Sacred Books of the East, Vol. 38 — The Vedanta-Sutras, Part II (Sankara/Thibaut, page scans)

1 Freedom from impurity can result only from the knowledge that the individual soul is in reality Brahman, The commentators explain ra^as by avidya\

2 Tadartham iti, ^ivasya brahmasiddhyartham iti yayat, ^aitany- aMayapanna dhiA sukhadina pari/zamata iti, tatra purusho*pi bhak- trz'tvam ivanubhavati na tattvata iti vaktum adhyaropayati, Ananda Giri.

124 vedanta-s6tras.

Scripture says, 'He spoke : The person that is seen in the eye that is the Self. This is the immortal, the fearless, this is Brahman. Even though they drop melted butter or water on it (the eye) it runs away on both sides,' &c. [Kh. Up.

IV, 15, i).

The doubt here arises whether this passage refers to the reflected Self which resides in the eye, or to the individual Self, or to the Self of some deity which presides over the sense of sight, or to the Lord.

With reference to this doubt the purvapakshin argues as follows : What is meant (by the person in the eye) is the reflected Self, i. e. the image of a person (reflected in the eye of another) ; for of that it is well known that it is seen, and the clause, ' The person that is seen in the eye,5 refers to it as something well known. Or else we may appropriately take the passage as referring to the individual Self. For the individual Self (cognitional Self, vi^anatman) which perceives the colours by means of the eye is, on that account, in proximity to the eye; and, moreover, the word ' Self (which occurs in the passage) favours this interpretation. Or else the passage is to be understood as referring to the soul animating the sun which assists the sense of sight ; compare the passage (Bri. Up. V, 5, 2), ' He (the person in the sun) rests with his rays in him (the person in the right eye).' More- over, qualities such as immortality and the like (which are ascribed to the subject of the scriptural passage) may some- how belong to individual deities. The Lord, on the other hand 1i cannot be meant, because a particular locality is spoken of.

Against this we remark that the highest Lord only can be meant here by the person within the eye. — Why? — ' On account of the agreement.' For the qualities men- tioned in the passage accord with the nature of the highest Lord. The quality of being the Self, in the first place, belongs to the highest Lord in its primary (non-figurative or non-derived) sense, as we know from such texts as ' That

1 Who, somebody might say, is to be understood here, because immortality and similar qualities belong to him not somehow only, but in their true sense.

I Adhyaya, 2 Pad a 1 4. I 25

is the Self/ ' That art thou.' Immortality and fearlessness again are often ascribed to him in Scripture. The location in the eye also is in consonance with the nature of the highest Lord. For just as the highest Lord whom Scrip- ture declares to be free from all evil is not stained by any imperfections, so the station of the eye also is declared to be free from all stain, as we see from the passage, ' Even though they drop melted butter or water on it it runs away on both sides.' The statement, moreover, that he possesses the qualities of sa/^yadvama, &c. can be reconciled with the highest Lord only (Kk. Up. IV. 15, 2, 'They call him Sa^yadvama, for all blessings (vama) go towards him (sawyanti). He is also vamani, for he leads (nayati) all blessings (vama). He is also Bhamani, for he shines (bhati) in all worlds '). Therefore, on account of agreement, the person within the eye is the highest Lord.

14. And on account of the statement of place, and so on.

But how does the confined locality of the eye agree with Brahman which is omnipresent like the ether? — To this question we reply that there would indeed be a want of agreement if that one locality only were assigned to the Lord. For other localities also, viz. the earth and so on, are attributed to him in the passage, ' He who dwells in the earth,' &c. (Br/. Up. Ill, 7, 3). And among those the eye also is mentioned, viz. in the clause, ' He who dwells in the eye,' &c. The phrase ' and so on,' which forms part of the Sutra, intimates that not only locality is assigned to Brahman, although not (really) appropriate to it, but that also such things as name and form, although not appro- priate to Brahman which is devoid of name and form, are yet seen to be attributed to it. That, in such passages as c His name is ut, he with the golden beard ' (Kh. Up. I, 6, 7, 6), Brahman although devoid of qualities is spoken of, for the purposes of devotion, as possessing qualities depending on name and form, we have already shown. And we have, moreover, shown that to attribute to Brahman

1 2 6 vedanta-sOtras.

a definite locality, in spite of his omnipresence, subserves the purposes of contemplation, and is therefore not con- trary to reason 1 ; no more than to contemplate Vishnu in the sacred ^alagram.

15. And on account of the passage referring to
that which is distinguished by pleasure (i.e. Brah-
man).

There is, moreover, really no room for dispute whether Brahman be meant in the passage under discussion or not, because the fact of Brahman being meant is established * by the reference to that which is distinguished by pleasure.' For the same Brahman which is spoken of as characterised by pleasure in the beginning of the chapter2, viz. in the clauses, ' Breath is Brahman, Ka is Brahman, Kha is Brah- man,' that same Brahman we must suppose to be referred to in the present passage also, it being proper to adhere to the subject-matter under discussion ; the clause, ' The teacher will tell you the way3,' merely announcing that the way will be proclaimed [by the teacher; not that a new subject will be started]. — How then, it may be asked, is it known that Brahman, as distinguished by pleasure, is spoken of in the beginning of the passage ? — We reply : On hearing the speech of the fires, viz. ' Breath is Brahman, Ka is Brahman, Kha is Brahman,' Upako^ala says, ' I under- stand that breath is Brahman, but I do not understand that Ka or Kha is Brahman.' Thereupon the fires reply, ' What is Ka is Kha, what is Kha is Ka.' Now the word Kha denotes in ordinary language the elemental ether. If therefore the word Ka which means pleasure were not applied to qualify the sense of ' Kha/ we should conclude

1 The /ikas say that the contents of this last sentence are hinted at by the word ' and ' in the Sutra.

2 I. e. at the beginning of the instruction which the sacred fires give to Upakorala, Kh, Up. IV, 10 ff.

3 Which words conclude the instruction given by the fires, and introduce the instruction given by the teacher, of which the passage ' the person that is seen in the eye/ &c. forms a part.

I Adhyaya, 2 Pada, 1 5. 12j

that the name Brahman is here symbolically 1 given to the mere elemental ether as it is (in other places) given to mere names and the like. Thus also with regard to the word Ka, which, in ordinary language, denotes the imperfect pleasure springing from the contact of the sense-organs with their objects. If the word Kha were not applied to qualify the sense of Ka we should conclude that ordinary pleasure is here called Brahman. But as the two words Ka and Kha (occur together and therefore) qualify each other, they intimate Brahman whose Self is pleasure, If2 in the passage referred to (viz. ' Breath is Brahman, Ka is Brahman, Kha is Brahman') the second Brahman (i. e. the word Brahman in the clause ' Ka is Brahman ') were not added, and if the sentence would run ' Ka, Kha is Brahman/ the word Ka would be employed as a mere qualifying word, and thus pleasure as being a mere quality would not be represented as a subject of meditation. To prevent this, both words — Ka as well as Kha — are joined with the word Brahman (' Ka (is) Brahman, Kha (is) Brah- man'). For the passage wishes to intimate that pleasure also, although a quality, should be meditated upon as some- thing in which qualities inhere. It thus appears that at the beginning of the chapter Brahman, as characterised by pleasure, is spoken of. After that the Garhapatya and the other sacred fires proclaim in turns their own glory, and finally conclude with the words, ' This is our knowledge, O friend, and the knowledge of the Self; ' wherein they point back to the Brahman spoken of before. The words, ' The teacher will tell you the way ' (which form the last clause of the concluding passage), merely promise an explanation of the way, and thus preclude the idea of another topic being started. The teacher thereupon saying, 'As water does not cling to a lotus leaf, so no evil deed clings to one who knows it ' (which words intervene between the concluding

1 A^rayantarapratyayasya^rayantare kshepaA pratika^, yatha brahma^abda^ paramatmavishayo namadishu kshipyate. Bha.

2 The following sentences give the reason why, although there is only one Brahman, the word Brahman is repeated.

128 vedanta-s6tras.

speech of the fires and the information given by the teacher about the person within the eye) declares that no evil attacks him who knows the person within the eye, and thereby shows the latter to be Brahman. It thus appears that the teacher's intention is to speak about that Brahman which had formed the topic of the instruction of the fires ; to represent it at first as located in the eye and possessing the qualities of Sa^eyadvama and the like, and to point out afterwards that he who thus knows passes on to light and so on. He therefore begins by saying, ' That person that is seen in the eye that is the Self.'

1 6. And on account of the statement of the way of him who has heard the Upanishads.

The person placed in the eye is the highest lord for the following reason also. From sruti as well as smrzti we are acquainted with the way of him who has heard the Upanishads or the secret knowledge, i. e. who knows Brahman. That way, called the path of the gods, is described (Pra. Up. I, 10), ' Those who have sought the Self by penance, abstinence, faith, and knowledge gain by the northern path the sun. This is the home of the spirits, the immortal, free from fear, the highest. From thence they do not return;' and also (Bha. Gita VIII, 2,4), ' Fire, light, the bright fortnight, the six months of the northern progress of the sun, on that way those who know Brahman go, when they have died, to Brahman.' Now that very same way is seen to be stated, in our text, for him who knows the person within the eye. For we read (Kk. Up. IV, 15, 5), 'Now whether people perform obsequies for him or no he goes to light;5 and later on, 'From the sun (he goes) to the moon, from the moon to lightning. There is a person not human, he leads them to Brahman. This is the path of the gods, the path that leads to Brah- man. Those who proceed on that path do not return to the life of man.' From this description of the way which is known to be the way of him who knows Brahman we ascertain that the person within the eye is Brahman.

I Adhyaya, 2 Pada, 1 7. 1 29

17. (The person within the eye is the highest),
not any other Self ; on account of the non-perma-
nency (of the other Selfs) and on account of the im-
possibility (of the qualities of the person in the eye
being ascribed to the other Selfs).