[ p. 121 ]
THIRD ADHYÂYA.
Adoration to the Highest Self (Paramâtman)!
1. Ganaka Vaideha (the king of the Videhas) sacrificed with a sacrifice at which many presents were offered to the priests of (the Asvamedha). Brâhmanas of the Kurus and the Pâ_ñ_kâlas had come thither, and Ganaka Vaideha wished to know, which of those Brâhmanas was the best read. So he enclosed a thousand cows, and ten pâdas (of gold) [2] were fastened to each pair of horns.
2. And Ganaka spoke to them: ‘Ye venerable Brâhmanas, he who among you is the wisest, let him drive away these cows.’
Then those Brâhmanas durst not, but Yâg_ñ_avalkya said to his pupil: ‘Drive them away, my dear.’
He replied: ‘O glory of the Sâman [3]’ and drove them away.
The Brâhmanas became angry and said: ‘How could he call himself the wisest among us?’
Now there was Asvala, the Hotri priest of Ganaka Vaideha. He asked him: ‘Are you indeed the [ p. 122 ] wisest among us, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya?’ He replied: ‘I bow before the wisest (the best knower of Brahman), but I wish indeed to have these cows.’
Then Asvala, the Hotri priest, undertook to question him.
1. 'Yâg_ñ_avalkya, he said, ‘everything here (connected with the sacrifice) is reached by death, everything is overcome by death. By what means then is the sacrificer freed beyond the reach of death?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘By the Hotri priest, who is Agni (fire), who is speech. For speech is the Hotri of the sacrifice (or the sacrificer), and speech is Agni, and he is the Hotri. This constitutes freedom, and perfect freedom (from death).’
4. ‘Yâg_ñ_avalkya,’ he said, ‘everything here is reached by day and night, everything is overcome by day and night. By what means then is the sacrificer freed beyond the reach of day and night?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘By the Adhvaryu priest, who is the eye, who is Âditya (the sun) [4]. For the eye is the Adhvaryu of the sacrifice, and the eye is the sun, and he is the Adhvaryu. This constitutes freedom, and perfect freedom.’
5. ‘Yâg_ñ_avalkya,’ he said, ‘everything here is reached by the waxing and waning of the moon, everything is overcome by the waxing and waning of the moon. By what means then is the sacrificer freed beyond the reach of the waxing and waning of the moon?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘By the Udgâtri priest, who is Vâyu (the wind), who is the breath. For the [ p. 123 ] breath is the Udgâtri of the sacrifice, and the breath is the wind, and he is the Udgâtri. This constitutes freedom, and perfect freedom.’
6. ‘Yâg_ñ_avalkya,’ he said, ‘this sky is, as it were, without an ascent (staircase.) By what approach does the sacrificer approach the Svarga world?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘By the Brahman priest, who is the mind (manas), who is the moon. For the mind is the Brahman of the sacrifice, and the mind is the moon, and he is the Brahman. This constitutes freedom, and perfect freedom. These are the complete deliverances (from death).’
Next follow the achievements.
7. ‘Yâg_ñ_avalkya,’ he said, ‘how many Rik verses will the Hotri priest employ to-day at this sacrifice?’
‘Three,’ replied Yâg_ñ_avalkya.
‘And what are these three?’
‘Those which are called Puronuvâkyâ, Yâgyâ, and, thirdly, Sasyâ [5].’
‘What does he gain by them?’
‘All whatsoever has breath.’
8. ‘Yâg_ñ_avalkya,’ he said, ‘how many oblations (âhuti) will the Adhvaryu priest employ to-day at this sacrifice?’
‘Three,’ replied Yâg_ñ_avalkya.
‘And what are these three?’
‘Those which, when offered, flame up; those which, when offered, make an excessive noise; and those which, when offered, sink down [6].’
[ p. 124 ]
‘What does he gain by them?’
‘By those which, when offered, flame up, he gains the Deva (god) world, for the Deva world flames up, as it were. By those which, when offered, make an excessive noise, he gains the Pitri (father) world, for the Pitri world is excessively (noisy) [7]. By those which, when offered, sink down, he gains the Manushya (man) world, for the Manushya world is, as it were, down below.’
9. ‘Yâg_ñ_avalkya,’ he said, ‘with how many deities does the Brahman priest on the right protect to-day this sacrifice?’
‘By one,’ replied Yâg_ñ_avalkya.
‘And which is it?’
‘The mind alone; for the mind is endless, and the Visvedevas are endless, and he thereby gains the endless world.’
10. ‘Yâg_ñ_avalkya,’ he said, ‘how many Stotriyâ hymns will the Udgâtri priest employ to-day at this sacrifice?’
‘Three,’ replied Yâg_ñ_avalkya.
‘And what are these three?’
‘Those which are called Puronuvâkyâ, Yâgyâ, and, thirdly, Sasyâ.’
‘And what are these with regard to the body (adhyâtmam)?’
‘The Puronuvâkyâ is Prâna (up-breathing), the Yâgyâ the Apâna (down-breathing), the Sasyâ the Vyâna (back-breathing).’
[ p. 125 ]
‘What does he gain by them?’
‘He gains the earth by the Puronuvâkyâ, the sky by the Yâgyâ, heaven by the Sasyâ.’
After that Asvala held his peace.
1. Then Gâratkârava Ârtabhâga [9] asked. ‘Yâg_ñ_avalkya,’ he said, ‘how many Grahas are there, and how many Atigrahas [10]?’
‘Eight Grahas,’ he replied,‘ and eight Atigrahas.’
‘And what are these eight Grahas and eight Atigrahas?’
2. ‘Prâna (breath) is one Graha, and that is seized by Apâna (down-breathing) as the Atigrâha [11], for one smells with the Apâna.’
3. 'Speech (vâk) is one Graha, and that is seized by name (nâman) as the Atigrâha, for with speech one pronounces names.
4. ‘The tongue is one Graha, and that is seized by taste as the Atigrâha, for with the tongue one perceives tastes.’
5. ‘The eye is one Graha, and that is seized by form as the Atigrâha, for with the eye one sees forms.’
6. ‘The ear is one Graha, and that is seized by sound as the Atigrâha, for with the ear one hears sounds.’
7. ‘The mind is one Graha, and that is seized by [ p. 126 ] desire as the Atigrâha, for with the mind one desires desires.’
8. ‘The arms are one Graha, and these are seized by work as the Atigrâha, for with the arms one works work.’
9. ‘The skin is one Graha, and that is seized by touch as the Atigrâha, for with the skin one perceives touch. These are the eight Grahas and the eight Atigrahas.’
10. ‘Yâg_ñ_avalkya,’ he said, ‘everything is the food of death. What then is the deity to whom death is food?’
‘Fire (agni) is death, and that is the food of water. Death is conquered again.’
11. ‘Yâg_ñ_avalkya,’ he said, ‘when such a person (a sage) dies, do the vital breaths (prânas) move out of him or no?’
‘No,’ replied Yâg_ñ_avalkya; ‘they are gathered up in him, he swells, he is inflated, and thus inflated the dead lies at rest.’
12. ‘Yâg_ñ_avalkya,’ he said, ‘when such a man dies, what does not leave him?’
‘The name,’ he replied; ‘for the name is endless, the Visvedevas are endless, and by it he gains the endless world.’
13. ‘Yâg_ñ_avalkya,’ he said,‘ when the speech of this dead person enters into the fire [12], breath into the air, the eye into the sun, the mind into the moon, the hearing into space, into the earth the body, into the ether the self, into the shrubs the hairs of the body, into the trees the hairs of the head, when the [ p. 127 ] blood and the seed are deposited in the water, where is then that person?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘Take my hand, my friend. We two alone shall know of this; let this question of ours not be (discussed) in public.’ Then these two went out and argued, and what they said was karman (work), what they praised was karman [13], viz. that a man becomes good by good work, and bad by bad work. After that Gâratkârava Ârtabhâga held his peace.
1. Then Bhugyu Lâhyâyani asked. ‘Yâgñ_avalkya,’ he said, 'we wandered about as students [15], and came to the house of Pata_ñkala Kâpya. He had a daughter who was possessed by a Gandharva. We asked him, ‘Who art thou?’ and he (the Gandharva) replied: ‘I am Sudhanvan, the Âṅgirasa.’ And when we asked him about the ends of the world, we said to him, ‘Where were the Pârikshitas [16]? Where then were the Pârikshitas, I ask thee, Yâg_ñ_avalkya, where were the Pârikshitas?’
2. Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘He said to thee, I suppose, that they went where those go who have performed a horse-sacrifice.’
He said: ‘And where do they go who have performed a horse-sacrifice?’
[ p. 128 ]
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘Thirty-two journeys of the car of the sun is this world. The earth surrounds it on every side, twice as large, and the ocean surrounds this earth on every side, twice as large. Now there is between [17] them a space as large as the edge of a razor or the wing of a mosquito. Indra, having become a bird, handed them (through the space) to Vâyu (the air), and Vâyu (the air), holding them within himself, conveyed them to where they dwell who have performed a horse-sacrifice. Somewhat in this way did he praise Vâyu indeed. Therefore Vâyu (air) is everything by itself, and Vâyu is all things together. He who knows this, conquers death.’ After that Bhugyu Lâhyâyani held his peace.
1. Then Ushasta Kâkrâyana asked. ‘Yâg_ñ_avalkya,’ he said, ‘tell me the Brahman which is visible, not invisible [19], the Self (âtman), who is within all.’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘This, thy Self, who is within all.’
‘Which Self, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya, is within all?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘He who breathes in the up-breathing, he is thy Self, and within all. He who breathes in the down-breathing, he is thy Self, and within all. He who breathes in the on-breathing, he is thy Self, and within all. He who breathes in [ p. 129 ] the out-breathing, he is thy Self, and within all. This is thy Self, who is within all.’
2. Ushasta Kâkrâyana said: ‘As one might say, this is a cow, this is a horse, thus has this been explained by thee. Tell me the Brahman which is visible, not invisible, the Self, who is within all.’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘This, thy Self, who is within all.’
‘Which Self, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya, is within all?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘Thou couldst not see the (true) seer of sight, thou couldst not hear the (true) hearer of hearing, nor perceive the perceiver of perception, nor know the knower of knowledge. This is thy Self, who is within all. Everything also is of evil.’ After that Ushasta Kâkrâyana held his peace.
1. Then Kahola Kaushîtakeya asked. 'Yâg_ñ_avalkya, 'he said, ‘tell me the Brahman which is visible, not invisible, the Self (Âtman), who is within all.’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘This, thy Self, who is within all.’
‘Which Self, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya, is within all?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘He who overcomes hunger and thirst, sorrow, passion, old age, and death. When Brâhmanas know that Self, and have risen above the desire for sons [21], wealth, and (new) worlds [22], they wander about as mendicants. For a desire for sons is desire for wealth, a desire for wealth is desire for worlds. Both these are indeed desires. Therefore let a Brâhmana, after he has done with learning, [ p. 130 ] wish to stand by real strength [23]; after he has done with that strength and learning, he becomes a Muni (a Yogin); and after he has done with what is not the knowledge of a Muni, and with what is the knowledge of a Muni, he is a Brâhmana. By whatever means he has become a Brâhmana, he is such indeed [24]. Everything else is of evil.’ After that Kahola Kaushîtakeya held his peace.
1. Then Gârgî Vâkaknavî asked. ‘Yâg_ñ_avalkya,’ she said, ‘everything here is woven, like warp and woof, in water. What then is that in which water is woven, like warp and woof?’
‘In air, O Gârgî,’ he replied.
‘In what then is air woven, like warp and woof?’
‘In the worlds of the sky, O Gârgî, 'he replied.
‘In what then are the worlds of the sky woven, like warp and woof?’
‘In the worlds of the Gandharvas, O Gârgî,’ he replied.
[ p. 131 ]
‘In what then are the worlds of the Gandharvas woven, like warp and woof?’
‘In the worlds of Âditya (sun), O Gârgî,’ he replied.
‘In what then are the worlds of Âditya (sun) woven, like warp and woof?’
‘In the worlds of Kandra (moon), O Gârgî,’ he replied.
‘In what then are the worlds of Kandra (moon) woven, like warp and woof?’
, In the worlds of the Nakshatras (stars), O Gârgî,’ he replied.
‘In what then are the worlds of the Nakshatras (stars) woven, like warp and woof?’
‘In the worlds of the Devas (gods), O Gârgî,’ he replied.
‘In what then are the worlds of the Devas (gods) woven, like warp and woof?’
‘In the worlds of Indra, O Gârgî,’ he replied.
‘In what then are the worlds of Indra woven, like warp and woof?’
‘In the worlds of Pragâpati, O Gârgî,’ he replied.
‘In what then are the worlds of Pragâpati woven, like warp and woof?’
‘In the worlds of Brahman, O Gârgî,’ he replied.
‘In what then are the worlds of Brahman woven, like warp and woof?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘O Gârgî, Do not ask too much, lest thy head should fall off. Thou askest too much about a deity about which we are not to ask too much [26]. Do not ask too much, O Gârgî.’ After that Gargî Vâkaknavî held her peace.
[ p. 132 ]
1. Then Uddâlaka Âruni [28] asked. ‘Yâgñ_avalkya,’ he said, ‘we dwelt among the Madras in the houses of Pata_ñkala Kâpya, studying the sacrifice. His wife was possessed of a Gandharva, and we asked him: “Who art thou?” He answered: “I am Kabandha Âtharvana.” And he said to Pata_ñ_kala Kâpya and to (us) students: “Dost thou know, Kâpya, that thread by which this world and the other world, and all beings are strung together?” And Pata_ñ_kala Kâpya replied: “I do not know it, Sir.” He said again to Pata_ñ_kala Kâpya and to (us) students: “Dost thou know, Kâpya, that puller (ruler) within (antaryâmin), who within pulls (rules) this world and the other world and all beings?” And Pata_ñ_kala Kâpya replied: “I do not know it, Sir.” He said again to Pata_ñ_kala Kâpya and to (us) students: “He, O Kâpya, who knows that thread and him who pulls (it) within, he knows Brahman, he knows the worlds, he knows the Devas, he knows the Vedas, he knows the Bhûtas (creatures), he knows the Self, he knows everything.” Thus did he (the Gandharva) say to them, and I know it. If thou, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya, without knowing that string and the puller within, drivest away those Brahma-cows (the cows offered as a prize to him who best knows Brahman), thy head will fall off.’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘O Gautama, I believe I know that thread and the puller within.’
[ p. 133 ]
The other said: ‘Anybody may say, I know, I know. Tell what thou knowest.’
2. Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘Vâyu (air) is that thread, O Gautama. By air, as by a thread, O Gautama, this world and the other world, and all creatures are strung together. Therefore, O Gautama, people say of a dead person that his limbs have become unstrung; for by air, as by a thread, O Gautama, they were strung together.’
The other said: ‘So it is, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya. Tell now (who is) the puller within.’
3. Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘He who dwells in the earth, and within the earth [29], whom the earth does not know, whose body the earth is, and who pulls (rules) the earth within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
4. ‘He who dwells in the water, and within the water, whom the water does not know, whose body the water is, and who pulls (rules) the water within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
5. ‘He who dwells in the fire, and within the fire, whom the fire does not know, whose body the fire is, and who pulls (rules) the fire within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
6. ‘He who dwells in the sky, and within the sky, whom the sky does not know, whose body the sky is, and who pulls (rules) the sky within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
7. ‘He who dwells in the air (vâyu), and within the air, whom the air does not know, whose body the [ p. 134 ] air is, and who pulls (rules) the air within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
8. ‘He who dwells in the heaven (dyu), and within the heaven, whom the heaven does not know, whose body the heaven is, and who pulls (rules) the heaven within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
9. ‘He who dwells in the sun (Âditya), and within the sun, whom the sun does not know, whose body the sun is, and who pulls (rules) the sun within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
10. ‘He who dwells in the space (disah), and within the space, whom the space does not know, whose body the space is, and who pulls (rules) the space within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
11. ‘He who dwells in the moon and stars (kandra-târakam), and within the moon and stars, whom the moon and stars do not know, whose body the moon and stars are, and who pulls (rules) the moon and stars within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
12. ‘He who dwells in the ether (âkâsa), and within the ether, whom the ether does not know, whose body the ether is, and who pulls (rules) the ether within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
13. ‘He who dwells in the darkness (tamas), and within the darkness, whom the darkness does not know, whose body the darkness is, and who pulls (rules) the darkness within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
14. ‘He who dwells in the light (tegas), and within the light, whom the light does not know, whose [ p. 135 ] body the light is, and who pulls (rules) the light within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
So far with respect to the gods (adhidaivatam); now with respect to beings (adhibhûtam).
15. Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘He who dwells in all beings, and within all beings, whom all beings do not know, whose body all beings are, and who pulls (rules) all beings within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
16. ‘He who dwells in the breath (prâna), and within the breath, whom the breath does not know, whose body the breath is, and who pulls (rules) the breath within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
17. ‘He who dwells in the tongue (vâk), and within the tongue, whom the tongue does not know, whose body the tongue is, and who pulls (rules) the tongue within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
18. ‘He who dwells in the eye, and within the eye, whom the eye does not know, whose body the eye is, and who pulls (rules) the eye within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
19. ‘He who dwells in the ear, and within the ear, whom the ear does not know, whose body the ear is, and who pulls (rules) the ear within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
20. ‘He who dwells in the mind, and within the mind, whom the mind does not know, whose body the mind is, and who pulls (rules) the mind within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
21. ‘He who dwells in the skin, and within the skin, whom the skin does not know, whose body the [ p. 136 ] skin is, and who pulls (rules) the skin within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
22. ‘He who dwells in knowledge [30], and within knowledge, whom knowledge does not know, whose body knowledge is, and who pulls (rules) knowledge within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal.’
23. ‘He who dwells in the seed, and within the seed, whom the seed does not know, whose body the seed is, and who pulls (rules) the seed within, he is thy Self, the puller (ruler) within, the immortal; unseen, but seeing; unheard, but hearing; unperceived, but perceiving; unknown, but knowing. There is no other seer but he, there is no other hearer but he, there is no other perceiver but he, there is no other knower but he. This is thy Self, the ruler within, the immortal. Everything else is of evil.’ After that Uddâlaka Âruni held his peace.
1. Then Vâkaknavî [32] said: ‘Venerable Brâhmanas, I shall ask him two questions. If he will answer them, none of you, I think, will defeat him in any argument concerning Brahman.’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘Ask, O Gârgî.’
2. She said: ‘O Yâg_ñ_avalkya, as the son of a warrior from the Kâsîs or Videhas might string his loosened bow, take two pointed foe-piercing arrows in his hand and rise to do battle, I have risen to [ p. 137 ] fight thee with two questions. Answer me these questions.’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘Ask, O Gârgî.’
3. She said: ‘O Yâg_ñ_avalkya, that of which they say that it is above the heavens, beneath the earth, embracing heaven and earth [33], past, present, and future, tell me in what is it woven, like warp and woof?’
4. Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘That of which they say that it is above the heavens, beneath the earth, embracing heaven and earth, past, present, and future, that is woven, like warp and woof, in the ether (âkâsa).’
5. She said: ‘I bow to thee, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya, who hast solved me that question. Get thee ready for the second.’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said [34]: ‘Ask, O Gârgî.’
6. She said: ‘O Yâg_ñ_avalkya, that of which they say that it is above the heavens, beneath the earth, embracing heaven and earth, past, present, and future, tell me in what is it woven, like warp and woof?’
7. Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘That of which they say that it is above the heavens, beneath the earth, embracing heaven and earth, past, present, and future, that is woven, like warp and woof, in the ether.’
Gârgî said: ‘In what then is the ether woven, like warp and woof?’
8. He said: ‘O Gârgî, the Brâhmanas call this the Akshara (the imperishable). It is neither coarse nor fine, neither short nor long, neither red (like fire) nor fluid (like water); it is without shadow, without darkness, without air, without ether, without [ p. 138 ] attachment [35], without taste, without smell, without eyes, without ears, without speech, without mind, without light (vigour), without breath, without a mouth (or door), without measure, having no within and no without, it devours nothing, and no one devours it.’
9. ‘By the command of that Akshara (the imperishable), O Gârgî, sun and moon stand apart [36]. By the command of that Akshara, O Gârgî, heaven and earth stand apart. By the command of that Akshara, O Gârgî, what are called moments (nimesha), hours (muhûrta), days and nights, half-months, months, seasons, years, all stand apart. By the command of that Akshara, O Gârgî, some rivers flow to the East from the white mountains, others to the West, or to any other quarter. By the command of that Akshara, O Gârgî, men praise those who give, the gods follow the sacrificer, the fathers the Darvî-offering.’
10. ‘Whosoever, O Gârgî, without knowing that Akshara (the imperishable), offers oblations in this world, sacrifices, and performs penance for a thousand years, his work will have an end. Whosoever, O Gargî, without knowing this Akshara, departs this world, he is miserable (like a slave) [37]. But he, O Gârgî, who departs this world, knowing this Akshara, he is a Brâhmana.’
11. ‘That Brahman,’ O Gârgî, ‘is unseen, but seeing; unheard, but hearing; unperceived, but perceiving; unknown, but knowing. There is nothing [ p. 139 ] that sees but it, nothing that hears but it, nothing that perceives but it, nothing that knows but it. In that Akshara then, O Gârgî, the ether is woven, like warp and woof.’
12. Then said Gargî: ‘Venerable Brâhmans, you may consider it a great thing, if you get off by bowing before him. No one, I believe, will defeat him in any argument concerning Brahman.’ After that Vâkaknavî held her peace.
1. Then Vidagdha Sâkalya asked him [39]: ‘How many gods are there, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya?’ He replied with this very Nivid [40]: ‘As many as are mentioned in the Nivid of the hymn of praise addressed to the Visvedevas, viz. three and three hundred, three and three thousand [41].’
‘Yes,’ he said, and asked again: ‘How many gods are there really, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya?’
‘Thirty-three,’ he said.
[ p. 140 ]
‘Yes,’ he said, and asked again: ‘How many gods are there really, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya?’
‘Six,’ he said.
‘Yes,’ he said, and asked again: ‘How many gods are there really, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya?’
‘Three,’ he said.
‘Yes,’ he said, and asked again: ‘How many gods are there really, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya?’
‘Two,’ he said.
‘Yes,’ he said, and asked again: ‘How many gods are there really, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya?’
‘One and a half (adhyardha),’ he said.
‘Yes,’ he said, and asked again: ‘How many gods are there really, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya?’
‘One,’ he said.
‘Yes,’ he said, and asked: ‘Who are these three and three hundred, three and three thousand?’
2. Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘They are only the various powers of them, in reality there are only thirty-three gods [42].’
He asked: ‘Who are those thirty-three?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘The eight Vasus, the eleven Rudras, the twelve Âdityas. They make thirty-one, and Indra and Pragâpati make the thirty-three [43].’
3. He asked: ‘Who are the Vasus.’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘Agni (fire), Prithivî (earth), Vâyu (air), Antariksha (sky), Âditya (sun), Dyu (heaven), Kandramas (moon), the Nakshatras (stars), these are the Vasus, for in them all that dwells (this world) [44] rests; and therefore they are called Vasus.’ [ p. 141 ] 4. He asked: ‘Who are the Rudras?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘These ten vital breaths (prânas, the senses, i.e. the five g_ñ_ânendriyas, and the five karmendriyas), and Âtman [45], as the eleventh. When they depart from this mortal body, they make us cry (rodayanti), and because they make us cry, they are called Rudras.’
5. He asked: ‘Who are the Âdityas?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘The twelve months of the year, and they are Âdityas, because they move along (yanti), taking up everything [46] (âdadânâh). Because they move along, taking up everything, therefore they are called Âdityas.’
6. He asked: ‘And who is Indra, and who is Pragâpati?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘Indra is thunder, Pragâpati is the sacrifice.’
He asked: ‘And what is the thunder?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘The thunderbolt.’
He asked: ‘And what is the sacrifice?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘The (sacrificial) animals.’
7. He asked: ‘Who are the six?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘Agni (fire), Prithivî (earth), Vâyu (air), Antariksha (sky), Âditya (sun), Dyu (heaven), they are the six, for they are all [47] this, the six.’
8. He asked: ‘Who are the three gods?’
[ p. 142 ]
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘These three worlds, for in them all these gods exist.’
He asked: ‘Who are the two gods?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘Food and breath.’
He asked: ‘Who is the one god and a half?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘He that blows.’
9. Here they say: ‘How is it that he who blows like one only, should be called one and a half (adhyardha)?’ And the answer is: ‘Because, when the wind was blowing, everything grew (adhyardhnot).’
He asked: ‘Who is the one god?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘Breath (prâna), and he is Brahman (the Sûtrâtman), and they call him That (tyad).’
10. Sâkalya said [48]: ‘Whosoever knows that person (or god) whose dwelling (body) is the earth, whose sight (world) is fire [49], whose mind is light,—the principle [ p. 143 ] of every (living) self, he indeed is a teacher, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya.’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘I know that person, the principle of every self, of whom thou speakest. This corporeal (material, earthy) person, “he is he.” But tell me [50], Sâkalya, who is his devatâ [51] (deity)?’
Sâkalya replied: ‘The Immortal [52].’
11. Sâkalya said: ‘Whosoever knows that person whose dwelling is love (a body capable of sensual love), whose sight is the heart, whose mind is light.—the principle of every self, he indeed is a teacher, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya.’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘I know that person, the principle of every self, of whom thou speakest. This love-made (loving) person, he is he." But tell me, Sâkalya, who is his devatâ?’
Sâkalya replied: ‘The women [53].’
12. Sâkalya said: ‘Whosoever knows that person whose dwelling are the colours, whose sight is the eye, whose mind is light,—the principle of every self, he indeed is a teacher, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya.’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘I know that person, the principle of every self, of whom thou speakest. That person in the sun, “he is he.” But tell me, Sâkalya, who is his devatâ?’
Sâkalya replied: ‘The True [54].’
13. Sâkalya said: ‘Whosoever knows that person [ p. 144 ] whose dwelling is ether, whose sight is the ear, whose mind is light,—the principle of every self, he indeed is a teacher, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya.’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘I know that person, the principle of every self, of whom thou speakest. The person who hears [55] and answers, “he is he.” But tell me, Sâkalya, who is his devatâ?’
Sâkalya replied: ‘Space.’
14. Sâkalya said: ‘Whosoever knows that person whose dwelling is darkness, whose sight is the heart, whose mind is light,—the principle of every self, he indeed is a teacher, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya.’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘I know that person, the principle of every self, of whom thou speakest. The shadowy [56] person, “he is he.” But tell me, Sâkalya, who is his devatâ?’
Sâkalya replied: ‘Death.’
15. Sâkalya said: ‘Whosoever knows that person whose dwelling are (bright) colours, whose sight is the eye, whose mind is light,—the principle of every self, he indeed is a teacher, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya.’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘I know that person, the principle of every self, of whom thou speakest. The person in the looking-glass, “he is he.” But tell me, Sâkalya, who is his devatâ?’
Sâkalya replied: ‘Vital breath’ (asu).
16. Sâkalya said: ‘Whosoever knows that person whose dwelling is water, whose sight is the heart, whose mind is light,—the principle of every self, he indeed is a teacher, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya.’
[ p. 145 ]
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘I know that person, the principle of every self, of whom thou speakest. The person in the water, “he is he.” But tell me, Sâkalya, who is his devatâ?’
Sâkalya replied: ‘Varuna.’
17. Sâkalya said: ‘Whosoever knows that person whose dwelling is seed, whose sight is the heart, whose mind is light,—the principle of every self, he indeed is a teacher, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya.’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya replied: ‘I know that person, the principle of every self, of whom thou speakest. The filial person, “he is he.” But tell me, Sâkalya, who is his devatâ?’
Sâkalya replied: ‘Pragâpati.’
18. Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘Sâkalya, did those Brâhmanas (who themselves shrank from the contest) make thee the victim [57]?’
Sâkalya said: ‘Yâgñ_avalkya, because thou hast decried the Brâhmanas of the Kuru-Pa_ñkâlas, what [58] Brahman dost thou know?’
19. Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘I know the quarters with their deities and their abodes.’
[ p. 146 ]
Sâkalya said: 'If thou knowest the quarters with their deities and their abodes,
20. ‘Which is thy deity in the Eastern quarter?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘Âditya (the sun).’
Sâkalya said: ‘In what does that Âditya abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the eye.’
Sâkalya said: ‘In what does the eye abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the colours, for with the eye he sees the colours.’
Sâkalya said: ‘And in what then do the colours abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the heart [59], for we know colours by the heart, for colours abide in the heart [60].’
Sâkalya said: ‘So it is indeed, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya.’
21. Sâkalya said: ‘Which is thy deity in the Southern quarter?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘Yama.’
Sâkalya said: ‘In what does that Yama abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the sacrifice.’
Sâkalya said: ‘In what does the sacrifice abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the Dakshinâ (the gifts to be given to the priests).’
Sâkalya said: ‘In what does the Dakshinâ abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In Sraddhâ (faith), for if a man believes, then he gives Dakshinâ, and Dakshinâ truly abides in faith.’
Sâkalya said: ‘And in what then does faith abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the heart, for by the heart faith knows, and therefore faith abides in the heart.’
Sâkalya said: ‘So it is indeed, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya.’ [ p. 147 ] 22. Sâkalya said: ‘Which is thy deity in the Western quarter?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘Varuna.’
Sâkalya said: ‘In what does that Varuna abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the water.’
Sâkalya said: ‘In what does the water abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the seed.’
Sâkalya said: ‘And in what does the seed abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the heart. And therefore also they say of a son who is like his father, that he seems as if slipt from his heart, or made from his heart; for the seed abides in the heart.’
Sâkalya said: ‘So it is indeed, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya.’
23. Sâkalya said: ‘Which is thy deity in the Northern quarter?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘Soma.’
Sâkalya said: ‘In what does that Soma abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the Dîkshâ [61].’
Sâkalya said: ‘In what does the Dîkshâ abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the True; and therefore they say to one who has performed the Dîkshâ, Speak what is true, for in the True indeed the Dîkshâ abides.’
Sâkalya said: ‘And in what does the True abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the heart, for with the heart do we know what is true, and in the heart indeed the True abides.’
Sâkalya said: ‘So it is indeed, O Yâg_ñ_avalkya.’
24. Sâkalya said: ‘Which is thy deity in the zenith?’
[ p. 148 ]
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘Agni.’
Sâkalya said: ‘In what does that Agni abide.’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In speech.’
Sâkalya said: 'And in what does speech abide
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the heart.’
Sâkalya said: ‘And in what does the heart abide?’
2 5. Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘O Ahallika [62], when you think the heart could be anywhere else away from us, if it were away from us, the dogs might eat it, or the birds tear it.’
26. Sâkalya said: ‘And in what dost thou (thy body) and the Self (thy heart) abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the Prâna (breath).’
Sâkalya said: ‘In what does the Prâna abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: In the Apâna (down-breathing) [63].’
Sâkalya said: ‘In what does the Apâna abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the Vyâna (back-breathing ) [64].’
Sâkalya said: ‘In what does the Vyâna-abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the Udâna (the out-breathing) [65].’
Sâkalya said: ‘In what does the Udâna abide?’
Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: ‘In the Samâna [66]. That Self [ p. 149 ] (âtman) is to be described by No, no [67]! He is incomprehensible, for he cannot be (is not) comprehended; he is imperishable, for he cannot perish; he is unattached, for he does not attach himself; unfettered, he does not suffer, he does not fail.’
‘These are the eight abodes (the earth, &c.), the eight worlds (fire, &c.), the eight gods (the immortal food, &c.), the eight persons (the corporeal, &c.) He who after dividing and uniting these persons [68], went beyond (the Samâna), that person, taught in the Upanishads, I now ask thee (to teach me). If thou shalt not explain him to me, thy head will fall.’
Sâkalya did not know him, and his head fell, nay, thieves took away his bones, mistaking them for something else.
27. Then Yâg_ñ_avalkya said: 'Reverend Brâhmanas, whosoever among you desires to do so, may now question me. Or question me, all of you. Or whosoever among you desires it, I shall question him, or I shall question all of you.
But those Brâhmanas durst not (say anything).
28. Then Yâg_ñ_avalkya questioned them with these Slokas:
1. 'As a mighty tree in the forest, so in truth is man, his hairs are the leaves, his outer skin is the bark.
2. 'From his skin flows forth blood, sap from the skin (of the tree); and thus from the wounded [ p. 150 ] man [69] comes forth blood, as from a tree that is struck.
3. 'The lumps of his flesh are (in the tree) the layers of wood, the fibre is strong like the tendons [70] . The bones are the (hard) wood within, the marrow is made like the marrow of the tree.
4. 'But, while the tree, when felled, grows up again more young from the root, from what root, tell me, does a mortal grow up, after he has been felled by death?
5. 'Do not say, “from seed,” for seed is produced from the living [71]; but a tree, springing from a grain, clearly [72] rises again after death [73].
6. 'If a tree is pulled up with the root, it will not grow again; from what root then, tell me, does a mortal grow up, after he has been felled by death?
7. ‘Once born, he is not born (again); for who should create him again [74]?’
[ p. 151 ]
‘Brahman, who is knowledge and bliss, he is the principle, both to him who gives gifts [75], and also to him who stands firm, and knows.’
121:1 Mâdhyandina text, p. 1067. ↩︎
121:2 Palakaturbhâgah pâdah suvarnasya. Comm. ↩︎
121:3 One expects iti after udaga, but Sâmasravas is applied to Yâg_ñ_avalkya, and not to the pupil. Yâg_ñ_avalkya, as the commentator observes, was properly a teacher of the Yagur-veda, but as the pupil calls him Sâmasravas, he shows that Yâg_ñ_avalkya knew all the four Vedas, because the Sâmans are taken from the Rig-veda, and the Atharva-veda is contained in the other three Vedas. Regnaud, however, refers it to the pupil, and translates, ‘Ô toi qui apprends le Sâma-veda.’ ↩︎
122:1 One expects âdityena kakshushâ, instead of kakshushâdityena, but see § 6. ↩︎
123:1 The Puronuvâkyâs are hymns employed before the actual sacrifice, the Yâgyâs accompany the sacrifice, the Sasyâs are used for the Sastra. All three are called Stotriyâs. ↩︎
123:2 These oblations are explained as consisting of wood and oil, of flesh, and of milk and Soma. The first, when thrown on the p. 124 fire, flame up. The second, when thrown on the fire, make a loud hissing noise. The third, consisting of milk, Soma, &c., sink down into the earth. ↩︎
124:1 On account of the cries of those who wish to be delivered out of it. Comm. ↩︎
125:1 Mâdhyandina text, p. 1069. ↩︎
125:2 A descendant of Ritabhâga of the family of Garatkâru. ↩︎
125:3 Graha is probably meant originally in its usual sacrificial sense, as a vessel for offering oblations. But its secondary meaning, in which it is here taken, is a taker, a grasper, i.e. an organ of sense, while atigraha is intended for that which is grasped, i.e. an object of sense. ↩︎
125:4 Here the â is long, khândasatvât. ↩︎
126:1 The commentator explains purusha here by asamyagdarsin, one who does not know the whole truth. See also Deussen, Vedânta, p. 405, and p. 399, note. ↩︎
127:1 What is intended is that the samsâra continues by means of karman, while karman by itself never leads to moksha. ↩︎
127:2 Mâdhyandina text, p. 1070. ↩︎
127:3 The commentator explains karakâh as adhyayanârtham vratakaranâk karakâh, adhvaryavo vâ. See Professor R. G. Bhandarkar, in Indian Antiquary, 1883, p. 145. ↩︎
127:4 An old royal race, supposed to have vanished from the earth. ↩︎
128:1 The commentator explains that this small space or hole is between the two halves of the mundane egg. ↩︎
128:2 Mâdhyandina text, p. 1071. It follows after what is here the fifth Brâhmana, treating of Kahoda Kaushîtakeya. ↩︎
128:3 Deussen, Vedanta, p. 163, translates, ‘das immanente, nicht transcendente Brahman,’ which is right, but too modern. ↩︎
129:1 Mâdhyandina text, p. 1071, standing before the fourth Brâhmana. ↩︎
129:2 See Brih. Âr. Up. IV, 4, 22. ↩︎
129:3 Life in the world of the Fathers, or in the world of the Gods. ↩︎
130:1 Knowledge of the Self, which enables us to dispense with all other knowledge. ↩︎
130:2 Mr. Gough proposes as an alternative rendering: ‘Let a Brâhmana renounce learning and become as a child; and after renouncing learning and a childlike mind, let him become a quietist; and when he has made an end of quietism and non-quietism, he shall become a Brâhmana, a Brâhmana indeed.’ Deussen takes a similar view, but I doubt whether ‘the knowledge of babes’ is not a Christian rather than an Indian idea, in spite of Saṅkara’s remarks on Ved. Sûtra, III, 4, 50, which are strangely at variance with his commentary here. Possibly the text may be corrupt, for tishthâset too is a very peculiar form. We might conjecture balyena, as we have abalyam, in IV, 4, 1. In Kaush. Up. III, 3, âbâlyam stands for âbălyam, possibly for ăbălyam. The construction of kena syâd yena syât tenedrisa eva, however, is well known. ↩︎
130:3 Mâdhyandina text, p. 1072. ↩︎
131:1 According to the commentator questions about Brahman are to be answered from the Scriptures only, and not to be settled by argument. ↩︎
132:1 Mâdhyandina text, p. 1072. ↩︎
132:2 Afterwards addressed as Gautama; see before, p. 1, note. ↩︎
133:1 I translate antara by ‘within,’ according to the commentator, who explains it by abhyantara, but I must confess that I should prefer to translate it by ‘different from,’ as Deussen does, l. c. p. 160, particularly as it governs an ablative. ↩︎
136:1 Self, i.e. the individual Self, according to the Mâdhyandina school; see Deussen, p. 161. ↩︎
136:2 Mâdhyandina text, p. 1075. ↩︎
136:3 Gârgî, not the wife of Yâg_ñ_avalkya. ↩︎
137:1 Deussen, p. 143, translates, ‘between heaven and earth,’ but that would be the antariksha. ↩︎
137:2 This repetition does not occur in the Mâdhyandina text. ↩︎
138:1 Not adhering to anything, like lac or gum. ↩︎
138:2 Each follows its own course. ↩︎
138:3 He stores up the effects from work, like a miser his riches,’ Roer. ‘He is helpless,’ Gough. ↩︎
139:1 Mâdhyandina text, p. 1076. ↩︎
139:2 This disputation between Yâg_ñ_avalkya and Vidagdha Sâkalya occurs in a simpler form in the Satapatha-brâhmana, XI, p. 873. He is here represented as the first who defies Yâg_ñ_avalkya, and whom Yâg_ñ_avalkya asks at once, whether the other Brâhmans had made him the ulmukâvakshayana, the cat’s paw, literally one who has to take a burning piece of wood out of the fire (ardha. dagdhakâshtham ulmukam; tasya vahirnirasanam avakshayanam vinâsah). The end, however, is different, for on asking the nature of the one god, the Prâna, he is told by Yâg_ñ_avalkya that he has asked for what he ought not to ask, and that therefore he will die and thieves will carry away his bones. ↩︎
139:3 Nivid, old and short invocations of the gods; devatâsaṅkhyâvâkakâni mantrapâdni kânikid vaisvadeve sastre sasyante. Saṅkara, and Dvivedagaṅga. ↩︎
139:4 This would make 3306 devatâs. ↩︎
140:1 ‘The glories of these are three and thirty.’ Gough, p. 172. ↩︎
140:2 Trayastrimsau, i.e. trayastrimsatah pûranau. ↩︎
140:3 The etymological explanation of Vasu is not quite clear, and p. 141 the commentator hardly explains our text. Perhaps vasu is meant for the world or the dwellers therein. The more usual explanation occurs in the Satap. Brâh. p. 1077, ete hîdam sarvam vâsayante tadyad idam sarvam vâsayante tasmâd vasava iti; or on p. 874, where we read te yad idam sarvam &c. ↩︎
141:1 Âtman is here explained as manas, the common sensory. ↩︎
141:2 The life of men, and the fruits of their work. ↩︎
141:3 They are the thirty-three gods. ↩︎
142:1 I prefer to attribute this to Sâkalya, who is still the questioner, and not Yâg_ñ_avalkya; but I am not quite satisfied that I am right in this, or in the subsequent distribution of the parts, assigned to each speaker. If Sâkalya is the questioner, then the sentence, veda vâ aham tam purusham sarvasyâtmanah parâyanam yam âttha, must belong to Yâg_ñ_avalkya, because he refers to the words of another speaker. Lastly, the sentence vadaiva has to be taken as addressed to Sâkalya. The commentator remarks that, he being the questioner, one expects prikkha instead of vada. But Yâg_ñ_avalkya may also be supposed to turn round on Sâkalya and ask him a question in turn, more difficult than the question addressed by Sâkalya to Yâg_ñ_avalkya, and in that case the last sentence must be taken as an answer, though an imperfect one, of Sâkalya’s. The commentator seems to think that after Yâg_ñ_avalkya told Sâkalya to ask this question, Sâkalya was frightened and asked it, and that then Yâg_ñ_avalkya answered in turn. ↩︎
142:2 The Mâdhyandina text varies considerably. It has the first time, kashur lokah for agnir lokah. I keep to the same construction throughout, taking mano gyotih, not as a compound, but like agnir loko yasya, as a sentence, i.e. mano gyotir yasya. ↩︎
143:1 Ask me. Comm. ↩︎
143:2 That from which he is produced, that is his devatâ. Comm. ↩︎
143:3 According to the commentator, the essence of food, which produces blood, from which the germ receives life and becomes an embryo and a living being. ↩︎
143:4 Because they excite the fire of love. Comm. ↩︎
143:5 The commentator explains satya, the true, by the eye, because the sun owes its origin to the eye. ↩︎
144:1 Read srautra instead of srotra; see Brih. Âr. Up. II, 5, 6. ↩︎
144:2 Shadow, khâyâ, is explained here by ag_ñ_âna, ignorance, not by g_ñ_âna, knowledge. ↩︎
145:1 Aṅgârâvakshayana is explained as a vessel in which coals are extinguished, and Ânandagiri adds that Yâg_ñ_avalkya, in saying that Sâkalya was made an aṅgârâvakshayana by his fellow Brâhmans, meant that he was given up by them as a victim, in fact that he was being burnt or consumed by Yâg_ñ_avalkya. I should prefer to take aṅgârâvakshayana in the sense of ulmukâvakshayana, an instrument with which one takes burning coals from the fire to extinguish them, a pair of tongs. Read sandamsa instead of sandesa. Kshi with ava means to remove, to take away. We should call an aṅgârâvakshayana a cat’s paw. The Brâhmanas used Sâkalya as a cat’s paw. ↩︎
145:2 It seems better to take kim as the interrogative pronoun than as an interrogative particle. ↩︎
146:1 Heart stands here for buddhi and manas together. Comm. ↩︎
146:2 In the text, published by Dr. Roer in the Bibliotheca Indica, a sentence is left out, viz. hridaya ity uvâka, hridayena hi rûpâni gânâti, hridaye hy eva rûpâni pratishthitâni bhavantîty. ↩︎
147:1 Dîkshâ is the initiatory rite for the Soma sacrifice. Having sacrificed with Soma which has to be bought, the sacrificer becomes endowed with wisdom, and wanders to the North, which is the quarter of Soma. ↩︎
148:1 A term of reproach, it may be a ghost or preta, because ahani lîyate, it disappears by day. ↩︎
148:2 Because the prâna would run away, if it were not held back by the apâna. ↩︎
148:3 Because the apâna would run down, and the prâna up, if they were not held back by the vyâna. ↩︎
148:4 Because all three, the prâna, apâna, and vyâna, would run away in all directions, if they were not fastened to the udâna. ↩︎
148:5 The Samâna can hardly be meant here for one of the five prânas, generally mentioned before the udâna, but, as explained by Dvivedagaṅga, stands for the Sûtrâtman. This Sûtrâtman abides in the Antaryâmin, and this in the Brahman (Kûtastha), which is p. 149 therefore described next. Could Samâna be here the same as in IV, 3, 7? ↩︎
149:1 See before, II, 3, 6; also IV, 2, 4; IV, 4, 22; IV, 5, 115. ↩︎
149:2 Dividing them according to the different abodes, worlds, and persons, and uniting them at last in the heart. ↩︎
150:1 In the Mâdhyandina-sâkhâ, p. 1080, tasmât tadâtunnât, instead of tasmât tadâtrinnât. ↩︎
150:2 Saṅkara seems to have read snâvavat, instead of snâva, tat sthiram, as we read in both Sâkhâs. ↩︎
150:3 Here the Mâdhyandinas (p. 1080) add, gâta eva na gâyate, ko nv enam ganayet punah, which the Kânvas place later. ↩︎
150:4 Instead of a_ñ_gasâ, the Mâdhyandinas have anyatah. ↩︎
150:5 The Mâdhyandinas have dhânâruha u vai, which is better than iva vai, the iva being, according to Saṅkara’s own confession, useless. The thread of the argument does not seem to have been clearly perceived by the commentators. What the poet wants to say is, that a man, struck down by death, does not come to life again from seed, because human seed comes from the living only, while trees, springing from grain, are seen to come to life after the tree (which yielded the grain or the seed) is dead. Pretya-sambhava like pretya-bhâva, means life after death, and pretyasambhava, as an adjective, means coming to life after death. ↩︎
150:6 This line too is taken in a different sense by the commentator. According to him, it would mean: ‘If you say, He has been born p. 151 (and there is an end of all questioning), I say, No; he is born again, and the question is, How?’ This is much too artificial. The order of the verses in the Mâdhyandina-sâkhâ is better on the whole, leading up more naturally to the question, ‘From what root then does a mortal grow up, after he has been felled by death?’ When the Brâhmans cannot answer, Yâg_ñ_avalkya answers, or the Sruti declares, that the root from whence a mortal springs again, after death, is Brahman. ↩︎
151:1 Saṅkara explains râtir dâtuh as râter dâtuh, a reading adopted by the Mâdhyandinas. He then arrives at the statement that Brahman is the principle or the last source, also the root of a new life, both for those who practise works and for those who, having relinquished works, stand firm in knowledge. Regnaud (II, p. 138) translates: 'C’est Brahma (qui est) l’intelligence, le bonheur, la richesse, le but suprême de celui qui offre (des sacrifices), et de celui qui réside (en lui), de celui qui connaît.’ ↩︎