bold = Main text
Vol., Sect., Part, Chap., Par. grey = Comment text
1 I, Pref | to the character of the original texts here translated; the
2 I, Pref | translations only, not from original documents, should have had
3 I, Pref | either to the editing of the original texts or to the careful
4 I, Pref | The idea of keeping the original and genuine tradition separate
5 I, Pref | but which are there in the original, and must be taken into
6 I, Pref | untranslated, and to give the original, when necessary, in a note.
7 I, Pref | a translation than the original; and it should not be supposed,
8 I, Pref | been their avowal, that the original is beyond their reach. And
9 I, Pref | possible to the Sanskrit original, and where I could not find
10 I, Pref | are driven to retain the original Sat.~From this Sat was derived
11 I, Translat | accessible to us in their original form, through the rapid
12 I, Translat | that the only great and original religions which profess
13 I, Translat | critical restoration of the original texts, in an examination
14 I, Translat | translations will be made from the original texts, and where good translations
15 I, Translat | translated chiefly from the two original collections, the Southern
16 I, Intro, 0, 0, 1 | From every sentence deep, original, and sublime thoughts arise,
17 I, Intro, 0, 0, 1 | Indian air surrounds us, and original thoughts of kindred spirits.
18 I, Intro, 0, 0, 4 | that they were found in the original text.~All these questions
19 I, Intro, 0, 0, 5 | sarvasyâsya bâhyatah, the original text may have been tad antar
20 I, Intro, 0, 0, 5 | Khândogya-upanishad gives us the original text, or a text nearest
21 I, Intro, 0, 0, 5 | or a text nearest to the original, no sound critic would venture
22 I, Intro, 0, 0, 5 | satvan, he believes the original text to have been Satvan-Matsyeshu.
23 I, Intro, 0, 0, 9 | vertical brackets in the original, as described below.]~[1.
24 XV, Intro | and in discovering the original meaning of the Upanishads;
25 XV, Intro | buddhi, the other; the original difference between the two
26 XV, Intro | had for deviating from the original, and for translating avigñâta
27 XV, Intro | conveyed the sense of the original, nay, would have conveyed
28 XV, Intro | reader a correct idea of the original.~Let us now examine some
29 XV, Intro | quite misapprehended the original Sanskrit, is this, that
30 XV, 1 | succeeded in rendering the original meaning of the author more
31 XV, 1 | of the Upanishad. In its original form it mayhave constituted
32 XV, 1 | however, of determining its original form, nor should we even
33 XV, 1 | they seem to have had their original place. Thirty-five years
34 XV, 1 | re-establishing what I thought the original text of the Upanishad must
35 XV, 1 | modern-sounding lines from the original context of these Vedântic
36 XV, 1 | whether they are due to the original composers, the compilers,
37 XV, 1 | No doubt, if we have the original text of an author, and can
38 XV, 1 | never hope to gain access to original documents, and where we
39 XV, 1 | approximate conception of what the original composer may have had in
40 XV, 3 | Taittirîyaka-upanishad seems to have had its original place in the Taittirîya-Âranyaka.
41 XV, 5 | creation is mâyâ, in its original sense of work, then of phenomenal
42 XV, 5 | creator is mâyin, in its original sense of worker or maker,
43 XV, 7 | apparently from a Telugu original, which contains the first
|