3.3 Million page views blog. Covers Economy, Social Issues, Political Issues, Religious Functions, Vedas, Puranas, Upanishads, Practice of Spirituality, Biographies and News. Current Project: 2025 Meaning of Rigveda.
The Kena Upanishad is a principal Upanishad. It is embedded in the Talavakara Brahmana of the Sama Veda.
It has four sections (Khandas) with around 35 verses total.
• Name: "Kena" means "by whom?" or "from what cause?", taken from the opening word of its first verse.
It is also known as the Talavakara Upanishad because it belongs to the Talavakara school of the Sama Veda.
• Structure:
It has four sections (Khandas) with around 35 verses total. The first two sections are in verse and focus on philosophical inquiry; the last two are in prose and use a fable to illustrate the teaching.
Core Teachings
• The Unseen Power: The text asks who directs the mind, the life force (prana), speech, and the senses. It answers that Brahman is the invisible, inner awareness behind all faculties.
• Beyond the Senses: Brahman cannot be seen by the eye, heard by the ear, or grasped by the mind. Instead, Brahman is the very power that lets the eye see and the mind think.
• The Paradox of Knowing: True realization means understanding that Brahman cannot be known as a standard external object. As the text states, those who think they know Brahman do not truly know it, while those who realize they cannot objectify it are on the path of true wisdom.
• Yaksha Narrative: In the prose sections, the Vedic gods win a victory and grow proud. A mysterious spirit (Yaksha) appears and tests Agni (fire) and Vayu (wind), showing them that their power is not their own. Uma (representing divine wisdom/Haimavati) then reveals to Indra that the power behind their victory belongs to Brahman.
The Isha Upanishad is one of the primary (Mukhya) Upanishads of Hinduism.
It consistis 17 to 18 verses ( depending on the specific recension). embedded as the 40th and final chapter of the Shukla Yajurveda.
Forms the 40th chapter of the Vajasaneyi Samhita in the Shukla Yajurveda, making it unique among the Upanishads for being directly attached to a Vedic Samhita rather than a Brahmana or Aranyaka.
Exists in two main textual traditions or recensions: the Kanva (VSK) and the Madhyandina (VSM).
• Name Derivation: Takes its title (Ishavasya or Isha) from the opening words of the first verse, "Īśā vāsyam idaṁ sarvaṁ" ("All this is pervaded or clothed by the Lord").
Core Philosophical Themes
• Universal Divine Presence (Verse 1):
Declares that every moving and non-moving thing in the universe is inhabited, wrapped, or pervaded by the Supreme Reality (Isha or Brahman).
• Enjoyment Through Renunciation (Tena Tyaktena Bhunjitha):
Teaches that one should enjoy the world not through greedy appropriation or ego-driven possession, but through spiritual detachment and the recognition that nothing truly belongs to the individual ("Lust not after any man's possession").
• Reconciliation of Action and Knowledge:
Bridges the gap between ritualistic duties (Karma) and higher self-knowledge (Jnana). It outlines how proper, unattached action performed with divine awareness purifies antahkarana and drives the persons towards acquiring jnana or participating in jnana yoga..
• Non-Dualism and the Nature of the Self:
Describes the ultimate Self (Atman) as unmoving yet faster than the mind, all-pervading, and identical to the Supreme Reality. It famously asserts that the wise person sees all beings in the Self and the Self in all beings.
• Balancing Vidya and Avidya (Knowledge and Ignorance):
Explores the relationship between secular/ritual action (avidya) and spiritual (paramatma, parabrahman) realization (vidya), indicating how integrating understanding helps transcend limitations of mortality and realize immortality (Amritatwa).
Prasthana Trayam - Three sources of axioms with epistemic authority, for the Vedanta schools.
They are:
The Upanishads, known as Upadeśa Prasthāna (injunctive texts), and the Śruti Prasthāna (the starting point for axioms of revelation), especially the Principal Upanishads.
The Bhagavad Gita, known as Sādhana Prasthāna (practical text), and the Smṛti Prasthāna (the starting point for axioms of remembered tradition)
The Brahma Sutras, known as Sūtra Prasthāna (formulative texts) or Nyāya Prasthāna or Yukti Prasthāna (logical text for axioms of logic)
5. In the beginning, all this was, verily, the Atman alone. There was nothing else living. Nothing else, whatsoever, living, existed. There was no other thing that winked at all.
26. Then he tried to catch it (food) by Apana, and he caught it. It is this Apana which catches food. This Apana is the giver of life, by food.
The Story of Birth
32. First indeed is the germ in man. That which is the semen is the essence of strength or vigour, drawn from all his limbs. He bears himself within his self alone. When he deposits it in the woman, he causes it to be born. This is its first birth.
The universe has Consciousness for its guide. Consciousness is the basis or stay of all. Verily, consciousness (Prajnanam) is Brahman.
42. Prajnanam Brahma: Pure Consciousness is Brahman. This is one of the Maha-Vakyas or great sentences of the Upanishads.
43. This is called the Lakshana-Vakya, because it gives a description of the nature of Brahman.
45. A liberated sage does not move to any world. He gets absorbed in the all-pervading Brahman. He realises that the individual soul is identical with Para Brahman.
19. Gautama asked: O Yajnavalkya, tell me who is the Inner Ruler?
22. He who dwells in all beings and within all beings, whom all beings do not know, whose body are all beings, and who from within rules all beings, is thy Self, the Inner Ruler, Immortal.
The Indestructible Being
28. Gargi said: O Yajnavalkya, that of which they say it is above the heavens, beneath the earth, embracing heaven and earth, past, present and future, tell me in what is it woven like warp and woof?
29. Yajnavalkya replied: In ether (Akasa).
40. But he who departs from this world, knowing this Indestructible Being, is a true Brahmana.
The Guiding Light
41. Janaka said: Yajnavalkya, what is the light of this Purusha?
42. Yajnavalkya replied: The sun, O king; for by the light of the sun man sits down, moves about and does his work and returns home.
49. When the sun has set and the moon has set, and the fire has gone out and sound is hushed, what is then the light of man?
50. The Self indeed is his light; for by the light of the Self he sits down, walks about, does his work and returns home.
51. What is that Self?
52. He who is within the heart, surrounded by the Pranas, the Purusha who is light, who is of the nature of Knowledge.
Waking and Dreaming
Deep Sleep
The phenomenon of Death
Da, Da, Da
Deep Sleep
101. Therefore, let one learn the triad of restraint, liberality and mercy (da, da, da).
It is presented in the form of an instruction by Uddālaka Āruni Gautama to his son Śvetaketu,
627 verses
6. In the beginning, all this was Pure Being, One without a second.
7. It thought: 'May I be many, may I grow forth.' It created fire.
8. The fire thought: 'May I be many, may I grow forth.' It created water. Therefore, whenever anybody is hot, he perspires and water is produced on him from fire alone.
The Tri-Colour Analysis
11. The red colour of the sun is the colour of fire. The white colour of water. The black of the earth. Thus vanishes what we call the sun, being only a modification which is a mere name based upon words, the only truth being that there are three elements. So are moon, lightning, fire, etc., mere combinations of these elements.
78. Hope is greater than memory. Fried by hope does memory read the Mantras, perform sacrifices, desires sons and cattle, desire this world and the next.
79. Meditate on hope. He who meditates on hope as Brahman, all his desires are fulfilled by Hope. His prayers are never vain. He becomes independent so far as hope reaches.
104. Indra, chief of Devas, and Virochana, chief among Asuras, went to Prajapatji, with fuel (samidhas) in hands, as was the custom for pupils approaching their Guru.
105. They dwelt there as religious students observing the vow of celibacy for a period of thirty-two years.
106. When questioned by Prajapati, they said: It is with the purpose of knowing the Self that we have dwelt here.
107. Prajapati said: The person that is seen in the eye, that is the Self. This is the Immortal, the Fearless. This is Brahman.
108. They asked: Sir, He that is perceived in the water, and He that is seen in the mirror which of these is That?
109. He said: He himself indeed is seen in all these.
110. They went away satisfied. Virochana with a satisfied heart went to the Asura and preached this doctrine to them. The body alone is to be worshipped (as the Self).
111. Therefore, they call even now a man who does not give alms here, who has no faith, and offers no sacrifices, an Asura, for this is the doctrine of the Asura.
119. At Prajapati's command, Indra remained with him for a further period of five years.
120. Then Prajapati said to Indra: Indra! This body is mortal. It is subject to death. It is the abode of that Self which is Immortal and bodyless.
121. The embodied self is subject to pleasure and pain. But Self without the body is not troubled by pleasure and pain.
122. The wind is without body; the cloud, lightning and thunder are without body. Now, as these, rising above, appear in their own form, as soon as they have approached the highest light.
123. Thus does this Being, rising above this body, and having reached the Highest Light, appear in Its own form.
124. This is the Uttama-Purusha, the Supreme Person.
125. He moves about there laughing, playing and rejoicing, never minding that body in which he was born.
126. Just as a horse is attached to the cart, so also the Prana is attached to this body.
127. Now where the eye has entered into Akasa, (in the act of seeing), that is the person in the eye, the eye itself is the instrument of seeing.
128. He who knows: May I smell this, he is the Self, the nose is the instrument of smelling.
129. He who knows: May I think, he is the Self, the mind is his divine eye. And it is by means of his divine eye of the mind that he sees desires and rejoices.
130. The Devas who are in the world of Brahman meditate upon this Self (as taught by Prajapati to Indra, and by Indra to the Devas).
The whole is all That. The whole is all this. The whole was born of the whole. Taking the whole from the whole, what remains is the whole.
4. The Upanishads teach the philosophy of absolute unity.
7. This world is indwelt by Para-Brahman or the Absolute.
8. Renounce all desires. Renounce egoism, selfishness and identification of self with the body (Deha-Adhyasa). Then alone will you attain Moksha or release.
9. Desire for liberation will destroy all earthly desires.
Nature of The Atman
17. The Atman is very subtle. It is Antaratma, the inner self of all beings. It fills and covers everything. It is all-full. Hence it is within and without.
18. The Atman is the substratum or support (Adhishthana) of all beings.
19. The sage sees all beings in the Atman and the Atman in all beings.
46. Brahman, the only real entity, cannot be attained by any other means than the removal of ignorance through knowledge of the Self.
47. When one attains the supreme Brahman which is unborn, unchangeable, birthless, undecaying, immortal, fearless, eternal, self-luminous, all-blissful, and all-pervading, one is freed from births and deaths.
50. Having abandoned the sense of I-ness in these, and rising above sense-life, the wise becomes immortal.
4. One is good while another is pleasant. Blessed is he who, between them, chooses the good alone (Sreyas); but who chooses what is pleasant (Preyas) loses the true end.
32. Brahma-Vidya is the most wonderful science. This is the science of sciences.
46. Brahma-Jnana or knowledge of the Self cannot be obtained by mere reasoning or argument. One has to feel and realise the Brahmic consciousness through spiritual experience or direct intuitive perception.
Who Gets Atma-Jnana
104. This Atman cannot be attained by studies of the Vedas, nor by intelligence, nor by much hearing. He whom the Self chooses, by him the Self can be attained. To him this Atman reveals its true nature
The Inner Order of Priority
132. Here is given the ascending degree of the subtlety of things. Beyond the senses are the rudiments of objects, beyond rudiments is the mind, beyond the mind is the intellect; beyond the intellect is the Cosmic intellect.
133. Beyond the cosmic intellect is the unmanifested (Avyaktam). Beyond the unmanifested is the Purusha; beyond the Purusha there is nothing; that is the end; that is the highest goal.
153. The Purusha is the cause of all causes. He fills all. Hence he is called Purusha.
Unity of Brahman, Man and World
231. Brahman appears as the Jiva through Upadhi or a limiting adjunct, viz., Avidya.
232. Brahman appears as Hiranyagarbha through the Upadhi or limiting adjunct of Maya.
233. The sum total or aggregate of Jivas (Samashti) is Hiranyagarbha.
234. The Jiva is a microcosmic aspect of Brahman.
235. When the limiting adjunct drops, Hiranyagarbha and Jiva become identical with the transcendent Brahman.
242. He who thinks: I am different from Brahman, is again born and dies; but he who feels; I am verily the all-pervading immortal Satchidananda Brahman, attains immortality.
281. The real source of life is the Atman. The Prana, Apana, etc. cannot be the source of life. Their work conjointly for the benefit of the Atman only, which is distinct from them.
419. Nachiketas, having acquired this knowledge imparted by Yama, and also the whole teaching about Yoga, attained Brahman, having become free from all impurities and from death. Thus it will be with others also who thus know the nature of Brahman.
10. You will become immortal while living in this body, if you attain knowledge of Brahman. You need not wait till you leave this body.
11. Just as the water in a cup borrows its heat from the sun or the fire, so also the mind. Prana and senses borrow their light and power from the Atman.
12. The ear hears through the light of the Atman, the tongue speaks through the power of the Atman, the mind thinks through the power of the Atman, and the Prana performs its functions through the power of the Atman only.
13. The mind and the organs are inert and non-intelligent. They appear to be intelligent through the light and power of the Atman.
29. Brahman is the only Reality. It is the basis and source for everything.
30. Brahman is not an object. It is all-pervading, mysterious, incomprehensible, Chaitanya or pure consciousness.
31. Brahman must be known through intuition.
39. The soul of man is the Atman. The soul of the universe is Brahman. The Atman is identical with Brahman.
48. Vedanta is not hostile to devotion. It only deprecates worship with selfish interest.
49. A Vedantin or a Sage is a perfect devotee.
50. Para-Bhakti or supreme devotion and Jnana or wisdom are one.
51. Vedanta says that Isvara whom people worship is one's own Self. It teaches an expanded form of Bhakti, the highest form of devotion.
64. Brahman is the Lord or the Proprietor of this mind-factory. The eyes, ears, etc. are ordinary clerks. The mind is the head-clerk. The intellect is the managing director.
65. What cannot be heard by the ears, but by which the ears are able to hear, know that alone is Brahman.
104. If one does not know Brahman, he is caught in the round of births and deaths.
The Mandukya Upanishad is the shortest yet one of the most profound Upanishads, consisting of just 12 verses. It explores the nature of the Self (Atman) through the symbol of Om, breaking it into its components – A, U, M – representing the waking, dreaming, and deep sleep states of consciousness. Beyond these three is the fourth state, Turiya, which transcends all experience and represents pure, undivided awareness. This Upanishad is foundational in Advaita Vedanta and was extensively commented on by Adi Shankaracharya. It emphasizes that realizing Turiya leads to liberation (moksha). Despite its brevity, it offers a complete roadmap to understanding ultimate reality.
1. Om, the word, is all this. Its further explanation is this. All that is past, present and future is verily Om. That which is beyond the triple conception of time, is verily Om.
2. All this is verily Brahman. This Atman (the Supreme Self) is Brahman. This Atman has four quarters, four feet, not like those of a cow, but like the fractions of a coin
8. This is that Atman even with regard to the letters (of the word Om); it is the Omkara with its parts. The quarters are the parts, and the parts the quarters. The parts of OM are 'A', 'U' and 'M'.
12. That which has no parts is the fourth, transcendental, destitute of phenomenal existence, all bliss and non-dual. This verily is Omkara. He who knows this merges his self in the Self.
1. Hariḥ Aum. Aum, the word, is all this. A clear explanation of it (is the following). All that is past, present and future is verily Aum. That which is beyond the triple conception of time, is also truly Aum.
THREE OUT OF THE 10 Major Upanishads are from the Atharvana Veda. They are Prashna, Mundaka and Maandukya. Mundaka is usually studied before Prashna because the former gives the Mantras and the latter explains their usage.
64 verses
Shaunaka is the student and Angiraa is the Teacher in this text.
1. The knowledge which is a means to the attainment of the highest Brahman can be attained only by the grace of the preceptor, after one's having renounced all desire and egoism, and having acquired the four means of salvation.
6. Cultivate discrimination, dispassion, austerity, faith, concentration, love for solitude, for the attainment of immortality and eternal bliss.
7. Seek the knowledge of Brahman from a qualified teacher who is versed in the Vedas (Brahma Stotriya) and is established in Brahman (Brahma-Nishtha).
8. There are two kinds of Vidya Apara (the lower) and the Para (the higher). The former is founded on the four Vedas and the six Vedangas. The latter refers to Brahman which is all-pervading, immortal, indivisible and self-luminous.
9. Just as a spider projects the web out of its body and then again withdraws it into itself, so also Brahman projects this world and then withdraws it into itself.
10. Brahman is a target to be penetrated by meditation on Om.
14. Brahma, the creator and protector of this universe, arose as the first among Gods. He expounded the science of the knowledge of Brahman (Brahma-Vidya), the foundation of all knowledge (all sciences) to Atharvan, his eldest son.
15. Whatever Brahma told Atharvan, that knowledge Atharvan gave to Angir. Angir taught it to Satyavaha of the family of Bharadvaja, and Satyavaha taught to Angiras the knowledge traditionally obtained by the success on of teachers.
16. Saunaka, the great householder, approached Angiras in the manner laid down by the scriptures and questioned; What is that, O Bhagavan, which being known, all this becomes known?
The Origin of Things
30. As a spider sends forth and draws in its web, as herbs grow from the earth, as hair grows from living man, so this universe proceeds from the immortal (Brahman).
31. Creation is not a real transformation (Parinama) but only a projection of a certain inscrutable, illusory power of Brahman.
32. Just as seeds remain latent underground in winter and burst forth into herbs and plants in the rainy season, so also the Jivas remain latent in Pralaya with their different Karmas as their seeds, and come out at the time of creation as trees of different kinds, but with their roots always in Brahman.
60. But sages who have attained the knowledge of the Self attain Kaivalya Mukti. They do not go to any Loka or world. Their Pranas, etc. are directly absorbed in Brahman. They become one with the supreme Self. They attain liberation in this very life.
78. Knowledge of Brahman is not mere intellectual knowledge. To know Brahman is to become Brahman.
79. Know this Brahman which is beyond the reach of the intellect and senses, through intuition or direct spiritual experience in deep meditation.
90. There are three kinds of Karmas, viz., Sanchita (accumulated works) Prarabdha and Agami or Kriyamana (current works done in this present life, which will bear fruit in future lives).
91. Prarabdha is the name given to the effects of one's works which brought about this birth which have already begun to germinate and bear fruit in this life.
Auxiliaries to Wisdom
118. The realisation of Brahman as the one common consciousness in all beings, the knowledge of the Atman alone, is real wisdom.
158. He who knows the highest Brahman becomes even Brahman. In his line no one who does not know Brahman will be born. He overcomes grief, good and evil, and being freed from the fetters of the heart, becomes Immortal.
159. Let one teach this knowledge of Brahman to those only who perform the Karma enjoined, who are versed in the Vedas, and firmly established in the Brahman (lower), who, endowed with full faith, offer oblations, themselves, to the fire called Ekarshi, and who perform the vow called Sirovrata (who carry fire on the head) according to the rule (of the Atharvanas).
स ब्रह्मविद्यां सर्वविद्याप्रतिष्ठामथर्वाय ज्येष्ठपुत्राय प्राह ॥ १ ॥
1. Brahma was the first among the Devas, the creator of the universe, the protector of the world. He taught the knowledge of Brahman, on which all knowledge rests, to his eldest son Atharva.
The Prashna Upanishad is a series philosophical poems presented as questions (prashna) inquired by various Hindu sages (Rishi) and answered by Sage Pippalada. The questions discuss knowledge about Brahman, the relation of the individual (Purusha) with the universal (Atman), meditation, immortality and various other Spiritual topics.
1. Six seekers of Brahman go to a sage called Pippalada and put him six questions. These questions and answers form the substance of this Upanishad.
18. Sukesa, Satyakama, Gargya, Kausalya, Bhargava, Kabandhi, all these devoted to Brahman and centered in Brahman, seeking the highest Brahman, approached the revered Pippalada with offering (Samit) in their hands, thinking that he would explain all to them.
Life and Matter
27. Life has no beginning. The world is not created. It is simply projected by God.
28. Then Katyayana Kabandi approached Pippalada and asked; Venerable master, whence are these creatures born?
29. He replied: Prajapati (the Lord of creatures) was desirous of offspring. He performed penance (thought) and having performed he created a pair-matter (Rayi) and life (Prana), food and eater, thinking that these together would produce creatures for him in many ways.
Prana: Greater than Senses
70. Then Bhargava, son of Vidarbha questioned Pippalada.: O Bhagavan, how many Devas support the creation? Which of them enlighten that? Who, again, is, amongst them, the greatest?
72. He replied: Those Devas verily are the ether, wind, fire, water, speech, mind, eye and the ear. They, manifesting their glory, disputed among each other and said, we hold together and support this body.
73. Prana, the greatest, said to them: Be not lost in delusion
The Mystery of Life
92. Then Kausalya, son of Asvala, questioned Pippalada: O, Bhagavan, where is this Prana born? How does it come into the body? How does it abide after it has divided itself? How does it go out? How does it support what is without, and all within the body?
94. This Prana is born of the Atman. As is this shadow in the man, so is this Prana in the Atman. By the action of the mind this enters into the body.
Functions of Prana
96. As a king commands his officers, saying to them, Reside in and govern these or those villages, so does this Prana dispose the other Pranas each for their separate work.
97. The Apana dwells in the organs of excretion and generation; the Prana itself abides in the eye, ear, mouth, and nose. In the middle is Samana. It. distributes the food supplied equally and the seven flames proceed from it.
98. Apana dwells in the anus and the generative organs. It does excretion. Prana does the sensory life function. It dwells in the eye, the ears, etc. Samana dwells in the navel. It does the digestive function. Vyana does the circulation of blood. It is all-pervading. Udana helps swallowing of food and drink. It takes the Jiva to Brahman during deep sleep. It takes the Jiva out of the body during death and conducts him to the other world. It abides in the throat.
Glory of Meditation on Om
130. Then Satyakama, son of Sibi questioned Pippalada; O Bhagavan, what world does he who, among men, meditates on Om until death, attain by that.
131. Om is the Pratika or substitute for Brahman. It is the symbol of Brahman.
132. Meditation on Om with Bhava (feeling) and its meaning is really meditation on Brahman.
133. Meditation on Om is the keeping up of the continuous flow of the one idea of the supreme Self, like the flow of oil from one vessel to another (Tailadharavat) .
134. The mind should be steady like the flame of a lamp in a windless place.
135. Meditation can be practised only by that aspirant whose senses are turned away from external objects, who has a calm mind, who is endowed with discrimination, self-restraint, purity, faith, endurance and a strong yearning for final emancipation.
136. Pippalada replied: O Satyakama, the syllable Om is indeed the higher and the lower Brahman. Therefore, he who knows it by this means, surely attains either of them.
137. Om primarily signifies Para-Brahman and secondarily denotes Hiranyagarbha.
Fundamentals of Sankhya Philosophy
152. According to the Sankhya philosophy, Prakriti or Pradhana is the creator and Purusha is the enjoyer.
153. Prakriti transforms itself into Mahat (intellect), mind, egoism, Tanmatras, elements, etc., for the benefit or enjoyment of the Purusha.
154. He created Prana, from Prana faith, ether, air, fire, water, earth, senses, mind and food; and from food, strength, penance, Mantras, Karma and the world, and in the world, name (i.e., the individual) .
155. Akasa, ether, has the attribute of sound.
156. Air is born of Akasa. It has two attributes, its own, touch, and that of its cause, sound.
157. Fire is born of air. It has three attributes, its own, form, and the two attributes of previous elements, sound and touch.
158. Water is born of fire. It has four attributes its own, taste, and the three attributes of the elements previously named.
159. Earth is born of water. It has four attributes its own, smell, and the attributes of the four previously named.
162. Then Pippalada said to them: This much alone I know of this highest Purusha; there is nothing higher than this.
163. They, worshipping him, said: Thou art our father who helps to cross over the ocean, of ignorance. Salutations to the highest Rishis! Salutations to the highest Rishis!
ओं सुकेशा च भारद्वाजः शैब्यश्च सत्यकामः सौर्यायणी च गार्ग्यः कौसल्यश्चाश्वलायनो भार्गवो वैदर्भिः कबन्धी कात्यायनस्ते हैते ब्रह्मपरा ब्रह्मनिष्ठाः परं ब्रह्मान्वेषमाणा एष ह वै तत्सर्वं वक्श्यतीति ते ह समित्पाणयो भगवन्तं पिप्पलादमुपसन्नाः ॥ १ ॥
1. Sukesa, son of Bharadvaja, and Satyakama, son of Sibi, and Gargya, a son of the son of the sun, and Kausalya, son of Asvala, and Bhargava of Vidarbha, and Kabandhi, son of Katya,—all these intent on Brahman and centred in Brahman, seeking the highest Brahman, approached the revered Pippalada, samit (sacrificial fuel) in hand, thinking that he would explain all to them.
The Taittiriya Upanishad is one of the older, "primary" Upanishads, part of the Yajur Veda. It says that the highest goal is to know the Brahman, for that is truth. It is divided into three sections, 1) the Siksha Valli, 2) the Brahmananda Valli and 3) the Bhrigu Valli.
2. This Upanishad is divided into sections called vallis, viz.,
(1) Siksha-valli or the section on instruction.
(2) Brahmananda-valli or the section on Brahma-bliss.
(3) Bhrigu-valli or the section on Bhrigu.
9. Vayu is Hiranyagarbha or Cosmic Prana.
10. The repetition of �Om-Santi' thrice is to remove the three kinds of obstacles, viz. Adhyatmika (from our self), Adhidaivika (from the heavens) and Adhibhautika (from living beings).
11. Mitra is the presiding deity of the activity of the Prana and the day. Varuna is the presiding deity of the activity of Apana and of the night. Aryama (the sun) is the presiding deity of the eye and of the sun. Indra is the presiding deity of strength and of the hands. Brihaspati is the presiding deity of speech and intellect. Vishnu is the presiding deity of the feet.
The Exhortation
12. Now comes the final instruction which the students in those days received when they completed their studies under the preceptor. Having taught the Vedas the preceptor exhorts the disciple.
13. Speak the truth. Do your duty (righteousness). Never swerve from the study of the Vedas. Do not cut off the thread of the offspring after giving the preceptor the fee he desires. Never swerve away from truth. Never swerve from duty (righteousness). Never neglect your welfare. Never neglect your prosperity. Never neglect the study and the teachings of the Vedas.
14. Never swerve from your duties to the gods and to men. May the mother be thy god (Matrudevo bhava). May the father be thy god (Pitrudevo bhava). May the preceptor be thy god (Acharyadevo bhava). May the guest be thy god (Atithidevo bhava). Let only those actions that are free from blemish be done, and not others. Only those that are good acts to us should be performed by thee, and not others.
15. You should remove the fatigue of Brahmins who are superior, by serving them with seats, etc.
16. Gift should be given with faith; it should never be given without faith. It should be given in plenty, with modesty, with reverence, with sympathy.
17. Now, if there should arise in thee any doubt as regards any action or conduct, thou shouldst act in those matters as do those Brahmins there, who are thoughtful, religious, not cruel, and devoted to Dharma.
18. Now as regards persons accused of sin, do thou deal with them as do the Brahmins there, who are thoughtful, religious, not cruel, and devoted to Dharma.
19. This is the injunction. This is the teaching. This is the secret of the Vedas. This is the word of command. This should be observed. Thus is this to be meditated upon.
This edition contains the orignal sanskrit, and the english translation of the Taittiriya Upanishad With the Commentaries of Śaṅkarāchārya (Shankara), Sureśvarāchārya (Sureshvara) and Sāyaṇa (also known as Vidyāraṇya)
oṃ śaṃ no mitraḥ śaṃ varuṇaḥ | śaṃ no bhavatvaryamā | śaṃ na indro bṛhaspatiḥ | śaṃ no viṣṇururukramaḥ || 1 ||
1. Om. May Mitra be propitious to us, and Varuṇa propitious be; may Aryaman propitious be to us; propitious be Indra and Bṛhaspati to us; to us propitious may Viṣṇu of vast extent be.
The Veda consists of two portions, Mantra and Brāhmaṇa. The Brahmavallī falls under the category of Brāhmaṇa. Brāhmaṇa again is eight-fold. And the eight varieties of Brāhmaṇa are enumerated by the Vājasaneyins: as follows:
THE SOUL AT THE TIME OF TRANSMIGRATION DOES TAKE with it subtle parts of the elements
Tadantarapratipattau ramhati samparishvaktah
prasnanirupanabhya - III.1.1 (292)
In order to obtain another body (the soul) goes enveloped (by subtle elements) (as appears from) the question and explanation (in the scripture, Chhandogya).
Tadantarapratipattau: for the purpose of obtaining a fresh body (Tat: that, i.e. a body; Antara: different, another; Prati- pattau: in obtaining); Ramhati: goes, departs, Samparishvaktah: enveloped (by subtle elements); Prasna: from question; Nirupanabhyam: aid for explanations.
In the Second Chapter all objections raised against the Vedantic view of Brahman on the ground of Sruti and reasoning have been refuted. It has been shown also that all other views are incorrect and devoid of foundation and the alleged mutual contradictions of Vedic texts do not exist. Further it has been shown that all the entities different from the indivi dual soul such as Prana, etc., spring from Brahman for the enjoyment of the soul.
Kritatyayadhikaranam: Topic 2 (Sutras 8-11)
THE SOULS DESCENDING FROM HEAVEN HAVE A REMNANT OF KARMA which determines their birth
Kritatyaye'nusayavan drishtasmritibhyam
yathetamanevam cha III.1.8 (299)
On the exhaustion of good work the soul returns to the earth with a remainder of the Karmas, as can be understood from direct statement in Sruti and Smriti, by the same route through which he ascended after death and differently too.
Krita: of what is done, of the Karma; Atyaye: at the end, at the exhaustion; Anusayavan: with a remainder of the Karma; Drishtasmritibhyam: as can be understood from direct statement in Sruti and Smriti; Yatha itam: by the way he went; Anevam: differently; Cha: and.
A fresh topic is discussed here. This Adhikarana teaches the mode of return from heaven
Anishtadikaryadhikaranam: Topic 3 (Sutras 12-21)
ANISHTADIKARYADHIKARANAM: TOPIC 3 (SUTRAS 12-21)
THE FATE AFTER DEATH OF THOSE SOULS WHOSE DEEDS DO NOT entitle them to pass up to Chandraloka
Anishtadikarinamapi cha srutam III.1.12 (303)
The Sruti declares that the non-performers of sacrifices, etc., also (go to the world of moon).
Anishtadikarinam: of those who do not perform sacrifices etc.; Api: even; Cha: also; Srutam: is declared by the Sruti.
The movement of persons doing evil deeds is now described.
Sabhavyapattyadhikaranam: Topic 4 (Sutra 22)
The soul on its descent from the Chandraloka does not become identified with ether, etc., but attains a similarity of nature
Tatsabhavyapattirupapatteh III.1.22 (313)
(The soul when coming down from the sphere of moon) attains similarity of nature with them, (i.e., with ether, air, etc.,) as this only is possible.
Tatsabhavyapattih: attainment of a similarity of nature with them; Upapatteh: being reasonable.
Natichiradhikaranam: Topic 5 (Sutra 23)
IT TAKES ONLY A SHORT TIME FOR THE DESCENT OF THE SOUL
Natichirena viseshat III.1.23 (314)
(The soul passes through the stages of its descent) in a not very long time; on account of the special statement.
Na: not; Atichirena: in a very long time; Viseshat: because of special statement of Sruti.
Anyadhisthitadhikaranam: Topic 6 (Sutras 24-27)
WHEN THE SOULS ENTER INTO PLANTS, ETC., THEY ONLY CLING TO THEM and do not themselves become those species
Anyadhishthiteshu purvavadabhilpat III.1.24 (315)
(The descending soul enters) into (plants) animated other (souls), as in the previous cases, on account of scriptural declaration.
Anyadhishthiteshu: into what is possessed or occupied by another; Purvavat: like the previous cases; Abhilapat: on account of the scriptural statement.
The discussion on the way of descent of the individual soul is continued.
Section 2 (Sutras 319-359)
Introduction and Synopsis
Sandhyadhikaranam: Topic 1 (Sutras 1-6)
The soul in the dream state.
Sandhye srishtiraha hi III.2.1 (319)
In the intermediate stage (between waking and deep sleep) there is (a real) creation; because (the Sruti) says so.
Sandhye: in the intermediate stage (between waking and deep sleep, i.e., in the dream state); Srishtih: (there is real) creation; Aha: (Sruti) says so; Hi: because.
The state of dream is now considered.
Tadabhavadhikaranam: Topic 2 (Sutras 7-8)
THE SOUL IN DREAMLESS SLEEP.
Tadabhavo nadishu tat sruteh atmani cha III.2.7 (325)
The absence of that (i.e., of dreams, i.e., dreamless sleep) takes place in the nerves (Nadis or psychic currents) and in the self, as it is known from the Sruti or scriptural statement.
Tadabhavah: absence of that (dreaming) i.e., deep sleep; Nadishu: in the nerves (psychic currents); Tat sruteh: as it is known from the Srutis; Atmani: in the self; Cha: and, also. (Tat: about it.)
The state of dreamless deep sleep is now discussed.
Sa eva tu karmanusmritisabdavidhibhyah III.2.9 (327)
But the same (soul returns from Brahman after deep sleep) on account of work, remembrance, scriptural text and precept.
Sah eva: the selfsame soul (which went to sleep); Tu: but; Karmanusmritisabdavidhibhyah: on account of Karma or work, memory, scriptural authority and precept; (Sah: he; Eva: only, and no other); Karma: activity, on account of his finishing the action left unfinished; Anusmriti: remembrance, on account of memory of identity; Sabda: from the Sruti; Vidhibhyah: from the commandments.
Here we have to enquire whether the soul when awaking from deep sleep is the same which entered into union with Brahman or another one.
In a swoon (in him who is senseless) there is half union on account of this remaining (as the only alternative left, as the only possible hypothesis).
Mugdhe: in a swoon; Ardhasampattih: partial attainment of the state of deep sleep or death; Pariseshat: on account of the remaining, because of excess, as it is a state in addition to all others.
The state of a swoon is now discussed.
Ubhayalingadhikaranam: Topic 5 (Sutras 11-21)
THE NATURE OF BRAHMAN.
Na sthanato'pi parasyobhayalingam sarvatra hi III.2.11 (329)
Not on account of (difference of) place also two-fold characteristics can belong to the Highest; for everywhere (scripture teaches It to be without any difference).
Na: not; Sthanatah: on account of (difference of) place; Api: even; Parasya: of the Highest (i.e., Brahman); Ubhayalingam: two-fold characteristics; Sarvatra: everywhere; Hi: because.
The Sutrakara now proceeds to deal with the nature of Brahman.
What has been mentioned up to this is denied (by the words not this, not this and the Sruti) says something more than that (afterwards).
Prakritaitavattvam: what bas been mentioned up to this; Hi: because, for; Pratishedhati: denies; Tatah: then that, over and above that; Braviti: declares; Cha: and; Bhuyah: something more. (Prakrita: mentioned first, previously stated; Etavattvam: this much.)
In this group of Sutras also the Sutrakara expounds the Nirvisesha (formless) Brahman.
Paradhikaranam: Topic 7 (Sutras 31-37)
BRAHMAN IS ONE WITHOUT A SECOND.
Paramatah setunmanasambandha-
bhedavyapadesebhyah III.2.31 (349)
(There is something) Superior to this (Brahman) on account of terms denoting a bank, measure, connection and difference (used with respect to It).
Param: greater; Atah: for this, than this (Brahman); Setunmanasambandhabhedavyapadesebhyah: on account of terms denoting a bridge, measure, connection and difference. (Setu: a bridge; Unmana: dimensions; Sambandha: relation; Bheda: difference; Vyapadesebhyah: from the declarations.)
It may be said that there must be something higher than Brahman because Brahman is described as a bridge, or as limit ed or as attained by man or as different from man.
Phaladhikaranam: Topic 8 (Sutras 38-41)
THE LORD IS THE GIVER OF THE FRUITS OF ACTIONS.
Phalamata upapatteh III.2.38 (356)
From Him (the Lord) are the fruits of actions, for that is reasonable.
Phalam: the fruit; Atah: from Him only; Upapatteh: for that is reasonable.
(The Vidyas or the Upasanas) described in the various Vedanta texts (are not different, are identical) on account of the non-difference of injunction, etc., (i.e., connection, form and name).
Sarvavedantapratyayam: exposition of Brahman in all the Vedanta texts; Chodanadyaviseshat: as there is no difference in the injunctions, etc., (i.e., con nection, form and name). (Sarva: all; Veda: the Vedas; Anta: the settled conclusion; Pratyayam: the knowledge, realisation; Chodanadi: or the injunction and others; Aviseshat: as there is no difference.)
Upasamharadhikaranam: Topic 2 (Sutra 5)
Particulars of identical Vidyas mentioned in different Sakhas or places are to be combined into one meditation
Upasamharo'rthabhedadvidhiseshavatsamane cha III.3.5 (364)
And in the Upasanas of the same class (mentioned in differ ent Sakhas) a combination (of all the particulars mentioned in all Sakhas is to be made) as there is no difference in the object of meditation, just as (a combination of) all subsidiary rites of a main sacrifice (mentioned in different Sakhas is made).
Upasamharah: combination; Arthabhedat: as there is no difference in the object of meditation; Vidhiseshavat: like the subsidiary rites of a main sacrifice; Samane: in the Upasanas of the same class, in the case of equality, the forms of meditation being the same in effect; Cha: also, and. (Artha: purpose; Abheda: non-difference; Vidhi: injunctions, of the duties enjoined by the scriptures.)
A deduction is made from the four preceding Sutras. This Sutra states the practical outcome of the discussion carried on in the first four Sutras.
Anyathatvadhikaranam: Topic 3 (Sutras 6-8)
Those Vidyas with different subject-matter are separate, even if there may be some similarities.
If it be said (that the Udgitha Vidya of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad and that of the Chhandogya Upanishad) are different on account of (difference in) texts; we deny this on the ground of their non-difference (as regards essentials).
Anyathatvam: there is difference; Sabdat: on account of (difference in) texts; Iti: so; Chet: if; Na: not; Aviseshat: on account of non-difference (as regards essentials).
This Sutra represents the view of the Purvapakshin or the opponent. The opponent tries to establish that the two Vidyas are one.
Vyaptyadhikaranam: Topic 4 (Sutra 9)
It is appropriate to specialise OM by the term `Udgitha'.
Vyaptescha samanjasam III.3.9 (368)
And because (OM) extends (over the whole of the Vedas), (to specialise it by the term 'Udgitha') is appropriate.
Vyapteh: because (OM) extends (over the whole of the Vedas); Cha: and; Samanjasam: is appropriate, consistent, justifiable.
Sutra 7 is elaborated here.
Sarvabhedadhikaranam: Topic 5 (Sutra 10)
Unity of the Prana-Vidya.
Sarvabhedadanyatreme III.3.10 (369)
On account of the non-difference (of the Vidya) everywhere (i.e., in all the texts of the different Sakhas where the Prana-Vidya occurs) these qualities (mentioned in two of them are to be inserted) in the other places (e.g., the Kaushitaki Upanishad).
Sarvabhedat: on account of non-difference everywhere; Anyatra: in the other places; Ime: these (qualities are to be inserted).
A concrete instance on the general principle of Sutra 5 is cited.
Anandadyadhikaranam: Topic 6 (Sutras 11-13)
Attributes like Bliss, etc., of Brahman have to be combined into one meditation
Anandadayah pradhanasya III.3.11 (370)
Bliss and other attributes (which depict the true nature) of the Principal or the Supreme Self, i.e., Brahman (have to be combined from all places in the meditation on Brahman).
Anandadayah: Bliss and other attributes; Pradhanasya: of the Principal i.e., the Supreme Self or Brahman.
Brahman is described as Bliss, Knowledge, all-pervading, the Self of all, true, etc., in different texts of different Sakhas. All the attributes are not mentioned in all places.
Adhyanadhikaranam: Topic 7 (Sutras 14-15)
Katha Up. I.3.10-11 teaches merely that the Self is higher than everything else
Adhyanaya prayojanabhavat III.3.14 (373)
(The passage in Katha Upanishad I.3.10 tells about the Self only as the highest) for the sake of pious meditation, as there is no use (of the knowledge of the objects being higher than the senses and so on).
Adhyanaya: for the sake of meditation; Prayojanabhavat: as there is no use, as there is no other necessity. (Prayojana: of any other purpose; Abhavat: on account of the absence.)
The previous discussion is continued.
Atmagrihityadhikaranam: Topic 8 (Sutras 16-17)
The Self mentioned in Ait. Up. I.1. is the Supreme Self and the attributes of the Self given elsewhere should be combined with this meditation.
Atmagrihitiritaravaduttarat III.3.16 (375)
(In the Aitareya Upanishad I.1.) the Supreme Self is meant, as in other texts (dealing with creation) because of the subsequent qualification.
Atmagrihitih: the Supreme Self is meant; Itaravat: as in other texts (dealing with creation); Uttarat: because of the subsequent qualification.
We read in the Aitareya Upanishad Verily in the begin ning all this was the Self, one only; there was nothing else whatsoever (I.1). Here the doubt arises whether the term Self denotes the Supreme Self or some other being such as Hiranyagarbha.
Karyakhyanadhikaranam: Topic 9 (Sutra 18)
Only thinking water to be the dress of Prana is enjoined in the Prana-Vidya
Karyakhyanadapurvam III.3.18 (377)
On account of (the rinsing of the mouth with water refer red to in the Prana Vidya) being a reiteration of an act (already ordained by the Smriti), what has not been so ordained elsewhere (is here enjoined by the Sruti).
Karyakhyanat: on account of being a statement of an act (already enjoined by the Smriti); Apurvam: which has not been so enjoined elsewhere.
In regard to Prana Upasana, Achamana is ordained only as reiteration of what is stated elsewhere. What is ordained is only meditation on water as covering food. What is enjoined in Prana Vidya Upasana of Chhandogya Upanishad is not the Achamana, as such. Achamana is enjoined by the Smritis and is common to all. What is ordained is Anagnatatchintana i.e., meditating that the food is covered by water.
Samanadhikaranam: Topic 10 (Sutra 19)
Vidyas of the same Sakha which are identical should be combined, in meditation
Samana evam chabhedat III.3.19 (378)
In the same (Sakha also) it is thus (i.e., there is unity of Vidya,) owing to non-difference (of the object of meditation).
Samana: in the same Sakha; Evam: every, (it is) like this; Cha: and, also; Abhedat: owing to non-difference.
A corollary to Sutra 5 is proved.
Sambandhadhikaranam: Topic 11 (Sutras 20-22)
The names `Ahar' and `Aham' of Brahman occurring in Bri. Up. V.5.1-2 cannot be combined
Sambandhadevamanyatrapi III.3.20 (379)
Thus in other cases also, on account of the connection (of particulars with one and the same Vidya).
Sambandhat: on account of the connection; Evam: thus, like this; Anyatra: in other cases; Api: also.
An inference on the analogy of the preceding Sutra is drawn by way of objection.
This Sutra is a Purvapaksha Sutra. It sets forth the view of the opponent.
Sambhrityadhikaranam: Topic 12 (Sutra 23)
Attributes of Brahman occurring in the Ranayaniya Khila constitute an independent Vidya
Sambhritidyuvyaptyapi chatah III.3.23 (382)
For the same reason (as in the previous Sutra) the support ing (of the world) and pervading the sky (attributed to Brahman in the Ranayaniya Khila) also (are not to be included in other Vidyas or Upasanas of Brahman).
Sambhriti: supporting the world; Dyuvyapti: pervading the sky; Api: also; Cha: and; Atah: for the same reason (as in the previous Sutra). (Dyu: the sky, all the space, heaven).
A restriction to Sutra 5 is made.
Purushavidyadhikaranam: Topic 13 (Sutra 24)
The Purusha Vidya in the Chhandogya and the Taittiriya are not to be combined
And (as the qualities) as (mentioned) in the Purusha-Vidya (of the Chhandogya) are not mentioned (in that) of the others (i.e., in the Taittiriya) (the two Purusha-Vidyas are not one; are not to be combined).
Parushavidyayamiva: as in the Purusha-Vidya (of the Chhandogya); Cha: and; Itaresham: of the others; Anamnanat: because of not being mentioned (in the Taittiriya).
The Purusha Vidya of the Chhandogya Upanishad and that of the Taittiriya Upanishad are now examined.
Vedhadyadhikaranam: Topic 14 (Sutra 25)
Unconnected Mantras and sacrifices mentioned in certain Upanishads do not belong to Brahma-Vidya
Vedhadyarthabhedat III.3.25 (384)
Because the matter (of certain Mantras) such as piercing and so on is different (from the matter of the approximate Vidyas), (the former are not to be combined with the latter).
Vedhadi: piercing etc.; Arthabhedat: because they have a different meaning.
Certain expressions occurring at the beginning of an Upanishad of the Atharva-Veda are taken up for discussion.
Hanyadhikaranam: Topic 15 (Sutra 26)
The statement that the good and evil deeds of a person go respectively to his friends and enemies is true for texts that mention discarding of such actions by him
Hanau tupayanasabdaseshatvat
kusacchandastutyupaganavattaduktam III.3.26 (385)
But where only the getting rid (of the good and evil) is mentioned (the obtaining of this good and evil by others has to be added) because the statement about acceptance is supplementary (to the statement about the getting rid of) as in the case of the Kusas, metres, praise and hymns or recitations. This (i.e., the reason for this) has been stated (by Jaimini in Purvamimamsa).
Hanau: where only the getting rid (of good and evil) is mentioned; Tu: but; Upayanasabdaseshatvat: on account of the word `acceptance' being supplementary to the word `getting rid'; Kusacchandastutyupaganavat: like Kusa-sticks, metres, praises and hymns; Tat: that; Uktam: has been stated (by Jaimini). (Upayana: acceptance; Sabda: on account of the statement of the word; Seshatvat: on account of being supplementary to.)
Here is a discussion on the shaking off of virtues and vices by the released soul at death and their acceptance by his friends and enemies.
Samparayadhikaranam: Topic 16 (Sutras 27-28)
The shaking off of good and evil by the man of Knowledge occurs only at the time of his death
(He who attains knowledge gets rid of his good and evil deeds) at the time of death, there being nothing to be attained (by him on the way to Brahmaloka through those works); for thus others (declare in their sacred texts).
Samparaye: at the time of death; Tarttavyabhavat: there being nothing to be attained; Tatha: in this way, so; Hi: because, for; Anye: others.
This Sutra decides when the individual soul shakes off his good and evil deeds.
The knower of Saguna Brahman alone goes along Devayana, and not the knower of Nirguna Brahman
Gaterarthavattvamubhayathanyatha hi virodhah III.3.29 (388)
(The soul's) journey (along the path of the gods, Devayana) is applicable in a two-fold manner, otherwise there would be contradiction (of scripture).
Gateh: of the journey of the soul (after death), along the path of the gods; Arthavatvam: utility; Ubhayatha: in two ways; Anyatha: otherwise; Hi: for, certainly; Virodhah: contradiction.
Here is a side issue of Sutra 27.
Aniyamadhikaranam: Topic 18 (Sutra 31)
The passage of the soul by Devayana applies equally to all Vidyas of Saguna Brahman
There is no restriction (as to the going on the path of the gods for any Vidya). There is no contradiction as is seen from the Sruti and Smriti.
Aniyamah: (there is) no restriction; Sarvasam: of all; Avirodhah: there is no contradiction; Sabdanumanabhyam: as is seen from Sruti and Smriti. (Sabdah: the word, i.e., the revealed scripture or Sruti; Anumana: inference or Smriti.)
The journey of the soul who knows Brahman is continued.
Yavadadhikaradhikaranam: Topic 19 (Sutra 32)
Perfected souls may take a corporeal existence for divine mission.
Of those who have a mission to fulfil (there is corporeal) existence, so long as the mission is not fulfilled.
Yavadadhikaram: so long as the mission is not fulfilled; Avasthitih: (there is corporeal) existence; Adhikarikanam: of those who have a mission in life to fulfil. (Yavad: as long as; Adhikaram: mission, purpose to be fulfilled.)
A plausible objection to Sutra 31 is refuted.
Aksharadhyadhikaranam: Topic 20 (Sutra 33)
The negative attributes of Brahman mentioned in various texts are to be combined in all meditations on Brahman
But the conceptions of the (negative) attributes of the Imperishable (Brahman) are to be combined (from different texts where the Imperishable Brahman is dealt with, as they form one Vidya), because of the similarity (of defining the Imperishable Brahman through denials) and the object (the Imperishable Brahman) being the same, as in the case of the Upasad (offerings). This has been explained (by Jaimini in the Purvamimamsa).
Aksharadhiyam: of the meditation of negative attributes belonging to the Imperishable; Tu: but, indeed; Avarodhah: combination; Samanyatadbhavabhyam: because of the similarity (of denying Brahman through denials) and the object (viz., Imperishable Brahman) being the same; Aupasadavat: as in the case of the Upasad (offering) like the hymn or the Mantra in connection with the Upasada rite; Tat: that; Uktam: has been explained (by Jaimini in the Purvamimamsa).
The negative attributes of the Imperishable are now examined, as the positive attributes were examined in Sutra 11 of this section.
Iyadadhikaranam: Topic 21 (Sutra 34)
Mundaka III.1.1 and Katha I.3.1 constitute one Vidya.
Iyadamananat III.3 34 (393)
Because (the same thing) is described as such and such.
Iyat: so much only, this much; Amananat: on account of being men tioned in the scripture.
Antaratvadhikaranam: Topic 22 (Sutras 35-36)
Brihadaranyaka III.4.1 and III.5.1 constitute one Vidya
Antara bhutagramavatsvatmanah III.3.35 (394)
As the Self is within all, as in the case of the aggregate of the elements, (there is oneness of Vidya).
Antara: as being innermost of all, inside, the status of being the inmost; Bhutagramavat: as in the case of the aggregate of the elements; Svatmanah: of one's own self.
Two passages from the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad are taken up for discussion to show that they relate to the same Vidya.
Vyatiharadhikaranam: Topic 23 (Sutra 37)
The Sruti prescribes reciprocal meditation in Ait. Ar. II.2.4.6.
Vyatiharo vishimsanti hitaravat III.3.37 (396)
There is exchange (of meditation), because the texts distin guish (two meditations); as in other cases.
Vyatiharah: exchange; reciprocity (of meditation); Visimshanti: (the scriptures) explain clearly, distinguish; Hi: because, for; Itaravat: as in other cases.
The Aitareya Aranyaka says with reference to the person in the sun, What I am, that He is; what He is, that am I (Ait. Ar. II.2.4.6).
Satyadyadhikaranam: Topic 24 (Sutra 38)
Brihadaranyaka V.4.1 and V.5.3 treat of one Vidya about Satya Brahman
Saiva hi satyadayah III.3.38 (397)
The same (Satya Vidya is taught in both places), because (attributes like) Satya etc., (are seen in both places).
Sa eva: the same (Satya Vidya); Hi: because; Satyadayah: (attributes like) Satya etc.
We read in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad He who knows this great, glorious, first born (Being) as the Satya Brahman, conquers these worlds (V.4.1). Again we read That which is Satya is that Sun the being who is in that orb and the being who is in the right eye... he destroys evils (V.5.3).
Now a doubt arises whether these two Satya Vidyas are one or different.
Kamadyadhikaranam: Topic 25 (Sutra 39)
Attributes mentioned in Chh. Up. VIII.1.1 and Bri. Up. IV.4.22 are to be combined on account of several common features in both texts
Kamaditaratra tatra chayatanadibhyah III.3.39 (398)
(Qualities like true) desire etc., (mentioned in the Chhandogya Upanishad are to be inserted) in the other (i.e., in the Brihadaranyaka) and (those mentioned) in the other (i.e., in the Brihadaranyaka are also to be inserted in the Chhandogya) on account of the abode, etc., (being the same in both).
Kamadi: (Satyasankalpadi) (True) desire etc.; Itaratra: in the other, elsewhere, in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad; Tatra: there, in the Chhandogya Upanishad; Cha: also; Ayatanadibhyah: on account of the abode etc.
Dahara Vidya of the Chhandogya and the Brihadaranyaka Upanishads is now discussed.
Adaradhikaranam: Topic 26 (Sutras 40-41)
Pranagnihotra need not be observed on days of fast.
Adaradalopah III.3.40 (399)
On account of the respect shown (to the Pranagnihotra by the Sruti) there can be no omission (of this act) (even when the eating of food is omitted).
Adarat: on account of the respect shown; Alopah: there can be no omission.
This Sutra gives the view of the Purvapakshin or the opponent.
Tannirdharanadhikaranam: Topic 27 (Sutra 42)
Upasanas mentioned in connection with sacrifices are not their parts, but separate.
There is no rule about the inviolability of that (i.e., Upasanas connected with certain sacrifices) that is seen (from the Sruti itself); for a separate fruit (belongs to the Upasanas), viz., non-obstruction (of the results of the sacrifice).
Tannirdharananiyamah: no rule, about the inviolability of that; Taddrishtih: that being seen (from the Sruti); Prithak: separate; Hi: because; Apratibandhah: non-obstruction; Phalam: fruit, reward, result.
This Sutra states that a meditation or Upasana prescribed in connection with a ceremonial rite is not compulsory.
------------------------
------------------------
Pradanadhikaranam: Topic 28 (Sutra 43)
Meditations on Vayu and Prana are to be kept separate notwithstanding the essential oneness of these two.
Pradanavadeva taduktam III.3.43 (402)
As in the case of the offerings (Vayu and Prana must be held apart). This has been explained (in the Purvamimamsa Sutra).
Pradanavat: as in the case of the offerings of the `Pradana, oblation'; Eva: exactly; Tat: that; Uktam: has been stated.
The section of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad which begins Voice held, I shall speak (Bri. Up. I.5.21) determines Prana to be the best amomg the organs of the body and Vayu to be the best among the Devas.
Lingabhuyastvadhikaranam: Topic 29 (Sutras 44-52)
The fires in Agnirahasya of the Brihadaranyaka are not part of the sacrificial act, but form an independent Vidya
On account of the majority of indicatory marks (the fires of the mind, speech, etc., in the Agnirahasya of the Vajasaneyins do not form part of the sacrifice), for it (the indicatory mark) is stronger (than the context or the general subject matter). This also (has been explained in the Purvamimamsa Sutras by Jaimini).
Lingabhuyastvat: because of an abundance of distinguishing marks; Tat: that, the distinguishing mark; Hi: because; Baliyah: is stronger; Tat: that; Api: also.
In the Agnirahasya of the Vajasaneyins (Satapatha Brahmana) certain fires named after mind, speech, eyes, etc., are mentioned.
(The fires spoken of in the previous Sutra are) alternative forms of the one mentioned first, (i.e., the actual sacrificial fire) on account of the context; (they) ought to be part of the sacrifice like the imaginary drink or the Manasa-cup.
Purvavikalpah: an alternative form of the already mentioned first;
Prakaranat: on account of the context, as can be understood from the subject matter of the chapter;
Syat: there may be, ought to be;
Kriyamana savat: ceremonial act, like the act of meditation, like the imaginary drink, as in the case of mental operation in the soma-sacrifice.
An objection is raised to the preceding Sutra.
The Purvapakshin raises a fresh objection. On the tenth day of the Soma sacrifice a Soma drink is offered to Prajapati wherein the earth is regarded as the cup and the sea as the Soma. This is a mental act only, and yet it forms a part of the sacrifice.
The same then holds good with regard to the quasi-agnis made of mind and so on though these fires are mental, i.e., imaginary, yet they form part of the sacrifice and not an independent Vidya, because of the context. They are an alternate form of the actual fire mentioned first.
You may say that it is only Arthavada and that a mere Arthavada cannot override the context and that such meditation is part of the Karma as is the case in the Dasaratra Karma.
Atidesascha III.3.46 (405)
And on account of the extension (of the attributes of the actual fire to these imaginary fires).
Atidesat: on account of the extension (of the attributes of' the first to these fires);
Cha: and.
Objection to Sutra 44 is continued by presenting another argument in support of Sutra 45.
The Purvapakshin gives another reason to support his view. The Sruti in that passage ascribes all the attributes of the actual fire to these imaginary fires. Therefore, they are part of the sacrifice.
Vidyaiva tu nirdharanat III.3.47 (406)
विद्यैव तु, निर्धारणात् ॥Brahma-Sutra 3.3.47
But (the fires) rather constitute the Vidya, because (the Sruti) asserts it.
Vidya: Vidya, form of meditation or worship, Knowledge;
Eva: alone, indeed;
Tu: verily, undoubtedly, but;
Nirdharanat: because the Sruti asserts it.
Objections raised in Sutras 45 and 46 are now refuted.
The word `Tu' (but) sets aside the Purvapaksha. It refutes the opponent.
The present Sutra declares that the fires form an independent Vidya, because the text asserts that They are built of knowledge (Vidya) only, and that By knowledge they are built for him who thus knows.
Darsanaccha III.3 48 (407)
दर्शनाच्च ॥Brahma-Sutra 3.3.48
And because (in the text indicatory marks of that are) seen.
Darsanat: it being seen in the scriptures, because it is clearly stated in Sruti, because (of the indicatory marks) seen;
Cha: and.
The indicatory marks are those referred to in Sutra 44. In fact the internal indications show that it is a Vidya and not a Karmanga.
-------------------------
More detailed explanation
-------------------------
Srutyadibaliyastvaccha na badhah III.3.49 (408)
(The view that the Agnis or fires constitute an independent Vidya) cannot be refuted, owing to the greater force of the Sruti etc.
Srutyadibaliyastvat: on account of the greater force of the Sruti etc.; Cha: and; Na: no, cannot; Badhah: refutation.
Objections raised in Sutras 45 and 46 are further refuted.
There is no negation of this view on the basis of the context, because of the greater strength of Sruti, etc.
Our opponent has no right to determine on the ground of Prakarana that the Agnis are subordinate to the sacrificial action and so to set aside our view according to which they are independent. For we know from the Purvamimamsa that direct enunciation (Sruti), indicatory mark (Linga) and syntactical connection (Vakya) are of greater force than leading subject matter (Prakarana) and all those three means of proof are seen to confirm our view of the Agnis being independent.
Mere context is of no force against express Sruti, Linga, etc. The Sruti used the word `Eva' where there is an imperative tense, etc., used, a mere Upadesa can be treated as an Arthavada, because there is also an express command. Where there is no such indication, an Upadesa must be treated as a Vidhi. Therefore what we have here is an independent Vidya and not a Karmanga.
The Sruti directly says, All these fires are kindled with knowledge alone. The indicatory mark is this. All beings kindle these fires for him, even when he is asleep. This continuity of the fire shows that they are mental ones. An actual sacrifice is not continued during sleep. The syntactical connections Through meditation alone these fires of the worshipper are kindled. These three are more forcible than mere context.
Anubandhadibhyah prajnantaraprithaktvavat
drishtascha taduktam III.3.50 (409)
On account of the connection and so on (the fires built of mind, etc., form an independent Vidya), in the same way as other Vidyas (like Sandilya Vidya) are separate; and it is seen (that in spite of the context a sacrifice is treated as independent). This has been explained (in the Purvamimamsa Sutras by Jaimini).
Anubandhadibhyah: from the connection and so on; Prajnantaraprithaktvavat: even as the other Vidyas are separate; Drishtah: (it is) seen; Cha: and; Tat: that; Uktam: is stated (in the Purvamimamsa by Jaimini).
The argument in refutation of Sutras 45 and 46 is continued.
This Sutra gives additional reasons in support of the view set forth in Sutra 47.
Independence has, against the general subject matter, to be assumed for the fire-altars built of mind and so on, because the text connects the constituent members of the sacrificial action with activities of the mind. The text connects for the purpose of Sampad Upasana (meditations based on resemblance) parts of a sacrifice with mental activities, e.g., These fires are started mentally, the altars are set up mentally, the cups are taken mentally, the Udgatris are praised men tally, the Hotris are recited mentally, everything connected with this sacrifice is done mentally. This is possible only if there is a sharp difference between things which resemble each other.
The Sruti mentions in regard to such mental worship all the greatness of a Karmanga. Therefore Atidesa (similarity) applies even on the footing of the context referring to an inde pendent Vidya which is separate from a Karmanga.
The fires constitute an independent Vidya, just as the Sandilya Vidya, Dahara Vidya, form separate Vidyas, although mentioned along with sacrificial acts.
A similar thing is seen in Aveshti being done as an independent ceremony in the Rajasuya sacrifice. It is observed in the sacrificial portion of the Vedas, that though the sacrifice Aveshti is mentioned along with the Rajasuya sacrifice, it is yet considered as an independent sacrifice by Jaimini in the Purva mimamsa Sutras.
Na samanyadapyupalabdhermrityuvanna hi
lokapattih III.3.51 (410)
In spite of the resemblance (of the fires to the imaginary drink, they do) not (constitute part of the sacrificial act) because it is seen (from the reasons given, and on the ground of Sruti that they form an independent Vidya) as in the case of death; for the world does not become (fire, because it resembles fire in some points).
Na: not; Samanyadapi: in spite of the resemblance, because of common ness, on the ground of their resemblance to sacrificial fire; Upalabdheh: for it is seen; Mrityuvat: just as in the case of death; Na hi lokapattih: for the world does not become (fire on account of certain resemblances).
The argument in refutation of Sutras 45 and 46 is continued.
Though being a mental act, there is an element of similarity, it is not a Karmanga because it is stated to have a separate fruit. This is clear from the illustrations relating to Mrityu and describing the earth as fire.
The resemblance cited by the Purvapakshin has no force. It cannot certainly stand because on account of the reasons already given, viz., the Sruti, indicatory mark, etc., the fires in question subserve the purpose of man only, and not the purpose of some sacrificial action.
Mere resemblance can hardly justify the contrary view. Anything indeed may resemble anything in some point or other; but in spite of that there remains the individual dissimilarity of each thing from all other things.
The case is analogous to that of `death'. The resemblance cited is like the common epithet `death' applied to fire and the being in the sun. The being in that orb is death indeed (Sat. Br. X.5.2.3). Fire indeed is death (Tait. Samh. V.1.10.3). This resemblance cannot make fire and the being in the same one.
Again we have This world is a fire indeed, O Gautama, the sun is its fuel etc., (Chh. Up. V.4.1). Here it does not follow from the similarity of fuel and so on that the world does not actually become fire.
Thus also in our case. Hence from the fact that the Manaschita Agni (fire) is a mental act like the Manasagraha which is a Karmanga, you cannot on that ground of such similarity alone argue that it also is a Karmanga.
Parena cha sabdasya tadvidhyam
bhuyastvattvanubandhah III.3.52 (411)
And from the subsequent (Brahmana) the fact of the text (under discussion) being such (i.e., enjoining an independent Vidya) (is known). But the connection (of the fanciful Agnis or imaginary fires with the actual fire is) on account of the abundance (of the attributes of the latter that are imagined in these fires).
Parena: from the subsequent (Brahmana), by the subsequent expression, by the statements immediately following; Cha: and; Sabdasya: of Sruti, of the text, of the word; Tadvidhyam: the fact of being such; Bhuyastvat: because of abundance; Tu: but; Anubandhah: connection.
In a subsequent Brahmana we have By knowledge they ascend there where all wishes are attained. Those skilled in words do not go there, nor those who destitute of knowledge do penance. This verse depreciates mere works and praises Vidya or knowledge. A former Brahmana also viz., the one beginning Where that orb leads (Sat. Br. X.5.2.23) concludes with a state ment of the fruit of knowledge Immortal becomes he whose self is death and thereby shows that works are not the chief thing. Hence we conclude that the injunction of the Sruti is that the fires constitute an independent Vidya.
The connection of the fires with the actual fire is not because they constitute part of the sacrifice but because many of the attributes of the real fire are imagined in the fires of the Vidya, in the Agnis built of mind. The statement of the fires built of mind along with the ordinary sacrificial fire is due to an abundance of common matters with the latter.
All this establishes the conclusion that the fire-altars built of mind and so on constitute an independent Vidya.
Aikatmyadhikaranam: Topic 30 (Sutras 53-54)
Atman is an entity distinct from the body.
Eka atmanah sarire bhavat III.3.53 (412)
Some (maintain the non-existence) of a separate self (besi des the body) on account of the existence (of the self) where a body is (only).
Eka: some (maintain the non-existence); Atmanah: of a separate self (besides the body); Sarire: in the body; Bhavat: because of existence.
In this topic the existence of an Atman apart from the body is taken up for discussion. Unless there is a soul apart from the body there is no use of the scripture teaching liberation. Nor can there be any scope for ethical commands which are the means of attainment of heaven or for the teaching that the soul is Brahman.
Angavabaddhadhikaranam: Topic 31 (Sutras 55-56)
Upasanas connected with sacrificial acts, i.e., Udgitha Upasana are valid for all schools
Angavabaddhastu na sakhasu hi prativedam III.3.55 (414)
But (the Upasanas or meditations connected with parts) (of sacrificial acts are) not (restricted) to (particular) Sakhas, according to the Veda (to which they belong), (but to all its Sakhas because the same Upasana is described in all).
Angavabaddhah: (Upasanas) connected parts (of sacrificial acts); Tu: but; Na: not; Sakhasu: to (particular) Sakhas; Hi: because; Prativedam: in each Veda, according to the Veda.
There is no rule that the Angavabaddha (Karmanga) Upa sana in each Sruti Sakha is separate and should be confined to it alone.
Bhumajyayastvadhikaranam: Topic 32 (Sutra 57)
Vaisvanara Upasana is one entire Upasana.
Bhumnah kratuvajjyayastvam tatha hi darsayati III.3.57 (416)
Importance (is given to the meditation) on the entire form (of Vaisvanara) as in the case of sacrifice; for thus (the Sruti) shows.
Bhumnah: on the entire form; Kratuvat: as in the case of sacrifice; Jyayastvam: prominence, pre-eminence, importance; Tatha: so; Hi: be cause, for, as; Darsayati: (the Sruti) shows.
The Vaisvanara Vidya is discussed here.
Sabdadibhedadhikaranam: Topic 33 (Sutra 58)
Various Vidyas like the Sandilya Vidya, Dahara Vidya and so on are to be kept separate and not combined into one entire Upasana
Nana sabdadibhedat III.3.58 (417)
(The Vidyas are) separate, on account of the difference of words and the like.
Nana: different, various; Sabdadibhedat: on account of difference of names of words, etc. (Bhedat: due to variety.)
In the previous Sutra we have arrived at the conclusion that a meditation on Vaisvanara as a whole is the pre-eminent meaning of the text, although special fruits are stated for meditations on parts such as Sutejas and so on.
Vikalpadhikaranam: Topic 34 (Sutra 59)
Any one of the Vidyas should be selected according to one's own option or choice.
Vikalpo'visishtaphalatvat III.3.59 (418)
There is option (with respect to the several Vidyas), because the result (of all the Vidyas) is the same.
Vikalpah: option; Visishtaphalatvat: on account of (all Vidyas) having the same result.
The most important Vidyas are: Sandilya Vidya, Bhuma Vidya, Sat Vidya, Dahara Vidya, Upakosala Vidya, Vaisvanara Vidya, Udgitha Vidya, Anandamaya Vidya, Akshara Vidya.
Kamyadhikaranam: Topic 35 (Sutra 60)
Vidyas yielding particular desires may or may not be combined according to one's liking
Kamyastu yathakamam samucchiyeranna va
purvahetvabhavat III.3.60 (419)
But Vidyas for particular desires may be combined or not according to one's desires on account of the absence of the previous reason (mentioned in the previous Sutra).
Kamyah: Vidyas adopted for some sensuous desires; Tu: but; Yatha kamam: according to one's desire or liking; Samucchiyeran: may be combined; Na: not; Va: or; Purva: the former; Hetu: reason; Abhavat: on account of the absence of.
This Sutra shows an exception to the previous Sutra that more Vidyas than one may be combined where the object is other than the realisation of Brahman.
Of the six Sutras which are contained in this Adhikarana, the first four Sutras are Purvapaksha Sutras and the last two Sutras are Siddhanta Sutras.
Meditations connected with members of sacrificial acts may or may not be combined according to one's liking
Angeshu yathasrayabhavah III.3.61 (420)
With regard (to meditations) connected with members (of sacrificial acts) it is as with (the members) with which they are connected.
Angeshu: with regard (to meditations) connected with members (of sacrificial acts); Yathasrayabhavah: it is as with (members) with which they are connected.
Different instructions connected with a sacrifice are stated in the different Vedas. The scriptures say that all these members mentioned in the different Vedas are to be combined for the due performance of the principal one.
The question now is, which is the rule to be followed with regard to the meditations or Upasanas connected with these members.
The present Sutra declares that the same rule which applies to the members applies also to the Upasanas connected with them. It is according to the abodes. As the abiding places of those meditations, viz., the Stotra and so on are combined for the performance of the sacrifice, so those meditations or Upasanas also; for a meditation is subject to what it rests on. All these Upasanas are to be combined.
Just as the Stotras, etc., are combined when performing Karmas, so also the Upasanas which are Angas of Karma (Angavabaddha Upasana) should be combined.
Sishtescha III.3.62 (421)
And from the injunction of the Sruti.
Sishteh: from the injunction of the Sruti; Cha: and.
An argument in support of the objection raised in Sutra 61 is adduced.
That is because the Upasanas depend on the Stotras.
As the Stotra and the other members of the sacrifice on which the meditations under discussion rest are taught in the three Vedas, so also are the meditations resting on them. Just as the members are scattered in the different Vedas, so also are the meditations connected with them. There is no difference as regards the injunction of the Sruti with reference to these meditations.
There is no difference between the members of a sacrificial act and the meditations referring to them.
Samaharat III.3.63 (422)
On account of the rectification.
Samaharat: on account of the rectification.
A further reason is given by the opponent. Another argu ment in support of Sutra 61 is adduced.
There is also indication in the Sruti about such combination. Such combination is seen when the Udgatri performs the Hautra Karma described in another Veda for removing the effects of error in the discharge of his function.
Chhandogya Upanishad declares What is Udgitha is OM or Pranava and what is OM is Udgitha. This meditation on the oneness of the Udgitha and OM mends the Udgitha defiled by any mistake committed even on the part of the Hotri, the hymn-reciting priest in recitation of the Udgitha (Chh. Up. I.5.5).
Here it is said that the mistakes committed by the Udgatri or chanting priest of the Sama Veda are rectified by the recitation of the Hotri or invoking priest of the Rigveda. This indicates that though the meditations are given in the different Vedas they are yet interlinked. Hence all of them have to be observed.
The passage From the seat of the Hotri, he sets right any mistake committed in the Udgitha (Chh. Up. I.5.5), declares that owing to the force of the meditation on the unity of Pranava and Udgitha, the Hotri rectifies any mistake he may commit in his work, by means of the work of the Hotri.
Now, as a meditation mentioned in one Veda is connected with what is mentioned in another Veda, in the same manner as a thing mentioned in another Veda, the above passage suggests the conclusion that all meditations on members of sacrificial acts, in whatever Veda they may be mentionedhave to be combined.
A thing belonging to the Rigveda, viz., Pranava is, accord ing to the Chhandogya text, connected with the Sama Veda meditation on the Udgitha. Hence meditations also which belong to different Vedas may be combined; because there is no difference between them and things as far as connection is concerned.
Gunasadharanyasrutescha III.3.64 (423)
And from the Sruti declaring `OM' which is a common feature (of the Udgitha Vidya) to be common to all the Vedas.
Gunasadharanyasruteh: from the Sruti declaring the feature of `OM' as being common to all the Vedas; Cha: and.
Another argument in support of Sutra 61 is adduced.
Further Pranava (Omkara) is common to all the Upasanas and links them up.
It is found in Sruti that OM is the common property of all the Vedas. Therefore, it is an inseparable concomitant of the sacrificial rites, prescribed in the Vedas. Hence the Vidyas also, being dependent on OM, are concomitants of the sacrificial rites. Chhandogya Upanishad declares Through this (`OM') the Vedic Vidya proceeds. With OM the Adhvaryu gives orders, with OM the Hotri recites, with OM the Udgatri sings (Chh. Up. I.1.9). This is stated with re ference to OM, which is common to all the Vedas and all the Upasanas in them. This indicates that as the abode of all Vidyas, viz., OM, is common, so the Vidyas that rest in it are common also. Therefore, all of them are to be observed.
Na va tatsahabhavasruteh III.3.65 (424)
(The meditations connected with members of the sacrificial acts are) rather not (to be combined) as the Sruti does not state their going together.
Na: not; Va: rather; Tatsahabhavasruteh: their correlation not being mentioned by the Sruti. (Tat: their; Sahabhava: about being together; Asruteh: because there is no such injunction in Sruti).
The words `Na va' `rather not' discard the Purvapaksha. This Sutra refutes the contention raised in Sutras 61-64.
This and the following Sutra give the conclusion.
There is no Sruti commanding such combination of the Karmanga Upasanas. No Sruti refers to such compulsory combination of the Upasanas. So they can be done singly or in combination as we like.
There is no binding rule that the Vidyas, depending on the Pranava or on any part of a sacrificial rite, is a necessary concomitant of the sacrifice. It may be dispensed with or retained at the option of the performer. But there is this difference. If Vidyas be associated with the rites greater good will accrue.
Though the utterance of the Pranava or the Udgitha hymn has been enjoined by the Sruti to be necessary for the sacrificial performance, yet Sruti does not insist that the Vidya (meditation) portion of the performance is a necessary adjunct to the mind. It is not absolutely necessary for the fulfilment of external sacrifices. A sacrifice may be per formed even without the Vidya (meditation) merely by utterance of Mantras, singing of the Udgitha hymns, pouring of the clarified butter into the sacred fire and the like external rites, in order to attain particular desired objects, but the Vidya or meditation on Brahman leads to realisation of Brahman.
The rule for combining the instructions regarding sacrifices that are scattered in all the Vedas cannot be applied with regard to the meditations (Upasanas) connected with them. If the instructions regarding the sacrifices are not combined, the sacrifice will itself fail. But it is not the case if the Upasanas are not practised, because Upasanas only increase the fruits of the sacrifice (Vide III.3.42). Upasanas are not inseparable from the sacrifice.
Therefore, Upasanas (Vidyas, meditations) may or may not be practised.
Darsanaccha III.3.66 (425)
And because the Sruti (scripture) says so (shows it).
Darsanat: because the Sruti says so, shows it from Sruti; Cha: and, also.
This Sutra is adduced in support of Sutra 65.
This may also be inferred from Sruti.
Chhandogya Upanishad declares The Brahmana (superintending chief priest) who possesses such knowledge saves the sacrifice, the sacrificer and all the priests, just as the horse saves the horseman (Chh. Up. IV.17.10).
This shows that the scriptures do not intend that all the meditations should go together. For, if all meditations were to be combined, all priests would know them all and the text could not specially announce that the Brahmana, chief superintending priest, possessing a certain knowledge thereby saves the others.
The meditations, therefore, according to one's liking may or may not be combined.
End of the Third Pada (Section 3) of the Third Adhyaya (Chapter III) of the Brahma Sutras or the Vedanta Philosophy.
Section 4 (Sutras 426-477)
Introduction and Synopsis
Purusharthadhikaranam: Topic 1 (Sutra 1-17)
Knowledge of Brahman is independent of sacrificial acts.
From this (Brahma Vidya or Brahma Jnana results) the purpose or the chief object of pursuit of man, because the scriptures state so; thus (holds) the sage Baadarayana.
Purusharthah: purpose of man, object of human pursuit, here the chief object, i.e., salvation; Atah: from this, from Brahma Vidya; Sabdat: from the scriptures, because the scriptures state so, from Sruti; Iti: so thus (says), this is the opinion of; Baadarayanah: the sage Baadarayana, (holds).
The result or fruit of Brahma Vidya is stated.
The Sutrakara Sri Vyasa now proceeds to show that Brahma Jnana leads not to Karma, but to the attainment of the highest Purushartha, i.e., Moksha or the final emancipation. That is Baadarayana's teaching.
The four Purusharthas are: Dharma (discharge of religious duty), Artha (acquisition of wealth, worldly prosperity), Kama (enjoyment), and Moksha (salvation). Knowledge of Brahman is not merely connected with sacrificial acts by affording to the agent a certain qualification. It definitely paves the way for the attainment of the final release or freedom from births and deaths.
Whence is this known? From the scripture.
Baadarayana bases his arguments on the Sruti texts, such as The knower of Atman goes beyond griefTarati sokamatmavit (Chh. Up. III.4.1). He who knows the highest Brah man becomes even BrahmanBrahmavitbrahmaivabhavati (Mun.Up.III.2.9). He who knows Brahman attains the HighestBrahmavidapnoti Param (Tait. Up. II.1).
For him who has a teacher there is delay only so long as he is not delivered; then he will be perfect (Chh. Up. VI.14.2). He who has searched out and understood the Self which is free from sin, etc., obtains all worlds and all desires (Chh. Up. VIII.7.1). The Atman is to be seen etc., up to Thus far goes immortality (Bri. Up. IV.5.6-15).
These and similar texts emphatically declare that Knowledge of Brahman effects the highest purpose of man or Supreme Purushartha.
Against this the Purvapakshin raises his objection as follows. The poorva pakshin is Jaimini.
Because (the self) is supplementary (to sacrificial acts), (the fruits of the Knowledge of the Self) are mere praise of the agent, as in other cases; thus Jaimini opines.
Seshatvat: because of being supplementary (to sacrificial acts); Pusushar thavadah: are mere praise or the agent; Yatha: as; Anyeshu: in other cases; Iti: thus (says); Jaiminih: Jaimini (holds).
Sutras 2 to 7 are Purvapaksha Sutras and Sutras 8 to 17 are Siddhanta Sutras.
Jaimini thinks that the Sruti texts merely praise the doer of Karma and that Brahmajnana is only an accessory of Karma (Karmanga).
He is of the opinion that the Vedas merely prescribe works to attain certain purposes including emancipation. He holds that the knowledge of Brahman has no independent fruit of its own because it stands in a subordinate relation to sacrificial action. This relation is meditated by the Self, the object of knowledge, which is the agent in all works and, therefore, itself stands in a subordinate relation to action. The agent becomes qualified for actions, the fruit of which will only appear after death by knowing that his self will survive the body.
A man undertakes a sacrificial act only when he is conscious that he is different from the body and that after death he will go to heaven when he will enjoy the fruits of his sacrifice.
The qualification the self thus acquires is similar to that which the rice-grains acquire by being sprinkled with water; because they become fit to be used in the sacrifice, only through this latter act of ceremonial purification.
As the knowledge of the Self has no independent position, it cannot have an independent fruit of its own. Therefore the passages which state such fruits cannot be taken as injunctions of fruits, but merely as Arthavadas (or glorificatory passages), like other Arthavadas relating to the substance (Dravya) or to the purification of the substance (Samskara) or to subordi nate acts themselves (Karma), making some additional state ment about the fruits of the sacrificial actions to which the knowledge of the Self is auxiliary.
Jaimini maintains that the statement that the reward of Brahma Jnana is the highest good does not mean that such knowledge of the Self by itself yields any real fruit but the statement is only an exhortation to the performance of the sacrifices. He says that the knowledge of the self is useful only so far as it produces in the performer a belief in his extramundane existence to enable him to enjoy the rewards of his sacrifices. The statement that it yields any fruit by itself is only an exhortation to purification of the sacrificer. The purification of the sacrificer is a necessary concomitant factor like other material requisites of a sacrifice; because without this purifica tion he would not be assured of his surviving the body and enjoying the fruit of his sacrifices in a higher world after death.
Acharadarsanat III.4.3 (428)
Because we find (from the scriptures such) conduct (of men of realisation).
Acharadarsanat: because of the conduct found (from the scriptures).
The objection raised in Sutra 2 is strengthened.
Janaka the king of the Videhas performed a sacrifice in which gifts were freely distributed (Bri. Up. III.1.1). Sirs, I am going to perform a sacrifice (Chh. Up. V.11.5). These and similar passages indicate that those who know Brahman are connected with sacrificial action.
Janaka and Asvapati were knowers of Brahman. If they had attained the final emancipation by knowledge of Brahman there was no necessity for them to perform sacrifices. If mere knowledge could effect the purpose of man, why should they perform sacrifices troublesome in many respects? If a man would find honey in the Arka tree why should he go to the forest? But the two texts intimate that they did perform sacrifices.
This proves that one attains the final emancipation through sacrifices or works alone and not through the knowledge of Brahman, as the Vedantins maintain.
Tacchruteh III.4.4 (429)
Because scripture directly declares that (viz., that knowledge of Brahman stands in a subordinate relation to sacrificial acts.)
Tat: that, that knowledge is subsidiary and supplementary to sacrifice; Sruteh: from Sruti, because the scriptures directly declare.
The Sruti also says that Vidya is an Anga of Karma.
If one does Karma with knowledge there will be greater efficiency. What a man does with knowledge, faith and meditation is more powerful (Chh. Up. I.1.10). This text clearly indicates that knowledge is a part of the sacrificial act. This passage directly states that knowledge is subordinate to work and from this it follows that mere knowledge cannot effect the purpose of man.
Samanvarambhanat III.4.5 (430)
Because the two (knowledge and work) go together (with the departing soul to give fruits of actions).
Samanvarambhanat: because of the accompanying together, as they jointly follow the sacrificer to produce their effects on account of their taking hold together or being together.
The objection begun in Sutra 2 is continued.
Brihadaranyaka Upanishad says The departing soul is followed by knowledge and work (Bri. Up. IV.4.2). This passage indicates that knowledge and work go together with the soul and begin together to manifest their fruits. Therefore, it follows that knowledge is not independent. It is not able to produce any such effect independently. It is concluded that knowledge is not independent of works or sacrificial acts.
Tadvato vidhanat III.4.6 (431)
Because (the scriptures) enjoin (works) for such (only who understand the purport of the Vedas).
Tadvatah: for such (as know the purport of the Vedas); Vidhanat: be cause (the scriptures) enjoin (work).
The objection, begun in the Sutra 2, is continued.
Further Karma is enjoined for one who recites and studies the Vedas. He who has learnt i.e., read the Vedas from a family of teachers, according to the sacred injunction in the leisure time left from the duties to be performed for the Guru; who after having received his discharge has settled in his own house, studying his sacred texts in some sacred spot (Chh. Up. VIII.15.7). Such passages also indicate that those who know the purport of the whole Veda are qualified for sacrificial acts and that hence knowledge does not independently produce any result.
Niyamaccha III.4.7 (432)
And on account of prescribed rules.
Niyamat: on account of prescribed rules, because of compulsory injunction; Cha: also, and.
The argument begun in Sutra 2 is concluded here.
Doing Karma is a Niyama or life-long commandment. Performing works here (i.e., in this life), let a man wish to live a hundred years (Isa. Up. 2). Agnihotra is a sacrifice lasting up to old age and death; for through old age one is freed from it or through death (Sat. Br. XII.4.1.1). From such definite rules also it follows that Knowledge is merely supple mentary to works, or stands in a subordinate relation to work .
The Sutrakara (Sri Vyasa) upholds his view in the following Sutra against all those objections.
But because (the scriptures) teach (the Supreme Self to be) other (than the agent), Baadarayana's view is correct (or valid) for that is seen thus (in scriptural passages).
Adhikopadesat: because (the sriptures) teach (the Supreme Self to be) something over and above; Tu: but; Baadarayanasya: of Baadarayana; Evam: thus, such (is the opinion); Taddarsanat: for that is seen (from the scrip tures). (Adhika: Supreme Being, more different; Upadesat: from the statement in Sruti, owing to the teaching about.)
Objections raised in Sutras 2 to 7 are now being refuted one by one. This Sutra refutes Sutra 2.
Sutras 2-7 give the view of the Mimamsakas which is refuted in Sutras 8-17.
The Sruti declares Isvara as higher than the individual soul. So Baadarayana's doctrine as stated in Sutra 1 is correct. The Sruti shows this. The real nature of the soul is divinity.
The word `tu' (but) discards the Purvapaksha. The Vedanta texts do not teach the limited self which is the agent. What the Vedanta texts really teach as the object of Knowledge is something different from the embodied self, viz., the non-transmigrating Lord who is free from all attributes of transmigrating existence such as agency and the like and distinguished by freedom from sin and so on, the Supreme Self.
The knowledge of such a self does not only not promote action but rather puts an end to all actions. Hence the view of the revered Baadarayana which was stated in Sutra 1 remains valid and cannot be shaken by fallacious reasoning about the subordination of knowledge to action and the like.
That the Vedanta texts teach the Supreme Self is clear from such texts as the following:
He who perceives all and knows all (Mun. Up. I.1.9).
From terror of it the wind blows, from terror the sun rises (Tait. Up. II.8).
It is a great terror, a raised thunderbolt (Katha Up. II.6.2).
By the command of that Imperishable one, O Gargi (Bri. Up. III.8.9).
It thought, may I be many, may I grow forth. It sent forth fire (Chh. VI.2.3).
Tulyam tu darsanam III.4.9 (434)
But the declarations of the Sruti equally support both views.
Tulyam: the same, similar, equal; Tu: but; Darsanam: declaration of the Sruti.
This Sutra refutes the view expressed in Sutra 3. It is a reply to the third Sutra.
There are equal Srutis which show that Vidya is not Karmanga. The Sruti shows that Vidya is not Karmanga.
The word `tu' (but) is used in order to remove the idea that Vidya is subordinate to Karma. There is equal authority in the scriptures from the proposition that Vidya is not subordi nate to Karma, that for one who has attained knowledge there is no work. Thus there are scriptural passages such as:
knowing this the Rishis descended from Kavasa said: For what purpose should we study the Vedas, for what purpose should we sacrifice? Knowing this indeed the ancient ones did not offer the Agnihotra, and when Brahmanas know that self and have risen above the desire for sons, wealth and worlds, they wander about as mendicants (Bri. Up. III.5).
Thus the sages called Kavaseyas did not care for Karma, nor did Yajnavalkya, who abandoning all Karmas went to forest. This much indeed is the means of Immortality, my dear, saying this Yajnavalkya left home (Bri. Up. IV.5.15).
Thus we find examples of eminent men devoted to Vidya, renouncing all ceremonial actions. Therefore, scriptural texts are not all one-sided, in favour of Karmas, but there are passages to the contrary also. The examples of persons like Janaka and others indicate that these men followed Karma as an example to mankind, so that the social order may be pre served. Their work was characterised by non-attachment and therefore it was practically no work at all. Hence the argument of the Mimamsakas is weak.
There are indeed found in Srutis instances of sacrifices being performed by enlightened souls like Janaka, but there are also declarations of equal weight to the effect that performance of sacrifices is quite useless and redundant for the enlightened, i.e., those who have known Brahman.
So it cannot be asserted on the strength of the instances of Janaka and others like him, that knowledge is to be considered as secondary to the sacrifice.
With reference to the indicatory sign as to the dependence of knowledge to work, which is implied in the passage Sirs, I am going to perform a sacrifice we say, that it belongs to a section which treats of Vaisvanara.
Now the texts may declare that a Vidya of Brahman as limit ed by adjuncts is accompanied by works; but all the same the Vidya does not stand in a subordinate relation to works as the leading subject matter and the other means of proof are absent.
The author or Sutrakara (Baadarayana) next answers the objection raised in the Sutra 4.
Asarvatriki III.4.10 (435)
(The scriptural declaration referred to in Sutra 4) is not of universal application.
Asarvatriki: not universal, not applicable everywhere.
The refutation of the objections is continued. This Sutra specially refutes Sutra 4.
The statement of the Sruti referred to in Sutra 4 to the effect that the combination of meditation and sacrifice makes the sacrifice effective is not applicable everywhere. The above-mentioned statement of the Sruti does not refer to meditations in general, but only to the Udgitha Vidya which forms the subject matter of the discourse concerned.
The declaration of the Sruti that Knowledge increases the fruit of the sacrifice does not refer to all knowledge (all Vidyas), as it is connected only with the Udgitha (Udgitha Vidya) which is the topic of the section "Let a man meditate on the syllable OM as the Udgitha."
The text says that if this Udgitha Vidya is recited by a person with knowledge, then it is more fruitful than if it is recited without such Vidya.
Therefore, Vidya is not an auxiliary to work in every instance.
The author next answers the objection raised in III.4.5.
Vibhagah satavat III.4.11 (436)
There is division of knowledge and work as in the case of a hundred (divided between two persons).
Vibhagah: (there is) division of knowledge and work; Satavat: as in the case of a hundred (divided between two persons).
This Sutra specially refutes Sutra 5.
Brihadaranyaka Upanishad declares The departing soul is followed by Vidya (Knowledge) and Karma (work) and past experiences (IV.4.2). Here we have to take knowledge and work in a distributive sense. It means the knowledge follows one and work another. Just as when we say, Give Rs. 100 to Rama and Krishna it means Give Rs. 50 to Rama and Rs. 50 to Krishna, the above passage means that the Vidya relates to the souls seeking emancipation and Karma to other souls. There is no combination of the two.
The text quoted refers only to knowledge and work which concern the soul that transmigrates but not the soul which is about to obtain final release. Because the passage, Thus does the man who desires to transmigrate (Bri. Up. IV.4.6) indicates that the previous text refers to the soul that transmigrates. The Sruti declares of the soul who is about to be released, But the man who never desires never transmigrates (Bri. Up. IV.4.6).
The next Sutra refutes the Sutra 6.
Adhyayanamatravatah III.4.12 (437)
(The scriptures enjoin work) on those who have merely read the Vedas.
Adhyayanamatravatah: of one who has merely read the Vedas.
This Sutra specially refutes Sutra 6.
He who has read the Vedas and known about the sacrifices is entitled to do sacrifice. But no work is prescribed for one who has knowledge of Brahman (Brahma Jnana).
Naviseshat III.4.13 (438)
There being no specification (the rule does) not (specially apply to him who knows, i. e., a Jnani).
Na: not, compulsion does not apply; Aviseshat: on account of the absence of any specification, because there is no special mention.
This Sutra specially refutes Sutra 7.
The Sruti Kurvanneveha performing works here let a man live etc., of the Isavasya Upanishad does not specially apply to a Brahma Jnani. It is general in its terms. There is no special mention in it that it is applicable to a Jnani also. It is not binding on a Jnani when there is no specification.
The Sruti of the Isavasya does not lay down any such restrictive rule that even the illumined sage must perform Karma throughout his life. Why so? Aviseshat. Because there is no specification. All that it says is Let one perform Karmas throughout his life. There is nothing to show to which class of people, that particular rule is addressed. On the other hand there are express texts of the Srutis which show that immortality is not to be obtained by Karmas, but by knowledge alone.
Mahanarayana Upanishad of the Tait. Ar. X.5 declares Not by Karmas (sacrifices), not by progeny, nor by wealth can one obtain immortality. It is by renunciation alone that some great souled beings have obtained immortality.
The apparent conflict in the two Sruti texts is to be recon ciled by giving them different scopes. One is addressed to Karma-nishtha-devotees, the other to the Jnana-nishtha- devotees.
Stutaye'numatirva III.4.14 (439)
Stutaye Anumatih Va
Or rather the permission (to do work) is for the glorification (of knowledge).
Stutaye: for the purpose of glorification (of knowledge); Anumatih: permission; Va: or, rather.
This Sutra also refutes Sutra 7.
The passage performing works here may be treated in another way also. The injunction to do work for the knowers of Brahman or the illumined sages is for eulogising this knowledge. A Brahma Jnani or knower of the Self may work all his life but he will not be bound by its effects, on account of the power of knowledge. Knowledge nullifies the effect of Karma. No work clings to the man. This clearly glorifies Knowledge.
Kamakarena chaike III.4.15 (440)
And some according to their own liking (have abandoned all works).
Kamakarena: according to their own liking; Cha: and; Eke: some.
The argument in refutation of Jaimini's views is continued.
In Sutra 3 it was stated that Janaka and others performed sacrifices even after attaining knowledge of Brahman. This Sutra says that some have abandoned all works according to their own liking. Some may like to work to set an example to others after attaining knowledge, while others may abandon all works. There is no compulsion on the knowers of Brahman or liberated sages as regards work.
A scripfural text of the Vajasaneyins runs as follows: Know ing this the people of old did not wish for offspring. What shall we do with offspring, they said, we who have this self and this world (Bri. Up. IV.4.22). From this it follows that know ledge is not subordinate to action and that the scriptural state ments as to the fruit of knowledge cannot be taken in any but their true sense.
Upamardam cha III.4.16 (441)
And (scripture teaches that the) destruction (of all qualifi cations for work results from knowledge).
Upamardam: complete destruction, putting an end to all actions; Cha: and.
The previous argument is continued.
Further, such knowledge brings the realisation that every thing is Atman or Brahman. How then can the knower act?
Again, far from being a part of work, knowledge puts an end to all works, all obligatory duties. Mundaka Upanishad declares, Brahman in both His superior and inferior aspects being realised, the knot of the heart (egoism, etc.) is cut down, all doubts are dispelled and works are destroyed (Mun. Up. II.2.9).
Knowledge of Brahman annihilates all ignorance and its effects like agent, deed and fruit, But when to the Knower of Brahman everything has become the Self, then what should one see and through what? (Bri. Up. IV.5.15). The know ledge of Brahman is antagonistic to all actions. Hence it cannot be subsidiary to work. It is independent.
Urdhvaretassu cha sabde hi III.4.17 (442)
And (knowledge belongs) to those who observe perpetual celibacy, because in scripture (that stage of life is mentioned).
Urdhvaretassu: to those who observe perpetual celibacy, in those stages of life where the sexual energy has an upward flow; Cha: and; Sabde: in the Sruti; Hi: because.
The previous argument is continued.
Further the Sruti declares Jnana in relation to Sannyasins. Knowledge is said to be in Sannyasins. They have not to do any Karmas. Such Sannyasa can be taken even without going through the householder's life.
Scripture shows that knowledge is valid also for the stages of life for which perpetual celibacy is prescribed. Now in their case knowledge cannot be subordinate to work, because work is absent, because the works prescribed by Vedas such as the Agnihotra are not performed by men who have reached those stages. To a Sannyasin there is no work prescribed except enquiry of Brahman and meditation on the Supreme Self. So how can knowledge be subordinate to work?
We find from the Sruti texts that there is a stage of life called Sannyasa. There are three branches of duty (Chh. Up. II.23.1). Those who in the forest practise faith and austerity (Chh. Up. V.10.1). Those who practise penance and faith in the forest (Mun. Up. I.10.11). Wishing for that world only, mendicants renounce their homes and wander forth (Bri. Up. IV.4.22). Let him wander forth at once from the state of studentship. All these attain to the worlds of the virtuous; but only one who is finally established in Brahman, attains immortality. (Chh. Up. II.23. 1-2).
Everyone can take to this life, without being a householder etc. This indicates the independence of knowledge.
Thus, the theory of Jaimini that Knowledge is subordinate to Karma has no legs to stand upon, and has been refuted.
Paramarsadhikaranam: Topic 2 (Sutras 18-20)
Sannyasa is prescribed by the scriptures
Paramarsam jaiminirachodana chapavadati hi III.4.18 (443)
Jaimini (considers that scriptural texts mentioning those stages of life in which celibacy is obligatory, contain) a reference (only to those stages; they are not injunctions; because other (scriptural texts) condemn (those stages).
Paramarsam: a passing allusion, mere reference; Jaiminih: Jaimini; Achodana: there is no clear injunction; Cha: and; Apavadati: condemns; Hi: because, clearly, certainly.
An objection to Sutra 17 is raised.
Jaimini says that in the text quoted in the last Sutra (Chh. Up. II.23.1), there is no word indicating that Sannyasa is enjoined on man. It is a mere reference only but not an injunction.
The Brihadaranyaka text quoted in the last Sutra declares that some persons do like Sannyasa. Sruti here makes a statement of fact. It does not enjoin Sannyasa.
Thus there is no direct Sruti for Sannyasa though there are Smritis and Achara (usage). But if we say that there is no Sruti for the householder's life, he (Jaimini) would reply that Karmas like Agnihotra are enjoined by Sruti.
Further, the text here glorifies steadfastness in Brahman. But only one who is firmly established in Brahman attains Immortality. Sacrifice, study, charity, austerity, studentship and life-long continence bestow the fruit of obtaining heaven. But Immortality is attained only by one who is firmly established in Brahman.
Moreover, there are other Sruti passages which condemn Sannyasa. Having brought to your teacher his proper reward, do not cut off the line of children (Tait. Up. I.11.1). To him who is without a son this world does not belong; all beasts even know that (Tait. Br. VII.13.12).
Baadarayana (holds that Sannyasa) also must be gone through, because the scriptural text (quoted) refers equally to all the four Asramas or stages of life.
Anushtheyam: should be practised; Baadarayanah: Baadarayana, the author of the Sutras; Samyasruteh: for the scriptural text refers equally to all the four Asramas.
The objection raised in Sutra 18 is refuted.
In the text quoted sacrifice refers to the householder's life, austerity to Vanaprastha, studentship to Brahmacharya, and one who is firmly established in Brahman to Sannyasa. So the text refers equally to all the four stages of life. The text that relates to the first three stages refers to what is enjoined elsewhere. So also does the text that relates to Sannyasa.
Therefore, Sannyasa also is enjoined and must be gone through by all.
Baadarayana holds that Sannyasa is an appropriate Asrama like Grihastha Asrama (householder's life), because both are referred to in Sruti. The word Tapas refers to a different Asrama in which the predominant factor is Tapas.
Vidhirva dharanavat III.4.20 (445)
Or rather (there is an) injunction (in this text) as in the case of carrying (of the sacrificial wood).
Vidhih: injunction; Va: or rather; Dharanavat: as in the case of carry ing (of the sacrificial wood).
The argument commenced in Sutra 19 to refute the objection raised in Sutra 18 is continued.
This Sutra now tries to establish that there is an injunction about Sannyasa in the Chhandogya text quoted. The passage is rather to be understood as containing an injunction, not a mere reference.
The case is analogous to that of `carrying'. There is a scriptural text relating to the Agnihotra which forms part of the Mahapitriyajna which is performed for the manes. Let him approach carrying the sacrificial wood below the ladle holding the offering; for above he carries it to the gods. Jaimini inter prets the last clause as an injunction although there is no word in it to that effect, for such an injunction is nowhere else to be found in the scriptures. Following this argument, this Sutra declares that there is an injunction as regards Sannyasa and not a mere reference in Chh. Up. II.23.1, as it is not enjoined anywhere else.
Even if in the Sruti there is only Anuvada (declaration) of other Asramas, the Purvamimamsika rules show that we must infer a Vidhi (injunction) of Sannyasa from the portion: Brahmasamstho'mritatvameti, because there is no other sepa rate injunction just as there is no command that the Samit should be kept on the upper portion of the Sruk and yet the Purvamimamsa says that such command should be inferred.
In the present case also the same rule of construction should be applied. Further, even if there is only a declaration and not an injunction as regards the other Asramas, we must infer an injunction about Sannyasa as it has been specially glorified.
Further there are Sruti passages which directly enjoin Sannyasa, Or else he may wander forth from the student's life, or from the house, or from the forest (Jabala Upanishad 4). Hence the existence of Sannyasa Asrama is undeniable.
The word Tapas in the Sruti refers to Vanaprastha whereas the speciality of Sannyasa is control of the senses (Indriya Samyama). The Sruti differentiates Sannyasa and says that those belonging to the other three Asramas go to the Punya Lokas whereas the Sannyasin attains Amritatva (Immortality).
Jaimini himself says that even glorification must be in a complimentary relation to an injunction. In the text, steadfast devotion to Brahma is employed. Hence it has an injunctive value. Brahma Samstha means meditating always on Brahman. It is a state of being grounded in Brahman to the exclusion of all other activities. In the case of other Asramas: that is not possible as they have their own Karmas. But it is possible to Sannyasins as they have abandoned Karmas. Their Sama (serenity) and Dama (self-restraint) help them towards it and are not obstacles.
Sannyasa is not prescribed only for those who are blind, lame, etc., and who are, therefore, not fit for performing rituals. Sannyasa is a means for the realisation of Brahman. It must be taken in a regular prescribed manner. The Sruti declares, The wandering mendicant, with orange-coloured robe, shaven, wifeless, pure, guileless, living on alms, accepting no gifts, qualifies himself for the realisation of Brahman (Jabali Sruti).
Therefore, Sannyasa is prescribed by the scriptures. As knowledge is enjoined on Sannyasins, it is independent of works.
Stutimatradhikaranam: Topic 3 (Sutras 21-22)
Scriptural texts as in Chh. Up. I.1.3. which refer to Vidyas are not mere praises but themselves enjoin the meditations
If it be said that (texts such as the one about the Udgitha are) mere glorifications on account of their reference (to parts of sacrifices), (we say) not so, on account of the newness (of what they teach, if viewed as injunctions).
Stutimatram: mere praise; Upadanat: on account of their reference (to parts of sacrificial acts); Iti: thus, so; Chet: if; Na: not so; Apurvatvat: on account of its newness. (Iti chet: if it be said).
This Sutra consists ot two parts, namely an objection and its reply. The objection portion is: `Stutimatramupadanaditi chet', and the reply portion is: `Na apurvatvat'.
That Udgitha (OM) is the best of all essences, the highest, holding the highest place, the eighth (Chh. Up. I.1.3). This earth is the Rik, the fire is Saman (Chh. Up. I.6.1). This world in truth is that piled up fire-altar (Sat. Br. X.1.2.2). That hymn is truly that earth (Ait. Ar. II.1.2.1).
A doubt arises whether these passages are meant to glorify the Udgitha or to enjoin devout meditations.
The Purvapakshin maintains that these are mere praise and no injunction to meditate on `OM' and so on. These passages are analogous to passages such as This earth is the ladle. The sun is the tortoise. The heavenly world is the Ahavaniya which simply glorify the ladle and so on.
The latter half of the present Sutra refutes the view of the opponent.
In the Sruti passage That Udgitha (OM) is the best essence of the essences etc., the description is not mere praise but is a Vidhi, and it tells us something which is new.
The analogy is incorrect. Glorificatory passages are of use in so far as entering into a complimentary relation to injunctive passages, but the passages under discussion are not capable of entering into such a relation to the Udgitha and so on which are enjoined in altogether different places of the Vedas and would be purposeless as far as the glorification is concerned. Passages such as This earth is the ladle are not analogous because they stand in proximity to injunctive passages, and so they can be taken as praise.
Therefore, the texts such as those under discussion have an injunctive purpose. On account of the newness, these are not mere praise but an injunction.
Bhavasabdaccha III.4.22 (447)
And there being words expressive of injunction.
Bhavasabaat: from words indicative of existence of injunction in Sruti; Cha: and, also, moreover.
The argument commenced in Sutra 21 is concluded.
Let one meditate on OM or the Udgitha (Chh. Up. I.1.1). We have a very clear injunction to meditate on OM in this passage. On the face of this we cannot interpret the text quoted in the last Sutra as mere praise of OM. The expression This is the best of all the essences in the passage cited under the preceding Sutra is not a mere glorificatory expression, but it amounts to an injunction for the Udgitha meditation.
Pariplavadhikaranam: Topic 4 (Sutras 23-24)
The stories mentioned in the Upanishads do not serve the purpose of Pariplavas and so do not form part of the ritualistic acts.
They are meant to euloisge the Vidya taught in them
If it be said (that the stories told in the Upanishads) are for the purpose of Pariplava (only, we say) not so, because (certain stories above) are specified (by the Sruti for this purpose).
Pariplavarthah: for the purpose of Pariplavas; Iti: so; Chet: if; Na: not so; Viseshitatvat: because of specification, on account of (certain stories alone) being specified. (Iti chet: if it be said.)
The purpose of narration of stories in the Upanishads is stated in this Sutra and in the next one.
This Sutra consists of two parts namely, an objection and its reply. The objection portion is `Pariplavartha iti chet'. And the reply is: `Na viseshitatvat'.
In the Asvamedha sacrifice the priest recites stories to the king who performs the Asvamedha sacrifice, and his relatives at intervals during the performance of the sacrifice. These are known as Pariplavas and form part of the ritualistic acts.
The question is whether the stories of the Upanishads such as those relating to Yajnavalkya and Maitreyi (Bri. Up. IV.5.1), Pratardana (Kau. Up. III.1), Janasruti (Chh. Up. IV.1.1), and so on also serve this purpose in which case they become part of the rites, and the whole of Jnana Kanda becomes subordinate to Karma Kanda.
The Purvapakshin holds that those stories of the Upanishads serve the purpose of Pariplava, because they are stories like others and because the telling of stories is enjoined for the Pariplava. From this it follows that the Upanishadic stories and Vedanta texts do not chiefly aim at knowledge, because like Mantras they stand in a complimentary relation to sacrificial acts.
Tatha chaikavakyatopabandhat III.4.24 (449)
And so (they are meant to illustrate the nearest Vidyas), being connected as one coherent whole.
Tatha: so, similarly; Cha: and; Ekavakyatopabandhat: being connected as one whole. (Ekavakya: unity cf construction or of statements or that of sense; Upabandhat: because of connection.)
The discussion commenced in Sutra 23 is concluded here.
Therefore, it is for the purpose of praise of Vidya because only then there would be unity of idea in the context. Only such a view will lead to harmony of the context.
The stories of the Upanishads are to be regarded as essential parts of Brahma Vidya. They are introduced only to facilitate an intelligent grouping of the subject. The stories are intended to introduce the Vidyas. The story form creates more attention and interest on the part of the aspirant. Their object is to make it clear to our understanding in a concrete form, the Vidyas taught in other portions of the Upanishads in the abstract.
Why do we say so? Ekavakyatopabandhat. Because of their syntactical connection with the Vidyas taught in the succeeding passages.
Thus in the story beginning with Yajnavalkya had two wives, etc., we find immediately following in that very section, the Vidya taught about the Atman in these words The Atman is verily to be seen, to be heard of, to be meditated upon. As these stories are immediately preceded or succeeded by instructions about Brahman, we infer that they are meant to glorify the Vidyas and are not Pariplava stories. The stories are told in order to facilitate the understanding of these abstruse subjects and they are eminently fitted to subserve that purpose.
Agnindhanadyadhikaranam: Topic 5 (Sutra 25)
Sannyasins need not observe ritualistic acts, as Brahma Vidya or knowledge serves their purpose
Ata eva chagnindhanadyanapeksha III.4.25 (450)
And, therefore, there is no necessity of the lighting of the fire and so on.
Ata eva: therefore, only, for this reason only; Cha: and, also; Agni: fire; Indhanadi: fire-wood, and so on, kindling fire and performing sacrifices, etc.; Anapeksha: no need, has not to be depended upon. (Agni-indhanadi-anapeksha: no necessity of lighting fires, etc.)
This Sutra states that the seeker of Brahman may dispense with sacrificial rites.
Brahma Vidya has no need for fire, fire-wood, etc. It is by itself the cause of emancipation.
In Sutra III.4.1 it was stated that the knowledge of Brah man results in the attainment of the highest Purushartha or goal of life. The expression Ata Eva (for this reason alone) must be viewed as taking up Sutra III.4.1 because thus a satisfa ctory sense is established. For this very same reason, i.e., because knowledge serves the purpose of Sannyasins, the lighting of the sacrificial fire and similar works which are enjoined on the householders, etc., need not be observed by them.
Thus the Sutrakara sums up the result of this first Adhikarana, intending to make some further remarks.
As a Sannyasin, devoted to the meditation on Brahman is stated in Sruti to attain immortality and not any of the rewards arising from sacrificial rites, he is not required to have recourse to sacrificial works to be performed with fire, fire-wood and so on. Chhandogya Upanishad declares, Brahmasamstho'amrita tvameti One devoted to Brahman attains Immortality (Chh. Up. II.23.1).
The theory or doctrine that knowledge and work must be combined in order to produce Mukti or salvation is hereby set aside. Brahma Vidya or Knowledge of Brahman is sufficient for that purpose.
Sarvapekshadhikaranam: Topic 6 (Sutras 26-27)
Works prescribed by the scriptures are means to the attainment of knowledge
Sarvapeksha cha yajnadi sruterasvavat III.4.26 (451)
And there is the necessity of all works because the scriptures prescribe sacrifices, etc., (as means to the attainment of knowledge) even as the horse (is used to draw a chariot, and not for ploughing).
Sarvapeksha: there is the necessity of all works; Cha: and; Yajnadisruteh: for the scriptures prescribe sacrifices, etc., (as means to knowledge); Asvavat: like a horse, as in the case of the horse.
The Sutra says that sacrificial works and the like are necessary for origination of knowledge of Brahman.
We may conclude from the previous Sutra that works are altogether useless.
This Sutra says that all these works are useful for origination of knowledge. Even the scriptures prescribe them as they serve an indirect means to the attainment of knowledge. Brihad aranyaka Upanishad declares, Brahmanas seek to know Brahman by the study of the Vedas, by scriptures, gifts, penance and renunciation (Bri. Up. IV.4.22). Similarly the passage, what people call sacrifice that is really Brahmacharya (Chh. Up. VIII.5.1), by connecting sacrifices and so on with Bra hmacharya which is a means of knowledge, intimates that sacri fices, etc., also are means of knowledge. Again the passage That word which all the Vedas record, which all penances proclaim, desiring which men live as religious students, that word I tell thee briefly, it is OM (Katha Up. I.2.15), likewise intimates that the works enjoined on the Asramas are means of knowledge.
When knowledge once is attained requires no help from external works for the production of this result namely, Liberation. The case is analogous to a horse, whose help is required until the place of destination is reached but it may be dispensed with after the journey has been accomplished.
When Atma-Jnana is attained it does not need any other accessory to bring about salvation, but Karma is needed for Atma-Jnana. Just as a horse is not used to drag a plough but is used to drag a car, so the Asrama Karmas are not needed for the fruition of Jnana but are needed for Jnana.
The final emancipation results only from knowledge of Brahman and not from work. Work purifies the mind and knowledge dawns in a pure mind.
Hence works are useful as they are an indirect means to knowledge.
If knowledge be originated by sacrifices, gifts, penance and fasting, what is the necessity of other qualifications like Sama (serenity) and Dama (self-restraint)? To this the author replies in the next Sutra.
Samadamadyupetah syat tathapi tu tadvidhestadangataya
teshamavasyanushtheyatvat III.4.27 (452)
But all the same (even though there is no injunction to do sacrificial acts to attain knowledge in the Brihadaranyaka text) one must possess serenity, self-control and the like, as these are enjoined as auxiliaries to knowledge and therefore have necessarily to be practised.
Samadamadyupetah syat: one must possess serenity, self-control and the like; Tathapi: still, all the same, even if it be so; Tu: verily; Tadvidheh: as they are enjoined; Tadangataya: on account of their being a part, as helps to knowledge; Tesham: their; Avasyanushtheyatvat: because it being necessary to be practised. (Avasya: necessarily; Anushtheyatvat: because they must be practised.)
Brihadaranyaka Upanishad declares, The Brahmanas seek to know Brahman through the study of the Vedas, sacrifices, charity, etc. (Bri. Up. IV.4.22). In this passage there is no word to indicate that sacrifice is enjoined on one who wants to know Brahman.
So the Purvapakshin maintains that there is no necessity at all for work for one who aspires after knowledge.
This present Sutra says that even should this be so. The seeker for knowledge must possess calmness of mind, must subdue his senses and so on; because all this is enjoined as a means of knowledge in the following scriptural passage, There he who knows this, having become calm, subdued, satisfied, patient and collected sees Self in Self (Bri. Up. IV.4.23).
What is enjoined must necessarily be carried out. The introductory word `therefore' (Tasmat) which expresses the praise of the subject under discussion makes us un derstand that the passage has an injunctive character, because if there were no injunction, the praise would be meaningless.
Further the Madhyandina Sruti uses the word pasyet let him see and not `he sees'. Hence calmness of mind, etc., are required even if sacrifices, etc., should not be required.
As these qualities are enjoined, they are necessarily to be practised. Sama, Dama etc., are proximate or direct means of knowledge (Antaranga-Sadhana). Yajnas or sacrifices, etc., are remote or indirect means of knowledge (Bahiranga-Sadhana).
The word `Adi' (and the rest) mentioned in the Sutra, indi cates that the aspirant after Brahma Vidya must possess all these qualifications of truthfulness, generosity, asceticism, celibacy, indifference to worldly objects, tolerance, endurance, faith, equilibrium, compassion etc.
Sarvannanumatyadhikaranam: Topic 7 (Sutras 28-31)
Food-restrictions may be given up only when life is in danger
Only when life is in danger (there is) permission to take all food (i.e., take food indiscriminately) because the Sruti declares that.
Sarvannanumatih: permission to take all sorts of food; Cha: only; Prana tyaye: when life is in danger; Taddarsanat: because the Sruti declares that.
This and the subsequent three Sutras indicate what kind of food is to be taken.
Chhandogya Upanishad declares, For one who knows this, there is nothing that is not food (Chh. Up. V.2.1). The question is if such Sarvannanumati (description of all as his food) is a Vidhi or Vidhyanga or a Sruti (praise).
The Purvapakshin maintains that it is enjoined on one who meditates on Prana on account of the newness of the statement. It has an injunctive value, as such statement is not found anywhere else.
The Sutra refutes it and declares that it is not an injun ction, but only a statement of fact. We are not justified in assuming an injunction, where the idea of an injunction does not arise. It is not Vidhi or injunction as no mandatory words are found. Can a man eat and digest all things? No. Prohi bited food may be eaten only when life is in danger, when one is dying of hunger as was done by the sage Chakrayana (Ushasti) when he was dying for want of food. Sruti declares this.
Sage Ushasti was dying of hunger on account of famine. He ate the beans half-eaten by a keeper of elephants but refused to drink what had been offered by the latter on the ground of its being a mere leaving. The sage justified his conduct by saying, I would not have lived, if I had not eaten the beans, but water I can do without at present. I can drink water wherever I like.
From this it follows, that the passage For one who knows this etc., is an Arthavada.
Abadhatccha III.4.29 (454)
And because (thus) (the scriptural statements with respect to food) are not contradicted.
Abadhat: becausc of a non-contradiction, as there is no contrary state ment anywhere in Sruti; Cha: and, also, moreover, on account of non-sublation.
The topic commenced in Sutra 28 is continued.
And thus those scriptural passages which distinguish lawful and unlawful food such as When the food is pure the whole nature becomes pure (Chh. Up. VII.26.2) are non-sublated. The statement of the Chhandogya Upanishad will not be contradicted only if the explanation given is taken, and not otherwise.
Only then other Srutis will have unhindered applications. Only in this view will the Sruti When the food is pure the mind becomes pure have application.
Clean food should generally be taken as there is no contrary statement anywhere in Sruti to the purifying effect of clean food. There is nowhere any passage in Sruti, contradicting the passage of the Chhandogya Sruti which declares that clean food makes our nature pure.
Unlawful food as a general rule clogs the understanding and obstructs the clear works of the intellect. But in the case of the sage, whose heart is always pure and intellect keen, the taking of such food does not obstruct the working of his brain, and his knowledge remains as pure as ever.
Api cha smaryate III.4.30 (455)
And moreover the Smritis say so.
Api: also; Cha: moreover; Smaryate: the Smriti says so, it is seen in the Smritis, it is prescribed by Smriti.
The previous topic is continued.
Smriti also states that when life is in danger both he who has knowledge and he who has not can take any food. He who eats food procured from anywhere when life is in danger, is not tainted by sin, as a lotus leaf is not wetted by water.
On the contrary many passages teach that unlawful food is to be avoided. The Brahmana must permanently forego intoxicating liquor. Let them pour boiling spirits down the throat of a Brahmana who drinks spirits. Spirit-drinking worms grow in the mouth of the spirit-drinking man, because he enjoys what is unlawful.
From this it is inferred that generally clean food is to be taken except in the case of extreme starvation or in times of distress only.
When the Upanishad says that the sage may eat all kinds of food, it must be interpreted as meaning that he may eat all kinds of food, in times of distress only. The text of the Upanishad should not be construed as an injunction in favour of eating unlawful food.
Sabdaschato'kamakare III.4.31 (456)
And hence the scripture prohibiting license.
Sabdah: the scriptural passage; Cha: and; Atah: hence; Akamakare: to prevent undue license, prohibiting license, as to non-proceeding according to liking.
The previous topic is discussed and concluded here.
There are scriptural passages which prohibit one from doing everything just as he pleases, which forbid man to take undue liberty in the matter of food and drink. Therefore a Brahmana must not drink liquor (Kathaka Sam.). Perfect spiritual discipline is absolutely necessary for controlling the mind and the senses and attaining knowledge or Self-realisation. Such Sruti texts are meant for this discipline.
Therefore, it is established that the Sruti does not enjoin on one who meditates on Prana to take all kinds of food indiscriminately.
As there is Sruti which forbids license in food and drink, the Sruti referred to above in Sutra 28 is an Arthavada.
The permission to take all kinds of food is confined to times of distress only when one's life is in danger. One must strictly observe the injunctions of the scriptures in ordinary times.
Ashramakarmadhikaranam: Topic 8 (Sutras 32-35)
The duties of Asrama are to be performed by even one who is not desirous of salvation
Vihitatvacchasramakarmapi III.4.32 (457)
And the duties of the Asramas (are to be performed also by him who does not desire emancipation) because they are enjoined (on him by the scriptures).
Vihitatvat: because they are enjoined; Cha: and; Asrama- karma: duties of the Asrama, or order of life; Api: also.
This and the subsequent three Sutras show who are required to perform sacrifices and do other prescribed duties.
Under Sutra 26 it has been proved that the works enjoined on the Asramas are means to knowledge. The question arises now, why should one who does not desire knowledge or final release do these works?
The present Sutra declares that since these duties are enjoined on all who are in these Aramas or orders of life, viz., student-life, householder's life, and hermit life, one should observe them.
In the case of a man who keeps to the Asramas but does not seek liberation, the Nityakarmas or the permanent obligatory duties are indispensable. The Sruti says Yavajjivam agnihotram juhotias long as his life lasts, one is to offer the Agnihotra.
Sahakaritvena cha III.4.33 (458)
And (the duties are to be performed also) as a means to knowledge.
Sahakaritvena: as, an auxiliary, on account of cooperativeness, as means to knowledge; Cha: and.
The topic commenced in Sutra 32 is continued.
The duties or works are helpful in producing knowledge but not its fruit, viz., emancipation. In the former case the connection between Karma and fruit is inseparable (Nitya-Samyoga), but in the latter case it is separable (Anitya-Samyoga). Salva tion or Moksha is attainable only through knowledge of Brahman or Brahma-Jnana.
Works (Karmas) are an aid to Vidya or knowledge of Self. Those who are desirous of emancipation should also perform religious rites as a help to enlightenment. Brahma Vidya is independent in producing its results. Karma is merely the handmaid and cooperator of Vidya. Works are means for the origination of knowledge.
Sarvathapi ta evobhayalingat III.4.34 (459)
In all cases the same duties (have to be performed), because of the twofold indicatory marks.
Sarvatha: in all cases, in every respect, under any circumstance; Api: also; Ta eva: the same duties (have to be performed); Ubhayalingat: because of the twofold inferential signs. (Ta: they, the sacrificial works; Eva: certainly.)
The previous topic is continued.
The word `Api' in the Sutra has the force of `indeed', `even'. The words `Sarvatha Api' are equal to `Sarvatha Eva'.
The question arises whether the works performed as enjoined on the Asramas, and those done as auxiliaries to knowledge are of two different kinds.
The present Sutra declares that in either case, whether viewed as duties incumbent on the Asramas or as cooperating with knowledge, the very same Agnihotra and other duties have to be performed, as is seen from the Sruti and the Smriti texts.
Brihadaranyaka Upanishad declares, Him the Brahmanas seek to know through the study of the Vedas, sacrifices etc. (Bri. Up. IV.4.22). This text indicates that sacrifices etc., enjoined in Karmakanda for different purposes are to be performed as means to knowledge also.
The Smriti also says the same thing, He who performs obligatory works without aiming at the fruit of work etc. (Gita VI.1). Those very obligatory duties subserve the origi nation of knowledge also.
Moreover the Smriti passage He who is qualified by that forty-eighty purifications etc., refers to the purifications required for Vedic works, with a view to the origination of knowledge in him who has undergone these purifications.
In every respect, whether viewed as duties incumbent on a householder or as practices auxiliary to knowledge or illumination, the sacrificial works, prescribed to be performed, are recognised to be the same and not different, because they are indispensable requisites for both orders of life, as permanent duties for a householder and as auxiliary aids to meditation for a Sannyasi.
The Sutrakara, therefore, rightly emphasises the non-difference of the works.
Anabhibhavam cha darsayati III.4.35 (460)
And the scripture also declares (that he who is endowed with Brahmacharya) is not overpowered (by passion, anger, etc.).
Anabhibhavam: not being overpowered; Cha: and; Darsayati: the scrip ture shows, the Srutis declare.
The previous topic is concluded here.
This Sutra points out a further indicatory mark strengthening the conclusion that works cooperate towards knowledge. Scripture also declares that he who is endowed with such means as Brahmacharya, etc.. is not overpowered by such afflictions as passion, anger and the like. For that Self does not perish which one attains by Brahmacharya (Chh. Up. VIII.5.3). This passage indicates that like work, Brahmacharya, etc., are also means to knowledge. He who is endowed with celibacy is not overcome by anger, passion, jealousy, hatred. His mind is ever peaceful. As his mind is not agitated, he is able to practise deep and constant meditation which leads to the attainment of knowledge.
It is thus a settled conclusion that works are obligatory on the Asramas and are also means to knowledge.
Vidhuradhikaranam: Topic 9 (Sutras 36-39)
Those who stand midway between two Asramas also are qualified for knowledge
Antara chapi tu taddrishteh III.4.36 (461)
And (persons standing) in between (two Asramas) are also (qualified for knowledge), for that is seen (in scripture).
Antara: (persons standing) in between (two Asramas); Cha: and; Api tu: also; Taddrishteh: such cases being seen, (as it is seen in Sruti, because it is so seen).
Widowers who have not married again, persons who are too poor to marry and those who are forced by circumstances not to enter into wedlock and have not renounced the world come under the purview of Sutras 36-39.
The word `tu' is employed in order to refute the Purvapaksha that Karma is necessary for the origination of knowledge of Brahman. The force of the word `cha' is to show certainty.
A doubt arises whether persons in want who do not possess means, etc., and, therefore, are not able to enter into one or the other of the Asramas, or who stand midway between two Asramas as for example, a widower, are qualified for knowledge or not.
The Purvapakshin maintains that they are not qualified, as they cannot perform the works of any Asrama which are means to knowledge.
The present Sutra declares that they are entitled, because such cases are seen from the scriptures. Scriptural passages declare that persons of that class such as Raikva and Gargi, the daughter of Vachaknavi had the knowledge of Brahman (Chh. Up. IV.1 and Bri. Up. III.6.8).
Vidura, a man who had no wife, did not adopt the Vanaprastha Asrama, and who had no Asrama, was expert in Brahma Vidya. He had knowledge of Brahman.
Antara (who stand outside) are those persons who do not belong to any order or Asrama and consequently do not perform the duties of any Asrama. They are born in this life with discrimination and dispassion owing to the performance of such duties in their previous birth. Their minds have been purified by truth, penance, prayers, etc., performed in their past lives. If a man has duly discharged the duties of his Asrama in previous birth, but owing to some obstacles or Pratibandhas Brahma-Jnana did not arise in him in that life, and he dies before the dawn of knowledge, then he is born in the present life ripe for knowledge. Brahma-Jnana manifests in him in all its glory by mere contact with a sage. Therefore such a man does not perform any Karmas or rather does not stand in any need of performing any duties of Asramas.
Api cha smaryate III.4.37 (462)
This is stated in Smriti also.
Api: also, too; Cha: moreover, and; Smaryate: is stated in Smriti, the Smriti records such cases.
The previous topic is continued.
Moreover, it is stated also in Smriti that persons, not belonging to any one of the four prescribed orders of life, acquire Brahma-Jnana.
It is recorded in the Itihasas (Mahabharata) also how Samvarta and others who paid no regard to the duties incumbent on the Asramas went naked and afterwards became great Yogins or saints. The great Bhishma is also an instance in point.
Manu Samhita declares There is no doubt that a Brahmana attains final success only by practice of continuously repeating the Japa. It matters little whether he performs other prescribed duties or not. One who is friendly to all, is really a Brahmana (II.87).
But the instances quoted from scripture and Smriti furnish merely indicatory marks. What then is the final conclusion? That conclusion is stated in the next Sutra.
Viseshanugrahascha III.4.38 (463)
And the promotion (of knowledge is bestowed on them) through special acts.
Visesha: special; Anugrahah: favour; Cha: and. (Viseshanu- grahah: special advantage, advantage or favour accruing from extraordinary good works done in the previous life.)
The previous topic is continued.
Moreover knowledge of Brahman may be attained by the special grace of the gods due to Japa, fasting and worship of gods. Or it may be that Asrama Karmas might have been done in previous births.
A widower who is not a householder in the proper sense of the term, can attain knowledge of Brahman through special acts like Japa, fasting, prayer, which are not opposed to the condition of those who do not belong to any Asrama.
The Smriti says By mere prayer no doubt the Brahmana perfects himself. May he perform other works or not, the kind-hearted one is called Brahmana (Manu Samhita II.87).
This passage indicates that where the works of the Asramas are not possible, prayer qualifies for knowledge.
Smriti also declares Perfected by many births he finally goes to the highest state (Bhagavad Gita VI.45). This passage intimates that the aggregate of the different meritorious works performed in previous births promotes knowledge.
Therefore, there is no contradiction in admitting qualifica tion for knowledge on the part of widowers and the like.
Atastvitarajjyayo lingaccha III.4.39 (464)
Better than this is the other (state of belonging to an Asrama) on account of the indicatory marks (in the Sruti and the Smriti).
Atah: from this, than this, than the intermediate state mentioned above; Tu: but; Itarat: the other, the state belonging to a prescribed order of life; Jyayah: better, superior; Lingat: because of the indicatory marks, from such indications in the scripture, from indication, signs, in ferences; Cha: and.
The previous topic is concluded here.
The word `tu' (but) is employed in order to remove the doubt. The word `cha' (and) is used in the sense of exclusion.
Though it is possible for one who stands between two Asramas to attain knowledge, yet it is a better means to know ledge to belong to some Asrama. He who belongs to an Asrama has better means of attaining knowledge of the Self or Brahman, because the facilities are greater in the latter condition.
This is confirmed by the Sruti and Smriti The Brahmanas seek to know Brahman through sacrifices etc. (Bri. Up. IV.4.22). On that path goes whoever knows Brahman and who has done holy works as prescribed for the Asramas and obtained splendour (Bri. Up. IV.4.9). Smriti declares, Let not a Brahmana stay for a day outside the Asrama; having stayed outside for a year he goes to utter ruin.
Tadbhutadhikaranam: Topic 10 (Sutra 40)
He who has taken Sannyasa cannot revert back to his former stages of life
Tadbhutasya tu natadbhavo jaiminerapi
niyamatadrupabhavebhyah III.4.40 (465)
But for one who has become that (i.e. entered the highest Asrama, i.e., Sannyasa) there is no reverting (to the preced ing ones) on account of restrictions prohibiting such reversion or descending to a lower order. Jaimini also (is of this opinion).
Tadbhutasya: of one who has become that, for one who has attained that (highest Asrama); Tu: but; Na: no; Atadbhavah: lapse from that stage, falling away from that; Jaimineh: according to Jaimini, of Jaimini (is this opinion); Api: also, even; Niyamatadrupabhavebhyah: on account of the restrictions prohibiting such reversion. (Niyamat: because of the strict rule; Atadrupdbhavebhyah: because there is no statement permitting it, and because it is against custom; Abhavebhyah: because of the absence of that.)
The question whether one who has taken Sannyasa can go back to the previous Asrama is now considered.
The present Sutra declares that he cannot go back to the previous Asrama. This is the opinion of Jaimini also.
There are no words in the Sruti allowing such a descent. The Sruti expressly forbids it, He is to go to the forest, he is not to return from there.
It is also against approved custom or usage.
The Upanishad declares Having been dismissed by the teacher he is to follow one of the four Asramas according to rule, up to release from the body (Chh. Up. II.23.1). There are texts which teach of the ascent to higher Asramas. Having completed the Brahmacharya state he is to become a householder. He may wander forth from the Brahmacharya state, but there are no texts which treat of the descent to lower Asramas.
Dharma is what is enjoined for each and not what each is capable of doing.
Scripture declares, Once returning to the forest, one should never return to household life. A Sannyasi should not stir up the household fire again after having once renounced it.
Therefore, one cannot go back from Sannyasa.
Adhikaradhikaranam: Topic 11 (Sutras 41-42)
Expiation for one who has broken the vow of Sannyasa Na chadhikarikamapi patananumanattadayogat III.4.41 (466)
And there is no fitness for expiation in the case of a Naishthika Brahmacharin (who is immoral), because a fall (in his case) is inferred from the Smriti and because of the inefficacy (in his case) of the expiatory ceremony.
Na: not; Cha: and; Adhikarikam: (expiation) mentioned in the chapter that deals with the qualification; Api: also, even; Patananumanat: because of a fall (in his case) is inferred from the Smriti; Tadayogat: because of its (of the expiatory ceremony) inefficiency in his case.
The previous discussion is continued.
The present Sutra expresses the view of the Purvapakshin.
The opponent maintains that there is no expiation for such transgression in the case of a Naishthika Brahmacharin who has taken the vow of life-long celibacy, because no such expiatory ceremony is mentioned with respect to him. The expiatory ceremony which is mentioned in Purvamimamsa VI.8.22, refers to ordinary Brahmacharins and not to Naishthika Brahmacharins.
Smriti declares that such sins cannot be expiated by him any more than a head once cut off can again be fixed to the body, He who having once entered on the duties of a Naishthika again lapses from them, for him a slayer of the Self, I see no expiation which might make him clean again (Agneya XVI.5.23).
Further the expiatory ceremony referred to in Purvamimamsa is not efficacious in his case, because he will have to light sacrificial fire and therefore have to marry. In that case he will cease to be a Naishthika Brahmacharin thereafter.
But the Upakurvana (i.e., who is a Brahmacharin for a certain period only, not for life, one who is a Brahmacharin till marriage) about whose sin Smriti makes no similar declaration, may purify himself by the ceremony mentioned. If he is immoral there is expiation.
But some (consider the sin) a minor one (and therefore claim) the existence (of expiation for the Naishthika Brahmacharin also); as in the case of eating (of unlawful food). This has been explained (in the Purvamimamsa).
Upapurvam: (Upapurvaka-patakam, Upapatakam) a minor sin; Api tu: but, however; Eke: some (say); Bhavam: possibility of expiation; Asanavat: as in the eating (prohibited food); Tat: this; Uktam: is explained (in Purvamimamsa).
The previous discussion is continued.
Some teachers, however, are of opinion that the transgres sion of the vow of chastity, even on the part of a Naishthika is a minor sin, not a major one excepting cases where the wife of the teacher is concerned and so can be expiated by proper ceremonies just as ordinary Brahmacharins who take prohibited food such as honey, wine, flesh, are again purified by expiatory ceremonies. They plead that that sin is not anywhere enumerated among the deadly ones (Mahapataka) such as violating a teacher's bed and so on. They claim the expia tory ceremony to be valid for the Naishthika as well as the Upakurvana. Both are Brahmacharins and have committed the same offence.
It is only sexual intercourse with the wife of the Guru or spiritual preceptor that is a Mahapataka (major sin). That Upapataka, a minor sin is an expiable sin has been explained in the Purvamimamsa of Jaimini in Chap. I.3.8.
The Smriti passage which declares that there is no expiation for the Naishthika must be explained as aiming at the origination of serious effort on the part of Naishthika Brahmacharins. It puts him in mind of the serious responsibility on his part so that he may be ever alert and vigilant and struggle hard in maintaining strict unbroken Brahmacharya and thus achieving the goal or summum bonum of life, i.e., Self-realisation.
Similarly in the case of the hermit and the Sannyasin. The Smriti does prescribe the purificatory ceremony for both the hermit (Vanaprastha) and the mendicant (Sannyasi). When the hermit has broken his vows, undergoes the Kricchra-penance for twelve nights and then cultivates a place which is full of trees and grass. The Sannyasi also proceeds like the hermit, with the exception of cultivating the Soma plant, and undergoes the purifications prescribed for his state.
Bahiradhikaranam: Topic 12 (Sutra 43)
The life-long celibate who fails to keep up his vow must be excluded by society.
But (they are to be kept) outside the society in either case, on account of the Smriti and custom.
Bahih: outside; Tu: but; Ubhayatha: in either case, whether it be a grave sin or a minor sin; Api: also, even; Smriteh: on account of the state ment of the Smriti, from the Smriti; Acharat: from custom; Cha: and.
The previous discussion is concluded here.
Whether the lapses be regarded as major sins or minor sins, in either case good people (Sishtas) must shun such transgres sors, because the Smriti and good custom both condemn them.
Smriti declares, he who touches a Brahmana who has broken his vow and fallen from his order, must undergo the Chandrayana penance. Approved custom also condemns them, because good men do not sacrifice, study, or attend weddings with such persons.
Svamyadhikaranam: Topic 13 (Sutras 44-46)
The meditations connected with the subordinate members of sacrificial acts (Yajnangas) should be observed by the priest and not by the sacrificer.
Svaminah phalasruterityatreyah III.4.44 (469)
To the sacrificer (belongs the agentship in meditations) because the Sruti declares a fruit (for it): thus Atreya (holds).
Svaminah: of the master, of the sacrificer or Yajamana; Phalasruteh: from the declaration in Sruti of the results; Iti: so, thus; Atreyah: the sage Atreya (holds).
This is the view of the Purvapakshin or the opponent.
A doubt arises as to who is to observe the meditations connected with the subordinate members of sacrificial acts (Yajnangas), whether it is the sacrificer (Yajamana) or the priest (Ritvik).
The opponent, represented by the Sage Atreya, maintains that it is to be observed by the sacrificer, as the Sruti declares a special fruit for these meditations.
There is rain for him and he brings rain for others who thus knowing meditates on the five-fold Saman as rain (Chh. Up. II.3.2).
Hence the sacrificer only is the agent in those meditations which have a fruit. This is the opinion of the teacher Atreya.
Artvijyamityaudulomistasmai hi parikriyate III.4.45 (470)
(They are) the duty of the Ritvik (priest), this is the view of Audulomi, because he is paid for that (i.e., the performance of the entire sacrifice).
Artvijyam: the duty of the Ritvik (priest); Iti: thus; Audulomih: the sage Audulomi (thinks); Tasmai: for that; Hi: because; Parikriyate: he is paid.
The previous topic is continued.
The assertion that the meditations on subordinate members of the sacrifice are the work of the sacrificer (Yajamana) is unfounded.
But Audulomi says that they are to be done by the priest (Ritvik), because he is engaged (literally bought) for the sake of the Karma. As the priest is paid for all his acts, the fruit of all his acts, is as it were, purchased by the Yajamana (sacri ficer). Therefore the meditations also fall within the perfor mance of the work, as they belong to the sphere of that to which the sacrificer is entitled. They have to be observed by the priest and not the sacrificer.
This is the view of the sage Audulomi.
Srutescha III.4.46 (471)
And because the Sruti (so) declares.
Sruteh: from the Sruti; Cha: and.
The previous topic is concluded here.
The Ritvik is to make the Anga Upasana. But the fruit goes to the Yajamana.
Whatever blessing the priests pray for at the sacrifice, they pray for the good of the sacrificer (Sat. Br. I.3., I.26). Therefore an Udgatri who knows this may say: what wish shall I obtain for you by my singing (Chh. Up. I.7.8). The scriptural passages also declare that the fruit of meditations in which the priest is the agent, goes to the sacrificer.
All this establishes the conclusion that the meditations on subordinate parts of the sacrifice are the work of the priest.
Therefore, Audulomi's view is correct, being supported by the Sruti texts.
In Bri. Up. III.5.1 meditation is enjoined besides the child-like state and scholarship
Sahakaryantaravidhih pakshena tritiyam
tadvato vidhyadivat III.4.47 (472)
There is the injunction of something else, i.e., meditation, cooperation (towards knowledge) (which is) a third thing (with regard to Balya or state of a child and Panditya or scholarship), (which injunction is given) for the case (of per fect knowledge not yet having arisen) to him who is such (i.e., the Sannyasin possessing knowledge); as in the case of injunctions, and the like.
Sahakaryantaravidhih: a separate auxiliary injunction; Pakshena: as an alternative; Tritiyam: the third; Tadvatah: for one who possesses it, (i.e., knowledge); Vidhyadivat: just as in the case of injunctions and the like.
This Sutra examines a passage of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad and concludes that continuous meditation is also to be considered as enjoined by Sruti for the realisation of Brahman. This and the following two Sutras show that the scripture enjoins the four orders of life.
Mauna (Nididhyasa or meditation) is enjoined as an aid. The third, i.e., Mauna is enjoined for a Sannyasi in case his sense of cosmic diversity is persistent, just as Yajnas are enjoined for one desirous of heaven.
Therefore, a knower of Brahman, having done with scholar ship, should remain like a child (free from passion, anger, etc.); and after having finished with this state and with erudition he becomes meditative (Muni) (Bri. Up. III.5.1).
A doubt arises now whether the meditative state is enjoined or not.
The Purvapakshin maintains that it is not enjoined, as there is no word indicating an injunction. Though the imperative mood occurs in regard to Balya or child-like state, there is no such indication in regard to the Muni. The text merely says that he becomes a Muni or meditative whereas it expressly enjoins One should remain etc., with respect to the state of child and scholarship.
Further scholarship refers to knowledge. Therefore, it includes Muniship which also refers to knowledge. As there is no newness (Apurva) with respect to Muniship in the text it has no injunctive value.
This Sutra refutes this view and declares that Muniship or meditativeness is enjoined in the text as a third requisite besides child-like state and scholarship.
Muni means a person who constantly meditates on Brahman. So constant meditation is the third auxiliary observance for one who is already possessed of Panditya (erudition) and Balya (child-like state); and as such constant meditation is enjoined to be observed like the injunctions about sacrifice and control of the senses and so on.
This Sutra refers to a passage of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, where in reply to a question by one Kahola, the sage Yajnaval�kya enjoins first, scholarly attainments, the child-like simplicity, and then thirdly, continuous meditation cooperating with the two previous conditions, with a view to realisation of Brahman. Though there is no verb of imperative or injunctive force in the case of this third state, there is to be inferred an injunction to be understood like the injunctions in the other cases.
Muniship is continuous contemplation on Brahman. Therefore, it is different from scholarship. It is a new thing (Apurva). It has not been referred to before. Hence the text has injun ctive value. Incessant meditation is highly beneficial for a Sannyasin who has not yet attained oneness or unity of Self and who experiences plurality on account of past expressions or the prevailing force of the erroneous idea of multiplicity.
Munihood is enjoined as something helpful to knowledge.
Kritsnabhavattu grihinopasamharah III.4.48 (473)
On account of his being all, however, there is winding up with the householder.
Kritsnabhavat: on account of the householder's life including all; Tu: verily; Grihina: by a householder, with the householder; Upasamharah: the conclusion, the goal, salvation, (the Chapter) ends. (Kritsna: of all (duties); Bhavat: owing to the existence; Grihinopasamharah: conclusion with the case of the householder.)
The Sruti winds up with the householder as he has all the duties. He has to do difficult sacrifices and has also to observe Ahimsa, self-control, etc. As the householder's life includes duties of all the other stages of life, the Chapter ends with the enumeration of the duties of the householder.
The Chhandogya Upanishad concludes with the householder's stage, because of the fact that this stage includes all the others. He, the householder, conducting his life in this way, concent rating all his senses upon the self, and abstaining from injury to any living being throughout his life, attains the world of Brahma and has not to return again to this world (Chh. Up. VIII.15.1).
The word `tu' is meant to lay stress on the householder being everything. He has to do many duties belonging to his own Asrama which involve a great trouble. At the same time the duties of the other Asramas such as tenderness for all living creatures, restraint of the senses and study of scriptures, and so on are incumbent on him also as far as circumstances allow. Therefore, there is nothing contradictory in the Chhandogya winding up with the householder.
The householder's life is very important. Grihasthasrama includes more or less the duties of all Asramas. The Sruti enumerates the duties of the Brahmacharin and then those of the householder and there it ends without referring to Sannyasa in order to lay stress on the life of the householder, to show its importance, and not because it is not one of the prescribed Asramas.
Maunavaditareshamapyupadesat III.4.49 (474)
Because the scripture enjoins the other (stages of life, viz., Brahmacharya and Vanaprastha), just as it enjoins the state of a Muni (Sannyasi).
Maunavat: just as silence, like constant meditation, like the state of a Muni (Sannyasi); Itaresham: of the others, of the other orders of life; Api: even, also; Upadesat: because of scriptural injunction.
This Sutra states that the scripture enjoins the observance of the duties of all the orders of life.
Just as the Sruti enjoins Sannyasa and householder's life, so also it enjoins the life of a Vanaprastha (hermit) and that of a student (Brahmacharin). For we have already pointed above to passages such as Austerity is the second, and to dwell as a student in the house of a teacher is the third. As thus the four Asramas are equally taught by the scripture, they are to be gone through in sequence or alternately.
That the Sutra uses a plural form (of the `others') when speaking of two orders only, is due to its having regard either to the different sub-classes of those two or to their difficult duties.
Anavishkaradhikarnam: Topic 15 (Sutra 50)
Child-like state means the state of innocence, being free from egoism, lust, anger, etc.
Anavishkurvannanvayat III.4.50 (475)
(The child-like state means) without manifesting himself, according to the context.
Anavishkurvan: without manifesting himself; Ananvayat: according to the context.
This Sutra says that the perversity of a child is not meant by the word `Balyena' (by the child-like state), in the passage of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad quoted under Sutra 47.
In the passage of the Brihadaranyaka quoted in the Sutra 47, the child-like state is enjoined on an aspirant after knowledge. Therefore, a Brahmana after he has done with learning should remain like a child. What is exactly meant by this?
Does it mean to be like a child without any idea of purity and impurity, freely attending to the calls of nature without any respect of place, etc., behaving, talking and eating, accord ing to one's liking and doing whatever one likes, or does it mean inward purity, i.e., absence of cunningness, arrogance, sense of egoism, force of the sensual passions and so on as in the case of a child?
The present Sutra says it is the latter and not the former, because that is detrimental to knowledge. It means that one should be free from guile, pride, egoism, etc. He should not manifest the undesirable evil traits. He should not manifest by a display of knowledge, learning and virtuousness. Just as a child whose sensual powers have not yet developed themselves does not attempt to make a display of himself before others, he must not publish and proclaim his learning, wisdom and goodness. Such meaning only is appropriate to the context, purity and innocence being helpful to knowledge.
Then only the passage has a connection with the entire chapter on the ground of cooperating towards the principal matter, namely, the realisation of Brahman. Being free from ostentation is necessary, because only then there will be Anvaya or concordance of doctrine.
The Smriti writers have said, He whom nobody knows either as noble or ignoble, as ignorant or learned, as well as well-conducted or ill-conducted, he is a Brahmana. Quietly devoted to his duty, let the wise man pass through life unknown, let him step on this earth as if he were blind, unconscious, deaf. Another Smriti passage is With hidden nature, hidden conduct, and so on.
Aihikadhikaranam: Topic 16 (Sutra 51)
The time of the origination of knowledge when Brahma Vidya is practised
In this life (the origination of knowledge takes place) if there be no obstruction to it (the means adopted), because it is so seen from the scriptures.
Aihikam: in this life; Api: even; Aprastutapratibandhe: in the absence of an obstruction to it (the means adopted); Taddarsanat: as it is seen in Sruti. (Aprastuta: not being present; Pratibandhe: obstruction; Tat: that; Darsanat: being declared by the scriptures.)
This Sutra states whether the consequence of Brahma Vidya, which is the realisation of Brahman, is possible in this life or will wait till death.
Beginning from Sutra 26 of the present Pada (Section) we have discussed the various means of knowledge.
The question now is whether knowledge that results from these means comes in this life or in the life to come.
The present Sutra declares that knowledge may come in this life only if there is no obstruction to its manifestation from extraneous causes. When the fruition of knowledge is about to take place, it is hindered by the fruit of some other powerful work (Karma), which is also about to mature. When such an obstruction takes place, then knowledge comes in the next life.
That is the reason why the scripture also declares that it is difficult to know the Self, He of whom many are not even able to hear, whom many even when they hear of him do not comprehend; wonderful is a man when found who is able to teach him; wonderful is he who comprehends him when taught by an able teacher (Katha Up. I.27).
The Gita also says, There he recovers the characteristics belonging to his former body, and with that he again strives for perfection, O Joy of the Kurus (Chap. VI.43). The Yogin striving with assiduity, purified from sin, gradually gaining perfection, through manifold births, then reaches the Supreme Goal (Chap. VI.45).
Further scripture relates that Vamadeva already became Brahman in his mother's womb and thus shows that knowledge may spring up in a later form of existence through means pro cured in a former one; because a child in a womb cannot possibly procure such means in its present state.
It, therefore, is an established conclusion that knowledge originates either in the present or in a future life, in dependence on the evanescence of obstacles.
Muktiphaladhikaranam: Topic 17 (Sutra 52)
Liberation is a state without difference. It is only one.
No such definite rule exists with respect to emancipation, the fruit (of knowledge), because the Sruti asserts that state (to be immutable).
Evam: thus, like this; Muktiphalaniyamah: there is no rule with respect to the final emancipation, the fruit (of knowledge); Tadavasthavadhriteh: on account of the assertions by the Sruti as to that condition. (Mukti: salvation; Phala: fruit; Aniyamah: there is no rule; Tat: that; Avastha: condition; Avadhriteh: because the Sruti has ascertained so.)
In the previous Sutra it was seen that knowledge may result in this life or the next according to the absence or presence of obstructions and the intensity of the means adopted.
The final emancipation, which is the fruit of knowledge. A doubt may arise whether salvation can be delayed after knowledge, and whether there are degrees of knowledge according to the qualification of the aspirant, whether there exists a similar definite difference with regard to the fruit characterised as final release, owing to the superior or inferior qualification of the persons knowing.
This Sutra declares that no such rule exists with regard to release. Because all Vedanta texts assert the state of final release to be of one kind only. The state of final release is nothing but Brahman and Brahman cannot be connected with different forms since many scriptural passages assert it to have one nature only. The knower of Brahman becomes Brahman. There is no difference in it, as Brahman is without qualities.
There may be differences in the potency of the Sadhana leading to knowledge or Brahma Vidya. Mukti may come early or late owing to the power of the Sadhana. There is no difference in the nature of Mukti (liberation) which is attained by Brahma Vidya. There would be difference of results in Karmas and Upasanas (Saguna Vidyas) but Nirguna Vidya is but one and its result viz., Mukti is identical in all cases.
Difference is possible only when there are qualities as in the case of the Saguna Brahman. There may be difference in the experiences according to difference in Vidyas but with regard to Nirguna Brahman it can be one only and not many.
The means of knowledge may, perhaps, according to their individual strength, impart a higher or lower degree to their result, viz., knowledge, but not to the result of knowledge, viz., Liberation. Because liberation is not something which is to be brought about, but something whose nature is permanently established, and is reached through knowledge.
Although knowledge may originate after a long or short time, it is impossible that liberation should be distinguished by a higher or lower degree. From the absence of difference of knowledge also there follows absence of definite distinction on the part of the result of knowledge, viz., Liberation.
There cannot be any delay in the attainment of emancipation after knowledge has dawned, because knowledge of Brahman itself is emancipation.
The repetition of the clause, Tadavasthavadhriteh because the Sruti asserts that state indicates that the Chapter ends here.
End of the Fourth Pada (Section 4) of the Third Adhyaya (Chapter III) of the Brahma Sutras
---------------------
Chapter Three: Sadhana Adhyaya – Table of Contents
