BIBLIOTHECA INDICA; COLLECTION OF ORIENTAL WORKS
Bon. Court of Directors of the Last tndia Company,
AND THE SUPERINTENDENCE OF THE ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL.
Vou. Il. Parr IIl.
ॐ ७ ७ ov =
THE BRIHAD A/RANYAKA UPANISHAD,
1 [8 (यतमं
°
ॐ we @ न ॐ ॐ ॐ se
4 = os ॐ ॐ
AND
THE COMMENTARY OF S’ANKARA ACHARYA ON ITS FIRST CHAPTER,
TRANSLATED FROM THE ORIGINAL SANSCRIT
By Dr. E. Roser.
१५. न a Vir WeyoRd CALCUTTA ;
PRINTED BY J. THOMAS, AT THE BAPTIST MISSION PRESS. 1856.
PREFACE.
IT was my intention to have accompanied this transla- tion of the Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad with an intro- duction in the manner adopted in my translation of the minor Upanishads; but as the state of my health compels me to rest for a time from literary labours, and as I do not wish to delay any longer the publication of a work which has been several years in progress, I am obliged to forego my wishes on the subject, reserving for the future the publication of my: views on’ this Uparishad in a separate form
I would only add here the reason :¢hich’ induced me to discontinue the translation of Sfankara’s eormmentary At the commencement of the work -i deeniéd it desirable to anglicise the commentary in order to assist the student in understanding so difficult an author as Sankara; this; I presume, has been accomplished by the portion I have translated in the first two fasciculi, and it appeared to me useless to continue with the translation of the whole commentary, as it is cumbrous and generally adds nothing to the explanation of the text, an opinion which was also held by several of my Oriental friends in Europe. In the latter part of my work, accordingly, I translated only such passages of the commentary as elucidate the text, and gave, generally in my own words, S’ankara’s prefatory remarks to the different Brahmanas, these remarks being interesting for the views expounded there- in as well as for the insight which they offer into the connexion of the various parts of this Upanishad.
CORRECTIONS.
line PO 1 after the months add 80 13 8 ~ _ by inference = the 14 22 for of that read =“ that”’ ow. 23 ,, another that Be another ^ that’” 16 2 =,» being - are 25 80 + gesence gescence 33 2, after desires write a— 4b. 3 ys Thus read ४1०८8 40 21 after speeeh add _ performed 41 21 2 with read = ६0 42 81 ˆ, with » to 43 19 + with es to 51 7 dele he , 54 2 for letters read _ letter 56 ng irasa Angirasa From p. 65—80 for the heading third Braéhmaza read fourth Brahmaza 65 9 for ( write < $b. 21 ( 9 2 78 «#19 ~(C,, in १९८४४ ४ 80 #5 P write € 85 12 dele p. 23 86 3 — he 26. 24 — 16 89 17 for him read 8 1197 96 १ This soul is this soul 97 8 +, have नि had 104 a 8 after butread then dele then is; and after 34879 a is 107 23 for ता ` read soul 109 8 ,, whi छ which is 112 35 ,, he, or the that 118 2 dele he after I: 122 6 , + » = 0. 81 >» 9 2 9१ 1338 18 ,, 136 4 for breathes not read = not breathes. 4b. 6 dele he before eats. $b. 8s, The Mantra : 4b. 9 for penance ‘5 «५ penance” 137 Le gy penance.” “He =+, penance; “he
»
page 137
line
8 for the causes read ther with regard to those causes,
8, place ‘9 12 dele 1 the sacrificer 13 after collected add 14 for obtuins read 22 +, are a 23. +; decreased” a
5 for sleep read 34 + 6 99 35 Cs the same, as well. ,,
5 after Rudra dele 24 for are read 6 > » this ”
30.5, yacheha zs ib. after gatiptirvakam add 81 for stashnu. read 0. > vyapya ॐ 3 ) Katydnf Pe 27 ys dhumah ५ 24 after and add 84 dele vide katha U. 5, 10. 85 change बू to ib. before that ut 5 for Vyashti read 6 + Parameshti © . 82 sy the idea 6 7 after vital add a + auxiliaries put 8, organs dele 17 for Pariskhitas read 21 ,, in 33 1 dele it 15 for on : 81 were ms 1 dele* after thinker and place it 9 for Gargi ” 18 dele after 14 place 7 8 after subtile place 3 4s red ५ ab. ,; viscid 3 4 5, adhesive र 0 3 entrance ४ 8 it 99 10 for अ. read ib. after a place 22 dele d
vi
is: The nature of a fa- case
by the sacrificer obtain
do
decrease”
sleeps
the text
in the same way,as wells 18
, the other yachcha
yat
stdsnu
vyapya
Ratyant dhiméh
musical
|
q
Vyashti Parameshthi 18
817
*
a Parikshitas 18
of
are
after “ not thinking”’ O Gargi
him
we
9
after
one to And
‘garvavaD-
he dream a8
18 milk-cow fruit both mortals tons babana Sas'tra Vais'war
assuming his
fine
Vil
one with regard to An
sarvavan=—
the
29
८८
in
milch-cow
fruits
-either
the
tions
vahana
S’/as/tra
Vais’yas
having assumed his present
(of the rising)
SANKARA’S INTRODUCTION.
Om! Salutation to Bramha (or Bramhé) and the other Rishis, per- fect in the traditional knowledge of Bramha, whose names are enume- rated in the lineage from teacher to teacher.* Salutation to the reli- gious instructors.t
This brief{ commentary of the Vajasanéyi Bramha Upanishad, which commences with the words: ‘The dawn isthe head of the sacrificial horse,”? is composed for the sake of those who wish to liberate them- selyes from the world, in order that they may acquire the knowledge, that Brambha§ and the soul|| are the same, a knowledge, by which the libera- tion from the cause of the world* is accomplished. This knowledge of Bramha is called Upanishad, because it completely annihilates the world, together with its cause (ignorance) in such as possess this know- ledge ; for this is the meaning of the word Sad,+ preceded by Upani.t A work which treats on the same knowledge, is also called Upanishad.
# Bramha Rishis are the sages, who in continuous succession from Bramha, Bramh&, Paramésti, &c. taught the knowledge of the universal soul. They are enumerated in the Vansa Bramha, a part of the present Upanishad. ए. p. 503, &c.
+ The plural is here the plural is majestatis, meaning the preceptor of Sankara _ Kehfrya, whose name was Gévinda.
t Brief it is called, in comparison with the more voluminous commentary, called the Bhartri Prapancha Bhashya.
§ Bramba, the universal soul.
॥ The individual soul. According to the Védantists the soul, independent of the body, is the substance which is pure existence, knowledge and bliss, and which must therefore not be confounded with its faculties, the senses, the mind, intel- lect, &c.
* The cause of the world is ignorance.
+ Sad means to destroy, or to go.
प॑ Upa means near, Ni expresses certainty.
B
2 Introduction.
The above-mentioned Upanishad, which contains 6 chapters, is called Aranyaka, as being spoken in a desert, and Brihad (great) from its extent.* |
The connexion of this Upanishad with the ceremonial partt of the Védas will now be mentioned. The whole Véda has the design to explain by what means objects of desire and aversion that cannot be proved by perception or inference, may be obtained or removed ; for every man has naturally the wish to obtain objects of desire, and remove objects of aversion. The Véda has not to investigate objects of the senses, because the knowledge of what satisfies desires, or re- moves objects of aversion, is produced by perception and inference. t ` Further, unless there is a knowledge of the existence of the soul in ‘another life, there cannot be a wish to obtain or remove objects of de- sire or aversion in a subsequent life; this is clear from the conduct of those who§ do not admit any other desires but those, prompted by one’s own nature. In consequence the Védaic science is founded on the knowledge of the existence of the soul, relative to a former life, and upon the special means by which objects of desire and aversion in another life may be obtained or removed. The existence of the soul as independent of the body, is evident from positive declarations of the Védas, as shown by the following passages: ‘‘ This is the investigation
* This Upanishad, besides the names of Vajisanéyi Bramha Upanishad and Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad, bears also the denomination of Kanwa Upanishad.
+ The Védas are divided in two parts, the first is the Karma-kanda, the ceremo- nial part, also Parva-kanda, and treats on ceremonies, the second is the Jn&na- kanda, the part which contains knowledge, also named Uttara-kanda or posterior part, and unfolds the knowledge of Bramha or the universal soul.
t+ The Miménsakas and Védantis assert five kinds of evidence, viz. perception, in- ference, verbal communication, comparison and presumption. Some add also pri- vation. The Charvdkas recognise but one, viz. perception. The followers of Kanfda and those of Sugata (Buddha) acknowledge two, perception and inference. The Sénchyas reckon three, including affirmation. The Naiydyicas, or followers of Gétama, count four, viz. the foregoing together with comparison. The Prabhakaras, as first observed, admit five. And the rest of the Mimansakas, in both schools, prior and later Mimansa, enumerate six. Col. M. ए. Vol. I. pp. 303,304. Jn our passage perception and inference include the other kinds of evidence.
§ The Lék4yatikas are here meant according to Ananda Giri. They do not ac- knowledge the existence of the soul, independent of the kody, and accordingly do not perform any actions relative to a future life.
_ Introduction. 3
whether after the death of man ¢he soul exists ; some assert, the soul exists; the soul does not exist, assert others.’’ This is the commence- ment of one Upanishad,* and it concludes with the words: it exists.
Another passage says: ^< Some souls after death are born (again) to obtain a body like animals, others are changed into the condition of a trunk, according to their works, according to their knowledge of the Védas.”’t
Another passage commences: ‘‘ ६ (the soul) is itself light, its know- ledge and ceremonial works follow it (in another life); man becomes holy by holy work.”
Another passage which commences: ^ I will declare’’§ concludes with the words: the soul is knowledge.
The assertion, that the existence of the soul, as independent of the body, can be proved by perception, is not correct ; for there is a contra- dictory assertion of such who argue the contrary.
For, if from perception a knowledge of the existence of the soul in connexion with another body, could be derived, we should not be op- posed to the Lokéyatikas|| and Bauddhas,* who assert that the soul
* See Katha Upanishad, I. 20. † K. U. VI. 13.
t K. ए. ४. 6—7
§ Brihad Aranyaka U. p. 345
|| The Charvaékas (or Sanyavadis) so named from one of their teachers, the Muni Chérvaéka. From Vrishaspati they are called also Varbaspatyas. The appellation Sanyavadis, implies the asserter of the unreality and emptiness of the universe, and another designation, Lékayata, expresses their adoption of the tenet, that this be- ing is the Be-all of existence : they were, in short, the advocates of materialism and
atheism, and have existed from a very remote period, and still exist, as we shall here- after see. Wilson’s Sects of the Hindus, p. 15.
They (the Charvakas) restrict to perception the only means of proof and source of knowledge. Others, however, admit probability and tradition. Col. M. E. Vol. I. p. 403. Sadananda in the Védanta Sara, calls up for refutation no less than four followers of Charvéka; one maintaining, that the gross corporeal frame is identical with the soul, another that the corporeal organs constitute the soul, a third affirming that the vital functions do so, a fourth insisting, that the mind and the soul are the same. C.M. E. pp. 403, 404. -
* Bauddhas. There are four sects among the followérs of Buddha: 1. The Méadhyamicas, who maintain, that all is void. 2. The Yégacharas, who assert, that, except internal sensation or intelligence (Vijny4na) all else is void. 3. SautrAnticas,
8 2
4 Introduction.
does not exist. For with regard to objects of the senses, as for instance & pot, no contradiction takes place, as if one would assert the non-existence of a pot, although it is perceived by the senses. If you hold, such contradiction may exist by referring to the well known topic of the trunk and the man, if the same object is taken by some for a trunk, by others for a man, we remind you of the fact, that all dispute ceases, when the nature of the object has been ascertained. For there is no dispute about the nature of an object of the senses, for instance, of a trunk, when it has been ascertained by perception. The Vain4sikas* on the other hand, although acknowledging the J, yet reject the opinion of the existence of the soul, independent of the internal body. Accordingly, since the soul is different from any object of the senses, its existence cannot be proved by perception.
Nor can it be proved by inference. If you say, that the Sruti applies arguments in proving the existence of the soul, and that these argu- ments are based upon perception, we do not admit this on the ground, that there is no perception of the soul, relative toa former birth. ‘When, however, the existence of the soul by the Véda is acknowledged, and also by common arguments, according to the meaning of the Véda, the followers of the Véda, the Mimaénsakas and Tarkikas (or logi- cians), will substitute the fiction, as if the perception of the I and the arguments in accordance with the Védas, were produced by their own
They affirm the actual existence of external objects no less than of internal sensa- tions. The exterior objects to be known by immediate perception. 4. Vaibhashikas, who agree with the latter, except that they contend for a mediate apprehension of exterior objects, through images, or resembling forms, represented to the intellect, C. M. E. Vol. I. pp. 390, 391.
* Hence these Buddhists (the Sautréntikas and Vaibh&shikas, who believe, that objects cease to exist, when no longer perceived, they have but a brief durae tion, like the flash of lightning, lasting no longer than the perception of them. Their identity is but momentary) are by their adversaries, the orthodox Hindus, designated as Pirna—or Sarva—Vaindsikas arguing total perishableness, while the followers of Kanada, who acknowledge some of their categories to be eternal and invariable, and reckon only others transitory and changeable; and who insist that - identity ceases with any variation in the composition of the body, and that acor- poreal frame, receiving nutriment and discharging excretions, undergoes continual change, and consequent early loss of identity, are for that particular opinion, called Ardhavainésikas ‘ arguing half perishableness.’?’ Col. M. E. Vol. I. pp. 393, 394.
Introduction. 5
intellect, and hence say, that the soul is proved by perception and in- ference.
The ceremonial part of the Védas is intended for the special instruc- tion of him, who with certainty knows that the soul exists, subject to transmigration, and who in consequence is anxious to avail himself of special means to obtain and remove objects of desire and aversion in connexion with another body. The ignorance, however, with regard to the soul, which produces the wish to obtain what is desired, and to remove what is not desired, and which by its nature prides itself in the feelings of self, dominion and possession, is not annihilated by ceremonial works + this can only be effected by the opposite knowledge of the identity of Bramha with the individual soul. For as long as this ignorance is not annihilated, so long the ignorant soul, owing to passion, hatred and other natural faults, resulting from works, and owing to the transgression of commands and prohibitions of the SAstra, conti- nues to accumulate by thoughts, words and by the body, works which are called unholy, and which are the causes of evil concerning events that fall within the senses as well as that which do not fall within them. Allthis is the result of the greater power of natural faults. Hence, in proportion to the faults, transmigration ensues from the highest state downwards to the lowest state of animate matter.
Sometimes the purification by means of the Sastra has a greater power. Hence the soul acquires by actions of mind, speech and body a state which is called virtue, and which is the cause of good. This virtue is twofold—virtue resulting from knowledge and mere virtue. The reward of the latter is the obtaining of the world of the manes (Pitris) and of other like worlds. The reward of virtue, resulting from knowledge, is the obtaining of the world of the Dévas, and of other worlds, upwards to the world of Bramha. Thus it is said in the SAstra: sacrifi- cial works directed to Bramha, are preferable to works directed to the Dévas. Also the Smriti* teaches: work, according to the Védas, is twofold, (such as concerns ‘active life, and such as refers to contem- plation ; the former satisfies desires, the latter abstains from them through knowledge.) ~
If lastly, virtue and vice are equally balanced in a person, he obtains the condition of man. Thus by the power of ignorance and other
* Manu. 12. 88.
6 Introduction.
innate faults, a soul has to transmigrate, in accordance with its virtue or vice, into worldly forms, different in name, shape and works, from the state of the world of Bramh4& downwards to the condition of inani- mate matter.
Thus this manifested world, subject to the connexion between cause and effect, was not manifested before its creation. «^ This world which, like a sprout springs from seed, proceeds from ignorance, which is placed as the result from works, from the performer and effects upon the soul, is without beginning, is without end, is without reality.” To remove the ignorance of a person who shows by reflections, as just described, his dissatisfaction with the world, the following Upanishad 18 commenced ; in order that he may obtain the knowledge of Bramha, which is opposite to that ignorance.
The knowledge, however, of the ceremonies regarding the sacrifice of a horse, is required that those who are not fit to perform the horse- sacrifice may obtain by this knowledge the same reward.*
If one by such passages from the Sruti as the following: ^ By know- ledge or by holy actions the mentioned reward may be obtained,” and ० [€ who overcomes even this world,’’ would conclude, that the knowledge was only a kind of work, he would be in error, first, because passages as such : ^^ who offers the sacrificial horse,” and ‘‘ who knowst him thus,’ leave it optional, to perform that sacrifice either by knowledge or in reality ; secondly, because it (this knowledge) is also mentioned in the second part of the Sruti, which treats on knowledge ; thirdly, because also by other ceremonies a similar representation is made. Hence it follows, that from knowledge alone the reward of the horse-sacrifice is derived. The chief of all ceremonies, however, is the Aswamédha, because its reward includes the universal and. special state of Hiranya Garbha.f
* Viz. at the commencement of the Upanishad a description of the Aswamédha or horse-sacrifice, which does not properly belong to it, is given for the object, that Bréhmansand others may obtain by knowledge the reward of this sacrifice, which can in reality only be performed by kings.
+ That is to say, who knows the sacrifice of the horse to be an emblem of Prajapati.
‡ The universal state is Hiranya Garbha as soul of the universe, or Fswara, who rules all; the special state is Hiranya Garbha as present in every individual. Here the special state means of course the state of a special divinity.
Introduction. 7
Further at this commencement of the knowledge of Brahma, the ceremony of the horse-sacrifice is described for the purpose to show the worldly tendency of all sacrifices; for its reward is shown as the devourer, which is death.
If it be said that the regular* ceremonies have no worldly effect, we deny this on the authority of the Sruti, which enumerates the effects of all works. For every ceremony requires the assistance of a wife. When by such wishes as the following, “may I have a wife,’’ which are based on our very nature, the connection of all ceremonies with ob- jects of desire,—moreover, as the reward of the ceremonies to be performed by a son, the world of the Rishis or Dévas, have been pointed out, the state of Hiranya Garbha will be shown as reward of the Aswamédha at the end of this chapter by the words: “ This world 18 threefold by name, form and work.”
Thus the world is the manifest effect from all actions. These three (names, forms and works) then were before the origin of the world not manifested. Again they become manifest from the effects of the works of all living creatures, as a tree springs from seed. This world, which is at the same time manifest and not manifest, the object of ignorance, which is morpheus and amorpheus ; is for the sake of the ceremony, the performer and the effect, placed through igno- rance upon the soul by its semblance of it. Therefore the soul, although it is separate from the world, although in its nature it is without the distinction of name, form and work, although it is without duality, essentially eternal, pure, intelligent. and blissful, is yet manifested by the difference of ceremony, performer, effect, and by other distinctions. Therefore as the erroneous conception of arope as a snake is removed by a correct apprehension, so the knowledge of Bramha is commenced to annihilate the ignorance, the cause of desire and other faults, and also of works, of a person who is dissatisfied with this world, which natu- rally represents the distinctions of ceremonial act, of the performer and of the effect, and which naturally applies causes and effects by such sentences, as: this is so or so. In this the part, commencing
* Regular ceremonies are such, which, if not performed, are causes of sin, and if performed, are no causes of merit, ceremonies which every Brahman is bound to perform, as for instance the regular ceremonies, called Sandhya bandana. V. Vé- danta Sara. Calcutta Edition. p. 2.
8 Introduction,
with: ‘The dawn 18 the head,” &c., is designed for the knowledge the horse sacrifice. The sacrifice is represented under the emblem of a horse, on account of the eminence of the horse. The eminence again is derived from the sacrifice bearing its name, and from its being the representation of Praj4pati.*
क The Aswamédha and Purushamédha, celebrated in the manner directed by this Véda, (white Yajur Véda) are not really sacrifices of horses and men. In the first mentioned ceremony, six hundred and nine animals of various prescribed kinds, domestic and wild, including birds, fish, and reptiles, are made fast, the tame ones, to twenty-one posts, and the wild, in the intervals between the pillars; and after cer- tain prayers have been recited, the victims are let loose without injury....... ee. This mode of performing the Aswamédha and Purushamédha, ss emblematic cere- monies, not asreal sacrifices, is taught in this Veda and the interpretation is fully confirmed by the rituals, and by commentators on the Sanhité and Brahmana. .... The horse, which is the subject of the religious ceremony, called Aswamédha, is also avowedly an emblem of Viréj, or the primeval and universal manifested being. Col. >, E. Vol. I. pp. 61, 62.
BRIHAD ARANYAKA UPANISHAD.
FIRST CHAPTER. First Brémhana.
Om! The dawn in truth is the head of the sacrificial horse. The sun is the eye; the wind the breath; the fire, under the name Vaiswanara, the open mouth ; the year the body of the sacrificial horse. The heaven is the back ; the atmosphere the belly $ the earth the footstool (hoof) ; the quarters the sides; the intermediate quarters the bones of the sides; the seasons the
‘‘The dawn 18 in truth, &c.”’ The dawn means here the hour of Bramhé. “ In truth,”’ is said for the sake of reminding, and reminds of a well known time. ^ Is the head,” from its being the principal time ; for the head is the principal part of the body. For the object of purifying the animal, representing in its members the various parts of the ceremonies, time and other conditions of the sacrifice are typified by the head and other parts. It is represented as Prajépati by giving it the emblems of Prajdpati ; for the representation of the animal by time, the worlds and the divinities is its representation as Prajapati ; for this is the nature of Prajdpati, as Vishnu and other deities are represented under the form of an image. ‘“‘The sun is the eye,” as nearest to the head, and as being. the tutelary deity of the eye.*—‘* The wind is the breath,”’ from its identity with it. ‘“‘The mouth is fire, under the name of Vaiswanara ;” Vaiswdnara is the special name of Agni, meaning, whose mouth is wide open. Agni is also the deity of the mouth. = ^ व 06 year is the body,” viz. the year, as containing twelve or thirteen months. The year is the body of the members of time ; for the body is in the midst of the mem- bers, as the Sruti says. ‘Of the sacrificial horse ;”’ this is here repeated for the sake of connection, ‘“‘ The heaven is the back,’’ both being placed alike above. ‘The atmosphere the belly,” both being hollow. The earth the footstool. The quarters, although four, are the two sides, by
* As the eye is nearest to the head, so the sun nearest to the dawn. This is the point of their resemblance. Ananda Giri.
९
10 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
members ; the months, the half months, are the joints; day and night the feet; the constellations the bones; the sky the mus- cles ; the half digested food the sand; the rivers arteries and veins ; the liver and spleen the mountains ; the herbs and trees the various kinds of hair. The sun, as long as he rises, is the fore- part of the body; the sun as long as he descends, is the hind part of the body. The lightning is like yawning; the shak- ing of the members is like the rolling of the thunder; the passing of urine is like the rain of the clouds; its voice is like speech. |.
¢he similarity of both. This comparison is not improper for the reason, that the number of both is different ; for as the two sides of the horse are turned to all quarters, there is no fault in this comparison. ‘The intermediate quarters,” viz. Agnéyi (regent of the south-east), &c., the bones of the sides. «^ The seasons are the members,”’ from the simila. rity of the parts of the year with the members of the body. “The months and half months the joints,” from their similarity. ‘Days and nights the feet’ in plural number from the difference of days, as days of Prajépati, of the Dévas, of the Pitris, and of men. = ^^ Feet,” because they proceed ; for the time as body proceeds with the days and nights, as with the feet of the horse. ‘The constellations the bones,’’ from their similar white colour. ‘‘ The sky,’”’ meaning here the clouds of the sky, because the sky was formerly mentioned as the belly, are the muscles, from the similarity of both in oozing either water or blood. «The half digested food the sand,” from the similarity of the separate parts. The rivers, “arteries and veins,’’ because both ooze. “The liver and the spleen,” the mountains, viz. the two pieces of flesh to the right and left under the heart ; they are called ‘“‘ mountains” from their hard- ness and height. Theherbs, small plants, the hair of the body; the “* trees,” the-hair of the head, according to their likeness. The sun rising until noon is the forepart of the horse above:the navel ; the.sun, descend- ing from the midst of his course, is the other half, the hips and loins, from their respective similarity. ‘The lightning is like the yawning,”’ from the likeness of ‘the mouth, when it suddenly opens, with the rend- ing of a cloud. ‘‘The shaking of the members is like the rolling of thunder,” from the similarity of the sound. “The passing of the urine”’
First Chapter. First Brdmhana. 11
The day is the Mahima, placed before the horse ; its birth- place is the eastern sea; the night the other Mahima, which is placed behind the horse; its birthplace is the western sea ; these Mahimas are placed around the horse. The horse, under the name of Haya, carried the gods, under the name of V&ji the Gandharvas, under the name of Arva, Asurs, under the name of Aswa, men. The sea is its companion, the sea its birthplace. 2.
is like the raining of the clouds—both sprinkle alike. The voice is like the neighing of the horse ; in this there is a natural likeness. 1
“The day,” &c., this is said in illustration of the golden and silver cups, called Mahima, which are placed before and behind the horse. The day is the golden cup, from the similar splendour of both. How is the day placed -as the cup before the horse? By its being an emblem of Praja- pati; for Prajapati who is represented by Aditya (the sun), &c. is de- signed by the day. In naming the horse, Prajépati is meant, as the lightning is manifest by manifesting a tree. The birthplace of the golden cup means here the place where it is kept. Thus the night represents the silver cup, from the likeness of the colour, or of the hind-part of the horse. Behind this horse, the cup, by name Mahima, is placed. Its birthplace is the western sea. Mahima means greatness ; for it shows the opulence of the horse, that the golden and silver cups are placed on either side. These cups, under the name of Mahima, are placed around the horse. The repetition is here made for: the sake of praise, viz. the Mahimas, which have those distinctions, and the horse gifted with greatness. The same praise is intended by the words: ‘The horse under the name of Haya.” Haya is derived from the root Hindti, the action of going, going m an eminent manner, unless it means a peculhar race. “It carries the gods,’ means either it gained the condition of a god by its being the representation of Prajd- pati, or it became the carrier of the gods. But is not the office of carrying a blame? By no means ; for carrying is the nature of the horse, and as by this nature it acquires an eminence, as being connected with the gods and other superior beings, it is rather a praise. In the same manner the word V4ji and the other terms of the horse denote different races. The horse, under the name of V&ji, carried
c 2
12 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
Second Brémhana. There was not any thing here before: this was indeed en- veloped by death, who is voracity ;
the Gandharvas, under the name of Arva the Asurs, under the name of Aswa men. The sea, which represents here the universal soul, in its companion ; there is its dwelling place. The sea, its birth- place, the cause of its production. In this way the purified birth- place, or the purified dwelling-place is praised. In the waters is the birth-place of the horse, says the Sruti; thus the sea is its well known origin (2.)
The origin of the fire, required for the performance of the horse-sacri- fice, will now be explained. As it is intended to describe the particulars of the fire with regard to the horse sacrifice, the birth of the fire is here introduced for its praise.
“There was not any thing here before.” ^ Here,” in this universe, — there was not any thing that could be distinguished by differences = of name or shape. ‘Before,’ viz. before the creation of the mind and | other productions.
€Then was there not the universal void ?* For this follows from the passage of the Sruti: ‘‘There was not any thing here,’’ which means there was neither an effect nor a cause. It follows also from the idea of production ; for suppose a pot be produced, consequently there is no ex- istence of the pot before its production.’
But hence does not follow the non-existence of the cause, as is evident from the lump of earth (from which the pot is produced ;) let it be granted, that there is no existence of a thing, that is not perceived ;+ let therefore the effect not exist; this, however, does not affect the exist- ence of the cause, as it can be perceived (before it produces the effect.)
‘No, because before the production there is no perception whatever, either of cause or effect. If then non-perception, which is a negation, is the cause of the-whole world, neither cause nor effect can be perceived = before its creation ; therefore the negation of all (cause and effect) must be admitted.’
We deny this. First, because the Sruti declares : ^ By death was this
* This is the opinion of the Madhyamikas, one of the four sects of the Bauddhas. Vide p. 3. + As of an effect, which is not perceived, before it is produced by its cause.
First Chapter. Second Brémhana. 13
indeed enveloped ;” for if there was nothing to envelop, and nothing to be enveloped, the Sruti could not say, this was indeed enveloped ; for there is no such a conception as the son of a barren woman, adorned with a sky-flower. And itis said, by death indeed was this enveloped ; there- fore, by the evidence of the Sruti, it follows both, that before the crea- tion of the world there was a cause which was enveloping, and that there was an effect which was enveloped. We deny it secondly, by argument ; for we may know by inference existence of cause and effect before the production ; for if a real effect takes place, it must be produced by a real cause, and cannot be produced by an unreal cause.
The existence of a cause of the world before its creation is argued in the same manner as the existence of the cause of a pot and of other productions. If you* argue the non-existence of the cause of the pot, &c. from the reason, that the pot could ०९६ be produced, unless the lump of eartht and other similar things disappear,} we cannot agree, since earth and other substances are the real causes; for earth, gold, &c. are the causes in the production of a pot, and not the peculiar shape of the lump, since, if there is not the former, (earth,) there is not the latter, (the pot.) Namely, even if thereis not a peculiar shape of the lump, the production of a pot and similar effects takes place from such substances alone, as earth, gold and similar causes. Therefore not the peculiar shape of the lump is the cause in the production of a pot. On the other hand, if there do not exist earth, gold and similar substances, the production of a pot, &c. does not take place ; consequently, earth, gold, &c. are the causes, not the peculiar shape of the lump; for every cause, when producing an effect, produces this effect only by con- cealing (making disappear) its former effects, because it 18 impossible that from one and the same cause, at one and the same time, many effects should be derived.§
* The opponent of course.
t From which the pot is produced.
‡ Viz. the opponent reasons in this way: If the effect (for instance, the pot) has no actual existence, the cause (the lump of earth) does also not exist. If the effect has actual existence, the cause (the lump of earth) has disappeared, i. e. exists no more.
§ For instance. The shape of a lump of earth, from which a pot is to be made, must disappear in order that the production be possible. This shape, however, is not the cause, but it is merely a former effect of the same cause, earth.
14 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
Nor does the cause disappear with its former effect: therefore the | production of the pot by the disappearance of the lump, (which you say, is the cause) shows, that the lump is not the cause. If you say, ° that before the production a cause does not exist, because, mdependent of the lump of earth, earth and other substances have no existence,’ we ob- ject ; for earth and other substances do not disappear with their former effects, but are yet found in the last productions, as in a pot, &c.
If you maintain, ‘that without the lump, the pot, &c., earth and other causes are not perceived,’ we deny this also, because, when a pot, &c. is produced, the lump, &c. has disappeared, while the earth and other real causes are there still remaining. If you say, ‘that the connexion (between cause and effect) depends upon comparison,* and not upon the permanence of the cause (in the effect) ;* we deny this also, for as the parts of earth that compose a lump, are found in a pot by mere per- ception, there is only a semblance of inference, and therefore comparison and other similar actions do not take place.
Moreover the different mode of operation in perception and in imfer- ence is not incompatible, because inference, which is always preceded by perception, would otherwise have nowhere a place to depend upon.
If it be supposed, that ‘ all has only a momentary existence, and ac- cordingly in a sentence : that is this, both terms refer only to a momen- tary existence,’ it follows, that the notion of that is dependent on the notion of another that, which is again dependent on another, so that there is no stability. It further follows, that the notion ‘that is like this,’ is also impossible, (the term ‘this’ being dependent on a simi- lar series) hence the conclusion is unavoidable : there is no dependence whatsoever. The connection between the two notions of that and this is also impossible, because there is no subjectt to perceive them. If you say, ‘there is a connection between them by comparison,’ we
* Sankara has omitted to give the argument of the opponent, which is based upon the supposition that the relation of cause and effect can only be apprehended by comparison. Ananda Giri supplies this as follows. All that exists is only moe mentary ; but these modes (cause and effect) exist ; therefore they are momentary. If thus the momentary existence of all that exists, has been shown, and the relation of cause and effect depends upon comparison, delusion is unavoidable.
+ No sentient subject, no reasonable being, because it would be involved in the same eternal change. ।
First Chapter. Second Brdmhana. 15
object, because the mutual connexion of the notions of that and this cannet be understood. Aad if there be no connection between one object and another object, the idea of comparison cannot take place. ` ©Granted, that there is no comparison, the notion of that is possi- ble.’ No, because, like the notion from comparison, the notions of that and this have no reference to any real object. ‘Granted that all notions have no real object, what then?’ You must then admit that true as well as false notions refer to objects which are objects of nothing. If you lastly say, ‘this may be so,’ we contradict, because, if all notions are without object, you cannot form the idea of a false notion. Hence, your opinion, that the notion of that depends upon comparison, is not true, and we therefore conclude, that the real existence of the cause before the production is proved. |
This is also true with regard to the effect, on the ground of its mani- festation. ‘How is the existence of the effect before its production proved on the ground of its manifestation ?’*
Manifestation is the ground of this (effect)—hence manifestation means a perception dependent on a knowledge which is present; for as in common life a pot and similar things, envelaped by darkness, become an abject of knowledge, when the cause of enveloping has been removed by means of light, &c., and do therefore not disapprove their former exist- ence, 80 also we argue the existence of this world before its production ; for unless a pot exists, it cannot be perceived, even if the sun rises.
It certainly is not perceived by you, unless it exists. For if produc- tions, as a pot, &c. do at any timet not exist, they are not perceived
* Ths objection of the opponent, according to Ananda Giri, is, as follows: If you say, that an effect is proved by its manifestation, how does the existence of the effect follow from its manifestation? for from the existence af the effect follows also its manifestation, and again you maintain, that the existence of the effect is based upon its manifestation. This is a false circle —The answer of the Védantist is : The previous existence of aneffect, which is not perceived, is proved by its mani- festation, which is perceived. There is therefore no false circle. The argument for the previous existence of an effect is based on this premise: All that is manifested, exists before its manifestation, as a pot enveloped by darkness.
+ Reference is here made to the past and future time ; for if, says Ananda Giri, an effect, that is destroyed, or that is to be, did exist like a-present effect, it would be also perceived. This, however, is not the case, and therefore the argument is not correct. :
16 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
by you, ifthe sun even rises. Ifthe lump of earth is not at hand, and no enveloping causes, as darkness, being present, the effect will not be perceived on the ground that it exists.’
We do not admit this, because there is a twofold kind of envelop- ing ; for things that envelop an effect, as a pot, &c. are twofold ; first, things which screen, as darkness, &c. when the earth and other substances are already manifested ; secondly, the modification of the parts of earth and other substances in the state of another effect as ofa lump, &c., before the manifestation of the earth in the effect of a pot, &c. Accordingly, the perception of an effect, as a pot, although existing before its production, cannot take place, because it is enveloped (in another effect). The distinction, however according to the common ideas of destroyed, produced, existing, not existing, is merely the twofold distinc- tion of the ideas of manifestation and disappearance.*
‘This is improper, because the lump, the two halves of the pot,+ &c. are different from any thing that envelops ; for any screen, as darkness, which envelops any production, as a pot, &c., appears something differ- ent from the pot and similar things, while the lump or the two ; do not appear different from the pot. Therefore your assertion, that a pot, which is in the state of a lump, or of the two halves, is not per- ceived, because it is enveloped, is improper, because it is different from the idea of enveloping.’{
* By the disappearance of the half, a pot is destroyed ; by removing the lump and other enveloping things, it is manifested ; its manifestation by means of a light, &c. 18 its existence ; its disappearance by means of the lump, &c. is its non-existence.
t+ To understand the following, itis necessary to know that the usual way among the Hindus to make a pot is, first to form two separate parts, the Kapélas, the halves of the pot, and to join them afterwards in the middle.
वु This objection is based upon the supposition, that the thing, which is envelop- ing, is not identical with the thing, that is enveloped by it, as for instance darkness is not identical with any thing that is enveloped by it. Therefore, the opponent argues, the lump of earth cannot envelop a pot or any other production, because both (the lump and the pot) are identical. The refutation of this is twofold, according to a distinction in the term identical, viz. the assertion that the enve- loping thing cannot be identical with the thing enveloped, means either, that it cannot be identical as to its appearence in space, &c. or not identical as to its cause. The firstis refuted by the fact, that the contrary takes places, for instance : when milk and water are mixed, water, which is enveloped by milk, is perceived as one and the same with the milk, which could not be the case, if the thing that
First Chapter. Second Brdmhana. 17
We do not agree, for, on the one hand, milk and water (when mixed) and similar things, appear in an identical state, although the water and similar things are enveloped by milk, &c. On the other hand, if you say, that ‘there is nothing which envelops, because the parts of a half that is ground to dust are contained in the pot,’ &c., we deny this; for if the different parts are in another effect, there is evidently an enveloping. ‘There must, however, be an effort to remove what envelops, because the pot and other effects, which are in the state of the lump or of the halves, are not perceived in consequence of their being enveloped, and accordingly a person, who is desirous of any production, as of a pot, must direct his effort to destroy what envelops it, and not to the production of the pot. This, how- ever, does not exist, and it is therefore improper to say, that there is no perception of a thing which exists, because it is enveloped.” We deny this, because it is against the rule in practice ; for the manifestation of a pot, &c. does not take place only by an effort to destroy obstacles, as is evident from the effort to produce a light, if a pot and other productions are enveloped in darkness. Ifyou say, ‘that this is done to destroy darkness, viz. that the effort made to produce a light, is merely made to let darkness disappear, and if the darkness is destroyed, the pot is* manifest by itself; for there is nothing (no obstacle to the sight) in the pot,’ we do not grant this, because the perception takes place, when the pot is manifested ; for as the manifested pot is perceived by means of a light, so it is not before the light is employed. Therefore the light is not for the means to destroy the darkness, but rather for the means of manifesting the pot, because the perception takes place by manifesta- tion. Sometimes there may be an effort also to destroy what envelops, as in the destruction of a screen, &c., but on this account it is not the rule. A person who wishes the manifestation of any thing, must make an effort to destroy all that envelops.
This follows also from the success of a work, if done in accordance with its rule. We said, that an effect, which abides in the cause, is an
envelops must be different from the thing that is enveloped. The second is refut- ed on the ground, that different effects in one and the same cause are separated from each other, and do therefore not destroy each other.—A. G. * That is to say, when the screen, darkness, is removed, there is no obstacle to its manifestation. D
18 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
obstacle to another effect. If then an effort is made to destroy an effect, which was before manifested, for instance a lump, or the two halves which were before concealed by the lump,* then is produced an effect which is called splitting or grinding, &c. A pot, which is enveloped by such effects, is not perceived, and requires therefore another effort ; hence a person who wishes the manifestation of a pot, can only be successfal, if the needful action of producing a pot is used by him. There- fore the effect exists even before its production.—This follows also from the distinction of the ideas of past and future. It is only reasonable, that the ideas of ‘there was a pot” and “there will be a pot,” like the idea of “there is a pot,” do not refer to an object that does not exist.—It also follows from the actions of any one, who is desirous of a future production ; for nobody would act with regard to a desire of things that have no existence.—It follows also from the trath of the knowledge of the Yégis, with regard to past and future events. If a future pot were not an existing thing, divine knowledge, from imme- diate perception with regard to a future pot, would be false. We do not take notice here of an effect, which is perceived at the present time ; for we granted Jefore inference for the existence of an effect which has been, or which ts to be.—This also follows from the impossibility of the contrary. When potters are engaged in the fabrication of a pot, it is evident by this proof that the pot is to be; for if with any time the future existence of the pot is connected, then to connect with that time a not existing pot, is a contradiction ; for a pot, that is to exist, does not exist, means, it 18 not to exist ; it is the same, as if it be said: This pot now before us does not exist.—Further, let potters be engaged in the fabrication of a pot, and let it be said, the pot does not exist before its production. If then the meaning of the word not existing, is, that the pot does not exist in the same manner, as potters and other artisans, who are en- gaged in their work, exist, then there is no contradiction. Why not? Because the pot exists in its own form, which is to exist ; for neither the existence of the lump, nor of the half, is the existence of the pot ; nor is their future existence the future existence of the pot. Taken in this view, when potters are engaged tn making a pot, there 18 no contradic- tion in the idea of a pot which does not exist before its production. If
* That is to say, which were before in the state of the lump; for this is a pre. vious effect of the same cause (earth).
First Chapter. Second Brdmhana. - 19
you, however, prohibit the idea of the condition of the pot as a future production, there is a contradiction ; but you did not prohibit this ; for with every action is not only existence or futurity connected (but also the past). Further, among the four privations,* the mutual privation with regard to the pot is perceived as something different from the pot, as the negation of the pot may be for example cloth ; but it never can become fhe negation of a pot itself; for the negation of a pot, for instance cloth which exists, is never something negative, but some- thing positive. If this is the case, then all the other negations, viz. ante- cedent negation, destruction and absolute negation, which may take place with regard to the pot, are something positive, different from the pot itself, because tney nave the same connection with it as the mutual nega- tion. In this manner refer all negations to something positive. If this 18 the case, the antecedent negation of the pot does not mean a negation of the pot itself before its production. Therefore if you say, “the antece- dent negation of a pot,’ you must acknowledge the (existence of the) pot itself, or you could not connect it with the genitive case (of the pot). If you say, ‘it is conneeted with it by a rhetorical figure, as if one speaks of the Jody of a stone figure,’ yet, if you pronounce such a sentence as the negation of a pot, the connexion of the rhetorical negation is with the pot, and not with the nature of a pot (then the negation is only artificial negation and not the real negation of the pot.) If you say, ‘that the nega- tion of a pot is something different from the pot,’ then we must refer you to the answer we have given before.
Further, before the production of a pot, there cannot be a con- nection of the pot which does not exist with its cause which exists, which is, as if you would give horns to a hare, because the connection is always mutual. If you say, ‘there is no fault in our case, because the connexion is only an accidental one,’ we object, because even an accidental connexion cannot take place for elements, of which the one
* Negation or privation is of two sorts, universal and mutual. Universal nega- tion comprehends three species, antecedent, emergent and absolute. Antecedent privation is present negation of that which at a future time will be. Emergent negation is destruction, or cessation of an effect. Absolute negation extends through all times, past, present and future. Mutual privation is difference. It is recipro- cal negation of identity, essence, or respective peculiarity. (Col. M. E. Vol. I. pp. 288, 289.)
D 2
20 Brihad -tranyaka Upanishad.
For voracity is death. He created this mind, desiring: May I have a soul. He went forth worshipping. From him when worshipping, the waters were produced. He then reflected: To me, when worshipping, water (Ka) was produced. For the same reason fire obtained the name of Arka. Happiness is indeed produced for him, who in this manner knows the nature of Arka. (1.)
exists, the other not exists; for with regard to two elements that exist, either the necessary, or accidental connexion may take place; but it does not take place for elements, of which the one exists, the other does not exist, or for elements, of which either does not exist. It is therefore proved, that the effect exists before its production. The Upanishad now explains the nature of death, by whom this (uni- verse) was enveloped by the words:
९ Who is voracity.”"* The desire to devour is voracity—this is death, for voracity is the true definition of death. By death then whose nature is voracity, this universe was enveloped. How is voracity death ! The answer is: ^ For voracity is death.” The meaning of the word ‘for’ is, that the reason is well known ; for he who desires to devour, kills according to his voracity the livirig creatures. Consequently death is represented by voracity ; Voracity asa desire is a quality of the soul in its modification as intelligence ; therefore this Hiranya Garbha, in his modification as intelligence, is called death. By this death was this effect enveloped, as a pot and other productions are enveloped by earth in its modification as alump. ‘He created this mind;” the abovementioned death, by the desire to create the productions, after- wards to be specified, made the so-called mind, capable to reflect on his creation, viz. the internal sense which is possessed with the faculty to ascertain knowledge, and with other faculties. For what purpose did he create the mind? The answer is: ‘‘ May I have a soul,” may, by the soul, in its modification as mind, I have mind. Prajapati, possessed with mind by the manifestation of mind, having adored himself, said : I have succeeded. ^ From him,” from Prajapati, ^ when worshipping, the waters,’ the element whose quality is taste, ^^ were produced,”’ as the embodied: parts of his devotion, that is to say, he created the water after the production of the sky and the other two
* Vid. p. 12.
First Chapter. Second Brdmhana. 21
Or the waters are Arka. The froth of the waters, which was there, became consistent. This became the earth. On the creation of this he became fatigued. The splendour, the exu- dation of him, when he was fatigued, heated, was poured out as fire. (2.)
elements,* as it accords with the authority of another passage of the Sru- ti, and the improbability of a reverse order of the creation. ‘ He then reflected, when worshipping, (Archate) water (Ka) was produced for me.” For the same reason, that death was called Arka, Arkaor the fire, in its connection with the sacrifice of Aswamédha, obtained the name of Arka; for the second appellation of fire is Arka. The name of Arka, as de- rived from Archana, which means to worship for one’s welfare, or as derived from its connection with water, denotes a quality of fire. To him who in this manner, as has been mentioned knows the nature of Arka, water, or happiness (the word Ka is used for both) is indeed, of a certainty, produced (1.)
‘*Qr the waters are Arka.” Who is again called Arka? The waters, the embodied parts of the devotion, are Arka, as produced from Arka orfire. As it is said in the Sruti: And in the waters is placed the fire. But they are not directly called Arka, because this is the proper place to describe the fire, but not the water. And afterwards it 1s also said: This fire is Arka, ‘The froth of the waters, which was there,” like the cream of curdled milk, ‘‘ became consistent ;”’ the froth of the waters, heated from within and without by the generative splendour, became consistent, ‘became the earth.” The meaning is, that from these waters the mundane egg sprang forth. “On this,’’ on the produc- tion of the earth, ‘“he,”’ death, Prajapati ^^ became fatigued ;”’ for every body, after the performance of work, gets fatigued, and it is the great work of Prajépati to create the earth. What does it mean that he got fatigued? From the body of Prajépati, when fatigued, heated, distressed, his creative splendour as exudation, his substance was poured out. Which is the fire that was poured out? It is Prajé- pati as the Biréj (who is throughout splendour) within the egg, the first-born, containing within himself the whole organism of productions. He is the first embodied soul, as it is said in the Smriti (2.)
99
* Air and fire. Taittaréya Upanishad. I. 2.
22 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
He made himeelf threefold, Aditya as the third, Vayu as the third. This life parted threefold. His eastern quarter is the head. The quarters on either side are the arms. Then his western quarter is the tail, the quarters on either side are the thighs, the south and north the flanks, the sky the back, the atmosphere the belly ; this earth the breast. This fire is placed in the waters; for wheresoever one repairs, there he is placed. This results from the knowledge of the wise. (3.)
This Prajépati, when born, divided his own self, the organism of all productions, threefold. How threefold? besides Agni and V4yu, he made Aditya asthe third to complete the number of three; in the same manner, beside Agni and Aditya, Vayu as the third, and also, beside Vayu and Aditya, Agni as the third, according to their equal power to fill up the number of three. This Prajapati, the life of every individual in the world, was divided threefold according to the nature of Agni, Vayu, and Aditya, especially according to his own nature as death, without giving up the nature of Viréj. This first-born fire, as Arka in its connection with the ceremony of the Aswamédha, this fire as Virdj, which is purified according to holy rite, is also represented under the symbol of a horse ; for, we said, the whole origin, as above mentioned, is narrated for his praise. Thus is his sacred origin. ‘‘ His eastern quarter is the head,” both being alike by their excellence. - “‘ The quarters on either side,’’ viz. the quarters of Is4 and of Agn¢yi, “are the arms.” “ Then the western quarter of the fire is the tail,” viz. the part of the hip and loins, as being opposite to the front part. ‘The quarters on either अतल," viz. Vayu and the seasons, “‘ are the thighs,”’ being like to the corners of the back ; ‘south and north the flanks,’ being like by their connexion with the two former quarters. ‘‘The heaven the back, the atmosphere the belly,’ as in the former description ; ‘‘ this earth is the breast,’”’ both being alike by their position downwards. ‘This fire,” being like Prajé- pati, or the fire as the substance of the worlds and of the other created beings, ‘‘is placed in the waters.”’ As another passage of the Sruti says : thus are all these worlds within the waters. ‘“‘ For wheresoever any body repairs, there he is placed” there he gains his abode. Who? He who thus knows the nature of the fire, which in the manner described is placed in the waters ; for this is the fruit of his knowledge. (3.)
First Chapter. Second Brdmhana. 23.
He desired: Let a second self of me be produced. By his mind he created speech, created union, viz. the devourer, death. The seed which there sprang forth, became the year. For the year was not before him ; he was conceived for the space of such time. After the time, which is contained within the space of a year, he created him. When he was born, he opened his mouth against him. He cried. Thus was speech produced. (4.)
** He desired” Who? Death. He by himself, according to the suc- cessive order of creation of the water and the other elements, created himself within the egg, as the Viréj, as Agni, containing the organism of all productions. He also made himself threefold, as it was said. How was his activity, while he created? The answer is: ^^ He,” death, “ desired.” What ? ^^ Let a second self of me,” a body, by which I am possessed with a body, ^“ be produced.”” Having thus desired, he created, by his before created mind, speech, viz. speech representing the three Védas ; he creat- ed the union of speech with the mind, that is to say, he reflected in his mind on the creation of the three Védas in their successive order. Who? Death, represented by voracity, as it is said, death is represented by the desire to devour. This is here repeated, in order that it be not con- nected with another. ‘‘The seed,” the generative seed both of know- ledge and ceremonies, the cause of all productions of Prajapati, the first embodied soul, which (seed) he perceived by his contemplation of the three Védas, “ which there,” in that union, “sprung forth, became” (being conceived in the form of an egg, after he had entered with this generative seed the water, which he had created in accordance with his recollection ofits (the water’s) production in a former birth) “the year.” This means, Prajipati, the framer of the period, called a year, became the year. ‘For the year was not before him,” before Prajépati, the framer of the annual period. As long as the duration of a year is, so long a time was Prajapati, the framer of the annual period, con- ceived. What did he do after the completion of this time? ‘He created him”—which means, he broke the egg. When the babe, fire, the first em- bodied soul, was thus born, death in accordance with his voracity, “‘opened his mouth against him’ to devour him, upon which the babe,
‘according to his natural ignorance, got afraid and cried. ‘Thus was speech produced”’ the sound of speech produced. (4.)
24 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
He reflected: If 1 kill him, I] shall have only little food. On this reflection he created by that word in union with that soul all this whatsoever, the Rig, the Yajur, the Sama Védas, the metres, the sacrifices, mankind, the animals.
He resolved to devour all that he had created in this man- ner; for he eats all, therefore he has the name of Aditi. He is the eater of this whole universe, this whole universe is his food. He who thus knows him in his nature as Aditi, will obtain the reward of this knowledge. (5.)
“‘ He reflected.” When death saw the terrified babe crying in such a manner, he reflected: ‘‘ If I,’’ however desirous of eating, kill at any time this babe, ‘‘I shall have only little food.”’ On this reflection he abstained from eating him; for much food is required for eating a long time, not a little ; for by eating this boy, there will be only little food, as by the eating of the seed there will be want of corn. After having thus reflected on the necessity of abundant food, he created by the union of the before-men- tioned threefold speech with the soul, the mind, the whole moveable and immoveable universe, “all this whatsoever,” viz. the Rig, Yajur, Sama Védas, the seven metres, viz. the Gdéyatri and others, the three kinds of Mantras, which are the parts of the body of the Stotra Sastra, with their Gayatri and other metres, the sacrifices to be performed by Mantras, mankind, as the performer of sacrifices, and all the wild and domestic animals, necessary for the performance of the sacrifices. ‘ How is it possi- ble, that he created by the threefold speech in its union with the mind, the Rig and the other Védas when it was said before, that he created them in this manner?’ There is no fault in this. The union, which the mind has with the three Védas, does not exist as manifested, and the creation is the manifestation of the existing Védas by their ap- plication to ceremonies. ‘ He,’ Praj&pati, being thus aware of the increase of food, ‘‘ resolved to devour all that he had created,”’ all the actions, the causes of actions and the effects of actions. Death is therefore called Aditi, because he eats all ; for Aditi 18 derived from Atti, he eats.—Thus it is said in a Mantra: ^ Aditi is the sky, he is the atmosphere, he is mother and शालः. He isthe devourer of the whole world, considered as his food, by being the universal soul; otherwise there would be a contradiction ; for no individual can be the eater of the universe. There-
|
First Chapter. Second Brdmhana. 25
He desired: Let me perform again the great sacrifice. He became fatigued. He performed penance. When he was fatigued, when he had performed penance, glory and power departed. Life is glory, power ; therefore, when life had depart- ed from his body, his body assumed a swollen appearance ; there was yet mind within his body. (6.)
fore he is the universal soul. ‘‘ This whole universe is his food.” Therefore it is consistent that all becomes his food, because he, as the universal soul, is the eater,—he, who in the aforesaid manner knows this state of Prajapati, death, or Aditi, viz. this state, accord- ing to which he eats every thing, will have such a reward. (5.)
“‘ He desired,” this is said for the purpose to give the description of the horse and the horse-sacrifice. ‘‘ Let me perform again the great sacrifice.’ The word again refers to his former birth; Prajdpati made the sacrifice of a horse in his former birth. With this recollection he came again at the commencement of the present Kalpa.* Being impressed with the recollection of the ceremonies, the performer and the reward of the horse sacrifice, he desired : ^^ Let me again perform the great sacrifice,’ and after he had thus desired the great work, he became . fatigued like all other people. “‘He performed penance.” When he was fatigued, when he had performed penance, as in the former description, t glory and power departed. The explanation of the words glory and power is given in the Upanishad itself; life, viz. the organs of sense, are glory, as being the cause of glory, for by the means of them renown is gained. In the same manner is power in this body ; for if life is extinguished, no glory, no power is possible. Therefore the organs of sense are like glory and power in this body ; thus that glory and power of life departed from his body. When the organs of sense, the cause of glory and power, had departed from the body of Prajapati, it presented the appearance of tur- gesence ; and was unpurified. ‘‘ There was yet mind in his body,” al- though deserted by Prajépati, in the same manner as the mind dwells on a beloved object, however distant it may be. When he thus remained in the body as mind, what did he do? (6.)
* Kalpa, a renovation of the universe, one of the great periods, from the reno- vation to the destruction of the world. † Vide p. 24. E
26 Brikad Aranyaka Upaniehad.
He desired: Let this my body be pure. Let me have a self by this body. Hence it became a horse, because this became swollen. And because it became pure, therefore the ceremony gained the name of the Aswamédha. He who thus knows the Aswamédha, knows also him.
He knows the Aswamédha, who knows him in this manner. Having left it unrestrained, he considered himself 28 the
The answer is : ^“ प्र desired.” What? ‘ Let this my body be pure,”’ worthy of the sacrifice. ‘‘ Let me have a self,’”’ let me have a body by this body.”’ Thus he entered this body. = ^ Because this,”’ this body by my separation from it, destitute of glory and power, became swollen (Aswad) for this reason it became a horse (Aswa). Hence the name of horse (Aswa) is evidently intended for the praise of Praj&patiin this ce- remony. Further, ^^ because’ that which was before impure (Amédhya) without glory and power, by his entering again ‘‘became pure’ (Mé- dhya,) worthy of sacrifice, ^ therefore’ the ceremony bearing the name of Aswamédha obtained the name of Aswamédha ; for the nature of the sacrifice is to have ceremonies, a performer and effects. Thisis like Pra- jépati. That the horse, by which the sacrifice is accomplished, is to represent Prajdpati, is evident from the words of the Sruti: ‘ The dawn is the head of the sacrificial horse,” &c.
The present passage, however: ‘He knows the Aswamédha,”’’ is commenced, in order that the worship of the sacrificial horse, as an emblem of Prajépati and also of the fire, as it has been described, both of which are equal as being the sacrifice and effect, should be established. This view is obtained first, because in the former passage no verb, enjoining the action, is met with, and secondly because the rite (of the Aswamédha) requires such a verb.* ‘‘He knows the Aswamédha, who him,”” viz. the horse and Arka in his nature as fire, in this manner, he knows the Aswamédha, none beside, which means, that it should there- ‘fore be known in this manner. The Upanishad now explains, why Pra-
* Ananda Giri supplies here the defect in the argument ; for, says he, a verb en- joining the action, has been mentioned in the former passage by the words ‘ He who knows the nature of Aditi.’ The rite or action which is by this established, he |
continues, refers, however, only toa worship of secondary order; here on the con- trary, is the rule of the chief worship established.
First Chapter. Second Brémhana. 27
horse. After a year he slaughtered it for his own sake, he gave up the animals to the gods. Therefore they slaughter the purified animal, representing in its nature as Prajdpati all deities. He is the Aswamédha who shines. His body is the year. This fire is Arka. These worlds are parts of his self. They in such a manner are Arka and Aswamédha. They are again one
jépati 18 represented under the symbol of an animal. When Prajépati had desired : ‘ Let me again perform the great sacrifice,’ and had represented himself under the emblem of a sacrificial animal, he considered himself as the horse which he left unrestrained, viz. without rein. After the completion of a year, ^< he slaughtered it for his own sake,” by his nature as Prajapati representing all deities. ‘‘ He gave up the animals,’’ all the other animals, wild and domestic, according to the deities which they re- present, “to the gods.” Because Prajdpati considered himself as the horse, ^^ therefore’ any other person, who, according tothe beforemen- tioned manner, represents himself under the emblem of an animal, of the sacrificial horse, will thus think: Let me as the representative of all deities, being purified, slaughtered, be the divinity of myself. Let the other wild and domestic animals, according to the deities of which they are symbols, be slaughtered for the other divinities which are my parts.”’ In accordance with this, the priests slaughter at present the purified an- imal, which in its nature as Prajépati represents all deities. ^^ He is the Aswamédha who 8101168. He who is thus the sacrifice which is per- formed by the means of animals, is a/so described as the visible reward, in the words: “ He is the Aswamédha.””’ Who? He who “shines,’’ viz. S4vitri (the sun) who manifests the world by hig splendour. ^^ His body,”’ viz. the body of him who is at the same time the reward and the sacrifice, ‘‘is the year,’ because his revolution is performed within a year.* And because the sacrifice which represents him, is only per- formed by means of fire, the reward is described by the symbol of the sacrifice. This terrestrial fire, Arka, is the cause of performing the sacrifice. ‘*These worlds,” these three worlds, ‘‘are parts of his self,’ of the body of this Arka, which is called Chiti, when applied at the sacrifice. Thus it was before said : "^ His eastern quarter,” t &९. * The sacrifice is also performed in the space of a year.
† Page 22. E 2
28 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
divinity, death. He thus conquers the second death. Death does not obtain him. Death becomes his soul. He becomes one of those deities. 7.
‘‘ They,” the fire and Aditya, ‘“‘in such a manner,” as they are describ- ed, “are Arka and Aswamédha,”’ the sacrifice and the reward. Arka, the terrestrial fire, as the visible action, is therefore described as like the sacrifice, since the sacrifice is accomplished by fire. And because the reward (Savitri) is the effect of the sacrifice, it (the reward) is described by the emblem of the sacrifice. Therefore it is said, Aditya is the Aswamédha. “They,” cause and effect, sacrifice and reward, Agni and Aditya, ^^ are again one divinity.’* This is death. Being before also one, he was divided to correspond to the division into sacrifice, per- former and effect, as it was said: ^“ He divided himself threefold.’’+ He becomes again in the time, when the ceremonies are accomplished, one
divinity, viz. death representing the reward. Whosoever again knows |
him, the Aswamédha, death, as one deity in this manner :—I am_ thus death, the Aswamédha, one deity ; the state of this is gained by me as being like the horse and the fire,—‘ he conquers the second death,’’ that is to say, once having died, he is not born again for the second death. Doubting, whether death, although conquered, would still not get him
again, it is said: ‘‘Death does not obtain him.’ Why? ^ Death
becomes his soul,” the soul of him who knows death in this manner. Or, death being thus the reward, ‘he becomes one of those deities.’’{ This is his reward.
* Life, according to Ananda Giri. T Page 22 ‡ Savitri and Arka (sun and fire.)
First Chapter. Third Brémhana. 29
Third Brdmhana Udgitha* Bréhmana. Twofold indeed is the offspring of Prajdpati, the gods and
What is the connexion of the words: ^^ Two-fold indeed is the off- spring of Prajépati?”’ The highest reward of ceremonial works, accom- panied with knowledge, has been mentioned, viz. the state of death is the reward of the Aswamédha. Therefore the Udgitha Brémhana is now commenced to expound, from whencet the origin of ceremonial works and knowledge which lead to a state identical with death, is de- rived.
If it should be said : ‘The state of death has been before declared as the reward of the beforementioned knowledge and ceremonies.{ Now it will be asserted, that the reward of the knowledge and the ceremonies of the Udgitha is to overcome the condition of death. Therefore, since the reward is different, it is of no use to explain the origin of the former ceremonies and knowledge.’
We answer, there is no fault in this; for as the reward of the Udgi- tha is the condition of Agni or Aditya, it is the same reward which has been mentioned for the former ceremonies and knowledge in the words: ‘* He becomes one of those deities.”’ ‘Is it then not contradictory to _ say, that he overcomes death ?’§ No, because the overcoming of death means here to be liberated from the contact of innate sin.
To explain the meaning of the questions: Who is that death which is the contact with innate sin? Whence is his origin? By whom is he overcome and how? a narrative is given, commencing with the words: ‘ Two-fold indeed.” The word “ indeed” is used to remind of
* The Udgitha, a part of the Sama Véda (second chapter) is a kind of song, commencing with the mystic syllable Om, which the priest called Udgata, sings at the 8008 Yaga. The Séma Yaga is the general name for seven distinct rites, viz. Agni Stéma, Atyagni Stéma, Ukthya, Shérasi, Vajapéa Aterétra and Aptorydma, where the Séma, or moon-plant juice is offered. 6th Chap. of Xswaldyana’s Sutras.
tT This source of all ceremonies and knowledge is the all-pervading life, as de- scribed in this Bramhana.
‡ As reward of the Aswamédha, performed either symbolically, or in reality.
§ Viz. he who performs the Udgitha, overcomes death, while the reward of the Aswamédha has been stated as death.
30 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
the demons.* Therefore the gods are thus few in number, the demons many. They rivalled in these worlds. The gods of a
--- i ee | ---- ~
a former state, viz. it reminds of the state of the present Prajdpati in his former birth. ‘The offspring of Prajdpati,”? means his offspring in a former birth. Who are “the gods and the demons?” The organsf of Praj4pati, speech and the others. How again is the ‘divine and demoniacal nature of the offspring? The answer is: The gods (0८९४) who der:ve their name from manifesting (Dydtana) are such as are dedicated to knowledge and works, in accordance with the SAstras, the demons (Asura) as are dedicated to works and knowledge, the necessi- ty of which is visible, in accordance with natural perception and inference. They are different from the gods or Suras, because they are satisfied within their own life,t and also because the knowledge and works of the demons are directed to visible wants. ‘Therefore the gods are thus few in number, the demons many ;”’ for the desire of the organs to act in accordance with natural knowledge and works is stronger than the desire to act in accordance with knowledge and works, derived from the Sdstras, because the necessity of the former is evident. Therefore the number of the gods is less, because the desire to act in accordance with the S4stras, is less strong; for it can only be accomplished by excessive exertion. ‘‘ They,’ the gods and the demons, being alike the parts of the body of Prajapati, rivalled with each other for the sake of the enjoyment of these worlds, which may be obtained by actions and knowledge either in accordance with one’s own nature, or in accordance with the Sdstras. The contest is for victory or defeat, of the nature of the gods or demons. Sometimes the nature of the organs in accordance with knowledge and works derived from the Sastras, is vic- torious. When it has the ascendancy, then the demoniacal power of
* The same narrative, which here is given at the commencement of the Udgitha to show the power of life and its unity with the supreme soul, occurs in the Chan- dogya Upanishad, first Adhyaya, first Prapdthaka, where it is also used as an intro- duction to the Udgitha.
+ I remind here, that the number of organs, according to the Védanta, is eleven, viz. the five organs of sense, sight, &c., five organs of action, speech, the hand, &c., and the internal organ, the mind. Here, bowever, the organs of Prajapati, refer only to speech, smell, sight, hearing and mind, viz. to those which are required for the performance of the Udgitha.
व Asu here in the sense of vital air, life; it means also fire, reflection.
First Chapter. Third Brdmhana. 31
truth spoke. Let us nowin this sacrifice overcome the demons by the Udgitha. | |
the organs which refers to visible wants, and proceeds from knowledge and works in accordance with perception and inference, is defeated. This is the victory of the gods, and the defeat of the demons. Some- times the reverse takes place, the nature of the gods is defeated, that of the demons is victorious. When the gods are victorious, then, by the prevalence of virtue, an ascension ensues up to the obtaining of the state of Prajépati. When the demons are victorious, then, by the pre- valence of vice, a descension ensues down to the state of inanimate matter. When both are alike, then the state of man is obtained. ‘‘ The gods,”’ who by their own small number and the greater number of the demons, were defeated by them, of a truth spoke: ‘Let us in this sacrifice,’ viz. the Jyoti-Stéma,* ‘‘overcome the demons by the Udgitha,” by taking refuge to the agent of the rite, called Udgitha. By defeating the demons, we shall obtain our own divine nature, as manifested by the 6487988. Thus they spoke to each other.
To take refuge to the nature of the agent of the rite, called Udgitha, knowledge and works are required. The work consists in the recital of some (afterwards to be mentioned) Mantras, and will be established by such passages of the Yajur as: ^ Let him recite those Mantras.” The
knowledge will now be determined. © But is this not rather Arthav4da,+ as concluding the rite of reciting
* The Agnistéma is a modification of the Jydétistéma, a sacrifice, offered by a person who is desirous of obtaining the enjoyment of heaven. The time of the sa- crifice is the spring season. The performer is a brahman who has read the Védas, and entertains the sacred fire. The offering is the S6ma (moon-plant) juice, and the deities to whom the offering is made, are Indra, Vaju, &c. The number of priests required to perform the rites, is sixteen, viz. four Hétas (who read the Man- tras of the Rig Véda), the same number of Adhwaryus (who recite the Mantras of the Yajur Veda), of Bramhas (who superintend and direct the rites of the sacrifice), and of Udgatas (who sing the Mantras of the Sama Véda.) Each of the priests of
the four divisions has again a separate name and office. The ceremonies continue for five days. Sabda Kalpa Druma.
+ A kind of praise. The opponent reasons in this way. The Udgithais Artha- vada, a kind of praise, and accordingly not knowledge; for praise of the deities does not contain a true knowledge of their nature and qualities, because it is merely offered for the purpose to make them propitious. A. G.
32 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
the Abhyardha,* than an attempt to define knowledge?’ No, because it is said in the Sruti: “‘ He who thus knows.” ‘But then it has the object to establish the rite of Udgitha, because in the topic of Udgitha it is authorized by the ancient narrative, commencing with the words: Two-fold indeed is the offspring of Prajapati.’ No, because it does not belong to this subject; further, because the Udgitha is established in another place ;+ further, because the rite of reciting the Abhyaroha is applied in two ceremonies,{ and is therefore not invariable ; further, because the knowledge must be applied by a person who is perfect in his knowledge, and is declared invariable ; further, because the Sruti says: ‘He who overcomes this world,”’ &c., further, because _ life is declared pure, speech and the other organs impure; for if life were no object of worship, it could not have been declared pure, nor speech, and the other organs which are mentioned in the same passage with life, impure ; for by the reproof of speech, &c. the praise of the principal life is evident, as it was also intended. Lastly, because such and similar rewards are declared as: He who overcomes death, gets resplendent ; for a state which resembles that life, for instance the state of the goddess of speech, when like Agni, is the reward.
° Let then the worship of life be granted, but no purity and similar qualities, If you say, this purity, &c. follows also from the Sruti, we reply ; it does not, because, as assigned in the act of worship, it is evi- dently intended as praise.’ (Arthavdda.)
We do not admit this; for, as in common life, by acquiring an object that is not contrary to our wishes, we acquire happiness ; for in common life a person who obtains an object that is not contrary
* Some Mantras of the Yajur Véda, recited by a person who is desirous of ob- taining a divine state, as Ananda Giri explains: Dévabhavam anéna 4réhati, iti Abbyaréha.
+ In the Karma Kaénda.—A. G.
‡ There are two classes of ceremonies, the Havir Yaga, (Havir, a kind of usually clarified butter.—Wilson Dict.) including seven distinct ceremonies, viz. Agnyddhan, Darsapaurna Masa, Chatur Masya, Pashu Bandana, &c., and the Séma Yaga, also including seven classes of rites, which have been mentioned before (page 29), The rite of the Udgitha, which is performed by the Udgata, is only per- formed in the Soma Y4ga, while the Abhyaréha is included in either of the two classes. On this account it is said, the Abhyaréha, as occurring in two places, is variable, and is therefore no object of knowledge, as the Udgitha is.
First Chapter. Third Brdmhana. 983
to his wishes, gets his desire, or he turns from the undesired object ; but this is not the case by obtaining an object, contrary fo our desires. Thus in our case also, by obtaining. an object in accordance with the words of the Sruti, we evidently obtain happiness, not otherwise. More- over, there is no proof against the truth of the object of knowledge, arising from the word, which is mentioned for the sake of worship. Nor is there stated any impediment of the said knowledge. Therefore by proving, that we have acquired. happiness, we also acquire the truth of the object of knowledge ; otherwise we evidently acquire an unreal object ; for he who in common life acquires an object, contrary to his idea, for instance, a trunk instead of a man, or an enemy instead of a friend, has evidently obtained something unreal. If in this way, the notions of the soul, of fswara,* and of the gods in accordance with the Sruti, were not true, then we should obtain by the S4stra something illusive. If this were the case, it would be known, as in common life: but this is not admitted.
‘ This is not true, because Bramha is represented by differences of name, form, &c.; but such distinctions are evidently excluded from the nature of Bramha. In this perception of Bramhat the Sastra is guilty of the same contradiction, as if a man is perceived asa trunk. There- fore we deny that with your obtaining the truth by the Sastra, you also obtain happiness.
We do not admit this argument, on the ground that here is the same distinction, as it is with regard to an image. For your assertion, that the perception of Bramha by such distinctions, as name, form, which are excluded from the nature of Bramha, &c., is in the same way con- tradictory, as if a man is perceived as a trunk, is not right. Why not? Because by the distinctions of Bramha, who cannot be perceived by name, form and other properties ; the perception of Bramha by name, form, &c., is established in the same way, as the perception of Vish- nu by an image and similar things. The perception by name, form, &c. is, like the image, a mere appliance ; for Bramha is by no means name, form, &c. The perception of Bramha by such distinctions, as name, form, &c. is by no means in the same way contradictory, as if a trunk, before it is ascertained as such, is perceived as a man.
* Yswara, the supreme ruler. The soul, in which the universality of ignorance, or of unconsciousness, is inherent, and which has the attributes of omniscience, omni- potence ... which is the cause of the world, 18 the universal ruler. Védénta Sdra, p. 5.
¶† That is to say, if Bramha is perceived, or comprehended by such distinctions.
34 Brihad dAranyaka Upanishad.
If you say, ‘that there is only a perception of Bramha, but Bramha himself does not exist; for the perception of Bramha by name, form &c. is just like the representation of Vishnu and other gods by an image, or of the forefathers by a Bramhan,’* we object ; for the Rig and the other Védas are represented under the form of the earth and other substances, that is to say, they are represented under the form of sub- stances that really exist. Consequently, as the representation of Bramha, Yswara, &c. under name, form, &c., is the same with that just mentioned, the reality of Bramha, I'swara, &c. is proved. Hence also follows the ob- jective reality of all those modes of perception, by which Vishnu and other gods are represented by images, or the forefathers by Bramhans.
This (the existence of Bramha, Iswara, &c.) follows also from the necessity, that every thing that is derived, depends upon the thing from which it is derived ; for as in the five fires* the fire is only some- thing derived, and hence proves the existence of an underived fire, so is the nature of Bramha in its distinctions of name, form, etc. only some- thing derived, and hence proves the existence of an underived Bramha.
This follows also from the fact, that there is no difference between the passages of the Sruti referring to ceremonies, and those referring to knowledge ; for as the ceremonies of the Darsapaurna Masa have their peculiar reward, their special rites, and a disposal of their parts in a certain order, and as by means of this a transcendent thing which cannot be proved by perception or inference, is taught in its true nature by sentences of the Véda, so also such beings, as the supreme goul, Yswara, the gods, &c., who by their nature exclude the idea of corporeal composition, who overcome death, and who have these and other dis- tinctions, are taught by sentences of the Véda, that is to say, by proofs different from perception and inference, and it is therefore right that they should be true.
Nor is there a difference in passages of the Sruti referring to cere- monies, and in such referring to knowledge, as to the formation of the true notion of them. |
Likewise is the notion (Buddhi) whose object is the supreme soul and the like substances, neither indefinite nor contradictory. If you 88४ : ‘This is improper, on the ground that knowledge is no object of
* The Brfimhan who eats at the Srfddha the food intended for the manes, isa representative of them.
t+ Here the Vedaic fires, by which the ceremonies the householder has to perform, are accomplished.
First Chapter. Third Brémhana. 35
ceremonial practice. We may grant, that any rite which has the three parts above mentioned,* although it is beyond common evidence, may be communicated by ceremonial practice through sentences, explaining the ceremonies.; but it is not so with the knowledge of the supreme soul, fswara and other substances, in which there is no possible object of ceremonial practice. Therefore the part of the Sruti explaining cere- monies, and the part referring to knowledge, have nothing in common.’
We do not admit this, on the ground that knowledge has objective reality ; for the truth of that knowledge does not depend on its possi- bility to become an object of ceremonial practice, the rites of which have those three parts, and can be performed,—but on its possibility to be obtained by proof. Nor has a notion, whose object is that know- ledge, reality, because it-can become an object of practice, but because it can be derived from sentences of the Védas.
If you say: ‘Admitting the truth of the substance (Bramha) ob- tained by sentences of the Védas, it is either an object of ceremonial practise, or it is not so. If it is such an object, it can be practised ; if otherwise, it cannot be practised. As an object of practice, however, it is not proved by the evidence of sentences ; for there is no connexion of words with a sentence, unless there is a ceremonial practice. On the other hand, if it is an object of practice, there is also a connexion of words for the sake of the ceremonies. Therefore a sentence, dependent on practice, may be proved, as for instance: This in this manner is by this person to be performed ; but words, as, this, by this, thus, how many so ever you may string together, would never form a sentence, unless they be connected with such as: let do, may be done, &c. Therefore the supreme soul, ['swara, etc. cannot be proved by sentences. And if you say, it can be proved by the meaning of the words, we reply, that in this case another kind of proof is necessary.t Therefore this Bramha does not exist.’
* These three parts are: special reward, special rites, and special arrangement.
t I believe this to be the correct translation of the above passage, and the sense would be as follows: If you assume, that the supreme substance can be proved by the meaning of the words (Padartha, the single words, in distinction from the whole sentence, Vakya) you have abandoned your argument, which was, that it should be proved by the Védas; for the meaning of words or ideas does not depend upon the Védas, but upon their own contents, and requires therefore an investigation,
different from the present. F 2
~-
36 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
We do not admit this argument, on the ground that there are sen- tences which do not require any actions ८० be intelligible, as for in- stance, there is the four-coloured Méru; for if this sentence 18 pro- nounced, there arises no notion referring to any possible practice with regard to Meru. If this is the case, how is it possible to prevent a con- nexion of words in a sentence, expressing the idea of the supreme soul, Yswara, &c. with the word “exists,” in the usual mode of connexion between subject and predicate. If you say, ‘this is inadmissible, because the knowledge of the supreme soul has no final end, as the knowledge of Méru, &c. has,’ we deny this, for the reward is mentioned in such passages of the Sruti, as: ‘‘ He who knows Bramha, obtains libera. tion,”’ and: ^" The bonds of the heart are broken,”’ &c.
The same is evident from the ceasing of the ignorance and _ other faults which are the origin of the world. And since the knowledge of Bramha does not depend upon any other knowledge, it cannot be con- sidered as Arthavéda* (praise) as for instance, a special reward is de- clared by the use of the Juhu.f
Moreover the connection of prohibitions with punishment is learnt from the Véda, which is also no object of practice. Nor is there, with regard to a forbidden object, any thing required but to refrain from an action ; for prohibitory regulations depend in reality upon the knowledge that a certain thing is not to be done. If a hungry maz, whose mind is impressed with the notion of food, forbidden on account of its nature or of accidental circumstances, falls in with poisoned] meat, or with impure§ rice, and the idea arises in him, that the one is eatable, and the other not impure, he is restrained from eating by the recollection, that food of this or that kind is forbidden to be eaten. The same is the case with regard to thirst, when a mirrage produces the appearance of water. When by the knowledge of the real nature of 8 thing, the natural knowledge that is opposed to the former, has been removed, there no Jonger remains the injurious desire to eat what is
* Every praise depends upon a regulation, to which it supplies the motive.
+ Juhu means a spoon of leaves, to the use of which in ceremonies, in prefer- ence to any other kind of spoon, a special reward is attached.
~ Poisoned meat is the meat of an animal, wounded by a poisoned weapon. |
§ Rice, etc. is impure by the touch of a person who has committed the murder of a Bramhan, or similar crimes.
First Chapter. Third Brdmhana. 37
forbidden by its nature or accidental circumstances. There is a cessa- tion from the desire, which is caused by such an opposite knowledge, and if that desire does not exist, no effort is again to be made. Hence it is evident, that the prohibitory regulations depend upon the know- ledge of the true nature of things, and not in any way upon the prac- tice of a person. If this is true, then also in our case the regula- tions, respecting the true knowledge of the supreme soul, &c., are founded solely upon the knowledge of the supreme soul itself. In this manner, when the worldly knowledge, produced by one’s own nature, is removed by the recollection of the true knowledge of the supreme soul and of similar substances, a person, whose mind is impressed with the knowledge of Bramha, has not any desire, caused by a knowledge, contrary to that of Bramha, because he knows that those desires have ` no real object.
‘The eating of poisoned meat having an undesirable (unreal) object, and there being at the same time a recollection of the knowledge of the real nature of a thing, we may grant, that the natural knowledge, con- trary to the former, which refers to its eating, is abolished ; yet we must contend, that the absence of a desire to perform what is com- manded by the S4stra, is not admissible, because there is-no object of prohibition, as there is such an absence of a desire to eat meat as before described.’
We deny this; for there is in reality no difference between the cause of the contrary knowledge and of the cause of the desire of an unde- sirable object. As the desire to eat poisoned meat, &c., is caused by a false knowledge, and is the cause of danger, so it is also with regard to the desires of what is commanded by the Sastras. Accordingly, a per- son who perfectly knows the reality of the supreme soul, has consis- tently no desire of any actions commanded by the S4stras, because all such desires are the causes of false ideas and of danger, and because by the knowledge of the supreme soul, the contrary knowledge 18 abo- lished.
‘This may be granted for the above mentioned prohibitions and com- mands, but it cannot be granted for the regular ceremonies ; for these are solely produced by the Sastra, and not directed to an unreal object.’
We do not agree ; for the regular ceremonies are merely commanded on behalf of such persons who are tainted by ignorance, passion, hatred
38 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
and other faults ; for as ceremonies whose object is a special desire, as those of the Darsa Paurna Masa, are commanded on behalf of a person who is tainted by the fault of desiring heaven, &c. so are the regular cere- monies enjoined on behalf of a person who is stained by the fault of ignorance, the cause of all unreality, stained by love and hatred, &c. in obtaining the good and avoiding the evil, in accordance with the impressions of ignorance, and who is anxious to obtain the good and avoid the evil of his indiscriminate desires, caused by love and hatred ; hence they (the regular ceremonies) do not merely refer to the Sdstras. Nor can it be ascertained, whether the Agnihétra, Dasa Paurna Masa, Chatur Mésya, P&ésu Bandha and Soma, are by their own nature regular ceremonies, or ceremonies, whose object is a special desire ; for their reference to desire only arises, when they have found an agent, who is tainted with the desire of heaven, &c. Therefore the regular ceremonies behoof to one who is tainted with the blame of ignorance, &c., and who is desirous to obtain the good and to avoid the evil, pointed out to him by the promptings of his own nature. On the other hand, for one who has the true knowledge of the supreme soul, no action is found to be commanded, except the subduing of his desires; for by the annihilation of the knowledge concerning all other motives, as ceremonies, causes, divinities, &c. the knowledge of the soul is established. And the knowledge with regard to actions, performer, &c. being once annihilated, there does not arise a desire of any action, because this only takes place, if preceded by a knowledge of a special action, a special motive, &c.; for there is no time to engage into actions for him who has the firm idea of Bramha, removed as it is from all notions of space, time, extension, duality, &c.
If you say ‘ there is the same time, as if one is about to eat,’ we deny this ; there is no necessity to engage in eating, &c., all which acts are only necessary in consequence of ignorance and other faults; for if an action is sometimes performed, and sometimes not, it cannot be called a regular action that has been fixed according to a rule. Because eating and other actions are merely done in consequence of faults, there is no certain rule for them, as there is no certain rule for desires and their objects, faults being sometimes prevalent, sometimes subdued. Hence, however, does not follow any uncertainty for regular actions,
4
First Chapter. Third Brdmhana. 39
The gods then said to speech: ‘ Do thou for our sake sing the Udgitha.” Speech, with the words: “ Let it be so,”’ sang the
because time and other circumstances have been fixed for them by the SAstra.
If you lastly say, ‘even granted, that faults, &c. are the mediate cause of actions, (as eating, &c.) still there may have been fixed a time to . engage in such actions, as eating, as according to the command of the S4stra for ceremonies like the Agni Hoétra, the times of morning and evening are appointed,’ —we do not agree, because rule and action can- not be substituted for each other, viz. a rule is no action, and an action no rule,—hence no objection remains against the supposition of knowledge. Consequently, in accordance with the rule of true know- ledge of the supreme soul, which (knowledge) has the power to destroy its contrary knowledge of extension, duality, &c., the reality of the rule by which all actions are forbidden, is established; for the absence of any engagement in actions is the same, as if there were a prohibition. Therefore as the prohibitory regulation of the Sastra is proved, so also the supreme soul, as produced by the S4stra, and as the sole object of the S4stra, has been proved. 1.
<° (€ gods then,” after having thus considered, said to Speech, to the tutelary goddess of speech: ‘Do thou for our sake sing the Udgitha,” perform the ceremony of Udgitha ; for they considered the ceremony of the Udgitha to be performed by the goddess of speech, and moreover by Mantras like this: ‘Do thou lead us from evil to good,” her as the goddess called Japamantra. In this ceremony, speech and the other organs are pointed out as the agents of internal worship and external rites. For what reason ?* Because their own objects and all in-
* In assigning devotion and rites to the agency of speech and the other organs, an objection may be made, on the ground that all agency depends according to the Sastra upon the soul. If this is the case, it depends either on the supreme soul, or upon the soul in its modification as life. Not on the first; for agency, &c. - depending upon speech and other organs to which active power must be ascribed ; cannot be assigned to the soul, which, considered in itself, is wholly without such a power. Moreover, all activity is the effect of ignorance, which is totally opposed to the supreme soul. Not onthe second, because life is only the general idea of the senses, and has therefore in reality no agency. Hence it is correct to assign agency and similar notions to the active senses. A. ©.
40 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
Udgitha for them. She sang to the gods all the enjoyment that is in speech. That she speaks well, is for herself.
tercourse concerning knowledge and ceremonies, are in truth only possi- ble by their agency ; for by the passage in the sixth chapter* of this Upa- nishad, “it thinks as it were,’’ it proceeds as it were,”’ it is evidently declared, that the soul has no agency. In the end of this chapter also it will be proved, that these three, name, form and action, as resulting from work, performer and effect, in their unmanifested state, are the ob- ject of ignorance. That, however, which is different from all unmanifested things, and which bears the name of the supreme soul, and is without name, form and work, will by such negations, as: it is not this, it is not this, &c.,be proved as something distinct, to be comprehended under a dif- ferent notion. But the mundane soult the existence of which, as arising from all the senses considered as one, is only a fiction, is plainly shown as arising from those senses, considered as one, by such passages as: ‘* Arising from these elements it is also destroyed with them.” There- fore it is right to assign to speech and the other senses the reward, obtained by their being the agents of knowledge and ceremonies.
Speech, being addressed by the gods, with the words: Let it be so, performed for them, for the sake of their imploration, the Udgitha. Which is again the special work which speech by the ceremony of
* Vide 6th chapter, 2d Bramhana, 7th Khandika.
+ There are, according to the Vedanta, four sheaths or cases of the soul. The first is the intelligent case (Vijnanamaya Késa) and is formed by intellect and the five intellectual senses. The second case is the mental (ManOmaya) and consists of mind (Manas) with the five organs of action, viz., speech, hand, foot, &c. (I may here observe that Colebrooke, in stating, (M. E. p. 372,) that the mental sheath consists of the intellect, joined to the five senses and the mind, is not quite correct, as it is mind joined with the five organs of action.) The third is the vital case (Pranamaya [६ 658) formed of the five vital airs, or faculties, (respiration, inspiration, circulation, &c.) and the five organs of action. The three cases united compose the subtile organism of the soul, which therefore comprehends 17 elements, viz. intellect, mind, the ten organs, and the five vital airs. This subtile organism is inseparable from the soul, as long as it has to undergo transmigration ; considered as one, itis universal organism, and the soul, to which this universality is ascribed, is Hiranyagarbha. (Véddnta Sdra, pp. 8—10.) In our passage the mundane soul means Hiranyagarbha, the soul which has the three cases, and is therefore in actual relation with the world. The last case is the nutrimental (Annamaya) which is composed of the gross elements.
First Chapter. Third Brdémhana. 4}
The demons knew, by this Udgitha the gods will overcome us. Therefore, running up to him, they pierced him with their sin. That is this sin. That one speaks improper words, is the sin. 2.
Udgitha for the sake of the gods? The answer is: “ All the enjoy- ment,” which means, all the assistance of speech and all the other organs, which by means of speech is obtained in the intercourse of speaking ; for the reward of all is the enjoyment, derived from speaking words, &c. It describes this enjoyment in three Stotras, called Pavaména, and in the nine remaining Stétras it assigns the reward of the Ritwig, as authorized by the Upanishad,* by the words: ^^ That it speaks well,” that it pronounces well the letters, "^ is for itself,” for 716 ; for the special work of: speech is the entire pronunciation of the letters; therefore it is mentioned, ‘that it speaks well ;’’ but the effect of speaking as to the assistance of all, is for the sake of the sacrificer.
At that time (when the Udgitha was performed) by the contact which takes places between speech and the well speaking, an opportunity was obtained by the demons of entering the deity like a hole.t ‘The demons knew.” What? ‘ By this Udgitha the gods will overcome us,” viz. natural knowledge and work, by the light of the Udgitha, which is knowledge and work in accordance with the Sastra. = ^^ There- fore,’ being aware of this, ‘‘ running up to him,” to the performer of the Udgitha, ‘they pierced,” worried him with their sin, viz. the sin of contact, which means, they allied him with their sin. ^" That is this sin ;” “that,” the sin which was not cast by the demons upon the speech of Prajapati in his former birth, “is this sin,’”’ which becomes manifest. Which is the sin? ^" That one speaks improper words,”’ viz., words contrary to themselves, forbidden by the S4stra, by which
* Viz. The Ritwig, or priest, who performs the ceremonies, is not entitled to a reward for himself, because his services are hired, and all the good resulting from the ceremonies, will be obtained by the sacrificer. Hence the special re- ward here mentioned, does not follow from the sacrifice, but from the word of the Upanishad. A. G.
+ This means, the deity of speech, having spoken well for its own sake, commits the sin of contact, of the connexion of a desire with external objects. Therefore by this sin an opportunity is given, as it were, a hole of the deity, to pierce it with their sin.
G
42 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
Then they spoke to the breath : Do thou sing the Udgitha for us. The breath, with the words: ‘Let it be so,’ sang the Udgitha for them. It sang to the gods all the enjoyment that is in breath. That it smells well, is for itself. The demons knew, by this Udgitha the gods will overcome us. Therefore running up to him, they pierced him with their sin. That is this sin. That one smells improper odours, is the sin. 3.
Then they spoke to the eye: Do thou sing the Udgitha for us. The eye, with the words: ‘ Let it be so,’ sang the Udgitha for them. It sang to the gods all the enjoyment that is in the eye. That it sees well, is for itself. The demons knew, by this Udgitha the gods will overcome us. Therefore run- ning up to him, they pierced him with their sin. That is this sin. That one sees improper colours, is the sin. 4.
Then they spoke to the ear: Do thou sing the Udgitha for us. The ear, with the words: ‘ Let it be so,’ sang the Udgitha for them. It sang to the gods all the enjoyment that is in the ear. That it hears well, is for itself. The demons knew,
induced, one speaks indecorous, hateful, false and the like words, even , against his own inclination, ^ 18 the sin,’ known by its beforementioned effect, viz., the speaking of improper words, which is found in the speech of the intelligent creatures of Praj&pati, which being implied by the speaking of improper words, is also in the speech of Prajépati ; for the effect is of the same nature as the cause. 2.
When the gods had in this manner successively examined, whether by the performance of the Udgitha the deities were fit to be mani- fested by the Japamantra, and to become objects of devotion, they were convinced, that speech and the other deities whom they had successively examined, were unable to perform the Udgitha ; for by contact, which is their connexion with the special work which they well performed, they were allied with the sin of the demons. Therefore they are not meant by the Mantra: ‘‘ Do thou lead me from evil to good ;”” nor are they worthy to be worshipped, because they are not pure, and inferior to the principal life. In the same way as the deity of speech, &c., the deities of touch and of the other organs, although not especially
First Chapter. Third Brémhana. 43
by this Udgitha the gods will overcome us. Therefore, running up to him, they pierced him with their sin. That is this sin. That one hears improper sounds, is the sin. 5.
Then they spoke to the mind: Do thou sing the Udgitha for us. The mind, with the words: ^ Let it be so,’ sang the Udgt- tha for them. It sang to the gods all the enjoyment that is in mind; that it imagines well, is for itself. The demons knew, by this Udgitha the gods will overcome us. Therefore running up to him, they pierced him with their sin. That is this sin. That one has improper notions, is the sin. In this manner the deities came in contact with sin, were pie rced with sin. 6.
Then the gods spoke indeed to this life whose name is Asanya: ‘Do thou sing the Udgitha for us.’ That life, with the words : ° Let it be so,’ sang the Udgitha for them. The demons knew, by this Udgitha the gods will overcome us. Therefore running up to him, they wished to pierce him with their sin. As a clod of earth, by falling upon a rock, is destroyed, so they were also
mentioned in this passage, were pierced with sin by the manifestation of good and evil works, which means, they were allied with sin. Thus speech and the other deities, although gradually worshipped, were unable to protect from death. 3—6.
‘** Then the gods spoke indeed to this, (the word “ this” is used to show respect) life, whose name 18 Asanya,” which means, produced in the mouth, which abides in the inner cavity of the mouth: Do thou sing the Udgithafor us. The principal life, with the words: ‘ Let it be so,’ sang the Udgitha for the gods who had invoked its protection. This and what immediately follows, is all alike the former description. When the demons, desirous of piercing life with sin, in accordance with the prac- tice which they had acquired by repeatedly entering speech and the other organs, attacked by their sin of contact the principal life which was free from sin, they became destroyed. To show how, an illustra- tion is given. As in common life a clod of earth which is thrown upon a rock to reduce it to dust, is destroyed, reduced to dust itself, so were the demons in different ways destroyed. By this destruction of the demons, speech and the other organs became free from the sins, which
G 2
44 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
altogether destroyed. Hence they became gods; the demons perisbed. In this manner he becomes &ke him. By the soul perishes the enemy, the brother’s son, of him, who thus knows. 7.
are the effect of the natural contact, and obstacles to their divinity ; and obtained their own nature by the protecting power of the principal life which is free from contact. What did they obtain? The nature of fire, &c. in accordance with their own divinity, which (nature) will be explained hereafter, and which they had already before possessed. In this state, when their knowledge was darkened by their natural sin, they had a notion of an individual body alone. The meaning is: By the separation from that sin, they left off the notion of an individual body, and obtained a notion of the nature of speech, &c. in its identity with fire, &c., as it is delivered in the S4stra. Moreover their oppo- nents, ‘the demons, perished.” Perished means, they were destroyed. < In this manner he (the present sacrificer) becomes like him’ (the an- cient sacrificer) this means: As the former sacrificer,* described in the ancient narrative,—when he had comprehended the meaning of the Sruti pointed out in this narrative, when he in the order mentioned in the Sruti, had examined speech and the other deities, and abandoned them, because they are tainted with the sin of contact, when he had known by the idea of the soul the principal life free from sin, and aban- doned the idea, that the soul is different according to the differences of the individual bodies, as speech and others, which are believed to be the soul, as the former sacrificer obtained the nature of the present Prajépati, as manifested by the S4stra, which is the notion of the body, as Virdj,f and which exhibits speech in its nature as fire,—so the pre- sent sacrificer obtains the state of Prajépati im the same manner. ‘* By the soul,’’ in its modification of Prajépati, his sin, contrary to the nature of Préjapati, ‘‘the brother’s son, perishes ;’’ for the son of a brother, like Bharata and others, may be also not an enemy ; but the sin pro- duced by the contact of the senses with their objects, is at the same time a brother’s son and an enemy, because it does not acknowledge the na- ture of the supreme soul. This sin then perishes, is reduced to dust, as 8 clod of earth, by its contact with life. Whose is thisreward? The answer is: ‘He who thus knows,’’ which means, who thus, like the
* The sacrificer in a former birth. t Vide page 23.
First Chapter. Third Brémhana. 45
They spoke. Where was he, who thus established us? He is within the mouth; hence he is Ayésya. He is Angirasa, because he is the essence of the members. 8.
ancient sacrificer, comprehends life by the notion of the soul. Having described the reward, the Sruti now shows the reward in the form of the narrative.* And for what reason? To prove, that the principal life, after the deities of speech, &c. have been rejected, is alone to be worshipped by the idea of the soul, on the ground, that it is the com- mon nature (soul) of such separate substanccs, as speech, &c., the Sruti goes on in the narrative. 7. ^^ They,” the organs of Prajépati, having, by means of the principal hfe, obtained their divine nature and their reward, spoke thus: ‘“‘ Where then,”’ the word where shows their reflection. ^" Where then was he who thus established us,” that is to say, united us by the true notion of the soul with our divine nature, which was before separated from us ; for whosoever is assisted by some body, remembers his benefactor. In the same manner the gods, when they had®remembered their benefactor, had reflected on him, perceived him in the soul, which is the whole of causes and effects. Why is he within the mouth? Because he 18 evidently in the ether of the mouth (Asya), as everybody will find on reflection. Thus also the gods. Life is called Aydsya, because, exclud- ing all distinctions of the nature of speech, &c., it was perceived by the gods within the internal ether ; therefore is life like Aydsya, since op- posed to all distinctions, it united the organs, as speech, &c., with their divine nature. Hence it is called also Angirasa, the essence of causes and effects; for Angirasa is a compound of Anga and Rasa,—Anga meaning members, causes and effects, and Rasa essence, substance; the whole meaning therefore is the substance, upon which causes and effects depend. It is the essence of every thing, because, unless it were pre- sent, all would become without effect. The meaning of the whole is :— Life, as the essence of causes and effects, and as annihilating all distine- tions, is the common essence of causes and effects, and also purified ;
* Ananda Giri explains this so:—As the reward, following from the worship of the principal life has been set forth, the next words of the Upanishad : ‘‘ They spoke,’’ &c., refer to a special worship of life. Sankara says therefore, ‘‘ Having described the reward,’’ which means, having described the reward following from the worship of the principal life, he is to show the worship of life, endowed with special qualities,
46 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
The name of that deity is Dur ; for death is far (dar) from it. Far is death surely also from him who thus knowa. 9.
accordingly life, without further reference to speech, &c., is to be cor- sidered under the idea of the soul; for the soul can but be perceived by its own notion, since good is obtained by a notion that is not contrs- dictory ; otherwise evil is obtained. 8.
If it be thought, that the purity of life has not been proved, we ask, is not this notion (of the impurity of life) removed, since life is no place for the sin of contact, as speech and the other organs are by well speaking, hearing, smelling, &c.? ‘This may be so ; but since it is called the essence of speech and the other organs as diffused through all, there is an apprehension that impurity may ensue through speech and the other organs, as it does by touching a person who has touched a corpse.’ To this the Sruti answers: ‘Life is pure.” Wherefore! ‘The name of that deity is Dar’’ (far.) The demons, coming in contact with life, were destroyed, as a cle of earth is by a stone. This is the deity which, abiding in the body of the sacrificer of the present time, has been found by the gods as abiding in the mouth. It is a deity, because it is an object of devotion. Because its name is Dir, (Duriti,) its purity is proved by the name of Dir. Whence again comes the name of Dir? The Sruti answers, ‘‘ because death, viz. sin, which i defined by contact, is far (dir) from that deity of life. Duriti, a the name of life, shows its purity, because death, although placed near, is yet removed from life, which by its nature is free from contact. The reward of the wise is then mentioned, viz. ^“ Far is death surely from him,” from him means from the person who knows in the above de scribed manner. Therefore he worships thus the true life which is pure. Upasana (worship) is derived from Upa, which means, Manasa upa-agamya (having perceived by the mind) the nature of a deity in the same way, as by passages of the Sruti in the Arthavada (praise) it is made known as an object of worship—and from Asana, which means continued reflection without interposition of worldly notions © until the idea is manifested, Iam that deity, just as in the common notion, Iamaman. This is evident from such passages of the Sruti as: ‘Having thus become a god, he goes to the gods,” and: ^ What god art thou in the eastern quarter?’ 9,
First Chapter. Third Brémhana. 47
This deity then, after having destroyed the sin of the deities, viz. death, made him depart, where the end is of the quarters. There it fixed the abode of the sins of the deities. Hence let no one repair to the outer people; let him not follow sin, death. 10.
‘‘This deity then.” Is is said, that death is far from it, but why again is death far from him who thus knows? The answer is, because death is opposed to a knowledge of such a kind; for sin, which is produced by the contact of the senses with their objects, is opposed to a person, who has the notion, that life is identical with the soul. He is at variance, because he has the notion, that the soul is different according to the differences of speech, &c., and because his knowledge is pro- duced by his own nature. On the other hand, the notion, that life is identical with the soul, is produced by the Sastra. In consequence it is proper to say, that sin is far from one who has such a notion of life, because both are opposed to each other. Therefore by the words : ‘‘ This deity,’ the Sruti shows the said meaning to be sin, the death of speech and the other deities; for every body dies by the sin pro- duced by contact of the senses with their objects in accordance with his natural ignorance. Sin is therefore called death. Life, by the sole notion of its identity with the soul, destroyed the death of the deities who had the notion of the identity of life with the soul, and is therefore called the destroyer. Sin then is removed from a person who thus knows by his being at variance with it. What did life again, when it had destroyed the sin, the death ofthe gods? The answer is: ** Life made him depart, where the end is of the quarters,”’ viz. of the eastern and the other quarters. But as there is no end of the quarters, how can life make him depart there? The word “ quarter’ is made for the purpose to designate the abode of the people possessed of the knowledge of the Védas; the country therefore, inhabited by people who do not follow the Védas, is called the end of the country, the desert. Accordingly, there is no blemish in the expression. The deity of life made depart there the sins of the deities, and by con- tempt fixed in various ways their abode among the outer people, who are without knowledge of the identity of life with the soul.
For he is by his nature produced by the contact of the senses with their objects, and is therefore dependent upon the living creatures.
48 Brihad .tranyaka Upanishad.
That deity destroyed the sin, death, of those deities. Then life, having overcome death, saved them. 11.
Life, having overcome death, saved the first speech. When specch, having overcome death, was liberated, it became fire. That fire, having become free after its separation from death, shines forth. 12.
Then life, having overcome death, saved the smell. That
Hence let them not go to the outer people, not approach them by inter- course in words or other actions. By intercourse with them, intercourse — is made with sin; for he is the place of sin. The meaning is :—Let none repair to his abode which is defined by the end of the quarters, although it may not be inhabited by the people, nor to that people, although it may be far from that country. 10.
By the words: ‘That deity,” the reward is mentioned, which for speech, &c., results from the knowledge, that life is the soul, which reward 18 to acquire the nature of fire, &c. ‘‘ Then life, having over- come death, saved them.” This means: Life is called the destroyer of sin, death, because sin, death, which causes the separation of the soul from life, has been destroyed by the knowledge that life is one with the soul. Therefore this life, having overcome the natural sin, oF death, saved them, which means, caused the deities of speech and the other organs to gain their divine nature as fire, &c., which is not separated from them (after the destruction of death). 11.
< Life saved the first speech ;”’ first means the principal, which is more efficacious than any other organ to perform the ceremony of the Udgitha. The nature of speech, which was saved, after death was over- come, is thus described: When speech, after sin or death was over- come, had been liberated, it became fire, which means, speech was fire, before it became united with death, and became fire again after its sepa- ration from death ; so great is its difference after its separation from death. This fire, when released, shines forth after its separation from death. Before its liberation being allied with death, it was not shining, as it is at present; now again after its separation from death, it shines forth. 12.
In the same manner the sense of smell became air, wind. Wind, liberated from death, purifies. All the particulars are as before. 13.
First Chapter. Third Brémhana. 49
smell, having overcome death, became wind. That wind, hav- ing become free after its separation from death, purifies. 13.
Then life, having overcome death, saved the eye. When the eye, having overcome death, was liberated, it- became Aditya. That Aditya, having become free after its separation from death, burns. 14.
Then life, having overcome death, saved the ear. When the ear, having overcome death, was liberated, it became the quar- ters; the quarters after their separation from death, are made free. 15. |
Then life, having overcome death, saved the mind. When the mind, having overcome death, was liberated, it became the moon. That moon, having become free after its separation from death, is resplendent. In this manner that goddess having overcome death, saves the present sacrificer. Whosoever thus knows, obtains his due reward. 16. -
Then life for its own sake praised by the Udgitha the prime- val food ; for whatever food is eaten, the same is eaten by life. On this it subsists. 17.
Thus the eye becomes Aditya. He burns. 14.
Thus the ear became the eastern and the other quarters. 15.
Mind is resplendent as moon. As the deity of life, having in its identity with speech, &c. as fire, &c., overcome death, saved the former sacrificer, so she saves also the present one. He who knows, that life is the same with speech and the other four organs in their state as fire, &c., obtains the state of life, which he has worshipped, be it as fire, air, &c. 16.
‘Then for its own sake,” that is to say, as by speech and the other organs for their own sake praise was offered, so also by the principal 112, when it had praised in the three Pavamana Stotras the reward which is the state of Prajaépati, common to speech and the other organs, it praised it in the nine remaining Stétras food for its own sake. The connexion of desire with the agent is authorized by the Upanishad, as has been mentioned before. How again must it be understood,
H
50 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
The gods spoke: ^ All this is only so much. Whatsoever food there is, is praised by thee for thy own sake. Let us eat of that food.’ Life answered: ‘Do enter me.’ They with the words: ‘Let it be so,’ every where entered life. There- fore whatsoever food is eaten by life, satisfies them. Him
that life praised the primary food for its own sake? To explain this, the cause is mentioned in the words: ‘for whatever,” &c. The word food means here common food; for whatsoever food in this world 18 eaten by any living individual, ‘the same is eaten by life.” Prana (life) with the preposition Pra is derived from Ana. Ana, with a final 8, (Prénas) means cart, with a final vowel (Prana) life. The meaning is: this is eaten by life. And the primary food is not only eaten by life; but life subsists on it, when it is transformed into the substance of its (life’s) own body. Therefore the primary food is praised by life for the sake of its own subsistence. All that is eaten by life, is for its own subsistence ; therefore the sin, which arises from the contact with the excellence of performance, is not in life, as it is in speech, &c. 17.
“The gods.” ‘But is it not improper to assert, that the food was thus eaten merely by life, since it is evident, that food is also the cause of the support of speech? &c.’ There is no fault in this, because the support is obtained by the means of life. How again is the food supplied by life, in support of speech and the other organs ! To explain this, it is said: ‘The gods,’’ (Deva) speech and others, (they are called gods, Déva, because they manifest their own nature,) “spoke” to the principal life. ‘‘ All this is only so much;’’ hence there is no more than this. ‘‘ Whatsoever food,” the cause of the इणु port of life, is eaten in the world, ‘is praised by thee for thy own sake,” which means, is transformed by thy praise into thy own substance. We also are unable to subsist without food ; therefore let us afterwards for our own sake eat of thy food. Life answered: ‘All of you, if desirous of food, every where enter me.’ When life had thus spoken, they surrounded and entered life with the words, ‘ Let it be so.’ Thus the good food, the support of life, which is eaten by life, satisfies speech and the other organs which entered life by its command ; but by their own will they have no connexion with food. Therefore it is
First Chapter. Third Brdmhana. 51
enter his own; he is the preserver of his own, he 18 pre- eminent ; he walks before, he is an eater of food, he is the lord paramount, who thus knows. He who against one who thus knows, amongst his own becomes a rival lord, is not able to support his dependents. On the other hand whosoever be- comes a follower of such a one, and whosoever, following him, strives to support his own dependents, he is able to provide for them. 18.
He who abides in the mouth, is Angirasa; for he is the essence (Rasa) of the members (Anga.) Life is the essence
proper to assert, that food is eaten merely by life. ‘Therefore’ Because the deities of speech and the other organs by taking refuge to life had entered life in accordance with its command, “therefore whatsoever food people eat by life, the same satisfies them,” viz. speech and the other organs. Whosoever knows that life is the support of speech, &c., and also knows that the five organs depend upon life, ‘‘him enter also his own,” his relations, as speech and the other organs enter life, which means, he is the supporter of his relations. ‘He is the preserver of his own,” who have entered him, by his own food, as life is of speech, &c. Thus “he is pre-eminent.’ ‘‘ He walks before,” he has the precedence, as life among speech, &c. ‘Thus he is an eater of food,’’ which means, he is without disease. ^ He is lord paramount,” and to guide them he becomes their preserver as independent lord, as life of speech, &c. He «^ who thus knows,”’ viz. life, will obtain the above mentioned reward. ‘‘ But he who against one who thus knows,”’ viz., who thus knows life, ^ amongst his own,’”’ amongst his relations, ‘ be- comes a rival lord,” like the demons who strove against life, “(is not able to support his dependents.” On the other hand ^ whosoever amongst his relations becomes a follower of such a one,”’ of a man who has that knowledge, as speech and others were of life, ‘and whosoever, following such a person, strives to support his own dependents,” as speech and the other senses, following life, strove to support themselves, “ is able to provide for them,” not any other who acts on his own will. 18.
All this is declared to be the reward, resulting from the knowledge of the qualities of life. To establish the idea, that life is the essence
H 2
52 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
of the members; for life is the essence of the members ; therefore, for the reason, that any member, from which life has departed, becomes dry, life is the essence of the members. 19.
This is also Brihaspati. Speech 18 Bribati. Life 18 the pre- server (Pati) of Brihati; therefore it is Brihaspati. 20.
of causes and effects, life is named Angirasa. Before it was said : ‘ This (life) 18 Angirasa ;’’* but there was no reason assigned, why it is Angirasa ; to explain this reason, it is now said : ‘‘ He who abides within the mouth, is Angirasa.” For it depends upon this reason, that life is the essence of causes and effects ; afterwards the dependence of speech and the other organs upon life is stated. How is this dependence to be proved? To answer this, it is said: ‘‘ He who abides within the mouth, is Angirasa.’’ Hence it is taken according to its former de- scription. The next sentence: ‘ Life is the essence of the members,”’ is to remind of the meaning that has been explained before. How is life the essence of the members? The answer is: “ For life ;’’ the word ‘for’ is used to show, that the essence of the members 18 well known. It is well known, that life is the essence of the members, but not that speech and the other organs are the essence. Therefore it is proper to remind of this by the words: ^ Life 18. How is it again well known? To answer this, it is said, ‘therefore.’ The word ‘‘ therefore,” which conveys the idea of conclusion, must be connected with the last part of the sentence. ‘For the reason that any member, from which life has departed, becomes dry,’’ without essence, ^^ there- fore’ this is the conclusion, “life is the essence of the members.’> Hence it is evident, that life is the substance of causes and effects, because, when it is not there, dryness, death, ensues. Therefore all living creatures live through it. Therefore in preference to speech and the other organs, life is an object of worship. This latter is the meaning of the whole deduction. 19.
‘This 18.” Life is not only the substance (soul) of causes and effects which have become forms and works, but also the substance of the Rig, Yajur and Sd4ma Védas, which have become words. By the praise of life as the soul of all, it is exalted for the sake of worship. ‘ This,”’ well known ‘‘ Angirasa’”’ is also Brihaspati. Why? The answer is: % Speech is Brihati,”’ the Védaic metre Brihati, composed of thirty-six
* Page 45.
First Chapter. Third Brémhana. 53
This is also Bramhanaspati. Speech is Bramha. Life is the preserver (Pati) of speech; therefore life is Bramhanas- pati. 21.
syllables. Further, Anustup is speech. Why? Because it is said in a passage of the Sruti: ‘Speech is Anustup.” And this Anustup, which is like speech, is contained in the Brihatf metre.* Therefore it is proper to declare it as a well-known fact, that ^ speech is Brihati.’’ Moreover all the Mantras of the Rig Véda are contained in the Brihatt, because life is praised as Brihati, as a passage of the Sruti says: ^ Life 18 Brihati.” ^^ Let it be known, life is the Rig,” says another passage of the Sruti. Further: The Rigs are included in life, because they partake of the nature of speech. To prove this, it is said: ‘ This life is the preserver of this speech, Brihati, Rig, because it produces the Rig ; for the Rig is dependent upon the wind, produced by the digestive action of the stomach. Lastly, life is the preserver of speech for preserv- ing it ; for speech is preserved by life, because without life (breath) it is impossible to pronounce a sound. Therefore Brihaspati is the life, substance of the Rigs. This is the meaning of the whole. 20. |
Life is also the substance of the Mantras of the Yajur. Why? ‘*This is also Bramhanaspati. Speech is Bramha,” that is to say Yajur, which is a kind of speech. “ Of this,” speech, Yajur, Bramhana, < life is the preserver”’ (Pati). Therefore it is called Bramhanaspati, as before. - How again is this known? The answer is, Brihati and Bramha mean the Rig and Yajur, not any thing else; for since at the conclusion of this subject it is said : ‘Speech is 84118, it is evident that the Sama Véda is the same with speech. In the same manner, if speech is Brihati, speech Bramha, and both therefore the same with speech ; it is proper to maintain, Rig and Yajur are Brihat{ and Bramha, for they are remaining; for as the Sdma 18 mentioned last, the re- maining two must be the Rig and Yajur. This follows also from the difference occurring in speech; for Rig and Yajur are different kinds of speech. Therefore it is right to say, that they are the same with speech. And also from the fact that if this were not the case, there would not be any distinction between them. The word: “The Sama is the Udgitha,” clearly shows the use of a distinct name.
* The Anustup, of 32 syllables, is contained in the Bribatf of 36 syllables, as the smaller in the larger number,—A. G.
54 Brihad Aranyaka. Upanishad.
This 18 also Sima. Speech is S4ma. Sima is 8६ and Amas. Therefore the Sama has the nature of SAma.—Because it is like (Sama) a bee, like a gnat, like an elephant, like these three worlds, like this all, therefore again it is called Séma.
---~ ~~ ~~~ स
Therefore it is also proper to employ the distinct names of Brihatti and Bramha ; otherwise, if distinct names were not fixed, there would be no sense. Further, if special names of them were a mere sound, there would be a repetition of the same.* And the names of the Rig, Yajur, Sima, Udgitha, are also successively mentioned in the Sruti. 21.
‘This is also Sama.”’ Why? The answer is: ‘Speech is S4,” viz., whatsoever is included in the feminine gender, is 8६, speech ; for the demonstrative pronoun 88 denotes all that is included in the feminine gender. In the same manner, this life is Ama, viz., Ama means all that is included in the masculine gender. How hast thou obtained my masculine names? The answer is: By life. How hast thou obtained my feminine names? By speech, as another passage of the Sruti says. Both, the names of speech and life are included in the sound of Séma. Accordingly the name of S&ma means a song, consisting of the whole of the letters, words and sentences, and depend- ing upon life; therefore the name of Sama is nothing else but a compound of the names of life and speech, because each letters, &c. is produced by and dependent upon life. "^ This life is Sama” and “speech is Séma.” Because the repetition of Séma” shows, that Sama partakes of the nature of speech and life, viz., as com- pounded of the words S4 and Ama, “therefore the Sama,” viz., the songs, which consist of the whole of the letters, words and sentences, must be comprehended under this idea of S4ma. The con- nexion of the next sentence 18 : ‘‘ Because it is like’ (Sama) all which is afterwards mentioned, “therefore again it is S4ma.”’—The word ‘‘arain’” shows the possibility to explain fhe meaning of Sdma in ano- ther way by the term of Sama (like). In what way is the likeness of life assumed? The answer is: It is “like (Sama) a bee,” viz., the body ofa bee, “ like a gnat,”’ viz., like the body of a gnat, “ like an ele- phant,”’ viz. like the body of an elephant, “like these three worlds,” viz., like Prajépati, whose body is the three worlds ; “like this all,” like
* Viz. Speech is speech.
First Chapter. Third Brdmhana. 55
He obtains unity of nature with Sama, or unity of place who thus knows this Sama. 22.
This is also Udgitha. Life is Ut; for by life all this is upraised. Speech is Githa. It is Ut and Githa, therefore it is Udgitha. 23. |
Hiranyagarbha, whose form is the world, which is entirely found in all individual bodies, in the bee as well as in all others, as the idea of cow is found in all individual cows. This is the likeness (identity) of life. Again, this identity is not merely found in the different bodies in pro- portion to their size, because life has no shape and is everywhere ; nor is the identity in the individual bodies an identity of contraction and expansion, as a light contracts in a jar and expands in a palace; for the Sruti says: “ All these are like, all are without लात्. There is, however, no contradiction between its being everywhere and its being limited to a certain size in the different bodies. He, who thus knows the life whose name is Sama, under the idea of Sama (identity), viz., the life, whose greatness is declared in the Sruti, obtains this reward, viz., ‘the gains unity of nature (Sayujya)* with Sama,” viz., with life, that is tosay, unity of body, organs and knowledge, or unity of place, that is to say, the same world, according to the power of his meditation, viz., he who knows Sama, life, who meditated on it, until the knowledge of the identity of life with the soul became manifest. 22.
‘‘ This is also Udgitha.”” The name of Udgitha means here neither a portion, a special division, of the Sama-Véda nor the portion, referring to songs (१९808) because the Udgitha is included in the description of the Sama, which means here life (Sé-Ama). Why then is life Udgitha? The answer is: ‘Life is Ut; for by life is all this,” the universe, “raised up’ (Uttabdha) that is, supported. The name Ut, which elucidates the meaning of Uttabdha, shows a quality of life. Therefore, in accordance with the single words in the compound of Udgitha, Ut means life, and Githa speech. This Githa, after the meaning of the name derived from Gai (to sing) is speech ; but with the exception of the sound Githa (song) there is nothing in any part
* Sdyujya, a kind of salvation, of which five kinds are stated. 1. Salékya, the abode in the same world. 2. Sarshti, equal prosperity. 3. Samipya, vicinity. 4, Sérupya, likeness of form. 5. E’katwa, unity or identity of nature.
56 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
There is also a narrative: Bramhadatta, the grandson of Chikiténa, when drinking the resplendent Séma jutce, spoke: ‘ Let this resplendent juice cut off the head of this man, if ई 88१2 ng irasa performed the Udgitha by any other than this.’ Therefore he performed the Udgitha by speech and life. 24.
He who knows the wealth of that Séma here, obtains its wealth. The musical notes are its wealth. Therefore let one
of the Udgitha which refers to singing. Therefore the assertion, that life is Udgttha, is proper, viz., Ut is life, and Githa speech, dependent upon life ; both terms, thus compounded in one term, form Udgitha. 23.
To show the firmness of the just explained meaning, a narrative is commenced with the words: ‘‘ There,” that is, with regard to the meaning just explained, a narrative is also known. ^" Bram- hadatta,”’ by name, the young grandson of Chikiténa, when drinking at the sacrifice the resplendent Soma juice, spoke: ‘‘ Let this resplen- dent juice,” that is here in the sacrificial cup and drunk by me, “cut off the head of this man,” of me speaking falsely, which means, if I speak falsely. How again is the meaning of falsehood implied tz the words of the Upanishad? ‘‘If Ayésya (he is called Aydshya Angi- rasa, because his name is derived from the principal life) the per- former of the Udgithain the assembly of the former Rishis, who created the world, ^ performed the Udgitha by any other,’’ by another deity beside speech and life, “than by this,” viz., by the above described life in union with speech,—then let me be a speaker of falsehood, let the 86709 cut off the head of me who has asserted something contra- dictory to the nature of the deity. In these words he made an imprecation, and shows therefore the necessity of the strength of the faith in the knowledge, that life is the Udgttha. The Sruti con- firms then by its own word the meaning conveyed by the narra- | tive, viz., by speech, dependent upon life, and by life, transformed into his own nature, the Udgita, Ay4sya Angirasa, performed the Ud- githa. ‘This meaning is established by the imprecation. 24.
“Of that Sama here.” The word ^ that’? connects it with the above described life. The term “ here’? shows it as by a gesture as being present. He who knows the wealth of life which is called by the word Sama, obtains what? ^ He obtains its weakh.’’ This is the
First Chapter. Third Brémhana. 57
who is to perform the duties of a Ritwig, desire to acquire the musical notes together with speech. By that speech which has obtained the musical notes, let him perform the rites of the Ritwig. Therefore people are desirous to look during the sacrifice upon the sweet-toned performer of the Udgtiha as upon a rich man ; for people desire to look upon him who has obtained wealth. He obtains wealth, who in such a manner knows the wealth of this Sima.’ 25.
He who knows the gold of this Sama, obtains verily its gold. The musical notes are its gold. He verily obtains gold, who in such a manner knows the gold of this S4ma. 26.
reward which the Sruti shows as an inducement to the hearer, viz. “<The musical notes are its wealth.” The musical notes, the sweet sound, produced in the throat, are its wealth, its ornament ; for a song, adorned with these notes, obtains wealth. Because this is 80, ^ there- fore let him who is to perform the duties of the Ritwig,” the song of the Ritwig, viz., the Udgéta—who is anxious to exhibit the wealth of the 8678 by its note, desire to acquire in speech the musical note, dependent upon speech. This, however, is established in the course of explaining the topic, that the tones of the Sama are necessarily mu- sical notes, and that the musical notes are not acquired by mere desire, but by the cleaning of teeth and the drinking of oil, &c. ‘ By that speech,” that purified speech, «^ which has obtained the musical notes, let him perform the rites of the Ritwig.”’ ‘‘ Therefore.” Because the note has become the property (Swabhiuita) of the Sama, and hence the Sima 18 adorned with the note as with wealth (Swa), ^^ therefore people are desirous to look during the sacrifice upon the sweet-toned performer of the Udgitha, as upon a rich man; for it is well known, that ^" people desire to look upon him who has obtained wealth” (Swa). A person who has fully obtained the reward resulting from his knowledge of this quality, is described in the words: ‘He obtains wealth who in such a manner knows the wealth of this Sama.”’ 25.
Now another quality of the Sdma is explained, viz., to be possessed of gold. This refers also to the sweetness of the notes, with the difference, however, that, while the former designated the sweetness of the notes, produced in the throat, the latter means gold only figuratively. ^" He
I
58 Brikad Arasyaka Upanishad.
He who knows the abode of that S&ma here, abides. Speech is its abode ; for it is well known, that this life verily abides in speech, some say, that it abides in food. 27.
Therefore afterwards the rite of the Abhy4réha of the Pavaména Stétras is defined. The praiser verily praises the Sama. Where he praises it, there let him mutter these Mantras: From the
who knows the gold of the SAma, obtains verily its gold.” The meaning is, since the same word, Suvarpa, denotes a musical note, (Suvarna, from Su, good, and Varna, letter) and gold, (Suvarna) common gold becomes the reward of him who knows this quality. Its musical note is, as it were, its gold. ‘He who knows the Séma in such a manner, verily obtains its gold,’’ just as it has been described before. 26.
- Then the quality of abiding is explained, viz. “‘ He who knows the abode of this Séma.”” The Sama abides in speech ; therefore speech is called the abode. He who knows this quality of abiding of the Sdéma, ५ 2091468. It is proper to assign this quality to him, because it is said in the Sruti, according to the manner in which “it is worship- ped.” To him, who as in the former description, is desirous of the reward, and wishes to know which is the abiding place of the Sdma, the answer is given: ‘Speech is the abode of the Sima.” Speech means the organs of sound at the root of the tongue and elsewhere.’’* This speech is the abode. Therefore it is said: ‘For it is well known,”’ because it is well known, that this life abides in speech, in the organs of speech, the root of the tongue, &c., therefore speech is the abiding place of the Séma. ^^ Some,” others, ‘say, that it abides in food,” that it is well known to abide there. And because neither of these two opinions is blamed, therefore it is optional to assign the qua- lity of abiding either to speech or to food. 27.
For him who thus knows life, the rite of muttering prayers is ap- poimted. The perfection in muttering prayers which one who thus knows has acquired, is called his knowledge. ‘Therefore afterwards.” Because the rite of muttering prayers, the reward of which is the ascen- sion (Abhyaréha) to a divine state, must be performed by one, perfect in knowledge, “‘therefore’’ it is defined. The muttering of prayers by its connexion with the Udgitha might be performed at any time, but
* he of the cheat, throat, head, root-of the tongue, teeth, nose, lips, and palate.
First Chapter. Third Brdmhaaa. 59
unreal lead me to the real, from darkness lead me to light, from death lead me to immortality. In the words of the Mantra: From the unreal lead me to the real, death is the unreal, the real immortality ; from death lead me to immortality, which implies, render me immortal. Further in the words: From darkness lead
according to the word of the Sruti: ^ Pavamaném,” a time is fixed for them, and although the rite is herewith assigned to the three > Pavamdna Stédtras, yet the time is again restricted by the words: “‘The praiser verily praises the Sima.” ^ Where,” at what time “he,” the praiser, “praises,” commences the Sama, “ there,’’ at that time let him mutter these Mantras. The rite of muttering these Mantras, is called Abhy4réha (ascension) because a person who thus knows, directly ascends (Abhimukhyéna 4réhati) to the state of a god. The plural E’téni (these Mantras) shows that three Mantras of the Yajur are meant. These Mantras must be read according to the accent, which is in the Braémhana, and not as it is in the Mantras, as the second case (दयप) proves,* and also their being found in the Brémhana.t The rite of muttering must be performed by the sacrificer.
The following are the Mantras of the Yajur: ‘From the unreal lead me to the real, from darkness lead me to light, from death lead me to immortality.” As the meaning of the Mantras is concealed, the Brémhana itself explains it: “In the words of the Mantra: From the unreal lead me to the real, death is the unreal ;’’ ^" death’’ it is called, because his knowledge and works arise from his own nature; ‘unreal’ it is called from the very low degree of its existence. ‘‘ The real immortality,’ ‘the real,” knowledge and works, derived from the Séstra, are “immortality, because they are the cause of it. Therefore “from the unreal,” viz., from unreal works and from ignorance “ lead me to the real,’’ viz., to such works and knowledge, as are derived from the Séstra, that is to say, produce the state of the soul, by which the nature of a god is obtained. The meaning of the whole sentence is given in the words: “which implies, render me immortal.” Thus also in the next Mantra: ‘From darkness lead me to light, death is dark- ness ;’” for every ignorance, from its natural tendency to screen, is dark-
* Otherwise the third case would be required. A. ©, + Viz. the Satapatha Brémhaga.
12
60 Brihkad Aranyaka Upanishad.
me to light, death is darkness, light immortality ; from death lead me to immortality, which implies, render me immortal. In the last Mantra: From death lead me to immortality, there is nothing concealed.—Then in the remaining Sté6tras let him praise the primeval food for his own sake. Therefore in those Stétras he may chose a blessing. Whatever desire he may desire, the same he may chose, viz. the Udgata who thus knows. Whatever desire he may desire, either for himself or the
ness; this as the cause of dying, is death. ‘Light immortality,”’ the divine nature, contrary to the former (darkness) ; knowledge, by its natural tendency to manifest, is light; this is immortality, because its nature is exempt from destruction. Therefore: «^ From darkness lead me to light,” as before, means : ^^ From death lead me to immortality,’’ which implies, ‘‘render me immortal,’’ that is, grant me the divine state of Prajépati as reward. The first Mantra means, from a state without causality produce a state that has causality. The second Mantra, however, means, from a state that has causality, but which is yet subject to igno- rance, produce a state, where the whole effect ts accomplished. In the third Mantra: र From death lead me to immortality,” the whole meaning of the two preceding Mantras is given as conclusive. In the third Mantra, therefore, there is not, as in the two preceding, the meaning concealed, but it is the real meaning of the text. ‘‘Then,”’ having made the song of the sacrificer in the three Pavaména Stotras, ‘‘ in the remaining Stdtras let him,” the Udgéta* who knows life and has obtained the nature of life, ‘‘ praise the primeval food for his own sake”’ in the same way, as life did. Because such an Udgéta knows life thus, in the manner, before described, and hence, like life, is able to accomplish the desire ; ४८ therefore he,” the sacrificer, ^ may chose in those Stétras,’”’ at the recital of them, ‘‘a blessing.” ‘Whatever desire he may desire, the same he may chose,”’ ask as a boon, viz., “the Udgéta who thus knows.” ‘Whatever desire the Udgéta desires,” asks, ‘ either for himself or for the sacrificer, the same he accomplishes by the recital.” In this sense it is said, that the acquirement of life in its identity with the soul takes place by knowledge and works, and therein is no apprehension of any doubt. It may, however, be matter
* The priest who knows the Sama Véda,
Firet Chapter. Third Brdmhana. . 91
sacrificer, the same he accomplishes by the recital. This verily overcomes the worlds. There is verily no doubt to be worthy of the worlds for him who thus knows this Sama. 28.
of doubt, whether in the absence of works life is obtained or not. To remove this doubt, it is said: ‘This verily overcomes the worlds.” ‘This verily,” this knowledge of life alone, separated from works, ५‹ overcomes the worlds,”’ is the cause of gaining the worlds. ^ There is verily no doubt to be worthy of the worlds,”’ nor even a desire ; for if one has the firm knowledge, that life is the soul, he has no doubt that he will obtain it; for a man, who 13 in a village, does not doubt, like one in the desert, whether he may arrive at the village. There may be indeed a doubt for one who has not the knowledge of the soul, which is yet far from him, but not for one who has it ; he* therefore has no apprehension that he should not acquire the state of life as identical with the soul. For whom is there not such an appre- hension? ‘For him who thus knows the Sama” to be life, in accordance with the greatness, as has been explained, for him therefore who knows: I am the life, inaccessible to the sins of the demons, which consist in the contact of the senses with their objects; I am purified ; I am speech and the other four organs,f which by their dependence upon me have obtained their original nature, as fire, wind, &c. which are free from the blemish of the sins of the demons, produced by the contact of the senses with their objects, in consequence of natural knowledge, and which by dependence upon: me are the cause of the connection of the primeval food with all the elements; I am the soul of all the elements as the common essence of them ; I am also the soul of speech, embodied in the Rig, Yajur, Sama and Udgitha, be- cause I pervade them and am their cause. When I have obtained the state of the song of the Sima, my external wealth, or ornament is the sweetness of the notes. When I have obtained the golden state, figuratively speaking, the sweetness of the notes, the state of the song, my organs are the various places of the throat, &c. Possessed of such qualities, I pervade with my whole nature all living beings down to the smallest insect, for I am without shape and every where. He will attain such a reward, whose worship manifests such a knowledge.
* Who knows that life is identical with the soul. ¶† Viz. nose, eye, ear and mind.
62 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
Fourth Brémhana. This was before soul, bearing the shape of a man. Looking
‘*This was before soul.’’ How the state of Prajépati is obtained by the united effect of knowledge and works, has been described, and also, how it is obtained by the mere knowledge of life, by passages as: °< This verily overcomes the worlds,” &c. By descriptions of the omnipotence and other attributes of Prajipati, who is the embodied reward, in the creation, preservation and destruction of the world, the eminence of the reward, resulting from knowledge and works in accordance with the Védas, 18 further to be described. For this object the present Brdm- hana has been commenced. This description sets forth the praise of the knowledge and works ordained by the practical* part, because they are of great power. But it 18 at the same time intended to show, that the whole reward, resulting from knowledge and works, has a worldly tendency ; for it is said, that it is subject to fear and unhappiness ; it is further involved in the connexion between cause and effect, and as a manifestation of the gross organismf it is not eternal. The second part of the Védas on the other hand, is intended to show the liberation, resulting from the mere knowledge of Bramha, which will hereafter be explained ; for he who is not dissatisfied with the objects of the world, subject as they are to the division of cause and effect etc., has no desire ६० obtain the knowledge, that the soul is one and all, as a person who is not thirsty has no desire to drink. Consequently the description of the reward, resulting from knowledge and works, is made for the sake of the second part. With regard to this, it will be said: ^< This should be known by him.” ‘This is better than a son.”
“This was before the इण.” The soul is here defined as Prajépati, the first-born from the egg, the embodied soul, as the result. from his knowledge and works in accordance with the Védas. He was what? «‘ This,” produced by the division of body ‘ was the soul,” not separated from the body of Prajaépati ^^ before,’’ before the 7 of other bodies. He was also bearing the shape of man, which means, that he was endowed with head, hands and other members; he was the Vir4j, the first-born. ‘ Looking round,” reflecting, who am I, and
* Ceremonial part of the Véda. Vide page 2, note 2. T Vide p. 40, note.
_ First Chapter. Fourth Brdmhana. 63
round, he beheld nothing but himself.: He said first: ‘ This am 1. Hence the name of I was produced. Therefore even now a man, when called, says first: ‘It is I,’ and tells afterwards any other name that belongs to him. And because he as the first of all of them consumed by fire all the sins, therefore he 25 called Purusha. He verily consumes him, who
of what nature, “he beheld nothing but himself,’ the fulness of life, the organism of causes and effects. He beheld only himself as the universal soul. Then endowed with the recollection of his Védaic knowledge in a former birth, “he said first : This am 137 viz. Praj&pati, the universal soul. ‘* Hence,”’ therefore, because from the recollection of his knowledge in a former world he called himself I, therefore his name was I. The name of I, as proved in this Upanishad, and there- fore in the Sruti, will afterwards be explained.
** Therefore,’ because this happened to Prajdpati, as the cause, there- fore it happens also to the living creatures, his effects ; for even now a man ‘when called,’ addressed with : ‘ Who art thou ?’ says first: ‘It is I,’ denoting himself with the name of the soul as the cause, and when afterwards asked for his special name, the name of this special individual, he answers by: ‘I am Dévadatta, or Yajnadatta,’ &c. ; he tells the name, which was given to this individual person by father and mother. ‘And because he,”’ Prajépati in a former birth, which is the eause, as the first of those who were desirous to obtain the state of Pra- jépati by the exercise of refleetion on works and knowledge, viz. “as the first of all of them,” of all those desirous of obtaining the state of Prajépati—consumed by the perfect exercise of reflection on works and knowledge all the sins of contact, which are obstacles to the acquirement of the state of Prajdpati,—because such was the case,— therefore he is called Purusha, because he, Purvam Aushad, (first burned.) As that Prajépati, by consuming all opposite sins, became this Purusha Prajépati, so also any other consumes, reduces to ashes, by the fire of the practice of his reflection on knowledge and works, or only by the force of his knowledge. ‘‘He verily consumes.’’ Whom? “Him who before this sage strifes to obtain the state of Prajépati.” The sage is pointed out as he who thus knows, who accord- ing to his power manifests his reflection on knowledge. ‘ But is it not
64 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
before this strives to obtain the state of Prajfpati, he namely, who thus knows. |. He was afraid ; therefore man, when alone, is afraid. He then
useless for any one to strive for the state of Praj4pati, if he is con- sumed by one who thus knows?’ There is no fault in this; for con- suming means here only, that the highest state, that of a Praj4pati, is not obtained, because the eminence of the reflection on knowledge is want- ing. Therefore by the words: ‘‘ He consumes him,” is it meant, that the perfect performer obtains the highest state of Prajdpati, he, who is less perfect, does not obtain it, and by no means, that the less perfect performer is actually consumed by the perfect ; thus it is said in common life, that a warrior who first rushes into battle, consumes his comba- tants, which means, that he exceeds them in prowess.
To show that the reward of knowledge and works, as set forth in the Karma Ka4nda, which is the state of Prajipati, praiseworthy as it may be, does yet not overcome this world, it is said: ‘‘ He was afraid,” viz. this Prajdpati, who is called the first-born embodied soul, bearing the shape of man, was afraid, as we and other creatures are. Hence it is said: Because he, bearing the shape of man, endowed with an organised body, was afraid in consequence of his desire against his destruction,* ‘therefore man,’’ on account of his likeness with Praj4pati, also now, when alone, “is afraid.’’ And further as with us, so also with Prajdpati, the true knowledge of himself (the soul) is the cause, that the desire against one’s destruction is removed. Hence it is said: ‘‘He looked round.’”?’ How? The answer is: ^ Since nothing but myself,” but the soul, not a second thing, exists, ^ of whom should I be भक्षत, while there is no cause of my destruction. ‘“‘Hence,” from the true knowledge of himself (the soul) Prajapati’s ‘“‘fear departed,” for his fear is merely the effect of his ignorance, which cannot remain with true knowledge, wherefore it is said: ‘‘ For whom should he fear,” viz. he who fears, and the meaning which is intended, is, when truth has been ascertained, fear is removed, since fear arises from a second, from another thing, and a second, another thing, is merely the production of ignorance ; for a second thing, of which there is no knowledge, cannot be the cause of the origin of fear. Thus it is said
* Or of his desire for his preservation.
First Chapter. Third Brdmhana. 65 looked round : Since nothing but myself exists, of whom should
in a Mantra: What blindness of mind, what distress exists for him who- is conscious of the universal identity ? And it is also proper, that by the knowledge that all is one, the fear is removed; for the knowledge of a second, from which fear may arise, is removed by the knowledge that all is one ; hence there is nothing, from whence it could arise. Here it is asked : Whence was produced Prajépati’s knowledge, that all is one, or who instructed hyn ?
(Either the knowledge manifested itself without instruction. Then the same should be the case with us and similar beings. Or it is derived from impressions received in a former birth; then the know- ledge that all is the soul, is useless ; for in this case, as the knowledge of Prajépati, although existing when he was in the state of a former birth, did not remove the cause of the contrary ignorance, because on account of his ignorance he was afraid, so also is the knowledge of the identity of the soul useless for every one. And if you, lastly, say, that the knowledge removes the ignorance at the time of death, we also object, because, as before, it must again be connected with a prior knowledge, whence arises the logical fault of a too general argument. Hence it must be concluded, that the knowledge of the identity of the soul is useless.)
We deny this, on the ground that the knowledge of Prajapati is produced from the most powerful cause ; for as in common life strength of intellect and extent of memory are observed with him from the time of his birth, who has acquired various efficacious causes by his pious actions, 80 also with regard to the eminent birth of Prajdpati, united as it is with efficient causes, which are purified by his having consumed all sins, the effects of opposite causes, by the power of moral merit, of knowledge and of liberty from worldly desires. Hence it is proper to maintain, that Prajdépati’s knowledge of the identity of the soul, produced at the time of his birth, has arisen without any instruction. In this respect says the Smriti: = ^ Whose four qualities, his unbounded know- ledge, freedom from passion, power and moral merit are innate.”
If you say, ‘if they are innate, fear is impossible, for darkness doeg not rise with the sun,’ we deny this on the ground, that the notion of innate knowledge has merely the meaning to exclude instruction from
K
66 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
I be afraid? Hence his fear departed ; fur whom should he fear, since fear arises from another. 2.
another. If your opinion is, ‘that faith, devotion and reverence are no causes of knowledge, and that such causes of knowledge, as faith, devotion and reverence, assigned by the Sruti and Smriti in such passages as: ‘‘ The faithful whose mind is devoted to only one object, whose senses are subdued, gains knowledge,’’* ‘Thou shalt know it by reverence,’’t—have no causality,’ and if you moyeover say, ‘that our moral merit in our former birth is the cause of our knowledge (in the next birth) as it is the case with Prajépati,’ we do not agree, because we must attend to the distinction of general and special causes, as well as of qualified and unqualified causes ; for in common life obtains a manifold division of causes with regard to effects dependent upon a cause ; in the same manner of general causes. These as well as special causes are again divided into qualified and unqualified causes. To show this by an instance we chose the perception of form, as an effect from a variety of causes. Here the perception of form in the dark, without light, by animals roaming at night, is caused by the contact of the eye with form. The cause of perception of form by the Yégis is the mind alone ; for us it is the contact of the eye with form through light. Further by the division of light into sunlight, moonlight, &c. are produced the general divisions of the cause. Moreover there is the other division of light, light, especially qualified and light not qualified. In the same manner the cause of the knowledge of the identity of the soul is sometimes work performed in a former birth, as is the case with Prajapati; sometimes penance, as the Sruti says: By penance search for Bramha ;t¢ ometimes instruction from the teacher, as follows from such passages of the Sruti andSmriti: ‘A man, who has a teacher, knows.’’ “The faithful acquires knowledge.” ^ Do thou know it by reverence.” ‘ From the teacher he must be known, seen, heard,” &c. Faith, devotion, &c. are direct causes to obtain that knowledge, as they effect separation from vice and from other causes of the contrary. The same is the case with the hearing, thinking and mental intuition of the Véddnta,
* Bhagavadgita, Fourth chapter. ¶ Bhagavadgita, €. 1. ‡ Taittarfya Upanishad Bbrigu Valli 5th Khanda.
eee he eras _ mites
First Chapter. Third Brdémhana. 67
- He did thus not feel delight. Therefore no body, when alone, feels delight. He was desirous of a second. He was in the same state as husband (Pati) and wife (Patni) are when in mutual embrace. He divided this self two-fold. Hence were husband and wife produced. Therefore was this only a half of himself,
because here is comprehended the present object of knowledge itself, and also because by the annihilation of sin and other obstacles the true knowledge of the soul and the mind from its very nature produces that knowledge. Therefore faith, reverence, &c. are real causes of kuow- ledge. 2.
From this also follows the worldly state of Prajépati, viz. because “ He,” Prajdpati, “did thus not feel delight,” which means, was un- happy, like us and others at the present time ; “ therefore,” in conse- quence of the state of loneliness, &c., “no body, when alone, feels delight.” Delight means the pleasure, derived from the union with a desired object. Unhappiness is called the state of mental distress, following the separation from an object of desire, to which one is attached. For the removal of this unhappiness ‘he was desirous of a second, of a wife able to destroy the unhappiness. And while he thus longed for a wife, his state was as of one, embraced by a wife. And because by this state he desired something real, he was of such a state. Of what state? In such a state, as in common life husband and wife are, when in embrace for the removal of unhappiness. ^ He,”’ thus, “divided this ^ इल्? which was of such a kind, ‘‘ two-fold.” The term ^ this’ is used in order to define the self and to distinguish it from the Virdj, the first cause. He was by the removal of the state of Virdj not in the same state, in which curd is, when zés former state, that of milk, is entirely removed. Which was then the state of sepa- ration ? By the objective mental power of Viraj, entirely dependent upon himself, there was, beside himself, another body in the state of husband and wife in embrace. And this Virdj of such a kind, “ was in the same state,” because he is the same subject for two predicates. “ Hence,” from this division (Pdtan4t) husband (Pati) and wife (Patni) were produced, which is a description of the common state of husband and wife. ‘Therefore,’ because this wife is, as it were, the other separated half of himself, ^ therefore was this,” this body, ^ only the
K 2
68 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
as asplit pea ts of the whole. Thus verily has Yéjnavalkys declared it. This void is thus completed by woman. He approached her. Hence men were born. 3.
She verily reflected: How can he approach me, whom he has produced from himself? Alas, I will conceal myself. Thus she became a cow, the other a bull. He approached her. Hence kine were born. The one became a mare, and the other a
half of himself, as a split pea is of the whole.” Of whom was it only a half before his taking a wife? The answer is: ‘Of his self.” Thus verily has Ydjnavalkya, viz. the son of Yajnavalka (which denotes him who speaks at the sacrifice) Dévarati, declared it. It may also mean a son of Bramhd. Because this male half is void, as want- ing the female half, ^^ therefore,’”’ again* after the taking of a wife, it is again completed by the female half, as a split pea by its being joined with its other half. ‘‘ He,” ^“ Prajapati,”? under the name of Manu, ‘‘ approached her,’’ by name Sétarupa,t his own daughter, under the notion that she was his wife. ‘‘ Hence,” from this union, ° men were born.” 3.
‘‘ She,”’ Satarup4, recollecting that it is forbidden in the Smriti to approach one’s own daughter, “verily reflected: How happens this improper action, that he can approach me,’”’ whom he has produced from himself. ‘Alas, I will now conceal myself,’’ will conceal my- self under the disguise of another kind. ‘ Thus,” having thus re-
* Ananda observes, that the word ^^ again’’ refers to the same event in a former birth,—because the world is without commencement.
+ The notion of Viraj dividing his own substance into male and female, occurs in more than one Purfna. So does that of an incestuous marriage and intercourse of the first Menu with his daughter Saturdp4, and the commentators on the Upa- nishad understand that legend to be alluded to in this place. But the institutes ascribed to Menu make Viréj to be the issue of such a separation of persons, and Menu himself to be his offspring. There is indeed, as the reader may observe from the passages cited in the present essay, much disagreement and consequent confa- sion, in the gradation of persons interposed by Hindu theology between the supreme being and the created world. Col. M.E. Vol. I. p. 65. See also Wilson’s Vishnu Purana, where, p. 51, note 5, avery lucid view of the opinions of the different Puranas on this subject is given.
First Chapter. Third Brémhana. 69
stallion, the one a female ass, the other a male ass. He ap- proached her. Hence the one-hoofed kind wasborn. The one became a female goat, the other a male goat, the one became an ewe, the other a ram. He approached her. Hence goats and sheep were born. In this manner he created every living pair whatsoever down to the ants. 4.
He knew: I am verily this creation; for I created this all. Hence the name of creation is derived. Verily he who thus knows, becomes in this creation like him. 5.
flected, ‘“‘she became a cow,” by herself, and again and again was this the inclination of Satarup4, incited by the impulse of living crea- tures, as well as of Manu. Therefore ‘the other became a bull. He approached her,’”’ in the same manner, as it has been related before. ** Hence kine were born.”” Thus ‘the one became a mare, and the other a stallion,’’ thus, ^ the one a female ass, the other a male ags.’’ There, by the union of the mare with the stallion and the union of the other kinds “the one hoofed kind,’’ viz. horses, mules and asses, ० were 00 Thus “ the one became a female goat, the other a male goat, the one became an ewe, the other a ram. He approached her,” viz. the one after the other in the order as they are mentioned. ‘* Hence goats and sheep were born. In this manner he created every living pair, male and female, whatsoever, down to the ants,” viz. he created the world. 4.
० He,” Prajépati, having created all this world, “knew.” What? ‘*T am verily this creation.”’ The world is created, therefore the created world is called creation. Because the world is created by me, there- fore, since it is not separated from me, am I the world ; it is not dis- tinguished from me. Why is this 1? ^ For I,’ because “ I created this whole world,” therefore. Because Prajapati called himself the creation, ‘“‘hence,”’ therefore “the name of creation is derived.” ‘Verily he becomes in this creation,’”’ in this world of Prajapati, “like him ;” he becomes like Prajdpati, a creator of the world, which is not different from his own self. Who? ‘He who thus knows,’ knows like Prajdépati, as has been said, that he is the world, depending upon the notion of the soul, of the elements and of the deities. 5.
70 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
Then he churned. From his mouth, as the place of produc- tion, and from his hands he created the fire. Both therefore
Prajdpati, having thus created this world as a succession of pairs, was desirous of creating the guardian deities of the Bréhmans and of the other castes, and at the commencement throwing his hands upon his mouth ^ he churned.”’ Churning with his hands “he created from his mouth,” as the organ of production, and also ‘from his hands,” as organs of production, “ the fire,” the special benefactor of the caste of Bréhmans. Because both the hands and the mouth are the organs of production of the fire, whose nature is to consume, “ there- fore both are without hair ;” not the whole, however, but only the inside ; for both resemble in this respect the female organ of produc- tion ; “ for this is inside without 187. Thus also the Brdhman was born from the mouth of Prajapati. Therefore the fire is the special benefactor of the Brahman, both being sprung from the same source, as the elder brother is of the younger. Therefore the Bréhman has the fire as his guardian deity, and the mouth as his strength, as proved by the Sruti and Smriti. Thus he produced from his arms, the seat of power, the slayer of Bala,* and other gods,t the ruling deities of the Kshatriya caste and also the Kshatriya. Therefore the Kshatriya has Indra as his guardian deity, and the arm as his strength, as both Sruti and Smriti attest. Thus he created from his thigh, as the seat of endeavour—the Vasus{ and others, the ruling deities of the Vis, and also the Vis. Therefore the Vaisya is devoted to agriculture, mer- chandize and similar pursuits, and his guardian deities are the Vasus, &c., according to the evidence of the Sruti and Smriti. Thus he created from his feet Pushana,§ the guardian deity of the earth, and also the Sidra, who is fitted for servitude, according to the evidence of the Sruti and Smriti. The Upanishad makes here for the praise of
* Indra.
+t Varuna, &c.
मुं The Vasus were the sons of Vasu. Their names are: Apa, Dhruva, Soma, Dhaba (fire), Anila (wind), Anala (fire), Pratyisha (daybreak), and Prabhfsa (light.) —W.V.P.p.128. °
§ One of the twelve Adityas, sons of Kasyapa by Aditi, the daughter of Dakshu.—L. C, p. 122.
First Chapter. Third Brémhana. 71
are inside without hair; for the place of production is inside without hair.
That they speak there this word : Sacrifice to this, sacrifice to this, hence sacrifice to the one or the other god, is not proper. His is really this creation ; for he verily is all the gods.
the whole creation, the supposition, as if the origin of the guardian deities of the Kshatriya and the other castes had been related, although it has not been done, and yet remains to be related. By this passage of the Sruti it is accordingly evident, that Prajapati is all deities, because there is no difference between the creator and the creature, and because the gods are created by Prajapati.
The meaning of the subject being thus established, the blame of the contrary notion* of ignorant people is introduced for the praise of the meaning, as it has been established ; for the blame of the one is the praise of the other.
*‘That they,” the mere performers of sacrifices, ‘‘speak there,’’ during the performance of the ceremonies at the time of offering, ^ this word: Sacrifice to this,” to’ Agni, ‘‘ sacrifice to this,’’ to Indra, &e. | they do so in accordance with the difference of name, S4stra, Stétra, work, &c. by considering this or the other different god, for instance Agni, &c., as one among others. This should not be thus understood, because “‘his,”’ Praj4pati’s, ‘is really this creation,’ the whole division of the gods ; “for he,” Prajapati, as life, ‘‘is verily all the gods.”
Here we meet with a contradictory opinion. ‘Namely, some say, the supreme Hiranyagarbha is meant, others Hiranyagarbha, as being in a worldly state. According to the letter of the Mantras the supreme is meant ; for the Sruti says: ‘‘ They call him Indra, Mittra, Varuna and Agni.” And another passage: ‘‘ He who is Bramha, who is Indra and Prajapati, is all these gods.” Also the Smriti says: ^^ Some call him Agni, others Manu, others Prajapati.”” And further: He who is no object of the organs,t who is unapproachable,t who is infinitely little,§ unmanifested,
* The contrary notion is, that the deities are independent beings ; this view is blamed in the next sentence of the Upanishad.
+ The organs of action are here meant, according to Ananda.
t To the senses of intellect, eye, ear, &c.
§ This is the cause, that he cannot be perceived by the senses.
72 Brikad Arazyaka Upanishad.
eternal, whose nature comprehends all elements, who is not conceived by thought,* sprung thus forth by himself. On the other hand he is alse in a worldly state. This follows from the passage of the Sruti, stat- ing: ^ He consumed all sins ;” for unless one is in a worldly state, he cannot consume sins. It follows also from the passage of the Sruti, that he is subject to fear and unhappiness. Also from the other: ^° Being mortal he created immortals.” Further, from the letter of the Mantra: “Lo the birth of Hiranyagarbha.”’ Also from a passage of the Smriti in the chapter which treats on the results of works: Sages call Bramhé, the creators of the world, virtue, the great, the unmanifested, the best condition, which can be obtained by the quality of goodness.t Therefore a contradictory meaning being obtained, the argument is faulty ?
We do not grant this, because there is no contradiction, if it is con- sidered under a different fictitious view, and a different fictitious view is obtained, if it is connected with a special fictitious attribute.~ In this manner it is declared in the Sruti :
* No object of the mind, the internal sense.
¶† This passage is taken from Manu 12, 50. According to Ananda, by the creators are meant Manu and others, by virtue Yama, by the great one (Mahat), intelligence, Buddhi, the first production of Prakriti, or self-existing nature, according to the Saénkhya system. Kullika Bhatta, the commentator of Manu, explains it differently, viz. Bramh& is the Bramhé with four faces, the creators Marichi and the others, Mahat and Avyakta (unmanifested) two of the causes of the Sankhya system, here the tutelary deity of the same, virtue the embodied virtue.
‡ I translated Kalpané with ‘ fictitious view” and Upadhi with “ fictitious attri- bute, as I was unable to find more adequate words. Kalpan& according to the dictionaries means: arrangement, distinction, artificial making ; but these words do not express the meaning, which it has according to the Véddnta, where it is a predi- cate, which is assigned to a thing to which it really does not belong, or the con- ceiving of a thing under an idea which is contrary to its nature, as for instance, if Bramha (the infinite soul, infinite substance) is comprehended under the notion of infinite mind (manas) or infinite intelligence (Buddhi) which notions are mere anthro- pomorphisms. Thus far is the Kalpana indeed an artificial notion, a notion made by some contrivance, or not founded on the real nature of the thing. Upadhi, (accord- ing to Wilson discriminating or distinguishing property, disguise, in the Védénta this is especially applied to certain natural forms or properties, considered as dis-
First Chapter. Third Brdmhana. 73
‘* Sitting he proceeds afar, sleeping he goes everywhere. Who beside me, is able to know the god who is happy and not happy.”* Through attributes he is connected with the world; in reality by himself he is unconnected with the world. This is the identity and diversity of Hiranyagarbha, and in the same manner of all living creatures, which follows from the passage of the Sruti: ‘That art thou.” But while Hiranyagarbha, in consequence of the superlative purity of his attri- butes is, as it were, almost entirely supreme, as Sruti and Smriti de- clare, although they show his worldly state as it were, at some places, the worldly state of the living creatures, in consequence of the preva- lent impurity of their attributes, is almost everywhere evident. Divested,
guises of the spirit which I translated with fictitious attribute, is any quality which is assigned by a fictious notion to the infinite soul; for instance, omnipotence, omoniscience, &c; If the infinite substance is considered in its own nature, it has no attributes whatever, and the notions under which it is thought, viz., existence, knowledge, happiness, are in reality no different attributes, but they constitute the one identical substance (Atma, soul).
On the other hand, it is necessary to form fictitious views of the infinite sub- stance; for the world cannot be thought in itself, and therefore requires to be thought by the infinite soul, as entirely depending upon it. The act of the mind by which it transfers the notions of the world upon Bramha or the infinite soul, is called Adhy4répa, which is in fact the same idea with that of Kalpan&. Under the condition, that the world is considered in Bramha, Bramha or the infinite soul is also considered under various attributes, as for instance, omniscience, universal providence, immanent cause of the world, &c. The Kalpana, the view, although fictitious, is yet necessary, and the Upadhi, the attribute, although not really an attribute of Bramha, is still indispensable, if he is considered in his relation to the world.
There is therefore according to the Védanta, no contradiction, if attributes are ascribed to Bramha, and denied of him, as long as the notions under which both is done, are kept separate ; namely, he has no attributes, if considered in himself; he has attributes in his relation to the world.
* Katha Upanishad, 2 V. 21. In this passage the contradictory predicates are founded upon the different modes, by which the soul may be conceived. Thus ८५ sitting’ refers to its unchangeableness, ‘‘ proceeding’ to its worldly nature, where it proceeds faster than any other being. The Upanishads generally repre- sent the difficulty to understand the infinite soul by assigning to it contradictory predicates. Thus it is said in the Vaéjasanéya Up. v. 5. If (the soul) proceeds, it does not proceed ; it is far; it is near; it is within this universe ; it is without this universe.
L
74 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
Then whatsoever is moist, the same he created from his semen, this is the S6ma. So much is this whole universe, either food, or the eater of food. 86708 is the food, and Agni the eater of the food. This is the surpassing creation of Bramhi. Because he from the better parts created the gods, and also,
however, of all distinction of attributes, every one obtains the name of supreme according to the evidence of the Sruti and Smriti. But the logicians who, abandoning the authority of the holy writings, reason much about existence and non-existence, agency and non-agency, con- found the meaning of the Sdstra. Hence the determination of the meaning becomes difficult. But for those who without pride follow the | 9६878 alone, the meaning of the Sastra with regard to deities is as clear, as if it were an object of perception. Here it is intended to in- troduce with reference to Prajipati, although he is one God, such dis- tinctions as food, &८, Among them the fire has been mentioned ; the 36108, as the first food will now be mentioned.
‘“‘Then whatsoever is,”’ in the world, ‘ moist,’’ in the form of a fluid, ^ the same he created from his semen,”’ from his seed. Thus it is said in the Sruti: ‘From the semen sprang the waters.” And the Sdma is also watery ; therefore all that is moist, is created by Prajapati from his semen. This is, “as it were, the Sdma.” ‘So much is this whole universe,’ that is, there is no more than this. What is it? ‘‘ Either food,” which is Séma, as nourishing by its fluidity, or “the eater of the food,’? Agni, by his heat and harshness. Hence 86708 is defined as food. From the force of the meaning it is evident, that Séma is all that is eaten, and that Agni is the eater. Sometimes the fire, when offering is made by it, becomes Soma,—Sdma also, when offering is made to it, becomes fire, because it eats. Whosoever in this manner perceives the world, as consisting of Agni and Soma, under the idea of the soul, is not tainted by any blame, and becomes also like Prajépati. ‘This is the surpassing creation of Bramhé,”’ Prajépati, surpassing, because it surpasses his own nature. Which is this crea- tion? ‘Because he from the better parts,” the parts resembling him, ‘created the gods,”’ therefore is the creation of the gods a surpassing creation. How is it again a creation which surpasses himself? The
First Chapter. Third Brémhana. 75
becanse he, a mortal, created the immortals, therefore is it a sur- passing creation. He who thus knows, becomes in this surpass- ing creation like Prajdpati. 6.
That which is this, was then verily unmanifested. That mani-
answer is: “And also, because he, a mortal,’ of a mortal nature,. ‘‘created the immortals,’”’ the gods of immortal nature, after he had consumed all his sins by the fire of works and knowledge, therefore is this surpassing creation the effect of perfect knowledge. Therefore ** he who knows” this surpassing creation of Prajapati, as proceeding from himself, verily becomes in this surpassing creation like Prajapati, becomes a creator like Prajapati. 6.
«° That which is this* was then verily unmanifested.”” All Védaic causes,t denoted by knowledge and work, depend upon such distinc- tions as agent, &c., and their ultimate reward is the acquirement of the state of Prajépati;t the effect is ^ 80 much,” viz. this manifested world. The Upanishad is now to show, how this manifested world, depending upon the connection of causes and effects, was before its manifestation in the shape of a seed (in its original shape) which is inferred, as the tree is inferred from its effect, the sprout; for this tree of the world, whose seed is work and whose field is ignorance, is to be taken up with ifs root, as by its taking up the liberation of man is accomplished. Thus it is said in the Kéthaka:§ “Its root is above, its branches go downwards.” The same is said in the Gita: “ Its root is above, its branches go downwards.”’ It is alsosaid ina Purana:
* That which is this. Tad idam (that this) according to an idiotism in Sanscrit, where two demonstrative pronouns, this and that, are connected with the same subject, and where tad (that) refers to the past time, and idam (this) to the present time. The Véd&ota frequently uses this form of expression to show the identity of the logical subject in its connexion with predicates which exclude each other.
+ Védaic causes are here causes of any mode or form of worldly existence, as asserted by the Védas; causes which lead to final liberation from the world, are accordingly in this passage not referred to; this is evident, says Ananda, on the ground, that a multiplicity of causes cannot be a means of liberation which is of a uniform nature.
‡ Or in other words the ultimate reward is the state of death.—A. G.
§ Kathaka, 2 Adh. 6 Volli. V. 1.
L 2
76 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
fested itself by name and form, as it is commonly said: ^ He is of this name, of this form.” In the same manner that which
The eternal tree of Bramha. ‘‘ That,’ the world in the state of a seed before its creation, is named, on account of its imperceptibility at that time, by the pronoun ^ that,’’ which denotes any thing that is no object of perception. The word “verily,” which is the mark of a nar- rative,* is used here for the object to make it easily understood, that the world was in the state of non-manifestation, because it is connected with the past time. If it is said: Thus it verily was, it is easily under- stood, that the imperceptible state of the world is meant, in the same way, as if it is said: There verily was aking Judhisthira. ‘‘ Which is this.” This denotes the world as nianifested by name, form and work, as being in the connexion of cause and effect, in the manner in which it has been described. The terms “ that’’ and “this” denote the state of imperceptibility and perceptibility of the world, and placed upon one and the same subject, they express the identity of the world in its state of perceptibility and imperceptibility. The meaning is: That which is this, and this, which is that, was then unmanifested. If this is the case, it is evident that no effect can be produced from any thing that does not exist, and that it cannot be destroyed from any thing that exists.
९५ That,” so described world, which was not manifested, manifested itself by name and form. The reflexive formt ^^ manifested itself,’’ shows, that the soul was manifested by itself. «^ It manifested itself,’’ it clearly obtained a perceptible form of existence, the limits of whose knowledge are the differences of name and form, which by its own power} pro- duced the relations of ruler, agent, and depends upon the action of causes. ^" He is of this name;’’ by the pronoun§ “ he,” which is 4
* The word for narrative is Itihaésa, Iti-ha-4sa; thus verily it was, which for- mula commonly concluding a narrative in the Védas, became the term ofa narrative generally.
¶ Karma Kartri, where the agent (Kartri) is its own object (Karma.)
‡ This is here mentioned, because according to the Védanta it is necessary, that the world as an effect must have a cause.
§ The word for pronoun is in Sanscrit, Sarvandma, a general name, on the mean- ing of which the exposition, as giveu above, is founded.
First Chapter. Third Brémhana. 77
is this also then manifests itself, as it is said: ^" He is of this name, of this form.”? He entered this world.
name without distinction, a name only is indicated. ‘He is of this name,”’ viz. Dévadatta, or Jajnadatta is his name. In the same man- ner the pronoun ‘“‘this,”’ in the sentence, he is of this colour, denotes colour generally, without distinction of white or black, &c. ‘‘ That,” unmanifested, substance, «^ which is this, then,’”’ at that time, manifests itself, by name and form, in the manner as it is said: He is of this name, this form. |
‘* He,” * for whom the whole Sastrat is commenced, upon whom by means of natural ignorance the notions of agent, ceremony and reward are transferred, who is the causet of the whole world, from whom, identical with his nature, name and form, not manifested before, are manifested, as dirty foam from clear water, and who, different from either, name and form, of his own nature is eternal, pure, intelligent and free, “he,” manifesting the before unmanifested name and form, which are identical with his own nature, ‘entered this world,’’ these bodies from Bramhé down to inanimate matter, dependent upon works and the consequences thereof, and subject to death and other evils.
° But it was said, that the unmanifested manifested itself; how can it now be maintained, that even the supreme soul, manifesting the un- manifested, entered this world ?’§ :
There is no fault in this; first, because the supreme soul was meant under the notion of the unmanifested world; for we said, that the un- manifested world, which produces the relations of a creator, agent, &c., and which is dependent upon the action of causes, &c., manifested itself; secondly, because the term ^^ this” is identical with the term ‘* manifested.’ As ^ this’? means manifested, when it has obtained the
* The Supreme Bramha.
t Viz. the Véda in its two parts, the Karma Kanda, which relates to ceremonies,
and the Jnana Kanda, which relates to the knowledge of Bramha.
‡ Viz. the only cause, without any difference of the mediate and material cause, as in the Sankhya system.
§ In other words, before it was not said of the soul, that it manifested the world, but it was said, that the unmanifested manifested itself. How is it there-
fore consistent with that doctrine to substitute here the notion of the soul for the notion of the unmanifested.
78 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
endless differences of ruler of the world and other agents, of cause, &c., so means “ that” unmanifested, when it has not emitted any of its differ- ences. The only difference* is, that the one is manifest, the other not manifest. In common life also the same word has different meanings according to the intention of the speaker, as if for instance it is said : The village is arrived, the village is empty. Sometimes the word vil- lage may only mean the dwellings, as in the sentence: the village is empty. Sometimes the inhabitants may be intended, as in the sentence : the village has arrived. Sometimes both meanings may be intended, as in the sentence: let him not enter the village. Thus also in the present case. If it is said: this manifested and unmanifested world, where there is no intention to separate them, the soul and the non-soul are meant. Further, this world, subject to production and destruction, means the world alone. Further, the soul, which is great, not pro- duced, not extended, which is not this, which is not that, means the soul alone.
< But how can it be thought that ‘he entered’ the world, manifested by the supreme manifestor, and everywhere and at every time pervaded by him? For a country, which is not entered before, may be entered by any thing of limited extent, as for instance a village by a man, &c., but not by any thing without limit, as for instance the ether, because from its nature it is always present. If he entered it, as a snake a stone, by a modification of qualities,t we may grant such a modification for the snake, but not for the supreme soul, because he entered even with his nature. Ifit be supposed, that, abiding in the effect (the world) he was produced by a modification of qualities, and that by this he entered, as a snake, which is produced at the same time, abides in the stone, or water in a cocoa-nut, we object, because the Sruti says: hav- ing created that he entered it; for here it is evident, that the creator himself, without assuming another mode of existence, when he had created the world, entered it afterwards. Thus it is said: having en-
* Between the world in its former and in its present state.
+ The snake can be considered as a modification of the stone, because according to the VédAnta, both are productions of the five elements; therefore there is no contradiction in considering the snake a modification of the five elements which abide in a stone. In the same manner it may be thought, that the infinite soul entered the intellect and other creations by its modification as life.
First Chapter. Third Brdmhana. 79
joyed he goes. There also is a mutual difference between the actions of enjoying and going, referring to the past and present time, but the agent is the same. The same case is here, and it cannot be thought that a modification of existence of him who abides in this effect, is produced. |
Nor accords the idea of an entrance, which denotes the separation from one place and the connexion with another, with the tdea of the soul, which is without parts and without limits. If it be supposed, that the Sruti refers to an entrance, where parts are admitted, we deny this on the authority of such passages of the Sruti as: for he is radiant, without form, he is complete, without parts, without actions ; we deny it also on the authority of such passages as prohibit the application of any differences of qualities whatsoever fo the soul.
Nor entered he the world as an image, as there is no separation of a second thing. |
Nor did he enter it as a quality enters a substance, because he does not depend upon any thing ; for a quality indeed, which in every way depends upon another thing, is considered to enter a substance, but not so Bramha, as depending upon himself according to the Sruti.
Nor as a seed the fruit, because such attributes as an increase and decrease of its parts, a production and destruction, are assigned to this relation; but there are no such attributes of Bramha, of whom it is said in the Sruti: He is not produced, he is without age, &c.
Nor as another separate body; for from the passage of the Sruti: This deity reflected, let me manifest name and form, it is clear that the same deity, which enters, also manifests and acts. Also from these passages : ‘‘ Having created this, he entered it,” and : ^^ Having opened the place, where the hairs divide, he entered by this door.’’* Having considered all forms, having made all names, the hero sits inclined.” ‘‘Thou, O youth, or thou, O maid, thou, old man with a staff, spends thy time,” it follows, that no other enters but the supreme soul.t
* Aittariya Up. 3 Vol. 11 P., that is to say, having opened the middle part of the skull, where the hairs divide, he entered the body by this opening.
¶ The first part of the argument was to prove, that it is the supreme 809) which enters ; the second is to show, that the supreme soul is not affected in its nature by his entrance.
30 Brihad Araayaka Upanishad.
If it be thought, that there is a multiplicity in the supreme soul, in consequence of the natural differences of the things which he entered, we object from passages of the Srutias: ‘‘One god he sits at many places; being one, he proceeded to many places. Thou, although one, hast entered many. One god art thou concealed in all beings thou pervadest all; thou art the soul within all beings.”
‘We shall at present not enquire, whether the idea of entering has been established or not ; but it is clear, that the supreme soul has a worldly form, because the things which he entered, have a worldly form, and are not different from the soul?
We deny this, because the Sruti says: He overcomes death.
If it is thought that he is in a worldly state, on the ground that he is subject to happiness and unhappiness, we object ; for the Sruti says: ‘‘ He is not tainted with the unhappiness of the world, he is free from it.”
If you say, this is improper, because it is at variance with percep- tion,* we do not agree, because the difference in objects of perception or other sources of knowledge is only produced by the notion of depend- ance on attributes.t Such passages of the Sruti as: ^^ Thou doest not behold the beholder of the visible.’ ‘‘ How could one know him who knows 7? Unknown is he who knows—prove that knowledge has no reference to the soul.t
To what then? Knowledge from perception, declared in such sen- tences as: Iam happy, I am unhappy, is the object of the image of the soul, which is reflected in the intellect and in other attributes.
The same is also shown by the fiction of the identity of the percep- tible object (the body) and the subject which perceives (the soul) in a sentence like this, I am this§ (body). It follows also from the pas- sage of the Sruti : ^° There is none else but him who sees,”’ by which the idea of another soul is prohibited.
If you say, that happiness and unhappiness are qualities of the body,
* With individual perception, as in common life, people say: I am happy, I am unhappy.
¢ And therefore not by the soul, as attributes do not really belong to the soul,
‡ Accordingly no perception, for instance, I am happy, I am unhappy.
§ Because here the soul, which is endowed with the perceptible object, the body, is an object of perception, and therefore the soul in itself is not in a worldly state.
First Chapter. Fourth Brémhana. 81 -
because both must be predicated of parts of the body,* and that there- fore from the passage of the Sruti: ‘ For the sake of the desire of the soul,’’+ it is improper to maintain, that the soul is free from the world ?—-we do not agree, because the passage of the Sruti: ^ Where it is, as it were, some other thing,’’ shows, that it is for the sake of the soul, which is in the state of ignorance. From such passages: “‘ How can it behold any one.” (B. A. 4th A. Sth B. 15. Bib. I. V. 11. p. 929.) ‘There is no difference whatsoever with regard to him. (K. U. 4th. V. 11. B. I. ए. VIIL. p. 130.) ‘ There is no delusion, no grief,” (Vaj. S. U. 7. B. I. Vol. VIII. 14) which refer to knowledge, it also follows, that unhappiness, as prohibited in them, is no quality of the soul.
If it is said, ‘that the unworldly state of the soul cannot be admitted as contradictory to the argument of logicians’,t we deny this, because by reasoning algo it can be proved that the soul is free from unhappiness ; for unhappiness, which is an object of perception, cannot be attributed to the soul, which is no object of perception. If you say, ‘that unhap- piness is in the same manner a quality of the soul, as the sound is a quality of the ether,’§ we deny this, because the soul and unhappi- ness are not objects of one and the same kind of knowledge ;|| for a knowledge of unhappiness, which is an object of perception, ean never
_ become an object of the soul, which is eternal, and can only be known by inference. Unhappiness cannot become an object of the soul for this reason also, that the soul, as one, is no object of anything whatsoever.
* On the ground, that every one who feels pain or pleasure in any part of the body, refers this part to himself, as if one says, ‘‘ my head aches.”’
+ The desire of happiness; but if happiness is granted, the contrary must be also admitted, because both are inseparable.
t Of the Vais’eshikas, according to whom the soul has the following fourteen qualities: intellect, pleasure, pain, desire, aversion, endeavour, number, quantity, severalty, conjunction and disjunction, faculty, merit and demerit.
§ Viz. the connexion between substance and quality, which exists between ether and sound, of which the one (sound) is perceptible, the other (ether) not percepti- ble, may also exist between soul and happiness.
|| This is in accordance with the principle, that where there is a relation between quality and substance, these are both perceived by. one and the same kind (source) of knowledge, as for instance a jar and its white colour.
M
ee । lyn | ) «|
Le Woy OR
82 Brikad A'ranyaka Upanishad.
If you maintain, ‘that, like a light, the soul, although one, is an object and manifests objects,’ we do not agree, because this is impossible at one and the same time,* and because the soul has no parts. Hence the idea, that there is a perception of knowledge, and that knowledge is at the same time perceived, cannot be admitted with reference to the soul.
If it is said: ‘ Unhappiness and soul, the one of which is an object of perception, the other of inference, are in relation of quality and sub- stance, as may be known by inference ; for unhappiness is constantly an object of perception, and has an equal dependence upon a substance, as form has,’ &c. Accordingly, as unhappiness is perceived by the soul through its union with the mind, such attributes as multiplicity, changeableness and transientness, must be also assigned to the soul ; for, without a change in the substance which is in contact, it is nowhere found that a quality is added or removed. Nor has it at any time been found that a substance which changes, is without parts, or that a substance whose qualities are transient, is eternal. Nor is the ether considered as an eternal thing by those who follow the Sruti. Nor is there any other case.t If you say, ‘ that a thing, although it changes may be eternal, because the knowledge, ‘ that is this,’ yet remains,’’— we deny this, because the notion of change cannot be thought without the notion of a change of the parts of the thing.
And if you say, ‘that a thing which has parts, may also be eternal,’ we deny this, because a thing that has parts, must before have been joined by a union of its parts, by which the idea of a separation is established. |
If you say, ‘ that this is contrary to perception, as if you see light- ning,’ we object, because we conclude that its parts have been joined before. Therefore it is impossible to conceive the idea that the soul is the site of unhappiness and other transient qualities.
And if you say, ‘on the supposition that the supreme soul is with- out unhappiness, and that there exists no other soul which is unhappy ;
* In accordance with the doctrine of the Nydya, that the mind, through whose agency every object, external or internal, is represented to the soul, can only perceive one object at one time.
¶ The supposition of atoms is meant; for the existence of atoms cannot be
proved by any evidence.
First Chapter. Fourth Brdmhana. 83
the 9६8४8, which is commenced for the purpose to remove unhappiness, is useless,’ we object, because it has the purpose to destroy the illusion of unhappiness, which is placed upon the soul by ignorance. And also because the unhappiness of the soul is only fictitious, and is removed in the same way, 88 a mistake in counting a common number, in which the person who counts, himself 18 included.*
As the image of the sun, &c. enters the water, so the entrance of the soul means the perceptibility of the soud in its effect which is mani- fested like a reflection. Before the production of the world the soul is not perceived ; afterwards being perceived within the intellect in the effect which is created, manifested, as the reflection of the sun &c. ts perceived in water, &९, it is defined, as it were, as entering after the creation of the effect. This is evident, for example, from the follow- ing passages :
«° He entered this world.” (B. A. U. Ist Adh. 3d B. 7. B. I. Vol. II. p. 155.) ‘ Having created this world, he verily entered it.”’ (Taittariya U. 2d Adh. 6th Anu. B. I. Vol. VII. p. 90.) “ Having opened the place, where the hair is divided, he entered by this door.” (Aitt. ए. 3 Kh. 12 Varga B.I. Vol. VII. p. 198.) ‘This deity reflected: Verily, I am these three deities.” (Chh. U. 6th Prapa. 3 Kh. B. I. Vol. III. p. 406.) ‘“‘ Having entered by this life, soul, &c.” {Chh. U. 6th Prapa. 3d Kh. B. I. Vol. III. pp. 407—411.)
This is meant by the entering of the soul, but we say, it is impossi- ble, that the soul which is all-pervading and without parts, has ever a real entrance, the notion of which is to proceed from one part of space, place, or time to another.
Moreover there is nothing else but the supreme soul, as we said before in accordance with such passages of the Sruti as the following :
* This seems to refer to the following tale. Ten friends having crossed a danger- ous river, were anxious to know, whether any of them had been lost, and accord- ingly one of them commenced to count, but omitting himself(A’tma, meaning the soul and himeelf,) found of course, that there were only nine. The others successively counted also, but doing it in the same manner as the first, the re- sult was the same. Upon this they thought, that one had perished in the river, and broke out in lamentations. A stranger who passed by, perceived the cause of their error, and explaining it to them satisfactorily, changed their distress into rejoicing,
M 2
84 Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.
Until the ends of the nails, as a razor is placed in a razor- case, or Viswambhara in the dwelling of Viswambhara. They
‘‘ There is nothing else that sees, hears, &c. but he.” (B. A. 3rd A. 6th B. 11. B. I. Vol. II. p. 637.)
And the notions of creation, entrance, preservation, and destruction are merely formed for the apprehension of the soul. Again the ap- prehension of the soul is enjoined for the sake of final liberation, which is evident from such passages of the Sruti as :
० He knew the soul.” (®. A. Ist Adh. 4th B. 10. ए. I. Vol. IT. p. 198.) ‘Therefore he was this all.” (B.A. p. 209.) ‘‘He who knows Bramha, obtains liberation.” (Taitt. 26 A. 1 Anuv. 1 Kh. B. 1. Vol. VII. p. 37.) “प्र who knows the supreme Bramha, verily becomes Bramha.”” (3 Mund. U. 2 Kh. 9 M. B. I. and Vol. VIIL 7. 323.) ‘The person who has a teacher, knows Bramha.” (Chh. U. 6 Prapa. 14 Kh. B.I. Vol. III. p. 459.) * He lives as long’’ (as he has not obtained liberation.) (Chh. U. 6th P. 14th KI. B. I. Vol. III. p- 460). It is also evident from passages of the Smriti as: ‘ Then forthwith.” (Bh. ©, 18th Adh. 55.) Having known me in truth, he enters me. ^^ For it (the knowledge of Bramha) is the highest knowledge; for immortality is thereby gained.” (Manu 8. 12th Add. 85.)
And the passages with regard to a creation, &c. serve for the pur- pose to establish the knowledge of the identity of the soul, because the notion of difference is prohibited. Therefore the entrance means the perceptibility of the soul, as far as it abides in its effect.
** Until the ends of the nails.” (Vide. p. 78.) This means, to the ends of the nails the consciousness of the soul extends. How did he enter the world? The answer 18 : As in common life, ^ a razor is perceived as placed in a razor-case, or as Viswambhara, which means fire,—so called from its supporting (bhara), the world, Viswa,—is concealed ina nest, viz. in wood, &c.,—it is there; for on rubbing wood, &c. fire 18 €. ceived,—and as a razor is placed on one side of the case, and as fire is everywhere pervading wood, &c. so, the soul, generally and speci- ally, abides pervading the body. For there it is observed, performing the functions of inspiration, &c. and of seeing, &९, Therefore “ they do not behold,” do not apprehend ^ him” the soul, which has entered there, endowed as it is with inspiration, &c., seeing and other functions.
First Chapter. Fourth Brdmhana. 85
do not behold him. For when incomplete, when inspiring only, it is called life, when speaking, speech, when seeing, sight, when
But is not in the sentence: «^ They do not behold him,” a prohi- bition of a thing, which has not been obtained before? for, no doubt, the beholding has not been obtained in our text.
There 1870 fault in this, for in the passages, relative to the creation, preservation, &c. which were directed towards the acquirement of the knowledge, that the soul is identical, the beholding (knowledge) of it (of the soul) has been introduced. Thus a Mantra declares: “ Being of this and that form, he became every form for the sake of being 86९0. (Kath. U. 5 ए, 9-10 Mantr. B. I. Vol. VIII. p. 138. ए. A. U. 2 A. 5 Bramh. 19 Kh. B. I. Vol. II. p. 600 p. 23.)
The reason, why the soul having the functions of inspiration, expira- 7028, &c. 18 not apprehended, is given in the words: ‘ For when in- complete ;” because it is not perfect, when inspiring or performing other functions. Whence again proceeds the incompleteness? The answer is: for by “inspiring” performing the function of inspiration
(Praénana) it is called life (Prana) for by performing the function of inspiration (Prdénana) life (Praga) inspires, that is to say, performs no other function, as a wood-cutter, or a cook ts so called from his sper cial work. Therefore because it does not include the other functions, it is incomplete.
In the same manner, ^^ when speaking,” performing the function of speaking, it is called speech, ‘‘ when seeing,” it is called sight; for because the beholder sees (chashte) therefore it is called eye (chakshu :) ; when hearing (srinwan), it is called ear (srotram.) By the words: ‘‘ when inspiring, it is called life, when speaking, speech,’’ the origin of the power of action is shown, by the words ‘when seeing, sight, when hearing, ear,” the origin of the power of knowledge; for the objects of the power of knowledge are name and form ; for nothing is an object of knowledge, unless having name and form. The organs of perceiving them are the eye and the ear, and the action, to be performed by name and form, is intimately united with life. The organ of the manifestation of this action, which depends upon life, is the word. In this manner speech is mentioned here in illustration of
86 Brikad A'ranyaka Upanishad.
hearing, ear, when minding, mind. These are the names of its actions. Whosoever worships one or the other special being, separate from that totality, he does not know, for that soul is incomplete $ it is determined by this or that individual function. The soul; considering this, Jef a man worship it; for in it all these differences become one.
the other organs of action, viz. the hand, foot, and the organs of ex- cretion and generation ; for it will afterwards be said: ‘‘ for this all is manifested, or this threefold, name, form and action.” (ए, A. 2d A. Ist B. Ist Kh. B. I. Vol. II. p. 313.)
** When minding, mind.”” Mind (mana:) is derived_from minding (manuté), and it is the general organ of the manifestation of the power of knowledge.
These names of inspiration, &c. are the names of “its,” the soul’s, ‘actions,’ that is to say, produced from actions. They are names of action, as it were, but not objects of the substance, (of the soul) alone ; therefore they do not manifest the whole substance of the soul; for in this manner the soul, although manifested by the action of inspiration, &c. and by its forms and names, derived from its different actions, is still not completely apprehended.
५८ Whosoever worships this or the other special being,—”’ separated from its totality as inspiration, &c. for instance life, or the eye, as a being, unmodified by the totality of the other special actions,—whoso- ever worships this in his mind under the notion, that it is the soul, **he does not know” Bramha. Why ? ^ for that soul is incomplete,”’ not whole, because this soul, as separated from this totality of inspiration, &c. seeing, §ec. and determined only by one or the other determining action, excludes all the other attributes. As long as a person knows himself only as determined by the activity of his own nature, which appears in such sentences as: ‘I see,’’ “ I hear,” “I touch,” &c. 80 long he does not know perfectly the complete soul. =,
How again seeing does he know? The text answers: ‘The soul ;” for it is called soul (Atma) because it unites (obtains, Apnuvan) all the above mentioned different functions of life, &c. The soul, in this manner including all differences, becomes all; for only in its notion as
First Chapter. Fourth Brémhana. 87
substance it unites (obtains) the differences, produced by actions of inspiration, &c. which are the fictitious attributes of the soul. For instance it will be said: ‘ He thinks, as it were, he proceeds, as it were.” (B. A. 4th A. 3rd B. 8th Kh. B. I. Vol. II. p. 730.) There- fore ‘‘The soul, considering this, let a man worship it ;’’ for in this manner the whole soul is comprehended by its own notion as sub- stance. Why is it the whole? Under this doubt it is said in the text: “For in it,” * for,” because, ‘‘in it,’ in this soul, when consi- dered without fictitious attributes, like the different reflections of the sun in water, the above mentioned differences as life, &c. which are fictitious attributes of the soul, and bear different names from their different functions as inspiration, &c ‘become one,” obtain indifference, therefore ‘‘the soul; considering this, let a man wor- ship it.”
The passage: “ The soul; considering this, let a man worship, it is mot a regulation, by which the acquirement of something not acquired before is enjoined, as it is acquired on our part; for the knowledge whose object is the soul, is produced by passages of the Sruti, intended to produce the idea of the supreme soul, for instance: ‘ That present, perceptible Bramha,” (ए. A. 3rd A. 4th ए. 2 Kh. B. I. Vol. IT. p. 575.) ‘“* Which is soul.” (ए, A. 4th A. 3rd B. Ist Kh. B, I. Vol. I. p- 723.) Whose natare is knowledge, &c. (B. A. p. 305.)
There by the knowledge of the nature of the soul is removed the ignorance, which is the misunderstanding that the non-soul is the soul, and which creates the fictions of agent, &c. rite and reward. If this sgnorance is removed, the thinking of the non-soul is impossible, because
` desires and other faults are impossible. It remains at last only the thinking of the soul. Therefore the worship of the soul is on our part not enjoined ; for it is acquired.
We will not now discuss, whether the acquirement of the worship of the soul is called proceeding from the text, or permanent, but at any rate it is regulation for something not acquired before, because, if knowledge and worship are the same, it was not acquired Jefore, and the identity of the terms of ‘“‘ knowledge” and “ worship,”’ is evident from the passage of the Sruti, commencing: ‘He does not know,” where knowledge is praised, and concluding: ‘‘The soul; considering this, let a man worship it,” (B. A. p. 173), for by such passages of
88 Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.
the Sruti as: ^ By this he knows this all.” (B.A. p. 185), and: « He knew the soul,” &. (B.A. p. 198), knowledge is the same as worship, and as it was not acquired before, it is also the object of a rule.
Nor show people any activity, if only the nature of a thing is related. Therefore that passage is a regulation for acquiring some- thing not acquired before.
This follows also from its being identical with a regulation concern- ing rites. As the regulations concerning rites enjoin by such words as: ‘Let him sacrifice,” ‘let him offer,” so by similar words as: ‘¢Let a man worship it,” and: “The soul should be seen,” &c. the worship of the soul is enjoined, wherefore there appears no dif- ference between a regulation enjoining the worship of the supreme soul and the former regulations.
This follows also from the reason, that knowledge is an act of the mind. As a person, by whom an oblation is taken for a deity, should reflect on this deity in his mind, before performing a sacrifice, which is commenced by the word: ‘* Vashad,”’ by which this and other ceremonies are proved as acts of the mind, so the passage: ‘*Let a man worship,” indicates, that the soul 18 to be thought of, to be meditated upon, (ए. A. A, 2d A. 4th ए. 5th Kh. B.I. र. II. 7. 450,) and that the act therefore refers to knowledge. In this manner we maintained that the terms “to know’ (Véda) and °" to worship” had the same meaning.
This follows also from the reason that our passage possesses the three parts of a regulation. For instance in the regulation: ‘ Let him sacrifice,” &c. viz. what, by what means, and how, the three parts, by which future desires are removed, clearly appear. In the same manner, if the regulation: ‘ Let a man worship,” is about to be fixed, and at the same time the intention, what is to be worshipped, by what means or how, the three parts are established by a passage like this: ¶ Let him who is intent on the duties of abstinence (trom desires that are forbidden) of the observances of a religious student, of tranquillity and self-restraint, of resting (from all ceremonies), endurance, &c. worship the soul by the mind.”
And as by the enunciation of the regulation for the Dars'apuirnamasa, &c. the application of all its parts is established, so by the enunciation
First Chapter. Fourth Brdimhana. 69
of the regulation for the worship of the soul ts established the appli- eation of the subject of the worship of the soul as found in all the Upanishads. The application of passages as: ^^ He is not this, he is not that. (B. X. 2d A. 3 B. 6th K. B. J. V. II. p. 435.) ^ Without gross body,” one, without duality. (Chh. U. 6 P. 2 K. p. 387.) «° [त € overcomes death,’’ &c. is made by showing the speciality of the nature of the soul which 18 to be worshipped. And the reward is liberation or cessation from ignorance.,
Others say: ‘By worshipping should be produced another special knowledge whose object is the soul. By this alone the soul is known, and ignorance also removed. The knowledge, produced by the word of the Véda, has not the soul for its object. This sense is also supported by such passages as: ‘* Having known, let him form his knowledge :’’ <“ He is to be seen, to be heard, to be thought of, to be contemplated, to be searched, to be enquired.” ’
We do not admit the latter riew, because its meaning does not differ from the former. Nor is the passage: ‘‘ The soul, therefore, let him worship it,” a regulation for something, not acquired before. Why ? The words, referring to the nature of the soul, have no other meaning, of any thing to be dune by the mind or the external senses, beside the knowledge, produced by the prohibiting sentences with reference to the non-soul.* For there a rule has taken effect, where, beside the knowledge produced by merely hearing the words, a person is observed as engaged in its execution, as by the rule of the Dars‘aptirnamasa: ‘‘ Let him, who is desirous of heaven, sacrifice ;” for the knowledge, produced by the words for the regulation of the Dars‘apirpamasa, is not also the performance of its ceremonies. This is dependent on a perfect knowledge and the other requisites ; but here, on the other hand, beside the knowledge, produced by the passage viz. “ He 18 not this, he is not that,’’ establishing the idea of the soul, there arises no activity, asit does with regard to the ceremonies of the Dars‘apirnamasa, &c. and this for the reason, that the knowledge, pro- duced by that passage, causes the cessation of every activity ; for the knowledge of a person who is unconcerned in any worldly affair,
* That is to say, the sentences which declare the nature of the soul, have the
same meaning as sentences, which prohibit to comprehend the soul by attributes of the non-soul.
N
90 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.,
does not produce activity, because such sentences as: ^^ He is one without duality.” (Chh. ए. 6 Prap. 2 Kh. B. J. Vol. III. pp. 387, 389, 398.) ^“ That art thou,’ (&c. pp. 448, 457, 453, 455, 461.) anni- hilate the’ knowledge relative to non-Bramha, or the non-soul. And this knowledge being annihilated, no desire for action arises ; for it would be contradictory.
If it is said, ‘that by the knowledge alone, produced by such pas- sages (as established the nature of Bramha) there is no annihilation of the knowledge of a non-Bramha, or a non-soul,’ we contradict, because it is proved by such passages as: ‘That art thou,” “It is not this,” ° £ is not that,” “This is the soul,” ^ One immortal Bramha without duality is this,’’ ‘* There is none who sees, &c. but him,” ^^ Know this alone 98 Bramha.”’ (Kéna U. 4, B. I. Vol. VIII. p. 43.)
Nor do those passages set forth the object of a rule with reference ¢o Bramha to be seen, &c. because this, as we already said, does not differ from the meaning first stated. And we said before, that,—because by passages, setting forth the true nature of the soul, such as: ‘¢That art thou,” the knowledge of the soul was established at the time of hearing them,—no performance, different from the regulation for the object of the seeing, was necessary.*
1. Ifyou say, ‘that, without a rule, by the mere declaration of the nature of the soul, a knowledge of the soul could not arise,’ we object, because the knowledge of the soul is produced by hearing passages setting forth the soul, and why do you want to do once more what has been done already ?
2. Ifyou say, ‘knowledge does not arise by hearing such pas- sages, we do not admit this, because we should otherwise have a retrogress in infinitum. For as (according to your opinion) by hearing the meanings of passages, declaring the soul, without a regulation, knowledge does not arise, it would follow, that also by hearing the meanings of the words of the regulation, knowledge could not arise without a regulation, and this would require another regulation.
* Where then is the regulation? If there is one, it either takes place—1, with reference to the knowledge of the soul, or 2, to the hearing of the passage, setting forth the knowledge of the soul, or 3, to the continuation of the recollection of its meaning, or 4, to the subduing of the state of the mind. But in all these cases it is impossible, as will be shown presently. A. G.
First Chapter. Fourth Brémhana. 91
The same would take place on hearing the latter, so that a retrogress in infinitum is evident, (by your assumption.)
3. Further, if you assume, ‘that by the continuation of the recol- lection of the knowledge of the soul, arising from Véddic passages, & meaning is produced, different from the knowledge of what is merely heard, (and that therefore a regulation is necessary)’ we do not agree on the ground, that the meaning has been obtained. At the time indeed that the knowledge, whose object is the soul, arises from hearing passages which produce ¢he idea of the soul, at the same time this knowledge, at the moment of its production, annihilates the false knowledge with reference to itself. And if the false knowledge whose object is the soul, is annihilated, the natural recollections also, which are the effects of that false knowledge and which manifest the differ- ences of a substance not the soul, cease to exist.
This follows also from the knowledge of the unreality of every other thing ; for if the knowledge of the soul is true, it is also known, that every other substance is unreal, as tainted with transientness, unhappi- ness, impurity and many other faults; also from the fact, that the sub- stance of the soul is free from them. Therefore, if the soul is known, there are no longer any recollections of a knowledge with reference to a non-soul. And as at last there exists in reality a continual recollection of the knowledge only of the soul, no regulation can be established.
This follows also from the annihilation of वा faults, as grief, delusion, fear, weariness and other kinds of unhappiness ;* for grief, delusion and other faults arise from a knowledge, contrary to that recollec- tion, as is proved by such passages of the Srutias: ‘“‘ What delusion is there.” (Vajan. S. U. B.I. Vol. VII. p. 14.) ‘The wise is not afraid.”’ ^ You have, O Janaka, obtained fearlessless.” (Br. A. p. 702.) ‘The bonds of the heart are broken,” &c. (Mund. 2d Kh. 8th M. B. I. Vol. VII. p. 302.)
4. Ifyou say, ‘but then subduing has another meaning ; there- fore there ought to be a regulation ; for the subduing of the state of the mind (Chitta) has a meaning different from the knowledge, produced by the words of the Véda. And in other philosophical systemst also
* This may also be rendered .... and other kinds of unhappiness, which is effected by that recollection ; for grief, delusion and other faults arise from. a contrary knowledge. ¶ In the Yogusastra.
N 2
92 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
the nature of a rule is known by that which is to be done.’ We deny this, because it (the subduing of the state of the mind) is not known as effecting liberation ; fur in the Védanta nothing else but the knowledge of the soul as 2378718 is considered as effecting the final end of man. This follows from a hundred passages such as these: ^“ परि € knows the soul alone ; hence he became this all.’”’ (B. A. p. 209.) ‘The knower of Bramha obtains the supreme Bramha.” (Taittiriya U. 2d. A. 1 A. 1. M. B. I. Vol. VII. p. 51.) ^ Whosoever verily knows the supreme Bramha, becomes Bramha.” ‘A person who has a teacher, knows.” (Chh. 6th P. 14th K. B. J. V. 1. p. 459.) ‘To him all becomes for ever without fear.’’ ^" Whosoever thus knows, becomes Bramha,” &c.
Moreover the aforesaid subduing depends not upon another cause ; for beside the uninterrupted recollection of the knowledge of the soul, no other cause exists for the subduing of the state of the soul, and in this sense it has been stated before ;* without a knowledge of Bramha, however, nothing can be thought as cause of liberation.
Further, there is no intention, and therefore is no regulation. What has been said ९९०7९, ‘that, as an intention with regard to a regula- tion,—for instance when it is said: „^ Let him sacrifice,’ where the three parts of a regulation, viz. what, by what means, and how, are present,—is removed by understanding the effect, cause and the necessary acts, so it is also here established with reference to the regulation for the knowledge of the soul,’ we say, this is not true, be- cause every intention is annihilated at the very time, when the meaning of passages as the following is understood: ‘‘One even without dua- lity.’ ‘That art thou.” ‘He is not this, he is not that.” ‘* That soul, which is not within, which is not without, is Bramha,”’ &c.
Nor is the application of a regulation possible, in order to understand the meaning of a sentence. And we have already explained the fault of a regress in infinitum, following from the application of another rule.
Further, no rule can be understood to proceed from passages such as : ‘¢One Bramha even without duality,” because it is abolished by the declaration of the nature of the soul.
And if you say, ‘there is no proof that this takes place by the mere declaration of the nature of a substance. For instance as in the
* Viz. that the state of the mind, beside the knowledge of the soul, has no other cause.
First Chapter. Fourth Brdémhana. 93
passage: ‘‘ He wept (arodit) ; because he wept, therefore Rudra (a name of fire) obtained the name of Rudra,” (Taitt. S. 5th Pr. 18६ Kh.) there is no proof by the mere declaration of the nature of the substance, so there is also no proof in passages, setting forth the nature of the soul,’ —we object, because there is a difference. Neither the declaration of the nature of a thing, nor the declaration of rites is the cause of the proof or non-proof of a passage of the Védas, but it is the production of knowledge, united with its necessary effect. Where such a passage is met with, it is also proved, and where not, it is not proved.
Moreover we would ask you: Do you admit, that in passages, engaged in declaring the nature of Bramha, a determined knowledge, which is at the same time united with its effect, is produced, or 18 not produced? If it is produced, why is it not proved? Do you not see the effect of the knowledge in the disappearance of the faults of ig- norance, grief, delusion, fear, &c. which are the causes of the world? Or do you not hear: What delusion, what grief is there for one who knows the identity. (V. U. A. 7, p.14.) ‘I know even Mantras, not the soul.” ^ Being such, U most venerable, I am grieved. O vene- rable, do teach me to overcome grief.’ And of the same kind there are a hundred other passages of the Upanishads.
Is then in such passages as: ^ He wept,’ &c. the knowledge a determined one and united with its effect, or is 2४ not? If it is not, we may admit, that there 18 no proof for it. If there is no proof for it, what does it matter with reference to the passage, producing the know- ledge, which is determined and united with its effect? And if there 18 no proof for the latter, what confidence can be placed in passages, referring to the Dars4puirnamdasa and other ceremonies ?
‘ But are the passages, referring to the Darsdptirpamasa and other ceremonies, not proved by their producing a knowledge, causing man to act? The same is not found in passages, referring to the knowledge of the soul.’
This is true; however, it is no fault, because we have obtained that which is the cause of proof. The cause of proof, namely, is what has before been mentioned,* and nothing else.t This, however, is
* Viz. such passages as produce a knowledge which is determined and at the same time united with its effect.
¶ For the cause of a proof is neither that which produces a knowledge, by which
94 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
rather a merit than a fault, because, if there is something, producing a knowledge united with its effect, which annihilates the cause of every action, it cannot be maintained, that there is no proof of the passages, producing the knowledge of the soul.
° But passages, mentioned before, such as: ^ Having known, let him form his knowledge,’’ are rather destined for the cause of worship, without the knowledge of the meanings of the passages.” This we admit; but they do not refer to a rule for something not acquired before, but to what has been necessarily acquired in our text.
‘ How again can the worship of the soul have been acquired in the text? Forit has been said, that by the annihilation of the non-soul, there remains at last the permanent continuation of the recollection of the knowledge of the soul.’* Very good. If this is the case, although perfect knowledge has been obtained, yet by the necessary effects of works which are the causes of the assumption of a body (transmigra- tion) activity will be indispensable ; for action, having gained entrance in word, thought and body, is more powerful than is the velocity of arrows, &c. when in motion. Hence the efficacy of knowledge, acquired in the course of discussion, is weak. Therefore we said before, that the uninterrupted recollection of the knowledge of the soul is to be effected by dependance upon the force of abandoning all worldly desires, of indifference to them and of the other essential causes ; but it is not a regulation for something, not acquired before, because the idea of a necessity to act has not been obtained. Accordingly such pas- sages as: ‘‘ Having known let him form his knowledge,”’ are intended to establish a rule for the uninterrupted recollection of a knowledge, which is obtained ; for another meaning is impossible.
‘By employing the term ‘considering this,” (vide. p. 86.) the worship of the non-soult (under the idea of the soul) is rather enjoined,
action is produced, because otherwise no proof of passages were possible, by which something is forbidden,—nor that which produces a knowledge prohibitory of au action, because otherwise no proof of passages were possible which enjoin action, —nor that which is different from either, because, in this case, no proof were possi- . ble in accordance with the first supposition.
* That is to say, it has not been obtained from the text, but from something else, not connected with it, viz. the annihilation of the idea of the non-soul.
¶† This is an objection in the view of the Sénkhyas viz. the non-soul is the
First Chapter. Fourth Brdmhava. 95
as if it were said: ‘the dear, considering this worship 1४. Here is not the quality of ‘‘ dear’ to be worshipped, but ६४८ worship of life, &c. which has the quality of ^ dear,”’ &c. is here enjoined. In the same manner it must also be understood in the passage under consideration, that by employing the term ‘the supreme soul,”’ the substance of the non-soul, determined by the qualities of the soul, is to be worshipped. This is also clear from the difference of that passage from any other, where the worship of the soul is enjoined. Thus for instance it will afterwards be said: ‘ Worship the soul as the place of dependance.”’ In this sentence the worship of the soul is evidently intended by using the accusative case. In the sentence under consideration, however, the accusative is not employed, and there “the soul, considering this worship” the term ‘soul’? means something different. Therefore it is evident, that not the worship of the soul is enjoined, but of something else possessed of the qualities of the soul.’
We deny this, for as at the eud of the passage the idea of the wor- ship of the soul is understood ; it is also understood, that the soul alone is to be worshipped, viz. ^° This, even this is to be conceived in this all, viz. this soul,”’ ^“ Because this soul is more internal,’’ “‘He knew the soul.”
If you say ‘that there does not arise the notion of the worship (of the soul) asthe beholding is prohibited for him who entered ; for which soul is said to enter, for the same the beholding is forbidden, as it is evident from the passage, obtained in the text, viz. ‘They do not behold him,” (p. 85.) Accordingly the soul is no object of worship.’
We deny this, for the beholding is merely prohibited, in consequence of the fault of non-totality, with the intention to guard against the fault of non-totality, not with the intention to guard against the wor- ship of the soul, because the soul is determined in that passage by the differences of inspiration and other actions. |
And if you say, ‘that the worship of the soul was not intended,’ the consequence were, that the passage, referring to the non-totality of the soul, which is determined by individual functions, as inspiration, &c.
Pradhana (the chief) or Mala Prakriti (nature as the root of all things) which, according to the passage, would obtain the attributes of the soul, or the non-sowl is to be thought of uader the attributes of the soul.
€
96 Brihad Arenyaka Upenished.
This, even this is to be conceived in this all, viz. This soul; fur by this, one knows this all. As verily by a foot-print one
a a 0 क >> eee
would be without use, viz. ‘‘ for that soul is incomplete ; it is determined only by this or the other individual function,” (vide p. 86.) Hence itis proved, that the soul, possessed of many functions, on account of its to- tality, is an object of worship. The final application, however, of the term ‘‘soul”’ after the term °" considering this,” is in truth only to show that the real notion of the soul is no object whatever of the inflective base of the word atman (soul) and its inflectional terminations, (that is to say, the supreme soul cannot be described by any words,) other- wise the accusative case would have been used: ‘ Let him worship the soul.” If this were the meaning, (that is, if, without the formula ° con- sidering this’’ the word 4tm4 should be applied) then the inflective base and one of its terminations would be applied to the soul. But this is not admitted, as is clear from such passages of the Sruti as : “ It is not this, it is not that,” ‘How should one know him who knows,” «« Unknown is he who knows.”” (B. A. p. 473.) =“ From whom words and the mind return, without having obtained him.” (Taitt. U. 2d A. 9A. B. J. Vol. VII. p. 119.) The passage, however: “Let him worship the soul as the place,’ is not a different word, because it is designed to remove the worship of the non-soul.
If it is said: ‘ Both the soul and non-soul are to be known, as they have the common notion of not being perfectly known. Why then is here made an effort to worship the soul alone, as it is said: ^^ The soul, considering this let one worship it,”’ and not also an effort with regard to the other knowledge?’ The answer to this is: ^^ This, even this,’’ which is obtained in the text, “is to be conceived,’’ to be comprehended, nothing else, ‘‘ in this all” (the sixth case tn Sanscrit, ‘* Asya Sarvvasya,” 18, for the sake of determination, used for the seventh, ^“ Asmin Sarvvasmin,”’) ‘this soul,”’ the nature of the soul. Shall this not be known? Jf so, why not also what is different? Because, when known, another knowledge is not required, different Jrom the knowledge of the soul. Why? ‘for,’ because, ‘* by this,”’ knowledge of the soul, ‘one knows this all,’’ all this other which is non-soul,
If the objection is made, ‘ by another knowledge is not known another
%
First Chapter. Fourth Brémhana. 97
finds cattle, so a person who thus knows, finds fame and com- pleteness. 7.
thing,’ we shall refute it afterwards by the passage, referring to the drum, &c. (B. A. U. p. 452.)
How again is this to be conceived? The answer is: ‘As verily,” in common life, ‘‘ by a foot-print’” (a foot-print is called a place marked by the hoof of a cow, &c.) ‘‘ one’? who makes a search by means of a foot-print, “ finds,”’ recovers, cattle that have been lost, and whose recovery is desired, thus, when the soul is obtained, all is obtained.
‘If the soul is known, all other is known, and knowledge, we may admit, is obtained in the text. But then how can it be called obtain- ing, a term which is not authorized by the text?’ This is not the case, because the terms of ^“ knowledge’ and of ^“ obtaining’ have one and the same meaning according to the intention of the speaker; for the non-obtaining of the soul is even ignorance. Therefore is knowledge the obtaining of the soul, and the obtaining of the soul is not,—like the obtaining of anything which is not the soul,—to be comprehended by the notion of an acquiring of what was not acquired before, because there is no difference (here) between the obtainer and what is to be obtained ; for where the non-soul is to be obtained by the soul, there is the soul the obtainer, and the non-soul what is to be obtained. This non-soul) is not acquired, as concealed by the action of producing, &c. and 18 to be obtained when producing a special action by the produc- tion of a special agent ; but it falls under the notion of an acquirement of something not acquired before, and is transient, because it is the effect of an action in accordance with a desire, produced by false knowledge, as the obtaining of a son in a dream. But the soul, which is contrary to the former (non-soul), is by its nature as soul not conceal: ed by the actions of production, &c. Therefore, as there exists the nature of something eternally obtained, is ignorance only concealment. As the non-apprehension of mother-of-pearl, although apprehended, * which appears through error as silver, is merely a concealment of the opposite knowledge, so 18 apprehension even mere knowledge, because knowledge has destroyed the concealment by the opposite knowledge. Thus in this case also is the non-obtaining of the soul the concealment
* According to its nature, adds A. 0
98 Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.
This is dearer than a son, dearer than wealth, dearer than any other thing, dearer than all, because this soul is more inter- nal. Whosoever says to one, saying any thing else to be dearer
of it merely by ignorance. Therefore by knowledge must be understood an obtaining, which annihilates ignorance merely, and no other obtaining. Therefore we shall say afterwards, that in respect of the obtaining of the soul, any cause, which has any meaning different from knowledge, is useless. Therefore the text, without any doubt, intending to set forth the identity of the terms of “knowledge” and ‘‘ obtaining,” after having mentioned knowledge in the text, says: ‘One finds’’ (as Vindati, °^ to find,” has the meaning of Labha “obtaining,” this is stated as the effect from the knowledge of the qualities.)
As that soul, by entering with name and form, acquired fame, viz. with the names and forms of the soul, &c., and as it obtained complete- ness (Sloka) that is to say the totality of life and other actions, so a person who thus knows, “ finds,’’ obtains, ‘ fame,” (kirti) celebrity, and ^“ completeness’’ (Sloka) a multitude of followers, together with his friends.
Or the passage may also thus be understood. A person who knows the substance in the declared manner, obtains the knowledge of iden- tity (which is understood by the term ‘‘kirti,’”’) desired by those who strive for liberation, and the fruit of that knowledge (which is under- stood by the term Sloka) liberation, that is to say, the principal fruit. 7.
And why then is the nature of the soul to be known without re- gard to other things? The answer is: “This,” the nature of the soul, ‘‘is dearer,’ more beloved, ‘ than a son ;’’ for a son is generally known as dear. By saying, that it is more beloved even than this, it is shown, how exceedingly dear it is. In the same manner it is dearer than ^“ wealth,”’ gold, jewels, &c , 10 the same manner “ dearer than any other thing,” which is generally known as dear, that is to say, therefore dearer than all.
Why then is the nature of the soul more beloved, why not rather life &c.? The answer is: The totality of life is more internal, is nearer the soul than what is external, a son, wealth, &c., «^ because this soul,” this nature of the soul, ‘‘is more internal” than what is more internal. For a person who in common life is exceedingly dear, must be obtained
First Chapter. Fourth Brdmhana. 99
than the soul: ^ What is dear, is to perish,” he is the lord, therefore verily it should be so. A person should worship as dear even the soul. Whosoever worships as dear the soul, to him is not dear a perishable object. 8.
by every effort. In this manner is the soul the dearest of all that is dear in common life, that is to say, great efforts should be made to obtain it. Why again, discarding an effort, considered as a duty, with regard to the obtaining of other dear objects, shall,—by the abandonment of either of the dear objects, the soul and non-soul,— with reference to the obtaining of the production of one, the abandon- ment of the other rather be made by the obtaining of the production of the soul,—why not the contrary ?
In reply to this it is said : ‘‘ Whosoever (viz. a person who holds that the soul is the dearest object) says to one saying any thing else,”’ some particular non-soul, for instance a son, &c., ‘to be more beloved than the soul,’ what? ‘‘ What is dear,” in thy opinion, a son or the like, ‘is to perish” (rotshyati) is to obtain concealment, or ceasing of life (Prénasanrodham) that is, “is to be destroyed.’’ On what ground can he say so? Because “ he is the lord,’’ because he is able, fit to say so, therefore it should be so, that he obtains the ceasing of life, as has been said by him ; for he is a speaker of truth; therefore he is the lord to say every thing. Some understand by the term ^" Fswara’”’ (which has before been explained by able, and whose original meaning 18 ruler, lord) ^^ quick.” If it is accomplished, then, abandoning every other dear object, a person should worship as dear only the soul. «५ Whosoever worships as dear even the soul, to him, it is considered, is the soul alone dear, and no other object. Having come to the certainty, that any other worldly object which is dear, is even tn reality not dear, he worships, he meditates ; ‘‘to him,’’ who thus knows, “is not dear a perishable object,’”’ an object whose nature is subject to death. This sentence (let him worship as dear even the soul) is ether only a repeti- tion of what is certain (of the sentence by which the knowledge of the soul is produced) because for one who knows the soul, nothing is dear or not dear, or it is said for the praise of the knowledge, that the soul ` is dear, or for the determination of the fruit of the attribute of ‘‘ dear,”
०2
100 Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.
This they declare to be the knowledge of Bramha by which men think, we shall become all. What then knew that Bramha, by which he became all ? 9.
because it is producing faith in the perishable nature of all dear objects in the mind of one whose knowledge of the soul is of a sluggish kind. 8.
The knowledge of Bramha has been declared in the aphorism: ‘* The soul, considering this, let a man worship it.” Wishing to explain this very aphorism, for which the whole Upanishad has been composed, the text exemplifies ४ under the desire of setting forth its necessity (end.)
‘‘ This,” viz. the thing to be set forth, to be manifested in the next sentence, ‘‘they declare’ they, viz. the Bramhanas, those who are desirous to know Bramha, having repaired to the Guru (spiritual teacher) the vessel over the future shoreless ocean of the pain of exer- tion, caused by the uninterrupted revolution of the wheel of birth, old age and death, who are desirous of crossing over to its shore, who are separated from the nature of cause and effect, viz. the cause of virtue and vice and its consequences, and who are desirous of obtaining the eternal incomparable good, free from those causes.
What do they declare? The answer is: ‘the knowledge of Bramha;’’ Bramha means the supreme soul ; the knowledge, by which this is comprehended, is the knowledge of Bramha, ^ men, think, we shall become all’’ the totality. The term ^ man,” is used for the pur- pose to indicate the special subject of this knowledge ;* for men alone are the subjects of effecting in a special manner either a state of elevationt or of liberation. This is the intention of the tent. As with regard to works they think, that fruits will necessarily follow from works, so they think, that from the knowledge of Bramha the fruit, which is the state of universal identity, will necessarily follow ; for as to their being proved by the Véda, there is no difference between them (the works and Bramha.)
Theret is something§ contradictory indicated. Therefore we ask; «What then knew that Bramha,” by whose knowledge men think,
* In the text is adhikéra, which means ‘‘ possession,’’ ‘* competent knowledge.” I translated adhikari, as conveying the idea more exactly.
{ In the scale of existence, viz. the state of happiness in the different worlds.
‡ In assigning to man the notion of subject.
§ Something means here the effect from knowledge. A. ©.
First Chapter. Fourth Brdmhana. 101
Bramha verily was this before; therefore he knew even the soul, (himself.)
we shall become all? What knew that, ‘by which,” knowledge, he became this all, and Bramha is all according to the Sruti.
If he, (Bramha) not entirely knowing any thing, became all, then it (all) may also belong to others, and of what use would then be the know- ledge of Bramha? If knowing something it became all, then, as it is effected by knowledge, all (the effect from knowledge) is like the effect from work, and therefore the notion of transientness is in fact applied. Moreover, the effect from a knowledge of Bramha, which (effect) is the State of the nature of all, has the fault of a regress into infinitum, namely knowing something else than this, he became all, and further knowing something else, &c. &८, However, if knowing all, it became all, there is not the fault of a contradiction of the meaning of the Séstra, and therefore not the fault of a transientness of the effect. If, knowing something only, this Bramha became all, we ask: ^ What then knew that Bramha, by which he became all 2” 9.
Having thus said, the text gives an answer, untouched by any blem- ish : ^ Bramha,” ‘viz. the inferior Bramha, because it is obtained under the notion of a ‘ cause of the nature of all; for it is impossi- ble to obtain by knowledge the nature of all with regard to the su- preme Bramha, and the text speaks of an obtaining of the nature of all by means of knowledge, in the words: ‘ Therefore this became all.” Therefore the words: ^ Bramha verily was this before,” cannot mean
any thing else but the inferior Bramha.’
Or: ‘By making man the subject of the knowledge, a Bramhana who is to become this Bramha, may be designated. For in the pas- sage: ^" Men think, we shall become all,”’* men are obtained in the text, and it is said, that they are in a special manner the subjects to effect elevation or liberation; this is not said either of the su- preme Bramha, or of the inferior Prajépati. Therefore, on account of his knowledge of Bramha, is here designated a Bramha (Brémhana), who is to become a supreme Bramha, who by the knowledge of the inferior
* Here the opinion of the Vrittikrits is given, which is the view of the Bhar- triprapancha Bhashya, viz. because the nature of 81] is obtained under the notion _ of something to be accomplished (of an effect, viz. from knowledge) it is impossible, that the supreme Bramha should have obtained the nature of all by knowledge,
102 Brihad A ranyaka Upanishad.
Bramha, viz. the knowledge, that duality is identity, a knowledge which is connected with works, has obtained the state of an inferior Bramha, who has renounced all enjoyment, and who by obtaining ll, has broken the bonds of desire and work. It appears also in common life, that a term is applied with reference to its future state, for instance in the sentence: ‘‘He cooks the boiled rice; (Odana means rice which is boiled,) and also in the Sdstra, for instance: ‘* Let a Paribrajaka (a person who has already obtained a state, entirely de- voted to the contemplation of God) give to all beings the blessing of fearlessness.’’ In this manner some explain a Brdmhana as a person who is to become Bramha.’
This is not right, because, if the nature of all is obtained, the fault of transientness is committed ; for it is impossible, that in this world any person should in reality obtain by any cause another state, and a¢ the same time be eternal. In the same manner, if by means of the knowledge of Bramha the nature of all should be obtained, and this state be at the same time eternal, there is a contradiction. If on the other hand, it (viz. the nature of all) is considered as non-eternal, the before mentioned fault takes place, viz. that there is a resemblance with the effects from works. But if you think, ‘ that the abolition of the nature of non-totality (individual existence) which (nature of non- totality) is the effect of ignorance, axd the obtaining of the nature of all, is the effect of a knowledge of Bramha,’ then the fiction of a person who 18 to become Bramha, is useless. But if you think, that even before the knowledge of Bramha every creature by 2८5 possessing the nature of Bramha, has eternally obtained the nature of all, that the state of non- Bramha and of non-totality is superimposed in reality by ignorance and that, as silver is superimposed on mother-of-pearl, or as any special place (Atala means, literally, a division of the infernal regions) of standing or unclearness on the sky, so are also here the notions of non-Bramha and of non-totality superimposed by ignorance and removed by the know- ledge of Bramha ; if you think thus, then it is right to say, that in reality the supreme Bramha was, because in the passage: ^ Bramha verily was this before,’’ the literal meaning of the term “ Bramha,” is supreme Bramha ; for the Véda declares a meaning, as it in reality is ; but the fiction, according to which a person whoisto become Bramha, is called Bramha, at variance with the meaning of the term ^ Bramha,”’ is not
First Chapter. Fourth Brdmhana. 103
right, because a hypothesis, by which the meaning of the Sruti is lost, and a fiction is made of something, not acquired in the Sruti, is inad- missible, unless there be some strong necessity.
If you say, ‘ that, without being produced by ignorance, there may exist. the nature of non-Bramha and non-totality,’ we object, because it is impossible, that in thts case they could be removed by the knowledge of Bramha; for it is never observed, that knowledge either destroys or creates the attributes of any actual thing, but it is everywhere ob- served as the destroyer of ignorance. In the same manner let also in our case the knowledge of Bramha remove the nature of non-Bramha and non-tvtality, as the productions of ignorance; but the knowledge of Bramha is never able to create or destroy any real thing. Therefore the hypothesis, by which the meaning of the Sruti is lost, and a fiction is made of something, not found in the Sruti, is even without use.
If you say, ‘that ignorance with regard to Bramha is impossible,’ we do not agree, because knowledge is enjoined with regard to Bramha ; for if mother of pearl has become an object of the eye, then its nature is never known by such a sentence: This is mother-of-pearl and not silver, unless there is a superimposition of (the notion of) silver upon it. In the same manner, from such passages as: ^^ This all alone existing,” ^“ This all alone Bramha,” “ This all merely the soul,”’ ‘‘ This is not duality, non-Bramha,” the knowledge of identity with reference to Bramha could never be enjoined, unless there is a super- imposition of ignorance upon Bramha. We do not say (like you), as there is @ superimposition with regard to mother-of-pearl, so there is not a superimposition of the nature of non-Bramha (atad.) What then? Bramha is not the cause of the superimposition of the nature of non-Bramha upon his own self, and is not the producer of ignorance.
We admit, that Bramha is not producer of ignorance nor deluded ; but do not admit, that there is another deluded conscious being (beside Bramha) which could be the producer of the ignorance of non-Bramha. This is evident from such passages of the Srutias: ‘There is no other knower than him.” ‘ There is nothing else which knows but him.” ^^ That art thou.” (Ch. त, p. 448.) ‘“* He knew the soul.” (B. U. 184.) ^“ 7 am the soul.” (B. A. p. 205.) ‘Another is he, another am I.” ^“ He does not know.” And also from such passages of the Smriti
104 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
as: ^“ Whosoever beholds God as the same in all beings,” etc. (Bhag. Git. 13 Adh. 27th 81.). ‘I am the soul, © Gudakés'a, dwelling in the heart of all beings.”’ (B. ©. 10th Adh. 20th 81.) ‘ The wise see the same.... in the dog and the man who lives upon dog’s-meat.”’ (Bh. G. 5th Adh. 18th Sl.) And from such Mantras as: ‘‘ Who beholds all beings in the soul,”’ and “In whom all beings are like the soul.” (४६). 8. U. M. 6 and 7 8.1. Vol. VII. p. 13.)
‘ But if this is the case, then is the advice of the S'A4stra without any use?’ Well, this may in this manner be admitted, if Bramha is known ; but if you say, ‘also the knowledge is uscless, we object,* because the cessation of non-understanding is visible.’ If it is said: ‘That ces- sation is even impossible, because there is identity,’ we object, because this is contradictory to what is visible ; for it is ‘ visible, that there is a cessation from non-understanding by the knowledge of identity.
If any one says, ‘ that even, when seen, it is impossible,’ it is contra- dictory to what is visible ; and a contradiction to what is visible, is by no body admitted.
Nor, when visible, is any thing in reality impossible, because it is even seen.
If it is said, ‘ that the seeing is impossible,’ the same argument holds good.
Tf it ts said: ‘From such passages of the Sruti, as the following: ¢ प्र € becomes holy by holy work.” (B.A. p. 546.) ^ Knowledge and work entered का. ‘The Purusha is the comprehender, agent, the knowing soul,” itis evident, that there is another mundane soul, dif- ferent from the supreme soul. And this different soul is the supreme Bramha, which follows from such passages of the Sruti as: ‘‘ He is not this, heis not that.” (B.A. p. 435.) ^ The soul liberated from sin, without old age, without death.” ‘ The ruler of this universe.” (B. A. p. 628.)
Also in the Séstras 01 [९९६११ Akshapfdat and others, God (Fswara) is proved as different from the mundane soul ; for through the desire to remove the unhappiness, arising from the world, activity is perceived —
* The cessation of non-knowledge is either different from Bramha, and then there non-duality is lost, or it is not different, and then it cannot be comprehended under the idea of knowledge.
T A name of Goutama, the founder of the Nyaya.
= Firet Chapter. Fourth Brémhana. 105
I am verily Bramha. Therefore he became all.
with the embodied soul (and not with God), and hence the difference between God and mundane soul is clear.
And the Sruti and Smriti declare: ^ He, without speech, without honour २० “ There is nothing, O Partha, to be done by mein the three worlds.” (B.G. 3d A. 22.) ‘ He is to be searched, to be en- quired into.” (Ch. U. p. 571.) ‘A person, knowing him, is not con- taminated.” (ए. X. B. I. Vol. II. p. 913.) ‘Whosoever knows Bramha, obtains the supreme Bramha.”’ (T. U. 2d A Ist An. Ist M.) ‘* He (Bramha) is to be contemplated in a uniform manner.” (B. A. 6th Adh. 4th Br. 20. B. I. Vol. II. p. 889.) ‘* Knowing that which is undestroyable, 0 Gargi.”’ (B. A. 5th Ad. 8th B. 10. B. 1. Vol. IT. 7. 636.) ‘The firm, knowing him.” (B. A. p. 829.) ‘The great ‘word (the letters A. U. M. being joined) is like a bow, and the soul like the arrow; and Bramha (what) is aimed at by it.” (2d Mund. U. 4th M. B. I. p. vol. vii. p. 228.) In all these passages there is a declaration of agent and action.
This is also evident from the declaration, that the roads to elevation are different from the road of him who strives after liberation. If there were no difference, to what place could there be proceeded by any one? Andif there were not, a difference of the northern and southern roads and of the places to be proceeded to, would be impossible ; but if the mundane soul is different from the supreme, all this is possible.
This follows also from the declaration with reference to the causes of knowledge and work. If the mundane soul is different from Bramha, the declaration addressed to the former about work and knowledge, as being the causes either of elevation or liberation, is consistent, but it is not with reference to God, because all desires are obtained by him.’
If it is therefore (on all those grounds) said, ‘ It is proper, that the term ^^ Bramha’”’ means a person who is to become Bramha,’ we ob- ject, because the application of the declaration with regard to Bramha would be useless ; for if the mundane soul,—which is not Bramha, dué is to become Bramha, on the strength of the passage : ‘‘ knowing the soul, I am verily Bramha,”’—should become all, the advice with regard to Bramha, would be undoubtedly useless, because the effect, which is the state of the nature of all, would be accomplished by the knowledge
P
106 Brihad Aranyaka Upaniskad.
of the soul, which is to be accomplished ;* because that knowledge, (viz. the knowledge of the regulation concerning work) could never be ap- plied to the accomplishment of the last aim of man.
If it is said, ‘that the declaration with regard to Bramha, in the pas- sage: ‘I am Bramha,”’ is for the sake of transforming the mundane soul to the nature of Bramha,’ we object ; for, if the nature of Bramhs is not perfectly known, what can the passage, ^ I am Bramha’’ trans- form’ If his nature is known, a transformation is possible. By pas- sages in our text such as: ‘That soul is verily Bramha.”. (ए. A. 6th Adh. 4th Br. 5. ए. I. Vol. II. p. 849.) ‘* That present perceptible Bramha.” (B. A. 5th Ad. 4th Br. 1. 2.1. Vol. II. p. 575.) ‘* Which soul.” (8. A. p. 575.) ‘This is true.” ‘This soul.” ^ He who knows Bramha, obtains the supreme,” (ध. U. 2nd A. Ist A. 18८ M.) and by such a conclusion as: ‘From this very soul,” the terms ४५ Bramha” and ‘soul’ are more than a thousand times placed on the same ground, and therefore it is evident, that they have the same meaning ; for transformation of another takes place to the nature of another, and not to identity ,
And the passage: ‘‘ Because this all is that soul,” proves the iden- tity of the soul, which has been set forth in the text, and which is to be seen afterwards. Therefore, it is impossible, that the soul could be transformed to the nature of Bramha.
It is also impossible to conceive with regard to Bramha any other effect, because in such passages as: ‘‘ He who knows Bramha, becomes Bramha,”’ the obtaining of Bramha only is declared.
‘If the transformation is the obtaining of Bramha,’ we object ; for another state of another is impossible.
If it is said, ‘that, according to the word of the S’ruti the obtaining of the state of Bramha, even implies transformation,’ we object, because transformation is only 8 notion (not something real), and we said, that knowledge had no other agency but to destroy a false knowledge ; a word has no power to produce any thing, for the Sdstra teaches, but does not create ; this is evident, = ।
* If it is said, that the advice with reference to Bramha is useful, under the condition, that it is the object of a regulation, we ask, whether it is a regulation regarding work, or regarding worship? छत्राय assumption is contradictory.
First Chapter. Fourth Brémhana. 107
From such passages as: ‘He entered this world ;” (B. A..p. 77.) it is certain, that it is the supreme Bramha who entered ; therefore it is not right to explain the term ‘‘ Bramha” by a person who is to become Bramha.
This is also evident on the ground, that the meaning, which you wish to establish, is an obstacle to the admitted meaning; for the knowledge that, like a lump of rock-salt, Bramha is of the same taste (substance) without difference without or within,—which is the mean- ing intended to be expressed in all Upanishads, is clearly established at the end of two K4ndas (of this Upanishad, viz. the Madhu Kénda and Muni Kanda) viz. ^ This is the declaration’ (p. 503) and: ‘So far extends this cause of immortality.” (B. A. B. I. Vol. II. p. 930.)
In the same manner is the knowledge of the identity of Bramha the certain meaning of the Upanishads of all the S’ékhas
If by the passage: ‘‘ He knew even the soul,’’ (p. 101.) a mundane soul, different from Bramha, is assumed, it would be an obstacle to the admitted meaning. If it were so, then, by the contradiction of the commencement and of the conclusion of this Saéstra, an inconsistency would be assumed
Also the declaration would be impossible ; for if by the passage : «* He knew even the soul,”’ a mundane soul were assumed, there could not be a declaration of the know \edge of Bramha, because then the passage: “He knew even the sou ,” would refer to the knowledge of the mundane soul alone. | |
If it is said, ‘that the term “ soul’ means something different from the knower,’ we object, because it is the predicate of J, in the passage : ०८ am verily Bramba,”’ and if any thing else were the object of know- ledge, it would have been determined: ‘‘ This is that,”’ but not: ^
m.” As in the passage: “I am verily Bramha,” Bramha is the pre- dicate, and as it is determined in the passage: ‘“He knew even the soul,’ it is distinctly understood, that the soul alone is Bramha. If this is the case, the declaration of the knowledge of Bramha is possible, not otherwise ; for the knowledge would be otherwise.
. Nor is the knowledge of Bramha possible, if the nature of Bramha and non-Bramha were to belong to one sudject, because there would
* For instance the road which leads upwards through the fire, that is fo say through sacrifices etc. A’. ©,
P 2
108 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
be in reality a contradiction, as darkness ts contradictory at the mani- featation of the sun.
Nor, if both (Bramha and non-Bramha) were the objects of koow- ledge, would the definite declaration of a knowledge of Bramha be proper, because in this case there should be a knowledge of Bramha and of the mundane soul.
Nor is it proper to assume a substance with contradictory attributes ; for in this case, the knowledge of the truth being declared, doubt would arise in the nrind of the hearer, and a definite knowledge is re- quired to accomplish the last end of man. From the following passages of the Sruti and Smriti: ‘ Of whom there is even no doubt,” ^ A per- son who doubts perishes,’’ it is evident, that whosoever is desirous of the welfare of others, must not say the meaning of a sentence which is doubtful.
If it is maintained, ‘ that in (your explanation of) the passage: ‘‘ He knew even the soul; therefore he became all,’’ the not very skilful assumption is made of Bramha being, like us and similar beings, an agent’ (viz. as the subject of knowledge) we protest, because this notion is conceived in the Sastra ; for it is not our assumption, but that of the Sastra ; therefore the Sdstra is to be blamed (which you would probably not do.) And by him, who is anxious about his welfare, must not be given up the literal meaning of Bramha by an assumption at variance with the meaning of the Sfstra.
An obstinacy on your part which goes so far, is also not proper; for all difference with regard to Bramha is only a fiction, and must be considered under the notion of identity, as follows from a hundred pas- sages, such as: “ Here is nothing different ;” ‘for where there is duality, as it were ;’’ ‘one alone without duality.” Every action of man in fact with regard to Bramha is a fiction, wherefore it is said very little, that this assumption 1s not skilful. |
Therefore (in the passage: Bramha verily was this before) न Bramha’”’ means the Bramha who entered, who is the creator. The term “ verily” is used for the sake of determination. ‘‘ This,” all that is perceived as embodied (in the shape of a body) ‘ Before.” Previously even to apprehension (awakening) was Bramha alone, and all this; but from the moment of the apprehension there is the opinion,—‘I am non- Bramha,” I am not all,—the effect of superimposition ; hence the
First Chapter. Fourth Brdémhana. 109
superimposition: ‘I am agent, I am performer of ceremovies, I am the mundane soul, the enjoyer of fruits, happy, unhappy, &c. but in reality there is Bramha alone, and this all which is separate from him. ‘*He’’ (tat), who has in any manner been made known by a merciful teacher in the sentence: ‘ Thou-art not the mundane soul,’—‘ knew even the soul,” in its own nature, and the term ‘‘even” means the soul, free from any differences, superimposed by ignorance.
‘Say then, wh i the soul in its own nature which Bramha knew as the soul?’ Do you not recollect the soul? for it has been declared thus: ‘**He, who having entered this world, inspires, causes to descend, diffuses, expires and equalises ?”’
* But then you declare him in the same manner, as if you say: ^ This 18 a cow,” “this is a horse ;” you do not show him directly,’
Well then, the soul is the beholder, the hearer, the thinker, the knower.
` But then, here also you do not show directly the nature of the agent of the actions of seeing, hearing, &c. ; for the action of going is not the nature of the goer, nor the action of cutting the nature of the cutter.’
Then let us say, the soul is the beholder of the beholding, the hearer of the hearing, the thinker of the thinking, the knower of the knowing.
‘ But how differs this from the mere beholder? Whether there is a beholder of the beholding, or the beholder of a jar, there is in every instance a beholder alone ; but whether it is a beholder of the beholding, or a beholder of a jar, there is no difference ; for it is even a beholder.’
There is a difference. The beholder of the beholding, if there is a beholding, constantly sees the beholding ; the beholding is at no time not seen by the beholder; therefore the beholding belongs permanently to the beholder. If the beholding of the beholder is transient, then the beholding, which is to be seen, does at some or the other time not behold, as for instance, where a jar and the like is seen by a transient behold- ing. Moreover, the beholder of that beholding sees never the beholding.
‘ But then, there are two beholdings of the beholder, one, the perma- nent, which is invisible, and the other a transient one, which is visible.’
Be it so. On the one hand, the transient beholding of the beholder is evident from the appearance of blindness and non-blindness ; for if
this beholding were constant, no one would be blind. The permanent beholding of the beholder, on the other hand, 18 evident from the
110 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
passage of the Sruti: "^ For there is no variance between the beholder and the beholding.” (B. A. B. I. Vol. II. 0. 803) It follows also from inference ; for it is observed, that in a dream, there is a beholding of the blind, by which a jar for instance is an object of manifestation. This beholding of the beholder then is not destroyed by the destruction of the other beholding. By this unperishable permanent beholding, which is identical with itself, which is called self-manifesting light, seeing the other transient beholding, which remains in a dream, and which among the two beholdings resembles the knowledge of an impression, the beholder is the beholder of the beholding. If this is the case, the beholding is even his nature, like the heat of the fire, and there is not another conscious beholder, as is the opinion of the followers of Kanada. ‘ This,” Bramha, ‘‘ knew even the soul,” viz. the soul, like the permanent beholding, and free from the transient beholding, superimposed by ignorance
‘ But then the knowledge of the knower is prohibited, as follows from the passage of the Sruti: ‘Thou dost not know the knower.”’
We say, No; for there is no prohibition of knowledge. In the same manner must be understood the beholder of the beholding.
This follows also from its independence of another knowledge ; for, if it is known, that the beholding of the beholder is permanent, no other beholding, of which the beholder is the object, is expected ; for it ceases the desire of a beholding, which is the object of the beholder, as this is improbable ; for no one has.a desire, if there is no object (of the desire.) Nor has the visible beholding the power to make the be- holder its object,-so that one could desire it. Nor is there any desire of any one whose object is one’s own nature. Accordingly, by the passage : ‘‘ He knew even the soul,” it is said, that there is a cessation from ignorance, but not, that the soul is made an object.
How did he know? The answer of the text is: 1" the beholder of the beholding, the soul, ‘‘ am verily Bramha,” and ^^ Bramha” means the present, perceptible soul, which is within all, has overcome hunger, &c., which is not this, which is not that, and has therefore the characteris- tics, not to be of gross body, not to be an atom, &c.
This alone am I, not another mundane soul, as you said. Therefore from a knowledge of such a kind ^ he” Bramha “became श. From the disappearing of the superimposition of non-Bramha by the cesse
First Chapter. Fourth Bramhana. 111
Whosoever among the gods comprehended it, he alone be- came it; thus whosoever among the Rishis, whosoever among men. | |
Knowing that this is that, the Rishi Vamadéva verily obtained these Mantras: I became Manu, I became the Sun. Whoso-
tion of the effect of it (the superimposition of non-Bramha) he became all. Therefore it is alone proper ४० say, ‘‘men think, that by the knowledge of Bramha we shall become all.” What has been asked before £ °" What then knew that Bramha, from which he became all,” is now defined, viz. ‘* Bramha in truth was this before, he knew even the soul, therefore he became this all.”’
In respect of this ‘‘ whosoever among the gods comprehended’ the soul, in the manner explained (viz. according to its true notion) “he alone,’ the enlightened soul ^ became it”? Bramha ; ‘ thus whosoever among the Rishis, thus whosoever among men” (comprehended the soul, became this all.)
By the terms ‘‘ among the gods,” &c. a reference is made to the different worlds, and therefore the knowledge of Bramha is not men- tioned thereby, but we declared, that by the passage: ^ Bramha (Purusha) entered before,’ Bramha everywhere entered within. There- fore the terms “among the gods” are used with reference to the know- ledge of the different worlds, which is produced by the superimposition of body, &c. In reality, however, was Bramha here and there before, viz. before comprehension, in the bodies of the gods, &c.; otherwise he would be an object of investigation.
The meaning of the passages: ‘‘ He knew even the soul,” and also € 06 became all” is, that the fruit of this knowledge of Bramha is the obtaining of the nature of all. To establish this meaning firmly, the Sruti quotes some Mantras. How? ‘Knowing, that this’ Bramha, ०९ 18 that,” the soul: ‘I am Bramha,” from this knowledge of Bramha alone “the Rishi Vamadéva,” by name, verily ‘‘ obtained” these Man- tras. He, firmly established in the knowledge of the nature of Bramha, saw these Mantras: ‘1 became Manu, I became the sun,” &c.
By the words : ^ Knowing that this 18 that,’’ Bramha, the knowledge of Bramha is shown; by the words: ‘I became Manu, I became the sun,’ &c., the text shows, that the fruit of the knowledge of Bramha 18 the obtaining of the state of all, Knowing, he obtained the fruit,
peel
112 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
ever knows this Bramhka also in this time in the said manner: ५९ am Bramha,” even the gods verily are not able to prevent him from its possession. (The possession of the state of all.)
the state of the nature of all; thus by this declaration the text makes known the liberation, which is effected by means of the knowledge of Bramha, as he who eats gets satisfied. ~
Some one may have the impression: ‘The obtaining of the state of all by the knowledge of Bramha was possible for the great gods by their extraordinary power, but not at present for beings of the present Yuga, especially not for men, because they have only little power.’ To remove this objection, the text says: ^“ Whosoever,”’ free from external desires, ‘‘ knows this” Bramha,—set forth in the text, as having entered all beings and possessed of the characteristics of knowledge, action, &c. ‘‘ also in this,” the present, ‘‘time,’’ whosoever knows this as the soul alone in the said manner: Iam Bramha, who, having discarded all differences, superimposed on knowledge by delusions, produced by 00 titious attributes (upadhi), knows: I am only Bramha, not affected by any worldly characteristics, who is not within, who is not without,—he, from the cessation of the state of non-totality, becomes this all by the knowledge of Bramha. There is no difference with regard to Bramha or to the knowledge of him among persons of great power, such 88 Vamadeva, and persons of little power, such as the present men. But there is a doubt, whether the present men are adequate to obtain the fruit of the knowledge of Bramha. To remove this, the text says: “Even the gods,” of extraordinary power ‘are not able to prevent him,” who knows Bramha in the said manner, ‘from its possession,” from obtaining the state of all like Bramha. How then others? But there is ro doubt, that the gods and the like are able to create obstacles to obtaining the fruit of the knowledge of Bramha, as it is said: ‘‘The mortals are in the condition of debtors towards the gods ;”’ for the Sruti shows, that man, even when born, is indebted to the Rishis by the duties of a religious student, to the gods by sacrifices, and to the forefathers by Ais offspring. This follows from the declaration, that men are like beasts to the gods, and also from the passage: ^ व्र ला he or the soul is the place of all beings.”
From this argument: that the gods from the desire to preserve the state of the soul, create obstacles to men, subject to another's will,
First Chapter. Fourth Brémhana. 113
like debtors, to obtain the state of immortality,—arises that appre- hension. The gods preserve their beasts like their bodies; for the text shows afterwards, that the maintenance of gods, etc. which depends upon work, becomes greater, because each single man is worth many beasts ; for it will be said: ‘Therefore it is not pleasant to them, that men should know this.” (p. 119.) ‘As one for his own body verily wishes welfare, so also wish all beings welfare for one who knows thus.”’ ८८. A. p. 255.) Ifa man has the knowledge of Bramha, then, with the ceasing of dependance, there exists no longer the nature of one’s own body and of a dependance like cattle ; this is the intended meaning, as is evident from the two passages about “the not being pleasant,’ and the °“ welfare.” Therefore the gods raise even to the knower of Bramha, obstacles to obtaining the fruit from the knowledge of Bramha ; for they are powerful
‘But then, if this is the case, the gods raise obstacles also to obtaining other effects of works, like the drinking of what is drink- able. Alas then, there is an end of the faith, that practice (of cere- monies and knowledge) is the cause of elevation and liberation. In the same manner, on account of his inconceivable power, God is able to raise obstacles, in the same manner, time, action, charms, drugs and penances ; for that they are causes of obtaining or not obtaining the fruit, is evident from the S'astra and common belief ; hence there is no faith in any practice in accordance with the S'astras.’
We reply to this, No; for all things are produced by their necessary causes, and the world shows a variety (of happiness and unhappiness, ) both of which is impossible under the supposition, that all arises from its own nature. But when the supposition, that (ceremonial) work is the cause of (the enjoyment of) happiness and unhappiness and of other consequences, is firmly established and confirmed by the statements of the Véda, Smriti, argument, and common belief, ४ is clear, that the gods, Fswara and time are not opposed to the acquirement of the fruit of works, because works are the causes of what is desired ; for the good or bad work of men, independent of the gods, time, Fswara and other agents, is by itself without effect (liter. does not produce itself) and if it should even have effect by itself, it is not able to give the fruit, as it is the nature of action to be produced by agents and other numberless causes. Therefore the gods, Is'wara, etc. favour actions, and hence there cannot be a disbelief
५
114 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
For he becomes the soul of them.
as to the obtaining of the fruit. Sometimes actions are subject also to them (to the gods) because their power cannot be destroyed ; but whether the nature of action or time, gods, things, etc. is the first or second, is not determined, and is difficult to be understood ; hence arises the delusion of the people. Some say, action is the cause, and not any thing else, with reference to the obtaining of the fruit ; others, it is the gods; others, time; others, the nature of the things; others, all these together. With regard to this, the statements of the Véda and the Smriti acknow- ledge action as the principal cause, as for instance: ‘‘ Holy gets a person by holy action, sinful by sinful.’’ Even if one or the other of those agents with regard to its own object should become principal, while at the same time the principal power of the others were stopped, yet it could not be said, that work is not the principal agent as to the acquire- ment of the fruit, because the principal agency of work is established by the S'déstra and argument.
(But if it be asked, whether the gods do not hinder the acquirement of the effect of knowledge, we answer:) No, because on the mere cessa- tion of ignorance the effect is the obtaining of Bramha. In respect of what has been said, “that the gods raise obstacles to the effect, which is the obtaining of Bramha,” the gods have no power to raise obstacles. Why? because there is no time intervening between the knowledge of Bramha and the effect, which is the obtaining of Bramha. How? Asin common life at the very time when light is in contact with the eye of the beholder, there is the manifestation of colour, so at the very time when the knowledge, whose object is the soul, takes place, there is the disappearance of the ignorance, whose object is the soul. Therefore, when the knowledge of Bramha exists, an effect contrary to it is impossible, just as it is impossible, that the effect of light is darkness. Where (when the knowlecge of Bramha exists) the knower of Bramha is the very soul (substance) of the gods, how can they in any way raise obstacles to him ?
The text then declares, what is this very nature, viz. Bramha, identical with himself (whose nature is the soul) who is to be thought of, who may be known from all the S‘astras; ‘‘ for he,” the knower of Bramha ९५ becomes the soul of धल, of the gods, at the very time, when there
First Chapter. Fourth Brémhana. 115
exists the knowledge of Bramha, by the mere cessation of the screen of ignorance, like the nature of mother-of-pearl, which appears as silver, as we said before. Therefore the endeavour of the gods has no success against the soul; for where an effect ensues, not referring to the nature of the soul, and where there is a difference of space, time and causes, there, in respect of any thing whose object is not the soul, the endeavour of the gods to raise obstacles is successful, but not in respect of the effect referring to the nature of the soul, which takes places at the time of the knowledge without any difference of space, time and causes, because an opportunity (to raise obstacles) is impossible.
‘But then, since there is no continuation of the (first) apprehension of the knowledge of Bramha, and since (after the first apprehension) the contrary apprehension (= non-sou)), and its effects are apparent, only the last apprehension of the soul destroys the ignorance, and not the first.”* (Ifthe last knowledge destroys ignorance, it is either, because it is the last, or because its object is the soul.) Not under the first alter- native, because the last could not be determined. (Not under the second) for if the first apprehension, whose object is the soul, does not destroy: the ignorance, then also not the last, because the object is the same.
If it is said, ‘this being the case, the continuation of knowledge destroys the ignorance, not a single act of knowledge,’ we object; for as long as life, etc. remains, a continuation (of knowledge) is impossible ; for as long as there is an apprehension, of which life, etc. is the cause, the continuation of the apprehension of knowledge is impossible, because it is contradictory.
` *® As S’ankara has set forth his argument rather enigmatically, I give it in the more explicit form of Ananda Giri. ‘‘ ‘ But then, an opponent may say, the know- ledge which destroys the ignorance, cannot be the first, because after the first know- ledge there is no continuation of it, and because afterwards the opposite knowledge and its effects take place.’ To show the futility of this objection, S’ankara assumes the following alternative, if the first knowledge does not destroy the ignorance, either the last knowledge destroys it, or the continuation of knowledge.
If the last knowledge destroys the ignorance, it is either, because it is the last, or because its object 18 the soul; but not under the first of these alternatives, because it could not be determined (which is the last); not under the second, (because its object is the soul) because in this respect it is the same as the first knowledge, which, according to admission, does not destroy ignorance.’’ The second part of the argument is clearly given by S’unkara, wherefore we do not repeat it here.
Qa 2
116 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
If you say: ‘But then by the disappearance of the apprehension, of which life, etc. is the cause, there remains a continuation of knowledge until death,’ we object, because the continuation of a so-much-ness of the apprehension is not defined, and there is hence the fault, that the meaning of the S’dstra is not defined. By saying,—the continuation of a so-much-ness of the apprehension destroys the ignorance,—there is nothing defined, and hence the meaning of the S'4stra is undefined. And this is not desired.
If it is said, ‘that the meaning of the S‘dstra is even defined, when there is a mere continuation,’ we object, because there is no difference between the first and last knowledge ; for either the first knowledge is the continuation of the apprehension, or the last until the time of death ; but as in this way no difference is found between the first and last apprehensions, the two above mentioned faults apply.
If it is said: ‘This being the case, then knowledge does not even destroy ignorance,’ we object, because our text declares: ‘‘ Therefore he became all,’’ the same 18 also declared in other passages of the S'ruti “The bond of the heart is broken,” and र" There is no delusion, ete.”
If it is said: ‘It is merely for the sake of praise,’ (Arthavada) we object, because otherwise the same applies to the Upanishads of all the S'ékhas (Védéic schools) viz. that they are merely for the sake of praise ; for the Upanishads of all the S’Akhas set forth neither more nor less than this meaning.
If it is said: ^ Let it be so, (that they are for the sake of praise, ) since the object of the soul is evident from perception ;’ we object, because from the said statement (that knowledge destroys ignorance) ignorance, grief, delusion, fear and other faults have ceased.
If it is said ‘from perception,” the answer has already been given. Therefore it cannot be fixed, whether the knowledge is the first, or the last, a continuation, or not a continuation, because the ulti- mate effect of knowledge is the cessation of ignorance and other faults. That apprehension, whether the first or the last, continuation or no continuation, is alone knowledge, which produces the effect, viz. the cessation of the faults of ignorance, etc. Having come to this conclu- sion, there remains nothing to be fixed.
But what has been said before: ‘Since the contrary apprehension and its effects are apparent, only the last apprehension of the soul
a
First Chapter. Fourth Brdmhana. 117
destroys the ignorance and not the first,” (p. 115) this also holds not good, because the last action (in a former birth) is the cause of the production of a body (in this world). The action,—which is the cause of the production of the body, and which, by means of the fault of the opposite apprehension of the work, which is of such a nature and which has the fault of the opposite apprehension, is able to produce the fruit,—Zthis action puts into effect the opposite apprehension, and the faults of passion, etc. by the continuation of the enjoyment of the effect, as long as life lasts, and only so long, because the entering upon the enjoyment of the effects follows necessarily from their cause, viz. action, like arrows which are shot (continue their course, until their velocity is spent). Therefore knowledge does not destroy action of such a kind (which is the effect of actions in a former world) because it is not oppos- ed to it. What then (does it destroy)? The effect of ignorance, opposite to its own (knowledge’s) nature, which (effect) has the tendency to produce another body (in a future world) even from ignorance, which is its support, (it destroys it,) because it determines it; for it (the action) has not yet arrived, (not yet been done) the other action (which is the cause of the present body) has been produced (is passed, and cannot therefore be destroyed by knowledge). Moreover, the opposite apprehension (opposite to true knowledge) is not produced for the knower, because it (the opposite apprehension) is. without object ; for the opposite apprehension, when produced, is produced as dependent upon generality, when the nature of its particular object has not been ascertained, as silver is on mother-of-pearl. But this (opposite appre- hension) by the destruction of the site of opposite apprehensions without number, does not arise for one who has ascertained the differences of objects, as the delusion of silver does not again appear, when a perfect apprehension of mother-of-pearl has taken place.
If you say, ‘that recollections,—manifesting opposite apprehensions, and arising from impressions, produced from opposite apprehensions, which were made previously to the knowledge,—that these recollections in the moment of their birth sometimes cause of a sudden the obtain- ment of opposite apprehensions, and that, in the same manner, as for one who is perfectly acquainted with the divisions of space, yet of a sudden a confusion may arise with regard to space, so also for the perfect knower an opposite apprehension may be produced, as it was
118 Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.
Then whosoever worships another deity in such a manner, as: ८ He is another, another am I,” he does not know; like a
before’ (the attainment of knowledge) then it would follow, that there is no confidence also in perfect knowledge, that hence an activity with regard to the knowledge and the works in accordance with the meaning ef the S‘dstra would be inconsistent, and that proof had become non- proof; for a difference between proof and non-proof were impossible.
Hereby it is ascertained, for what reason there is no liberation from the body (immediately) after the attainment of perfect knowledge. But that consequent to knowledge, from the very same time, there is a de- struction of the actions which are collected for a future birth and whose fruits have not commenced, has been proved from our text, which pro- hibits any obstacle to the obtaining of the fruit; also from such passages of the S’ruti as: ^“ His actions also are annihilated,’ (1st Mund. B. I. Vol. VIII. p. 302.) ‘All is his forever,” ‘ All sins are shaken off,” «< Having known him, they are not tainted by sin,” (B. A. B. I. Vol. IE. p- 913.) ‘Him alone do those two not trouble, him good and bad. actions do not torment,” (I. c. p. 910.) ‘‘ Him he does not torment, he is not afraid of any thing ;”’ (8 त. B. I. Vol. VII. p. 119.) also from. passages of the Smriti such as this: ^^ The fire of knowledge burns all actions to ashes.”’ (Bh. G. 4th Adh. Sl. 37.)
But what before (p. 112) has been said, that he is bound by debts, is also not applicable, because this refers to ignorance ; for the ignorant isa debtor; for him the notion of agency etc. 18 true; thus it will be said afterwards: ‘‘ Where some other thing exists, there another sees it otherwise,’’ and the term ‘‘other’’ means here, what differs from the true substance, the soul. Where ignorance exists, there it is another thing, as it were; there, like the moon on the second day after its darkness, is an action of showing (one saying, It is this, another, It is not this, etc.) dependent on the many agents through ignorance ; and the effect, arising from this (ignorance) is also shown by passages such as this: “ Another sees it otherwise.” (3, A. p. 813.) Where, however, knowledge exists, by the removal of the numberless illusions, arising from ignorance, there is shown the impossibility of actions by such passages as: ‘Therefore he sees all.’”’ (p. 94.) Therefore the state of a debtor is described as referring to ignorance alone,—because
First Chapter. Fourth Brdmhana. 119
beast, he is used by the gods.
As verily many beasts maintain a man, 80 every man main- tains the gods. It is not pleasant, even if only one beast is taken away, how then, if many? Therefore it is not pleasant
that state is the consequence of actions,—not as referring to knowledge. This we shall in the next passage explicitly show by our explanation, as follows: ‘Then whosoever,” not knowing Bramha, by praise, reverence, offering, (of flowers, scents, etc.) oblation (gift of eatables), attention and contemplation, ‘‘ worships” (represents to himself the state of the excellencies of a deity) ‘‘another deity,’ a deity different from the soul “‘in such a manner as: He is another,”’ not the soul, different from me, ‘‘another am I,” subject to him, I, like a debtor, have to propitiate him,—whosoever through such a belief worships, ‘he’ through such a belief ‘does not know’ the truth. Such a person is not only ignorant, or has the faults of ignorance and the like, but like a beast, a cow, etc. is used for the benefit of conveyance, of giving milk, etc. so for the various benefits he affords through offerings, etc. is he used by each of the gods. Therefore he is, like a beast, sub- ject to works of all kinds—thisis the meaning. For the effect of the work in accordance with the word of the S/4stra, be it work, united with knowledge, or be it work alone, done by a person who is ignorant, a partaker of the division of caste and the orders of life,* and dependent, the effect of suck a work is elevation from man, etc. to Bramha; the effect, however, of work, which is at variance with the word of the S’4stra and which is done by the promptings of one’s own nature, is descension from man, etc. down to inanimate matter. For as here, so we shall say the same at the end of this chapter by the passage : ०८ Again there are three worlds, etc. (B. A. p. 301.’’—That the effect of knowledge is the obtaining of the state of all, has been briefly shown ; for this whole Upanishad is engaged to show the divisions of knowledge and ignorance (or the whole knowledge within this Upanishad is not very extensive as it describes the divisions of ignorance).
And that this is the meaning of the whole S'éstra, we shall a/ter- wards show. Because it is so, therefore the gods are able to raise
* These are four, viz. of the religious student, of the house-holder, of the an- chorite (Vanaprastha, who retires to the wood,) and of the mendicant.
120 Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.
to them, that men should know this. 10.
obstacles or to show favour to an ignorant man. This is said in the words: ‘‘ As verily’ in common life, ‘‘ many beasts,”’ cows, horses, etc. «° maintain a man,” their owner, ruler, ‘so every” ignorant ‘ man,” who stands for many beasts, “‘ maintains the gods,” (the plural “the gods,” is here used to indicate also the forefathers, etc.) under the idea: ‘Indra and the other gods, who are different from me, are my lords; I am like a servant of them. If I adore them by praise, reverence, gifts, etc. I shall obtain the rewards, given by them, viz. elevation and libera- ६००. Thus asin this world it is very unpleasant for a possessor of many beasts, ‘‘even if only one beast is taken away,’’ is seized by a tiger, etc., so, if one man who stands for many beasts, rises from the state of a beast, it is not surprising, that it is unpleasant to the gods, as the taking away of many beasts is to the house-holder. ‘‘ Therefore it is not pleasant to them,” to the gods,—what ? ‘‘ that men should” in any way “know this,”’ truth of the nature of Bramha. In this view it is said by the venerable Vyasa in the Anugitas (a part of the Mahabharata) ««The world of the gods is closed for the performers of wcrks ; for the gods do not wish, that men abide above.” Therefore the gods try to exclude, like cattle from tigers, men from the knowledge of Bramha, as it is their desire, that they should not be elevated above the sphere of their use. Whom they wish to liberate, to him they impart belief, etc. and unbelief to him whom they wish not to liberate. Therefore let 8 person, desirous of liberation, be intent on the adoration of the gods, on reverence and faith, submissive, and assiduously striving for the acquirement of knowledge, or for knowledge, as is implied in the words of fear: ‘ How then, if many.” This is the meaning of the passage: “It is not pleasant to the gods.” 10.
The meaning of the S/4stra has been declared in the Sdtra: ‘ The soul, considering this, Jet a man worship it.” (p. 86.) The relation and the necessity of this Sitra, which was to be explained, has been determined by the words: ‘They declare, that by the knowledge of Bramha, etc.” (p. 100.) together with its Arthavéda (by the words ; ‘* Therefore, whosoever among the gods,” etc. (p. 101.),—and the subjection of ignorance to the world in the words: ‘ Then whosoever
worships another deity, etc.” (p. 118.) >
First Chapter. Fourth Brémhana. 121
Bramha verily was this before, one alone. Being one, he did not extend. He with concentrated power created the Kshatra of elevated nature, viz. ali those Kshatras who are protectors among the gods, Indra, Varuna, Soma, Rudra, Parjanya, Yama, Death, and 81६72. Therefore none is greater than the Kshatra ;
There it has been said, that the ignorant is a debtor, and subject to the will of another by the necessity to perform, like a beast, the works of the gods and others. What again is the means of performing the necessary works of the gods and others? The different castes and orders of life. Which then are the castes? In reply to this the present passage is commenced, viz. to show how that ignorant person, dependent on another’s will and subject to works in connexion with their agents, is busy, like a beast, in this world.
The creation of Indra, etc. has not been described above after the creation of Agni (ए, p. 70.) ; but the creation of Agni has been described to complete the creation through Prajépati. The creation of Indra, etc. however, should there have been shown, because it is its conclusion ; but it is here told in order to show, that the ignorant is the proper subject for the performance of works.
‘‘Bramha verily was this before.”’ = ^^ Bramha,” by the creation of Agni having obtained the nature of Agni (he is called Bramha by believing himself to be the caste of Bréhmanas) ‘ verily was this,’’. the caste of Kshatras, etc. ; the undivided Bramha, “one alone.’ There. was no distinction of the Kshatriya and other castes. ‘* Being one,”’ without the distinctions of Kshatra, etc., of preserver, etc. ‘he,’ Bramha, “did not extend,’? which means, was not sufficient for extensive work.
Then “he,” Bramha, reflecting, I am a Brémhana, I, who by nature desire to perform the work to be done by the Brémhana caste, have to discharge such and such duties, ‘created’ for the amplification of work and agent, ‘with concentrated power the Kshatra of elevated nature.” Which again is the Kshatra, the Kshatriya caste, created by him? To show this, the text specifies the indi- viduals, viz. ‘‘all those Kshatras who are protectors among the gods.” Those who are anointed kings, are here specified ^ Indra,” the king of the gods (Dévas) ^“ Varuna’ of the aquatic animals, “Soma,” of
R
122 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
therefore the Bramhana, under the Kshatriya, worships at the Réjasiya ceremony. The Kshatra alone gives him his glory. Bramha is thus the birth-place of the Kshatra. Therefore, although the king obtains the highest dignity, he at last takes refuge in the Bramha as in his birth-place. Whosvever despises him, he destroys his birth-place. He is a very great sinner, like a man who injures a superior. 11.
the Brémhanas, ^" Rudra,’”’ of beasts, ‘“ Parjanya,”’ of lightning, ete. ‘*Yama’”’ of the forefathers, ^ Death,” of persons in ill health, etc. and [s'ana of splendours. These and others are the Kshatras among the gods. After them (the divine Kshatras) he created the Kshatras who are ruled by Indra and other Kshatra deities, viz. the families of the moon and sun, as the king Purtravas, etc. For this reason the creation of the Kshatras among the gods has been set forth.
Because the Kshatra was created by more concentrated power than the Bréhmana, ‘therefore none is greater than the Kshatra,”’ who is also the ruler of the Brdhmana caste. ‘Therefore the Brdhmana,” although the source of the Kshatriya, placed ^ under the Kshatriya,”’ *‘ worships’ him who is placed above. Where? “At the Rajastya cere- mony.” ‘‘The Kshatra alone gives him his glory,”’ his repute as Bram- ha. The Ritwig,—at the Rajasdya ceremony addressed by the king, who is anointed and seated on the royal chair, by the words : ‘‘O Bramha,” —replies again to the king: ^ 0 king, thou art Bramha.”’ He alone is called Kshatra who bestows glory. ‘Bramha is thus the” well known “‘birth-place of the Kshatra.” ‘Therefore, although the king obtains the highest dignity,” in virtue of the anointing at the Réja- siiya ceremony, “he at last’? at the completion of the ceremony, ‘‘ takes refuge in the Bramha,” in the Bramhapical caste, “as in his birth-place,” that is, he appoints a family priest. ‘‘ Whosoever” again from the pride of power, “despises,” lowers, ‘‘him’’ his birth- place, the Bréhmanical caste, the Bréhmaya, he destroys his ‘own birth-place.’’ “He,” by so doing, “is a very great sinner ;” (in former times the Kshatriya was also a sinner) by his wickedness, because he injures his producer, “like,” in common life, ‘a man who injures,” defeats, ^^ his superior’ is a very great sinner. 11,
First Chapter. Fourth Brdmhana. 123
He did not extend. He created the Vit. He is all those gods who, according to their classes, are called Vasus, Rudras, Adityas, Vis'wédévas, and Maruts. 12.
He did not extend. He created the caste of the S’ddras as the nourisher. This earth is the nourisher; for it nourishes all this whatsoever. 13.
He did not extend ; he created with concentrated power justice of eminent nature. This justice is the preserver (Kshatra) of
(As Bramha did not extend before the creation of the Kshatra), so even after the creation of the Kshatra ‘‘he’? Bramha, ‘did not extend’’ for the work. He did not extend, because there was none to procure wealth. ‘‘He created the Vit.’’ to procure wealth for the performance of ceremonies. Who again is the Vit? ‘He is all those gods according to their classes’ (for almost all the Vits are called so, as they are counted in classes; for commonly they are only capable of collecting wealth, when joined together, and not sing- ly); the class of ^" the Vasus,” is eight in number, of “the Rudras,”’ eleven, of ‘the Adityas’’ twelve, of “the Vis’wédévas,”’ means either the thirteen sons of Vis'wa, or ali (sarve-vis'we) the gods, and of “the Maruts”’ is seven times seven. 12.
«° €? in want of servants, “‘did not extend. He created the caste of the S/iidras.”” Which again is the caste of the S‘idras, created by him? ‘The nourisher,”’ (५808108) because he nourishes. Who again is that Pusha? The text determines this in a special manner. ०८ This,” earth, “is Pusha: for it nourishes all this whatsoever.”’ 13.
‘‘He,’’ after having created the four castes, did not extend. ^^ He,’’ from a fear of the ungovernableness of the Kshatra on account of his fiery nature, “created by concentrated power justice of eminent nature.”’ ८ This justice,’ created of eminent nature, ‘is the preserver,” the go- vernor even ‘‘ of the Kshatra,”’ more fiery even than the fiery. ‘There is nought higher than justice,” because it governs even the Kshatra ; for all are ruled by it. In what manner? To this it is replied : “Even the weak is confident to defeat the more powerful” than himself, ^ by’’ the power of ‘justice,’ ‘‘as” in common life ^ the house-holder by the king,”’ who is the most powerful. Therefore it is
R 2
124 Brihud Aranyaka Upanishad.
the Kshatra. There is nought higher than justice. Even the weak is confident ८० defeat the more powerful by justice, as & householder by the king. Verily justice 18 true. Therefore they say of a person who speaks the truth, he speaks justice, or of a person who speaks justice, he speaks the truth. In this manner verily it is both. 14.
This is the creation of the Bramha, the Kshatra, the Vit and the S‘idra. He was in the form of Agni (fire) among the
in this manner evident, that justice is governing all, beeause it is more powerful than all. ‘‘ Verily justice,” viz. a case which has been decided according to legal evidence, ^ 18 true.” Here ^ true” means, in accordance with the meaning of the S‘déstra, and justice means, what is transacted in such a manner; it is true, if understood in accordance with the meaning of the 8४8४8. Because this is so, “therefore they” those who are sitting near, who are aware of the arguments on both parts, ‘‘say of a person who speaks,” at the time when a suit is transacted, the “truth” that is, according to the S'éstras. ‘He speaks justice,” viz. he speaks according to fitness, which is well known and pursuant to usage. Thus, on the other hand, they say ^‹ of a person, who speaks in accordance with justice,” to usage, ८८ 116 speaks in accordance with truth,” he speaks what does not deviate from the S'4stra. ‘In this manner verily it,’’ which has been mentioned before, ‘‘is both,’”’ viz. the justice, which must be made known and which must be practised. Therefore justice, as an object of knowledge and of practice governs all, as well those who know the S'4stras as those who do not know them. Therefore, it is the pre- server even of the Kshatra. Hence an ignorant person, who is proud of justice, acknowledges for the practice of its different parts, its difference which is the cause of the Bramha, Kshatra, Vit and S'tdra castes. These differences are by their own nature the causes of the different agents. 14.
The passage: “‘This ig the creation of the four castes” “of the Bramha, the Kshatra, the Vit and S'idra,’’ serves as an introduction into the next sentence. ‘‘ He,’? Bramha, the creator, “‘ was in the form of Agni among the gods,”’ that is to say in no other form. “ As
First Chapter. Fourth Bramhana. 125
gods as Bramha, he was the Bramhana among men, in the form of Kshatriya Kshatriya, in the form of Vais’ya Vais’ya, in the form of S'‘idra Sidra. Therefore among the gods the place (loka) is desired through Agni only, among men through the Bréhmana, because in their forms Bramha became manifest.
Brahma,”’’ ^^ the Brahmana caste, he was the Bréhmana,”’ in the form of a Bréhmana Brahma was among men. Assuming other modifications among the other castes, he became in the Kshatriya form a Kshatriya, whose tutelary deities are Indra and other gods (dévas ;) in the Vaishya form a Vaishya, and in the S’idra form a S'idra.
Because Bramha the creator assumed other and other modifications among the Kshatriya and other castes, and remained unmodified only in Agni’s form, “therefore among the gods the place,” the fruit of works, % 18 desired through Agni only,” that is to say, by the performance of works, dependent on Agni; for on this ground is this Brahma evidently represented under the form of Agni, the locality of works. Therefore it is established, that by the performance of work through Agni, the fruit, resulting from it, is desired. ^ Among men through the Brahmana.” If among men there is a desire of the fruit to be derived from works, there is no dependance upon works, of which Agni, etc. is the cause. How then? The object of man is effected only by reliance upon the nature of the castes. Where, however, the accomplishment of the object of man is subject to the gods, there it is dependant upon work in conjunction with Agni. etc. This follows also from the passage of the Smriti: < By muttering prayers, the Bréhmana, no doubt, is successful, whether he performs other work (work, dependant upon fire) or not. Friend is called the Bréhmana.’’* This is also evident from his leading the life of a religious mendicant.t Therefore among men the place, the effect of works, is desired through the nature of the Bréhmana alone, “ be- cause Brahma,”’ the creator, ‘in their forms,’ in the forms of the Bréhmaga and Agni, the forms upon which the agents of work are dependent, ‘‘ became manifest.”
* By giving to all beings the blessing to be without fear.
+ Which is to renounce all worldly objects—the cause of obtaining the world of Bramha.
-- ~ -- -~ -~
126 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
Then whosoever, through this world not seeing the self-like world, dies, him the latter, because unknown, does not preserve, as the Véda which is not read, or as other work, which is not done.
With reference to this, some* say, ‘it is the place of the supreme soul, the obtainment of which is desired through Agni and the Bréh- maya. This is not true; because a subjection to ignorance existing, the division of the castes is introduced for the subjection to works, it is not true, moreover, because it differs from the next passage ; for if here (in the present passage) by the term ‘‘place,’”’ even the supreme soul were declared, then in the next passage: ^^ Not having seen the self-like place,” the predicate ‘ self-like,’’ would be absurd; for if there the common place (world) which is desired by dependance upon Agni, is different from the self-like place, then the predicate “self-like,”’ is proper, because the meaning is the annihilation of the common place (world) after death, and because by the term “self-like” there is no going astray from the place of the supreme soul; but the works, performed by ignorance, would go astray by the term “‘self-like.” And by the passage: ‘‘ Perishes certainly,” the going astray of all the effects by works will be set forth. By Bramha the castes were created for the sake of work, and this work, because it rules all castes by the notion of duty and accomplishes the object of man, has the name of virtue.
If therefore by this work alone the self-like place which is called the supreme soul, is obtained, although it is unknown, why then is it neces- sary to do any thing with reference to its production? On this ground it is said in the text: ‘‘Then,” which is to remove the objection of the opponent. ‘ Whosoever through this ‘‘ कणत,” which is subject to trans- migration, whose nature is the assumption of a body, whose causes are the desire and work of ignorance by believing in the work, dependent upon Agni, or by believing in work to be performed by the Bréhmana caste alone, on account of the world which is transient, and whose nature is not self-like, ‘‘ not seeing the self-like world,”’ which is called soul from not going astray from the nature of the soul, not seeing ‘I am Bramha,”’— ** dies,” the latter, (although “the latter’’ means the self-like world, yet it is unknown, concealed by ignorance, as a horse, which is not recognised) ‘*does not preserve him,’’—as the tenth soul in the well known example
* The commentary, called Bhartriprapanchika.
First Chapter. Fourth Brdmhana. 127
Even the great and holy work, which a person who does not know in this manner, performs, all this work of him, verily perishes at last. Leta man worship the soul as Ais place. Whosoever worships the soul alone as his place, his work does verily not
(vide p. 83.), does not preserve himself,—by the removal of grief, delusion, fear and other faults. And “ as’’ in common life, ^^ the Véda, which is not read,’’ does not teach work and whatsoever arises from it, ‘‘ or as other work,”’ in common life, for instance ploughing, ^^ which is not done,’’ is not manifested by its own nature, does not preserve him by the yielding of its fruit, so the soul, if unmanifested by its self-like nature, which is the eternal soul, does not preserve Aim by the annihilation of ignorance. “But then, does it not follow from the necessity that work obtains its effect by preserving the cause of the knowledge of the self-like world, and from the abundance of work, which is the cause of the desired effect, “that its preserving cause is undestroyable?’’? No, because every effect is liable to destruction. Therefore it is said in the text: ‘* Even the great,”’ as for instance many As’wamédha sacrifices, “and holy कण, which obtains its fruit, as if it were desired (although there has been no desire of its fruit) ‘“‘which a person,” of extra- ordinary magnanimity, ‘who does not know in this manner,” who does not know the self-like place in the said manner, continually ^ per- forms,”’ under the notion, that he shall thereby gain immortality, “ad? this work of him,”’ of the ignorant person, “verily perishes at last,” at the end of the enjoyment of the fruit, because desire, the effect of ig- norance, is its cause, like some wonderful superhuman power (perished) which appeared by the delusion of a dream. Since the causes of it (of the work) viz. ignorance and desire, are not permanent, it is necessary, that its effect is also liable to destruction. Therefore there is no hope to preserve for ever the fruit of holy work. ‘‘Therefore let a man worship the soul alone”’ as the self-like place; the soul is the self-like place; for in this meaning is the self-like place set forth in the text, and here is the term of “‘self-like’ not applied. = ^ Whosoever wor- ships the soul as Ais place,” what of him? 1६ is replied in the text : ‘*his work does verily not perish,’’ because there is even no work; this is repeated here in order to to establish it firmly. The meaning is, as there is constantly worldly unhappiness, consisting in the decrease
128 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
perish. Fur whatsoever he desires from the soul, the same he obtains. 15.
of the effect derived from work, so there is not for him (the wise) as if one thinks: if Mithila is burned, nothing burns me. Others* explain it to mean, ‘that the work of the knowing worshipper of his ownself (soul) does not perish by the connexion with a person who does not know. Further, for the term of ‘‘place,’’ intimately connected with work, they in fact assume two meanings; one is the place in the state of manifestation, depending upon work, and bearing the name of Hiranyagarbha. Whosoever worships this place, which is intimately connected with work, which is manifested and finite, the work of him, who knows the finite self as engaged in work, verily perishes. But whosoever worships the world, which is intimately connected with work, comprehending it in its unmanifested state under the notion of cause, his work does not perish, because he knows the infinite self (soul) as engaged in work.” ‘This assumption is ingenious, but it does not accord with the S'ruti, because by the term “the place of self”’ the supreme soul, set forth in the text, is denoted.’
The text having mentioned (before) ‘the place of self,’ omits (now) the term ‘‘ of self”’ and introducing the term ^" soul,” shows its identity with the former by the words: ‘‘ whosoever worships the soul alone as his place.”” There is here no possibility for the assumption of a place, intimately connected with work.
Moreover it (the place intimately connected with work) is different from the supreme place, whose object is knowledge alone. By the passage: ‘‘The soul 18 not the place,’ it is distinguished from the places, which are gained by inferior knowledge and the work of a son. Therefore ‘the soul is not the place,” and also: ‘His place is not measured by any work; this is his highest place.’’ By these sentences, because they are determined, a corresponding meaning is proper. Thus here also, because by the words ‘the place of self,” the predicate is fixed.
If it is said ‘that according to the passage: ‘‘for whatsoever,” it is improper, that the place of self is the supreme soul ; for if it is certain, that by the worship of him he becomes the supreme soul; whatsoever
* Viz. the explanation, given by the Bhartriprapancha.
First Chapter. Fourth Brémkhana. 129 Next that soul (self) verily is the place of all beings.
he desires, he obtains from the soul, then the declaration with regard to the fruit is improper, unless it is to obtain that soul.? We contradict, because it has the object to extol the worship of the world of self; for the meaning is, from the place of self alone all that is desired is obtained ; any thing different from it is not to be asked for, because all desires are satisfied, as it is said in another passage of the S’ruti (10. U. 7th Pr. 16th Kh. B. I. Vol. III. p. 524): ‘From the soul is life, from the soul hope.” Or it means to show the state of the universal soul as before (p. 105). For if the supreme soul is declared, it is right to apply the term “soul” in the passage: ‘‘for.... from the soul,” (p. 128) and it means, from the place of self, which is set forth as soul in the text. Otherwise it would have been said with a predicate, ^^ from the place of work in its unmanifested state’ in order to remove thereby the tdea of a place of the supreme soul in accordance with the text, and to remove the state of manifestation ; for since it set forth in the text and determined, another state, not authorized by the S’ruti, is impossible. 15. ** Next that soul verily.”” It has before (in the last section, describing the state of ignorance) been said, that the ignorant, in the conscious pride of caste and order of life, etc., and governed by the law, is, like a heast, subject to another by the necessity of perform- ing the works of the gods and others. Which again are the works by the necessary performance of which he becomes, like a beast, subject to another? And who are the gods and others whom he assists, like a beast, by works? Both is explained in the text. The term “next” is intended as an introduction to the present sentence. The house-holder, as set forth in the text, who is subject to work, ignorant, and endowed with body, senses, etc., is here called ‘ that soul.’’ ‘The meaning is “he is the place,”’ the object of enjoyment, ‘of all beings,” from the gods down to the ants, because he affords assistance to all by works which are commanded with reference to the different castes and orders. By what special works again affording assistance १०९३ ` he become the place, for what special beings? The answer is: ‘By what he,” the house-holder, ‘‘offers and sacrifices.” Sacrifice with reference to the deity is an abandonment of wealth (to the deity). If it is performed until the sprinkling of the water (on the head of the sacri- 8
130 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
He is the place of the gods by what he offers and sacrifices, further of the Rishis by what he learns, further of the fore- fathers (Pitris) by what he gives to the forefathers, and by his exertions about offspring, further of men by housing them and giving them food, further of cattle by finding them grass and water, further of beasts of prey, birds, etc. down to ants, by sustaining their life in his dwelling. As every one desires the continuance of his place, so verily desire all beings
ficer), itis Homa. By this work, viz. by Homa (offering) and sacrifice (Y4ga) which it is his duty to perform, “he is,”’ like a beast, subject to the will of another, ‘the place of the gods.” ‘Further by what he reads,” viz. his daily reading of the Védas, “he is the place of the Rishis.” ‘Further by what he gives to the forefathers,” viz. the oblation, water, etc., “and by his exertions about offspring,” by that work, which he is bound to perform, ‘“‘he is the place of the fore- fathers.” ‘Further by housing men,” by giving them place, water, etc. in his house, “and giving them food,’”’ viz. them who ask him for it, whether they live in his house or not, ‘“‘he is the place of men.” ‘Further by finding,” giving ‘“‘them grass and water,” he is the “place of cattle.” ‘Further of beasts of prey, birds together with ants by sustaining their life in his dwelling,” with grains and (particles of food guined) by the cleaning of the sacrificial vessels, % {16 is the place of them.”’ Because by those works he affords as- sistance to the gods, etc., therefore ‘‘as every one desires continu- ance of his own place,” of his own body, desires the preservation of his nature, from the fear of losing his nature sustains it always by . nourishing, protecting it, etc., “so verily desire all beings,’’ the gods and others, the above mentioned continuance of life ‘for him who thus. knows,” who thus frames his soul: ‘‘I am to be enjoyed by all beings, I, like a debtor, am bound to make returns;” that is to say, they preserve him for the continuance of their own existence, as house-holders preserve cattle. Therefore it is said: ‘It is not pleasant tothem.” ‘ This verily,” that the said works must necessarily be done, like the paying of a debt, “is declared,” in the chapter of the five great sacrifices, (the five great sacrifices, viz. to all beings, to men, to the forefathers, to the gods, and to Bramh&) “‘and considered,’’ and proved as necessary by
First Chapter. Fourth Brdmhana. 131
welfare for one who thus knows. This verily is declared and. considered. 16. |
Self (the soul) alone was this before; he was even one. He consideration in the chapter of the distribution of the things, required for the five great sacrifices (Avaddnaprakarana). 16
“‘Self alone was this before.” If the knower of Bramha is liberat- ed from the state of cattle, which consists in the bondage of duty, by whom then has he been made subject to the bondage of work, and 170 again to the practice of knowledge, which is the means of liberation ? Is it not said: ‘‘The gods preserve?’ Certainly, but they preserve those who by the performance of work obtained their own (the gods’) state ; otherwise it would be in their power to bestow the effects of actions not done, or destroy the effects of actions done, (that is to say ; otherwise, they would be partial) but they do not preserve a common man, who has not obtained a special perfection. Therefore it must be the same (who makes him subject to the bondage of work) by whose power a person subject to work is getting out of his own place. Is that not ignorance? for the ignorant, getting out of himself, is engaged in work? No, ignorance also is not the cause which makes one to engage in work ; for its character is to conceal the true nature of a thing ; but it may be the cause of making one to engage in work, in the same manner, as blindness is the cause, that one is liable to fall into holes, etc. If this is the case, then say, what causes one to engage in work ? This is set forth, viz. it is willing, desire. Thus it is said in the Kéthaka (4 to ए. 2. B. I. Vol. VIII. p. 123): ^ Remaining in their natural ignorance, youths engage in actions ; follow external objects of desire.”’ In the Bhagavadgita: ‘It is desire, it is anger, etc.” (28. ७. 3rd A. 37.) And in Manu: “ Desire is the cause of all engagements in action, (M. 8. 2d. A.4.) This meaning is in all its detail proved throughout this whole chapter. ‘‘ Self alone was this befure.”’ Self alone viz. the person who is ignorant by his own nature, who is to be comprehended under the notion of effect and cause, the Bramhachéri (the religious student). ‘‘ Before.’’ Previous to the union with a wife he is called self.
There was no object of desire, as a wife, etc. different from this self. ‘‘ He was even one,” possessed of ignorance, the cause of the desire of a wife, etc., he, was even alone; he was pervaded by ignorance,
8 2
132 Brihad Arunyaka Upanishad.
desired: Let me have a wife ; again,—let me be born ; again, — let me have wealth; again,—let me perform work. So far extend,. verily desire. For without desire one dues not get more than
the nature of which is to assign to one’s own soul the assumptions of agent, action and fruit. ‘‘ He desired’”” What? ‘ Let me have a wife.” Let me, the agent, have a wife, the cause of the performance of work ; without her I am not a fit agent for work ; therefore to accomplish the performance of work, let me have a wife. = ^" Again,—let me be born,”’ let me be produced as offspring. ‘‘ Again,—let me have wealth,’’ cows, etc., by which work is accomplished. ^ Again let me perform work,” the cause of elevation and liberation, viz. let me perform work,—by which,— liberated from my debt, I may obtain the places (worlds) of the gods, etc.,—and the ceremonial rites for objects of desire which are the causes by which a son, wealth, heaven, etc. are effected. ‘‘ So far extends verily desire,’ which means, desire is limited to those objects. So far extend the objects which are to be desired, viz. a wife, son, wealth and works, viz. the desire as cause. The three worlds, the world of man, the world of the forefathers, and the world of the gods, are the effects of this desire as cause ; for the desire, as cause referring to wife, son, wealth and work, is for their sake. Therefore this is one desire ; and the other, the desire of the worlds, which is also a desire, depends upon a cause ; in this manner desire is two-fold. Hence it will be afterwards (ए. A. p. 592), said: «५ These two desires.”” Because every action is undertaken on account of its effect, therefore it should be understood, that by the passage: ‘So far extends desire’ the worlds are necessarily implied, and therefore declared,”’ for if eating is mentioned, it is not necessary to mention also satisfaction, because eating is merely for the sake of it. These two desires, characterised as cause and effect, are the longing, by which compelled, the ignorant, who is subject ६० work, like the silk- worm, encases his self (soul) ; that is ¢o say, on the road of action not attending to himself (the soul), ard having got out (of himself), he does not know his own place (the place which is like himself). Thus it is said in the Taittariya: ^ Bewildered by fire, teased by smoke, he does not know his own place.” How again is it ascertained, that desire ex- tends so far, because desires are infinite, for desires have no end? On this account the reason is stated: Because ^^ without desire one does
First Chapter. Fourth Brdémkana. 133
this. Therefore also now a person, when alone, desires : Let me have a wife,—again, let me be born,—again, Jet me have wealth, —again, let me perform work. As long as he does not obtain one of them, so long he thinks himself incomplete. His completeness is this, that the mind is his self (soul) and speech his wife.
not get more than this,” which consists of effect and cause ; for, beside cause and effect, nothing, either perceived or not perceived, is to be gained in ¢his world; for the object to be obtained is desire, and as this does not exist without them (cause and effect) it is proper to say : ९८ 80 far extends verily desire.”’ Hereby it is said: Wish, the object of action of the ignorant subject, is two-fold desire, viz. either desire as effect, or 98 cause, whether its object is perceived or not perceived. Above this wish the wise must be elevated. Because in this manner the ignorant self (soul) being desirous, before desired, and also he who preceded him, —(for this is the law of the world, and in the same manner was this the creation of Prajdpati; for it is said, (p. 64) ‘he was afraid’’ by igno- rance. Then (pp. 67-68): ‘‘ Hence, excited by desire, a person is not happy when alone; to remove the unhappiness, he desired a wife ; he approached her ; hence sprang forth this creation,’ —“‘ Therefore,” after this creation, “also now,”’ at the present time, ‘a lonely person,”’ before his being married, desires in accordance with what has been said: ‘ Let me have a wife,—again, let me be born,—again, let me have wealth,— again, let me perform work.’’ ^ Aslong as he,” who is thus desirous and endeavouring of getting all, a wife, &c., ‘‘ as long as he does not obtain one of them,” one of what has been mentioned, a wife, &c., "80 long he thinks himself incomplete.”” At last when he obtains all of them, 018 completeness ensues ; but when he cannot accomplish his completeness,
he is in the state of incompleteness; then for the accomplishing of his
completeness, the text says: ‘‘ His completeness,” the completeness of him, who, as before mentioned is conscious of incompleteness “ is this.”
What! (To show this), the totality of effect and cause 18 divided. Here
(in this division) ‘‘the mind is’ (for every thing else, produced from the
totality of cause and effect is governed by it), by its superiority, ‘his
self (the soul)’ which means like his self, as the master of the family is
like the soul of the wives, &c., because his wife, son, &c., follow him.
In the same manner is the mind here assumed as the self for the sake of
134 Brikad Aranyaka Upanieshad.
Life is their offspring, the eye the wealth of man ; for by the eyes one obtains it,—the ear {0९ wealth of the gods ; for by the ear one hears it; self is even his work,—for by self one performs work.
The sacrifice is five-fold, the animal five-fold, the man five- fold, five-fold this all whatsoever. Whosoever thus knows, the same obtains this all. 17.
completeness ; ‘‘ and” thus also “ speech his wife,’”’ on account of speech, being in like manner governed by the mind. Speech, viz. sound, whose characteristic is directing, &c., is received by the mind through the ear, &c., considered and revered; in this manner is speech the wife of the mind. From both, speech and mind, represented as wife and husband, was produced life for the performance of work ; therefore “life is their offspring,’ as it were. There (if self, wife and offspring are present) work characterised by the effort of life, &c., is to be accomplished by the wealth perceived by the eye, and therefore is ‘‘ the eye the wealth of man.” Wealth is two-fold, wealth of man and other wealth ; therefore it is said, ‘of man,’’ to distinguish it from other wealth ; for cattle, the wealth connected with man and perceptible by the eye, is accomplishing action ; therefore i¢ represents it. Hence by connexion is the eye the wealth of man ; ‘‘for,’’ because, ‘* one obtains,” perceives, ‘‘it,’’ the wealth of man, cattle etc., ^^ by the eye’’ (there- fore is the eye the wealth of man). What again is the other kind of wealth? ‘The ear the wealth of the gods,” because knowledge is the object of the gods. Knowledge is the wealth of the gods. There- fore in our case is the ear even the object of wealth. Why? ‘ For by the ear ;” because by the ear “one hears it,”’ the wealth of the gods, knowledge, therefore is the ear even the wealth, because knowledge is dependent on the ear. How again is work to be performed by those agents, the first of which is self, and the last wealth? The answer is: ‘‘Self'is even.” Self means here the body. How again is self (the body) the representative of work ? because it is the cause of work for him (the sacrificer). How is it the cause of work? *‘ For by self,” by the body, ‘‘ one performs work.’’ In this manner is the complete- ness, whose characteristics are external objects, as a son, &c., accome plished for him, who thinks himself incomplete. In this manner therefore, ‘‘ The sacrifice is five-fold,” to be performed by five, even
First Chapter. Fifth Brémhana. 135 Fifth Brdmhana.
Of the seven provisions which the father created by under-
in the case of a person who has ceased from work, where it is to be performed by symbols alone. How again is the symbol by the mere apprehension of five, called a sacrifice? Because an external sacrifice also is accomplished by men and animals, and there are five men and five animals, by the application of the mentioned five, mind, speech, &c. Therefore it is said: ‘The animal five-fold,—the man five-fold.”’ Although the notion of animal is found also in man, yet there is a dif- ference between them, wherefore ‘‘man’’ has been separately men- tioned. What more? “ Five-fold this all,’’ the cause and effect of the work, र" whatsoever.’? ^ Whosoever thus knows,’’ whosoever in this manner represents the five-fold sacrifice as himself, ^ the same obtains this all,’’ the world under the notion of himself. 17.
There (in the last Bramhana) ignorance has been introduced by the words : ‘‘ Whosoever worships another deity in sucha manner:”? “He is another, another am I,”’ the same does not know.” (B. A. p. 118). It bas also been said (p. 129,) that the person, who has the conscious- ness of caste and of the different conditions of life (viz. of a religious student, a house-holder, of one who retires to the forest, and of one who lives merely for the contemplation of God), who is ruled by his duties, who, compelled by desire, affords assistance to the gods, fore- fathers, &c., through sacrifices and other rites, is the place for all beings. And as by each and all of his works he has been created as the place to be enjoyed by all beings, thus he has created all beings and the whole world for his own enjoyment. The meaning is, in this*manner every body, in accordance with his knowledge and work, is the enjoyer and enjoyment, the agent and the object of action of the whole world. To understand the identity of the suul, we shall say with reference to know- ledge in the chapter treating on the knowledge of the universal essence (madhu lit. honey,): ‘‘ All is the effect of all, one universal essence.”’
He created by the five-fold work whose object in desire, viz. by the five-fold sacrifice, °&c., the world, for Ais enjoyment, and also by knowledge (for his consideration). This whole world is seven-fold divided according to its being cause and effect. They (these parts) are called provisions, because they are objects of enjoyment. Hence
136 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
atanding and penance, he assigned one as the common to adé, and two to the gods, three he made for bimself, one he gave to the animals ; for upon this all is founded, whatsoever breathes and whatsoever breathes not. Why are they not destroyed, although always consumed? Whosoever knows the cause of the non-destruction, he eats the principal food; he goes to the gods, he lives eternally. 1.
The Mantra: ‘ Of the seven provisions which the father creat- ed by understanding and penance ; for the father created by un-
(by the creation of them through work and knowledge) he is the father of those provisions. Those Mantras: ‘‘ Of the seven provisions,” &c. are here assumed as Siitras, because they show, compendiously, the meaning of those provisions, together with their application. (The term ^ Yad” is here an adverb in connexion with ‘he created.’) By “‘ understanding,” knowledge, and “penance,” work; for knowledge and work are the meanings of the terms “understanding,” and “penance,” because they are topics of the text, and not the literal meanings of them “ understanding” and “penance,” because they are not topics of the text; for the five-fold work, to be accom- plished by a wife, &c. and afterwards knowledge by the words: “ who thus knows, &c.,’’ have been set forth in the text. Therefore it must not be doubted, that understanding and penance are well known. Again: ‘The seven provisions which the father created,” by knowledge and work, here it must be supplied : the same I will mention.* 1. | Here 18 the sense of the Mantras on account of their obscurity dif- ficult to be understood ; hence the Bramhana is engaged in the expla- nation of them. There what means the Mantra: ‘Of the seven provisions which the father created.’”’ ‘‘The answer is given by the term for’ which is to show, that the meaning is well-known; for the meaning is, that the meaning of the Mantra is well-known, and therefore by the repetition of the Mantra: ‘The provisions he produced,”’ isto indicate, that the meaning is well-known. Therefore the Bramhana says without hesitation: ‘For the father created by understanding and penance.” But how then is the meaning well-known? The answer
* There is no necessity for assuming the proposed ellipsis, and I have, therefore, not followed S’ankar&’s explanation in the translation.
First Chapter. Fifth Brdmhana. 137
derstanding and penance.”” =^" He assigned one as the common to all.””?. The common provision to all, is that which is eaten.
the causes, producing the worlds, of which the first is a wife and the last work, is evident, and it is also declared by such passages as: «° Let me have a wife.’”’ There it has been declared, that the wealth of the gods,—viz. knowledge,—work and ason are the cause of the creation with reference to the worlds in their nature as effects (that is to say, as the result of good or bad actions.) And also that which will be said, is well known. Therefore it is proper to say: «१ By understanding, &c;’’ for desire, whose object is (enjoyment of ) fruit, is well-known in common life, and also desire, whose object is a wife, &c., which is set forth in the passage: ‘So far extends desire ;** but as to the object of the knowledge of Bramha (which is liberation), desire is impussible, because then all is one and the same. Thereby (by showing, that the cause of the world is desire, produced by ignorance) it is also said, that the world is created by natural, unscriptural knowledge and penance. This follows also from the reason, that work and knowledge are the cause of consequences which are not desired, down to the state of inanimate matter. But it was intended to explain the relation of effect and cause in accord- ance with the S‘astra; for in the desire to establish the knowledge of Bramha, there is included the intention to describe the state, in which the world is disregarded ; for this whole world, whose nature is manifested and not manifested, is impure, transient, a compound of cause and effect, the object of unhappiness and ignorance, and therefore for him who has no regard for this world, the knowledge of Bramha is to be commenced.
There, by the division of the provisions, their application is set forth. ‘«¢ He assigned one as the common to all,” this is a part of the Mantra. Its explanation is as follows: ^ The common provision to all’’ to all enjoyers, what is it? ‘that which is eaten,’”’ enjoyed by all beings day by day; this common food, the object of all enjoyers, the father assigned after the creation of the provision. =
«५ Whosoever worships,’’—which means is attached to, (for worship means also attachment, as it is clear from common expressions such as: ^° He worships the teacher,”’ ^ he worships the king,”’) “ it’’—viz. the common provision, which is to be enjoyed, the cause of the preser-
T
138 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad. ध
Whosoever worships it, the same does not turn from sin ; for it
vation of all living beings, whose principal object is the enjoyment of provision for the sake of the preservation of the body, and not work for the sake of something unseen,—“ the same,” being of such a na- ture, °^ does not turn,” is not liberated, ° from sin,’® from vice. Thus a Mantra says: ^ He enjoys useless food,” &c. (Kr. Yajur Brambana 2d Adh. 8th Pr. 8th Anva.) Also the Smriti: ‘* Let him not cook food for himeelf”’ (alone). He, who eats, without giving to the guests, isa thief. Even a person who procures abortion,* becomes free from sin, if he eats food, after he has first distributed it.”
Why again does he not turn from sin? ‘‘ for it is mixed ;’’ for the property, which is enjoyed by the living creatures, is undivided (and therefore it does not belong to one, as the property, left by a father, does not belong to any of his sons, before it is divided) because it is the object of enjoyment for all. Even the morsel, which is put inte the mouth, is observed to cause pain in the mind of another ; for, while there is the desire, let me have it, the hope of every one is thereby ex- cluded. Therefore it is impossible to take even a mouthful of food, without giving pain to another. Thus it is said in the Smriti: “ It is the guilt of man,” &c
Some (the Bhartriprapancha) say: The food, called that of the Vis'wadévas which is daily given by the house-holder, is here meant This is not evident, like the food, which is an object of enjoyment for all living beings ; nor does it agree with the passage: “that which is eaten.” Because the food, which is called the food of the Vis'wadévas, is included in the food, which is an object of enjoyment for all living beings, therefore it is proper to understand the food which may be eaten by a dog, a (0६00६18, &c., for it is the food which, beside the Vis’wadévas, is taken by a dog, Chandéla, &c. In this case the expression ; ‘‘ that which is eaten,” is proper ;. for if food is not to meen general food, then it must be said, that it has neither been creat- ed nor applied by the father ; but it has been granted, that all food has been created and distributed by the father; and it is very improper to say, that a person who has performed the work, which is called that of the Vis’'wadévas, and which isin accordance with S‘4stras, is not re«
* According to Ananda a person, who kills a high caste Bréhmana.
First Chapter. Fifth Brémhana. 139
fs mixed. ‘And two to the gods,” viz. the sacrifice and the oblation. Again, others say they mean the ceremonies at the
leased from all sin. Nor is there a prohibition of it ; nor is it, like the action of catching fish, blamed for its own nature, because it is per- formed by good people, and because the S'ruti declares it sin, if it is not done; moreover, otherwise also sin is obtained ; for it is said in a Mantra: “I am food, I eat him who eats food.’’—‘* dnd two to the gods.” This isa part of the Mantra. Which are the two pro- visions, which after their creation he assigned to the gods? The answer is: ^“ The sacrifice (Hutam) and the oblation (Prahutam).’’* Sacrifice is an offering in the fire. The oblation is the taking of the offerable food after the sacrifice. Because the father made over these two provisions, the sacrifice and the oblation, to the gods, therefore at this time house-holders also ‘“‘ sacrifice to the gods,”’ thinking, this food must be given by us to the gods, ‘‘ and offer,” which means, and having sacrified, take the offering. ‘‘ Again others say,’ the two provisions which were given by the father to the gods, are not the sacrifice and the oblation ; what then? ‘‘ They mean the ceremonies at the new and full moon (Dars’apirnamésau). Here, according to the first supposition, it will be said, because there is no difference with reference to the dual number (dwe, two provisions, which may be as well ap- plied to Hutaprahute as to Dars'apirpamdsau) and because they (the Huta and Prahuta) are otherwise known, it means the. sacrifice (Huta) and the oblation (Prahuta). But although the dual number accords also with the sacrifice and the oblation, yet the ceremonies at the new and full moon are also performed by the Srauta fire,t and the notion of their being provisions, is yet better known, because they are declared in a Mantra.t And if a quality and the thing to which it refers, are obtained (at the same time) the latter must first be comprehended ; but to the ceremonies at the new and full moon the idea of priority must
* The Brahmana has twice daily to perform the ceremony of Homa (the offering of ghee in fire). When the food is ready, a part of it is to be offered in the fire to the gods; this is called Hutam, while another part is thrown on the ground as an offering to those gods, who are called Dharmadi.
+ The house-holder has to perform his daily ceremonies, &c., by the Smarta fire
(the fire ordained by the Smriti) and the ceremonies at the new and full moon by the Srauta fire (the fire, ordained by the S’ruti).
Tr 2
140 Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.
new and full moon. Therefore it is not their nature to be associated with desires. ‘“‘One he gave to the animals,” This is milk ; for before men as well as animals subsist on milk alone. Therefore they feed the child, when born, either with melted butter, or put him to the breast. Then they call the babe born; for he does not eat grass.
be assigned rather than to the sacrifice and oblation. Therefore it is proper to think of them by the words: ‘ dnd two to the gods.” Because those two provisions under the name of the provisions at the new and full moon, were designed by the father for the gods, ‘‘therefore,”” in order to remove any objection, that they are made for the gods, ‘it is not their nature to be associated with desires” (ishti ;) that the term ^" ishti’’ means desire, is clear from the S‘atapatha Brémhana, (the affix uka in the word, ‘‘ Ishtiyayuka,” means a na- tural inclination).
० 00९ he gave to the animals.”’. Which is the one provision which the father gave to the animals ? “This is milk :”” How again is it known, that the animals are the possessors of that provision? The text an- swers: ‘ For before” because before, at first, ^^ men as well as animals, subsist on milk alone,” therefore this provision 18 proper for them ; how could they otherwise before subsist on it in accordance with a law? How do they before subsist on it? The answer is: Because men as well as animals subsist on that provision (as this application is made at the commencement, although there existed also other provisions) ‘‘ therefore they,” the three castes, ‘either feed,’ cause to eat, «^ the child, when born,” at the ceremony of its birth, ‘ with melted butter,” together with gold,* ९८०१ they put him afterwards to the breast,’’ they cause him afterwards to drink milk. As itis natural for the others, (vis. for animals, different from men) they put the young animal first to the breast. ‘Then they call the babe born.” Of what, size (that is to say ‘‘age’”’) 18 the babe? To this question it is replied: ^^ for he does not eat grass,” even until this day he does not eat grass, which means, that a very young child even until this day lives upon milk. And what has before been said, ‘‘that at first at the ceremony after birth they subsist on melted butter, and others on milk (viz. that
* It is only a touching of the tongue with melted butter, mixed with gold.
First Chapter. Fifth Brdmhara. 141
Upon this all is founded, whatsoever breathes and whatso- ever not breathes; for on milk all is founded, whatsoever breathes and whatsoever not breathes. The saying: ‘a per- son, offering throughout the year with milk, overcomes the
they subsist upon milk merely; this makes no difference) for melted butter is of the same nature as milk, being a modification of it. Why is the provision for animals, which was before (in the Mantra) given in the seventh place, explained here in the fourth? This is done, because thereby the work is accomplished ; for all work which refers to burnt- offerings, &c., depends upon milk as its cause.
And this work (milk) which is to be effected by wealth, is to effect the three provisions which will be mentioned, as the before men- tioned two provisions of the ceremonies at the new and full moon (are the cause of the three provisions) ; therefore it (milk) being a part of the work (ceremonial work) it is declared to be identical with work. Moreover, since there is no difference as to its being ४ cause (as this provision, milk, is a cause in the same way as the former two provisions are) and hence the meaning (of the two former provisions with milk) is similar, the succession (in which the topics are described in the Mantra) is disregarded (lit. is no reason, that the explanation should not have been made in a different order.) It is also done, because the explanation is theredy made more easy ; for the provisions, when éreated one after another, can be easily explained, and, when explained, are easily understood.
‘‘Upon this all is founded, whatsoever breathes and whatsoever not breathes.”” What is the meaning of this? The answeris: ^ Upon this,” the animal provision, ‘‘all,’”’ be it characterized as belonging to the soul, or to the material sphere, or to the superintendence of deities, the whole world, “ is founded,” “^ whatsoever breathes,’ endowed with the effort of breathing, ^ and whatsoever not breathes,’’ immoveable matter, as rocks, &c. And there (in the text) it is explained by the term € for,’’ which illustrates any thing already well known. How can it be said that the notion ^ to be the foundation of all,’”’ belongs to milk? On account of its being considered as cause. And it is the intimate cause of all the works connected with burnt-offerings, and by its nature a modification of the oblation of a burnt-sacrifice. That it is the whole
142 Brihkad dA'ranyaka Upeaxishad.
second death,” let none understand this in such a manner. Which day a person sacrifices, the same day he overcomes the second death. A person who thus knows, will overcome the second death that day on which he offers; for he gives all the eatable food to the gods. For what reason do they not decrease, although they are continually consumed ? The soul is
world (which is founded thereon) is established by a hundred passages of the S’ruti and Smriti, wherefore it is proper to explain it by the term ‘for.’ ‘The saying: in other Bramhanas, “a person, offering throughout a year with milk, overcomes the second death”’ (here by the year are in fact meant three hundred and sixty days, and in them there are seven hundred and twenty burnt-offerings.) By the sacrificer the bricks* which are collected in accordance with the Yajur Véda and the days and nights of the year, obtains Praj&pati in the shape of the fire, which is called Sambatsara (the annual fire). Having performed in this manner offerings throughout the year, a person overcomes the second death ; having died he becomes like the gods, and does not die again. This, which is said in the passages of other Brdmhanas; “let none understand this in such a manner,”’ let it not be explained thus. ‘“‘ Which day a person sacrifices ; the same day he overcomes the second death,” it does not depend upon the practice of the whole year. ‘ A person who thus knows,” viz. what has been said, that ^ Upon milk all is founded,” because all is a modification of the burnt-offering of milk, obtains the nature of the world (of Prajdépati) in one day. Thus it is said: ^“ He overcomes the second death ;’’ the sage, once dying, being separated from the body, becomes the universal soul (the nature of all) which means, does not assume a finite body for dying again. What again is the reason, that by gaining the nature of all he overcomes death? It is replied: ० {07 he gives,’ because he gives all ‘‘ the eatable food to the gods,” to all of them, by his morning and evening burnt-offerings ; therefore it is proper, that he,—after having made his whole self like a burnt-offering, after having gained one identical nature with all the gods by his being the provision of all the gods, and after being like all the gods,—should not
* The sacrificer, or in his stead his appointed substitute, is after every daily ceremony to put down a brick to mark the number of ceremonies he has performed in the year.
First Chapter. Fifth Brdémhana. 143
verily the cause that they do not decrease, for he again and again produces this provision. : ५« Whosoever knows the cause that they do not decrease,—the soul is the cause that they do not decrease ; for he produces this provision by understanding, by understanding and by works; if he did not produce it, it would verily decrease,—* he eats food
die again. In this manner it is also said ina Bramhana. ‘The self- existing Brémha (in the form of Hiranyagarbha) performed penance. Then he reflected: ‘Verily, there is a limit of penance; alas; let me offer myself in all beings, and all beings in myself,’ therefore, having offered himself in all beings and all beings in himself, he obtained by his excellency over all beings, his kingdom, his dominion.” ‘‘ For what reason do they not decrease, although they are continually consumed 2?” From the time that the provisions after their creation were given by the father to the seven different enjoyers, they are consumed by them. Since they (the provisions) are the cause of their (of the enjoyers’) preserva- tion, and since there ^^ continually,’’ without interruption, is a decrease of what has been made, their decrease is proper. But they do not decrease, a8 is evident, from the world continuing m an unshaken manner ; hence there must be a cause for it, that they do not deerease. Therefore it is asked: ‘For what reason,” again, *‘do they not decrease.” The reply is: ^ The soul 18 verily the cause, that they are not deereased.”” As the father was before the creator of the provisions by understanding, and as he was enjoyer by the five-fold work in con- nexion with a wife, &c., in the same manner also those, to whom the provisions are given, although they are enjoyers of those provisions, are fathers; they produce by understanding and penance those provi- sious. It is then declared: the soul which is the enjoyer of the provi- sions, is the eanse, that they do not decrease. How is it the cause, that they do not decrease? The answer is: “For he,” because he “again and again produces this provision,” viz. this seven-fold provi- sion, which is to be enjoyed, the characteristic of which is to be cause and effect, and which consists im the effect of work,—‘‘ by understanding, by understanding,” by knowledge which will take place at this or the other time, ‘and by works,” the efforts of speech, mind and body. “If he did not produee it,” the mentioned seven-fold provisions, even for
।
144 Brihkad Arasyaka Upanishad.
in the true manner,” true means principal; therefore he eats food in the principal manner, he goes to the gods, he lives upon strength ; this is said for the sake of praise. 2.
an instant, by knowledge and works, then he would be separated from the permanent enjoyment, “it would verily decrease.” And the mean- ing is, therefore, because the soul, the enjoyer of the provisions, unin- terruptedly produces them according to Ats knowledge and action, therefore is the soul the cause that they do not decrease, as it is a constant agent; therefore the provisions, although consumed, do not decrease. Hence the whole world, the totality, characterised by knowledge and the result of action, consisting of effect and cause, being the effect resulting from action,—because it is an expanse, concreted by the actions and desires of numberless embodied souls, joined together,—of a moment’s duration, impure, without substance, like the continuation of a light reflected on the current of a river, without substance like the trunk of — the plantain-tree, like foam, like a deception, like the water in a mirage, like a dream, &c., although changeable and transient, appears to be substantial to those whose knowledge is formed by it. For the sake of disregarding the world it is said: ^ He produces this provision by understanding, by understanding and by works. If he did not produce it, it would verily decrease ;” for in this manner the disregard of those who disregard the world, has success :—therefore the science of Bramha will be commenced in the fourth chapter. ^ Whosoever knows the cause that they do not decrease,’’—the three provisions to be mentioned are by this opportunity explained ; in this manner the effect of true knowledge is set forth. = ^ Whosoever knows the cause that they do not decrease, —the soul is verily the cause that they do not decrease; for he produces this provision by understanding, by understanding and by works ; if he did not produce #¢, it would verily decrease,—he eats food in the true manner.” The sense of this is explained ; ‘‘in the principal manner; whosoever knows in the principal manner that the cause of the non-decrease of the provisions is the father, the soul, ^^ he eats the food ;” a person who knows is not placed, as the ignorant is, in an accidental relation to the food ; having become the substance of the provisions, he is alone the enjoyer ; he does not become an object of enjoyment (for others) ^“ he goes to the gods,” obtains a godlike state ; ^“ he lives upon
First Chapter. Fifth Brémhana. 145
© Three he made for himself,” viz. mind, speech, and life ; these he made for himself. ‘ I was absent in mind, I did not see. I was absent in mind, I did not hear ;” in this manner it is evident, that a person sees with the mind, hears with the mind. Desire, determination, uncertainty, belief, unbelief, steadiness
strength,”’ and immortality, “this is said for the sake of praise,” it has not another meaning relative to an invisible effect. 2.
The three provisions, mentioned before which are the effects of the five-fold work, exceed in value the others on account of their nature as effects and of their extensiveness. For the separate explanation of them, the present section, from the words: ‘‘ Three he made for himself,” until the end of ¢his Bramhana is commenced. What is its meaning ? The answer is: ‘Mind, speech and life, these,’ three provisions, these mind, speech and life, ‘he,’ the father, at the commence- ment of the creation, “made for himself,’ for his own sake. With reference to them there is a doubt as to the existence and nature of the mind ; hence it is said, the mind exists as something different from the ear and the other external organs, because it is well known, that, although there is a connexion of the soul with the objects of the external organs, yet a person does not (always) apprehend a present object. A person, when asked: Dost thou see this form? answers Jor instance: My mind wandered somewhere else, ‘*I was absent in mind, I did not see.”” In the same manner, when asked: Dost thou hear my word? he answers: ‘I was absent in mind, I did not hear.” Therefore, it is evident, that that,—in the absence of which a knowledge of form, sound, &c., by the eye, ear, &c. (the instruments fit to appre- ‘hend forms, sounds, &c.) does not take place, although they (eye, ear, &c.) are in connexion with their respective objects, and by the presence of which such a knowledge takes place,—is something different, named the mind, the internal organ, connected with the objects of all the other organs. Therefore ‘in this manner it is evident, that a person’”’ every person ‘sees with the mind, hears with the mind,” because, the mind being disturbed, there is no seeing, hearing, &c. The existence of the mind having been proved, the following is said with reference to its nature : “* Desire,’’—the wish to be united with a woman, &c., ^^ determination,’’ —the ascertaining of a present object of white, blue, &c., ^ uncertainty,”
U
146 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
non- steadiness, shame, intellect, fear, all this is the mind alone. Therefore, when touched from behind, a person knows by the mind, Every sound whatsoever is speech ; for it extends as far as the end ; for it is not an object of manifestation. The vital air, which goes forwards, the vital air, which goes downwards, the
—doubt, ^^ belief,”—the knowledge of the existence of actions whose effects are not perceived, of deities, &c., ^ unbelief,”’—the knowledge, opposite to the former, ‘‘ steadiness,” —the firmness in pain of the body, &c. “‘ non-steadiness,”—the opposite of the former, ‘‘shame,””—bashful- ness ; ‘‘ intellect,””>—knowledge ; ‘ fear,’’—apprehension, “all this, &c. is the mind,” are forms of the mind, of the internal organ. Another reason is also mentioned for the existence of the mind. Because, ‘when touched from behind,” by some body unperceived by the eye, 8 person is aware by discrimination, this is a touch of the hand, that a touch of the knee, therefore exists an internal organ, called mind. If there were nothing which discriminates, called mind, how could there be discrimination by the mere skin; therefore the mind, the cause of the possibility of discrimination, exists. Its nature has already been shown.
The three provisions, the effects of actions, viz. mind, speech and life, are here to be explained inasmuch as they are subservient to the soul, as they have their material sphere, and as they are superintended by deities. Among them, viz. among mind, speech and life, 98 subser- vient to the soul, the mind has been explained. Now speech will be explained. = ^^ Every sound whatsoever,” . viz.—either that which is characterized as a letter, &c. to be pronounced through the palate and other organs by the agency of living beings, or the other Aind, produc- ed by drums, clouds, &c.,—every sound ‘‘is speech.” Such is the nature of speech, now its effect will be mentioned. ^^ For it,” for speech ०५ extends as far as the end,”’ the conclusion of what is to be named, the determination of the same ; "^ for it,”’ again, as being the manifester, 18 not to be manifested, as is what is to be named, because its nature is to manifest like a light, &c. ; for what manifests, as alight and the like, is not manifested by some other manifestation. In the same manner speech which manifests, is not manifested itself. Thus the S’ruti removes the regressum in infinitum (that any thing which manifests, supposes some thing else by which it is manifested, &c). It is not an object of mani-
First Chapter. Fifth Bréimhara. 147
vital air, which goes everywhere, the vital air, which goes up- wards, and the vital air, which equalises, vital air, all this is life (Préna:). Thus modified the soul is the modification of mind, the modification of speech, and the modification of life. 3.
They are even the three worlds; speech is even this world, mind the atmospheric world, life that world. 4.
festation, and the meaning is, manifestation is the effect of speech.— Now “< the vital air, which goes forwards,”’ (respiration, Prana :) is explained. Respiration is the function of the heart which is to be discharged by the mouth and nose. Respiration (Prana is derived from Pranayana, taking forwards). ‘The vital air which goes downwards,”’ (Flatulence, Apana) whose function is downwards, from the carrying away of excre- ments, urine, &c., the vital air which goes every where,” (circulation : ए ६०६) has its place from the navel (throughout the whole body) and is called Vy4na from its function of regulating (Vyayamana) ; it is the union of the functions of respiration and flatulence and the cause of energetic action. ‘ The vital air, which goes upwards,”” (Eructation, Udéna) is the getting stout, it is the cause of going upwards, the function of rising from the sole of the feet to the head ; ‘the vital air, which equalises,” (assimilation, Saména) because it equally (Samam) carries (distributes) what is eaten and drunk ; its place is the stomach, and its function to digest the food; vital air (Ana) is the common function of all those special functions, and united with the common effort of the body. ‘ All this,’ the whole of the mentioned functions of respiration, &c., is life (Prana),—Life, as having a function and subservient to the soul, is not mentioned; but its action has been explained by showing the division of its functions. Explained are the provisions called mind, speech and life, in their relation as subservient to the soul. ‘‘ Thus modified,” viz. by the modifications commenced by mind, speech and life, as referring to Praj&pati.
Which is that soul, the whole of causes and effects, the thus or thus modified totality, which by those who do not discriminate, from want of distinction, is thought to be of the nature of the soul? The mentioned totality is the modification of speech, the modification of mind and the modification of life ; this alsois said for the purpose to determine life. 3.
The material sphere (Adhibhautika) of these provisions of Prajépati
u 2
148 Brihad Aranyaka Upaniehad.
They are even the three Védas; speech is even the Rig Véda, mind the Yajur Véda, and life the Sama Véda. 5.
They are even the gods, the forefathers and men; speech is even the gods, mind the forefathers, and life men. 6.
They are even father, mother and child ; mind is even the father, speech the mother, and life the child. 7.
They are even that which is known, which is wished to be known, and which is not known; whatsoever is known, is of the nature of speech; for speech is known; speech being of such a nature, preserves a person. 8.
Whatsoever is wished to be known, is of the nature of the mind ; for the mind is desired to be known; the mind being of such a nature, preserves a person. 9.
will now be stated. “ They” speech, mind and life, are even “ the three worlds,’’ earth, atmosphere and heaven. Their distinction is ^ speech is even this world,’ mind the atmosphere, and life that world. 4.
In the same manner : ^ They are even,” &c. ; the meaning of these words is plain. 5.—7.
‘¢ They are even that which is known, which is wished to be known, and which is not known.” Their distinction is, ‘‘ whatever is known,” fully known, ‘is of the nature of speech ;” and the text gives the rea- son for this ; ‘‘ for speech is known,” because its nature is to manifest. How can that be unknown, which makes other things also known? ‘* By speech the universal king is known as a companion,’’ will be said after- wards. The effect of knowing the nature of speech is ‘speech being of such a nature, being known, preserves him,’ viz. the person who knows the mentioned perfections of speech, that is to say, in the form of knowledge becomes a provision, an enjoyment, for him. 8.
In the same manner, ^^ whatsoever,’ how indistinct soever, desir- ed to be known distinctly, ‘‘is wished to be known, is of the nature of the mind, for,”’ because, “the mind” on account of its doubtful na- ture, ^ 18 desired to be known.” As before, is described the reward for one who knows the perfection of the mind. ‘‘ The mind,” being of such a nature, viz. which is wished to be known ‘‘ preserves him,” obtains the nature of a provision by its own characteristic to be some-
First Chapter. Fifth Brdmhana. 149
Whatsoever is not known, is of the nature of life, for life is not known; life being of such a nature, preserves a person. 10.
Of this speech is earth the body, its illuminating nature that fire. Therefore as far as speech extends, so far extends the earth, so far fire. 11.
thing wished to be known. In the same manner ^ whatsoever is not known,” is not an object of knowledge, nor doubted, ^ 18 of the nature of life ; for life is not known,” not known in its nature, since it is not heard to be determined. As the distinction of speech, mind and life is established by the division into what is known, what is wished to be known, and what is not known (viz. by a division, comprehending all objects of knowledge) the three worlds, &c. are only mentioned for the sake of illustration. By the passage showing, that the nature of what is known is every where, &c., its rule is to be remembered. “« Life, being of such a nature, preserves him,” which means life with its unknown nature becomes his provision. Teachers, fathers, &c. appear to be doubted and their assistance to be not known by disciples, sons, &c. In the same manner is obtained the nature of the provisions of mind and life, which are doubted and not known. 10.
The material extent of speech, mind and life has been explained ; now their sphere, as superintended by deities, is commenced. ‘ Of this speech,” which is shown in the text under the notion of a provision of Prajapati, ‘‘is earth the body,” the external locality ; ^" its illumi- nating nature,” the manifesting organ, located upon the earth, ० that”’ earthly, ^ 076 ;’’ for twofold is Prajdpati’s speech, viz. effect, locality, which does not manifest, and secondly organ, which is placed in that locality, and which does manifest. Both of them, earth and fire, are the speech of Prajépati. ‘‘Therefore (tat, explained by S‘ankara with tattra, ‘‘ with reference to this’’) as far as, in measure “speech, extends,”’ in its divisions, viz. in its subserviency to the soul and in its material sphere, ^^ so far extends the earth,”’ which is established every- where under the notion of locality as effect, ^ so far goes that fire,’’ as located in the form of sense, it entered so far with its illuminating na- ture the earth. The last (relation, viz. the sphere superintended by deities) is the same (and therefore not commented on). 11.
150 Brihad Aravyaka Upanishad.
Again, of this mind is heaven the hody, its illuminating nature that Aditya. Therefore as far as mind extends, so far extends heaven, so far that Aditya. They united in love. Hence life was produced. He 18 Indra, he is without rival. A second verily 18 a rival. Whosoever knows this, has no rival, 12.
Again of this life are the waters the body, the illuminating nature that moon. Therefore as far as life extends, so far
‘‘ Again of this mind,” which has been declared a provision of Pra- jApati “is heaven,” the place of heaven, ‘‘ the body,” the effect, the loca- lity, ‘its illuminating nature,” its organ, that which is to be located, ‘that Aditya.’’ There ‘as far as,”” in measure, ‘‘ mind,” as subservient to the soul, or in its material sphere, ^“ extends, so far’’ in expanse, iu measure, is fixed heaven to be the locality for the illuminating organ of the mind, “so far that Aditya,” the illuminating organ, which requires to be located. ‘‘They,’? Agni and Aditya, speech and mind, in their nature as superintending deities, mother and father, ^ united in love.” Both having the intention, I will do the action, it was—between the two places (heaven and earth),—produced by the mind, Aditya, as fa- ther, and manifested by speech, Agni, as mother. ‘‘ Hence’’ by the union of both of them, ‘life,”’ air, ^" was produced” for the sake of motion, of work. ‘ He,”’ who was born “is Indra,” the supreme lord (Para: més wara) and not only Indra, but ‘without rival.’”? Without riva means a person, for whom there exists no rival. Who again has really a rival? ‘“*A second verily,’ a second who approaches with the inten- tion of contention, “is” called ^^ arival.” Accordingly, although speech and mind have the nature of a second, yet they entertain no rivalvy ; for they have a friendly intention towards life.—The fruit, arising from the knowledge, that there is no rivalship from those who were united in love, is like that derived from the subserviency to the soul, as fol- lows : ^ Whosoever knows this,”’ life as it has been described, as being without rival, viz. he who has true knowledge, ‘‘ has no rival,” no antagonist. 12.
८ Again, of this life,””—of the life, set forth in the text, which is a provision of Prajépati, not the life which has been declared as offspring, and described immediately before, ‘“‘are the waters the body,”’ the
First Chapter. Fifth Brémhana. 151
extend the waters, so far extends that moon. They are even all alike, all infinite. Whosoever worships them as finite (be- ings) conquers a finite world; again whosoever worships them as infinite (beings) conquers an infinite world. 13.
That Prajapati in his likeness of the year consists of 16 parts (Kala). His nights are even 15 parts; his fixed part is the
effect, the locality for the organs, ‘‘the illuminating nature,’’ as be- fore, ‘‘that moon.’’ There ‘‘as far as,” in measure, “ life extends,’’ in its divisions as subservient to the soul and as material sphere, ‘so far extend’ pervade, ‘the waters,” in their measure, ‘so far’? “extends that moon” which is to be located, 80 far, having entered the waters, and being of the nature of sense, it extends, as far as the sphere, subservient to the soul, and the material sphere extend.—Those three provisions, created by the father through the five-fold work, bear the names of speech, mind and life. The whole world in its sphere, subservient to the soul, and in its material sphere, is pervaded by them, or, besides them, there is nothing whatsoever, either effect or cause. But all these are Prajépati. ^ They,” speech, mind and life, ^ are even all alike,” hav- ing the same extent, are as far pervading, as the objects of living beings together with the sphere subservient to the soul and the material sphere. Therefore they are “infinite ;’’ because they are present in all bodies ; for a body cannot be conceived without cause and effect ; for it is said, that they consist of cause and effect. ^ Whosoever worships them,” which are of the nature of Prajapati, ‘as finite,” limited, un- der the notion of their material sphere and their sphere, subservient to the soul, ‘“‘conquers’’ as the reward in accordance with his worship, «८ 8 finite world,” a world which is limited, which means, ‘‘ he does not get their nature.” ‘‘ Again, whosoever worships them as infinite,”’ as possessing the nature of all, the nature of all living beings, as unlimited «° conquers an infinite world.” 13 : It has been said, that the father, after having created seven provi- sions by the fivefold work, produced three provisions for his own sake They are explained to be the effects of the five-fold work. How again are they called the effect of the five-fold work? Because even in these three provisions the five-fold work is perceived, as wealth and work
152 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
sixteenth. He becomes full and wanes by the nights. At the day of the new moon, during the night entering with this six- teenth part all that is endowed with life, he is then the next day born in the morning. Therefore let in that night nobody
are there probable, therefore ts their cause also similar. There (as to the three provisions) the earth and fire are the mother, heaven and Aditya the father, and the life (air) which is in the middle of them, is ¢heir offspring, as it has been explained. On account of this wealth and work should be produced ; this means to imply the com- mencement: ‘That Prajdpati, in his likeness of the year,” who has been set forth in the text as consisting of three parts, is de- termined in a special manner by the nature of the year as consisting of sixteen parts. He, consisting of sixteen parts, is the year, the nature of time. ‘ His,”’ Prajdpati’s, as the substance of time, ‘‘ nights,” days and nights—meaning lunar days (tithi) are fifteen parts. ‘‘ His fixed,” permanent, “part’’ remains, as “the sixteenth,” as the part (Kalé) which completes the sixteenth. ^ He’’ becomes full and wanes by the nights ;” by the lunar days which are called parts (Kala) ; for by the first day of a lunation, and by those which succeed it, the moon, Pra- japati, gets full in the light half of the lunation, it grows by the increas- ing parts (Kalas) until the orb is full at the day of the full moon; it wanes by the decreasing parts in the dark half of the lunation, until the one permanent part remains in the dark night. ‘“He,’’ Prajdpati, the substance of time, ‘at the day of the new moon during the night,” *‘ entering with this sixteenth part,’ which has been called the perma- nent part, “all that is endowed with life,” all living beings, viz. all that drinks water and all that eats annual plants, pervading all this by his identity with the annual plants (or with water) and abiding during the dark night, ‘‘is then” the next day, “born in the morning,” united (the moon) with its second part.—In the following manner is Prajapati of five-fold nature. The heaven and sun are the mind, the father,—the earth and fire speech, the wife, the mother ; and their offspring is life, the days of the moon, the parts (Kala) are the wealth, because by their increasing and decreasing they are like wealth, and the work of those parts is what effects the change of the world. In this manner the whole Prajépati, has become the effect of the five-fold work, in accordance
First Chapter. Fifth Brémhana. 153
cut off the life of any one endowed with life, not even of the chameleon ; it is intended for the honour of this deity. 14. That Prajapati who under the likeness of the year is possess- ed of sixteen parts, is even this. That ८ this” is a person who thus knows. His wealth is the fifteen parts, his soul (self) is his sixteenth part. He gets full and wanes even by wealth.
with the desires: ‘‘ Let me have a wife,”—again ‘‘ Let me be born,” — again, ‘ Let me have wealth,” again,—* Let me perform work;”’ for as the cause so is the effect, is a principle even with the common people. Because the moon, having that night entered all living creatures, is possessed of its permanent part, ‘‘ therefore,” on this ground, ‘let in that night nobody cut off the life of any one endowed with life,” let him not destroy a living creature, “not even of a chameleon,” for the chameleon, as being wicked, is naturally destroyed, since it is consider- ed to forebode bad luck, when it is seen. ‘But then, enmity to living beings is prohibited according to the passage of the Smriti: ‘* Not killing living creatures, except at holy places.’ Very good, it is prohibited ; but yet it must not be said, that the sentence means to make an exception for any other time than the day of the dark night, or an exception for the killing of the chameleon. What then does it mean? ^ [६४ is intended for the honour,” the adoration, “of this deity, viz. the deity of the moon.”
‘*That Praj&pati,”’ bearing the name of the invisible, *‘ who under the likeness of the year is possessed of sixteen parts,” must not be thought as absolutely invisible, because he "८18 even this,” he is perceived visibly. Who is that ‘this?’ ^“ He is the person who thus knows,” who knows, that Prajdpati whose nature consists of the three provisions, is like himself. By the similarity with what is he Prajapati? The answer is: ‘‘ His wealth,” the wealth in cows, &c. of a person who thus knows, ‘is the fifteen parts.” For the sake of his complete- ness, ‘his soul,” the individual self, ‘‘ is his’ (the knowing person’s) sixteenth part, representing the permanent Kalé. ‘He,’ like the moon, ‘gets full and wanes even by wealth.” ‘It is well known” in common life, that **the soul,”’ the individual self, ‘‘is like the nave of a wheel, wealth like its periphery,’ represented by the family, the external part of the wheel, viz. spokes and circumference, &c.
x
154 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
It és well known, that the soul is like the nave of a wheel, wealth like its periphery. Therefore, although he suffers the loss of all, if he lives, he is bare of the periphery, as it is said. 15.
Again there are verily three worlds, the world of man, the world of the forefathers, and the world of the gods. The world of man is to be conquered by a son, and not by any other work, (or knowledge,) by work the world of the fore- fathers, by science the world of the gods. The world of the
‘Therefore, although he suffers the loss of all,’’ of his property, suffers distress, ^^ 1 he lives,” ‘by the soul,” represented by the nave of the wheel, ‘he is bare of,’ he has lost “the periphery,” the external wealth, the family, as a wheel, deprived of spokes and circumference, ‘Cas itis said,” and the meaning is, if he lives, he is again increasing in wealth, represented by the spokes and circumference. 15.
It has been explained, how by fivefold work in connexion with science, the wealth of the gods, Prajdpati is possessed of the nature of the three provisions; it has afterwards been said, how the wealth of a wife, &c. is represented by the family. There (in the former section) it has only generally been understood, that a son, work and inferior science (knowledge of the Védas with reference to ceremonies), are causes of obtaining the worlds, but the rule of the special connexion of a son, &c., with the effect, which is the obtaining of the worlds, has not been understood. To explain the special connexion of the effects with their causes, viz. a son, &c., the present section is commenced. The term ‘‘again” has the object to introduce the sentence “ there are verily,” verily is to show certainty, ^^ three worlds,’’ alone fit to be causes, stated by the S‘4stra, neither more nor less. Which are they ? The answer is: **The world of man, the world of the forefathers, and the world of the gods.” Among them ‘the world of man” is to be gained by, is the effect of ‘a son,” as cause (how it is to be gained by ason, will after- wards be said) ‘‘and not by any other work,” or knowledge, as must be supplied here; ^ by work,” alone, as for 198६४४८6 the daily burnt- offering (Agnihotra) ‘the world of the forefathers,” is to be gained, and not by a son, nor by knowledge,—‘“‘ by science the world of the gods,”’ not by a son, nor by work. ‘The world of the gods is the.
First Chapter. Fifth Brémhana. 155
gods is the best among the worlds. Therefore they praise science. 16.
Hence again the making over. When the father thinks he is to die, then he says to hisson: ‘Thou art Bramha, thou art the sacrifice, thou art the कणत. The son repeats: ^ I am Bramha, I am the sacrifice, I am the world.”? Of all that
best,’’ the one most deserving of praise, ^^ among the’’ three, ^“ worlds.” ‘** Therefore they praise science,’ because it is the cause of it. 16.
In this manner the three causes, yiz. a son, work, and knowledge, find their application according to the division of the effect, viz. the three worlds which are to be accomplished. But a wife, because it is necessary for the sake of a son and of work, is not a separate cause, and is therefore not separately mentioned. Also wealth, as it is the cause of work, is not a separate cause. It is evident, that knowledge and work are means of conquering the worlds in consequence of their recovering their own nature. Buta son not being of the nature of work, it is not clear, in what manner he is the means of conquering the worlds. ‘‘ Hence,” it is to be explained, in this manner “ again,” afterwards is commenced, ^" the making over ;’’ this is the name of the work which is to be now related ; for the father makes over the duties he has himself to perform, in the manner to be mentioned, to his son ; hence this work bears the name of ‘‘ making over.’’ At what time 18 this to be done? ^ When the father thinks, he is to die,” by inauspicious signs and the like, ‘then he says to his son (after having called him) : ‘Thou art Bramha, thou art the sacrifice, thou art the world.’ ’’ Thus addressed, he ^^ repeats.” That 18 to say, being instructed before, he knows, I have to do this. In this manner he says the three sentences : ५ am Bramha, I am the sacrifice, I am the गात. Under the idea, that the sense of the same is concealed, the S'ruti continues for its expla- nation: ‘Of all that has been read’ the remainder of what has been read, that is to say, read or not read ‘‘is Bramha the identity,” is the identity in the term of Bramha. The practice of reading with reference to the Védas, which was hitherto thy duty, is hence- forth thou, Bramha; which means, must be done by thy agency. In the same manner, “ Of all the sacrifices that were to be performed by me,” may they be performed by me or not performed, ‘‘is sacri-
x 2
156 Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.
has been read, is Bramha the identity. Of all the sacrifices that are to be performed, is sacrifice the identity. Of all the worlds that are to be conquered, is world the identity. Thus far extends verily all this. All this multitude preserves me
fice the identity,” is the identity in the term sacrifice. The sacrifices which were to be performed by my agency, are henceforth “ thou sacri- fice,’ which means, are to be performed by thy agency. =," All the worlds that are to be conquered,” by me, whether they are conquered or not conquered, is world the “ identity,” is the identity in the term ‘“ जरगा]. Henceforward they are ‘‘ thou world,” to be con- quered by thee, henceforward the sacrifice, which it was my duty to perform by reading (the Védas) offerings and conquering of the worlds, is laid by me upon thee, but I am free from the sacrifice consisting in the bondage of duty. And the son has understood all in this manner, because he was instructed (before), The S'ruti, having considered there the intention of the father, gives this explanation: ‘“‘Thus far ex- tends verily all this,’ this is the limit of all the duties of a house- holder, viz. that the Védas are to be read, the sacrifices to be perform- ed and the world to be conquered. ° All this multitude’’ (for all this burthen, to which I am subject, when taken from me and placed upon you) preserves me, saves me from this world. (The past Abhunajat in Sanscrit has in the S'ruti the meaning of the future: Palayishyati). Because a son, who thus knows, is to liberate Ais father from this world, from the bondage of duty, ‘therefore they,” the Bramhanas, ‘call a son who is ¢hus instructed, Lokya,”’ which means, good for his father obtaining the worlds. ‘‘ Therefore they,” the fathers, ‘instruct a son” under the expectation, that he will be their Lokya (procurer of the worlds). ‘ When he,” the father, ^ having such a knowledge,” after having delivered to the son the sacrifice of duty, ‘‘ departs from this world,” dies, ‘‘ then he enters with those lives the son,’”’ pervades him with the speech, mind and life set forth in the text. When the cause of distinction relative to the.soul (which cause is ignorance) is removed, the speech, mind and life of the father enter all with their nature as superintended by deities, viz. in their likeness with the tek he fire and the sun. Together with those lives the father also enter%, because the father 18 transformed into the nature of speech, mind १. आत life ; for
ta were a =
First Chapter. Fifth Brdmhana. 157
from this world. Therefore they call a son who is instructed, Lokya; therefore they instruct him. When he, having such a knowledge, departs from this world, then he enters together with those lives the son. If by him any thing through negligence,
the father is transformed in such a manner as: ‘I am the infinite speech, mind and life, extending as far as the distinctions of what relates to the soul, to matter and to the superintendence of deities.”” There- fore his life is a continuation of the father’s, and it is hence properly said, ‘* then together with those lives he enters the son;’ for it is said, he becomes the soul (substance) of all and (therefore also) of the son ; and the meaning is, the father who has a thus instructed son, continues in this world, is by the likeness with the son not to be thought dead. In this manner it is said in another passage of the S'ruti ; “‘He is made his other soul by holy works.” (A. U. B. I. vii. p. 226, M. 4.) Now the text gives the derivation of Puttra (son). “If by him,” by the father at any time, ‘“‘any thing through negligence, remains,’’ meanwhile, ‘‘ undone,” which ought to be done, *‘the son liberates him from all this,’ which, bearing the nature of duty, was left undone by the father, and which is an obstacle to gaining the worlds,—he liberates him, by completing it (Ptrayitva) through his own practice. = ^" Therefore,” because he saves the father by completing (Puranéna) hence the name of a son (Puttra). This is the true notion of a son (Puttrasya Puttratvam) that by filling (Pirayittvé) the hole of the father he saves him. ^" He,” the father, ‘* continues,” although dead, yet immortal, “ by a son,” of such a kind, ‘*in this world.” In this manner the father conquers (obtains) by the son this world of man,—not so, however, the worlds of the gods and the forefathers by knowledge and work, but (he conquers them) by as- suming their nature alone; for without assuming their own nature, knowledge and work cannot possibly become causes of conquering the world by dependance upon another, as it is the case with a son. ‘*Then,” after the father has made over his duties, ‘‘ those divine’ belonging to Hiranyagarbha, ‘immortal,’’ whose nature it is not to die, ‘‘ lives,” speech and the others, ‘enter him.” How? The answer is given in the next section by the words: ‘* The divine speech, &c.” In this manner it has been shown by the S'ruti itself, that a son, work and inferior knowledge have the power of accomplishing the
158 Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.
remains undone, the son liberates him from all this. Hence the name of a son (Puttra). He continues by a son alone in this world. Then those divine, immortal lives enter him. 17.
worlds of men, of the forefathers and of the gods. In respect of this some wranglers (the Mimansakas are meant) not knowing the special meanings of the words of the S'ruti, say, that a son and the other causes have the power to effect liberation. To silence them this passage has been given by the S'ruti, commencing with: ^" Let me have a wife,” and all the other fivefold work which accomplishes desire, continuing with : “ So far goes the desire,” of a son, &c., and coneluding with the application to the special effects to be accomplished. Hence it is evi- dent, that the passage of the S’ruti about debt refers to an ignorant per- son, and not to the knowledge of the supreme soul. And it will be said (p. 903): ‘Of what use is a son to us, to whom the soul is the world.” Others, (the Bhartriprapanchika) on the other hand, maintain, that the conqnering of the worlds of the forefathers and gods is even an ex- clusion from them. Therefore a person, who by the joint performance of a son, of work and of the inferior knowledge is excluded from those three worlds, obtains liberation by the knowledge of the supreme soul; in this way the causes of a son, &c. successively have the power to effect liberation, To silence them also the other subsequent passage of the S’ruti is engaged in showing the effect, resulting for the father, whose duty is the performance of work, who has the knowledge of the nature of the three provisions and who makes over the performance of what has been left undone. But it cannot be said, that the effect is that of liberation, because it has been shown, that by the effect derived from understanding and penance in connexion with the three provisions, the provisions are again produced. This follows also from the passage, referring to the decrease (of the provisions). ^ For what even does not produce it, decreases,”’ also from the nature of the means of the effect in the passage: ‘The body is like light,” and lastly from the conclusion with the nature of name, form and work, in the passage: ^^ Threefold is this, &. Nor is it possible to infer from this passage, that the three causes, when united, have the power to effect one’s liberation and another’s, obtaining the nature of the three provisions, because the pas- sage merely intends to show, that the effect of a son and of the other causes is the obtaining of the nature of the three provisions. 17.
First Chapter. Fifth Brdémhana. 159
From the earth and the fire the divine speech enters him. That speech is verily divine, by which, whatever he says, comes to pass. 18.
From the sky and the sun the divine mind enters him. That verily is the divine mind, by which he becomes joyful; hence- forth he does not grieve. 19.
From the waters and the moon the divine life enters him. That verily is the divine life, which, whether issuing forth, or not issuing forth, is not afraid, again which is not lost. The
‘‘From the earth and the fire the divine speech, (divine refers to its superintending deity,) enters him,’’ after he has made over his duties ; that is to say, the divine speech, as characterised by earth and fire, is the last cause of the speech of all ; for speech is obstructed by the faults of attachment, &c. with reference to the material elements, and as the faults of a person who has knowledge are removed, it (speech) pervades him, like water and the manifestation of a light, on the breaking of what concealed them (for instance a vessel). This is the sense of the words: ‘‘ From the earth and the fire the divine speech enters him.”? ‘That speech is verily divine,” free from the faults of untruth and the like, pure, ^ by which” (divine speech) “‘ whatever he says,” either for himself or another, ‘ comes to pass,” that is to say, his word is not in vain, is not obstructed. 18.
In the same manner: ^ From the sky and the sun the divine mind enters him.” And, “that is the divine mind,” by the purity of its nature, ‘‘ by which he (the father) becomes joyful,’”’ happy, ^“ hence- forth’? moreover, ^^ he does not grieve,”’ because there is no connexion of such a cause as grief (with him.) 19.
In the same manner: “From the waters and the moon the divine life enters him. That verily is the divine life ;” viz. of what na- ture? the answer is,—‘* Which, whether issuing forth,” in all the dis- tinctions of life, ‘or not issuing forth,” in its nature as totality or speciality, or also, issuing forth in all moveable things, and not issuing forth in all immoveable things, “is not afraid,” is not connected with fear, of which unhappiness is the cause, ^ again, is not lost,” is not destroyed, is not injured. ‘‘The person who knows thus,” the before
160 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
person who thus knows, becomes the soul of all beings. As that deity, so also he. As all beings preserve that deity, so also preserve all beings a person who thus knows.
Whatever grief the children suffer together with thetr children, remains united with them alone ; what is holy approaches him ; for sin does not approach the goda. 20.
mentioned view of the nature of the three provisions, ‘‘ becomes the soul of all beings,”’ becomes the life of all beings, becomes the mind of all beings, becomes their speech, that is to say, becomes omniscient by being the nature of all; and also omnipotent. ‘As that वल्क,” the before mentioned deity, named Hiranyagarbha, ‘so also” (also shows, that there is no obstacle to his omniscience and omnipotence) “he” which term concludes the illustration. Moreover :* ^, As all beings, ५८ preserve” worship, ‘that deity,’ the deity called Hiranyagarbha with offerings, &c. ‘So also preserve all beings a person who thus knows,” which means, they worship him always with offerings and the like.
It has been said, °^ he becomes the soul of all beings.’” Now it may be questioned, whether, by his being the nature of cause and effect of all beings, he is not also allied to the happiness and unhappiness of them. This is not the case, because his intellect is unlimited. As to persons whose intellect and nature are limited on being censured, &c. a connexion with unhappiness is evident, as if we say: “I am censured by that man ;” but in virtue of Ais being the soul of all, there is no unhappiness from such causes produced, as there is 20 distinction of intellect with regard to the nature of the soul be- between the one who is censured and the other who censures, and also, as, like the unhappiness of death, there is no cause. For instance. If any body dies, unhappiness is produced for somebody (showing itself in such words as:) He is my son, my brother, where the cause (of the distress) is a son, a brother. If there is no cause of such & kind, unhappiness is not produced, even should a person behold the death of a person, &c. (who is not related to him). In this manner no
* Kinha (moreover) is in text connected with the preceding sentence, com- mencing with ‘* Sa,’’ I believe, by a clerical error, as in this place it has no meal: ing, or a meaning which destroys the simplicity of the text.
First Chapter. Fifth Brahmana. 161
Next therefore the deliberation of observance. Prajapati verily created the actions. When they were created, they vied with each other. With the words,—“ I will speak,” speech kept the observance ; with the words,—“ I will see,” eye ; with the words, —‘¢] will hear,”? ear; in the same manner the other actions
unhappiness arises for god whose nature is unlimited, because he has not the faults of false knowledge, &c. which produce the unhappiness of pride, &c. This is meant by the words,—‘t Whatever grief his sub- jects suffer together with their children,” ‘ the same,” the unhappi- ness which 18 the cause of the grief, &c., ‘‘ remains united with them,” with his subjects, because it is produced from a limited intellect. But what of the universal soul can be united with or disunited from what thing? ^ Whatis holy,” what is good,—the desired reward means here holy; for a great many holy actions are done by him, therefore its reward, ‘approaches him who now occupies the place of Prajapati.”” «^ एण sin does not approach the gods,’’ and the meaning 18, sin, its effect, unhappiness does not approach the gods, because there is no opportunity for the effect of sin. 20.
By the words,—* They are all alike, they are all infinite,” (p. 151) the worship of speech, mind and life has been declared in general, that is to say, without their mutual distinction. Must this now be under- stood in the mentioned manner, or is there any possible distinction with regard to observance on considering the case ? The answer is,— ‘‘Next therefore,” then follows ‘the deliberation of observance,” of worship, which means the consideration of the action of worship. And the consideration turns upon this, which is it among those organs, whose work is to be conceived under the idea of observance? ^“ Praja- pati verily,” after having created Ais offspring, ^ created the actions,” which means the organs, speech and others (for being capable of action, they are called actions) and the meaning is: He created speech and the other organs. Again ‘when they were created, they vied,” rivaled, ‘with each other.’ How? ^ With the words,—I will speak,”’ let me not rest from my business, speaking, ‘speech kept the observance.” If there is likewise another, my equal, who does not require rest from his business, let him show his prowess. In the same manner, ^^ with the words,—‘‘I will see,” eye ; with the words, “I will hear,” ear; in
भर
oy LIBR
3" ~ 4 eds 4 - )
५ ae Vie W-yYORYS
162 Brihad Araryaka Upanishad.
(Karmani) according to their action. Death, being there as fatigue, seized them, he made them his own; having made them his own, he arrested them. Therefore speech gets even fatigued, the eye gets futigued, the ear gets fatigued. Again he did not make his own that life. They resolved to-know that central life. ‘He verily is amongst us the best, who moving and not moving, not suffers, is not injured. Well then, let us all become of the nature of him.” Thus all of them became of his nature. Therefore they are named by this “ Pranéh.” After him, who
the same manner the other actions,” organs, “according to their action.” ५ Death,” the destroyer, ‘ being there as fatigue,” in the form of fatigue ‘‘ seized them,” took hold of them. How? ‘‘ He made them,” the organs engaged in their business, ^“ his own,’’ he appeared under the form of fatigue, and “having made them his own, he” death, ५५ arrested them,’ made them cease from their work. ‘* Therefore,” even now, “speech,” having entered upon its work, ‘‘gets even fatigued,” is made to cease from its work, seized by death in the form of fatigue. In the same manner “ the eye gets fatigued, the ear gets fatigued.” ‘Again he,” death in the form of fatigue “did not make his own that life,’ the principal life. ‘ They” the other organs, ‘‘ resolved,’ made up their mind, “to know that central life’ which even now not fatigued by him (death) enters upon its work.
‘He verily is amongst us the best,’’ the most praiseworthy, the greatest, ‘who moving and not moving not suffers,’ again, ‘is not injured. Well then’? now “let us all become of the nature of him,”’ of life, that is to say, let us consider ourselves as life. Having “thus” ascertained, ‘our observances are not sufficient to protect ws from death,’ ‘‘all of them became of his nature,’’ considering themselves as the nature of life, kept the observances of life. Because by the nature of life, viz. by its nature to move and by its nature to manifest, the other organs get their nature,—namely, without life nothing could move ; for only after the action of moving they are observed to engage in their own work,—“ therefore they,’ speech and the others, “ are named by this,”’ name of life, ‘‘ Pranah”’ (lives). ९" After him,’”’ the wise person, who in this manner knows that all the organs have the nature
First Chapter. Fifth Brdhmana. . 163
thus knows, is verily called the family in which he is Jorn. Whosoever rivals one who thus knows, after having wasted, dies at last. This is what refers to the soul. 21.
- Next what refers to the superintendence of deities. With the words,—“ 1 will burn,” fire kept the observance, with the words,—‘* I will heat,” the sun, with the words,—‘I will shine,’”? the moon. In the same manner the other deities ac- cording to their divine nature. As this central life amongst those organs, 80 appears VAju (the air), amongst those deities ;
of life, and are called by the term ‘‘life’’ (Prana) ‘is verily called the family,” by the people. The family, in which he who thus knows, ५ 18 born,”’ gets famous by the name of the wise person, it is his family, as this is the family of Tapati. ^ Whosoever thus’’ in the manner mentioned, ‘knows’ that speech and the other organs have the nature and the name of life, gets a reward of such a kind. Again, ‘Whosoever rivals,” being his antagonist ‘‘one who thus knows,” knows the nature of life, wastes in this body, ‘after having wasted, dies at last,” not on a sudden. ‘ This is what refers to the soul,” in the mentioned manner, the knowledge of the nature of life. This conclusion is intended to introduce the exposition of what refers to the superintendence of deities. 21.
‘** Next what refers to the superintendence of deities,” the thinking as to the deities is described. It is the question, of which special deity is it best to keep the ordinance? All is here like the former descrip- tion about what referred to the soul. ‘* With the words,—“ I will burn,” fire kept the observance, with the words,—“ I will heat,” the sun, with | the words,—‘* I will shine,’ the moon. In the same manner the other deities according to their divine nature.” Here is an illustration. ° As this central life,’? with reference to the soul, ‘‘ amongst those organs,” speech and the others, was not seized by death, was not compelled to cease from its work, was not disturbed in its own observance of life, so also not ^ Véju amongst those deities,” Agni and others; ‘for the other deities,’ Agni and the rest, like speech &c. with regard to the soul, according to their divine nature, ‘decline,’ go down, cease from their works, ^ not Vaju,” goes down
¥ 2
164 Brihkad Aranyaka Upaniskad.
for the other deities decline, not VAju. This Vaju indeed is an unrestrained deity. 22.
Here follows this Sloka,—‘* Whence the sun rises and where he sets,”’—he verily rises from life and sets into life,—** this the gods made their sacred law. This sways to-day, this sways to-murrow.” What they kept then, they will also observe
as the central lite (does not decline). Therefore “this Vaju indeed is an unrestrained deity.’’ The reference to the soul and the superin- tendence of deities having in this manner been considered, it is ascertained, that the observance of the nature of Vaju (alone) remains unbroken. 22.
‘* Here” in elucidation of the said meaning “follows this Sloka.”’ «५ कर 06066," from which wind “the sun 71868" (with reference to divine superintendence) and from which life (as regards its reference to the soul) he rises by the nature of the eye, again into which wind and life at evening and at the sleeping-time of men he sets, °^ this the gods made” kept, “their sacred law.” This means, the gods, speech and others, and fire and others, having before considered the observance of life and the observance of Vaju. ‘This sways to-day, this sways to-morrow,” this will be followed by them at the present and future time. Here the Bréhmana explains briefly the meaning of the Mantra. ‘He,’ the sup, “verily rises from life and sets into it.”” ‘ This the gods made their sacred law; this sways to-day, this sways to-morrow.” What does this mean? It is answered by the tert : ^ What,’’ what observ- ance, observance of life and of V&ju, “they,” speech and the rest, and Agni and the rest, “kept then,” at that time, ‘the same they will also observe to-day,”’ the same observance they will keep un- broken. But any observance of speech, &c. gets even broken, as it has been shown, that at the time of their setting they decline into Vaju and life.—It is said elsewhere,—‘‘ When man sleeps, then speech, mind, eye, ear, all become life; when he awakes, then they are born again from life. This is their reference to the soul. Next their reference to divine superintendence. When fire is extinguished, 1४ disappears in एकप (air). Therefore it is said, it is lost in it; for it is extinguished in the air. When the sun sets, he enters into the air, into the air the moon enters; in the air are placed the
First Chapter. Sixth Brdhmana. 165
to-day. Therefore let a man follow only one observance ; let him breathe, let him expel. Alas, let death not seize me. If a person follows it, let him strive to accomplish it. Thereby a person gains union and dwelling in the same world with that deity. 23.
Sixth Brahmana. This (world) is a triad, name, form and work. The names are
quarters. From the air they are born again.” Because then the ob- servance is found in speech and the rest, and also in Agni and the rest, because the observance, whose nature is to move, is to be obeyed by all the gods, ‘therefore let a man follow only one observance.” Which 18 it? ‘Let him breathe,” let him perform the function of breathing (Praéna), ‘let him expel,’”’ let him perform the function of expelling (of the descending air); for there 13 no ceasing of the function of life (Prana) of which the functions of breathing and expelling are here given as examples. ‘‘ Therefore let a man follow only one observance,” abandoning the functions of all the other organs. ‘Alas’ (this term expresses apprehension) “let not death,” as fatigue—“ seize me.” The meaning is, let a person, who is afraid that he will be seized by death on his abandoning that observance, keep the observance of life. ९९ If a person follows it,’’ once has commenced the observance of life, ‘ let him strive to accomplish it ;” for if he ceases from the observance, life is despised, and also the gods are; therefore let him accomplish it even. Thereby” by that observance,—for by the obtaining of the nature of life, my functions, for instance speech, &c. and Agni, &c., are in all beings, and (my) soul as life is the moving cause of all,—by the keeping of that observance, ‘a person gains,” obtains ‘‘ union,” identity of nature, ‘‘and dwelling in the same world,” identity of place, «° with that deity,” with the deity of life. 23.
‘‘This” manifested world, characterised as cause and effect, further the reward, which consists in obtaining the nature of life (Hiranya- garbha), both of which have been set forth as being included in the idea of ignorance, and lastly the state of the world before its manifes- tation, which is called ‘‘ unmanifested”’ like the seed of a tree, “‘is a 184. What is this triad? The answer is,—‘‘ name, form and
166 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
speech; the latter is the foundation, for from the same all names spring forth. This is their community ; for it is in com- mon to all the names ; it is the Brahma of them ; for it upholds all names. 1.
work,’ that is to say, non-soul, not the soul which is the present, visible Brahma. Therefore the Brahmana, of which the first words are,— ५५ this is a triad,” is commenced for the object, that man should turn from this (world) ; for the knowledge, resulting from the great sentence, —‘ I am Brahma,’’—to adore the soul alone as the proper place, is without effect for one whose thought is not averted from this (world) which is not the soul—the actions (of the mind) with regard to external objects and the absolute soul being at variance. In this manner it is said in the Katha (4, 1.) ^" The self-existent subdued the senses which turn to external objects; therefore (man) sees the external objects, not the internal soul, (but) the wise with eye averted (from sensual objects) and desirous of immortal nature, beholds the absolute soul.” Why again falls this world, which is manifested and not manifested, and at the same time effect, cause and reward, under the notion of name, form and work, why should it not rather be thought by the notion of the soul? |
To answer this, it is said,—‘‘ The names” in the order in which they are introduced, ‘‘are speech,” as is called the general term of all sounds. Every sound is even speech; it is speech in consequence of being spoken, the meaning of a sound is merely the general term of sound. ‘The latter is their foundation,’ the special cause, of the special names, as a hill of rock-salt is the cause of (all) the grains of rock- salt. For this reason it is said,—‘‘ for from the same,”’ general term of names, ‘‘all names,” as Yajnadatta, Dévadatta, according to this or any other division, ‘‘ spring forth,”’ are produced, separated, as grains of salt from a rock of salt; and the effect is not different from the cause. In the same manner the special (names) being included in the general term, how can there be a state of generality and of special objects ? (To show this it is said),—‘‘ This,”’ the general term of the sounds, “is their community,” of the special names, community from its being
Firet Chapter. Sixth Brahmana. 167
Further, the forms are objects of the eye; the latter is their foundation, for from the same all forms spring forth; this is their community ; for it is common to all the forms. It is the Brahma of them ; for it upholds all forms. 2.
Further, the works are self (Atma) ; the latter is their foun- dation ; for from the same all works spring forth; this is their
common, viz. the general term ; ‘for it is common to all the names,’ which are different from it, (and) moreover, because the special names are not different (from it) by having obtained it (the general idea), (for) nothing is perceived to differ from that whose nature it has assumed, as a jar differs not from the earth (of which it is made). How are the special names said to have obtained it (the general idea of speech) ? The answer is, because ‘‘it,’’ the thing called by the name of speech, ‘is the Brahma of them,”’ their soul ; for hence the names obtain it (the generality); for nothing is found differing from the nature of sound. This the text explains: ‘‘for this,” the general notion of sound, ‘upholds all names” by giving them its own nature. This, the relation of cause and effect, of the general idea and the special objects and of the communication of the own nature (of one thing to other things) being proved, 1४18 evident, that the special names are only sound. The same explanation holds good for the two other things. 1.
८ Further, the forms,” white, black, &c., ‘are objects of the eye,” are the general idea, named “object of the eye,” the general idea of forms, all that may be manifested. (^ For from the latter all forms spring forth ; the same is their community; for it is common to all the forms. It is the Brahma of them ; for it upholds all forms.” 2.
Further all special works, as well such as thinking, seeing, &c. as also such as refer to motion, are said to be contained in the general notion of effect. How? All special works are “self,” the body, the general notion ; self are called the works of self ; for it is said, that by the self, by the body, people perform their work. Moreover, in the body every work is manifested. Therefore by its being sited there (in the body) ‘the latter” work, the general idea of work, ‘is the founda-
168 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
community ; for it is common to all works; it is the Brahma of them ; for it upholds all works. Those three are existing, one, that self (4tma) ; that self, one, existing, is the three. This im- mortal (being) is concealed by existence. Life is verily the immortal being, name and form existence. By them that life is concealed. 3.
tion of them,” just the same as before. ^“ Those three,’ name, form and work, as mentioned before, being in mutual dependence, being the mutual cause of manifestation and being united for their mutual de- struction, ‘‘are,” like the (mutual) support of the three vows of the devotee,* “ existing, ०1९.* Why is the idea of unity connected with the self? It is answered,—‘ That self,’ that lump, the combination of cause and effect ; in the same manner as in the following passage (B. A. 1, 5, 3); “Thus modified is the soul, the modifications of mind, speech and life, ‘for so far extend this all, both manifested and un- manifested, as name, form and work.’’
‘The self (soul) one,’’ the combination of effect and cause, ^^ ex- isting,” in relation to the soul, the elements and the deities, “is the three,’”’ as defined, name, form and work. ‘‘ This immortal (being)”’ to be mentioned, ‘‘is concealed by existence.” .The text itself ex- plains the meaning of the preceding sentence, viz. ^^ Life is the im- mortal being,” in its nature as cause, the internal support of work, being the same with the soul, immortal, indestructible. ‘‘Name and form are existence ;” they have the nature of effects and abide in the body ; but life having the nature of cause and being the support of them, ‘is concealed,’’ not manifested, by them, which are external, corporeal, liable to increase and decrease, and mortal. The fourtht chapter is commenced for the purpose to show, that the soul, the ob- ject of knowledge, must be comprehended.
* To subdue his mind, his senses and his speech. + The fourth chapter of the Bréhmana, the second of the Upanishad.
Second Chapter. First Bréhmana. 169
SECOND CHAPTER.
First Brdhmana.
There was a great speaker, Gargya the proud son of Balaka. He said to Ajatas‘atru, the king of Késf,—** Let me explain to thee (the nature of) Brahma.”* Ajatas‘atru said,—* For sucha word,t I will give thousand (of cows). (Hearing) ^ Janaka, Janaka,”’$ people verily run (after a man of such a character). 1.
Gargya said,—* I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the sun.”§ Ajétas‘atru said,—** Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing that, excelling all beings he is their head, their king, I adore that spirit. Whoever thus adores him, excels all beings and becomes their head, their king.” 2.
_Ga4rgya said,—* 1 adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in
the moon.’’|| Ajatas’atru said,—‘ Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is great, clothed in a white dress,] Soma,* (and) king, I adore that spirit. (For him) who thus adores him, is day by. day produced and reproduced (the Soma) his food does not decrease. _ G4&rgya said,—*I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in lightning.”+ Ajdtas’atru said,—* Do not boast, do not boast of # In the first chapter the difference between knowledge and ignorance has been defined, and ignorance generally described ; in the second knowledge, or the science treating on Brahma, is set forth. This is done in the form of a narrative,—in which the Bréhman Gargya represents the imperfect ideas, entertained on the nature of Brahma, while king Ajatas‘atru represents the perfect knowledge of Brahma—with a view of showing, that this knowledge cannot be obtained by mere arguing, in conse- quence of the subtle nature of its object, and that it requires both a disciple believing in the existence of Brahma, and a teacher who has.a full knowledge of him. S’.
¶ Even for the mere word, whether thou be able or not to explain Brahma.
t °“ Janaka is a liberal donor, Janaka is a zealous hearer.’’ S’,
§ The spirit who abiding in the sun and in the eye has entered the heart through the eye. S’.
And in the mind. S’,
¶ Because water is the body of life, in the form of the moon. S’.
* As Soma, the moon-plant, in the sacrifice. S’.
+ In the lightning, in the skin, and in the heart. S’.
ष्ट
170 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
him. Knowing, that he is glorious, I adore that spirit. Who- ever thus adores him, becomes glorious; glorious becomes his offspring.” 4.
G&rgya said,— I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides.in the ether.”’* Ajatas‘atru said,—* Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is full and immoveable, I adore that spirit. Whoever thus adores him, has plenty of offspring and cattle, and his offspring is never removed from this world.”’ 5.
Girgya said,—* I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the wind.”’+ Ajatas’atru said,—‘ Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is Indra, whose strength is indomitable and whose hosts are unconquerable, I adore that spirit. Who- ever thus adores him, becomes a conqueror, is unconquerable by foes, and conqueror of his step-brothers.”
Gfrgya said,—* I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the fire.”’{ Ajdtas‘atru said,— Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is a destroyer, I adore that spirit. Whoever thus adores him, becomes a destroyer, and his offspring becomes a destroyer.” 7.
Gfrgya said,—“ I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the waters.”’§ Ajatas‘atru said,—Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is the same,|| I adore that spirit. Whoever thus adores him, obtains him as the same, not as not the same. Again from him is born what is the same with him.” { 7.
GArgya said,— I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the looking-glass.”* Ajdtas’atru said,—* Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is resplendent, I adore that
* In the ether as element, and also in the ether of the heart S’. - In the wind, in the vital air of the body, and in the heart. S’. ‡ And in the understanding of the heart. S’. § In the waters, in the semen and in the heart. 8 | In the S’rati and Smriti. 8’. gq A son like himeelf. * In the looking-glass, in other reflective things, and in the heart. S’,
Second Chapter. First Brdkmana. 171
spirit. Whoever thus adores him, becomes resplendent, and resplendent his offspring; he overcomes in splendour all those with whom he meets.” 9.
Gargya said,—“ I adore as Brahma the spirit who, when pro- ceeding, is followed by noise.”* Ajatas‘atru said,—‘ Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is life, I adore that spirit. Whoever thus adores him, obtains the full age in this world; life does not leave him before the (appointed) time.”? 10.
G4rgya said, I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the quarters.”+ Aj&tas‘atru said,—* Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is double and inseparable,t I adore him. Whoever thus adores him, becomes double,§ and his followers never part from him.” 11.
GArgya said, —* I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the shadow.|| Ajatas‘atru said,—Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is death, I adore that spirit. Whoever thus adores him, obtains (his) full age in this world; death does: not approach him before the time.” 12.
GArgya said,—* I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the soul,” (in self.) Ajatas’atru said,‘ Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is possessed of soul,* I adore that spirit. Whoever thus adores him, becomes in this world possessed of soul, and also his offspring.” Then Gargya was silent. 13.
Ajatas'atru said,—‘‘ Does (Brahma) so far extend?’ (He answered),—"‘ So far.’’—(Ajatas’atru said),—‘‘ Brahma 18 not
* Life.
+ In the quarters, in the ear and in the heart. 9’.
‡ Like the Asvins who are the tutelary deities of the quarters,
§ By the number of his servants. A. G.
The spirit, abiding in the shadow, externally as darkness and internally, in the heart as ignorance.
¶ु The spirit, abiding in the soul, in Prajdpati, and in the intellect of the heart, S’.
* Of much understanding.
2 2
172 Rrihkad Aranyaka Upanishad.
comprehended by (a knowledge) which so far extends only.’’* Gérgya said,—** Let me approach thee as disciple.” 14.
Aj&tas’atru said,—‘ It verily goes against the grain that a Brébman should approach a Kshatriya for the purpose of learning (the nature of) Brahma from him. I will explain (him) to thee.” (Thus saying) he took him by the hands and rose. They went toa man who slept. They called him by the name, “‘ Mighty one, clad in white garments, Soma, king.”? He did not rise. Squeez- ing him with the hand, he awoke him. He then arose. 15.
Aj&tas/atru said,—‘‘ Where was the spirit whose nature is like knowledge, at the time when he thus profoundly slept? ‘Whence did he come ?”” Gargya did not know this.
Ajatas‘atru said,—** When the spirit whose nature is like know- ledge, thus profoundly slept, then the ether,t in the midst of the heart drawing in, together with the knowledge of the senses,t (their actual) knowledge,§ slept therein (in the ether).|| When the spirit draws in that (knowledge of the senses), then he sleeps indeed. Then life is drawn in,§ speech is drawn in, the eye is drawn in, the ear is drawn in, (and mind 18 drawn in). 17.
When he is in the state of dream, then become such (con- ditions as the following) his worlds, then he becomes like a great king, like a great Bréhman, he proceeds as it were to higher and lower places. As a great king, assembling his fol- lowers, sends them about in his kingdom according to his pleasure, so that (spirit resembling knowledge, drawing in) the ‘organs, sends them about in his body according to his plea- sure. 18,
* Why then sayest thou boasting, —I will teach thee the nature of Bréhma >.
+ The soul in its independent nature. S’.
‡ The intellect of the heart in which Brahma is reflected.
§ The faculty of the senses of manifesting their respective objects ; that is to say, in sleep, intellect withdraws the senses from their objects, and concentrates them in the heart, where intellect itself is absorbed in the nature of the soul.
॥ The soul within its own self.
शरु Means here, according to S’ankara, the sense of smelling.
Second Chapter. Second Brahmana. 173
Again when he profoundly sleeps, he does not know of any thing. There are 72,000* arteries called the good, which from the heart proceed every where to the body. Returning with them he sleeps in the body. Asa youth, or a great king, or great Brahman, sleep, enjoying excessive bliss, so does he (the spirit resembling knowledge) sleep.
As the spider proceeds along with its web, as little sparks proceed from fire, so proceed from that soul all organs, all worlds, all the gods, all beings. The nearest conception of him is this, that he is the truth of truth. The organs are the truth, he is the truth of them.’ 20.
Second Brdéhmana.t
Whoever knows the young animal with its abode, the upper -part of its abode, its pillar (and) its rope, destroys the seven
* Vid. Pras’na Upanishad. 3, 6.
+ What “ the truth of truth’? means, will be explained in the two next Brahe 7181088. S’.
‡ The connexion between the former and the present Brahmana is shown by ‘S’ankara, as follows. The topic of Brahma has been introduced by the words,—‘* I will explain Brahma,’”’ (p. 172) and declared,—The one Brahma is ke from whom the world is produced, of whom it consists and into whom it is dissolved. Og what nature again is the world, which is produced and dissolved? It consists of the five elements, which consist of name and form, Moreover it has been said, that name and form are truth (satya). The truth of the truth, (consist- ing of the five elements) is Brahma. Why again are the elements truth? This question is answered in the Brahmana, whose subject is to show the nature of what has form and what is without form. On account of their having form and not having form, the elements, consisting of effect and cause (are truth, and thus) also the organs (Préu4h). To define the nature (Sattva) of the elements, con. sisting of cause and effect, the two next Braéhmanas are commenced. This Upanishad is to be explained, for Brahma is determined as the truth of the truth by the determination of the reality (Sattva) of effect and cause. There (in the former -Bréhmana) it has been said,—‘* The organs are the truth ; heis the truth of them,’’ Here by the connexion of the Brahma Upanishad in this manner,—‘* Which are the organs, of which nature their objects, and which the Upanishads,”’ he determines ‘the, nature of the causes, the same, as well, gardens, &c. seen on a road, are determined.
174 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
inimical brother’s sons.* The young animal is the central life. ¶ 0184 is its abode, this§ the upper part of its abode, life|| is the pillar, food the rope.¢ 1.
The seven (deities) who cause (its) indestructibility,* surround itt (the infant) worshipping, viz. Rudra, adores it with the red lines in the eye, Parjanya with the water in the eye, Aditya with the sight, Agni with the black in the eye, Indra with the white, the earth adores it with the lower, and the heavens, with the upper eye-lash. The food of him is not destroyed who thus knows it. 2.
This is said in the following memorial verse,— There is a Soma-cup, whose mouth is below, and whose foot is above; therein is put glory of various kinds. On its margin there are seven Rishis, and speech is the eighth, as holding communi- cation with Brahma.” The Soma-cup whose mouth is below and whose foot is above, is the head; for it is like a cup with mouth below and foot above. ^ Therein is put glory of various kinds.”” With the various kinds put (therein),+ it (the memo- rial verse) means the vital airs.§ ^ On its margin there are seven Rishis. ^ With the Rishis it means the vital winds.”
* For the sons of a brother may be inimical or friendly. Here the attachment to the objects of the senses is denoted by the brother’s sons. The senses are the seven orifices by which objects are perceived, the attachment produced by them _are the brother's war (i
¶ The subtle body, {dwelling in the midst of the body; subject to it are the organs; it is a babe, betause it is uuwitted, while the senses are keen with regard to their objects. S’,
‡ The body. 9.
$ The head with its seven orifices. S’.
॥ Life, means, according to S’ankara, the strength produced by food, accordiag to others, respiration.
¶ By which the young animal is bound to the pillar.
* Thus I rendered ^^ Akhsiti’’ after S’. They cause the indestructibility of food.
¶ The babe, when dwelling in the upper part of the abode it rises to the eye. S’.
t As the Soma-juice in the cup. 8’.
§ The vital airs by which the senses are moved to the performance of their functions.
Second Chapter. Third Brdhmana. 175
“Speech is the eighth, as communicating with Brahma ;’’ for speech as the eighth communicates with Brahma.* 3.
These (ears) are Goutama and Bharadvaja, this (ear) is Goutama, the other Bharadvaja. These (eyes) are Vis'vAmittra and Jamadagni; this is Vis’vamittra, the other Jamadayni. These (nostrils) are Vasistha and Kasyapa; this is Vasistha, this Kasyapa; speech is Attri; for by speech food is consumed ; for Attri is verily derived from the root Attih (to eat, con- sume) ; he is the consumer of all. All becomes the food of him who thus knows. 4.
Third Brahmana.
There are two modest of Brahma,{t what has form, and what has no form,§ the one mortal, the other immortal, again finite the one, and the other infinite, || again the one existing and the other beyond. 1.
What has form, is what is different from the air and the ether ;* this is mortal, this is finite, this is visible. The essence of what has form, what is mortal, finite and visible, is the being that heats (the sun) ; for he is the essence of what exists. 2,
Again what has no form 18 the air and the ether ; this is im- mortal, this is infinite, this 18 beyond. The essence of what has no form, what is immortal, infinite and beyond, is the spirit who (abides) in this universe.t This refers to the divine relation. 3.
* Brahma is the whole of sounds, and speech has communication with it, by pronouncing it. A. G.
+ I use mode here in the sense of ^ accidental modification of substance.’”’
‡ Brahma the supreme soul, who, in his absolute nature, is without those two modes. ऽ“.
§ At the time that their differences are not evolved. Their differences are stated afterwards. S’.
| Sthitancha yacheha, explained by S’ sthitam parichchhinnam gatipirvakam sthasnu, yachcha yatiti yadvyapyaparichchhinnam, what is stationary, limited, what after motion has the tendency to stand, and what moves, therefore what is pervading, unlimited.
q What is formed of parts, a compound. S’,
* Namely, the other three elements, earth, water and light.
¶ Hiranyagarbha.
176 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
Now the relation to the soul. What has form is different from the air and from the ether in the midst of the body.* This is mortal, this is finite, this existing. The essence of what has form, what is mortal, finite and existing, is the eye ;t for this is the essence of what exists. 4.
Now what has no form is the air, and the ether in the midst of the body. This is immortal, this is infinite, this is beyond. The essence of what has no form, what is immortal, infinite and beyond, is the spirit (Purusha) in the right eye; for he is the essence of what is beyond. 5.
The form of this spiritt is, as cloth dyed by turmeric,§ as the smoke colour of sheep-wool, as the red colour of the In- dragopa insect, as the bright colour of the fire-flame, as the white colour of the lotus, as the lightning shines forth at one moment, (thus are the modifications of the desires of that spirit.) The glory of him who thus knows, shines forth at one moment. After this therefore the definition (of Brahma),—He is not this, he is not this, &c.|| There is another name, different from that (definition),—‘* He is not this, he is not this,”’ viz. the truth of truth. The organs are the truth, he is the truth of them. 6.
* That is to say, the three elements, light, water and earth, as constituents of the body, independent of ether and air. S’. ।
+ Because by the eye the whole body assumes substance, and because the eyes were first produced, in accordance with the passage, ^" Aditya (the sun), becoming eye, entered the eyes.”’ S’,
t The subtle spirit, the spirit, who is the cause of manifestation.
§ As cloth, dyed by turmeric, so is the desire of that spirit in contact with special objects.
| If it is asked, how by those negations the “truth of truth’ is defined, the answer is,—by the prohibition of any allegation which may be made with regard to the nature of Brahma, name, form, action, quality, &c. must be denied of Brahma ; for there is no distinction in Brahma; if he is defined, this definition refers only to qualities which are alleged of him ; but bis own nature, can in no manner be determined, except by stating, that every attribute is denied of him.
Second Chapter. Fourth Brdhmana. 177
Fourth Braéhmana.*
“Maitréyi,” said Yajnavalkya,t “ Behold, I am desirous of raising myself from the ordert (of house-holder) ; therefore, let me divide (my property) amongst thee and Katydyani there.” 1.
Maitréyi said,—“ If, O Venerable, this whole world with all its wealth were mine, could I become immortal thereby ?” Yajnavalkya said,—“ Like the life of the wealthy thy life might become ; by wealth, however, there is no hope of (obtaining) immortality.” 2.
Maitréyi said,— Of what use would be wealth to me, if I did not become thereby immortal. Tell me, O Venerable, any (means of obtaining immortality) of which thou knowest.” 3.
Y4jnavalkya said,— Behold, (thou wast) dear to us before, (and now) thou sayest what is dear. Come, sit down; I will explain to thee (the means of obtaining immortality) ; endea- vour to comprehend my explanation.” 4.
He said,—* Behold, not indeed for the husband’s sake the husband is dear,§ but for the sake of the self, || is dear the hus- band. Behold, not indeed for the wife’s sake the wife is dear, but for the sake of the self, is dear the wife. Behold, not for the sons’ sake the sons are dear, but for the sake of the self are dear the sons. Behold, not for property’s sake property is dear, but for the sake of the self is property dear. Behold, not for the Brahma’s sake the Brahma is dear, but forthe sake of the self is the Brahma dear. Behold, not for the Kshattra’s
* It is the object of this Brahmana to show that the state of a SannyAsi, viz. the retiring from the world to the forest and the renunciation of all ceremonies, is indispensable for the knowledge of Brahma. S’. The same convergation between Yajnavalkya and his wife Maitréyi is, with slight variations, repeated in the 5th Bréhmana of the 4th chapter.
+ A Rishi, Yajnavalkya by name. S’.
t To the higher 8४५६6 of a Sannyasi.
§ To the wife,
|| Atma, the self, the soul; for the self of the wife, for her own soul.
2A
178 Rrihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
sake the Kshattra is dear, but for the sake of the self the Kshattra is dear. Behold, not for the worlds’ sake the worlds are dear, but for the sake of the self are dear the worlds. Behold, not for the gods’ sake the gods are dear, but for the sake of the self are dear the gods. Behold, not for the Védas’ sake the Védas are gear, but for the sake of the self are dear the Védas.* Behold, not for the elements’ sake the elements are dear, but for the sake of the self are dear the elements. Be- hold, not for the sake of the universe the universe is dear, but for the sake of the self is dear the universe. Behold, the self (4tm4) is verily to be seen, heard, minded (and) meditated upon. Behold, O Maitréyi, by seeing, hearing, minding, knowing the self, all this (universe) is comprehended. 5.
The Brahma should disown a person,t who considers the Brahma (cast) as something different from (his) self (Atma) ; the Kshattra should disown a person who considers the Kshattra (cast) as something different from (his) self; the worlds should disown a person who considers the worlds as something different from (his) self; the gods should disown a person who considers the gods as something different from (their) self; the elements should disown a person who considers the elements as something different from (their) self; the universe should disown a person who considers the universe as something different from (its) self. This (own) self is this Brahma, this Kshattra, these worlds, these gods, these elements, is this universe,—6.
As a person, when a drum (unseen by him) is beaten, is unable to perceive the sounds proceeding from it (as sounds of a drum), but on the perception of the drum the sound of a drum beaten is perceived,—7.
As a person, when a shell (unseen by him) is blown, is un- able to perceive the sounds, proceeding from it (as sounds of a
* The last sentence is omitted in the Sanscrit text, published by the As. Soc, ¶ A person, belonging to the Bralnninical caste.
Second Chapter. Fourth Bréhmana. 179
shell) but on the perception of the shell the sound of a shell blown is perceived,—8.
As a person, when a lute (unseen to him) is played, is un- able to perceive the sounds proceeding from it, but on the perception of the lute the sound of a lute played 18 per- ceived ,*—9.
As from fire, made of damp wood, proceed smoke, sparks, &c.+ of various kind, thus, behold, is the breathing of this great being the Rig Véda, the Yajur Véda, the Sama Véda, the Atharvangirasa, the narratives (Itihasa,{) the doctrines on creation (Purana), the science (Vidya), the Upanishads, the memorial verses (Slokas), the aphorisms (Sitras), the explana- tion of tenets (Anuvyakhanani,) the explanation of Mantras, (Vyakhyanani,) all these are his breathing. 10.
As the only site of all the waters is the sea, thus is the only site of every touch the skin, thus the only site of every taste the tongue, thus the only site of every smell the nose, thus the only site of every colour the eye, thus the only site o¢ every sound the ear, thus the only site of every determination the mind, thus the only site of every knowledge the heart, thus the only site of every act the hands, thus the only site of every pleasure the organs of generation, thus the only site of every evacuation the anus, thus the only site of every motion the feet, thus the only site of every Véda speech. 11.
* S’ankara supplies the above comparisons with,—so is the identity of Brahma with the individual soul only apprehended by general and special knowledge.
+ Dhuméh (smoke), the plural denotes, according to S., smoke, sparks, ashes, &c.
‡ S. asserts, that the Itihasa, &c. are the eight topics of the Brahmanas, viz. Itihdsa, narrative, as for instance that of Urvasi, and Purdravasa ; Purana, doc- trines on creation, as for instance ‘this was before ;’’ vidya the science of the gods, for instance, ‘‘ he knows;’’ Upanishads, doctrines about adoration, for instance, ‘‘ the soul, therefore let it be adored ;’’ Slokas, Mantras, occurring in the Bréhmanas, as ^ there follow these Slokas ;’’ Sitras, sentences, which give the pith of athing, as ^^ the soul, therefore it should be adored ;’’ Anuvyaékhyanani, explana- tion of Mantras ; Vyakhyanani, praise in honor of a deity, &c.
2a2
180 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
As a piece of salt, when thrown into water, is dissolved into mere water, and none is capable of perceiving it, because, from whatever place a person might take (water), it would have the taste of salt (but be no piece of salt), thus, behold, this great being, which is infinite, independent and mere knowledge. Springing forth together with those elements,* (he)+ is de- stroyed, when they are destroyed. After death, no conscience remains ;{ thus, O Maitréyi, I hold.” Thus said Yajnavalkya 12.
Maitréyi said,—‘“ With regard to him (Brahma) thou hast bewildered me, O Venerable, by the saying,§—After death no conscience remains.” YAjnavalkya said,—‘ Behold, I verily do not create bewilderment, behold, this (Brahma) is sufficient for knowledge.” 13.
For where|| there is duality,** as it were, there sees another, tt another thing, there smells another another thing, there hears another another thing, there speaks another of another thing, there minds another another thing, there knows another ano- ther thing; but how does one to whom all has become mere soul (६६08), smell any thing, how see any thing, how hear any
* I give here, in a somewhat different language, some of the images, which S’ankara uses in explanation of this passage. As the appearance of the sun and moon in water is a mere reflection, and nothing real, or as the appearance of red in a white crystal is a mere reflection from a red substance and nothing real ;—for on removing the water, the sun and moon only remain, not their reflections, or on removing the red substance, the whiteness of the crystal continues unchanged,— thus the elements and the individual souls are reflections of the one soul upon ignorance, and nothing real ; for on removing the ignorance by knowledge the soul alone remains, while those reflections cease to exist.
+ He, the individual soul, or as S’ankara has it, the division of a particular soul.
‡ For him who has the true knowledge of the eternal soul.
§ Because this seems contradictory to the former statement, that Brahma is the fulness of knowledge.
| In the individual soul, produced by the substrate of ignorance as the totality of causes and effects, S’.
## Difference from the supreme soul.
tf Any individual soul.
Second Chapter. Fifth Brdéhmana. 181
thing, how speak of any thing, how mind any thing, how know any thing? How should he know him by whom he knows this all ; behold, how should he know the knower ??’*14.
Fifth Bréhmana.t The earth is honey} for all beings, for the earth are all
* The argument which S‘ankara advances in support of this doctrine is essentially as follows,—Every effect requires a cause ; or, without cause there is no ¢ffect ; there- fore, if there is ignorance, there is the assumption of effect, cause and reward as the effect of ignorance ; but this assumption is not made on a knowledge of Brahma ; for if all is soul or Brahma, there is, beside the soul, neither cause, nor effect, nor reward. A knowledge of a cause can take place, if there is a difference between the cause and the object of knowledge, and there may be an enquiry on the subject of the knowledge (the knowing soul) and the object of the same, but not of the soul. If the latter be the case, such a knowledge (the knowledge of the knowing subject, the soul) would be either produced by the soul itself, or by something else. Not the first ; for the soul is not an object of the soul, not by something else; for there is nothing else but the soul, and there is therefore no object of its knowledge.
+ S‘ankara explains the connexion between the present and the preceding Bréhmana, as follows :—The Maitreyf Brahmana has been composed for the pur- pose to state that that which is independent of ceremonies and the cause of im- mortality, is worthy of explanation. This is the knowledge of Brahma, pertaining, as has been declared, to all the duties of a Sannyasi. Moreover, since by the know- ledge of the soul the whole universe is known, and the soul is dearer to every one than every thing else, ‘‘ the soul should be beheld.’’ ‘* It is to be heard, to be minded, to be pondered upon,’’ The different modes of beholding the soul, have been stated before. To be heard is the soul, by means of the teacher, to be pondered on by means of disquisition, and disquisition has been explained. The proposition, ५५ the soul is this all,’’ is proved by the argument, that the one soul is the only cause of the generality, of the production and of the dissolution of the world, and as this may be doubtful, the present Brahmana, is composed to remove any doubt regarde ing it. Because the whole world, earth, etc, is in the mutual dependence of sup- port aod supported, it is dependent upon one cause of generality, production and dissolution. Or with other words, after the proposition (Pratijna) ‘* soul alone is this all,’’ has been proved by the argument, that the soul is the cause of the creation, preservation and dissolution of the world, the conclusion (Nigamana) of the propos- ed meaning is again made in the Madhubrélimana, conformably to the definition of logicians, that the conclusion in a syllogism is the repetition of the proposition, after the argument has been stated.
‡ Vid. Chand. Up., 3, 1—5, where a similar comparison in made.
182 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
beings honey*. Both the immortal, luminous spirit+ (abiding) in the earth, and the immortal, luminous spirit, who exists in the body according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings and all beings are honey for them.) Thist{ is that soul, this§ is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 1.
The waters are honey for all beings; for the waters are all beings honey. Both the immortal, luminous spirit (abiding) in the water, and the immortal, luminous spirit, abiding in the semen according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings and all beings are honey for them). This is that soul, this 18 immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 2.
The fire is honey for all beings; for the fire all beings are honey. Both the immortal, luminous spirit, (abiding) in the fire, and the immortal luminous spirit, abiding in speech according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 3.
The wind is honey for all beings; for the wind all beings are honey. Both the immortal, luminous spirit (abiding) in the wind, and the immortal, luminous spirit, who is life according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immor- tal, this is Brahma, this all. 4.
Aditya is honey for all beings; for Aditya all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit, (abiding) in that Aditya, and the immortal, luminous spirit, abiding in speech according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings,
* As the bees collect honey from every kind of flowers, which again serves as nourishment for the bees, so all the beings are nourishment for the one earth, are changed into its very substance, and again the earth is nourishment for all beings ; it is changed into all ; that is to say, they are mutually dependent ; there is no real difference between them ; they are the same,—Brabma.
+ The Sanscrit term is Purusha.
‡ This (ayam) this fourfold division, viz. the earth, all beings, the spirit abiding
in the earth, and the spirit abiding in the body. S’. § This (idam) the knowledge, whose object is the fourfold division. S’.
Second Chapter. Fifth Brahmana. 183
and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 5.
The quarters are honey for all beings; for the quarters all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit (abid- ing) in the quarters, and the immortal, luminous spirit, abid- ing in the ear according to his relation to the soul, (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 6.
The moon is honey for all beings ; for the moon all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit (abiding) in the moon, and the immortal, luminous spirit, abiding in the mind according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 7.
The lightning is honey for all beings ; for the lightning all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit (abid- ing) in lightning, and the immortal, luminous spirit, abiding in the light (skin) according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 8.
The thunder is honey for all beings; for the thunder all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit, (abid- ing) in thunder, and the immortal, luminous spirit, abiding in sound and note according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings, and all the beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 9.
The ether is honey for all beings; for the ether all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit, (abiding) in the ether, and the immortal luminous spirit, abiding as ether in the heart according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 10.
Justice is honey for all beings; for justice all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit (abiding) in jus- tice, and the immortal luminous spirit, produced in justice ac-
184 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
cording to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is im- mortal, this is Brahma, this all. 11.
Truth is honey for all beings; for truth all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit, (abiding) in truth, and the immortal, luminous spirit, produced in truth according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them). This is that soul, this is immortal, this Brahma, this all. 12.
Mankind is honey for all beings ; for mankind all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit, (abiding) in mankind, and the immortal luminous spirit, produced in man- kind according to his relation to the soul, (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this Brahma, this all. 13.
The soul is honey for all beings; for the soul all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit (abiding) in the soul, and the immortal, luminous spirit who is that soul (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them). This is that soul, this is immortal, this Brahma, this all. 14,
This soul is verily the lord of all beings, the king of all beings. As all spokes are fastened in the nave and the cir- cumference of the wheel,* thus also all beings, all gods, all worlds, all organs, all souls, are fastened in that soul. 15.
This honey Dadhich,+ the son of Atharvana, explained to the
* See a similar comparison, 2 Mund, 2, 6.
T The tale, alluded to in the text, is contained in the Taittarfya Brahmana, in the part which treats on the Pragarvya sacrifice, and is given by S’ankara. Its drift 18, as follows,—Dadhich, the son of Atharvana, explained to the two Asvins, the physicians of the gods, the Madhu Bréhmana. When they came to him for instruc- tion, he told them, that Indra had threatened him to cut off his head, if he repeated the Madhu Brahmana to any body else. The Asvins promised to save him from the consequence of Indra’s anger. They would place his head somewhere else, and meanwhile put a horse’s head on his body ; when Indra should cut off the head, they would replace it by his own. He consented, and explained to them the Madhu Brahmaya by means of the head of a horse which they had placed upon
Second Chapter. Fifth Braékmana. 185
two As’vins. Beholding their deed the Rishi* said,—“O ye men, I will manifest your cruel.deedt (undertaken) for your advantage, as Tanyatu{ (manifests) rain (from acloud). The honey which Dadhin’, the son of Atharvana, explained to you through the head of the horse, (is this honcy).” 16.
This honey explained Dadhin’, the son of Atharvana, to the two As’vins. Beholding this deed, the Rishi said,—‘‘ O As'vins, ye placed a horse-head on Dadhin’, the son of Athar- vana. To keep his promise, he explained to you, O Destroyers, the honey of Tvastar (Aditya) and also the honey, which is to be concealed.”§ 17.
This honey explained Dadhin', the son of Atharvana, to the two As’vins. Beholding their deed, the Rishi said,—“ (He) |} created the bodies (purah) of bipeds (and then) the bodies of quadrupeds. At first, (purah) being a bird,{ he entered as Purusha the bodies(purah). This Purushais called thus, because he sleeps in all bodies (Puris’aya).”” From him nothing is con- cealed (within), from him nothing is concealed (without). 18.
This honey explained Dadhin’, the son of Atharvana, to the two As’‘vins. Beholding this deed, the Rishi said,—“ He became to every nature of every nature ; therefore to manifest the na- ture of him, Indra* appears of manifold nature by his Mayahs; for his hundred and ten senses are attached (to the body as horsest to a car), it (the soul) is the senses; it is ten, it is many thousands, nay infinite, if is Brahma who has not
his body instead of his own, and on Indra cutting off the horse-head, they restored to him his own. This tale, says S’ankara, is to illustrate the superiority of the knowledge of Brahma; for the knowledge, possessed by Indra is difficult even for the gods, to gain, and was gained but with great trouble by the As/vins.
क The Mantra. 8’.
¶ The catting off the head of Dadhin’. ‡ Parjanya.
§ The honey of Tvastar is knowledge, referring to rite; the honey to be con- cealed, the knowledge of Brahma, S’,
॥ Vid. Katha U. 5 10.
षूं Paramés’vara, S’. That is to say, being of subtile body. * Psramés’vara. S’.
¶ The word “ Hari,’’ means in Sanscrit °" sense’’ as well as ‘‘ horse,’’ and denotes here both of them.
2 8
186 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
a Before nor an After, nor a Beside, nor a Without; this is the soul, Brahma, the perceiver of all.* Such is the doctrine.
Sixth Bréhmana.
Next follows the school.t Pautimashya succeeded Gaupa- vana,—Gaupavana, Pautim4shya,—Pautimashya, Gaupavana, —Gaupavana, Kausika,—Kaus‘ika, Kaundinya,—Kaundinya, S'4ndilya,—S'andilya, Kausika and Gautama,—Gautama, 1.
Kenivés'ya,—Agnivés ya, Séndilya and Anabhimléta,—Ana- bhimléta, Anabhimldta,—Anabhimlata, Anabhiml4ta,—Ana- bhimldta, Gautama,—Gautama, Saitava and Prféchinayogya,— Saitava aud Prichinayogya, Pérds'arya,—Pfras’arya, Bhérad- véya,—Bhiéradvaya Bhéradvéja and Gautama,—Gautama, Bhéradvéja,—Bhiradvaja, Pérés'4rya, —Praras‘arya, Vaijavapa- yana,—Vaijavépd4yana, Kausik4yani,—Kaus‘ikdyani, 2.
Ghritakaus’ika,—Ghritakaus‘ika, P4ras‘aryayana,—Paras/ar- yéyana, Pérds’arya,—Péras'arya, Jatikarnya,—Jatuikarnya, Asuréyana and Yaska,—Asuréyana, Sraivani,—Sraivani, Au- pajandhani,—Aupajandhani, Asuri,—Asuri, Bhéradvaja,— Bhéradvéja, Atréya,—Atréya, Ménti,—Ménti, Gautama,— Gautama, Gautama,—Gautama, Vatsya,—Vatsya, Sandilya,— Sandilya, Kais‘orya Képya,—Kais‘orya Kapya, Kumérahérita,— Kumiraharita, G4lava,—Galava, Vidarbhi Kaundinya,—Vidar- bhi Kaundinya, Vatsanapat Babhrava,—Vatsanapaét Babhrava, Pathéh Saubhara,— PathéhSaubhara,Ay4syaAngirasa,—Ayasya Angirasa, Abhiti Tv4s'tar,— A bhiti Tv4s’tar, Visvarupa Tv4star,
* This passage may also be translated,—This Brahma is without a Before, without an After, without a Beside, without a Without, is this soul (the individual soul) ; Brahma is the enjoyer of all.
Or,—This is Brahma, who is without a Before, without an After, without a Beside, without a Without, it is this soul (the individual soul), it is Brahma, the enjoyer of all (the universal soul).
+ Two more lists of teachers are given in this Upanishad, viz. 4, 6, and 6, 5. S’ankara observes about the present list, that it is the list of the Madhu Kanda and given for the praise of the knowledge of Brahma. The school itself means the
succession of teachers for the four preceding chapters of the Brahmana, or the two first chapters of the B. A. U.
Second Chapter. Sixth Bréhmana. 187
—Visvarupa Tvastar, the Asvins,—the Asvins, Dadhin’ Athar- vapa,—Dadhiw Atharvana, Atharvana Daiva,—Atharvana Daiva, Mrityu Pradhvasana,—Mrityu Pradhvasana, Pradhva- sana,— Pradhvasana, Ekarishi, —Ekarishi, Viprachitti,—Vipra- chitti, Vyashti,—Vyashti, Sanéru,—Sanéru, Sandtana,—Sana- tana, Sanaga,—Sanaga, Paraméshti,—Paraméshti, Brahma*, — Brahma is the self-existent ; salutation to Brahma.
* Paramésthi Virét, and Brabmé, denotes Hiranyagarbha, S’.
2
188 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad,
THIRD CHAPTER.
First Brdhmana.*
Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas, performed the sacrifice, named Bahudakshini.¢ There were assembled the Bréhmans of the Kurus and the Panchalas. Janaka, the king of the Vidé- has, had a great desire to know, who among those Bréhmans knew best the Védas; for this purpose he tied a thousand cows (in a stable); the horns of each of them were surrounded with ten Padahs (of gold). ¢ 1.
He said to them,—“‘O venerable Brahmans, whoever amongst you is the best knower of Brahma, shall drive home those cows.” The Br&hmans did not venture (to come forward). Then said Yajnavalkya to his Brahma student,—“ O gentle one, drive home those (cows).”” ^ (4.8 you command), O knower of the Sima Véda,§” with these words (the disciple) drove them home. The Bréhmans became angry (thinking),—How dare he call himself amongst us the best knower of Brahma? There was then As'vala, the Hotar|| of Janaka, king of the Vidéhas. He asked him,—‘“ Art thou in very deed amongst us the best knower of Brahma, O Y4jnavalkya?” He said,—~ We bow to
* The present Kinda, or the YAjnavalkya Kanda, treats the same subject as the Madhu Kénda; but it is no repetition, for while the latter exhibits the knowledge of Brahma in the form of mere enunciation, the former establishes it by argument. The narrative is given in praise of the knowledge of Brahma, and also to show liberality as a means conducive to that knowledge. S’.
¶ Bahudakshina is either a sacrifice of this name, which has been explained in another S’4kha, or the As’vamédha sacrifice, as in the latter great donations are required. S’.
‡ A Pada is according to S’ankara, equal to the 4th part of a Pala, or equal to a Suvarpa of gold, which, according to Wilson, is equal to about 176 grains Troy.
§ That is to say, knower of the four Védas, as the Sama Véda was to be studied after the three other Védas.
॥ The Ritvig, one who knows the Rig Véda, or he who arranges the sacrifices,
Third Chapter. First Brahmana. 189
him who is the best knower of Brahma; we are even desirous of getting the cows.”’ Hence the Hotar As'vala undertook to question him. 2.
He said,— YAjnavalkya, all this is pervaded by death, all this is subject to death. By what means overcoming the grasp of death is the sacrificer liberated >” (He replted)—, “ By speech which is fire in the shape of the priest, called Hotar. The speech of the sacrificer,* is verily the Hotar. This speecht is this fire; this (fire) is the Hotar, this (fire of the Hotar) is liberation, this (liberation) absolute liberation.”§ 38.
He said,—‘ Yajnavalkya, all this is pervaded by day and night,|| all this is subject to day and night. By what means, overcoming the grasp of day and night, is the sacrificer liberat- ed >”? (He replied,)—“ By the eye, which is Aditya (the sun) in the shape of the priest called Adhvaryu. The eye of the sacri- ficer is verily the Adhvaryu. This eye is this Aditya, this (Aditya) is the Adhvaryu, this (Adhvaryu) is liberation, this {liberation) absolute liberation.” 4
He said,— Y4jnavalkya, all is pervaded by the light and dark halves of the lunar month ; all this is subject to the light and dark halves of the lunar months. By what means, over- coming the grasp of the light and dark halves of the lunar month, is the sacrificer liberated?” (He replied),—‘ By the vital breath, which is the wind in the shape of the priest, call-
* With reference to the sacrifice. S’, |
+ With reference to the deities, S’,
+ Cause of liberation. S
§ Absolute liberation is here the gaining of the state of speech and of the deity of fire. S’
॥ The cause of the continual change of such rites as the Dars’a and Pirnamasa, is time ; for although time is included in work, yet, independent of the performance of work, time, before and after work, the idea observed to change the causes of rites, for which reason the liberation from time must be separately explained. S’.
q Although time, as containing lunar days, is included in time, characterized by day and night, and although the sun is the Ruler of day and night, yet this is only the case in general, but not with regard to days and nights, where there is an in- crease or decrease which are ruled by the moon, and in this respect a liberation from time as represented by lunar days, is hecessary. S’.
190 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
ed the Udgatar.- The vital breath of the sacrificer 18 verily the Udgitar. This vital breath is this wind, this (wind) is the Udgitar, this (Udgétar) is liberation, this (liberation) absolute liberation.” 5.
He said,—“ Yajnavalkya, this atmosphere is without founda- tion, as it were ; by what approach* does (man) approach then the place of heaven?” (He replied),— By the mind which is the moon in the shape of the priest, called the Brahma. The mind of the sacrificer is verily the Brahma; mind is this Brahma, this (moon) is the Brahma, this (Brahma) is liberation, this (liberation) absolute liberation.’ So far the absolute emau- cipation (from death). Next the means.+ 6.
He said,—“ Y4jnavalkya, by how many Rikst of the Rig Véda does this Hotar in this sacrifice to-day perform the praise ?” (He replied),—“‘ By three.”’—“ By what three?” ‘By those, to be recited before (the sacrifice,) by those to be recited for ` the sake of the sacrifice, and by those to be recited for the sake of praise.” ‘What does he conquer by them?” “All that bears life.’”’§ 7.
He said,—“‘ Yajnavalkya, how many oblations|| does this Adh- varyu offer to-day in this sacrifice ?”? (He replied), —‘‘ Three.” ‘Which are these three?” ‘The oblations which flame up- wards; the oblations which make a great noise; the oblations which fall downwards.” =^ What does he conquer by them ?” ५ By the oblations that flame upwards, he conquers the world
* In 3-5, the liberation of the sacrificer from death has been declared, but not the means by which he effects it. These means are explained in the present section. S’,
_ व Means are either all the appliances necessary for the performance of sacred rites, or the knowledge of those means. S’.
+t A Rig does not mean herea single verse of the Rig Veda, but it refers to certain kinds of Rig-verses, which may include any number of Mantras.
§ The three worlds, according to S, since they are the supporters of life, and the three worlds correspond with the three kinds of Riks.
\| Oblations, fire offerings.
¶ In the oblations, flaming upwards, butter; in those making a great noise, meat ; and in those falling downwards, milk or the Soma juice is offered,
Third Chapter. First Bréhmana. 191
of the gods; for the world of the gods (déva) shines (dipyaté) as it were; by the oblations which make a great noise, he con- quers the world of the forefathers ; for the world of the fore- fathers is very noisy,* as it were; by the oblations which fall downwards, he conquers the world of man ; for the world of man is down below, as it were.” 8.
He said,—“ Yajnavalkya, by how many deitiest does this Brahma, (seated on the chair) to the right, protect to-day this sacrifice ?”? (He replied)—, “By one.” ‘Which is the one?” “The mind ;f the mind is infinite,§ infinite are the Visvédévas ; he conquers thereby the world of the Infinite.”’ 9.
He said,—“ Yajnavalkya, how many hymns of praise, || will the Udgiatar sing to-day in this sacrifice?”? (He replied),— “Three.” ‘ Which are these three?” ‘Those to be recited before (the sacrifice,) those to be recited for the sake of the sacrifice, and thirdly, those to be recited for the sake of praise.” “Which are those (three) according to their relation to the soul?” ^“ The vital air that goes forwards (respiration) is those to be recited before,{ the vital air that goes downwards those to be recited for the sake of the sacrifice,* the vital air that equalises those to be recited for the sake of praise.” ‘“ What does he conquer by them?” ‘ By the Mantras to be recited before, he conquers the world of man, by those to be recited for the sake of the sacrifice, the world of the atmosphere, by those to be recited for the sake of praise, the world of the heavens.” Hence the Hotar As’vala became silent. 10.
* The noise refers to the lamentations of those who are punished for their crimes, Ss’.
¶ The plural instead of the singular according to S’., is either used to connect this question with the former ones, or to deceive Yajnavalkya
‡ For by the mind is Brahma meditated upon
§ This means, that the modifications of the mind are infinite.
|| Rika either of the Rig or Sama ९6०६.
¶ Both going upwards.
* As the wind going downwards causes a noise.
192 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
Second Bréhmanga.
Then asked* him Artabhéga,t from the family of Jaratkéra,— ५८ Y4jnavalkya,” said he, “ how many fetterst are there, and how many auxiliaries to them?” (He replied),—“ Eight fetters and eight auxiliaries.” ‘ Which are the eight fetters and the eight auxiliaries?” 1.
The vital air that goes forwards§ is a fetter; it is enhanced by the vital going downwards, || which is its auxiliary ; for by the vital air that goes downwards, smell is perceived. 2.
Speech is a fetter; it isenhanced by the word which is its auxiliary, for by speech words are pronounced. The tongue isa fetter ; it is enhanced by taste which is its auxiliary ; for by the tongue various kinds of taste become manifest. 4,
The eye is a fetter; it is enhanced by colour which is its auxiliary ; for by the eye colours are seen. 5. |
The ear is a fetter; it is enhanced by sound which is its auxiliary ; for by the ear sounds are heard. 6.
The mind is a fetter; it is enhanced by desire which is its
auxiliary ; for by mind desires are formed. 7. The hands are a fetter ; it is enhanced by action which is its
auxiliary ; for by the hands actions are done. 8. The skin is a fetter; it is enhanced by touch which is its
* The absolute liberation from death in the relation of the latter to time and work, has been explained in the preceding Brahmana. What then is the nature of death itself? Death is an attachment, produced from the natural ignorance of man, as to the material world and to the soul. Death is therefore a bond, and the senses and their objects by which death is characterised, are called chains and their enhancers, and it is the object of this Brahmana to show the liberation from death, as characterised by the sensual chains and their enhancers, the sensual objects. S’.
¶ The son of Ritubhaga.
‡ The terms in the text are ‘‘ graha’’ and ‘‘ ati-graha,’’ graha, by which something is seized and atigraha, which aids in ths seizure, by which the seizare becomes stronger.
§ The vital air that goes forwards is here the sense of smell, from its connexiun with the present topic. S’,
॥ The vital air that goes downwards is here the sensation of smell. S’.
Third Chapter. Third Brdhmana. 193
auxiliary ; for by the skin the various kinds of touch become. known. ‘These are the eight fetters and the eight auxiliaries.’’
He said,—“ Yajnavalkya, all this 18 the food of death. Which then is the deity whose food is death (himself) 2” (He repli- ed) ,—‘“< Fire verily is death ; the same is the food of the water ; (thereby) death again is conquered.” 10.
He 8810,-- Yajnavalkya, when this spirit (Purusha) dies, do then the organs* ascend from him?” YaAjnavalkya said ;— «° कि 0, by no means, no, by no means; theret united they are dissolved in him;§ he becomes swollen, he becomes full of wind, when blown upon: the dead sleep.”|| 11.
He said,—“ Yajnavalkya, when this spirit dies, then what does not leave him?”? (He replied),—‘ The name. The name indeed is infinite, infinite are the Visvédévas; he conquers thereby the world of the Ynfinite.” 12.
He said,—‘ Yajnavalkya,{—when the speech* of the spirit departed is dissolved into fire, the vital air into the wind, the eye into the sun, the mind into the moon, the ear into the quar- ters, the body into earth, the soult into the ether, the hairs of the body into annual herbs, the hairs of the head into trees, blood and semen into the waters, where then does this spirit re- main ?””—(He replied),— Take, O gentle Artabh4ga, my hand, (and let us go to a lonely place, there) we shall know (the
* The fetters above mentioned, as speech, and their auxiliaries are the impres- sions of words, etc.
+ From him who knows Brahma,
व In him who knows Brahma.
§ In the supreme Brahma; they become of the same nature with him.
| There is no actual death ; when the bonds are destroyed, the liberated does not proceed any where.
q In 10 and 11, the state, which is obtained by the liberated, has been men- tioned. What then does become after death of him who is not liberated? The answer is given in the present section.
* By speech, the vital airs, etc, according to S’. the tutelary deities are here to be understood, and not the organs, because they do not depart.
+ The soul (Atma) means here the place of the soul, the ether of the heart.
20
194 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
answer of) this question ; this our (question) cannot be (decided) in a crowded place.”—Going there they deliberated. What they said there, was work,* what they praised there, was work. By holy work verily a person becomes holy, unholy by un- holy.” Hence Artabhiga from the family of Jaratkdéra became silent. 13.
Third Brdhmana.t
Then asked him Bhujya, the son of Lahya,—“ Yajnavalkya,” said he, “ wandering (once) in the country of the Madras for the sake of studying the Védas, we came to the house of Patanchala of the family of Kapi. His daughter was possessed by a Gan- १६7१६. We asked him,—‘ Who art thou?’ He answered,—‘ I am Sudhanvat, of the family of Angirasa.? When asking him about the boundaries of the world, we said: to him,—* Where are the Pdrikshitas ? where are the Pfrikshitas?’ I (now) ask thee, 0 YA4jnavalkya, where are the Parikshitas?” 1.
He (Yajuavalkya) said,—‘“ Verily he (the Gandharva), said,— They (the Périskhitas) went where the performers of the Asva- médha-sacrifice go.” ‘‘ Where then go the performers of the Asvamédha-sacrifice ?”’ “ This world§ extends to thirty-two days (of the journey) of the car of the sun ; the earth extends twice as
* Work as the material cause of man again assuming a body, etc.
+ This 127६४८४8) according to S’., is to show, that the rites have only worldly effects, and that absolute liberation is thereby impossible, The highest among all rites is the performance of the horse-sacrifice, in its double form, either as an actual sacrifice, accompanied with knowledge, or as a sym bolical sacrifice by mental representation. The effect resulting from the horse-sacrifice, is, either individual, viz. the obtaining of the nature of fire and other deities, or univer- sal, as referring to the deity of the universe, viz. the obtaining of the nature of Hi- ranyagarbha, the first-born, that is to say, by neither of those effects absolute libera-_ tion from the world, or identity with Brahma is obtained.
‡ A being of superhuman power. By saying, that he has his knowledge from such a being, Bhujya means to assert, that his knowledge must be superior to that of Y4jnavalkya, as not derived from sucha source, S’.
§ This world is, according to S’. the space, enclosed by the mountains of the rising and the setting sun.
Third Chapter. Fourth Brahmana. 195
far everywhere ; the ocean extends twice as far as the earth everywhere. There* as far as the edge of a razor, or the wing of a fly (extends), so far extends the ether in the midst. Indra,t_ in the shape of a falcon surrendered them (the Périkshitas), to the wind ; the wind placing them upon himself} carried them there, where the performers of the Asvamédha-sacrifice abide. In this manner he (the Gandharva) praised the wind ; there- fore the wind is indeed the individuality, the wind the totality. Whoever thus knows, conquers the second death.” Hence Bhujya, the son of Lahya, became silent. 2.
Fourth Bréhmana.
Then asked§ him Ushasta, the son of Chakra,— Yajnaval- kya,”’ said he, “do explain to me that Brahma who is a witness and present,|| that soul, which is within every (being).” (He re- plied) ,—*“ It is thy soul which is within every (being).” ‘ Which soul is within every one,O Yajnavalkya?”’ ^ That which breathes
* There, according to S’.’s explanation, means at the aperture of the two halves of the mundane egg. To this end of the world leads a road of the length, above described, and through the aperture, which is the ether, the performers of the horse- sacrifice go, to be united with the wind that surrounds it.
† Paramés’vara. S’.
‡ Making them like himself.
§ The connexion between the present question and the two preceding ones is thus stated by $, It has been declared that, seized by the fetters and their auxi- liaries, viz. the senses and their objects, which are produced by virtue and vice, man roams about in the world, again and again shaking off those fetters, and again and again assuming them. The highest elevation to be gained by virtue has also ‘been explained, that is to say, the acquirement of the same nature with the two-fold nature of Hiranyagarbha, viz. with his nature as totality or with his nature as separated within individual existences. The present question is to enquire, whether he who, seized by the senses and their objects, assumes one body after the other, exists or not, and if he exists, what is his nature, that is to say it shows, how to distinguish the soul from every other thing as the indispensable means of liberation ; for the nature of the soul being comprehended, liberation ensues from the above described bondage.
|| Witness and present, the first, according to S’. means ‘‘ not obstructed by any thing,’’ and the second ‘‘ without attributes.’’
2c 2
196 Brihad Aragyaka Upanishad.
by the breath, is thy soul* which is within every (being) ; that which descends by the descending air, is thy soul which is within every (being) ; that which goes everywhere by the air going every- where, in thy soul which 18 within every (being); that which ascends by the ascending air, is the soul which is within every (being) ; this thy soul is within every (being).” 1.
Ushasta, the son of Chakra, said,—‘ As some one may say: This is a cow, this 1s a horse, thus is this (Brahma) described by thee.t Do (now) explain to me that Brahma who is a witness and present, that soul which is within every (एल). “It is thy soul which is within every (being).” ८ Which soul is within every (being), Yajnavalkya?”’ ‘Thou couldstt not behold the beholder of the beholding ; thou couldst not hear the hearer of the hearing; thou couldst not mind the minder of the minding ; thou couldst not know the knower of the knowing. This thy soul is within every (being) ; every thing different from it, is transient.” Hence Ushasta, the son of Chakra, became silent. 2. |
Fifth Brdhmana.
Then asked him Kahola, the son of Kushitaka,—“ Y4jnaval- kya,” said he, “ do explain to me that Brahma, who is a witness
* The soul, whose nature in knowledge. S’,
t+ To show Brahma by such signs as respiration, etc. is the same, as if some body who engages to define a cow, etc. defines it merely by signs, saying for instance, the animal which goes there is a cow; that is to say, thy definition is an improper one.
‡ Yajnavalkya declines to give a definition of Brahma in the way, as it is given of a jar, etc. And his reason for declining it, is that such a definition is contra- dictory to the nature of Brahma. For the nature of Brahma consists in the agency described as beholding, etc. The soul is the beholder of the beholding. The beholding, hearing, knowing, etc. is therefore twofuld, the common one and that to which it in reality applies. The common beholding, etc. is a modification of the internal organ by means of its connexion with the eye, etc. This is an effect, and has therefore a commencement and an end; but the beholding, etc. of the soul, the beholding of the beholding, has, by its own nature, no beginning and no end.
Third Chapter. Fifth Brdhmana. 197
and present, that soul, which it is within every (being).”* (He
replied),—‘ It is thy soul, which is within every (being).”
“Which is (the soul), O Yajnavalkya, that is within every (being) ?”’ “ (It 18 the soul) which conquers hunger, thirst, grief, delusion, old age, (and) death. When Bréhmanas know this soul,+ then elevating themselves from the desire of obtaining a son,{ from the desire of wealth, and from the desire of gaining the worlds, they lead the life of wandering mendicants ; for the desire of a son, is also the desire for wealth; the desire for wealth§ is also the desire for the worlds; for both are even desires. Therefore knowing wisdom let the Bréhmana arm himself with strength.|| Knowing wisdom and strength] the
* In the first three Brdhmanas the bondage of the soul together with its cause has been declared. In the fourth the existence of the so bound soul and its independence on every other thing has been set forth. The fifth Brahmana is to show the knowledge of the soul in connexion with the renunciation of the world as the cause of the liberation of the soul from bondage. In this and the preceding Braébmanas the question, ^" Explain to me that Brahma, etc.” is the same, and it might therefore be justly asked, whether the two questions refer to one and the same soul, or to two, the supreme and the individual souls. The latter case appears the correct one on the first glance; for if it is one and the same soul, the second question seems useless; on a closer consideration, however, this view must be abandoned ; for one and the same whole of causes and effects is possessed of soul merely by one soul. The difference between the present and the preceding ques- tions is this, that in the latter the soul is described, as far as it has existence and is independent of the body, while in the former the particular knowledge, in con- nexion with the renunciation of the world, is described, by which the liberation from that bondage takes place. S’.
+ Know the soul, that is to say, their own soul as the supreme Brahma.
t The desire of being united with a wife for the purpose of obtaining a son, by whom they were able to conquer the world. S’.
§ Wealth is twofold, human and divine wealth. Human wealth supplies the means to perform rites ; by these rites, if unaccompanied with knowledge, the world of the forefathers is gained. Divine wealth is knowledge; by rites, connected therewith, the world of the gods is gained, and the same also by mere knowledge. From this knowledge also an elevation is necessary to obtain perfect liberation from the world; for in reality that knowledge is ignorance. S’,
| Wisdom, Péndityam, the knowledge of Brahma, strength, such as results from the knowledge of Brahma.
¶ The thinker, Muni, explained by S’, mananst Muni, that is a Yogi.
198 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
thinker,* knowing the thinking and the not thinking of Brahma, will become a (true) Bréhmanna.” “ By what (work) will the Brahmana live 77 ^ He will remain such an one by any (work).t Any (state) different from this (state of a Brahman) is perisha- ble.’ Then Kahola, the son of Kushitaka, became silent. 1.
Sirth Brdhmana.
Then askedt him Gargi, the daughter of Vachaknu,— Y4j- navalkya,” said she, “ all this (earth) is woven and rewoven on the waters ;$ upon what then are the waters woven and re- woven?” (Ife replied),—“ On the wind,|| Gargi.” “On what then is woven and rewoven the wind?” ‘ On the worlds of the atmosphere,§ Gargi.” ‘On what then are woven and rewoven the worlds of the atmosphere?” ५ 00 the worlds of the Gandharvas, 0 Gargi.” ‘‘On what then are woven and re- woven the worlds of the Gandharvas?’” “On the worlds of Aditya, O Gargi.” ‘‘On what then are woven and rewoven the worlds of Aditya?” “On the worlds of the moon, 0 Gargi.” “On what then are woven and rewoven the worlds of the moon?” ‘On the worlds of the stars, O Gargi.’? “On
* Not thinking and thinking, thus I have translated literally, different from S’.’s explanation, who explains ‘‘ Amaunam,’’ the knowledge of soul and the remov- ing a belief of non-soul, and ‘‘ Maunam the ultimate effect from removing a belief in the non-soul,
+ The sense is, for him who has acquired the true knowledge of Brahma, every work is indifferent; he is above work.
‡ In the last two Brahmanas it has been declared, that the soul is within all ; the next three Brahmanas are to give a more exact definition of this. A. G.
§ This is the case, because the earth every where from without and within is pervaded by the water; otherwise it would be scatterred every where like a hand- ful of pounded rice. Here applies this argument, all that is an effect, that is finite and gross, is pervaded by something, which is a cause, which is infinite and sub- tile ; and this commences from the five elements up to the soul. S’.
|| Instead of ‘‘ on the wind,’’ the answer ‘‘ on the fire’ should be here expected ; but says S’, the fire has no existence of its own, independent of water and earth, and is therefore not mentioned separately. |
¶ The worlds of the atmosphere are composed of the five elements. S’.
Third Chapter. Seventh Bréhmana. 199
what then are the worlds of the stars woven and rewoven?” © On the worlds of the gods, O Gargi.” ‘On what then are woven and rewoven the worlds of the gods?” “On the worlds of Indra, O Gargi.” ‘On what then are woven and rewoven the worlds of Indra?’ “On the worlds of Prajapati, O Gargi.” ‘On what then are woven and rewoven the worlds of Prajapati ?” ‘On the worlds of Brahma, O Gargi.” ‘On what then are woven and rewoven the worlds of Brahma.” =^ Gargi,”’ said he, ‘do not ask an improper question,* in order that thy head may not drop down. Thou askest the deity which is not to be ques- tioned. Do not question, © Gargi.” Thence Gargi, the daugh- ter of Vachaknu, became silent. 1.
Seventh Bradhmana.
Then asked himt Uddalaka, the son of Aruna,—‘ Y4jna- valkya,” said he, “in the country of the Madras we abode in the house of Patanchala of the family of Kapi for the sake of studying the science of offering. His wife was possessed by a Gandharva. We asked him (the Gandharva), ‘ Who art thou ?” He said, ‘ Kabandha, the son of Atharvana.’ He said to Patan- chala, of the family of Kapi, and to (us) priests, ‘O Kapya, knowest thou that Thread by which this world, and the other world and all beings{ are bound together?’ Patanchala, of the family of Kapi, said,—‘ I do not know it, O Venerable.’ He said to Patanchala, of the family of Kapi, and to (us) priests §,— < Knowest thou, O K4pya, that inner Ruler who within rules this world and the other world, and all beings?’ Patan- chala, of the family of Kapi, said, ‘I do not know (this), 0 Venerable.’ He said to Patanchala, of the family of Kapi, and to (us) priests, ‘O Kapya, whoever knows the Thread and the
* Do not ask an improper question, because it cannot be decided by argument, but only by the Sastra. S’,
4 Patanchala’s pupils.
{ From Brahma downwards to inanimate matter, S’.
§ Patanchala’s pupils.
200 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
Inner Ruler, knows Brahma, knows the worlds, knows the gods, knows the Védas, knows the elements,* knows the soul, knows all.’ (Then the Gandharva) said (all about the Thread and the Inner Ruler) tothem. Therefore do I know this. If thou, O Yajnavalkya, ignorant of the Thread and the Inner Ruler, hast taken away the Brahma cows,t thy head will certainly drop down.” ‘I know verily, Gautama, the Thread and the Inner Ruler.” ^ Any one may say this, I know, I know; but tell the manner, in which thou knowest.” 1.
He said,—“ The wind, O Gautama, is the Thread; by the wind as by a thread are this world, the other world, all beings bound together,O Gautama. Therefore, © Gautama, it is said of a dead man, that his members are relaxed ; for by the wind, O Gautama, as by a thread, they are bound together.” ‘This is so, O Ydjnavalkya, (now) explain the Inner Ruler.” 2.
‘He who dwelling in the earth is within the earth, whom the earth does not know,t whose body is the earth, who within rules the earth, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 3.
^^ प्ट who dwelling in the waters is within the waters, whom the waters do not know, whose body are the waters, who within rules the waters, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal, 4.
«^ He who dwelling in the fire is within the fire, whom the fire does not know, whose body is the fire, who within rules the fire, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 5.
‘He who dwelling in the atmosphere is within the atmos- phere, whom the atmosphere does not know, whose body is the atmosphere, who within rules the atmosphere, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 6.
^ He who dwelling in the wind is within the wind, whom the wind does not know, whose body is the wind, who within rules the wind, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 7.
“He who dwelling in the heavens is within the heavens, whom
* Or the beings.
+t The cows destined for the best knower of Brahma. ‡ The deity of the earth.
Third Chapter. Seventh Brdhinena. 201
the heavens do not know, whose body are the heavens, who from within rules the heavens, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 8.
He who dwelling in the sun, is within the sun, whom the sun does not know, whose body is the sun, who from within rules the sun, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal.
He who dwelling in the quarters, is within the quarters, whom the quarters do not know, whose body are the quarters, who from within rules the quarters, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 10.
He who dwelling in the moon and stars, is within the moon and stars, whom the moon and stars do not know, whose body are the moon and stars, who from within rules the moon and stars, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 11.
He who dwelling in the ether, is within the ether, whom the ether does not know, whose body is the ether, who from within rules the ether, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 12.
He who dwelling in the darkness, is within the darkness, whom the darkness does not know, whose body is the dark- ness, who from within rules the darkness, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal, 13.
He who dwelling in the light, is within the light, whom the light does not know, whose body is the light, who from within rules the light, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal.
This is (his) relation to the gods. Next of (his) relation to the elements. 14.
He who dwelling in all elements, is within the elements, whom the elements do not know, whose body are the elements, who from within rules the elements, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. This is (his) relation to the elements. Next of (his) relation to the soul. 15.
He who dwelling in the vital air,* is within the vital air, whom the vital air does not know, whose body is the vital air,
* In smell, accompanied by the air of respiration. S’.
2D
202 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
who from within rules the vital air, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 16.
He who dwelling in speech, is within speech, whom speech does not know, whose body is speech, who from within rules speech, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 17.
He who dwelling in the eye, is within the eye, whom the eye does not know, whose body is the eye, who from within rules the eye, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 18.
He who dwelling in the ear, is within the ear, whom the ear does not know, whose body is the ear, who from within rules the ear, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 19.
He who dwelling in the mind, is within the mind, whom the mind does not know, whose body is the mind, who from within rules the mind, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 20.
He who dwelling in the skin, is within the skin, whom the skin does not know, whose body is the skin, who from within rules the skin, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 21.
He who dwelling in knowledge, is within knowledge, whom knowledge does not kuow, whose body is knowledge, who from within rules knowledge, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 22.
He who dwelling in the seed,* is within the seed, whom the seed does not know, whose body is the seed, who from within rules the seed, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. Unseen he sees, unheard he hears, unminded he minds, un- known he knows. There is none that sees, but he, there is none that hears, but he, there is none that minds, but | he, there is none that knows, but he.t He is thy soul, the = Inner Ruler, immortal. Whatever is different from hin, is perishable.” Hence Udd4laka, the son of Aruna, became silent. 23.
* In procreation, S’. + Vid. Br. 4. 3, 4, 2, Pras’na U. 419, and Katha ए. 6, 12. Mugd 3, 8, Taitt. 2, 4, Talav. U. 1, 3.
Third Chapter. Eighth Bréhmana. 203
Eighth Braéhmana.
Then* the daughter of Vachaknu said,—“ O venerable Braéh- mans, I wish to ask him (further) two questions. If he answers them, then indeed none of you will ever defeat him in argument concerning Brahma.” (‘They replied),—‘“‘ Ask (him), O Gargi.” 1.
She said,—“ As the king of the Kas’is or of the Vidéhas, the offspring of heroes, when he has bound the string to the string- less bow, rises in sight with two foe-piercing arrows in his hand, so I will rise before thee with two questions. Do thou make answer to 16.72 -- ^ Ask, 0 Gargi.” 2.
She said,—‘ What is above the heavens, O Yajnavalkya, what is beneath the earth, what is between, and what is these two, heavens and earth, and what is called the past, the present and the future,—upon what is all this woven and rewoven?” 3.
He said,—“ What is above the heavens, O Gargi, what is beneath the earth, what is between, and is these two, heavens and earth, and what is called the past, the present, and the future,—all this is woven and rewoven on the ether.” 4.
She said,—‘‘ I bow to thee, O Yajnavalkya, who hast explain- ed this (question) to me; be prepared for the other.” ‘Ask, O Gargi.” |
She said,—‘‘ What is above the heavens, what is beneath the earth, what is between, and what is these two, heavens and earth, and what is called past, present, and future,—upon what is all this woven and rewoven 27" 6
He said,—“ What is above the heavens, O Gargi, what is beneath the earth, what 1s between, and what is these two, heavens and earth, and what is called past, present, and future—is woven and rewoven on the ether.” ^ Upon what then is the ether woven and rewoven ?” 7.
* This Braéhmana is to show the present, visible Brahma as independent of any attributes. S’.
+ The second question, which is the same with the first, is intended firmly to estublish the truth declared before. S.’
2 7? 2
20-4 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
He said,—“ It is called by the Br&hmans* the indestructi- ble one, O G&rgi. (This) is not of a gross body, it is not subtile, not long, not wide, not red,t not viscid,t not shadow, not darkness, not air, not ether, not adhesive,§ not taste, not smell, not eye, not ear, not speech, not mind, not light, not life, not entrance,|| not measure, not within, not without. It does not consume any thing, nor does any one consume it. 8.
“By the command of this indestructible (being), O GArgi, sun and moon stay upheld in their places,** by the command of this indestructible (being), O Gargi, heavens andearth stay upheld in their places; by the command of this indestructible (being), 0 G&rgi, minutes, hours, days and nights, the half months, the months, the seasons, the years stay upheld in their places; by the command of this indestructible (being), O 0६181; the eastern riverst+ flow from the snowy mountains (to the castern quarter), the western{} to the western quarter, and the others to the quarters, (ordained for them). By the com- mand of this indestructible (being), O Gfrgi, men praise the giver, gods follow the sacrificer, (and) fore-fathers the ob- lation. 9.
०५ Whoever, ignorant of this indestructible (being), O GArgi, in this world performs offerings, adores the gods (and) practises austerities even many thousands of years, consumes at last the (fruit of his works). Whoever, ignorant of this indestructible (being), O Gargi, departs from this world, becomes a 10186756 again; whoever, knowing this indestructible (being), O GArgi, departs from this world, is a (true) Brahman. 10.
* The Brahmans are here such as know Brahma, S’,
+ Prasna ए. $, 9. Mund 1, 5.
+ Like fire. S’. § Like water. 8. | Like lac, S’.
q Not entrance, to whom there is no entrance, unapproachable.
*@ A)l these negatives are to establish the conviction, that Brahma has no attri- butes. Vide. Vaj S.U.8. Katha U. 3, 15. Mund 1, 6.
++ Katha U. 6,2. Taitt. U. 2,8. tf 7४८ ७००६६, etc. ff The Sindhu, etc. S’.
§§ Stores up the effects from works, like a miser riches.
Third Chapter. Ninth Brakinana. 205
“ This indestructible (being), O Gargi, although unseen sees, unheard hears, unminded minds, unknown knows. There is none that sees, but he, there is none that hears, but he, there is none that minds but he, there is none that knows, but he.* On this indestructible (being), 0 G&rgi, the ether is verily woven and rewoven.” 11.
She said,—“O venerable Brahmans, highly respect this (my word) and acquit yourself towards him (Yajnavalkya) with salutation. None among you will ever become his conqueror in argument concerning Brahma.” Hence the daughter of Vacha- knu became silent. 12.
Ninth Brdhmana.
Then askedt him Vidagdha, the son of S'akala,—“ How many pods are there, 0 Yajnavalkya?” He (answered),—* This can be learnt from the Nivit ;t as many (gods) as are mentioned in the Nivit of the Vais’vadéva (Sastra), (so many are there), (viz.) three and three hundred, and three and three thousand (3,306).”§ He said,—“ Om ! How many gods are there,O Yajna- valkya?” “ Thirty-three.”— He said,—“ Om! How many gods are there?” He said,—“ Six.” He said,—“‘Om! How many gods are there, 0 Yajnavalkya?” “ Three.” He said,—* Om! How many gods are there, O Y4jnavalkya?” “Two.” He said,—
* Pras’na, 4, 8. Hd. Talavakéra U. 1, 4—8.
+ After it has been stated, that the earth, the other elements, etc., by their successively more and more subtile nature are, one to another, in the state which has been called ^" woven and rewoven,’’ Brahma has been declared to be within all. (Brahm. 4-6.) It has been farther stated, that Brahma has the attribute of ५6 Ruler’’ in the divisions of the thread which pervade the whole manifested world, for all that is manifested requires, to be understood, the Ruler as its cause. The present 18070818 undertakes now to show, how the nature of Brahma as a wit- ness, and as present, can be comprehended by the maximum and minimum numbers of the gods. S’.
t The title of a set of Mantras, defining the number of deities, S’.
§ This is no doubt the amount of the number of the text, according to the ex- planation of S’ankara ; the number given in the Tiké 3,336, is probably owing to the mis. apprehension of a copyist who added ^^ trins’at’’ (30.)
206 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
“Om! How many gods are there, O Y4jnavalkya?” ^ Adhy- ardha.’”’* He said,—‘ Om! How many gods are there, 0 Y4j- navalkya?” “One.” He said,—‘‘Om! Which are these three and three hundred, and three and three thousand.” 1.
He said,—“ This is even for their glory; there are (in rea- lity) thirty-three gods.” =^ Which are those thirty-three ?”’ ‘Right Vasus, eleven Rudras, twelve Adityas. These are thirty-one; besides Indra and Prajapati. These are thirty- three.” 2.
‘Which are the Vasus?” ^ The fire, the earth, the wind, the atmosphere, the sun, the heavens, the moon, and the stars. These are the Vasus, for upon them this all is founded ; this means Vasu, therefore they are called Vasus.” 3.
“Which are the Rudras?”’? “The ten organs (18091) in man, and the soul as the eleventh. When they leave this body after death, they weep. Therefore, because they weep (Rodayanti), they are called Rudras.” 4.
“Which are the Adityas?”” ‘The twelve months of the year are the Adityas ; for taking all thist they pass. Because taking all this they pass (4dadén4 yanti), therefore they are called Adityas.” 6.
५५ प 10 is Indra, who is Prajdpati?” “The cloud is Indra, the sacrifice is Prajapati.” ‘‘ Which is the cloud?” ^ The lightning.” ^ Which is the sacrifice?” =^ The animals.” 6.
“Which are the six?” ‘The fire (Agni), the earth, the wind, the atmosphere, the sun and the heavens;t for they are six; for this all is six.” 7.
८ Which are the three gods?”’ “The three worlds,§ for within
* Adhyardha, which is more than half, half of two would be one; to distinguish it from the next, this term appears to have been chosen; see the explanation, given in 9.
+ All this, the age of man and the fruit, derived from works, S’.
‡ In this number the moon and the stars are omitted.
§ Earth and fire together are here considered as one god, the atmosphere and the wind as the second, and the heavens and Aditya (the sun) as the third god. A. G.
Third Chapter. Ninth Brdhmana. 207
them all those gods are (comprehended).” “ Which are the two gods ?”” ‘‘ Food and life.” ^ Which is the Adhyardha?”’ ^^ He who purifies.”* 8.
‘¢ Here it is objected, He who purifies, is one even; how then is he Adhyardha?’+ ‘Because all obtains increase in him,t therefore is he Adhyardha.” ‘ Which is the one god ?” ८ Life ; this is called Brahma, this what is beyond.”§ 9.
“Whoever knows that spirit (Purusha), whose abode is the earth, whose place (of sight)|| is the fire, whose light is the mind,—as the highest locality of every soul, is in truth the one who knows.” ‘I know indeed, O Y4jnavalkya, that spirit, the highest locality of every soul, of whom thou speakest. He is the spirit who abides in the body.” ^^ Say, O Sékalya, which is the deity of the same?” He said, “ Immortality.” 10.
‘Whoever knows that spirit, whose abode is desire, whose place (of sight) is the heart,§ whose light is the mind, as the highest locality of every soul, is in truth one who knows.” “TI know indeed, O Yajnavalkya, that spirit, the highest locality of every soul, of whom thou speakest. He is the spirit, whuse nature is desire.” ^ Say, O Sakalya, which is the deity of the same?’ He said,—* Women.” 11.
“Whoever knows that spirit whose abode are colours, whose place (of sight) is the eye, whose light is the mind, as the highest locality of every soul, is in truth one who knows.” “TI know indeed, 0 Yajnavalkya, that spirit, the highest locality of the whole soul, of whom thou speakest. He is the spirit in
the sun.”” “ Say, O Sakalya, which is the deity of the same ?”” He said,— Truth.” 12.
* The wind. + The objection seems to be made from the literal meaning of Adhyardha, which is ‘‘ half.’’
¢ Adhyardhnotadhi ridhim prapnoti.
§ Vid. 2, 3, 1.
\| Place (of sight) lokah, lokayati aneneti. S’. शु The heart, intellect. 8
** Adayana yanti.
ii ee REE शः [यमी sie
206 Brihad Araayaka Upanishad.
“Whoever knows that spirit, whose abode is the ether, whose place (of sight) is the ear, whose light is the mind,—as the locality of the whole soul, is in truth one who knows.” ‘1 know, O Y4jnavalkya, the spirit, the locality of the whole soul, of whom thou speakest. He is the spirit who abides in the ear, to whom all hearing is subject.” ‘Say, O Sdékalya, which 18 the deity of the same?” He said,—“ The quarters.”” 13.
“Whoever knows the spirit, whose abode 18 darkness, whose place (of sight) is the heart, whose light is the mind,—-as the highest locality of the whole soul, is in truth one who knows.” ९८ know indeed, O YAjnavalkya, the spirit, who is the highest locality of the whole soul, of whom thou speakest. He is the spirit, whose nature is shadow.” ‘Say, O Sékalya, which is the deity of the same?” He said,—“ Death.” 14.
“Whoever knows the spirit, whose abode are the colours, whose place (of sight) is the eye, whose light the mind,—as the highest locality of the whole soul, is in truth one who knows.” ‘‘I know, O Yajuavalkya, the spirit, who is the highest loca- lity of the whole soul, of whom thou speakest. He is the spirit who abides in the looking-glass.” ‘Say, 0 Sakalya, which is the deity of the same ?”? He said,—‘ The breath.” 15.
^ Whoever knows the spirit, whose abode are the waters, whose place (of sight) is the heart, whose light the mind, as the locality of the whole soul, is in truth one who knows.” “I know, O Yajnavalkya, the spirit, who is the highest locality of the whole soul, of whom thou speakest. He is the spirit who abides in the waters.” ‘Say, 0 Sakalya, which is the deity of the same?” He said,—“ Varuna.” 16.
“Whoever knows the spirit, whose abode is in the semen, whose place of sight is the heart, whose light is the mind, as the highest locality of the whole soul, is in truth one who knows.” “TI know indeed, O YAjnavalkya, that spirit, as the highest locality of the whole soul, of whom thou speakest. He is the spirit who abides in the sun.” ‘Tell, O Sékalya, which is the deity of the same ?”” He 8810,-- Prajapati.” 17.
Third Chapter. Niath Brékmana. 209
Y4jnavaikya said,—“O S’ékalya, these Br&hmans have made thee cinders.” 18. - |
S‘akalya said,—O Yajnavalkya, (does this thy boast), that thou hast defeated these Kuru and Panchala Bréhmaans in ar- gument, (arise from a conceit that) thou knowest Brahma?” “I know the quarters with their deities and their localities.” “If thou dost know the quarters with their deities and localities—19.
Which deity art thou in the eastern quarter?” “The sun.” ‘Where is the sun located?” “In the eye.” ‘ Where has the eye its locality?” “In colours; for by the eye colours are seen.” ^ Where is the locality of colours??? He said,—“ In the heart; for colours are produced by the heart ; the heart there- fore is the locality of colour.” ^^ Thus is it, Yajnavalkya. 20.
Which deity art thou in the southern quarter?” ^ The deity of Yama.” ^ Where is the locality of Yama?” “In sacrifice.” ‘ Where is the locality of the sacrifice ?” ^ In the bestowal of gifts.’* “Where is bestowing of gifts?” “In faith ; for if a man have faith, he gives gifts; faith therefore 18 the locality of bestowal of gifts.”” ^ Where is the locality of faith?” “ In the heart,” said he ; “for by the heart he knows faith ; the heart therefore is the locality of faith.” ‘Thus is 1४, O Yajnavalkya. 21.
Which deity art thou in the western quarter?” ^ The deity of Varuna.” ^ Where is the locality of Varuna?” ^ In the waters.” ‘Where is the locality of the waters?” ^ In the semen?” ^ Where is the locality of the semen >” “In the heart ; for it is said of a son, who resembles (his father), he is dropped from (his) heart, as it were, he is made of (his) heart, as it were; the heart therefore is the locality of the semen.” ‘‘Thus is it, © Yajnavalkya. 22. ` Which deity art thou in the northern quarter?” ^< The deity of Soma.” =^ Where is the locality of Soma?” “In the
* To the officiating priests, from whom the sacrificer purchases the sacrifice. 8’.
210 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
initiatory rite.”* ‘* Where is the locality of the initiatory rite?” ^ In truth ; for we say concerning a person, who has perform- ed the initiatory rite,—speak the truth; the heart therefore is the locality of the initiatory rite.” ^ Where is the locality of truth ?” “In the heart,” said he ; “ for by the heart man knows truth; the heart therefore is the locality of truth.” ‘Thus is it, 0 Yéjnavalkya. 23. |
Which deity art thou in the polar वपल 2 ‘ The deity of Agni.” ‘ Where is the locality of Agni?” “In speech.” ८५ Where is the locality of speech?” “ In the heart.”’ “ Where is the locality of the heart?” 24.
Y4jnavalkya said,—‘O Ahallika,t if thou believest at any time that the heart isin any other place than in our (body), if the same is in any other place than in our (body), then why do the dogs not eat it, or the birds not tear it?” 25.
‘‘“Where art thou and where is self§ located?’ ^^ In “the vital air that goes forwards.”” Where is the location ‘of the vital air that goes forwards?’ In the descending air.’ ^“ Where is the location of the descending air?” In the circulating air.”? ‘*‘ Where is the location of the cir- culating air?” “In the ascending air.” ^ Where is the location of the ascending air?” “In the equalising air. This soul, which is neither this, nor that, nor aught else, is in- tangible, for it is not to be laid hold of ; it is not to be dissipated, for it cannot be dissipated ; it is without contact, for it does not come into contact ; it is not limited; it is not subject to pain, nor to destruction.—There are eight abodes, eight places (of sight), eight deities, and eight Purushas. Whoever understands those Purushas in their division,|| and again in their union,§ has overcome (the world). I ask thee about the Purusha in the Upanishads. And thou explain not him to me, thy head will
# A rite previous to the sacrifice. This may be also rendered, ^^ In the initia- tory Mantra,’’ the Mantra which the sacrificer receives previous to the sacrifice.
+ The quarter which is above those who dwell on the mountain Meru. S’.
‡ Ahallika, ahani lfyate, a being who disappears in the day time, a ghost. S’,
§ Atma means here the body. S’.
|| In their eight-fold division. S’.
As they are united in the heart. S’,
Third Chapter. Ninth Brdhmana. 211
fall off.”? S/akalya knew him not, so his head fell off. More- over robbers took away his bones, mistaking them for some thing else.* 26. _ |
Then he said,—‘“ 0 venerable Brahmans, let any one among you who wishes it, question me, ordo you so all together. Or I will question any one among you who desires it; or I will question you altogether.” The Brahmanas dared not. 27.
He questioned them by these Slokas,—‘ As the tree is identical with the lord of the forest,t so is the Purusha identical with truth. His hair is the leaves, his skin the external bark. From his skin blood flows, as sap from the bark; therefore if he be. hurt, blood proceeds from him, as sap from a wounded tree. The parts of flesh are the layers{ (of wood) ; the inner bark is firm like the tendons. The bones are the inner layers of wood; the pith is made like the marrow. If a tree be cut down, it springs up anew from the root. From what root rises mortal (man), if cut down by death? Do not say, from the semen, because this is produced from the living. The tree springs (also) from seed; after it has died away, it is visibly produced (again from seed). If the tree be destroyed together with its root,§ it does not spring up afresh. If then mortal (man) be cut down by death, from what root shall he spring up? He who has (once) been born, cannot be born (any more). Who (then) produces him afterwards again ?’’ ||
It is Brahma, who is knowledge and bliss, the highest aim of the giver of wealth (as he is) of that one who abideth (in Him) and knoweth him.* 5.
# While his body was being carried for the performance of the funeral rites by his disciples to his house, S’. _ ¶ ^" Vanaspati,’’ lord of the forest, is another name for ^" tree,” _ This evidently refers to the outer woody layer or alburnum.
§ Or with its seed. S’.
|| Here is the end of the narrative. The Brahmans could not answer the ques- tion of Yajnavalkya with reference to the last cause of the world, and thereby the superiority of his knowledge was established. In the next sentence the answer is given by the S’ruti itself. S’.
षू Of him who performs ceremonies, of the sacrificer. S’.
* Of him, who no longer practising rites knows Brahma in his true nature, 9’,
222
212 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
FOURTH CHAPTER. Firat Brdhmana.
Janaza,* the king of the Vidéhas, sat (on his throne). Then came Y4jnavaikya. He said,—~ Why hast thou come, 0 Y4jnavalkya? Is it seeking cattle, or subtile (questions) ?” ८ Even both, O king of kings,” said he. 1.
“Let us hear, what any has taught thee.” ‘‘Jitv&, the son of Silina taught me, speech 18 Brahma.” “As one having an excellent mother, father and teacher, the son of S’ilina taught, speech 18 Brahma—for of what use is a person who cannot speak? He, no doubt, taught thee his (Brahma’s) place and site.”+ “He did not teach me that Brahma is only one-footed,t O king of kings.” ‘Then, O Y&jnavalkya, do
* The connexion of the two next Brdhmagas with the preceding chapter is thus explained by S’ankara,—It has been stated, that the eight Purushas (Vid, 3, 9, 10 —17), are separated from each other, and again united in the heart; that this again separates into five according to the division of the quarters (1. c. 18—24) ; again, that they, the heart and the body, in their mutual dependence are one, in the Satra or the soul of the world, Samana by name, whose nature is present in the five vital airs (€. 1. 26) ; and lastly, that the Purusha of the Upanishad sur- pesses the soul of the world or the Stra and is to be defined by negations, and at the same time (positively) as the present Brahma, and the substantial cause of all in the words ‘* Knowledge and bliss, etc,’’ (९, 1. 28.) In the next two Bréhmanas it will be explained, in what manner this Brahma may again be comprehended by the deities of speech, etc. Ananda Giri expresses the connexion briefly thus,—Ia the former chapter the nature of Brahma, as existence, knowledge and bliss, has been defined after the manner of a wrangling dispute, in the present it is explained in a formal argument.
¶ According to S’. place (4yatana) means body, and site (Pratishtha) the con- tinual existence in the past, present and future times, where body seems to denote the transient, and site the permanent nature of Brahma with regard to time.
+ This passage is rather obscure and admits of several explanations. The literal translation may be two-fold. First, ° he did not tell me so. This Brahma is one- footed, O king of kings.’’ And the apparent meaning is, Thou hast determined Brabma by two attributes, as having place and site. But this is not.correet; for,
Fourth Chapter. First Brdivaana. 218
thou give us the explanation.” ‘‘ Verily, speech* is the place, the ether, the site, the knowledge! In this viewt let one medi- tate on him (Brahma).”” What knowledge,t O Y4jnavalkya?” He said,—“ Verily, speech, O king of kings. By speech, O king of kings, a friend is made known ; (so are made known) the Rig Véda, the Yajur Véda, theS4ma Véda, the Atharvans and Angiras the narratives, the doctrines of creation,the science, the Upani- shads, the memorial verses, the aphorisms, the explanation of tenets, the explanation of Mantras,§ the fruits of sacrifices, of offerings, of bestowing food, of bestowing drink, this world and the other world and all beings. By speech, O king of kings, is ‘Brahma known; speech, O king of kings, is the supreme Brahma. Speech does not desert him who with this knowledge meditates on that (Brahma), all beings approach him ;|| having become a god, verily he goes to the gods!” ‘I will give thee a thousand cows, big as elephants,” said Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas, YAjnavalkya said,“ My father admonished me —where one does not instruct, one should not take (gifts).” 2.
being single in all respects, Brahma can have only one attribute. This explanation, however, does not agree with the next passage, where speech, representing Brahma, has four attributes, viz. place, ether, site, and knowledge ; unless the last attribute (knowledge) be considered as the true one which defines the nature of Brahma. Or secondly,—‘* He did not tell me, that this (Brahma) is only one-footed,’’—as thou supposest it to be, but rather four-footed. S’ankarsa adopts neither of these interpretations, but explains the passage as follows,—‘' The other, (Yajnavalkya) said,—' He did not tell me (8o0).’? The other (the king) said,—‘‘ If this is the case, then is Brahma one-footed.” ‘‘(Thé idea of) Brahma is without effect, if he be meditated upon as having only three feet, © king of kings.’’ * If so, then explain the matter to me according to thy knowledge, O Yajnavalkya.”’ S.’s ex- planation agrees in sense, although not in detail, with the second version, above given.”
# Speech, the speech of Brahma, represented by the deity of speech. S’,
+ By this knowledge, being the fourth foot of the Brahma of the Upauishad. S’.
‡ This question means, is it knowledge itself, or the cause of knowledge? Is it distinguished from Brahma, as his place and foundation are, or is it not distinguish- ed from him? And the answer implies, that it is not distinguished. S’.
§ Vid. p. 179, where the above terms have been explained.
|| With offerings and presents.
i
214 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
“Let us hear, what another has taught thee.” =^" Udanka, the son of S‘ulbasa, told me, life is Brahma.” “ As one having an excellent mother, father and teacher, the son of S’ulbasa taught, life is Brahma; for of what use is a person who has no life? He, no doubt, taught thee his place and site.” ^“ He did not teach me that Brahma is only one-footed, O king of kings.” “Then, © Y4jnavalkya, give us the explanation.” ‘‘ Life is even the place, the ether, the site, that which is dear to us! In this view let one meditate on him.” “ What dear object, O Y4jnavalkya?” He said,—“ Verily life is the dear object, O king of kings. For love of life,O king of kings, one desires what is not desirable, seizes on what is not to be seized ; for the desire of life, O king of kings, arises dread of being killed* wherever one goes. Life, O king of kings, is the supreme Brahma. Him who that knowing meditates on that (Brahma), does life not desert, him all beings approach; hav- ing become a god, he even goes tothe gods!” “I will give thee a thousand cows, big as elephants,” said Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas. Yajnavalkya said,—‘‘ My father ad- monished me—where one does not instruct, one should not take (gifts). 3. |
“Tet us hear, what another has taught thee.” ‘“ Barkku, the son of Vrishna, taught me, the eye is Brahma.’ “ As one having an excellent mother, father and teacher, the son of Vrishna taught, the eye is Brahma; for of what use is one who does not see? He, no doubt, taught thee his place and site.” ‘He did not teach me that Brahma is only one-footed, O king of kings.” “Then, 0 YAjnavalkya, give us the explanation.” ‘Verily the eye is the place, the ether, the site, the truth! In this view let one meditate un him.” “ Which truth, O Yajnavalkya?”’? Hesaid,—‘ The eye, O king of kings. When one who sees with the eye, is asked, O king of kings, hast thou seen? (Should) he answer, I have seen, then that (which he has seen) is truth. The eye,
* From robbers, etc.
Fourth Chapter. First Brahmana. 215.
O king of kings, is the supreme Brahma. The eye not deserts him who with this knowledge meditates on that (Brahma) ; all beings approach him; having become a god, verily he goes to the gods.” “TI will give thee a thousand cows, big as elephants,”’ said Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas. Y4jnavalkya said,— My father admonished me—where one does not in- struct, one should not take (gifts).” 4.
<^ [6४ us hear, what another has taught thee.” =“ Garda- bhivipita,-of the family of Bharadvaja, taught me, the ear is Brahma.”* “As one having an excellent mother, father and teacher, Bhaéradvija taught, the ear is Brahma; for of what use is he who does not hear? He, no doubt, taught thee his place and site.” ‘He did not teach me that Brahma is only one-footed, O king of kings.” ‘Then, O Yajnavalkya, give us the explanation.” “Verily the ear is the place, the ether, the site, the infinite! In this view let one meditate on him.” ^ What infinite, O Y4jnavalkya?’” He said,— Verily the quarters are infinite, O king of kings. Therefore, O king of kings, none comes to the end of any quarter whichsoever ; for the quarters are infinite. The quarters, O king of kings, are the ear; the ear, O king of kings, is the supreme Brahma. The ear not deserts him, who with this knowledge meditates on that (Brahma), all beings approach him; having become a god, verily he goes to the gods.” “TI will give thee a thousand cows, big as elephants,” said Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas. Y4jnavalkya said,—* My father admonished me—where one does not instruct, one should not take (gifts).” 5.
‘ Let us hear, what another has taught thee.” = ^ Satyakéma the son of Jabala, taught me, the mind is Brahma.” ^. As one having an excellent mother, father and teacher, the son of ग 80६16 taught, the mind is Brahma; for of what use is he who has no mind? He, nodoubt, taught thee his place and site.” ‘¢ He did not teach me that Brahma 18 only one-footed, O king
* And thus the eye differs from the other senses, for instance from the evi- dence of words where doubt may arise.
216 Brihad Araayaka Upanishad.
of kings.” “Then, O YAjnavalkya, give us the explanation.” ‘The mind is the place, the ether, the site, happiness! By this let one meditate on him.” ^ Which bliss, O Y4jnavalkya ?” He said,—“ Verily the mind, O king of kings. By the mind, O king of kings, one has a desire after a wife; through her a son similar (to one-self) is born; he (the son) is bliss. The mind, O king of kings, is the supreme Brahma. Mind not deserts him, who with this knowledge, meditates on that (Brah- ma), all beings approach him ; having become a god, verily he goes to the gods.” “I will give thee a thousand cows, big as elephants,” said Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas. Yajna- valkya said,—‘‘ My father admonished me—where one does not instruct, one should not take (gifts). 6.
‘Let us hear, what another has taught thee.” =^ Vidagdha, of the family of S’ékalya, taught me, the heart is Brahma.” ‘‘As one, having an excellent mother, father and teacher S‘Skalya taught, the heart is Brahma; for of what use is he who has no heart. He, no doubt, taught thee his place and site.” “He did not teach me that Brahma is (only) one- footed, O king of kings.” “Then, O YAjnavalkya, give us the explanation.”” ‘Verily the heart is the place, the ether, the site, the locality!’ ‘ Which locality, O Yajnavalkya?”’ He said,— The heart, O king of kings, is the place of all beings; the heart, O king of kings, is the site of all beings ; in the heart, O king of kings, are all the beings sited. The heart, O king of kings, 18 the supreme Brahma. Heart not deserts him who with this knowledge meditates on that (Brah- ma), all beings approach him; having become a god, verily he goes to the gods.”’ “TI will give thee a thousand cows, big as elephants,” said Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas. र क्षण valkya said,—‘‘ My father admonished me—where one does not instruct, one should not take (gifts).” 7.
Fourth Chapter. Second Brahmana. 217
Second Brdhmana.*
Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas, (rising) from (his) throne, approached (Y4jnavalkya) with humility saying,—‘I bow to thee, 0 Yajnavalkya, do thou instruct me.” Hesaid,— As one who is going to travel a great distance, takes a chariot or a boat, 80 art thou prepared in mind (for the knowledge of Brahma) by those U panishads ;+ thus art thou venerable, wealthy ; thus hast thou read the Védas, and art instructed in the Upanishads. f (I now ask thee), when liberated from this (body), where art thou to go?” “I know not, O Venerable, where [ am to go.” “Then I will tell thee, where thou art to go.” ‘Say, O Vener- able.” 1.
Indha§ is verily the name of that Purusha who dwells in the right eye. Him whose true name is Indha, they call In- dra, by an indirect name; for the gods like indirect names, and dislike to be named directly.|| 2.
Again, that which in the shape of a Purusha dwells in the left eye, is his wife, the Virat.q The union of them* is the
* In the antecedent Brahmana have been mentioned some modes of meditation as conducive towards the knowledge of Brahma ; the present Brahmana is to set forth the states of waking, etc. as means of attaining the knowledge of Brahma. A. ©.
+ The term ‘‘ Upanishads’’ means here of course not the knowledge of Brahma, but certain meditations with regard to Brahma which have been explained in the antecedent Brfhmana.
‡ But though thou art furnished with all these appliances, yet thou hast not at- tained the highest object of man, unless thou have the knowledge of Brahma. S’,
§ It is intended to show the fourth (or supreme) Brahma by re-capitulating what has been said before with reference to Brahma considered as Vis’wa, (or the soul, endowed with a gross body), as Taijasa, (or the soul, endowed with a subtle body) and as PrAjna (07 the soul endowed with a causal body). A. ७.
` {| Vide a similar passage in the Aitar. U. 1, 3, 14.
¶ Vais’wanara, although one, is, in the present sentence and in the preceding section, represented, as a couple, viz. Indra and Indrani, for the purpose of medi- tating upon him. A. ©. That A’. is right, is evident from the term Virat, another name of Vais’wanara, which refers to both Indra and Indrani and points out the idea according to which they are to be comprehended as one.
* The union of Indra and Indraénf, which in the state of waking is called Vis’wa (Vais’wanara, Virdt), bears in the state of dream the name of Taijasa. A. ©,
2F
218 Brihad Araayaka Upanishad.
ether within the heart ;* again their food is the red lump within the heart ; again their place of retreat is the net-workt within the heart; again the road to be travelledt on, is the artery which rises upwards from the heart. As a hair a thousand times divided thus do its (the body’s) veins, called the good,§ become which are located within the heart. Proceeding by these (veins) that (food) proceeds. There is, as it were, nourish- ment yet more subtile than that. From this corporeal soul (is nourished the higher soul).|| 3.
Its{ eastern quarter are the vital airs that go to the east, its southern quarter the vital airs that go to the south, its western quarter the vital airs that go to the west, its north- ern quarter the vital airs that go to the north, his ascend- ing quarter the ascending vital airs, his descending quarter the descending vital airs, all quarters all vital airs. This soul
* The union of them (as Taijasa) takes place in the ether of the heart, and the heart is here the lump of flesh on which they subsist. To understand this, it is necessary to know the different kinds of food for the different parts of the body. Food undergoes a double modification by the process of digestion, a gross and a more subtile one. The product of the former is carried off by excre- tion. The product of the latter is again modified by the digestive heat and converted into two juices. The one juice of mean subtility, consisting of the five elements, nourishes the gross body by its change into blood, &c. The other juice is very subtile, and constitutes the red lump which, after it has entered the fine blood. vessels of the heart, supplies the sustenance of the subtile body of Indra (as Taijasa), when united with Indrén{ in the heart. S’,
¶† Itis like a net-work from the countless number of apertures between the subtile blood-vessels. S’.
‡ The road from the place of waking to the place of dream. 9S’,
$ Vid. Aitt. U. 1, 3, 14.
|| Or, there is yet (a higher soul) than the one mentioned, whose food (the food of the higher soul) is more subtile, The corporeal soul is Vis’wanara, and the higher, Taijasa.
शू Taijasa, whose abode is in the heart, when supported by subtile life, becomes life (Prana), that is to say, the Prana which is called Préjna (the soul of imperfect knowledge, or the third state of the individual soul, corresponding to the third state of the universal soul, which is called I’s’wara, the Ruler). This refers to him who knows, and who from the state of Vais’wanara has gradually obtained the state of Taijasa and of life (Prana). S’.
Fourth Chapter. Third Brahmana. 219
which is neither this, nor aught else, which 18 intangible*—for it cannot be laid hold of—, not to be dissipated—for it cannot be dissipated—, without contact—for it cannot come into con- tact—, not limited, not subject to pain nor to destruction ; this fearless} (soul), 0 Janaka, is obtained by thee,” thus said Y4j- navalkya. Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas, said,—“ May that fearless (Brahma) become thy own, O Yajnavalkya, which thou, © Venerable, hast taught us. I bow to thee ; let this kingdom of the Vidéhas and this myself be thine.t 4.
Third Bréhmana.
Yajnavalkya§ went to Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas. He bethought -him, I will not say aught. (It happened that for- merly), when Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas, and Y4jnavalkya
* One who thus knows, attains gradually the general soul. When he has identified the individual soul with the universal soul, he obtains the fourth Brahma by such negations as he is not this, he is not that. S’. Vid. Br. A. 3, 9, 26.
+ Fearless, because it is beyond any cause of fear, as birth, death, etc. 8. `
t Vid. ©). U’., 3, 12, 6. and Katha Up. 1, 27-29.
§ In his introduction to the present Brihmana, showing its connexion with the preceding section, §.’ recapitulates the principal points of the third chapter. The visible and present Brahma is also the supreme Brahma whose nature is know- ledge, which is evident from such passages as, ‘‘ There is none that sees but he,” (3, 8,11). This (Brahma), after he has entered the body, is divided according to the functions of speech, etc. In the Madhukanda, in the part relating the conversation of Ajatasattru, Brahma is conceived, by the attributes of dominion and enjoyment of life, etc. (2, 4, 17 ), (as something different from life, etc.). Again in the question of Ushasta, representing him under the attributes of life, etc. (3, 4), he is compre- hended in a general manner by such words as, ‘‘ That which breathes by breath, etc. (1. €)» andin the full power of his nature by the words, ‘‘ He is the beholder of the beholding.’’ (If it is now asked why he should enter upon a worldly state, which is not his true nature, the answer is), The worldly state of him is the attribute
of the supreme one (ignorance). As it is an effect of ignorance, if a rope, a desert place, a mother-of-pearl shell, the ether, etc. be respectively considered as a snake, as water, silver, impure, etc., as thisis aneffect of ignorance, and not their own nature (so is it an effect of ignorance, if a worldly state be attributed to the soul). (Brahma) who is without attribute and unattainable by word (or mind), must be defined by negations, as ‘‘ He is not this, he is not that, etc., and is (affirmatively) comprehended as the visible present soul (3, 5), pervading all, as the
2a 2
220 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
had held converse together about the fire-offering,* that Yajnavalkya had given him (permission to ask) a boon. The boon he chose was, to question (Y4jnavalkya) according to his pleasure. He granted that boon to him. The king of kings first asked him,t—‘ Y4jnavalkya, of what light is this Purusha?’{ He said,—‘Of the light of the sun, 0
indestructible Brabma (3, 8), as the Inner Ruler (3, 7), as the Parusha of the Upanishads (3, 9, 26), as the Brahma whose natare is knowledge and bliss (4, 1). This Brahma is again conceived under the name of Indha (4, 2) as the soul, nourished by subtile food (Vais’wanara) ; (again) as the soul of the subtile body (lingétma, Taijasa), nourished by food, more subtile than that (of Vais’‘wanara). Greater than this (or both, Vais’wanara and Taijasa) is the soul of the world, having the attri- bute of life. From this againis distinguished by knowledge the soul of the world, having the attribute of life, by the words,—‘‘ He is not this, he is not thus, as a snake, etc. (is distinguished by knowledge) from a rope, etc., and thus the visible and present Brahma (the fourth) who is within all, is comprehended, (4,1). In the same wianner has Janaka obtained the fearless Brahma by the succinct instruction of Yajnavalkya according to the doctrine of the S’ruti. There (4, 2), are the states of waking, dream, profound sleep and of the fourth mentioned for another purpose (for the purpose of showing the gradual liberation of the soul from the attachment to the world as the effect of those kinds of meditation, A’. G.) viz. Indha (4, 2, 2), he, whose nourishment is subtile (4, 2, 3), all life(4, 2, 4) and ‘* He is not this, he is not that,” (€, 1.) In the present Brahmana (Brahma) is to be comprehended by means of the states of waking, dream, etc. through the operation of profound discussion, as the fearless; the existence of the soul (is to be comprehended) by removing any doubt arising from dispute, its nature (is to be comprehended) as independent, pure, similar with light, of omnipotent power, as infinite bliss and as being without duality. For this purpose the present Br&bmana is commenced.
* And Yajoavalkya was gratified by the king’s knowledge.
t 1. €. On the present occasion, the introductory episode of the boon and right to put questions being concluded.
‡ Purusha, the being, who consists of the combination of causes and effects, and has head, hands, etc. Of what light, means, by what light as cause does man dis- charge the business of life. S’. S’. makes here some very good reflections about the nature of this light, whether it is external or internal, separated or not separated from the body; bat they are rather S’.’s reflections than those of the Upanishad, and we will therefore omit them. The progress from one idea to another in the Upanishad is very clear, viz. any light which is found in external nature, is incapable of being the cause of the intellectual functions of man, for it ceases to act at certain times; the light by which man acts, must therefore be something dis- tinct from any of them.
Fourth Chapter. Third Brahmana. 221
king of kings. By the light of the sun (man) sits down, walks about, performs his work and returns (home).” “It is even so, O Yajnavalkya.” 2.
“Of what light, O Y4jnavalkya, is this Purusha, when the sun has set.” “The moon is even his light. By the moon- light he sits down, walks about, performs his work and returns (home).” “It is even 80, © Y4jnavalkya.” 3.
८५ Of what light, O Yajnavalkya, is this Purusha, when the sun has set and the moon has set.” ‘The fire is even his light. By the fire-light he sits down, walks about, performs his work and returns (home).” “It is even so, 0 YAjna- valkya.” 4.
“Of what light, O Yajnavalkya, is this Purusha, when the sun has set, the moon has set, and the fire is at rest?” ० Speech* is even his light. By the light of speech he sits down, walks about, performs his work and returns (home). Therefore, O king of kings, at a time,t when one can not distinguish his own hand, he resorts there, whence speech pro- ceeds.”{ “It is even 80, O Yajnavalkya.” 6,
‘Of what light, O Yajnavalkya, is this Purusha, when the sun has set, the moon has set, fire is at rest, and speech is at rest ?” ‘“Soul§ (Atma) is even his light. By the light of the soul he sits down, walks about, performs his work and returns (home).” 6.
* Speech means here sound, the object of the sense of hearing. When this sense is enlightened, reflection is produced inthe mind. By the mind effort to obtain external things is made; for by the mind one sees, one hears, S’,
+ When it is dark from clouds, or when every other light has ceased to shine. S’.
t Where sound rises, be it the neighing of horses or the braying of donkeys, etc. Speech serves here only as an illustration and includes the other senses, S’.
§ Different from the whole of the causes and effects in the body and its parts, manifesting the effects and causes, like the sun and other external lights, and not manifested by any thing else. It is light which is within, and at the same time independent of effects and causes. It is not perceived by the eye or any other organs like the sun, but inferred from its effects. S’.
222 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
“Which soul?”’* ‘That soul which among the organs has the nature of knowledge, which abides in the heart, and is the Purusha who is light.t He,t being the same§ (with the heart), migrates|| to both worlds. He, as it were, thinks ;
® Although it has been proved, that the soul has an existence, independent (of the gross body), and abides within (the body), yet, seeing that (the sun, etc.) which assists (the body in the operation of its functions), is of the same kind (with the body), there may proceed the delusion (that the soul which is light may also be of the same nature with the body, etc., there being no difference between the kinds of assis‘ance), and from the want of distinction the question may arise, is the soul one of the organs, or some thing different from them? Or in other words, though it is proved, that the soul is different from the body, yet all the organs partake of the nature of knowledge, and since no distinction is apprehended between the soul and the organs, the question of the text is necessary, ‘‘ which soul.’’ S’.
+ The whole sentence may be explained, according to S,’, in a threefold manner.
1. The first part contains the question, ‘‘ Which soul?’ and the second the answer to it, ‘The Purusha who among the organs has the nature of knowledge and is the light of the heart.’’
2. Or ‘‘ Which is the soul among the organs that has the nature of knowledge ?”’ The answer in this case is, ‘* The Parusha who is light alone, abiding in the heart.’”
3. Or ^“ Which is the soul that among the organs has the nature of knowledge and is the Purusha, who is light alone, abiding in the heart ?’’
S’ankara prefers the first explanation. ‘‘ Has the nature of knowledge’? means, according to him, resembles knowledge or intellect (buddhi), and ‘‘heart’’ the intellect which has its place in the organ of the heart.
+ He, the Purusha. The Purusha who is light alone, who manifests all and is not manifested by any thing else, cannot be comprehended in the state of waking, since none of the organs is an object of perception, and since from the confusion, arising from the united action of so many causes and effects of the senses, the soul in its nature as light alone cannot be shown. The Upanishad, therefore, explains it by means of the state of dream. S’.
§ Being the same, or similar. This refers to the ‘‘ heart,’’ as is clear from the topic and from the relations which the soul has to the heart (or intelleet). As light, manifesting red, green, etc. colours, becomes itself red or green, so the Purusha, manifesting intellect, manifests thereby the whole body, and by this intellect he becomes also like every other thing. S’.
|| The cause of his migration is his similarity with intellect; on his own accord such a migration does not take place. He migrates by leaving his present body and entering another and another ia endless succession. S’.
¶ Both worlds, the future and the present world.
Fourth Chapter. Third Brdlunana. 223
he, as it were, moves ;* for, having become dream,+ he quits this world,{ (he quits) the forms of death.§ 7.
This Purusha,|| when born,{ when assuming a body, is allied to sins ;* when rising upwards, when dying, he lays aside the sins.t 8. |
There are even two places of this Purusha, this place, and the place of the next world; the place of dream,{ which is between them, is the third. Abiding in this middle place, (man) sees both places, this and the place of the other world. In proportion to the endeavour|| with which one is (striving to obtain) the place of the other world, does he accordingly see sin{ or bliss. When he sleeps, (when), putting on a rudiment
* He as it were thinks, that is to say, in reality he does not think or reflect ; for reflection does not belong to his nature, S’, (and is the effect of his being con- sidered under the attribute of intellect).
+ He becomes all that intellect becomes, and intellect assuming the state of dream, the Purusha also assumes it, S’.
‡ This world, characterised by the functions practised during waking. S’.
§ Death means, work, ignorance, etc.; his forms, causes and effects. S’.
॥ As the Purushain this body, when assuming the state of dream, quits the forms of death, and remains in his own light, so when born.. .. he is allied to sins. S’.
q When born, when assuming the state of the soul within a body. S’.
* Sins mean causes and effects, depending upon vice and virtue. S’,
+ He lays them aside, he becomes free from them. As the Purusha, abiding in one and the same body, in consequence of his similarity with intellect, by assuming and laying aside causes and effects in the form of sin, continually migrates from the state of waking to that of dream and vice versa, so by assuming and laying aside those causes and effects, he continually migrates through birth and death to this and to the other world, until he is finally liberated. It is therefore evident, that the soul, which has the nature of light, is different from sins, as causes and effects, because it is joined to and separated from them,
‡ Dream is not a world, but only the union of two worlds, as the place between two villages is not a village itself. S’.
§ How then is it proved, that there is another world, different from the place of union, or dream? The answer is, because the Purusha sees in dream both the present and another world.
॥ The endeavour being considered 86 the seed from which the tree of the body rises,
¶ Sin, the effect of sin, unhappiness. He sees them in the shape of impres-
224 Brikad Arasyaka Upaniehad.
(only) of this world which consists of all elements,* himself prostrating (his body), himself raising a buildingt+ by force of his own splendour and manifestation, he sleeps —then becomes this Purusha unmingled light. 9.
No chariotst are there,§ no horses, nor roads; then he creates chariots, horses and roads. No pleasures are there, no joys, nor rejoicings ; then he creates pleasures, joys and rejoic- ings. No tanks are there, no lakes, nor rivers; then he creates tanks, lakes and rivers; for he is the agent.|| 10.
Here apply, these Slokas,f “ In dream, prostrating* the body, himself dreamless, he develops the modes of dreaming. After he has assumed the pure (form), the goldliket Purusha, the “one wanderer, proceeds{ again to the place (of waking). 11.
By (the power of) life§ preserving (from death) the inferior nest, || and roaming outside of it, he, the immortal one, the gold- like Purusha, the one wanderer, proceeds where his desire leads him. 12.
sions, received in a former world. What is the proof of this? Because he sees in dream many things, not to be perceived in this birth ; for dream means not a per- ception of things seen before, which is called remembrance. Therefore, beside the places of waking and dream, there exist those two worlds. S’.
* Which consists of all elements (sarvavan), admits of a double explanation. Sarvam avati, he preserves all, or sarvavan-sarvavan, which contains every thing. And this element is again the cause of creation.
ft A dreamlike body.
~ What has been said before that the Purusha in dream is life alone, is here expressed in another manner, A’. G.
§ There, in dream, where there are no objects of the senses as in waking. S’.
| He is the agent for the dream-land. S’.
¶ Slokas means here Mantras, (memorial verses). They apply here, that is to say, to the view, that the Purusha is light alone.
क Annihilating the action.
+ Gold-like, he whose nature is the light of consciousness. S’.
t As the consequence of his action, S’.
§ Life in its division into the five vital airs.
॥ Nest, the body.
@ Although h ePurusha, while yet in the body, sees dreams, yet he is con- sidered to be outside, because he has no connexion with it. S’.
Fourth Chapter. Third Brdhmana. 225
In his dream passing from high to low,* he, the god, displays manifold forms, either playing with women, or laughing, or beholding fearful sights. 13.
His pleasure-groundsy are visible ; but he is visible to none ; they say, none comprehends the Pervader. Difficult to be cured is the body, when the Purusha attains not that (door of the senses).t (Some) say indeed, (his place of Dream) is (the same as) his place of waking; for he sees in sleep the same (forms) which he does when awake. This is not so; (for) here the Purusha becomes a self-shining light.” ‘I will give thee, O Venerable, a thousand (cows). Speak next of libera- tion.” 14, |
‘¢ Having§ in the state, where there is perfect 01788, || enjoyed bliss, wandered about, and seen what is holy and what is sinful,{ he proceeds again in a reverse order to the place of his. birth, to Dream. He is not chained by what he sees* there
* Becoming, as fancy leads him, a god or a brute creature. S’.
+ Pleasure grounds in the shape of impressions. S’. ` ‡ I translated thus in accordance with S’.’s explanation. The meaning is,—If the Purusha does not return to the waking state through the same door of the senses through which he entered into the state of dream, if he re-enters in any other manner, then diseases are produced, such as blindness, deafness, etc., which are difficult to cure.
§ The proposition at the commencement of this Braéhmana, that the soul is self- shining light, has been proved by the text ‘‘ There that soul becomes self-shining light.” But with regard to the text ‘‘ Being dream, he quits this world,’ the meaning is doubtful; for it may be said, he may indeed quit the forms of death, but not for this reason death himself; for it is evident, that, although separated from effect and cause, one may yet experience in dream, joy, terror, ete., there- fore he does not in truth quit death; for death being work, his effects, joy, terror, etc., are visible. And if one of bis own nature be bound by death, liberation is not obtained by him, as he cannot be liberated from his own nature. Therefore, we must conclude, death cannot be one’s own nature, and liberation from him is possible. To show this, is the object of Yajnavalkya in his answer to the question of the king. 8.
| That is to say, in the state of profound sleep; for there none experiences any grief. S’.
q The effects of them. 8S’,
* Because, in dream, he does not actually do what is holy and evil, he is not
2G
226 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
(in dream*) ; for the Purusha is untouchedt+ (thereby),” “ This is so,O Y4jnavalkya, I will give thee, O Venerable, a thousand (cows). Speak next of liberation.” 15.
‘‘ Having in that dream enjoyed bliss, wandered about, and seen what is holy and sinful, he proceeds again in the reverse order to the place of hie birth, to the waking state. He is not chained by what he sees there;t+ for the Purusha is un- touched{.”’ “ This 18 80, O Y&jnavalkya. Speak next of libera- tion.” 16
% Having§ enjoyed bliss, wandered about and seen what is holy and sinful, duriug his waking state, he proceeds again in the reverse order to the place of his birth, to dream.” 17.
As a large fish|| glides between both banks, the right and the left one, so glides the Purusha between both boundaries, the boundary of dream and the boundary of the waking state. 18.
As an eagle* or a falcon, roaming in the sky, fatigued, folds
chained by either; for good or evil actions and their consequences are not imput- ed to the mere spectator of them. Therefore in dream he does not only overcome the forms of death, but death himself. He does not act in dream, and is there- fore different in nature from death who is work, and therefore he is free from him. S’.
* As is evident from common experience ; for no one is blamed or praised for what he does in dream. S.’
+ In dream.
‡ Untouched, as being without form. S.’
§ But bow can he be untouched in the waking state, as he does good and evil acts and sees their consequences? This is not the case, says S’, for if there is, an agent, the notion of agency 18. admissible. It has been declared, that the soul is a self-shining light, and that, manifested by its own light as cause and effect, it is an agent. Therefore if he be comprehended under the notion of an agent, attributes are assigned to the soul which it has not of its own nature, and this is done by means of intellect. In this passage the soul is, however, considered, as, it exists in its own nature, and not as represented by attributes taken from its. connexion with some thing else. S’
| That the Purusha is not touched by sin, has been shown in the three preceding, sections ; this is here illustrated by a simile. 8S’.
¶ Without being seized by the current of the stream. S’.
* It has been further proved before, that the soul is not in itself the cause of the worldly attributes, and that its worldly state is imputed to it through ignorance;
Fourth Chapter. Third Brdhmana. 227
his wings and is drawn* to his nest, so proceeds that Purusha to the boundary,+ where, asleep, he desires not any desire, nor sees any dream. 19.
Hist vessels, which are called good, are of the fineness of a hair, a thousand-fold divided, and filled with white,§ blue, yellow, green and red juice. Therefore all the objects of terror, which a man sees when awake, are, through ignorance, fancied by him, (in dream,) when any body seems to kill him, seems to subdue him, an elephant seems to put him to flight, (or when) he falls into a pit; again|| when he seems to be conscious I am a god, I am king, I am even all this, he has attained his highest place. 20.
this, however, has only been described separately, for the soul in its three states, and the identity of the soul has not been shown comprehensively ; to set this forth, is the object of the present section. S’.
~ * Of his own accord.
+ To his own self, free from every worldly attribute and from the distinctions of agent, work or fruit. S’.
t It is the nature of the Purusha to be free from worldly attributes, which are the effects of ignorance. Here the question arises, whether ignorance belongs to his own nature, or is only accidental? If it be accidental, liberation from it is possible. Further, is there any evidence of ignorance being accidental, and in what manner is ignorance an attribute of the non-soul? The present section has the object to show the nature of ignorance,
§ Food, when digested, becomes blue, if there be an abundance of the airy humour, yellow by an abundance of bile, white by an abundance of phlegm, green by a deficiency of bile, and red by an equal mixture of all the humours, and in this mannver, the vessels also through which the humours flow, assume the same colour according to the Susruta. A’.G. In those very fine vessels, abides the subtile body consisting of 17 parts (the five organs of intellect, the five organs of action, the five vital airs, intellect and mind). Dependent upon the subtile body are all the impressions produced by the belief in the worldly attributes of a higher or lower state. S’.
| Again...I give here in substance the train of Sankara’s ideas on this subject Ignorance being subdued and knowledge prevailing, what is the object of knowledge and what its character? The highest place, the highest state of the soul, is, when it exists as the soul of all, in its own inherent nature. On the other hand, if the soul be considered as different from the soul of all, however little the difference may be, the state. of ignorance is the consequence, The result of igno- rance are the lower worlds down tothe state of inanimate matter, where the na-
2a 2
228 ` Brihad Aragyaka Upanishad.
This is his (true) nature, which is free from desire, sin* and fear.t Asin the embrace of a beloved wife one is unconsci- ous of aught, from without or within ; 80, embraced by the all- knowingt soul, this Purusha is unconscious of all, without or within. This is his (true) mature, when all desires are 8४८18060, § where the (only) desire is for the soul, where there is no desire, where there is no grief. 21.
Then|| the father is no father, the mother no mother, the worlds no worlds, the gods no gods, the Védas no Védas. Then the thieff is no thief, the murderer of a Br&éhman*
ture of the soul is not comprehended. Beyond the worlds which are the objects of worldly action, the state of the universal soul, which is all-pervading, aud which is without an Other and without an Out, is his highest state. Therefore, igno- rance being subdued, and knowledge having attained its perfection, the state of the universal soul, liberation occurs. In the same manner ignorance prevailing and k nowledge having disappeared, the effect is described in the passage, ‘‘ When any body seems to kill him.’’ The respective effects then of knowledge and igno- rance are the state of the universal soul and that of the individual soul. From pure knowledge the state of the universal soul proceeds, from ignorance, a state which is not universal. Therefore the state of ignorance consists in this, that the universal existing soul is conceived under the notion of the soul which is not uni- versal, and that some thing, different from: the soul, and which does not exist, is substituted for the soul. The nature of ignorance bas been explained together with its effects, and the effect of knowledge, the state of the universal soul, has been shown to be opposite to ignorance. We therefore must conclude, that ignor- ance is not an attribute of the soul, and that liberation from it is possible.
* Sin means here, both sin and virtue.
+ Though the state, where no fear exists, has been already referred to at the close of the last Brébmana (p. 219), yet it bas been there only enunciated, while it is here established by discussion. S’.
‡ All-knowing, Prajna, the supreme soul according to its own nature.
§ Knowledge, its object, and the agent who knows, not existing, there can be no manifestation of a special knowledge, as a desire. S’.
| Then, when the Purusha has obtained the form, free from ignorance, from desire and from work, of which state profound sleep is the type. And this change takes place, because the notions of a father, mother, etc., express a relation, estab- lished by work, which relation of course ceases when work has ceased. S’,
शृ Thief means here, according to S’., one who steals the gold of a Brahman, as indicated by its connexion with Bhravaha.
* Bbrianaha means literally the murderer of an embryo; I have translated it in accordance with §.’s and A’. G.’s explanation.
Fourth Chapter. Third Brahmana. 229
no murderer of a 87६70०08), the Chandaéla* no (7041818, the’ Paulkasa no Paulkasa,t+ the religious mendicant (Sr4mana) no religious mendicant, the ascetic no ascetic; he is unconnected with aught that is holy, he is unconnected with sin; for he is then beyond every grief of the heart.{ 22.
It is not true, that, being thus, (in profound sleep,) seeing,§ he sees not; he does see; for there is no loss of sight to the see-er, since it is indestructible ;|| and there is no second, no other, separated from him which could see. 28.
It is not true, that, being thus, smelling, he smells 10४ ; he does smell; for there is no loss of smell to the smeller, since it is indestructible; and there is no second, no other, se- parated from him which could smell. 24
It is not true, that, being thus, tasting, he tastes not; he does taste; for there is no loss of taste to the taster, since it is indestructible ; there is no second, no other, separated from him which could taste. 25.
It is not true, that, being thus, speaking, he speaks not; he does speak ; for there is no loss of speech to the speaker, since it is indestructible; and there is no second, no other, separated from him which could speak. 26.
It is not true, that, being thus, hearing, he hears not ; he does
* Chandala, the son of a Brahman woman by a 8१९४, 8S’.
+ Paulkasa, the son of a Kshattriya woman by a 58478.
t Intellect, abiding in the heart.
§ But is it no contradiction, that the soul whose nature is perfect knowledge, should not know? It is not, from the reason assigned in the text. S’.
{| But here the following inference seems to apply, seeing is an action, as it is performed by the agent who sees, and every action is transient. However, the inference is not applicable; because the seeing is only seeing, and includes no agent. It is the nature of the soul to manifest, and this not through the intercession of an agent, as there is nothing else but the soul. S’.
¶ It has been declared, that what is known in waking or in dream, is a second, and ‘does not (really) exist, and that no difference is known in profound sleep. If this latter state be the nature of the soul, from what proceeds the difference, and if its nature 18 to know the difference, why does it not know this difference (in pro- found sleep)? S’.
250 Brihad Araasyaka Upanishad.
hear; for there is no loss of hearing to the hearer, since it is indestructible ; and there is no second, no other, separated from him whieh could hear. 27.
It is not true, that, being thus, minding, he miuds not; he does mind ; for there is no loss of minding to the minder, since it is indestructible ; and there is no second, no other, separat- ed from him that could mind. 28.
It is not true, that, being thus, touching, he touches not; he does touch; for there is no loss of touching to the toucher, since it is indestructible; and there is no second, no other, separated from him that could touch. 29.
It is not true, that, being thus, knowing, he knows not; he does know; for there is no loss of knowing to the knower, since it is indestructible ; and there is no second, no other, separated from him that could know. 30.
Wherever some other thing, as it were, exists, there let ano- ther see another thing, another smell another thing, another taste another thing, another speak another thing, another hear another thing, another mind another thing, another touch another thing, another know another thing. 31.
Like water (purified), the one see-er without duality, is the Brahma world,* O king of kings ;” thus Yajnavalkya instructed him. ^ This is his highest aim, his highest wealth, his highest world, his highest happiness. Of this happiness, all other beings enjoy only a part. 32.
(The bliss of 00९)¶ who among men is perfect in limb, wealthy, a sovereign lord of others, and who has the fulness of all human enjoyments, is the highest bliss of men. Further a hun- dredfold the bliss of men is one 01138 of the forefathers who have overcome the worlds.t Further a hundredfold the bliss
* The Brahma world, the highest world. And this is the state of the soul in
profound sleep. S’. +t Vide Taitt. Up., 2, 8, which corresponds almost literally with this whols
section. ‡ Those who by such ceremonics as the Sraddha have obtained the world of the
forefathers.
Fourth Chapter. Third Brddmana. 231
ef the forefathers who have overcome the worlds, is one bliss of the world of the Gandharvas. Further a hundredfold the bliss of the world of the Gandharvas is one bliss of the ritual gods* who gain their divinity by rites. Further a hundredfold the bliss of the ritual gods is one bliss of those who are gods by birth, and of him who knows the Védas, and is free from sin and desire. Further a hundredfold the bliss of those who are gods by birth is one bliss of the world of Prajdpatit and of him who knows the Védas, and is free from sin and desire.f. Further a hundredfold the bliss of the world of Prajapati, is one bliss of the world of Brahma§ and of him who knows the Védas and is free from sin and desire.|| Further the highest bliss] is even the world of Brahma,* 0 king of kings ;”’ thus said Yajnavalkya. (He said),—“I will give thee, O Venerable, a thousand cows. Speak next of liberation.”” Then Y4jna- valkya was afraid, that the wary king should drive him from all his last positions.t 33.
‘“ Having enjoyed bliss,t wandered about and seen what is
- # The ritual gods are such as have gained their divinity by the performance of Vedaic rites, as the fire-offering, etc. $^.
+ Of Prajapati in the body of the Virat. S’.
‡ And who at the same time knows this, that is to say, who has meditated on the soul in its form as Virat. S.’
§ Or Hiranyagarbha. S’.
|| And who has also meditated on the nature of Hiranyagarbha. S’.
q All the happiness up to that of the world of Brahm4, compared with this hap- piness is like a drop of water, compared with the sea. And this state is gained by. him who comprehends himself as the one identical Brahma. S’.
* For the sake of comparison, I give here the scale of the degrees of happiness in the Taitt. Up.,—Man, Gandharvas, Divine Gandharvas, Forefathers, Ritual Gods, Gods by birth, Indra, Brihaspati, Prajapati and Brahma.
¶ From the solutions of the questions which he had given. He was mot afraid, because he was deficient in knowledge, but he was afraid that the king who. by the acuteness of his understanding always observed some point not yet wholly defined, should, under the pretence of Yajnavalkya’s promise to answer any question of the king, allure him to communicate to him all his knowledge. S’.
‡ The antecedent exposition (viz. of the waking state, of dream, and profound sleep) serves only as an illustration (of the soul in its bondage and liberation).
282 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
holy and sinful during his dream, he proceeds again in the reverse order to the place of his birth, the waking state. 34.
As* a well laden cartt moves on noisily, so the embodied soul, directed by the omniscient soul,t at the time, when breathing its last. 35.
When it gains its subtle state§, when it obtains its subtle state by old age or disease, then, as the fruit of the mangoe tree, or of the glomerate fig tree, or of the holy fig tree becomes free from its bond,|| becomes free this Purusha from those members{ and proceeds again* in the reverse ordert to its birth- place for (the obtaining of) a body. 386.
As,t on the approach of the king, men of violent deeds,§ (and) such as are addicted to every crime, charioteers and governors of villages stand prepared with food and drink and
The following sections undertake to describe liberation and bondage themselves, bondage being like the state of dream and waking, and liberation like profound sleep. The present section (34) seems to be an episode to recapitulate what has been said before about the nature of dream.
* Hence to the end of this Brahmana and the commencement of the next the worldly state of the soul is described. To explain the first proposition that the soul proceeds from the body, of which it is presently possessed, to another body in the same manner as it proceeds from dream to the state of waking, an illustration is given. S’,
+ Directed by the driver. S’.
‡ The supreme soul, which is self-shining light in its own nature. S’.
§ At what time does the soul attain this state, by what cause, in what manner, and for what end? The answer is given as follows. The time is, when man assumes the subtile body, the cause of it is either old age or disease, the manner is illustrated by a number of similes to show the various ways in which the event may happen, and the end 18 the assuming of another body.
|| This Purusha who abides in the subtile body. S’.
¢ From the eye and the other members of the body which he does not preserve as before in profound sleep (vid. p. 224 (12).) by the agency of life. S’.
* As before, when quitting one body and assuming another. 8’.
+ In the order opposite to that of his entrance into the body. S’.
‡ But how can the Purusha build another body, himself having no power, in absence of any assistants? The present section gives the answer. S’,
§ Ugra either means people of a particular tribe or men. of violent deeds. §
Fourth Chapter. Fourth Brdalmana. 233
palaces, (saying), he comes, he approaches, so on (the approach of) the conscious one*¥ all beingst stand prepared, (saying), this Brahma comes, this Brahma approaches. 37.
As, when the king is desirous of coming, men of violent deeds, (and) such as are addicted to every crime, charioteers and governors of villages go to meet him, so at the time of death all the organst go to meet the soul, when breathing its last. 38.
Fourth Brdéhmana.
When the soul,* after having come to a state, where it has no strength (as it were),t comes to a state of unconsciousness, as it were,{ then the organs go to meet it. Having wholly seized those organs which are throughout resplendent with light§, the soul enters the heart.|| When the Purusha dwel- ling in the eye, altogether returns, then (the soul) is uncon- scious of colour. 1.
* Evam vid, he who knows the fruit derived from work, the worldly soul. S’.
¶ All beings, such as Aditya, upon whom the existence of body depends, and who render assistance to the organs for the performance of their work. S’.
+ Speech and the rest. S’.
# It has been declared, that the Purusha is liberated from his bodily members : at what time and in what manner this liberation takes places, is now more fully to be described. S
+ No strength; the want of strength of the body is here transferred to the soul although in reality it cannot be attributed to it. S’
t+ No consciousness, no power of reflection, as reflection also is the effect of the act of transferring; for to the soul neither reflection nor its absence can be ascribed ; this sense is indicated in the text by the term ‘‘as it were ’’ S’,
§ They are resplendent by their power of manifestation. S’,
|| The heart, the ether of the heart. S’.
The Purusha, dwelling in the eye, is a part of A’ditya (the deity of the sun), who for the benefit of the soul in its worldly functions remains in the eye as long as life lasts, After death he quits his office, and is reunited with A’ditya, 84
2H
284 Brihad Arazyaka Upanishad.
He is one ;* he does not see, as it is said. He is one; he does not smell, as it is said. He is one; he does not taste, as it is said. He 18 one; he does not speak, as it is said. He is one; he does not hear, as it is said. He is gne; he does not mind, as it 18 said. He is one; he does not touch, as it is said. He 18 one; he does not know, as it is said. The entrance to the heart becomes luminous ;¢ through this, when thus illuminated, the soul{ departs§ either from the eye, or from the head, or from other parts of the body. When it departs, life departs after 1४; when life departs, all the organs depart after it. It is endowed with knowledge;|| endowed with knowledge it departs. Knowledge{ and work and the knowledge of (its) former (life) pervade it wholly. 2. ।
As a leech when arrived at the top of a blade of grass, in order to gain another place of support, contracts itself; so the soul, in order to gain another place of support, contracts itself, after having thrown off this body and obtained (that state of) know- ledge.* 38.
As a goldsmith, taking a piece of gold, forms another shape, which is more new and agreeable, so throwing off this body and obtaining (that state of) knowledge, the soul forms a shape, which is more new and agreeable, either suited to the
# With all his organs; or they become one with the subtile soul.
+ Becomes luminous, as in dream, by the light of the soul. S’.
‡ The soul, characterised by knowledge, and placed in the subtile body. 8
§ From the eye, in order to obtain the world of Aditya, from the head, to obtain that of Brahma, and so with regard to the other parts of the body, according to man’s good or evilactions, S&S’.
|| Endowed with knowledge, vis. with such = as it has in dream, which is a knowledge of impressions referring to their respective objects. And this knowledge is the effect of actions, not of the soul. S’,
q Knowledge, which is enjoined, such as refers to the soul, which is prohibited, such as looking at a naked woman, which is not enjoined and not prohibited, knowledge of indifferent objects. The same classification applies to work. ^,©,
* Which is founded apon impreasions as in a dream.
Fourth Chapter. Fourth Bréhmana. 235
world of the forefathers, or of the Gandharvas, or of the gods, or of Prajépati, or of Brahma, or of the other beings. 4.
This soul,*—which is Brahma,t which resembles knowledge, t mind, life,§ eye,|| ear, earth, water, air, ether, hight, not light,* desire, not desire,t wrath, not wrath, virtue, not vir- tue,t which resembles all, which is this, which is not this,— becomes as are its works,§ and conduct. He whose works are good becomes good; he whose works are evil becomes evil. By holy works one becomes holy, by evil works, evil. Like- wise (others) say,|| this Purusha has the nature of desire. As his desire, so is his resolve, as his resolve, so is his work, as his work, so is his reward.¢ 5.
Here applies this memorial verse,—He who 18 attached* (to worldly objects), obtains by means of work the object to which his mind as the cause is attached. Having arrived at the last (effect) of the work which he here performs, he comes from this world again to this world in consequence of (his) work. Thus he who desires (wanders from world to world). But the organs of him who does not desire,t who has no desires,
* The soul, which proceeds from one bodily state to another. S’.
† Brahma in his true nature.
t Intellect. § The five vital functions.
By the perception of colour, and thus it resembles the other organs by the perception of their objects.
q By the assuming of an earthly body. S’.
* Light, by assuming the body of a god, not light, by assuming the body of a brute, etc. 8S’.
+ When discovering, that a desire 18 wrong. S’.
‡ Through desire and wrath, etc. man becomes vicious or virtuous, no action being possible without previous desire; by the performance of good or bad actions he be- comes all, as the world in its manifestal state is the effect of virtue and vice. S’.
§ Works which are expressly enjoined or prohibited, conduct which is not ex- pressly enjoined, or prohibited.
It is true, that vice and virtue are the causes of worldly existence, provided they are preceded by desire, etc. S’.
q Therefore is desire the root of the whole world. S’.
* Has a desire to obtain any object.
+ For he who does not desire, does not act. S’. `
2H 2
236 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
who is beyond desires, whose desires are satisfied, whose desire is the soul, do not depart (from the body).* Being even Brahmat, he obtains Brahma.{ 6.
Here applies this memorial verse,—‘‘ When all desires, dwelling in the heart,§ have been quitted, then the mortal becomes immortal ;|| (then) he enjoys heref Brahma.” “ As the slough of a snake as (something) dead is abandoned on an ant-hill, so is this body (by the soul). Then this uncor- poreal, immortal life* is even Brahma, even light.”+ ‘I will give thee, O Venerable, a thousand (cows),” said Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas. 7.
“ Here apply these memorial verses, t—“ The narrow,§ wide- extended, || ancient€ road is touched by me, fully obtained by me. On this (road) proceed* also the (other) sages who know Brahma, to heaven,+ to (their) place, when liberated from this body. 8.
Here (is this dissent).{ (Some) call it white, some blue,
* There being no cause for it. 8S’.
+ In this world, although yet remaining in the body. S’.
t After his death. S’.
§ In intellect.
|| The desires whieh refer to what is not the soul, characterised by ignorance, are death; by separation from death, immortality ensues. S’,
{| 10 this body. S’. | .
* Life means here Brahma, the supreme soul.
+ The self.shining light of the soul, by which the world is manifested.
‡ The following Slokas are intended to explain more fully the view, obtained in the Mantra Brahmana, that liberation ensues for him whose only object of desire is the soul and who has the knowledge of Brahma. S’,
§ Narrow from the difficulty in discovering it. S’.
|| Instead of vitata (wide extended) another reading, mentioned by S’., is vitara (which causes man to turn from the common road te Brahma),
q Because it is taught by the eternal S’ruti, S’,
* Proceed to obtain liberation, the effect resulting from the knowledge of Brab- ma. S’.
+ Heaven means here the supreme Brahma, व Among those who are desirous of liberation. S’.
Fourth Chapter. Fourth Bréhmana. 237
some yellow, or green, orred.* That road 13 fully penetrated by Brahma. On this (road) proceeds he who knows Brahma, who has been a doer of good,+ whose nature is like light. 9.
Those who worship ignorance,} enter into gloomy darkness ;§ into still greater darkness those who are devoted to know- ledge.|| 10.
To the so-named blissless§ worlds, covered with gloomy darkness, go all the peaple, when departing (from this world), who are ignorant, unintelligent.* 11.
If one knowst+t the 80प्रा so as to comprehend it as his own self, then for what desire or for whose wish should he suffer the ills of the body? 12.
He whose soul, penetrated (and) illumined (by the supreme Brahma), has entered this (body) which abounds with doubts and perplexities, is the creator of the universe; for he is the lord of all; he is the place of it; he is even the place.§ 18.
* They consider the road either to be those vessels, like the Sushumna, which from the juice they contain (vid. p. 227 and Chh. U. 8, 6, 1) are white, etc., or to be the same with the path that leads to A’ditya. But Brahma is different from any of those colours, the road which leads to him, bears no relation to the world ; those therefore, who proceed by any particular road, as by the eye, the head, or any other part of the body, gain the world of Brahma, etc., but not liberation which is only gained by knowledge of Brahma. S’.
+ Who has been a doer of good, thus I translated in accordance with S’.’s cor. rect remark, that he has been so in a former time, before he attained perfect know- Jedge, as on its attainment, every desire has ceased to exist.
+ Those who worship any object different from the object of knowledge, that is to say, all those who are engaged in action, S’.
§ Darkness means any place where the nature of the soul is unknown, S’.
|| Knowledge, which has reference to the objects of ignorance, even the know- ledge of the three Védas as they are intended for the performance of work, S’, Vid. Vaj. S. U. 9, (B. I. vol. 15, p. 73 note), where the same Sloka occurs,
q This passage is similar to that in V4j. S., 3, where instead of ‘‘ blissless’’ the term ‘‘ godless” occirs.
* Who are incapable of compgehending the soul. S’.
t To extol the knowledge of the soul, the text declares, that he who has this knowledge is exempt from bodily ills. A’. ©.
{ The supreme soul as his own self.
§ One soul of all, 8S’.
238 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
Being here* we know pcrhaps, (Brahma); if we do not know him, if there be ignorance (of him), then great calamityt (ensues). Those who know him become immortal ; again (all) others undergo even unhappiness. 14.
When a person 0600108 (his own) soul as god, as the true Ruler of what was and what is to be, then he does not wish to conceal (his self) from him.{ 15.
Adore him, ye gods, after whom§ the year by rolling days is completed, the light of lights, as the immortal life. 16.
I, the wise, immortal, comprebend as the immortal Brahma the soul upon which the five (kinds of) beings|] and the etherf are founded. 17.
_Those who know him as the life of life, the eye of the eye, the ear of the ear,* (and) the mind of the mind, have compre- hended the old, before existing Brahma, 18.
By the mind is he to be seen $ in him there is no varie- ty. Whoever sees variety in hii, proceeds from death to death.t 19.
In one manner (only)§ is to be seen (the being) which can-
* That one who knows Brahma has obtained the highest object of life, is not enly proved by the S’ruti, but also by his own experience. A’. ©.
+ Calamity, by being subject to endless transmigrations from one body to another.
8’. Vid. a similar passage in Kéna ए. 2, 5. । t From the Ruler; for all persons who perceive themselves different from him wish to conceal themselves from God. 8’.
§ The Raler, Vid. Kath. U. 6, 3 and Taitt. U. 2, 8.
|| Viz. the Gandharvas, the fore-fathers, the gods, the Asuras and the Rakshashas, or the five castes, including the Nishfdas. S’.
¶ The ether upon which every thing is woven and rewoven. 8, Vid. p. 203.
* For by themselves, without the light of Brahma, are all these organs inanimate like a tree or a clod of earth, S’. Vid. a similar passage in Kéna. ए, 1, 2. Katha U. 6, 2, and Taitt. U. 2, 8.
¶ Katha U. 4,11. S’wet. 4, 17.
‡ Vid. a similar passage in Katha U. 4, 10 and 11.
§ That is to say, in an uniform manner, without any distinotion.
Fourth Chapter. Fourth Bréhmana. 239
not be proved,* which is eternal, without spot,+ higher than the ether,t unborn,§ the great, eternal soul. 20.
Knowing]|| him let the wise Brahman form his notion (after him) ; let him not meditate on many sounds ;§ for words are embarrassing. 21.
This great,* unborn soul is the same which abides as the intelligent (soul) in all living creatures, the same which abides as ethert in the heart; in him it sleeps; it is the sub- duer of all, thet Ruler of all, the sovereign lord of all; it does not become greater by good works, nor less by evil work. It is the Ruler of all, the sovereign lord of all beings,§ the Preserver|| of all beings, the bridge,’ the Upholder of the worlds* so that they fall not to ruin. In accordance with the word of the Védas} the Bréhmanst desire to comprehend
* It caunot be proved, because it is without difference, uniform; for proof is only possible by means of another thing, but Brahma is one, and there 18 nothing,. beside him, Here appears to be a contradiction,—it cannot be proved, and yet it is known, that is to say, it can be comprehended by proof. This objection, how- ever, has here no force, because the prohibition, refers to the relation between proof and object of proof concerning common things but has no authority respecting the S‘ruti. ७ + Without virtue or vice. 8.
t The ether signifies the unmanifestal state of the world, and “ higher’’ either more subtile or more pervading. S’.
§ Unborn, by this epithet all other modifications are excluded, because every thing must have first an origin before it can have any relation, S’.
| Knowing, according to the instruction of the teacher and the S’astra.
{ Because plurality is forbidden, and it is said ‘‘ By Om’”’ meditate on the soul. S’.
* Bondage and liberation, together with their causes, have been described in the Mantras, Brahmanas, and Slokas; again, the nature of liberation bas been fully explained. The present section has the object to show the relation which the whole Véda bears to the knowledge of the supreme Brahma, S’,
¶ Ether, the abode of intellect and knowledge, or it may be, according to S’., the ether, abiding in the internal organ at the time of profound sleep, that is to say, the supreme soul without attributes, whose nature is knowledge, his own nature. In this his own nature, or in the supreme soul which is called ether, he sleeps.
t Of Brahma, Indra, etc, S’. § From Brahmé down to inanimate matter, S’,
]| Of the rules of the casts and,orders, etc, S’. बु Vid. Chh. U. 8, 4.
* From the earth up to the Brahma world. S’.
+ That is to say, Mantras and Bréhmanas, S’.
‡ The Brahmans indicates here the three first casts; for there is no difference between them with regard to knowledge. S’. |
240 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
him by sacrifice,* gift, ascetic work+ and subduing of desires.{ One who knows him thus, becomes a Muni.§ Desiring him as (their) place, the wandering mendicants wander about.|| This is indeed (the cause of the state of wandering mendicant), that the ancient sages did not desire offspring{ (thinking by themselves),— What shall we do by means of offspring. Those to whom, (like) us,* the soult is the (supreme) place, lead the life ofa religious men. licant, after they have abandoned the desire for a son, the desire for wealth and the desire for (heavenly) places ; for the desire for a son 18 the ?` meas the desire for wealth ; the desire for wealth is the same as the desire for (heavenly) places ; for both are even desires. The soul,{ which is not this, nor that, nor ought else, is intangible ; for it cannot be laid hold of, it is not to be dissipated; for it cannot be dissipated; it is without contact, for it does not come into contact ; it is not limited; it is not subject to pain nor to destruction ;
* Sacrifice, or ceremonial work is general, although not a direct means of pro- ducing the knowledge of Brahma, is necessary to purify the mind; when the mind is so purified, knowledge is possible, no obstacle opposing it. S’.
t Ascetic work, as the Chandrayana, says S’., which is a kind of fasting for the expiation of sin.
प Literally, abstaining from food, The three first obligations (sacrifice, gift and ascetic work) include all the permanent works, enjoined by the Védas, and the last (fasting) an abstaining from desires. By those means, a desire to comprehend the soul is produced. S’.
§ Muni, mananat muni, a Yogi, who, while yet alive, has obtained liberation. S’.
|| That is to say, they have abandoned all work. S’,
¶ Offspring indicates work and the knowledge of the inferior Brahma, as the cause of obtaining the three external worlds. S’.
* Like us who have the true knowledge of the soul. 8.
fT In its own nature.
t If it be admitted, that the soul is the place, why is there a means required for obtaining it, and for what reason is the state of wandering mendicant necessary, since it is said, work should not be entered upon? The answer is, the soul, for whose desire one should enter the state of wandering mendicant, has no connexion with works. Why? It evidently follows from such negations as, it cannot be seized. Because the soul thus com pre- hended, viz, independent of work, cause and effect, free from- every worldly
Fourth Chapter. Fourth Bréhmana. 241
those* two do verily not subdue him; therefore (he does not say),—I have done evil, or I have done good. He subdues them both ; neither good nor evil deeds agitate him. 22.
The samet is said in the following Rik,—The eternal greatness of the Bréhman is neither increased by work,t nor diminished.§ Let him even know the nature of that (greatness) ; knowing that (greatness), he is not stained by evil work.|/ Therefore one who thus knows, who has subdued his senses, who is calm,* free from all desires, enduring,+ and composed in mind,t beholds the soulin the soul alone, be- holds the whole soul; sin does not subdue him; he subdues sin; sin does not consume him; he consumes sin.§ He is free from sin, free from doubt, he is pure, he is the (true) Brah- man; this is the (true) world of Brahma, O king of kings,” thus spoke Yajnavalkya. ‘I will give thee,O Venerable, the kingdom of the Vidéhas, and my own self, to become thy slave.” 23.
attribute, beyond every desire, not possessed of grossness and the like attributes, unborn, undecaying, immortal, beyond fear, like a lump of rock-salt, of one uniform nature which is knowledge, a self-shining light, one alone, without duality, without beginning, without end, not within, not without, because this is established by the S’ruti and by discussion, especially by the conversation between Janaka and Yajna- valkya, therefore, it is also established, that no work is entered into, if the soul be thus comprehended. S’.
* Sin and virtue. ।
+ The same, which has been had said in the 87६0०088, is also declared in a -Mantra. S’.
‡ By good work.
§ By evil work.
| Or exalted by good work.
¶ The external senses. S’.
# Who has overcome the desires of the internal organ. ऽ.
¶† Capable of bearing such opposite agents, as hunger and thirst, heat and cold, etc. S’.
‡ Having fixed his attention upon one point only. S’,
§ He consumes sin by the fire of the knowledge of the soul. S’,
21
242 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
This soul* is great, unborn, the consumer of 00, the giver of wealth. Whoever thus knows, obtains wealth. 24.
Thist great, unborn, undecaying, undying, immortal, fear- less soul is Brahma; Brahma is verily fearless; he who thus knows, becomes verily the fearless Brahma. 25.
Fifth Bréhmana.§
Y4jnavalkya then had two wives, Maitréyi and Kéatyayani. Among them, Maitréyi was fond of discussing the nature of Brahma, KAétydyani wise in the duties of a house-wife. Y4j- navalkya was desirous of attaining another order superior (to that of house-holder). 1.
८ Maitréyi,” said YAjnavalkya, ^ Behold, I am desirous of quitting this order for that of a wandering mendicant ; there- fore, let me divide (my property) amongst thee and KAtyé- yani there.” 2.
Maitréyi said,—“ If, O Venerable, this whole world with all its wealth were mine, could I become immortal thereby ?” Y4jnavalkya said, “By no means. Like the life of the
* That is to say, the soul whose nature has been explained in the conversation between Janaka and Yajnavalkya. S’.
+ Abiding in all beings, consuming every food.
‡ The meaning of the whole Aranyaka is expressed in the present section, S’.
§ The present Brahmana, with the exception of the first section and part of the fourteenth and fifteenth sections, is a literal repetition of the fourth Brahmana in the second chapter, vide pp. 177—181. S’ankara’s explanation of this circumstance is ingenious, although somewhat strained. We give it here, in order that the reader may judge for himself. The nature of Brahma has been determined in the Madbu- ४६०१६, the principal part of the S’astra, and also in the Brahmakfnda. Again it has been thoroughly sifted by discussion in the Yajnavalkyakaénda, which is the principal part as to the method by which that knowledge is acquired. And lastly, it has been declared after full discussion by means of the relation between disciple and teacher in the fourth chapter. The Maitréyf Br&éhmana serves therefore to show the conclusion after the manner of the logicians, who define a conclusion to be ‘‘ the repetition of the proposition, because the reason has been stated.’’ (Nydya Sadtras, 1, 38.) The pro- position, here referred to, is that the knowledge of Brahma, when accompanied with the renunciation of the world, is the means, by which immortality,is attained.
Fourth Chapter. Fifth Braéhmana. 248
wealthy thy life might become; by wealth, however, there is no hope of (obtaining) immortality.” 3.
Maitréyi said,—“ Of what use would be wealth to me, if I did not become thereby immortal. ‘Tell me, O Venerable, any (means of obtaining immortality) which thou knowest.” 4.
YAjnavalkya said,—‘ Behold, (thou wast) dear to us before, (and now) sayest thou what is dear. Come, sit down; I will explain to thee (the means of obtaining immortality) ; endea- vour to comprehend my explanation.” 5.
He said,—“ Behold, not indeed for the husband’s sake the husband is dear (to the wife), but for the sake of the self, is dear the husband. Behold, not indeed for the wife’s sake, the wife is dear (to the husband), but for the sake of the self, is dear the wife. Behold, not for the sons’ sake, the sons are dear (to the parents), but for the sake of the self are dear the sons. Behold, not for the property’s sake, property is dear (to one), but for the sake of self is property dear. Behold, not for the Brahma’s sake, the Brahma is dear, but for the sake of self is dear the Brahma. Behold, not for the Kshattra’s sake is the Kshattra dear, but for the sake of the self is dear the Kshattra. Behold, not for the worlds’ sake, the worlds are dear, but for the sake of the self, are dear the worlds. Behold, not for the gods’ sake the gods are dear, but for the sake of the self are dear the gods. Behold, not for the Védas’ sake are the Védas dear, but for the sake of the self are dear the Védas. Behold, not for the elements’ sake the elements are dear, but for the sake of the self are dear the elements. Behold, not for the sake of the universe, the universe is dear, but for the sake of the self is dearthe universe. Behold, the self is verily to be seen, heard, minded (and) meditated upon. Behold, O Maitréyi, by seeing, hearing, minding, knowing the self, all this (universe) is comprehended. 6.
«The Brahma should disown a person, who considers the Brahma (cast) as something different from (his) self; the Kshattra should disown a person, who considers the Kshattra
212
244 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
(cast) as something different from (his) self; the world | disown a person who considers the world as something different from (his) self; the gods should disown a person, who considers the gods as something different from (his) self; the elements should disown a person, who considers the elements as some- thing different from (his) self; the universe should disown a person, who considers the universe as something different from (his) self. This (own) self is this Brahma, this Kshattra, these worlds, these gods, these elements, is this universe. 7.
‘Asa person, when a drum (unseen by him) is beaten, is unable to perceive the sounds proceeding from it (as sounds of _adrum), but on the perception of the drum, the sound of a drum beaten is perceived. 8.
“As a person, when a shell (unseen by him) is blown,is wna- ble to perceive the sounds proceeding from it (as sounds of a shell), but on the perception of the shell, the sound of a shell blown is perceived. 9.
५८ Asa person, when a flute (unseen to him) is played, is unable to perceive the sounds proceeding from it, but on the percep- tion of the flute, the sound of a flute played is perceived. 10.
“ As from fire, made of damp wood, proceed smoke, sparks, etc. of various kind, thus, behold, the breathing of this great being is the Rig Véda, the Yajur Véda, the 88708 Veda, the Atharva and Adgirasa, the narratives, the doctrines on creation, the science, the Upanishads, the memorial verses, the aphor- isms, the explanation of tenets, the explanation of mantras,— all these are his breathing. 11
‘ As the only site of the waters is the sea, thus the only site of every touch is the skin, thus the only site of every taste the tongue, thus the only site of every smell the nose, thus the only site of every colour the eye, thus the only site of every sound the ear, thus the only site of every determination the mind, thus the only site of every knowledge the heart, thus the only site of every act the hands, thus the only site of every pleasure the organ of generation, thus the only site of every
Fourth Chapter. Fifth Brdhmana. 245
evacuation the anus, thus the only site of every motion the feet, thus the only site of every Véda, speech. 12.
५५ Asa piece of salt, when thrown into water, is dissolved into mere water, and none is capable of perceiving it, because, from whatever place a person might take (water), it would have the taste of salt, (but be no piece of salt), thus, behold, this great being, which is infinite, independent and mere knowledge. Springing forth together with those elements, (the individual soul) is destroyed, when they are destroyed. After death, no conscience remains; thus, 0 Maitréyi,I hold.’ Thus said Yajnavalkya. 13.
Maitréyi said,—“ With regard to the soul thou hast bewilder- ed me, O Venerable, (by the saying,—After death no conscience remains.) I do not comprehend that (soul).” Ydajuavalkya said,—‘“ Behold, I verily do not create bewilderment ; behold this soul is indestructible ; its nature is without variance. 14,
‘For where there is, as it were, duality, there sees another another thing, there smells another another thing, there tastes another another thing, there speaks another another thing, there hears another another thing, there minds another an- other thing, there touches another another thing, there knows another another thing; but how does one, to whom all has become mere soul, see any thing, how smell any thing, how taste any thing, how speak any thing, how hear any thing, how mind any thing, how touch any thing, how know any thing? How should he know him by whom he knows this all? This soul is not this, nor ought else; it is unseiza- ble; for it cannot be seized; it is not scattered; for it cannot be scattered ; it is without contact ; for it comes not into contact; it is without colour; it is not subject to pain or destruction. How should one know the knower? In this manner art thou instructed. So far, O beloved Maitréyi, ex- tends in truth immortality.” Having said thus, Yajnavalkya went to the forest. 15.
246 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
Sizth Brdhmana.
Next follows the school commencing from Pautiméshya.* Pautimfshya succeeded Gaupavana,—Gaupavana, Pautimashya, —Pautimadshya, Gaupavana,—Gaupavana, Kaus’ika,—Kaus'1- ka, Kaundinya,—Kaundinya, S’Andilya,—S‘andilya, Kaus 1४8 and Gautama,—Gautama, 1.
Agnivés'ya,—Agnivés‘ya,t Gérgya,—Gargya, Gérgya,—Gar- gya, Gautama,—Gautama, Saitava,—Saitava Parfs'aryéyana,— Pérfs‘arydyana, Gargy4yana,—Gargydyana, Uddalokéyana,— Uddalokéyana, Jévaélféyana,—J4valéyana, Maédhyandinéyana,— 21800 $ 87101085 802, Saukarfyana,—Saukarfyana, Kashayana, —K4shdyana, Séyakéyana,—Sfyak4yana, Kaus‘ikéyani,—Kav- s'ikfyani, 2.
Ghritakaus ika, —Ghritakaus’ika, Pérés’aryéyana,—Péris’- arySyana, Pardés/arya,—Paérds‘arya, Jétukarnya,—Jatukarnya, Asurféyanaand Y4éska,—Asuréyana, Sraivani,—Sraivani, Aupa- jandhani,—Aupajandhani, Asuri,— Asuri, Bhéradv4ja,— Bhara- dv4ja, Atréya,—Atréya, = Gautama,— Gautama, Gautama,—Gautama, VAtsya,—VaAtsya, S-Andilya,—S andilya, Kaisorya K&pya,—Kais/orya Kapya, Kumérahérita,—Kumé- rahérita, Gélava,—Gélava, Vidarbhi Kaundinya,—Vidarbhi Kaundinya, Vatsanapét V&bhrava,—Vatsanapét Vabhrava, Panth&éh Saubhara,—Panthéh Saubhara, Ay4sya Angirasa,— Ay&sya Angirasa, Abhiti Tvdshtar,—Abhuti Tv4shtar, Vis- varipa Tvdshtar,—Visvaripa Tvdshtar, the two As'vins,—the two As’vins, Dadhyat Atharvana,—Dadhyat Atharvana, Atharva Daiva,—Atharvaé Daiva, Mrityu Prédhvasana,—Mrityu Pradb- vasana, Pradhvasana,—Prddhvasana, Ekarishi,—Ekarish|, Viprachitti,—Viprachitti, Vyashti—Vyashti, Sandru,—sa- néru, Sanftana,—Sandtana, Sanaga,—Sanaga, Paraméshthi,— Paraméshthi, Brahma,t{—Brahma 18 the self-existent ; saluta- tion to Brahma.
* Two more lists of teachers are given in this Upanishad, viz. 4, 6, and 6, 5. + From Agnivés’ya to Kaus’ikayani the names of teachers differ from those given
in 4, 6, 2. ‡ Parameshthi denotes Virét, and Brahma, Hiranyagarbha. S’.
Fifth Chapter. Second Brahmana. 247
FIFTH CHAPTER.
First Bradhmana.
Infinite* is that,t infinite is this. From the infinite one proceeds the infinite one. On taking the infinity} of the infi- nite one, there is left infinity.
Om is the ether,§ is Brahma. The ether|| exists of old, the ether is the source of the wind, thus said the son of Kauravyayani. That (Omkara) is the Véda. The Brahmans know (vidur) that by this (name) one knows (véda) all that is to be known (véditavya).
Second Bradhmana.
The three-fold offspring of Prajapati, gods, men and Asuras followed as religious students their father Prajapati. The
* In the preceding four chapters the knowledge of Brahma in his independent nature has been explained ;*in the present chapter the modes of meditation on the soul in its various relations are set forth. These modes, not at variance with the performance of work, lead to a higher and higher state of existence, and effect the gradual liberation of the soul from the world, The first of them is the Omkara, as being the most eminent, after which follow the commands of restraint, liberality, and compassion. S’,
+ That (adah) refers to the imperceptible Brahma, who is all-pervading and independent of any relation, ¢his (idam) to Brahma as conceived under relations. ‘‘ Infinite,” parna; the literal meaning of which is full, and which S’. explains by not finite, all-pervading. It is infinite, (or full), he continues, as pervaded by the supreme soul, not by the individual soul, since the latter is involved in relations. ‘¢ The infinite;’’—considered as effect, ‘‘ proceeds from the infinite,’ —considered as cause. S’.
‡ Taking the infinity, literally the infinite one, and the sense is, comprehending the one identical nature of Brahma, by the omission of all relative attributes.
§ According to S’., Brahma is the subject, and Kha (the ether) the predicate of the sentence.
|| The ether (kha) contains two meanings, as ancient it represents the supreme soul, and as the source of the wind, it represents the inferior Brahma. The same applies to the sound Om, the representative of Kha. S’.
भजे "> -ननग > = ` ~~ =
248 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
gods, having finished their time of learning, said (to Prajapati), —“ Tell us, O Venerable, (our duty).’? He proclaimed to them the syllable Da. ‘Do you comprehend?” They answered, —‘ We do comprehend. Restrain your desires, hast thou said to us.” He said,—“ Om! you have fully comprehended.”
Then the men said to him,—Tell us, O Venerable, (our duty).” He proclaimed to them the letter Da. “Do you comprehend?” They answered,—“ We do comprehend. Be liberal, hast thou said to us.’’ He said,—‘‘ Om | you have fully comprehended.” Then the Asuras said to him, “Tell us, 0 Venerable, (our duty).” He proclaimed to them the letter Da. “Do you comprehend?” They answered,— We do comprehend. Be clement, hast thou said to us.” He said,— **Qm! you have fully comprehended.” The same 18 repeated by a divine voice with the force of thunder, viz. the syllables Da, Da, Da, meaning, Be restrained (démyata), be liberal (datta), and be clement (dayadhvam). Therefore let one learn the triad of restraint, liberality and clemency. 8.
Third Bréhmana.*
This Prajfpatit is the heart (hridaya),t this Brahma,§ this all. ^ Hridaya’”’ consists of three syllables. The first syllable 18 Hri. To him who thus knows, the senses and the rest|| perform (abhifaranti), (their work). The second syllable
* Restraint, liberality and clemency are the highest of all modes of adoration ; for he, whose passions are subdued, who is not desirous of gain, and who is merci- ful, is in possession of all those modes. In the preceding two Bréhmavas the me- ditation on Brahma without attributes has been explained, the present shows the elevated places, obtained from meditating on Brahma as endowed with attributes.
+ The creator of all beings. S’.
¶ The intellect, abiding in the heart. S’.
§ Brahma, from his growing (bribattwét) and from hie being the soul of all. S’.
| The rest, according to S.’, means the objects of the senses, as sounds, etc. 9
हि
is Da, The senses and the rest bestow (dadati) (power) on him who thus knows. The third syllable is Ya. He who thus knows, proceeds, (eti) to heaven, (his) place.
Fifth Chapter. Fifth Brahmana. 249
Fourth Bréhmana.
This* (Brahma) was even truth.t Whoever knows that he, the great, the venerable, the first-born,} is thet rue Brahma, conquers (his enemy), as (the true Brahma conquers the worlds), and destroys him (also) ; for Brahma is truth.
Fifth Brahmana.§
Water|| was at first this (world). Water created truth. Truth is Brahma,* Brahma (created) Prajdpati,t Prajdpati the gods. The gods adore even truth. The name of Satya (truth) consists of three syllables. The first syllable is ०८ Sa,” the second syllable ^“ 77,” andthe third syllable ^ Ya.” The first and the last syllables (Sa and Ya) are truth,t the
* In the text the demonstrative pronoun “ tat” is three times repeated. Accord - ing to S’. the first refers to Brahma, described by the name of the heart in the pre- ceding 4010808, the second connects it with ‘‘ état’’ which is to enunciate some other predicate of Brahma, and the third ^" tat’’ indicates the new predicate.
+ Truth, Sacbcha tyachcha mdartanchamirtancha satyam Brahma panchabhitat- makam, vid. p. 175, (2, 3, 1.)
¶ Born before every other being which has a worldly existence. S’,
§ This Br&hmaya has the object of extolling the true Brahma. S$’,
|| Water indicates here the unmanifested state of the world, before its creation, together with the creator, therefore the seeds of all creation. S’.
भू The world io its manifestation. S’.
# The first born, Hiranyagharbha, or the Satratma. S’.
+ Or the Virat. S’.
t Because these two syllables occur neither in the word ‘‘ mrityu’’ (death), nor in the word ^" anrita,” while the middle syllable ‘‘ ta’ is found as well in ^" mrityu’’ as in ‘‘ anrita.’’ S’.
2k
250 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
middle is falsehood (६०१४४) ; falsehood, is on either side en- compassed by truth; there is, (therefore), a preponderance of truth. Falsehood does not hurt him who (thus) knows. 1.
That truth* is Aditya, the Purusha, (dwelling) in that orb, and also the Purusha, (dwelling) in the right eye. They abide in each other. The former abides through his rays in the latter,t and the latter in the former through his senses. When he quits the body, he beholds that pure orb;t{ the rays do not return to him. 2.
Bhi (the earth)§ is the head|| of the Purusha, dwelling in that orb, there being one head and also one syllable,— Bhuvah (the atmosphere) the arms,—there being two arms, and also two syllables,—Swah (the heavens) the foundation,{— there being two foundations and also two syllables. His representative name 18 Ahar* (day); for whoever thus knows, destroys (hanti) and relinquishes (jahéti) sin. 3.
Bhi is the head of the Purusha, dwelling in the right eye,— there being one head and also one syllable,—Bhuvah, the arms, —there being two arms and also two syllables.—Swah the foundation, —there being two foundations and also two syllables. His representative name 18 Aham ;t for who, ever thus knows, destroys and relinquishes sin. 4.
* This section exbibits the meditation on the true Brahma in his several locali- ties. S’.
+ The sun assists man by the manifestation of objects, and man the sun by perception. S’.
‡ The moon. S’.
§ This section replies to the question, which are the sacred names and the corresponding parts of the body of the Purusha whose name is “ Satya,’’ in that orb. S.’
|| The head from its excellence, S’.
नू Denoting ‘‘ foot.’’
® Ahar is here derived from the root ‘‘ Ha”? meaning either to destroy, or to relinquish.
† The derivation of Abam is bere the same as tbat of Ahar.
Fifth Chapter. Highth Brahmana. 251
Sixth Bréhmana.
The Purusha, who resembles* mind, is the true light ;+ (he abides) within the heart, (in size) like a grain of rice or barley.t He is the Ruler of all, the sovereign lord of all; he overrules whatever exists in this universe.
Seventh Brdéhmana. | It is said, that “vidyut” (lightning) is Brahma, for vidyut 18 derived from ४1१8188, (tearing asunder§). Whosoever thus knows, that Brahma is vidyut, tears asunder the sins of that (soul) ; for vidyut is even Brahma.
Eighth Braéhmana.
Let one meditate on speech (under the semblance of) a milk-cow. Her four udders are the words Sw4ha, Vashat, Hanta and Swadhé.|| Two udders, the words 8 ६7६ and Vashat, feed the gods, the word Hanta (feeds) men, and the word Swadha the forefathers. Her bull is life, her young one the mind.
Ninth Brahmana.
The fire whose name is Vaiswanara is that fire in the midst of the body, by which all the food that is eaten is digested.
# S’. explains the affix ‘‘ maya’’ in ‘‘ manamaya,”’ not by ^ Swardpa” (of the same nature with the mind), but by ‘‘ object of the mind,” because comprehended either in or by the mind.
+ Because the mind manifests all, and every thing is an object of the mind, S’.
‡ Vid. Katha U. 3, 11, and S’wétas'watara U. 3, 13.
§ From tearing asunder the darkness; for by destroying the darkness of the clouds, lightning is manifested, S’,
|| Ghee is offered to the gods by pronouncing ‘‘ Sw&h& and Vashat, rice to men by saying ‘‘ Hanta,”’ and Swadhé to the forefathers by saying ^" Swadha.”’
2K 2
252 Brihad Aragyaka Upanishad.
From this (fire) arises a noise which one hears on closing his ears. When he* quits the body, he does not hear the noise.
Tenth Braéhmana.t
When the Purushat proceeds from this world (to another), he comes to.the air. The air opens there as wide for him as the aperture of a chariot-wheel. By this (aperture) he ascends, (and) comes to the sun. The same opens there for him as wide as the aperture of a Lambara.§ By this he ascends, and comes to the moon. The same opens there for him as wide as the aperture of a small drum. By this he ascends, and comes to the world,|| where there is no grief, where there is no snow ;¢ there he dwells endless years.*
[
Eleventh Bréhmana.
The greatest pain surely is that, which one endures from sickness. Whoever thus knows, gains the highest world. The greatest pain surely is (to think) that they carry oné after death to the furest. Whoever thus knows, gains the highest world. The greatest pain surely is (to think) that they lay the (body of the) deceased in the fire. Whoever thus knows, gains the highest world.
* The individual who experiences pain or pleasure in the panda
+ In this Br&hmana, the fruits, consequent upon the abovem nds of ,
meditation, are stated. S’, ‡ The Purusha who has the knowledge before described. S’. 1 § A kind of musical instrament, probably a large drum, | To the world of Prajapati. 8’. ¶ु Grief denotes mental pain, and snow pain, arising from the body. S’, * Many Kalpas of Brahma. S’.
rd
Fifth Chapter. Thirteenth Brdlunana. 253
Twelfth Bréhmana.
Some say, ^ Food is Brahma.” Thisis not so; food decays,* without (the support of) life. Others say, ‘‘ Life is Brahma.” This is not so; life dries up without (the support of) food. Those deities+ verily, when becoming one, attain the highest state.{ Thus (reflecting) Patrida said to his father,— Can I do any good or evil to one who thus knows?” He answered (checking him) with his hand,—‘ Do not (speak thus), O Patrida; for who, that is the unity of them, can ever obtain the highest state ?”? He§ said to him “ Vi;’’ food is verily “Vi; for all these beings enter|| food. (Again he said to him) ^ Ram ;” life verily is Ram; for all these beings sport in life. Into him who thus knows, enter all beings ; in him sport all beings. |
Thirteenth Braéhmana.
The Uktha{ is verily life; therefore (let one meditate on) the Uktha; for life causes this all to spring up, (utthdpayati). From him who thus knows, springs up a son who knows the Uktha, and is firm. Whoever thus knows, gains the same nature* and the same place with the Uktha. 1.
* While Brahma is without decay. S’.
+ Food and life.
‡ The state of Brahma.
§ The father.
|| Are dependent upon food.
{ Uktha is the principal Mantra in the rite, called Mahébrata. The Uktha is the principal rite, and life is also first among the other functions. S’.
* 8.“ explains Sayujya by identity of body, organs aad consciousness, vid. p. 55. The Sayujya and Salokata are two of the five kinds of liberation which are specified in the S’ri-Bhagavat, 3, 29, viz. Salokya, Sarsti, Samfpya, Sérapya and Ekatwa. Vid. Sabda K, D.
254 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
The Yajur is verily life; therefore (let one meditate on) the Yajur; for in life are all these beings united (yujyante). With him who thus knows are all beings united for the sake of his superiority. Whoever thus knows, obtains the same nature and the same place with the Yajur. 2.
The Sima is verily life; therefore (let one meditate on) the S4ma ; for in life meet all these beings together (Samyamhi). For him who thus knows meet all these beings together for the sake of his superiority. Whoever thus knows, obtains the same nature and the same place with the Sima. 3.
The Kshattra is verily life; (therefore let one meditate on) the Kshattra; for life saves (trfyate) this (body), when it is wounded (Kshanitoh). Whoever thus knows, gains the Kshattra which is Attra,* and obtains the same nature and the same place with the Kshattra. 4.
Fourteenth Brdéhmana.t
Bhimi (earth), Antariksha (the atmosphere), Dyau (the heavens), are eight syllables;t the first foot of the Gayatri consists of eight syllables; this (foot) of the Gayatri is that (nature of the earth, of the atmosphere and of the heavens). Whover thus knows the (first) foot of the (Gayatri), conquers all that is in the three worlds. 1. `
The Richah, Yajunshi (and) 80801 are eight syllables; the second foot of the Gayatri consists of eight syllables; this
* Attra means, according to S’. what is not preserved by another (na trayate anyena kénochit, iti attram). Kshattra which is Attra seems to denote one who is not preserved by any body else, that is to say, who preserves himself.
+ S’. gives the following introduction to the fourteenth Brahmana. The medi- tation upon Brahma, as endowed with many fictitious attributes, such as the heart, &c., has been explained ; the present Brahmana is to set forth the meditation upon him, as represented by the Gayatri.
प See a similar play with letters Chh. U. 1, 3, 6—7.
Fifth Chapter. Fourteenth Brahmana., 255
(foot) of the Gayatri is that (nature of the three Vedas). Whoever thus knows, conquers all that is conquerable by the knowledge of the three Vedas. 2.
Prana (the vital air which goes forwards), Ap4na (the vital air which descends,) (and) Vy4na (the vital air which equa- lises), these are eight syllables; the third foot of the Gayatri consists of eight syllables ; this (foot) of the Gayatri is that (nature of the three vital airs). “Whoever thus knows the third foot of the (GAéyatri), conquers all that has life. Again, the turiya (the fourth), the Dars’ata foot of the Gayatri, is the Paro Rajé,* which sheds rays. What 18 (commonly called) Chaturtha, (the fourth), is (the same as) the “turiya.” It is, as it were, beheld (dadris’é) ; hence it is called the Dars‘ata foot. (It is called) Paro Raja, because it sheds rays upon all the dust- born creatures of the universe. Whoever thus knows that (foot of the Gayatri), is radiant with power and glory. 3.
This Gdyatrit is founded upon the fourth, the Dars’ata foot, the Paro Rajé. This (fourth foot) is founded upon truth. The eye is verily truth; for (that) the eye in truth, (is evident). Hence, if at present two have entered uponadispute, (one saying), —I have seen, (the other),—I have heard, then we believe him, who has said, I have seen. Truth is founded upon power; life is verily power. Upon this life (truth) is founded. There- fore it is said, power is stronger than truth.t In the same man- ner the Gayatri, is founded upon that which bears a relation to the soul; for this (Gayatri) preserves (tattré) the Gayas; the vital organs (Pranah) are the Gayas ; therefore, because it pre- serves the Gayas (gayéns tattré), it is called Gdyatri. The
* Paro Raji, Aditya or the sun, the representative of Brahma.
fT This Gayatri with its three feet representing the world in its twofold state, as being endowed with form, and as being without form. S’.
‡ Vid. Chh. ए. 7, 8.
256 Brihad Aragyaka Upansshad.
Savitri which he* teaches, is this (Géyatrf) ; it preserves the life of him to whom he has taught it. 4.
Somet call this Savitri Anustup, (saying),—‘“‘ Speech is Anus- tup; we repeat that speech is Anustup.” Let none do 80, let him call the Gayatri Savitri. If one who thus knows, receive even many (gifts),t yet he would not receive so much as is equal to one foot of the Gayatri. 5.
If one receive the three worlds, full (of all their riches), he would obtain (no more than is equal to) the first foot. Again if one receive as much as the science of the three Védas ex- tends, he would obtain (no more than what is equal to) the second foot. Again, if one receive as much as all that has life extends, he would obtain (no more than what is equal to) its third foot. Again, the fourth Dars'ata Paro Raja foot of the G4yatri is never by any one obtainable.§ Hence how could he receive (an equivalent) which extends so far? 6.
The praise of this Géyatri is given in the following Man- tra),—Thou art of one foot,|| of two feet, of three feet, and of four feet ; for thou art not obtained. Salutation to thy fourth Darsfta Paro Raj& foot. May this (enemy of thine){ not ac- complish this (work).* If (one who thus knows) hates any body (and makes against him this invocation), “this (man is my enemy); may his wish not be accomplished,” then the
* The teacher.
+ Some followers of Véda schools.
‡ Many gifts, at the time of investiture, when the pupil begs for presents.
§ Obtainable by any wealth which may be given.
|| The first foot, representing the three worlds, the second representing the know- ledge of the three Vedas, the third representing all living creatures.
q Enemy, sin. The sentence is elliptical, but the above sense appears to be intended ; which is corroborated by the explanation given by the Upanishad itself.
* By which he seeks to harm thee.
Fifth Chapter. Fourteenth Brahmana. 257
wish of the latter will verily not be accomplished, if he make against him the invocation, “I have obtained his wish.” 7.
Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas, thus addressed Butila, the son of As/watara,— (If) thy saying that thou knowest the Gayatri (be true), then why hast thou become an elephant to carry (me) ?”
He said,—“‘I did not know the mouth of the Gayatri, O king of kings.” Its mouth is fire. HKven much wood, thrown into fire, is consumed by the same; in the like manner, one who thus knows, although committing many sins, consumes them all, becomes clean and pure, and is without decay and immortal. 14.
Open, O Ptishan, the mouth of truth, concealed in the golden vessel,* to (me who have been) devoted to true piety, for the sake of beholding (the truth). O Pushan,f thou sole Rishi,t Yama, Surya, son of Prajapati, do withhold thy rays, diminish thy splendour, that I may behold thy most auspicious form. I, that Purusha, am immortal. (Let) my vital air (join) the wind; then (let) my body, when reduced to ashes, (join) the earth). Om! Kratu, remember (my) acts! Remember, O Kratu, remember my acts, remember! Guide (me), 0 Agni, by the road of bliss to enjoyment ; O god, who knowest all dis- positions, deliver (me from) crooked sin. Let us offer thee our best salutation.§
* S’ankara thus explains this passage, He who has performed both, acts of know- ledge and rites, prays to the sun at the time of his death, holding a golden vessel in his hands, As a valuable thing is concealed in a vessel, so Brahma, who is denoted as truth (vid.5,4.), and who abides in the resplendent orb of the sun, is concealed from him whose mind is not concentrated,
¶ Pashan from Poshanat because he upholds the world.
4 Rishi from Dars’anat, the sole beholder, or from ri to go. Surya, ekaki charatiti; Yama, jagatah sanyamanam tatkritam, 9S’,
§ The whole passage 18 nearly identical with Vajasanéya S. U. 15—18.
258 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
SIXTH CHAPTER. First Brahmana.
Whoever* knows what is oldest and best,t becomes the oldest and best among his own. Life is verily what is oldest and best. Whoever thus knows, becomes the oldest and best amongst his own, and also amongst others, should he wish so. 1.
Whoever knows the best foundation,t becomes best founded among his own. Speech is verily best founded. Whoever thus knows, becomes best founded amongst his own, and also amongst others, should he wish so. 2.
Whoever knows the best standing place, is best placed ; he stands firmly on what is even and uneven. The eye§ is verily a firm standing place; for by the eye he stands firmly on what
* It has been declared, that life is the Gdyatrf. For what reason again is the Gayatri represented by life, and not by speech or other functions ? The answer is, because life is the oldest and best, not so speech, etc. The present chapter has the object to determine, how life has those attributes. Or the connexion of this with the preceding chapter may also thus be stated,—The meditation upon life in prefer- ence to the other organs has been declared, life being the Uktha, Yajur, Sama, etc, The meditation upon life which in the former chapter has been enunciated merely as to its principal qualities, is here continyed, although it is not meant to conclude this meditation, This chapter, as is evident even from the name of ^ compilation’? which it bears has rather the object to enumerate the special fruit, not mentioned before, which result from a meditation on life. S’, This introduction of S’. is thus prefaced by X. G.,—The Omkéra, the triad of restraint, liberality and clemency, the meditation upon what is Brahma and what is not Brahma, the fruit of such a meditation, the places gained thereby, and the adoration of Aditya and the other deities, have been set forth in the fifth chapter. The sixth chapter hag the object to explain especially the meditation on that which is not Brahma together with the fruit, resulting from it, and also certain ceremonies, of which the Srimantha is the first.
+ Vid. Chhénd. U. 5, 2,4. Br, A. U. 4, 1, 3.
t Vasishtha means either best founded, or best clothed, both of which is the effect from a superior power of speech, S’. Vid. Ch.5,24. Br. 4 4, 1, 2.
§ Br. A’. 4, 1,4.
Sixth Chapter. First Brdhmana. 259
is even and uneven. Whoever thus knows, stands firmly upon what is even and uneven. 3.
‘Whoever knows what is treasure, obtains whatever he de- sires. The ear* is treasure; for in the ear all the Védas are treasured. Whoever thus knows, obtains whatever he desires.
Whoever knows the place of refuge,t becomes a place of refuge amongst his own. Mindt{ is verily the place of refuge. Whoever thus knows, becomes a place of refuge amongst his own. 5.
Whoever knows Prajapati (the lord of creation), becomes rich in offspring and in cattle. The seed is the source of creation. Whoever thus knows, creates offspring, and be- comes rich in cattle. 6.
The vital organs,§ disputing about their superiority, went to Brahma,|| and spoke to him,—‘‘ Who amongst us is best founded.” He said,—“ He amongst you is best founded, by whose departure the body is thought to suffer most.” 7.
Speech departed. Returning after the absence of a year, it said, “ How could you live without me.” They said,— ८ 4.8 dumb people who do no speak by speech, breathing by the vital breath, seeing by the eye, hearing by the ear, thinking by the mind, and begetting children, so have we lived.” Then speech re-entered (the body).
The eye departed. Returning after the absence of a year, it said,—‘ How could you live without me?” They said,— ५८ As blind people, who do not see by the eye, (live), breathing by the vital breath, speaking by the organ of speech, hearing by the ear, thinking by the mind, and begetting children, so have we lived.” Then the eye re-entered (the body). 8.
* Br. A’. 4, 1, 5.
¶ For the mind is the place, upon which the organs and their objects, are de- pendent, the objects of the senses being enjoyed by the soul through the mind. S’,
‡ Vid. Br. A’. 4, 1, 6.
§ Speech and the rest. S’. Vid. Chh. ए. 5, 1, 5—15, Pras’n. U. 2, 2—4, where the dispute among the organs is also described.
|| Brahma means here Prajapati.
212
260 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
The ear departed. Returning after the absence of a year, it said,—‘* How could you live without me?” They said,— ‘As deaf people, who do not hear by the ear, (live), breath- ing by the vital breath, speaking by the organ of speech, seeing by the eye, thinking by the mind, and begetting children, so have we lived.”? Then the ear re-entered (the body). 9.
The mind departed. Returning after the absence of a year, it said,—‘* How could you live without me?” ^ They said,— “As idiots who do not think by the mind, (live), breathing by the vital breath, speaking by the organ of speech, seeing by the eye, hearing by the ear, and begetting children, so have we lived.” Then the mind re-entered (the body). 10.
The organ of generation departed. Returning after the absence ofa year, it said,—‘ How could you live without me?” They said,— As impotent people who do not beget children (live), breathing by the vital breath, speaking by the organ of speech, seeing by the eye, hearing by the ear, and thinking by the mind, so have we lived.” Then the organ of generation re-entered (the body.) 12.
Then, the vital breath being about to depart, as a great, noble horse, born in the Sindhu country, raises its hoofs, so it shook those vital organs (from their places). They said,—* Do not depart, 0 Venerable. We can not live without thee.” “If I am such, then offer sacrifice* to me.”’ (They answered,)—“ Be it so.” 18.
Speech said,—* That I am founded, is, because thoa att founded.” The eye said, “ That I am a standing place, 18, because thou art a standing place.’’ The ear said,—“ That I am a treasure, is, because thou art a treasure.” The mind said, “That I am a place of refuge, is, because thon art a place of refuge.” The organ of generation said,— That I am 8 source of procreation, 18, because thou art a source of procrea- tion.” (Life said),—* If I am such, what then is my food, what
# Or 88 S’, explains it ‘‘ tribute.’’
Sixth Chapter. Second Bréhmana. 261
then is my foundation?” (They said),—* All this what- soever, horses, worms, small insects, locusts, and so on, is thy food; the waters are thy dwelling place.’* He who thus knows, does not eat (any food) which is not to be eaten,t nor does he take (any gift) which is not to be taken.t There- fore those acquainted with the Védas who thus know, sip water when commencing to eat, and sip water (again) after they have eaten, thinking, that (thereby) they have clothed the naked (life).
Second Braéhmana.
S'wétakétu,§ Aruneya,|| came to the assembly of the Pan- (1६188. He came to Pravdhana, the son of Jibala, who was
* Or thy garment.
t He is not guilty of any fault by eating food which is prohibited.
‡ Thus I rendered ‘‘ anannam”’ in accordance with Sankara’s explanation. It is the same term which in the first half of the sentence is translated by ^" not to be eaten.”’
§ All that bas been omitted in the former chapters of this Upanishad, is to be mentioned in this part, the ‘‘ Khilakanda.” At the end of the seventh chapter he who has been addicted during his life to both, to knowledge and to the performance of rites, asks on the approach of death for the road of Agni with the words ‘‘ Agni, lead me on the good path.’ By the qualification of ‘* good”’ the existence of many paths is indicated, and the roads themselves are paths towards the acquirement of the effects, resulting from works. They succinctly show the whole result of worldly endeavours, be they works flowing from mere natural knowledge or from scriptural knowledge. Although, therefore, natural sin has been explained in the words “threefold is the offspring of Prajapati,’’ and also its effects in the words: ‘* He has not to perform this work,” and although the consequences of scriptural know- ledge have been set forth at the end of the topic on ^" the obtaining of the nature of the threefold food” and at the commencement of the knowledge of Brahma, as implied in the injunction to abstain from those consequences, yet it has merely been said, that by work alone the world of the forefathers, and by knowledge and by work, accompanied with knowledge, the world of the gods is gained, but by what means either is to be obtained has not been stated. To exhibit them and to give finally a succinct view of the whole meaning of the S‘astra, is the object of the present Khilakénda. S’.—The present narrative, with the modification of some words, is essentially the same with Chh. U. 5, 3—10.
|| Arunéya, the son of Aruni, who is the son of Aruni. $^
262 Brikad Aranyaka Upanishad.
attended by his courtiers. Seeing him, he saluted him by the words,—“ [8 it thou, 0 youth?”* He answered, ^ Ah, yes, O friend.”+ Art thou instructed by thy father? ‘ He said,” “ Om (I am).” 1.
“Dost thou know, how the creatures who depart this life, proceed on different 0808 7? He said,—“I do not know.” “‘ Dost thou know, how they return to this world ?” He daid,— “TI do not know.” ^ Dost thou know, how many, who have quitted again and again this world, no more return to it?” He said,—“ I do not know.”’ ^ Dost thou know at which 88611066 the waters become the words of man, and rise to speak ?” He said,— I do not know.”’ ^ Dost thou know the means of obtain- ing the road, which is called Dévay4na, or the road, ¢alled Pitriyaéna, (that is to say, dost thou know) by which work the road to the world of the gods or of the forefathers is obtaihed ? It is heard (also) the word of the Rishi,t—I heard of two roads, the one§ of the forefathers; and the other of the gods (either of which must be proceeded on) by the mortals. ‘ As distant as is the father from the mother,|| (so distant 18 the one road from the other).” ‘ I do not know any thing of all this,” said he. 2.
Then he invited him to sit. Not heeding the proffered seat, the youth hastened away. He went to his father and 8410 to him, *‘ Hast thou not before declared us to be instructed (in all science)??? ‘What then, 0 youth of subtile mind?” < 16 man whose companions are kings, asked me five ques-
* The address of the king is merely Kumara, of which the last syllable is Pluta (three times the length of a short vowel), to indicate contempt, says S’.
+ S’wétakétu returns the salutation of the king by the simple syllable ‘ Bho’ with Pluta, which according to S.’, is not a particle suited in addressing a king.
‡ Of the Mantra. S’.
§ Leading to the world of the forefathers.
|| Father and mother denote heaven and earth, the two halves of the mundane egg. S’.
Sixth Chapter.. Second Brdhmana. 263
tons, of which I did not know one.” ^ Which are they ?” “These” and he mentioned them one after another. 3.
He said,—“ Thou must know, O beloved one, that I told thee all which I know myself.. Up then. Going there, let us perform the service of a Brahma student (to the king).”’ “Do thou go, O Venerable.” Gautama went, where Pra- 0811919, the son of Jibala held his residence. (The king) bringing a seat for him, had (also) water brought.; then 16 made the oblation according to rite. He said to him,—‘ We grant thee a boon,* O respected Gautama.” 4.
He said,—(1 accept) the boon which thou hast promised me. Explain to me the word which thou hast said before to the youth.” 5.
He said,—“ That 18 a boon concerning gods; name one con- cerning men.” 6.
He said,—-‘‘ Thou knowest well, Ihave enough of gold, of cows and horses, female slaves, dependants and garments. Do thou not withhold from us the gift which is great, permanent, and extends (to many generations), He satd,—Verily according to rite thou desirest, O Gautama, (to obtain knowledge from me).” He said,—I approach thee as pupil (according to the rite).”+ With words others also approached of old} (their teachers). He resided there through the mere name of a respectful gift. 7.
He said,—“ Do not hold us guilty, O Gautama, as thy forefathers (held not guilty my forefathers). That this know- ledge in former times was not possessed by a Bréhmana (thou knowest thyself). But I will explain it to thee; for whoever could refuse it to one who thus speaks? 8,
oo
* By which is 0691६ a gift of cows, horses, etc. S’,
¶ Enjoined by the 56878. S’, च
‡ Brahmanas went to Kshatriyas, or Kshatriyas to Vais'was for acquiring know- ledge, only with words, and not with presents.
204 Brihad Aranyake Upanishad.
That world* is the 076, 0 Gautama. The sun (Aditya) is its fuel; his rays the smoke ;t the day the flame ;j the quar- ters the coals ;§ the within lying quarters|| the sparks. The gods{ offer faith to this fire. From this offering king Soma springs forth.* 9.
Or Parjanya,t is fire,—O Gautama; the year{ is its fuel;
* The king answers first the fourth question, because, says S’., on its solution also the other questions are solved. That world, viz. the heavens,
+ As likewise rising from the fuel. S’.
‡ Being alike through mauifestation. S’.
§ Resembling them by their bringing to rest. S’.
॥ Flying off from the other quarters like the sparks from fire. S’.
¶ Indra, and the rest. S’.
* He is king of the forefathers and of the Bréhmans. S’,
+ Parjanya, the second locality of the offerings, is the tatelary deity of rain. S’.
‡ The two offerings of the fire sacrifice, viz. the offerings in the morning and in the evening, exist in this world in a manifested form, as do also the necessary ap- pliances of the sacrifice, viz. the sacrificial fire, the wood, the coals, the sparks of the fire, the things which are offered as milk, ghee, etc. When they rise to the other world, to heaven or their unmanifested state, they exist according to their subtile nature as do ulso those appliances. Again, at the time of manifestation, or at the creation of the world the ceremonial work is changed by assuming the state of the fire of the atmosphere, etc, The same changes undergoes also at present the work, called fire-sacrifice. In this manner the whole world is the effect of the invisible changes of the two offerings of the fire-sacrifice. Those six neces- sary appliances will be mentioned afterwards for the sake of extolling the two offerings ; but here, where the consequences, resulting from the work of the sacri- fices are to be explained, the object is to set forth the doctrine of the five fires as the cause of obtaining the northern path for the enjoyment of the fruit derived from special work. The organs of the body in their relation to the soul are here the offering priests of the fire-sacrifice. Considered in their relation to the gods, they are Indra and the other gods who are the offering priests for the fire of hea- ven, etc. They offer the fire-sacrifice for the sake of the fruit, derived from it. When they have enjoyed the whole fruit, they perform the same sacrifice again. In this manner the organs are called gods, In this our present state, also, any offer- ing, as milk, ete., dependent on the rite of the fire-sacrifice, which has been thrown in the sacrificial fire and consumed by it, enters in its invisible, subtile form, together with the sacrificer, this world, further in the form of smoke, the atmo- sphere, and from the atmosphere the heavens, These are the subtile waters, the effects of offerings, the parts of the fire-sacrifice, bearing the name of faith, which
Sixth Chapter. Secend Bréhmana. 265
the clouds the smoke ;* the lightning the flame;+ the thun- derbolt the coals;{ the thunder claps the sparks.§ The gods offer king Soma to this fire. From this offering rain springs forth. 10. |
This world|| is fire, O Gautama. The earth is its fuel ;{ fire the smoke;* night: the flame;t the moon the coals ;t the stars the sparks. The gods offer rain to this fire. From this offering food springs forth. 11.
Man is fire, O Gautama. His open mouth is the fuel ;§ breath the smoke ;|| speech, the flame; the eye the coals; the
at the world of the moon create another body for the sacrificer, and when entering the heavens, are offered. Therefore the waters which are parts of the fire- sacrifice and the cause that the sacrificer obtains another body in the world of the moon, are called faith, They bear the name of waters, because the greater part of their composition is water. The fire-sacrifice however, is merely a representative of all the other Vedaic rites, and what has been said about the former, applies also to the latter. S’. ।
* They are smoke, either from their being produced from smoke, or from their similar appearance. S’, |
¶ Both having the power of manifestation. S’.
‡ Both being alike extinguishable and hard. S’.
_§ Both flying off and being alike frequent. S’,
॥ This world, the place where living creatures are born, and have their enjoy- ment. S’.
q For by the earth, furnished with;the means of enjoyment for innumerable living creatures, this world is nourished. S’.
* It is fire, as rising from the earth in the same manner as smoke from fire. S’.
† The night is the flame, because as the flame has its origin from the connexion of fuel with fire, so the night from the connexion with its fuel, viz. the earth, the darkness of the night being called the shadow of the earth, S’, To which A. ©. adds ; for darkness is the place of Rahu, and this is the shadow of the earth.
‡ The moon is the coals, from similarity of origin; for as from the flame, coals are produced, so the moon is produced in the night, Or because both are alike extinguishable. S’.
§ For through the mouth man is lighted up, i.e. enlightened with regard to speech, study of the Védas, etc. S’,
|| Both rising equally upwards, S’.
{ From their like power of manifestation. S’.
2M
266 ` Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
ear the sparks. The gods offer food in this fire. From this offering seed springs forth. 12.
Woman is fire, O Gautama, her haunch the fuel; the hairs on the body the smoke ;* the organ of generation the flame ;t+ cohabitation the coals ;¶ the fits of enjoyment the sparks. The gods offer seed in this fire. From this offering man springs forth.§ He lives as long as he lives.{| When he dies, 13.
Then they{ take him* to the fire ; his fire becomes fire; his fuel, fuel ; his smoke, smoke; his flame, flame ; his coals, coals : his sparks, sparks. The gods offer man in this fire. From this offering, man in radiant splendour springs forth. 14.
Thoset who have this knowledge,t and those who in the
* Botb rising equally upwards. S’.
+ From likeness of colour. S’.
‡ Both equally extinguishing. S’.
§ In this manner the waters, bearing the name of faith, are gradually offered in the fires of heaven, of Parjanya, of this world, of man, and of woman, and having assumed gradually a grosser and grosser shape, they are the cause of the creation of man. And thereby the fourth question, viz. ‘* Dost thou know, at the offering of which sacrifice, the waters becoming the words of man, rise to speak ?’’ is decid- ed, viz. they become so, on the performance of the fifth offering in the fire which is woman, when the waters become seed. S’.
| As long as the fruit of the work continues, which had been the cause of his assuming his body. S’,
¶ The Ritwigs or priests, performing the last rites. S’.
* The deceased who in this case is himself the offering. S’,
+ The present section replies to the first question and to part of the fifth, viz. ८५ Dost thou know, in what way the creatures, departing this life, proceed on differ- ent roads ?”’ and ‘* Dost thou know the means of obtaining the road which is called Dévayana ?”’
‡ Those who thus know. This knowledge does not refer to one of those fires only, but to the five fires together, as is evident from the Chb, U., where (5, 10, 10) the knowledge of the five fires is expressly mentioned with reference to the same topic. The knowledge concerns the nuture of those fires and not the comparisons; which are only made for the sake of extolling the fire-sacrifice. But who are those who thus know? Not the householders in general; for those among them who have not the knowledge of the five fires, are to gain the worlds of smoke 88 the fruit, etc. resulting from sacrifice, gifts and austerity, (16). Not those who have retired to the forest, nor religious mendicants; for they are mentioned in the passage of the, text immediately following, ‘‘ those who in the forest,’’ and
Sixth Chapter. Second Brahmana. 267
forest* meditate with faith on truth,+ obtain the flame,{ from the flame the day; from the day the light half of the moon; from the light half of the moon the six months when the sun moves tothe north; from those months the world of the gods ; from the world of the gods the sun; from the sun the world of the lightning. Those who have obtained the world of the light- ning, are removed by the Purusha created by the mind§ to the Brahma worlds.|| In those Brahma worlds exalted they live infinite years. For them, there is no return (to this world).q 15.
the knowledge of the five fires has connexion with the work of the householders, and not with that of hermits or religious mendicants. Nor lastly the Brahmachiris, because their entering upon the northern path is proved by the Smriti. Therefore the words ^“ those who know,’’ refer to the house-holders who have a knowledge of the five fires. S’. ।
* Those who in the forest, viz. those who have retired from the world to the forest (the Vanaprasthas,) and also the religious mendicants, (Parivrajakas.)
+t Who meditate on truth, that is to say on truth, that is to say on Brahma in the form of Hirapyagarbha, not such as meditate with faith simply. As long as the householders have not the knowledge of the five fires, or of Brahma, so long, after the fifth offering in the gradual order of those offerings has been performed, they are again born from the fire of woman, and on their return to this world they perform again ceremonial work. By means of this work they go again in the gradual procession from one world to another up to the world of the forefathers, and from there backwards in the reverse order to this world, Here, being again born from the fire of woman, the same circle is to be described like the continual rotation of a water-wheel. S’.
‡ Flame means here the tutelary deity of the fire, and so the terms ^" the day,’’ ५४ the light half of the moon,’’ the tutelary deities of the day, etc.
§ By Brahma. S’.
॥ The Brahma worlds, the plural refers either to different regions in the Brahma world, which is only one, or to the difference of the rewards, derived from different modes of meditation, S’.
“| That is to say, there is no return for them during the present duration of the world, but they return of course on a new creation, as absolute liberation from transmigration, is only the effect from the knowledge of Brahma, while the know- ledge here in question is merely a knowledge of the five fires, or . पाशो in the form of Hiranyagarbha. This view is clear from the whole doctrine of this Upanishad, and does not require any further proof; but S’. wastes much ingenuity to prove it from the form of language of another passage, where the ‘‘ not return”’ has the addition (^ to this world.” |
2M 2
268 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad. =
Again,* those who conquer the worlds by sacrifice, gifts and austerity,t obtain smoke ;} from smoke night ; from night the dark half of the moon; from the dark half of the moon the six months when the sun moves to the south ; from those months the world of the forefathers; from the world of the forefathers the moon. Having obtained the moon, they be- come food. As (the offering priests) consume (again and again) king Soma, saying, do increase, and do decrease, so the gods consume them there.§ When that (fruit of their works) ceases, then they obtain the ether, from the ether the air, from the air rain, from rain the earth. Having obtained the earth, they become food.||/ Again they are offered in the fire of man ; hence they are born in the fire of woman. Proceed- ing from world to world, they return in this way again and again. Again, those who do not know those roads, become worms, locusts and gnats.¢ 16.
Third Brdéhmana. Whoever desires* to obtain greatness, (has to perform the
* Those householders, who have not the knowledge of the five fires.
+ S’. says, that ‘‘ gifts and austerity’’ do not refer to such as are enjoined by the Védas, as they would be inchuded in "" sacrifice.”
t The deities of smoke, etc.
§ As the offering priests consume again and again the Soma juice, so the per- formers of rites who are the supporters of the gods by sacrifices, etc., on theif obtaining new bodies in the Soma world, are turned back again and again to this world for the performance of troublesome work by the gods, from whom they receive such rewards as are in correspondence with their work. 8S’. And thereby is answered the second-half of the fifth question.
{| This is the reply to the second question.
न The answer to the third question.
* The ultimate effect, derived from knowledge and works, has been declared. Knowledge is independent of any other thing, but work depends both upon the wealth of gods and upon that of man. For the sake of work, therefore, wealth must be acquired, and this by means unaccompanied with sin. For the acquirement of wealth the ceremony, called Mantha, is ordained, in order that greatness be 0b- tained ; for wealth is the consequence of greatness. S’.
(
Sixth Chapter. Third Brahmana. 269
following rite). At the time when the sun moves tothe north, on an auspicious day of the light half of the moon, the twelfth day of his performing the vow named Upavasad,* after he has gathered and mixed together all kinds of herbs and fruits in a shell-shaped vessel or in a spoon, either made of the wood of the conglomerate fig-tree ; after he has sprinkled with water (the place of offering), placed the cow-dung, lightened the fire, spread (the kusa grass), cleaned the covered ghee, and taken the mixture at the time of a male star, he performs the offering,+ (saying),— To all the gods of crooked mind who under thy control, 0 Jatavéda,t obstruct man’s desire, do I offer a share (of the sacrifice). Satisfied, let them satisfy me with all de- sires. Swahato the goddess of crooked mind who under the thought that she is the upholder (of all) has taken refuge to thee; to-this deity who is the accomplisher of all, I offera part of the ghee, Swaha! 1.
^ Swiha to the eldest, Swiha to the best !”§ with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. “Swaha to life, Swiha to what is firmly founded |” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. ^“ Swé- hé to speech, Swaha to the standing place!” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. ‘‘Swaha to the eye, Sw4h4 to the trea- sure!” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the re- mainder of the ghee into the churning vessel. ‘ Swadha to the ear, Sw4hé to the place of refuge!” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the
* The vow which is called Upavashad is part of the Yotistoma rites, and consists in limiting the food for a period of twelve days, taking the first day as much milk as is contained in one udder of a cow, the second as is contained in two, the third in three, and the fourth in four, then on the fifth again taking three, and so down to one, when again one is added on each successive day. S’.
+ Then while offering ghee, he speaks the following Mantras. S’.
t Fire.
§ The eldest and the best is life. Compare this passage with 6, 1, 1—6.
270 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
churning vessel. ‘‘ Sw4hé to the mind, Sw4ha to the source of procreation!” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. ^ § क 818 to the seed!” with these words offering in the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. 2.
५८ 8 क 10६ to the 076 17 with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. “Swéhi to Soma!” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. ८ Swihé to the earth !” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. ^ Swih4 to the atmosphere!” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. ^“ 8 7 81६ to the heavens!” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) iuto the churning vessel. ‘‘ Sw&hé to the earth, to the atmosphere and to the heavens !” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. ^“ Swahé to the Brahma!” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. “ Swaha to the Khattra,”? with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. ५ 8 08 to the past!” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. «५ 8 8118 to the future!” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. ८ 8 कर 8108 to the universe !”’ with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. ८८ Swhé to all!” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. 3.
Then he touches that (mixture saying), “Thou art move- able ;* thou art resplendent,t thou art full;{ thou art un.,
* Moveable, because life is moveable, and thou art of the same nature ॐ A’. G. vatness
+ Because fire, the same as thou, is so. A’. G. वं In thy nature as Brahma. A’. ©.
hey
h ५५५
Sixth Chapter. Third Brdéhmana. 271
shaken ;* thou art the one pervader of this (universe) ; thou art proclaimed ;f thou art proclaimed again ;¶ thou art sung ;§ thou art sung again;|| thou art sounded,f thou art resound- ed ;* thou shinest in the cloud ;+ thou art pervading ; thou art powerful; thou art food;t thou art splendour,§ thou art de- struction ;|| thou art identity.” 4.
Then he raises that (mixture, saying),—“ Thou thinkest (of 211) ; we think of thy greatness; for he is king, lord and sovereign. Let him, the king and lord, make me a sovereign.” 5.
Then he eats that (mixture, and with the words),—*“ Let us reflect on the adorable light of Savitar, (viz.) May the winds convey happiness; may the rivers drop happiness; may the herbs be of sweet juice to us. Swaha to the earth!” (let him take the first morsel). (With the words),—“ (Let us reflect on the adorable light of Savitar,” (viz.) May the night, yea even the morning-dawns (bring us) happiness, (may be fraught with) happiness the dust of the earth. May the heavens, our father, (bring us) happiness. Sw4hé to the atmosphere {> (let him take the second morsel). With the words,—* (Let us reflect on
= In thy likeness of the sky. A’. ©.
‘+ By the Prastotar at the commencement of the sacrifice. A’. ©.
+ By the same in its middle. A’. ©.
§ By the Udgatar at the commencement of the sacrifice. A’. G.
|| By the same in its middle. A’. ©.
“| By the Adhwaryu. A’. ©.
* By the Agnidhra. A’. ©.
+ According to A’. G.’s explanation ; Literally, in what is moist.
t Food, represented by Soma, all things to be enjoyed. A’. ©,
§ Splendour as represented by fire, in its nature as consumer. A’. G.
|| Destroyer, being the cause of destruction of all things according to their rela- tion to the soul and to the deities. A’. ७.
¶ He shall gradually take three morsels. With the first morsel he shall recite the first foot of the Gayatri and the first sacred word (Bhi), with the second the second foot and the second sacred word (Bhuvah), and with the third the third foot and the third sacred word (Swar). After he has muttered the three sacred words, he should clean the vessel, in which he has dropped the remainder of the ghee, and drink this in silence. 8’.
272 Brihad. Areanyaka Upanishad.
the adorable light of Savitar) who quickens our understanding, (viz.) May Vanaspati (bring) us happiness; may the sun (bring) us happiness; may his rays (bring) us happiness. 8 818 to the heavens!” (Jet him take the third morsel). And having repeated the whole SAvitri and all the benedic- tions,* he says at the close (of the rite), “May I become this all, Swihé to the earth, the atmosphere and the heavens !” Then having sipped (water) and cleaned his hands, he touches the fire with his thigh, his head turned towards the east. (Then) in the morning dawn he adores Aditya (with the Mantra),—‘“‘ Thou art the one lotus of the quarters; may I become the one lotus of men.” As he (before) approached the fire, so he (again) approaches it with the thigh, and after being seated, he mutters the school.t 6.
Uddalaka A'runi having explained this (mixture) ta his dis- ciple, Yajnavalkya, of the Vajasanéya school, said,—‘* Whoever pours it on a dry trunk; (will see) its branches rise and its leaves spring forth. 7
YAjnavalkya of the Vdjasanéya school, having explained this (mixture) to his disciple, Madhuka Paingya, said,—‘* Whoever pours it on a dry trunk, (will see) its branches rise and its leaves spring forth.” 8.
Madhuka Paingya having explained this (mixture) to his disciple, Chiila Bhagavitti, said,—‘ Whoever pours it on a dry trunk, (will see) its branches rise and its leaves spring forth.” 9
Chila Bhégavitti, having taught this (mixture) to his dis- ciple, Jénaki Ayasthtina, said,—‘‘ Whoever pours it on a dry trunk, (will see) its branches rise and its leaves spring forth.” 10
Janaki A’yastina having explained this (mixture) to his disciple, Satyakama प 80818, said,—‘“‘ Whoever pours it on a dry trunk, (will see) its branches rise and its leaves spring forth.” 11.
Satyakima Jabala having explained this (mixture) to his
* He eats the fourth morsel. A’. G. † The succession of teachers and disciples.
Sixth Chapter. Fourth Brékmana. 278
disciples, said,—‘‘ Whoever places it on a dry trunk, (will see) its branches rise, and its leaves spring forth. Let none teach it to one who is not a son, or a disciple.” 12.
There should be four things made of the wood of the con- glomerate fig tree, the Sruva,* the Chamasa,t the sacrificial wood, and the two churning vessels ; there should be ten kinds of cultivated seeds, viz. rice, barley, sesamum seed, kidney. beans, 771116४, { panick seed, wheat, lentil, pulse and veteh. When they are ground down, and sprinkled with curdled milk, honey and ghee, he shall offer the clarified butter. 13.
Fourth Brdhmaua.§
Terra est horam elemeutorum essentia, aqua terre, herbz aquee, flores herbarum, fruges florum, homo frugum, semen hominis. 1. Prajdpatis respiciens,—Age, illi (hommn) habitationem pa- rabo,—femimam creavit. Ea creata, Adha Up4sana sic dic- tum ritum celebravit. Quam ob causam (homo etiam) Adha Up&saua ritam cam conjuge celebret. Pene turgido facto, Prajdpatis cum illa coivit. 2. :
Bjus vulva est altare, corporis pili Kus’a sic dictum gra. men, cutis ignis, testiculi in medio igne colloecata duo Soma sacrificil vasa. Quatenus ejus mundus extensus est qui Vajapéya sacrificium facit, eatenus hominis mundus extensus est qui ejus (Adha Upasana ritas) gnarus cum conjuge coit. Is (quoque) conjugum bene factum aufert. Verum qui ignarus Adha Upasana ritum celebrat, ejus bene factum conjuges auferunt. 3.
Hac eognitione preditus Uddélaka Arunis, hac cognitione preeditus Néka Maudgalyus, hac cognitione preditus Kumara- hdritus declaraverunt,—Ex ea terrestri mundo multi mortales
* A kind of ladle with which the ghee is taken, when offered to the fire. ¶ Another kind of ladle, to be put in the water used for the sacrifice. ¶ Anu, ४ sort of corn of very small seed, which is called China in Bengali. § i translated the greater part of this Brahmana into Latin as it would not bear an English rendering. 2N
274 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
discedunt, quibus nomen modo est Bréhmanorum, quorum sen- sus sunt obtusi, et quorum bene factum fructu caret, ii vide- licet, qui illius ritus ignari cum femina coeunt. Quodsi dor- mientis sive vigilantis (mariti) semen, multum sit sive parvum, labitur, 4.
Is semen tollens ea hymni verba recitet,—Quod semen hodie in terram est lapsum, quod in herbas sive in aquam descendit, id semen meum recipio. Rursum me adeat robur, rursum me adeat splendor, rursum me adeat prosperitas. Rursum ignis numina ipsius loco semen reddant. Ita locutus, digito annu- Jari ac pollice semen tollens inter mammas seu supercilia abstergat. 5.
Dein si (maritus) in aqua ipsius imaginem videt, ea hymni verbi recitet,—(Dei) mihi splendorem, robur, famam, opes et । bene factum largiantur.—(Maritus) cum conjuge preclara, sordida veste induta, ea de causa quod vestis sordida est, coi- turus, ea hymni verba recitet,—Sit illa inter mulieres fortu- nata. 6.
Quodsi illa ad mariti voluntatem non se conformat, (donis) eam emat. Quod si illa ad mariti voluntatem (iterum) non se conformat, baculo seu manu eam percutiens eis hymni verbis devincat,—(Hoc) membro atque (hac) fama famam tuam aufero. Hoc modo illa fama privata erit. 7.
Quodsi illa ad mariti voluntatem se conformat, (is ea hymni verba recitet),—(Hoc) membro atque (hac) fama tibi famam attuli. Eo modo uterque fama preditus erit. 8.
Si quis conjugem eum amare cupit, pene in ea collocato, ore ori affixo, et conjugis pudendo fricato, (is ea hymni verba musset),—Ex omnibus membris ortum, corde natum ta sane es membrorum essentia. Eam, sicut dorcadem sagitta-veneno illinita feritam, mihi subjectam redde. 9.
Dein si quis conjagem non pregnantem esse cupit, pene in ea collocato, ore ori affixo, et spiritu exhalato et inhalato, (is ea hymni verba musset),—Hoc membro semineque semen tuum aufero. Eo modo conjux non erit pregnans. 10.
»
Sixth Chapter. Fourth Brdhmana. 275
Dein si quis conjugem esse pregnantem cupit, pene in ea collocato, ore ori affixo et spiritu inhalato et exhalato (is ea hymni verba musset),—Hoc membro semine que semen affero. Sic ea erit pregnans. 11. |
Dein si conjugis est amasius quem maritus odit, is vas non coctum in igne ponat, et S’aravarhi sic dictum gramen inverso ordine sternens et ejus calamos butyro immersos inverso ordine in igne sacrificans, (ea hymni verba dicat),—Heus tu in igne meo sacrificasti, equidem spiritum tuum progredi- entem nec ne spiritum descendentem aufero. Heus tu in igne meo sacrificasti: equidem liberos tuos ac pecora tua aufero. Heus tu in igne meo sacrificasti; equidem fructus, quos e ceremoniis et benefacto adeptus es, aufero. Heus tu in igne meo sacrificasti; equidem spem tuam ac expectationes tuas aufero. Is sane sensibus obtusis, et benefacti fructu orbatus ex hoc mundo terrestri discedet, quem Brahmanus, ea cognitione preeditus, exsecratur. Quare ne quis, ea cognitione preditus, in’ Brahmani, Vedorum scientia instructi, foribus (mente quidem) delectari cupiat, minimum vero (re ipsa delectetur) ; etenim ea cognitione preditus inimicus exstat. 12.
Dein si quis conjugem menstruas purgationes subeuntem novit, triduum e poculo bibat; nec sit ejus (mariti) vestis scissa ; nec S/udrus neque S/udré eam tangat. Tribus noctibus elapsis, eam lavari et de paleis oryze grana exuere jubeat. 13.
Dein si quis albicoloris filium nasci cupit qui peritus sit unius Vedorum atque vitam ad extremum aetatis humane finem degat, lacte una cum oryza et butyro purificato cocto, uterque edat (ea hymni verba dicens),—Utinam procreatioue pollentes simus. 14.
Dein si quis filium coloris nigricantis e gilvo nasci cupit qui peritus sit duorum Vedorum atque vitam ad extremum actatis humane finem degat, lacte coagulato una cum oryza et butyro purificato cocto, uterque edat, (ea hymni verba dicens‘,—Uti- nam procreatione pollentes simus. 15.
Dein si quis filium nigro colore rubrisque oculis ornatum 2N 2 |
276 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
nasci cupit qui peritus sit trium Vedorum atque vitam ad ex- tremum aetatis humane finem degat, oryza una cum butyro purificato cocto, uterque edat, (ea hymai verba dicens),—Uti- nam procreatione pollentes simus. 16.
Dein si quis doctam filiam nasci cupit quae vitam ad extre- mum aetatis humane finem degat, Tila sic dictae plante semini- bus una cum butyro purificato coctis, uterque edat, (ea hymni verba dicens),—Utinam procreatione pollentes simus. 17.
Dein si quis filium doctum et valde celebratum nasci cupit, gui conciones frequentet, suavia verba loquatur, omnium Vedo- rum peritus sit et vitam ad extremum aetatis humane finem degat, minoris sive majoris aetatis tauri carne una cum oryza et butyro purificato cocto, uterque edat (ea hymni verba dicens),— Utinam procreatione pollentes simus. 18.
Dein is mane butyro purificato Sthalipfka sic dicta cere- monia consecrato, iterum iterumque oryzz partem (eis hymni verbis) offert,—Igni Swihd, Anumati SwAh4, divino Savitri, verse procreationis causae, Swih4! Oryza hoc modo sacrifi- cata et vase sublato, ipse est posteaque conjugem edere jubet. Tuam manibus ablutis et vase aquario aqua repleto ter eam con- spergit (ea hymni verba diceus),—Surge de ea, Viswa-vasu, aliamque qufzre eminam juvenem et idoneam que cum marito ineat ludos amatorios. 19. |
Dein eam amplectitur, (ea hymni verba dicens),—Ego sum Amus, tu es S4, tu es S4, ego sum Amus, ego SAmé, tu es terra. Age, operam demus et filii procreandi causa semen emittamus. 20.
Dein ejus femora pulsat (ea hymni verba dicens),— Recludi- minor, vos coelum et terra! Ac pene in ea collocato, ore ori affixo a capite ad pedes ter ejus corpus fricat, (ea hymui एला dicens),—Vishnus vulvam tuam paret (ad procreandum), Twaster membra tua extendat, Prajdpatis emittat semen, et . creator foetum nutriat. Foetum recipe, Sinivali, foetum recipe, multam celebrata. Aswines dei, radiorum sertis ful- gentes, foetum tuum nutriant. 21.
Sisth Chapter. Fourth Brékmana. 277
Aswines ligna duo, quibus sacrificamus foetum tuum, peragi- tent ita ut decimo nascatar mense. Sicuti terra est igne preegnans, sicuti coelum est Indro pregnans, sicuti ventus est plagis preegnans, similiter ego foetum tuum preebeo. 22.
Eam partum enitentem aqua conspergit (ea hymni verba ‘dicens),—Sicuti ventus lacum ubique commovet, similiter foetus tuus una cum tegumentis exeat. Haec via pessulo et tegumento Indri causa est munita. Hac via, Indre, exeas. Fac etiam, ut exeant secundine. 23.
(When the child is born), let him light a fire, and placing it on his lap, and taking curdled milk, mixed with clarified butter in a goblet, he offers repeatedly of the curdled milk and clarified butter, (saying),—‘“ May I, magnified (by this son) in this house support a thousand (men). When he has obtained offspring, let there be no loss of prosperity in offspring and in cattle. Swahé! I offer with my mind to thee my vital airs. Swahi! May the wise Agni who fulfils all desires right for us any work which ought not to have been done, or any work which ought to have been done in this rite.” 24,
Then, putting (his mouth) near the child’s right ear, he mutters three times, ^“ Speech, speech!” Then, taking eurdled milk, honey and clarified butter together with unmixed gold, he feeds it, (saying),— I give thee the earth, I give thee the atmosphere, I give thee the heavens. I give thee all, earth, atmosphere and heavens.” 25.
Then he gives him the name “ Véda,” which is his secret name. 26.
Then giving him to his mother, he makes him take the breast (saying),—‘‘O Saraswati, enter for the suckling (of the child into this (breast of the mother) thy breast which is fruit- ful, the support (of all creatures), the giver of jewels, the knower of wealth, and the liberal donor, by which thou causeth to grow all that 18 desirable.” 27.
Then he addresses the child’s mother with this Mantra,— “Thou art worthy of praise, thou art like Maittr4varuaf. Thou
278 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.
who hast born to the strong a strong (son), be strong, thou who giveth usa strong (son). Of him people may say,—“ Thou indeed excellest thy father, thou indeed excellest thy grand-father.” The son born to a Brahman who has this knowledge, obtains the highest goal by prosperity, fame and the glory of a Brah- man. 28. ‘
Now the school. The son of Pautimdshi succeeded the son of Katyéyani,—the son of Katvayani the son of Gotami,—the son of Gotami the son of Bhaéradw4ji,—the son of Bhaéradwaji the son of Pirds’ari,—the son of Pérds’ari the son of Aupas- wasti,—the son of Aupaswasti the son of Pérds‘ari,—the son of Pards’ari the son of Katydyani,—the son of Katydyani the son of Kausiki,—the son of Kausiki the son of Alambi and the son of Vaiyaghrapadi,—the son of Vaiyaghrapadi the son of Kanwi and the son of KApi, 1.
The son of Kpi the son of Atreyi,—the son of Atreyi the son of Gautami,—the son of Gautami the son of Bharadwaji, —the son of Bharadw4ji the son of Pérds'ari,—the son of Péras‘ari the son of VaAatsi,—the son of V4&tsi the son of Pards’ari,—the son of P4rds’ari the son of VArkkéruni,— the son of Varkk4runi the son of Varkkdéruni,—the son of Varkkadrunf the son of Arttabh&gf,—the son of Arttabhdgi the son of S’aungi,—the son of S’aungi the son of Sankriti,—the son of Sdnkriti the son of Alamb4yanf,—the son of Alambé- yani the son of Alambi,—the son of Alambi the son of Jdyanti,—the son of Jayanti the son of Mandukayani,—the son of Manduk4yani the son of Manddki,—the son of M4n- diki the son of S’andili,—the son of S‘dndili the son of Rathitari,—the son of Rathitari the son of Bh4luki,—the son of Bhaluki the two sons of Kraunchiki,—the two sons of Kraunchiki the son of Vaidribhati,—the son of Vaidribhati the son of Kars’akéyi,—the son of Kars'akéyi the son of Prachinayogi,—the son of Prachinayogi the son of Sanjivi,— the son of SAnjivi the son of Pras’ni,—the son of 2148101 Asuréyana,—Asurayana Asuri,—Asuri 2.
Sixth Chapter. Fourth Brdéhmana. 279
Y4jnavalkya,—Yajnavalkya Uddalaka,—Uddalaka Aruna, —Aruna Upaves’i,—Upaves’i1 Kus’ri,—Kus’ri_ Vajas’ravas,— Vajas’ravas Jihwavat Vadhyoga,—Jihuavat Vadhyoga Asita Varshagana,—Asita Varshagana MHarita Kas’yapa,—Harita Kas’yapa 81172 Kas’yapa,—S’ilpa Kas’yapa Kas'yapa Naidh- ruvi,—Kas yapa Naidhruvi Vak, Vak Ambhinf,—Awmbhini Aditya. These Mantras of the white Yajur, which are de- rived from Aditya, have been declared by Ydjnavalkya of the Vajasanéya school. 3.
From (Prajapati) until the son of Sanjiviis the same (suc- cession of teachers).* The son of Sénjivi succeeded Man- dikéyani,—Mandak4éyani Mandavya,—Mandavya Kautsa,— Kautsa Méahitthi,—Mahitthi Vamakakshayana,—Vaémaka- kshdyana Séndilya,—Sandilya Vatsya, Vatsya Kus’ri,— Kus’ri Yajnavachas Rajastambayana,—Yajnavachas Rajastamb4éyana Tura Kavashéya,—Tusr. Kavashéya Prajdpati,—Prajapati Brahma. Brahmais the self-existent. Salutation to Brahma! 4.
* In all the Vajasanéyi schools.
Digitized by Google
CORRECTIONS.
page line | 10 after the months वदद and 13 8 - ए inference Pr the 14 22 for ग that read ९ that’ 26. 23 ~«; another that ws another “ that’’ 16 9... being a are 25 30 ,, gesence + gescence 33 2 0, after desires write a— ab 3. 3 Thus read _ thus 40 21 after speech add _ performed 41 21 for with read ६0 42 31 ,, with < to 43 19 ,, with a {0 51 7 dele he - 54 21 for letters read ietter - 56 ng irasa Angirasa From p. 65 —80 for the heading third Bréhmana read fourth Brahmana 65 9 for ( write < 26. 21 ,, ( + a 73 19 y,, in read by 80 Pe ? write 92 85 12 dele p. 23 86 3 ` — he 2९6. 24 — he 89 17 for him read 8 man 96 ॥. . This soul 5 this soul 97 8 5, have ey had 104 8 after but read then dele then is; and after Sdstra add is 107 23 for son read 8०] 109 8 + wh 1 + which 18 112 35 5 he, or the e that 118 2 dele’ he after I: 122 6 5 99 3 him 26. 31 39 ” 93 39 133 18 =,
1356 4 for breathes not read _ not breathes.
26. 6 dele he before eats. 76. 8 dele ‘The Mantra: ib, 9 for penance read = penance”’ 137 1 for penance.” “He __,, penance; ‘he ab. 3 for the causes ५ is: The nature of a 8. ther with regard of those causes, 141 8 ,, place न case 142 12 dele By the sacrificer ib, 13 after collected add एर् the sacrificer. 26. 14 for obtains read _ obtain 143 22 ,, are ss do 26. 23 ), decreased’’ Pe decrease”’
144 10 ,, characterised a characterized