1. Upanishads Vol 3 Roer

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project

to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the

publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the

public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to

prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

We also ask that you:

• Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for

personal, non-commercial purposes.

• Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine

translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the

use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

• Maintain attribution The Google “watermark” you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find

additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

• Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just

because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other

countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of

any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner

anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers

discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at http://books.google.com/

Bib. Ind. I. 15

BIBLIOTHECA INDICA;

COLLECTION OF ORIENTAL WORKS

PUBLISHED UNDER THE PATRONAGE OF THE

Hon. Court of Directors of the East India Company,

AND THE SUPERINTENDENCE OF THE

ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL.

Vol. II. Part III.

Nos. 27, 88 & 135.

THE BRIHAD A'RANYAKA UPANISHAD,

AND

THE COMMENTARY OF S'ANKARA A'CHARYA ON ITS

FIRST CHAPTER,

TRANSLATED FROM THE ORIGINAL SANSCRIT

By Dr. E. Röer.

CALCUTTA :

PRINTED BY J. THOMAS, AT THE BAPTIST MISSION PRESS.

PREFACE.

IT was my intention to have accompanied this translation of the Brihad Āranyaka Upanishad with an introduction in the manner adopted in my translation of the minor Upanishads ; but as the state of my health compels me to rest for a time from literary labours, and as I do not wish to delay any longer the publication of a work which has been several years in progress, I am obliged to forego my wishes on the subject, reserving for the future the publication of my views on this Upanishad in a separate form.

I would only add here the reason which induced me to discontinue the translation of S'aṅkara's commentary. At the commencement of the work I deemed it desirable to anglicise the commentary in order to assist the student in understanding so difficult an author as S'aṅkara ; this, I presume, has been accomplished by the portion I have translated in the first two fasciculi, and it appeared to me useless to continue with the translation of the whole commentary, as it is cumbrous and generally adds nothing to the explanation of the text, an opinion which was also held by several of my Oriental friends in Europe. In the latter part of my work, accordingly, I translated only such passages of the commentary as elucidate the text, and gave, generally in my own words, S'aṅkara's prefatory remarks to the different Brāhmaṇas, these remarks being interesting for the views expounded therein as well as for the insight which they offer into the connexion of the various parts of this Upanishad.

CORRECTIONS.

page line after add and

10 1 after the months add and

13 8 — by inference " the

14 22 for of that read "that"

ib. 23 " another that read another "that"

16 2 " being are read gescence

25 30 " gesence read gesence

33 2 " after desires write a,—

ib. 3 " Thus read thus

40 21 after speeeh add performed

41 21 for with read to

42 31 " with " to

43 19 " with " to

51 7 dele he

54 21 for letters read letter

56 4 " ng irasa " Angirasa

From p. 65—80 for the heading third Brāhmaṇa read fourth Brāhmaṇa

65 9 for ( write <

ib. 21 " ( " >

73 19 " in read by

80 " ? dele p. 23 write c

85 12 — he

86 3 — he

ib. 24 — he

89 17 for him read a man

96 1 " This soul " this soul

97 8 " have had read then dele then is; and after Sāstra

104 8 after but read add is

107 23 for son read soul

109 8 " wh i which is read which is

112 35 " he, or the that read that

118 2 dele he after I:

122 6 " " him read him

ib. 31 " " " "

133 18 " ( "

136 4 for breathes not read not breathes.

ib. 6 dele he before eats.

ib. 8 " The Mantra :

ib. 9 for penance "penance" read "penance" "he penance; " he

137 1 " penance." " He " penance; " he

Digitized by Google

vi

page line

137 3 for the causes read is : The nature of a fa-

ther with regard to those causes,

141 8 place " case

142 12 dele By the sacrificer " by the sacrificer

ib. 13 after collected add obtain

ib. 14 for obtains read do

143 22 " are " decrease"

ib. 23 " decreased" "

173 5 for sleep read sleeps

ib. 34 " he " the text

ib. 35 " the same, as well. " in the same way, as wells

174 5 after Rudra dele ,

ib. 24 for are read is

175 6 , this " , the other

ib. 30 " yacheha " yachcha

ib. ib. after gatipúrvakam add yat sthánu

ib. 31 for stásnu read vyápya

ib. ib. " vyapya " Kátyaní

177 3 " Katyáni " dhúmáh

179 27 " dhumáh " muscular

183 24 after and add *

185 34 dele vide kaṭha U. 5, 10.

ib. 35 change ¶ to ||

ib. ib. before that put Vyashṭi

187 5 for Vyashti read Parameshṭhi

ib. 6 " Parameshṭhi " is

189 32 " the idea " air

192 7 after vital add *

193 2 " auxiliaries " *

ib. 8 " organs " dele *

194 17 for Páriskhitas read is

196 21 " in " it

197 1 dele on

ib. 15 for " of

ib. 31 " were " are

198 1 dele* after thinker and place it after “ not thinking”

ib. 9 for Gárgi " O Ṇárgi

199 13 dele † after him

ib. 14 place † we

204 3 after subtle place †

ib. 3 " red " ‡

ib. ib. " viscid " §

ib. 4 . " adhesive " ||

ib. 6 " entrance " ¶

ib. 8 " it " # *

ib. 10 for stay read are

ib. ib. after places place † †

205 22 dele Hd

page line

205 24 for one to read one with regard to

210 31 " And " " An

224 23 " sarváván- " sarváván=

ib. 37 " he the " "

226 12 after dream dele "

236 6 before as " read in

240 17 for is " milk-cow milch-cow

251 10 " " " fruits

258 21 " fruit " fruits

ib. 31 " both " either

262 18 before mortals dele the tions

263 1 for tons read

ib. 7 " bahana " vahana

ib. 31 " Sas'tra " S'as'tra

ib. 32 " Vais'war " Vais'yas

266 24 " assuming his " having assumed his

269 9 after fine write (of the rising)

ŚANKARA'S INTRODUCTION.

Om! Salutation to Bramba (or Bramhā) and the other Rishis, perfect in the traditional knowledge of Bramba, whose names are enumerated in the lineage from teacher to teacher.* Salutation to the religious instructors.†

This brief‡ commentary of the Vājasanéyi Bramba Upanishad, which commences with the words: “The dawn is the head of the sacrificial horse,” is composed for the sake of those who wish to liberate themselves from the world, in order that they may acquire the knowledge, that Bramba§ and the soul|| are the same, a knowledge, by which the liberation from the cause of the world* is accomplished. This knowledge of Bramba is called Upanishad, because it completely annihilates the world, together with its cause (ignorance) in such as possess this knowledge; for this is the meaning of the word Sad,† preceded by Upani.‡ A work which treats on the same knowledge, is also called Upanishad.

• Bramba Rishis are the sages, who in continuous succession from Bramba, Bramhā, Paramésti, &c. taught the knowledge of the universal soul. They are enumerated in the Vansa Bramba, a part of the present Upanishad. V. p. 503, &c.

† The plural is here the plural is majestatis, meaning the preceptor of Sankara Achārya, whose name was Góvinda.

‡ Brief it is called, in comparison with the more voluminous commentary, called the Bhartri Prapancha Bhāshya.

§ Bramba, the universal soul.

|| The individual soul. According to the Védantists the soul, independent of the body, is the substance which is pure existence, knowledge and bliss, and which must therefore not be confounded with its faculties, the senses, the mind, intellect, &c.

• The cause of the world is ignorance.

† Sad means to destroy, or to go.

‡ Upa means near, Ni expresses certainty.

2

Introduction.

The above-mentioned Upanishad, which contains 6 chapters, is called

Aranyaka, as being spoken in a desert, and Brihad (great) from its

extent.*

The connexion of this Upanishad with the ceremonial part† of the

Védas will now be mentioned. The whole Véda has the design to

explain by what means objects of desire and aversion that cannot

be proved by perception or inference, may be obtained or removed; for

every man has naturally the wish to obtain objects of desire, and

remove objects of aversion. The Véda has not to investigate objects

of the senses, because the knowledge of what satisfies desires, or re-

moves objects of aversion, is produced by perception and inference.‡

Further, unless there is a knowledge of the existence of the soul in

another life, there cannot be a wish to obtain or remove objects of de-

sire or aversion in a subsequent life; this is clear from the conduct of

those who§ do not admit any other desires but those, prompted by one's

own nature. In consequence the Védic science is founded on the

knowledge of the existence of the soul, relative to a former life, and

upon the special means by which objects of desire and aversion in

another life may be obtained or removed. The existence of the soul as

independent of the body, is evident from positive declarations of the

Védas, as shown by the following passages : “This is the investigation

• This Upanishad, besides the names of Vájasanéyi Bramba Upanishad and

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad, bears also the denomination of Kánwa Upanishad.

† The Védas are divided in two parts, the first is the Karma-kánḍa, the ceremo-

nial part, also Párva-kánḍa, and treats on ceremonies, the second is the Jnána-

kánḍa, the part which contains knowledge, also named Uttara-kaṇḍa or posterior

part, and unfolds the knowledge of Bramba or the universal soul.

‡ The Mímánsakas and Védántís assert five kinds of evidence, viz. perception, in-

ference, verbal communication, comparison and presumption. Some add also pri-

vation. The Chárvákas recognise but one, viz. perception. The followers of

Kaṇáda and those of Sugata (Buddha) acknowledge two, perception and inference.

The Sánchyas reckon three, including affirmation. The Naiyáyicas, or followers of

Gótama, count four, viz. the foregoing together with comparison. The Prabhákaras,

as first observed, admit five. And the rest of the Mímánsakas, in both schools,

prior and later Mimansa, enumerate six. Col. M. E. Vol. I. pp. 303, 304. In our

passage perception and inference include the other kinds of evidence.

§ The Lókáyatikas are here meant according to Ánanda Giri. They do not ac-

knowledge the existence of the soul, independent of the body, and accordingly do

not perform any actions relative to a future life.

Introduction.

whether after the death of man the soul exists; some assert, the soul exists; the soul does not exist, assert others.” This is the commencement of one Upanishad,* and it concludes with the words: it exists.†

Another passage says: “Some souls after death are born (again) to obtain a body like animals, others are changed into the condition of a trunk, according to their works, according to their knowledge of the Védas.”‡

Another passage commences: “It (the soul) is itself light, its knowledge and ceremonial works follow it (in another life); man becomes holy by holy work.”

Another passage which commences: “I will declare”§ concludes with the words: the soul is knowledge.

The assertion, that the existence of the soul, as independent of the body, can be proved by perception, is not correct; for there is a contradictory assertion of such who argue the contrary.

For, if from perception a knowledge of the existence of the soul in connexion with another body, could be derived, we should not be opposed to the Lókáyatikas|| and Bauddhas,* who assert that the soul

• See Kaṭha Upanishad, I. 20.

† K. U. VI. 13.

‡ K. U. V. 6–7.

§ Brihad Aranyaka U. p. 345.

|| The Chárvákas (or Súnyavádis) so named from one of their teachers, the Muni Chárváka. From Vrihaspati they are called also Várhaspatyas. The appellation Súnyavádis, implies the asserter of the unreality and emptiness of the universe, and another designation, Lókáyata, expresses their adoption of the tenet, that this being is the Be-all of existence: they were, in short, the advocates of materialism and atheism, and have existed from a very remote period, and still exist, as we shall hereafter see. Wilson's Sects of the Hindus, p. 15.

They (the Chárvákas) restrict to perception the only means of proof and source of knowledge. Others, however, admit probability and tradition. Col. M. E. Vol. I. p. 403. Sadánanda in the Védánta Sára, calls up for refutation no less than four followers of Chárváka; one maintaining, that the gross corporeal frame is identical with the soul, another that the corporeal organs constitute the soul, a third affirming that the vital functions do so, a fourth insisting, that the mind and the soul are the same. C. M. E. pp. 403, 404.

• Bauddhas. There are four sects among the followers of Buddha: 1. The Mádhyamicas, who maintain, that all is void. 2. The Yógacháras, who assert, that, except internal sensation or intelligence (Vijnyána) all else is void. 3. Sautránticas.

3

32

4

Introduction.

does not exist. For with regard to objects of the senses, as for instance a pot, no contradiction takes place, as if one would assert the non-existence of a pot, although it is perceived by the senses. If you hold, such contradiction may exist by referring to the well known topic of the trunk and the man, if the same object is taken by some for a trunk, by others for a man, we remind you of the fact, that all dispute ceases, when the nature of the object has been ascertained. For there is no dispute about the nature of an object of the senses, for instance, of a trunk, when it has been ascertained by perception. The Vainâsikas* opinion of the existence of the soul, independent of the internal body. Accordingly, since the soul is different from any object of the senses, its existence cannot be proved by perception.

Nor can it be proved by inference. If you say, that the Sruti applies arguments in proving the existence of the soul, and that these arguments are based upon perception, we do not admit this on the ground, that there is no perception of the soul, relative to a former birth. When, however, the existence of the soul by the Vêda is acknowledged, and also by common arguments, according to the meaning of the Vêda, the followers of the Vêda, the Mîmânsakas and Târkikas (or logicians), will substitute the fiction, as if the perception of the I and the arguments in accordance with the Vêdas, were produced by their own

They affirm the actual existence of external objects no less than of internal sensations. The exterior objects to be known by immediate perception. 4. Vaibhâshikas, who agree with the latter, except that they contend for a mediate apprehension of exterior objects, through images, or resembling forms, represented to the intellect. C. M. E. Vol. I. pp. 390,391.

• Hence these Buddhists (the Sautrântikas and Vaibháshikas, who believe, that objects cease to exist, when no longer perceived, they have but a brief duration, like the flash of lightning, lasting no longer than the perception of them. Their identity is but momentary) are by their adversaries, the orthodox Hindus, designated as Pûrna- or Sarva-Vainâsikas arguing total perishableness, while the followers of Kanada, who acknowledge some of their categories to be eternal and invariable, and reckon only others transitory and changeable; and who insist that identity ceases with any variation in the composition of the body, and that a corporeal frame, receiving nutriment and discharging excretions, undergoes continual change, and consequent early loss of identity, are for that particular opinion, called Ardha-vainâsikas 'arguing half perishableness.' Col. M. E. Vol. I. pp. 393, 394.

Digitized by Google

Introduction.

intellect, and hence say, that the soul is proved by perception and inference.

The ceremonial part of the Védas is intended for the special instruction of him, who with certainty knows that the soul exists, subject to transmigration, and who in consequence is anxious to avail himself of special means to obtain and remove objects of desire and aversion in connexion with another body. The ignorance, however, with regard to the soul, which produces the wish to obtain what is desired, and to remove what is not desired, and which by its nature prides itself in the feelings of self, dominion and possession, is not annihilated by ceremonial works; this can only be effected by the opposite knowledge of the identity of Bramha with the individual soul. For as long as this ignorance is not annihilated, so long the ignorant soul, owing to passion, hatred and other natural faults, resulting from works, and owing to the transgression of commands and prohibitions of the Sastra, continues to accumulate by thoughts, words and by the body, works which are called unholy, and which are the causes of evil concerning events that fall within the senses as well as that which do not fall within them. All this is the result of the greater power of natural faults. Hence, in proportion to the faults, transmigration ensues from the highest state downwards to the lowest state of inanimate matter.

Sometimes the purification by means of the Sastra has a greater power. Hence the soul acquires by actions of mind, speech and body a state which is called virtue, and which is the cause of good. This virtue is twofold—virtue resulting from knowledge and mere virtue. The reward of the latter is the obtaining of the world of the manes (Pitris) and of other like worlds. The reward of virtue, resulting from knowledge, is the obtaining of the world of the Dévas, and of other worlds, upwards to the world of Bramhà. Thus it is said in the Sastra : sacrificial works directed to Bramha, are preferable to works directed to the Dévas. Also the Smriti* teaches : work, according to the Védas, is twofold, (such as concerns active life, and such as refers to contemplation ; the former satisfies desires, the latter abstains from them through knowledge.)

If lastly, virtue and vice are equally balanced in a person, he obtains the condition of man. Thus by the power of ignorance and other

• Manu. 12. 88.

6

Introduction.

innate faults, a soul has to transmigrate, in accordance with its virtue or vice, into worldly forms, different in name, shape and works, from the state of the world of Bramhā downwards to the condition of inanimate matter.

Thus this manifested world, subject to the connexion between cause and effect, was not manifested before its creation. “This world which, like a sprout springs from seed, proceeds from ignorance, which is placed as the result from works, from the performer and effects upon the soul, is without beginning, is without end, is without reality.”

To remove the ignorance of a person who shows by reflections, as just described, his dissatisfaction with the world, the following Upanishad is commenced; in order that he may obtain the knowledge of Bramha, which is opposite to that ignorance.

The knowledge, however, of the ceremonies regarding the sacrifice of a horse, is required that those who are not fit to perform the horse-sacrifice may obtain by this knowledge the same reward.*

If one by such passages from the Sruti as the following: “By knowledge or by holy actions the mentioned reward may be obtained,” and “He who overcomes even this world,” would conclude, that the knowledge was only a kind of work, he would be in error, first, because passages as such : “who offers the sacrificial horse,” and “who knows† him thus,” leave it optional, to perform that sacrifice either by knowledge or in reality ; secondly, because it (this knowledge) is also mentioned in the second part of the Sruti, which treats on knowledge ; thirdly, because also by other ceremonies a similar representation is made. Hence it follows, that from knowledge alone the reward of the horse-sacrifice is derived. The chief of all ceremonies, however, is the Aswamédha, because its reward includes the universal and special state of Hiranya Garbha.‡

• Viz. at the commencement of the Upanishad a description of the Aswamédha or horse-sacrifice, which does not properly belong to it, is given for the object, that Brāhmans and others may obtain by knowledge the reward of this sacrifice, which can in reality only be performed by kings.

† That is to say, who knows the sacrifice of the horse to be an emblem of Prajápati.

‡ The universal state is Hiranya Garbha as soul of the universe, or Isvara, who rules all ; the special state is Hiranya Garbha as present in every individual. Here the special state means of course the state of a special divinity.

Digitized by Google

Introduction.

7

Further at this commencement of the knowledge of Brahma, the ceremony of the horse-sacrifice is described for the purpose to show the worldly tendency of all sacrifices; for its reward is shown as the devourer, which is death.

If it be said that the regular* ceremonies have no worldly effect, we deny this on the authority of the Sruti, which enumerates the effects of all works. For every ceremony requires the assistance of a wife. When by such wishes as the following, "may I have a wife," which are based on our very nature, the connection of all ceremonies with objects of desire,—moreover, as the reward of the ceremonies to be performed by a son, the world of the Rishis or Dévas, have been pointed out, the state of Hiranya Garbha will be shown as reward of the Aswamédha at the end of this chapter by the words : "This world is threefold by name, form and work."

Thus the world is the manifest effect from all actions. These three (names, forms and works) then were before the origin of the world not manifested. Again they become manifest from the effects of the works of all living creatures, as a tree springs from seed. This world, which is at the same time manifest and not manifest, the object of ignorance, which is morpheus and amorpheus ; is for the sake of the ceremony, the performer and the effect, placed through ignorance upon the soul by its semblance of it. Therefore the soul, although it is separate from the world, although in its nature it is without the distinction of name, form and work, although it is without duality, essentially eternal, pure, intelligent and blissful, is yet manifested by the difference of ceremony, performer, effect, and by other distinctions.

Therefore as the erroneous conception of a rope as a snake is removed by a correct apprehension, so the knowledge of Bramah is commenced to annihilate the ignorance, the cause of desire and other faults, and also of works, of a person who is dissatisfied with this world, which naturally represents the distinctions of ceremonial act, of the performer and of the effect, and which naturally applies causes and effects by such sentences, as : this is so or so. In this the part, commencing

• Regular ceremonies are such, which, if not performed, are causes of sin, and if performed, are no causes of merit, ceremonies which every Bráhman is bound to perform, as for instance the regular ceremonies, called Sandhya bandana. V. Vé-dánta Sára. Calcutta Edition. p. 2.

Digitized by Google

8

Introduction.

with: "The dawn is the head," &c., is designed for the knowledge of the horse sacrifice. The sacrifice is represented under the emblem of a horse, on account of the eminence of the horse. The eminence again is derived from the sacrifice bearing its name, and from its being the representation of Prajāpati.*

• The Aśwamédha and Purushamédha, celebrated in the manner directed by this Véda, (white Yajur Véda) are not really sacrifices of horses and men. In the first mentioned ceremony, six hundred and nine animals of various prescribed kinds, domestic and wild, including birds, fish, and reptiles, are made fast, the tame ones, to twenty-one posts, and the wild, in the intervals between the pillars; and after certain prayers have been recited, the victims are let loose without injury.......... This mode of performing the Aśwamédha and Purushamédha, as emblematic ceremonies, not as real sacrifices, is taught in this Véda and the interpretation is fully confirmed by the ritualists, and by commentators on the Sanhitá and Bráhmaṇa. .... The horse, which is the subject of the religious ceremony, called Aśwamédha, is also avowedly an emblem of Viráj, or the primeval and universal manifested being. Col. M. E. Vol. I. pp. 61, 62.

BRIHAD ARANYAKA UPANISHAD.

FIRST CHAPTER.

First Bráhmana.

Om ! The dawn in truth is the head of the sacrificial horse. The sun is the eye; the wind the breath; the fire, under the name Vaiśwánara, the open mouth ; the year the body of the sacrificial horse. The heaven is the back ; the atmosphere the belly ; the earth the footstool (hoof) ; the quarters the sides; the intermediate quarters the bones of the sides ; the seasons the

"The dawn is in truth, &c." The dawn means here the hour of Bramhâ. "In truth," is said for the sake of reminding, and reminds of a well known time. "Is the head," from its being the principal time ; for the head is the principal part of the body. For the object of purifying the animal, representing in its members the various parts of the ceremonies, time and other conditions of the sacrifice are typified by the head and other parts. It is represented as Prajápati ; for the representation of the animal by time, the worlds and the divinities is its representation as Prajápati ; for this is the nature of Prajápati, as Vishnu and other deities are represented under the form of an image. "The sun is the eye," as nearest to the head, and as being the tutelary deity of the eye.*—"The wind is the breath," from its identity with it. "The mouth is fire, under the name of Vaiśwánara ;" Vaiśwánara is the special name of Agni, meaning, whose mouth is wide open. Agni is also the deity of the mouth. "The year is the body," viz. the year, as containing twelve or thirteen months. The year is the body of the members of time ; for the body is in the midst of the members, as the Sruti says. "Of the sacrificial horse ;" this is here repeated for the sake of connection. "The heaven is the back," both being placed alike above. "The atmosphere the belly," both being hollow. The earth the footstool. The quarters, although four, are the two sides, by

• As the eye is nearest to the head, so the sun nearest to the dawn. This is the point of their resemblance. Ánanda Giri.

10 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

members; the mouths, the half months, are the joints; day and night the feet; the constellations the bones; the sky the muscles; the half digested food the sand; the rivers arteries and veins; the liver and spleen the mountains; the herbs and trees the various kinds of hair. The sun, as long as he rises, is the forepart of the body; the sun as long as he descends, is the hind part of the body. The lightning is like yawning; the shaking of the members is like the rolling of the thunder; the passing of urine is like the rain of the clouds; its voice is like speech.1.

the similarity of both. This comparison is not improper for the reason, that the number of both is different; for as the two sides of the horse are turned to all quarters, there is no fault in this comparison. "The intermediate quarters," viz. Agneyi (regent of the south-east), &c., the bones of the sides. "The seasons are the members," from the similarity of the parts of the year with the members of the body. "The months and half months the joints," from their similarity. "Days and nights the feet" in plural number from the difference of days, as days of Prajapati, of the Devas, of the Pitris, and of men. "Feet," because they proceed; for the time as body proceeds with the days and nights, as with the feet of the horse. "The constellations the bones," from their similar white colour. "The sky," meaning here the clouds of the sky, because the sky was formerly mentioned as the belly, are the muscles, from the similarity of both in oozing either water or blood. "The half digested food the sand," from the similarity of the separate parts. The rivers, "arteries and veins," because both ooze. "The liver and the spleen," the mountains, viz. the two pieces of flesh to the right and left under the heart; they are called "mountains" from their hardness and height. The herbs, small plants, the hair of the body; the "trees," the hair of the head, according to their likeness. The sun rising until noon is the forepart of the horse above the navel; the sun, descending from the midst of his course, is the other half, the hips and loins, from their respective similarity. "The lightning is like the yawning," from the likeness of the mouth, when it suddenly opens, with the rending of a cloud. "The shaking of the members is like the rolling of thunder," from the similarity of the sound. "The passing of the urine"

First Chapter. First Bráhmaṇa.

11

The day is the Mahimá, placed before the horse ; its birthplace is the eastern sea; the night the other Mahimá, which is placed behind the horse ; its birthplace is the western sea; these Mahimas are placed around the horse. The horse, under the name of Haya, carried the gods, under the name of Vâji the Gandharvas, under the name of Arva, Asurs, under the name of Aswa, men. The sea is its companion, the sea its birthplace. 2.

is like the raining of the clouds—both sprinkle alike. The voice is like the neighing of the horse ; in this there is a natural likeness. 1

"The day," &c., this is said in illustration of the golden and silver cups, called Mahimá, which are placed before and behind the horse. The day is the golden cup, from the similar splendour of both. How is the day placed as the cup before the horse? By its being an emblem of Prajápati ; for Prajápati who is represented by Âditya (the sun), &c. is designated by the day. In naming the horse, Prajápati is meant, as the lightning is manifest by manifesting a tree. The birthplace of the golden cup means here the place where it is kept. Thus the night represents the silver cup, from the likeness of the colour, or of the hind-part of the horse. Behind this horse, the cup, by name Mahimá, is placed. Its birthplace is the western sea. Mahimá means greatness ; for it shows the opulence of the horse, that the golden and silver cups are placed on either side. These cups, under the name of Mahimá, are placed around the horse. The repetition is here made for the sake of praise, viz. the Mahimas, which have those distinctions, and the horse gifted with greatness. The same praise is intended by the words : "The horse under the name of Haya." Haya is derived from the root Hinóti, the action of going, going 'in an eminent manner, unless it means a peculiar race. "It carries the gods," means either it gained the condition of a god by its being the representation of Prajápati, or it became the carrier of the gods. But is not the office of carrying a blame? By no means ; for carrying is the nature of the horse, and as by this nature it acquires an eminence, as being connected with the gods and other superior beings, it is rather a praise. In the same manner the word Vâji and the other terms of the horse denote different races. The horse, under the name of Vâji, carried

c 2

12

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

Second Bráhmana.

There was not any thing here before: this was indeed en-veloped by death, who is voracity;

the Gandharvas, under the name of Arva the Asurs, under the name of Aswa men. The sea, which represents here the universal soul, in its companion; there is its dwelling place. The sea, its birth-place, the cause of its production. In this way the purified birth-place, or the purified dwelling-place is praised. In the waters is the birth-place of the horse, says the Sruti; thus the sea is its well known origin (2.)

The origin of the fire, required for the performance of the horse-sacrifice, will now be explained. As it is intended to describe the particulars of the fire with regard to the horse sacrifice, the birth of the fire is here introduced for its praise.

"There was not any thing here before." "Here," in this universe, there was not any thing that could be distinguished by differences of name or shape. "Before," viz. before the creation of the mind and other productions.

'Then was there not the universal void ?* For this follows from the passage of the Sruti: "There was not any thing here," which means there was neither an effect nor a cause. It follows also from the idea of production; for suppose a pot be produced, consequently there is no existence of the pot before its production.'

But hence does not follow the non-existence of the cause, as is evident from the lump of earth (from which the pot is produced;) let it be granted, that there is no existence of a thing, that is not perceived ;† let therefore the effect not exist; this, however, does not affect the existence of the cause, as it can be perceived (before it produces the effect.)

'No, because before the production there is no perception whatever, either of cause or effect. If then non-perception, which is a negation, is the cause of the whole world, neither cause nor effect can be perceived before its creation; therefore the negation of all (cause and effect) must be admitted.'

We deny this. First, because the Sruti declares: "By death was this

• This is the opinion of the Mádhyamikas, one of the four sects of the Bauddhas. Vide p. 3.

† As of an effect, which is not perceived, before it is produced by its cause.

First Chapter. Second Brāhmana. 13

indeed enveloped ;" for if there was nothing to envelop, and nothing to be enveloped, the Sruti could not say, this was indeed enveloped ; for there is no such a conception as the son of a barren woman, adorned with a sky-flower. And it is said, by death indeed was this enveloped ; therefore, by the evidence of the Sruti, it follows both, that before the creation of the world there was a cause which was enveloping, and that there was an effect which was enveloped. We deny it secondly, by argument ; for we may know by inference existence of cause and effect before the production ; for if a real effect takes place, it must be produced by a real cause, and cannot be produced by an unreal cause.

The existence of a cause of the world before its creation is argued in the same manner as the existence of the cause of a pot and of other productions. If you* argue the non-existence of the cause of the pot, &c. from the reason, that the pot could not be produced, unless the lump of earth† and other similar things disappear,‡ we cannot agree, since earth and other substances are the real causes ; for earth, gold, &c. are the causes in the production of a pot, and not the peculiar shape of the lump, since, if there is not the former, (earth,) there is not the latter, (the pot.) Namely, even if there is not a peculiar shape of the lump, the production of a pot and similar effects takes place from such substances alone, as earth, gold and similar causes. Therefore not the peculiar shape of the lump is the cause in the production of a pot. On the other hand, if there do not exist earth, gold and similar substances, the production of a pot, &c. does not take place ; consequently, earth, gold, &c. are the causes, not the peculiar shape of the lump ; for every cause, when producing an effect, produces this effect only by concealing (making disappear) its former effects, because it is impossible that from one and the same cause, at one and the same time, many effects should be derived.§

• The opponent of course. † From which the pot is produced. ‡ Viz. the opponent reasons in this way : If the effect (for instance, the pot) has no actual existence, the cause (the lump of earth) does also not exist. If the effect has actual existence, the cause (the lump of earth) has disappeared, i. e. exists no more. § For instance. The shape of a lump of earth, from which a pot is to be made, must disappear in order that the production be possible. This shape, however, is not the cause, but it is merely a former effect of the same cause, earth.

14

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

Nor does the cause disappear with its former effect : therefore the production of the pot by the disappearance of the lump, (which you say, is the cause) shows, that the lump is not the cause. If you say, 'that before the production a cause does not exist, because, independent of the lump of earth, earth and other substances have no existence,' we object ; for earth and other substances do not disappear with their former effects, but are yet found in the last productions, as in a pot, &c.

If you maintain, 'that without the lump, the pot, &c., earth and other causes are not perceived,' we deny this also, because, when a pot, &c. is produced, the lump, &c. has disappeared, while the earth and other real causes are there still remaining. If you say, 'that the connexion (between cause and effect) depends upon comparison,* and not upon the permanence of the cause (in the effect) ;' we deny this also, for as the parts of earth that compose a lump, are found in a pot by mere perception, there is only a semblance of inference, and therefore comparison and other similar actions do not take place.

Moreover the different mode of operation in perception and in inference is not incompatible, because inference, which is always preceded by perception, would otherwise have nowhere a place to depend upon.

If it be supposed, that 'all has only a momentary existence, and accordingly in a sentence : that is this, both terms refer only to a momentary existence,' it follows, that the notion of that is dependent on the notion of another that, which is again dependent on another, so that there is no stability. It further follows, that the notion "that is like this," is also impossible, (the term 'this' being dependent on a similar series) hence the conclusion is unavoidable : there is no dependence whatsoever. The connection between the two notions of that and this is also impossible, because there is no subject† to perceive them.

If you say, 'there is a connection between them by comparison,' we

• Sankara has omitted to give the argument of the opponent, which is based upon the supposition that the relation of cause and effect can only be apprehended by comparison. Ananda Giri supplies this as follows. All that exists is only momentary ; but these modes (cause and effect) exist ; therefore they are momentary. If thus the momentary existence of all that exists, has been shown, and the relation of cause and effect depends upon comparison, delusion is unavoidable.

† No sentient subject, no reasonable being, because it would be involved in the same eternal change.

First Chapter. Second Brāhmana.

15

object, because the mutual connexion of the notions of that and this cannot be understood. And if there be no connexion between one object and another object, the idea of comparison cannot take place.

' Granted, that there is no comparison, the notion of that is possible.' No, because, like the notion from comparison, the notions of that and this have no reference to any real object. 'Granted that all notions have no real object, what then?' You must then admit that true as well as false notions refer to objects which are objects of nothing. If you lastly say, 'this may be so,' we contradict, because, if all notions are without object, you cannot form the idea of a false notion. Hence, your opinion, that the notion of that depends upon comparison, is not true, and we therefore conclude, that the real existence of the cause before the production is proved.

This is also true with regard to the effect, on the ground of its manifestation. 'How is the existence of the effect before its production proved on the ground of its manifestation?'*

Manifestation is the ground of this (effect)—hence manifestation means a perception dependent on a knowledge which is present; for as in common life a pot and similar things, enveloped by darkness, become an object of knowledge, when the cause of enveloping has been removed by means of light, &c., and do therefore not disapprove their former existence, so also we argue the existence of this world before its production; for unless a pot exists, it cannot be perceived, even if the sun rises.

'It certainly is not perceived by you, unless it exists.' For if productions, as a pot, &c. do at any time† not exist, they are not perceived

• The objection of the opponent, according to Ananda Giri, is, as follows : If you say, that an effect is proved by its manifestation, how does the existence of the effect follow from its manifestation? for from the existence of the effect follows also its manifestation, and again you maintain, that the existence of the effect is based upon its manifestation. This is a false circle.—The answer of the Védantist is : The previous existence of an effect, which is not perceived, is proved by its manifestation, which is perceived. There is therefore no false circle. The argument for the previous existence of an effect is based on this premise : All that is manifested, exists before its manifestation, as a pot enveloped by darkness.

† Reference is here made to the past and future time ; for if, says Ananda Giri, an effect, that is destroyed, or that is to be, did exist like a present effect, it would be also perceived. This, however, is not the case, and therefore the argument is not correct.

Digitized by Google

16

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

by you, if the sun even rises. If the lump of earth is not at hand, and no enveloping causes, as darkness, being present, the effect will not be perceived on the ground that it exists.'

We do not admit this, because there is a twofold kind of enveloping ; for things that envelop an effect, as a pot, &c. are twofold ; first, things which screen, as darkness, &c. when the earth and other substances are already manifested ; secondly, the modification of the parts of earth and other substances in the state of another effect as of a lump, &c., before the manifestation of the earth in the effect of a pot, &c. Accordingly, the perception of an effect, as a pot, although existing before its production, cannot take place, because it is enveloped (in another effect). The distinction, however, according to the common ideas of destroyed, produced, existing, not existing, is merely the twofold distinction of the ideas of manifestation and disappearance.*

'This is improper, because the lump, the two halves of the pot,† &c. are different from any thing that envelops ; for any screen, as darkness, which envelops any production, as a pot, &c., appears something different from the pot and similar things, while the lump or the two halves do not appear different from the pot. Therefore your assertion, that a pot, which is in the state of a lump, or of the two halves, is not perceived, because it is enveloped, is improper, because it is different from the idea of enveloping.'‡

• By the disappearance of the half, a pot is destroyed ; by removing the lump and other enveloping things, it is manifested ; its manifestation by means of a light, &c. is its existence ; its disappearance by means of the lump, &c. is its non-existence.

† To understand the following, it is necessary to know that the usual way among the Hindus to make a pot is, first to form two separate parts, the Kapalas, the halves of the pot, and to join them afterwards in the middle.

‡ This objection is based upon the supposition, that the thing, which is enveloping, is not identical with the thing, that is enveloped by it, as for instance darkness is not identical with any thing that is enveloped by it. Therefore, the opponent argues, the lump of earth cannot envelop a pot or any other production, because both (the lump and the pot) are identical. The refutation of this is twofold, according to a distinction in the term identical, viz. the assertion that the enveloping thing cannot be identical with the thing enveloped, means either, that it cannot be identical as to its appearence in space, &c. or not identical as to its cause. The first is refuted by the fact, that the contrary takes places, for instance : when milk and water are mixed, water, which is enveloped by milk, is perceived as one and the same with the milk, which could not be the case, if the thing that

First Chapter. Second Brāmhana.

17

We do not agree, for, on the one hand, milk and water (when mixed) and similar things, appear in an identical state, although the water and similar things are developed by milk, &c. On the other hand, if you say, that ‘there is nothing which envelops, because the parts of a half that is ground to dust are contained in the pot,’ &c., we deny this; for if the different parts are in another effect, there is evidently an enveloping. ‘There must, however, be an effort to remove what envelops, because the pot and other effects, which are in the state of the lump or of the halves, are not perceived in consequence of their being enveloped, and accordingly a person, who is desirous of any production, as of a pot, must direct his effort to destroy what envelops it, and not to the production of the pot. This, however, does not exist, and it is therefore improper to say, that there is no perception of a thing which exists, because it is enveloped.’ We deny this, because it is against the rule in practice; for the manifestation of a pot, &c. does not take place only by an effort to destroy obstacles, as is evident from the effort to produce a light, if a pot and other productions are enveloped in darkness. If you say, ‘that this is done to destroy darkness, viz. that the effort made to produce a light, is merely made to let darkness disappear, and if the darkness is destroyed, the pot is* manifest by itself; for there is nothing (no obstacle to the sight) in the pot,’ we do not grant this, because the perception takes place, when the pot is manifested ; for as the manifested pot is perceived by means of a light, so it is not before the light is employed. Therefore the light is not for the means to destroy the darkness, but rather for the means of manifesting the pot, because the perception takes place by manifestation. Sometimes there may be an effort also to destroy what envelops, as in the destruction of a screen, &c., but on this account it is not the rule. A person who wishes the manifestation of any thing, must make an effort to destroy all that envelops.

This follows also from the success of a work, if done in accordance with its rule. We said, that an effect, which abides in the cause, is an envelops must be different from the thing that is enveloped. The second is refuted on the ground, that different effects in one and the same cause are separated from each other, and do therefore not destroy each other.—A. G.

• That is to say, when the screen, darkness, is removed, there is no obstacle to its manifestation.

D

Digitized by Google

18 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

obstacle to another effect. If then an effort is made to destroy an effect, which was before manifested, for instance a lump, or the two halves which were before concealed by the lump,* then is produced an effect which is called splitting or grinding, &c. A pot, which is enveloped by such effects, is not perceived, and requires therefore another effort ; hence a person who wishes the manifestation of a pot, can only be successful, if the needful action of producing a pot is used by him. Therefore the effect exists even before its production.—This follows also from the distinction of the ideas of past and future. It is only reasonable, that the ideas of “there was a pot” and “there will be a pot,” like the idea of “there is a pot,” do not refer to an object that does not exist.—It also follows from the actions of any one, who is desirous of a future production ; for nobody would act with regard to a desire of things that have no existence.—It follows also from the truth of the knowledge of the Yógis, with regard to past and future events. If a future pot were not an existing thing, divine knowledge, from immediate perception with regard to a future pot, would be false. We do not take notice here of an effect, which is perceived at the present time ; for we granted before inference for the existence of an effect which has been, or which is to be.—This also follows from the impossibility of the contrary. When potters are engaged in the fabrication of a pot, it is evident by this proof that the pot is to be ; for if with any time the future existence of the pot is connected, then to connect with that time a not existing pot, is a contradiction ; for a pot, that is to exist, does not exist, means, it is not to exist ; it is the same, as if it be said : This pot now before us does not exist.—Further, let potters be engaged in the fabrication of a pot, and let it be said, the pot does not exist before its production. If then the meaning of the word not existing, is, that the pot does not exist in the same manner, as potters and other artisans, who are engaged in their work, exist, then there is no contradiction. Why not? Because the pot exists in its own form, which is to exist ; for neither the existence of the lump, nor of the half, is the existence of the pot ; nor is their future existence the future existence of the pot. Taken in this view, when potters are engaged in making a pot, there is no contradiction in the idea of a pot which does not exist before its production. If

• That is to say, which were before in the state of the lump ; for this is a previous effect of the same cause (earth).

First Chapter. Second Brāhmana.

19

you, however, prohibit the idea of the condition of the pot as a future production, there is a contradiction; but you did not prohibit this; for with every action is not only existence or futurity connected (but also the past). Further, among the four privations,* the mutual privation with regard to the pot is perceived as something different from the pot, as the negation of the pot may be for example cloth ; but it never can become the negation of a pot itself; for the negation of a pot, for instance cloth which exists, is never something negative, but something positive. If this is the case, then all the other negations, viz. antecedent negation, destruction and absolute negation, which may take place with regard to the pot, are something positive, different from the pot itself, because tney nave the same connection with it as the mutual negation. In this manner refer all negations to something positive. If this is the case, the antecedent negation of the pot does not mean a negation of the pot itself before its production. Therefore if you say, “the antecedent negation of a pot,” you must acknowledge the (existence of the) pot itself, or you could not connect it with the genitive case (of the pot). If you say, ‘it is connected with it by a rhetorical figure, as if one speaks of the body of a stone figure,’ yet, if you pronounce such a sentence as the negation of a pot, the connexion of the rhetorical negation is with the pot, and not with the nature of a pot (then the negation is only artificial negation and not the real negation of the pot.) If you say, ‘that the negation of a pot is something different from the pot,’ then we must refer you to the answer we have given before.

Further, before the production of a pot, there cannot be a connexion of the pot which does not exist with its cause which exists, which is, as if you would give horns to a hare, because the counection is always mutual. If you say, ‘there is no fault in our case, because the connexion is only an accidental one,’ we object, because even an accidental connexion cannot take place for elements, of which the one

• Negation or privation is of two sorts, universal and mutual. Universal negation comprehends three species, antecedent, emergent and absolute. Antecedent privation is present negation of that which at a future time will be. Emergent negation is destruction, or cessation of an effect. Absolute negation extends through all times, past, present and future. Mutual privation is difference. It is reciprocal negation of identity, essence, or respective peculiarity. (Col. M. E. Vol. I. pp. 288, 289.)

D 2

20

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

For voracity is death. He created this mind, desiring : May I have a soul. He went forth worshipping. From him when worshipping, the waters were produced. He then reflected : To me, when worshipping, water (Ka) was produced. For the same reason fire obtained the name of Arka. Happiness is indeed produced for him, who in this manner knows the nature of Arka. (1.)

exists, the other not exists; for with regard to two elements that exist, either the necessary, or accidental connexion may take place; but it does not take place for elements, of which the one exists, the other does not exist, or for elements, of which either does not exist. It is therefore proved, that the effect exists before its production. The Upanishad now explains the nature of death, by whom this (universe) was enveloped by the words :

" Who is voracity."* The desire to devour is voracity—this is death, for voracity is the true definition of death. By death then whose nature is voracity, this universe was enveloped. How is voracity death ? The answer is : " For voracity is death." The meaning of the word "for" is, that the reason is well known ; for he who desires to devour, kills according to his voracity the living creatures. Consequently death is represented by voracity ; Voracity as a desire is a quality of the soul in its modification as intelligence ; therefore this Hiranya Garbha, in his modification as intelligence, is called death. By this death was this effect enveloped, as a pot and other productions are enveloped by earth in its modification as a lump. " He created this mind;" the abovementioned death, by the desire to create the productions, afterwards to be specified, made the so-called mind, capable to reflect on his creation, viz. the internal sense which is possessed with the faculty to ascertain knowledge, and with other faculties. For what purpose did he create the mind? The answer is : "May I have a soul," may, by the soul, in its modification as mind, I have mind. Prajápati, possessed with mind by the manifestation of mind, having adored himself, said : I have succeeded. " From him," from Prajápati, " when worshipping, the waters," the element whose quality is taste, " were produced," as the embodied parts of his devotion, that is to say, he created the water after the production of the sky and the other two

• Vid. p. 12.

First Chapter. Second Bráhmana. 21

Or the waters 'are Arka. The froth of the waters, which was there, became consistent. This became the earth. On the creation of this he became fatigued. The splendour, the exudation of him, when he was fatigued, heated, was poured out as fire. (2.)

elements,* as it accords with the authority of another passage of the Sruti, and the improbability of a reverse order of the creation. " He then reflected, when worshipping,(Archate) water (Ka) was produced for me." For the same reason, that death was called Arka, Arka or the fire, in its connection with the sacrifice of Aswamédha, obtained the name of Arka ; for the second appellation of fire is Arka. The name of Arka, as derived from Archana, which means to worship for one's welfare, or as derived from its connection with water, denotes a quality of fire. To him who in this manner, as has been mentioned knows the nature of Arka, water, or happiness (the word Ka is used for both) is indeed, of a certainty, produced (1.)

" Or the waters are Arka." Who is again called Arka ? The waters, the embodied parts of the devotion, are Arka, as produced from Arka or fire. As it is said in the Sruti : And in the waters is placed the fire. But they are not directly called Arka, because this is the proper place to describe the fire, but not the water. And afterwards it is also said : This fire is Arka, "The froth of the waters, which was there," like the cream of curdled milk, "became consistent ;" the froth of the waters, heated from within and without by the generative splendour, became consistent, "became the earth." The meaning is, that from these waters the mundane egg sprang forth. "On this," on the production of the earth, "he," death, Prajápati "became fatigued ;" for every body, after the performance of work, gets fatigued, and it is the great work of Prajápati to create the earth. What does it mean that he got fatigued ? From the body of Prajápati, when fatigued, heated, distressed, his creative splendour as exudation, his substance was poured out. Which is the fire that was poured out ? It is Prajápati as the Bíráj (who is throughout splendour) within the egg, the first-born, containing within himself the whole organism of productions. He is the first embodied soul, as it is said in the Smriti (2.)

• Air and fire. Taittaréya Upanishad. I. 2.

22

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

He made himself threefold, Aditya as the third, Váyu as the third. This life parted threefold. His eastern quarter is the head. The quarters on either side are the arms. Then his western quarter is the tail, the quarters on either side are the thighs, the south and north the flanks, the sky the back, the atmosphere the belly ; this earth the breast. This fire is placed in the waters; for wheresoever one repairs, there he is placed. This results from the knowledge of the wise. (3.)

This Prajápati, when born, divided his own self, the organism of all productions, threefold. How threefold? besides Agni and Váyu, he made Aditya as the third to complete the number of three; in the same manner, beside Agni and Aditya, Váyu as the third, and also, beside Váyu and Aditya, Agni as the third, according to their equal power to fill up the number of three. This Prajápati, the life of every individual in the world, was divided threefold according to the nature of Agni, Váyu, and Aditya, especially according to his own nature as death, without giving up the nature of Viráj. This first-born fire, as Arka in its connection with the ceremony of the Aswamédha, this fire as Viráj, which is purified according to holy rite, is also represented under the symbol of a horse; for, we said, the whole origin, as above mentioned, is narrated for his praise. Thus is his sacred origin. “His eastern quarter is the head,” both being alike by their excellence. “The quarters on either side,” viz. the quarters of Isá and of Agnéyi, “are the arms.” “Then the western quarter of the fire is the tail,” viz. the part of the hip and loins, as being opposite to the front part. “The quarters on either side,” viz. Váyu and the seasons, “are the thighs,” being like to the corners of the back; “south and north the flanks,” being like by their connexion with the two former quarters. “The heaven the back, the atmosphere the belly,” as in the former description; “this earth is the breast,” both being alike by their position downwards. “This fire,” being like Prajá-pati, or the fire as the substance of the worlds and of the other created beings, “is placed in the waters.” As another passage of the Sruti says: thus are all these worlds within the waters. “For wheresoever any body repairs, there he is placed” there he gains his abode. Who? He who thus knows the nature of the fire, which in the manner described is placed in the waters; for this is the fruit of his knowledge. (3.)

Digitized by Google

First Chapter. Second Bráhmana. 23

He desired : . Let a second self of me be produced. . By his mind be created speech, created union, viz. the devourer, death. The seed which there sprang forth, became. the year. For the year was not before him ; he was conceived for the space of such time. . After the time, which is contained within the space of a year, he created him. When he was born, he opened his mouth against him. . He cried. Thus was speech produced. (4.)

"He desired" Who ? Death. He by himself; according to the successive order of creation of the water and the other elements, created himself within the egg, as the Viráj, as Agni, containing the organism of all productions. He also made himself threefold, as it was said. How was his activity, while he created ? The answer is : "He," death, " desired." What ? "Let a second self of me," a body, by which I am possessed with a body, "be produced." Having thus desired, he created, by his before created mind, speech, viz. speech representing the three Védas ; he created the union of speech with the mind, that is to say, he reflected in his mind on the creation of the three Védas in their successive order. Who ? Death, represented by voracity; as it is said, death is represented by the desire to devour. This is here repeated, in order that it be not connected with another. . "The seed," the generative seed both of knowledge and ceremonies, the cause of all productions of Prajápati, the first embodied soul, which (seed) he perceived by his contemplation of the three Védas, " which there," in that union, " sprung forth, became" (being conceived in the form of an egg, after he had entered with this generative seed the water, which he had created in accordance with his recollection of its (the water's) production in a former birth) "the year." This means, Prajápati, the framer of the period, called a year, became the year. . "For the year was not before him," "before Prajápati, the framer of the annual period. As long as the duration of a year is, so long a time was Prajápati, the framer of the annual period, conceived. What did he do after the completion of this time ? "He created him"—which means, he broke the egg. When the babe, fire, the first embodied soul, was 'thus born, death in accordance with his voracity, " opened his mouth against him" to devour him, upon which the babe, according to his natural ignorance, got afraid and cried. . "Thus was speech produced" the sound of speech produced. (4.)

24

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

He reflected: If I kill him, I shall have only little food.

On this reflection he created by that word in union with

that soul all this whatsoever, the Rig, the Yajur, the Sáma

Védas, the metres, the sacrifices, mankind, the animals.

He resolved to devour all that he had created in this man-

ner; for he eats all, therefore he has the name of Aditi.

He is the eater of this whole universe, this whole universe is his

food. He who thus knows him in his nature as Aditi, will obtain

the reward of this knowledge. (5.)

" He reflected." When death saw the terrified babe crying in such a

manner, he reflected: " If I," however desirous of eating, kill at any time

this babe, " I shall have only little food." On this reflection he abstained

from eating him; for much food is required for eating a long time, not a

little; for by eating this boy, there will be only little food, as by the eating

of the seed there will be want of corn. After having thus reflected on the

necessity of abundant food, he created by the union of the before-men-

tioned threefold speech with the soul, the mind, the whole moveable and

immoveable universe, " all this whatsoever," viz. the Rig, Yajur, Sáma

Védas, the seven metres, viz. the Gáyatri and others, the three kinds of

Mantras, which are the parts of the body of the Sátra Sastra, with their

Gáyatri and other metres, the sacrifices to be performed by Mantras,

mankind, as the performer of sacrifices, and all the wild and domestic

animals, necessary for the performance of the sacrifices. ' How is it possi-

ble, that he created by the threefold speech in its union with the mind,

the Rig and the other Védas when it was said before, that he created

them in this manner? There is no fault in this. The union, which

the mind has with the three Védas, does not exist as manifested,

and the creation is the manifestation of the existing Védas by their ap-

plication to ceremonies. ' He,' Prajápati, being thus aware of the increase

of food, " resolved to devour all that he had created," all the actions, the

causes of actions and the effects of actions. Death is therefore called

Aditi, because he eats all; for Aditi is derived from Atti, he eats.—Thus

it is said in a Mantra: " Aditi is the sky, he is the atmosphere, he is

mother and father." He is the devourer of the whole world, considered

as his food, by being the universal soul; otherwise there would be a

contradiction; for no individual can be the eater of the universe. There-

First Chapter. Second Brāhmaṇa.

25

He desired: Let me perform again the great sacrifice. He became fatigued. He performed penance. When he was fatigued, when he had performed penance, glory and power departed. Life is glory, power ; therefore, when life had departed from his body, his body assumed a swollen appearance ; there was yet mind within his body. (6.)

fore he is the universal soul. “This whole universe is his food.” Therefore it is consistent that all becomes his food, because he, as the universal soul, is the eater,—he, who in the aforesaid manner knows this state of Prajāpati, death, or Aditi, viz. this state, according to which he eats every thing, will have such a reward. (5.)

“He desired,” this is said for the purpose to give the description of the horse and the horse-sacrifice. “Let me perform again the great sacrifice.” The word again refers to his former birth ; Prajāpati made the sacrifice of a horse in his former birth. With this recollection he came again at the commencement of the present Kalpa.* Being impressed with the recollection of the ceremonies, the performer and the reward of the horse sacrifice, he desired : “Let me again perform the great sacrifice,” and after he had thus desired the great work, he became fatigued like all other people. “He performed penance.” When he was fatigued, when he had performed penance, as in the former description,† glory and power departed. The explanation of the words glory and power is given in the Upanishad itself ; life, viz. the organs of sense, are glory; as being the cause of glory, for by the means of them renown is gained. In the same manner is power in this body ; for if life is extinguished, no glory, no power is possible. Therefore the organs of sense are like glory and power in this body ; thus that glory and power of life departed from his body. When the organs of sense, the cause of glory and power, had departed from the body of Prajāpati, it presented the appearance of tur-gescence ; and was unpurified. “There was yet mind in his body,” although deserted by Prajāpati, in the same manner as the mind dwells on a beloved object, however distant it may be. When he thus remained in the body as mind, what did he do ? (6.)

• Kalpa, a renovation of the universe, one of the great periods, from the renovation to the destruction of the world.

† Vide p. 24.

E

26

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

He desired : Let this my body be pure. Let me have a self by this body. Hence it became a horse, because this became swollen. And because it became pure, therefore the ceremony gained the name of the Aswamédha. He who thus knows the Aswamédha, knows also him.

He knows the Aswamédha, who knows him in this manner. Having left it unrestrained, he considered himself as the

The answer is : "He desired." What ? "Let this my body be pure," worthy of the sacrifice. "Let me have a self," let me have a body by this body." Thus he entered this body. "Because this," this body by my separation from it, destitute of glory and power, became swollen (Aswad) for this reason it became a horse (Aswa). Hence the name of horse (Aswa) is evidently intended for the praise of Prajápati in this ceremony. Further, "because" that which was before impure (Amédhya) without glory and power, by his entering again "became pure" (Médhya,) worthy of sacrifice, "therefore" the ceremony bearing the name of Aswamédha obtained the name of Aswamédha ; for the nature of the sacrifice is to have ceremonies, a performer and effects. This is like Prajápati. That the horse, by which the sacrifice is accomplished, is to represent Prajápati, is evident from the words of the Sruti : "The dawn is the head of the sacrificial horse," &c.

The present passage, however : "He knows the Aswamédha," is commenced, in order that the worship of the sacrificial horse, as an emblem of Prajápati and also of the fire, as it has been described, both of which are equal as being the sacrifice and effect, should be established. This view is obtained first, because in the former passage no verb, enjoining the action, is met with, and secondly because the-rite (of the Aswamédha) requires such a verb.* "He knows the Aswamédha, who knows him," viz. the horse and Arka in his nature as fire, in this manner, he knows the Aswamédha, none beside, which means, that it should therefore be known in this manner. The Upanishad now explains, why Pra-* 'Ananda Giri supplies here the defect in the argument ; for, says he, a verb enjoining the action, has been mentioned in the former passage by the words 'He who knows the nature of Aditi.' The rite or action which is by this established, he continues, refers, however, only to a worship of secondary order ; here on the contrary, is the rule of the chief worship established.

Digitized by Google

First Chapter. Second Brāhmaṇa.

27

horse. After a year he slaughtered it for his own sake, he gave up the animals to the gods. Therefore they slaughter the purified animal, representing in its nature as Prajāpati all deities. He is the Aswamédha who shines. His body is the year. This fire is Arka. These worlds are parts of his self. They in such a manner are Arka and Aswamédha. They are again one

jápati is represented under the symbol of an animal. When Prajápati had desired : ' Let me again perform the great sacrifice,' and had represented himself under the emblem of a sacrificial animal, he considered himself as the horse which he left unrestrained, viz. without rein. After the completion of a year, " he slaughtered it for his own sake," by his nature as Prajápati representing all deities. " He gave up the animals," all the other animals, wild and domestic, according to the deities which they represent, " to the gods." Because Prajápati considered himself as the horse, " therefore " any other person, who, according to the beforementioned manner, represents himself under the emblem of an animal, of the sacrificial horse, will thus think: Let me as the representative of all deities, being purified, slaughtered, be the divinity of myself. Let the other wild and domestic animals, according to the deities of which they are symbols, be slaughtered for the other divinities which are my parts."

In accordance with this, the priests slaughter at present the purified animal, which in its nature as Prajápati represents all deities. " He is the Aswamédha who shines." He who is thus the sacrifice which is performed by the means of animals, is also described as the visible reward, in the words : " He is the Aswamédha." Who ? He who " shines," viz. Sávitri (the sun) who manifests the world by his splendour. " His body," viz. the body of him who is at the same time the reward and the sacrifice, " is the year," because his revolution is performed within a year.* And because the sacrifice which represents him, is only performed by means of fire, the reward is described by the symbol of the sacrifice. This terrestrial fire, Arka, is the cause of performing the sacrifice. " These worlds, these three worlds, " are parts of his self," of the body of this Arka, which is called Chiti, when applied at the sacrifice. Thus it was before said : " His eastern quarter,"† &c.

• The sacrifice is also performed in the space of a year.

† Page 22.

28

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

divinity, death. He thus conquers the second death. Death does not obtain him. Death becomes his soul. He becomes one of those deities. 7.

"They," the fire and Aditya, "in such a manner," as they are described, "are Arka and Aswamédha," the sacrifice and the reward. Arka, the terrestrial fire, as the visible action, is therefore described as like the sacrifice, since the sacrifice is accomplished by fire. And because the reward (Sávitri) is the effect of the sacrifice, it (the reward) is described by the emblem of the sacrifice. Therefore it is said, Aditya is the Aswamédha. "They," cause and effect, sacrifice and reward, Agni and Aditya, "are again one divinity."* This is death. Being before also one, he was divided to correspond to the division into sacrifice, performer and effect, as it was said : "He divided himself threefold."† He becomes again in the time, when the ceremonies are accomplished, one divinity, viz. death representing the reward. Whosoever again knows him, the Aswamédha, death, as one deity in this manner :-I am thus death, the Aswamédha, one deity ; the state of this is gained by me as being like the horse and the fire,—"he conquers the second death," that is to say, once having died, he is not born again for the second death. Doubting, whether death, although conquered, would still not get him again, it is said : "Death does not obtain him." Why? "Death becomes his soul," the soul of him who knows death in this manner. Or, death being thus the reward, "he becomes one of those deities."‡ This is his reward.

• Life, according to Ananda Giri.

† Page 22

‡ Savitri and Arka (sun and fire.)

First Chapter. Third Brāhmaṇa.

Third Brāhmaṇa Udgítha* Brāhmaṇa.

Twofold indeed is the offspring of Prajāpati, the gods and

What is the connexion of the words : "Two-fold indeed is the off-spring of Prajāpati ?" The highest reward of ceremonial works, aceom-panied with knowledges, has been mentioned, viz. the state of death is the reward of the Aswamédha. Therefore the Udgítha Brāhmaṇa is now commenced to expound, from whence† the origin of ceremonial works and knowledge which lead to a state identical with death, is derived.

If it should be said : ‘The state of death has been declared as the reward of the beforementioned knowledge and ceremonies.‡ Now it will be asserted, that the reward of the knowledge and the ceremonies of the Udgítha is to overcome the condition of death. Therefore, since the reward is different, it is of no use to explain the origin of the former ceremonies and knowledge.’

We answer, there is no fault in this; for as the reward of the Udgt-tha is the condition of Agni or Āditya, it is the same reward which has been mentioned for the former ceremonies and knowledge in the words : " He becomes one of those deities." ‘Is it then not contradictory to say, that he overcomes death ?’§ No, because the overcoming of death means here to be liberated from the contact of innate sin.

To explain the meaning of the questions : Who is that death which is the contact with innate sin? Whence is his origin? By whom is he overcome and how ? a narrative is given, commencing with the words : "Two-fold indeed." The word "indeed" is used to remind of

• The Udgítha, a part of the Sáma Vêda (second chapter) is a kind of song, commencing with the mystic syllable Om, which the priest called Udgéta, sings at the Sôma Yága. The Sôma Yága is the general name for seven distinct rites, viz. Agni Stôma, Atyagni Stôma, Ukthya, Shôrasí, Vájapéa Aterátra and Aptóryáma, where the Sôma, or moon-plant juice is offered. 6th Chap. of Āswaláyana's Sutras.

† This source of all ceremonies and knowledge is the all-pervading life, as de-scribed in this Brāmhapa.

‡ As reward of the Aswamédha, performed either symbolically, or in reality.

§ Viz. he who performs the Udgítha, overcomes death, while the reward of the Aswamédha has been stated as death.

30

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

the demons.* Therefore the gods are thus few in number, the

demons many. They rivalled in these worlds. The gods of a

a former state, viz. it reminds of the state of the present Prajāpati in

his former birth. "The offspring of Prajápati," means his offspring

in a former birth. Who are "the gods and the demons ?" The

organs† of Prajápati, speech and the others. How again is the divine

and demoniacal nature of the offspring? The answer is : The gods

(Déva) who derive their name from manifesting (Dyótana) are such as

are dedicated to knowledge and works, in accordance with the Sástras ;

the demons (Asura) as are dedicated to works and knowledge, the necessi-

ty of which is visible, in accordance with natural perception and inference.

They are different from the gods or Suras, because they are satisfied

within their own life,‡ and also because the knowledge and works of

the demons are directed to visible wants. "Therefore the gods are

thus few in number, the demons many ;" for the desire of the organs to

act in accordance with natural knowledge and works is stronger than

the desire to act in accordance with knowledge and works, derived from

the Sástras, because the necessity of the former is evident. Therefore

the number of the gods is less, because the desire to act in accordance

with the Sástras, is less strong ; for it can only be accomplished by

excessive exertion. "They," the gods and the demons, being alike the

parts of the body of Prajápati, rivalled with each other for the sake of

the enjoyment of these worlds, which may be obtained by actions and

knowledge either in accordance with one's own nature, or in accordance

with the Sástras. The contest is for victory or defeat, of the nature

of the gods or demons. Sometimes the nature of the organs in

accordance with knowledge and works derived from the Sástras, is vic-

torious. When it has the ascendancy, then the demoniacal power of

• The same narrative, which here is given at the commencement of the Udgítha

to show the power of life and its unity with the supreme soul, occurs in the Chan-

dógya Upanishad, first Adhyáya, first Prapáthaka, where it is also used as an intro-

duction to the Udgítha.

† I remind here, that the number of organs, according to the Védanta, is eleven,

viz. the five organs of sense, sight, &c., five organs of action, speech, the hand, &c.,

and the internal organ, the mind. Here, however, the organs of Prajápati, refer

only to speech, smell, sight, hearing and mind, viz. to those which are required for

the performance of the Udgítha.

‡ Asu here in the sense of vital air, life ; it means also fire, reflection.

First Chapter. Third Brāhmaṇa.

31

truth spoke. Let us now in this sacrifice overcome the demons by the Udgítha.

the organs which refers to visible wants, and proceeds from knowledge and works in accordance with perception and inference, is defeated. This is the victory of the gods, and the defeat of the demons. Sometimes the reverse takes place, the nature of the gods is defeated, that of the demons is victorious. When the gods are victorious, then, by the prevalence of virtue, an ascension ensues up to the obtaining of the state of Prajápati. When the demons are victorious, then, by the prevalence of vice, a descension ensues down to the state of inanimate matter. When both are alike, then the state of man is obtained. "The gods," who by their own small number and the greater number of the demons, were defeated by them, of a truth spoke: "Let us in this sacrifice," viz. the Jyóti-Stóma,* "overcome the demons by the Udgítha," by taking refuge to the agent of the rite, called Udgítha. By defeating the demons, we shall obtain our own divine nature, as manifested by the Sástras. Thus they spoke to each other.

To take refuge to the nature of the agent of the rite, called Udgítha, knowledge and works are required. The work consists in the recital of some (afterwards to be mentioned) Mantras, and will be established by such passages of the Yajar as : "Let him recite those Mantras." The knowledge will now be determined.

'But is this not rather Arthaváda,† as concluding the rite of reciting

• The Agnistóma is a modification of the Jyótistóma, a sacrifice, offered by a person who is desirous of obtaining the enjoyment of heaven. The time of the sacrifice is the spring season. The performer is a bráhman who has read the Védas, and entertains the sacred fire. The offering is the Sóma (moon-plant) juice, and the deities to whom the offering is made, are Indra, Vájú, &c. The number of priests required to perform the rites, is sixteen, viz. four Hótras (who read the Mantras of the Rig Véda), the same number of Adhwaryus (who recite the Mantras of the Yajur Véda), of Brāhmas (who superintend and direct the rites of the sacrifice), and of Udgátas (who sing the Mantras of the Sáma Véda.) Each of the priests of the four divisions has again a separate name and office. The ceremonies continue for five days. Sabda Kalpa Druma.

† A kind of praise. The opponent reasons in this way. The Udgítha is Arthaváda, a kind of praise, and accordingly not knowledge; for praise of the deities does not contain a true knowledge of their nature and qualities, because it is merely offered for the purpose to make them propitious. A. G.

Digitized by Google

32 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

the Abhyaróha,* than an attempt to define knowledgé? No, because it is said in the Sruti : "He who thus knows." "But then it has the object to establish the rite of Udgítha, because in the topic of Udgítha it is authorized by the ancient narrative, commencing with the words :

Two-fold indeed is the offspring of Prajápati.' No, because it does not belong to this subject; further, because the Udgítha is established in another place ;† further, because the rite of reciting the Abhyaróha is applied in two ceremonies,‡ and is therefore not invariable ; further, because the knowledgé must be applied by a person who is perfect in his knowledge, and is declared invariable ; further, because the Sruti says : "He who overcomes this world," &c., further, because life is declared pure, speech and the other organs impure ; for if life were no object of worship, it could not have been declared pure, nor speech, and the other organs which are mentioned in the same passage with life, impure ; for by the reproof of speech, &c. the praise of the principal life is evident, as it was also intended. Lastly, because such and similar rewards are declared as : He who overcomes death, gets resplendent ; for a state which resembles that life, for instance the state of the goddess of speech, when like Agni, is the reward.

' Let then the worship of life be granted, but no purity and similar qualities. If you say, this purity, &c. follows also from the Sruti, we reply : it does not, because, as assigned in the act of worship, it is evidently intended as praise.' (Arthaváda.)

We do not admit this ; for, as in common life, by acquiring an object that is not contrary to our wishes, we acquire happiness ; for in common life a person who obtains an object that is not contrary

• Some Mantras of the Yajur Veda, recited by a person who is desirous of obtaining a divine state, as Ánanda Giri explains : Dévabhávam anéna áróhati, iti Abhyaróha.

† In the Karma Kánda.—A. G.

‡ There are two classes of ceremonies, the Havir Yága, (Havir, a kind of oblation, usually clarified butter.—Wilson Dict.) including seven distinct ceremonies, viz. Agnyádhan, Darsapaurna Mása, Chatur Másya, Pasu Bandana, &c., and the Sóma Yága, also including seven classes of rites, which have been mentioned before (page 29). The rite of the Udgítha, which is performed by the Udgáta, is only performed in the Sóma Yága, while the Abhyaróha is included in either of the two classes. On this account it is said, the Abhyaróha, as occurring in two places, is variable, and is therefore no object of knowledgé, as the Udgítha is.

First Chapter. Third Bráhmana.

33

to his wishes, gets his desire, or he turns from the undesired object ; but this is not the case by obtaining an object, contrary to our desires. Thus in our case also, by obtaining an object in accordance with the words of the Sruti, we evidently obtain happiness, not otherwise. Moreover, there is no proof against the truth of the object of knowledge, arising from the word, which is mentioned for the sake of worship. Nor is there stated any impediment of the said knowledge. Therefore by proving, that we have acquired happiness, we also acquire the truth of the object of knowledge ; otherwise we evidently acquire an unreal object ; for he who in common life acquires an object, contrary to his idea, for instance, a trunk instead of a man, or an enemy instead of a friend, has evidently obtained something unreal. If in this way, the notions of the soul, of Iswara,* and of the gods in accordance with the Sruti, were not true, then we should obtain by the Sástra something illusive. If this were the case, it would be known, as in common life: but this is not admitted.

'This is not true, because Bramha is represented by differences of name, form, &c. ; but such distinctions are evidently excluded from the nature of Bramha. In this perception of Bramha† the Sástra is guilty of the same contradiction, as if a man is perceived as a trunk. Therefore we deny that with your obtaining the truth by the Sástra, you also obtain happiness.

We do not admit this argument, on the ground that here is the same distinction, as it is with regard to an image. For your assertion, that the perception of Bramha by such distinctions, as name, form, which are excluded from the nature of Bramha, &c., is in the same way contradictory, as if a man is perceived as a trunk, is not right. Why ? Because by the distinctions of Bramha, who cannot be perceived by name, form and other properties ; the perception of Bramha by name, form, &c., is established in the same way, as the perception of Vishnu by an image and similar things. The perception by name, form, &c. is, like the image, a mere appliance ; for Bramha is by no means name, form, &c. The perception of Bramha by such distinctions, as name, form, &c. is by no means in the same way contradictory, as if a trunk, before it is ascertained as such, is perceived as a man.

• Iswara, the supreme ruler. The soul, in which the universality of ignorance, or of unconsciousness, is inherent, and which has the attributes of omniscience, omnipotence ... which is the cause of the world, is the universal ruler. Védánta Sára, p. 5.

† That is to say, if Bramha is perceived, or comprehended by such distinctions.

34 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

If you say, 'that there is only a perception of Bramha, but Bramha himself does not exist ; for the perception of Brâmha by name, form &c. is just like the representation of Vishnu and other gods by an image, or of the forefathers by a Brâmhan,'* we object ; for the Rig and the other Védas are represented under the form of the earth and other substances, that is to say, they are represented under the form of substances that really exist. Consequently, as the representation of Bramha, Iswara, &c. under name, form, &c., is the same with that just mentioned, the reality of Bramha, Iswara, &c. is proved. Hence also follows the objective reality of all those modes of perception, by which Vishnu and other gods' are represented by images, or the forefathers by Brâmhans.

This (the existence of Bramha, Iswara, &c.) follows also from the necessity, that every thing that is derived, depends upon the thing from which it is derived ; for as in the five fires* the fire is only something derived, and hence proves the existence of an underived fire, so is the nature of Bramha in its distinctions of name, form, etc. only something derived, and hence proves the existence of an underived Bramha.

This follows also from the fact, that there is no difference between the passages of the Sruti referring to ceremonies, and those referring to knowledge ; for as the ceremonies of the Darsapaurna Máșa have their peculiar reward, their special rites, and a disposal of their parts in a certain order, and as by means of this a transcendent thing which cannot be proved by perception or inference, is taught in its true nature by sentences of the Vêda, so also such beings, as the supreme soul, Iswara, the gods, &c., who by their nature exclude the idea of corporeal composition, who overcome death, and who have these and other distinctions, are taught by sentences of the Vêda, that is to say, by proofs different from perception and inference, and it is therefore right that they should be true.

Nor is there a difference in passages of the Sruti referring to ceremonies, and in such referring to knowledge, as to the formation of the true notion of them.

Likewise is the notion (Buddhi) whose object is the supreme soul and the like substances, neither indefinite nor contradictory. If you say : 'This is improper, on the ground that knowledge is no object of

• The Brâmhan who eats at the Srâddha the food intended for the manes, is a representative of them.

† Here the Vedâic fires, by which the ceremonies the householder has to perform, are accomplished.

First Chapter. Third Brāhmana.

35

ceremonial practice. We may grant, that any rite which has the three parts above mentioned,* although it is beyond common evidence, may be communicated by ceremonial practice through sentences, explaining the ceremonies ; but it is not so with the knowledge of the supreme soul, Is'wara and other substances, in which there is no possible object of ceremonial practice. Therefore the part of the Sruti explaining ceremonies, and the part referring to knowledge, have nothing in common.'

We do not admit this, on the ground that knowledge has objective reality ; for the truth of that knowledge does not depend on its possibility to become an object of ceremonial practice, the rites of which have those three parts, and can be performed,—but on its possibility to be obtained by proof. Nor has a notion, whose object is that knowledge, reality, because it can become an object of practice, but because it can be derived from sentences of the Védas.

If you say : ' Admitting the truth of the substance (Bramha) obtained by sentences of the Védas, it is either an object of ceremonial practise, or it is not so. If it is such an object, it can be practised ; if otherwise, it cannot be practised. As an object of practice, however, it is not proved by the evidence of sentences ; for there is no connexion of words with a sentence, unless there is a ceremonial practice. On the other hand, if it is an object of practice, there is also a connexion of words for the sake of the ceremonies. Therefore a sentence, dependent on practice, may be proved, as for instance : This in this manner is by this person to be performed ; but words, as, this, by this, thus, how many so ever you may string together, would never form a sentence, unless they be connected with such as : let do, may be done, &c. Therefore the supreme soul, Is'wara, etc. cannot be proved by sentences. And if you say, it can be proved by the meaning of the words, we reply, that in this case another kind of proof is necessary.† Therefore this Bramha does not exist.'

• These three parts are : special reward, special rites, and special arrangement.

† I believe this to be the correct translation of the above passage, and the sense would be as follows : If you assume, that the supreme substance can be proved by the meaning of the words (Padártha, the single words, in distinction from the whole sentence, Vákya) you have abandoned your argument, which was, that it should be proved by the Védas ; for the meaning of words or ideas does not depend upon the Védas, but upon their own contents, and requires therefore an investigation, different from the present.

F 2

36

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

We do not admit this argument, on the ground that there are sentences which do not require any actions to be intelligible, as for instance, there is the four-coloured Méru; for if this sentence is pro-nounced, there arises no notion referring to any possible practice with regard to Méru. If this is the case, how is it possible to prevent a connexion of words in a sentence, expressing the idea of the supreme soul, Iswara, &c. with the word “exists,” in the usual mode of connexion between subject and predicate. If you say, ‘this is inadmissible, because the knowledge of the supreme soul has no final end, as the knowledge of Méru, &c. has,’ we deny this, for the reward is mentioned in such passages of the Sruti, as : “ He who knows Bramha, obtains libera-tion,” and : “ The bonds of the heart are broken,” &c.

The same is evident from the ceasing of the ignorance and other faults which are the origin of the world. And since the knowledge of Bramha does not depend upon any other knowledge, it cannot be considered as Arthaváda* (praise) as for instance, a special reward is declared by the use of the Juhu.†

Moreover the connection of prohibitions with punishment is learnt from the Véda, which is also no object of practice. Nor is there, with regard to a forbidden object, any thing required but to refrain from an action ; for prohibitory regulations depend in reality upon the knowledge that a certain thing is not to be done. If a hungry man, whose mind is impressed with the notion of food, forbidden on account of its nature or of accidental circumstances, falls in with poisoned‡ meat, or with impure§ rice, and the idea arises in him, that the one is eatable, and the other not impure, he is restrained from eating by the recollection, that food of this or that kind is forbidden to be eaten. The same is the case with regard to thirst, when a mirrage produces the appearance of water. When by the knowledge of the real nature of a thing, the natural knowledge that is opposed to the former, has been removed, there no longer remains the injurious desire to eat what is

• Every praise depends upon a regulation, to which it supplies the motive.

† Juhu means a spoon of leaves, to the use of which in ceremonies, in preference to any other kind of spoon, a special reward is attached.

‡ Poisoned meat is the meat of an animal, wounded by a poisoned weapon.

§ Rice, etc. is impure by the touch of a person who has committed the murder of a Brámhan, or similar crimes.

First Chapter. Third Brahmaṇa.

forbidden by its nature or accidental circumstances. There is a cessation from the desire, which is caused by such an opposite knowledge, and if that desire does not exist, no effort is again to be made. Hence it is evident, that the prohibitory regulations depend upon the knowledge of the true nature of things, and not in any way upon the practice of a person. If this is true, then also in our case the regulations, respecting the true knowledge of the supreme soul, &c., are founded solely upon the knowledge of the supreme soul itself. In this manner, when the worldly knowledge, produced by one's own nature, is removed by the recollection of the true knowledge of the supreme soul and of similar substances, a person, whose mind is impressed with the knowledge of Brāhma, has not any desire, caused by a knowledge, contrary to that of Brāhma, because he knows that those desires have no real object.

'The eating of poisoned meat having an undesirable (unreal) object, and there being at the same time a recollection of the knowledge of the real nature of a thing, we may grant, that the natural knowledge, contrary to the former, which refers to its eating, is abolished; yet we must contend, that the absence of a desire to perform what is commanded by the Sástra, is not admissible, because there is no object of prohibition, as there is such an absence of a desire to eat meat as before described.'

We deny this; for there is in reality no difference between the cause of the contrary knowledge and of the cause of the desire of an undesirable object. As the desire to eat poisoned meat, &c., is caused by a false knowledge, and is the cause of danger, so it is also with regard to the desires of what is commanded by the Sástras. Accordingly, a person who perfectly knows the reality of the supreme soul, has consistently no desire of any actions commanded by the Sástras, because all such desires are the causes of false ideas and of danger, and because by the knowledge of the supreme soul, the contrary knowledge is abolished.

'This may be granted for the above mentioned prohibitions and commands, but it cannot be granted for the regular ceremonies; for these are solely produced by the Sástra, and not directed to an unreal object.'

We do not agree; for the regular ceremonies are merely commanded on behalf of such persons who are tainted by ignorance, passion, hatred

38 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

and other faults ; for as ceremonies whose object is a special desire, 'as those of the Darsa Paurna Masa, are commanded on behalf of a person who is tainted by the fault of desiring heaven, &c. so are the regular ceremonies enjoined on behalf of a person who is stained by the fault of ignorance, the cause of all unreality, stained by love and hatred, &c. in obtaining the good and avoiding the evil, in accordance with the impressions of ignorance, and who is anxious to obtain the good and avoid the evil of his indiscriminate desires, caused by love and hatred ; hence they (the regular ceremonies) do not merely refer to the Sastras. Nor can it be ascertained, whether the Agnihotra, Darsa Paurna Masa, Chatur Masya, Pasu Bandha and Soma, are by their own nature regular ceremonies, or ceremonies, whose object is a special desire ; for their reference to desire only arises, when they have found an agent, who is tainted with the desire of heaven, &c. Therefore the regular ceremonies behoof to one who is tainted with the blame of ignorance, &c., and who is desirous to obtain the good and to avoid the evil, pointed out to him by the promptings of his own nature. On the other hand, for one who has the true knowledge of the supreme soul, no action is found to be commanded, except the subduing of his desires ; for by the annihilation of the knowledge concerning all other motives, as ceremonies, causes, divinities, &c. the knowledge of the soul is established. And the knowledge with regard to actions, performer, &c. being once annihilated, there does not arise a desire of any action, because this only takes place, if preceded by a knowledge of a special action, a special motive, &c. ; for there is no time to engage into actions for him who has the firm idea of Brahma, removed as it is from all notions of space, time, extension, duality, &c.

If you say ' there is the same time, as if one is about to eat,' we deny this ; there is no necessity to engage in eating, &c., all which acts are only necessary in consequence of ignorance and other faults ; for if an action is sometimes performed, and sometimes not, it cannot be called a regular action that has been fixed according to a rule. Because eating and other actions are merely done in consequence of faults, there is no certain rule for them, as there is no certain rule for desires and their objects, faults being sometimes prevalent, sometimes subdued. Hence, however, does not follow any uncertainty for regular actions,

First Chapter. Third Brāhmana.

39

The gods then said to speech: "Do thou for our sake sing the Udgítha." Speech, with the words: "Let it be so," sang the

because time and other circumstances have been fixed for them by the Sástra.

If you lastly say, 'even granted, that faults, &c. are the mediate cause of actions, (as eating, &c.) still there may have been fixed a time to engage in such actions, as eating, as according to the command of the Sástra for ceremonies like the Agni Hótra, the times of morning and evening are appointed,'—we do not agree, because rule and action cannot be substituted for each other, viz. a rule is no action, and an action no rule,—hence no objection remains against the supposition of knowledge. Consequently, in accordance with the rule of true knowledge of the supreme soul, which (knowledge) has the power to destroy its contrary knowledge of extension, duality, &c., the reality of the rule by which all actions are forbidden, is established; for the absence of any engagement in actions is the same, as if there were a prohibition. Therefore as the prohibitory regulation of the Sástra is proved, so also the supreme soul, as produced by the Sástra, and as the sole object of the Sástra, has been proved. 1.

"The gods then," after having thus considered, said to Speech, to the tutelary goddess of speech: "Do thou for our sake sing the Udgítha," perform the ceremony of Udgítha; for they considered the ceremony of the Udgítha to be performed by the goddess of speech, and moreover by Mantras like this: "Do thou lead us from evil to good," her as the goddess called Japamantrā. In this ceremony, speech and the other organs are pointed out as the agents of internal worship and external rites. For what reason?*

• In assigning devotion and rites to the agency of speech and the other organs, an objection may be made, on the ground that all agency depends according to the Sástra upon the soul. If this is the case, it depends either on the supreme soul, or upon the soul in its modification as life. Not on the first; for agency, &c. cannot be assigned to the soul, which, considered in itself, is wholly without such a power. Moreover, all activity is the effect of ignorance, which is totally opposed to the supreme soul. Not on the second, because life is only the general idea of the senses, and has therefore in reality no agency. Hence it is correct to assign agency and similar notions to the active senses. A. G.

40

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

Udgítha for them. She sang to the gods all the enjoyment that

is in speech. That she speaks well, is for herself.

tercourse concerning knowledge and ceremonies, are in truth only possi-

ble by their agency ; for by the passage in the sixth chapter* of this Upa-

nishad, "it thinks as it were," "it proceeds as it were," it is evidently

declared, that the soul has no agency. In the end of this chapter also

it will be proved, that these three, name, form and action, as resulting

from work, performer and effect, in their unmanifested state, are the ob-

ject of ignorance. That, however, which is different from all unmanifested

things, and which bears the name of the supreme soul, and is without

name, form and work, will by such negations, as : it is not this, it is not

this, &c., be proved as something distinct, to be comprehended under a dif-

ferent notion. But the mundane soul† the existence of which, as arising

from all the senses considered as one, is only a fiction, is plainly shown

as arising from those senses, considered as one, by such passages as :

"Arising from these elements it is also destroyed with them." There-

fore it is right to assign to speech and the other senses the reward,

obtained by their being the agents of knowledge and ceremonies.

Speech, being addressed by the gods, with the words : Let it be so,

performed for them, for the sake of their imploration, the Udgítha.

Which is again the special work which speech by the ceremony of

• Vide 6th chapter, 2d Bráhmana, 7th Khandika.

† There are, according to the Vedánta, four sheaths or cases of the soul. The

first is the intelligent case (Vijñánamaya Kósa) and is formed by intellect and the

five intellectual senses. The second case is the mental (Manómaya) and consists of

mind (Manas) with the five organs of action, viz., speech, hand, foot, &c. (I may here

observe that Colebrooke, in stating, (M. E. p. 372,) that the mental sheath consists

of the intellect, joined to the five senses and the mind, is not quite correct, as it is mind

joined with the five organs of action.) The third is the vital case (Pránamaya Kósa)

formed of the five vital airs, or faculties, (respiration, inspiration, circulation, &c.)

and the five organs of action. The three cases united compose the subtle organism

of the soul, which therefore comprehends 17 elements, viz. intellect, mind, the ten

organs, and the five vital airs. This subtle organism is inseparable from the soul, as

long as it has to undergo transmigration ; considered as one, it is universal organism,

and the soul, to which this universality is ascribed, is Hiranyagarbha. (Védánta

Sára, pp. 8—10.) In our passage the mundane soul means Hiranyagarbha, the soul

which has the three cases, and is therefore in actual relation with the world. The

last case is the nutrimental (Annamaya) which is composed of the gross elements.

Digitized by Google

First Chapter. Third Bráhmana.

The demons knew, by this Udgítha the gods will overcome us. Therefore, running up to him, they pierced him with their sin. That is this sin. That one speaks improper words, is the sin. 2.

Udgítha for the sake of the gods? The answer is: "All the enjoyment," which means, all the assistance of speech and all the other organs, which by means of speech is obtained in the intercourse of speaking; for the reward of all is the enjoyment, derived from speaking words, &c. It describes this enjoyment in three Stótras, called Pavamána, and in the nine remaining Stotras it assigns the reward of the Ritwig, as authorized by the Upanishad,* by the words: "That it speaks well," that it pronounces well the letters, "is for itself," for me; for the special work of speech is the entire pronunciation of the letters; therefore it is mentioned, "that it speaks well;" but the effect of speaking as to the assistance of all, is for the sake of the sacrificer.

At that time (when the Udgítha was performed) by the contact which takes places between speech and the well speaking, an opportunity was obtained by the demons of entering the deity like a hole.† "The demons knew." What? "By this Udgítha the gods will overcome us," viz. natural knowledge and work, by the light of the Udgítha; which is knowledge and work in accordance with the Sástra. "Therefore," being aware of this, "running up to him," to the performer of the Udgítha, "they pierced," worried him with their sin, viz. the sin of contact, which means, they allied him with their sin. "That is this sin ;" "that," the sin which was not cast by the demons upon the speech of Prajápati in his former birth, "is this sin," which becomes manifest. Which is the sin? "That one speaks improper words," viz., words contrary to themselves, forbidden by the Sástra, by which

• Viz. The Ritwig, or priest, who performs the ceremonies, is not entitled to a reward for himself, because his services are hired, and all the good resulting from the ceremonies, will be obtained by the sacrificer. Hence the special reward here mentioned, does not follow from the sacrifice, but from the word of the Upanishad. A. G.

† This means, the deity of speech, having spoken well for its own sake, commits the sin of contact, of the connexion of a desire with external objects. Therefore by this sin an opportunity is given, as it were, a hole of the deity, to pierce it with their sin.

Then they spoke to the breath : Do thou sing the Udgítha for us. The breath, with the words : ‘ Let it be so,’ sang the Udgítha for them. It sang to the gods all the enjoyment that is in breath. That it smells well, is for itself. The demons knew, by this Udgítha the gods will overcome us. Therefore running up to him, they pierced him with their sin. That is this sin. That one smells improper odours, is the sin. 3.

Then they spoke to the eye: Do thou sing the Udgítha for us. The eye, with the words: ‘ Let it be so,’ sang the Udgítha for them. It sang to the gods all the enjoyment that is in the eye. That it sees well, is for itself. The demons knew, by this Udgítha the gods will overcome us. Therefore running up to him, they pierced him with their sin. That is this sin. That one sees improper colours, is the sin. 4.

Then they spoke to the ear: Do thou sing the Udgítha for us. The ear, with the words : ‘ Let it be so,’ sang the Udgítha for them. It sang to the gods all the enjoyment that is in the ear. That it hears well, is for itself. The demons knew,

induced, one speaks indecorous, hateful, false and the like words, even against his own inclination, “ is the sin,” known by its beforementioned effect, viz., the speaking of improper words, which is found in the speech of the intelligent creatures of Prajápati, which being implied by the speaking of improper words, is also in the speech of Prajápati ; for the effect is of the same nature as the cause. 2.

When the gods had in this manner successively examined, whether by the performance of the Udgítha the deities were fit to be manifested by the Japamantra, and to become objects of devotion, they were convinced, that speech and the other deities whom they had successively examined, were unable to perform the Udgítha ; for by contact, which is their connexion with the special work which they well performed, they were allied with the sin of the demons. Therefore they are not meant by the Mantra : “ Do thou lead me from evil to good ;” nor are they worthy to be worshipped, because they are not pure, and inferior to the principal life. In the same way as the deity of speech, &c., the deities of touch and of the other organs, although not especially

First Chapter. Third Brāhmaṇa.

43

by this Udgítha the gods will overcome us. Therefore, running up to him, they pierced him with their sin. That is this sin. That one hears improper sounds, is the sin. 5.

Then they spoke to the mind : Do thou sing the Udgítha for us. The mind, with the words : ‘ Let it be so,’ sang the Udgítha for them. It sang to the gods all the enjoyment that is in mind; that it imagines well, is for itself. The demons knew, by this Udgítha the gods will overcome us. Therefore running up to him, they pierced him with their sin. That is this sin. That one has improper notions, is the sin. In this manner the deities came in contact with sin, were pie rced with sin. 6.

Then the gods spoke indeed to this life whose name is Ásanya: ‘ Do thou sing the Udgítha for us.’ That life, with the words : ‘ Let it be so,’ sang the Udgítha for them. The demons knew, by this Udgítha the gods will overcome us. Therefore running up to him, they wished to pierce him with their sin. As a clod of earth, by falling upon a rock, is destroyed, so they were also

mentioned in this passage, were pierced with sin by the manifestation of good and evil works, which means, they were allied with sin. Thus speech and the other deities, although gradually worshipped, were unable to protect from death. 3—6.

“ Then the gods spoke indeed to this, (the word “this” is used to show respect) life, whose name is Ásanya,” which means, produced in the mouth, which abides in the inner cavity of the mouth : Do thou sing the Udgítha for us. The principal life, with the words: ‘ Let it be so,’ sang the Udgítha for the gods who had invoked its protection. This and what immediately follows, is all alike the former description. When the demons, desirous of piercing life with sin, in accordance with the practice which they had acquired by repeatedly entering speech and the other organs, attacked by their sin of contact the principal life which was free from sin, they became destroyed. To show how, an illustration is given. As in common life a clod of earth which is thrown upon a rock to reduce it to dust, is destroyed, reduced to dust itself, so were the demons in different ways destroyed. By this destruction of the demons, speech and the other organs became free from the sins, which

G 2

Digitized by Google

44 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

altogether destroyed. Hence they became gods ; the demons perished. In this manner he becomes like him. By the soul perishes the enemy, the brother's son, of him, who thus knows. 7.

are the effect of the natural contact, and obstacles to their divinity ; and obtained their own nature by the protecting power of the principal life which is free from contact. What did they obtain ? The nature of fire, &c. in accordance with their own divinity, which (nature) will be explained hereafter, and which they had already before possessed. In this state, when their knowledge was darkened by their natural sin, they had a notion of an individual body alone. The meaning is : By the separation from that sin, they left off the notion of an individual body, and obtained a notion of the nature of speech, &c. in its identity with fire, &c., as it is delivered in the Sastra. Moreover their opponents, "the demons, perished." Perished means, they were destroyed. "In this manner he (the present sacrificer) becomes like him" (the ancient sacrificer) this means : As the former sacrificer,* described in the Sruti pointed out in this narrative, when he in the order mentioned in the Sruti, had examined speech and the other deities, and abandoned them, because they are tainted with the sin of contact, when he had known by the idea of the soul the principal life free from sin, and abandoned the idea, that the soul is different according to the differences

of the individual bodies, as speech and others, which are believed to be the soul, as the former sacrificer obtained the nature of the present Prajapati, as manifested by the Sastra, which is the notion of the body, as Virāj,† and which exhibits speech in its nature as fire,—so the present sacrificer obtains the state of Prajapati in the same manner. "By the soul," in its modification of Prajapati, his sin, contrary to the nature of Prajapati, "the brother's son, perishes ;" for the son of a brother, like Bharata and others, may be also not an enemy ; but the sin produced by the contact of the senses with their objects, is at the same time a brother's son and an enemy, because it does not acknowledge the nature of the supreme soul. This sin then perishes, is reduced to dust, as a clod of earth, by its contact with life. Whose is this reward ? The answer is : "He who thus knows," which means, who thus, like the

• The sacrificer in a former birth. † Vide page 23.

First Chapter. Third Brāhmaṇa.

45

They spoke. Where was he, who thus established us? He is within the mouth; hence he is Ayāsya. He is Angirasa, because he is the essence of the members. 8.

ancient sacrificer, comprehends life by the notion of the soul. Having described the reward, the Sruti now shows the reward in the form of the narrative.* And for what reason? To prove, that the principal life, after the deities of speech, &c. have been rejected, is alone to be worshipped by the idea of the soul, on the ground, that it is the common nature (soul) of such separate substances, as speech, &c., the Sruti goes on in the narrative. 7.

"They," the organs of Prajāpati, having, by means of the principal life, obtained their divine nature and their reward, spoke thus: "Where then," the word where shows their reflection. "Where then was he who thus established us," that is to say, united us by the true notion of the soul with our divine nature, which was before separated from us; for whosoever is assisted by some body, remembers his benefactor. In the same manner the gods, when they had remembered their benefactor, had reflected on him, perceived him in the soul, which is the whole of causes and effects. Why is he within the mouth? Because he is evidently in the ether of the mouth (Asya), as everybody will find on reflection. Thus also the gods. Life is called Ayāsya, because, excluding all distinctions of the nature of speech, &c., it was perceived by the gods within the internal ether; therefore is life like Ayāsya, since opposed.to all distinctions, it united the organs, as speech, &c., with their divine nature. Hence it is called also Angirasa, the essence of causes and effects; for Angirasa is a compound of Anga and Rasa,—Anga meaning members, causes and effects, and Rasa essence, substance; the whole meaning therefore is the substance, upon which causes and effects depend. It is the essence of every thing, because, unless it were present, all would become without effect. The meaning of the whole is :-

• Ānanda Giri explains this so :-As the reward, following from the worship of the principal life has been set forth, the next words of the Upanishad : "They spoke," &c., refer to a special worship of life. Sankara says therefore, " Having described the reward," which means, having described the reward following from the worship of the principal life, he is to show the worship of life, endowed with special qualities.

46

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

The name of that deity is Dúr ; for death is far (dúr) from it. Far is death surely also from him who thus knows. 9.

accordingly life, without further reference to speech, &c., is to be considered under the idea of the soul; for the soul can but be perceived by its own notion, since good is obtained by a notion that is not contradictory ; otherwise evil is obtained. 8.

If it be thought, that the purity of life has not been proved, we ask, is not this notion (of the impurity of life) removed, since life is no place for the sin of contact, as speech and the other organs are by well speaking, hearing, smelling, &c.? 'This may be so ; but since it is called the essence of speech and the other organs as diffused through all, there is an apprehension that impurity may ensue through speech and the other organs, as it does by touching a person who has touched a corpse.' To this the Sruti answers : 'Life is pure.' Wherefore ?

'The name of that deity is Dúr'' (far.) The demons, coming in contact with life, were destroyed, as a clod of earth is by a stone. This is the deity which, abiding in the body of the sacrificer of the present time, has been found by the gods as abiding in the mouth. It is a deity, because it is an object of devotion. Because its name is Dúr, (Dúriti,) its purity is proved by the name of Dúr. Whence again comes the name of Dúr? The Sruti answers, 'because death, viz. sin, which is defined by contact, is far (dúr) from that deity of life. Dúriti, as the name of life, shows its purity, because death, although placed near, is yet removed from life, which by its nature is free from contact. The reward of the wise is then mentioned, viz. 'Far is death surely from him,' from him means from the person who knows in the above described manner. Therefore he worships thus the true life which is pure. Upasana (worship) is derived from Upa, which means, Manasa upa-gannya (having perceived by the mind) the nature of a deity in the same way, as by passages of the Sruti in the Arthaváda (praise) it is made known as an object of worship—and from Ásana, which means continued reflection without interposition of worldly notions until the idea is manifested, I am that deity, just as in the common notion, I am a man. This is evident from such passages of the Sruti, as : 'Having thus become a god, he goes to the gods,' and: 'What god art thou in the eastern quarter?' 9.

First Chapter. Third Bráhmana.

47

This deity then, after having destroyed the sin of the deities, viz. death, made him depart, where the end is of the quarters. There it fixed the abode of the sins of the deities. Hence let no one repair to the outer people; let him not follow sin, death. 10.

"This deity then." Is is said, that death is far from it, but why again is death far from him who thus knows? The answer is, because death is opposed to a knowledge of such a kind; for sin, which is produced by the contact of the senses with their objects, is opposed to a person, who has the notion, that life is identical with the soul. He is at variance, because he has the notion, that the soul is different according to to the differences of speech, &c., and because his knowledge is produced by his own nature. On the other hand, the notion, that life is identical with the soul, is produced by the Sástra. In consequence it is proper to say, that sin is far from one who has such a notion of life, because both are opposed to each other. Therefore by the words : "This deity," the Sruti shows the said meaning to be sin, the death of speech and the other deities ; for every body dies by the sin produced by contact of the senses with their objects in accordance with his natural ignorance. Sin is therefore called death. Life, by the sole notion of its identity with the soul, destroyed the death of the deities who had the notion of the identity of life with the soul, and is therefore called the destroyer. Sin then is removed from a person who thus knows by his being at variance with it. What did life again, when it had destroyed the sin, the death of the gods? The answer is : "Life made him depart, where the end is of the quarters," viz. of the eastern and the other quarters. But as there is no end of the quarters, how can life make him depart there? The word "quarter" is made for the purpose to designate the abode of the people possessed of the knowledge of the Védas ; the country therefore, inhabited by people who do not follow the Védas, is called the end of the country, the desert. Accordingly, there is no blemish in the expression. The deity of life made depart there the sins of the deities, and by contempt fixed in various ways their abode among the outer people, who are without knowledge of the identity of life with the soul.

For he is by his nature produced by the contact of the senses with their objects, and is therefore dependent upon the living creatures.

Digitized by Google

That deity destroyed the sin, death, of those deities. Then life, having overcome death, saved them. 11.

Life, having overcome death, saved the first speech. When speech, having overcome death, was liberated, it became fire. That fire, having become free after its separation from death, shines forth. 12.

Then life, having overcome death, saved the smell.

Hence let them not go to the outer people, not approach them by intercourse in words or other actions. By intercourse with them, intercourse is made with sin ; for he is the place of sin. The meaning is :-Let none repair to his abode which is defined by the end of the quarters, although it may not be inhabited by the people, nor to that people, although it may be far from that country. 10.

By the words : "That deity," the reward is mentioned, which for speech, &c., results from the knowledge, that life is the soul, which reward is to acquire the nature of fire, &c. "Then life, having overcome death, saved them." This means : Life is called the destroyer of sin, death, because sin, death, which causes the separation of the soul from life, has been destroyed by the knowledge that life is one with the soul. Therefore this life, having overcome the natural sin, or death, saved them, which means, caused the deities of speech and the other organs to gain their divine nature as fire, &c., which is not separated from them (after the destruction of death). 11.

"Life saved the first speech ;" first means the principal, which is more efficacious than any other organ to perform the ceremony of the Udgítha. The nature of speech, which was saved, after death was overcome, is thus described : When speech, after sin or death was overcome, had been liberated, it became fire, which means, speech was fire, before it became united with death, and became fire again after its separation from death ; so great is its difference after its separation from death. This fire, when released, shines forth after its separation from death. Before its liberation being allied with death, it was not shining, as it is at present; now again after its separation from death, it shines forth. 12.

In the same manner the sense of smell became air, wind. Wind, liberated from death, purifies. All the particulars are as before. 13.

smell, having overcome death, became wind. That wind, having become free after its separation from death, purifies. 13.

Then life, having overcome death, saved the eye. When the eye, having overcome death, was liberated, it became Aditya. That Aditya, having become free after its separation from death, burns. 14.

Then life, having overcome death, saved the ear. When the ear, having overcome death, was liberated, it became the quarters ; the quarters after their separation from death, are made free. 15.

Then life, having overcome death, saved the mind. When the mind, having overcome death, was liberated, it became the moon. That moon, having become free after its separation from death, is resplendent. In this manner that goddess having overcome death, saves the present sacrificer. Whosoever thus knows, obtains his due reward. 16.

Then life for its own sake praised by the Udgitha the primeval food ; for whatever food is eaten, the same is eaten by life. On this it subsists. 17.

Thus the eye becomes Aditya. He burns. 14.

Thus the ear became the eastern and the other quarters. 15.

Mind is resplendent as moon. As the deity of life, having in its identity with speech, &c. as fire, &c., overcome death, saved the former sacrificer, so she saves also the present one. He who knows, that life is the same with speech and the other four organs in their state as fire, &c., obtains the state of life, which he has worshipped, be it as fire, air, &c. 16.

"Then for its own sake," that is to say, as by speech and the other organs for their own sake praise was offered, so also by the principal life, when it had praised in the three Pavamana Stotras the reward which is the state of Prajapati, common to speech and the other organs, it praised it in the nine remaining Stotras food for its own sake. The connexion of desire with the agent is authorized by the Upanishad, as has been mentioned before. How again must it be understood,

50 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

The gods spoke: 'All this is only so much. Whatsoever food there is, is praised by thee for thy own sake. Let us eat of that food.' Life answered: 'Do enter me.' They with the words: 'Let it be so,' every where entered life. Therefore whatsoever food is eaten by life, satisfies them. Him

that life praised the primary food for its own sake? To explain this, the cause is mentioned in the words : "for whatever," &c. The word food means here common food ; for whatsoever food in this world is eaten by any living individual, "the same is eaten by life." Prápa (life) with the preposition Pra is derived from Ana. Ana, with a final s, (Pránas) means cart, with a final vowel (Prána) life. The meaning is : this is eaten by life. And the primary food is not only eaten by life ; but life subsists on it, when it is transformed into the substance of its (life's) own body. Therefore the primary food is praised by life for the sake of its own subsistence. All that is eaten by life, is for its own subsistence ; therefore the sin, which arises from the contact with the excellence of performance, is not in life, as it is in speech, &c. 17.

"The gods." 'But is it not improper to assert, that the food was thus eaten merely by life, since it is evident, that food is also the cause of the support of speech ? &c.' There is no fault in this, because the support is obtained by the means of life. How again is the food supplied by life, in support of speech and the other organs ? To explain this, it is said : "The gods," (Deva) speech and others, (they are called gods, Déva, because they manifest their own nature,) "spoke" to the principal life. "All this is only so much;" hence there is no more than this. "Whatsoever food," the cause of the support of life, is eaten in the world, "is praised by thee for thy own sake," which means, is transformed by thy praise into thy own substance. We also are unable to subsist without food ; therefore let us afterwards for our own sake eat of thy food. Life answered : 'All of you, if desirous of food, every where enter me.' When life had thus spoken, they surrounded and entered life with the words, 'Let it be so.' Thus the good food, the support of life, which is eaten by life, satisfies speech and the other organs which entered life by its command ; but by their own will they have no connexion with food. Therefore it is

First Chapter. Third Bráhmana.

51

enter his own; he is the preserver of his own, he is pre-eminent; he walks before, he is an eater of food, he is the lord paramount, who thus knows. He who against one who thus knows, amongst his own becomes a rival lord, is not able to support his dependents. On the other hand whosoever becomes a follower of such a one, and whosoever, following him, strives to support his own dependents, he is able to provide for them. 18.

He who abides in the mouth, is Angirasa; for he is the essence (Rasa) of the members (Anga.) Life is the essence

proper to assert, that food is eaten merely by life. "Therefore" Because the deities of speech and the other organs by taking refuge to life had entered life in accordance with its command, "therefore whatsoever food people eat by life, the same satisfies them," viz. speech and the other organs. Whosoever knows that life is the support of speech, &c., and also knows that the five organs depend upon life, "him enter also his own," his relations, as speech and the other organs enter life, which means, he is the supporter of his relations. " He is the preserver of his own," who have entered him, by his own food, as life is of speech, &c. Thus "he is pre-eminent." " He walks before," he has the precedence, as life among speech, &c. "Thus he is an eater of food," which means, he is without disease. " He is lord paramount," and to guide them he becomes their preserver as independent lord, as life of speech, &c. He " who thus knows," viz. life, will obtain the above mentioned reward. " But he who against one who thus knows," viz., who thus knows life, " amongst his own," amongst his relations, " becomes a rival lord," like the demons who strove against life, " is not able to support his dependents." On the other hand " whosoever amongst his relations becomes a follower of such a one," of a man who has that knowledge, as speech and others were of life, " and whosoever, following such a person, strives to support his own dependents," as speech and the other senses, following life, strove to support themselves, " is able to provide for them," not any other who acts on his own will. 18.

All this is declared to be the reward, resulting from the knowledge of the qualities of life. To establish the idea, that life is the essence

H 2

Digitized by Google

52 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

of the members; for life is the essence of the members;

therefore, for the reason, that any member, from which life has

departed, becomes dry, life is the essence of the members. 19.

This is also Brihaspati. Speech is Brihati. Life is the pre-

server (Pati) of Brihati; therefore it is Brihaspati. 20.

of causes and effects, life is named Angirasa. Before it was said : " This

(life) is Angirasa ;"* but there was no reason assigned, why it is

Angirasa ; to explain this reason, it is now said : " He who abides within

the mouth, is Angirasa." For it depends upon this reason, that life is

the essence of causes and effects ; afterwards the dependence of speech

and the other organs upon life is stated. How is this dependence to be

proved ? To answer this, it is said: " He who abides within the

mouth, is Angirasa." Hence it is taken according to its former de-

scription. The next sentence : " Life is the essence of the members,"

is to remind of the meaning that has been explained before. How is

life the essence of the members ? The answer is : " For life ;" the

word 'for' is used to show, that the essence of the members is well

known. It is well known, that life is the essence of the members, but

not that speech and the other organs are the essence. Therefore it is

proper to remind of this by the words : " Life is." How is it again

well known ? To answer this, it is said, "therefore." The word

" therefore," which conveys the idea of conclusion, must be connected

with the last part of the sentence. " For the reason that any member,

from which life has departed, becomes dry," without essence, " there-

fore" this is the conclusion, " life is the essence of the members."

Hence it is evident, that life is the substance of causes and effects,

because, when it is not there, dryness, death, ensues. Therefore all living

creatures live through it. Therefore in preference to speech and the

other organs, life is an object of worship. This latter is the meaning

of the whole deduction. 19.

" This is." Life is not only the substance (soul) of causes and effects

which have become forms and works, but also the substance of the Rig,

Yajur and Sama Vedas, which have become words. By the praise of

life as the soul of all, it is exalted for the sake of worship. " This,"

well known " Angirasa" is also Brihaspati. Why? The answer is :

" Speech is Brihati," the Vedaic metre Brihati, composed of thirty-six

Page 45.

First Chapter. Third Bráṃhaṇa.

This is also Brámhaṇaspati. Speech is Bramha. Life is the preserver (Pati) of speech; therefore life is Brambaṇaspati. 21.

Anustup is speech. Why? Because it is said in a passage of the Sruti : "Speech is Anustup." And this Anustup, which is like speech, is contained in the Brihatí metre.* Therefore it is proper to declare it as a well-known fact, that "speech is Brihatí." Moreover all the Mantras of the Rig Véda are contained in the Brihatí, because life is praised as Brihatí, as a passage of the Sruti says : "Life is Brihatí." "Let it be known, life is the Rig," says another passage of the Sruti. Further : The Rigs are included in life, because they partake of the nature of speech. To prove this, it is said : "This life is the preserver of this speech, Brihatí, Rig, because it produces the Rig ; for the Rig is dependent upon the wind, produced by the digestive action of the stomach. Lastly, life is the preserver of speech for preserving it ; for speech is preserved by life, because without life (breath) it is impossible to pronounce a sound. Therefore Brihaspati is the life, substance of the Rigs. This is the meaning of the whole. 20.

Life is also the substance of the Mantras of the Yajur. Why? "This is also Brambaṇaspati. Speech is Bramha," that is to say Yajur, which is a kind of speech. "Of this," speech, Yajur, Brambaṇa, "life is the preserver" (Pati). Therefore it is called Brambaṇaspati, as before. How again is this known? The answer is, Brihatí and Bramha mean the Rig and Yajur, not any thing else ; for since at the conclusion of this subject it is said : "Speech is Sáma," it is evident that the Sáma Véda is the same with speech. In the same manner, if speech is Brihatí, speech Bramha, and both therefore the same with speech ; it is proper to maintain, Rig and Yajur are Brihatí and Bramha, for they are remaining ; for as the Sáma is mentioned last, the remaining two must be the Rig and Yajur. This follows also from the difference occurring in speech ; for Rig and Yajur are different kinds of speech. Therefore it is right to say, that they are the same with speech. And also from the fact that if this were not the case, there would not be any distinction between them. The word : "The Sáma is the Udgítha," clearly shows the use of a distinct name.

• The Anustup, of 32 syllables, is contained in the Brihatí of 36 syllables, as the smaller in the larger number.—A. G.

54

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

This is also Sáma. Speech is Sáma. Sáma is Sá and Amas. Therefore the Sáma has the nature of Sáma.—Because it is like (Sama) a bee, like a gnat, like an elephant, like these three worlds, like this all, therefore again it is called Sáma.

Therefore it is also proper to employ the distinct names of Brihatí and Brambá ; otherwise, if distinct names were not fixed, there would be no sense. Further, if special names of them were a mere sound, there would be a repetition of the same.* And the names of the Rig, Yajur, Sáma, Udgítha, are also successively mentioned in the Sruti. 21.

"This is also Sáma." Why? The answer is : "Speech is Sá," viz., whatsoever is included in the feminine gender, is Sá, speech ; for the demonstrative pronoun Sá denotes all that is included in the feminine gender. In the same manner, this life is Ama, viz., Ama means all that is included in the masculine gender. How hast thou obtained my masculine names ? The answer is: By life. How hast thou obtained my feminine names ? By speech, as another passage of the Sruti says. Both, the names of speech and life are included in the sound of Sáma. Accordingly the name of Sáma means a song, consisting of the whole of the letters, words and sentences, and depending upon life ; therefore the name of Sáma is nothing else but a compound of the names of life and speech, because each letters, &c. is produced by and dependent upon life. "This life is Sáma" and "speech is Sáma." Because the repetition of Sáma shows, that Sáma partakes of the nature of speech and life, viz., as compounded of the words Sá and Ama, "therefore the Sáma," viz., the songs, which consist of the whole of the letters, words and sentences, must be comprehended under this idea of Sáma. The connexion of the next sentence is : "Because it is like" (Sama) all which is afterwards mentioned, "therefore again it is Sáma."—The word "again" shows the possibility to explain the meaning of Sáma in another way by the term of Sama (like). In what way is the likeness of life assumed ? The answer is: It is "like (Sama) a bee," viz., the body of a bee, "like a gnat," viz., like the body of a gnat, "like an elephant," viz. like the body of an elephant, "like these three worlds," viz., like Prajápati, whose body is the three worlds ; "like this all," like

• Viz. Speech is speech.

First Chapter. Third Bráhmaṇa.

55

He obtains unity of nature with Sáma, or unity of place who thus knows this Sáma. 22.

This is also Udgítha. Life is Ut; for by life all this is upraised. Speech is Gítha. It is Ut and Gítha, therefore it is Udgítha. 23.

Hiranyagarbha, whose form is the world, which is entirely found in all individual bodies, in the bee as well as in all others, as the idea of cow is found in all individual cows. This is the likeness (identity) of life. Again, this identity is not merely found in the different bodies in proportion to their size, because life has no shape and is everywhere ; nor is the identity in the individual bodies an identity of contraction and expansion, as a light contracts in a jar and expands in a palace; for the Sruti says : " All these are like, all are without end." There is, however, no contradiction between its being everywhere and its being limited to a certain size in the different bodies. He, who thus knows the life whose name is Sáma, under the idea of Sama (identity), viz., the life, whose greatness is declared in the Sruti, obtains this reward, viz., "he gains unity of nature (Sáyujya)* with Sáma," viz., with life, that is to say, unity of body, organs and knowledge, or unity of place, that is to say, the same world, according to the power of his meditation, viz., he who knows Sáma, life, who meditated on it, until the knowledge of the identity of life with the soul became manifest. 22.

"This is also Udgítha." The name of Udgítha means here neither a portion, a special division, of the Sáma-Véda nor the portion, referring to songs (Udgána) because the Udgítha is included in the description of the Sáma, which means here life (Sá-Ama). Why then is life Udgítha? The answer is : " Life is Ut ; for by life is all this," " raised up" (Uttabdha) that is, supported. The name Ut, which elucidates the meaning of Uttabdha, shows a quality of life. Therefore, in accordance with the single words in the compound of Udgítha, Ut means life, and Gítha speech. This Gítha, after the meaning of the name derived from Gai (to sing) is speech ; but with the exception of the sound Gítha (song) there is nothing in any part

• Sáyujya, a kind of salvation, of which five kinds are stated. 1. Sálókya, the abode in the same world. 2. Sárshti, equal prosperity. 3. Sámipya, vicinity. 4. Sárúpya, likeness of form. 5. E'katwa, unity or identity of nature.

56

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

There is also a narrative: Bramhadatta, the grandson of

Chikitána, when drinking the resplendent Sóma juice, spoke:

'Let this resplendent juice cut off the head of this man, if Ayásya

irássa performed the Udgítha by any other than this.'

Therefore he performed the Udgítha by speech and life.

He who knows the wealth of that Sáma here, obtains its

wealth. The musical notes are its wealth. Therefore let one

of the Udgítha which refers to singing. Therefore the assertion, that

life is Udgítha, is proper, viz., Ut is life, and Gítha speech, dependent

upon life; both terms, thus compounded in one term, form Udgítha.

To show the firmness of the just explained meaning, a narrative

is commenced with the words: 'There,' that is, with regard to

the meaning just explained, a narrative is also known.

'Bramhadatta,' by name, the young grandson of Chikitána, when drinking

at the sacrifice the resplendent Sóma juice, spoke: 'Let this resplen-

dent juice,' that is here in the sacrificial cup and drunk by me, 'cut

off the head of this man,' of me speaking falsely, which means, if I

speak falsely. How again is the meaning of falsehood implied in the

words of the Upanishad? 'If Ayásya (he is called Ayáshya Angi-

rasa, because his name is derived from the principal life) the per-

former of the Udgítha in the assembly of the former Rishis, who created

the world, 'performed the Udgítha by any other,' by another deity

beside speech and life, 'than by this,' viz., by the above described

life in union with speech,—then let me be a speaker of falsehood, let

the Sóma cut off the head of me who has asserted something contra-

dictory to the nature of the deity. In these words he made an

imprecation, and shows therefore the necessity of the strength of

the faith in the knowledge, that life is the Udgítha. The Sruti con-

firms then by its own word the meaning conveyed by the narra-

tive, viz., by speech, dependent upon life, and by life, transformed

into his own nature, the Udgáta, Ayásya Angirasa, performed the Ud-

gítha. This meaning is established by the imprecation.

'Of that Sáma here.' The word 'that' connects it with the

above described life. The term 'here' shows it as by a gesture as

being present. He who knows the wealth of life which is called by

the word Sáma, obtains what? 'He obtains its wealth.' This is the

First Chapter. Third Brāhmaṇa.

who is to perform the duties of a Ritwig, desire to acquire the musical notes together with speech. By that speech which has obtained the musical notes, let him perform the rites of the Ritwig. Therefore people are desirous to look during the sacrifice upon the sweet-toned performer of the Udgītha as upon a rich man; for people desire to look upon him who has obtained wealth. He obtains wealth, who in such a manner knows the wealth of this Sáma. 25.

He who knows the gold of this Sáma, obtains verily its gold. The musical notes are its gold. He verily obtains gold, who in such a manner knows the gold of this Sáma. 26.

reward which the Sruti shows as an inducement to the hearer, viz. "The musical notes are its wealth." The musical notes, the sweet sound, produced in the throat, are its wealth, its ornament; for a song, adorned with these notes, obtains wealth. Because this is so, "therefore let him who is to perform the duties of the Ritwig," the song of the Sáma by its note, desire to acquire in speech the musical note, dependent upon speech. This, however, is established in the course of explaining the topic, that the tones of the Sáma are necessarily musical notes, and that the musical notes are not acquired by mere desire, but by the cleaning of teeth and the drinking of oil, &c. "By that speech," that purified speech, "which has obtained the musical notes, let him perform the rites of the Ritwig." "Therefore." Because the note has become the property (Swabhúta) of the Sáma, and hence the Sáma is adorned with the note as with wealth (Swa), "therefore people are desirous to look during the sacrifice upon the sweet-toned performer of the Udgītha, as upon a rich man; for it is well known, that "people desire to look upon him who has obtained wealth" (Swa). A person who has fully obtained the reward resulting from his knowledge of this quality, is described in the words : "He obtains wealth who in such a manner knows the wealth of this Sáma." 25.

Now another quality of the Sáma is explained, viz., to be possessed of gold. This refers also to the sweetness of the notes, with the difference, however, that, while 'the former designated the sweetness of the notes, produced in the throat, the latter means gold only figuratively. "He

58 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

He who knows the abode of that Sáma here, abides. Speech is its abode; for it is well known, that this life verily abides in speech, some say, that it abides in food. 27.

Therefore afterwards the rite of the Abhyáróha of the Pavamána Stótras is defined. The praiser verily praises the Sáma. Where he praises it, there let him mutter these Mantras : From the

who knows the gold of the Sáma, obtains verily its gold." The meaning is, since the same word, Suvarna, denotes a musical note, (Suvarna, from Su, good, and Varna, letter) and gold, (Suvarna) common gold becomes the reward of him who knows this quality. Its musical note is, as it were, its gold. "He who knows the Sáma in such a manner, verily obtains its gold," just as it has been described before. 26.

Then the quality of abiding is explained, viz. "He who knows the abode of this Sáma." The Sáma abides in speech; therefore speech is called the abode. He who knows this quality of abiding of the Sáma, "abides." It is proper to assign this quality to him, because it is said in the Sruti, according to the manner in which "it is worshipped." To him, who as in the former description, is desirous of the reward, and wishes to know which is the abiding place of the Sáma, the answer is given : "Speech is the abode of the Sáma." Speech means the organs of sound at the root of the tongue and elsewhere."* This speech is the abode. Therefore it is said : "For it is well known," because it is well known, that this life abides in speech, in the organs of speech, the root of the tongue, &c., therefore speech is the abiding place of the Sáma. "Some," others, "say, that it abides in food," that it is well known to abide there. And because neither of these two opinions is blamed, therefore it is optional to assign the quality of abiding either to speech or to food. 27.

For him who thus knows life, the rite of muttering prayers is appointed. The perfection in muttering prayers which one who thus knows has acquired, is called his knowledge. "Therefore afterwards." Because the rite of muttering prayers, the reward of which is the ascension (Abhyáróha) to a divine state, must be performed by one, perfect in knowledge, "therefore" it is defined. The muttering of prayers by its connexion with the Udgítha might be performed at any time, but

• Viz. of the chest, throat, head, root of the tongue, teeth, nose, lips, and palate, —A. G.

First Chapter. Third Brāmhana.

unreal lead me to the real, from darkness lead me to light, from death lead me to immortality. In the words of the Mantra : From the unreal lead me to the real, death is the unreal, the real immortality; from death lead me to immortality; which implies, render me immortal. Further in the words : From darkness lead

according to the word of the Śruti: "Pavamánam," a time is fixed for them, and although the rite is herewith assigned to the three Pavamána Stótras, yet the time is again restricted by the words : "The praiser verily praises the Sáma." "Where," at what time "he," the praiser, "praises," commences the Sáma, "there," at that time let him mutter these Mantras. The rite of muttering these Mantras, is called Abhyároha (ascension) because a person who thus knows, directly ascends (Abhimukháya árohati) to the state of a god. The plural E'táni (these Mantras) shows that three Mantras of the Yajur are meant. These Mantras must be read according to the accent, which is in the Brámhana, and not as it is in the Mantras, as the second case (E'táni) proves,* and also their being found in the Brámhana.† The rite of muttering must be performed by the sacrificer.

The following are the Mantras of the Yajur: "From the unreal lead me to the real, from darkness lead me to light, from death lead me to immortality." As the meaning of the Mantras is concealed, the Brámhana itself explains it: "In the words of the Mantra : From the unreal lead me to the real, death is the unreal ;" "death" it is called, because his knowledge and works arise from his own nature; "unreal" it is called from the very low degree of its existence. "The real immortality," "the real," knowledge and works, derived from the Sástra, are "immortality, because they are the cause of it. Therefore "from the unreal," viz., from unreal works and from ignorance "lead me to the real," viz., to such works and knowledge, as are derived from the Sástra, that is to say, produce the state of the soul, by which the nature of a god is obtained. The meaning of the whole sentence is given in the words: "which implies, render me immortal." Thus also in the next Mantra: "From darkness lead me to light, death is darkness;" for every ignorance, from its natural tendency to screen, is dark-

ness;" for every ignorance, from its natural tendency to screen, is darkness. A. G.

• Otherwise the third case would be required.

† Viz. the Sátapatha Brámhana.

1 2

60 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

me to light, death is darkness, light immortality ; from death lead me to immortality, which implies, render me immortal. In the last Mantra : From death lead me to immortality, there is nothing concealed.—Then in the remaining Stótras let him praise the primeval food for his own sake. Therefore in those Stótras he may chose a blessing. Whatever desire he may desire, the same he may chose, viz. the Udgáta who thus knows. Whatever desire he may desire, either for himself or the

ness ; this as the cause of dying, is death. “Light immortality,” the divine nature, contrary to the former (darkness) ; knowledge, by its natural tendency to manifest, is light; this is immortality, because its nature is exempt from destruction. Therefore : “From darkness lead me to light,” as before, means : “From death lead me to immortality,” which implies, “render me immortal,” that is, grant me the divine state of Prajápati as reward. The first Mantra means, from a state without causality produce a state that has causality. The second Mantra, however, means, from a state that has causality, but which is yet subject to ignorance, produce a state, where the whole effect is accomplished. In the third Mantra : “From death lead me to immortality,” the whole meaning of the two preceding Mantras is given as conclusive. In the third Mantra, therefore, there is not, as in the two preceding, the meaning concealed, but it is the real meaning of the text. “Then,” having made the song

of the sacrificer in the three Pavamana Stotras, “in the remaining Stotras let him,” the Udgáta* who knows life and has obtained the nature of life, “praise the primeval food for his own sake” in the same way, as life did. Because such an Udgáta knows life thus, in the manner, before described, and hence, like life, is able to accomplish the desire ; “therefore he,” the sacrificer, “may chose in those Stótras,” at the recital of them, “a blessing.” “Whatever desire he may desire,” ask as a boon, viz., “the Udgáta who thus knows.” “Whatever desire the Udgáta desires,” asks, “either for himself or for the sacrificer, the same he accomplishes by the recital.” In this sense it is said, that the acquirement of life in its identity with the soul takes place by knowledge and works, and therein is no apprehension of any doubt. It may, however, be matter

• The priest who knows the Sáma Véda.

First Chapter. Third Brāhmaṇa.

sacrificer, the same he accomplishes by the recital. This verily overcomes the worlds. There is verily no doubt to be worthy of the worlds for him who thus knows this Sáma. 28.

of doubt, whether in the absence of works life is obtained or not. To remove this doubt, it is said : "This verily overcomes the worlds." "This verily," this knowledge of life alone, separated from works, "overcomes the worlds," is the cause of gaining the worlds. "There is verily no doubt to be worthy of the worlds," nor even a desire ; for if one has the firm knowledge, that life is the soul, he has no doubt that he will obtain it ; for a man, who is in a village, does not doubt, like one in the desert, whether he may arrive at the village. There may be indeed a doubt for one who has not the knowledge of the soul, which is yet far from him, but not for one who has it ; he* therefore has no apprehension that he should not acquire the state of life as identical with the soul. For whom is there not such an apprehension ? "For him who thus knows the Sáma" to be life, in accordance with the greatness, as has been explained, for him therefore who knows : I am the life, inaccessible to the sins of the demons, which consist in the contact of the senses with their objects ; I am purified ; I am speech and the other four organs,† which by their dependence upon me have obtained their original nature, as fire, wind, &c. which are free from the blemish of the sins of the demons, produced by the contact of the senses with their objects, in consequence of natural knowledge, and which by dependence upon me are the cause of the connection of the primeval food with all the elements ; I am the soul of all the elements as the common essence of them ; I am also the soul of speech, embodied in the Rig, Yajur, Sáma and Udgítha, because I pervade them and am their cause. When I have obtained the state of the song of the Sáma, my external wealth, or ornament is the sweetness of the notes. When I have obtained the golden state, figuratively speaking, the sweetness of the notes, the state of the song, my organs are the various places of the throat, &c. Possessed of such qualities, I pervade with my whole nature all living beings down to the smallest insect, for I am without shape and every where. He will attain such a reward, whose worship manifests such a knowledge.

• Who knows that life is identical with the soul.

† Viz. nose, eye, ear and mind.

62

Brihad Aranyaka. Upanishad.

Fourth Bráhmana.

This was before soul, bearing the shape of a man. Looking

"This was before soul." How the state of Prajápati is obtained by the united effect of knowledge and works, has been described, and also, how it is obtained by the mere knowledge of life, by passages as : "This verily overcomes the worlds," &c. By descriptions of the omnipotence and other attributes of Prajápati, who is the embodied reward, in the creation, preservation and destruction of the world, the eminence of the reward, resulting from knowledge and works in accordance with the Védas, is further to be described. For this object the present Bráh-hana has been commenced. This description sets forth the praise of the knowledge and works ordained by the practical* part, because they are of great power. But it is at the same time intended to show, that the whole reward, resulting from knowledge and works, has a worldly tendency ; for it is said, that it is subject to fear and unhappiness ; it is further involved in the connexion between cause and effect, and as a manifestation of the gross organism† it is not eternal. The second part of the Védas on the other hand, is intended to show the liberation, resulting from the mere knowledge of Bramba, which will hereafter be explained ; for he who is not dissatisfied with the objects of the world, subject as they are to the division of cause and effect etc., has no desire to obtain the knowledge, that the soul is one and all, as a person who is not thirsty has no desire to drink. Consequently the description of the reward, resulting from knowledge and works, is made for the sake of the second part. With regard to this, it will be said : "This should be known by him." "This is better than a son."

"This was before the soul." The soul is here defined as Prajápati, the first-born from the egg, the embodied soul, as the result from his knowledge and works in accordance with the Védas. He was what ? "This," produced by the division of body "was the soul," not separated from the body of Prajápati "before," before the production of other bodies. He was also bearing the shape of man, which means, that he was endowed with head, hands and other members ; he was the Viráj, the first-born. "Looking round," reflecting, who am I, and

• Ceremonial part of the Véda. Vide page 2, note 2.

† Vide p. 40, note.

First Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa.

63

round, he beheld nothing but himself. He said first: ‘This am I.’ Hence the name of I was produced. Therefore even now a man, when called, says first : ‘It is I,’ and tells afterwards any other name that belongs to him. And because he as the first of all of them consumed by fire all the sins, therefore he is called Purusha. He verily consumes him, who

of what nature, " he beheld nothing but himself," the fulness of life, the organism of causes and effects. He beheld only himself as the universal soul. Then endowed with the recollection of his Védāic knowledge in a former birth, " he said first : This am I," viz. Prajápati, the universal soul. "Hence," therefore, because from the recollection of his knowledge in a former world he called himself I, therefore his name was I. The name of I, as proved in this Upanishad, and therefore in the Sruti, will afterwards be explained.

"Therefore," because this happened to Prajápati, as the cause, therefore it happens also to the living creatures, his effects ; for even now a man "when called," addressed with : ‘Who art thou ?’ says first : ‘It is I,’ denoting himself with the name of the soul as the cause, and when afterwards asked for his special name, the name of this special individual, he answers by : ‘I am Dévadatta, or Yajnadatta,’ &c. ; he tells the name, which was given to this individual person by father and mother. "And because he," Prajápati in a former birth, which is the cause, as the first of those who were desirous to obtain the state of Pra-jápati by the exercise of reflection on works and knowledge, viz. "as the first of all of them," of all those desirous of obtaining the state of Prajápati,—consumed by the perfect exercise of reflection on works and knowledge all the sins of contact, which are obstacles to the acquirement of the state of Prajápati,—because such was the case,—therefore he is called Purusha, because he, Purvam Aushad, (first burned.) As that Prajápati, by consuming all opposite sins, became this Purusha Prajápati, so also any other consumes, reduces to ashes,

by the fire of the practice of his reflection on knowledge and works, or only by the force of his knowledge. " He verily consumes." Whom ? " Him who before this sage strifes to obtain the state of Prajápati." The sage is pointed out as he who thus knows, who according to his power manifests his reflection on knowledge. ‘But is it not

64

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

before this strives to obtain the state of Prajápati, he namely, who thus knows. 1.

He was afraid ; therefore man, when alone, is afraid. He then

useless for any one to strive for the state of Prajápati, if he is consumed by one who thus knows ?' There is no fault in this ; for consuming means here only, that the highest state, that of a Prajápati, is not obtained, because the eminence of the reflection on knowledge is wanting. Therefore by the words : ' He consumes him,' is it meant, that the perfect performer obtains the highest state of Prajápati, he, who is less perfect, does not obtain it, and by no means, that the less perfect performer is actually consumed by the perfect ; thus it is said in common life, that a warrior who first rushes into battle, consumes his combatants, which means, that he exceeds them in prowess.

To show that the reward of knowledge and works, as set forth in the Karma Kánda, which is the state of Prajápati, praiseworthy as it may be, does yet not overcome this world, it is said : ' He was afraid,' viz. this Prajápati, who is called the first-born embodied soul, bearing the shape of man, was afraid, as we and other creatures are. Hence it is said : Because he, bearing the shape of man, endowed with an organised body, was afraid in consequence of his desire against his destruction,* ' therefore man,' on account of his likeness with Prajápati, also now, when alone, ' is afraid.' And further as with us, so also with Prajápati, the true knowledge of himself (the soul) is the cause, that the desire against one's destruction is removed.

Hence it is said : ' He looked round.' How? The answer is : ' Since nothing but myself,' but the soul, not a second thing, exists, ' of whom should I be afraid,' while there is no cause of my destruction. ' Hence,' from the true knowledge of himself (the soul) Prajápati's ' fear departed,' for his fear is merely the effect of his ignorance, which cannot remain with true knowledge, wherefore it is said : ' For whom should he fear,' viz. he who fears, and the meaning which is intended, is, when truth has been ascertained, fear is removed, since fear arises from a second, from another thing, and a second, another thing, is merely the production of ignorance ; for a second thing, of which there is no knowledge, cannot be the cause of the origin of fear. Thus it is said

• Or of his desire for his preservation.

First Chapter. Third Brāhmaṇa.

65

looked round : Since nothing but myself exists, of whom should

in a Mantra: What blindness of mind, what distress exists for him who

is conscious of the universal identity ? And it is also proper, that by the

knowledge that all is one, the fear is removed; for the knowledge of a

second, from which fear may arise, is removed by the knowledge that

all is one ; hence there is nothing, from whence it could arise. Here it is

asked : Whence was produced Prajāpati's knowledge, that all is one, or

who instructed him ?

(Either the knowledge manifested itself without instruction. Then

the same should be the case with us and similar beings. Or it is

derived from impressions received in a former birth; then the know-

ledge that all is the soul, is useless ; for in this case, as the knowledge

of Prajāpati, although existing when he was in the state of a former

birth, did not remove the cause of the contrary ignorance, because on

account of his ignorance he was afraid, so also is the knowledge of the

identity of the soul useless for every one. And if you, lastly, say, that

the knowledge removes the ignorance at the time of death, we also

object, because, as before, it must again be connected with a prior

knowledge, whence arises the logical fault of a too general argument.

Hence it must be concluded, that the knowledge of the identity of the

soul is useless.)

We deny this, on the ground that the knowledge of Prajāpati is

produced from the most powerful cause ; for as in common life strength

of intellect and extent of memory are observed with him from the time

of his birth, who has acquired various efficacious causes by his pious

actions, so also with regard to the eminent birth of Prajāpati, united as

it is with efficient causes, which are purified by his having consumed all

sins, the effects of opposite causes, by the power of moral merit, of

knowledge. and of liberty from worldly desires. Hence it is proper to

maintain, that Prajāpati's knowledge of the identity of the soul, produced

at the time of his birth, has arisen without any instruction. In this

respect says the Smṛiti : " Whose four qualities, his unbounded know-

ledge, freedom from passion, power and moral merit are innate. "

If you say, 'if they are innate, fear is impossible, for darkness does

not rise with the sun,' we deny this on the ground, that the notion of

innate knowledge has merely the meaning to exclude instruction from

K

66

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

I be afraid? Hence his fear departed; for whom should he fear,

since fear arises from another. 2.

another. If your opinion is, 'that faith, devotion and reverence are

no causes of knowledge, and that such causes of knowledge, as faith,

devotion and reverence, assigned by the Sruti and Smriti in such

passages as : "The faithful whose mind is devoted to only one object,

whose senses are subdued, gains knowledge,"* "Thou shalt know it

by reverence,"†—have no causality,' and if you moreover say, 'that

our moral merit in our former birth is the cause of our knowledge

(in the next birth) as it is the case with Prajápati,' we do not agree,

because we must attend to the distinction of general and special causes,

as well as of qualified and unqualified causes ; for in common life obtains

a manifold division of causes with regard to effects dependent upon a

cause ; in the same manner of general causes. These as well as special

causes are again divided into qualified and unqualified causes. To show

this by an instance we chose the perception of form, as an effect from

a variety of causes. Here the perception of form in the dark,

without light, by animals roaming at night, is caused by the contact of

the eye with form. The cause of perception of form by the Yógis is

the mind alone; for us it is the contact of the eye with form through

light. Further by the division of light into sunlight, moonlight, &c. are

produced the general divisions of the cause. Moreover there is the other

division of light, light, especially qualified and light not qualified. In

the same manner the cause of the knowledge of the identity of the soul is

sometimes work performed in a former birth, as is the case with Prajápati ;

sometimes penance, as the Sruti says : By penance search for Brámha ;‡

sometimes instruction from the teacher, as follows from such passages of

the Sruti and Smriti : "A man, who has a teacher, knows." "The

faithful acquires knowledge." "Do thou know it by reverence." "From

the teacher he must be known, seen, heard," &c. Faith, devotion, &c.

are direct causes to obtain that knowledge, as they effect separation

from vice and from other causes of the contrary. The same is the

case with the hearing, thinking and mental intuition of the Védánta,

• Bhagavadgíta, Fourth chapter.

† Bhagavadgíta, e. 1.

‡ Taittaríya Upanishad Bhrigu Valli 5th Khapda.

Digitized by Google

First Chapter. Third Bráhmaṇa.

67

He did thus not feel delight. Therefore no body, when alone, feels delight. He was desirous of a second. He was in the same state as husband (Pati) and wife (Patni) are when in mutual embrace. He divided this self two-fold. Hence were husband and wife produced. Therefore was this only a half of himself,

because here is comprehended the present object of knowledge itself, and also because by the annihilation of sin and other obstacles the true knowledge of the soul and the mind from its very nature produces that knowledge. Therefore faith, reverence, &c. are real causes of knowledge. 2.

From this also follows the worldly state of Prajápati, viz. because "He," Prajápati, "did thus not feel delight," which means, was unhappy, like us and others at the present time; "therefore," in consequence of the state of loneliness, &c., "no body, when alone, feels delight." Delight means the pleasure, derived from the union with a desired object. Unhappiness is called the state of mental distress, following the separation from an object of desire, to which one is attached. For the removal of this unhappiness "he was desirous of a second, of a wife able to destroy the unhappiness. And while he thus longed for a wife, his state was as of one, embraced by a wife. And because by this state he desired something real, he was of such a state. Of what state ? In such a state, as in common life husband and wife are, when in embrace for the removal of unhappiness. "He," thus, "divided this " self," which was of such a kind, "two-fold." The term "this" is used in order to define the self and to distinguish it from the Viráj, the first cause. He was by the removal of the state of Viráj not in the same state, in which curd is, when its former state, that of milk, is entirely removed. Which was then the state of separation ? By the objective mental power of Viráj, entirely dependent upon himself, there was, beside himself, another body in the state of husband and wife in embrace. And this Viráj of such a kind, "was in the same state," because he is the same subject for two predicates. "Hence," from this division (Pátnat) husband (Patí) and wife (Patní) were produced, which is a description of the common state of husband and wife. "Therefore," because this wife is, as it were, the other separated half of himself, "therefore was this," this body, "only the

68

Brihad Aṛanyaka Upanishad.

as a split pea is of the whole. Thus verily has Yájnavalkya declared it. This void is thus completed by woman. He approached her. Hence men were born. 3.

She verily reflected: How can he approach me, whom he has produced from himself? Alas, I will conceal myself. Thus she became a cow, the other a bull. He approached her. Hence kine were born. The one became a mare, and the other a

half of himself, as a split pea is of the whole." Of whom was it only a half before his taking a wife? The answer is : "Of his self." Thus verily has Yájnavalkya, viz. the son of Yajnavalka (which denotes him who speaks at the sacrifice) Dévaráti, declared it. It may also mean a son of Bramhā. Because this male half is void, as wanting the female half, "therefore" again* after the taking of a wife, it is again completed by the female half, as a split pea by its being joined with its other half. "He," "Prajápati," under the name of Manu, "approached her," by name Sátarupá,† his own daughter, under the notion that she was his wife. "Hence," from this union, "men were born." 3.

"She," Satarupá, recollecting that it is forbidden in the Smriti to approach one's own daughter, "verily reflected : How happens this improper action, that he can approach me," whom he has produced from himself. "Alas, I will now conceal myself," will conceal myself under the disguise of another kind. "Thus," having thus re-

• Ánanda observes, that the word "again" refers to the same event in a former birth,—because the world is without commencement.

† The notion of Viráj dividing his own substance into male and female, occurs in more than one Purána. So does that of an incestuous marriage and intercourse of the first Menu with his daughter Satarupá, and the commentators on the Upanishad understand that legend to be alluded to in this place. But the institutes ascribed to Menu make Viráj to be the issue of such a separation of persons, and Menu himself to be his offspring. There is indeed, as the reader may observe from the passages cited in the present essay, much disagreement and consequent confusion, in the gradation of persons interposed by Hindu theology between the supreme being and the created world. Col. M. E. Vol. I. p. 65. See also Wilson's Vishnu Purana, where, p. 51, note 5, a very lucid view of the opinions of the different Puránas on this subject is given.

First Chapter. Third Brāmaṇa.

stallion, the one a female ass, the other a male ass. He ap-proached her. Hence the one-hoofed kind was born. The one

became a female goat, the other a male goat, the one became an ewe, the other a ram. He approached her. Hence goats

and sheep were born. In this manner he created every living pair whatsoever down to the ants. 4.

He knew : I am verily this creation; for I created this all. Hence the name of creation is derived. Verily he who thus

knows, becomes in this creation like him. 5.

flected, "she became a cow," by herself, and again and again was this the inclination of Starupā, incited by the impulse of living crea-

tures, as well as of Manu. Therefore "the other became a bull. He approached her," in the same manner, as it has been related before.

"Hence kine were born." Thus "the one became a mare, and the other a stallion," thus, "the one a female ass, the other a male ass."

There, by the union of the mare with the stallion and the union of the other kinds "the one hoofed kind," viz. horses, mules and asses,

"were born." Thus "the one became a female goat, the other a male goat, the one became an ewe, the other a ram. He approached her,"

viz. the one after the other in the order as they are mentioned. "Hence goats and sheep were born. In this manner he created every

living pair, male and female, whatsoever, down to the ants," viz. he created the world. 4.

"He," Prajápati, having created all this world, "knew." What? "I am verily this creation." The world is created, therefore the created

world is called creation. Because the world is created by me, therefore, since it is not separated from me, am I the world ; it is not dis-

tinguished from me. Why is this I? "For I," because "I created this whole world," therefore. Because Prajápati called himself the creation,

"hence," therefore "the name of creation is derived." "Verily he becomes in this creation," in this world of Prájapati, "like him ;"

he becomes like Prajápati, a creator of the world, which is not different from his own self. Who? "He who thus knows," knows like

Prajápati, as has been said, that he is the world, depending upon the notion of the soul, of the elements and of the deities. 5.

70

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

Then he churned. From his mouth, as the place of production, and from his hands he created the fire. Both therefore

Prajápati, having thus created this world as a succession of pairs, was desirous of creating the guardian deities of the Bráhman8 and of the other castes, and at the commencement throwing his hands upon his mouth " he churned." Churning with his hands " he created from his mouth," as the organ of production, and also "from his hands," as organs of production, " the fire," the special benefactor of the caste of Bráhmans. Because both the hands and the mouth are the organs of production of the fire, whose nature is to consume, "therefore both are without hair ;" not the whole, however, but only the inside ; for both resemble in this respect the female organ of production ; "for this is inside without hair." Thus also the Bráhman was born from the mouth of Prajápati. Therefore the fire is the special benefactor of the Bráhman, both being sprung from the same source; as the elder brother is of the younger. Therefore the Bráhman has the fire as his guardian deity, and the mouth as his strength, as proved by the Sruti and Smriti. Thus he produced from his arms, the seat of power, the slayer of Bala,* and other gods,† the ruling deities of the Kshatriya caste and also the Kshatriya. Therefore the Kshatriya has Indra as his guardian deity, and the arm as his strength, as both Sruti and Smriti attest. Thus he created from his thigh, as the seat of endeavour—the Vasus‡ and others, the ruling deities of the Vis, and also the Vis. Therefore the Vaisya is devoted to agriculture, merchandise and similar pursuits, and his guardian deities are the Vasus, &c., according to the evidence of the Sruti and Smriti. Thus he created from his feet Pushana,§ the guardian deity of the earth, and also the Súdra, who is fitted for servitude, according to the evidence of the Sruti and Smriti. The Upanishad makes here for the praise of

• Indra.

† Varuna, &c.

‡ The Vasus were the sons of Vasu. Their names are : Ápa, Dhruva, Soma, Dhaba (fire), Anila (wind), Anala (fire), Pratyúsha (daybreak), and Prabhása (light.) —W. V. P. p. 128.

§ One of the twelve Ádityas, sons of Kasyapa by Aditi, the daughter of Dakshu.—L. C. p. 122.

First Chapter. Third Bráhmana.

71

are inside without hair; for the place of production is inside without hair.

That they speak there this word : Sacrifice to this, sacrifice to this, hence sacrifice to the one or the other god, is not proper.

His is really this creation; for he verily is all the gods.

the whole creation, the supposition, as if the origin of the guardian deities of the Kshatriya and the other castes had been related, although it has not been done, and yet remains to be related.

By this passage of the Sruti it is accordingly evident, that Prajápati is all deities, because there is no difference between the creator and the creature, and because the gods are created by Prajápati.

The meaning of the subject being thus established, the blame of the contrary notion* of ignorant people is introduced for the praise of the meaning, as it has been established; for the blame of the one is the praise of the other.

"That they," the mere performers of sacrifices, "speak there," during the performance of the ceremonies at the time of offering, "this word : Sacrifice to this," to Agni, "sacrifice to this," to Indra, &c., they do so in accordance with the difference of name, Sastra, Sotra, work, &c. by considering this or the other different god, for instance Agni, &c., as one among others.

This should not be thus understood, because "his," Prajápati's, "is really this creation," the whole division of the gods ; "for he," Prajápati, "as life," "is verily all the gods."

Here we meet with a contradictory opinion. ‘Namely, some say, the supreme Hiranyagarbha is meant, others Hiranyagarbha, as being in a worldly state.

According to the letter of the Mantras the supreme is meant ; for the Sruti says : “They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuna and Agni.”

And another passage : “He who is Bramhâ, who is Indra and Prajápati, is all these gods.”

Also the Smriti says : “Some call him Agni, others Manu, others Prajápati.”

And further : He who is no object of the organs,† who is unappreachable,‡ who is infinitely little,§ unmanifested,

• The contrary notion is, that the deities are independent beings ; this view is blamed in the next sentence of the Upanishad.

† The organs of action are here meant, according to Ánanda.

‡ To the senses of intellect, eye, ear, &c.

§ This is the cause, that he cannot be perceived by the senses.

72 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

eternal, whose nature comprehends all elements, who is not conceived by thought,* sprung thus forth by himself. On the other hand he is also in a worldly state. This follows from the passage of the Sruti, stating : "He consumed all sins;" for unless one is in a worldly state, he cannot consume sins. It follows also from the passage of the Sruti, that he is subject to fear and unhappiness. Also from the other : "Being mortal he created immortals." Further, from the letter of the Mantra : "Lo the birth of Hiranyagarbha." Also from a passage of the Smriti in the chapter which treats on the results of works : Sages call Bramhā, the creators of the world, virtue, the great, the unmanifested, the best condition, which can be obtained by the quality of goodness.† Therefore a contradictory meaning being obtained, the argument is faulty?

We do not grant this, because there is no contradiction, if it is considered under a different fictitious view, and a different fictitious view is obtained, if it is connected with a special fictitious attribute.‡ In this manner it is declared in the Sruti :

• No object of the mind, the internal sense.

† This passage is taken from Manu 12, 50. According to Ananda, by the creators are meant Manu and others, by virtue Yama, by the great one (Mahat), intelligence, Buddhi, the first production of Prakriti, or self-existing nature, according to the Sānkhya system. Kullāka Bhatta, the commentator of Manu, explains it differently, viz. Bramhā is the Brambhā with four faces, the creator Marichi and the others, Mahat and Avyakta (unmanifested) two of the causes of the Sānkhya system, here the tutelary deity of the same, virtue the embodied virtue.

‡ I translated Kalpanā with "fictitious view" and Upadhi with "fictitious attribute, as I was unable to find more adequate words. Kalpanā according to the dictionaries means : arrangement, distinction, artificial making; but these words do not express the meaning, which it has according to the Védánta, where it is a predicate, which is assigned to a thing to which it really does not belong, or the conceiving of a thing under an idea which is contrary to its nature, as for instance, if Bramba (the infinite soul, infinite substance) is comprehended under the notion of infinite mind (manas) or infinite intelligence (Buddhi) which notions are mere anthropomorphisms. Thus far is the Kalpanā indeed an artificial notion, a notion made by some contrivance, or not founded on the real nature of the thing. Upadhi, (according to Wilson discriminating or distinguishing property, disguise, in the Védánta this is especially applied to certain natural forms or properties, considered as dis-

First Chapter. Third Bráhmana.

"Sitting he proceeds afar, sleeping he goes everywhere. Who beside me, is able to know the god who is happy and not happy."* Through attributes he is connected with the world; in reality by himself he is unconnected with the world. This is the identity and diversity of Hiranyagarbha, and in the same manner of all living creatures, which follows from the passage of the Sruti: "That art thou." But while Hiranyagarbha, in consequence of the superlative purity of his attributes is, as it were, almost entirely supreme, as Sruti and Smriti declare, although they show his worldly state as it were, at some places, the worldly state of the living creatures, in consequence of the prevalent impurity of their attributes, is almost everywhere evident. Divested,

guises of the spirit which I translated with fictitious attribute, is any quality which is assigned by a fictitious motion to the infinite soul; for instance, omnipotence, omniscience, &c. If the infinite substance is considered in its own nature, it has no attributes whatever, and the notions under which it is thought, viz., existence, knowledge, happiness, are in reality no different attributes, but they constitute the one identical substance (Ātma, soul).

On the other hand, it is necessary to form fictitious views of the infinite substance; for the world cannot be thought in itself, and therefore requires to be thought by the infinite soul, as entirely depending upon it. The act of the mind by which it transfers the notions of the world upon Bramba or the infinite soul, is called Adhyárópa, which is in fact the same idea with that of Kalpaná. Under the condition, that the world is considered in Bramba, Bramba or the infinite soul is also considered under various attributes, as for instance, omniscience, universal providence, immanent cause of the world, &c. The Kalpaná, the view, although fictitious, is yet necessary, and the Upadhi, the attribute, although not really an attribute of Bramba, is still indispensable, if he is considered in his relation to the world.

There is therefore according to the Védánta, no contradiction, if attributes are ascribed to Bramba; and denied of him, as long as the notions under which both is done, are kept separate ; namely, he has no attributes, if considered in himself; he has attributes in his relation to the world.

• Kaṭha Upanishad, 2 V. 21. In this passage the contradictory predicates are founded upon the different modes, by which the soul may be conceived. Thus "sitting" refers to its unchangeableness, "proceeding" to its worldly nature, where it proceeds faster than any other being. The Upanishads generally represent the difficulty to understand the infinite soul by assigning to it contradictory predicates. Thus it is said in the Vájasanéya Up. v. 5. If (the soul) proceeds, it does not proceed ; it is far ; it is near ; it is within this universe ; it is without this universe.

74

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

Then whatsoever is moist, the same he created from his semen, this is the Sôma. So much is this whole universe, either food, or the eater of food. Sôma is the food, and Agni the eater of the food. This is the surpassing creation of Bramhâ. Because he from the better parts created the gods, and also,

however, of all distinction of attributes, every one obtains the name of supreme according to the evidence of the Sruti and Smriti. But the logicians who, abandoning the authority of the holy writings, reason much about existence and non-existence, agency and non-agency, con- found the meaning of the Sâstra. Hence the determination of the meaning becomes difficult. But for those who without pride follow the Sâstra alone, the meaning of the Sâstra with regard to deities is as clear, as if it were an object of perception. Here it is intended to introduce with reference to Prajâpati, although he is one God, such distinctions as food, &c. Among them the fire has been mentioned; the Sôma, as the first food will now be mentioned.

"Then whatsoever is," in the world, "moist," in the form of a fluid, 'the same he created from his semen,' from his seed. Thus it is said in the Sruti : "From the semen sprang the waters." And the Sôma is also watery ; therefore all that is moist, is created by Prajâpati from his semen. This is, "as it were, the Sôma." "So much is this whole universe," that is, there is no more than this. What is it ?

"Either food," which is Sôma, as nourishing by its fluidity, or "the eater of the food," Agni, by his heat and harshness. Hence Sôma is defined as food. From the force of the meaning it is evident, that Sôma is all that is eaten, and that Agni is the eater. Sometimes the fire, when offering is made by it, becomes Sôma,—Sôma also, when offering is made to it, becomes fire, because it eats. Whosoever in this manner perceives the world, as consisting of Agni and Sôma, under the idea of the soul, is not tainted by any blame, and becomes also like Prajâpati. "This is the surpassing creation of Bramhâ," Prajâpati, surpassing, because it surpasses his own nature. Which is this creation ?

"Because he from the better parts," the parts resembling him, "created the gods," therefore is the creation of the gods a surpassing creation. How is it again a creation which surpasses himself ? The

First Chapter. Third Bráhmaṇa.

75

because he, a mortal, created the immortals, therefore is it a surpassing creation. He who thus knows, becomes in this surpassing creation like Prajápati. 6.

That which is this, was then verily unmanifested. That mani-

answer is: "And also, because he, a mortal," of a mortal nature, "created the immortals," the gods of immortal nature, after he had consumed all his sins by the fire of works and knowledge, therefore is this surpassing creation the effect of perfect knowledge. Therefore "he who knows" this surpassing creation of Prajápati, as proceeding from himself, verily becomes in this surpassing creation like Prajápati, becomes a creator like Prajápati.

"That which is this* was then verily unmanifested." All Védic causes,† denoted by knowledge and work, depend upon such distinctions as agent, &c., and their ultimate reward is the acquirement of the state of Prajápati ;‡ the effect is "so much," viz. this manifested world. The Upanishad is now to show, how this manifested world, depending upon the connection of causes and effects, was before its manifestation in the shape of a seed (in its original shape) which is inferred, as the tree is inferred from its effect, the sprout; for this tree of the world, whose seed is work and whose field is ignorance, is to be taken up with its root, as by its taking up the liberation of man is accomplished. Thus it is said in the Káthaka:§ "Its root is above, its branches go downwards." The same is said in the Gíta: "Its root is above, its branches go downwards." It is also said in a Puráṇa:

• That which is this. Tad idam (that this) according to an idiotism in Sanscrit, where two demonstrative pronouns, this and that, are connected with the same subject, and where tad (that) refers to the past time, and idam (this) to the present time. The Védánta frequently uses this form of expression to show the identity of the logical subject in its connexion with predicates which exclude each other.

† Védic causes are here causes of any mode or form of worldly existence, as asserted by the Védas; causes which lead to final liberation from the world, are accordingly in this passage not referred to; this is evident, says Ananda, on the ground, that a multiplicity of causes cannot be a means of liberation which is of a uniform nature.

‡ Or in other words the ultimate reward is the state of death.—A. G.

§ Káthaka, 2 Adh. 6 Volli. V. 1.

L 2

Digitized by Google

76

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

fested itself by name and form, as it is commonly said: " He is of this name, of this form." In the same manner that which

The eternal tree of Bramha. "That," the world in the state of a seed before its creation, is named, on account of its imperceptibility at that time, by the pronoun " that," which denotes any thing that is no object of perception. The word "verily," which is the mark of a narrative,* is used here for the object to make it easily understood, that the world was in the state of non-manifestation, because it is connected with the past time. If it is said : Thus it verily was, it is easily understood, that the imperceptible state of the world is meant, in the same way, as if it is said : There verily was a king Judhisthira. " Which is this." This denotes the world as manifested by name, form and work, as being in the connexion of cause and effect, in the manner in which it has been described. The terms "that" and "this" denote the state of imperceptibility and perceptibility of the world, and placed upon one and the same subject, they express the identity of the world in its state of perceptibility and imperceptibility. The meaning is : That which is this, and this, which is that, was then unmanifested. If this is the case, it is evident that no effect can be produced from any thing that does not exist, and that it cannot be destroyed from any thing that exists.

" That," so described world, which was not manifested, manifested itself by name and form. The reflexive form† "manifested itself," shows, that the soul was manifested by itself. "It manifested itself," it clearly obtained a perceptible form of existence, the limits of whose knowledge are the differences of name and form, which by its own power‡ produced the relations of ruler, agent, and depends upon the action of causes. "He is of this name ;" by the pronoun§ "he," which is a

• The word for narrative is Itihása. Iti-há-ása ; thus verily it was, which formula commonly concluding a narrative in the Védas, became the term of a narrative generally.

† Karma Kartri, where the agent (Kartri) is its own object (Karma.)

‡ This is here mentioned, because according to the Védánta it is necessary, that the world as an effect must have a cause.

§ The word for pronoun is in Sanscrit, Sarvanáma, a general name, on the meaning of which the exposition, as given above, is founded.

First Chapter. Third Bráhmana.

77

is this also then manifests itself, as it is said: "He is of this name, of this form." He entered this world.

name without distinction, a name only is indicated. "He is of this name," viz. Dévatta, or Jajnadatta is his name. In the same manner the pronoun "this," in the sentence, he is of this colour, denotes colour generally, without distinction of white or black, &c. "That," unmanifested, substance, "which is this, then," at that time, manifests itself, by name and form, in the manner as it is said: He is of this name, this form.

"He,"* for whom the whole Sástra† is commenced, upon whom by means of natural ignorance the notions of agent, ceremony and reward are transferred, who is the cause‡ of the whole world, from whom, identical with his nature, name and form, not manifested before, are manifested, as dirty foam from clear water, and who, different from either, name and form, of his own nature is eternal, pure, intelligent and free, "he," manifesting the before unmanifested name and form, which are identical with his own nature, "entered this world," these bodies from Brámhá down to inanimate matter, dependent upon works and the consequences thereof, and subject to death and other evils.

'But it was said, that the unmanifested manifested itself; how can it now be maintained, that even the supreme soul, manifesting the unmanifested, entered this world?'§

There is no fault in this; first, because the supreme soul was meant under the notion of the unmanifested world; for we said, that the unmanifested world, which produces the relations of a creator, agent, &c., and which is dependent upon the action of causes, &c., manifested itself; secondly, because the term "this" is identical with the term "manifested." As "this" means manifested, when it has obtained the

• The Supreme Brambá. † Viz. the Véda in its two parts, the Karma Káṇḍa, which relates to ceremonies, and the Jñána Káṇḍa, which relates to the knowledge of Bramba. ‡ Viz. the only cause, without any difference of the mediate and material cause, as in the Sánkhya system. § In other words, before it was not said of the soul, that it manifested the world, but it was said, that the unmanifested manifested itself. How is it therefore consistent with that doctrine to substitute here the notion of the soul for the notion of the unmanifested.

78 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

endless differences of ruler of the world and other agents, of cause, &c., so means "that" unmanifested, when it has not emitted any of its differences. The only difference* is, that the one is manifest, the other not manifest. In common life also the same word has different meanings according to the intention of the speaker, as if for instance it is said : The village is arrived, the village is empty. Sometimes the word village may only mean the dwellings, as in the sentence : the village is empty. Sometimes the inhabitants may be intended, as in the sentence : the village has arrived. Sometimes both meanings may be intended, as in the sentence : let him not enter the village. Thus also in the present case. If it is said : this manifested and unmanifested world, where there is no intention to separate them, the soul and the non-soul are meant. Further, this world, subject to production and destruction, means the world alone. Further, the soul, which is great, not produced, not extended, which is not this, which is not that, means the soul alone.

'But how can it be thought that 'he entered' the world, manifested by the supreme manifestor, and everywhere and at every time pervaded by him ? For a country, which is not entered before, may be entered by any thing of limited extent, as for instance a village by a man, &c., but not by any thing without limit, as for instance the ether, because from its nature it is always present. If he entered it, as a snake a stone, by a modification of qualities,† we may grant such a modification for the snake, but not for the supreme soul, because he entered even with his nature. If it be supposed, that, abiding in the effect (the world) he was produced by a modification of qualities, and that by this he entered, as a snake, which is produced at the same time, abides in the stone, or water in a cocoa-nut, we object, because the Sruti says : having created that he entered it ; for here it is evident, that the creator himself, without assuming another mode of existence, when he had created the world, entered it afterwards. Thus it is said : having en-

• Between the world in its former and in its present state.

† The snake can be considered as a modification of the stone, because according to the Védánta, both are productions of the five elements; therefore there is no contradiction in considering the snake a modification of the five elements which abide in a stone. In the same manner it may be thought, that the infinite soul entered the intellect and other creations by its modification as life.

First Chapter. Third Brāmhana.

79

joyed he goes. There also is a mutual difference between the actions

of enjoying and going, referring to the past and present time, but the

agent is the same. The same case is here, and it cannot be thought

that a modification of existence of him who abides in this effect, is

produced.

Nor accords the idea of an entrance, which denotes the separation

from one place and the connexion with another, with the idea of the

soul, which is without parts and without limits. If it be supposed, that

the Sruti refers to an entrance, where parts are admitted, we deny this

on the authority of such passages of the Sruti as : for he is radiant,

without form, he is complete, without parts, without actions ; we deny

it also on the authority of such passages as prohibit the application of

any differences of qualities whatsoever to the soul.

Nor entered he the world as an image, as there is no separation of a

second thing.

Nor did he enter it as a quality enters a substance, because he does

not depend upon any thing ; for a quality indeed, which in every way

depends upon another thing, is considered to enter a substance, but

not so Bramha, as depending upon himself according to the Sruti.

Nor as a seed the fruit, because such attributes as an increase and

decrease of its parts, a production and destruction, are assigned to this

relation ; but there are no such attributes of Bramha, of whom it is

said in the Sruti : He is not produced, he is without age, &c.

Nor as another separate body ; for from the passage of the Sruti :

This deity reflected, let me manifest name and form, it is clear that

the same deity, which enters, also manifests and acts. Also from

these passages : "Having created this, he entered it," and : "Having

opened the place, where the hairs divide, he entered by this door."*

Having considered all forms, having made all names, the hero sits

inclined." "Thou, O youth, or thou, O maid, thou old man with a

staff, spends thy time," it follows, that no other enters but the supreme

soul.†

• Aittariya Up. 3 Vol. 11 P., that is to say, having opened the middle part of

the skull, where the hairs divide, he entered the body by this opening.

† The first part of the argument was to prove, that it is the supreme soul which

enters ; the second is to show, that the supreme soul is not affected in its nature by

his entrance.

Digitized by Google

80

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

If it be thought, that there is a multiplicity in the supreme soul, in consequence of the natural differences of the things which he entered, we object from passages of the Sruti as : "One god he sits at many places ; being one, he proceeded to many places. Thou, although one, hast entered many. One god art thou concealed in all beings thou pervadest all ; thou art the soul within all beings."

" We shall at present not enquire, whether the idea of entering has been established or not ; but it is clear, that the supreme soul has a worldly form, because the things which he entered, have a worldly form, and are not different from the soul ?

We deny this, because the Sruti says : He overcomes death.

If it is thought that he is in a worldly state, on the ground that he is subject to happiness and unhappiness, we object ; for the Sruti says : " He is not tainted with the unhappiness of the world, he is free from it."

If you say, this is improper, because it is at variance with perception,* we do not agree, because the difference in objects of perception or other sources of knowledge is only produced by the notion of dependence on attributes.† Such passages of the Sruti as : "Thou doest not behold the beholder of the visible." " How could one know him who knows ?" Unknown is he who knows—prove that knowledge has no reference to the soul.‡

To what then ? Knowledge from perception, declared in such sentences as : I am happy, I am unhappy, is the object of the image of the soul, which is reflected in the intellect and in other attributes.

The same is also shown by the fiction of the identity of the perceptible object (the body) and the subject which perceives (the soul) in a sentence like this, I am this§ (body). It follows also from the passage of the Sruti : " There is none else but him who sees," by which the idea of another soul is prohibited.

If you say, that happiness and unhappiness are qualities of the body,

• With individual perception, as in common life, people say : I am happy, I am unhappy.

† And therefore not by the soul, as attributes do not really belong to the soul.

‡ Accordingly no perception, for instance, I am happy, I am unhappy.

§ Because here the soul, which is endowed with the perceptible object, the body, is an object of perception, and therefore the soul in itself is not in a worldly state.

Digitized by Google

because both must be predicated of parts of the body,* and that therefore from the passage of the Sruti : "For the sake of the desire of the soul,"† it is improper to maintain, that the soul is free from the world ?—we do not agree, because the passage of the Sruti : "Where it is, as it were, some other thing," shows, that it is for the sake of the soul, which is in the state of ignorance. From such passages : "How can it behold any one." (B. A. 4th A. 5th B. 15. Bib. I. V. 11. p. 929.) "There is no difference whatsoever with regard to him. (K. U. 4th. V. 11. B. I. V. VIII. p. 130.) "There is no delusion, no grief," (Váj. S. U. 7. B. I. Vol. VIII. 14) which refer to knowledge, it also follows, that unhappiness, as prohibited in them, is no quality of the soul.

If it is said, 'that the unworldly state of the soul cannot be admitted as contradictory to the argument of logicians',‡ we deny this, because by reasoning also it can be proved that the soul is free from unhappiness ; for unhappiness, which is an object of perception, cannot be attributed to the soul, which is no object of perception. If you say, 'that unhappiness is in the same manner a quality of the soul, as the sound is a quality of the ether,'§ we deny this, because the soul and unhappiness are not objects of one and the same kind of knowledge ;|| for a knowledge of unhappiness, which is an object of perception, can never become an object of the soul, which is eternal, and can only be known by inference. Unhappiness cannot become an object of the soul for this reason also, that the soul, as one, is no object of anything whatsoever.

• On the ground, that every one who feels pain or pleasure in any part of the body, refers this part to himself, as if one says, "my head aches." † The desire of happiness; but if happiness is granted; the contrary must be also admitted, because both are inseparable. ‡ Of the Vais'eshikas, according to whom the soul has the following fourteen qualities : intellect, pleasure, pain, desire, aversion, endeavour, number, quantity, severalty, conjunction and disjunction, faculty, merit and demerit. § Viz. the connexion between substance and quality, which exists between ether and sound, of which the one (sound) is perceptible, the other (ether) not perceptible, may also exist between soul and happiness. || This is in accordance with the principle, that where there is a relation between quality and substance, these are both perceived by one and the same kind (source) of knowledge, as for instance a jar and its white colour.

82

Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.

If you maintain, 'that, like a light, the soul, although one, is an object and manifests objects,' we do not agree, because this is impossible at one and the same time,* and because the soul has no parts. Hence the idea, that there is a perception of knowledge, and that knowledge is at the same time perceived, cannot be admitted with reference to the soul.

If it is said : 'Unhappiness and soul, the one of which is an object of perception, the other of inference, are in relation of quality and substance, as may be known by inference ; for unhappiness is constantly an object of perception, and has an equal dependence upon a substance, as form has,' &c. Accordingly, as unhappiness is perceived by the soul through its union with the mind, such attributes as multiplicity, changeableness and transientness, must be also assigned to the soul ; for, without a change in the substance which is in contact, it is nowhere found that a quality is added or removed. Nor has it at any time been found that a substance which changes, is without parts, or that a substance whose qualities are transient, is eternal. Nor is the ether considered as an eternal thing by those who follow the Sruti. Nor is there any other case.† If you say, " that a thing, although it changes may be eternal, because the knowledge, 'that is this,' yet remains,"—we deny this, because the notion of change cannot be thought without the notion of a change of the parts of the thing.

And if you say, 'that a thing which has parts, may also be eternal,' we deny this, because a thing that has parts, must before have been joined by a union of its parts, by which the idea of a separation is established.

If you say, ' that this is contrary to perception, as if you see lighting,' we object, because we conclude that its parts have been joined before. Therefore it is impossible to conceive the idea that the soul is the site of unhappiness and other transient qualities.

And if you say, ' on the supposition that the supreme soul is without unhappiness, and that there exists no other soul which is unhappy ;

• In accordance with the doctrine of the Nyáya, that the mind, through whose agency every object, external or internal, is represented to the soul, can only perceive one object at one time.

† The supposition of atoms is meant; for the existence of atoms cannot be proved by any evidence.

Digitized by Google

First Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa.

83

the S'āstra, which is commenced for the purpose to remove unhappiness, is useless,' we object, because it has the purpose to destroy the illusion of unhappiness, which is placed upon the soul by ignorance. And also because the unhappiness of the soul is only fictitious, and is removed in the same way, as a mistake in counting a common number, in which the person who counts, himself is included.*

As the image of the sun, &c. enters the water, so the entrance of the soul means the perceptibility of the soul in its effect which is manifested like a reflection. Before the production of the world the soul is not perceived; afterwards being perceived within the intellect in the effect which is created, manifested, as the reflection of the sun &c. is perceived in water, &c. it is defined, as it were, as entering after the creation of the effect. This is evident, for example, from the following passages :

" He entered this world." (B. A. U. 1st Adh. 3d B. 7. B. I. Vol. II. p. 155.) "Having created this world, he verily entered it." (Taittarīya U. 2d Adh. 6th Anu. B. I. Vol. VII. p. 90.) "Having opened the place, where the hair is divided, he entered by this door." (Aitt. U. 3 Kh. 12 Varga B. I. Vol. VII. p. 198.) "This deity reflected: Verily, I am these three deities." (Chh. U. 6th Prapa. 3 Kh. B. I. Vol. III. p. 406.) "Having entered by this life, soul, &c." (Chh. U. 6th Prapa. 3d Kh. B. I. Vol. III. pp. 407—411.)

This is meant by the entering of the soul, but we say, it is impossible, that the soul which is all-pervading and without parts, has ever a real entrance, the notion of which is to proceed from one part of space, place, or time to another.

Moreover there is nothing else but the supreme soul, as we said before in accordance with such passages of the Sruti as the following :

• This seems to refer to the following tale. Ten friends having crossed a dangerous river, were anxious to know, whether any of them had been lost, and accordingly one of them commenced to count, but omitting himself (A'tma, meaning the soul and himself,) found of course, that there were only nine. The others successively counted also, but doing it in the same manner as the first, the result was the same. Upon this they thought, that one had perished in the river, and broke out in lamentations. A stranger who passed by, perceived the cause of their error, and explaining it to them satisfactorily, changed their distress into rejoicing.

M 2

84

Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.

Until the ends of the nails, as a razor is placed in a razor-case, or Viswambhara in the dwelling of Viswambhara. They

"There is nothing else that sees, hears, &c. but he." (B. A. 3rd A. 6th B. 11. B. I. Vol. II. p. 637.)

And the notions of creation, entrance, preservation, and destruction are merely formed for the apprehension of the soul. Again the apprehension of the soul is enjoined for the sake of final liberation, which is evident from such passages of the Sruti as :

"He knew the soul." (B. A. 1st Adh. 4th B. 10. B. I. Vol. II. p. 198.) "Therefore he was this all." (B. A. p. 209.) "He who knows Bramba, obtains liberation." (Taitt. 2d A. 1 Anuv. 1 Kh. B. I. Vol. VII. p. 37.) "He who knows the supreme Bramba, verily becomes Bramba." (3 Mund. U. 2 Kh. 9 M. B. I. and Vol. VIII. p. 323.) "The person who has a teacher, knows Bramba." (Chh. U. 6 Prapa. 14 Kh. B. I. Vol. III. p. 459.) "He lives as long" (as he has not obtained liberation.) (Chh. U. 6th P. 14th Kl. B. I. Vol. III. p. 460). It is also evident from passages of the Smriti as : "Then forthwith." (Bh. G. 18th Adh. 55.) Having known me in truth, he enters me. "For it (the knowledge of Bramba) is the highest knowledge; for immortality is thereby gained." (Manu S. 12th Add. 85.)

And the passages with regard to a creation, &c. serve for the purpose to establish the knowledge of the identity of the soul, because the notion of difference is prohibited. Therefore the entrance means the perceptibility of the soul, as far as it abides in its effect.

"Until the ends of the nails." (Vide. p. 78.) This means, to the ends of the nails the consciousness of the soul extends. How did he enter the world? The answer is : As in common life, "a razor is perceived as placed in a razor-case, or as Viswambhara, which means fire,—so called from its supporting (bhara), the world, Viswa,—is concealed in a nest, viz. in wood, &c.,—it is there; for on rubbing wood, &c. fire is perceived,—and as a razor is placed on one side of the case, and as fire is everywhere pervading wood, &c. so, the soul, generally and specially, abides pervading the body. For there it is observed, performing the functions of inspiration, &c. and of seeing, &c. Therefore "they do not behold," do not apprehend "him" the soul, which has entered there, endowed as it is with inspiration, &c., seeing and other functions.

First Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa.

85

do not behold him. For when incomplete, when inspiring only,

it is called life, when speaking, speech, when seeing, sight, when

But is not in the sentence: “They do not behold him,” a prohi-

bition of a thing, which has not been obtained before? for, no doubt,

the beholding has not been obtained in our text.

There is no fault in this, for in the passages, relative to the creation,

preservation, &c. which were directed towards the acquirement of the

knowledge, that the soul is identical, the beholding (knowledge) of it

(of the soul) has been introduced. Thus a Mantra declares: “Being

of this and that form, he became every form for the sake of being

seen.” (Kath. U. 5 V. 9–10 Mantr. B. I. Vol. VIII. p. 138. B. A.

U. 2 A. 5 Bramh. 19 Kh. B. I. Vol. II. p. 600 p. 23.)

The reason, why the soul having the functions of inspiration, expira-

tion, &c. is not apprehended, is given in the words: “For when in-

complete;” because it is not perfect, when inspiring or performing

other functions. Whence again proceeds the incompleteness? The

answer is: for by “inspiring” performing the function of inspiration

(Prāṇana) it is called life (Prāṇa) for by performing the function of

inspiration (Prāṇana) life (Prāṇa) inspires, that is to say, performs no

other function, as a wood-cutter, or a cook is so called from his spe-

cial work. Therefore because it does not include the other functions,

it is incomplete.

In the same manner, “when speaking,” performing the function of

speaking, it is called speech, “when seeing,” it is called sight; for-

because the beholder sees (chashte) therefore it is called eye (chakshu:);

when hearing (srinwan), it is called ear (srotram.) By the words:

“when inspiring, it is called life, when speaking, speech,” the origin

of the power of action is shown, by the words “when seeing, sight,

when hearing, ear,” the origin of the power of knowledge; for the

objects of the power of knowledge are name and form; for nothing is

an object of knowledge, unless having name and form. The organs

of perceiving them are the eye and the ear, and the action, to be

performed by name and form, is intimately united with life. The

organ of the manifestation of this action, which depends upon life, is

the word. In this manner speech is mentioned here in illustration of

Digitized by Google

86

Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.

hearing, eār, when minding, mind. These are the names of its

actions. Whosoever worships one or the other special being,

separate from that totality, he does not know, for that soul is

incomplete; it is determined by this or that individual function.

The soul; considering this, let a man worship it; for in it all

these differences become one.

the other organs of action, viz. the hand, foot, and the organs of ex-

cretion and generation; for it will afterwards be said: "for this all

is manifested, or this threefold, name, form and action." (B. A.

2d A. 1st B. 1st Kh. B. I. Vol. II. p. 313.)

"When minding, mind." Mind (mana :) is derived from minding

(manuté), and it is the general organ of the manifestation of the power

of knowledge.

These names of inspiration, &c. are the names of "its," the soul's,

'actions,' that is to say, produced from actions. They are names of

action, as it were, but not objects of the substance, (of the soul) alone;

therefore they do not manifest the whole substance of the soul; for in

this manner the soul, although manifested by the action of inspiration,

&c. and by its forms and names, derived from its different actions, is

still not completely apprehended.

"Whosoever worships this or the other special being,—" separated

from its totality as inspiration, &c. for instance life, or the eye, as a

being, unmodified by the totality of the other special actions,—whoso-

ever worships this in bis mind under the notion, that it is the soul,

"he does not know" Bramba. Why? "for that soul is incomplete," not

whole, because this soul, as separated from this totality of inspiration,

&c. seeing, &c. and determined only by one or the other determining

action, excludes all the other attributes. As long as a person knows

himself only as determined by the activity of his own nature, which

appears in such sentences as: "I see," "I hear," "I touch," &c.

so long he does not know perfectly the complete soul.

How again seeing does he know? The text answers: "The soul;"

for it is called soul (Ātma) because it unites (obtains, Apnuvan) all

the above mentioned different functions of life, &c. The soul, in this

manner including all differences, becomes all; for only in its notion as

First Chapter. Fourth Bráhmaṇa.

87

substance it unites (obtains) the differences, produced by actions of inspiration, &c. which are the fictitious attributes of the soul. For instance it will be said: "He thinks, as it were, he proceeds; as it were." (B. Á. 4th A. 3rd B. 8th Kh. B. I. Vol. II. p. 730.) Therefore "The soul, considering this, let a man worship it;" for in this manner the whole soul is comprehended by its own notion as substance. Why is it the whole? Under this doubt it is said in the text: "For in it," "for," because, "in it," in this soul, when considered without fictitious attributes, like the different reflections of the sun in water, the above mentioned differences as life, &c. which are fictitious attributes of the soul, and bear different names from their different functions as inspiration, &c "become one," obtain indifference, therefore "the soul; considering this, let a man worship it."

The passage: "The soul; considering this, let a man worship, it is not a regulation, by which the acquirement of something not acquired before is enjoined, as it is acquired on our part; for the knowledge whose object is the soul, is produced by passages of the Sruti, intended to produce the idea of the supreme soul, for instance: "That present, perceptible Bramhâ," (B. Á. 3rd A. 4th B. 2 Kh. B. I. Vol. II. p: 575.) "Which is soul." (B. Á. 4th A. 3rd B. 1st Kh. B. I. Vol. II. p. 723.) Whose nature is knowledge, &c. (B. Á. p. 305.)

There by the knowledge of the nature of the soul is removed the ignorance, which is the misunderstanding that the non-soul is the soul, and which creates the fictions of agent, &c. rite and reward. If this ignorance is removed, the thinking of the non-soul is impossible, because desires and other faults are impossible. It remains at last only the thinking of the soul. Therefore the worship of the soul is on our part not enjoined; for it is acquired.

We will not now discuss, whether the acquirement of the worship of the soul is called proceeding from the text, or permanent, but at any rate it is regulation for something not acquired before, because, if knowledge and worship are the same, it was not acquired before, and the identity of the terms of "knowledge" and "worship," is evident from the passage of the Sruti, commencing: "He does not know," where knowledge is praised, and concluding: "The soul; considering this, let a man worship it," (B. A. p. 173), for by such passages of

Digitized by Google

88

Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.

the Sruti as : " By this he knows this all." (B. Â. p. 185), and :

" He knew the soul," &c. (B. Â. p. 198), knowledge is the same as

worship, and as it was not acquired before, it is also the object of a

rule.

Nor show people any activity, if only the nature of a thing is

related. Therefore that passage is a regulation for acquiring some-

thing not acquired before.

This follows also from its being identical with a regulation concern-

ing rites. As the regulations concerning rites enjoin by such words

as : "Let him sacrifice," "let him offer," so by similar words as :

"Let a man worship it," and : "The soul should be seen," &c.

the worship of the soul is enjoined, wherefore there appears no dif-

ference between a regulation enjoining the worship of the supreme soul

and the former regulations.

This follows also from the reason, that knowledge is an act of

the mind. As a person, by whom an oblation is taken for a deity,

should reflect on this deity in his mind, before performing a sacrifice,

which is commenced by the word : " Vashad," by which this and

other ceremonies are proved as acts of the mind, so the passage :

"Let a man worship," indicates, that the soul is to be thought of,

to be meditated upon, (B. Â. Â, 2d Â. 4th B. 5th Kh. B. I. V. II.

p. 450,) and that the act therefore refers to knowledge. In this

manner we maintained that the terms " to know" (Véda) and " to

worship" had the same meaning.

This follows also from the reason that our passage possesses the

three parts of a regulation. For instance in the regulation : " Let

him sacrifice," &c. viz. what, by what means, and how, the three parts,

by which future desires are removed, clearly appear. In the same

manner, if the regulation : "Let a man worship," is about to be fixed,

and at the same time the intention, what is to be worshipped, by what

means or how, the three parts are established by a passage like this :

" Let him who is intent on the duties of abstinence (from desires that

are forbidden) of the observances of a religious student, of tranquillity

and self-restraint, of resting (from all ceremonies), endurance, &c.

worship the soul by the mind."

And as by the enunciation of the regulation for the Dars' apûrnamâsa,

&c. the application of all its parts is established, so by the enunciation

of the three parts is established,

of the regulation for the worship of the soul is established the application of the subject of the worship of the soul as found in all the Upanishads. The application of passages as : "He is not this, he is not that. (B. A. 2d A, 3 B. 6th K. B. J. V. II. p. 435.) "Without gross body," one, without duality. (Chh. U. 6 P. 2 K. p. 387.) "He overcomes death," &c. is made by showing the speciality of the nature of the soul which is to be worshipped. And the reward is liberation or cessation from ignorance.

Others say : 'By worshipping should be produced another special knowledge whose object is the soul. By this alone the soul is known, and ignorance also removed. The knowledge, produced by the word of the Veda, has not the soul for its object. This sense is also supported by such passages as : "Having known, let him form his knowledge :" "He is to be seen, to be heard, to be thought of, to be contemplated, to be searched, to be enquired."

We do not admit the latter view, because its meaning does not differ from the former. Nor is the passage : "The soul, therefore, let him worship it," a regulation for something, not acquired before. Why ? The words, referring to the nature of the soul, have no other meaning, of any thing to be done by the mind or the external senses, beside the knowledge, produced by the prohibiting sentences with reference to the non-soul.* For there a rule has taken effect, where, beside the knowledge produced by merely hearing the words, a person is observed as engaged in its execution, as by the rule of the Dars'apúrnamása: "Let him, who is desirous of heaven, sacrifice ;" for the knowledge, produced by the words for the regulation of the Dars'apúrnamása, is not also the performance of its ceremonies. This is dependent on a perfect knowledge and the other requisites ; but here, on the other hand, beside the knowledge, produced by the passage viz. "He is not this, he is not that," establishing the idea of the soul, there arises no activity, as it does with regard to the ceremonies of the Dars'apúrnamása, &c. and this for the reason, that the knowledge, produced by that passage, causes the cessation of every activity ; for the knowledge of a person who is unconcerned in any worldly affair,

• That is to say, the sentences which declare the nature of the soul, have the same meaning as sentences, which probibit to comprehend the soul by attributes of the non-soul.

90

Brihad Āranyaka Upanishad.

does not produce activity, because such sentences as : "He is one without duality." (Chh. U. 6 Prap. 2 Kh. B. J. Vol. III. pp. 387, 389, 398.) "That art thou," (&c. pp. 448, 457, 453, 455, 461.) annihilate the knowledge relative to non-Bramha, or the non-soul. And this knowledge being annihilated, no desire for action arises; for it would be contradictory.

If it is said, 'that by the knowledge alone, produced by such sages (as established the nature of Bramha) there is no annihilation of the knowledge of a non-Bramha, or a non-soul,' we contradict, because it is proved by such passages as: "That art thou," "It is not this," "It is not that," "This is the soul," "One immortal Bramha without duality is this," "There is none who sees, &c. but him," "Know this alone as Bramha." (Kêna U. 4, B. I. Vol. VIII. p. 43.)

Nor do those passages set forth the object of a rule with reference to Bramha to be seen, &c. because this, as we already said, does not differ from the meaning first stated. And we said before, that,—because by passages, setting forth the true nature of the soul, such as: "That art thou," the knowledge of the soul was established at the time of hearing them,—no performance, different from the regulation for the object of the seeing, was necessary.*

1. If you say, 'that, without a rule, by the mere declaration of the nature of the soul, a knowledge of the soul could not arise,' we object, because the knowledge of the soul is produced by hearing passages setting forth the soul, and why do you want to do once more what has been done already ?

2. If you say, 'knowledge does not arise by hearing such sages,' we do not admit this, because we should otherwise have a retrogress in infinitum. For as (according to your opinion) by hearing the meanings of passages, declaring the soul, without a regulation, knowledge does not arise, it would follow, that also by hearing the meanings of the words of the regulation, knowledge could not arise without a regulation, and this would require another regulation.

• Where then is the regulation? If there is one, it either takes place—]. with reference to the knowledge of the soul, or 2, to the hearing of the passage, setting forth the knowledge of the soul, or 3, to the continuation of the recollection of its meaning, or 4, to the subduing of the state of the mind. But in all these cases it is impossible, as will be shown presently. A. G.

First Chapter. Fourth Bráhmana.

91

The same would take place on hearing the latter, so that a retrogress in infinitum is evident, (by your assumption.)

3. Further, if you assume, 'that by the continuation of the recollection of the knowledge of the soul, arising from Védic passages; a meaning is produced, different from the knowledge of what is merely heard, (and that therefore a regulation is necessary)' we do not agree on the ground, that the meaning has been obtained. At the time indeed that the knowledge, whose object is the soul, arises from hearing passages which produce the idea of the soul, at the same time this knowledge, at the moment of its production, annihilates the false knowledge with reference to itself. And if the false knowledge whose object is the soul, is annihilated, the natural recollections also, which are the effects of that false knowledge and which manifest the differences of a substance not the soul, cease to exist.

This follows also from the knowledge of the unreality of every other thing; for if the knowledge of the soul is true, it is also known, that every other substance is unreal, as tainted with transientness, unhappiness, impurity and many other faults; also from the fact, that the substance of the soul is free from them. Therefore, if the soul is known, there are no longer any recollections of a knowledge with reference to a non-soul. And as at last there exists in reality a continual recollection of the knowledge only of the soul, no regulation can be established.

This follows also from the annihilation of all faults, as grief, delusion, fear, weariness and other kinds of unhappiness;* for grief, delusion and other faults arise from a knowledge, contrary to that recollection, as is proved by such passages of the Sruti as: "What delusion is there." (Vajan. S. U. B. I. Vol. VII. p. 14.) "The wise is not afraid." "You have, O Janaka, obtained fearlessness." (Br. Â. p. 702.) "The bunds of the heart are broken," &c. (Mund. 2d Kh. 8th M. B. I. Vol. VII. p. 302.)

4. If you say, 'but then subduing has another meaning ; therefore there ought to be a regulation ; for the subduing of the state of the mind (Chitta) has a meaning different from the knowledge, produced by the words of the Véda. And in other philosophical systems† also

• This may also be rendered .... and other kinds of unhappiness, which is effected by that recollection ; for grief, delusion and other faults arise from a contrary knowledge.

† In the Yogasástra.

N 2

92 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

the nature of a rule is known by that which is to be done.' We deny this, because it (the subduing of the state of the mind) is not known as effecting liberation ; for in the Védánta nothing else but the knowledge of the soul as Bramha is considered as effecting the final end of man.

This follows from a hundred passages such as these: " He knows the soul alone ; hence he became this all." (B.Á. p. 209.) "The knower of Bramha obtains the supreme Bramha." (Taittiriya U. 2d. A. 1 A. 1. M. B. I. Vol. VII. p. 51.) " Whosoever verily knows the supreme Bramha, becomes Bramha." "A person who has a teacher, knows." (Chh. 6th P. 14th K. B. J. V. III. p. 459.) "To him all becomes for ever without fear." " Whosoever thus knows, becomes Bramha," &c.

Moreover the aforesaid subduing depends not upon another cause ; for beside the uninterrupted recollection of the knowledge of the soul, no other cause exists for the subduing of the state of the soul, and in this sense it has been stated before;* without a knowledge of Bramha, however, nothing can be thought as cause of liberation.

Further, there is no intention, and therefore is no regulation. What has been said before, 'that, as an intention with regard to a regulation,—for instance when it is said: "Let him sacrifice," where the three parts of a regulation, viz. what, by what means, and how, are present,—is removed by understanding the effect, cause and the necessary acts, so it is also here established with reference to the regulation for the knowledge of the soul,' we say, this is not true, because every intention is annihilated at the very time, when the meaning of passages as the following is understood: "One even without duality." "That art thou." "He is not this, he is not that." "That soul, which is not within, which is not without, is Bramha," &c.

Nor is the application of a regulation possible, in order to understand the meaning of a sentence. And we have already explained the fault of a regress in infinitum, following from the application of another rule.

Further, no rule can be understood to proceed from passages such as : "One Bramha even without duality," because it is abolished by the declaration of the nature of the soul.

And if you say, 'there is no proof that this takes place by the mere declaration of the nature of a substance. For instance as in the * Viz. that the state of the mind, beside the knowledge of the soul, has no other cause.

First Chapter. Fourth Bráhmaṇa. 93

passage : “He wept (arodit) ; because he wept, therefore Rudra (a name of fire) obtained the name of Rudra,” (Taitt. S. 5th Pr. 1st Kh.) there is no proof by the mere declaration of the nature of the substance, . so there is also no proof in passages, setting forth the nature of the soul, —we object, because there is a difference. Neither the declaration of the nature of a thing, nor the declaration of rites is the cause of the proof or non-proof of a passage of the Védas, but it is the production of knowledge, united with its necessary effect. Where such a passage is met with, it is also proved, and where not, it is not proved.

Moreover we would ask you : Do you admit, that in passages, engaged in declaring the nature of Bramha, a determined knowledge, which is at the same time united with its effect, is produced? If it is produced, why is it not proved? Do you not see the effect of the knowledge in the disappearance of the faults of ignorance, grief, delusion, fear, &c. which are the causes of the world? Or do you not hear : What delusion, what grief is there for one who knows the identity. (V. U. A. 7, p. 14.) “I know even Mantras, not the soul.” “Being such, O most venerable, I am grieved. O venerable, do teach me to overcome grief.” And of the same kind there are a hundred other passages of the Upanishads.

Is then in such passages as : “He wept,” &c. the knowledge a determined one and united with its effect, or is it not? If it is not, we may admit, that there is no proof for it. If there is no proof for it, what does it matter with reference to the passage, producing the knowledge, which is determined and united with its effect? And if there is no proof for the latter, what confidence can be placed in passages, referring to the Darsápúrṇamása and other ceremonies?

‘But are the passages, referring to the Darsápúrṇamása and other ceremonies, not proved by their producing a knowledge, causing man to act? The same is not found in passages, referring to the knowledge of the soul.’

This is true ; however, it is no fault, because we have obtained that which is the cause of proof. The cause of proof, namely, is what has before been mentioned,* and nothing else.† This, however, is

• Viz. such passages as produce a knowledge which is determined and at the same time united with its effect.

† For the cause of a proof is neither that which produces a knowledge, by which

94 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

rather a merit than a fault, because, if there is something, producing a knowledge united with its effect, which annihilates the cause of every action, it cannot be maintained, that there is no proof of the passages, producing the knowledge of the soul.

'But passages, mentioned before, such as : "Having known, let him form his knowledge," are rather destined for the cause of worship, without the knowledge of the meanings of the passages.' This we admit; but they do not refer to a rule for something not acquired before, but to what has been necessarily acquired in our text.

'How again can the worship of the soul have been acquired in the text? For it has been said, that by the annihilation of the non-soul; there remains at last the permanent continuation of the recollection of the knowledge of the soul.'* Very good. If this is the case, although perfect knowledge has been obtained, yet by the necessary effects of works which are the causes of the assumption of a body (transmigration) activity will be indispensable; for action, having gained entrance in word, thought and body, is more powerful than is the velocity of arrows, &c. when in motion. Hence the efficacy of knowledge, acquired in the course of discussion, is weak. Therefore we said before, that the uninterrupted recollection of the knowledge of the soul is to be effected by dependance upon the force of abandoning all worldly desires, of indifference to them and of the other essential causes; but it is not a regulation for something, not acquired before, because the idea of a necessity to act has not been obtained. Accordingly such passages as: "Having known let him form his knowledge," are intended to establish a rule for the uninterrupted recollection of a knowledge, which is obtained; for another meaning is impossible.

'By employing the term "considering this" (vide. p. 86.) the worship of the non-soul† (under the idea of the soul) is rather enjoined, action is produced, because otherwise no proof of passages were possible, by which something is forbidden,—nor that which produces a knowledge prohibitory of an action, because otherwise no proof of passages were possible which enjoin action,—nor that which is different from either, because, in this case, no proof were possible in accordance with the first supposition.

• That is to say, it has not been obtained from the text, but from something else, not connected with it, viz. the annihilation of the idea of the non-soul.

† This is an objection in the view of the Sánkhyas viz. the non-soul is the

Digitized by Google

First Chapter. Fourth Brāhmana.

as if it were said: "the dear, considering this worship it." Here is not the quality of "dear" to be worshipped, but the worship of life, &c. which has the quality of "dear," &c. is here enjoined. In the same manner it must also be understood in the passage under consideration, that by employing the term "the supreme soul," the substance of the non-soul, determined by the qualities of the soul, is to be worshipped. This is also clear from the difference of that passage from any other, where the worship of the soul is enjoined. Thus for instance it will afterwards be said: "Worship the soul as the place of dependance." In this sentence the worship of the soul is evidently intended by using the accusative case. In the sentence under consideration, however, the accusative is not employed, and there "the soul, considering this worship" the term "soul" means something different. Therefore it is evident, that not the worship of the soul is enjoined, but of something else possessed of the qualities of the soul.'

We deny this, for as at the end of the passage the idea of the worship of the soul is understood; it is also understood, that the soul alone is to be worshipped, viz. "This, even this is to be conceived in this all, viz. this soul," "Because this soul is more internal," "He knew the soul."

If you say 'that there does not arise the notion of the worship (of the soul) as the beholding is prohibited for him who entered; for which soul is said to enter, for the same the beholding is forbidden, as it is evident from the passage, obtained in the text, viz. "They do not behold him," (p. 85.) Accordingly the soul is no object of worship.'

We deny this, for the beholding is merely prohibited, in consequence of the fault of non-totality, with the intention to guard against the fault of non-totality, not with the intention to guard against the worship of the soul, because the soul is determined in that passage by the differences of inspiration and other actions.

And if you say, 'that the worship of the soul was not intended,' the consequence were, that the passage, referring to the non-totality of the soul, which is determined by individual functions, as inspiration, &c.

Pradhána (the chief) or Múla Prakriti (nature as the root of all things) which, according to the passage, would obtain the attributes of the soul, or the non-soul is to be thought of under the attributes of the soul.

96

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

This, even this is to be conceived in this all, viz. This soul; for by this, one knows this all. As verily by a foot-print one

would be without use, viz. "for that soul is incomplete ; it is determined only by this or the other individual function," (vide p. 86.) Hence it is proved, that the soul, possessed of many functions, on account of its totality, is an object of worship. The final application, however, of the term "soul" after the term "considering this," is in truth only to show that the real notion of the soul is no object whatever of the inflective base of the word atman (soul) and its inflectional terminations, (that is to say, the supreme soul cannot be described by any words,) otherwise the accusative case would have been used : "Let him worship the soul." If this were the meaning, (that is, if, without the formula "considering this" the word ātmá should be applied) then the inflective base and one of its terminations would be applied to the soul. But this is not admitted, as is clear from such passages of the Sruti as : "It is not this, it is not that," "How should one know him who knows," "Unknown is he who knows." (B. A. p. 473.) "From whom words and the mind return, without having obtained him." (Taitt. U. 2d A. 9 A. B. J. Vol. VII. p. 119.) The passage, however : "Let him worship the soul as the place," is not a different word, because it is designed to remove the worship of the non-soul.

If it is said : "Both the soul and non-soul are to be known, as they have the common notion of not being perfectly known. Why then is here made an effort to worship the soul alone, as it is said : "The soul, considering this let one worship it," and not also an effort with regard to the other knowledge ? The answer to this is : "This, even this," which is obtained in the text, "is to be conceived," to be comprehended, nothing else, "in this all" (the sixth case in Sanscrit, "Asya Sarvvasya," is, for the sake of determination, used for the seventh, "Asmin Sarvvasmin," "this soul," the nature of the soul. Shall this not be known? If so, why not also what is different ? Because, when known, another knowledge is not required, different from the knowledge of the soul. Why ? "for," because, "by this," knowledge of the soul, "one knows this all," all this other which is non-soul.

If the objection is made, 'by another knowledge is not known another

First Chapter. Fourth Brāhmana.

97

finds cattle, so a person who thus knows, finds fame and com-

pleteness. 7.

thing,' we shall refute it afterwards by the passage, referring to the

drum, &c. (B. K. U. p. 452.)

How again is this to be conceived? The answer is : "As verily,"

in common life, "by a foot-print" (a foot-print is called a place marked

by the hoof of a cow, &c.) "one" who makes a search by means of a

foot-print, "finds," recovers, cattle that have been lost, and whose

recovery is desired, thus, when the soul is obtained, all is obtained.

'If the soul is known, all other is known, and knowledge, we may

admit, is obtained in the text. But then how can it be called obtain-

ing, a term which is not authorized by the text?' This is not the case,

because the terms of "knowledge" and of "obtaining" have one and

the same meaning according to the intention of the speaker; for the

non-obtaining of the soul is even ignorance. Therefore is knowledge

the obtaining of the soul, and the obtaining of the soul is not,—like the

obtaining of anything which is not the soul,—to be comprehended by

the notion of an acquiring of what was not acquired before, because

there is no difference (here) between the obtainer and what is to be

obtained; for where the non-soul is to be obtained by the soul, there

is the soul the obtainer, and the non-soul what is to be obtained. This

non-soul) is not acquired, as concealed by the action of producing, &c.

and is to be obtained when producing a special action by the produc-

tion of a special agent; but it falls under the notion of an acquirement

of something not acquired before, and is transient, because it is the

effect of an action in accordance with a desire, prodnced by false

knowledge, as the obtaining of a son in a dream. But the soul, which

is contrary to the former (non-soul), is by its nature as soul not conceal-

ed by the actions of production, &c. Therefore, as there exists the

nature of something eternally obtained, is ignorance only concealment.

As the non-apprehension of mother-of-pearl, although apprehended,*

which appears through error as silver, is merely a concealment of the

opposite knowledge, so is apprehension even mere knowledge, because

knowledge has destroyed the concealment by the opposite knowledge.

Thus in this case also is the non-obtaining of the soul the concealment

• According to its nature, adds K.

Digitized by Google

98

Brihad Āranyaka Upanishad.

This is dearer than a son, dearer than wealth, dearer than any other thing, dearer than all, because this soul is more internal. Whosoever says to one, saying any thing else to be dearer

of it merely by ignorance. Therefore by knowledge must be understood an obtaining, which annihilates ignorance merely, and no other obtaining. Therefore we shall say afterwards, that in respect of the obtaining of the soul, any cause, which has any meaning different from knowledge, is useless. Therefore the text, without any doubt, intending to set forth the identity of the terms of "knowledge" and "obtaining," after having mentioned knowledge in the text, says : "One finds" (as Vindati, " to find," has the meaning of Labha "obtaining," this is stated as the effect from the knowledge of the qualities.)

As that soul, by entering with name and form, acquired fame, viz. with the names and forms of the soul, &c., and as it obtained completeness (Sloka) that is to say the totality of life and other actions, so a person who thus knows, "finds," obtains, "fame," (kírti) celebrity, and "completeness" (Sloka) a multitude of followers, together with his friends.

Or the passage may also thus be understood. A person who knows the substance in the declared manner, obtains the knowledge of identity (which is understood by the term "kírti,") desired by those who strive for liberation, and the fruit of that knowledge (which is understood by the term Sloka) liberation, that is to say, the principal fruit. 7.

And why then is the nature of the soul to be known without regard to other things ? The answer is : "This," the nature of the soul, "is dearer," more beloved, "than a son ;" for a son is generally known as dear. By saying, that it is more beloved even than this, it is shown, how exceedingly dear it is. In the same manner it is dearer than "wealth," gold, jewels, &c , in the same manner "dearer than any other thing," which is generally known as dear, that is to say, therefore dearer than all.

Why then is the nature of the soul more beloved, why not rather life &c. ? The answer is : The totality of life is more internal, is nearer the soul than what is external, a son, wealth, &c., "because this soul," this nature of the soul, "is more internal" than what is more internal. For a person who in common life is exceedingly dear, must be obtained

Digitized by Google

First Chapter. Fourth Bráhmana.

99

than the soul : " What is dear, is to perish," he is the lord, therefore verily it should be so. A person should worship as dear even the soul. Whosoever worships as dear the soul, to him is not dear a perishable object. 8.

by every effort. In this manner is the soul the dearest of all that is dear in common life, that is to say, great efforts should be made to obtain it. Why again, discarding an effort, considered as a duty, with regard to the obtaining of other dear objects, shall,—by the abandonment of either of the dear objects, the soul and non-soul,—with reference to the obtaining of the production of one, the abandonment of the other rather be made by the obtaining of the production of the soul,—why not the contrary ?

In reply to this it is said : " Whosoever (viz. a person who holds that the soul is the dearest object) says to one saying any thing else," some particular non-soul, for instance a son, &c., ' to be more beloved than the soul,' what? ' "What is dear," in thy opinion, a son or the like, " is to perish" (rotshyati) is to obtain concealment, or ceasing of life (Pránasanrodham) that is, " is to be destroyed." On what ground can he say so ? Because " he is the lord," because he is able, fit to say so, therefore it should be so, that he obtains the ceasing of life, as has been said by him ; for he is a speaker of truth ; therefore he is the lord to say every thing. Some understand by the term " Íswara (which has before been explained by able, and whose original meaning is ruler, lord) " quick." If it is accomplished, then, abandoning every other dear object, a person should worship as dear only the soul. " Whosoever worships as dear even the soul, to him, it is considered, is the soul alone dear, and no other object. Having come to the certainty, that any other worldly object which is dear, is even in reality not dear, he worships, he meditates ; " to him," who thus knows, " is not dear a perishable object," an object whose nature is subject to death. This sentence (let him worship as dear even the soul) is either only a repetition of what is certain (of the sentence by which the knowledge of the soul is produced) because for one who knows the soul, nothing is dear or not dear, or it is said for the praise of the knowledge, that the soul is dear, or for the determination of the fruit of the attribute of " dear,"

o 2

100

Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.

This they declare to be the knowledge of Bramha by which men think, we shall become all. What then knew that Bramha, by which he became all ? 9.

because it is producing faith in the perishable nature of all dear objects in the mind of one whose knowledge of the soul is of a sluggish kind. 8.

The knowledge of Bramha has been declared in the aphorism : "The soul, considering this, let a man worship it." Wishing to explain this very aphorism, for which the whole Upanishad has been composed, the text exemplifies it under the desire of setting forth its necessity (end.)

"This," viz. the thing to be set forth, to be manifested in the next sentence, "they declare" they, viz. the Bráhmaṇas, those who are desirous to know Bramha, having repaired to the Guru (spiritual teacher) the vessel over the future shoreless ocean of the pain of exertion, caused by the uninterrupted revolution of the wheel of birth, old age and death, who are desirous of crossing over to its shore, who are separated from the nature of cause and effect, viz. the cause of virtue and vice and its consequences, and who are desirous of obtaining the eternal incomparable good, free from those causes.

What do they declare? The answer is : "the knowledge of Bramha;" Bramha means the supreme soul; the knowledge, by which this is comprehended, is the knowledge of Bramha, " men, think, we shall become all" the totality. The term "man," is used for the purpose to indicate the special subject of this knowledge;* for men alone are the subjects of effecting in a special manner either a state of elevation† or of liberation. This is the intention of the text. As with regard to works they think, that fruits will necessarily follow from works, so they think, that from the knowledge of Bramha the fruit, which is the state of universal identity, will necessarily follow ; for as to their being proved by the Véda, there is no difference between them (the works and Bramha.)

There‡ is something§ contradictory indicated. Therefore we ask : "What then knew that Bramha," by whose knowledge men think,

• In the text is adhikára, which means "possession," "competent knowledge."

I translated adhikari, as conveying the idea more exactly.

† In the scale of existence, viz. the state of happiness in the different worlds.

‡ In assigning to man the notion of subject.

§ Something means here the effect from knowledge. A. G.

First Chapter. Fourth Brāmhana.

101

Bramha verily was this before; therefore he knew even the soul, (himself.)

we shall become all? What knew that, "by which," knowledge, he became this all, and Bramba is all according to the Śruti.

If he, (Bramha) not entirely knowing any thing, became all, then it (all) may also belong to others, and of what use would then be the knowledge of Bramba? If knowing something it became all, then, as it is effected by knowledge, all (the effect from knowledge) is like the effect from work, and therefore the notion of transientness is in fact applied.

Moreover, the effect from a knowledge of Bramha, which (effect) is the state of the nature of all, has the fault of a regress into infinitum, namely knowing something else than this, he became all, and further knowing something else, &c. &c.

However, if knowing all, it became all, there is not the fault of a contradiction of the meaning of the Śāstra, and therefore not the fault of a transientness of the effect. If, knowing something only, this Bramha became all, we ask : "What then knew that Bramha, by which he became all ?" 9.

Having thus said, the text gives an answer, untouched by any blemish : "Bramha," 'viz. the inferior Bramba, because it is obtained under the notion of a ' cause of the nature of all ; for it is impossible to obtain by knowledge the nature of all with regard to the supreme Bramba, and the text speaks of an obtaining of the nature of all by means of knowledge, in the words : "Therefore this became all."

Therefore the words : "Bramha verily was this before," cannot mean any thing else but the inferior Bramha.'

Or : 'By making man the subject of the knowledge, a Brāhmaṇa who is to become this Bramha, may be designated. For in the passage : "Men think, we shall become all,"* men are obtained in the text, and it is said, that they are in a special manner the subjects to effect elevation or liberation; this is not said either of the supreme Bramha, or of the inferior Prajāpati.

Therefore, on account of his knowledge of Bramba, is here designated a Bramba (Brāhmaṇa), who is to become a supreme Bramha, who by the knowledge of the inferior

• Here the opinion of the Vrttikrits is given, which is the view of the Bhartripancha Bhāshya, viz. because the nature of all is obtained under the notion of something to be accomplished (of an effect, viz. from knowledge) it is impossible, that the supreme Bramha should have obtained the nature of all by knowledge.

Digitized by Google

102 Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.

Bramha, viz. the knowledge, that duality is identity, a knowledge which is connected with works, has obtained the state of an inferior Bramha, who has renounced all enjoyment, and who by obtaining all, has broken the bonds of desire and work. It appears also in common life, that a term is applied with reference to its future state, for instance in the sentence : 'He cooks the boiled rice; (Odana means rice which is boiled,) and also in the Sástra, for instance: 'Let a Paribrájaka (a person who has already obtained a state, entirely devoted to the contemplation of God) give to all beings the blessing of fearlessness.' In this manner some explain a Brámhaṇa as a person who is to become Bramha.'

This is not right, because, if the nature of all is obtained, the fault of transientness is committed ; for it is impossible, that in this world any person should in reality obtain by any cause another state, and at the same time be eternal. In the same manner, if by means of the knowledge of Bramha the nature of all should be obtained, and this state be at the same time eternal, there is a contradiction. If on the other hand, it (viz. the nature of all) is considered as non-eternal, the before mentioned fault takes place, viz. that there is a resemblance with the effects from works. But if you think, ' that the abolition of the nature of non-totality (individual existence) which (nature of non-totality) is the effect of ignorance, and the obtaining of the nature of all, is the effect of a knowledge of Bramha,' then the fiction of a person who is to become Bramha, is useless. But if you think, that even before the knowledge of Bramha every creature by its possessing the nature of Bramha, has eternally obtained the nature of all, that the state of non-Bramha and of non-totality is superimposed in reality by ignorance and that, as silver is superimposed on mother-of-pearl, or as any special place (Atala means, literally, a division of the infernal regions) of standing or unclearness on the sky, so are also here the notions of non-Bramha and of non-totality superimposed by ignorance and removed by the knowledge of Bramha ; if you think thus, then it is right to say, that in reality the supreme Bramha was, because in the passage : ' Bramha verily was this before,' the literal meaning of the term 'Bramha,' is supreme Bramha ; for the Véda declares a meaning, as it in reality is ; but the fiction, according to which a person who is to become Bramha, is called Bramha, at variance with the meaning of the term 'Bramha,' is not

First Chapter. Fourth Bráhmana. 103

right, because a hypothesis, by which the meaning of the Sruti is lost, and a fiction is made of something, not acquired in the Sruti, is inadmissible, unless there be some strong necessity.

If you say, 'that, without being produced by ignorance, there may exist the nature of non-Bramha and non-totality,' we object, because it is impossible, that in this case they could be removed by the knowledge of Bramha ; for it is never observed, that knowledge either destroys or creates the attributes of any actual thing, but it is everywhere observed as the destroyer of ignorance. In the same manner let also in our case the knowledge of Bramha remove the nature of non-Bramha and non-totality, as the productions of ignorance; but the knowledge of Bramha is never able to create or destroy any real thing. Therefore the hypothesis, by which the meaning of the Sruti is lost, and a fiction is made of something, not found in the Sruti, is even without use.

If you say, 'that ignorance with regard to Bramha is impossible,' we do not agree, because knowledge is enjoined with regard to Bramha; for if mother of pearl has become an object of the eye, then its nature is never known by such a sentence : This is mother-of-pearl and not silver, unless there is a superimposition of (the notion of) silver upon it. In the same manner, from such passages as : 'This all alone existing,' 'This all alone Bramha,' 'This all merely the soul,' 'This is not duality, non-Bramha,' the knowledge of identity with reference to Bramha could never be enjoined, unless there is a superimposition of ignorance upon Bramha. We do not say (like you), as there is a superimposition with regard to mother-of-pearl, so there is not a superimposition of the nature of non-Bramha (atad.) What then ? Bramha is not the cause of the superimposition of the nature of non-Bramha upon his own self, and is not the producer of ignorance.

We admit, that Bramha is not producer of ignorance nor deluded ; but do not admit, that there is another deluded conscious being (beside Bramha) which could be the producer of the ignorance of non-Bramha. This is evident from such passages of the Sruti as : 'There is no other knower than him.' 'There is nothing else which knows but him.' 'That art thou.' (Ch. U. p. 448.) 'He knew the soul.' (B. U. 184.) 'I am the soul.' (B. A. p. 205.) 'Another is he, another am I.' 'He does not know.' And also from such passages of the Smriti

104

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

as : " Whosoever beholds God as the same in all beings," etc. (Bhag. Gít. 13 Adh. 27th Sl.). " I am the soul, O Guḍakés'a, dwelling in the heart of all beings." (B. G. 10th Adh. 20th Sl.) " The wise see the same.... in the dog and the man who lives upon dog's-meat." (Bh. G. 5th Adh. 18th Sl.) And from such Mantras as : " Who beholds all beings in the soul," and " In whom all beings are like the soul." (Váj. S. U. M 6 and 7 B. i. Vol. VII. p. 13.)

' But if this is the case, then is the advice of the S'ástra without any use ?' Well, this may in this manner be admitted, if Bramha is known ; but if you say, ' also the knowledge is useless, we object,* because the cessation of non-understanding is visible.' If it is said : ' That cessation is even impossible, because there is identity,' we object, because this is contradictory to what is visible ; for it is ' visible, that there is a cessation from non-understanding by the knowledge of identity.

If any one says, ' that even, when seen, it is impossible,' it is contradictory to what is visible ; and a contradiction to what is visible, is by no body admitted.

Nor, when visible, is any thing in reality impossible, because it is even seen.

If it is said, ' that the seeing is impossible,' the same argument holds good.

If it is said : " From such passages of the Sruti, as the following : " He becomes holy by holy work." (B. A. p. 546.) " Knowledge and work entered him." " The Purusha is the comprehender, agent, the knowing soul," it is evident, that there is another mundane soul, different from the supreme soul. And this different soul is the supreme Bramha, which follows from such passages of the Sruti as : " He is not this, he is not that." (B. A. p. 435.) " The soul liberated from sin, without old age, without death." " The ruler of this universe." (B. A. p. 628.)

Also in the Sástras of Kaṇáda, Akshapáda† and others, God (Íswara) is proved as different from the mundane soul ; for through the desire to remove the unhappiness, arising from the world, activity is perceived

• The cessation of non-knowledge is either different from Bramba, and then there non-duality is lost, or it is not different, and then it cannot be comprehended under the idea of knowledge.

† A name of Goutama, the founder of the Nyáya.

First Chapter. Fourth Brāmhana. 105

I am verily Bramba. Therefore he became all.

with the embodied soul (and not with God), and hence the difference between God and mundane soul is clear.

And the Sruti and Smriti declare: "He, without speech, without honour :" "There is nothing, O Partha, to be done by me in the three worlds." (B. G. 3d A. 22.) "He is to be searched, to be enquired into." (Ch. U. p. 571.) "A person, knowing him, is not contaminated." (B. A. B. I. Vol. II. p. 913.) "Whosoever knows Bramba, obtains the supreme Bramba." (T. U. 2d A 1st An. 1st M.)

"He (Bramba) is to be contemplated in a uniform manner." (B. A. 6th Adh. 4th Br. 20. B. I. Vol. II. p. 889.) "Knowing that which is indestructible, O Gargi." (B. A. 5th Ad. 8th B. 10. B. I. Vol. II. p. 636.) "The firm, knowing him." (B. A. p. 829.) "The great word (the letters A. U. M. being joined) is like a bow, and the soul like the arrow ; and Bramba (what) is aimed at by it." (2d Mund. U. 4th M. B. I. p. vol. vii. p. 228.) In all these passages there is a declaration of agent and action.

This is also evident from the declaration, that the roads to elevation are different from the road of him who strives after liberation. If there were no difference, to what place could there be proceeded by any one? And if there were not, a difference of the northern and southern roads and of the places to be proceeded to, would be impossible ; but if the mundane soul is different from the supreme, all this is possible.

This follows also from the declaration with reference to the causes of knowledge and work. If the mundane soul is different from Bramba, the declaration addressed to the former about work and knowledge, as being the causes either of elevation or liberation, is consistent, but it is not with reference to God, because all desires are obtained by him.'

If it is therefore (on all those grounds) said, 'It is proper, that the term "Bramba" means a person who is to become Bramba,' we object, because the application of the declaration with regard to Bramba would be useless ; for if the mundane soul,—which is not Bramba, but is to become Bramba, on the strength of the passage : "knowing the soul, I am verily Bramba,"—should become all, the advice with regard to Bramba, would be undoubtedly useless, because the effect, which is the state of the nature of all, would be accomplished by the knowledge

106

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

of the soul, which is to be acomplished ;* because that knowledge, (viz.

the knowledge of the regulation concerning work) could never be ap-

plied to the accomplishment of the last aim of man.

If it is said, ' that the declaration with regard to Bramha, in the pas-

sage : " I am Bramha," is for the sake of transforming the mundane

soul to the nature of Bramha,' we object ; fur, if the nature of Bramha

is not perfectly known, what can the passage, " I am Bramha" trans-

form ? If his nature is known, a transformation is possible.. By pas-

sages in our text such as : " That soul is verily Bramha." (B. A. 6th

Adh. 4th Br. 5. B. I. Vol. II. p. 849.) " That present perceptible

Bramha." (B. A. 5th Ad. 4th Br. 1. B. I. Vol. II. p. 575.) " Which

soul." (B. A. p. 575.) " This is true." " This soul." " He who

knows Bramha, obtains the supreme," (T.U. 2nd A. 1st A. 1st M.)

and by such a conclusion as : " From this very soul," the terms

" Bramha" and " soul" are more than a thousand times placed on

the same ground, and therefore it is evident, that they have the same

meaning ; for transformation of another takes place to the nature of

another, and not to identity.

And the passage : " Because this all is that soul," proves the iden-

tity of the soul, which has been set forth in the text, and which is to

be seen afterwards. Therefore, it is impossible, that the soul cuold be

transformed to the nature of Bramha.

It is also impossible to conceive with regard to Bramha any other

effect, because in such passages as : " He who knows Bramha, becomes

Bramha," the obtaining of Bramha only is declared.

' If the transformation is the obtaining of Bramha,' we object ; for

another state of another is impossible.

If it is said, ' that, according to the word of the S'ruti the obtaining

of the state of Bramha, even implies transformation,' we object, because

transformation is only a notion (not something real), and we said, that

knowledge had no other agency but to destroy a false knowledge ; a

word has no power to produce any thing, for the Sástra teaches, but

does not oreate ; this is evident.

• If it is said, that the advice with reference to Bramha is useful, under the

condition, that it is the object of a regulation, we ask, whether it is a regulation

regarding work, or regarding worship ? Either assump-tion is contradictory.

First Chapter. Fourth Brāmhana.

107

From such passages as : "He entered this world ;" (B. A. p. 77.) it is certain, that it is the supreme Bramba who entered ; therefore it is not right to explain the term "Bramha" by a person who is to become Bramba.

This is also evident on the ground, that the meaning, which you wish to establish, is an obstacle to the admitted meaning ; for the knowledge that, like a lump of rock-salt, Bramha is of the same taste (substance) without difference without or within,—which is the meaning intended to be expressed in all Upanishads, is clearly established at the end of two Kánḍas (of this Upanishad, viz. the Madhu Kánda and Muni Kánda) viz. "This is the declaration" (p. 503) and : "So far extends this cause of immortality." (B. A. B. I. Vol. II. p. 930.)

In the same manner is the knowledge of the identity of Bramha the certain meaning of the Upanishads of all the Sákhas.

If by the passage : "He knew even the soul," (p. 101.) a mundane soul, different from Bramba, is assumed, it would be an obstacle to the admitted meaning. If it were so, then, by the contradiction of the commencement and of the conclusion of this Sastra, an inconsistency would be assumed.

Also the declaration would be impossible ; for if by the passage : "He knew even the soul," a mundane soul were assumed, there could not be a declaration of the knowledge of Bramha, because then the passage : "He knew even the sou ," would refer to the knowledge of the mundane soul alone.

If it is said, 'that the term "soul' means something different from the knower,' we object, because it is the predicate of I, in the passage : "I am verily Brambs," and if any thing else were the object of knowledge, it would have been determined : "This is that," but not : "I am." As in the passage : "I am verily Bramha," Bramha is the predicate, and as it is determined in the passage : "He knew even the soul," it is distinctly understood, that the soul alone is Bramha. If this is the case, the declaration of the knowledge of Bramha is possible, not otherwise ; for the knowledge would be otherwise.

Nor is the knowledge of Bramha possible, if the nature of Bramba and non-Bramha were to belong to one subject, because there would * For instance the road which leads upwards through the fire, that is to say through sacrifices etc. A'. G.

P 2

108 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

be in reality a contradiction, as darkness is contradictory at the manifestation of the sun.

Nor, if both (Bramha and non-Bramha) were the objects of knowledge, would the definite declaration of a knowledge of Bramha be proper, because in this case there should be a knowledge of Bramha and of the mundane soul.

Nor is it proper to assume a substance with contradictory attributes; for in this case, the knowledge of the truth being declared, doubt would arise in the mind of the hearer, and a definite knowledge is required to accomplish the last end of man. From the following passages of the Śruti and Smriti : “Of whom there is even no doubt,” “A person who doubts perishes,” it is evident, that whosoever is desirous of the welfare of others, must not say the meaning of a sentence which is doubtful.

If it is maintained, ‘that in (your explanation of) the passage : “He knew even the soul ; therefore he became all,” the not very skilful assumption is made of Bramha being, like us and similar beings, an agent’ (viz. as the subject of knowledge) we protest, because this notion is conceived in the Sástra ; for it is not our assumption, but that of the Sástra ; therefore the Sástra is to be blamed (which you would probably not do.) And by him, who is anxious about his welfare, must not be given up the literal meaning of Bramha by an assumption at variance with the meaning of the Sástra.

An obstinacy on your part which goes so far, is also not proper ; for all difference with regard to Bramha is only a fiction, and must be considered under the notion of identity, as follows from a hundred passages, such as : “Here is nothing different ;” “for where there is duality, as it were ;” “one alone without duality.” Every action of man in fact with regard to Bramha is a fiction, wherefore it is said very little, that this assumption is not skilful.

Therefore (in the passage: Bramha verily was this before) “Bramha” means the Bramha who entered, who is the creator. The term “verily” is used for the sake of determination. “This,” all that is perceived as embodied (in the shape of a body) “Before.” Previously even to apprehension (awakening) was Bramha alone, and all this ; but from the moment of the apprehension there is the opinion,—“I am non-Bramha,” I am not all,—the effect of superimposition ; hence the

superimposition: "I am agent, I am performer of ceremonies, I am the mundane soul, the enjoyer of fruits, happy, unhappy, &c. but in reality there is Brâmha alone, and this all which is separate from him. "He" (tat), who has in any manner been made known by a merciful teacher in the sentence: "Thou art not the mundane soul,"—"knew even the soul," in its own nature, and the term "even" means the soul, free from any differences, superimposed by ignorance.

'Say then, wh i the soul in its own nature which Brâmha knew as the soul?' Do you not recollect the soul? for it has been declared thus: "He, who having entered this world, inspires, causes to descend, diffuses, expires and equalises ?"

'But then you declare him in the same manner, as if you say: "This is a cow," "this is a horse ;" you do not show him directly.'

Well then, the soul is the beholder, the hearer, the thinker, the knower.

'But then, here also you do not show directly the nature of the agent of the actions of seeing, hearing, &c. ; for the action of going is not the nature of the goer, nor the action of cutting the nature of the cutter.'

Then let us say, the soul is the beholder of the beholding, the hearer of the hearing, the thinker of the thinking, the knower of the knowing.

'But how differs this from the mere beholder ? Whether there is a beholder of the beholding, or the beholder of a jar, there is in every instance a beholder alone ; but whether it is a beholder of the beholding, or a beholder of a jar, there is no difference ; for it is even a beholder.'

There is a difference. The beholder of the beholding, if there is a beholding, constantly sees the beholding; the beholding is at no time not seen by the beholder ; therefore the beholding belongs permanently to the beholder. If the beholding of the beholder is transient, then the beholding, which is to be seen, does at some or the other time not behold, as for instance, where a jar and the like is seen by a transient beholding. Moreover, the beholder of that beholding sees never the beholding.

'But then, there are two beholdings of the beholder, one, the permanent, which is invisible, and the other a transient one, which is visible.'

Be it so. On the one hand, the transient beholding of the beholder is evident from the appearance of blindness and non-blindness ; for if this beholding were constant, no one would be blind. The permanent beholding of the beholder, on the other hand, is evident from the

110 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

passage of the Sruti: “For there is no variance between the beholder and the beholding.” (B. A. B. I. Vol. II. p. 803) It follows also from inference ; for it is observed, that in a dream, there is a beholding of the blind, by which a jar for instance is an object of manifestation. This beholding of the beholder then is not destroyed by the destruction of the other beholding. By this unperishable permanent beholding, which is identical with itself, which is called self-manifesting light, seeing the other transient beholding, which remains in a dream, and which among the two beholdings resembles the knowledge of an impression, the beholder is the beholder of the beholding. If this is the case, the beholding is even his nature, like the heat of the fire, and there is not another conscious beholder, as is the opinion of the followers of Kanāda. “This,” Bramha, “knew even the soul,” viz. the soul, like the permanent beholding, and free from the transient beholding, superimposed by ignorance.

But then the knowledge of the knower is prohibited, as follows from the passage of the Sruti : “Thou dost not know the knower.” We say, No ; for there is no prohibition of knowledge. In the same manner must be understood the beholder of the beholding. This follows also from its independence of another knowledge ; for, if it is known, that the beholding of the beholder is permanent, no other beholding, of which the beholder is the object, is expected ; for it ceases the desire of a beholding, which is the object of the beholder, as this is improbable ; for no one has a desire, if there is no object (of the desire.) Nor has the visible beholding the power to make the beholder its object, so that one could desire it. Nor is there any desire of any one whose object is one’s own nature. Accordingly, by the passage : “He knew even the soul,” it is said, that there is a cessation from ignorance, but not, that the soul is made an object.

How did he know? The answer of the text is : “I” the beholder of the beholding, the soul, “ am verily Bramhā,” and “Bramhā” means the present, perceptible soul, which is within all, has overcome hunger, &c., which is not this, which is not that, and has therefore the characteristics, not to be of gross body, not to be an atom, &c. This alone am I, not another mundane soul, as you said. Therefore from a knowledge of such a kind “he” Bramhā “became all.” From the disappearing of the superimposition of non-Bramhā by the cessa-

First Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa.

111

Whosoever among the gods comprehended it, he alone became it; thus whosoever among the Rishis, whosoever among men.

Knowing that this is that, the Rishi Vāmadéva verily obtained these Mantras : I became Manu, I became the Sun.

Whosoever comprehended the effect of it (the superimposition of non-Bramha) he became all. Therefore it is alone proper to say, "men think, that by the knowledge of Bramha we shall become all." What has been asked before : "What then knew that Bramha, from which he became all," is now defined, viz. "Bramha in truth was this before, he knew even the soul, therefore he became this all."

In respect of this "whosoever among the gods comprehended" the soul, in the manner explained (viz. according to its true notion) "he alone," the enlightened soul "became it" Bramha ; "thus whosoever among the Rishis, thus whosoever among men" (comprehended the soul, became this all.)

By the terms "among the gods," &c. a reference is made to the different worlds, and therefore the knowledge of Bramha is not mentioned thereby, but we declared, that by the passage : "Bramha (Purusha) entered before," Bramha everywhere entered within. Therefore the terms "among the gods" are used with reference to the knowledge of the different worlds, which is produced by the superimposition of body, &c. In reality, however, was Bramha here and there before, viz. before comprehension, in the bodies of the gods, &c.; otherwise he would be an object of investigation.

The meaning of the passages : "He knew even the soul," and also "he became all" is, that the fruit of this knowledge of Bramha is the obtaining of the nature of all. To establish this meaning firmly, the Sruti quotes some Mantras. How ? "Knowing, that this" Bramha, "is that," the soul : "I am Bramha," from this knowledge of Bramha alone "the Rishi Vāmadéva," by name, verily "obtained" these Mantras. He, firmly established in the knowledge of the nature of Bramha, saw these Mantras : "I became Manu, I became the sun," &c.

By the words : "Knowing that this is that," Bramha, the knowledge of Bramha is shown ; by the words : "I became Manu, I became the sun," &c., the text shows, that the fruit of the knowledge of Bramha is the obtaining of the state of all. Knowing, he obtained the fruit,

Digitized by Google

112

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

ever knows this Bramha also in this time in the said manner :

"I am Bramba," even the gods verily are not able to prevent

him from its possession. (The possession of the state of all.)

the state of the nature of all ; thus by this declaration the text makes

known the liberation, which is effected by means of the knowledge of

Bramha, as he who eats gets satisfied.

Some one may have the impression : 'The obtaining of the state

of all by the knowledge of Bramha was possible for the great gods by

their extraordinary power, but not at present for beings of the present

Yuga, especially not for men, because they have only little power.' To

remove this objection, the text says : "Whosoever," free from external

desires, "knows this" Bramha,—set forth in the text, as having entered

all beings and possessed of the characteristics of knowledge, action, &c.

"also in this," the present, "time," whosoever knows this as the soul

alone in the said manner : I am Bramha, who, having discarded all

differences, superimposed on knowledge by delusions, produced by fic-

titious attributes (upadhi), knows : I am only Bramha, not affected by

any worldly characteristics, who is not within, who is not without,—he,

from the cessation of the state of non-totality, becomes this all by the

knowledge of Bramha. There is no difference with regard to Bramha

or to the knowledge of him among persons of great power, such as

Vámadéva, and persons of little power, such as the present men. But

there is a doubt, whether the present men are adequate to obtain the

fruit of the knowledge of Bramha. To remove this, the text says :

"Even the gods," of extraordinary power "are not able to prevent

him," who knows Bramha in the said manner, "from its possession,"

from obtaining the state of all like Bramha. How then others ?

But

there is no doubt, that the gods and the like are able to create obstacles

to obtaining the fruit of the knowledge of Bramha, as it is said :

"The mortals are in the condition of debtors towards the gods ;"

for the Sruti shows, that man, even when born, is indebted to the Rishis

by the duties of a religious student, to the gods by sacrifices, and to

the forefathers by his offspring. This follows from the declaration,

that men are like beasts to the gods, and also from the passage :

"Then he or the soul is the place of all beings."

From this argument : that the gods from the desire to preserve the

state of the soul, create obstacles to men, subject to another's will,

First Chapter. Fourth Brāhmana.

113

like debtors, to obtain the state of immortality,—arises that apprehension. The gods preserve their beasts like their bodies; for the text shows afterwards, that the maintenance of gods, etc. which depends upon work, becomes greater, because each single man is worth many beasts; for it will be said: “Therefore it is not pleasant to them, that men should know this.” (p. 119.) “As one for his own body verily wishes welfare, so also wish all beings welfare for one who knows thus.” (B. A. p. 255.) If a man has the knowledge of Bramha, then, with the ceasing of dependance, there exists no longer the nature of one’s own body and of a dependance like cattle; this is the intended meaning, as is evident from the two passages about “the not being pleasant,” and the “welfare.” Therefore the gods raise even to the knower of Bramha, obstacles to obtaining the fruit from the knowledge of Bramha; for they are powerful.

‘But then, if this is the case, the gods raise obstacles also to obtaining other effects of works, like the drinking of what is drinkable. Alas then, there is an end of the faith, that practice (of ceremonies and knowledge) is the cause of elevation and liberation. In the same manner, on account of his inconceivable power, God is able to raise obstacles, in the same manner, time, action, charms, drugs and penances; for that they are causes of obtaining or not obtaining the fruit, is evident from the S’ástra and common belief; hence there is no faith in any practice in accordance with the S’ástras.’

We reply to this, No; for all things are produced by their necessary causes, and the world shows a variety (of happiness and unhappiness,) both of which is impossible under the supposition, that all arises from its own nature. But when the supposition, that (ceremonial) work is the cause of (the enjoyment of) happiness and unhappiness and of other consequences, is firmly established and confirmed by the statements of the Véda, Smriti, argument, and common belief, it is clear, that the gods, Iswara and time are not opposed to the acquirement of the fruit of works, because works are the causes of what is desired; for the good or bad work of men, independent of the gods, time, Iswara and other agents, is by itself without effect (liter. does not produce itself) and if it should even have effect by itself, it is not able to give the fruit, as it is the nature of action to be produced by agents and other numberless causes. Therefore the gods, Is’wara, etc. favour actions, and hence there cannot be a disbelief

L

114

Brihad Áranyaka Upanishad.

For he becomes the soul of them.

as to the obtaining of the fruit. Sometimes actions are subject also to

them (to the gods) because their power cannot be destroyed ; but whether

the nature of action or time, gods, things, etc. is the first or second,

is not determined, and is difficult to be understood ; hence arises the

delusion of the people. Some say, action is the cause, and not any thing

else, with reference to the obtaining of the fruit ; others, it is the gods ;

others, time ; others, the nature of the things ; others, all these together.

With regard to this, the statements of the Véda and the Smriti acknow-

ledge action as the principal cause, as for instance : “ Holy gets a person

by holy action, sinful by sinful.” Even if one or the other of those

agents with regard to its own object should become principal, while at

the same time the principal power of the others were stopped, yet it

could not be said, that work is not the principal agent as to the acquire-

ment of the fruit, because the principal agency of work is established

by the S'ástra and argument.

(But if it be asked, whether the gods do not hinder the acquirement

of the effect of knowledge, we answer :) No, because on the mere cessa-

tion of ignorance the effect is the obtaining of Bramha. In respect

of what has been said, “ that the gods raise obstacles to the effect,

which is the obtaining of Bramha,” the gods have no power to raise

obstacles. Why ? because there is no time intervening between the

knowledge of Bramha and the effect, which is the obtaining of Bramha.

How ? As in common life at the very time when light is in contact

with the eye of the beholder, there is the manifestation of colour,

so at the very time when the knowledge, whose object is the soul,

takes place, there is the disappearance of the ignorance, whose object

is the soul. Therefore, when the knowledge of Bramha exists, an

effect contrary to it is impossible, just as it is impossible, that the

effect of light is darkness. Where (when the knowledge of Bramha

exists) the knower of Bramha is the very soul (substance) of the gods,

how can they in any way raise obstacles to him ?

The text then declares, what is this very nature, viz. Bramha, identical

with himself (whose nature is the soul) who is to be thought of, who

may be known from all the S'ástras; “ for he,” the knower of Bramha

“ becomes the soul of them,” of the gods, at the very time, when there

First Chapter. Fourth Brāmhana. 115

exists the knowledge of Bramha, by the mere cessation of the screen of ignorance, like the nature of mother-of-pearl, which appears as silver, as we said before. Therefore the endeavour of the gods has no success against the soul ; for where an effect ensues, not referring to the nature of the soul, and where there is a difference of space, time and causes, there, in respect of any thing whose object is not the soul, the endeavour of the gods to raise obstacles is successful, but not in respect of the effect referring to the nature of the soul, which takes places at the time of the knowledge without any difference of space, time and causes, because an opportunity (to raise obstacles) is impossible.

'But then, since there is no continuation of the (first) apprehension of the knowledge of Bramha, and since (after the first apprehension) the contrary apprehension (= non-soul), and its effects are apparent, only the last apprehension of the soul destroys the ignorance, and not the first.'* (If the last knowledge destroys ignorance, it is either, because it is the last, or because its object is the soul.) Not under the first alternative, because the last could not be determined. (Not under the second) for if the first apprehension, whose object is the soul, does not destroy the ignorance, then also not the last, because the object is the same.

If it is said, 'this being the case, the continuation of knowledge destroys the ignorance, not a single act of knowledge,' we object ; for as long as life, etc. remains, a continuation (of knowledge) is impossible ; for as long as there is an apprehension, of which life, etc. is the cause, the continuation of the apprehension of knowledge is impossible, because it is contradictory.

• As S'ankara has set forth his argument rather enigmatically, I give it in the more explicit form of Ananda Giri. " 'But then, an opponent may say, the knowledge which destroys the ignorance, cannot be the first, because after the first knowledge there is no continuation of it, and because afterwards the opposite knowledge and its effects take place.' To show the futility of this objection, S'ankara assumes the following alternative, if the first knowledge does not destroy the ignorance, either the last knowledge destroys it, or the continuation of knowledge.

If the last knowledge destroys the ignorance, it is either, because it is the last, or because its object is the soul ; but not under the first of these alternatives, because it could not be determined (which is the last) ; not under the second, (because its object is the soul) because in this respect it is the same as the first knowledge, which, according to admission, does not destroy ignorance." The second part of the argument is clearly given by S'ankara, wherefore we do not repeat it here.

Q 2

Digitized by Google

116

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

If you say : 'But then by the disappearance of the apprehension, of which life, etc. is the cause, there remains a continuation of knowledge until death,' we object, because the continuation of a so-much-ness of the apprehension is not defined, and there is hence the fault, that the meaning of the S'astra is not defined. By saying,—the continuation of a so-much-ness of the apprehension destroys the ignorance,—there is nothing defined, and hence the meaning of the S'astra is undefined. And this is not desired.

If it is said, 'that the meaning of the S'astra is even defined, when there is a mere continuation,' we object, because there is no difference between the first and last knowledge; for either the first knowledge is the continuation of the apprehension, or the last until the time of death ; but as in this way no difference is found between the first and last apprehensions, the two above mentioned faults apply.

If it is said : 'This being the case, then knowledge does not even destroy ignorance,' we object, because our text declares : "Therefore he became all," the same is also declared in other passages of the S'ruti "The bond of the heart is broken," and "There is no delusion, etc."

If it is. said : 'It is merely for the sake of praise,' (Arthaváda) we object, because otherwise the same applies to the Upanishads of all the S'ákhas (Védáic schools) viz. that they are merely for the sake of praise ; for the Upanishads of all the S'ákhas set forth neither more nor less than this meaning.

If it is said : 'Let it be so, (that they are for the sake of praise,) since the object of the soul is evident from perception ;' we object, because from the said statement (that knowledge destroys ignorance) ignorance, grief, delusion, fear and other faults have ceased.

If it is said "from perception," the answer has already been given. Therefore it cannot be fixed, whether the knowledge is the first, or the last, a continuation, or not a continuation, because the ultimate effect of knowledge is the cessation of ignorance and other faults. That apprehension, whether the first or the last, continuation or no continuation, is alone knowledge, which produces the effect, viz. the cessation of the faults of ignorance, etc. Having come to this conclusion, there remains nothing to be fixed.

But what has been said before : "Since the contrary apprehension and its effects are apparent, only the last apprehension of the soul

First Chapter. Fourth Brāhmana. 117

destroys the ignorance and not the first," (p. 115) this also holds not good, because the last action (in a former birth) is the cause of the production of a body (in this world). The action,—which is the cause of the production of the body, and which, by means of the fault of the opposite apprehension of the work, which is of such a nature and which has the fault of the opposite apprehension, is able to produce the fruit,—this action puts into effect the opposite apprehension, and the faults of passion, etc. by the continuation of the enjoyment of the effect, as long as life lasts, and only so long, because the entering upon the enjoyment of the effects follows necessarily from their cause, viz. action, like arrows which are shot (continue their course, until their velocity is spent). Therefore knowledge does not destroy action of such a kind (which is the effect of actions in a former world) because it is not opposed to it. What then (does it destroy)? The effect of ignorance, opposite to its own (knowledge's) nature, which (effect) has the tendency to produce another body (in a future world) even from ignorance, which is its support, (it destroys it,) because it determines it; for it (the action) has not yet arrived, (not yet been done) the other action (which is the cause of the present body) has been produced (is passed, and cannot therefore be destroyed by knowledge). Moreover, the opposite apprehension (opposite to true knowledge) is not produced for the knower, because it (the opposite apprehension) is without object; for the opposite apprehension, when produced, is produced as dependent upon generality, when the nature of its particular object has not been ascertained, as silver is on mother-of-pearl. But this (opposite apprehension) by the destruction of the site of opposite apprehensions without number, does not arise for one who has ascertained the differences of objects, as the delusion of silver does not again appear, when a perfect apprehension of mother-of-pearl has taken place.

If you say, 'that recollections,—manifesting opposite apprehensions, and arising from impressions, produced from opposite apprehensions, which were made previously to the knowledge,—that these recollections in the moment of their birth sometimes cause of a sudden the obtainment of opposite apprehensions, and that, in the same manner, as for one who is perfectly acquainted with the divisions of space, yet of a sudden a confusion may arise with regard to space, so also for the perfect knower an opposite apprehension may be produced, as it was

Digitized by Google

118

Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.

Then whosoever worships another deity in such a manner, as: “He is another, another am I,” he does not know; like a before' (the attainment of knowledge) then it would follow, that there is no confidence also in perfect knowledge, that hence an activity with regard to the knowledge and the works in accordance with the meaning of the S'ástra would be inconsistent, and that proof had become non-proof; for a difference between proof and non-proof were impossible.

Hereby it is ascertained, for what reason there is no liberation from the body (immediately) after the attainment of perfect knowledge. But that consequent to knowledge, from the very same time, there is a destruction of the actions which are collected for a future birth and whose fruits have not commenced, has been proved from our text, which prohibits any obstacle to the obtaining of the fruit; also from such passages of the S'ruti as: “His actions also are annihilated,” (1st Mund. B. I. Vol. VIII. p. 302.) “All is his forever,” “All sins are shaken off,” “Having known him, they are not tainted by sin,” (B. Â. B. I. Vol. II. p. 913.) “Him alone do those two not trouble, him good and bad actions do not torment,” (l. c. p. 910.) “Him he does not torment, he is not afraid of any thing;” (S'. U. B. I. Vol. VII. p. 119.) also from passages of the Smriti such as this: “The fire of knowledge burns all actions to ashes.” (Bh. G. 4th Adh. Sl. 37.)

But what before (p. 112) has been said, that he is bound by debts, is also not applicable, because this refers to ignorance: for the ignorant is a debtor; for him the notion of agency etc. is true; thus it will be said afterwards: “Where some other thing exists, there another sees it otherwise,” and the term “other” means here, what differs from the true substance, the soul. Where ignorance exists, there it is another thing, as it were; there, like the moon on the second day after its darkness, is an action of showing (one saying, It is this, another, It is not this, etc.) dependent on the many agents through ignorance; and the effect, arising from this (ignorance) is also shown by passages such as this: “Another sees it otherwise.” (B. Â. p. 813.) Where, however, knowledge exists, by the removal of the numberless illusions, arising from ignorance, there is shown the impossibility of actions by such passages as: “Therefore he sees all.” (p. 94.) Therefore the state of a debtor is described as referring to ignorance alone,—because

First Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa.

119

beast, he is used by the gods.

As verily many beasts maintain a man, so every man maintains the gods. It is not pleasant, even if only one beast is taken away, how then, if many? Therefore it is not pleasant

that state is the consequence of actions,—not as referring to knowledge. This we shall in the next passage explicitly show by our explanation, as follows: “Then whosoever,” not knowing Bramba, by praise, reverence, offering, (of flowers, scents, etc.) oblation (gift of eatables), attention and contemplation, “worships” (represents to himself the state of the excellencies of a deity) “another deity,” a deity different from the soul “in such a manner as : He is another,” not the soul, different from me, “another am I,” subject to him, I, like a debtor, have to propitiate him,—whosoever through such a belief worships, “he” through such a belief “does not know” the truth. Such a person is not only ignorant, or has the faults of ignorance and the like, but like a beast, a cow, etc. is used for the benefit of conveyance, of giving milk, etc. so for the various benefits he affords through offerings, etc. is he used by each of the gods. Therefore he is, like a beast, subject to works of all kinds—this is the meaning. For the effect of the work in accordance with the word of the S'āstra, be it work, united with knowledge, or be it work alone, done by a person who is ignorant, a partaker of the division of caste and the orders of life,* and dependent,

the effect of such a work is elevation from man, etc. to Brambha; the effect, however, of work, which is at variance with the word of the S'āstra and which is done by the promptings of one's own nature, is descension from man, etc. down to inanimate matter. For as here, so we shall say the same at the end of this chapter by the passage : “Again there are three worlds, etc. (B. A. p. 301.”—That the effect of knowledge is the obtaining of the state of all, has been briefly shown ; for this whole Upanishad is engaged to show the divisions of knowledge and ignorance (or the whole knowledge within this Upanishad is not very extensive as it describes the divisions of ignorance).

And that this is the meaning of the whole S'āstra, we shall afterwards show. Because it is so, therefore the gods are able to raise

• These are four, viz. of the religious student, of the house-holder, of the anchorite (Vanaprastha, who retires to the wood,) and of the mendicant,

[Digitized by Google

120 Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.

to them, that men should know this. 10.

obstacles or to show favour to an ignorant man. This is said in the words : "As verily" in common life, "many beasts," cows, horses, etc. "maintain a man," their owner, ruler, "so every" ignorant "man," who stands for many beasts, "maintains the gods," (the plural "the gods," is here used to indicate also the forefathers, etc.) under the idea : "Indra and the other gods, who are different from me, are my lords ; I am like a servant of them. If I adore them by praise, reverence, gifts, etc. I shall obtain the rewards, given by them, viz. elevation and liberation." Thus as in this world it is very unpleasant for a possessor of many beasts, "even if only one beast is taken away," is seized by a tiger, etc., so, if one man who stands for many beasts, rises from the state of a beast, it is not surprising, that it is unpleasant to the gods, as the taking away of many beasts is to the house-holder. "Therefore it is not pleasant to them," to the gods,—what? "that men should" in any way "know this," truth of the nature of Bramba. In this view it is said by the venerable Vyása in the Anugítas (a part of the Mahábhárata) "The world of the gods is closed for the performers of works; for the gods do not wish, that men abide above." Therefore the gods try to exclude, like cattle from tigers, men from the knowledge of Bramba, as it is their desire, that they should not be elevated above the sphere of their use. Whom they wish to liberate, to him they impart belief, etc. and unbelief to him whom they wish not to liberate. Therefore let a person, desirous of liberation, be intent on the adoration of the gods, on reverence and faith, submissive, and assiduously striving for the acquirement of knowledge, or for knowledge, as is implied in the words of fear : "How then, if many." This is the meaning of the passage : "It is not pleasant to the gods." 10.

The meaning of the S'ástra has been declared in the Sútra: "The soul, considering this, let a man worship it." (p. 86.) The relation and the necessity of this Sútra, which was to be explained, has been determined by the words : "They declare, that by the knowledge of Bramba, etc." (p. 100.) together with its Arthaváda (by the words : "Therefore, whosoever among the gods," etc. (p. 101.),—and the subjection of ignorance to the world in the words : "Then whosoever worships another deity, etc." (p. 118.)

First Chapter. Fourth Bráṃhaṇa.

121

Bramha verily was this before, one alone. Being one, he did not extend. He with concentrated power created the Kshatra of elevated nature, viz. all those Kshatras who are protectors among the gods, Indra, Varuṇa, Soma, Rudra, Parjanya, Yama, Death, and Is'ána. Therefore none is greater than the Kshatra;

There it has been said, that the ignorant is a debtor, and subject to the will of another by the necessity to perform, like a beast, the works of the gods and others. What again is the means of performing the necessary works of the gods and others? The different castes and orders of life. Which then are the castes? In reply to this the present passage is commenced, viz. to show how that ignorant person, dependent on another's will and subject to works in connexion with their agents, is busy, like a beast, in this world.

The creation of Indra, etc. has not been described above after the creation of Agni (v. p. 70.) ; but the creation of Agni has been described to complete the creation through Prajápati. The creation of Indra, etc. however, should there have been shown, because it is its conclusion ; but it is here told in order to show, that the ignorant is the proper subject for the performance of works.

"Bramha verily was this before." "Brámha," by the creation of Agni having obtained the nature of Agni (he is called Bramha by believing himself to be the caste of Bráhmaṇas) " verily was this," the caste of Kshatras, etc. ; the undivided Brámha, "one alone." There was no distinction of the Kshatriya and other castes. "Being one," without the distinctions of Kshatra, etc., of preserver, etc. "he," Brámha, "did not extend," which means, was not sufficient for extensive work.

Then "he," Brámha, reflecting, I am a Bráhmaṇa, I, who by nature desire to perform the work to be done by the Bráhmaṇa caste, have to discharge such and such duties, "created" for the amplification of work and agent, "with concentrated power the Kshatra of elevated nature." Which again is the Kshatra, the Kshatriya caste, created by him? To show this, the text specifies the individuals, viz. "all those Kshatras who are protectors among the gods." Those who are anointed kings, are here specified "Indra," the king of the gods (Dévas)." Varuṇa" of the aquatic animals, "Soma," of

122 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

therefore the Brámhaṇa, under the Kshatriya, worships at the Rájasúya ceremony. The Kshatra alone gives him his glory. Bramha is thus the birth-place of the Kshatra. Therefore, although the king obtains the highest dignity, he at last takes refuge in the Bramha as in his birth-place. Whosoever despises him, he destroys his birth-place. He is a very great sinner, like a man who injures a superior. 11.

the Brámhaṇas, "Rudra," of beasts, "Parjanya," of lightning, etc. "Yama" of the forefathers, "Death," of persons in ill health, etc. and Is'ana of splendours. These and others are the Kshatras among the gods. After them (the divine Kshatras) he created the Kshatras who are ruled by Indra and other Kshatra deities, viz. the families of the moon and sun, as the king Purúravas, etc. For this reason the creation of the Kshatras among the gods has been set forth.

Because the Kshatra was created by more concentrated power than the Bráhmaṇa, "therefore none is greater than the Kshatra," who is also the ruler of the Bráhmaṇa caste. "Therefore the Bráhmaṇa," although the source of the Kshatriya, placed "under the Kshatriya," "worships" him who is placed above. Where? "At the Rájasúya ceremony." "The Kshatra alone gives him his glory," his repute as Bramha. The Ritwig,—at the Rájasúya ceremony addressed by the king, who is anointed and seated on the royal chair, by the words : "O Bramma," —replies again to the king: "O king, thou art Bramha." He alone is called Kshatra who bestows glory. "Bramha is thus the" well known "birth-place of the Kshatra." "Therefore, although the king obtains the highest dignity," in virtue of the anointing at the Rájasúya ceremony, "he at last" at the completion of the ceremony, "takes refuge in the Bramha," in the Brámhaṇical caste, "as in his birth-place," that is, he appoints a family priest. "Whosoever" again from the pride of power, "despises," lowers, "him" his birth-place, the Bráhmaṇical caste, the Bráhmaṇa, he destroys his "own birth-place." "He," by so doing, "is a very great sinner ;" (in former times the Kshatriya was also a sinner) by his wickedness, because he injures his producer, "like," in common life, "a man who injures," defeats, "his superior" is a very great sinner. 11.

First Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa.

123

He did not extend. He created the Viṭ. He is all those gods who, according to their classes, are called Vasus, Rudras, Ādityas, Viśwédévas, and Maruts. 12.

He did not extend. He created the caste of the Śúdras as the nourisher. This earth is the nourisher; for it nourishes all this whatsoever. 13.

He did not extend; he created with concentrated power justice of eminent nature. This justice is the preserver (Kshatra) of all this whatsoever.

(As Bramba did not extend before the creation of the Kshatra), so even after the creation of the Kshatra "he" Bramba, "did not extend" for the work. He did not extend, because there was none to procure wealth. "He created the Viṭ." to procure wealth for the performance of ceremonies. Who again is the Viṭ? "He is all those gods according to their classes" (for almost all the Viṭs are called so, as they are counted in classes; for commonly they are only capable of collecting wealth, when joined together, and not singly); the class of "the Vasus," is eight in number, of "the Rudras," eleven, of "the Ādityas" twelve, of "the Viśwédévas," means either the thirteen sons of Viśwa, or all (sarve-viś'we) the gods, and of "the Maruts" is seven times seven. 12.

"He" in want of servants, "did not extend. He created the caste of the Ś'údras." Which again is the caste of the Ś'údras, created by him? "The nourisher," (Púshana) because he nourishes. Who again is that Púsha? The text determines this in a special manner. "This," earth, "is Púsha: for it nourishes all this whatsoever." 13.

"He," after having created the four castes, did not extend. "He," from a fear of the ungovernableness of the Kshatra on account of his fiery nature, "created by concentrated power justice of eminent nature." "This justice," created of eminent nature, "is the preserver," the governor even "of the Kshatra," more fiery even than the fiery. "There is nought higher than justice," because it governs even the Kshatra; for all are ruled by it. In what manner? To this it is replied: "Even the weak is confident to defeat the more powerful" than himself, "by" the power of "justice," "as" in common life "the house-holder by the king," who is the most powerful. Therefore it is

R 2

Digitized by Google

124 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

the Kshatra. There is nought higher than justice. Even the weak is confident to defeat the more powerful by justice, as a householder by the king. Verily justice is true. Therefore they say of a person who speaks the truth, he speaks justice, or of a person who speaks justice, he speaks the truth. In this manner verily it is both. 14.

This is the creation of the Bramha, the Kshatra, the Viṭ and the S'údra. He was in the form of Agni (fire) among the

in this manner evident, that justice is governing all, because it is more powerful than all. "Verily justice," viz. a case which has been decided according to legal evidence, "is true." Here "true" means, in accordance with the meaning of the S'ástra, and justice means, what is transacted in such a manner; it is true, if understood in accordance with the meaning of the S'ástra. Because this is so, "therefore they" those who are sitting near, who are aware of the arguments on both parts, "say of a person who speaks," at the time when a suit is transacted, the "truth" that is, according to the S'ástras. "He speaks justice," viz. he speaks according to fitness, which is well known and pursuant to usage. Thus, on the other hand, they say "of a person, who speaks in accordance with justice," to usage, "he speaks in accordance with truth," he speaks what does not deviate from the S'ástra. "In this manner verily it," which has been mentioned before, "is both," viz. the justice, which must be made known and which must be practised. Therefore justice, as an object of knowledge and of practice governs all, as well those who know the S'ástras as those who do not know them. Therefore, it is the pre-server even of the Kshatra. Hence an ignorant person, who is proud of justice, acknowledges for the practice of its different parts, its difference which is the cause of the Bramha, Kshatra, Viṭ and S'údra castes. These differences are by their own nature the causes of the different agents. 14.

The passage : "This is the creation of the four castes" "of the Bramha, the Kshatra, the Viṭ and S'údra," serves as an introduction into the next sentence. "He," Bramha, the creator, "was in the form of Agni among the gods," that is to say in no other form. "As

gods as Bramha, he was the Bráhmaṇa among men, in the form of Kshatriya Kshatriya, in the form of Vais'ya Vais'ya, in the form of S'údra S'údra. Therefore among the gods the place (loka) is desired through Agni only, among men through the Bráhmaṇa, because in their forms Bramha became manifest.

Braha, "the Brahmaṇa caste, he was the Bráhmaṇa," in the form of a Bráhmaṇa Brahma was among men. Assuming other modifications among the other castes, he became in the Kshatriya form a Kshatriya, whose tutelary deities are Indra and other gods (dévás ;) in the Vaishya form a Vaishya, and in the S'údra form a S'údra.

Because Bramha the creator assumed other and other modifications among the Kshatriya and other castes, and remained unmodified only in Agni's form, "therefore among the gods the place," the fruit of works, "is desired through Agni only," that is to say, by the performance of works, dependent on Agni ; for on this ground is this Brahma evidently represented under the form of Agni, the locality of works. Therefore it is established, that by the performance of work through Agni, the fruit, resulting from it, is desired. "Among men through the Bráhmaṇa." If among men there is a desire of the fruit to be derived from works, there is no dependance upon works, of which Agni, etc. is the cause. How then? The object of man is effected only by reliance upon the nature of the castes. Where, however, the accomplishment of the object of man is subject to the gods, there it is dependant upon work in conjunction with Agni. etc. This follows also from the passage of the Smriti : "By muttering prayers, the Bráhmaṇa, no doubt, is successful, whether he performs other work (work, dependant upon fire) or not. Friend is called the Bráhmapa."* This is also evident from his leading the life of a religious mendicant.† Therefore among men the place, the effect of works, is desired through the nature of the Bráhmaṇa alone, "because Brahma," the creator, "in their forms," in the forms of the Bráhmaṇa and Agni, the forms upon which the agents of work are dependent, "became manifest."

• By giving to all beings the blessing to be without fear.

† Which is to renounce all worldly objects—the cause of obtaining the world of Bramba.

126 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

Then whosoever, through this world not seeing the self-like world, dies, him the latter, because unknown, does not preserve, as the Vêda which is not read, or as other work, which is not done.

With reference to this, some* say, 'it is the place of the supreme soul, the obtainment of which is desired through Agni and the Brâhmaṇa.' This is not true; because a subjection to ignorance existing, the division of the castes is introduced for the subjection to works, it is not true, moreover, because it differs from the next passage ; for if here (in the present passage) by the term 'place,' even the supreme soul were declared, then in the next passage : 'Not having seen the self-like place,' the predicate 'self-like,' would be absurd ; for if there the common place (world) which is desired by dependance upon Agni, is different from the self-like place, then the predicate 'self-like,' is proper, because the meaning is the annihilation of the common place (world) after death, and because by the term 'self-like' there is no going astray from the place of the supreme soul; but the works, performed by ignorance, would go astray by the term 'self-like.' And by the passage : 'Perishes certainly,' the going astray of all the effects by works will be set forth. By Brama the castes were created for the sake of work, and this work, because it rules all castes by the notion of duty and accomplishes the object of man, has the name of virtue.

If therefore by this work alone the self-like place which is called the supreme soul, is obtained, although it is unknown, why then is it necessary to do any thing with reference to its production? On this ground it is said in the text : 'Then,' which is to remove the objection of the opponent. 'Whosoever through this 'world,' which is subject to transmigration, whose nature is the assumption of a body, whose causes are the desire and work of ignorance by believing in the work, dependent upon Agni, or by believing in work to be performed by the Brâhmaṇa caste alone, on account of the world which is transient, and whose nature is not self-like, 'not seeing the self-like world,' which is called soul from not going astray from the nature of the soul, not seeing 'I am Bramba,'—'dies,' the latter, (although 'the latter' means the self-like world, yet it is unknown, concealed by ignorance, as a horse, which is not recognised) 'does not preserve him,'—as the tenth soul in the well known example

• The commentary, called Bhartripranchika.

First Chapter. Fourth Bráhmana. 127

Even the great and holy work, which a person who does not know in this manner, performs, all this work of him, verily perishes at last. Let a man worship the soul as his place. Whosoever worships the soul alone as his place, his work does verily not

(vide p.83.), does not preserve himself,—by the removal of grief, delusion, fear and other faults. And "as" in common life, "the Véda, which is not read," does not teach work and whatsoever arises from it, "or as other work," in common life, for instance ploughing, "which is not done," is not manifested by its own nature, does not preserve him by the yielding of its fruit, so the soul, if unmanifested by its self-like nature, which is the eternal soul, does not preserve him by the annihilation of ignorance.

'But then, does it not follow from the necessity that work obtains its effect by preserving the cause of the knowledige of the self-like world, and from the abundance of work, which is the cause of the desired effect, "that its preserving cause is undestroyable?" No, because every effect is liable to destruction. Therefore it is said in the text : "Even the great," as for instance many As'wamédha sacrifices, "and holy work," which obtains its fruit, as if it were desired (although there has been no desire of its fruit) "which a person," of extraordinary magnanimity, "who does not know in this manner," who does not know the self-like place in the said manner, continually "performs," under the notion, that he shall thereby gain immortality, "all this work of him," of the ignorant person, "verily perishes at last," at the end of the enjoyment of the fruit, because desire, the effect of ignorance, is its cause, like some wonderful superhuman power (perished) which appeared by the delusion of a dream. Since the causes of it (of the work) viz. ignorance and desire, are not permanent, it is necessary, that its effect is also liable to destruction. Therefore there is no hope to preserve for ever the fruit of holy work. "Therefore let a man worship the soul alone" as the self-like place; the soul is the self-like place; for in this meaning is the self-like place set forth in the text, and here is the term of "self-like" not applied. "Whosoever worships the soul as his place," what of him? It is replied in the text : "his work does verily not perish," because there is even no work; this is repeated here in order to to establish it firmly. The meaning is, as there is constantly worldly unhappiness, consisting in the decrease

Digitized by Google

128

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

perish. For whatsoever he desires from the soul, the same he obtains. 15.

of the effect derived from work, so there is not for him (the wise) as if one thinks : if Mithila is burned, nothing burns. Others* explain it to mean, 'that the work of the knowing worshipper of his ownself (soul) does not perish by the connexion with a person who does not know. Further, for the term of "place," intimately connected with work, they in fact assume two meanings ; one is the place in the state of manifestation, depending upon work, and bearing the name of Hiranyagarbha. Whosoever worships this place, which is intimately connected with work, which is manifested and finite, the work of him, who knows the finite self as engaged in work, verily perishes. But whosoever worships the world, which is intimately connected with work, comprehending it in its unmanifested state under the notion of cause, his work does not perish, because he knows the infinite self (soul) as engaged in work." This assumption is ingenious, but it does not accord with the S'ruti, because by the term "the place of self" the supreme soul, set forth in the text, is denoted.'

The text having mentioned (before) "the place of self," omits (now) the term "of self" and introducing the term "soul," shows its identity with the former by the words : "whosoever worships the soul alone as his place." There is here no possibility for the assumption of a place, intimately connected with work.

Moreover it (the place intimately connected with work) is different from the supreme place, whose object is knowledge alone. By the passage : "The soul is not the place," it is distinguished from the places, which are gained by inferior knowledge and the work of a son. Therefore "the soul is not the place," and also : "His place is not measured by any work ; this is his highest place." By these sentences, because they are determined, a corresponding meaning is proper. Thus here also, because by the words "the place of self," the predicate is fixed.

If it is said 'that according to the passage : "for whatsoever," it is improper, that the place of self is the supreme soul ; for if it is certain, that by the worship of him he becomes the supreme soul ; whatsoever

• Viz. the explanation, given by the Bhartriprancha.

Digitized by Google

First Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa.

Next that soul (self) verily is the place of all beings.

he desires, he obtains from the soul, then the declaration with regard to the fruit is improper, unless it is to obtain that soul.' We contradict, because it has the object to extol the worship of the world of self; for the meaning is, from the place of self alone all that is desired is obtained; any thing different from it is not to be asked for, because all desires are satisfied, as it is said in another passage of the S'ruti (Chh. U. 7th Pr. 16th Kh. B. I. Vol. III. p. 524) : "From the soul is life, from the soul hope." Or it means to show the state of the universal soul as before (p. 105). For if the supreme soul is declared, it is right to apply the term "soul" in the passage: "for . . . from the soul," (p. 128) and it means, from the place of self, which is set forth as soul in the text. Otherwise it would have been said with a predicate, "from the place of work in its unmanifested state" in order to remove thereby the idea of a place of the supreme soul in accordance with the text, and to remove the state of manifestation; for since it set forth in the text and determined, another state, not authorized by the S'ruti, is impossible. 15.

"Next that soul verily." It has before (in the last section, describing the state of ignorance) been said, that the ignorant, in the conscious pride of caste and order of life, etc., and governed by the law, is, like a beast, subject to another by the necessity of performing the works of the gods and others. Which again are the works by the necessary performance of which he becomes, like a beast, subject to another? And who are the gods and others whom he assists, like a beast, by works? Both is explained in the text. The term "next" is intended as an introduction to the present sentence. The house-holder, as set forth in the text, who is subject to work, ignorant, and endowed with body, senses, etc., is here called "that soul." The meaning is "he is the place," the object of enjoyment, "of all beings," from the gods down to the ants, because he affords assistance to all by works which are commanded with reference to the different castes and orders. By what special works again affording assistance does he become the place, for what special beings? The answer is: "By what he," the house-holder, "offers and sacrifices." Sacrifice with reference to the deity is an abandonment of wealth (to the deity). If it is performed until the sprinkling of the water (on the head of the sacri-

130

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

He is the place of the gods by what he offers and sacrifices, further of the Rishis by what he learns, further of the forefathers (Pítris) by what he gives to the forefathers, and by his exertions about offspring, further of men by housing them and giving them food, further of cattle by finding them grass and water, further of beasts of prey, birds, etc. down to ants, by sustaining their life in his dwelling. As every one desires the continuance of his place, so verily desire all beings

ficer), it is Homa. By this work, viz. by Homa (offering) and sacrifice (Yága) which it is his duty to perform, "he is," like a beast, subject to the will of another, "the place of the gods." "Further by what he reads," viz. his daily reading of the Védas, "he is the place of the Rishis." "Further by what he gives to the forefathers," viz. the oblation, water, etc., "and by his exertions about offspring," by that work, which he is bound to perform, "he is the place of the forefathers." "Further by housing men," by giving them place, water, etc. in his house, "and giving them food," viz. them who ask him for it, whether they live in his house or not, "he is the place of men." "Further by finding," giving "them grass and water," he is the "place of cattle." "Further of beasts of prey, birds together with ants by sustaining their life in his dwelling," with grains and (particles of food gained) by the cleaning of the sacrificial vessels, "he is the place of them." Because by those works he affords assistance to the gods, etc., therefore "as every one desires continuance of his own place," of his own body, desires the preservation of his nature, from the fear of losing his nature sustains it always by nourishing, protecting it, etc., "so verily desire all beings," the gods and others, the above mentioned continuance of life "for him who thus knows," who thus frames his soul : "I am to be enjoyed by all beings, I, like a debtor, am bound to make returns;" that is to say, they preserve him for the continuance of their own existence, as house-holders preserve cattle. Therefore it is said : "It is not pleasant to them." "This verily," that the said works must necessarily be done, like the paying of a debt, "is declared," in the chapter of the five great sacrifices, (the five great sacrifices, viz. to all beings, to men, to the forefathers, to the gods, and to Bramhā) "and considered," and proved as necessary by

First Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa.

131

welfare for one who thus knows. This verily is declared and considered. 16.

Self (the soul) alone was this before; he was even one. He

consideration in the chapter of the distribution of the things, required for the five great sacrifices (Avadánaprakaraṇa). 16.

"Self alone was this before." If the knower of Bramba is liberated from the state of cattle, which consists in the bondage of duty, by whom then has he been made subject to the bondage of work, and not again to the practice of knowledge, which is the means of liberation ?

Is it not said : "The gods preserve ?" Certainly, but they preserve those who by the performance of work obtained their own (the gods') state; otherwise it would be in their power to bestow the effects of actions not done, or destroy the effects of actions done, (that is to say ; otherwise, they would be partial) but they do not preserve a common man, who has not obtained a special perfection. Therefore it must be the same (who makes him subject to the bondage of work) by whose power a person subject to work is getting out of his own place. Is that not ignorance ? for the ignorant, getting out of himself, is engaged in work ? No, ignorance also is not the cause which makes one to engage in work ; for its character is to conceal the true nature of a thing ; but it may be the cause of making one to engage in work, in the same manner, as blindness is the cause, that one is liable to fall into holes, etc. If this is the case, then say, what causes one to engage in work ?

This is set forth, viz. it is willing, desire. Thus it is said in the Kāṭhaka (4 to P. 2. B. I. Vol. VIII. p. 123) : "Remaining in their natural ignorance, youths engage in actions ; follow external objects of desire."

In the Bhagavadgítá : "It is desire, it is anger, etc." (B. G. 3rd A. 37.) And in Manu : "Desire is the cause of all engagements in action, (M. S. 2d. A. 4.) This meaning is in all its detail proved throughout this whole chapter. "Self alone was this before." Self alone viz. the person who is ignorant by his own nature, who is to be comprehended under the notion of effect and cause, the Brāhmaṇa (the religious student). "Before." Previous to the union with a wife he is called self.

There was no object of desire, as a wife, etc. different from this self. "He was even one," possessed of ignorance, the cause of the desire of a wife, etc., he, was even alone; he was pervaded by ignorance,

2

Digitized by Google

132 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

desired: Let me have a wife; again,—let me be born; again,— let me have wealth; again,—let me perform work. So far extend, verily desire. For without desire one dues not get more than

the nature of which is to assign to one's own soul the assumptions of agent, action and fruit. “He desired” What? “Let me have a wife.” Let me, the agent, have a wife, the cause of the performance of work; without her I am not a fit agent for work; therefore to accomplish the performance of work, let me have a wife. “Again,—let me be born,”

let me be produced as offspring. “Again,—let me have wealth,” cows, etc., by which work is accomplished. “Again let me perform work,” the cause of elevation and liberation, viz. let me perform work,—by which,— liberated from my debt, I may obtain the places (worlds) of the gods,

etc.,—and the ceremonial rites for objects of desire which are the causes by which a son, wealth, heaven, etc. are effected. “So far extends verily desire,” which means, desire is limited to those objects. So far extend the objects which are to be desired; viz. a wife, son, wealth and works;

viz. the desire as cause. The three worlds, the world of man, the world of the forefathers, and the world of the gods, are the effects of this desire as cause ; for the desire, as cause referring to wife, son, wealth and work; is for their sake. Therefore this is one desire ; and the other, the desire

of the worlds, which is also a desire, depends upon a cause ; in this mannet desire is two-fold. Hence it will be afterwards (B. A. p. 592), said : “ These two desires.” Because every action is undertalen on account of its effect, therefore it should be understood, that by the passage : “ So far extends desire” the worlds are necessarily implied, and therefore declared,” for if eating is mentioned, it is not neoessary to mention

also satisfaction, because eating is merely for the sake of it. These two desires, characterised as cause and effect, are the longing, by which compelled, the ignorant, whò is subject to work, like the silk- worm, encases his self (soul); that is to say, on the road of action not attending to himself (the soul), and having got out (of himself), he does

not know his own place (the place which is like himself). Thus it is said in the Taittarlya: “ Bewildered by fire, teased by smoke, he does not know his own place.” How again is it ascertained, that desire extends so far, beoause desires are infinite, for desires have no end? On this acoount the reason is stated : Because “ without desire one does

First Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa.

133

this. Therefore also now a person, when alone, desires : Let me have a wife,—again, let me be born,—again, let me have wealth,—again, let me perform work. As long as he does not obtain one of them, so long he thinks himself incomplete. His completeness is this, that the mind is his self (soul) and speech his wife.

not get more than this," which consists of effect and cause ; for, beside cause and effect, nothing, either perceived or not perceived, is to be gained in this world; for the object to be obtained is desire, and as this does not exist without them (cause and effect) it is proper to say : " So far extends verily desire." Hereby it is said : Wish, the object of action of the ignorant subject, is two-fold desire, viz. either desire as effect, or as cause, whether its object is perceived or not perceived. Above this wish the wise must be elevated. Because in this manner the ignorant self (soul) being desirous, before desired, and also he who preceded him,—(for this is the law of the world, and in the same manner was this the creation of Prajāpati ; for it is said, (p. 64) "he was afraid" by ignorance. Then (pp. 67-68): " Hence, excited by desire, a person is not happy when alone ; to remove the unhappiness, he desired a wife ; he approached her ; hence sprang forth this creation,"—"Therefore," after this creation, "also now," at the present time, "a lonely person," before his being married, desires in accordance with what has been said : " Let me have a wife,—again, let me be born,—again, let me have wealth,—again, let me perform work." " As long as he," who is thus desirous and endeavouring of getting all, a wife, &c., "as long as he does not obtain one of them," one of what has been mentioned, a wife, &c., "so long he thinks himself incomplete." At last when he obtains all of them, his completeness ensues ; but when he cannot accomplish his completeness, he is in the state of incompleteness ; then for the accomplishing of his completeness, the text says : " His completeness," the completeness of him, who, as before mentioned is conscious of incompleteness. " is this." What ? (To show this), the totality of effect and cause is divided. Here (in this division) " the mind is" (for every thing else, produced from the totality of cause and effect is governed by it), by its superiority, " his self (the soul)" which means like his self, as the master of the family is like the soul of the wives, &c., because his wife, son, &c., follow him. In the same manner is the mind here assumed as the self for the sake of

Digitized by Google

131

Brihad Âranyaka Upanishad.

Life is their offspring, the eye the wealth of man ; for by the eyes one obtains it,—the ear the wealth of the gods ; for by the ear one hears it; self is even his work,—for by self one performs work.

The sacrifice is five-fold, the animal five-fold, the man five-fold, five-fold this all whatsoever. Whosoever thus knows, the same obtains this all. 17.

"and" thus also "speech his wife," on account of speech, being in like manner governed by the mind. Speech, viz. sound, whose characteristic is directing, &c., is received by the mind through the ear, &c., considered and revered ; in this manner is speech the wife of the mind. From both, speech and mind, represented as wife and husband, was produced life for the performance of work ; therefore "life is their offspring," as it were. There (if self, wife and offspring are present) work characterised by the effort of life, &c., is to be accomplished by the wealth perceived by the eye, and therefore is "the eye the wealth of man." Wealth is two-fold, wealth of man and other wealth ; therefore it is said, "of man," to distinguish it from other wealth ; for cattle, the wealth connected with man and perceptible by the eye, is accomplishing action ; therefore it represents it. Hence by connexion is the eye the wealth of man ; "for," because, "one obtains," perceives, "it," the wealth of man, cattle etc., "by the eye" (therefore is the eye the wealth of man). What again is the other kind of wealth ? "The ear the wealth of the gods," because knowledge is the object of the gods. Knowledge is the wealth of the gods. Therefore in our case is the ear even the object of wealth. Why? "For by the ear ;" because by the ear "one hears it," the wealth of the gods, knowledge, therefore is the ear even the wealth, because knowledge is dependent on the ear. How again is work to be performed by those agents, the first of which is self, and the last wealth ? The answer is : "Self is even." Self means here the body. How again is self (the body) the representative of work ? because it is the cause of work for him (the sacrificer). How is it the cause of work ? "For by self," by the body, "one performs work." In this manner is the completeness, whose characteristics are external objects, as a son, &c., accomplished for him, who thinks himself incomplete. In this manner therefore, "The sacrifice is five-fold," to be performed by five, even

First Chapter. Fifth Brāmaṇa.

Fifth Brámaṇa.

Of the seven provisions which the father created by under-

in the case of a person who has ceased from work, where it is to be

performed by symbols alone. How again is the symbol by the mere

apprehension of five, called a sacrifice? Because an external sacrifice

also is accomplished by men and animals, and there are five men and

five animals, by the application of the mentioned five, mind, speech, &c.

Therefore it is said : "The animal five-fold,—the man five-fold."

Although the notion of animal is found also in man, yet there is a dif-

ference between them, wherefore "man" has been separately men-

tioned. What more? "Five-fold this all," the cause and effect of the

work, "whatsoever." "Whosoever thus knows," whosoever in this

manner represents the five-fold sacrifice as himself, "the same obtains

this all," the world under the notion of himself. 17.

There (in the last Brámaṇa) ignorance has been introduced by the

words : "Whosoever worships another deity in such a manner :" "He

is another, another am I," the same does not know." (B. Â. p. 118).

It has also been said (p. 129,) that the person, who has the conscious-

ness of caste and of the different conditions of life (viz. of a religious

student, a house-holder, of one who retires to the forest, and of one

who lives merely for the contemplation of God), who is ruled by his

duties, who, compelled by desire, affords assistance to the gods, fore-

fathers, &c., through sacrifices and other rites, is the place for all beings.

And as by each and all of his works he has been created as the place

to be enjoyed by all beings, thus be has created all beings and the

whole world for his own enjoyment. The meaning is, in this manner

everybody, in accordance with his knowledge and work, is the enjoyer and

enjoyment, the agent and the object of action of the whole world. To

understand the identity of the soul, we shall say with reference to know-

ledge in the chapter treating on the knowledge of the universal essence

(madhu lit. honey,) : "All is the effect of all, one universal essence."

He created by the five-fold work whose object in desire, viz. by the

five-fold sacrifice, &c., the world for his enjoyment, and also by

knowledge (for his consideration). This whole world is seven-fold

divided according to its being cause and effect. They (these parts)

are called provisions, because they are objects of enjoyment. Hence

136

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

standing and penance, he assigned one as the common to all,

and two to the gods, three he made for himself, one he gave to

the animals; for upon this all is founded, whatsoever breathes

and whatsoever breathes not. Why are they not destroyed,

although always consumed? Whosoever knows the cause of

the non-destruction, he eats the principal food; he goes to the

gods, he lives eternally. 1.

The Mantra : "Of the seven provisions which the father creat-

ed by understanding and penance; for the father created by un-

(by the creation of them through work and knowledge) he is the

father of those provisions. Those Mantras : "Of the seven provisions,"

&c. are here assumed as Sútras, because they show, compendiously, the

meaning of those provisions, together with their application. (The

term "Yad" is here an adverb in connexion with 'he created.') By

"understanding," knowledge, and "penance," work ; for knowledge

and work are the meanings of the terms "understanding," and

"penance," because they are topics of the text, and not the literal

meanings of them "understanding" and "penance," because they

are not topics of the text; for the five-fold work, to be accom-

plished by a wife, &c. and afterwards knowledge by the words : "who

thus knows, &c.," have been set forth in the text. Therefore it must

not be doubted, that understanding and penance are well known.

Again : "The seven provisions which the father created," by knowledge

and work, here it must be supplied : the same I will mention.* 1.

Here is the sense of the Mantras on account of their obscurity dif-

ficult to be understood ; hence the Bráhmaṇa is engaged in the expla-

nation of them. There what means the Mantra : "Of the seven

provisions which the father created," "The answer is given by the

term for" which is to show, that the meaning is well-known ; for the

meaning is, that the meaning of the Mantra is well-known, and therefore

by the repetition of the Mantra : "The provisions he produced," is to

indicate, that the meaning is well-known. Therefore the Bráhmaṇa says

without hesitation : "For the father created by understanding and

penance." But how then is the meaning well-known ? The answer

• There is no necessity for assuming the proposed ellipsis, and I have, therefore,

not followed S'ankará's explanation in the translation.

Digitized by Google

First Chapter. Fifth Brdmhana.

derstanding and penance." " He assigned one as the common to all." The common provision to all, is that which is eaten.

the causes, producing the worlds, of which the first is a wife and the last work, is evident, and it is also declared by such passages as : " Let me have a wife." There it has been declared, that the wealth of the gods,—viz. knowledge,—work and a son are the cause of the creation with reference to the worlds in their nature as effects (that is to say, as the result of good or bad actions.) And also that which will be said, is well known. Therefore it is proper to say : " By understanding, &c;" for desire, whose object is (enjoyment of ) fruit, is well-known in common life, and also desire, whose object is a wife, &c., which is set forth in the passage : " So far extends desire ;" but as to the object of the knowledge of Bramba (which is liberation), desire is impossible, because then all is one and the same. Thereby (by showing, that the cause of the world is desire, produced by ignorance) it is also said, that the world is created by natural, unscriptural knowledge and penance. This follows also from the reason, that work and knowledge are the cause of consequences which are not desired, down to the state of inanimate matter. But it was intended to explain the relation of effect and cause in accordance with the S'astra; for in the desire to establish the knowledge of Bramba, there is included the intention to describe the state, in which the world is disregarded; for this whole world, whose nature is manifested and not manifested, is impure, transient, a compound of cause and effect; the object of unhappiness and ignorance, and therefore for him who has no regard for this world, the knowledge of Bramba is to be commenced.

There, by the division of the provisions, their application is set forth. " He assigned one as the common to all," this is a part of the Mantra. Its explanation is as follows : " The common provision to all" to all enjoyers, what is it ? " that which is eaten," enjoyed by all beings day by day ; this common food, the object of all enjoyers, the father assigned after the creation of the provision.

" Whosoever worshps,"—which means is attached to, (for worship means also attachment, as it is clear from common expressions such as : " He worships the teacher," " he worships the king,") " it"—viz. the common provision, which is to be enjoyed, the cause of the preser-

138

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

Whosoever worships it, the same does not turn from sin; for it

vation of all living beings, whose principal object is the enjoyment of

provision for the sake of the preservation of the body, and not work

for the sake of something unseen,—“ the same,” being of such a na-

ture, “ does not turn,” is not liberated, “from sin,” from vice. Thus

a Mantra says: “ He enjoys useless food,” &c. (Kr. Yajur Brámhaṇa

2d Adh. 8th Pr. 8th Anva.) Also the Smriti : “ Let him not cook

food for himself” (alone). He, who eats, without giving to the guests,

is a thief. Even a person who procures abortion,* becomes free from

sin, if he eats food, after he has first distributed it.”

Why again does not turn from sin? “ for it is mixed ;” for the

property, which is enjoyed by the living creatures, is undivided (and

therefore it does not belong to one, as the property, left by a father,

does not belong to any of his sons, before it is divided) because it

is the object of enjoyment for all. Even the morsel, which is put into

the mouth, is observed to cause pain in the mind of another ; for, while

there is the desire, let me have it, the hope of every one is thereby ex-

cluded. Therefore it is impossible to take even a mouthful of food,

without giving pain to another. Thus it is said in the Smriti : “ It is

the guilt of man,” &c.

Some (the Bhartripancha) say : The food, called that of the

Vis'wadévas which is daily given by the house-holder, is here meant.

This is not evident, like the food, which is an object of enjoyment for

all living beings; nor does it agree with the passage : “ that which is

eaten.” Because the food, which is called the food of the Vis'wadévas,

is included in the food, which is an object of enjoyment for all living

beings, therefore it is proper to understand the food which may be

eaten by a dog, a Chándála, &c., for it is the food which, beside

the Vis'wadévas, is taken by a dog, Chándála, &c. In this case

the expression ; “ that which is eaten,” is proper ; for if food is not to

mean general food, then it must be said, that it has neither been creat-

ed nor applied by the father ; but it has been granted, that all food has

been created and distributed by the father ; and it is very improper to

say, that a person who has performed the work, which is called that

of the Vis'wadévas, and which is in accordance with S'ástras, is not re-

• According to Ánanda a person, who kills a high caste Bráhmaṇa.

First Chapter. Fifth Bráhmaṇa.

139

is mixed. "And two to the gods," viz. the sacrifice and the oblation. Again, others say they mean the ceremonies at the

leased from all sin. Nor is there a prohibition of it; nor is it, like the action of catching fish, blamed for its own nature, because it is performed by good people, and because the S'ruti declares it sin, if it is not done; moreover, otherwise also sin is obtained; for it is said in a Mantra: "I am food, I eat him who eats food."—"And two to the gods." This is a part of the Mantra. Which are the two provisions, which after their creation he assigned to the gods? The answer is: "The sacrifice (Hutam) and the oblation (Prahutam)."* Sacrifice is an offering in the fire. The oblation is the taking of the offerable food after the sacrifice. Because the father made over these two provisions, the sacrifice and the oblation, to the gods, therefore at this time house-holders also "sacrifice to the gods," thinking, this food must be given by us to the gods, "and offer," which means, and having sacrificed, take the offering. "Again others say," the two provisions which were given by the father to the gods, are not the sacrifice and the oblation; what then? "They mean the ceremonies at the new and full moon (Dars'apúrṇamásau). Here, according to the first supposition, it will be said, because there is no difference with reference to the dual number (dwe, two provisions, which may be as well applied to Hutaprahute as to Dars'apúrṇamásau) and because they (the Huta and Prahuta) are otherwise known, it means the sacrifice (Huta) and the oblation (Prahuta). But although the dual number accords also with the sacrifice and the oblation, yet the ceremonies at the new and full moon are also performed by the Srauta fire,† and the notion of their being provisions, is yet better known, because they are declared in a Mantra.† And if a quality and the thing to which it refers, are obtained (at the same time) the latter must first be comprehended; but to the ceremonies at the new and full moon the idea of priority must

• The Bráhmaṇa has twice daily to perform the ceremony of Homa (the offering of ghee in fire). When the food is ready, a part of it is to be offered in the fire to the gods; this is called Hutam, while another part is thrown on the ground as an offering to those gods, who are called Dharmádi.

† The house-holder has to perform his daily ceremonies, &c., by the Smárta fire (the fire ordained by the Smriti) and the ceremonies at the new and full moon by the Srauta fire (the fire, ordained by the S'ruti).

T 2

140

Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.

new and full moon. Therefore it is not their nature to be associated with desires. "One he gave to the animals." This is milk ; for before men as well as animals subsist on milk alone. Therefore they feed the child, when born, either with melted butter, or put him to the breast. Then they call the babe born ; for he does not eat grass.

be assigned rather than to the sacrifice and oblation. Therefore it is proper to think of them by the words : "And two to the gods." Because those two provisions under the name of the provisions at the new and full moon, were designed by the father for the gods, "therefore," in order to remove any objection, that they are made for the gods, "it is not their nature to be associated with desires" (ishti ;) that the term "ishti" means desire, is clear from the S'atapatha Bráhmana, (the affix uka in the word, "Ishtiyayuka," means a natural inclination).

"One he gave to the animals." Which is the one provision which the father gave to the animals ? "This is milk :" How again is it known, that the animals are the possessors of that provision ? The text answers : "For before" because before, at first, "men as well as animals, subsist on milk alone," therefore this provision is proper for them ; how could they otherwise before subsist on it in accordance with a law ? How do they before subsist on it ? The answer is : Because men as well as animals subsist on that provision (as this application is made at the commencement, although there existed also other provisions) "therefore they," the three castes, "either feed," cause to eat, "the child, when born," at the ceremony of its birth, "with melted butter," together with gold,* "or they put him afterwards to the breast," they cause him afterwards to drink milk. As it is natural for the others, (viz. for animals, different from men) they put the young animal first to the breast. "Then they call the babe born." Of what size (that is to say "age") is the babe ? To this question it is replied : "for he does not eat grass," even until this day he does not eat grass, which means, that a very young child even until this day lives upon milk. And what has before been said, "that at first at the ceremony after birth they subsist on melted butter, and others on milk (viz. that

• It is only a touching of the tongue with melted butter, mixed with gold.

First Chapter. Fifth Brāhmaṇa.

141

Upon this all is founded, whatsoever breathes and whatsoever ever not breathes; for on milk all is founded, whatsoever breathes and whatsoever not breathes. The saying: “ a person, offering throughout the year with milk, overcomes the

they subsist upon milk merely; this makes no difference) for melted butter is of the same nature as milk, being a modification of it. Why is the provision for animals, which was before (in the Mantra) given in the seventh place, explained here in the fourth? This is done, because thereby the work is accomplished; for all work which refers to burnt-offerings, &c., depends upon milk as its cause.

And this work (milk) which is to be effected by wealth, is to effect the three provisions which will be mentioned, as the before mentioned two provisions of the ceremonies at the new and full moon (are the cause of the three provisions); therefore it (milk) being a part of the work (ceremonial work) it is declared to be identical with work. Moreover, since there is no difference as to its being a cause (as this provision, milk, is a cause in the same way as the former two provisions are) and hence the meaning (of the two former provisions with milk) is similar, the succession (in which the topics are described in the Mantra) is disregarded (lit. is no reason, that the explanation should not have been made in a different order.) It is also done, because the explanation is thereby made more easy; for the provisions, when treated one after another, can be easily explained, and, when explained, are easily understood.

“Upon this all is founded, whatsoever breathes and whatsoever not breathes.” What is the meaning of this? The answer is: “Upon this,” the animal provision, “all,” be it characterized as belonging to the soul, or to the material sphere, or to the superintendence of deities, the whole world, “ is founded,” “whatsoever breathes,” endowed with the effort of breathing, “and whatsoever not breathes,” immoveable matter, as rocks, &c. And there (in the text) it is explained by the term “for,” which illustrates any thing already well known. How can it be said that the notion “to be the foundation of all,” belongs to milk? On account of its being considered as cause. And it is the intimate cause of all the works connected with burnt-offerings, and by its nature a modification of the oblation of a burnt-sacrifice. That it is the whole

Digitized by Google

142

Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.

second death," let none understand this in such a manner.

Which day a person sacrifices, the same day he overcomes the second death. A person who thus knows, will overcome the second death that day on which he offers; for he gives all the eatable food to the gods. For what reason do they not decrease, although they are continually consumed ?

The soul is world (which is founded thereon) is established by a hundred passages of the S'ruti and Smriti, wherefore it is proper to explain it by the term "for." "The saying:" in other Brámhanas, "a person, offering throughout a year with milk, overcomes the second death" (here by the year are in fact meant three hundred and sixty days, and in them there are seven hundred and twenty burnt-offerings.) By the sacrificer the bricks* which are collected in accordance with the Yajur Véda and the days and nights of the year, obtains Prajápati in the shape of the fire, which is called Sambatsará (the annual fire). Having performed in this manner offerings throughout the year, a person overcomes the second death ; having died he becomes like the gods, and does not die again.

This, which is said in the passages of other Brámhanas ; "let none understand this in such a manner," let it not be explained thus. "Which day a person sacrifices ; the same day he overcomes the second death," it does not depend upon the practice of the whole year. "A person who thus knows," viz. what has been said, that "Upon milk all is founded," because all is a modification of the burnt-offering of milk, obtains the nature of the world (of Prajápati) in one day. Thus it is said : "He overcomes the second death ;" the sage, once dying, being separated from the body, becomes the universal soul (the nature of all) which means, does not assume a finite body for dying again. What again is the reason, that by gaining the nature of all he overcomes death ? It is replied: "for he gives," because he gives all "the eatable food to the gods," to all of them, by his morning and evening burnt-offerings ; therefore it is proper, that he,—after having made his whole self like a burnt-offering, after having gained one identical nature with all the gods by his being the provision of all the gods, and after being like all the gods,—should not

• The sacrificer, or in his stead his appointed substitute, is after every daily ceremony to put down a brick to mark the number of ceremonies he has performed in the year.

First Chapter. Fifth Brāmhana.

143

verily the cause that they do not decrease, for he again and again produces this provision.

"Whosoever knows the cause that they do not decrease,—the soul is the cause that they do not decrease; for he produces this provision by understanding, by understanding and by works; if he did not produce it, it would verily decrease,—"he eats food

die again. In this manner it is also said in a Brāhmaṇa. "The self-existing Brámha (in the form of Hiranyagarbha) performed penance. Then he reflected: "Verily, there is a limit of penance; alas, let me offer myself in all beings, and all beings in myself," therefore, having offered himself in all beings and all beings in himself, he obtained by his excellency over all beings, his kingdom, his dominion." "For what reason do they not decrease, although they are continually consumed ?"

From the time that the provisions after their creation were given by the father to the seven different enjoyers, they are consumed by them. Since they (the provisions) are the cause of their (of the enjoyers') preservation, and since there "continually," without interruption, is a decrease of what has been made, their decrease is proper. But they do not decrease, as is evident, from the world continuing in an unshaken manner; hence there must be a cause for it, that they do not decrease. Therefore it is asked: "For what reason," again, "do they not decrease." The reply is : "The soul is verily the cause, that they are not decreased." As the father was before the creator of the provisions by understanding, and as he was enjoyer by the five-fold work in connexion with a wife, &c., in the same manner also those, to whom the provisions are given, although they are enjoyers of those provisions, are fathers; they produce by understanding and penance those provisions. It is then declared: the soul which is the enjoyer of the provisions, is the cause, that they do not decrease? How is it the cause, that they do not decrease? The answer is: "For he," because he "again and again produces this provision," viz. this seven-fold provision, which is to be enjoyed, the characteristic of which is to be cause and effect, and which consists in the effect of work,—"by understanding," by knowledge which will take place at this or the other time, "and by works," the efforts of speech, mind and body. "If he did not produce it," the mentioned seven-fold provisions, even for

"Digitized by Google"

144

Brihad Āranyāka Upanishad.

in the true manner,” true means principal; therefore he eats food in the principal manner, he goes to the gods, he lives upon strength ; this is said for the sake of praise. 2.

an instant, by knowledge and works, then he would be separated from the permanent enjoyment, “ it would verily decrease.” And the meaning is, therefore, because the soul, the enjoyer of the provisions, uninterruptedly produces them according to his knowledge and action, therefore is the soul the cause that they do not decrease, as it is a constant agent; therefore the provisions, although consumed, do not decrease. Hence the whole world, the totality, characterised by knowledge and the result of action, consisting of effect and cause, being the effect resulting from action,—because it is an expanse, concreted by the actions and desires of numberless embodied souls, joined together,—of a moment’s duration, impure, without substance, like the continuation of a light reflected on the current of a river, without substance like the trunk of the plantain-tree, like foam, like a deception, like the water in a mirage, like a dream, &c., although changeable and transient, appears to be substantial to those whose knowledge is formed by it. For the sake of disregarding the world it is said: “ He produces this provision by understanding, by understanding and by works. If he did not produce it, it would verily decrease ;” for in this manner the disregard of those who disregard the world, has success :—therefore the science of Bramha will be commenced in the fourth chapter. “ Whosoever knows the cause that they do not decrease,”—the three provisions to be mentioned are by this opportunity explained ; in this manner the effect of true knowledge is set forth. “ Whosoever knows the cause that they do not decrease,—the soul is verily the cause that they do not decrease ; for he produces this provision by understanding, by understanding and by works ; if he did not produce it, it would verily decrease,—he eats food in the true manner.” The sense of this is explained : “in the principal manner;” whosoever knows in the principal manner that the cause of the non-decrease of the provisions is the father, the soul, “ he eats the food;”

a person who knows is not placed, as the ignorant is, in an accidental relation to the food; having become the substance of the provisions, he is alone the enjoyer ; he does not become an object of enjoyment (for others) “ he goes to the gods,” obtains a godlike state ; “ he lives upon

First Chapter. Fifth Brāhmaṇa.

145

"Three he made for himself," viz. mind, speech, and life;

these he made for himself. "I was absent in mind, I did not

see. I was absent in mind, I did not hear ;" in this manner it

is evident, that a person sees with the mind, hears with the mind.

Desire, determination, uncertainty, belief, unbelief, steadiness

strength," and immortality, "this is said for the sake of praise," it has

not another meaning relative to an invisible effect. 2.

The three provisions, mentioned before which are the effects of the

five-fold work, exceed in value the others on account of their nature as

effects and of their extensiveness. For the separate explanation of them,

the present section, from the words : "Three he made for himself,"

until the end of this Brāhmaṇa is commenced. What is its meaning ?

The answer is : "Mind, speech and life, these," three provisions,

these mind, speech and life, "he," the father, at the commence-

ment of the creation, "made for himself," for his own sake. With

reference to them there is a doubt as to the existence and nature

of the mind ; hence it is said, the mind exists as something different

from the ear and the other external organs, because it is well known,

that, although there is a connexion of the soul with the objects of the

external organs, yet a person does not (always) apprehend a present

object. A person, when asked: Dost thou see this form ? answers

for instance : My mind wandered somewhere else, "I was absent in

mind, I did not see." In the same manner, when asked : Dost thou

hear my word ? he answers : "I was absent in mind, I did not hear."

Therefore, it is evident, that that,—in the absence of which a knowledge

of form, sound, &c., by the eye, ear, &c. (the instruments fit to appre-

hend forms, sounds, &c.) does not take place, although they (eye, ear,

&c.) are in connexion with their respective objects, and by the presence

of which such a knowledge takes place,—is something different, named

the mind, the internal organ, connected with the objects of all the other

organs. Therefore "in this manner it is evident, that a person" every

person "sees with the mind, hears with the mind," because, the mind

being disturbed, there is no seeing, hearing, &c. The existence of the mind

having been proved, the following is said with reference to its nature :

"Desire,"—the wish to be united with a woman, &c., "determination,"

—the ascertaining of a present object of white, blue, &c., "uncertainty,"

146

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

non-steadiness, shame, intellect, fear, all this is the mind alone. Therefore, when touched from behind, a person knows by the mind. Every sound whatsoever is speech ; for it extends as far as the end ; for it is not an object of manifestation. The vital air, which goes forwards, the vital air, which goes downwards, the

—doubt, " belief,"—the knowledge of the existence of actions whose effects are not perceived, of deities, &c., " unbelief,"—the knowledge, opposite to the former, " steadiness,"—the firmness in pain of the body, &c. " non-steadinss,"—the opposite of the former, " shame,"—bashfulness ; " intellect,"—knowledge ; " fear,"—apprehension, " all this, &c. is the mind," are forms of the mind, of the internal organ. Another reason is also mentioned for the existence of the mind. Because,

" when touched from behind," by some body unperceived by the eye, a person is aware by discrimination, this is a touch of the hand, that a touch of the knee, therefore exists an internal organ, called mind. If there were nothing which discriminates, called mind, how could there be discrimination by the mere skin ; therefore the mind, the cause of the possibility of discrimination, exists. Its nature has already been shown.

The three provisions, the effects of actions, viz. mind, speech and life, are here to be explained inasmuch as they are subservient to the soul, as they have their material sphere, and as they are superintended by deities. Among them, viz. among mind, speech and life, as subservient to the soul, the mind has been explained. Now speech will be explained. " Every sound whatsoever," viz.—either that which is characterized as a letter, &c. to be pronounced through the palate and other organs by the agency of living beings, or the other kind, produced by drums, clouds, &c.,—every sound " is speech." Such is the nature of speech, now its effect will be mentioned. " For it," for speech " extends as far as the end," the conclusion of what is to be named, the determination of the same ; " for it," again, as being the manifester, is not to be manifested, as is what is to be named, because its nature is to

manifest like a light, &c. ; for what manifests, as a light and the like, is not manifested by some other manifestation. In the same manner speech which manifests, is not manifested itself. Thus the S'ruti removes the regressum in infinitum (that any thing which manifests, supposes some thing else by which it is manifested, &c). It is not an object of mani-

[Digitized by Google

First Chapter. Fifth Brāhmaṇa.

147

vital air, which goes everywhere, the vital air, which goes upwards, and the vital air, which equalises, vital air, all this is life (Prāṇa:). Thus modified the soul is the modification of mind, the modification of speech, and the modification of life. 3.

They are even the three worlds; speech is even this world, mind the atmospheric world, life that world. 4.

festation, and the meaning is, manifestation is the effect of speech.—Now "the vital air, which goes forwards," (respiration, Prāṇa :) is explained. Respiration is the function of the heart which is to be discharged by the mouth and nose. Respiration (Prāṇa is derived from Praṇayana, taking forwards). "The vital air which goes downwards," (Flatulence, Apāna) whose function is downwards, from the carrying away of excrements, urine, &c., the vital air which goes every where," (circulation : Vyāna) has its place from the navel (throughout the whole body) and is called Vyāna from its function of regulating (Vyāyamaṇa) ; it is the union of the functions of respiration and flatulence and the cause of energetie action. "The vital air, which goes upwards," (Eructation, Udāna) is the getting stout, it is the cause of going upwards, the function of rising from the sole of the feet to the head ; "the vital air, which equalises," (assimilation, Samāna) because it equally (Samam) carries (distributes) what is eaten and drunk ; its place is the stomach, and its function to digest the food; vital air (Ana) is the common function of all those special functions, and united with the common effort of the body. "All this," the whole of the mentioned functions of respiration, &c., is life (Prāṇa),—Life, as having a function and subservient to the soul, is not mentioned; but its action has been explained by showing the division of its functions. Explained are the provisions called mind, speech and life, in their relation as subservient to the soul. "Thus modified," viz. by the modifications commenced by mind, speech and life, as referring to Prajāpati.

Which is that soul; the whole of causes and effects, the thus or thus modified totality, which by those who do not discriminate, from want of distinction, is thought to be of the nature of the soul ? The mentioned totality is the modification of speech, the modification of mind and the modification of life ; this also is said for the purpose to determine life. 3.

The material sphere (Adhibhautika) of these provisions of Prajāpati

v 2?

148 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

They are even the three Védas ; speech is even the Rig Véda, mind the Yajur Véda, and life the Sáma Véda. 5.

They are even the gods, the forefathers and men ; speech is even the gods, mind the forefathers, and life the men. 6.

They are even father, mother and child ; mind is even the father, speech the mother, and life the child. 7.

They are even that which is known, which is wished to be known, and which is not known ; whatsoever is known, is of the nature of speech ; for speech is known ; speech being of such a nature, preserves a person. 8.

Whatsoever is wished to be known, is of the nature of the mind ; for the mind is desired to be known ; the mind being of such a nature, preserves a person. 9.

will now be stated. "They" speech, mind and life, are even "the three worlds," earth, atmosphere and heaven. Their distinction is "speech is even this world," mind the atmosphere, and life that world. 4.

In the same manner : "They are even," &c. ; the meaning of these words is plain. 5.—7.

"They are even that which is known, which is wished to be known, and which is not known." Their distinction is, "whatever is known," fully known, "is of the nature of speech ;" and the text gives the reason for this ; "for speech is known," because its nature is to manifest.

How can that be unknown, which makes other things also known ? "By speech the universal king is known as a companion," will be said afterwards. The effect of knowing the nature of speech is "speech being of such a nature, being known, preserves him," viz. the person who knows the mentioned perfections of speech, that is to say, in the form of knowledge becomes a provision, an enjoyment, for him. 8.

In the same manner, "whatsoever," how indistinct soever, desired to be known distinctly, "is wished to be known, is of the nature of the mind, for," because, "the mind" on account of its doubtful nature, "is desired to be known." As before, is described the reward for one who knows the perfection of the mind. "The mind," being of such a nature, viz. which is wished to be known "preserves him," obtains the nature of a provision by its own characteristic to be some-

[Digitized by Google

First Chapter. Fifth Brāhmaṇa.

149

Whatsoever is not known, is of the nature of life, for life is not known; life being of such a nature, preserves a person. 10.

Of this speech is earth the body, its illuminating nature that fire. Therefore as far as speech extends, so far extends the earth, so far fire. 11.

thing wished to be known. In the same manner "whatsoever is not known," is not an object of knowledge, nor doubted, "is of the nature of life; for life is not known," not known in its nature, since it is not heard to be determined. As the distinction of speech, mind and life is established by the division into what is known, what is wished to be known, and what is not known (viz. by a division, comprehending all objects of knowledge) the three worlds, &c. are only mentioned for the sake of illustration. By the passage showing, that the nature of what is known is every where, &c., its rule is to be remembered. "Life, being of such a nature, preserves him," which means life with its unknown nature becomes his provision. Teachers, fathers, &c. appear to be doubted and their assistance to be not known by disciples, sons, &c. In the same manner is obtained the nature of the provisions of mind and life, which are doubted and not known. 10.

The material extent of speech, mind and life has been explained; now their sphere, as superintended by deities, is commenced. "Of this speech," which is shown in the text under the notion of a provision of Prajápati, "is earth the body," the external locality; "its illuminating nature," the manifesting organ, located upon the earth, "that" earthly, "fire;" for twofold is Prajápati's speech, viz. effect, locality, which does not manifest, and secondly organ, which is placed in that locality, and which does manifest. Both of them, earth and fire, are the speech of Prajápati. "Therefore (tat, explained by S'ankara with tattra, "with reference to this") as far as, in measure "speech, extends," in its divisions, viz. in its subserviency to the soul and in its material sphere, "so far extends the earth," which is established every where under the notion of locality as effect, "so far goes that fire," as located in the form of sense, it entered so far with its illuminating nature the earth. The last (relation, viz. the sphere superintended by deities) is the same (and therefore not commented on). 11.

Digitized by Google

150

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

Again, of this mind is heaven the body, its illuminating nature that Aditya. Therefore as far as mind extends, so far extends heaven, so far that Aditya. They united in love. Hence life was produced. He is Indra, he is without rival. A second verily is a rival. Whosoever knows this, has no rival. 12.

Again of this life are the waters the body, the illuminating nature that moon. Therefore as far as life extends, so far

"Again of this mind," which has been declared a provision of Prajapati "is heaven," the place of heaven, "the body," the effect, the locality, "its illuminating nature," its organ, that which is to be located, "that Aditya." There "as far as," in measure, "mind," as subservient to the soul, or in its material sphere, "extends, so far" in expanse, in measure, is fixed heaven to be the locality for the illuminating organ of the mind, "so far that Aditya," the illuminating organ, which requires to be located. "They," Agni and Aditya, speech and mind, in their nature as superintending deities, mother and father, "united in love." Both having the intention, I will do the action, it was—between the two places (heaven and earth),—produced by the mind, Aditya, as father, and manifested by speech, Agni, as mother. "Hence" by the union of both of them, "life," air, "was produced" for the sake of motion, of work. "He," who was born "is Indra," the supreme lord (Paramés'wara) and not only Indra, but "without rival." Without rival means a person, for whom there exists no rival. Who again has really a rival? "A second verily," a second who approaches with the intention of contention, "is called "a rival." Accordingly, although speech and mind have the nature of a second, yet they entertain no rivalry ; for they have a friendly intention towards life.—The fruit, arising from the knowledge, that there is no rivalry from those who were united in love, is like that derived from the subserviency to the soul, as follows : "Whosoever knows this," life as it has been described, as being without rival, viz. he who has true knowledge, "has no rival," no antagonist. 12.

"Again, of this life,"—of the life, set forth in the text, which is a provision of Prajápati, not the life which has been declared as offspring, and described immediately before, "are the waters the body," the

First Chapter. Fifth Brāhmaṇa.

151

extend the waters, so far extends that moon. They are even all alike, all infinite. Whosoever worships them as finite (beings) conquers a finite world; again whosoever worships them as infinite (beings) conquers an infinite world. 13.

That Prajāpati in his likeness of the year consists of 16 parts (Kalā). His nights are even 15 parts; his fixed part is the

effect, the locality for the organs, "the illuminating nature," as before, "that moon." There "as far as," in measure, "life extends," in its divisions as subservient to the soul and as material sphere, "so far extend" pervade, "the waters," in their measure, "so far" "extends that moon" which is to be located, so far, having entered the waters, and being of the nature of sense, it extends, as far as the sphere, subservient to the soul, and the material sphere extend.—Those three provisions, created by the father through the five-fold work, bear the names of speech, mind and life. The whole world in its sphere, subservient to the soul, and in its material sphere, is pervaded by them, or, besides them, there is nothing whatsoever, either effect or cause. But all these are Prajāpati. "They," speech, mind and life, "are even all alike," having the same extent, are as far pervading, as the objects of living beings together with the sphere subservient to the soul and the material sphere. Therefore they are "infinite;" because they are present in all bodies; for a body cannot be conceived without cause and effect; for it is said, that they consist of cause and effect. "Whosoever worships them," which are of the nature of Prajāpati, "as finite," limited, under the notion of their material sphere and their sphere, subservient to the soul, "conquers" as the reward in accordance with his worship, "a finite world," a world which is limited, which means, "he does not get their nature." "Again, whosoever worships them as infinite," as possessing the nature of all, the nature of all living beings, as unlimited "conquers an infinite world." 13.

It has been said, that the father, after having created seven provisions by the fivefold work, produced three provisions for his own sake. They are explained to be the effects of the five-fold work. How again are they called the effect of the five-fold work? Because even in these three provisions the five-fold work is perceived, as wealth and work

Digitized by Google

152 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

sixteenth. He becomes full and wanes by the nights. At the day of the new moon, during the night entering with this sixteenth part all that is endowed with life, he is then the next day born in the morning. Therefore let in that night nobody

are there probable, therefore is their cause also similar. There (as to the three provisions) the earth and fire are the mother, heaven and Aditya the father, and the life (air) which is in the middle of them, is their offspring, as it has been explained. On account of this wealth and work should be produced; this means to imply the commencement: "That Prajāpati, in his likeness of the year," who has been set forth in the text as consisting of three parts, is determined in a special manner by the nature of the year as consisting of sixteen parts. He, consisting of sixteen parts, is the year, the nature of time. "His," Prajāpati's, as the substance of time, "nights," days and nights—meaning lunar days (tithi) are fifteen parts. "His fixed," permanent, "part" remains, as "the sixteenth," as the part (Kalā) which completes the sixteenth. "He" becomes full and wanes by the nights;" by the lunar days which are called parts (Kalā) ; for by the first day of a lunation, and by those which succeed it, the moon, Prajāpati, gets full in the light half of the lunation, it grows by the increasing parts (Kalás) until the orb is full at the day of the full moon ; it wanes by the decreasing parts in the dark half of the lunation, until the

one permanent part remains in the dark night. "He," Prajāpati, the substance of time, "at the day of the new moon during the night," "entering with this sixteenth part," which has been called the permanent part, "all that is endowed with life," all living beings, viz. all that drinks water and all that eats annual plants, pervading all this by his identity with the annual plants (or with water) and abiding during the dark night, "is then" the next day, "born in the morning," united (the moon) with its second part.—In the following manner is Prajāpati of five-fold nature. The heaven and sun are the mind, the father,—the earth and fire speech, the wife, the mother ; and their offspring is life, the days of the moon, the parts (Kalā) are the wealth, because by their increasing and decreasing they are like wealth, and the work of those parts is what effects the change of the world. In this manner the whole Prajāpati, has become the effect of the five-fold work, in accordance

First Chapter. Fifth Brāhmaṇa.

153

cut off the life of any one endowed with life, not even of the chameleon ; it is intended for the honour of this deity. 14.

That Prajápati who under the likeness of the year is possessed of sixteen parts, is even this. That " this" is a person who thus knows. His wealth is the fifteen parts, his soul (self) is his sixteenth part. He gets full and wanes even by wealth.

with the desires : " Let me have a wife,"—again " Let me be born,"— again, " Let me have wealth," again,—" Let me perform work;" for as the cause so is the effect, is a principle even with the common people.

Because the moon, having that night entered all living creatures, is possessed of its permanent part, " therefore," on this ground, " let in that night nobody cut off the life of any one endowed with life," let him not destroy a living creature, " not even of a chameleon." for the chameleon, as being wicked, is naturally destroyed, since it is considered to forebode bad luck, when it is seen. ' But then, enmity to living beings is prohibited according to the passage of the Smriti : " Not killing living creatures, except at holy places." ' Very good, it is prohibited ; but yet it must not be said, that the sentence means to make an exception for any other time than the day of the dark night, or an exception for the killing of the chameleon. What then does it mean ? " It is intended for the honour," the adoration, " of this deity, viz. the deity of the moon."

" That Prajápati, " bearing the name of the invincible, " who under the likeness of the year is possessed of sixteen parts," must not be thought as absolutely invisible, because he " is even this," he is perceived visibly. Who is that " this ?" " He is the person who thus knows," who knows, that Prajápati whose nature consists of the three provisions, is like himself. By the similarity with what is he Prajapati ? The answer is : " His wealth," the wealth in cows, &c. of a person who thus knows, " is the fifteen parts." For the sake of his completeness, " his soul," the individual self, " is his" (the knowing person's) sixteenth part, representing the permanent Kalá. " He," like the moon, " gets full and wanes even by wealth." " It is well known " in common life, that " the soul," the individual self, " is like the nave of a wheel, wealth like its periphery," represented by the family, the external part of the wheel, viz. spokes and circumference, &c.

154

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

It is well known, that the soul is like the nave of a wheel, wealth like its periphery. Therefore, although he suffers the loss of all, if he lives, he is bare of the periphery, as it is said. 15.

Again there are verily three worlds, the world of man, the world of the forefathers, and the world of the gods. The world of man is to be conquered by a son, and not by any other work, (or knowledge,) by work the world of the forefathers, by science the world of the gods.

"Therefore, although he suffers the loss of all," of his property, suffers distress, "if he lives," "by the soul," represented by the nave of the wheel, "he is bare of," he has lost "the periphery," the external wealth, the family, as a wheel, deprived of spokes and circumference, "as it is said," and the meaning is, if he lives, he is again increasing in wealth, represented by the spokes and circumference. 15.

It has been explained, how by fivefold work in connexion with science, the wealth of the gods, Prajápati is possessed of the nature of the three provisions; it has afterwards been said, how the wealth of a wife, &c. is represented by the family. There (in the former section) it has only generally been understood, that a son, work and inferior science (knowledge of the Védas with reference to ceremonies), are causes of obtaining the worlds, but the rule of the special connexion of a son, &c., with the effect, which is the obtaining of the worlds, has not been understood.

To explain the special connexion of the effects with their causes, viz. a son, &c., the present section is commenced. The term "again" has the object to introduce the sentence "there are verily," verily is to show certainty, "three worlds," alone fit to be causes, stated by the Sástra, neither more not less. Which are they ? The answer is : "The world of man, the world of the forefathers, and the world of the gods." Among them "the world of man" is to be gained by, is the effect of "a son," as cause (how it is to be gained by a son, will afterwards be said) "and not by any other work," or knowledge, as must be supplied here; "by work," alone, as for instance the daily burnt-offering (Agnihotra) "the world of the forefathers," is to be gained, and not by a son, nor by knowledge,—"by science the world of the gods," not by a son, nor by work. "The world of the gods is the

First Chapter. Fifth Brāhmana.

165

gods is the best among the worlds. Therefore they praise science. 16.

Hence again the making over. When the father thinks he is to die, then he says to his son : "Thou art Brama, thou art the sacrifice, thou art the world." The son repeats : "I am Brama, I am the sacrifice, I am the world." Of all that

best," the one most deserving of praise, "among the" three, "worlds." "Therefore they praise science," because it is the cause of it. 16.

In this manner the three causes, viz, a son, work, and knowledge, find their application according to the division of the effect, viz. the three worlds which are to be accomplished. But a wife, because it is necessary for the sake of a son and of work, is not a separate cause, and is therefore not separately mentioned. Also wealth, as it is the cause of work, is not a separate cause. It is evident, that knowledge and work are means of conquering the worlds in consequence of their recovering their own nature. But a son not being of the nature of work, it is not clear, in what manner he is the means of conquering the worlds. "Hence," it is to be explained, in this manner "again," afterwards is commenced, "the making over ;" this is the name of the work which is to be now related ; for the father makes over the duties he has himself to perform, in the manner to be mentioned, to his son ; hence this work bears the name of "making over." At what time is this to be done? "When the father thinks, he is to die," by inauspicious signs and the like, "then he says to his son (after having called him) : 'Thou art Brama, thou art the sacrifice, thou art the world.' " Thus addressed, he "repeats." That is to say, being instructed before, he knows, I have to do this. In this manner he says the three sentences : "I am Brama, I am the sacrificer, I am the world." Under the idea, that the sense of the same is concealed, the S'ruti continues for its explanation : "Of all that has been read" the remainder of what has been read, that is to say, read or not read "is Brama the identity," is the identity in the term of Bramba. The practice of reading with reference to the Védas, which was hitherto thy duty, is henceforth thou, Bramba ; which means, must be done by thy agency. In the same manner, "Of all the sacrifices that were to be performed by me," may they be performed by me or not performed, "is sacri-

me,"

x 2

Digitized by Google

156 Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.

has been read, is Branha the identity. Of all the sacrifices that are to be performed, is sacrifice the identity. Of all the worlds that are to be conquered, is world the identity. Thus far extends verily all this. All this multitude preserves me

fice the identity," is the identity in the term sacrifice. The sacrifices which were to be performed by my agency, are henceforth "thou sacrifice," which means, are to be performed by thy agency. "All the worlds that are to be conquered," by me, whether they are conquered or not conquered, is world the "identity," is the identity in the term "world." Henceforward they are "thou world," to be conquered by thee, henceforward the sacrifice, which it was my duty to perform by reading (the Védas) offerings and conquering of the worlds, is laid by me upon thee, but I am free from the sacrifice consisting in the bondage of duty. And the son has understood all in this manner, because he was instructed (before). The S'ruti, having considered there the intention of the father, gives this explanation: "Thus far extends verily all this," this is the limit of all the duties of a householder, viz. that the Védas are to be read, the sacrifices to be performed and the world to be conquered. "All this multitude" (for all this burthen, to which I am subject, when taken from me and placed upon you) preserves me, saves me from this world. (The past Abhunajat in Sanscrit has in the S'ruti the meaning of the future : Palayishyati).

Because a son, who thus knows, is to liberate his father from this world, from the bondage of duty, "therefore they," the Brámhanas, "call a son who is thus instructed, Lokya," which means, good for his father obtaining the worlds. "Therefore they," the fathers, "instruct a son" under the expectation, that he will be their Lokya (procurer of the worlds). "When he," the father, "having such a knowledge," after having delivered to the son the sacrifice of duty, "departs from this world," dies, "then he enters with those lives the son," pervades him with the speech, mind and life set forth in the text. When the cause of distinction relative to the soul (which cause is ignorance) is removed, the speech, mind and life of the father enter all with their nature as superintended by deities, viz. in their likeness with the earth, the fire and the sun. Together with those lives the father also enters, because the father is transformed into the nature of speech, mind and life; for

First Chapter. Fifth Brāmaṇa.

157

from this world. Therefore they call a son who is instructed,

Lokya; therefore they instruct him. When he, having such

a knowledge, departs from this world, then he enters together

with those lives the son. If by him any thing through negligence,

the father is transformed in such a manner as: "I am the infinite

speech, mind and life, extending as far as the distinctions of what relates

to the soul, to matter and to the superintendence of deities." Therefore his life is a continuation of the father's, and it is hence properly

said, "then together with those lives he enters the son;"

for it is said, he becomes the soul (substance) of all and (therefore also) of

the son; and the meaning is, the father who has a thus instructed son,

continues in this world, is by the likeness with the son not to be

thought dead. In this manner it is said in another passage of the

S'ruti; "He is made his other soul by holy works." (A. U. B. I.

vii. p. 226, M. 4.) Now the text gives the derivation of Puttra (son).

"If by him," by the father at any time, "any thing through

negligence, remains," meanwhile, "undone," which ought to be done,

"the son liberates him from all this," which, bearing the nature

of duty, was left undone by the father, and which is an obstacle to

gaining the worlds,—he liberates him, by completing it (Púrayitvá)

through his own practice. "Therefore," because he saves the father

by completing (Púranéna) hence the name of a son (Puttra). This

is the true notion of a son (Puttrásya Puttrátvam) that by filling

(Púrayittvá) the hole of the father he saves him. "He," the father,

"continues," although dead, yet immortal, "by a son," of such a kind,

"in this world." In this manner the father conquers (obtains) by the son

this world of man,—not so, however, the worlds of the gods and the

forefathers by knowledge and work, but (he conquers them) by as-

suming their nature alone; for without assuming their own nature,

knowledge and work cannot possibly become causes of conquering

the world by dependance upon another, as it is the case with a son.

"Then," after the father has made over his duties, "those divine"

belonging to Hiranyagarbha, "immortal," whose nature it is not to

die, "lives," speech and the others, "enter him." How? The answer

is given in the next section by the words: "The divine speech, &c."

In this manner it has been shown by the S'ruti itself, that a son,

work and inferior knowledge have the power of accomplishing the

Digitized by Google

158 Brihad A'ranyaka Upanishad.

remains undone, the son liberates him from all this. Hence the name of a son (Puttra). He continues by a son alone in this world. Then those divine, immortal lives enter him. 17.

worlds of men, of the forefathers and of the gods. In respect of this some wranglers (the Mímánsakas are meant) not knowing the special meanings of the words of the S'ruti, say, that a son and the other causes have the power to effect liberation. To silence them this passage has been given by the S'ruti, commencing with: "let me have a wife," and all the other fivefold work which accomplishes desire, continuing with : "So far goes the desire," of a son, &c., and concluding with the application to the special effects to be accomplished. Hence it is evident, that the passage of the S'ruti about debt refers to an ignorant person, and not to the knowledge of the supreme soul. And it will be said (p. 903) : "Of what use is a son to us, to whom the soul is the world."

Others, (the Bhartripanchikas) on the other hand, maintain, that the conquering of the worlds of the forefathers and gods is even an exclusion from them. Therefore a person, who by the joint performance of a son, of work and of the inferior knowledge is excluded from those three worlds, obtains liberation by the knowledge of the supreme soul; in this way the causes of a son, &c. successively have the power to effect liberation. To silence them also the other subsequent passage of the S'ruti is engaged in showing the effect, resulting for the father, whose duty is the performance of work, who has the knowledge of the nature of the three provisions and who makes over the performance of what has been left undone. But it cannot be said, that the effect is that of liberation, because it has been shown, that by the effect derived from understanding and penance in connexion with the three provisions, the provisions are again produced. This follows also from the passage, referring to the decrease (of the provisions). "For what even does not produce it, decreases," also from the nature of the means of the effect in the passage : "The body is like light," and lastly from the conclusion with the nature of name, form and work, in the passage : "Threefold is this, &c. Nor is it possible to infer from this passage, that the three causes, when united, have the power to effect one's liberation and another's, obtaining the nature of the three provisions, because the passage merely intends to show, that the effect of a son and of the other causes is the obtaining of the nature of the three provisions. 17.

First Chapter. Fifth Brāhmaṇa. 159

From the earth and the fire the divine speech enters him. That speech is verily divine, by which, whatever he says, comes to pass. 18.

From the sky and the sun the divine mind enters him. That verily is the divine mind, by which he becomes joyful; henceforth he does not grieve. 19.

From the waters and the moon the divine life enters him. That verily is the divine life, which, whether issuing forth, or not issuing forth, is not afraid, again which is not lost.

"From the earth and the fire the divine speech, (divine refers to its superintending deity,) enters him," after he has made over his duties; that is to say, the divine speech, as characterised by earth and fire, is the last cause of the speech of all ; for speech is obstructed by the faults of attachment, &c. with reference to the material elements, and as the faults of a person who has knowledge are removed, it (speech) pervades him, like water and the manifestation of a light, on the breaking of what concealed them (for instance a vessel). This is the sense of the words : "From the earth and the fire the divine speech enters him." "That speech is verily divine," free from the faults of untruth and the like, pure, "by which" (divine speech) "whatever he says," either for himself or another, "comes to pass," that is to say, his word is not in vain, is not obstructed. 18.

In the same manner : "From the sky and the sun the divine mind enters him." And, "that is the divine mind," by the purity of its nature, "by which he (the father) becomes joyful," happy, "henceforth" moreover, "he does not grieve," because there is no connexion of such a cause as grief (with him.) 19.

In the same manner : "From the waters and the moon the divine life enters him. That verily is the divine life ;" viz. of what nature? the answer is,—"Which, whether issuing forth," in all the distinctions of life, "or not issuing forth," in its nature as totality or speciality, or also, issuing forth in all immoveable things, and not issuing forth in all immoveable things, "is not afraid," is not connected with fear, of which unhappiness is the cause, "again, is not lost," is not destroyed, is not injured. "The person who knows thus," the before

160

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

person who thus knows, becomes the soul of all beings. As that deity, so also he. As all beings preserve that deity, so also preserve all beings a person who thus knows.

Whatever grief the children suffer together with their children, remains united with them alone; what is holy approaches him; for sin does not approach the gods. 20.

mentioned view of the nature of the three provisions, "becomes the soul of all beings," becomes the life of all beings, becomes the mind of all beings, becomes their speech, that is to say, becomes omniscient by being the nature of all; and also omnipotent. "As that deity," the before mentioned deity, named Hiranyagarbha, "so also": (also shows, that there is no obstacle to his omniscience and omnipotence) "he" which term concludes the illustration. Moreover :* "As all beings, "preserve" worship, "that deity," the deity called Hiranyagarbha with offerings, &c. "So also preserve all beings a person who thus knows," which means, they worship him always with offerings and the like.

It has been said, "he becomes the soul of all beings." Now it may be questioned, whether, by his being the nature of cause and effect of all beings, he is not also allied to the happiness and unhappiness of them. This is not the case, because his intellect is unlimited. As to persons whose intellect and nature are limited on being censured, &c. a connexion with unhappiness is evident, as if we say : "I am censured by that man ;" but in virtue of his being the soul of all, there is no unhappiness from such causes produced, as there is no distinction of intellect with regard to the nature of the soul between the one who is censured and the other who censures, and also, as, like the unhappiness of death, there is no cause. For instance. If any body dies, unhappiness is produced for somebody (showing itself in such words as :) He is.my son, my brother, where the cause (of the distress) is a son, a brother. If there is no cause of such a kind, unhappiness is not produced, even should a person behold the death of a person, &c. (who is not related to him). In this manner no

• Kinha (moreover) is in text connected with the preceding sentence, commencing with " Sa," I believe, by a clerical error, as in this place it has no meaning, or a meaning which destroys the simplicity of the text.

First Chapter. Fifth Bráhmaṇa.

161

Next therefore the deliberation of observance. Prajápati verily created the actions. When they were created, they vied with each other. With the words,—“I will speak,” speech kept the observance ; with the words,—“I will see,” eye ; with the words,—“I will hear,” ear ; in the same manner the other actions

unhappiness arises for god whose nature is unlimited, because he has not the faults of false knowledge, &c. which produce the unhappiness of pride, &c. This is meant by the words,—“Whatever grief his subjects suffer together with their children,” “the same,” the unhappiness which is the cause of the grief, &c., “remains united with them,” with his subjects, because it is produced from a limited intellect. But what of the universal soul can be united with or disunited from what thing ? “What is holy,” what is good,—the desired reward means here holy ; for a great many holy actions are done by him, therefore its reward, “approaches him who now occupies the place of Prajápati.” “For sin does not approach the gods,” and the meaning is, sin, its effect, unhappiness does not approach the gods, because there is no opportunity for the effect of sin. 20.

By the words,—“They are all alike, they are all infinite,” (p. 151) the worship of speech, mind and life has been declared in general, that is to say, without their mutual distinction. Must this now be understood in the mentioned manner, or is there any possible distinction with regard to observance on considering the case ? The answer is,—“Next therefore,” then follows “the deliberation of observance,” of worship, which means the consideration of the action of worship. And the consideration turns upon this, which is it among those organs, whose work is to be conceived under the idea of observance ? “Prajá- pati verily,” after having created his offspring, “created the actions,” which means the organs, speech and others (for being capable of action, they are called actions) and the meaning is : He created speech and the other organs. Again “when they were created, they vied,” rivaled, “with each other.” How ? “With the words.—I will speak.” let me not rest from my business, speaking, “speech kept the observance.” If there is likewise another, my equal, who does not require rest from his business, let him show his prowess. In the same manner, “with the words,—“I will see,” eye ; with the words, “I will hear,” ear ; in

Y

Digitized by Google

162

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

(Karmani) according to their action. Death, being there as fatigue, seized them, he made them his own; having made them his own, he arrested them. Therefore speech gets even fatigued, the eye gets fatigued, the ear gets fatigued. Again he did not make his own that life. They resolved to know that central life. "He verily is amongst us the best, who moving and not moving, not suffers, is not injured. Well then, let us all become of the nature of him." Thus all of them became of his nature. Therefore they are named by this "Pránáh." After him, who

the same manner the other actions," organs, "according to their action." "Death," the destroyer, "being there as fatigue," in the form of fatigue "seized them," took hold of them. How? "He made them," the organs engaged in their business, "his own," he appeared under the form of fatigue, and "having made them his own, he" death, "arrested them," made them cease from their work. "Therefore," even now, "speech," having entered upon its work, "gets even fatigued," is made to cease from its work, seized by death in the form of fatigue. In the same manner "the eye gets fatigued, the ear gets fatigued." "Again he," death in the form of fatigue "did not make his own that life," the principal life. "They" the other organs, "resolved," made up their mind, "to know that central life" which even now not fatigued by him (death) enters upon its work.

"He verily is amongst us the best," the most praiseworthy, the greatest, "who moving and not moving not suffers," again, "is not injured. Well then" now "let us all become of the nature of him," of life, that is to say, let us consider ourselves as life. Having "thus" ascertained, 'our observances are not sufficient to protect us from death,' "all of them became of his nature," considering themselves as the nature of life, kept the observances of life. Because by the nature of life, viz. by its nature to move and by its nature to manifest, the other organs get their nature,—namely, without life nothing could move; for only after the action of moving they are observed to engage in their own work,—"therefore they," speech and the others, "are named by this," name of life, "Pránáh" (lives). "After him," the wise person, who in this manner knows that all the organs have the nature

First Chapter. Fifth Brāhmaṇa.

163

thus knows, is verily called the family in which he is born. Whosoever rivals one who thus knows, after having wasted, dies at last. This is what refers to the soul. 21.

Next what refers to the superintendence of deities. With the words,—“ I will burn,” fire kept the observance, with the words,—“ I will heat,” the sun, with the words,—“ I will shine,” the moon. In the same manner the other deities according to their divine nature. As this central life amongst those organs, so appears Vāju (the air), amongst those deities ;

of life, and are called by the term “life” (Prāṇa) “ is verily called the family,” by the people. The family, in which he who thus knows, “ is born,” gets famous by the name of the wise person, it is his family, as this is the family of Tapatí. “ Whosoever thus” in the manner mentioned, “ knows” that speech and the other organs . have the nature and the name of life, gets a reward of such a kind. Again, “ Whosoever rivals,” being his antagonist “ one who thus knows,” knows the nature of life, wastes in this body, “ after having wasted, dies at last,” not on a sudden. “ This is what refers to the soul,” in the mentioned manner, the knowledge of the nature of life. This conclusion is intended to introduce the exposition of what refers to the superintendence of deities. 21.

“ Next what refers to the superintendence of deities,” the thinking as to the deities is described. It is the question; of which special deity is it best to keep the ordinance? All is here like the former description about what referred to the soul. “ With the words,—“ I will burn,” fire kept the observance, with the words,—“ I will heat,” the sun, with the words,—“ I will shine,” the moon. In the same manner the other deities according to their divine nature.” Here is an illustration. “ As this central life,” with reference to the soul, “ amongst those organs,” speech and the others, was not seized by death, was not compelled to cease from its work, was not disturbed in its own observance of life, so also not “ Vāju amongst those deities,” Agni and others ; “ for the other deities,” Agni and the rest, like speech &c. with regard to the soul, according to their divine nature, “ decline,” go down, cease from their works, “ not Vāju,” goes down

Y 2

164

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

for the other deities decline, not Vájú. This Vájú indeed is an unrestrained deity. 22.

Here follows this Sloka,—“ Whence the sun rises and where he sets.”—he verily rises from life and sets into life.—“ this the gods made their sacred law. This sways to-day, this sways to-morrow.” What they kept then, they will also observe

as the central life (does not decline). Therefore “ this Vájú indeed is an unrestrained deity.” The reference to the soul and the superintendence of deities having in this manner been considered, it is ascertained, that the observance of the nature of Vájú (alone) remains unbroken. 22.

“Here” in elucidation of the said meaning “ follows this Sloka.” “ Whence,” from which wind “ the sun rises ” (with reference to divine superintendence) and from which life (as regards its reference to the soul) he rises by the nature of the eye, again into which wind and life at evening and at the sleeping-time of men he sets, “ this the gods made”

kept, “ their sacred law.” This means, the gods, speech and others, and fire and others, having before considered the observance of life and the observance of Vájú. “ This sways to-day, this sways to-morrow,”

this will be followed by them at the present and future time. Here the Bráhmaṇa explains briefly the meaning of the Mantra. “ He,” the sun, “ verily rises from life and sets into it.” “ This the gods made their sacred law ; this sways to-day, this sways to-morrow.” What

does this mean? It is answered by the text : “ What,” what observance, observance of life and of Vájú, “ they,” speech and the rest, and Agni and the rest, “ kept then,” at that time, “ the same they will also observe to-day,” the same observance they will keep unbroken. But any observance of speech, &c. gets even broken, as it

has been shown, that at the time of their setting they decline into Vájú and life.—It is said elsewhere,—“ When man sleeps, then speech, mind, eye, ear, all become life ; when he.awakes, then they are born again from life. This is their reference to the soul. Next

their reference to divine superintendence. When fire is extinguished, it disappears in Vájú (air). Therefore it is said, it is lost in it ; for it is extinguished in the air. When the sun sets, he enters into the air, into the air the moon enters; in the air are placed the

First Chapter. Sixth Brāhmaṇa.

165

to-day. Therefore let a man follow only one observance ; let him breathe, let him expel. Alas, let death not seize me. If a person fullows it, let him strive to accomplish it. Thereby a person gains union and dwelling in the same world with that deity. 23.

Sixth Brāhmaṇa.

This (world) is a triad, name, form and work. The names are quarters. From the air they are born again. "Because then the observance is found in speech and the rest, and also in Agni and the rest, because the observance, whose nature is to move, is to be obeyed by all the gods, "therefore let a man follow only one observance." Which is it? "Let him breathe," let him perform the function of breathing (Prāṇa), "let him expel," let him perform the function of expelling (of the descending air) ; for there is no ceasing of the function of life (Prāṇa) of which the functions of breathing and expelling are here given as examples. "Therefore let a man follow only one observance," abandoning the functions of all the other organs. "Alas" (this term expresses apprehension) "let not death," as fatigue—" seize me." The meaning is, let a person, who is afraid that he will be seized by death on his abandoning that observance, keep the observance of life. "If a person follows it," once has commenced the observance of life, "let him strive to accomplish it :" for if he ceases from the observance, life is despised, and also the gods are ; therefore let him accomplish it even. "Thereby" by that observance,—for by the obtaining of the nature of life, my functions, for instance speech, &c. and Agni, &c., are in all beings, and (my) soul as life is the moving cause of all,—by the keeping of that observance, "a person gains," obtains "union," identity of nature, "and dwelling in the same world," identity of place, "with that deity," with the deity of life. 23.

"This" manifested world, characterised as cause and effect, further the reward, which consists in obtaining the nature of life (Hiraṇyagarbha), both of which have been set forth as being included in the idea of ignorance, and lastly the state of the world before its manifestation, which is called "unmanifested" like the seed of a tree, "is a triad." What is this triad? The answer is,—"name, form and

triad."

166

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

speech; the latter is the foundation, for from the same all

names spring forth. This is their community; for it is in com-

mon to all the names; it is the Brahma of them; for it upholds

all names. 1.

work," that is to say, non-soul, not the soul which is the present, visible

Brahma. Therefore the Brāhmaṇa, of which the first words are,—

" this is a triad," is commenced for the object, that man should turn

from this (world); for the knowledge, resulting from the great sentence,

—"I am Brahma,"—to adore the soul alone as the proper place, is

without effect for one whose thought is not averted from this (world)

which is not the soul—the actions (of the mind) with regard to external

objects and the absolute soul being at variance. In this manner it is said

in the Kaṭha (4, 1.) "The self-existent subdued the senses which turn

to external objects; therefore (man) sees the external objects, not the

internal soul, (but) the wise with eye averted (from sensual objects)

and desirous of immortal nature, beholds the absolute soul." Why

again falls this world, which is manifested and not manifested, and at

the same time effect, cause and reward, under the notion of name, form

and work, why should it not rather be thought by the notion of the

soul?

To answer this, it is said,—"The names" in the order in which

they are introduced, "are speech," as is called the general term of all

sounds. Every sound is even speech; it is speech in consequence of

being spoken, the meaning of a sound is merely the general term of

sound. "The latter is their foundation," the special cause, of the

special names, as a hill of rock-salt is the cause of (all) the grains of rock-

salt. Fur this reason it is said,—"for from the same," general term of

names, "all names," as Yajnadatta, Dévadatta, according to this or

any other division, "spring forth," are produced, separated, as grains of

salt from a rock of salt; and the effect is not different from the cause.

In the same manner the special (names) being included in the general

term, how can there be a state of generality and of special objects? (To

show this it is said),—"This," the general term of the sounds, "is

their community," of the special names, community from its being

Digitized by Google

First Chapter. Sixth Brāhmaṇa.

167

Further, the forms are objects of the eye; the latter is their foundation, for from the same all forms spring forth; this is their community; for it is common to all the forms. It is the Brahma of them; for it upholds all forms. 2.

Further, the works are self (átma); the latter is their foundation; for from the same all works spring forth; this is their common, viz. the general term; "for it is common to all the names," which are different from it, (and) moreover, because the special names are not different (from it) by having obtained it (the general idea), (for) nothing is perceived to differ from that whose nature it has assumed, as a jar differs not from the earth (of which it is made).

How are the special names said to have obtained it (the general idea of speech)? The answer is, because "it," the thing called by the name of speech, "is the Brahma of them," their soul; for hence the names obtain it (the generality); for nothing is found differing from the nature of sound. This the text explains: "for this," the general notion of sound, "upholds all names" by giving them its own nature. This, the relation of cause and effect, of the general idea and the special objects and of the communication of the own nature (of one thing to other things) being proved, it is evident, that the special names are only sound. The same explanation holds good for the two other things. 1.

"Further, the forms," white, black, &c., "are objects of the eye," are the general idea, named "object of the eye," the general idea of forms, all that may be manifested. "For from the latter all forms spring forth; the same is their community; for it is common to all the forms. It is the Brahma of them; for it upholds all forms." 2.

Further all special works, as well such as thinking, seeing, &c. as also such as refer to motion, are said to be contained in the general notion of effect. How? All special works are "self," the body, the general notion; self are called the works of self; for it is said, that by the self, by the body, people perform their work. Moreover, in the body every work is manifested. Therefore by its being sited there (in the body) "the latter" work, the general idea of work, "is the foundation.

168 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

community ; for it is common to all works; it is the Brahma of them ; for it upholds all works. Those three are existing, one, that self (âtma) ; that self, one, existing, is the three. This im- mortal (being) is concealed by existence. Life is verily the immortal being, name and form existence. By them that life is concealed. 3.

tion of them," just the same as before. "Those three," name, form and work, as mentioned before, being in mutual dependence, being the mutual cause of manifestation and being united for their mutual de- struction, "are," like the (mutual) support of the three vows of the devotee,* "existing, one." Why is the idea of unity connected with the self? It is answered,—"That self," that lump, the combination of cause and effect ; in the same manner as in the following passage (B. A. 1, 5, 3) ; "Thus modified is the soul, the modifications of mind, speech and life, "for so far extend this all, both manifested and un- manifested, as name, form and work."

"The self (soul) one," the combination of effect and cause, "ex- isting," in relation to the soul, the elements and the deities, "is the three," as defined, name, form and work. "This immortal (being)" to be mentioned, "is concealed by existence." The text itself ex- plains the meaning of the preceding sentence, viz. "Life is the im- mortal being," in its nature as cause, the internal support of work, being the same with the soul, immortal, indestructible. "Name and form are existence ;" they have the nature of effects and abide in the body ; but life having the nature of cause and being the support of them, "is concealed," not manifested, by them, which are external, corporeal, liable to increase and decrease, and mortal. The fourth† chapter is commenced for the purpose to show, that the soul, the ob- ject of knowledge, must be comprehended.

• To subdue his mind, his senses and his speech. † The fourth chapter of the Brāhmana, the second of the Upanishad.

Second Chapter. First Brāhmaṇa.

169

SECOND CHAPTER.

First Brāhmaṇa.

There was a great speaker, Gárgya the proud son of Balākā. He said to Ajátas'atru, the king of Kāśí,—“ Let me explain to thee (the nature of) Brahma.”* Ajátas'atru said,—“ For such a word,† I will give thousand (of cows).” (Hearing) “ Janaka, Janaka,”‡ people verily run (after a man of such a character). 1. Gárgya said,—“ I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the sun.”§ Ajátas'atru said,—“ Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing that, excelling all beings he is their head, their king, I adore that spirit. Whoever thus adores him, excels all beings and becomes their head, their king.” 2.

Gárgya said,—“ I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the moon.”∥ Ajátas'atru said,—“ Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is great, clothed in a white dress,¶ Soma,* (and) king, I adore that spirit. (For him) who thus adores him, is day by day produced and reproduced (the Soma) ; his food does not decrease.”

Gárgya said,—“ I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in lightning.”† Ajátas'atru said,—“ Do not boast, do not boast of

• In the first chapter the difference between knowledge and ignorance has been defined, and ignorance generally described ; in the second knowledge, or the science treating on Brahma, is set forth. This is done in the form of a narrative,—in which the Brāhmaṇ Gárgya represents the imperfect ideas, entertained on the nature of Brahma, while king Ajátas'atru represents the perfect knowledge of Brahma—with a view of showing, that this knowledge cannot be obtained by mere arguing, in consequence of the subtle nature of its object, and that it requires both a disciple believing in the existence of Brahma, and a teacher who has a full knowledge of him. S'.

† Even for the mere word, whether thou be able or not to explain Brahma.

‡ “ Janaka is a liberal donor, Janaka is a zealous hearer.” S'.

§ The spirit who abiding in the sun and in the eye has entered the heart through the eye. S'.

∥ And in the mind. S'.

¶ Because water is the body of life, in the form of the moon. S'.

• As Soma, the moon-plant, in the sacrifice. S'.

† In the lightning, in the skin, and in the heart. S'.

Z

Digitized by Google

170

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

him. Knowing, that he is glorious, I adore that spirit. Whoever thus adores him, becomes glorious; glorious becomes his offspring." 4.

Gárgya said,— "I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the ether."* Ajátas'atru said,—" Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is full and immoveable, I adore that spirit. Whoever thus adores him, has plenty of offspring and cattle, and his offspring is never removed from this world." 5.

Gárgya said,—"I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the wind."† Ajátas'atru said,—" Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is Indra, whose strength is indomitable and whose hosts are unconquerable, I adore that spirit. Whoever thus adores him, becomes a conqueror, is unconquerable by foes, and conqueror of his step-brothers."

Gárgya said,—"I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the fire."‡ Ajátas'atru said,—" Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is a destroyer, I adore that spirit. Whoever thus adores him, becomes a destroyer, and his offspring becomes a destroyer." 7.

Gárgya said,—"I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the waters."§ Ajátas'atru said,—Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is the same,║ I adore that spirit. Whoever thus adores him, obtains him as the same, not as not the same. Again from him is born what is the same with him." ¶ 7.

Gárgya said,—"I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the looking-glass."* Ajátas'atru said,—" Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is resplendent, I adore that

• In the ether as element, and also.in the ether of the heart S'.

† In the wind, in the vital air of the body, and in the heart. S'.

‡ And in the understanding of the heart. S'.

§ In the waters, in the semen and in the heart. S'.

║ In the S'rati and Smriti. S'.

¶ A son like himself.

• In the looking-glass, in other reflective things, and in the heart. S'.

Digitized by Google

Second Chapter. First Brahmana. 171

spirit. Whoever thus adores him, becomes resplendent, and resplendent his offspring; he overcomes in splendour all those with whom he meets." 9.

Gárgya said,—" I adore as Brahma the spirit who, when proceeding, is followed by noise."* Ajátas'atru said,—" Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is life, I adore that spirit. Whoever thus adores him, obtains the full age in this world; life does not leave him before the (appointed) time." 10.

Gárgya said,—" I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the quarters."† Ajátas'atru said,—" Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is double and inseparable,‡ I adore him. Whoever thus adores him, becomes double,§ and his followers never part from him." 11.

Gárgya said, —" I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the shadow.‖ Ajátas'atru said,—Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is death, I adore that spirit. Whoever thus adores him, obtains (his) full age in this world; death does not approach him before the time." 12.

Gárgya said,—" I adore as Brahma the spirit who abides in the soul,"¶ (in self.) Ajátas'atru said,—" Do not boast, do not boast of him. Knowing, that he is possessed of soul, * I adore that spirit. Whoever thus adores him, becomes in this world possessed of soul, and also his offspring." Then Gárgya was silent. 13.

Ajátas'atru said,—" Does (Brahma) so far extend ?" (He answered),—" So far."—(Ajátas'atru said),—" Brahma is not

• Life.

† In the quarters, in the ear and in the beart. S'.

‡ Like the Asvins who are the tutelary deities of the quarters.

§ By the number of his servants. A. G.

‖ The spirit, abiding in the shadow, externally as darkness and internally, in the heart as ignorance.

¶ The spirit, abiding in the soul, in Prajápati, and in the intellect of the heart. S'.

• Of much understanding.

z

172

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

comprehended by (a knowledge) which so far extends only."* Gárgya said,—"Let me approach thee as disciple." 14.

Ajátas'atru said,—"It verily goes against the grain that a Bráhman should approach a Kshatriya for the purpose of learning (the nature of) Brahma from him. I will explain (him) to thee." (Thus saying) he took him by the hands and rose. They went to a man who slept. They called him by the name, "Mighty one, clad in white garments, Soma, king." He did not rise. Squeezing him with the hand, he awoke him. He then arose. 15.

Ajátas'atru said,—"Where was the spirit whose nature is like knowledge; at the time when he thus profoundly slept? Whence did he come?" Gárgya did not know this.

Ajátas'atru said,—"When the spirit whose nature is like knowledge, thus profoundly slept, then the ether,† in the midst of the heart drawing in, together with the knowledge of the senses,‡ (their actual) knowledge,§ slept therein (in the ether).∥ When the spirit draws in that (knowledge of the senses), then he sleeps indeed. Then life is drawn in,¶ speech is drawn in, the eye is drawn in, the ear is drawn in, (and mind is drawn in). 17.

When he is in the state of dream, then become such (conditions as the following) his worlds, then he becomes like a great king, like a great Bráhman, he proceeds as it were to higher and lower places. As a great king, assembling his followers, sends them about in his kingdom according to his pleasure, so that (spirit resembling knowledge, drawing in) the organs, sends them about in his body according to his pleasure. 18.

• Why then sayest thou boasting, —I will teach thee the nature of Bráhma? † The soul in its independent nature. S'. ‡ The intellect of the heart in which Brahma is reflected. § The faculty of the senses of manifesting their respective objects ; that is to say, in sleep, intellect withdraws the senses from their objects, and concentrates them in the heart, where intellect itself is absorbed in the nature of the soul. ∥ The soul within its own self. ¶ Means here, according to S'ankara, the sense of smelling.

Second Chapter. Second Bráhmana. 173

Again when he profoundly sleeps, he does not know of any thing. There are 72,000* arteries called the good, which from the heart proceed every where to the body. Returning with them he sleeps in the body. As a youth, or a great king, or great Bráhman, sleep, enjoying excessive bliss, so does he (the spirit resembling knowledge) sleep.

As the spider proceeds along with its web, as little sparks proceed from fire, so proceed from that soul all organs, all worlds, all the gods, all beings. The nearest conception of him is this, that he is the truth of truth. The organs are the truth, he is the truth of them."† 20.

Second Bráhmana.‡

Whoever knows the young animal with its abode, the upper part of its abode, its pillar (and) its rope, destroys the seven

• Vid. Pras'na Upanishad. 3, 6.

† What "the truth of truth" means, will be explained in the two next Bráhmanas. S'.

‡ The connexion between the former and the present Bráhmana is shown by S'ankara, as follows. The topic of Brahma has been introduced by the words,—"I will explain Brahma," (p. 172) and declared,—The one Brahma is he from whom the world is produced, of whom it consists and into whom it is dissolved. Of what nature again is the world, which is produced and dissolved? It consists of the five elements, which consist of name and form. Moreover it has been said, that name and form are truth (satya). The truth of the truth, (consisting of the five elements) is Brahma. Why again are the elements truth? This question is answered in the Bráhmana, whose subject is to show the nature of what has form and what is without form. On account of their having form and not having form, the elements, consisting of effect and cause (are truth, and thus) also the organs (Pránáh). To define the nature (Sattva) of the elements, consisting of cause and effect, the two next Bráhmaṇas are commenced. This Upanishad is to be explained, for Brahma is determined as the truth of the truth by the determination of the reality (Sattva) of effect and cause. There (in the former Bráhmana) it has been said,—"The organs are the truth ; he is the truth of them." Here by the connexion of the Brahma Upanishad in this manner,—"Which are the organs, of which nature their objects, and which the Upanishads," he determines the nature of the causes, the same, as well, gardens, &c. seen on a road, are determined.

174

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

inimical brother's sons.* The young animal is the central life.†

This‡ is its abode, this§ the upper part of its abode, life|| is

the pillar, food the rope.¶ 1.

The seven (deities) who cause (its) indestructibility,* surround

it† (the infant) worshipping, viz. Rudra, adores it with the

red lines in the eye, Parjanya with the water in the eye, Aditya

with the sight, Agni with the black in the eye, Indra with the

white, the earth adores it with the lower, and the heavens,

with the upper eye-lash. The food of him is not destroyed

who thus knows it. 2.

This is said in the following memorial verse,—“ There is a

Soma-cup, whose mouth is below, and whose foot is above;

therein is put glory of various kinds. On its margin there are

'seven Rishis, and speech is the eighth, as holding communion

with Brahma.” The Soma-cup whose mouth is below

and whose foot is above, is the head ; for it is like a cup with

mouth below and foot above. “Therein is put glory of various

kinds.” With the various kinds put (therein),‡ it (the memo-

rial verse) means the vital airs.§ “ On its margin there are

seven Rishis.” “With the Rishis it means the vital winds.”

• For the sons of a brother may be inimical or friendly. Here the attachment

to the objects of the senses is denoted by the brother's sons. The senses are the

seven orifices by which objects are perceived, the attachment produced by them

are the brother's sons. S'.

† The subtle body, dwelling in the midst of the body ; subject to it are the

organs ; it is a babe, because it is unwitted, while the senses are keen with regard to

their objects. S'.

‡ The body. S'.

§ The head with its seven orifices. S'.

|| Life, means, according to S'ankara, the strength produced by food, according

to others, respiration.

¶ By which the young animal is bound to the pillar.

• Thus I rendered “Akhsiti” after S'. They cause the indestructibility of food.

† The babe, when dwelling in the upper part of the abode it rises to the eye. S'.

‡ As the Soma-juice in the cup. S'.

§ The vital airs by which the senses are moved to the performance of their

functions.

Digitized by Google

Second Chapter. Third Brāhmaṇa. 175

"Speech is the eighth, as communicating with Brahma;" for speech as the eighth communicates with Brahma.* 3.

These (ears) are Goutama and Bharadvāja, this (ear) is Goutama, the other Bharadvāja. These (eyes) are Vis'vámittra and Jamadagni; this is Vis'vámittra, the other Jamadagni. These (nostrils) are Vasisṭha and Kasyapa; this is Vasisṭha, this Kasyapa; speech is Attri; for by speech food is consumed; for Attri is verily derived from the root Attiḥ (to eat, consume); he is the consumer of all. All becomes the food of him who thus knows. 4.

Third Brāhmaṇa.

There are two modes† of Brahma,‡ what has form, and what has no form,§ the one mortal, the other immortal, again finite the one, and the other infinite,‖ again the one existing and the other beyond. 1.

What has form,¶ is what is different from the air and the ether;* this is mortal, this is finite, this is visible. The essence of what has form, what is mortal, finite and visible, is the being that heats (the sun); for he is the essence of what exists. 2.

Again what has no form is the air and the ether; this is immortal, this is infinite, this is beyond. The essence of what has no form, what is immortal, infinite and beyond, is the spirit who (abides) in this universe.† This refers to the divine relation. 3.

• Brahma is the whole of sounds, and speech has communication with it, by pronouncing it. Ā. G.

† I use mode here in the sense of " accidental modification of substance."

‡ Brahma the supreme soul, who, in his absolute nature, is without those two modes. S'.

§ At the time that their differences are not evolved. Their differences are stated afterwards. S'.

‖ Sthitancha yacheha, explained by S' sthitam parichchhinnam gatipúrvakam sthasnu, yachcha yáti yadvyapaparichchhinnam, what is stationary, limited, what after motion has the tendency to stand, and what moves, therefore what is pervading, unlimited.

¶ What is formed of parts, a compound. S'.

• Namely, the other three elements, earth, water and light.

† Hiranyagarbha.

176

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

Now the relation to the soul. What has form is different from the air and from the ether in the midst of the body.*

This is mortal, this is finite, this existing. The essence of what has form, what is mortal, finite and existing, is the eye ;†

for this is the essence of what exists. 4.

Now what has no form is the air, and the ether in the midst of the body. This is immortal, this is infinite, this is beyond.

The essence of what has no form, what is immortal, infinite and beyond, is the spirit (Purusha) in the right eye; for he is the

essence of what is beyond. 5.

The form of this spirit‡ is, as cloth dyed by turmeric,§ as the smoke colour of sheep-wool, as the red colour of the Indragopa insect, as the bright colour of the fire-flame, as the

white colour of the lotus, as the lightning shines forth at one moment, (thus are the modifications of the desires of that spirit.) The glory of him who thus knows, shines forth at one

moment. After this therefore the definition (of Brahma),— He is not this, he is not this, &c.∥ There is another name, different from that (definition),—“ He is not this, he is not this,” viz.

the truth of truth. The organs are the truth, he is the truth of them. 6.

• That is to say, the three elements, light, water and earth, as constituents of the body, independent of ether and air. S'.

† Because by the eye the whole body assumes substance, and because the eyes were first produced, in accordance with the passage, “Aditya (the sun), becoming eye, entered the eyes.” S'.

‡ The subtle spirit, the spirit, who is the cause of manifestation.

§ As cloth, dyed by turmeric, so is the desire of that spirit in contact with special objects.

∥ If it is asked, how by those negations the "truth of truth" is defined, the answer is,—by the prohibition of any allegation which may be made with regard to the nature of Brahma, name, form, action, quality, &c. must be denied of

Brahma ; for there is no distinction in Brahma; if he is defined, this definition refers only to qualities which are alleged of him ; but his own nature, can in no manner be determined, except by stating, that every attribute is denied of him.

Digitized by Google

Second Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa.

177

Fourth Brāhmaṇa.*

"Maitréyi," said Yájnavalkya,† "Behold, I am desirous of raising myself from the order‡ (of house-holder) ; therefore, let me divide (my property) amongst thee and Katyáyaní there." 1.

Maitréyí said,—"If, O Venerable, this whole world with all its wealth were mine, could I become immortal thereby ?" Yájnavalkya said,—"Like the life of the wealthy thy life might become ; by wealth, however, there is no hope of (obtaining) immortality." 2.

Maitréyí said,—"Of what use would be wealth to me, if I did not become thereby immortal. Tell me, O Venerable, any (means of obtaining immortality) of which thou knowest." 3.

Yájnavalkya said,—"Behold, (thou wast) dear to us before, (and now) thou sayest what is dear. Come, sit down ; I will explain to thee (the means of obtaining immortality) ; endeavour to comprehend my explanation." 4.

He said,—"Behold, not indeed for the husband's sake the husband is dear,§ but for the sake of the self,∥ is dear the husband. Behold, not indeed for the wife's sake the wife is dear, but for the sake of the self, is dear the wife. Behold, not for the sons' sake the sons are dear, but for the sake of the self are dear the sons. Behold, not for property's sake property is dear, but for the sake of the self is property dear. Behold, not for the Brahma's sake the Brahma is dear, but for the sake of the self is the Brahma dear. Behold, not for the Kshattra's

• It is the object of this Brāhmaṇa to show that the state of a Sannyási, viz. the retiring.from the world to the forest and the renunciation of all ceremonies, is indispensable for the knowledge of Brahma. S'. The same conversation between Yájnavalkya and his wife Maitréyi is, with slight variations, repeated in the 5th Bráhmaṇa of the 4th chapter.

† A Rishi, Yájnavalkya by name. S'.

‡ To the higher stage of a Sannyási.

§ To the wife.

∥ Átmá, the self, the soul ; for the self of the wife, for her own soul.

2

Digitized by Google

178

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

sake the Kshattra is dear, but for the sake of the self the Kshattra is dear. Behold, not for the worlds' sake the worlds are dear, but for the sake of the self are dear the worlds. Behold, not for the gods' sake the gods are dear, but for the sake of the self are dear the gods. Behold, not for the Védas' sake the Védas are dear, but for the sake of the self are dear the Védas.* Behold, not for the elements' sake the elements are dear, but for the sake of the self are dear the elements. Behold, not for the sake of the universe the universe is dear, but for the sake of the self is dear the universe. Behold, the self (átmá) is verily to be seen, heard, minded (and) meditated upon. Behold, O Maitréyí, by seeing, hearing, minding, knowing the self, all this (universe) is comprehended. 5.

The Brahma should disown a person,† who considers the Brahma (cast) as something different from (his) self (átmá); the Kshattra should disown a person who considers the Kshattra (cast) as something different from (his) self; the worlds should disown a person who considers the worlds as something different from (his) self; the gods should disown a person who considers the gods as something different from (their) self; the elements should disown a person who considers the elements as something different from (their) self; the universe should disown a person who considers the universe as something different from (its) self. This (own) self is this Brahma, this Kshattra, these worlds, these gods, these elements, is this universe,—6.

As a person, when a drum (unseen by him) is beaten, is unable to perceive the sounds proceeding from it (as sounds of a drum), but on the perception of the drum the sound of a drum beaten is perceived,—7.

As a person, when a shell (unseen by him) is blown, is unable to perceive the sounds, proceeding from it (as sounds of a

• The last sentence is omitted in the Sanscrit text, published by the As. Soc.

† A person, belonging to the Bráminical caste.

Second Chapter. Fourth Bráhmaṇa.

179

shell) but on the perception of the shell the sound of a shell blown is perceived,—8.

As a person, when a lute (unseen to him) is played, is unable to perceive the sounds proceeding from it, but on the perception of the lute the sound of a lute played is perceived,*—9.

As from fire, made of damp wood, proceed smoke, sparks, &c.† of various kind, thus, behold, is the breathing of this great being the Rig Véda, the Yajur Véda, the Sáma Véda, the Atharvángirasa, the narratives (Itihása,‡) the doctrines on creation (Puráṇa), the science (Vidyá), the Upanishads, the memorial verses (Slokas), the aphorisms (Sútras), the explanation of tenets (Anuvyákhánáni,) the explanation of Mantras, (Vyákhyánáni,) all these are his breathing. 10.

As the only site of all the waters is the sea, thus is the only site of every touch the skin, thus the only site of every taste the tongue, thus the only site of every smell the nose, thus the only site of every colour the eye, thus the only site of every sound the ear, thus the only site of every determination the mind, thus the only site of every knowledge the heart, thus the only site of every act the hands, thus the only site of every pleasure the organs of generation, thus the only site of every evacuation the anus, thus the only site of every motion the feet, thus the only site of every Véda speech. 11.

• Śankara supplies the above comparisons with,—so is the identity of Brahma with the individual soul only apprehended by general and special knowledge.

† Dhumáh (smoke), the pṛal denotes, according to S., smoke, sparks, ashes, &c.

‡ S. asserts, that the Itihása, &c. are the eight topics of the Bráhmanas, viz. Itihása, narrative, as for instance that of Urvaśí, and Páraravasa ; Puráṇa, doctrines on creation, as for instance “this was before;” vidyá the science of the gods, for instance, “he knows;” Upanishads, doctrines about adoration, for instance, “the soul, therefore let it be adored;” Slokas, Mantras, occurring in the Bráhmanas, as “there follow these Slokas;” Sútras, sentences, which give the pith of a thing, as “the soul, therefore it should be adored;” Anuvyákhyánáni, explanation of Mantras; Vyákhyánáni, praise in honor of a deity, &c.

2 A 2

Digitized by Google

180

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

As a piece of salt, when thrown into water, is dissolved into mere water, and none is capable of perceiving it, because, from whatever place a person might take (water), it would have the taste of salt (but be no piece of salt), thus, behold, this great being, which is infinite, independent and mere knowledge. Springing forth together with those elements,* (he)† is destroyed, when they are destroyed. After death, no conscience remains;‡ thus, O Maitréyi, I hold." Thus said Yájnavalkya. 12.

Maitréyí said,—“With regard to him (Brahma) thou hast bewildered me, O Venerable, by the saying,§—After death no conscience remains.” Yájnavalkya said,—“Behold, I verily do not create bewilderment, behold, this (Brahma) is sufficient for knowledge.” 13.

For where|| there is duality,** as it were, there sees another,†† another thing, there smells another another thing, there hears another another thing, there speaks another of another thing, there minds another another thing, there knows another another thing; but how does one to whom all has become mere soul (átmá), smell any thing, how see any thing, how hear any

• I give here, in a somewhat different language, some of the images, which S'ankara uses in explanation of this passage. As the appearance of the sun and moon in water. is a mere reflection, and nothing real, or as the appearance of red in a white crystal is a mere reflection from a red substance and nothing real ;—for on removing the water, the sun and moon only remain, not their reflections, or on removing the red substance, the whiteness of the crystal continues unchanged,— thus the elements and the individual souls are reflections of the one soul upon ignorance, and nothing real ; for on removing the ignorance by knowledge the soul alone remains, while those reflections cease to exist.

† He, the individual soul, or as S'ankara has it,the division of a particular soul.

‡ For him who has the true knowledge of the eternal soul.

§ Because this seems contradictory to the former statement, that Brahma is the fulness of knowledge.

|| In the individual soul, produced by the substrate of ignorance as the totality of causes and effects. S'.

** Difference from the supreme soul.

†† Any individual soul.

Second Chapter. Fifth Brahmana.

181

thing, how speak of any thing, how mind any thing, how know any thing? How should he know him by whom he knows this all; behold, how should he know the knower?''*14.

Fifth Brāhmaṇa.†

The earth is honey‡ for all beings, for the earth are all

• The argument which S'ankara advances in support of this doctrine is essentially as follows,—Every effect requires a cause; or, without cause there is no effect; therefore, if there is ignorance, there is the assumption of effect, cause and reward as the effect of ignorance; but this assumption is not made on a knowledge of Brahma; for if all is soul or Brahma, there is, beside the soul, neither cause, nor effect, nor reward. A knowledge of a cause can take place, if there is a difference between the cause and the object of knowledge, and there may be an enquiry on the subject of the knowledge (the knowing soul) and the object of the same, but not of the soul. If the latter be the case, such a knowledge (the knowledge of the knowing subject, the soul) would be either produced by the soul itself, or by something else. Not the first; for the soul is not an object of the soul, not by something else; for there is nothing else but the soul, and there is therefore no object of its knowledge.

† S'ankara explains the connexion between the present and the preceding Brāhmaṇa, as follows :-The Maitreyí Brāhmaṇa has been composed for the purpose to state that that which is independent of ceremonies and the cause of immortality, is worthy of explanation. This is the knowledge of Brahma, pertaining, as has been declared, to all the duties of a Sannyási. Moreover, since by the knowledge of the soul the whole universe is known, and the soul is dearer to every one than every thing else, "the soul should be beheld." "It is to be heard, to be minded, to be pondered upon." The different modes of beholding the soul, have been stated before. To be heard is the soul, by means of the teacher, to be pondered on by means of disquisition, and disquisition has been explained. The proposition, "the soul is this all," is proved by the argument, that the one soul is the only cause of the generality, of the production and of the dissolution of the world, and as this may be doubtful, the present Brāhmaṇa, is composed to remove any doubt regarding it. Because the whole world, earth, etc. is in the mutual dependence of support and supported, it is dependent upon one cause of generality, production and dissolution. Or with other words, after the proposition (Pratijñá) "soul alone is this all," has been proved by the argument, that the soul is the cause of the creation, preservation and dissolution of the world, the conclusion (Nigamana) of the proposed meaning is again made in the Madhubrálmaṇa, conformably to the definition of logicians, that the conclusion in a syllogism is the repetition of the proposition, after the argument has been stated.

‡ Vid. Chánd. Up., 3, 1—5, where a similar comparison in made.

beings honey*. Both the immortal, luminous spirit† (abiding) in the earth, and the immortal, luminous spirit, who exists in the body according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings and all beings are honey for them.) This‡ is that soul, this§ is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 1.

The waters are honey for all beings; for the waters are all beings honey. Both the immortal, luminous spirit (abiding) in the water, and the immortal, luminous spirit, abiding in the semen according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings and all beings are honey for them). This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 2.

The fire is honey for all beings; for the fire all beings are honey. Both the immortal, luminous spirit, (abiding) in the fire, and the immortal luminous spirit, abiding in speech according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 3.

The wind is honey for all beings; for the wind all beings are honey. Both the immortal, luminous spirit (abiding) in the wind, and the immortal, luminous spirit, who is life according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 4.

Aditya is honey for all beings; for Aditya all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit, (abiding) in that Aditya, and the immortal, luminous spirit, abiding in speech according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings,

• As the bees collect honey from every kind of flowers, which again serves as nourishment for the bees, so all the beings are nourishment for the one earth, are changed into its very substance, and again the earth is nourishment for all beings; it is changed into all ; that is to say, they are mutually dependent ; there is no real difference between them ; they are the same,—Brahma.

† The Sanscrit term is Purusha.

‡ This (ayam) this fourfold division, viz. the earth, all beings, the spirit abiding in the body. S'.

§ This (idam) the knowledge, whose object is the fourfold division. S'

Second Chapter. Fifth Brāhmaṇa.

and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 5.

The quarters are honey for all beings ; for the quarters all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit (abiding) in the quarters, and the immortal, luminous spirit, abiding in the ear according to his relation to the soul, (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 6.

The moon is honey for all beings ; for the moon all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit (abiding) in the moon, and the immortal, luminous spirit, abiding in the mind according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 7.

The lightning is honey for all beings ; for the lightning all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit (abiding) in lightning, and the immortal, luminous spirit, abiding in the light (skin) according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 8.

The thunder is honey for all beings ; for the thunder all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit, (abiding) in thunder, and the immortal, luminous spirit, abiding in sound and note according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings, and all the beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 9.

The ether is honey for all beings ; for the ether all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit, (abiding) in the ether, and the immortal luminous spirit, abiding as ether in the heart according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 10.

Justice is honey for all beings; for justice all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit (abiding) in justice, and the immortal luminous spirit, produced in justice ac-

184

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

cording to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this is Brahma, this all. 11.

Truth is honey for all beings; for truth all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit, (abiding) in truth, and the immortal, luminous spirit, produced in truth according to his relation to the soul (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them). This is that soul, this is immortal, this Brahma, this all. 12.

Mankind is honey for all beings; for mankind all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit, (abiding) in mankind, and the immortal luminous spirit, produced in mankind according to his relation to the soul, (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them.) This is that soul, this is immortal, this Brahma, this all. 13.

The soul is honey for all beings; for the soul all beings are honey. Both, the immortal, luminous spirit (abiding) in the soul, and the immortal, luminous spirit who is that soul (are honey for all beings, and all beings are honey for them). This is that soul, this is immortal, this Brahma, this all. 14.

This soul is verily the lord of all beings, the king of all beings. As all spokes are fastened in the nave and the circumference of the wheel,* thus also all beings, all gods, all worlds, all organs, all souls, are fastened in that soul. 15.

This honey Dadhich,† the son of Atharvana, explained to the

• See a similar comparison, 2 Muṇḍ, 2, 6.

† The tale, alluded to in the text, is contained in the Taittarīya Brāhmaṇa, in the part which treats on the Pragarvya sacrifice, and is given by Śaṅkara. Its drift is, as follows,—Dadhich, the son of Atharvaṇa, explained to the two Asvins, the physicians of the gods, the Madhu Brāhmaṇa. When they came to him for instruction, he told them, that Indra had threatened him to cut off his head, if he repeated the Madhu Brāhmaṇa to any body else. The Asvins promised to save him from the consequence of Indra's anger. They would place his head somewhere else, and meanwhile put a horse's head on his body; when Indra should cut off the head, they would replace it by his own. He consented, and explained to them the Madhu Brāhmaṇa by means of the head of a horse which they had placed upon

Second Chapter. Fifth Brāhmaṇa.

185

two As´vins. Beholding their deed the Rishi* said,—“O ye men, I will manifest your cruel deed† (undertaken) for your advantage, as Tanyatu‡ (manifests) rain (from a cloud). The honey which Dadhin´, the son of Atharvaṇa, explained to you through the head of the horse, (is this honey).” 16.

This honey explained Dadhin´, the son of Atharvaṇa, to the two As´vins. Beholding this deed, the Rishi said,—“O As´vins, ye placed a horse-head on Dadhin´, the son of Atharvaṇa. To keep his promise, he explained to you, O Destroyers, the honey of Tvasṭar (Āditya) and also the honey, which is to be concealed.”§ 17.

This honey explained Dadhin´, the son of Atharvaṇa, to the two As´vins. Beholding their deed, the Rishi said,—“(He)∥ created the bodies (purah) of bipeds (and then) the bodies of quadrupeds. At first, (purah) being a bird,¶ he entered as Parusha the bodies (purah). This Purusha is called thus, because he sleeps in all bodies (Puris´aya).” From him nothing is concealed (within), from him nothing is concealed (without). 18.

This honey explained Dadhin´, the son of Atharvaṇa, to the two As´vins. Beholding this deed, the Rishi said,—“He became to every nature of every nature ; therefore to manifest the nature of him, Indra‡ appears of manifold nature by his Máyahs ; for his hundred and ten senses are attached (to the body as horses† to a car), it (the soul) is the senses ; it is ten, it is many thousands, may infinite, it is Brahma who has not

his body instead of his own, and on Indra cutting off the horse-head, they restored to him his own. This tale, says S´ankara, is to illustrate the superiority of the knowledge of Brahma ; for the knowledge, possessed by Indra is difficult even for the gods, to gain, and was gained but with great trouble by the As´vins.

• The Mantra. S´.

† The cutting off the head of Dadhin´.

‡ Parjanya.

§ The honey of Tvasṭar is knowledge, referring to rite ; the honey to be concealed, the knowledge of Brahma. S´.

∥ Vid. Kaṭha U. 5 10.

¶ Parameś´vara. S´. That is to say, being of subtle body.

• Parameś´vara. S´.

† The word “Hari,” means in Sanscrit “sense” as well as “horse,” and denotes here both of them.

2 B

186

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

a Before nor an After, nor a Beside, nor a Without; this is the soul, Brahma, the perceiver of all.* Such is the doctrine.

Sixth Brāhmaṇa.

Next follows the school.† Pautimáshya succeeded Gaupavana,—Gaupavana, Pautimáshya,—Pautimáshya, Gaupavana,—Gaupavana, Kaus'ika,—Kaus'ika, Kaundinya,—Kaundinya, S'ándilya,—S'ándilya, Kaus'ika and Gautama,—Gautama, 1.

Ágnivés'ya,—Ágnivés'ya, Sándilya and Ánabhimláta,—Ánabhimláta, Ánabhimláta,—Ánabhimláta, Gautama,—Gautama, Saitava and Práchínayogya,—Saitava and Práchínayogya, Párás'arya,—Párás'arya, Bháradváya,—Bháradváya Bháradvája and Gautama,—Gautama, Bháradvája,—Bháradvája, Párás'arya,—Párás'arya, Vaijavápáyana,—Vaijavápáyana, Kaus'ikáyani,—Kaus'ikáyani, 2.

Ghritakaus'ika,—Ghritakaus'ika, Párás'aryáyana,—Párás'aryáyana, Párás'arya,—Párás'arya, Játúkarṇya,—Játúkarṇya, Ásuráyana and Yáska,—Ásuráyana, Sraivaṇi,—Sraivaṇi, Aupajandhani,—Aupajandhani, Ásuri,—Ásuri, Bháradvája,—Bháradvája, Átréya,—Átréya, Mánți,—Mánți, Gautama,—Gautama, Gautama,—Gautama, Vátsya,—Vátsya, Sándilya,—Sándilya, Kais'orya Kápya,—Kais'orya Kápya, Kumárahárita,—Kumárahárita, Gálava,—Gálava, Vidarbhí Kaundinya,—Vidar-bhí Kaundinya, Vatsanapát Bábhrava,—Vatsanapát Bábhrava, Patháh Saubhara,—PatháhSaubhara,AyásyaÁngirasa,—Ayásya Ángirasa, Ábhúti Tvás'tar,—Ábhúti Tvás'tar, VisvarupaTvás'tar,

• This passage may also be translated,—This Brahma is without a Before, without an After, without a Beside, without a Without, is this soul (the individual soul) ; Brahma is the enjoyer of all.

Or,—This is Brahma, who is without a Before, without an After, without a Beside, without a Without, it is this soul (the individual soul), it is Brahma, the enjoyer of all (the universal soul).

† Two more lists of teachers are given in this Upanishad, viz. 4, 6, and 6, 5. S'ankara observes about the present list, that it is the list of the Madhu Káṇḍa and given for the praise of the knowledge of Brahma. The school itself means the succession of teachers for the four preceding chapters of the Bráhmaṇa, or the two first chapters of the B. A. U.

Second Chapter. Sixth Brāhmaṇa.

187

—Visvarupa Tvástar, the Asvins,—the Asvins, Dadhin' Athar-vaṇa,—Dadhin' Atharvaṇa, Atharvaṇa Daiva,—Atharvaṇa Daiva, Mrityu Prádhvasana,—Mrityu Prádhvasana, Pradhva-sana,—Prádhvasana, Ekarishi,—Ekarishi, Viprachitti,—Vipra-chitti, Vyashti,—Vyashti, Sanáru,—Sanáru, Sanátana,—Saná-tana, Sanaga,—Sanaga, Paraméshti,—Paraméshti, Brahmá*,—Brahmá is the self-existent ; salutation to Brahmá.

• Paraméshti Virát, and Brahmá, denotes Hiranyagarbha. S'.

2 B 2

Digitized by Google

188

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

THIRD CHAPTER.

First Bráhmaṇa.*

Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas, performed the sacrifice, named Bahudakshiṇa.† There were assembled the Bráhmaṇs of the Kurus and the Panchálas. Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas, had a great desire to know, who among those Bráhmaṇs knew best the Védas; for this purpose he tied a thousand cows (in a stable); the horns of each of them were surrounded with ten Pádahs (of gold).‡ 1.

He said to them,—“O venerable Bráhmaṇs, whoever amongst you is the best knower of Brahma, shall drive home those cows.” The Bráhmaṇs did not venture (to come forward). Then said Yájnavalkya to his Brahma student,—“O gentle one, drive home those (cows).” “(As you command), O knower of the Sáma Véda,§” with these words (the disciple) drove them home. The Bráhmaṇs became angry (thinking),—How dare he call himself amongst us the best knower of Brahma? There was then As'vala, the Hotar|| of Janaka, king of the Vidéhas. He asked him,—“Art thou in very deed amongst us the best knower of Brahma, O Yájnavalkya?” He said,—“We bow to

• The present Káṇḍa, or the Yájnavalkya Káṇḍa, treats the same subject as the Madhu Káṇḍa; but it is no repetition, for while the latter exhibits the knowledge of Brahma in the form of mere enunciation, the former establishes it by argument. The narrative is given in praise of the knowledge of Brahma, and also to show liberality as a means conducive to that knowledge. S'.

† Bahudakshiṇa is either a sacrifice of this name, which has been explained in another S'ákha, or the As'vamédha sacrifice, as in the latter great donations are required. S'.

‡ A Páda is according to S'ankara, equal to the 4th part of a Pala, or equal to a Suvarṇa of gold, which, according to Wilson, is equal to about 176 grains Troy.

§ That is to say, knower of the four Védas, as the Sáma Véda was to be studied after the three other Védas.

|| The Ritvig, one who knows the Rig Véda, or he who arranges the sacrifices,

Third Chapter. First Brāhmaṇa.

189

him who is the best knower of Brahma; we are even desirous of getting the cows." Hence the Hotar As'vala undertook to question him. 2.

He said,—" Yájnavalkya, all this is pervaded by death, all this is subject to death. By what means overcoming the grasp of death is the sacrificer liberated ?" (He replied)—" By speech which is fire in the shape of the priest, called Hotar. The speech of the sacrificer,* is verily the Hotar. This speech† is this fire ; this (fire) is the Hotar, this (fire of the Hotar) is liberation,‡ this (liberation) absolute liberation."§ 3.

He said,—" Yájnavalkya, all this is pervaded by day and night,|| all this is subject to day and night. By what means, overcoming the grasp of day and night, is the sacrificer liberated ?" (He replied,)—" By the eye, which is Áditya (the sun) in the shape of the priest called Adhvaryu. The eye of the sacrificer is verily the Adhvaryu. This eye is this Áditya, this (Áditya) is the Adhvaryu, this (Adhvaryu) is liberation, this (liberation) absolute liberation." 4.

He said,—" Yájnavalkya, all is pervaded by the light and dark halves of the lunar month ;¶ all this is subject to the light and dark halves of the lunar months. By what means, overcoming the grasp of the light and dark halves of the lunar month, is the sacrificer liberated ?" (He replied),—" By the vital breath, which is the wind in the shape of the priest, call-

• With reference to the sacrifice. S'.

† With reference to the deities. S'.

‡ Cause of liberation. S'.

§ Absolute liberation is here the gaining of the state of speech and of the deity of fire. S'.

|| The cause of the continual change of such rites as the Darśa and Párṇamāsa, is time; for although time is included in work, yet, independent of the performance of work, time, before and after work, the idea observed to change the causes of rites, for which reason the liberation from time must be separately explained. S'.

¶ Although time, as containing lunar days, is included in time, characterized by day and night, and although the sun is the Ruler of day and night, yet this is only the case in general, but not with regard to days and nights, where there is an increase or decrease which are ruled by the moon, and in this respect a liberation from time as represented by lunar days, is necessary. S'.

Digitized by Google

190

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

ed the Udgátar. The vital breath of the sacrificer is verily

the Udgátar. This vital breath is this wind, this (wind) is the

Udgátar, this (Udgátar) is liberation, this (liberation) absolute

liberation." 5.

He said,—" Yájnavalkya, this atmosphere is without founda-

tion, as it were; by what approach* does (man) approach then

the place of heaven ?" (He replied),—" By the mind which is

the moon in the shape of the priest, called the Brahma. The

mind of the sacrificer is verily the Brahma; mind is this

Brahma, this (moon) is the Brahma, this (Brahma) is liberation,

this (liberation) absolute liberation." So far the absolute emau-

cipation (from death). Next the means.† 6.

He said,—" Yájnavalkya, by how many Ríkst of the Ríg Véda

does this Hotar in this sacrifice to-day perform the praise ?"

(He replied),—" By three."—" By what three ?" " By those,

to be recited before (the sacrifice,) by those to be recited for

the sake of the sacrifice, and by those to be recited for the sake

of praise." " What does he conquer by them ?" " All that

bears life."§ 7.

He said,—" Yájnavalkya, how many oblations|| does this Adh-

varyu offer to-day in this sacrifice ?" (He replied),—" Three."

" Which are these three ?" " The oblations which flame up-

wards; the oblations which make a great noise ; the oblations

which fall downwards."¶ " What does he conquer by them ?"

" By the oblations that flame upwards, he conquers the world

• In 3-5, the liberation of the sacrificer from death has been declared, but not

the means by which he effects it. These means are explained in the present

section. S'.

† Means are either all the appliances necessary for the performance of sacred

rites, or the knowledge of those means. S'.

‡ A Rík does not mean here a single verse of the Ríg Véda, but it refers to

certain kinds of Ríg-verses, which may include any number of Mantras.

§ The three worlds, according to S, since they are the supporters of life, and the

three worlds correspond with the three kinds of Ríks.

|| Oblations, fire offerings.

¶ In the oblations, flaming upwards, butter ; in those making a great noise,

meat ; and in those falling downwards, milk or the Soma juice is offered.

Third Chapter. First Brāhmaṇa.

191

of the gods; for the world of the gods (déva) shines (dípyaté) as it were; by the oblations which make a great noise, he conquers the world of the forefathers; for the world of the forefathers is very noisy,* as it were; by the oblations which fall downwards, he conquers the world of man; for the world of man is down below, as it were." 8.

He said,—" Yájnavalkya, by how many deitiest does this Brahmá, (seated on the chair) to the right, protect to-day this sacrifice?" (He replied)—, "By one." "Which is the one?" "The mind;‡ the mind is infinite,§ infinite are the Visvédévas; he conquers thereby the world of the Infinite." 9.

He said,—" Yájnavalkya, how many hymns of praise,|| will the Udgátar sing to-day in this sacrifice?" (He replied).—"Three." "Which are these three?" "Those to be recited before (the sacrifice,) those to be recited for the sake of the sacrifice, and thirdly, those to be recited for the sake of praise." "Which are those (three) according to their relation to the soul?" "The vital air that goes forwards (respiration) is those to be recited before,¶ the vital air that goes downwards those to be recited for the sake of the sacrifice,* the vital air that equalises those to be recited for the sake of praise." "What does he conquer by them?" "By the Mantras to be recited before, he conquers the world of man, by those to be recited for the sake of the sacrifice, the world of the atmosphere, by those to be recited for the sake of praise, the world of the heavens." Hence the Hotar As'vala became silent. 10.

• The noise refers to the lamentations of those who are punished for their crimes, s'.

† The plural instead of the singular according to S'., is either used to connect this question with the former ones, or to deceive Yájnavalkya.

‡ For by the mind is Brahma meditated upon.

§ This means, that the modifications of the mind are infinite.

|| Riks either of the Rig or Sáma Veda.

¶ Both going upwards.

• As the wind going downwards causes a noise.

Digitized by Google

192

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

Second Brāhmaṇa.

Then asked* him Artabhága,† from the family of Jaratkāra,—

"Yājnavalkya," said he, "how many fetters‡ are there, and how

many auxiliaries to them ?" (He replied),—"Eight fetters and

eight auxiliaries." "Which are the eight fetters and the eight

auxiliaries ?" 1.

The vital air that goes forwards§ is a fetter ; it is enhanced

by the vital going downwards,∥ which is its auxiliary ; for by the

vital air that goes downwards, smell is perceived. 2.

Speech is a fetter ; it is enhanced by the word which is its

auxiliary, for by speech words are pronounced. The tongue is a

fetter ; it is enhanced by taste which is its auxiliary ; for by the

tongue various kinds of taste become manifest. 4.

The eye is a fetter ; it is enhanced by colour which is its

auxiliary ; for by the eye colours are seen. 5.

The ear is a fetter ; it is enhanced by sound which is its

auxiliary ; for by the ear sounds are heard. 6.

The mind is a fetter ; it is enhanced by desire which is its

auxiliary ; for by mind desires are formed. 7.

The hands are a fetter ; it is enhanced by action which is its

auxiliary ; for by the hands actions are done. 8.

The skin is a fetter ; it is enhanced by touch which is its

• The absolute liberation from death in the relation of the latter to time and work,

has been explained in the preceding Brāhmaṇa. What then is the nature of death

itself ? Death is an attachment, produced from the natural ignorance of man, as

to the material world and to the soul. Death is therefore a bond, and the

senses and their objects by which death is characterised, are called chains and their

enhancers, and it is the object of this Brāhmaṇa to show the liberation from death,

as characterised by the sensual chains and their enhancers, the sensual objects. S'.

† The son of Ritubhāga.

‡ The terms in the text are "graha" and "ati-graha," graha, by which something

is seized and atigraha, which aids in ths seizure, by which the seizure becomes stronger.

§ The vital air that goes forwards is here the sense of smell, from its connexion

with the present topic. S'.

∥ The vital air that goes downwards is here the sensation of smell. S'.

Third Chapter. Third Brāhmaṇa.

193

auxiliary ; for by the skin the various kinds of touch become known. These are the eight fetters and the eight auxiliaries.

He said,—“ Yájnavalkya, all this is the food of death. Which then is the deity whose food is death (himself) ?” (He replied),—“ Fire verily is death ; the same is the food of the water ; (thereby) death again is conquered.” 10.

He said,—“ Yájnavalkya, when this spirit (Purusha) dies, do then the organs* ascend from him ?”† Yájnavalkya said ;— “ No, by no means, no, by no means ; there‡ united they are dissolved in him ;§ he becomes swollen, he becomes full of wind, when blown upon : the dead sleep.”|| 11.

He said,—“.Yájnavalkya, when this spirit dies, then what does not leave him ?” (He replied),—“ The name. The name indeed is infinite, infinite are the Visvédévas ; he conquers thereby the world of the Infinite.” 12.

He said,—“ Yájnavalkya,¶—when the speech* of the spirit departed is dissolved into fire, the vital air into the wind, the eye into the sun, the mind into the moon, the ear into the quarters, the body into earth, the soul† into the ether, the hairs of the body into annual herbs, the hairs of the head into trees, blood and semen into the waters, where then does this spirit remain ?”—(He replied),—“ Take, O gentle Ārtabhāga, my hand, (and let us go to a lonely place, there) we shall know (the

• The fetters above mentioned, as speech, and their auxiliaries are the impressions of words, etc.

† From him who knows Brahma.

‡ In him who knows Brahma.

§ In the supreme Brahma; they become of the same nature with him.

|| There is no actual death ; when the bonds are destroyed, the liberated does not proceed any where.

¶ In 10 and 11, the state, which is obtained by the liberated, has been mentioned. What then does become after death of him who is not liberated ? The answer is given in the present section.

• By speech, the vital airs, etc, according to S'. the tutelary deities are here to be understood, and not the organs, because they do not depart.

† The soul (átma) means here the place of the soul, the ether of the heart.

20

Digitized by Google

194

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

answer of) this question ; this our (question) cannot be (decided)

in a crowded place.—Going there they deliberated. What

they said there, was work,* what they praised there, was work.

By holy work verily a person becomes holy, unholy by un-

holy." Hence Ártabhága from the family of Jaratkára became

silent. 13.

Third Bráhmana.†

Then asked him Bhujya, the son of Lahya,—“Yájnavalkya,”

said he, " wandering (once) in the country of the Madras for the

sake of studying the Védas, we came to the house of Patanchala

of the family of Kapi. His daughter was possessed by a Gan-

dharva.‡ We asked him,—‘Who art thou ?’ He answered,—‘I

am Sudhanvat, of the family of Angirasa.’ When asking him

about the boundaries of the world, we said to him,—‘Where are

the Párikshitas ? where are the Párikshitas ?’ I (now) ask thee,

O Yájnavalkya, where are the Párikshitas ?" 1.

He (Yájnavalkya) said,—“Verily he (the Gandharva), said,—

They (the Párikhitas) went where the performers of the Asva-

médha-sacrifice go." "Where then go the performers of the

Asvamédha-sacrifice ?" "This world§ extends to thirty-two days

(of the journey) of the car of the sun ; the earth extends twice as

• Work as the material cause of man again assuming a body, etc.

† This Bráhmana, according to S’., is to show, that the rites have only

worldly effects, and that absolute liberation is thereby impossible. The highest

among all rites is the performance of the horse-sacrifice, in its double form,

either as an actual sacrifice, accompanied with knowledge, or as a symbolical

sacrifice by mental representation. The effect resulting from the horse-sacrifice, is,

either individual, viz. the obtaining of the nature of fire and other deities, or univer-

sal, as referring to the deity of the universe, viz. the obtaining of the nature of Hi-

ranyagarbha, the first-born, that is to say, by neither of those effects absolute libera-

tion from the world, or identity with Brahma is obtained.

‡ A being of superhuman power. By saying, that he has his knowledge from

such a being, Bhujya means to assert, that his knowledge must be superior to that

of Yájnavalkya, as not derived from such a source. S’.

§ This world is, according to S’. the space, enclosed by the mountains of the

rising and the setting sun.

Third Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa.

195

far everywhere ; the ocean extends twice as far as the earth everywhere. There* as far as the edge of a razor, or the wing of a fly (extends), so far extends the ether in the midst. Indra,† in the shape of a falcon surrendered them (the Pārikshitas), to the wind ; the wind placing them upon himself‡ carried them there, where the performers of the Asvamédha-sacrifice abide.

In this manner he (the Gandharva) praised the wind ; therefore the wind is indeed the individuality, the wind the totality.

Whoever thus knows, conquers the second death." Hence Bhujya, the son of Lahya, became silent. 2.

Fourth Brāhmaṇa.

Then asked§ him Ushasta, the son of Chakra,—“ Yájnaval-kyá,” said he, “do explain to me that Brahma who is a witness and present,|| that soul, which is within every (being).” (He replied),—“ It is thy soul which is within every (being).” “ Which soul is within every one, O Yájnavalkya?” “ That which breathes

• There, according to S'.'s explanation, means at the aperture of the two halves of the mundane egg. To this end of the world leads a road of the length, above described, and through the aperture, which is the ether, the performers of the horse-sacrifice go, to be united with the wind that surrounds it.

† Paramés'vara. S'.

‡ Making them like himself.

§ The connexion between the present question and the two preceding ones is thus stated by S'. It has been declared that, seized by the fetters and their auxiliaries, viz. the senses and their objects, which are produced by virtue and vice, man roams about in the world, again and again shaking off those fetters, and again and again assuming them. The highest elevation to be gained by virtue has also been explained, that is to say, the acquirement of the same nature with the two-fold nature of Hiranyagarbha, viz. with his nature as totality or with his nature as separated within individual existences. The present question is to enquire, whether he who, seized by the senses and their objects, assumes one body after the other, exists or not, and if he exists, what is his nature, that is to say it shows, how to distinguish the soul from every other thing as the indispensable means of liberation ; for the nature of the soul being comprehended, liberation ensues from the above described bondage.

|| Witness and present, the first, according to S'. means " not obstructed by any thing," and the second " without attributes."

2 0 2

198

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

by the breath, is thy soul* which is within every (being) ; that which descends by the descending air, is thy soul which is within every (being) ; that which goes everywhere by the air going everywhere, in thy soul which is within every (being) ; that which ascends by the ascending air, is the soul which is within every (being) ; this thy soul is within every (being)." 1.

Ushasta, the son of Chakra, said,—"As some one may say : This is a cow, this is a horse, thus is this (Brahma) described by thee.† Do (now) explain to me that Brahma who is a witness and present, that soul which is within every (being)." "It is thy soul which is within every (being)." "Which soul is within every (being), Yájnavalkya?" "Thou couldst‡ not behold the beholder of the beholding ; thou couldst not hear the hearer of the hearing ; thou couldst not mind the minder of the minding ; thou couldst not know the knower of the knowing. This thy soul is within every (being) ; every thing different from it, is transient." Hence Ushasta, the son of Chakra, became silent. 2.

Fifth Bráhmaṇa.

Then asked him Kahola, the son of Kushítaka,—"Yájnavalkya," said he, "do explain to me that Brahma, who is a witness

• The soul, whose nature in knowledge. S'.

† To show Brahma by such signs as respiration, etc. Is the same, as if some body who engages to define a cow, etc. defines it merely by signs, saying for instance, the animal which goes there is a cow ; that is to say, thy definition is an improper one.

‡ Yájnavalkya declines to give a definition of Brahma in the way, as it is given of a jar, etc. And his reason for declining it, is that such a definition is contradictory to the nature of Brahma. For the nature of Brahma consists in the agency described as beholding, etc. The soul is the beholder of the beholding. The beholding, hearing, knowing, etc. is therefore twofold, the common one and that to which it in reality applies. The common beholding, etc. is a modification of the internal organ by means of its connexion with the eye, etc. This is an effect, and has therefore a commencement and an end; but the beholding, etc. of the soul, the beholding of the beholding, has, by its own nature, no beginning and no end.

Third Chapter. Fifth Brāhmaṇa. 197

and present, that soul, which it is within every (being)."* (He replied),—" It is thy soul, which is within every (being)." " Which is (the soul), O Yájnavalkya, that is within every (being)?" " (It is the soul) which conquers hunger, thirst, grief, delusion, old age, (and) death. When Brāhmaṇas know this soul,† then elevating themselves from the desire of obtaining a son,‡ from the desire of wealth, and from the desire of gaining the worlds, they lead the life of wandering mendicants ; for the desire of a son, is also the desire for wealth ; the desire for wealth§ is also the desire for the worlds; for both are even desires. Therefore knowing wisdom let the Brāhmaṇa arm himself with strength.∥ Knowing wisdom and strength¶ the

• In the first three Brāhmaṇas the bondage of the soul together with its cause has been declared. In the fourth the existence of the soul and its independence on every other thing has been set forth. The fifth Brāhmaṇa is to show the knowledge of the soul in connexion with the renunciation of the world as the cause of the liberation of the soul from bondage. In this and the preceding Brāhmaṇas the question, " Explain to me that Brahma, etc." is the same, and it might therefore be justly asked, whether the two questions refer to one and the same soul, or to two, the supreme and the individual souls. The latter case appears the correct one on the first glance ; for if it is one and the same soul, the second question seems useless ; on a closer consideration, however, this view must be abandoned ; for one and the same whole of causes and effects is possessed of soul merely by one soul. The difference between the present and the preceding questions is this, that in the latter the soul is described, as far as it has existence and nexion with the renunciation of the world, is described, by which the liberation from that bondage takes place. S'.

† Know the soul, that is to say, their own soul as the supreme Brahma.

‡ The desire of being united with a wife for the purpose of obtaining a son, by whom they were able to conquer the world. S'.

§ Wealth is twofold, human and divine wealth. Human wealth supplies the means to perform rites ; by these rites, if unaccompanied with knowledge, the world of the forefathers is gained. Divine wealth is knowledge; by rites, connected therewith, the world of the gods is gained, and the same also by mere knowledge. From this knowledge also an elevation is necessary to obtain perfect liberation from the world ; for in reality that knowledge is ignorance. S'.

∥ Wisdom, Pāṇdityam, the knowledge of Brahma, strength, such as results from the knowledge of Brahma.

¶ The thinker, Muni, explained by S', mananat Mani, that is a Yogi.

198

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

thinker,* knowing the thinking and the not thinking of Brahma,

will become a (true) Brāhmaṇa." "By what (work) will the

Brāhmaṇa live i" "He will remain such an one by any (work).†

Any (state) different from this (state of a Bráhman) is perisha-

-ble." Then Kahola, the son of Kushítaka, became silent. 1.

Sixth Brāhmaṇa.

Then asked‡ him Gárgi, the daughter of Vachaknu,—" Yáj-

navalkya," said she, "all this (earth) is woven and rewoven on

the waters;§ upon what then are the waters woven and re-

woven ?" (He replied),—"On the wind,|| Gárgi." "On what then

is woven and rewoven the wind ?" "On the worlds of the

atmosphere,¶ Gárgi." "On what then are woven and rewoven

the worlds of the atmosphere?" "On the worlds of the

Gandharvas, O Gárgi." "On what then are woven and re-

woven the worlds of the Gandharvas ?" "On the worlds of

Áditya, O Gárgi." "On what then are woven and rewoven

the worlds of Áditya?" "On the worlds of the moon, O

Gárgi." "On what then are woven and rewoven the worlds

of the moon ?" "On the worlds of the stars, O Gárgi." "On

• Not thinking and thinking, thus I have translated literally, different from S'.'s

explanation, who explains " Amannam," the knowledge of soul and the removing a belief of non-soul, and " Maunam the ultimate effect from removing a belief

in the non-soul.

† The sense is, for him who has acquired the true knowledge of Brahma, every

work is indifferent ; he is above work.

‡ In the last two Bráhmaṇas it has been declared, that the soul is within all ;

the next three Bráhmaṇas are to give a more exact definition of this. A. G.

§ This is the case, because the earth every where from without and within is

pervaded by the water; otherwise it would be scattered every where like a hand-

ful of pounded rice. Here applies this argument, all that is an effect, that is finite

and gross, is pervaded by something, which is a cause, which is infinite and sub-

tile ; and this commences from the five elements up to the soul. S'.

|| Instead of " on the wind," the answer " on the fire" should be here expected ;

but says S', the fire has no existence of its own, independent of water and earth,

and is therefore not mentioned separately.

¶ The worlds of the atmosphere are composed of the five elements. S'.

what then are the worlds of the stars woven and rewoven?

"On the worlds of the gods, O Gárgi." "On what then are woven and rewoven the worlds of the gods?" "On the worlds of Indra, O Gárgi." "On what then are woven and rewoven the worlds of Indra?" "On the worlds of Prajápati, O Gárgi." "On what then are woven and rewoven the worlds of Prajápati?" "On the worlds of Brahma, O Gárgi." "On what then are woven and rewoven the worlds of Brahma." "Gárgi," said he, "do not ask an improper question,* in order that thy head may not drop down. Thou askest the deity which is not to be questioned. Do not question, O Gárgi." Thence Gárgi, the daughter of Vachaknu, became silent. 1.

Seventh Bráhmaṇa.

Then asked him† Uddálaka, the son of Aruṇa,—"Yájnavalkya," said he, "in the country of the Madras we abode in the house of Patanchala of the family of Kapi for the sake of studying the science of offering. His wife was possessed by a Gandharva. We asked him (the Gandharva), 'Who art thou?' He said, 'Kabandha, the son of Atharvaṇa.' He said to Patanchala, of the family of Kapi, and to (us) priests, 'O Kápya, knowest thou that Thread by which this world, and the other world and all beings‡ are bound together?' Patanchala, of the family of Kapi, said,—'I do not know it, O Venerable.' He said to Patanchala, of the family of Kapi, and to (us) priests §— 'Knowest thou, O Kápya, that inner Ruler who within rules this world and the other world, and all beings?' Patanchala, of the family of Kapi, said, 'I do not know (this), O Venerable.' He said to Patanchala, of the family of Kapi, and to (us) priests, 'O Kápya, whoever knows the Thread and the

• Do not ask an improper question, because it cannot be decided by argument, but only by the Sást ra. S'.

† Patanchala's pupils.

‡ From Brahmá downwards to inanimate matter, S'.

§ Patanchala's pupils.

200 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

Inner Ruler, knows Brahma, knows the worlds, knows the gods, knows the Védas, knows the elements,* knows the soul, knows all.' (Then the Gandharva) said (all about the Thread and the Inner Ruler) to them. Therefore do I know this. If thou, O Yájnavalkya, ignorant of the Thread and the Inner Ruler, hast taken away the Brahma cows,† thy head will certainly drop down." "I know verily, Gautama, the Thread and the Inner Ruler." "Any one may say this, I know, I know ; but tell the manner, in which thou knowest." 1.

He said,—"The wind, O Gautama, is the Thread; by the wind as by a thread are this world, the other world, all beings bound together, O Gautama.. Therefore, O Gautama, it is said of a dead man, that his members are relaxed ; for by the wind, O Gautama, as by a thread, they are bound together." "This is so, O Yájnavalkya, (now) explain the Inner Ruler."2.

"He who dwelling in the earth is within the earth, whom the earth does not know,‡ whose body is the earth, who within rules the earth, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 3.

"He who dwelling in the waters is within the waters, whom the waters do not know, whose body are the waters, who within rules the waters, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal, 4.

"He who dwelling in the fire is within the fire, whom the fire does not know, whose body is the fire, who within rules the fire, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 5.

"He who dwelling in the atmosphere is within the atmosphere, whom the atmosphere does not know, whose body is the atmosphere, who within rules the atmosphere, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 6.

"He who dwelling in the wind is within the wind, whom the wind does not know, whose body is the wind, who within rules the wind, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 7.

"He who dwelling in the heavens is within the heavens, whom

• Or the beings.

† The cows destined for the best knower of Brahma.

‡ The deity of the earth.

Third Chapter. Seventh Brāhmaṇa.

201

the heavens do not know, whose body are the heavens, who from within rules the heavens, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 8.

He who dwelling in the sun, is within the sun, whom the sun does not know, whose body is the sun, who from within rules the sun, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal.

He who dwelling in the quarters, is within the quarters, whom the quarters do not know, whose body are the quarters, who from within rules the quarters, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 10.

He who dwelling in the moon and stars, is within the moon and stars, whom the moon and stars do not know, whose body are the moon and stars, who from within rules the moon and stars, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 11.

He who dwelling in the ether, is within the ether, whom the ether does not know, whose body is the ether, who from within rules the ether, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 12.

He who dwelling in the darkness, is within the darkness, whom the darkness does not know, whose body is the darkness, who from within rules the darkness, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 13.

He who dwelling in the light, is within the light, whom the light does not know, whose body is the light, who from within rules the light, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal.

This is (his) relation to the gods. Next of (his) relation to the elements. 14.

He who dwelling in all elements, is within the elements, whom the elements do not know, whose body are the elements, who from within rules the elements, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. This is (his) relation to the elements. Next of (his) relation to the soul. 15.

He who dwelling in the vital air,* is within the vital air, whom the vital air does not know, whose body is the vital air,

• In smell, accompanied by the air of respiration. S'.

2 D

202

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

who from within rules the vital air, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 16.

He who dwelling in speech, is within speech, whom speech does not know, whose body is speech, who from within rules speech, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 17.

He who dwelling in the eye, is within the eye, whom the eye does not know, whose body is the eye, who from within rules the eye, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 18.

He who dwelling in the ear, is within the ear, whom the ear does not know, whose body is the ear, who from within rules the ear, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 19.

He who dwelling in the mind, is within the mind, whom the mind does not know, whose body is the mind, who from within rules the mind, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 20.

He who dwelling in the skin, is within the skin, whom the skin does not know, whose body is the skin, who from within rules the skin, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 21.

He who dwelling in knowledge, is within knowledge, whom knowledge does not know, whose body is knowledge, who from within rules knowledge, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. 22.

He who dwelling in the seed,* is within the seed, whom the seed does not know, whose body is the seed, who from within rules the seed, is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. Unseen he sees, unheard he hears, unminded he minds, unknown he knows. There is none that sees, but he, there is none that hears, but he, there is none that minds, but he, there is none that knows, but he.† He is thy soul, the Inner Ruler, immortal. Whatever is different from him, is perishable." Hence Uddálaka, the son of Aruṇa, became silent. 23.

• In procreation. S'.

† Vid. Br. K. 3, 4, 2, Prasna U. 419, and Kaṭha U. 6, 12. Muṇḍ 3, 8, Taitt. 2, 4, Talav. U. 1, 3.

Third Chapter. Eighth Bráhmana. 203

Eighth Bráhmana.

Then* the daughter of Vachaknu said,—“ O venerable Bráh-

mans, I wish to ask him (further) two questions. If he

answers them, then indeed none of you will ever defeat him

in argument concerning Brahma.” (They replied),—“ Ask

(him), O Gárgi.” 1.

She said,—“ As the king of the Kás'is or of the Vidéhas, the

offspring of heroes, when he has bound the string to the string-

less bow, rises in sight with two foe-piercing arrows in his hand,

so I will rise before thee with two questions. Do thou make

answer to me.”—“ Ask, O Gárgi.” 2.

She said,—“ What is above the heavens, O Yájnavalkya, what

is beneath the earth, what is between, and what is these two,

heavens and earth, and what is called the past, the present and

the future,—upon what is all this woven and rewoven ?” 3.

He said,—“ What is above the heavens, O Gárgi, what is

beneath the earth, what is between, and is these two, heavens

and earth, and what is called the past, the present, and the

future,—all this is woven and rewoven on the ether.” 4.

She said,—“ I bow to thee, O Yájnavalkya, who hast explain-

ed this (question) to me ; be prepared for the other.” “ Ask,

O Gárgi.” 5.

She said,—“ What is above the heavens, what is beneath the

earth, what is between, and what is these two, heavens and

earth, and what is called past, present, and future,—upon

what is all this woven and rewoven ?Ӡ 6.

He said,—“ What is above the heavens, O Gárgi, what is

beneath the earth, what is between, and what is these two,

heavens and earth, and what is called past, present, and

future—is woven and rewoven on the ether.” “ Upon what

then is the ether woven and rewoven ?” 7.

• This Bráhmana is to show the present, visible Brahma as independent of any

attributes. S'.

† The second question, which is the same with the first, is intended firmly to

establish the truth declared before. S.'

2 D 2

204 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

He said,—“ It is called by the Bráhmans* the indestructible one, O Gárgi. (This) is not of a gross body, it is not subtile, not long, not wide, not red,† not viscid,‡ not shadow, not darkness, not air, not ether, not adhesive,§ not taste, not smell, not eye, not ear, not speech, not mind, not light, not life, not entrance,|| not measure, not within, not without. It does not consume any thing, nor does any one consume it.¶ 8.

" By the command of this indestructible (being), O Gárgi, sun and moon stay upheld in their places,** by the command of this indestructible (being), O Gárgi, heavens and earth stay upheld in their places ; by the command of this indestructible (being), O Gárgi, minutes, hours, days and nights, the half months, the months, the seasons, the years stay upheld in their places ; by the command of this indestructible (being), O Gárgi, the eastern rivers†† flow from the snowy mountains (to the eastern quarter), the western‡‡ to the western quarter, and the others to the quarters, (ordained for them). By the command of this indestructible (being), O Gárgi, men praise the giver, gods follow the sacrificer, (and) fore-fathers the oblation. 9.

" Whoever, ignorant of this indestructible (being), O Gárgi, in this world performs offerings, adores the gods (and) practises austerities even many thousands of years, consumes at last the (fruit of his works). Whoever, ignorant of this indestructible (being), O Gárgi, departs from this world, becomes a miser§§ again ; whoever, knowing this indestructible (being), O Gárgi, departs from this world, is a (true) Bráhman. 10.

• The Bráhmans are here such as know Brahma. S'. † Prásna U. 4, 9. Mund 1, 5. ‡ Like fire. S'. § Like water. S'. || Like lac. S'. ¶ Not entrance, to whom there is no entrance, unapproachable. ** All these negatives are to establish the conviction, that Brahma has no attributes. Vide. Váj S. U. 8. Kaṭha U. 3, 15. Mund 1, 6. †† Kaṭha U. 6, 2. Taitt. U. 2, 8. ‡‡ The Sindhu, etc. S'. §§ Stores up the effects from works, like a miser riches.

Third Chapter. Ninth Bráhmaṇa. 205

"This indestructible (being), O Gárgi, although unseen sees, unheard hears, unminded minds, unknown knows. There is none that sees, but he, there is none that hears, but he, there is none that minds but he, there is none that knows, but he.* On this indestructible (being), O Gárgi, the ether is verily woven and rewoven." 11.

She said,—" O venerable Bráhmaṇs, highly respect this (my word) and acquit yourself towards him (Yájnavalkya) with salutation. None among you will ever become his conqueror in argument concerning Brahma." Hence the daughter of Vacha-knu became silent. 12.

Ninth Bráhmaṇa.

Then asked† him Vidagdha, the son of S'akala,—"How many gods are there, O Yájnavalkya?" He (answered),—"This can be learnt from the Nivit ;‡ as many (gods) as are mentioned in the Nivit of the Vais'vadéva (Sástra), (so many are there), (viz.) three and three hundred, and three and three thousand (3,306)."§ He said,—" Om ! How many gods are there,O Yájnavalkya ?" " Thirty-three."—He said,—" Om ! How many gods are there?" He said,—"Six." He said,—"Om! How many gods are there, O Yájnavalkya ?" " Three." He said,—" Om ! Huw many gods are there, O Yájnavalkya?" "Two."

• Pras'na. 4, 8. Hd. Talavakára U. 1, 4—8.

† After it has been stated, that the earth, the other elements, etc., by their successively more and more subtile nature are, one to another, in the state which has been called " woven and rewoven," Brahma has been declared to be within all. (Bráhm. 4-6.) It has been farther stated, that Brahma has the attribute of " Ruler" in the divisions of the thread which pervade the whole manifested world, for all that is manifested requires, to be understood, the Ruler as its cause. The present Bráhmaṇa undertakes now to show, how the nature of Brahma as a wit-ness, and as present, can be comprehended by the maximum and minimum numbers of the gods. S'.

‡ The title of a set of Mantras, defining the number of deities. S'.

§ This is no doubt the amount of the number of the:text, according to the ex-planation of S'aṅkara ; the number given in the Ṭiká 3,336, is probably owing to the mis-apprehension of a copyist who added " triṅ'sat" (30.)

Digitized by Google

206

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

"Om ! How many gods are there, O Yájnavalkya?" "Adhyardha."* He said,—"Om ! How many gods are there, O Yájnavalkya?" "One." He said,—"Om ! Which are these three and three hundreds, and three and three thousand." 1.

He said,—"This is even for their glory; there are (in reality) thirty-three gods." "Which are those thirty-three?" "Eight Vasus, eleven Rudras, twelve Adityas. These are thirty-one; besides Indra and Prajápati. These are thirty-three." 2.

"Which are the Vasus ?" "The fire, the earth, the wind, the atmosphere, the sun, the heavens, the moon, and the stars. These are the Vasus, for upon them this all is founded ; this means Vasu, therefore they are called Vasus." 3.

"Which are the Rudras?" "The ten organs (Pránah) in man, and the soul as the eleventh. When they leave this body after death, they weep. Therefore, because they weep (Rodayanti), they are called Rudras." 4.

"Which are the Adityas?" "The twelve months of the year are the Adityas ; for taking all this† they pass. Because taking all this they pass (ádadáná yanti), therefore they are called Adityas." 5.

"Who is Indra, who is Prajápati ?" "The cloud is Indra, the sacrifice is Prajápati." "Which is the cloud ?" "The lightning." "Which is the sacrifice ?" "The animals." 6.

"Which are the six ?" "The fire (Agni), the earth, the wind, the atmosphere, the sun and the heavens ;‡ for they are six ; for this all is six." 7.

"Which are the three gods ?" "The three worlds,§ for within

• Adhyardha, which is more than half, half of two would be one ; to distinguish it from the next, this term appears to have been chosen ; see the explanation, given in 9.

† All this, the age of man and the fruit, derived from works. S'.

‡ In this number the moon and the stars are omitted.

§ Earth and fire together are here considered as one god, the atmosphere and the wind as the second, and the heavens and Aditya (the sun) as the third god. K. G.

Digitized by Google

Third Chapter. Ninth Brāhmaṇa.

them all those gods are (comprehended)." "Which are the two gods ?" "Food and life." "Which is the Adhyardha ?" "He who purifies."* 8.

"Here it is objected,—He who purifies, is one even; how then is he Adhyardha ?"† "Because all obtains increase in him,‡ therefore is he the Adhyardha." "Which is the one god ?" "Life; this is called Brahma, this what is beyond."§ 9.

"Whoever knows that spirit (Purusha), whose abode is the earth, whose place (of sight)∥ is the fire, whose light is the mind,—as the highest locality of every soul, is in truth the one who knows." "I know indeed, O Yájnavalkya, that spirit, the highest locality of every soul, of whom thou speakest. He is the spirit who abides in the body." "Say, O Sākalya, which is the deity of the same ?" He said, "Immortality." 10.

"Whoever knows that spirit, whose abode is desire, whose place (of sight) is the heart,¶ whose light is the mind, as the highest locality of every soul, is in truth one who knows." "I know indeed, O Yájnavalkya, that spirit, the highest locality of every soul, of whom thou speakest. He is the spirit, whose nature is desire." "Say, O Sākalya, which is the deity of the same ?" He said,—"Women." 11.

"Whoever knows that spirit whose abode are colours, whose place (of sight) is the eye, whose light is the mind, as the highest locality of every soul, is in truth one who knows." "I know indeed, O Yájnavalkya, that spirit, the highest locality of the whole soul, of whom thou speakest. He is the spirit in the sun." "Say, O Sākalya, which is the deity of the same ?" He said,—"Truth." 12.

• The wind. † The objection seems to be made from the literal meaning of Adhyardha, which is "half." ‡ Adhyardhnotadhi vidhim práṇeti. § Vid. 2, 3, 1. ∥ Place (of sight) lokah, lokayati aneneti. S′. ¶ The heart, intellect. S′. Adayana yanti.

208 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

"Whoever knows that spirit, whose abode is the ether, whose place (of sight) is the ear, whose light is the mind,—as the locality of the whole soul, is in truth one who knows." "I know, O Yájnavalkya, the spirit, the locality of the whole soul, of whom thou speakest. He is the spirit who abides in the ear, to whom all hearing is subject." "Say, O Sákalya, which is the deity of the same?" He said,—"The quarters." 13.

"Whoever knows the spirit, whose abode is darkness, whose place (of sight) is the heart, whose light is the mind,—as the highest locality of the whole soul, is in truth one who knows." "I know indeed, O Yájnavalkya, the spirit, who is the highest locality of the whole soul, of whom thou speakest. He is the spirit, whose nature is shadow." "Say, O Sákalya, which is the deity of the same?" He said,—"Death." 14.

"Whoever knows the spirit, whose abode are the colours, whose place (of sight) is the eye, whose light the mind,—as the highest locality of the whole soul, is in truth one who knows." "I know, O Yájnavalkya, the spirit, who is the highest locality of the whole soul, of whom thou speakest. He is the spirit who abides in the looking-glass." "Say, O Sákalya, which is the deity of the same?" He said,—"The breath." 15.

"Whoever knows the spirit, whose abode are the waters, whose place (of sight) is the heart, whose light the mind, as the locality of the whole soul, is in truth one who knows." "I know, O Yájnavalkya, the spirit, who is the highest locality of the whole soul, of whom thou speakest. He is the spirit who abides in the waters." "Say, O Sákalya, which is the deity of the same?" He said,—"Varuṇa." 16.

"Whoever knows the spirit, whose abode is in the semen, whose place of sight is the heart, whose light is the mind, as the highest locality of the whole soul, is in truth one who knows." "I know indeed, O Yájnavalkya, that spirit, as the highest locality of the whole soul, of whom thou speakest. He is the spirit who abides in the sun." "Tell, O Sákalya, which is the deity of the same?" He said,—"Prajápati." 17.

Digitized by Google

Third Chapter. Ninth Brāhmaṇa.

209

Yájnavalkya said,—“ O S'ākalya, these Brāhmans have made thee cinders.” 18.

S'ākalya said,—O Yájnavalkya, (does this thy boast), that thou hast defeated these Kuru and Panchala Brāhmans in argument, (arise from a conceit that) thou knowest Brahma ?”

“ I know the quarters with their deities and their localities.”

“ If thou dost know the quarters with their deities and localities—19.

Which deity art thou in the eastern quarter?” “ The sun.”

“ Where is the sun located ?” “ In the eye.” “ Where has the eye its locality ?” “ In colours ; for by the eye colours are seen.”

“ Where is the locality of colours ?” He said,—“ In the heart ; for colours are produced by the heart ; the heart therefore is the locality of colour.”

“ Thus is it, Yájnavalkya. 20.

Which deity art thou in the southern quarter ?” “ The deity of Yama.”

“ Where is the locality of Yama ?” “ In sacrifice.”

“ Where is the locality of the sacrifice ?” “ In the bestowal of gifts.”*

“ Where is bestowing of gifts ?” “ In faith ; for if a man have faith, he gives gifts ; faith therefore is the locality of bestowal of gifts.”

“ Where is the locality of faith ?” “ In the heart,” said he ; “ for by the heart he knows faith ; the heart therefore is the locality of faith.”

“ Thus is it, O Yájnavalkya. 21.

Which deity ārt thou in the western quarter ?” “ The deity of Varuṇa.”

“ Where is the locality of Varuṇa ?” “ In the waters.”

“ Where is the locality of the waters ?” “ In the semen ?”

“ Where is the locality of the semen ?” “ In the heart ; for it is said of a son, who resembles (his father), he is dropped from (his) heart, as it were; he is made of (his) heart, as it were; the heart therefore is the locality of the semen.”

“ Thus is it, O Yájnavalkya. 22.

Which deity art thou in the northern quarter ?” “ The deity of Soma.”

“ Where is the locality of Soma ?” “ In the

• To the officiating priests, from whom the sacrificer purchases the sacrifice. S'.

2 E

Digitized by Google

210

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

initiatory rite."* "Where is the locality of the initiatory rite?" " In truth ; for we say concerning a person, who has perform-

ed the initiatory rite,—speak the truth ; the heart therefore is the locality of the initiatory rite." " Where is the locality of

truth ?" " In the heart," said he ; "for by the heart man knows truth ; the heart therefore is the locality of truth." " Thus

is it, O Yájnavalkya. 23.

Which deity art thou in the polar quarter?"† " The deity of Agni." " Where is the locality of Agni?" " In speech."

" Where is the locality of speech ?" " In the heart." " Where is the locality of the heart?" 24.

Yájnavalkya said,—" O Ahallika,‡ if thou believest at any time that the heart is in any other place than in our (body),

if the same is in any other place than in our (body), then why do the dogs not eat it, or the birds not tear it ?" 25.

" Where art thou and where is self§ located?" " In " the vital air that goes forwards." Where is the location

" of the vital air that goes forwards ?" In the descending " air." " Where is the location of the descending air ?" " In

the circulating air." " Where is the location of the circulating air ?" " In the ascending air." " Where is the

location of the ascending air ?" " In the equalising air. This

soul, which is neither this, nor that, nor aught else, is intangible; for it is not to be laid hold of ; it is not to be dissipated,

for it cannot be dissipated ; it is without contact, for it does not come into contact ; it is not limited ; it is not subject to pain,

nor to destruction.—There are eight abodes, eight places (of sight), eight deities, and eight Purushas. Whoever understands

those Purushas in their division,∥ and again in their union,¶ has overcome (the world). I ask thee about the Purusha in

the Upanishads. And thou explain not him to me, thy head will

• A rite previous to the sacrifice. This may be also rendered, " In the initiatory Mantra," the Mantra which the sacrificer receives previous to the sacrifice.

† The quarter which is above those who dwell on the mountain Meru. S'.

‡ Ahallika, ahani liyate, a being who disappears in the day time, a ghost. S'.

§ Atma means here the body. S'.

∥ In their eight-fold division. S'.

¶ As they are united in the heart. S'.

Third Chapter. Ninth Brāhmaṇa.

211

fall off." S'ākalya knew him not, so his head fell off. Moreover robbers took away his bones, mistaking them for some thing else.* 26.

Then he said,—"O venerable Brāhmaṇs, let any one among you who wishes it, question me, or do you so all together. Or I will question any one among you who desires it ; or I will question you altogether." The Brāhmaṇs dared not. 27.

He questioned them by these Slokas,—"As the tree is identical with the lord of the forest,† so is the Purusha identical with truth. His hair is the leaves, his skin the external bark. From his skin blood flows, as sap from the bark ; therefore if he be hurt, blood proceeds from him, as sap from a wounded tree. The parts of flesh are the layers‡ (of wood) ; the inner bark is firm like the tendons. The bones are the inner layers of wood ; the pith is made like the marrow. If a tree be cut down, it springs up anew from the root. From what root rises mortal (man), if cut down by death ? Do not say, from the semen, because this is produced from the living. The tree springs (also) from seed ; after it has died away, it is visibly produced (again from seed). If the tree be destroyed together with its root,§ it does not spring up afresh. If then mortal (man) be cut down by death, from what root shall he spring up ? He who has (once) been born, cannot be born (any more). Who (then) produces him afterwards again ?"||

It is Brahma, who is knowledge and bliss, the highest aim of the giver of wealth¶ (as he is) of that one who abideth (in Him) and knoweth him.* 5.

• While his body was being carried for the performance of the funeral rites by his disciples to his house. S'.

† "Vanaspati," lord of the forest, is another name for "tree."

‡ This evidently refers to the outer woody layer or alburnum.

§ Or with its seed. S'.

|| Here is the end of the narrative. The Brāhmaṇs could not answer the question of Yájnavalkya with reference to the last cause of the world, and thereby the superiority of his knowledge was established. In the next sentence the answer is given by the S'ruti itself. S'.

¶ Of him who performs ceremonies, of the sacrificer. S'.

• Of him, who no longer practising rites knows Brahma in his true nature. S'.

2 : 2

212

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

FOURTH CHAPTER.

First Brāhmaṇa.

Janaka,* the king of the Vidéhas, sat (on his throne). Then came Yájnavalkya. He said,—“ Why hast thou come, O Yájnavalkya? Is it seeking cattle, or subtle (questions) ?”

“ Even both, O king of kings,” said he. 1. “Let us hear, what any has taught thee.” “Jitvá, the son of S'ílina taught me, speech is Brahma.” “As one having an excellent mother, father and teacher, the son of S'ílina taught, speech is Brahma—for of what use is a person who cannot speak ?” He, no doubt, taught thee his (Brahma's) place and site.”† “He did not teach me that Brahma is only one-footed,‡ O king of kings.” “Then, O Yájnavalkya, do

• The connexion of the two next Bráhmanas with the preceding chapter is thus explained by S'ankara,—It has been stated, that the eight Purushas (Vid. 3, 9, 10 —17), are separated from each other, and again united in the heart; that this again separates into five according to the division of the quarters (l. c. 18—24 ); again, that they, the heart and the body, in their mutual dependence are one, in the Sútra or the soul of the world, Samána by name, whose nature is present in the five vital airs (e. l. 26 ); and lastly, that the Purusha of the Upanishad surpasses the soul of the world or the Sútra and is to be defined by negations, and at the same time (positively) as the present Brahma, and the substantial cause of all in the words " Knowledge and bliss, etc." (e. l. 28.) In the next two Bráhmanas it will be explained, in what manner this Brahma may again be comprehended by the deities of speech, etc. Ananda Giri expresses the connexion briefly thus,—In the former chapter the nature of Brahma, as existence, knowledge and bliss, has been defined after the manner of a wrangling dispute, in the present it is explained in a formal argument.

† According to S'. place (áyatana) means body, and site (Pratishṭha) the continual existence in the past, present and future times, where body seems to denote the transient, and site the permanent nature of Brahma with regard to time.

‡ This passage is rather obscure and admits of several explanations. The literal translation may be two-fold. First, “ he did not tell me so. This Brahma is one-footed, O king of kings.” And the apparent meaning is, Thou hast determined Brahma by two attributes, as having place and site. But this is not correct ; for,

Digitized by Google

Fourth Chapter. First Bráhmana.

213

thou give us the explanation." "Verily, speech* is the place, the ether, the site, the knowledge! In this view† let one meditate on him (Brahma)." What knowledge,‡ O Yájnavalkya?"

He said,—"Verily, speech, O king of kings. By speech, O king of kings, a friend is made known ; (so are made known) the Rig Véda, the Yajur Véda, the Sáma Véda, the Atharvans and Angiras the narratives, the doctrines of creation, the science, the Upanishads, the memorial verses, the aphorisms, the explanation of Mantras,§ the fruits of sacrifices, of offerings, of bestowing food, of bestowing drink, this world and the other world and all beings. By speech, O king of kings, is Brahma known; speech, O king of kings, is the supreme Brahma. Speech does not desert him who with this knowledge meditates on that (Brahma), all beings approach him ;|| having become a god, verily he goes to the gods !" "I will give thee a thousand cows, big as elephants," said Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas. Yájnavalkya said,—"My father admonished me —where one does not instruct, one should not take (gifts)." 2.

being single in all respects, Brahma can have only one attribute. This explanation, however, does not agree with the next passage, where speech, representing Brahma, has four attributes, viz. place, ether, site, and knowledge; unless the last attribute (knowledge) be considered as the true one which defines the nature of Brahma. Or secondly,—"He did not tell me, that this (Brahma) is only one-footed,"—as thou supposest it to be, but rather four-footed. S'ankara adopts neither of these interpretations, but explains the passage as follows,—"The other, (Yájnavalkya) said,—"He did not tell me (so)." The other (the king) said,—"If this is the case, then is Brahma one-footed." "(The idea of) Brahma is without effect, if he be meditated upon as having only three feet, O king of kings." "If so, then explain the matter to me according to thy knowledge, O Yájnavalkya." S'.'s explanation agrees in sense, although not in detail, with the second version, above given."

• Speech; the speech of Brahma, represented by the deity of speech. S'.

† By this knowledge, being the fourth foot of the Brahma of the Upanishad. S'.

‡ This question means, is it knowledge itself, or the cause of knowledge? Is it distinguished from Brahma, as his place and foundation are, or is it not distinguished from him ? And the answer implies, that it is not distinguished. S'.

§. Vid. p. 179, where the above terms have been explained.

|| With offerings and presents.

Digitized by Google

214 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

"Let us hear, what another has taught thee." "Udanka, the son of S'ulbasa, told me, life is Brahma." "As one having an excellent mother, father and teacher, the son of S'ulbasa taught, life is Brahma; for of what use is a person who has no life? He, no doubt, taught thee his place and site." "He did not teach me that Brahma is only one-footed, O king of kings." "Then, O Yájnavalkya, give us the explanation." "Life is even the place, the ether, the site, that which is dear to us! In this view let one meditate on him." "What dear object, O Yájnavalkya?" He said,—"Verily life is the dear object, O king of kings. For love of life, O king of kings, one desires what is not desirable, seizes on what is not to be seized ; for the desire of life, O king of kings, arises dread of being killed* wherever one goes. Life, O king of kings, is the supreme Brahma. Him who that knowing meditates on that (Brahma), does life not desert, him all beings approach ; having become a god, he even goes to the gods !" "I will give thee a thousand cows, big as elephants," said Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas. Yájnavalkya said,—"My father admonished me—where one does not instruct, one should not take (gifts)." 3.

"Let us hear, what another has taught thee." "Barkku, the son of Vrishṇa, taught me, the eye is Brahma." "As one having an excellent mother, father and teacher, the son of Vrishṇa taught, the eye is Brahma; for of what use is one who does not see? He, no doubt, taught thee his place and site." "He did not teach me that Brahma is only one-footed, O king of kings." "Then, O Yájnavalkya, give us the explanation." "Verily the eye is the place, the ether, the site, the truth! In this view let one meditate on him." "Which truth, O Yájnavalkya?" He said,—"The eye, O king of kings. When one who sees with the eye, is asked, O king of kings, hast thou seen? (Should) he answer, I have seen, then that (which he has seen) is truth. The eye,

• From robbers, etc.

Fourth Chapter. First Brāhmaṇa.

O king of kings, is the supreme Brahma. The eye not deserts him who with this knowledge meditates on that (Brahma) ; all beings approach him ; having become a god, verily he goes to the gods." "I will give thee a thousand cows, big as elephants," said Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas. Yájnavalkya said,—"My father admonished me—where one does not instruct, one should not take (gifts)." 4.

"Let us hear, what another has taught thee." " Gardabhívípíta, of the family of Bharadvája, taught me, the ear is Brahma."* "As one having an excellent mother, father and teacher, Bháradvája taught, the ear is Brahma; for of what use is he who does not hear? He, no doubt, taught thee his place and site." "He did not teach me that Brahma is only one-footed, O king of kings." "Then, O Yájnavalkya, give us the explanation." "Verily the ear is the place, the ether, the site, the infinite! In this view let one meditate on him." "What infinite, O Yájnavalkya?" He said,—"Verily the quarters are infinite, O king of kings. Therefore, O king of kings, none comes to the end of any quarter whichsoever; for the quarters are infinite. The quarters, O king of kings, are the ear ; the ear, O king of kings, is the supreme Brahma. The ear not deserts him, who with this knowledge meditates on that (Brahma), all beings approach him ; having become a god, verily he goes to the gods." "I will give thee a thousand cows, big as elephants," said Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas. Yájnavalkya said,—"My father admonished me—where one does not instruct, one should not take (gifts)." 5.

"Let us hear, what another has taught thee." "Satyakáma the son of Jabálá, taught me, the mind is Brahma." "As one having an excellent mother, father and teacher, the son of Jabálá taught, the mind is Brahma; for of what use is he who has no mind? He, no doubt, taught thee his place and site." "He did not teach me that Brahma is only one-footed, O king

• And thus the eye differs from the other senses, for instance from the evidence of words where doubt may arise.

216

Brihad Âranyaka Upanishad.

of kings." "Then, O Yâjnavalkya, give us the explanation." "The mind is the place, the ether, the site, happiness ! By this let one meditate on him." "Which bliss, O Yâjnavalkya ?"

He said,—" Verily the mind, O king of kings. By the mind, O king of kings, one has a desire after a wife; through her a son similar (to one-self) is born ; he (the son) is bliss. The mind, O king of kings, is the supreme Brahma. Mind not deserts him, who with this knowledge, meditates on that (Brahma), all beings approach him ; having become a god, verily he goes to the gods." "I will give thee a thousand cows, big as elephants," said Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas. Yâjna-valkya said,—"My father admonished me—where one does not instruct, one should not take (gifts). 6.

" Let us hear, what another has taught thee." "Vidagdha; of the family of S'âkalya, taught me, the heart is Brahma." "As one, having an excellent mother, father and teacher S'âkalya taught, the heart is Brahma; for of what use is he who has no heart. He, no doubt, taught thee his place and site." "He did not teach me that Brahma is (only) one-footed, O king of kings." "Then, O Yâjnavalkya, give us the explanation." "Verily the heart is the place, the ether, the site, the locality !" "Which locality, O Yâjnavalkya?"

He said,—" The heart, O king of kings, is the place of all beings; the heart, O king of kings, is the site of all beings; in the heart, O king of kings, are all the beings sited. The heart, O king of kings, is the supreme Brahma. Heart not deserts him who with this knowledge meditates on that (Brahma), all beings approach him ; having become a god, verily he goes to the gods." "I will give thee a thousand cows, big as elephants," said Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas. Yâjna-valkya said,—"My father admonished me—where one does not instruct, one should not take (gifts)." 7.

Fourth Chapter. Second Brāhmaṇa.

217

Second Brāhmaṇa.*

Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas, (rising) from (his) throne, approached (Yájnavalkya) with humility saying,—“I bow to thee, O Yájnavalkya, do thou instruct me.” He said,—“As one who is going to travel a great distance, takes a chariot or a boat, so art thou prepared in mind (for the knowledge of Brahma) by those Upanishads;† thus art thou venerable, wealthy ; thus hast thou read the Védas, and art instructed in the Upanishads.‡ (I now ask thee), when liberated from this (body), where art thou to go?” “I know not, O Venerable, where I am to go.” “Then I will thee, where thou art to go.” “Say, O Venerable.” 1.

Indha§ is verily the name of that Purusha who dwells in the right eye. Him whose true name is Indha, they call Indra, by an indirect name ; for the gods like indirect names, and dislike to be named directly.|| 2.

Again, that which in the shape of a Purusha dwells in the left eye, is his wife, the Virát.¶ The union of them* is the

• In the antecedent Brāhmaṇa have been mentioned some modes of meditation as conducive towards the knowledge of Brahma; the present Brāhmaṇa is to set forth the states of waking, etc. as means of attaining the knowledge of Brahma. A. G.

† The term “ Upanishads” means here of course not the knowledge of Brahma, but certain meditations with regard to Brahma which have been explained in the antecedent Brāhmaṇa.

‡ But though thou art furnished with all these appliances, yet thou hast not attained the highest object of man, unless thou have the knowledge of Brahma. S’.

§ It is intended to show the fourth (or supreme) Brahma by re-capitulating what has been said before with reference to Brahma considered as Vis’wa, (or the soul, endowed with a gross body), as Taijasa, (or the soul, endowed with a subtle body) and as Prájña (or the soul endowed with a causal body). A. G.

|| Vide a similar passage in the Aitar. U. 1, 3, 14.

¶ Vais’wanara, although one, is, in the present sentence and in the preceding section, represented, as a couple, viz. Indra and Indrāṇí, for the purpose of meditating upon him. A. G. That A’ is right, is evident from the term Virát, another name of Vais’wanara, which refers to both Indra and Indrāṇí and points out the idea according to which they are to be comprehended as one.

• The union of Indra and Indrāṇí, which in the state of waking is called Vis’wa (Vais’wanara, Virát), bears in the state of dream the name of Taijasa. A. G.

2 †

218

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

ether within the heart;* again their food is the red lump within

the heart; again their place of retreat is the net-work† within

the heart; again the road to be travelled‡ on, is the artery

which rises upwards from the heart. As a hair a thousand

times divided thus do its (the body's) veins, called the good,§

become which are located within the heart. Proceeding by

these (veins) that (food) proceeds. There is, as it were, nourish-

ment yet more subtile than that. From this corporeal soul (is

nourished the higher soul).‖ 3.

Its¶ eastern quarter are the vital airs that go to the east;

its southern quarter the vital airs that go to the south, its

western quarter the vital airs that go to the west, its north-

ern quarter the vital airs that go to the north, his ascend-

ing quarter the ascending vital airs, his descending quarter

the descending vital airs, all quarters all vital airs. This soul

• The union of them (as Taijasa) takes place in the ether of the heart, and the

heart is here the lump of flesh on which they subsist. To understand this, it is

necessary to know the different kinds of food for the different parts of the body.

Food undergoes a double modification by the process of digestion, a gross

and a more subtile one. The product of the former is carried off by excre-

tion. The product of the latter is again modified by the digestive heat and

converted into two juices. The one juice of mean subtlety, consisting of the five

elements, nourishes the gross body by its change into blood, &c. The other juice

is very subtile, and constitutes the red lump which, after it has entered the fine

blood-vessels of the heart, supplies the sustenance of the subtle body of Indra (as

Taijasa), when united with Indrání in the heart. S'.

† It is like a net-work from the countless number of apertures between the

subtile blood-vessels. S'.

‡ The road from the place of waking to the place of dream. S'.

§ Vid. Aitt. U. 1, 3, 14.

‖ Or, there is yet (a higher soul) than the one mentioned, whose food (the food

of the higher soul) is more subtile: The corporeal soul is Vis'wanara; and the

higher, Taijasa.

¶ Taijasa, whose abode is in the heart, when supported by subtile life, becomes

life (Prána), that is to say, the Prána which is called Prájña (the soul of imperfect

knowledge, or the third state of the individual soul, corresponding to the third state

of the universal soul, which is called I's'wara, the Ruler). This refers to him who

knows, and who from the state of Vais'wanara has gradually obtained the state of

Taijasa and of life (Prána). S'.

Digitized by Google

Fourth Chapter. Third Bráhmaṇa.

219

which is neither this, nor aught else, which is intangible*—for it cannot be laid hold of—, not to be dissipated—for it cannot be dissipated—, without contact—for it cannot come into contact—, not limited, not subject to pain nor to destruction ; this fearless† (soul), O Janaka, is obtained by thee," thus said Yájnavalkya. Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas, said,—" May that fearless (Brahma) become thy own, O Yájnavalkya, which thou, O Venerable, hast taught us. I bow to thee ; let this kingdom of the Vidéhas and this myself be thine.‡ 4.

Third Bráhmaṇa.

Yájnavalkya§ went to Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas. He bethought him, I will not say aught. (It happened that formerly), when Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas, and Yájnavalkya

• One who thus knows, attains gradually the general soul. When he has identified the individual soul with the universal soul, he obtains the fourth Brahma by such negations as he is not this, he is not that. S'. Vid. Br. Á. 3, 9, 26.

† Fearless, because it is beyond any cause of fear, as birth, death, etc. S'.

‡ Vid. Chh. U'. , 3, 12, 6. and Kaṭha Up. 1, 27-29.

§ In his introduction to the present Bráhmaṇa, showing its connexion with the preceding section, S.' recapitulates the principal points of the third chapter. The visible and present Brahma is also the supreme Brahma whose nature is knowledge, which is evident from such passages as, "There is none that sees but he," (3, 8, 11). This (Brahma), after he has entered the body, is divided according to the functions of speech, etc. In the Madhukáṇḍa, in the part relating the conversation of Ajátaśatru, Brahma is conceived, by the attributes of domination and enjoyment of life, etc. (2, 4, 17), (as something different from life, etc.). Again in the question of Ushasta, representing him under the attributes of life, etc. (3, 4), he is comprehended in a general manner by such words as, " That which breathes by breath, etc." (l. c.);, and in the full power of his nature by the words, " He is the beholder of the beholding." (If it is now asked why he should enter upon a worldly state, which is not his true nature, the answer is), The worldly state of him is the attribute of the supreme one (ignorance). As it is an effect of ignorance, if a rope, a desert place, a mother-of-pearl shell, the ether, etc. be respectively considered as a snake, as water, silver, impure, etc., as this is an effect of ignorance, and not their own nature (so is it an effect of ignorance, if a worldly state be attributed to the soul). (Brahma) who is without attribute and unattainable by word (or mind), must be defined by negations, as " He is not this, he is not that, etc., and is (affirmatively) comprehended as the visible present soul (3, 5), pervading all, as the

2 f 2

220 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

had held converse together about the fire-offering,* that Yajnavalkya had given him (permission to ask) a boon. The boon he chose was, to question (Yajnavalkya) according to his pleasure. He granted that boon to him. The king of kings first asked him,†—“Yajnavalkya, of what light is this Purusha ?”‡ He said,—“Of the light of the sun, O indestructible Brahma (3, 8), as the Inner Ruler (3, 7), as the Purusha of the Upanishads (3, 9, 26), as the Brahma whose nature is knowledge and bliss (4, 1). This Brahma is again conceived under the name of Indha (4, 2) as the soul, nourished by subtle food (Vais'wanara) ; (again) as the soul of the subtle body (lingatma, Taijasa), nourished by food, more subtle than that (of Vais'wanara). Greater than this (or both, Vais'wanara and Taijasa) is the soul of the world, having the attribute of life. From this again is distinguished by knowledge the soul of the world, having the attribute of life, by the words,—“He is not this, he is not thus, as a snake, etc. (is distinguished by knowledge) from a rope, etc., and thus the visible and present Brahma (the fourth) who is within all, is comprehended, (4, 1). In the same manner has Janaka obtained the fearless Brahma by the succinct instruction of Yajnavalkya according to the doctrine of the S'ruti. There (4, 2), are the states of waking, dream, profound sleep and of the fourth mentioned for another purpose (for the purpose of showing the gradual liberation of the soul from the attachment to the world as the effect of those kinds of meditation. A'. G.) viz. Indha (4, 2, 2), he, whose nourishment is subtle (4, 2, 3), all life (4, 2, 4) and “He is not this, he is not that,” (e. l.) In the present Brahmapa (Brahma) is to be comprehended by discussion, as the fearless; the existence of the soul (is to be comprehended) by removing any doubt arising from dispute, its nature (is to be comprehended) as independent, pure, similar with light, of omnipotent power, as infinite bliss and as being without duality. For this purpose the present Brahmapa is commenced.

• And Yajnavalkya was gratified by the king's knowledge. † i, e. On the present occasion, the introductory episode of the boon and right to put questions being concluded. ‡ Purusha, the being, who consists of the combination of causes and effects, and has head, hands, etc. Of what light, means, by what light as cause does man discharge the business of life. S'. S'. makes here some very good reflections about the nature of this light, whether it is external or internal, separated or not separated from the body; but they are rather S'.s reflections than those of the Upanishad, and we will therefore omit them. The progress from one idea to another in the Upanishad is very clear, viz. any light which is found in external nature, is incapable of being the cause of the intellectual functions of man, for it ceases to act at certain times; the light by which man acts, must therefore be something distinct from any of them.

Fourth Chapter. Third Brāhmaṇa.

221

king of kings. By the light of the sun (man) sits down, walks about, performs his work and returns (home). “It is even so, O Yājnavalkya.” 2.

“Of what light, O Yájnavalkya, is this Purusha, when the sun has set.” “The moon is even his light. By the moon-light he sits down, walks about, performs his work and returns (home).” “It is even so, O Yájnavalkya.” 3.

“Of what light, O Yájnavalkya, is this Purusha, when the sun has set and the moon has set.” “The fire is even his light. By the fire-light he sits down, walks about, performs his work and returns (home).” “It is even so, O Yájnavalkya.” 4.

“Of what light, O Yájnavalkya, is this Purusha, when the sun has set, the moon has set, and the fire is at rest ?” “Speech* is even his light. By the light of speech he sits down, walks about, performs his work and returns (home). Therefore, O king of kings, at a time,† when one can not distinguish his own hand, he resorts there, whence speech proceeds.”‡ “It is even so, O Yájnavalkya.” 5.

“Of what light, O Yájnavalkya, is this Purusha, when the sun has set, the moon has set, fire is at rest, and speech is at rest ?” “Soul§ (ātma) is even his light. By the light of the soul he sits down, walks about, performs his work and returns (home).” 6.

• Speech means here sound, the object of the sense of hearing. When this sense is enlightened, reflection is produced in the mind. By the mind effort to obtain external things is made; for by the mind one sees, one hears. S′.

† When it is dark from clouds, or when every other light has ceased to shine. S′.

‡ Where sound rises, be it the neighing of horses or the braying of donkeys, etc. Speech serves here only as an illustration and includes the other senses. S′.

§ Different from the whole of the causes and effects in the body and its parts, manifesting the effects and causes, like the sun and other external lights, and not manifested by any thing else. It is light which is within, and at the same time independent of effects and causes. It is not perceived by the eye or any other organs like the sun, but inferred from its effects. S′.

Digitized by Google

222

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

"Which soul?"* "That soul which among the organs has the nature of knowledge, which abides in the heart, and is the Purusha who is light.† He,‡ being the same§ (with the heart), migrates|| to both worlds.¶ He, as it were, thinks;

• Although it has been proved, that the soul has an existence, independent (of the gross body), and abides within (the body), yet, seeing that (the sun, etc.) which assists (the body in the operation of its functions), is of the same kind (with the body), there may proceed the delusion (that the soul which is light may also be of the same nature with the body, etc., there being no difference between the kinds of assistance), and from the want of distinction the question may arise, is the soul one of the organs, or some thing different from them? Or in other words, though it is proved, that the soul is different from the body, yet all the organs partake of the nature of knowledge, and since no distinction is apprehended between the soul and the organs, the question of the text is necessary, "which soul." S'.

† The whole sentence may be explained, according to S.', in a threefold manner.

1. The first part contains the question, "Which soul?" and the second the answer to it, "The Purusha who among the organs has the nature of knowledge and is the light of the heart."

2. Or "Which is the soul among the organs that has the nature of knowledge?" The answer in this case is, "The Purusha who is light alone, abiding in the heart."

3. Or "Which is the soul that among the organs has the nature of knowledge and is the Pûrusha, who is light alone, abiding in the heart?"

S'ankara prefers the first explanation. "Has the nature of knowledge" means, according to him, resembles knowledge or intellect (buddhi), and "heart" the intellect which has its place in the organ of the heart.

‡ He, the Pârusha. The Parusha who is light alone, who manifests all and is not manifested by any thing else, cannot be comprehended in the state of waking, since none of the organs is an object of perception, and since from the confusion, arising from the united action of so many causes and effects of the senses, the soul in its nature as light alone cannot be shown. The Upanishad, therefore, explains it by means of the state of dream. S'.

§ Being the same, or similar. This refers to the "heart," as is clear from the topic and from the relations which the soul has to the heart (or intellect). As light, manifesting red, green, etc. colours, becomes itself red or green, so the Purusha, manifesting intellect, manifests thereby the whole body, and by this intellect he becomes also like every other thing. S'.

|| The cause of his migration is his similarity with intellect; on his own accord such a migration does not take place. He migrates by leaving his present body and entering another and another in endless succession. S'.

¶ Both worlds, the future and the present world.

Digitized by Google

Fourth Chapter. Third Brāhmana.

223

he, as it were, moves;* for, having become dream,† he quits this world,‡ (he quits) the forms of death.§ 7.

This Purusha,|| when born,¶ when assuming a body, is allied to sins;* when rising upwards, when dying, he lays aside the sins.† 8,

There are even two places of this Purusha, this place, and the place of the next world; the place of dream,‡ which is between them, is the third. Abiding in this middle place, (man) sees§ both places, this and the place of the other world. In proportion to the endeavour|| with which one is (striving to obtain) the place of the other world, does he accordingly see sin¶ or bliss. When he sleeps; (when); putting on a rudiment

• He as it were thinks, that is to say, in reality he does not think or reflect; for reflection does not belong to his nature, S'. (and is the effect of his being considered under she attribute of intellect).

† He becomes all that intellect becomes, and intellect assuming the state of dream, the Purusha also assumes it. S'.

‡ This world, characterised by the functions practised during waking. S'.

§ Death means, work, ignorance, etc. ; his forms, causes and effects. S'.

|| As the Purusha in this body, when assuming the state of dream, quits the forms of death, and remains in his own light, so when born... he is allied to sins. S'. :

¶ When born, when assuming the state of the soul within a body. S'.

• Sins mean causes and effects, depending upon vice and virtue. S'.

† He lays them aside, he becomes free from them. As the Purusha, abiding in one and the same body, in consequence of his similarity with intellect, by assuming and laying aside causes and effects in the form of sin, continually migrates from the state of waking to that of dream and vice versâ, so by assuming and laying aside those causes and effects, he continually migrates through birth and death to this and to the other world, until he is finally liberated. It is therefore evident, that the soul, which has the nature of light, is different from sins, as causes and effects, because it is joined to and separated from them.

‡ Dream is not a world, but only the union of two worlds, as the place between two villages is not a village itself. S'.

§ How then is it proved, that there is another world, different from the place of union, or dream? The answer is, because the Purusha sees in dream both the present and another world.

|| The endeavour being considered as the seed from which the tree of the body rises.

¶ Sin, the effect of sin, unhappiness. He sees them in the shape of impressions.

Digitized by Google

224 Brihad Arazyaka Upanishad.

(only) of this world which consists of all elements,* himself prostrating (his body), himself raising a building† by force of his own splendour and manifestation, he sleeps -then becomes this Purusha unmingled light. 9.

No chariots‡ are there,§ no horses, nor roads; then he creates chariots, horses and roads. No pleasures are there, no joys, nor rejoicings ; then he creates pleasures, joys and rejoicings. No tanks are there, no lakes, nor rivers ; then he creates tanks, lakes and rivers ; for he is the agent.|| 10.

Here apply, these Slokas,¶ “ In dream, prostrating* the body, himself dreamless, he develops the modes of dreaming. After he has assumed the pure (form), the goldlike† Purusha, the one wanderer, proceeds‡ again to the place (of waking). 11.

By (the power of) life§ preserving (from death) the inferior nest,|| and roaming outside¶ of it, he, the immortal one, the gold-like Purusha, the one wanderer, proceeds where his desire leads him. 12.

sions, received in a former world. What is the proof of this? Because he sees in dream many things, not to be perceived in this birth ; for dream means not a perception of things seen before, which is called remembrance. Therefore, beside the places of waking and dream, there exist those two worlds. S'.

• Which consists of all elements (sarváva'n), admits of a double explanation.

Sarvam avati, he preserves all, or sarváván-sarváva'n, which contains every thing. And this element is again the cause of creation.

† A dreamlike body.

‡ What has been said before that the Purusha in dream is life alone, is here expressed in another manner. A'. G.

§ There, in dream, where there are no objects of the senses as in waking. S'.

|| He is the agent for the dream-land. S'.

¶ Slokas means here Mantras, (memorial verses). They apply here, that is to say, to the view, that the Purusha is light alone.

• Ahnniliating the action.

† Gold-like, he whose nature is the light of consciousness. S'.

‡ As the consequence of his action. S'.

§ Life in its division into the five vital airs.

|| Nest, the body.

¶ Although he Purusha, while yet in the body, sees dreams, yet he is considered to be outside, because he has no connexion with it. S'.

Digitized by Google

Fourth Chapter. Third Brāhmaṇa.

225

In his dream passing from high to low,* he, the god, displays manifold forms, either playing with women, or laughing, or beholding fearful sights. 13.

His pleasure-grounds† are visible; but he is visible to none; they say, none comprehends the Pervader. Difficult to be cured is the body, when the Purusha attains not that (door of the senses).‡ (Some) say indeed, (his place of Dream) is (the same as) his place of waking; for he sees in sleep the same (forms) which he does when awake. This is not so; (for): here the Purusha becomes a self-shining light.' 'I will give thee, O Venerable, a thousand (cows). Speak next of liberation.' 14.

"Having§ in the state, where there is perfect bliss,∥ enjoyed bliss, wandered about, and seen what is holy and what is sinful,¶ he proceeds again in a reverse order to the place of his birth, to Dream. He is not chained by what he sees* there

• Becoming, as fancy leads him, a god or a brute creature. S'.

† Pleasure grounds in the shape of impressions. S'.

‡ I translated thus in accordance with S'.'s explanation. The meaning is,—If the Purusha does not return to the waking state through the same door of the senses through which he entered into the state of dream, if he re-enters in any other manner, then diseases are produced, such as blindness, deafness, etc., which are difficult to cure.

§ The proposition at the commencement of this Brāhmaṇa, that the soul is self-shining light, has been proved by the text "There that soul becomes self-shining light." But with regard to the text "Being dream, he quits this world," the meaning is doubtful; for it may be said, he may indeed quit the forms of death, but not for this reason death himself; for it is evident, that, although separated from effect and cause, one may yet experience in dream, joy, terror, etc., therefore he does not in truth quit death; for death being work, his effects, joy, terror, etc., are visible. And if one of his own nature be bound by death, liberation is not obtained by him, as he cannot be liberated from his own nature. Therefore, we must conclude, death cannot be one's own nature, and liberation from him is possible. To show this, is the object of Yājnavalkya in his answer to the question of the king. S'.

∥ That is to say, in the state of profound sleep; for there none experiences any grief. S'.

¶ The effects of them. S'.

• Because, in dream, he does not actually do what is holy and evil, he is not

2 G'

226

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

(in dream*); for the Purusha is untouched† (thereby)." "This is so, O Yájnavalkya, I will give thee, O Venerable, a thousand (cows). Speak next of liberation." 15.

"Having in that dream enjoyed bliss, wandered about, and seen what is holy and sinful, he proceeds again in the reverse order to the place of his birth, to the waking state. He is not chained by what he sees there;† for the Purusha is untouched‡." "This is so, O Yájnavalkya. Speak next of liberation." 16.

"Having§ enjoyed bliss, wandered about and seen what is holy and sinful, during his waking state, he proceeds again in the reverse order to the place of his birth, to dream." 17.

As a large fish∥ glides between both banks,¶ the right and the left one, so glides the Purusha between both boundaries, the boundary of dream and the boundary of the waking state. 18.

As an eagle* or a falcon, roaming in the sky, fatigued, folds chained by either; for good or evil actions and their consequences are not imputed to the mere spectator of them. Therefore in dream he does not only overcome the forms of death, but death himself. He does not act in dream, and is therefore different in nature from death who is work, and therefore he is free from him. S'.

• As is evident from common experience; for no one is blamed or praised for what he does in dream. S.'

† In dream..

‡ Untouched, as being without form. S.'

§ But how can be be untouched in the waking state, as he does good and evil acts and sees their consequences? This is not the case, says S', for if there is an agent, the notion of agency is admissible. It has been declared, that the soul is a self-shining light, and that, manifested by its own light as cause and effect, it is an agent. Therefore if he be comprehended under the notion of an agent, attributes are assigned to the soul which it has not of its own nature, and this is done by means of intellect. In this passage the soul is, however, considered, as it exists in its own nature, and not as represented by attributes taken from its connexion with some thing else. S'.

∥ That the Purusha is not touched by sin, has been shown in the three preceding sections; this is here illustrated by a simile.. S'.

¶ Without being seized by the current of the stream. S'.

• It has been further proved before, that the soul is not in itself the cause of the worldly attributes, and that its worldly state is imputed to it through ignorance;

Fourth Chapter. Third Brāhmaṇa.

227

his wings and is drawn* to his nest, so proceeds that Purusha to the boundary,† where, asleep, he desires not any desire, nor sees any dream. 19.

His‡ vessels, which are called good, are of the fineness of a hair, a thousand-fold divided, and filled with white,§ blue, yellow, green and red juice. Therefore all the objects of terror, which a man sees when awake, are, through ignorance, fancied by him, (in dream,) when any body seems to kill him, seems to subdue him, an elephant seems to put him to flight, (or when) he falls into a pit; again|| when he seems to be conscious I am a god, I am king, I am even all this, he has attained his highest place. 20.

this, however, has only been described separately, for the soul in its three states, and the identity of the soul has not been shown comprehensively ; to set this forth, is the object of the present section. S'.

• Of his own accord.

† To his own self, free from every worldly attribute and from the distinctions of agent, work or fruit. S'.

‡ It is the nature of the Purusha to be free from worldly attributes, which are the effects of ignorance. Here the question arises, whether ignorance belongs to his own nature, or is only accidental? If it be accidental, liberation from it is possible. Further, is there any evidence of ignorance being accidental, and in what manner is ignorance an attribute of the non-soul? The present section has the object to show the nature of ignorance.

§ Food; when digested, becomes blue, if there be an abundance of the airy humour, yellow by an abundance of bile, white by an abundance of phlegm, green by a deficiency of bile, and red by an equal mixture of all the humours, and in this manner, the vessels also through which the humours flow; assume the same colour according to the Sus'ruta. A'. G. In those very fine vessels, abides the subtle body consisting of 17 parts (the five organs of intellect, the five organs of action, the five vital airs, intellect and mind). Dependent upon the subtle body are all the impressions produced by the belief in the worldly attributes of a higher or lower state. S'.

|| Again...I give here in substance the train of Sankara's ideas on this subject Ignorance being subdued and knowledge prevailing, what is the object of knowledge and what its character? The highest place, the highest state of the soul, is, when it exists as the soul of all, in its own inherent nature. On the other hand, if the soul be considered as different from the soul of all, however little the difference may be, the state of ignorance is the consequence, The result of ignorance are the lower worlds down to the state of inanimate matter, where the na-

2 G 2

228

Brihad Áranyaka Upanishad.

This is his (true) nature, which is free from desire, sin* and fear.† As in the embrace of a beloved wife one is unconscious of aught, from without or within ; so, embraced by the all-knowing† soul, this Púrusha is unconscious of all, without or within. This is his (true) nature, when all desires are satisfied,§ where the (only) desire is for the soul, where there is no desire, where there is no grief. 21. Then|| the father is no father, the mother no mother, the worlds no worlds, the gods no gods, the Védas no Védas. Then the thief¶ is no thief, the murderer of a Bráhman*

ture of the soul is not comprehended. Beyond the worlds which are the objects of worldly action, the state of the universal soul, which is all-pervading, and which is without an Other and without an Out, is his highest state. Therefore, ignorance being subdued, and knowledge having attained its perfection, the state of the universal soul, liberation occurs. In the same manner ignorance prevailing and knowledge having disappeared, the effect is described in the passage, " When any body seems to kill him." The respective effects then of knowledge and ignorance are the state of the universal soul and that of the individual soul. From pure knowledge the state of the universal soul proceeds, from ignorance, a state

which is not universal. Therefore the state of ignorance consists in this, that the universal existing soul is conceived under the notion of the soul which is not universal, and that some thing, different from the soul, and which does not exist, is substituted for the soul. The nature of ignorance has been explained together with its effects, and the effect of knowledge, the state of the universal soul, has been shown to be opposite to ignorance. We therefore must conclude, that ignorance is not an attribute of the soul, and that liberation from it is possible.

• Sin means here, both sin and virtue.

† Though the state, where no fear exists, has been already referred to at the close of the last Bráhmaná (p. 219), yet it has been there only enunciated, while it is here established by discussion. S'.

‡ All-knowing, Prájna, the supreme soul according to its own nature.

§ Knowledge, its object, and the agent who knows, not existing, there can be no manifestation of a special knowledge, as a desire. S'.

|| Then, when the Purusha has obtained the form, free from ignorance, from desire and from work, of which state profound sleep is the type. And this change takes place, because the notions of a father, mother, etc., express a relation, established by work, which relation of course ceases when work has ceased. S'.

¶ Thief means here, according to S'., one who steals the gold of a Bráhman, as indicated by its connexion with Bhrúnaha.

• Bhrúnaha means literally the murderer of an embryo ; I have translated it in accordance with S.'s and A'. G.'s explanation.

Fourth Chapter. Third Bráhmaṇa.

229

no murderer of a Bráhman, the Chándála* no Chándála, the Paulkasa no Paulkasa,† the religious mendicant (Srámana) no religious mendicant, the ascetic no ascetic; he is unconnected with aught that is holy, he is unconnected with sin; for he is then beyond every grief of the heart.‡ 22.

It is not true, that, being thus, (in profound sleep,) seeing,§ he sees not; he does see; for there is no loss of sight to the see-er, since it is indestructible;‖ and there is no second,¶ no other, separated from him which could see. 23.

It is not true, that, being thus, smelling, he smells not; he does smell; for there is no loss of smell to the smeller, since it is indestructible; and there is no second, no other, separated from him which could smell. 24.

It is not true, that, being thus, tasting, he tastes not; he does taste; for there is no loss of taste to the taster, since it is indestructible; there is no second, no other, separated from him which could taste. 25.

It is not true, that, being thus, speaking, he speaks not; he does speak; for there is no loss of speech to the speaker, since it is indestructible; and there is no second, no other, separated from him which could speak. 26.

It is not true, that, being thus, hearing, he hears not; he does

• Chándála, the son of a Bráhman woman by a S'údra. S'.

† Paulkasa, the son of a Kshattriya woman by a S'údra.

‡ Intellect, abiding in the heart.

§ But is it no contradiction, that the soul whose nature is perfect knowledge, should not know? It is not, from the reason assigned in the text. S'.

‖ But here the following inference seems to apply, seeing is an action, as it is performed by the agent who sees, and every action is transient. However, the inference is not applicable; because the seeing is only seeing, and includes no agent. It is the nature of the soul to manifest, and this not through the intercession of an agent, as there is nothing else but the soul. S'.

¶ It has been declared, that what is known in waking or in dream, is a second, and does not (really) exist; and that no difference is known in profound sleep. If this latter state be the nature of the soul, from what proceeds the difference, and if its nature is to know the difference, why does it not know this difference (in profound sleep)? S'.

Digitized by Google

hear ; for there is no loss of hearing to the hearer, since it is indestructible ; and there is no second, no other, separated from him which could hear. 27.

It is not true, that, being thus, minding, he minds not; he does mind ; for there is no loss of minding to the minder, since it is indestructible; and there is no second, no other, separated from him that could mind. 28.

It is not true, that, being thus, touching, he touches not; he does touch ; for there is no loss of touching to the toucher, since it is indestructible; and there is no second, no other, separated from him that could touch. 29.

It is not true, that, being thus, knowing, he knows not; he does know ; for there is no loss of knowing to the knower, since it is indestructible ; and there is no second, no other, separated from him that could know. 30.

Wherever some other thing, as it were, exists, there let another see another thing, another smell another thing, another taste another thing, another speak another thing, another hear another thing, another mind another thing, another touch another thing, another know another thing. 31.

Like water (purified), the one see-er without duality, is the Brahma world,* O king of kings;" thus Yájnavalkya instructed him. " This is his highest aim, his highest wealth, his highest world, his highest happiness. Of this happiness, all other beings enjoy only a part. 32.

(The bliss of one)† who among men is perfect in limb, wealthy, a sovereign lord of others, and who has the fulness of all human enjoyments, is the highest bliss of men. Further a hundredfold the bliss of men is one bliss of the forefathers who have overcome the worlds.‡ Further a hundredfold the bliss

• The Brahma world, the highest world. And this is the state of the soul in profound sleep. S'.

† Vide Taitt. Up., 2, 8, which corresponds almost literally with this whole section.

‡ Those who by such ceremonies as the Sraddha have obtained the world of the forefathers.

of the forefathers who have overcome the worlds, is one bliss of the world of the Gandharvas. Further a hundredfold the bliss of the world of the Gandharvas is one bliss of the ritual gods* who gain their divinity by rites. Further a hundredfold the bliss of the ritual gods is one bliss of those who are gods by birth, and of him who knows the Védas, and is free from sin and desire. Further a hundredfold the bliss of those who are gods by birth is one bliss of the world of Prajápati† and of him who knows the Védas, and is free from sin and desire.‡ Further a hundredfold the bliss of the world of Prajápati, is one bliss of the world of Brahmaṣ and of him who knows the Védas and is free from sin and desire.|| Further the highest bliss¶ is even the world of Brahma,* O king of kings ;" thus said Yájnavalkya. (He said),—“ I will give thee, O Venerable, a thousand cows. Speak next of liberation.” Then Yájnavalkya was afraid, that the wary king should drive him from all his last positions.† 33.

“ Having enjoyed bliss,‡ wandered about and seen what is

• The ritual gods are such as have gained their divinity by the performance of Vedaic rites, as the fire-offering, etc. S'.

† Of Prajápati in the body of the Viráṭ. S'.

‡ And who at the same time knows this, that is to say, who has meditated on the soul in its form as Viráṭ. S'

§ Or Hiranyagarbha. S'.

|| And who has also meditated on the nature of Hiranyagarbha. S'.

¶ All the happiness up to that of the world of Brahmá, compared with this happiness is like a drop of water, compared with the sea. And this state is gained by him who comprehends himself as the one identical Brahma. S'.

• For the sake of comparison, I give here the scale of the degrees of happiness in the Taitt. Up.,—Man, Gandharvas, Divine Gandharvas, Forefathers, Ritual Gods, Gods by birth, Indra, Brihaspati, Prejápati and Brahma.

† From the solutions of the questions which he had given. He was not afraid, because he was deficient in knowledge, but he was afraid that the king who

by the acuteness of his understanding always observed some point not yet wholly defined, should, under the pretence of Yájnavalkya's promise to answer any question of the king, allure him to communicate to him all his knowledge. S'.

‡ The antecedent exposition (viz. of the waking state, of dream, and profound sleep) serves only as an illustration (of the soul in its bondage and liberation).

282 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

holy and sinful during his dream, he proceeds again in the reverse order to the place of his birth, the waking state. 34.

As* a well laden cart† moves on noisily, so the embodied soul, directed by the omniscient soul,‡ at the time, when breathing its last. 35.

When it gains its subtle state§, when it obtains its subtle state by old age or disease, then, as the fruit of the mangoe tree, or of the glomerate fig tree, or of the holy fig tree becomes free from its bond,|| becomes free this Purusha from those members¶ and proceeds again* in the reverse order† to its birth-place for (the obtaining of) a body. 36.

As,‡ on the approach of the king, men of violent deeds,§ (and) such as are addicted to every crime, charioteers and governors of villages stand prepared with food and drink and

The following sections undertake to describe liberation and bondage themselves, bondage being like the state of dream and waking, and liberation like profound sleep. The present section (34) seems to be an episode to recapitulate what has been said before about the nature of dream.

• Hence to the end of this Brāhmaṇa and the commencement of the next the worldly state of the soul is described. To explain the first proposition that the soul proceeds from the body, of which it is presently possessed, to another body in the same manner as it proceeds from dream to the state of waking, an illustration is given. S'.

† Directed by the driver. S'.

‡ The supreme soul, which is self-shining light in its own nature. S'.

§ At what time does the soul attain this state, by what cause, in what manner, and for what end? The answer is given as follows. The time is, when man assumes the subtile body, the cause of it is either old age or disease, the manner is illustrated by a number of similes to show the various ways in which the event may happen, and the end is the assuming of another body.

|| This Purusha who abides in the subtle body. S'.

¶ From the eye and the other members of the body which he does not preserve as before in profound sleep (vid. p. 224 (12).) by the agency of life. S'.

• As before, when quitting one body and assuming another. S'.

† In the order opposite to that of his entrance into the body. S'.

‡ But how can the Purusha build another body, himself having no power, in absence of any assistants? The present section gives the answer. S'.

§ Ugra either means people of a particular tribe or men of violent deeds. S.

Digitized by Google

Fourth Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa. 233

palaces, (saying), he comes, he approaches, so on (the approach of) the conscious one* all beings† stand prepared, (saying), this Brahma comes, this Brahma approaches. 37.

As, when the king is desirous of coming, men of violent deeds, (and) such as are addicted to every crime, charioteers and governors of villages go to meet him, so at the time of death all the organs‡ go to meet the soul, when breathing its last. 38.

Fourth Brāhmaṇa.

When the soul,* after having come to a state, where it has no strength (as it were),† comes to a state of unconsciousness, as it were,‡ then the organs go to meet it. Having wholly seized those organs which are throughout resplendent with light§, the soul enters the heart.|| When the Purusha dwelling in the eye,¶ altogether returns, then (the soul) is unconscious of colour. 1.

• Evam vid, he who knows the fruit derived from work, the worldly soul. S'.

† All beings, such as Ā'ditya, upon whom the existence of body depends, and who render assistance to the organs for the performance of their work. S'.

‡ Speech and the rest. S'.

• It has been declared, that the Purusha is liberated from his bodily members ; at what time and in what manner this liberation takes places, is now more fully to be described. S'.

† No strength ; the want of strength of the body is here transferred to the soul, although in reality it cannot be attributed to it. S'.

‡ No consciousness, no power of reflection, as reflection also is the effect of the act of transferring ; for to the soul neither reflection nor its absence can be ascribed ; this sense is indicated in the text by the term " as it were " S'.

§ They are resplendent by their power of manifestation. S'.

|| The heart, the ether of the heart. S'.

¶ The Purusha, dwelling in the eye, is a part of Ā'ditya (the deity of the sun), who for the benefit of the soul in its worldly functions remains in the eye as long as life lasts. After death he quits his office, and is reunited with Ā'ditya. S'.

2

284

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

He is one;* he does not see, as it is said. He is one; he does not smell, as it is said. He is one; he does not speak, as it is said. He is one; he does not hear, as it is said. He is one; he does not mind, as it is said. He is one; he does not touch, as it is said. He is one; he does not know, as it is said. The entrance to the heart becomes luminous;† through this, when thus illuminated, the soul‡ departs§ either from the eye, or from the head, or from other parts of the body. When it departs, life departs after it; when life departs, all the organs depart after it. It is endowed with knowledge;|| endowed with knowledge it departs. Knowledge¶ and work and the knowledge of (its) former (life) pervade it wholly. 2.

As a leech when arrived at the top of a blade of grass, in order to gain another place of support, contracts itself; so the soul, in order to gain another place of support, contracts itself, after having thrown off this body and obtained (that state of) knowledge.* 3.

As a goldsmith, taking a piece of gold, forms another shape, which is more new and agreeable, so throwing off this body and obtaining (that state of) knowledge, the soul forms a shape, which is more new and agreeable, either suited to the

• With all his organs; or they become one with the subtile soul.

† Becomes luminous, as in dream, by the light of the soul. S'.

‡ The soul, characterised by knowledge, and placed in the subtile body. S'.

§ From the eye, in order to obtain the world of Aditya, from the head, to obtain that of Brahma, and so with regard to the other parts of the body, according to man's good or evil actions. S'.

|| Endowed with knowledge, viz. with such knowledge as it has in dream, which is a knowledge of impressions referring to their respective objects. And this knowledge is the effect of actions, not of the soul. S'.

¶ Knowledge, which is enjoined, such as refers to the soul, which is prohibited, such as looking at a naked woman, which is not enjoined and not prohibited, knowledge of indifferent objects. The same classification applies to work. K. G.

• Which is founded upon impressions as in a dream.

Fourth Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa. 235

world of the forefathers, or of the Gandharvas, or of the gods, or of Prajāpati, or of Brahma, or of the other beings. 4.

This soul,—which is Brahma,† which resembles knowledge,‡ wind, life,§ eye,|| ear, earth,¶ water, air, ether, light, not light, desire, not desire,† wrath, not wrath, virtue, not virtue,‡ which resembles all, which is this, which is not this,—becomes as are its works,§ and conduct. He whose works are good becomes good; he whose works are evil becomes evil. By holy works one becomes holy, by evil works, evil. Likewise (others) say,|| this Purusha has the nature of desire. As his desire, so is his resolve, as his resolve, so is his work, as his work, so is his reward.¶ 5.

Here applies this memorial verse,—He who is attached* (to worldly objects), obtains by means of work the object to which his mind as the cause is attached. Having arrived at the last (effect) of the work which he here performs, he comes from this world again to this world in consequence of (his) work. Thus he who desires (wanders, from world to world). But the organs of him who does not desire,† who has no desires,

• The soul, which proceeds from one bodily state to another. S'.

† Brahma in his true nature.

‡ Intellect.

§ The five vital functions.

|| By the perception of colour, and thus it resembles the other organs by the perception of their objects.

¶ By the assuming of an earthly body. S'.

• Light, by assuming the body of a god, not light, by assuming the body of a brute, etc. S'.

† When discovering, that a desire is wrong. S'.

‡ Through desire and wrath, etc. man becomes vicious or virtuous, no action being possible without previous desire; by the performance of good or bad actions he becomes all, as the world in its manifestal state is the effect of virtue and vice. S'.

§ Works which are expressly enjoined or prohibited, conduct which is not expressly enjoined, or prohibited.

|| It is true, that vice and virtue are the causes of worldly existence, provided they are preceded by desire, etc. S'.

¶ Therefore is desire the root of the whole world. S'.

• Has a desire to obtain any object.

† For he who does not desire, does not act. S'.

2 H 2

236

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

who is beyond desires, whose desires are satisfied, whose desire is the soul, do not depart (from the body).* Being even Brahmat, he obtains Brahma.‡ 6.

Here applies this memorial verse," "When all desires, dwelling in the heart,§ have been quitted, then the mortal becomes immortal;|| (then) he enjoys here¶ Brahma." " As the slough of a snake as (something) dead is abandoned on an ant-hill; so is this body (by the soul). Then this uncor- poreal, immortal life* is even Brahma, even light."† "I will give thee, O Venerable, a thousand (cows)," said Janaka, the king of the Videhas. 7.

" Here apply these memorial verses,‡—"The narrow,§ wide- extended,|| ancient road is touched by me, fully obtained by me. On this (road) proceed* also the (other) sages who know Brahma, to heaven,† to (their) place, when liberated from this body. 8.

Here (is this dissent).‡ (Some) call it white, some blue;

• There being no cause for it. S'.

† In this world, although yet remaining in the body. S'.

‡ After his death. S'.

§ In intellect.

|| The desires which refer to what is not the soul, characterised by ignorance, are death ; by separation from death, immortality ensues. S'.

¶ In this body. S'.

• Life means here Brahma, the supreme soul.

† The self-shining light of the soul, by which the world is manifested.

‡ The following Slokas are intended to explain more fully the view, obtained in the Mantra Bráhmaṇa, that liberation ensues for him whose only object of desire is the soul and who has the knowledge of Brahma. S'.

§ Narrow from the difficulty in discovering it. S'.

|| Instead of vitata (wide extended) another reading, mentioned by S'., is vitara (which causes man to turn from the common road to Brahma).

¶ Because it is taught by the eternal Śruti. S'.

• Proceed to obtain liberation, the effect resulting from the knowledge of Brahma. S'.

† Heaven means here the supreme Brahma.

‡ Among those who are desirous of liberation. S'.

Fourth Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa.

237

some yellow, or green, or red.* That road is fully penetrated by Brahma. On this (road) proceeds he who knows Brahma, who has been a doer of good,† whose nature is like light. 9.

Those who worship ignorance,‡ enter into gloomy darkness ;§ into still greater darkness those who are devoted to knowledge.|| 10.

To the so-named blissless¶ worlds, covered with gloomy darkness, go all the people, when departing (from this world), who are ignorant, unintelligent.* 11.

If one knows† the soul‡ so as to comprehend it as his own self, then for what desire or for whose wish should he suffer the ills of the body? 12.

He whose soul, penetrated (and) illumined (by the supreme Brahma); has entered this (body) which abounds with doubts and perplexities, is the creator of the universe ; for he is the lord of all ; he is the place of it ; he is even the place.§ 13.

• They consider the road either to be those vessels, like the Sashumná, which from the juice they contain (vid. p. 227 and Chh. U. 8, 6, 1) are white, etc., or to be the same with the path that leads to A'ditya. But Brahma is different from any of those colours, the road which leads to him, bears no relation to the world ; those therefore, who proceed by any particular road, as by the eye, the head, or any other part of the body, gain the world of Brahma, etc., but not liberation which is only gained by knowledge of Brahma. S'.

† Who has been a doer of good, thus I translated in accordance with S'.'s correct remark, that he has been so in a former time, before he attained perfect knowledge, as on its attainment, every desire has ceased to exist.

‡ Those who worship any object different from the object of knowledge, that is to say, all those who are engaged in action. S'.

§ Darkness means any place where the nature of the soul is unknown. S'.

|| Knowledge, which has reference to the objects of ignorance, even the knowledge of the three Védas as they are intended for the performance of work. S'. Vid. Váj. S. U. 9, (B. I. vol. 15, p. 73 note), where the same Sloka occurs.

¶ This passage is similar to that in Váj. S., 3, where instead of "blissless" the term "godless" occurs.

• Who are incapable of comprehending the soul. S'.

† To extol the knowledge of the soul, the text declares, that he who has this knowledge is exempt from bodily ills. A'. G.

‡ The supreme soul as his own self.

§ One soul of all. S'.

Digitized by Google

238

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

Being here* we know perhaps, (Brahmā); if we do not know him, if there be ignorance (of him), then great calamity† (ensues). Those who know him become immortal; again (all) others undergo even unhappiness. 14.

When a person beholds (his own) soul as god, as the true Ruler of what was and what is to be, then he does not wish to conceal (his self) from him.‡ 15.

Adore him, ye gods, after whom§ the year by rolling days is completed, the light of lights, as the immortal life. 16.

I, the wise, immortal, comprehend as the immortal Brahma the soul upon which the five (kinds of) beings|| and the ether¶ are founded. 17.

Those who know him as the life of life, the eye of the eye, the ear of the ear,* (and) the mind of the mind, have comprehended the old, before existing Brahma. 18.

By the mind is he to be seen ;† in him there is no variety. Whoever sees variety in him, proceeds from death to death.‡ 19.

In one manner (only)§ is to be seen (the being) which can-

• That one who knows Brahma has obtained the highest object of life, is not only proved by the Śruti, but also by his own experience. A'. G.

† Calamity, by being subject to endless transmigrations from one body to another. S'. Vid. a similar passage in Kéna U. 2, 5.

‡ From the Ruler ; for all persons who perceive themselves different from him wish to conceal themselves from God. S'.

§ The Ruler, Vid. Kaṭh. U. 6, 3 and Taitt. U. 2, 8.

|| Viz. the Gandharvas, the fore-fathers, the gods, the Asuras and the Rakshasahas, or the five castes, including the Nishádas. S'.

¶ The ether upon which every thing is woven and rewoven. S'. Vid. p. 203.

• For by themselves, without the light of Brahma, are all these organs inanimate like a tree or a clod of earth, S'. Vid. a similar passage in Kéna. U. 1, 2. Kaṭha U. 6, 2, and Taitt. U. 2, 8.

† Kaṭha U. 4, 11. S'wet. 4, 17.

‡ Vid. a similar passage in Kaṭha U. 4, 10 and 11.

§ That is to say, in an uniform manner, without any distinction.

Digitized by Google

Fourth Chapter. Fourth Bráhmaṇa.

239

not be proved,* which is eternal, without spot,† higher than the ether,‡ unborn,§ the great, eternal soul. 20.

Knowing|| him let the wise Bráhman form his notion (after him); let him not meditate on many sounds;¶ for words are embarrassing. 21.

This great,* unborn soul is the same which abides as the intelligent (soul) in all living creatures, the same which abides as ether† in the heart ; in him it sleeps; it is the subduer of all, the‡ Ruler of all, the sovereign lord of all ; it does not become greater by good works, nor less by evil work. It is the Ruler of all, the sovereign lord of all beings,§ the Preserver|| of all beings, the bridge,¶ the Upholder of the worlds* so that they fall not to ruin. In accordance with the word of the Véda† the Bráhmans‡ desire to comprehend

• It cannot be proved, because it is without difference, uniform ; for proof is only possible by means of another thing, but Brahma is one, and there is nothing, beside him. Here appears to be a contradiction,—it cannot be proved, and yet it is known, that is to say, it can be comprehended by proof. This objection, however, has here no force, because the prohibition, refers to the relation between proof and object of proof concerning common things but has no authority respecting the S'ruti. S'.

† Without virtue or vice. S'.

‡ The ether signifies the unmanifestal state of the world, and " higher either more subtile or more pervading. S'.

§ Unborn, by this epithet all other modifications are excluded, because every thing must have first an origin before it can have any relation. S'.

|| Knowing, according to the instruction of the teacher and the S'ástra.

¶ Because plurality is forbidden, and it is said " By Om" meditate on the soul. S':

• Bondage and liberation, together with their causes, have been described in the Mantras, Bráhmanas, and Slokas; again, the nature of liberation has been fully explained. The present section has the object to show the relation which the whole Véda bears to the knowledge of the supreme Brahm. S'.

† Ether, the abode of intellect and knowledge, or it may be, according to S'., the ether, abiding in the internal organ at the time of profound sleep, that is to say, the supreme soul without attributes, whose nature is knowledge, his own nature. In this his own nature, or in the supreme soul which is called ether, he sleeps.

‡ Of Brahma, Indra, etc. S'. § From Brahmá down to inanimate matter. S'.

|| Of the rules of the castes and orders, etc. S'. ¶ Vid. Chh. U. 8, 4.

• From the earth up to the Brahma world. S'.

† That is to say, Mantras and Bráhmanas. S'.

‡ The Bráhmans indicates here the three first casts ; for there is no difference between them with regard to knowledge. S'.

Digitized by Google

240 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

him by sacrifice,* gift, ascetic work† and subduing of desires.‡ One who knows him thus, becomes a Muni.§ Desiring him as (their) place, the wandering mendicants wander about.|| This is indeed (the cause of the state of wandering mendicant), that the ancient sages did not desire offspring¶ (thinking by themselves);—What shall we do by means of offspring. Those to whom, (like us)* the soul† is the (supreme) place, lead the life of a religious mendicant, after they have abandoned the desire for a son, the desire for wealth and the desire for (heavenly) places ; for the desire for a son is the same as the desire for wealth ; the desire for wealth is the same as the desire for (heavenly) places ; for both are even desires. The soul,‡ which is not this, nor that, nor ought else, is intangible; for it cannot be laid hold of, it is not to be dissipated; for it cannot be dissipated ; it is without contact, for it does not come into contact ; it is not limited ; it is not subject to pain nor to destruction ;

• Sacrifice, or ceremonial work is general, although not a direct means of producing the knowledge of Brahma, is necessary to purify the mind; when the mind is so purified, knowledge is possible, no obstacle opposing it. S'. † Ascetic work, as the Chândrayana, says S'., which is a kind of fasting for the expiation of sin. ‡ Literally, abstaining from food. The three first obligations (sacrifice, gift and ascetic work) include all the permanent works, enjoined by the Védas, and the last (fasting) an abstaining from desires. By those means, a desire to comprehend the soul is produced. S'. § Muni, mananat muni, a Yogi, who, while yet alive, has obtained liberation. S'. || That is to say, they have abandoned all work. S'. ¶ Offspring indicates work and the knowledge of the inferior Brahma, as the cause of obtaining the three external worlds. S'. * Like us who have the true knowledge of the soul. S'. † In its own nature. ‡ If it be admitted, that the soul is the place, why is there a means required for obtaining it, and for what reason is the state of wandering mendicant necessary, since it is said, work should not be entered upon? The answer is, the soul, for whose desire one should enter the state of wandering mendicant, has no connexion with works. Why? It evidently follows from such negations as, it cannot be seized. Because the soul thus comprehended, viz. independent of work, cause and effect, free from every worldly

Fourth Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa. 241

those* two do verily not subdue him; therefore (he does not say),—I have done evil, or I have done good. He subdues them both; neither good nor evil deeds agitate him. 22.

The same† is said in the following Ṛik,—The eternal greatness of the Bráhman is neither increased by work,‡ nor diminished.§ Let him even know the nature of that (greatness); knowing that (greatness), he is not stained by evil work.ǁ Therefore one who thus knows, who has subdued his senses,¶ who is calm,* free from all desires, enduring,† and composed in mind,‡ beholds the soul in the soul alone, beholds the whole soul; sin does not subdue him; he subdues sin; sin does not consume him; he consumes sin.§ He is free from sin, free from doubt, he is pure, he is the (true) Bráhman; this is the (true) world of Brahma, "O king of kings," thus spoke Yájnavalkya. "I will give thee, O Venerable, the kingdom of the Vidéhas, and my own self, to become thy slave." 23.

attribute, beyond every desire, not possessed of grossness and the like attributes, unborn, undecaying, immortal, beyond fear, like a lump of rock-salt, of one uniform nature which is knowledge, a self-shining light, one alone, without duality, without beginning, without end, not within, not without, because this is established by the S'ruti and by discussion, especially by the conversation between Janaka and Yájnavalkya, therefore, it is also established, that no work is entered into, if the soul be thus comprehended. S'.

• Sin and virtue. † The same, which has been had said in the Bráhmaṇa, is also declared in a Mantra. S'. ‡ By good work. § By evil work. ǁ Or exalted by good work. ¶ The external senses. S'.
• Who has overcome the desires of the internal organ. S'. † Capable of bearing such opposite agents, as hunger and thirst, heat and cold, etc. S'. ‡ Having fixed his attention upon one point only. S'. § He consumes sin by the fire of the knowledge of the soul. S'.

2 II

242

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

This soul* is great, unborn, the consumer of food,† the giver of wealth. Whoever thus knows, obtains wealth. 24.

This‡ great, unborn, undecaying, undying, immortal, fearless soul is Brahma; Brahma is verily fearless ; he who thus knows, becomes verily the fearless Brahma. 25.

Fifth Bráhmana.§

Yájnavalkya then had two wives, Maitréyí and Kátyáyaní. Among them, Maitréyí was fond of discussing the nature of Brahma, Kátyáyani wise in the duties of a house-wife. Yájnavalkya was desirous of attaining another order superior (to that of house-holder). 1.

"Maitréyí," said Yájnavalkya, "Behold, I am desirous of quitting this order for that of a wandering mendicant ; therefore, let me divide (my property) amongst thee and Kátyáyaní there." 2.

Maitréyí said,—"If, O Venerable, this whole world with all its wealth were mine, could I become immortal thereby ?" Yájnavalkya said, "By no means. Like the life of the

• That is to say, the soul whose nature has been explained in the conversation between Janaka and Yájnavalkya. S'.

† Abiding in all beings, consuming every food.

‡ The meaning of the whole Áranyaka is expressed in the present section. S'.

§ The present Bráhmana, with the exception of the first section and part of the fourteenth and fifteenth sections, is a literal repetition of the fourth Bráhmana in the second chapter, vide pp. 177—181. S'ankara's explanation of this circumstance is ingenious, although somewhat strained. We give it here, in order that the reader may judge for himself. The nature of Brahma has been determined in the Madhu-kánda, the principal part of the S'ástra, and also in the Brahmakánḍa. Again it has been thoroughly sifted by discussion in the Yájnavalkyákánda, which is the principal part as to the method by which that knowledge is acquired. And lastly, it has been declared after full discussion by means of the relation between disciple and teacher in the fourth chapter. The Maitréyí Bráhmana serves therefore to show the conclusion after the manner of the logicians, who define a conclusion to be " the repetition of the proposition, because the reason has been stated." (Nyáya Sútras, 1, 38.) The proposition, here referred to, is that the knowledge of Brahma, when accompanied with the renunciation of the world, is the means, by which immortality is attained.

Digitized by Google

Fourth Chapter. Fifth Brāhmana.

243

wealthy thy life might become; by wealth, however, there is no hope of (obtaining) immortality." 3.

Maitréyí said,—"Of what use would be wealth to me, if I did not become thereby immortal? Tell me, O Venerable, any (means of obtaining immortality) which thou knowest." 4.

Yájnavalkya said,—"Behold, (thou wast) dear to us before, (and now) sayest thou what is dear. Come, sit down ; I will explain to thee (the means of obtaining immortality) ; endeavour to comprehend my explanation." 5.

He said,—"Behold, not indeed for the husband's sake the husband is dear (to the wife), but for the sake of the self, is dear the husband. Behold, not indeed for the wife's sake, the wife is dear (to the husband), but for the sake of the self, is dear the wife. Behold, not for the sons' sake, the sons are dear (to the parents), but for the sake of the self are dear the sons. Behold, not for the property's sake, property is dear (to one), but for the sake of self is property dear. Behold, not for the Brahma's sake, the Brahma is dear, but for the sake of self is dear the Brahma. Behold, not for the Kshattra's sake is the Kshattra dear, but for the sake of the self is dear the Kshatra. Behold, not for the worlds' sake, the worlds are dear, but for the sake of the self, are dear the worlds. Behold; not for the gods' sake the gods are dear, but for the sake of the self are dear the gods. Behold, not for the Védas' sake are the Védas dear, but for the sake of the self are dear the Védas. Behold, not for the elements' sake the elements are dear, but for the sake of the self are dear the elements. Behold, not for the sake of the universe, the universe is dear, but for the sake of the self is dear the universe. Behold, the self is verily to be seen, heard, minded (and) meditated upon. Behold, O Maitréyí, by seeing, hearing, minding, knowing the self, all this (universe) is comprehended. 6.

"The Brahma should disown a person, who considers the Brahma (cast) as something different from (his) self ; the Kshattra should disown a person, who considers the Kshattra

2 | 2

244

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

(cast) as something different from (his) self ; the world should disown a person who considers the world as something different from (his) self ; the gods should disown a person, who considers the gods as something different from (his) self ; the elements should disown a person, who considers the elements as something different from (his) self ; the universe should disown a person, who considers the universe as something different from (his) self. This (own) self is this Brahma, this Kshatra, these worlds, these gods, these elements, is this universe. 7.

"As a person, when a drum (unseen by him) is beaten, is unable to perceive the sounds proceeding from it (as sounds of a drum), but on the perception of the drum, the sound of a drum beaten is perceived. 8.

"As a person, when a shell (unseen by him) is blown,is unable to perceive the sounds proceeding from it (as sounds of a shell), but on the perception of the shell, the sound of a shell blown is perceived. 9.

"As a person, when a flute (unseen to him) is played, is unable to perceive the sounds proceeding from it, but on the perception of the flute, the sound of a flute played is perceived. 10.

"As from fire, made of damp wood, proceed smoke, sparks, etc. of various kind, thus, behold, the breathing of this great being is the Rig Véda, the Yajur Véda, the Sáma Veda, the Atharva and Angirasa, the narratives, the doctrines on creation, the science, the Upanishads, the memorial verses, the aphorisms, the explanation of tenets, the explanation of mantras,—all these are his breathing. 11.

"As the only site of the waters is the sea, thus the only site of every touch is the skin, thus the only site of every taste the tongue, thus the only site of every smell the nose, thus the only site of every colour the eye, thus the only site of every sound the ear, thus the only site of every determination the mind, thus the only site of every knowledge the heart, thus the only site of every act the hands, thus the only site of every pleasure the organ of generation, thus the only site of every

Fourth Chapter. Fifth Brāhmaṇa. 245

evacuation the anus, thus the only site of every motion the feet, thus the only site of every Véda, speech. 12.

"As a piece of salt, when thrown into water, is dissolved into mere water, and uone is capable of perceiving it, because, from whatever place a person might take (water), it would have the taste of salt, (but be no piece of salt), thus, behold, this great being, which is infinite, independent and mere knowledge. Springing forth together with those elements, (the individual soul) is destroyed, when they are destroyed. After death, no conscience remains; thus, O Maitréyí, I hold." Thus said Yájnıvalkya. 13.

Maitréyí said,—"With regard to the soul thou hast bewildered me, O Venerable, (by the saying,—After death no conscience remains.) I do not comprehend that (soul)." Yájnıvalkya said,—"Behold, I verily do not create bewilderment; behold this soul is indestructible; its nature is without variance. 14.

"For whıre there is, as it were, duality, there sees another another thing, there smells another another thing, there tastes another another thing, there speaks another another thing, there hears another another thing, there minds another another thing, there touches another another thing, there knows another another thing; but how does one, to whom all has become mere soul, see any thing, how smell any thing, how taste any thing, how speak any thing, how hear any thing? How should he know him by whom he knows this all? This soul is not this, nor ought else; it is unseizable; for it cannot be seized; it is not scattered; for it cannot be scattered; it is without contact; for it comes not into contact; it is without colour; it is not subject to pain or destruction. How should one know the knower? In this manner art thou instructed. So far, O beloved Maitréyí, extends in truth immortality." Having said thus, Yájnıvalkya went to the forest. 15.

246

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

Sixth Brāhmaṇa.

Next follows the school commencing from Pautimáshya.*

Pautimáshya succeeded Gaupavana,—Gaupavana, Pautimáshya,

—Pautimáshya, Gaupavana,—Gaupavana, Kaus'ika,—Kaus'ika,

Kaundinya,—Kaundinya, S'ándilya,—S'ándilya, Kaus'ika

and Gautama,—Gautama, 1.

Agnivés'ya,—Agnivés'ya,† Gárgya,—Gárgya, Gárgya,—Gárgya,

Gautama,—Gautama, Saitava,—Saitava Párás'aryáyaṇa,—

Párás'aryáyaṇa, Gárgyáyaṇa,—Gárgyáyaṇa, Uddálokáyana,—

Uddálokáyana, Jáváláyana,—Jáváláyana, Mádhyandináyana,—

Mádhyandináyana, Saukaráyaṇa,—Saukaráyaṇa, Kásháyaṇa,

—Kásháyaṇa, Sáyakáyana,—Sáyakáyana, Kaus'ikáyani,—Kau-

s'ikáyani, 2.

Ghritakaus'ika, —Ghritakaus'ika, Párás'aryáyaṇa,—Párás'-

aryáyaṇa, Párás'arya,—Párás'arya, Játúkarṇya,—Játúkarṇya,

Asuráyaṇa and Yáska,—Asuráyaṇa, Sraivaṇi,—Sraivaṇi, Aupa-

jandhani,—Aupajandhani, Asuri,—Asuri, Bháradvája,—Bhára-

dvája, Atréya,—Atréya, Mánṭi,—Mánṭi, Gautama,—Gautama,

Gautama,—Gautama, Vátsya,—Vátsya, S'ándilya,—S'ándilya,

Kais'orya Ká́pya,—Kais'orya Ká́pya, Kumārahárita,—Kumá-

rahárita, Gálava,—Gálava, Vidarbhí Kaundinya,—Vidarbhí

Kaundinya, Vatsanapát Vábhrava,—Vatsanapát Vábhrava,

Pantháh Saubhara,—Pantháh Saubhara, Ayásya Ángirasa,—

Ayásya Ángirasa, Ábhúti Tváshtar,—Ábhúti Tváshtar, Vis-

varúpa Tváshtar,—Visvarúpa Tváshtar, the two As'vins,—the

two As'vins, Dadhyaṭ Atharvaṇa,—Dadhyaṭ Atharvaṇa, Atharvā

Daiva,—Atharvā Daiva, Mrityu Prádhvasana,—Mrityu Prádh-

vasana, Prádhvasana,—Prádhvasana, Ekarishi,—Ekarishi,

Viprachitti,—Viprachitti, Vyashti,—Vyashti, Sanáru,—Sa-

náru, Sanátana,—Sanátana, Sanagā,—Sanaga, Paraméshṭhi,—

Paraméshṭhi, Brahma,‡—Brahma is the self-existent ; saluta-

tion to Brahma.

• Two more lists of teachers are given in this Upanishad, viz. 4, 6, and 6, 5.

† From Agnives'ya to Kaus'ikáyani the names of teachers differ from those given

in 4, 6, 2.

‡ Paramesbṭhi denotes Virát, and Brahma, Hiranyagarbha. S'.

Fifth Chapter. Second Bráhmaṇa.

247

FIFTH CHAPTER.

First Bráhmaṇa.

Infinite* is that,† infinite is this. From the infinite one proceeds the infinite one. On taking the infinity‡ of the infinite one, there is left infinity.

Oṃ is the ether,§ is Brahma. The ether|| exists of old, the ether is the source of the wind, thus said the son of Kauravyáyaṇí. That (Omkara) is the Véda. The Bráhmaṇs know (vidur) that by this (name) one knows (véda) all that is to be known (véditavya).

Second Bráhmaṇa.

The three-fold offspring of Prajápati, gods, men and Asuras followed as religious students their father Prajápati. The

• In the preceding four chapters the knowledge of Brahma in his independent nature has been explained ; in the present chapter the modes of meditation on the soul in its various relations are set forth. These modes, not at variance with the performance of work, lead to a higher and higher state of existence, and effect the gradual liberation of the soul: from the world. The first of them is the Omkara, as being the most eminent, after which follow the commands of restraint, liberality, and compassion. S'.

† That (adah) refers to the imperceptible Brahma, who is all-pervading and independent of any relation, this (idam) to Brahma as conceived under relation. " Infinite," púrṇa; the literal meaning of which is full, and which S' . explains by not finite, all-pervading. It is infinite, (or full), he continues, as pervaded by the supreme soul, not by the individual soul, since the latter is involved in relations. "The infinite;"—considered as effect, "proceeds from the infinite,"—considered as cause. S'.

‡ Taking the infinity, literally the Infinite one, and the sense is, comprehending the one identical nature of Brahma, by the omission of all relative attributes.

§ According to S'., Brahma is the subject, and Kha (the ether) the predicate of the sentence.

|| The ether (kha) contains two meanings, as ancient it represents the supreme soul, and as the source of the wind, it represents the inferior Brahma. The same applies to the sound Om, the representative of Kha. S'.

248

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

gods, having finished their time of learning, said (to Prajápati),

—“Tell us, O Venerable, (our duty).” He proclaimed to them

the syllable Da. “Do you comprehend?” They answered,

—“We do comprehend. Restrain your desires, hast thou said

to us.” He said,—“Om! you have fully comprehended.”

Then the men said to him,—“Tell us, O Venerable, (our

duty).” He proclaimed to them the letter Da. “Do you

comprehend?” They answered,—“We do comprehend. Be

liberal, hast thou said to us.” He said,—“Om! you have fully

comprehended.” Then the Asuras said to him, “Tell us, O

Venerable, (our duty).” He proclaimed to them the letter

Da. “Do you comprehend?” They answered,—“We do

comprehend. Be clement, hast thou said to us.” He said —

“Om! you have fully comprehended.” The same is repeated by

a divine voice with the force of thunder, viz. the syllables Da,

Da, Da, meaning, Be restrained (dámyata), be liberal (datta),

and be clement (dayadhvam). Therefore let one learn the

triad of restraint, liberality and clemency. 3.

Third Bráhmaná.*

This Prajápati† is the heart (hridaya),‡ this Brahma,§ this

all. “Hridayá” consists of three syllables. The first syllable

is Hri. To him who thus knows, the senses and the rest||

perform (abhiharanti), (their work). The second syllable

• Restraint, liberality and clemency are the highest of all modes of adoration;

for he, whose passions are subdued, who is not desirous of gain, and who is merciful, is in possession of all those modes. In the preceding two Bráhmanas the meditation on Brahma without attributes has been explained, the present shows the elevated places, obtained from meditating on Brahma as endowed with attributes.

† The creator of all beings. S’.

‡ The intellect, abiding in the heart. S’.

§ Brahma, from his growing (brihattwát) and from his being the soul of all. S’.

|| The rest, according to S.’, means the objects of the senses, as sounds, etc.

Fifth Chapter. Fifth Bráhmaṇa.

249

is Da. The senses and the rest bestow (dadati) (power) on him who thus knows. The third syllable is Ya. He who thus knows, proceeds, (eti) to heaven, (his) place.

Fourth Bráhmaṇa.

This* (Brahmā) was even truth.† Whoever knows that he, the great, the venerable, the first-born,‡ is the true Brahmā, conquers (his enemy), as (the true Brahmā conquers the worlds), and destroys him (also); for Brahmā is truth.

Fifth Bráhmaṇa.§

Water|| was at first this (world).¶ Water created truth. Truth is Brahmā,* Brahmā (created) Prajāpati,† Prajāpati the gods. The gods adore even truth. The name of Satya (truth) consists of three syllables. The first syllable is "Sa," the second syllable "Tī," and the third syllable "Ya." The first and the last syllables (Sa and Ya) are truth,‡ the

• In the text the demonstrative pronoun "tat" is three times repeated. According to S'. the first refers to Brahmā, described by the name of the heart in the preceding Bráhmaṇa, the second connects it with "état" which is to enunciate some other predicate of Brahmā, and the third "tat" indicates the new predicate.

† Truth, Sachcha tyachcha múrtanchámúrtancha satyam Brahma panchabhutát-makam, vid. p. 175, (2, 3, 1.)

‡ Born before every other being which has a worldly existence. S'.

§ This Bráhmaṇa has the object of extolling the true Brahmā. S'.

|| Water indicates here the unmanifested state of the world, before its creation, together with the creator, therefore the seeds of all creation. S'.

¶ The world in its manifestation. S'.

• The first born, Hiranyagarbha, or the Sútrátma. S'.

† Or the Virát. S'.

‡ Because these two syllables occur neither in the word "mrityu" (death), nor in the word "anrita," while the middle syllable "ta" is found as well in "mrityu" as in "anrita." S'.

2 K

Digitized by Google

250 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

middle is falsehood (anrita) ; falsehood, is on either side encompassed by truth ; there is, (therefore), a preponderance of truth. Falsehood does not hurt him who (thus) knows. 1.

That truth* is Aditya, the Purusha, (dwelling) in that orb, and also the Purusha, (dwelling) in the right eye. They abide in each other. The former abides through his rays in the latter,† and the latter in the former through his senses. When he quits the body, he beholds that pure orb ;‡ the rays do not return to him. 2.

Bhú (the earth)§ is the head|| of the Purusha, dwelling in that orb, there being one head and also one syllable,—Bhuvah (the atmosphere) the arms,—there being two arms, and also two syllables,—Swah (the heavens) the foundation,¶—there being two foundations and also two syllables. His representative name is Ahar* (day) ; for whoever thus knows, destroys (hanti) and relinquishes (jaháti) sin. 3.

Bhú is the head of the Purusha, dwelling in the right eye,—there being one head and also one syllable,—Bhuvah, the arms,—there being two arms and also two syllables.—Swah the foundation,—there being two foundations and also two syllables. His representative name is Aham ;† for who, ever thus knows, destroys and relinquishes sin. 4.

• This section exhibits the meditation on the true Brahma in his several localities. S′.

† The sun assists man by the manifestation of objects, and man the sun by perception. S′.

‡ The moon. S′.

§ This section replies to the question, which are the sacred names and the corresponding parts of the body of the Purusha whose name is “ Satya,” in that orb. S′

|| The head from its excellence. S′.

¶ Denoting “foot.”

• Ahar is here derived from the root “ Hā” meaning either to destroy, or to relinquish.

† The derivation of Aham is here the same as that of Ahar.

Fifth Chapter. Eighth Brāhmaṇa.

251

Sixth Brāhmaṇa.

The Purusha, who resembles* mind, is the true light ;† (he abides) within the heart, (in size) like a grain of rice or barley.‡ He is the Ruler of all, the sovereign lord of all ; he overrules whatever exists in this universe.

Seventh Brāhmaṇa.

It is said, that “vidyut” (lightning) is Brahma, for vidyut is derived from vidānát, (tearing asunder§). Whosoever thus knows, that Brahma is vidyut, tears asunder the sins of that (soul) ; for vidyut is even Brahma.

Eighth Brāhmaṇa.

Let one meditate on speech (under the semblance of) a milk-cow. Her four udders are the words Swāhā, Vashat, Hanta and Swadhā.|| Two udders, the words Swāhā and Vashat, feed the gods, the word Hanta (feeds) men, and the word Swadhá the forefathers. Her bull is life, her young one the mind.

Ninth Brāhmaṇa.

The fire whose name is Vaiswánara is that fire in the midst of the body, by which all the food that is eaten is digested.

• S'. explains the affix “maya” in “manamaya,” not by “Swarúpa” (of the same nature with the mind), but by “object of the mind,” because comprehended either in or by the mind.

† Because the mind manifests all, and every thing is an object of the mind. S'.

‡ Vid. Kaṭha U. 3, 11, and S'wétás'watara U. 3, 13.

§ From tearing asunder the darkness ; for by destroying the darkness of the clouds, lightning is manifested, S'.

|| Ghee is offered to the gods by pronouncing “Swāhá and Vashat, rice to men by saying “Hanta,” and Swadhá to the forefathers by saying “Swadhá.”

2 K 2

Digitized by Google

252

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

From this (fire) arises a noise which one hears on closing his ears. When he* quits the body, he does not hear the noise.

Tenth Brāhmaṇa.†

When the Purusha‡ proceeds from this world (to another), he comes to the air. The air opens there as wide for him as the aperture of a chariot-wheel. By this (aperture) he ascends, (and) comes to the sun. The same opens there for him as wide as the aperture of a Lambara.§ By this he ascends, and comes to the moon. The same opens there for him as wide as the aperture of a small drum. By this he ascends, and comes to the world,|| where there is no grief, where there is no snow ;¶ there he dwells endless years.*

Eleventh Brāhmaṇa.

The greatest pain surely is that, which one endures from sickness. Whoever thus knows, gains the highest world. The greatest pain surely is (to think) that they carry one after death to the forest. Whoever thus knows, gains the highest world. The greatest pain surely is (to think) that they lay the (body of the) deceased in the fire. Whoever thus knows, gains the highest world.

• The individual who experiences pain or pleasure in the body. S'.

† In this Brāhmaṇa, the fruits, consequent upon the abovementioned kinds of meditation, are stated. S'.

‡ The Purusha who has the knowledge before described. S'.

§ A kind of musical instrument, probably a large drum.

|| To the world of Prajāpati. S'.

¶ Grief denotes mental pain, and snow pain, arising from the body. S'.

• Many Kalpas of Brahmā. S'.

Fifth Chapter. Thirteenth Brāhmaṇa.

253

Twelfth Bráhmaṇa.

Some say, "Food is Brahma." This is not so; food decays,* without (the support of) life. Others say, "Life is Brahma." This is not so; life dries up without (the support of) food. Those deities† verily, when becoming one, attain the highest state.‡ Thus (reflecting) Pátrida said to his father,—" Can I do any good or evil to one who thus knows ?" He answered (checking him) with his hand,—"Do not (speak thus), O Pátrida ; for who, that is the unity of them, can ever obtain the highest state ?" He§ said to him "Vi ;" food is verily "Vi ;" for all these beings enter|| food. (Again he said to him) "Ram ;" life verily is Ram ; for all these beings sport in life. Into him who thus knows, enter all beings ; in him sport all beings.

Thirteenth Bráhmaṇa.

The Uktha¶ is verily life ; therefore (let one meditate on) the Uktha ; for life causes this all to spring up, (utthápayati). From him who thus knows, springs up a son who knows the Uktha, and is firm. Whoever thus knows, gains the same nature* and the same place with the Uktha. 1.

• While Brahma is without decay. S'.

† Food and life.

‡ The state of Brahma.

§ The father.

|| Are dependent upon food.

¶ Uktha is the principal Mantra in the rite, called Mahábrata. The Uktha is the principal rite, and life is also first among the other functions. S'.

• S.' explains Sáyujya by identity of body, organs and consciousness, vid. p. 55. The Sáyujya and Salokatá are two of the five kinds of liberation which are specified in the S'rí-Bhágavat, 3, 29, viz. Sálokya, Sársati, Sámípya, Sárúpya and Ekatwa. Vid. Sabda K. D.

254

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

The Yajur is verily life ; therefore (let one meditate on) the Yajur ; for in life are all these beings united (yujyante). With him who thus knows are all beings united for the sake of his superiority. Whoever thus knows, obtains the same nature and the same place with the Yajur. 2.

The Sáma is verily life; therefore (let one meditate on) the Sáma; for in life meet all these beings together (Samyamhi). For him who thus knows meet all these beings together for the sake of his superiority. Whoever thus knows, obtains the same nature and the same place with the Sáma. 3.

The Kshattra is verily life; (therefore let one meditate on) the Kshattra; for life saves (tráyate) this (body), when it is wounded (Kshanitoh). Whoever thus knows, gains the Kshattra which is Attra,* and obtains the same nature and the same place with the Kshattra. 4.

Fourteenth Bráhmanat

Bhúmi (earth), Antariksha (the atmosphere), Dyau (the heavens), are eight syllables;‡ the first foot of the Gáyatrí consists of eight syllables ; this (foot) of the Gáyatrí is that (nature of the earth, of the atmosphere and of the heavens). Whover thus knows the (first) foot of the (Gáyatrí), conquers all that is in the three worlds. 1.

The Richah, Yajunshi (and) Sámáni are eight syllables; the second foot of the Gáyatrí consists of eight syllables; this

• Attra means, according to S'. what is not preserved by another (na trá́yate anyéna kénochit, iti attram). Kshattra which is Attra seems to denote one who is not preserved by any body else, that is to say, who preserves himself.

† S'. gives the following introduction to the fourteenth Bráhmaṇa. The meditation upon Brahama, as endowed with many fictitious attributes, such as the heart, &c., has been explained ; the present Bráhmaṇa is to set forth the meditation upon him, as represented by the Gáyatrí.

‡ See a similar play with letters Chh. U. 1, 3, 6—7.

Fifth Chapter. Fourteenth Bráhmaṇa. 255

(foot) of the Gáyatŕí is that (nature of the three Vedas). Whoever thus knows, conquers all that is conquerable by the knowledge of the three Vedas. 2.

Práṇa (the vital air which goes forwards), Apána (the vital air which descends), (and) Vyána (the vital air which equalises), these are eight syllables; the third foot of the Gáyatŕí consists of eight syllables ; this (foot) of the Gáyatŕí is that (nature of the three vital airs). Whoever thus knows the third foot of the (Gáyatŕí), conquers all that has life. Again, the turíya (the fourth), the Dars'ata foot of the Gáyatŕí, is the Paro Rajá,* which sheds rays. What is (commonly called) Chaturtha, (the fourth), is (the same as) the “turíya.” It is, as it were, beheld (dadris'é) ; hence it is called the Dars'ata foot. (It is called) Paro Rajá, because it sheds rays upon all the dust-born creatures of the universe. Whoever thus knows that (foot of the Gáyatŕí), is radiant with power and glory. 3.

This Gáyatŕí† is founded upon the fourth, the Dars'ata foot, the Paro Rajá. This (fourth foot) is founded upon truth. The eye is verily truth ; for (that) the eye in truth, (is evident). Hence, if at present two have entered upon a dispute, (one saying), —I have seen, (the other),—I have heard, then we believe him, who has said, I have seen. Truth is founded upon power ; life is verily power. Upon this life (truth) is founded. Therefore it is said, power is stronger than truth.‡ In the same manner the Gáyatŕí, is founded upon that which bears a relation to the soul ; for this (Gáyatŕí) preserves (tattré) the Gayas ; the vital organs (Práṇah) are the Gayas ; therefore, because it preserves the Gayas (gayáns tattré), it is called Gáyatŕí. The

• Paro Rajá, Áditya or the sun, the representative of Brahmá.

† This Gáyatŕí with its three feet representing the world in its twofold state, as being endowed with form, and as being without form, S'.

‡ Vid. Chh. U. 7, 8.

256

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

Savitrí which he* teaches, is this (Gáyatrí) ; it preserves the life

of him to whom he has taught it. 4.

Somet call this Sávitrí Anustup, (saying),—“Speech is Anus-

tup ; we repeat that speech is Anustup.” Let none do so, let

him call the Gáyatrí Sávitrí. If one who thus knows, receive

even many (gifts),‡ yet he would not receive so much as is

equal to one foot of the Gáyatrí. 5.

If one receive the three worlds, full (of all their riches), he

would obtain (no more than is equal to) the first foot. Again

if one receive as much as the science of the three Védas ex-

tends, he would obtain (no more than what is equal to) the

second foot. Again, if one receive as much as all that has

life extends, he would obtain (no more than what is equal to) its

third foot. Again, the fourth Darsáta Paro Rajá foot of the

Gáyatrí is never by any one obtainable.§ Hence how could

he receive (an equivalent) which extends so far? 6.

The praise of this Gáyatrí is given in the following Man-

tra),—Thou art of one foot,|| of two feet, of three feet, and of

four feet ; for thou art not obtained. Salutation to thy fourth

Darsáta Paro Rajá foot. May this (enemy of thine)¶ not ac-

complish this (work).* If (one who thus knows) hates any

body (and makes against him this invocation), “this (man

is my enemy) ; may his wish not be accomplished,” then the

• The teacher.

† Some followers of Véda schools.

‡ Many gifts, at the time of investiture, when the pupil begs for presents.

§ Obtainable by any wealth which may be given.

|| The first foot, representing the three worlds, the second representing the know-

ledge of the three Vedas, the third representing all living creatures.

¶ Enemy, sin. The sentence is elliptical, but the above sense appears to be

intended ; which is corroborated by the explanation given by the Upanishad

itself.

• By which he seeks to harm thee.

Fifth Chapter. Fourteenth Bráhmaṇa.

257

wish of the latter will verily not be accomplished, if he make against him the invocation, “ I have obtained his wish.” 7.

Janaka, the king of the Vidéhas, thus addressed Buṭila, the son of As'watara,—“ (If) thy saying that thou knowest the Gáyatrí (be true), then why hast thou become an elephant to carry (me) ?”

He said,—“ I did not know the mouth of the Gáyatrí, O king of kings.” Its mouth is fire. Even much wood, thrown into fire, is consumed by the same; in the like manner, one who thus knows, although committing many sins, consumes them all, becomes qlean and pure, and is without decay and immortal. 14.

Open, O Púshan, the mouth of truth, concealed in the golden vessel,* to (me who have been) devoted to true piety, for the sake of beholding (the truth). O Púshan,† thou sole Rishi,‡ Yama, Súrya, son of Prajápati, do withhold thy rays, diminish thy splendour, that I may behold thy most auspicious form. I, that Purusha, am immortal. (Let) my vital air (join) the wind ; then (let) my body, when reduced to ashes, (join) the earth). Om ! Kratu, remember (my) acts! Remember, O Kratu, remember my acts, remember! Guide (me), O Agni, by the road of bliss to enjoyment ; O god, who knowest all dispositions, deliver (me from) crooked sin. Let us offer thee our best salutation.§

• S'ankara thus explains this passage, He who has performed both, acts of knowledge and rites, prays to the sun at the time of his death, holding a golden vessel in his hands. As a valuable thing is concealed in a vessel, so Brahma, who is denoted as truth (vid. 5, 4.), and who abides in the resplendent orb of the sun, is concealed from him whose mind is not concentrated.

† Púshan from Poshṇát because he upholds the world.

‡ Rishi from Dars'anát, the sole beholder, or from ri to go. Súrya, ekáf charáti; Yama, jagatáh saṃyamanaṃ tat kritam. S'

§ The whole passage is nearly ideutical with Vájasanéya S. UJ. 15—18.

24

258

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

SIXTH CHAPTER.

First Brahmana.

Whoever* knows what is oldest and best,† becomes the oldest and best among his own. Life is verily what is oldest and best. Whoever thus knows, becomes the oldest and best amongst his own, and also amongst others, should he wish so. 1.

Whoever knows the best foundation,‡ becomes best founded among his own. Speech is verily best founded. Whoever thus knows, becomes best founded amongst his own, and also amongst others, should he wish so. 2.

Whoever knows the best standing place, is best placed; he stands firmly on what is even and uneven. The eye§ is verily a firm standing place; for by the eye he stands firmly on what

• It has been declared, that life is the Gáyatrí. For what reason again is the Gáyatrí represented by life, and not by speech or other functions? The answer is, because life is the oldest and best, not so speech, etc. The present chapter has the object to determine, how life has those attributes. Or the connexion of this with the preceding chapter may also thus be stated,—The meditation upon life in preference to the other organs has been declared, life being the Uktha, Yajur, Sáma, etc. The meditation upon life which in the former chapter has been enunciated merely as to its principal qualities, is here continued, although it is not meant to conclude this meditation. This chapter, as is evident even from the name of “ compilation”, which it bears has rather the object to enumerate the special fruit, not mentioned before, which result from a meditation on life. S’. This introduction of S’.

is thus prefaced by Á. G.,—The Omkára, the triad of restraint, liberality and clemency, the meditation upon what is Brahma and what is not Brahma, the fruit of such a meditation, the places gained thereby, and the adoration of Aditya and the other deities, have been set forth in the fifth chapter. The sixth chapter has the object to explain especially the meditation on that which is not Brahma together with the fruit, resulting from it, and also certain ceremonies, of which the Srimantha is the first.

† Vid. Chhánd. U. 5, 2, 4. Br. A. U. 4, 1, 3.

‡ Vasishṭha means either best founded, or best clothed, both of which is the effect from a superior power of speech. S’. Vid. Ch. 5, 2 4. Br. A 4, 1, 2.

§ Br. A’. 4, 1, 4.

Digitized by Google

Sixth Chapter. First Brāhmana.

259

is even and uneven. Whoever thus knows, stands firmly upon what is even and uneven. 3.

Whoever knows what is treasure, obtains whatever he desires. The ear* is treasure; for in the ear all the Védas are treasured. Whoever thus knows, obtains whatever-he desires.

Whoever knows the place of refuge,† becomes a place of refuge amongst his own. Mind‡ is verily the place of refuge. Whoever thus knows, becomes a place of refuge amongst his own. 5.

Whoever knows Prajápati (the lord of creation), becomes rich in offspring and in cattle. The seed is the source of creation. Whoever thus knows, creates offspring, and becomes rich in cattle. 6.

The vital organs,§ disputing about their superiority, went to Brahma,|| and spoke to him,—“Who amongst us is best founded.” He said,—“He amongst you is best founded, by whose departure the body is thought to suffer most.” 7.

Speech departed. Returning after the absence of a year, it said, “How could you live without me.” They said,—“As dumb people who do no speak by speech, breathing by the vital breath, seeing by the eye, hearing by the ear, thinking by the mind, and begetting children, so have we lived.” Then speech re-entered (the body).

The eye departed. Returning after the absence of a year, it said,—“How could you live without me?” They said,—“As blind people, who do not see by the eye, (live),.breathing by the vital breath, speaking by the organ of speech, hearing by the ear, thinking by the mind, and begetting children, so have we lived.” Then the eye re-entered (the body). 8.

• Br. Ā′. 4, 1, 5.

† For the mind is the place, upon which the organs and their objects, are de-pendent, the objects of the senses being enjoyed by the soul through the mind. S′.

‡ Vid. Br. Ā′. 4, 1, 6.

§ Speech and the rest. S′. Vid. Chh. U. 5, 1, 5—15, Pras'n. U. 2, 2—4, where the dispute among the organs is also described.

|| Brahma means here Prajápati.

2 I 2

Digitized by Google

260

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

The ear departed. Returning after the absence of a year, it said,—“ How could you live without me?” They said,—

“ As deaf people, who do not hear by the ear, (live), breathing by the vital breath, speaking by the organ of speech, seeing by the eye, thinking by the mind, and begetting children, so have we lived.” Then the ear re-entered (the body). 9.

The mind departed. Returning after the absence of a year, it said,—“ How could you live without me ?” “ They said,—

“ As idiots who do not think by the mind, (live), breathing by the vital breath, speaking by the organ of speech, seeing by the eye, hearing by the ear, and begetting children, so have we lived.” Then the mind re-entered (the body). 10.

The organ of generation departed. Returning after the absence of a year, it said,—“ How could you live without me ?”

They said,—“ As impotent people who do not beget children (live), breathing by the vital breath, speaking by the organ of speech, seeing by the eye, hearing by the ear, and thinking by the mind, so have we lived.” Then the organ of generation re-entered (the body.) 12.

Then, the vital breath being about to depart, as a great, noble horse, born in the Sindhu country, raises its hoofs, so it shook those vital organs (from their places). They said,—“ Do not depart, O Venerable. We can not live without thee.” “ If I am such, then offer sacrifice* to me.” (They answered,)—“ Be it so.” 13.

Speech said,—“ That I am founded, is, because thou art founded.” The eye said, “ That I am a standing place, is, because thou art a standing place.” The ear said,—“ That I am a treasure, is, because thou art a treasure.” The mind said, “ That I am a place of refuge, is, because thou art a place of refuge.” The organ of generation said,—“ That I am a source of procreation, is, because thou art a source of procreation.” (Life said),—“ If I am such, what then is my food, what

• Or as S'. explains it “ tribute.”

Digitized by Google

Sixth Chapter. Second Brāhmaṇa.

261

then is my foundation?" (They said),—“ All this whatsoever, horses, worms, small insects, locusts, and so on, is thy food; the waters are thy dwelling place."* He who thus knows, does not eat (any food) which is not to be eaten,† nor does he take (any gift) which is not to be taken.‡ Therefore those acquainted with the Védas who thus know, sip water when commencing to eat, and sip water (again) after they have eaten, thinking, that (thereby) they have clothed the naked (life).

Second Brāhmaṇa.

S'wétakétu,§ Aruneya,|| came to the assembly of the Panchálas. He came to Praváhaṇa, the son of Jibála, who was

• Or thy garment.

† He is not guilty of any fault by eating food which is prohibited.

‡ Thus I rendered " anannam" in accordance with Sankara's explanation. It is the same term which in the first half of the sentence is translated by " not to be eaten."

§ All that has been omitted in the former chapters of this Upanishad, is to be mentioned in this part, the " Khilakánḍa." At the end of the seventh chapter he who has been addicted during his life to both, to knowledge and to the performance of rites, asks on the approach of death for the road of Agni with the words " Agni, lead me on the good path." By the qualification of "good" the existence of many paths is indicated, and the roads themselves are paths towards the acquirement of

the effects, resulting from works. They succinctly show the whole result of worldly endeavours, be they works flowing from mere natural knowledge or from scriptural knowledge. Although, therefore, natural sin has been explained in the words " threefold is the offspring of Prajápati," and also its effects in the words: " He has not to perform this work," and although the consequences of scriptural knowledge have been set forth at the end of the topic on " the obtaining of the nature of the threefold food" and at the commencement of the knowledge of Brahma, as implied in the injunction to abstain from those consequences, yet it has merely been said, that by work alone the world of the forefathers, and by knowledge and by work, accompanied with knowledge, the world of the gods is gained, but by what means either is to be obtained has not been stated. To exhibit them and to give finally a succinct view of the whole meaning of the S'ástra, is the object of the present Khilakánda. S'.—The present narrative, with the modification of some words, is essentially the same with Chh. U. 5, 3–10.

|| Arunéya, the son of Aruni, who is the son of Aruṇi. S'.

Digitized by Google

262 Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

attended by his courtiers. Seeing him, he saluted him by the words,—“ Is it thou, O youth ?”* He answered, “ Ah, yes, O friend.”† Art thou instructed by thy father ? ” He said, “ Om (I am).” 1.

“ Dost thou know, how the creatures who depart this life, proceed on different roads ?” He said,—“ I do not know.” “ Dost thou know, how they return to this world ?” He said,— “ I do not know.” “ Dost thou know, how many, who have quitted again and again this world, no more return to it ?” He said,—“ I do not know.” “ Dost thou know at which sacrifice the waters become the words of man, and rise to speak ?” He said,—“ I do not know.” “ Dost thou know the means of obtaining the road, which is called Dévayána, or the road, called Pitriyána, (that is to say, dost thou know) by which work the road to the world of the gods or of the forefathers is obtained ? It is heard (also) the word of the Rishi,‡—I heard of two roads, the one§ of the forefathers ; and the other of the gods (either of which must be proceeded on) by the mortals. “ As distant as is the father from the mother,∥ (so distant is the one road from the other).” “ I do not know any thing of all this,” said he. 2.

Then he invited him to sit. Not heeding the proffered seat, the youth hastened away. He went to his father and said to him, “ Hast thou not before declared us to be instructed (in all science) ?” “ What then, O youth of subtile mind ?” “ The man whose companions are kings, asked me five ques-

• The address of the king is merely Kumára, of which the last syllable is Pluta (three times the length of a short vowel), to indicate contempt, says S'. † S'wetakétu returns the salutation of the king by the simple syllable ' Bho' with Pluta, which according to S.', is not a particle suited in addressing a king. ‡ Of the Mantra. S' § Leading to the world of the forefathers. ∥ Father and mother denote heaven and earth, the two halves of the mundane egg. S'.

Sixth Chapter. Second Brāhmaṇa.

tons, of which I did not know one. " Which are they ?" " These" and he mentioned them one after another. 3.

He said,—" Thou must know, O beloved one, that I told thee all which I know myself. Up then. Going there, let us perform the service of a Brahma student (to the king)."

" Do thou go, O Venerable." Gautama went, where Prabáhana, the son of Jíbala held his residence. (The king) bringing a seat for him, had (also) water brought; then he made the oblation according to rite. He said to him,—" We grant thee a boon,* O respected Gautama." 4.

He said,—(I accept) the boon which thou hast promised me. Explain to me the word which thou hast said before to the youth." 5.

He said,—" That is a boon concerning gods; name one concerning men." 6.

He said,—" Thou knowest well, I have enough of gold, of cows and horses, female slaves, dependants and garments. Do thou not withhold from us the gift which is great, permanent, and extends (to many generations). He said,—Verily according to rite thou desirest, O Gautama, (to obtain knowledge from me)." He said,—" I approach thee as pupil (according to the rite)."† With words others also approached of old‡ (their teachers). He resided there through the mere name of a respectful gift. 7.

He said,—" Do not hold us guilty, O Gautama, as thy forefathers (held not guilty my forefathers). That this knowledge in former times was not possessed by a Bráhmaṇa (thou knowest thyself).But I will explain it to thee; for whoever could refuse it to one who thus speaks ? 8.

• By which is meant a gift of cows, horses, etc. S′.

† Enjoined by the Sástra. S′.

‡ Bráhmanas went to Kshatriyas, or Kshatriyas to Vais'was for acquiring knowledge, only with words, and not with presents.

Digitized by Google

204

Brihad Áranyaka Upanishad.

That world* is the fire, O Gautama. The sun (Áditya) is its fuel; his rays the smoke;† the day the flame ;‡ the quarters the coals;§ the within lying quarters|| the sparks. The gods¶ offer faith to this fire. From this offering king Soma springs forth.* 9.

Or Parjanya,† is fire,—O Gautama; the year‡ is its fuel;

• The king answers first the fourth question, because, says S'., on its solution also the other questions are solved. That world, viz. the heavens.

† As likewise rising from the fuel. S'.

‡ Being alike through manifestation. S'.

§ Resembling them by their bringing to rest. S'.

|| Flying off from the other quarters like the sparks from fire. S'.

¶ Indra, and the rest. S'.

• He is king of the forefathers and of the Bráhmans. S'.

† Parjanya, the second locality of the offerings, is the tutelary deity of rain. S'.

‡ The two offerings of the fire sacrifice, viz. the offerings in the morning and in the evening, exist in this world in a manifested form, as do also the necessary appliances of the sacrifice, viz. the sacrificial fire, the wood, the coals, the sparks of the fire, the things which are offered as milk, ghee, etc. When they rise to the other world, to heaven or their unmanifested state, they exist according to their subtile nature as do also those appliances. Again, at the time of manifestation, or at the creation of the world the ceremonial work is changed by assuming the state of the fire of the atmosphere, etc. The same changes undergoes also at present the work, called fire-sacrifice. In this manner the whole world is the effect of the invisible changes of the two offerings of the fire-sacrifice. Those six necessary appliances will be mentioned afterwards for the sake of extolling the two offerings; but here, where the consequences, resulting from the work of the sacrifices are to be explained, the object is to set forth the doctrine of the five fires as the cause of obtaining the northern path for the enjoyment of the fruit derived from special work. The organs of the body in their relation to the soul are here the offering priests of the fire-sacrifice. Considered in their relation to the gods, they are Indra and the other gods who are the offering priests for the fire of heaven, etc. They offer the fire-sacrifice for the sake of the fruit, derived from it. When they have enjoyed the whole fruit, they perform the same sacrifice again. In this manner the organs are called gods. In this our present state, also, any offering, as milk, etc., dependent on the rite of the fire-sacrifice, which has been thrown in the sacrificial fire and consumed by it, enters in its invisible, subtile form, together with the sacrificer, this world, further in the form of smoke, the atmosphere, and from the atmosphere the heavens. These are the subtile waters, the effects of offerings, the parts of the fire-sacrifice, bearing the name of faith, which

the clouds the smoke;* the lightning the flame;† the thunderbolt the coals;‡ the thunder claps the sparks.§ The gods offer king Soma to this fire. From this offering rain springs forth. 10.

This world|| is fire, O Gautama. The earth is its fuel;¶ fire the smoke;* night the flame;† the moon the coals;‡ the stars the sparks. The gods offer rain to this fire. From this offering food springs forth. 11.

Man is fire, O Gautama. His open mouth is the fuel;§ breath the smoke ;|| speech, the flame;¶ the eye the coals; the

at the world of the moon create another body for the sacrificer, and when entering the heavens, are offered. Therefore the waters which are parts of the fire-sacrifice and the cause that the sacrificer obtains another body in the world of the moon, are called faith. They bear the name of waters, because the greater part of their composition is water. The fire-sacrifice however, is merely a representative of all the other Vedaic rites, and what has been said about the former, applies also to the latter. S’.

• They are smoke, either from their being produced from smoke, or from their similar appearance. S’.

† Both having the power of manifestation. S’.

‡ Both being alike extinguishable and hard. S’.

§ Both flying off and being alike frequent. S’.

|| This world, the place where living creatures are born, and have their enjoyment. S’.

¶ For by the earth, furnished with the means of enjoyment for innumerable living creatures, this world is nourished. S’.

• It is fire, as rising from the earth in the same manner as smoke from fire. S’.

† The night is the flame, because as the flame has its origin from the connexion of fuel with fire, so the night from the connexion with its fuel, viz. the earth, the darkness of the night being called the shadow of the earth, S’. To which A. G. adds ; for darkness is the place of Ráhu, and this is the shadow of the earth.

‡ The moon is the coals, from similarity of origin ; for as from the flame, coals are produced, so the moon is produced in the night. Or because both are alike extinguishable. S’.

§ For through the mouth man is lighted up, i. e. enlightened with regard to speech, study of the Védas, etc. S’.

|| Both rising equally upwards. S’.

¶ From their like power of manifestation. S’.

2 M

266

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

ear the sparks. The gods offer food in this fire. From this offering seed springs forth. 12.

Woman is fire, O Gautama, her haunch the fuel; the hairs on the body the smoke ;* the organ of generation the flame;† cohabitation the coals ;‡ the fits of enjoyment the sparks. The gods offer seed in this fire. From this offering man springs forth.§ He lives as long as he lives.|| When he dies, 13.

Then they¶ take him* to the fire ; his fire becomes fire ; his fuel, fuel ; his smoke, smoke ; his flame, flame ; his coals, coals ; his sparks, sparks. The gods offer man in this fire. From this offering, man in radiant splendour springs forth. 14:

Those† who have this knowledge,‡ and those who in the

• Both rising equally upwards. S’. † From likeness of colour. S’. ‡ Both equally extinguishing. S’. § In this manner the waters, bearing the name of faith, are gradually offered in the fires of heaven, of Parjanya, of this world, of man, and of woman, and having assumed gradually a grosser and grosser shape, they are the cause of the creation of man. And thereby the fourth question, viz. " Dost thou know, at the offering of which sacrifice, the waters becoming the words of man, rise to speak ?" is decided, viz. they become so, on the performance of the fifth offering in the fire which is woman, when the waters become seed. S’.

|| As long as the fruit of the work continues, which had been the cause of his assuming his body. S’.

¶ The Ritwigs or priests, performing the last rites. S’. * The deceased who in this case is himself the offering. S’.

† The present section replies to the first question and to part of the fifth, viz. " Dost thou know, in what way the creatures, departing this life, proceed on different roads ?" and " Dost thou know the means of obtaining the road which is called Dévayána ?"

‡ Those who thus know. This knowledge does not refer to one of those fires only, but to the five fires together, as is evident from the Chh. U., where (5, 10, 10) the knowledge of the five fires is expressly mentioned with reference to the same topic. The knowledge concerns the nature of those fires and not the comparisons, which are only made for the sake of extolling the fire-sacrifice. But who are those who thus know? Not the householders in general ; for those among them who have not the knowledge of the five fires,’ are to gain the worlds of smoke as the fruit, etc. resulting from sacrifice, gifts and austerity, (16). Not those who have retired to the forest, nor religious mendicants; for they are mentioned in the passage of the text immediately following, " those who in the forest," and

Sixth Chapter. Second Brāhmaṇa.

267

forest* meditate with faith on truth,† obtain the flame,‡ from the flame the day; from the day the light half of the moon; from the light half of the moon the six months when the sun moves to the north; from those months the world of the gods; from the world of the gods the sun; from the sun the world of the lightning. Those who have obtained the world of the lightning, are removed by the Purusha created by the mind§ to the Brahma worlds.|| In those Brahma worlds exalted they live infinite years. For them, there is no return (to this world).¶ 15.

the knowledge of the five fires has connexion with the work of the householders, and not with that of hermits or religious mendicants. Nor lastly the Brahmacháris, because their entering upon the northern path is proved by the Smriti. Therefore the words "those who know," refer to the house-holders who have a knowledge of the five fires. S'.

• Those who in the forest, viz. those who have retired from the world to the forest (the Vanaprasthas,) and also the religious mendicants, (Párivrájakas.)

† Who meditate on truth, that is to say on truth, that is to say on Brahma in the form of Hiranyagarbha, not such as meditate with faith simply. As long as the householders have not the knowledge of the five fires, or of Brahma, so long, after the fifth offering in the gradual order of those offerings has been performed, they are again born from the fire of woman, and on their return to this world they perform again ceremonial work. By means of this work they go again in the gradual procession from one world to another up to the world of the forefathers, and from there backwards in the reverse order to this world. Here, being again born from the fire of woman, the same circle is to be described like the continual rotation of a water-wheel. S'.

‡ Flame means here the tutelary deity of the fire, and so the terms "the day," "the light half of the moon," the tutelary deities of the day, etc.

§ By Brahma. S'.

|| The Brahma worlds, the plural refers either to different regions in the Brahma world, which is only one, or to the difference of the rewards, derived from different modes of meditation. S'.

¶ That is to say, there is no return for them during the present duration of the world, but they return of course on a new creation, as absolute liberation from transmigration, is only the effect from the knowledge of Brahma, while the knowledge here in question is merely a knowledge of the five fires, or of Brahma in the form of Hiranyagarbha. This view is clear from the whole doctrine of this Upanishad, and does not require any further proof; but S'. wastes much ingenuity to prove it from the form of language of another passage, where the "not return" has the addition "to this world."

2 M 2

268

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

Again,* those who conquer the worlds by sacrifice, gifts and austerity,† obtain smoke ;‡ from smoke night ; from night the dark half of the moon ; from the dark half of the moon the six months when the sun moves to the south ; from those months the world of the forefathers; from the world of the forefathers the moon. Having obtained the moon, they become food. As (the offering priests) consume (again and again) king Soma, saying, do increase, and do decrease, so the gods consume them there.§ When that (fruit of their works) ceases, then they obtain the ether, from the ether the air, from the air rain, from rain the earth. Having obtained the earth, they become food.|| Again they are offered in the fire of man ; hence they are born in the fire of woman. Proceeding from world to world, they return in this way again and again. Again, those who do not know those roads, become worms, locusts and gnats.¶ 16.

Third Brāhmaṇa.

Whoever desires* to obtain greatness, (has to perform the

• Those householders, who have not the knowledge of the five fires.

† S'. says, that "gifts and austerity" do not refer to such as are enjoined by the Védas, as they would be included in "sacrifice."

‡ The deities of smoke, etc.

§ As the offering priests consume again and again the Soma juice, so the performers of rites who are the supporters of the gods by sacrifices, etc., on their obtaining new bodies in the Soma world, are turned back again and again to this world for the performance of troublesome work by the gods, from whom they receive such rewards as are in correspondence with their work. S'. And thereby is answered the second-half of the fifth question.

|| This is the reply to the second question.

¶ The answer to the third question.

• The ultimate effect, derived from knowledge and works, has been declared. Knowledge is independent of any other thing, but work depends both upon the wealth of gods and upon that of man. For the sake of work, therefore, wealth must be acquired, and this by means unaccompanied with sin. For the acquirement of wealth the ceremony, called Mantha, is ordained, in order that greatness be obtained ; for wealth is the consequence of greatness. S'.

Sixth Chapter. Third Brāhmaṇa.

following rite). At the time when the sun moves to the north; on an auspicious day of the light half of the moon, the twelfth day of his performing the vow named Upavasad,* after he has gathered and mixed together all kinds of herbs and fruits in a shell-shaped vessel or in a spoon, either made of the wood of the conglomerate fig-tree; after he has sprinkled with water (the place of offering), placed the cow-dung, lightened the fire, spread (the kusa grass), cleaned the covered ghee, and taken the mixture at the time of a male star, he performs the offering,† (saying),—“ To all the gods of crooked mind . who under thy control, O Játavéda,‡ obstruct man's desire, do I offer a share (of the sacrifice). Satisfied, let them satisfy me with all desires. Swáhà to the goddess of crooked mind who under the thought that she is the upholder (of all) has taken refuge to thee; to this deity who is the accomplisher of all, I offer a part of the ghee, Swáhà ! 1.

“ Swáhà to the eldest, Swáhà to the best !”§ with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. “ Swáhà to life, Swáhà to what is firmly founded !” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. “ Swáhà to speech, Swáhà to the standing place !” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. “ Swáhà to the eye, Swáhà to the treasure !” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder of the ghee into the churning vessel. “ Swáhà to the ear, Swáhà to the place of refuge !” with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the

• The vow which is called Upavasad is part of the Yotistoma rites, and consists in limiting the food for a period of twelve days, taking the first day as much milk as is contained in one udder of a cow, the second as is contained in two, the third in three, and the fourth in four, then on the fifth again taking three, and so down to one, when again one is added on each successive day. S'.

† Then while offering ghee, he speaks the following Mantras. S'.

‡ Fire.

§ The eldest and the best is life. Compare this passage with 6, 1, 1—6.

270

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

churning vessel. "Swáhá to the mind, Swáhà to the source of procreation !" with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. "Swáhà to the seed !" with these words offering in the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel.

"Swáhà to the fire !" with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. "Swáhà to Soma !" with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. "Swáhà to the earth !" with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel.

"Swáhà to the atmosphere !" with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. "Swáhà to the heavens !" with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. "Swáhà to the earth, to the atmosphere and to the heavens !" with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel.

"Swáhà to the Brahma !" with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. "Swáhà to the Khattra," with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel.

"Swáhà to the past !" with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel. "Swáhà to the future !" with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel.

"Swáhà to the universe !" with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel; "Swáhà to all !" with these words offering to the fire, he drops the remainder (of the ghee) into the churning vessel.

Then he touches that (mixture saying), "Thou art moveable;* thou art resplendent,† thou art full;‡ thou art un-

• Moveable, because life is moveable, and thou art of the same nature as life. A'. G.

† Because fire, the same as thou, is so. A'. G.

‡ In thy nature as Brahma. A'. G.

Digitized by Google

Sixth Chapter. Third Bráhmaṇa.

271

shaken ;* thou art the one pervader of this (universe) ; thou art proclaimed ;† thou art proclaimed again ;‡ thou art sung ;§ thou art sung again ;|| thou art sounded,¶ thou art resounded ;* thou shinest in the cloud ;† thou art pervading ; thou art powerful ; thou art food;‡ thou art splendour,§ thou art destruction;|| thou art identity." 4.

Then he raises that (mixture, saying),—“Thou thinkest (of all) ; we think of thy greatness; for he is king, lord and sovereign. Let him, the king and lord, make me a sovereign." 5.

Then he eats¶ that (mixture, and with the words),—“Let us reflect on the adorable light of Savitar, (viz.) May the winds convey happiness ; may the rivers drop happiness ; may the herbs be of sweet juice to us. Swáhá to the earth !” (let him take the first morsel). (With the words),—“(Let us reflect on the adorable light of Savitar,” (viz.) May the night, yea even the morning-dawns (bring us) happiness, (may be fraught with) happiness the dust of the earth. May the heavens, our father, (bring us) happiness. Swáhá to the atmosphere !” (let him take the second morsel). With the words,—“(Let us reflect on

• In thy likeness of the sky. A'. G.

† By the Prastotar at the commencement of the sacrifice. A'. G.

‡ By the same in its middle. A'. G.

§ By the Udgátar at the commencement of the sacrifice. A'. G.

|| By the same in its middle. A'. G.

¶ By the Adhwaryu. A'. G.

• By the Agnídhra. A'. G.

† According to A'. G.'s explanation ; Literally, in what is moist.

‡ Food, represented by Soma, all things to be enjoyed. A'. G.

§ Splendour as represented by fire, in its nature as consumer. A'.G.

|| Destroyer, being the cause of destruction of all things according to their relation to the soul and to the deities. A'. G.

¶ He shall gradually take three morsels. With the first morsel he shall recite the first foot of the Gáyatrí and the first sacred word (Bhú), with the second the second foot and the second sacred word (Bhuvah), and with the third the third foot and the third sacred word (Swar). After he has muttered the three sacred words, he should clean the vessel, in which he has dropped the remainder of the ghee, and drink this in silence. S'.

272

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

the adorable light of Savitar) who quickens our understanding,

(viz.) May Vanaspati (bring) us happiness ; may the sun

(bring) us happiness; may his rays (bring) us happiness.

Swáhá to the heavens!" (let him take the third morsel).

And having repeated the whole Sávitri and all the benedic-

tions,* he says at the close (of the rite), "May I become

this all, Swáhá to the earth, the atmosphere and the heavens!"

Then having sipped (water) and cleaned his hands, he touches

the fire with his thigh, his head turned towards the east.

(Then) in the morning dawn he adores Áditya (with the

Mantra),—"Thou art the one lotus of the quarters; may

I become the one lotus of men." As he (before) approached

the fire, so he (again) approaches it with the thigh, and after

being seated, he mutters the school.† 6.

Uddálaka A'runi having explained this (mixture) to his dis-

ciple, Yájnavalkya, of the Vájasanéya school, said,—"Whoever

pours it on a dry trunk, (will see) its branches rise and its

leaves spring forth. 7.

Yájnavalkya of the Vájasanéya school, having explained this

(mixture) to his disciple, Madhuka Paingya, said,—"Whoever

pours it on a dry trunk, (will see) its branches rise and its

leaves spring forth." 8.

Madhuka Paingya having explained this (mixture) to his

disciple, Chúla Bhágavitti, said,—"Whoever pours it on a dry

trunk, (will see) its branches rise and its leaves spring forth." 9.

Chúla Bhágavitti, having taught this (mixture) to his dis-

ciple, Jánaki Ayasthúṇa, said,—"Whoever pours it on a dry

trunk, (will see) its branches rise and its leaves spring forth." 10.

Jánaki A'yasthúṇa having explained this (mixture) to his

disciple, Satyakáma Jábála, said,—"Whoever pours it on a dry

trunk, (will see) its branches rise and its leaves spring forth." 11.

Satyakáma Jábála having explained this (mixture) to his

• He eats the fourth morsel. A'. G.

† The succession of teachers and disciples.

Digitized by Google

Sixth Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa.

273

disciples, said,—“Whoever places it on a dry trunk, (will see)

its branches rise, and its leaves spring forth. Let none teach

it to one who is not a son, or a disciple.” 12.

There should be four things made of the wood of the con-

glomerate fig tree, the Sruva,* the Chamasā,† the sacrificial

wood, and the two churning vessels; there should be ten kinds

of cultivated seeds, viz. rice, barley, sesamum seed, kidney

beans, millet,‡ panick seed, wheat, lentil, pulse and vetch.

When they are ground down, and sprinkled with curdled milk,

honey and ghee, he shall offer the clarified butter. 13.

Fourth Brāhmaṇa.§

Terra est horum elementorum essentia, aqua terræ, herbæ

aquæ, flores herbarum, fruges florum, homo frugum, semen

hominis. 1.

Prajápatis respiciens,—Age, illi (homini) habitationem pa-

rabo,—feminam creavit. Ea creata, Adha Upásana sic dic-

tum celebravit. Quam ob causam (homo etiam) Adha

Upásana ritum cum conjuge celebret. Pene turgido facto,

Prajápatis cum illa coivit. 2.

Ejus vulva est altare, corporis pili Kus'a sic dictum gra-

men, cutis ignis, testiculi in medio igne collocata duo Soma

sacrificii vasa. Quatenus ejus mundus extensus est qui Vájapéya

sacrificium facit, eatenus hominis mundus extensus est qui ejus

(Adha Upásana ritus) gnarus cum conjuge coit. Is (quoque)

conjugum bene factum aufert. Verum qui ignarus Adha Upásana

ritum celebrat, ejus bene factum conjuges auferunt. 3.

Hac cognitione præditus Uddálaka Árunis, hac cognitione

præditus Náka Maudgalyus, hac cognitione præditus Kumára-

háritus declaraverunt,—Ex ea terrestri mundo multi mortales

• A kind of ladle with which the ghee is taken, when offered to the fire.

† Another kind of ladle, to be put in the water used for the sacrifice.

‡ Anu, a sort of corn of very small seed, which is called Chíma in Bengali.

§ I translated the greater part of this Bráhmaṇa into Latin as it would not bear

an English rendering.

2 *

274

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

discedunt, quibus nomen modo est Brāhmanorum, quorum sensus sunt obtusi, et quorum bene factum fructu caret, ii videntur, qui illius ritus ignari cum femina coeunt. Quodsi dormientis sive vigilantis (mariti) semen multum sit sive parvum, labitur, 4.

Is semen tollens ea hymni verba recitet,—Quod semen hodie in terram est lapsum, quod in herbas sive in aquam descendit, id semen meum recipio. Rursum me adeat robur, rursum me adeat splendor, rursum me adeat prosperitas. Rursum ignis numina ipsius loco semen reddant. Ita locutus, digito annulari ac pollice semen tollens inter mamas seu supercilia absterget. 5.

Dein si (maritus) in aqua ipsius imaginem videt, ea hymni verbi recitet,—(Dei) mihi splendorem, robur, famam, opes et bene factum largiantur.—(Maritus) cum conjuge præclara, sordida veste induta, ea de causa quod vestis sordida est, coitur, ea hymni verba recitet,—Sit illa inter mulieres fortunata. 6.

Quodsi illa ad mariti voluntatem non se conformat, (donis) eam emat. Quod si illa ad mariti voluntatem (iterum) non se conformat, baculo seu manu eam percutiens eis hymni verbis devincat,—(Hoc) membro atque (hac) fama famam tuam aufero. Hoc modo illa fama privata erit. 7.

Quodsi illa ad mariti voluntatem se conformat, (is ea hymni verba recitet),—(Hoc) membro atque (hac) fama tibi famam attuli. Eo modo uterque fama præditus erit. 8.

Si quis conjugem eum amare cupit, pene in ea collocato, ore ori affixo, et conjugis pudendo fricato, (is ea hymni verba musset),—Ex omnibus membris ortum, corde natum tu sane es membrorum essentia. Eam, sicut dorcadem sagitta veneno illinita feritam, mihi subjectam redde. 9.

Dein si quis conjugem non prægnantem esse cupit, pene in ea collocato, ore ori affixo, et spiritu exhalato et inhalato, (is ea hymni verba musset),—Hoc membro semineque semen tuum aufero. Eo modo conjux non erit prægnans. 10.

Sixth Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa. 275

Dein si quis conjugem esse prægnantem cupit, pene in ea collocato, ore ori affixo et spiritu inhalato et exhalato (is ea hymni verba musset),—Hoc membro semine que semen afferro. Sic ea erit prægnans. 11.

Dein si conjugis est amasius quem maritus odit, is vas non coctum in igne ponat, et S'aravarhi sic dictum gramen inverso ordine sternens et ejus calamos butyro immersos inverso ordine in igne sacrificans, (ea hymni verba dicat),—Heus tu in igne meo sacrificasti, equidem spiritum tuum progredientem nec ne spiritum descendentem aufero. Heus tu in igne meo sacrificasti : equidem liberos tuos ac pecora tua aufero. Heus tu in igne meo sacrificasti; equidem fructus, quos e cerimoniis et benefacto adeptus es, aufero. Heus tu in igne meo sacrificasti; equidem spem tuam ac expectationes tuas aufero. Is sane sensibus obtusis, et benefacti fructu orbatus ex hoc mundo terrestri discedet, quem Brāhmaṇus, ea cognitione præditus, exsecratus. Quare ne quis, ea cognitione præditus, in Brāhmaṇi, Vedorum scientia instructi, foribus (mente quidem) delectari cupiat, minimum vero (re ipsa delectetur) ; etenim ea cognitione præditus inimicus exstat. 12.

Dein si quis conjugem menstruas purgationes subeuntem novit, triduum e poculo bibat ; nec sit ejus (mariti) vestis scissa ; nec S'údrus neque S'údrá eam tangat. Tribus noctibus elapsis, eam lavari et de paleis oryzæ grana exuere jubeat. 13.

Dein si quis albi coloris filium nasci cupit qui peritus sit unius Vedorum atque vitam ad extremum ætatis humanæ finem degat, lacte una cum oryza et butyro purificato cocto, uterque edat (ea hymni verba dicens),—Utinam procreatione pollentes simus. 14.

Dein si quis filium coloris nigricantis e gilvo nasci cupit qui peritus sit duorum Vedorum atque vitam ad extremum ætatis humanæ finem degat, lacte coagulato una cum oryza et butyro purificato cocto, uterque edat, (ea hymni verba dicens),—Utinam procreatione pollentes simus. 15.

Dein si quis filium nigro colore rubrisque oculis ornatum

276

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

nasci cupit qui peritus sit trium Vedorum atque vitam ad ex-tremum aetatis humanæ finem degat, oryza una cum butyro purificato cocto, uterque edat, (ea hymni verba dicens),—Uti-nam procreatione pollentes simus. 16.

Dein si quis doctam filiam nasci cupit quae vitam ad extre-mum aetatis humanæ finem degat, Tila sic dictae plantæ semini-bus una cum butyro purificato coctis, uterque edat, (ea hymni verba dicens),—Utinam procreatione pollentes simus. 17.

Dein si quis filium doctum et valde celebratum nasci cupit, qui conciones frequentet, suavja verba loquatur, omnium Vedo-rum peritus sit et vitam ad extremum aetatis humanæ finem degat, minoris sive majoris aetatis tauri carne una cum oryza et butyro purificato cocto, uterque edat (ea hymni verba dicens),—Utinam procreatione pollentes simus. 18.

Dein is mane butyro purificato Sthálipáka sic dicta cere-monia consecrato, iterum iterumque oryzæ partem (eis hymni verbis) offert,—Igni Swáhá, Anumati Swáhá, divino Savitri, veræ procreationis causae, Swáhá! Oryza hoc modo sacrifi-cata et vase sublatato, ipse est posteaque conjugem edere jubet. Tum manibus ablutis et vase aquario aqua repleto ter eam con-spergit (ea hymni verba dicens),—Surge de ea, Viswa-vasu, aliamque quæere eminentem juvenem et idoneam quæ cum marito ineat ludos amatorios. 19.

Dein eam amplectitur, (ea hymni verba dicens),—Ego sum Amus, tu es Sá, tu es Sá, ego sum Amus, ego Sámá, tu es terra. Age, operam demus et filii procreandi causa semen emittamus. 20.

Dein ejus femora pulsat (ea hymni verba dicens),—Recludi-minor, vos coelum et terra! Ac pene in ea collocato, ore ori affixo a capite ad pedes ter ejus corpus fricat, (ea hymni verba dicens),—Vishnus vulvam tuam paret (ad procreandum); 'Twaster membra tua extendat, Prajápatis emittat semen, et creator foetum nutriat. Fœtum recipe, Siníváli, fœtum recipe, multam celebrata. Aswines dei, radiorum sertis ful-gentes, fœtum tuum nutriant. 21.

Sixth Chapter. Fourth Brāhmana. 277

Aswines ligna duo, quibus sacrificamus foetum tuum, peragitent ita ut decimo mense nascatur menses. Sicuti terra est igne prægnans, sicuti celum est Indro prægnans, sicuti ventus est plagis prægnans, similiter ego foetum tuum præbeo. 22.

Eam partum enitentem aqua conspergit (ea hymni verba dicens),—Sicuti ventus lacum ubique commovet, similiter foetus tuus una cum tegumentis exeat. Haec via pessulo et tegumento Indri causa est munita. Hac via, Indre, exeas. Fac etiam, ut exeat secundinæ. 23.

(When the child is born), let him light a fire, and placing it on his lap, and taking curdled milk, mixed with clarified butter in a gublet, he offers repeatedly of the curdled milk and clarified butter, (saying),—“May I, magnified (by this son) in this house support a thousand (men). When he has obtained offspring, let there be no loss of prosperity in offspring and in cattle. Swāhá! I offer with my mind to the my vital airs. Swāhá! May the wise Agni who fulfils all desires right for us any work which ought not to have been done, or any work which ought to have been done in this rite.” 24.

Then, putting (his mouth) near the child's right ear, he mutters three times, “Speech, speech!” Then, taking curdled milk, honey and clarified butter together with unmixed gold, he feeds it, (saying),—“I give thee the earth, I give thee the atmosphere, I give thee the heavens. I give thee all, earth, atmosphere and heavens.” 25.

Then he gives him the name “Véda,” which is his secret name. 26.

Then giving him to his mother, he makes him take the breast (saying),—“O Saraswati, enter for the suckling (of the child into this (breast of the mother) thy breast which is fruitful, the support (of all creatures), the giver of jewels, the knower of wealth, and the liberal donor, by which thou causeth to grow all that is desirable.” 27.

Then he addresses the child's mother with this Mantra,—“Thou art worthy of praise, thou art like Maitrāvaruṇī. Thou

278

Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

who hast born to the strong a strong (son), be strong, thou who giveth us a strong (son). Of him people may say,—“ Thou indeed excellest thy father, thou indeed excellest thy grand-father.”

The son born to a Bráhman who has this knowledge, obtains the highest goal by prosperity, fame and the glory of a Bráhman. 28.

Now the school. The son of Pautimáshí succeeded the son of Kátyáyaní,—the son of Kátyáyaní the son of Gotamí,—the son of Gotamí the son of Bháradwájí,—the son of Bháradwájí the son of Párás'arí,—the son of Párás'arí the son of Aupaswastí,—the son of Aupaswastí the son of Párás'arí,—the son of Párás'arí the son of Kátyáyaní,—the son of Kátyáyaní the son of Kausíkí,—the son of Kausíkí the son of Álambí and the son of Vaiyaghrapadí,—the son of Vaiyaghrapadí the son of Kánwí and the son of Kápí, 1.

The son of Kápí the son of Átreyí,—the son of Átreyí the son of Gautamí,—the son of Gautamí the son of Bháradwájí,—the son of Bháradwájí the son of Párás'arí,—the son of Párás'arí the son of Vátsí,—the son of Vátsí the son of Párás'arí,—the son of Párás'arí the son of Várkkáruní,—the son of Várkkáruní the son of Várkkáruní,—the son of Várkkáruní the son of Árttabhágí,—the son of Árttabhágí the son of S'aungí,—the son of S'aungí the son of Sánkrití,—the son of Sánkrití the son of Álambáyaní,—the son of Álambáyaní the son of Álambí,—the son of Álambí the son of Jáyantí,—the son of Jáyantí the son of Mánḍúkáyaní,—the son of Mánḍúkáyaní the son of Mánḍukí,—the son of Mánḍukí the son of S'ánḍilí,—the son of S'ánḍilí the son of Ráthítarí,—the son of Ráthítarí the son of Bhálukí,—the son of Bhálukí the two sons of Kraunchikí,—the two sons of Kraunchikí the son of Vaidribhatí,—the son of Vaidribhatí the son of Kárs'akéyí,—the son of Kárs'akéyí the son of Práchínayogí,—the son of Práchínayogí the son of Sánjíví,—the son of Sánjíví the son of Prás'ní,—the son of Prás'ní Ásuráyana,—Ásuráyana Ásuri,—Ásuri 2.

Digitized by Google

Sixth Chapter. Fourth Brāhmaṇa.

279

Yájnavalkya,—Yajnavalkya Uddálaka,—Uddálaka Aruṇa,

—Aruṇa Upaves'i,—Upaves'i Kus'ri,—Kus'ri Vájás'ravas,—

Vájás'ravas Jihwávat Vádhyoga,—Jihuávat Vádhyoga Asita

Várshagana.—Asita Várshagana Harita Kas'yapa,—Harita

Kas'yapa S'ilpa Kas'yapa,—S'ilpa Kas'yapa Kas'yapa Naidh-

ruvi,—Kas'yapa Naidhruvi Vak, Vak Ambhini,—Ambhini

Áditya. These Mantras of the white Yajur, which are de-

rived from Áditya, have been declared by Yájnavalkya of the

Vájasanéya school. 3.

From (Prajápati) until the son of Sánjíví is the same (suc-

cession of teachers).* The son of Sánjíví succeeded Mán-

ḍukáyani,—Máṇḍakáyani Mánḍavya,—Mánḍavya Kautsa,—

Kautsa Máhitthi,—Máhitthi Vámakaksháyana,—Vámaka-

ksháyana Sáṇḍilya,—Sáṇḍilya Vátsya, Vátsya Kus'ri,—Kus'ri

Yajnavachas Rájastambáyana,—Yajnavachas Rájastambáyana

Tura Kávashéya,—Tusr Kávashéya Prajápati,—Prajápati

Brahmā. Brahmā is the self-existent. Salutation to Brahmā ! 4.

• In all the Vájasanéyi schools.

CORRECTIONS.

page line

10 1 after the months add and

13 8 — by inference „ the

22 for of that read „ th':

23 „ another that „ another “ that”

16 2 „ being „ are

25 30 „ gesence „ gescence

33 2 „ after desires write a,—

ib 3 „ Thus read thus

40 21 after speech add performed

41 21 for with read to

42 31 „ with „ to

43 19 „ with „ to

51 7 dele he read „

54 21 for letters read letter

56 4 „ ng irasa „ Angirasa

From p. 65 —80 for the heading third Bráhmaṇa read fourth

65 9 for ( write <

ib. 21 „ ( „ ˚

73 19 „ in read by

80 dele p. 23 write ˚

85 12 — he

86 3 — he

ib. 24 — —

89 17 for him read a man

96 1 „ This soul „ this soul

97 8 „ have „ had

104 8 after but read then dele then is; and after Sást ra add is

107 23 for son read soul

109 8 „ wh i „ which is

112 35 „ he, or the „ that

118 2 dele he after I :

122 6 „ „ „ him

ib. 31 „ „ „ ”

133 18 „ ( „

136 4 for breathes not read not breathes.

ib. 6 dele he before eats.

ib. 8 dele The Mantra :

ib. 9 for penance” read penance”

137 1 for penance.” “He „ penance ; “he

ib. 3 for the causes „ is : The nature of a fa-

ther with regard of those causes.

141 8 „ place „ case

142 12 dele By the sacrificer

ib. 13 after collected add by the sacrificer.

ib. 14 for obtains read obtain

143 22 „ are „ do

ib. 23 „ decreased” „ decrease”

144 10 „ characterised „ characterized

Digitized by Google

Digitized by Google