606. Brown and other followers of Reid, whether they understood Reid or
not, regarded all the perceptions as only particular modifications of the
mind. They denied the objective existence of the world.
607. The commentator explains this verse thus, although as regards the
second line he stretches it a little. If Nilakantha be right, K.P. Singha
must be wrong. Generally, however, it is the known incapacity of the
ocean to transgress its continents that supplies poets with
illustrations. Here, however, possibly, the rarity of the phenomenon,
viz., the ocean's transgressing its continents, is used to illustrate the
rare fact of the intelligence, succeeding by yoga power, in transcending
the attributes of Rajas, Tamas and Sattwa.
608. on the other hand, directing one's thoughts boldly to it, one should
ascertain its cause and dispel that cause, which, as stated here, is
Passion.
609. The first two words of the second line are those of verse 5 of See,
I, Manu.
610. Kathanchit is explained by Nilakantha as 'due to great ill-luck.'
611. I do not follow Nilakantha in rendering this verse.
612. The soul is said to be only a witness or spectator and not an actor.
The Rishis understood by the soul the being to whom the mind, the senses,
etc., all belong. Could the idea of the inactive and unsinning Soul have
arisen from observation of the moral principle of Conscience which
discriminates between right and wrong, and acts, therefore, as an
impartial judge, or watches everything like an uninterested spectator?
European moralists generally attribute two other functions to the
Conscience, viz.
Pages:
2773
2774
2775
2776
2777
2778
2779
2780
2781
2782
2783
2784
2785
2786
2787
2788
2789
2790
2791
2792
2793
2794
2795
2796
2797