3. Adhyāya 3 — Sādhana

Pāda 1

3.1.1

॥ अथ तृतीयोऽध्यायः॥ ॐ तदन्तरप्रतिपत्तौ रंहति सम्परिष्वक्तः प्रश्ननिरूपणाभ्याम् ॐ ॥ ३.१.१॥

॥ atha tṛtīyo'dhyāyaḥ॥ oṃ tadantarapratipattau raṃhati sampariṣvaktaḥ praśnanirūpaṇābhyām oṃ ॥ 3.1.1॥

In the matter of obtaining the next one (ie., body), the individual soul moves out enveloped (by the subtle elements), for so it is known from the question and its solution.

tadantarapratipattau—With a view to obtaining a fresh body; raṃhati—goes; saṃpariṣvaktaḥ—enveloped (with subtle parts of the elements); praśnanirūpaṇābhyām—(so it is known) from the question and answer.

3.1.2

ॐ त्र्यात्मकत्वात्तु भूयस्त्वात् ॐ ॥ ३.१.२॥

oṃ tryātmakatvāttu bhūyastvāt oṃ ॥ 3.1.2॥

But the soul is not enveloped by water alone, since water has three components; water is mentioned because of its pre-ponderance.

tryātmakatvāt—On account of (water) consisting of three elements; tu—but; bhūyastvāt—on account of the preponderance (of water).

3.1.3

ॐ प्राणगतेश्च ॐ ॥ ३.१.३॥

oṃ prāṇagateśca oṃ ॥ 3.1.3॥

And from the going out of the organs (it follows that the elements also move out).

prāṇagateḥ—Because of the going of the sense-organs; ca—and.

3.1.4

ॐ अग्न्यादिगतिश्रुतेरिति चेन्न भाक्तत्वात् ॐ ॥ ३.१.४॥

oṃ agnyādigatiśruteriti cenna bhāktatvāt oṃ ॥ 3.1.4॥

If it be objected (that the organs do not accompany the soul at the time of death) since the Upanishadic texts mention their entry into the (deities) Fire and others, then we say, not so, for that is said in a secondary sense.

agnyādigatiḥ—Entering into fire etc.; śruteḥ—from the scriptures; iti cet—if it be said; na—not so; bhāktatvāt—on account of its being so said in a secondary sense.

3.1.5

ॐ प्रथमेऽश्रवणादिति चेन्न ता एव ह्युपपत्तेः ॐ ॥ ३.१.५॥

oṃ prathame'śravaṇāditi cenna tā eva hyupapatteḥ oṃ ॥ 3.1.5॥

If it be objected (that water does not come to be known as man), since it is not heard of in the first instance, then not so, for on logical grounds, water itself is meant.

prathame—In the first of the oblations; aśravaṇāt—not being mentioned; iti cet—if it be said; na—not so; tāḥ eva—that only (i.e. water); hi—because; upapatteḥ—on account of the appropriateness;

3.1.6

ॐ अश्रुतत्वादिति चेन्नेष्टादिकारिणां प्रतीतेः ॐ ॥ ३.१.६॥

oṃ aśrutatvāditi cenneṣṭādikāriṇāṃ pratīteḥ oṃ ॥ 3.1.6॥

If it be argued (that the soul does not depart enveloped by water) since it is not mentioned thus in the Upanishads, then not so, for it is perceived to be so in the case of those who perform sacrifices etc., (ie., it can be verified by what happens to the sacrificers).

aśrutatvāt—On account of not being mentioned in the Sruti; iti cet—if it be said; na—not so; iṣṭādikāriṇām—the performers of sacrifices etc.; pratīteḥ—being understood.

3.1.7

ॐ भाक्तं वाऽनात्मवित्त्वात् तथा हि दर्शयति ॐ ॥ ३.१.७॥

oṃ bhāktaṃ vā'nātmavittvāt tathā hi darśayati oṃ ॥ 3.1.7॥

Or rather the statement (that the souls become the food of gods) is made in a metaphorical sense on account of their non-realization of the Self. For the Upanishad shows the same.

bhāktaṃ—In a secondary sense; vā—but; anātmavittvāt—on account of their (souls) not knowing the Self; tathā—so; hi—because; darśayati—(Sruti) declares.

3.1.8

ॐ कृतात्ययेऽनुशयवान् दृष्टस्मृतिभ्याम् ॐ ॥ ३.१.८॥

oṃ kṛtātyaye'nuśayavān dṛṣṭasmṛtibhyām oṃ ॥ 3.1.8॥

After the actions are exhausted, the soul returns together with (the residual) karma, as is known from the Upanishads and Smritis, along the path followed (by it) while going as also differently.

kṛtātyaye—On the exhaustion of (good) work; anuśayavān—possessed of residual Karma; dṛṣṭasmṛtibhyām—as is known from the Sruti and Smriti; yathā etam—as (it) went; anevam—differently; ca—and.

3.1.9

पाठभेद 3.1.8 and 9 combined ॐ यथेतमनेवं च ॐ ॥ ३.१.९॥

pāṭhabheda 3.1.8 and 9 combined oṃ yathetamanevaṃ ca oṃ ॥ 3.1.9॥

3.1.10

ॐ चरणादिति चेन्नोपलक्षणार्थेति कार्ष्णाजनिः ॐ ॥ ३.१.१०॥

oṃ caraṇāditi cennopalakṣaṇārtheti kārṣṇājaniḥ oṃ ॥ 3.1.10॥

If it be contended that (the soul gets its rebirth) owing to conduct (and not residual karma), then according to Karsnajini, it is not so, that (Upanishadic passage) being used suggestively (for residual karma).

caraṇāt—On account of conduct; iti cet—if it be said; na—not so; upalakṣaṇārthā—to denote indirectly; iti—thus; kārṣṇājiniḥ—Karshnajini (thinks).

3.1.11

ॐ आनर्थक्यमिति चेन्न तदपेक्षत्वात् ॐ ॥ ३.१.११॥

oṃ ānarthakyamiti cenna tadapekṣatvāt oṃ ॥ 3.1.11॥

If it be objected that (in that case) conduct will cease to have any usefulness, then it is not so, because karma is dependent on that conduct.

ānarthakyam—Irreievancy; iti cet—if it be said; na—not so; tadapekṣatvāt—on account of dependence on that.

3.1.12

ॐ सुकृतदुष्कृते एवेति तु बादरिः ॐ ॥ ३.१.१२॥

oṃ sukṛtaduṣkṛte eveti tu bādariḥ oṃ ॥ 3.1.12॥

But (the teacher) Badari thinks that good and bad works themselves are meant (by the word carana).

sukṛtaduṣkṛte—Good and evil work; eva—merely; iti—thus; bādariḥ—Badari.

3.1.13

ॐ अनिष्टादिकारिणामपि च श्रुतम् ॐ ॥ ३.१.१३॥

oṃ aniṣṭādikāriṇāmapi ca śrutam oṃ ॥ 3.1.13॥

It is known from the Vedic texts that (the moon is the goal) even for the performers of unholy acts etc., as well.

aniṣṭādikāriṇām—Of those who do not perform sacrifices etc.; api—even; ca—also; śrutam—is declared by the Sruti.

3.1.14

ॐ संयमने त्वनुभूयेतरेषामारोहावरोहौ तद्गतिदर्शनात् ॐ ॥ ३.१.१४॥

oṃ saṃyamane tvanubhūyetareṣāmārohāvarohau tadgatidarśanāt oṃ ॥ 3.1.14॥

(Vedantin): But as for others (they have their descent) after suffering in the abode of Death; (thus occur their) ascent and descent, for their course is met with in the Upanishads.

saṃyamane—In the abode of Yama; tu—but; anubhūya—having experienced; atareṣām—of others (than the performers of sacrifices etc.); ārohāvarohau—the ascent and descent; tadgati darśanāt—such a passage being declared by the Sruti.

3.1.15

ॐ स्मरन्ति च ॐ ॥ ३.१.१५॥

oṃ smaranti ca oṃ ॥ 3.1.15॥

And they mention this in the Smritis.

smaranti—The Smritis declare; ca—also.

3.1.16

ॐ अपि सप्त ॐ ॥ ३.१.१६॥

oṃ api sapta oṃ ॥ 3.1.16॥

And (they are mentioned as) seven (hells in the Puranas).

api ca—Moreover; sapta—seven.

3.1.17

ॐ तत्रापि च तद्व्यापारादविरोधः ॐ ॥ ३.१.१७॥

oṃ tatrāpi ca tadvyāpārādavirodhaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.1.17॥

Since Death’s control extends even there, no contradiction can arise.

tatra—There; api—even; ca—and; tat-vyāpārāt—on account of his control; avirodhaḥ—there is no contradiction.

3.1.18

ॐ विद्याकर्मणोरिति तु प्रकृतत्वात् ॐ ॥ ३.१.१८॥

oṃ vidyākarmaṇoriti tu prakṛtatvāt oṃ ॥ 3.1.18॥

But (by the expression “of these two paths”) what is meant is “of knowledge (ie., meditation) and action”, for that is the topic under discussion.

vidyākarmaṇoḥ—Of knowledge and work; iti—thus; tu—but; prakṛtatvāt—on account of their being the subject under discussion.

3.1.19

ॐ न तृतीये तथोपलब्धेः ॐ ॥ ३.१.१९॥

oṃ na tṛtīye tathopalabdheḥ oṃ ॥ 3.1.19॥

(The specification about the number of oblations) is not applicable in the case of the third state, this being noticeable (in the Upanishad).

na—not; tṛtīye—in the third; tathā—so; upalabdheḥ—it being seen.

3.1.20

ॐ स्मर्यतेऽपि च लोके ॐ ॥ ३.१.२०॥

oṃ smaryate'pi ca loke oṃ ॥ 3.1.20॥

Moreover, it is seen (that creatures are born without the five oblations).

smaryate—Are recorded; api—also; ca—and; loke—in the world.

3.1.21

ॐ दर्शनाच्च ॐ ॥ ३.१.२१॥

oṃ darśanācca oṃ ॥ 3.1.21॥

darśanāt—On account of observation; ca—also.

3.1.22

ॐ तृतीये शब्दावरोधः संशोकजस्य ॐ ॥ ३.१.२२॥

oṃ tṛtīye śabdāvarodhaḥ saṃśokajasya oṃ ॥ 3.1.22॥

Life springing from moisture is included in the third term (plant life).

tṛtīya-śabda-avarodhaḥ—Inclusion in the third term; saṃśokajasya—of that which springs from moisture.

3.1.23

ॐ स्मरणाच्च ॐ ॥ ३.१.२३॥

oṃ smaraṇācca oṃ ॥ 3.1.23॥

3.1.24

ॐ तत्स्वाभाव्यापत्तिरुपपत्तेः ॐ ॥ ३.१.२४॥

oṃ tatsvābhāvyāpattirupapatteḥ oṃ ॥ 3.1.24॥

(The descending soul) attains similarity (with space, air, etc.,); for that is reasonable.

tat-sābhāvya-āpattiḥ—Attainment of a similarity of nature with them; upapatteḥ—being reasonable.

3.1.25

ॐ नातिचिरेण विशेषात् ॐ ॥ ३.१.२५॥

oṃ nāticireṇa viśeṣāt oṃ ॥ 3.1.25॥

(The descent of the soul from one state to another takes place) not after long intervals, (as is known) on the authority of a specific statement (in the Upanishad).

na—not; aticireṇa—in very long time; viśeṣāt—on account of the special declaration.

3.1.26

ॐ अन्याधिष्ठिते पूर्ववदभिलापात् ॐ ॥ ३.१.२६॥

oṃ anyādhiṣṭhite pūrvavadabhilāpāt oṃ ॥ 3.1.26॥

As in the earlier stages, so also (in the later stages) the soul merely resides in paddy etc., that are already inhabited by other souls, for so it is declared.

anya-adhiṣṭhite—Into what is ruled by another; pūrvavat—as in the previous cases; abhilāpāt—for so the Sruti states.

3.1.27

ॐ अशुद्धमिति चेन्न शब्दात् ॐ ॥ ३.१.२७॥

oṃ aśuddhamiti cenna śabdāt oṃ ॥ 3.1.27॥

If it be argued that rites (invoking killing of animals) are unholy, we say, no, since they are sanctioned by scriptures.

aśuddham—Unholy; iti cet—if it be said; na—not so; śabdāt—on account of scriptural authority.

3.1.28

ॐ रेतः सिग्योगोऽथ ॐ ॥ ३.१.२८॥

oṃ retaḥ sigyogo'tha oṃ ॥ 3.1.28॥

Then (the soul) gets connected with an inseminator.

retaḥ sika-yogo—Connection with one who performs the act of generation; atha—then.

3.1.29

ॐ योनेः शरीरम् ॐ ॥ ३.१.२९॥ इति श्रीमत्कृष्णद्वैपायनकृतब्रह्मसूत्रेषु तृतीयाध्यायस्य प्रथमः पादः समाप्तः

oṃ yoneḥ śarīram oṃ ॥ 3.1.29॥ iti śrīmatkṛṣṇadvaipāyanakṛtabrahmasūtreṣu tṛtīyādhyāyasya prathamaḥ pādaḥ samāptaḥ

From the womb (comes) a new body (for the descending soul).

yoneḥ—From the womb; śarīram—body.

Pāda 2

3.2.1

ॐ सन्ध्ये सृष्टिराह हि ॐ ॥ ३.२.१॥

oṃ sandhye sṛṣṭirāha hi oṃ ॥ 3.2.1॥

In the intermediate stage (of dream) occurs (real) creation; for the Upanishad says so.

saṃdhye—In the intermediate stage (between waking and deep sleep, i.e. in the dream state); sṛṣṭiḥ—(there is real) creation; āha—(Sruti) says so; hi—because;

3.2.2

ॐ निर्मातारं चैके पुत्रादयश्च ॐ ॥ ३.२.२॥

oṃ nirmātāraṃ caike putrādayaśca oṃ ॥ 3.2.2॥

And some (following a particular branch) consider the Self to be a creator (of things desired); and sons and others (are the objects desired).

nirmātāraṃ—Creator; ca—and; ike—some (the followers of particular Sakhas of the Vedas); putrādayaḥ—sons etc.; ca—and;

3.2.3

ॐ मायामात्रं तु कार्त्स्न्येनानभिव्यक्तस्वरूपत्वात् ॐ ॥ ३.२.३॥

oṃ māyāmātraṃ tu kārtsnyenānabhivyaktasvarūpatvāt oṃ ॥ 3.2.3॥

But the dream creation is a mere Maya, because of its nature of not being a complete manifestation of the totality of attributes (found in the wakeful state).

māyāmātraṃ—Mere illusion; tu—but; kārtsnyena—in toto; anabhivyaktasvarūpatvāt—on account of its nature not being manifest.

3.2.4

ॐ सूचकश्च हि श्रुतेः आचक्षते च तद्विदः ॐ ॥ ३.२.४॥

oṃ sūcakaśca hi śruteḥ ācakṣate ca tadvidaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.2.4॥

A dream is also an omen, for so it is known from the Upanishads and experts say so.

sūcakaḥ—Omen; ca—but; hi—for; śruteḥ—from the Sruti; ācakṣate—say; ca—also; tadvidaḥ—experts in dream-reading.

3.2.5

ॐ पराभिध्यानात्तु तिरोहितं ततो ह्यस्य बन्धविपर्ययौ ॐ ॥ ३.२.५॥

oṃ parābhidhyānāttu tirohitaṃ tato hyasya bandhaviparyayau oṃ ॥ 3.2.5॥

From the meditation on the supreme Lord, however, becomes manifest that which remains obscured; because the soul’s bondage and freedom are derived from Him.

parābhidhyānāt—By meditation on the Supreme Lord; tu—but; tirohitam—that which is covered (by ignorance); tataḥ—from Him (the Lord); hi—for; asya—of the soul; bandhaviparyayau—bondage and its opposite, i.e. freedom.

3.2.6

ॐ देहयोगाद्वासोऽपि ॐ ॥ ३.२.६॥

oṃ dehayogādvāso'pi oṃ ॥ 3.2.6॥

Or rather that covering occurs also on account of connection with the body.

dehayogāt—From its connection with the body; vā—and; saḥ—that (the covering of its rulership); api—also.

3.2.7

ॐ तदभावो नाडीषु तच्छ्रुतेः आत्मनि च ॐ ॥ ३.२.७॥

oṃ tadabhāvo nāḍīṣu tacchruteḥ ātmani ca oṃ ॥ 3.2.7॥

The absence of that dream (ie., dreamless sleep) takes place in the nerves and the Self, as it is known to be so from the Upanishads

tat-abhāvaḥ—Absence of that (dreaming), in other words Sushupti; nāḍīṣu—in the nerves; ātmani ca—and in the self; tat-śruteḥ—as it is known from the Sruti;

3.2.8

ॐ अतः प्रबोधोऽस्मात् ॐ ॥ ३.२.८॥

oṃ ataḥ prabodho'smāt oṃ ॥ 3.2.8॥

For the same reason, the soul’s waking up is from this supreme Self.

ataḥ—Hence; prabodhaḥ—awakening; asmāt—from this.

3.2.9

ॐ स एव तु कर्मानुस्मृतिशब्दविधिभ्यः ॐ ॥ ३.२.९॥

oṃ sa eva tu karmānusmṛtiśabdavidhibhyaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.2.9॥

But the very same soul returns from sleep because of the reasons of action, remembrance, scriptural authority and injunction.

sa eva—The selfsame soul; tu—but; karma-anusmṛti-śabda-vidhibhyaḥ—on account of Karma, memory, scriptural authority, and precept.

3.2.10

ॐ मुग्धेऽर्थसम्पत्तिर्परिशेषात् ॐ ॥ ३.२.१०॥

oṃ mugdhe'rthasampattirpariśeṣāt oṃ ॥ 3.2.10॥

In the case of one in swoon, there is only partial attainment (of the state of sleep), that being the last alternative.

mugdhe—In a swoon; ardhasaṃpattiḥ—partial attainment of the state of deep sleep; pariśeṣāt—as only alternative left.

3.2.11

ॐ न स्थानतोऽपि परस्योभयलिङ्गं सर्वत्र हि ॐ ॥ ३.२.११॥

oṃ na sthānato'pi parasyobhayaliṅgaṃ sarvatra hi oṃ ॥ 3.2.11॥

. Not even according to place can Brahman have a twofold characteristic, for everywhere (It is taught to be without attributes).

na—Not; sthānataḥ—from (difference of) place; api—even; parasya—of Brahman; ubhayaliṅgaṃ—twofold characteristic; hi—because; sarvatra—throughout (the scriptures teach otherwise).

3.2.12

ॐ न भेदादिति चेन्न प्रत्येकमतद्वचनात् ॐ ॥ ३.२.१२॥

oṃ na bhedāditi cenna pratyekamatadvacanāt oṃ ॥ 3.2.12॥

If it be argued that (Brahman cannot have only one characteristic), on account of differences (met with in the scriptures), (we say that) it is not so, because the scriptures negate each of these differences individually.

na—Not; bhedāt—on account of difference (being taught in the scriptures); iti cet—if it be said; na—not so; pratyekam—with respect to each; atadvacanāt—because of the declaration of the opposite of that.

3.2.13

ॐ अपि चैवमेके ॐ ॥ ३.२.१३॥

oṃ api caivameke oṃ ॥ 3.2.13॥

Moreover, the followers of certain branches declare thus.

api ca—Moreover; evam—thus; eke—some.

3.2.14

ॐ अरूपवदेव हि तत्प्रधानत्वात् ॐ ॥ ३.२.१४॥

oṃ arūpavadeva hi tatpradhānatvāt oṃ ॥ 3.2.14॥

. Brahman is only formless to be sure, for that is the dominant note (of the Upanishadic teaching).

arūpavat—Formless; eva—only; hi—verily; tat-pradhānatvāt—on account of that being the main purport.

3.2.15

ॐ प्रकाशवच्चावैयर्थ्यम् ॐ ॥ ३.२.१५॥

oṃ prakāśavaccāvaiyarthyam oṃ ॥ 3.2.15॥

And like light, Brahman can (be assumed to) have different appearances, so that the scriptures may not become purportless

prakāśavat—Like light; ca—and; avaiyarthyāt—not being purportless.

3.2.16

ॐ आह च तन्मात्रम् ॐ ॥ ३.२.१६॥

oṃ āha ca tanmātram oṃ ॥ 3.2.16॥

The Upanishad also declares Brahman to be Consciousness alone.

āha—Declares; ca—and; tat-mātram—that (i.e. intelligence) only.

3.2.17

ॐ दर्शयति चाथोऽपि स्मर्यते ॐ ॥ ३.२.१७॥

oṃ darśayati cātho'pi smaryate oṃ ॥ 3.2.17॥

Moreover, the Vedas reveal this; likewise this is mentioned in the Smritis also.

darśayati—(Scripture) shows; ca—also; atho—thus; api—also; smaryate—(it is) stated by the Smritis.

3.2.18

ॐ अत एव चोपमा सूर्यकादिवत् ॐ ॥ ३.२.१८॥

oṃ ata eva copamā sūryakādivat oṃ ॥ 3.2.18॥

Hence also are the illustrations of the sun’s reflection etc.

ata eva—Therefore; ca—also; copamā—comparison; sūryakādivat—like the images of the sun etc.

3.2.19

ॐ अम्बुवदग्रहणात्तु न तथात्वम् ॐ ॥ ३.२.१९॥

oṃ ambuvadagrahaṇāttu na tathātvam oṃ ॥ 3.2.19॥

But that kind of parallelism is inapplicable as nothing is perceived to be similar to water.

ambuvat—Like water; agrahaṇāt—not being experienced; tu—but; na—no; tathātvam—similarity.

3.2.20

ॐ वृद्धिह्रासभाक्त्वमन्तर्भावात् उभयसामञ्जस्यादेवम् ॐ ॥ ३.२.२०॥

oṃ vṛddhihrāsabhāktvamantarbhāvāt ubhayasāmañjasyādevam oṃ ॥ 3.2.20॥

Since Brahman has entered into the limiting adjuncts, It seems to participate in their increase and decrease. The illustration is apt since the illustration and thing illustrated have propriety from this point of view.

vṛddhi-hrāsa-bhāktvam—Participating in the increase and decrease; antarbhāvāt—on account of its being inside; ubhaya-sāmañjasyāt—on account of the similarity in the two cases; evam—thus.

3.2.21

ॐ दर्शनाच्च ॐ ॥ ३.२.२१॥

oṃ darśanācca oṃ ॥ 3.2.21॥

. And (this is also) in accordance with (the Vedic) revelation.

darśanāt—On account of scriptural instruction; ca—and.

3.2.22

ॐ प्रकृतैतावत्त्वं हि प्रतिषेधति ततो ब्रवीति च भूयः ॐ ॥ ३.२.२२॥

oṃ prakṛtaitāvattvaṃ hi pratiṣedhati tato bravīti ca bhūyaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.2.22॥

The Upanishad certainly denies the limitation that is being dealt with and then speaks of something more.

prakṛta-etāvattvaṃ—What has been mentioned up to this; pratiṣedhati—denies; tato—than that; bhūyaḥ—something more; bravīti—says; ca—and.

3.2.23

ॐ तदव्यक्तमाह हि ॐ ॥ ३.२.२३॥

oṃ tadavyaktamāha hi oṃ ॥ 3.2.23॥

That Brahman is unmanifest, for the Upanishad says so.

tat—That (Brahman); avyaktam—is not manifest; āha—(so the scripture) says; hi—for.

3.2.24

ॐ अपि संराधने प्रत्यक्षानुमानाभ्याम् ॐ ॥ ३.२.२४॥

oṃ api saṃrādhane pratyakṣānumānābhyām oṃ ॥ 3.2.24॥

Moreover, Brahman is realized in Samadhi, as is known from direct revelation and inference.

api ca—And moreover; saṃrādhane—in perfect meditation (It is experienced); pratyakṣa-anumānābhyām—from the Sruti and Smriti.

3.2.25

ॐ प्रकाशवच्चावैशेष्यं ॐ ॥ ३.२.२५॥

oṃ prakāśavaccāvaiśeṣyaṃ oṃ ॥ 3.2.25॥

. And the effulgent Self appears to be different during activity, as is the case with light etc.; yet (intrinsically) there is non-difference as is evident from repetition (of “That thou art”).

prakāśādivat—Like light etc.; ca—and; avaiśeṣyaṃ—(there is) no difference; prakāśaḥ—Brahman; ca—also; karmaṇi—in work; abhyāsāt—on account of repeated mention (in the Sruti).

3.2.26

पाठभेद 3.2.25 and 26 combined ॐ प्रकाशश्च कर्मण्यभ्यासात् ॐ ॥ ३.२.२६॥

pāṭhabheda 3.2.25 and 26 combined oṃ prakāśaśca karmaṇyabhyāsāt oṃ ॥ 3.2.26॥

3.2.27

ॐ अतोऽनन्तेन तथा हि लिङ्गम् ॐ ॥ ३.२.२७॥

oṃ ato'nantena tathā hi liṅgam oṃ ॥ 3.2.27॥

Hence (the individual gets) unity with the Infinite; for such is the indicatory mark (in the Upanishad).

ataḥ—Therefore; anantena—with the Infinite; tathā—thus; hi—for; liṅgam—(the scripture) indicates.

3.2.28

ॐ उभयव्यपदेशात्तु अहिकुण्डलवत् ॐ ॥ ३.२.२८॥

oṃ ubhayavyapadeśāttu ahikuṇḍalavat oṃ ॥ 3.2.28॥

But since both difference and non-difference are mentioned, the relationship (between the supreme Self and the individual is) as that between the snake and its coil.

ubhayavyapadeśāt—On account of both being taught; tu—but; ahikuṇḍalavat—like that between a serpent and its coils.

3.2.29

ॐ प्रकाशाश्रयवद्वा तेजस्त्वात् ॐ ॥ ३.२.२९॥

oṃ prakāśāśrayavadvā tejastvāt oṃ ॥ 3.2.29॥

Or they are like light and its source, both being but effulgence.

prakāśa-āśrayavat—Like light and its substratum; vā—or; tejastvāt—on account of both being luminous.

3.2.30

ॐ पूर्ववद्वा ॐ ॥ ३.२.३०॥

oṃ pūrvavadvā oṃ ॥ 3.2.30॥

Or (the relationship between the individual and the supreme Self is) as already shown.

pūrvavat—As before; vā—or.

3.2.31

ॐ प्रतिषेधाच्च ॐ ॥ ३.२.३१॥

oṃ pratiṣedhācca oṃ ॥ 3.2.31॥

And on account of the denial.

pratiṣedhāt—On account of the denial; ca—and.

3.2.32

ॐ परमतस्सेतून्मानसंबन्धभेदव्यपदेशेभ्यः ॐ ॥ ३.२.३२॥

oṃ paramatassetūnmānasaṃbandhabhedavyapadeśebhyaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.2.32॥

There is some entity superior to this Brahman, because of the mention of embankment, measure, connection and difference.

param—Greater; ataḥ—than this (Brahman); setu-unmāna-saṃbandha-bheda-vyapadeśebhyaḥ—on account of terms denoting a bank, measure, connection, and difference.

3.2.33

ॐ दर्शनात् ॐ ॥ ३.२.३३॥

oṃ darśanāt oṃ ॥ 3.2.33॥

But (the Self is referred to as an embankment) on account of similarity.

tu—But; sāmānyāt—on account of similarity.

3.2.34

ॐ बुद्ध्यर्थः पादवत् ॐ ॥ ३.२.३४॥

oṃ buddhyarthaḥ pādavat oṃ ॥ 3.2.34॥

For the sake of intellectual grasp (Brahman’s magnitude is spoken of) just like the feet (of the mind or of space), (or the quarters of the karsapana).

buddhyarthaḥ—For the sake of easy comprehension; pādavat—just like (four) feet.

3.2.35

ॐ स्थानविशेषात्प्रकाशादिवत् ॐ ॥ ३.२.३५॥

oṃ sthānaviśeṣātprakāśādivat oṃ ॥ 3.2.35॥

(Connection and difference are mentioned about Brahman) from the point of view of limiting adjuncts, as in the case of light etc.

sthānaviśeṣāt—On account of special places; prakāśādivat—like light etc.

3.2.36

ॐ उपपत्तेश्च ॐ ॥ ३.२.३६॥

oṃ upapatteśca oṃ ॥ 3.2.36॥

And because (such a position alone is) logically justifiable.

upapatteḥ—From reasoning; ca—and.

3.2.37

ॐ तथाऽन्यप्रतिषेधात् ॐ ॥ ३.२.३७॥

oṃ tathā'nyapratiṣedhāt oṃ ॥ 3.2.37॥

Similarly from the denial of everything else (it follows that there is nothing but Brahman).

tathā—Similarly; anya-pratiṣedhāt—on account of the express denial of all other things.

3.2.38

ॐ अनेन सर्वगतत्वमायामयशब्दादिभ्यः ॐ ॥ ३.२.३८॥

oṃ anena sarvagatatvamāyāmayaśabdādibhyaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.2.38॥

Hereby (is established) the omnipresence (of the Self), (as is known) on the strength of (Upanishadic) words like extension and other sources (ie., Smriti and logic).

anena—By this; sarvagatatvam—all-pervadingness; āyāmaśabdādibhyaḥ—as is known from scriptural statements etc. regarding (Brahman’s) extent.

3.2.39

ॐ फलमत उपपत्तेः ॐ ॥ ३.२.३९॥

oṃ phalamata upapatteḥ oṃ ॥ 3.2.39॥

The fruit of action is from Him, this being the logical position.

phalam—Fruits of actions; ataḥ—from Him; upapatteḥ—for that is reasonable.

3.2.40

ॐ श्रुतत्वाच्च ॐ ॥ ३.२.४०॥

oṃ śrutatvācca oṃ ॥ 3.2.40॥

(God is the ordainer of results) for the further reason that the Upanishads say so.

śrutatvāt—Because the scripture so teaches; ca—and.

3.2.41

ॐ धर्मं जैमिनिः अत एव ॐ ॥ ३.२.४१॥

oṃ dharmaṃ jaiminiḥ ata eva oṃ ॥ 3.2.41॥

For these very reasons Jaimini considers virtuous deeds to be the yielder of results.

dharmaṃ—Religious merits; jaiminiḥ—(sage) Jaimini; ata eva—for the same reasons.

3.2.42

ॐ पूर्वं तु बादरायणो हेतुव्यपदेशात् ॐ ॥ ३.२.४२॥ इति श्रीमत्कृष्णद्वैपायनकृतब्रह्मसूत्रेषु तृतीयाध्यायस्य द्वितीयः पादः समाप्तः

oṃ pūrvaṃ tu bādarāyaṇo hetuvyapadeśāt oṃ ॥ 3.2.42॥ iti śrīmatkṛṣṇadvaipāyanakṛtabrahmasūtreṣu tṛtīyādhyāyasya dvitīyaḥ pādaḥ samāptaḥ

But Badarayana considers the earlier One (viz., God) (as the bestower of results), because He is mentioned as the cause of even action.

pūrvam—The former (i.e. the Lord); tu—but; bādarāyaṇaḥ—Badarayana; hetu-vyapadeśāt—on account of His being declared to be the cause (of the actions even).

Pāda 3

3.3.1

ॐ सर्ववेदान्तप्रत्ययं चोदनाद्यविशेषात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.१॥

oṃ sarvavedāntapratyayaṃ codanādyaviśeṣāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.1॥

Any (particular) conception for meditation (vijnana) imparted in all the Upanishads is the same on account of the sameness of the injunction etc.

sarva-vedānta-pratyayam—Described in the various Vedanta texts; codanādi-aviśeṣāt—on account of non-difference as regards injunction etc. (i.e. connection, form and name).

3.3.2

ॐ भेदान्नेति चेदेकस्यामपि ॐ ॥ ३.३.२॥

oṃ bhedānneti cedekasyāmapi oṃ ॥ 3.3.2॥

If it be said that the vijnanas cannot be the same owing to the difference in details, then not so, for difference can occur even in the same vijnana.

bhedāt—On account of difference na—not; iti cet—if it be said; na—not so; ekasyāmapi—even in the same (Vidya).

3.3.3

ॐ स्वाध्यायस्य तथात्वेन हि समाचारेऽधिकाराच्च ॐ ॥ ३.३.३॥

oṃ svādhyāyasya tathātvena hi samācāre'dhikārācca oṃ ॥ 3.3.3॥

The rite of carrying fire on the head is an appendage of Vedic study, because it is stated to be so in the Samachara and also because of competence. And that regulation is like that about libations.

svādhyāyasya—Of the study of the Vedas; tathātvena—as being such; iti—because; samācāre—in the Samachara (a book of that name); adhikārāt—on account of the qualification; ca—and; savavat—like that of the (seven) oblations (viz. Saurya etc.); ca—and; tanniyamaḥ—that rule.

3.3.4

पाठभेद + समाचारेऽधिकाराच्च सववच्च तन्नियमः ॐ सलिलवच्च तन्नियमः ॐ ॥ ३.३.४॥

pāṭhabheda + samācāre'dhikārācca savavacca tanniyamaḥ oṃ salilavacca tanniyamaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.3.4॥

3.3.5

ॐ दर्शयति च ॐ ॥ ३.३.५॥

oṃ darśayati ca oṃ ॥ 3.3.5॥

. Moreover, (the scripture) reveals (this fact).

darśayati—Instructs; ca—also.

3.3.6

ॐ उपसंहारोऽर्थाभेदाद्विधिशेषवत्समाने च ॐ ॥ ३.३.६॥

oṃ upasaṃhāro'rthābhedādvidhiśeṣavatsamāne ca oṃ ॥ 3.3.6॥

And in similar meditations (all) the traits are to be combined, for there is no difference in application like the subsidiaries of an injunction.

upasaṃhāraḥ—Combination; arthābhedāt—since there is no difference in the object of meditation; vidhiśeṣavat—like the subsidiary rites of a main sacrifice; samāne ca—and in the Upasanas of the same class.

3.3.7

ॐ अन्यथात्वं च शब्दादिति चेन्नाविशेषात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.७॥

oṃ anyathātvaṃ ca śabdāditi cennāviśeṣāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.7॥

If it be said that the (Udgitha) meditations (in the Chandogya and Brihadaranyaka Upanishads) are different on account of the difference of (texts), then not so, for there is no difference.

anyathātvaṃ—There is difference; śabdāt—on account of (difference in) texts; iti cet—if it be said; na—not so; aviśeṣāt—on account of non-difference (as regards essentials).

3.3.8

ॐ न वा प्रकरणभेदात्परोवरीयस्त्वादिवत् ॐ ॥ ३.३.८॥

oṃ na vā prakaraṇabhedātparovarīyastvādivat oṃ ॥ 3.3.8॥

Rather not owing to a difference of subject-matter even as in such cases as (meditation on the Udgitha as) possessed of the quality of being higher than the high, (greater than the great).

na vā—Rather not; prakaraṇa-bhedāt—on account of difference in subject-matter; parovarīyastvādivat—even as (the meditation on the Udgitha) as the highest and greatest (Brahman) (is different).

3.3.9

ॐ संज्ञातश्चेत्तदुक्तमस्ति तु तदपि ॐ ॥ ३.३.९॥

oṃ saṃjñātaścettaduktamasti tu tadapi oṃ ॥ 3.3.9॥

If from the sameness of name, (the two meditations are held to be the same), that has already been answered. But that (sameness of name) is met with (even with regard to things quite different).

saṃjñātaḥ—On account of the name (being same); cet— if; tat—it; uktam—has already been answered; asti—exists; tu—but; tat—that; api—even.

3.3.10

ॐ प्राप्तेश्च समञ्जसम् ॐ ॥ ३.३.१०॥

oṃ prāpteśca samañjasam oṃ ॥ 3.3.10॥

Since Om pervades all the Vedas, it is appropriate to qualify it by the word Udgitha.

vyāpteḥ—Because (Om) extends (over the whole of the Vedas); ca—and; samañjasam—is appropriate.

3.3.11

ॐ सर्वाभेदादन्यत्रेमे ॐ ॥ ३.३.११॥

oṃ sarvābhedādanyatreme oṃ ॥ 3.3.11॥

All (the meditations on Prana) being the same, these traits (found here in one) are to be added elsewhere.

sarvābhedāt—On account of non-difference everywhere; anyatra—in the other places; ime—these qualities (are to be inserted).

3.3.12

ॐ आनन्दादयः प्रधानस्य ॐ ॥ ३.३.१२॥

oṃ ānandādayaḥ pradhānasya oṃ ॥ 3.3.12॥

Bliss and other characteristics of the principal entity (ie., Brahman) are to be combined.

ānandādayaḥ—Bliss and other attributes; pradhānasya—of the subject (i.e. Brahman).

3.3.13

ॐ प्रियशिरस्त्वाद्यप्राप्तिरुपचयापचयौ हि भेदे ॐ ॥ ३.३.१३॥

oṃ priyaśirastvādyaprāptirupacayāpacayau hi bhede oṃ ॥ 3.3.13॥

Attributes such as having joy as the head and so on are not to be added everywhere, since (they have) degrees of intensity and feebleness, (which are) possible in a context of difference (ie., duality).

priyaśirastvādi—(Qualities like) joy being Its head etc.; aprāptiḥ—are not to be taken everywhere; upacayāpacayau—increase and decrease; hi—because; bhede—(are possible) in difference.

3.3.14

ॐ इतरे त्वर्थसामान्यात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.१४॥

oṃ itare tvarthasāmānyāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.14॥

But the other characteristics are to be understood everywhere on account of identity of purport.

itare—Other attributes; tu—but; arthasāmānyāt—on account of identity of purport.

3.3.15

ॐ आध्यानाय प्रयोजनाभावात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.१५॥

oṃ ādhyānāya prayojanābhāvāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.15॥

What is mentioned in the Katha Upanishad is meant for deep meditation on Purusha, (and not for stating any gradation), as that serves no purpose.

ādhyānāya—For the sake of meditation; prayojana-abhāvāt—as there is no use.

3.3.16

ॐ आत्मशब्दाच्च ॐ ॥ ३.३.१६॥

oṃ ātmaśabdācca oṃ ॥ 3.3.16॥

And (this must be the conclusion) on account of the use of the word Self.

ātmaśabdāt—On account of the word ‘Self’; ca—and.

3.3.17

ॐ आत्मगृहीतिरितरवदुत्तरात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.१७॥

oṃ ātmagṛhītiritaravaduttarāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.17॥

The supreme Self is to be understood in the Aitareya Upanishad, just as elsewhere (in other texts about creation), on account of the subsequent qualification. (Or) The Self is to be understood (in the Chandogya Upanishad), just as in the other (Brihadaranyaka) Upanishad, because of the subsequent (instruction about identity).

ātmagṛhīti—The Supreme Self is meant; itaravat—as in other texts (dealing with creation); uttarāt—on account of the subsequent qualification.

3.3.18

ॐ अन्वयादिति चेत्स्यादवधारणात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.१८॥

oṃ anvayāditi cetsyādavadhāraṇāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.18॥

If it be objected that it follows from the trend of the sentences that the Supreme Self is not meant, (the reply is that) it must be so because of the definite statement (that the Self alone existed in the beginning). (Or) If it be argued that the rule about the conformity of the commencement and the conclusion leads to the idea that the Self is not meant, then we say that it must be so because of the definite statement.

anvayāt—Because of the context; iti cet—if it be said; syāt—it might be so; avadhāraṇāt—on account of the definite statement.

3.3.19

ॐ कार्याख्यानादपूर्वम् ॐ ॥ ३.३.१९॥

oṃ kāryākhyānādapūrvam oṃ ॥ 3.3.19॥

Since acamana is mentioned as a duty already recognized, it occurs (in the Upanishad) in connection with a fresh injunction (of meditation on Prana).

kāryākhyānāt—On account, of being a restatement of an act (already enjoined by the Smriti); apūrvam—what has not been so enjoined elsewhere.

3.3.20

ॐ समान एवञ्चाभेदात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.२०॥

oṃ samāna evañcābhedāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.20॥

(The meditations) in the same branch are similarly the same (and their traits are to be combined) because of the non-difference of the object.

samāne—In the same Sakha; evam—(it is) like this; ca—also; abhedāt—on account of non-difference.

3.3.21

ॐ संबन्धादेवमन्यत्रापि ॐ ॥ ३.३.२१॥

oṃ saṃbandhādevamanyatrāpi oṃ ॥ 3.3.21॥

Elsewhere also (in the case of meditation on Satya-Brahman), (the attributes have to be combined) as here (in the case of Sandilya-Vidya), on account of the very fact of connection (with the same object of meditation).

saṃbandhāt—On account of the connection; evam—like this; anyatra—in other cases; api—also.

3.3.22

ॐ न वा विशेषात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.२२॥

oṃ na vā viśeṣāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.22॥

Rather they are not to be combined on account of a distinction.

na vā—Rather not; viśeṣāt—on account of difference.

3.3.23

ॐ दर्शयति च ॐ ॥ ३.३.२३॥

oṃ darśayati ca oṃ ॥ 3.3.23॥

The scripture also indicates the same thing.

darśayati—(The scripture) declares; ca—also.

3.3.24

ॐ सम्भृतिद्युव्याप्त्यपि चातः ॐ ॥ ३.३.२४॥

oṃ sambhṛtidyuvyāptyapi cātaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.3.24॥

And (the attributes of Brahman such as) possession of unchallenged powers and pervasion of heaven are also not to be added to other meditations for the same reason (of association with special abodes).

saṃbhṛtiḥ—Supporting (the universe); dyuvyāptiḥ—pervading the sky; api—also; cātaḥ—and for the same reason (as in the previous Sutra).

3.3.25

ॐ पुरुषविद्यायामिव चेतरेषामनाम्नानात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.२५॥

oṃ puruṣavidyāyāmiva cetareṣāmanāmnānāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.25॥

And the characteristics of the Purusha-Vidya are not to be added to the Taittiriyaka because they have not been recited there as it is done in the course of the Purusha-Vidya in other branches.

puruṣavidyāyām-iva—As in the Purusha Vidya (of the Chhandogya); ca—and; itareṣām—of the others; anāmnānāt—not being mentioned (in the Taittiriya).

3.3.26

ॐ वेधाद्यर्थभेदात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.२६॥

oṃ vedhādyarthabhedāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.26॥

Piercing etc., are not to be applied in meditation, since (the mantras of piercing etc., are) disparate in purport.

vedhādi—Piercing etc.; arthabhedāt—because they have a different meaning.

3.3.27

ॐ हानौ तूपायनशब्दशेषात् कुशाच्छन्दस्स्तुत्युपगानवत् तदुक्तम् ॐ ॥ ३.३.२७॥

oṃ hānau tūpāyanaśabdaśeṣāt kuśācchandasstutyupagānavat taduktam oṃ ॥ 3.3.27॥

(A man of knowledge gets rid of virtue and vice) at the time of death, since nothing remains to be attained. For thus it is that others (ie., the followers of the other branches) state.

hānau–Where (only) the discarding (of good and evil) is mentioned; tu—but; upāyana-śabdaśeṣatvāt—on account of the word ‘receiving’ being supplementary (to the word ‘discarding’); kuśā-cchandaḥ-stuti-upagānavat—as in the case of Kusas (sticks for keeping count of hymns) metres, praise, and recitation; tat—that; uktam—has been stated (by Jaimini).

3.3.28

ॐ साम्पराये तर्तव्याभावात् तथा ह्यन्ये ॐ ॥ ३.३.२८॥

oṃ sāmparāye tartavyābhāvāt tathā hyanye oṃ ॥ 3.3.28॥

(A man of knowledge gets rid of virtue and vice) at the time of death, since nothing remains to be attained. For thus it is that others (ie., the followers of the other branches) state.

sāṃparāye—At the time of death; tartavya-abhāvāt—there being nothing to be attained; tathā—so also; hi— for; anye—others.

3.3.29

ॐ छन्दत उभयाविरोधात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.२९॥

oṃ chandata ubhayāvirodhāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.29॥

As there is no conflict between the two (ie., two texts, or cause and effect) on the admission that destruction results from voluntary effort, (therefore such effort must take place before death).

chandataḥ—According to his liking; ubhaya-avirodhāt—on account of there being harmony between the two.

3.3.30

ॐ गतेरर्थवत्त्वमुभयथाऽन्यथा हि विरोधः ॐ ॥ ३.३.३०॥

oṃ gaterarthavattvamubhayathā'nyathā hi virodhaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.3.30॥

The soul’s course after death must have purposefulness in two ways, for else it will lead to contradiction.

gateḥ—Of the soul’s journey (after death) along the path of the gods; arthavattvam—utility; ubhayathā—in two ways; anyathā—otherwise; hi—for; virodhaḥ—a contradiction.

3.3.31

उपपन्नस्तल्लक्षणार्थोपलब्धेः लोकवत् ॐ ॥ ३.३.३१॥

upapannastallakṣaṇārthopalabdheḥ lokavat oṃ ॥ 3.3.31॥

This (differentiation) is reasonable, for facts indicative of a soul’s journey are met with (in the case of meditation on the qualified Brahman alone), just as (much as such a difference is) met with in common life.

upapannaḥ—Is reasonable; tat-lakṣaṇārtha-upalabdheḥ—for the characteristics which render such journey possible are seen; lokavat—as in the world.

3.3.32

ॐ अनियमः सर्वेषामविरोधश्शब्दानुमानाभ्याम् ॐ ॥ ३.३.३२॥

oṃ aniyamaḥ sarveṣāmavirodhaśśabdānumānābhyām oṃ ॥ 3.3.32॥

(The journey of the souls along the path of the gods is) not restricted (to any particular meditation). It applies to all meditations (on the qualified Brahman). This involves no contradiction as is known from Upanishadic and Smriti texts (lit. direct text and inference).

aniyamaḥ—(There is) no restriction; sarvāsām—(Devayana applies equally) to all (Vidyas of the Saguna Brahman); avirodhaḥ—there is non-contradiction; śabda-anumānābhyām—as is seen from the Sruti and Smriti.

3.3.33

ॐ यावदधिकारमवस्थितिराधिकारिकाणाम् ॐ ॥ ३.३.३३॥

oṃ yāvadadhikāramavasthitirādhikārikāṇām oṃ ॥ 3.3.33॥

Those who have a mission to fulfil continue in the corporeal state as long as the mission demands it.

yāvat-adhikāram—So long as the mission is not fulfilled; avasthitiḥ—(there is corporeal) existence; ādhikārikāṇām—of those who have a mission to fulfil.

3.3.34

ॐ अक्षरधियां त्वविरोधः सामान्यतद्भावाभ्यामौपसदवत्तदुक्तम् ॐ ॥ ३.३.३४॥

oṃ akṣaradhiyāṃ tvavirodhaḥ sāmānyatadbhāvābhyāmaupasadavattaduktam oṃ ॥ 3.3.34॥

All the (negative) conceptions of the Immutable are to be combined, since the process of presentation is similar and the object dealt with is the same. This is just as it is in the case of the Upasad sacrifice, as has been shown by Jaimini.

akṣaradhiyāṃ—Of the conceptions of the (negative) attributes of the Immutable (Brahman); tu—but; avarodhaḥ—combination; sāmānyatadbhāvābhyām—on account of the similarity (of defining Brahman through denials) and the object (viz. Immutable Brahman) being the same; upasadavat—as in the case of the Upasad (offerings); tat—it; uktam—has been said (by Jaimini).

3.3.35

ॐ इयदामननात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.३५॥

oṃ iyadāmananāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.35॥

. The conceptions (in the Mundaka and Svetasvatara on the one hand and Katha on the other) are the same, on account of the mention of a particular limit.

iyat-āmananāt—On account of describing as this much.

3.3.36

ॐ अन्तरा भूतग्रामवदिति चेत् तदुक्तम् ॐ ॥ ३.३.३६॥

oṃ antarā bhūtagrāmavaditi cet taduktam oṃ ॥ 3.3.36॥

(The conception of the Self is the same in Brihadaranyaka III-iv-1 and III-v-1, since) one’s own Self is declared to be the inmost of all as in the case of the aggregate of elements. (Or - since one’s own Self is declared to be the inmost of all, just as it is shown to be the Self of all in Svetasvatara VI-11).

antarā—As being innermost of all; bhūtagrāmavat—as in the case of the elements; svātmanaḥ—(teaching) of the same Self.

3.3.37

ॐ अन्यथा भेदानुपपत्तिरितिचेन्नोपदेशवत् ॐ ॥ ३.३.३७॥

oṃ anyathā bhedānupapattiriticennopadeśavat oṃ ॥ 3.3.37॥

If it be argued that unless difference be admitted the separate statements become illogical, the reply is that this is not so, for it can be like another instruction of this kind.

anyathā—Otherwise; bheda-anupapattiḥ—the repetition cannot be accounted for; iti cet—if it be said; na—not so; upadeśānta-ravat—like another instruction (in the Chhandogya).

3.3.38

ॐ व्यतिहारो विशिंषन्ति हीतरव्रत् ॐ ॥ ३.३.३८॥

oṃ vyatihāro viśiṃṣanti hītaravrat oṃ ॥ 3.3.38॥

There should be a reciprocal interchange as in the case of other traits; for so the readers (of the scriptures) recite distinctly.

vyatihāraḥ—Reciprocity (of meditations); viśiṃṣanti—(the scriptures) prescribe (this); hi—for; itaravat—as in other cases.

3.3.39

ॐ सैव हि सत्यादयः ॐ ॥ ३.३.३९॥

oṃ saiva hi satyādayaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.3.39॥

Since the same Satya-Vidya is taught in both the places (of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad), therefore traits like Satya have to be combined.

sa eva—The same (Satya-Vidya); hi—because; satyādayaḥ—(attributes like) Satya etc.

3.3.40

ॐ कामादितरत्र तत्र च आयतनादिभ्यः ॐ ॥ ३.३.४०॥

oṃ kāmāditaratra tatra ca āyatanādibhyaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.3.40॥

Traits like (true) desire etc., (mentioned in the Chandogya) are to be added to the other (viz., Brihadaranyaka) and those mentioned there are to be added here, because of the (sameness of) abode etc.

kāmādi—(True) desire etc.; itaratra—in the other; tatra—(those mentioned) in the other; ca—and; āyatanādibhyaḥ—on account of the abode etc.

3.3.41

ॐ आदारादलोपः ॐ ॥ ३.३.४१॥

oṃ ādārādalopaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.3.41॥

There can be no omission (of the performance of the Agnihotra to Prana) on account of the respect shown (in the Upanishad).

ādarāt—On account of the respect shown; alopaḥ—there can be no omission.

3.3.42

ॐ उपस्थितेस्तद्वचनात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.४२॥

oṃ upasthitestadvacanāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.42॥

The Agnihotra is to be performed from that (food) itself when it is present, for such is the declaration (of the Upanishad).

upasthite—When food is served; ataḥ—from that; tat-vacanāt—so (the Sruti) declares.

3.3.43

ॐ तन्निर्धारणार्थनियमस्तद्दृष्टेर्पृथग्ध्यप्रतिबन्धः फलम् ॐ ॥ ३.३.४३॥

oṃ tannirdhāraṇārthaniyamastaddṛṣṭerpṛthagdhyapratibandhaḥ phalam oṃ ॥ 3.3.43॥

There is no obligatory rule about that (ie., the meditations becoming connected always with rites), for that is obvious from the Upanishad, inasmuch as a meditation has a separate result, consisting in the elimination of hindrance to a rite.

tat-nirdhāraṇa-aniyamaḥ—No rule about the inviolability of that; tat-dṛṣṭeḥ—that being seen (from the Sruti); pṛthak—separate; hi—for; apratibandhaḥ—non-obstruction; phalam—result.

3.3.44

ॐ प्रदानवदेव हि तदुक्तम् ॐ ॥ ३.३.४४॥

oṃ pradānavadeva hi taduktam oṃ ॥ 3.3.44॥

(The meditations on Prana and Vayu or Air are to be kept apart) exactly as in the case of offerings, as that has been stated by Jaimini.

pradānavat—As in the case of the offerings; eva—exactly; tat–that; uktam—has been stated.

3.3.45

ॐ लिङ्गभूयस्त्वात्तद्धि बलीयस्तदपि ॐ ॥ ३.३.४५॥

oṃ liṅgabhūyastvāttaddhi balīyastadapi oṃ ॥ 3.3.45॥

The fires (of the mind, speech, etc., of Agni-rahasya) do not form parts of any rite, on account of the abundance of indicatory marks; for these marks are stronger than the context. That also was said by Jaimini.

liṅga-bhūyastvāt—On account of the abundance of indicatory marks; tat—it (an indicatory mark); hi—for; balīyaḥ—is stronger; tat—that; api—also.

3.3.46

ॐ पूर्वविकल्पः प्रकरणात्स्यात्क्रियामानसवत् ॐ ॥ ३.३.४६॥

oṃ pūrvavikalpaḥ prakaraṇātsyātkriyāmānasavat oṃ ॥ 3.3.46॥

On the strength of the context, the conceptual fires are to be used alternatively for the actual fire enjoined earlier. They constitute some rite like the imaginary drinking (of Soma juice).

pūrva-vikalpaḥ—Alternative forms of the one mentioned first; prakaraṇāt—on account of the context; syāt—ought to be; kriyā—part of the sacrifice; mānasavat—like the imaginary drink.

3.3.47

ॐ अतिदेशाच्च ॐ ॥ ३.३.४७॥

oṃ atideśācca oṃ ॥ 3.3.47॥

And (this conclusion is supported) by the fact of extended application.

atideśāt—On account of the extension (of the attributes of the first to these fires); ca—and.

3.3.48

ॐ विद्यैव तु निर्धारणात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.४८॥

oṃ vidyaiva tu nirdhāraṇāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.48॥

The fires rather constitute only a meditation, for so it is determined (in the Vedas).

vidyā—Vidya; eva—indeed; tu—but; nirdhāraṇāt—because (the Sruti) asserts it.

3.3.49

ॐ दर्शनाच्च ॐ ॥ ३.३.४९॥

oṃ darśanācca oṃ ॥ 3.3.49॥

And owing to the indicatory mark met with.

darśanāt—Because (of the indicatory marks) seen; ca—and.

3.3.50

ॐ श्रुत्यादिबलीयस्त्वाच्च न बाधः ॐ ॥ ३.३.५०॥

oṃ śrutyādibalīyastvācca na bādhaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.3.50॥

. Moreover, the view (that the fires constitute a meditation) cannot be set aside owing to the greater authority of express statement etc.,

śrutyādi-balīyastvāt—Because of the greater force of the Sruti etc. (i.e. indicatory mark and syntactical connection); ca—and; na bādhaḥ—cannot be refuted.

3.3.51

ॐ अनुबन्धादिभ्यः ॐ ॥ ३.३.५१॥

oṃ anubandhādibhyaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.3.51॥

On account of being linked up with the mind and such other reasons, the mental fires are independent even as other meditations are. And it is seen that the sacrifices are treated as independent (irrespective of their context), as was pointed out by Jaimini.

anubandhādibhyaḥ—From the connection and soon (extension etc.); prajñāntara-pṛthaktvavat—even as other Vidyas are separate; dṛṣṭaḥ—(it is) seen; ca—and; tat-uktam—this has been said (by Jaimini).

3.3.52

ॐ प्रज्ञान्तरपृथक्त्ववद्दृष्टिश्च तदुक्तम् ॐ ॥ ३.३.५२॥

oṃ prajñāntarapṛthaktvavaddṛṣṭiśca taduktam oṃ ॥ 3.3.52॥

3.3.53

ॐ न सामान्यादप्युपलब्धेर्मृत्युवन्नहि लोकापत्तिः ॐ ॥ ३.३.५३॥

oṃ na sāmānyādapyupalabdhermṛtyuvannahi lokāpattiḥ oṃ ॥ 3.3.53॥

. Not even on the ground of similarity can the mental fires become subservient to rites, since they are noticed to serve human needs, just as it is in the case of death; for the world does not become fire just because of a similarity.

na—Not; sāmānyāt-api—in spite of the resemblance; upalabdheḥ—for it is seen; mṛtyuvat—as in the case of death; na hi lokāpattiḥ—for the world does not become (fire because of certain resemblances).

3.3.54

ॐ परेण च शब्दस्य ताद्विध्यं भूयस्त्वात्त्वनुबन्धः ॐ ॥ ३.३.५४॥

oṃ pareṇa ca śabdasya tādvidhyaṃ bhūyastvāttvanubandhaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.3.54॥

From the subsequent Brahmana text also it is known that the scripture has that (prescription of a meditation) in view; but the connection with fire occurs because of the abundance of the attributes of fire that have to be imagined here.

pareṇa—From the- subsequent (Brahmana); ca—and; śabdasya—of the text; tādvidhyam—the fact of being such; bhūyastvāt—on account of the abundance; tu—but; anubandhaḥ—connection

3.3.55

ॐ एक आत्मनः शरीरे भावात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.५५॥

oṃ eka ātmanaḥ śarīre bhāvāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.55॥

Some deny the existence of the soul, its existence being dependent on the existence of the body.

eka—Some (deny); ātmanaḥ—(the existence) of an Atman (besides the body); śarīre (suti?) bhāvāt—(for It) exists (only) when there is a body.

3.3.56

ॐ व्यतिरेकस्तद्भावभावित्वान्न तूपलब्धिवत् ॐ ॥ ३.३.५६॥

oṃ vyatirekastadbhāvabhāvitvānna tūpalabdhivat oṃ ॥ 3.3.56॥

But this is not so; there is a distinction (between the soul and the body) because consciousness may not exist even when the body exists, as it is in the case of perception.

vyatirekaḥ—Separateness; tadbhāva-abhāvitvāt—for (consciousness) does not exist even when there is the body; na—not (so); tu—but; upalabdhivat—as in the case of cognition.

3.3.57

ॐ अङ्गावबद्धास्तु न शाखासु हि प्रतिवेदम् ॐ ॥ ३.३.५७॥

oṃ aṅgāvabaddhāstu na śākhāsu hi prativedam oṃ ॥ 3.3.57॥

But the meditations connected with the accessories of rites are not to be confined to the branches of the Vedas in which they obtain, for they are to be adopted in all the (branches of the) Vedas.

aṅgāvabaddhāḥ—(Upasanas) connected with parts (of sacrificial acts); tu—but; na—not; śākhāsu—to (particular) Sakhas; hi—because; prativedam—in each Veda.

3.3.58

ॐ मन्त्रादिवद्वाऽविरोधः ॐ ॥ ३.३.५८॥

oṃ mantrādivadvā'virodhaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.3.58॥

Or rather (they are to be adopted in other branches) like the mantas; (and thus) there is no contradiction.

mantrādivat—Like Mantras etc.; vā—or else; avirodhaḥ—is no contradiction.

3.3.59

ॐ भूम्नः क्रतुवज्ज्यायस्त्वं तथा च दर्शयति ॐ ॥ ३.३.५९॥

oṃ bhūmnaḥ kratuvajjyāyastvaṃ tathā ca darśayati oṃ ॥ 3.3.59॥

The meditation on the whole is of greater importance just as in the case of sacrifices. For so the Upanishad shows.

bhūmnaḥ—On the entire form; kratuvat—as in the case of sacrifice; jyāyastvaṃ—importance; tathā—so; hi—for; darśayati—(the Sruti) shows.

3.3.60

ॐ नानाशब्दादिभेदात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.६०॥

oṃ nānāśabdādibhedāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.60॥

The meditations are different when there is a difference in terminology etc.

nānā—Different; śabdādi-bhedāt—owing to difference of words etc.

3.3.61

ॐ विकल्पो विशिष्टफलत्वात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.६१॥

oṃ vikalpo viśiṣṭaphalatvāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.61॥

Any one meditation (can be accepted as) an alternative for other meditations, because their result is the same.

vikalpaḥ—Option; aviśiṣṭa-phalatvāt—on account of (all Vidyas) having the same result.

3.3.62

ॐ काम्यास्तु यथाकामं समुच्चीयेरन्न वा पूर्वहेत्वभावात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.६२॥

oṃ kāmyāstu yathākāmaṃ samuccīyeranna vā pūrvahetvabhāvāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.62॥

As for the meditations (based on symbols and) undertaken for fulfilment of worldly desires, they may be either combined or not combined according to one’s option, since the previous reason (of sameness of result) does not exist.

kāmyāḥ—Vidyas for particular desires; tu—but; yathākāmaṃ—according to one’s desire; samuccīyeran—one may combine; na vā—or not; pūrva-hetu-abhāvāt—on account of the absence of the preceding reason.

3.3.63

ॐ अङ्गेषु यथाश्रयभावः ॐ ॥ ३.३.६३॥

oṃ aṅgeṣu yathāśrayabhāvaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.3.63॥

In the case of the meditations based on the subsidiaries (of rites), their position is the same as of their bases.

aṅgeṣu—With regard (to meditations) connected with members (of sacrificial acts); yathā-śraya-bhāvaḥ—it is as with (the members) with which they are connected.

3.3.64

ॐ शिष्टेश्च ॐ ॥ ३.३.६४॥

oṃ śiṣṭeśca oṃ ॥ 3.3.64॥

(The meditations are to be combined), also because they are enjoined (in the Vedas).

śiṣṭeḥ—From the injunction of the Sruti; ca—and.

3.3.65

ॐ समाहारात् ॐ ॥ ३.३.६५॥

oṃ samāhārāt oṃ ॥ 3.3.65॥

(The meditations are to be combined) because of the (indicatory mark of the) rectification (of one with the help of another).

3.3.66

ॐ गुणसाधारण्यश्रुतेश्च ॐ ॥ ३.३.६६॥

oṃ guṇasādhāraṇyaśruteśca oṃ ॥ 3.3.66॥

And from the Upanishadic declaration that Om, which is a accessory of the Vedic rites is common to all the Vedas, (it follows that the meditations based on it must co-exist).

guṇa-sādhāraṇya-śruteḥ—From the Sruti declaring the feature ‘Om’ as being common to all the Vedas; ca—and.

3.3.67

ॐ न वा तत्सहभावश्रुतेः ॐ ॥ ३.३.६७॥

oṃ na vā tatsahabhāvaśruteḥ oṃ ॥ 3.3.67॥

(The meditations are) rather not to be combined, since the Upanishads do not declare this.

na vā—Rather not; tatsahabhāva-aśruteḥ—their correlation not being mentioned by the Sruti.

3.3.68

ॐ दर्शनाच्च ॐ ॥ ३.३.६८॥ इति श्रीमत्कृष्णद्वैपायनकृतब्रह्मसूत्रेषु तृतीयाध्यायस्य तृतीयः पादः समाप्तः

oṃ darśanācca oṃ ॥ 3.3.68॥ iti śrīmatkṛṣṇadvaipāyanakṛtabrahmasūtreṣu tṛtīyādhyāyasya tṛtīyaḥ pādaḥ samāptaḥ

And (there is no obligation about combination) since the Upanishad shows (contrariwise).

darśanāt—Because the Sruti says so; ca—and.

Pāda 4

3.4.1

ॐ पुरुषार्थोऽतः शब्दादिति बादरायणः ॐ ॥ ३.४.१॥

oṃ puruṣārtho'taḥ śabdāditi bādarāyaṇaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.4.1॥

Badarayana thinks that liberation results from this (knowledge of the Self), (as presented in the Upanishads), because the Vedic texts declare so.

puruṣārthaḥ—Purpose of man; ataḥ—from this; śabdāt—from the scriptures; iti—thus (says); bādarāyaṇaḥ—Badarayana.

3.4.2

ॐ शेषत्वात्पुरुषार्थवादो यथाऽन्येष्विति जैमिनिः ॐ ॥ ३.४.२॥

oṃ śeṣatvātpuruṣārthavādo yathā'nyeṣviti jaiminiḥ oṃ ॥ 3.4.2॥

Jaimini thinks that since the Self holds a subservient position in rites etc., the mention of the result of knowledge is (merely) in glorification of the agent, as is the case elsewhere.

śeṣatvāt—On account of being supplementary (to sacrificial acts); puruṣa-arthavādaḥ—are mere praise of the agent; yathā—even as; anyeṣu—in other cases; iti—thus (says) jaiminiḥ—Jaimini.

3.4.3

ॐ आचारदर्शनात् ॐ ॥ ३.४.३॥

oṃ ācāradarśanāt oṃ ॥ 3.4.3॥

(This is confirmed) on the strength of what is revealed about the behaviour (of the knowers of Brahman).

ācāra-darśanāt—Because of the conduct found (from the scriptures).

3.4.4

ॐ तच्छ्रुतेः ॐ ॥ ३.४.४॥

oṃ tacchruteḥ oṃ ॥ 3.4.4॥

(This is so) because the Upanishad declares this.

tat-chruteḥ—Because the scriptures directly declare that.

3.4.5

ॐ समन्वारम्भणात् ॐ ॥ ३.४.५॥

oṃ samanvārambhaṇāt oṃ ॥ 3.4.5॥

(This is so), because both knowledge and work follow the Self (when it transmigrates).

3.4.6

ॐ तद्वतो विधानात् ॐ ॥ ३.४.६॥

oṃ tadvato vidhānāt oṃ ॥ 3.4.6॥

. (And this is so) because rites are enjoined for one who is possessed of that (knowledge of the Vedas).

tadvataḥ—For such (as know the purport of the Vedas); vidhānāt—because (the scriptures) enjoin (work).

3.4.7

ॐ नियमाच्च ॐ ॥ ३.४.७॥

oṃ niyamācca oṃ ॥ 3.4.7॥

. And (this follows) from the restrictive texts.

niyamāt—Or account of prescribed rules; ca—and.

3.4.8

ॐ अधिकोपदेशात्तु बादरायणस्यैवं तद्दर्शनात् ॐ ॥ ३.४.८॥

oṃ adhikopadeśāttu bādarāyaṇasyaivaṃ taddarśanāt oṃ ॥ 3.4.8॥

But Badarayana’s view stands unshaken because of the instruction that the supreme Self is even greater (than the agent); for so it is revealed (by the Upanishads).

adhika-upadeśāt—Because (the scriptures) teach (the Supreme Self to be) something over and above; tu—but; bādarāyaṇasya—Badarayana’s (view); evam— such i.e. correct; tat-darśanāt—for that is seen (from the scriptures).

3.4.9

ॐ तुल्यं तु दर्शनम् ॐ ॥ ३.४.९॥

oṃ tulyaṃ tu darśanam oṃ ॥ 3.4.9॥

But the Upanishadic declaration (of conduct) is equally in evidence (proving that knowledge is not subservient to religious acts).

tulyam—Equal; tu—but; darśanam—declarations of the Sruti.

3.4.10

ॐ असार्वत्रिकी ॐ ॥ ३.४.१०॥

oṃ asārvatrikī oṃ ॥ 3.4.10॥

The declaration is not universal.

3.4.11

ॐ विभागः शतवत् ॐ ॥ ३.४.११॥

oṃ vibhāgaḥ śatavat oṃ ॥ 3.4.11॥

Knowledge and action are to be divided like a hundred things.

vibhāgaḥ—(There is) division of knowledge and work; śatavat—as in the case of a hundred (divided between two persons).

3.4.12

ॐ अध्ययनमात्रवतः ॐ ॥ ३.४.१२॥

oṃ adhyayanamātravataḥ oṃ ॥ 3.4.12॥

(Engagements in religious actions is prescribed) for him only who has merely recited the Vedas.

3.4.13

ॐ नाविशेषात् ॐ ॥ ३.४.१३॥

oṃ nāviśeṣāt oṃ ॥ 3.4.13॥

(The restrictive texts) do not apply (to the man of knowledge), since the restrictions is made without any specification.

na—not; aviśeṣāt—owing to the absence of any specification.

3.4.14

ॐ स्तुतयेऽनुमतिर्वा ॐ ॥ ३.४.१४॥

oṃ stutaye'numatirvā oṃ ॥ 3.4.14॥

Or rather the consent (accorded) for doing religious acts is meant for the glorification of knowledge.

stutaye—For the praising (of Knowledge); anumatiḥ—permission; vā—or rather.

3.4.15

ॐ कामकारेण चैके ॐ ॥ ३.४.१५॥

oṃ kāmakāreṇa caike oṃ ॥ 3.4.15॥

Moreover, some refrain from (religious) work according to personal predilection.

kāmakāreṇa—According to their choice; ca—and; eke—some.

3.4.16

ॐ उपमर्दं च ॐ ॥ ३.४.१६॥

oṃ upamardaṃ ca oṃ ॥ 3.4.16॥

Moreover, (from knowledge comes) the destruction (of the whole world).

upamardaṃ—Destruction; ca—and.

3.4.17

ॐ ऊर्ध्वरेतस्सु च शब्दे हि ॐ ॥ ३.४.१७॥

oṃ ūrdhvaretassu ca śabde hi oṃ ॥ 3.4.17॥

And knowledge belongs to the monks, for they are met with in the Vedas.

ūrdhvaretaḥ su—To those who observe continence; ca—and; śabde—(this Asrama is mentioned) in the scriptures; hi—because.

3.4.18

ॐ परामर्शं जैमिनिरचोदना चापवदिति हि ॐ ॥ ३.४.१८॥

oṃ parāmarśaṃ jaiminiracodanā cāpavaditi hi oṃ ॥ 3.4.18॥

Jaimini thinks that to be an allusion to other stages and no injunction; and (this is so) since the scripture condemns them.

parāmarśaṃ—Mere reference; jaiminiḥ—Jaimini; acodanā—there is no injunction; ca—and; apavadati hi—because (the scripture) condemns (it).

3.4.19

ॐ अनुष्ठेयं बादरायणः साम्यश्रुतेः ॐ ॥ ३.४.१९॥

oṃ anuṣṭheyaṃ bādarāyaṇaḥ sāmyaśruteḥ oṃ ॥ 3.4.19॥

Badarayana thinks that the other orders of life are also to be observed, since Vedic texts speak equally of all the stages of life.

anuṣṭheyam—Ought to be gone through; bādarāyaṇaḥ—Badarayana; sāmyaśruteḥ—for the scriptural text refers equally to all the four Asramas.

3.4.20

ॐ विधिर्वा धारणवत् ॐ ॥ ३.४.२०॥

oṃ vidhirvā dhāraṇavat oṃ ॥ 3.4.20॥

Or rather it is an injunction as in the case of holding the sacrificial fuel.

vidhiḥ—Injunction; vā—or rather; dhāraṇavat—as in the case of the carrying (of the sacrificial fuel).

3.4.21

ॐ स्तुतिमात्रमुपादानादिति चेन्नापूर्वत्वात् ॐ ॥ ३.४.२१॥

oṃ stutimātramupādānāditi cennāpūrvatvāt oṃ ॥ 3.4.21॥

If it be contended that texts (about Udgitha etc.) are merely eulogistic, because of having been accepted as subservient to ritual acts, then not so, because of the extra-ordinariness (of the texts).

stutimātram—Mere praise; upādānāt—because of their reference (to parts of sacrificial acts); iti cet—it be said; na— not so; apūrvatvāt—on account of its newness.

3.4.22

ॐ भावशब्दाच्च ॐ ॥ ३.४.२२॥

oṃ bhāvaśabdācca oṃ ॥ 3.4.22॥

Moreover, (there must be injunctions) on account of the occurrence of words having an injunctional meaning.

bhāvaśabdāt—There being words expressive of injunction; ca—and.

3.4.23

ॐ पारिप्लवार्था इति चेन्न विशेषितत्वात् ॐ ॥ ३.४.२३॥

oṃ pāriplavārthā iti cenna viśeṣitatvāt oṃ ॥ 3.4.23॥

If it be argued that they (the Upanishadic stories) are meant for the (ritualistic application called) Pariplava, (we say) that this not so, on account of the stories for the Pariplava having been specified.

pāriplavārthāḥ—For the purpose of Pariplavas; iti cet—if it be said; na—not so; viśeṣitatvāt—on account of (certain stories alofie) being specified.

3.4.24

ॐ तथा चैकवाक्योपबन्धात् ॐ ॥ ३.४.२४॥

oṃ tathā caikavākyopabandhāt oṃ ॥ 3.4.24॥

And because (the stories) become connected (with meditations) through unity of idea in that way, (therefore they are meant for illuminating the proximate knowledge). Topic-5: Sannyasins Free from Rituals

tathā—So; ca—and; ekavākyataḥ-pabandhāt—being connected as one whole.

3.4.25

ॐ अत एव चाग्नीन्धनाद्यनपेक्षा ॐ ॥ ३.४.२५॥

oṃ ata eva cāgnīndhanādyanapekṣā oṃ ॥ 3.4.25॥

For that very reason again, (the Sannyasin has) no need of “lightning fire”, and such other rites.

ata eva—Therefore; ca—and; agni-indhanādi-anapekṣā—no necessity of lighting fires etc.

3.4.26

ॐ सर्वापेक्षा च यज्ञादिश्रुतेः अश्ववत् ॐ ॥ ३.४.२६॥

oṃ sarvāpekṣā ca yajñādiśruteḥ aśvavat oṃ ॥ 3.4.26॥

On the strength of the Upanishadic sanction of sacrifices etc., all religious activities as well are necessary. This is the same as in the case of a horse (in matters of its adequacy).

sarvāpekṣā—There is the necessity of all works; ca—and; yajñādi-śruteḥ—for the scriptures prescribe sacrifices etc. (as means to Knowledge); aśvavat—even as the horse.

3.4.27

ॐ शमदमाद्युपेतः स्यात्तथाऽपि तु तद्विधेस्तदङ्गतया तेषामवश्यानुष्ठेयत्वात् ॐ ॥ ३.४.२७॥

oṃ śamadamādyupetaḥ syāttathā'pi tu tadvidhestadaṅgatayā teṣāmavaśyānuṣṭheyatvāt oṃ ॥ 3.4.27॥

(Even though there be no injunction about sacrifices etc.,), still one must be endowed with self-control and the like, since these are enjoined as subsidiaries of knowledge; and hence have to be practised as a matter of course.

śama-damādi-upetaḥ syāt—One must possess calmness, self-control, and the like; tathā api—even if it be so; tu—but; tadvidheḥ—since they are enjoined; tadaṅgatayā—as helps to Knowledge; teṣām-avaśya-anuṣṭheyatvāt—and therefore they have necessarily to be observed.

3.4.28

ॐ सर्वान्नानुमतिश्च प्राणात्यये तद्दर्शनात् ॐ ॥ ३.४.२८॥

oṃ sarvānnānumatiśca prāṇātyaye taddarśanāt oṃ ॥ 3.4.28॥

All kinds of food are permitted only when life is in danger; for so it is revealed.

sarva-anna-anumatiḥ—Permission to take all sorts of food; (ca—and;) prāṇātyaye—when life is jeopardized; tat-darśanāt—because the Sruti declares that.

3.4.29

ॐ अबाधाच्च ॐ ॥ ३.४.२९॥

oṃ abādhācca oṃ ॥ 3.4.29॥

. And (this should be the interpretation) so that the scriptures (about permissible and forbidden food) may not be contradicted.

abādhāc—Because of a non-contradiction (thus); ca—and.

3.4.30

ॐ अपि स्मर्यते ॐ ॥ ३.४.३०॥

oṃ api smaryate oṃ ॥ 3.4.30॥

Moreover, the Smritis support this view.

api ca—Moreover; smaryatethe—Smritis say so.

3.4.31

ॐ शब्दश्चातोऽकामचारे ॐ ॥ ३.४.३१॥

oṃ śabdaścāto'kāmacāre oṃ ॥ 3.4.31॥

Hence also occur the scriptural texts prohibiting license.

śabdaḥ—The scriptural text; ca—and; ataḥ—hence; kāmakāre—prohibiting license.

3.4.32

ॐ विहितत्वाच्चाश्रमकर्मापि ॐ ॥ ३.४.३२॥

oṃ vihitatvāccāśramakarmāpi oṃ ॥ 3.4.32॥

At the same time the duties of the orders of life are to be performed (by one who does not want liberation), since these have been enjoined.

vihitatvāt—Because they are enjoined; ca—and; āśrama-karma—duties of the Asrama (order of life); api—also.

3.4.33

ॐ सहकारित्वेन च ॐ ॥ ३.४.३३॥

oṃ sahakāritvena ca oṃ ॥ 3.4.33॥

And (these have to be performed, since these are enjoined as) being jointly the generators of knowledge.

sahakāritvena—As a means to Knowledge; ca—and.

3.4.34

ॐ सर्वथापि तु त एवोभयलिङ्गात् ॐ ॥ ३.४.३४॥

oṃ sarvathāpi tu ta evobhayaliṅgāt oṃ ॥ 3.4.34॥

Considered either way, however, the very same religious duties are meant for performance, because of the indicatory marks of both kinds.

sarvathā api—In all cases; te eva—the same duties (have to be performed); ubhaya-liṅgāt—because of the twofold indicatory mark.

3.4.35

ॐ अनभिभवं च दर्शयति ॐ ॥ ३.४.३५॥

oṃ anabhibhavaṃ ca darśayati oṃ ॥ 3.4.35॥

The Vedas also show that one (equipped with Brahmacharya etc.,) is not overpowered.

anabhibhavaṃ—Not being overpowered; ca—and; darśayati—the scripture shows.

3.4.36

ॐ अन्तरा चापि तु तद्दृष्टेः ॐ ॥ ३.४.३६॥

oṃ antarā cāpi tu taddṛṣṭeḥ oṃ ॥ 3.4.36॥

As a matter of fact, a person standing in between two stages is also entitled, such cases being met with (in the Upanishads).

antarā—(Persons standing) in between (two Asramas); ca—and; api tu—also; taddṛṣṭeḥ—such cases being seen.

3.4.37

ॐ अपि स्मर्यते ॐ ॥ ३.४.३७॥

oṃ api smaryate oṃ ॥ 3.4.37॥

Moreover, the Smritis also mention this fact.

api ca—Further; smaryate—the Smriti records such cases.

3.4.38

ॐ विशेषणानुग्रहं च ॐ ॥ ३.४.३८॥

oṃ viśeṣaṇānugrahaṃ ca oṃ ॥ 3.4.38॥

And (in their case) there can be the favour of special factors (like Japa etc.,).

viśeṣa-anugrahaḥ—Favour due to special works; ca—and.

3.4.39

ॐ अतस्त्वितरज्ज्यायो लिङ्गाच्च ॐ ॥ ३.४.३९॥

oṃ atastvitarajjyāyo liṅgācca oṃ ॥ 3.4.39॥

But as compared with this, the other one is better, because of indicatory sign (in the Upanishad and Smritis) as well.

ataḥ—Than this; tu—but; itarat—the other; jyāyoḥ—better; liṅgāt—because of the indicatory marks; ca—and.

3.4.40

ॐ तद्भूतस्य तु तद्भावो जैमिनेरपि नियमातद्रूपाऽभावेभ्यः ॐ ॥ ३.४.४०॥

oṃ tadbhūtasya tu tadbhāvo jaiminerapi niyamātadrūpā'bhāvebhyaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.4.40॥

But for one who has become so, there can be no reversion from it, on account of restriction, absence of text sanctioning reversion and absence of good precedence. This is the view of Jaimini as well.

tadbhūtasya—For one who has attained that (the highest Asrama); tu—but; na—no; atadbhāvaḥ—ceasing from that; jaimineḥ—of Jaimini (is this opinion); api—also; niyama-atadrūpa-abhāvebhyaḥ—on account of restrictions prohibiting such reversion.

3.4.41

ॐ न चाधिकारिकमपि पतनानुमानात्तदयोगात् ॐ ॥ ३.४.४१॥

oṃ na cādhikārikamapi patanānumānāttadayogāt oṃ ॥ 3.4.41॥

And even an expiation is not available for him, since his fall is known from the Smriti to be irremediable and he has no connection with it.

na—Not; ca—and; ādhikārikam—(expiation) mentioned in the chapter dealing with the qualification; api— even; patana-anumānāt—because a fall (in his case) is inferred from the Smriti; tadayogāt—and because of its inefficacy(in his case).

3.4.42

ॐ उपपूर्वमपीत्येके भावशमनवत्तदुक्तम् ॐ ॥ ३.४.४२॥

oṃ upapūrvamapītyeke bhāvaśamanavattaduktam oṃ ॥ 3.4.42॥

Some, however, consider this to be a minor sin and concede expiation as in a case of eating forbidden food. So it is explained by Jaimini.

upapūrvam—Prefixed with ‘Upa’, i.e. an Upapataka or a minor sin; api tu—but; eke—some; bhāvam—the existence; aśanavat—as in the case of eating; tat—this; uktam—is explained in Purva Mimamsa.

3.4.43

ॐ बहिस्तूभयथापि स्मृतेराचाराच्च ॐ ॥ ३.४.४३॥

oṃ bahistūbhayathāpi smṛterācārācca oṃ ॥ 3.4.43॥

(Whether their transgression constitutes a major or a minor sin), they are to be kept outside in either case in accordance with Smriti texts and behaviour of good people. Topic-13: Meditations Connected with Rites

bahiḥ—Outside; tu—but; bhayathā-api—in either case; smṛteḥ—from the Smriti; ācārāt—from custom; ca—and.

3.4.44

ॐ स्वामिनः श्रुतेरित्यात्रेयः ॐ ॥ ३.४.४४॥

oṃ svāminaḥ śruterityātreyaḥ oṃ ॥ 3.4.44॥

The teacher Atreya thinks that the agentship for meditation belongs to the master of the sacrifice, since the Upanishads mention their results. XXXXXX

svāminaḥ—To the sacrificer; phala-śruteḥ—from the declaration of results in the Sruti; iti—thus; ātreyaḥ—Atreya.

3.4.45

ॐ आर्त्विज्यमित्यौडुलोमिः तस्मै हि परिक्रियते ॐ ॥ ३.४.४५॥

oṃ ārtvijyamityauḍulomiḥ tasmai hi parikriyate oṃ ॥ 3.4.45॥

The (teacher) Audulomi says that it is the duty of the priest (to undertake such meditations), for he is retained for that.

ārtvijyam—The duty of the Ritvik (priest); iti—thus; auḍulomiḥ—Audulomi; tasmai—for that; hi—because; parikrīyate—he is paid.

3.4.47

ॐ सहकार्यन्तरविधिः पक्षेण तृतीयं तद्वतो विद्यादिवत् ॐ ॥ ३.४.४६॥

oṃ sahakāryantaravidhiḥ pakṣeṇa tṛtīyaṃ tadvato vidyādivat oṃ ॥ 3.4.47॥

In case of a partial application to knowledge by one possessed of (imperfect) knowledge, an injunction is implied in another auxiliary which is the third; this is like the main injunction being applied to the subsidiary acts.

sahakāryantaravidhiḥ—Injunction of another auxiliary (to Knowledge); pakṣeṇa—as an alternative; tadvataḥ—for one who possesses it (i.e. Knowledge); tṛtīyaṃ—a third one; vidhyādivat—as in the case of injunctions and the like.

3.4.48

पाठभेद श्रुतेश्च added to 3.4.46 ॐ कृत्स्नभावात्तु गृहिणोपसंहारः ॐ ॥ ३.४.४७॥

pāṭhabheda śruteśca added to 3.4.46 oṃ kṛtsnabhāvāttu gṛhiṇopasaṃhāraḥ oṃ ॥ 3.4.48॥

But the conclusion is made (in the Chandogya Upanishad) with the householder, since he has an all-inclusive life.

kṛtsnabhāvāt—On account of the householder’s life including all; tu—verily; upasaṃhāraḥ—(the chapter) ends; gṛhiṇā—with the householder.

3.4.49

ॐ मौनवदितरेषामप्युपदेशात् ॐ ॥ ३.४.४८॥

oṃ maunavaditareṣāmapyupadeśāt oṃ ॥ 3.4.49॥

Since there is injunction even about the others, just as much as of meditativeness.

maunavar—Even as the state of a Muni (Sannyasa); itareṣām—of the others; api—even; upadeśāt—on account of scriptural instruction.

3.4.50

ॐ अनाविष्कुर्वन्नन्वयात् ॐ ॥ ३.४.४९॥

oṃ anāviṣkurvannanvayāt oṃ ॥ 3.4.50॥

(The word ‘balya’ in the Brihadaranyaka means that a man of enlightenment should behave like a child) without displaying his parts, for so it fits in with the context.

anāviṣkurvan—Without manifesting himself; anvayāt—on account of the context.

3.4.51

ॐ ऐहिकमप्रस्तुतप्रतिबन्धे तद्दर्शनात् ॐ ॥ ३.४.५०॥

oṃ aihikamaprastutapratibandhe taddarśanāt oṃ ॥ 3.4.51॥

he generation of knowledge takes place even in this life if there is no obstruction to the means adopted. For this is what is revealed (by the Upanishads).

aihikam—In this life; api—even; aprastuta-pratibandhe—if there is no obstruction to it (the means adopted); tat-darśanāt—because it is so seen from the scriptures.

3.4.52

ॐ एवं मुक्तिफलानियमस्तदवस्थावधृतेस्तदवस्थावधृतेः ॐ ॥ ३.४.५१॥ इति श्रीमत्कृष्णद्वैपायनकृतब्रह्मसूत्रेषु तृतीयाध्यायस्य चतुर्थः पादः समाप्तः ॥ इति तृतीयोऽध्यायः॥

oṃ evaṃ muktiphalāniyamastadavasthāvadhṛtestadavasthāvadhṛteḥ oṃ ॥ 3.4.52॥ iti śrīmatkṛṣṇadvaipāyanakṛtabrahmasūtreṣu tṛtīyādhyāyasya caturthaḥ pādaḥ samāptaḥ ॥ iti tṛtīyo'dhyāyaḥ॥

There is no rule of this kind with regard to the result called liberation, because that state has been definitely determined (to be the same), because that state has been definitely determined (to be the same).

evaṃ—Like this; muktiphala-aniyamaḥ—there is no rule with respect to Liberation, the fruit (of Knowledge); tat-avasthā-avadhṛte—because the Sruti asserts that state (to be immutable).