not the subject-matter of the Vedic teaching. The substance of the objection comes to this: if Brahman cannot be revealed by the Vedic text, then it cannot be the subject-matter of the Vedic teaching; without being 惫别诲补惫腻办测腻谤迟丑补, Brahman cannot be 惫别诲腻谤迟丑补. Since the 狈颈测辞驳补惫腻诲颈苍 maintains that Brahman is not 惫别诲补-惫腻办测腻谤迟丑补, he must also maintain that Brahman is not 惫别诲腻谤迟丑补.

The 狈颈测辞驳补惫腻诲颈苍 does not see any force in this argument. He maintains that while Brahman is 惫别诲腻谤迟丑补, the subject-matter of Vedic teaching, it is not 惫别诲补惫腻办测腻谤迟丑补, what is comprehended by the Vedic text. Brahman, according to him, is 惫别诲腻谤迟丑补, because it is directly known by the knowledge which arises as a result of the repeated contemplation on the knowledge conveyed by the Vedic text (惫别诲补惫腻办测辞迟迟丑补箩帽腻苍腻产丑测腻蝉补-蝉腻诲丑测补-蝉腻办峁Ｄ乼办腻谤补-濒补办峁�a峁嘺-j帽膩nagamyatv膩t 惫别诲腻谤迟丑补tva峁� brahma峁嘺岣� siddhyati).