carries out a king's command because he fearfully considers in his mind, ' A thunderbolt (i. e. the king's wrath, or threatened punishment) is hanging over my head ; it might fall if I did not carry out his command.' In the same manner this whole world inclusive of fire, air, sun, and so on, regularly carries on its manifold functions from fear of Brahman ; hence Brahman as inspiring fear is compared to a thunderbolt. Similarly, another scriptural passage, whose topic is Brahman, declares, 'From terror of it the wind blows, from terror the sun rises ; from terror of it Agni and Indra, yea, Death runs as the fifth.' — That Brahman is what is referred to in our passage, further follows from the declara- tion that the fruit of its cognition is immortality. For that immortality is the fruit of the knowledge of Brahman is known, for instance, from the mantra, ' A man who knows him only passes over death, there is no other path to go ' (vSVet. Up. VI, 15). — That immortality which the piirva- pakshin asserts to be sometimes represented as the fruit of the knowledge of the air is a merely relative one ; for there (i.e. in the chapter from which the passage is quoted) at first the highest Self is spoken of, by means of a new topic being started (Bri. Up. Ill, 4), and thereupon the inferior nature of the air and so on is referred to. (' Everything else is evil.5)— That in the passage under discussion the highest Self is meant appears finally from the general subject- matter ; for the question (asked by Na&ketas in I, 2, 14, * That which thou seest as neither this nor that, as neither effect nor cause, as neither past nor future tell me that ') refers to the highest Self.
40. The light (is Brahman), on account of that (Brahman) being seen (in the scriptural passage).
We read in Scripture, ' Thus does that serene being, arising from this body, appear in its own form as soon as it has approached the highest light' {Kh. Up. VIII, 13, 3). Here the doubt arises whether the word ' light ' denotes the (physical) light, which is the object of sight and dispels dark- ness, or the highest Brahman.
232 VEDANTA-stjTRAS.
The purvapakshin maintains that the word ' light ' denotes the well-known (physical) light, because that is the conven- tional sense of the world. For while it is to be admitted that in another passage, discussed under I, 1, 24, the word 'light' does, owing to the general topic of the chapter, divest itself of its ordinary meaning and denote Brahman, there is in our passage no similar reason for setting the ordinary meaning aside. Moreover, it is stated in the chapter treating of the nadis of the body, that a man going to final release reaches the sun (' When he departs from this body then he departs upwards by those very rays ; ' Kk. Up. VIII, 6, 5). Hence we conclude that the word 'light' denotes, in our passage, the ordinary light.
To this we make the following reply. — The word ' light ' can denote the highest Brahman only, on account of that being seen. We see that in the whole chapter Brahman is carried on as the topic of discussion. For the Self, which is free from sin, &c. is introduced as the general subject- matter in VIII, 7, 1 (' the Self which is free from sin ') ; it is thereupon set forth as that which is to be searched out and to be understood (VIII, 7, 1); it is carried on by means of the clauses, 'I shall explain that further to you' (VIII, 9, 3 ff.) ; after that freedom from body is said to belong to it, because it is one with light (' when he is free from the body then neither pleasure nor pain touches him,' VIII, 13, 1) — and freedom from body is not possible outside Brahman — and it is finally qualified as 'the highest light, the highest person ' (VIII, 13, 3). — Against the statement, made by the purvapakshin, that Scripture speaks of a man going to re- lease as reaching the sun, we remark that the release there referred to is not the ultimate one, since it is said to be con- nected with going and departing upwards. That the ulti- mate release has nothing to do with going and departing upwards we shall show later on.
41. The ether is (Brahman), as it is designated as something different, &c. (from name and form).
Scripture says, c He who is called ether (aklra) is the revealer of all forms and names. That within which these
I Adhyaya, 3 Pada, 42. 233
forms and names are contained is the Brahman, the Immor- tal, the Self ' {Kh. Up. VIII, 14, 1).
There arising a doubt whether that which here is called ether is the highest Brahman or the ordinary elemental ether, the purvapakshin declares that the latter alternative is to be embraced, firstly, because it is founded on the con- ventional meaning of the word 'ether ;' and, secondly, because the circumstance of revealing names and forms can very well be reconciled with the elemental ether, as that which affords room (for all things). Moreover, the passage contains no clear indicatory mark of Brahman, such as creative power, and the like.
To this we reply, that the word c ether ' can here denote the highest Brahman only, because it is designated as a different thing, &c. For the clause, £That within which these two are contained is Brahman,' designates the ether as something different from names and forms. But, excepting Brahman, there is nothing whatever different from name and form, since the entire world of effects is evolved exclusively by names and forms. Moreover, the complete revealing of names and forms cannot be accom- plished by anything else but Brahman, according to the text which declares Brahman's creative agency, ' Let me enter (into those beings) with this living Self (^iva atman), and evolve names and forms ' (Kk. Up. VI, 3, 2). But — it may be said — from this very passage it is apparent that the living Self also (i. e. the individual soul) possesses revealing power with regard to names and forms. — True, we reply, but what the passage really wishes to intimate, is the non- difference (of the individual soul from the highest Self). And the very statement concerning the revealing of names and forms implies the statement of signs indicatory of Brahman, viz. creative power and the like. — Moreover, the terms 'the Brahman, the Immortal, the Self (VIII, 14) indicate that Brahman is spoken of.
42. And (on account of the designation) (of the
highest Self) as different (from the individual soul)
in the states of deep sleep and departing.
2 34 VEDANTA-stiTRAS.
In the sixth prapd^aka of the BnTiaddra^yaka there is given, in reply to the question, ' Who is that Self ? ' a lengthy exposition of the nature of the Self, ' He who is within the heart, among the pri/zas, the person of light, consisting of knowledge' (Bri. Up. IV, 3, 7). Here the doubt arises, whether the passage merely aims at making an additional statement about the nature of the transmi- grating soul (known already from other sources), or at establishing the nature of the non-transmigrating Self.
The purvapakshin maintains that the passage is concerned with the nature of the transmigrating soul, on account of the introductory and concluding statements. For the intro- ductory statement, ' He among the pr&«as who consists of knowledge,' contains marks indicatory of the embodied soul, and so likewise the concluding passage, ' And that great unborn Self is he who consists of cognition,' &c. (IV, 4, 22). We must therefore adhere to the same subject- matter in the intermediate passages also, and look on them as setting forth the same embodied Self, represented in its different states, viz. the waking state, and so on.
In reply to this, we maintain that the passage aims only at giving information about the highest Lord, not at making additional statements about the embodied soul. — Why? — On account of the highest Lord being designated as different from the embodied soul, in the states of deep sleep and of departing from the body. His difference from the embodied soul in the state of deep sleep is declared in the following passage, ' This person embraced by the intelligent (pra^a) Self knows nothing that is without, nothing that is within.' Here the term, ' the person,' must mean the embodied soul ; for of him it is possible to deny that he knows, because he, as being the knower, may know what is within and without. The ' intelligent Self,' on the other hand, is the highest Lord, because he is never dissociated from intelligence, i. e. — in his case — all-embracing knowledge. — Similarly, the passage treating of departure, i. e. death (' this bodily Self mounted by the intelligent Self moves along groaning '), refers to the highest Lord as different from the individual Self. There also we have to understand by the ' embodied one ' the indi-
I Adhyaya, 3 Pada, 42. 235
vidual soul which is the Lord of the body, while the c intel- ligent one ' is again the Lord. We thus understand that ' on account of his being designated as something different, in the states of deep sleep and departure/ the highest Lord forms the subject of the passage. — With reference to the purvapakshin's assertion that the entire chapter refers to the embodied Self, because indicatory marks of the latter are found in its beginning, middle, and end, we remark that in the first place the introductory passage (' He among the pra«as who consists of cognition') does not aim at setting forth the character of the transmigrating Self, but rather, while merely referring to the nature of the transmigrating Self as something already known, aims at declaring its identity with the highest Brahman; for it is manifest that the immediately subsequent passage, 'as if thinking, as if moving1,' aims at discarding the attributes of the transmigrating Self. The concluding pas- sage again is analogous to the initial one ; for the words, ' And that great unborn Self is he who/ &c, mean : We have shown that that same cognitional Self, which is observed among the prd^as, is the great unborn Self, i. e. the highest Lord. — He, again, who imagines that the pas- sages intervening (between the two quoted) aim at setting forth the nature of the transmigrating Self by represent- ing it in the waking state, and so on, is like a man who, setting out towards the east, wants to set out at the same time towards the west. For in representing the states of waking, and so on, the passage does not aim at describing the soul as subject to different states or transmigration, but rather as free from all particular conditions and trans- migration. This is evident from the circumstance that on kanaka's question, which is repeated in every section, * Speak on for the sake of emancipation/ Ya^avalkya replies each time, ' By all that he is not affected, for that person is not attached to anything' (Br/. Up. IV, 3, 14-16). And later on he says (IV, 3, %%\ i He is not followed by
1 The stress lies here on the ' as if/ which intimate that the Self does not really think or move.
236 vedanta-sOtras.
good, not followed by evil, for he has then overcome all the sorrows of the heart.' We have, therefore, to conclude that the chapter exclusively aims at setting forth the nature of the non-transmigrating Self.
43. And on account of such words as Lord, &c.
That the chapter aims at setting forth the nature of the non-transmigrating Self, we have to conclude from that circumstance also that there occur in it terms such as Lord and so on, intimating the nature of the non-transmigrating Self, and others excluding the nature of the transmigrating Self. To the first class belongs, for instance, ' He is the lord of all, the king of all things, the protector of all things/ To the latter class belongs the passage, ' He does not be- come greater by good works, nor smaller by evil works.' — From all which we conclude that the chapter refers to the non-transmigrating highest Lord.
I Adhyaya, 4 Pada, I. 237
FOURTH PADA.
Reverence to the highest Self!
1. If it be said that some (mention) that which is
based on inference (i. e. the pradhana) ; we deny this,
because (the term alluded to) refers to what is con-
tained in the simile of the body (i.e. the body itself) ;
and (that the text) shows.