ĪŚĀVĀSYOPANIṢAD ｜ ईशावास्योपनिषद्

“The whole (Brahman) is all that is invisible. The whole (Brahman) is all that is visible. The whole (Hiranyagarbha) was horn out of the whole (Brahman). When the whole (the Universe) is absorbed into the whole (Brahman) the whole alone (Brahman) remains.”

Om. Peace! Peace!! Peace!!!

Adoration to the Brahman. The mantras beginning with Isavasyam, etc., have not been utilized in rituals, because they serve the purpose of enlightening us on the true nature of the Atman who is not an anga of i.e., not connected with. Karma. The true nature of the Atman consists, as will be described, in its purity being untouched by sin, oneness, being eternal, having no body, omnipresence, etc., and as that conflicts with Karma, it is only reasonable that these mantras should not be utilized in rituals; nor is the true nature of the Atman thus defined, a product, a modification, a thing to be attained or a thing to be refined; nor is it of the nature of a doer or enjoyer so that it may be connected with Karma. All the Upanishads exhaust themselves in describing the true nature of the Atman; and the Gita; and the Mokshadharma are bent on the same end. Therefore all Karma lias been enjoined in accordance with worldly understanding, which attributes to the Atman diversity, agency, enjoyment, impurity, sinfulness, etc. Those that know who are competent to perform Karma and who are not, (Adhikaravidah) tell us that he who seeks the fruits of Karma—visible such as the inherent splendour of a Brahmin and invisible such as Heaven,etc.,—and thinks “I am a twice-born free from any defect such as being one-eyed or hunch-backed, &c., which disqualifies one for the performance of Karma” is entitled to perform Karma. So, these mantras by enlightening (us) on the true nature of the Atman remove our natural ignorance and produce in us the knowledge of the oneness, etc., of the Atman,—the means of uprooting grief, delusion, etc., the concomitants of Samsara.



We shall now briefly comment upon the mantras, the persons competent to study which, the subject matter of which, the relevancy of which (samhandha) and the fruits of which, have been thus declared.

The verses beginning with Īśāvāsyam are not utilised in ritual[1], since they explain the true nature of the Self which is not subsidiary to karma. The true nature of the Self, as will presently be indicated, is purity, taintlessness, oneness, permanence, bodilessness, omnipresence and so forth, which being inconsistent with karma, it is only right that these (verses) are not used in ritual. The Self whose essence is thus described, moreover, cannot be produced, modified, acquired or purified; nor is it of the character of an agent or an enjoyer; in which case it would be subsidiary to karma. (And its existence cannot be called in question) inasmuch as all the Upanishads purport only to unfold its nature. The Bhagavadgīta and the Mokṣadharma (in the Mahābhārata) have also the same aim. (It has therefore to be presumed that) karma is prescribed taking (for granted) that, as recognised by the intelligence of the average man, plurality, agency, enjoyment and so forth, as also impurity and sinfulness, are of the Self. Those that know who are eligible (for ritual) state that karma is prescribed only for him who is desirous of its fruit—whether that fruit be visible (i.e. attainable in this life) as spiritual lustre or invisible (i.e. attainable only in another life) as Svarga—and thinks “I am a twice-born, free from blindness, dwarfishness and the like marks of disqualification”[2]. Therefore the following verses, removing this original nescience concerning the Self, from an explanation of its real nature, produce a knowledge of unity which is the means of eradicating sorrow, delusion and other similar features of mundane existence. We shall briefly comment on these verses, having thus indicated the persons entitled to study them, the subject-matter, aim and their inter-relation[3].



FOOTNOTES:-

[1]: The doubt whether these verses are to be used in ritual arises because this Upanishad forms part of a Saṃhitā and the verses in the Saṃhitā portion of the Veda are generally so employed. If these verses are at all to be utilised in ritual there should be an express statement to that effect in the Veda or there should at least be an indirect guidance afforded by their contents. We find no such express statement, and the subject matter, so far from being connected with karma, is directly antagonistic to it. Further it is usual to classify whatever is subsidiary or supplementary to ritual in four ways as follows—that which is produced as e.g. a sacrificial cake which is newly made out of flour, that which is modified, as e.g. soma juice which is extracted from soma leaves, that which is acquired as e. g. a mantra which is learnt by rote before being used in ritual and, lastly, that which is purified, as e. g. unhusked rice which is utilised after being ceremonially sanctified. The Self cannot be brought under any of these classes. It is neither an effect, nor a modification. It is not external to us to be obtained anew; nor is it impure to require any purification. The only other way of connecting the Self with karma is to make it an agent or an enjoyer. Neither of these, however, can the Self be, as will hereafter be explained in the commentary. Hence the denial of all relationship between the Self and karma.



Compare— (?? the position of the note with these references was unclear ??)



samam sarveṣu bhūteṣu tiṣṭhantam parameśvaram

vinaśyatsvavinaśyantam yaḥ paśyati sa paśyati

—Bhagavad Gita xiii 27.



eka eva hi bhūtātmā bhūte bhūte vyavasthitaḥ.

ekadhā bahudhā chaiva dṛṣyate jalachandravat.

Mahābhārata—Mokṣadharma.



[2]: Desire, which is either for attaining happiness or for avoiding misery necessarily implies nescience. For the Self being in reality bliss itself, untouched by sorrow, cannot by its nature, be affected by any desire. Similarly, believing that the Self is fit for performing karma because its bodily adjuncts with which it is empirically connected are fit for it is also an indication of nescience.



[3]: In the beginning of a commentary it is customary to point out specifically the qualifications of persons entitled to study the treatise, its subject-matter, the aim of its teaching and their inter-relation, especially that between the last two. Deficiency in respect of any of these which are termed the Anubandhachatuṣṭayam is understood to indicate the unworthiness of the treatise to be commented upon.

pūrṇam—Full; adas—that, the above; pūrṇam—full; idam—this, the manifest; pūrṇat—from the Full; pūrṇam—the full; udacyate—proceeds; pūrṇasya—from the Full; pūrṇam—full; ādāya—subtracting; pūrṇam—full; eva—even; ava-śiṣyate—remains behind.



Om. That is Full, this is full, from that Full, this full emanates. Taking away this full from that Full, the Full still remains behind. Om. Peace, Peace, Peace.

Salutation to Hari, the Lord of all Sacrifices, who is full of bliss, whose body is of wisdom, and who is eternal, and the upholder of this universe which consists of the eternals and non-eternals.



Note.—Viṣṇu is called the Sacrifice also, because He is the enjoyer of all Sacrifices. Sacrifice or Yajña is another name of the Lord. Beings whose happiness is imperfect are running after external objects in order to complete there happiness. Surely Hari is not the enjoyer of sacrifices in this sense, for His happiness or bliss is perfect and full. His enjoyment, therefore, is a mere ‘1ī1ā’ or sport, in order to show condescension to His devotees by accepting their offerings. Hari possesses infinite bliss, because He is the upholder of the universe. The eternals are the jīvas or souls. The non-eternals are the bodies and other material objects, which change their forms. If the Lord be absolutely without a body, then He cannot uphold the world; if He has a body then He would be subject to death and decay. To answer this dilemma the verse uses the words “whose body is of wisdom” and “who is eternal.” The body of the Lord consists of jñana matter, and is eternal.



Salutation to the Guru, and to Hari from whom alone comes incessantly the illumination and increase of the knowledge of Brahmā, Rudra and of other devas, and even of Śrī.



Note.—It is customary to salute the Guru after saluting the Iṣṭa devatā: Madhva follows this custom by bowing to his Guru also; but that Guru is Hari Himself. In the case of Brahmā and other devas, there takes place an acquisition of knowledge. In the case of Śrī there is never a want of knowledge in her, and so she is mentioned separately. Though Śrī called also Ramā is eternally free and possesses knowledge, yet that knowledge is under the Lord. Hari is, therefore, the sole and the only Guru. Others are Gurus by His command and direction.



Manu called Svāyambhuva praised the Lord Viṣṇu when He appeared as Yajña, the son of Ākuti, with the verses of this Upaniṣad.



[Note.—There is an ancient warning that no one should perform a sacrifice for himself or for others, study himself or teach others, unless he knows the four-fold laws regarding every mantra. These are (1) the devatā of the mantra, (2) the musical note of the hymn, (3) its seer or Ṛṣi and (4) its meaning. The meaning and the metre of a mantra can be found by reading the mantra itself. The other two require to be taught. This is done here. The Ṛṣi is Svayambhuva Manu and devatā is that incarnation of Viṣṇu called Yajña, the son of Ākuti. But how do you know this? Madhva answers it by quoting Brahmāṇḍa Purāṇa.]



Thus we learn from the Brahmaṇḍa Purāṇa. “Svāyambhuva Manu praised with collected mind Viṣṇu who had incarnated as his daughter’s son, and was named Yajña, by means of these verses of the Īśāvāsya Upaniṣad.



“The ferocious Rākṣasas, who had come to devour him, as soon as they heard the chant of these mantras, could not bear (the strong vibrations of these) and so they left him unmolested, and thus he was delivered by Yajña from them. These Ṛākṣasas, who could not otherwise be destroyed, were killed by Yajña.



“The Lord Hara had given two boons to these Rākṣasas, by which they had themselves become incapable of being slain; and they could kill with impunity everybody else. But Hari is Lord of all, and so He transcended Siva also, for who is higher than He?”



In the Bhāgavata, Parana also this is the meaning given to this Upaniṣad. (See Bhāgavata Purāṇa VIII Skandha, I Adhyaya, &c.)



Note.—In the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, Book VIII, Chapter I, Svāyambhuva praises Hari who had incarnated in his family as his daughter’s son. As he uses the first of these verses to praise Hari, it is clear that he must have been the seer of these verses; and as Hari in His incarnation as Yajña is the person addressed in that Purāṇa He is fitly called the devatā of this Upaniṣad. Madhva always quotes some Purānic authority for his apparently strange interpretations. It is clear from these apt quotations, that the school of thought which he represents existed long before him. These Bhāgavatas had already propounded a system of interpretation of their own. Madhva, by his genius gave an impetus to it, which still reverberates throughout India, wherever the religion of the Heart has flourished, and is not overpowered by the religion of the Head.

All this—whatsoever moveth on the earth—should he covered by the Lord. That renounced, enjoy. Covet not anybody’s wealth.

The word ‘Isa’ is from the verb ‘Ishte’ (rules) and means ‘by the Lord.’ The Lord is Paramesvara, the Paramatman of all. He rules everything being the Atman of all. Should he covered by the Lord, by his own self, the Atman. What? All this, whatsoever moveth on the earth. All this universe, movable and immovable, unreal in absolute truth, should he covered by his self, the Lord, Paramatman, with the idea, “I alone am all this as being the inner self of all.” Just as the had odour—the result of moisture, etc.,—produced by contact with water, in sandal and agaru, etc., is hidden (lost) in their naturally agreeable smell produced by the process of rubbing, similarly all this on this earth (the word earth being illustratively used for the whole Cosmos) differentiated as name, form, and action, this bundle of modifications, superimposed upon the Atman by ignorance, and consisting in this seeming duality with its distinctions of doer, enjoyer, etc., will be abandoned by the contemplation of the true Atman. One who thus contemplates on the self as the Paramatman is bound to renounce the three-fold desire of son, etc., and not perform Karma. ‘Tena tyaktena’ means ‘by such renunciation.’ It is well-known that one’s son or servant, abandoned or dead, having therefore no bond of connection, does not protect that one. ‘denunciation’, therefore, is the meaning of this word tyaktena. Bhunjithah means protect. Having thus renounced all desires, do not cherish any desire for wealth. ‘Anybody's wealth’; do not long for wealth either yours or another’s. Svit is a meaningless particle.



Or, it may be thus interpreted. Do not covet. Why? ‘Whose is wealth?’ is used in the sense of an objection; for nobody has any wealth which could be coveted. The meaning is “all this has been renounced by the contemplation of Jsvara, that the Atman is all. All this, therefore, belongs to the Atman and the Atman is all. Do not, therefore, covet what is unreal.”

In the Lord is to be veiled all this—whatsoever moves on earth. Through such renunciation do thou save (thyself); be not greedy, for whose is wealth.

He who rules is (termed) Īt. Īśā (means), ‘by the Lord’. The Lord is the Ruler and the real Self of every creature[1]. By such a Lord, identical with oneself, is to be overspread i.e, covered. What? idam sarvam = (all this), yat kincha = whatsoever. jagatyām= on earth. jagat = all that (moves). By one’s own Self,—the Lord, the supreme Self—which is the sole reality, all these unreal (things), both movable and immovable, have to be covered over, (perceiving) thus—‘I am the inner Self of all’.[2] Just as adventitious bad odour in a piece of sandal, arising from moisture, is overcome by true fragrance when the (sandal) piece is rubbed[3], so indeed, will all the congenital variety of the world, such as being an agent or an enjoyer, superimposed on the Self, disappear at the perception (everywhere) of the (one) really existent Self. Since jagatyām is (here used) in an indicatory sense, all kinds of effects differentiated as name, form and action (are to be understood as connoted by it). What a person, that is so full of the conception that the Lord is the Self of all, ought to do is to renounce the three-fold desire for offspring etc., and not (be engaged in) karma. In tena tyaktena, tyakta means renunciation (being used as an abstract noun). (It is not to betaken here as a past participle in the sense of ‘given up’ because) a son or a servant (for example) who has been abandoned or is dead, cannot save one since all connection is severed between them. Therefore (the word) can only mean ‘renunciation’. bhuñjīthāḥ =do save[4]. Having thus renounced desires, be not greedy (mā gṛdhaḥ) i.e., do not long for wealth, kasya svit = (of anybody). (The meaning is)—Do not long for the wealth of anybody—i.e., yourself or another. (In this interpretation) svit is a mere expletive. Or (we may say as follows)—Be not greedy. Why? (The answer is )—kasya svit dhanam= Whose is wealth?—implying a denial. If wealth could belong to anybody it might be sought; (but) everything having disappeared through the discovery of the Lord (everywhere), all this is of the Self, and all this is the Self. Thus it means—Do not seek an unreality.’[5]



FOOTNOTES:-

[1]: The difference between the controller and the controlled is not to be understood as real. I t is merely apparent and is based on an illusion. In the same sense, we may, for example, say that a person standing before a number of mirrors controls the several reflected images of himself.



[2]: The sense is that one should realise that all is Self and that there is no variety in the Universe. This is the chief teaching of the present Upanishad and corresponds, in its significance, to the well-known tattvamasi of the Chāndogyopaniṣad.



[3]: The object of this illustration is to suggest that when conviction regarding the unity of all existence does not spring directly from faith in the teaching, reasoning or enquiry will generally lead to it.



[4]: This statement is not to be understood literally for the Self does not, in reality, require to be saved. It is only intended to extol renunciation by ascribing final release to its influence.



[5]: The third pāda of this verse enjoins renunciation on such as can discriminate between what is Self and what is not. Such withdrawal from the world is the only course for Self-realisation. By removing the ordinary distractions of life it renders easy the attainment of final release. The fourth pāda prescribes a rule of conduct and prohibits the acquisition by such persons of wealth of any description beyond what is necessary for bare maintenance.

īśā—(īśasya āvāsyaṃ=īśāvāsyaṃ) by the Lord, of the Lord; vāsyam—(āvāsamarhatītyāvāsyaṃ) worthy of being dwelt in, entered; idam—this; sarvam—all; yat-kiñca—whatsoever; jagatyām—(prakṛtyāṃ) in the Prakṛti; jagat—moves, becomes modified or undergoes change; tena—(īśvareṇa) by that, (Lord); tyaktena—(attena vittena) renounced, allotted, given, ie, whatever conies providentially; bhuñjithāḥ—(bhogaṃ kuryāḥ) enjoy thou; mā—do not; gṛdhaḥ—(ākāṃkṣethāḥ) beg, covet; kasya—(rājādeḥ) from any; svit—(api) even, verily; dhanam—wealth.



All this whatsoever that moves in Prakṛti (does so because it) is indwelt by the Lord. Enjoy thou what He hath allotted to thee, and do not beg from any, (though he be a king), for wealth.

The words ‘īśā vāsyam’ mean “worthy or capable of being dwelt in by the Lord.” ‘Jagatyam’ ‘in the prakriti.’ ‘Tena’ means ‘by Him the Lord.’ ‘Tyaktena’—given. Enjoy thou what is given by him.



Note.—All motion that we see in nature is caused by the Lord, by His entering into and taking up his residence in each atom of Prakṛti. The Prakṛti is under the Lord; and all this motion that we see in matter is of the Lord, because He has permeated it. He, therefore, is the only Free Agent. Be ye content with what the Lord has given you. Since none but the Lord is truly Free, so no being, howsoever high, can give any thing to any one. Therefore, do not go soliciting for wealth to the rich—ask the Lord alone.



Thus says the Brahmāṇḍa Purāṇa:—“Because Prakṛti is incapable of motion of herself, therefore, the Śruti says ‘the world is indwelt by the Lord Who causes all its motion? Since Yiṣṇu has entered into Prakṛti, in order to cause her evolution (pravṛtti), therefore He is called the Lord of Prakṛti. Since the evolution is under His control, everything is said to belong to Him. Enjoy thou that only which He has given; and do not beg from others.”



Note.—This quotation from the Brahmaṇḍa Purāṇa is Madhva’s authority for the interpretation that he has given.

Should one wish to live a hundred years on this earth, he should live doing Karma. While thus, (as) man, you live, there is no way other than this by which Karma will not cling to you.

Thus the drift of the Vedic text is that he who knows the Atman should renounce the three-fold desire of son, etc., and save his Atman by being centred in the knowledge of the Atman (Gnananishtha). The mantras now proceed to inculcate the following for the benefit of him who does not know the Atman and is not competent to cognize the Atman as above indicated.



Kurvanneva means certainly doing, i.e., ‘only by doing.’ Karmani means ‘Agnihotara, etc.’ Jijivishet means ‘should like to live.’ Satamsamah means ‘a hundred years.’ It has been declared that that is a man’s longest life. Thus declaring agreeably to natural inclination the desire to live a hundred years, the text lays down the injunction in respect of how one should live—continually performing Karma and not otherwise. If you would thus live, content to be a man, there is no other mode of life than the one of performing Agnihotra, etc., by which bad Karma may not cling to you. Therefore, one should like to live doing Karma enjoined by the Sastras such as Agnihotra, etc. But how is this drift arrived at? By the previous mantra, Gnananishtha has been inculcated to the sanyasin. By this. Karmanistha is enjoined on those who are not able to become sanyasins. Do you not remember it was pointed out that the antithesis between Knowledge and Karma is a fact unshakable like a mountain? Here also it has been said that be who would like to live must perform Karma and that this universe must be abandoned as unreal, in the contemplation of the Lord as all, by one who would protect his Atman having renounced all and not coveting anybody’s wealth. According to the Srutis it is settled that one should not long for either life or death and should leave for the forest. There is also the injunction by which one is interdicted from returning thence—thus ordaining sanyasa.



The distinction in the results of the two courses will also be pointed out. (The Narayana Upanishad) says



“In the beginning these two roads were laid. The road through Karma and sanyasa; the latter consists in the renunciation of the threefold desire. Of these, the road through sanyasa is the preferable one.”



The Taittiriya Upanishad also says, “Renunciation (Nyasa) certainly is to be preferred.”



Bhagavan Vyasa, the preceptor of the Vedas, after much discussion told his son his firm conviction in the following text.



“These then are the two roads on which the Vedas are based. Both the courses—one which leads to Karma and the other which draws away from Karma have been explained, etc.” This division will be explained.

Always performing karma here, one should desire to live, for a hundred years. So long as thou (seekest to live) a mere man, no other (path) exists (where) activity does not taint thee.

Kurvanneva= always performing. iha =(here) karmāni = rites such as agnihotra. jijīviṣet =one should desire to live. śatam =one hundred in number. samāḥ= years. For thus much is known to be the maximum age of man. Since (this is) a (mere) iteration (of an empirically known fact) what should be taken as enjoined (here) is that, if one should desire to live a hundred years, he should live only performing karma. evam= in this manner. in regard to you), nare i.e. when you live content to be a mere man. itaḥ i.e., from this present course of performing karma like agnihotra. different course, na asti =does not exist; in which course evil action does not stain; i.e., you do not get tainted by sin. Wherefore if one should desire for life Tone should live) throughout performing karma such as agnihotra prescribed by the śāstra.



How is it to be understood that the former verse assigns to a sannyāsin devotion to knowledge and the latter, only devotion to karma to one incapable of it (Self-realisation)? We reply—Do you not remember the aforesaid antithesis between jñāna and karma which remains unshakable as a mountain? Here also the same has been expressly stated in verses 1 and 2,—(that he who seeks to live must perform karma and that he who does not, must give up all desire. The same conclusion may be arrived at) from the (following) directions to sannyāsins—“He should desire neither for life, nor for death; he should enter a forest. This is the law.” “He should not thence return”. The difference in result between the two will also be pointed out later on. (Another statement of the like import is) “These two paths only appeared in the beginning—the path of activity and (the path) of withdrawal.” Of these two, renunciation is higher, cf. Taittirīya Āraṇyaka “Renunciation alone excelled”. And Vyāsa, the great Vedic teacher, after much reflection, taught his son definitely as follows—“The Vedas aim at inculcating these two paths—one termed the path of activity and the other, of renunciation.”

kurvan—doing (without desire of fruit; ) eva—even; iha—here, (while born as a human being; ) karmāṇi—doings, works; agnihotra—etc; jijīviṣet—let him desire to live; śatam—a hundred, the full period; samāḥ—years; evam—thus, doing works; tvayi—for thee; na—not; anyathā—any other, the sin of not doing Karma; itaḥ—from this; asti—is; na—not; karma—(pāpa) sin, Karma; lipyate—binds, stains; nare—in the man.



Performing works even here, let a man live his allotted hundred years; thus is it right for thee, not otherwise than this; karma will not bind that man.

If Karma is not performed, then the man doth incur sin: for says Nārada: “If a man is ignorant and does not worship the Lord Kṛṣṇa, then he incurs sin; but if he is a Jñānin and fails in this, verily the bliss of his self-realisation is diminished thereby. Thus the Jñānin who is free from the taint of Karma, becomes tainted by his omission: therefore let all work always.”



Note.—The ignorant jīvas incur actual sin by omitting to worship the Lord. The Mukta jīvas suffer diminution of heavenly bliss if they omit (which is almost an impossible contingency) to worship the Lord. Thus the first verse teaches Vairāgya or indifference to all worldly objects; by realising that the Lord is the sole and only motive power of the whole universe, that a man gets all that he deserves and should not hanker for other’s wealth. The second verse teaches that not only he must possess Vairāgya, but perform action as well. Here also the Nāradīya is the authority for Madhva’s interpretation.

Those births partake of the nature of the Asuras and are enveloped in blind darkness. After leaving the body they who kill their Atman attain them.

This mantra is begun for the purpose of condemning those who have no knowledge of the Atman. Asuryah: even Devas, etc., are Asuras, relatively to becoming one with the Paramatman. Asuryah because they belong to them (Asuras). Kama is a meaningless word. Those lokas (births) so called because the fruits of Karma are there perceived or enjoyed (lokyante). Andhena tamasa, ‘ignorance which consists in inability to see one’s self.’ Avritah means covered. These births down to the immovable. Pretya means ‘leaving the body.’ ‘Abhigachhanti’ means ‘attain in accordance with their Karma and Knowledge.’ ‘Atmahanah’ means ‘those who kill the Atman.’ Who are they? Those who do not know the Atman. How do they kill the eternal Atman? By drawing the veil of ignorance over the Atman that exists. Those who do not, under the influence of their natural tendencies (Prakriti), know the Atman are called ‘Atmahanah’ (slayers of the Atman); because in their case the result of the existence of the Atman, i. e., the knowledge of its undecaying and immortal nature is veiled, as if the Atman were killed. By this fault of slaying the Atman, they get into Samsara.

Malignant are those worlds and enveloped in blinding darkness, into which pass, after death, whatsoever people slay the Self.

From the standpoint of Unity in the form of the supreme Self, even devas are (reckoned) as asuras. asuryāḥ=belonging to demons, nāma is a mere expletive here. te=(those), lokāḥ=births (or lives), because therein the fruits of karma are perceived or enjoyed. andhena=of blinding nature. tamasā=by nescience. āvritāḥ=enveloped. tān=(those) viz. existences down to the immovable, pretya=having left this body. abhigacchanti=(attain) according to their past deeds and according to their devotional practices, ye ke whosoever. ātmahanaḥ=those who slay the Self. Who are they? People that are ignorant[1]. How can they slay the eternal Self? Through their failing of ignorance they veil (i.e. forget) the ever present Self. The sign of (a belief in) its existence is the consciousness of its undecaying immortal nature. This becomes veiled (ie. forgotten), as if the Self has been slain, and the ordinary ignorant people are termed ‘slayers of Self’[2]. By reason of this sin of slaying the Self, they transmigrate.



FOOTNOTES:-

[1]: I read “ke te? Ye janā avidvāṃsaḥ”.



[2]: Ascribing impurity etc. to the Self is considered as equivalent to killing it; just as imputing a false and serious charge against a virtuous man is, in ordinary parlance, spoken of as “murder without a weapon.”—aśastravadha

asuryāḥ—full of great sorrow, belonging to the asuras, miserable, terrible, fit only for asuric natures; nāma—named, certainly; te—those; lokāḥ—worlds, births; andhena—(adarśanātmakena, ajñānena) by blinding, deep; tamasā—by darkness; āvṛtāḥ—covered, pervaded; tān—them, refers to worlds; te—they, also refers to worlds; The word “ye” is understood (ye te lokāḥ, tān); pretya—dying; abhigaccanti—go down to, constantly revist; ye—who; ke—those; ca—and; ātma-hanaḥ—self-killing; worshipping Viṣṇu wrongly or not worshipping Him at all; Ātma = Viṣṇu, killers of Viṣṇu are those who renounce the worship of the Lord and go after false gods; janāḥ—men, creatures, subject to continual birth and death.



Those worlds called Asurya are covered with blinding darkness: dying to those worlds they go, who kill the Self.

The word ‘asuryāḥ’ means ‘that where the asuras go’ and “where there is absence of good (su) enjoyment (ra).”



Note.—It does not mean the land where the sun (sūrya) does not shine. The authority for giving this interpretation to the word Asuryāḥ is the Bhāgavata Purāṇa again, which Madhva next quotes.)



For says the Bhāgavata Purāṇa “O! the killers of Ātman are those who worship by erroneous methods. They are called asuras or miserable for they do not (a) enjoy happiness (su + ra), and suffer great pains.” The Yamana Parana thus explains this Mantra:—“These Lokas are called Asuryāḥ, first because they are full of intense misery, secondly because they are the fit abode of asuras or materialists. To such Lokas they go who have turned their face away from the Lord.”



By the word “ye ke ca”—“whosoever” a general rule is declared. All who are opposed to Hari go to darkness, not that some go there, and some do not. As says a text: “All go to darkness who are opposed to Hari—this is the law.”

It is motionless, one, faster than mind; and the Devas (the senses) could not overtake it which ran before. Sitting, it goes faster than those who run after it. By it, the all-pervading air (Sutratman) supports the activity of all living beings.

As the ignorant by killing their Atman whirl in Samsara, contrariwise, those who know the Atman attain emancipation; and they are not slayers of the Atman. What then is the nature of the Atman will now be explained.



Anejat is a compound of na and ejat. The root ejri means to shake. Shaking is motion, i.e., deviation, from a fixed position. Free from that, i. e., ever constant. It is, besides, one in all Bhatas. It is fleeter than the mind, whose characteristics are volition, etc. How is this inconsistent statement made i. e., that it is constant and motionless and at the same time fleeter than the mind? This is no fault. This is possible with reference to its being thought of, as unconditioned and conditioned. It is constant and motionless in its unconditioned state. That the mind travels fastest is well-known to all, seeing that the mind encased within the body and characterised by volition and doubt is able at one volition to travel to such distant places as the Brahmaloka etc.; and travelling so fast as it does, it perceives on landing (at its destination) that the intelligent Atman has, as it were, gone there before it; therefore, the Atman is said to be fleeter than the mind. Devas, from the root which means ‘enlighten,’ signifies the senses such as the eye, etc. Etat means the entity of the Atman which is now being treated of. These senses could not overtake it. The mind is faster than these, because these are distanced by the activity of the mind. Not even the semblance of the Atman is within the perception of the senses; for, it had gone even before the mind which is fleeter than they, being all-pervading, like the Akas. The entity of the Atman, all-pervading, devoid of any attributes of samsara, and in its unconditioned state subject to no modification, appears to undergo all the changes of samsara. superposed upon it. and though one, appears, in the eyes of ignorant men, diverse and enclosed in every body. It seems to travel beyond the reach of others’ mind, speech, the senses, &c., which are dissimilar to the Atman, though they run fast. The sense of ‘seems’ is suggested by the mantra using tishtkat (sitting). ‘Sitting, means ‘being itself inactive.’ ‘Tasmin’ means ‘while the entity of the Atman endures.’ ‘Matarisva’ means ‘air,’ so called, because it moves (svayati) in space (matari—antarikshe). Air (matarisva) is that whose activity sustains all life, on which all causes and effects depend, and in which all these inhere, which is called sutra (thread, as it were) supporting all the worlds through which it runs. The word ‘Apah’ means all Karma—the manifested activity of all living things. (This air) allots to fire, sun, clouds, &c., their several functions of flaming, burning, sinning, raining, &c. Or, it may be said that it supports these, from the Srutis, such as “From fear of this, the wind blows, &c.” The meaning is that all these modifications of effects and causes take place only while the eternally intelligent entity of the Atman, the source-of all, endures.

Unmoving, one, (and speedier than the mind; the senses reach it never; (for) it (Self) goes before. Standing, it outstrips others that run. In virtue of it, does mātarisvā allot functions (severally to all).

Now is explained of what nature this Self is, by slaying which the ignorant transmigrate and, as distinguished from them, the learned, by not slaying it, attain final release—



Anejat=not shaking, from the root to shake. Shaking is moving, i.e., lapsing from its real state. (The Self is) free from it, i.e., is always of the same form. It is also one in all beings. manaso javīyaḥ= speedier than the mind which is characterised by desire &c. Wherefore these conflicting statements—that it is at once assuredly motionless and speedier than the mind? This is not wrong, for it can be justified (on the basis of the Self) being conditioned or unconditioned. In its original unconditioned form it is stated to be unmoving and one. (It is also possible to predicate motion of the Self) because it reflects (the features of) its conditioning mind which is the internal sense charaterised by desire and doubt. Since the mind, though residing here within the body can, in an instant, conceive of the distant Brahmaloka and the like, it is ordinarily taken as possessing great speed. When such mind, for instance reaches (in thought) Brahmaloka, with rapidity, the Self appears to have reached there already. Therefore it is said here 'speedier than the mind’. devāḥ=senses such as the eye—so called because they illuminate. enat =this entity of the Self. na-āpnuvan=did not reach, the mind being speedier than they. Since mental operation (always) intervenes, not even the semblance of the Self becomes perceivable by the Senses.[1] (And it is beyond the mind itself) because the Self is always in advance (of it) being all-pervading like space. (Now the verse) states that the Self, always[2] free from all features of transmigration, in its own unconditioned form and being altogether changeless, appears to the undiscriminating ignorant, as experiencing all the several modes of life due to limiting adjuncts and also as being many, i.e., one in each body. tat=(that). dhāvataḥ=speedily going. anyān=mind, the organs of speech &c., which are all other than the Self. atyeti =seems to outstrip. The text itself indicates the sense of iva (seems) by tiṣṭhat which means ‘itself remaining immutable.’ tasmin i.e. in virtue of the existence of the Self which is of the nature of eternal sentiency. Mātariśvā=He who moves (śvayati) in the heavens (mātari); the Wind, the active principle in all creatures; on which are dependent all the aggregates of causes and effects and into which they are woven like warp and woof and which is also termed ‘the connecting thread’ and is the support of the whole universe. Such is mātariśvā. apaḥ=functions[3] of things, such as flaming and burning of Fire, shining of the Sun, raining of the Cloud and so on. dadhāti=allots[4]; or the word may mean ‘directs’ agreeably to texts like “Through fear of Him the wind blows &c.” (Taitirriya Upanishad: II, viii, 1) (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-taittiriya-upanishad/d/doc79840.html#page-603). The idea is that all changes of the nature of cause and effect take place only when the Self, the eternal sentiency and substrate of all, exists.



FOOTNOTES:-

[1]: The action of the senses presupposes the operation of the mind. The Self being beyond mind, is necessarily beyond the senses as well.



[2]: I read sarvadāpi instead of sarvavyāpi.



[3]: Apaḥ in a secondary sense means ‘Sacrificial acts’ for most of them are performed with water, ghee and such other liquids. Hence, in what may be called a ‘tertiary sense’ the term may be taken to denote all kinds of activity.



[4]: This implies an argument for the existence of an all-controlling Lord of the Universe.

anejat—untrembling, ie, fearless unagitated; ekam—one, because supreme: and not because there is no other object than He; manasaḥ—than mind; javīyaḥ—swifter; na—not; enat—it, the Supreme Brahman; devāḥ—the shining ones, like Brahmā and other devas; āpnuvan—obtain, fully comprehend; Pūrvam, from before (the beginning of time), beginningless, eternal; arṣat—knowing, He knows all from before; tat—that Brahman; dhāvataḥ—running; anyān—these others; atyeti—goes beyond, surpasses; tiṣṭhat—staying at one place, resting, sitting; tasmin—in that ātman or Hari; apaḥ—lit. that which protects from all side, namely, karmas; mātariśvā—the Principal Vāyu, or Spirit, the mover in space, Sūtrātmā, the Prāṇa, the Marut; dadhāti—offers as pūjā, supports, allots for, establishes; The karmas done by all beings are stored up in Him, by the Spirit, the great Saviour, called Christ in the West and the Thread-soul or Vāyu here.



He is fearless, supreme, and swifter than the mind. The Devas even know Him not fully, but He knows them all, as He is the Eternal. He staying in one place surpasses them all, though they be running. In Him, the Mātariśvan offers up all karmas of all creatures.

‘Anejat’ means not trembling, because He is fearless, and so also, He is ekam or one, because He is Supreme. ‘The devas even cannot reach Him’ means that they even are incapable of understanding Him fully and completely. By His very nature He knows everything, from before the beginning of time. And because His powers are inconceivable, and He is All-pervading, therefore, though others be running lie surpasses them. And Marut places all karmas in Him. Because all activities proceed from Prāṇa or Marut, therefore, let men resign all their actions into the Lord. For says the Brahmāṇḍa Parana: “Since all actions depend upon Spirit (Prāṇa) let one resign all actions to Hari.”



The word arṣat comes from the root “ṛṣa”—‘to know.’



Note.—There is no such root as “ṛṣa jñāne” in the Dhātupātḥa, but in the Mahā Bhāṣya it is said, there is such a root.



Note.—This verse describes the nature of the Lord or the Ātman. A wrong knowledge of this atman leads to darkness, as has been taught in the last mantra. The Ātman is fearless and supreme. He is swifter than the mind. The Devas even know Him not fully: but He knows them all from eternity. Though all may be straining their utmost to catch Him and be running after Him, yet He by merely staying in one place is beyond their reach. The great Mediator, Mātariśvan, the Son of the Mother-Space, offers to Him all the actions of creatures. When a person does an act with perfect humility, believing that the true agent is Hari and not he, that all acts are sacred and must be performed with the idea of their being sacred, and with full love and devotion towards God, such acts become holy and are carried by Vāyu to the Lord. Since the man has renounced all fruits of action and does all act for the Lord, they remain in Him. This of course refers to karmas of good men.

It moves, it is motionless. It is distant, it is near. It is within all, it is without all this.

Showing that there is no superfluity of mantras, the following mantra declares again what was expressed by the previous mantra. ‘It’ means ‘the entity of the Atman which is being treated of.’ ‘Ejati’ means ‘moves.’ ‘Xaijati’ means ‘does not move of itself.’ The meaning is that though motionless in itself, it seems to move. Besides, it is distant, i.e., it seems to be far removed, because it is not attainable by the ignorant, even in the course of hundreds of millions of ages. Tadvantike is split into tad, u and antike. It is very near to the knowing; for, it is their Atman. It is not merely distant and near; it is within everything according to the Sruti “The Atman which is within everything.” All means ‘all the world of names and forms and activity.’ It is without all this, being all-pervading like the Akas; and within everything, being extremely subtle. It is indivisible according to the Sruti “It is dense with knowledge.”

It moves: and it moves not; it is far and it is near. It is inside all this; it is also outside all this.

Not weary of repeating, the Veda states once again what has already been said in the previous verse—



Tad=the Self in question. ejati=moves. The same does not move (na ejati) i.e., in itself. In other words, being in truth motionless, it (only) appears to move. Moreover, it, tat=it, dūre=(at a distance). It is distant, as it were, because the ignorant cannot get at it even in a thousand million years. tat u=(it is also); antike=near. Absolutely so, to the wise for it is their very Self. It is not merely far and near; it is (also) antaḥ i.e. inside of all this. Compare—‘Which Self is inmost of all’—(Brihadaranyaka Upanishad III, iv, 1) (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc118355.html). asya savasya =(of this all) i.e., the universe consisting of name, form and action. It is outside all this, being pervasive; inside, being supremely subtle like space. (We should also remember) that it is without interstices from the teaching contained in passages like “wholly solid sentiency &c.’—(Brihadaranyaka Upanishad IV, v, 13) (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc122154.html#page-780)

tat—from Him (the word ‘tad’ is an indeclinable here=tasmāt); ejati—trembles in awe; tat—He Himself; na—not; ejati—trembles, fears; tat—He; Because all-pervading—He is; dūre—far off; tadu—so also; antike—near; tat—He; antar—within; asya—of this; sarvasya—of all; tat u sarvasyaḥ—that verily of all; asya—of this; bāhyataḥ—outside.



All tremble from fear of Him, but He is afraid of none (and since He is All-pervading) He is far off as well as near, He is without as well as within.

The words ‘tad ejat’ mean that “the others tremble from fear of Him.” But He Himself is afraid of none and so does not tremble. As we find in the Tattva Saṃhitā:—“All even are afraid of Him, but Hari is afraid of no one. As He is all-pervading, He is said to be far off as well as near: to be outside of all as well as inside of all.”



Note.—The words “tad ejat” do not mean either that Brahman is agitated or active Himself; or that He is afraid. In fack the word ‘tad’ is an indeclinable here, and means ‘from him’ or ‘on account of Him.’ The indeclinable has the force of the ablative case. The word ‘anyat,’ “others” is understood here and is the agent to the verb ejat. This verse cannot be consistently explained on the theory that Brahman is actionless.

Who sees everything in his Atman and his Atman in everything, by that he feels no revulsion.

Who, i.e., the sanyasin, who wishes for emancipation. All Bhutas, i.e., from the Avyakta down to the immoveable creation. ‘Seeing them all in his own Atman’ means ‘seeing that they are not distinct from his own self.’ ‘Seeing his Atman in them all’ means ‘seeing his Atman as the Atman of all.’ Just as he finds his Atman the witness of all his perceptions, the thinking principle, pure and unconditioned, the soul of his body, which is a bundle of effects and causes, he finds bis Atman in the same unconditioned state, the life principle of all the universe, from the Avyakta down to the immoveable. He who thus views does not turn with revulsion by reason of such view. This statement is only a declaration of a truth already known. All revulsion arises only when one sees anything bad distinct from one’s Atman. To one who sees his pure Atman alone continuous, there is no other object which could excite the feeling of revulsion. Therefore he does not turn with revulsion.

And he who sees all beings in himself and himself in all beings has no aversion thence.

Yaḥ tu i.e., a sannyāsin desiring final release. sarvāṇi bhūtāni= all beings (i.e., existences) from prakṛti down to the immovable, ātmani eva anupaśyati =(discovers in himself) i.e., does not understand as other than his own Self, sarva bhūteṣu cha i.e. and in the same (beings), ātmānam = (himself) i.e., his own Self as the Self of all those beings as well. (The reference here is to him) who beholds himself, the same in all beings thus—‘Just as I, the cogniser of all notions, the perceiver, one and devoid of all attributes, am the Self of this my body, the aggregate of causes and effects, so also am I in the same form, the Self of all beings from prakṛti down to the immovable. tataḥ = through such perception, na vijugupsate = does not feel repelled. This is an iteration of what is (empirically) known. All aversion is from evil things other than one’s own self, and if one recognises (everywhere) only the Self, absolutely pure and continuous, it is clear that (for such an one) there is nothing to excite repulsion. Hence the statement—‘He has no aversion thence’.

yaḥ—who; tu—but, and; sarvāṇi—all; bhūtāṇi—beings, creatures, from avyakta downwards, those having consciousness, and those that have not; ātmani—in the Supreme Self; eva—only, even; anūpaśyati—beholds, sees, experiences, knows without any doubt; sarvabhūteṣu—in all beings; ca—and; ātmānam—God, who rules by being their innermost self; tataḥ—therefore, by reason of this realisation; na—not; vijugupsate—wishes to guard and save himself.



He who sees all beings in the Supreme Self (knowing that Brahman is the support of them all), and sees the Supreme Self in all beings (as the Ruler and Controller from within of them all) becomes fearless and is not anxious about saving his self.

As says the Śruti of the Saṅkarāyaṇas “He who sees the Supreme Self as pervading all, and everything in the Supreme Self does not wish to guard himself, because he has no fear from any one. Being fearless he is never anxious about preserving his little self.”



Note.—The last mantra showed that the Lord is the great support of all beings as He is inside of them all, and pervades all. The result of the realisation of this knowledge is mentioned in the present verse. The verse cannot apply to the jīva, but to the Supreme. The ambiguity, if any, of the mantra is cleared up by another mantra of the Saṅkarāyaṇas which uses the word Parama Ātman and so leaves no doubt that it refers to the Supreme Self and not to the jīva self. It also shows that the jīva is not identical with the Lord, for the Ātman is shown here in the locative case, and is the receptacle of all. The contents and the container are always different. He who realises that the Lord is the Support of all and the Inner Ruler of all, becomes fearless, for he knows that none has any real power, all their power belongs to the Lord.

When to the knower, all Bhutas become one with his own Atman, what perplexity, what grief, is there when he sees this oneness.

This other text also expresses the same purport. The word ‘Yasmin’ means either ‘when’ or ‘in which Atman.’ When all the Bhutas have become one with the Atman, owing to the knowledge of the Atman, then or in the case of the Atman, how can there he perplexity or grief? Perplexity and grief, the seed of all desire and Karma, affect the ignorant, hut not him who sees the oneness, pure and like the sky. The negation of perplexity and grief—the effect of ignorance—being shown by the form of a question, the total uprooting of all samsara with its seed has been indicated.

When to a knower discovering unity, all beings become his very Self, what delusion then (to him) and what sorrow?

Another verse also expresses the same idea—



Yasmin=when or in which Self, sarvāṇi bhūtāni= the same (already mentioned) beings of all kinds, ātma eva abhūt= became one’s own self, through right perception, vijānataḥ = (to the knower) of Reality. tatra= then or in such Self, ko mohaḥ kaṣṣokaḥ = (what delusion and what sorrow?). Sorrow and delusion are for one that does not understand the source of desire and activity but not to one that realises the unity of Self, pure and resembling space. The third pāda by calling in question and denying the possibility of sorrow and delusion which are the result of nescience, indicates (so far as the knower is concerned) the absolute cessation of worldly existence together with its cause.

yasmin—in whom, ie, in the Supreme Self; sarvāṇi—all; bhūtāni—beings, (exist) the word tiṣṭhanti is understood here; He is their support; ātmā—the Supreme Self; eva—even, indeed; abhūt— was, existed, or exists inside those beings also; that the Supreme God is the controller of all beings by dwelling within them; vijānataḥ—who understands, (by differentiating the jīva from Īśvara) understanding; tatra—in those beings; kaḥ—what; mohaḥ—delusion; kaḥ—what; Śokaḥ grief. ekatvam—unity, the indissoluble and eternal relation between God and jīvas, as between attribute and substance, life and form; The unity of the Lord in all creatures and of all beings in one Lord. anuapaśyataḥ—experiencing, seeing, realising;



“That Supreme Self in whom all beings exist, has existed indeed within all beings (from eternity.)”—How can he who knows this have delusion or sorrow? For he realises the unity; (by which the Supreme is in all, and all in Him.)

“That Supreme Self, in whom are ail creatures, is indeed that same Supreme Self, who exists, and has existed within all creatures too (from eternity).” This is the Truth. He who knows this truth, and sees the Supreme Self thus residing in all creatures as a unity, can have no delusion. That Atman in whom are all-creatures, is all pervading and is inside of all beings. He who thus sees Viṣnu everywhere, has no delusion nor sorrow, for he has known the truth.



Note.—The life-giving truth is this that in the Supreme Lord exist all beings, and He dwells in them all from eternity. He who has realised this truth and knows that the Lord is still a unity, existing in all and all existing in Him, transcends all sorrow and delusion. Both the words vijānataḥ and anupaśyataḥ have the same meaning, viz., vijānataḥ “Of him who knows.” That Supreme Self in whom stay all the beings, is the same Supreme Self who already was in those beings. As the support of all beings He exists in all beings from eternity. He who knows the Supreme Self thus—intellectually as well as by realisation—and also knows that though the beings are many, yet the Supreme Self in them is one,——and thus knows that the Lord is merciful and he, the devotee, is the object of His mercy——has no delusion and no grief. But how can this mere knowledge remove all grief, &c.? To this the commentator answers



“Since the knower of the Lord completely attains the Lord, hence takes place the cessation of all sorrow and delusion” thus says the Pippalāda Śruti. The last verse declared that the knower of Brahman becomes fearless; this verse makes an additional statement that such a knower has no delusion and sorrow.



Note.—In verse 6 it was declared that he who sees (i.e., knows) Brahman as the Support of all and pervading all, becomes fearless. The present verse is not a mere repetition of the same idea. It further states that the same knower of Brahman transcends sorrow and delusion. The same person who had become fearless on account of the knowledge of Brahman, becomes also free from delusion and grief as a result of the same knowledge. So there is no tautology. The last verse described the fruit of seeing Brahman as pervading all and the support of all. The present verse declares that something more is gained when this knowledge of Brahman becomes more specific, when his unity is perceived in all the diversity of the universe.



(But verse 5 also expressed the same idea that Brahman is the support of all and is All-pervading—for the phrase ‘He is far, he is near, He is outside, He is inside’ denotes the same thing. What was then the necessity of verse 6, which expresses the same proposition? This objection is next answered by the commentator.)



The repetition is for the sake of explaining the full significance of the All-pervading-ness of Brahman,

He pervaded all, resplendent, bodiless, scatheless, having no muscles, pure, untouched by sin; far-seeing, omniscient, transcendent, self-sprung, (he) duly allotted to the various eternal creators their respective functions.

This text describes the real nature of the Atman, spoken of. in the previous texts. Sah means ‘the Atman previously spoken of.’ ‘Paryagat means went round.’ The meaning is ‘he is all-pervading like the Akas.’ Sukram means pure, hence bright, resplendent. Akayam, means ‘bodiless,’ i.e., having no linga sarira or subtle, boy. Avranam means ‘scatheless.’ ‘Asnaviram’ means ‘having no muscles.’ The adjuncts Avranam and Asnaviram show that the Atman has no sthula sarira or gross body. By the word suddha, pure or free from the taint of ignorance, it is shown that it has no karana sarira or causal body. ‘Apapa-viddham means ‘untouched by Karma, good or bad.’ ‘Sukram’ and the following epithets are to be read as masculine, because of the beginning and the end being in the masculine, as sah, kavih etc. Kavih means far-seeing, i.e., all-seeing; for, says the Sruti “There is no seer other than the Atman, etc.” ‘Manishi’ means ‘prompting the mind,’ hence ‘omniscient, omnipotent.’ Paribhuh means ‘being above all.’ Svayambhuh means ‘himself being all above and all below becomes all.’ He, the ever free, and omnipotent, being omniscient, allotted their respective functions, i.e., objects to be created to the various and eternal Prajapatis, known popularly as ‘years,’ as aids to the enjoyment of the fruits of Karma.

He (the self) is all pervading, bright, incorporeal, scatheless and veinless, pure, untouched by sin; a seer, all-knowing, superposed and self-begotten. (It is He that) has duly allotted to the eternal creators their (various) duties.

The following verse (now) states of what description the Self—spoken of in the foregoing verses—in its nature, is—



Saḥ=the aforesaid Self. paryagāt =went round; i.e. he is pervading like space. śukram=white, i.e. radiant, bright. akāyam=bodiless i.e. without the subtle body, avraṇam=not to be wounded, snāva=vein; therefore asnāviram means ‘veinless’. The last two (epithets) deny the gross body; ś uddham = without the stain of nescience. This denies the causal body, apāpaviddham=by evil (which term is meant to include) both merits and demerits[1]. The words beginning with sukram are to be changed to the masculine form, because the verse starts with saḥ (a masculine form) and ends likewise with kaviḥ and (which also are masculine in form). kaviḥ=seeing what is past[2], i.e. witness of all, according to the text—“There is no seer other than He” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad III, vii, 23), manīṣī =the controller of the mind i.e., the all-knowing Lord. paribhūḥ means ‘who is above (pari = upari) everything’. svayambhūh = self-begotten. This signifies that what is above everything as well as what is everything are both the Self. Such a Lord, always free, being all-knowing, has allotted duties (arthān) according to past deeds which are instrumental in yielding fruit (in this life) i.e. has appropriately distributed (them). Yāthātathyataḥ, being derived from yathātathā, means ‘according to facts’. ś āśvatībhyaḥ= permanent; Samābhyaḥ i.e. among Creators going by the name of ‘Time’[3]



FOOTNOTES:-

[1]: According to the view of Śaṅkarāchārya, it should be remembered, good and evil become reduced to the same level in the eyes of a knower of the Self, for both alike lead to a succession of births, although the one be of a higher kind than the other.



[2]: This word literally means ‘one that can see what is past’. Here it is to be understood in a secondary sense, the past indicatin all time—the present as well as the future. Hence it means “witness of all”.



[3]: For this sense of Samvatsara see Brihadaranyaka Upanishad I, v, 14 (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc117941.html#page-224) and Prashna Upanishad i. 9. Like everything else Time also is born of the Creator. Hence ‘Time’ is ‘Creator’ taking the effect for the cause.

saḥ—he, the Adhikārin who meditates on the Self thus; paryagāt—attained; śukram—free from sorrow; akāyam—(liṅgaśarīra varjitam) incorporeal, without the subtle body; avraṇam—Eternal and full; Asnāviram sinews-less—without muscles, without the dense body; śuddham—the purifier; apāpaviddham—untouched by evil, untouched by karma-effects, good or bad; kaviḥ—the seer, the knower or seer of all, the wise, the omniscient; manīṣī—the ruler of mind, or the controller of Manas and intelligences like Brahmā, etc; paribhūḥ—omnipresent, all-existent, all-controller, overessence, conqueror of all passions, the best of all; swayambhūḥ—self-existent; Self-reliant. yāthātathyataḥ—in its full and proper sense, really and truly, and not as an illusion; arthān—things; vyadadhāt—disposed, ordained; śāśvatībhyaḥ—through eternal or recurring; samābhyaḥ—years, ages.



He attains the Lord Who is free from grief, free from subtle body, free from smallness, free from dense body, the Purifier, not tainted by sin. He creates the objects (like mahat, etc.) really and truly, from eternity. He is wise and omniscient, the Ruler of all Intelligences, the Best of all and Self-dependent.

The Varāha Purāṇa explains this mantra as follows:—



Brahman is called ‘Śukra’ [śukram], ‘griefless’ because He is free (ra) from grief (Śuk). He is called avraṇa [avraṇa], not small, (vraṇa=small), because He is Eternal and Kull; as He is the Purifier, He is said to be always pure; as He has no Liṅga deha or subtle body He is called ‘incorporeal’; as He has no dense body, He is called bodiless or without sinews. Though He is thus bodiless, yet He is called Kavi or Wise, because He is omniscient; He is called manīṣī or the Lord of Manas, because He rules the Intelligences (Manas) of all beings from Brahmā downwards, and even Prakṛti and Manas itself. He is called “Paribhū” because He is best of all and He is Svayambhu because He never depends upon another. The Lord Puruṣottama creates the world under fixed rules, in beginningless and endless times, in one uniform course. He creates this world as a reality, and it is eternal as a current (though ever changing). He the Lord has a head consisting of pure Being (sat), Intelligence (jñāna) and Bliss (ananda), His arms are pure Being, Intelligence and Bliss, His body is Being, Intelligence and Bliss, His feet are Being, Intelligence and Bliss. Such is the Great God, the Mahā-Viṣṇu The Lord created this real world, which is beginningless and endless, by His mere Will.”



Note.—In the preceding verse it was said that the wise become free from grief and sorrow, when they reach Viṣṇu. This verse gives the reason why it should be so. It is divided into two parts—one consisting of almost all negative attributes, describing that He is bodiless, etc., and naturally giving rise to the doubt how can such a Being be reached who has no body, etc., and how can He create? The next half beginning with kaviḥ, etc., shows that He has positive attributes also, and so He can be reached and can create the universe. Sri Madhva has explained this verse, not in his own words, lest some one may question his authority, but by quoting Varāha Purāṇa where this verse has been fully and exhaustively explained. The wise reaches the Lord and becomes similar to Him, in shaking off the dense and the subtle bodies: and when these bodies do not exist, there can be no sorrow, for they are the seeds of all misery. Therefore it has been properly said that on reaching Brahman one becomes free from grief, delusion, etc.



But how can God who is without body create? Nor is it right to say that the creation is an illusion, like the seeing of silver in a mother-of-pearl shell. For the the true notion of the shell removes the false notion of silver, but no one has ever observed the notion of the world being sublated by anything higher. The world, therefore, is real. Nor can it be said that time will create of itself. For creation is beginningless in time, like the flow of a river, the particles of which are constantly changing, the river yet retains a permanent form as a current. The creation being thus beginningless, is not subject to measurement.



The Lord has no material body, but has a body all the same consisting of Being, Intelligence and Bliss, and thus the objection, how can a Being without body create anything, is answered.

They who worship Avidya alone fall into blind darkness; and they who worship Vidya alone fall into even greater darkness.

The first purport of the Vedas, the acquisition of knowledge of the Brahman by renunciation of all desires has been explained in the first mantra Isavasyam, etc. The second alternative, i.e., the spending of life in continually performing Karma has been explained, for the benefit of the ignorant who are not capable of Gnananishtha, in the second mantra beginning with ‘Kurvanneveha Karmani.’ The bifurcation, i.e., Knowledge and Karma here pointed out by these texts has also been clearly indicated in the Brihadaranya Upanishad, by the text “he wished, let me have a wife, etc.” And from the texts ‘Karma for the ignorant and men having desires’ and ‘the mind is his Atman and speech, bis wife, etc.,’ it is clear that ignorance and desires are the characteristics of one engaged in the performance of Karma. Thus, the result of Karma is the creation of the seven kinds of food and of an indentification of self with them considered, as the Atman. It has also been shown that concentration in the self, i.e., the Atman (as opposed to the performance of Karma) by the renunciation of the three-fold desire of wife, etc., is the only necessary condition for those who know the Atman. Indirectly by condemning the ignorant, the true nature of the Atman has-been disclosed to those sanyasins bent on the acquisition of knowledge by the text beginning with ‘Asurya - nama’ and ending with ‘saparyayat’ etc., so as to show that they alone and not those who have desires are qualified to acquire knowledge. To the same effect says the Svetasvatara Upanishad. “In the midst of a crowd of seers, he taught the greatest and the holiest truth to those who belonged to the highest order of life.” This text “Andhantamah,” etc., is addressed to those who desire to live here continually performing Karma. How is it inferred that this text is addressed to such only and not to all alike?, Because, he who has no desires has got over the false distinction between means and ends, according to the mantra “Yasmin sarvani bhutani, etc”; for, it is easy to perceive that none who is not a fool will like to associate the knowledge of unity of the Atman with Karma, or with any other piece of knowledge. But here, in view to combining two elements, the ignorant are ridiculed. That which can possibly combine with another, either from logic or from the Sastras, is here pointed out. It is the knowledge of the deities that is here represented as fit to combine with Karma, not the knowledge of the Paramatman; for a distinct result is predicated of the knowledge of the deities by the text by such knowledge, the Devaloka is attained.’ Either of such knowledge and Karma separately pursued is here denounced, not really to condemn but in view to the desirability of their combination; for distinct fruits are said to result from either individually, by the texts “by such knowledge, they climb up to it.” “by such knowledge is Devaloka attained,” “there they do not go who go south” and “by Karma is the abode of the manes attained. It is also well-known that nothing ordained by th e Sastras can ever become unworthy of performance.



Here. They enter into blind darkness. Who? They who follow Avidya. Avidya is something other than Vidya or knowledge, lienee Karma; for Karma is opposed to knowledge. The drift is that those who are continually performing Agnihotra etc., alone, fall into darkness. And they fall even into greater darkness. Who? Those who having given up Karma are always bent upon acquiring the knowledge of the deities. Reason is given for combining Knowledge and Karma each of which separately bears different fruits. If one of the two alone bore fruit and the other not, then by a well-recognised law that which bore no fruit by itself would become a mere appendage to the other.

Into blinding darkness pass they who adhere to karma and into still greater darkness, as it were, they who delight in meditation.

The first point taught here in Verse 1 is (exclusive) devotion to true knowledge after giving up desires of all kinds. The second point—taught in verse 2,—is that as this devotion to self-knowledge is not possible to the ignorant who seek to live (in the ordinary way) they should devote themselves to karma. The distinctness of the two courses referred to in these verses (belonging to the Suklayajurveda Saṃhitā) is also indicated in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka (which forms part of the Suklayajurveda Brāhmaṇa). (Thus we understand) from the passage beginning with “He desired, ‘Let me have a wife’ etc” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad I, iv, 17) (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc117939.html#page-191) that all karma is for the ignorant actuated by worldly desires. And the statement, (in the same passage) “To him the mind is the Self; speech, wife; &c”[1] makes it clear that ignorance and covetousness characterise the person devoted to karma. Its result is accordingly the creation of the seven kinds of food and (thereafter) identifying with them oneself (and one’s interests)[2]. Again, as opposed to adherence to karma, exclusive devotion to the Self, in its reality, through renunciation of the three kinds of desire for wife &c., is taught to knowers of the Self in the passage beginning with “What have we to do with offspring—we to whom this Self is the desired end (world)?” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad IV, iv, 22.) (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc122058.html#page-747)



In verses 3—8, by first showing, dis-paragement of the ignorant, the real nature of the Self has been explained to such as devote themselves, after renunciation, to Self-realisation; for it is the knowers and not the worldly-minded that are qualified for it (Self-realisation). The same has been distinctly stated in the Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad (vi, 21)—“To those in the highest religious stage, he well explained the sacred truth followed by many sages” The following verses are (now) addressed to the worldly-minded who, devoting themselves to karma, desire to live a life of activity. How is it to be known (that they are addressed to such alone) and not to all? The reply is—None but the deluded would associate with karma or with other kinds of knowledge, that knowledge of Self-unity, which arises from the destruction of all difference between end and means as taughc to the unworldly in verse 7. In what follows the dispraise of the ignorant is with a view to associate Karma with Vidyā. (Hence we should understand that) only such (knowledge) is meant here as can, with reason or in accordance with śāstra, be combined with karma. That knowledge is knowledge of deities (upāsanā or meditation), known as ‘divine wealth’ which is taught here as co-existent with, and not the knowledge of the supreme Self, for a specific result is known to follow (from a knowledge of deities) from the text—“The world of the gods through meditation” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad I, v, 16) (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc117941.html). The separate practice of meditation and karma is condemned here with a view to (inculcate their) simultaneous practice and not for altogether deprecating (either); for specific results are known (from the Veda) to follow from each. Compare—‘That, They ascend through meditation’; ‘The world of the gods through meditation’ ‘Those who take the southern path do not go there ‘The world of the manes by karma’. Nothing that śāstra prescribes can possibly be blameworthy.—



andham tamaḥ = blinding darkness, praviśanti =(they pass). Who? ye avidyām upāsate = yjey who practise karma. avidyā is what is other than knowledge i.e. karma, because karma is opposed to knowledge. upāsate =devoutly practise i.e. perform only karma such as agnihotra. tataḥ i.e. than such blinding darkness. bhūya-iva= greater, as it were.[3] te tamaḥ i.e. they pass into darkness. Who? ye-u = those who, on the other hand; vidyāyām =in meditating on deities; ratāḥ take delight i.e. who engage themselves in it to the exclusion of karma.



FOOTNOTES:-

[1]: Believing mind to be the Self is an indication of nescience.



[2]: See Brihadaranyaka Upanishad I, v, 1. (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc117941.html)



[3]: I read bahutaram iva.

andham—blinding; tamaḥ—darkness; praviśanti—enter; ye—who; avidyām—wrong conception of Deity; any one other than Viṣṇu; upāsate—worship; tataḥ—than that; bhūyaḥ—greater; iva—undoubtedly; te—they; tamaḥ—darkness; ye—who; u—but; vidyāyām—knowledge immersed in spirit alone, and not correcting the false notions of others; ratāḥ—devoted, delight in.



They who follow after Avidyā (worship deities other than the Lord) enter into gloomy darkness; into, undoubtedly even greater darkness than that go they who are devoted to Vidyā only (and do not correct the wrong notions of others.)

There is no commentary available for Mantra 9.

One result is predicated of Vidya and another of Avidya. We have so heard from wise men who taught us both Vidya and Avidya.

‘Anyat’ means ‘something distinct.’ They say that by Vidya, some distinct result is produced according to the Srutis, “by knowledge is Devaloka attained” and “by knowledge they climb up to it.” They say that other results are produced by Avidya (Karma) according to the text “by Karma is the abode of the manes attained.” We have heard this stated to us by wise men, i.e., those preceptors who taught us both Knowledge and Karma. The purport is that this is their view as handed down from preceptor to disciple.

Distinct, they say, is (the fruit borne) by meditation and distinct again, they say, is (that borne) by karma. Thus have we heard from sages who taught us that.

Now follows a statement of the distinction between the respective fruits of meditation and karma, as an argument for their simultaneous practice. Otherwise, if of the two thus proximately stated, one only is known to bear fruit and not the other, the relation between them would be (according to rules of interpretation, not one of co-ordination but) only that of subordination[1]. —



anyat-eva= quite distinct. Vidyayā =(by meditation) i.e. the fruit borne by meditation is distinct. āhuḥ= they say; (the second pāda) means “karma yields a distinct fruit altogether”; as recorded in “The world of manes through karma; the world of gods through meditation”. iti =thus. śuśruma =we have heard, dhīrānām i.e. (the saying) of the wise, ye—i.e., which teachers. naḥ= to us. tat i.e. karma and meditation. vicacakṣire =explained well. The purport is that this their teaching has been handed down by tradition,



FOOTNOTES:-

[1]: I read aṅgāṅgitaiva syāt.

anyat—different, one thing; devaloka—partial liberation; The means of liberation is different—is something else than mere vidyā; eva—even, truly, verily, indeed; āhuḥ—they say; The Upaniṣads declare. vidyayā—from vidyā, from knowledge devoid of practice; anyat—one thing, different, is the means of liberation, partial; āhuḥ—they say; avidyayā—from avidyā or practice without knowledge; iti—thus; śūśrumaḥ—we have heard; dhīrāṇām—from the wise, of the steadfast sages; ye—who; naḥ—us; tat—that; vicacakṣire—explained, taught.



One thing they say is verily obtained from vidyā, another thing they say from avidyā: thus have we heard from the wise who explained that to us.

There is no commentary available for Mantra 10.

He who simultaneously knows both Vidya and Avidya gets over Death by Avidya and attains immortality by Vidya.

This being so, the following results. Vidya is the knowledge of the deities; Avidya is Karma. Who knows that both these should simultaneously be followed by the same person, he alone, so combining the two, gradually secures the one desirable end. ‘By Vidya’ means ‘by Karma such as Agnihotra, etc.’ ‘Death’ means ‘action and knowledge induced by Prakriti (nature).’ ‘Tirtva’ means ‘having got over.’ ‘By Avidya’ means ‘by the knowledge of the deities.’ ‘Asnute’ means ‘attains.’ To become one with the deities is what is called immortality (Amritam.)

Whoever understands meditation and karma as going together, (he) overcoming death through karma, attains immortality through meditation.

Since it is so, —



The first pāda means ‘meditating on deities and karma’. yah= (whoever.) ta = etat =this. ubhayam =(two) saha—i.e. to be practised by the same person. veda =(understands). (The second half of the verse) states that only a person, practising both together, will in due course, achieve the chief end[1] avidyayā= by karma like agnihotra. mṛtyum—by this word are here meant usual activity and knowledge. having overcome those two. vidyayā= by meditation on deities. amṛtam= (immortality); godhead. aśnute =attains. Becoming one with the deity (meditated upon) is termed ‘immortality’ here.



FOOTNOTES:-

[1]: I read Samucchayakāriṇa eva ekapuruṣārthasaṃbandhaḥ.

vidyām—vidyā, knowledge, wisdom; Theoretical knowlege of religious truths; The meditation on Brahman; The right knowledge of Viṣṇu; ca—and; avidyām—non-knowledge; Correcting and condemning false knowledge; The Karmas which are a necessary part of and lead to knowledge; ca—and; yaḥ—who; tat—that; veda—knows; The correlation of these two; the principal and subordinate nature of these two—the necessity of both; ubhayam—both; saha—at the same time, together; avidyayā—through not-knowledge (by Karmas ordained as auxiliaries of knowledge); mṛtyum—death, mental impurity as result of forgetting one’s true self; The past karmas, like virtuous and evil deeds; the Destiny; Evils like grief, ignorance, etc; tīrtvā—having overcome, crossed over; vidyayā—through knowledge; amṛtam—immortality; one-ness with Devas only; aśnute—enjoys, obtains, reaches.



Of these two, Vidyā and Avidyā, by a knowledge of Avidyā alone death is overcome; but knowing, both these together, by a knowledge of Vidyā also, he obtains liberation.

These mantras are thus explained in the Kūrma Purāṇa:—“Undoubtedly the worshippers of other deities than Viṣṇu go to blinding darkness, but undoubtedly to greater darkness they go who do not censure and condemn such persons (and fail to??????????? their mistakes). Therefore those, who know the Lord Narayana, in His true form as free from all evils and who also condemn the worshippers of false deities, are truly the good people.



Such persons by condemning the falsehood, whose nature is grief and ignorance, cross over grief and ignorance, and by knowing the truth, whose nature is joy and knowledge, attain such joy and knowledge.

They fall into blind darkness who worship the unborn Prakriti. They fall into greater darkness who are bent upon the Karya Brahman Hiranyagarbha. (12).

Now, in view to the combining of the worship of the Avyakrita (Prakriti) and manifested Brahman, each in itself is denounced. “Asambhutih” is what is not Sambhutih or that which is born of another; hence unborn Prakriti. This again is ignorance, cause of all, known as Avyakrita. Those who worship this Prakriti, known as Avyakrita, ignorance which is the cause of all. the seed of all desire and Karma, and mere blindness in its nature, fall into corresponding or answering darkness which is blindness in its nature; and they who worship the Karya Brahman named Hiranyagarbha fall into even greater darkness.

Into blinding darkness pass they who are devoted to the unmanifest, and into still greater darkness, as it were, they who delight in the manifest.

Now with a view to inculcate their simultaneous practice, follows the condemnation of the separate meditation on the manifest and on the unmanifest—



Saṃbhavanam means birth. That which is born and is an effect is sambhūti. asambhūti is what is other than sambhūti i.e., prakṛti, the undifferentiated cause whose essence is nescience and which is the source of all activity and desire. They who devote themselves to such Cause enter (as may be expected) darkness which is correspondingly blind in its nature. Sambhūtyām i.e., in the phenomenal Brahman known as Hiraṇyagarbha. They who delight only in Him enter darkness which is, as it were, more blinding still.

andhantamaḥ—blinding darkness; prāviśanti—they enter; ye—who; asambhūtīm—destruction, called vināśā in verse 14; Hence the cause in which things merge at destruction; destroyer—Noncreator; upāsate—worship; tataḥ—than that; bhūyaḥ—greater; iva—surely; te—they; tamaḥ—darkness; ye—who; u—but; sambhūtyām—merely as Creator and not Destroyer; rataḥ—devoted.



They who worship That as Destroyer only enter into gloomy darkness, into surely even greater darkness than that go they who are devoted to Him as Creator alone.

There is no commentary available for Mantra 12.

They say one thing results from the worship of Hiranyagarbha and another from the worship of Prakriti. We have thus heard it stated by wise preceptors who taught us that.

Now, the distinction in the fruits of the two individual worships is jointed out, in view to their combination. They have said that from the worship of Sambhutih or Karya Brahman or Hiranyagarbha results the attainment of Anima and other Siddhis. Similarly, they have said that according to Paurairikas the absorption into Prakriti results from the worship of the unborn Prakriti. We have heard it thus stated by wise preceptors who taught us the fruits of the worship of Prakriti and Hiranyagarbha individually.

Distinct, they say, is (what results) from the manifest and distinct again, they say, is (what results) from the unmanifest. Thus have we heard from the sages who taught us that.

Now follows as an argument for their simultaneous practice, a statement of the distinction between the respective fruits of the two kinds of meditation—



anyat-eva= altogether distinct. āhuḥ =(they say). Sambhavāt =from that which has birth i.e., from meditating on the phenomenal Brahman, supernatural power such as assuming, at will, extreme subtlety is said to result. Similarly, they say that there is a (distinctive) fruit from meditating on the unmanifest,—that, alluded to in pāda 1 of verse 12 and which is known as “absorption into primal cause”[1] to those versed in the Purāṇas. iti =thus. śuśruma-dhīrāṇām—i.e., we have heard the saying of the wise. The last pāda means “who explained to us the results of meditating on the manifest and the unmanifest”



FOOTNOTES:-

[1]: This state may be sought on account of the absence of the ordinary excitements of life in it as in sleep.

anyate—one thing, different; eva—even, indeed; āhuḥ—they say; sambhavāt—creator; anyat—different, one thing; āhuḥ—they say; asambhavāt—destroyer; iti—thus; śuśruma—we have heard; dhirāṇām—of the wise, of steadfast sages; ye—who; naḥ—to us; tat—that; vicacakṣire—explained, taught.



One thing they say is verily obtained from devotion to That as Creator: another thing they say from Him as Destroyer. Thus have we heard from the wise who explained it to us.

There is no commentary available for Mantra 13.

Those who worship the unmanifested Prakriti and Hiranyagarbha (Destruction) together, get over death through the worship of Hiranyagarbha and attain immortality through the worship of Prakriti.

As this is so, this mantra declares the desirability of combining the worship of Prakriti and Hiranyayarbha as they combine to secure the one aim of the individual. ‘Vinasa’ means that active object whose characteristic attribute is Destruction, the abstract being here used for the concrete. ‘By vinasa’ means ‘by the worship of Hiranyagarbha.’ ‘Gets over death’ means ‘gets over the defects of vice, desires and anaisvaryam (limited powers) and attains anima and other siddhis which are the result of the worship of Hiranyagarbha. Having thus overcome anaisvaryam, death, etc., he, by the worship of Prakriti, attains immortality, i.e., absorbtion into Prakriti. It should be noted that the word Sambhutih is an apheresis for Asambhutih agreeably to the results predicated, i.e., absorption into Prakriti.

Whoever understands the manifest and the unmanifest as going together, (he), by overcoming death through the manifest, attains immortality through the unmanifest

Since this is so, it is but right that meditation on both the effect and the cause should be practised together; a further reason being the achievement (through such meditation) of the chief end.[1]—



The first half of the verse means “He who understands that meditation on the manifest and the unmanifest should be practised together”, here means an “effect”—that whose character is transitoriness; the abstract being put for the concrete, vināśena means “by meditating on such (Brahman)”. mṛtyum =death all kinds of deficiency arising from limited power, demerit, covetousness and soon. tīrtvā =(having overcome); for great supernatural power is attained by the contemplation of Hiraṇyagarbba. Having thus overcome death or limitation of power &c., asambhūtya i.e., by meditating on the unmanifest. amṛtam i.e. absorption into the First Cause. aśnute (attains). It should be noted that sambhūti in the first pāda is mentioned without the (initial) a (and is to be taken as equivalent to asambhūti) agreeably to the statement that the result is absorption into the First Cause.



FOOTNOTES:-

[1]: I read yukta eva and ekapuruṣārthatvāccha.

sambhutim—knowing him as Creator; ca—and; vināśam—knowing him as destroyer also; ca—and; yaḥ—who; tat—that; veda—knows their inter-dependence; ubhayam—both; saha—together; vināśena—by destruction; mṛtyum—death; tīrtvā—having overcome; sambhūtyā—by the knowledge of production or effect. Amṛtam, immortality; agnute—enjoys, obtains.



Of these two, the Creator and the Destroyer, by (a knowledge of) the Destroyer alone, death is overcome; but knowing both, these together by (a knowledge of) the Creator also, he obtains liberation.

Quotation from the Kūrma Purāṇa.—(continued)



Similarly those also, who do not acknowledge that Hari is the Creator, go to deep darkness and so also those who do not acknowledge Him as the Destroyer. Therefore those, who thus know the Lord, as possessing all qualities, as the Creator of all as the Lord of Lords, as the destroyer of all, become freed from the bonds of embodied existence through their knowledge that the Lord is the destroyer; and by the knowledge that He is the creator of all joy and knowledge, etc., get verily joy and knowledge. Let one know that the Lord, the sifter of men, is eternally free from all faults and full of all auspicious qualities; and let him not divide or take away any of His attributes, nor let him imagine that the released souls can ever become equal to Hari, or that they become identical with Viṣṇu. Nor similarly should he imagine that a freed soul can become equal to Brahmā and the rest. Let one know that oven among the Released, souls from men up to Brahmā, there is difference between them and that Viṣṇu is the highest of all beings (whether they be bound or released souls)—for only by such complete knowledge is there mukti.” (Kūrma Purāṇa).



[Having described the nature of God, and the realisation of Him in His two aspects, Matter and Spirit, Creator and Destroyer, as the means of perfect liberation, the Śruti next teaches that such direct God-vision takes place only through the grace of God and not by mere self-exertion.]

The entrance of the True is covered as if by a golden vessel. Remove, O sun, the covering that I who have been worshipping “The True” may behold it.

The highest result that could be achieved. according to the Sastras, by wealth of men and the deities is absorption into Prakriti. Up to this is rotation in Samsara. Beyond this is the result of the pursuit of knowledge preceded by a renunciation of all desire, i.e., the seeing of the Atman in everything as indicated in verse 7. Thus the two-fold purport of the Vedas, one stimulating to activity and the other drawing to renunciation has been explained. The Brahmanas up to Pravargya Brahmana were utilized for the elucidation of the former purport of the Vedas which is indicated by mandatory and prohibitory injunctions. The Brihadaranyaka hereafter is to deal with the elucidation of the latter purport of the Vedas—renunciation. Now, by what road he, who has been performing Karma as enjoined from conception to the grave and along with it the worship of the lower Brahman in accordance with verse 11, attains immortality, will be explained. He who has been worshipping the manifested Brahman referred to in the passage “That is the True, the Aditya, the Purusha in this orb: and the Purusha in the left eye; both these are true” and also has been performing Karma as enjoined, entreats, when the hour of death is arrived, the way leading to the Atman—the True, by the text beginning with ‘Hiranmayena, etc.’ ‘Hiranmaya’ means seeming golden hence resplendent. ‘Patrena’ means as if by a lid forming a cover. ‘Satyasya,’ means ‘of the Brahman sitting in the orb of the Sun.’ ‘Apihitam’ means ‘covered.’ ‘Mukham’ means‘opening.’ ‘Apavrinu’ means ‘open.’ ‘Satyadharmaya,’ to me who have been worshipping Satya or the True or who have been practising Satya, i.e., ‘virtue as enjoined.’ ‘Drishtaye’ means ‘for realizing the Satya or the True which thou art.’

Truths face is covered with a golden lid; remove that, O Pūṣan, that I, Truth’s devotee, may see It.

The result derivable, according to śāstra, through worldly and divine ‘wealth’[1] extends up to absorption into the First Cause. Thus far is metempsychosis. Higher than that, is the realisation of the unity of Self spoken of in verse 9—the result of renouncing all desires and devoting oneself (exclusively) to true knowledge. Thus the twofold teaching of the Veda, as relating to worldly activity and to withdrawal from it, has been explained here. And the (Śatapatha) Brāhmaṇa up to (the chapters on) Pravargya (purificatory ceremonies described in Khanda xiv chapters 1—3 ) concerns itself with elucidating, in full, the Vedic teaching relating to the path of activity, consisting of injunctions and prohibitions. The succeeding portion, viz., the Brhadāraṇyaka, explains the path of withdrawal from the world. In verse 11 it has been stated[2] that he who desires to live performing karma (in its entirety) from conception to death, and along with it, practises meditation on the lower (phenomenal) Brahman will attain immortality. It is now pointed out by what course, one so qualified becomes immortal. (We read in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad V, v, 2) (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc122192.html#page-826) “That is what is Truth; it is the Sun, the Person in this disc, as also the Person in the right eye”. The worshipper of this two-fold Brahman—Truth—who has also been performing karma as prescribed, addresses thus, when the end is come, Brahman who is Truth, beseeching Him for entrance—



Hiranmayam =seeming golden, resplendent tena =by such. pātrena =lid, as it were, satyasya i.e., of the Brahman residing in the Solar disc, apihitam =covered. mukham= entrance. tat= (that); tvam =(you); he-pūṣan =O Sun, apāvṛṇu =remove. satyadharmāya i.e., to me who am through meditation on you who are Truth. Or this expression may mean “one that practises true piety” Dṛṣṭaye i.e., for reaching you whose essence is Truth.



FOOTNOTES:-

[1]: Worldly wealth or means comprising cattle, land, money &c., all required for performing karma. ‘Divine wealth’ is knowledge of deities.



[2]: taduktam iti, tam pratyuktam mantreṇa vidyāṃcāvidyāṃcetyādinā.-—Ānandagici. One Ms., reads tampratyetaduktam in place of taduktam.

hiraṇmayena—by the golden, brilliant; pātreṇa—disk; Who evaporates the water and saves the world. The solar orb is called the golden disk. satyasya—of the True, of the Indestructible Person, of Brahman, ie, Viṣṇu; apihitam—is covered, concealed, not known to all; Veiled. mukham—face, ie, the whole body; Part taken for the whole. tat—that; tvam—thou; pūṣan—O Full, O Nourisher; apāvriṇu—open, unveil, remove; satya-dharmāya—he who holds (dhārayat), in his heart of hearts, the True, i.e., the devotee of the True; The lover of the Lord Viṣṇu. The upholder of the True. dṛṣṭaye—to see, or I may see, or find.



The entrance to the True is covered by a shining disk, that (disk) do thou, O Pūṣan, remove, for me who is devoted to the True, that I may see Thee.

The phrase ‘By the golden disk’ means by ‘the solar orb.’ The phrase ‘Of the true’ denotes ‘of Viṣṇu.’ By this solar photosphere is constantly hidden the body of the Lord. Pūṣan, the Full Lord Viṣṇu, reveals that form Himself to His devotees, called here Satya-dharmas—the Lover of the True.



Note.—The word hiraṇmaya means “like a golden,” i.e., full of light, effulgent. The word pātra means that which drinks (pā) the water and saves (tra) the world. Therefore the whole phrase hiranmayeṇa pātreṇa means “by the solar disk” which is refulgent as gold, and which saves the world by evaporating waters and raining them back. The word satyasya means of him who is full of “sat” or good qualities. He is inside the solar orb and His body is covered by the solar disk. O Pūṣan, remove the veil from Thy face that I may see Thee. I who am a Satya-dharma—who constantly meditate on Thee the Satya.

O Sun, sole traveller of the Heavens, controller of all, Surya, son of Prajapati remove thy rays and gather up thy burning light. I behold thy glorious form; 1 am he, the Purusha within thee.

‘Pushan,’ vocative case meaning ‘O Sun.’ The Sun is called Pushan because he feeds the world. ‘Ekarshi’ means ‘one who travels alone.’ The Sun is called Vania, because he controls all. He is called Surya because he imbibes Prana, rays and liquids. ‘Prajapatya’ means ‘son of Prajapati.’ ‘Vyuha’ means ‘remove to a distance thy rays.’ ‘Samuha,’ means ‘gather up, i.e., contract.’ ‘Tejah’ means. ‘burning light.’ I wish to behold by thy grace thy most glorious form. Moreover I do not entreat thee like a servant. I am he the Parasha within the solar orb. composed of Vyakritis as limbs or parts. ‘Purusha' because he has the figure of a man or because he pervades the whole in the form of Prana and intelligence or because he occupies the city (of the Soul) i.e.,

O Pūṣan, sole traveller, Yama, Sun, child of Prajāpati, recall thy rays; withdraw thy light that I may behold thee of loveliest form. Whosoever that Person is, that also am I.

Pūṣan=the sun, so called because he protects the world. Ekarṣe, because he traverses (the sky) alone. Yama, Death, because he controls all. Sūrya, because he sucks up rays, life and water. Prājāpatya, because he is the son of Prajāpati, the Creator. vyūha =remove, raśmīn i.e. your rays. samūha= unite i.e. withdraw. your light, yat-te =what is yours. rūpam =form, kalyāṇatamam = loveliest, tat-te =that of yours paśyāmi i.e. I may see by your grace. Further I am not entreating you as a servant, because whoever is the Person in the Solar disc, composed of vyāhṛtis,[1] the same am I. He is known as purusha (person) because He is of the form of a person, or because this world is full of Him in His modes of activity and thought or, again, because He lies in the citadel of the body.



FOOTNOTES:-

[1]: Vyāhṛti is literally ‘utterance’ and is the term used to denote the three sacred syllables bhūḥ, bhuvaḥ, suvaḥ. See Brihadaranyaka Upanishad V, v, 3. (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc122192.html#page-828)

pūṣan—O Pūṣan! O Nourisher! O Full! Ekarṣe, Eka-ṛṣe who is principally knowledge or wisdom; Eka=highest, supreme, ṛṣi=knowledge, Supreme knower, Omniscient; Yama. O Yama or Punisher or Judge of all. sūrya—O the Goal of the Sūris or wise, ie, thy Devotees, especially of Hiraṇyagarbha; prājāpatya—O Goal of Prajāpati Hiraṇyagarbha, because thou hast taught him the Vedas, and he merges in Thee; vyūha—spread, expand; raśmīn—the knowledge of self or soul; The knowledge of the true form of God. samūha—gather, in-draw, collect; tejaḥ—the knowledge of the non-self or of external objects; yat—what; te—thy; rūpam—form; kalyāṇatamam—most auspicious, fairest, loveliest; tat—that; te—(through) thy (grace; ) paśyāmi—I see, I may see, I wish to see.

yaḥ—who; asau—in life; it is locative singular of “life”; That person in the solar orb is in life, The word sthitaḥ must be supplied; asau—yonder that person in my heart; puruṣaḥ—person, all-full; The sleeper or dweller-in-the city. saḥ—he; aham—“I”; not-inferior: Supreme; It is derived from the root “hā” to abandon—with the negative affix “a, a + hā = aham”—“that which is not abandoned, hence Supreme”; asmi—“I am”: it is an Indeclinable, meaning “essence”, “Being”, he who is in my life breath, that puruṣa is the great “I am,” is the supreme Being, may I see him; “as”—“to be” + “mā”—“to measure”.



O All-fuil! O Sole-wise! O All-Judge! O Goal of the Wise! O the Lord of Prajapati [Prajāpati?]! expand my knowledge of the self, and increase my knowledge of the non-self, so that through Thy grace, I may see that form of Thine which is the most auspicious.

That yonder person who dwells in Asu (Life) is known by the name of Aham “I” (i.e., the Supreme) and Asmi “I am” (i.e., the only standard of existence.)

The word Ekarṣe means “O thou who art principally (eka), all knowledge and wisdom (ṛṣi).” The word ekarṣi is thus the name of Viṣṇu. Hari is called Yama because he controls and punishes all—He is the Great Judge. He is called Sūrya because he is the Goal of the wise (sūris). He is called Prājāpatya, because he is specially the Goal of Hiraṇyagarbha Prajāpati.



Note.—The raśmin and tejas have no reference to the rays of the sun and his heat and light rays. For no amount of enfeebling of the light and heat rays of the sun will give one the divine vision. Therefore raśmin is translated as ‘knowledge of the self’—expansion of raśmin means the expansion of consciousness. While the expansion of tejas means controlling the non-self—getting more and more power over the forces of nature. In short it is a prayer for the expansion of one’s consciousness and the growth and purification of one’s vehicles. When the raśmin and the tejas, the consciousness and the



He is called Aham, because he is not discardable (aheya). In other words “Aham” means “the Supreme.” He is called “Asmi,” because he dwells in all beings and thus He is the measure (mā) of their existence (as)—(their existence or be-ness depends upon His being in them—He is the standard of their existence). But Hari, the Supreme Lord, however, is apart from all His devotees (jīvas), though ensouling all.



Note.—Though the words aham and asmi are used in the Mantra, and ordinarily they would mean “I am He,”—lest one should fall into this error of identifying himself with the Lord, the author says “svayaṃ tu sarvajīvebhyo vyatiriktaḥ paro hari”—“Hari, the Supreme, is quite separate from all jīvas, however devoted they may be to him. In ectasy [ecstasy?] one may exclaim ‘I am He’—but as a truth, the jīva can never become He.”



Of the two in the above verse, one is a pronoun nominative singular of adas, and means ‘that’, the other is the locative singular of the noun “asu” meaning ‘life,’ i.e., in the life.



Note.—The meaning of the verse is that the well-known Person who resides in the Prāṇa, also dwells in His devotees as aham and asmi, i.e., He is the very “I” and the very “I am” of the devotees. He is in Pūṣan, etc., and is then called by the name of Pūṣan, Yama, Ekarṣi, etc. He though in all these is one alone, and does not become differentiated, owing to the differences of beings in whom He resides. The Brahman is one in all.

(Let my) Prana melt into the all-pervading Air, the eternal Sutratman; and let this body he burnt by fire to ashes; Om. O mind, remember, remember my deeds; O mind, remember, remember my deeds.

Now, as I am dying, let my Prana leave its confinement within this body and join the all-pervading godly form of Air, i.e., the Sutratman. The word ‘reach’ should be supplied to complete the sentence. The idea ‘Let my Linga Sarira or subtle body purified by knowledge and Karma ascend’ must be supplied in virtue of the fact of the speaker entreating a passage. Let this body given as an oblation to the fire be reduced to ashes. Om, according to the forms of worship being a pratika (substitute) of the nature of the True and called Agni is mentioned as the same as Brahman. ‘Krato,’ vocative case, meaning ‘O mind whose characteristic is volition,’ ‘Remember’ i.e., time has come for me to remember what I should. Remember all that I have till now thought of ‘O Agni, remember what I have done’ i.e., remember all Karma which I have done from childhood. The repetition of the same words ‘Krito Sinara’ &c., expresses solicitude.

(May) this life (merge in) the immortal breath! And (may) this body end in ashes! Om! mind, remember, remember thy deeds; mind, remember, remember thy deeds!

Now that I am dying, may my life (Vāyu) abandoning the bodily adjunct assume the godly, in the immortal breath of the universal Self, the ‘connecting thread’ of all. pratipadyatām (“may reach”) is to be understood. The meaning, agreeably to the prayer for entrance, is “May this subtle body purified by meditation and karma advance”. atha =(and). idam =(this), śarīram =(body), hutam =(burnt) in fire. bhasmāntam i.e., may it end in ashes. Om—thus is addressed Brahman—as identical with what is known as Agni the essence of Truth—following the mode of meditating on Him-through this symbol, krato i.e., O mind, so called because it desires, smara i.e., remember what has to be remembered, for the time for it is now come. Therefore remember what has till now been meditated upon. Remember also whatever karma you have done till now[1]—since boyhood. The repetition of the third pāda indicates-earnestness.



FOOTNOTES:-

[1]: I read agre in place of agne.

vāyuḥ—the Prāṇa; anilam—sūtrātman; Brahma-abiding: “a” = Brahm, “nilaṃ” = abiding; amṛtam—immortal; atha—now then; idam—this (visible dense body); bhasmāntam—End-in-ashes, thrown into fire; śarīram—body. om—the symbol of Hari: from ava (‘to Protect’, ‘to pervade’, ‘obtain’, ‘to shine’; O all-pervading!; krato—O Sacrifice! O Creator! O Hari! O all-pervading; O radiant; smara—remember, ie, have mercy on me; kṛtam—duty; smara—remember; Krato! O Hari! O Creator!. smara—remember me, forgive, pardon or be compassionate; kṛtam—my deeds, evil deeds and good deeds; smara—remember.



Though this body be reduced to ashes, the Indwelling Spirit, the Lord does not die, He is. immortal: nor does the jīva die. For the Vāyu has become immortal, because Brahman dwells in him (why should??? in which??? the??? dwells). O All-pervading Creator! remember me. Have mercy on me. O Soul remember thy duty.

Because the Supreme Lord is in Vāyu the Vāyu, has become an Immortal, (how great must He be whose very presence makes others immortal)—how great must be the Immortality of the Supreme then? The word anila [anilaḥ] is compounded of two words meaning Brahman, and nilayanam, abode. The Vāyu is called Anila [anilam] because it is the abode of Brahman (Brahama-dhāma): or because it is supported by Brahman.



Note.—It has been said before that the Supreme Lord dwelling in the jīva is eternal existence and of most auspicious form. A doubt arises: when the man dies and his body is reduced to ashes what becomes of the Lord? Does He also die like the jīva? This verse removes that doubt. Though this body is reduced to ashes, yet the Supreme Lord within it is not tainted with the faults of dying, etc., Why? Anila [anilaḥ], etc., When Vāyu, by merely taking refuge in Brahman, has become an Immortal, how can that Brahman, the giver of Immortality to others, be Himself subject to death? But how is Vāyu immortal? This is answered by Śrī Madhva by a quotation.



Vāyu is called Immortal, because His knowledge does not get obscured even in the Pralaya. (In the case of other jīvas there is an obscuration of consciousness in the Pralaya.)



Note.—The knowledge here refers to the functional knowledge obtained through the vṛttis or modifications of the vehicles. Such functional knowledge or Vṛttī-Jñana persists in the case of Vāyu alone in Pralaya. In the case of other jīvas, they cease to function then. The functional knowledge of Bhāratī also remains unaffected by Pralaya. In the Pralaya, Vāyu and Bhārati also go to sleep, but they are not completely unconscious, they dream. Their functional knowledge in the Pralaya is something like our dreams: i.e., their Manas remains active: though their external functioning ceases, while in the case of other jīvas, there is total unconsciousness in Pralaya, something like deep sleep.



For thus says Rāma Saṃhitā:—“The Lord Himself is the Chief Immortal, (others are immortal in a secondary sense only). The Supreme Self is alone the Eternal, with his Nada (or voice ever vibrating through the eternities of the Pralaya).



Note.—The word Immortal is primarily applied to the Lord alone, for two reasons, that His body never falls off: and His knowledge never gets obscured. Even the highest jīvas, like Vāyu, lose their bodies at the Pralaya; and there takes place some diminution in their knowledge. They cannot carry their consciousness intact through the Great Pralayic sleep. The word “sanātana” is another form of “sanādana” ‘Along with Nāda—whose Nāda constantly vibrates.’



Some take this verse as a prayer of the dying man; asking that his vital breath should leave his body and that the latter should be reduced to ashes; and that the vital breath should join the eternal. This explanation is open to the objection that a thing which is inevitable is never prayed for; and the reduction of the body to ashes is inevitable, and so there is no need for praying that it should be reduced to ashes. The real sense of the verse, which is not a prayer, but a statement of fact, is that when Vāyu has become immortal by the mere indwelling of the Lord in him; a fortiori the Lord must be immortal; and His immortality is beyond all questions.



But, says an objector, the verse has two words only “Vāyu” and “amṛta”. It does not say “in the Vāyu there is the Lord, and so the Vāyu is immortal.” How do you read all this meaning into it? To this it is answered, that the word anila [anilam] suggests the above explanation. This word literally means “that whose support or refuge is Brahman called [‘a’?]”. The Vāyu is called anila because he has the Lord for his Refuge.



In the Brahman-tarka it is declared The phrase “O Viṣṇu! remember Thy devotees,” means have mercy on Thy devotees: for memory in reference to the Omniscient Lord has no meaning. He always remembers or rather knows everything: for past, present and future is one to Him: His knowledge is Eternal. Therefore “remember” is not to be taken here in its literal sense but in the sense, of “Have compassion upon thy devotee.”



Note.—When a thing passes out of perception then arises the memory of it from the impressions left by the object on the mind. In the case of the Lord, no object can ever vanish out of His perception—in fact all objects owe their be-ness to His perception of it. So the Lord has no Memory, but Eternal perception and cognition: for the essential nature of the Lord is eternal knowledge. This portion of the verse is a prayer to the Lord, symbolised as Om, to have compassion on His worshipper. Not only must one pray for mercy, but should never forget his own duty. Both are necessary—performing diligently one’s duty and praying for the mercy of the Lord.

O Agni, lead us by the good path to the enjoyment of the fruits of our deeds, knowing O God, all our deeds. Remove the sin of deceit from within us. We offer thee many prostrations by word of mouth. (18).

He requests passage again by another mantra. Naya means ‘lead.’ ‘Supatha’ means ‘by good path.’ The attribute in Supatha is used for the purpose of avoiding the southern route. The suppliant seems to say “I have been afflicted by going to and for, by the southern route by which one goes only to return. I therefore entreat you to take me by the good road through which there is no going and returning.” ‘Raye’ means ‘to wealth; i.e.. to the enjoyment of the fruits of our Karma.’ ‘Asman means ‘us,’ possessed of the fruits of the virtue aforesaid. ‘Visvani’ means ‘all.’ O God, ‘Vayunani’ means ‘deeds or knowledge.’ ‘Vidvan’ means ‘Knowing.’ Besides do this: ‘Yuyodhi’ means ‘destroy.’ ‘Asmat’ means ‘from us.’ ‘Juhuranam’ means ‘consisting in deceit.’ ‘Enah’ means ‘sin.’ ‘The meaning is:—Thus purified they could attain what they wish for. “But we are now unable to do you active service. We have to content ourselves by offering you many prostrations.”



Now a doubt is raised by some about the construction of the latter halves of mantras 11 and 14. We shall therefore enter into a brief discussion to solve the doubt. What the question is due to shall first he stated. It is, why not understand the term Vidya in those passages in its primary sense of ‘the knowledge of the Paramatmam,’ and so Amritatvam? They argue thus: granted that the knowledge of the Paramatman and the performance of Karma are mutually antagonistic and cannot therefore co-exist, this antagonism is not perceivable; for agreement and antagonism rest alike on the authority of the Sastras. Just as the performance of Karma and the acquisition of Knowledge are matters exclusively based on the Sastras, so also must be the question of their agreement or opposition. Thus we find that the prohibitory injunction ‘Do not kill any liv ing thing is overridden by another Sastraic injunction ‘Kill a sheep in a sacrifice.’ The same may apply to Karma and Knowledge. If from the text “They are opposed and travel different roads. Knowledge and Karma.” it is urged that they cannot co-exist, we say that from the text “He who follows both Knowledge and Karma, etc,” there is no antagonism between them. We answer that cannot he; for. they are opposed to each other in regard to their causes, nature and results. But if it he urged that from the impossibility of Knowledge and Karma being opposed and not opposed to each other and from the injunction to combine them there is no antagonism between them, that is unsound; for their co-existence is impossible. If it he argued that they may gradually grow to coexist. it is untenable; for when Knowledge arises. Karma cannot exist in the individual to whom Knowledge adheres. It is well known that when one knows that fire is hot and bright, he cannot at the same time think that fire is neither hot nor bright; or even entertain a doubt as to whether fire is bright or hot; for, according to the text “When to the knower all living things become one with his own Atman, where is grief or perplexity to one who sees this unity,” grief or perplexity is out of the question. We have already said that where ignorance ceases, its result, Karma, also ceases. The immortality in ‘attains immortality’ (in the passage under contemplation) means relative immortality and not absolute immortality. If the word Vidya in those texts meant the knowledge of the Paramatman, then the entreaty to the Sun for allowing a passage would become inappropriate. We therefore conclude w ith observing that our interpretation, i.e., that the combination desired is of Karma with the worship of the deities and not with the Knowledge of the Paramatman, is the purport of the mantras as commented upon by us.







Here ends the Commentary of Sankara Bhavatpada on the Vajasaneya Samhitopanishad or Isavasyopanishad.



Om! Peace! Peace!! Peace!!!

O God Agni, lead us on to prosperity by a good path, judging all our deeds. Take away ugly sin from us. We shall say many prayers unto thee.

By another verse also, entrance is prayed for—



Agne =(O Fire), naya =lead, supathā =by a good path. This qualifying word excludes the southern path. (The devotee means)—“I am tired of the southern path characterised by birth and death, and therefore do I repeatedly ask you to lead (me) by the good path free from birth and death”. rāye =for wealth i.e. (here) for enjoying the fruit of karma. asmān =us, that are qualified for (the enjoyment of) the fruits of the prescribed practices. viśvāni =all. deva =O God, vayunāni=karma or meditation. vidvān =knowing. Further, yuyodhi i.e., separate or destroy. asmat=asmattaḥ =from us. juhurāṇam =crooked or deceitful. enaḥ= sin; so that becoming pure thereby we may obtain our wish. We are not, however, able now to serve you actively (as of old); we can but do obeisance again and again (bhūyiṣṭhām) to you.



Some entertain a doubt (as regards the antithesis between karma and true knowledge) hearing the statements (contained in verses 11 and 14—“Overcoming death through avidyā, he attains immortality through vidyā” and “Overcoming death through the manifest, he attains immortality through the unmanifest”. We shall therefore briefly consider (the matter now) in order to clear (this doubt.) Now then, what is the reason for the doubt? The answer is—Why should not true knowledge itself be understood by vidyā in the above passage? and also (by amṛtatva true) immortality? Well, are not this knowledge of the supreme Self and karma mutually exclusive on account of the antithesis between them? True; but this antagonism is not known (through śāstra) for antagonism or the reverse should be based on śāstraic authority only. Just as the performance of karma and the practice of Vidyā are known through śāstra alone, so also should their opposition or agreement be. As the śāstraic prohibition “No creature should be hurt” is annulled by śātra itself in “In a sacrifice animals may be killed” so also should it be in the case of vidyā and avidyā as well as in the case of knowledge and karma.[1]



No; because the Veda says—“Distant are these.—opposed and leading in diverse ways—karma and knowledge” (Katha Upanishad ii, 4)- If it be said that owing to the statement in verse 11, there is (likewise) no antagonism between them, we reply ‘No’; because[2] there can possibly be no option as regards opposition or agreement between true knowledge and avidyā[3]. If it be rejoined that there is no antithesis at all, on the strength of the injunction (here in verse 11) regarding their combined practice, we repeat ‘No’; for the two cannot conceivably co-exist.



If it be urged that vidyā and avidyā are to be pursued by the same (person) one after the other[4], we reply ‘No’; for when true knowledge comes to a person, nescience is inconceivable in him. Thus (for instance) if once a man experiences heat and light in fire, there cannot arise in him the ignorance—that fire is cold or devoid of light. Nor can there be doubt or delusion (in a knower) for verse 7 denies all possibility of them. Nescience being inconceivable,—we have said—its result[5]—karma—is equally inconceivable. The immortality spoken of (here) is only relative. Further if vidyā in this passage referred to knowledge of the supreme Self, praying for an entrance would be inappropriate.[6] Thus we conclude by stating that the meaning of the verses in question is, as we have explained.



FOOTNOTES:-

[1]: I omit samucchayaḥ after vidyākarmaṇaśca.



[2]: I omit hetusvarūpaphalavirodhāt. I also put a full stop after vikalpāsambhavāt.



[3]: Option is conceivable in the case of karma. Thus one śākha of the Veda prescribes “udite-juhoti”; another, “anudite-juhoti.”. Here it may be understood that the Veda gives one, option to offer oblations either after sunrise or before. But the same rule cannot apply to vidyā and avidyā, on the strength of the two texts in question. In this case, only one of the statements can hold good and the other, instead of being taken literally, has to be interpreted in such a manner that it will not clash with the first. Reason has to decide which statement is to be understood literally and which not.



[4]: If it is meant that karma precedes knowledge, there is no difficulty in agreeing with the opponent, for it is recognised that karma prepares man for true knowledge. But if karma is to succeed knowledge, the statement of the opponent cannot be admitted.



[5]: The opponent may argue at this stage that the antithesis hithereto spoken of is between vidyā and avidyā and not between karma and vidyā. This argument is met by stating that dissociating avidyā from a knower is perforce dissociating karma also from him.



[6]: This is said in reference to the Vedic text. “na tasya prānā utkrāmanti” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad v, 6)(https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc122193.html), which declares that final release is attained by a knower, where he is, and not by his going elsewhere.

agne—O agni! lit, “Leader and Director (nī) of the universe”; O Hari!; naya—Lead; Direct; supathā—by a good path, by Deva-yāna, by a path from which there is no return; The path of Arcis, etc; rāye—to the wealth (of mukti); asmān—us; viśvāni—all (our knowledge leading upto release; ) deva—O God; vayunāni—thoughts, knowledge; efforts for salvation; vidvan—knowing; yuyodhi—remove, separate; asmat—from us; juhurāṇam—degrading, contracting, making small: causing rebirth into Saṃśarm [Saṃsāra?]; enaḥ—sin, evil deed, detrimental to Puruṣārtha; bhūyiṣṭhām—fullest, full of devotion and love; te—to thee; namaḥ—praise, salutations, all hail; uktim—word; vidhema—we shall offer, do; We ourselves are too weak to overcome evil: and so help us to conquer sin.



18.O Agni! lead us by that Path (from which there is no going back), the good Path, in order that we may get the treasure of Salvation. O God! thou knowest all our efforts for salvation. Remove from us the degrading sin. We offer Thee salutations over and over again.

There is no commentary available for Mantra 18.