We read (Mu. Up. II, 2, 10, and Ka. Up. V, 15), < The sun does not shine there, nor the moon and the stars, nor these lightnings, much less this fire. After him when he shines everything shines ; by the light of him all this is lighted.' The question here arises whether he ' after whom when he shines everything shines, and by whose light all this is lighted,' is some luminous substance, or the highest Self (pra^T/a dtman).

A luminous substance, the purvapakshin maintains. — Why ?— Because the passage denies the shining only of such luminous bodies as the sun and the like. It is known (from every-day experience) that luminous bodies such as the moon and the stars do not shine at daytime when the sun, which is itself a luminous body, is shining. Hence we infer that that thing on account of which all this, includ- ing the moon, the stars, and the sun himself, does not

I Adhyaya, 3 Pada, 22. 1 93

shine is likewise a thing of light. The < shining after ' also is possible only if there is a luminous body already ; for we know from experience that * acting after5 (imita- tion) of any kind takes place only when there are more than one agent of similar nature ; one man, for instance, walks after another man who walks himself. Therefore we consider it settled that the passage refers to some luminous body.

To this we reply that the highest Self only can be meant. — Why? — On account of the acting after. The shining after mentioned in the passage, ' After him when he shines everything shines/ is possible only if the pragma Self, i. e. the highest Self, is understood. Of that pra^a Self another scriptural passage says, ' His form is light, his thoughts are true ' {Kh. Up. Ill, 14, 2). On the other hand, it is not by any means known that the sun, &c. shines after some other luminous body. Moreover, on account of the equality of nature of all luminous bodies such as the sun and the like, there is no need for them of any other luminous body after which they should shine ; for we see that a lamp, for instance, does not * shine after ' another lamp. Nor is there any such absolute rule (as the pur- vapakshin asserted) that acting after is observed only among things of similar nature. It is rather observed among things of dissimilar nature also ; for a red-hot iron ball acts after, i. e. burns after the burning fire, and the dust of the ground blows (is blown) after the blowing wind. — The clause ' on account of the acting after ' (which forms part of the Sutra) points to the shining after (mentioned in the scriptural doka under discussion) ; the clause ' and of him ' points to the fourth pada of the same ^loka. The meaning of this latter clause is that the cause assigned for the light of the sun, &c. (in the passage ' by the light of him everything is lighted ') intimates the prdgna. Self. For of that Self Scripture says, 'Him the gods worship as the light of lights, as immortal time ' (Bri. Up. IV, 4, 16). That, on the other hand, the light of the sun, the moon, &c. should shine by some other (physical) light is, in the first place, not known ; and, in the second place, absurd [34] o

1 94 vedanta-s6tras.

as one (physical) light is counteracted by another. — Or else the cause assigned for the shining does not apply only to the sun and the other bodies mentioned in thedoka; but the meaning (of the last pada) rather is — as we may conclude from the comprehensive statement ' all this ' — that the manifestation of this entire world consisting of names and forms, acts, agents and fruits (of action) has for its cause the existence of the light of Brahman ; just as the existence of the light of the sun is the cause of the manifestation of all form and colour. — Moreover, the text shows by means of the word ' there ' (' the sun does not shine there/ &c.) that the passage is to be connected with the general topic, and that topic is Brahman as appears from Mu. Up. II, 2, 5, ' In whom the heaven, the earth, and the sky are woven/ &c. The same appears from a passage subsequent (on the one just quoted and immediately pre- ceding the passage under discussion). 'In the highest golden sheath there is the Brahman without passion and without parts ; that is pure, that is the light of lights, that is it which they know who know the Self.' This passage giving rise to the question, ' How is it the light of lights ? ' there is occasion for the reply given in 'The sun does not shine there/ &c. — In refutation of the assertion that the shining of luminous bodies such as the sun and the moon can be denied only in case of there being another luminous body — as, for instance, the light of the moon and the stars is denied only when the sun is shining— we point out that it has been shown that he (the Self) only can be the luminous being referred to, nothing else. And it is quite possible to deny the shining of sun, moon, and so on with regard to Brahman ; for whatever is perceived is perceived by the light of Brahman only so that sun, moon, &c. can be said to shine in it; while Brahman as self- luminous is not perceived by means of any other light. Brahman manifests everything else, but is not manifested by anything else ; according to such scriptural passages as, 'By the Self alone as his light man sits/ &c. (Br/. Up. IV, 3, 6), and ' He is incomprehensible, for he cannot be comprehended ' (Br/. Up. IV, 2, 4).

I Adhyaya, 3 Pada, 24. 1 95

23. Moreover Smrzti also speaks of him (i. e. of the pr&g-na Self as being the universal light).

Moreover that aspect of the pr&gna. Self is spoken of
in Smrz'ti also, viz. in the Bhagavad Gita (XV, 6, 13),
' Neither the sun, nor the moon, nor the fire illumines that ;
having gone into which men do not return, that is ray-
highest seat.5 And ' The light which abiding in the sun
illumines the whole world, and that which is in the moon
and that which is in the fire, all that light know to be
mine.'

24. On account of the term, (viz. the term ' lord '
applied to it) the (person) measured (by a thumb) (is
the highest Lord).

We read (Ka. Up, II, 4, 12), 'The person of the size of a thumb stands in the middle of the Self,' &c, and (II, 4, 13), 'That person, of the size of a thumb, is like a light without smoke, lord of the past and of the future, he is the same to-day and to-morrow. This is that.' — The question here arises whether the person of the size of a thumb mentioned in the text is the cognitional (individual) Self or the highest Self.

The purvapakshin maintains that on account of the declaration of the person's size the cognitional Self is meant. For to the highest Self which is of infinite length and breadth Scripture would not ascribe the measure of a span ; of the cognitional Self, on the other hand, which is connected with limiting adjuncts, extension of the size of a span may, by means of some fictitious assumption, be predicated. Smrzti also confirms this, ' Then Yama drew forth, by force, from the body of Satyavat the person of the size of a thumb tied to Yama's noose and helpless' (Mahabh. Ill, 16763). For as Yama could not pull out by force the highest Self, the passage is clearly seen to refer to the transmigrating (individual soul) of the size of a thumb, and we thence infer that the same Self is meant in the Vedic passage under discussion.

To this we reply that the person a thumb long can only

1 96 vedanta-s6tra$.

be the highest Lord. — Why? — On account of the term ' lord of the past and of the future.' For none but the highest Lord is the absolute ruler of the past and the future. — Moreover, the clause ' this is that ' connects the passage with that which had been enquired about, and therefore forms the topic of discussion. And wThat had been enquired about is Brahman, ' That which thou seest as neither this nor that, as neither effect nor cause, as neither past nor future, tell me that ' (I, 2, 14). — ' On ac- count of the term,' i. e. on account of the direct statement, in the text, of a designation, viz. the term ' Lord/ we under- stand that the highest Lord is meant1. — But still the question remains how a certain extension can be attributed to the omnipresent highest Self. — The reply to this is given in the next Sutra.

25. But with reference to the heart (the highest
Self is said to be of the size of a span), as men are
entitled (to the study of the Veda).

The measure of a span is ascribed to the highest Lord, although omnipresent with reference to his abiding within the heart ; just as to ether (space) the measure of a cubit is ascribed with reference to the joint of a bamboo. For, on the one hand, the measure of a span cannot be ascribed directly to the highest Self which exceeds all measure, and, on the other hand, it has been shown that none but the highest Lord can be meant here, on account of the term ' Lord,' and so on. — But — an objection may be raised— as the size of the heart varies in the different classes of living beings it cannot be maintained that the declaration

1 This last sentence is directed against the possible objection that 'jabda/ which the Sutra brings forward as an argument in favour of the highest Lord being meant, has the sense of ' sentence ' (vakya), and is therefore of less force than linga, i. e. indicatory or inferential mark which is represented in our passage by the angush/Zzamatrata of the purusha, and favours the ^iva-interpreta- tion. *Sabda, the text remarks, here means jruti, i. e. direct enun- ciation, and jruti ranks, as a means of proof, higher than liriga.

I Adhyaya, 3 Pada, 25. I97

of the highest Self being of the size of a thumb can be explained with reference to the heart. — To this objection the second half of the Sutra replies : On account of men (only) being entitled. For the ^astra, although propounded without distinction (i. e. although not itself specifying what class of beings is to proceed according to its pre- cepts), does in reality entitle men * only (to act according to its precepts) ; for men only (of the three higher castes) are, firstly, capable (of complying with the precepts of the jastra) ; are, secondly, desirous (of the results of actions enjoined by the ^astra) ; are, thirdly, not excluded by pro- hibitions ; and are, fourthly, subject to the precepts about the upanayana ceremony and so on2. This point has been explained in the section treating of the definition of adhi- kara (Purva Mim. S. VI, 1). — Now the human body has ordinarily a fixed size, and hence the heart also has a fixed size, viz. the size of a thumb. Hence, as men (only) are entitled to study and practise the ^astra, the highest Self may, with reference to its dwelling in the human heart, be spoken of as being of the size of a thumb. — In reply to the purvapakshin's reasoning that on account of the statement of size and on account of Smrzti we can under- stand by him who is of the size of a thumb the trans- migrating soul only, we remark that — analogously to such passages as 'That is the Self,' 'That art thou' — our passage

1 I. e. men belonging to the three tipper castes,