BRAHMA SUTRAS
TEXT
, WORD-
T
O-W
ORD MEANI
NG
, TRASLA
TION
AND COMM
ENT
AR
Y
 BY
Sri
 Swami
 Sivanand
a
Published by
THE DIVINE LIFE SOCIETY
P
.O. SHI
V
ANANDANAGARŠ249 1
92
T
ehri-Garhwal
, Uttarakhand, Himalayas, Indi
a
Price ]

   2008

  [ Rs. 230/-

Published by S
wami V
imalananda for The Div
ine Life Societ
y
,
Shivanandanagar
, and printed by
 him at the Y
oga V
edant
a Forest
Academy Press, P
.O. S
hivanandanagar
, Distt.
 T
ehri-Garhwal,
Utt
arakhand, Himalayas, I
ndia
First Edition
:
1949
Second Edition:
1977
Third Edition:
1999
Fourth Edition:
2008
[ 1,000 Copies ]
©The Divine Life T
rust Society
ISBN 81-7052-151-
3
ES22

TO
Sri V
yasa Bhagavan
Sri Jagadguru Sankarachar
ya
and
Srimad Appayya Dikshi
tar

SRI SW
AMI SIV
ANANDA
Born on the 8th Sep
tem
ber
, 1887, in the il
lus
tri
ous fam
ily
of Sage App
ayya D
ikshit
ar and sev
eral other re
nowned saint
s
and sa
vant
s, Sri Swam
i Sivananda had a nat
u
ral flair for a life
de
voted to the study
 and prac
tice of V
edant
a. Added to this
was an in
born ea
ger
ness to serve all and an in
nate feel
ing of
unity with all m
ankind.
His p
as
sion for ser
vice drew him t
o the med
i
cal ca
reer;
and soon he grav
i
t
ated to where he thought that his ser
vice
was most needed. Ma
laya claimed him. H
e had ear
lier been
ed
it
ing a health jour
nal and wrote ex
ten
sively on health prob
-
lems. He dis
cov
ered that peo
ple needed right knowl
edge most
of all; dis
sem
i
na
tion of that knowl
edge he es
poused as his own
mission
.
It was di
vine dis
pen
sa
tion and the bless
ing of God upon
man
kind that the doc
tor of body and m
ind re
nounced his ca
reer
and took to a life of re
nun
ci
a
tion to qual
ify for m
in
is
ter
ing to the
soul of man. He set
tled down at Rishikesh in 1924, prac
tised
in
tense aus
teri
ties and shone as a great Y
ogi, saint, sage and
Jivanmukt
a.
In 1932 Swami S
ivananda st
arted the Sivanandashram
.
In 1936 was born The Di
vine Life So
ci
ety
. In 1948 the
Y
oga-V
edant
a
For est
Acad emy
was
or gan ised.
Dis sem i na tion
of spir
i
tual knowl
edge and train
ing of peo
ple in Y
oga and
V
edant
a were their aim and ob
ject. In 1950 Swamiji un
der
took
a light
ning tour of In
dia and Cey
lon. In 1953 Swamiji con
vened
a ‚W
orld Par
lia
ment of Re
li
gions™. Swamiji is the au
thor of over
300 vol
umes and has dis
ci
ples all over the world, be
long
ing to
all na
tion
al
i
ties, re
li
gions and creeds. T
o read Swamiji™
s works
is to drink at the Foun
t
ain of Wis
dom Su
preme. O
n 14th July
,
1963 Swamiji entered M
ahasamadhi.
(7)

PREF
ACE
It need not
 be over-emphasised that t
he Bhrahma Sut
ras, or the
Nyaya-Prasthana of
 the triad of
 In
dian Philo
soph
i
cal trea
tises hold
su preme
sway
over
the
later
ra tio nal is tic
and
scho las tic
de vel op
-
ment
s. Right from t
he mighty
 brain of Sankara down to the m
as
ter-in
-
tel
lect
s like Sriharsha, Chit
sukha and Madhusudana, the main
po
lem
ics have been oc
cu
pied with the t
ask of es
t
ab
lish
ing the doc
-
trine of ab
so
lute Mo
nism and re
fut
ing the vi
ews con
trary to it
, by ap
-
peal to logic as well as au
thor
ity al
ike, which find thei
r seeds al
ready
sown in the Brahma Sut
ras. The founder of a new re
li
gious and philo
-
soph
i
cal school had sim
ply to writ
e a new com
men
t
ary on the Brahma
Sutras so that his v
iew may be ac
cepted by the m
ass of peo
ple. Such
is the au
thor
ity of
 the Brahma S
utras, the work of Baadaray
ana.
Com
men
t
ar
ies there have been many
 on the Brahma S
utras,
but ei
ther they are t
oo short and in
suf

fi cient to be use
ful for a com
pre
-
hen
sive study of
 the Sut
ras, or are ex
tremely t
ough and ab
struse to
be uti
lized by men of or
di
nary un
der
st
and
ing. This work of Swami
Sivananda is of
 a unique type i
n it

self, un ri
valled by
 any other
. This
com
men
t
ary is nei
ther too short to be use
less, nor too ver
bose to be
un in tel li gi
 ble,
but
fol lows
a
via me
dia
 course, use
ful to one and all
,
mainly t
he spir
i
tual as
pi
rant
s, who want thought,
 not mere word.
Swamiji has got hi
s own in
im
i
t
a
ble way of writ
ing, which is a
boon to the in
quis
i
tive st
u
dent on the spir
i
tual p
ath. A
ll real as
pi
rant
s
af

ter Truth should pos
sess this book, for it is a guide-light
 that is ca
p
a
-
ble of steer
ing them across the sea of ig
no
rance and doubt.
Swamiji has lef
t noth
ing un
said that may
 be use
ful to t
he stu
dent
of the B
rahma Sutras, and in ad
di
tion has given use
ful in
for
ma
tion
which will not be found in ot
her notes and com
men
t
ar
ies. The di
vi
sion
of each Pada into t
he rel
e
vant A
dhikaranas mark
ing at the same t
ime
the num
ber of Sutras they
 con
t
ain, the sub
ject mat
ter they t
reat of,
and the ac
com
p
a
ni
ment of each Su
tra by the se
rial num
ber from the
very be
gin
ning is for the use and guid
ance of the stu
dent. A
n elab
o
-
rate in
tro
duc
tion pre
cedes the work in ad
di
tion to a short in
tro
duc
tion
and a sum
mary of t
he dif

fer ent Adhikaranas pre
ced
ing each Pada.
These are all a boon to the stu
dent of t
he Brahma Sut
ras for which the
in
com
p
a
ra
ble Swamiji has t
o be eulo
gised. Each Su
tra also con
t
ains
a word-by-word mean
ing and a run
ning trans
la
tion.
More need not be said than t
hat the pro
duc
tion is a mar
vel
ous
one. Swamiji
 has com
pleted his an
no
t
a
tions on the Prasthanat
raya
with his Brahma Sut
ras. His writ
ings are too fa
mous to ne
ces
si
t
ate
fur ther
in tro duc tion.
The text
 of the B
rahma Sutras has been in
cluded herein to en
-
able the read
ers to do Svadhy
aya and get t
hem by heart f
or pur
pose
of
med i t
a tion.

ŠTHE D
IVINE LIFE SO
CIETY
(8)

lr Jwé Ü`mZ_²
~«÷mZ
ÝX§ n
a_gwI
X§ Ho$db§ km
Z_y{Vª
ÛÝÛmVrV
§ JJZgÑ
e§ VÎ
d_ñ`m{X
bú`_
EH§$ {ZË`§ {d_b_Mb§ gd©Yrgm{j
^yV§
^mdmVrV§ {
ÌJwUa{
hV§ gX²
Jwé§
 V§ Z_
I pros
trate my

self be fore that Guru,
 the Ex

is tence, de
void of t
he
three Gunas, be
yond com
pre
hen
sion, the wit
ness of all men
t
al func
-
tions, change
less and pure, one and eter
nal, tran
scend
ing the p
airs
of op
po
sites, ex
p
an
sive like the sky
, reach
able through the sen
tences
like ‚Thou art That™
, the Mass of A
b
so
lute Wis
dom.
lr h[aÜ`mZ_²
`§ e¡d
m– g
_wnmg
Vo {ed
 B{V ~
«÷o{V doX
mpÝV
Zmo
~m¡Õ
m ~wÕ
 B{V à
_mUnQ>
d– H$V}
{V Z¡
`m{`H$
Ah©
{ÞË`W O
¡ZemgZ
aVm– H
$_}
{V _r_
m§gH$
m–
gmo@`§ dmo
 {dXY
mVw dmpÄN>
He whom the Saiv
as wor
ship as Siva; t
he V
edantins as the Ab
-
so
lute (Brah
man); the B
uddhist
s as Lord Bud
dha; the lo
gi
cians, the
ex
pert
s in the the
ory of knowl
edge, as the Cre
ator; those f
ol
low
ing the
teach
ings of Jaina as the Ar
hat and the rit

u al
ist
s as the Sac
ri
fice; may
that Hari, t
he Lord of the three worlds, giv
e you the de
sired ob
ject.
(9)

lr ì`mgÜ
`mZ_²
ì`mg§ {
dîUw
ñdê$n§
 H${
b_b
V_g– à
moÚXm{
XË`Xrq
á
dm{gîR>
§ doX
emImì`gZH$
a_¥
qf Y_
©~rO
§ _hmÝV
nm¡am
U~«÷g
yÌmÊ
`aM`
XW `m
o ^maV
§ M ñ_¥qV V
§
H¥$îUÛ¡nm
`Zm
»`§ g
waZa{X{
VO¡– n
y{OV§ nyO`
I wor
ship the great Rishi V
yasa, who is called
Krishna-dvaip
ayana, who is wor
shipped by gods, men and Asuras
alike, who is the form of
 V
ishnu, who is like the light
 of the ris
ing sun to
the dark
ness of the im
pu
ri
ties of the age of
 Kali, who be
longs to the
fam
ily of
 V
asishtha, who di
vided the V
edas into dif

fer ent sec
tions,
who is the seed of Dharma, who wrote the P
uranas, the Brahma
Sutras, t
he Mahabharat
a and the Smrit
i.
lr e§H
$amMm`©
 Ü`mZ_²
nÙmgrZ§ à
emÝV§ `_
{ZaV_
Zﬁm[aV
wë`à
^md§
\$mbo
 ^ñ_m{
‚>Vm^§
pñ_
Vé{M
a_w
Imå^moO
{_ÝX
rdamj_²
 &
H$å~w
J«rd§ H
$amä`m_
{dhV{db
gËnwñV
H§
$ kmZ_
wÐm§
dÝÚ§ Jrdm©
U_w
»`¡Z©
VOZda
X§ ^
md`o e‚>
am`©_
I con
tem
plate on Sankaracharya, who is seated in P
admasana,
who is tran
quil, who is es
t
ab
lished in self-re
straint, whose glory is li
ke
that of
 the en
emy of Cu
pid, who wears the sa
cred ashes shin
ing on
his fore
head, whose smil
ing face re
sem
bles the blossomed lo
tus,
who has lo
tus-like eyes, whose neck is conch-like, hold
ing book in
one hand and in
di
cat
ing Jnana-mudra (with an
other hand), who is
adored by the fore
most of gods, who giv
es boons to those who pros
-
trate to hi
m.
(10)

lr hñVm_b
H$mMm`©
{da{MV
§
lr e§H$aXo
{eH$mï>H$_²
{d{XVm{Ibemógw
YmObYo! _{h
öX`o
 H$b`o
{d_b§
 MaU§
! ^d
 e§H$aXo{
eH$ _o eaU_
1. O ocean of the nec
t
ar of il
lu
mined knowl
edge of the whole
Satras! Thou hast re
vealed the t
rea
sure of the mean
ing of the great
Up
anishads. I med
i
t
ate on Thy pure Lo
tus Feet in my
 heart, O
Sankara Desika (Acharya), be Thou my ref
uge.
H$éU
mdéUmb`! nmb`
 _m§ ^dgmJ
aXw–
I{dXyZ
&
a{MVm{
IbXe©
ZVÎd
{dX§
! ^d
 e§H$aXo{
eH$ _o eaU_
2. O ocean of mercy!
 Pro
tect me who am af

flicted sorely by the
p
ains of Samsara; Thou hast
 ex
pounded the truth of
 the var
i
ous
schools of phi
los
o
phy
, O Sankara Desika, be Thou my ref

uge.^dVm OZ
Vm gw{IVm ^
{dVm! {Z
O~moY{
dMmaUMmé_
H$b`oí
daOr
d{d
doH${
dX§ ^d
 e§H$aXo{
eH$ _o eaU_
3. By
 Thee the hu
man
ity has at

tained hap
pi
ness. Thou art en
-
dowed with a fine in
tel
lect re
flect
ing Self-knowl
edge. I med
i
t
ate on
Thee who ex
pounded the iden
tity
 of Jiva and I
svara, O Sankara, be
Thou my ref
uge.
^d Ed ^dm{
Z{V _
o {ZVa
m§ g_Om`V MoV
{g H$
m¡Vw{H$
__ dm
a` _mo
h_hm
ObqY ^d
 e§H$aXo{
eH$ _o eaU_
4. ﬁThou art my
 GodﬂŒŒthus think
ing my mind be
came full of j
oy
.
Re
move the great
 ocean of de
lu
sion in me, O Sankara, be T
hou my
ref uge.
gwH¥$V
o@{YH
¥$Vo ~
hþYm ^dV
mo ^{dVm n
XXe
©Zbmbg
A{VXrZ{__
§ n[
anmb`
 _m§ ^
d e§H$aXo
{eH$ _o eaU
_² &&
5. It
 is through var
i
ous mer
i
to
ri
ous ac
tions done by me f
or a long
time that
 I have got
 in me a love f
or the vi
sion of Thy lo
tus Feet. P
ro
-
tect this hum
ble self, O S
ankara, be Thou my ref
uge.
(1
1)

OJVr_{d
Vw§ H${bVm
H¥$V`mo
 {dMapÝV _hm
_hgü{bVm–
A{h_
m§
ew
[admÌ {
d^m{g n
w

amo ^d e§
H$a
Xo
{eH
$ _o
 eaU_
²

&
6. For the re
demp
tion of man
kind great souls like Thy Self
 move
about from place to p
lace. Thou seems to me like t
he pure and re
-
splen
dent sun, O Sankara, be Thou m
y ref
uge.
Jwénw§Jd! nw§J
dHo$V
Z! Vo g_
Vm_`V
m§ Z{h H
$mo@{n g
&
eaUmJV
dËgb
!
 VÎd
{ZYo! ^d e§H$aXo{eH$ _o
7. O best of Gu
rus, O Lord Siva!
 It is im
pos
si
ble for any
one to
gauge Thy men
t
al poise. O Pro
tec
tor of the ref

uges! O Re pos
i
tory of
Knowl
edge! O Sankara, be Thou m
y ref
uge.
{d{XVm
 Z _`m {
deX¡H$H$b
m Z M qH$M
Z H$m#m
Z_pñV J
wamo
ÐþV_od {
dYo{h H
¥$nm§ g
hOm§ ^d e§H
$aX
o{eH
$ _o e
aU_² &
8. I hav
e not been able to f
ind any trea
sure wor
thy of
 pos
ses
sion
ex
cept Thee, O Pre
cep
tor! Have mercy on m
e which is Thy nat
u
ral
qual
ity
, O Sankara, be Thou m
y ref
uge.
(12)

LIST O
F ABBREVIA
TIO
NS
Chh. Up.
........
Chhandogya Up
anishad
T
ait. Up.
........
T
aittiriya Up
anishad
Kau. Up.
........
Kaushit
aki Up
anishad
Ait. Up
.........
Ait
areya Up
anishad
Mun. Up
........
Mundaka Up
anishad
Bri. Up
.........
Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad
Katha Up.
.......
Katha Up
anishad
Kena Up
........
Kena Up
anishad
Prasna Up
.......
Prasna Up
anishad
Svet. Up
........
Svet
asvat
ara Up
anishad
Sat. Br
.........
Sat
ap
atha Brahmana
(14)

ł
&&
lr emara
H$_r_m§
gmXe©Z_
²
[

~«÷gyÌm
{U
]
>
AW àW_m
o@Ü`m
`–
AW àW_– nmX–
0
AWmVmo ~«÷{
&&
0
OÝ_mÚñ
&&
3 emó`mo{ZËdm{YH$aU_² & gy
0
emó`mo{Z
4 g_Ýd`m{YH$aU_² & gy
0
&&
5 B©jË`mÚ{YH$aU_² & gy
0
Jm¡UüoÞ
mË_eã
&&
V{ÞîR>ñ` _mojmonXoemV
ho`
ËdmdM
Zm…
&
&&
J{Vgm_mÝ`mV²
&&
lwVËdm
&
6 AmZÝX_`m{YH$aU_² & gy
0
AmZÝX_`
mo@ä`mgmV²
&&
{dH$maeãXmÞo{V MoÞ àm
_mÝÌd{U©H$_od M J
ZoVamo@
^oXì`nXoem…
&&
H$m_m…
 ZmZw_mZmn
&18
Apñ_Þñ` M V
ÚmoJ§ e
7 AÝVa{YH$aU_² & gy
0
AÝVñVÕ_m}nXoem
^oXì`
nXoem
…mÝ
8 AmH$mem{Y
H$aU_² &
 gy
0
9 àmUm{YH$aU_² & gy
0
AV E
d àmU
&
10 Á`mo{Vüa
Um{YH$aU_² &
gy
0
Á`mo{Vü
&&24
N>ÝXmo@{^Ym
ZmÞo{V MoÞ V
Wm
  MoVmo@n©U
{ZJXmÎm
Wm

{h  Xe©Z_² &&2
^y
Vm{XnmXì`nXo
emo
nnÎmo
ü¡
d_²
CnXoe^oXmÞo{V M
oÞmo^`pñ_Þ-
  ß`{damoYmV²
&&
(15)

11 àVX©Zm{YH$aU_² & gy
0
àmUñVWmZw
&&28
Z dºw$amË_monXoem{X{V
  MoXÜ`mË_gå~ÝY^
y_m
emóÑîQçm V
Ord_w»`àmU{bﬁmÞo{V
  MoÞmonmgmÌ¡{dÜ`Xm
{lVËdm{Xh
  VÚmoJmV²

&&
B{V d¡`m{g−`m§ emaraH$_r_m§gm`m§ àW_mÜ`m`ñ` àW_– nmX
AW {
ÛVr` n
mX–
1 gd©Ì à{gÕç{YH$aU_² & gy
0
{dd{jVJwUm
H$_©H$V©¥ì
eãX{deo
A^©H$m¡H$ñËdmÎmX²>ì`nXoem… Zo{V
  MoÞ
{ZMmæ`ËdmXod§
gå^moJàm
{á[a{V M
2 AÌ{YH$aU_² & gy
0
0
Jwhm§ à{dï>mdmË_mZm
¡ {h
  VÔe
©Zm
{deo
fUm
&
4 AÝVa{YH$aU_² & gy
0
AÝVa CnnÎ
ñWm
Zm{
Xì`nXo
lwVmon{ZfËH$JË`{^Ym
AZdpñWVoagå^dm
5 AÝV`m©å`{
0
AÝV`m
©å`{YXodm{Xfw
Z M ñ_mV©_VÕ_m©{^
emaraüm
o^`o@{n {h
  ^oXoZ¡Z_Yr`V
6 AÑí`Ëdm
{YH$aU_²
0
AÑí`Ëdm{XJwUH$mo Y_m
{deofU^oXì`nXoemä`
m§ M
  ZoV
am¡
&
ê$nmonÝ`m
0
d¡œmZa– gmYmaUeãX-
ñ_`©_mU_Zw_mZ§ ñ`
eãXm{Xä`mo@ÝV
–à{Vð>mZm… Zo{V MoÞ
  VWm
Ñï>çwnXoemXgå^dmËnwéf_{n
AV Ed Z XodVm
gmjmXß`{da
A{^ì`ºo$[aË`mí_aÏ`–
&&
AZwñ_¥Vo~m©X[
(16)

gånÎmo[a{V
 O¡{_{ZñVWm {h
Am_ZpÝV M¡Z_p
&&32
AW V¥Vr`– n
mX–
0
_wº$mongwß`ì`nXoem
ZmZw_mZ_VÀN>ã
àmU
&&
pñWË
&
0
^y_m gåàgmXmXÜ`wnXoem
y
0
&&
AÝ`^m
4 B©
j{VH$_©
ì`nXo
em{YH$aU
_²
0
5 Xham
{YH$
aU_²
0
J{VeãX
mä`m§ VWm {h Ñ
ï>
§
  {bﬁ§
Y¥V
oü _{håZ
mo@
ñ`mpñ_ÞwnbãYo
à{gÕo
BVanam_em©Ëg B
{V
  MoÞmgå^dmV
CÎmam
AënlwVo[a{V
0
AZwH
¥$Vo
ñVñ`
 gy
0
eãXmX
od à{_
öÚnoj`m Vw
&&
8 XodVm{YH
0
VXw
n`©
{n ~mXam`U–

gå^dmV²
 &&26
{damoY– H$_©Ur{V
  MoÞmZoH$à{VnÎ
eãX B{V MoÞmV–

à^dm
ËàË`jm
Zw
_mZ
mä`
m_²
&
AV E
d M pZ
Ë`Ëd_²
&
g_mZZm_
ê$nË
dm…md¥Îmmdß`{
damoYmo
  Xe©Z
mËñ_¥
_Üdm{Xîdgå^dmXZ{YH$m
a§
Á`mo{V{f ^md
&
^md§ Vw ~mXa
m`Umo@pñV {
0
ewJñ` VX
ZmXal
dUmÎmXmÐ
dUmV²
  gyÀ`Vo
j{Ì`ËdmdJVoümoÎ
maÌ M¡ÌaWoZ
(17)

g§ñH$manam_em©V²
  VX^mdm{^
VX^md{ZYm
©aUo M àd¥Îm
ldUmÜ``Z
mW©à{VfoYmV²
  ñ_¥Vo
0
11 Á`mo{Va{YH
0
Á`mo{VX©e©Zm
12 AWm©ÝV
aËdm{X-
gy
0
AmH$memo@Wm©
ÝVaËdm{Xì`nX
oemV²
13 gwfwßË`wËH«$mÝË`{Y-
gy
0
gwfwßË`wËH«$mÝË`m
B{V d¡`m{g−`m§ emaraH$_r_m§gm`m§ àW_mÜ`m`ñ` V¥Vr`– nmX
AW MVwW©– nmX–
0
AmZw_m{ZH
$_ß`oHo$fm{_{V
 MoÞ
  earaê$nH${dÝ
`ñVJ¥hr
VoX©e©`{V
ko`
ËdmdM
Zm…
&
dXVr{V MoÞ àmk
mo {h
&&
Ì`mUm_od M¡d_wnÝ
`mg–
&&
0
Á`mo{VénH«$_m Vw V
Wm
  øYr`V
&&
H$ënZmonXoem…
3 g§»`mong§J«hm{Y-
  H$aU_²
&
gy
0
Z g§»`mong§J«h
mX{n
  ZmZm^mdmX{
VaoH$m…
&&
àmUmX`mo
 dm−`eofmV²
&&
Á`mo{Vf¡Ho
$fm_gË
&&
4 H$maUËdm{YH$a
0
H$maUËdoZ MmH$mem{Xfw
  `Wm
ì`n{
Xï>moº
g_mH
$fm
5 ~mbm−`{Y
& gy
0
OJÛm
{MËdm
Ord_w»`àmU{bﬁm
Þo{V MoÎmX²
  ì`m»`mV_²

AÝ`mW
ª Vw O¡{_{Z–
  àíZì`m»
`mZmä`m_{
n
&&
6 dm−`mÝd
`m{Y-
  H$aU_²
&
gy
0
&&19
à{Vkm{gÕo{b©ﬁ_m
CËH«${_î`V
  Edå^mdm
(18)

AdpñWVo[a{V H$meH¥$Ë
7 àH¥$Ë`{YH$a
0
àH¥${Vü
  à{VkmÑï
>mÝVmZwn
amoYmV²
&
gmjm…mo
&&25
AmË_H¥$Vo–
&&
`mo{Zü {h J
0
EVoZ gd}
 ì`m»`m
Vm
  ì`m
»`m
B{V d¡`m{g−`m§ emaraH$_r_m§gm`m§ àW_mÜ`m`ñ` MV
AW {
ÛVr`mo
@Ü`m`–
AW àW_– nmX–
y
0
ñ_¥Ë`ZdH$meXmof
àgﬁ B{V
  MoÞmÝ`
ñ_¥Ë`ZdH$me-
  Xmof
àgﬁm
V²
&
BVaofm§ Mm
2 `moJàË`w
−Ë`{YH$aU
0
3 {dbjUË
dm{YH$aU
0
Z {dbjUËdmXñ` VWm
Ëd§ M
  eãXmV²
&&
A{^_m{Zì`nXoeñVw
  {deofmZwJ
{Vä`m_²
Ag{X{V Mo
Þ à{Vfo
Y_mÌËdmV²
AnrVm¡ V
Z Vw Ñï
&&
ñdnjXm
ofm
&
VH$m©à{Vð>mZm
X{n AÝ`WmZ
w_o`{_{V
  MoV²

Ed_ß`{Z
0
EVoZ {eï>mn[aJ
«hm A{n
  ì`m
»`m
5 ^mo−ÌmnÎ`
m{YH$a
0
^mo−ÌmnÎ
moa{d^mJ
üoËñ`m-
  ëbmoH$dV² &&
6 Amaå^
Um{YH$a
0
VXZÝ`Ëd
_maå^UeãX
m{Xä`–
AgX²ì`nXoemÞo{V MoÞ Y_m©Ý
VaoU
  dm−`eofmV²
`wºo$– eã
>
`Wm
 M àm
Um{
&
7 BVaì`nXoem
{YH$aU_²
0
BVaì`nXo
em{ÕVmH$aUm{X-
  Xmof
àg{º
&
A{YH§$ Vw ^oX{ZX}emV
8 Cng§hmaXe©Zm{YH$aU_² & gy
0
Cng§hmaXe©ZmÞo
(19)

9 H¥$ËñZàg−Ë`{YH$aU_² & gy
0
H¥$ËñZàg{º${Z©ad`dËdeãXH$monmo
0
gdm}noVm M V
{dH$aUËdmÞo{V MoV²  V
0
Z à`moOZdÎ
bmoH$dÎmw br
12 d¡få`Z¡K¥©Ê`m{Y-
gy
0
d¡få`Z¡K©¥Ê`
o Z gmnojËdmV²
  VWm
{h
Xe©`{
&
Z H$_m©
{d^mJm{X
{V
  MoÞmZm{XËdmV²
CnnÚVo Mmß`
0
AW {ÛVr`– nmX–
0
aMZmZwnnÎmoü ZmZw_mZ_
n`mo@å~
ì`{Vao
H$mZdpñWVo
ümZno
jËdmV²
AÝ`Ìm^mdm… Z V¥
Um{XdV²
Aä`wnJ_
&&
nwéfmí_d{X{V MoV² VW
AÝ`WmZw{_Vm¡ M ke{º$
&&
{dà{VfoYm…m
2 _hÔrKm©{YH$a
0
_hÔrK©dX²dm
&&
3 na_mUwOJXH$maUËdm{Y-
  H$aU_²
&
gy
0
C^`Wm{n Z
  H$_m
©VñV
X^md
&
g_dm`mä
`wnJ_m…
  gmå`mXZd
pñWVo–
{ZË`_od M ^mdmV
ê$nm{X_Îdm… {dn`©`
mo
  Xe©Z
mV²
&
&&16
An[aJ«hm…
mË`ÝV_Zn
&17
0
g_wXm` C^`h
oVwHo$@{n
  VXàm
BVaoVaàË``Ëdm{X{V MoÞm
oËn{Îm_mÌ-
CÎmam
oËnmXo M nyd©{ZamoYmV
Ag{V à{Vkm
onamoYmo
  `m¡
JnÚ_
Ý`
(20)

à{Vg§»
`m@à{Vg»`m-
  {ZamoYmà
m{áa{dÀN>oXmV
&&23
AZwñ
_¥Vo
&
Zmg
Vmo
@Ñï>Ëdm
CXmgrZmZ
0
Zm^md C
d¡Yå`m©… Z ñdßZm
Z ^mdmo@
j{UH
gd©WmZwnnÎm
6 EH$pñ_Þgå^dm{Y-
gy
0
Ed§
 MmË_
m@H
$mËñÝ
`©_²
&
Z M n`m©`
mXß`{damoY
mo
  {dH$mam{Xä`–
&&
AÝË`mdpñ
WVoümo^`{ZË
`Ëdm-
& gy
0
gå~ÝYm
H$aUd…oÞ ^moJm
AÝVdÎ
d_gd©kVm dm
8 CËnÎ
`gå^dm{Y-
gy
0
CËnÎ
`gå^
dmV
&
Z M H$V©w– H$aU_
{dkmZm{X^
mdo dm
  VXà{
Vfo
AW V¥Vr`– n
mX–
0
ApñV
Jm¡Ê`gå^d
&
ñ`m…¡H$ñ` ~«÷eã
à{Vkm@hm{Zaì
`{V-
  aoH$mÀN>ãX
`md{ÛH$ma§ V
w {d^mJm
o
2 _mV[aœm{YH$a
0
EVoZ _mV[aû
dm ì`m»`
&&
0
Agå^dñVw gVmo@
0
VoOmo@V–
&
0
Amn
&
0
n¥{Wdr A{YH$ma
ê$n-
(21)

0
VX{^Ü`mZ
mXod Vw
  V{ëbﬁmV
²
0
{dn`©`oU Vw H«$_m
o@V–
  CnnÚV
o
9 AÝVa
m{dkmZm{Y
& gy
0
AÝVam
 {dkmZ_Zgr
 H«$_oU
  V{—ﬁm{X{V
MoÞ
10 MamM
aì`nml`{
0
MamMaì`nml
`ñVw ñ`mV² VX
>ì`nX
oemo
  ^mº$–
V×md^m{dËdmV
0
ZmË_
m@lw
Vo{Z
©Ë`Ëdm
… Vm
0
kmo
@V E
&
13 CËH«$mpÝVJË`{Y
0
CËH«
$mpÝVJË
&&19
ñdmË
_Zm MmoÎma`mo
&20
ZmUwaVÀ
N®>Vo[a{V
A{damoYüÝXZdV
AdpñW{Vd¡eoî`m{X{V
  MoÞmÜ`wnJ_m
X²Y¥{X
JwUmÛm@
&&
n¥WJwnXoemV² &
VÒþUgmaËdmV² V
  àmk
`mdXmË_^m{dËdm… Z
nw§ñËdm{XdV² Ëdñ`
  gVmo@{^ì`{
&&31
{ZË`monbãÜ`ZwnbpãYàgﬁmo@
Ý`Va-
  {Z`_mo
&
0
H$Vm© emóm
{dhmamonXoem
CnmXmZmV²
&&
ì`nXoem… {H«$`m`m
§ Z
e{º${dn`©`mV
g_mÜ`^md
&&
15 Vjm{YH$aU_
0
&&
16 nam`
Îmm{YH$a
0
namÎmw V
H¥$Và`ËZmnojñVw {d{hV
à{V{fÕm-
0
A§emo ZmZ
mì`nXoemXÝ`W
m
  Mm{n
Xme{H$Vdm{XËd_Yr`
V
_ÝÌd
Um©
&
A{n M
 ñ_`©V
&
(22)

AZwkmn[ah
mam¡
  Xohgå
~ÝYm‡`mo{Vam{X
&48
Am^
mg E
AÑï>m{
Z`_
mV²
&
A{^gÝÜ`m
àXoem{X{V MoÞmÝ
V^m©dmV
AW MVwW©– nmX–
1 àmUmoËn
0
Jm¡Ê`gå^d
&&
VËàm
−N®
2 gáJË`{YH$aU_
0
gá JVo{d©e
hñVmX`ñ
Vw pñWVo
@Vmo Z¡d_
0
&&
0
0
Z dm`w{H«$`o n¥W
Mjwam{XdÎm
w
  VËgh
{eï>ç
m{Xä
AH$aUË
dm… Z X
mofñVWm {h
  Xe©`
n#md¥{Îm_©Zm
0
AUwü
&
7 Á`mo{VamÚ{YH$a
0
Á`mo{Vam
Ú{YîR>mZ§ Vw
  VXm_
ZZm
àmU
dVm
 eãXmV
&
Vñ`
 M {Z
Ë`Ëdm
0
V BpÝÐ
`m{U VX²>
ì`nXo
emXÝ`Ì
  loîR>m
V²
&
^oXlwV
&
9 g§km_y{V©−b¥ßË`{Y-
  H$aU_²
gy
0
g§km_y{V©−b¥{á
ñVw {Ìd¥ËHw$d©V
  CnXoe
mV²
&
_m§gm{
X ^m¡_
§
d¡eoî`mÎ
mw VÛmXñVÛm
B{V d¡`m{g−`m§ emaraH$_r_m§gm`m§ {ÛVr`mÜ`m`ñ` MVwW©– nmX–
AW V¥Vr
`mo@Ü`
m`
–
AW àW_– nmX–
(23)

1 VXÝVaà{
VnÎ`{YH$
0
VXÝVaà{V
nÎmm¡ a
§h{V g§n[a
îdº$–
  àíZ{Zê$nUm
ä`m_²
Í`m
Ë_H$Ëdm
Îm
w ^y`
ñËdmV
&
A½Ý`m
{XJ{VlwVo[a{V M
oÞ
  ^mº
$ËdmV
²
&
àW_o@l
dUm{X{
V MoÞ Vm Ed
AlwVËdm{X{V MoÞoï>m{XH$m[aUm§
&&
^mº§$ d
mZmË_{
dÎdmÎmWm {h
&&
2 H¥$VmË``m{Y
0
H¥$VmË``o@Zwe`dm
Z²  Ñï>ñ_¥{Vä`m§
  `WoV_Zod§
MaUm{X{V MoÞm
onbjUmW}{V
AmZW©−
`{_{V MoÞ
  VXnoj
ËdmV
²
&
gwH¥$VXwîH¥$Vo Edo{V V
0
A{Zï>m
{XH$m
[aU
m_{n
 M lw
V_²
&
g§`_Zo ËdZw^y`oVa
ofm_mam
ohmdamoh
m¡
  VX²J{VXe©ZmV
A{n M
VÌm{n M
  VX²ì`mnmamX{damoY–
&&
{dÚmH$_©Umo[a{V
 Vw
  àH¥$V
ËdmV
²
&
Z V¥Vr`
ñ_`©Vo@{n M bmoH
Xe©Z
V¥Vr`eãXmd
amoY–
&&
4 gm^mì`mn
Î`{YH$aU_
0
VËgm^mì
`mn{Îmén
&&22
5 Zm{V{Mam{YH$a
0
Zm{V{MaoU
0
AÝ`m{Y{îR>Vofw
  nyd©dX{^bmnmV²
aoVpñg
B{V d¡`m{g−`m§ emaraH$_r_m§gm`m§ V¥Vr`mÜ`m`ñ` àW_– nmX
AW {ÛVr`– nmX–
0
{Z_m©Vma
_m`m_mÌ
§ Vw H$
mËñÝ`}
ZmZ{^ì`º$
-
  ñdê$nËdmV²
gyMH$ü {h lwVoamMj
Vo M
nam{^Ü`
mZmÎmw {Vamo
{hV§ VVmo ø
ñ`
  ~ÝY{dn`
Xoh`mo
JmÛm gmo@{
&
(24)

2 VX^mdm
{YH$aU
0
VX^mdmo ZmS>
rfw VV² lw
VoamË_
{Z
3 H$_m©Zwñ_¥{VeãX{dÜ`{Y
H$aU_² & gy
0
9&
g Ed Vw
4 _w½Yo@Y©gå
0
_w½Yo@Y©gån{Îm
– n[aeofmV
0
Z ñWmZVm
o@{n nañ`mo^`
{bﬁ§ gd©Ì
Z ^oXm{X{V MoÞ
  àË`oH
$_VÛM
ZmV
&
Aê$ndXod {h VËàYmZËdmV
àH$med…md¡`Ï`m
Amh M VÝ_mÌ_
&&
Xe©`{V MmW
AV Ed Mmon_m gy
Aå~wdXJ«hUm
Îmw Z VW
d¥{Õõmg^m−
Ëd_ÝV^m©dmXw^
`-
  gm_ÄOñ`mXod_²
Xe©Z
6 àH¥
$V¡
VmdÎdm{
YH$aU_²
 & gy
0
àH¥$V¡VmdÎ
d§ {h à{VfoY{V
 VVmo
  ~«dr{V
M
VXì`º$
&&23
A{n M g§amYZo
  àË`jm
Zw_m
Zmä
`m_
&
àH$mem{Xd…md¡eoî`§ àH
$meü
  H$_©Ê
`ä`
mgm
AVmo@ZÝVoZ VWm {
h {bﬁ_
C^`ì`nXo
emÎd{h
Hw$ÊS
àH$meml`dÛm V
0
na_VñgoVyÝ_m
Zgå~ÝY
-
&&32
ñWmZ{deofm
&&
AZoZ gd©JV
Ëd-
  _m`m_eãXm{Xä
0
&
Y_ª O¡{_{
&&
nydª Vw ~mXam
`Umo
  hoVwì`nXoemV
AW V¥Vr`– n
mX–
0
(25)

gd©doXmÝVàË``§
  MmoXZmÚ{deofm
V²
^oXmÞo{V MoÞ¡H$ñ`m
ñdmÜ`m`ñ
` VWmËdoZ {
h
  g_mMmao@{YH$mam…
gdd…
0
Cng§hmam
o@Wm©^oXm{Û{Y
-
  eofdËg_mZo M
&&
3 AÝ`WmËd
m{YH$a
0
AÝ`Wm
Ëd§ eãXm{X{V
  MoÞm{deofmV
²
Z dm àH$aU-
  ^oXmËnamodar`
ñËdm{XdV²
g§kmVüoÎm
4 ì`mßË`{YH$
0
0
0
{à`{eañËdmÚàm{áénM`m
nM`m¡
  {h
BVao Ë
dW©gm_mÝ`mV²
7 AmÜ`mZm{Y
& gy
0
AmÜ`mZm` à`mo
OZm^mdmV²
&&
AmË_e
8 AmË_J¥hrË`{YH$aU_² & gy
0
AmË_
J¥hr{V[aVad
XwÎmamV²
&
AÝd`m{X{V
  MoËñ`mXdYmaUmV²
&&
0
H$m`m©»`m
0
g_mZ Ed§
 Mm^oXmV²
&
0
gå~
ÝYm
Xod_Ý
`Ìm
Z dm {deofm
12 gå^¥Ë`{Y
0
g§^¥{VÚwì`mß
0
nwéf{dÚm`m{_d
  MoVaofm_ZmåZmZmV²
14 doYmÚ{YH$a
0
15 hmÝ`{YH$a
0
hmZm¡ Vynm`
ZeãX
-
  eofËdmËHw$emÀN>ÝXñVwË`wn-
  JmZdÎmXwº$_²
&&
0
gmånam`o
  VÎm©ì`m^mdmÎmWmø
&&
N>ÝXV
 C^`
m{da
moY
mV²
&
17 JVoaW©d
0
JVoaW©dÎd_
w^`Wm@Ý`Wm {h
CnnÞñV—jUmW
m}nbãYo-
18 A{Z`_m{YH$a
0
A{Z`_– gdm©gm_{dam
oY–
  eãX
mZw_mZmä
&&31
(26)

19 `mdX{YH$mam{YH$a
0
`mdX{YH$ma_dpñW{Vam
{Y-
20 AjaÜ`{
YH$aU_
0
Aja{Y`m
§ ËddamoY– gm_mÝ
`VØmdm
-
  ä`m_m¡ngXdÎm
0
B`Xm_
ZZm
22 AÝVaËd
0
AÝV
am ^
yVJ
«m_d
ËñdmË_Z
&
AÝ`Wm
 ^oXmZwnn{Îm[
a{V
  MoÞmonXoemÝV
23 ì`{Vhmam{YH$aU_
0
ì`{Vhmamo {
dqefpÝV
  hrVadV²
 gy
0
g¡d {h
 gË`m
25 H$m_mÚ{YH$a
0
H$m_mX
rVaÌ VÌ
Mm`VZm{Xä`–
26 AmXa
m{YH$a
0
AmXa
mXbm
Cnpñ
WVo@VñVÛMZ
&
0
V{ÞYm©aUm
{Z`_ñVX²>Xwï>o–
  n¥W½Ü`à{V~
ÝY–
&&
0
29 {bﬁ
^y
`ñËd
m{YH$
aU_²
0
{bﬁ^y`ñËdmÎm{Õ
  ~br
`ñV
nyd©{dH$ën– àH$aUmËñ`mV
²
  {H«$`m_mZgdV
²
{dÚ¡d Vw {ZYm©aUm
Xe©Z
lwË`m{X~br`ñËdm… Z
&&
AZw~ÝYm
{Xä`–
  àkmÝV
an¥W−ËddX²>Ñï>ü
  VXwº
Z gm_mÝ`
mXß`wnbãYo_©¥Ë`wdÞ {h
  bmoH$mn{Îm
naoU M eãXñ` Vm{ÛÜ`
§
  ^y`
ñËdmÎ
dZw~
30 EoH$mËå`
0
ì`{VaoH$ñVØm
dm^m{dËdmÞ
31 Aﬁmd~Õm{Y
& gy
0
Aﬁmd~ÕmñVw Z e
mImgw {h
_ÝÌm{XdÛm@{dam
32 ^y_Á
y
0
^yåZ– H«$VwdÁÁ`m`ñËd§ VWm
 {h
0
ZmZm eãX
m{X^o
&&58
0
0
H$må`mñ
Vw `WmH$m_
§ g_w
…r`oaÞ
 dm
(27)

  nyd©hoËd^mdmV²
36 `W
ml`^mdm{
YH$a
gy
0
Aﬁofw `Wml
&&61
&&
Z dm VËgh^md
mlwVo–
&
B{V d¡`m{g−`m§ emaraH$_r_m§gm`m§ V¥Vr`mÜ`m`ñ` V¥Vr`– nmX
(28)

AW MVwW©– nmX–
1 nwéfmWm©{YH$aU_² & gy
0
nwéfmWm}@
VíeãXm{X{V
eofËdmËnwéfmW©dmXmo `
Wm@Ý
`opîd{V
VÀ
N®>Vo
&
&&
A{YH$monXoemÎ
mw ~mXam
`Uñ`¡d§
Vwë`§ Vw Xe©Z
{d^mJ– eVdV
AÜ``
Z_m
Zm{deofm
ñVwV`o@Zw_{V
&&
Cn_Xª
2 nam_em©{YH$a
0
nam_eª O¡{_{ZaMm
oXZm MmndX{V
AZwîR>
o`§ ~mXam`U–
 gmå`lw
&&19
{d{Ydm© YmaU
0
ñVw{V_mÌ_wnXmZm{X{V
^md
eãXm…
&
0
nm[aßbdm
Wm© B{V MoÞ
0
AV Ed Mm¾rÝYZmÚ
&&25
6 gdm©nojm{YH$aU_² & gy
0
gdm©nojm M `k
e_X_mÚwnoV– ñ`mÎmW
m{n Vw
  V{ÛYoñ
VX>ﬁ
V`m
  Vofm_dí`m
0
gdm©ÞmZw_{Vü àm
UmË``o
  VÔe
©Zm
&&
eãXümVmo@H$m_H$
&&
0
gd©Wm{n V E
dmo^`{bﬁmV
AZ{^^d§ M Xe©`{V
9 {dYwam{YH
0
AÝVam
{deofmZwJ
AVpñËdVa
ÁÁ`m`
mo {bﬁm
0
VX²>^yVñ` Vw ZmV
Ømdmo O¡{_Zoa{n
(29)

  {Z`_mVÐÿnm^
11 Am{Y
H$m[aH
$m{Y-

gy
0
Z Mm{YH$m[aH$_{n
  nVZmZw_
mZmÎmX`moJmV²
&&
Cnnyd©_{n ËdoHo$
  ^md_eZdÎ
12 ~{ha{YH
0
>~{hñVy
^`Wm{n ñ_
&&43
13 ñdmå`{YH
0
AmpËd©Á`{_Ë`m¡Sw>bmo{_ñVñ_¡ {h
lwVoü
&
14 ghH$m`©ÝVa
{dÜ`{Y-
H$aU_² & gy
0
ghH$m`©Ý
Va{d{Y– njoU V¥V
r`§
  VÛVmo
H¥$ËñZ^mdmÎm
w J¥{hUm
_m¡Zd{XVaofm
15 AZm{dîH$mam{YH$a
0
AZm{dîHw$d©ÞÝd`m
16 Eo{hH$m{YH$a
0
Eo{hH$_ß`
àñVwVà{V~
ÝYo
  VÔe
©Zm
y
0
Ed§ _w{º$\$bm{Z`_ñV
XdñWm-
B{V d¡`m{g−`m§ emaraH$_r_m§gm`m§ V¥Vr`mÜ`m`ñ` MV
AW MVwWm
}@Ym`m
`–
AW àW_– nmX–
0
Amd¥{Îma
{bﬁm
&
0
AmË_o{V VynJÀ
N>pÝV J«mh
0
0
~«÷
Ñ{ï>éËH$f
m©V
&
 gy
0
Am{XË`{X_V`ümﬁ CnnÎm
0
AmgrZ– g
&&
Ü`m
Zm…
&
7 EH$mJ«Vm{
0
`Ì¡H$mJ«Vm
 VÌm{deofm
8 Amàm`Um{YH
& gy
0
Am àm`UmÎmÌm{n
 {h Ñï
>_²
&
9 VX{YJ_m{YH
0
VX{YJ_ CÎ
manydm©K`
moaíbof{dZm
em¡
(30)
B{V d¡`m{g−`m§ emaraH$_r_m§gm`m§ MVwWm©Ü`m`ñ` {ÛVr`– nmX–

0
BVañ`mß`od_g§íbof
11 AZmaãYm{YH$a
0
AZmaãYH$m
`} Ed Vw nyd}
  VXdY
&
12 A{¾
hmoÌmÚ{Y
-
gy
0
A{¾hmoÌ
m{X Vw
 VËH$
m`m©`¡d
&&
AVmo@Ý
`m{n øoHo$fm
0
14 BVajnUm
{YH$aU_²
0
^moJoZ
pËdVao jn{`Ëdm
  gånÚV
B{V d¡`m{g−`m§ emaraH$_r_m§gm`m§ MVwWm©Ü`m`ñ` àW_– n
AW {ÛVr`– nmX–
1 dmJ{YH$aU
0
dmL²_Z{g Xe©ZmÀ
AV Ed M gdm
2 _Zmo@{YH$a
0
3 AÜ`jm{YH
0
gmo@Ü`jo VXwnJ
^yVofw VÀN®
>Vo–
0
g_mZm Mm
g¥Ë`wnH«$_mX_¥VËd§
  MmZwnmoî`
0
VXmnrVo– g§gma
gyú_§ à_mUVü V
Zmo
n_X}Z
Añ`¡d MmonnÎ
0
à{VfoYm{X{V M
oÞ emaram
ñ_`©V
7 dmJm{
Xb`m{YH$
 gy
0
Vm{Z nao VWm ø
&
8 A{d^mJm{
0
A{d^mJm
0
VXmoH$mo@J«ÁdbZ
§ VËàH$m{eVÛmam
o
  {dÚmgm_Ï`m©Î
mÀN>ofJË`Zwñ_¥{V-
  `moJm…
hmXm©Zw
J¥hrV–
&&
10 aíå`
0
{Z{e Zo{V M
oÞ gå~ÝYñ`
  `mdÔoh^m
{dËdmÔe©`{V
0
AVüm`Zo@
(31)

`mo{JZ– à{V
 M ñ_`©Vo ñ_mV}
  M¡V
&
AW V¥Vr`– n
mX–
0
A{M©am{XZm V
0
dm`w_ãXmX{deof{deofm
0
V{S>Vmo@{
Y déU–
&&
0
Am{Vdm{hH$
mñV{—ﬁ
C^`ì`m_mo
hmÎmpËg
Õo–
d¡ÚwVoZ¡d VVñVÀ
0
gm_rß`mÎmw VX
²>ì
`nXo
&&
H$m`m©Ë
``o VXÜ`jo
U ghmV–
ñ_¥V
6 AàVrH$mbå
~Zm{Y-
gy
0
AàVrH$mb
å~ZmÞ`Vr{V
  ~mXam`U
C^`Wm@XmofmÎmV²-
  H«$V
B{V d¡`m{g−`m§ emaraH$_r_m§gm`m§ MVwWm©Ü`m`ñ` V¥Vr`– n
0
_wº$– à{
0
A{d^mJoZ
0
~«m÷oU O¡{_{ZénÝ`m
{M{VVÝ_m
ÌoU
Ed_ß`wnÝ
`mgmV
² nyd©^mdmX{damoY
§
0
g‚>ënmXod Vw VÀ
5 A^md
m{YH$a
0
A^md§ ~m
^md§ O¡{_{Z{d©H$ënm
ÛmXemhdXw^`
{dY§
  ~mXam`Umo@V–
&
VÝd^m
0
àXrndXmdoeñVWm {h
(32)

ñdmß``g§nÎ
`moaÝ`
Vamnoj_m{dîH¥$V
§
7 OJX²ì`mn
mam{Y-
gy
0
OJX²>ì`mnma
dOª
  àH$aUmXg{Þ{hVË
àË`jmonXoem{X{V
  MoÞm{YH$m[aH$_ÊS>b
&&
{dH$mamd{V© M V
Wm {h
  pñW{
&&
Xe©`Vü¡d§ àË`jmZw_m
^moJ_mÌg
må`{bﬁ
&21
AZmd¥{Îm
– eãXmXZmd¥{Îm–
  eãXmV
&
B{V d¡`m{g−`m§ emaraH$_r_m§gm`m§ MVwWm©Ü`m`ñ` M
g_máü
~«÷
gyÌnmR>
33

INTRODUCTION
Hari Om! Sal
u
t
a
tions to Sri V
yasa, the A
vat
ara of V
ishnu, the
wise Badarayana and Sri Krishna Dv
aip
ayana.
V
edas con
sist of three por
tions viz.,
 the Karma K
anda which
deals with sac
ri
fices or cer
e
mo
nial rites, t
he Up
asana Kanda which
treat
s of Up
asana (wor
ship) and the Jnana Kanda which deals with
knowl
edge of Brah
man. Karma K
anda rep
re
sent
s the feet of
 a man,
Up
asana Kanda the heart,
 and the Jnana Kanda the head.
 Just as the
head is the most im
por
t
ant por
tion of a ma
n, so also the Up
anishads
which treat of t
he knowl
edge por
tion of t
he V
edas is the head of the
V
edas. Hence it is said to be the S
iras (head) of V
edas.
Mimamsa means the in
ves
ti
ga
tion or en
quiry into t
he con
nected
mean
ing of the sa
cred text
s. Of thi
s Mimamsa two branches have
been re
cog
nised, the Purv
a Mimamsa (ear
lier) and the Utt
ara
Mimamsa (the lat

ter). The for mer sys
tema
tises the Karma
KandaŠthe por
tion of t
he V
eda which per
t
ains to ac
tion and sac
ri
-
fices and which com
prises Samhit
as and the Brahmanas; the l
at
ter
sys
tema
tises the Jnana Kanda i.
e., t
hat p
art of the V
edas which in
-
cludes the Aranyaka por
tion of t
he Brahmanas and the Up
anishads.
Jaimini is the au
thor of the P
urva Mimamsa.
 Sri V
yasa (Badarayana
or Krishna Dvaip
ayana) the Guru of Jaimi
ni is the au
thor of the
Brahma Sut
ras oth
er
wise known as V
edant
a Sutras. The study
 of
Brahma Sut
ras is a syn
thetic study
 of the Up
anishads. It t
reat
s of the
V
edant
a
phi los o phy
.
The V
edas are eter
nal. They were not
 writ
ten by any
 in
di
vid
ual.
They came out f
rom the breath of Hirany
agarbha (Lord Brahma).
V
edant
a is the end or gist of t
he V
edas. It deals wit
h the knowl
edge
por
tion. V
edant
a is not mere spec
u
la
tion. I
t is the au
then
tic re
cord of
tran scen den t
al
ex pe ri ences
or
di rect
and
ac tual
reali sa tion
of
the
great Hindu Rishis or seers. Brahma Sutras is the Sci
ence of the
Soul.
Sutras are con
cise aph
o
risms. They giv
e the es
sence of the ar
-
gu
ment
s on a topic. Max
i
mum of t
hought is com
pressed or con
-
densed into these Sut
ras in as few words as pos

si ble. It
 is easy to
re mem ber
them.
Great
in tel lec tual

peo ple
only
,
with
reali sa tion,
can
ł
_– &&
3

com
pose Sutras. They are clues or aids to mem

ory. They can
not be
un der stood
with out
a
lu cid
com men t
ary
(Bhashya).
The
com men t
ary
also is in need of fur
ther elab
o
rate ex
pla
na
tion. Thus t
he in
ter
pre
t
a
-
tions of the S
utras gave rise to var
i
ous kinds of lit
er
ary writ
ings such
as V
rittis (gloss) and Karikas. The dif

fer ent Acharyas (found
ers of dif

-
fer
ent schools of thought) hav
e given thei
r own in
ter
pre
t
a
tions of the
Sutras to es
t
ab
lish their own doc
trines. The Bhashy
a of Sri Sankara
on Brahma Sut
ras is known as
 Sariraka Bhashya. His school of
thought is Kev
ala Advait
a. The Bhashya of
 Sri Ramanuja who
founded the V
isisht
advait
a School is called Sri Bhashy
a. The com
-
men
t
ary of Sri Nim
barkacharya is known as V
edant
a-p
arijat
a-
saurabha. Sri V
allabhacharya ex
pounded his sys
tem of phi
los
o
phy of
Suddhadvait
a (pure mo
nism) and his com
men
t
ary on the Brahma
Sutras is known as Anu Bhashya.
San
skrit is very elas
tic. It
 is like Kamadhenu or Kalp
at
aru. Y
ou
can milk out of it
 var
i
ous kinds of Rasas ac
cord
ing to your in
tel
lec
tual
cal i bre
and
spir i tual
ex pe ri ences.
There fore
dif
 fer ent
Acharyas
have
built dif

fer ent sys
tems of thoug
ht or cult
s by in
ter
pret
ing the Sut
ras in
their own ways and be
came found
ers of sect
s. Madhva f
ounded his
own sys
tem of Dv
ait
a. The cult
s of V
ishnu known as Bhagavat
a or
Pancharatra and those of S
iva, P
asupat
a or Mahesvara have in
ter
-
preted Brahma Sut
ras in ac
cor
dance with their own ten
et
s.
Nimbarkacharya in
ter
preted the V
edant
a sys
tem from t
he st
and

pointof Bhedabheda-Dvait
advait
a. He was largely in
flu
enced by the teach
-
ings of Bhaskara who flour
ished in the first hal
f of t
he ninth cen
tury
.
The the
ory held by B
haskara and Nimbarka was
 held by the an
cient
teacher Audulomi.
 Badarayana him
self re
fers to this the
ory in his
Brahma Sut
ras.
There are more than four
teen com
men
t
ar
ies on the Brahma
Sutras. Sri A
pp
aya Dikshit
a ren
dered the com
men
t
ary of Sri S
ankara
more clear by his Parimala,
 Sri V
achaspat
i Misra by his work Bhamati
and Sri Amalananda S
arasvati by hi
s Kalp
at
aru.
The er
ro
ne
ous iden
ti
fi
ca
tion of t
he body with t
he pure At
man is
the root cause for hu
man suf

fer ings and mis
er
ies and for births and
deaths. Y
ou iden
tify
 your
self with the body
 and say
, ‚I am f
air
, dark,
stout or thin.
 I am a Brah
min, I am
 a Kshatriya,
 I am a doc
tor
™. Y
ou
iden
tify
 your
self with the senses and say
, ‚I am bl
ind, I am du
mb™. Y
ou
iden
tify
 your
self with the m
ind and say
, ‚I know noth
ing. I know ev
ery
-
thing. I
 be
came an
gry
. I en
joyed a good meal.
 I am suf

fer ing from this
dis
ease™. The en
tire ob
ject of the B
rahma Sutras is to re
move thi
s er
-
ro
ne
ous iden
ti
fi
ca
tion of t
he Soul with t
he body which is the root
cause of your suf

fer ings and mis
er
ies, which is the prod
uct of A
vidya
(ig
no
rance) and help you in the at
t
ain
ment of t
he fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion
through knowl
edge of Brah
man.
INTR
ODUCT
ION
4

The Up
anishads seem to be full of con
tra
dic
tions at fi
rst. They
do not con
t
ain con
sis
tent sys
tem of t
hought. S
ri V
yasa sys
tema
tised
the thought
s or phi
los
o
phy of t
he Up
anishads in his Brahma Sutras.
The Sutras rec
on
cile the con
flict
ing st
ate
ment
s of the Up
anishads. In
re
al
ity t
here are no con
flict
s for the thinker
. Audulomi
 and Asmarathya
also did this work in their own way and founded t
heir own schools of
thought.
Those who wish to study the phi
los
o
phy of V
edant
a should
study the T
en Clas
si
cal Upani
shads and the Brahma Sutras. A
ll
Acharyas have com
mented on Brahma S
utras. This is a great au
thor
-
ity f
or ev
ery philo
soph
i
cal school in In
dia. If
 any Acharya wishes to es
-
t
ab
lish his own cult or sect or school of thought he will hav
e to write a
com
men
t
ary of his own on Brahma S
utras. Then only i
t will be re
cog
-
nised.
The five great
 Acharyas: Sri S
ankara the ex
po
nent of K
evala
Advait
a or un
com
pro
mis
ing mo
nism, Sri Ramanuja t
he ex
po
nent of
V
isisht
advait
a or qual
i
fied mo
nism, Sri Nimbarka the ex

po nent of
Bhedabheda-vada, S
ri Madhva the ex

po nent of strict Dv
aitism or
Dvait
a-vada and Sri V
allabha the ex

po nent of S
uddhadvait
a-vada or
pure mo
nism agree that Brah
man is the cause of this world and that
knowl
edge of Brah
man leads to Moksha or the fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion,
which is the goal of lif
e. They also em
phat
i
cally de
clared that Brah
-
man can be known only through the scrip
tures and not through mere
rea
son
ing. But
 they dif

fer amongst them

selves as to the na ture of thi
s
Brah
man, the re
la
tion of t
he in
di
vid
ual soul to Brah
man, the st
ate of
the soul in the st
ate of f
i
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion, t
he means of at
t
ain
ing It
and It
s cau
sal
ity wit
h ref
er
ence to this uni
verse.
Ac
cord
ing to Sri S
ankara, there is one Ab
so
lute Brah
man who is
Sat-chit-ananda,
 who is of an ab
so
lutely
 ho
mo
ge
neous na
ture. The
ap
pear
ance of this world is due to May
aŠthe il
lu
sory power of Brah
-
man which is nei
ther Sat nor A
sat. This world is un
real. This world is a
V
ivart
a
or
ap p
ar ent
mod i fi ca ti
on
through
Maya.
Brah man
ap pears
as
this uni
verse through Maya.
 Brah
man is the only re
al
ity
. The in
di
vid
-
ual soul has lim
ited him
self through A
vidya and i
den
ti
fi
ca
tion with t
he
body and other v
e
hi
cles. Through his self
ish ac
tions he en
joys the
fruit
s of his ac
tions. He be
comes the ac
tor and enjoyer
. He re
gards
him
self as atomic and as an agent on ac
count of A
vidya or t
he lim
it
ing
Ant
ahkarana. The in
di
vid
ual soul be
comes iden
ti
cal with Brah
man
when his A
vidya i
s de
stroyed. I
n re
al
ity Jiv
a is all-per
vad
ing and iden
-
ti
cal with Brah
man. Isv
ara or Saguna Brah
man is a prod
uct of May
a.
W
or
ship of Isvara leads to K
rama Mukti. The pi

ous dev o
tees (the
knowers of Saguna Brah
man) go to Brahmaloka and at
t
ain fi
nal re
-
lease through high
est knowl
edge. They do not
 re
turn to thi
s world.
They at
t
ain the Nirguna Brah
man at the end of
 the cy
cle. Knowl
edge
of Nirguna Brah
man is the only m
eans of lib
er
a
tion. The knowers of
5
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS

Nirguna Brah
man at
t
ain im
me
di
ate fi
nal re
lease or Sadyomukti.
 They
need not go by t
he p
ath of gods or the p
ath of Devay
ana. They m
erge
them
selves in Para Brah
man. They
 do not go to any
 Loka or world. Sri
Sankara™
s Brah
man is Nirvisesha Brah
man (Im
per
sonal Ab
so
lute)
with out
at trib ut
es.
Ac
cord
ing to Sri Ramanuja,
 Brah
man is with at
trib
utes
(Savisesha). He is en
dowed with all aus
pi
cious qual
i
ties. He is not in
-
tel li gence
it
 self.
In tel li
 gence
is
his
chief
at trib ut
e.
He
con t
ains
within
Him
self what
ever ex
ist
s. W
orld and in
di
vid
ual souls are es
sen
tial real
con
stit
u
ent
s of Brah
man™
s na
ture. Mat

ter (Achit) and soul (Chit) formthe body of
 the Lord, Lord Narayana who is the In
ner Ruler
(Ant
aryamin). Mat

ter and souls are called modes of Him (Prakara).The in
di
vid
ual souls will never be en
tirely re
solved in Brah
man. Ac
-
cord
ing to Ramanuja, B
rah
man is not ab
so
lutely
 one and ho
mo
ge
-
neous. The in
di
vid
ual souls un
dergo a st
ate of S
ankocha
(con
trac
tion) dur
ing Pralaya.
 They ex
p
and (V
ikasa) dur
ing cre
ation.
Sri Ramanuja™
s Brah
man is a Per
sonal God with at
trib
utes. The in
di
-
vid
ual soul of Ramanuja is re
ally in
di
vid
ual. It
 will re
main a per
son
al
ity
for ever
. The soul re
mains in V
aikuntha for ever in a st
ate of bliss and
en
joys the di
vine Aisv
arya of Lord Narayana. B
hakti is the chief
means to fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion and not Jnana. S
ri Ramanuja fol
lows in
his Bhashya the au
thor
ity of
 Bodhayana.
Ac
cord
ing to Sri Nimbarkacharya, B
rah
man is con
sid
ered as
both the ef

fi cient and ma
te
rial cause of the world. Brah
man is both
Nirguna and Saguna. The uni
verse is not un
real or il
lu
sory but is a
true man
i
fes
t
a
tion or Parinama of
 Brah
man. (Sri Ramanuja also
holds this view
. He says ﬁJust as milk is trans
formed into curd, so also
Brah
man has trans
formed Him
self as this uni
verseﬂ). This world is
iden
ti
cal with and at the same t
ime dif

fer ent from B
rah
man just as the
wave or bub
ble is the same and at t
he same time dif

fer ent from wa
ter
.
The in
di
vid
ual souls are part
s of the Su
preme Self.
 They are con
-
trolled by t
he Su
preme Be
ing. The fi

nal sal va
tion lies in real
is
ing the
true na
ture of one™
s own soul. This can be achieved by Bhakti
 (de
vo
-
tion). The in
di
vid
u
al
ity of
 the fi
nite self (Jivat
man) is not dis
solved
even in the st
ate of f
i
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion. S
ri Ramanuja also holds that
the Jiva as
sumes the di
vine body of
 Sri Narayana with f
our hands and
en
joys in V
aikuntha the di
vine Aisv
arya of the Lord.
Y
ou may ask why do such great real
ised souls hold dif

fer ent
views, why hav
e they st
arted dif

fer ent cult
s or sys
tems. The high
est
phi
los
o
phy of S
ri Sankara which be
speaks of the iden
tity
 of the in
di
-
vid
ual soul and the Su
preme Soul can
not be un
der
stood by the v
ast
ma
jor
ity of
 per
sons. There
fore Sri Madhv
a and Sri Ramanuja st
arted
their Bhakti cult
. The dif

fer ent schools are dif

fer ent rungs in the lad
der
of Y
oga. The stu
dent must place his foot
 step by step and f
i
nally reach
the high
est peak of per
fec
tionŠthe K
evaladvai
t
a reali
sa
tion of S
ri
INTR
ODUCT
ION
6

Sankara. As tem
per
a
ment
s are dif

fer ent, dif

fer ent schools are also
nec
es
sary to suit t
he t
aste, ca
p
ac
ity
, and st
age of evo
lu
tion of t
he as
-
pi
rant. There
fore all schools and cult
s are nec
es
sary
. They hav
e got
their own place and scope.
The views of v
ar
i
ous Acharyas are all true in re
spect of the p
ar
-
tic
u
lar as
pect of Brah
man dealt with by
 them each in his own way
.
Sankara has t
aken Brah
man in His tran
scen
den
t
al as
pect, while Sri
Ramanuja has t
aken Him chiefly in His im
ma
nent as
pect. Peo
ple
were fol
low
ing blindly t
he rit
u
als dur
ing the tim
e of Sri San
kara. When
he was pre
p
ar
ing his com
men
t
ary he had in view t
he pur
pose of com
-
bat
ing the bane
ful ef

fects which blind rit
u
al
ism pro
duced. He never
con
demned self
less ser
vice or Nishkama Karma Y
oga. He con
-
demned the per
for
mance of rit
u
als with self
ish mo
tives.
Sankara Bhashya is the old
est of all com
men
t
ar
ies. It up
holds
Suddha-Para-Brah
man or the Su
preme Self of
 the Up
anishads as
some
thing su
pe
rior to other di
vine be
ings. It pro
pounds a very bold
phi los o phy
and
de clares
em phat i cally

that
the
in di vid ual
soul
is
iden ti
-
cal with the Su
preme Self.
 Sankara™
s philo
soph
i
cal view ac
cu
rately
rep
re
sent
s the mean
ing of Badaray
ana. His ex
pla
na
tions only f
aith
-
fully
 ren
der the in
tended mean
ing of Sri V
yasa. This is be
yond doubt
and dis
pute.
S
tu
dent
s of Kevalad
vait
a School of Phi

los o
phy should study t
he
Sariraka Bhashya of S
ri Sankara which is pro
found, sub
tle and
unique. It
 is an au
thor
ity which leads to t
he right un
der
st
and
ing of the
Brahma Sut
ras. The best think
ers of In
dia, Ger
many
, Amer
ica and
Eng
land be
long to this school. I
t oc
cu
pies a high rank in books on phi
-
los
o
phy
. Adv
ait
a phi
los
o
phy is the most sub
lime and the grand
est phi
-
los
o
phy of t
he Hin
dus.
Y
ou can un
der
st
and the Brahma S
utras if you hav
e a knowl
edge
of the t
welve clas
si
cal Upani
shads. Y
ou can un
der
st
and the sec
ond
chap
ter if y
ou have a knowl
edge of Sankhya,
 Nyaya, Y
oga,
Mimamsa, V
aiseshika Darsana and Buddhistic school, too. All
 these
schools are re
futed here by S
ri Sankara. Sri Sankara™
s com
men
t
ary is
the best com
men
t
ary
. Dr
. Thibaut has t
rans
lated this com
men
t
ary into
Eng
lish. ﬁBrahma Sut
rasﬂ is one of the books of Prasthanatray
a. This
is an au
thor
i
t
a
tive book on Hindu Phi

los o
phy
. The work con
sist
s of 4
Adhyay
as (chap
ters), 16 Padas (sec
tions), 223 Adhikaranas (top
ics)
and 555 Sutras (aph
o
risms). The first chap
ter (Samanvay
adhyaya)
uni
fies Brah
man, the sec
ond (A
virodhadhyay
a) re
futes other phi
los
o
-
phies, the thi
rd (Sadhanadhyaya) deals with prac
tice (Sadhana) to at

-
t
ain Brah
man and the fourt
h (Phaladhyay
a) treat
s of fruit
s of
Self-reali
sa
tion. E
ach chap
ter con
t
ains four Padas. Each P
ada con
-
t
ains Adhikaranas. Each Adhikarana has sep

a rate ques
tion to dis
-
cuss. The first fiv
e Adhikaranas of the fi
rst chap
ter are very
, very
im por t
ant.
7
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS

Glory to S
ri V
yasa Bhagavan,
 son of Parasara, the might
y sage,
a Chiranjivi who has writ
ten all Puranas and also di
vided the V
edas.
May his bless
ings be upon you all!
INTR
ODUCT
ION
8

CHAPTER I
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
The V
edant
a Sutras are called ﬁSariraka Mimamsaﬂ be
cause
they deal wit
h Para Brah
man, the S
arira (the em
bod
ied).
In the f
irst chap
ter the au
thor shows that all the V
e
dic text
s uni
-
formly re
fer to Brah
man and find th
eir Samanvay
a (rec
on
cil
i
a
tion) in
Him. In t
he sec
ond chap
ter
, it has been proved t
hat there is no con
flict
be
tween V
edant
a and other Sastras. I
n the third chap
ter the means of
at
t
ain
ing Brah
man are de
scribed. In the fourt
h chap
ter is de
scribed
the re
sult of at
t
ain
ing Brah
man.
The Adhikarin (one who is com
pe
tent t
o un
der
st
and and study
the Sastra) is one who is of tran
quil mind and has the at

trib utes of
Sama (qui
etude), Dama (self-con
trol), etc.
, is full of
 faith,
 is con
st
antly
en
gaged in good thought
s and as
so
ci
ates with the knowers of T
ruth,
whose heart is pu
ri
fied by t
he due dis
charge of all du
ties, re
li
gious
and sec
u
lar
, and with
out any idea of
 re
ward. The Sambandha is the
de
scrip
tion of B
rah
man by thi
s Sastra. The V
ishaya or the sub
ject
mat
ter of thi
s Sastra is the Su
preme Brah
man who is all pure. The
Prayojana (ne
ces
sity) of t
his Sastra is to ob
t
ain reali
sa
tion of t
he Su
-
preme Brah
man, by t
he re
moval of
 all false no
tions that pre
vent t
hat
reali sa tion.
This Sastra con
sist
s of sev
eral Adhikaranas or top
ics or prop
o
-
si
tions. Ev

ery prop o
si
tion con
sist
s of fiv
e p
art
s:Š(1) The
sis or
V
ishaya, (2) Doubt or Samsay
a, (3) Anti-t
he
sis or Purvap
aksha, (4)
Syn
the
sis or right con
clu
sion or Siddhant
a and (5) Sangati or agree
-
ment of t
he prop
o
si
tion with t
he other p
art
s of the Sastra.
ł
BRAHMA
 SUTRAS
Salut
ations to Sri
 Ganesha, Sr
i Sarasv
ati Dev
i,
Sri S
ankarachary
a and all Brahm
a-V
idy
a-Gurus.
9

In the whole book of t
he V
edant
a Sutras Brah
man is the main
theme or the sub
ject mat
ter of dis
cus
sion. An in
ter
pre
t
a
tion of any
p
as
sage must not go away f
rom the sub
ject mat
ter of Brah
man. Each
chap
ter has a p
ar
tic
u
lar topic of it
s own. A
 p
as
sage must be in
ter
-
preted con
sis
tently
 with the t
opic of that chap
ter
. There is a cer
t
ain re
-
la
tion be
tween Adhikaranas or top
ics them
selves. One Adhikarana
leads to an
other through some p
ar
tic
u
lar as
so
ci
a
tion of ideas.
 In a
Pada or sec
tion there are many
 Adhikaranas and they are not put
 to
-
gether in a hap
haz
ard man
ner
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
10

SYNOPSIS
This sec
tion giv
es a bird™
s-eye view of t
he sub
ject dealt wit
h in
the Brahma S
utras namely t
he na
ture of the S
u
preme Brah
man or the
High
est Self,
 of the in
di
vid
ual soul and the uni
verse and their inter-re
-
la
tions and gives hint
s on med
i
t
a
tion on Brah
man.
Adhikarana I:
 Su
tra 1 gives a hint
 that t
he book is meant for
those who are en
dowed with a real de
sire for at
t
ain
ing the knowl
edge
of Brah
man.
Adhikarana II:
 Su
tra 2 de
fines Brah
man as that whence the
world
orig i nates
etc.
Adhikarana III
:
 Su
tra 3 de
clares that Brah
man is the source of
the V
edas and that Brah
man is known only by the st
udy of S
ruti and
by no other means of knowl
edge.
Adhikarana IV
:
 Su
tra 4 proves Brah
man to be the uni

form topicof all V
edant
a text
s.
Adhikarana V
:
 Sutras 5 to 1
1 show that none but B
rah
man is ad
-
mit
ted by S
ruti to be t
he cause of the world. They prov
e by var
i
ous co
-
gent and con
vinc
ing ar
gu
ment
s that the B
rah
man which the V
edantic
text
s pro
claim as the cause of the uni
verse is an in
tel
li
gent prin
ci
ple,
and can
not be iden
ti
fied with t
he non-in
tel
li
gent or in
sen
tient
Pradhana from which the world orig
i
nates, as de
clared by the
Sankhyas.
Adhikarana VI:
 Sutras 12 to 19 raise the ques
tion whether the
‚Anandamay
a™
 in T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad II-5 is merely t
he in
di
vid
ual soul
or the Su
preme Self.
 The Sutras show that B
rah
man is All-Bli
ss and
that by
 the term ‚A
nandamaya™
 in Sruti is meant
 nei
ther the in
di
vid
ual
soul, nor the Pradhana of
 Sankhyas. The S
utras prove that t
hey all
de
scribe none but Brah
man.
Adhikarana VII
:
 Sutras 20 and 21, show that
 the golden per
son
seen within the sun and the per
son seen within the eye men
tioned in
Chh. Up. I-6 are not some in
di
vid
ual soul of high em
i
nence, but the
high
est Brah
man or the Su
preme Self.
Adhikarana VII
I:
 Su
tra 22 shows that the et
her (Akasa) from
which ac
cord
ing to Chh. Up. I
-9 all be
ings orig
i
nate, is not t
he el
e
-
men
t
al ether but t
he Su
preme Brah
man.
Adhikarana IX:
 Su
tra 23 shows that Prana, also men
tioned in
Chh. Up. I-1
1-15 is the Su
preme Brah
man.
Adhikarana X:
 Sutras 24 to 27 t
each that the li
ght spo
ken of in
Chh. Up. II
I-13-7 is not the or
di
nary phys
i
cal light but t
he Su
preme
Brah man.
Adhikarana XI:
 Sutras 28 to 31 de
cide that the P
rana men
tioned
in Kau. Up. I
II-2 is Brah
man.
11

CHAPTER I
SAMANV
A
Y
A
 ADHY
A
Y
A
SECTION 1
Jijnasadh
ikaranam: T
opic 1
The enquiry into Brahm
an and it
s pre-requisites.
AWmVmo
 ~«÷
{Ok
Athato Brahmajij
nasa
I.1.1 (
1)
No
w, there
fore,
 the en
qui
ry into
 Brah
man.
Atha:
 now
, then,
 af
terwards;
At
ah:
 therefore;
Brahmaji
jnasa:
 a
desire for the knowledge of Brahman (t
he enquiry into t
he real nature
of Brahman).
Su tra

lit
er
ally means a string.
 It serves the pur
pose of string
ing
to
gether the fl
ow
ers of the V
edant
a p
as
sages.
The word
Atha
is not used to in
tro
duce a new sub
ject that i
s go
-
ing to be t
aken up. It is here to be t
aken as de
not
ing im
me
di
ate
consecution.
The en
quiry of B
rah
man spe
cially de
pends upon some an
te
-
ced
ent con
di
tions. The en
quirer should be en
dowed with cer
t
ain spir
i
-
tual req
ui
sites or qual
i
fi
ca
tions. Then only
 the en
quiry is pos
si
ble.
Atha
i.e.,

af
 ter
the
at t
ain ment
of
cer t
ain
pre lim i nary
qual i fi ca
-
tions such as the four means of sal
va
tion vi
z., (1) Nitya-anit
ya-vastu-
viveka (dis
crim
i
na
tion be
tween the eter
nal and the non-eter
nal); (2)
Ihamutrarthaphal
abhogaviraga (in
dif

fer ence to the en
joy
ment in thi
s
life or in heav
en, and of t
he fruit
s of one™
s ac
tions); (3) Shat
samp
at
(six
fold vi
r
tues viz.,
 SamaŠcon
trol of mind,
 DamaŠcon
trol of t
he ex
-
ter
nal senses, Uparat
iŠces
sa
tion from worldly
 en
joy
ment
s or not
think
ing of ob
ject
s of senses or dis
con
tinu
ance of re
li
gious cer
e
mo
-
nies, T
itikshaŠen
dur
ance of plea
sure and pain,
 heat and cold,
SraddhaŠfait
h in the words of the pre
cep
tor and of the Up
anishads
and SamadhanaŠdeep con
cen
tra
tion); (4) Mumukshutv
a (de
sire for
lib er a tion).
Those who have got an ear
nest de
sire for the knowl
edge of
Brah
man only are fi
t for the st
udy of V
edant
a Phi
los
o
phy or Brahma
Sutras. Ev
en with
out pos
sess
ing the knowl
edge of Karma K
anda
which deals with re
li
gious cer
e
mo
nies or sac
ri
fices, a de
sire for at
-
t
ain
ing the knowl
edge of Brah
man will arise di
rect from the study
 of
the Sruti
s. The en
quiry of B
rah
man does not de
pend on the per
for
-
mance of any act
s.
12

Y
ou must know and real
ise the eter
nal Brah
man. Then only
 you
will at
t
ain eter
nal bliss, free
dom, per
fec
tion and im
mor
t
al
ity
. Y
ou must
have
cer t
ain
pre lim i nary
qual i fi ca ti
ons
for
your
search.
Why
should
you en
quire about Brah
man? Be
cause the fruit
s ob
t
ained by sac
ri
-
fices etc., are ephem
eral, whereas the knowl
edge of Brah
man is eter
-
nal. Life i
n this earth and the li
fe in heaven which y
ou will at
t
ain on
ac
count of your v
ir
tu
ous deeds is tran
sient. If
 you know Brah
man, you
will en
joy ev
er
last
ing bliss and im
mor
t
al
ity
. That is t
he rea
son why you
must st
art the quest of
 Brah
man or the T
ruth or the Ul
ti
mate Re
al
ity
.
A
 time co
mes when a per
son be
comes in
dif

fer ent to K
ar
mas.
He knows that Kar
mas can
not give hi
m ev
er
last
ing, un
al
loyed hap
pi
-
ness which is not mixed with p
ain, sor
row and fear
. There
fore, nat
u
-
rally
, a de
sire arises in him for the knowl
edge of Brah
man or the
all-per
vad
ing, eter
nal Soul which is above K
ar
mas, which is the
source of eter
nal hap
pi
ness.
Charvakas or Lokayatikas think that t
he body is the soul. S
ome
think that t
he senses are the soul. Some oth
ers think that the m
ind is
the soul. Som
e think that t
he in
tel
lect is the soul. S
ome think that
 the
soul is a mere mo
men
t
ary idea.
Some think t
hat noth
ing ex
ist
s in re
al
ity
. Some t
hink that there is
a soul which is dif

fer ent from t
he body which is both agent and enjoy
er
of the f
ruit
s of ac
tion. Ot
h
ers hold that he is not a doer but i
s only an
enjoyer
. Some t
hink that the i
n
di
vid
ual soul is a p
art of the S
u
preme
Soul. V
edantins main
t
ain that t
he in
di
vid
ual soul is iden
ti
cal with the
Su preme
Soul.
Dif
 fer ent
schools
of
phi los o phy
hold
dif
 fer ent
views.
There
fore it is nec
es
sary to ex
am
ine the trut
h of things v
ery care
fully
.
Knowl
edge of Brah
man de
stroys A
vidya or ig
no
rance which is
the root of al
l evil,
 or the seed of this for
mi
da
ble Samsara or worldly
life. Hence you m
ust en
ter
t
ain the de
sire of know
ing Brah
man.
Knowl
edge of Brah
man leads to the at

tain
ment of t
he fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
-
tion. Hence an en
quiry about B
rah
man through the study
 of the S
rutis
which treat
s of Brah
man is worth
while and should be un
der
t
aken.
The ques
tion now arises: What are the char
ac
ter
is
tics of that
Brah
man? The na
ture of the B
rah
man is de
scribed in the fol
low
ing
Su tra
or
aph o rism.
Janmady
adhikaranam
: T
opic 2
Definition of
 Brahman
OÝ_mÚñ` `V
Janmady
asy
a y
at
ah
I.1.2 (
2)
(Bra
hman i
s that)
 from w
hich th
e o
rigin e
tc., (i.e
. the
 origi
n,
sustena
nce and di
ssolut
ion)
 of t
his (
worl
d proceed).
Janmadi:
 origin etc.;
Asy
a:
 of this (world);
Y
at
ah:
 from which.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
13

An
swer to the en
quiry of B
rah
man is briefly gi
ven in thi
s Su
tra. It
is st
ated that
 Brah
man who is eter
nally pure, wise and free (Nit
ya,
Bud
dha, Mukt
a Svabhav
a) is the only cause, st
ay and fi
nal re
sort of
this world. Brah
man who is the orig
i
na
tor
, pre
server and ab
sorber of
this vast world must hav
e un
lim
ited pow
ers and char
ac
ter
is
tics.
Hence He is Om
nip
o
tent and Om
ni
scient. Who but the O
m
nip
o
tent
and Om
ni
scient Brah
man could cre
ate, rule and de
stroy it? Cer
t
ainly
mere at
oms or chance can
not do this work. Ex

is tence can
not come
out of non-ex
is
tence (
Ex nihilo nihil fit
). The or
i
gin of the world can
not
pro
ceed from a non-in
tel
li
gent Pradhana or Prakriti.
 It can
not pro
ceed
from it
s own na
ture or Svabhav
a spon
t
a
ne
ously with
out a cause, be
-
cause spe
cial places, times and causes are needed for the pro
duc
-
tion of ef

fects.
Brah
man must have some char
ac
ter
is
tics. Y
ou can at
t
ain
knowl
edge of Brah
man through re
flec
tion on it
s at
trib
utes. Oth
er
wise
it is not pos
si
ble to have such knowl
edge. In
fer
ence or rea
son
ing is
an in
stru
ment of right
 knowl
edge if it does not
 con
tra
dict the V
edant
a
texts.
In the as
cer
t
ain
ment of T
ruth or the Ul
ti
mate Re
al
ity or t
he first
cause the scrip
tures alone are au
thor
i
t
a
tive be
cause they are in
fal
li
-
ble, they
 con
t
ain the di
rect in
tu
itiv
e ex
pe
ri
ences of Rishis or Seers
who at
t
ained Brahma Sakshatkara or Self
-reali
sa
tion. Y
ou can
not de
-
pend on in
tel
lect or rea
son be
cause a man of strong in
tel
lect can
over
throw a man of weak in
tel
lect. Brah
man is not an ob
ject of the
senses. It is be
yond the reach of t
he senses and the in
tel
lect.
The sec
ond Su
tra does not pro
pound here that in
fer
ence serves
as the means of know
ing Brah
man. It
 point
s to a V
edantic tex
t which
gives a de
scrip
tion of t
he char
ac
ter
is
tics of Brah
man. What t
hen, is
that V
edant
a text
? It is the p
as
sage of T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad III-i:
 Bhrigu
V
aruni went to his fa
ther V
aruna say
ingŠﬁSir
, teach me Brah
man.ﬂ
V
aruna said
&
 ﬁThat from whence these be
ings are born, that by
 which, when
born they liv
e, that
 into which they en
ter at thei
r death, try
 to know
That. That
 is Brah
man.ﬂ
Y
ou will at
t
ain Self-reali
sa
tion through med
i
t
a
tion on Brah
man
or the truths de
clared by V
edantic tex
t
s and not through mere rea
son
-
ing. Pure rea
son (Suddha Buddhi) is a help in Self
-reali
sa
tion. I
t in
-
ves
ti
gates and re
veals the t
ruths of the S
crip
tures. It
 has a place also
in the means of S
elf-reali
sa
tion. B
ut per
verted in
tel
lect (V
ip
arit
a
Buddhi) is a great hin
drance. It keep
s one far away from the T
ruth.
That which is the cause of the world is Brah
man. This is
T
at
astha Lakshana. The or
i
gin, sus
te
nance and dis
so
lu
tion of t
he
world are char
ac
ter
is
tics of the world. T
hey do not per
t
ain to the et
er
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
14

nal un
chang
ing Brah
man. Y
et these in
di
cate Brah
man which is the
cause for this uni
verse. Sruti
s give an
other def
i
ni
tion of B
rah
man.
This is a de
scrip
tion of it
s true, es
sen
tial na
ture
 ﬁSatyam
 Jnanam
Anant
am B
rahma
ŠT
ruth, Knowl
edge, In
fin
ity i
s Brah
man.ﬂ This is
Svarup
a Lakshana.
The knowl
edge of the real na
ture of a thi
ng does not de
pend on
the no
tions of man but
 only on the t
hing it

self. The knowl edge of Brah
-
man also de
pends al
to
gether on the thi
ng, i.e.
, Brah
man it

self. Ac tion
de
pends en
tirely on y
our will but per
cep
tion is not an ef

fect of vo
li
tion.
It de
pends on the ob
ject per
ceived. Y
ou can
not con
vert a tree int
o a
man by an act of
 will. A
 tree will re
main a tree al
ways. Sim
i
larly Reali
-
sa
tion of B
rah
man is V
astu T
an
tra. It
 de
pends on the re
al
ity of
 the ob
-
ject. It
 is not Purusha T
an
tra. It
 does not de
pend on vo
li
tion. I
t is not
some
thing to be ac
com
plished by ac
tion. B
rah
man is not an ob
ject of
the senses. It has no con
nec
tion with ot
her means of knowl
edge. The
senses are fi
nite and de
pend
ent. They
 have only ex

ter nal things for
their ob
ject
s, not Brah
man. They
 are char
ac
ter
ised by out
go
ing ten
-
den
cies on ac
count of the f
orce of Rajas. They are in thei
r na
ture so
con
sti
tuted t
hat they
 run to
wards ex
ter
nal ob
ject
s. They can
not cog
-
nise Brah
man.
Knowl
edge of Brah
man can
not come through mere rea
son
ing.
Y
ou can at
t
ain this knowl
edge through in
tu
ition or rev
e
la
tion. I
n
tu
ition
is the fi
nal re
sult of the en
quiry into B
rah
man. The ob
ject of en
quiry is
an ex
ist
ing sub
st
ance. Y
ou will have to know thi
s only through in
tu
-
ition or di
rect cog
ni
tion (Ap
arakosha-anubhuti or AnubhavaŠex
pe
ri
-
ence). Sravana (hear
ing of the S
rutis), Ma
nana (re
flec
tion on what
you have heard), Nididhy
asana (pro
found med
i
t
a
tion) on Brah
man
leads to in
tu
ition. T
he Brahmakara V
ritti is gen
er
ated from t
he Satt
vic
Ant
ahkarana which is equipped with the four means of sal
va
tion, and
the in
struc
tions of the G
uru, who has un
der
stood the real sig
nif
i
cance
of ‚T
at Tvam
 Asi™
 Mahavakya.
 This Brahmakara V
ritti de
stroys the
Mula-A
vidya or prim
i
tive i
g
no
rance, the root cause of all bond
age,
births and deaths. When the i
g
no
rance or veil is re
moved, B
rah
man
which is self-ef

ful gent re
veals It

self or shines by It

self in Its pris
tine
glory
and
in ef
 fa ble
splen dour
.
In
or di nary
per cep tion
of
ob ject
s
the
mind as
sumes the form of t
he ob
ject. The V
ritti or ray of
 the mind re
-
moves the v
eil (A
varana-bhanga) that en
vel
op
s the ob
ject and
V
ritti-sahit
a-chait
anya
or
in tel li gence
re flected
in
the
mod i fi ca ti
on
of
the mind re
veals the ob
ject. Then only
 you cog
nise the ob
ject. There
is V
ritti-v
yapti and t
here is Phala-vyapt
i also in the per
cep
tion of an
ob
ject. Y
ou want a V
ritti and in
tel
li
gence (Chait
anya) as
so
ci
ated with
the V
ritti.
 But in t
he case of cog
ni
tion of B
rah
man there is no
Phala-vy
apti. There is only
 V
ritti-v
yapti as Brah
man is self-lu
mi
nous.
If t
here is a cup in a pot, you want
 a lamp and the ey
es to see the cup
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
15

in the dark, when the pot
 is bro
ken; but if t
here is a lamp within the pot
,
you want the ey
es only to see the lam
p when the pot is bro
ken. Y
ou do
not want a lamp.
Sastray
onitv
adhikaranam
: T
opic 3
Brahman i
s realisable only through the scriptures
emó`mo{Z
Sastray
onitv
at
I.1.3 (
3)
T
he scri
ptur
e being th
e source of r
igh
t know
ledge.
Sastra:
 the scripture;
Y
onitv
at:
 being the source of or the means of
the right knowledge.
The Om
ni
science of Brah
man fol
lows from His be
ing the source
of scrip
ture. The aph
o
rism clearly point
s out that t
he Srutis alone are
proof about Brah
man.
As Brah
man is the cause of the world we have t
o in
fer that B
rah
-
man or the Ab
so
lute is Om
ni
scient. As the scrip
ture alone is the
means of right knowl
edge with ref
er
ence to Brah
man the prop
o
si
tion
laid in Su
tra 2 be
comes con
firmed. B
rah
man is not merely t
he Cre
-
ator
, Sust
ainer and De
stroyer of the world,
 He is the source or womb
of scrip
tures and is re
vealed by scrip
tures. As Brah
man is be
yond the
reach of the senses and the in
tel
lect, He can be ap
pre
hended only on
the au
thor
ity of
 the Sruti
s which are in
fal
li
ble and con
t
ain the spir
i
tual
ex
pe
ri
ences of real
ised seers or sages
. The Sruti
s de
clare that Brah
-
man Him
self breathed fort
h the V
edas. There
fore He who has
brought forth t
he Srutis or the V
edas which con
t
ain such won
der
ful di
-
vine knowl
edge must be all-knowl
edge and all-pow
er
ful.
The scrip
tures il
lu
mine all thi
ngs like a search light. Scrip
ture is
the source or the means of right knowl
edge through which you have a
com pre hen sive
un der st
and ing
of
the
na ture
of
Brah man.
Srutis
fur
-
nish in
for
ma
tion about what
 is not known from other sources. It can
-
not be known by other means of knowl
edge in
de
pend
ently of
 the
Srutis. B
rah
man is form
less, colour
less, attribut
eless. Hence it can
-
not be grasped by the senses by di
rect per
cep
tion. Y
ou can in
fer the
ex
is
tence of fire by
 it
s ac
com
p
a
ny
ing smoke but Brah
man can
not be
es
t
ab
lished by in
fer
ence or anal
ogy
, be
cause it is attribut
eless and
there can
not be a sec
ond thing which is sim
i
lar to Brah
man. Brah
man
is In
fi
nite and secondless. He who is ig
no
rant of the S
rutis can
not
know that Su
preme Be
ing. There are other means of knowl
edge also
which have got a place but t
hey are not in
de
pend
ent. They
 sup
ple
-
ment af

ter Brah man is es
t
ab
lished by the S
rutis.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
16

Samanv
ay
adhikaranam
: T
opic 4
Brahman t
he main purport of
 all V
edantic text
s
VÎmw
T
attu Samanv
ay
at
I.1.4 (
4)
Bu
t that (B
rahma
n is to
 be
 kno
wn on
ly from
 the
 Scrip
ture
s
and no
t inde
pe
nde
ntly by any o
ther me
ans is e
stablis
hed
),
because
 it is t
he main purpose (of all Vedantic texts).
Ta
t
:
 that;
Tu
:
 but;
Samanv
ay
at:
 on account of agreement or
harmony
, because it is the main p
urpose.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 2 is con
tin
ued. Brah
man or the
Ab
so
lute can be known only from t
he scrip
tures be
cause all the scrip
-
tural p
as
sages can be har
mo
nised only by such a doc
trine. The
V
edantic tex
t
s re
fer to Brah
man only
, be
cause they have B
rah
man for
their main topi
c. The prop
o
si
tion that
 Brah
man is the only cause of t
he
world is es
t
ab
lished: be
cause this is the au
thor
i
t
a
tive say

ing of thescrip
tures. All t
he V
edantic tex
t
s agree in this re
spect.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) is em
ployed to re
but the abov
e Purvap
aksha
or the prima fa
cie view as urged above. I
t is proper to say that
 Brah
-
man is the uni
form topic t
aught in all t
he V
edantic tex
t
s. Why?
Samanvay
at. A
nvaya means con
stru
ing a p
as
sage ac
cord
ing to the
six char
ac
ter
is
tics or Shad Lingas viz.,

(1)
Up
akrama-Upasamhara
Ekavakyat
aŠagree ment
in
be gin ning
and
con clu sion;
(2)
AbhyasaŠrep e ti t
ion;
(3)
Apurvat
aŠUnique ness
of
sub ject
mat ter;
(4) PhalaŠfruit;
 (5) ArthavadaŠpraise and (6) Y
uktiŠrea
son
ing.
These six marks help to ar
rive at t
he real pur
port of any work. I
n chap
-
ter six of t
he Chhandogya Up
anishad Brah
man is the main pur
port of
all p
as
sages. In the be
gin
ning you will f
ind ﬁThis world, my child,
 was
but the Real (Sat
) in the be
gin
ning.ﬂ It
 con
cludes, ﬁIn it all
 that ex

ists
has it
s Self. I
t is true. I
t is the Sel
f.ﬂ There is agree
ment in the
open
ing
and con
clud
ing p
as
sages. This is Upakrama-Up
asamhara. Uddalaka
the pre
cep
tor
, re
peat
s ‚T
at Tvam
 Asi™
 nine times to hi
s dis
ci
ple
Svet
aketu. This is rep
e
ti
tion (Abhy
asa). Brah
man is doubt
less
unique, as He is In
fi
nite and secondless. When you at
t
ain knowl
edge
of Brah
man ev
ery
thing else is known. This is Phala or fruit
.
There is rea
son
ing in the scrip
tures. Just as pot
s are noth
ing but
clay
, or
na
ment
s are noth
ing but gold, so also t
his world of names and
forms is noth
ing but Brah
man. If
 you know the na
ture of clay
, you will
know all that is made out
 of clay
. Ev
en so if you know Brah
man, ev
ery
-
thing else will be known to y
ou. Brah
man is the source of the cre
ation,
pres
er
va
tion and dis
so
lu
tion of t
he uni
verse. This is Artha-v
ada or
S
tuti-v
ada by way of praise.
 All these six
 marks or Shad Lingas de
-
note that
 the chief topi
c or main pur
port of the V
edantic tex
t
s is Brah
-
man.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
17

All the V
edant
a-text
s have for their pur
port Brah
man, for ex

am -
ple, ﬁBe
ing only t
his was in the be
gin
ning, one with
out a sec
ondﬂ
(Chh. Up. VI-2-1) ﬁIn t
he be
gin
ning all this was At
man or Self only
ﬂ
(Ait.
 Ara. II
-4-I-1) ﬁThis is Brah
man with
out cause and with
out ef

fect,with
out any
thing in
side or out

side; this self is Brah
man per
ceiv
ing ev
-
ery
thingﬂ (Bri. Up.
 II-5-19) ﬁThat Im

mor t
al Brah
man is be
foreﬂ (Mun.
Up. II-2-1
1) and sim
i
lar p
as
sages. It is not right
 to think that
 these p
as
-
sages have a dif

fer ent sense. The p
as
sages can
not re
fer to agent
s,
di
vin
i
ties con
nected with act
s of re
li
gious duty
. Y
ou will find in B
ri. Up.
II-4-14, ﬁThen by
 what should he see and Whom?ﬂ This clearly shows
that t
here is nei
ther an agent, nor an ob
ject of ac
tion, nor an in
stru
-
ment.
Brah
man can
not be
come an ob
ject of per
cep
tion and other
means of knowl
edge, be
cause It is ex
tremely sub
tle, ab
stract, in
fi
nite
and all-per
vad
ing. How can a fi
nite in
sen
tient in
stru
ment know the In
-
fi
nite? The senses and the mind de
rive their power and light
 from
Brah
man the source. Brah
man is Self-lu
mi
nous, Self-ex

is tent,
Self-knowl
edge, Self
-de
light, and S
elf-con
t
ained. Brah
man can
not
be real
ised with
out the aid of
 V
edantic p
as
sage ﬁT
at Tvam
 AsiŠThou
art Thatﬂ (Chh. Up. V
I-8-7).
When one real
ises Brah
man, he is to
t
ally f
reed from all sort
s of
mis
er
ies and p
ains. He at
t
ains the goal of li
fe or the
sum m
um
bonum
.
The con
cep
tion of du
al
ity as agent
, ac
tion and the li
ke is de
stroyed.
Self-reali
sa
tion is not a f
ruit of ac
tion. I
t is not a re
sult of y
our will
ing or
do
ing. It
 is the re
sult of real
is
ing one™
s iden
tity
 with Brah
man. Scrip
-
ture aims only at
 re
mov
ing the vei
l of ig
no
rance or A
vidya.
 Then the
self-ef

ful gent Brah
man shines by It

self in Its pris
tine glory
. The st
ate
of Moksha or the fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion is eter
nal. It
 is not tran
sient like
the fruit
s at
t
ained through ac
tion. A
c
tion de
pends upon the will and is
in
de
pend
ent of t
he ob
ject. Knowl
edge de
pends on the na
ture of the
ob
ject and is in
de
pend
ent of t
he will of the knower
.
A
 proper un
der
st
and
ing of the V
edantic tex
t
s leads to the fi
nal
eman
ci
p
a
tion of man.
 It is not nec
es
sary for him to ex

ert or do any su -
per
hu
man feat or ac
tion. I
t is only mere un
der
st
and
ing that it
 is a rope
and not a snake that help
s to de
stroy one™
s fear
. Scrip
ture does not
speak only of eth
i
cal and cer
e
mo
nial du
ties. It
 re
veals the soul and
help
s one to at
t
ain Self-reali
sa
tion. The sage who has learnt by
 the
help of V
edantic tex
t
s to re
move the er
ro
ne
ous iden
ti
fi
ca
tion with t
he
body will not ex

pe ri
ence pai
n. It
 is only the ig
no
rant worldly minded
man who ex
pe
ri
ences pain on ac
count of his iden
ti
fi
ca
tion with t
he
body
.
The at
t
ain
ment of heav
en, pro
cur
ing a son, get
ting rain, et
c., are
t
aught in the V
edas as in
cite
ment to t
he ac
quire
ment of knowl
edge of
Brah
man by baby souls and t
o pro
duce faith in man.
 When he finds
that t
he V
e
dic Mantras have the power to pro
duce rain he get
s faith in
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
18

them and has an in
cli
na
tion to study
 them. He grad
u
ally get
s dis
gust
for
the
mun dane
ob ject
s
and
de vel op
s
dis crim i na tion
be tween
the
real and the tran
si
tory and burn
ing yearn
ing for lib
er
a
tion. He de
vel
-
op
s love for Brah
man. There
fore all V
edas teach Brah
man. Sac
ri
fices
give mun
dane fruit
s only when they are done wit
h self
ish mo
tives,
only when Kama or strong de
sire is at the back of the Mant
ras. When
they are per
formed with Nishkamya B
hava with
out self
ish mo
tives
they pu
rify t
he heart and help to at

tain knowl
edge of the S
elf. Hence
Karma Kanda it

self, by teach
ing the wor
ship of var
i
ous de
i
ties, be
-
comes part
 of Brahma Jnana. I
t is re
ally t
he wor
ship of Brah
man,
when the el
e
ment of de
sire or self
ish
ness is re
moved. S
uch a wor
-
ship pu
ri
fies the heart and pro
duces a t
aste for en
quiry of B
rah
man. It
does not pro
duce any other earthly
 de
sire.
The ob
ject of en
quiry in the K
arma Kanda is some
thing to be ac
-
com
plished viz.,
 duty
. The ob
ject of en
quiry in V
edant
a text
s is the al
-
ready ex
is
tent,
 ab
so
lutely
 ac
com
plished Brah
man. The fruit
 of the
knowl
edge of Brah
man must be dif

fer ent from t
he fruit of
 knowl
edge
of duty
 which de
pends on the per
for
mance of ac
tion.
Y
ou will find in t
he Up
anishads ﬁV
er
ily t
he Self (At

man) is to beseenﬂ Bri. Up. II
-4-5. ﬁThe At
man which is free from sin that
 it is which
we must search out, that i
t is which we must try t
o un
der
st
andﬂ Chh.
Up VIII
-7-1. ﬁLet a man wor
ship him as At
man or the Self
ŠBri. Up
I-4-7; Let a man wor
ship the At
man only as his true st
ateŠBri.
 Up.
I-4-15; He who knows Brah
man be
comes Brah
manŠMun. Up.
III
-2-9ﬂ. These text
s rouse in you a de
sire to know what that Brah
man
is. The V
edantic tex
t
s give a beau
ti
ful de
scrip
tion of t
he na
ture of
Brah
man. They
 teach that B
rah
man is eter
nal, all-know
ing, ab
so
-
lutely
 self-suf

fi cient, ev
er pure, free, pure knowl
edge, ab
so
lute bliss,
self-lu mi nous
and
in di vis i ble.

One
at t
ains
fi nal
eman ci p
a tion
as
the
fruit of
 med
i
t
a
tion on Brah
man.
The V
edantic tex
t
s de
clare, ﬁThe wise who knows the At
man as
bodi
less within the bod
ies, as un
chang
ing among chang
ing things, as
great and om
ni
pres
ent does never grieveﬂ (Kat
ha Up. II-22). ﬁHe is
with
out breath, wit
h
out mind, pureﬂ (Mun.
 Up. II-1-2). ﬁThat
 per
son is
not at
t
ached to any
thingﬂ (Bri. Up.
 IV
-3-15). All these t
ext
s es
t
ab
lish
the fact t
hat the f
i
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion dif

fers from all the fruit
s of ac
tion
and is an eter
nally and es
sen
tially
 bodi
less st
ate. Moksha is Kut
astha
Nitya,
 i.e.,
 eter
nal, with
out un
der
go
ing any change. B
rah
man is om
ni
-
pres
ent like ether (Akasavat
 Sarvagat
a) free from all mod
i
fi
ca
tions
(Nirvikara),
ab so lutely
Self-suf
 fi cient,

Self-con t
ained
(Nirapeksha),
in
di
vis
i
ble (Akhanda). He is not com
posed of p
art
s (Nishkala). He is
Self-lu
mi
nous (Svayam P
rakasa, Svayam
 Jyoti).
Y
ou will find in K
atha Up
anishad, ﬁDif

fer ent from merit
 and de
-
merit, dif

fer ent from ef

fect and cause, dif

fer ent from p
ast and fu
ture is
that B
rah
manﬂ (I-2-14). Moksha is the same as Brah
man. Moksha or
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
19

Brah
man can
not be the ef

fect of ac tions. It
 can
not be sup
ple
men
t
ary
to ac
tions. If
 it is so it would be non-eter
nal.
T
o know Brah
man is to be
come Brah
man. Mundaka Up
anishad
says, ﬁHe who knows Brah
man be
comes Brah
man.ﬂ As Brah
man is
an al
ready ex
ist
ing en
tity
, know
ing Brah
man does not in
volve an act
like a rit
u
al
is
tic act. When A
vidya or ne
science is de
stroyed through
knowl
edge of the S
elf, B
rah
man man
i
fest
s It

self, just as the rope
man
i
fest
s it

self when the il lu
sion of snake is re
moved. A
s Brah
man is
your In
ner Self y
ou can
not at
t
ain It by
 any ac
tion. I
t is real
ised as
one™
s own At
man when the ig
no
rance is an
ni
hi
lated. T
ext
s like ﬁThe
At
man is to be real
isedﬂ etc., is not an i
n
junc
tion. I
t is in
tended to wit
h
-
draw the mind of t
he as
pi
rant from ex
ter
nal ob
ject
s and turn it in
-
wards.
Brah
man is not an ob
ject of the ac
tion of know
ing. ﬁIt
 is dif

fer ent
from the K
nown and again it is be
yond the Un
known (Kena Up. I-3)
ﬁHow should he know him by whom He knows all thisﬂ (Bri. Up.
II-4-14). Brah
man is ex
pressly de
clared not to be the ob
ject of an act
of de
vout wor
ship (Upasana). ﬁK
now that alone t
o be Brah
man, not
that which peo
ple adore hereﬂ (Kena Up. I-5).
The scrip
ture never de
scribes Brah
man as this or that.
 It
s pur
-
pose is to show that Brah
man as the eter
nal sub
ject, Prat
yagatman,
the in
ner Self is never an ob
ject. It
 can
not be main
t
ained that Mo
ksha
or Brah
man is some
thing to be cer
e
mo
ni
ally pu
ri
fied. There is no
room for a pu
rif
i
ca
tory cer
e
mony in t
he eter
nally pure Brah
man.
Brah
man is the Self
 or At
man of all.
 It can nei
ther be striven nor
avoided. A
ll ob
ject
s per
ish be
cause they are mere mod
i
fi
ca
tions of
the fiv
e el
e
ment
s. But t
he Soul or Brah
man is im
mor
t
al and un
chang
-
ing. It
 is in it
s es
sence eter
nally pure and free.
He who iden
ti
fies him
self with his body ex

pe ri
ences pain.
 A
sage who has re
moved Dehadhyasa or iden
ti
fi
ca
tion of t
he body by
iden
ti
fy
ing him
self with the pure,
 all-per
vad
ing Brah
man will not ex

pe -
ri
ence pai
n. A
 rich man who is puf
fed up by t
he con
ceit of his wealth i
s
af

fected with grief when he loses his wealth. But he is not
 af

fected bythe loss of wealth af

ter he has once re tired from t
he world and has be
-
come an as
cetic. A
 sage who has at
t
ained knowl
edge of Brah
man
can
not be a merely worldly
 doer as be
fore. He does not be
long to this
world as he did be
fore. A
 worldly man also can be
come a sage of
Self-reali
sa
tion with t
he Bhava of
 non-doer (Akart
a), non-agent
(Abhokt
a). The Srutis de
clare ﬁWhen he is free from the body
, then
nei
ther plea
sure nor pain t
ouches himﬂ (Chh. Up. VIII
-12-1). The ob
-
jec
tor may say ﬁThe st
ate of be
ing free from t
he body fol
lows only
when a man dies.ﬂ This is en
tirely wrong be
cause the cause of man
be
ing joined to t
he body is er
ro
ne
ous knowl
edge. The sage who has
at
t
ained knowl
edge of Brah
man, and who iden
ti
fies him
self with
Brah
man is free from his body ev
en while still aliv
e. The Sruti
 also de
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
20

clares ﬁJust as the slough of a snake lies on an ant-hill, dead and cast
away
, so also lies this body
. That bodi
less im
mor
t
al Soul is Brah
man
only
, is only li
ghtﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
-4-7). With eyes, He is with
out eyes as it
were; with ears, with
out ears as it were; with speech, with
out speech
as it were; with a mind,
 with
out mind as it were; wit
h Prana, with
out
Prana as it were; The sage is no lon
ger con
nected with ac
tion of any
kind.
The Sankhyas say that
 the V
edantic tex
t
s about cre
ation do not
re
fer to Brah
man but to t
he Pradhana which is made up of the t
hree
GunasŠSattv
a, Rajas and T
amasŠas the First Cause. They m
ain
-
t
ain that all
 the V
edant
a text
s which treat of the cre
ation of t
he world
clearly point out
 that t
he cause of the world has to be con
cluded from
the ef

fect by in
fer
ence and the cause which is to be in
ferred is the
con
nec
tion of t
he Pradhana or Prakriti with t
he Souls or Purushas.
The fol
low
ers of Kanada (the School of
 V
aiseshika phi
los
o
phy) in
fer
from the v
ery same p
as
sages that the Lord is the ef

fi cient cause of the
uni
verse and the at
oms are it
s ma
te
rial cause.
The Sankhyas say ﬁOm
nip
o
tence can be at
trib
uted to t
he
Pradhana as it has all it
s ef

fects for it
s ob
ject
s. Om
ni
science also can
be as
cribed to it. K
nowl
edge is re
ally an at

trib ute of S
attv
a Guna.
Satt
va is one of t
he com
po
nent
s of Pradhana. There
fore Pradhana
can be said to be om
ni
scient. Y
ou can
not as
cribe Om
ni
science or lim
-
ited knowl
edge to the S
oul or Purusha which is iso
lated and pure in
-
tel
li
gence it

self. There fore the V
edant
a text
s as
cribe Om
ni
science to
the Pradhana al
though it is in i
t

self non-in tel
li
gentﬂ.
ﬁBrah
man is with
out any in
stru
ment
s of ac
tion. A
s Pradhana
has three com
po
nent
s it seems rea
son
able that it
 alone is ca
p
a
ble of
un der go ing
mod i fi ca ti
ons
like
clay
into
var i ous
ob ject
s
and
may
act
as
a ma
te
rial cause, while the un
com
pounded, ho
mo
ge
neous and un
-
change
able Brah
man is un
able to do so. There
fore the V
edantic tex
t
s
which treat of cre
ation clearly re
fer to Pradhana only
 and there
fore it
is the First Cause re
ferred to by t
he scrip
tures.ﬂ T
o these con
clu
sions
Sri V
yasa gives an an
swer in the fol
low
ing Su
tra.
Ikshaty
ady
adhikaranam
: T
opic 5 (Sutras 5-1
1)
Brahman (t
he intelligent
 principle) is the First Cause
B©jVoZ
m©eãX
Ikshaternasabdam
I.1.5 (
5)
On acc
ount o
f see
ing (i.e. think
ing be
ing attribute
d in the
Upanishads to t
he First Cause, the Pradhana) is n
ot (the fir
st
cause indicated by the Upanishads; for) it
 (Pradhana) is n
ot
based on th
e script
ures.
Ikshateh:
 on account of seeing (thinking);
Na:
 is not;
Asabdam:
 not
based on the scriptures.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
21

Sutras 5 to 1
1 re
fute t
he ar
gu
ment
s of the Sankhy
as and es
t
ab
-
lish Brah
man alone as the First Cause.
It is not pos
si
ble to find room i
n the V
edant
a text
s for the non-in
-
tel
li
gent Pradhana, be
cause it is not based on scrip
ture. Why? B
e
-
cause see
ing or think
ing is as
cribed to the cause in the scrip
ture. In
the scrip
ture it is said that
 the First Cause willed or thought
 be
fore cre
-
ation. Y
ou will find in t
he Chhandogya Up
anishad VI-2, ﬁBe
ing only
,
my dear
, this was in the be
gin
ning, one only
 with
out a sec
ond. It
thought ‚May
 I be many
, may I
 grow forth.™
 It pro
jected fire.ﬂ A
it
areya
Up
anishad says, ﬁThe At
man willed: ‚Let
 me pro
ject worlds™. So it
 pro
-
jected these worldsﬂ (I-1-1.2). In P
rasna Upanishad VI
-3 it is said of
the per
son of six
teen p
art
s. ﬁHe thought. He sent f
orth Prana..
.ﬂ There
can
not be any t
hink
ing or will
ing in the in
sen
tient P
radhana. It i
s pos
-
si
ble only if
 the First Cause is an in
tel
li
gent be
ing like Brah
man.
If it
 is said that such a qual
ity can be at

trib uted to P
rakriti in a
sec
ond
ary sense, just as red-hot iron can be called fire be
cause it can
burn, we re
ply
, why should we as
cribe cre
ative power and Om
ni
-
science to such Prakriti which we in
vest with will
 and Om
ni
science in
a sec
ond
ary sense when we can as
cribe cre
ative power and Om
ni
-
science to Brah
man Him
self to whom Will and Om

ni science can be
as
cribed in a pri
mary sense.
Brah
man™
s knowl
edge is per
ma
nent. He is not in need of
 any in
-
stru
ment
s of knowl
edge. He is not in need of a body
. His knowl
edge is
with
out any ob
struc
tions. Sv
et
asvat
ara Upani
shad says, ﬁHe grasps
with
out hands, mov
es with
out feet
, sees with
out eyes, hears with
out
ears. He knows what can be know
n, but no one knows Him. They
 call
Him the first,
 the Great per
sonﬂ (VI-8, II
I-19).
Y
ou can
not at
trib
ute sentiency (Chet
anatva) to P
radhana even
in a fig
u
ra
tive sense, be
cause it is said that the Cre
ator be
came the
soul and en
tered the body
. How can the in
sen
tient mat

ter (Achetana)
be
come the sen
tient soul (Chet
ana)? V
edantic tex
t
s em
phat
i
cally de
-
clare that by know
ing Brah
man ev
ery
thing else can be known. How
can we know the souls by know
ing mat
ter?
Pradhana or mat
ter can
not be the S
at which is de
scribed as the
cause of the world, be
cause that would be op
posed to the scrip
ture
which uses the word ﬁIkshatehﬂ. Y
ou will find in S
vet
asvat
ara
Up
anishad, ﬁHe, the God of
 all souls, is the Cre
ator of the worldﬂ.
There
fore it is quit
e clear that Brah
man and not Pradhana is the
cause of this world.
In all V
edantic tex
t
s there is a uni
form dec
la
ra
tion that
 Chet
ana
(con
scious
ness) is the cause of the world. Pradhana po
ten
tially
 con
-
t
ains all forms in a seed st
ate. The whole world ex

ists in it in a sub
tle
seed st
ate in Pralay
a and yet it
 can
not be re
garded as the Cre
ator be
-
cause it is non-sen
tient.
 V
edant
a text
s em
phat
i
cally de
clare that an
In
tel
li
gent Be
ing willed and cre
ated this uni
verse. Y
ou will find in
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
22

Chhandogya Up
anishad, ﬁThe Sat ex

isted in the be gin
ning. It
 was
one with
out a sec
ond. It
 willed to be
come many
. It
 cre
ated fireﬂ.
The ar
gu
men
t
a
tion of t
he Sankhyas that
 the Pradhana is
all-know
ing be
cause of it
s Sattv
a is in
ad
mis
si
ble, be
cause Sattva i
s
not pre
pon
der
ant in the P
radhana as the three Gunas are in a st
ate of
equi
poise. If t
he Pradhana is all-know
ing even in t
he con
di
tion of
equi
lib
rium (Gunasamyavastha) on ac
count of the power of knowl
-
edge re
sid
ing in Satt
va, it
 must be lit
tle-know
ing also on ac
count of
the power of re
t
ard
ing knowl
edge which re
sides in Rajas and T
amas.
There
fore while Satt
va will make it
 all-know
ing, Rajas and T
amas will
make it lit

tle-know ing. This is ac
tu
ally a con
tra
dic
tion. Fur
ther a mod
i
-
fi
ca
tion of S
attv
a which is not con
nected with a wit
ness
ing prin
ci
ple or
si
lent Sakshi is not called knowl
edge. The non-in
tel
li
gent Pradhana is
de
void of such a prin
ci
ple. Hence all-know
ing
ness can
not be as
-
cribed to Pradhana.
The case of the Y
ogin does not ap
ply to t
he point un
der con
sid
-
er
ation here. He at
t
ains Om
ni
science on ac
count of ex
cess of Sattv
a
in him. There is an in
tel
li
gent prin
ci
ple (Sakshi) in him in
de
pend
ent of
Satt
va. When a Y
ogi at
t
ains knowl
edge of the p
ast and the fu
ture on
ac
count of the grace of t
he Lord, you can
not deny t
he Eter
nity and I
n
-
fin
ity of
 Brah
man™
s knowl
edge.
Brah man
is
pure
In tel li
 gence
it
 self,
Un change able.
All-know ing
-
ness and cre
ation are not pos
si
ble for Brah
man. T
o this ob
jec
tion it
can be re
plied that B
rah
man can be All-know
ing and cre
ative t
hrough
His il
lu
sory power
, Maya.
Just as in the case of ether we t
alk of ether in
side a jar and ether
in the sky but it
 is all re
ally one et
her
, so also the dif

fer en
ti
a
tion of Jiv
a
and Isvara is only an ap
p
ar
ent dif

fer en
ti
a
tion on ac
count of lim
it
ing
ad
junct
s or Upadhis, v
iz., body
 and mind.
The Sankhyas raise an
other ob
jec
tion. They
 say that f
ire and
wa
ter also are fig
u
ra
tivel
y spo
ken of as in
tel
li
gent be
ings. ﬁThe fire
thought ‚May
 I be many
, May I
 grow™
 and it pro
jected wa
ter
. W
a
ter
thought ‚May
 I be many
, May I
 grow
,™
 it pro
jected earthﬂ Chh. Up.
6-2-3-4. Here wa
ter and fire are in
sen
tient ob
ject
s, and yet t
hink
ing is
at
trib
uted to t
hem. Ev
en so the think
ing by the S
at in the t
ext orig
i
nally
quoted can also be t
aken fig
u
ra
tivel
y in the case of P
radhana also.
Hence, though Pradhana is in
sen
tient,
 it can yet
 be the First Cause.
The
fol low ing
Su tra
re futes
this
ar gu ment.
Jm¡Uü
oÞmË_eã
Gaunaschet na Atmasabdat
I.1.6 (
6)
If it b
e s
aid that (the
 word ‚s
ee
ing™ or thinki
ng) is use
d in a
secondary sense
, (we say) not so, because of the word Atman
being appl
ied to t
he cause of t
he worl
d.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
23

Gaunah:
 indirect, secondary
, figurat
ive;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not;
Atmasabdat:
 because of the word Atman,
 i.e.,
 soul.
Y
ou say that t
he term ‚Sat
™
 de
notes the non-in
tel
li
gent Pradhana
or Prakriti and that
 ‚think
ing™
 is at
trib
uted to it
 in a sec
ond
ary or fig
u
ra
-
tive sense only as it
 is to fire and wa
ter
. Y
ou may ar
gue that in
ert
things are some
times de
scribed as liv
ing be
ings. There
fore
Pradhana can well be ac
cepted as the ef

fi cient cause of the world.
This can
not st
and. This is cer
t
ainly un
ten
a
ble. Why so? Be
cause of
the terms ‚At

man™ (soul) be
ing ap
plied sub
se
quently i
n the Sruti
 to
that which is the cause of t
he world vide the S
ruti ﬁAll t
his uni
verse is
in es
sence That; That i
s the T
ruth. That
 is At
man (Soul). That
 thou art
O Svet
aketuﬂ Chh. Up. VI
-8-7. (In
struc
tion by Uddalaka to h
is son,
Svet
aketu).
The p
as
sage in Chh. Up. VI-2 be
gins, ﬁBe
ing (Sat) only
, my
dear
, this was in the be
gin
ningﬂ. Af

ter cre at
ing fire, wa
ter
, earth, I
t
thought ‚let
 me now en
ter into t
hese three as this liv
ing self (Jiva) and
evolve nam
es and forms™
 Chh. Up. VI
-3-2. The Sat,
 the First Cause,
re
fers to the in
tel
li
gent prin
ci
ple, the Jiv
a as it
s Self. B
y the t
erm Jiva
we must un
der
st
and the in
tel
li
gent prin
ci
ple which rules over the body
and sup
port
s the Prana. How could such a prin
ci
ple be the self of
 the
non-in
tel
li
gent Pradhana? By
 Self or At

man we un der
st
and a be
ing™
s
own na
ture. There
fore it is quit
e ob
vi
ous that the in
tel
li
gent Jiva can
-
not form t
he na
ture of the non-in
tel
li
gent Pradhana. T
he think
ing on
the p
art of the f
ire and wa
ter is to be un
der
stood as de
pend
ent on
their be
ing ruled over by t
he Sat.
 Hence it is un
nec
es
sary to as
sume a
fig
u
ra
tive sense of t
he word ‚think
ing™.
Now the Sankhya co
mes with a new ob
jec
tion. He says that
 the
word ‚At
man™
 (Self) may
 be ap
plied to the P
radhana, al
though it is
non-in
tel
li
gent, on ac
count of it
s be
ing fig
u
ra
tivel
y used in the sense
of ‚that
 which serves all pur
poses of an
other
™, as for ex
am
ple, a king
uses the word ‚self
™
 to some ser
vant who car
ries out his wishes
‚Govinda is my
 (other) self
™. Sim

i larly it
 ap
plies to Pradhana also be
-
cause the Pradhana works for the en
joy
ment and the f
i
nal sal
va
tion of
the soul and serves the soul just in t
he same man
ner as the min
is
ter
serves his king. Or else the word At
man (Self) may
 re
fer to non-in
tel
li
-
gent things, as well as t
o in
tel
li
gent be
ings, as for in
st
ance, in ex
pres
-
sions like Bhut
atma (the S
elf of t
he el
e
ment
s), Indriyat
ma (the Self
 of
the senses) just as the one word ‚light™
 (Jyoti) de
notes a cer
t
ain sac
ri
-
fice (the Jyot
istoma) as well as a flame. T
here
fore the word Self
 (At
-
man) can be used with ref
er
ence to the Pradhana also. How then
does it fol
low from the word ‚Self™
 that t
he ‚think
ing™
 at
trib
uted to t
he
cause of the uni
verse is not to be t
aken in a fig
u
ra
tive sense?
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
24

The next S
u
tra re
futes the ar
gu
ment.
V{Þð>
ñ` _mo
jmonXo
T
annishthasy
a mokshop
adesat
I.1.7 (
7)
(The Pradha
na canno
t be
 de
signate
d by the
 term Se
lf) be
caus
e
Salv
ati
on is decl
ared to on
e who is
 devoted to t
hat
 Sat
.
Ta
t
:
 to tha
t;
Nishthasy
a:
 of the dev
oted;
Mokshop
adesat
: from
 the
st
atement of
 salvation.
Fur
ther rea
son is given in this Su
tra to prove t
hat Pradhana is
not the cause of thi
s world.
The non-in
tel
li
gent Pradhana can
not be de
noted by t
he term
‚Self™
 be
cause Chhandogya Upanishad de
clares: ﬁO Svet
aketu! That
(the sub
tle Sat
) is the Self.
 ‚Thou art That™
.ﬂ An in
tel
li
gent man like
Svet
aketu can
not be iden
ti
fied with t
he non-in
tel
li
gent Pradhana. I
f
the non-in
tel
li
gent Pradhana were de
noted by t
he term ‚Sat
™, the
mean
ing of the Ma
havakya ﬁT
at Tvam
 Asiﬂ would be ‚Thou art non-in
-
tel
li
gent™. The t
each
ing will come to t
his. Y
ou are an Achet
ana or
non-in tel li gence
and
eman ci p
a tion
is
at t
ain ing
such
a
st
ate
of
insentiency
. Then the S
rutis would be a source of evil. T
he scrip
tures
would make con
tra
dic
tory st
ate
ment
s to the dis
ad
van
t
age of man and
would thus not be
come a means of right knowl
edge. It
 is not right to
de
stroy the au
thor
ity of
 the fault

less Srutis. If you as
sume that the
 in
-
fal
li
ble Sruti is not
 the means of right
 knowl
edge this will be cer
t
ainly
quite
un rea son able.
The fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion is de
clared in the Srutis t
o him who is de
-
voted t
o the Sat
, who has his be
ing in Sat.
 It can
not be at
t
ained by
med
i
t
a
tion on the non-in
tel
li
gent Pradhana vi
de Sruti:
 ‚He wait
s only
till he is re
leased and there
from unites with B
rah
man™
 (Chh. Up.
VI-14-2).
If t
he scrip
ture which is re
garded as a means of right knowl
edge
should point out a man who is de
sir
ous of eman
ci
p
a
tion but who is ig
-
no
rant of the way
 to it,
 an in
sen
tient self
 as the true Self
 he would, like
the blind man who had caught hold of
 the ox™
s t
ail to reach his vil
lage,
never be able to at

tain the fi
nal re
lease or the true Self
.
There
fore the word ‚Self™
 is ap
plied to the sub
tle Sat
 not in a
merely fi
g
u
ra
tive sense. I
t re
fers to what is in
tel
li
gent only i
n it
s pri
-
mary mean
ing. The ‚S
at™, t
he first cause, does not re
fer to the
Pradhana but to an i
n
tel
li
gent prin
ci
ple. It
 is de
clared in the Sruti t
hat
he, who is ab
so
lutely
 de
voted t
o the Cre
ator or cause of the world, at
-
t
ains the fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion. I
t is not rea
son
able to say t
hat one at
-
t
ains his re
lease by de
vo
tion to bli
nd mat
ter
, Pradhana. Hence
Pradhana can
not be the Cre
ator of the world.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
25

ho`ËdmdM
Hey
atv
av
achanaccha
I.1.8 (
8)
And (t
he Pradh
ana ca
nnot
 be denoted by th
e word ‚S
elf™),
because
 it is not
 stated (by the scriptur
es) that It (Sat
) has to be
discarded.
Hey
atv
a:
 fitness to be discarded;
A
v
achanat:
 not being st
ated (by
the scriptures);
Cha:
 and.
An
other rea
son is given in this Su
tra to prove t
hat Pradhana is
not the Cre
ator of the uni

verse.If y
ou want to point
 out to a man t
he small st
ar Arundhati, y
ou di
-
rect his at
ten
tion at f
irst to a big neigh
bour
ing st
ar and say ‚That is
Arundhati™
 al
though it is re
ally not
 so. Then you point
 out to him t
he
real Arundhati.
 Even so if
the pre
cep
tor in
tended to make his dis
ci
ple
un
der
st
and the Self
 step by step f
rom grosser to sub
tler truths
through the non-self he would def

i nitely
 st
ate in the end t
hat the S
elf is
not of t
he na
ture of the P
radhana and that the P
radhana must be dis
-
carded. But no such st
ate
ment is made. T
he whole chap
ter of the
Chhandogya Up
anishad deals with the Sel
f as noth
ing but that
 Sat.
An as
pi
rant has been t
aught to f
ix his mind on t
he cause and
med
i
t
ate on it.
 Cer
t
ainly he can
not at
t
ain the fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion by
med
i
t
at
ing on the in
ert Pradhana. I
f the S
ruti here meant t
he
Pradhana to be the cause of t
he world, it would hav
e surely asked the
as
pi
rant to aban
don such a cause and find out some
thing higher for
his fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion. Hence Pradhana can
not be the end and aim
 of
spir i tual
quest.
The word ‚and™
 sig
ni
fies that t
he con
tra
dic
tion of a pre
vi
ous
st
ate
ment is an ad
di
tional rea
son for the re
jec
tion.
Fur
ther this chap
ter be
gins with the ques
tion, ﬁWhat i
s that
which be
ing known ev
ery
thing is known? Have you ev
er asked, my
child, for that
 in
struc
tion by which y
ou hear what can
not be heard, by
which you per
ceive what can
not be per
ceived, by
 which you know
what can
not be known.ﬂ Now if the t
erm ‚Sat™
 de
noted the P
radhana, if
the Pradhana were the fi
rst cause, then by know
ing Pradhana ev
ery
-
thing must be known, which is not a f
act. The enjoy
er (soul) which is
dif

fer ent from P
radhana, which is not an ef

fect of the Pradhana can
-
not be known by know
ing the Pradhana.
 If ‚t
hat™
 or Sat means
Pradhana (mat
ter) the Sruti
s should teach us to turn away from it
. But
it is not t
he case. It giv
es a def
i
nite as
sur
ance that by know
ing that ev

-
ery
thing can be known. How can we know the soul by know
ing mat
-
ter? How can we know the enjoyer by know
ing the en
joyed? Hence
the Pradhana is not de
noted by t
he term ‚Sat
™. It
 is not the fi
rst cause,
know
ing which ev
ery
thing is known, ac
cord
ing to the S
ruti.
For this the Sut
rakara gives an
other rea
son.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
26

ñdmß``mV²
Sv
apy
ay
at
I.1.9 (
9)
On acc
ount o
f (the ind
ividu
al) me
rging in its own Se
lf (the Se
lf
cannot b
e the
 Pradha
na).
Sv
apy
ay
at:
 on account of merging in one™
s own self.
The ar
gu
ment to prov
e that P
radhana is not the cause of the
uni
verse or the Self
 is con
tin
ued.
The wak
ing st
ate is that where t
he mind, the senses and the
body act in con
cert to know the ob
ject
s. The in
di
vid
ual soul iden
ti
fies
him
self with the gross body
. In t
he dream
ing st
ate the body
 and the
senses are at rest and the mind plays with t
he im
pres
sions which the
ex
ter
nal ob
ject
s have lef
t. The mi
nd weaves it
s web of V
asanas. In
deep sleep the in
di
vid
ual soul is free from the l
im
i
t
a
tion of mi
nd. He
rest
s in his own Self though i
n a st
ate of ig
no
rance.
With ref
er
ence to the cause de
noted by t
he word ‚Sat™
 the Sruti
says, ﬁWhen a man sleep
s here, then my child,
 he be
comes united
with the Sat
, he is gone to his own self.
 There
fore they say
 of him ‚he
sleep
s™
 (Svapit
i) be
cause he is gone to his own (Svam Apit
a) Chh. Up.
VI-8-1. From t
he fact that
 the in
di
vid
ual soul merges in the uni
ver
sal
soul in deep sleep, it is un
der
stood that t
he Self,
 which is de
scribed in
the Sruti
 as the ul
ti
mate Re
al
ity
, the cause of the world is not
Pradhana.
In the Chhandogya t
ext it
 is clearly said that t
he in
di
vid
ual soul
merges or re
solves in the Sat
. The in
tel
li
gent Self
 can clearly not re
-
solve it

self into the non-in
tel
li
gent Pradhana. Hence, t
he Pradhana
can
not be the First Cause de
noted by t
he term ‚Sat
™
 in the tex
t. That
into which all in
tel
li
gent souls are merged in an in
tel
li
gent cause of the
uni
verse is de
noted by t
he term Sat
 and not the P
radhana.
A
 fur
ther rea
son for the Pradhana not be
ing the cause is given in
the next
 Su
tra.
J{Vgm_mÝ`mË
m² &
Gatisamany
at
I.1.
10 (10)
On a
cco
unt o
f the
 unifo
rmity o
f vie
w (of th
e V
ed
anta te
xts,
Brahman is t
o be take
n as that
 cause).
Gati:
 view
;
Samany
at:
 on account of the unif
ormity
.
The ar
gu
ment to prov
e that P
radhana is not the cause of the
uni verse
is
con tin ued.
All the V
edant
a text
s uni
formly re
fer to an in
tel
li
gent prin
ci
ple as
the First Cause. There
fore Brah
man is to be con
sid
ered as the cause.
All the V
edant
a text
s uni
formly t
each that the cause of t
he world is the
in
tel
li
gent Brah
man. The Srut
is de
clare thus, ﬁAs from a burn
ing fire
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
27

sparks pro
ceed in all di
rec
tions, thus f
rom that S
elf the P
ranas pro
-
ceed each to
wards it
s place, from the P
ranas the gods, from the gods
the worldsﬂ (Kau. Up. II
I-3). ﬁFrom that
 Brah
man sprang etherﬂ (T
ait.
Up. II-
1). ﬁ
All this
 spr
ings
 from
 the Se
lfﬂ (
Chh
. Up. VII-
2-6
). ﬁT
his
Prana is born from the S
elfﬂ (Pra. Up. I
II-3). A
ll these p
as
sages de
-
clare the Self t
o be the cause. The term ‚S
elf
™
 de
notes an in
tel
li
gent
be
ing. There
fore the all-know
ing Brah
man is to be t
aken as the cause
of the world be
cause of the uni
for
mity
 of view of
 the V
edant
a text
s.
A
 fur
ther rea
son for this con
clu
sion is given in the f
ol
low
ing
Sutra
.
lwVË
Srut
atv
accha
I.1.1
1 (1
1)
And
 be
cau
se
 it is d
ire
ctly s
tate
d in th
e S
ruti (th
ere
fore
 the
all-k
nowing Brahm
an alone
 is the c
ause
 of the u
nive
rse).
Srut
atv
at:
 being declared by the S
ruti;
Cha:
 also, and.
The ar
gu
ment that
 Pradhana is not the cause of t
he world is
con tin ued.
The All-know
ing Lord is the cause of the uni
verse. This is st
ated
in a p
as
sage of the Sv
et
asvat
ara Upani
shad VI-9, ﬁHe is the cause,
the Lord of the l
ords of the or
gans. He has nei
ther p
ar
ent nor lordﬂ.
‚He™
 re
fers to the all-know
ing Lord de
scribed in the chap
ter
. There
fore
it is fi
nally es
t
ab
lished that t
he All-know
ing, All
-pow
er
ful Brah
man is
the First Cause and not the i
n
sen
tient or non-in
tel
li
gent Pradhana or
any body
else.
Thus the V
edant
a text
s con
t
ained in Su
tra I-1-1
1 have clearly
shown that the Om
ni
scient, Om
nip
o
tent Lord is the cause of t
he or
i
-
gin, sub
sis
tence and dis
so
lu
tion of t
he world. It i
s al
ready shown on
ac
count of the uni
for
mity
 of view (I-1-10) that
 all V
edant
a text
s hold an
in tel li gent

cause.
From Su
tra 12 on
wards till the end of t
he first chap
ter a new
topic is t
aken up for dis
cus
sion. The Up
anishads speak of two types
of Brah
man, vi
z., the Nirguna or Brah
man with
out at
trib
utes and the
Saguna or Brah
man with at
trib
utes.
The Up
anishads de
clare, ﬁFor where there is du
al
ity as it
 were,
then one sees the other; but
 when the Self
 only is all t
his, how should
he see an
other?ﬂ Bri. Up. I
V
-5-15. ﬁWhere one sees noth
ing else,
hears noth
ing else, un
der
st
ands noth
ing else, that
 is the great
est (In
-
fi
nite, B
huma). Where one sees some
thing else, hears some
thing
else, un
der
st
ands some
thing else, t
hat is the lit

tle (fi nite). The great

-
est is im
mor
t
al; the li
t
tle is mor
t
alﬂ Chh. Up. VI
I-24-1. ﬁThe wise one,
who hav
ing pro
duced all forms and made all names, sit
s call
ing the
things by t
heir namesﬂ T
ait. A
r
. II
I-12-7.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
28

ﬁWho is with
out p
art
s, with
out ac
tions, tran
quil, with
out fault
s,
with
out t
aint, t
he high
est bridge of im
mor
t
al
ity
, like a fire t
hat has con
-
sum
ed its fuel
ﬂ Svet. U
p. VI-1
9. ﬁN
ot so
, not s
oﬂ Br
i. Up
. II-3-
6. ﬁIt i
s
nei
ther coarse nor fine, nei
ther short nor long; de
fec
tive i
n one place,
per
fect in the ot
herﬂ Bri. Up. II
I-1-8.
All these t
ext
s de
clare Brah
man to pos
sess a dou
ble na
ture, ac
-
cord
ing as it is the ob
ject ei
ther of ne
science or knowl
edge. Brah
man
with at
trib
utes (Saguna) is within the do
main of ne
science. It is the ob
-
ject of Up
asana which is of dif

fer ent kinds giv
ing dif

fer ent re
sult
s,
some
to
ex al t
a tions,
some
to
grad ual
eman ci p
a tion
(Krama-Mukti),
some to suc
cess in work
s. When it is the ob
ject of ne
science, cat
e
go
-
ries of dev
o
tee, ob
ject of de
vo
tion, wor
ship are ap
plied to it
. The kinds
of Up
asana are dis
tinct ow
ing to the dis
tinc
tion of t
he dif

fer ent qual
i
-
ties and lim
it
ing ad
junct
s. The fruit
s of de
vo
tion are dis
tinct ac
cord
ing
as the wor
ship re
fers to dif

fer ent qual
i
ties. The S
rutis say ﬁAc
cord
ing
as man wor
ship
s him, that
 he be
comes.ﬂ ﬁAc
cord
ing to what his
thought is in t
his world, so will he be when he has lef
t this lif
eﬂ Chh.
Up. III
-14-1. Med
i
t
a
tion on the S
aguna Brah
man can
not lead to im

me -
di
ate eman
ci
p
a
tion (Sady
o-Mukti). It
 can only help one to at

tain grad
-
ual
eman ci p
a tion
(Krama-Mukti).
Nirguna Brah
man of V
edantins or Jnanis is free from all at
trib
-
utes and lim
it
ing ad
junct
s. It is Nirup
adhika, i.e.
, free from Up
adhi or
Maya. I
t is the ob
ject of knowl
edge. The Knowl
edge of the Nirguna
Brah man
alone
leads
to
im me di ate
eman ci p
a tion.
The V
edantic p
as
sages have a doubt

ful im port. Y
ou will have to
find out t
he true sig
nif
i
cance of the tex
t
s through rea
son
ing. Y
ou will
have to make a proper en
quiry into t
he mean
ing of the t
ext
s in or
der to
ar
rive at a set
tled con
clu
sion re
gard
ing the knowl
edge of the S
elf
which leads to in
st
an
t
a
neous eman
ci
p
a
tion. A
 doubt may arise
whether the knowl
edge has the higher or the lower Brah
man for it
s
ob
ject as in the case of Su
tra I-1-2.
Y
ou will find in m
any places in the Up
anishads that Brah
man is
de
scribed ap
p
ar
ently wit
h qual
i
fy
ing ad
junct
s. The Srutis say t
hat the
knowl
edge of that
 Brah
man leads to in
st
an
t
a
neous re
lease
(Sadyo-Mukti).
 W
or
ship of Brah
man as lim
ited by t
hose ad
junct
s can
-
not
lead
to
im me di ate
eman ci p
a tion.
But
if
these
qual i fy
 ing
ad junct
s
are con
sid
ered as not be
ing ul
ti
mately
 ar
rived at by
 the p
as
sages but
used merely as in
dic
a
tive of
 Brah
man then these p
as
sages would re
-
fer to the Nirguna B
rah
man and the fi

nal eman ci
p
a
tion would re
sult
from know
ing that B
rah
man. There
fore you will hav
e to find out
 the
true sig
nif
i
cance of the p
as
sages through care
ful en
quiry and rea
son
-
ing.
In some places you will hav
e to find out
 whether the tex
t re
fers to
Saguna Brah
man or the in
di
vid
ual soul. Y
ou will have to ar
rive at a
proper con
clu
sion as to the true sig
nif
i
cance of these p
as
sages which
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
29

ev
i
dently hav
e a doubt

ful im port through care
ful en
quiry and rea
son
-
ing. There will be no dif

fi culty in un
der
st
and
ing for the in
tel
li
gent as
pi
-
rant who is en
dowed with a sharp, sub
tle and pure in
tel
lect. The help
of the t
eacher is al
ways nec
es
sary
.
Here ends the com
men
t
ary of the el
even Sut
ras which form a
sub-sec
tion by i
t

self.Anandamay
adhikaranam
: T
opic 6 (Sutras 12-19)
Anandam
aya is Para Brahman
.
AmZÝX
_`mo@
ä`mgmV² &
Anandamay
o™bhy
asat
I.1.
12 (12)
Anandamaya means Para Brahman
 on account of th
e
rep
etitio
n (of the
 word ‚b
liss™ a
s de
noting the
 Highe
st Self).
Anandamay
ah:
 full of bliss;
Abhy
asat:
 because of repetition.
Now the au
thor Badarayana t
akes up the topic of Sam
anvaya.
He clearly shows that sev
eral words of the Srutis which are ap
p
ar
-
ently am

big u
ous re
ally ap
ply to B
rah
man. He be
gins with the word
‚Anandamay
a™
 and t
akes up other words one af
ter an
other till t
he end
of the chap
ter
.
T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad says, ﬁDif

fer ent from t
his V
ijnanamaya is
an
other in
ner Self which con
sist
s of bliss (Anandamaya). T
he for
mer
is filled by
 this. Joy (Priy
a) is it
s head. Sat
is
fac
tion (Moda) is it
s right
wing or arm. Great sat
is
fac
tion (Pramoda) is it
s lef
t wing or arm. Bl
iss
(Ananda) is it
s trunk. Brah
man is the t
ail, the sup
port.ﬂ II
-5
Now a doubt arises as to whether this Anandamaya i
s Jiva (hu
-
man soul) or Para Brah
man. The Purv
ap
akshin or op
po
nent holds
that t
he Self con
sist
ing of bliss (Anandamay
a) is a sec
ond
ary self and
not the prin
ci
p
al Self,
 which is some
thing dif

fer ent from B
rah
man, as it
forms a link in a se
ries of selfs be
gin
ning with the self
 con
sist
ing of
food (Annamay
a), all of which are not t
he prin
ci
p
al Self.
 Even t
hough
the bliss
ful Self
, Anandamay
a Purusha, is st
ated to be t
he in
ner
most
of all it
 can
not be the pri
mary Self
, be
cause it is st
ated to hav
e joy
,
etc., f
or it
s lim
it
s and to be em
bod
ied. ﬁIt
 also has the shape of man.
Like the hu
man shape of the f
or
mer is the hu
man shape of the lat

terﬂ.If it
 were iden
ti
cal with the pri
mary Self
, joy
, sat
is
fac
tion, et
c., would
not af

fect it; but the t
ext clearly
 says, ‚Joy is it
s head™. The tex
t also
says, ‚Of t
hat for
mer one this one is the em
bod
ied Self™
 T
ait. Up.
 II-6.
Of that
 for
mer Self of
 bliss (Anandamaya) is the em
bod
ied Self.
 That
which has a body will be cer
t
ainly af

fected by joy and p
ain. The term
Anandamaya
sig ni fies
a
mod i fi ca ti
on.
There fore
it
can not
re fer
to
Brah
man which is change
less. Fur
ther fiv
e dif

fer ent p
art
s such as
head, right arm,
 lef
t arm, t
runk and t
ail are men
tioned of t
his
Anandamaya S
elf. B
ut Brah
man is with
out p
art
s. There
fore the
Anandamaya S
elf is only Jiv
a or the in
di
vid
ual soul.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
30

Here is the an
swer of the Siddhanti
n. This Su
tra shows that
Brah
man is Bliss. By
 the Anandamay
a Self we hav
e to un
der
st
and
the High
est Self,
 ‚on ac
count of rep
e
ti
tion™. A
bhyasa or rep
e
ti
tion
means ut
ter
ing a word again with
out any qual
i
fi
ca
tions. It
 is one of the
Shad Lingas or six char
ac
ter
is
tics or marks by which the sub
ject mat
-
ter of a p
as
sage is as
cer
t
ained.
The word ‚Bliss™
 is re
peat
edly ap
plied to the hi
gh
est Self.
T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad says:
‚Raso vai sah. Rasam hyevayam
labdhvanandi bhavati™
Š‚He the High
est Self i
s Bliss in it

self. The in di
-
vid
ual soul be
comes bliss
ful af

ter at t
ain
ing that B
liss™
 II-7. ‚
Who could
breathe forth if
 that B
liss did not ex
ist in the et
her of the heart? B
e
-
cause He alone causes
 Bliss. He at
t
ains that Sel
f con
sist
ing of Bli
ss™
II-7. ﬁHe who knows the Bliss of B
rah
man fears noth
ingﬂ II-9. A
nd
again ﬁHe (Bhrigu, hav
ing t
aken re
course to med
i
t
a
tion), real
ised or
un
der
stood that B
liss is Brah
manŠ
Anandam
 Brahmet
i vyajanat
ﬂ
III-6.
V
aruna teaches his son Bhrigu what is Brah
man. He first de
-
fines Brah
man as the cause of the cre
ation, et
c., of t
he uni
verse and
then teaches him that
 all ma
te
rial ob
ject
s are Brah
man. Such as, f
ood
is Brah
man, Prana is Brah
man, mind is B
rah
man, etc. He say
s this in
or
der to teach that
 they are the m
a
te
ri
als of which the world is made.
Fi
nally he con
cludes his teach
ing with ‚Ananda™
 de
clar
ing that
‚Ananda is Brah
man™. Here he stop
s and con
cludes that ‚the doc
trine
t
aught by me i
s based on Brah
man, the S
u
preme™
 T
aitt.
 Up. III
-6-1.
ﬁKnowl
edge and Bliss is Brah
manﬂ Bri. Up. I
II-9-27. A
s the word
‚Bliss™
 is re
peat
edly used with ref
er
ence to Brah
man, we con
clude
that t
he Self con
sist
ing of bliss is Brah
man also.
It is ob
jected that t
he bliss
ful Self
 de
notes the in
di
vid
ual soul as
it forms a link in a se
ries of sec
ond
ary selfs be
gin
ning with the
Annamaya S
elf. Thi
s can
not st
and be
cause the Anandamaya S
elf is
the in
ner
most of all.
 The Sruti t
eaches step by step, from t
he grosser
to the sub
tler
, and more and more in
te
rior and finer for the sake of
easy com
pre
hen
sion by men of small
 in
tel
lect. The f
irst re
fers to the
phys
i
cal body as the Self
, be
cause worldly minded peo
ple t
ake this
body as the Sel
f. I
t then pro
ceeds from the body t
o an
other self, t
he
Pranamaya self
, then again t
o an
other one. It
 rep
re
sent
s the non-self
as the Self f
or the pur
pose of easy un
der
st
and
ing. It
 fi
nally t
eaches
that t
he in
ner
most Self
 which con
sist
s of bliss is the real Self
, just as a
man point
s out at first t
o an
other man sev
eral st
ars which are not
Arundhati as be
ing Arundhati and f
i
nally point
s out in the end the real
Arundhati.
 There
fore here also the Anandamay
a Self is t
he real Self
as it is the in
ner
most or the last.
‚T
ail™
 does not mean the lim
b. It
 means that Brah
man is the sup
-
port of the i
n
di
vid
ual soul as He is the sub
stra
tum of t
he Jiva.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
31

The pos
ses
sion of a body hav

ing part
s and joy and so on as
head, etc.,
 are also at
trib
uted to I
t, on ac
count of the pre
ced
ing lim
it
-
ing con
di
tion vi
z., the self
 con
sist
ing of un
der
st
and
ing, the so-called
V
ijnanamaya K
osha. They do not
 re
ally be
long to the real S
elf. The
pos
ses
sion of a body is as
cribed to the Self
 of Bliss, onl
y be
cause it is
rep
re
sented as a link in the chain of bod
ies which be
gins with the self
con
sist
ing of food.
 It is not at

trib uted to it
 in the same sense in which it
is pred
i
cated of the in
di
vid
ual soul or the sec
ond
ary self (the
Samsarin). There
fore the Sel
f con
sist
ing of Bli
ss is the high
est Brah
-
man.
Thus, the Su
tra es
t
ab
lishes that Anandam
aya is Brah
man. But
the com
men
t
a
tor Sankara has a new ori
en
t
a
tion of out

look in this re -
gard. The Acharya says t
hat Anandamay
a can
not be Brah
man be
-
cause Anandamaya is one of t
he five sheat
hs or Koshas of the
in
di
vid
ual, the ot
her four be
ing Annamay
a (phys
i
cal body),
Pranamaya (vi

tal body), Manom
aya (men
t
al body), and V
ijnanamaya
(in
tel
lec
tual body).
 The Anandamay
a is ac
tu
ally t
he causal body
which de
ter
mines the func
tions of the ot
her sheaths. The in
di
vid
ual
en
ters into the A
nandamaya sheath in deep sleep and en
joys bliss
there, which is the rea
son why this sheath is called Anandamay
a
(bliss-filled).
A

cov er age
of
in di vid u al i
ty
can not
be
re garded
as
Brah
-
man. Fur
ther
, if A
nandamaya had been Brah
man it

self, the in
di
vid
ual
in deep sleep will be united wit
h Brah
man in that con
di
tion. B
ut this
does not hap
pen since one who goes to sleep re
turns to or
di
nary
wak
ing ex
pe
ri
ence. Hence the Anandamay
a is not Brah
man.
{dH$
maeãX
mÞo{V M
oV²
 Z àmM
w`m©
V² &
V
ikarasabdanneti
 chet na prachury
at
I.1.
13 (13)
If (
it be
 ob
je
cte
d that th
e te
rm Ana
nda
maya
 con
sisti
ng of b
liss
can)
 not (
denote th
e Supreme Self
) because of i
ts bein
g a w
ord
denotin
g a modi
fic
ati
on or t
ran
sfor
mati
on or pr
oduct (
we say
tha
t t
he objection
 is) n
ot (v
alid)
 on accoun
t of
 abundan
ce,
(which is de
note
d by the
 suffix ‚m
aya™).
V
ikara sabdat:
 from the word ‚Anandam
aya™
 with the suf
fix ‚
mayat™
denoting modif
ication;
Na:
 is not;
Iti:
 this
; thus
;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not so;
Prachury
at:
 because of abundance.
An ob
jec
tion against S
u
tra 12 is re
futed in t
his Su
tra.
If t
he ob
jec
tor says that ‚
maya™
 means mod
i
fi
ca
tion, it
 can
not be.
W
e can
not pred
i
cate such a mod
i
fi
ca
tion with re
gard to Brah
man who
is change
less. W
e re
ply that
 ‚maya™
 means fulness or abun
dance and
Anandamaya m
eans not a de
riv
a
tive f
rom Ananda or Bliss but
fulness or abun
dance of bliss.
The word ‚Anandamaya™
 has been cer
t
ainly ap
plied to de
note
the Su
preme Soul or the High
est Self and not
 the in
di
vid
ual soul. In
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
32

the T
ait. Up.
 II-8 the B
liss of Brah
man is fi
nally de
clared to be ab
so
-
lutely
 Su
preme. ﬁMayaﬂ there
fore de
notes abun
dance or ﬁfulnessﬂ.
Anandamaya does not
 mean ab
sence of p
ain or sor
row
. It
 is a
pos
i
tive at

trib ute of B
rah
man and not a mere ne
ga
tion of p
ain.
Anandamaya m
eans ‚He whose es
sen
tial na
ture or Svarup
a is
Ananda or Bliss™. When we say:
 ‚the sun has abun
dance of light™,
 it re
-
ally means, t
he sun, whose es
sen
tial na
ture is light is called
Jyotirmay
a. There
fore Anandamay
a is not Jiva but B
rah
man.
‚Anandamay
a™, is equal to ‚
Ananda-svarup
a™ŠHe whose es
sen
tial
na
ture is bliss. ‚May
a™
 has not the force of V
ikara or mod
i
fi
ca
tion here.
The word ‚Ananda™
 or Bliss is used re
peat
edly in t
he Srutis only
with ref
er
ence to Brah
man. ‚May
a™
 does not mean that
 Brah
man is a
mod
i
fi
ca
tion or ef

fect of Bliss. ‚Maya™
 means per
va
sion.
The phrase ‚The sac
ri
fice is Annamay
a™
 means ‚the sac
ri
fice is
abound
ing in food™,
 not ‚is some mod
i
fi
ca
tion or prod
uct of food™!
There
fore here also Brah
man, as abound
ing in Bliss, is called
Anandamaya.
VÕoVwì`
nXoem
T
addhetuv
y
ap
adesaccha
I.1.
14. (14)
And because he is declar
ed to be the cause of i
t (i
.e. of
 bliss
;
ther
efore ‚may
a™ denotes abun
dance or f
ulness).
T
ad + Hetu:
 the cause of that,
 namely t
he cause of Ananda;
V
y
ap
adesat:
 because of the st
atement of
 declaration;
Cha:
 and.
An
other ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 12 is given.
The Srutis de
clare that ﬁit is B
rah
man who is the cause of bliss
of all.ﬂ ﬁ
Esha hyevanandayati
ŠFor he alone causes blissﬂ T
ait. Up.
II-7. He who causes bliss must him
self abound in bliss, just as a man
who en
riches oth
ers must him
self be in pos
ses
sion of abun
dant
wealth. The giv
er of bliss to all is Bl
iss it

self. As ‚Maya™
 may be un
der
-
stood to de
note abun
dance, the Self
 con
sist
ing of bliss,
Anandamaya,
 is the Su
preme Self or B
rah
man.
The Sruti de
clares that Brah
man is the source of bliss to the in
-
di
vid
ual soul. The do
nor and the donee can
not be one and the same.
There
fore it is un
der
stood that ‚A
nandamaya™
 as st
ated in Su
tra 12 is
Brah man.
_mÝÌd{U©
H$_
od M Jr`Vo
Mantrav
arnikamev
a cha giy
ate
I.1.
15 (15)
Mo
reo
ve
r that ve
ry Bra
hman w
hich h
as b
ee
n re
-re
ferre
d to
 in
the
 Man
tra po
rtion i
s su
ng (i.e
. pro
clai
me
d in th
e B
rahma
na
passage as the Anandamaya).
Mantra-v
arnikam:
 He who is described in the Mantra portion;
Eva:
the very same;

Cha:
 and also, moreover;
Giy
ate:
 is sung.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
33

The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 12 is con
tin
ued. The pre
vi
ous
proofs were founded on Lingas. The ar
gu
ment which is now given is
based on Prakarana.
The Self con
sist
ing of bliss is the high
est Brah
man for the f
ol
-
low
ing rea
son also. The sec
ond chap
ter of the T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad
be
gins, ﬁHe who knows Brah
man at
t
ains the High
-
estŠ
Brahmavidapnot
i Param
. Brah
man is T
ruth, Knowl
edge and In
-
fin ity
(
Satyam
, Jnanam,
 Anant
am B
rahma
)ﬂ (
T
ait. U
p. II-1
). Th
en it i
s
said that from B
rah
man sprang at first the et
her and then all other
mov
ing and non-mov
ing things. The B
rah
man en
ter
ing into the be
-
ings st
ays in the re
cess, in
most of all.
 Then the se
ries of the dif

fer ent
self are enu
mer
ated. Then f
or easy un
der
st
and
ing it is said that
 dif

fer -
ent from t
his is the in
ner Self.
 Fi
nally t
he same Brah
man which the
Man
tra had pro
claimed is again pro
claimed in the p
as
sage un
der dis
-
cus
sion, ﬁdif

fer ent from t
his is the other in
ner Self,
 which con
sist
s of
blissﬂ. The Brahmanas only ex

plain what the Mantras de
clare. There
can
not be a con
tra
dic
tion be
tween the Man
tra and Brahmana por
-
tions.
A
 fur
ther in
ner Self dif

fer ent from t
he Self con
sist
ing of bliss is
not men
tioned. On t
he same i.e. t
he Self con
sist
ing of bliss is
founded. ﬁThis same knowl
edge of Bhrigu and V
aruna, he un
der
stood
that bliss is Brah
manﬂ T
ait. Up.
 III
-6. There
fore the Sel
f con
sist
ing of
Bliss is the Su
preme Self.
ﬁ
Brahmavidapnot
i Param
ﬂŠThe knower of Brah
man ob
t
ains
the High
est. This shows that the wor
ship
per Jiva ob
t
ains the wor
-
shipped Brah
man. There
fore Brah
man who is the ob
ject at
t
ained
must be con
sid
ered as dif

fer ent from t
he Jiva who ob
t
ains, be
cause
the ob
t
ained and the obt
ainer can
not be one and the same.
 Hence
the Anandamay
a is not Jiva. T
he Brah
man which is de
scribed in the
Mantras (
Satyam
 Jnanam Anant
am B
rahma
) is de
scribed later on in
the Brahmanas as Anandamay
a. It
 is our duty to real
ise the iden
tity
 of
the teach
ing in the Mant
ras and the Brahmanas which form the
V
edas.
ZoVam
o@Zwnn
&
Net
aro™nup
ap
atteh
I.1.
16 (16)
(Brahman and) not the
 other (i.e
. the individ
ual sou
l is mea
nt
he
re)
 on a
cco
unt o
f the
 imp
oss
ibil
ity (o
f the
 latte
r ass
ump
tion)
.
Na:
 not;
It
arah:
 the other
, i.e.
, the Jiv
a;
Anup
ap
atteh:
 because of the
impossibility
, non-reasonableness.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 12 is con
tin
ued.
The Jiva is not t
he be
ing re
ferred to in the M
an
tra ﬁ
Satya
m
Jnanam Anant
am B
rahma
ﬂ be
cause of the im
pos
si
bil
ity of
 such a
con struc tion.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
34

The in
di
vid
ual soul can
not be de
noted by t
he term ﬁthe one con
-
sist
ing of bliss.ﬂ Why? On ac
count of the im

pos si
bil
ity
. Be
cause the
scrip
ture says with ref
er
ence to the Self
 con
sist
ing of bliss, ﬁHe
wished ‚May I be many
, may I
 grow forth.™
 He re
flected. A
f

ter he hadthus re
flected, he sent
 forth what
ever there isﬂ.
He who is re
ferred to in the p
as
sage, ﬁThe Self con
sist
ing of
bliss etc.ﬂ is said to be cre
ator of ev
ery
thing. ﬁHe pro
jected all thi
s
what
ever isﬂ T
ait. Up.
 II-6. T
he Jiva or the in
di
vid
ual soul can
not cer
-
t
ainly do t
his. There
fore he is not re
ferred to in the p
as
sage ﬁThe Self
con
sist
ing of blissﬂ etc.
Bhedav
y
ap
adesaccha
I.1.
17 (17)
And on a
ccount
 of t
he declara
tion
 of t
he diff
erence (between
the
 two i.e
. the
 one
 refe
rred
 to in th
e p
ass
age
 ‚The S
el
f
consisting
 of bliss™ etc. and the individual soul, th
e latter
cann
ot b
e th
e o
ne
 refe
rred
 to in th
e p
ass
age
).
Bheda:
 dif
ference;
V
y
ap
adesat:
 because of the declaration;
Cha:
and.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 12 is con
tin
ued.
The Sruti makes a dis
tinc
tion be
tween the two.
 It de
scribes that
one is the giver of
 bliss and the other as the re
ceiver of bliss. The Jiv
a
or the in
di
vid
ual soul, who is the re
ceiver
, can
not be the
Anandamaya,
 who is the giver of bli
ss.
ﬁThe Self con
sist
ing of bliss is of the es
sence of fla
vour at
t
ain
ing
which the in
di
vid
ual soul is bliss
ful:
Raso vai sah
 (Brahma)
Rasam
hyeva™
yam
 (Jiva) l
abdhva™
nandi bhavati
.ﬂ T
ait. U
p. II-7
.
That which is at
t
ained and the att
ainer can
not be the same.
Hence the in
di
vid
ual soul is not re
ferred to in the p
as
sage which
is
un der
dis cus sion.
H$m_
m… ZmZw
_mZmno
Kamaccha Nanumanapeksh
a
I.1.
18 (18)
Because
 of wishin
g or will
ing in t
he scriptural passage we
cannot say even inferentially t
hat Anandamaya means
Pradhana.
Kamat:
 because of desire or willing;
Cha:
 and;
Na:
not;
Anumana:
the inferred one, i
. e.,
 the Pradhana;
Apeksha:
 necessity
.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 12 is con
tin
ued.
The word ‚Akamyat
a™
 (willed) in the scrip
tural tex
t shows that the
Anandamaya can
not be Pradhana (pri
mor
dial mat
ter), be
cause will
can
not be as
cribed to non-sen
tient (Jada) mat
ter
. Prakriti is non-sen
-
tient and can hav
e no Kamana or wish. There
fore the Anandam
aya
with re
gard to which the word Kama is used can
not be Prakriti or
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
35

Pradhana. That
 which is in
ferred i.e. t
he non-in
tel
li
gent Pradhana as
-
sumed by the S
ankhyas can
not be re
garded as be
ing the Self
 of bliss
(Anandamaya) and the cause of t
he world.
Ap
ñ_Þñ` M
 VÚmoJ§
Asminnasy
a cha t
ady
ogam sasti
I.1.
19 (19)
And
 more
ove
r it, i e
., the
 scrip
ture
, tea
che
s the
 join
ing o
f this,
i.e
., the
 indi
vid
ual
 sou
l, with tha
t, i.e
., con
sisti
ng of b
liss
(Anand
amaya) whe
n knowle
dge
 is attaine
d.
Asmin
:
 in him; in t
he person called Anandamaya;
Asy
a:
 his
, of the
Jiva
;
Cha:
 and, also;
Ta
t
:
 that;
Y
ogam:
 union;
Sasti:
 (Sruti) teaches.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 12 is con
cluded in this Su
tra.
Scrip
ture teaches that t
he Jiva or the in
di
vid
ual soul ob
t
ains the
fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion when he at
t
ains knowl
edge, when he is joined or
iden
ti
fied with t
he Self of
 bliss un
der dis
cus
sion. The Sruti
 de
clares,
ﬁWhen he finds free
dom from fear
, and rest in that
 which is in
vis
i
ble,
bodi
less, in
de
fin
able and supportless, then he has at
t
ained the fear
-
less (Brah
man). If
 he has the small
est dis
tinc
tion in it
 there is fear (of
Samsara) for himﬂ T
ait. Up.
 1
1-7.
Per
fect rest is pos
si
ble only when we un
der
st
and by the S
elf
con
sist
ing of bliss, t
he Su
preme Self and not
 ei
ther the Pradhana or
the in
di
vid
ual soul. There
fore it is proved t
hat the S
elf con
sist
ing of
bliss (Anandamaya) is the S
u
preme Self or P
ara Brah
man.
Ant
aradhikaranam
: T
opic 7 (Sutras 20-21)
The being or person in the Sun and the eye is B
rahman.
AÝVñVÕ_
m}nXoemV² &
Ant
ast
addharmop
adesat
I.1.
20 (20)
The be
ing within (the Su
n and the
 eye
) is Brahma
n, be
caus
e
His
 attrib
ute
s are
 taug
ht the
rei
n.
Ant
ah:
 (Ant
aratma, t
he being within the sun and t
he eye);
Ta
t
Dharma:
 His essential attribut
e;
Up
adesat:
 because of the teaching,
as Sruti teaches.
The won
der
ful Purusha of Chhandogy
a Up
anishad de
scribed in
chap
ters 1, 6 and 7 is Brah
man.
From the de
scrip
tion in the Chhandogy
a Up
anishad of the es
-
sen
tial qual
i
ties be
long
ing to the I
n
dwell
ing S
pirit re
sid
ing in the Sun
and in the hu
man eye, i
t is to be un
der
stood that he is B
rah
man and
not the in
di
vid
ual soul. Y
ou will find in Chhandogy
a Up
anishad I-6-6,
ﬁNow that per
son bright as gold who is seen within the sun, with beard
bright as gold and hair bright as gold al
to
gether to the v
ery tip
s of his
nails, whose eyes are like blue lo
tus. His name is ‚Ut™
 be
cause he has
risen (Udit
a) above all evi
l. He tran
scends all lim
i
t
a
tions. He also who
knows this rises above all evil. S
o much with ref
er
ence to the Devas.ﬂ
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
36

With ref
er
ence to the body
, ﬁNow the per
son who is seen in the
eye is Rik. He is Sama.
 He is Uktha. He is Y
ajus. He is Brah
man. His
form is the same as that
 of the f
or
mer i.e. of
 the Be
ing in the Sun.
 The
joint
s of the one are the joint
s of the other
, the name of
 the one is the
name of the ot
herﬂ Chh. Up. I-7-5.
Do these text
s re
fer to some spe
cial in
di
vid
ual soul who by
means of knowl
edge and pi
ous deeds has raised him
self to an ex

-
alted st
ate; or do they
 re
fer to the et
er
nally per
fect su
preme Brah
-
man? The Purvap
akshin says that the ref
er
ence is to an in
di
vid
ual
soul only
, as the scrip
ture speaks of a def
i
nite shape, p
ar
tic
u
lar
abode. S
pe
cial fea
tures are at
trib
uted to t
he per
son in the Sun, such
as the pos
ses
sion of beard as bright as gold and so on. The same
char
ac
ter
is
tics be
long to the be
ing in the ey
e also.
On the con
trary no shape can be at
trib
uted to t
he Su
preme
Lord, ﬁThat which is with
out sound, with
out touch, wit
h
out form,
 with
-
out de
cayﬂ Kau. Up. I
-3-15.
Fur
ther a def
i
nite abode is st
ated, ﬁHe who is in the Sun.
 He who
is in the eyeﬂ.
 This shows that an in
di
vid
ual soul is meant. A
s re
gards
the Su
preme Lord, he has no spe
cial abode, ﬁWhere does he rest? In
his own gloryﬂ Chh. Up. VI
I-24-1. ﬁLike the ether he is Om
ni
pres
ent,
Eter nalﬂ.
The power of the be
ing in ques
tion is said to be lim

ited. ﬁHe isthe Lord of the worlds be
yond that
 and of the wishes of the Dev
as,ﬂ
shows that the power of the be
ing in the Sun i
s lim
ited. ﬁHe is the Lord
of the worlds be
neath that
 and of the wishes of men,
ﬂ shows that the
power of the per
son in the eye is lim

ited. Whereas the power of the
Su
preme Lord is un
lim
ited. ﬁHe is the Lord of
 all, the K
ing of all t
hings,
the Pro
tec
tor of all t
hings.ﬂ This in
di
cates that the Lord is f
ree from all
lim
i
t
a
tions. There
fore the be
ing in the Sun and i
n the eye can
not be
the Su
preme Lord.
This Su
tra re
futes the abov
e ob
jec
tion of t
he Purvap
akshin. The
be
ing within the S
un and within the ey
e is not the in
di
vid
ual soul, but
the Su
preme Lord only
. Why? Be
cause His es
sen
tial at
trib
utes are
de clared.
At f
irst the name of t
he be
ing within the S
un is st
ated, ﬁHis name
is ‚Ut™.ﬂ Then it
 is de
clared, ﬁHe has risen above all evilﬂ. T
he same
name is then trans
ferred to the be
ing in the ey
e, ﬁthe name of
 the one
is the name of t
he otherﬂ. Per
fect free
dom from sins is as
cribed to the
Su
preme Self only
, the S
elf which is free from sin et
c.,
Ap
ahat
ap
apma
Chh. Up. VI
II-7. T
here is the p
as
sage, ﬁHe is Rik. He is Saman, Uktha,
Y
ajus, Brah
man,ﬂ which de
clares the be
ing in the ey
e to be the S
elf,
Saman and so on. This is pos
si
ble only if
 the be
ing is the Lord, who as
be
ing the cause of all,
 is to be re
garded as the Self of
 all.
Fur
ther it is de
clared, ﬁRik and Saman are his joint
sﬂ with ref
er
-
ence to the Devas, and ﬁt
he joint
s of the one are the joint
s of the other
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
37

with ref
er
ence to the bodyﬂ.
 This st
ate
ment can be made only
 with ref
-
er
ence to that which is the S
elf of all
.
The men
tion of a p
ar
tic
u
lar abode, viz.
, the S
un and the eye,
 of
form with a beard bright as gold and of
 a lim
i
t
a
tion of pow
ers is only for
the pur
pose of med
i
t
a
tion or Up
asana. The Su
preme Lord may as
-
sume through Maya any
 form He likes in or
der to please thereby his
de
vout wor
ship
pers to save and bless them. S
mriti also says, ﬁThat
thou seest me O Narada, is the May
a emit
ted by me.
 Do not then look
on me en
dowed with the qual
i
ties of all be
ings.ﬂ The lim
i
t
a
tion of B
rah
-
man™
s pow
ers which is due to the dis
tinc
tion of what
 be
longs to the
Devas and what to the body
, has ref
er
ence to de
vout med
i
t
a
tion only
.
It is for t
he con
ve
nience of med
i
t
a
tion that
 these lim
i
t
a
tions are imag
-
ined in Brah
man. In His es
sen
tial or true na
ture He is be
yond them.
 It
fol
lows, there
fore, that
 the Be
ing which scrip
ture st
ates to be within
the eye and t
he Sun is the Su
preme Lord.
^oXì`nXoem…mÝ`
Bhedav
y
ap
adesacchany
ah
I.1.
21 (21)
And
 the
re i
s ano
the
r one
 (i.e
. the
 Lord
 who i
s di
ffere
nt from th
e
individual souls animat
ing th
e Sun etc.) on account of th
e
declaration of disti
nction.
Bheda:
 dif
ference;
V
y
ap
adesat:
 because of declaration;
Cha:
 and,
also;
Any
ah:
 is dif
ferent, anot
her
, other than t
he Jiva or the indiv
idual
soul.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 20 is ad
duced.
Anyah
: (
Sarirat anyah:
 other than the em

bod ied in
di
vid
ual soul).
More
over there is one who is dis
tinct from t
he in
di
vid
ual souls which
an
i
mate the S
un and other bod
ies, viz.,
 the Lord who rules within. The
dis
tinc
tion be
tween the Lord and the in
di
vid
ual souls is de
clared in
the fol
low
ing p
as
sage of the Srut
is, ﬁHe who dwells in the Sun and is
within the S
un, whom the S
un does not know
, whose body the S
un is
and who rules the Sun from with
in, is thy
 Self,
 the ruler within,
 the im
-
mor
t
al (Bri. Up. I
II-7-9). Here the ex

pres sion ﬁHe within the Sun whom
the Sun does not knowﬂ clearly shows that t
he Ruler within is dis
tinct
from that
 cog
nis
ing in
di
vid
ual soul whose body is the sun. The tex
t
clearly in
di
cates that the S
u
preme Lord is within the Sun and y
et dif

-
fer
ent from t
he in
di
vid
ual soul iden
ti
fy
ing it

self with the Sun. This con
-
firms the v
iew ex
pressed in the pre
vi
ous Su
tra. It
 is an es
t
ab
lished
con
clu
sion that the p
as
sage un
der dis
cus
sion gives a de
scrip
tion of
the Su
preme Lord only but not
 of any ex

alted Jiva.BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
38

Akasadhikaranam: T
opic 8
The word Akasa must be understood as Brahm
an
AmH$meñV{ëbﬁmV² &
Akasast
alli
ngat
I.1.
22 (22)
T
he word Akasa i.e., ether here is Brahman on account of
chara
cte
ristic
 mark
s (o
f that i.e
. Brah
man b
ei
ng me
ntion
ed
).
Akasah:

the word Akasa as used here;
Ta
d
:
 His, of Brahman;
Lingat:
 because of characteristic mark.
Brah
man is shown to be Akasa in this Su
tra. The Akasa of Chh.
Up. I-9 is Brah
man.
In the Chhandogya Up
anishad I-9 the fol
low
ing p
as
sage co
mes
in. ﬁWhat is the or
i
gin of this world? ‚E
ther
™
 he re
pliedﬂ. Be
cause all
these be
ings t
ake their or
i
gin from the et
her only
, and re
turn into t
he
ether
. Et
her is greater than these, et
her is their ul
ti
mate re
sort (Di
a
-
logue be
tween Silak and Prabahana). Here t
he doubt arisesŠDoes
the word ‚ether
™
 de
note the High
est Brah
man or the Su
preme Self or
the
el e men t
al
ether?
Here Akasa re
fers to the High
est Brah
man and not to t
he el
e
-
men
t
al ether
, be
cause the char
ac
ter
is
tics of Brah
man, namely
 the or
i
-
gin of the en
tire cre
ation from it
 and it
s re
turn to it
 at dis
so
lu
tion are
men
tioned. These marks may al
so re
fer to Akasa as the scrip
tures
say ﬁfrom the A
kasa sprang air
, from air f
ire, and so on and they re
turn
to the A
kasa at the end of a cy
cleﬂ. But t
he sen
tence ﬁAll these be
ings
t
ake their or
i
gin from the A
kasa onlyﬂ clearly in
di
cates the high
est
Brah
man, as all V
edant
a-text
s agree in pro
claim
ing def
i
nitely
 that all
be
ings t
ake their or
i
gin from the High
est Brah
man.
But t
he Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent may say
 that t
he el
e
men
-
t
al Akasa also may be t
aken as the cause viz., of ai
r
, fire and t
he other
el
e
ment
s. But t
hen the force of t
he words ﬁall theseﬂ and ﬁonlyﬂ in the
text
 quoted would be lost. T
o keep it, the t
ext should be t
aken to re
fer
to the f
un
da
men
t
al cause of all, in
clud
ing Akasa also, which is Brah
-
man alone.
The word ﬁAkasaﬂ is also used for Brah
man in other tex
t
s: ﬁThat
which is called Akasa is the revealer of all f
orms and names; that
within which forms and names are, that
 is Brah
manﬂ Chh. Up.
VII
I-14-1. The clause ﬁThey re
turn into t
he etherﬂ again point
s to Brah
-
man and so also the phrase ‚Akasa is greater than these, A
kasa is
their fi
nal re
sort™, be
cause the scrip
ture as
cribes to the Su
preme Self
only
ab so lute
su pe ri or ity
.
Chh.
Up.
III
-14-3.
Brah
man alone can be ﬁgreater than allﬂ and thei
r ﬁul
ti
mate goalﬂ
as men
tioned in the t
ext.
 The qual
i
ties of be
ing greater and the ul
ti
-
mate goal of e
v
ery
thing are men
tioned in the f
ol
low
ing text
s: ﬁHe is
greater than the earth,
 greater than the sky
, greater than heav
en,
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
39

greater than all t
hese worldsﬂ Chh. Up. III-14-3. ﬁBrah
man is Knowl
-
edge and Bliss. He is the Ul
ti
mate Goal of
 him who makes gif
t
sﬂ Bri.
Up. III-
9-2
8.
The text
 says that all t
hings have been born from Akasa. S
uch a
cau
sa
tion can ap
ply only
 to Brah
man. The tex
t says that
 Akasa is
greater than ev
ery
thing else, t
hat Akasa is the Su
preme Goal and that
it is In
fi
nite. These in
di
ca
tions show that Akasa means Brah
man only
.
V
ar
i
ous syn
onyms of A
kasa are used to de
note Brah
man. ﬁIn
which the V
edas are in the Im
per
ish
able One (Brah
man) the High
est,
the ether (V
yoman)ﬂ T
ait. Up.
 III
-6. Again ﬁOM,
 Ka is Brah
man, ether
(Kha) is Brah
manﬂ Chh. Up IV
-10-5 and ﬁthe old etherﬂ (Bri. Up. V
-1.)
There
fore we are jus
ti
fied in de
cid
ing that t
he word Akasa,
though it oc
curs in the be
gin
ning of the p
as
sage re
fers to Brah
man, it
is sim
i
lar to that
 of the phrase ﬁAgni (the f
ire) stud
ies a chap
terﬂ,
where the word Agni, though i
t oc
curs in the be
gin
ning de
notes a boy
.
There
fore it is set
tled that
 the word Akasa de
notes Brah
man only
.
Pranadhi
karanam: T
opic 9
The word ‚Prana™
 must be understood as B
rahman
AV Ed à
mU–&
At
a ev
a Pranah
I.1.
23 (23)
For th
e s
ame
 rea
son
 the
 bre
ath al
so re
fe
rs to B
rahma
n.
At
a ev
a
: for the same reason;
Pranah:
 the breath (also refers to
Brahman).
As Prana is de
scribed as the cause of the world, such a de
scrip
-
tion can ap
ply to B
rah
man alone.
ﬁWhich then is that de
ity?ﬂ ‚P
rana™
 he said. Re
gard
ing the
Udgitha it is said (Chh. Up. I
-10-9), ‚Prastotri™
 that de
ity which be
longs
to the P
rast
ava etc.
ﬁFor all the be
ings merge in Prana alone and from P
rana they
arise. This is the de
ity be
long
ing to the P
rast
avaﬂ Chh. Up. I-1
1-4.
Now the doubt arises whether Prana is vi
t
al force or Brah
man. The
Purvap
akshin or op
po
nent says that
 the word Prana de
notes the fiv
e
-
fold breath.
 The Siddhanti
n says: No. Just as in the case of the
 pre
-
ced
ing Su
tra, so here also Brah
man is meant on ac
count of
char ac ter is tic
marks
be ing
men tioned;
for
here
also
a
com ple men t
ary
p
as
sage makes us to un
der
st
and that all be
ings spring from and
merge into Prana.
 This can oc
cur only in con
nec
tion with t
he Su
-
preme Lord.
The op
po
nent says ﬁThe scrip
ture makes the fol
low
ing st
ate
-
ment: when man sleep
s, then into breat
h in
deed speech merges, into
breath the eye,
 into breath t
he ear
, into breat
h the mind; when he
wakes up then they spring again from breat
h alone.ﬂ What the V
eda
here st
ates is a mat
ter of daily
 ob
ser
va
tion, be
cause dur
ing sleep
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
40

when the breath
ing goes on un
in
ter
rupt
edly the f
unc
tion
ing of the
sense or
gans ceases and again be
comes man
i
fest when the man
wakes up only
. Hence the sense or
gans are the es
sence of all be
ings.
The com
ple
men
t
ary p
as
sage which speaks
 of the merg
ing and
emerg
ing of the be
ings can be rec
on
ciled with the chief
 vi
t
al air also.
This can
not be. P
rana is used in the sense of Brah
man in p
as
-
sages like ‚the Prana of P
rana™
 (Bri. Up. I
V
-4-18) and ‚Prana in
deed is
Brah
man™
 Kau. Up. I
II-3. T
he Sruti de
clares ﬁAll these be
ings merge in
Prana and from Prana t
hey ariseﬂ Chh. Up. I-1
1-5. This is pos
si
ble
only if
 Prana is Brah
man and not the v
i
t
al force in which the senses
only get m
erged in deep sleep.
Jy
otischaranadhi
karanam: T
opic 10 (Sutras 24-27)
The light is Brahm
an
.
Á`mo{V
üaU
m{^Y
Jy
otischaranabhidhanat
I.1.
24 (24)
The ‚light™ is B
rahman, on ac
cou
nt of the me
ntion of fe
et in a
passage which is connected with th
e passage
 about the light.
Jy
otih:
 the light;

Charana:
 feet;
Abhidhanat:
 because of the
mention.
The ex
pres
sion ‚Jyotih™
 (light) is next
 t
aken up for dis
cus
sion.
The Jyotis of Chhandogy
a Up
anishad III-13-7 re
fers to Brah
man and
not to ma
te
rial light;
 be
cause it is de
scribed as hav
ing four feet
.
Sruti de
clares, ﬁNow that light which shines above t
his heaven,
higher than all, hi
gher than ev
ery
thing, in t
he high
est worlds be
yond
which there are no other worldsŠthat is the same light
 which is within
man.ﬂ Here the doubt arises whether the word ﬁlightﬂ de
notes the
phys
i
cal light of t
he sun and the like or the Su
preme Self?
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent holds that t
he word ‚light™
 de
-
notes the light
 of the sun and the li
ke as it is the or
di
nary well-es
t
ab
-
lished mean
ing of the t
erm. More
over the word ‚shines™
 or
di
narily
re
fers to the sun and sim
i
lar sources of light. Brah
man is colour
less. It
can
not be said in the pri
mary sense of the word that
 it ‚shines™. Fur
ther
the word ‚Jyotis™
 de
notes light f
or it is said to be bounded by t
he sky
(‚that light
 which shines above this heaven™); t
he sky can
not be
come
the bound
ary of Brah
man which is the Self
 of all, which is all-per
vad
-
ing and in
fi
nite, and is t
he source of all things mov
able or im
mov
able.
The sky can form the bound
ary of light
 which is mere prod
uct and
which is there
fore united.
The word Jyoti does not mean phy
s
i
cal light of t
he sun which
help
s vi
sion. It de
notes Brah
man. Why? On ac
count of the f
eet (quar
-
ters) be
ing men
tioned in a pre
ced
ing text
: ﬁSuch is it
s great
ness,
greater than this is the P
urusha. One foot of
 It is all be
ings, while it
s
re
main
ing three feet
 are the Im
mor
t
al in heavenﬂ Chh. Up. I
II-12-6.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
41

That which in this tex
t forms the t
hree quar
ter p
art, im
mor
t
al and con
-
nected with heaven of
 Brah
man which al
to
gether con
sti
tutes four
quar
ters, this v
ery same en
tity
 is again re
ferred to in the p
as
sage un
-
der dis
cus
sion, for there also it
 is said to be con
nected with heaven.
Brah
man is the sub
ject mat
ter of not onl
y the pre
vi
ous text
s, but
also of the sub
se
quent sec
tion, S
andilya V
idya (Chh. Up. I
II-14). I
f we
in
ter
pret ‚light™
 as or
di
nary light,
 we will com
mit the er
ror of drop
ping
the topic st
arted and in
tro
duce a new sub
ject. Brah
man is the main
topic in the sec
tion im
me
di
ately f
ol
low
ing that which con
t
ains the p
as
-
sage un
der dis
cus
sion (Chh. Up. III
-14). There
fore it is quit
e rea
son
-
able to say t
hat the in
ter
ven
ing sec
tion also (Chh. Up. II
I-13) treat
s of
Brah
man only
. Hence we con
clude that in t
he p
as
sage the word ‚light™
must de
note Brah
man only
.
The word ‚Jyoti™
 here does not at all de
note that
 light on which
the func
tion of t
he eye de
pends. It has dif

fer ent mean
ing, for in
st
ance
ﬁwith speech only as light man sit
sﬂ (Bri. Up. IV
-3-5); what
ever il
lu
-
mines some
thing else may be con
sid
ered as ‚light™. T
here
fore the
term ‚light
™
 may be ap
plied to Brah
man also whose na
ture is in
tel
li
-
gence be
cause It gives light
 to the whole uni
verse. The Srut
is de
clare
ﬁHim the shin
ing one, ev
ery
thing shines af

ter; by His light all this is il
-
lu
minedﬂ (Kau. Up. I
I-5-15) and ﬁHim the gods wor
ship as the Light of
light
s, as the Im
mor
t
alﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
-4-16).
The men
tion of li
m
it
ing ad
junct
s with re
spect to Brah
man, de
-
noted by t
he word ‚light™
 ‚bounded by heaven™
 and the as
sign
ment of a
spe
cial lo
cal
ity serves t
he pur
pose of de
vout med
i
t
a
tion. The S
rutis
speak of dif

fer ent kinds of med
i
t
a
tion on Brah
man as spe
cially con
-
nected with cer
t
ain lo
cal
i
ties such as the sun, the eye,
 the heart.
There
fore it is a set
tled con
clu
sion that the word ‚li
ght™
 here de
-
notes Brah
man.
N>ÝXm
o@{^YmZm
Þo{V M
oV² Z VW
m

MoVmo@n
©U{ZJ
XmÎm
Wm {h
&
Chhando™bhidhananneti chet na t
atha

cheto™rp
ananigadat t
atha hi darsanam
I.1.
25 (25)
If it
 be said th
at Br
ahma
n is n
ot denot
ed on accoun
t of
 the
me
tre G
ayatri b
ei
ng de
note
d, we
 rep
ly no
t so, b
ec
aus
e th
us i
.e.
by me
ans of the
 metre
 the ap
plicatio
n of the m
ind on B
rahman
is declared; be
cause thus it is seen (in other passages also).
Chhandas:
 the metre known as Gayatri;

Abhidhanat:
 because of
the description;
Na:
 not;
Iti
: thus
;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not;
T
atha:
 thus, like
that;
Chet™orp
ana:
 application of t
he mind;
Nigad
at:
because of the
teaching;
T
atha hi:
 like that;

Darsanam:
 it is seen (in other tex
t
s).
An ob
jec
tion raised against Su
tra 24 is re
futed in t
his Su
tra.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
42

The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says ﬁIn the p
as
sage, ‚One
foot of
 It is all be
ings™,ﬂ Brah
man is not re
ferred to but t
he metre
Gayatri,
 be
cause the first p
ara
graph of the pre
ced
ing sec
tion of t
he
same Upani
shad be
gins with ﬁGayatri i
s ev
ery
thing, what

so ever here
ex
ist
sﬂ. Hence the feet re
ferred to in the t
ext men
tioned in the pre
vi
-
ous Su
tra re
fer to thi
s metre and not to B
rah
man.
In re
ply we say
, not so; be
cause the Brahmana p
as
sage
ﬁGayatri in
deed is all thisﬂ teaches that one should m
ed
i
t
ate on the
Brah
man which is con
nected with this met
re, for Brah
man be
ing the
cause of ev
ery
thing is con
nected with that
 Gayatri also and it
 is that
Brah
man which is to be med
i
t
ated upon.
Brah
man is med
i
t
ated upon as Gayatri.
 By t
his ex
pla
na
tion all
be
come con
sis
tent.
 If Gay
atri meant m
etre then it
 would be im
pos
si
-
ble to say of
 it that
 ﬁGayatri is ev
ery
thing what

so ever here ex
ist
sﬂ be
-
cause cer
t
ainly t
he metre is not ev

ery thing. There
fore the Su
tra says
ﬁT
atha hi darsanamﬂ
ŠSo we see. By
 such an ex
pla
na
tion only
 the
above p
as
sage gives a con
sis
tent mean
ing. Oth
er
wise we will have
to hold a metre t
o be ev
ery
thing which is ab
surd. There
fore through
Gayatri t
he med
i
t
a
tion on Brah
man is shown.
The di
rec
tion of t
he mind is de
clared in the tex
t ‚Gayat
ri is all
this™. The p
as
sage in
struct
s that by m
eans of the met
re Gayatri the
mind is to be di
rected on Brah
man which is con
nected with that
metre.
This in
ter
pre
t
a
tion is in ac
cor
dance with the other t
ext
s in the
same sec
tion e.g.
 ﬁAll this in
deed is Brah
manﬂ Chh. Up. II
I-14-1
where Brah
man is the chief t
opic.
De vout
med i t
a tion
on
Brah man
through
it
s
mod i fi ca ti
ons
or
ef

-
fect
s is men
tioned in other p
as
sages also; for in
st
ance, Ait.
 Ar
.
III
-2-3.12 ﬁit is the S
u
preme Be
ing un
der the name of Gay
atri, whom
the Bahv
richas wor
ship as Mahat-Uktha i.e. M
aha Prana, the
Adhvaryu priest
s as Agni (fire), and the Chandoga priest
s as Maha
V
rat
a (the great
est rite).ﬂ
There
fore Brah
man is meant here and not t
he metre Gayat
ri.
^yVm{
Xnm
Xì`n
Xoem
onnÎm
Bhut
adip
adav
y
ap
adesop
ap
atteschaiv
am
I.1.
26 (26)
And thus also (we must conclude, viz.,
 that Br
ahman is t
he
subject or topic of the previous passage
, where Gayatri
 occurs)
because
 (thus only)
 the declaration as to th
e be
ings etc. being
th
e feet
 is
 pos
si
bl
e.
Bhut
adi:
 the element
s etc. i.e.
 the element
s, the earth,
 the body and
the heart;
Pada:
 (of)
 foot, part;
V
y
ap
adesa:
 (of) mention (of)
declaration or expression;
Up
ap
atteh:
 because of the possibility
 or
proof, reasonableness, as it is rightly
 deduced from the above
reasons;
Cha:
 also;
Evam:
 thus, so.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
43

An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 24 is ad
duced.
The be
ings, earth, body
 and heart can be felt only
 of Brah
man
and not of Gay
atri, t
he metre, a mere col
lec
tion of sy
l
la
bles. The pre
-
vi
ous pas
sage has only Brah
man for it
s topic or sub
ject, be
cause the
text
 des
ig
nates the be
ings and so on as the feet of Gay
atri. The t
ext at

first speaks of the be
ings, the earth,
 the body and t
he heart and then
goes on de
scrib
ing ﬁthat Gay
atri has four feet
 and is six
foldﬂ. I
f Brah
-
man were not meant,
 there would be no room for the v
erse ﬁsuch is
the great
nessﬂ etc.
Hence by Gayatri is here meant
 Brah
man as con
nected with the
metre Gayat
ri. It
 is this Brah
man p
articularised by Gayat
ri that is said
to be the S
elf of ev

ery thing in the p
as
sage ﬁGayatri is ev
ery
thingﬂ etc.
There
fore Brah
man is to be re
garded as the sub
ject mat
ter of
the pre
vi
ous pas
sage also. This same Brah
man is again re
cog
nised
as light in Chh. Up. I
II-12-7.
The el
e
ment
s, the earth,
 the body and t
he heart can
not be rep
-
re
sented as the four verses of Gay
atri. They
 can be un
der
stood only
to mean the f
our
fold man
i
fes
t
a
tions of the S
u
preme Be
ing. The word
ﬁheavenﬂ is a sig
nif
i
cant word. It
s use in con
nec
tion with ‚l
ight™
 re
-
minds us of it
s use in con
nec
tion with t
he ‚Gayatri™
 also. There
fore the
‚light™
 shin
ing above heaven i
s the same as the ‚Gayat
ri™
 that has three
of it
s feet in heav
en.
CnXoe
^oXmÞ
o{V MoV² Z
 C^`pñ
_Þß`{
dam
oYmV² &
Upade
sabhe
dannet
i chet
 na ubhay
asm
innapya
virodha
t
 I.1.
27 (27)
If it be said (that Brahman
 of the Gayatri
 passage cannot be
reco
gnise
d in the
 pass
age
 treating o
f ‚light™) on a
ccou
nt of the
diffe
ren
ce
 of d
es
ignati
on o
r the
 spe
cific
atio
n (we
 rep
ly) no
,
be
caus
e in e
ither (d
es
ignation) the
re is no
thing contrary (to the

reco
gnition).
Up
adesa
: of t
eaching of grammatical construction or cases;
Bhedat:
because of the dif
ference;
Na:
 not;
 Iti ch
et:
 if it be said;

Na:
 no;
Ubhay
asmin:
 in both, (whether in t
he ablativ
e case or in the locative
case);

Api:
 even;
A
v
irodhat:
 because there is no contradiction.
An
other ob
jec
tion against S
u
tra 24 is raised and re
futed.
 If it
 be
ar
gued that t
here is a dif

fer ence of ex
pres
sion con
sist
ing in case-end
-
ing in the Gay
atri-Sruti and i
n the Jyoti
 Sruti re
gard
ing the word ‚Div™
(heaven) then the re
ply is ‚No™; t
he ar
gu
ment is not t
en
a
ble, as there is
no
ma te rial
con tra dic tion
be tween
the
two
ex pres sions.
In the Gay
atri p
as
sage ﬁthree feet of i
t are what is im
mor
t
al in
heavenﬂ, heave
n is des
ig
nated as the abode of B
rah
man; while in t
he
lat
ter p
as
sage ﬁthat light which shines above t
his heavenﬂ, Brah
man
is de
scribed as ex
ist
ing above heaven.
 One may ob
ject that t
he sub
-
ject mat
ter of the f
or
mer p
as
sage can
not be re
cog
nised in the lat
ter
.
The ob
jec
tor may say ﬁhow then can one and t
he same Brah
man be
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
44

re
ferred to in both t
he text
s?ﬂ It can; there can be no con
tra
dic
tion
here. Just as in or
di
nary lan
guage a bird, al
though in con
t
act with the
top of a t
ree, is not only
 said to be on the tree,
 but also above t
he tree,
so Brah
man also, al
though be
ing in heaven,
 is here re
ferred to as be
-
ing be
yond heaven as well.
The locative ﬁDiv
iﬂ in heaven and the ab
la
tive ‚
Divah™
 above
heaven are not con
trary
. The dif

fer ence in the case-end
ing of the
word ﬁDivﬂ is no con
tra
dic
tion as the locati
ve case (the sev
enth
case-end
ing) is of

ten used in the scrip tural tex
t
s to ex
press sec
ond
-
arily the m
ean
ing of the ab
la
tive (t
he fif
th case-end
ing).
There
fore the Brah
man spo
ken of in the for
mer p
as
sage can be
re
cog
nised in the lat
ter also. It
 is a set
tled con
clu
sion that the word
ﬁlightﬂ de
notes Brah
man.
Though the gram
mat
i
cal cases used in the scrip
tural p
as
sage
are not iden
ti
cal, the ob
ject of the ref

er ence is clearly re
cog
nised as
be ing
iden ti cal.
Prat
ardanadhikaran
am: T
opic 1
1 (Sutras 28-31)
Prana is Brahm
an
àmUñVWmZwJ_mV² &
Pranast
athanugamat
I.1.
28 (28)
Pran
a is Br
ahma
n, t
hat
 being so u
nderst
ood fr
om a con
nected
con
sid
era
tion (
of the
 pas
sage
 refe
rring to
 Pran
a).
Pranah:
 the breath or lif
e-energy;
T
atha:
 thus, so, likewise like that
st
ated before; l
ike that st
ated in the S
ruti quoted bef
ore in connection
therewith;
Anugamat:
 because of being understood (from the t
ext
s).
The ex
pres
sion ‚Prana™
 is again t
aken up for dis
cus
sion.
In the K
aushit
aki Upani
shad there oc
curs the con
ver
sa
tion be
-
tween Indra and Prat
ardana. Prat
ardana, the son of Div
odasa, came
by means of f
ight
ing and strength to t
he abode of Indra. P
rat
ardana
said to Indra, ﬁY
ou your
self choose for me that boon which y
ou think is
most ben
e
fi
cial to manﬂ. I
ndra re
plied, ﬁKnow me only
. This is what I
think most ben
e
fi
cial to man. I
 am Prana, t
he in
tel
li
gent Self
(Prajnatman). M
ed
i
t
ate on me as life,
 as im
mor
t
al
ityﬂ I
II-2. ﬁThat
Prana is in
deed the in
tel
li
gent Self
, bliss, undecaying,
 im
mor
t
alﬂ III
-8.
Here the doubt arises whether the word Prana de
notes merely
breath, the m
od
i
fi
ca
tion of air or t
he God Indra, or the in
di
vid
ual soul,
or the high
est Brah
man.
The word ‚Prana™
 in the p
as
sage re
fers to Brah
man, be
cause it
is de
scribed as the most con
du
cive to hu
man wel
fare. Noth
ing is
more con
du
cive to hu
man wel
fare than the knowl
edge of Brah
man.
More
over Prana is de
scribed as Prajnatma. The air which is non-in
-
tel
li
gent can clearly not be t
he in
tel
li
gent Self
.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
45

Those char
ac
ter
is
tic marks which are men
tioned in the con
clud
-
ing p
as
sage, viz.,
 ‚bliss™
 (Ananda), undecaying (Aj
ara), im
mor
t
al (Am
-
ri
t
a) can be true only of B
rah
man. Fur
ther knowl
edge of Prana
ab
solves one from all sins. ﬁHe who knows me thus by no deed of his
is his life harmed, nei
ther by ma
tri
cide nor by p
at
ri
cideﬂ Kau. Up. II
I-1.
All thi
s can be prop
erly un
der
stood only if
 the Su
preme Self or
the high
est Brah
man is ac
knowl
edged to be the sub
ject mat
ter of the
p
as
sages, and not if t
he vi
t
al air is sub
sti
tuted in it
s place. Hence the
word ‚Prana™
 de
notes Brah
man only
.
Z dºw
$amË_mo
nXoem{
X{V Mo
XÜ`mË_
gå~ÝY^y
_m øpñ
_Z²
Na v
akturatmop
adesaditi chet
 adhy
atmasambandhabhuma
hy
asmin
I.1.
29 (29)
I
f it be
 said
 that (B
rahma
n is) n
ot (d
en
ote
d o
r refe
rred
 in the
se
passages on accou
nt of) t
he spe
aker™s instruction about
himself, we reply not so, because there is abundance
 of
ref
ere
nce
 to the
 I
nne
r Se
lf in thi
s (ch
apte
r or Up
anis
had
).
Na:
 not;
V
aktuh:
 of the speaker (Indra);
Atma:
 of the
 Self;
Up
adesat:
on account of instruction;

Iti:
 thus;
Chet:
 if;
Adhy
atma sambandha
bhuma:
 abundance of reference to the I
nner Self;

Hi:
 because;
Asmin
:
 in this (chapter or Up
anishad).
An ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 28 is re
futed.
An ob
jec
tion is raised against the as
ser
tion that
 Prana de
notes
Brah
man. The op
po
nent or Purvap
akshin says, ﬁThe word Prana
does not de
note the S
u
preme Brah
man, be
cause the speaker Indra
des
ig
nates him
self.ﬂ Indra speaks to Prat
ardana, ﬁKnow me only
. I am
Prana, the i
n
tel
li
gent Self
.ﬂ How can the Prana which re
fers to a per
-
son
al
ity be B
rah
man to which the at
trib
ute of be
ing a speaker can
not
be as
cribed. The Sruti de
clares, ﬁBrah
man is with
out speech, with
out
mind
ﬂ Bri
. Up. III-
8-8
.
Fur
ther on, also Indra,
 the speaker glo
ri
fies him
self, ﬁI slew the
three-headed son of Tvashtri.
 I de
liv
ered the Arunmukhas, the dev

o -
tees to the wolv
es (Salavrika). I kill
ed the peo
ple of Prahladaﬂ and so
on. Indra may
 be called Prana ow
ing to his strength.
 Hence Prana
does not de
note Brah
man.
This ob
jec
tion is not v
alid be
cause there are found abun
dant
ref
er
ences to Brah
man or the In
ner Self in t
hat chap
ter
. They are
ﬁPrana, the in
tel
li
gent Self
, alone hav
ing laid hold of t
his body makes it
rise upﬂ. For as in a car the cir
cum
fer
ence of the wheel is set on the
spokes and the spokes on the nave; thus are these ob
ject
s set on the
sub
ject
s (the senses) and the sub
ject
s on the Prana. A
nd that P
rana
in
deed is the Self
 of Prajna,
 blessed (Ananda), undecaying (Ajara)
and im
mor
t
al (Am
ri
t
a). ﬁHe is my Self
, thus let i
t be knownﬂ. ﬁThis Self
is Brah
man, Om
ni
scientﬂ Bri. Up. I
I-5-19.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
46

Indra said to Prat
ardana, ﬁW
or
ship me as Pranaﬂ. This can only
re
fer to Brah
man. For the wor
ship of Brah
man alone can give Mukti
 or
the fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion which is most ben
e
fi
cial to man (Hit
atma). I
t is
said of this Prana,
 ﬁFor he (Prana) makes him, whom he wishes to
lead out from t
hese worlds, do a good deed.ﬂ This shows that the
Prana is the great cause that m
akes ev
ery ac
tiv
ity pos
si
ble. This also
is con
sis
tent wit
h Brah
man and not with breat
h or Indra. Hence
‚Prana™
 here de
notes Brah
man only
.
The
chap ter
con t
ains
in for ma tion
re gard ing
Brah man
only
ow
-
ing to plenty
 of ref
er
ences to the In
ner Self,
 not re
gard
ing the self of
some de
ity
.
But if
 Indra re
ally meant
 to teach the wor
ship of Brah
man, why
does he say ﬁwor
ship meﬂ? It is re
ally mis
lead
ing. T
o this the fol

low ing
Su
tra gives the proper an
swer
.
emóÑï
>çm Vy
nXoemo
 dm_Xo
ddV² &
Sastradrishty
a tup
adeso v
amadev
av
at
1.1.30 (30)
The d
ec
larati
on (m
ade
 by I
ndra
 abo
ut him
se
lf, viz.
, that he
 is
and w
ith
 Brah
man)
 is possi
ble thr
ough i
ntui
tion
 as at
tested by
Sruti,
 as in the case of Vamadeva.
Sastradrishty
a:
 through insight based on scripture or as attested by
Sruti
;
Tu
:
 but;
Up
adesah:
 instruction;
V
amadev
av
at:
 like that of
V
amadeva.
The ob
jec
tion raised in Su
tra 29 is fur
ther re
futed.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) re
moves the doubt
. Indra™
s de
scrib
ing him
-
self as Prana is quite suit

able as he iden ti
fies him
self with Brah
man in
that in
struc
tion to P
rat
ardana like the sage V
amadeva.
Sage V
amadeva real
ised Brah
man and said ﬁI was Manu and
Suryaﬂ which is in ac
cor
dance with the p
as
sage ﬁWhat
ever Deva
knew Brah
man be
came Thatﬂ (Bri. Up. I
-4-10). Indra™
s in
struc
tion also
is like that.
 Hav
ing real
ised Brah
man by means of Rishi-like in
tu
ition,
Indra iden
ti
fies him
self in the in
struc
tion with t
he Su
preme Brah
man
and in
struct
s Prat
ardana about the High
est Brah
man by means of t
he
words ‚Know me only™.
Indra praises the knowl
edge of Brah
man. There
fore it is not hi
s
own glo
ri
fi
ca
tion when he says ‚I killed T
vashtri™
s son™
 etc. The mean
-
ing of the p
as
sage is ‚Al
though I do such cruel ac
tions, y
et not ev
en a
hair of mine is harmed be
cause I am one with Brah
man. There
fore
the life of
 any other per
son also who knows
 me thus is not harmed by
any deed of his.
 Indra says in a sub
se
quent p
as
sage ‚I am Prana, t
he
in
tel
li
gent Self
.™
 There
fore the whole chap
ter re
fers to Brah
man only
.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
47

Ord_w
»`àmU{
bﬁmÞo
{V Mo
V² Z C
nmgmÌ¡{dÜ
`mV²

 Am{l
VËdm{Xh V
ÚmoJmV²
Jiv
amukhy
apranalin
ganneti chet na up
asatraiv
idhy
at
 asrit
atv
adiha
t
ady
ogat

I.1.
31 (31)
If it be said that (Brah
man is) not
 (meant) on account of
characterist
ic marks of th
e individual soul and the chief vital
air (being mentioned); we say no, because
 (such an
int
erpreta
tion
) woul
d enjoin
 thr
eefold meditat
ion (
Upasa
na),
because
 Prana has been acce
pted (e
lsewhere in the Sruti in
the sense o
f Brahman
) and because
 here also (words denoting
Brah
man)
 are
 me
ntion
ed
 with re
fe
ren
ce
 to P
rana.
Jiv
amukhy
apranalin
gat:
 on account of the characteristic marks of
the indiv
idual soul and the chief v
it
al air;
Na:
 not;
Iti:
 thus;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
not;
Up
asana:
 worship, medit
ation;
T
raividhy
at:
 because of the
three ways;
Asrit
atv
at:
 on account of Prana being accepted
(elsewhere in Sruti in the sense of B
rahman);
Iha:
 in the Kaushit
aki
p
assage;
T
ady
ogat:
 because of it
s appropriateness; as they have
been applied; because words denoting Brahman are menti
oned with
reference to Prana.
But an
other ob
jec
tion is raised. What is t
he ne
ces
sity of
 this
Adhikarana again, ﬁmed
i
t
a
tion of P
ranaﬂ and iden
ti
fy
ing Prana with
Brah
man, when in the pre
ced
ing Su
tra, I-1-23 it
 has been shown that
Prana means Brah
man?
T
o this we an
swer: this Adhikarana is not a re
dun
dancy
. In t
he
Su
tra I-1-23, the doubt
 was only with re
gard to the mean
ing of the sin
-
gle word Prana. In t
his Adhikarana the doubt was not about
 the mean
-
ing of the word Prana,
 but about t
he whole p
as
sage, in which there
are words, and marks or in
di
ca
tions that would hav
e led a per
son
med
i
t
at
ing, to t
hink that there also Jiv
a and breath meant t
o be med
i
-
t
ated upon. T
o re
move thi
s doubt, it i
s de
clared that Brah
man alone is
the topic of di
s
cus
sion in this Kaushit
aki Upani
shad and not Jiva or vi
-
t
al breath.
There
fore this Adhikarana has been sep

a rately st
ated by t
he
au thor
.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent holds that P
rana does not
de
note Brah
man, but ei
ther the in
di
vid
ual soul or the chief vi

tal air or
both. He says that
 the chap
ter men
tions the char
ac
ter
is
tic marks of
the in
di
vid
ual soul on the one hand, and of
 the chief v
i
t
al air on the
other hand.
The p
as
sage ‚One should know the speaker and not en
quire
into speech™
 (Kau. Up. I
II-4) men
tions a char
ac
ter
is
tic mark of the in
di
-
vid
ual soul. The p
as
sage ﬁPrana, lay
ing hold of his body
, makes it rise
upﬂ Kau. Up. I
II.
 3 point
s to the chief v
i
t
al air be
cause the chief at
trib
-
ute of t
he vi
t
al air is that it
 sus
t
ains the body
. Then there is an
other
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
48

p
as
sage, ‚Then Prana said to t
he or
gans: be not de
ceived. I
 alone di
-
vid
ing my
self fiv
e
fold sup
port this body and keep it
™
 Prasna Up. II-3.
Then again you will f
ind ‚What is Prana, t
hat is Prajna; what
 is Prajna,
that is Prana.
™
This Su
tra re
futes such a view and says, t
hat Brah
man alone is
re
ferred to by ‚P
rana™, be
cause the above in
ter
pre
t
a
tion would in
volve
a three
fold Up
asana, viz.,
 of the in
di
vid
ual soul, of t
he chief vi
t
al air
,
and of Brah
man. Which is cer
t
ainly against t
he ac
cepted rules of in
-
ter
pre
t
a
tion of t
he scrip
tures. It
 is in
ap
pro
pri
ate to as
sume that a sin
-
gle sen
tence en
joins three kinds of wor
ship or med
i
t
a
tion.
Fur
ther in the be
gin
ning we have ﬁknow me onlyﬂ fol
lowed by ﬁI
am Prana, in
tel
li
gent Self
, med
i
t
ate on me as life,
 as im
mor
t
al
ityﬂ;
 and
in the end again we read ﬁAnd that
 Prana in
deed is the in
tel
li
gent Self
,
blessed (Ananda), undecaying (Ajara) and im
mor
t
al (Am
ri
t
a).ﬂ The
be
gin
ning and the con
clud
ing p
art are thus seen to be sim
i
lar
. There
-
fore we must con
clude that they
 re
fer to one and the same sub
ject
and that t
he same sub
ject-mat
ter is kept up through
out.
There
fore ‚Prana™
 must de
note Brah
man only
. In t
he case of
other p
as
sages where char

ac ter
is
tic marks of Brah
man are men
-
tioned the word ‚Prana™
 is t
aken in the sense of Brah
man. It
 is a set
tled
con
clu
sion that Brah
man is the topic or sub
ject mat
ter of the whole
chap ter
.
Thus ends the first
 Pada (Sec
tion 1) of the f
irst Adhy
ay
a
(Chap
ter I) of the
 Brahma Sutras; or t
he V
edant
a Phi
los
o
phy
.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 1
49

CHAPTER I
SECTION 2
INTRODUCTION
In the First P
ada or Sec
tion Brah
man has been shown to be the
cause of the or
i
gin, sus
te
nance and dis
so
lu
tion of t
he whole uni
verse.
It has been t
aught that
 the Su
preme Brah
man should be en
quired
into. Cer
t
ain at
trib
utes such as Eter
nity
, Om
ni
science,
All-pervadingness, t
he Self of
 all and so on have been de
clared of the
Brah man.
In the lat

ter part of Sec
tion I cer
t
ain terms in the S
ruti such as
Anandamaya,
 Jyoti,
 Prana, Akasa, et
c., used in a dif

fer ent sense
have been shown through rea
son
ing to re
fer to Brah
man. Cer
t
ain
p
as
sages of the scrip
tures about whose sense doubt
s are en
ter
-
t
ained and which con
t
ain clear char
ac
ter
is
tics of Brah
man
(S
p
asht
a-Brahmalinga) have been shown to re
fer to Brah
man.
Now in this and the next
 Sec
tion some more p
as
sages of doubt

-
ful im
port wherein the char
ac
ter
is
tic marks of Brah
man are not so ap
-
p
ar
ent (Asp
asht
a-Brahmalinga) are t
aken up for dis
cus
sion. Doubt
s
may arise as to the ex

act mean ing of cer
t
ain ex
pres
sions of Sruti,
whether they in
di
cate Brah
man or some
thing else. Those ex

pres -
sions are t
aken up for dis
cus
sion in this and the nex
t Sec
tions.
In the S
ec
ond and Third Padas will be shown that cer
t
ain other
words and sen
tences in which there is only ob
scure or in
dis
tinct in
di
-
ca
tion of B
rah
man ap
ply also to B
rah
man as in those of the F
irst
Pada.
50

SYNOPSIS
Doubt
s may arise as to the ex

act mean ing of cer
t
ain ex
pres
-
sions of Sruti,
 whether they in
di
cate Brah
man or some
thing else.
These ex
pres
sions are t
aken up for dis
cus
sion in this and the nex
t
sec tions.
It is proved i
n this sec
tion that
 the dif

fer ent ex
pres
sions used in
dif
 fer ent
Srutis
for
Di vine
con tem pla tion
in di cate
the
same
In fi nit
e
Brah man.
In the S
andilya V
idya of t
he Chhandogya Up
anishad it is said
that as the f
orm and the char
ac
ter of a per
son in his next lif
e are de
ter
-
mined by his de
sires and thought
s of the pres
ent one, he should con
-
st
antly de
sire for and med
i
t
ate upon Brah
man who is per
fect, who is
Sat-Chit-A
nanda, who is im
mor
t
al, who is Self
-lu
mi
nous, who is eter
-
nal, pure, birt
hless, death
less, In
fi
nite etc.,
 so that he may
 be
come
iden ti cal
with
Him.
Adhikarana I:
 (Sutras 1 to 8) shows that the be
ing which con
-
sist
s of mind, whose body is breath et
c., men
tioned in Chhandogya
Up
anishad III-14 is not
 the in
di
vid
ual soul, but B
rah
man.
Adhikarana II:
 (Sutras 9 and 10) de
cides that he to whom t
he
Brahmanas and Kshatriyas are but
food (Katha Up.
 I-2-25) is the Su
-
preme Self or B
rah
man.
Adhikarana III
:
 (Sutras 1
1 and 12) shows that the two which en
-
tered into t
he cave (Katha Up. I
-3-1) are Brah
man and the in
di
vid
ual
soul.
Adhikarana IV
:
 (Sutras 13 to 17) st
ates that t
he per
son within
the eye men
tioned in Chh. Up. I
V
-15-1 in
di
cates nei
ther a re
flected
im
age nor any in
di
vid
ual soul, but B
rah
man.
Adhikarana V
:
 (Sutras 18 to 20) shows that the I
n
ner Ruler
within (Ant
aryamin) de
scribed in the Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad
III
-7-3 as per
vad
ing and guid
ing the fiv
e el
e
ment
s (earth, wa
ter
, fire,
air
, ether) and also heaven,
 sun, moon, st
ars etc., is no other than
Brah man.
Adhikarana VI:
 (Sutras 21 to 23) proves that
 which can
not be
seen, etc., m
en
tioned in Mundaka Up
anishad I-1-6 is Brah
man.
Adhikarana VII
:
 (Sutras 24 to 32) shows that the A
t
man, the
V
aisvanara of Chhandogya Up
anishad V
-1
1-6 is Brah
man.
The opin
ions of dif

fer ent sages namely Jaimini,
 Asmarathya
and Badari have also been giv
en here to show that the I
n
fi
nite Brah
-
man is some
times con
ceived as fi
nite and as pos
sess
ing head, trunk,
feet and ot
her limbs and or
gans in or
der to fa
cil
i
t
ate di
vine con
tem
pla
-
tion ac
cord
ing to the ca
p
ac
ity of
 the medit
ator
.
51

Sarv
atra Prasiddh
y
adhikaranam
: T
opic 1 (Sutras 1-8)
The Manom
aya is Brahman.
gd©Ìà{
gÕmon
XoemV²
Sarv
atra prasiddhop
adesat
I.2.
1 (32)
(T
hat wh
ich consists of t
he mind ‚Manomaya™ is Brahman)
because
 there is taught (
in thi
s text) (that
 Brahman w
hich is)
well-
known (a
s the c
ause
 of the wo
rld) in the
 Upanisha
ds.
Sarv
atra:
 everywhere, in ev
ery V
edantic p
assage i.e., in al
l
Up
anishads;
Prasiddha:
 the well-known;
Up
adesat:
 because of the
teaching.
Sruti de
clares, ﬁAll this in
deed is Brah
man, em
a
nat
ing from Him,
liv
ing and mov
ing in Him, and ul
ti
mately
 dis
solv
ing in Him; t
hus know
-
ing let a man med
i
t
ate with a calm mi
nd.ﬂ A
 man in his pres
ent life i
s
the out
come of his pre
vi
ous thought
s and de
sires. He be
comes that in
af

ter-life what he now re solves to be. There
fore he should med
i
t
ate
on Brah
man who is ide
ally per
fect, who f
unc
tions through his very
life-en
ergy and who is all-light.
 ﬁHe who con
sist
s of the mind,
 whose
body is Prana (the sub
tle body) et
c.ﬂ Chh. Up. II
I-14.
Now a doubt arises whether what is pointed out as the ob
ject of
med
i
t
a
tion by m
eans of at
trib
utes such as con
sist
ing of mind,
 etc., is
the in
di
vid
ual soul or the Su
preme Brah
man.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says: t
he p
as
sage re
fers to
the in
di
vid
ual soul only
. Why? Be
cause the em
bod
ied self only i
s con
-
nected with the mi
nd. This is a well-known fact, while t
he Su
preme
Brah
man is not. I
t is said in the Mundaka Up
anishad II-1-2 ‚He is with
-
out breath, wit
h
out mind, pure.
™
The p
as
sage does not aim at en
join
ing med
i
t
a
tion on Brah
man.
It aims only
 at en
join
ing calm
ness of mind. The ot
her at
trib
utes also
sub
se
quently st
ated in the t
ext ﬁHe to whom all
 works, all de
sires be
-
longﬂ re
fer to the i
n
di
vid
ual soul.
The Srutis de
clare ﬁHe is my Self wit
hin the heart,
 smaller than a
corn of rice, smaller than a corn of bar
ley
.ﬂ This re
fers to the in
di
vid
ual
soul which has the size of the point of
 a goad, but not
 to the in
fi
nite or
un lim ited
Brah man.
W
e re
ply: The S
u
preme Brah
man only is what is t
o be med
i
t
ated
upon as dis
tin
guished by the at

trib utes of con
sist
ing of mind and so
on. Be
cause the text
 be
gins with ﬁAll t
his in
deed is Brah
man.ﬂ That
Brah
man which is con
sid
ered as the cause of the world in all scrip
-
tural p
as
sages is t
aught here also in the for
mula ﬁT
ajjalanﬂ. As t
he be
-
gin
ning re
fers to Brah
man, the lat

ter pas
sage where ﬁHe who
con
sist
s of the mindﬂ (Manomay
a) oc
curs, should also re
fer to Brah
-
man as dis
tin
guished by cer
t
ain qual
i
ties. Thus we avoid t
he fault of
drop ping
the
sub ject-mat ter
un der
dis cus sion
and
un nec es sar ily
in
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
52

tro
duc
ing a fresh topic. Fur
ther the tex
t speaks of Up
asana, med
i
t
a
-
tion. There
fore it is but proper t
hat Brah
man which is de
scribed in all
other p
as
sages as an ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion is also t
aught here and not
the in
di
vid
ual soul. The in
di
vid
ual soul is not spo
ken of any
where as
an ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion or Up
asana.
More
over you can at
t
ain se
ren
ity by
 med
i
t
at
ing on Brah
man
which is an em
bodi
ment of peace.
 Manomaya re
fers to Brah
man in
Mun. Up. I
I-2-7, T
ait. Up.
 I-6-1 and Katha Up. V
II-9. T
he well-known
Manomaya,
 ap
plied in all t
he above p
as
sages to Brah
man, is re
ferred
to here in the Chhandogya al
so. There
fore Manomaya re
fers to the
Su preme
Brah man
only
.
{dd{jVJw
UmonnÎ
V
iv
akshit
agunop
ap
attescha
I.2.
2 (33)
Moreover t
he quali
ties desir
ed to be expressed are possible (i
n
Brah
man; th
ere
fore
 the
 pas
sage
 refe
rs to B
rahma
n).
V
iv
akshit
a:
 desired to be expressed;
Guna:
 qualities;
Up
ap
atteh:
because of the reasonableness, for the justif
ication;
Cha:
 and,
moreover
.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is ad
duced. And be
cause the
at
trib
utes, sought to be ap
plied by t
he Sruti quot
ed above, just
ly be
-
long to Brah
man, it m
ust be ad
mit
ted that
 the p
as
sage re
fers to Brah
-
man.
ﬁHe who con
sist
s of the mind,
 whose body is Prana (the sub
tle
body), whose form is light
, re
solve is true, whose na
ture is like that of
ether (Om
ni
pres
ent and in
vis
i
ble), from whom pro
ceed all ac
tions, all
de
sires, all scent
s, all t
astes; who is All-em
brac
ing, who is voice
less
and un
at
t
achedﬂ Chh. Up. III
-14-2. These at
trib
utes men
tioned in thi
s
text
 as top
ics of med
i
t
a
tion are pos
si
ble in Brah
man only
.
The qual
i
ties of hav

ing true de sires (Sat Kama) and true pur
-
poses (Sat Sankalp
a) are at
trib
uted to t
he Su
preme Self in an
other
p
as
sage viz., ‚T
he Self which is free f
rom sin etc.™
 Chh. Up. VI
II-7-1,
ﬁHe whose Self is the etherﬂ; t
his is pos
si
ble as Brah
man which as the
cause of the en
tire uni
verse is the Self
 of ev
ery
thing and is also the
Self of
 the ether
. Thus the qual
i
ties here in
ti
mated as top
ics of med
i
t
a
-
tion agree with t
he na
ture of Brah
man.
Hence, as the qual
i
ties men
tioned are pos
si
ble in Brah
man, we
con
clude that the S
u
preme Brah
man alone is rep
re
sented as the ob
-
ject
of
med i t
a tion.
AZwnnÎm
oñVw Z e
mar
a–
Anup
ap
attestu na saarirah
I.2.
3 (34)
On the other hand, as (
those qualities) are not possible (in it)
the embodied (sou
l is)
 not (
denoted by Man
omaya
 etc.)
.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 2
53

Anup
ap
atteh:
 not being justif
iable, because of the i
mpossibility
,
because of the unreasonableness, because they are not appropriate;

Tu
:
 but on the ot
her hand;
Na:
 not;
Saarirah:
 the embodied,
 the Jiva
or the indivi
dual soul.
Such qual
i
ties can
not ap
ply to t
he in
di
vid
ual soul. The ar
gu
ment
in sup
port of the S
u
tra is con
tin
ued. The pre
ced
ing Su
tra has st
ated
that t
he qual
i
ties men
tioned are pos
si
ble in Brah
man. The pres
ent
Su
tra de
clares that they
 are not pos
si
ble in the Jiva or t
he em
bod
ied
Soul. B
rah
man only is en
dowed with the qual
i
ties of ‚con
sist
ing of
mind or Manomaya,
 and so on™
 but not t
he em
bod
ied Self.
Be
cause the qual
i
ties such as ‚He whose pur
poses are true,
whose Self is the et
her
, who is speech
less, who is not dis
turbed, who
is greater than the earth™
 can
not be as
cribed to the in
di
vid
ual soul.
The term ‚Saarira™
 or em
bod
ied means ‚dwell
ing in a body
.™
If t
he op
po
nent says ‚The Lord also dwells in the body
™, we re
ply:
true, He does abide in the body
, but not
 in the body al
one; be
cause
Sruti de
clares ‚The Lord is greater than the earth, great
er than the
heaven, Om
ni
pres
ent like the et
her
, eter
nal.™
 On the con
trary the in
di
-
vid
ual soul re
sides in the body only
.
The Jiva is like a glow-worm be
fore the ef

ful gence of the Brah
-
man who is like a Sun when com
p
ared with it.
 The su
pe
rior qual
i
ties
de
scribed in the text
 are not cer
t
ainly pos
si
ble in Jiva.
The All-per
vad
ing is not the em
bod
ied self or the in
di
vid
ual soul,
as it is quite im
pos
si
ble to pred
i
cate Om
ni
pres
ence of Him. It
 is im
-
pos
si
ble and against fact and rea
son also that one and the same in
di
-
vid
ual could be in all the bod
ies at the same ti
me.
H$_©H$V©¥ì
`nX
oem…
Karmakartriv
y
ap
adesaccha
I.2.
4 (35)
Be
cau
se
 of the
 de
clara
tion o
f the
 attain
er a
nd the
 ob
je
ct
attain
ed. He
 who consists of
 the mind (Manomaya) r
efers to
Brah
man a
nd not
 to t
he indi
vidual s
oul.
Karma:
 object;
Kartri
:
 agent;
V
y
ap
adesat:
 because of the
declaration or mention;

Cha:
 and.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 3 is ad
duced.
A
 sep
a
rate dis
tinc
tion is drawn be
tween the ob
ject of ac
tiv
ity
and of the agent
. There
fore the at
trib
utes of ‚con
sist
ing of mind™
(Manomaya) can
not be
long to the em

bod ied self. The t
ext says
ﬁWhen I shall have de
p
arted from hence I shall ob
t
ain himﬂ Chh. Up.
III
-14-4. Here the word ‚Him™
 re
fers to that
 which is the topic of dis
cus
-
sion. ﬁWho con
sist
s of the mind,
 the ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tionﬂ viz.
, as
some
thing to be ob
t
ained; while the words ‚I shall ob
t
ain™
 rep
re
sent
the med
i
t
at
ing in
di
vid
ual soul as the agent i.
e., t
he obt
ainer
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
54

W
e must not as
sume that one and t
he same thing is spo
ken of
as the att
ainer (agent) and the ob
ject at
t
ained at the same t
ime. The
att
ainer and the at
t
ained can
not be the same.
 The ob
ject med
i
t
ated
upon is dif

fer ent from t
he per
son who med
i
t
ates, the in
di
vid
ual soul
re
ferred to in the abov
e text
 by the pro
noun ‚I™.
Thus for the above rea
son also, that which is char
ac
ter
ised by
the at
trib
utes con
sist
ing of mind ‚M
anomaya™
 and so on, can
not be
the
in di vid ual
soul.
eãX{deofmV²
 &
Sabdav
iseshat
I.2.
5 (36)
Be
cau
se
 of the
 diffe
ren
ce
 of wo
rds.
Sabda:
 word; V
iseshat: because of dif
ference.
The ar
gu
ment in fa
vour of Su
tra 1 is con
tin
ued. That which pos
-
sesses the at
trib
utes of ﬁcon
sist
ing of mindﬂ and so on can
not be the
in
di
vid
ual soul, be
cause there is a dif

fer ence of words.
In the S
at
ap
atha Brahmana t
he same idea is ex
pressed in sim
i
-
lar words ﬁAs is a grain of rice, or a grain of bar
ley
, or a ca
nary seed or
the ker
nel of a ca
nary seedﬂ, so is that golden per
son in the Self
 (X.
6-3-2). Here one word i.e. the locativ
e ﬁin the Self
ﬂ de
notes the in
di
-
vid
ual soul or the em
bod
ied self, and a dif

fer ent word, viz.
 the nom
i
na
-
tive ‚
per
son™
 de
notes the self dis
tin
guished by the at

trib utes of
con
sist
ing of mind et
c.
W
e, there
fore, con
clude that the t
wo are dif

fer ent and that
 the
in
di
vid
ual self is not re
ferred to in the t
ext un
der dis
cus
sion.
&
Smri
tescha
I.2.
6 (37)
From
 the S
mri
ti a
lso (w
e know t
he embodied self or
 the
indi
vid
ual
 sou
l is d
iffe
ren
t from the
 one
 refe
rred
 to in th
e te
xt
under dis
cussion
).
Smrite
h:
 from
 the Smr
iti;
Cha:
 and, also.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is con
tin
ued.
It is so de
clared also in the Smrit
i (Bhagavad Git
a). From the
Smriti al
so it is ev
i
dent that
 the in
di
vid
ual soul is mark
edly dif

fer ent
from the sub
ject mat
ter of the t
ext un
der dis
cus
sion.
Smriti al
so de
clares the dif

fer ence of the in
di
vid
ual soul and the
Su
preme Soul ﬁThe Lord dwelleth in t
he heart
s of all be
ings, O
Arjuna, by
 His il
lu
sive power
, caus
ing all be
ings to re
volve,
 as though
mounted on a pot
ter
™
s wheelﬂ (Git
a: XVI
II-61).
The dif

fer ence is only imag
i
nary and not real. T
he dif

fer ence ex
-
ist
s only so long as A
vidya or ig
no
rance last
s and the sig
nif
i
cance of
the Mahavaky
a or Great Sen
tence of the Up
anishads ‚T
at Tvam
 Asi™
(Thou art That) has not been real
ised. As soon as you grasp the truth
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 2
55

that t
here is only one uni
ver
sal Self,
 there is an end to Samsara or
phe nom e nal
life
with
it
s
dis tinc tion
of
bond age,
fi nal
eman ci p
a tion
and the like.
A^©
H$m¡
H$ñË
dmÎmX²
ì`nXoe
m… Zo{
V MoÞ {
ZMmæ`ËdmXo
d§ ì`mo
Arbhakaukastv
att
adv
y
ap
adesaccha neti chet na
 nichay
y
atv
adev
am
v
y
omav
accha
I.2.
7 (38)
I
f it be
 said
 that (the
 pas
sage
 do
es
) not (
ref
er to
 Brah
man)
 on
account
 of t
he small
ness of t
he abode (menti
oned i.e. t
he
he
art) and
 also
 on a
cco
unt o
f the
 de
nota
tion o
f that (i.e
. of
minuteness) we say, No; because
 (Brahman)
 has thus t
o be
meditated and be
cause the case
 is similar
 to that
 of ether.
Arbhakaukastv
at:
 because of the smallness of the abode;
T
adv
y
ap
adesat:
because of the description or denot
ation as such
i.e. mi
nuteness;
Cha:
 and also;
Na:
 not;
 Iti:
 not so;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not;
Nichay
y
atv
at:
 because of medit
ation (in the heart
);
Evam:
 thus, so;
V
y
omav
at:
 like the ether;
Cha:
 and.
An ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 1 is raised and re
futed.
Now an ob
jec
tion is raised, that
 the Manomay
a of the
Chhandogya Up
anishad can
not be Brah
man, but is Jiv
a, be
cause the
de
scrip
tion there is more ap
pli
ca
ble to an in
di
vid
ual soul than to B
rah
-
man. The tex
t says ﬁHe is my self wit
hin the heart,
 smaller than a corn
of rice, smaller than a m
us
t
ard seedﬂ Chh. Up. III-14-3. T
his shows
that t
he Manomaya oc
cu
pies very lit

tle space, in fact it
 is atomic and
so can
not be Brah
man.
This Su
tra re
futes it.
 Though a man is the king of t
he whole
earth, he could at t
he same time be called t
he king of A
yodhya as well.

The In
fi
nite is called the at
omic be
cause He can be real
ised in the
min
ute sp
ace of the cham
ber of the heart,
 just as Lord V
ishnu can be
real
ised in the sa
cred stone called Saligrama.
Al
though pres
ent ev
ery
where, the Lord is pleased when med
i
-
t
ated upon as abid
ing in the heart.
 The case is sim
i
lar to that
 of the
eye of t
he nee
dle. The ether
, though all-per
vad
ing, is spo
ken of as
lim
ited and min
ute, wit
h ref
er
ence to it
s con
nec
tion with t
he eye of t
he
nee
dle. So it
 is said of Brah
man also.
The at
trib
utes of lim
i
t
a
tion of abode and of
 mi
nute
ness are as
-
cribed to Brah
man only f
or the con
ve
nience of con
cep
tion and med
i
-
t
a
tion, be
cause it is dif

fi cult to med
i
t
ate on the all-per
vad
ing, in
fi
nite
Brah
man. This will cer
t
ainly not
 go against His Om
ni
pres
ence. These
lim
i
t
a
tions are sim
ply imag
ined in Brah
man. They
 are not at all real.
In the v
ery p
as
sage Brah
man is de
clared to be in
fi
nite like
space,
 and all-per
vad
ing like ether
, ‚Greater than t
he earth, greater
than the sky
, greater than heav
en, greater than all
 these worlds.™
Though Brah
man is all-per
vad
ing, yet
 He be
comes atomic through
His mys
te
ri
ous in
con
ceiv
able power to please His dev
o
tees. He ap
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
56

pears
si mul t
a neously
ev ery where,
wher ever
His
dev o tees
are.
This
si mul t
a neous
ap pear ance
of
the
atomic
Brah man
ev ery where
es t
ab
-
lishes His all-pervadingness even in His man
i
fested form.
 Gopis saw
Lord Krishna ev
ery
where.
The op
po
nent says: I
f Brah
man has His abode in the heart,
which heart-abode is a dif

fer ent one in each body
, it would f
ol
low
, that
He is at
tended by all
 the im
per
fec
tions which at
t
ach to be
ings hav
ing
dif

fer ent abodes, such as p
ar
rot
s shut up in dif

fer ent cages viz., want
of unity
 be
ing made up of p
art
s, non-per
ma
nency
, etc. He would be
sub ject
to
ex pe ri ences
orig i nat ing
from
con nec tion
with
bod ies.
T
o
this the au
thor gives a suit

able re ply in t
he fol
low
ing Su
tra.
gå^moJà
m{á[a{
V MoV²
 Z d¡eo
î`mV²
Sambho
gapraptiri
ti chet na v
aiseshy
at
I.2.
8 (39)
If i
t be
 said
 that (b
ei
ng co
nne
cte
d with th
e h
ea
rts of a
ll
indi
vidual s
ouls t
o) Its (Br
ahma
n™s)
 Omni
presence, it
 would
also have ex
perience
 (of pleasure and pain) (we say) not so, on
acc
ou
nt of the
 diffe
ren
ce
 in the
 natu
re (
of the
 two).
Sambhogaprapti:
 that it
 has experience of pleasure and p
ain;
Iti:
thus;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not;
V
aiseshy
at:
 because of the dif
ference in
nature.
An
other ob
jec
tion is raised and re
futed here.
The word ‚Sambhoga™
 de
notes mu
tual ex
pe
ri
ence or com
mon
ex
pe
ri
ence. The force of ‚S
am™
 in ‚Sambhoga™
 is that of ‚
Saha™. The
mere dwell
ing within a body i
s not a cause al
ways of ex
pe
ri
enc
ing the
plea
sures or pains con
nected with that
 body
. The ex
pe
ri
ence is sub
-
ject to the i
n
flu
ence of the good and evi
l ac
tions. Brah
man has no
such Karma. He is ac
tion
less (Nishkr
iya, A
kart
a). In the Gi
t
a the Lord
says, ﬁThe Kar
mas do not touch Me and I hav
e no at
t
ach
ment to t
he
fruit o
f Kar
mas
Š
Na mam
 karmani lim
p
anti na m
e karmaphale
spriha
ﬂ.
There is no equal
ity i
n ex
pe
ri
ence be
tween Brah
man and the in
-
di vid ual
soul,
be cause
Brah man
is
all-per vad ing,
of
ab so lute
power;
the in
di
vid
ual soul is of lit
tle power and ab
so
lutely
 de
pend
ent.
Though Brah
man is all-per
vad
ing and con
nected with heart
s of
all in
di
vid
ual souls and is also in
tel
li
gent like them,
 He is not sub
ject to
plea
sure and pain.
 Be
cause the in
di
vid
ual soul is an agent, he is the
doer of good and bad ac
tions. There
fore he ex
pe
ri
ences plea
sure
and p
ain. Brah
man is not the doer
. He is the eter
nal Satchidananda.
He is free from all ev
il.
The op
po
nent says: The in
di
vid
ual soul is in es
sence iden
ti
cal
with Brah
man. There
fore Brah
man is also sub
ject to the pl
ea
sure and
p
ain ex
pe
ri
enced by the Jiva or t
he in
di
vid
ual soul. This is a fool
ish ar
-
gu
ment. Thi
s is a fal
lacy
. In re
al
ity t
here is nei
ther the in
di
vid
ual soul
nor plea
sure and pain.
 Plea
sure and pain are m
en
t
al cre
ations only
.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 2
57

When the in
di
vid
ual soul is un
der the in
flu
ence of ig
no
rance or
A
vidya,
 he fool
ishly thinks that
 he is sub
ject to plea
sure and pain.
Prox
im
ity will
 not cause the cling
ing of p
ain and plea
sure to
Brah
man. When some
thing in sp
ace is af

fected by fire, the sp
ace it

-
self can
not be af

fected by fire. Is ether blue be
cause boys call it so?
Not even the slight

est trace of ex pe
ri
ence of plea
sure and pain can be
at trib ut
ed
to
Brah man.
Sruti de
clares ﬁT
wo birds are liv
ing to
gether as friends on the
same tree i.e. body
. One of t
hem, i.e.
 the in
di
vid
ual soul, eat
s the
t
aste
ful fruit
 i.e. en
joys the f
ruit of his ac
tions: and the ot
her i.e. t
he Su
-
preme Soul wit
nesses with
out eat
ing any
thing, i.
e. with
out p
ar
t
ak
ing
of fru
itﬂ Mu
n. Up
. III-1-
1.
Sutras 1 to 8 hav
e es
t
ab
lished that t
he sub
ject of dis
cus
sion in
the quoted por
tion of t
he Chhandogya Up
anishad Chap
ter III
-14 is
Brah
man and not the i
n
di
vid
ual soul.
Attradhikaranam: T
opic 2 (Sutras 9-10)
The eater is Brahm
an
.
AÎ
mm MamM
aJ«h
UmV² &
Att
a characharagrahanat
I.2.
9 (40)
T
he Eater (is Brahman)
, because
 both the movable and
immovab
le (i.e
. the whole
 world) is take
n (as His foo
d).
Att
a:
 the Eat
er;
Characharagrahanat:
 because the movable and
immovable (i.
e. the whole univ
erse) is taken (as His food).
A
 p
as
sage from the Kat
hop
anishad is now t
aken up for dis
cus
-
sion. W
e read in Kathop
anishad I.2.25 ﬁWho t
hen knows where H
e is,
to Whom the B
rahmanas and Kshatriyas are (as it were) but food,
 and
death it

self a con di
ment?ﬂ This tex
t shows by means of the words
‚food™
 and ‚con
di
ment™
 that t
here is some eater
.
Who is this eater? Is it t
he fire re
ferred to in as eater: ﬁS
oma in
-
deed is food, and fi
re eaterﬂ Bri. Up. I
-4-6, or is it in
di
vid
ual soul re
-
ferred to as eater ﬁOne of t
hem eat
s the sweet fruitﬂ Mun.
 Up. III
-I-I, or
the Su
preme Self?
W
e re
ply that
 the eater must be t
he Su
preme Self be
cause it is
men
tioned what is mov

able and what is im mov
able. The en
tire uni
-
verse is re-ab
sorbed in Brah
man. All
 things mov
able and im
mov
able
are here to be t
aken as con
sti
tut
ing the food of
 Brah
man while Death
it

self is the con di
ment. The eat
er of the whole world, t
he con
sumer of
all these things in t
heir to
t
al
ity can be Brah
man alone and none else.
The Brahmanas and the Kshat
riyas are men
tioned as mere ex
-
am
ples as they are fore
most of cre
ated be
ings and as they hold a
pre-em i nent
po si tion.
The
words
are
merely
il lus tra tiv
e.
The whole uni
verse sprin
kled over by Death is re
ferred to here
as the food. Con
di
ment is a thing which ren
ders other things more
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
58

p
al
at

able and causes other things to be eaten with great rel
ish.
There
fore the Death it

self is con sumed, be
ing a con
di
ment as it were,
it makes other things p
al
at

able. There fore the Eat
er of the en
tire
world made p
al
at

able by Death, can mean only Brah
man in His as
-
pect of De
stroyer
. He with
draws the whole uni
verse within Him
self at
the time of
 Pralaya or dis
so
lu
tion. There
fore the Su
preme Self must
be t
aken here as the Eater
.
The op
po
nent says: B
rah
man can
not be an eater
. The Sruti
 de
-
clares ﬁThe other looks on with
out eat
ingﬂ. W
e say that t
his has no va
-
lid
ity
. The p
as
sage aims at de
ny
ing the fru
ition of t
he re
sult
s of works.
It is not m
eant to deny
 the re-ab
sorp
tion of t
he world into Brah
man;
be
cause it is well-es
t
ab
lished by all t
he V
edant
a-text
s that Brah
man is
the cause of the cre
ation, sus
te
nance and re-ab
sorp
tion of t
he world.
There
fore the Eat
er can here be Brah
man only
.
Prakaranaccha
I.2.
10 (41)
And on ac
count
 of t
he context
 also t
he (eater is
 Brah
man)
.
Prakaranat:
 from the contex
t;
Cha:
 also, and.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 9 is given.
Brah
man is the sub
ject of the di
s
cus
sion. In the be
gin
ning
Nachiket
as asks Y
ama, ﬁT
ell me of t
hat which is above good and evil
,
which is be
yond cause and ef

fect and which is other than the p
ast and
fu
tureﬂ Katha Up. I
-2-14. Y
ama re
plies, ﬁI will t
ell you in brief
. It
 is OMﬂ
Katha Up. I
-2-15. This At
man is nei
ther born nor does it dieﬂ Katha
Up. I-2-18. He fi
nally in
cludes ﬁof whom the Brahmana and the
Kshatriya classes are, as it were, f
ood and Death it

self a con di
ment or
pickle, how can one thus know where that At
man is?ﬂ
All thi
s ob
vi
ously shows that Brah
man is the gen
eral topic. T
o
ad
here to the gen
eral topic is the proper pro
ceed
ing. Hence the Eat
er
is Brah
man. Fur
ther the clause ﬁWho then knows where he isﬂ, shows
that reali
sa
tion is very
 dif

fi cult. This again point
s to the Su
preme Self.
The force of the word ‚Cha™
 (and) in the Su
tra is to in
di
cate that
the Smrit
i is also to the same ef

fect, as says the Git
a.
ﬁThou art the Eat
er of the worlds, of al
l that mov
es and st
ands;
wor
thier of rev
er
ence than the Guru™
s self, there is none like Theeﬂ.
Guhaprav
isht
adhikaranam
: T
opic 3 (Sutras 1
1-12)
The dwellers in the cave of the heart are
the individual soul and Brahm
an.
Jwhm§
 à{dï
>mdmË_mZm¡
 {h VÔe©
Guham prav
ist
av
atmanau hi t
addarsanat
I.2.
1
1 (42)
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 2
59

The two who hav
e e
ntere
d into the
 cavity (o
f the he
art) are
indeed the in
dividual
 soul an
d the Supr
eme Soul, because it
 is
so see
n.
Guham:
 in the cavit
y (of the heart
)
Prav
isht
au:
 the two who have
entered;
Atmana
u:
 are the two selfs (indivi
dual soul and the
Supreme Soul);

Hi:
 indeed, because;
T
addarsanat:
 because it is so
seen.
An
other p
as
sage of the Kat
hop
anishad is t
aken up for dis
cus
-
sion. In the same K
athop
anishad I-3-1 we read, ﬁHav
ing en
tered the
cav
ity of
 the heart, t
he two en
joy the re
ward of their works in the body
.
Those who know Brah
man call them shade and light
: like
wise those
house
hold
ers who per
form the T
rinachiket
a sac
ri
ficeﬂ.
The doubt arises here whether the cou
ple re
ferred to are the in
-
di
vid
ual soul and Buddhi (in
tel
lect).
In the p
as
sage un
der dis
cus
sion, the cou
ple re
ferred to are the
in
di
vid
ual soul and the Su
preme Self,
 for these two, be
ing both in
tel
li
-
gent selfs, are of t
he same na
ture. W
e see that in or
di
nary life al
so
when
ever a num
ber is men
tioned, be
ings of the same class are un
-
der
stood to be meant
. When a bull is brought t
o us, we say ‚bring an
-
other
, look out for a sec
ond™. It
 means an
other bull, not
 a horse or a
man. So,
 if with an in
tel
li
gent self, t
he in
di
vid
ual soul, an
other is said
to en
ter the cav
ity of
 the heart, i
t must re
fer to an
other of the same
class i.e. to an
other in
tel
li
gent be
ing and not to t
he in
tel
lect (Buddhi)
which is in
sen
tient.
Sruti and Sm
riti speak of the S
u
preme Self as placed in t
he
cave. W
e read in Kathop
anishad I-2-12 ﬁThe an
cient who is hid
den in
the cave, who dwells in t
he abyssﬂ. W
e also find in T
aittiriy
a
Up
anishad II-1 ﬁHe who knows him hid
den in the cave,
 in the high
est
etherﬂ and ﬁsearch for the self who en
tered into t
he caveﬂ. A
 spe
cial
abode for the all-per
vad
ing Brah
man is given for t
he pur
pose of con
-
cep
tion and med
i
t
a
tion. Thi
s is not con
trary to rea
son.
Some
times the char
ac
ter
is
tics of one in a group are in
di
rectly
ap
plied to the whole group as when we say ﬁThe men with an um

-
brellaﬂ where only one has an um
brella and not the whole group.
 Sim
-
i
larly here also, t
hough it is only one who is en
joy
ing the fruit
s of
ac
tions both are spo
ken of as eat
ing the fruit
s.
The word
‚pibant
au™
 is in the dual num
ber mean
ing ‚the two drink
while as a mat
ter of fact
, the Jiv
a only drinks the fruit
 of his works and
not the S
u
preme Self.
 W
e may ex
plain the p
as
sage by say
ing that
while the in
di
vid
ual soul drinks, the Su
preme Self also is said to drink
be
cause he makes the soul to drink. The in
di
vid
ual soul is the di
rect
agent, t
he Su
preme Self is t
he causal agent that is t
o say the in
di
vid
-
ual self di
rectly drinks while the Su
preme Self causes the in
di
vid
ual
soul to drink.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
60

The phrases ‚shade™
 and ‚light™
 show the dif

fer ence be
tween the
In
fi
nite Knowl
edge of the S
u
preme Self and t
he fi
nite knowl
edge of
the Jiva,
 or that the Jiv
a is bound down to the chain of S
amsara, while
the Su
preme Self is abov
e Samsara.
W
e, there
fore, un
der
st
and by the ‚t
wo en
tered into t
he cave™, t
he
in
di
vid
ual soul and the Su
preme Self.
An
other rea
son for this in
ter
pre
t
a
tion is given i
n the fol
low
ing
Su tra
.
{deofU
V
iseshanaccha
I.2.
12 (43)
And on account of the distin
ctive qualities (of the two
menti
oned in su
bsequent t
exts).
V
iseshanat:
 on account of distinctiv
e qualities;
Cha:
 and.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1
1 is given.
This is clear also from the de
scrip
tion in other por
tions of the
same scrip
ture viz. K
athop
anishad.
Fur
ther the dis
tinc
tive qual

i ties men
tioned in the t
ext agree only
with the in
di
vid
ual soul and the Su
preme Soul. B
e
cause in a sub
se
-
quent p
as
sage (I-3-3) the char
ac
ter
is
tics of the t
wo that have en
tered
the cav
ity of
 the heart are given.
 They in
di
cate that t
he two are the in
-
di
vid
ual soul and Brah
man. ﬁKnow that
 the Self
 to be the char
i
o
teer
,
the body t
o be the char
iot.ﬂ The in
di
vid
ual soul is rep
re
sented as a
char i o teer
driv ing
on
through
the
trans mi gra tory
ex is tence
and
fi nal
eman
ci
p
a
tion. Fur
ther it is said ﬁHe at
t
ains the end of his jour
ney
, that
high
est place of V
ishnuﬂ Katha Up. I-3-9.
 Here it is rep
re
sented that
the Su
preme Self is t
he goal of the driv
er
™
s course. The two are men
-
tioned here as the att
ainer and the goal at
t
ained i.e. t
he in
di
vid
ual soul
or Jiva and the Su
preme Soul or Brah
man.
In the pre
ced
ing p
as
sage (I-2-12) also it is said ﬁThe wise, who
by means of med
i
t
a
tion on his Self
, re
cog
nises the An
cient who is dif

-
fi
cult to be seen, who has en
tered into t
he dark, who is hid
den in the
cave of the heart
, who abides in the aby
ss as God, he in
deed leaves
joy and sor
row far be
hindﬂ. Here the two are spo
ken of as the
medit
ator and the ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion.
More
over the Su
preme Self is t
he gen
eral topic. It
 is there
fore
ob vi ous
that
the
p
as sage
un der
dis cus sion
re fers
to
the
in di vid ual
soul and the Su
preme Self.
Ant
aradhikaranam
: T
opic 4 (Sutras 13-17)
The person within the eye is Brahm
an
.
AÝVa CnnÎ
Ant
ara up
ap
atteh
I.2.
13 (44)
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 2
61

The pe
rson within (the
 eye
) (is Brahma
n) on acc
ount o
f (the
attrib
ute
s me
ntion
ed
 the
rei
n) be
ing ap
pro
pria
te (
only
 to
Brahman).
Ant
ara:
 inside (the eye), t
he being within the ey
e;
Up
ap
atteh:
 on
account of the appropriateness of (att
ributes).
The be
ing within the ey
e is Brah
man, be
cause it is rea
son
able
to con
strue the p
as
sage as ap
ply
ing to the S
u
preme Self t
han to any
-
thing else.
The form of wor
ship in an
other p
art of Chhandogya Up
anishad
(IV
-15-1), t
ak
ing the be
ing within the ey
es as the Su
preme Self,
 is
t
aken up as the sub
ject for dis
cus
sion.
In Chhandogya Up
anishad IV
-15-1 we read, ﬁThis per
son that is
seen in the eye is the S
elf. Thi
s is Im
mor
t
al and fear
less, this is Brah
-
manﬂ. The doubt here arises whether this p
as
sage re
fers to the re
-
flected self which re
sides in the eye, or t
o the in
di
vid
ual soul or to the
self of some de
ity which pre
sides over the or
gan of sight or to t
he Su
-
preme Self.
The Su
tra says that t
he per
son in the eye is Brah
man only
, be
-
cause the at
trib
utes ‚Im
mor
t
al™, ‚f
ear
less™, etc.,
 men
tioned here ac
-
cord with the na
ture of the S
u
preme Self only
.
The at
trib
utes ‚be
ing un
touched by sin™, be
ing ‚Samy
advama™
etc., are ap
pli
ca
ble to the S
u
preme Self only
. The at
trib
utes of be
ing
‚V
amani™
 or the leader of all and ‚B
hamani™, t
he All-ef

ful gent, ap
plied
to the per
son in the eye are ap
pro
pri
ate in the case of B
rah
man also.
There
fore, on ac
count of agree
ment, t
he per
son within the eye
is the Su
preme Self or B
rah
man only
.
ñWmZm{X
ì`nXoe
S
thanadiv
y
ap
adesaccha
I.2.
14 (46)
And on a
ccount
 of t
he stat
ement of
 place and s
o on.
S
thanadi:
 the place and the rest;
V
y
ap
adesat:
 on account of the
st
atement;

Cha:
 and.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 13 is given.
In other Srut
is lo
ca
tion etc.,
 i.e.,
 abode, name and form are at

-
trib
uted to B
rah
man Him
self to fa
cil
i
t
ate med
i
t
a
tion. B
ut how can the
all-per
vad
ing Brah
man be in a lim
ited sp
ace like the eye? Def
i
nite
abode like the cav
ity of
 the heart, t
he eye, t
he earth, disc of the sun
etc., is giv
en to the all-per
vad
ing Brah
man for the pur
pose of med
i
t
a
-
tion (Up
asana), just as Saligrama is pre
scribed for med
i
t
a
tion on
V
ishnu. This is not con
trary to rea
son.
The phrase ‚and so on™
 which forms p
art of the S
u
tra shows that
not only abode i
s as
signed to Brah
man but also such things as name
and form not ap
pro
pri
ate to B
rah
man which is de
void of nam
e and
form, are as
cribed to It f
or the sake of med
i
t
a
tion, as Brah
man with
out
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
62

qual
i
ties can
not be an ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion. V
ide Chh. Up. 1.6.
6-7.
ﬁHis name is ‚Ut™. He with t
he golden beard.ﬂ
gwI{d{
eï>
m{^Y
mZmXod M
Sukhav
isisht
abhidhanad
ev
a cha
I.2.
15 (46)
And
 on a
cco
unt o
f the
 pas
sage
 refe
rring to
 that whic
h is
distinguishe
d by blis
s (i.e. Brahman).
Sukha:
 bliss;
V
isisht
a:
 qualified by
;
Abhidhanat:
 because of the
description;
Eva:
 alone;
Cha:
 and.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 13 is con
tin
ued.
Be
cause the text
 re
fers to the S
u
preme Self only
 and not to Jiv
a
who
is
mis er a ble.
The same Brah
man which is spo
ken of as char
ac
ter
ised by bliss
in the be
gin
ning of the chap
ter in the clauses ﬁBreath is Brah
man,ﬂ
ﬁ
Ka
is Brah
manﬂ ﬁ
Kha
is Brah
manﬂ we must sup
pose It to be re
ferred
to in the pres
ent p
as
sage also, as it is proper to stick to the sub
ject
mat ter
un der
dis cus sion.
The fires t
aught to Up
akosala about Brah
man ﬁBreath is Brah
-
man, bliss is Brah
man, the et
her is Brah
manﬂ Chh. Up. IV
-10-5. This
same Brah
man is fur
ther elu
ci
dated by his t
eacher as ﬁthe be
ing in
the eyeﬂ.
On hear
ing the speech of the f
ires viz., ﬁBreat
h is Brah
man,
Ka
is Brah
man,
Kha
is Brah
manﬂ, Up
akosala says ﬁI un
der
st
and that
breath is Brah
man, but I
 do not un
der
st
and that
Ka
or
Kha
is Brah
-
manﬂ. There
fore the fi
res re
ply ﬁWhat is
Ka
is
Kha
. What is
Kha
is
Ka
ﬂ.
The word
Ka
in
or di nary
lan guage
de notes
sen sual
plea sure.
If
the word
Kha
were not used to qual
ify t
he sense of
Ka
one would think
that or
di
nary worldly plea
sure was meant. But as the t
wo words
Ka
and
Kha
oc
cur to
gether and qual
ify each ot
her
, they
 in
di
cate Brah
-
man whose Self is Bli
ss. There
fore the ref
er
ence is to Su
preme Bliss
and such a de
scrip
tion can ap
ply only
 to Brah
man.
If t
he word Brah
man in the clause ﬁ
Ka
is Brah
manﬂ were not
added and if the sen
tence would run ﬁ
Ka
,
Kha
is Brah
manﬂ, the word
Ka
would be only an ad
jec
tive and t
hus plea
sure be
ing a mere qual
ity
can
not be a sub
ject of med
i
t
a
tion. T
o pre
vent t
his, both words
Ka
as
well as
Kha
are joined with the word Brah
man. ﬁ
Ka
is Brah
man.
Kha
is
Brah
manﬂ. Qual
i
ties as well as per
sons hav
ing those qual
i
ties could
be
ob ject
s
of
med i t
a tion.
lwVmo
n{ZfËH
$JË`{^Y
Srutop
anishatkagaty
abhidhanacch
a
I.2.
16 (47)
And o
n acco
unt of the
 statem
ent o
f the way o
f him who has
known the
 Truth of the Upanis
hads.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 2
63

Sruto
: heard;
Up
anishatka:
 Up
anishads;
Gati:
 way;

Abhidhanat:
because of the st
atement;

Cha:
 and.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 13 is con
tin
ued.
The per
son in the eye is the S
u
preme Self f
or the fol
low
ing rea
-
son also. From Sruti we know of t
he way of the knower of B
rah
man.
He trav
els af

ter death through the Devayana p
ath or the p
ath of t
he
Gods. That way i
s de
scribed in Prasna Up. 1-10. ﬁThose who have
sought the Self
 by pen
ance, ab
sti
nence, faith and knowl
edge at
t
ain
the Sun by
 the North
ern Path or the p
ath of Devay
ana. From thence
they do not
 re
turn. This is the i
m
mor
t
al abode, free f
rom fear
, and the
high est.ﬂ
The knower of the ﬁper
son in the eyeﬂ also goes by t
his p
ath af

-
ter death. F
rom this de
scrip
tion of t
he way which is known to be the
way of him who knows Brah
man it is quit
e clear that the per
son within
the eye is Brah
man.
The fol
low
ing Su
tra shows that it is not
 pos
si
ble for the abov
e
text
 to mean ei
ther the re
flected Sel
f or the Jiva or t
he de
ity i
n the Sun.
AZdp
ñWVoa
gå^dm… Zo
Anav
asthiterasambhav
accha net
arah
I.2.
17 (48)
(The pe
rson within the
 eye
 is the Su
pre
me Se
lf) and no
t any
other (i.e. t
he individual soul etc.) as these do not e
xist always;
and on
 accoun
t of
 the im
possibi
lit
y (of
 the qua
lit
ies of t
he
pe
rson in the
 be
ing ascrib
ed
 to any of the
se
).
Anav
asthiteh:
 not exist
ing always;
Asambhav
at:
 on account of the
impossib
ility;
Cha:
 and;
Na:
 not;
It
arah:
 any other
.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 13 is con
tin
ued.
The re
flected self does not
 per
ma
nently abi
de in the eye.
 When
some per
son co
mes near the eye the re
flec
tion of t
hat per
son is seen
in the eye.
 When he moves away the re
flec
tion dis
ap
pears.
Surely y
ou do not pro
pose to have some one near the ey
e at the
time of m
ed
i
t
a
tion so that y
ou may med
i
t
ate on the im

age in the eye.Such a fleet
ing im
age can
not be the ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion. The i
n
di
vid
-
ual soul is not meant by
 the p
as
sage, be
cause he is sub
ject to ig
no
-
rance, de
sire and ac
tion, he has no per
fec
tion. Hence he can
not be
the
ob ject
of
med i t
a tion.
The
qual i ties
like
im mor t
al ity
,
fear less ness,
im ma nence,
eter nity
,
per fec tion
etc.,
can not
be
ap pro pri ately
at trib
-
uted to t
he re
flected self or t
he in
di
vid
ual soul or the de
ity i
n the sun.
There
fore no other self save t
he Su
preme Self is here spo
ken of as
the per
son in the eye.
 The per
son in the eye (Akshi Purusha) must be
viewed as the Su
preme Self only
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
64

Ant
ary
amy
adhikaranam
: T
opic 5 (Sutras 18-20)
The internal ruler is Brahm
an
.
AÝV`m©å`{Y
X¡dm{Xfw
VÕ_©
ì`nXoemV² &
Ant
ary
amy
adhidai
v
adishu t
addharmav
y
ap
adesat
I.2.
18 (49)
The internal ru
ler o
ve
r the god
s and s
o on (is
 Brahman)
be
cau
se
 the
 attrib
ute
s of th
at (B
rahma
n) are
 me
ntion
ed
.
Ant
ary
ami:
 the ruler within;

Adhidaiv
adishu:
 in the gods, etc.
;
Ta
t
:
His;
Dharma:
 attribut
es;
 V
y
ap
adesat:
 because of the st
atement.
A
 p
as
sage from the Brihadarany
aka Upanishad is now t
aken up
for dis
cus
sion. In Bri.
 Up. III
-7-1 we read ﬁHe w
ho within rules this
world and the other world and all be
ingsﬂ and later on ﬁHe who dwells
in the earth and wit
hin the earth,
 whom the earth does not know
,
whose body the earth is, who rules the eart
h from within,
 he is thy
Self,
 the ruler within,
 the im
mor
t
alﬂ etc., I
II-7-3.
Here a doubt arises whether the In
ner Ruler (Ant
aryamin) de
-
notes the in
di
vid
ual soul or some Y
ogin en
dowed with ex
traor
di
nary
pow
ers such as for in
st
ance, the power of mak
ing his body sub
tle or
the pre
sid
ing de
ity or P
radhana or Brah
man (the High
est Self).
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says: Som
e god pre
sid
ing
over the earth and so on must be t
he Ant
aryamin. He only
 is ca
p
a
ble
of rul
ing the earth as he is en
dowed with the or
gans of ac
tion. Rul
er
-
ship can rightly be as
cribed to him only
. Or else the ruler may be some
Y
ogin who is able to en
ter within all t
hings on ac
count of his ex
traor
di
-
nary Y
ogic pow
ers. Cer
t
ainly t
he Su
preme Self can
not be meant as
He does not pos
sess the or
gans of ac
tions which are needed for rul
-
ing.
W
e give the f
ol
low
ing re
ply
. The in
ter
nal Ruler must be Brah
man
or the Su
preme Self.
 Why so? Be
cause His qual
i
ties are men
tioned in
the p
as
sage un
der dis
cus
sion. Brah
man is the cause of all cre
ated
things. The uni
ver
sal rul
er
ship is an ap
pro
pri
ate at
trib
ute of t
he Su
-
preme Self only
. Om
nip
o
tence, Self

hood, Im mor
t
al
ity
, etc.,
 can be as
-
cribed to Brah
man only
.
The p
as
sage ﬁHe whom the earth does not know
,ﬂ shows that
the In
ner Ruler is not known by the earth-de
ity
. There
fore it is ob
vi
ous
that t
he In
ner Ruler is dif

fer ent from t
hat de
ity
. The at
trib
utes ‚un
seen™,
‚un
heard™, also re
fer to the S
u
preme Self only
 Which is de
void of
shape and other sen
si
ble qual
i
ties.
He is also de
scribed in the sec
tion as be
ing all-per
vad
ing, as He
is in
side and the Ruler within of ev

ery thing vi
z., the eart
h, the sun, wa
-
ter
, fire,
 sky
, the et
her
, the senses, etc. T
his also can be true only of
the High
est Self or B
rah
man. For all t
hese rea
sons, the In
ner Ruler is
no other but the S
u
preme Self or B
rah
man.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 2
65

Z M ñ_
mV©_VÕ
_m©{
^bmnmV²
Na cha smart
amat
addharmabh
ilap
at
I.2.
19 (50)
And (the
 Inte
rnal Rule
r is) not that which is tau
ght in the
Sankhya Smr
iti (viz
., Pradhan
a) because
 qualities contrar
y to
its na
ture
 are
 me
ntion
ed
 (he
re)
.
Na:
 neither;
Cha:
 also, and;
Smart
am
: that
 which is t
aught in
(Sankhya) Smrit
i;
At
addharmabhilap
at:
 because qualities contrary
to it
s nature are mentioned.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 18 is given.
The word Ant
aryamin (In
ner Ruler) can
not re
late to P
radhana
as it has not got Chait
anya (sentiency) and can
not be called At

man.The Pradhana is not thi
s ‚In
ter
nal Ruler
™
 as the at
trib
utes ﬁHe is
the im
mor
t
al, un
seen Seer
, un
heard Hearerﬂ etc., ﬁThere is no other
seer but He, there is no other thi
nker but He, there is no other Knower
but He. This is the S
elf, t
he Ruler within, the I
m
mor
t
al. Ev

ery thing else
is of evilﬂ (Bri.
 Up. III
-7-23), can
not be as
cribed to the non-in
tel
li
gent
blind Pradhana.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says: W
ell then, i
f the t
erm
‚In
ter
nal Ruler
™
 can
not de
note the P
radhana as it is nei
ther a Self
 nor
seer it can cer
t
ainly de
note the in
di
vid
ual soul or Jiva who is in
tel
li
gent
and there
fore sees, hears, thinks and knows, who is in
ter
nal and
there
fore of the na
ture of Sel
f. Fur
ther the in
di
vid
ual soul is ca
p
a
ble of
rul
ing over the or
gans, as he is the enjoyer
. There
fore the in
ter
nal
ruler is the in
di
vid
ual soul or Jiva.
The fol
low
ing Su
tra gives a suit

able an swer to this.
eara
ümo^`o@{
n {h ^oX
oZ¡Z_Yr`
Sariraschobhay
e™pi hi bhedenainamadhiy
ate
I.2.
20 (51)
And t
he indi
vidual
 soul (i
s not
 the Int
ernal
 Ruler)
 for
 both
 also
(i.e. b
oth rec
ens
ions viz
., the Kanva
 and Ma
dhyand
ina Sakha
s
of the Brihadar
anyaka Upanishad) speak of it as dif
ferent
(from th
e I
nte
rnal Ru
le
r.)
Sarira
h
: the embodie
d, the indiv
idual soul;
Cha:
 also, and; (Na: not
);
Ubhay
e:
 the both namel
y the recentions Kanv
a and Madhyandinas;
Api:
 even, also;
 Hi:
 because;
 Bhedena:
 by way of di
f
ference;
Enam:
this, the Jiv
a;
Adhiy
ate:
 read, speak of, indicate.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 18 is con
tin
ued. The word ‚not™

is to be sup
plied from the pre
ced
ing Su
tra.
The fol
low
ers of both Sakhas speak in their tex
t
s of the in
di
vid
-
ual soul as dif

fer ent from t
he in
ter
nal ruler
. The Kanv
as read ﬁHe who
dwells in Knowl
edgeŠ
Y
o vijnane tishthan
ﬂ Bri
. Up. III-
7-2
2. He
re
‚knowl
edge™
 st
ands for the in
di
vid
ual soul. The Madhy
andinas read
ﬁHe who dwells in the SelfŠ
ya atmani
 tishthan
ﬂ. Here ‚Self™
 st
ands for
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
66

the in
di
vid
ual soul. In ei
ther read
ing the in
di
vid
ual soul is spo
ken of as
dif

fer ent from t
he ‚In
ter
nal Ruler
™, for t
he In
ter
nal Ruler is the Ruler of
the
in di vid ual
soul
also.
The dif

fer ence be
tween the Jiva and B
rah
man is one of Up
adhi
(lim i t
a tion).
The
dif
 fer ence
be tween
the
In ter nal
Ruler
and
the
in di vid
-
ual soul is merely the prod
uct of ig
no
rance or A
vidya.
 It has it
s rea
son
in the lim
it
ing ad
junct, con
sist
ing of the or
gans of ac
tion, pre
sented by
ig
no
rance. The dif

fer ence is not ab
so
lutely
 true. Be
cause the Self
within is one only;
 two in
ter
nal Selfs are not pos
si
ble. But
 on ac
count
of lim
it
ing ad
junct
s the one Self i
s prac
ti
cally treat
ed as if it were two,
just as we make a dis
tinc
tion be
tween the ether of
 the jar and the uni
-
ver sal
ether
.
The scrip
tural tex
t ﬁwhere there is du
al
ity
, as it were, t
here one
sees an
otherﬂ in
ti
mates that t
he world ex
ist
s only in the sphere of ig
-
no
rance, while the sub
se
quent tex
t ﬁBut when t
he Self only
 is all this
how should one see an
otherﬂ de
clares that the world dis
ap
pears in
the sphere of true knowl
edge.
Adrisy
atv
adhikaranam
: T
opic 6 (Sutras 21-23)
That which cannot be seen is Brahm
an.
AÑí
`Ëdm{XJw
UH$mo
 Y_m}
ºo
Adrisy
atvadigunako dharmokteh
I.2.
21 (52)
The posse
ssor of qu
alities lik
e ind
ivisibility e
tc., (is Brahman)
on a
cco
unt o
f the
 de
clara
tion o
f I
ts attrib
ute
s.
Adrisy
atv
a:
 invisibility;
Adi:
 and the rest, beginning wit
h;
Gunakah:
one who possesses
 the quality
 (
Adrisy
atv
adigunakah:

possessor of
qualities like
 invisibility);
Dharmokteh:
because of the mention of
qualities.
Some ex
pres
sions from the Mundaka Up
anishad are now t
aken
up as the sub
ject for dis
cus
sion.
W
e read in the Mundaka Up
anishad (I-1-5 & 6) ﬁThe higher
knowl
edge is this by which the in
de
struc
ti
ble is known or real
ised.
That which can
not be seen nor seized, which is with
out or
i
gin and
qual
i
ties, with
out hands and feet,
 the eter
nal, all-per
vad
ing, om
ni
-
pres
ent, in
fin
i
tes
i
mal, that
 which is im
per
ish
able, that
 it is which the
wise con
sider as the source of all be
ings.ﬂ
Here the doubt arises whether the source of all be
ings which is
spo
ken of as char
ac
ter
ised by in
vis
i
bil
ity et
c., is Pradhana, or t
he in
di
-
vid
ual soul, or the Su
preme Self or t
he High
est Lord.
That which here is spo
ken of as the source of all be
ings
(Bhut
ayoni)
char ac ter ised
by
such
at trib ut
es
as
in vis i bil i
ty
and
so
on,
can be the Su
preme Self or B
rah
man only
, noth
ing else, be
cause
qual
i
ties like ﬁHe is all-know
ing (Sarvajna), al
l-per
ceiv
ing (Sarvavi
t)
Mun. Up. I
-1-9 are true only of Brah
man and not of t
he Pradhana
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 2
67

which is non-in
tel
li
gent. Cer
t
ainly it
 can
not re
fer to the Jiv
a or the em
-
bod
ied soul as he is nar
rowed by his lim
it
ing con
di
tions. The sec
tion
also, in which these p
as
sages oc
cur re
lates to the High
est Knowl
-
edge or Para V
idya. There
fore it must re
fer to Brah
man and not to
Pradhana or Jiva.
{deof
U^oXì`
nXoem
ä`m
§ M ZoVam
V
iseshanabhedav
y
ap
adesabhy
am cha net
arau
I.2.
22 (53)
T
he other
 two (
viz.
 the in
dividua
l soul a
nd th
e Pradhan
a) ar
e
not (th
e s
ou
rce
 of al
l be
ings)
 for d
istinc
tive
 attrib
ute
s and
diffe
ren
ce
s are
 state
d.
V
iseshanabhedav
y
ap
adesabhy
am:
 on account of the ment
ion of
distinctiv
e attribut
es and dif
ferences;
Cha:
 and;
Na:
 not;
 It
arau:
 the
other two.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 21 is given.
The source of all be
ings is Brah
man or the Su
preme Self but
 not
ei
ther of the t
wo oth
ers viz., t
he in
di
vid
ual soul for the fol

low ing rea
-
son also.
W
e read in the Mundaka Up
anishad II.1,
 2 ﬁThat the heav

enlyper
son is with
out a body
. He is both with
out and within,
 is birthless,
with
out breath, and wit
h
out mind, pure,
 higher than the high,
 Im
per
-
ish
able.ﬂ The dis
tinc
tive at

trib utes men
tioned here such as ﬁbe
ing of a
heav
enly na
tureﬂ (Divya), ‚
Birthless™, ‚
Pure™, et
c., can in no way be
-
long to the in
di
vid
ual soul who er
ro
ne
ously re
gards him
self to be lim

-
ited by nam
e and form as pre
sented by A
vidya or ig
no
rance and
er ro ne ously
con sid ers
him self
lim ited,

im pure,
cor po real,
etc.
There
-
fore the p
as
sage ob
vi
ously re
fers to the S
u
preme Self or B
rah
man
who is the sub
ject of all t
he Up
anishads.
ﬁHigher than the high, I
m
per
ish
able (Pradhana)ﬂ in
ti
mates that
the source of all be
ings spo
ken of in the last S
u
tra is not the P
radhana
but some
thing dif

fer ent from it
. Here the term im

per ish
able means the
A
vyakt
am or A
vyakrit
a (the unmanifested or t
he un
dif

fer en
ti
ated)
which rep
re
sent
s the po
ten
ti
al
ity or t
he seed of all names and forms,
con
t
ains the sub
tle p
art
s of the ma
te
rial el
e
ment
s and abides in the
Lord. As it is no ef

fect of any

thing, it is high when com
p
ared to all ef

-
fect
s. In
tel
lect, mind,
 ego
ism, the T
anmatras, the or
gans are all born
from
 it. ﬁ
Aksharat p
arat
ah p
arah
ŠHigher than the high,
 Im
per
ish
-
ableﬂ, which ex
presses a dif

fer ence clearly in
di
cates that the S
u
-
preme Self or B
rah
man is meant here. B
e
yond Pradhana or
A
vyakt
am is Para Brah
man. It
 is a set
tled con
clu
sion there
fore that
the source of all be
ings must mean the high
est Self or B
rah
man only
.
A
 fur
ther ar
gu
ment in fa
vour of the same con
clu
sion is given in
the
fol low ing
Su tra.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
68

énmonÝ`
Rupop
any
asaccha
I-2-23 (54)
And on a
ccount
 of it
s for
m being m
ention
ed (the pass
age
under disc
ussion r
efers to Br
ahman
).
Rup
a:
 form
;
Up
any
asat:
 because of the mention;

Cha:
 and.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 21 is con
tin
ued.
Fur
ther His form is de
scribed in the Mundaka Up
anishad II-1-4
ﬁFire is His head, His eyes the sun and the moon, t
he quar
ters His
ears, His speech the V
edas, the wind His breath, His heart t
he uni
-
verse; from His feet
 came the earth, He is in
deed the in
ner Self of
 all
be ings.ﬂ
This st
ate
ment of f
orm can re
fer only t
o the Su
preme Lord or
Brah
man. Such a de
scrip
tion is ap
pro
pri
ate only i
n the case of Brah
-
man, be
cause the Jiva is of lim
ited power and be
cause Pradhana
(mat
ter) can
not be the S
oul or in
ner Self of
 liv
ing be
ings.
As the ﬁsource of all be
ingsﬂ forms the gen
eral topic, the whole
p
as
sage from ﬁFrom Him is born breathﬂ upto ﬁHe is the in
ner Self of
all be
ingsﬂ re
fers to that
 same source.
ﬁThe Per
son in
deed is all this, sac
ri
fice, knowl
edge etc.ﬂ Mun.
Up. II-1-10, i
n
ti
mates that t
he source of all be
ings re
ferred to in the
p
as
sage un
der dis
cus
sion is none other than the S
u
preme Self or
Brah
man, for He is the in
ner Self of
 all be
ings.
V
aisv
anaradhikaranam
: T
opic 7 (Sutras 24-32)
V
aisvanara is Brahman.
d¡ídmZ
a– gmYma
UeãX
{deof
mV² &
V
aisv
anarah sadharanasabdav
iseshat
I.2.
24 (55)
Vaisvanara (
is Brahman)
 on account of th
e distinction
qualifyin
g the common terms (ﬁVaisvanar
aﬂ and ﬁSelfﬂ).
V
aisv
anarah:
 V
aisvanara;
Sadharana sabda:
 common word;
V
iseshat:
 because of the distinction.
This Su
tra proves that t
he word ﬁV
aisvanaraﬂ used in Sruti for
wor ship
in di cates
Brah man.
W
e read in Chh. Up. V
.18.1-2 ﬁHe who med
i
t
ates on the
V
aisvanara Self,
 ex
tend
ing from heaven t
o earth as iden
ti
cal with his
own Self, eat
s food in all be
ings, in all selfs.
 Of that
 V
aisvanara Self
Sutejas (heaven) is the h
ead, the sun the ey
e, the f
eet the earth,
 the
mouth the A
havaniya f
ire.ﬂ
Here the doubt arises whether by the t
erm ﬁV
aisvanaraﬂ we
have to un
der
st
and the gas
tric fire or the el
e
men
t
al fire, or t
he god
pre
sid
ing over the el
e
men
t
al fire, or t
he in
di
vid
ual soul or the Su
-
preme Self (B
rah
man).
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 2
69

The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says that
 V
aisvanara is the
gas
tric fire be
cause it is said in Bri. Up. V
-9 ﬁAgni V
aisvanara is the fire
within man by
 which the food that
 is eaten is di
gested. Or it m
ay de
-
note fire in gen
eral or the de
ity which pre
sides over the el
e
men
t
al fire
or the in
di
vid
ual soul who be
ing an enjoyer is in close vi
cin
ity t
o
V
aisvanara fire.ﬂ
The Siddhanti
n says, here that t
he Su
preme Self or B
rah
man
only is re
ferred to on ac
count of the qual
i
fy
ing ad
junct
s to these
words. The ad
junct
s are ﬁHeaven is the head of this V
aisvanara Self,
the Sun it
s eyes, etc.ﬂ This is pos
si
ble only in t
he case of the Su
preme
Self.
Fur
ther in the p
as
sage ﬁHe eat
s food in all worlds, in all be
ings,
in all selfs.ﬂ This is pos
si
ble only if
 we t
ake the term V
aisvanara to de
-
note the High
est Self.
The fruit of
 med
i
t
a
tion on this V
aisvanara Self i
s the at
t
ain
ment
of all de
sires and de
struc
tion of all
 sins (Chh. Up. V
.24.3). T
his can
only be true if
 the Su
preme Self is meant
. More
over the chap
ter be
-
gins with the en
quiry ﬁWhat is our Self
? What is Brah
man?ﬂ The
words ‚Self
™
 and ‚Brah
man™
 are marks of Brah
man and in
di
cate the
Su
preme Self only
. The word ‚Brah
man™
 is used in it
s pri
mary sense.
There
fore it is proper to t
hink that the whole chap
ter treat
s of Brah
-
man only
. More
over
, ety

mo logi
cally also the word V
aisvanara means
Brah
man; be
cause it is com
posed of two words ﬁV
isvaﬂ mean
ing ﬁallﬂ
and ﬁNaraﬂ mean
ing ﬁmenﬂ namely ﬁHe who con
t
ains all men within
him
self.ﬂ Such a be
ing is Brah
man only
.
It is a set
tled con
clu
sion, there
fore, that
 only Brah
man can be
meant by t
he term ﬁV
aisvanaraﬂ.
Smary
amanamanu
manam sy
aditi
I.2.
25 (56)
Be
cau
se
 that (c
osm
ic fo
rm of th
e S
up
rem
e L
ord
) whic
h is
de
scrib
ed
 in the
 Smriti i
s an i
ndic
atory
 mark
 or infe
ren
ce
 (from

which we
 infer the
 mea
ning of this Sruti te
xt und
er
discussion).
Smary
amanam:
 mentioned in t
he Smriti;

Anumanam:
 indicatory
mark, inference;
Sy
at:
 may be;
Iti:
 because thus.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 24 is given.
 The word ‚Iti™
 de
-
notes a rea
son. It point
s to a cor
rob
o
ra
tive st
ate
ment which ex
-
presses the same thing as the Sruti.
 The Smriti
s in
ter
pret the
p
as
sages of the Sruti.
 There
fore where a doubt arises as to the sig
nif
-
i
cance of a p
as
sage in the Sruti,
 the Smrit
i may be con
sulted in or
der
to get more light
 on the sub
ject mat
ter
. The Smrit
i gives a de
scrip
tion
of the cos
mic form of t
he High
est Lord as ﬁHe whose mouth is fire,
whose head is heaven, whose na
vel the et
her
, whose eyes the sun,
whose ears the re
gions, rev
er
ence to Him, whose body is the world.
ﬂ
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
70

This is in agree
ment with t
he de
scrip
tion in the t
ext un
der dis
cus
sion.
The same Lord who is spo
ken of in the Srut
i is de
scribed in the Smriti
also.
In the B
hagavad Git
a XV
-14 the word V
aisvanara is ex
pressly
ap
plied to the LordŠﬁI
 hav
ing be
come the fire of l
ife, t
ake pos
ses
sion
of the bod
ies of breath
ing be
ings and united with t
he life-breaths, I
 di
-
gest the four kinds of f
ood.ﬂ Here a truth about t
he Lord is de
clared in
a Smriti p
as
sage and from it we may
 in
fer that t
he V
aisvanara V
idya
t
aught in the Chhandogy
a Up
anishad also re
fers to this my
s
tery of t
he
Lord. Hence V
aisvanara is the High
est Lord. There
fore it is a set
tled
con
clu
sion that the S
u
preme Lord is re
ferred to in the t
ext.
In the f
ol
low
ing Su
tra the au
thor re
moves the doubt
 that t
he
V
aisvanara may de
note the gas
tric fire.
eãXm{
Xä`mo@
ÝV–à{
Vð>mZ
m… Zo{
VMoÞ V
Wm

 Ñï>ç
wnXoemXgå^dmËnwé
f_{n M¡
Sabdadibhy
o™nt
ahpratisthanacc
ha neti chet na t
atha

drishty
up
adesat asambhav
at purushamapi
 chainamad
hiy
ate
I.2.
26 (57)
If it be said that (Vaisvan
ara is) not
 (Brahman)
 or the Highest
Lord on account of t
he term (viz.,
 Vaisvanara w
hich has a
diffe
ren
t se
ttle
d me
aning v
iz., gas
tric fire
) e
tc., and
 on a
cco
unt
of his abiding w
ithin
 (which
 is a charact
eristic of t
he gastric
fire) (we say) no,
 because
 there is the instr
uction to conceive
(Brahman)
 as such (as the gastr
ic fir
e, be
cause it is impossible
for the
 gastri
c fire
 to ha
ve
 the
 he
ave
n e
tc., for i
ts he
ad a
nd
other limbs) and also because they (the Vajasaneyins) describe
him (viz.
 the Vaisvanara) as man
 (which t
erm cannot apply to
the
 gastri
c fire
).
Sabdadibhy
ah:
 on account of the word;
Ant
ah:
 within;
Pratishthanat:
 because of abiding;
Cha:
 and;
Na:
not;
Iti ch
et:
 if it be
said;
Na:
 not so;
T
atha:
 thus, as such;
Drishty
up
adesat:
on account
of the instructi
ons to conceive it;

Asambhav
at:
 because of
impossib
ility;
Purusham:
 as person;
Api:
 also;
Cha:
 and;
Evam:
him;
Adhiy
ate:
 (they) describe.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 24 is con
tin
ued.
The Purvap
akshin raises the fol
low
ing ob
jec
tion. The or
di
nary
mean
ing of ﬁV
aisvanaraﬂ is fire. More
over scrip
ture speaks of the
V
aisvanara as abid
ing within. ﬁHe knows him abid
ing within manﬂ Sat
.
Br
. 10-6-1-1
1 which ap
plies to the gas
tric fire only
. There
fore the gas
-
tric fire alone and not B
rah
man is re
ferred to in the t
ext un
der dis
cus
-
sion.
This Su
tra re
futes this ob
jec
tion. The S
iddhantin giv
es the fol
-
low
ing re
ply
. The Sruti
 here teaches the wor
ship of Brah
man in the
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 2
71

gas
tric fire by way
 of med
i
t
a
tion (Up
asana) anal
o
gously to such p
as
-
sages as ﬁLet a man med
i
t
ate on the mi
nd as Brah
manﬂ Chh. Up.
III-18
-1.
More
over the gas
tric fire can
not have heav
en for it
s head, and
so on. Fur
ther the V
ajasaneyins con
sider V
aisvanara as a man
(Purusha). ﬁThis Agni V
aisvanara is a manﬂ Sat.
 Br
. 10.6.
1-1
1.
There
fore ﬁV
aisvanaraﬂ here re
fers to Brah
man only
. In t
he fol
-
low
ing Su
tra the au
thor set
s aside the view that
 V
aisvanara of thi
s
p
as
sage means the Devat
a called Agni or the el
e
men
t
al fire.
AV Ed Z X
odVm ^y
At
a ev
a na dev
at
a bhut
am cha
I.2.
27 (58)
For the same reasons (the Vaisvanara) cannot be the deity (fir
e)
or the
 el
em
en
t (fire
).
At
a ev
a
: for the same reasons;
Na:
 (is) not;

Dev
at
a:
 the presiding
deity of
 fire;
Bhut
am:
 the element
of fire;

Cha:
 and.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 24 is con
tin
ued.
The Purvap
akshin says: the pre
sid
ing de
ity of
 fire is a mighty
be
ing. He is en
dowed with great lord
li
ness and power
. There
fore
heaven, et
c., may
 very ap
pro
pri
ately be i
t
s head and other mem
bers.
There
fore the p
as
sage may very well
 ap
ply to hi
m.
For the same rea
sons stat
ed in Su
tra 26 V
aisvanara is nei
ther
the di
vin
ity of
 fire nor the el
e
ment of f
ire. The el
e
men
t
al fire is mere
heat and light.
 The heaven and so on can
not prop
erly be as
cribed as
it
s head and so on, be
cause an ef

fect can not be the S
elf of an
other ef

-
fect. A
gain the heav
enly world can
not be as
cribed as head, etc., t
o
the god of f
ire, be
cause it is not the S
u
preme Cause but a mere ef

fectand it
s power or glory de
pends on the Su
preme Lord. T
o them the
word ﬁAt
manﬂ could not ap
pro
pri
ately be ap
pli
ca
ble at all.
gmjmXß`{
damoY
§ O¡
{_{
Z–
Sakshadapy
av
irodham
 Jaimi
nih
I.2.
28 (59)
Jaimini (de
clares that the
re is) no c
ontradiction e
ven (if by
Vaisvanara)
 (Brahman i
s) directly (t
aken as the obje
ct of
worship).
Sakshat:
 directly;

Api:
 also, even;

A
v
irodham:
 no objection, no
contradiction;
Jaiminih
:
 (so say
s) Jaim
ini.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 24 is con
tin
ued.
Jaimini says that
 it is not nec
es
sary to st
ate that
 what is meant
by V
aisvanara is fire as a sym
bol of God and that
 the view t
hat it
means Brah
man di
rectly and in a pri
mary sense is quite con
sis
tent
and ap
pro
pri
ate. The v
ery word ‚V
aisvanara™
 means the to
t
al
ity of
 life
and ap
plies to Brah
man as he is the Soul of
 all (Sarvat
matvat
).
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
72

This Su
tra de
clares that ‚V
aisvanara™
 can be t
aken di
rectly to
mean Brah
man as an ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion, be
cause V
aisvanara also
means the uni
ver
sal man i.e.,
 the all-per
vad
ing Brah
man Him
self. As
the word V
aisvanara lit
er
ally means ﬁHe to whom be
long all menﬂ or
ﬁwho is the leader (Nara) of all (V
isva)ﬂ so the word V
aisvanara de
-
notes
ety mo l
ogi cally
the
Su preme
Brah man.
A{^ì`ºo$[aË`m
&
Abhiv
y
akterity
asmarathy
ah
I.2.
29 (60)
On account of the manif
estation, so says Aasmarat
hya.
Abhiv
y
akteh:
 because of manifest
ation; I
ti: t
hus, so;
Aasmarathy
ah:
 (says) Asmarathya.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 24 is con
tin
ued.
In the Chhandogya Up
anishad un
der dis
cus
sion V
aisvanara is
de
scribed as hav
ing the size of a sp
an. How can the In
fi
nite Brah
man
be lim
ited by t
he mea
sure of a Pradesa or a span? T
o this ob
jec
tion
the au
thor gives his an
swer in the fol
low
ing Su
tra.
The sage Aasmarathya says t
hat for the ben
e
fit of
 the wor
ship
-
per
the
In fi nit
e
Brah man
man i fest
s
Him self
in
the
fi nite
in di vid u all
y
be
-
ing local
ised in lim
ited places such as the body or the heart of
 the
hu
man be
ing. There
fore there is no in
con
gru
ity i
n us
ing the word
ﬁV
aisvanaraﬂ (even st
and
ing for the gas
tric fire) to sig
nify B
rah
man.
Even t
hough Brah
man is all-per
vad
ing, yet
 He spe
cially man
i
fest
s
Him
self as ex
tend
ing from heaven t
o earth or in the heart f
or the sake
of His dev
o
tees.
Asmarathya say
s that the I
n
fi
nite is real
ised through His grace
in the lim
ited sp
ace of men
t
al im
age in the mind or a phy
s
i
cal im
age
with
out. The dev

o tees who med
i
t
ate on Brah
man in their heart as
hav
ing the size of a sp
an, see Him of that
 size, be
cause He man
i
fest
s
Him
self to them
 in that f
orm.
This is the opin
ion of Aasmarathy
a.
Hence, ac
cord
ing to the opin
ion of the t
eacher Aasmarathya the
scrip
tural tex
t which speaks of Him who is mea
sured by a sp
an may
re
fer to the S
u
preme Self or t
he High
est Lord.
AZwñ_¥Vo~
m©X[
&
Anusmriterbadarih
I.2.
30 (61)
For the sake of me
ditation or
 constant r
eme
mbranceŠso says
the sage Badari.
Anusmriteh:
 for the sake of medit
ation or const
ant remembrance;
Baadarih:
 (so says) the sage Baadari.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 24 is con
tin
ued.
The sage Baadari is of opin
ion that t
his mea
sure of a span i
s a
men t
al
de vice
to
fa cil i t
ate
med i t
a tion.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 2
73

He says that the size of t
he thumb re
fers to a men
t
al im
age and
not to t
he ac
tual size.
The Su
preme Lord may be called ‚mea
sured by a sp
an™
 be
-
cause He is re
mem
bered or med
i
t
ated, by
 means of the mind,
 which
is seated in the heart which is mea
sured by a sp
an. The size of the
heart is that of
 a span.
 As Brah
man is med
i
t
ated as abid
ing in the lo
-
tus of the heart
, the as
pi
rant in
vol
un
t
arily as
so
ci
ates him with t
he size
of a sp
an. This men
t
al as
so
ci
a
tion or Anusmriti
 is the cause why
Brah
man is called Pradesamatra, t
he mea
sure of a span.
There
fore V
aisvanara may well st
and for Brah
man.
gånÎmo[
a{V O¡{_{ZñVWm {h Xe©`
Samp
atteriti jai
mini
st
atha hi darsay
ati
I.2.
31 (62)
Be
cause
 of imaginary id
entity the
 Supre
me Lo
rd may be
 calle
d
Pradesamatra (span long)
. So says Jai
mini because so
 (the
Sruti) dec
lares.
Samp
atteh:
 because of imaginary ident
ity;
 Iti:
 thus, so;
Jaimini:
(says)
 Jaimini;
T
atha:
 in this way;
Hi:
 because;
Darsay
ati:
 (the Sruti)
declares.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 24 is con
tin
ued.
Jaimini says that
 the de
scrip
tion re
fers to a st
ate of reali
sa
tion of
form be
tween the crown of the head and t
he chin in your body
. The
cos mic
be ing
is
wor shipped
through
the
iden ti fi
 ca tion
of
dif
 fer ent
p
art
s of His with the dif

fer ent p
art
s of the wor
ship
per
™
s body from the
top of head t
o the chin. The head of
 the medit
ator or wor
ship
per is
heaven, t
he eyes the sun and the moon,
 and so on. In this med
i
t
a
tion
the cos
mic be
ing is lim
ited to t
he size of a sp
an, the dis
t
ance from the
crown of the head to the chin.
 Hence Jaimini says that t
he High
est
Lord in the p
as
sage un
der dis
cus
sion is con
sid
ered as of the size of a
span.
The Sruti also de
clares ﬁThe teacher said, point
ing to his own
head. ‚This is the High
est V
aisvanara™
 i.e. t
he head of the
V
aisvanaraﬂŠV
ajasaneyi Brahmana.
Am_ZpÝV M¡Z_pñ_Z² &
Amananti chai
namasmi
n
I.2.
32 (63)
Mo
reo
ve
r the
y (the
 Jab
alas
) te
ach th
at this
 (Sup
rem
e L
ord
 is to

be m
edi
ta
ted
 upo
n)
 in
 th
is
 (t
he s
pa
ce b
etw
een t
he h
ead
 an
d
the chin)
.
Amananti:
 (they) speak, teach, recit
e, declare;
Cha:
 moreover
, also,
and;
Enam:
 this
;
Asmin
:
 in this.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 24 is con
cluded.
More
over the Jabalas speak in their tex
t of t
he Su
preme Lord in
the in
ter
me
di
ate sp
ace be
tween the top of
 the head and the chin.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
74

Jabala Sruti also says so. It
 says that He is to be real
ised
A
vimukt
a (full lib
er
a
tion) be
tween V
arana (sin preventor) and Nasi
(sin de
stroyer).
Jabala Upani
shad says ﬁWhat is the place? The place where
the eye-brows and the nose join. That
 is the join
ing place of the heav

-
enly world rep
re
sented by the up
per p
art of the head and of
 the other
i.e. t
he earthly world rep
re
sented by the chin.
ﬂ
Sutras 27 to 32 de
clare that the ref

er ence to the Su
preme Lord
by the t
erm ﬁPradesamatra as ex
tend
ing from heaven t
o the earth or
as mea
sured by a sp
anﬂ is quite ap
pro
pri
ate.
By all t
his it is proved that
 V
aisvanara is the Su
preme Lord.
See Jabala Up
anishad-1.
Thus ends the Sec
ond Pada (Sec
tion 2) of the First
 Adhy
ay
a
(Chap
ter I) of the
 Brahma-Sutras of
 the V
edant
a Phi
los
o
phy
.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 2
75

CHAPTER I
SECTION 3
INTRODUCTION
In the last S
ec
tion tex
t
s of doubt

ful im port were in
ter
preted to re
-
fer to Brah
man. Some ot
her ex
pres
sions pre
scribed for di
vine con
-
tem
pla
tion in dif

fer ent Sruti
s, not al
ready dis
cussed in Sec
tion 2 are
now t
aken up for dis
cus
sion to prove that
 they all
 in
di
cate the same
In fi nit
e
Brah man.
In the First S
ec
tion of t
he First Chap
ter the au
thor (Sutrakara)
took up the terms which re
ferred to the man
i
fested world such as
Akasa (ether), Prana (en
ergy), Jyoti
 (light) and showed that t
hey re
-
ally re
fer to Brah
man. In t
he Sec
ond Sec
tion the au
thor took up the
terms which re
ferred to the hu
man body and showed that t
hey re
fer to
Brah
man. The Sec
tion re
ferred to the S
aguna as
pect of Brah
man.
The Third Sec
tion re
fers to the Nirguna as
pect of Brah
man. Here the
sub
ject of dis
cus
sion is to Para Brah
man or the Su
preme Nirguna
Brah man.
76

SYNOPSIS
Some other p
as
sages pre
scribed for med
i
t
a
tion in dif

fer ent
Srutis, not
 al
ready dis
cussed in Sec
tion-2 are now t
aken up for dis
-
cus
sion to prove that
 they all
 in
di
cate the same In
fi
nite,
Satchidananda,
all-per vad ing,
eter nal,
Im mor t
al
Brah man.
Adhikarana I:
 (Sutras 1-7) proves that that
 within which the
heaven, t
he earth etc.,
 are wo
ven (Mun. Up. I
I-2-5) is Brah
man.
Adhikarana II:
 (Sutras 8-9) shows that the Bhuma re
ferred to in
Chh. Up. VI
I-23 is Brah
man.
Adhikarana III
:
 (Sutras 10-12) teaches that the A
kshara (the Im
-
per
ish
able one) of Bri.
 Up. III
-8-8 in which the ether is wo
ven is Brah
-
man.
Adhikarana IV
:
 (Su
tra 13) de
cides that the High
est Per
son who
is to be med
i
t
ated upon with t
he syl
la
ble OM ac
cord
ing to Prasna Up.
V
-5 is not the lower but t
he higher Brah
man.
Adhikarana V
:
 (Sutras 14-21) shows that the small ether
(Daharakasa)
 within the lo
tus of the heart
 men
tioned in Chh. Up.
VIII-1 is
 Brah

man.Adhikarana VI:
 (Sutras 22-23) proves that he af

ter whom ev ery
-
thing shines, by whose light
 all this is light
edŠKatha Up. I
I-2-15Šis
not some ma
te
rial lu
mi
nous body
, but B
rah
man it

self.Adhikarana VII
:
 (Sutras 24-25) de
cides that the per
son of the
size of a thumb men
tioned in Kat
ha Up. II-1-12 is not t
he in
di
vid
ual
soul but Brah
man.
Adhikarana VII
I:
 (Sutras 26-33) The next t
wo Adhikaranas are
of the na
ture of a di
gres
sion. They raise a side is
sue and de
cide that
de
i
ties are equally en
ti
tled to prac
tise Brahma V
idya as pre
scribed in
the V
edas. Sutras 29 and 30 es
t
ab
lish the con
clu
sion that the V
edas
are eter
nal.
Adhikarana IX:
 (Sutras 34-38) ex
plains that S
udras are al
to
-
gether not en
ti
tled for B
rahma V
idya.
Adhikarana X:
 (Su
tra 39) proves that t
he Prana in which ev
ery
-
thing trem
bles ac
cord
ing to Kat
ha Up. II-3-2 is Brah
man.
Adhikarana XI:
 (Su
tra 40) proves that t
he ‚light™
 (Jyoti) men
-
tioned in Chh. Up.
VII
I-12-3 is the High
est Brah
man.
Adhikarana XII
:
 (Su
tra 41) de
cides that the et
her which re
veals
names and forms (Chh. Up. VI
II-14) is not t
he el
e
men
t
al ether but
Brah man.
Adhikarana XII
I:
 (Sutras 42-43) teaches that the
V
ijnanamayaŠhe who con
sist
s of knowl
edge of Bri.
 Up. IV
-3-7 is not
the in
di
vid
ual soul but Brah
man.
77

Dy
ubhv
ady
adhikaranam
 : T
opic 1 (Sutras 1-7)
The abode of heaven, earth et
c. is Brahm
an
ÚwädmÚm`V
Z§ ñdeã
Dy
ubhv
ady
ay
at
anam sv
asabdat
I.3.
1 (64)
T
he abode
 of heaven, earth, etc.,
 (is Brahman
) on account of
the
 term
, ‚ow
n™ i.e
., ‚Se
lf™.
Dy
u:
 heaven;
Bhu:
 earth;
Adi:
 and the rest;
A
y
at
anam:
 abode;
Sva:
own;
Sabdat:
 from the word (
Sv
a sabdat:
 on account of the word
‚Self
™).
An ex
pres
sion from the Mundaka Up
anishad is t
aken up for dis
-
cus sion.
Para Brah
man is the ba
sis or rest
ing place of heaven,
 earth etc.,

as the term At

man in dic
a
tive of
 Him is found in the p
as
sage. W
e read
in Mundaka Up
anishad II-2-5 ﬁHe in whom the heaven,
 the earth, and
the sky are wo
ven, as also the mi
nd with all the senses, know Him
alone as the Self
, and leave of
f other t
alk! He is the bridge of im

mor t
al
-
ity
.ﬂ
Here the doubt arises whether the abode is the Su
preme Brah
-
man or some
thing else.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent holds that t
he abode is
some
thing else on ac
count of the ex

pres sion ﬁHe is the bridge of im
-
mor
t
al
ityﬂ.
 He says: it is known from daily
 ex
pe
ri
ence that a bridge
t
akes one to some fur
ther bank. It
 is im
pos
si
ble to as
sume some
thing
be
yond the S
u
preme Brah
man, be
cause the Srutis de
clare, ﬁBrah
-
man is end
less with
out a shoreﬂ Bri. Up. I
I-4-12. As the P
radhana is
the gen
eral cause, it may be call
ed the gen
eral abode. Or the
Sutratm
an may be the abode.
 The Srutis say ﬁAi
r is that thread,
 O
Gaut
ama! By
 air as by a thread O Gaut
ama! this world and the ot
her
world and all be
ings are strung to
getherﬂ Bri. Up. I
II-7-2. S
o the air
sup
port
s all things. Or else the Jiv
a may be the abode wit
h ref
er
ence
to the ob
ject
s of en
joy
ment as he is the enjoy
er
.
He who is spo
ken of as the abode, in whom t
he earth, heaven
etc., are wo
ven is Brah
man only
, on ac
count of the t
erm ‚Own™
 or ‚Self™

which is ap
pro
pri
ate only i
f Brah
man is re
ferred to in the t
ext and not
Pradhana or Sutratm
an. (W
e meet with t
he word ‚Self
™
 in the p
as
-
sageŠﬁKnow him alone as the Self
ﬂ).
Brah
man is spo
ken of in the Srut
i as the gen
eral abode by it
s
own terms i.e. by
 terms prop
erly des
ig
nat
ing Brah
man as, for in
-
st
ance, ﬁAll these crea
tures, my dear
, have t
heir root in the be
ing,
their abode in the be
ing, their rest in t
he be
ingﬂ (Chh. Up. VI-8-4).
In the t
ext
s pre
ced
ing and fol
low
ing this one, i.
e. in Mun. Up.
II-1-10 and II
-2-1
1 Brah
man is spo
ken of. There
fore it is only
 proper to
in
fer that B
rah
man only is re
ferred to in the i
n
ter
ven
ing text
s which is
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
78

un
der dis
cus
sion. In the t
ext
s cited above men
tion is made of an
abode and that which abides. I
n Mundaka Upani
shad II-2-1
1 we read:
ﬁBrah
man in
deed is all this.ﬂ From t
his a doubt may arise that
 Brah
-
man is of a man
i
fold var
ie
gated na
ture, just as in t
he case of a tree
con
sist
ing of leav
es, branches, stem, root et
c. In or
der to re
move thi
s
doubt the t
ext de
clares in the p
as
sage un
der dis
cus
sion ﬁKnow Him
alone as the Self
ﬂ i.e. know the Se
lf alone and not t
hat which is merely
a prod
uct of A
vidya (ig
no
rance) and is false or il
lu
sory
. An
other scrip
-
tural tex
t re
proves the man who thinks that
 this world is real. ﬁFrom
death to deat
h goes he who be
holds any dif

fer ence hereﬂ (Katha Up.
II-4
-1
1).
The st
ate
ment ﬁAll i
s Brah
manﬂ aims at dis
solv
ing the wrong
con
cep
tion of t
he re
al
ity of
 the world. It
 does not in
ti
mate that
 Brah
-
man
is
of
man i fold,

var ie gated
na ture.
The
ho mo ge neous
na ture
of
Brah
man is clearly st
ated in the S
rutis. ﬁAs a mass of salt has nei
ther
in
side nor out

side, but is al to
gether a mass of t
aste, thus in
deed has
that S
elf (Brah
man) nei
ther in
side nor out

side, but is al to
gether a
mass of knowl
edgeﬂ (Bri. Up. IV
-5-13). For all these rea
sons the
abode of heaven,
 earth etc.,
 is the Su
preme Brah
man.
The word Setu (bridge) in the words ‚
Am
rit
asyaisa Setuh
™
 (He is
the bridge of im
mor
t
al
ity) merely
 re
fers to His be
ing the ba
sis of ev
ery
cre
ated ob
ject and the means of i
m
mor
t
al
ity
. The word ‚bridge™
 is
meant to in
ti
mate only
 that which is called a bridge that
 sup
port
s, not
that it
 has a fur
ther bank. Y
ou should not think that
 the bridge meant i
s
like an or
di
nary bridge made of wood or stone. B
e
cause the word
‚Setu™
 is de
rived from t
he root ‚Si™
 which means to bind. The word con
-
veys the i
dea of hold
ing to
gether or sup
port
ing.
_wº$mon
g¥ß`ì
`nX
oemV
² &
Muktop
asripy
av
y
ap
adesat
I.3.
2 (65)
Be
cau
se
 of the
 de
clara
tion (
in the
 scrip
ture
s) tha
t that is
 to b
e
attain
ed
 by the
 libe
rate
d.
Mukt
a up
asripy
a:
 to be att
ained by the l
iberated;
V
y
ap
adesat:
because of declaration.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra I is giv
en.
The above word ﬁDyubhvady
ayat
anamﬂ re
fers to Para Brah
-
man, also be
cause He is de
scribed as at
t
ained by the em
an
ci
p
ated
soul.
A
 fur
ther rea
son is given to in
ti
mate that
 Brah
man is meant in
the p
as
sage un
der dis
cus
sion. Brah
man is the goal of t
he eman
ci
-
p
ated. That
 Brah
man is that which is to be re
sorted to by t
he lib
er
ated
is known from other scrip
tural p
as
sages such as
 ﬁThe fet
ter of the
heart is bro
ken, all doubt
s are solved, all his works per
ish when He
who is the higher and the lower has been be
heldﬂ Mun. Up. I
I-2-8.
ﬁThe wise man freed from name and form
 goes to the di
vine Per
son
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
79

who is greater than the greatﬂ (Mun. Up.
 III
.2-8). ﬁWhen all de
sires
which once en
tered his heart are de
stroyed then does the m
or
t
al be
-
come im
mor
t
al, then he ob
t
ains Brah
manﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
-4-7).
No
where you will find t
hat the P
radhana and sim
i
lar en
ti
ties are
to be re
sorted to by t
he eman
ci
p
ated.
W
e read in the Bri.
 Up. IV
-4-21, ﬁLet a wise Brahmana af

ter hehas dis
cov
ered Him, prac
tise wis
dom. Let him
 not seek af

ter manywords, be
cause that is mere wea
ri
ness of the tongue.ﬂ For t
his rea
-
son also the abode of heaven,
 earth, etc.
, is the Su
preme Brah
man.
ZmZw_
mZ_VÀN
>ãX
Nanumanamat
acchabdat
I.3.
3 (66)
(The ab
od
e o
f he
ave
n e
tc.) is
 not tha
t which i
s infe
rred
 i.e
.
Pradhana because
 there is no term indicatin
g it.
Na:
 not;
Anumanam:
 that which is inferred i.
e.
Pradhana;

At
ad
sabdat:
 because there is no word denoting it.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is con
tin
ued.
The abode re
ferred to in Su
tra 1 does not in
di
cate Pradhana be
-
cause there is no such ex
pres
sion in the said Mundaka Up
anishad as
can be con
strued to in
di
cate Pradhana or mat
ter
. On the con
trary
such terms as ﬁHe who k
nows all (Sarvajna) un
der
st
ands all
(Sarvavit
)ﬂ (Mun. Up. I-1-9) in
ti
mate an in
tel
li
gent be
ing op
posed to
Pradhana in na
ture. For the same rea
son the air (Sutratm
an) can
not
be ac
cepted as the abode of heav
en, earth etc.
àmU^
Pranabhri
ccha
I.3.
4 (67)
(Nor) also
 the individ
ual sou
l.
Pranabhrit:
 the liv
ing or individual soul,
 supporter of Prana, i.
e., Jiv
a;
Cha
: also; (
Na:
 not).
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is con
tin
ued.
The word ‚not™
 is un
der
stood here from the pre
ced
ing Su
tra.
Al
though the in
di
vid
ual soul is an in
tel
li
gent be
ing and can
there
fore be de
noted by t
he word ‚Self
™
 yet om
ni
science and sim
i
lar
qual
i
ties do not be
long to him,
 as his knowl
edge is lim
ited by t
he ad
-
junct
s. He can
not be
come the rest
ing place or abode of the en
tire
world as he is lim
ited and there
fore not om
ni
pres
ent.
The in
di
vid
ual soul can
not be ac
cepted as the abode of heav
en,
earth etc.,
 for the fol

low ing rea
son also.
&
Bhedav
y
ap
adesat
I.3.
5 (68)
(Also)
 on accoun
t of
 the declar
ati
on of di
ff
erence (between)
indi
vidual
 soul an
d th
e abode of heaven etc.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
80

Bhedav
y
ap
adesat
: on account of dif
ference being mentioned.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is con
tin
ued.
In the t
ext un
der dis
cus
sion viz., ﬁK
now him alone as the Self
(At
man)ﬂ (Mun. Up. II
-2-5), there is a dec
la
ra
tion of dif

fer ence. The in
-
di
vid
ual soul who is de
sir
ous of eman
ci
p
a
tion is the K
nower and
abode of heaven is t
he thing to be known. B
rah
man which is de
noted
by the word ‚Sel
f
™
 and rep
re
sented as the ob
ject of knowl
edge is un
-
der
stood to be the abode of
 heaven, earth and so on.
For the fol
low
ing rea
son also the in
di
vid
ual soul can
not be ac
-
cepted as the abode of heav
en, earth etc.
Prakaranat
I.3.
6 (69)
On a
cco
unt o
f the
 sub
je
ct ma
tter.
Prakaranat:
 On account of the subject mat
ter
, from t
he context.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is con
tin
ued.
The Su
preme Brah
man is the sub
ject mat
ter of the en
tire chap
-
ter
. Y
ou can un
der
st
and this from the p
as
sage ﬁSir
, what is that
through which when it is known, ev
ery
thing else be
comes known?ﬂ
Mun. Up. I
-1-3. Here the knowl
edge of ev
ery
thing is said to be de
-
pend
ent on the knowl
edge of one thing.
 Be
cause all this i.e. t
he whole
uni
verse be
comes known if Brah
man the Self
 of all is known, but not
 if
only the i
n
di
vid
ual soul is known.
The Mundaka Up
anishad be
gins with ‚what is that
 through
which™
 and con
cludes by say
ing ﬁThe knower of the Brah
man be
-
comes Brah
manﬂ III
-2-9. This clearly in
ti
mates that t
he sub
ject mat
ter
of the whole Up
anishad from the be
gin
ning to the end is B
rah
man
only
. Hence it is the same B
rah
man which is spo
ken of as the rest
ing
place of heaven,
 earth and so on.
An
other rea
son against the in
di
vid
ual soul is given in t
he fol
low
-
ing Su
tra.
S
thity
adanabhy
am cha
I.3.
7 (70)
And on ac
count
 of t
he two c
ondit
ions of
 remain
ing
 unat
tach
ed
and
 ea
ting (o
f which th
e fo
rme
r is ch
arac
teri
stic o
f the
Sup
rem
e S
el
f, the
 latte
r of the
 indi
vid
ual
 sou
l).
S
thiti
:
 abiding, ex
istence;
Adanabhy
am:
 eating;
Cha:
and.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is con
cluded.
W
e read in Mundakop
anishad III-1-1.
 ﬁT
wo birds, in
sep
a
ra
ble
friends cling to the same t
ree. One of them
 eat
s the sweet fruit,
 the
other looks on (re
mains as a wit
ness).ﬂ The pas
sage re
fers to Brah
-
man as Self-poised bliss and to t
he in
di
vid
ual soul as eat
ing the sweet
and bit
ter fruit
s of ac
tions. Here Brah
man is de
scribed as the si
lent
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
81

wit
ness. The p
as
sage de
scribes the con
di
tion of mere in
ac
tive pres
-
ence of Brah
man. The in
di
vid
ual soul eat
s the fruit
s of his works viz.
plea
sure and pain and t
here
fore he is dif

fer ent from B
rah
man. The
two st
ates viz. mere pres
ence and the en
joy
ment in
di
cate that B
rah
-
man and the in
di
vid
ual soul are re
ferred to. Thi
s de
scrip
tion which
dis
tin
guishes the two can be apt only i
f the abode of
 heaven etc. i
s
Brah
man. Oth
er
wise there will be no con
ti
nu
ity of
 topic.
It can
not be said that t
he p
as
sage merely de
scribes the na
ture
of the in
di
vid
ual soul, be
cause it is no
where the pur
pose of the scrip
-
ture to de
scribe the in
di
vid
ual soul. The in
di
vid
ual soul is known to ev
-
ery
one as agent and enjoyer
. Or
di
nary ex
pe
ri
ence tells us noth
ing of
Brah
man. Brah
man is the spe
cial topic of all scrip
tural tex
t
s. The pur
-
pose of the scrip
tures is al
ways to de
scribe and es
t
ab
lish Brah
man
which is not well known.
Bhumadhi
karanam: T
opic 2 (Sutras 8-9)
Bhum
a is Brahman
^y_
mgåàgmXmX
Ü`wnX
oemV²
Bhuma samprasad
adadhy
up
adesat
I.3.
8 (71)
Bhuma (is Brahman)
 because
 it is t
aught aft
er the state of
dee
p slee
p (i.e. after Pran
a or the vital air
 which r
emains awake
eve
n in th
at stat
e).
Bhuma:
 the vast,
 the Inf
inite, t
he full;
Samprasadat adh
i:
 beyond the
st
ate of deep sleep (here the v
it
al principle or Prana);
Up
adesat:
because of the teaching.
The term ‚Bhum
a™
 does not de
note nu
mer
i
cal large
ness but per
-
va
sion in the shape of ful
ness. Samprasada means the un
dis
turbed
place or bliss hence the st
ate of deep sleep, when t
hat bliss is en
-
joyed. ‚
Adhi™
 means above, be
yond.
Bhuma de
notes Brah
man, be
cause it is de
scribed in Sruti to be
above Prana, which is here rep
re
sented by the bl
iss en
joyed dur
ing
deep sleep. Bhuma re
fers to Brah
man as the p
as
sage teaches an en
-
tity
 higher than Samprasada i.e.
 Prana or vi
t
al air which is awake and
ac
tive ev
en in deep sleep.
An ex
pres
sion from the Chhandogya Up
anishad is now t
aken
up for dis
cus
sion. In the sev

enth chap ter of the Chhandogy
a
Up
anishad Sanatkumara gives in
struc
tions to Narada. He be
gins
with ‚name™
 and t
akes the stu
dent step by st
ep. He goes higher and
higher and ul
ti
mately
 teaches the high
est truth which is Bhuma or t
he
In
fi
nite. S
anatkumara says to Narada ﬁBhuma is Bli
ss. Y
ou should de
-
sire to un
der
st
and where one sees noth
ing else, hears noth
ing else,
un
der
st
ands noth
ing else, that
 is Bhuma.ﬂ VI
II-22-24.
Here the doubt arises whether Bhuma is the v
i
t
al air or Brah
man
(the Su
preme Self).
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
82

The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent main
t
ains that the v
i
t
al air is
Bhuma. He says: Narada ap
proaches Sanatkumara for ini
ti
a
tion into
the mys
ter
ies of At
man. W
e meet with a se
ries of ques
tions and an
-
swers suc
h as ﬁIs there any
thing greater than a nam
e? S
peech is
greater than name. I
s there any
thing greater than speech? Mind is
greater than speech which ex
tends from name up t
o vi
t
al airﬂ. Then
Narada does not ask whether there is any higher truth. B
ut still
Sanatkumara giv
es an ex
po
si
tion on Bhuma.
 This in
ti
mates that
Bhuma is not dif

fer ent from t
he vi
t
al air t
aught al
ready
.
Fur
ther he calls the knower of the vi

tal air an Ativ
adin i.e.,
 one
who makes a stat
e
ment sur
p
ass
ing pre
ced
ing st
ate
ment
s. This
clearly shows that the v
i
t
al air is the high
est T
ruth.
This Su
tra re
futes the ar
gu
ment and says that
 Bhuma is Brah
-
man. Sanat
kumara dis
tinctly
 says to NaradaŠﬁBut v
er
ily he is an
Ativ
adin who de
clares the high
est Be
ing to be the T
rue (Satya)ﬂ Chh.
Up. VII
-16-1. This clearly in
di
cates that it
 re
fers to some
thing higher
than Prana or the v
i
t
al air
. One can be
come truly an A
tivadi
n by know
-
ing this Su
preme T
ruth only
.
Though Narada does not ask Sanatkumara ﬁIs there any
thing
greater than the v
i
t
al air?ﬂ, a new topic about B
rah
man (Bhuma)
which is the Su
preme T
ruth is be
gun. Narada said to Sanat
kumara
ﬁSir
, may I
 be
come an Ativ
adin through the T
ruth.ﬂ Sanat
kumara
leads Narada step by step, st
age by st
age to the knowl
edge of Brah
-
man or Bhuma and in
struct
s him that t
his Bhuma is Brah
man.
Narada at first lis
tens to the in
struc
tion giv
en by Sanat
kumara
on var
i
ous mat
ters, the last of
 which is Prana and then be
comes si
-
lent. There
upon the wise Sanatkumara ex

plains to him spon t
a
ne
-
ously with
out be
ing asked that he only i
s an Ativadi
n who has
knowl
edge of the High
est T
ruth, and that
 the knowl
edge of vi
t
al air
which is an un
real prod
uct is des
ti
tute of
 sub
st
ance. By t
he term ﬁThe
T
rueﬂ is meant the Su
preme Brah
man, be
cause Brah
man is the only
Re
al
ity
. Sanat
kumara there
upon leads Narada by a se
ries of step
s
be
gin
ning with un
der
st
and
ing up to the knowl
edge of Bhuma.
 W
e,
there
fore, con
clude that the B
huma is the Su
preme Brah
man, and
that it
 is dif

fer ent from P
rana or the vi
t
al air
.
If P
rana or the vi
t
al air were the Bhuma t
hen Sanatkumara
would not have con
tin
ued his in
struc
tions. He would have stopped hi
s
in
struc
tions af

ter say ing ﬁPrana is greater than hopeﬂ (VII
-15-1). But
he gives a clear de
scrip
tion of t
he na
ture of Bhum
a in Sec
tions 23, 24,
25 of the same chap
ter
. There
fore Bhuma alone is B
rah
man or the
High est
T
ruth.
Self
hood does not be
long to Prana.
 More
over one can free him
-
self from grief onl
y by knowl
edge of the S
u
preme Brah
man. Brah
man
only is All
 Full. B
huma means also fulness. The qual
ity of
 the Bhuma
agrees best with the Su
preme Brah
man which is the cause, source,
sup
port and sub
stra
tum for ev

ery thing. B
huma is t
aught as the last of
the se
ries. It is I
n
fi
nite Bli
ss. There
fore it is the hi
gh
est of all.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
83

The med
i
t
a
tion on Prana is higher than m
ed
i
t
a
tion on Name up
to hope. There
fore he who thus med
i
t
ates on Prana is called an
Ativ
adin. He is an Ati
vadin com
p
ared with those be
low him. But
 the
med
i
t
a
tion on the S
u
preme Brah
man is su
pe
rior even to that
 on
Prana. Hence he who med
i
t
ates on Brah
man or the Bhuma i
s the real
Ativ
adin.
Narada thought that
 the in
struc
tion about t
he At
man is now
com
pleted. There
fore he did not ask any f
ur
ther ques
tion.
Sanatkumara knew that t
he knowl
edge of Prana is not t
he high
est
knowl edge.
There fore
he
spon t
a ne ously
con tin ues
his
teach ing
to
Narada and tells him that
 the knowl
edge of Brah
man or the Bhuma i
s
the high
est knowl
edge. The Srut
is say that P
rana springs from Brah
-
man. There
fore Prana is in
fe
rior to Brah
man. Brah
man alone is the
Bhuma of t
he p
as
sage of the Chhandogya Up
anishad un
der dis
cus
-
sion.
Y_m}nn
Dharmop
ap
attescha
I.3.
9 (72)
And becau
se the attributes (declared in the scriptural passage
to Bhum
a) apply
 appropr
iat
ely only
 to Par
a Brah
man.
Dharma:
 qualities, at
tributes;
Up
ap
atteh:
 because of the suit
ability
;
Cha:
 and.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 8 is given.
The at
trib
utes which the scrip
ture at
trib
utes to the B
huma agree
well with Brah
man. In t
he Bhuman the or
di
nary ac
tiv
i
ties of see
ing
etc. are ab
sent. The Srut
i de
clares ﬁwhere one s
ees noth
ing else,
hears noth
ing else, un
der
st
ands noth
ing else, that
 is the Bhumaﬂ. W
e
know from an
other text
 that t
his is the char
ac
ter
is
tic of the S
u
preme
Self.
 ﬁBut when the A
t
man only is all t
his, how could he see an
other?ﬂ
Bri. U
p. IV
-5-
15.
The qual
i
ties of be
ing the T
rue, rest
ing on it
s own great
ness,
non-du al ity
,
bliss,
In fi nit
e ness,
the
self
of
ev ery thi
ng,
Om ni pres ence,
Im
mor
t
al
ity et
c., men
tioned in the t
ext un
der dis
cus
sion can be
long to
the Su
preme only
, not t
o Prana which is an ef

fect and as such can not
pos
sess any of these at
trib
utes.
By all t
his it is proved that
 the Bhuma is t
he Su
preme Self or
Brah man.
Aksharadhikaranam
: T
opic 3 (Sutras 10-12)
Akshara is Brahman
Aja_å~a
Aksharamambaran
t
adhriteh
I.3.
10 (73)
T
he Imperisha
ble (is Br
ahma
n) on
 accoun
t of
 (it
s) suppor
tin
g
everyth
ing
 up to Akasa
 (ether
).
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
84

Aksharam:
 the Imperishable;

Ambarant
a dhriteh:
 because it
support
s all up to Akasa.
An ex
pres
sion from the Brihadarany
aka Upanishad is now
t
aken up for dis
cus
sion. W
e read in Bri. Up. I
II-8-7, ﬁIn what
 then is the
ether wo
ven like warp and woof?ﬂ Gargi put thi
s ques
tion to sage
Y
ajnavalkya.
 He re
plied: ﬁO Gargi, t
he Brahmanas call this Akshara
(the Im
per
ish
able). It
 is nei
ther coarse nor fine, nei
ther short nor long
etc.ﬂ Bri.
 Up. III
-8-8. Here the doubt arises whether the word ‚Akshara™

means syl
la
ble ‚OM™
 or Brah
man. The Purv
ap
akshin or the op
po
nent
main
t
ains that ‚A
kshara™
 ety
mo
logi
cally means a syl
la
ble and there
-
fore gen
er
ally rep
re
sent
s the syl
la
ble OM, which is also an ob
ject of
med
i
t
a
tion. W
e have no right t
o dis
re
gard the set
tled mean
ing of a
word.
This Su
tra re
futes the abov
e view and says that
 ‚Akshara here
st
ands for Brah
man only™.
 Why? Be
cause the Akshara is said to sup
-
port ev
ery
thing from eart
h up to ether
. The tex
t says ﬁIn that
 Akshara,
Gargi! is the et
her wo
ven like warp and woofﬂ Bri. UP
. II
I-8-1
1. Now
the at
trib
ute of sup
port
ing ev
ery
thing up to et
her can
not be as
cribed
to any be
ing but Brah
man.
More
over ﬁIt is nei
ther coarse nor fine, nei
ther short nor longﬂ
etc., in
di
cates that rel
a
tive qual

i ties are ab
sent in it.
 There
fore the
‚Akshara™
 is Brah
man. The ob
jec
tor says: But
 even Pradhana sup
-
port
s ev
ery
thing up to et
her
, be
cause it is the cause of all the m
od
i
fied
ob
ject
s in the uni
verse and so the Akshara or the Im
per
ish
able may
be Pradhana. T
o this doubt the f
ol
low
ing Su
tra gives an an
swer
.
gm M àemgZ
Sa cha prasasanat
I.3.
1
1 (74)
T
his (
support
ing
) on ac
count
 of t
he comman
d (at
tr
ibuted t
o
th
e Imp
eri
sh
ab
le,
 ca
n b
e th
e wo
rk
 of
 th
e Su
pr
eme S
elf
 on
ly
and n
ot of
 the Pr
adhan
a).
Sa:
 this (the qualit
y of supporting ev
erything up t
o ether);
Cha:
 and,
also;
Prasasanat:
 because of the command.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 10 is given.
The sup
port
ing of all t
hings up to ether is the work of the High
est
Self only
. Why? On ac
count of the com
mand. The tex
t speaks of a
com
mand ﬁBy t
he com
mand of that
 Akshara O Gargi! the sun and the
moon st
and ap
artﬂ Bri. Up. I
II-8-9.
This com
mand or rul
er
ship can be the work of the high
est Lord
only
, not of
 the non-in
tel
li
gent Pradhana. B
e
cause non-in
tel
li
gent
causes suc
h as clay and the like can
not com
mand their ef

fects such
as jars and the like. There
fore the Pradhana can
not be the ‚A
kshara™
which sup
port
s ev
ery
thing up to A
kasa or ether
.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
85

AÝ`^mdì
`md¥Î
moü
Any
abhav
av
y
av
rittescha
I.3.
12 (75)
And
 on a
cco
unt o
f (the
 Sruti)
 se
para
ting (the
 Ak
shara
) from
that na
ture
 is d
iffe
ren
t (from
 Brah
man)
.
Any
a:
 another;
Bhav
a:
 nature;
V
y
av
ritteh
:
on account of the
exclusion;
Cha:
 and.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 10 is con
cluded.
The Im
per
ish
able (Akshara) is not Pradhana or Jiva, be
cause in
the same tex
t we find de
scrip
tion of at

trib utes which would ex
clude
an
other na
ture than Brah
man. In a sup
ple
men
t
ary p
as
sage in the
same Upani
shad we find de
scrip
tion of t
his Akshara which ex
cludes
Pradhana and Jiva, be
cause they do not pos
sess that na
ture.
The qual
i
ties re
ferred to in the t
ext namel
y
, see
ing, hear
ing,
think
ing, know
ing etc., ﬁThat
 Akshara, O Gargi! is un
seen but see
ing,
un
heard but hear
ing, un
per
ceived but per
ceiv
ing, un
known but know
-
ing. There is no other seer but He, no ot
her hearer but He, no other
thinker but He, no ot
her knower but He. In that I
m
per
ish
able O Gargi!
the ether is wo
ven warp and woofﬂ (Bri. Up. I
II-8-1
1), point t
o an in
tel
li
-
gent be
ing and there
fore ne
gate the P
radhana which is non-in
tel
li
-
gent.
The word ‚Akshara™
 can
not de
note the in
di
vid
ual soul as he is
not free from l
im
it
ing ad
junct
s, from which Akshara is free. The Srut
is
say ﬁAkshara is with
out eyes, wit
h
out ears, with
out speech, with
out
mind
 etc.ﬂ
 (Bri
. Up. III-
8-8
).
There
fore it is a set
tled con
clu
sion that the A
kshara or the im
-
per
ish
able is the Su
preme Brah
man only
.
Ikshatikarm
av
y
ap
adesadhikaranam
: T
opic 4
The Highest person to be med
it
ated upon is the Highest B
rahman
B©j{VH$
_©ì`nXo
Ikshatikarm
av
y
ap
adesat sah
I.3.
13 (76)
Because of His being m
ention
ed as the object of
 sigh
t,
 He (who
is t
o be meditated upon is
 Brah
man)
.
Ikshati:
 seeing, realising;
Karma:
 object;
V
y
ap
adesat:
 because of
his being mentioned;

Sah:
 he.
An ex
pres
sion from the Prasnop
anishad is t
aken up now for dis
-
cus sion.
The High
est Brah
man is de
scribed as He is s
t
ated to be t
he ob
-
ject of Ikshana (reali
sa
tion by v
i
sion). The ref
er
ence is clearly to the
Su
preme Self as the ob
ject of Ikshana.
W
e read in Prasna Up
anishad V
-2 ﬁO Satyakama,
 the syl
la
ble
OM is the high
est and also the other Brah
man; there
fore he who
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
86

knows it ar
rives by the same m
eans at one of the t
woﬂ. The text
 then
goes on ﬁAgain he who med
i
t
ates with the syl

la ble Om of t
hree
Matras (A-U-M) on the High
est Per
sonﬂ Prasna Up. V
-5. A
 doubt
arises whether the ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion is the High
est Brah
man or the
lower Brah
man, be
cause in V
-2 both are men
tioned, and also be
-
cause Brahmaloka is de
scribed as the fruit by t
he wor
ship of this
High est
Per son.
The Su
tra says: What is here t
aught as the ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion
is the High
est Brah
man and not Hiranyagarbha (the lower Brah
man).
Why? On ac
count of it
s be
ing spo
ken of as the ob
ject of sightŠﬁHe
sees the High
est Per
sonﬂ. This in
ti
mates that he a
c
tu
ally real
ises or
get
s him
self iden
ti
fied with t
he High
est Per
son. Hiranyagarbha also is
un
real from the high
est or tran
scen
den
t
al view point.
 He is within the
realm of May
a. He is as
so
ci
ated with May
a. There
fore the High
est
Per
son means the High
est Brah
man only which is the only
 Re
al
ity
.
This very B
rah
man is t
aught at t
he be
gin
ning of the p
as
sage as the
ob ject
of
med i t
a tion.
The Sruti de
clares that the re
lease from evil i
s the fruit of
 med
i
-
t
a
tion ﬁAs a snake is freed from it
s skin, so is he freed from evilﬂ.
 This
clearly in
di
cates that the S
u
preme con
sti
tutes the ob
ject of med
i
t
a
-
tion.
The at
t
ain
ment of B
rahmaloka by the wor
ship
per should not be
con sid ered
as
an
in ap pro pri ate
or
in sig nif i cant
fruit
of
the
wor ship
of
the High
est Per
son, be
cause it is a step in grad
ual lib
er
a
tion or eman
-
ci
p
a
tion by de
grees (Krama Mukti). He who med
i
t
ates on the Su
-
preme Self by
 means of the syl
la
ble OM as con
sist
ing of the Ma
tras,
ob
t
ains for his first re
ward Brahmaloka and af

ter that Kaivaly
a
Moksha or one
ness with Su
preme Brah
man.
In Prasna Up
anishad we read ﬁHe ar
rives at thi
s by means of
the Omkara; the wise ar
rives at that
 which is at rest, free from de
cay
,
from death,
 from fear
, the High
estﬂ. Free from de
cay
, free from deat
h,
free from fear
, the High
est can ap
ply only
 to the S
u
preme Brah
man
and not to t
he lower Brah
man.
The word Brahmaloka does not mean the Loka of B
rah
man but
the Loka or con
di
tion which is Brah
man Him
self, just as we ex
plain
the com
pound word Nishadasthapat
i, not as the head
man of the
Nishadas but a head
man who at the same ti
me is a Nishada. It i
s a
Karmadharaya com
pound which does not mean the ﬁworld of Brah
-
man, but t
hat world which is Brah
man.ﬂ
Daharadhikaranam
: T
opic 5 (Sutras 14-21)
The Dahara or the ‚S
mall
 Akasa™
 is Brahman
Xha CÎ
Dahara utt
arebhy
ah
I.3.
14 (77)
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
87

T
he small (ether, Akasa, is Brah
man) on account of t
he
subsequent a
rgum
ents or
 expression)
.
Daharah:
 the small;
Utt
arebhy
ah:
 from subsequent tex
t
s or
expressions or argument
s.
An
other ex
pres
sion from the Chhandogya Up
anishad is t
aken
up for dis
cus
sion.
‚Dahara™
 re
fers to Brah
man, be
cause the rea
son st
ated in the
later por
tions of the p
as
sage show this clearly
.
W
e read in Chhandogya Up
anishad VIII
-1-1 ﬁNow there is this
city of
 Brah
man (the body), and i
n it the place,
 the small lo
tus (the
heart) and in it t
hat small ether (Akasa)ﬂ. Now what ex
ist
s within that
small ether is to be sought,
 that is to be un
der
stood.
Here the doubt arises whether the small ether wit
hin the small
lo
tus of the heart
, which the Sruti
 speaks, is the el
e
men
t
al ether
, or
the in
di
vid
ual soul, or the Su
preme Soul.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says: By
 the small ether we
have to un
der
st
and the el
e
men
t
al ether which is the or
di
nary mean
ing
of the word. I
t is here called small with ref
er
ence to it
s small abode,
the heart. Or else t
he ‚small one™
 may be t
aken to mean the in
di
vid
ual
soul on ac
count of the t
erm the city
 of Brah
man (Brahmapuri). The
body is here called the city
 of Brah
man be
cause the in
di
vid
ual soul
has his abode in the body
, and has ac
quired this by his deeds. The i
n
-
di
vid
ual soul is here called Brah
man in a met

a phor
i
cal sense. The Su
-
preme Brah
man can
not be meant,
 be
cause He is not linked with the
body as it
s Lord. The Lord of the city
 i.e.,
 the in
di
vid
ual soul re
sides in
one spot of the cit
y viz.
, the heart,
 just as a King dwells in one spot of
his King
dom. Fur
ther the mind,
 the lim
it
ing ad
junct of the i
n
di
vid
ual
soul, abides in the heart.
 Only the i
n
di
vid
ual soul is com
p
ared in the
Sruti in size to t
he point of a goad.
Here the ‚small Akasa™
 is Brah
man and does not mean el
e
men
-
t
al ether
, al
though there is the qual
i
fi
ca
tion ‚small™
 which may in
di
cate
that he is a lim

ited some thing. Why
? Be
cause the na
ture of Brah
man
is de
scribed later on in the tex
t ﬁAs large as this (ex
ter
nal) ether is, so
large is that Akasa within t
he heart. Bot
h heaven and earth are con
-
t
ained within it
.ﬂ Chh. Up. VI
II 1-3. T
his clearly in
ti
mates that i
t is not
ac tu ally
small.
Akasa can
not be com
p
ared with it

self. The fi
nite in
di
vid
ual soul
also with it
s lim
it
ing ad
junct
s can
not be com
p
ared with the all-per
vad
-
ing Akasa or ether
. The Sruti
 de
clares ﬁBoth the earth and heav
en are
con
t
ained in itﬂ. T
his in
di
cates that thi
s Akasa is the sup
port of the
whole world. From this it
 is man
i
fest that
 the ether is the S
u
preme
Self.
W
e read in the Chhandogya Up
anishad VIII
-1-5 ﬁThe Self or At

-
man is sin
less, age
less, death
less, griefless, free f
rom old age, hun
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
88

ger
, thirst,
 with true de
sire (Satkama), true t
hought (Sat
sankalpa) t
hat
ever co
mes trueﬂ. This can
not ap
ply to m
ere phys
i
cal ether
. These
are all dis
tinct qual
i
ties of the S
u
preme Brah
man. The de
scrip
tion
can
not re
fer to the i
n
di
vid
ual soul, be
cause the com
p
ar
i
son to the in
fi
-
nite ether and t
he st
ate
ment that
 heaven and earth are con
t
ained in it
can not
ap ply
to
the
fi nite
in di vid ual
soul.
The word ‚Brahma™
 in Brahmapuri shows the ref
er
ence to Brah
-
man only
. Ev
en if you t
ake the word as re
fer
ring to Jiva t
he teach
ing
re
lates to Brah
man who is real
ised in the heart which is the
Brahmapuri (the city
 of soul or Brah
man). More
over the prom
ise of In
-
fi
nite Bli
ss to the knower of Dahara Akasa in
ti
mates that t
he ref
er
ence
is only to t
he Su
preme Brah
man.
For all the rea
sons ex
plained, that
 ether is the High
est Self or
Su preme
Brah man.
J{VeãX
mä`m§ VWm {
h Ñï
>§ {
bﬁ§
Gatisabdabhy
am t
atha hi drish
t
am li
ngam cha
I.3.
15 (78)
T
he small Akasa (ether) is Brahman on account
 of the action of
goin
g (i
nto Br
ahma
n) an
d of t
he word (
Brah
maloka)
; because
thus it is se
en (i.e
. the individ
ual sou
ls go into Brahman) is
se
en e
lse
where
 in othe
r Sruti tex
ts; and this d
aily going o
f the
souls into
 Brahman (during de
ep
 slee
p) is an infe
rential sign
by m
ea
ns o
f which
 we
 may p
rop
erl
y inte
rpre
t the
 word
‚Brahmaloka™).
Gatisabdabhy
am:
 on account of the going and of
 the word;
T
atha hi:
thus, like;
Drisht
am:
 it is seen;
 Lingam:
 mark, sign from which
something may be i
nferred;
Cha:
 and.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 14 is given.
It has been said in the pre
ced
ing Su
tra that t
he small ether is
Brah
man on ac
count of the rea
sons given in the sub
se
quent p
as
-
sages. These sub
se
quent p
as
sages are now de
scribed.
The men
tion of ‚go
ing™
 and a ‚word™
 re
fers to Brah
man. W
e read
in Chhandogya Up
anishad VIII
-3-2 ﬁAll these crea
tures day af

ter daygo into this B
rahmaloka (i.e. they
 are merged in Brah
man dur
ing deep
sleep) and yet do not di
s
cover itﬂ etc. Thi
s pas
sage shows that all
Jivas or in
di
vid
ual souls go daily int
o the ‚small A
kasa™
 called here
Brahmaloka. This in
ti
mates that t
he ‚small Akasa™
 is Brah
man.
This go
ing of the in
di
vid
ual souls into Brah
man which oc
curs
daily in t
he deep sleep is men
tioned in the ot
her Sruti tex
t: ﬁHe be
-
comes united with the t
rue (Sat), he is merged in his own Self
ﬂ Chh.
Up. VI-
8-1
.
In com
mon p
ar
lance or or
di
nary life al
so we say of a man who is
in deep sleep ﬁHe has be
come Brah
manﬂ. ﬁHe is gone into the st
ate of
Brah manﬂ.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
89

The word ‚Brahmaloka™
 is to be in
ter
preted as Brah
man Him
self,
and not as the world of B
rah
man (Saty
a Loka) be
cause there is the
indicatory sign in t
he p
as
sage. What is that
 indicatory sign or Lin
gam?
It is said in t
he text
 that t
he soul goes to this world daily
. It
 is cer
t
ainly
im
pos
si
ble for the Jiv
a to go to t
he world of Brah
man daily
. Hence the
term ‚Brahmaloka™
 means here Brah
man Him
self.
Y¥Voü _{hå
Zmo@ñ`
mpñ_Þ
&
Dhritescha mahimno™
sy
asminnup
alabdheh
I.3.
16 (79)
Moreover on
 accoun
t of
 the suppor
tin
g als
o (at
tr
ibuted t
o it)
the small ether must be Brahman, because this greatness is
observed in t
his (
Brah
man on
ly ac
cordi
ng t
o other
 scri
ptur
al
passages).
Dhrite
h:
 on account of supporting (of the world by
 the Akasa or
ether);
Cha:
 and, moreover
, also;
Asy
a mahim
nah:
 this greatness;
Asmin
:
 in Brahman;
Up
alabdheh:
on account of being observed or
found.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 14 is con
tin
ued.
Daharakasa or the small ether re
ferred to in Su
tra 14 in
di
cates
Brah
man, as the glory
 of sup
port
ing all the worlds can be rea
son
ably
true only in re
spect of Brah
man. And also on ac
count of the ‚sup
port
-
ing™
 the small ether can be the S
u
preme Brah
man only
. How? T
o be
-
gin with the t
ext in
tro
duces the gen
eral sub
ject of dis
cus
sion in the
p
as
sage ﬁIn it is that
 small etherﬂ. Then t
he small ether is to be com
-
p
ared with the uni
ver
sal ether
. Ev

ery thing is con
t
ained in it.
 Then the
term Self
 is ap
plied to it
. Then it i
s st
ated that
 it is free from sin et
c. Fi
-
nally it
 is said ﬁThat Self i
s a bank, a lim
it
ing sup
port (V
idhriti) so that
these worlds may not be con
foundedﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
II-4-1). In t
his p
as
-
sage the glory of small
 ether by way of
 sup
port
ing the worlds is seen.
Just as a dam stores the wa
ter so that t
he bound
aries of the fiel
ds are
not con
founded, so also that
 Self serves like a dam i
n or
der that the
world and all the dif

fer ent castes and Asramas may not be con
-
founded.
Other text
s de
clare that this great
ness of sup
port
ing be
longs to
Brah
man alone. ﬁBy
 the com
mand of that
 Im
per
ish
able (Akshara) O
Gargi, the sun and moon are held in t
heir po
si
tionsﬂ Bri. Up. I
II-8-9.
ﬁHe is the lord of all, t
he king of all kings, the pro
tec
tor of all t
hings. He
is a bank and a lim
it
ing sup
port, so that
 these worlds may not be con
-
foundedﬂ Bri. Up.
 IV
-4-22. This also shows that to be a bound
ary and
sup
port of the worlds is the dis
tinc
tive at

trib ute of B
rah
man only
.
There
fore, on ac
count of the ‚sup
port
ing™
 also, the small (et
her) is
noth
ing else but Brah
man.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
90

&
Prasiddh
escha
I.3.
17 (80)
Also because of t
he well-kn
own m
eaning
 (of Aka
sa as
Brahman,
 the small Akasa is Brahman).
Prasiddheh:
 of the well-known (meaning);
Cha:
 also
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 14 is con
tin
ued.
Akasa has the set
tled mean
ing of Brah
man. It
 is a well-known
fact in Srut
i that B
rah
man is in
di
cated by the t
erm Akasa. There
fore
‚Daharakasa™
 also st
ands for Brah
man.
W
e read in Chh. Up. VI
II-14-1 ﬁAkasa is the revealer of
 all
names and formsﬂ. ﬁAll t
hese be
ings t
ake their or
i
gin from Akasa
aloneﬂ Chh. Up. I-9-1. ﬁFor who could breathe if
 that A
kasa (ether)
were not blissﬂ T
ait. Up.
 II-7. I
n all these tex
t
s ‚Akasa™
 st
ands for Brah
-
man.
BVanam_
em©Ëg B{
V MoÞmgå^
It
arap
aramarsat sa iti ch
en nasambhav
at
I.3.
18 (81)
If it is said
 that the other o
ne (i.e
. the individ
ual sou
l) is mea
nt
on account of a reference to it (made in a comple
mentary
passage) (we say) no, on account of t
he impossibility.
It
ara:
 the other one, t
hat is the Jiva;

Paramarsat:
 on account of
reference;
Sa:
 he (the indivi
dual soul);
Iti:
 thus;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not;
Asambhav
at:
 on account of impossibilit
y
.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 14 is con
tin
ued. W
e read in
the Chhandogya Up
anishadŠﬁNow that se
rene be
ing, the in
di
vid
ual
soul (Jiva) in
deed which hav
ing risen above this earthly
 body
, and
hav
ing reached the high
est light,
 ap
pears in it
s true form, t
hat is the
Self:
 thus he spoke.ﬂ
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says: As in t
he com
ple
men
-
t
ary p
as
sage the in
di
vid
ual soul is re
ferred to, t
he small Akasa of Chh.
Up. VII
I-1-1 is also the in
di
vid
ual soul. ﬁThe word ‚se
ren
ity™
(Samprasada) which de
notes the st
ate of deep sleep con
veys the
idea of the in
di
vid
ual soul only
. The ‚ris
ing from the body
™
 also can be
spo
ken of the in
di
vid
ual soul only whose abode is there
fore ‚the small
Akasa™; this de
notes in the p
as
sage un
der dis
cus
sion only the in
di
vid
-
ual soul, on ac
count of ref
er
ence to the ether
.ﬂ
This can
not be. I
n the first place t
he in
di
vid
ual soul which is lim
-
ited by t
he in
ter
nal or
gan and it
s other ad
junct
s, can
not be com
p
ared
with the all-per
vad
ing ether
.
In the sec
ond place, the at
trib
utes like ‚free
dom from evi
l™
 and
the likes of thi
s Akasa, re
ferred to in the p
as
sage un
der dis
cus
sion,
can
not be true of t
he in
di
vid
ual soul. Hence Brah
man is meant in t
hat
p
as sage.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
91

CÎmam…
oXm{d^
©yV
ñdê$nñVw
Utt
aracchedav
irbhut
asv
arup
astu
I.3.
19 (82)
I
f it be
 said
 that fo
r sub
se
que
nt te
xts (
it ap
pe
ars tha
t the
indi
vid
ual
 sou
l is m
ea
nt, we
 say th
at what i
s the
re re
ferre
d to
is) rat
her (the individual soul in so far)
 as its real natur
e has
be
com
e m
anife
st (i.e
. as it i
s no
n-d
iffe
ren
t from B
rahma
n).
Utt
arat:
 from the subsequent t
ext
s of the Srut
i;
Chet:
 if;
A
v
irbhut
a-svarup
at:
 with it
s true nature made manif
est;
Tu
:
 but.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 14 is con
tin
ued.
An ob
jec
tion is again raised by t
he Purvap
akshin to jus
tify
 that
the ‚small A
kasa™
 (Dahara) re
fers to the in
di
vid
ual soul. Prajap
ati at
the out

set de clares that the Sel
f, which is free from sin and t
he like is
that which we must try
 to un
der
st
and Chh. Up. VI
II-7-1. A
f

ter that hepoint
s out that t
he seer within the eye i.
e. ‚the in
di
vid
ual soul is the
Self™, Chh. Up. VIII
-7-3. He again ex
plains the na
ture of the same i
n
di
-
vid
ual soul in it
s dif

fer ent st
ates. ﬁHe who moves about happy
 in
dreams is the Selfﬂ Chh. Up.
 VII
I-10-1. ﬁWhen a man be
ing asleep, re
-
pos
ing, and at per
fect rest sees no dreams, that i
s the Selfﬂ Chh. Up.
VII
I-1l-1. The qual
i
fy
ing terms ‚Im
mor
t
al, fear
less™
 used in each of
these de
scrip
tions of the self
 show that the in
di
vid
ual soul is free from
sin or evil and the li
ke. Ob
vi
ously the in
di
vid
ual soul is meant here be
-
cause Brah
man is free from t
he three st
ates viz. wak
ing, dream and
deep sleep. It i
s also said to be free from evi
l. There
fore ‚small Akasa™
re
fers to the in
di
vid
ual soul or Jiva and not to B
rah
man.
The Su
tra re
futes this.
 The Su
tra uses the ex
pres
sion ﬁHe
whose na
ture has be
come man
i
festﬂ. P
rajap
ati fi
nally ex

plains the in -
di
vid
ual soul in it
s true na
ture as iden
ti
cal with Brah
man. The ref
er
-
ence is to the in
di
vid
ual soul in it
s true na
ture as iden
ti
cal with
Brah
man or
, in other words, who has real
ised his one
ness with Brah
-
man and not to t
he in
di
vid
ual soul as such. ﬁAs soon as it has ap
-
proached the high
est light it
 ap
pears in it
s own form. Then It
 is the
High
est Purushaﬂ Chh. Up. VI
II-12-3. The i
n
di
vid
ual soul is free from
evil et
c., when it be
comes iden
ti
cal with Brah
man and not when it is
en
vel
oped by lim
it
ing ad
junct
s and re
mains as the fi
nite Jiva or em
-
bod
ied soul. Agency (K
artritva),
 en
joy
ing (Bhoktritv
a), like and dis
like
(Raga-dvesha) in
di
cate Jivahood. I
f these are re
moved the i
n
di
vid
ual
soul shines as Brah
man.
As long as the in
di
vid
ual soul does not free it

self from Avidya (ig
-
no
rance) in the form of du
al
ity and does not
 rise to the knowl
edge of
the Self
 or Brah
man, whose na
ture is un
change
able and
Satchidananda which ex
presses it
self in the f
orm ‚I am Brah
man™, so
long it re
mains as an in
di
vid
ual soul. The ig
no
rance of the Jiva may
 be
com
p
ared to the mis
t
ake of a man who in the twi
light mis
t
akes a post
for a man, a rope for a ser
pent.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
92

When it gives up t
he iden
ti
fi
ca
tion with t
he body
, sense or
gans
and mind, when it real
ises it
s iden
tity
 with the Su
preme Brah
man it
be
comes Brah
man it

self whose na ture is un
change
able and
Satchidananda, as is de
clared in Mun. Up. II
I-2-9 ﬁHe who knows the
high
est Brah
man be
comes even Brah
manﬂ. This is the real na
ture of
the in
di
vid
ual soul by means of which it
 arises from the body and ap
-
pears in it
s own real form.
Why a ref
er
ence has at all been made to Jiv
a in this Sec
tion
treat
ing of Dahara, you wil
l find an an
swer in the fol
low
ing Su
tra.
AÝ`mW©
ü nam_
e©–
Any
arthascha p
aramarsah
I.3.
20 (83)
And
 the
 refe
ren
ce
 (to the
 indi
vid
ual
 sou
l) is
 for a d
iffe
ren
t
purpose.
Any
arthah:
 for a dif
ferent purpose;
Cha:
 and;
Paramarsah:
reference.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 14 is con
tin
ued.
The ref
er
ence to the in
di
vid
ual soul has a dif

fer ent mean
ing.
The ref
er
ence to the in
di
vid
ual soul is not meant t
o de
ter
mine the na
-
ture of the i
n
di
vid
ual soul, but rather t
he na
ture of the S
u
preme Brah
-
man. The ref
er
ence to the three st
ates of the in
di
vid
ual soul is meant
not to es
t
ab
lish the na
ture of Jiva as such, but t
o show fi
nally it
s real
na
ture (Svarup
a) which is not dif

fer ent from B
rah
man.
An
other ob
jec
tion is raised. The t
ext de
scribes this ‚Dahara™
 as
oc
cu
py
ing a very small
 space in t
he heart, and be
cause ‚Dahara™
 is so
small and Jiva is also small, t
here
fore, ‚Dahara™
 must be Jiva men
-
tioned sub
se
quently
. The fol
low
ing Su
tra gives a suit

able an swer
.
AënlwVo[
a{V MoÎm
Alp
asruteriti chet t
adukt
am
I.3.
21 (84)
I
f it be
 said
 that o
n acc
ou
nt of the
 scrip
tural
 de
clara
tion o
f the
smallne
ss (o
f the e
ther) (the
 Brahman c
annot b
e m
ea
nt) (we
say that
) that
 has already bee
n explained
.
Alp
asruteh:
 because of the Sruti declaring i
t
s smallness;
 Iti:
 thus;
Chet:
 if;
Ta
t
:
 that;
Ukt
am:
 has already been explained.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 14 is con
cluded.
The Purvap
akshin or the ob
jec
tor has st
ated that
 the small
ness
of the et
her st
ated by t
he Sruti ﬁIn i
t is that smal
l etherﬂ does not agree
with Brah
man, that
 it may
 how
ever re
fer to the Jiv
a or the in
di
vid
ual
soul which is com
p
ared to the point
 of a goad. This has al
ready been
re
futed.
 It has al
ready been shown un
der I.2.7 t
hat small
ness may be
at
trib
uted to B
rah
man for the pur
pose of med
i
t
a
tion (Up
asana). The
same ref
u
t
a
tion is to be ap
plied here also. That small

ness is con tra
-
dicted by t
hat Sruti
 text
 which com
p
ares the ether within t
he heart with
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
93

the uni
ver
sal ether ﬁAs large as is this ether so large is the ether withi
n
the heartﬂ.
Anukrity
adhikaranam
: T
opic 6 (Sutras 22-23)
Everything shines af
ter Brahm
an
AZwH¥
Anukritest
asy
a cha
I.3.
22 (85)
On a
cco
unt o
f the
 actin
g afte
r (i.e
. the
 shini
ng afte
r) (that a
fter
which sun, mo
on, e
tc. are s
aid to s
hine is
 the Su
pre
me Se
lf)
and (be
cause
 by the light) of Him (e
verything els
e is lighte
d).
Anukriteh
: because of the acting af
ter
, from im
it
ation, f
rom the
following;
T
asy
a:
 it
s;
Cha:
 and.
A
 p
as
sage from the Mundaka Up
anishad is t
aken now for dis
-
cus sion.
W
e read in Mundaka Upani
shad II-2-10 and Kathop
anisad
II-ii-15 ﬁThe Sun does not
 shine there nor the moon and the st
ars, nor
these lightnings,
 much less the fire. A
f

ter him when he shines ev ery
-
thing shines; by t
he light of hi
m all this is light
ed.ﬂ
Now a doubt arises whether ﬁhe af

ter whom when he shines ev -
ery
thing shines, and by whose light
 all this is light
edﬂ is some ef

ful gent
sub
st
ance, or the Su
preme Self.
The ‚shin
ing af

ter™
 men
tioned in the t
ext ﬁAf

ter him when heshines ev
ery
thing shinesﬂ is pos
si
ble only if
 the Su
preme Self or
Brah
man is un
der
stood. An
other Sruti de
clares of that Su
preme Self,
ﬁHis form is light, hi
s thought
s are trueﬂ Chh. Up. III
-14-2. ﬁHim the
gods wor
ship as the light of
 light
s, as im
mor
t
al timeﬂ Bri.
 Up. IV
-4-16.
The clause ﬁOn ac
count of the act
ing af

terﬂ points to the ‚shin
ing
af

ter™
 men
tioned in the t
ext un
der dis
cus
sion.
That the li
ght of t
he Sun etc.,
 should shine by some other ma
te
-
rial light is not
 known. It is ab
surd to say that one l
ight is light
ed by an
-
other
. W
e do not know of any phy
s
i
cal light, ex

cept the sun, that can
light Brah
man.
The man
i
fes
t
a
tion of t
his whole uni
verse has for it
s cause the
ex
is
tence of the li
ght of B
rah
man, just as the ex

is tence of the li
ght of
the sun is the cause of the man
i
fes
t
a
tion of all
 form and colours. Brah
-
man is self-lu
mi
nous. It re
mains in It
s own glory
. It
 il
lu
mines the sun,
the moon, t
he st
ars, the light
ning, the f
ire, the senses, the mi
nd and
the in
tel
lect and all ob
ject
s. It does not need any
 other light t
o il
lu
mine
it. S
ruti tex
t
s like ﬁBrah
man is the light
 of light
s (
Jyoti
sham
 Jyoti
h
)ﬂ
clearly in
ti
mate that
 Brah
man is Self-ef

ful gent. I
t is quite pos
si
ble to
deny the shin
ing of sun, moon et
c., with ref

er ence to Brah
man, be
-
cause what
ever is seen is seen by the light
 of Brah
man only
. As Brah
-
man is Self-ef

ful gent, it
 is not seen by means of any
 other light.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
94

Brah
man man
i
fest
s ev
ery
thing else but is not
 man
i
fested by
any
thing else. W
e read in Bri. Up. ﬁB
y the S
elf alone as his light m
an
sit
sﬂ IV
-3-6. The word ‚Sarvam™
 de
notes that t
he en
tire world of names
and forms is de
pend
ent on the glory
 of Brah
man. The word ‚anu™
 in
ti
-
mates that t
he ref
er
ence is to Brah
man be
cause it is from Him that
 all
ef
 ful gence
is
de rived.
Api cha smary
ate
I.3.
23 (86)
Mo
reo
ve
r the
 Smriti a
lso
 spe
aks
 of him
 i.e
. Brah
man to
 be
 the
unive
rsal light.
Api cha:
 moreover
, also;
Smary
ate:
 the Smr
iti states
.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 22 is given.
The Smriti
 or Git
a also says so. In Git
a, Chap
ter XV
-6 we read
ﬁNei
ther the sun, nor the m
oon, nor the fi
re il
lu
mines that,
 hav
ing gone
into which men do not re
turn, that
 is My high
est seat.ﬂ And ﬁThe li
ght
which abid
ing in the sun il
lu
mines the whole world and that which is in
the moon and that
 which is in the fire, al
l that li
ght know to be Mineﬂ
XV
-12.
Prami
t
adhikaranam
: T
opic 7 (Sutras 24-25)
The person of the size of a thum
b is Brahman
eãXmXo
d à{_
Sabdadev
a pramit
ah
I.3.
24 (87)
From
 the
 ve
ry word
 (viz., th
e te
rm Lord
 app
lie
d to
 it) the
(person)
 measured (by t
he size of t
he thum
b) (is
 Brah
man)
.
Sabdat
: from t
he very word;
Eva:
 even, only
, it
self;
Pramit
ah:
measured, i.e.,
 described as having the size of the t
humb.
An ex
pres
sion from the Kat
hop
anishad is t
aken up for dis
cus
-
sion.
W
e read in Kathop
anishad II-4-12, ﬁThe per
son of the size of a
thumb re
sides in the mid
dle or cen
tre of the body
 etc.ﬂ and in II
-4-13
ﬁThat per
son, of the size of a t
humb is like a light wit
h
out smoke, lord
of the p
ast and of the f
u
ture, he is the same t
o
day and to
mor
row
.
Know
ing Him one does not seek to hide one
self any more.
 This is
That.ﬂ
A
 doubt arises now whether the per
son of the size of a thum
b
men
tioned in the t
ext is t
he in
di
vid
ual soul or the Su
preme Self (B
rah
-
man).
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent holds that on ac
count of the
st
ate
ment of t
he per
son™
s size of thumb the in
di
vid
ual soul is meant,
be
cause to the Su
preme Self which is In
fi
nite the S
ruti tex
t would not
as
cribe the mea
sure of a thumb.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
95

T
o this we re
ply that
 the per
son of the size of a thum
b can only
be Brah
man. Why? On ac
count of the t
erm ‚Isana™, ‚Lord of
 the p
ast
and of the f
u
ture.™
 The high
est Lord only is the ab
so
lute ruler of t
he
p
ast and the fu
ture. Fur
ther the clause ﬁThis is thatﬂ con
nect
s the p
as
-
sage with that which had been en
quired about, and t
here
fore forms
the topic of di
s
cus
sion. What had been en
quired about by Nachiket
as
is Brah
man. Nachiket
as asks Lord Y
ama, ﬁThat which thou seest as
nei
ther this nor that
, as nei
ther ef

fect nor cause, as nei ther p
ast nor
fu
ture, tel
l me thatﬂ (K
atha Up. I-2-14). Y
ama re
fers to this per
son of
the size of a thumb t
hus ﬁThat which you wanted to know is this.ﬂ
Brah
man is said to be of t
he size of a thumb, t
hough He is
all-per
vad
ing, be
cause He is reali
sable in the lim
ited cham
ber of the
heart of a man.
The ep
i
thet ‚The Lord of
 the p
ast and the fu
ture™, can
not be ap
-
plied to Jiva at
 all, whose p
ast and the fu
ture is bound by his Kar
mas
and who is not free to pos
sess so much glory
.
But how the al
l-per
vad
ing Lord can be said to be lim
ited by t
he
mea
sure of a thumb? The fol

low ing Su
tra gives a suit

able an swer
.
öÚno
j`m Vw _
Zwî
`m{YH
$maËdmV²
Hridy
apekshay
a tu manushy
adhikaratv
at
I.3.
25 (88)
Bu
t with re
fere
nce
 to the
 he
art (the
 highe
st Bra
hman i
s sa
id to
be of th
e size of a t
humb)
 as man
 alone is
 entit
led (to t
he study
of the
 Ve
das
, to p
ractis
e m
ed
itatio
n and
 attain
Self-re
alisation).
Hrid
i:
 in the heart,
 with reference to the heart
;
Apekshay
a:
 by
reference to, in consideration of
;
Tu
:
 but;
Manushy
adhikaratv
at:
because of the privilege of
 men.
A
 qual
i
fy
ing ex
pla
na
tion of S
u
tra 24 is given,
 and the priv
i
lege
for Up
asana or med
i
t
a
tion is dis
cussed.
The mea
sure of a thumb is as
cribed to Brah
man, al
though
all-per
vad
ing, which with ref
er
ence to his re
sid
ing within the heart
which is gen
er
ally as big as the t
humb. Brah
man dwells within the
heart of all li
v
ing be
ings. The heart
s dif

fer ac cord
ing to the an
i
mals,
some have larger heart
s, some have smaller
, some are more than a
thumb, some are less than a t
humb. Why is t
he ‚thumb™
 used as a
st
an
dard? Why a man™
s heart only and not t
hat of any
 other an
i
mal,
also? The sec
ond half of t
he Su
tra gives an an
swerŠ‚on ac
count of
man only be
ing en
ti
tled™. M
an only is en
ti
tled to t
he study of t
he V
edas
and prac
tice of med
i
t
a
tion and dif

fer ent Up
asanas of Brah
man pre
-
scribed in them. There
fore the thum
b is used as the st
an
dard of mea
-
sure
ment with ref

er ence to him alone.
The aim here is to show the iden
tity
 of in
di
vid
ual soul with Brah
-
man which is in
side the body and is of t
he size of a thumb. T
he
V
edant
a p
as
sages have two
fold pur
port. Som
e of them aim
 in giv
ing
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
96

a de
scrip
tion of t
he na
ture of Brah
man, some in teach
ing the unity
 of
the in
di
vid
ual soul with the S
u
preme Soul. Our p
as
sage teaches the
unity of
 the in
di
vid
ual soul with the S
u
preme Soul or Brah
man, not t
he
size of any
thing. Thi
s point is ren
dered quite clear fur
ther on in the
Up
anishad. ﬁThe per
son of the size of a thum
b, the in
ner Self,
 al
ways
abides in the heart of m
en. Let a man draw that
 Self f
orth from his
body with steadi
ness, as one draws the pith from a reed. Let hi
m
know that Self
 as ‚Bright as the I
m
mor
t
al™.ﬂ Kat
ha Up. II-6-17.
Dev
at
adhikaranam
: T
opic 8 (Sutras 26-33)
The Devas also are entitled to t
he study of V
edas
and to m
edit
ate on Brahm
an
VXwn`©
{n ~mXa
m`U– gå^dmV²
T
adup
ary
api Baadaray
anah sambhav
at
I.3.
26 (89)
Also (b
eings) ab
ove
 them (viz., me
n) (are e
ntitled for the s
tudy
and practice of the Vedas) on account of the possibility (
of it)
according to Baadarayan
a.
T
ad up
ari:
 above them i
.e. higher t
han men namely Dev
as;
Api:
 also,
even;
Baadaray
anah:
 the sage Baadarayana is of
 opinion;
Sambhav
at:
 because (it is) possible.
The de
scrip
tion of t
he priv
i
lege of study
 of V
edas and med
i
t
a
tion
is
con tin ued.
There is a di
gres
sion from the main t
opic in this Sec
tion in
Sutras 26 to 38.
 The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent holds that such
med
i
t
a
tion is not pos
si
ble in the case of the Dev
as, be
cause they are
not en
dowed with the sense or
gans. Hence they have got
 no ca
p
a
bil
-
ity t
o med
i
t
ate. The Dev
as like Indra and the rest are mere thought
forms cre
ated by t
he chant
ing of Mantras. T
hey have no de
sire for the
pos
ses
sion of V
airagya (disp
assion), V
iveka (dis
crim
i
na
tion) etc. T
o
this the au
thor gives a re
ply in t
his Su
tra. A
 doubt may arise f
rom the
pre
vi
ous Su
tra that as it
 is st
ated that
 men alone have t
he priv
i
lege to
the study of
 the V
edas, the gods are thereby de
barred. This Su
tra re
-
moves this doubt.
The teacher Baadarayana t
hinks that the S
u
tra en
ti
tles gods
also who are above men for the study
 of V
edas, prac
tice of med
i
t
a
tion
and at
t
ain
ment of knowl
edge of Brah
man. How? Be
cause it is pos
si
-
ble for them also as they
 too are cor
po
real be
ings. The Up
anishads,
the Man
tra por
tion of t
he V
edas, the It
ihasas and the Puranas all
unan
i
mously de
scribe that the Devas hav
e bod
ies. They may
 have
the de
sire of fi
nal re
lease caused by the re
flec
tion that
 all ef

fects, ob
-
ject
s and power are non-per
ma
nent. They
 may have t
he de
sire to
pos sess
the
four fold
qual i fi ca ti
on
which
is
nec es sary
for
at t
ain ing
the
knowl
edge of Brah
man. The gods un
dergo dis
ci
ple
ship in or
der to at
-
t
ain knowl
edge. W
e read in Chh. Up. VI
II-7-1
1 ﬁIndra lived as a dis
ci
-
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
97

ple with Prajap
ati for one hun
dred and one yearsﬂ; ﬁBhrigu V
aruni
went to his fa
ther V
aruna, say
ing, sir
, teach me Brah
manﬂ T
ait. Up.
III
-1. The god V
aruna pos
sessed the knowl
edge of Brah
man which he
teaches to his son Bhrigu.
The gods also pos
sess all the req
ui
sites for prac
tis
ing med
i
t
a
-
tion. There
fore they are also en
ti
tled for t
he study of t
he V
edas and at
-
t
ain
ing Self-reali
sa
tion. E
ven with
out Up
anayana and study t
he V
eda
is man
i
fest of it

self to the gods.The p
as
sage about that which is of t
he size of a thumb is equally

valid when the right
 of the gods is ac
cepted. In t
heir case the Sruti de
-
scrib
ing the Lord of t
he size of a thumb re
fers to the size of t
heir
thumbs.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says if we ad
mit that
 Devas
have bod
ies, then there would arise dif

fi cul
ties with re
gard to sac
ri
-
fices, be
cause it is not pos
si
ble for one fi
nite cor
po
real be
ing like
Indra to be si
mul
t
a
neously pres
ent at many
 places of sac
ri
fices, when
he is in
voked si
mul
t
a
neously by all hi
s wor
ship
pers. There
fore sac
ri
-
fices will be
come use
less. T
o this ob
jec
tion the au
thor gives a suit

able re
ply in t
he fol
low
ing Su
tra.
{dam
oY– H$_©Ur
{V MoV² Z
 AZoH$à{Vn
ÎmoX©e
©ZmV
V
irodhah karmaniti chet na
 anekapratip
atterdarsanat
I.3.
27 (90)
I
f it be
 said
 that (the
 corp
ore
ality o
f the
 god
s inv
olv
es
) a
contradict
ion to sacrif
ices; (we say) no, because
 we find (in t
he
scri
ptur
es) th
e assumpt
ion (
by th
e gods) of
 many
 (for
ms at
 one
and the same time).
V
irodhah:
 contradiction;
Karmani:
 In the sacrifices;
Iti:
 thus;
Chet:
if;
Na:
 not;
Aneka:
 many (bodies);
Prati
p
atteh:
 because of the
assumption;
Darsanat:
 because it is found (in the scriptures).
An ob
jec
tion against S
u
tra 26 is raised and re
futed.
It is pos
si
ble for a Devat
a to as
sume sev
eral forms at the same
time. He can ap
pear in sac
ri
fices per
formed si
mul
t
a
neously at dif

fer -
ent places. Smrit
i also st
ates ﬁA
 Y
ogin, O hero of t
he Bharat
as, may by

his power mul
ti
ply his self in m
any thou
sand forms and in them walk
about on earth. I
n some he may en
joy the ob
ject
s, in oth
ers he may
un
dergo dire pen
ance, and fi
nally he may
 again with
draw them all,
just as the sun with
draws it
s many raysﬂ. If
 such Smriti p
as
sage de
-
clares that even Y
ogins, who have merely
 ac
quired var
i
ous ex
traor
di
-
nary pow
ers, such as sub
tlety
 of body and t
he like may as
sume
sev
eral bod
ies at the same ti
me, how much more ca
p
a
ble of such
feat
s must the gods be, who nat
u
rally pos
sess all su
per
nat
u
ral pow
-
ers. A
 god may di
vide him
self into many
 forms and pres
ent him
self in
many sac
ri
fices at the same t
ime. He can re
main all the whil
e un
seen
by oth
ers, in con
se
quence of his power to make him
self in
vis
i
ble.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
98

More
over
, why can
not the same god be t
he ob
ject of many
 sac
ri
fices,
just as the same man can be the ob
ject of sal
u
t
a
tion of many
 per
-
sons?
eãX B{V Mo
V² Z AV– à
Sabda iti
 chet na at
ah prabhav
at
 praty
akshanumanabh
y
am
I.3.
28 (91)
I
f it be
 said
 (that a
 con
tradi
ctio
n will re
sul
t) in re
spe
ct of th
e
word (
we say)
 no, becaus
e (the wor
ld) or
igi
nat
es from
 the wor
d,
as is
 kno
wn from
 dire
ct pe
rce
ptio
n (Sru
ti) and
 infe
ren
ce
(Smriti).
Sabda:
 regarding V
edic words;
 Iti:
 thus;
Chet
: if;
Na:
 no;
At
ah:
 from
this, from t
hese words;
Prabhav
at:
 because of the creation;
Praty
akshanumanabh
y
am:
 from direct perception (Srut
i) and
inference (Smriti).
An
other ob
jec
tion against S
u
tra 26 (with re
spect to the cor
po
re
-
al
ity of
 the gods) is raised and re
futed.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains: The V
e
dic words have been
proved in the P
urvamimamsa phi
los
o
phy to be per
ma
nent, i.
e. with
-
out be
gin
ning or end. Now if gods are said to have bod
ies they must
have births and deaths,
 which all em
bod
ied be
ings are sub
ject to.
There fore
the
V
e dic
words
for
in di vid ual
de i ties
can not
ex ist
be fore
their birth,
 nor can those words sig
nify any
 de
i
ties, when they
 have
ceased to ex
ist dur
ing dis
so
lu
tion. Hence the per
ma
nency of V
e
dic
words fails.
T
o this ob
jec
tion the an
swer is that there can
not be any such in
-
con
gru
ity wit
h re
gard to V
e
dic words, be
cause both Sruti and Sm
riti
main
t
ain that in
di
vid
ual gods owe their or
i
gin to V
e
dic words.
The V
e
dic words ex
ist from eter
nity
. They hav
e got their set
tled
mean
ing. The V
e
dic names for gods sig
nify t
heir types and not t
he in
-
di
vid
u
als. There
fore the births or deaths of
 in
di
vid
ual gods can
not af

-
fect the t
ypes, much less the per
ma
nent char
ac
ter of V
e
dic words.
Cows are in
nu
mer
a
ble but it i
s with the ty
pe that t
he word ‚cow™
is in
sep
a
ra
bly con
nected. The word ‚cow™
 is eter
nal. It
 does not de
-
pend on the birth and deat
h of in
di
vid
u
als be
long
ing to that
 type.
W
ords rep
re
sent
ing the gods have f
or their coun
ter
p
art ob
ject
s that
are types and not in
di
vid
u
als. Indra re
fers to a di
vine func
tion like the
of

fice of the Vice
roy and who
ever is called to that
 func
tion is called
Indra. There
fore here is no non-eternality
 with ref
er
ence to the V
edas.
The word, in
clud
ing even the gods,
 is cre
ated from scrip
tural
words. The scrip
tural words are the source for the world and the gods.
If y
ou ob
ject to thi
s and say that t
his con
flict
s with the Su
tra I-1-2,
which says that Brah
man is the cause of the world, we re
ply: B
rah
-
man is the Up
adanakarana (ma
te
rial cause). The V
eda is not such
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
99

ma
te
rial cause. The cre
ator ut
ters the V
e
dic words and cre
ates. He
says earth and cre
ates the earth and so on.
The cre
ation of ev

ery em bod
ied be
ing, whether Indra or a cow
,
pro
ceeds from re
mem
brance of the form and it
s char
ac
ter
is
tics by
Lord Brahma. When he ut
ters these words, which by as
so
ci
a
tion al
-
ways sug
gest the p
ar
tic
u
lar form and the char
ac
ter
is
tics of that
 form.
When a spe
cial in
di
vid
ual of the class called Indra has per
ished, the
cre
ator
, know
ing from the V
e
dic word ‚Indra™
 which is pres
ent in his
mind as the class char
ac
ter
is
tics of the be
ing de
noted by t
he word,
cre ates
an other
Indra
pos sess ing
those
very
same
char ac ter is tics,
just as the pot
ter fash
ions a new jar on the ba
sis of the word ‚jar
™
 which
is re
volv
ing in his mind.
Ev
ery V
e
dic word al
ways ex
presses a par
tic
u
lar type f
orm and
does not ex
press any in
di
vid
ual. Brah
man cre
ates the world by re
-
mem
ber
ing the p
ar
tic
u
lar type f
orms de
noted by t
hose words. Forms
(Akritis) are eter
nal and ex
ist in the ar
che
typ
al plane from eter
nity be
-
fore they be
come con
crete in any in
di
vid
ual form. B
rahma, the cre
-
ator cre
ated the Devas by
 re
flect
ing on the word ‚Ete™
 (these). He
cre
ated the men by
 the word ‚Asrigram™; t
he Pitris by t
he word
‚Indavah™
 (drops); t
he plan
et
s by the word ‚T
iras pav
itram™; t
he songs
by the word ‚Asuv
a™; the Mant
ras by the word ‚V
isvani™
 and he cre
ated
all other crea
tures by the word ‚Abhi
saubhaga™.
The word ‚et
ad™
 (this) re
minds Brahma the cre
ator of the Dev
as
pre
sid
ing over the senses; the word ‚Asrigra™
 mean
ing blood, re
minds
him of those crea
tures in which blood is the chief lif
e-el
e
ment, nam
ely
men; the word‚I
ndu™
 de
not
ing moon, re
minds him of t
he fa
thers, who
live in t
he Chandraloka; the word ‚T
iras pav
itram™
 mean
ing ‚hold
ing of
the pure am
bro
sia™
 re
minds of the plan
et
s where the Soma fluid ex

-
ist
s; the word ‚Asuva™
 (flow
ing) re
minds him of t
he sweet flow of mu
-
sic; the word ‚V
isva™
 re
minds him of t
he hymns sa
cred to the
V
isvedevas; t
he word ‚Abhisubhaga™, mean
ing ‚great pros
per
ity™
, re
-
minds him of all
 crea
tures. W
e read in Bri. Up. ﬁHe with hi
s mind
united him
self with speechﬂ i.e. t
he word of the V
eda.
Ev
ery word has for it
s coun
ter
p
art a form or an ob
ject which it
de
notes. Name and form are in
sep
a
ra
ble. When
ever you thi
nk of a
form it
s name co
mes be
fore your mind at
 once. When
ever you ut
ter a
name the ob
ject co
mes be
fore your mind.
 The re
la
tion be
tween a
name or word and form (the ob
ject) is eter
nal.
The V
eda is not the ma
te
rial cause of the uni
verse. If
 you say
that t
he V
eda re
fers to V
asus, Rudras, Adityas and ot
her gods who
are born and are there
fore non-eter
nal and, hence, the V
edas also
must be non-eter
nal, we re
ply that
 what are born are the in
di
vid
ual
man
i
fes
t
a
tions of Dravy
a (sub
st
ance), Guna (qual
ity) and K
arma (ac
-
tions) but not t
he Akritis, spe
cies. The orig
i
na
tion of t
he uni
verse from
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
100

the ‚word™
 is not to be un
der
stood in the sense that t
he word con
sti
-
tutes the ma
te
rial cause of the world as Brah
man does.
ﬁThe sev
eral names, ac
tions, and con
di
tions of all t
hings He
shaped in the be
gin
ning from the words of t
he V
edasﬂ Manu I-21.
Thought first m
an
i
fest
s as a word and then as the more con
crete
form. Y
ou can
not sep

a rate the thought
 from name and form.
 If y
ou
wish to do a thing y
ou first re
mem
ber the word de
not
ing the thing and
then you st
art the work. The V
e
dic words man
i
fested in the m
ind of
Prajap
ati, t
he cre
ator be
fore the cre
ation. A
f

ter that he cre ated the
things cor
re
spond
ing to those words. ﬁUt
ter
ing ‚Bhur
™
 he cre
ated the
earthﬂ etc. T
aittiriy
a Brahmana II
-2-4-2.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent main
t
ains that the uni

versecan
not be born of let

ters which are per ish
able, that
 there is an eter
nal
S
phot
a (causal form of sound) of which ut
tered sounds are man
i
fes
t
a
-
tions and that such S
phot
a is the cause of the uni
verse. S
phot
a is that
which causes the con
cep
tion of t
he sense of a word (Arthadhiketu).
S
phot
a is a supersensuous
 en
tity
 which is man
i
fested by t
he let
ters of
the word and if com
pre
hended by the mi
nd it

self man i
fest
s the sense
of the word.
This st
ate
ment of t
he Purvap
akshin is re
ally un
ten
a
ble. This is
cer
t
ainly not
 our ac
tual ex
pe
ri
ence. The ut
tered sounds do not per
ish,
for at the end of
 their ut
ter
ance we real
ise their iden
tity
 when we ut
ter
them again. I
t is said that t
here might be a dif

fer ence of in
to
na
tion
when ut
ter
ing the same word twice; thi
s does not ne
gate the iden
tity
,
for the dif

fer ence is only a dif

fer ence of the in
stru
ment of m
an
i
fes
t
a
-
tion. A
l
beit the let

ters are many, their group can be the sub
ject of a
con
cep
tion (e.g.
 ten, hun
dred etc). The S
phot
a the
ory is there
fore
quite
un nec es sary
.
It is there
fore quite clear that
 the V
e
dic sounds are eter
nal and
that t
here is no log
i
cal fal
lacy in the doc
trine that
 through them has
been cre
ated the en
tire uni
verse in
clud
ing the gods.
AV Ed M {
ZË`Ëd_²
At
a ev
a cha nity
atv
am
I.3.
29 (92)
From
 this v
ery
 rea
son
 also
 the
re fo
llow
s the
 ete
rnity o
f the
Vedas.
At
a ev
a:
 therefore, f
rom this very reason;
Cha:
 also;
Nity
atv
am:
 The
eternity
 of the V
edas.
A
 side is
sue is de
duced from Su
tra 28.
The eter
nal na
ture of V
e
dic words is also es
t
ab
lished from the
same rea
sons ad
duced in Su
tra 28 i.e.
 be
cause those words sig
nify
per ma nent
types.
This Su
tra now con
firms the al
ready es
t
ab
lished eter
nity of
 the
V
edas. The uni
verse with it
s def
i
nite eter
nal types or spheres such as
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
101

gods and so on orig
i
nates from the word of t
he V
eda. For this very
rea
son the eter
nity of
 the word of the V
eda must be ac
cepted. As
gods etc., as ty
pes are eter
nal, the V
e
dic words are also eter
nal.
The V
edas were not writ
ten by any

body. They are t
he very
breath of the Lord.
 They are eter
nal. The Rishis were not the au
thors
of the V
edas. They only
 dis
cov
ered them. ﬁBy
 means of their p
ast
good deeds the priest
s were able to un
der
st
and the V
edas. They
found them dwell
ing in the Rishis.ﬂ The Man
tra ﬁBy means of
 sac
ri
fice
they f
ol
lowed the trace of speech; they
 found it dwell
ing in the Rishisﬂ
in Rigveda Samhi
t
a X-71-3 shows that the speech found by t
he Rishis
was per
ma
nent. V
eda V
yasa also says ﬁFor
merly the great
 Rishis,
be
ing al
lowed to do so by Sv
ayambhu, ob
t
ained through their pen
-
ance the V
edas to
gether with the I
tihasas, which had been hid
den at
the end of t
he Y
uga.ﬂ
g_mZZm_
ê$nËdmV²
 M Amd¥
Îmmdß`{
damoY
mo Xe©
ZmËg_¥
Voü
Samananam
arup
atv
at cha av
ritt
av
apy
av
irodho
 darsanat
smritescha
I.3.
30 (93)
And on account of the sameness of names and forms in every
fres
h cyc
le
 the
re i
s no
 con
tradi
ctio
n (to th
e e
tern
ity of th
e
words of th
e Ve
das) eve
n in th
e revo
lving of t
he world cycles, as
is se
en
 from the
 Sruti a
nd Sm
riti.
Samananam
arup
atv
at:
 on account of similar names and forms;
Cha:
 and;
Av
r
i
t
ta
u
:
 in the cycles of creation;

Api:
even, also;
A
v
irodhah:
 no inconsistency or contradiction;
Darsanat:
 from
 the
Sruti
;
Smrite
h:
 from
 the Smr
iti,
Cha:
and.
An ar
gu
ment in fa
vour of Su
tra 29 is given in t
his Su
tra.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says: At
 the end of a cy
cle
ev
ery
thing is to
t
ally an
ni
hi
lated. There is new cre
ation at t
he be
gin
-
ning of the nex
t cy
cle. There is a break in the con
ti
nu
ity of
 ex
is
tence.
Hence even as types, t
he gods are not eter
nal and the eter
nal re
la
tion
of V
e
dic words and the ob
ject
s they de
note does not re
main. Con
se
-
quently t
here is con
tra
dic
tion to t
he eter
nity and t
he au
thor
ity of
 the
V
edas.
W
e say it is not so.
 Just as a man who rises from sleep con
tin
-
ues the same form of ex

is tence which he en
joyed pre
vi
ously to his
sleep, so also the world is a la
tent or po
ten
tial st
ate (in seed form) in
Pralaya or dis
so
lu
tion; it
 is again pro
jected with all t
he pre
vi
ous va
ri
-
ety of
 names and forms at the be
gin
ning of the nex
t cy
cle. There
fore
the eter
nity of
 the re
la
tion be
tween V
e
dic words and their ob
ject
s is
not
at
all
con tra dicted.
Con se quently
the
au thor i t
a tive ness
of
the
V
edas re
mains. This is sup
ported by Srut
i and Smriti
. W
e read in
Rigveda X-190-3 ﬁAs for
merly the Lord or
dered the sun and the
moon, heaven,
 earth, the sky et
c.ﬂ W
e read in the Smrit
i ﬁAs the same
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
102

signs of sea
sons ap
pear again and again in their due course, so do
be ings
ap pear
and
re ap pear
in
suc ces s
ive
cy clesﬂ.
The word ‚Cha™
 in the Su
tra is used to re
move the doubt
 raised.
Even af

ter a great Pralaya there is no con
tra
dic
tion with re
gard to the
eter
nity of
 V
e
dic words, be
cause the new cre
ation pro
ceeds on the
same
ness of names and forms etc., i
n the pre
ced
ing cre
ation. I
n a
Mahapralaya the V
edas and the types de
noted by t
he words of the
V
edas merge in the Lord and be
come one with Him. They
 re
main in
Him in a st
ate of la
tency
. When the Lord de
sires to cre
ate they
 come
out from Him again and be

come man i
fest. The cre
ation of in
di
vid
u
als
is al
ways pre
ceded by a re
flec
tion on the words of t
he V
edas and the
types de
noted by t
hem.
Af

ter the Mahapralaya the Lord cre
ates the V
edas in ex
actly t
he
same or
der and ar
range
ment
s as they had been be
fore. He re
flect
s
on the words and types and pro
ject
s the whole uni
verse. A
 sub
se
-
quent cre
ation is sim
i
lar to the p
ast cre
ation. The Lord cre
ates the
world just as a pot
ter who makes a pot by re
mem
ber
ing the word ‚pot™
and the form which the word calls up in his mind.
Af

ter a Mahapralaya the Lord Him
self cre
ates all el
e
ment
s from
Mahat down
wards up to Brahmanda. He pro
ject
s Brahma from His
body and teaches him the V
edas men
t
ally (not orall
y) and en
trust
s
him with the work of f
ur
ther cre
ation. I
n mi
nor Pralaya Brahma does
not cease to ex
ist, nor do the el
e
ment
s. Brahma him
self cre
ates the
world af

ter ev ery mi
nor Pralaya.
It may
 be ob
jected that when we sleep and then wake up we can
re
call the al
ready ex
pe
ri
enced ex
ter
nal uni
verse and that such a thing
is not pos
si
ble in the case of the di
s
so
lu
tion of t
he world. But our an
-
swer is that by the grace of t
he Su
preme Lord, Hiranyagarbha or
Brahma can rec
ol
lect the st
ate of t
he world as it was be
fore the dis
so
-
lu
tion. W
e read in the Sv
et
asvat
ara Upani
shad ﬁDur
ing Pralaya all
forms van
ish but Sakti re
mains. The next
 cre
ation t
akes place
through it aloneﬂ.
 Oth
er
wise you would have to pos
tu
late a cre
ation
out of not
h
ing.
_Üdm{
Xîdgå^
dmXZ{Y
H$ma
§ O¡
{_{Z
Madhv
adishv
asambhav
adanadhikaram
 Jaimi
nih
I.3.
31 (94)
On acc
ount
 of t
he imposs
ibil
ity
 (of t
he gods being
 quali
fied) f
or
Madhu
 Vidya e
tc., Jaimini (is o
f opinio
n that the go
ds) are
 not
qua
lifie
d (e
ithe
r for Up
asa
na o
r for the
 Brah
ma Vi
dya
 or the
knowl
edge of th
e Self).
Madhu adishu:
 in Madhu V
idya etc.
;
Asambhav
at:
 on account of the
impossib
ility;
Anadhikaram:
 disqualification;

Jaiminih
:
 Jaimini is o
f
opinion.
An
other ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 26 is raised.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
103

For Madhu V
idya vi
de Chh. Up. II
I-1-1
1, the sage Jaimini,
 the
au
thor of Purv
amimamsa, says t
hat as the sun and the oth
er gods are
the de
i
ties to be wor
shipped in Madhu V
idya and the l
ike, it is im
pos
si
-
ble that t
hey should also be the wor
ship
pers. Hence they are not en
ti
-
tled for t
he Up
asana pre
scribed in Sruti, be
cause ob
vi
ously they
can
not wor
ship them
selves. In Madhu V
idya one is to med
i
t
ate on the
Sun as honey (ben
e
fi
cial). Such a med
i
t
a
tion is not pos
si
ble for Surya
or the Sun-god be
cause one and the same per
son can
not be both t
he
ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion as well as the per
son med
i
t
at
ing.
Fur
ther the Devas like V
asu etc., al
ready be
long to the class of
V
asus etc. There
fore in their case the med
i
t
a
tion is use
less as the fruit
is al
ready ac
com
plished. The Devas have not
h
ing to gain by
 such
med
i
t
a
tion. S
o they hav
e no de
sire for this med
i
t
a
tion, be
cause they
al
ready are in pos
ses
sion of that which is t
he fruit of
 such med
i
t
a
tion.
Á`mo{V
Jy
otishi bh
av
accha
I.3.
32 (95)
And (t
he gods ar
e not qual
ifi
ed for Vi
dyas)
 because (th
e words
‚sun,
 moon™ etc
.,
 spoken of as
 gods) a
re used in t
he sense of
mer
e sp
her
es o
f l
ig
ht
.
Jy
otishi:
 as mere spheres of light;
Bhav
at:
 because used in the
sense;
Cha:
 and.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of the ob
jec
tion raised in Su
tra 31 is
given.
The Purvap
akshin raises an
other ob
jec
tion: The l
u
mi
nous orbs
can
not pos
si
bly do act
s of med
i
t
a
tion. S
uch and other lu
mi
nary ob
-
ject
s as Agni etc., can
not have a bodil
y form wit
h hands, heart or in
tel
-
li
gence. They are ma
te
rial in
ert ob
ject
s. They can
not have wishes.
W
e can
not place fait
h on Itihasas and Puranas, as they
 are of hu
man
or
i
gin and as they t
hem
selves st
and in need of other means of
 knowl
-
edge on which to base. The Mantras do not f
orm an in
de
pend
ent
means of au
thor
i
t
a
tive knowl
edge. The Arth
avada p
as
sages can
not
be re
garded to con
sti
tute by
 them
selves rea
sons for the ex
is
tence of
the per
son
al
ity of
 the gods. Con
se
quently t
he gods are not qual
i
fied
for any kind of V
idya or knowl
edge of Brah
man.
^md§ Vw
 ~mXam`Umo
@pñ
Bhav
am tu Baadaray
ano™
sti hi
I.3.
33 (96)
But Baadarayana, on t
he other hand (maint
ains) th
e e
xistence
(of q
ual
ifica
tion o
n the
 part o
f the
 god
s for B
rahma
 Vid
ya); fo
r
the
re a
re (
pas
sage
s ind
icato
ry of tha
t; bo
dy, d
es
ire
s e
tc., whic
h
quali
fy on
e for suc
h know
ledge do exist in
 the cas
e of th
e gods).
Bhav
am:
 the exist
ence (of the qualifi
cation to practise the m
edit
ation
like Madhu V
idya etc.
);
Tu
:
 but;
Baadaray
anah:
 the sage
Baadarayana (maint
ains);
Asti:
does exist;
Hi
: because.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
104

This Su
tra re
futes the ar
gu
ment
s in the pre
vi
ous two Sutras and
con cludes
the
dis cus sion.
But Ba
adarayana holds that t
he gods too have the right
 to prac
-
tise Up
asana as med
i
t
a
tion and Brahma V
idya, be
cause there are in
-
di
ca
tions in Sruti
 to that
 ef

fect. He main t
ains that each lu
mi
nary orb
has a pre
sid
ing de
ity wit
h body
, in
tel
li
gence, de
sires etc. The gods
can as
sume any form at
 will. Indra as
sumed the form of
 a ram and
car
ried of
f Medhatit
hi. Sury
a as
sumed the form of
 a man and came to
Kunti.
 W
e read in Chh. Up. VI
II-12-6 ﬁThe gods in
deed do wor
ship the
At
man.ﬂ The sun-god may be dis
qual
i
fied for a p
ar
tic
u
lar form of med
-
i
t
a
tionŠMadhu V
idya, as he can
not med
i
t
ate on the sun him
self, but
that is no rea
son why he should be dis
qual
i
fied for ot
her med
i
t
a
tions
or for Brahma V
idya or the knowl
edge of Brah
man. Sim

i lar is the case
with other gods.
The ex
pres
sion ‚T
u™
 (but, on the ot
her hand) is meant to re
but
the Purvap
akshin.
Scrip
ture de
clares that the Devas are qual
i
fied. ﬁWhat
ever Deva
was awak
ened so to know Brah
man he in
deed be
came thatﬂ Bri.
 Up.
1-4-10. Indra went to P
rajap
ati say
ing ﬁwell, let us search for that
 Self
by which if one has searched it out,
 all worlds and all de
sires are ob
-
t
ainedﬂ Chh. Up. VI
II-7.
The de
scrip
tion of t
he forms of gods is real. How can un
real
forms of gods be con
ceived by our minds f
or our of

fer ing sac
ri
fices to
them? Or
di
nary peo
ple are not able to be
hold their forms. B
ut sages
like V
yasa have seen them.
 They spoke to the gods. T
he Y
oga Sutras
say ﬁBy S
vadhyay
a one can be in com
mu
nion with the de
ity which we
wor
ship.ﬂ How can you deny the pow
ers of Y
oga? Rishis had mar
vel
-
lous pow
ers.
There
fore gods have forms and are el
i
gi
ble for Brahma V
idya.
Ap
asudradhikaran
am: T
opic 9 (Sutras 34-38)
The right of t
he Sudras to the study of V
edas discussed
ewJñ` VX
ZmXal
dUmV² VX
mÐdUmV²
 gyÀ`Vo
Sugasy
a t
adanadarasrav
anat

t
adadrav
anat suchy
ate hi
I.3.
34 (97)
(King Janasru
ti) was in grie
f on he
aring some
 conte
mptuo
us
wor
ds used about h
im by
 the sag
e in th
e form
 of a sw
an;
 owin
g
to his ap
proachi
ng Raikva, o
ve
rwhelming with that grie
f,
Raikva calle
d him Sudra; for it (the grie
f) is pointe
d at by
Raikva.
Suk:
 grief;
Asy
a:
 his;
Ta
t
:
 that,
 namely t
hat grief;

Anadarasrav
anat:
from hearing his (the Rishi™
s) disrespectful
 speech;
T
ada:
 then;
Adrav
anat:
 because of going to him i.
e. to Raikva;

Suchy
ate:
 is
referred to;
Hi:
 because.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
105

The
dis cus sion
on
the
priv i lege
of
di vine
med i t
a tion
be gun
in
Su
tra 25 is con
tin
ued.
The whole of this A
dhikarana about Sudras to
gether with the
pre
ced
ing one about the Dev
as ap
pears to be an in
ter
po
la
tion of
some later au
thor
.
In the pre
vi
ous Su
tra it has been shown that t
he gods are en
ti
-
tled to t
he study of V
edas and Brahma V
idya. Thi
s Su
tra dis
cusses
whether the Sudras are en
ti
tled to t
hem or not.
The Purvap
akshin says: The Sudras also have got bod
ies and
de
sires. Hence they are also en
ti
tled. Raikva re
fers to Janasruti who
wishes to learn from him by t
he name of Sudra.
 ﬁFie, neck
lace and
car
riage be thine, O S
udra, to
gether with the cowsﬂ Chh. Up. IV
-2 & 3.
But when he ap
pears a sec
ond time, Raikv
a ac
cept
s his pres
ent
s and
teaches him. Sm
riti speaks of V
idura and oth
ers who were born from
Sudra moth
ers as pos
sess
ing high
est knowl
edge. There
fore the
Sudra has a claim to Brahma V
idya or knowl
edge of Brah
man.
This Su
tra re
futes the v
iew and de
nies the right to t
he study of
the V
edas for Sudra. The word ‚Sudra™
 does not de
note a Sudra by
birth which is it
s con
ven
tional mean
ing, be
cause Janasruti was a
Kshatriya king.
 Here we will have to t
ake the et
y
mo
log
i
cal mean
ing of
the word which is, ﬁHe rushed into grief (
Sukam abhi
 dudrava
) or as
ﬁgrief rushed on himﬂ or as ﬁhe in his grief rushed to Raikvaﬂ. The fol
-
low
ing Su
tra also in
ti
mates that he
 was a Kshatriya.
j{Ì`ËdmdJVo
ümo
ÎmaÌ M
¡ÌaW
oZ {
bﬁmV
Kshatriy
atv
av
agateschott
aratra chaitrarathena li
ngat
I.3.
35 (98)
And because th
e Kshat
riy
ahood (of
 Jan
asrut
i) i
s know
n fr
om
the infere
ntial mark (supp
lied
 by his be
ing mentione
d) late
r on
with Chaitraratha (who
 was a Ksha
triya himse
lf).
Kshatriy
atv
a:
 the st
ate of his being a K
shatriya;
A
v
agateh:
 on
account of being known or understood;
Cha:
 and;
Utt
aratra:
 latter on
in a subsequent p
art of the t
ext;

Chaitrarathena:
 with Chaitraratha;
Lingat:
 because of the indicatory sign or t
he inferential m
ark.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 34 is given.
Janasruti is men
tioned with t
he Kshatriya Chait
raratha
Abhiprat
arin in con
nec
tion with t
he same V
idya. Hence we can in
fer
that Janasruti also was a Kshatriy
a be
cause, as a rule, equals are
men
tioned to
gether with equals. Hence the S
udras are not qual
i
fied
for the knowl
edge of Brah
man.
g§ñH
$manam_
em©V²
 VX^mdm{^
Samskarap
aramarsat t
adabhav
abhilap
accha
(I.3.36) (99)
Because
 purificat
ory ceremonies are me
ntioned (in th
e case
 of
the twice-born) and th
eir absence
 is declared (in the case o
f the
Sudra
).
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
106

Samskara:
 the purificatory
 ceremonies, the invest
iture with sacred
thread;
Paramarsat:
 because of the reference;
Ta
t
:
 that ceremony;
Abhava:
 absence;
Abhilap
at:
 because of the declaration;
Cha:
 and.
The dis
cus
sion on the priv
i
lege of Brahma V
idya on the p
art of
Sudras is con
tin
ued.
In dif

fer ent places of the V
idyas the Up
anayana cer
e
mony is re
-
ferred to. The Up
anayana cer
e
mony is de
clared by the scrip
tures to
be a nec
es
sary con
di
tion for t
he study of al
l kinds of knowl
edge or
V
idya. W
e read in Prasna Up. I-1 ﬁDe
voted t
o Brah
man, firm
 in Brah
-
man, seek
ing for the high
est Brah
man they
, car
ry
ing fuel in t
heir
hands, ap
proached the ven
er
a
ble Pipp
alada, think
ing that he would
teach them all t
hat.ﬂ Up
anayana cer
e
mony is meant f
or the higher
castes. With ref
er
ence to the Sudras on the ot
her hand, the ab
sence
of cer
e
mo
nies is fre
quently m
en
tioned in the scrip
tures. ﬁIn the S
udra
there is not any sin by
 eat
ing pro
hib
ited food,
 and he is not fit
 for any
cer
e
monyﬂ Manu X-12-6. A
 Sudra by birth can
not have Up
anayana
and other Samskaras with
out which the V
edas can
not be stud
ied.
Hence the Sudras are not en
ti
tled to t
he study of t
he V
edas.
The next S
u
tra fur
ther strength
ens the view that
 a Sudra can
have no Samskara.
VX^md{Z
Ym©a
Uo M
àd¥
T
adabhav
anirdharane ch
a prav
ritteh
I.3.
37 (100)
And because th
e incli
nat
ion (
on th
e part of
 Gautam
a to i
mpar
t
knowle
dge
 is se
en o
nly) on the
 asce
rtainment o
f the ab
se
nce
 of
Sudrahood (in Jabala Sat
yakama).
Ta
d
:
 that,
 namely t
he Sudrahood;
Abhava:
 absence;
Nirdharane:
 in
ascertai
nment;
Cha:
 and;
Prav
ritteh:
 from inclinati
on.
The same dis
cus
sion on the Sudras™
 right is con
tin
ued.
Gaut
ama, hav
ing as
cer
t
ained Jabala not to be a S
udra from his
speak
ing the trut
h pro
ceeded to ini
ti
ate and in
struct him. ﬁNone who
is not a Brahmana would thus speak out.
 Go and fetch fuel
, friend,
 I
shall ini
ti
ate you.
 Y
ou have not swerved from t
he truthﬂ Chh. Up.
IV
-4-5.
This scrip
tural tex
t fur
nishes an in
fer
en
tial sign of t
he Sudras not
be ing
ca pa bl
e
of
ini ti a t
ion.
ldUm
Ü``Z
mW©à{V
foYmV
&
Srav
anadhy
ay
anarthapratishedhat sm
ritescha
I.3.
38 (101)
And on a
ccount
 of t
he prohi
biti
on in
 Smr
iti
 of (t
he Sudra
s)
hea
ring, studying and
 unde
rstanding (the
 Ve
da) and
pe
rformi
ng Ve
dic
 rite
s (the
y are
 not e
ntitle
d to
 the
 kno
wle
dge
of B
rahma
n).
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
107

Srav
ana:
 hearing;
Adhy
ay
ana:
 studying;

Artha:
 underst
anding;
Pratishedhat:
 on account of the prohibit
ion;
Smrite
h:
 in the Smriti;
Cha:
 and.
The same dis
cus
sion on the Sudras™
 right is con
cluded here.
The Smriti
 pro
hib
it
s their hear
ing the V
eda, their study

ing andun
der
st
and
ing the V
eda and their per
form
ing V
e
dic rites. ﬁThe ears of
him who hears the V
eda are to be filled wit
h mol
ten lead and lac.ﬂ For
a Sudra is like a cem
e
tery
. There
fore the V
eda is not to be read in the
vi
cin
ity of
 a Sudra. ﬁHis tongue is to be slit
 if he pro
nounces it; his body
is to be cut through if
 he pre
serves it.ﬂ Sudras like V
idura and the re
li
-
gious hunter Dharma V
yadha ac
quired knowl
edge ow
ing to the af

teref

fects of for
mer deeds in p
ast births. It
 is pos
si
ble for the S
udras to
at
t
ain that knowl
edge through the Puranas, Gi
t
a and the ep
ics,
Ramayana and Mahabharat
a which con
t
ain the quin
tes
sence of the
V
edas.
It is a set
tled point t
hat the S
udras do not pos
sess any such
qual i fi ca ti
on
with
re gard
to
the
V
eda.
The di
gres
sion be
gun from Su
tra 26 ends here and the gen
eral
topic is again t
aken up.
Kamp
anadhikaranam
: T
opic 10
The Prana in which everything trem
bles is Brahman
H$ånZmV²
Kamp
anat
I.3.
39 (102)
(Prana is Brah
man) on account of t
he vibration or tr
embling
(spoken of
 the wh
ole worl
d).
Kamp
anat:
 on account of shaking or vibration.
Af

ter dis cuss
ing the side is
sues in Su
tra 25-38 the Sut
rakara or
the au
thor of the S
utras re
sumes the ex
am
i
na
tion of t
he main is
sue.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 24 is given here.
The dis
cus
sion of qual
i
fi
ca
tion for B
rahma V
idya or knowl
edge
of Brah
man is over
. W
e re
turn to our chief t
opic i.e.,
 the en
quiry into
the pur
port of the V
edant
a text
s.
W
e read in Kathop
anishad II-3-2 ﬁWhat
ever there is in the whole
world has come out of Prana and trem
bles in the Prana. T
he Prana is
a great ter
ror
, a raised thun
der
bolt. Those who know it be
come im
-
mor t
al.ﬂ
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that the t
erm Prana de
notes the air
or the vi
t
al force with it
s five mod
i
fi
ca
tions. The S
iddhantin says: Here
Prana is Brah
man and not the v
i
t
al force, be
cause Brah
man only is
spo
ken of in the pre
ced
ing as well as in the sub
se
quent p
art of the
chap
ter
. How then can it be sup
posed that all at
 once the vi
t
al force
should be re
ferred to in the i
n
ter
me
di
ate p
art?
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
108

ﬁThe whole world trem
bles in Prana.ﬂ W
e find here a qual
ity of
Brah
man viz.,
 it
s con
sti
tut
ing the abode of t
he whole world. That the
word ‚Prana™
 de
notes the high
est Self ap
pears from such pas
sages
as ‚the Prana of P
rana™
 Bri. Up. I
V
-4-18. The scrip
ture de
clares ﬁNo
mor
t
al lives by t
he Prana and the breath t
hat goes down. W
e live by
an
other in whom these two re
poseﬂ (Katha Up. II
-5-5). In the p
as
sage
sub
se
quent to t
he one un
der dis
cus
sion ﬁFrom ter
ror of it fi
re burns,
from ter
ror the sun shines, from ter
ror Indra and V
ayu and Death as
the fif
th run away
.ﬂ Brah
man and not the v
i
t
al force is spo
ken of as the
sub
ject of that
 p
as
sage, which is rep
re
sented as the cause of fear on
the p
art of the en
tire uni
verse in
clu
sive of t
he Prana it

self. Brah man
only is the cause of t
he life of t
he en
tire uni
verse in
clud
ing the vi

tal
force.
Brah
man is com
p
ared to a thun
der
bolt be
cause he in
spires fear
in fire, air
, sun, Indra and Y
ama. Fur
ther Im
mor
t
al
ity i
s de
clared to him
who knows this Prana. ﬁA
 man who knows him only p
asses over
death, t
here is no other p
ath to go.
ﬂ (Svet.
 Up. VI-15). P
rana is also of

-
ten used to de
note Brah
man in the Srut
i.
Jy
otiradhikar
anam: T
opic 1
1
The ‚li
ght™
 is Brahman
Á`m
o{VX©e
©ZmV
Jy
otirdarsanat
I.3.
40 (103)
The light (is Brahma
n) on acc
ount o
f that (Brahman) b
eing
see
n (in t
he scriptural passage).
Jy
otih:
light;
Darsanat:
 on account of (Brahman) being seen.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 24 is con
tin
ued.
W
e read in the Sruti
 ﬁThus does that se
rene be
ing aris
ing from
this body
, ap
pear in it
s own form as soon as it has ap
proached the
High
est Lightﬂ (Chh. Up. V
III
-12-3).
Here the doubt arises whether the word ‚light™
 de
notes the phys
-
i
cal light which is the ob
ject of sight and di
s
pels dark
ness, or the High
-
est Brah
man.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says: The word light
 de
notes
the well-known phys
i
cal light be
cause that is the con
ven
tional sense
of the word.
T
o this we have the f
ol
low
ing re
ply
. The word ‚light™
 can de
note
the High
est Brah
man only
. Why? Be
cause in the whole chap
ter Brah
-
man is the topic of
 dis
cus
sion. The High
est Light is also called the
‚High
est Per
son™
 in that t
ext it

self later on. Free
dom from body i
s said
to be
long to that
 be
ing which is one with this light
. Sruti
 de
clares
ﬁWhen he is free from the body t
hen nei
ther plea
sure nor pain
touches himﬂ (Chh. Up. VII
I-12.1). Free
dom from body i
s not pos
si
ble
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
109

out

side Brah man. One can at
t
ain free
dom or the bodi
less st
ate when
he iden
ti
fies him
self with Brah
man.
Arthant
aratv
adiv
y
ap
adesadhikaranam
: T
opic 12
The Akasa is Brahman
AmH
$memo@
Wm©ÝVa
Ëdm{Xì`nX
oemV²
Akaso™rthant
aratv
adiv
y
ap
adesat
I.3.
41 (104)
Akasa (is Brahman) because it is declared to be
 something
diffe
ren
t etc
., (from
 name
s and
 forms
).
Akasah:
 Akasa;

Arthant
aratv
adi-v
y
ap
adesat:
 because it is
declared to be something dif
ferent;
Artha:
 with a meaning;
Ant
aratv
a:
 dif
ferentness.
Adi:
 etc.;
V
y
ap
adesat:
 from st
atement on
account of designation.
An
other ex
pres
sion from the Chhandogya Up
anishad is now
t
aken up for dis
cus
sion. W
e read in Chhandogya Up
anishad VIII
-14-1
ﬁThat which is called Akasa is the revealer of al
l names and forms.
That within which t
hese names and forms are con
t
ained is Brah
man,
the Im
mor
t
al, the S
elf.ﬂ
Here a doubt arises whether that which here is called Akasa is
the
High est
Brah man
or
the
or di nary
el e men t
al
ether
.
The Purvap
akshin or the ob
jec
tor says that A
kasa means here
the el
e
men
t
al ether
, be
cause this is the con
ven
tional mean
ing of the
word.
T
o this the Si
ddhantin giv
es the fol
low
ing re
ply
. Here ‚Akasa™
 is
Brah
man only
, be
cause it is des
ig
nated as a dif

fer ent thing et
c.
Names and forms are said to be within thi
s Akasa, which is there
fore
dif
 fer ent
from
these.
The term Akasa sig
ni
fies Brah
man be
cause it is st
ated to be t
he
source of all names and forms, also be
cause it is qual
i
fied by such ep
-
i
thet
s as ‚In
fi
nite™
 ‚Im
mor
t
al™
 ‚Self™. The word Akasa, re
fers to Brah
man
be
cause the de
scrip
tion ﬁbe
yond name and formﬂ ap
plies only to
Brah man.
Sushupty
utkranty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 13 (Sutras 42-43)
The Self consisting of
 knowledge is Brahman
gwfwßË
`wËH«$m
ÝË`
mo^}XoZ
Sushupty
utkrantyorbhedena
I.3.
42 (105)
Be
cau
se
 of the
 High
es
t Se
lf be
ing sh
own a
s di
ffere
nt (from
 the
indi
vidual
 soul) i
n th
e stat
es of deep sleep and death.
Sushupti utkranty
oh:
 In deep sleep and death;
Bhedena:
 by the
dif
ference, as dif
ferent; (
Sushupti:
 deep sleep;
Utkranti
:
 dep
arting
at the t
ime of death).
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
110

An ex
pres
sion from the sixt
h chap
ter of the B
rihadaranyaka
Up
anishad is now t
aken up for dis
cus
sion.
In the six
th Prap
athaka or chap
ter of the B
rihadaranyaka
Up
anishad, in re
ply to t
he ques
tionŠﬁWho is that S
elf?ﬂ (IV
-3-7), a
lengthy ex

po si
tion of t
he na
ture of the S
elf is given.
 ﬁHe who is within
the heart, am
ong the Pranas, t
he per
son of light,
 con
sist
ing of knowl
-
edgeﬂ.
Here a doubt arises whether the Self is t
he High
est Self or t
he
in di vid ual
soul.
The Su
tra de
clares that it is t
he High
est Self.
 Why? Be
cause it is
shown to be dif

fer ent from t
he in
di
vid
ual soul in the st
ate of deep
sleep and at the ti
me of death.
 ﬁThis per
son em
braced by the High
est
in
tel
li
gent Self
 knows noth
ing that is wit
h
out or withinﬂ Bri.
 Up.
IV
-3-21. This clearly in
di
cates that in deep sleep t
he ‚per
son™
 or the in
-
di
vid
ual soul is dif

fer ent from t
he High
est in
tel
li
gent Self
 or Brah
man.
Here the term ﬁthe per
sonﬂ must mean the Jiva or the em

bod ied
soul, be
cause the ab
sence of the knowl
edge of what is within and
with
out in deep sleep can be pred
i
cated only of
 the in
di
vid
ual soul.
The
Su preme
in tel li gent

Self
is
Brah man
be cause
such
in tel li gence
can be pred
i
cated of Brah
man only
. Brah
man is never dis
so
ci
ated
from all-em
brac
ing knowl
edge. Sim
i
larly the p
as
sage that treat
s of
de
p
ar
ture i.e.
 death (this bodily
 Self mount
ed by the in
tel
li
gent self
moves along groan
ing) re
fers to the S
u
preme Lord as dif

fer ent from
the in
di
vid
ual soul. The Jiva who cast
s of
f this mor
t
al body is dif

fer ent
from Su
preme Self or B
rah
man. The Jiva al
one p
asses through the
st
ages of sound-sleep and death. Brah
man has nei
ther sleep nor
death. He is wide awake al
ways.
There
fore Brah
man is the chief t
opic in this Sec
tion. The Chap
-
ter ex
clu
sively aim
s at de
scrib
ing the na
ture of Brah
man. The lengt
hy
dis
course on the in
di
vid
ual soul in this Sec
tion is to show that
 he is in
es sence
iden ti cal
with
Brah man.
nË`m{Xeã
Paty
adisabdebhy
ah
I.3.
43 (106)
(T
he Being r
eferred t
o in S
utr
a 42 is Br
ahma
n) because of
 the
wor
ds ‚Lor
d™ etc.
, being
 applied t
o Him.
 ﬁHe is th
e contr
oller,
the
 Rule
r, the
 Lord
 of al
l.ﬂ B
ri. Up. I
V-4
-22
.
Paty
adi sabdebhy
ah:
 On account of words like ‚Lord™
 etc., (t
he self in
the tex
t under discussion is the Superme Self
).
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 42 is given.
These ep
i
thet
s are apt only in t
he case of Brah
man, be
cause
these ep
i
thet
s in
ti
mate that
 the thing spo
ken of is ab
so
lutely
 free.
Hence the word Self de
notes the High
est Self or B
rah
man and not the
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 3
111

Jiva or the em
bod
ied soul, from all
 of which we con
clude that the
Chap
ter re
fers to the S
u
preme Brah
man.
Here ends the
 Third Pada of the First Adhyay
a of the Br
ahma
Sutras and of Sari
raka Bhashy
a of Sri S
ankarachary
a.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
112

CHAPTER I
SECTION 4
INTRODUCTION
In T
opic 5, Sec
tion 1, it
 has been shown that as the Pradhana of
the Sankhyas is not based on t
he au
thor
ity of
 the scrip
tures and that
as all the Sruti
 text
s re
fer to an in
tel
li
gent prin
ci
ple as the first cause,
Brah
man is the first cause.
The na
ture of Brah
man has been de
fined in I.
1.2. I
t has been
shown that the pur
port of all V
edant
a text
s is to set forth t
he doc
trine
that B
rah
man and not the P
radhana, is the cause of the world.
The Sankhyas say that
 it has not been sat
is
fac
to
rily proved t
hat
there is no scrip
tural au
thor
ity f
or the Pradhana, be
cause some
Sakhas con
t
ain ex
pres
sion which seem to con
vey t
he idea of the
Pradhana.
This Pada or Sec
tion pro
ceeds to deal with the con
sid
er
ation of
other V
e
dic text
s which are as
serted by the S
ankhyas to de
clare that
the Pradhana is the cause of t
he uni
verse.
The whole of Sec
tion 4 giv
es suit

able and co gent an
swers to all
ob
jec
tions raised by the S
ankhyas.
11
3

SYNOPSIS
The fourth Pa
da or Sec
tion of t
he first Chap
ter is spe
cially di
-
rected against the Sankhy
as. This Sec
tion ex
am
ines some p
as
sages
from the Up
anishads where terms oc
cur which may be mis
t
aken for
the names of t
he in
sen
tient mat

ter of Sankhyas. It de
clares au
thor
i
t
a
-
tivel
y that
 the V
edant
a text
s lend no sup
port what

so ever to the
Sankhya the
ory of cre
ation or the doc
trine of P
radhana. This Sec
tion
proves that B
rah
man is the ma
te
rial as well as the ef

fi cient cause of
the uni
verse.
Adhikarana I:
 (Sutras 1-7) dis
cusses the pas
sage in Katha
Up
anishad I-3-10, 1
1 where men
tion is made of t
he great (Mahat) and
the un
de
vel
oped (A
vyakt
am). A
vyakt
a is a syn
onym for P
radhana in
the Sankhya S
astra. ‚Mahat™
 means in
tel
lect in Sankhya phi

los o
phy
.
Sri Sankaracharya shows that the t
erm A
vyakt
a de
notes the sub
tle
body or Sukshma Sarira as well as the gross body also and the t
erm
Mahat Brah
man or the Su
preme Self.
Adhikarana II:
 (Sutras 8-10) shows that ac
cord
ing to Sankara
the tri-col
oured ‚Aja™
 spo
ken of in the Sv
et
asvat
ara Upani
shad IV
.5 is
not the P
radhana of the Sankhy
as but ei
ther that power of t
he Lord
from which the world t
akes it
s or
i
gin or the pri
mary causal mat
ter first
pro
duced by that power
.
Adhikarana III
:
 (Sutras 1
1-13) shows that the
‚Pancha-p
ancha-janah™
 men
tioned in Brihadarany
aka Upanishad
IV
-4-17 are not the twenty
-five prin
ci
ples of the Sankhy
as.
Adhikarana IV
:
 (Sutras 14-15) shows that al
though there is con
-
flict as re
gards the or
der of cre
ation, scrip
ture does not con
tra
dict it

-
self on the all-im

por t
ant point of
 Brah
man i.e.,
 a Be
ing whose
es
sence is in
tel
li
gence, which is the cause of this uni
verse.
Adhikarana V
:
 (Sutras 16-18) proves that ﬁHe who is the maker
of those per
sons, of whom this is the workﬂ men
tioned in Kau.
 Up.
IV
-1-19 is not ei
ther the Prana (the v
i
t
al air) or the in
di
vid
ual soul, but
Brah man.
Adhikarana VI:
 (Sutras 19-22) de
cides that the ﬁSel
f to be seen,
to be heardﬂ etc. (Bri.
 Up. II-4-5) is the S
u
preme Self,
 but not t
he in
di
-
vid
ual soul. The vi
ews of Jaimini, A
smarathya, A
udulomi and
Kasakrit
sna are ex
pressed.
Adhikarana VII
:
 (Sutras 23-27) teaches that Brah
man is not only
the ef

fi cient or op
er
a
tive cause (Nimitt
a) of the world, but
 it
s ma
te
rial
cause as well. The world springs from Brah
man by way of
 mod
i
fi
ca
-
tion (Parinama S
u
tra 26).
11
4

Adhikarana VII
I:
 (Su
tra 28) shows that the ref
u
t
a
tion of t
he
Sankhya vi
ews is ap
pli
ca
ble to other t
he
o
ries also such as the atomic
the
ory which says that t
he world has orig
i
nated from at

oms, etc.CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 4
115

Anumanikad
hikaranam
: T
opic 1 (Sutras 1-7)
The Mahat and A
vyakta of
 the Kat
hop
anishad
do not refer to t
he Sankhya T
attvas
AmZw_m
{ZH$_ß`
oHo$fm
{_{V MoÞ

 earaê$nH${
dÝ`ñVJ¥hrVoX©e©
Anumanikam
apy
ekeshamiti
 chet na

sarirarup
akav
iny
ast
agrihiter d
arsay
ati cha
I.4.
1 (107)
If it be said that in some (recensions of the Vedas) that whi
ch is
inferred
 (i.e. the P
radhana) (is) also
 (mentione
d), (we sa
y) no,
becaus
e (the word ‚Avyakta™ occurring in
 the Katha
Upan
isha
d) is m
ention
ed in a si
mile r
eferred to t
he body (an
d
mea
ns the b
ody itse
lf and not the
 Pradhana
 of the (Sa
nkhyas);
(the Sruti) also e
xplains (it).
Anumanikam:
 that which is inferred (i.e.
, the P
radhana);
Api:
 also;
Ekesham:
 of some branches or school of Srutis or recensions of the
text;
Iti:
 thus;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 No;
Sarirarup
akav
iny
ast
agrihiteh:
because it is mentioned in a simi
le referring to the body
 (
Sarira
:
 body
,
Rup
aka:
 simile,
V
iny
ast
a:
 cont
ained,
Grihiteh:
 because of the
reference);
Darsay
ati:
 (the Srutis) expl
ain;
 Cha:
 also, too, and.
The Sankhyas again raise an ob
jec
tion. They
 say that t
he
Pradhana is also based on scrip
tural au
thor
ity
, be
cause some
Sakhas like the Katha
 Sakha (school) con
t
ain ex
pres
sions wherein
the Pradhana seems to be re
ferred to ﬁBe
yond the Mahat
 there is the
A
vyakt
a (the unmanifested
 or the un
de
vel
oped), be
yond the A
vyakt
a
is the Purusha (Be
ing or Per
son)ﬂ Katha Up. 1-3-1
1.
The Sankhyas say that
 the word ‚A
vyakt
a™
 here re
fers to the
Pradhana be
cause the words ‚Mahat™, ‚A
vyakt
a™
 and ‚Purusha™
 which
oc
cur in the same or
der in the Sankhya phi

los o
phy
, oc
cur in the Sruti
text
. Hence they are re
cog
nised to be the same cat
e
go
ries of the
Sankhyas. The P
radhana is called ‚un
de
vel
oped™
 be
cause it is des
ti
-
tute of
 sound and other qual
i
ties. It
 can
not there
fore be said that t
here
is no scrip
tural au
thor
ity f
or the Pradhana. W
e de
clare that this
Pradhana is the cause of the world on the st
rength of Srut
i, Smrit
i and
ra ti o ci na tion.
This Su
tra re
futes it t
hus. The word ‚A
vyakt
a™
 does not re
fer to
the Pradhana. I
t is used in con
nec
tion with a sim
ile re
fer
ring to the
body
. The im
me
di
ately pre
ced
ing p
art of the Chap
ter ex
hib
it
s the sim
-
ile in which the Self
, the body
, and so on, are com
p
ared to the Lord of
a char
iot, a char
i
o
teer etc. ﬁKnow t
he soul to be the Lord of t
he char
-
iot, t
he body to be t
he char
iot, t
he in
tel
lect the char
i
o
teer and the mind
the reins. The senses they call t
he horses, the ob
ject
s of the senses
their roads. When the Sel
f is in un
ion with the body
, the senses and
the mind, t
hen wise peo
ple call him the enjoy
erﬂ Katha Up. I.
3.3-4.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
116

All these t
hings that are re
ferred to in these v
erses are found in
the fol
low
ing: ﬁBe
yond the senses there are the ob
ject
s, be
yond the
ob
ject
s there is mind, be
yond the mi
nd there is the in
tel
lect, the great
Self (Mahat
) is be
yond the in
tel
lect. Be
yond the great (Mahat
) is the
A
vyakt
a (the un
de
vel
oped), be
yond the A
vyakt
a there is the Purusha.
Be
yond the P
urusha there is noth
ingŠthis is the goal,
 the high
est
p
athﬂ Katha Up.
 I.3.
10-1
1.
Now com
p
are these two quo
t
a
tions. In t
his p
as
sage we re
cog
-
nise the senses etc. which in the pre
ced
ing sim
ile had been com
-
p
ared to horses and so on. The senses, the in
tel
lect and the mind are
re
ferred to in both p
as
sages un
der the same names. The ob
ject
s in
the sec
ond p
as
sage are the ob
ject
s which are in the for
mer p
as
sage
des
ig
nated as the roads of the senses. The Mahat
 of the lat
er text
means the cos
mic in
tel
lect. In t
he ear
lier p
as
sage in
tel
lect is the char
-
i
o
teer
. It
 in
cludes the in
di
vid
ual and cos
mic in
tel
lect. The A
t
man of the
ear
lier text
 cor
re
sponds to the Purusha of the l
ater text
 and body of
the ear
lier text
 cor
re
sponds to A
vyakt
a in the later t
ext.
 There
fore
A
vyakt
a means the body here and not t
he Pradhana. There re
mains
now the body only
 which had be
fore been com
p
ared to the char
iot in
the ear
lier text
.
Now an ob
jec
tion is raised. How can the body which is man
i
fest,
gross and vis
i
ble (V
yakt
a) be said to be unmanifest and un
evolved?
The fol
low
ing Su
tra gives a suit

able an swer
.
gyú_§ Vw V
Xh©Ëd
&
Sukshmam
 tu t
adarhatv
at
I.4.
2 (108)
But t
he subtl
e (body is mean
t by t
he term Av
yakt
a) on a
ccount
of it
s capabi
lit
y (of
 being so desi
gnat
ed).
Sukshmam
:
 the subtle, t
he permanent atoms,
 the causal body;
 Tu
:
but;
T
ad arhatv
at:
 because it can be properly so termed.
An ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 1 is re
futed.
The Su
tra re
plies that what t
he term ‚A
vyakt
a™
 de
notes is the
sub
tle causal body
. Any

thing sub tle may
 be spo
ken of as ‚un
de
vel
-
oped™
 or ‚unmanifested™.
 The sub
tle p
art
s of the el
e
ment
s, the causal
sub
st
ance, i.e.,
 the fiv
e un
com
pounded el
e
ment
s out of which the
body is formed may
 be called so. As they
 are sub
tle and not m
an
i
fest,
and as they also tran
scend sense per
cep
tion, t
hey can be prop
erly
des
ig
nated by t
he term ‚A
vyakt
a™.
It is also a mat

ter of com mon oc
cur
rence to de
note the ef

fect bythe cause. There
fore the gross body is re
ferred to here in
di
rectly
.
Com
p
are for in
st
ance the phrase ﬁMix the S
oma with the cow (i.e.
,
milk)ﬂ Rigveda IX.
40.4. A
n
other scrip
tural p
as
sage also de
clares
ﬁNow all this, i.e.
, this de
vel
oped world with names and forms is ca
p
a
-
ble of be
ing des
ig
nated ‚un
de
vel
oped™
 in so far as in a pre
vi
ous st
ate it
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 4
117

was in a merely sem
i
nal or po
ten
tial st
ate des
ti
tute of
 names and
formsﬂ.
In Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad I-4-7, the K
a
ra
na Sarira is called
by the t
erm un
evolved or A
vyakt
a. Be
fore the world came into man
i
-
fes
t
a
tion it was in t
he form of a seed or causal body
.
An ob
jec
tion is raised. If
 the A
vyakt
a is t
aken to be mat
ter in it
s
sub
tle st
ate con
sist
ing of the causal body
, what ob
jec
tion is there to
in
ter
pret it as the P
radhana of the Sankhy
a sys
tem, be
cause there
also A
vyakt
a means mat
ter in sub
tle st
ate. The f
ol
low
ing Su
tra gives
a suit

able an swer to this ob
jec
tion.
VXYrZ
ËdmXW©
T
adadhinatv
at arthav
at
I.4.
3 (109)
On accoun
t of
 its
 dependence (on the Lor
d, such
 a previous
seminal
 condit
ion of
 the wor
ld may
 be admitt
ed, because such
an admission is) r
easonable
.
Ta
d
:
 it
s;
Adhinatvat:
 on account of dependence;
Arthav
at:
 having a
sense or a meaning subserving an end or purpose; is fitting.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is con
tin
ued.
The op
po
nent says. I
f a suit

able causal state of t
he gross world
is ad
mit
ted it is as good as ac
cept
ing the Pradhana,
 for we Sankhyas
un
der
st
and by the t
erm Pradhana, noth
ing but the an
te
ced
ent con
di
-
tion of t
he uni
verse.
The Siddhanti
n gives the f
ol
low
ing re
ply
. The Pradhana of
 the
Sankhyas is an in
de
pend
ent en
tity
. The sub
tle causal st
ate ad
mit
ted
here is de
pend
ent on the High
est Lord. A
 pre
vi
ous sub
tle st
age of the
uni
verse must nec
es
sar
ily be ad
mit
ted. I
t is quite rea
son
able. For
with
out it t
he Lord can
not cre
ate. I
t is the po
ten
tial power of Brah
man.
The whole Lila is kept up through t
his power
. He could not be
come
ac
tive i
f he were des
ti
tute of
 this po
ten
tial power
. It
 is the causal po
-
ten ti al i
ty
in her ent
in
Brah man.
That
causal
po ten ti al i
ty
is
of
the
na ture
of ne
science.
The ex
is
tence of such a causal po
ten
ti
al
ity ren
ders it pos
si
ble
that t
he Jivanmukt
as or lib
er
ated souls do not t
ake fur
ther birth as it is
de
stroyed by per
fect knowl
edge. It
 is rightly de
noted by t
he term ‚un
-
de
vel
oped™
 (A
vyakt
a). It has t
he Su
preme Lord for it
s sub
stra
tum. I
t is
of the na
ture of an il
lu
sion. It i
s Anirvachaniya or in
de
scrib
able. Y
ou
can nei
ther say that
 it is nor that i
t is not.
This un
de
vel
oped prin
ci
ple is some
times de
noted by t
he term
‚Akasa™, ether
. ﬁIn that
 Im
per
ish
able then, O Gargi,
 the ether is wo
ven
like warp and woofﬂ Bri. Up. I
II-8-1
1. Some
times, again,
 it is de
noted
by the t
erm Akshara, the Im
per
ish
able. ﬁHigher than the hi
gh, Im
per
-
ish
ableﬂ Mun. Up. I
I-1-2.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
118

Just as the il
lu
sion of a snake in a rope is not pos
si
ble merely
through ig
no
rance with
out the sub
stra
tumŠrope, so also the world
can
not be cre
ated merely by
 ig
no
rance with
out the sub
stra
tum, t
he
Lord. There
fore the sub
tle causal con
di
tion is de
pend
ent on the Lord,
and yet t
he Lord is not in the least af

fected by this ig
no
rance, just as
the snake is not af

fected by the poi
son. ﬁKnow that t
he Prakriti is
Maya and the great
 Lord the ruler of Mayaﬂ S
vet.
 Up. IV
-10.
So the A
vyakt
a is a helper (Sahakari) to the Lord in His cre
ation.
The Lord cre
ates the uni
verse us
ing it as a means. I
t is de
pend
ent on
the Lord. It
 is not like the P
radhana of the Sankhy
as which is an in
de
-
pend ent
en tity
.
The Lord looks on Maya and energises her
. Then she has the
power of pro
duc
ing the world. I
n her own na
ture she is Jada or in
sen
-
tient.
In the nex
t Su
tra the au
thor gives an
other rea
son for hold
ing
that t
he ‚A
vyakt
a™
 of the K
atha Up
anishad is not to be in
ter
preted as
Pradhana.
ko`Ë
Jney
atv
av
achanaccha
I.4.
4 (1
10)
And because it
 is not
 menti
oned (th
at t
he Avyakt
a) is
 to be
known (it canno
t be
 the Prad
hana of the
 Sankhyas).
Jney
atv
a:
 that is the obj
ect to be known;
A
v
achanat:
 because of
non-mention;
Cha:
 and.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is con
tin
ued.
Ac
cord
ing to the S
ankhyas, eman
ci
p
a
tion re
sult
s when the dif

-
fer
ence be
tween the Purusha and the A
vyakt
a (Prakriti) is known. For
with
out a knowl
edge of the na
ture of the con
sti
tu
tive el

e ment
s of
Pradhana it is im
pos
si
ble to re
cog
nise the dif

fer ence of the soul from
them. Hence the A
vyakt
a is to be known ac
cord
ing to the S
ankhyas.
But here there is no ques
tion of know
ing the A
vyakt
a. Hence it can
not
be the Pradhana of t
he Sankhyas.
It is im
pos
si
ble to hold that
 knowl
edge of things which is not
t
aught in the t
ext is of
 any use to man.
 For this rea
son also we hold
that t
he word ‚A
vyakt
a™
 can
not de
note the P
radhana.
The Sankhyas call A
vyakt
a or Pradhana the first cause. B
ut the
first cause has been st
ated in the S
ruti as the ob
ject to be known. In
the Sruti
 ‚A
vyakt
a™
 is not st
ated to be an ob
ject of pur
suit. Hence it is
not the f
irst cause and con
se
quently
, can
not be mis
t
aken for the mat
-
ter of Sankhy
as.
Ac
cord
ing to the S
ankhyas, lib
er
a
tion is at
t
ained by know
ing
that P
urusha is dif

fer ent from P
rakriti. The knowl
edge of Prakriti is
thus an es
sen
tial of re
lease. But t
he Katha Up
anishad no
where men
-
tions that t
he knowl
edge of ‚A
vyakt
a™
 is nec
es
sary for the fi

nal eman -
ci
p
a
tion. There
fore the A
vyakt
a of the K
atha Up
anishad is not the
Prakriti of t
he Sankhyas.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 4
119

No
where does the scrip
ture de
clare that Pradhana (Mat

ter) isJneya (to be known) or Upasya (t
o be wor
shipped). What is aimed at
as the ob
ject of knowl
edge of ad
o
ra
tion in the S
rutis is the Su
preme
seat of V
ishnu (
T
ad V
ishnoh p
aramam
 p
adam
).
dXVr{V M
oÞ à
mkmo {
h àH
$aUmV²
 &
V
adatiti chet na praj
no hi prakaran
at
I.4.5 (
1
1
1)
And if
 you mai
nta
in t
hat
 the t
ext does speak (of t
he Pradh
ana
as an obj
ect of kn
owledge) we deny t
hat
; because th
e
intellige
nt (supre
me)
 Self is
 mea
nt on acco
unt of the
 gene
ral
sub
je
ct ma
tter.
V
adati:
 the verse or the tex
t st
ates;
Iti:
 thus;
 Chet:
 if.
Na:
 no;
Prajna
h:
 the intell
ect supreme;
Hi:
because;
Prakaranat:
 from
 the
context,
 because of the general subject-matt
er of the Chapter
.
An ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 4 is raised and re
futed.
The Sruti says,
 ﬁHe who has per
ceived that
 which is with
out
sound, with
out touch, wit
h
out form,
 de
cay
, with
out t
aste, eter
nal, with
-
out smell, wit
h
out be
gin
ning, with
out end, be
yond the great (Mahat
)
and un
change
able, is freed from t
he jaws of deathﬂ Kat
ha Up. II-3-15.
The Sankhyas says that
 the Pradhana has to be known to at

tain
the fi
nal re
lease, be
cause the de
scrip
tion giv
en of the en
tity
 to be
known agrees with the Pradhana, which is also be
yond the Mahat
(great). Hence we con
clude that the P
radhana is de
noted by t
he term
‚A
vyakt
am™.
This Su
tra re
futes this.
 It says t
hat by A
vyakt
a, the one be
yond
Mahat (great) etc.,
 the in
tel
li
gent Su
preme Self is meant
, as that is t
he
sub
ject-mat
ter of that
 Sec
tion.
Fur
ther the high
est Self i
s spo
ken of in all V
edantic tex
t
s as pos
-
sess
ing just those qual
i
ties which are men
tioned in the p
as
sage
quoted above v
iz., ab
sence of sound etc.
Hence it fol
lows that the P
radhana in the tex
t is nei
ther spo
ken
of as the ob
ject of knowl
edge nor de
noted by t
he term ‚A
vyakt
am™.
Even t
he propounders of the Sankhya phi
los
o
phy do not st
ate
that lib
er
a
tion or re
lease from death is the re
sult of the knowl
edge of
Pradhana. They
 st
ate that
 it is due to t
he knowl
edge of the sen
tient
Purusha.
The au
thor gives an
other rea
son for hold
ing that P
radhana is
not meant in
the p
as
sage of the Kat
ha Up
anishad.
Ì`mUm_o
d M¡d_
wnÝ`mg– à
íZü
T
ray
anamev
a chaiv
amup
any
asah prasnascha
I.4.
6 (1
12)
And the
re is q
ue
stion and e
xpla
nation re
lating to three
 things
only (not to
 the P
radhana).
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
120

T
ray
anam:
 of the t
hree, namely t
hree boons asked by Nachiketas;
Eva:
 only;
Cha:
 and;
Evam:
 thus;
Up
any
asah:
 mentioned,
(present
ation by way
 of answer);
Prasnat:
 question;
Cha:
 and.
The ob
jec
tion raised in Su
tra 5 is fur
ther re
futed.
In the K
atha Up
anishad Nachiket
as asks Y
ama three ques
tions
only vi
z., about t
he fire sac
ri
fice, the i
n
di
vid
ual soul and the Su
preme
Self.
 These three things only Y
ama ex
plains and to them onl
y the
ques
tions of Nachiket
as re
fer
. Pradhana is not men
tioned. Not
h
ing
else is men
tioned or en
quired about. There is no ques
tion rel
a
tive t
o
the Pradhana and hence no scope for any re
marks on it. W
e can
not
ex
pect Y
ama to speak of the P
radhana which has not been en
quired
into. S
o Pradhana has no place in the dis
course.
Mahadv
accha
I.4.
7 (1
13)
And
 (the
 cas
e o
f the
 term
 Avy
akta
) is l
ike
 that o
f the
 term
Mahat.
Mahadv
at:
 like the Mahat;

Cha:
 and.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is given.
 Just as in the case of
Mahat, A
vyakt
a also is used in the V
edas in a sense dif

fer ent from t
hat
at
t
ached to it in t
he Sankhya.
The Sankhyas use the term ‚
Mahat™
 (the great one) to de
note
the first born en
tity
, the in
tel
lect. The t
erm has a dif

fer ent mean
ing in
the V
e
dic text
s. In the V
e
dic text
s it is con
nected with the word Self
.
Thus we see in such pas
sages as the fol
low
ingŠﬁThe great Self
 is
be
yond the in
tel
lectﬂ (Katha Up. I
-3-10), ﬁThe great Om
ni
pres
ent Self
ﬂ
(Katha Up. I
-2-22), ﬁI know the great per
sonﬂ (Svet. Up.
 III
-8). W
e
there
fore, con
clude that the t
erm ‚A
vyakt
a™
 also where it oc
curs in the
Srutis, can
not de
note the P
radhana. Though the A
vyakt
a may mean
the Pradhana or Prakriti in t
he Sankhya phi
los
o
phy
, it means some
-
thing dif

fer ent in the S
ruti tex
t
s. So the P
radhana is not based on
scrip
tural au
thor
ity
, but is a mere con
clu
sion of in
fer
ence.
Mahat is the B
uddhi of the S
ankhyas. But i
n the Kat
ha
Up
anishad the Mahat is said t
o be higher than Buddhi.
 ﬁ
Buddheratm
a
mahan p
arah
.ﬂ So the M
ahat of t
he Kathop
anishad is dif

fer ent from
the Mahat of
 the Sankhyas.
Chamasadhikaran
am: T
opic 2 (Sutras 8-10)
The Aja of S
vet
asvat
ara Upani
shad does not mean P
radhana
M_gdX{deofmV²
 &
Chamasav
adav
iseshat
I.4.
8 (1
14)
(It cannot be maintained that ‚Aja™ means th
e Pradhana)
because
 no special characteristi
c is stated, as in t
he case o
f the
cup.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 4
121

Chamasav
at:
 like a cup;
A
v
iseshat:
 because there is no special
characteristic.
An ex
pres
sion from the Sv
et
asvat
ara Upani
shad is now t
aken
up for dis
cus
sion in sup
port of Su
tra 1.
The au
thor next re
futes an
other wrong in
ter
pre
t
a
tion giv
en by
the Sankhyas of
 a verse from the S
vet
asvat
ara Upani
shad.
W
e find in the S
vet
asvat
ara Upani
shad IV
-5, ﬁThere is one ‚Aja™
red, white and black in col
our
, pro
duc
ing man
i
fold of
f
spring of the
same na
ture.ﬂ
Here a doubt arises whether this ‚Aja™
 re
fers to the P
radhana of
the Sankhyas or to t
he sub
tle el
e
ment
s fire, wa
ter
, earth. T
he
Sankhyas main
t
ain that ‚A
ja™
 here means the Pradhana, t
he un
born.
The words red, white and black re
fer to it
s three con
stit
u
ent
s, the
Gunas, Satt
va, Rajas and T
amas. She is called ‚un
born™. She is not
an ef

fect. She is said to pro
duce man
i
fold of
f
spring by her own un
-
aided ef

fort.This Su
tra re
futes this.
 The Man
tra t
aken by it

self is not able to
give as
ser
tion what t
he Sankhya doc
trine is meant.
 There is no ba
sis
for such a spe
cial as
ser
tion in the ab
sence of spe
cial char
ac
ter
is
tics.
The case is anal
o
gous to that of
 the cup men
tioned in the M
an
tra,
ﬁThere is a cup hav
ing it
s mouth be
low and it
s bot
tom aboveﬂ B
ri. Up.
II-2-3. I
t is im
pos
si
ble to de
cide from the tex
t it

self what kind of cup ismeant. S
im
i
larly it
 is not pos
si
ble to fix
 the mean
ing of ‚Aj
a™
 from the
text
 alone.
But in con
nec
tion with t
he Man
tra about the cup we have a sup
-
ple
men
t
ary p
as
sage from which we learn what kind of cup is meant.
ﬁWhat is called the cup hav
ing it
s mouth be
low and it
s bot
tom above i
s
the skull.ﬂ Sim

i larly
, here we have to re
fer this p
as
sage to sup
ple
men
-
t
ary text
s to fix
 the mean
ing of Aja.
 W
e should not as
sert that it
 means
the Pradhana.
Where can we learn what spe
cial be
ing is meant by t
he word
‚Aja™
 of the S
vet
asvat
ara Upani
shad? T
o this ques
tion the f
ol
low
ing
Su
tra gives a suit

able an swer
.
Á`mo{V
énH«
$_m Vw
 VWm øYr`V EH
Jy
otirup
akrama tu t
atha hy
adhiy
at
a eke
I.4.
9 (1
15)
But (the
 ele
ments
) be
ginning with light (are
 mea
nt by the te
rm
Aja), because
 some read
 so in their t
ext.
Jy
otirup
akrama:
 element
s beginning with light
;
Tu
:
 but;
T
atha:
thus;
Hi:
 because;
Adhiy
ate:
 some read, some recensions have a reading;
Eke:
some.
This is ex
plan
a
tory to S
u
tra 8.
By t
he term ‚Aja™
 we have to un
der
st
and the causal mat
ter from
which fire, wa
ter and earth have sprung. The m
at
ter be
gins with light
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
122

i.e.,
 com
prises fire, wa
ter and earth. The word ‚t
u™
 (but) gives em
pha
-
sis to the as
ser
tion. One S
akha as
signs to them red col
our etc. ﬁThe
red col
our is the col
our of fire, whit
e col
our is the col
our of wa
ter
, black
col
our is the col
our of earthﬂ Chh. Up. VI
-2-4, 4-1.
This p
as
sage fixes the mean
ing of the word ‚Aj
a™. It
 re
fers to fire,
earth and wa
ter from which the world has been cre
ated. I
t is not the
Pradhana of the S
ankhyas which con
sist
s of the three Gunas. T
he
words red, white, black pri
mar
ily de
note spe
cial colours. They can be
ap
plied to the t
hree Gunas of the Sankhyas in a sec
ond
ary sense
only
. When doubt

ful pas
sages have to be in
ter
preted, the p
as
sages
whose sense is be
yond doubt are to be used.
 This is gen
er
ally a re
-
cog nised
rule.
In the S
vet
asvat
ara Upani
shad in Chap
ter I we find t
hat Aja is
used along with the word ﬁ
Devatma S
akti
Šthe di
vine power
.ﬂ There
-
fore Aja does not mean P
radhana.
The cre
ative power is Brah
man™
s in
her
ent en
ergy
, which em
a
-
nates from Him dur
ing the pe
riod of cre
ation. P
rakriti her
self is born of
Brah
man. There
fore Aja in it
s lit
eral sense of ‚un
born™
 can
not ap
ply to
Prakriti or Pradhana. Lord K
rishna says, ﬁ
Mama yonir m
ahad
Brahma
ŠMy womb is the great
 Brah
man, in that
 I place the germ
thence com
eth forth t
he birth of all be
ings, O Bharat
a.ﬂ This shows
that P
rakriti her
self is pro
duced from the Lord.
H$ën
ZmonXo
em… _Ü
dm{XdX{
damoY
Kalp
anop
adesaccha madhv
adiv
adav
irodhah
I.4.
10 (1
16)
And on a
ccount
 of t
he stat
ement of
 the ass
umpti
on (of
 a
meta
phor) the
re is no
thing contrary to re
ason (in A
ja de
noting
the causal matter) as in
 the case of honey (de
noting t
he sun in
Madhu Vidya for th
e sake
 of meditation) and sim
ilar cases.
Kalp
ana:
 the creative power of t
hought;
Up
adesat:
 from teaching;
Cha:
 and;
Madhv
adiv
at:
 as in the case of honey etc.
;
A
v
irodhah:
 no
incongruity
.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 8 is con
tin
ued.
The Purvap
akshin says, ﬁThe term Aja de
notes some
thing un
-
born. How can it re
fer to the t
hree causal el
e
ment
s of the
Chhandogya Up
anishad, which are some
thing cre
ated? This is con
-
trary to rea
son.ﬂ
The Su
tra says: There is no in
con
gru
ity
. The source of all be
ings
viz.,
 fire, wa
ter and earth is com
p
ared to a she-goat by way of
 met

a -
phor
. Some she-goat mi
ght be p
artly red, p
artly whit
e and p
artly
black. She might
 have many y
oung goat
s re
sem
bling her in col
our
.
Some he-goat might
 love her and lie by
 her side, while some other
he-goat might aban
don her af

ter hav ing en
joyed her
. Sim
i
larly the uni

-
ver
sal causal mat
ter which is tri-col
oured on ac
count of it
s com
pris
ing
fire, wa
ter and earth pro
duces many in
an
i
mate and an
i
mate be
ings
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 4
123

like unto it

self and is en joyed by t
he souls who are bound by A
vidya or
ig
no
rance, while it is re
nounced by those souls who have at
t
ained
true knowl
edge of the B
rah
man.
The words ‚like honey™
 in the Su
tra mean that
 just as the sun al
-
though not be
ing honey is rep
re
sented as honey (Chh. Up. II
I.1), and
speech as cow (
Bri. Up. V
-8), and the heav
enly world etc.,
 as the fires
(Bri. Up. V
I-2.9). S
o here the causal mat
ter though not be
ing a tri-col
-
oured
she-goat,
is
met
 a phor i cally
or
fig u ra tiv
ely
rep re sented
as
one.
Hence there is noth
ing in
con
gru
ous in us
ing the term ‚A
ja™
 to de
note
the ag
gre
gate of f
ire, wa
ter and earth. ‚A
ja™
 does not mean ‚un
born™.
The de
scrip
tion of Na
ture as an Aja is an imag
i
na
tive way
 of teach
ing
a T
ruth. The sun is the honey
 of the gods, t
hough the sun is not mere
honey
.
Sankhy
op
asangrahadhikar
anam: T
opic 3
The five-fold-fi
ve (Pancha-panchajanah) does not
refer to the t
wenty-five Sankhyan categories
Z g§»`mo
ng§J«h
mX{n ZmZ
m^mdmX{Va
oH$
Na sankhy
op
asangrahadapi n
anabhav
adatirekaccha
I.4.
1
1 (1
17)
Eve
n from th
e s
tate
me
nt of the
 numb
er (
five
-fol
d-fi
ve
 i.e
.,
twe
nty-fiv
e c
ate
gorie
s by
 the
 Sruti i
t is) no
t (to b
e u
nde
rstoo
d
that the
 Sruti re
fers
 to the
 Prad
hana
) on a
cco
unt o
f the
di
ff
eren
ces
 (i
n t
he c
at
ego
ri
es a
nd
 th
e exc
ess
 ov
er t
he n
um
ber
of the Sa
nkhyan cate
gorie
s).
Na:
 not;
 Sankhy
a:
 number;
Up
asangrahat:
 from st
atement;

Api:
even;
Nanabhav
at:
 on account of the dif
ferences;
Atirekat:
 on
account of excess;
Cha:
 and.
This Su
tra dis
cusses w
hether the twent
y-fiv
e prin
ci
ples of the
Sankhyan phi
los
o
phy are ad
mit
ted by t
he Sruti.
The Sankhya or Purv
ap
akshin failed in his at
tempt t
o base his
doc
trine on the t
ext which speaks of the ‚A
ja™. He again co
mes for
-
ward and point
s to an
other text
. ﬁHe in whom the fi
ve group
s of fiv
e
and the ether rest, Him
 alone I be
lieve t
o be the Self
; I who know be
-
lieve Him t
o be Brah
manﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
-4-17). Now five-times-fi
ve
makes twenty-fi
ve. This is ex

actly the num
ber of the Sankhy
a T
attv
as
or prin
ci
ples. The doc
trine of P
radhana rest
s on a scrip
tural ba
sis.
Here is the scrip
tural au
thor
ity f
or our phi
los
o
phy
.
This Su
tra re
futes such an as
sump
tion. P
anchapanchajanah,
five-f
ive-peo
ple can
not de
note the t
wenty-fiv
e cat
e
go
ries of the
Sankhyas. The S
ankhya cat
e
go
ries have each their in
di
vid
ual dif

fer -
ence. There are no at
trib
utes in com
mon to each pent
ad. The
Sankhya cat
e
go
ries can
not be di
vided int
o group
s of fiv
e of any ba
sis
of sim
i
lar
ity
, be
cause all the twenty
-five prin
ci
ples or T
attv
as dif

ferfrom each other
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
124

This is fur
ther not pos
si
ble ‚on ac
count of the ex

cess™. The etheris men
tioned as a sep

a rate cat
e
gory
. This will make the num

bertwenty-six
 in all. Thi
s is not in ac
cor
dance with the the
ory of the
Sankhyas.
From the mere enu
mer
a
tion of t
he num
ber 25 we can
not say
that t
he ref
er
ence is to the twenty
-five S
ankhya cat
e
go
ries and that
hence the Sankhya doc
trine has the sanc
tion of t
he V
edas.
The p
as
sage re
fers to At

man also. Then the to
t
al num
ber will be
twenty-seven.
 At
man is de
scribed as the ba
sis of the oth
ers. There
-
fore it can
not be one of t
he twenty-f
ive prin
ci
ples.
The prin
ci
ples of Sankhya phi
los
o
phy are pro
pounded as in
de
-
pend
ent of P
urusha. But here the cat

e go
ries are known to be en
tirely
de
pend
ent on Brah
man or At
man who is said to be the main
st
ay of
them all.
 So they
 can
not be ac
cepted as the in
de
pend
ent prin
ci
ples of
Sankhya.
The word Panchajanah is a group de
not
ing term. I
t is the spe
cial
name be
long
ing to all t
he mem
bers of that group. T
he group con
sist
s
of fiv
e mem
bers, each of whom is called a Panchajanah. There
fore
the phrase ‚Pancha-p
anchajanah™
 does not mean fiv
e times fiv
e be
-
ings but fiv
e be
ings. Ev
ery one of whom is called a Panchajanah.
 It is
just like the phrase Sapt
arshi, which de
notes the con
stel
la
tion Ursa
Ma
jor
, con
sist
ing of seven st
ars. The word Sapt
arshi is a spe
cial
name of ev
ery
one of these st
ars. When we say seven Sapt
arshis we
do not mean seven t
imes-seven st
ars but seven st
ars each one of
whom is called a Sapt
arshi. There
fore ‚Pancha-p
anchajanah™
 does
not mean fiv
e times fiv
e prod
uct
s, but fiv
e peo
ple ev
ery one of whom
is called a Panchajanah. The t
wenty-fiv
e T
attv
as of the Sankhy
as are
these: 1, P
rakriti; 2-8, seven m
od
i
fi
ca
tions of Prakriti
 viz.,
 Mahat etc.,
which are causal sub
st
ances, as well as ef

fects; 9-24 six
teen ef

fects;
the 25 is the soul which is nei
ther a causal sub
st
ance nor an ef

fect.Who then are these be
ings called Panchajanah? The fol
low
ing
Su
tra gives the re
ply
.
àmUmX
`mo dm−`eo
fmV² &
Pranaday
o v
aky
aseshat
I.4.
12 (1
18)
(The P
anch
ajan
ah o
r the
 five
 pe
op
le
 refe
rred
 to are
) the
 vital
force etc., (as is seen) from the compleme
ntary
 passage.
Pranaday
ah:
 the Prana and the rest;

V
aky
aseshat:
 because of the
complement
ary p
assage.
The Su
tra is ex
plan
a
tory to S
u
tra 1
1.
The text
 in which the Panchajanah are men
tioned is fol
lowed by
an
other one in which the vi
t
al force and four other thi
ngs are men
-
tioned in or
der to de
scribe the na
ture of Brah
man. ﬁThey who know
the Prana of P
rana (the breath of breath),
 the eye of
 the eye,
 the ear
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 4
125

of the ear
, the f
ood of the f
ood, the mind o
f mind etc.
ﬂ (Bri. Madhya.
IV
-4-21).
The five peo

ple re fer to the P
rana and the other four of t
he text
and are men
tioned for t
he pur
pose of de
scrib
ing the na
ture of Brah
-
man.
The Sankhya asks how can the word ‚peo
ple™
 be ap
plied to the
breath, the ey
e, the ear and so on? How we ask in re
turn, can it be ap
-
plied to y
our cat
e
go
ries? In both cases the com
mon mean
ing of the
term ‚peo
ple™
 is ap
plied to the P
ranas in the text
, ﬁThese are the fiv
e
per
sons of Brah
manﬂ (Chh. Up. III
-13-6). ﬁBreath is fa
ther
, breath is
motherﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
I-15-1).
The ob
jec
tor says. This is pos
si
ble only in t
he recension of the
Madhyandinas, who read the ad
di
tional word ‚Annasya A
nnam™. But
in Kanva recension that
 phrase ‚annasya annam™
 is omit
ted. W
e have
only four
. This ob
jec
tion is an
swered by the au
thor in the f
ol
low
ing Su
-
tra.
Á`mo{V
f¡H
o$fm_
Jy
otishaikesham
asaty
anne
I.4.
13 (1
19)
In the
 tex
t of some
 (the Kanv
a rec
ens
ion) whe
re foo
d is no
t
mentione
d (the nu
mbe
r five is mad
e u
p) by ‚light™ (me
ntioned
in the previous verse
).
Jy
otisha:
 by light
;
Ekesham:
 of some tex
t
s or recensions, i.e., of t
he
Kanvas;
Asati:
 in the absence of;
Anne:
 food.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1
1 is con
tin
ued.
ﬁThe im
mor
t
al light of
 light
s the gods wor
ship as lon
gev
ityﬂ B
ri.
Up. IV
-4-10. Al
though food is not m
en
tioned in the t
ext cit
ed in the last
Su
tra, ac
cord
ing to the K
anva recension of the S
at
ap
atha Brahmana,
yet t
he four of that
 verse, to
gether with ‚light
™
 men
tioned in the t
ext
quoted above,
 would make the fiv
e peo
ple.
W
e have proved here
with that
 scrip
tures of

fer no ba sis for the
doc
trine of t
he Pradhana. It
 will be shown later on that t
his doc
trine
can
not be proved ei
ther by Sm
riti or by ra
ti
o
ci
na
tion.
Karanatv
adhikaranam
: T
opic 4 (Sutras 14-15)
Brahman i
s the First cause
H$ma
UËdoZ
 MmH$
mem{Xfw
 `Wmì`n{X
ï>mo
ºo
$–&
Karanatv
ena chakasadishu y
athav
y
ap
adishtokteh
I.4.
14 (120)
Altho
ugh the
re i
s a c
onfli
ct of th
e V
ed
anta te
xts a
s re
gard
s the
thing
s created such as e
ther and so on, t
here is no such
conflict
 with
 respect to Brahman as the First
 Cause, on
account
 of His
 being r
epresented in on
e text as descr
ibed in
othe
r tex
ts.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
126

Karanatv
ena:
 as the (First) cause;
Cha:
 and;
Akasadishu:
 with
reference to Akasa and the rest;
Y
atha:
 as;
V
y
ap
adisht
a:
 t
aught in
dif
ferent Srut
is;
Ukteh:
 because of the st
atement.
The doubt that
 may arise from S
u
tra 13 that di
f

fer ent Sruti
s may
draw dif

fer ent con
clu
sions as to the cause of the uni
verse is re
moved
by this Su
tra.
In the pre
ced
ing p
art of the work the proper def
i
ni
tion of B
rah
-
man has been given. I
t has been shown that all t
he V
edant
a text
s
have Brah
man for their com
mon topic. I
t has been proved also that
there is no scrip
tural au
thor
ity f
or the doc
trine of t
he Pradhana. But
now the Sankhya raises a new ob
jec
tion.
He says: It is not
 pos
si
ble to prove ei
ther that B
rah
man is the
cause of the or
i
gin etc., of
 the uni
verse or that all t
he V
edant
a text
s re
-
fer to Brah
man; be
cause the V
edant
a p
as
sages con
tra
dict one an
-
other
. All t
he V
edant
a text
s speak of the suc
ces
sive step
s of the
cre
ation in dif

fer ent or
der
. In re
al
ity t
hey speak of dif

fer ent cre
ations.
Thus in T
ait. Up.
 II-1-1 we find t
hat cre
ation pro
ceeds from Self or
Brah
man ﬁFrom the Self
 sprang Akasa, from Akasa airﬂ etc. This p
as
-
sage shows that the cause of cre
ation is At

man. In an other place it is
said that the cre
ation be
gan with fire (Chh. Up. V
I-2-3). In an
other
place, again, it
 is said ﬁThe per
son cre
ated breath and from breat
h
faithﬂ (Pras. Up.
 IV
-4); in an
other place, again, t
hat the S
elf cre
ated
these worlds, the wa
ter above the heav
en, light,
 the mor
t
al (earth)
and the wa
ter be
low the earth (Ait
areya Aranyaka II
-4-1-2, 3). There
no or
der is st
ated at all.
 Some
where it is said that t
he cre
ation orig
i
-
nated from t
he non-ex
is
tent (Asat
). ﬁIn the be
gin
ning there was the
non-ex
is
tent (Asat
); from it
 was born what ex
ist
sﬂ (T
ait. Up.
 II-7). ﬁIn
the be
gin
ning there was the non-ex
is
tent;
 it be
came ex
is
tent;
 it grewﬂ
(Chh. Up. III
-19-1). In an
other place it is said ﬁOth
ers say
, in the be
gin
-
ning there was that only
 which is not; but how could it be
 thus, my
dear? How could that which is to be born of that
 which is notﬂ (Chh.
Up. VI-
2-1
, 2).
In an
other place Sat is said t
o be the cause of the uni
verse ﬁSat
alone was in the be
gin
ningﬂ Chh. Up. VI
-2-1. In an
other place, again,
the cre
ation of t
he world is spo
ken of as hav
ing t
aken place spon
t
a
ne
-
ously
. Again we f
ind that A
vyakt
a is said to be the cause of the world
ﬁNow all this was then A
vyakrit
a (un
de
vel
oped). It be
came de
vel
oped
by name and formﬂ B
ri. Up. 1-4-7. Thus the Up
anishads are not con
-
sis
tent,
 as re
gards the cause of the uni
verse. Thus it is not
 pos
si
ble to
as
cer
t
ain that B
rah
man alone is t
aught in the Up
anishads as the
cause of the world. As many
 dis
crep
an
cies are ob
served, the
V
edant
a text
s can
not be ac
cepted as au
thor
i
ties for de
ter
min
ing the
cause of the uni
verse. W
e must ac
cept some other cause of the world
rest
ing on the au
thor
ity of
 Sruti and rea
son
ing.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 4
127

It is pos
si
ble to say t
hat Pradhana alone is t
aught to be t
he
cause of the world as we find from the p
as
sage of the Bri.
 Up. al
ready
quoted above.
 Fur
ther the words Sat,
 Asat, P
rana, Akasa and
A
vyakrit
a can very well be ap
plied to Pradhana,
 be
cause some of
them such as Akasa, Prana are the ef

fects of Pradhana, while ot
h
ers
are the names of Pradhana it

self. All these terms can
not be ap
plied to
Brah man.
In some p
as
sages we find that At

man and Brah man are also
said to be the cause of the world;
 but these two t
erms can be ap
plied
to Pradhana also. The l
it
eral mean
ing of the word ‚At

man™ is all-per
-
vad
ing. Pradhana is all-per
vad
ing. Brah
man lit
er
ally means that
which is pre-em
i
nently great
 (Brihat). P
radhana may be called Brah
-
man also. Pradhana is called Asat
 in it
s as
pect of mod
i
fied things and
it is called Sat
 or be
ing in it
s causal or eter
nal as
pect. Pradhana is
called Prana as it is an el
e
ment pro
duced from it. T
hink
ing etc., m
ay
also ap
ply to P
radhana in a met

a phor
i
cal sense, mean
ing the com
-
mence
ment of ac
tion. S
o when the Up
anishad says ﬁIt thought
, let me
be
come manyﬂ, it
 means, that
Pradhana st
arted the ac
tion of mul

ti pli
-
ca
tion. There
fore all the Up
anishad p
as
sages re
lat
ing to cre
ation har
-
mo
nise better with t
he the
ory of Pradhana be
ing the cre
ator than of
Brah man.
The Siddhanti
n gives the f
ol
low
ing re
ply
. Al
though the V
edant
a
text
s may be con
flict
ing with re
gard to the or
der of the thi
ngs cre
ated
such as ether and so on, yet they
 uni
formly de
clare that Brah
man is
the First Cause. The V
edantic p
as
sages which are con
cerned with
set
ting fort
h the cause of the world are in har
mony through
out. I
t can
-
not be said that t
he con
flict of
 st
ate
ment
s re
gard
ing the uni
verse af

-
fect
s the st
ate
ment
s re
gard
ing the cause i.e.,
 Brah
man. It
 is not the
main ob
ject of the V
edant
a text
s to teach about cre
ation. There
fore it
would not even mat

ter greatly. The chief pur
pose of the Srut
is is to
teach that B
rah
man is the First Cause. There is no con
flict re
gard
ing
this
.
The teacher will rec
on
cile later on these con
flict
ing p
as
sages
also which re
fer to the uni

verse.g_mH$
fm©V²
 &
Samakarshat
I.4.
15 (121)
On account of the connection (wi
th passages treating of
Brahman,
 non-existence d
oes not mean abso
lute
Non-existe
nce)
Samakarshat:
 from it
s connection with a dist
ant expression.
Some tex
t
s from the T
aittiriy
a, the Chhandogya and
Brihadaranyaka Up
anishads are t
aken up for dis
cus
sion.
The Sankhyas raise an
other ob
jec
tion. They
 say: There is a
con
flict wit
h ref
er
ence to the first cause, be
cause some text
s de
clare
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
128

that t
he Self cre
ated these worlds (Ait.
 Ar
. II
-4-1-2-3). Some V
edant
a
p
as sages
de clare
that
cre ation
orig i nated
from
non-ex is tence
(T
ait.
II-7). A
gain in some p
as
sages ex
is
tence is t
aught as the First Cause
(Chh. Up. VI-1-2). S
ome Srutis speak of spon
t
a
ne
ous cre
ation. I
t can
-
not be said that t
he Srutis re
fer to Brah
man uni
formly as t
he First
Cause ow
ing to the con
flict
ing st
ate
ment
s of the V
edant
a text
s.
The Siddhanti
n gives the f
ol
low
ing re
ply
. W
e read in the T
ait. Up.

II-7 ﬁThis was in
deed non-ex
is
tence in the be
gin
ning.ﬂ Non-ex
is
tence
here does not mean ab
so
lute non-ex
is
tence. It
 means un
dif

fer en
ti
-
ated
ex is tence.
In
the
be gin ning
ex is tence
was
un dif
 fer en ti at
ed
into
name and form. T
aittriy
a Up
anishad says ﬁHe who knows
 Brah
man
as non-ex
ist
ing be
comes him
self non-ex
ist
ing. He who knows Brah
-
man as ex
ist
ing, him we know him
self as ex
ist
ingﬂ T
ait. Up.
 II-6. I
t is
fur
ther elab
o
rated by means of t
he se
ries of sheaths viz.,
 the sheath
of food et
c. rep
re
sented as the in
ner self of ev
ery
thing. Thi
s same
Brah
man is again re
ferred to in the clause. He wished ‚May
 I be
many™.
 This clearly in
ti
mates that B
rah
man cre
ated the whole uni
-
verse.
The term ‚Be
ing™
 or
di
narily de
notes that which is dif

fer en
ti
ated
by names and forms. The t
erm ‚Non-be
ing™
 de
notes the same sub
-
st
ance
pre vi ous
to
it
s
dif
 fer en ti a t
ion.
Brah man
is
called
‚Non-be ing™
pre
vi
ously to t
he orig
i
na
tion of t
he world in a sec
ond
ary sense.
W
e read in Chh. Up. VI
-2-2 ﬁHow can that which is cre
ated from
non-ex
is
tence be?ﬂ This clearly de
nies such a pos
si
bil
ity
.
ﬁNow this was then un
de
vel
opedﬂ (Bri. Up. I-4-7) does not by
any means as
sert that t
he evo
lu
tion of t
he world took place with
out a
ruler
, be
cause it is con
nected with an
other p
as
sage where it is said,
ﬁHe has en
tered here to the v
ery tip
s of the fin
ger-nailsﬂ (Bri. Up.
I-4-7). ‚He™
 re
fers to the Ruler
. There
fore we have to t
ake that the
Lord, the Ruler
, de
vel
oped what was un
de
vel
oped.
An
other scrip
tural tex
t also de
scribes that the evo
lu
tion of t
he
world took place un
der the su
per
in
ten
dence of a Ruler
. ﬁLet me now
en
ter these be
ings with this lov

ing Self, and let me t
hen evolve nam
es
and formsﬂ Chh. Up. VI
-3-2.
Al
though there is a reaper it is said ﬁThe corn-field reap
s it

self.ﬂIt is said also ﬁThe vil

lage is be ing ap
proached.ﬂ Here we have to sup
-
ply ﬁby Dev
adatt
a or some
body else.ﬂ
Brah
man is de
scribed in one place as ex
is
tence. In an
other
place it is de
scribed as the Self of al
l. There
fore it is a set
tled con
clu
-
sion that all V
edant
a text
s uni
formly poi
nt to B
rah
man as the First
Cause. Cer
t
ainly t
here is no con
flict on t
his point.
Even in t
he p
as
sage that de
clares Asat i.e. non-be
ing to be the
cause there is a ref
er
ence to Sat i.
e. Be
ing. Ev
en the tex
t that
 de
-
scribes Asat as the Causal force ends by re
fer
ring to Sat
.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 4
129

The doubt about t
he mean
ing of a word or p
as
sage can be re
-
moved by ref

er ence to it
s con
nec
tion with a dis
t
ant p
as
sage in the
same text
, for such con
nec
tion is found t
o ex
ist in the dif

fer ent p
as
-
sages of Sruti. T
he ex
act mean
ing of such words as ‚Asat™
 which
means non-en
tity
, ap
p
ar
ently
, ‚A
vyakrit
a™
 which means ap
p
ar
ently
non-man
i
fest Pradhana of
 Sankhya, is t
hus as
cer
t
ained to be Brah
-
man. Com
p
are the Srutis:

gmo@H$m_
`V ~hþñ`m§
àOm`o
`o{V

ﬁHe de
sired, I will be
many I wil
l man
i
fest my

selfﬂ Tait. Up.
 II-6-2.
AgÛm BX_J
« AmgrV²

ﬁThis was at
first AsatﬂŠap
p
ar
ently a non-en
tity
. T
ait. I
I-7-1. The mean
ing of the
word Asat of the sec
ond p
as
sage is as
cer
t
ained to be Brah
man by
ref
er
ence to the first p
as
sage where the same ques
tion namely
 the
st
ate of t
he uni
verse be
fore cre
ation is an
swered in a clearer way
.
The mean
ing of the word A
vyakrit
a in the Brihadarany
aka
Up
anishad I-4-7 in the p
as
sage
VÛoX§ Vø©ì`mH¥$
V_mgrV² &
 (thus there
fore, that
was the un
dif

fer en
ti
ated) is as
cer
t
ained to be the B
rah
man as still un
-
de
vel
oped by a ref
er
ence to the p
as
sage
g Ef B
h à{dï> AmZImJ
«oä`–
 (the same
is per
vad
ing all through and through down t
o the tip
s of the nails of t
he
fin
gers and toes). A
vyakt
a is re
cog
nised in the last p
as
sage more
clearly by t
he words ‚Sa esha™
 (the self-same one).
The Pradhana of t
he Sankhyas does not find a pl
ace any
where
in the p
as
sages which treat about the cause of the world.
 The words
‚Asat™
 ‚A
vyakrit
a™
 also de
note Brah
man only
.
The word ‚Asat™
 re
fers to Brah
man which is the sub
ject un
der
dis
cus
sion in the pre
vi
ous verse. Be
fore the cre
ation, t
he dis
tinc
tion
of names and forms did not ex

ist. Brah man also then did not ex

ist inthe sense that He was not con
nected with names and forms. A
s he
has then no name and form,
 he is said to be Asat or non-ex
is
tent.
The word ‚Asat™
 can
not mean mat

ter or non-be ing, be
cause in
this very p
as
sage we find that t
he de
scrip
tion giv
en of it can ap
ply
only to B
rah
man.
Brah
man is not ‚Asat
™
 in the lit

eral mean ing of that
 word. The
seer of the Up
anishad uses it in a sense to
t
ally dis
tinct from i
t
s or
di
-
nary
de no t
a tion.
Balaky
adhikaranam
: T
opic 5 (Sutras 16-18)
He who is the maker of t
he Sun, Moon,
 etc. is Brahm
an
and not Prana or the indi
vidual soul
OJÛm{
Jagadv
achitv
at
I.4.
16 (122)
(He, whose work is this,
 is Brahman)
 because
 (the ‚work™)
denotes th
e world.
Jagat:
 the world;
V
achitv
at:
 because of the denot
ation.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
130

A
 p
as
sage from the Kaushit
aki Upani
shad is now t
aken up for
dis cus si
on.
In the K
aushit
aki Brahmana the sage Balaki prom
ises to teach
Brah
man by say
ing ﬁI shall tell
 you Brah
manﬂ, and he goes on to de
-
scribe six
teen things as Brah
man, be
gin
ning with the S
un. All t
hese
are set aside by the K
ing Ajat
asatru who says, none of them
 is Brah
-
man. When Balaki is si
lenced, Ajat
asatru gives the t
each
ing about
Brah
man in these words: ﬁO Balaki! He who is the m
aker of those per
-
sons whom you men
tioned and whose work is the vis
i
ble uni
-
verseŠis alone to be known.ﬂ
W
e read in the Kaushit
aki Upani
shad in the di
a
logue be
tween
Balaki and Ajat
asatru ﬁO Balaki, He who is the maker of t
hose per
-
sons whom you men
tioned, and whose work is this (vis
i
ble uni
verse)
is alone to be knownﬂ (Kau. Up. IV
-19).
A
 doubt arises now whether what is here said as the ob
ject of
knowl
edge is the in
di
vid
ual soul or the Prana or Brah
man, the S
u
-
preme Self.
 The Purvap
akshin holds that the v
i
t
al force or Prana is
meant, be
cause he says the clause ﬁof whom this is the workﬂ point
s
to the ac
tiv
ity of
 mo
tion and that
 ac
tiv
ity rest
s on Prana. Sec
ondly
, we
meet with t
he term ‚Prana™
 in a com
ple
men
t
ary p
as
sage. ﬁThen he be
-
comes one with the Prana aloneﬂ Kau.
 Up. IV
-20. The word ‚Prana™
de
notes the vi

tal force. This is well known. Thirdly
, Prana is the maker
of all the per
sons, the per
son in the Sun, t
he per
son in the moon etc.
W
e know from an
other scrip
tural tex
t that
 the Sun and ot
her de
i
ties
are only dif

fer en
ti
a
tions of Prana,
 ﬁWho is that one God in whom all
other gods are con
t
ained? Prana and he is Brah
man, and they
 call
him Th
atﬂ (
Bri. U
p. III-9
-9)
.
Or the p
as
sage re
fers to the in
di
vid
ual soul as the ob
ject of
knowl
edge. A
 sub
se
quent p
as
sage con
t
ains an in
fer
en
tial mark of t
he
in
di
vid
ual soul, ﬁAs the mas
ter feeds with his peo
ple, nay as his peo
-
ple feed on the m
as
ter
, thus does this con
scious Self feed with t
he
other selfsﬂ Kau. Up. I
V
-20. As the in
di
vid
ual soul is the sup
port of the
Prana, it
 may it

self be called Prana. We thus con
clude that the p
as
-
sage un
der dis
cus
sion re
fers ei
ther to the i
n
di
vid
ual soul or to the
chief Prana but not
 to the Lord of whom i
t does not con
t
ain any in
fer
-
en tial
marks
what
 so ever
.
The Su
tra re
futes all t
hese and says it is Brah
man that is re
-
ferred to the maker in t
he text
; be
cause Brah
man is t
aught here ﬁI
shall teach you Brah
man.ﬂ Again ‚t
his™
 which means the world, is his
‚work.™
 This clearly point
s out that t
he ‚he™
 is Brah
man only
.
The ref
er
ence in the Kaushit
aki Brahmana p
as
sage is to the Su
-
preme Lord be
cause of the ref
er
ence to the world. The ac
tiv
ity re
-
ferred to is the world of which the Lord is t
he Cre
ator
.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 4
131

There
fore the maker is nei
ther Prana nor the in
di
vid
ual soul, but
the High
est Lord. It
 is af

firmed in all Vedant
a text
s that the Ma
ker of
the world is the Su
preme Lord.
Ord_w
»`àmU{
bﬁmÞo
{V Mo
ÎmX²
 ì`m»`mV_²
Jiv
amukhy
apranalin
ganneti chet t
ad v
y
akhy
at
am
I.4.
17 (123)
I
f it be
 said
 that o
n acc
ou
nt of the
 infe
ren
tial m
arks
 of the
individual soul and the chief Prana (Br
ahman is) n
ot (referred
to b
y the
 word
 ‚ma
tter™
 in the
 pas
sage
 quo
ted
), (we
 rep
ly) tha
t
has already bee
n explained
.
Jiv
a:
 the indiv
idual soul;
Mukhy
aprana:
 the chief v
it
al air;
Lingat:
because of the inferenti
al marks;
Na iti
:
not thus;
Chet:
 if;
Ta
t
:
 that;
Yy
akhy
at
am:
 has already been explained.
An ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 16 is raised and re
futed.
 The ob
jec
tion has
al
ready been dis
posed of un
der I-1-31.
In the S
u
tra I-1-31 which dealt with t
he topic of the di

a logue be
-
tween Indra and Prat
ardana, this ob
jec
tion was raised and an
swered.
All those ar
gu
ment
s would ap
ply here also. I
t was shown there that
when a text i
s in
ter
preted as re
fer
ring to Brah
man on the ground of a
com
pre
hen
sive sur
vey of
 it
s ini
tial and con
clud
ing clauses, all other
in
fer
en
tial marks which point to ot
her top
ics, such as Jiva or Prana
etc., must
 be so in
ter
preted that t
hey may be i
n har
mony with t
he
main topic.
Here also the ini
tial clause re
fers to Brah
man in the sen
tence
ﬁShall I t
ell you Brah
man?ﬂ The con
clud
ing clause is ﬁHav
ing over
-
come all evils,
 he ob
t
ains pre-em
i
nence among all be
ings, sov
er
-
eignty and su
prem
acy
, yea,
 he who knows thisﬂ. Thus the ini
tial and
con
clud
ing clauses here also re
fer to Brah
man. If
 in the mid
dle of this
text
 we find any mark from which Jiva or any
 other topic may
 be in
-
ferred, we must so in
ter
pret the p
as
sage as to re
fer to Brah
man, in or
-
der to avoid con
tra
dic
tion.
This topic is not re
dun
dant as it is al
ready t
aught in Su
tra I-1-31,
be
cause the chief point dis
cussed here is the word ‚Karma™
 which is li
-
a ble
to
mis in ter pre t
a tion.
There fore
this
Adhikarana
cer t
ainly
teaches
some thing
new
.
The word Prana oc
curs in the sense of Brah
man in the p
as
sage
ﬁThe mind set
tles down on Pranaﬂ Chh. Up. VI
-8-2.
AÝ`mWª
 Vw O
¡{_
{Z– à
íZì`m»`mZmä
`m_{n M
¡d_o
Ho$
Any
artham tu Jaim
inih p
rasnav
y
akhy
anabhy
amapi
 chaiv
ameke
I.4.
18 (124)
But Jaimini thinks that (the re
fere
nce to the
 individu
al soul in
the t
ext) ha
s anot
her pur
pose on accoun
t of
 the quest
ion an
d
the reply; moreover, thus some also (the Vajasaneyins) (read in
the
ir te
xt o
r rec
en
sio
n).
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
132

Any
artham
:
 for another purpose;
Tu
:
 but;
Jaiminih
:
 Jaimini;
Prasna-v
y
akhy
anabhy
am:
 from the question and
 the reply;

Api:
also;
Cha:
 and;
Evam:
 in this way;
Eke:
others, other Srut
is.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 16 is given.
Even t
he ref
er
ence to the in
di
vid
ual soul has a dif

fer ent pur
pose
i.e. aim
s at in
ti
mat
ing Brah
man.
Af

ter Ajatasatru has t
aught Balaki by
 wak
ing the sleep
ing man,
that t
he soul is dif

fer ent from t
he Prana or the vi
t
al air
, he asks the fol
-
low
ing ques
tion: ﬁB
alaki, where did the per
son here sleep? Where
was he? Whence came he thus back
?ﬂ Kau. Up. I
V
. 19. These ques
-
tions clearly re
fer to some
thing dif

fer ent from t
he in
di
vid
ual soul. And
so like
wise does the an
swer (Kau. Up. IV
.20) say that
 the in
di
vid
ual
soul is merged in Brah
man in deep sleep.
When sleep
ing he sees no dream, then he be
comes one with
that P
rana alone, and ‚from t
hat Self
 all Pranas pro
ceed, each to
-
wards it
s place, from the P
ranas the gods, from the gods t
he worldsﬂ.
This con
ver
sa
tion oc
curs in the Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad. It
clearly re
fers to the in
di
vid
ual soul by means of t
he term ﬁthe per
son
con
sist
ing of cog
ni
tionﬂ (V
ijnanamaya) and dis
tin
guishes from it the
High
est Self.
 ﬁWhere was then the per
son con
sist
ing of cog
ni
tion?
and from whence did he thus come back?ﬂ (Bri. Up. II
-1-16) and later
on, in the re
ply to t
he above ques
tion, de
clares that ‚the per
son con
-
sist
ing of cog
ni
tion lies in t
he ether within t
he heart™. W
e al
ready know
that t
he word ‚ether
™
 de
notes the su
preme seat for in
st
ance in the p
as
-
sage above the ﬁsmall ether wit
hin the lo
tus of the heart
ﬂ (Chh. Up.
VIII-1-
1).
V
aky
anv
ay
adhikaranam
: T
opic 6 (Sutras 19-22)
The Atm
an to be seen through hearing etc.,
 of the
Bri. Up. I
I-4-5 is Brahman and not
 Jivatma
V
aky
anv
ay
at
I.4.
19 (125)
(T
he S
elf
 to
 be s
een,
 to
 be h
ear
d et
c.
, i
s t
he S
upr
eme S
elf
) o
n
acco
unt of the
 conne
cted
 mea
ning of the
 se
ntence
s.
V
aky
anv
ay
at:
 On account of the connected meaning of
 the
sentences.
A
 p
as
sage from the Brihadarany
aka Upanishad is now t
aken up
for
dis cus sion.
From the syn
thetic study
 of the con
text
 it is clear that t
he ref
er
-
ence is to the Su
preme Self.
W
e read in the Maitrey
i-Brahmana of t
he Brihadaranyaka
Up
anishad the fol
low
ing p
as
sage: ﬁV
er
ily a hus
band is not dear that
you may l
ove the hus
band etc., but
 that y
ou may lov
e the Self
, there
-
fore ev
ery
thing is dear
. V
er
ily t
he Self is t
o be seen, to be heard, t
o be
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 4
133

re
flected and to be m
ed
i
t
ated upon, O Mai
treyi!
 When the Self
 has
been seen, heard, re
flected and real
ised or known, then all this is
knownﬂ Bri
. Up.
 IV
-5-6.
Here a doubt arises whether that which is rep
re
sented as the
ob
ject to be seen, t
o be heard and so on is the in
di
vid
ual soul or the
Su preme
Self.
The Purvap
akshin says: The Self i
s by the men
tion of dear
things such as hus
band and so on, in
di
cated as the enjoyer
. From this
it ap
pears that the t
ext re
fers to the in
di
vid
ual soul.
This Su
tra re
futes this and says t
hat in this p
as
sage the high
est
Self is re
ferred to, and not
 the in
di
vid
ual soul. In t
he whole Sec
tion
Brah
man is treated. M
aitreyi say
s to her hus
band Y
ajnavalkya:
 ﬁWhat
should I do with the wealt
h by which I do not be
come im
mor
t
al? What
my Lord knoweth tell
 that t
o me.ﬂ There
upon Y
ajnavalkya ex

poundsto her the knowl
edge of the S
elf. S
crip
ture and Smrit
i de
clare that im
-
mor
t
al
ity can be at

tained only by
 the knowl
edge of the S
u
preme Self.
Then Y
ajnavalkya t
eaches her the knowl
edge of the S
elf. Fi

nally the
Sec
tion con
cludes with ﬁThus far goes im
mor
t
al
ity
.ﬂ
Im
mor
t
al
ity can
not be at
t
ained by the knowl
edge of the in
di
vid
-
ual soul, but only
 by the knowl
edge of the High
est Self or B
rah
man.
There
fore Brah
man alone is the sub
ject mat
ter of the p
as
sage un
der
dis
cus
sion. Brah
man alone is to be seen or real
ised through hear
ing,
re flec tion
and
med i t
a tion.
Y
ajnavalkya de
clares that the Sel
f is the cen
tre of the whole
world with the ob
ject
s, the senses and the mind, t
hat it has nei
ther in
-
side nor out

side, that it is al
to
gether a mass of knowl
edge. It
 fol
lows
from all thi
s that what t
he text
 rep
re
sent
s as the ob
ject of sight and so
on is the Su
preme Self.
Fur
ther it is said in t
he text
 that by
 the knowl
edge of the S
elf ev
-
ery
thing is known. This clearly in
ti
mates that t
he Self is B
rah
man only
be
cause how can the knowl
edge of fi
nite Jiva or in
di
vid
ual soul give
us knowl
edge of ev
ery
thing?
&
Pratijn
asiddherl
ingamasm
arathy
ah
I.4.
20 (126)
(T
he fact that
 the individual soul is taught
 as the object of
realisation is an
) indicator
y mark whi
ch is proof of t
he
proposi
tion
; so Asm
arat
hya t
hin
ks.
Pratijnasiddheh:
 because of the proof of t
he proposition;
Lingam:
indicatory mark;
Asmarathy
ah:
 the sage Asmarathy
a.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 19 is given.
 The in
di
ca
tion is
that t
he in
di
vid
ual soul is not dif

fer ent from B
rah
man, the Ul
ti
mate
Cause, of which it is a ray
. Hence to know Brah
man, the Cause, is t
o
know all that.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
134

If t
he in
di
vid
ual were quite dif

fer ent from B
rah
man, then by
 the
knowl
edge of Brah
man ev
ery
thing else would not be known. The ini

-
tial st
ate
ment aims at rep
re
sent
ing the in
di
vid
ual soul or Jiva and the
Su
preme Self as non-dif

fer ent for the pur
pose of ful
fill
ing the prom
ise
made. The non-dif

fer ence be
tween Brah
man and the in
di
vid
ual soul
es
t
ab
lishes the prop
o
si
tion, ﬁWhen the S
elf is known all this is
knownﬂ, ﬁAll this is that
 Selfﬂ.
Asmarathya i
s of opin
ion that t
he p
as
sages ‚
Atm
ani vijnate
sarvamidam
 vijnat
am bhavati
™
 and ‚
Idam
 sarvam yadayamatm
a
™
prove the as
pect of iden
tity
 of the in
di
vid
ual soul and the Su
preme
Self,
 be
cause only then can be at
t
ained what is prom
ised i.e.,
 that by
the knowl
edge of Brah
man ev
ery
thing can be at
t
ained. I-4-20.
The sp
arks that pro
ceed from a fire are not ab
so
lutely
 dif

fer ent
from the f
ire as they are of t
he na
ture of the f
ire. They are not
 ab
so
-
lutely
 non-dif

fer ent from t
he fire, be
cause in that case they could be
dis
tin
guished nei
ther from the f
ire nor from each other
. Sim
i
larly the
in
di
vid
ual souls also, which are the ef

fects of Brah
man, are nei
ther
ab
so
lutely
 dif

fer ent from B
rah
man, be
cause that would mean that
they are not of
 the na
ture of in
tel
li
gence; nor ab
so
lutely
 non-dif

fer ent
from Brah
man, be
cause in that case they could not
 be dis
tin
guished
from each other; and be
cause if they were iden
ti
cal with Brah
man,
and there
fore Om
ni
scient, it would be use
less to give them
 any in
-
struc tion.
There fore
the
in di vid ual
souls
are
some how
dif
 fer ent
from
Brah
man and some
how non-dif

fer ent. This doc
trine of A
smarathya is
known as ﬁBheda-abheda-vadaﬂ. This is the opin
ion of the sage
Asmarathya.
CËH«
${_î
`V Edå^mdm{X
Ë`m¡S
w>b
mo{_
Utkramishy
at
a ev
ambhav
adity
audulom
ih
I.4.
21 (127)
The initial stateme
nt identifie
s the indiv
idual so
ul with
Brahman o
r the Su
pre
me
 Self b
ec
ause
 the so
ul, whe
n it will
de
part (
from the
 bo
dy), i
s su
ch (i.e
. one
 with the
 Sup
rem
e S
el
f);
thus
 Audulomi t
hin
ks.
Utkramishy
at
a:
 of him who would p
ass away from the body;

Evam
bhavat:
 because of this condition;
Iti:
 thus;
Audulomih:
 the sage
Audulomi.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 19 is con
tin
ued.
Jiva or the in
di
vid
ual soul which is as
so
ci
ated with it
s dif

fer ent
lim
it
ing ad
junct
s viz., body
, senses and mind, at
t
ains free
dom through
med
i
t
a
tion and knowl
edge. When it rises from t
he body i.e.
, when it is
free and has no body-con
scious
ness, it real
ises that it i
s iden
ti
cal with
Brah
man. There
fore it is rep
re
sented as non-dif

fer ent from t
he Su
-
preme Self.
 This is the opin
ion of the t
eacher Audulomi.
W
e read in the Sruti
s also ﬁthat se
rene be
ing aris
ing from this
body
, ap
pears in it
s own form as soon as it has ap
proached the High
-
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 4
135

est Lightﬂ Chh. Up. V
III
-12-3. Mundakop
anishad says ﬁAs the flow
ing
rivers van
ish in the sea, hav
ing lost their name and f
orm, so also the
sage, freed from name and f
orm, goes to the Di
vine Per
son who is
greater than the greatﬂ Mu
n. Up. II
I-2-8.
The in
di
vid
ual soul is ab
so
lutely
 dif

fer ent from t
he Su
preme
Self.
 It is con
di
tioned by t
he dif

fer ent lim
it
ing ad
junct
s viz., body
,
senses, mind and in
tel
lect. But
 it is spo
ken of in the Up
anishads as
non-dif

fer ent from t
he Su
preme Self be
cause it may p
ass out of the
body and be
come one with the Su
preme Self,
 af

ter hav ing pu
ri
fied it

-
self by means of m
ed
i
t
a
tion and knowl
edge. The tex
t of t
he
Up
anishad thus trans
fers a fu
ture st
ate of non-dif

fer ence to that t
ime
when
dif
 fer ence
ac tu ally
ex ist
s.
This
doc trine
ad vo cated
by
AudulomiŠwhich holds that
 dif

fer ence be
tween the in
di
vid
ual soul
and Brah
man in the st
ate of ig
no
rance is a re
al
ityŠi
s a
Saty
abhedavada.
A
v
asthiteriti Kasakri
t
snah
I.4.
22 (128)
(T
he i
ni
ti
al
 st
at
emen
t i
s m
ad
e) b
eca
us
e (t
he S
upr
eme S
elf
)
ex
ists in the cond
ition (of the indiv
idual so
ul); so the
 Sage
Kasakritsn
a thinks.
A
v
asthiteh:
 because of the existence;

Iti:
 thus (holds);
Kasakrit
snah:
 the sage Kasakrit
sna.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 19 is con
tin
ued.
The in
di
vid
ual soul or Jiva is quite dif

fer ent in na
ture from Brah
-
man or the Su
preme Self.
 It is not pos
si
ble for the in
di
vid
ual soul to be
one with Brah
man in the st
ate of eman
ci
p
a
tion. There
fore the teacher
Kasakrit
sna thinks that the High
est Self I
t

self ex ist
s as the in
di
vid
ual
soul. As the S
u
preme Self ex

ists also in the con
di
tion of t
he in
di
vid
ual
soul, the Sage K
asakrit
sna is of opin
ion that t
he ini
tial st
ate
ment
which aims at in
ti
mat
ing the non-dif

fer ence of the two is pos
si
ble.
Brah
man or the Su
preme Self and t
he in
di
vid
ual soul are ab
so
-
lutely
 non-dif

fer ent. The ap
p
ar
ent dif

fer ence is due to Up
adhis or lim
-
it
ing ve
hi
cles or ad
junct
s which are only prod
uct
s of A
vidya or
ig
no
rance. The dif

fer ence is il
lu
sory or un
real from the ab
so
lute or
tran
scen
den
t
al view point.
 There
fore it f
ol
lows that ev
ery
thing else is
known by the knowl
edge of the S
elf or Brahmajnana.
That the S
u
preme Self only
 is that which ap
pears as the in
di
vid
-
ual soul is ob
vi
ous from the Brahmana-p
as
sage ﬁLet me en
ter into
them with t
his liv
ing Self and ev
olve names and forms.ﬂ
Su
tra 20 means that,
 the af

fir ma
tion that
 ﬁby know
ing It ev

ery -
thing is knownﬂ, shows the in
di
vid
ual soul and the Su
preme Self are
non-dif

fer ent. S
u
tra 21 means the iden
tity
 of the soul and the S
u
-
preme Self,
 re
fers to the st
ate of at

tain
ment of t
he Su
preme Self by
the pu
ri
fied and per
fected soul. S
u
tra 22 means that ev
en now the
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
136

Su
preme Self is t
he in
di
vid
ual soul. It
 is not that t
he in
di
vid
ual soul is
dis
solved or merged in the S
u
preme Self.
 Our er
ro
ne
ous sense of di
-
ver
sity and sep

a rate
ness is lost or dis
solved but t
he soul, which is in
re
al
ity t
he Su
preme Self (or the one A
t
man which alone ex
ist
s), ex
ist
s
for ever
.
Of these three opin
ions, the one held by
 Kasakrit
sna is in ac
cor
-
dance with the Scrip
ture, be
cause it agrees with what all the V
edant
a
text
s teach.
Ac
cord
ing to the st
ate
ment of A
smarathya, t
he soul is not ab
so
-
lutely
 dif

fer ent from t
he Su
preme Self.
 His dec
la
ra
tion in
di
cates by the
ex
pres
sion ﬁOw
ing to the f
ul
fil
ment of t
he prom
iseﬂ, that t
here is a cer
-
t
ain re
la
tion of cause and ef

fect be tween the Su
preme Self and t
he in
-
di
vid
ual soul. The prom
ise is made in the two p
as
sages ﬁwhen the
Self is known, all t
his is knownﬂ and ﬁall this is that Self
.ﬂ Ac
cord
ing to
Asmarathya t
he in
di
vid
ual soul is a prod
uct of the High
est Self.
 There
-
fore the knowl
edge of the cause gives rise to t
he knowl
edge of ev
ery
-
thing. I
f the S
oul and the Su
preme Self are non-dif

fer ent, t
he prom
ise
that t
hrough the ﬁknowl
edge of one ev
ery
thing be
comes knownﬂ can
be ful
filled.
Ac
cord
ing to the v
iew of Audulomi
 the dif

fer ence and non-dif

fer -
ence of the two de
pend on dif

fer ence of con
di
tion; t
he in
di
vid
ual soul
is only a st
ate of t
he high
est Self or B
rah
man. The v
iew of
Asmarathya and A
udulomi can
not st
and.
Jivahood is an un
re
al
ity
. It
 is a cre
ation of A
vidya or ne
science.
The in
di
vid
ual soul is iden
ti
cal with Brah
man in es
sence. On ac
count
of ig
no
rance we feel that we are con
di
tioned or lim
ited by t
he false, il
-
lu
sory Up
adhis and that we are dif

fer ent from B
rah
man. Re
ally t
he in
-
di
vid
ual soul is nei
ther cre
ated nor de
stroyed. I
f the Jiv
ahood is a
re
al
ity i
t can never be de
stroyed and lib
er
a
tion would be im
pos
si
ble. If

the in
di
vid
ual soul be
comes one with Brah
man or the High
est Self
when it at
t
ains free
dom or the fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion, t
hen Jivahood is il
-
lu
sory
. The or
i
gin of the souls from t
he Su
preme Self li
ke sparks from
the fire is not real cre
ation. I
t must be v
iewed only with ref

er ence to
the
lim it i
ng
ad junct
s.
The ob
jec
tor says: the p
as
sage, ‚Ris
ing from out of
 these el
e
-
ment
s he van
ishes again af

ter them. When he has de
p
arted there is
no more knowl
edge™, in
di
cates the fi
nal an
ni
hi
la
tion of t
he soul, but
not it
s one
ness with the Su
preme Self.
W
e re
ply
, this is in
cor
rect. The p
as
sage means to say only t
hat
all sense per
cep
tion ceases when the soul de
p
art
s from the body
, not
that t
he Self is an
ni
hi
lated. The p
as
sage in
ti
mates that t
he eter
nally
un
chang
ing Self which is one mass of knowl
edge or con
scious
ness
can
not cer
t
ainly per
ish but by means of t
rue knowl
edge of the S
elf,
dis
con
nec
tion with t
he el
e
ment
s and the sense or
gans, which are the
prod
uct
s of ig
no
rance, has t
aken place.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 4
137

The in
di
vid
ual soul and the Su
preme Self dif

fer in name only. It
is a set
tled con
clu
sion that per
fect knowl
edge pro
duces ab
so
lute
one
ness of the two. The S
elf is called by m
any dif

fer ent names but it
 is
One only
. Per
fect knowl
edge is the door to Moksha or the fi
nal eman
-
ci
p
a
tion. Moksha is not some
thing ef

fected and non-eter nal, It
 is eter
-
nal and is not dif

fer ent from t
he eter
nally un
chang
ing, im
mor
t
al, pure
Brah
man who is One with
out a sec
ond. Those who st
ate that
 there is
dis
tinc
tion be
tween the in
di
vid
ual and the Su
preme Self are not
 in
har
mony with t
he true sense of the V
edant
a text
s.
Prakrity
adhikaranam
: T
opic7 (Sutra 23-27)
Brahman i
s both the eff
icient and the m
aterial cause
àH
¥${V
ü à
{VkmÑ
ï>mÝV
mZwna
moYmV
Prakriti
scha pratijna d
risht
ant
anup
arodhat
I.4.
23 (129)
(Brahman i
s) the material cause also on account of (th
is view)
not b
ei
ng in c
onfli
ct with the
 pro
po
sitio
n and
 the
 illu
stratio
ns
(quot
ed in th
e Srut
i).
Prakr
itih:
 the material cause;
Cha:
 also;
Prat
ijna:
 the proposition;
Drisht
ant
a:
 illustrations
;
Anup
arodhat:
 on account of this not bei
ng
in conflict.
This Su
tra st
ates that B
rah
man is the ef

fi cient as well as the ma
-
te
rial cause of the uni
verse.
Brah
man has been de
fined as that f
rom which pro
ceed the or
i
-
gin, sus
te
nance and dis
so
lu
tion of t
his uni
verse. Now a doubt arises
whether Brah
man is the ma
te
rial cause like clay or gold, or the ef

fi -
cient or op
er
a
tive cau
sal
ity l
ike pot
ter or gold
smith.
The Purvap
akshin or the ob
jec
tor holds that B
rah
man is the only
op
er
a
tive or t
he ef

fi cient cause of the world, as in t
ext
s like, ﬁHe re
-
flected, he cre
ated Pranaﬂ Pras. Up. V
I.3
&
4. Ob
ser
va
tion and ex
pe
-
ri
ence in
ti
mate that
 the ac
tion of op
er
a
tive causes only such as
pot
ters and the like is pre
ceded by think
ing or re
flec
tion. I
t is, there
-
fore, quit
e cor
rect that we should re
gard the cre
ator also in the same
light. T
he cre
ator is de
clared as the ‚Lord™. Lords such as kings are
known only as op
er
a
tive causes. The S
u
preme Lord must be re
-
garded as an op
er
a
tive cause.
This Su
tra re
futes this
prima
fa
cie view of the P
urvap
akshin.
Brah
man is also the ma
te
rial cause of this uni
verse. The term ‚
cha™
(also) in
di
cates that Brah
man is the ef

fi cient cause as well. Only if
Brah
man is the ma
te
rial cause of the uni
verse it is pos
si
ble to know
ev
ery
thing through t
he knowl
edge of Brah
man. ﬁHave you ev
er asked
for that i
n
struc
tion by which that
 which is not heard be
comes heard;
that which is not per
ceived, per
ceived; t
hat which is not known,
known?ﬂ (Chh. Up. IV
.1-2), which de
clare that the ef

fects are not dif

-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
138

fer
ent from t
heir ma
te
rial cause, be
cause we know from or
di
nary ex
-
pe
ri
ence that the car
pen
ter is dif

fer ent from t
he house he has built.
The il
lus
tra
tions re
ferred to here are ﬁMy dear
, as by one lump of

clay all that
 is made of clay is known, t
he mod
i
fi
ca
tion i.e.
, the ef

fectbe
ing a name merely which has it
s or
i
gin in speech, while the t
ruth is
that it
 is clay merelyﬂ et
c. (Chh. Up. VI
-1-14). These text
s clearly in
di
-
cate that B
rah
man is the ma
te
rial cause of the uni
verse, oth
er
wise
they would be mean
ing
less.
Prom
is
ing st
ate
ment
s are made in other places also. For in
-
st
ance ﬁWhat is that through which if i
t is known ev
ery
thing else be
-
comes known,ﬂ Mun. Up. I.1.
3. ﬁWhen the Self
 has been seen, heard,
per
ceived and known then all thi
s is knownﬂ (Bri. Up. IV
-5-6). All these
prom
is
sory st
ate
ment
s and il
lus
tra
tive i
n
st
ances which are to be
found in all V
edant
a text
s prove that B
rah
man is also the ma
te
rial
cause.
There is no other guid
ing be
ing than Brah
man. W
e have to con
-
clude from this that
 Brah
man is the ef

fi cient cause at the same tim
e.
Lump
s of clay and pieces of gold are de
pend
ent on ex
tra
ne
ous op
er
-
a
tive causes such as pot
ters and gold
smiths in or
der to shape them
-
selves into ves
sels and or
na
ment
s; but out

side Brah man as ma
te
rial
cause there is no other op
er
a
tive or ef

fi cient cause to which the ma
te
-
rial cause could look, be
cause the scrip
ture says that B
rah
man was
One with
out a sec
ond pre
vi
ous to cre
ation. Who else could be an ef

fi -
cient or op
er
a
tive cause when there was noth
ing else?
If t
hat were ad
mit
ted that
 there is a guid
ing prin
ci
ple dif

fer ent
from the ma
te
rial cause, in that case ev
ery
thing can
not be known
through one thing.
 Con
se
quently t
he prom
is
sory st
ate
ment
s and the
il lus tra tions
would
be
stul ti f
ied.
There
fore Brah
man is the ef

fi cient cause, be
cause there is no
other rul
ing prin
ci
ple. He is the ma
te
rial cause as well be
cause there
is no other sub
st
ance from which the uni
verse can t
ake it
s or
i
gin.
For the sake of har
mony be
tween the prop
o
si
tion to be es
t
ab
-
lished and il
lus
tra
tions given t
herein, we con
clude that Brah
man is
the ma
te
rial cause of the world. The t
ext ex

pressly de clares Him to be
the ef

fi cient or op
er
a
tive cause as well.
A{^
Ü`monX
Abhidhy
op
adesaccha
I.4.
24 (130)
On a
cco
unt o
f the
 state
me
nt of wi
ll or re
fle
ctio
n (to c
rea
te o
n
the
 part o
f the
 Sup
rem
e S
el
f, I
t is the
 mate
rial c
aus
e)
.
Abhidhy
a:
 will, reflection;
Up
adesat:
 on account of instruction or
teaching or st
atement;

Cha:
 also, and.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 4
139

An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 23 is given ﬁHe wished or
thought may
 I be many
, may I
 grow forthﬂ. In t
his text
 the de
sire and
re flec tion
in di cate
that
Brah man
is
the
ef
 fi cient
cause.
ﬁMay I be many
ﬂ shows that Brah
man Him
self be
came many
.
There
fore He is the ma
te
rial cause as well.
He willed to man
i
fest Him
self as many i.
e., as the uni
verse.
He willed to evolv
e the uni
verse out of Him
self. This in
ti
mates
that He is at once the m
a
te
rial and the ef

fi cient cause of cre
ation.
gmjm…mo^
`måZmZmV²
Sakshacchobhay
amnanat
I.4.
25 (131)
And
 be
cau
se
 the
 Sruti s
tate
s that b
oth (th
e o
rigin a
nd the
dis
sol
utio
n of the
 univ
ers
e)
 have
 Brah
man fo
r the
ir mate
rial
cause.
Sakshat:
 direct;
Cha:
 also;
Ubhay
amnanat:
 because the Sruti
st
ates both.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 23 is con
tin
ued.
This Su
tra pro
vides a fur
ther ar
gu
ment for B
rah
man™
s be
ing the
gen eral
ma te rial
cause.
That from which a thi
ng t
akes it
s or
i
gin and into which it i
s with
-
drawn, and ab
sorbed is it
s ma
te
rial cause. This is well known. Thus
the earth, f
or in
st
ance, is the ma
te
rial cause of rice, bar
ley and the
like. ﬁAll t
hese things t
ake their or
i
gin from the A
kasa (Brah
man)
alone and re
turn into t
he Akasaﬂ Chh. Up. I-9-1.
ﬁThat from which these thi
ngs are pro
duced, by which, when
pro
duced they liv
e, and into which they
 en
ter at thei
r dis
so
lu
tionŠtry
to know that.
 That is Brah
manﬂ T
ait. Up.
 III
.1. These Up
anishadic p
as
-
sages in
di
cate clearly that
 Brah
man is the ma
te
rial cause also.
The word ‚Sakshat™
 (di
rect) in the Su
tra shows that there is no
other ma
te
rial cause, but that
 all this orig
i
nated from t
he Akasa (Brah
-
man) only
. Ob
ser
va
tion and ex
pe
ri
ence teach that ef

fects are not
re-ab
sorbed into any
thing else but t
heir ma
te
rial cause.
AmË_H
¥$Vo
– n[aUm_mV²
Atmakriteh p
arinamat
I.4.
26 (132)
(Brahman i
s the material cause of the world) because it
creat
ed Itself by un
dergoin
g modi
fic
ati
on.
Atmakri
teh:
 created it
self;
Parinam
at:
 by undergoing modif
ication.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 23 is con
tin
ued.
W
e read in the T
ait. Up.
 II-7 ﬁThat I
t

self man i
fested It

self.ﬂ Thisin
ti
mates that B
rah
man alone cre
ated the world out of
 It

self, which ispos si ble
only
by
un der go ing
mod i fi ca ti
on.
This
rep re sent
s
the
Self
as
the ob
ject of ac
tion as well as the agent.
 So He is the Kart
a (cre
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
140

ator-agent) and Karma (cre
ation). He be
comes the cre
ation by
means
of
Parinama
(evo lu tion
or
mod i fi ca ti
on).
The word ‚It

self™
 in
ti
mates the ab
sence of any other op
er
a
tive
cause but the Self
. The mod
i
fi
ca
tion is ap
p
ar
ent (V
ivart
a), ac
cord
ing
to Sri Sankaracharya.
 It is real, ac
cord
ing to Sri Ramanujacharya.
The world is un
real in the sense that it
 is not per
ma
nent. I
t is an il
lu
-
sion in the sense it has only a phe
nom
e
nal ex
is
tence, it has no ex

is -
tence sep

a rate from Brah
man.
`mo{Zü
 {h Jr`Vo
Y
onischa hi giy
ate
I.4.
27 (133)
And becau
se (Brahman) is called the source.
Y
oni:
 the womb, t
he source, the origin;
Cha:
 and;
Hi:
 because;
Giy
ate:
 is called
.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 23 is con
tin
ued.
Brah
man is the ma
te
rial cause of the uni
verse, also be
cause He
is st
ated in Srut
i to be the source of the uni

verse.W
e read in Mundaka Upani
shad III-1-3, ﬁThe M
aker
, the Lord,
the Per
son, who has his source in Brah
manﬂ and ﬁthat which the wise
re
gard as the Source of all be
ingsﬂ Mun. Up. I-1-6.
Achintyam
-avyaktam
-anant
a rup
am,
 sivam, prasant
am
amrit
am brahm
ayonim;
 T
amadim
adhyant
avihinam-ekam
 vibhum
chidanandam-arup
am-adbhut
am
ŠHe
is
in com pre hen si ble,
un
-
speak
able, in
fi
nite in form,
 all-good, all-peace, im

mor t
al, the p
ar
ent of
the uni
verse, with
out be
gin
ning, mid
dle and end, with
out ri
val, al
l-per
-
vad ing,
all-con scious ness,
all-bliss,
in vis i ble,

and
in scru t
a ble
(Kaivaly
a Up. 6)Šthis in
di
cates that Brah
man is the ma
te
rial cause of
the world.
The word Y
oni or womb al
ways de
notes the ma
te
rial cause, as
in the sen
tence ﬁthe earth is the Y
oni or womb of herbs and trees.ﬂ
It is thus prov
ed or es
t
ab
lished that B
rah
man is the ma
te
rial
cause of the uni
verse.
Sarv
av
y
akhy
anadhikaranam
: T
opic 8
The argument
s which refute the Sankhyas
refute the ot
hers also
EVoZ gd}
Etena sarv
e v
y
akhy
at
a v
y
akhy
at
ah
I.4.
28 (134)
By this all (the
 doc
trines c
once
rning the o
rigin of the wo
rld
whi
ch ar
e opposed to the Vedant
a texts
) ar
e explained.
Etena:
 by this,
 by what has been said;
Sarv
e:
 all;
V
y
akhy
at
ah:
 are
explained.
The ar
gu
ment is con
cluded in this Su
tra.
CHAPT
ER IŠSE
CT
ION 4
141

By what has been said in t
he fore
go
ing Sutras it i
s to be un
der
-
stood that t
he teach
ing of all t
he Srutis, ev
en those that hav
e not been
dis
cussed point
s to Brah
man, the only
 cause of the world.
By t
hus dis
prov
ing the doc
trine of P
radhana be
ing the cause of
the world all have been re
futed.
 By ov
er
throw
ing the chief dis
pu
t
ant
oth
ers are over
thrown just as by de
feat
ing the com
mander all the oth

-
ers are also de
feated.
 Thus those who at
trib
ute cre
ation to at

oms and other the
o
rist
s are all de
feated.
All doc
trines that speak of t
wo sep
a
rate causes are re
futed.
 The
atomic the
ory and other the
o
ries are not based on scrip
tural au
thor
ity
.
They con
tra
dict many scrip
tural tex
t
s.
The Sankhya doc
trine ac
cord
ing to which the Pradhana is t
he
cause of the uni
verse, has in the Sut
ras be
gin
ning with I.
1.5 been
again and again brought for
ward and re
futed.
The doc
trine of P
radhana st
ands some
what near to the V
edant
a
doc
trine as it ad
mit
s the non-dif

fer ence of cause and ef

fect like theV
edant
a doc
trine. Fur
ther
, it has been ac
cepted by some of t
he au
-
thors of the Dharma Sut
ras such as D
evala and oth
ers. More
over the
V
edant
a text
s con
t
ain some p
as
sages which to some peo
ple who are
en
dowed with dull in
tel
lect may ap
pear to con
t
ain in
fer
en
tial marks
point
ing to it.
 For all these rea
sons the com
men
t
a
tor has t
aken spe
-
cial trou
ble to re
fute t
he Pradhana doc
trine. He has not di
rected his
spe
cial at
ten
tion to t
he atomic and other t
he
o
ries.
The rep
e
ti
tion of t
he phrase ‚are ex
plained™
 shows that the
Chap
ter ends here.
It is proved t
hat Brah
man is the ma
te
rial as well as the ef

fi cient
cause of the uni
verse.
Thus ends the Fourth Pada (
Sec
tion 4) of the First
 Adhy
ay
a
(Chap
ter I) of the
 Brahma Sutras or the V
edant
a Phi
los
o
phy
.
Her
e ends Chap
ter I
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
142

CHAPTER II
A
VIRODHA-ADHY
A
Y
A
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
Smriti-ny
aya-virodha-p
arihara forms the topic of t
he first Pada.
The Smriti
virodha is dealt wit
h in Sutras 1-3 and 12 also. The
Nyayav
irodha is treated in the rest of
 the Sut
ras. Pada (Sec
tion) 2 at
-
t
acks the var
i
ous Darsanas or
 sys
tems of phi
los
o
phy on their own
grounds. The Third and Fourth Padas aim at
 es
t
ab
lish
ing a unity
 of
pur port
in
the
ap p
ar ently
di ver gent
and
in con sis tent
cos mo log i cal
and p
sy
cho
log
i
cal thought
s of the sev
eral V
edant
a p
as
sages. Thus
the ti
tle A
virodha or ab
sence of con
tra
dic
tion giv
en to the chap
ter is
quite
ap pro pri ate.
It has been shown in the First Chap
ter that t
he Om
ni
scient Lord
of all is the cause of t
he or
i
gin of the world just as clay
 is the ma
te
rial
cause of pot
s etc., and gold of
 golden or
na
ment
s. It has been con
clu
-
sively prov
ed also in the First Chap
ter that al
l the V
edant
a text
s treat
of Brah
man as the First Cause and that B
rah
man is the im
port of all
the V
edant
a text
s. This was es
t
ab
lished by the S
amanvaya.
Just as the ma
gi
cian is the cause of the sub
sis
tence of the m
ag
i
-
cal il
lu
sion, so also Brah
man is the cause of the sub
sis
tence of this
uni
verse by His Rul
er
ship. Just as the four classes of crea
tures are
re
ab
sorbed into the earth,
 so also, pro
jected world is fi
nally re
ab
-
sorbed into His es
sence dur
ing Pralaya or dis
so
lu
tion.
It has been fur
ther proved also that
 the Lord is the Self
 of all be
-
ings.
The doc
trine of P
radhana be
ing the cause of the world has been
re
futed in t
he First Chap
ter as it is not based on the au
thor
ity of
 the
scrip tures.
In this Sec
tion the ar
gu
ment
s based on rea
son
ing against the
doc
trine which speaks of Brah
man as the First Cause are re
futed.
Fur ther
ar gu ment
s
which
claim
their
au thor i t
a tive ness
from
the
Smritis t
o es
t
ab
lish the doc
trine of P
radhana and the the
ory of the at

-
oms are re
futed in t
his Sec
tion.
143

SYNOPSIS
Pre
vi
ously it has been proved on t
he au
thor
ity of
 Sruti t
hat the
mat
ter or Pradhana is not the cause of t
he world. The First Chap
ter
has proved that all
 the V
edantic tex
t
s unan
i
mously teach that
 there is
only one cause of the uni
verse, viz.
, Brah
man, whose na
ture is in
tel
li
-
gence. It has also been proved t
hat there is no scrip
tural tex
t which
can be used to es
t
ab
lish sys
tems op
posed to the V
edant
a, more p
ar
-
tic
u
larly the S
ankhya sys
tem.
The first two P
adas of the Sec
ond Chap
ter re
fute any
 ob
jec
tions
which may be raised against the V
edant
a doc
trine on purely spec
u
la
-
tive grounds ap
art from the au
thor
ity of
 the Sruti
s. They also show
that no sys
tem that
 can
not be rec
on
ciled with the V
edant
a can be es
-
t
ab lished
in
a
sat is fac tory
man ner
.
Sec
tion I (P
ada) of the Sec
ond Chap
ter proves by ar
gu
ment
s
that B
rah
man is the cause of the world and re
moves all ob
jec
tions
that may
 be lev
elled against such con
clu
sion.
Adhikarana I:
 (Sutras 1-2) re
futes the ob
jec
tion of t
he Sankhyas
that t
he ac
cept
ing of the sy
s
tem of V
edant
a in
volves t
he re
jec
tion of
the Sankhya doc
trine which con
sti
tutes a p
art of Sm
riti and so has
claims or con
sid
er
ation. The V
edant
a re
plies that t
he ac
cep
t
ance of
the Sankhya S
mriti would force us to re
ject other Smrit
is such as the
Manu Smriti
 which are op
posed to the doc
trine of t
he Sankhyas. The
V
eda does not con
firm the S
ankhya Smrit
i but only
 those Smriti
s
which teach that the uni

verse takes it
s or
i
gin from an in
tel
li
gent cre
-
ator or in
tel
li
gent pri
mary cause (Brah
man).
Adhikarana II:
 (Su
tra 3) ex
tends the same line of
 ar
gu
men
t
a
tion
to the Y
oga-Smriti.
 It dis
cards the the
ory of the Y
oga phi
los
o
phy of
Pat
anjali re
gard
ing the cause of the world.
Adhikarana III
:
 (Sutras 4-5) raises an ob
jec
tion that
 as Brah
man
and the world are not sim
i
lar in na
ture and prop
er
ties, one be
ing sen
-
tient,
 etc., and t
he other in
sen
tient,
 etc., B
rah
man can
not be the
cause of the uni
verse.
Adhikarana III
:
 (Sutras 6-7) re
futes the ob
jec
tion by st
at
ing that
there are in
st
ances in the world of gen
er
a
tion of t
he in
an
i
mate from
the an
i
mate as, for in
st
ance, the pro
duc
tion of hair f
rom the liv

ingbody
, also of the an
i
mate from t
he in
an
i
mate as, for in
st
ance, the birth
of scor
pi
ons and other in
sect
s from cow-dung. They prove t
hat it is
not nec
es
sary that t
he cause and the caused should be sim
i
lar in all
re spects.
144

Adhikarana III
:
 (Su
tra 8) raises an ob
jec
tion that
 at the t
ime of
gen
eral dis
so
lu
tion, when t
he ef

fect (world) is merged in the cause(Brah
man), the lat

ter must be con t
am
i
nated by t
he for
mer
.
Adhikarana III
:
(Su
tra 9) re
futes the ob
jec
tion by show
ing that
there are di
rect in
st
ances to the con
trary
, just as the prod
uct
s of the
earth such as jars etc., at the t
ime of dis
so
lu
tion do not change earth
into their own na
ture; but,
 on the con
trary
, they
 are them
selves
changed into the sub
st
ance of earth.
Adhikarana III
:
 (Sutras 10-1
1),
Adhikarana IV
:
 (Su
tra 12),
Adhikarana IX:
 (Su
tra 29) show that ar
gu
ment
s di
rected against the
view that
 Brah
man is the cause of the world may
 be lev
elled against
the op
po
nent
s as well, such as the Sankhyas and the V
aiseshikas,
be
cause in the Sankhya sys
tem, t
he name
less Pradhana pro
duces
all names and forms and in the V
aiseshika sys
tem in
vis
i
ble and form
-
less at
oms unite and form a v
is
i
ble world. The Sut
ras stat
e that ar
gu
-
ment
s may be pro
longed with
out any con
clu
sion be
ing ar
rived at and
that t
he con
clu
sion of the V
edas only is to be re
spected. All t
he views
which are an
t
ag
o
nis
tic to the V
edas are ruth
lessly re
futed.
Adhikarana V
:
 (Su
tra 13) teaches that al
though the en
joy
ing
souls and the ob
ject
s are in re
al
ity not
h
ing but Brah
man, yet
 they may

prac
ti
cally be held ap
art, just as in or
di
nary life we hold ap
art and dis
-
tin
guish as sep
a
rate in
di
vid
ual things, t
he waves, the rip
ples and
foam of t
he ocean al
though they
 are in es
sence iden
ti
cal and only sea
wa ter
.
Adhikarana VI:
 (Sutras 14-20) treat
s of the non-dif

fer ence of the
ef

fect from the cause, a doc
trine of t
he V
edant
a which is de
fended by
the fol
low
ers of the V
edant
a against the V
aiseshikas. Ac
cord
ing to the
V
aiseshikas, the ef

fect is some thing dif

fer ent from t
he cause.
Adhikarana VII
:
 (Sutras 21-22) re
futes the ob
jec
tion that
 Brah
-
man in the fo
rm of the in
di
vid
ual soul is sub
ject to plea
sure and pain
by show
ing that t
hough Brah
man as
sumes the form of t
he in
di
vid
ual
soul, yet
 He tran
scends the lat
ter and re
mains un
t
ainted by any
 prop
-
erty of Jiv
a whom He con
trols from within.
 Though the in
di
vid
ual soul
or Jiva is no other than Brah
man Him
self, y
et Brah
man re
mains the
ab
so
lute Lord and as such above plea
sure and pain.
 Jiva is a slave of
A
vidya.
 Brah
man is the con
trol
ler of Maya.
 When Jiva is freed from
A
vidya,
 he be
comes iden
ti
cal with Brah
man.
Adhikarana VII
I:
 (Sutras 23-25) shows that Brah
man, al
though
de
void of m
a
te
rial and in
stru
ment
s of ac
tion, may
 yet cre
ate the world
through His Sat-Sankalp
a or will power
, just as gods by thei
r mere
power of vo
li
tion cre
ate p
al
aces, an
i
mals and the like and milk by
 it

self turns into curds.
Adhikarana IX:
 (Sutras 26-29) ex
plains that B
rah
man does not
en
tirely t
rans
form Him
self into t
he uni
verse though He is with
out
p
art
s. Al
though He pro
ject
s the world from Him
self, y
et He re
mains
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
145

one and un
di
vided. The world is un
real. The change is only ap
p
ar
ent
like the snake is the rope but not real.
 Brah
man is not ex
hausted in
the cre
ation.
Adhikarana X:
 (Sutras 30-31) teaches that Brah
man, al
though
de
void of i
n
stru
ment
s of ac
tion, is able t
o cre
ate the uni
verse by
means of the di
verse pow
ers He pos
sesses.
Adhikarana XI:
 (Sutras 32-33) ex
plains that B
rah
man has no
mo
tive i
n cre
at
ing the world but pro
ject
s the uni
verse out of mere
sport
ing im
pulse which is in
her
ent in Him.
Adhikarana XII
:
 (Sutras 34-36) jus
ti
fies Brah
man from the
charges of par
tial
ity and cru
elty which are brought against
Him ow
ing
to the in
equal
ity of
 po
si
tion and fat
e of the v
ar
i
ous per
sons and the
uni
ver
sal suf

fer ing in the world. B
rah
man act
s as a cre
ator and dis
-
penser with ref
er
ence to the merit an
d de
merit of t
he in
di
vid
ual souls.
Adhikarana XII
I:
 (Su
tra 37) sums up the pre
ced
ing ar
gu
ment
s
and st
ates that all
 the at
trib
utes of Brah
man, vi
z., Om
ni
science, Om
-
nip
o
tence and the like, are f
ound ap
pro
pri
ate in Brah
man alone and
none else and are such as to ca
p
ac
i
t
ate Him for t
he cre
ation of t
he
uni
verse. Brah
man is, there
fore, the cause of t
he world.
Smri
ty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 1 (Sutras 1-2)
Refut
ation of S
mrit
is not based on Srutis
ñ_¥
Ë`ZdH$
meXmofà
gﬁ B{V M
oÞmÝ`ñ_
¥Ë`ZdH
$meXmof
àgﬁmV
Smri
ty
anav
akasadoshaprasanga i
ti chet na
 any
asmrity
anav
akasadoshaprasangat
II.
1.1 (135)
I
f it be
 ob
je
cte
d tha
t (from
 the
 do
ctrine
 of B
rahma
n be
ing the
cau
se
 of the
 world
) the
re w
ou
ld re
sul
t the
 de
fe
ct of th
ere
 be
ing
no ro
om fo
r ce
rtain Sm
ritis (w
e s
ay) no
, be
cau
se
 (by th
e
rej
ec
tion o
f that do
ctrine
) the
re w
ou
ld re
sul
t the
 de
fec
t of wan
t
of ro
om fo
r som
e o
the
r Smriti.
Smriti:
 the Sankhya phi
losophy;
Anav
akasa:
 no room;
Dosha:
defect;
Prasangat:
 Result, chance;
Iti:
thus;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not;
Anyasmriti:
 othe
r Smr
itis;
Anav
akasadoshaprasangat:
 because
there would result the def
ect of want of
 room for other Smrit
is.
The con
clu
sion ar
rived at in Chap
ter IŠSec
tion IV
, that
 Brah
-
man is the cause of the world is cor
rob
o
rated by Sm
ritis other than
Sankhya. The ear
li
est and the most or
tho
dox of t
hese Smritis is the
Smriti writ

ten by Manu.If y
ou say that one set
 of Smrit
is will be ig
nored if it is said t
hat
Pradhana is not the cause of t
he world, will not an
other set of S
mritis
like Manu Smrit
i which is based on the Srutis and there
fore more au
-
thor
i
t
a
tive be i
g
nored if you say t
hat Brah
man is not the cause? W
e
have shown that t
he Sruti de
clares Brah
man to be the cause. Only
such Smritis which are in full agree
ment with t
he Sruti are au
thor
i
t
a
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
146

tive.
 What if K
apila and oth
ers are Siddhas? Siddhi (per
fec
tion) de
-
pends on Dharma and Dharma de
pends on the V
edas. No Siddha is
au
thor
i
t
a
tive i
f his view is con
trary to t
hat of t
he Sruti.
 Smritis which
are op
posed to the V
edas should be re
jected ruth
lessly
.
Kapila ac
knowl
edges a plu
ral
ity of
 selfs. He does not ad
mit the
doc
trine of t
here be
ing one uni
ver
sal Self.
 The sys
tem of K
apila con
-
tra
dict
s the V
edas, not only
 the as
sump
tion of an in
de
pend
ent
Pradhana but also by i
t
s hy
poth
e
sis of a plu
ral
ity of
 selfs. W
e can
not
ex
plain the V
edant
a text
s in such a man
ner as not to bring them i
nto
con
flict wit
h Kapila Sm
riti. K
apila Smrit
i con
tra
dict
s the Srutis. Hence
it should be dis
re
garded.
The verse V
-2 of Svet
asvat
ara Upani
shad does not re
fer to
Kapila the f
ounder of Sankhya phi
los
o
phy
. It
 re
fers to a dif

fer ent be
ing
al
to
gether
. The verse re
ally means ﬁHe who be
fore the cre
ation of t
he
world pro
duced the golden col
oured Brahma (Kapila) in or
der to
main
t
ain the uni
verseﬂ. The word Kapila means here ‚golden col
-
oured™
 and is an
other name for Brahma called Hirany
garbha.
BVaof
m§ Mm
ZwnbãYo–
It
aresham chanup
alabdheh
II.
1.2 (136)
And
 the
re b
ei
ng no m
en
tion (
in the
 scrip
ture
s) o
f othe
rs (i.e
.,
the e
ffects o
f the Prad
hana acco
rding to the
 Sankhya sys
tem),
(the Sank
hya syste
m cannot b
e a
uthoritative
).
It
aresham:
 of others;
Cha:
 and;
Anup
alabdheh:
 there being no
mention.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is given.
Fur
ther such prin
ci
ples as Mahat etc.,
 which are said to be prod
-
uct
s of Pradhana are per
ceived nei
ther in the V
eda nor in or
di
nary ex
-
pe
ri
ence. On the other hand t
he el
e
ment
s and the senses are found
in the V
eda and in the world and hence may be re
ferred to in the
Smriti.
 Hence such wor
ds as Mahat etc., f
ound in Smriti
s do not re
fer
to prod
uct
s of Pradhana but t
o other cat
e
go
ries re
vealed in t
he Sruti.
See I.4
.1.
There is no men
tion of t
he other cat
e
go
ries of the Sankhyas
any
where in the V
edas. There
fore the Sankhy
a sys
tem can
not be au
-
thor i t
a tive.
Sankaracharya has proved that by
 the word Mahat we have t
o
un
der
st
and ei
ther the cos
mic in
tel
lect or Hiranyagarbha or the in
di
vid
-
ual soul, but in no case the M
ahat of t
he Sankhya phi
los
o
phy i.e.
, the
first prod
uct of the P
rakriti.
It is not onl
y be
cause Sankhya teaches that P
radhana is the au
-
thor of cre
ation which makes it un
au
thori
t
a
tive,
 but it t
eaches other
doc
trines also which have no foun
da
tion in the V
edas. It t
eaches that
souls are pure con
scious
ness and all-per
vad
ing, that
 bond
age and
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
147

free
dom is the work of Prakriti.
 It f
ur
ther teaches that t
here is no Su
-
preme Self,
 the Lord of all.
 It also main
t
ains that Pranas are merely
forms of the f
unc
tions of the f
ive senses and have no sep

a rate ex
is
-
tence of their own.
 All these het

ero dox doc
trines are to be found
there. Hence the Sankhy
a sys
tem can
not be au
thor
i
t
a
tive.
Y
ogapraty
ukty
adhikaranam: T
opic 2
Refut
ation of Y
oga
EVoZ `mo
J– àË`w
Etena y
ogah praty
ukt
ah
II.
1.3 (137)
By th
is t
he Yoga ph
ilosoph
y is (
also)
 refut
ed.
Etena:
 by this v
iz., by
 the refut
ation of t
he Sankhya Sm
riti;
Y
ogah:
 the
Y
oga philosophy;
Praty
ukt
ah:
 is (also) refuted.
The Y
oga phi
los
o
phy of P
at
anjali is re
futed here. Y
oga is called
ﬁSesvara-Sankhyaﬂ.
The Purvap
akshin says: The Y
oga sys
tem is given i
n the
Up
anishads also, like the Sv
et
avat
ara Upani
shad etc. ﬁHold
ing his
head, neck, trunk erectﬂ etc. Sv
et. Up. I
I-8. ﬁThe Self
 is to be heard, to
be thought of
, to be med
i
t
ated uponﬂ Bri. Up.
 II-4-5. ﬁThis t
he firm
hold
ing back of the senses is what is called Y
ogaﬂ Katha Up. I
I-3-1
1.
ﬁHav
ing re
ceived this knowl
edge and the whole rule of Y
ogaﬂ Katha.
Up. II-3-18. Y
oga is an aid to the con
cen
tra
tion of mi
nd. With
out con
-
cen
tra
tion one can
not have knowl
edge of Brah
man. Hence Y
oga is a
means to knowl
edge. As the Y
oga Smriti i
s based on the Srutis, it
 is
au
thor
i
t
a
tive.
 The Y
oga Smriti ac
knowl
edges the Pradhana which is
the First Cause.
For the same rea
son as ad
duced against the Sankhya sy
s
tem,
the Y
oga phi
los
o
phy by P
at
anjali is also re
futed as it al
so ac
cept
s the
the
ory that P
rakriti is the cause of the uni
verse.
This Su
tra re
marks that by t
he ref
u
t
a
tion of t
he Sankhya Smrit
i
the Y
oga Smriti al
so is to be con
sid
ered as re
futed be
cause the Y
oga
phi los o phy
also
re cog nises,
in
op po si tion
to
scrip ture,
a
Pradhana
as
the in
de
pend
ent cause of the world and the great
 prin
ci
ple etc., as it
s
ef

fects al
though the V
eda or com
mon ex
pe
ri
ence is not in fa
vour of
these views.
Though the Smrit
i is p
artly au
thor
i
t
a
tive i
t should be re
jected as
it con
tra
dict
s the Srutis on other t
op
ics.
Al
though there are many S
mritis which treat of
 the soul, we have
di
rected our at
ten
tion to re
fute t
he Sankhya and Y
oga, be
cause they
are widely known as of

fer ing the means for at

tain
ing the high
est end
of man. M
ore
over
, they
 have ob
t
ained the ap
pre
ci
a
tion of many
 great
per
sons. Fur
ther their po
si
tion is strength
ened by Sruti
 ﬁHe who has
known that cause which is to be ap
pre
hended by Sankhya and Y
oga
he is freed from all f
et
tersﬂ Svet.
 Up. VI-13.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
148

W
e say that t
he high
est goal of man can
not be at
t
ained by the
knowl
edge of the S
ankhya Smrit
i, or Y
oga prac
tice. Srut
i clearly says
that t
he fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion or the su
preme be
at
i
tude can only be ob
-
t
ained by the knowl
edge of the unit
y of t
he Self which is con
veyed by
the V
eda. ﬁOnly t
he man who knows Brah
man crosses over Death,
there is no other p
ath to goﬂ Sv
et. Up. I
II-8.
The Sankhya and Y
oga sys
tems main
t
ain du
al
ity
. They do not
dis
cern the unity of
 the Self
. In t
he text
 cited ﬁThat cause which is to be
known by Sankhya and Y
ogaﬂ, the terms ‚S
ankhya™
 and ‚Y
oga™
 de
note
V
e
dic knowl
edge and med
i
t
a
tion as these terms are used in a p
as
-
sage st
and
ing close to other p
as
sages which re
fer to V
e
dic knowl
-
edge.
W
e cer
t
ainly al
low room for those por
tions of the t
wo sys
tems
which do not con
tra
dict the V
eda. The Sankhyas say
, ﬁThe soul is free
from all qual
i
ties (Asanga).ﬂ This is in har
mony with t
he V
eda which
de
clares that Purusha is es
sen
tially
 pure. ﬁFor that per
son is not at
-
t
ached to any
thingﬂ Bri.
 Up. IV
-3-16.
The Y
oga pre
scribes re
tire
ment from t
he con
cerns of life
(Nivritti
) for the wan
der
ing Sannyasin.
 This is cor
rob
o
rated by the
Sruti.
 ﬁThen the Pariv
rajaka with or
ange robe, shaven, wit
h
out any
pos
ses
sionﬂ etc. Jabala Up
anishad V
.
Their rea
son
ing is ac
cept

able to the ex

tent to which it leads to
Self-reali sa ti
on.
The above re
marks will serve as a re
ply to t
he claims of all ar
gu
-
men
t
a
tive S
mritis. W
e hold that t
he truth can be real
ised nor known
from the V
edant
a text
s only
, ﬁNone who does not know the V
eda per
-
ceives the great oneﬂ T
aittiriy
a Brahmana II
I-12.9.7.
 ﬁI now ask thee
that P
er
son t
aught in the Up
anishadsﬂ Bri. Up. II
I-9-26.
Na V
ilakshanatv
adhikaranam
: T
opic 3 (Sutras 4-1
1)
Brahman can be t
he cause of the universe, although
It is of a cont
rary nature from t
he universe
Z {dbj
UËdmXñ` VW
mËd§ M eã
Na v
ilakshanatv
adasy
a t
athatv
am cha sabdat
II.
1.4 (138)
(T
he obje
ctor says t
hat) Bra
hman cann
ot be the cause
 of the
world
, be
cau
se
 this (th
e w
orld
) is o
f a di
ffe
ren
t natu
re (
from
Brahman) a
nd its be
ing so (d
iffere
nt from Brahman) (
is kno
wn)
from th
e s
crip
ture
s.
Na:
 not (i.e.
 Brahman is not the cause of t
he world);
V
ilakshanatv
at:
because of dif
ference in nature;
Asy
a:
 it
s (i.e. of t
his world);
T
athatv
am:
 it
s being so;
Cha:
 and;
Sabdat:
 from the word, f
rom the
Sruti
.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
149

There are eight Sutras in t
his Adhikarana. The first and t
he sec
-
ond ex
press the Purvap
aksha (ob
jec
tion) and the ot
h
ers ex
press the
true doc
trine (Siddhant
a).
The ob
jec
tions founded on Sm
riti against t
he doc
trine of B
rah
-
man be
ing the ef

fi cient and the ma
te
rial cause of the uni
verse have
been re
futed.
 W
e now pro
ceed to re
fute t
hose founded on rea
son
ing.
Some plau
si
ble ob
jec
tions against Brah
man be
ing the cause of
the world are raised in this Su
tra and the sub
se
quent one.
The ob
jec
tor says: Brah
man is in
tel
li
gence. Brah
man is pure.
But t
he uni
verse is ma
te
rial, in
sen
tient and im

pure. There fore, it
 is dif

-
fer
ent from t
he na
ture of Brah
man. Hence, Brah
man can
not be the
cause of this world.
The ef

fect must be of the same na
ture as the cause. The ef

fectis only cause in an
other form. T
he cause and ef

fect can not be en
tirely
of a dif

fer ent na
ture. The in
tel
li
gent and sen
tient B
rah
man can
not pro
-
duce
non-in tel li gent
,
in sen tient,

ma te rial
uni verse.
If
Brah man
is
t
aken to be the cause of the world, t
he na
ture of the t
wo must be sim
i
-
lar
. But
 they ap
pear to be quite dif

fer ent in es
sence or na
ture. Hence,
Brah
man can
not be the cause of the world.
The dif

fer ence in na
ture is also known from the st
ate
ment
s of
Sruti,

ﬁBrah man
be came
in tel li gence
as
well
as
non-in tel li gence
(world)ﬂ (T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad, Brahmananda V
alli, S
ixth
AnuvakaŠ
V
ijnanam
 cha avijnanam cha abhavat
). There
fore, Brah
-
man can
not be the cause of the m
a
te
rial uni
verse. Brah
man, which is
pure spirit, can
not be the cause of thi
s uni
verse, which is im
pure mat
-
ter
. The world which con
sist
s of p
ain, plea
sure and il
lu
sion can
not be
de
rived from B
rah
man.
A{^_
m{Zì`nXoeñVw
 {deofmZwJ{Vä`m_²
Abhimani
v
y
ap
adesastu v
iseshanugati
bhy
am
II.
1.5 (139)
Bu
t the
 refe
ren
ce
 is to
 the
 pre
sid
ing d
ei
tie
s (o
f the
 orga
ns) o
n
account of th
e spe
cial charact
erisation and also fr
om the fact
of a deit
y so pr
esiding
.
Abhimani:
 the presiding deity
 (of the organs and the element
s);
V
y
ap
adesah:
 an expression, an indication,
 pointing out of
,
denot
ation of;

Tu
:
 but;
V
isesha:
 specific adjunct, on account of
distinction,
 because of so being qualified;
Anugatibhy
am:
 the act of
pervading;
V
iseshanugatibhy
am:
 from the specific adjunct as well
as from the fact of
 pervading, on account of
 their entering.
This Su
tra meet
s an ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 4. The word ‚T
u™
 (but) dis
-
cards the doubt raised.
When
ever an in
an
i
mate ob
ject is de
scribed in Smriti as be
hav
-
ing like an
i
mate be
ings, we are to un
der
st
and that it
 is an in
di
ca
tion of
a de
ity pre
sid
ing over it.
 In the case of ac
tions like speak
ing, dis
put
-
ing, and so on, which re
quire in
tel
li
gence, the scrip
tural tex
t
s do not
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
150

de
note the mere ma
te
rial el
e
ment
s and or
gans but rather the in
tel
li
-
gent de
i
ties which pre
side over each or
gan viz.,
 speech, etc.
Y
ou will find in K
aushit
aki Upani
shad: ﬁThe de
i
ties con
tend
ing
with each other for who was the best.ﬂ ﬁAl
l the de
i
ties re
cog
nised the
pre-em
i
nence in Pranaﬂ (Kau. Up. I
I-14). The Kaushit
akins make ex
-
press use of the word ﬁde
i
tiesﬂ in or
der to ex
clude the idea of t
he mere
ma
te
rial or
gans be
ing meant. A
it
areya Aranyaka (II
-2-4) says, ﬁAgni
hav
ing be
come speech en
tered the mout
hﬂ. This shows that each or
-
gan is con
nected with it
s own pre
sid
ing de
ity
.
There is a text i
n the Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad (VI-I-7) which
says, ﬁThese or
gans quar
relled over their re
spec
tive great

ness.ﬂThe text
s of Chhandogya Up
anishad also show the ex
is
tence of
such pre
sid
ing de
i
ties. ﬁThe fi
re thought and pro
duced wa
ter
.ﬂ This in
-
di
cates that the i
n
an
i
mate ob
ject may be called God hav

ing ref er
ence
to it
s pre
sid
ing de
ity
. The thought
 spo
ken of is that of
 the High
est De
-
ity which is con
nected with the ef

fects as a su
per
in
tend
ing prin
ci
ple.
All these strengt
hen the hy
poth
e
sis that the t
ext
s re
fer to the su
per
in
-
tend ing
de i ties.
From all this,
 we have to con
clude that thi
s uni
verse is dif

fer ent
in na
ture from Brah
man. There
fore, the Uni
verse can
not have B
rah
-
man for it
s ma
te
rial cause.
The next S
u
tra gives a very
 suit

able re ply to t
he ob
jec
tion raised
by the P
urvap
akshin or the ob
jec
tor
.
Drishy
ate tu
II.
1.6 (140)
Bu
t it (su
ch o
rganis
atio
n of li
fe
 from m
atte
r) is a
lso
 se
en
.
Drishy
ate:
 is seen;
Tu
:
 but.
Ob
jec
tion raised in Sut
ras 4 and 5 are now re
futed.
The word ‚but™
 dis
cards the Purvap
aksha. ‚But™
 re
futes the
Purvap
akshin™
s or ob
jec
tor
™
s views ex
pressed in the last Su
tra, vi
z.,
that t
his uni
verse can
not have orig
i
nated from B
rah
man, be
cause it is
dif

fer ent in char
ac
ter
. For we see that from
 man who is in
tel
li
gent,
non-in
tel
li
gent things such as hair and nails orig
i
nate, and t
hat from
non-in
tel
li
gent mat
ter such as cow-dung, scor

pi ons etc., are pro
-
duced. So the ob
jec
tions raised in Sutras 4 and 5 are not v
alid. Hence
it is quite pos
si
ble that t
his ma
te
rial uni
verse could be pro
duced by an
in tel li gent

Be ing,
Brah man.
Orig i na tion
of
in sen tient
cre ation
from
the
sen tient
Cre ator
is
not
un rea son able.
The Mundaka Up
anishad says ﬁJust as the spi
der stretches
forth and gath
ers to
gether it
s threads, as herbs grow out of the earth,
as from a liv
ing man co
mes out the hair
, so also from the I
m
per
ish
able
co
mes out this uni
verseﬂ (I.1.7).
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
151

The ob
jec
tor may say t
hat the body
 of a man is the cause of t
he
hair and nails and not the man,
 and the cow-dung is the cause of the
body of t
he scor
pion, etc. E
ven then,
 there is dif

fer ence in char
ac
ter
be
tween the cause, the dung and t
he ef

fect, the body of t
he scor
pion,
in so far as some non-in
tel
li
gent mat
ter (the body) is the abode of
 an
in
tel
li
gent prin
ci
ple (the soul of the scor
pion), which the other non-in
-
tel
li
gent mat
ter (the cow-dung) is not. They are not
 sim
i
lar in all re
-
spect
s. If t
hey were, then t
here would be noth
ing like cause and
ef

fect. If you ex

pect to find all the as
pect
s of Brah
man in the world,
then what is the dif

fer ence be
tween cause and ef

fect?The cause and it
s ef

fects are not sim
i
lar in all re
spect
s, but
some
thing in the cause is found in t
he ef

fect also, just as clay in the
lump is found in t
he jar also, though the shape,
 etc., of
 the two vary
.
The very re
la
tion
ship of cause and ef

fect im plies that t
here is some
dif

fer ence be
tween the two.
 Some qual
i
ties of the cause, B
rah
man,
such as ex
is
tence and in
tel
li
gence, are found in It
s ef

fect, the uni
-
verse. All ob
ject
s in the uni
verse ex
ist. The uni
verse get
s this qual
ity
from Brah
man, which is Ex
is
tence it

self. Fur ther the in
tel
li
gence of
Brah
man il
lu
mines the en
tire world. The two qual
i
ties of Brah
man,
viz.,
 ex
is
tence and in
tel
li
gence, are found in the uni
verse. Hence it is
quite proper to t
ake Brah
man as the cause of this uni
verse, though
there may be some dif

fer ence in other re
spect
s be
tween them.
Ag{X{V M
oÞ à{Vfo
Asaditi chet na pratish
edhamatratv
at
II.
1.7 (141)
I
f it be
 said
 (that the
 world
, the
 effe
ct, wo
uld
 the
n be
)
non-
ex
iste
nt (be
fore
 its o
riginati
on o
r cre
atio
n), (we
 say)
 no,
because
 it is a mere negation (wit
hout any basis).
Asat:
 non-existence;
Iti ch
et:
 if it be said;

Na:
 no;
Pratishedham
atratvat:
 because of denial, as it simpl
y denies.
An ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 6 is raised and re
futed.
The op
po
nent says that
 if Brah
man which is in
tel
li
gent, pure and
de
void of qual

i ties such as sound and so on, is the cause of the uni
-
verse which is of an op
po
site na
ture, i.
e., non-in
tel
li
gent, im
pure, pos
-
sess
ing the qual
i
ties of sound, et
c., it f
ol
lows that the ef

fect, i.e., t
he
world,
was
non-ex is tent
be fore
it
s
ac tual
orig i na tion,
be cause
Brah
-
man was then the only
 ex
is
tence. This means that
 some
thing which
was non-ex
ist
ing is brought into ex

is tence, which is not ac
cepted by
the V
edantins who main
t
ain the doc
trine of t
he ef

fect ex ist
ing in the
cause al
ready
.
The ob
jec
tion raised by t
he op
po
nent is no real ob
jec
tion. I
t has
no force on ac
count of it
s be
ing a mere ne
ga
tion.
This Su
tra re
futes the ob
jec
tion raised by t
he op
po
nent. I
t de
-
clares that this ne
ga
tion is a mere st
ate
ment with
out any ob
jec
tive v
a
-
lid
ity
. If
 you neg
a
tive t
he ex
is
tence of the ef

fect pre vi
ous to it
s ac
tual
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
152

orig
i
na
tion, y
our ne
ga
tion is a mere ne
ga
tion with
out any ob
ject to be
neg
a
tived.
 The ef

fect cer t
ainly ex

ists in the cause be
fore it
s orig
i
na
-
tion and also af

ter it. The ef

fect can never ex ist in
de
pend
ently
, ap
art
from the cause ei
ther be
fore or af

ter cre ation. The S
ruti says, ﬁWho
-
so
ever looks for any
thing else
where than in Brah
man is aban
doned
by ev
ery
thingﬂ (Bri. Up.
 II-4-6).
There
fore, the uni

verse ex ist
s in Brah
man even be
fore cre
ation.
It is not ab
so
lutely
 non-ex
is
tent.
AnrVm¡
 VX²dËà
gﬁmXg_Ä
Og_²
Apit
au t
adv
atprasangadasamanj
asam
II.
1.8 (142)
On account of the conseque
nce that at t
he time of Pralaya or
great diss
olution (the
 cause
 be
come
s) like
 that (i.e., like the
effe
ct), the
 do
ctrine
 mainta
ine
d hith
erto
 (that B
rahma
n is the
cause of the universe
) is absurd.
Apit
au:
 at the t
ime of Pralay
a or the great dissolution;

T
adv
at:
 like
that,
 like the ef
fect;
Prasangat:
 on account of the consequences;
Asamanjasam
:
 inconsistent, absurd.
A
 plau
si
ble ob
jec
tion against B
rah
man be
ing the cause of the
world is raised here.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent raises fur
ther ob
jec
tions.
Dur
ing dis
so
lu
tion the ef

fect, i.e., t
he world, is ab
sorbed in the
cause, the Brah
man. Con
se
quently
, it f
ol
lows that the cause be
-
comes like the ef

fect. The cause is af

fected by the na
ture of the ef

fect. The evils of de
fect
s in
her
ent in the ef

fect will taint the cause. B
rah
man
must be af

fected by the na
ture of the world,
 just as wa
ter is af

fectedby the salt
 which is dis
solved in it,
 just as the whole food is scented by
the pun
gent smell of asaf
oetida when it is mi
xed with any
 con
di
ment.
He would be
come im
pure and would no more be the Om
ni
scient
cause of the uni
verse as the Up
anishads hold. He must be
come in
-
sen
tient,
 gross, lim
ited, li
ke the world, which is ab
surd. Brah
man,
there
fore, can
not be the cause of the world.
There is an
other ob
jec
tion also. Dur
ing dis
so
lu
tion all t
hings
have gone into a st
ate of one
ness with Brah
man. All
 dis
tinc
tions p
ass
at the t
ime of re
ab
sorp
tion into t
he st
ate of non-dis
tinc
tion. Then t
here
would be no spe
cial cause lef
t at t
he time of a ne
w be
gin
ning of the
uni
verse. Con
se
quently
, the new world could not arise with all
 the dis
-
tinc
tions of en
joy
ing souls, ob
ject
s to be en
joyed, et
c. There will be no
fac
tor bring
ing about cre
ation again.
The third ob
jec
tion is, if
 in spite of t
his a new cre
ation is pos
si
ble,
then even t
he lib
er
ated souls or the Mukt
as who have be
come one
with Brah
man, will be dragged int
o re
birth.
It can
not be said that t
he uni
verse re
mains dis
tinct from t
he
High
est Brah
man even in t
he st
ate of re
ab
sorp
tion or dis
so
lu
tion, be
-
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
153

cause in that case it would be no dis
so
lu
tion at all
. The ef

fect ex ist
ing
sep
a
rate from the cause is not pos
si
ble.
Hence the V
edant
a doc
trine of B
rah
man be
ing the cause of the
uni
verse is ob
jec
tion
able as it leads to all sort
s of ab
sur
di
ties.
The next S
u
tra gives a suit

able re ply to t
his.
Z Vw Ñ
ï>mÝV
Na tu drisht
ant
abhavat
II.
1.9 (143)
Bu
t not (s
o) o
n acc
ou
nt of the
 ex
iste
nce
 of ill
ustra
tions
.
Na:
 not;
Tu
:
 but;
Drisht
ant
abhav
at:
 on account of illustrat
ions.
The ob
jec
tion raised in Su
tra 8 is re
futed.
By t
he word ‚tu™
 (but) the pos
si
bil
ity of
 the ob
jec
tion is set aside.
The ob
jec
tions have no f
orce. Why should an ef

fect which is re -
solved into t
he cause again af

fect the cause by in tro
duc
ing the de
-
fect
s of the ef

fect? When the ef

fect is in volved i
n the cause, it does not
at all t
aint the cause by it
s ef

fects. There are in
nu
mer
a
ble in
st
ances. If
a good or
na
ment is melt
ed into gold, how can the pe
cu
liar
i
ties of form
of the or
na
ment ap
pear in the gold?
When a jar made up of clay is bro
ken and re
ab
sorbed into it
s
orig
i
nal sub
st
ance, i.e.,
 clay
, it does not i
m
p
art to it
 it
s spe
cial fea
tures
or qual
i
ties. It
 does not turn the earth i
nto pot
s and pitch
ers but it is it

-
self trans
formed as earth. The f
our-fold com
plex of or
ganic be
ings
which springs from the earth does not im
p
art it
s qual
i
ties to the l
at
ter
at the t
ime of re-ab
sorp
tion.
Re
ab
sorp
tion can
not oc
cur at all if t
he ef

fect, when re solv
ing
back into it
s causal sub
st
ance, con
tin
ues to sub
sist there with all i
t
s
in di vid ual
prop er ties.
De
spite the non-dif

fer ence of cause and ef

fect, the ef

fect has its
self in the cause but not
 the cause in the ef

fect. The ef

fect is of the na
-
ture of the cause and not t
he cause the na
ture of the ef

fect. There fore
the qual
i
ties of the ef

fect can not touch the cause.
In
stead of Brah
man be
ing trans
formed into t
he world, the world
is trans
formed into B
rah
man, be
ing merged in Him at t
he time of i
t
s
dis
so
lu
tion. Hence there can
not be any ob
jec
tion to B
rah
man be
ing
ac
cepted as the cause of the world on the ground sug
gested in
Sutra 8.
Though the world is full of
 mis
ery
, etc.,
 yet B
rah
man is all pure,
etc. He re
mains al
ways un
touched by evi
l. As yout
h, child
hood and
old age be
long to the body
 only and not t
o the Self
, as blind
ness and
deaf
ness etc., be
long to the senses and not to t
he Self,
 so the de
fect
s
of the world do not be
long to Brah
man and do not per
vade the pure
Brah man.
If cause and ef

fect are sep

a rate as you say
, there will be no in
-
vo
lu
tion at all
. As cause and ef

fect are one and the same, the ob
jec
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
154

tion that
 the de
fect
s of the ef

fect will af

fect the cause is not pe cu
liar to
in
vo
lu
tion alone. I
f what the P
urvap
akshin says is cor
rect, the de
fect
will af

fect the cause even now. That t
he iden
tity
 of cause and ef

fect ofBrah
man and the uni
verse, holds good in
dis
crim
i
nately wit
h re
gard to
all time,
 not only t
he time of i
n
vo
lu
tion or re
ab
sorp
tion is de
clared in
many scrip
tural p
as
sages, as for in
st
anceŠThis ev
ery
thing is that
Self (
Bri. U
p. II.4.6
). Th
e Self i
s al
l this
 (Ch
h. Up
. VII.25.2
). Th
e Im
-
mor
t
al Brah
man is this be
fore (Mun. Up. I
I.2.
1
1). All t
his is Brah
man
(Ch
h. Up
. III.14.1
).
If it
 is said that the de
fect
s are the ef

fects of su
per
im
po
si
tion of
A
vidya or ne
science and can
not af

fect the cause, this ex
pla
na
tion will
ap ply
to
in vo lu t
ion
also.
Co
bra is not af

fected by the poi
son. A
 ma
gi
cian is not af

fectedby the mag
i
cal il
lu
sion pro
duced by him
self, be
cause it is un
real.
Even so Brah
man is not af

fected by Maya. The world is only
 an il
lu
-
sion or ap
pear
ance. Brah
man ap
pears as this uni
verse, just as a rope
ap
pears as the snake. There
fore Brah
man is un
af

fected by Maya or
the world il
lu
sion. No one is af

fected by his dream-cre
ations or the il
-
lu
sory vi
sions of his dream, be
cause they do not ac
com
p
any the wak
-
ing st
ate and the st
ate of dream
less sleep. Sim
i
larly the E
ter
nal
Wit
ness of all st
ates of con
scious
ness is not af

fected by the world or
Maya.
Equally base
less is the sec
ond ob
jec
tion. There are p
ar
al
lel in
-
st
ances with ref
er
ence to this also. I
n the st
ate of deep sleep, y
ou do
not see any
thing. The soul en
ters into an es
sen
tial con
di
tion of
non-dis
tinc
tion. There is no di
ver
sity
, but as soon as you wake up you
be
hold the world of di
ver
sity
. The old st
age of dis
tinc
tion co
mes
again, as ig
no
rance or A
vidya i
s not de
stroyed. Chhandogya
Up
anishad says, ﬁAll t
hese crea
tures when they have be
come
merged in the T
rue, know not that t
hey are merged in the T
rue. What
-
ever these crea
tures are here, whether a lion, or a wolf,
 or a boar or a
worm or a gnat or a mos
quito, t
hat they
 be
come againﬂ (Chh. Up.
VI-9-
2 & 3)
.
A
 sim
i
lar phe
nom
e
non t
akes place dur
ing Pralaya or dis
so
lu
-
tion. The power of
dis
tinc
tion re
mains in a po
ten
tial st
ate as A
vidya or
Ne
science in the st
ate of dis
so
lu
tion also. S
o long as the ba
sic A
vidya
or ig
no
rance is there, cre
ation or evo
lu
tion will f
ol
low in
vo
lu
tion just as
a man wakes up af

ter sleep.The lib
er
ated souls will not be born again be
cause in their case
wrong knowl
edge or ig
no
rance has been com
pletely
 de
stroyed by
per
fect knowl
edge of Brah
man.
The view held by
 the Purvap
akshin that even at
 the time of
 re
ab
-
sorp
tion the world should re
main dis
tinct from B
rah
man is not ad
mit
-
ted by t
he V
edantins.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
155

In con
clu
sion it can be cor
rectly said that
 the sys
tem founded on
the Up
anishads is in ev
ery way un
ob
jec
tion
able.
ñdnjXmo
Sv
ap
akshadosaccha
II.
1.10 (144)
And becau
se the obje
ctions (r
aised by the Sankhya against
 the
Vedanta doctrine) apply to his (S
ankhya) view also.
Sv
ap
akshadoshat:
 because of the objections, t
o his own view;
Cha:
and.
The ob
jec
tions raised in Sutras 4 and 8 are lev
elled against the
op po nent
s.
Now the t
a
bles are turned on the ob
jec
tor
. The ob
jec
tions raised
by him (the S
ankhya) to the doc
trines of V
edant
a are ap
pli
ca
ble to his
the
ory as well. In his doc
trine of cau
sa
tion also, t
he world of forms and
sounds t
akes it
s or
i
gin from Pradhana and P
rakriti which has no form
or sound. Thus the cause is dif

fer ent from t
he ef

fect here also. In the
st
ate of re
ab
sorp
tion or dis
so
lu
tion, all
 ob
ject
s merge into Pradhana
and be
come one with it.
There is per
va
sion into the P
radhana of all the ef

fects of the
world. It i
s ad
mit
ted by t
he Sankhyas also that at
 the time of
 re
ab
sorp
-
tion the ef

fect passes back
 into the st
ate of non-dis
tinc
tion from t
he
cause, and so the ob
jec
tion raised in Su
tra 8 ap
plies to Pradhana
also. The Sankhya wil
l have to ad
mit that
 be
fore the ac
tual be
gin
ning,
the ef

fect was non-ex is
tent.
 What
ever ob
jec
tions that are raised
against V
edant
a in this re
spect are in fact true of t
he Sankhyas. That
Brah
man is the cause of the world, which is ad
mit
ted by S
ruti, can
not
be thrown out by t
his sort of vain rea
son
ing. V
edant
a is based on the
Srutis. Hence the doc
trine of V
edant
a is au
thor
i
t
a
tive and i
n
fal
li
ble.
There
fore it must be ad
mit
ted. Fur
ther
, the V
edantic view is pref
er
a
-
ble, be
cause the ob
jec
tions have also been an
swered from the view
-
point of V
edant
a. It
 is not pos
si
ble to an
swer them from the v
iew
point
of the S
ankhya.
VH$m©
à{Vî
R>mZmX
{n; A
Ý`WmZw_
o`{_
{V Mo
V² Ed_ß
`{Z_m}
jàgﬁ
T
arkapratishthanadapi
; any
athanumey
amiti ch
et
 ev
amapy
anirmo
ksha
prasangah
II.
1.1
1 (145)
If it be
 said that in co
nseq
ue
nce o
f the non-
finality of rea
soning
we
 mus
t frame
 ou
r con
clu
sio
ns o
the
rwise
; (we
 rep
ly that)
 thus
also t
here woul
d result
 non-
release.
T
arka:
 reasoning, argument;
Apratishthana
t:
 because of not having
any fix
ity or f
inality
;
Api:
 also;
Any
atha:
 otherwise;
Anumey
am:
 to
be inferred, to be ascert
ained, by arguing;

Iti ch
et:
 if it be said,
 even
thus in this way;

Api:
 even;
Anirmoksha:
 want of release, absence of
the way out;

Prasangah:
 consequence.
Ob
jec
tions raised in Sutras 4 and 8 are fur
ther re
futed.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
156

Great think
ers like Kapila and Kanada are seen to re
fute each
other
. Logic has no fix
ity or f
i
nal
ity
. The de
duc
tions of one rea
soner
are over
thrown by an
other
. What one man es
t
ab
lishes through rea
-
son can be re
futed by
 an
other man more in
tel
li
gent and in
ge
nious
than he. Nei
ther anal
ogy nor syl
lo
gism can ap
ply to t
he soul. Con
clu
-
sions ar
rived at by
 mere ar
gu
men
t
a
tion, how
ever well-rea
soned, and
not based on any au
thor
i
t
a
tive st
ate
ment, can
not be ac
cepted as fi
nal
as there still re
mains the chance of their be
ing re
futed by
 more ex
pert
soph
ist
s. Hence, the con
clu
sion of Sruti al
one must be ac
cepted.
With
out show
ing any re
gard to rea
son
ing we must be
lieve Brah
-
man to be the m
a
te
rial cause of the uni
verse, be
cause the Upani
shad
teaches so.
The con
clu
sions of V
edant
a are based on the Srutis which are
in fal li bl
e
and
au thor i t
a tive.

Rea son ing
which
has
no
sure
ba sis
can
-
not over
throw the con
clu
sions of V
edant
a.
Rea
son has it
s own prov
ince and scope. It is use
ful in cer
t
ain
sec
u
lar mat
ters but in mat
ters tran
scen
den
t
al such as the ex
is
tence
of Brah
man, fi
nal re
lease, life be
yond, t
he pro
nounce
ment
s of hu
man
in
tel
lect can never be per
fectly
 free from doubt,
 be
cause these are
mat
ters which are be
yond the scope of in
tel
lect. Ev
en if there is to be
any fi
nal
ity of
 rea
son
ing, it wil
l not bring about any
 fi
nal
ity of
 doc
trine
with ref
er
ence to the soul, be
cause the soul can
not be ex
pe
ri
enced
by the senses. Brah
man can
not be an ob
ject of per
cep
tion or of in
fer
-
ence based on per
cep
tion. B
rah
man is in
con
ceiv
able and con
se
-
quently unarguable.
 Kathop
anishad says, ﬁThis knowl
edge is not to
be ob
t
ained by ar
gu
ment, but
 it is easy to un
der
st
and it, O
Nachiket
as, when t
aught by a t
eacher who be
holds no dif

fer enceﬂ
(I.2.9
).
The op
po
nent says: Y
ou can
not say that
 no rea
son
ing what
ever
is well-founded be
cause even the judg
ment about rea
son
ing is ar
-
rived at t
hrough rea
son
ing. Y
ou your
self can see that rea
son
ing has
no foun
da
tion on rea
son
ing only
. Hence the st
ate
ment that
 rea
son
ing
has never a sure ba
sis is not cor
rect. Fur
ther
, if all
 rea
son
ing were un
-
founded, hu
man life would hav
e to come to an end.
 Y
ou must rea
son
cor
rectly and prop
erly
.
W
e re
mark against this ar
gu
ment of t
he op
po
nent that
 thus also
then re
sult
s ﬁwant of re
leaseﬂ. Al
though rea
son
ing is well-founded
with re
spect to cer
t
ain things, wit
h re
gard to the mat

ter in hand therewill re
sult ﬁwant of re
leaseﬂ.
Those sages who teach about the fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion of t
he
soul, de
clare that it re
sult
s from per
fect knowl
edge. Per
fect knowl
-
edge is al
ways uni
form. I
t de
pends upon the thing it

self. What ever
thing is per
ma
nently of
 one and the same na
ture is ac
knowl
edged to
be the true thi
ng. Knowl
edge that per
t
ains to this is per
fect or true
knowl
edge. Mu
tual con
flict of
 men™
s opin
ions is not pos
si
ble in the
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
157

case of true or per
fect knowl
edge. But
 the con
clu
sions of rea
son
ing
can never be uni
form. The S
ankhyas main
t
ain through rea
son
ing that
Pradhana is the cause of the uni
verse. The Naiyay
ikas ar
rive through
rea
son
ing that t
he Paramanus or at
oms are the cause of the world.
Which to ac
cept? How
, there
fore, can knowl
edge which is based on
rea
son
ing, and whose ob
ject is not some
thing al
ways uni
form, be
true of per
fect knowl
edge? W
e can
not come to a def

i nite, pos
i
tive
con
clu
sion through rea
son
ing in
de
pend
ent of t
he Srutis. The V
eda is
eter
nal. It
 is the source of knowl
edge. It
 has for it
s ob
ject firmly
 es
t
ab
-
lished things. K
nowl
edge which is founded on the V
eda can
not be de
-
nied at all by
 any of t
he lo
gi
cians of the p
ast, pres
ent or fu
ture. As t
he
truth can
not be known through rea
son
ing, there will be no l
ib
er
a
tion.
W
e have thus es
t
ab
lished that per
fec
tion can be at
t
ained
through knowl
edge of Brah
man with the aid of
 Up
anishads or the
Srutis. P
er
fect knowl
edge is not pos
si
ble with
out the help of
 the
Srutis. Dis
re
gard of Srutis will l
ead to ab
sence of fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion.
Rea
son
ing which goes against the scrip
tures is no proof of knowl
-
edge.
Our fi
nal po
si
tion is that
 the in
tel
li
gent Brah
man must be re
-
garded as the cause and sub
stra
tum of t
he uni
verse on the ground of
scrip ture
and
of
rea son ing
sub or di nate
to
scrip ture.
Sisht
ap
arigrahadhi
karanam: T
opic 4
Kanada and Gaut
ama Refut
ed
EVoZ {
eï>
mn[aJ«hm A
Etena sisht
ap
arigraha api
 v
y
akhy
at
ah
II.
1.12 (146)
By this (i.e
. by the a
rgume
nts against the
 Sankhyas
) (those
othe
r the
orie
s) no
t acc
ep
ted
 by the
 wise
 or co
mpe
ten
t pe
rson
s
are explain
ed or refut
ed.
Etena:
 by this (by t
he above reasoning, by what
 has been said
against Sankhya);
Sisht
ap
arigrahah:
 not accepted by t
he wise or
competent persons;
Api:
 also;
V
y
akhy
at
ah:
 are explained or refuted.
Other views or the
o
ries not ac
cepted by the V
edas are re
futed.
Sisht
ah
Šthe re
main
ing sys
tems like those of t
he ﬁAt
om
ist
sﬂ
trained, i.
e., t
rained in the V
edas.
Sisht
ap
arigrahah
Šall other vi
ews or sys
tems of thoug
ht not ac
-
cepted by those who are well in
structed in the V
edas; all the dif

fer ent
views or sys
tems con
trary to t
he V
edas.
Ap
arigrahah means those sys
tems which do not ac
knowl
edge
or ac
cept (Parigraha) the V
edas as au
thor
ity on t
hese mat
ters, but
which rely on rea
son alone and which are not coun
te
nanced by the
V
eda.
All the di
f

fer ent views or sys
tems of thoug
ht which are con
trary
to the V
edas and which are not ac
cepted by the di
s
ci
plined and the
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
158

wise are re
futed by
 what is said against Sankhya,
 i.e.,
 by the same ar
-
gu ment
s.
Like the the
ory of those who say t
hat Pradhana or Prakriti is t
he
cause of the world, the t
he
o
ries of those who pos
tu
late at
oms as the
cause are re
futed by
 those who know the truths of scrip
ture, like
Manu or V
yasa, trained i
n the cor
rect way of know
ing them. T
he doc
-
trine of t
he Pradhana de
serves to be re
futed f
irst as it st
ands near to
the V
e
dic sys
tem, and is sup
ported by some
what strong and weighty
ar
gu
ment
s. Fur
ther
, it has to a cer
t
ain ex
tent been adopt
ed by some
au
thor
i
ties who fol
low the V
eda. If
 the most dan
ger
ous en
emy is con
-
quered, the mi
nor en
e
mies are al
ready con
quered. Even so,
 if the
Sankhya doc
trine is re
futed,
 all other sys
tems are al
ready re
futed
also.
The Su
tra teaches that by
 the de
mo
li
tion of t
he Sankhya doc
-
trine given abov
e, the re
main
ing the
o
ries not com
prised within the
V
edas are also re
futed,
 such as the the
o
ries of Kanada, Gaut
ama,
Akshap
ada, Bud
dhist
s, etc., be
cause they are op
posed to the V
edas
on these point
s. The rea
sons are the same as in the case of Sankhya.
As re
gards the na
ture of the at
om, there is no una
nim
ity of
 opin
-
ion. Kanada and Gaut
ama main
t
ain it to be per
ma
nent, while t
he four
schools of Buddhas hold it to be i
m
per
ma
nent. The V
aibhashika
Bauddhas hold that t
he at
oms are mo
men
t
ary but have a
n ob
jec
tive
ex
is
tence (Kshanikam artha-bhut
am). The Y
ogachara Bauddhas
main
t
ain it to be m
erely cog
ni
tional (Jnanarup
am). The Madhy
amikas
hold it to be f
un
da
men
t
ally v
oid (Sunya-rup
am). The Jains hold it t
o be
real and un
real (Sad-asad-rupam).
Bhoktrap
atty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 5
The distinctions of enj
oyer and enjoyed do not oppose unity
^mo−ÌmnÎ
moa{
d^mJüo
Ëñ`mëbmo
H$dV²
Bhoktrap
atteravi
bhagaschet sy
allokav
at
II.
1.13 (147)
If it be said (that if
 Brahman be the cause then) on account of
(the o
bje
cts of e
njoyme
nt) turning into the e
njoye
r,
non-di
stinction (be
twee
n the e
njoye
r and the o
bje
cts e
njoye
d)
would r
esult,
 we reply t
hat
 such di
sti
nct
ion m
ay exist
nev
ert
hel
ess
 as
 is
 exper
ien
ced
 co
mm
on
ly
 in
 th
e wo
rl
d.
Bhoktri:
 one who enjoys and suf
fers;
Ap
atteh:
 from the objecti
ons, if
it be objected;

A
v
ibhagah:
 non-distinction;
Chet:
 if it be said;

Sy
at:
may exi
st;
Lokav
at:
 as is experienced in the world.
An
other ob
jec
tion based on rea
son
ing is raised against Brah
-
man be
ing the cause and re
futed.
The dis
tinc
tion be
tween the enjoy
er (the Jiva or the in
di
vid
ual
soul) and the ob
ject
s of en
joy
ment is well known from or
di
nary ex
pe
ri
-
ence. The enjoyers are in
tel
li
gent, em
bod
ied souls while sound and
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
159

the like are the ob
ject
s of enjoyemnt
. Ramakrishna for in
st
ance, is an
enjoyer while the m
ango which he eat
s is an ob
ject of en
joy
ment. I
f
Brah
man is the ma
te
rial cause of the uni
verse, then t
he world, the ef

-
fect would be non-dif

fer ent from B
rah
man. The Jiva and B
rah
man be
-
ing iden
ti
cal, the dif

fer ence be
tween the sub
ject and the ob
ject would
be an
ni
hi
lated, as the one would p
ass over into the ot
her
. Con
se
-
quently
, Brah
man can
not be held to be t
he ma
te
rial cause of the uni
-
verse, as it would lead t
o the sublation of
 the well-es
t
ab
lished
dis
tinc
tion be
tween the enjoy
er and the ob
ject
s of en
joy
ment.
If y
ou say that t
he doc
trine of B
rah
man be
ing the cause of the
world will lead to the enj
oyer or spirit be
com
ing one with the ob
ject of
en joy ment

(mat ter),
we
re ply
that
such
dif
 fer en ti a t
ion
is
ap pro pri ate
in
our case also, as in
st
ances are found in the uni
verse in the case of
ocean, it
s waves, foams and bub
bles and of the Sun and i
t
s light. The
ocean waves, foams and bub
bles are one and yet di
verse in the uni
-
verse. Sim

i larly
, are the Brah
man and the world. He cre
ated and en
-
tered into t
he cre
ation. He is one with t
hem, just as the et
her in the sky
and the ether in t
he pot are one al
though they
 ap
pear to be sep

a rate.
There
fore it is pos
si
ble to have di
f

fer ence and non-dif

fer ence in
things at the same t
ime ow
ing to the nam
e and form. The enjoy
ers
and the ob
ject
s of en
joy
ment do not p
ass over into each other and yet
they are not di
f

fer ent from t
he Su
preme Brah
man. The enjoy
ers and
ob
ject
s of en
joy
ment are not dif

fer ent from t
he view
point of B
rah
man
but they
 are dif

fer ent as enjoyers and ob
ject
s en
joyed. There is not
con tra dic tion
in
this.
The con
clu
sion is that the di
s
tinc
tion of enjoy
ers and ob
ject
s of
en
joy
ment is pos
si
ble, al
though both are non-dif

fer ent from B
rah
man,
their High
est Cause, as the instnce of t
he ocean, and it
s waves,
foams and bub
bles dem
on
strates.
Arambhanadhi
karanam: T
opic 6 (Sutras 14-20)
The world (ef
fect) is non-dif
fer
ent from
 Brah
man (the cause)
VXZÝ`Ëd_
maå^Ueã
T
adanany
atv
amarambh
anasabdadibh
y
ah
II.
1.14 (148)
The no
n-d
if
fer
en
ce
 of the
m (i.e
. of ca
use
 and
 ef
fec
t) re

sults
from such terms as ‚or
i
gin™ and th
e like
.
Ta
t
:
 (it
s, of the uni
verse):
Anany
atv
am
:
non-dif
 fer ence;
Arambhana
sabdadibhy
ah:
 from words like ‚or
i
gin™, etc.
That the ef

fect is not dif

fer ent from t
he cause is shown here.
In su
tra 13, the S
utrakara spoke from the point of v
iew of
Parinamavada and re
futed t
he ob
jec
tion raised by t
he op
po
nent that
Brah
man can
not be the ma
te
rial cause as it con
tra
dict
s per
cep
tion. I
n
Parinamavada,

Brah man
ac tu ally
un der goes
trans for ma tion
or
mod i
-
fi
ca
tion. Now the same ob
jec
tion is over
thrown from the v
iew point of
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
160

V
ivart
avada. I
n V
ivart
avada there is only
 ap
p
ar
ent mod
i
fi
ca
tion. Rope
ap
pears as a snake. It is not trans
formed into an ac
tual snake. This is
the doc
trine of A
dvait
a of Sri Sankara.
In the pre
vi
ous Su
tra the sim
ile of the ocean and t
he waves was
st
ated, ac
cept
ing the ap
p
ar
ent va
ri
ety of
 ob
ject
s. But in re
al
ity
, cause
and ef

fect are one even now. This is clear from the word ‚Arambha
na™
(be
gin
ning), just as by know
ing a lump of clay
, all clay wil
l be known.
Name is only a ver
bal mod
i
fi
ca
tion. The t
rue be
ing is only clay
. A
 pot is
only clay ev
en now
. Sim
i
larly
, the world is only B
rah
man even now
. It
is wrong to say that one
ness and manifoldness are both true as in the
case of ocean and waves, etc. The word ‚eva™
 in ‚Mritt
iketyev
a™
 shows
that all di

ver sity is un
real. The soul is de
clared to be one with Brah
-
man.
The ob
jec
tor or Purvap
akshin says: ‚If t
here is only one T
ruth
viz.,
 Brah
man, the di
verse ob
ject
s of per
cep
tion will be ne
gated. The
eth
i
cal in
junc
tions and pro
hi
bi
tions will lose their pur
port if t
he dis
tinc
-
tion on which their va
lid
ity de
pends does not re
ally ex

ist. More over
,
the sci
ence of lib
er
a
tion of t
he soul will have no re
al
ity
, if t
he dis
tinc
-
tion of t
eacher and the stu
dent on which it de
pends is not real. There
would be no bond
age and hence no lib
er
a
tion. A
s the sci
ence of the
soul it

self is un real, it can
not lead to t
he Re
al
ity
. If
 the doc
trine of re
-
lease is un
true, how can we main
t
ain the trut
h of the ab
so
lute unity
 of
the Self
?
But t
hese ob
ject
s have no force be
cause the whole phe
nom
e
-
nal ex
is
tence is re
garded as true as long as the knowl
edge of Brah
-
man has not arisen, just as the dream crea
tures are re
garded to be
true till t
he wak
ing st
ate ar
rives. When we wake up af

ter dreams, weknow the dream world to be false but t
he knowl
edge of dreams is not
false. More
over
, even dreams some
times fore
bode the im
mi
nent re
-
al
ity of
 death. The re
al
ity of
 reali
sa
tion of B
rah
man can
not be said to
be il
lu
sory be
cause it de
stroys ig
no
rance and leads to the ces
sa
tion
of
il lu sion.
^mdo M
monbã
Bhave chop
alabdheh
II.
1.15 (149)
An
d (
be
ca
us
e) o
nl
y o
n t
he ex

is

tence (
of
 th
e ca
us
e) (
th
e ef
fec
t)
 is
ex pe r
i en
ced
.
Bhav
e:
 on the ex
is
tence;
Cha:
 and;
Up
alabdheh:

is
ex pe ri enced
ef

fect (world) is in sep
a
ra
ble from it
s ma
te
rial cause, Brah
man, is
con tin ued.
The ar
gu
ment be
gun in Su
tra 14 as to how it f
ol
lows that the ef

-
fect (world) is in
sep
a
ra
ble from it
s ma
te
rial cause, Brah
man, is con
-
tin ued.
The ef

fect is per ceived only when t
he cause is pres
ent in it;
 oth
-
er
wise not. A
 pot or cloth will ex

ist even if the pot
ter or the weaver is
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
161

ab
sent, but it
 will not ex
ist if t
he clay or thread is ab
sent. This proves
that t
he ef

fect is not dif

fer ent from t
he cause. The Chhandogya
Up
anishad says, ﬁAll t
hese cre
ated things, O
 my son, orig
i
nate from
Sat,
 i.e.,
 Brah
man, rest in Him and ev
en
tu
ally dis
solve in Himﬂ
(VI-8
-4).
The ob
jec
tor says: There is no rec
og
ni
tion of f
ire in the smoke.
The smoke be
ing the ef

fect of fire, ought t
o show fire in it. T
o this we
re
ply that
 smoke is re
ally t
he ef

fect of damp fuel. The dam
p fuel co
-
mes in con
t
act with fire and t
hrows of
f it
s earthly p
ar
ti
cles in the form
of smoke. The smoke and the f
uel are iden
ti
cal. W
e can re
cog
nise the
fuel in the smoke.
 This is proved by the f
act that t
he smoke has smell
just as the fuel has.
 The smoke is gen
er
ally of
 the same na
ture as that
of the f
uel.
The phe
nom
ena of the uni
verse man
i
fest only
 be
cause Brah
-
man ex
ist
s. They can
not cer
t
ainly ap
pear with
out Brah
man. There
-
fore the world (ef

fect) is not dif

fer ent from B
rah
man, the cause.
gÎdm…mdañ
Sattv
acchav
arasy
a
II.
1.16 (150)
And
 on a
c
cou
nt of the
 po
s
te
rior (i
.e.,
 the
 ef
fec
t which c
o
me
s
af
ter the cause) e
x
ist
ing (as t
he cause
 be
fore cre
ation).
Sattv
at:
Be
cause of the ex
is
tence;
Cha:
 and;
A
v
arasy
a:
 of the
pos
te
rior
, i.e.
, of t
he ef

fect as it co mes af

ter the cause, i.e., of t
he
world.
The ar
gu
ment be
gun in Su
tra 14 is con
tin
ued.
The scrip
ture says that t
he ef

fect (the world) ex isted in it
s causal
as
pect (Brah
man) be
fore the cre
ation.
ﬁIn the be
gin
ning, my
 dear
,
Sadeva somyedam
agra asit
, this
was only ex
is
tenceﬂ (Chh. Up.). ﬁ
Atm
a va idam eka agra asit
, ver
ily in
the be
gin
ning this was Self,
 one onlyﬂ (Ait
. Ar
.2.4.
1). ﬁ
Brahma va
idamagra asit
. Be
fore cre
ation, t
his uni
verse ex
isted as Brah
manﬂ
(Bri
. Up. 1
.4.10
).
The Up
anishads de
clare that the uni
verse had it
s be
ing in the
cause, Brah
man, be
fore cre
ation. I
t was one with Brah
man. As the
world was non-dif

fer ent from t
he cause be
fore cre
ation, it
 con
tin
ues
to be non-dif

fer ent af

ter cre ation also.
The ef

fect (world) is non-dif

fer ent from t
he cause (Brah
man) be
-
cause it is ex
is
tent in t
he cause, iden
ti
cally even,
 prior to it
s man
i
fes
-
t
a
tion, t
hough in time it
 is pos
te
rior
.
A
 thing which does not ex
ist in an
other thing by
 the self of t
he lat
-
ter is not pro
duced from that ot
her thing. For in
st
ance, oil is not pro
-
duced from sand. W
e can get oil from t
he ground
nut be
cause it ex
ist
s
in the seed, though i
n la
tency
, but not
 from sand, be
cause it does not
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
162

ex
ist in it.
 The ex
is
tence is the same both in t
he world and in Brah
-
man. As ev

ery thing ex
ist
s in Brah
man, so it can come out of
 it.
Brah
man is in all tim
e nei
ther more nor less than that which is.
So the ef

fect also (the world) is in all time only t
hat which is. That
which is, is one only
. Hence the ef

fect is non-dif

fer ent from t
he cause.
AgX²
ì`nXoe
mÞo{V M
oÞ Y_
m©ÝVao
U dm−`eof
Asadvyap
adesanneti chet na dharmant
arena
 vakyaseshat
II.
1.17 (151)
I
f it be
 said
 that o
n ac
cou
nt of (th
e e
f
fe
ct) b
e
ing d
e
scrib
ed
 as
that whic
h is no
t, (the
 ef
fec
t do
es
) not (
ex

ist be
fore
 cre

ation),
we
 re
ply ‚
not s
o™,
 be

cause
 the
 term
 ‚that w
hich i
s no
t™ de

notes
an
othe
r char
ac
ter
is
tic o
r at
trib
ute
 (as i
s se
en
 from the
 lat
ter
part o
f the
 tex
t.
Asadv
y
ap
adesat:
 on ac
count of it
s be
ing de
scribed as non-ex
is
tent;
Na:
 not;
Iti ch
et:
 if it be said;

Na:
 no:
Dharmant
arena:
 by an
other
at trib ut
e
or
char ac ter is tic;
V
aky
aseshat:
 from the lat

ter part of the
text
 or p
as
sage, be
cause of the com
ple
men
t
ary p
as
sage.
The ar
gu
ment that
 the world had no ex
is
tence be
fore cre
ation is
re futed.
From the word ‚Asat™,
 lit
er
ally mean
ing non-ex
is
tence, in the
Sruti,
 it may
 be ar
gued that be
fore cre
ation the world had no ex

is -
tence. But
 that ar
gu
ment can
not st
and as the lat
ter p
art of the same
text
 uses ep
i
thet
s other than ﬁnon-ex
is
tentﬂ to de
scribe the con
di
tion
of the world be
fore cre
ation. W
e un
der
st
and from this that
 the world
was ex
is
tent be
fore cre
ation. Thi
s is es
t
ab
lished by rea
son
ing also
be
cause some
thing can
not come out of
 noth
ing and also by clear
st
ate
ment
s on other text
s of Sruti.
 ﬁ
Asad va idam agra asit
ﬂŒŒAsat
was this ver
ily in t
he be
gin
ning (T
ait. Up.
 II-7-1).
ﬁ
Asat eva agre asit
ﬂŒŒThis uni
verse was at first but non-ex

is -
tent.
 Asat in
deed was this in the be
gin
ning. From it
 ver
ily pro
ceeded
the Sat
 (Chh. Up. III
.19.1). T
he lat
ter p
art of the p
as
sage is
ﬁT
at
sadasitﬂ (That was ex
is
tent). T
he word ‚non-ex
is
tent™
 (Asat) uni
-
verse does not cer
t
ainly mean ab
so
lute non-ex
is
tence, but t
hat the
uni
verse did not ex
ist in a gross, dif

fer en
ti
ated st
ate. I
t ex
isted in an
ex
tremely sub
tle unmanif
ested st
ate. I
t was not dif

fer en
ti
ated. I
t had
not yet
 de
vel
oped name and form. Th
e world was pro
jected. Then it
be
came gross, and de
vel
oped name and form. Y
ou can get the
mean
ing if y
ou go through the lat

ter part of the p
as
sage ‚It be
came ex
-
is
tent.™
 ‚It gr
ew™
.
It is ab
surd to say that non-ex

is tence (Asat) ex
isted. There
fore,
Sat means man
i
fest, i.
e. hav
ing name and form,
 whereas Asat sim
ply
means fine, sub
tle and unmanif
ested. ‚Asat
™
 re
fers to an
other at
trib
-
ute of t
he ef

fect, namely non-man
i
fes
t
a
tion. The words Sat
 and Asat
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
163

re
fer to two at

trib utes of one and the same ob
ject, namely
 to it
s gross
or man
i
fested con
di
tion and sub
tle or unmanifest
ed con
di
tion.
& VVmo d¡ gXOm`
d`_Hw$éV
_mV² VËgwH¥ V_wÀ
& `Û¡
VËgwH¥$

Asad va idamagra asit.
 T
ato vai sadajayat
a. T
adatm
anam
svayamakurut
a. T
asmat t
at
sukrit
amuchyat
a iti. Y
advai t
at
sukrit
am.
Asat in
deed was this in the be
gin
ning. From it
 ver
ily pro
ceeded the
Sat.
 That made it

self its Self. T
here
fore, it
 is said to be self-made.
The words ﬁAsat made it

self its Selfﬂ clears up any doubt as to
the real mean
ing of the word ﬁthat
ﬂ. If t
he word ﬁAsatﬂ meant ab
so
lute
non-ex
is
tence, then t
here will be a con
tra
dic
tion in terms,
 be
cause
non-ex
is
tence can never make it

self the Self of any

thing. The wordﬁAsitﬂ or ﬁwasﬂ be
comes ab
surd when ap
plied to ﬁAsatﬂ be
cause ab
-
so
lute non-ex
is
tence can never be said to ex
ist and ‚was™
 means ‚ex
-
isted™. A
n ab
so
lute non-ex
is
tence can have no re
la
tion with t
ime p
ast
or pres
ent. Fur
ther
, it can
not have any
 agency also as we find in the
p
as
sage, ﬁIt made it

self its Self.ﬂ Hence the word ‚Asat
™
 should be ex
-
plained as a sub
tle st
ate of an ob
ject.
`wº
o$– eã
XmÝVam…
Y
ukteh sabdant
araccha
II.
1.18 (152)
From
 rea

son

ing and fro
m an
othe
r Sruti te
xt (the
 sam
e i
s cle
ar.
T
his re
la
tion be
tween cause
 and ef
fect is es
tab
lished.)
Y
ukteh:
 from rea
son
ing;
Sabda-ant
arat:
 from an
other Sruti t
ext;
Cha:
 and.
That the ef

fect ex ist
s be
fore it
s orig
i
na
tion and is non-dif

fer ent
from the cause fol
lows from rea
son
ing and also from a fur
ther scrip
-
tural p
as
sage or an
other text
 of the V
edas.
The same fact is clear from logic or rea
son
ing also. Oth
er
wise,
ev
ery
thing could have been pro
duced from any
thing. I
f non-be
ing is
the cause, then why should t
here be an in
ev
i
t
a
ble se
quence? Why
should curds be pro
duced from milk and not f
rom mud? It i
s im
pos
si
-
ble even within t
hou
sands of years to bring about an ef

fect which isdif
 fer ent
from
it
s
cause.
Par tic u lar
causes
pro duce
p
ar tic u lar
ef
 fect
s
only
. The re
la
tion of cause and ef

fect (e.g. the re
la
tion of mud
and pot)
is a re
la
tion of iden
tity
. The cause of our think
ing and say
ing ‚the pot
ex
ist
s™
 is the fact t
hat the lump
of clay as
sumes a par
tic
u
lar form of a
neck, hol
low belly
, etc.,
 while the ma
te
rial re
mains as clay only
. On
the con
trary we think and say ‚t
he jar does not ex
ist™, when the clay
pot is bro
ken into piece. Hence ex
is
tence and non-ex
is
tence show
only
their
dif
 fer ent
con di tions.
Non-ex is tence
in
this
con nec tion
does
not mean ab
so
lute non-ex
is
tence. This is rea
son
ing or Y
ukti.
Just as an ac
tor put
s on many dis
guises and is yet the same
man, so also the Ul
ti
mate Cause (Brah
man) ap
pears as these di
-
verse ob
ject
s and yet is the same.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
164

Hence the cause ex
ist
s be
fore the ef

fects and is non-dif

fer ent
from the ef

fect.The ef

fect ex ist
s in the cause in an unmanifested st
ate. I
t is
man
i
fested dur
ing cre
ation. That
 is all. An ab
so
lutely
 non-ex
is
tent
thing like the horns of a hare can never come int
o ex
is
tence. The
cause can
not pro
duce al
to
gether a new thing which was not ex
ist
ing
in it al
ready
.
Fur
ther
, we find f
rom the well-known p
as
sage of the
Chhandogya Up
anishad, ﬁIn the be
gin
ning, my
 dear
, there was only
ex
is
tence, one with
out a sec
ondﬂ (Chh. Up. VI-2-1), t
hat the ef

fect ex -
ist
s even be
fore cre
ation and is non-dif

fer ent from it
s cause.
The au
thor now gives some il
lus
tra
tions in or
der to con
firm the
doc
trine that
 ef

fect is iden ti
cal with the cause.
Pat
av
accha
II.
1.19 (153)
And li
ke a piece of clot
h.
Pat
av
at:
 like a piece of cloth;
Cha:
 and.
An ex
am
ple in sup
port of Su
tra 17 is pre
sented.
Just as a rolled or folded piece of cloth is sub
se
quently un
rolled
or un
folded, so also the world which rested unmanif
ested be
fore cre
-
ation be
comes af

ter wards man
i
fested. The world is like a f
olded cloth
be
fore cre
ation. I
t is like a cloth that
 is spread out af

ter cre ation. A
folded cloth is not
 seen as a cloth till it
 is spread out. The threads are
not seen as a cloth till t
hey are wo
ven. E
ven so, the ef

fect is in thecause and is iden
ti
cal with the cause. In t
he folded st
ate you can
not
make out whether it is a clot
h or any
thing else. B
ut when it is spread
out you can clearly know that
 is a cloth. In t
he st
ate of dis
so
lu
tion
(Pralaya) the world ex

ists in a seed st
ate or po
ten
tial con
di
tion in
Brah man.
There are no names and forms. The uni
verse is in an un
dif

fer en
-
ti
ated or unmanifested
 st
ate. I
t t
akes a gross form af
ter cre
ation. The
names and forms are dif

fer en
ti
ated and man
i
fested.
As a piece of cloth is not di
f

fer ent from t
he threads, so the ef

fect(world) is not dif

fer ent from it
s cause (Brah
man).
The word ﬁChaﬂ (and) of the Su
tra shows that other il
lus
tra
tions
like the seed and the tree may
 also be given here.
When the cloth is folded,
 you do not know of what def

i nite length
and wid
th it is.
 But when it
 is un
folded you know all t
hese par
tic
u
lars.
Y
ou also know that the cloth i
s not dif

fer ent from t
he folded ob
ject. The
ef

fect, the piece of cloth, i
s unmanifested as long as it ex

ists in it
s
cause, i.e.,
 the threads. I
t be
comes man
i
fest and is clearly seen on
ac
count of the op
er
a
tions of shut
tle, loom
, weaver
, etc.
The con
clu
sion is that the ef

fect is not dif

fer ent from t
he cause.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
165

`Wm M à
Y
atha cha pranadi
II.
1.20 (154)
And as in the case of the dif
fer
ent Pranas or Vi
tal air
s.
Y
atha:
as;
Cha:
 and;
Pranadi:
 in the case of Pranas or vi
t
al airs.
An
other il
lus
tra
tion in sup
port of Su
tra 17 is pre
sented.
The word ‚Cha™
 (and) in the Su
tra shows that the last i
l
lus
tra
tion
of the piece of clot
h and the pres
ent one of lif
e func
tions should be
read to
gether as one il
lus
tra
tion.
When the fiv
e dif

fer ent vi
t
al airs are con
trolled by t
he prac
tice of
Pranayama,
 they merge in t
he chief Prana, t
he cause which reg
u
lates
breath
ing. Mere lif
e only is main
t
ained. All
 other func
tions such as
bend
ing and stretch
ing of the li
mbs etc., are stopped.
 This shows that
the var
i
ous vi
t
al airs, the ef

fects, are not dif

fer ent from t
heir cause, the
chief Prana. The di
f

fer ent vi
t
al airs are only mod
i
fi
ca
tions of the chief
or Mukhyaprana. So is t
he case with all ef

fects. They are not di
f

fer ent
from the cause.
Thus it is es
t
ab
lished that t
he ef

fect, the world, is iden
ti
cal with
it
s cause, Brah
man. There
fore, by know
ing Brah
man ev
ery
thing is
known. As the whole world is an ef

fect of Brah
man and non-dif

fer ent
from it,
 the prom
ise held out in the scrip
tural tex
t ‚what is not heard is
heard, what is not per
ceived is per
ceived, what is not
 known is known™

(Ch
h. Up
. VI.I.3) i
s ful

filled.
It
arav
y
ap
adesadhikaranam
: T
opic 7 (Sutras 21-23)
Brah
man does not cre
ate evil
BVaì`nX
oem{Õ
VmH$a
Um{XX
mofà
g{º$
It
arav
y
ap
adesaddhit
akaranadidoshap
rasaktih
II.
1.21 (155)
On a
c
cou
nt of the
 othe
r (i.e
., the
 in
di
vid

ual sou
l) be

ing stated
(as n
on-
dif
fe
r
en
t from B
rah
man)
 the
re w
ou
ld a
rise
 (in
Brah
man) the
 faults o
f not do
ing what is be
n
e
fi
cial and
 the
like
.
It
arav
y
ap
adesat:
 on ac
count of the ot
her be
ing st
ated (as
non-dif
 fer ent
from
Brah man);
Hit
akaranadidoshap
rasaktih:
 de
fect
s
of not do
ing what is ben
e
fi
cial and the like would arise.
(
It
ara:
 other than be
ing Brah
man, i.e.
 the in
di
vid
ual soul;
V
y
ap
adesat:
 from the des
ig
na
tion, f
rom the ex
pres
sion;
Hit
a:
 good,
ben e fi cial;
Akaranadi:
 not cre
at
ing, etc.;

Dosha:

im per fec tion,
de fect,
fault
s;
Prasaktih:

re sult,
con se quence.)
The dis
cus
sions on the re
la
tion of t
he world to Brah
man have
been fin
ished now
. The ques
tion of t
he re
la
tion of t
he in
di
vid
ual soul
to Brah
man is be
ing raised by way of an ob
jec
tion in thi
s Su
tra.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
166

In the pre
vi
ous Adhikarana, the one
ness of the ef

fect (world)with it
s cause (Brah
man) has been es
t
ab
lished.
In this Su
tra, the op
po
nent or Purvap
akshin raises an ob
jec
tion.
He says, that if
 Brah
man is the cause of the world, t
here is in
ap
pro
pri
-
ate
ness in that view be
cause the scrip
ture de
scribes Jiva as be
ing
Brah
man and, there
fore, he will not
 cause harm to him
self such as
birth, deat
h, old age, dis
ease, by get
ting into t
he per
son of the body
. A
be
ing which is it

self ab so
lutely
 pure, can
not t
ake this al
to
gether im
-
pure body as form
ing p
art of it
s Self.
The scrip
ture de
clares the other
, i.e.
, the em
bod
ied soul to be
one with Brah
man. ﬁThat is t
he Selfﬂ.
 ﬁThou art That. O
 Svet
aketuﬂ
(Chh. Up. VI.
8.7.). B
y st
at
ing that t
he in
di
vid
ual soul is one with Brah
-
man, there arises room for fi
nd
ing out a fault
 in the wis
dom of Brah
-
man, that
 He is not do
ing good to Him
self by cre
at
ing suf

fer ing and
p
ain on ac
count of re
peated births and deaths for Him
self. Will any
one do what is harm
ful and un
pleas
ant to him
self? Will he not re
mem
-
ber that he cre
ated the world? Will he not
 de
stroy it as t
he cause of his
suf

fer ing? Brah
man would have cre
ated a very be
au
ti
ful world where
ev
ery
thing would have been pl
eas
ant for the i
n
di
vid
ual soul with
out
the least p
ain or suf

fer ing. That i
s not so. Hence, Brah
man is not the
cause of the world as V
edant
a main
t
ains. As we see that what would
be ben
e
fi
cial is not done, t
he hy
poth
e
sis of the world hav
ing come out
of an In
tel
li
gent Cause (Brah
man) is not ac
cept

able.A{YH§$ Vw ^oX{
ZX}em
V² &
Adhikam tu bhedanirdesat
II.
1.22 (156)
Bu
t (Bra
h
man, the
 Cre

ator, is) so
em
thing mo
re (
than the
in
di
vid
ual soul
) on ac

count of t
he stat
e
ment i
n th
e Srut
is (of
dif f
er ence)
be tween
the
in di v
id ual
soul
(and
Brah
 man)
.
Adhikam:
 some
thing more, great
er than the Jiva;
 Tu
:
 but;
Bhedanirdesat:
 be
cause of the point
ing out of dif

fer ences on
ac
count of the st
ate
ment of dif

fer ence. (
Bheda:

dif
 fer ence;
Nirdesat:
be
cause of the point
ing out).
The ob
jec
tion raised in Su
tra 21 is re
futed.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) re
futes the ob
jec
tion of t
he last Su
tra. It
 dis
-
cards the Purvap
aksha.
The Cre
ator of the world is Om
nip
o
tent.
 He is not the im
pris
-
oned, em
bod
ied soul. The de
fect
s men
tioned in the pre
vi
ous Su
tra
such as do
ing what is not ben
e
fi
cial and the like do not at

tach to that
Brah man
be cause
as
eter nal
free dom
is
His
char ac ter is tic
na ture,
there is noth
ing ei
ther ben
e
fi
cial to be done by Him or non-ben
e
fi
cial
to be avoided by
 Him. More
over
, there is no ob
struc
tion to His knowl
-
edge and power
, be
cause He is Om
ni
scient and Om
nip
o
tent.
 He is a
mere wit
ness. He is con
scious of the un
re
al
ity of
 the world and Jiva.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
167

He has nei
ther good nor evil.
 Hence the cre
ation of a uni
verse of good
and evil by
 Him is un
ob
jec
tion
able.
The Jiva is of a dif

fer ent na
ture. The de
fect
s men
tioned in the
pre
vi
ous Su
tra be
long to the Jiv
a only
, so long as he is in a st
ate of ig
-
no
rance. The Srutis clearly poi
nt out t
he dif

fer ence be
tween the in
di
-
vid
ual soul and the Cre
ator in tex
t
s like ﬁV
er
ily
, the S
elf is to be seen,
to be heard, to be re
flected and to be m
ed
i
t
ated uponﬂ (Bri. Up. I
I.4.
5).
All these dif

fer ences are imag
i
nary or il
lu
sory on ac
count of ig
no
-
rance. When the in
di
vid
ual soul at
t
ains knowl
edge of Brah
man, he re
-
mem
bers his iden
tity
 with Brah
man. Then the whole phe
nom
e
non of
plu
ral
ity which springs from wrong knowl
edge dis
ap
pears. There is
nei
ther the em
bod
ied soul nor the cre
ator
.
This Brah
man is su
pe
rior to the in
di
vid
ual soul. The in
di
vid
ual
soul is not the cre
ator of thi
s uni
verse. Hence the ob
jec
tion raised in
Su
tra 21 can
not st
and. The pos
si
bil
ity of
 fault
s cling
ing to Brah
man is
ex cluded.
Though Brah
man as
sumes the form of t
he in
di
vid
ual soul, yet
He is not ex
hausted thereby
. But
 He re
mains as some
thing more, i.
e.,
as the con
trol
ler of the in
di
vid
ual soul. This is ob
vi
ous from the dis
tinc
-
tion pointed out
 in the Srut
i. Hence there is no oc
ca
sion for the fault
spo
ken of in Su
tra 21.
Aí_
m{Xd… VX
Zwnn{
Îm–&>
Asmadiv
accha t
adanup
ap
attih
II.
1.23 (157)
And becau
se the case
 is similar
 to that
 of stones, etc.,
(pro
du
ce
d fro
m the
 sam
e e
arth), the
 ob
je
ctio
n rais
ed
 is
unte
nable
.
Asmadiv
at:
 like stone, etc.
;
 Cha:
 and;
T
at anup
ap
attih:
 it
s
untenabilit
y
, unreasonableness, impossibility
; (
Ta
t
:
 of tha
t;
T
asy
a:
 it
s,
of the objecti
on raised in Sutra 21).
The ob
jec
tion raised in Su
tra 21 is fur
ther re
futed.
The ob
jec
tor may say t
hat Brah
man which is Knowl
edge and
Bliss and un
change
able can
not be the cause of a uni
verse of di
ver
-
sity
, of good and bad.
 This ob
jec
tion can
not st
and, be
cause we see
that f
rom the same ma
te
rial earth, stones of di
f

fer ent val
ues like di
a
-
monds, lapis laz
uli, crys
t
als and also or
di
nary stones are pro
duced.
From the seeds which are placed in one and the same ground var
i
ous
plant
s are seen to spring up, such as san
dal
wood and cu
cum
bers,
which show the great
est dif

fer ence in their leaves, bl
os
soms, fruit
s,
fra
grance, juice, etc. One and t
he same food pro
duces var
i
ous ef

fects
such as blood, hair
, nail, et
c. So also, one B
rah
man also may con
t
ain
in it

self the dis tinc
tion of t
he in
di
vid
ual selves and the high
est Self and
may pro
duce var
i
ous ef

fects. So also from B
rah
man which is Bliss
and Knowl
edge, a world of good and evi
l can be cre
ated.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
168

Hence the ob
jec
tion imag
ined by oth
ers against the doc
trine of
Brah
man be
ing the cause of the world can
not be main
t
ained.
More
over
, the scrip
ture de
clares that all ef

fects have their or
i
gin
in speech only
. The dream
ing man is one but the dream pi
c
tures are
many
. These are hinted at by
 the word ‚Cha™
 of the S
u
tra.
Up
asamharadarsanadh
ikaranam: T
opic 8 (Sutras 24-25)
Brahman i
s the cause of the world
Cng§hma
Xe©Z
mÞo{V M
oÞ jrad{
Up
asamharadarsanann
eti chenna kshi
rav
addhi
II.
1.24 (158)
I
f you
 ob
je
ct that B
rahma
n witho
ut ins
trume
nts ca
nnot b
e th
e
cause of the universe
, because
 an agent is seen to collect
materials for
 any constr
uction, (w
e say) no, because
 (it is)
 like
milk (turning into curds).
Up
asamharadarsanat:
 because collection of materials is seen;
Na:
not;
Iti ch
et:
 if it be said;

Na:
 no;
Kshirav
at:
 like milk;
Hi:
 because, as.
Darsanat:
because of the seeing;
Iti:
 thus;
Chet:
if;
Va
t
:
 like, has the
force of an instrument
al case here. (See Sutra of
 Panini,
T
ena tulyam
kriya
 etc.)
An ob
jec
tion that
 ma
te
ri
als are nec
es
sary for the cre
ation of t
he
world is re
futed.
Though Brah
man is de
void of m
a
te
ri
als and in
stru
ment
s, He is
yet t
he cause of the uni
verse. If
 you ob
ject that an ef

fi cient cause like
a pot
ter is seen to use in
stru
ment
s and there
fore Brah
man can
not be
the ma
te
rial cause as also the ef

fi cient cause, we re
ply that
 it is like
milk turn
ing into curds.
The ob
jec
tor
, Purvap
akshin, says: W
ork
men are found to col
lect
ma
te
ri
als to do their works. Brah
man also must have re
quired ma
te
ri
-
als where
with to cre
ate the world, but
 there was no other thing than
Brah
man be
fore cre
ation. He is one with
out a sec
ond. He could not
have brought out His work of cre
ation as there was no ma
te
rial, just
as a pot
ter could not have m
ade his pot
s, if there had been no m
a
te
ri
-
als like earth, wa
ter
, st
af
fs, wheels, etc.
, be
fore him.
This ob
jec
tion has no force. Ma
te
ri
als are not re
quired in ev
ery
case. For in
st
ance, milk is it

self trans formed into curd. I
n milk no ex
-
ter
nal agency is needed to change it i
nto curds. If y
ou say that i
n the
case of milk heat is nec
es
sary for cur
dling the mil
k, we re
ply that
 heat
merely ac
cel
er
ates the pro
cess of cur
dling. The cur
dling oc
curs
through the in
her
ent ca
p
ac
ity of
 the milk. Y
ou can
not turn wa
ter into
curds by the ap
pli
ca
tion of heat
. The milk™
s ca
p
a
bil
ity of
 turn
ing into
curd is merely com
pleted by t
he co
op
er
a
tion of aux

il iary means.
Brah
man man
i
fest
s Him
self in the f
orm of the uni
verse by His in
-
scru
t
a
ble power
. He sim
ply wills. T
he whole uni
verse co
mes into be
-
ing. Why can
not the Om
nip
o
tent I
n
fi
nite Brah
man cre
ate the world by
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
169

His will-power (Sankalpa) alone wit
h
out in
stru
ment
s and ex
tra
ne
ous
aids?
Brah man
is
Om nip o tent

and
In fi nit
e.
Hence
no
ex tra ne ous
aid
or in
stru
ment is nec
es
sary for Him to cre
ate this world.
Thus Sruti also de
clares ﬁThere is no ef

fect and no in stru
ment
known of Him, no one is seen like unto or bett
er
. His high power is re
-
vealed as man
i
fold and in
her
ent, act
ing as force and knowl
edgeﬂ
(Svet. U
p. VI. 8)
.
There
fore, Brah
man, al
though one only
, is able to t
rans
form
Him
self as this uni
verse of di
verse ef

fects with
out any in
stru
ment or
ex
tra
ne
ous aid, on ac
count of His in
fi
nite pow
ers.
Xodm{X
dX{n b
moHo
Dev
adiv
adapi lo
ke
II.
1.25 (159)
(T
he case
 of Brahman cr
eating the world is) l
ike that of gods
and o
ther be
ings in the
 world (in o
rdinary e
xpe
rience
).
Dev
adiv
at:
 like gods and others (saint
s);
Api:
 even, also;

Loke:
 in
the world.
The word ‚vat™
 has the force of sixt
h case here. An
other read
ing
is ‚Iti™
 (thus), in
stead of
‚Api™.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 24 is brought for
ward.
An ob
jec
tor (or Purvap
akshin) says: ‚The ex
am
ple of milk t
urn
-
ing into curds is not ap
pro
pri
ate as it is an in
sen
tient t
hing. In
tel
li
gent
agent
s like pot
ters be
gin to do their work af

ter pro vid
ing them
selves
with a com
plete set of i
n
stru
ment
s. How then can it be said that
 Brah
-
man, an in
tel
li
gent Be
ing, can do His work of cre
ation with
out any
aux il iary
,
with out
the
aid
of
any
con stit u ent
ma te ri als?™

W
e
re ply
,
‚like
gods and oth
ers.™
W
e see also that in the world gods and sages cre
ate p
ar
tic
u
lar
things such as pal
aces, char
i
ot
s, etc., by
 force of will, wit
h
out ex
ter
nal
aid. Why can
not the Om
nip
o
tent Cre
ator cre
ate the world by His
will-power (Sat Sankalp
a) or His in
fi
nite power of May
a?
Just as the spi
der pro
ject
s out of it

self the threads of it
s web, just
as the fe
male crane con
ceives with
out a male from
 hear
ing the sound
of thun
der
, just as the lo
tus wan
ders from one lake to an
other with
out
any means of con
vey
ance so also the in
tel
li
gent Brah
man cre
ates the
world by it

self with out ex
ter
nal in
stru
ment
s or aid.
The case of Brah
man is dif

fer ent from t
hat of pot

ters and sim i
lar
agent
s. No ex
tra
ne
ous means is nec
es
sary for Brah
man for cre
ation.
There is lim
i
t
a
tion in the cre
ation of pot
s. The cre
ation of B
rah
man
can
not be lim
ited by t
he con
di
tions ob
served in the cre
ation of pot
s.
Brah man
is
Om nip o tent
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
170

Krit
snaprasakty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 9 (Sutras 26-29)
Brahman i
s the mat
erial cause of the universe,
though He is without p
art
s
H¥$ËñZàg{º
Krit
snaprasaktirni
rav
ay
av
atv
asabdakopo v
a
II.
1.26 (160)
Either the
 conse
que
nce
 of the e
ntire (B
rahman und
ergo
ing
change) has to be accep
ted, or else
 a violation of t
he texts
de
clari
ng Bra
hman to
 be
 witho
ut p
arts (i
f Brah
man is
 the
material cause of the world).
Krit
snaprasaktih:
possibility of
 the entire (Brahman bei
ng modified);
Nirav
ay
av
atv
asabdakop
at:
 contradiction of t
he scriptural st
atement
that B
rahman is without p
art
s;
Va
:
 or
, otherwise.
(
Krit
sna:
 entire, f
ull, tot
al; complete;

Prasaktih:
 exigency
,
employment
; activ
ity;

Nirav
ay
av
a:
 without p
art
s, without f
orm,
without members, i
ndivisible;

Sabda:
 word, text
, expressions in Sruti;

Kop
at:
 contradiction, v
iolation,
 incongruity
, stulti
fication;

Va
:
 or
.)
An ob
jec
tion that
 Brah
man is not the ma
te
rial cause of the
world, is raised in the Su
tra.
The ob
jec
tor says that i
f the en
tire Brah
man be
comes the world,
then no Brah
man will re
main dis
tinct from t
he world and that if
 a p
art
of Brah
man be
comes the world, the scrip
tural tex
t
s which de
clare
Brah
man to be with
out p
art
s will be vi
o
lated.
If B
rah
man is with
out p
art
s and yet the m
a
te
rial cause of the uni
-
verse, then we have t
o ad
mit that
 the en
tire Brah
man be
comes mod
i
-
fied into t
he uni
verse. Hence there will be no Brah
man lef
t but only
 the
ef

fect, the uni
verse. Fur
ther
, it will
 go against the dec
la
ra
tion of t
he
Sruti t
ext t
hat Brah
man is un
change
able.
If on t
he con
trary it i
s said that a por
tion of B
rah
man only be
-
comes the uni
verse, then we will hav
e to ac
cept that B
rah
man is
made up of p
art
s, which is de
nied by the scrip
tural tex
t
s. The p
as
-
sages are,
{ZîH$b§ {ZpîH
«$`§ emÝ
&
 ŠﬁHe who is with
out p
art
s, with
-
out ac
tions, tran
quil, with
out fault
, with
out t
aintﬂ (Svet
. Up. VI
.19).
{Xì`mo
ø_yV©– nwéf– g ~mømä`ÝVa
ŠﬁThat heav
enly per
son is with
out body
, He is
both with
out and within,
 not pro
ducedﬂ (Mun. Up. II.
1.2).
BX§ _hX²^yV_ZÝV_nma§
 ŠﬁThat great Be
ing is end
less, un
lim
ited, con
sist
ing of
noth
ing but Knowl
edgeﬂ (Bri. Up. II
.4.12).
ŠﬁHe is to be
de
scribed by No, Noﬂ (Bri. Up. II
I.9.
26).
AñWyb_ZUw
ŠﬁIt is nei
ther coarse
nor fineﬂ (Bri. Up. I
II.
8-8). All t
hese pas
sages deny the ex
is
tence of
p
art
s or dis
tinc
tions in Brah
man.
What
ever has form is per
ish
able and so Brah
man also will be
-
come per
ish
able or non-eter
nal.
Also if t
he uni
verse is Brah
man, where is the need for any
 com
-
mand to see (Drast
avya)? The t
ext
s which ex
hort us to strive t
o see
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
171

Brah
man be
come pur
pose
less, be
cause the ef

fects of Brah
man may
be seen with
out any ef

fort and apart from them
 no Brah
man ex
ist
s. Fi
-
nally
, the t
ext
s which de
clare Brah
man to be un
born are con
tra
dicted
thereby
.
Hence Brah
man can
not be the ma
te
rial cause of the uni
verse.
This ob
jec
tion is re
futed in t
he next S
u
tra.
lwVoñ
Vw eãX_
Srutestu sabdamu
latv
at
II.
1.27 (161)
But (this i
s not so) on account of scr
iptural passages and on
account of (Brah
man) restin
g on scriptur
e (only).
Sruteh:
 from Sruti
, as it is st
ated in Srut
i, on account of scriptural
texts;
Tu
:
 but;
Sabdamu
latv
at:
 on account of being based on the
scripture, as Sruti is the f
oundation.
(
Sabda:
 word, revelation,
 Sruti;

Mula:
 foundation.
)
The ob
jec
tion raised in Su
tra 25 is re
futed.
The en
tire Brah
man does not be
come the world be
cause the
scrip
ture de
clares so, and Brah
man can be known only through the
source of scrip
ture.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) dis
cards the ob
jec
tion. I
t re
futes the v
iew of
the pre
vi
ous Su
tra. These ob
jec
tions have no f
orce be
cause we rely
on the Sruti
 or scrip
ture.
The en
tire Brah
man does not un
dergo change, al
though the
scrip
tures de
clare that the uni
verse t
akes it
s or
i
gin from Brah
man.
Sruti says, ﬁone f
oot (quar
ter) of Him is all be
ings, and three feet
 are
what is im
mor
t
al in heaven.
ﬂ (
nmXmo@ñ` {dœm ^yVm{Z {Ì
)
More
over
, we are one with Brah
man in deep sleep as st
ated by
the scrip
ture. How could that hap
pen if the en
tire Brah
man has be
-
come the world?
Fur
ther
, the scrip
ture de
clares that we can real
ise Brah
man in
the heart. How could that
 be if the en
tire Brah
man has be
come the
world?
More over
,
the
pos si bil ity
of
Brah man
be com ing
the
ob ject
of
per
cep
tion by m
eans of the senses is de
nied while it
s ef

fects may
thus be per
ceived.
The scrip
tural tex
t
s de
clare Brah
man to be with
out p
art
s. Then
how could a part
 be
come man
i
fest? W
e re
ply that
 it is only t
he re
sult
of A
vidya.
Are there two moons if
 on ac
count of a de
fect of y
our vi
sion you
see two moons? Y
ou must rely on scrip
tures alone but not on logi
c for
know
ing what is be
yond the mi
nd.
Brah
man rest
s ex
clu
sively on t
he Srutis or scrip
tures. The sa
-
cred scrip
tures alone, but not
 the senses, are au
thor
i
t
a
tive re
gard
ing
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
172

Brah
man. Hence we will have to ac
cept the dec
la
ra
tions of the S
rutis
with out
the
least
hes i t
a tion.
The scrip
tural tex
t
s de
clare on the one hand that not
 the en
tire
Brah
man changes into it
s ef

fects and on the other hand, t
hat Brah
-
man is with
out p
art
s. Even cer
t
ain or
di
nary things such as gems,
spells, herbs, etc.,
 pos
sess pow
ers which pro
duce di
verse op
po
site
ef

fects on ac
count of dif

fer ence of time,
 place, oc
ca
sion and so on.
No one is able to find out
 by mere re
flec
tion the num
ber of these pow
-
ers, their fa
vour
ing con
di
tions, thei
r ob
ject
s, their pur
poses, etc., wit
h
-
out the help of
 in
struc
tion. When such is the case with or
di
nary things,
how much more im
pos
si
ble is it to con
ceive with
out the aid of
 scrip
-
ture the true na
ture of Brah
man with it
s pow
ers un
fath
om
able by
thought? The scrip
ture de
clares ﬁDo not ap
ply rea
son
ing to what is
un think able.ﬂ
Hence the Srutis or the scrip
tures alone are au
thor
ity i
n mat
ters
supersensuous. W
e will have to ac
cept that bot
h these op
po
site
views ex
pressed by the scrip
tures are true, though it
 does not st
and
to rea
son. It must
 be re
mem
bered that the change in B
rah
man is only
ap
p
ar
ent and not real.
 Brah
man some
how ap
pears as this uni
verse,
just as rope ap
pears as the snake. Brah
man be
comes the ba
sis of the
en
tire, ap
p
ar
ent uni
verse with it
s changes, but it re
mains at the same
time un
changed in it
s true and real na
ture.
AmË_{
Z M¡
d§ {d{
MÌmü {
Atmani chaiv
am v
ichitrascha hi
II.
1.28 (162)
And becau
se in the individual soul also (as in gods, magi
cians,
in dream
s) various
 (creation e
xists). Similarly (with Brahman
also).
Atmani
:
 in the indiv
idual soul;
Cha:
 also, and;
Evam:
 thus;
V
ichit
rah:
 diverse, manif
old, variegat
ed;
Cha:
 and, also;
Hi:
because.
The ob
jec
tion raised in Su
tra 26 is fur
ther re
futed by
 an il
lus
tra
-
tion.
There is no rea
son to find faul
t with t
he doc
trine that
 there can
be a man
i
fold cre
ation in the one S
elf with
out de
stroy
ing it
s char
ac
ter
.
In the dream st
ate, we see such di
verse and won
der
ful cre
ation in
our
selves. ﬁThere are no char
i
ot
s in that dream
ing st
ate, no horses,
no roads, but he him
self cre
ates char
i
ot
s, horses and roadsﬂ (
Bri. Up.
IV
.3.10), and y
et the in
di
vid
ual char
ac
ter of the self
 is not af

fected byit. Thi
s does not lessen or af

fect our in teg
rity of
 be
ing.
In or
di
nary life t
oo mul
ti
ple cre
ations, el
e
phant
s, horses and the
like are seen to ex
ist in gods, ma
gi
cians, with
out any change in t
hem
-
selves, with
out in
ter
fer
ing with the unit
y of t
heir be
ing. Sim

i larly
, a
mul
ti
ple cre
ation may
 ex
ist in Brah
man also with
out di
vest
ing it of i
t
s
char
ac
ter of unit
y
. The di
verse cre
ation orig
i
nates from Brah
man
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
173

through It
s in
scru
t
a
ble power of Maya and B
rah
man It

self re mains un
-
changed.
The sec
ond ‚cha™
 (also, and) is in or
der to in
di
cate that when
such won
der
ful things are be
lieved by
 us as the dreams, the pow
ers
of the gods and the m
a
gi
cians, why should we hes
i
t
ate to be
lieve in
the mys
te
ri
ous pow
ers of Brah
man? The word ‚hi™
 im
plies that t
he
fact
s above men
tioned are well known in the scrip
tures.
ñdnjXmo
Sv
ap
akshadoshaccha
lI.1.
29 (163)
And on a
ccount
 of t
he opponent™
s own
 view being
 subject t
o
th
ese v
ery
 obj
ect
io
ns
.
Sv
ap
aksha:
 in one™
s own view;
Doshat:
 because of the defect
s;
Cha:
 also, and.
The ob
jec
tion raised in Su
tra 26 is fur
ther re
futed.
The ar
gu
ment raised in Su
tra 26 can
not st
and, be
cause the
same charge can be lev
elled against the ob
jec
tor
™
s side also.
The ob
jec
tion raised by y
ou will equally ap
ply to y
our doc
trine
that t
he form
less (imp
artite) In
fi
nite Pradhana or Prakriti v
oid of sound
and other qual
i
ties cre
ates the world. The S
ankhyas may say
, ﬁW
e do
not men
tion that
 our Pradhana is with
out p
art
s. Pradhana is only a
st
ate of equi
poise of the three Gunas,
 Satt
va, Rajas and T
amas.
Pradhana forms a whole con
t
ain
ing the three Gunas as it
s part
s. W
e
re
ply that
 such a parti
teness does not re
move the ob
jec
tion in hand
since Sattv
a, Rajas and T
amas are each of them equally
 imp
artite.
Each Guna by it

self as sisted by the t
wo other Gunas, con
sti
-
tutes the ma
te
rial cause of that p
art of the world which re
sem
bles it in
it
s na
ture. Hence, the ob
jec
tion lies against t
he Sankhya vi
ew like
-
wise.
As rea
son
ing is al
ways un
st
a
ble, if y
ou are in
clined to be
lieve in
the Pradhana™
s be
ing in fact ca
p
a
ble of p
ar
ti
tion, t
hen it fol
lows that
the Pradhana can
not be eter
nal.
Let it t
hen be said that the v
ar
i
ous pow
ers of the Pradhana to
which the va
ri
ety of
 it
s ef

fects are point
ing are it
s part
s. W
ell, we re
ply
,
those di
verse po
ten
cies are ad
mit
ted by us also as we see the cause
of the world in Brah
man. The same ob
jec
tion ap
plies also to your
atomic the
ory
.
The same ob
jec
tions can be lev
elled against the doc
trine of t
he
world hav
ing orig
i
nated from at

oms. The atom is not made up of p
art
s.
When one atom com
bines with an
other atom,
 it must en
ter into com
-
bi
na
tion with it
s whole ex
tent wit
h an
other
. It
 can
not en
ter into p
ar
tial
con
t
act with an
other
. There will be en
tire interpenet
ration. Hence,
there could be no fur
ther in
crease in the size. The com
pound of two
at
oms would not oc
cupy more sp
ace than one atom.
 The re
sult of the
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
174

con
junc
tion would be a mere atom.
 But if
 you hold that
 the atom en
-
ters into the com
bi
na
tion with a p
art only
, that
 would go against the
as
sump
tion of t
he at
oms hav
ing no p
art
s.
If t
he Pradhana is t
aken to be the cause of the uni
verse as the
Sankhyas main
t
ain, in that
 case also the view of the S
ankhyas will be
equally sub
ject to the ob
jec
tions raised against the V
edantic view of
Brah
man as the cause of the uni
verse, as the Pradhana,
 too, is with
-
out p
art
s. As for the propounder of t
he Brah
man-the
ory
, he has al
-
ready re
futed t
he ob
jec
tion di
rected against his own view
.
Sarv
opet
adhikaranam
: T
opic 10 (Sutras 30-31)
Fully-equipped Brahm
an
gdm}noV
m M VÔe©
Sarv
opet
a cha t
addarsanat
II.
1.30 (164)
And (Br
ahma
n is)
 endowed wit
h all
 (powers
), because it
 is seen
(from
 the
 scrip
ture
s).
Sarv
opet
a:
 endowed with all powers, all-powerful;
Cha:
 also, and;
T
addarsanat:
 because it is seen (from the scriptures).
(
Sarv
a:
 all;
Upet
a:
 endowed with, possessed with;
Ta
t
:
 that, th
e
possession of such power
s.)
The ob
jec
tion in Su
tra 26 is fur
ther re
futed.
Brah
man is Om
nip
o
tent as is clear from the scrip
tures. Hence it
is per
fectly
 within His pow
ers to man
i
fest Him
self as the world and to
be at the same t
ime be
yond it.
The ob
jec
tor (Purvap
akshin) says: W
e see that men who have a
phys
i
cal body are en
dowed with pow
ers. But Brah
man has no body
.
Hence He can
not be in the possesssion of such pow
ers.
This has no force. This Su
tra gives proof of
 Brah
man be
ing en
-
dowed with Maya S
akti. V
ar
i
ous scrip
tural tex
t
s de
clare that Brah
man
pos
sesses all pow
ers. ﬁHe to whom all ac
tions, de
sires, all odours, all
t
astes be
long, he who em
braces all this, who never speaks, and is
never sur
prisedﬂ (Chh. Up. III.
14.4). ﬁHe who de
sires what is true and
imag
ines what is trueﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
II.
7.1). ﬁHe who knows all in it
s to
-
t
al
ity and cog
nises all in it
s de
t
ailsﬂ (Mun. Up. I.
1.9). ﬁBy
 the com
mand
of that
 Im
per
ish
able, O Gargi, sun and moon st
and ap
artﬂ (Bri. Up.
III
.8.9). ﬁThe great
 Lord is the Mayin (t
he Ruler of Maya)ﬂ (Sv
et. Up.
IV
.10) and other sim
i
lar p
as
sages.
{dH$aU
Ëdm
Þo{V M
oV² VXwº$_
V
ikaranatv
anneti chet t
adukt
am
II.
1.31 (165)
If it be said that because
 (Brahman)
 is devoid o
f organs,
 (it is)
not (a
ble
 to cre
ate
), (we
 rep
ly that)
 this ha
s alre
ady
 be
en
explained.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
175

V
ikaranatv
at:
 because of want of organs of action and perception;
Na:
 not;
Iti:
 thus;
Chet:
 if;
Ta
t
:
 that,
 that objecti
on;
Ukt
am:
 has been
explained or answered.
An
other ob
jec
tion to B
rah
man be
ing the cause of the world is re
-
futed.
The op
po
nent says: ﬁBrah
man is des
ti
tute of
 or
gans. Hence,
though He is all-pow
er
ful, He can
not cre
ate.ﬂ Scrip
ture de
clares, ﬁHe
is with
out eyes, wit
h
out ears, with
out speech, with
out mindﬂ (Bri.
 Up.
III
.8.8). F
ur
ther Srutis say
, ﬁNot this,
 Not this.ﬂ This pre
cludes all at
trib
-
utes. W
e know from Mantras and Arthav
adas, etc., t
hat the gods and
other in
tel
li
gent be
ings, though en
dowed with all pow
ers, are able to
cre
ate be
cause they are fur
nished with bodily i
n
stru
ment
s of ac
tion.
The Su
tra con
sist
s of an ob
jec
tion and it
s re
ply
. The ob
jec
tion
por
tion is ‚
V
ikaranatvanneti chet
™
 and the re
ply por
tion is ‚
T
adukt
am
.™
Even t
hough Brah
man has no eyes or ears, or hands or feet, He
is Om
nip
o
tent.
 That has been ex
plained above in S
utras II.
1.4 and
II.
1.25. He as
sumes dif

fer ent forms through A
vidya or May
a. With re
-
spect to Brah
man, the scrip
ture alone is the au
thor
ity
, but not
 rea
son.
The scrip
ture de
clares that Brah
man, though des
ti
tute of
 or
gans,
pos
sesses all ca
p
ac
i
ties and pow
ers, ﬁGrasps with
out hands, mov
es
swif
tly wit
h
out feet
, sees with
out eyes and hears with
out earsﬂ (Svet.
Up. III
.19). Though B
rah
man is de
void of al
l at
trib
utes, yet
 He is en
-
dowed with all pow
ers through A
vidya or May
a.
Pray
ojanatv
adhikaranam
: T
opic 1
1 (Sutras 32-33)
Final end of Creation
Z à`mo
OZdÎ
Na pray
ojanav
attvat
II.
1.32 (166)
(Brahman i
s) not (t
he creator of the universe) on account of
(eve
ry acti
vity) h
aving a moti
ve.
Na:
 not (i.e.
 Brahman cannot be the creator);
Pray
ojana-v
attvat:
on
account of having mot
ive.
An
other ob
jec
tion to B
rah
man be
ing the cause of the world is
raised.
The ob
jec
tor says: ﬁIn t
his world, ev
ery
body does a work with
some mo
tive.
 He does any work to sat
isfy his de
sire. There is also a
scrip
tural p
as
sage that con
firms this re
sult of com
mon ex
pe
ri
ence,
‚V
er
ily
, ev
ery
thing is not dear that
 you may l
ove ev
ery
thing, but
 that
you may l
ove the S
elf, t
here
fore ev
ery
thing is dear
™
 (Bri. Up. I
I.4.
5).
But Brah
man is all-full,
 self-suf

fi cient and self-con
t
ained. He has
noth
ing to gain by
 the cre
ation. There
fore He can
not en
gage Him
self
in such a use
less cre
ation. Hence, B
rah
man can
not be the cause of
the uni
verse.ﬂ
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
176

The un
der
t
ak
ing of cre
at
ing this world with all it
s de
t
ails is in
-
deed a weighty one.
 If B
rah
man de
sires cre
ation to f
ul
fil a wish, t
hen
He can
not be an eter
nally happy
, per
fect be
ing with no un
ful
filled de
-
sires. If He has no de
sire, then He will not wish t
o cre
ate and so there
will be no cre
ation. I
t can
not be said that He cre
ates with
out pur
pose,
like a sense
less man in a st
ate of f
renzy
. That would cer
t
ainly con
tra
-
dict His Om
ni
scienc
e.
Hence the doc
trine of t
he cre
ation pro
ceed
ing from an in
tel
li
-
gent
Be ing
(Brah man)
is
un ten a ble.
bmoH
$dÎmw
 brbmH
¡$dë`_
Lokav
attu lilakai
v
aly
am
II.
1.33 (167)
But (Brahman™s cr
eative activity) is m
ere spo
rt,
 such as is seen
in the world (o
r ordinary life).
Lokav
at:
 as in the world, as in ordinary lif
e;
Tu
:
 but;
Lilakai
v
aly
am:
mere p
astime.
(
Lila:
 sport, play;

Kaiv
aly
am:
 merely;
Lilama
tra
m:
 mere p
astime.)
The ob
jec
tion raised in Su
tra 32 is re
plied to.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) re
moves the abov
e obejction.
Brah
man has cre
ated the world not out
 of any de
sire or mo
tive.
It is sim
ply His p
as
time, pro
ceed
ing from His own na
ture, which is in
-
her
ent in and in
sep
a
ra
ble from Him, as it
 is seen also in the world that
some
times a rich man or a prince, does some ac
tion with
out any mo
-
tive or pur
pose, sim
ply out of
 a sport
ive im
pulse. Just as chil
dren play
out of mere f
un, or just as men breathe with
out any mo
tive or pur
pose,
be
cause it is their very na
ture, just as a man f
ull of cheer
ful
ness when
awak
en
ing from sound sleep, be
gins to dance about with
out any ob
-
jec
tive,
 but from mere ex

u ber
ance of spirit, so also Brah
man en
gages
Him
self in cre
at
ing this world not out of
 any pur
pose or mo
tive,
 but out
of sport
ing or Lila or play pro
ceed
ing from His own na
ture.
Al
though the cre
ation of t
his uni
verse ap
pears to us a weighty
and dif

fi cult un
der
t
ak
ing, it i
s mere play to t
he Lord, whose power is
in fi nite
or
lim it less.
If in or
di
nary life we may
 pos
si
bly by close scru
tiny de
tect some
sub
tle mo
tive ev
en for sport
ful ac
tion (play
ing at a game of
 balls is not
al
to
gether mo
tive
less, be
cause the prince get
s some plea
sure by the
play), we can
not do so with re
gard to the ac
tions of the Lord.
 The
scrip
ture de
clares that all wishes are ful
filled in t
he Lord and that He is
all-full,
 self-con
t
ained and self-suf

fi cient.
It should not be f
or
got
ten how
ever that t
here is no cre
ation from
the st
and

point of the Ab
so
lute, be
cause name and form are due to
A
vidya or ig
no
rance and be
cause Brah
man and At
man are re
ally
one.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
177

The op
po
nent again raises an ob
jec
tion. The t
he
ory that B
rah
-
man is the cre
ator is open to the ob
jec
tion that
 He is ei
ther p
ar
tial or
cruel, be
cause some men en
joy hap
pi
ness and oth
ers suf

fer mis ery
.
Hence this the
ory is not a con
gru
ous one. This ob
jec
tion is re
moved
by the f
ol
low
ing Su
tra.
V
aishamy
anairghri
ny
adhikaranam
: T
opic 12 (Sutras 34-36)
Brahman i
s neither p
artial nor cruel
d¡få
`Z¡K©¥Ê
`o Z g
mnoj
Ëdm
V² VWm
 {h Xe©`
V
aishamy
anairghri
ny
e na sapekshatv
at

t
atha hi darsay
ati
II.
1.34 (168)
Partialit
y and cruelty cannot
 (be ascribed
 to Brahman)
 on
account of His taking
 into consideration (ot
her reasons in that
matte
r viz., m
eri
t and
 de
me
rit of the
 sou
ls), fo
r so (
scrip
ture
)
declares.
V
aishamy
a:
 inequality
, p
artiality
;
Nairghriny
e:
 cruelty
, unkindness;
Na:
 not (cannot be ascribed to Brahman);
Sapekshatv
at:
 because of
dependence upon, as it is dependent on somet
hing else, i.e.
, upon
the Karma of
 the souls;
T
atha:
 so;
Hi:
 because;
Darsay
ati:
 the
scripture declares.
The ac
cu
sa
tion that
 Brah
man is p
ar
tial and cruel in His cre
ation
of the world is re
moved.
Some are cre
ated poor
, some rich. There
fore Brah
man or the
Lord is par
tial to some.
 He makes peo
ple suf

fer. There
fore He is
cruel. For these two rea
sons Brah
man can
not be the cause of the
world. This ob
jec
tion is un
ten
a
ble. The Lord can
not be ac
cused of in
-
equal
ity and cru
elty
, be
cause en
joy
ment and suf

fer ing of the in
di
vid
-
ual soul are de
ter
mined by his own pre
vi
ous good and bad ac
tions.
Sruti also de
clares. ﬁA
 man be
comes vir
tu
ous by his vir
tu
ous deeds
and sin
ful by hi
s sin
ful act
sŠ
Punyo vai punyena karmana bhavati,
p
ap
ah p
apena
ﬂ (Br
i. Up
. III.2.13
).
The grace of the Lord is like rain which brings the po
tency of
each seed to man
i
fest it

self ac cord
ing to it
s na
ture. The v
a
ri
ety of
 p
ain
and plea
sure is due to va
ri
ety of
 Karma.
The po
si
tion of t
he Lord is to be re
garded as sim
i
lar to that
 of
Parjanya,
 the giver of
 rain. Parjany
a is the com
mon cause of the pro
-
duc
tion of rice, bar
ley and other plant
s. The dif

fer ence be
tween the
var i ous
spe cies
is
due
to
the
di verse
po ten ti al i
 ties
ly ing
hid den
in
the
re
spec
tive seeds. E
ven so, the Lord is t
he com
mon cause of the cre
-
ation of gods, m
en, etc. The di
f

fer ences be
tween these classes of be
-
ings are due to the dif

fer ent merit be
long
ing to the in
di
vid
ual souls.
Scrip
ture also de
clares, ﬁThe Lord makes him whom He wishes
to lead up from t
hese worlds do a good ac
tion. The Lord makes Him
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
178

whom He wishes to lead down do a bad ac
tionﬂ (Kau. Up.
 III
.8). ﬁA
man be
comes good by good work, bad by bad workﬂ (Bri. Up.
III
.2.13). S
mriti also de
clares that the Lord metes out
 re
wards and
pun
ish
ment
s only in con
sid
er
ation of t
he spe
cific ac
tions of be
ings. ‚I
serve men in the way i
n which they ap
proach Me.™
 (Bhagavad Git
a
IV
.1
1).
Z H$_
m©{d^
mJm{X{V M
oV²
 Z AZm{
Na karmav
ibhagadi
ti chet na anaditv
at
II.
1.35 (169)
I
f it be
 ob
je
cte
d tha
t it (vi
z., the
 Lord
™s ha
ving re
gard
 to me
rit
and demeri
t) i
s not
 possibl
e on accoun
t of
 the n
on-dis
tin
cti
on
(of m
eri
t and d
em
eri
t be
fore
 cre
atio
n), (we
 say)
 no, b
ec
aus
e o
f
(the world
) be
ing without a be
ginning.
Na:
 not;
Karmav
ibhagat:
 because of the non-distinction of
 work
(before creation);
Iti ch
et:
 if it be said,
 if it be obj
ected in this way;

Na:
no, the objecti
on cannot st
and;
Anadi
tv
at:
 because of
beginninglessness.
An ob
jec
tion against S
u
tra 34 is raised and re
futed.
The Su
tra con
sist
s of two p
art
s, viz.,
 an ob
jec
tion and it
s re
ply
.
The ob
jec
tive por
tion is ‚
Na karmavibhagaditi chet
™
 and the re
ply por
-
tion is ‚
Na anaditvat
™.
An ob
jec
tion is raised now
. The Sruti
 says, ﬁBe
ing only t
his was
in the be
gin
ning, one with
out a sec
ond.ﬂ There was no dis
tinc
tion of
works be
fore cre
ation of t
he world. There was only the ab
so
lutely
One Real Be
ing or Brah
man. The cre
ation at t
he be
gin
ning of one
man as rich and of an
other as poor and un
happy can
not cer
t
ainly de
-
pend on the re
spec
tive pre
vi
ous good or bad deeds. The first cre
ation
must have been f
ree from in
equal
i
ties.
This ob
jec
tion can
not st
and. The cre
ation of t
he world is also
with
out a be
gin
ning. There was never a time t
hat may be said t
o be an
ab
so
lute be
gin
ning. The ques
tion of f
irst cre
ation can
not arise. Cre
-
ation and de
struc
tion of t
he world fol
low
ing each other con
tin
u
ally by
ro
t
a
tion is with
out any be
gin
ning and end. The con
di
tion of in
di
vid
ual
souls in any p
ar
tic
u
lar cy
cle of cre
ation is pre
de
ter
mined by t
heir ac
-
tions in the pre
vi
ous cy
cle.
It can
not be said that t
here could be no Karma prior to cre
ation,
which causes the di
ver
sity of
 cre
ation, be
cause Karma is Anadi
(beginningless). Cre
ation is only t
he shoot from a pre-ex
ist
ing seed of
Karma.
As the world is with
out a be
gin
ning, merit and i
n
equal
ity are li
ke
seed and sprout. There is an un
end
ing chain of the re
la
tion of cause
and ef

fect as in the case of the seed and the sprout. There
fore, there
is no con
tra
dic
tion pres
ent in the Lord™
s cre
ative ac
tiv
ity
.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
179

Cnn
ÚVo Mm
ß`wnbä
&
Up
ap
ady
ate chapy
up
alabhy
ate cha
II.
1.36 (170)
And (that the
 worldŠand
 also Karma
Šis without a b
eginning)
is reasonable and is also se
en (from th
e scriptures).
Up
ap
ady
ate:
 is proved by reasoning, is reasonable that
 it should be
so;
Cha:
 and;
Api:
and, also, assuredly;
Up
alabhy
ate:
 is seen, is
found in Srut
i or Scriptures;
Cha:
 also, and.
Karma is Anadi (beginningl
ess). This is log
i
cal and is sup
ported
by scrip
ture. By
 rea
son
ing also it can be de
duced that the world must
be beginningless. Be
cause, if the world did not
 ex
ist in a po
ten
tial or
seed st
ate, t
hen an ab
so
lutely
 non-ex
ist
ing thing would be pro
duced
dur
ing cre
ation. There is also t
he pos
si
bil
ity of
 lib
er
ated per
sons be
-
ing re
born again. Fur
ther
, peo
ple would be en
joy
ing and suf

fer ing
with
out hav
ing done any
thing to de
serve it. A
s there would ex
ist no
de
ter
min
ing cause of the un
equal dis
pen
sa
tion of plea
sure and pain,
we should have to sub
mit or as
sert to the doc
trine of re
wards and
pun ish ment
s
be ing
al lot ted
with out
ref er ence
to
pre vi ous
vir tues
and
vi
cious deeds. There will be ef

fect with out a cause. This is cer
t
ainly
ab
surd. When we as
sume ef

fect with out a cause, there could be no
law at all with ref

er ence to the pur
pose or reg
u
lar
ity of
 cre
ation. The
Sruti de
clares that cre
ation is ‚Anadi
™
 (beginningless).
More
over
, mere A
vidya (ig
no
rance) which is ho
mo
ge
neous
(Ekarup
a), can
not cause the het
er
o
ge
ne
ity of
 cre
ation. I
t is A
vidya di

-
ver
si
fied by V
asanas due to Karma that can hav
e such a re
sult.
A
vidya needs t
he di
ver
sity of
 in
di
vid
ual p
ast work to pro
duce var
ied
re
sult
s. A
vidya m
ay be the cause of in
equal
ity i
f it be con
sid
ered as
hav
ing re
gard to de
merit ac
cru
ing from ac
tion pro
duced by the men
t
al
sup
pres
sion of wrath, ha
tred and other af

flict ing p
as
sions.
The scrip
tures also posit the ex
is
tence of the uni
verse in for
mer
cy
cles or Kalp
as in text
s like, ﬁThe cre
ator fash
ioned the sun and the
moon as be
foreﬂ (Rig V
eda Samhit
a, X-190-3). Hence p
ar
tial
ity and
cru
elty can
not be as
cribed to the Lord.
Sarv
adharmop
ap
atty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 13
Saguna Brahm
an necessary for cr
eation
gd©Y_m
}nnÎm
Sarv
adharmop
ap
attescha
II.
1.37 (171)
And
 be
cau
se
 all the
 qua
litie
s (re
qui
red
 for the
 cre
atio
n of the
worl
d) ar
e reasonabl
y foun
d (onl
y in
 Brah
man)
 He must be
admit
ted to be th
e cause of th
e universe.
Sarv
a:
all;
Dharma:
 attribut
es, qualities;

Up
ap
atteh:
 because of the
reasonableness, because of being proved;
Cha:
 and, also.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
180

An
other rea
son to prove that
 Brah
man is the cause of the world
is brought for
ward.
The
ob jec tor
says:
Ma te rial
cause
un der goes
mod i fi ca ti
on
as
the ef

fect. Such a cause is en
dowed with the at
trib
utes. Brah
man
can
not be the ma
te
rial cause of the uni
verse as He is attributeless.
This Su
tra gives a suit

able an swer to this ob
jec
tion.
There is no real change in Brah
man but there is an ap
p
ar
ent
mod i fi ca ti
on
in
Brah man
on
ac count
of
His
in scru t
a ble
power
of
Maya.
Brah
man ap
pears as this uni
verse, just as rope ap
pears as
snake. All the at

trib utes needed in the cause for the cre
ation (such as
Om nip o tence,
Om ni science)
are
pos si ble
in
Brah man
on
ac count
of
the power of Maya.
 Hence, Brah
man is the ma
te
rial cause of this uni
-
verse through ap
p
ar
ent change. He is also the ef

fi cient cause of this
uni verse.
There
fore it is es
t
ab
lished that B
rah
man is the cause of the uni
-
verse. The V
edantic sys
tem founded upon t
he Up
anishads is not
open to any ob
jec
tion. Thus it
 fol
lows that the whole cre
ation pro
-
ceeds from Para Brah
man.
In the V
edantic the
ory as hith
erto dem
on
strated, v
iz., that
 Brah
-
man is the ma
te
rial and the ef

fi cient cause of the worldŠthe ob
jec
tion
al
leged by our op
po
nent
s such as dif

fer ence of char
ac
ter and the like
have been re
futed by
 the great T
eacher
. He brings to a con
clu
sion the
sec
tion prin
ci
p
ally de
voted t
o strengthen his own the
ory
. The chief
aim of the nex
t chap
ter will be to re
fute t
he opin
ions held by other
teach ers.
Thus ends the First Pada (
Sec
tion 1) of the Sec
ond Adhy
ay
a
(Chap
ter II) of the B
rahma Sutras or the V
edant
a Phi
los
o
phy
.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 1
181

CHAPTER II
SECTION 2
INTRODUCTION
In the First S
ec
tion of t
he Sec
ond Chap
ter Brah
man™
s
creatorship of the world has been es
t
ab
lished on the au
thor
ity of
 the
scrip
tures sup
ported by logic.
 All ar
gu
ment
s against Brah
man be
ing
the cause of the uni
verse have been re
futed.
In the pres
ent Sec
tion the S
utrakara or the framer of the S
utras
ex
am
ines the the
o
ries of cre
ation ad
vanced by other schools of
thought in v
ogue in his time.
 All the doc
trines of the ot
her schools are
t
aken up for ref
u
t
a
tion through rea
son
ing alone with
out ref
er
ence to
the au
thor
ity of
 the V
edas. Here he re
futes by rea
son
ing the Mat
ter
the
ory or the Pradhana th
e
ory of the S
ankhya phi
los
o
phy
, the A
tom
the
ory of the V
aiseshika phi
los
o
phy
, the mo
men
t
ary and the Ni
hil
is
tic
view of t
he Bud
dhist
s, the Jain the
ory of si
mul
t
a
neous ex
is
tence and
non-ex is tence,
the
Pasup
at
a
the ory
of
co or di nate
du al ity

and
the ory
of
en ergy
un aided
by
in tel li gence.
It has been shown in the last S
u
tra of the F
irst Sec
tion of t
he
Sec
ond Chap
ter that B
rah
man is en
dowed with all the at

trib utes
through Maya,
 such as Om
nip
o
tence, Om
ni
science, etc., f
or qual
i
fy
-
ing Him to be the cause of t
he world.
Now in Sec
tion 2 the ques
tion is t
aken up whether the Pradhana
of the S
ankhya phi
los
o
phy can sat
isfy all t
hose con
di
tions.
182

SYNOPSIS
I
T
o put all thi
ngs con
cisely in a nut

shell, Sri Vyasa Bhagavan re
-
futes in thi
s sec
tion all t
he doc
trines or the
o
ries prev
a
lent in his ti
me
and in
con
sis
tent wit
h the V
edant
a the
ory; vi
z., (1) The Sankhya t
he
-
ory of the P
radhana as the first cause. (2) Ref
u
t
a
tion of t
he ob
jec
tion
from the V
aiseshika stand poi
nt against the B
rah
man be
ing the First
Cause. (3) Ref
u
t
a
tion of t
he Atomic t
he
ory of the V
aiseshikas. (4) Ref
-
u
t
a
tion of t
he Bauddha Ide
al
ist
s and Ni
hil
ist
s. (5) Ref
u
t
a
tion of t
he
Bauddha Re
al
ist
s. (6) Ref
u
t
a
tion of t
he Jainas. (7) Ref
u
t
a
tion of t
he
Pasup
at
a doc
trine, t
hat God is only t
he ef

fi cient and not the m
a
te
rial
cause of the world. (8) Ref
u
t
a
tion of t
he Pancharatra or the
Bhagavat
a doc
trine that
 the soul orig
i
nates from the Lord,
 etc.
In the First S
ec
tion of t
he Sec
ond Chap
ter Brah
man™
s au
thor
-
ship of the world has been es
t
ab
lished on the au
thor
ity of
 the scrip
-
tures sup
ported by logic.
 The t
ask of the Sec
ond Pada or Sec
tion is to
re
fute by
 ar
gu
ment
s in
de
pend
ent of V
e
dic p
as
sages the more im
por
-
t
ant
philo soph i cal
the o ries
con cern ing
the
or i gin
of
the
uni verse
which
are con
trary to t
he V
edantic view
.
Adhikarana I:
 (Sutras 1-10) is di
rected against the Sankhy
as. It
aims at prov
ing that a non-in
tel
li
gent first cause such as the Pradhana
of the S
ankhyas is un
able to cre
ate and dis
pose.
Adhikaranas II and II
I:
 (Sutras 1
1-17) re
fute t
he V
aiseshika doc
-
trine that
 the world t
akes it
s or
i
gin from the at

oms which are set in mo -
tion by t
he Adrisht
a.
Adhikaranas IV and V
:
 are di
rected against var
i
ous schools of
Buddhistic
phi los o phy
.
Adhikarana IV
:
 (Sutras 18-27) re
futes the v
iew of Buddhisti
c Re
-
al
ist
s who main
t
ain the re
al
ity of
 an ex
ter
nal as well as an in
ter
nal
world.
Adhikarana V
:
 (Sutras 28-32) re
futes the v
iew of the
V
ijnanavadins or Buddhist
ic Ide
al
ist
s, ac
cord
ing to whom Ideas are
the only re
al
ity
. The last S
u
tra of the A
dhikarana re
futes the v
iew of
the Madhyam
ikas or Sunyavadins (Ni
hil
ist
s) who teach that ev
ery
-
thing is void,
 i.e.,
 that not
h
ing what

so ever is real.
Adhikarana VI:
 (Sutras 33-36) re
futes the doc
trine of t
he Jainas.
Adhikarana VII
:
 (Sutras 37-41) re
futes the P
asupat
a school
which teaches that the Lord is not t
he ma
te
rial but only
 the ef

fi cient or
op
er
a
tive cause of t
he world.
183

Adhikarana VII
I:
 (Sutras 42-45) re
futes the doc
trine of t
he
Bhagavat
as or Pancharatras.
II
In Sut
ras 1 to 10 the prin
ci
ple of Sankhya
 phi
los
o
phy is fur
ther
re
futed by
 rea
son
ing. Pradhana or blind mat

ter is in ert. It
 is in
sen
tient
or
non-in tel li gent
.
There
is
me thod i cal
ar range ment
in
the
cau sa tion
of this world. Hence it i
s not rea
son
able to sup
pose that blind mat

tercan have any in
cli
na
tion for t
he cre
ation of t
he world with
out the help
of
in tel li gence.
The Sankhya says that
 the in
ert Pradhana may be
come ac
tive
of it
s own ac
cord and spon
t
a
ne
ously p
ass into the st
ate of t
he world
and
un dergo
mod i fi ca ti
on
into
in tel lect,

ego ism,
mind,
T
anmatras,
etc., just
 as wa
ter flows in rivers spon
t
a
ne
ously
, rain from t
he clouds,
or milk from the ud
der to the calf.
 This ar
gu
ment of t
he Sankhya is un
-
ten
a
ble, be
cause the flow
ing of wa
ter or milk is di
rected by the in
tel
li
-
gence of the Su
preme Lord.
Ac
cord
ing to the S
ankhyas, there is no ex
ter
nal agent to urge
Pradhana into ac
tiv
ity or re
strain
ing from ac
tiv
ity
. Pradhana can work
quite
in de pend ently
.
Their
Purusha
is
al ways
in ac tive
and
in dif
 fer ent.
He is not an agent. Hence the con
ten
tion that
 Pradhana in pres
ence
of Purusha or S
pirit ac
quires a ten
dency to
wards ac
tion or cre
ation
can not
st
and.
The Sankhya ar
gues that Pradhana is by
 it

self turned into the
vis
i
ble world, just as grass eaten by a cow is it

self turned into milk.
This ar
gu
ment is ground
less as no such trans
for
ma
tion is found on
the p
art of the grass eaten by
 the bull. Hence, al
so, it is the wil
l of the
Su
preme Lord that brings about t
he change, not be
cause the cow has
eaten it.
 There
fore Pradhana by it

self can not be said to be the cause
of the world.
The Sankhya says that
 Purusha can di
rect the Pradhana or in
-
spire ac
tiv
ity i
n Pradhana though He has no ac
tiv
ity
, just as a lame
man can move by sit

ting on the shoul ders of a blind man and di
rect
his move
ment
s. The in
de
pend
ent and blind Pradhana,
 in con
junc
tion
with the p
as
sive but in
tel
li
gent Purusha, orig
i
nates the world. This ar
-
gu ment
also
is
un ten a ble
be cause
the
per fect
in ac tiv it
y
and
in dif
 fer
-
ence of Purusha and the ab
so
lute in
de
pend
ence of Pradhana can
not
be rec
on
ciled with each other
.
The Pradhana con
sist
s of three Gunas, vi
z., Sat
tva,
 Rajas and
T
amas. They are in a st
ate of equi
poise be
fore cre
ation. No Guna is
su
pe
rior or in
fe
rior to the other
. The Purusha is al
to
gether in
dif

fer ent.
He has no in
ter
est in bring
ing about the dis
tur
bance of equi
lib
rium of
the Pradhana. Cre
ation st
art
s when the equi
poise is up

set and oneGuna be
comes more pre
dom
i
nant than t
he other two. A
s there was in
the be
gin
ning of cre
ation no cause for the dis
tur
bance of the st
ate of
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
184

equi
poise, it was not pos
si
ble for Pradhana to be t
rans
formed into t
he
world.
Sutras 1
1 to 17 re
fute t
he Atomic t
he
ory of the V
aiseshika phi
-
los
o
phy where the in
di
vis
i
ble min
ute at
oms are st
ated to be t
he cause
of the world. I
f an atom has any
 p
art
s of an ap
pre
cia
ble mag
ni
tude,
then it can
not be an atom.
 Then it can be fur
ther di
vis
i
ble. If
 they are
with
out p
art
s of any ap
pre
cia
ble mag
ni
tude, as they
 are so de
scribed
in V
aiseshika phi
los
o
phy
, it is not
 pos
si
ble for such two p
artless at
oms
to pro
duce by their un
ion a sub
st
ance hav
ing any mag
ni
tude. Hence
com
pound sub
st
ances can never be formed by the com
bi
na
tion of at

-
oms. There
fore the V
aiseshika the
ory of orig
i
na
tion of t
he world from
in di vis i ble
at oms
is
un ten a ble.
The in
an
i
mate at
oms can have no ten
dency of them

selves tounite to
gether and co
here so as to form com
pounds. V
aiseshikas
hold that t
he mo
tion which is due to the un
seen prin
ci
ple (Adrisht
a),
joins the at
oms in which it re
sides to an
other atom.
 Adrisht
a is a la
tent
force of the sum t
o
t
al of pre
vi
ous deeds which waits t
o bear fruit in t
he
fu
ture. Thus the whole world orig
i
nates from at
oms.
As Adrisht
a is in
sen
tient it
 can
not act. I
t can
not re
side in the at
-
oms. It m
ust in
here in the soul. If
 the la
tent f
orce or Adrisht
a be an in
-
her
ent prop
erty of at

oms, the at oms will al
ways re
main united.
 Hence
there will be no dis
so
lu
tion and no chance for fresh cre
ation.
If t
he two at
oms unite to
t
ally or per
fectly
 the atomic st
ate will
con
tinue as there will be no in
crease in bulk. If in p
art, then at

oms willhave p
art
s. This is against the t
he
ory of the V
aiseshikas. Hence, the
the
ory of the V
aiseshikas that the world is caused by com
bi
na
tion of
at oms
is
un ten a ble.
The atomic the
ory in
volves an
other dif

fi culty
. If
 the at
oms are by
na
ture ac
tive,
 then cre
ation would be per
ma
nent. No Pralay
a or dis
-
so
lu
tion could t
ake place. If t
hey are by na
ture in
ac
tive,
 no cre
ation
could t
ake place. The dis
so
lu
tion would be per
ma
nent. For t
his rea
-
son also, the atomi
c doc
trine is un
ten
a
ble.
Ac
cord
ing to the V
aiseshika phi
los
o
phy
, the at

oms are said tohave col
our etc. That which has form,
 col
our etc., is gross, and im
per
-
ma
nent. Con
se
quently
, the at

oms must be gross and im per
ma
nent.
This con
tra
dict
s the the
ory of the V
aiseshikas that they are mi
n
ute
and
per ma nent.
If t
he re
spec
tive at

oms of the el e
ment
s also pos
sess the same
num
ber of qual
i
ties as the gross el
e
ment
s, then the at
om of air will
have one qual
ity
, an atom of
 earth will have f
our qual
i
ties. Hence an
atom of eart
h which pos
sesses four qual
i
ties will be big
ger in size. It
would not be an atom any
 lon
ger
. Hence the At
om the
ory of the
V
aiseshikas on the cau
sa
tion of t
he world does not st
and to rea
son in
any way
. This At
om the
ory is not ac
cepted by the V
edas.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
185

Sutras 18 to 32 re
fute t
he Buddhistic the
ory of moment
arism
(Kshanikavada) and Ni
hil
ism (Sunyav
ada). The V
aiseshikas are the
Re
al
ist
s (Sarvastitv
avadins). They
 ac
cept the re
al
ity of
 both the out

-
side world and the in
side world con
sist
ing re
spec
tivel
y of ex

ter nal ob
-
ject
s and con
scious
ness and feel
ings. The Saut
rantikas are the
ide
al
ist
s (V
ijnanavadins). They
 hold that t
hought alone is real. They
main
t
ain that ideas only
 ex
ist and the ex

ter nal ob
ject
s are in
ferred
from the ideas. T
he Y
ogacharas hold that ideas alone are real and
there is no ex
ter
nal world cor
re
spond
ing to these ideas. T
he ex
ter
nal
ob
ject
s are un
real like dreamy ob
ject
s. The Madhymi
kas main
t
ain
that ev
en the ideas them
selves are un
real and there is noth
ing that
ex
ist
s ex
cept the voi
d (Sunyam). T
hey are the Ni
hil
ist
s or
Sunyav
adins who hold that ev

ery thing is void and un
real. All of
 them
agree that ev
ery
thing is mo
men
t
ary
. Things of t
he pre
vi
ous mo
ment
do not ex
ist in the nex
t mo
ment.
Ac
cord
ing to the B
ud
dhist
s, at
oms and con
scious
ness are both
in
an
i
mate. There is no per
ma
nent in
tel
li
gence which can bring about
the ag
gre
ga
tion or which can guide the at
oms to unite int
o an ex
ter
nal
thing or to f
orm a con
tin
u
ous men
t
al phe
nom
ena. Hence the doc
trine
of this school of B
auddhas is un
ten
a
ble.
Ne
science etc., st
and in a causal re
la
tion to each other m
erely
.
They can
not be made to ac
count for the ex

is tence of the ag
gre
gates.
Ac
cord
ing to the B
uddhistic the
ory
, ev
ery
thing is mo
men
t
ary
. A
 thing
of the pres
ent mo
ment van
ishes in the next m
o
ment, when it
s suc
ces
-
sor man
i
fest
s. At t
he time of t
he ap
pear
ance of a sub
se
quent thing,
the pre
vi
ous thing al
ready van
ishes. Hence it is im
pos
si
ble for the
pre
vi
ous thing to be the cause of t
he sub
se
quent thing.
 Con
se
quently
the
the ory
is
un ten a ble.
The
Bud dhist
s
main t
ain
that
ex is tence
orig i nates
from
non -ex is
-
tence be
cause they hold that
 the ef

fect can not man
i
fest with
out the
de
struc
tion of t
he cause, the tree can
not ap
pear un
til the seed is de
-
stroyed. W
e al
ways per
ceive that
 the cause sub
sist
s in the ef

fect asthe thread sub
sist
s in the cloth. Hence the B
uddhistic view is in
cor
-
rect,
un rea son able
and
in ad mis si ble.
Even t
he p
ass
ing of cause into ef

fect in a se ries of suc
ces
sive
st
ates like ne
science, etc., can
not t
ake place un
less there is a co
or
di
-
nat
ing in
tel
li
gence. The Bud
dhist
s say that ev

ery thing has only a mo
-
men
t
ary ex
is
tence. Their school can
not bring about t
he si
mul
t
a
neous
ex
is
tence of two suc
ces
sive mo
ment
s. If t
he cause ex
ist
s till it
 p
asses
into the st
age of ef

fect, the the
ory of mo
men
t
ary ex
is
tence
(Kshanikavada) will van
ish.
Ac
cord
ing to the B
uddhistic view
, sal
va
tion or free
dom is at
-
t
ained when ig
no
rance is de
stroyed. I
g
no
rance is the false idea of
per
ma
nency in things which are mo
men
t
ary
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
186

The ig
no
rance can be an
ni
hi
lated by t
he adop
tion of some
means such as pen
ance, knowl
edge, etc.,
 (con
scious de
struc
tion), or
it may
 de
stroy it

self (spon t
a
ne
ity).
 But bot
h the al
ter
na
tives are de
fec
-
tive.
 Be
cause this an
ni
hi
la
tion of ig
no
rance can
not be at
t
ained by the
adop
tion of pen
ance or the like, be
cause the means like ev
ery other
thing is also mo
men
t
ary ac
cord
ing to the B
uddhistic view and is there
-
fore,
not
likely
to
pro duce
such
an ni hi la tion.

An ni hi la t
ion
can not
t
ake
place of it
s own ac
cord, for in that
 case all Buddhistic in
struc
tions, the
dis ci plines
and
meth ods
of
med i t
a tion
for
the
at t
ain ment
of
sal va tion
will be use
less.
The Bud
dhist
s do not re
cog
nise the ex
is
tence of Akasa. They
re
gard Akasa as a non-en
tity
. This is un
rea
son
able. Akasa has the
qual
ity of
 sound. It is also a dis
tinct en
tity
 like earth, wa
ter
, etc. I
f
Akasa be a non-en
tity
, then t
he en
tire world would be
come des
ti
tute
of sp
ace. Scrip
tural p
as
sages de
clare ﬁAkasa sprang from At
man.ﬂ
Hence Akasa is a real thing. It i
s a V
astu (ex
ist
ing ob
ject) and not
non-ex is tence.
If ev

ery thing is mo
men
t
ary
, the ex
periencer of some
thing must
also be mo
men
t
ary
. But
 the experiencer is not mo
men
t
ary be
cause
peo
ple have the m
em
ory of p
ast ex
pe
ri
ences. Mem
ory can t
ake place
in a man who has pre
vi
ously ex
pe
ri
enced it. He is con
nected with at
least two mo
ment
s. This cer
t
ainly re
futes the t
he
ory of mo
men
t
ari
-
ness.
A
 non-en
tity
 has not been ob
served to pro
duce en
tity
. There
fore
it does not st
and to rea
son to sup
pose non-en
tity
 to be the cause. The
world which is a re
al
ity i
s st
ated by t
he Bud
dhist
s to have arisen out of
non-en
tity
. This is ab
surd. A
 pot is never found t
o be pro
duced with
out
clay
. If
 ex
is
tence can come out of non-ex
is
tence, then any

thing maycome out of any

thing, be cause non-en
tity
 is one and the same in all
cases. A
 jack tree may come out of
 a mango seed. If
 an ex
ist
ing thing
can arise out of noth
ing, then an in
dif

fer ent and lazy man may
 also at
-
t
ain sal
va
tion with
out ef

forts. Eman
ci
p
a
tion may
 be at
t
ained like a
wind
fall. Rice will grow ev
en if the f
armer does not cul
ti
vate his f
ield.
The V
ijnanavadins say t
hat the ex

ter nal things have no ob
jec
-
tive
re al ity
.
Ev ery t
hing
is
an
idea
with out
any
re al ity
cor re spond ing
to
it. Thi
s is not cor
rect. The ex
ter
nal ob
ject
s are ac
tu
ally per
ceived by
senses of per
cep
tion. The ex

ter nal world can
not be non-ex
is
tent like
the horns of a hare.
The Bud
dhist Ide
al
ist
s say that per
cep
tion of t
he ex
ter
nal world
is like the dream. This is wrong. The con
scious
ness in dream de
-
pends on the pre
vi
ous con
scious
ness in the wake
ful st
ate, but
 the
con
scious
ness in the wake
ful st
ate does not de
pend on any
thing else
but on the ac
tual per
cep
tion by t
he sense. Fur
ther
, the dream ex

pe ri
-
ences be
come false as soon as one wakes up.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
187

The Bud
dhist Ide
al
ist
s hold that though an ex

ter nal thing does
not ac
tu
ally ex

ist, yet it
s im
pres
sions do ex
ist, and from t
hese im
pres
-
sions di
ver
si
ties of per
cep
tion and ideas like chair
, tree arise. This is
not pos
si
ble, as there can be no per
cep
tion of an ex

ter nal thing which
is it

self non-ex is
tent.
 If t
here be no per
cep
tion of an ex

ter nal thing,
how can it leave an im
pres
sion?
The men
t
al im
pres
sions can
not ex
ist be
cause the ego which re
-
ceives im
pres
sions is it

self mo men
t
ary in their v
iew
.
The Sunyav
ada or Ni
hil
ism of the B
ud
dhist
s which as
sert
s that
noth
ing ex
ist
s is fal
la
cious, be
cause it goes against ev
ery method of
proof, vi
z., per
cep
tion, in
fer
ence, tes
ti
mony or scrip
ture and anal
ogy
.
Sutras 33 to 36 re
fute t
he Jaina the
ory
. Ac
cord
ing to the Jaina
the
ory
, ev
ery
thing is at once ex
ist
ing and non-ex
ist
ing. Now this view
can
not be ac
cepted, be
cause in one sub
st
ance it is not pos
si
ble that
con tra dic tory
qual i ties
should
ex ist
si mul t
a neously
.
No
one
ever
sees
the same ob
ject to be hot and cold at
 the same time.
 Si
mul
t
a
neous
ex
is
tence of light
 and dark
ness in one place is im
pos
si
ble.
Ac
cord
ing to the Jaina doc
trine heaven and li
b
er
a
tion may
 ex
ist
or may not ex

ist. We can
not ar
rive at any
 def
i
nite knowl
edge. There is
no cer
t
ainty about
 any
thing.
The Jainas hold that t
he soul is of the size of the body
. As the
bod
ies of dif

fer ent classes of crea
tures are of dif

fer ent sizes, the soul
of a man t
ak
ing the body of
 an el
e
phant on ac
count of his p
ast deeds
will not be able t
o fill up t
he body of an el
e
phant. The soul of
 an el
e
-
phant will not hav
e suf

fi cient sp
ace in the body of
 an ant. The st
a
bil
ity
of the di
men
sions of the soul is im
p
aired. The Jaina the
ory it

self fallsto the ground.
Sutras 37 to 41 re
fute t
he the
ory of the f
ol
low
ers of the Pasup
at
a
sys
tem. The f
ol
low
ers of this school re
cog
nise God as the ef

fi cient or
the op
er
a
tive cause. They
 re
cog
nise the pri
mor
dial mat
ter as the ma
-
te
rial cause of the world. This v
iew is con
trary to t
he view of t
he Sruti
or V
edant
a where Brah
man is st
ated to be bot
h the ef

fi cient and the
ma
te
rial cause of the world. Hence, the t
he
ory of Pasup
at
as can
not
be ac
cepted.
God, in thei
r view
, is pure, with
out at
trib
utes, and ac
tiv
ity
. Hence
there can be no con
nec
tion be
tween Him and the in
ert pri
mor
dial
mat
ter
. He can
not urge and reg
u
late mat
ter to work. T
o say that God
be
comes the ef

fi cient cause of the world by put
t
ing on a body is also
fal
la
cious be
cause all bod
ies are per
ish
able. God is eter
nal ac
cord
ing
to the P
asupat
as, and so can
not have a per
ish
able body and be
come
de pend ent
on
this
phys i cal
in stru ment.
If it
 be said that the Lord rules the P
radhana, etc.,
 just as the Jiva
rules the senses which are also not per
ceived, t
his can
not be; be
-
cause the Lord also would ex
pe
ri
ence plea
sure and pain,
 hence
would for
feit His God
head. He would be sub
ject to births and deat
hs,
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
188

and de
void of Om

ni science. He will lose all His su
prem
acy
. This sort
of God is not ad
mit
ted by t
he Pasup
at
as.
Sutras 42 to 45 re
fute t
he doc
trine of t
he Bhagavat
as or the
Pancharatra doc
trine. A
c
cord
ing to this school, t
he Lord is the ef

fi -
cient as well as the ma
te
rial cause of the uni
verse. This is in quite
agree
ment with t
he Srutis. A
n
other p
art of the sy
s
tem is open to ob
-
jec
tion. The doc
trine that
 Sankarshana or the Jiva is born of
V
aasudeva, Prady
umna or mind from S
ankarshana, Aniruddha or
Ahamkara from Prady
umna is in
cor
rect. Such cre
ation is not pos
si
-
ble. If
 there is such birth, if t
he soul be cre
ated it would be sub
ject to
de
struc
tion and hence there could be no lib
er
a
tion.
The Bhagavat
as may say that
 all the V
yuhas or forms are
V
aasudeva, the Lord hav

ing in tel
li
gence, Lord
ship, strength, power
,
etc., and are f
ree from fault
s and im
per
fec
tions. In t
his case there will
be more than one Isvara or Lord. Thi
s goes against their own doc
trine
ac
cord
ing to which there is only one real es
sence, the holy
V
aasudeva. Fur
ther
, there are also in
con
sis
ten
cies or man
i
fold con
-
tra
dic
tions in the sys
tem. There are p
as
sages which are con
tra
dic
tory
to the V
edas. It con
t
ains words of de
pre
ci
a
tion of t
he V
edas. Hence,
the doc
trine of t
he Bhagavat
as can
not be ac
cepted.
Rachananup
ap
atty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 1 (Sutras 1-10)
Refut
ation of t
he Sankhyan theory of the
Pradhana as the cause of the world
Rachananup
ap
attescha nanumanam
II.
2.1 (172)
That which is inferre
d (by the
 Sankhyas
, viz., the Pra
dhana),
cannot be the cause (of the world) because
 (in th
at case it is)
not pos
sible (t
o account
 for
 the) desig
n or or
derly a
rr
angement
(fou
nd in
 the
 cre
atio
n).
Rachana:
 construction, the design in creation;

Anup
ap
atteh:
 on
account of the impossibili
ty;

Cha:
 and;
Na:
 not;
Anumanam:
 that
which is inferred, what is arrived at by
 inference, i.e.
, the P
radhana of
the Sankhyas.
An ar
gu
ment is brought for
ward to the ef

fect that the Pradhana
of the S
ankhyas is not the cause of the world.
The main ob
ject of the V
edant
a Sutras is to show the pur
pose of
the rev
e
la
tion of t
ruth in the V
edas. They aim al
so at re
fut
ing the
wrong doc
trines in the other sy
s
tems of phi
los
o
phy
. In t
he pre
vi
ous
por
tion the doc
trine of t
he Sankhyas has been re
futed here and there
on the au
thor
ity of
 the scrip
tures. Sut
ras 1-10 re
fute it
 through log
i
cal
rea son ing.
Pradhana or blind mat
ter is in
ert. It
 is an in
sen
tient en
tity
. It
 does
not pos
sess the in
tel
li
gence that is needed for cre
at
ing such a mul
ti
-
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
189

far i ous,
elab o rate,
won der ful,
or derly
,
me thod i cal
and
well-de signed
uni
verse as this. It
 can
not bring into be
ing the man
i
fold or
der
li
ness of
the cos
mos. No one has ever seen a beau
ti
ful p
al
ace con
structed by
the for
tu
itous com
ing to
gether of bricks, mor
t
ar
, etc.,
 with
out the ac
-
tive
co op er a tion
of
in tel li gent

agent
s
like
the
ar chi tect
s,
ma sons
and
the rest. Hence, Pradhana can
not be the cause of thi
s world.
Clay can
not change it

self into a pot.
The rea
son
ing that P
radhana is the cause of the world be
cause
it has in it pl
ea
sure, p
ain, dull
ness, which are found in the world is not
valid,
 be
cause it is not pos
si
ble for an in
sen
tient en
tity
 to cre
ate the
won
der
ful, or
derly uni
verse. More
over
, how do you say t
hat plea
sure
and p
ain and dull
ness are found in the out

side world? The ex ter
nal
ob
ject
s are a fac
tor in plea
sure and pain which are in
ter
nal ex
pe
ri
-
ences. More
over
, there can be plea
sure and pain ev
en ir
re
spec
tive of
the ex
ter
nal ob
ject
s. How can you as
cribe them to an in
sen
tient en
tity
(Achet
ana)?
Phys
i
cal ob
ject
s like flow
ers, fruit
s, etc., no doubt
 have the pres
-
ence in them of t
he qual
ity of
 pro
duc
ing plea
sure. But t
he feel
ing of
plea
sure is al
to
gether an in
ter
nal feel
ing. W
e can
not say that
 flow
ers
and fruit
s have the na
ture of plea
sure in them, though t
hey ex
cite
plea
sure in man. Plea
sure is al
to
gether an at
trib
ute of t
he soul and
not of mat

ter or Pradhana. Hence, mat

ter or Pradhana can not be said
to have t
he qual
ity of
 plea
sure, etc.
&
Prav
rittescha
II.
2.2 (173)
And on a
ccount
 of t
he (imp
ossibi
lit
y of)
 acti
vit
y.
Prav
ritteh:
 because of the activi
ty
, of a t
endency;
Cha:
 and (it has the
force of ‚only
™
 here).
This is an ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1.
Pradhana (blind mat
ter) can
not be the cause of the world,
 be
-
cause it is also im
pos
si
ble for it t
o have an in
cli
na
tion for cre
ation.
How does Pradhana in a st
ate of equi
lib
rium of it
s three Gunas
be
come dy
namic and cre
ative? I
t can
not dis
turb it
s own equi
poise.
The de
sire or ten
dency to cre
ate can
not be as
cribed to the in
ert
Pradhana. The in
ert char
iot can
not move by
 it

self. It is only the in
tel
li
-
gent char
i
o
teer who moves the char
iot by di

rect ing the mov
e
ment
s of
the horse. Mud by i
t

self is never seen to cre ate a jar with
out the
agency of an in
tel
li
gent pot
ter
. From what is seen we de
ter
mine what
is not seen. W
e pro
ceed from the known to the un
known. How then do
you prove that
 Pradhana which is in
sen
tient is self
-mov
ing? Hence
the in
ert Pradhana can
not be the cause of the u
ni
verse, be
cause the
ac
tiv
ity t
hat is nec
es
sary for the cre
ation of t
he uni
verse would be im
-
pos
si
ble in that case. T
here must be a di
rec
tive i
n
tel
li
gent Be
ing or
En
tity
 for that pur
pose.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
190

The
ac tiv it
y
must
be
at trib ut
ed
to
the
di rec tive
in tel li gence
rather
than to t
he in
ert mat
ter or Pradhana. That
 which set
s Pradhana or
mat
ter in mo
tion is the real agent
. Ev

ery ac tiv
ity i
s seen as the re
sult
of an in
tel
li
gent agent.
 In
ert mat
ter or Pradhana there
fore has no
agency
. Mat
ter or Pradhana has no self-ini
ti
ated ac
tiv
ity of
 it
s own.
The ob
jec
tor may say ﬁI
 do not see Chet
ana (soul) ac
tive and
that I
 see only the ac
tiv
ity of
 the body
.ﬂ W
e re
ply that
 there is no ac
tiv
-
ity wit
h
out the soul.
He may again say t
hat the soul, be
ing pure con
scious
ness, can
-
not have ac
tiv
ity
. W
e re
ply that
 the soul can in
duce ac
tiv
ity
, though not

self-ac
tive,
 just as a lode
stone or mag
net though unmov
ing can make
iron move. A
 ma
te
rial ob
ject though fi
xed causes ac
tiv
ity i
n our
senses.
The ob
jec
tor may again say
 that as the soul is one and in
fi
nite,
there is no pos
si
bil
ity of
 cau
sa
tion of ac
tiv
ity
. W
e re
ply that
 it causes
ac
tiv
ity i
n the names and forms cre
ated by May
a ow
ing to A
vidya.
Hence, mo
tion can be rec
on
ciled with the doc
trine of an in
tel
li
-
gent First Cause but not wit
h the doc
trine of a non-in
tel
li
gent first
cause (Pradhana of the Sankhyas).
n`m
o@å~wd
…oV² VÌ
&
Pay
o™mbu
v
acchet t
atra™pi
II.
2.3 (174)
If it be said (that th
e Pradhana moves or spontaneou
sly
modif
ies herself
 int
o the var
ious pr
oducts)
 like mil
k or w
ater
(without the
 guida
nce
 of any inte
llige
nce
), (we re
ply that) the
re
also (it is du
e to inte
lligence
).
Pay
o™mbuv
at:
 like milk and water;
Chet:
 if;
T
atra:
 there, in t
hose
cases;
Api:
 even, also.
 (
Pay
ah:
 milk;
Ambuv
at:
 like water
.)
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is con
tin
ued.
If t
he ob
jec
tor says that t
here could be self-ac
tiv
ity of
 na
ture as
in milk or wa
ter
, we re
ply that
 even then t
here is the op
er
a
tion of an in
-
tel li gent

agent.
The Sankhya says that
 the in
ert Pradhana may be
come ac
tive
of it
s own ac
cord and un
dergo mod
i
fi
ca
tion into i
n
tel
lect, ego
ism,
mind, T
anmatra, et
c., just as wa
ter flows in rivers spon
t
a
ne
ously
, rain
from the clouds or milk from t
he ud
der to the calf.
This is re
futed by
 the lat
ter p
art of Su
tra ‚
T
atra Api
™, even t
here.
Even t
he flow
ing of wa
ter or milk is di
rected by the in
tel
li
gence of the
Su
preme Lord. This we in
fer from the ex

am ple of char
iot, et
c. W
e may
not see the in
tel
li
gent driver of t
he char
iot, but
 we in
fer his ex
is
tence
from the mo
tion of t
he car
.
The scrip
tures also say
, ﬁHe who dwells in the wa
ter
, who rules
the wa
ter from withi
nﬂ (Bri. Up. II
I.7.
4). ﬁBy t
he com
mand of that
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
191

Akshara, O Gargi! some rivers fl
ow to the eastﬂ (Bri.
 Up. III
.8.9). E
v
-
ery
thing in thi
s world is di
rected by the Lord.
Fur
ther the cow is an in
tel
li
gent crea
ture. She l
oves her calf, and
makes her milk flow by her wish. The mil
k is in ad
di
tion drawn forth by
the suck
ing of the calf
. The flow of
 wa
ter de
pends on the down
ward
slop
ing of the eart
h.
ì`{Vao
H$mZdp
ñWVoü
mZnojËdmV
V
y
atirekanav
asthiteschanapekshatv
at
II.
2.4 (175)
And b
ec
ause
 (the P
radhana) is
 not de
pe
nde
nt (on anything),
th
ere b
ein
g n
o ext
ern
al
 ag
ent
 bes
id
es i
t (
it
 ca
nn
ot
 be a
ct
iv
e).
V
y
atirekanav
asthiteh:
 There being no external agency
 besides it;
Cha:
 and also;
Anapekshatv
at:
 because it is not dependent.
(
V
y
atireka:
 an external agent
;
Anav
asthiteh:
 from non-existence,
 as
it does not ex
ist.)
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is con
tin
ued.
Ac
cord
ing to the S
ankhyas, there is no ex
ter
nal agent to urge
Pradhana into ac
tiv
ity
, or re
strain from ac
tiv
ity
. Their Purusha is in
dif

-
fer
ent, nei
ther moves to,
 nor re
strains from, ac
tion. He is not an
agent. He is un
re
spon
sive to t
he first stim
u
lus for st
art
ing the pro
cess
of cre
ation. Hence, t
here is no agency to dis
turb the pri
mor
dial equi
-
lib
rium. There
fore, the P
radhana of the Sankhy
as can
not be the First
Cause of the world.
The st
ate in which the three Gunas are in a st
ate of equi
poise is
called Pradhana by th
e Sankhyas. Ac
cord
ing to the S
ankhyas, no
con
trol
ling sen
tient power op
er
ates on the Pradhana.
 Purusha is
st
atic and qui
es
cent.
There
fore, Pradhana may
 evolve i
n one way now and in an
other
way af

ter wards or may not evolv
e at all, as it
 is not con
trolled by any
di
rect
ing and rul
ing In
tel
li
gence. But t
he Su
preme Lord is Om
ni
scient
and Om
nip
o
tent.
 He has per
fect con
trol over May
a. He can cre
ate or
not cre
ate as He pleases.
The Pradhana of t
he Sankhyas is in
ert, so it can
not of it

self start
to be ac
tive;
 or when it is set in mo
tion it can hardly
 stop to be ac
tive of
it

self. Hence, the Sankhyas can
not ex
plain cre
ation and dis
so
lu
tion
when there is no di
rect
ing or rul
ing in
tel
li
gence. All ot
her prin
ci
ples
are only ef

fects of the Pradhana.
 There
fore, they
 can
not ex
er
cise any
in
flu
ence on it. Hence, the t
he
ory of the S
ankhyas is self-con
tra
dic
-
tory
.
AÝ`Ìm^mdm…
 Z V¥U
m{XdV²
Any
atrabhav
accha na trinadi
v
at
II.
2.5 (176)
And (it can) n
ot (be said that th
e Pradhana modifies itself
spontaneously) like grass, etc.,
 (which
 turn in
to milk), because
of its absence e
lsewhere (than in th
e female
 animals).
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
192

Any
atra:
 elsewhere, in the other case, elsewhere than in cows;
Abhavat:
 because of the absence;
Cha:
 and, also;
Na:
 not;
T
rinadiv
at:
 like the grass etc.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is con
tin
ued.
The word ‚cha™, and, has the f
orce of ‚only™.
The ob
jec
tor says that as grass be
comes milk, so Pradhana
may evol
ve into t
he world. But does grass be
come milk of it
s own
power? No. If so, t
ry to pro
duce milk from grass. A
 cow alone con
vert
s
grass into milk. Does a bull do so?
The
spon t
a ne ous
mod i fi ca ti
on
of
the
Pradhana
is
not
pos si ble.
Grass is not changed into milk spon
t
a
ne
ously
. It
 is con
verted int
o milk
only when eaten by
 cows but not by the bul
ls. Here also it is the will of
the Su
preme Lord that brings about t
he change, not be
cause the cow
has eaten it.
The il
lus
tra
tion or anal
ogy is use
less. It can
not st
and. The ar
gu
-
ment of t
he Sankhyas is not sound. Hence, t
he Pradhana™
s un
der
go
-
ing
mod i fi ca ti
on
of
it
 self
can not
be
ac cepted.
The
spon t
a ne ous
mod
i
fi
ca
tion of P
radhana can
not be proved from t
he in
st
ances of
grass and the like.
Aä`wn
J_o@ß`W
m©^m
dmV
Abhy
up
agame™py
arthabhavat
II.
2.6 (177)
Eve
n if we ad
mit (the Sa
nkhya p
ositio
n with regard
 to the
spont
aneous modif
icat
ion of
 the Pr
adhan
a, i
t can
not be t
he
cause of the universe
) because
 of the absence o
f any purpose.
Abhy
up
agame:
 accepting, admit
ting, t
aking for granted;
Api:
 even;
Artha:
 purpose;
Abhavat:
 because of the absence.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is con
tin
ued.
Even t
hough we ad
mit for t
he sake of ar
gu
ment that
 the
Pradhana is spon
t
a
ne
ously ac
tive,
 it will lead t
o a con
tra
dic
tion in
their phi
los
o
phy
. If
 the Pradhana is spon
t
a
ne
ously ac
tive,
 if it i
s ca
p
a
-
ble of an in
her
ent ten
dency for mod
i
fi
ca
tion, mo
tion or change, it
s ac
-
tiv
ity can
not have any
 pur
pose. This will con
tra
dict the v
iew of the
Sankhyas that
 the mod
i
fi
ca
tion of t
he Pradhana is for the ex

pe ri
ence
or en
joy
ment (Bhoga) and re
lease of the soul (Moksha).
There is no en
joy
ment to be en
joyed by t
he ever-per
fect
Purusha (or Soul). If
 he could en
joy
, how could he ever be
come free
from en
joy
ment? He is al
ready free. He is al
ready in a st
ate of be
at
i
-
tude. A
s He is per
fect, He can have no de
sire.
The in
sen
tient P
radhana can
not have a de
sire to evolv
e. So t
he
sat
is
fac
tion of a de
sire can
not be con
sid
ered as the pur
pose of ac
tiv
-
ity of
 the Pradhana. I
f you say t
hat evo
lu
tion must be pos
tu
lated be
-
cause
cre ative
power
would
be come
in op er a tive
oth er wise,
we
re ply
that in t
hat case cre
ative power will be al
ways op
er
a
tive and t
here
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
193

could be no at
t
ain
ment of f
ree
dom from it
 by the at

tain
ment of be
at
i
-
tude.
It is, t
here
fore, im
pos
si
ble to main
t
ain that t
he Pradhana be
-
comes ac
tive f
or the pur
pose of the soul. I
t can
not be the cause of the
uni verse.
nwéfmí_d{
X{V MoV²
Purushasm
av
aditi chet t
athapi
II.
2.7 (178)
If it
 be said (t
hat
 the Pur
usha or
 Soul ca
n dir
ect or m
ove the
Pradhana) as t
he (lame) man can direct a blind man,
 or as the
magne
t (move
s the iro
n), eve
n then (the
 difficulty c
annot be
overcome
).
Purusha:
 a person;
Asma:
 a lodestone, a magnet
;
Va
t
:
 like;
Iti:
 thus;
Chet:
 if;
T
athapi:
 even then,
 still.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is con
tin
ued.
The Sankhyas say that
 Purusha can di
rect the Pradhana or in
-
spire ac
tiv
ity i
n Pradhana, though He has no ac
tiv
ity
, just as a lame
man can move by sit

ting on the shoul ders of a blind man and di
rect
his move
ment
s or just as a mag
net at
tract
s iron. But t
hese il
lus
tra
-
tions are not apt.
 A
 lame man speaks and di
rect
s the blind man. T
he
blind man, t
hough in
ca
p
a
ble of see
ing, has the ca
p
ac
ity of
 un
der
-
st
and
ing those in
struc
tions given by
 the lame man and act
ing upon
them. B
ut Purusha is per
fectly
 in
dif

fer ent. He has no kind of ac
tiv
ity at
all. Hence, He can
not do that
 with re
gard to the Pradhana.
More
over
, the lame and
 the blind are both con
scious en
ti
ties
and the iron and the mag
net are both in
sen
tient mat

ter. Con
se
-
quently
, the in
st
ances given are not to t
he point. A
c
cord
ing to the
Sankhyas the Pradhana is in
de
pend
ent. Hence, it
 is not right to say
that it
 de
pends on the prox
im
ity of
 the Purusha for it
s ac
tiv
ity
, just as
the iron de
pends on the mag
net for it
s mo
tion. A
 mag
net at
tract
s
when the iron is brought near
. The prox
im
ity of
 the mag
net to t
he iron
is not per
ma
nent. I
t de
pends on a cer
t
ain ac
tiv
ity and t
he ad
just
ment
of the mag
net in a cer
t
ain po
si
tion. B
ut no one brings the Purusha
near Pradhana. If
 Purusha is al
ways near
, then cre
ation will be et
er
-
nal. There will be no lib
er
a
tion at all
.
The Purusha and the Pradhana are al
to
gether sep

a rate and in
-
de pend ent.
Pradhana
is
non-in tel li gent
,
in ert
and
in de pend ent.
Purusha is in
tel
li
gent and in
dif

fer ent. No one else (a third prin
ci
ple)
ex
ist
s to bring them to
gether
. Hence there can be no con
nec
tion be
-
tween them.
There could be no cre
ative ac
tiv
ity at
 all ac
cord
ing to the doc
-
trine of t
he Sankhyas. I
f there could be such ac
tiv
ity
, there could be no
fi
nal re
lease as the cause of cre
ation could never cease.
In V
edant
a, Brah
man which is the cause of the uni
verse is in
dif

-
fer
ent but He is en
dowed with at
trib
utes and ac
tiv
ity t
hrough Maya.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
194

He is char
ac
ter
ised by non-ac
tiv
ity i
n
her
ent in His own na
ture and at
the same time by
 mov
ing power in
her
ent in May
a. So He be
comes
the Cre
ator
. He is in
dif

fer ent by na
ture and ac
tive by
 Maya. Hence,
His cre
ative power is well ex

plained. He is su pe
rior to the Purusha of
the Sankhyas.
A{ﬁËdm
Zwnn
Angitv
anup
ap
attescha
II.
2.8 (179)
And again (t
he Pradhana cannot be active) because
 the
relat
ion of
 prin
cipal
 (and s
ubordin
ate mat
ter)
 is im
possibl
e
(b
etw
een t
he t
hr
ee Gun
as
).
Angitvanup
ap
atteh:
 on account of the impossibili
ty of
 the relation of
princip
al (and subordinate);
Cha:
 and, also. (
Angitva:
 the relation of
being the princip
al, being preponderant;

Anup
ap
atteh:
 on account of
the impossibilit
y and unreasonableness).
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is con
tin
ued.
The Pradhana has been de
fined to be t
he equi
lib
rium of the
three Gunas. The Pradhana con
sist
s of three Gunas, vi
z., Sat
tva,
Rajas and T
amas. Three Gunas are in
de
pend
ent of each other
. They
are in a st
ate of equi
poise be
fore cre
ation. I
n the st
ate of P
radhana no
Guna is su
pe
rior or in
fe
rior to the other
. Ev

ery one of them is equal to
the other and con
se
quently t
he re
la
tion of sub
or
di
nate and prin
ci
p
al
could not ex
ist then. T
he Purusha is al
to
gether in
dif

fer ent. He has no
in
ter
est in bring
ing about the dis
tur
bance of equi
lib
rium of the
Pradhana. Cre
ation st
art
s when the equi
poise is up

set and one Gunabe
comes more pre
dom
i
nant than t
he other two. A
s there ex
ist
s no ex
-
tra
ne
ous prin
ci
ple to stir up the G
unas, the pro
duc
tion of t
he Great
Prin
ci
ple and the other ef

fects which would re
quire for it
s op
er
a
tive
cause a non-bal
anced st
ate of t
he Gunas is im
pos
si
ble. Equi
poise
can
not be dis
turbed with
out any ex

ter nal force. The Gunas are ab
so
-
lutely
 in
de
pend
ent when they are in a st
ate of equi
lib
rium. They
 can
-
not t
ake of them
selves a sub
sid
iary po
si
tion to an
other Guna with
out
los ing
their
in de pend ence.
Hence,
cre ation
would
be
im pos si ble.
This Su
tra says that such pre
pon
der
ance is not pos
si
ble. The
Sankhyas can
not ex
plain why should one Guna pre
pon
der
ate over
the other
. Hence, on ac
count of the im

pos si
bil
ity of
 such pre
pon
der
-
ance of one over the ot
her Gunas, Pradhana can
not be ac
cepted to
be the cause of the world.
AÝ`WmZ
w{_
Vm¡ M k
e{º$
{d`moJmV²
Any
athanumit
au cha jnasaktiv
iy
ogat
II.
2.9 (180)
Eve
n if it b
e i
nfe
rred
 othe
rwise
 on a
cco
unt o
f the
 Prad
hana
being devoid of
 the pow
er of i
ntell
igence (t
he oth
er objecti
ons
to the Pradhana being the cause of the universe
 remain in
force
).
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
195

Any
atha:
 otherwise, in other ways;

Anumit
au:
 if it be i
nferred, in
case of inference;
Cha:
 even, and;

Jnasakti:
 power of intelligence;
V
iy
ogat:
 because of being destitut
e of, because of dissociation.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is con
tin
ued.
Even if
 the ob
jec
tor pos
tu
lates such power of mod
i
fi
ca
tion as
be ing
in her ent
in
Pradhana,
the
in ap pro pri ate ness
will
con tinue
be
-
cause of the insentiency or non-in
tel
li
gence of the Pradhana.
The Sankhya says: W
e do not ac
knowl
edge the Gunas to be
char ac ter ised
by
ab so lute
in de pend ence,
irrelativit
y
and
unchangeableness. W
e in
fer the char
ac
ter
is
tics of the Gunas from
those of their ef

fects. W
e pre
sume that th
eir na
ture must be such as to
make the pro
duc
tion of t
he ef

fects pos
si
ble. The Gunas have some
char ac ter is tics,
dif
 fer ent
at trib ut
es
and
mys te ri ous
pow ers
in her ent
in
them like unst
ability
. Con
se
quently t
he Gunas them
selves are able to
en
ter into a st
ate of in
equal
ity
, even while t
hey are in a st
ate of equi
-
poise. Even i
n that case we re
ply
, the ob
jec
tions st
ated above which
were founded on the im
pos
si
bil
ity of
 an or
derly ar
range
ment of t
he
world, etc.,
 re
main in force on ac
count of the P
radhana be
ing de
void
of the power of in
tel
li
gence. As Pradhana is in
sen
tient it
 has not the
power of self-con
scious
ness. Be
ing thus des
ti
tute of
 it, it
 has not the
idea of any pl
an or de
sign. It can
not say as an in
tel
li
gent en
tity
 would
say
, ﬁLet me cre
ate the world in such and such a way
.ﬂ A
 house can
never be built by
 mere bricks and mor
t
ar with
out the su
per
vi
sion and
ac
tive agency
 of the ar
chi
tect and ma
sons. Even so, cre
ation never
pro
ceeds from dead mat
ter or Pradhana. With
out the di
rec
tive ac
tion
of in
tel
li
gence, the Gunas, how
ever won
der
ful in thei
r pow
ers and at
-
trib
utes, can
not of t
hem
selves cre
ate the uni
verse.
On ac
count of lack of in
tel
li
gence the ob
jec
tions, founded on de
-
sign etc., in t
he uni
verse and that it
 would lead to con
tin
u
ous cre
ation,
come in the way of
 ac
cept
ing the Pradhana as the cause of t
he uni
-
verse (V
ide Sutras 1, 4 and 7).
{dà{
VfoY
m…mg_Ä
Og_²
V
ipratishedh
acchasamanjasam
II.
2.10 (181)
And mor
ever (th
e Sankh
ya doct
rin
e) is object
ionabl
e on
account of its cont
radictions.
V
ipratishedhat:
 because of contradiction;
Cha:
 also, and;
Asamanjasam
:
 inconsistent, objecti
onable, not harmonious,
untenable.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is con
cluded.
Fur
ther
, the S
ankhya doc
trine is in
con
sis
tent be
cause there are
var i ous
con tra dic tions
in
the
Sankhya
phi los o phy
.
Some tim
es
the
senses are said to be eleven and again they are said t
o be seven. It
some
times says that
 the T
anmatras come from Mahat and some
-
times that
 they come f
rom Ahamkara. Some
times it say
s that there
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
196

are three Ant
ahkaranas. Some
times it say
s that there is only
 one
Ant
ahkarana.
More
over
, their doc
trine con
tra
dict
s Sruti which teaches that t
he
Lord is the cause of the uni
verse, and Smrit
i based on Sruti. F
or these
rea
sons also the Sankhya sys
tem is ob
jec
tion
able. It
 can
not be ac
-
cepted.
Here the Sankhya again brings a coun
ter-charge. He says ﬁY
ou
also have got such in
ap
pro
pri
ate
ness in your doc
trine.ﬂ He asks
whether if Brah
man is cause and ef

fect, there could be any lib
er
a
tion
from ef

fects and whether scrip
ture af

firm ing lib
er
a
tion will not
 be
come
use
less. He ar
gues ﬁfire can
not be
come free from heat and l
ight or
wa
ter free from wav
es. Only when there is sep

a rate
ness of cause and
ef

fect, there can be any mean
ing in lib
er
a
tion.ﬂ
W
e re
ply that
 even the ob
jec
tor must ad
mit that
 Purusha be
ing
by na
ture pure, can
not be dis
turbed and that di
s
tur
bance is due to
A
vidya and i
s not ab
so
lutely
 real. That is our po
si
tion too.
 But y
ou give
A
vidya a st
ate of per
ma
nence. Con
se
quently ev
en if Purusha get
s
free from it
, there is no surety t
hat such sep
a
ra
tion will be per
ma
nent.
W
e pos
tu
late only
 one Be
ing. All
 ef

fects are only rel
a
tive and can
not,
there fore,
af
 fect
the
ab so lute
re al ity
.
Mahaddirghadhikaranam: T
opic 2
Refut
ation of t
he V
aiseshika view
_hÔrK©
dÛm õñ
dn[a_ÊS
>bmä`m_
Mahaddirg
hav
adv
a hrasv
ap
arimand
alabhy
am
II.
2.1
1 (182)
(The wo
rld m
ay o
rigina
te fro
m Bra
hman)
 as the
 gre
at and
 the
long
 origi
nate
 from the
 sho
rt and
 the
 atom
ic.
Mahat dirghavat:
 like the great and the l
ong;
Va
:
 or;
Hrasv
ap
arimand
alabhy
am:
 from the short and t
he atomic.
The atomic the
ory of the V
aiseshikas that form
less, in
di
vis
i
ble
at
oms en
ter into t
he com
po
si
tion of t
he world is now re
futed.
The sage Kanada is the founder of
 the V
aiseshika phi
los
o
phy
.
He holds all ob
ject
s which have any shape or form as per
ish
able and
they are all m
ade of min
ute, in
di
vis
i
ble, form
less and im
mu
t
a
ble p
ar
ti
-
cles known as at
oms (Anu). These at
oms are con
sid
ered to be the
cause of the world. The at
oms are of four kinds, viz.
, the at

oms ofearth, the at

oms of wa ter
, the at

oms of fire and the at
oms of air
. These
at
oms ex
ist dis
tinct from one an
other with
out any shape or form.
 At
the be
gin
ning of cre
ation, one at
om (a monad) unites with an
other
and forms a dyad, an ag
gre
gate of t
wo at
oms. The dyad (dv
yanu)
unites with an
other atom and f
orms a triad, an ag
gre
gate of t
hree at
-
oms, and so on. Thus a vis
i
ble uni
verse is formed.
The V
aiseshikas ar
gue thus: The qual
i
ties which in
here in the
sub
st
ance which con
sti
tutes the cause pro
duces qual
i
ties of the
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
197

same kind in the sub
st
ance which forms the ef

fect. White cloth is pro
-
duced from a cloth of a dif

fer ent col
our
. Con
se
quently
, when the in
tel
-
li
gent Brah
man is t
aken as the cause of the uni
verse, we should find
in
tel
li
gence in
her
ent in the ef

fect also, viz., the uni

verse. But this is not
so. Hence, the in
tel
li
gent Brah
man can
not be the cause of the uni

-
verse.
The Sutrakara or the au
thor of the S
utras shows that this rea
-
son
ing is fal
la
cious on the ground of the sys
tem of V
aiseshikas them
-
selves.
The Sankhya phi
los
o
phy has been re
futed in S
utras 1-10. Now
the V
aiseshika sys
tem is t
aken up in Sutras 1
1-17 and re
futed.
 The in
-
con
sis
tency in t
he orig
i
na
tion of an ag
gre
gate of t
he three and of four
at
oms from the un
ion of mo
nads and of dyads of t
he V
aiseshika is like
the in
con
sis
tency in t
he orig
i
na
tion of t
he world from the in
sen
tient
Pradhana of Sankhy
a. If
 the atom has any
 p
art
s of an ap
pre
cia
ble
mag
ni
tude, t
hen it can
not be an atom.
 Then it can be fur
ther di
vis
i
ble.
If t
hey are with
out p
art
s of any ap
pre
cia
ble mag
ni
tude, as they
 are so
de
scribed in V
aiseshika phi
los
o
phy
, it is not
 pos
si
ble for such two
p
artless at
oms to pro
duce by their un
ion a sub
st
ance hav
ing any
mag
ni
tude. The same is t
he case with three at
oms and so on. Hence,
com
pound sub
st
ances can never be formed by the com
bi
na
tion of at

-
oms. There
fore, the V
aiseshika the
ory of orig
i
na
tion of t
he world upon
in di vis i ble
at oms
is
un ten a ble.
Ac cord ing
to
the
V
aiseshika
phi los o phy
,
two
ul ti mat
e
at oms
(Parimandalas or Paramanus) be
come a dou
ble atom (Dvy
anuka or
Hrasva) on ac
count of Adrisht
a, etc. B
ut the at
omic na
ture of the ul

ti -
mate atom
 is not found in t
he Dvyanuka which is small. T
wo
Dvyanukas form a Chaturanuka (qua
dru
ple atom) which has not the
char
ac
ter
is
tics of small
ness but be
comes lon
ger and big
ger
. If
 the ul
-
ti
mate atom
 can cre
ate some
thing which is con
trary to t
he atom, what
is the in
ap
pro
pri
ate
ness in Brah
man which is Knowl
edge and Bliss
cre
at
ing the in
sen
tient and non-in
tel
li
gent world full of
 mis
ery? Just as
the atomic na
ture of the ul

ti mate atom
 is not found in t
he later com
bi
-
na
tions which have other trait
s, so also the Chait
anya or in
tel
li
gence
of Brah
man is not found in t
he world.
The ul
ti
mate con
di
tion of t
he world is atomic, ac
cord
ing to the
V
aiseshika sys
tem. The at

oms are eter nal. They are t
he ul
ti
mate
cause of the uni
verse. The uni
verse ex
ist
s in the atomic st
ate in the
st
ate of P
ralaya or dis
so
lu
tion. A
n atom is in
fin
i
tes
i
mal. A
 dyad is min
-
ute and short. Chaturanuka or qua
dru
ple atom is great,
 and long.
If t
wo at
oms which are spher
i
cal can pro
duce a dyad which is
min
ute and short but which has not got t
he spher
i
cal na
ture of the
atom, if
 the dyads which are short and min
ute can pro
duce a
Chaturanuka which is great and long but which has not got the m
i
-
nute
ness and short
ness of the dyad,
 it is quite ob
vi
ous that all t
he
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
198

qual
i
ties of the cause are not f
ound in the ef

fect. So it is quite pos
si
ble
that t
he in
tel
li
gent, bliss
ful Brah
man can be the cause of a world
which is non-in
tel
li
gent and full of
 suf

fer ing.
Paramanuj
agadakaranatv
adhikaranam
: T
opic 3 (Sutras 12-17)
Refut
ation of t
he atom
ic theory of the V
aiseshikas
The ob
jec
tion against t
he view of V
edant
a has been an
swered
in the pre
vi
ous Su
tra. Now the V
aiseshika sys
tem is re
futed.
C^`Wm{n
 Z H$_
m©VñVX
Ubhay
athapi na karmat
ast
adabhav
ah
II.
2.12 (183)
In both cases also (in the cases o
f the Adrisht
a, the unseen
principle
 inhering e
ither in the atoms
 or the so
ul) the ac
tivity
(of the
 atom
s) is
 not p
oss
ible
; he
nce
 ne
gatio
n of tha
t (viz.,
crea
tion through the
 union o
f the ato
ms).
Ubhay
atha:
 in either case, in both way
s, on both assumptions or
hypotheses;
Api:
 also;
Na:
 not;
Karma:
 action, activ
ity
, motion;

At
ah:
therefore;
T
adabhav
ah:
 absence of that, negat
ion of that
, i.e.
,
negation of t
he creation of the world by
 union of atom
s.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he V
aiseshika sys
tem com
menced in
Su
tra 1
1 is con
tin
ued.
What is the cause that f
irst op
er
ates on the ul
ti
mate at
oms?
V
aiseshikas hold that the mo
tion which is due to the un
seen prin
ci
ple
(Adrisht
a) joins the atom in which it
 re
sides, to an
other atom.
 Thus bi
-
nary com
pounds, etc. are pro
duced and fi
nally t
he el
e
ment of air
.
Sim
i
larly fi
re, wa
ter
, earth, t
he body with it
s or
gans are pro
duced.
Thus the whole world orig
i
nates from at
oms. The qual
i
ties of the bi

-
nary com
pounds are pro
duced from the qual
i
ties in
her
ing in the at
-
oms, just as the qual
i
ties of the clot
h re
sult from the qual

i ties of the
threads. Such is the t
each
ing of the V
aiseshika sys
tem of phi
los
o
phy
.
The mo
tion in the at

oms can not be brought about by
 the
Adrisht
a re
sid
ing in the at
oms, be
cause the Adrisht
a which is the re
-
sul
t
ant of t
he good and bad ac
tions of the soul can
not re
side in the at
-
oms. It m
ust in
here in the soul. The A
drisht
a re
sid
ing in the soul
can
not pro
duce mo
tion in the at
om. The mo
tion of t
he atom is not ex

-
plained on both these v
iews. As Adrisht
a is in
sen
tient it
 can
not act. A
s
Adrisht
a is in the soul, how can it op
er
ate in the at

oms? If it can, such
op
er
a
tion will go on f
or ever as there is no agency to con
trol it.
 When
two at
oms com
bine do they uni
te per
fectly
 or not? If t
hey unite t
o
t
ally
,
if there is to
t
al interpenetrat
ion, the at
omic st
ate will con
tinue as there
will be no in
crease in bulk. If in p
art, then at

oms will have part
s. This is
against the the
ory of the V
aiseshikas. More
over
, if t
hey com
bine
once, there can
not be sep

a ra
tion or dis
so
lu
tion. A
drisht
a will be ac
-
tive t
o bring about cre
ation for t
he en
joy
ment of t
he fruit
s of ac
tions.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
199

For these rea
sons the doc
trine of t
he at
oms be
ing the cause of the
world must be re
jected.
The V
aiseshikas may ar
gue that t
he mo
tion orig
i
nates in the at
-
oms as soon as they come in the prox
im
ity of
 the souls charged with
any def
i
nite Adrisht
a. This also is un
ten
a
ble. Be
cause there can be no
prox
im
ity or con
t
act be
tween the souls which are p
artless and the at
-
oms which also are partl
ess.
An in
sen
tient ob
ject can
not move an
other as it is in
ert. Al
l mo
-
tion of ob
ject
s are ini
ti
ated, guided and di
rected by in
tel
li
gence and in
-
tel li gent

be ings.
The soul can
not be the cause of the pri
mal mo
tion of t
he at
oms
at the be
gin
ning of cre
ation. B
e
cause in dis
so
lu
tion, ac
cord
ing to the
V
aiseshikas, the soul it

self lies dor mant with
out pos
sess
ing any in
tel
-
li
gence and hence is in no way su
pe
rior to the atom
.
It can
not be said also that t
he pri
mal mo
tion of t
he atom is
caused by the will of t
he Lord in con
for
mity
 with the Adrisht
a of the
souls, be
cause the Adrisht
as of the souls do not ma
ture and are not
awak
ened. Hence the will of t
he Lord is not ac
tive.
As there is thus no mo
tion in the at

oms in the be gin
ning of the
cre
ation, t
hey can
not come to
gether and form an ag
gre
gate. Con
se
-
quently
, there can be no cre
ation as the bi
nary com
pounds can
not be
pro duced.
Ac
cord
ing to the V
aiseshikas, the uni
verse is cre
ated by t
he un
-
ion of the at

oms. Now what causes this un ion? If it
 is a seen cause, it
is not pos
si
ble be
fore the cre
ation of t
he body
. A
 seen cause can be
an endeavour or an im
p
act. There can be no endeavour on the p
art of
the soul if t
here is no con
nec
tion of t
he soul with mind. A
s there is nei
-
ther body nor mind be
fore cre
ation, t
here can
not be any endeav
our
.
Sim
i
lar is the case with im
p
act or the like.
What causes the un
ion of the at

oms? Adrishta or the un
seen
prin
ci
ple can
not be the cause of the f
irst mo
tion of t
he at
oms be
cause
the Adrisht
a is non-in
tel
li
gent. There is no in
tel
li
gence to guide the
Adrisht
a. Hence it can
not act by i
t

self.Does the Adrisht
a in
here in the soul or the at
oms? If it
 is in
her
ent
in the soul, t
here is no in
tel
li
gence to di
rect the Adrisht
a as the soul is
then in
ert. More
over
, the soul is p
artless like the at
oms. Con
se
-
quently
, there can
not be any con
nec
tion be
tween the soul and the at

-
oms. Hence, if t
he Adrisht
a in
heres in the soul, it can
not pro
duce
mo
tion in the at

oms which are not con nected with the soul.
If t
he Adrisht
a is in
her
ent in the at

oms, there would be no dis so
-
lu
tion be
cause the at
oms will ever be ac
tive as t
he Adrisht
a is al
ways
pres ent.
There
fore there is no pos
si
bil
ity f
or orig
i
nal mo
tion in the at

omsand so com
bi
na
tion of at

oms is not pos si
ble.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
200

Hence the the
ory of V
aiseshikas that the uni
verse is caused by
the
com bi na tion
of
at oms
is
un ten a ble.
g_dm`mä`wnJ_
m… gmå`mXZdp
Samav
ay
abhy
up
agamaccha samy
adanav
asthiteh
II.
2.13 (184)
And becau
se in consequ
ence
 of Samavaya being admitt
ed, a
regresssu
s a
d inf
ini
t
um
 results on similar
 reasoning (hence the
Vaiseshika theory is untenable).
Samav
ay
abhy
up
agamat:
 Samavay
a being admitt
ed;
Cha:
 and,
also;
Samy
at:
 because of equality of
 reasoning;
Anav
asthiteh:
regressus ad infinitum
 would result.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he V
aiseshika phi
los
o
phy com
menced
in Su
tra 1
1 is con
tin
ued.
Samavay
a
is
in sep
 a ra ble
in her ence
or
con com i t
ant
cause
or
com
bin
ing force. It
 is one of the seven cat
e
go
ries of the V
aiseshika
phi
los
o
phy
. It
 is the af

fin ity which brings about t
he un
ion of the at

oms.The V
aiseshikas say that two Paramanus be
come a Dvyanuka
on ac
count of the op
er
a
tion of t
he com
bin
ing force (Samavay
a) and
that t
he Samavay
a con
nect
s the dyad with it
s con
stit
u
ent
s, the two at

-
oms, as the dyad and t
he at
oms are of dif

fer ent qual
i
ties. Sam
avaya
is dif

fer ent from t
he ul
ti
mate at
oms and dyads which it con
nect
s. Why
should it op
er
ate un
less there be an
other Samav
aya to make it
 op
er
-
ate? That new Sam
avaya will
 re
quire an
other Samav
aya to con
nect it
with the f
irst and so on. Thus their the
ory is vi
ti
ated by t
he fault of
Anavastha Dosha or
regressus
ad
in fi ni t
um
.
The ar
gu
ment is fault
y
. Hence the atomic doc
trine which ad
mit
s
Samavay
a re
la
tion
ship for the un
ion of the at

oms is not ad mis
si
ble. It
must be re
jected as it is use
less and as it is an in
con
gru
ous as
sump
-
tion.
{ZË`_
od M ^
Nity
amev
a cha bhav
at
II.
2.14 (185)
And on a
ccount
 of t
he perman
ent exist
ence (of ac
tiv
ity
 or
non-activit
y, th
e atomic theory is not admissi
ble).
Nity
am:
 eternal;
Eva:
 cert
ainly
, even;

Cha:
 and, also;
Bhav
at:
because of the existence,
 from the possibilit
y
.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he V
aiseshika com
menc
ing in Su
tra 1
1
is
con tin ued.
The atomic the
ory in
volves an
other dif

fi culty
. If
 the at
oms are by
na
ture ac
tive,
 then cre
ation would be per
ma
nent. No Pralay
a or dis
-
so
lu
tion could t
ake place. If t
hey are by na
ture in
ac
tive,
 no cre
ation
could t
ake place. The dis
so
lu
tion would be per
ma
nent. Their na
ture
can
not be both ac
tiv
ity and i
n
ac
tiv
ity be
cause they are self-con
tra
dic
-
tory
. If
 they were nei
ther
, their ac
tiv
ity and non-ac
tiv
ity would hav
e to
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
201

de

pend on an op

er

a

tive or
e
f

f
i

c
ient cause like Adrishta. A
s

t
h
e
A
d
r
ishta is in per

m
a

nent prox

im

ity to the at

oms, as the Adrishta is al

-
w
a
y
s con

nected with the at

oms, they will be ever
a
c

t
i
v
e
. Con

s
e

-
q
u
e
n
t
l
y
,
c
re

a
t
i
o
n

would be per

ma

nent. If there is no ef

f
i

c
i
e
n
t
o
r
o
p

e
r

a

t
i
v
e

c
a
u
s
e
,

there will be no
a
c

tiv

ity of
t
h
e
 at

o
ms.
C
o
n

se

que
n
t
l
y
,
t
h
e
r
e

w
o
u
ld be no cre

ation.
F
o
r
 this rea

son also the atomic doc

tri
n
e
 is
u
n

ten
a
ble and in

ad
-
mis si ble.
ê
$nm{X_Îdm…
 {dn
`©`mo
 Xe©Z
mV²
R
u
padimatvaccha viparyayo darsanat
II.2.15 (186)
And on acc
ount of the atoms posse
s
s
ing colour, etc., the
o
pposite (of which the V
ai
seshikas hold would ta
k
e
 place),
because it is seen o
r observed.
R
upadimatvat:
 because of possessing colour, et
c.
;
C
ha:
 and,
 also;
Viparyayah:
 the reverse, the opp
o
s
i
te;
D
a
rsan
a
t:

b
e
c
a
u
s
e

i
t is seen
or

o
b
s
e
rved, from common experience.
T
h
e

a
r

g
u

ment against
V
aiseshika com

menc
i
n
g
 in
Su

tr
a

1
1
 is
c
o
n

t
i
n ued.
A
c

c
o
r
d

ing to the
V
aiseshika phi

los

o

p
h
y
,

t
h
e

a
t

o
ms are said to
have col

our, etc. If this is not

th
e
 case, the ef

fects will not pos

sess
t
h
e
s
e

q
u
a
l

i

t
i
e
s
,

a
s

the qual

i

ties of the cause only are found in the ef

-
f
e
c
ts. Then the at

o
m
s
 would no lon

ger be
a
t
o
mic and per

ma

nent. Be

-
c
a
u
s
e
 that which has form, col

our, etc., is
g
ross, ephem

eral and
i
m

per

m
a

nent. Con

s
e

q
u
e
n
t
l
y the a
t

o
ms, etc., wh
ich are en

d
o
wed with
c
o
l

o
u
r e
tc., must be gross and i
permanent. This con

t
ra

dicts the the

-
o
r
y

o
f

t
h
e

V
a
i
se
shikas that they are min

u
t
e

a
n
d

p
e
r

ma

nent.
H
e
n
c
e
 the atomic the

or
y
, be

in
g
 thus self-con

tra

dic

tor
y
, ca
n

not
b
e

a
c

c
e
p
t
e
d
.

T
h
e
 at

oms ca
n

not be

t
h
e

u
l

t
i

mate

c
a
u
s
e
o
f

t
h
e
u
n
i

ver
s
e
.

Th
e
r
e
 would re

sult from the cir

cum

stance o
f

t
h
e

a
t

oms hav

ing col

our,
e
t
c
.
,

the
o
p

p
o

s
i
t
e

o
f

w
h
ich the
V
aiseshikas mean.
C^`Wm M XmofmV
²
U
b
h
a
ya
t
ha
 cha doshat
II.2.16 (187)
A
nd because of defects
i
n b
oth cases (the atomic
 theory cannot
b
e

acce pted).
U
b
h
a
y
a
t
ha
:
in both ways, on either side, in eith
e
r case;

Cha:
 also,
a
n
d
;

D
o
s
h
a
t
:

b
e
cause of defects (or difficulties).
T
h
e

a
r

g
u

ment against
V
aiseshikas is con

tin
ue
d
.
Earth has the qual

i
ties of smell,
 t
a
s
t
e
,

c
o
l

our and is gross. W
a

t
e
r
h
a
s

c
o
l

our, taste and touch and is fin
e
.

F
i
re has col

our and touch and
i
s

f
i
n
e
r
still.

Air is the fi
n

e
s
t

o
f

all a
n
d

h
a
s

t
h
e

q
u
a
l

i
t
y

o
f

touch onl
y
. The
f
o
u
r

g
r
o
ss
e
l

e

ments earth, wa

ter, fire and air are pro

duced
f
rom
 at

-
o
m
s
.
BRAHMA SUTRAS
202

I
f

w
e

sup

pose that the re

spec

tive at

o
ms of the el

e

ments also
p
o
s

s
e
s
s

t
h
e

s
a
me num

ber of qual

i

ties as the gross el

e

m
e
n
ts, then
t
h
e
 atom of air will hav
e

o
n
e
 qual

i
t
y
,

a
n
 atom of earth will have four
q
u
a
l

i

ties. Hence an atom of earth
w
h
i
c
h
 pos

sesses four qual

i

t
ies will
b
e

b
i
g

g
e
r

i
n

s
ize. It would not be an atom any lon

g
e
r. It will not sat

isfy
the def

i

ni

tion of an atom.
If we sup

pose them all to pos

s
e
s
s
 the same num

ber of qual

i

t
i
e
s
,

i
n

that case there can

not be any dif

f
e
r

e
n
c
e
 in the qual

i

ties of t
h
e
 ef

-
f
e
c
ts, the gross el

e

m
e
n
ts

b
e

cause
 the at

trib

utes of the cause
(the at

-
oms) are re

pro

duced in its ef

fects (
the gross el

e

ments).
I
f

the atom is one and the same and has only one qual

it
y
, then
m
o
re than one qual

i
t
y
 should not be found. Fire s
h
o
u
l
d
 not have form
in

a
d

d
i

t
i
o
n

t
o

t
o
u
c
h

a

so
o
n.
H
e
n
c
e
,
 in ei

ther case the doc

trine of th
e

V
aiseshikas is de

fec
-
t
i
v
e
a
n
d

t
h
e
re
fore un

ten
a
ble. It

can
not be log

i
c
a
l
l
y

main

tained.
An[aJ«hm…mË`ÝV_
A
parigrahacchatyantamanapeksha
II.2.17 (188)
A
nd

b
e
cause (the atom
ic theory) is not accepted (by
authoritative sage
s
 like Manu and
others) it is to

be  totally
r
e
jected.
Apa
r
i
g
rahat:

because it is not accepted;

Cha:

a
n
d
;

A
t
yantam:
a
l
t
o
g
e
t
h
e
r, totall
y
,

c
o
m
p
l
e
tely
;
An
a
peksha:

to be rejected.
T
h
e

a
r

g
u

ment against
V
aiseshika is con

cluded
.
A
t
 least the Sankhya doc

trine of Pradhana was ac

cepted to
s
o
m
e
 e
x

tent by

Manu and other knowers of th
e

Veda but the atomic
d
o
c

t
r
ine has not been ac

cepted by any per

son
o
f
 au

thor
ity in any of its
pa
rts. There

fore, it

is to be dis

re
garded e
n

t
i
rely
b
y

all those who take
t
h
e
i
r
stand on the Veda.
F
u
r

ther, there are other ob

jec

tions to the
V
aiseshika doc

tri
n
e
.
T
h
e

V
a
i
s
e
s
hikas as

sume six cat

e

go

ries
o
r
Padarthas viz., Dravya
(
s
u
b

stance), Guna (qual

ity), Karma (ac

tion), Samanya (gen

er

a
l

ity),
Vi
s
e
s
h
a

(
par tic u lar ity)

and

Sam
a
v
a
ya

(in her ence).

They

main tain
t
h
a
t

the six cat

e

go

ries a
r
e

a
b

s
o

lutely dif

f
e
r

e
n
t
 fr
o
m
e
a
ch other and
pos

sess dif

f
e
r

e
n
t
 char

ac

ter

is

tics just as a man
,
 a
h
o
rse
a
n
d
 a
h
a
re
d
i
f

f
e
r

f
r
o
m

o
n
e
 an

other. They say that the cat

e

g
o

ries ar
e

i
n

de

pe
n
d

e
n
t
and yet they hold that on Dravya the other five cat

e

go

ries de

pend.
T
h
i
s
co
n

t
r
a

d
i
c
ts

t
h
e

f
o
r

m
e
r

o
n
e
.
 T
h
i
s
 is
q
u
i
t
e
 in

ap

pro

pri

ate. Just as
a
n

i

mals, grass, trees and the like, be

ing ab

so

lutely dif

fer

ent from
each other, do not de

pend on each other, so also the qual

i

ties etc.,
a
l
s
o

b
e

i
n
g

a
b

s
o

l
u
t
e
ly dif

f
e
r

e
nt
f
rom
 sub

stance can

not d
e

p
e
n
d
 on the
lat ter.
T
h
e

V
a
i
seshikas say that Dravya (sub

sta
n
c
e
) and Guna (qual

-
i
t
y
) are in

sep
a
ra
bly con

nected. At

t
h
e
 s
a
me tim
e

th
e
y

s
a
y

t
h
a
t
 each
CHAPTER IIŠSECTION 2
203

be
gins it
s ac
tiv
ity
. The threads bring the clot
h into ex
is
tence and the
white
ness in the threads pro
duces the white
ness in the cloth. ﬁSub
-
st
ances
orig i nate
an other
sub st
ance
and
qual i ties
an other
qual ity
ﬂ
(V
aiseshika Sutras I.1.
10). If t
he thread and it
s qual
ity oc
cupy the
same space and are in
sep
a
ra
bly unit
ed, how can this t
ake place? If
the sub
st
ance and the qual
ity are in
sep
a
ra
bly to
gether with ref
er
ence
to time,
 the two horns of a cow would have to grow to
gether
. If
 there is
in
sep
a
ra
bil
ity i
n the na
ture of the sub
st
ance and it
s qual
ity
, why can
you not say t
hat both are one and iden
ti
cal? Hence the the
ory that t
he
qual
ity de
pends upon sub
st
ance and that the qual
ity and sub
st
ance
are
in sep
 a ra ble,
is
un ten a ble
and
in ad mis si ble.
Fur
ther
, the V
aiseshikas make dis
tinc
tion be
tween Samy
oga
(con
junc
tion) and Samav
aya (in
her
ence). They say t
hat Samy
oga is
the con
nec
tion of t
hings which ex
ist
s sep
a
rately and S
amavaya i
s the
con nec tion
of
things
which
are
in ca p
a ble
of
sep a rat
e
ex is tence.
This
dis
tinc
tion is not t
en
a
ble as the cause which ex
ist
s be
fore the ef

fectcan
not be said to be in
ca
p
a
ble of sep

a rate ex
is
tence. What is the
proof of the ex

is tence of Samy
oga or Samavay
a ap
art from cause
and ef

fect? Nor is there any Samyoga or Samav
aya ap
art from the
things which be
come con
nected. The same man al
though be
ing one
only forms t
he ob
ject of many
 dif

fer ent names and no
tions ac
cord
ing
as he is con
sid
ered in him
self or in his re
la
tion to ot
h
ers. Thus he is
thought and spo
ken of as man, Brahmana,
 learned in the V
eda, gen
-
er
ous boy
, young man,
 old man, fa
ther
, son, grand
son, brother
,
son-in-law
, etc. The same di
git con
notes dif

fer ent num
bers, ten or
hun
dred or thou
sand, ac
cord
ing to it
s place.
More
over
, we have not seen S
amyoga ex
cept as be
tween
things which oc
cupy sp
ace. But mi
nd is Anu and does not oc
cupy
space ac
cord
ing to you.
 Y
ou can
not say that
 you will imag
ine some
space f
or it. I
f you make such a sup
po
si
tion, t
here is no end to such
sup
po
si
tions. There is no rea
son why you should not as
sume a fur
-
ther hun
dred or thou
sand things in ad
di
tion to t
he six cat
e
go
ries as
-
sumed by the V
aiseshikas.
More
over
, two Paramanus which have no f
orm can
not be united
with a Dvyanuka which has form.
 There does not ex
ist that kind of
 in
ti
-
mate con
nec
tion be
tween ether and earth which ex
ist
s be
tween
wood and var
nish.
Nor is the the
ory of Sam
avaya nec
es
sary to ex
plain which, out
of cause and ef

fect, de pends on the other
. There is mu
tual de
pend
-
ence. V
edantins do not ac
cept any dif

fer ence be
tween cause and ef

-
fect. E
f

fect is only cause in an other form. T
he V
edantins ac
knowl
edge
nei
ther the sep

a rate
ness of cause and ef

fect, nor their st
and
ing to
each other in the re
la
tion of abode and t
he thing abid
ing. Ac
cord
ing to
the V
edant
a doc
trine, t
he ef

fect is only a cer t
ain st
ate of t
he cause.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
204

More
over
, Paramanus are fi
nite and so they
 will have form
.
What has form must be li
a
ble to de
struc
tion.
Thus it is quite clear that
 the atomic doc
trine is sup
ported by
very weak ar
gu
ment
s. It is op
posed to those scrip
tural tex
t
s which de
-
clare the Lord to be the gen
eral cause. It is not al
so ac
cepted by
sages like Manu and oth
ers. There
fore, it
 should be to
t
ally dis
re
-
garded by wise men.
Samuday
adhikaranam
: T
opic 4 (Sutras 18-27)
Refut
ation of t
he Bauddha Realist
s
g_wXm
` C^`
hoVwHo$@{n
 VXàm{
&
Samuday
a ubhay
ahetuke™pi t
adapraptih
II.
2.18 (189)
Eve
n if the
 (two k
inds
 of) a
ggre
gate
s pro
ce
ed
 from the
ir two
causes, there would take
 place non-establishment (of the two
aggrega
tes).
Samuday
a:
the aggregate;
Ubhay
ahetuke:
 having two causes;
Api:
also, even;

T
adapraptih:
 it will not
 t
ake place, it cannot be
est
ablished.
Af

ter re fut
ing the atomi
c the
ory of V
aiseshika, the Buddhisti
c
the
o
ries are now re
futed.
Lord Bud
dha had four dis
ci
ples who founded four sys
tems of
phi los o phy
,
called
re spec tively
V
aibhashika,
Sautranti
ka,
Y
ogachara
and Madhyamika. T
he V
aibhashikas are the Re
al
ist
s
(Sarvastit
vavadins) who ac
cept the re
al
ity of
 both the out

side and thein side
world
con sist ing
re spec tively
of
ex ter nal
ob ject
s
and
thought
(also con
scious
ness, feel
ings, etc.). T
he Sautranti
kas are the Ide
al
-
ist
s (V
ijnanavadins). They
 hold that t
hought alone is real. They
 main
-
t
ain that t
here is no proof whether ex
ter
nal ob
ject
s re
ally ex

ist or not,the ideas only ex

ist and the ex

ter nal ob
ject
s are in
ferred from these
ideas. Thus the V
aibhashikas hold that the ex

ter nal ob
ject
s are di
-
rectly per
ceived while the S
autrantikas main
t
ain that t
he out
ward
world is an in
fer
ence from ideas. The thi
rd class, the Y
ogacharas hold
that ideas alone are real and there is no ex

ter nal world cor
re
spond
ing
to these ideas. The out

ward ob ject
s are un
real like dream ob
ject
s.
The Madhyamikas main
t
ain that ev
en the ideas them
selves are
un
real and there is noth
ing that ex

ists ex
cept the voi
d (Sunyam).
They are the Ni
hil
ist
s or Sunyavadins who hold t
hat ev
ery
thing is void
and un
real. All of
 them agree that
 ev
ery
thing is mo
men
t
ary
. Noth
ing
last
s be
yond a mo
ment. Thi
ngs of the pre
vi
ous mo
ment do not ex

ist in the next
 mo
ment. One ap
pears and the next mo
ment it i
s re
placed by
an
other
. There is no con
nec
tion be
tween the one and the ot
her
. Ev

-
ery
thing is like a scene in a cin
ema which is pro
duced by the suc
ces
-
sive
ap pear ance
and
dis ap pear ance
of
sev eral
iso lated
pic tures.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
205

The
Re al ist
s
re cog nise
two
ag gre gates,
viz.,

the
ex ter nal
ma te
-
rial world and the in
ter
nal men
t
al world, which to
gether make up the
uni
verse. The ex
ter
nal world is made up of the ag
gre
gate of at

oms,which are of four kinds, viz.,
 at
oms of earth which are solid, at
oms of
wa
ter which are vis
cid, at
oms of fire which are hot and at
oms of air
which are mo
bile.
The five S
kandhas or groups are the cause for the in
ter
nal
world. They are Rup
a Skandha, V
ijnana Skandha, V
edana Skandha,
Samjna Skandha and S
amskara Skandha. The senses and their ob
-
ject
s form the Rup
a Skandha. V
ijnana Skandha is the stream of
 con
-
scious
ness which gives the no
tion of ego
ism or ‚I™. T
he V
edana
Skandha com
prises the feel
ing of plea
sure and pain.
 The Samjna
Skandha con
sist
s of names such as Ramakrishna, etc. All words thus
con
sti
tute t
he Samjna Skandha.
 The fif
th Skandha called Sam
skara
Skandha con
sist
s of the at
trib
utes of the m
ind such as af

fec tion, ha
-
tred, de
lu
sion, merit (Dharma), de
merit (Adharma), et
c. All in
ter
nal
ob
ject
s be
long to any one of
 the last four S
kandhas. The four last
Skandhas form the in
ter
nal ob
ject
s. All ac
tiv
i
ties de
pend upon the in
-
ter
nal ob
ject
s. The in
ter
nal ob
ject
s con
sti
tute t
he in
ner mo
tive of
 ev
-
ery
thing. A
ll ex
ter
nal ob
ject
s be
long to one Skandha namely
 the Rup
a
Skandha. Thus the whole uni
verse con
sist
s of these two kinds of ob
-
ject
s, in
ter
nal and ex
ter
nal. The in
ter
nal ag
gre
gate or the men
t
al
world is formed by the ag
gre
gate of t
he last four Skandhas. These are
the two in
ter
nal and ex
ter
nal ag
gre
gates re
ferred to in the S
u
tra.
The the
ory of the B
auddhas which clas
si
fies all ob
ject
s un
der
two heads, one ag
gre
gate be
ing called the ex
ter
nal, the ot
her in
ter
-
nal, is not suf

fi cient to ex

plain the world or der; be
cause all ag
gre
gates
are
un in tel li gent

and
there
is
no
per ma nent
in tel li gence
ad mit ted
by
the Bauddhas which can bring about this ag
gre
ga
tion. E
v
ery
thing is
mo
men
t
ary in it
s ex
is
tence ac
cord
ing to the B
auddhas. There is no
per
ma
nent in
tel
li
gent be
ing who brings about the con
junc
tion of t
hese
Skandhas. The con
tin
u
a
tion is not pos
si
ble for these ex
ter
nal at
oms
and
in ter nal
sen sa tions
with out
the
in ter ven t
ion
of
an
in tel li gent
guide. If
 it be said they
 come to
gether of thei
r own in
ter
nal mo
tion,
then the world be
comes eter
nal; be
cause the Skandhas will be con
-
st
antly bring
ing about cre
ation as they
 are eter
nal and as they pos
-
sess mo
tion of t
heir own. Thus this the
ory is un
ten
a
ble.
It can
not be ex
plained how the ag
gre
gates are brought about,
be
cause the p
art
s that con
sti
tute t
he ma
te
rial ag
gre
gates are des
ti
-
tute of
 in
tel
li
gence. The Bauddhas do not ad
mit any
 other per
ma
nent
in
tel
li
gent be
ing such as en
joy
ing soul or a rul
ing lord, which could ef

-
fect the ag
gre
ga
tion of at

oms.How are the ag
gre
gates formed? Is t
here any in
tel
li
gent prin
ci
-
ple be
hind the ag
gre
gates as the Cause, the Guide,
 the Con
trol
ler or
the Di
rec
tor? Or does it t
ake place spon
t
a
ne
ously? If
 you say that
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
206

there is an in
tel
li
gent prin
ci
ple, is it per
ma
nent or mo
men
t
ary? If i
t is
per
ma
nent, t
hen the Buddhisti
c doc
trine of mo
men
t
ari
ness is op
-
posed. If it
 is mo
men
t
ary
, it must
 come into ex
is
tence first and then
unite the at

oms. Then the cause should last more than one mo
ment.
If t
here is no in
tel
li
gent prin
ci
ple as di
rec
tor or con
trol
ler
, how can
non-in
tel
li
gent at
oms and the Skandhas ag
gre
gate in an or
derly man
-
ner? Fur
ther
, the cre
ation would con
tinue for ev
er
. There would be no
dis so lu tion.
For all these rea
sons the for
ma
tion of ag
gre
gates can
not be
prop
erly ex
plained. With
out ag
gre
gates there would be an end of t
he
stream of earthly
 ex
is
tence which pre
sup
poses those ag
gre
gates.
There
fore, the doc
trine of t
his school of Bauddhas is un
ten
a
ble and
in ad mis s
i ble.
BVao
VaàË
``Ëdm{X{
V MoÞmo
Ën{Îm_
mÌ{Z{_
ÎmËdmV²
It
aret
arapraty
ay
atv
aditi
 chennotp
attimatranim
itt
atv
at
II.
2.19 (190)
I
f it be
 said
 that (the
 forma
tion o
f aggre
gate
s ma
y be
 ex
pla
ine
d)
through (ne
scie
nce
) standing in the
 relatio
n of mutu
al
cau
sali
ty, we
 say ‚
no™
; the
y me
rel
y are
 the
 effi
cie
nt cau
se
 of the
orig
in (
of t
he immedia
tely s
ubsequent li
nks an
d not
 of t
he
aggrega
tion).
It
ara-it
ara:
 mutual, one
another;
Praty
ay
atv
at:
 because of being the
cause, one being the cause of the ot
her;
Iti:
 thus;
Chet:
 if; (
Iti ch
et:
 if
it be said);
Na:
 no;
Utp
attim
atrani
mi
tt
atv
at:
 because they are
merely the ef
ficient cause of t
he origin.
An ob
jec
tion against S
u
tra 18 is raised and re
futed.
The se
ries be
gin
ning with ne
science com
prise the fol
low
ing
mem
bers: Ne
science, Samskara or im
pres
sion, V
ijnana (knowl
-
edge), name and form,
 the abode of t
he six (i.e.
, the body
 and the
senses, con
t
act, ex
pe
ri
ence of plea
sure and pain,
 de
sire, ac
tiv
ity
,
merit, de
merit, birt
h, spe
cies, de
cay
, death,
 grief, lam
en
t
a
tion, men
t
al
af

flic tion and the li
ke).
Ne
science is the er
ror of con
sid
er
ing that what
 is mo
men
t
ary
,
im
pure, etc.,
 to be per
ma
nent, pure, et
c. Im
pres
sion, (af

fec tion,
Samskara) com
prises de
sire, aver
sion, etc.,
 and the ac
tiv
ity caused
by them.
 Knowl
edge (V
ijnana) is the self-con
scious
ness (
Aham
 iti
alayavijnanasya vrittilabhah
) spring
ing up in the em
bryo. Name and
form is the ru
di
men
t
ary flake or bub
ble-like con
di
tion of t
he em
bryo.
The abode of the six
 (Sadayat
ana) is the fur
ther de
vel
oped st
age of
the em
bryo in which the lat
ter is the abode of t
he six senses. T
ouch
(S
p
arsa) is the sen
sa
tion of cold,
 warmth, etc.
, on the em
bryo™
s part
.
Feel
ing (V
edana) is the sen
sa
tion of plea
sure and pain re
sult
ing
there
from. De
sire (T
rishna) is the wish to en
joy the pl
ea
sur
able sen
-
sa
tions and to shun the p
ain
ful ones. Ac
tiv
ity (Up
adana) is the ef

fortCHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
207

re
sult
ing from de
sire. Birth is t
he p
ass
ing out from t
he uterus. S
pe
cies
(Jati) is the class of be
ings to which the new-born crea
ture be
longs.
De
cay (Jara), death (Marana) is ex
plained as the con
di
tion of t
he
crea
ture when about to die (Mum
ursha). Grief (Soka) is the frus
tra
tion
of wishes con
nected there
with. La
ment (Pariv
edana): the lam
en
t
a
-
tions on that ac
count. Pain (Duhkha) is such p
ain as caused by the
five senses. Durmanas is men
t
al af

flic tion. The ‚
and the like™
 im
plies
death, t
he de
p
ar
ture to an
other world and the sub
se
quent re
turn from
there.
The Buddhistic re
al
ist says: Al

though there ex ist
s no per
ma
nent
in
tel
li
gent prin
ci
ple of the na
ture ei
ther of a rul
ing Lord of an en
joy
ing
soul un
der whose in
flu
ence the for
ma
tion of t
he ag
gre
gates could
t
ake place, yet t
he course of earthly ex
is
tence is ren
dered pos
si
ble
through the mu
tual cau
sal
ity of
 ne
science (ig
no
rance) and so on, so
that we need not l
ook for any other com
bin
ing prin
ci
ple.
Ne
science, Samskara, etc., con
sti
tute an un
in
ter
rupted chain of
cause and ef

fect. In the above se
ries the im
me
di
ately pre
ced
ing item
is the cause of the next
. The wheel of cause and ef

fect re volves un
-
ceas
ingly like t
he wa
ter-wheel and this can
not t
ake place with
out ag
-
gre
gates. Hence ag
gre
gates are a re
al
ity
.
W
e re
ply: Though i
n the se
ries the pre
ced
ing one is the cause of
the sub
se
quent one, t
here is noth
ing which can be the cause of the
ag
gre
gates. It
 may be ar
gued that t
he un
ion of atom a
nd the con
tin
u
-
ous flow of sen
sa
tions are proved by t
he mu
tual in
ter
de
pen
dence ex
-
ist
ing among them.
 But t
he ar
gu
ment can
not st
and, as this mu
tual
in
ter
de
pen
dence can
not be the cause of thei
r co
he
sion. Of t
wo things
one may pro
duce the other
, but t
hat is no rea
son why they should
unite to
gether
.
Even if
 A
vidya (ne
science), Samskara, V
ijnana, Nama, and
Rup
a, etc.,
 may with
out a sen
tient or in
tel
li
gent agency p
ass from the
st
age of cause to the st
age of ef

fect, yet how can the to
t
al
ity of
 all
these
si mul t
a neously
ex ist
with out
the
will
of
a
co or di nat ing
mind?
If y
ou say that t
his ag
gre
gate or the world is formed by
 the mu
-
tual cau
sa
tion of A
vidya and t
he rest, we say it is not
 so, be
cause your
link of cau
sa
tion ex
plains only the or
i
gin of the sub
se
quent from t
he
pre
vi
ous. It only
 ex
plains how V
ijnana arises from Samskara, etc. I
t
does not ex
plain how the ag
gre
gate is brought about.
 An ag
gre
gate
called Sanghat
a al
ways shows a de
sign and is brought about for the
pur
pose of en
joy
ment. A
 Sanghat
a like a house may be ex
plained to
have been pro
duced by putt
ing to
gether of bricks, mor
t
ar
, etc.,
 but
they do not
 ex
plain the de
sign. Y
ou say that t
here is no per
ma
nent At

-
man. Y
our At
man is mo
men
t
ary only
. Y
ou are a Kshanikatvav
adin.
There can be no en
joy
ment or ex
pe
ri
enc
ing for such a mo
men
t
ary
soul; be
cause the en
joy
ing soul has not pro
duced the merit or de
merit
whose fruit
s it has to en
joy
. It
 was pro
duced by an
other mo
men
t
ary
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
208

soul. Y
ou can
not say that
 the mo
men
t
ary soul suf

fers the fruits of the
act
s done by it
s an
ces
tral soul, for t
hen that an
ces
tral soul must be
held to be per
ma
nent and not mo
men
t
ary
. If
 you hold any soul t
o be
per
ma
nent, it
 will con
tra
dict your the
ory of the m
o
men
t
ari
ness of ev
-
ery
thing. B
ut if y
ou hold ev
ery
thing to be im

per ma
nent, y
our the
ory is
open to the ob
jec
tion al
ready made. Hence the doc
trine of t
he
Sanghat
as (Bud
dhist
s) is un
ten
a
ble. It
 is not based on rea
son.
The at
oms can
not com
bine by them

selves even when they are
as
sumed to be per
ma
nent and eter
nal. W
e have al
ready shown this
when ex
am
in
ing the doc
trine of t
he V
aiseshikas. Their com
bi
na
tion is
much more im
pos
si
ble when they are mo
men
t
ary
.
The Bauddhas say that
 a com
bin
ing prin
ci
ple of the at

oms is not nec
es
sary if the at

oms stand in a re
la
tion of cau
sal
ity
. The at
oms
would com
bine by them

selves. This is in cor
rect. The cau
sal
ity will
 ex
-
plain only t
he pro
duc
tion of at

oms at dif

fer ent mo
ment
s. It can
not cer
-
t
ainly ex

plain the un ion of the at
om into an ag
gre
gate. The
com
bi
na
tion of an ag
gre
gate can t
ake place only if t
here is an in
tel
li
-
gent agent be
hind. Oth
er
wise it is im
pos
si
ble to ex
plain the un
ion of
in ert
and
mo men t
ary
at oms.
Y
ou will say that
 in the eter
nal Samsara the ag
gre
gates suc
ceed
one an
other in an un
bro
ken chain and hence also Ne
science and so
on which abide in those ag
gre
gates. But
 in that case you will
 have to
as sume
ei ther
that
each
ag gre gate
nec es sar ily
pro duces
an other
ag
-
gre
gate of t
he same kind, or that it
 may pro
duce ei
ther a like or an un
-
like one with
out any set
tled or def
i
nite rule. I
n the for
mer case a
hu
man body could never p
ass over into that
 of a god or an an
i
mal or a
be
ing of the in
fer
nal re
gions as like will go on pro
duc
ing like; in t
he lat
-
ter case a man might in an in
st
ant be
come an el
e
phant or a god and
again be
come a man; ei
ther of which con
se
quences would be con
-
trary to y
our sys
tem.
The in
di
vid
ual soul for whose en
joy
ment this ag
gre
gate of body
etc., ex

ists is also ev
a
nes
cent or mo
men
t
ary
. It
 can
not there
fore be
an enjoyer
. As the in
di
vid
ual soul is mo
men
t
ary
, whose is lib
er
a
tion?
As there is no per
ma
nent enjoyer
, there is no ne
ces
sity f
or these ag
-
gre
gates. There may
 ex
ist a causal re
la
tion be
tween the mem
bers of
the se
ries con
sist
ing of Ne
science, etc., but
 in the ab
sence of a per
-
ma
nent en
joy
ing soul, it i
s not pos
si
ble to es
t
ab
lish on that ground the
ex
is
tence of ag
gre
gates. Hence the doc
trine of mo
men
t
ari
ness of the
Bud
dhist school of Re
al
ist
s can
not st
and.
CÎmam
oËnm
Xo M nyd
©{ZamoYm
Utt
arotp
ade cha purvanirodhat
II.
2.20 (191)
(Nor can th
ere be
 a causal relation between nescie
nce, etc.)
be
caus
e o
n the o
rigination of the
 sub
se
que
nt thing the
pr
eced
in
g o
ne c
eas
es t
o be.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
209

Utt
arotp
ade:
 at the t
ime of the producti
on of the subsequent thi
ng;
Cha:
 and;
Purv
anirodhat:
 because the antecedent one has ceased
to exist
, because of the destruction of
 the previous thi
ng. (
Utt
ara:
 in
the next
, in the subsequent;

Utp
ade:
 on the origination,
 on the
production.)
The ar
gu
ment against t
he Buddhistic the
ory
, com
menced in Su
-
tra 18, is con
tin
ued.
W
e have hith
erto ar
gued that ne
science and so on stand in a
causal re
la
tion to each other m
erely
, so that t
hey can
not be made to
ac
count for the ex

is tence of the ag
gre
gates. W
e are now go
ing to
prove that t
hey can
not even be re
garded as ef

fi cient causes of the
sub
se
quent mem
bers of the se
ries to which they be
long.
Ac
cord
ing to the B
uddhistic the
ory ev
ery
thing is mo
men
t
ary
. A
thing of t
he pres
ent mo
ment van
ishes in the next m
o
ment when it
s
suc
ces
sor man
i
fest
s. At t
he time of
the ap
pear
ance of a sub
se
quent
thing, t
he pre
vi
ous thing van
ishes. Hence it is im
pos
si
ble for the pre
vi
-
ous thing to be the cause of t
he sub
se
quent thing.
 Con
se
quently t
he
the ory
is
un ten a ble
and
in ad mis si ble.
It
can not
st
and
to
rea son.
W
e al
ways per
ceive that
 the cause sub
sist
s in the ef

fect as thethread sub
sist
s in the cloth. B
ut the B
ud
dhist
s hold that ex

is tence
orig
i
nates from non-ex
is
tence be
cause they main
t
ain that t
he ef

fectcan
not man
i
fest with
out the de
struc
tion of t
he cause, the tree can
not
ap
pear un
til the seed is de
stroyed.
Even t
he p
ass
ing of cause into ef

fect in a se ries of suc
ces
sive
st
ates like ne
science, etc., can
not t
ake place, un
less there is a co
or
di
-
nat
ing in
tel
li
gence. Y
ou say that ev

ery thing has only a mo
men
t
ary ex
-
is
tence. Y
our School can
not bring about t
he si
mul
t
a
neous ex
is
tence
of two suc
ces
sive mo
ment
s. If t
he cause ex
ist
s till it
 p
asses into the
st
age of ef

fect, the the
ory of mo
men
t
ary ex
is
tence (Kshanikatva) will
van ish.
Y
ou may say t
hat the f
or
mer mo
men
t
ary ex
is
tence when it has
reached it
s full de
vel
op
ment be
comes the cause of the later mo
men
-
t
ary ex
is
tence. That al
so is im
pos
si
ble, be
cause even that will re
quire
a
suc ces s
ive
or
sec ond
mo ment
for
op er a tion.
This
con tra dict
s
the
doc trine
of
mo men t
ari ness.
The the
ory of mo
men
t
ary ex
is
tence (Kshanikatva) can
not
st
and. The gold that
 ex
ist
s at the tim
e the or
na
ment is made is alone
the cause of the or
na
ment and not t
hat which ex
isted be
fore and has
ceased to ex
ist then. I
f it be sti
ll held to be t
he cause, then ex
is
tence
will come out of non-ex

is tence. This is not pos
si
ble. The the
ory of mo
-
men
t
ari
ness will con
tra
dict the doc
trine that
 the ef

fect is the cause in a new form. This doc
trine in
di
cates that the cause ex
ist
s in the ef

fect.This shows that it is not m
o
men
t
ary
. Fur
ther
, orig
i
na
tion and de
struc
-
tion will be t
he same ow
ing to mo
men
t
ari
ness. If it
 is said that there is
dif

fer ence be
tween orig
i
na
tion and de
struc
tion, t
hen we will have to
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
210

say that t
he thing last
s for more than one mo
ment. Hence we have
again to de
clare the doc
trine of mo
men
t
ari
ness to be un
ten
a
ble.
Ag{V à
{Vkmo
namoY
mo `m¡JnÚ
Asati pratijnop
arodho y
augap
ady
amany
atha
II.
2.21 (192)
If n
on
-exi
st
enc
e (o
f c
au
se)
 be a
ss
um
ed,
 (w
hi
le y
et t
he ef
fec
t
take
s pl
ace
), the
re re
sul
ts co
ntrad
ictio
n of the
 adm
itte
d
prin
ciple or pr
opositi
on. Ot
herwi
se there woul
d result
simultaneity (
of cause and e
ffect).
Asati:
 in the case of non-existence of
 cause, if it be adm
itted t
hat an
ef
fect is produced without a cause;
Prat
ijna:

proposition, admit
ted
principle;
Up
arodhah:
 contradiction, denial
;
Y
augap
ady
am:
simult
aneity
, simult
aneous existence;
Any
atha:
 otherwise.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he Buddhistic the
ory is con
tin
ued.
If t
he Bud
dhist
s say that an ef

fect is pro duced with
out a cause
then they
 would con
tra
dict their own prop
o
si
tion that
 ev
ery ef

fect hasa cause. The prop
o
si
tion ad
mit
ted by B
ud
dhist
s that the con
scious
-
ness of blue, etc.,
 arises when mind, eye, li
ght and ob
ject act in un
ion
as cause will fail. Al
l sort
s of ef

fects can co-ex
ist.
If a cause be as
sumed then we have to ac
cept that t
he cause
and ef

fect ex ist si
mul
t
a
neously at t
he next mo
ment. The cause ex
ist
s
for more than one mo
ment. The cause ex
ist
s till the st
ate of ef

fect isreached. Then the doc
trine of mo
men
t
ari
ness will fail.
à{Vg§
»`mà{V
g§»`m{Za
moYmà
m{áa{
dÀN>o
Pratisankhy
apratisankhy
anirodha
 praptirav
icchedat
II.
2.22 (193)
Consci
ous and un
consci
ous destr
ucti
on woul
d be impossibl
e
on acc
ount
 of non
-int
errupt
ion.
Pratisankhy
a nirodha:
 conscious destruction, destruction due to
some cause or agency; causal destruction, destruction depending
upon the voli
tion of conscious entity
;
Apratisankhya ni
rodha:
unconscious destruction, destruction not depending upon any
volunt
ary agency;
Apraptih:
 non-att
ainment, i
mpossibility
;
A
v
icchedat:
 because of non-interruption, because it goes on wit
hout
interruption.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he the
ory of the B
ud
dhist
s is con
tin
ued.
The Bud
dhist
s hold that uni
ver
sal de
struc
tion is ever go
ing on
and that t
his de
struc
tion or ces
sa
tion is of t
wo kinds, viz., con
scious
and un
con
scious. Con
scious de
struc
tion de
pends upon an act of
thought as when a man breaks a jar hav
ing pre
vi
ously formed t
he in
-
ten
tion of do
ing so. Un
con
scious de
struc
tion is the nat

u ral de
cay of
ob ject
s.
The flow of cause and ef

fect goes on with out in
ter
rup
tion and
there
fore can
not be sub
ject to ei
ther kind of de
struc
tion. Nor can any
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
211

in
di
vid
ual an
te
ced
ent of a se
ries be said to be to
t
ally de
stroyed, as it
is
re cog nised
in
it
s
im me di ate
con se quence.
Both kinds of de
struc
tion or ces
sa
tion are im
pos
si
ble be
cause it
must re
fer ei
ther to the se
ries of mo
men
t
ary existences or to t
he sin
-
gle
mem bers
con sti tut ing
the
se ries.
The for
mer al
ter
na
tive i
s not pos
si
ble be
cause in all se
ries of
mo
men
t
ary existences the m
em
bers of the se
ries st
and in an un
bro
-
ken re
la
tion of cause and ef

fect so that the se
ries can
not be in
ter
-
rupted.
The
lat ter
al ter na tiv
e
is
sim i larly
not
ad mis si ble,
be cause
it
is
not pos
si
ble to hold that
 any mo
men
t
ary ex
is
tence should un
dergo
com plete
an ni hi la tion
en tirely
un de fin able
and
dis con nected
with
the
pre
vi
ous st
ate of ex

is tence, as we ob
serve that a t
hing is re
cog
nised
in the var
i
ous st
ates through which it may
 p
ass and thus has a con
-
nected ex
is
tence. When an earthen jar is de
stroyed we find t
he ex
is
-
tence of the clay
 in the pot

sherds or frag ment
s into which the jar is
bro
ken or in the pow
der into which the pot

sherds are ground. We in
fer
that ev
en though what seems to v
an
ish al
to
gether such as a drop of
wa
ter which has fallen on heated iron,
 yet con
tin
ues to ex
ist in some
other form, v
iz., as steam.
The se
ries of mo
men
t
ary ex
is
tence form
ing a chain of causes
and ef

fect is con tin
u
ous and can never be stopped, be
cause the last
mo men t
ary
ex is tence
be fore
it
s
an ni hi la tion
must
be
sup posed
ei ther
to pro
duce it
s ef

fect or not to pro
duce it. If
 it does, then t
he se
ries is
con
tin
ued and will not be de
stroyed. I
f it does not pro
duce the ef

fect,the last link does not re
ally ex

ist as the Bauddhas de fine Sat
t
a of a
thing as it
s causal ef

fi ciency and the non-ex
is
tence of the last
 link
would lead back
ward to the non-ex
is
tence of the whole se
ries.
W
e can
not have t
hen two kinds of de
struc
tion in the i
n
di
vid
ual
mem
bers of the se
ries also. Con
scious de
struc
tion is not pos
si
ble on
ac
count of the mo

men t
ary ex
is
tence of each mem
ber
. There can
not
be un
con
scious de
struc
tion as the in
di
vid
ual mem
ber is not to
t
ally an
-
ni
hi
lated. De
struc
tion of a t
hing re
ally means only
 change of con
di
tion
of the sub
st
ance.
Y
ou can
not say that
 when a can
dle is burnt out, i
t is to
t
ally an
ni
-
hi
lated. When a can
dle burns out, it i
s not lost but un
der
goes a
change of con
di
tion. W
e do not cer
t
ainly per
ceive the can
dle when it
is burnt out, but
 the ma
te
ri
als of which it con
sisted con
tinue to ex

ist ina very sub
tle st
ate and hence they are im

per cep
ti
ble.
For these rea
sons the two kinds of de
struc
tion which the
Bauddhas as
sume can
not be proved.
C^`Wm M X
mofmV²
Ubhay
atha cha doshat
II.
2.23 (194)
And on a
ccount
 of t
he objection
s present
ing
 themselv
es in
either case.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
212

Ubhay
atha:
in either case;
Cha:
 and, also;
Doshat:
 because of
objections.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he Buddhistic the
ory is con
tin
ued.
There is a fal
lacy in ei
ther view
, i.e.
, that
 A
vidya or ig
no
rance is
de
stroyed by right
 knowl
edge or self-de
stroyed.
Ac
cord
ing to the B
uddhistic view
, eman
ci
p
a
tion is the an
ni
hi
la
-
tion of ig
no
rance. Sal
va
tion or free
dom is at
t
ained when ig
no
rance is
de
stroyed. I
g
no
rance (A
vidya or ne
science) is the false idea of per
-
ma
nency in things which are mo
men
t
ary
.
The ig
no
rance can be an
ni
hi
lated by t
he adop
tion of some
means such as pen
ance, knowl
edge, etc.,
 (con
scious de
struc
tion); or
it may
 de
stroy it

self (spon t
a
ne
ity).
 But bot
h the al
ter
na
tives are de
fec
-
tive.
 Be
cause this an
ni
hi
la
tion of ig
no
rance can
not be at
t
ained by the
adop
tion of pen
ance or the like; for the m
ean like ev
ery other thing,
 is
also mo
men
t
ary ac
cord
ing to the B
uddhistic view and is, t
here
fore,
not
likely
to
pro duce
such
an ni hi la tion;

an ni hi la tion
can not
t
ake
place
of it
s own ac
cord, for in that
 case all Buddhistic in
struc
tions, the di
s
ci
-
plines and meth
ods of med
i
t
a
tion for t
he at
t
ain
ment of em
an
ci
p
a
tion
will be use
less.
Ac
cord
ing to the B
uddhistic the
ory
, there can be no vol
un
t
ary
ex
er
tion on the p
art of the as
pi
rant for the break
ing asun
der of his
con
tin
ued worldly ex
pe
ri
ences or ne
science. There is no hope of their
ever com
ing to an end by m
ere ex
haus
tion as the causes con
tinue to
gen
er
ate their ef

fects which again con
tinue to gen
er
ate their own ef

-
fect
s and so on and there is no oc
ca
sion lef
t for prac
tices for at
t
ain
ing
re lease.
Thus in the Buddhist
ic sys
tem re
lease or free
dom can never be
es
t
ab
lished. The teach
ing of the B
ud
dhist
s can
not st
and the test of
rea son ing.
AmH
$meo M
m{deofmV
Aakase chav
iseshat
II.
2.24 (195)
The ca
use
 of A
kas
a (e
the
r) als
o no
t be
ing d
iffe
ren
t (from
 the
tw
o other
 kinds of
 destruc
tion
 it a
lso can
not b
e a non-ent
ity
.)
Akase:
 in the case of Akasa or ether;
Cha:
 also, and;
A
v
iseshat:
because of no specific dif
ference.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he Buddhistic the
ory is con
tin
ued.
W
e have shown in Sutras 22-23 that
 the two kinds of de
struc
tion
(ces sa tion)
are
not
to t
ally
des ti tute
of
all
pos i tive
char ac ter is tics
and
so can
not be non-en
ti
ties. W
e now pro
ceed to show the same with re
-
gard to sp
ace (ether
, Akasa).
The Bud
dhist
s do not re
cog
nise the ex
is
tence of Akasa. They
re
gard Akasa as a non-en
tity
. Akasa is noth
ing but the ab
sence of
cov
er
ing or oc
cu
py
ing body (A
varanabhava). Thi
s is un-rea
son
able.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
213

Akasa has the qual
ity of
 sound, just as earth has smell, wa
ter t
aste,
fire form,
 air touch. Akasa also is a dis
tinct en
tity
 like earth, wa
ter
, etc.
Hence there is no rea
son why Akasa also should be re
jected as a
non-en
tity
, while earth,
 wa
ter
, etc.,
 are re
cog
nised as be
ing en
ti
ties.
Just as earth, air
, etc.,
 are re
garded as en
ti
ties on ac
count of
their be
ing the sub
stra
tum of at

trib utes like smell, et
c., so also Akasa
should be con
sid
ered as an en
tity
 on ac
count of it
s be
ing the sub
stra
-
tum of sound. E
arth, wa
ter
, etc.,
 are ex
pe
ri
enced through their re
-
spec
tive qual

i ties, v
iz., smell,
 t
aste, form,
 touch. The ex
is
tence of
Akasa is ex
pe
ri
enced through it
s qual
ity
, sound. Hence Akasa also
must be an en
tity
.
S
p
ace is in
ferred from it
s at
trib
ute of sound, just
 as earth is in
-
ferred from smell. Where t
here is re
la
tion of sub
st
ance and at
trib
ute
there must be an ob
ject. The B
ud
dhist
s hold that sp
ace is mere
non-ex
is
tence of mat

ter (Avaranabhavamat
ram). If so,
 a bird may fal
l
down as there is no ob
struc
tive m
at
ter
, but how can it f
ly up? Non-ex
-
is
tence of mat

ter is space which is a pos
i
tive ob
ject and not mere ne
-
ga
tion or non-en
tity
.
The doc
trine that
 Akasa is an ab
so
lute non-en
tity
 is not ten
a
ble.
Why do you say so? A
viseshat, be
cause there is no dif

fer ence in the
case of Akasa from any other kind of
 sub
st
ance which is an ob
ject of
per
cep
tion. W
e per
ceive sp
ace when we say
, ﬁthe crow flies in
space.
ﬂ The space,
 there
fore, is as much a real sub
st
ance as the
earth, etc.
 As we know the earth by it
s qual
ity of
 smell, wa
ter by it
s
qual
ity of
 t
aste, and so on, so we know from the qual
ity of
 be
ing the
abode of ob
ject
s, the ex
is
tence of sp
ace, and that it
 has the qual
ity of
sound. Thus Akasa is a real sub
st
ance and not a non-en
tity
.
If A
kasa be a non-en
tity
, then t
he en
tire world would be
come
des ti tute
of
space.
Scrip
tural p
as
sages de
clare ﬁS
p
ace sprang from the At
manﬂ
(
Atm
ana akasassambhut
ah
). So Akasa is a real thing.
 It is a V
astu
(ex ist ing
ob ject)
and
not
non-ex is tence.
O Bud
dhist
s! Y
ou say that ai
r ex
ist
s in Akasa. In the B
auddha
scrip
tures, a se
ries of ques
tions and an
swers be
gin
ning ﬁOn which, O
re
vered Sir
, is the earth f
ounded?ﬂ in which the fol
low
ing ques
tion oc
-
curs, ﬁOn which is the air founded?ﬂ to which it is re
plied that t
he air is
founded on sp
ace (ether). Now it is clear that thi
s st
ate
ment is ap
pro
-
pri
ate only on t
he sup
po
si
tion of sp
ace be
ing a pos
i
tive en
tity
, not a
mere ne
ga
tion. I
f Akasa was to
t
ally non-ex
is
tent,
 what would be the
re cep t
a cle
of
air?
Y
ou can
not say that
 space is not
h
ing but the ab
sence of any oc
-
cu
py
ing ob
ject. This also can
not st
and to rea
son. If y
ou say that
space is not
h
ing but the ab
sence in gen
eral of any cov
er
ing or oc
cu
-
py
ing body
, then when one bird is fly

ing, whereby space is oc
cu
pied,
there would be no room for a sec
ond bird which wishes to fly at t
he
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
214

same time. Y
ou may giv
e an an
swer that the sec
ond bird may fl
y there
where there is ab
sence of a cov
er
ing body
. But
 we de
clare that that
some
thing by which the a
b
sence of cov
er
ing bod
ies is dis
tin
guished
must be a pos
i
tive en
tity
, viz.
, sp
ace in our sense and not the mere
non-ex ist ing
of
cov er ing
bod ies.
More
over
, there is a self-con
tra
dic
tion in the st
ate
ment
s of Bud
-
dhist
s with ref
er
ence to the three kinds of neg
a
tive en
ti
ties
(Nirupakhy
a). They say t
hat the neg
a
tive en
ti
ties are not pos
i
tivel
y
de
fin
able, and also are eter
nal. It
 is ab
surd to t
alk of a non-be
ing as
be
ing eter
nal or ev
a
nes
cent. The dis
tinc
tion of sub
ject
s and pred
i
-
cates of at
tri
bu
tion to
t
ally rest
s on real things. Where there is such
dis
tinc
tion, t
here ex
ist
s the real thing such as pot, et
c., which is not a
mere
un de fin able
ne ga tion
or
non-en tity
.
&
Anusmritescha
II.
2.25 (196)
And o
n accou
nt of mem
ory the things a
re not mo
mentary.
Anusmriteh:
on account of memory;

Cha:
 and.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he Buddhistic the
ory is con
tin
ued.
The the
ory of mo
men
t
ari
ness of the Bud
dhist
s is re
futed here. I
f
ev
ery
thing is mo
men
t
ary the experiencer of some
thing must also be
mo
men
t
ary
. But
 the experiencer is not mo
men
t
ary
, be
cause peo
ple
have the mem

ory of past ex
pe
ri
ences. Mem
ory can t
ake place only in
a man who has pre
vi
ously ex
pe
ri
enced it, be
cause we ob
serve that
what one man has ex
pe
ri
enced is not re
mem
bered by an
other man. I
t
is not that t
he ex
pe
ri
ence is that one sees and an
other re
mem
bers.
Our ex
pe
ri
ence is ﬁI saw and I now re
mem
ber what I saw
.ﬂ He who ex
-
pe
ri
ences and re
mem
bers is the same. He is con
nected with at least
two mo
ment
s. This cer
t
ainly re
futes the t
he
ory of mo
men
t
ari
ness.
The Bud
dhist
s may say that
 mem
ory is due to sim
i
lar
ity
. But
 un
-
less there be one per
ma
nent know
ing sub
ject, who can per
ceive the
sim
i
lar
ity i
n the p
ast with the pres
ent. One can
not say ﬁThis is the pot
,
this is the chair which was in the p
ast.ﬂ So long t
here is not the same
soul which saw and which now
 re
mem
bers, how can mere sim
i
lar
ity
bring about such a con
scious
ness as ﬁI saw and I now re
mem
ber
(Pratyabhij
na)?ﬂ The know
ing sub
ject must be per
ma
nent and not
mo men t
ary
.
Doubt may arise with ref

er ence to an ex
ter
nal ob
ject. Y
ou may
not be able to say
 whether it is iden
ti
cally the same ob
ject which was
per
ceived in the p
ast or some
thing sim
i
lar to it.
 But with ref

er ence to
the Self
, the cog
nis
ing sub
ject, there can nev
er arise any such doubt
whether I am the same who was in the p
ast, for it
 is im
pos
si
ble that
the mem
ory of a thi
ng per
ceived by an
other should ex
ist in one™
s own
Self.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
215

If y
ou say that t
his, the thi
ng re
mem
bered, is like that,
 the thing
seen, in that case also two t
hings are con
nected by one agent.
 If t
he
thing per
ceived was sep
a
rate and ceased to
t
ally
, it can
not be re
ferred
at all. M
ore
over the ex
pe
ri
ence is not that ﬁthi
s is like thatﬂ but t
hat
ﬁthi
s is
 that.ﬂ
W
e ad
mit that
 some
times with ref
er
ence to an ex
ter
nal thing a
doubt may arise whether it
 is that or merely
 is sim
i
lar to that
; be
cause
mis
t
ake may oc
cur con
cern
ing what lies out

side our minds. But the
con
scious sub
ject never has any doubt
 whether it is it

self or only sim i
-
lar to it

self. It is dis
tinctly
 con
scious that it is one and the same sub
ject
which yes
ter
day had a cer
t
ain sen
sa
tion and re
mem
bers that sen
sa
-
tion to
day
. Does any one doubt whether he who re
mem
bers is the
same as he who saw?
For this rea
son also the the
ory of mo
men
t
ari
ness of the Bud
-
dhist
s is to be re
jected.
W
e do not per
ceive ob
ject
s com
ing into ex

is tence in a mo
ment
or van
ish
ing in a mo
ment. Thus t
he the
ory of mo
men
t
ari
ness of all
things is re
futed.
ZmgVmo@
Ñï>
Nasato™drisht
atv
at
II.
2.26 (l97)
(Existe
nce
 or e
ntity doe
s) not (sp
ring) from non-e
xiste
nce
 or
non-entity,
 because
 it is not
 see
n.
Na:
 not;
Asat
ah:
 from non-existence,
 of the unreal,
 of a non-entit
y;
Adrisht
atv
at:
 because it is not seen.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he Buddhistic the
ory is con
tin
ued.
A
 non-en
tity
 has not been ob
served to pro
duce en
tity
. There
fore
it does not st
and to rea
son to sup
pose non-en
tity
 to be the cause.
The Bauddhas (V
ainasikas) as
sert that no ef

fect can be pro -
duced from any
thing that
 is un
chang
ing and eter
nal, be
cause an un
-
chang
ing thing can
not pro
duce an ef

fect. So they de
clare that the
cause per
ishes be
fore the ef

fect is pro duced. They say f
rom the de
-
com
posed seed only the young pl
ant springs, spoilt mil
k only turns
into curds, and the lump of
 clay has ceased to be a lump when it be
-
comes a pot. So ex

is tence co
mes out of non-ex
is
tence.
Ac
cord
ing to the v
iew of the Bud

dhists, a real thing, i
.e.,
 the
world has come into ex
is
tence out of not
h
ing. But
 ex
pe
ri
ence shows
that t
his the
ory is false. A
 pot for in
st
ance is never found to be pro
-
duced with
out clay
. Such a hy
po
thet
i
cal pro
duc
tion can only ex

ist inthe imag
i
na
tion, f
or ex
am
ple, the child of
 a bar
ren woman. Hence the
view
of
the
Bud dhist
s
is
un ten a ble
and
in ad mis si ble.
If ex

is tence can come out of non-ex
is
tence, if be
ing can pro
-
ceed from non-be
ing, then t
he as
sump
tion of spe
cial causes would
have no mean
ing at all.
 Then any
thing may
 come out of any

thing, be -
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
216

cause non-en
tity
 is one and the same in all cases. There is no dif

fer -
ence be
tween the non-en
tity
 of a mango seed and that
 of a jack-seed.
Hence a jack tree may come out of a mango seed.
 S
prout
s also may
orig
i
nate from t
he horns of hares. If t
here are dif

fer ent kinds of
non-ex
is
tence, hav
ing spe
cial dis
tinc
tions just as for in
st
ance, blue
-
ness and the like are the spe
cial qual
i
ties of lo
tuses and so on, the
non-ex
is
tence of a mango seed will dif

fer from that of a jack-seed,
and then this would turn non-en
ti
ties into en
ti
ties.
More
over if ex

is tence springs from non-ex
is
tence all ef

fects
would be af

fected with non-ex

is tence, but t
hey are seen to be pos
i
tive
en ti ties
with
their
var i ous
spe cial
char ac ter is tics.
The horn of a hare is non-ex
is
tent.
 What can come out from t
hat
horn? W
e see only be
ing emerg
ing from be
ing, e.g.
, or
na
ment from
gold, etc.
Ac
cord
ing to the B
auddhas, all mind and all m
en
t
al mod
i
fi
ca
-
tions spring from the f
our Skandhas and all ma
te
rial ag
gre
gates from
the at
oms. And y
et they
 say at the same t
ime that en
tity
 is born of
non-en tity
.
This
is
cer t
ainly
quite
in con sis tent
and
self-con tra dic tory
.
They stul
tify
 their own doc
trine and need
lessly con
fuse the minds of
ev ery
one.
CXmgrZmZm_
{n M¡
d§ {g{
Udasinanamap
i chaiv
am siddh
ih
II.
2.27 (198)
And t
hus (i
f exist
ence should s
prin
g fr
om non
-existenc
e, th
ere
wou
ld re
sul
t) the
 attain
me
nt of the
 goa
l by th
e i
ndiffe
ren
t and
non-active people
 also.
Udasianam:
 of the indif
ferent and non-activ
e;
Api:
 even, also;

Cha:
and;
Evam:
 thus;
Siddih:
 success
 accomplishment, and at
t
ainment
of the goal.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he Buddhistic the
ory is con
tin
ued.
If it
 were ad
mit
ted that
 ex
is
tence or en
tity
 springs from non-ex
is
-
tence or non-en
tity
, lazy in
ac
tive peo
ple also would at
t
ain their pur
-
pose. Rice will grow even if t
he farmer does not cul
ti
vate his f
ield. Jars
will shape them
selves even if t
he pot
ter does not fash
ion the clay
. The
weaver too will hav
e fin
ished pieces of cloth with
out weav
ing. No
body
will have to ex

ert him self in the least
 ei
ther for go
ing to the heav

enlyworld or for at
t
ain
ing fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion. A
ll this is ab
surd and not
main
t
ained by any
body
.
Thus the doc
trine of t
he orig
i
na
tion of ex

is tence or en
tity
 from
non-ex is tence
or
non-en tity

is
un ten a ble
or
in ad mis si ble.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
217

Nabhav
adhikaranam
: T
opic 5 (Sutras 28-32)
Refut
ation of t
he Bauddha Idealist
Zm^md Cnb
ãYo
–
Nabhava up
alabdheh
lI.2.
28 (199)
The non-e
xiste
nce
 (of e
ternal things)
 cannot b
e ma
intaine
d; on
account of (our) consciousness (of th
em).
Na:
 not;
Abhavah:
 non-existence;
Up
alabdheh:
 because they are
perceived, because of perception, because we are conscious of them
on account of their being ex
perienced.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he Buddhistic the
ory is con
tin
ued. From
this Su
tra be
gins the ref
u
t
a
tion of B
uddhistic Ide
al
ist
s.
The doc
trine of t
he Bud
dhist which af

firms the mo men
t
ary ex
is
-
tence of ex
ter
nal ob
ject
s has been re
futed.
 The Sutrakara or the au
-
thor of the S
utras now pro
ceeds to re
fute t
he doc
trine of t
he
Buddhistic school which af

firms the mo men
t
ari
ness of thought, which
de
clares that only ideas ex

ist and noth ing else.
Ac
cord
ing to the B
uddhistic Ide
al
ist
s (V
ijnanavadins), t
he ex
ter
-
nal world is non-ex
is
tent.
 They main
t
ain that ev

ery phe nom
e
non re
-
solves it

self into con scious
ness and idea with
out any re
al
ity
cor
re
spond
ing to it.
 This is not cor
rect. The ex
ter
nal phe
nom
ena are
not non-ex
is
tent as they
 are ac
tu
ally wit
nessed by our senses of per
-
cep
tion. The ex

ter nal world is an ob
ject of ex

pe ri
ence through the
senses. It can
not there
fore, be non-ex
is
tent like t
he horns of a hare.
The V
ijnanavadins say:
 No ex
ter
nal ob
ject ex
ist
s apart
 from
con scious ness
.
There
is
im pos si bil ity

for
the
ex is tence
of
out ward
things. Be
cause if out
ward ob
ject
s are ad
mit
ted, t
hey must be ei
ther
at
oms or ag
gre
gates of at
oms such as chairs
, pot
s, etc. But
 at
oms
can
not be com
pre
hended un
der the ideas of chair
, etc. I
t is not pos
si
-
ble for cog
ni
tion to rep
re
sent things as min
ute as at
oms. There is no
rec
og
ni
tion of at

oms and so the ob ject
s could not be at
oms. They
could not be atomic com
bi
na
tions be
cause we can
not af

firm if suchcom
bi
na
tions are one with at
oms or sep
a
rate there
from.
Ac
cord
ing to the V
ijnanavadins or the Y
ogachara sys
tem the
V
ijnana Skandha or idea alone is real. A
n ob
ject like pot or chair
which is per
ceived out

side is noth ing more than ideas. The V
ijnana or
idea mod
i
fies it

self into the form of an ob
ject. Al
l worldly ac
tiv
i
ties can
go on with mere ideas, just as in dream all
 ac
tiv
i
ties are per
formed
with the t
hought ob
ject
s. Ideas only ex

ist. It is use
less to as
sume that
the ob
ject is some
thing dif

fer ent from t
he idea. It
 is pos
si
ble to have
prac
ti
cal thought and in
ter
course with
out ex
ter
nal ob
ject
s, just as it is
done in dream. All
 prac
ti
cal pur
poses are well ren
dered pos
si
ble by
ad
mit
ting the re
al
ity of
 ideas only
, be
cause no good pur
pose is served
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
218

by
ad di tional
as sump tion
of
ex ter nal
ob ject
s
cor re spond ing
to
in ter nal
ideas.
The mind as
sumes dif

fer ent shapes ow
ing to the dif

fer ent
V
asanas or de
sire-im
pres
sions sub
merged in it. Just as t
hese
V
asanas cre
ate the dream world, so t
he ex
ter
nal world in the wak
ing
st
ate is also the re
sult of V
asanas. The as
sump
tion of an ex

ter nal ob
-
ject is un
nec
es
sary
. W
e do not see any sep

a ra
tion of cog
ni
tion and
ob
ject. In dream we cog
nise with
out ob
ject
s. Even so in t
he wak
ing
st
ate there could be cog
ni
tion with
out ob
ject
s. Our manifoldness of
V
asanas can ac
count for such cognitions.
Per
cep
tion in the wak
ing st
ate is like a dream. The ideas t
hat
are pres
ent dur
ing a dream ap
pear in the form of
 sub
ject and ob
ject,
al
though there is no ex
ter
nal ob
ject. Hence, the i
deas of chair
, pot,
which oc
cur in our wak
ing st
ate are like
wise in
de
pend
ent of ex

ter nal
ob
ject
s, be
cause they also im
ply ideas.
This ar
gu
ment is fal
la
cious. When you see a chair or a pot how
can you deny it
? When you eat, y
our hun
ger is ap
peased. How can
you doubt t
he hun
ger or the food? Y
ou say that t
here is no ob
ject
ap
art from your cog
ni
tion on ac
count of your ca
pri
cious
ness. Why do
you not see a chair as a pot? If
 an ob
ject is a mere men
t
al cre
ation like
a dream why should the mind lo
cate it out

side?The Bud
dhist may say
 ﬁI do not af

firm that I have no con
scious
-
ness of an ob
ject. I al
so feel that t
he ob
ject ap
pears as an ex
ter
nal
thing, but
 what I af

firm is this that I am al
ways con
scious of noth
ing di
-
rectly save my
 own ideas. My idea alone shines as some
thing ex
ter
-
nal. Con
se
quently t
he ap
pear
ance of the ex
ter
nal things is the re
sult
of my own ideas.
ﬂ
W
e re
ply that
 the very f
act of your con
scious
ness proves that
there is an ex
ter
nal ob
ject giv
ing rise to the idea of
 externalit
y
. That
the
ex ter nal
ob ject
ex ist
s
ap
art
from
con scious ness

has
nec es sar ily
to be ac
cepted on the ground of t
he na
ture of con
scious
ness it

self. No one when per
ceiv
ing a chair or a pot is con
scious of his per
cep
tion
only
, but all are con
scious of chair or a pot and the like as ob
ject
s of
per cep tion.
Y
ou (V
ijnanavadins) say that
 the in
ter
nal con
scious
ness or idea
ap
pears as some
thing ex
ter
nal. This al
ready in
di
cates that the ex

ter -
nal world is real. If i
t were not real, y
our say
ing like some
thing ex
ter
nal
would be mean
ing
less. The word ‚like™
 shows that you ad
mit the re
al
-
ity of
 the ex
ter
nal ob
ject
s. Oth
er
wise you would not have used t
his
word. Be
cause no one makes a com
p
ar
i
son with a thing which is an
ab
so
lute un
re
al
ity
. No one says that Ramakrishna is like the son of a
bar ren
woman.
An idea like a lamp re
quires an ul
te
rior in
tel
lec
tual prin
ci
ple or
illuminer to ren
der it man
i
fest. V
ijnana has a be
gin
ning and an end. It
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
219

also be
longs to the cat
e
gory of the known. T
he knower is as in
dis
-
pens
able of cognitions as of ob
ject
s.
The Bud
dhist ide
al
ist, while con
tend
ing that t
here is noth
ing out

-
side the mind, f
or
get
s the fal
lacy of t
he ar
gu
ment. I
f the world, as t
hey
ar
gue, were only an out
ward ex
pres
sion of in
ter
nal ideas, then t
he
world also would be just mind. But
 the Bud
dhist
s ar
gue that t
he mind,
which is os
ten
si
bly in t
he in
di
vid
ual, is also the world out

side. Herethe ques
tion arises: How does the idea of t
here be
ing noth
ing out

sidearise with
out the mind i
t

self be ing out

side? The con scious
ness that
noth
ing ex
ist
s out

side can not arise if there is re
ally not
h
ing out

side.Hence the Bud
dhist V
ijnanavada doc
trine is de
fec
tive.
When the Bud
dhist
s came to know of the il
log
i
cal
ity of
 their con
-
cept, they
 mod
i
fied their doc
trine say
ing that t
he mind re
ferred to here
is not the in
di
vid
ual mind but t
he cos
mic mind, known as
Alaya-V
ijnana, which is the re
pos
i
tory of al
l in
di
vid
ual minds in a po
-
ten
tial form.
 Here the Bud
dhist stum
bles on the V
edant
a doc
trine that
the world is a man
i
fes
t
a
tion of t
he Uni
ver
sal Mind.
d¡Yå
`m©… Z ñ
dßZm{X
V
aidharm
y
accha na sv
apnadiv
at
II.
2.29 (200)
And on ac
count
 of t
he diff
erence in na
tur
e (in con
sciousn
ess
be
twee
n the wak
ing and the
 dre
aming state
, the e
xpe
rience
 of
the
 wak
ing sta
te)
 is no
t like
 dre
ams
, etc
., etc
.
V
aidharm
y
at:
on account of dif
ference of nature, because of
dissimilar
ity;
Cha:
 and, also;
Na:
 not;
Sv
apnadiv
at:
 like dreams etc.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he Buddhistic the
ory is con
tin
ued.
The wak
ing st
ate is not like dream,
 etc., be
cause of dis
sim
i
lar
ity
.
The ideas of the wak
ing st
ate are not like those of
 a dream on ac
count
of their dif

fer ence of na
ture.
The Bud
dhist
s say: The per
cep
tion of t
he ex
ter
nal world is like
the dream. There are no ex
ter
nal ob
ject
s in a dream and yet t
he ideas
man
i
fest as sub
ject and ob
ject. Ev
en so the ap
pear
ance of the ex
ter
-
nal
uni verse
is
in de pend ent
of
any
ob jec tive
re al ity
.
The anal
ogy of dream phe
nom
ena to the phe
nom
ena of the
wak
ing world is wrong. The con
scious
ness in a dream and that in a
wake
ful st
ate are dis
sim
i
lar
. The con
scious
ness in a dream de
pends
on the pre
vi
ous con
scious
ness in the wake
ful st
ate, but
 the con
-
scious
ness in the wake
ful st
ate does not de
pend on any
thing else,
but on the ac
tual per
cep
tion by senses. Fur
ther the dream ex
pe
ri
ence
be
come false as soon as one wakes up. The dream
ing man says as
soon as he wakes up, ﬁI wrongly dreamt that I
 had a meet
ing with the
col
lec
tor
. No such meet
ing took place. My
 mind was dulled by sleep
and so the false ideas arose.ﬂ Those things on the con
trary
, of which
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
220

we are con
scious in our wak
ing st
ate such as post and the like, are
never ne
gated in any st
ate. They
 st
and un
chal
lenged and un
con
tra
-
dicted. Ev
en af

ter hun dreds of years they will
 have the same ap
pear
-
ance as now
.
More
over dream phe
nom
ena are mere mem
o
ries whereas the
phe
nom
ena of the wak
ing st
ate are ex
pe
ri
enced as re
al
i
ties. The dis
-
tinc tion
be tween
re mem brance
and
ex pe ri ence
or
im me di ate
con
-
scious
ness is di
rectly real
ised by ev
ery
one as be
ing founded on the
ab
sence or pres
ence of the ob
ject. When a man re
mem
bers his ab
-
sent son, he does not di
rectly meet
 him. Si
m
ply be
cause there is sim
i
-
lar
ity be
tween dream st
ate and wak
ing st
ate we can
not say that
 they
have the same na
ture. If
 a char
ac
ter
is
tic is not the na
ture of an ob
ject
it will not
 be
come it
s in
her
ent na
ture sim
ply by be
ing sim
i
lar to an ob
-
ject which has that na
ture. Y
ou can
not say that
 fire which burns is cold
be
cause it has char
ac
ter
is
tics in com
mon with wa
ter
.
Hence the dream
ing st
ate and the wak
ing st
ate are to
t
ally dis
-
sim i lar
in
their
in her ent
na ture.
Z ^mdmo@
Zwnb
ãYo
Na bhavo™nup
alabdheh
II.
2.30 (201)
T
he ex
istence (of Samskaras or mental i
mpressions) is not
possibl
e (accor
ding
 to t
he Bauddhas
), on
 accoun
t of
 the
absence of perc
eption (
of extern
al t
hin
gs).
Na:
 not;
Bhav
ah:
 existence (of impressions or Samskaras);
Anup
alabdheh:
 because they are not perceived,
 because (external
things) are not experienced.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he Buddhistic the
ory is con
tin
ued.
Ac
cord
ing to your doc
trine there could be no ex
is
tence of
V
asanas or men
t
al im
pres
sions as you deny the ex

is tence of ob
ject
s.
Y
ou say that t
hough an ex
ter
nal thing does not ac
tu
ally ex

ist, yet
it
s im
pres
sions do ex
ist, and from t
hese im
pres
sions di
ver
si
ties of
per
cep
tion and ideas like chair
, tree arise. This is not
 pos
si
ble, as
there can be no per
cep
tion of an ex

ter nal thing which is it

self non-ex -
is
tent.
 If t
here be no per
cep
tion of an ex

ter nal thing, how can it
 leave
an
im pres sion?
If y
ou say that t
he V
asanas or the men
t
al im
pres
sions are Anadi
(beginningless, or cause
less), this will land you i
n the log
i
cal fal
lacy of
regressus
ad
in fi ni t
um
. This would in no way es
t
ab
lish your po
si
tion.
V
asanas are Samskaras or im
pres
sions and im
ply a cause and ba
sis
or sub
stra
tum, but
 for you there is no cause or ba
sis for V
asanas or
men
t
al im
pres
sions, as you say that
 it can
not be cog
nised through
any means of knowl
edge.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
221

j{UH
Kshanikatv
accha
II.
2.31 (202)
And on account of the momentariness (of th
e Alayavijnana or
ego-consciousne
ss it cann
ot be the abod
e of the Samskaras or
mental impressions).
Kshanikatv
at:
 on account of the moment
ariness;
Cha:
 and.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he Buddhistic the
ory is con
tin
ued.
The
men t
al
im pres sions
can not
ex ist
with out
a
re cep t
a cle
or
abode. Ev
en the Alay
avijnana or ego-con
scious
ness can
not be the
abode of men
t
al im
pres
sions as it is also mo
men
t
ary ac
cord
ing to the
Buddhistic vi
ew
.
Un less
there
ex ist
s
one
con tin u ous
per ma nent
prin ci ple
equally
con
nected with the p
ast, the pres
ent and the f
u
ture, or an ab
so
lutely
un
change
able Self which cog
nises ev
ery
thing, we are un
able to ac
-
count for re
mem
brance, rec
og
ni
tion, which are sub
ject to men
t
al im
-
pres
sions de
pend
ent on place, ti
me and cause. If y
ou say that
Alayav
ijnana is some
thing per
ma
nent then t
hat would con
tra
dict your
doc trine
of
mo men t
ari ness.
W
e have thus re
futed t
he doc
trine of t
he Bud
dhist
s which holds
the mo
men
t
ary re
al
ity of
 the ex
ter
nal world and the doc
trine which de
-
clares that ideas only ex

ist.gd©W
mZwn
&
Sarv
athanup
ap
attescha
II.
2.32 (203)
And (as the Bauddha system is) illogical in every way (it
 cannot
be acce
pted).
Sarv
atha:
 in every way
;
Anup
ap
atteh:
 because of it
s not being
proved illogical;

Cha:
 and, also.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he Buddhistic the
ory is con
cluded here.
The Sunyav
ada or Ni
hil
ism of the B
ud
dhist which as
sert
s that
noth
ing ex
ist
s is fal
la
cious be
cause it goes against ev
ery method of
proof, vi
z., per
cep
tion, in
fer
ence, tes
ti
mony and anal
ogy
. It
 goes
against the Srut
i and ev
ery means of right knowl
edge. Hence it has to
be to
t
ally ig
nored by those who care for their own hap
pi
ness and wel
-
fare. It
 need not be dis
cussed in de
t
ail as it giv
es way on all sides, like
the walls of a well dug in sandy
 soil. It
 has no foun
da
tion what
ever to
rest upon. Any
 endeavour to use this sys
tem as a guide in the prac
ti
-
cal con
cerns of life is mere folly
.
O Sunyav
adins! Y
ou must ad
mit y
our
self to be a be
ing and your
rea
son
ing also to be some
thing and not not
h
ing. This con
tra
dict
s your
the
ory that al
l is noth
ing.
Fur
ther
, the means of
 knowl
edge by which Sunyat
a is to be
proved must at l
east be real and must be ac
knowl
edged to be true,
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
222

be
cause if such means of knowl
edge and ar
gu
ment
s be them
selves
noth
ing, then t
he the
ory of noth
ing
ness can
not be es
t
ab
lished. If
these means and ar
gu
ment
s be true, then some
thing cer
t
ainly is
proved. Then also th
e the
ory of noth
ing
ness is dis
proved.
Ekasmi
nnasambhav
adhikaranam
: T
opic 6 (Sutras 33-36)
Refut
ation of t
he Jaina Doctrine
Z¡H
$pñ_
Naikasmin
nasambhav
at
II.
2.33 (204)
On a
cco
unt o
f the
 imp
oss
ibil
ity (o
f con
tradi
ctory
 attrib
ute
s) in
one
 and the
 same
 thing at the sa
me tim
e (the
 Jaina do
ctrine is
)
not (
to be accepted).
Na:
 not;
Ekasmi
n:
 in one;
Asambhav
at:
 on account of the
impossib
ility
.
Af

ter the ref u
t
a
tion of t
he Buddhistic doc
trine of mo
men
t
ari
ness,
V
ijnanavada and Ni
hil
ism, the Jaina doc
trine is t
aken up for dis
cus
-
sion
and
ref u t
a tion.
The Jainas ac
knowl
edge seven cat
e
go
ries or T
attv
as, viz.,
soul(Jiva), non-soul (Ajiva),
 the is
su
ing out
ward(Asrava), re
straint
(Samvara), de
struc
tion (Nirjara), bond
age (Bandha), and re
lease
(Moksha). These cat
e
go
ries can be mainly di
vided int
o two group
s,
the soul and the non-soul. The Jainas say also t
hat there are fiv
e
Astikayas vi
z., Jiva or soul, P
udgala (body
, mat
ter), Dharma (merit),
Adharma (de
merit) and Akasa (sp
ace).
Their chief doc
trine is the Sapt
abhanginyaya.
 They pred
i
cate
seven dif

fer ent views with ref

er ence to the re
al
ity of
 ev
ery
thing, i.
e., it
may ex
ist, may
 not ex
ist, may
 ex
ist and may not
 ex
ist, may
 be in
ex
-
press
ible, may
 ex
ist and may be in
ex
press
ible, may
 not ex
ist and may
be in
ex
press
ible and may ex

ist and may not ex
ist and may be in
ex
-
press ible.
Now this view about t
hings can
not be ac
cepted, be
cause in one
sub
st
ance it is not pos
si
ble that con
tra
dic
tory qual
i
ties should ex
ist si
-
mul
t
a
neously
. No one ever sees the same ob
ject to be hot and cold at
the same time.
 Si
mul
t
a
neous ex
is
tence of light
 and dark
ness in one
place
is
im pos si ble.
Ac
cord
ing to the Jaina doc
trine, heav
en and lib
er
a
tion may
 ex
ist
or may not ex

ist. This world, heaven and even lib
er
a
tion will be
come
doubt

ful. We can
not ar
rive at any
 def
i
nite knowl
edge. It
 would be use
-
less to lay down rules of prac
tice for the at

tain
ment of heav
en, for the
avoid
ance of hell or for eman
ci
p
a
tion be
cause there is no cer
t
ainty
about any
thing. The heav
en may as well be hell and f
i
nal free
dom not
dif

fer ent from t
hese. As ev
ery
thing is am
big
u
ous, there would be
noth
ing to dis
tin
guish heaven, hell and f
i
nal lib
er
a
tion from each
other
.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
223

Con
fu
sion will arise not only wit
h re
gard to the ob
ject of the
world, but of t
he world also. If t
hings are in
def
i
nite, and if
 ev
ery
thing is
ﬁsome
how it is, some
how it is not,ﬂ t
hen a man who want
s wa
ter will
t
ake fire to quench his thirst and so on with ev

ery thing else, be
cause it
may be that
 fire is hot, i
t may be t
hat fire is cold.
If t
here is such doubt how can true knowl
edge re
sult? How can
the Jaina teach
ers teach any
thing with cer
t
ainty i
f ev
ery
thing is doubt

-
ful? How can their fol
low
ers act at all, learn
ing such teach
ings?
Ap
ply
ing this Sapt
abhanginyaya t
o their fiv
e Astikayas, t
he five
may be
come four or even less. If
 they are in
ex
press
ible, why do t
hey
t
alk about it?
W
e have al
ready re
futed t
he atomic the
ory on which is based
the Jaina doc
trine that
 Pudgala (mat
ter) is due to atomic com
bi
na
tion.
Hence
the
Jaina
doc trine
is
un ten a ble
and
in ad mis si ble.
Their
logic is frag
ile as the thread of a spi
der and can
not st
and the strain of
rea son ing.
Ed§ MmË_
mH$mËñÝ
`©_²
Ev
am chatmakart
sny
am
II.
2.34 (205)
And
 in the
 sam
e w
ay (the
re re
sul
ts from
 the
 Jaina
 do
ctrine
) the

non-u
nive
rsality of the
 sou
l.
Evam:
 thus, in the same way
, as it is suggested by t
he Jaina theory;
Cha:
 also, and;
Atma-akart
sny
am:
 non-universality
 of the soul.
Other de
fect
s of the Jaina the
ory are shown.
W
e have hith
erto spo
ken about the ob
jec
tion re
sult
ing from the
Syadv
ada of the Jainas, v
iz., that
 one thing can
not have con
tra
dic
tory
at
trib
utes. W
e now turn to the ob
jec
tion that
 from their doc
trine it
would fol
low that t
he in
di
vid
ual soul is not uni
ver
sal, i.e.
, not om
ni
-
pres ent.
The Jainas hold that t
he soul is of the size of the body
. In t
hat
case it would be lim
ited and with p
art
s. Hence it can
not be eter
nal and
om ni pres ent.
More
over
, as the bod
ies of dif

fer ent classes of crea
tures are of
dif

fer ent sizes, the soul of a m
an t
ak
ing the body of
 an el
e
phant on ac
-
count of it
s past
 deeds will not be able to f
ill up that
 body
. The soul of
an ant also will not be abl
e to fill
 up the body of
 an el
e
phant. The soul
of an el
e
phant will not hav
e suf

fi cient sp
ace in the body of
 an ant. A
large por
tion of it
 will have to be out

side that body. The soul of a child
or a youth be
ing smaller in size will not be able t
o fill com
pletely
 the
body of a grown-up man.
The st
a
bil
ity of
 the di
men
sions of the soul is im
p
aired. The Jaina
the
ory it

self falls to the ground.
The Jainas may give an an
swer that a Jiva has in
fi
nite limbs and
there
fore could ex
p
and or con
tract. B
ut could those in
fi
nite limbs be in
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
224

the same place or not? If
 they could not
, how could they be com
-
pressed in a small space? If
 they could,
 then all the l
imbs must be in
the same place and can
not ex
p
and into a big body
. More
over they
have no right t
o as
sume that a Jiva has in
fi
nite limbs.
 What is there to
jus
tify
 the view t
hat a body of
 lim
ited size con
t
ains an in
fi
nite num
ber
of soul p
ar
ti
cles?
W
ell then, t
he Jainas may re
ply
, let us as
sume that by
 turns
when
ever the soul en
ters a big body
, some p
ar
ti
cles ac
cede to it,
while some with
draw from it, when
ever it en
ters a small body
.
T
o this hy
poth
e
sis, the next
 Su
tra gives a suit

able an swer
.
Z M n`m©
`mXß`{
damoY
mo {dH
$mam{X
Na cha p
ary
ay
adapy
av
irodho v
ikaradibh
y
ah
II.
2.35 (206)
Nor is non-contr
adiction to be derived
 from t
he succe
ssion (of
part
s accor
ding
 to an
d departi
ng f
rom t
he soul to s
uch
diffe
ren
t bo
die
s) o
n acc
ou
nt of the
 chan
ge
, etc
., (of the
 sou
l).
Na:
 not;
Cha:
 also, and;
Pary
ay
at:
 in turn, because of assuming by
succession
;
Api:
 even;
A
v
irodhah:
 no inconsistency;
V
ikaradibh
y
ah:
 on account of change, etc.
Fur
ther de
fect
s of the Jaina doc
trine are shown in this Su
tra.
The Jaina may say t
hat the soul is re
ally in
def
i
nite in it
s size.
There
fore when it an
i
mates the bod
ies of an in
fant or a yout
h it has
that size, and when it
 oc
cu
pies the bod
ies of horses or el
e
phant
s it ex
-
p
ands it

self to that size. By suc
ces
sive ex
p
an
sion and di
la
tion like the
gas it fully
 oc
cu
pies the en
tire body which an
i
mates for the t
ime be
ing.
Then there is no ob
jec
tion to our t
he
ory that t
he soul is of the size of
the body
.
Even if
 you say that
 the limbs of t
he soul keep out or come in ac
-
cord
ing as the body is small or big,
 you can
not get ov
er the ob
jec
tion
that in such a case the soul will be li
a
ble to change and con
se
quently
will not be eter
nal. Then any
 t
alk of bond
age and eman
ci
p
a
tion would
be mean
ing
less. The fu
til
ity of
 the ques
tion of re
lease and of the phi
-
los
o
phy that
 deals with it would re
sult.
If t
he soul™
s limbs can come and go, how could it be dif

fer ent in
na
ture from the body
? So one of t
hese limbs only can be the A
t
man.
Who can fix it
? Whence do the limbs of the soul come? Where do they

t
ake rest? They can
not spring from the m
a
te
rial el
e
ment
s and re-en
-
ter the el
e
ment
s be
cause the soul is im
mor
t
al. The lim
bs come and
go. The soul will be of an
 in
def
i
nite na
ture and st
at
ure.
The Jaina may say t
hat al
though the soul™
s size suc
ces
sively
changes it may y
et be per
ma
nent. Just as the stream of
 wa
ter is per
-
ma nent
al though
the
wa ter
con tin u ally
changes.
Then the same ob
jec
tion as that urged against
 the Bud
dhist
s
will arise. If
 such a con
ti
nu
ity i
s not real but is only ap
p
ar
ent, t
here will
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
225

be no At
man at all.
 W
e are led back to the doc
trine of a gen
eral void. I
f
it is some
thing real, t
he soul will be li
a
ble to change and hence not
eter
nal. This will ren
der the view of t
he Jaina im
pos
si
ble.
AÝË`mdp
ñWVoü
mo^`{
ZË`ËdmX{
Anty
av
asthiteschobhay
anity
atv
adav
isesah
II.
2.36 (207)
And on ac
count
 of t
he permanenc
y of t
he fin
al (s
ize of t
he soul
on rel
eas
e) a
nd the re
sulting pe
rmanenc
y of the two
 (pre
ce
ding
size
s), the
re i
s no
 diffe
ren
ce
 (of s
ize
 of the
 sou
l, at an
y time
).
Anty
av
asthi
teh:
 because of the permanency of t
he size at the end;
Cha:
 and;
Ubhay
anity
atv
at:
 as both are permanent;
A
v
iseshah:
because there being no dif
ference.
Dis
cus
sion on the de
fect
s of the Jaina doc
trine is con
cluded.
Fur
ther the Jainas them
selves ad
mit the per
ma
nency of the f
i
-
nal size of the soul, which it
 has in the st
age of re
lease. From this it
 fol
-
lows also that it
s ini
tial size and it
s in
ter
ven
ing size must be
per
ma
nent. There
fore there is no dif

fer ence be
tween the three sizes.
What is the spe
ci
al
ity of
 the st
ate of re
lease? There is no pe
cu
liar
ity of

dif

fer ence, ac
cord
ing to the Jainas, be
tween the st
ate of re
lease and
the mun
dane st
ate. The dif

fer ent bod
ies of the soul have one and t
he
same size and the soul can
not en
ter into big
ger and smaller bod
ies.
The soul must be re
garded as be
ing al
ways of the same size, whether
min
ute or in
fi
nite and not of
 the vary
ing sizes of the bod
ies.
There
fore the Jaina doc
trine that
 the soul var
ies ac
cord
ing to
the size of the body
 is un
ten
a
ble and in
ad
mis
si
ble. It
 must be set
aside as not in any way more ra
tio
nal than the doc
trine of t
he
Bauddhas.
Paty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 7 (Sutras 37-41)
Refut
ation of t
he Pasup
at
a System
nË`
wagm
_ÄOñ`m
Paty
urasamanj
asy
at
II.
2.37 (208)
The Lo
rd (c
anno
t be
 the
 effi
cie
nt or the
 op
era
tive
 cau
se
 of the
wor
ld) on
 accoun
t of
 the in
consi
stency
 (of t
hat
 doctr
ine).
Paty
uh:
 of the Lord, of
 Pasup
ati, of
 the Lord of animals;
Asamanjasy
at:
 on account of inconsistency
, on account of
untenableness, inappropriateness.
The Pasup
at
as or the Mahesvaras are di
vided int
o four classes,
viz.,
 Kap
ala, Kalam
ukha, Pasup
at
a and Saiva.
 Their scrip
ture de
-
scribes five cat
e
go
ries, viz.,
 Cause (Ka
ra
na), Ef

fect (Karya), Un
ion
(Y
oga by the prac
tice of med
i
t
a
tion), Rit

ual (Vidhi) and the end of p
ain
or sor
row (Duhkhanta), i
.e.,
 the fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion. Thei
r cat
e
go
ries
were re
vealed by t
he great Lord Pasup
ati Him
self in or
der to break
the bonds of the soul called herein P
asu or an
i
mal.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
226

In this sys
tem Pasup
ati is the op
er
a
tive or t
he ef

fi cient cause
(Nimitt
a Ka
ra
na). Mahat and t
he rest are the ef

fects. Un
ion means un
-
ion with Pasup
ati, t
heir God, through ab
stract med
i
t
a
tion. Thei
r rit
u
als
con
sist of bath
ing thrice a day
, smear
ing the fore
head with ashes,
interturning t
he fin
gers in re
li
gious wor
ship (Mudra), wear
ing
Rudraksha on the neck and arms, tak
ing food in a hu
man skull,
smear
ing the body wit
h ashes of a burnt hu
man body
, wor
ship
ping
the de
ity i
m
mersed in a wine-ves
sel. By wor
ship
ping the Pasup
ati the
soul at
t
ains prox
im
ity wit
h the Lord, and there ac
crues a stat
e of ces
-
sa
tion of all
 de
sires and all p
ains which is Moksha.
The fol
low
ers of this school re
cog
nise God as the ef

fi cient or the
op er a tive
cause.
They
re cog nise
the
pri mor dial
mat ter
as
the
ma te rial
cause of the world. This the
ory is con
trary to t
he view of t
he Sruti
where Brah
man is st
ated to be bot
h the ef

fi cient and the ma
te
rial
cause of the world. Hence the the
ory of Pasup
at
as can
not be ac
-
cepted.
Ac
cord
ing to V
edant
a, the Lord is both t
he ef

fi cient and the ma
-
te
rial cause of the uni
verse. The Naiyay
ikas, V
aiseshikas, Y
ogins and
Mahesvaras say that t
he Lord is the ef

fi cient cause only and the ma
te
-
rial cause is ei
ther the at
oms, ac
cord
ing to the Naiy
ayikas and
V
aiseshikas, or the Pradhana, ac
cord
ing to the Y
ogins and
Mahesvaras. He is the ruler of t
he Pradhana and the souls which are
dif
 fer ent
from
Him.
This view is wrong and in
con
sis
tent.
 Be
cause God will be p
ar
tial
to some and prej
u
diced against oth
ers. Be
cause some are pros
per
-
ous, while oth
ers are mis
er
a
ble in this uni
verse. Y
ou can
not ex
plain
this say
ing that such dif

fer ence is due to di
ver
sity of
 Karma, f
or if the
Lord di
rect
s Karma, they
 will be
come mu
tu
ally de
pend
ent. Y
ou can
-
not ex
plain this on the ground of
 beginninglessness, for the de
fect of
mu tual
de pend ence
will
per sist.
Y
our doc
trine is in
ap
pro
pri
ate be
cause you hold the Lord to be a
spe
cial kind of soul. From t
his it fol
lows that He must be de
void of al
l
ac tiv ity
.
The Sutrakara him
self has proved in the pre
vi
ous Sec
tion of t
his
book that the Lord is the m
a
te
rial cause as well as the ruler of the
world
(ef
 fi cient
or
the
op er a tive
cause).
It is im
pos
si
ble that t
he Lord should be the mere ef

fi cient cause
of the world, be
cause His con
nec
tion with t
he world can
not be es
t
ab
-
lished. In or
di
nary worldly lif
e we see that a pot
ter who is merely the
ef

fi cient cause of the pot has a cer
t
ain con
nec
tion with t
he clay with
which he fash
ions the pot.
The Srutis em
phat
i
cally de
clare ‚I will be
come many™
 (T
ait. Up.
II.
6). This in
di
cates that the Lord is bot
h the ef

fi cient and the ma
te
rial
cause of the uni
verse.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
227

gå~ÝYmZw
nnÎmo
Samband
hanup
ap
attescha
II.
2.38 (209)
And because relat
ion (
between th
e Lord an
d th
e Pradha
na or
the soul
s) is
 not pos
sible.
Sambandha:
 relation;
Anup
ap
atteh:
 because of the impossibilit
y;
Cha:
 and.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he Pasup
at
a view is con
tin
ued.
A
 Lord who is dis
tinct from t
he Pradhana and the souls can
not
be the ruler of the l
at
ter with
out be
ing con
nected with them i
n a cer
t
ain
way
. It
 can
not be con
junc
tion (Samy
oga), be
cause the Lord, the
Pradhana and the souls are of in
fi
nite ex
tent and des
ti
tute of
 p
art
s.
Hence they can
not be ruled by Him.
There could not be Samav
aya-sambandha (in
her
ence) which
sub sist
s
be tween
en ti ties
in sep
 a ra bly
con nected
as
whole
and
p
art,
sub
st
ance and at
trib
utes etc., (as in t
he case of T
antu-p
at
a, thread
and cloth), be
cause it would be im
pos
si
ble to de
fine who should be
the abode and who the abid
ing thing.
The dif

fi culty does not arise in t
he case of the V
edantins. They
say that B
rah
man is Abhinna-Nimit
t
a-Upadana,
 the ef

fi cient cause
and the ma
te
rial cause of the world. They
 af

firmT
adatmya-sambandha (re
la
tion of iden
tity
). Fur
ther they de
pend on
the Sruti
s for their au
thor
ity
. They de
fine the na
ture of the cause and
so on, on the ba
sis of Sruti.
 They are, t
here
fore, not obl
iged to ren
der
their
ten et
s
en tirely
con form able
to
ob ser va tion
as
the
op po nent
s
have to.
The Pasup
at
as can
not say that
 they hav
e the sup
port of the
Aga
ma (T
an
tras) for af

firm ing Om
ni
science about God. Such a st
ate
-
ment suf

fers from the de fect of a log
i
cal see-saw (
pe titio
principii
), be
-
cause the om
ni
science of the Lord is es
t
ab
lished on the doc
trine of
the scrip
ture and the au
thor
ity of
 the scrip
ture is again es
t
ab
lished on
the om
ni
science of the Lord.
For all these rea
sons, such doc
trines of Sankhyay
oga about the
Lord is de
void of f
oun
da
tion and is in
cor
rect. Other sim
i
lar doc
trines
which like
wise are not based on the V
eda are to be re
futed by
 cor
re
-
spond ing
ar gu ment
s.
A{YîR>m
ZmZ
wnnÎ
&
Adhishthananup
ap
attescha
II.
2.39 (210)
And on a
ccount
 of t
he imposs
ibil
ity
 of r
ulersh
ip (on
 the par
t of
the Lo
rd).
Adhisthana:
 rulership;
Anup
ap
atteh:
 because of the impossibilit
y;
Cha:
 and.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he Pasup
at
a view is con
tin
ued.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
228

The
Lord
of
the
ar gu men t
a tive
phi los o phers,
such
as
Naiyayikas,
etc.,
is
un ten a ble
hy poth e sis.
There
is
an other
log i cal
fal
-
lacy in the Ny
aya con
cep
tion of I
svara. They say
 that t
he Lord cre
ates
the world with the help of
 Pradhana, etc.
, just as a pot
ter makes pot
s
with the mud.
But t
his can
not be ad
mit
ted, be
cause the Pradhana which is de
-
void of col
our and other qual
i
ties and there
fore not an ob
ject of per
-
cep
tion, is on t
hat ac
count of an en
tirely di
f

fer ent na
ture from clay and
the like. There
fore, it
 can
not be looked upon as the ob
ject of the
Lord™
s ac
tion. The Lord can
not di
rect the Pradhana.
There is an
other mean
ing also for this Su
tra. In t
his world we
see a king with a body and never a king with
out a body
. There
fore, the
Lord also must have a body which will serve as t
he sub
stra
tum of his
or
gans. How can we as
cribe a body to the Lord,
 be
cause a body is
only pos
te
rior to cre
ation?
The Lord, there
fore, is not able t
o act be
cause he is de
void of a
ma te rial
sub stra tum,
be cause
ex pe ri ence
teaches
us
that
ac tion
needs a ma
te
rial sub
stra
tum. I
f we as
sume that the L
ord pos
sesses
some kind of body which serves as a sub
stra
tum for his or
gans prior
to cre
ation, t
his as
sump
tion also will not
 do, be
cause if the Lord has a
body He is sub
ject to the sen
sa
tions of the or
di
nary souls and thus no
lon
ger is the Lord.
The Lord™
s putt
ing on a body also can
not be es
t
ab
lished. So t
he
Lord of an
i
mals (Pasup
ati) can
not be the ruler of m
at
ter (Pradhana).
That by put
t
ing on a body the Lord be
comes the ef

fi cient cause of the
world is also fal
la
cious. In the world it
 is ob
served that a pot

ter hav ing
a bodily f
orm fash
ions a pot with the clay
. If
 from this anal
ogy the Lord
is in
ferred to be the ef

fi cient cause of the world, He is to be ad
mit
ted to
have a bodily
 form. B
ut all bod
ies are per
ish
able. Ev
en the Pasup
at
as
ad
mit that
 the Lord is eter
nal. It
 is un
ten
a
ble that t
he eter
nal Lord re
-
sides in a per
ish
able body and so be
comes de
pend
ent on an
other
ad
di
tional cause. Hence it can
not be in
ferred that t
he Lord has any
bodily f
orm.
There is still an
other mean
ing. Fur
ther
, there is in his case the
im
pos
si
bil
ity (ab
sence) of place. For an agent like the pot

ter etc.,st
ands on the ground and does his work. He has a place to stand
upon. Pasup
ati does not pos
sess that.
H$a
Ud…oÞ ^
moJm{Xä
Karanavacchenna bhogadibhy
ah
II.
2.40 (21
1)
I
f it be
 said
 (that the
 Lord
 rule
s the
 Prad
hana
 etc
.,) jus
t as (th
e
Jiva rules) the senses (which are also not perceive
d), (we say)
no
, b
eca
us
e of
 th
e enj
oy
men
t,
 etc
.
Karanav
at:
 like the senses;
Chet:
 if, if
 it be conceived.
Na:
 not (no
it cannot be accepted);
Bhogadibhy
ah:
 because of enjoyment,
 etc.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
229

An ob
jec
tion against S
u
tra 38 is raised and re
futed.
The Su
tra con
sist
s of two p
art
s, namely an ar
gu
ment and it
s re
-
ply
. The ar
gu
ment is ‚
Karanavacchet
™
 and the re
ply is ‚
Na
bhogadibhyah
™.
The op
po
nent says: Just as the in
di
vid
ual soul rules the sense
or
gans which are not per
ceived, so also the Lord rules the P
radhana,
etc.
The anal
ogy is not cor
rect, be
cause the in
di
vid
ual soul feels
plea
sure and pain.
 If t
he anal
ogy be true, t
he Lord also would ex
pe
ri
-
ence plea
sure and pain,
 caused by the Pradhana etc.
, and hence
would for
feit His God
head.
AÝVdÎ
d_gd©k
Vm dm
Ant
av
attvam
asarv
ajnat
a v
a
II.
2.41 (212)
(T
here would f
ollow
 fr
om th
eir doct
rin
e the Lor
d™s) being
subject t
o destruc
tion
 or His
 non-
omni
science.
Ant
av
attv
am:
 finiteness, t
erminableness, subject to destruction;
Asarv
ajnat
a:
 absence of Omniscience;
Va
:
 or
.
The ar
gu
ment raised in Su
tra 40 is fur
ther re
futed and t
hus the
Pasup
at
a doc
trine is re
futed.
Ac
cord
ing to these schools (Nyaya, P
asupat
a, the Mahesv
ara,
etc.), t
he Lord is Om
ni
scient and eter
nal. The Lord, t
he Pradhana and
the souls are in
fi
nite and sep

a rate. Does the Om
ni
scient Lord know
the mea
sure of the Pradhana, soul and Him
self or not? If
 the Lord
knows their mea
sure, they all
 are lim
ited. There
fore a time will
 come
when they will all
 cease to ex
ist. If
 Samsara ends and thus there is no
more Pradhana, of what
 can God be the ba
sis or His lord
ship? Or
,
over what is His Om
ni
science to ex
tend? If
 na
ture and souls are fi
nite,
they must
 have a be
gin
ning. If
 they hav
e a be
gin
ning and end, there
will be scope for Sunyav
ada, the doc
trine of not
h
ing
ness. If He does
not know them, t
hen he would no lon
ger be Om
ni
scient. In ei
ther case
the doc
trine of t
he Lord™
s be
ing the mere ef

fi cient cause of the world is
un ten a ble,
in con sis tent
and
un ac cept
 able.
If God be ad
mit
ted to hav
e or
gans of senses and so to be sub
-
ject to plea
sure and pain,
 as st
ated in Su
tra 40, He is sub
ject to birth
and death like an or
di
nary man. He be
comes de
void of Om

ni science.
This sort of God is not ac
cepted by the P
asupat
as even. Hence the
doc
trine of t
he Pasup
at
as, that God i
s not the ma
te
rial cause of the
world can
not be ac
cepted.
Utp
atty
asambhav
adhikaranam
: T
opic 8 (Sutras 42-45)
Refut
ation of t
he Bhagavat
a or the Pancharatra school
Utp
atty
asambhav
at
II.
2.42 (213)
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
230

On a
cco
unt o
f the
 imp
oss
ibil
ity of th
e o
rigina
tion (
of the
indi
vidual
 soul f
rom t
he High
est Lor
d), (
the doct
rin
e of th
e
Bhagavatas or t
he Pancharatr
a doctrine cannot be accepted
).
Utp
atti:
 causation, originati
on, creation;
Asambhav
at:
 on account of
the impossib
ility
.
The Pancharatra doc
trine or the doc
trine of t
he Bhagavat
as is
now re
futed.
Ac
cord
ing to this school, t
he Lord is the ef

fi cient cause as well
as the ma
te
rial cause of the uni
verse. This is in quite agree
ment with
the scrip
ture or the Sruti
 and so it is au
thor
i
t
a
tive.
 A
 p
art of thei
r sys
-
tem agrees with the V
edant
a sys
tem. W
e ac
cept this. A
n
other p
art of
the sys
tem, how
ever
, is open to ob
jec
tion.
The Bhagavat
as say that V
aasudeva whose na
ture is pure
knowl
edge is what re
ally ex

ists. He di
vides Him
self four
fold and ap
-
pears in four forms (V
yuhas) as V
aasudeva, Sankarshana,
Pradyumna and A
niruddha. V
aasudeva de
notes the Su
preme Self,
Sankarshana the in
di
vid
ual soul, Pradyum
na the mind,
and
Aniruddha the prin
ci
ple of ego
ism, or Ahamkara. Of
 these four
,
V
aasudeva con
sti
tutes the Ul
ti
mate Cause, of which the t
hree oth
ers
are the ef

fects.
They say t
hat by de
vo
tion for a long pe
riod to V
aasudeva
through Abhigamana (go
ing to the t
em
ple with de
vo
tion), Up
adana
(se cur ing
the
ac ces so ries

of
wor ship),
Ijya
(ob la tion,
wor ship),
Svadhy
aya (study of
 holy scrip
ture and rec
i
t
a
tion of Mant
ras) and
Y
oga (de
vout med
i
t
a
tion) we can p
ass be
yond all af

flic tions, p
ains
and sor
rows, at
t
ain Lib
er
a
tion and reach the Su
preme Be
ing. W
e ac
-
cept this doc
trine.
But we con
tro
vert the doc
trine that
 Sankarshana (the Jiva) is
born from V
aasudeva and so on. Such cre
ation is not pos
si
ble. If
there is such birth, if t
he soul be cre
ated it would be sub
ject to de
-
struc
tion and hence there could be no Lib
er
a
tion. That
 the soul is not
cre
ated will be shown in Su
tra II.
3.17.
For this rea
son the Pancharatra doc
trine is not ac
cept

able.Z M H$V©w– H$a
Na cha kartuh karanam
II.
2.43 (214)
And (i
t is
) not
 (observed th
at)
 the in
str
ument (
is pr
oduced)
from the
 age
nt.
Na:
 not;
Cha:
 and;
Kartuh:
 from the agent
;
Karanam:
 the
instrument.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he Pancharatra doc
trine is con
tin
ued.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
231

An in
stru
ment such as a hatchet and the li
ke is not seen to be
pro
duced from the agent,
 the wood
cut
ter
. But
 the Bhagav
at
as teach
that f
rom an agent, v
iz., the i
n
di
vid
ual soul termed Sankarshana,
there springs it
s in
ter
nal in
stru
ment or mind (Prady
umna) and from
the mind, t
he ego or Ahamkara (Aniruddha).
The mind is the in
stru
ment of t
he soul. No
where do we see the
in
stru
ment be
ing born from the doer
. Nor can we ac
cept that
Ahamkara is
sues from the mind. T
his doc
trine can
not be ac
cepted.
Such doc
trine can
not be set
tled with
out ob
served in
st
ances. W
e do
not meet wit
h any scrip
tural p
as
sage in it
s fa
vour
. The scrip
ture de
-
clares that ev
ery
thing t
akes it
s or
i
gin from Brah
man.
{dkmZm{
X^mdo dm V
Xà{
VfoY
V
ijnanad
ibhav
e v
a t
adapratishedhah
II.
2.44 (215)
Or if t
he (four Vyuhas are said to) possess infinit
e knowled
ge,
etc
., ye
t the
re i
s no
 de
nial o
f that (v
iz., the
 ob
je
ctio
n rais
ed
 in
Sutr
a 42).
V
ijnanadibhav
e:
 if intel
ligence etc. exi
st;
Va
:
 or
, on the ot
her hand;
T
at:
that (
T
asya it
i
);
Apratishedhah:
 no denial (of). (
V
ijnana
:
knowledge;
Adi:
 and the rest;
Bhav
e:
 of the nat
ure (of).)
The ar
gu
ment against t
he Pancharatra doc
trine is con
tin
ued.
The er
ror of the doc
trine will per
sist even if t
hey say that
 all the
V
yuhas are gods hav
ing in
tel
li
gence, etc.
The Bhagavat
as may say
, that
 all the forms are V
aasudeva, the
Lord, and that al
l of them equal
ly pos
sess Knowl
edge, Lord
ship,
S
trength, P
ower
, etc.,
 and are free from fault
s and im
per
fec
tions.
In this case there will be more t
han one Isvara. This goes
against your own doc
trine ac
cord
ing to which there is only one real
es
sence, viz., t
he holy V
aasudeva. All
 the work can be done by only
One Lord. Why should there be f
our Isvaras?
More
over
, there could be no birth of
 one from an
other
, be
cause
they are equal ac
cord
ing to the B
hagavat
as, whereas a cause is al
-
ways greater than the ef

fect. Ob ser
va
tion shows that the re
la
tion of
cause and ef

fect re quires some su
pe
ri
or
ity on t
he p
art of the cause,
as for in
st
ance, in the case of the clay
 and the pot,
 where the cause is
more ex
ten
sive than t
he ef

fect and that with
out such su
pe
ri
or
ity t
he
re
la
tion is sim
ply im
pos
si
ble. The Bhagav
at
as do not ac
knowl
edge
any dif

fer ence founded on su
pe
ri
or
ity of
 knowl
edge, power
, etc.,
 be
-
tween V
aasudeva and the other Lords, but
 sim
ply say t
hat they
 are all
forms of V
aasudeva with
out any spe
cial dis
tinc
tion.
Then again, the f
orms of V
aasudeva can
not be lim
ited to f
our
only
, as the whole world from Brahm
a down to a blade of grass is a
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
232

form or man
i
fes
t
a
tion of t
he Su
preme Be
ing. The whole world is the
V
yuha of V
aasudeva.
{dà{
VfoY
V
ipratishedh
accha
II.
2.45 (216)
And becau
se of contradictions (
the Pancharat
ra doctrin
e is
unte
nable
).
V
ipratishedhat:
 because of contradiction;
Cha:
 and.
The ar
gu
ment against t
he doc
trine of t
he Bhagavat
as is con
-
cluded here.
There
are
also
other
in con sis ten cies,
or
man i fold
con tra dic tions
in the Pancharatra doc
trine. Jnana, A
isvarya, or rul
ing ca
p
ac
ity
, Sakti
(cre
ative power), B
ala (strength), V
irya (val
our) and T
ejas (glory) are
enu
mer
ated as qual
i
ties and they
 are again in some other place spo
-
ken of as selfs, holy V
aasudevas and so on. It say
s that V
aasudeva is
dif

fer ent from S
ankarshana, Pradyumna and Ani
ruddha. Y
et it say
s
that t
hese are the same as V
aasudeva. Som
e
times it speaks of the
four forms as qual
i
ties of the A
t
man and some
times as the At

man it
-
self
.
Fur
ther we meet with p
as
sages con
tra
dic
tory to t
he V
edas. It
con
t
ains words of de
pre
ci
a
tion of t
he V
edas. It say
s that Sandil
ya got
the Pancharatra doc
trine af

ter find ing that t
he V
edas did not con
t
ain
the means of per
fec
tion. Not
 hav
ing found the high
est bliss in the
V
edas, Sandily
a stud
ied this Sastra.
For this rea
son also the Bhagavat
a doc
trine can
not be ac
-
cepted. As thi
s sys
tem is op
posed to and con
demned by all t
he Srutis
and abhored by the wise, it
 is not wor
thy of
 re
gard.
Thus in this Pada has been shown that t
he p
aths of Sankhy
as,
V
aiseshikas and the rest down to the Pancharatra doc
trine are strewn
with thorns and are full of
 dif

fi cul
ties, while t
he p
ath of V
edant
a is free
from all these de
fect
s and should be trod
den by ev
ery
one who wishes
his
fi nal
be at i tude
and
sal va tion.
Thus ends the Sec
ond Pada (Sec
tion 2) of the Sec
ond Adhy
ay
a
(Chap
ter II) of the B
rahmasutras or the
 V
edant
a Phi
los
o
phy
.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 2
233

CHAPTER II
SECTION 3
INTRODUCTION
In the pre
vi
ous Sec
tion the in
con
sis
tency of t
he doc
trines of the
var
i
ous non-V
edantic schools has been shown. Af

ter show ing the
untenabilit
y and un
re
li
abil
ity of
 other sys
tems, Sri V
yasa, the au
thor of
V
edant
a Sutras now pro
ceeds to ex
plain the ap
p
ar
ent con
tra
dic
tions
and in
con
sis
ten
cies in the Sruti sy
s
tem be
cause there ap
pear to be
di
ver
si
ties of doc
trines with ref
er
ence to the or
i
gin of the el
e
ment
s,
the senses, etc.
W
e now clearly un
der
st
and that ot
her philo
soph
i
cal doc
trines
are worth
less on ac
count of their mu
tual con
tra
dic
tions. Now a sus
pi
-
cion may arise that t
he V
edantic doc
trine also is equally worth
less on
ac count
of
it
s
in trin sic
con tra dic tions.
There fore
a
new
dis cus sion
is
be
gun in or
der to re
move all doubt
s in the V
edant
a p
as
sages which
re
fer to cre
ation and thus to re
move the sus
pi
cion in the minds of t
he
read
ers. Here we have to con
sider first the ques
tion whether ether
(Akasa) has an or
i
gin or not.
In Sec
tions III
 and IV t
he ap
p
ar
ent con
tra
dic
tions in Sruti
 text
s
are beau
ti
fully
 har
mo
nised and rec
on
ciled. The ar
gu
ment
s of the op
-
po
nent (Purvap
akshin) who at
tempt
s to prove the S
elf-con
tra
dic
tion
of the scrip
tural tex
t
s are given first.
 Then co
mes the ref
u
t
a
tion by t
he
Siddhantin.
234

SYNOPSIS
The Third Sec
tion of Chap
ter II deal
s with the or
der of cre
ation
as it is t
aught in Srut
i, of t
he five pri
mal el
e
ment
s namely Akasa, air
,
fire, wa
ter and earth. I
t dis
cusses the ques
tion whether the el

e ment
s
have an or
i
gin or not, whether t
hey are co-eter
nal with Brah
man or is
-
sue from it and are with
drawn into it at
 st
ated in
ter
vals. The es
sen
tial
char ac ter is tics
of
the
in di vid ual
is
also
as cer tai
ned.
The first seven A
dhikaranas deal with the fiv
e el
e
men
t
ary sub
-
st
ances.
Adhikarana I:
 (Sutras 1-7) teaches that the et
her is not co-eter
-
nal with Brah
man but orig
i
nates from it as it
s first ef

fect. Though there
is no men
tion of A
kasa in the Chhandogya Up
anisad, the in
clu
sion of
Akasa is
 im
plied.
Adhikarana II:
 (Su
tra 8) shows that air orig
i
nates from ether
.
Adhikarana III
:
 (Su
tra 9) teaches that t
here is no or
i
gin of that
which is (i.e., B
rah
man) on ac
count of the im

pos si
bil
ity of
 there be
ing
an or
i
gin of Brah
man, and as it does not st
and to rea
son.
Adhikarana IV
, V
, VI
: (Sutras 10, 1
1, 12) teach that
 fire springs
from air
, wa
ter from fi
re, earth from wa
ter
.
Adhikarana VII
:
 (Su
tra 13) teaches that t
he orig
i
na
tion of one el
-
e
ment from an
other is due not to t
he lat
ter in it

self but to Brah
man act
-
ing in it.
 Brah
man who is their Indweller has ac
tu
ally ev
olved these
suc ces s
ive
el e ment
s.
Adhikarana VII
I:
 (Su
tra 14) shows that the ab
sorp
tion of t
he el
e
-
ment
s into Brah
man t
akes place in the in
verse or
der of their cre
ation.
Adhikarana IX:
 (Su
tra 15) teaches that t
he or
der in which the
cre
ation and the re-ab
sorp
tion of t
he el
e
ment
s t
akes place is not in
-
ter
fered with by t
he cre
ation and re-ab
sorp
tion of P
rana, mind and the
senses, be
cause they also are the cre
ations of Brah
man, and are of
el
e
men
t
al na
ture and there
fore are cre
ated and ab
sorbed to
gether
with the el
e
ment
s of which they con
sist.
The re
main
ing por
tion of t
his Sec
tion is de
voted t
o the spe
cial
char ac ter is tics
of
the
in di vid ual
soul
by
com p
ar ing
dif
 fer ent
Srutis
bear
ing on this point.
Adhikarana X:
 (Su
tra 16) shows that ex
pres
sions such as
ﬁRamakrishna is bornﬂ ﬁ
Ramakrishna has diedﬂ, strictly ap
ply to t
he
body only and are t
rans
ferred to the soul in so far only
 as it is con
-
nected with a body
.
Adhikarana XI:
 (Su
tra 17) teaches that t
he in
di
vid
ual soul is ac
-
cord
ing to the S
rutis per
ma
nent, et
er
nal. There
fore it is not l
ike the
ether and the other el
e
ment
s, pro
duced from Brah
man at the t
ime of
235

cre
ation. The Jiv
a is in re
al
ity i
den
ti
cal with Brah
man. What orig
i
nates
is merely the soul™
s con
nec
tion with it
s lim
it
ing ad
junct
s such as mind,
body
, senses, etc. This con
nec
tion is more
over il
lu
sory
.
Adhikarana XII
:
 (Su
tra 18) de
fines the na
ture of the i
n
di
vid
ual
soul. The Su
tra de
clares that in
tel
li
gence is the very es
sence of the
soul.
Adhikarana XII
I:
 (Sutras 19-32) deals with the ques
tion whether
the in
di
vid
ual soul is Anu, i.
e., of
 very min
ute size or om
ni
pres
ent,
all-per
vad
ing. The Sut
ras 19-28 rep
re
sent the vi
ew of the
Purvap
akshin ac
cord
ing to which the in
di
vid
ual soul is Anu, while S
u
-
tra 29 for
mu
lates the Si
ddhant
a viz.,
 the in
di
vid
ual soul is in re
al
ity
all-per
vad
ing; it i
s spo
ken of as Anu in some scrip
tural p
as
sages be
-
cause the qual
i
ties of the i
n
ter
nal or
gan it

self are Anu which con sti
tute
the es
sence of the Jiva so long as he is in
volved i
n the Samsara.
Su
tra 30 ex
plains that t
he soul may be called Anu as it
 is con
-
nected with the B
uddhi as long as it is im
pli
cated in the Sam
sara.
Su
tra 31 in
ti
mates that i
n the st
ate of deep sleep the soul i
s po
-
ten
tially
 con
nected with the B
uddhi while in the wak
ing st
ate that
 con
-
nec tion
be comes
ac tu ally
man i fest.
Su
tra 32 in
ti
mates that i
f no in
tel
lect ex
isted there would re
sult
con st
ant
per cep tion
or
con st
ant
non-per cep tion.
Adhikaranas XIV and X
V
:
 (Sutras 33-39 and 40) re
fer to the
Kartritv
a of the in
di
vid
ual soul, whether the soul is an agent
 or not.
Sutras 33-39 de
clare that the soul is an agent
. The soul is an
agent when he is con
nected with the in
stru
ment
s of ac
tion, B
uddhi,
etc. Su
tra 40 in
ti
mates that he
 ceases to be an agent when he is dis
-
so
ci
ated from t
hem, just as the car
pen
ter works as long as he wields
his in
stru
ment
s and rests af

ter hav ing laid them aside.
Adhikarana XVI
:
 (Sutras 41-42) teaches that the agent
ship of
the in
di
vid
ual soul is ver
ily sub
or
di
nate to and con
trolled by t
he Su
-
preme Lord. The Lord al
ways di
rect
s the soul ac
cord
ing to his good or
bad ac
tions done in pre
vi
ous births.
Adhikarana XVI
I
 (Sutras 43-53) treat
s of the re
la
tion of t
he in
di
-
vid
ual soul to Brah
man.
Su
tra 43 de
clares that the in
di
vid
ual soul is a p
art (Amsa) of
Brah
man. This Su
tra pro
pounds A
vacchedavada i.e.
, the doc
trine of
lim
i
t
a
tion i.e.
, the doc
trine that
 the soul is the Su
preme Self in so f
ar as
lim
ited by i
t
s ad
junct
s.
The fol
low
ing Sutras in
ti
mate that
 the Su
preme Lord is not af

-
fected by pl
ea
sure and pain l
ike the in
di
vid
ual soul, just as light
 is un
-
af

fected by the shak
ing of it
s re
flec
tions.
Ac
cord
ing to Sankara, ‚A
msa™
 must be un
der
stood to mean
‚Amsa iva™
, a p
art as it were. The one uni
ver
sal in
di
vis
i
ble Brah
man
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
236

has no real part
s but ap
pears to be di
vided ow
ing to it
s lim
it
ing ad
-
junct
s.
Su
tra 47 teaches that t
he in
di
vid
ual souls are re
quired to fol
low
the dif

fer ent in
junc
tions and pro
hi
bi
tions laid down in the scrip
tures,
when they are con
nected with bod
ies, high and low
. Fire is one only
but the f
ire of a fu
neral pyre is re
jected and that of
 the sac
ri
fice is ac
-
cepted. Sim

i lar is the case with the At

man. When the soul is at t
ached
to the body
, eth
i
cal rules, ideas of pu
rity and im

pu rity hav
e full ap
pli
ca
-
tion.
Su
tra 49 shows that there is no con
fu
sion of ac
tions or fault
s of
ac
tions. The in
di
vid
ual soul has no con
nec
tion with all
 the bod
ies at
the same time.
 He is con
nected with one body onl
y and he is af

fectedby the pe
cu
liar prop
er
ties of that
 one alone.
Su
tra 50 pro
pounds the doc
trine of re
flec
tion (Abhasavada) or
Pratibimbav
ada, the doc
trine that
 the in
di
vid
ual soul is a mere re
flec
-
tion of t
he Su
preme Brah
man in the Buddhi
 or in
tel
lect.
In the S
ankhya phi
los
o
phy the in
di
vid
ual soul has been st
ated to
be all-per
vad
ing. If
 this view be ac
cepted there would be con
fu
sion of
works and their ef

fects. This view of t
he Sankhyas is, there
fore, an
un fair
con clu sion.
V
iy
adadhikaranam
: T
opic 1 (Sutras 1-7)
Ether is not et
ernal but created
Z {d`Xl
wVo
Na v
iy
adasruteh
II.
3.1 (217)
(The P
urva
pak
shin, i
.e
., the
 ob
je
ctor s
ays th
at) e
the
r (Ak
asa
)
(does) not
 (ori
gin
ate),
 as Sr
uti does n
ot say
 so.
Na:
 not;
Vi
ya
t
:
 ether
, sp
ace, Akasa;
Asruteh:
 as Sruti does not say
so.
The op
po
nent raises a con
ten
tion that
 Akasa is uncreated and
as such not pro
duced out of Brah
man. This
prima f
a
cie
 view is set
aside in the next
 Su
tra.
T
o be
gin with, t
he text
s which treat of cre
ation are t
aken up.
Akasa (ether) is first dealt wit
h. The Purv
ap
akshin says that Akasa is
not caused or cre
ated be
cause there is no Sruti to t
hat ef

fect. Akasa is
eter
nal and is not caused be
cause the Sruti does not call it
 caused,
while it re
fers to the cre
ation of f
ire. ﬁ
T
adaikshat
a bahu syam
prajayeyeti t
attejo™
srijat
a
ﬂ ﬁIt thought
 ‚May I
 be
come many
, may I
 grow
forth™ŠI
t sent fort
h fireﬂ. (Chh. Up. V
I.2.
3). Here there is no men
tion of
Akasa be
ing pro
duced by Brah
man. As scrip
tural sen
tence is our only
au
thor
ity i
n the orig
i
na
tion of knowl
edge of supersensuous things,
and as there is no scrip
tural st
ate
ment de
clar
ing the or
i
gin of ether
,
ether must be con
sid
ered to have no or
i
gin. There
fore Akasa has no
or
i
gin. It
 is eter
nal.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
237

In the V
edantic tex
t
s, we come across in dif

fer ent places dif

fer -
ent st
ate
ment
s re
gard
ing the or
i
gin of var
i
ous things. Some t
ext
s say
that t
he ether and air orig
i
nated; some do not
. Some ot
her text
s again
make sim
i
lar st
ate
ment
s re
gard
ing the in
di
vid
ual soul and the Pranas
(vi
t
al airs). In some places the Srut
i text
s con
tra
dict one an
other re
-
gard
ing or
der of suc
ces
sion and the like.
ApñV Vw
Asti tu
II.
3.2 (218)
But there is (a Sruti t
ext which stat
es that Akasa is created).
Asti:
 there is;
Tu
:
 but.
The con
tra
dic
tion raised in Su
tra 1 is p
ar
tially
 met here.
The word ‚but™
 (tu) is used in this Su
tra in or
der to re
move the
doubt raised in the pre
ced
ing Su
tra.
But t
here is a Sruti which ex
pressly says so. Though there is no
st
ate
ment in the Chhandogy
a Up
anishad re
gard
ing the cau
sa
tion of
Akasa, yet t
here is a pas
sage in the T
aittiriy
a Sruti on it
s cau
sa
tion:
ﬁT
asmad va et
asmadatm
ana akasah sambhut
ahﬂ
ŠﬁFrom the Self
(Brah
man) sprang Akasa, from Akasa the air
, from air t
he fire, f
rom
fire the wa
ter
, from wa
ter the earth (T
ait. Up.
 II.
1).ﬂ
Jm¡Ê`gå^dmV²
Gauny
asambhav
at
II.
3.3 (219)
(The Sruti tex
t conce
rning the o
rigination of A
kasa
) has a
secondary sense
, on account of t
he impossibility (of t
he
orig
inat
ion of
 the Akasa
).
Gauni:
 used in a secondary sense, having a met
aphorical sense;
Asambhav
at:
 because of the impossibilit
y
.
Here is an ob
jec
tion against S
u
tra 20.
The op
po
nent says: The T
aittiriy
a text
 re
ferred to in the pre
vi
ous
Su
tra which de
clares the orig
i
na
tion of t
he Akasa should be t
aken in a
sec
ond
ary sense (fig
u
ra
tive),
 as Akasa can
not be cre
ated. I
t has no
p
art
s. There
fore it can
not be cre
ated.
The V
aiseshikas deny that Akasa was caused. They say t
hat
cau
sa
tion im
plies three fac
tors, viz.
, Samav
ayikarana (in
her
ent
causesŠmany and sim
i
lar fac
tors), Asamavay
ikarana (non-in
her
ent
causes, their com
bi
na
tion) and Nimitt
akarana (op
er
a
tive causes, a
hu
man agency). T
o make a cloth, threads and thei
r com
bi
na
tion and a
weaver are needed. Such causal fac
tors do not ex
ist in the case of
Akasa.
W
e can
not pred
i
cate of sp
ace a spaceless st
ate, just as we can
pred
i
cate of fire an an
te
ced
ent st
ate with
out bright
ness.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
238

Fur
ther un
like earth, etc.
, Akasa is all-per
vad
ing and hence
could not have been caused or cre
ated. I
t is eter
nal. It
 is with
out or
i
-
gin.
The word ‚Akasa™
 is used in a sec
ond
ary sense in such phrases
as ‚make room™, ‚there is room™.
 Al
though sp
ace is only one, it
 is des
-
ig
nated as be
ing of dif

fer ent kinds when we speak of the sp
ace of a
pot, t
he space of
 a house. Even i
n V
e
dic p
as
sages a form of ex
pres
-
sion such as ‚He is to place the wild an
i
mals in the sp
aces
(Akaseshu)™
 is seen. Hence we con
clude that those S
ruti tex
t
s also
which speak of the orig
i
na
tion of A
kasa must be t
aken to have a sec
-
ond ary
sense
or
fig u ra tiv
e
mean ing.
Sabdaccha
II.
3.4 (220)
Als
o fro
m the
 Sruti te
xts (
we
 find th
at Ak
asa
 is e
tern
al).
Sabdat:
 from the S
ruti tex
t
s, because Sruti says so;
Cha:
 also, and.
Here is an ob
jec
tion against S
u
tra 2.
In the pre
vi
ous Su
tra Akasa was in
ferred to be eter
nal. In t
his
Su
tra the op
po
nent cites a Sruti
 text
 to show that it
 is eter
nal. He
point
s out that S
ruti de
scribes Akasa as unc
aused and uncreated.
ﬁ
V
ayuschantariksham
 chait
adamrit
am
ﬂŠﬁThe air and the Akasa are
im
mor
t
alﬂ (Br
. Up. II
.3.3). What
 is im
mor
t
al can
not have an or
i
gin.
An other
scrip tural
p
as sage,
ﬁOm ni pres ent
and
eter nal
like
etherﬂŠﬁ
Akasavat sarvagato nityah
ﬂ, in
di
cates that those t
wo qual
i
-
ties of Brah
man be
long to the et
her also. Hence an or
i
gin can
not be
at
trib
uted to t
he Akasa.
Other scrip
tural p
as
sages are: ﬁAs this Akasa is in
fi
nite, so the
Self is t
o be known as in
fi
nite.ﬂ ﬁBrah
man has the ether for it
s body
,
the Akasa is the Self
.ﬂ If t
he Akasa had a be
gin
ning it could not be
pred
i
cated of Brah
man as we pred
i
cate blue
ness of a lo
tus (lo
tus is
blue).
There
fore the eter
nal Brah
man is of the same na
ture as Akasa.
(This is the view of t
he op
po
nentŠPurv
ap
akshin).
ñ`m
…¡H$ñ`
 ~«÷eãXd
V² &
Sy
acchaikasy
a Brahmasabdav
at
II.
3.5 (221)
It is p
ossib
le that the
 one
 word (‚s
prang™ŠSam
bhutah) ma
y be
used in a se
condary and primar
y sense like
 the word
Brahman.
Sy
at:
 is possible;
Cha:
 also, and;
Ekasy
a:
 of the one and t
he same
word;
Brahmasabdav
at:
 like the word Brahman.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of the abov
e ob
jec
tion is now ad
vanced
by the op
po
nent (Purvap
akshin).
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
239

The op
po
nent says that
 the same word ‚sprang™
 (Sambhut
ah) in
the T
aittiriy
a text
 (II.1)ŠﬁFrom t
hat Brah
man sprang Akasa, from
Akasa sprang air
, from air sprang fire.
ﬂŠcan be used in a sec
ond
ary
sense with re
spect to Akasa and in the pri
mary sense with re
spect to
air
, fire,
 etc. He sup
port
s his st
ate
ment by m
ak
ing ref
er
ence to other
Sruti t
ext
s where the word ‚Brah
man™
 is so used. ﬁT
ry to know Brah
-
man by pen
ance, be
cause, pen
ance is Brah
manﬂ (T
ait. Up.
 III
.2).
Here Brah
man is used both in a pri
mary and in a sec
ond
ary sense in
the same tex
t.
The same word Brah
man is in the way of
 fig
u
ra
tive i
den
ti
fi
ca
tion
(Bhakti) ap
plied to pen
ance which is only the means of know
ing Brah
-
man and again di
rectly to B
rah
man as the ob
ject of knowl
edge.
Also ﬁFood is Brah
manŠ
Annam
 Brahma
ﬂ (T
ait. U
p. III.2)
, and
ﬁBliss is
 Brah
manŠ
Anando Brahm
a
ﬂ (T
ait. Up
. III.6). H
ere
 Brah

manis used in a sec
ond
ary and pri
mary sense re
spec
tivel
y in two com
ple
-
men t
ary
text
s.
The V
edantin says: B
ut how can we up
hold now the va
lid
ity of
the st
ate
ment made in t
he clause, ﬁBrah
man is one only with
out a
sec ondŠ
Ekameva Advit
iyam B
rahma
ﬂ. Be
cause if Akasa is a sec
-
ond en
tity
 co-ex
ist
ing with Brah
man from eter
nity
, it f
ol
lows that Brah
-
man has a sec
ond. If
 it is so, how can it be said that
 when Brah
man is
known ev
ery
thing is known? (Chh. Up. VI.
1.3).
The op
po
nent re
plies that t
he words ﬁ
Ekameva
Šone onlyﬂ are
used with ref
er
ence to the ef

fects. Just as when a man sees in a pot
-
ter
™
s house a lump of clay
, a st
af
f, a wheel and so on to
day and on the
fol
low
ing day a num
ber of pot
s and says that clay alone ex

isted on the pre
vi
ous day
, he means only t
hat the ef

fects, i.e.,
 the pot
s did not ex
ist
and does not deny the wheel or t
he stick of the pot
ter
, even so the
p
as
sage means only that t
here is no other cause for Brah
man which
is the ma
te
rial cause of the world. The t
erm ‚with
out a sec
ond™
 does
not ex
clude the ex
is
tence from eter
nity of
 ether but ex
cludes the ex
is
-
tence of any ot
her su
per
in
tend
ing Be
ing but Brah
man. There is a su
-
per
in
tend
ing pot
ter in ad
di
tion to t
he ma
te
rial cause of the ves
sels,
i.e.,
 the clay
. But
 there is no other su
per
in
ten
dent in ad
di
tion to B
rah
-
man, the m
a
te
rial cause of the uni
verse.
The op
po
nent fur
ther adds that t
he ex
is
tence of Akasa will not
bring about the ex

is tence of two t
hings, for num
ber co
mes in only
when there are di
verse things. Brah
man and Akasa have no such di
-
verse
ness be
fore cre
ation as both are all-per
vad
ing and in
fi
nite and
are in
dis
tin
guish
able like milk and wa
ter mixed t
o
gether
. There
fore
the Sruti
 says: ﬁ
Akasasariram Brahm
a
ŠBrah
man has the ether for it
s
bodyﬂ. It
 fol
lows that the t
wo are iden
ti
cal.
More
over all cre
ated things are one with A
kasa which is one
with Brah
man. There
fore if B
rah
man is known with it
s ef

fects, Akasa
also is known.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
240

The case is sim
i
lar to that
 of a few drop
s of wa
ter poured into a
cup of milk. These drop
s are t
aken when the milk is t
aken. The t
ak
ing
of the drop
s does not form some
thing ad
di
tional to t
he t
ak
ing of the
milk. Si
m
i
larly the A
kasa which is non-s
ep

a rate in place and time f
rom
Brah
man, and it
s ef

fects, is com
prised within Brah
man. There
fore,
we have to un
der
st
and the p
as
sages about the or
i
gin of the et
her in a
sec ond ary
sense.
Thus the op
po
nent (Purvap
akshin) tries to es
t
ab
lish that A
kasa
is uncreated and is not an ef

fect and that the Sruti
 text
 calls it
‚Sambhut
a™
 (cre
ated) only in a sec
ond
ary sense.
à{Vkm@hm{Zaì`{
VaoH$mÀN>ãXoä`–
Pratijn
a™hanirav
y
atirekacchabdebhy
ah
II.
3.6 (222)
T
he non-a
bandon
ment of
 the pr
oposit
ion (
viz.
, by t
he
knowle
dge
 of one
 ev
erything e
lse
 be
come
s kno
wn, can res
ult
only
) from
 the
 non-
diffe
ren
ce
 (of the
 en
tire
 world
 from
Brah
man)
 acc
ord
ing to
 the
 word
s of th
e V
ed
a or th
e S
ruti te
xts
(which
 declare the non-difference
 of the cause and its effects).
Pratijn
a ahanih:
 non-abandonment of t
he proposition;
A
v
y
atirekat:
from non distincti
on, on account of non-dif
ference, because of
absence of exclusion;
Sabdebhy
ah:
 from the words namely f
rom the
Sruti
s.
The ob
jec
tion raised in Su
tra 1 and con
tin
ued in Sutras 3, 4 and
5 is now re
plied to.
The Sutrakara re
futes the P
urvap
akshin™
s (ob
jec
tor
™
s) view and
es
t
ab
lishes his po
si
tion. The scrip
tural as
ser
tion that
 from the knowl
-
edge of One (Brah
man) ev
ery
thing else is known can be true only if
ev
ery
thing in the world is an ef

fect of Brah
man. Be
cause the Sruti
says that t
he ef

fects are not dif

fer ent from t
he cause, there
fore if t
he
cause (Brah
man) is known, the ef

fects also will be known. If Akasa
does not orig
i
nate from B
rah
man, then by
 know
ing Brah
man we can
-
not know Akasa. There
fore the above as
ser
tion will not
 come true.
Akasa still re
mains to be known as it is not an ef

fect of Brah
man. But
 if
Akasa is cre
ated then t
here will be no such dif

fi culty at
 all. There
fore
Akasa is an ef

fect. It is cre
ated. I
f it is not
 cre
ated the au
thor
i
t
a
tive
-
ness of the V
edas will dis
ap
pear
.
The op
po
nent is en
tirely wrong in imag

in ing that t
he T
aittiriy
a
Sruti is in con
flict wit
h Chhandogya Up
anishad. Y
ou will have to add
 in
the Chhandogya Srut
i ﬁAf

ter cre at
ing Akasa and V
ayuﬂ. Then t
he text
would mean that af

ter cre at
ing Akasa and V
ayu ﬁBrah
man cre
ated
fire.ﬂ Now there will be no con
flict at
 all.
More
over
, the ex

pla na
tion that
 as Brah
man and Akasa are one
like milk and wa
ter and that as A
kasa is one with all things it will
 be
known by know
ing Brah
man and it
s ef

fects is en
tirely wrong, be
cause
the knowl
edge of milk and wa
ter which are one is not a cor
rect knowl
-
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
241

edge. The anal
ogy given i
n the Sruti
 text
 is not milk and wa
ter
, but clay

and jars to in
di
cate that all
 ef

fects are not sep
a
rate from the cause
and be
cause the word ‚eva™
 in ﬁEkameva Adv
itiy
amﬂ ex
cludes two
com
bined things like milk and wa
ter and says that onl
y one en
tity
 is
the cause.
The knowl
edge of ev
ery
thing through t
he knowl
edge of one
thing of which the S
ruti speaks can
not be ex
plained through the anal
-
ogy of mi
lk mixed with wa
ter
, for we un
der
st
and from the p
ar
al
lel in
-
st
ance of a piece of clay be
ing brought for
ward, (Chh. Up. VI.
1.4), that

the knowl
edge of ev
ery
thing has to be ex

pe ri
enced through the re
la
-
tion of t
he ma
te
rial cause and the ma
te
rial ef

fect. The knowl edge of
the cause im
plies the knowl
edge of the ef

fect. Fur ther
, the knowl
edge
of ev
ery
thing, if
 t
aken to be sim
i
lar to the case of knowl
edge of milk
and wa
ter
, could not be called a per
fect knowl
edge
(Samyag-V
ijnana), be
cause the wa
ter which is ap
pre
hended only
through the knowl
edge of the mi
lk with which it is mix
ed is not grasped
by per
fect knowl
edge, be
cause the wa
ter al
though mix
ed with the
milk, yet is dif

fer ent from it.
That noth
ing has an in
de
pend
ent ex
is
tence ap
art from Brah
man
is cor
rob
o
rated by st
ate
ment
s in Sruti: ﬁ
Sarvam khalvidam
Brahma
ﬂŠﬁ
Idam
 sarvam yadayamatm
a
ﬂ. Tha
t Self is
 all tha
t is (
Bri.
Up. II.4
.6).
`md{ÛH
$ma§ V
w {d^
mJmo bmo
H$dV²
Y
av
adv
ikaram tu v
ibhago l
okav
at
II.
3.7 (223)
Bu
t whe
rev
er th
ere
 are
 effe
cts, the
re a
re s
ep
arate
ne
ss a
s is
see
n in the world (as in o
rdinary life).
Y
av
at v
ikaram:
 so far as all modificati
ons go, wherever there is an
ef
fect;
Tu
:
 but;
V
ibhagah:
 division, sep
arateness, distinction,
specification;
Lokav
at:
 as in the world. (
Y
av
at:
 whatever;
V
ikaram:
transformation.
)
The ar
gu
ment be
gun in Su
tra 6 is con
cluded here.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) re
futes the idea t
hat Akasa is not cre
ated. I
t
shows that the doubt raised in t
he last Su
tra is be
ing re
moved.
The Chhandogya Up
anishad pur
posely omit
s Akasa and V
ayu
from the list
 enu
mer
ated, be
cause it keep
s in view the pro
cess of
T
rivritkarana, com
bi
na
tion of t
he three vis
i
ble el
e
ment
s (Murt
a, i.e.
,
with form), i
n
stead of Panchikarana, com
bi
na
tion of f
ive el
e
ment
s
which is else
where de
vel
oped.
It is to be not
ed here that though al
l the el
e
ment
s orig
i
nate from
Brah
man, yet
 Akasa and air are not men
tioned by nam
e in the Srut
i,
Chhandogya Up
anishad, whereas fire, wa
ter and earth are dis
tinctly
st
ated therein t
o have orig
i
nated from B
rah
man. The spec
i
fi
ca
tion is
like that f
ound in sim
i
lar cases of or
di
nary ex
pe
ri
ence in the world, for
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
242

in
st
ance, to mean all t
he sons of a p
ar
tic
u
lar per
son, Ramakrishna,
only a few of
 them are named.
This is just like what we find in t
he or
di
nary world. If
 a man says
ﬁall these are sons of Narayanaﬂ and then he gives cer
t
ain p
ar
tic
u
lars
about the birt
h of one of t
hem, he im
plies thereby t
hat it ap
plies to the
birth of all t
he rest. Ev
en so when the Up
anishad says that ﬁall t
his has
it
s self in Brah
manﬂ and then it goes on t
o give the or
i
gin of some of
them from B
rah
man such as fire, wa
ter and earth, it
 does not mean
that ot
h
ers have not their or
i
gin in Him, but
 it only
 means that it
 was
not thought
 nec
es
sary to give a de
t
ailed ac
count of their or
i
gin.
There
fore, though t
here is no ex
press text in t
he Chhandogya
Up
anishad as to the or
i
gin of Akasa, y
et we in
fer from the uni

ver sal
prop
o
si
tion therein t
hat ﬁev
ery
thing has it
s self in Brah
manﬂ, that
Akasa has it
s self in Brah
man, and so is pro
duced from Brah
man.
Akasa is an el
e
ment like fi
re and air
. There
fore it must hav
e an
or
i
gin. It
 is the sub
stra
tum of im

per ma
nent qual
ity l
ike the sound, and
so it must be im
per
ma
nent. This is t
he di
rect ar
gu
ment to prov
e the
or
i
gin and de
struc
tion of A
kasa. The in
di
rect ar
gu
ment to prov
e it is,
ﬁwhat
ever has no or
i
gin is eter
nal as Brah
manﬂ and what
ever has
per
ma
nent qual
i
ties is eter
nal as the soul, but A
kasa not be
ing like
Brah
man in these re
spect
s, can
not be eter
nal.
Akasa t
akes it
s or
i
gin from Brah
man, though we can
not con
-
ceive how sp
ace can have any or
i
gin.
W
e see in this uni
verse that all
 cre
ated things are dif

fer ent from
each other
. What
ever we ob
serve: ef

fects or mod
i
fi
ca
tions of a sub
-
st
ance such as jars
, pot
s, brace
let
s, arm
let
s, and ear-rings, nee
dles,
ar
rows, and swords w
e ob
serve di
vi
sion or sep
a
rate
ness. What
ever
is di
vided or sep

a rate is an ef

fect, as jars, pots, etc. What
ever is not
an ef

fect is not di vided as the At

man or Brah man. A
 pot is dif

fer ent
from a piece of cloth and so on.
 Ev
ery
thing that
 is di
vided or sep

a rate
is cre
ated. I
t can
not be eter
nal. Y
ou can
not think of a t
hing as sep
a
-
rate from oth
ers and yet eter
nal.
Akasa is sep
a
rate from earth,
 etc. Hence Akasa also must be an
ef

fect. It can
not be eter
nal. It
 must be a cre
ated thing.
If y
ou say that A
t
man also, be
ing ap
p
ar
ently sep

a rate from
Akasa etc., must
 be an ef

fect we re ply that
 it is not so, be
cause Akasa
it

self has orig i
nated from A
t
man. The Srut
i de
clares that ﬁAkasa
sprang from the At

manﬂ (Tait. Up.
 II.
1). If A
t
man also is an ef

fect,Akasa etc., will be wit
h
out an At

man i.e., Svarup
a. The re
sult will be
Sunyav
ada or the doc
trine of not
h
ing
ness. At
man is Be
ing, there
fore
it can
not be neg
a
tived.
 ﬁAtm
atvacchatmano nirakarana-
sankanupap
attihﬂ
.
 It is s
elf-
ex
is
tent.
ﬁNa hyatma-gantukah kasyachit,
svayam siddhatvatﬂ
.
 It is self-ev

i dent. ﬁ
Na hyatma at
manah
pramanapekshaya siddhyati
.ﬂ
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
243

Akasa etc., are not st
ated by any

one to be self-ex is
tent.
 Hence
no one can deny the At

man, be cause the de
nier is him
self, At

man. At
-
man ex
ist
s and is eter
nal.
The All-per
va
sive
ness and eter
nity of
 Akasa are only rel
a
tivel
y
true. Akasa is cre
ated. I
t is an ef

fect of Brah
man.
In the clauses, ﬁI know at t
he pres
ent mo
ment what
ever is pres
-
ent, I
 knew at for
mer mo
ment
s, the nearer and the re
moter p
ast; I
shall know in the fu
ture, the nearer and re
moter fu
tureﬂ the ob
ject of
knowl
edge changes ac
cord
ing as it is some
thing p
ast or some
thing
fu
ture or some
thing pres
ent. B
ut the know
ing agent does not change
at all as his na
ture is eter
nal pres
ence. As the na
ture of the A
t
man is
eter
nal pres
ence it can
not be an
ni
hi
lated even when t
he body is burnt
to ashes. Y
ou can
not even t
hink that it
 ever should be
come some
-
thing dif

fer ent from what i
t is. Hence the At

man or Brah man is not an
ef

fect. The Akasa, on the con
trary
, co
mes un
der the cat
e
gory of ef

-
fect
s.
More
over
, you say t
hat there must be m
any and sim
i
lar causal
fac
tors be
fore an ef

fect can be pro duced. This ar
gu
ment is not cor
-
rect. Threads are Dravya (sub
st
ance). Their com
bi
na
tion (Samy
oga)
is a Guna (at
trib
ute) and yet bot
h are fac
tors in the pro
duc
tion of an ef

-
fect. E
ven if y
ou say that t
he need for many and sim
i
lar causal fac
tors
ap
plies only to S
amavayi
karana, this sort of ex

pla na
tion is not cor
-
rect, for a rope or a car
pet is spun out of t
hread, wool, etc.
More
over
, why do you say
 that many
 causal fac
tors are
needed? In the case of Paramanu
or ul
ti
mate atom
 or mind, the ini

tialac
tiv
ity i
s ad
mit
tedly not
 due to many causal fac
tors. Nor can you say
that only
 for a Dravya (sub
st
ance) many causal fac
tors are nec
es
-
sary
. That would be so, i
f com
bi
na
tion causes the ef

fect as in the case of threads and cloth. B
ut in many
 in
st
ances, (e.g., mi
lk be
comes curd)
the same sub
st
ance changes into an
other sub
st
ance. It is not
 the
Lord™
s law that only sev

eral causes in con junc
tion should pro
duce an
ef

fect. We there
fore de
cide on the au
thor
ity of
 the Sruti
 that t
he en
tire
world has sprung from the one Brah
man, Akasa be
ing pro
duced first
and later on the ot
her el
e
ment
s in due suc
ces
sion (V
ide II.
1.24).
It is not right
 to say that
 with ref
er
ence to the or
i
gin of Akasa we
could not find out
 any dif

fer ence be
tween it
s pre-causal state and i
t
s
post-causal st
ate (the ti
me be
fore and af

ter the orig i
na
tion of et
her).
Brah
man is de
scribed as not gross and not sub
tle (
Asthulam
 na anu
)
in the Srut
i. The Srut
i re
fers to an Anakasa st
ate, a st
ate de
void of
Akasa.
Brah
man does not p
ar
tic
i
p
ate in the na
ture of Akasa as we un
-
der
st
and from the p
as
sage. ﬁIt is with
out Akasaﬂ (Bri. Up. I
II.
8.8).
There
fore it is a set
tled con
clu
sion that, be
fore Akasa was pro
duced,
Brah man
ex isted
with out
Akasa.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
244

More
over
, you (Purv
ap
akshin or op
po
nent) are cer
t
ainly wrong
in say
ing that A
kasa is dif

fer ent in it
s na
ture from earth,
 etc. The Srut
i
is against the uncreatedness of Akasa. Hence there is no good in
such
in fer ence.
The in
fer
ence drawn by you that A
kasa has no be
gin
ning be
-
cause it dif

fers in na ture from these sub
st
ances which have a be
gin
-
ning such as earth, etc., i
s with
out any v
alue, be
cause it must be
con
sid
ered fal
la
cious as it is con
tra
dicted by t
he Sruti.
 W
e have
brought for
ward co
gent, con
vinc
ing and strong ar
gu
ment
s show
ing
that A
kasa is an orig
i
nated thing.
Akasa has Anitya-guna (non-eter
nal at
trib
ute). There
fore it also
is Anity
a (non-eter
nal). Akasa is non-eter
nal be
cause it is the sub
stra
-
tum of a non-et
er
nal qual
ity
, viz.
, sound, just as jars and other thi
ngs,
which are the sub
strat
a of non-eter
nal qual
i
ties are them
selves
non-eter
nal. The V
edantin who t
akes his stand on t
he Up
anishads
does not ad
mit that
 the At

man is the sub stra
tum of non-et
er
nal qual
i
-
ties
.
Y
ou can
not say that
 At
man also may be Ani
tya (non-eter
nal) for
Sruti de
clares that At
man is eter
nal (Nitya).
The Sruti t
ext
s which de
scribe Akasa as eter
nal (Am
ri
t
a) de
-
scribe it so in a sec
ond
ary sense only (Gauna), just as it
 calls
heaven-dwell
ing gods as eter
nal (Am
ri
t
a). The or
i
gin and de
struc
tion
of Akasa has been shown to be pos
si
ble.
Even in t
he Sruti t
ext,
 ﬁ
Akasavat sarvagat
ascha nityah
ﬂ which
de
scribes At
man as sim
i
lar to Akasa in be
ing all-per
vad
ing and eter
-
nal, these words are used only in a sec
ond
ary and fig
u
ra
tive sense
(Gauna).
The words are used only to in
di
cate in
fi
nite
ness or super-
em
i
-
nent great
ness of At
man and not to say
 that A
t
man and Akasa are
equal. The use is as ﬁwhen the sun is said to go like an ar
row
.ﬂ When
we say that t
he sun moves with the speed of an ar
row
, we sim
ply
mean that he m
oves fast,
 not that
 he moves at t
he same rate as an ar
-
row
.
Such p
as
sages as ﬁBrah
man is greater or vaster than A
kasaﬂ
prove that t
he ex
tent of
 Akasa is less than that of B
rah
man. Pas
sages
like ﬁThere is no im
age of Him. There is not
h
ing like Brah
manŠ
Na
t
asya pratimasti
ﬂ (Svet.
 Up. IV
.19) show that there is not
h
ing to com
-
p
are Brah
man to. P
as
sages like ﬁEv
ery
thing else is of ev
ilﬂ (Bri. Up.
III
.4.2) show that ev

ery thing dif

fer ent from B
rah
man such as Akasa is
of evil
. All but
 Brah
man is small. Hence Akasa is an ef

fect of Brah
-
man.
Srutis and rea
son
ing show that Akasa has an or
i
gin. There
fore
the fi
nal set
tled con
clu
sion is that Akasa is an ef

fect of Brah
man.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
245

Mat
arisv
adhikaranam
: T
opic 2
Air originates from
 ether
EVoZ _
mV[aídm ì`m»`mV
Etena mat
arisv
a v
y
akhy
at
ah
II.
3.8 (224)
By this i.e
., the fore
going e
xpla
nation abo
ut Aka
sa be
ing a
pro
du
ct, (the
 fact o
f) air (a
lso
 be
ing an
 effe
ct) is
 ex
pla
ine
d.
Etena:
 by this,
 i.e.,
 the foregoing ex
planation about A
kasa being a
production, by t
his p
arity of
 reasoning;
Mat
arisv
a:
 the air
, the mov
er
in mother
, sp
ace;
V
y
akhy
at
ah:
 is explained.
This Su
tra st
ates that air also,
 like Akasa, has been cre
ated by
and from Brah
man.
The pres
ent Su
tra ex
tends the rea
son
ing con
cern
ing Akasa to
the air of which the A
kasa is the abode. The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains
that t
he air is not a prod
uct, be
cause it is not men
tioned in the chap
ter
of the Chhandogya Up
anishad which treat
s of the orig
i
na
tion of
things. The P
urvap
akshin says that the birt
h of air men
tioned in the
T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad is fig
u
ra
tive onl
y
, be
cause air is said to be one of
the im
mor
t
al along with Akasa.
ﬁV
ayu (the air) is the de
ity t
hat never set
sﬂ (Bri. Up. I.
5.22). The
de
nial of V
ayu™
s never set
ting re
fers to the lower knowl
edge or Ap
ara
V
idya in which Brah
man is spo
ken of as to be med
i
t
ated upon un
der
the form of
 V
ayu and is merely a rel
a
tive one.
The glory of V
ayu is re
ferred to as an ob
ject of wor
ship. The
Sruti says ﬁV
ayu never set
s.ﬂ Some dull t
ype of men m
ay think t
hat
V
ayu (air) is eter
nal. T
o re
move thi
s doubt there is made a for
mal ex
-
ten
sion of the for
mer rea
son
ing to air also.
V
ayu is called death
less or im
mor
t
al only in a f
ig
u
ra
tive sense.
V
ayu (air) also has or
i
gin like Akasa.
Asambhav
adhikaranam
: T
opic 3
Brahman (S
at) has no origin
Agå^d
ñVw g
Vmo@Z
wnnÎm
Asambhav
stu sato™nup
ap
atteh
II.
3.9 (225)
Bu
t the
re i
s no
 origi
n of tha
t which i
s (i.e
., Brahm
an), o
n
accoun
t of
 the im
possibi
lit
y (of
 such a
n or
igi
n).
Asambhav
ah:
 no origination, no creati
on;
Tu
:
 but;
Sat
ah:
 of the S
at,
of the t
rue one, eternally
 existing,
 of Brahman;

Anup
ap
atteh:
 as it
does not st
and to reason, on account of the i
mpossibility
 of there
being an origin of Brahman.
This Su
tra st
ates that B
rah
man has no or
i
gin as it is, nei
ther
proved by rea
son
ing nor di
rectly st
ated by S
ruti.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) is used in or
der to re
move the doubt
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
246

The op
po
nent says that
 Svet
asvat
ara Upani
shad de
clares that
Brah
man is born, ﬁThou art born with Thy
 face turned to all di

rec tionsﬂ
(Svet. U
p. 4.3
).
W
e can
not, as in the case of A
kasa and V
ayu, at

trib ute or
i
gin to
Brah
man also. Brah
man is not an ef

fect like Akasa, etc. Orig
i
na
tion of
Brah
man can
not be es
t
ab
lished by any m
ethod of proof.
Brah
man is ex
is
tence it

self. It can
not be an ef

fect, as It can have
no cause. The Sruti t
ext ex

pressly de nies that Brah
man has any pro
-
gen
i
tor
. ﬁHe is the cause, the Lord of t
he Lords of the or
gans and there
is of Him nei
ther pro
gen
i
tor nor Lordﬂ (Svet.
 Up. VI.
9).
More
over it is not
 sep
a
rated from any
thing else.
Nei
ther can Sat come from A
sat, as Asat has no be
ing, for t
hat
which is not (Asat) is with
out a self and can
not there
fore con
sti
tute a
cause, be
cause a cause is the self of it
s ef

fects. The Sruti say
s ﬁHow
can ex
is
tence come out of non-ex

is tence? (Chh. Up. VI
.2.2).
Y
ou can
not say that
 Sat co
mes from Sat as t
he re
la
tion of cause
and ef

fect can not ex
ist with
out a cer
t
ain su
pe
ri
or
ity on t
he p
art of the
cause. The ef

fect must have some spe
ci
al
ity not
 pos
sessed by the
cause. Brah
man is mere ex
is
tence with
out any de
struc
tion.
Brah
man can
not spring from that
 which is some
thing p
ar
tic
u
lar
,
as this would be con
trary to ex

pe ri
ence. Be
cause we ob
serve that
p
ar
tic
u
lar forms are pro
duced from what is gen
eral, as for in
st
ance,
jars and pot
s from clay
, but not
 that which is gen
eral is pro
duced from
p
ar
tic
u
lars. Hence Brah
man which is ex
is
tence in gen
eral, can
not be
the ef

fect of any p
ar
tic
u
lar thing.
If t
here is no eter
nal First Cause, the log
i
cal fal
lacy of Anav
astha
Dosha (
regressus
ad
in fi ni t
um
)
is
in ev i t
a ble.
The
non-ad mis sion
of
a
fun
da
men
t
al cause (sub
st
ance) would drive us to a
retrogressus ad
in fi ni tum
. Sruti
 says, ﬁThat great birt
hless Self is undecayingﬂ (Bri.
 Up.
IV
.4.25
).
Brah
man is with
out any or
i
gin. Ac
cord
ing to Srut
i, He alone is
the T
rue one, who ex
ist
s eter
nally
. On the sup
po
si
tion of t
he or
i
gin of
Brah
man, He can
not be said to be eter
nal. Hence such a sup
po
si
tion
is against Sruti.
 It is also against rea
son
ing, be
cause by ad
mit
ting
such an or
i
gin the ques
tion of source of that
 or
i
gin arises; then again
an
other source of that source and so on. Thus an ar
gu
ment may
 be
con tin ued
ad
in fi ni t
um
 with
out com
ing to a def
i
nite con
clu
sion.
That
fun da men t
al
causeŠsub stanceŠwhich
is
gen er ally
ac
-
knowl
edged to ex
ist, just t
hat is our Brah
man.
There
fore Brah
man is not an ef

fect but is eter
nal.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
247

T
ejo™dhikaranam: T
opic 4
Fire originates from
 air
VoO
mo@V– V
T
ejo™t
ah t
atha hy
aha
II.
3.10 (226)
Fire (is p
roduce
d) from this (i.e., air), so ve
rily (decla
res the
Sruti)
.
T
ejah:
 fire
;
At
ah:
 from this, nam
ely from ai
r which has been just
spoken of in Sutra 8;
T
atha:
 thus, so;
Hi:
 because, verily;

Aha:
 says
(Srut
i).
T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad de
clares that fire was born of air
ﬁ
V
ayoragnih
ŠFrom air is pro
duced fireﬂ (T
ait. Up.
 II.
1). Chhandogya
Up
anishad (IV
.2.3) de
clares ﬁThat (Brah
man) cre
ated fireﬂ.
The con
sis
tency of t
he two Srutis is shown in Su
tra 13.
There is thus a con
flict of
 scrip
tural p
as
sages with re
gard to the
or
i
gin of fire.
 The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that fi
re has Brah
man for it
s
source. Why? Be
cause the text
 de
clares in the be
gin
ning that t
here
ex
isted only t
hat which is. It
 sent forth f
ire. The as
ser
tion that
 ev
ery
-
thing can be known through Brah
man is pos
si
ble only if
 ev
ery
thing is
pro
duced from Brah
man. The scrip
tural st
ate
ment ﬁ
T
ajjalan
ﬂ (Chh.
Up. III
.14.1) spec
i
fies no dif

fer ence. The Mundaka text
 (II.1.
3) de
-
clares that ev
ery
thing with
out ex
cep
tion is born from Brah
man. The
T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad speaks about the en
tire uni
verse with
out any ex

-
cep
tion ﬁAf

ter hav ing brooded, sent fort
h all what
ever there isﬂ (T
ait.
Up. II.
6). There
fore, the st
ate
ment that
 ‚Fire was pro
duced from air
™
(T
ait. Up.
 II.
1) teaches the or
der of suc
ces
sion only
. ﬁFire was pro
-
duced sub
se
quently t
o air
.ﬂ
The Purvap
akshin says: The above two Up
anishadic p
as
sages
can be rec
on
ciled by in
ter
pret
ing the T
aittiriy
a text
 to mean the or
der
of
se quenceŠBrah man
af
 ter
cre at ing
air
,
cre ated
fire.
This Su
tra re
futes this and says t
hat Fire is pro
duced from V
ayu
or air
. This does not at al
l con
tra
dict the Chhandogya t
ext.
 It means
that A
ir is a prod
uct of Brah
man and that f
ire is pro
duced from Brah
-
man, which has as
sumed the form of
 air
. Fire sprang from Brah
man
only through in
ter
me
di
ate links, not di

rectly. W
e may say equall
y that
milk co
mes from the cow
, that
 curds come from the cow
, that
 cheese
co
mes from the cow
.
The gen
eral as
ser
tion that
 ev
ery
thing springs from Brah
man re
-
quires that all t
hings should ul
ti
mately
 be traced to that
 cause, and not
that t
hey should be it
s im
me
di
ate ef

fects. Thus there is no con
tra
dic
-
tion. There re
mains no dif

fi culty
.
It is not right
 to say that
 Brah
man di
rectly cre
ated Fire af

ter cre -
at
ing Air
, be
cause the T
aittiriy
a ex
pressly says that fi
re was born of
Air
. No doubt Brah
man is the root cause.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
248

Abadhikaranam: T
opic 5
W
ater is produced from f
ire
Ap
ah
lI.3.
1
1 (227)
Wate
r (is p
rod
uce
d fro
m fire
).
Ap
ah:
 water
.
(
At
ah:
 from
 it;
T
atha:
 thus;
Hi:
 because;
Aha:
 says the Sruti.
)
The same thing may
 be said of wa
ter
.
W
e have to sup
ply from t
he pre
ced
ing Su
tra the words ﬁthenceﬂ
and ﬁfor thus the tex
t de
claresﬂ.
The au
thor of the S
utras ex
plained the cre
ation of f
ire in the pre
-
vi
ous Su
tra. He ex
plains cre
ation of eart
h in the next
 Su
tra. He pro
-
pounds the Su
tra in or
der to in
sert wa
ter and thus to point
 out it
s
po
si
tion in the S
rishtikrama or or
der of cre
ation.
ﬁAgnerap
ahﬂ
ŠFrom fire sprang wa
ter (T
ait. Up.
 II.
1).
ﬁT
atteja
aikshat
a bahu syam prajayeyeti t
adapo™
srijat
a
ŠThe fire thought
 ‚May
I be many
, may I
 grow forth.™
 It cre
ated wa
ter
.ﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
.2.3).
Doubt:
 Does wa
ter come out di
rectly from f
ire or from Brah
man?
The Purvap
akshin says: W
a
ter co
mes out di
rectly from B
rah
-
man as the Chhandyoga tex
t teaches.
Siddhant
a:
 There is no such con
flict.
 From fire is pro
duced wa
-
ter
, for thus says t
he scrip
ture.
Here also it means that as fi
re is a prod
uct of Brah
man, it i
s from
Brah
man which has as
sumed the form of
 fire, t
hat wa
ter is pro
duced.
There is no room for in
ter
pre
t
a
tion re
gard
ing a text
 which is ex
press
and
un am big u ous.
In the Chhandogya Up
anishad is given the rea
son why wa
ter
co
mes out of f
ire. ﬁAnd, t
here
fore, when
ever any
body any
where is hot
and per
spires wa
ter is pro
duced on him from fire alone.
 Sim
i
larly
,
when a man suf

fers grief and is hot with sor row
, he weep
s and thus
wa
ter is also pro
duced from fire.ﬂ
These ex
plicit st
ate
ment
s leave no doubt t
hat wa
ter is cre
ated
from
 fire
.
Prithiv
y
adhikaranam: T
opic 6
Earth is created from
 water
n¥{W
dr A{Y
H$ma
ê$neãX
mÝVaoä
Prithi
v
i adhikarar
up
asabdant
arebhy
ah
II.
3.12 (228)
The ea
rth (is me
ant by the
 word ‚A
nna™) be
caus
e o
f the su
bje
ct
matte
r, col
ou
r and
 othe
r Sruti te
xts.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
249

Prith
ivi:
 earth;
Adhikara:
 because of the context
, because of the
subject matter;

Rup
a:
 colour;
Sabdant
arebhy
ah:
 on account of
other text
s (Sruti).
The same thing may
 be said of earth.
ﬁFrom wa
ter sprang earthﬂ (T
ait. Up.
 II.
1). ﬁIt (wa
ter) pro
duced
Anna (lit
er
ally f
ood)ﬂ (Chh. Up. VI.2.
4). The two Srut
i text
s are ap
p
ar
-
ently con
tra
dic
tory
, be
cause in one text wa
ter is said to pro
duce earth
and in an
other food.
The Su
tra says that ‚
Anna™
 in the Chhandogya t
ext means not
food but earth.
 Why? On ac
count of the sub
ject mat
ter
, on ac
count of
the col
our
, and on ac
count of other p
as
sages. The sub
ject mat
ter in
the first place is clearly
 con
nected with the el
e
ment
s, as we see from
the pre
ced
ing p
as
sages. ﬁIt sent fort
h fire; it
 sent forth wa
ter
.ﬂ In de
-
scrib
ing the cre
ative or
der we can
not jump from
 wa
ter to ce
re
als with
-
out hav
ing the earth.
 The cre
ative or
der re
ferred to is in re
gard to the
el
e
ment
s. There
fore ‚Anna™
 should re
fer to an el
e
ment and not f
ood.
Again we find in a com
ple
men
t
ary p
as
sage, ﬁThe black col
our in
fire is the col
our of Annaﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
.4.1). Here, t
he ref
er
ence to col
-
our ex
pressly in
di
cates that the eart
h is meant by ‚A
nna™. Black col
our
agrees with earth. The pre
dom
i
nant col
our of earth is black. Eat

ablethings such as cooked dishes
, rice, bar
ley and the l
ike are not nec
es
-
sar
ily black. The P
auranikas also des
ig
nate the col
our of the earth by
the term ‚night
™. The night
 is black. W
e, there
fore, con
clude that black
is the col
our of earth, also.
Other Sruti t
ext
s like ﬁWhat was there as the froth of t
he wa
ter
,
that was hard
ened and be
came the earthﬂ (Bri. Up.
 I.2.
2), clearly in
di
-
cate that f
rom wa
ter earth is pro
duced.
On the other hand the t
ext de
clares that rice and the like were
pro
duced from the earth,
 ﬁFrom earth sprang herbs, from herbs foodﬂ
(T
ait. U
p. II.1.2
).
The com
ple
men
t
ary p
as
sage also, ﬁwhen
ever it rainsﬂ etc.,
point
ing out that
 ow
ing to the eart
hly na
ture of food (rice, bar
ley
, etc.),
earth it

self im me
di
ately springs from wa
ter
.
There
fore, for all
 these rea
sons the word ‚Anna™
 de
notes this
earth. There is re
ally no con
tra
dic
tion be
tween the Chhandogya and
T
aittiriya text
s.
T
adabhidhy
anadhikaranam: T
opic 7
Brahman abi
ding within the el
ement
 is the creative principle
VX{^Ü
`mZmXod V
w V{—
T
adabhidhy
anadeva tu t
allingat sah
II.
3.13 (229)
But on
account
 of t
he indi
cati
ng m
ark suppl
ied by th
eir
refl
ec
ting, i.e
., by the
 refl
ec
tion a
ttribu
ted
 to the
 el
em
en
ts, He
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
250

(i.e., the Lord is
 the cre
ative p
rinciple a
biding within the
elem
ent
s)
.
Ta
t

(T
asya): His (of Brahman);
Abhidhy
anat:
 because of the volit
ion,
reflection;
Eva:
 even, only
;
Tu
:
 but;
T
at lin
gat
:
 because of His
indicating marks;
Sah:
 He.
The con
ten
tion raised in Su
tra 10 is now re
futed.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) is used in or
der to re
move the doubt
.
The Purvap
akshin or the ob
jec
tor says: The Srut
is de
clare that
Brah
man is the cre
ator of ev
ery
thing. B
ut the T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad
says ﬁFrom Akasa sprang airﬂ (T
ait. Up.
 II.
1). This in
di
cates that cer
-
t
ain
el e ment
s
pro duce
cer t
ain
ef
 fect
s
in de pend ently
.
There
is
con tra
-
dic
tion in the S
ruti p
as
sages. This Su
tra re
futes this ob
jec
tion.
Cre
ation of A
kasa, fire, wind, wa
ter is done solely to Go
d™
s will.
One el
e
ment can
not cre
ate an
other el
e
ment out of
 it
s own power
. It
 is
God in the form of
 one el
e
ment that
 cre
ates an
other el
e
ment there
-
from by His will.
The el
e
ment
s are in
ert. They
 have no power to cre
ate. B
rah
man
Him
self act
ing from within t
he el
e
ment
s was the real cre
ator of all
those el
e
ment
s. Y
ou will find in B
rihadaranyka Up
anishad ﬁHe who
dwells within the f
ire, who is dif

fer ent from f
ire, whom fire does not
know
, whose body is fire, who rules the f
ire from within,
 is Thy Im
mor
-
t
al At
man, the I
n
ner Ruler withinﬂ (Bri. Up. I
II.
7.5).
This Sruti t
ext in
di
cates that the S
u
preme Lord is the sole Ruler
and de
nies all in
de
pend
ence to the el
e
ment
s.
Though it is st
ated in the Chhandogy
a Up
anishad that the el

e -
ment
s have cre
ated each one, the ot
her next of i
t, y
et the S
u
preme
Lord is in
deed the cre
ator of ev
ery
thing be
cause Sruti de
clares that
Brah
man has cre
ated this world by t
he ex
er
cise of His will.
T
ext
s such as ﬁH
e wished may I be
come many
, may I
 grow forthﬂ
(T
ait. U
p. II.6)
 and
 ﬁIt ma
de it
sel
f its Self,ﬂ i.e
., the Se
lf of ev
ery
thing
which ex
ist
s (II.7)Šin
di
cates that the S
u
preme Lord is the Self of
 ev
-
ery
thing. The p
as
sage ﬁThere is no other seer (thinker) but Heﬂ de
-
nies there be
ing any other seer (thinker), that
 which is (i.e., B
rah
man)
in the char
ac
ter of seer or thinker con
sti
tutes the sub
ject mat
ter of the
whole Chap
ter
, as we con
clude from the in
tro
duc
tory p
as
sage ﬁIt
thought,
 may I be m
any
, may I
 grow forthﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
.2.3).
In the Chhandogya Up
anishad it is st
ated ﬁThat f
ire thought.
That wa
ter thought.
ﬂ Re
flec
tion is not pos
si
ble for the in
ert el
e
ment
s.
The Su
preme Lord, the In
ner Ruler of all el
e
ment
s, the Indweller
within the el
e
ment
s re
flected and pro
duced the ef

fects. This is the
real mean
ing. The el
e
ment
s be
came causes only through the agency
of the S
u
preme Lord who abides within them and rules them f
rom
within. There
fore there is no con
tra
dic
tion at all
 be
tween the two t
ext
s.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
251

For a wise man who re
flect
s and cog
i
t
ates there is no con
tra
dic
-
tion.
The
Sruti
text
s
are
in fal li bl
e
and
au thor i t
a tive.

Re mem ber
this
point well al
ways. The Srut
i text
s have come out from t
he heart
s of
real
ised sages who had di
rect in
tu
itiv
e ex
pe
ri
ence in Nirvikalp
a Sam
-
adhi. They are nei
ther fic
ti
tious nov
els nor prod
uct
s of the in
tel
lect.
V
ip
ary
ay
adhikaranam
: T
opic 8
The process of dissolution of the elem
ent
s is
in the reverse order from that
 of creation
{dn
`©`oU
 Vw H«$_m
o@V– C
nnÚ
V
ip
ary
ay
ena tu kramo™t
ah up
ap
ady
ate cha
II.
3.14 (230)
The orde
r (in which the e
lem
ents a
re ind
ee
d withdrawn into
Brahman durin
g Pralaya or dissoluti
on) is the reverse o
f that
(i.e
., the
 ord
er i
n which
 the
y are
 cre
ate
d) a
nd thi
s is
reasonable.
V
ip
ary
ay
ena:
 in the reverse order;
Tu
:
 indeed, but;

Kramah:
order
,
the process of dissolution;
At
ah:
 from that
 (the order of creation);
Cha:
 and;
Up
ap
ady
ate:
 is reasonable.
The pro
cess of dis
so
lu
tion of t
he el
e
ment
s is de
scribed in this
Su tra
.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) has the force of ‚only
™
 here. The ques
tion here
is whether at the t
ime of cos
mic dis
so
lu
tion or Pralay
a the el
e
ment
s
are with
drawn into Brah
man in an in
def
i
nite or
der
, or in the or
der of
cre
ation or in the re
verse or
der
.
In cre
ation the or
der is from above and in dis
so
lu
tion the or
der is
from be
low
. The or
der of in
vo
lu
tion is in the i
n
verse of the or
der of
evo
lu
tion. I
t alone is quite ap
pro
pri
ate and rea
son
able. Be
cause we
see in or
di
nary life t
hat a man who has as
cended a st
air has in de
-
scend
ing to t
ake the step
s in the re
verse or
der
.
Fur
ther
, we ob
serve that t
hings made of clay such as jars,
dishes, etc., on be
ing de
stroyed p
ass back into clay and that t
hings
which have orig
i
nated from wa
ter such as snow and hail-stones again
dis
solve into wa
ter
, the cause.
The gross be
comes re
solved into t
he sub
tle, t
he sub
tle into t
he
sub
tler and so on till t
he whole man
i
fes
t
a
tion at
t
ains it
s fi
nal First
Cause, viz., B
rah
man. Each el
e
ment is with
drawn into it
s im
me
di
ate
cause, in the re
verse or
der till Akasa is reached, which in turn get
s
merged in Brah
man.
Smriti al
so de
clares ﬁO Di
vine Rishi! t
he earth, the ba
sis of the
uni
verse is dis
solved into wa
ter
, wa
ter into f
ire, fire int
o air
.ﬂ
Those which are pro
duced first in cre
ation are more pow
er
ful.
Con
se
quently t
hey have lon
ger ex
is
tence. There
fore, it
 fol
lows log
i
-
cally that
 the lat
est in cre
ation, be
ing of fee
ble es
sence, should first
be
come ab
sorbed in those of higher pow
ers. The higher pow
ers
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
252

should later on t
ake their turn. V
amana Purana de
clares: ﬁThe ear
lier
a thing hap
pens to be in cre
ation, t
he more it be
comes the re
cep
t
a
cle
of the Lord™
s glory
. Con
se
quently t
hose that are ear
lier in cre
ation are
more pow
er
ful and are with
drawn only later
. And f
or the same rea
son
un
doubt
edly thei
r per
va
sion is also greater
.ﬂ
Ant
arav
ijnanad
hikaranam
: T
opic 9
The ment
ion of the m
ind and intellect
 does not interfere
with the order of creation and reabsorption
as they are the product
s of the elem
ent
s
AÝVam {
dkmZ_
Zgr H«
$_o
U V{—ﬁ
m{X{V M
oÞ A{
deofmV²
Ant
ara v
ijnanam
anasi kramen
a t
alli
ngaditi

chet na av
iseshat
II.
3.15 (231)
I
f it be
 said
 that b
etw
ee
n (Bra
hman a
nd the
 el
em
en
ts) the
inte
lle
ct and
 the
 mind
 (are
 me
ntion
ed
, and
 that the
refo
re th
ei
r
orig
inat
ion an
d re-absor
ption
 are to be pla
ced) somewh
ere in
the se
ries o
n acco
unt of the
ir be
ing infere
ntial signs (whe
reb
y
the
 ord
er o
f the
 cre
atio
n of the
 el
em
en
ts is b
rok
en
), we
 say, no
t
so o
n acc
ou
nt of the
 non-
diffe
ren
ce
 (of the
 inte
lle
ct and
 the
mi
nd
 fr
om
 th
e elem
ent
s)
.
Ant
ara:
 intervening bet
ween, in between;
V
ijnanam
anasi:
 the
intellect and t
he mind;
Kramena:
 in the order of succession,
according to the successive order;
T
at lin
gat
:
 owing to indication of
that,
 as there is indication in Srut
i to that
 ef
fect, because of an
inferential m
ark of this;
Iti:
 thus
, this
;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not, no,
 not so, the
objection cannot st
and;
A
v
iseshat:
 because of no speciality
, as there
is no speciality ment
ioned in Sruti about
 the causation of t
he
element
s, because there being no p
articular dif
ference, on account of
non-dif
ference.
A
 fur
ther ob
jec
tion to t
he cau
sa
tion of t
he pri
mary el
e
ment
s from
Brah
man is raised and re
futed.
The Su
tra con
sist
s of two p
art
s namely an ob
jec
tion and it
s ref
u
-
t
a
tion. The ob
jec
tion is ﬁ
Ant
ara vijnanamanasi kram
ena t
allingat it
i
chet
ﬂ. The ref
u
t
a
tion por
tion is ﬁ
Na aviseshat
ﬂ.
In the A
tharvana (Mundaka Up
anishad) in the chap
ter which
treat
s of the cre
ation oc
curs the fol
low
ing text
: ﬁFrom this (Brah
man)
are born Prana, mind, t
he senses, ether
, air
, fire,
 wa
ter and earth, t
he
sup
port of allﬂ (II
.1.3).
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says: The or
der of cre
ation
which is de
scribed in the Mundaka Up
anishad con
tra
dict
s the or
der of
cre
ation of el
e
ment
s de
scribed in the Chhandogya Up
anishad VI.2.
3,
and other Srutis.
T
o this we re
ply: Thi
s is only a se
rial enu
mer
a
tion of t
he or
gans
and the el
e
ment
s. It is not
 cer
t
ainly a st
ate
ment as to th
e or
der of their
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
253

orig
i
na
tion. The M
undaka text onl
y st
ates that all
 these are pro
duced
from Brah
man.
In the A
tharva V
eda (Mundaka) mind, in
tel
lect and the senses
are men
tioned in the m
id
dle of the enu
mer
a
tion of t
he el
e
ment
s. This
does not af

fect the evo
lu
tion
ary or
der
, be
cause the mind, the i
n
tel
lect
and the senses are the ef

fects, of the el
e
ment
s and their in
vo
lu
tion is
in
cluded in the in
vo
lu
tion of t
he el
e
ment
s.
The in
tel
lect, the m
ind and the senses are prod
uct
s of the el
e
-
ment
s. There
fore, they
 can come into be
ing only af

ter the el e
ment
s
are cre
ated. The orig
i
na
tion and re
ab
sorp
tion of t
he mind, in
tel
lect
and the senses are the same as those of the el
e
ment
s as there is no
dif

fer ence be
tween the senses and the el
e
ment
s.
Even if
 the mind, t
he in
tel
lect and the senses are sep
a
rate from
the el
e
ment
s, the evo
lu
tion
ary or
der is ei
ther the mind and t
he senses
fol
lowed by the el
e
ment
s or the el
e
ment
s fol
lowed by the mi
nd and
the senses. Any
how they have an or
derly evo
lu
tion.
That the mi
nd, in
tel
lect and the or
gans are mod
i
fi
ca
tions of the
el
e
ment
s and are of the na
ture of the el

e ment
s is proved by Sruti
 text
s
like ﬁFor the mind, m
y child, con
sist
s of earth, breath or v
i
t
al force of
wa
ter
, speech of fireﬂ (Chh. Up. V
I.6.
5).
Hence the Mundaka text
 which treat
s of cre
ation does not con
-
tra
dict the or
der of cre
ation men
tioned in the Chhandogy
a and
T
aittiriy
a Up
anishads. The orig
i
na
tion of t
he or
gans does not cause a
break in the or
der of the orig
i
na
tion of t
he el
e
ment
s.
The Purvap
akshin again says: that as t
here is men
tion in Srut
i of
the mind and t
he senses, Akasa and the other el
e
ment
s should not be
con
sid
ered to be cre
ated out of
 Brah
man and to dis
solve in Brah
man
but to be cre
ated out of
 and to dis
solve in the mi
nd and the senses ac
-
cord
ing to the or
der of suc
ces
sion, as there is in
di
ca
tion in the
Mundaka to that
 ef

fect.This ar
gu
ment is un
ten
a
ble as there is no spe
ci
al
ity m
en
tioned
in Sruti about
 the cre
ation of t
he el
e
ment
s. The mind, t
he in
tel
lect and
the senses have all with
out ex
cep
tion been st
ated therein as cre
ated
out of B
rah
man.
The word ‚Et
asmat™
 of that
 text
 is to be read along with ev

ery one of these i.e.
, Prana, m
ind, etc. T
hus ﬁfrom Him is born Prana, from
Him is born mind, from Him
 are born the senses etc.Š
Et
asmat
Pranah, Et
asmat M
anah
ﬂ, etc
.
Characharav
y
ap
asray
adhikaranam
: T
opic 10
Births and deaths are not of
 the soul
MamMa
ì`nml`ñVw
 ñ`mV² VX
²>ì`n
Xoemo
 ^mº$
– VØmd^m{dË
Characharav
y
ap
asray
astu sy
at t
adv
y
ap
adeso bhakt
ah
 t
adbhavabhav
itv
at
II.
3.16 (232)
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
254

Bu
t the
 me
ntion
 of tha
t (viz., b
irth and
 de
ath o
f the
 indi
vid
ual
soul) i
s apt on
ly w
ith
 referenc
e to th
e bodies of being
s movi
ng
and n
on-movi
ng.
 It is seconda
ry or
 metaph
oric
al if
 applied t
o
th
e so
ul
, a
s t
he ex
is
ten
ce o
f t
ho
se t
erm
s d
epen
ds
 on
 th
e
ex
iste
nce
 of tha
t (i.e
., the
 bo
dy).
Characharav
y
ap
asray
ah:
 in connection with the bodi
es fixed and
movable;

Tu
:
 but, indeed;

Sy
at:
 may be, becomes;
T
adv
y
ap
adesah:
mention of t
hat, t
hat expression, i.
e., t
o popular expressions of births
and deaths of the soul;

Bhakt
ah:
 secondary
, met
aphorical, not lit
eral;
T
adbhavabhav
itv
at:
 on account of (those terms) depending on the
existence of t
hat. (
T
adbhava:
 on the exist
ence of that,
 i.e.,
 the body;
Bhav
itv
at:
 depending.)
The es
sen
tial na
ture or char
ac
ter of the i
n
di
vid
ual soul is dis
-
cussed now
.
A
 doubt may arise t
hat the in
di
vid
ual soul also has births and
deaths be
cause peo
ple use such ex
pres
sions as ﬁRamakris
hna is
bornﬂ, ﬁRamakrishna is deadﬂ and be
cause cer
t
ain cer
e
mo
nies such
as the Jat
akarma etc., are pre
scribed by the scrip
tures at the birt
h
and death of peo
ple.
This Su
tra re
futes such a doubt, and de
clares that the in
di
vid
ual
soul has nei
ther birth nor death.
 Birth and deat
h per
t
ain to the body
with which the soul is con
nected but not t
o the soul. If
 the in
di
vid
ual
soul per
ishes there would be no sense in the re
li
gious in
junc
tions and
pro hi bi tions
re fer ring
to
the
en joy ment

and
avoid ance
of
pleas ant
and
un
pleas
ant things in an
other body (an
other birth).
The con
nec
tion of t
he body with t
he soul is pop
u
larly called
birth, and t
he dis
con
nec
tion of t
he soul from the body
 is called death
in the com
mon p
ar
lance. Scrip
ture says, ﬁThis body in
deed dies when
the liv

ing soul has left it,
 the liv

ing soul does not dieﬂ (Chh. Up.VI.
1
1.3). Hence birth and death are spo
ken pri
mar
ily of
 the bod
ies of
mov
ing and non-mov
ing be
ings and only met

a phor
i
cally of t
he soul.
That the words ‚birth™
 and ‚death™
 have ref
er
ence to the con
junc
-
tion with and sep

a ra
tion from a body
 merely is also shown by the f
ol
-
low
ing Sruti t
ext,
 ﬁOn be
ing born that per
son as
sum
ing his body
,
when he p
asses out of the body and diesﬂ etc.
 (Bri. Up. I
V
.3.8).
The Jat
akarma cer
e
mony also has ref
er
ence to the man
i
fes
t
a
-
tion of t
he body only be
cause the soul is not man
i
fested.
Hence the birth and death be
long to the body
 only but not
 to the
soul.
Atmadhikaranam
: T
opic 1
1
The individual soul is eternal.
 ‚I
t is not produced™
ZmË_m,
 Alw
Vo{Z
©Ë`Ëdm… V
Natma, asruternity
atv
at cha t
abhy
ah
II.
3.17 (233)
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
255

T
he indi
vidual
 soul is
 not (
produced),
 (because) it
 is not
 (so)
mentioned by the scriptures, and as it is eternal accor
ding to
the
m (the
 Sruti te
xts)
.
Na:
 not (produced);
Atma:
 the indiv
idual soul;
Asruteh:
 because of
no mention in S
ruti, as it i
s not found in Srut
i;
Nity
atv
at:
 because of it
s
permanence, as it is eternal;

Cha:
 also, and;
T
abhy
ah:
 from them
(Srutis), according to the S
rutis.
The
dis cus sion
on
the
es sen tial
char ac ter is tics
of
the
in di vid ual
soul is be
ing con
tin
ued.
Ait
areya Up
anishad de
clares: At the be
gin
ning of cre
ation there
was only ﬁOne Brah
man with
out a sec
ondﬂ (I.1). There
fore it is not
rea
son
able to say t
hat the in
di
vid
ual soul is not born, be
cause then
there was noth
ing but Brah
man.
Again the S
ruti says, ﬁAs small sp
arks come forth from fire,
 thus
from that
 At
man all Pranas, all
 worlds, all gods em
a
nateﬂ (Bri. Up.
II.
1.20). ﬁAs from a bl
az
ing fire sp
arks, be
ing of the same na
ture as
fire, f
ly fort
h a thousandfold, t
hus are var
i
ous be
ings brought forth
from the I
m
per
ish
able, my
 friend, and re
turn thit
her also,ﬂ (Mun. Up.
II.
1.1). There
fore the Purv
ap
akshin or the ob
jec
tor ar
gues that the in
-
di
vid
ual soul is born at the be
gin
ning of the cy

cle, just as Akasa andother el
e
ment
s are born.
This Su
tra re
futes it and say
s that the in
di
vid
ual soul is not born.
Why? on ac
count of the ab
sence of scrip
tural st
ate
ment. For in t
he
chap
ters which treat of t
he cre
ation the S
ruti tex
t
s ex
pressly deny
birth to t
he in
di
vid
ual soul.
W
e know from scrip
tural p
as
sages that the soul is eter
nal, that
 it
has no or
i
gin, that
 it is un
chang
ing, that
 what con
sti
tutes the soul is
the un
mod
i
fied Brah
man, and that
 the soul has it
s self rooted in Brah
-
man. A
 be
ing of such a na
ture can
not be pro
duced.
The scrip
tural p
as
sages to which we are al
lud
ing are the fol
low
-
ing: ﬁThe great un
born Self undecaying
, un
dy
ing, im
mor
t
al, fear
less is
in
deed Brah
manﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
.4.25). ﬁThe know
ing self is not born, i
t
dies notﬂ (Katha Up. I
.2.18). ﬁThe an
cient is un
born, eter
nal, ev
er
last
-
ingﬂ (Katha Up. I
.2.18).
It is the one B
rah
man with
out a sec
ond that en
ters the in
tel
lect
and ap
pears as the in
di
vid
ual soul ﬁHav
ing sent forth t
hat en
tered into
itﬂ (T
ait. Up.
 II.
6). ﬁLet me now en
ter those with t
his liv
ing self and let
me then evol
ve names and formsﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
.3.2). ﬁHe en
tered
thither t
o the very t
ip
s of fin
ger-nailsﬂ (Bri. Up. I.
4.7).
ﬁThou art Thatﬂ (Chh. Up. V
I.8.
7). ﬁI am Brah
manﬂ (Bri. Up.
I.4.
10). ﬁThis self is Brah
man, know
ing allﬂ (Bri. Up. I
I.5.
19). All t
hese
text
s de
clare the eter
nity of
 the soul and thus con
tend against the
view of it
s hav
ing been pro
duced.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
256

There
fore there is in re
al
ity no di
f

fer ence be
tween the in
di
vid
ual
soul and Brah
man. Jiva is not
 cre
ated. I
t is not a prod
uct. It
 is not born
just as Akasa and other el
e
ment
s are born. The fact of t
he in
di
vid
ual
soul™
s be
ing non-cre
ated does not con
tra
dict the Srut
i p
as
sage ﬁAt
the be
gin
ning there was only the A
t
man the one with
out a sec
ondﬂ
(Ait. U
p. I.1)
.
The men
tion of cre
ation of souls in t
he other Sruti p
as
sages
cited is only in a sec
ond
ary sense. It does not
 there
fore con
tra
dict the
Sruti p
as
sage ﬁHav
ing cre
ated it,
 It en
tered into it
.ﬂ
The doc
trine that
 souls are born from Brah
man is not cor
rect.
Those who pro
pound this doc
trine de
clare that if souls are born from
Brah
man, the scrip
tural st
ate
ment that
 by know
ing Brah
man ev
ery
-
thing can be
come true, be
cause Brah
man is the cause and the
knowl
edge of the cause will lead t
o the knowl
edge of all the ob
ject
s.
They say f
ur
ther that B
rah
man can
not be iden
ti
fied with t
he in
di
vid
ual
souls, be
cause He is sin
less and pure, whereas they are not so. They
fur
ther say that
 all that i
s sep
a
rate is an ef

fect and that as the souls
are sep
a
rate they m
ust be ef

fects.
The souls are not sep

a rate. The Srut
i de
clares, ﬁThere is one
God hid
den in all be
ings, all-per
vad
ing, the S
elf within al
l be
ingsﬂ
(Svet.
 Up. VI.
1
1). It onl
y ap
pears di
vided ow
ing to it
s lim
it
ing ad
junct
s,
such as the mind and so on, just as the ether ap
pears di
vided by i
t
s
con
nec
tion with jars and the l
ike. It i
s His con
nec
tion with t
he in
tel
lect
that leads to hi
s be
ing called a Jiva, or t
he in
di
vid
ual soul. Et
her in a
pot is iden
ti
cal with the ether in sp
ace. All t
he above ob
jec
tions can
not
st
and be
cause of the ac
tual iden
tity
 of the in
di
vid
ual soul and Brah
-
man. There
fore there is no con
tra
dic
tion of t
he dec
la
ra
tion of t
he Sruti
that by
 know
ing Brah
man we can know ev
ery
thing. Orig
i
na
tion of
souls has ref
er
ence only to t
he body
.
Jnadhikaranam
: T
opic 12
The nature of t
he individual soul is intelli
gence
kmo@V E
Jno™t
a ev
a
II.
3.18 (234)
For th
is ve
ry re
aso
n (viz
., that it is
 not c
rea
ted
), (the
 indi
vid
ual
soul is) inte
lligence
 (itself).
Jnah:
 intelligent
, intell
igence, knower;
At
a ev
a:
 for this very
 reason,
therefore.
The
dis cus sion
on
the
es sen tial
char ac ter is tics
of
the
in di vid ual
soul is con
tin
ued.
The Sankhya doc
trine is that t
he soul is al
ways Chait
anya or
pure con
scious
ness in it
s own na
ture.
The V
aiseshikas de
clare that the in
di
vid
ual soul is not in
tel
li
gent
by na
ture, be
cause it is not found t
o be in
tel
li
gent in the st
ate of deep
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
257

sleep or swoon. It be
comes in
tel
li
gent when the soul co
mes to the
wak
ing st
ate and unites with t
he mind. The in
tel
li
gence of the soul is
ad
ven
ti
tious and is pro
duced by the con
junc
tion of t
he soul with the
mind, just as f
or in
st
ance the qual
ity of
 red
ness is pro
duced in an iron
rod by the con
junc
tion of t
he iron rod with fire.
If t
he soul were eter
nal, es
sen
tial in
tel
li
gence, it would re
main
in
tel
li
gent in the st
ates of deep sleep, swoon etc. T
hose who wake up
from sleep say that
 they were not con
scious of any
thing. There
fore,
as
in tel li gence
is
clearly
in ter mit t
ent,
we
con clude
that
the
in tel li gence
of the soul is ad
ven
ti
tious only
.
T
o this we re
ply that
 the soul is of eter
nal in
tel
li
gence. In
tel
li
-
gence con
sti
tutes the es
sen
tial na
ture of Brah
man. This we know
from Sruti
 text
s such as ﬁBrah
man is knowl
edge and Blissﬂ (Bri. Up.
III
.9.28.
7). ﬁBrah
man is true, knowl
edge, in
fi
niteﬂ (T
ait. Up.
 II.
1). ﬁHav
-
ing nei
ther in
side nor out

side but be ing al
to
gether a mass of knowl
-
edgeﬂ (Bri. Up. IV
.5.13). Now if
 the in
di
vid
ual soul is noth
ing but that
Su preme
Brah man,
then
eter nal
in tel li gence
con sti tutes
the
soul™
s
es
sen
tial na
ture, just as light
 and heat con
sti
tute t
he na
ture of fi
re.
The in
tel
li
gent Brah
man It

self be ing lim
ited by t
he Up
adhis or
lim
it
ing ad
junct
s such as body
, mind etc.
, man
i
fest
s as the in
di
vid
ual
soul or Jiva. There
fore, in
tel
li
gence is the very na
ture of Jiva and i
s
never al
to
gether de
stroyed, nor even i
n the st
ate of deep sleep or
swoon.
Sruti t
ext
s di
rectly de
clare that the in
di
vid
ual soul is of the na
ture
of self-lu
mi
nous in
tel
li
gence. ﬁHe not asleep, him
self looks down
upon the sleep
ing sensesﬂ (Bri. Up. IV
.3.1
1). ﬁThat per
son is self-il
lu
-
mi
natedﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
.3.14). ﬁFor t
here is no in
ter
mis
sion of the know
-
ing of the knowerﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
.3.30).
That the soul™
s na
ture is in
tel
li
gence fol
lows more
over from the
p
as
sage (Chh. Up. VII
I.12.
4) where it is st
ated as con
nected with
knowl
edge through all sense or
gans. ﬁHe who knows let me smell
this, he is the self
.ﬂ
Y
ou may ask, what is the use of
 the senses if the At

man it

self isof the na
ture of knowl
edge. The senses are needed to bring about the
dif
 fer en ti at
ed
sen sa tions
and
ideas
(V
rittijnana).
From the soul™
s es
sen
tial na
ture be
ing in
tel
li
gence it does not
fol
low that t
he senses are use
less; be
cause they serve the pur
pose of
de
ter
min
ing the spe
cial ob
ject of each sense, such as smell and so
on. Sruti
 ex
pressly de
clares: ﬁSmell (or
gan of smell) is for the pur
pose
of per
ceiv
ing odourﬂ (Chh. Up. VII
I.12.
4).
The ob
jec
tion that
 sleep
ing per
sons are not con
scious of any
-
thing is re
futed by
 scrip
ture, where we read con
cern
ing a man ly
ing in
deep sleep, ﬁAnd when there he does not see, y
et he is see
ing though
he does not see. Be
cause there is no in
ter
mis
sion of the see
ing of the
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
258

seer for it can
not per
ish. But t
here is then no sec
ond, noth
ing else dif

-
fer
ent from him
 that he could seeﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
.3.23).
The non-sentiency in deep sleep is not due t
o ab
sence of
Chait
anya but ab
sence of V
ishaya (ob
ject
s). The Jiva does not lose
it
s power of see
ing. It
 does not see, be
cause there is no ob
ject to see.
It has not lost
 it
s in
tel
li
gence, for it is im

pos si
ble. The ab
sence of ac
-
tual in
tel
lec
tual
ity i
s due to the ab
sence of ob
ject
s, but not t
o the ab
-
sence of in
tel
li
gence, just as the light
 per
vad
ing sp
ace is not ap
p
ar
ent
ow
ing to the ab
sence of things to be il
lu
mi
nated, not
 to the ab
sence of
it
s own na
ture.
If in
tel
li
gence did not ex
ist in deep sleep, et
c., then who would
be there to say t
hat it did not
 ex
ist? How could it be known? The man
af

ter wak ing from deep sleep says, ﬁI slept
 soundly
. I en
joyed per
fect
rest. I did not
 know any
thing.ﬂ He who says, ﬁI di
d not know any
thing. I
en
joyed per
fect restﬂ must hav
e been ex
is
tent at
 that t
ime. If
 it is not
so how could he re
mem
ber the con
di
tion of t
hat st
ate?
There
fore, the i
n
tel
li
gence of the in
di
vid
ual soul or Jiva is never
lost un
der any con
di
tion. The rea
son
ing of the V
aiseshikas and oth
ers
is merely fal
la
cious. It con
tra
dict
s the Srutis. W
e there
fore con
clude
and de
cide that eter
nal in
tel
li
gence is the es
sen
tial na
ture of the soul.
Utkrantigaty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 13 (Sutras 19-32)
The size of the individual soul
CËH«
$mpÝVJË`mJVrZ
Utkrantigaty
agatinam
II.
3.19 (235)
(On account of t
he scriptural declarati
ons) of (th
e soul™s)
pass
ing out, go
ing, and re
turning (the s
oul is
 not infinite
 in
size; it is of atom
ic size
).
Utkranti
:
p
assing out, coming out;

Gati:
 going;
Agatin
am:
 returning.
The dis
cus
sion on the char
ac
ter of the i
n
di
vid
ual soul is con
tin
-
ued.
From this up to S
u
tra 32 the ques
tion of t
he size of the soul,
whether it is atomi
c, me
dium-sized or in
fi
nite is dis
cussed. The first
ten Sut
ras (19-28) state t
he ar
gu
ment
s for the view t
hat the in
di
vid
ual
soul is Anu (atomic). The nex
t four Sut
ras give the re
ply
.
Svet
asvat
ara Upani
shad de
clares ﬁHe is the one God, all-per
-
vad
ingﬂ (VI.1
1). Mundaka Sruti say
s, ﬁThis At
man is atomicﬂ (III
.1.9).
The two tex
t
s con
tra
dict each other and we have to ar
rive at a de
ci
-
sion on the point.
It has been shown above that
 the soul is not a prod
uct and that
eter
nal in
tel
li
gence con
sti
tutes it
s na
ture. There
fore it f
ol
lows that it i
s
iden
ti
cal with the Su
preme Brah
man. The in
fin
ity of
 the Su
preme
Brah
man is ex
pressly de
clared in the Srutis.
 What need then is there
of a dis
cus
sion of the size of t
he soul? T
rue, we re
ply
. But
 Sruti t
ext
s
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
259

which speak of the soul™
s pass
ing out from t
he body (Utkranti), go
ing
(Gati) and re
turn
ing (Agati),
 es
t
ab
lish the
prima f
a
cie
 view that
 the
soul is of lim
ited size. Fur
ther
, the S
ruti clearly de
clares in some
places that the soul is of at
omic size. The pres
ent dis
cus
sion is there
-
fore be
gun in or
der to clear this doubt.
The op
po
nent or Purvap
akshin holds that the soul must be of
lim
ited atomi
c size ow
ing to it
s be
ing said to p
ass out, go and re
turn.
It
s pass
ing out is men
tioned in Kaushit
aki Upani
shad (III.
3), ﬁAnd
when he p
asses out of this body he p
asses out to
gether with all
these.ﬂ It
s go
ing is said in Kaushit
aki Upani
shad (I.2), ﬁAll
 who de
p
art
from this world go to t
he moon.ﬂ It
s re
turn
ing is seen in
Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad (IV
.4.6), ﬁFrom t
hat world he re
turns
again to this world of ac
tion.ﬂ From t
hese st
ate
ment
s as to the soul™
s
p
ass
ing out from t
he body
, go
ing to heaven,
 etc., and re
turn
ing from
there to thi
s world, it fol
lows that it i
s of lim
ited size. Be
cause mo
tion is
not pos
si
ble in the case of an all-per
vad
ing be
ing. If
 the soul is in
fi
nite,
how can it rise, or go or come? There
fore the soul is atomi
c.
ñdmË_Zm M
moÎma
Sv
atmana chott
aray
oh
II.
3.20 (236)
And
 on a
cco
unt o
f the
 latte
r two (i
.e
., goi
ng and
 retu
rning)
be
ing co
nne
cte
d with
 the
ir so
ul (i
.e.,
 age
nt), (the
 sou
l is o
f
atomic size).
Sv
atmana:
 (being connected) directly with t
he agent, t
he soul;
 Cha:
and, only
, also;
Utt
aray
oh:
 of the lat
ter two, namel
y
, of Gat
i and Agati,

of the going away
 and coming back, as st
ated in the prev
ious Sutra.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 19 is given in t
his Su
tra.
Even if
 it can be said that ‚
p
ass
ing out™
 means only dis
con
nec
-
tion with t
he body
, how can they who say t
hat the soul is in
fi
nite ex
-
plain it
s go
ing to the mo
on or re
turn
ing from there?
Even if
 the soul is in
fi
nite still
 it can be spo
ken of as p
ass
ing out,
out of t
he body
, if by
 that t
erm is meant ceas
ing to be the ruler of
 the
body
, in con
se
quence of the re
sult
s of it
s for
mer ac
tions hav
ing be
-
come ex
hausted, just as some
body
, when ceas
ing to be the ruler of
 a
vil
lage may be said to ‚
go out™. The p
ass
ing away from t
he body may
mean only ces
sa
tion of t
he ex
er
cise of a def
i
nite func
tion just as in t
he
case of a man no lon
ger re
t
ained in of

fice.But t
he two lat
ter ac
tiv
i
ties viz.,
 go
ing to the moon
, re
turn
ing
from there to t
he world, are im
pos
si
ble for an all-per
vad
ing soul.
Hence the soul is atomic in size.
ZmUwaVÀN®>Vo[a{V
 MoV² Z, BVam{YH$mamV
² &
Nanurat
acchruteriti chet,
 na, it
aradhikarat
II.
3.21 (237)
If it be said that (th
e soul is) not atomic, as th
e scriptures state
it to b
e o
the
rwise
, (i.e
., all-
pe
rvad
ing), (we
 say)
 not s
o, b
ec
aus
e
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
260

(the
 one
) othe
r than the
 indi
vid
ual
 sou
l (i.e
., the
 Sup
rem
e
Brah
man o
r the
 High
es
t Se
lf) is
 the
 sub
je
ct ma
tter (
of tho
se
passages).
Na:
 not;
Anu:
 minute, at
omic;
At
at:
 not that
, otherwise, namely
opposite of Anu;

Sruteh:
 as it is st
ated in Srut
i, because of a Sruti
 or
scriptural text
;
Iti:
 thus;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not;
It
ara:
 other than the
individual soul,
 i.e.,
 the Supreme S
elf;
Adhikarat:
 because of the
context or t
opic, from the subject
 matter of
 the portion in t
he Chapter
.
An ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 19 is raised and re
futed.
The Su
tra con
sist
s of an ob
jec
tion and it
s an
swer
. The ob
jec
-
tion-por
tion is ﬁ
Nanurat
acchruteriti chet
ﬂ and the an
swer-por
tion is
ﬁ
Na it
aradhikarat
.ﬂ
The p
as
sages which de
scribe the soul and in
fi
nite ap
ply only
 to
Su
preme Brah
man and not to t
he in
di
vid
ual soul.
Sruti p
as
sages like ﬁHe is the one God, who is hid
den in all be
-
ings, all-per
vad
ing, etc.ﬂ (S
vet.
 Up. VI.
1
1), ﬁHe is that great un
born
Self who con
sist
s of knowl
edge, is sur
rounded by the Pranas, t
he
ether within t
he heart.ﬂ (Bri. Up.
 IV
.4.22), ﬁLike t
he ether He is Om
ni
-
pres
ent, et
er
nal,ﬂ ﬁT
ruth, Knowl
edge, In
fi
nite is Brah
manﬂ (T
ait. Up.
II.
1)Šre
fer not to t
he Jiva or the in
di
vid
ual soul with it
s lim
i
t
a
tions, but
to the S
u
preme Brah
man or the High
est Self,
 who is other than the in
-
di
vid
ual soul, and forms the chief
 sub
ject mat
ter of all t
he V
edant
a
text
s, be
cause Brah
man is the one thing t
hat is to be known or real
-
ised in
tu
itiv
ely and is there
fore pro
pounded by all t
he V
edant
a p
as
-
sages.
ñdeãXmo
Ý_mZmä`m§
Sv
asabdonmanabhy
am cha
II.
3.22 (238)
And
 on a
cco
unt o
f dire
ct sta
tem
en
ts (o
f the
 Sruti te
xts a
s to th
e
atomic size
) and infinitesimal m
eas
ure (the
 soul is a
tomic).
Sv
asabdonmanabhy
am:
 from direct st
atement
s (of Sruti t
ext
s) and
infinit
esimal measure;
Cha:
 and. (
Sv
asabda:
 the word it
self; the
word directly denoting ‚m
inute™;
Unmanabhy
am:
 on account of the
measure of comp
arison;
Ut:
 subtle;
Mana:
 measure, hence subtle
division; hence smaller ev
en than the small.
Sv
asabdonmanabhy
am:
 as these are the words directly denoting
‚minute™
 and to expression denoting small
er than the small as
measured by division.
)
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 19 is con
tin
ued.
The soul must be atomic be
cause the Sruti ex
pressly says so
and calls
 him in
fi
nitely small.
Mundaka Sruti de
clares, ﬁThis Atma is atom
icﬂ (III.
1.9).
Svet
asvat
ara Upani
shad says, ﬁThe in
di
vid
ual is of the size of t
he
hun
dred
th p
art of a p
art, which it

self is one hun dred
th p
art of the poi
nt
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
261

of a hairﬂ (V
.9); ﬁThat l
ower one also is seen small even like the point
of a goad.ﬂ
There
fore the soul is atomi
c in size.
But an ob
jec
tion may
 here be raised. If t
he soul is of atomic size,
it will oc
cupy a point of
 the body only
. Then the sen
sa
tion which ex
-
tends over the whole body
 would ap
pear con
trary to rea
son. And yet
 it
is a mat
ter of ex
pe
ri
ence that those who t
ake bath in the Gan
ga ex
pe
-
ri
ence the sen
sa
tion of cold all
 over their whole bod
ies. In sum
mer
peo
ple feel hot al
l over the body
. The fol
low
ing Su
tra gives a suit

ablean
swer to the ob
jec
tion.
A{da
moYü
ÝXZdV²
A
v
irodhaschandanavat
II.
3.23 (239)
T
here is no contradiction as i
n the case of sandal paste.
A
v
irodhah:
 non-conflict, no contradict
ion, no incongruity
, it is not
incongruous;
Chandanavat:
 like the sandal p
aste.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 19 is con
tin
ued.
Just as one drop of san
dal-wood p
aste, smeared on one p
art of
the body makes the whole body
 thrill with j
oy
, so also the in
di
vid
ual
soul, though nat
u
rally min
ute, man
i
fest
s it

self through out the whole
body and ex
pe
ri
ences all the sen
sa
tions of plea
sure and pain.
Though the soul is atomic it
 may ex
pe
ri
ence plea
sure and pain ex

-
tend
ing over the whole body
. Though the soul is at
omic still it
 is pos
si
-
ble that it
 per
vades the en
tire body
, just as a drop of san
dal p
aste
al
though in ac
tual con
t
act with one p
ar
tic
u
lar spot of the body
 only
per
vades, i.
e., causes re
fresh
ing sen
sa
tion all ov
er the body
.
As the soul is con
nected with the skin which is the seat of
 feel
-
ing, the as
sump
tion that
 the soul™
s sen
sa
tions should ex
tend over the
whole body is not con
trary to rea
son be
cause the con
nec
tion of t
he
soul and the skin abides in the en
tire skin and the skin ex
tends over
the en
tire body
.
AdpñW{
Vd¡e
oî`m{X
{V MoÞ
, AÜ`wnJ
_mX²Y¥{X
A
v
asthitiv
aiseshy
aditi chenn
a,
 adhy
up
agamaddhridi
hi
II.
3.24 (240)
If it be said (that th
e two cases are not parallel), on account of
the specialisation of abode (prese
nt in t
he case o
f the
sanda
l-ointme
nt, abse
nt in the ca
se
 of the s
oul), we
 de
ny that,
on accoun
t of
 the ackn
owledgement
 (by sc
ript
ure, of
 a special
pla
ce
 of the
 sou
l), vi
z., within
 the
 he
art.
A
v
asthiti:
 existence, residence, abode;

V
aiseshy
at:
 because of the
speciality
, on account of specialisation;

Iti:
 thus
, this
;
Chet:
 if (if it be
argued);
Na:
 not (so), no, the argument
 cannot st
and;
Adhy
up
agamat:
 on account of the admission, o
r acknowledgment;
Hrid
i:
 in the heart;

Hi:
 indeed.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
262

An ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 23 is raised and re
futed by
 the op
po
nent or
Purvap
akshin.
The Su
tra con
sist
s of two p
art
s namely
, an ob
jec
tion, and it
s re
-
ply
. The ob
jec
tion-por
tion is: ‚
A
vasthitivaiseshyaditi chet
™, and the re
-
ply por
tion is:
‚Nabhyup
agamaddhridi hi
™
.
The Purvap
akshin or the ob
jec
tor raises an ob
jec
tion against
his own view
. The ar
gu
men
t
a
tion re
lied upon in the last
 Su
tra is not
ad
mis
si
ble, be
cause the two cases com
p
ared are not p
ar
al
lel. The
sim
i
lar
ity i
s not ex
act. The anal
ogy is fault
y or in
ap
pro
pri
ate. I
n the
case of the san
dal p
aste, it oc
cu
pies a p
ar
tic
u
lar point of t
he body and
re
freshes the en
tire body
. But
 in the case of the soul it
 does not ex
ist
in
any
p
ar tic u lar
lo cal ity
but
is
per cip i ent
of
all
sen sa tions
through out
the en
tire body
. W
e do not know that it
 has a pa
r
tic
u
lar abode or spe
-
cial seat. When there is no spe
cial seat, for t
he soul, we can
not in
fer
that it
 must have a p
ar
tic
u
lar abode in the body l
ike the san
dal p
aste
and there
fore be atomic. B
e
cause, even an all-per
vad
ing soul like
ether
, or a soul per
vad
ing the en
tire body li
ke the skin may pro
duce
the same re
sult.
W
e can
not rea
son like this: the soul is at
omic be
cause it causes
ef

fects ex
tend
ing over the en
tire body li
ke a drop of san
dal oint
ment,
be
cause that rea
son
ing would ap
ply to t
he sense of touch, the skin
also, which we know not to be of atom
ic size. There
fore it is not easy
to de
cide the size of the soul when there is no pos
i
tive proof
.
The op
po
nent re
futes the abov
e ob
jec
tion by quot

ing such Srutitext
s as: ﬁThe soul abides within the heartﬂ (Pras. Up.
 III
.6), ﬁThe self
is in the heartﬂ (Chh. Up. V
III
.3.3), ﬁThe S
elf abides in the heart
ﬂ (Bri.
Up. IV
.3.7), ﬁWho is that
 self? He who is within the heart,
 sur
rounded
by the P
ranas, the per
son of light,
 con
sist
ing of knowl
edge,ﬂ ex
-
pressly de
clare that the soul has a spe
cial abode or p
ar
tic
u
lar seat in
the body
, viz.
, the heart.
 There
fore it is atom
ic.
The anal
ogy is not f
aulty
. It
 is quite ap
pro
pri
ate. The t
wo cases
are p
ar
al
lel. Hence the ar
gu
men
t
a
tion re
sorted to in Su
tra 23 is not
ob jec tion able.
JwUmX²
dm@@b
moH$
Gunadv
a alokav
at
II.
3.25 (241)
Or on account of (i
ts) qualit
y (viz.
, int
elligence), as in cases of
ordinary experience
 (such as in th
e case
 of a lamp by its li
ght).
Gunat:
 on account of it
s quality (of
 intelligence);
Va
:
 or (a further
example is giv
en);
Alokav
at:
 like a light. (Or

Lokav
at:
 as in the world,
as in cases of ordinary experience).
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 23 is con
tin
ued.
Or it is like a
 small light whic
h, by it
s own vir
tue, il
lu
mi
nates the
whole house. The soul, though at
omic and oc
cu
pies a p
ar
tic
u
lar por
-
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
263

tion of t
he body
, may per
vade the whole body
 by it
s qual
ity of
 in
tel
li
-
gence as the flame per
vades the whole room by i
t
s rays and thus
ex
pe
ri
ences plea
sure and pain t
hrough
out the whole body
.
A
 fur
ther ex
am
ple is given by way
 of com
p
ar
i
son to show how
an atomic soul can have ex
pe
ri
ence through
out the en
tire body
.
ì`{Vao
H$mo
 JÝYdV²
V
y
atireko gandhav
at
II.
3.26 (242)
The exte
nsion (of the q
uality of intellige
nce) b
eyo
nd (the so
ul in
which it inhe
res) i
s like
 the o
dou
r (which ex
tend
s be
yond the
fragran
t ob
je
ct).
V
y
atirekah:
 exp
ansion, ext
ension beyond (the object i.
e., soul);
Gandhavat:
 like the odour
.
Su
tra 23 is fur
ther elu
ci
dated by t
his Su
tra.
Just as the sweet fra
grance of flow
ers ex
tends be
yond them
and dif

fuses through out a larger sp
ace, so also the in
tel
li
gence of the
soul, which is atomic, ex

tends be yond the soul and per
vades the en
-
tire body
.
If it
 be said that ev
en the anal
ogy in the abov
e Su
tra is not ap
-
pro
pri
ate, be
cause a qual
ity can
not be ap
art from the sub
st
ance, and
hence the light of
 a lamp is only t
he lamp in it
s ten
u
ous form, the anal
-
ogy of per
fume will ap
ply
. Just as though a flower is far away i
t
s scent
is felt around, so t
hough the soul is atomic it
s cog
ni
tion of t
he en
tire
body is pos
si
ble. This anal
ogy can
not be ob
jected on the ground that
even the f
ra
grance of a flower is only the
sub
tle p
ar
ti
cles of the flower
,
be
cause our ex
pe
ri
ence is that we feel t
he fra
grance and not any p
ar
-
ti cles.
T
atha cha darsay
ati
II.
3.27 (243)
T
hus also, (th
e Sruti) shows or
 declares.
T
atha:
 thus, in the same way
;
Cha:
 also;
Darsay
ati:
 (the Sruti)
declares.
The Sruti also,
 af

ter hav ing sig
ni
fied the soul™
s abid
ing in the
heart and it
s atomic size, de
clares by means of such p
as
sages as
ﬁUpto the hairs, upto t
he tip
s of the nailsﬂ (Kau. Up.
 IV
.20, B
ri. Up.
I.4.
7), that t
he soul per
vades the whole body by
 means of in
tel
li
gence,
which is it
s qual
ity
.
n¥WJwnXo
Prithagup
adesat
II.
3.28 (244)
On a
cco
unt o
f the
 se
para
te te
achi
ng (o
f the
 Sruti)
 (that the
 sou
l
pervades th
e body on acc
ount
 of it
s quali
ty of
 int
ellig
ence).
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
264

Prith
ak:
 separat
e, dif
ferent;
Up
adesat:
 because of teaching or
st
atement.
This Su
tra is a de
fence in fa
vour of the pre
ced
ing Su
tra where
in
tel
li
gence is used as an at
trib
ute of t
he in
di
vid
ual soul and so sep
a
-
rate from it
.
A
 fur
ther ar
gu
ment is given here t
o es
t
ab
lish the prop
o
si
tion of
the pre
vi
ous Su
tra. Kaushit
aki Upani
shad de
clares ﬁHav
ing by
Prajna, (in
tel
li
gence, knowl
edge,) t
aken pos
ses
sion of the body
ﬂ
(III.
6). This in
di
cates that in
tel
li
gence is dif

fer ent from t
he soul be
ing
re
lated as in
stru
ment and agent and t
he soul per
vades the en
tire
body with t
his qual
ity of
 in
tel
li
gence.
Again the t
ext ﬁThou t
he in
tel
li
gent per
son hav
ing through the in
-
tel
li
gence of the senses ab
sorbed within him
self all in
tel
li
genceﬂ (Bri.
Up. II.
1.17) shows in
tel
li
gence to be dif

fer ent from t
he agent, i.
e., t
he
Jiva or the in
di
vid
ual soul and so like
wise con
firms our views.
Though there is no fun
da
men
t
al dif

fer ence be
tween the in
di
vid
-
ual soul and his in
tel
li
gence, they are dif

fer ent in the sense that
 in
tel
li
-
gence is the at
trib
ute of t
he in
di
vid
ual soul which is the sub
st
ance.
The in
di
vid
ual soul is the pos
sessor of that at
trib
ute, be
cause the
Sruti st
ates a dif

fer ence be
tween the two.
VX²Jw
UgmaËdmV²
 Vw VX²
ì`nXoe
– àmk
T
adgunasaratv
at tu t
adv
y
ap
adesah prajnav
at
II.
3.29 (245)
But that
 declaration (as to t
he atomic size of the soul) is on
account of its h
aving for
 its essence
 the qualities of that
 (viz.,
the B
udd
hi), as in the
 case
 of the i
ntellige
nt Lord (Sagu
na
Brahman).
T
adgunasaratv
at:
 on account of it
s possess
ing for it
s essence the
qualities of t
hat (viz.,
 the Buddhi);

Tu
:
 but;
T
adv
y
ap
adesah:
 that
declaration (as to it
s atomic size);
Prajnav
at:
 as in the case of the
Intelli
gent Lord.
The dis
cus
sion on the true char
ac
ter of the i
n
di
vid
ual soul, com
-
menced in Su
tra 16 is con
tin
ued.
The word ‚tu™
 (but), re
futes all t
hat has been said in Sutras 19-28
and de
cides that the soul is all-per
vad
ing.
The next f
our Sutras are the Siddhant
a Sutras which lay down
the cor
rect doc
trine.
The soul is not of at
omic size as the Sruti does not de
clare it to
have had an or
i
gin. The scrip
ture de
clares that the Su
preme Brah
-
man en
tered the uni
verse as the in
di
vid
ual soul and that t
he in
di
vid
ual
soul is iden
ti
cal with Brah
man, and that
 the in
di
vid
ual soul is noth
ing
else but the Su
preme Brah
man. If
 the soul is the Su
preme Brah
man,
it must be of
 the same ex
tent as Brah
man. The scrip
ture st
ates Brah
-
man to be all-per
vad
ing. There
fore the soul also is all-per
vad
ing.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
265

Y
our ar
gu
ment is that
 though the soul is Anu,
 it can cog
nise all
that goes on in the body
 be
cause of it
s con
t
act with the skin. B
ut that
ar
gu
ment is un
ten
a
ble be
cause when a thorn pricks w
e feel p
ain only
in the pricked spot. More
over
, your anal
ogy of t
he lamp and it
s light
and of the f
lower and it
s fra
grance has no real ap
pli
ca
bil
ity
, be
cause a
Guna (qual
ity) can never be ap
art from the sub
st
ance (Guna). The
light and the per
fume are only sub
tle por
tions of the f
lame and the
flower
. Fur
ther
, as Chait
anya is the na
ture or Svarup
a of the soul, t
he
soul also must be of the size of t
he body if t
here is cog
ni
tion of t
he
whole body
. This lat
ter doc
trine has been al
ready re
futed.
 There
fore
the soul must be in
fi
nite.
The Jiva is de
clared to be atomic by rea
son of it
s iden
ti
fi
ca
tion
with the Budd
hi.
Ac
cord
ing to the ex

tent of in
tel
lect, the size of
 the in
di
vid
ual soul
has been fixed.
 It is imag
ined that t
he soul is con
nected with the
Buddhi or in
tel
lect and bound. Pass
ing out, go
ing and com
ing are
qual
i
ties of the i
n
tel
lect and are su
per
im
posed on the Jiva or the in
di
-
vid
ual soul. The soul is con
sid
ered to be atomic on ac
count of the li
m
i
-
t
a
tion of t
he in
tel
lect. That
 the non-trans
mi
grat
ing eter
nally f
ree
At
man, which nei
ther act
s nor en
joys is de
clared to be of the same
size as the Buddhi is due only t
o it
s hav
ing the qual
i
ties of the B
uddhi
(in
tel
lect) for it
s es
sence, viz., as long as it
 is in fic
ti
tious con
nec
tion
with the Budd
hi. It
 is sim
i
lar to imag
in
ing the all-per
vad
ing Lord as lim
-
ited for t
he sake of Upasana or wor
ship.
Svet
asvat
ara Upani
shad (V
.9) says, ﬁThat li
v
ing soul is to be
known as part of
 the hun
dred
th p
art of the poi
nt of a hair di
vided a
hun
dred times and yet
 it is to be in
fi
nite.ﬂ This S
ruti tex
t at f
irst st
ates
the soul to be atom
ic and then teaches it t
o be in
fi
nite. Thi
s is ap
pro
-
pri
ate only i
f the at
omicity of
 the soul is met

a phor
i
cal and it
s in
fin
ity i
s
real, be
cause both st
ate
ment
s can
not be t
aken in their pri
mary sense
at the same t
ime. The in
fin
ity cer
t
ainly can
not be un
der
stood in a met

-
a
phor
i
cal sense, as all the Up
anishads aim at show
ing that B
rah
man
con
sti
tutes the S
elf of t
he soul.
The other p
as
sage (Svet.
 Up. V
.8) which treat
s of the mea
sure
of the soul ﬁThe lower one en
dowed with the qual
ity of
 mind and the
qual
ity of
 the body
, is seen small even like t
he point of a goadﬂ
teaches the soul™
s small size to de
pend on it
s con
nec
tion with t
he
qual
i
ties of the B
uddhi, not upon it
s own Self.
Mundaka Upani
shad de
clares, ﬁThat small (Anu) Self
 is to be
known by thoughtﬂ (II
I.1.
9). This Up
anishad does not teach that t
he
soul is of atomic size, as the sub
ject of the chap
ter is Brah
man in so
far as not to be f
ath
omed by the ey
e, etc.,
 but to be real
ised by the
light of knowl
edge. Fur
ther
, the soul can
not be of at
omic size in the
pri
mary sense of the word.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
266

There
fore the st
ate
ment about A
nutva (small
ness, sub
tlety
) has
to be un
der
stood as re
fer
ring ei
ther to the di
f

fi culty of
 know
ing the
soul, or else to it
s lim
it
ing ad
junct
s.
The Buddhi abides in t
he heart. So i
t is said that t
he soul abides
in the heart.
 Re
ally t
he soul is all-per
vad
ing.
As the soul is in
volved i
n the Samsara and as it has for it
s es
-
sence the qual
i
ties of it
s lim
it
ing ad
junct viz.,
 Buddhi, it
 is spo
ken of as
min ute.
`mdXmË_^m{
dËdm… Z Xmo
fñVÔe©
Y
av
adatmabhav
itv
accha na doshast
addarsanat
II.
3.30 (246)
And the
re is no
 de
fect o
r fault in what has b
ee
n said in the
pre
vio
us S
utra (
as the
 con
junc
tion o
f the
 sou
l with the
 inte
lle
ct
exists) so long as the soul (in it
s relative aspect) ex
ists; because
it is so seen (in the scriptur
es).
Y
av
at:
 so long as;
Atmabh
av
itv
at:
 as the soul (in it
s relative aspect)
exi
st
s;
Cha:
 also, and;
Na doshah:
 there is no defect or fault
;
T
addarsanat:
 because it is so seen (in the scriptures), as Sruti also
shows that.
An ad
di
tional rea
son is given in sup
port of Su
tra 29.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent raises an ob
jec
tion. V
ery
well, let us t
hen as
sume that the
 trans
mi
gra
tory con
di
tion of t
he soul
is due to the qual
i
ties of the i
n
tel
lect form
ing it
s es
sence. It will f
ol
low
from this that
, as the con
junc
tion of t
he in
tel
lect and soul which are dif

-
fer
ent en
ti
ties must nec
es
sar
ily come to an end,
 the soul when dis
-
joined from the i
n
tel
lect will ei
ther cease to ex
ist al
to
gether or at least
cease to be a Samsarin (in
di
vid
ual soul).
T
o this ob
jec
tion this S
u
tra gives a re
ply
. There can be no such
de
fect in the ar
gu
ment of t
he pre
vi
ous Su
tra, be
cause this con
nec
tion
with the Buddh
i (in
tel
lect) last
s so long as the soul™
s st
ate of S
amsara
is not brought to an end by
 means of per
fect knowl
edge. As long as
the soul™
s con
nec
tion with t
he Buddhi, it
s lim
it
ing ad
junct last
s, so
long the in
di
vid
ual soul re
mains in
di
vid
ual soul, in
volved i
n trans
mi
-
gra tory
ex is tence.
There is no Jiva or in
di
vid
ual soul with
out iden
ti
fi
ca
tion with in
-
tel
lect. The con
nec
tion of t
he soul with the in
tel
lect will cease only by
right knowl
edge. The scrip
ture de
clares ﬁI know that Per
son of sunlike
lus
tre be
yond dark
ness. A
 man who knows Him passes over death,
there is no other p
ath to go (Sv
et. Up. I
II.
8).
How is it known that the soul is con
nected with the B
uddhi as
long as it ex
ist
s? W
e re
ply
, be
cause that is seen, viz.
, in scrip
ture. It
 is
known from the Sruti
s that this con
nec
tion is not sev
ered even at
death. The scrip
ture de
clares, ﬁHe who is within the heart, con
sist
ing
of knowl
edge, sur
rounded by Pranas, the per
son of light,
 he re
main
-
ing the same wan
ders along the two worlds as if think
ing, as if mov

-
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
267

ingﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
.3.7). Here the t
erm ﬁcon
sist
ing of knowl
edgeﬂ means
‚con
sist
ing of Buddhi™
. The p
as
sage ﬁHe re
main
ing in the same wan
-
ders along the two worldsﬂ de
clares that the Sel
f, ev
en when go
ing to
an
other world, is not sep

a rated from the B
uddhi etc. The t
erm ﬁas if
think
ing,ﬂ ﬁas if mov

ingﬂ mean that the in
di
vid
ual soul does not think
and move on it
s own ac
count, but only
 through it
s as
so
ci
a
tion with t
he
Buddhi. The i
n
di
vid
ual soul thinks as it were, and mov
es as it were,
be
cause the in
tel
lect to which it i
s joined re
ally mov
es and thinks.
The con
nec
tion of t
he in
di
vid
ual soul with the in
tel
lect, it
s lim
it
ing
ad
junct, de
pends on wrong knowl
edge. W
rong knowl
edge
(Mithyaj
nana) can
not cease ex
cept through per
fect knowl
edge.
There
fore, as long as there does not arise the reali
sa
tion of B
rah
man
or Brahmajnana, so long the con
nec
tion of t
he soul with the in
tel
lect
and it
s other lim
it
ing ad
junct
s does not come to an end.
nw§ñ
Ëdm{XdV²
 Ëdñ` gVmo@
{^ì`{
º$`mo
Pumstv
adiv
at tvasy
a sato™bhiv
y
aktiy
ogat
II.
3.31 (247)
On a
cco
unt o
f the
 app
rop
riate
ne
ss o
f the
 manif
es
tatio
n of tha
t
(conne
ction) which ex
ists (pote
ntially) like v
irile po
wer, etc.
Pumstv
adiv
at:
 like the viril
e power etc.;
Tu
:
 verily
, but;

Asy
a:
 its, i.e.,
of the connection wit
h the intell
ect;
Sat
ah:
 existing;
Abhiv
y
aktiy
ogat:
on account of the manif
est
ation being possible,
because of appropriateness of the manif
est
ation.
A
 proof is now given in sup
port of Su
tra 29 by show
ing the per
-
pet ual
con nec tion
be tween
the
in di vid ual
soul
and
the
in tel lect.

The
word ‚tu™
 (but), is used in or
der to set aside the ob
jec
tion raised above.
An ob
jec
tion is raised that i
n Sushupti or deep sleep and
Pralaya t
here can be no con
nec
tion with t
he in
tel
lect, as the scrip
ture
de
clares, ﬁThen he be
comes united with the T
rue; he is gone to his
ownﬂ (Chh. Up. VI.8.
1). How then can it be said that
 the con
nec
tion
with the in
tel
lect last
s so long as the in
di
vid
ual soul ex
ist
s?
The Su
tra re
futes it and say
s that this con
nec
tion ex
ist
s in a sub
-
tle or po
ten
tial form ev
en in deep sleep. Had it not
 been for this, it
could not have be
come man
i
fest in the wak
ing st
ate. S
uch con
nec
-
tion is clear from the ap
pro
pri
ate
ness of such con
nec
tion be
com
ing
man i fest
dur ing
cre ation,
af
 ter
dis so lu tion
and
dur ing
the
wak ing
st
ate
af

ter sleep, as in the case of vi
ril
ity dor
mant in boy

hood and man i
fest
in man
hood.
The con
nec
tion of t
he soul with the in
tel
lect ex
ist
s po
ten
tially
dur
ing deep sleep and the pe
riod of dis
so
lu
tion and again be
comes
man
i
fest at t
he time of wak
ing and the tim
e of cre
ation.
V
ir
ile power be
comes man
i
fest in man
hood only if
 it ex
ist
s in a
fine or po
ten
tial st
ate in the body
. Hence this con
nec
tion with t
he in
tel
-
lect last
s so long as the soul ex
ist
s in it
s Samsara-st
ate.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
268

{ZË`
monbãÜ`
ZwnbpãYàgﬁm
o@Ý`V
a{Z`_
mo dm
@Ý`W
Nity
op
alabdhy
anup
alabdhiprasango™ny
at
araniy
amo
 v
a™ny
atha
II.
3.32 (248)
Otherwise
 (if no intelle
ct ex
isted
) there wo
uld re
sult e
ither
const
ant
 perception
 or con
stan
t non
-percepti
on, or
 else a
limita
tion o
f ei
the
r of the
 two (i
.e.,
 of the
 sou
l or o
f the
 se
nse
s).
Nity
op
alabdhy
anup
alabdhiprasanga:
 there would result perpetual
perception or non-perception;
Any
at
ara:
 otherwise, either of
 the two;
Niyamah:
 restrictive rule;
Va
:
 or;
Any
atha:
 otherwise. (
Up
alabdhi:
perception, consciousness;
Anup
alabdhi:
 non-perception,
non-consciousnes
s.)
The in
ter
nal or
gan (Ant
ahkarana) which con
sti
tutes the li
m
it
ing
ad
junct of the soul i
s called in dif

fer ent places by dif

fer ent names such
as Manas (mind), Buddhi (in
tel
lect), V
ijnana (knowl
edge), and Chitt
a
(thought) etc. When it
 is in a st
ate of doubt
 it is called Manas; when it
is in a st
ate of de
ter
mi
na
tion it i
s called Buddhi. Now we must nec
es
-
sar
ily ac
knowl
edge the ex
is
tence of such an in
ter
nal or
gan, be
cause
oth er wise
there
would
re sult
ei ther
per pet ual
per cep tion
or
per pet ual
non-per cep tion.
There
would
be
per pet ual
per cep tion
when ever
there is a con
junc
tion of t
he soul, and senses and the ob
ject
s of
senses, the three to
gether form
ing the in
stru
ment
s of per
cep
tion. Or
else, if on t
he con
junc
tion of t
he three causes the ef

fect did not fol
low
,
there would be per
pet
ual non-per
cep
tion. B
ut nei
ther of these t
wo al
-
ter na tiv
es
is
ac tu ally
observ+ed.
Or else we will have to ac
cept the lim
i
t
a
tion of t
he power ei
ther
of the soul or of t
he senses. But the li
m
it
ing of power is not pos
si
ble,
as the At
man is change
less. It can
not be said that t
he power of the
senses which is not ob
structed ei
ther in the pre
vi
ous mo
ment or in the
sub
se
quent mo
ment is lim
ited in the m
id
dle.
There
fore we have to ac
knowl
edge the ex
is
tence of an in
ter
nal
or
gan (Ant
ahkarana) through whose con
nec
tion and dis
con
nec
tion
per
cep
tion and non-per
cep
tion t
ake place. The scrip
ture de
clares,
ﬁMy mind was else
where, I did not see,
 my mind was else
where, I did
not hear; for a man sees with his mi
nd and hears with the mindﬂ (Bri.
Up. I.5.
3). The scrip
ture fur
ther shows that de
sire, rep
re
sen
t
a
tion,
doubt, f
aith, want
 of fait
h, mem
ory
, for
get

ful ness, shame, re
flec
tion,
fear
, all this is mind.
There
fore there ex
ist
s an in
ter
nal or
gan, the A
nt
ahkarana, and
the con
nec
tion of t
he soul with the in
ter
nal or
gan causes the At
man to
ap
pear as the in
di
vid
ual soul or as the soul it
s Samsara st
ate as ex
-
plained in Su
tra 29. The ex

pla na
tion giv
en in Su
tra 29 is there
fore an
ap pro pri ate
one.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
269

Kartradhikaranam: T
opic 14 (Sutras 38-39)
The individual soul is an agent
H$Vm©
 emómW©dÎ
Kart
a sastrarthav
attvat
II.
3.33 (249)
(T
he soul is) an agent on account of t
he scripture having a
pu
rpo
rt the
reb
y.
Kart
a:
 agent;
Sastrarthav
attvat:
 in order that the scriptures may
have a meaning,
 on account of the scriptures having a purport.
An other
char ac ter is tic
of
the
in di vid ual
soul
is
be ing
st
ated.
The ques
tion as re
gards the size of the soul has been st
ated.
Now an
other char
ac
ter
is
tic of the soul i
s t
aken up for dis
cus
sion. The
Jiva is a doer or an agent, f
or oth
er
wise the scrip
tural in
junc
tions will
be use
less. On that as
sump
tion scrip
tural in
junc
tions such as ﬁHe is
to sac
ri
fice,ﬂ ﬁHe is to make an ob
la
tion into t
he fire,ﬂ ﬁHe is to giv
e,ﬂ
etc., hav
e a pur
port, oth
er
wise they would be purportless. The scrip
-
tures en
join cer
t
ain act
s to be done by the agent
. If
 the soul be not an
agent these in
junc
tions would be
come mean
ing
less. On that sup
po
-
si
tion there is mean
ing to the f
ol
low
ing p
as
sage also, ﬁFor
, it is he who
sees, hears, per
ceives, con
ceives, act
s, he is the per
son whose self
is knowl
edgeﬂ (Pras. Up. IV
.9). ﬁHe who de
sires to at
t
ain heaven, has
to per
form sac
ri
fices; and he, who de
sires to at
t
ain sal
va
tion, has to
wor ship
Brah man
in
med i t
a tion.ﬂ
{dhmamo
nXoemV²
V
iharop
adesat
II.
3.34 (250)
And o
n accou
nt of (the Sruti) te
aching (its) wand
ering ab
out.
V
ihara:
 wandering at will, play
, sporting about;

Up
adesat:
 on account
of declaration, as S
ruti declares.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 33 is given.
The Sruti de
clares ﬁThe im
mor
t
al one goes wher
ever he likesﬂ
(Bri. Up. I
V
.3.12), and agai
n ﬁHe t
ak
ing the senses along with him
moves about ac
cord
ing to his plea
sure, within his own bodyﬂ (Bri.
 Up.
II.
1.18). These p
as
sages which give a de
scrip
tion of t
he wan
der
ing of
the soul in the dream in
di
cate clearly that
 the soul is an agent.
CnXmZmV²
Up
adanat
II.
3.35 (251)
(Also i
t is
 a doer) on
 accoun
t of
 its
 taki
ng t
he orga
ns.
Up
adanat:
 on account of it
s t
aking (the organs).
An
other ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 33 is given.
The text
 quoted in the last
 Su
tra also in
di
cates that the soul i
n
dream st
ate t
akes the or
gans with it. ﬁHav

ing taken through the in
tel
li
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
270

gence of the senses, in
tel
li
gence, and hav
ing t
aken the sensesﬂ (Bri.
Up. II.
1.18, 19). T
his clearly shows that the soul is an agent.
It is a doer or an agent be
cause it is said to use the senses. The
in
di
vid
ual soul is to be ad
mit
ted as the agent,
 be
cause he is de
scribed
in Sruti t
o t
ake the senses along with him as in
stru
ment
s of his work,
while roam
ing within his own body dur
ing the dream st
ate. ﬁThus, he
t
ak
ing the senses along with him, m
oves about within hi
s own body
,
just as he pleases.ﬂ (Bri. Up. I
I.1.
18).
In the Git
a also we find ﬁwhen the soul ac
quires a body and
when he aban
dons it, he seizes these and goes with them,
 as the
wind t
akes fra
grance from the flow
ersﬂ (Git
a. XV
.8).
ì`nXoe
m… {H
«$`m`m§
 Z Mo
{ÞX}
V
y
ap
adesaccha kriy
ay
am na
 chennirdesav
ip
ary
ay
ah
II.
3.36 (252)
(T
he soul is an agent) also because
 it is designated as such
with re
gard
 to ac
tions
; if it we
re n
ot so
, the
re w
ou
ld b
e a
change
 of de
signation.
V
y
ap
adesat:
 on account of mention,
 from a st
atement of
 Sruti;

Cha:
also, and;
K
r
i
ya
ya
m
:
 in respect of performance of rites;

Na chet:
 if it
were not so, or else, otherwise;
Nirdesav
ip
ary
ay
ah:
 reversal of the
st
atement,
 change of designation.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 33 is con
tin
ued.
In the p
as
sage
ﬁV
ijnanam
 yajnam t
anute, K
armani t
anute™
pi
chaﬂ
ŠﬁIn tel li
 gence
(i.e.,

the
in tel li gent

per son,
Jiva)
per forms
sac ri
-
fices, and it al
so per
forms all act
sﬂ (T
ait. Up.
II.
5), by ‚I
n
tel
li
gence™
 the
soul is meant and not t
he Buddhi. Thi
s clearly shows that the soul is
an agent.
V
ijnana re
fers to Jiva and not
 to Buddhi,
 be
cause if Buddhi is re
-
ferred to, t
he word would be ‚V
ijnanena™. The nom

i na
tive case in
‚V
ijnanam
 yajnam t
anute™
, should be in
stru
men
t
al case, ‚V
ijnanena™,
‚by
in tel li gence™

mean ing
through
it
s
in stru men t
al ity
.
W
e see that in an
other text
 where the Buddhi is meant t
he word
‚in tel li
 gence™

is
ex hib it
ed
in
the
in stru men t
al
case
ﬁHav ing
through
the
in
tel
li
gence of these senses it t
akes all un
der
st
and
ingﬂ (Bri.
Up.
II.
1.17). In t
he p
as
sage un
der dis
cus
sion, on the con
trary
, the word
‚in
tel
li
gence™
 is given in the char
ac
ter
is
tic of the agent
, viz.
, nom
i
na
-
tive case and there
fore in
di
cates the soul which is dis
tinct from t
he
Buddhi.
Cnbp
ãYdX
Up
alabdhi
v
adaniy
amah
II.
3.37 (253)
As
 in
 th
e ca
se o
f p
erc
ept
io
n (
th
ere i
s)
 no
 ru
le (
her
e al
so
).
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
271

Up
alabdhiv
at:
 as in the case of perception;
Aniyamah:
 (there is) no
rule.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 33 is con
tin
ued.
An ob
jec
tion is raised that i
f the soul were a free agent,
 then why
should he do any act pro
duc
tive of
 harm
ful ef

fects? He would have
done only what is ben
e
fi
cial to him and not
 both good and evil
 ac
tions.
This ob
jec
tion is re
futed in t
his Su
tra. Just as the soul, al

thoughhe is free, per
ceives both pleas
ant and un
pleas
ant things, so also he
per
forms both good and evi
l ac
tions. There is no rule that
 he should
per
form only what
 is ben
e
fi
cial and avoid what is bad or harm
ful.
In the per
for
mance of ac
tions, the soul i
s not ab
so
lutely
 free as
he de
pends on dif

fer ences of place, time and ef

fi cient causes. But an
agent does not cease to be so be
cause he is in need of as
sis
t
ance. A
cook re
mains the agent in ac
tion of cook
ing, al
though he needs fuel,
wa
ter
, etc. His func
tion as a cook ex
ist
s at all tim
es.
e{º${dn`©
Saktiv
ip
ary
ay
at
II.
3.38 (254)
On a
cco
unt o
f the
 rev
ers
al o
f po
we
r (of the
 Bu
dd
hi).
Saktiv
ip
ary
ay
at:
 on account of the reversal of
 power (of the Buddhi).
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 33 is con
tin
ued.
If t
he Buddhi which is an in
stru
ment be
comes the agent and
ceases to func
tion as an in
stru
ment there would t
ake place a re
ver
sal
of power
, i.e.
, the in
stru
men
t
al power which per
t
ains to the Buddhi
would have to be set aside and t
o be re
placed by the power of an
agent.
If t
he Buddhi has the power of an agent
, it must
 be ad
mit
ted that
it is also the ob
ject of self-con
scious
ness (Aham-pratyaya), as we see
that ev

ery where ac
tiv
ity i
s pre
ceded by self-con
scious
ness: ﬁI go, I
come, I eat,
 I drink, I do,
 I en
joy
.ﬂ
If t
he Buddhi is en
dowed with the power of an agent and af

fects
all things, we hav
e to as
sume for it an
other in
stru
ment by m
eans of
which it af

fects ev
ery
thing, be
cause ev
ery doer needs an in
stru
ment.
Hence the whole dis
pute is about a name only
. There is no real dif

fer -
ence, since in ei
ther case that which is dif

fer ent from t
he in
stru
ment of
ac
tion is ad
mit
ted to be t
he agent. I
n ei
ther case an agent dif

fer ent
from the in
stru
ment has to be ad
mit
ted.
g_mÜ`^
Samadhy
abhav
accha
II.
3.39 (255)
And on a
ccount
 of t
he impossi
bili
ty of
 Sama
dhi.
Samadhy
abhav
at:
 on account of the impossibili
ty of
 Samadhi;
Cha:
and, also. (
Samadhi
:
 superconscious
 st
ate;
Abhavat:
 for w
ant, fo
r
impossibility
, as it becomes an impossible thi
ng).
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
272

The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 33 is con
tin
ued.
If t
he soul is not a doer
, there will be non-ex

is tence of at
t
ain
ment
of lib
er
a
tion. I
f the Jiv
a or soul is not an agent, t
hen the reali
sa
tion pre
-
scribed by Sruti tex
t
s like ﬁThe At
man is to be real
isedﬂ (Bri. Up.
II.
4.5.) through S
am
adhi would be im
pos
si
ble. The med
i
t
a
tion t
aught
in the V
edant
a text
s is pos
si
ble only if
 the soul is the agent.
 ﬁV
er
ily
, the
At
man is to be seen, to be heard,
 to be per
ceived, t
o be searched.ﬂ
ﬁThe Self we must seek out,
 we must try t
o un
der
st
andﬂ (Chh. Up.
VII
I.7.
1.) ﬁMed
i
t
ate on the S
elf as OMﬂ (Mun. Up. I
I.2.
6). There
from
also it fol
lows that the soul is an agent
.
ﬁThe soul will not be ca
p
a
ble of prac
tis
ing hear
ing, rea
son
ing,
re
flec
tion, and me
d
i
t
a
tionﬂ which lead to Sam

adhi and the at t
ain
ment
of Knowl
edge of the I
m
per
ish
able. Hence there will be no eman
ci
p
a
-
tion for t
he soul. There
fore it is es
t
ab
lished that t
he soul alone is the
agent, but
 not the B
uddhi.
T
akshadhikaranam
: T
opic 15
The soul is an agent as long as it is lim
ited by the adjunct
s
`Wm M Vjmo
Y
atha cha t
akshobhay
atha
II.
3.40 (256)
And as the carpenter is both.
Y
atha:
 as;
Cha:
 also, and;
T
aksha:
 the carpenter;
Ubhay
atha:
 in
both ways, is both.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 33 is con
tin
ued.
That the in
di
vid
ual soul is an agent has been proved by t
he rea
-
sons set forth in Sut
ras 33 to 39. W
e now have to con
sider whether
this agency is it
s real na
ture or only a su
per
im
po
si
tion due to it
s lim
it
-
ing ad
junct
s. The Nyaya S
chool main
t
ains that it
 is it
s very na
ture.
This Su
tra re
futes it and de
clares that it is su
per
im
posed on the
soul and not real. Such doership is not t
he soul™
s na
ture, be
cause if it
is so, there could be no lib
er
a
tion, just
 as fire, be
ing hot in it
s na
ture,
can never be free from heat.
 Do
ing is es
sen
tially
 of the na
ture of p
ain.
Y
ou can
not say that
 even if t
here is the power of do
ing, eman
ci
p
a
tion
can come when there is noth
ing to do, be
cause the power of do
ing
will re
sult in do
ing at some tim
e or other
. The Sruti
 calls the At
man as
hav
ing an eter
nally pure con
scious and free na
ture. How could that
be if doership is it
s na
ture? Hence, it
s doership is due to it
s iden
ti
fi
ca
-
tion with a li
m
it
ing func
tion. S
o there is no soul as doer or enjoyer
ap
art from Para-Brah
man. Y
ou can
not say that
 in that case God will
be
come a Samsarin, be
cause doership and en
joy
ment are due only
to A
vidya.
The body of t
he car
pen
ter is not the cause of his f
unc
tion. His
tools are the cause. Ev
en so the soul is a doer only through the m
ind
and the senses. The scrip
tural in
junc
tions do not com
mand do
ing but
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
273

com
mand act
s to be done on the ba
sis of such doership which is due
to A
vidya.
The Sruti de
clares ﬁThis At
man is non-at
t
achedﬂ (Bri. Up.
IV
.3.15). Just as in or
di
nary life,
 a car
pen
ter suf

fers when he is work -
ing with his tools and is happy when he leav
es his work, so does the
At
man suf

fer when he is ac tive i
n the wak
ing and dream st
ates
through his con
nec
tion with t
he in
tel
lect, etc.
, and is bliss
ful when he
ceases to be an agent as in the st
ate of deep sleep.
The scrip
tural in
junc
tions in pre
scrib
ing cer
t
ain act
s re
fer to the
con
di
tioned st
ate of t
he self. By
 na
ture the soul is in
ac
tive.
 It be
comes
ac
tive t
hrough con
nec
tion with it
s Upadhis or lim

it ing ad
junct
s, the in
-
tel
lect, etc.
 Doership re
ally be
longs to the in
tel
lect. Et
er
nal Up
alabdhi
or Con
scious
ness is in the soul. Doership im
plies Ahamkara or
ego-con
scious
ness. Hence such doers
hip does not be
long to the
soul as it
s na
ture but be
longs to the in
tel
lect.
The
scrip tural
in junc tions
in
pre scrib ing
cer t
ain
act
s
pre sup pose
an agent
ship es
t
ab
lished some
how on ac
count of A
vidya or ig
no
-
rance, but do not t
hem
selves aim at es
t
ab
lish
ing the di
rect agent
ship
of the S
elf. The agent
ship of the Sel
f does not con
sti
tute it
s real na
-
ture be
cause scrip
ture teaches that it
s true Self is B
rah
man. W
e,
there
fore, con
clude that the V
e
dic in
junc
tions are op
er
a
tive wit
h ref
er
-
ence to that agent
ship of the soul which is due to A
vidya.
Nor can you in
fer doership from the de
scrip
tion of V
ihara (play
or ac
tiv
ity) in dreams,
 be
cause the con
nec
tion with t
he mind or in
tel
-
lect con
tin
ues in dreams. Even in t
he st
ate of dream t
he in
stru
ment
s
of the S
elf are not al
to
gether at rest; be
cause scrip
ture de
clares that
even then it
 is con
nected with the B
uddhi. ﬁHav
ing be
come a dream,
to
gether with Buddhi,
 it p
asses be
yond this world.ﬂ S
mriti also says,
ﬁwhen the senses be
ing at rest, t
he mind not be
ing at rest is oc
cu
pied
with the ob
ject
s, that st
ate know to be a dream.ﬂ
It is clearly es
t
ab
lished that t
he agent
ship of the soul is due to it
s
lim it i
ng
ad junct
Buddhi
only
.
Paray
att
adhikaranam
: T
opic 16 (Sutras 41-42)
The soul is dependent on the Lord, when he works
nam
Îmw VV
&
Parattu t
at sruteh
II.
3.41 (257)
Bu
t (e
ve
n) that (
age
ncy o
f the
 sou
l) is
 from th
e S
up
rem
e L
ord
,
so declare
s the Sruti.
Parat:
 from the S
upreme Lord;
Tu
:
 but, indeed;

Ta
t
:
 agency
,
agent
ship;
Sruteh:
 from Sruti
, so declares the Sruti.
A
 lim
i
t
a
tion to S
u
tra 33 is st
ated.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
274

W
e now en
ter on the dis
cus
sion whether the agent
ship char
ac
-
ter
is
ing the in
di
vid
ual soul in the st
ate of ig
no
rance on ac
count of it
s
lim
it
ing ad
junct
s is in
de
pend
ent of t
he Lord or de
pend
ent on Him.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that the soul as f
ar as it is an agent
does not de
pend on the Lord.
The word ‚tu™
 (but), is em
ployed in or
der to re
move the doubt
raised by the Purv
ap
akshin. The view that
 the soul™
s doership is due
to it
s de
sires and it
s pos
ses
sion of the senses as in
stru
ment
s and not
to the Lord is wrong, be
cause the Sruti de
clares that Lord is the
cause.
The agency of t
he soul is also due to the Su
preme Lord. It can
be un
der
stood from Srut
i that t
he agent
ship of the in
di
vid
ual soul is
ver
ily sub
or
di
nate to and con
trolled by t
he Su
preme Lord. The soul
does good and bad deeds be
ing so di
rected by the Lord.
Sruti de
clares, ﬁHe makes him, whom He wishes to lead up from
these worlds do good deeds; He makes him, whom He wishes to lead
down from these worlds, do bad deeds.ﬂ (Kau. Up.
 III
.8) and, again,
ﬁHe who dwell
ing within the S
elf pulls the S
elf withinﬂ (Sat
. Br
.
XIV
.6.7.
30). ﬁThe Uni
ver
sal Soul en
ter
ing within, gov

erns the in di
vid
-
ual soulsﬂŠﬁ
Ant
ah pravisht
ah sast
a jivanam
ﬂ ﬁThe Lord is within all,
the Ruler of all crea
tures.ﬂ
Y
ou can
not say that
 that will cause the at

tri bu
tion of p
ar
tial
ity
(V
aishamya) and cru
elty (Nairghrinya) t
o the Lord, be
cause He acts
ac
cord
ing to Dharma (merit) and Adharma (de
merit). Y
ou may re
ply
that t
hese are due to doership and if doership is due to the Lord, how
can the Lord act ac
cord
ing to Dharma and Adharma?
W
e re
ply that
 the Sruti
 says that t
he soul is the doer and de
-
clares as caus
e of doership the Su
preme Lord who is the bestower of
the fruit
s of ac
tions, who is im
ma
nent in all,
 who is the wit
ness of all
ac
tions, and who is the in
spirer and guider of all.
H¥$Và
`ËZmnojñVw {d{hVà
{V{fÜYmd¡
`Ï`m©{Xä`–
Krit
apray
atnapekshastu
 v
ihit
apratishiddhavaiy
arthy
adibhy
ah
II.
3.42 (258)
But (t
he Lord™
s makin
g th
e soul act
) depends on t
he works
do
ne
 (by i
t), for o
the
rwise
 the
re w
ill b
e u
se
le
ssne
ss o
f the
scri
ptur
al in
junct
ions a
nd pr
ohibi
tion
s.
Krit
apray
atnapekshah:
 depends on works done;
Tu
:
 but;
V
ihit
a-pratishiddha-avaiy
arthy
adibhy
ah:
 so that the scriptural
injunctions and prohibitions may
 not be meaningless. (
V
ihit
a:
ordained;
Pratishiddha:
 prohibited;
A
v
aiy
arthy
adibhy
ah:
 on
account of non-meaninglessness.)
This Su
tra pro
ceeds to nar
row the scope of Su
tra 41 within cer
-
t
ain lim
it
s.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
275

If causal agency be
longs to the Lord, it
 fol
lows that He must be
cruel and un
just and that t
he soul has to un
dergo con
se
quences of
what it has not done.
 He must be cruel and whim
si
cal too as He
makes some per
sons do good acts and ot
h
ers evil deeds. This Su
tra
re
futes this doubt
.
The word ‚tu™
 (but), re
moves the ob
jec
tions. The Lord al
ways di
-
rect
s the soul ac
cord
ing to it
s good or bad ac
tions done in pre
vi
ous
births. He be
stows good and bad fruit
s ac
cord
ing to the soul™
s good
and bad ac
tions. He is the rain which al
ways causes each s
eed to
fruc
tify
 ac
cord
ing to it
s power
. Though doership is de
pend
ent on the
Lord, do
ing is the soul™
s act. What the soul does the Lord causes to be
done. Such do
ing is due to deeds done in pre
vi
ous birth and V
asanas
which, again, are due to pre
vi
ous Kar
mas and so on, Samsara be
ing
with
out be
gin
ning (Anadi). As S
amsara is beginningless there will al
-
ways be pre
vi
ous births with ac
tions per
formed in those births f
or the
guid
ance of the Lord. Hence He can
not be ac
cused of be
ing cruel,
un
just and whim
si
cal. T
o give fruit
s the Lord de
pends on the soul™
s ac
-
tions. If
 this were not so, the scrip
tural in
junc
tions and pro
hi
bi
tions
would be mean
ing
less. If Lord does not de
pend on the soul™
s ac
tions
for giv
ing fruit,
 ef

fort or ex er
tion (Purushartha) will hav
e no place at all.
The soul will gain noth
ing by fol

low ing these in
junc
tions.
More
over
, time,
 place and cau
sa
tion will be ca
pri
ciously op
er
a
-
tive and not
 ac
cord
ing to the law of
 cause and ef

fect, if our Karma is
not the in
stru
men
t
al cause, and the Lord the Su
per
vis
ing Cause.
Amsadhikaranam
: T
opic 17 (Sutras 43-53)
Relation of t
he individual soul to Brahm
an
A§e
mo ZmZmì
`nXoemX
Ý`Wm Mm{n X
me{H$
Vdm{XËd_
Yr`V EH
Amso nanav
y
ap
adesad any
atha chapi
 dasakit
av
aditv
amadhiy
at
a
eke
II.
3.43 (259)
(T
he soul is
) a par
t of
 the Lor
d on accoun
t of
 diff
erence
(b
etw
een t
he t
wo
) b
ein
g d
ecl
ar
ed a
nd
 ot
her
wi
se a
ls
o (
i.
e.,
 as
non-
diffe
ren
t from B
rahma
n); be
cau
se
 in so
me
 (Ve
dic
 tex
ts)
(Brahman)
 is spoken of as be
ing fi
shermen, knaves, etc.
Amsah:
 part;
Nanav
y
ap
adesat:
 on account of dif
ference being
declared;
Any
atha:
 otherwise;
Cha:
 and;
Api:
 also;
Dasakit
av
aditv
am:
 being fisher-men, knaves, et
c.;
Adhiy
at
a:
 read;
Eke:
 some (Srutis, Sakhas of t
he V
edas).
This Su
tra shows that the in
di
vid
ual soul is dif

fer ent from as well
as the same with Brah
man.
In the last t
opic it has been shown that the Lord rules the soul.
Now the ques
tion of t
he re
la
tion of t
he in
di
vid
ual soul to Brah
man is
t
aken up. Is it t
hat of mas
ter and ser
vant or as be
tween fire and it
s
sp
arks?
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
276

The Purvap
akshin holds that the re
la
tion is like that
 of mas
ter
and ser
vant,
 be
cause that con
nec
tion only
 is well known to be the re
-
la
tion of ruler (Lord) and ruled (sub
ject).
T
o this the Su
tra says that t
he soul must be con
sid
ered a p
art of
the Lord, just as a sp
ark is a part of
 the fire.
 But t
hen the soul is not ac
-
tu
ally a p
art, but a p
art as it were. It
 is an imag
ined p
art only
, be
cause
Brah
man can
not have any
 p
art
s. Brah
man is Nishkala, with
out p
art
s.
He is Akhanda (in
di
vis
i
ble). He is Niravayav
a (with
out limbs).
Why then should it
 be t
aken as a part a
nd not iden
ti
cal with the
Lord? Be
cause the scrip
tures de
clare a dif

fer ence be
tween them in
text
s like ﬁThat self it i
s which we must search out, that it
 is we must try
to un
der
st
andﬂ (Chh. Up. VII
I.7.
1). ﬁHe who knows H
im be
comes a
Muniﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
.4.22). ﬁHe who dwell
ing within the self
, pulls the self
from withinﬂ (Bri.
 Up. III
.7.23). ﬁThe A
t
man is to be seenﬂ (Bri. Up.
II.
4.5). This dif

fer ence is spo
ken of from the rel
a
tive v
iew
point. They
are iden
ti
cal from the ab
so
lute vi
ew
point.
The text
 ﬁBrah
man is the fish
er
men, Brah
man the slaves, B
rah
-
man these gam
blersﬂ etc., in
di
cate that ev
en such low per
sons are in
re
al
ity B
rah
man and that al
l in
di
vid
ual souls, men, women and chil
-
dren are all Brah
man.
The same view
point is set fort
h in other p
as
sages such as
ﬁThou art woman, Thou art m
an, Thou art t
he youth,
 Thou art the
maiden; Thou as an old man t
ot
ters along on Thy st
af
f, Thou art
 born
with Thy f
ace turned ev
ery
whereﬂ (Svet. Up.
 IV
.3). T
ext
s like ﬁThere is
no other but Heﬂ and sim
i
lar ones es
t
ab
lish the same truth.
 Non-dif

fer -
en
ti
ated in
tel
li
gence be
longs to the soul and the Lord ali
ke, just as
heat be
longs to the sp
arks as well as the fire.
From these two views of di
f

fer ence, and non-dif

fer ence, there
re
sult
s the com
pre
hen
sive view of
 the soul be
ing a p
art of the Lord.
_ÝÌdUm©
Mantrav
arnaccha
II.
3.44 (260)
Als
o fro
m the
 word
s of th
e M
antra (
it is k
nown th
at the
 sou
l is a

part o
f the
 Lord
).
Mantrav
arnat:
 from the words of the M
antra, from t
he letters in
sacred verses, because of description given in the sacred Mantras;
Cha:
 also, and.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 43, that
 the in
di
vid
ual soul is a
p
art of Brah
man is given.
A
 fur
ther rea
son is given to show that t
he soul is a p
art of the
Lord. ﬁSuch is the great
ness of it; greater t
han it is the P
er
son. One
foot of
 It are all t
hese be
ings, three feet
 of It
 are the im
mor
t
al in
heaven,ﬂ (Chh. Up. I
II.
12.6) where be
ings in
clud
ing souls are said to
be a foot or p
art of the Lord.

nmXmo@ñ` gdm© ^
yVm{Z
 (One foot, i
.e.,
 the fourth
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
277

p
art of Him are all be
ings, the whole cre
ation cov
ers only a frac
tion of
Him). Purusha Sukt
a: Rigveda:
 X.90.
3, de
clares the same thing. ﬁAl
l
the be
ings are but a foot of
 Himﬂ.
The word ‚p
ada™
 and ‚amsa™
 are iden
ti
cal. Both m
ean p
art or a
por tion.
Hence we con
clude that the i
n
di
vid
ual soul is a p
art of the Lord,
and again from the f
ol
low
ing rea
son.
Api cha smary
ate
II.
3.45 (261)
And
 it is s
o sta
ted
 in the
 Smriti.
Api:
 also;
Cha:
 and;
Smary
ate:
 it is (so) st
ated in the S
mriti.
The ar
gu
ment that
 the in
di
vid
ual soul is a p
art of Brah
man is
con cluded
here.
The Smriti
 also says soŠthat the in
di
vid
ual soul is a p
art of
Brah
man. ﬁAn et
er
nal por
tion of My

self be comes the in
di
vid
ual soul in
the world of lif
eﬂ (Bhagavad Git
a: XV
.7).
àH
$mem{XdÞ¡
Prakasadiv
annaiv
am p
arah
II.
3.46 (262)
T
he Supreme Lor
d is not
 (af
fected by pl
easure and pai
n) l
ike
this (individua
l soul) ju
st as light (is unaffecte
d by the
 shaking
of its
 refl
ec
tions
).
Prakasadiv
at:
 like
 ligh
t, etc.;
Na:
 is not;
Evam:
 thus, like thi
s, like the
individual soul;

Parah:
 the Supreme Lord.
The spe
ci
al
ity of
 the Su
preme Lord is shown in this Su
tra.
Here the Purvap
akshin raises an
other ob
jec
tion. I
f the soul is a
p
art of the Lord,
 the Lord also must ex
pe
ri
ence plea
sure and pain l
ike
the soul. W
e see in or
di
nary life t
hat the en
tire Ramakrishna suf

fersfrom the p
ain af

fect ing his hand or foot or some other lim
b. Hence at
-
t
ain
ment of God would m
ean max
i
mum grief and p
ain, and the old
lim
ited p
ain of in
di
vid
ual soul would be far better
.
This Su
tra re
futes it.
 The Lord does not ex
pe
ri
ence plea
sure
and p
ain like the in
di
vid
ual soul. The in
di
vid
ual soul iden
ti
fies it

selfwith the body
, the senses and the mind,
 on ac
count of ig
no
rance, and
there
fore ex
pe
ri
ences plea
sure and pain.
 The Su
preme Lord nei
ther
iden
ti
fies him
self with a body
, nor imag
ines him
self to be af

flicted byp
ain.
The p
ain of the in
di
vid
ual soul also is not real but imag
i
nary only
.
It is due to non-dis
crim
i
na
tion of t
he Self f
rom the body
, senses and
mind which are the prod
uct
s of A
vidya or ig
no
rance.
Just as a man feels the p
ain of a burn or cut which af

fects his
body by er
ro
ne
ously iden
ti
fy
ing him
self with the l
at
ter
, so also he feels
the p
ain which af

fects oth
ers such as s
ons or friends, by er
ro
ne
ously
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
278

iden
ti
fy
ing him
self with them
. He en
ters as it were into them t
hrough
Moha or love and imag
ines ﬁI am the son, I
 am the friend.
ﬂ This clearly
shows that the feel
ing of p
ain is due merely to t
he er
ror of false imag
i
-
na tion.
Some men and women are sit
ting to
gether and t
alk
ing. If
 then
some
body calls out ﬁthe son has diedﬂ, grief
 is pro
duced in the minds
of those who have Moha or lov
e for sons on ac
count of er
ro
ne
ous
imag
i
na
tion, iden
ti
fi
ca
tion, and con
nec
tion, but
 not in the m
inds of re
-
li
gious as
cet
ics or Sannyasins who have freed them
selves from that
imag
i
na
tion. I
f even a man of
 right knowl
edge who has be
come an as
-
cetic has no p
ain or grief con
se
quent on death of
 re
la
tions or friends,
God who is Su
preme and alone, who is pure con
scious
ness, who is
eter
nal pure in
tel
li
gence, who sees noth
ing be
side the Self
 for which
there are no ob
ject
s, can have no p
ain at all.
T
o il
lus
trate thi
s view the Su
tra in
tro
duces a com
p
ar
i
son like
light etc.
 Just as the light of
 the sun which is all-per
vad
ing be
comes
straight or bent by
 com
ing in con
t
act with p
ar
tic
u
lar ob
ject
s, but does
not re
ally be
come so, or the ether of a pot
 seems to move when the
pot is moved,
 but does not re
ally mov
e, or as the sun does not trem
ble
al
though it
s im
age which is re
flected in wa
ter trem
bles, so also the
Lord is not af

fected by plea
sure, p
ain or grief al
though plea
sure and
p
ain etc., are f
elt by t
hat p
art of Him,
 which is called the in
di
vid
ual soul
which is a prod
uct of ig
no
rance and is lim
ited by B
uddhi, etc.
Just as the sun does not be
come con
t
am
i
nated by it
s touch
through it
s part
s, the rays with t
he im
pu
ri
ties of the eart
h, so also the
Su
preme Lord does not be
come af

fected by the en
joy
ment and suf

-
fer
ing of the in
di
vid
ual soul, though lat

ter is part and p
ar
cel of the for
-
mer
.
When the soul™
s in
di
vid
ual st
ate due to ig
no
rance is sub
lat
ed, it
be
comes Brah
man, ﬁThou art That
ﬂ etc. Thus the Su
preme Lord is not
af

fected by the p
ain of the in
di
vid
ual soul.
Smaranti
 Cha
II.
3.47 (263)
T
he Smritis al
so state (that)
.
Smaranti
:
 the Smr
itis s
t
ate;
Cha:
 and, also.
ﬁOf the two,
 the Su
preme Self is said t
o be eter
nal, de
void of
qual
i
ties. It
 is not touched by t
he fruit
s of ac
tions, any
 more than a lo
-
tus leaf by
 wa
ter
.ﬂ The Smrit
i text
s like these st
ate that
 the Su
preme
Lord does not ex
pe
ri
ence plea
sure and pain.
AZw
kmn[ahma
m¡ Xo
hgå~ÝYmÁ
Á`mo{V
am{XdV²
Anujnap
ariharau dehasambandhajjy
otiradiv
at
II.
3.48 (264)
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
279

Injunct
ions a
nd pr
ohibi
tion
s (ar
e possible) on
 accoun
t of
 the
conne
ction (o
f the Se
lf) with the bo
dy, as in the
 case
 of light,
etc
.
Anujnap
ariharau:
 injunctions and prohibitions;

Dehasambandhat:
on account of connection with t
he body;
Jy
otiradiv
at:
 like light etc.
The
ne ces sity
for
ob ser vance
of
man da tory
and
pro hib i tory
rules is ex
plained.
The At
man or the Su
preme Self is one.
 There can be no in
junc
-
tions and pro
hi
bi
tions with re
gard to the At

man. But in
junc
tions and
pro
hi
bi
tions are pos
si
ble when it is con
nected with a body
. What are
those per
mis
sions and in
junc
tions? ﬁHe is to ap
proach his wife at the
proper time.ﬂ ﬁHe is not to ap
proach the wife of his Guru.ﬂ ﬁHe is to kill
the an
i
mal de
voted t
o Agnistomaﬂ and ﬁHe is not to hurt
 any be
ing.ﬂ
Fire is one only but t
he fire of t
he fu
neral pyre is re
jected and
that of
 a sac
ri
fice is ac
cepted. Some t
hings con
sist
ing of earth,
 like di
-
a
monds, are de
sired; other things con
sist
ing of earth,
 like dead bod
-
ies, are shunned. The urine and dung of cows are con
sid
ered pure
and used as such; those of other an
i
mals are re
jected. W
a
ter poured
from a clean ves
sel or of

fered by a clean per son is to be ac
cepted;
that con
t
ained in an un
clean ves
sel or of

fered by an un clean man is to
be re
jected. Si
m
i
lar is the case with the At

man.When the soul is in a st
ate of at

tach
ment to t
he body
, eth
i
cal
ideas of pu
rity and im

pu rity hav
e full ap
pli
ca
tion.
AgÝVVo
ümì`{
VH$a
Asant
ateschav
y
atikarah
II.
3.49 (265)
And on a
ccount
 of t
he non-ext
ension (
of t
he soul beyond i
ts
own body
) th
ere is no con
fusi
on (of
 result
s of ac
tion
s).
Asant
ateh:
 on account of non-extension (bey
ond it
s own body);
Cha:
 and;
A
v
y
atikarah:
 there is no confusion (of result
s of actions).
The
dis cus sion
on
the
spe cial
char ac ter is tic
of
the
in di vid ual
soul is con
tin
ued.
An ob
jec
tion is raised that on ac
count of the unit
y of t
he self
there would re
sult a con
fu
sion of the re
sult
s of ac
tions, there be
ing
only one mas
ter
, i.e.
, one soul to en
joy the f
ruit
s of ac
tions. This Su
tra
re futes
such
a
pos si bil ity
.
This is not so, be
cause there is no ex
ten
sion of the act
ing and
en
joy
ing self, i.
e., no con
nec
tion on it
s part
 with all bod
ies. The in
di
-
vid
ual soul de
pends on it
s ad
junct
s, and there is also non-ex
ten
sion
of the soul on ac
count of the non-ex

ten sion of those ad
junct
s. The in
-
di
vid
ual souls are dif

fer ent from each other
. Each soul is con
nected
with a p
ar
tic
u
lar body
, mind, et
c.
The in
di
vid
ual soul has no con
nec
tion with all
 the bod
ies at the
same time. He is con
nected with one body onl
y and he is af

fected byBRAHMA SU
T
RAS
280

the pe
cu
liar prop
er
ties of that
 one alone. There
fore the ef

fects of
works done by the soul in one body be
longs to him in re
spect of that
body only and not
 of any ot
her body
. All t
he in
di
vid
u
als are not af

-
fected by t
he works done by a par
tic
u
lar in
di
vid
ual.
There will be no pos
si
bil
ity f
or the At
man, as it is one,
 to ex
pe
ri
-
ence all the plea
sures and all the p
ains of all the bod
ies, be
cause the
bod ies
are
dis con nected.
There
fore there is no con
fu
sion of ac
tions or fruit
s of ac
tions.
Am^mg Ed M
Abhasa ev
a cha
II.
3.50 (266)
And (the
 individu
al soul is
) only a refle
ction (of Paramatman o
r
the Supr
eme Lord).
Abhasa:
 a reflection;
Eva:
 only;
Cha:
 and.
Ac
cord
ing to V
edant
a, the in
di
vid
ual soul is only a re
flec
tion of
Brah
man or the Su
preme Soul in the m
ind like the re
flec
tion of t
he sun
in the wa
ter
. Just as the re
flec
tions of the sun in di
f

fer ent pot
s of wa
ter
are dif

fer ent, so also the re
flec
tions of the S
u
preme Soul in dif

fer ent
minds are dif

fer ent. Just as, when one re
flected im
age of the sun
trem
bles, an
other re
flected im
age does not on that ac
count trem
ble
also, so also when a p
ar
tic
u
lar soul ex
pe
ri
ences fruit
s of his ac
tions,
viz.,
 plea
sure and pain,
 it is not shared by ot
her souls. When the in
di
-
vid
ual soul in one body is un
der
go
ing the ef

fects of his ac
tions, the
soul in any other body
 is not af

fected on that ac
count.
For those, such as the Sankhyas, t
he V
aiseshikas and the
Naiyayikas on the con
trary
, who main
t
ain that t
here are many souls
and all of them
 all-per
vad
ing, it f
ol
lows that there must be a con
fu
sion
of ac
tions and re
sult
s, be
cause each soul is pres

ent ev ery
where near
to those causes which pro
duce plea
sure and pain.
Ac
cord
ing to the opin
ion of the S
ankhyas, there ex
ist many
all-per
vad
ing selfs, whose na
ture is pure in
tel
li
gence, de
void of qual

i -
ties and of unsurp
assable ex
cel
lence. For the com
mon pur
pose of all
of them t
here ex
ist
s the Pradhana through which the souls ob
t
ain en
-
joy
ment and re
lease.
In the S
ankhya phi
los
o
phy the in
di
vid
ual soul has been st
ated to
be all-per
vad
ing. If
 this view be ac
cepted there would be con
fu
sion of
works and their ef

fects. This view of S
ankhyas is there
fore an un
fair
con clu sion.
There
fore there can be no con
fu
sion of the re
sult
s of ac
tion.
AX¥
ï>m{
Z`_mV²
Adrisht
aniy
amat
II.
3.51 (267)
T
here being n
o fixi
ty a
bout t
he unseen prin
ciple (t
here would
res
ult c
onfu
sio
n of wo
rks a
nd the
ir e
ffec
ts for th
ose
 who
belie
ve in many souls, each all-pervading).
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
281

Adrisht
aniy
amat:
 There being no fixi
ty about
 the unseen principle.
(
Adrisht
a:
 the fat
e, the accumulated st
ock of previous actions,
waiting as a latent
 force to bring forth f
ruit
s in future, merit
 or demerit
acquired by the souls by t
hought
s, words and actions;
Aniyamat:
 for
want of any bi
nding rule, on account of non-determ
inateness.)
The dis
cus
sion be
gun in Su
tra 50 is con
tin
ued.
Sutras 51 to 53 re
fute t
he doc
trine of t
he Sankhyas and other
schools about the plu
ral
ity of
 souls, each of which is all-per
vad
ing. It
leads
to
ab sur di ties.
This con
fu
sion can
not be avoided by
 bring
ing the Adrisht
a or
un
seen prin
ci
ple, be
cause if all the souls equally
 are all-per
vad
ing,
there can
not be any bind
ing rule as to upon which of them t
he force
will act.
Ac
cord
ing to the S
ankhyas, the A
drisht
a does not in
here in the
soul but in the P
radhana which is com
mon to all souls. Hence there is
noth
ing to fix
 that a p
ar
tic
u
lar Adrisht
a op
er
ates in a p
ar
tic
u
lar soul.
The doc
trine of t
he other two schools is open to the same ob
jec
-
tion. A
c
cord
ing to the Ny
aya and V
aiseshika schools, the un
seen
prin
ci
ple is cre
ated by t
he con
junc
tion of t
he soul with the mind.
 Here
also there is noth
ing to fix
 that a p
ar
tic
u
lar Adrisht
a be
longs to a p
ar
-
tic
u
lar soul, as ev
ery soul is all-per
vad
ing and there
fore equally con
-
nected with all mi
nds.
There
fore the con
fu
sion of re
sult
s is un
avoid
able.
A{^
gÝÜ`m{Xî
d{n M¡
Abhisandhy
adishu api chaiv
am
II.
3.52 (268)
And this is also t
he case in resolutions, etc.
Abhisandhy
adishu:
 in resolutions, etc.
;
Api:
 even;
Cha:
 and;
Evam:
 thus, like thi
s, in the like manner
.
The dis
cus
sion be
gun in Su
tra 50 is con
tin
ued.
The same log
i
cal de
fect will ap
ply also to t
he re
solve to do ac
-
tions. There will be no or
der
li
ness of re
solves to do ac
tions. That
 is
want of or
der also in mat
ters of per
sonal de
ter
mi
na
tion, et
c., if t
he in
-
di
vid
ual soul be ad
mit
ted to be all-per
vad
ing.
If it
 be held that t
he res
o
lu
tion which one makes to get some
-
thing or to av
oid some
thing will al
lot the A
drisht
a to p
ar
tic
u
lar souls,
even then t
here will be this con
fu
sion of re
sult
s of ac
tions, be
cause
res
o
lu
tions are formed by t
he con
junc
tion of t
he soul and the mind.
There
fore the same ar
gu
ment ap
plies here also.
If t
he in
di
vid
ual soul is all-per
vad
ing, there can
not be any or
der
in mo
tives or mat

ters of per sonal de
ter
mi
na
tion such as ﬁI will do a
cer
t
ain thingﬂ or ﬁI will not
 do a cer
t
ain thingﬂ be
cause in such a cas
e,
ev ery one
be comes
con scious
of
the
de ter mi na tion
of
ev ery
other
.
There
fore no or
der of de
ter
mi
na
tion and it
s putt
ing it int
o ac
tion can
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
282

be main
t
ained. More
over col
li
sion be
tween wills can
not be avoided.
But or
der is found in this world ev
ery
where.
There
fore it is es
t
ab
lished that t
he soul is not all-per
vad
ing.
àXo
em{X{V
 MoÞmÝV^
Pradesaditi
 chenna ant
arbhav
at
II.
3.53 (269)
If i
t be
 said
 (that the
 dis
tinctio
n of p
le
asu
re a
nd p
ain e
tc.,
res
ults
) from (
the
 diffe
ren
ce
 of) p
lace
, (we
 say)
 not s
o, o
n
account
 of t
he self being
 in al
l bodies.
Pradesat:
 on account of p
articular locality
 or environment,
 from
(dif
ference of) place;
Iti:
 thus;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not so, the argument
cannot st
and;
Ant
arbhavat:
 on account of the self bei
ng in all bodies.
An ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 52 is raised and re
futed.
 This Su
tra con
-
sist
s of two p
art
s, viz.,
 an ob
jec
tion and it
s re
ply
. The ob
jec
tion por
tion
is ‚
Pradesaditi chet
™
 and the re
ply por
tion is ‚
Na ant
arbhavat
.™
The Naiyayi
kas and oth
ers try to get ov
er the dif

fi culty shown in
the pre
vi
ous Su
tra by giv

ing the fol low
ing ar
gu
ment. Though each
soul is all-per
vad
ing, yet
, con
fu
sion of re
sult
s of ac
tions will not oc
cur
if we t
ake it
s con
nec
tion with t
he mind to t
ake place in that p
art of it
which is lim
ited by i
t
s body
.
Even t
his can
not st
and. This also is not pos
si
ble on ac
count of
it
s be
ing within all.
 Be
cause, as be
ing equally in
fi
nite all self
s are
within all bod
ies. Ev
ery soul is all-per
vad
ing and there
fore per
me
ates
all bod
ies. There is noth
ing to fix
 that a p
ar
tic
u
lar body be
longs to a
p
ar tic u lar
soul.
More
over
, on ac
count of the doc
trine of lim

i t
a
tion due to dif

fer -
ence of place, it would f
ol
low that some
times two selfs en
joy
ing the
same plea
sure or pain m
ay ef

fect their fru
ition by
 one and the same
way
, as it may
 hap
pen that t
he un
seen prin
ci
ple of two selfs oc
cu
pies
the same place.
Fur
ther
, from t
he doc
trine that
 the un
seen prin
ci
ples oc
cupy
fixed pl
aces it would fol
low that no en
joy
ment of heav
en can t
ake
place, be
cause the Adrisht
a is ef

fected in def i
nite places such as,
e.g.,
 the body of
 a Brahmana and the en
joy
ment of heav
en is bound
to
a
def i nite
dif
 fer ent
place.
There can
not be more than one all
-per
vad
ing en
tity
. If
 there
were many all-per
vad
ing en
ti
ties they
 would limit each ot
her and
there
fore cease to be all-per
vad
ing or in
fi
nite.
There
fore there is only one A
t
man and not many
. The V
edant
a
doc
trine of one A
t
man is the only f
ault
less doc
trine. The only
 doc
trine
not open to any
 ob
jec
tions is the doc
trine of t
he unity of
 the self. T
he
plu
ral
ity of
 selfs in V
edant
a is only a prod
uct of A
vidya,
 ne
science or
ig
no
rance and not a re
al
ity
.
Thus ends the Third Pada (Sec
tion 3) of the Sec
ond Adhy
ay
a
(Chap
ter II) of the B
rahmasutras or the
 V
edant
a Phi
los
o
phy
.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 3
283

CHAPTER II
SECTION 4
INTRODUCTION
In the Third P
ada or Sec
tion it has been shown that
 ether and
other el
e
ment
s are pro
duced from Brah
man by rec
on
cil
ing the ap
p
ar
-
ently con
tra
dic
tory tex
t
s of the Srut
is that treat
 of their or
i
gin. It
 has
been shown that a con
flict of
 the V
e
dic p
as
sages as to the orig
i
na
tion
of the et
her
, etc.,
 does not ex
ist. The same is now done in thi
s Sec
tion
with re
gard to the vi

tal airs or Pranas, and senses. The text
s that deal
with the or
i
gin of the P
ranas and senses ar
e t
aken up for dis
cus
sion.
This Sec
tion es
t
ab
lishes that the v
i
t
al airs and the senses de
rive their
or i gin
from
Brah man.
284

SYNOPSIS
This Sec
tion (Pada) IV
 of Chap
ter II i
s de
voted t
o the dis
cus
sion
of the cre
ation of t
he senses, the chief Prana. I
t es
t
ab
lishes that they
orig i nate
from
Brah man.
Adhikarana I:
 (Sutras 1-4) teaches that the P
ranas (senses
)
orig i nate
from
Brah man.
Adhikarana II:
 (Sutras 5-6) de
clares that the senses are eleven
in num
ber
.
Adhikarana III
:
 (Su
tra 7) teaches that t
he senses are of min
ute
size (Anu) and not all-per
vad
ing.
Adhikarana IV
:
 (Su
tra 8) in
ti
mates that t
he chief Prana is also
pro
duced from Brah
man.
Adhikarana V
:
 (Sutras 9-12) informs us that t
he chief Prana is a
prin
ci
ple dis
tinct from ai
r in gen
eral and from Pranas (senses) dis
-
cussed above.
Adhikarana VI:
 (Su
tra 13) teaches that t
he chief Prana is min
ute
(Anu) and not all-per
vad
ing.
Adhikarana VII
:
 (Sutras 14-16) teaches that the or
gans are su
-
per
in
tended and guided in thei
r ac
tions by spe
cial de
i
ties. The senses
are con
nected per
ma
nently wit
h and are sub
ser
vi
ent to t
he in
di
vid
ual
soul. Hence the in
di
vid
ual soul and not the pre
sid
ing de
i
ties is their
mas ter
.
Adhikarana VII
I:
 (Sutras 17-19) informs us that or
gans are in
de
-
pend
ent prin
ci
ples and not mere modes of func
tions of the chief
Prana. Prana is not
the re
sul
t
ant of t
he com
bined func
tions of all t
he
eleven senses. Al
though Prana is dif

fer ent from t
he senses and
there
fore not in
cluded in their num
ber of eleven,
 yet it
 is like them, an
in
stru
ment of ac
tion, as it
 has a spe
cific and ex
traor
di
nary func
tion of
sup
port
ing and nour
ish
ing the body
, sus
t
ain
ing life,
 and sup
port
ing
the senses.
Adhikarana IX:
 (Sutras 20-22) de
clares that the cre
ation of
names and forms (the Namarup
avyakarana) is the work not of t
he in
-
di
vid
ual soul but of t
he Lord.
Flesh orig
i
nates from earth.
 So also is the case of the t
wo other
el
e
ment
s (fire and wa
ter).
On
ac count
of
pre pon der ance
of
a
p
ar tic u lar
el e ment
in
them
the gross el
e
ment
s are so named af

ter it. As for in
st
ance, the gross
wa
ter is pro
duced from the mix

ture of all the five pri
mary el
e
ment
s but
as the share con
sti
tuted by
 the el
e
ment wa
ter pre
pon
der
ates in the
com
po
si
tion of t
he gross wa
ter
, it is named wa
ter
.
285

Pranotp
atty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 1 (Sutras 1-4)
The Pranas have their origin from
 Brahman
VWm àmU
T
atha pranah
II.
4.1 (270)
T
hus the vital air
s (are produce
d from Brahman
).
T
atha:
 thus, likewise, simil
arly
, like the creation of
 the fiv
e primal
element
s as stat
ed in the previous section;

Pranah:
 the Pranas, t
he
organs.
The cre
ation of t
he Pranas or senses is now
 de
scribed.
The Pranas are di
vided int
o two classes, namely Pranas in a
strict sense and Pranas in a met

a phor
i
cal sense. The eleven senses,
sight, hear
ing, etc.,
 are called Pranas in a sec
ond
ary mean
ing. The
five P
ranas, Prana, Ap
ana, V
yana, S
amana and Udana are the prin
ci
-
p
al Pranas. Among t
hese, the au
thor first t
akes up the eleven senses
which are called Pranas in a sec
ond
ary sense.
Purvap
akshin: The Pranas have no or
i
gin for they
 are eter
nal
like the Jivas and ex
isted even be
fore cre
ation.
Siddhantin:
 The Pranas have or
i
gin.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says: The chap
ters which
treat of t
he or
i
gin of things do not
 re
cord an or
i
gin of the v
i
t
al airs, e.g.,
ﬁIt s
ent fo
rth fi
reﬂ
, etc., (
Chh
. Up. VI.2
.3). ﬁ
Fro
m that Se
lf sp
ran
g
etherﬂ, etc.,
 (T
ait. Up.
 II.
1). It i
s said clearly in some places that the v
i
-
t
al airs were not pro
duced. ﬁThis was in
deed non-ex
is
tence in the be
-
gin
ning. They say
 what was that non-be
ing? Those Rishis in
deed
were the non-be
ing in the be
gin
ning. They say
 who are those Rishis?
The Pranas (or
gans) are in
deed the Rishisﬂ (Sat. B
r
. VI
.1.1.
1). This
shows that the Pranas (or
gans) are eter
nal and not cre
ated.
This Su
tra re
futes the abov
e view and says that
 the Pranas are
pro
duced just like ether from B
rah
man. The word ‚T
atha (thus or like
-
wise)™
 does not re
fer to the pre
ced
ing topic of t
he last sec
tion which is
the plu
ral
ity of
 souls but to the cre
ation of et
her
, etc.,
 treated in t
he last
sec
tion. S
ruti tex
t
s di
rectly de
clare their orig
i
na
tion. ﬁFrom t
hat (Brah
-
man) are pro
duced the vi
t
al air
, mind and all t
he or
gansﬂ (Mun. Up.
II.
1.3). ﬁAs small sp
arks come forth from fire,
thus do all vi
t
al airs
come forth from t
hat Brah
manﬂ (Bri. Up. I
I.1.
20). ﬁThe seven vi
t
al airs
also spring from Himﬂ (Mun. Up. II
.1.8). ﬁHe sent f
orth the vi

tal air;
from the v
i
t
al air
, Sraddha, et
her
, air
, light,
 wa
ter
, earth, sense, mi
nd,
food
ﬂ (Pr
as. U
p. VI.4)
.
There
fore, the senses are cre
ated.
If
 the
cre
ation
of
the Prana
is
 not
st
ated
 in
 some places,
that will not
 lessen the force of the p
as
sages about such cre
ation. ﬁ
Na
hi kvachidasravanamanyatra srut
am

nivarayitumut
sahate
ﬂ;
ﬁ
T
attejo™
srijat
ﬂ; ﬁ
Et
asmajjayate P
ranah
ﬂ.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
286

The cir
cum
st
ance of a thing not be
ing st
ated in some places has
no power to in
val
i
date what is st
ated about it
 in other places.
There
fore, an ac
count of equal
ity of
 scrip
tural st
ate
ment
s, it is
proper to main
t
ain that t
he Pranas also are pro
duced in the same way
as ether and so on.
Jm¡Ê`gå^dmV²
Gauny
asambhav
at
II.
4.2 (271)
On acc
ount
 of t
he imposs
ibil
ity
 of a secon
dary
 (ori
gin
 of t
he
Pranas).
Gauni:
 secondary sense;
Asambhav
at:
 on account of impossibilit
y
,
as it is impossible, being im
possible.
A
 plau
si
ble ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 1 is re
futed.
The Purvap
akshin says: The Sat
ap
atha Brahmana speaks of
the ex
is
tence of the P
ranas (or
gans) be
fore cre
ation. The t
ext
s which
de
scribe their cre
ation speak in a sec
ond
ary sense only
.
This Su
tra re
futes it.
 The st
ate
ment as to the o
r
i
gin of the
Pranas can
not be t
aken in a sec
ond
ary sense be
cause there
from the
aban
don
ment of a gen
eral as
ser
tion would re
sult. ﬁBy
 the knowl
edge
of one, ev

ery thing else is known.ﬂ ﬁWhat is that t
hrough which when it
is known ev
ery
thing else be
comes known?ﬂ (Mun. Up. I.1.3).
 There
-
fore the Pranas are pro
duced from Brah
man.
The cre
ation of ev

ery thing from B
rah
man has been re
it
er
ated in
Sruti.
 There is no Sruti which con
tra
dict
s it.
ﬁY
ato va im
ani bhut
ani
jayante
Šfrom which orig
i
nate all these t
hingsﬂ (T
ait. B
hriguvalli I
). In
the face of t
he ex
press stat
e
ment in Srut
is that all t
hings are cre
ated
from Brah
man, it i
s ab
surd to sup
pose the Pranas (senses) are the
sole
ex cep tions.
The ref
er
ence to the ex
is
tence of the P
ranas (or
gans) be
fore
cre
ation in the S
at
ap
atha Brahmana per
t
ains to Hiranyagarbha.
Hiranyagarbha is Cos
mic Prana. It
 is not re
solved in p
ar
tial dis
so
lu
-
tion of t
he uni
verse. Ev
en Hiranyagarbha is re
solved in com
plete dis
-
so lu tion
(Mahapralaya).
VËàmH²
$N®>Vo
T
atprakcchrutescha
II.
4.3 (272)
On acc
ount o
f that (word which ind
icate
s origin) b
eing
mentio
ned
 first (in conne
ction with Prana
s).
Ta
t
:
 that;
Prak:
 firs
t;
Sruteh:
 from Sruti
, on account of the S
ruti tex
t
being mentioned;

Cha:
 and, also.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 2 is given.
A
 fur
ther rea
son is given in this Su
tra to in
di
cate that t
he Pranas
(or
gans) have t
aken their or
i
gin from Brah
man.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 4
287

Fur
ther
, be
cause of the use of the word ‚Jayat
e™
 (is born) in re
-
spect of Pranas ex
ist
ing prior to Akasa or ether
, etc.,
 it is clear that t
he
Pranas (or
gans) have orig
i
nated from B
rah
man.
The scrip
tural st
ate
ment about t
he or
i
gin of the P
ranas is to be
t
aken in it
s lit
eral or pri
mary sense only
. The tex
t re
ferred to is ﬁFrom
that (Brah
man) are pro
duced the Prana (vi
t
al air), mind and all t
he or
-
gans, ether
, air
, wa
ter
, fire and earth.
ﬂ (Mun. Up. II
.1.3). Here the word
‚Jayate™
 (is born) oc
curs at the very be
gin
ning of the t
hings enu
mer
-
ated. I
f the word is in
ter
preted in it
s pri
mary sense with ref
er
ence to
ether
, etc.,
 it must be all
 the more so in
ter
preted with ref
er
ence to the
Pranas, mind and or
gans which are men
tioned ear
lier
.
The sec
ond
ary sense is not ac
cept

able be cause the Sruti
places the Pranas (or
gans) prior to Akasa, air
, etc. The word (Jayat
e)
oc
curs first, then the words sig
ni
fy
ing Prana and the senses, and, last
of all, come A
kasa, air
, etc. Now that
 the word ‚Jayate™
 is ac
cepted in
it
s pri
mary sense with re
spect to Akasa, etc.
, why should it be t
aken in
a sec
ond
ary sense, in con
nec
tion with P
ranas (or
gans) which the
Sruti has placed prior to Akasa, et
c.?
It would be ab
surd to de
cide that a word enu
mer
ated once only
in one chap
ter and one sen
tence and con
nected with many
 other
words, has in some cases to be taken in i
t
s pri
mary sense and oth
ers
in a sec
ond
ary sense, be
cause such a de
ci
sion would im
ply want of
uni
for
mity
. The word ‚Jayate™
 which co
mes in the end must be con
-
nected with the P
ranas, etc., men
tioned in the ear
lier p
art of the sen
-
tence.
VËnyd©
H$ËdmÛ
T
atpurv
akatv
adv
achah
II.
4.4 (273)
Because
 spee
ch is precede
d by that,
 (viz.,
 fire and the other
elem
ent
s)
.
T
atpurv
akatv
at:
 being preceded by them (the el
ement
s);
V
achah:
 of
the organ of speech.
An
other ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 2 is given.
The Chhandogya Up
anishad de
clares ﬁFor
, truly
, my child,
 mind
con
sist
s of earth (i.e.
, food), P
rana of wa
ter
, V
ak of speech of fireﬂ
(VI.5.
4). This text
 clearly in
di
cates that the or
gans, etc., are prod
uct
s
of the el
e
ment
s. The el
e
ment
s in their turn orig
i
nate from B
rah
man.
There
fore the or
gans (Pranas) are also prod
uct
s of Brah
man. As the
Pranas (or
gans) are the prod
uct
s of the el
e
ment
s, they are not
 sep
a
-
rately men
tioned in the S
ruti p
as
sages which treat of the or
i
gin of
things.
By t
he st
ate
ment in the S
ruti of t
he di
rect cau
sa
tion of t
he el
e
-
ment
s it is sug
gested that t
he Pranas (senses) have Brah
man for
their
im me di ate
cause.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
288

More
over
, the p
as
sage con
cludes by say
ing that t
he en
tire
world is the cre
ation of B
rah
man, and is the f
orm of Brah
man and is
ensouled by Brah
man.
There
fore it is an es
t
ab
lished con
clu
sion that the P
ranas also
are ef

fects of Brah
man. The Pranas (or
gans) have an or
i
gin just like
the el
e
ment
s ether
, etc.,
 and are not eter
nal.
Sapt
agaty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 2 (Sutras 5-6)
The number of
 the organs
gá JVo{
d©eo{
Sapt
a gaterv
iseshit
atv
accha
II.
4.5 (274)
T
he Pranas (organs)
 are seve
n on account of t
his being
understood (from scriptural
 passages) and of the spe
cificati
on
(of those seve
n).
Sapt
a:
 seven;
Gateh:
 from the mov
ement, being
so known (from the
scriptural p
assages);
V
iseshit
atv
at:
 on account of the specificati
on;
Cha:
 and.
The num
ber of the Pranas (senses) is now dis
cussed.
The num
ber of the or
gans is as
cer
t
ained in this and the nex
t Su
-
tra. A
 doubt arises here ow
ing to the con
flict
ing na
ture of the scrip
tural
p
as
sages. In one place seven Pranas are men
tioned ﬁThe seven
Pranas (or
gans) spring from Himﬂ (Mun. Up. II
.1.8). I
n an
other place
eight Pranas are men
tioned as be
ing Grahas ﬁEight Grahas there are
and eight At
igrahasﬂ (Bri. Up. II
I.2.
1). In an
other place nine ﬁSeven
are the Pranas of the head,
 two the lower onesﬂ (T
ait. S
amhit
a
V
.3.2.
5). Some
times ten ﬁNine Pranas in
deed are in man, the na
vel is
the tent
hﬂ (T
ait. S
amhit
a V
.3.2.
3). Some
times eleven ﬁT
en are these
Pranas in man, and At

man is the elev enthﬂ (Bri. Up. I
II.
9.4). Som
e
-
times twelv
e ﬁAll touches have t
heir cen
tre in the skinﬂ (Bri. Up.
II.
4.1
1). Some
times thir
teen ﬁThe eye and what can be seenﬂ (Prasna
Up. IV
.8). Thus the scrip
tural p
as
sages dis
agree about the num
ber of
the Pranas (or
gans).
This Su
tra gives the v
iew of the P
urvap
akshin or the op
po
nent.
Here the Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that the P
ranas are in re
al
ity sev
en
in num
ber
, be
cause it is st
ated to be so in some scrip
tural tex
t
s such
as ﬁThe seven Pranas (or
gans) sprang from Himﬂ (Mun. Up. II.
1.8).
These seven Pranas are more
over spec
i
fied in T
ait. S
amhit
a V
.1.7.
1,
ﬁSeven in
deed are the Pranas in the head.
ﬂ
Eight or nine or
gans are enu
mer
ated in some tex
t
s but these are
only mod
i
fi
ca
tions of the i
n
ner or
gan. Hence there is no con
tra
dic
tion
in the Srut
i text
s if we t
ake the num
ber as seven.
T
o this ar
gu
men
t
a
tion of t
he Purvap
akshin the next S
u
tra gives
a suit

able re ply
.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 4
289

hñVm
X`ñV
w pñWVo@V
mo Z¡d
Hast
aday
astu sthite™to naiv
am
II.
4.6 (275)
But (there are also in addition to t
he seve
n Pranas mentioned)
the
 hand
s and
 res
t. This be
ing a s
ettl
ed
 matte
r, the
refo
re (
we
mus
t) not (
con
clu
de
) thus
 (viz
., that the
re a
re s
ev
en
 Pran
as
only).
Hast
aday
ah:
 hands and the rest;
Tu
:
 but;
S
thite:
 being determined,
being a fact, whil
e abiding in the body
;
At
ah:
 therefore;
Na:
 not;
Evam:
 thus, so, like t
his.
Su
tra 5 is re
futed and t
he ac
tual num
ber of the Pranas (senses)
is
as cer tai
ned.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) re
futes the v
iew of the pre
vi
ous Su
tra. Su
tra 6
is the Siddhant
a Su
tra.
The num
ber seven is not cor
rect.
In ad
di
tion to t
he seven Pranas scrip
ture men
tions other Pranas
also, such as the hands, etc. ﬁThe hand is one Graha (or
gan) and that
is seized by work as the Atigraha; f
or with the hands one does workﬂ
(Bri. Up. I
II.
2.8), and sim
i
lar p
as
sages, ﬁten are the senses in a man
and mind with these com
pletes the num
ber elevenﬂ (Bri. Up. I
II.
9.4),
in
di
cate that t
he hands etc., are ad
di
tional or
gans. There
fore, four
other or
gans viz., hands, f
eet, anus and the or
gan of gen
er
a
tion have
to be added to t
he seven or
gans al
ready men
tioned, v
iz., ey
es, nose,
ears, tongue, t
ouch (skin), speech, and mind, the in
ner or
gan. The in
-
tel
lect, ego
ism, Chitt
a or mem
ory are not sep

a rate or
gans. They are
only
mod i fi ca ti
ons
of
the
mind.
There
fore, the num

ber of or gans is in all eleven.
 This is the num
-
ber that is fix
ed. They are,
 the fiv
e or
gans of knowl
edge
(Jnana-Indriyas), the fi
ve or
gans of ac
tion (Karma-Indriy
as) and the
in ner
or gan,
mind.
T
o unite all t
he di
verse ac
tiv
i
ties of the or
gans, it is nec
es
sary
that t
here should be an or
gan which must ex
ist as a uni
fy
ing agent
with the mem
ory of the p
ast and the pres
ent to
gether with the an
tic
i
-
p
a
tion of t
he fu
ture, be
cause with
out such an or
gan the ac
tiv
i
ties of
the or
gans would be unharmonised and dis
cor
dant. This uni
fy
ing or
-
gan is the in
ner or
gan or the Manas (mind). This one in
ner or
gan as
-
sumes four names such as mind, in
tel
lect, ego
ism and Chitt
a,
ac
cord
ing to the f
unc
tions it per
forms (V
rittibheda).
In the p
as
sage ﬁNine Pranas in
deed are in man, the na
vel is the
tenthﬂ, t
he ex
pres
sion ﬁten Pranasﬂ is used to de
note the dif

fer ent
open
ings of the hu
man body
, not t
he dif

fer ence of na
ture of the
Pranas. Be
cause no Prana is known that bears the name of na
vel. A
s
the na
vel is one of t
he spe
cial abodes of the chief P
rana, it is here
enu
mer
ated as tenth P
rana.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
290

There are only eleven P
ranas. This con
clu
sion is con
firmed by
one of the scrip
tural p
as
sages, ﬁT
en are these Pranas in man and At
-
man is the elev
enth.ﬂ By
 the word At
man we have to un
der
st
and the
in
ter
nal or
gan on ac
count of it
s rul
ing over the or
gans.
Prananutvadhikaranam: T
opic 3
The organs are minute i
n size
&
Anav
ascha
II.
4.7 (276)
And (the
y are) m
inute
.
Anav
ah:
 minute;
Cha:
 and, also.
The na
ture and size of senses is now as
cer
t
ained.
The au
thor now con
sid
ers the ques
tion of t
he na
ture and size of
the senses. Are these senses all-per
vad
ing or are they min
ute? The
Purvap
akshin says that the senses are all-per
vad
ing, be
cause we
can hear sounds at a dis
t
ance and see ob
ject
s far of
f. The S
iddhant
a
view how
ever is that senses are atomic.
The word ‚cha™
 has the force of cer
t
ainty
. It
 means that the
senses are not all-per
vad
ing but atomi
c. This Su
tra re
futes the doc
-
trine of t
he Sankhyas who main
t
ain that t
he senses are all-per
vad
ing.
The or
gans are min
ute. Min
ute does not mean at
omic, but sub
-
tle and lim
ited in size.
The or
gans must be sub
tle; f
or
, if t
hey are gross we could see
them when they
 go out of t
he body at t
he mo
ment of deat
h, as a snake
co
mes out of it
s hole. Had they been al
l-per
vad
ing like the ether
, there
would have been no move
ment pos
si
ble on their p
art, and the t
ext
s
which speak of their p
ass
ing out of body
 and go
ing and com
ing along
with the soul at deat
h and birth would be con
tra
dicted. The soul can
-
not have t
hem as his es
sence.
It can
not be said that ev
en if they
 are all-per
vad
ing they can
have a p
ar
tic
u
lar mode or func
tion within t
he body
, be
cause it is that
p
ar
tic
u
lar mode or func
tion which we call the sense or the in
stru
ment.
More
over
, we do not per
ceive through the senses what is hap
pen
ing
through
out the world. I
f they
 were all-per
vad
ing we will cer
t
ainly per
-
ceive through them
 what is hap
pen
ing through
out the world.
There
fore the senses are all sub
tle and fi
nite, i.
e., of
 lim
ited size.
Pranasraish
thy
adhikaranam
: T
opic 4
The chief Prana has also an origin from
 Brahman
Sreshthascha
II.
4.8 (277)
And
 the
 be
st (i.e
., the
 chie
f vital
 air o
r Pran
a is a
lso
 pro
du
ce
d).
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 4
291

Sreshthah:
 the best, t
he highest, the chief
 Prana (vit
al force or
life-energy);
Cha:
 and, also.
The chief Prana is be
ing char
ac
ter
ised now
.
The chief Prana has also an or
i
gin. It
 is an ef

fect of Brah
man.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says: ﬁFrom t
his (Brah
man)
is pro
duced the vi
t
al force or Pranaﬂ (Mun. Up. II
.1.3). A
gain we have
ﬁBy it
s own law the one was breath
ing with
out wind; t
here was noth
ing
dif

fer ent from t
hat or higher than that
ﬂ (Rig V
eda VII
I.7.
17). Here the
words ‚was breath
ing™
 which de
note the proper func
tion of breat
h
show that breath or Prana must hav
e ex
isted be
fore the cre
ation.
There
fore, it
 may be con
cluded that Prana was not cre
ated. There
seems to be a con
tra
dic
tion with ref

er ence to it
s orig
i
na
tion.
This Su
tra re
futes the abov
e view and de
clares that even t
he
chief Prana is pro
duced from Brah
man.
The words ﬁwas br
eath
ingﬂ are qual
i
fied by t
he ad
di
tion ﬁwith
out
windﬂ and so do not in
ti
mate that
 Prana ex
isted be
fore cre
ation.
More
over scrip
tural p
as
sages such as
 ﬁHe is with
out breath,
with
out mind, pureﬂ (Mun.
 Up. II.
1.2) de
clare clearly that B
rah
man is
with
out any qual
i
fi
ca
tions such as Prana and so on. There
fore the
words ﬁwas
 breath
ingﬂ have merely t
he pur
pose of st
at
ing the ex
is
-
tence of the cause. They
 in
ti
mate that
 Brah
man, the cause ex
isted
be
fore cre
ation as is known from the tex
t
s like ﬁEx
is
tence alone was
there be
fore thisﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
.2.1).
In the S
ruti p
as
sage ﬁAnidavat
amﬂ, the word ‚avat
a™
 shows that
what is re
ferred to is some
thing which is an
te
rior to Prana. A
nit, t
here
-
fore re
fers to Brah
man.
The term ﬁthe bestﬂ de
notes the chief v
i
t
al air (Mukhya Prana)
ac
cord
ing to the dec
la
ra
tion of scrip
ture, ﬁBreath i
n
deed is the old
est
and the bestﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.1.1). T
he breath is the old
est or the chief be
-
cause it be
gins it
s func
tion from t
he mo
ment when the child is con
-
ceived. The senses of hear
ing, etc.,
 be
gin to func
tion only
 when their
spe
cial seat
s, viz.,
 the ears, etc.,
 are formed. They
 are, there
fore, not
the old
est. It
 is called the old
est or the chief on ac
count of it
s su
pe
rior
qual
i
ties and on ac
count of the p
as
sage ﬁW
e shall not be able to l
ive
with
out theeﬂ (Bri.
 Up. VI.
1.13). The chief P
rana is called the best, be
-
cause it is the cause of the main
te
nance of the body
.
V
ay
ukriy
adhikaranam
: T
opic 5 (Sutras 9-12)
The chief Prana is diff
erent from
 air and sense functions
Z dm
`w{H«$`
o n¥WJ
wnXoem
Na vayukriye prit
hagup
adesat
II.
4.9 (278)
(The c
hie
f Pran
a is)
 ne
ithe
r air no
r func
tion, o
n acc
ou
nt of its
bei
ng
 men
ti
on
ed s
epa
ra
tel
y.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
292

Na:
 not;
V
ay
ukriy
e:
 air or function;
Prith
ak:
 separat
e, sep
arately;
Up
adesat:
 because of the teaching, on account of
 it
s being
mentioned. (
Prithagup
adesat:
 because of the sep
arate mention.
)
The na
ture of the chief
 Prana is dis
cussed in this Su
tra.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent main
t
ains that there is no
sep
a
rate prin
ci
ple called Prana, and t
hat the P
rana is ac
cord
ing to
Sruti not
h
ing but air
. For Sruti say
s, ﬁBreath is airﬂ; t
hat air as
sum
ing
five f
orms is Prana, Ap
ana, V
yana, Udana, S
amana. Or it m
ay be
con
sid
ered as the com
bined func
tion of all
 or
gans. Just as eleven
birds shut up in one cage may move t
he cage by the com
bi
na
tion of
their ef

forts, so also the eleven P
ranas which abide in one body func
-
tion
ing to
gether pro
duce one com
mon func
tion called Prana.
 This is
the view of
 the Sankhyas.
 The Sankhyas teach ﬁThe fi
ve airs, Pranas,
etc., are t
he com
mon func
tion of t
he or
gans (in
stru
ment
s).ﬂ There
-
fore, there is no sep

a rate prin
ci
ple called Prana.
This Su
tra re
futes these v
iews and says that the P
rana is nei
ther
air nor func
tion of or
gans, for it is men
tioned sep

a rately f
rom air and
the sense func
tions. ﬁBreat
h in
deed is the fourth f
oot of B
rah
man.
That foot
 shines and warms as the light called airﬂ (Chh. Up. III
.18.4).
Here it is dis
tin
guished from air
. Each sense and it
s func
tion are iden
-
ti cal.
Again, ot
her p
as
sages also, in which the Prana is men
tioned
sep
a
rately f
rom air and the or
gans are here to be con
sid
ered, e.g.,
ﬁFrom Him is born the Prana, mi
nd and all or
gans of sense, ether
, air
,
etc.ﬂ (Mun. Up. I
I.1.
3). This in
di
cates that Prana is not
 a func
tion of
any or
gan be
cause, in that case, it
 would not have been sep

a rated
from the or
gans.
It is not pos
si
ble that all
 the or
gans to
gether should have one
func
tion and that
 that f
unc
tion should be the P
rana, be
cause each or
-
gan has it
s own spe
cial func
tion and the ag
gre
gate of t
hem has no ac
-
tive power of i
t
s own. Prana can
not be said to be the re
sul
t
ant of t
he
joint func
tion
ing of the senses, as the f
unc
tions are di
verse.
The p
as
sage ﬁBreath (Prana) is airﬂ is also cor
rect, be
cause the
ef

fect is only the cause in an
other form. T
he Prana is only air that
func
tions within t
he body
. The air p
ass
ing into the A
dhyatma st
ate, di
-
vid
ing it

self five
fold and thus abid
ing in a spe
cial
ised con
di
tion is
called Prana.
The anal
ogy of t
he birds in a cage is not to the point
, be
cause
they all
 have the same kind of ac
tiv
ity which is fa
vour
able to the m
o
-
tion of t
he cage. But t
he func
tion
ing of the senses are not of one kind
but dif

fer ent from one an
other
. They are also of
 a dis
tinct na
ture from
that of
 Prana. Prana is quit
e dis
sim
i
lar to hear
ing, etc. Hence, t
hey
(the or
gans) can
not con
sti
tute lif
e. There
fore, Prana is a sep

a rate
entity
.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 4
293

More
over
, if t
he vi
t
al breath were the mere func
tion of or
gans it
could not be glo
ri
fied as the ‚best™
 and speech, etc., could not
 be rep
-
re
sented as sub
or
di
nate to P
rana. Hence the Prana is dif

fer ent from
air and the func
tions of the or
gans.
Mjwa
m{XdÎ
mw VËgh{
eîQ>
Chakshuradiv
attu t
at
sahasishty
adibhy
ah
II.
4.10 (278)
Bu
t (the
 Prana
 is su
bo
rdina
te to
 the
 sou
l), lik
e e
ye
s, e
tc., on
acc
ou
nt of (i
ts) b
ei
ng tau
ght with the
m (the
 ey
es
, etc
.) and
 for
othe
r rea
son
s.
Chakshuradiv
at:
 like the eyes and the rest;

Tu
:
 but;
T
at
saha:
 along
with them;

Sishty
adibhy
ah:
 on account of (it
s) being t
aught,
because of the scriptural instructions and other reasons.
The
char ac ter is tics
of
Prana
are
con tin ued.
The Purvap
akshin says: The Prana also must be con
sid
ered to
be in
de
pend
ent in this body
 like the in
di
vid
ual soul, as scrip
ture de
-
clares it to be the best and t
he or
gans such as s
peech, etc., t
o be sub
-
or
di
nate to it
. V
ar
i
ous pow
ers are at
trib
uted to it
 in scrip
tural
p
as
sages. It is said that
 when speech and the other or
gans are
asleep the Prana alone is awake; that
 the Prana alone is not reached
by death;
 that t
he Prana is the ab
sorber
, it ab
sorbs speech, etc., that
the Prana guards the other senses (Pranas) as a mother guards her
sons. Hence it fol
lows that the P
rana is in
de
pend
ent like the in
di
vid
ual
soul.
This Su
tra re
futes this and says t
hat the P
rana is sub
or
di
nate to
the soul.
The words ‚tu™
 (but) set
s aside the in
de
pend
ence of the Prana.
 It
re
moves the doubt
.
The word ‚Adi™
 etc., in
di
cates that the word ‚P
rana™
 is also used
in the sense of sense or
gans. The Prana is enu
mer
ated along with
the senses in or
der to in
di
cate that it
 is not in
de
pend
ent.
The Prana sub
serves the soul like the senses, be
cause it is de
-
scribed with them. The chief
 Prana is not in
de
pend
ent of t
he Jiva, but
is, like the senses, a means of his be
ing Kart
a (doer) and Bhokt
a
(enjoyer). The soul is the K
ing. Prana is his min
is
ter
. The senses are
his sub
ject
s. Prana is de
scribed along with the senses. It abides in t
he
body like the senses. Fur
ther
, it is A
chet
ana (non-sen
tient) like t
hem.
It is com
posed of p
art
s. These are the other rea
sons for re
fut
ing the
in
de
pend
ence of Prana. There
fore it de
pends on the soul and serves
the soul like the senses.
Prana is like the eyes,
 etc., one of
 the tools or in
stru
ment
s of the
in
di
vid
ual soul though it st
ands fore
most among them,
 be
cause it is
placed in the same cat
e
gory with the ey
e and the other senses in a
mu
tual con
ver
sa
tion amongst t
hem de
scribed in the Brihadaranyaka
Up
anishad VI.1.
7-14. Things hav
ing sim
i
lar at
trib
utes are al
ways
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
294

grouped and t
aught to
gether
, e.g.
, the B
rihat
saman and the
Rathant
arasaman. Hence it is sub
or
di
nate to t
he soul.
Akaranatv
accha na doshast
atha hi darsay
ati
II.
4.1
1 (280)
And on a
ccount
 of (i
ts)
 not b
eing an
 inst
rument
 the object
ion i
s
not (valid);
 because
 thus (scri
pture) declares.
Akaranatv
at:
 on account of (it
s) not being an instrument;

Cha:
 and,
also;
Na:
 not;
Doshah:
 defect, object
ion, fault
;
T
atha:
 thus, so;
Hi:
as, because;
Darsay
ati:
 teaches, scripture shows, declares.
An ob
jec
tion against S
u
tra 10 is re
futed.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says: if
 the Prana is sub
or
di
-
nate to t
he soul like the or
gans, then it m
ust st
and in the re
la
tion of an
in
stru
ment to t
he soul like the or
gans. W
e must as
sume an
other
sense-ob
ject anal
o
gous to col
our
. But
 there is no twelf
th sense-ob
-
ject. There are only el
even func
tions and eleven or
gans. There is no
room for a twelf
th or
gan when there is no twelf
th sense-ob
ject.
The word ‚Cha™
 (and) has the force of ‚but™
 here, and is used to
re
move the doubt
 raised above.
This Su
tra re
futes the abov
e ob
jec
tion. P
rana is not an in
stru
-
ment. S
crip
ture de
clares that the chief P
rana has a spe
cific func
tion
which can
not be
long to the ot
her or
gans. The body and all t
he senses
sub
sist by means of t
he chief Prana. The scrip
tural p
as
sages say:
ﬁThen Prana as the best said to t
he or
gans: Be not de
ceived. I
 alone,
di
vid
ing my
self fiv
e-fold, sup
port this body and keep it
ﬂ (Pras. Up.
II.
3). An
other p
as
sage, viz.,
 ﬁWith Prana guard
ing the lower nestﬂ (Bri.
Up. IV
.3.12), shows that
 the guard
ing of the body
 de
pends upon the
Prana.
Again, t
wo other p
as
sages show that the nour
ish
ing of the body
de
pends on Prana ﬁFrom what
ever limb P
rana goes away that lim
b
with
ersﬂ (Bri. Up. I.3.
19). ﬁWhat we eat and drink, with i
t sup
port
s the
other or
gansﬂ (Bri. Up. 1.3.
18). And an
other p
as
sage de
clares that
the soul™
s de
p
art
ing and st
ay
ing de
pends on Prana. ﬁWhat is it by
whose de
p
ar
ture I shall de
p
art, and by whose st
ay
ing I shall
st
ay?Šthe cre
ated Pranaﬂ (Pras. Up. V
I.3-4).
All these t
ext
s show that the func
tion of t
he Prana is nour
ish
ing
and up
keep of the body
. Prana pro
tect
s the body from di
s
so
lu
tion.
The strength of t
he body and the senses also de
pends upon Prana.
Prana sup
port
s the body and energises it with al
l the senses. This is
it
s spe
cific func
tion.
Prana is of the great

est help to the soul by be
ing the sup
port of
all other senses. Not only does it
 sup
port the senses but it is t
he or
-
gan
is
ing life of
 the body and hence of t
he great
est im
por
t
ance to the
Jiva or the in
di
vid
ual soul.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 4
295

Prana has no func
tion like the or
di
nary sense. There
fore it can
-
not be styl
ed as Indriya or or
gan. Hence it is ex
cluded from the list
 of
eleven senses.
The chief Prana is also an in
stru
ment of t
he soul. The senses
like the eye,
 ear
, etc.,
 are as if of

fi cials of the Jiva and hel
p him in his
en
joy
ment and ac
tiv
ity but
 the chief Prana is his prime mi
n
is
ter
. It
 as
-
sist
s him in his high
est func
tions and in the at

tain
ment of all
 his de
-
sires.
This is not the only
 func
tion of P
rana. There are other func
tions
also. The next
 Su
tra de
scribes the other func
tions.
n#md
¥{Îm_©Zm
odX² ì`
n{Xí`
Panchav
rittirman
ov
at v
y
ap
adisy
ate
II.
4.12 (281)
It is taught as h
aving a fi
vefold function like the mind.
Panchav
rittih:
 having fi
vefold f
unction;
Manov
at:
 like the mind;
V
y
ap
adisy
ate:
 is described, it is t
aught, it
 is designated.
The de
scrip
tion of t
he char
ac
ter
is
tics of the chief
 Prana is con
-
tin ued.
Prasna Up
anishad (II.3) de
clares ﬁI alone, di
vid
ing my
self fiv
e
-
fold, sup
port this body and pro
tect it.
ﬂ
Just as the mind in re
la
tion to t
he five senses has five m
odes,
even so Prana has fiv
e modes, viz.,
 Prana, Ap
ana, V
yana, Udana and
Samana. P
rana does the func
tion of res
pi
ra
tion; A
p
ana, evac
u
a
tion;
Samana,
di ges tion,
as sim i la tion
of
food;
V
yana,
cir cu la tion
of
blood
(aid
ing feat
s of strength); and Udana, degl
utition.
 Udana help
s the
soul to p
ass out of the body
 at the t
ime of death.
 In this re
spect Prana
re
sem
bles the in
ner or
gan which though one has a five-f
old as
pect as
mind, in
tel
lect, ego, Chit
t
a and mem
ory
.
Just as the mind be
ing en
dowed with sev
eral func
tions such as
de sire,
con tem pla tion,

faith,

vo li t
ion,
feel ing,
know ing,
etc.,
serves
the
in
di
vid
ual soul, so also the chief P
rana does good to the in
di
vid
ual
soul be
ing vested with t
he five f
unc
tions.
The func
tions of the m
ind, ac
cord
ing to Raja Y
oga of Pat
anjali
Maharshi, are right knowl
edge, er
ror
, imag
i
na
tion, slum
ber and re
-
mem
brance. Or the Su
tra may quot
e the means as an anal
o
gous in
-
st
ance merely with ref
er
ence to the plu
ral
ity and not
 the fiv
e-foldness
of it
s func
tions.
The Prana™
s sub
or
di
nate po
si
tion with re
gard to the soul fol
lows
from it
s hav
ing fiv
e func
tions like the mind.
Sreshthanutvadhikaranam: T
opic 6
The mi
nuteness of the chief P
rana
Anuscha
II.
4.13 (282)
And it (chie
f Prana) is minute
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
296

Anuh:
 minute;
 Cha:
 and.
The de
scrip
tion of t
he char
ac
ter
is
tics of the chief
 Prana is con
-
tin ued.
The chief Prana is also min
ute like the senses. Here also we
have to un
der
st
and by mi
nute
ness that the chief P
rana is sub
tle and
of lim
ited size, not t
hat it is of
 atomic size, be
cause by means of it
s five
func
tions it per
vades the whole body
.
Prana is sub
tle be
cause it can
not be seen when it goes out of
the body
. It
 is lim
ited or fi
nite, be
cause the scrip
ture speaks of it
s
p
ass
ing out, go
ing and com
ing. Had it been all
-per
vad
ing, there could
have been no move
ment on it
s part
.
There
fore Prana is also fi
nite or lim
ited.
It may
 be ob
jected that i
t is all-per
vad
ing ac
cord
ing to the t
ext
ﬁHe is equal to a gnat, equal t
o a mos
quito, equal t
o an el
e
phant,
equal to these three worlds, equal t
o this uni
verseﬂ (Bri. Up. I.
3.22).
But t
he all-pervadingness of which this tex
t speaks is with re
spect to
Hiranyagarbha, the cos
mic Prana, the P
rana of the mac
ro
cosm. It is
all-per
vad
ing in it
s uni
ver
sal as
pect; in it
s in
di
vid
ual as
pect it is lim
-
ited.
The st
ate
ment
s of equal
ity ﬁequal t
o a gnatﬂ, etc.
, de
clare the
lim
ited size of the P
rana which abides within ev
ery liv
ing be
ing.
Jy
otirady
adhikaranam
: T
opic 7 (Sutras 14-16)
The presiding deities of t
he organs
Á`mo{V
amÚ{Y
îR>
mZ§ Vw
 VXm_ZZ
Jy
otirady
adhishthanam tu t
adamananat
II.
4.14 (283)
Bu
t the
re i
s the
 pre
sid
ing o
ve
r by F
ire
 and
 othe
rs (o
ve
r the
organs),
 because
 of such statement in Sr
uti.
Jy
otirady
adhishthanam:
 presiding over by Fire and ot
hers;
Tu
:
 but;
T
adamananat:
 because of such stat
ement in Srut
i, on account of t
he
scriptures teaching that.
Now fol
lows a dis
cus
sion on the de
pend
ence of the or
gans or
the
pre sid ing
de i ties.
The Purvap
akshin holds that the P
ranas (senses
) act from their
own power
. If
 we ad
mit that
 the Pranas act only
 un
der the guid
ance of
the pre
sid
ing de
i
ties, it
 would fol
low that t
hose guid
ing de
i
ties are
enjoyers of the f
ruit
s of the ac
tions and the in
di
vid
ual soul would thus
cease to be the enjoyer
.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) is used in or
der to re
move the doubt
. It
 ex
-
cludes the Purvap
aksha.
The Pranas and senses func
tion not be
cause of their own po
-
tency but be
cause of the power of the de
i
ties pre
sid
ing over them.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 4
297

Pranas, i.e.
, the senses, are un
der the guid
ance of the de
i
ties
such as Fire and oth
ers pre
sid
ing over them.
 Sruti also st
ates so.
Ait
areya Aranyaka (I.
2.4) de
clares, ﬁFire hav
ing be
come speech en
-
tered the mout
h.ﬂ The senses are in
ert. They
 can
not move by
 them
-
selves.
The as
ser
tion that
 the Pranas be
ing en
dowed with the ca
p
a
bil
ity
of pro
duc
ing their ef

fects act from their own power is un
founded, as
we see that some things which pos
sess the ca
p
a
bil
ity of
 mo
tion such
as cars ac
tu
ally mov
e only if
 dragged by bulls and the like.
There
fore the Pranas and the senses are de
pend
ent on the pre
-
sid ing
de i ties.
àmUdVm eã
Pranav
at
a sabdat
II.
4.15 (284)
(T
he gods ar
e not t
he enjoyers,
 but t
he soul, becaus
e the
organs ar
e connecte
d) with t
he one (i.e., the soul) posse
ssing
them (a
 thing we k
now) from the
 scriptu
res.
Pranav
at
a:
 with the one possessing the Pranas (organs);
Sabdat:
from the scriptures.
From the pre
ced
ing Su
tra a doubt may
 arise, that t
he gods, who
guide the senses may be the enjoy
ers; this doubt is re
moved by t
his
Su tra
.
‚Prana™
 here is a syn
onym for I
ndriya or sense.
The senses are con
nected with the soul.
 This is de
scribed by
the Sruti
. Though the gods guide t
he senses, though they are t
he pre
-
sid
ing de
i
ties of the or
gans, they can
not be
come Bhokt
as or enjoyers.
The in
di
vid
ual soul is the mas
ter
. The senses are his ser
vant
s. The
senses func
tion for sub
serv
ing the in
ter
est of the soul.
 The in
di
vid
ual
soul is the Lord of the ag
gre
gate of t
he in
stru
ment
s of ac
tion. The Jiv
a
alone real
ises that he sees, hears, etc.
The scrip
tures de
clare ﬁThen where there is the eye, en
ter
ing
this open
ingŠthe cav
ity of
 the eyeŠit
 is there to serve the i
n
di
vid
ual
soul, the ey
e it

self is the in stru
ment of see
ing.ﬂ ﬁHe who knows ‚Let
me smell this™
 he is the Self
, the nose is the in
stru
ment of smell

ingﬂ(Chh. Up. VII
I.12.
4) This clearly shows that the soul is the enj
oyer but
not the gods. The or
gans are con
nected with the in
di
vid
ual soul only
.
The in
di
vid
ual soul claims and feels the ey
e to be his own. The
eye is to serve him
 by pre
sent
ing him with t
he ob
ject
s of sight. S
im
i
-
larly the ot
her senses also are the ser
vant
s of the same mas
ter
, the
in
di
vid
ual soul. Hence the in
di
vid
ual soul and not the pre
sid
ing de
i
ties
is the mas
ter or Lord of the senses and the real enjoyer
.
The soul is called Pranavat be
cause the Pranas (or
gans) be
-
long to it.
 The soul rules the senses in or
der to ac
com
plish it
s ob
ject
s
of en
joy
ment. The gods rule t
he senses by merely giv
ing their ac
tiv
i
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
298

ties. The in
di
vid
ual soul rules the senses in or
der to en
joy plea
sur
able
ex pe ri ences.
More
over there are many gods in t
he body
. A
 p
ar
tic
u
lar or
gan is
pre
sided over by a p
ar
tic
u
lar de
ity
. The plu
ral
ity of
 gods guid
ing the
or
gans ren
ders it im
pos
si
ble that t
hey should be enjoyers in thei
r
body
. There is and can be only one Bhokt
a or enjoyer
. Oth
er
wise re
-
mem brance
or
rec og ni tion
of
iden tity

would
be
im pos si ble.
There
fore the senses are for the en
joy
ment of t
he soul and not
the gods though they
 are pre
sided and di
rected by them.
T
asy
a cha nity
atv
at
II.
4.16 (285)
And on a
ccount
 of it
s (soul
™s) perm
anence (i
n th
e body it i
s th
e
enjo
yer, and
 not the go
ds).
T
asy
a:
 it
s;
Cha:
 and;
Nity
atv
at:
 on account of permanence.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 15 is given.
The in
di
vid
ual soul dwells per
ma
nently i
n this body as the
enjoyer
, as it can be af

fected by good and evil and can ex
pe
ri
ence
plea
sure and pain.
 It is the Jiv
a alone who has such per
ma
nent con
-
nec
tion with t
he senses in the body
. There
fore, the Jiv
a, and not t
he
guid
ing de
i
ties is their mas
ter
. The body i
s the re
sult of the soul™
s past
ac
tions. The soul only
 can ex
pe
ri
ence or en
joy in t
he body which is
the prod
uct of it
s Prarabdha Karma. Oth
ers, e.g.,
 the gods can
not en
-
joy in t
his body
.
The gods who have great glory and power can
not be enjoyers in
the low hu
man body
. They hav
e ex
alted st
a
tus. They would t
reat with
con
tempt such low en
joy
ment
s as can be ex
pe
ri
enced through the
hu man
body
.
They can
not pos
si
bly en
ter in this wretched body int
o the con
di
-
tion of enjoy
ers. Scrip
ture also says ﬁOnly what is good ap
proaches
him; v
er
ily ev
il does not ap
proach the Devasﬂ (Bri. Up. I.
5.20).
The or
gans are per
ma
nently con
nected with the em
bod
ied soul
only
. When the soul p
asses out, the Pranas (or
gans) fol
low it. Thi
s we
see from p
as
sages such as
 the fol
low
ing ﬁWhen the soul p
asses out,
the Prana fol

lows; when the Prana de p
art
s, all other or
gans fol
lowﬂ
(Bri
. Up. IV
.4.2)
.
The soul is the mas
ter and is there
fore the enjoy
er
, al
though
there are pre
sid
ing gods over the or
gans. The gods are con
nected
with the or
gans only
, not wit
h the st
ate of t
he soul as enjoyer
.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 4
299

Indriy
adhikaranam
: T
opic 8 (Sutras 17-19)
The organs are independent principles
and not functions of
 the chief Prana
V BpÝÐ
`m{U VX²
>ì`nXo
emXÝ`Ì lo
îR>
T
a Indriy
ani t
adv
y
ap
adesadany
atra sreshthat
II.
4.17 (286)
T
hey (the other Pranas) ar
e se
nses, on account of being so
de
signa
ted
 (by th
e s
crip
ture
s), with
 the
 ex
ce
ptio
n of the
 be
st
(the
 chie
f Pran
a).
Ta
:
 they;

Indriy
ani:
 the organs;
T
adv
y
ap
adesat
: because
designated as such;
Sreshthat any
atra:
 except the chief
, other than
the chief Prana which is the highest
. (
Any
atra:
 elsewhere, except;
Sreshthat:
 than the best or t
he chief Prana.)
The dis
tinc
tion be
tween the chief P
rana and other Pranas (the
or
gans) is now pointed out.
Now there arises an
other doubt vi
z., whether the or
gans such
as eyes, ears, etc.,
 are func
tions or modes of the chief
 Prana or in
de
-
pend ent
en ti ties.
The Purvap
akshin or the ob
jec
tor main
t
ains that they
 are mere
func
tions on ac
count of scrip
tural st
ate
ment. The scrip
ture says, ﬁThis
is the great
est amongst us (the or
gans). W
ell, let
 us all as
sume his
form. There
upon they all
 as
sumed his form. There
fore they are called
by this name of
 Pranaﬂ (Bri. Up. I
.5.21).
The Su
tra re
futes this and says t
hat the elev
en or
gans are not
func
tions or modes of the chief
 Prana. They
 be
long to a sep

a rate cat
-
e
gory
. They are shown to be dif

fer ent in scrip
tural p
as
sages like
ﬁFrom Him are born Prana, mind,
 and all or
gansﬂ (Mun. Up. II.
1.3). In
this and other p
as
sages Prana and the sense or
gans are men
tioned
sep
a
rately
. The tex
t of t
he Brihadaranyaka must be t
aken in a sec
-
ond ary
sense.
There
fore it can
not cer
t
ainly be said that
 just as the chief P
rana
has five modes the senses also are it
s modes, be
cause the Sruti de
-
scribes the senses as
 sep
a
rate. The senses are dis
tinct in
de
pend
ent
prin
ci
ples. The senses and the mind are de
scribed as be
ing eleven in
num ber
.
^oXlwVo–
Bhedasruteh
II.
4.18 (287)
(On a
cco
unt o
f the
) scri
ptu
ral sta
tem
en
t of d
iffe
ren
ce
.
Bhedasruteh:
 on account of the scriptural st
atement of
 dif
ference.
An ar
gu
ment in fa
vour of Su
tra 17 is given.
The Prana is ev
ery
where spo
ken of as dif

fer ent from t
he or
-
gans. In Brihadarany
aka Upanishad (I.
3.2) the or
gans are dealt with
in one sec
tion. A
f

ter con clud
ing it, t
he Prana is dealt with sep

a rately in
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
300

the same sec
tion. Thi
s clearly in
di
cates that they
 do not be
long to the
same
cat e gory
.
Other p
as
sages also re
fer
ring to that
 dif

fer ence may be quoted,
as for in
st
ance, ﬁHe made mind, speech and breath for him
selfﬂ (Bri.
Up. I.5
.3).
In the B
rihadaranyaka Up
anishad (I.3.2) it
 is st
ated that
 the
gods in their strug
gle with the A
suras, i.e., t
he evil f
orces found that
the senses such as the speech, the nose, the eye, t
he ear
, and the
mind were vi
ti
ated by t
he Asuras. So they
 took the help of t
he chief
Prana. The Asuras were not able to v
i
ti
ate the chief P
rana. The gods
be
came vic
to
ri
ous over the Asuras. Here the chief P
rana is spo
ken of
as dif

fer ent from and su
pe
rior to all the senses. For ref
er
ence vide,
ﬁThen, the gods ap
pealed to the chief
 Prana, the chief
 vi
t
al force
which is su
pe
rior to the sensesﬂ (Bri. Up. I.
3.7).
There fore
the
or gans
are
in de pend ent
prin ci ples,
and
not
modes or func
tions of the chief
 Prana.
d¡bjÊ
V
ailakshany
accha
II.
 4.19 (288)
And
 on a
cco
unt o
f the
 diffe
ren
ce
 of ch
arac
teri
stics
.
V
ailakshany
at:
 on account of dif
ference of characteristics;
Cha:
 and.
An ar
gu
ment in fa
vour of Su
tra 17 is given.
There
is,
more over
,
a
dif
 fer ence
of
char ac ter is tics
be tween
the
chief Prana and the senses. The or
gans do not func
tion in deep
sleep, whereas the Prana does. The chief P
rana alone is not reached
by death,
 while the other P
ranas are. The st
ay
ing and de
p
art
ing of the
chief Prana, not
 that of
 the sense or
gans is the cause of the main
te
-
nance and the dis
so
lu
tion of t
he body
.
The sense or
gans are the cause of the per
cep
tion of t
he
sense-ob
ject
s, not the chief
 Prana. The or
gans get tired, but
 not the
chief Prana. The l
oss of in
di
vid
ual or
gans does not cause death, but
the p
ass
ing out of P
rana causes death of the body
.
Thus there are many dif

fer ences dis
tin
guish
ing the Prana f
rom
the senses. This also in
di
cates that the senses are dif

fer ent from t
he
Prana.
The Sruti which speaks, ﬁThe senses as
sumed the form of
Pranaﬂ, is to be t
aken in a sec
ond
ary sense. The word ‚Prana™
 is ap
-
plied to the sense or
gans in a sec
ond
ary sense. It m
eans that their
func
tion
ing de
pends upon Prana. It
 means that t
he or
gans fol
low the
Prana just as the ser
vant
s fol
low their mas
ter
. The chief P
rana is the
ruler or the mas
ter or the teacher of t
he or
gans. The Sruti de
scribes
Prana as su
pe
rior to the or
gans (Sreshtha).
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 4
301

There
fore the or
gans are in
de
pend
ent prin
ci
ples and not modes
of the chief P
rana.
Samj
namurtikl
ripty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 9 (Sutras 20-22)
The creation of nam
es and forms is by the Lord
and not by the individual soul
g§km_
y{V©−b¥{
áñVw {
Ìd¥Ë
Hw$d©V C
nXoem
Samj
namurtikl
riptistu triv
ritkurv
at
a up
adesat
II.
4.20 (289)
But t
he creat
ion of
 names an
d for
ms is
 by Him
 who does t
he
tripa
rtite
 (cre
atio
n), for s
o the
 scrip
ture
s te
ach.
Samjnamu
rtik
lriptih
:
 the creation of name a
nd form;
Tu
:
 but;
T
riv
ritkurv
at
ah:
 of Him who does the trip
artite creation,
 of His who
made the element
s triple;
Up
adesat:
 on account of scriptural
teaching, as Sruti
 has st
ated so. (
Samjna:
 name;
Murtih:
form
;
Klrip
tih:
 creation;
 T
riv
rit:
 trip
artite,
 compound;
Kurv
at
ah:
 of the
Creator
.)
The Sruti de
clares: ﬁThat De
ity t
hought, let
 me now en
ter those
three de
i
ties (fire, eart
h, and wa
ter) with this liv

ing self (Jivatma) and
let me then e
volve nam
es and forms; let me m
ake each of these three
tri
par
titeﬂ
 (Ch
h. Up
. VI.3.2)
.
Here the doubt arises whether the agent in t
hat evo
lu
tion of
names and forms is the Jiva or the i
n
di
vid
ual soul or the Su
preme
Lord.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent main
t
ains the for
mer al
ter
-
na
tive on ac
count of the glo
ri
fi
ca
tion con
t
ained in the words ﬁwith this
liv ing
self.ﬂ
The word ‚tu™
 (but), dis
cards the Purvap
aksha. This Su
tra re
-
futes it and say
s: The in
di
vid
ual soul has not the power to cre
ate the
gross world. The en
tire cre
ation of t
he world can surely be the work of
the Su
preme Lord only who cre
ated fire,
 wa
ter and earth. The word
‚Jiva™
 in the p
as
sage is syn
t
ac
ti
cally re
lated with ‚en
trance™
 and not
with the cre
ation of name
s and forms.
That the S
u
preme Lord is He who evolves the names and forms
is ac
knowl
edged by all t
he Up
anishads, as we see from such pas
-
sages as ﬁHe w
ho is called ether is the evol
ver of all nam
es and
form
sﬂ
 (Ch
h. Up
. VIII.14)
.
Fur
ther
, the nex
t sen
tence of that
 text
, ﬁThen that
 De
ity said,
 ‚Let
me make each of these three el
e
ment
s tri
p
ar
tite™
ﬂ (Chh. Up. VI.
3.3),
clearly in
di
cates that the S
u
preme Lord alone cre
ates names and
forms, the gross el
e
ment
s and this uni
verse.
The Lord dwells in ev
ery
thing and di
rect
s the en
tire cre
ation. He
is the in
ner di
rec
tor
, in the pro
duc
tion of pot
s, etc., by
 the pot
ter
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
302

_m§gm{
X ^m¡_
§ `Wmeã
X{_V
a`moü
Mamsadi b
haumam y
athasabdamit
aray
oscha
II.
4.21 (290)
Fle
sh, e
tc., ori
ginate
s from
 ea
rth acc
ord
ing to
 the
 scrip
tural
statement and (so also) in t
he case o
f the other (elements, viz.,
fire
 and
 wate
r).
Mamsadi:
 flesh and the rest;
Bhaumam:
 are ef
fect
s of earth;
Y
athasabdam:
 as Sruti has said so, as declared by the scripture;
It
aray
oh:
 of the ot
her two, namely
 fire and water;
Cha:
 also, and.
T
ri
p
ar
tite eart
h, when as
sim
i
lated by m
an, forms flesh,
 etc. For
the tex
t says ﬁFood (earth) when eaten be
comes three-fold; it
s gross
-
est por
tion be
comes fae
ces, it
s mid
dle por
tion flesh,
 it
s sub
tlest por
-
tion mindﬂ (Chh. Up. V
I.5.
1). So also we have t
o learn from the t
ext t
he
ef

fects of the two ot
her el
e
ment
s, viz.,
 fire and wa
ter
. Out of
 the con
-
sumed wa
ter
, the gross por
tion goes out as urine, t
he me
dium por
tion
be
comes the blood and the sub
tle por
tion be
comes Prana. Out of
 the
as
sim
i
lated fire,
 the gross por
tion builds the bones,
 the me
dium por
-
tion be
comes the mar
row and the sub
tle por
tion be
comes speech.
d¡eoî
`mÎmw V
ÛmXñVÛ
V
aiseshy
attu t
adv
adast
adv
adah
II.
4.22 (291)
But on a
ccount
 of t
he preponderan
ce (of a par
tic
ular
 element
in the
m the
 gros
s e
le
me
nts) a
re s
o na
me
d (a
fter i
t).
V
aiseshy
at:
 on account of the preponderance;
Tu
:
 but;
T
adv
adah:
that special name.
Su
tra 21 is am
pli
fied here.
Here now an ob
jec
tion is raised. If
 all the gross el
e
ment
s con
t
ain
the three fi
ne el
e
ment
s, then why t
here is such dis
tinc
tion as ﬁThis is
fire, t
his is wa
ter
, this is earth?ﬂ And,
 again, why is it
 said that among
the el
e
ment
s of the hu
man body
, flesh etc.
, is the ef

fect of the food
that is eaten;
 blood, etc.,
 the ef

fect of the wa
ter that i
s drunk; bone
etc., t
he ef

fect of the fire eaten?
The word ‚tu™
 (but), re
moves the ob
jec
tion.
This Su
tra re
futes the ob
jec
tion.
Even in each el
e
ment, where the ot
her two el
e
ment
s have com
-
bined, it i
s called so be
cause it is the pre
dom
i
nant por
tion.
Al
though all thi
ngs are tri
p
ar
tite,
 yet we ob
serve in dif

fer ent
places
a
pre pon der ance
of
dif
 fer ent
el e ment
s.
Heat
pre pon der ates
in
fire, wa
ter in all that
 is liq
uid, food in eart
h. As the f
ine el
e
ment
s are
not found in equal pro
por
tion in each of t
he gross el
e
ment
s, they are
named af

ter that fine el
e
ment which pre
pon
der
ates in their con
sti
tu
-
tion.
CHAPT
ER IIŠSECT
ION 4
303

Thus the com
pound fire is called fire be
cause of the pre
pon
der
-
ance of pure fire in it.
 Sim
i
larly the Dev
as are called fi
ery
, be
cause
their bod
ies are made of sub
st
ances in which fire pre
pon
der
ates.
The
rep e ti tion
‚
T
advadah
™Š‚that
 spe
cial name™
 in
di
cates the ter
-
mi
na
tion of t
he Chap
ter
.
Thus ends the Fourth Pada (
Sec
tion 4) of the Sec
ond Adhy
ay
a
(Chap
ter II) of the B
rahmasutras or the
 V
edant
a Phi
los
o
phy
.
Here ends Chap
ter II
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
304

CHAPTER III
SADHANADHY
A
Y
A
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
Now in the Third Chap
ter are be
ing de
ter
mined those Sadhanas
or prac
tices which are the means of at
t
ain
ing the high
est Brah
man or
the In
fi
nite. I
n the First and Sec
ond Padas of this Chap
ter are be
ing
t
aught two thi
ngs, viz.,
 a strong yearn
ing or burn
ing de
sire
(Mumukshutva) to real
ise Brah
man or the fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion and an
equally strong dis
gust (V
airagya) to
wards all ob
ject
s other than Brah
-
man; be
cause these are the two fun
da
men
t
al things among all
Sadhanas.
In or
der to in
duce V
airagya or disp
assion, the Sut
ras show in the
first Pada t
he im
per
fec
tions of all m
un
dane existences and this they
base on the Panchagnividy
a or the doc
trine of f
ive fi
res of the
Chhandogya Up
anishad in which is t
aught how the soul p
asses af
ter
death from one con
di
tion to an
other
.
The first Pada t
eaches the great doc
trine of re
in
car
na
tion, t
he
de
p
ar
ture of the soul f
rom the phys
i
cal body
, it
s jour
ney to t
he
Chandraloka on the third plane and it
s com
ing back to the earth. T
his
is done in or
der to cre
ate V
airagya or in
dif

fe r
ence to sen
sual en
joy
-
ment
s herein and here
af

ter. In t
he Sec
ond Pada are de
scribed all the
glo ri ous
at trib ut
es
of
the
Su preme
Brah man,
His
Om ni science,
Om
-
nip
o
tence, Love
li
ness, etc., in or
der to at
tract the soul to
wards Him,
so that He may be t
he sole ob
ject of quest.
305

SYNOPSIS
Adhikarana I:
 (Sutras 1-7) teaches that the soul,
 at the dis
so
lu
-
tion of t
he body
, de
p
art
s, ac
com
p
a
nied by the sub
tle ma
te
rial el
e
-
ment
s (Bhut
a Sukshma), as well as by the I
ndriyas and Pranas. The
sub
tle el
e
ment
s serve as an abode to the Pranas at
t
ached to the soul.
Su
tra 7: Those who do sac
ri
fice be
come in Chandraloka the
food of t
he gods which means that they con
trib
ute to t
he en
joy
ment of
the gods by thei
r pres
ence and ser
vice to t
hem.
Adhikarana II:
 (Sutras 8-1
1) shows that the souls af

ter en joy
ing
the fruit
s of their mer
i
to
ri
ous deeds in the Chandraloka de
scend to the
earth with a re
main
der (Anusaya) of their works which de
ter
mines the
na
ture of the new body
 or the char
ac
ter of the new li
fe.
Adhikarana III
:
 (Sutras 12-21) dis
cusses the fate af

ter death ofthose evil-do
ers whom their evil deeds do not en
ti
tle to p
ass to the
Chandraloka.
Adhikaranas IV
, V
, and VI
:
 (Sutras 22; 23; and 24 t
o 27) teach
that t
he sub
tle bod
ies of the souls de
scend
ing from the Chandraloka
through the ether
, air
, etc.,
 do not be
come iden
ti
cal with ether
, air
,
etc., but
 only liv
e there; that
 they de
scend in a short time. On en
ter
ing
into a corn or a plant the soul re
mains merely in con
t
act with it which is
al
ready an
i
mat
ed by an
other soul. The soul af

ter hav ing en
tered into
a corn or a plant, get
s con
nected with him who eat
s the corn or fruit of
the plant and per
forms the act of cop
u
la
tion. The soul re
mains with
him till
 he en
ters into the mot
her
™
s womb with the sem
i
nal fluid in
-
jected. The soul ul
ti
mately
 en
ters the mother
™
s womb and is brought
forth as a child.
306

T
adant
arapratip
atty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 1 (Sutras 1-7)
The soul at the t
ime of
 transmigrat
ion does t
ake
with it subtl
e p
art
s of the elem
ent
s
VXÝVaà{VnÎm
m¡ a§h{V g§n[
aîdº$– àíZ{Zê$nUmä
`m_² &
T
adant
arapratip
att
au ramhati sam
p
arishv
akt
ah
 prasnanirup
anabhy
am
III.1.1 (
292
)
In order t
o obtai
n an
other
 body (t
he soul) g
oes enveloped (by
subtle e
leme
nts) (as appears from) t
he que
stion and
ex
planatio
n (in the sc
ripture
, Chhando
gya).
T
adant
arapratip
att
au:
 for the purpose of obt
aining a fresh body (
Ta
t
:
that,
 i.e. a body
;
Ant
ara:
 dif
ferent, anot
her;
Pratip
att
au:
 in obt
aining);
Ramhati:
 goes, dep
art
s,
Samp
arishv
akt
ah:
 enveloped (by subtl
e
element
s);
Prasna:
 from question;
Nirup
anabhy
am:
 aid for
explanati
ons.
In the S
ec
ond Chap
ter all ob
jec
tions raised against the V
edantic
view of B
rah
man on the ground of S
ruti and rea
son
ing have been re
-
futed.
 It has been shown also that all
 other views are in
cor
rect and de
-
void of f
oun
da
tion and the al
leged mu
tual con
tra
dic
tions of V
e
dic
text
s do not ex
ist. Fur
ther it has been shown that all
 the en
ti
ties dif

fer -
ent from t
he in
di
vi
d
ual soul such as Prana, etc., spring from B
rah
man
for the en
joy
ment of t
he soul.
In this Chap
ter the man
ner in which the soul trav
els af

ter deathto the dif

fer ent re
gions with it
s ad
junct
s, the dif

fer ent st
ates of the soul
and the na
ture of Brah
man, the sep

a rate
ness or non-sep
a
rate
ness of
the V
idyas (kinds of Up
asana); the ques
tion whether the qual

i ties of
Brah
man have to be cu
mu
lated or not,
 the at
t
ain
ment of t
he goal by
right knowl
edge (Samyagdarsana), the di

ver si
ties of the m
eans of
right know
l
edge and the ab
sence of cer
t
ain rules as to Moksha which
is the fruit of
 per
fect knowl
edge are dis
cussed to cre
ate disp
assion.
The Jiva (in
di
vid
ual soul) along with the P
ranas, the mind and
the senses leaves his for
mer body and ob
t
ains a new body
. He t
akes
with him
self, A
vidya,
 vir
tues and vi
cious ac
tions and the im
pres
sions
lef
t by his pre
vi
ous births.
Here the ques
tion arises whether the soul is en
vel
oped or not by
sub
tle p
art
s of the el
e
ment
s as the seed for the fu
ture body in his
trans
mi
gra
tion. The P
urvap
akshin or the op
po
nent saysŠIt
 is not so
en
vel
oped, be
cause the sub
tle p
art
s of the el
e
ment
s are eas
ily av
ail
-
able ev
ery
where. This Su
tra re
futes this v
iew and says that the soul
does t
ake with it sub
tle p
art
s of the el
e
ment
s which are the seeds of
the new body
. How do we know this? From the ques
tion and an
swer
that oc
curs in the scrip
tures. The ques
tion is ﬁDo you know why in the
fif
th ob
la
tion wa
ter is called man?ﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.3.3). T
he an
swer is
given in t
he whole p
as
sage which, af

ter ex plain
ing how the fiv
e ob
la
-
tions in the f
orm of Sraaddha, S
oma, rain, f
ood and seed are of

feredCHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 1
307

in the fiv
e fires, vi
z., the heav

enly world, Parjanya (rain God), the
earth, man and woman,
 con
cludes ﬁFor this rea
son is wa
ter
, in the
fif
th ob
la
tion, called m
anﬂ. Go through the sec
tion Panchagniv
idya in
Chh. Up. V
. p
art
s 3-10. Hence we un
der
st
and that t
he soul goes en
-
vel
oped by wa
ter
. Though the el
e
ment
s are avail
able ev
ery
where, yet
the seeds for a fu
ture body can
not be eas
ily pro
cured any
where. The
or
gans, etc., which go wit
h the soul can
not ac
com
p
any it wit
h
out a
ma te rial
body
.
Just as a cat
er
pil
lar t
akes hold of an
other ob
ject be
fore it leav
es
it
s hold of an ob
ject, so also the soul has the v
i
sion of the body
 to
come be
fore it leav
es the pres
ent body
. Hence the view of
 the
Sankhyas that
the Self
 and the or
gans are both all-per
vad
ing and
when ob
t
ain
ing a new body only be
gin to func
tion in it
 on ac
count of
Karma; t
he view of t
he Bauddhas that t
he soul alone with
out the or
-
gans be
gins to func
tion in a new body
, new senses be
ing formed like
the new body; t
he view of t
he V
aiseshikas that the mind alone goes t
o
the new body; and t
he view of t
he Digambara Jains that the soul only
flies away from
 the old body and al
ight
s in the new one just as a p
ar
rot
flies from one t
ree to an
other are not cor
rect and are op
pos
ing to the
V
edas. The soul goes from the body
 ac
com
p
a
nied by the m
ind,
Prana, the senses and the Sukshmabhut
as or sub
tle el
e
ment
s.
An ob
jec
tion can be raised that wa
ter only ac
com
p
a
nies the
soul and not any ot
her el
e
ment. How can it be said t
hen that t
he soul
goes en
vel
oped by the sub
tle p
art
s of all el
e
ment
s. T
o this ob
jec
tion
the next
 Su
tra gives the re
ply
.
Í`mË_H
$ËdmÎmw
 ^y`ñ
ËdmV² &
T
ry
atmakatv
attu bhuy
astv
at
III.1.2 (
293
)
On a
cco
unt o
f wate
r con
sisti
ng of th
ree
 (e
le
me
nts) (th
e s
ou
l is
env
elo
ped b
y a
ll
 th
ese el
emen
ts
 an
d n
ot
 mer
ely
 wa
ter
);
 but
(wate
r alo
ne
 is me
ntion
ed
 in the
 tex
t) on a
cco
unt o
f its
preponderan
ce (in t
he human
 body).
T
ry
atmakatv
attu:
 on account of (water) consisting of three element
s;
Tu
:
 but;
Bhuy
astv
at:
 on account of the preponderance (of water).
The wa
ter which en
vel
op
s the soul is three
fold. I
t de
notes all the
other
el e ment
s
by
im pli ca tion.

The
text

spec i fies
wa ter
,
be cause
it
pre
pon
der
ates in the hu
man body
. In all an
i
mated bod
ies liq
uid sub
-
st
ances such as
 juices, blood and the like pre
pon
der
ate.
The word ‚tu™
 (but), re
moves the ob
jec
tion raised above.
 W
a
ter
st
ands for all the el
e
ment
s be
cause it is re
ally a com
bi
na
tion of wa
ter
,
fire and earth ac
cord
ing to the t
ri
p
ar
tite cre
ation of t
he gross el
e
-
ment
s. There
fore all the t
hree el
e
ment
s ac
com
p
any the soul.
 No body
can be formed by wa
ter alone. Fur
ther liq
uid mat
ter is pre
dom
i
nant in
the causal st
ate of t
he body
, i.e.
, se
men and men
strual blood. More
-
over fluid por
tion is pre
dom
i
nant in Soma,
 milk, but
ter and the like
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
308

which are nec
es
sary for Karma, which is an ef

fi cient cause for the
build
ing of the f
u
ture body
.
àmUJVo
Pranagatescha
III.1.3 (
294
)
And because of t
he goin
g out of
 the Pr
anas
 (th
e sense organ
s)
with
 the soul, the eleme
nts also accompany t
he soul.
Prana:
 of the P
ranas (the sense organs)
;
Gateh:
 because of the
going out;
Cha:
 and.
A
 fur
ther rea
son is given to show that t
he sub
tle es
sences of the
el
e
ment
s ac
com
p
any the soul at
 the dis
so
lu
tion of t
he body
. The Sruti
has st
ated that
 the Pranas and senses de
p
art along with t
he in
di
vid
-
ual soul at the dis
so
lu
tion of t
he body
. ﬁWhen he thus de
p
art
s the chief
Prana de
p
art
s af

ter him, and when the chief Prana thus de
p
art
s all the
other Pranas de
p
art af

ter itﬂ (Bri. Up. IV
.4.2). T
hey can
not st
ay with
out
the ba
sis or sub
stra
tum or sup
port of the el

e ment
s. There
fore it f
ol
-
lows that the in
di
vid
ual soul de
p
art
s at
tended by t
he sub
tle es
sences
of the el
e
ment
s at the dis
so
lu
tion of t
he body
. The sub
tle el
e
ment
s
form the base for t
he mov
ing of Pranas. The go
ing of the P
ranas is not
pos
si
ble with
out a base. The Pranas can
not ei
ther move or abide
any
where with
out such a base. This is ob
served in liv
ing be
ings.
There can be en
joy
ment only
 when the Prana goes to an
other
body
. When the soul de
p
art
s the chief Prana also fol

lows. When thechief Prana de
p
art
s all the other Pranas and or
gans also fol
low
. The
es
sences of el
e
ment
s are the ve
hi
cle of Pranas. Where the el
e
ment
s
are, there the or
gans and Pranas are. They are never sep

a rated.
A½Ý`
m{XJ{V
lwVo
[a{V M
oÞ ^mº
&
Agny
adigatisruteri
ti chet na bhakt
atv
at
III.1.4 (
295
)
I
f it be
 said
 (that the
 Pran
as o
r the
 orga
ns d
o no
t follo
w the
soul) on account of th
e scriptural stat
eme
nts as to entering
into Agni,
 etc., (we say) not so,
 on account of its being so said in
a secondary sense
 (or metaphorical n
ature of these
state
me
nts).
Agny
adi:
 Agni and others;
Gati:
 entering;
Sruteh:
 on account of the
scriptures;
Iti:
 as thus;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not so (it cannot be accepted);
Bhakt
atv
at:
 on account of it
s being said in a secondary sense.
The Purvap
akshin or the ob
jec
tor de
nies that at t
he time when a
new body is ob
t
ained the Pranas go with t
he soul, be
cause the scrip
-
ture speaks of their go
ing to Agni,
 etc. This Su
tra re
futes this v
iew
.
The text
 which says that Pranas on death go t
o Agni and other
gods says so in a fig
u
ra
tive and sec
ond
ary sense just as when it says
that t
he hair goes to the trees. The t
ext means only
 that t
he Pranas
ob
t
ain the grace of Agni and ot
her gods.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 1
309

The en
ter
ing of speech, etc.,
 into Agni i
s met

a phor
i
cal. Al
though
the tex
t says that
 the hairs of the body
 en
ter into t
he shrubs and the
hairs of the head into t
he trees. It
 does not mean that
 the hairs ac
tu
-
ally f
ly away f
rom the body and en
ter into t
rees and shrubs.
The scrip
tural tex
t
s clearly say ﬁWhen the soul de
p
art
s, the
Prana fol
lows. When the Prana de
p
art
s, all the or
gans fol
lowﬂ (Bri.
Up. IV
.4.2.)
Fur
ther the soul could not go at
 all if t
he Prana could not fol
low it.
The soul could not en
ter into t
he new body with
out Prana. The
re
could be no en
joy
ment in the new body
 with
out the P
ranas go
ing to
this body
.
The p
as
sage met

a phor
i
cally ex
presses that Agni and other de
i
-
ties who act as guides of the P
ranas and the senses and co
op
er
ate
with them,
 stop their co
op
er
a
tion at t
he time of de
ath. The P
ranas and
the senses con
se
quently l
ose their re
spec
tive f
unc
tions and are sup
-
posed to be im
mersed in the guid
ing de
i
ties. The P
ranas and the
senses re
main at that
 time quit
e in
op
er
a
tive,
 wait
ing for ac
com
p
a
ny
-
ing the de
p
art
ing soul.
The en
ter
ing of speech into fi
re, etc.,
 means only that
 at the t
ime
of death,
 these senses and Pranas cease to per
form their f
unc
tions
and not that
 they are ab
so
lutely
 lost to the soul.
 The con
clu
sion,
there
fore, is that
 the Pranas and the senses do ac
com
p
any the soul
at the t
ime of death.
àW_
o@l
dUm{X{
V MoÞ Vm Ed ø
wnnÎ
Prathame™
srav
anaditi chet na t
a ev
a hi up
ap
atteh
III.1.5 (
296
)
If it be object
ed on the gr
ound of w
ater n
ot being
 menti
on
ed in
the
 first o
f the
 ob
latio
ns, we
 say n
ot so
, be
cau
se
 that (wa
ter)
only is verily meant by t
he word ﬁSraddhaﬂ because
 that i
s the
mos
t app
rop
riate
 me
aning
 of the
 word
 in that p
ass
age
.
Prathame:
 in the first of
 the fiv
e ob
la
tions de
scribed in the
Chhandogya Sruti;

Asrav
anat:
 on ac
count of not be
ing men
tioned;
Iti:
 thus;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not;
T
a ev
a:
 that o
nly
, i.e., w
a
ter;
Hi:
 be
cause;
Up
ap
atteh:
 be
cause of fit
ness.
The Purvap
akshin raises an ob
jec
tion: How can it be as
cer
-
t
ained that ‚i
n the fif
th ob
la
tion wa
ter is called man™
 as there is no
mean
ing of wa
ter in the f
irst ob
la
tion? On that
 al
t
ar the gods of

ferSraddha as ob
la
tion (Chh. Up. V
.4.2).
The Siddhanti
n gives his an
swer: In the case of the f
irst fire the
word Sraddha is to be t
aken in the sense of ‚wa
ter
™. Why? B
e
cause of
ap
pro
pri
ate
ness. Then only there is har
mony in t
he be
gin
ning, mid
dle
and end of the p
as
sage and the syn
thet
i
cal unity of
 the whole p
as
-
sage is not dis
turbed. Oth
er
wise the ques
tion and an
swer would not
agree and so the unity of
 the whole p
as
sage would be de
stroyed.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
310

Faith by i
t

self can not be phys
i
cally t
aken out and of

fered as anob
la
tion. There
fore the word Sraddha must be t
aken to mean ‚wa
ter
™.
W
a
ter is called Sraddha in the S
ruti tex
t
s. ﬁ
Sraddha va
ap
aha
ŠSraddha in
deed is wa
terﬂ (T
ait. S
am. I.
6.8.1). F
ur
ther it is the
Sraddha (faith) which leads to sac
ri
fice which leads to rain.
It is the ot
her four of

fer ings Soma, rain,
 food and seed that are
de
scribed to be the ef

fects of Sraddha. I
t is Sraddha which mod
i
fies it

-
self into t
hese four
. There
fore it must be a
sub
st
ance be
long
ing to the
same cat
e
gory as these four
, be
cause the cause can
not be dif

fer ent
from it
s ef

fect. An ef

fect is only a mod
i
fi
ca
tion of t
he cause. There
fore
it is rea
son
able to in
ter
pret Sraddha to mean wa
ter here.
Alw
VËdm{X{
V MoV²
 Z Bï>
m{XH
$m[aUm§
 àVrVo
Asrut
atv
aditi chet na i
sht
adikarinam
 pratiteh
III.1.6 (
297
)
If it be sai
d tha
t on a
ccount
 of (t
he soul) n
ot being
 stat
ed in th
e
Srut
i (t
he soul does not
 depart env
eloped by wat
er, etc
.) (
we
say)
 not s
o, because it
 is under
stood (f
rom t
he scri
ptur
es) th
at
the Jivas who perform sacr
ifices and other good works (alone
go to he
ave
n).
Asrut
atv
at:
 on account of this not bei
ng st
ated in the S
ruti;
Iti:
 this
;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not;
Isht
adikarinam
:
 in reference to those who perform
sacrif
ices;

Prat
iteh
:
 on account of being understood.
An ob
jec
tion is raised that i
n the Chhandogya Up
anishad (V
.3.3)
there is men
tion of wa
ter only but
 no ref
er
ence to the soul (Jiva). Thi
s
ob
jec
tion can
not st
and. The p
as
sage re
fers to the per
sons per
form
-
ing sac
ri
fices, i.e.
, the per
form
ers of Isht
a (sac
ri
fice) and Purt
a (dig
-
ging t
anks, build
ing tem
ples, etc.) and Dana (char
ity),
 go
ing by the
p
ath of smoke (Dhuma
marga or Dakshinayana Path to t
he world of
moon) Chh. Up. V
.10.3.
T
o those per
sons who have per
formed Ishtis,
 etc., wa
ter is sup
-
plied in the f
orm of ma
te
ri
als used in the Agnihot
ra, the
Darsapurnamasa and other sac
ri
fices, viz.
, sour milk, milk,
 curd, etc.
The ma
te
ri
als like milk, curds, etc.,
 that are of

fered as ob la
tions in
sac
ri
fices as
sume a sub
tle form called A
purva and at
t
ach them
selves
to the sac
ri
ficer
. The Jivas thus go en
vel
oped by wa
ter which is sup
-
plied by t
he ma
te
ri
als that are of

fered as ob la
tions in sac
ri
fices. The
wa
ter form
ing the ob
la
tions as
sumes the sub
tle form of
 Apurva, en
-
vel
op
s the souls and leads them to t
he heaven to re
ceive their re
-
ward.
An
other ob
jec
tion is raised now by the P
urvap
akshin. He says
ﬁthat is the f
ood of the gods. The gods do eat
 itﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.10.4.
)
ﬁHav
ing reached the moon they
 be
come food and then t
he Devas
feed on them t
hereﬂ (Bri. Up. VI
.2.16). I
f they
 are eaten by gods as by
ti
gers, how could they en
joy the f
ruit of t
heir ac
tions? The fol
low
ing
Su
tra gives a suit

able an swer
. The per
form
ers of sac
ri
fices ob
t
ain the
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 1
311

name of ‚Som
araja™
 when they reach Chandraloka. This tech
ni
cal
name ‚Somaraja™
 is ap
plied here to the soul.
^mº§
$ dmZmË_{
dÎdmV²
 VWm {h X
Bhakt
am v
anatmav
ittv
at t
atha hi darsay
ati
III.1.7 (
298
)
But (t
he souls™ bein
g th
e food of t
he gods in
 heaven is us
ed) in a
secondary or metaphorical sense, on account of their n
ot
knowing the
 Self b
ec
ause
 the Sruti d
ec
lares
 like
 that.
Bhakt
am:
 Met
aphorical;
Va
:
 but, or;
Anatma
v
ittv
at:
 on account of
their not knowing the S
elf;
T
atha:
 so;
Hi:
 because;
Darsay
ati:
 (Srut
i)
declares, shows.
ﬁThe soul be
comes the food of godsﬂ has to be un
der
stood in a
met
 a phor i cal
or
sec ond ary
sense
and
not
lit er ally
.
Oth er wise
the
st
ate
ment of scrip
tures such as ﬁHe w
ho is de
sir
ous of heaven must
per
form sac
ri
ficeﬂ is mean
ing
less. If t
he Devas were to eat the souls
why should men then ex

ert them selves to go there and why should
they per
form sac
ri
fices like Jyotistom
a and the rest? Food is the
cause of en
joy
ment. ‚E
at
ing™
 is the re
joic
ing of the gods with t
he per
-
form
ers of sac
ri
fices. The sac
ri
fices are ob
ject
s of en
joy
ment to t
he
gods just as wives, chil
dren and cat
tle are to men.
 It is not ac
tual eat
-
ing like the chew
ing and swal
low
ing of sweet
meat
s. The gods do not
eat in the or
di
nary way
. The scrip
ture says ﬁThe gods do not eat or
drink. They are sat
is
fied by see
ing the nec
t
ar
.ﬂ
Those who per
form sac
ri
fices re
joice like ser
vant
s of a king, al
-
though they
 are sub
or
di
nate to t
he gods. They giv
e en
joy
ment to t
he
gods and re
joice with them.
 Those who do not know the Self are ob
-
ject
s of en
joy
ment for t
he gods. This is known from text
s like ﬁNow
, if a
man wor
ship
s an
other de
ity
, think
ing the de
ity i
s one and he is an
-
other
, he does not know
. He is like a beast for the Dev
asﬂ (Bri. Up.
I.4.
10). That means he in t
his life pro
pi
ti
ates the gods by means of ob
-
la
tions and other works, serves them like a beast and does so in the
other world also, de
pend
ing on them like a beast and en
joys the f
ruit
s
of his works as as
signed by them.
 They (the per
form
ers of such sac
ri
-
fices) be
come ser
vice
able com
p
an
ions to the gods. They
 en
joy the
com
p
an
ion
ship of the gods. S
o they are said to be t
he food of t
he
gods in the fig
u
ra
tive or met

a phor
i
cal sense. They con
trib
ute to t
he
en
joy
ment of t
he gods by their pres
ence and ser
vice in that
 world.
There
fore it is quit
e clear that the soul goes en
vel
oped with the sub
tle
es
sence of el
e
ment
s when it goes to other spheres for en
joy
ing the
fruit
s of his good deeds. He en
joys in the Chandraloka and re
turns to
the earth at t
he end of his store of merit
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
312

Krit
aty
ay
adhikaranam
: T
opic 2 (Sutras 8-1
1)
The souls descending from heaven have a remnant
 of Karm
a
which determines t
heir birth
H¥$Vm
Ë``
o@Zwe`
dmZ
² Ñï>ñ_¥{Vä
`m_² `
WoV_Zod
Krit
aty
ay
e™nusay
av
an drisht
asmritib
hy
am
 y
athet
amanev
am
cha
III.1.8 (
299
)
On the
 ex
hau
stio
n of go
od
 work
 the
 sou
l re
turns
 to the
 ea
rth
with a re
main
de
r of the
 Karma
s, as
 can b
e u
nde
rstoo
d fro
m
dire
ct sta
tem
en
t in Sru
ti and
 Smriti, b
y the
 sam
e ro
ute
through which he
 asce
nde
d afte
r de
ath and diffe
rently too
.
Krit
a:
 of what is done, of
 the Karma;
 Aty
ay
e:
 at the end,
 at the
exhaustion;

Anusay
av
an:
 with a remainder of t
he Karma;
Dris
ht
asmr
itibh
y
am:
 as can be understood from direct st
atement in
Sruti
 and
 Smriti
;
Y
atha it
am:
 by the way he went
;
Anev
am:
dif
ferently
;
Cha:
 and.
A
 fresh topic is dis
cussed here. This Adhikarana teaches the
mode of re
turn from heaven.
 The ques
tion is raised whether the
souls, af

ter hav ing en
joyed the f
ruit
s of all their works, re
turn to the
earth with any rem
nant of K
arma (Karmasesha) or not. The
Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says that
 there is no rem
nant of
Karma. Why? O
n ac
count of the spec
i
fi
ca
tion ﬁ
Y
avat samp
at
am
ﬂ. The
Sruti says ﬁHav
ing dwelt there t
ill their work is ex
hausted, they
 re
turn
again the way t
hey went byﬂ (Chh. Up.
 V
.10.5). T
his in
di
cates that all
their Karma is com
pletely
 ex
hausted there and there is noth
ing lef
t.
This view is wrong. The right v
iew is that the souls re
turn to the
earth by the f
orce of some unenjoyed rem
nant or Anusaya of
 Karma.
When the to
t
al
ity of
 works which helped the souls to go to the
Chandraloka for en
joy
ment of t
he fruit
s of good deeds is ex
hausted,
then the body
 made up of wa
ter which had orig
i
nated there for t
he
sake of en
joy
ment is dis
solv
ed by the f
ire of sor
row spring
ing from the
thought t
hat the en
joy
ment co
mes to an end, just as hail
stones melt
by con
t
act with the ray
s of the sun, just as ghee mel
t
s by con
t
act with
the fire.
 Then the souls come down with a re
main
der yet lef
t.
This is proved by Srut
i and Smriti
 as well. The Sruti
 says ﬁThose
whose con
duct, dur
ing the pre
vi
ous life, has been good, pres
ently ob
-
t
ain good birth, such as the birth of
 a Brah
min, a Kshat
riya or a V
aisya;
those whose con
duct has been bad pres
ently ob
t
ain some evil birt
h
such as that of a dog or a pigﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.10.7).
The Smriti
 says ﬁThe mem
bers of the dif

fer ent castes and of the
dif

fer ent or
ders of life who are en
gaged in the works pre
scrib
ed for
them, af

ter leav ing this world and en
joy
ing the fruit
s of their works in
the other world, are born again ow
ing to the unenjoy
ed por
tion of t
heir
re
wards, in dis
tin
guished castes and fam
i
lies, with spe
cial beauty
,
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 1
313

lon gev it
y
,
knowl edge,
con duct,
prop erty
,
com fort
and
in tel li genceﬂ.
Hence the soul is born with re
sid
ual Karma.
What is such Anusaya (re
sid
ual work) of Karma which leads to
higher or lower birth? Of what kind is that
 re
main
der? Some say that
thereby we have t
o un
der
st
and a re
main
der of the works which had
been per
formed in the pre
vi
ous birth to ob
t
ain heaven and whose
fruit
s have for the greater p
art been en
joyed. That
 res
i
due might be
com
p
ared to the re
main
der of oil which sticks to the in
side of a ves
sel
pre
vi
ously fill
ed with oil even af

ter it has been emp tied or to a court
ier
of a king who loses his Dur
bar robe and there
fore co
mes out with his
shoes and um
brella alone. These anal
o
gies are ob
vi
ously wrong, be
-
cause when a vir
tu
ous deed leads the soul to heaven,
 we can
not as
-
sume that a por
tion of it
 brings him down to the earth.
 This would
con
tra
dict the tex
t which de
clares clearly that heaven al
one is the fruit
of
mer i to ri ous
act
s
and
no
res i due
con tin ues
to
ex ist.
More over
the
scrip tural
p
as sage
dis tin guishes
re main ders
of
a
dif

fer ent kind, v
iz., ‚t
hose whose con
duct has been good; those
whose con
duct has been bad™. The lat

ter can not be a por
tion of t
he
vir
tu
ous deed which leads the soul to the heaven.
 There
fore the
Anusaya is the res
i
due or rem
nant of some ot
her store of Kar
mas
bear
ing fruit.
 Af

ter the fruits of the mer
i
to
ri
ous act
s have com
pletely
been en
joyed in heav
en, the re
main
ing other set of works (good and
bad) whose fruit
s are to be en
joyed in t
his world forms the Anusaya
with which the souls come to the eart
h.
An
other view is that
 af

ter death the en tire store of K
ar
mas about
to bear fruit f
ruc
ti
fies. There
fore the souls come to the eart
h with
out
any Anusaya or res
i
due of Karma.
 This is wrong. This is un
ten
a
ble.
Some of t
hose Kar
mas can be en
joyed only
 in one kind of birth and
some in an
other
. They can
not com
bine in one birth. I
t can
not be said
that one por
tion ceases to bear fruit.
 There is no such ces
sa
tion save
by Prayaschit
t
a or ex
pi
a
tion. I
f all Kar
mas bear fruit af

ter death, there
will be no cause for re
birth af

ter life in heaven or hell or in an
i
mal bod
-
ies, be
cause in these there is no means of vir
tue or vice. M
ore
over
some cap
i
t
al sins like the kill
ing of a Brah
min in
volve m
any births.
How then can the to
t
al
ity of
 Kar
mas lead to one birth alone? T
he
scrip
ture is the sole source of vir
tue and vice.
 Sim
i
larly the K
ariri Ishti,
a sac
ri
fice of

fered by those who are de sir
ous of rain, causes rain.
There
fore you can
not as
cribe it to the f
ruc
tifi
ca
tion of p
ast act
s af

terdeath. There
fore the vi
ew that death m
an
i
fest
s all ac
tions, that
 all
event
s are due to the fruc
tifi
ca
tion of com
plete store of K
ar
mas af

terdeath is en
tirely i
n
cor
rect and base
less.
The Purvap
akshin or the ob
jec
tor ar
gues that just as a lamp
shows all ob
ject
s, so also death ex
haust
s all Kar
mas. This anal
ogy is
not cor
rect. Be
cause a lamp, al
though equally
 dis
t
ant from a big and a
very small ob
ject, may
 man
i
fest only
 the big one and not t
he small ob
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
314

ject. So deat
h ex
cites the op
er
a
tion of t
he stron
ger ac
tions only
, not
the weaker ones, al
though there is equal op
por
tu
nity f
or both set
s of
works for fruc
tifi
ca
tion. There
fore the vi
ew that all ac
tions are man
i
-
fested by deat
h can
not be up
held, be
cause it is con
tra
dicted by Srut
i,
Smriti and rea
son.
Y
ou need not be afraid t
hat if any
 Kar
mas are lef
t in store there
will be no sal
va
tion, be
cause knowl
edge of Self
 will an
ni
hi
late all K
ar
-
mas. There
fore it is an es
t
ab
lished con
clu
sion that the souls de
scend
to the earth f
rom heaven with a re
main
der of works (Anusaya).
By what way
 does it de
scend? They re
turn by the same way
 that
they went by
, but wit
h some dif

fer ence. From the ex

pres sion ﬁas they
cameﬂ and from the fact
 of ‚ether and smoke™
 it is con
cluded that they
de
scend by the way they
 went to the heav
en (Chh. Up. V
.10.5). T
hat
there is some dif

fer ence too is known from night, et
c., not be
ing men
-
tioned and from t
he cloud, etc.,
 be
ing added (Chh. Up. V
.10.6). He de
-
s
cends by the route by which he went t
o a cer
t
ain st
age and then by a
dif

fer ent route. T
he word ‚Ramaniyacharana™
 means works whic
h are
Ramaniya or good. ‚K
apuyacharana™
 means evil act
s. The word
‚Y
avat samp
at
am™
 does not mean the ex

haus tion of all
 Kar
mas, but
the ex
haus
tion of t
he works that took the soul to heav
en and which is
ex
hausted in heaven by
 en
joy
ment.
MaUm{X{V MoÞm
onbjUmW}{VH$mîUm
Charanaditi chet na u
p
alakshanartheti karsh
najini
h
III.1.9 (
300
)
If it
 be objected tha
t on a
ccount
 of con
duct (
the ass
umpti
on of
the
 rem
nant o
f Karma
, Anu
saya
 is no
t ne
ce
ssa
ry for re
birth o
n
earth), (
we say) not so (because
 the word ‚conduct™ is used) to
signify indire
ctly (the re
mainde
r). So Karshnajini think
s.
Charanat:
 on account of conduct;
Iti:
 thus, so;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not so;
Up
alakshanartha:
 to signify
 secondarily
, indirectly
, meant t
o imply or
connote;
Iti:
 thus;
Karshnajinih:
 Karshnajini thinks, holds,
 says.
An ob
jec
tion is raised with ref
er
ence to the re
sid
ual Karma,
Anusaya, st
ated in the pre
ced
ing Su
tra and is re
futed.
The Purvap
akshin or the ob
jec
tor says in the t
ext cit
ed (Chh.
Up. V
.10.7.
) ﬁthose whose con
duct has been goodﬂ etc., get a good
birth.
The qual
ity of
 the new birth de
pends on ‚Charana™
 or con
duct,
not on Anusaya or re
main
der of work. ‚Charana™
 and ‚Anusaya™
 are
dif

fer ent things be
cause ‚Charana™
 is the same as Charitra, Achara,
SilaŠall of
 which mean con
duct, while Anusay
a means re
main
der of
work.
Scrip
ture also says that ac
tion and con
duct are dif

fer ent things
ﬁAc
cord
ing as he act
s and ac
cord
ing as he con
duct
s him
self so will he
beﬂ
 (Bri
. Up. IV
.4.5)
.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 1
315

The ob
jec
tion is with
out force. This S
u
tra re
futes this and says
that t
he term ‚con
duct™
 is meant to de
note the re
main
der of the works
(good Kar
mas) af

ter en joy
ment in the
other world. Con
duct st
ands for
Karma which de
pends on good con
duct. This is the opin
ion of the
sage Karshnajini. This is sec
ond
ary im
pli
ca
tion of t
he term.
AmZW©
−`{_{
V MoÞ VX
nojËdmV²
Anarthaky
amiti ch
et na t
adapekshatv
at
III
.1.10 (301)
If it be sai
d (by suc
h in
terpr
etati
on of t
he word ‚
conduct
™
Šgood con
duct w
ould become) pur
poseless, (
we say)
 not s
o,
on accoun
t of
 (Kar
ma) bein
g dependent on t
hat
 (good con
duct)
.
Anarthaky
am:
 purposeless, useless, irrelevancy;
Iti:
 thus, as;
Chet:
if;
Na:
 not so;
Ta
t
:
 that (conduct);
Apekshatv
at:
 on account of
dependence on that.
A
 fur
ther ob
jec
tion with ref

er ence to the word ‚CharanaŠcon
-
duct™
 is raised and re
futed in t
his Su
tra.
The Purvap
akshin or the ob
jec
tor says that m
ay be, but
 why
should we give up that
 mean
ing which the word ‚Charana™
 di
rectly
con
veys vi
z., ‚con
duct™
 and t
ake up the merely con
no
t
a
tive m
ean
ing
‚res
i
due of Karma™.
 Then good con
duct would be pur
pose
less in
man™
s life, as it
 has no re
sult of it
s own, not be
ing a cause of the qual
-
ity of
 new birth. Con
duct which is the di
rect mean
ing of the word may
have for it
s fruit ei
ther a good or an evil birt
h ac
cord
ing as it is good or
bad. Some f
ruit will have t
o be al
lowed to it in any
 case for oth
er
wise it
would be pur
pose
less.
This Su
tra re
futes this.
 The Su
tra de
nies this view on the ground
that only
 those who are of good con
duct are en
ti
tled to per
form V
e
dic
sac
ri
fices. This ob
jec
tion is with
out force on ac
count of the de
pend
-
ence on it. It
 can
not st
and. The Smrit
i says, ﬁHim who is de
void of
good con
duct the V
edas do not pu
rify
.ﬂ He, whose con
duct is not
good, does not at
t
ain re
li
gious merit by mere per
for
mance of sac
ri
-
fices. Con
duct en
hances the fruit of K
arma (Atisaya).
 Good con
duct
is an aid or aux
il
iary to K
arma. There
fore it has a pur
pose. When the
sac
ri
fice be
gins to pro
duce it
s fruit, t
he con
duct which has ref
er
ence
to the sac
ri
fice will orig
i
nate in the f
ruit some ad
di
tion. I
t is, there
fore,
the view of
 Karshnajini that
 the res
i
due of works only which is the in
di
-
rect mean
ing of the t
erm ‚Charana™
 or con
duct and not just con
duct is
the cause of the new birth.
 If a man is able t
o run by means of his feet
he will cer
t
ainly not
 creep on his knees. If a man can
not run on his
legs, can he run on his knees?
gwH¥$V
XwîH¥$Vo E
do{V V
w ~mX
[a–
Sukrit
adushkrite ev
eti tu baadarih
III.1.1
1 (3
02)
But con
duct (
Char
ana)
 means mer
ely good an
d evil wor
ks;
thus th
e sage B
aadari thi
nks.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
316

Sukrit
a:
 good or righteous deeds;
Dushkrite:
 (and) bad or
unrighteous deeds;
Eva:
 only
, merely;
 Iti:
 thus;
Tu
:
 but;
Baadarih:
(Sage) Baadari.
Fur
ther dis
cus
sion on the mean
ing of the word ‚Charana™
 is
made here. The Su
tra says that t
here is no dif

fer ence be
tween con
-
duct and Karma. A
c
cord
ing to the sage Baadari t
he phrases
‚Ramaniyacharana™
 and ‚Kapuyacharana™
 mean good and evil works.
Charana means the same as Anusthana or Karma (work). The
root ‚Char
™
 (to walk, to con
duct one
self) is used in the gen
eral sense
of act
ing. Peo
ple say in com
mon p
ar
lance of a man who does sac
ri
-
fices. ﬁThat man walks in righ
teous
ness.ﬂ The term Achara also de
-
notes only a kind of re
li
gious duty
. A
 sac
ri
fice is a mer
i
to
ri
ous act
(Dharma). Achara is also Dharma. When Karma and Charana are
sep
a
rately de
scribed it is as when you speak of Brah
mins and
Parivrajakas, i.
e., S
annyasis. Though Charana and Karma are one,
yet t
hey are spo
ken of some
times as dif

fer ent on the max
im of
ﬁKuru-Pandavas.ﬂ Though t
he Pandavas were also Kurus, yet
 in the
phrase Kurus and Pandavas the word Kuru is used in a nar
rower
sense. Thus ‚men of good con
duct or char
ac
ter
™
 means those whose
ac
tions are praise
wor
thy;
 ‚men of ev
il con
duct or evil Charana™
 are
those whose ac
tions are to be cen
sured. Con
duct is used in the gen
-
eral sense of ac
tion. A
s Charana is Karma only
, it is es
t
a
b
lished,
there
fore, that
 those who go to heaven hav
e re
main
der of Karma
(Anusaya) as the cause of a new birth on earth.
Eva
Šonly: T
he force of this word in this S
u
tra is to in
di
cate that
this is the opin
ion of the au
thor of the S
utras.
Tu
Š‚but™
 is used to in
di
cate spe
ci
al
ity
, one™
s own con
clu
sion
and to add em
pha
sis.
Anisht
adikary
adhikaranam
: T
opic 3 (Sutras 12-21)
The fate af
ter death of t
hose souls whose deeds
 do not
entitle t
hem t
o p
ass up to Chandraloka
A{Zï>m{XH$m[aUm
Anisht
adikarinam
api cha srut
am
III
.1.12 (303)
The Sru
ti de
clare
s that the
 non-
pe
rforme
rs of s
acrifi
ce
s, e
tc.,
also (
go to t
he wor
ld of m
oon).
Anisht
adikarinam
:
 of those who do not perform sacrifices etc.
;
Api:
even;
Cha:
 also;
Srut
am:
 is declared by the Sruti
.
The move
ment of per
sons do
ing evil deeds is now de
scribed.
This Su
tra is that of
 Purvap
akshin.
It has been said that
 those who do sac
ri
fices, etc.,
 go to the
Chandraloka. The ques
tion now arises whether those per
sons also
who do not per
form sac
ri
fices go to the sphere of moon or not
.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 1
317

The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent main
t
ains that ev
en they go
to heaven t
hough they do not
 en
joy any
thing there like t
hose who per
-
form sac
ri
fices, be
cause they too are in need of
 the fif
th ob
la
tion for a
new birth. More
over the Srut
i de
clares: ﬁAll who de
p
art from thi
s world
go to the sphere of moonﬂ (Kau.
 Up. I.2).
 The word ‚all™
 shows that it is
a
uni ver sal
prop o si tion
with out
any
qual i fi ca ti
ons.
Since
all
who
per
-
ish must go to the world of
 moon, it f
ol
lows that the sin
ners also go
there.
Siddhantin:
 The sin
ners do not go to the sphere of moon.
 They
go to Y
amaloka or the world of pun
ish
ment. Thi
s is said in the fol
low
-
ing Su
tra.
g§`_
Zo Ëd
Zw^y`oV
aofm_
mam
ohmd
amohm
¡ VX²>J
{VXe
©ZmV
Samy
amane tv
anubhuy
et
areshamarohav
arohau
 t
adgatidarsanat
III
.1.13 (304)
Bu
t of o
the
rs, (i.e
., thos
e w
ho ha
ve
 not p
erfo
rme
d sa
crific
es
,
etc.) the ascent is to t
he abode
 of Yama and aft
er having
exper
ien
ced
 (t
he r
esu
lt
s o
f t
hei
r ev
il
 deeds
) t
hey
 co
me d
ow
n t
o
the earth; as such a course is declared b
y the Sruti
.
Samy
amane:
 in the abode of Y
ama;
Tu
:
 but;
Anubhuy
a:
 having
experienced;
It
aresham:
 of others (of those who do not perf
orm
sacrif
ices);

Aroha-ava rohau:
 the ascent and descent;
Ta
t
:
 of them;
Gati:
 (about their) courses;
Darsanat:
 as can be understood from the
Sruti
.
De
scrip
tion of t
he move
ment of per
sons who have done evil
deeds is con
tin
ued. This Su
tra re
futes the v
iew of the pre
vi
ous Su
tra.
This is the Siddhant
a Su
tra.
Sin
ners suf

fer in Yamaloka and re
turn to thi
s earth. Y
ama says
to Nachiket
as: ‚The way to t
he here
af

ter never rises be fore an ig
no
-
rant per
son who is de
luded by wealth.
 This is the worldŠhe
thinksŠthere is no other; t
hus he falls again and again un
der my
sway™
 (Katha Up. I
.2.6).
Tu

(but), dis
cards the Purvap
aksha. It is not t
rue that all per
sons
go to Chandraloka. The as
cent to the sphere of m
oon or Chandraloka
is only for t
he en
joy
ment of t
he fruit
s of good works. It is nei
ther with
-
out a spe
cial pur
pose nor for the mere pur
pose of sub
se
quent de
-
scent. Hence those who have done evil ac
tions do not go there.
Those who per
form sac
ri
fices rise to the Chandraloka not any ot
her
per sons.
Aroha-avarohau:
 As
cent and de
scent, i.e.
, com
ing to worldly
ex
is
tence (as
cent) and go
ing to still
 nether re
gions (de
scent). This is
the
in ter pre t
a tion
of
Sri
Madhvacharya.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
318

Smaranti
 cha
III
.1.14 (305)
T
he Smriti
s also declare thus.
Smaranti
:
 the Sruti
s declare;
Cha:
 also.
De
scrip
tion of t
he jour
ney of per
sons do
ing evil deeds is con
tin
-
ued in the Su
tra.
The Smriti
s also de
clare the same fate of
 the sin
ners. The
Smritis also de
clare that the ev
il do
ers come within the clutches of
Y
ama. Manu,
 V
yasa and oth
ers say that those who do evi
l deeds go
to hell and suf

fer there. In the Bhagav
at
a it is said ﬁThe sin
ners are
quickly car
ried to the abode of
 Y
ama by the p
ath of sin
ners, on which
they t
ravel with great p
ains, con
s
t
antly ris
ing and fall
ing, tired and
swoon
ing.ﬂ Manu and V
yasa de
clare that in the Chit
isamyamana ev
il
deeds are re
quited un
der the rule of Y
ama.
Api cha sapt
a
III
.1.15 (306)
Mor
eov
er t
her
e ar
e sev
en (
hel
ls
).
Api cha:
 also, moreover;
Sapt
a:
 the seven (hells).
Par
tic
u
lars of the abode of Y
ama are given. S
mriti men
tions
seven hells which serve as places of tor
ture for the ev
il do
ers. The
tem
po
rary hells are Raurava, Maharaurava,
 V
ahni, V
ait
arani and
Kumbhika. The t
wo eter
nal hells are T
amisra (dark
ness) and
Andhat
amisra (blind
ing dark
ness).
VÌm{n M VX
²ì`mnma
mX{damo
T
atrapi cha t
adv
y
ap
arat av
irodhah
III
.1.16 (307)
And on account of his (Yam
a™s) control even there (in those
hells) is no
 contradiction.
T
atra:
 there (in those hells);
Api:
 also, even;

Cha:
 and;
T
adv
y
ap
arat:
on account of his (Y
ama™
s) control;
A
v
irodhah:
 no contradiction.
The same topic con
tin
ues in this Su
tra. The Purv
ap
akshin or the
ob
jec
tor says: Ac
cord
ing to the S
ruti the ev
il
do
ers un
dergo pun
ish
-
ment from t
he hands of Y
ama. How is this pos
si
ble in the seven hell
s
called Raurava, etc.,
 which are su
per
in
tended by Chit
ragupt
a and
oth
ers? This Su
tra re
futes the ob
jec
tion.
There is no con
tra
dic
tion as the same Y
ama is the chief ruler in
those seven hells also. Chitragupt
a and oth
ers are only su
per
in
ten
-
dent
s and lieu
ten
ant
s em
ployed by Y
ama. They
 are all un
der Y
ama™
s
gov
ern
ment or su
zer
ainty
. Chitragupt
a and oth
ers are di
rected by
Y
ama.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 1
319

{dÚmH$
_©U
mo[a{
V Vw à
H¥$
V
idy
akarmanori
ti tu prakrit
atv
at
III
.1.17 (308)
Bu
t (the
 refe
ren
ce
 is to
 the
 two ro
ads
) of k
nowl
ed
ge
 and
 work
,
thos
e two being
 under dis
cussion
.
V
idy
akarmanoh:
 of knowledge and work;
 Iti:
 thus;
Tu
:
 but, only
;
Prakrit
atv
at:
 on account of these being the subject u
nder discussion.
But t
he sin
ners never go to heaven be
cause the topic re
lat
ing to
the two p
aths in the Chhandogya Up
anishad is con
fined to men o
f
knowl
edge and men of work. It
 has no ref
er
ence to evil-do
ers. The dif

-
fer
ent jour
neys of the de
p
arted souls to the other world t
hrough the
two roads or pat
hs de
scribed in the Panchagnividy
a of Chhandogya
Up
anishad are the re
sult
s of knowl
edge (med
i
t
a
tion) and re
li
gious
sac
ri
fices ac
cord
ing as they were prac
tised in lif
e; be
cause these two
are the sub
ject
s un
der dis
cus
sion.
The Sruti says t
hat those who do not go by
 means of V
idya
along the p
ath of Devay
ana to Brahmaloka or by m
eans of Karma
along the p
ath of P
itriyana t
o Chandraloka are born of
ten in low bod
-
ies and die of

ten. If you say t
hat evil
-do
ers also go to Chandraloka
that world will get
 overfull.
 But y
ou may re
ply that
 there will be souls
go
ing out from t
here to the earth.
 But t
hen the Sruti
 text
 clearly says
that t
he evil-do
ers do not go there.
The evil-do
ers go to the third place and not t
o heaven. The S
ruti
p
as
sage says ﬁNow those who go along nei
ther of these ways be
-
come those small crea
tures con
tin
u
ally re
turn
ing of whom it m
ay be
said ‚Live and die™.
 Theirs is a third place. There
fore the world never
be
comes fullﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.10.8).
The word ‚but™
 in the Su
tra re
futes a doubt t
hat arises from a tex
t
from Kaushit
aki Upani
shad, ‚That all
 de
p
arted go to the
Chandraloka™. The word ‚all™
 has to be t
aken as re
fer
ring only to t
hose
who are qual
i
fied, who hav
e per
formed good deeds. All
 el
i
gi
ble souls
only go to Chandraloka. I
t does not in
clude evil do
ers or sin
ners.
The word ‚but™
 set
s aside the view pro
pounded by the ob
jec
tor
. If

the sin
ners do not go to the world of m
oon or Chandraloka, then no
new body can be pro
duced in their case: be
cause there is no fif
th ob
-
la
tion pos
si
ble in their case and the fi
f
th ob
la
tion de
pends on one™
s
go
ing to the sphere of mo
on. There
fore all must go t
o the
Chandraloka in or
der to get a new body
. This ob
jec
tion is an
swered
by the nex
t Su
tra.
Z V¥Vr
`o VW
monbãYo–
Na tritiy
e t
athop
alabdheh
III
.1.18 (309)
Not in (th
e case
 of) a thi
rd place, as it is th
us dec
lared in the
scrip
ture
s.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
320

Na:
 not;
T
ritiye:
 in the third;

T
atha:
 so thus;
Up
alabdheh:
 it being
perceived or seen to be.
The fif
th ob
la
tion is not nec
es
sary in the case of those who go to
the third place, be
cause it is thus de
clared in the scrip
tures.
The rule about the f
ive ob
la
tions does not ap
ply in t
he case of
evil-do
ers or sin
ners be
cause they are born with
out the ob
la
tions.
The Sruti says,
 ﬁLive and die. That
 is the third place.ﬂ That
 is to say
these small crea
tures (flies, worms, etc.
,) are con
tin
u
ally be
ing born
and are dy
ing. The sin
ners are called small crea
tures be
cause they
as
sume the bod
ies of in
sect
s, gnat
s etc. Their place is called the t
hird
place, be
cause it is nei
ther the Brahmal
oka nor the Chandraloka.
Hence the heaven world never be
comes full, be
cause these sin
ners
never go there. More
over
, in the p
as
sage, ﬁIn the f
if
th ob
la
tion wa
ter is
called manﬂ the wa
ter be
comes the body of a m
an only
, not of
 an in
-
sect or moth etc. The word ‚man™
 ap
plies to the hu
man spe
cies only
.
ñ_`©V
o@{n M bm
Smary
ate™pi cha l
oke
III
.1.19 (310)
And
 (mo
reo
ve
r the
) Smriti
s hav
e re
cord
ed
 also
 (that) i
n this
world
 (the
re h
ad b
ee
n cas
es
 of b
irth witho
ut the
 cou
rse
 of fiv
e
oblat
ions)
.
Smary
ate:
 is stated in Smritis;
Api:
 also;
Cha:
 and;
Loke:
 in the
world.
The ar
gu
ment com
menced in Su
tra 17 to re
fute t
he ob
jec
tions
raised in Su
tra 12, is con
tin
ued.
There are, more
over
, tra
di
tions, ap
art from the V
edas that cer
-
t
ain per
sons like Drona, Dhrishtady
umna, Sit
a, Draup
adi and oth
ers
were not born in the or
di
nary way from m
other
™
s womb. In their cases
there was want
ing the fif
th ob
la
tion which is made to t
he woman. In
the case of Dhrisht
adyumna and oth
ers, even two of t
he ob
la
tions,
viz.,
 the one of

fered into woman and the one of

fered into man, were
ab
sent. Drona had no mother
. Dhrisht
adyumna had nei
ther fa
ther nor
mother
. Hence in many ot
her cases also, pro
cre
ation or birth may
 be
sup
posed to t
ake place in
de
pend
ently of
 ob
la
tions. The f
e
male crane
con
ceives with
out a male.
The five ob
la
tions are not ab
so
lutely
 nec
es
sary for a fu
ture birth.
The rule about the f
ive ob
la
tions is not uni
ver
sal. It ap
plies only to
those who do sac
ri
fices. There
fore the sin
ners need not go to
heaven.
The five ob
la
tions have not
h
ing to do with t
he third way
, i.e.
, die
and be born in low bod
ies. They re
fer only t
o hu
man births in the case
of souls who as
cend and then de
scend. In the case of oth
ers em
bodi
-
ment may
 t
ake place in a man
ner other than through wombs.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 1
321

By t
he p
ar
ti
cle ‚Cha™
 (and) the Sutrakara shows that the ob
ser
-
va
tion of t
he world is also one cor
rob
o
rated by Sm
riti.
Darsanaccha
III.1.20
 (31
1)
Also on a
ccount
 of observ
ati
on.
Darsanat:
 on account of observation;
 Cha:
 also, and.
The ar
gu
ment com
menced in Su
tra 17 is con
tin
ued.
It is also ob
served that of
 the four classes of or
ganic be
ings,
namely
vi vi
p
 a rous
an i mals,
ovip
 a rous
an i mals,
an i mals
spring ing
from heat and moi
s
ture and be
ings spring
ing from germs
(plant
s)Šthe last two classes are pro
duced with
out sex
ual in
ter
-
course, so that in their case the num
ber of ob
la
tions is of no con
se
-
quence.
The Purvap
akshin or the ob
jec
tor says, ﬁThe Srut
i p
as
sage
speaks only of three classes of be
ings: That which springs from an
egg (Andaja), that
 which springs from a liv
ing be
ing (Jivaja) and that
which springs from a germ (Udbhijja)ﬂ (Chh. Up. VI.3.
1). How then
can it be main
t
ained that t
here are four classes? The fol
low
ing Su
tra
gives a re
ply to hi
s ob
jec
tion.
V¥Vr`eã
XmdamoY
– g§emoH
T
ritiy
asabdav
arodhah samso
kajasy
a
III
.1.21 (312)
The third
 term
 (i.e
. pla
nt life
) incl
ud
es
 that whi
ch sp
rings fro
m
heat and moisture.
T
ritiy
a sabda:
 the third t
erm;
A
v
arodhah:
 inclusion;
Samsokaj
asy
a:
of that
 which springs from heat and moisture.
The two classes spring from earth or wa
ter
, from some
thing st
a
-
ble. They bot
h ger
mi
nate: one f
rom the earth and the ot
her from wa
-
ter
. It
 makes no dif

fer ence be
cause that which springs from mois
ture
is in
cluded in the place of plant
 life (Udbhijja). T
here is sim
i
lar
ity be
-
tween Svedaj
a and Udbhijja. Hence there is no con
tra
dic
tion. Those
which are born of sweat are called Svedaja. S
vedaja and Udbhijja are
not born of wombs. The word Udbhijja li
t
er
ally means born by burst
ing
through. The plant
s burst through the earth. T
he sweatborn burst
through the wa
ter
. Thus the or
i
gin of both is sim
i
lar
, for both are born
by burst
ing through.
Thus the evil-do
ers do not go to heaven.
 Only those who per
-
form sac
ri
fices go to heaven.
 This is the set
tled con
clu
sion.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
322

Sabhav
y
ap
atty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 4
The soul on it
s descent from t
he Chandraloka does not become
identi
fied with et
her
, etc.,
 but att
ains a similarit
y of nature
VËgm^mì`mn{Î
ménnÎmo
T
at
sabhav
y
ap
attirup
ap
atteh
III
.1.22 (313)
(The soul when com
ing down from the sphere of moon) at

tains
sim
i
lar
ity of
 na
ture with them
, (i.e.
, with et
her
, air
, etc.,
) as this only is
pos si ble.
T
at
sabhav
y
ap
attih:
 att
ainment of a sim
ilarity
 of nature with t
hem;
Up
ap
atteh:
 being reasonable.
The way of de
scent of the in
di
vid
ual soul from the sphere of t
he
moon is now dis
cussed. The Sruti de
clares, ﬁThey re
turn again the
way they went
, to t
he ether
, from t
he ether to the ai
r
. Then the sac
ri
-
ficer hav
ing be
come air be
comes smoke, hav
ing be
come smoke he
be
comes mist, hav
ing be
come mist, he be
comes a cloud, hav
ing be
-
come a cloud he rains downﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.10.5 &
 6).
Now a ques
tion arises whether the soul ac
tu
ally be
comes iden
-
ti
cal with ether
, etc.,
 or sim
ply re
sem
bles them.
This Su
tra says that t
he souls do not at
t
ain iden
tity
 with them,
be
cause it is im
pos
si
ble. It
 is not pos
si
ble that one t
hing should be
-
come an
other in the lit

eral sense of the word. One sub st
ance can
not
be
come an
other
. If
 the souls be
come iden
ti
cal with ether
, they
 could
no lon
ger de
scend through air
. The souls be
come only like ether
, air
,
etc. They as
sume a sub
tle form li
ke ether
, come un
der the in
flu
ence
or power of air and get mixed wit
h or con
nected with smoke etc. The
at
t
ain
ing to the st
ate of be
ing smoke, etc.,
 is but mov
ing along with
them when they
 are in mo
tion, stop
ping while they st
op, en
ter
ing into
them and be
com
ing as light as they
 are. There
fore the p
as
sage
means that th
e souls be
come sim
i
lar to Akasa, air
, etc.,
 but not iden
ti
-
cal.
Natichiradhi
karanam: T
opic 5
It t
akes only a short time f
or the descent of the soul
Zm{V{MaoU {deof
Natichirena v
iseshat
III
.1.23 (314)
(T
he soul passe
s through
 the stages of its descent) in a not very
long time; on account of
 the special statement.
Na:
 not;
Atichirena:
in a very long t
ime;
V
iseshat:
 because of
special st
atement of
 Sruti.
The dis
cus
sion on the soul™
s way of de
scent is con
tin
ued. Next
arises the ques
tion, does the soul i
n it
s de
scent through ether down to
rain, st
ay at each st
age for a very long t
ime, or p
asses through it
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 1
323

quickly? The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says: ‚There be
ing noth
-
ing to de
fine the t
ime of his st
ay
, it re
mains in
def
i
nitely
 long at each
st
age.™
 This view is set aside by t
his Su
tra. This Su
tra says that t
he
soul p
asses through them quickly
. This is in
ferred from the cir
cum
-
st
ance of the tex
t mak
ing a spe
cial st
ate
ment.
The Sruti says,
 ‚Hav
ing be
come a cloud he rains down. Then he
is born as rice and corn, herbs and trees, ses
amum and beans. From
thence the es
cape is be
set with many
 dif

fi cul
ties. For who
ever the
per
sons may be that eat
 the food,
 and be
get of
f
spring, he hence
forth
be
comes like unto them™
 (Chh. Up. V
.10.5).
The soul™
s jour
ney
, through the st
ages of the ether
, the air
, the
vapour or smoke, the mist,
 the cloud and the rain, t
akes a shorter time
than his p
ass
ing through the st
ages of corn, se
men, foe
tus, which
t
akes a much lon
ger time or hard suf

fer ing, as
there is the spe
cial
st
ate
ment in Srut
i, that
 af

ter its en
trance into a corn the es
cape is be
-
set with much greater dif

fi culty and p
ain.
The Sruti says ﬁThe souls en
ter into riceﬂ and adds ﬁfrom thence
the es
cape is be
set with more dif

fi culty and p
ain.ﬂ There is a hint here
that t
he es
cape from the pre
vi
ous st
ates or ear
lier st
ages is easy and
pleas
ant and at
t
ained quickly
.
ﬁHe who has be
gun to de
scend will en
ter the mot
her
™
s body
(womb) be
fore a year p
asses since s
t
art
ing, though wan
der
ing
through dif

fer ent placesﬂ (Naradiya Purana).
Any
adhisthit
adhikaranam
: T
opic 6 (Sutras 24-27)
When the souls enter into plant
s, etc., t
hey only cling to them
and do not them
selves become those species
AÝ`m{Y
{îR
>Vof
w ny
d©dX{
^bmnmV²
Any
adhishthiteshu purvav
adabhilap
at
III
.1.24 (315)
(The des
cend
ing soul e
nters) into (plants) anima
ted o
ther
(souls), as in t
he previou
s cases, on account of scriptural
declaration.
Any
adhishthiteshu:
 into what is possessed or occupied by another;
Pu
r
va
va
t
:
 like the previous cases;
Abhilap
at:
 on account of the
scriptural st
atement.
The dis
cus
sion on the way of de
scent of the in
di
vid
ual soul is
con tin ued.
In the de
scrip
tion of t
he soul™
s de
scent, it is said then t
hey are
born as rice and corn, herbs and beans
. Now a doubt arises, are
these souls de
scend
ing with a rem
nant of t
heir Kar
mas, them
selves
born as rice, corn, etc., or do they
 merely cling to t
hose plant
s, etc.
The Purvap
akshin holds that they
 are born as rice, corn, etc.,
and en
joy thei
r plea
sures and pains on ac
count of the re
main
der of
works still at
t
ach
ing to them a
nd do not merely cling t
o them. The con
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
324

di
tion of a plant
 may be a place of en
joy
ment of t
he fruit
s of ac
tions.
Sac
ri
fices which en
t
ail kill
ing of an
i
mals may lead t
o un
pleas
ant re
-
sult
s. Hence the word ‚born™
 is to be t
aken lit
er
ally
.
This Su
tra re
futes this v
iew
. The souls are merely con
nect
ed
with rice and plant
s which are al
ready an
i
mated by ot
her souls and do
not en
joy there plea
sures and pains as in pre
vi
ous cases. As the
souls be
com
ing air
, smoke, was de
cided to mean only t
hat they
 be
-
come con
nected with them,
 so here also their be
com
ing rice, etc.,
merely means that
 they be
come con
nected with those plant
s. Be
-
cause in these st
ages there is no ref
er
ence to their Karma,
 just as in
the ear
lier st
ages of ether etc. They
 en
ter these plant
s in
de
pend
ently
of their K
arma. They do not
 en
joy plea
sure and pain whil
e they abide
there. The souls use the rice and plant
s as their halt
ing st
a
tion with
out
be
ing iden
ti
fied with it
, as it is ex
pressly st
ated in Srut
i to be a p
ass
ing
st
age, like the pre
vi
ous st
ages of ether
, air etc. They
 do not lose their
iden
tity
. The souls are not born there for t
he pur
pose of re
trib
u
tive en
-
joy
ment. Where real birth t
akes place and ex
pe
ri
ence of plea
sure and
p
ain com
mences, the fruit
s of ac
tions be
gin, the t
ext re
fers to the op
-
er
a
tion of K
arma as in ﬁThose whose con
duct has been good will
quickly at
t
ain a good birthﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.10.7).
Fur
ther if t
he word ‚born™
 is t
aken in it
s lit
eral sense, then the
souls which have de
scended into the rice plant
s and are an
i
mat
ing
them would have t
o leave them
 when they are reaped, husked,
cooked and eaten. When a body is de
stroyed the soul t
hat an
i
mates it
aban dons
it.
There
fore the de
scend
ing souls are merely out
wardly con
-
nected with the plant
s an
i
mated by ot
her souls. They abide ti
ll they
 at
-
t
ain the op
por
tu
nity f
or a new birth.
AewÕ
{_{V Mo
Asuddhamiti chet na sabdat
III
.1.25 (316)
If it be
 said that (sacrificial work is
) unholy, (we s
ay) not so, on
acc
ou
nt of s
crip
tural
 auth
ority.
Asuddham:
 unholy;
Iti:
 so, thus;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 no, not so, (t
he
objection cannot st
and);
Sabdat:
 on account of the word, on account
of the script
ural authority
.
An ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 24 is raised and re
futed.
An ob
jec
tion may
 be raised that the sac
ri
fi
cial work, such as the
Jyotistoma sac
ri
fice and the like where an
i
mals are killed is un
holy
.
There
fore it
s re
sult may cause the sac
ri
ficer to be ac
tu
ally born as a
corn or a plant as pen
alty f
or his cruel ac
tion. S
uch ob
jec
tion is
ground
less, be
cause the kill
ing of an
i
mals in sac
ri
fices causes no de
-
merit as it is sanc
tioned by t
he scrip
tures.
The sac
ri
fices are not im
pure or sin
ful be
cause the scrip
tures
de
clare them to be mer
i
to
ri
ous. The scrip
tures alone can tell us what
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 1
325

is Dharma and what is Adharma, what is holy
 and what is un
holy
. Our
knowl
edge of what is duty
 and the con
trary of dut
y de
pends en
tirely
on Sastras, be
cause these are Atindriya,
 i.e.,
 be
yond sense per
cep
-
tion and there is in t
he case of right and wrong an en
tire want of bi
nd
-
ing rules as to place, time and oc
ca
sion. What in one place, at
 one
time on one oc
ca
sion is per
formed as a right ac
tion, is a wrong ac
tion
in an
other place, at an
other time,
 on an
other oc
ca
sion. There
fore no
one can know with
out a scrip
ture, what is ei
ther right or wrong. No
doubt the scrip
ture says that one m
ust not cause in
jury (
Ma him
syat
sarva bhutani
Šlet not any
 an
i
mal be in
jured (killed). That is t
he gen
-
eral rule. ‚Let him
 of

fer an an i
mal sa
cred to Agnistoma™
 is an ex
cep
-
tion. Gen
eral rule and ex
cep
tion have di
f

fer ent spheres of ap
pli
ca
tion.
They have di
f

fer ent scopes set
tled by us
age, and so there is no con
-
flict be
tween them.
There
fore we con
clude that the souls be
come en
closed in
plant
s when scrip
ture says that t
he de
scend
ing souls from the
Chandraloka be
come plant
s. They are per
fectly
 un
con
scious in these
st
ages.
aoVpñg
½`moJ
&
Ret
ah sigy
ogo™tha
III
.1.26 (317)
Then (the so
ul ge
ts) conne
cted
 with him who pe
rforms the
 act
of ge
ne
ratio
n.
Ret
ah:
 one who eject
s the seminal fluid;

Y
oga:
 connection with;
Atha:
 then af
terwards.
The dis
cus
sion on the way of de
scent of the soul is con
tin
u
ed.
What be
comes of the soul af

ter its cling
ing to the plant
s is now men
-
tioned.
Chhandogya text
 (V
.10.6.
) de
clares ﬁFor who
ever eat
s the food
and per
forms the act of gen
er
a
tion, t
hat again he (the soul) be
-
comesﬂ. Here again the soul™
s ‚be
com
ing™, i.
e., he who per
forms the
act of gen
er
a
tion can
not be t
aken in it
s lit
eral sense, be
cause a man
is able to pro
cre
ate when he at
t
ains pu
berty
. W
e have to un
der
st
and
that t
he soul get
s con
nected with one who per
forms the act of g
en
er
a
-
tion. W
e again in
fer from thi
s that the soul™
s be
com
ing a plant merely
means it
s en
ter
ing into con
nec
tion with t
he plant and not ac
tual birth
as such.
The soul af

ter hav ing en
tered into a corn or a plant be
comes
con
nected to him who eat
s the corn or the fruit and per
forms the act of
cop
u
la
tion. I
n ev
ery st
age of it
s pas
sage it re
t
ains it
s dis
tinc
tive i
den
-
tity
 from the bod
ies with which it may
 be con
nected.
When
ever one eat
s the food, when
ever one per
forms the act of
coition, t
he de
scend
ing soul be
comes again that food and t
hat se
-
men. The soul re
mains in him in cop
u
la
tion only
 till he en
ters into the
mother
™
s womb, with the se
men in
jected. He has a touch with t
he
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
326

sem
i
nal fluid cre
ated by eat

ing such grain and ul ti
mately
 at
t
ains a
body in wombs. The soul does not re
ally t
ake the form of and be
come
iden
ti
cal with it
s pro
cre
ator
, be
cause one thing can
not t
ake the form
of an
other thing.
 If it
 were to be
come lit
er
ally t
he pro
cre
ator
, then
there would be no pos
si
bil
ity of
 the soul™
s get
ting an
other body
.
&
Y
oneh sariram
III
.1.27 (318)
From
 the wom
b a (new)
 body (spr
ing
s).
Y
oneh:
 from the womb;

Sarira
m:
 the body
.
The dis
cus
sion on the na
ture of the de
scent of the soul is con
-
cluded here.
Af

ter hav ing p
assed through the var
i
ous pre
ced
ing st
ages, the
soul at last en
ters into the womb of
 the mother
. He at
t
ains a fully de
-
vel
oped hu
man body in t
he womb of the mot
her which is fit for ex
pe
ri
-
enc
ing the fruit
s of the re
main
der of works. The fam
ily in which it
 is to
be born is reg
u
lat
ed by the na
ture of thi
s re
main
der as men
tioned in
Chh. Up. V
.10.7.
 ﬁOf these, t
hose whose con
duct here has been good
will quickly at
t
ain some good birth, t
he birth of a B
rahmana, or a
Kshatriya or a V
aisya. But
 those whose con
duct here has been bad
will quickly at
t
ain an evil birt
h, the birt
h of a dog, or a Chandalaﬂ.
Thus it has been clearly shown that t
he soul be
comes plant,
etc., in t
he same sense as it be
comes ether
, etc.
The whole ob
ject of teach
ing this law of in
car
na
tion is that
 you
should real
ise that the A
t
man or the Ab
so
lute alone is the High
est
Bliss. This At

man alone must be your sole ob
ject of quest.
 Y
ou should
get dis
gusted with this world of p
ain and sor
row and de
velop
disp
assion and dis
crim
i
na
tion and try
 ear
nestly t
o at
t
ain the Et
er
nal
Bliss of the A
b
so
lute.
O ig
no
rant man! O f
ool
ish man! O mis
er
a
ble man! O de
luded
soul! W
ake up from your long slum
ber of ig
no
rance. Open your eyes.
De
velop the f
our means of sal
va
tion and at
t
ain the goal of l
ife, t
he
sum m
um
bonum
, right now in t
his very birth.
 Come out of t
his cage of
flesh. Y
ou have been long im
pris
oned in this prisonhouse of body f
or
time im
me
mo
rial. Y
ou have been dwell
ing in the womb again and
again. Cut t
he knot of A
vidya and soar high in t
he realms of Eter
nal
Bliss.
Thus ends the First Pada (
Sec
tion 1) of the Third A
dhy
ay
a
(Chap
ter III) of the Brahma Sutras
 or the V
edant
a Phi
los
o
phy
.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 1
327

CHAPTER III
SECTION 2
INTRODUCTION
In the pre
ced
ing Pada or Sec
tion the p
as
sage of the soul to dif

-
fer
ent spheres and it
s re
turn has been ex
plained in or
der to cre
ate
disp
assion or dis
gust in peo
ple who per
form sac
ri
fices to ob
t
ain
heaven. I
f they
 have a clear un
der
st
and
ing of the f
ate of t
he soul they
will nat
u
rally de
velop V
airagya and will striv
e to at
t
ain Moksha or the
fi nal
eman ci p
a tion.
This sec
tion st
art
s with the ex
pla
na
tion of t
he soul™
s dif

fer ent
st
ates, vi
z., wak
ing, dream, deep sleep.
 The three st
ates of the soul
will be shown to be merely il

lu sory and the iden
tity
 of the in
di
vid
ual
soul and the Su
preme Soul will be es
t
ab
lished.
A
 knowl
edge of the t
hree st
ates, vi
z., wak
ing, dream
ing and
deep sleep, is very nec
es
sary for the stu
dent
s of V
edant
a. It
 will help
them to un
der
st
and the na
ture of the f
ourth st
ate, v
iz., T
uriya or the
st
ate of superconsciousness. For a stu
dent of V
edant
a, the wak
ing
st
ate is as much un
real as the dream st
ate. The st
ate of deep sleep in
-
ti
mates that t
he na
ture of the S
u
p
reme Soul is Bli
ss and that Brah
man
is one with
out a sec
ond, and that
 the world is un
real. V
edantins make
a study of t
he four st
ates very care
fully
. They do not
 ig
nore dream and
deep sleep st
ates whereas the sci
en
tist
s draw their con
clu
sions from
the ex
pe
ri
ences of the wak
ing st
ate only
. Hence, their knowl
edge is
lim ited,

p
ar tial
and
in cor rect.
In the last sec
tion the wak
ing st
ate of t
he soul has been fully
dealt with.
 Now it
s dream st
ate is t
aken up for dis
cus
sion.
In or
der to make the stu
dent
s un
der
st
and the true sig
nif
i
cance
of the Maha-V
akya or the great sen
tence of the Up
anishad ﬁ
T
at Tvam
Asi
ŠThou art Thatﬂ,
 this sec
tion ex
plains the true na
ture of ﬁThatﬂ
and ﬁThouﬂ.
328

SYNOPSIS
This Sec
tion st
art
s with the ex
pla
na
tion of t
he st
ates of dream,
deep sleep and so on. Then it dis
cusses the two
fold na
ture of Brah
-
man, one im
ma
nent and the ot
her tran
scen
dent. Lastly
 it deals with
the re
la
tion of B
rah
man to the in
di
vid
ual soul as well as to the world.
Adhikarana I:
 (Sutras 1-6) treat
s of the soul in the dream
ing
st
ate. The v
i
sion in dreams is of a won
der
ful char
ac
ter
. Ac
cord
ing to
Sri Sankara the three f
irst Sutras dis
cuss the ques
tion whether the
cre
ative ac
tiv
ity
, at
trib
uted to t
he Jiva or the in
di
vid
ual soul in some
Sruti t
ext
s pro
duces ob
ject
s as real as those by which the soul in the
wak
ing st
ate is sur
rounded or not.
Su
tra 3 says that t
he cre
ations of the dream
ing soul are mere
ﬁMayaﬂ or il
lu
sion as they do not f
ully ex

hibit the na ture or char
ac
ter of
real ob
ject
s, as they are want
ing in the re
al
ity of
 the wak
ing st
ate.
Su
tra 4 in
ti
mates that dream
s, al
though mere Maya,
 yet hav
e a
pro
phetic qual
ity
. Some dreams are in
dic
a
tive of
 fu
ture good or bad.
Sutras 5 and 6 say that
 the soul, al
though it is iden
ti
cal with the
Lord, is not able to pro
duce in dreams a real cre
ation, be
cause it
s
knowl
edge and power are ob
scured by it
s con
nec
tion with t
he gross
body
. The rul
er
ship is hid
den by ig
no
rance in the Jiva st
ate. I
t is not
pos
si
ble for the in
di
vid
ual soul to dream a good or a bad dream ac
-
cord
ing to his own choice as he in his pres
ent st
ate of bond
age is ig
-
no
rant of the f
u
ture.
Adhikarana II:
 (Sutras 7-8) teaches that the soul abides wit
hin
Brah
man in the heart in
 the st
ate of deep sleep.
Adhikarana III
:
 (Su
tra 9) gives rea
sons to as
sume that the
 soul
awak
en
ing from sleep is the same t
hat went to sleep.
 What has been
p
artly done by
 a per
son be
fore go
ing to sleep is fin
ished af

ter hewakes up. He has also a sens
e of self-iden
tity
. He has mem
ory of p
ast
event
s. He has mem
ory in the shape of ‚
I am the per
son who had
gone to sleep and who have now awak
ened.™
Adhikarana IV
:
 (Su
tra 10) ex
plains the na
ture of a swoon. It
 in
ti
-
mates that swoon is half
 death and half deep sleep,
 a mix
ture of these
two st
ates.
Adhikarana V
:
 (Sutras 1
1-21) in
ti
mate the na
ture of Su
p
reme
Brah
man in which the in
di
vid
ual soul is merged in the st
ate of deep
sleep.
Su
tra 1
1 de
clares that Brah
man is de
void of di
s
tinc
tive at

trib -
utes (Nirvisesha). Brah
man with at
trib
utes is only for t
he sake of
Up
asana or pi
ous wor
ship of dev
o
tees. It
 is not it
s real na
ture.
329

Su
tra 12 de
clares that ev
ery form due to l
im
it
ing ad
junct is de
-
nied of Brah
man. In ev

ery pas
sage of Sruti iden
tity
 is af

firmed. TheSu
preme T
ruth is One
ness. Sep

a rate
ness is for de
vo
tion. There is
only one In
fi
nite form
less es
sence or Prin
ci
ple in re
al
ity
.
Su
tra 13 says that t
he whole uni
verse char
ac
ter
ised by
enjoyers, thi
ngs to be en
joyed and a ruler has Brah
man for it
s true na
-
ture.
Su
tra 14 says that t
he as
sump
tion of di
ver
sity or plu
ral
ity i
s ob
-
jec
tion
able. Brah
man is des
ti
tute of
 all forms.
Su
tra 15 says Brah
man ap
pears to have forms, as it
 were. This
is due to it
s con
nec
tion with it
s un
real lim
it
ing ad
junct
s, just as the
light of t
he sun ap
pears straight or crooked, as it were, ac
cord
ing to
the na
ture of the t
hing it il
lu
mines.
Su
tra 16 says that t
he Sruti (Brihadarany
aka) ex
pressly de
-
clares that Brah
man is one uni
form mass of con
scious
ness or in
tel
li
-
gence and has nei
ther in
side nor out

side.Su
tra 17 says the other scrip
tural p
as
sages and the Smriti al
so
teach that B
rah
man is with
out at
trib
utes.
Su
tra 18 de
clares that just as the one lu
mi
nous sun when en
ter
-
ing into re
la
tion to many
 dif

fer ent wa
ters is him
self ren
dered mul
ti
form
by his lim
it
ing ad
junct
s, so also the one Un
born Brah
man.
Su
tra 19: Here the Purv
ap
akshin ob
ject
s. There is no sim
i
lar
ity
of the t
wo things com
p
ared as in the case of Brah
man any sec
ond
thing is not ap
pre
hended or ex
pe
ri
enced like wa
ter
. Brah
man is form
-
less and all-per
vad
ing. It
 is not a ma
te
rial thing. S
un has a form. It
 is a
ma
te
rial thing. W
a
ter is dif

fer ent from t
he sun and is at a dis
t
ance from
the sun. Hence the sun may be re
flected in t
he wa
ter
.
Su
tra 20: The ob
jec
tion raised in Su
tra 19 is re
futed.
 The sim
i
-
lar
ity i
s only in point of
 the p
ar
tic
i
p
a
tion in the di
s
tor
tion and con
tor
-
tion, in i
n
crease and de
crease of the im
age re
flected. B
rah
man
p
ar
tic
i
p
ates as it were in the at
trib
utes and st
ates of the body
 and
other lim
it
ing ad
junct
s with which it abides. T
wo things are com
p
ared
with ref
er
ence to some p
ar
tic
u
lar point
s or fea
tures only
.
Su
tra 21 says the scrip
tures de
clare that the A
t
man is within the
Up
adhis or lim
it
ing ad
junct
s.
Adhikarana VI:

(Sutras 22-30) teaches that the clause ﬁ
neti,
neti
Šnot this,
 not thisﬂ in Brihadarany
aka Upanishad I
I.3.
6 de
nies the
gross and sub
tle forms of B
rah
man given in B
ri. Up. II
.3.1 and not
Brah man
it
 self.
Sutras 23-26 fur
ther dwell on Brah
man be
ing in re
al
ity de
void of
all dis
tinc
tive at

trib utes which are en
tirely due t
o the lim
it
ing ad
junct
s
or Upadhi
s.
Sutras 27-28: ex
press the views of the Bhedabhedav
adins.
They say t
here is dif

fer ence as well as non-dif

fer ence be
tween the in
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
330

di
vid
ual soul and Brah
man. The sep

a rate
ness and one
ness is like a
ser
pent in qui
es
cence and mo
tion.
Su
tra 29: This Su
tra re
futes the v
iew of the B
hedabhedavadins
and es
t
ab
lishes the fi
nal truth which has been de
clared in Su
tra 25
viz.,
 that t
he dif

fer ence is merely il
lu
sory due to fic
ti
tious lim
it
ing ad
-
junct
s and iden
tity
 or non-dif

fer ence is the re
al
ity
.
Su
tra 30: Su
tra 29 is con
firmed. The S
ruti in fact ex

pressly de -
nies
sep a rat
e ness.
Adhikarana VII
:
 (Sutras 31-37) ex
plains that B
rah
man is one
with
out a sec
ond and ex
pres
sions which ap
p
ar
ently i
m
ply some
thing
else
as
ex ist ing
are
only
met
 a phor i cal.
Brah
man is com
p
ared to a bridge or a bank or cause
way not to
in
di
cate that He con
nect
s the world with some
thing else be
yond Him
but to show that
 He is the pro
tec
tor of the worlds and is also like a
cause
way
, the sup
port of the i
n
di
vi
d
u
als while cross
ing over this
ocean of life.
He is con
ceived to be sym

bol ised and lo
cated in a lim
ited sp
ace
for fa
cil
ity of
 med
i
t
a
tion on the p
art of those who are not v
ery in
tel
li
-
gent.
Adhikarana VII
I:
 (Sutras 38-41) in
ti
mates that t
he fruit of
 ac
tions
is not as Jaimini thinks, t
he in
de
pend
ent re
sult of ac
tions act
ing
through Apurva,
 but is dis
pensed by the Lord. The Lord who is all-per
-
vad
ing is the bestower of fruit
s of ac
tions, ac
cord
ing to mer
it
s and de
-
mer it
s.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
331

Sandhy
adhikaranam
: T
opic 1 (Sutras 1-6)
The soul in the dream
 st
ate
gÝÜ`o g¥
{ï>
amh {h
Sandhy
e srishtiraha h
i
III.2.1 (
319
)
In t
he i
nt
erm
edi
at
e st
ag
e (b
etw
een w
ak
in
g a
nd
 deep s
leep
)
there is (a real) creation; because (the Sruti) says so.
Sandhy
e:
 in the intermedi
ate st
age (between waking and deep
sleep, i.e.
, in the dream st
ate);
Srisht
ih:
 (there is real) creation;
Aha:
(Srut
i) says so;

Hi:
 because.
The st
ate of dream is now con
sid
ered.
Sutras 1 and 2 are Purvap
aksha Sutras and set out the v
iew that
what we see in dreams are true cre
ations be
cause of the word
‚Srijate™
 (cre
ates).
The word ‚Sandhya™
 means dream. It
 is called ‚Sandhya™
 or the
in
ter
me
di
ate st
ate be
cause it is mid
way be
tween wak
ing (Jagrat) and
the deep sleep st
ate (Sushupti).
 That place is called the in
ter
me
di
ate
st
ate or place be
cause it lies there where the two worlds or else the
place of wak
ing and the place of deep sleep join.
Scrip
ture de
clares, ﬁwhen he falls asleep, there are no char
i
ot
s,
in that st
ate, no horses, no roads, but he him

self cre ates char
i
ot
s,
horses and roads, etc.ﬂ (Bri. Up. IV
.3.9-10). Here a doubt arises
whether the cre
ation which t
akes place in dreams is a real one
(Paramarthika) like the cre
ation seen in the wak
ing st
ate or whether it
is
il lu sor
y
(Maya).
The Purvap
akshin holds that in the dream
ing st
ate there is a
real cre
ation.
In that
 in
ter
me
di
ate st
ate or dream the cre
ation must be real,
 be
-
cause scrip
ture which is au
thor
i
t
a
tive de
clares it to be so, ﬁHe (the in
-
di
vid
ual soul) cre
ates char
i
ot
s, horses, roads,ﬂ etc. W
e, more
over
,
in
fer this from t
he con
clud
ing clause, ﬁHe in
deed is the cre
atorﬂ (Bri.
Up. IV
.3.10
).
Fur
ther there is no dif

fer ence be
tween the ex
pe
ri
ence of the
wak
ing st
ate and that
 of the dream st
ate. A
t
man in dream get
s plea
-
sure by go
ing in a car
, hear
ing mu
sic, see
ing plea
sure-sights and eat

-
ing sump
tu
ous food even as in the wak
ing st
ate.
Hence the cre
ation of t
he dream st
ate is real and orig
i
nates from
the Lord Him
self, just as et
her
, etc.,
 sprang from Him.
{Z_m©V
ma§ M¡Ho$ n
wÌmX
Nirmat
aram chaike p
utraday
ascha
III.2.2 (
320
)
And s
ome
 (the fo
llowe
rs of one
 Sakha, nam
ely, the
 Kathakas
)
(state
 that the
 Sup
rem
e L
ord
 is the
) Cre
ator; s
ons
, etc
., (be
ing
the lo
ve
ly things which He
 crea
tes).
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
332

Nirmat
aram:
 Creator
, the shaper
, the builder
, the maker;
Cha:
 and,
more over;
Eke:
 some (followers of the p
articular Sakhas of the
V
edas);
Putraday
ah:
 son
s, etc
.;
Cha:
 and, also.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent gives a f
ur
ther ar
gu
ment to
show that the cre
ation even i
n dreams is by the Lord Him
self. ﬁHe who
is awake in us while we are asleep, shap
ing one lovely
 thing af

ter an -
other
, that
 is Brah
manﬂ (Katha Up. I
I.2.
 8).
‚Kama™
 (lovely t
hings) in this p
as
sage means sons, etc., that
 are
so called be
cause they are be
loved. The t
erm ‚Kama™
 does not de
-
note mere de
sires. It is used in this sense in the pre
vi
ous pas
sage
also, such as ﬁAsk for all Kamas ac
cord
ing to thy
 wishﬂ (Katha Up.
I.1.
25). That t
he word Kama there means sons, etc.,
 we in
fer from
Katha Up. I
.1.23,
 where we find these Kamas de
scribed as sons
 and
grand sons,
etc.
Even in dreams t
he Lord Him
self cre
ates just as in the case of
the wak
ing st
ate. There
fore the world of dreams is also real.
The scrip
ture de
clares ﬁThis is the same as the place of wak
ing,
for what he sees while awake the same he sees while asleepﬂ (Bri.
Up. IV
.3.14). Hence the world of
 dreams is real.
T
o this we re
ply as fol
lows.
_m`m_mÌ§
 Vw H
$mËñÝ`}
ZmZ{^
ì`º$ñ
dê$nËdmV²
May
amatram tu kart
sny
ena-
 anabhiv
y
akt
asv
arup
atv
at
III.2.3 (
321
)
But it
 (viz
.,
 the dr
eam wor
ld) i
s mere ill
usion on
 accoun
t of
 its
natu
re n
ot ma
nife
sting i
tse
lf with the
 total
ity (o
f the
 attrib
ute
s
of re
ality)
.
May
amatram:
 mere illusio
n;
Tu
:
 but;
 Kart
sny
ena:
 entirely
, fully
;
Anabhiv
y
akt
asv
arup
atv
at:
 on account of it
s nature being
unmanifested.
The the
sis ad
duced in Sutras 1 and 2 is now criti
cised.
The word ‚tu™
 (but), dis
cards the view ex
pressed by the two pre
-
vi
ous Sutras. The world of dreams is not real.
 It is mere il
lu
sion. There
is not a p
ar
ti
cle of re
al
ity i
n it. The na
ture of the dream-world does not
agree en
tirely wit
h that of
 the wak
ing world with re
spect to time,
 place,
cause and the cir
cum
st
ance of non-ref
u
t
a
tion. Hence the dream
world is not real like the wak
ing world.
In the f
irst place there is in a dream no sp
ace for char
i
ot
s and the
like, be
cause those ob
ject
s can
not pos
si
bly fi
nd room in the lim
ited
con
fines of the body
. If
 you say that
 the soul goes out and en
joys ob
-
ject
s, how can it go hun
dreds of miles and re
turn within a f
ew min
-
utes?
In a dream the soul does not leav
e the body;
 be
cause if it did,
then one who dreams of hav
ing gone to Lon
don would find him
self
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
333

there on wak
ing, while he went t
o sleep in Bom
bay
. But
 as a mat
ter of
fact, he awakes in Bom
bay only
.
Fur
ther while a man imag
ines him
self in his dream go
ing in his
body to an
other place, the by
-st
anders see the very same body ly

ingon the cot.
More
over a dream
ing per
son does not see in his dream other
places such as they re
ally are. B
ut if he in see
ing them did ac
tu
ally go
about, t
hey would ap
pear to him like the t
hings he sees in his wak
ing
st
ate.
Sruti de
clares that the dream is withi
n the body
, ﬁBut when he
moves about in dream,
 he moves about ac
cord
ing to his plea
sure
within his own bodyﬂ (Bri.
 Up. II.
1.18).
In the sec
ond place we no
tice that dreams are in con
flict wit
h the
con
di
tions of ti
me. One man who is sleep
ing at night dreams t
hat it is
day
. An
other man liv
es dur
ing a dream which last
s for ten min
utes
only
, through fi
f
ty y
ears. One man sees at night an eclip
se of the sun
in his dream.
In the t
hird place, the senses which alone can bring the sen
sa
-
tion of sight
 etc., are not
 func
tion
ing in dream. The or
gans are drawn
in
ward and the dream
ing per
son has no eyes to see char
i
ot
s and
other things. How can he get in t
he twin
kling of an eye ma
te
ri
als for
mak
ing char
i
ot
s and the like?
In the f
ourth place the char
i
ot
s etc., dis
ap
pear on wak
ing. The
char
i
ot
s etc., dis
ap
pear even in the course of the dream.
 The dream
it

self re futes what it
 cre
ates, as it
s end con
tra
dict
s it
s be
gin
ning. The
char
iot is sud
denly trans
ferred into a man,
 and a man into a t
ree.
Scrip
ture it

self clearly says that the char
i
ot
s, etc., of
 a dream
have no real ex
is
tence. ﬁThere are no char
i
ot
s in that st
ate, no
horses, no roads, etc.ﬂ
Hence the vi
sions in a dream are mere il
lu
sion.
The ar
gu
ment that
 the dream world is real, be
cause it is also a
cre
ation of t
he Su
preme Lord like this wak
ing world is not true, be
-
cause the dream world is not the cre
ation of t
he Lord, but of t
he in
di
-
vid
ual soul. The Srut
i de
clares ﬁWhen he dreams he him
self put
s the
phys
i
cal body aside and him
self cre
ates a dream body in it
s placeﬂ
(Bri. Up. I
V
.3.9.
) This p
as
sage of the Srut
i clearly proves that
 it is the
in
di
vid
ual soul who cre
ates the dream world and not t
he Lord.
gyMH$ü {h lwVoamMjVo M V
Suchakascha hi
 sruterachakshate cha t
adv
idah
III.2.4 (
322
)
But (though the
 drea
m world is an illus
ion), yet it is indi
cative
(of the
 futu
re)
, for (s
o we
 find)
 in the
 Sruti, th
e d
rea
m-e
xp
erts
also declare this.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
334

Suchaka:
 indicative,
 suggestive;
Cha:
 moreover
, and;
Hi:
 because,
as for;
Sruteh:
 from
 the Sr
uti;
Achakshate:
 say
, af
firm;
Cha:
 also;
T
advi
dah:
 dream-expert
s, those who know the secret
s of dream.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 3 is given.
The word ‚T
advid™
 or ex
pert means those who know how to in
ter
-
pret dreams such as V
yasa, Brihasp
ati, and t
he rest.
W
ell then, as dreams are mere il
lu
sion, they
 do not con
t
ain a
p
ar
ti
cle of re
al
ity? Not
 so we re
ply: be
cause dreams are pro
phetic of
fu
ture good and bad for
tune. For scrip
ture says ﬁWhen a man en
-
gaged in some sac
ri
fice un
der
t
aken for a spe
cial wish sees in his
dreams a woman, he may in
fer suc
cess from that dream-vi
sionﬂ
(Chh. Up. V
.2.8). Ot
her scrip
tural p
as
sages de
clare that cer
t
ain
dreams in
di
cate speedy death,
 e.g.,
 ﬁIf he sees a black man with
black teeth, t
hat man will kill hi
m.ﬂ
Those who un
der
st
and the sci
ence of dreams main
t
ain that ﬁt
o
dream of rid
ing on an el
e
phant and the like is lucky while i
t is un
lucky
to dream of rid
ing on a don
key
.ﬂ ﬁWhat
ever a Brah
min or a god, a bull
or a king may tell a per
son in dream, will doubt
less prove true.ﬂ
Some
times one get
s Mantras in dream. Lord Siv
a t
aught
V
isvamitra in dream t
he Man
tra called Ramaraksha. V
isvamitra ex

-
actly wrote it
 out in the m
orn
ing, when he awoke from sleep.
In all these cases the thing i
n
di
cated may be real.
 The in
di
cat
ing
dream how
ever
, re
mains un
real as it is re
futed by
 the wak
ing st
ate.
The doc
trine that
 the dream it

self is mere il lu
sion thus re
mains un
con
-
tra dicted.
The word ‚cre
ation™
 in dream in the fi
rst Su
tra is used in a sec
-
ond
ary and fig
u
ra
tive sense. The soul™
s good and bad deeds bring
about plea
sure and pain en
joyed dur
ing dream, by m
eans of
dream-ex
pe
ri
ences. In the wak
ing st
ate the light
 of the soul op
er
ates
along with the li
ght of t
he sun to bring about ex
pe
ri
ences. The dream
st
ate is re
ferred to, t
o show the self-ac
tiv
ity of
 the soul even af

ter thesenses are shut of
f and there is no op
er
a
tion of ex

ter nal light.
 It is thi
s
fact that
 is the pri
mary teach
ing. The ref
er
ence to cre
ation in dreams
is
sec ond ary
.
The world of dreams is not real in the same sense as the world
con
sist
ing of ether is real. W
e must re
mem
ber that the so-called real
cre
ation with it
s ether
, air
, etc.,
 is not ab
so
lutely
 real. The world of
ether
, etc.,
 van
ishes into noth
ing when the in
di
vid
ual soul real
ises it
s
iden
tity
 with the Su

preme Soul.The dream-cre
ation, how
ever
, is stul
ti
fied ev
ery day
. That t
he
dream is mere il
lu
sion has there
fore to be un
der
stood very clearly
and
de ci sively
.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
335

nam{^Ü
`mZmÎmw
 {Vamo
{hV§
 VVmo øñ` ~
ÝY{dn`©
Parabhidhy
anattu tirohit
am t
ato hy
asy
a
 bandhav
ip
ary
ay
au
III.2.5 (
323
)
But by t
he meditat
ion on
 the Supr
eme Lord, t
hat
 whi
ch is
hidde
n (by ignora
nce
, viz., the e
quality o
f the Lord
 and the
 sou
l
be
com
es
 manif
es
t), be
cau
se
 from hi
m (the
 Lord
) are
 its (the
soul™s)
 bondag
e and fr
eedom.
Parabhidhy
anat:
 by medit
ation on the S
upreme Lord;
Tu
:
 but;
T
irohit
am:
 that which is hidden;
T
at
ah:
 from Him(the Lord);
Hi:
 for;
Asy
a:
 his, of the i
ndividual soul;

Bandhav
ip
ary
ay
au:
 bondage and
it
s opposite, i.e.
, freedom.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent says: The in
di
vid
ual soul is a
p
art (Amsa) of the S
u
preme Soul, just
 as a spark is a p
art of the f
ire.
Just as fire and sp
ark have in com
mon the pow
ers of burn
ing and giv
-
ing light,
 so also the in
di
vid
ual soul and the Lord have in com
mon the
pow
ers of knowl
edge and rul
er
ship. There
fore the in
di
vid
ual soul may
by means of his lord
ship cre
ate in the dream
ing st
ate char
i
ot
s and the
like at will (Sankalp
a) like the Lord.
This Su
tra re
futes it and say
s that the soul now is dif

fer ent from
the Lord on ac
count of A
vidya or ig
no
rance. The rul
er
ship is hid
den
by ig
no
rance in the Jiva st
ate. I
t be
comes man
i
fest only
 when in the
st
ate of med
i
t
a
tion on the Lord.
 This ig
no
rance is dis
pelled by t
he
knowl
edge, ﬁI am B
rah
manﬂ, just as through the a
c
tion of a strong
med
i
cine the power of sight of t
he blind man be
comes man
i
fest.
The Sruti de
clares ﬁwhen that God is known all fet
ters fall of
f;
suf

fer ings are de
stroyed and birth and deat
h cease. From med
i
t
at
ing
on Him there arises on the dis
so
lu
tion of t
he body
, a third st
ate, t
hat of
uni
ver
sal Lord
ship; he who is alone is sat
is
fiedﬂ (Svet
. Up. I.
1
1). T
ill
the knowl
edge dawns the in
di
vid
ual soul can
not cre
ate at will any

-
thing real.
Lord
ship does not come to man spon
t
a
ne
ously
. It
 does not on it
s
own ac
cord re
veal it

self to all men, as the bond
age and free
dom of
the in
di
vid
ual soul come from the Lord. T
hat means: f
rom knowl
edge
of Lord™
s true na
ture, i.
e., f
rom reali
sa
tion of God f
ree
dom co
mes;
from ig
no
rance of His true na
ture co
mes bond
age. T
ill such reali
sa
-
tion co
mes, where is then any power of cre
ation?
Xoh`
moJmÛm gmo
@{n
Dehay
ogadva so™
pi
III.2.6 (
324
)
And
 that (v
iz., the
 con
ce
alme
nt of the
 sou
l™s
 rule
rship
) als
o
(re
sul
ts) fro
m its c
onne
ctio
n with the
 bo
dy.
Dehay
ogat:
 from it
s connection with the body;

Va
:
 and, or;
Sah:
 that
(the concealment of t
he soul™
s rulership);
Api:
 also.
Su
tra 5 is am
pli
fied here.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
336

Such hid
ing of power is due to em
bodi
ment of t
he soul. The
st
ate of con
ceal
ment of t
he soul™
s knowl
edge and Lord
ship is due to
it
s be
ing joined to a body
, i.e.
, to a body
, sense-or
gans, mind, in
tel
lect,
sense-ob
ject
s, sen
sa
tions, etc.
, on ac
count of ig
no
rance. Just as fire
is hid
den in wood or ashes, the knowl
edge and power of the soul are
hid
den, though t
he Jiva is re
ally t
he Su
preme Lord. Hence the soul
does not it

self cre ate. I
f it can, i
t will never cre
ate un
pleas
ant dreams.
No one ever wishes for some
thing un
pleas
ant to him
self.
The soul™
s knowl
edge and Lord
ship re
main hid
den as long as
he er
ro
ne
ously thinks him
self as the body
, etc.,
 as long as he is un
der
the wrong no
tion of not
 be
ing dis
tinct from t
hose lim
it
ing ad
junct
s.
Sruti de
clares that the soul is non-dif

fer ent from t
he Lord. ﬁIt is
T
rue, it is the S
elf, Thou art
 That, O S
vet
aketu!ﬂ But
 it
s knowl
edge and
power are ob
scured by it
s con
nec
tion with t
he body
.
Though the dream-phe
nom
ena are like wak
ing phe
nom
ena in
their hav
ing rel
a
tive re
al
ity
, the S
ruti it

self de clares that they
 do not re
-
ally ex

ist. As the dreams are due to V
asanas ac
quired dur
ing the wak
-
ing st
ate, t
he sim
i
lar
ity be
tween the dream st
ate and the wak
ing st
ate
is de
clared.
From all this it
 fol
lows that dreams are mere il
lu
sion. They are
false.
T
adabhav
adhikaranam
: T
opic 2 (Sutras 7-8)
The soul in dreamless sleep
VX^mdmo
 ZmS>
rfw VV²
 lwVo
amË_{
T
adabhavo nadishu t
at sruteh at
mani cha
III.2.7 (
325
)
The ab
se
nce
 of tha
t (i.e
., of d
rea
ms, i.e
., dre
amle
ss s
le
ep
) tak
es

place in the nerves (Nadis o
r psychic cur
rents) and in t
he self,
as it i
s kn
own fro
m the
 Sruti o
r scrip
tural
 state
me
nt.
T
adabhav
ah:
 absence of that (dreaming) i.e.
, deep sleep;
Nadishu:
in the nerves (p
sychic currents);
T
at sruteh:
 as it is known from the
Sruti
s;
Atmani
:
 in the self;

Cha:
 and, also. (
Ta
t
:
 about it.
)
The st
ate of dream
less deep sleep is now dis
cussed.
The st
ate of dream has been dis
cussed. W
e are now go
ing to
en
quire into the st
ate of deep sleep (Sushupti
).
V
ar
i
ous Sruti tex
t
s de
scribe the soul as rest
ing in deep sleep in
nerves (Nadis), in Prana, in t
he heart, in it

self, in Brah
man or the Ab
-
so lute.
In dif

fer ent Sruti
 p
as
sages deep sleep is said to t
ake place un
-
der
dif
 fer ent
con di tions.
ﬁWhen a man is asleep re
pos
ing and at per
fect rest so that he
sees no dreams, then he has en
tered into t
hese Nadis (nerves)ﬂ
(Chh. Up. VII
I.6.
3). In an
other place it is said with ref

er ence to the
Nadis, ﬁThrough them he mov
es forth and rest
s in the re
gion of the
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
337

heartﬂ (Bri. Up. I
I.1.
19). In an
other place it is said ﬁIn t
hese the per
son
is when sleep
ing, he sees no dream. Then he be
comes one with the
Prana aloneﬂ (Kau. Up. I
V
.19). In an
other place it is said ﬁThat et
her
which is within the heart in t
hat he re
posesﬂ (Bri. Up. IV
.4.22). I
n
Chhandogya Up
anishad it is said, ﬁThen he be
comes united with that
which is, he is gone to his selfﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
.8.1). I
n Brihadaranyaka
Up
anishad it is said ﬁEm
braced by the high
est Self he knows noth
ing
that is with
out, not
h
ing that is wit
hinﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
.3.21). ﬁWhen thi
s be
-
ing full of
 con
scious
ness is asleep... lies in t
he ether
, i.e.
, the real self
which is in the heartﬂ (Bri. Up. I
I.1.
17).
Here the doubt arises whether the Nadis, etc.,
 men
tioned in the
above p
as
sages are in
de
pend
ent from each other and con
sti
tute v
ar
i
-
ous places for the soul in the st
ate of deep sleep or if t
hey st
and in mu
-
tual re
la
tion so as to re
fer to one place only
.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent holds the for
mer views on
ac
count of the v
ar
i
ous places men
tioned serv
ing one and the same
pur
pose. Things which serve the same pur
pose, e.g.,
 rice and bar
ley
do not de
pend on each other
. As all t
he words which stand for t
he
places enu
mer
ated are in the same case, vi
z., the locat
ive case in the
text
s,
they
are
co or di nate
and
there fore
al ter na tiv
es.
If
mu tual
re la tion
was meant then dif

fer ent case-end
ings would be used by the Sruti
.
Hence we con
clude that in t
he st
ate of deep sleep the soul op
tion
ally
goes to any one of t
hose places, ei
ther the Nadis, or that
 which is, the
Prana, the heart
, etc.
The Su
tra re
futes the v
iew of the Pu
rvap
akshin and says that
they are to be t
aken as stand
ing in mu
tual re
la
tion in
di
cat
ing the same
place. The view t
hat the soul goes to one or an
other of these is not
cor
rect. The trut
h is that the soul goes t
hrough the nerves to the re
-
gion of the heart
 and there rest
s in Brah
man.
There is no al
ter
na
tive here.
 The as
ser
tion made abov
e that we
are com
pelled to al
low op
tion be
cause the Nadis, etc., serve one and
the same pur
pose is with
out foun
da
tion. The au
thor
ity of
 the Sruti
s is
weak
ened if we al
low op
tion be
tween two st
ate
ment
s of the Srut
i. If
you
re cog nise
one
al ter na tiv
e,
the
au thor ity

of
the
other
al ter na tiv
e
is
de nied.
Fur
ther the same case is used where things serve dif

fer ent pur
-
poses and have to be com
bined. W
e say
, e.g.
, ﬁhe sleep
s in the p
al
-
ace, he sleep
s on a cot.ﬂ W
e have to com
bine the two locati
ves into
one as ﬁHe sleeps on a cot in t
he p
al
ace.ﬂ Even so the di
f

fer ent st
ate
-
ment
s have to be com
bined into one. ﬁThe soul goes t
hrough the
Nadis to the re
gion of the heart
 and then rest
s in Brah
man.ﬂ Just as a
man goes along the Gan
ga to the sea so also the soul goes through
the Nadis to Brah
man. So he at

tains Svarup
a.
Scrip
ture men
tions only t
hree places of deep sleep, viz.,
 the
Nadis, the pericardium and Brah
man. Among t
hese three again Brah
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
338

man alone is the last
ing place of deep sleep. The Nadis and the
pericardium, are mere roads lead
ing to it.
 The ‚Purit
at™
 or pericardium
is the cov
er
ing which sur
rounds the lo
tus of the heart
.
In deep sleep the in
di
vid
ual soul rest
s in Brah
man, but t
here is a
thin vei
l of ig
no
rance be
tween him and the S
u
preme Soul. Hence he
has no di
rect knowl
edge of his iden
tity
 with the Su
preme Soul, as in
Nirvikalp
a Sam
adhi or superconscious
 st
ate. The S
ruti de
clares ﬁHe
be
comes united with the T
rue, he is gone to his own (Self)ﬂ (Chh. Up.
VI.8).
In the K
aushit
aki Upani
shad (IV
.19) the three places are men
-
tioned to
gether: ﬁIn t
hese the per
son is when sleep
ing he sees no
dreams. Then he be
comes one with the Prana (Brah
man) aloneﬂ.
There
fore Brah
man is the rest
ing place of the soul in deep
sleep.
AV– à
~moY
mo@ñ
At
ah prabodho™
smat
III.2.8 (
326
)
He
nce
 the
 wak
ing fro
m that (
viz., B
rahma
n).
At
ah:
 hence;
Prabodhah:
 waking;
Asmat:
 from this (i.e.
, Brahman).
The mode of wak
ing from deep sleep is now de
scribed.
There
fore wak
ing is com
ing from that
 st
ate of un
ion with Brah
-
man or At
man.
Brah
man is the place of re
pose of deep sleep. That i
s the rea
-
son why the Sruti
 text
s which treat of deep sleep in
vari
ably teach t
hat
in the wak
ing st
ate the in
di
vid
ual soul re
turns to wak
ing con
scious
-
ness from Brah
man. The Srut
i de
clares ﬁIn the same man
ner
, my
child, all t
hese crea
tures when they have come back from t
he T
rue do
not know that t
hey have come back from t
he T
rueﬂ (Chh. Up. VI.10.
2).
This Sruti p
as
sage clearly in
ti
mates that t
he Jiva or the in
di
vid
ual soul
re
turns from the T
rue or Brah
man to the wak
ing st
ate and that
 the Jiva
rest
s or merges him
self in Brah
man and not in t
he Nadis, Hit
a, etc.,
dur
ing deep sleep. But
 he does not real
ise his iden
tity
 with Brah
man
in deep sleep as he is en
vel
oped by the ev
il of ig
no
rance.
Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad also de
clares ﬁWhen the time co
-
mes for the an
swer to the ques
tion ‚whence did he come back™?ﬂ
(II.1.
16); the tex
t says, ﬁAs small sp
arks come forth from fire,
 thus all
Pranas come forth from t
hat Self
ﬂ (II.1.
20).
If t
here were op
tional places, t
o which the soul may re
sort, in
deep sleep, the Srut
i would teach us that it
 awakes some
times from
the Nadis, some
times from t
he pericardium (Purit
at), some
times from
the Self
 (Brah
man).
For this rea
son also Brah
man is the place of deep sleep.
 The
Nadis are only the gate
way to Brah
man.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
339

Karmanusmri
tisabdav
idhy
adhikaranam
: T
opic 3
The same soul returns from
 deep sleep
g Ed Vw H
$_m©
Zwñ_
¥{Veã
X{d{Y
Sa ev
a tu karmanusm
ritisabdav
idhib
hy
ah
III.2.9 (
327
)
Bu
t the
 sam
e (
sou
l re
turns
 from B
rahma
n afte
r de
ep
 sle
ep
) on
acc
ou
nt of wo
rk, re
me
mbra
nce
, scrip
tural
 tex
t and
 pre
ce
pt.
Sah ev
a:
 the selfsame soul (which went to sleep);
Tu
:
 but;
Karmanusmritisabdavi
dhibhy
ah:
 on account of Karma or work,
memory
, scriptural authority
 and precept; (
Sah:
 he;
Eva:
 only
, and no
other);
Karma:
 activit
y
, on account of his fi
nishing the action lef
t
unfinished;
Anus
mriti:
 remembrance, on account of memory
 of
identity
;
Sabda:
 from
 the Sr
uti;
V
idhibhy
ah:
 from
 the
commandment
s.
Here we have to en
quire whether the soul when awak
ing from
deep sleep is the same which en
tered into un
ion with Brah
man or an
-
other one.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) re
moves the doubt
.
If an
other self arose from sleep, t
he con
scious
ness of per
sonal
iden
tity
 (Atmanusmarana) ex
pressed in the words ﬁI am the same as I
was be
foreﬂ would not be pos
si
ble.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent holds that t
here is no fixed
rule on this point.
 There can be no rule that the same soul arises from
Brah
man. When a drop of wa
ter is poured into a big ba
sin of wa
ter
, it
be
comes one with the lat
ter
. When we again t
ake out a drop it will be
dif

fi cult to man
age that it
 should be the very same drop.
 It is hard to
pick it out again.
 Even so when the in
di
vid
ual soul has merged in
Brah
man in deep sleep it is dif

fi cult to say t
hat the self-same Jiv
a
arises from Brah
man af

ter deep sleep. Hence some other soul arisesaf

ter deep sleep from Brah man.
This Su
tra re
futes this and says t
hat the same soul which in the
st
ate of deep sleep en
tered Brah
man again arises from Brah
man, af

-
ter deep sleep, not any
 other for the f
ol
low
ing rea
sons.
The per
son who wakes from sleep must be the same be
cause
what has been p
artly done by
 a per
son be
fore go
ing to sleep is fin
-
ished af

ter he wakes up. Men fin ish in the morn
ing what they
 had lef
t
in
com
plete on the day
 be
fore. It
 is not pos
si
ble that one m
an should
pro
ceed to com
plete a work half done by an
other man. I
f it were not
the same soul, then t
he lat
ter would find no in
ter
est in com
plet
ing the
work which has been partly done by
 an
other
. In t
he case of sac
ri
fices
oc
cu
py
ing more than one day
, there would be sev
eral sac
ri
fices.
Hence it would be doubt

ful to whom the fruit of
 the sac
ri
fice as prom
-
ised by the V
eda be
longs. This would bring stul
ti
fi
ca
tion of t
he sa
cred
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
340

text
. There
fore it is quit
e clear that it i
s one and the same man who fin
-
ishes on the lat
ter day the work be
gun on the for
mer
.
He has also a sense of self-iden
tity
. He ex
pe
ri
ences iden
tity
 of
per
son
al
ity be
fore and af

ter sleep, for if sleep leads to lib
er
a
tion by
un
ion with Brah
man, sleep will be
come the means of lib
er
a
tion. Then
scrip
tural in
struc
tions would be use
less to at
t
ain sal
va
tion. I
f the per
-
son who goes to sleep is dif

fer ent from t
he per
son who rises af
ter
sleep, then the com
mand
ment
s of the scrip
tures with ref
er
ence to
work or know
l
edge would be mean
ing
less or use
less.
The per
son ris
ing from sleep is the same who went t
o sleep. If i
t
is not so he could not re
mem
ber what he had seen, etc.,
 on the day
be
fore, be
cause what one man sees an
other can
not re
mem
ber
. He
has mem
ory of p
ast event
s. One can
not re
mem
ber what an
other felt
.
He has mem
ory or rec
ol
lec
tion in the shape of
 ﬁI am the per
son who
had gone to sleep and who have now awak
ened.ﬂ
The Sruti t
ext
s de
clare that the same per
son rises again. ﬁHe
has
tens back again as he came to the place from which he st
arted, to
be awakeﬂ (Bri. Up. IV
.3.16). ﬁA
ll these crea
tures go day af

ter day into
Brah
man and yet do not
 dis
cover Himﬂ (Chh. Up. VII
I.3.
2). ﬁWhat
ever
these crea
tures are here whether a ti
ger
, or a lion, or a wolf
, or a boar
,
or a worm, or a midge or a gnat, or a mos
quito, t
hat they
 be
come
againﬂ (Chh. Up. VI.
10.2). These and sim
i
lar text
s which ap
pear in the
chap
ters which deal with sleep
ing and wak
ing have a proper sense
only if
 the self-same soul rises again.
More
over
, if it
 is not the same soul, K
arma and A
vidya wil
l have
no pur
pose.
There
fore from all t
his it fol
lows that the per
son ris
ing from sleep
is the same that went
 to sleep.
The case of the drop of wa
ter is not quite anal

o gous, be
cause a
drop of wa
ter merges in the ba
sin of wa
ter with
out any ad
junct
s.
There
fore it is lost f
or ever but the in
di
vid
ual soul merges in Brah
man
with it
s ad
junct
s (viz., body
, mind, i
n
tel
lect, Prana,
 sense). So the
same Jiva rises again from Brah
man on ac
count of the f
orce of Karma
and de
sire.
When the in
di
vid
ual soul en
ters Brah
man in deep sleep, he en
-
ters like a pot full
 of salt wa
ter with cov
ered mouth plunged int
o the
Gan
ga. When he awak
ens from sleep it is the same pot
 t
aken out of
the river with t
he same wa
ter in it.
 Sim
i
larly the i
n
di
vid
ual soul en
vel
-
oped by his de
sires goes to sleep and for the time be
ing put
s of
f all
sense-ac
tiv
i
ties and goes to the rest
ing place namely
, the S
u
preme
Brah
man and again co
mes out of it
 in or
der to get fur
ther ex
pe
ri
-
ences. He does not be
come iden
ti
cal with Brah
man like the per
son
who has ob
t
ained lib
er
a
tion. Thus we hear that
 the same soul which
had gone to sleep awakes again into the same body
.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
341

Hence it is an es
t
ab
lished fact that
 the same soul awakes from
deep sleep.
Mugdhe™rdhasamp
atty
adhikaranam: T
opic 4
The nature of swoon
_w½Yo@Õ©gån
{Îm–
 n[ae
ofmV
Mugdhe™r
dhasamp
attih p
ariseshat
III
.2.10 (328)
In a
 swoo
n (in him who is
 se
nse
les
s) there
 is half unio
n on
account of th
is remaining
 (as the only alt
ernative left, as th
e
only
 possibl
e hypoth
esis).
Mugdhe:
 in a swoon;
Ardhasamp
attih:
 p
artial att
ainment of t
he
st
ate of deep sleep or death;
 Pariseshat:
 on account of the
remaining, because of excess, as it i
s a st
ate in additi
on to all others.
The st
ate of a swoon is now dis
cussed.
The Purvap
akshin says, ﬁThere are only three st
ates of a soul
while liv
ing in the body
, viz.
, wak
ing, dream
ing and deep sleep. The
soul™
s pass
ing out of t
he body is the f
ourth st
ate or death. T
he st
ate of
swoon can
not be t
aken as a fif
th st
ate. A
 fif
th st
ate is known nei
ther
from
 Sruti
 nor
 Smriti
.ﬂ
What is swoon then? Is it a sep

a rate st
ate of t
he soul or is it only
one of these st
ates?
It can
not be wak
ing, be
cause he does not per
ceive ex
ter
nal ob
-
ject
s, by the senses.
May thi
s case be sim
i
lar to that
 of the ar
row-maker? Jus
t as the
man work
ing in the prep

a ra
tion of an ar
row
, al
though awake, is so ab
-
sorbed in his work that he per
ceives noth
ing else, so also the man
who is stunned by a blow may be awake but may
 not per
ceive any
-
thing else as his mind is con
cen
trated on the sen
sa
tion of p
ain
caused by the blow of a stick.
No, we re
ply
. The case is dif

fer ent ow
ing to the ab
sence of con
-
scious
ness. The ar
row-maker says, ﬁI was not con
scious of any
thing
but the ar
row for such a length of time.
ﬂ The man who re
turns to con
-
scious
ness from a swoon says, ﬁI was con
scious of noth
ing. I was
shut up in blind dark
ness for such a length of time.
ﬂ A
 man who is wak
-
ing keep
s his body straight or up
right but t
he body of a swoon
ing per
-
son falls pros
trate on the ground.
 There
fore a man in a swoon is not
awake.
He is not dream
ing, be
cause he is to
t
ally un
con
scious.
It is not deep sleep be
cause there is hap
pi
ness in deep sleep
whereas there is no hap
pi
ness in the st
ate of swoon.
He is not dead also, be
cause he con
tin
ues to breathe and his
body is warm. When a man has be
come sense
less and when peo
ple
are in doubt whether he is aliv
e or dead, they t
ouch the re
gion of his
heart in or
der to find out
 whether there is warmth in his body or not
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
342

They place their hands to hi
s nos
trils to fi
nd out whether there is
breath
ing or not. I
f they
 do not per
ceive warmth or breath they
 come
to the con
clu
sion that he is dead and t
ake his body to the cre
ma
to
rium
to burn it.
 If t
here are warmth and breath
ing they con
clude that he is
not dead. They
 sprin
kle cold wa
ter on his face so that he may
 come
back to con
scious
ness.
The man who has swooned away is not dead, be
cause he co
-
mes back to con
scious
ness af

ter some time.Let us then say t
hat a man who has swooned lies in deep sleep
as he is un
con
scious and at the same time not
 dead. No, we re
ply
.
This is also not pos
si
ble ow
ing to the dif

fer ent char
ac
ter
is
tics of the
two st
ates.
A
 man who has swooned does some
times not breathe
for a long
time. His body
 shakes or trem
bles. His face is dread
ful. His eyes are
st
ar
ing wide open. But
 a sleep
ing man looks calm, peace
ful and
happy
.
He draws his breath at reg
u
lar in
ter
vals. His eyes are closed.
His body does not trem
ble. A
 sleep
ing man may be waked by a gen
tle
strok
ing with the hand.
 He who is ly
ing in a st
ate of swoon can
not be
wak
ened even by a blow wit
h a stick. Swoon is due to ex

ter nal causes
such as blow on the head with a stick, etc.,
 while sleep is due to fa
-
tigue or wea
ri
ness.
Swoon is only half
-un
ion. The man in t
he st
ate of swoon be
longs
with one half t
o the side of deep sleep, wit
h the other half
 to the side of
the other st
ate, i.
e., deat
h. It
 is only half sleep.
 W
e do not mean by t
his
that he half
 en
joys Brah
man. W
e mean that i
t p
artly re
sem
bles sleep.
It is half
 death, a st
ate al
most bor
der
ing upon death. I
n fact it i
s the
door to death. I
f there is a rem
nant of K
arma he re
turns to con
scious
-
ness. Else, he dies.
The man in the st
ate of swoon be
longs with one half t
o the side
of deep sleep, with t
he other half t
o the side of the ot
her st
ate, i.
e.,
death.
Those who know Brah
man say that
 swoon is half-un
ion. In a
swoon the per
son par
tially
 at
t
ains the st
ate of deep sleep as there is
no con
scious
ness in that st
ate and he re
turns to con
scious
ness and
p
ar
tially
 the st
ate of deat
h as he ex
pe
ri
ences pain and m
is
ery which
are ex
pressed through dis
tor
tion of f
ace and limbs.
The ob
jec
tion that
 no fif
th st
ate is com
monly ac
knowl
edged is
with
out much weight, be
cause as that st
ate oc
curs oc
ca
sion
ally only
it may
 not be gen
er
ally known. Al
l the same it i
s known from or
di
nary
ex
pe
ri
ence as well as from the sci
ence of A
yurveda. I
t is a sep

a rate
st
ate, t
hough it hap
pens oc
ca
sion
ally
. As it i
s a mix
ture of the t
wo
st
ates, vi
z., deep sleep and death it
 is not con
sid
ered as a fif
th st
ate.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
343

Ubhay
alingad
hikaranam
: T
opic 5 (Sutras 1
1-21)
The nature of B
rahman
Z ñWmZVmo
@{n na
ñ`mo^`{
bﬁ§
Na sthanato™pi p
arasy
obhay
alingam
 sarv
atra hi
III.2.1
1 (3
29)
No
t on ac
cou
nt of (d
iffe
ren
ce
 of) p
lace
 also
 two-
fold
chara
cte
ristic
s ca
n be
long
 to the
 High
es
t; for e
ve
rywhe
re
(scri
ptu
re te
ache
s I
t to b
e w
ithou
t any d
iffe
ren
ce
).
Na:
 not;
S
thanat
ah:
 on account of (dif
ference of) place;
Api:
even;
Parasy
a:
 of the Highest (i.
e., B
rahman);
Ubhay
alingam:
 two-f
old
charact
erist
ics;
Sarv
atra:
 everywhere;
Hi:
 because.
The Sutrakara now pro
ceeds to deal with the na
ture of Brah
-
man.
In the scrip
tures we find two kinds of de
scrip
tion about B
rah
-
man. Some t
ext
s de
scribe it as qual
i
fied, i.
e., wit
h at
trib
utes and some
as
un qual i fied
(with out
at trib ut
es).
ﬁFrom
whom
all
ac tiv i t
ies,
all
de
-
sires, all odours and all t
astes pro
ceedﬂ (Chh. Up. III.
14.2). This tex
t
speaks of at
trib
utes. Again,
 ﬁIt is nei
ther coarse nor fine, nei
ther short
nor long, nei
ther red
ness nor vis
cidﬂ etc. (Bri. Up. I
II.
8.8). This tex
t
speaks of Brah
man with
out at
trib
utes.
Are we to as
sume that bot
h are true of Brah
man ac
cord
ing as it
is or is not con
nected with lim
it
ing ad
junct
s or Upadhis or have we t
o
as
sume only one of t
hem as true and the other f
alse? and if so, which
is true? and why it is t
rue?
This Su
tra says that t
he High
est Brah
man can
not by it

self pos -
sess dou
ble char
ac
ter
is
tics. In t
he case of Brah
man you can
not say
that it
 has two as
pect
s, viz.,
 with form and at

trib utes, and with
out form
and at
trib
utes, i.e.
, with Up
adhis (lim
it
ing ad
junct
s) and with
out
Up
adhis, be
cause It is de
scribed ev
ery
where as be
ing Nirguna (with
-
out
at trib ut
es).
Both can
not be pred
i
cated of one and the same B
rah
man be
-
cause it is against ex
pe
ri
ence. One and the same thing can
not have
two con
tra
dic
tory na
tures at the same ti
me. Brah
man can
not at t
he
same time have f
orm and be form
less.
The red
ness of a flower re
flected in a crys
t
al does not change
the na
ture of the crys
t
al which is colour
less. Even so the m
ere con
-
nec
tion of a t
hing with an
other does not change it
s na
ture. It
 is an al
to
-
gether er
ro
ne
ous no
tion to im

pute red ness to the crys
t
al. The
red
ness of the crys
t
al is un
real. A
 thing can
not change it
s real na
ture.
Changes of it
s real na
ture means an
ni
hi
la
tion. S
im
i
larly in t
he case of
Brah
man, it
s con
nec
tion with t
he lim
it
ing ad
junct
s like earth, etc.,
 is
due to ig
no
rance. An Up
adhi can
not af

fect the na ture of Brah
man,
such Upadhi be
ing merely due t
o A
vidya or ne
science. The es
sen
tial
char
ac
ter of a thi
ng must al
ways re
main the same what
ever may be
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
344

the con
di
tions im
posed on it. If
 how
ever it ap
pears to be al
tered it is
surely due to ig
no
rance.
There
fore we have to ac
cept that B
rah
man is with
out at
trib
utes,
be
cause all Sruti tex
t
s whose aim is to rep
re
sent the na
ture of Brah
-
man such as ﬁIt is with
out sound, with
out touch, wit
h
out form,
 with
out
de
cayﬂ (Katha Up. I
.3.15) teach t
hat It
 is free from all at

trib utes.
Brah
man with at
trib
utes is only for t
he sake of Upasana or pi
ous
wor
ship of dev
o
tees; it i
s not It
s real na
ture.
Z ^oXm{X{V MoÞ àË`
Na bhedaditi chen
na praty
ekamat
adv
achanat
III
.2.12 (330)
I
f it be
 said
 that it is
 not s
o o
n acc
ou
nt of d
iffe
ren
ce
 (be
ing
taug
ht in the
 scrip
ture
s), we
 rep
ly that it i
s no
t so, b
ec
aus
e
with re
fere
nce
 to e
ach (
suc
h form)
, the
 Sruti d
ec
lare
s the
opposit
e of th
at.
Na:
 not so;
Bhedat:
 on account of dif
ference (being t
aught in the
scrip tures);
Iti:
 thus
, as, s
o, this
;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not so;
Praty
ekam:
 with
refe
rence to each;
At
adv
achanat:
 because of the declaration of
opposite of that
. (
At
ad:
 absence of that;
V
achanat:
 on account of the
st
atement.
)
An ob
jec
tion to t
he pre
ced
ing Su
tra is raised and re
futed.
This Su
tra con
sist
s of two p
art
s namely an ob
jec
tion and it
s re
-
ply
. The ob
jec
tion por
tion is ﬁ
Bhedat it
i chet
ﬂ and the re
ply por
tion is
ﬁ
Na pratyekamat
advachanat
ﬂ.
The Purvap
akshin says, ﬁThe var
i
ous V
idyas teach dif

fer ent
forms of Brah
man. It
 is said to have four f
eet (Chh. Up. II
I.18.
2); to
con
sist of six
teen p
art
s or Kalas (Pras. Up. VI.
1); to be char
ac
ter
ised
by dwarf
ish
ness (Katha Up. V
.3); to hav
e the three worlds for it
s body
(Bri. Up. I
.3.22); t
o be named V
aisvanara (Chh. Up. V
.1
1.2), etc.
Hence we must ad
mit that
 Brah
man is also qual
i
fied.ﬂ
This Su
tra re
futes it and de
clares that ev
ery such form due to
lim
it
ing ad
junct is de
nied of Brah
man in tex
t
s like ﬁThis bright, im
mor
-
t
al be
ing who is in this earth and that
 bright im
mor
t
al cor
po
real be
ing
in the body are but
 the selfﬂ (Bri.
 Up. II.
5.1). Such t
ext
s clearly in
di
cate
that t
he same self is pres
ent in all li
m
it
ing ad
junct
s like earth, etc.
There
fore there is only one
ness. It, t
here
fore can
not be main
t
ained
that t
he con
cep
tion of B
rah
man with var
i
ous forms is t
aught by t
he
V
edas.
In ev
ery p
as
sage iden
tity
 is also af

firmed. The Su
preme T
ruth is
one
ness. Sep

a rate
ness is for de
vo
tion. The S
ruti de
clares that the
form is not true and t
hat there is only
 one form
less es
sence or prin
ci
-
ple in re
al
ity
.
A{n M¡d
Api chaiv
ameke
III
.2.13 (331)
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
345

Moreove
r some (teach) thus.
Api:
also;
Cha:
 moreover
, and;
Evam:
 thus;
Eke:
 some.
A
 fur
ther ar
gu
ment is given i
n sup
port of Su
tra 1
1.
Some Sakhas or recensions of the V
edas di
rectly teach t
hat the
manifoldness is not true.
 They p
ass a crit
i
cal re
mark on those who
see dif

fer ence, ﬁHe goes from death to deat
h who sees dif

fer ence, as
it were, in it
ﬂ (Katha Up. I.
4.1
1). ﬁBy t
he mind alone it i
s to be per
-
ceived. There is no di
ver
sity in I
t. He who per
ceives therein any di
ver
-
sity goes from deat
h to deathﬂ (Bri.
 Up. IV
.4.19).
Oth
ers also ﬁBy know
ing the enjoy
er
, the en
joyed, and t
he ruler
,
ev
ery
thing has been de
clared to be three-fold and t
his is Brah
manﬂ
(Svet.
 Up. I.12),
 say that t
he en
tire world char
ac
ter
ised by enjoyers,
things to be en
joyed and a ruler has Brah
man for it
s true na
ture.
Aê$n
dXod {
h VËàY
Arup
av
adev
a hi t
atpradhanatv
at
III
.2.14 (332)
Ve
rily Brahman is
 only formle
ss on a
ccou
nt of that be
ing the
main
 purport
 (of al
l texts
 about Br
ahman
).
Arup
av
at:
 without f
orm, formless;
Eva:
 only
, indeed, decidedly
;
Hi:
verily
, cert
ainly
, because;
T
atpradhanatv
at:
 on account of that bei
ng
the main purport of
 scripture. (
Ta
t
:
 of tha
t;
Pradhanatv
at:
 on account
of being the chief
 thing.)
A
 fur
ther ar
gu
ment is given i
n sup
port of Su
tra 1
1.
W
e must def
i
nitely
 as
sert that B
rah
man is form
less and so on.
Why? On ac
count of this be
ing the main pur
port of scrip
tures. The
scrip
tures de
clare,ﬁIt is nei
ther coarse nor fine, nei
ther short nor longﬂ
(Bri. Up. I
II.
8.8). ﬁThat which is with
out sound, with
out form,
 with
out
de
cayﬂ (Katha Up. I
.3.15). ﬁHe who is called ether is the rev
ealer of all
names and forms. That wit
hin which names and forms are, that i
s
Brah
manﬂ (Chh. Up. VII
I.14.
1). ﬁThat heav
enly Per
son is with
out
body
, He is both within and wit
h
out, not
 pro
ducedﬂ (Mun. Up. II.
1.2).
ﬁThat Brah
man is with
out cause, and with
out any
thing in
side or out

-
side, this self is B
rah
man, Om
ni
pres
ent and Om
ni
scientﬂ (Bri. Up.
II.5.19
).
These text
s aim at teach
ing Brah
man, de
scribe It as form
less. If
Brah
man be un
der
stood to have a f
orm then the scrip
tural p
as
sages
which de
scribe it as form
less would be
come mean
ing
less. The scrip
-
tures have a pur
port all through
out. On t
he con
trary
, the ot
her p
as
-
sages which re
fer to a Brah
man qual
i
fied by f
orm do not aim at
 set
ting
forth the na
ture of Brah
man but rather at en
joy
ing the wor
ship of
Brah man.
There
fore Brah
man is form
less.
As long as those lat
ter text
s do not con
tra
dict those of t
he for
mer
class they are to be ac
cepted as they st
and; where, how
ever
, con
tra
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
346

dic
tions oc
cur
, the t
ext
s whose main pur
port is Brah
man must be
viewed as hav
ing greater force than those of
 the other kind. Thi
s is the
rea
son for our de
cid
ing that,
 al
though there are two dif

fer ent classes
of scrip
tural tex
t
s, Brah
man must be held to be al

to gether form
less,
not at t
he same time of an op
po
site na
ture. The main S
ruti tex
t
s de
-
clare Brah
man to be form
less.
The col
our and forms are the prod
uct
s of the el
e
ment
s and
Brah
man is far above t
he in
flu
ence of and dif

fer ent from t
he el
e
ment
s.
Hence He is called the colour
less or form
less. Ma
te
rial col
our and
form can
not be found in Him when He is far abov
e the sub
tle ma
te
rial
cause as well as above it
s pre
sid
ing de
ity
.
àH
$med…md¡`Ï
`m©V²
Prakasav
acchav
aiy
arthy
at
III
.2.15 (333)
And as light
 (assumes forms as it were by its cont
act wit
h
thing
s posse
ssing for
m, so does Brahman take form in
conne
c
tion with Upad
his or limiting a
djunc
ts), be
caus
e (te
xts
which ascr
ibe form to Brahman)
 are not meaningless.
Prakasav
at:
 like the light
;
Cha:
 and, moreover;
A
v
aiy
arthy
at:
because of not being meaningless.
A
 fur
ther ar
gu
ment is given i
n sup
port of Su
tra 1
1.
The word ‚Cha™
 (and) is em
ployed to re
move the doubt
 raised
above.
If B
rah
man is form
less then all the scrip
tural tex
t
s which treat of
Brah
man with form would be mean
ing
less, and su
per
flu
ous. Then all
Up
asanas of Brah
man with form would be use
less. How can the wor
-
ship of such a false Brah
man lead to Brahmal
oka?
This Su
tra ex
plains that t
hey also have a pur
pose. The light of
the sun has no form but it
 ap
pears to be great or small ac
cord
ing to
the hole through which it en
ters a room and yet has the f
orce of dis
-
pel
ling the dark
ness in the room. Sim

i larly Brah
man which is with
out a
form ap
pears to have a form due t
o lim
it
ing ad
junct
s like earth, body
,
etc. Just as the light
 of the sun co
mes in con
t
act with a fin
ger or some
other lim
it
ing ad
junct and ac
cord
ing as the lat
ter is straight or bent,
 it

-
self be
comes straight or bent as it were, so also Brah
man as
sumes,
as it were, the f
orm of the earth,
 and the lim
it
ing ad
junct
s with which it
co
mes into con
t
act. The wor
ship of such an il
lu
sory Brah
man can
help one to at
t
ain Brahmaloka which is also il
lu
sory from the
view-point of
 the Ab
so
lute.
There
fore these tex
t
s are not mean
ing
less. They have cer
t
ainly
a pur
port. Al
l p
art
s of the V
eda are equally au
thor
i
t
a
tive and t
here
fore
must all be as
sumed to have a mean
ing or pur
pose.
This, how
ever
, does not con
tra
dict the tenet
 main
t
ained above,
viz.,
 that B
rah
man though con
nected with lim
it
ing ad
junct
s does not
pos
sess dou
ble char
ac
ter
is
tics, be
cause what is merely due to a lim

-
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
347

it ing
ad junct
can not
con sti tute
an
at tri b ut
e
of
a
sub st
ance.
Fur ther
the
lim
it
ing ad
junct
s are all due to ig
no
rance.
Amh M VÝ_m
Aha cha t
anmatram
III
.2.16 (334)
And
 (the
 Sruti)
 de
clare
s (tha
t Brahm
an is
) that (i
.e.,
intellige
nce) o
nly.
Aha:
 (the Sruti) declares;
Cha:
 and, moreover;
T
anmatram:
 that
(i.e.,
 intelligent
) only
.
The force of the word ‚Mat
ra™
 in T
anmatra is to de
note ex
clu
sive
-
ness.
Scrip
ture de
clares that Brah
man con
sist
s of in
tel
li
gence. ﬁAs a
lump of salt has nei
ther in
side nor out

side, but is al to
ge
ther a mass of
saltish t
aste, thus in
deed has that Self
 nei
ther in
side nor out

side but is al
to
gether a mass of knowl
edgeﬂ (Bri. Up. IV
.3.13). P
ure in
tel
li
gence
con
sti
tutes it
s na
ture. Just as a lump of salt
 has nei
ther in
side nor out

-
side but one and the same salti
sh t
aste, not any
 other t
aste, so also
Brah
man has nei
ther in
side nor out

side any char ac
ter
is
tic form but i
n
-
tel li gence.
Xe©`{V MmWmo
 A{n ñ_`©
Darsay
ati chatho api sm
ary
ate
III
.2.17 (335)
(The scripture) a
lso shows (this and
) it is like
wise state
d in
Smriti.
Darsay
ati:
 (the scripture or Sruti) shows;
Cha:
 and, also;
Atho:
 thus,
moreover;
Api:
 also;
Smary
ate:
 the Smrit
is declare or stat
e.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1
1 is con
tin
ued.
That Brah
man is with
out any at

trib utes is also proved by those
scrip
tural tex
t
s also which ex
pressly deny that
 It pos
sesses any other
char ac ter is tics,
e.g.,

ﬁNow
,
there fore,
the
de scrip tion
of
Brah man;
not
this
, not th
is (
neti, net
i
)ﬂ (Bri. Up. II
.3.6). T
here is no other and more
ap
pro
pri
ate de
scrip
tion than t
his ﬁnot this, not
 thisﬂ.
Kenop
anishad (I.4) de
clares ﬁIt is dif

fer ent from t
he known, It is
also above the un
knownﬂ. T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad (II.9) says ﬁFrom
whence all speech, with the mind,
 turns away un
able to reach itﬂ.
The Sruti t
ext which treat
s of the con
ver
sa
tion be
tween Bahva
and V
ashkali has a sim
i
lar pur
port. V
ashkali ques
tioned Bahv
a about
the na
ture of Brah
man. Bahv
a ex
plained it t
o V
ashkali by si
lence.
Bahva said to
V
ashkali ﬁLearn Brah
man, O friendﬂ and be
came si
lent.
Then on a sec
ond and third ques
tion he re
plied ﬁI am teach
ing you in
-
deed, but y
ou do not un
der
st
and. That B
rah
man is Si
lence.ﬂ
If B
rah
man has form, t
here is no ne
ces
sity t
o deny ev
ery
thing
and say ﬁNot this, not
 this.ﬂ
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
348

The same teach
ing is con
veyed by
 those Smriti
 text
s which
deny of B
rah
man all other char
ac
ter
is
tics, e.g.
, ﬁI will pro
claim that
which is the ob
ject of knowl
edge, know
ing which one at
t
ains im
mor
-
t
al
ity;
 the High
est Brah
man with
out ei
ther be
gin
ning or end, which
can
not be said ei
ther to be or not t
o beﬂ (Git
a XII
I.12). ﬁI
t is
unmanifest,
 un
think
able, and with
out mod
i
fi
ca
tion, t
hus It is spo
ken
ofﬂ (
Gita II. 25).
Of a sim
i
lar pur
pose is an
other Smrit
i text
. Lord Hari in
structed
Narada ﬁThe cause, O Narada, of your see
ing Me en
dowed with the
qual
i
ties of all be
ings is the Maya t
hrown out by Me; do not
 cog
nise
Me as be
ing such in re
al
ity
.ﬂ
AW Ed M
mon_m gy
`©H$
m{XdV²
At
a ev
a chop
ama sury
akadiv
at
III
.2.18 (336)
For this very r
eason (we have
 with r
espe
ct to Brahm
an)
comparisons like the images of the sun and the like.
At
a ev
a:
 for this very
 reason; therefore;
Cha:
 also, and;
Up
ama:
comp
a rison;
Sury
akadiv
at:
 like the images of t
he sun and the like.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1
1 is con
tin
ued.
That Brah
man is form
less is fur
ther es
t
ab
lished from the sim
i
les
used with re
spect to It.
 As Brah
man is of the na
ture of in
tel
li
gence, de
-
void of al
l dif

fer ence, tran
scend
ing speech and mind, as He is form
-
less, ho
mo
ge
neous and as He is de
scribed only by de
ny
ing of Him all
other char
ac
ter
is
tics, the scrip
tures com
p
are His forms to the im
ages
of the sun re
flected in t
he wa
ter and the like, m
ean
ing thereby t
hat
these forms are un
real be
ing due only t
o lim
it
ing ad
junct
s. ﬁAs the one
lu
mi
nous sun en
ters into re
la
tion to many
 dif

fer ent wa
ters is him
self
ren
dered mul
ti
form by his lim

it ing ad
junct
s; so also the one un
born
Brah man
ap pears
dif
 fer ent
in
dif
 fer ent
bod ies.ﬂ
Aå~w
dXJ«hU
mÎmw Z
 VWmËd_²
 &
Ambuv
adagrahanatt
u na t
athatvam
III
.2.19 (337)
But there
 is no similarity (of the two things co
mpare
d since
) (in
the ca
se
 of Brahma
n any se
cond
 thing) is not ap
pre
hend
ed
 or
exper
ien
ced
 li
ke w
at
er.
Ambuv
at:
 like water;
Agrahanat:
 in the absence of perception,
because of non-acceptance,
 because it cannot be accepted, not
being experienced;
Tu
:
 but;
Na:
 not, no;

T
athatv
am:
 that nat
ure,
similarity
.
An ob
jec
tion to t
he pre
ced
ing Su
tra is raised by the
Purvap
akshin.
An ob
jec
tion is raised by the P
urvap
akshin that the sim
i
lar
ity
spo
ken of in the pre
ced
ing Su
tra is not ap
pro
pri
ate or cor
rect. In t
he
above il
lus
tra
tion the sun is seen to be sep

a rate from the wa
ter
. Sun
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
349

has a form. It
 is a ma
te
rial thing. W
a
ter is dif

fer ent from t
he sun and is
at a dis
t
ance from the sun. Hence the sun may be re
flected in t
he wa
-
ter
. But
 Brah
man is form
less and all-per
vad
ing.
It is not a m
a
te
rial thing. A
ll are iden
ti
cal with it.
 There are no lim
-
it
ing ad
junct
s dif

fer ent from it
 and oc
cu
py
ing a dif

fer ent place, that
 can
catch it
s re
flec
tion. I
t is not seen to be sep

a rate from the Up
adhis or
lim it ing
ad juncts.
Brah
man is all-per
vad
ing. So no ob
ject can be at a dis
t
ance
from Him. The sun is re
flected in wa
ter be
cause of it
s dis
t
ance from
wa
ter
. But
 there can be no such dis
t
ance be
tween Brah
man and any
ob
ject. Hence re
flec
tion in thi
s con
nec
tion is a mean
ing
less term.
There
fore the in
st
ances are not p
ar
al
lel. The com
p
ar
i
son is de
-
fec ti
ve.
The next S
u
tra re
moves the ob
jec
tion.
d¥{Õ
õmg^m−Ë
d_ÝV^m©
dmXw^`
gm_ÄO
ñ`mXod_
V
riddhihrasabhaktvamant
arbhavadubhay
a-
 samanjasy
adev
am
III
.2.20 (338)
As (the highe
st Brahman) is inside
 (its limiting adjuncts) I
t
participat
es in their incr
ease
 and decrease
; owing
 to the
app
rop
riate
ne
ss (th
us re
sul
ting) o
f the
 two (th
ings c
omp
are
d),
it i
s th
us, (
i.e.
, t
he compar
ison h
olds good)
.
V
riddhihrasabhaktvam:
 p
articip
ating in the i
ncrease and decreas
e;
Ant
arbhavat:
 on account of it
s being inside;
Ubhay
a-samanjasy
at:
on account of the appropriateness in the t
wo cases;
Evam:
 thus.
(
V
riddhi:
 increase; Hrasa: decrease;
Ubhay
a:
 towards both;
Samanj
asy
at:
 because of the justness, appropriateness.)
The ob
jec
tion raised in the pre
ced
ing Su
tra is re
futed.
The com
p
ar
i
son with the re
flec
tion of t
he sun should not be
t
aken on all fours. When
ever two things are com
p
ared they are so
only with ref

er ence to some p
ar
tic
u
lar point or fea
ture they hav
e in
com
mon. En
tire equal
ity of
 the two can never be dem
on
strated. I
f it
could be shown, there would be an end of that
 p
ar
tic
u
lar re
la
tion
which gives rise to the com
p
ar
i
son. Ex
act si
mil
i
tude in all point
s would
mean
ab so lute
iden tity
.
The sim
i
lar
ity i
s only in point of
 the p
ar
tic
i
p
a
tion in the di
s
tor
tion
and con
tor
tion in in
crease and de
crease of the im
age or re
flec
tion.
The re
flected im
age of the sun di
lates when the sur
face of the wa
ter
ex
p
ands; it con
tract
s when the wa
ter shrinks; it trem
bles when the
wa
ter is ag
i
t
ated; it
 di
vides it

self when the wa ter is di
vided. I
t thus p
ar
-
tic
i
p
ates in all the at

trib utes and con
di
tions of the wa
ter; while t
he real
sun re
mains all the t
ime the same.
Even so Brah
man al
though in re
al
ity uni

form and never chang -
ing, p
ar
tic
i
p
ates as it were in the at
trib
utes and st
ates of the body
 and
the other lim
it
ing ad
junct
s within which It abides. I
t grows with them as
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
350

it were, de
creases with them as it were and so on. As the t
wo things
com
p
ared pos
sess cer
t
ain com
mon fea
tures, no ob
jec
tion can be
made to the com
p
ar
i
son. The com
p
ar
i
son is cer
t
ainly not
 de
fec
tive on
ac
count of the abov
e sim
i
lar
ity i
n the two cases.
Darsanaccha
III
.2.21 (339)
And on ac
count
 of t
he declarat
ion of
 scri
ptur
e.
Darsanat:
 as it is found to be so,
 because it is seen, on account of
scrip tural
declaration;
Cha:
 and, also.
A
 fur
ther rea
son is given to re
fute t
he ob
jec
tion raised in
Sutra 19.
The scrip
ture more
over de
clares that the Su
preme Brah
man
en
ters into the body
 and other lim
it
ing ad
junct
s. ﬁHe made bod
ies with
two feet,
 He made bod
ies with four feet
. That High
est Brah
man first
en
tered the bod
ies as a bird. He is called the Purusha on ac
count of
His dwell
ing in all bod
iesﬂ (Bri. Up. II
.5.18). ﬁHav
ing en
tered into t
hem
with this lur
ing in
di
vid
ual selfﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
.3.2). F
or all these rea
sons
the com
p
ar
i
son set forth in Su
tra 18 is not de
fec
tive.
There
fore it is es
t
ab
lished that B
rah
man is form
less, ho
mo
ge
-
neous, of the na
ture of in
tel
li
gence, and with
out any dif

fer ence.
Scrip ture
de clares
that
de vout
med i t
a tions
on
Brah man
with
form have re
sult
s of their own viz.,
 ei
ther the ward
ing of
f of ca
lam
i
ties,
or the gain
ing of power
, or else re
lease by suc
ces
sive step
s (Krama
Mukti
or
pro gres sive
eman ci p
a tion).
Prakrit
ait
av
attvad
hikaranam
: T
opic 6 (Sutras 22-30)
The Neti-neti t
ext explained
àH¥
$V¡VmdÎd§ {
h à{Vfo
Y{V VVmo ~«
Prakrit
ait
av
attvam
 hi pratished
hati

t
ato braviti cha bhuy
ah
III
.2.22 (340)
Wha
t ha
s been mention
ed up to th
is is
 denied (by t
he words
ﬁnot this, not thisﬂ
 and the
 Sruti) says s
ome
thing more
 than
that (a
fte
rward
s).
Prakrit
ait
av
attvam
:
 what bas been mentioned up to t
his;
Hi:
because, for;
Pratishedhati
:
 denies;
T
at
ah:
 then that
, over and
above that
;
Brav
iti:
 declares;
Cha:
 and;
Bhuy
ah:
 something more.
(
Prakrit
a:
 mentioned fi
rst, previously
 st
ated;
Et
av
attvam
:
 this much.)
In this group of S
utras also the Sutrakara ex
pounds the
Nirvisesha (form
less) Brah
man.
The Sruti de
clares ﬁThere are two forms of Brah
man, gross and
sub
tle, t
he ma
te
rial and the im
ma
te
rial, the mor
t
al and the im
mor
t
al,
the lim
ited and the un
lim
ited, S
at and T
yatﬂ (Bri.
 Up. II.
3.1).
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
351

Af

ter de scrib
ing the two f
orms of Brah
man, the gross con
sist
ing
of earth, wa
ter and fire, and t
he sub
tle, con
sist
ing of air and ether
, the
Sruti de
clares fi
nally ﬁNow
, there
fore, the de
scrip
tion of B
rah
man; not
this
, not th
isﬂ
 (Bri
. Up. II.3
.6).
There arises a doubt whether the dou
ble de
nial in ﬁnot thi
s, not
thisﬂ ne
gates both the world and B
rah
man, or only one of
 them.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent main
t
ains that both are de
-
nied and con
se
quently B
rah
man which is false, can
not be the sub
-
stra
tum for a uni
verse which is also false. It l
eads us to Sunyav
ada. If
one only is de
nied it is proper that B
rah
man is de
nied, be
cause It is
not seen and there
fore It
s ex
is
tence is doubt

ful and not the uni
verse
be cause
we
ex pe ri ence
it.
This Su
tra re
futes this v
iew of the P
urvap
akshin. It is im
pos
si
ble
that t
he phrase ﬁNot so, not soﬂ should neg
a
tive bot
h, as that would
im
ply the doc
trine of a gen
eral void. The words ﬁNeti,
 Netiﬂ can
not be
said to deny B
rah
man as well as it
s hav
ing form, be
cause that would
be Sunyav
ada.
The Sruti af

firms Brah man. What is t
he good of teach
ing Brah
-
man and say
ing that it
 is non-ex
is
tent? Why smear y
our
self with mud
and then wash it? So B
rah
man is be
yond speech and mind and is
eter
nal, pure and free. I
t is a mass of con
scious
ness. There
fore the
Sruti de
nies that Brah
man has form but not
 Brah
man it

self.What has been de
scribed till now
, viz.
, the t
wo forms of Brah
-
man: gross and sub
tle, is de
nied by the words, ﬁnot t
his, not thi
sﬂ.
Brah
man can
not be de
nied, be
cause that would con
tra
dict the
in
tro
duc
tory phrase of the Chap
ter
. ﬁShall I
 tell y
ou Brah
man?ﬂ (Bri.
Up. II.
1.1), would show dis
re
gard of the threat
 con
veyed in T
ait. Up.
II.
6. ﬁHe who knows the Brah
man as non-ex
ist
ing be
comes him
self
non-ex
ist
ing,ﬂ would be op
posed to def
i
nite as
ser
tions such as ﬁHe isﬂ
ﬁHe is to be ap
pre
hendedﬂ (Katha Up. II
.6.13); and would cer
t
ainly in
-
volve a st
ul
ti
fi
ca
tion of t
he whole V
edant
a.
The phrase that Brah
man tran
scends all speech and thought
does cer
t
ainly not
 mean to say t
hat Brah
man does not ex
ist, be
cause
af

ter the Sruti has es
t
ab
lished the ex
is
tence of Brah
man in such text
s
as ﬁHe who know
s Brah
man ob
t
ains the High
estﬂ, ﬁT
ruth, Knowl
edge,
In
fin
ity i
s Brah
manﬂ. It
 can
not be sup
posed all at once to teach it
s
non-ex
is
tence. Be
cause the com
mon say
ing is ﬁBetter t
han bath
ing it
is not to touch dirt
 at all.ﬂ The S
ruti tex
t ﬁFrom whence all speech with
the mind turns away un
able to reach itﬂ (T
ait. Up.
 II.
4), must there
fore
be viewed as in
ti
mat
ing Brah
man.
ﬁNot so, not soﬂ neg
a
tives t
he en
tire ag
gre
gate of ef

fects su
per
-
im
posed on Brah
man, but not
 Brah
man which is the ba
sis for all fic
ti
-
tious
su per im po si tions.
It
de nies
of
Brah man
the
lim ited
form,
ma
te
rial as well as im
ma
te
rial which in the pre
ced
ing p
art of the chap
-
ter is de
scribed with ref
er
ence to the gods as well as the body
, and
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
352

also the sec
ond form which is pro
duced by the fi
rst, is char
ac
ter
ised
by men
t
al im
pres
sions, forms the es
sence of that which is im
ma
te
rial,
is de
noted by t
he term Purusha.
The dou
ble rep
e
ti
tion of t
he ne
ga
tion may
 ei
ther serve the pur
-
pose of fur
nish
ing spe
cial de
nial of the m
a
te
rial as well as the im
ma
-
te
rial form of B
rah
man; or the f
irst ‚not so™
 may neg
a
tive t
he ag
gre
gate
of ma
te
rial el
e
ment
s, while the sec
ond de
nies the ag
gre
gate of men
-
t
al im
pres
sions. Or else the rep
e
ti
tion may
 be an em
phatic one, in
ti
-
mat
ing that what

ever can be thought is not Brah
man.
The Sruti de
nies that Brah
man has form but not
 Brah
man it

self.It in
ter
dict
s by two ne
ga
tions the gross and the sub
tle bod
ies. Or it in
-
ter
dict
s Bhut
as (el
e
ment
s) and V
asanas. Or the rep
e
ti
tion is for st
at
-
ing the de
nial of all sim
i
lar as
sump
tions. So t
he de
nial de
nies the
world as su
per
im
posed on Brah
man and does not deny B
rah
man it

-
self
.
Af

ter the ne ga
tion of Net
i Neti, t
he Sruti goes on to de
scribe in
pos
i
tive t
erms the fur
ther at
trib
utes of this B
rah
manŠHis name be
ing
the T
rue of the true (
Satyasya Satyam
). More
over af

ter mak ing such a
de
nial, it
 af

firms the ex

is tence of some
thing higherŠ
Anyat
Paramast
i; Sat
yasya Satyam
ŠThe T
ruth of T
ruth. This in
ti
mates that
Brah
man alone is the one re
al
ity t
hat ex
ist
s and is the sub
stra
tum of
the world which is il
lu
sory
.
‚Neti Neti™
 de
nies the so-much
ness of Brah
man, as was de
-
scribed in the pre
ced
ing Sutras. I
t says that
 the ma
te
rial and im
ma
te
-
rial is not the whole of
 Brah
man. It
 is some
thing more than t
hat. The
word ‚Iti™
 re
fers to what has been men
tioned im
me
di
ately be
fore, i.
e.,
the two forms of
 Brah
man, the sub
ject mat
ter of the di
s
cus
sion.
Hence it can
not re
fer to Brah
man it

self which is not the chief topic of
the
pre ced ing
text
s.
The ob
jec
tion vi
z., Brah
man is not ex
pe
ri
enced and there
fore it
is Brah
man that is de
nied, has no force. It
 can
not st
and, be
cause the
ob
ject of the S
ruti is to teach about
 some
thing which is not or
di
narily
ex pe ri enced
by
us.
Oth er wise
it
s
teach ing
would
be
su per flu ous.
W
e, there
fore, de
cide that the clause ﬁnot so,
 not soﬂ, neg
a
tives
not ab
so
lutely
 ev
ery
thing, but
 only ev
ery
thing but B
rah
man.
T
adav
y
akt
amaha hi
III
.2.23 (341)
That (Bra
hman)
 is no
t mani
fe
st, for (
so th
e s
crip
ture
) say
s.
Ta
t
:
 that (i.
e., B
rahman);
A
v
y
akt
am:
 is not manifest
;
Aha:
 (so the
scripture) says;
Hi:
 for
, because.
The char
ac
ter of Brah
man is dis
cussed.
This is a Purvap
aksha Su
tra.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
353

Brah
man is be
yond the senses, so the Srut
i de
clares. If Brah
-
man ex
ist
s, then why is It
 not ap
pre
hended by the senses or the
mind? Be
cause It is ex
tremely sub
tle and is the wit

ness of what ever is
ap pre hended
i.e.,

sub ject
in
the
ap pre hen sion.
The
in di vid ual
souls
are en
vel
oped by ig
no
rance. Hence they are not able t
o per
ceive
Brah
man. The Srut
i de
clares ﬁBrah
man is not ap
pre
hended by the
eye, nor by t
he speech, nor by the other senses, nor by pen
ance, nor
by good worksﬂ (Mun. Up. III
.1). ﬁThat S
elf is to be de
scribed by no,
no! He is in
com
pre
hen
si
ble, for He can
not be com
pre
hendedﬂ (Bri.
Up. III
.9.26). ﬁThat
 which can
not be seen nor ap
pre
hendedﬂ (Mun.
Up. I.1
.6).
ﬁWhen
in
that
which
is
in vis i ble,

in cor po real,
un de fined,
un sup
-
portedﬂ (T
ait. Up.
 II.
7). Sim
i
lar st
ate
ment
s are made in Smriti p
as
-
sages, e.g., ﬁHe is called un
evolved,
 not to be f
ath
omed by thought
,
un change able.ﬂ
A{n M
 g§amY
Zo à
Ë`jmZw_
mZä`m_²
Api cha samradh
ane praty
akshanumanabh
y
am
III
.2.24 (342)
And mor
eover (Bra
hman
 is experienced) i
n devout m
edita
tion
(as we
 know) from
 the Sruti a
nd Smriti.
Api cha:
 and moreover;
Samradhan
e:
 in devout m
edit
ation;
Praty
akshanumanabh
y
am:
 from the S
ruti and the S
mriti.
The
dis cus sion
on
the
char ac ter is tic
of
Brah man
is
con tin ued.
The word ‚Api™
 set
s aside the Purvap
aksha. It is used in a
deprecative sense. The above P
urvap
aksha is not even wor
thy of
con sid er ation.
Brah
man is ex
ceed
ingly sub
tle. Hence He can
not be seen by
the phys
i
cal eyes. He is be
yond the senses. But
 Y
o
gis be
hold Him in
their pu
ri
fied minds. I
f Brah
man is not man
i
fest, t
hen we can never
know Him and there
fore there will be no f
ree
dom.
This Su
tra de
clares that Brah
man is not known only to t
hose
whose heart is not pu
ri
fied, but
 those who are en
dowed with a pure
heart real
ise Brah
man in the st
ate of S
am
adhi when ig
no
rance is an
-
ni hi lated.
This is vouched for by S
rutis as well as Smritis. ﬁThe S
elf-ex
is
-
tent cre
ated the senses with out-go
ing ten
den
cies. There
fore man
be
holds the ex
ter
nal uni
verse but not t
he in
ter
nal Self.
 Some wise
man, how
ever
, with his eyes closed and wish
ing for im
mor
t
al
ity be
-
holds the Self
 withinﬂ (Katha Up.
 IV
.1). ﬁWhen a man™
s mind has be
-
come pu
ri
fied by t
he se
rene light of knowl
edge, then he sees Him,
med
i
t
at
ing on Him as with
out p
art
sﬂ (Mun. Up. III
.1.8).
The Smriti
 also says the same thing ﬁHe who is seen as light by
the Y
ogins med
i
t
at
ing on Him sleep
lessly
, with sus
pended breath,
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
354

with con
tented minds and sub
dued senses, etc., rev
er
ence be to
Himﬂ and ﬁthe Y
ogins see Him, the au
gust, eter
nal one!ﬂ
àH
$mem{Xd…
md¡eoî
`§ à
H$meü
 H$_
©Ê`ä`mgmV²
Prakasadiv
acchav
aiseshy
am prakasascha
 karmany
abhy
asat
III
.2.25 (343)
And a
s in the c
ase
 of (physi
cal) light and
 the lik
e, the
re is no
difference, so also be
tween Brahman and Its manifestati
on in
activ
ity; on
 acc
ou
nt of the
 rep
ea
ted
 instru
ctio
n (of th
e S
ruti to
that e
ffec
t).
Prakasadiv
at:
 like light and t
he like;
Cha:
 also, and;
A
v
aiseshy
am:
simi
larity
, non-dif
ference, non-distinction;

Prakasah:
 Brahman;
Cha:
and;
Karmani:
 in work;
Abhy
asat:
on account of repeated ment
ion
(in the Sruti
).
The dis
cus
sion on the char
ac
ter of Brah
man is con
tin
ued.
The iden
tity
 of Jiva and Brah
man is ex
plained. Just as light,
ether
, the sun, et
c., ap
pear dif

fer en
ti
ated as it were, t
hrough their ob
-
ject
s such as fin
gers, ves
sels, wa
ter
, etc.,
 which form the lim
it
ing ad
-
junct
s while in re
al
ity t
hey pre
serve their es
sen
tial non-dif

fer ence, so
also the dis
tinc
tion of dif

fe r
ent selves is due to li
m
it
ing ad
junct
s only
,
while the unity
 of all selves is nat

u ral and orig
i
nal. Through ig
no
rance
the in
di
vi
d
ual soul thinks he is dif

fer ent from B
rah
man, but in re
al
ity he
is iden
ti
cal with Brah
man.
As in the case of light
, etc.,
 the self-lu
mi
nous Brah
man ap
pears
di
verse in med
i
t
a
tion and other act
s. This is clear from the Srut
i say
-
ing ﬁ
T
at Tvam
 Asi
ﬂ nine times.
The V
edant
a text
s in
sist again and again on the doc
trine of t
he
non-dif

fer ence of the in
di
vid
ual soul and the Su
preme Soul. The i
den
-
tity
 of the in
di
vid
ual soul with the S
u
preme Soul is known from re
-
peated in
struc
tion of t
he Sruti in t
ext
s like ﬁThat Thou artŠ
T
at Tvam
Asi
ﬂ, ﬁI am Brah
manŠ
Aham
 Brahma A
smi
ﬂ which deny dif

fer ence.
AVmo@ZÝ
VoZ VW
m {h {
Ato™nantena t
atha hi lingam
III
.2.26 (344)
Therefore
 (the individ
ual sou
l be
come
s one
) with the Infinite
;
for thu
s the
 (scri
ptu
re)
 indi
cate
s.
At
ah:
 hence, therefore;
Anantena:
 with the I
nfinite;

T
atha:
 thus;
Hi:
because, for;
Lingam:
 the indication (of
 the scriptures).
The re
sult of reali
sa
tion of B
rah
man is st
ated here.
By t
he reali
sa
tion of B
rah
man the medit
ator be
comes iden
ti
cal
with the I
n
fi
nite. I
g
no
rance with all it
s lim
it
ing ad
junct
s van
ishes when
one at
t
ains Brahma Jnana. There is in
di
ca
tion to t
hat ef

fect in Sruti,
ﬁHe who knows
 the high
est Brah
man be
comes Brah
man Him
selfﬂ
(Mun. Up. II
I.2.
9). ﬁBe
ing Brah
man he goes to Brah
manﬂ (Bri. Up.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
355

IV
.4.6). I
f the dif

fer ence were real, then one could not be
come Brah
-
man Him
self. Dif

fer ence is only il
lu
sory or un
real. Jiva is only
 a mere
shadow or re
flec
tion. He is mere ap
pear
ance. Just as the re
flec
tion of
the sun in the wa
ter get
s ab
sorbed in the sun it

self when the wa ter
dries up, so also the re
flected Jiva get
s ab
sorbed in Brah
man when
ig
no
rance is de
stroyed by t
he dawn of Knowl
edge of Brah
man.
C^`ì
`nX
oemÎd
{hHw$Ê
&
Ubhay
av
y
ap
adesattv
ahikundal
av
at
III
.2.27 (345)
Bu
t on a
cco
unt o
f bo
th (i.e
., diffe
ren
ce
 and
 non-
diffe
ren
ce
)
be
ing taught (by the
 Sruti), (the re
lation o
f the highe
st
Brah
man t
o the in
dividua
l soul h
as to be vi
ewed) like th
at of
the snake to its coils.
Ubhay
av
y
ap
adesat:
 on account of both being t
aught;
Tu
:
 but;
Ahikundalavat:
 like that bet
ween a serpent and it
s coils. (
Ubhay
a:
both;
V
y
ap
adesat:
 on account of the declaration of
 the scrip
ture;
Ahi:
serpent;
Kundalavat:
 like the coils.)
The dis
cus
sion on the char
ac
ter
is
tic of Brah
man is re
sumed.
Sutras 27 and 28 ex
press the views of the Bhedabhedav
adins.
Su
tra 29 gives the real v
iew
.
Hav
ing es
t
ab
lished the iden
tity
 of the in
di
vid
ual soul and Brah
-
man the Sut
rakara or the au
thor men
tions a dif

fer ent view of
 the same
mat
ter
. He now pro
ceeds to en
quire into the doc
trine of dif

fer ence and
non-dif
 fer ence.
Some scrip
tural tex
t
s re
fer to the S
u
preme Soul and the in
di
vid
-
ual soul as dis
tinct en
ti
ties: ﬁT
wo birds of beau
ti
ful plum
age, etc.ﬂ
(Mun. Up. II
I.1.
1). This text
 speaks of dif

fer ence be
tween the Jiva and
Brah man.
In some other tex
t
s the Su
preme Soul is rep
re
sented as the ob
-
ject of ap
proach and as the ruler of the in
di
vid
ual soul. ﬁThen he sees
him med
i
t
at
ing on him as with
out p
art
sﬂ (Mun. Up. III
.1.8). ﬁHe goes to
the Di
vine Per
son who is greater than the greatﬂ (Mun. Up. I
II.
2.8).
ﬁWho rules all be
ings within.ﬂ
In other tex
t
s again the two are spo
ken of as non-dif

fer ent.
ﬁThou art Thatﬂ (Chh. Up. V
I.8.
7). ﬁI am Brah
manﬂ (Bri. Up. I
.4.10).
ﬁTh
is is
 thy Self w
ho is
 with
in al
lﬂ (
Bri. U
p. III.4.1
). ﬁH
e is
 thy Self, th
e
ruler within, t
he im
mor
t
alﬂ (Bri. Up. I
II.
7.15).
As thus dif

fer ence and non-dif

fer ence are equally vouched for
by the S
ruti tex
t
s, the ac
cep
t
a
tion of ab
so
lute non-dif

fe r
ence would
ren
der fu
tile all t
hose text
s which speak of dif

fer ence. There
fore we
have to t
ake that their re
la
tion is one of dif

fer ence and non-dif

fer ence,
as be
tween a ser
pent and it
s coils. As a ser
pent it is one non-dif

fer ent,
but if we look at t
he coils, hood, erect pos
ture, and so on, t
here is dif

-
fer ence.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
356

Even so there is dif

fer ence as well as non-dif

fer ence be
tween
the in
di
vid
ual soul and Brah
man. The dif

fer ence be
tween them prior
to eman
ci
p
a
tion is real. The Jiv
a be
comes iden
ti
cal with Brah
man
only when his ig
no
rance is de
stroyed by t
he dawn of knowl
edge of
Brah man.
Their sep

a rate
ness and one
ness is like a ser
pent in qui
es
cence
and mo
tion.
àH
$meml`dÛm V
oOñ
Prakasasray
av
adv
a tejastv
at
III
.2.28 (346)
Or lik
e (
the
 rel
atio
n of) l
ight an
d its
 sub
stratu
m, on a
cco
unt o
f
both bein
g lumi
nous.
Prakasasray
av
at:
 like light and it
s substratum;
Va
:
 or;
T
ejastv
at:
 on
account of both being lum
inous.
The re
la
tion be
tween Brah
man and the in
di
vid
ual soul also is
dis cussed
.
Or else the re
la
tion of t
he two may be v
iewed as fol
lows. An
-
other il
lus
tra
tion is given t
o es
t
ab
lish the the
ory of dif

fer ence and
non-dif

fer ence. Just as the light of
 the sun and it
s sub
stra
tum, i.
e., t
he
sun it

self, are not ab so
lutely
 dif

fer ent, be
cause they both con
sist of
fire and yet
 are spo
ken of as dif

fe r
ent, so also the in
di
vid
ual soul and
the Su
preme Soul (Brah
man).
The light and t
he sun are both lu
mi
nous. Hence they are non-dif

-
fer
ent. They
 are dif

fer ent ow
ing to their v
ary
ing ex
tensity
. Sim
i
larly is
the re
la
tion be
tween the in
di
vid
ual soul and the Su
preme Soul one of
dif

fer ence and non-dif

fer ence. The for
mer is lim
ited and the lat

ter isall-per vad ing.
nyd©dÛ
Pu
r
va
va
d
va
III
.2.29 (347)
Or (the
 rel
atio
n be
twe
en
 the
 two, i.e
., Jiva
 and
 Brah
man i
s) as
(given) b
efore
.
Pu
r
va
va
t
:
 as before;
Va
:
 or
.
Or it may be as st
ated in Su
tra 25. This last i
s the real view
, be
-
cause if the in
di
vid
ual soul is an
other st
ate of B
rah
man or a ray of
Brah
man, such in
her
ent lim
i
t
a
tion will nev
er dis
ap
pear
. The Sruti
 af

-
firms iden
tity
 and st
ates the fea
ture of di
ver
sity which is due to A
vidya.
The two pre
vi
ous Sutras ex
press the view of
Bhedabhedavadins who main
t
ain the doc
trine of dif

fer ence and
non-dif
 fer ence.
This Su
tra re
futes the v
iew of Bhedabhedav
adins and es
t
ab
-
lishes the fi
nal truth which has been de
clared in Su
tra 25, vi
z., that
 the
dif

fer ence is merely il
lu
sory
, and iden
tity
 or non-dif

fer ence is the
reality
.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
357

If t
he bond
age of the soul is due to A
vidya or ig
no
rance only
, fi
-
nal lib
er
a
tion is pos
si
ble. But
 if the soul is re
ally bound,
 whether the
soul be re
garded as a cer
t
ain con
di
tion or st
ate of t
he Su
preme Soul
or Brah
man, as st
ated in Su
tra 27, or as a p
art of the S
u
preme Soul,
as ex
pressed in Su
tra 28Šit
s real bond
age can
not be de
stroyed.
Thus
the
scrip tural
doc trine
of
fi nal
lib er a tion
be comes
pur pose less
and ab
surd.
If t
he dif

fer ence is real it can never come to an end. A
ll the scrip
-
tural in
struc
tions with re
gard to the fi

nal eman ci
p
a
tion will be mean
-
ing
less. Bond
age is only the idea of
 sep
a
rate
ness. If sep

a rate
ness is
real there can be no fi
nal re
lease at all. B
ut if t
he dif

fer ence is due to
ne
science or ig
no
rance, then knowl
edge of Brah
man or
Brahma-Jnana can an
ni
hi
late it.
 Then the Su
preme Re
al
ity or B
rah
-
man, the non-dif

fer ence may be real
ised.
It can
not be said that t
he Sruti equally
 teaches dif

fer ence and
non-dif

fer ence. The Sruti ai
ms at es
t
ab
lish
ing non-dif

fer ence only
. It
merely re
fers to dif

fer ence as some
thing known from other sources of
knowl edge,
viz.,

per cep tion,
etc.
Hence the views ex
pressed in Sutras 27 and 28 are not cer
t
ainly
cor
rect. The view giv
en in Su
tra 25 alone is cor
rect.
The con
clu
sion is that the soul is not
 dif

fer ent from t
he Su
preme
Soul or Brah
man as ex
plained in Su
tra 25.
à{Vfo
Pratishedhacch
a
III
.2.30 (348)
And on a
ccount
 of t
he denial.
Pratishedhat:
 on account of denial;
Cha:
 and, moreover
.
Su
tra 29 is con
firmed.
The Sruti in f
act ex
pressly de
nies sep
a
rate
ness.
The con
clu
sion ar
rived at abov
e is con
firmed by t
he fact of
scrip ture
ex pressly
de ny ing
that
there
ex ist
s
any
in tel li gent

be ing
ap
art from Brah
man or the Su
preme Soul. ﬁThere is no other S
eer but
HeŠ
Nanyato™
sti Drasht
a
ﬂ (Br
i. Up
. III.7.23
).
The same con
clu
sion fol
lows from those p
as
sages which deny
the ex
is
tence of a world ap
art from Brah
man, and thus leav
e Brah
-
man alone re
main
ing, vi
z., ﬁNow then the t
each
ingŠnot thi
s, not thisﬂ
(Bri. Up. I
I.3.
6). ﬁThat Brah
man is with
out cause and with
out ef

fect,with
out any
thing in
side or out

sideﬂ (Bri. Up. II.5.19).
It is now an es
t
ab
lished fact that
 there is no other en
tity
 but
Brah
man. There
fore there is only one B
rah
man with
out any dif

fer -
ence at all.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
358

Paradhikar
anam: T
opic 7 (Sutras 31-37)
Brahman i
s one without a second
na_Vñ
goVyÝ
_mZg
å~Ý
Y^oXì`
nXoeoä
&
Paramat
ah setunmanasam
bandha-
 bhedav
y
ap
adesebhy
ah
III
.2.31 (349)
(There is
 some
thing) Supe
rior to this (B
rahman) on a
ccou
nt of
term
s de
notin
g a b
ank
, me
asu
re,
 con
ne
ctio
n and
 diffe
ren
ce
(us
ed
 with re
spe
ct to I
t).
Param:
 greater;
At
ah:
 for this, t
han this (Brahman);
Setunmanasam
bandhabhedav
y
ap
adesebhy
ah:
 on account of
terms denoting a bridge,
measure, connection and dif
ference. (
Setu:
a bridge;
Unmana:
 dimensions;
Sambandha:
 relation;
Bheda:
dif
ference;
V
y
ap
adesebhy
ah:
 from the declarations.
)
It may
 be said that there must
 be some
thing higher than B
rah
-
man be
cause Brah
man is de
scribed as a bridge, or as lim
it
ed or as at
-
t
ained by man or as dif

fer ent from man.
There arises now the doubt on ac
count of the con
flict
ing na
ture
of var
i
ous scrip
tural st
ate
ment
s whether some
thing ex
ist
s be
yond
Brah
man or not.
The Purvap
akshin holds that some en
tity
 must be ad
mit
ted
ap
art from Brah
man, be
cause Brah
man is spo
ken of as be
ing a bank,
as hav
ing size, as be
ing con
nected, as be
ing sep

a rated. As a bank it
is spo
ken of in the p
as
sage ﬁThe Self is a bank, a bound
aryﬂ (Chh. Up.
VII
I.4.
1). The term bank in
ti
mates that t
here ex
ist
s some
thing ap
art
from Brah
man, just as there ex

ists some
thing dif

fer ent from an or
di
-
nary bank. The same con
clu
sion is con
firmed by t
he words ﬁHav
ing
p
assed the bankﬂ (Chh. Up. VIII
.4.2). I
n or
di
nary life a m
an af

ter hav -
ing crossed a bank, reaches
 some place which is not a bank, let us
say a for
est. So we must un
der
st
and that a man af

ter hav ing crossed,
i.e.,
 p
assed be
yond Brah
man, reaches some
thing which is not Brah
-
man.
As hav
ing size Brah
man is spo
ken of in the fol

low ing p
as
s
ages
ﬁThis Brah
man has four feet (quar
ters), eight hoof
s, six
teen p
art
sﬂ
(Chh. Up. III
.18.2). Now it
 is well known from or
di
nary ex
pe
ri
ence that
wher
ever an ob
ject, e.g.
, a coin has a def
i
nite lim
ited size, there ex

ists
some
thing dif

fer ent from t
hat ob
ject. There
fore we must as
sume that
there also ex
ist
s some
thing dif

fer ent from B
rah
man.
Brah
man is de
clared to be con
nected in the fol

low ing p
as
sages.
ﬁThen he is united with t
he T
rueﬂ (Chh. Up. VI.8.
1). ﬁThe em
bod
ied
self is em
braced by the Su
preme Selfﬂ (Bri.
 Up. IV
.3.21). W
e ob
serve
that non-mea
sured things are con
nected with the t
hings mea
sured,
e.g.,
 men with a town.
 Scrip
ture de
clares that the in
di
vid
ual souls are
in the st
ate of deep sleep con
nected with Brah
man. There
fore we
con
clude that be
yond Brah
man there is some
thing un
mea
sured.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
359

The same con
clu
sion is con
firmed by t
hose text
s which stat
e dif

-
fer
ence. ﬁNow that golden per
son who is seen within the sun.ﬂ The
text
 re
fers to a Lord re
sid
ing in the sun and then men
tions a Lord re
-
sid
ing in the ey
e dis
tinct from t
he for
mer: ﬁNow the per
son who is
seen within the eye.
ﬂ
The Sruti de
clares ﬁThe At
man is to be seenﬂ etc. There is a
seer and there is the seen. There is dif

fer ence.
All these in
di
cate that B
rah
man is not one with
out a sec
ond, and
that t
here ex
ist
s some
thing dif

fer ent from B
rah
man.
gm_mÝ`mÎmw
Samany
attu
III
.2.32 (350)
But (Brahman i
s called a bank e
tc.) on account
 of similar
ity.
Samany
at:
 on account of similarity
;
Tu
:
 but.
The ob
jec
tion raised in the pre
ced
ing Su
tra is re
futed here.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) re
moves the doubt
. It
 set
s aside the pre
vi
-
ously
es t
ab lished
con clu sion.
There can ex
ist noth
ing dif

fer ent from B
rah
man. Brah
man is
called the bank, etc.
, be
cause He re
sem
bles it in a cer
t
ain re
spect. He
is the sup
port of all while cross
ing over this ocean of t
he world, just as
a bank is a great pro
tec
tion or help in cross
ing a ca
nal.
There can ex
ist noth
ing dif

fer ent from B
rah
man as we are not
able to ob
serve a proof for such ex
is
tence. All
 things pro
ceed from
Brah
man. The Srut
i says that by
 know
ing Brah
man ev
ery
thing will be
known. How then can there be any other en
tity
? Bridge or bank
means like a bridge or bank.
Brah
man is called a bank on ac
count of sim
i
lar
ity
, not be
cause
there ex
ist
s some
thing be
yond Him. I
f the mere f
act of Brah
man be
-
ing called a bank im
plied the ex

is tence of some
thing be
yond Him as
in the case of an or
di
nary bank, we should also be forced to con
clude
that B
rah
man is made of earth and stones.
 This would go against the
scrip
tural doc
trine that
 Brah
man is not some
thing pro
duced.
Brah
man is called a bank be
cause it re
sem
bles a bank in cer
-
t
ain re
spect
s. Just as a bank dams back the wa
ter and makes the
bound
ary of ad
ja
cent fields, so also Brah
man sup
port
s the world and
it
s bound
aries.
In the clause quoted abov
e ﬁHav
ing p
assed that bankﬂ the verb
‚to p
ass™
 can
not be t
aken in the sense of ‚go
ing be
yond™
 but must
rather mean ‚to reach fully
™. ﬁHav
ing p
assed the bankﬂ means ﬁhav
ing
at
t
ained Brah
man fully
ﬂ and not hav
ing crossed it just as we say of a
stu
dent ﬁhe has p
assed in the gram
marﬂ mean
ing thereby t
hat he has
fully
 mas
tered it.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
360

~wÕ
çW©– nmX
Buddhy
arthah p
adavat
III
.2.33 (351)
(T
he statement as to Brahman havin
g size) is for t
he sake
 of
easy compr
ehension (
i.e.,
 Upasan
a or devout m
editat
ion)
; jus
t
like
 (four) fee
t.
Buddhy
arthah:
 for the sake of easy comprehension;
Padav
at:
 just
like (four) feet.
The st
ate
ment
s as to the size of Brah
man ﬁBrah
man has four
feet,
ﬂ ﬁIt has six
teen dig
it
s,ﬂ etc., are meant
 for the sake of Up
asana or
de vout
med i t
a tion,
be cause
it
is
dif
 fi cult
to
un der st
and
the
In fi nit
e,
most
sub tle,
all-per vad ing
Brah man.
In
or der
to
fa cil i t
ate
pi ous
med i
-
t
a
tion on the p
art of less in
tel
li
gent peo
ple four feet
 etc., are as
cribed
to Brah
man.
The de
scrip
tion of B
rah
man as hav
ing a lim
ited form
(Shodasakala, 16 p
art
s) is for the sake of med
i
t
a
tion just as Padas,
i.e.,
 speech etc., are de
scribed in re
spect of mind.
Just as mind con
ceived as the per
sonal man
i
fes
t
a
tion of B
rah
-
man is imag
ined to have t
he or
gan of speech, nose, eyes and ears as
it
s four feet,
 so also Brah
man is imag
ined as hav
ing size, etc.,
 for fa
-
cil
ity of
 med
i
t
a
tion but not
 in re
al
ity
.
ﬁPrac
tise med
i
t
a
tion, t
ak
ing the mind as Brah
man,ﬂŠthis is t
he
form of wor
ship with the aid of
 the con
stit
u
ent
s of the in
di
vid
ual
soulŠﬁThis Brah
man is of four feet
, namely
, the speech as a foot,
 the
chief vi
t
al en
ergy as a foot,
 the eyes as a foot
, and the ears as a footﬂ
(Ch
h. Up
. III.18.1
-2)
.
ñWmZ{deo
fmV² à
H$mem{
S
thanav
iseshat prakasadiv
at
III
.2.34 (352)
(The state
me
nts conc
erning c
onne
ction and
 diffe
rence
 with
respect to Brahman) are due to spe
cial places: as in th
e case
 of
light and the
 like
.
S
thanav
iseshat:
 on account of special places;
Prakasav
at:
 like light
and the like.
Su
tra 33 is fur
ther con
firmed.
The
st
ate ment
s
re gard ing
con nec tion
and
dif
 fer ence
are
made
with a view t
o dif

fer ence of place. The st
ate
ment
s re
gard
ing dif

fer -
ence are made with ref
er
ence to lim
it
ing ad
junct
s (Buddhi, etc.) only
and not to any
 dif

fer ence in the na
ture of Brah
man.
When the cog
ni
tion of dif

fer ence which is pro
duced by Brah
-
man™
s con
nec
tion with dif

fer ent places i.e.,
 with the Budd
hi and the
other lim
it
ing ad
junct
s, ceases ow
ing to the ces
sa
tion of t
hose lim
it
ing
ad junct
s
them selves,
con nec tion
with
the
Su p reme
Self
is
met
 a phor i
-
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
361

cally said to t
ake place; but that
 is done with a view to t
he lim
it
ing ad
-
junct
s only
, not wit
h a view to any
 lim
i
t
a
tion on the p
art of Brah
man.
This is sim
i
lar to the case of light
 and the like. The l
ight of t
he sun
also is dif

fer en
ti
ated by it
s con
nec
tion with li
m
it
ing ad
junct
s. The light
is said to be di
vided on ac
count of these ad
junct
s. It is said t
o en
ter
into con
nec
tion or un
ion when the ad
junct
s are re
moved.
W
e see two moons on ac
count of an eye-dis
ease. W
e see only
one when the dis
ease is re
moved.
Light is re
ally one but
 we speak of light in
side a room and light
out

side it. The dis
tinc
tion is due to li
m
it
ing ad
junct
s. The light i
n
side
the room may be said t
o be united with t
he light in gen
eral when the
room is de
stroyed.
Other ex
am
ples of the ef

fect of lim
it
ing ad
junct
s are fur
nish
ed by
the ether en
ter
ing into con
nec
tion with t
he eyes of nee
dles and the
like.
CnnÎmoü
Up
ap
attescha
III
.2.35 (353)
And it is reasonable.
Up
ap
atteh:
as it becomes reasonable;
Cha:
 also, and.
Fur
ther only such a con
nec
tion as de
scribed above is pos
si
ble.
Be
cause scrip
tural p
as
sages such as
 ﬁHe is gone to his selfﬂ (Chh.
Up. VI.
8.1) de
clare that the con
nec
tion of t
he soul with the Su
preme
Soul is one of es
sen
tial na
ture. The es
sen
tial na
ture of a thi
ng is im
-
per
ish
able. Hence the con
nec
tion can
not be like that
 of the in
hab
it

-
ant
s with the town.
The con
nec
tion can only be ex

plained with ref er
ence to an ob
-
ser
va
tion ow
ing to ig
no
rance of the true na
ture of the soul.
Sim
i
larly the di
f

fer ence re
ferred to by scrip
ture can
not be real
but due to ig
no
rance, be
cause many text
s de
clare that there ex

ists
only one Brah
man.
Scrip
ture teaches that t
he one ether is made man
i
fold as it were
by it
s con
nec
tion with dif

fer ent places. ﬁThe ether which is out

sideman is the ether which is in
side man, and the et
her within the heartﬂ
(Ch
h. Up
. III.12.7
).
Hence con
nec
tion and dif

fer ence are not to be t
aken as real, but
only
met
 a phor i cally
.
VWmÝ`à{VfoY
T
athany
apratishedhat
III
.2.36 (354)
Similarly on ac
count o
f the e
xpre
ss de
nial of all o
ther things
(there
 is nothing b
ut Brahma
n).
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
362

T
atha:
 similarly;
Any
apratishedhat:
 on account of the ex
press
denial of all ot
her things. (
Any
a:
 any other
, of t
he other;
Pratishedhat:
 owing to the denial,
 or prohibition or negation.
)
Fur
ther the Srut
i de
nies ex
pressly that t
here is any other en
tity
be sides
Brah man.
(
Brahmai
vedam Sarvam
; At
maivedam
 Sarvam
).
Brah
man is de
scribed as the in
ner
most of all.
Hav
ing thus re
futed t
he ar
gu
ment
s of the Purv
ap
akshin, the au
-
thor or Sutrakara in con
clu
sion strength
ens his view by a fur
ther rea
-
son.
A
 great num
ber of V
e
dic p
as
sages dis
tinctly
 deny the ex

is tence
of any
thing else be
sides Brah
man. ﬁHe in
deed is be
low; I am be
low;
the Self
 is be
lowﬂ etc. (Chh. Up. VI
I.25.
1.2). ﬁWho
so
ever looks for
any
thing else
where than in the Sel
f was aban
doned by ev
ery
thingﬂ
(Bri. Up. I
I.4.
6). ﬁBrah
man alone is all thisﬂ (Mun.
 Up. II.
2.1
1). ﬁThe
Self is all
 thisﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
I.25.
2). ﬁIn it t
here is no di
ver
sityﬂ (Bri.
 Up.
IV
.4.19). ﬁHe to whom t
here is noth
ing su
pe
rior
, from whom t
here is
noth
ing dif

fer entﬂ (Svet
. Up. II
I.9). ﬁThi
s is the Brah
man with
out cause
and with
out ef

fect, with
out any
thing in
side or out

sideﬂ (Bri. Up.II.
5.19). That
 there is no other self withi
n the High
est Self f
ol
lows from
that scrip
tural p
as
sage which teaches Brah
man to be within ev

ery -
thing
 (Bri
. Up. II.5
.19)
.
There
fore Brah
man is one with
out a sec
ond.
AZo
Z gd©JVËd_
m`m_eãX
Anena sarv
agat
atv
amay
amasabdadi
bhy
ah
III
.2.37 (355)
By this t
he Omniprese
nce (of Brahman is establish
ed) in
accordance with th
e scriptural stat
eme
nts regardin
g
(Brah man™s)

exte
nt.
Anena:
 by this;

Sarv
agat
atv
am:
 all-pervadingness;
A
y
ama:
(regarding Brahman™
s) extent;

Sabdadibhy
ah:
 from scriptural
st
atement
s.
By t
he re
ject
ing of the t
ak
ing of the de
scrip
tion as bridge or bank
etc., in t
heir ac
tual sense, it i
s clear that Brah
man has
all-pervadingness. Such Om
ni
pres
ence is clear also from such words

as A
yama. I
f you t
ake the de
scrip
tion as bridge etc.,
 in their ac
tual
sense but not in the f
ig
u
ra
tive sense, B
rah
man will be
come lim
ited,
and con
se
quently not
 eter
nal. But
 the Sruti
 and Smriti de
scribe Brah
-
man as un
lim
ited and all-per
va
sive. The word A
yama means per
va
-
sive. The all
-pervadingness of Brah
man fol
lows from the very
 fact
that it
 is one with
out a sec
ond.
That Brah
man is Om
ni
pres
ent fol
lows from the tex
t
s pro
claim
-
ing it
s ex
tent.
 ﬁAs large as this ether is, so large is that et
her within the
heartﬂ (Chh. Up. VII
I.1.
3). ﬁLike the ether
, he is Om
ni
pres
ent and eter
-
nal.ﬂ ﬁHe is greater than the sky
, greater than t
he etherﬂ (Sat. B
r
.
X.6.
3.2). ﬁHe is eter
nal, Om
ni
pres
ent, f
irm, im
mov
ableﬂ (Git
a. II
.24).
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
363

Phaladh
ikaranam: T
opic 8 (Sutras 38-41)
The Lord is the giver of the f
ruit
s of actions
\$b_V
 CnnÎmo
Phalam
at
a up
ap
atteh
III
.2.38 (356)
From
 Him
 (the
 Lord
) are
 the
 fruits
 of ac
tions
, for tha
t is
reasonable.
Phalam:
 the fr
uit;
At
ah:
 from Him only;
Up
ap
atteh:
 for that i
s
reasonable.
An other
char ac ter is tic
of
Brah man
is
es t
ab lished.
The Mimamsakas hold that t
he Karma (work) and not the Lord
gives the f
ruit
s of one™
s ac
tions.
The Su
tra re
futes it and de
clares that the fruit
s of one™
s work
viz.,
 p
ain, plea
sure and a mix
ture of the t
wo, come only f
rom the Lord.
The Lord of all who knows all the dif

fer ences of place and time
alone is ca
p
a
ble of be
stow
ing fruit
s in ac
cor
dance with the merit of
the agent
s. Karma is in
sen
tient and short-liv
ed. It
 ceases to ex
ist as
soon as it is done. It
 can
not there
fore be
stow the fruit
s of ac
tions at a
fu
ture date ac
cord
ing to one™
s merit.
How can fruit which is pos
i
tive re
sult from such non-ex
is
tence?
Y
ou can
not say that
 Karma died af

ter gen er
at
ing the fruit
 which
at
t
a
ches it

self to the doer in due time, be
cause it is called fruit only
when it is en
joyed.
Y
ou can
not say also that
 Karma gen
er
ates Apurva which giv
es
fruit.
 Apurva is Achet
ana (non-sen
tient).
 It can
not act un
less moved
by some in
tel
li
gent be
ing. It
 can
not, t
here
fore, be
stow re
wards and
pun
ish
ment
s. Fur
ther there is no proof what
ever for the ex

is tence of
such an Apurva.
There
fore the fruit
s of ac
tions come to men f
rom Isvara or the
Lord
only
,
who
is
Eter nal,

Om nip o tent
,
Om ni scient,
All-com p
as sion
-
ate.
lwVË
Srut
atv
accha
III
.2.39 (357)
And becau
se the Sruti so teaches.
Srut
atv
at:
 because the Sruti so teaches, f
rom the declaration of t
he
Sruti
 to tha
t ef
fect;
Cha:
 also, and.
The pre
ced
ing Su
tra is strength
ened on the sup
port of Srut
i.
The Sruti also de
clares that the fruit
s of ac
tions come from the
Lord. ﬁThis in
deed is the great, un
born Self,
 the giver of
 food, and t
he
giver of wealt
h (the fruit of
 one™
s work)ﬂ
 (Bri. Up. I
V
.4.24).
Y_ª O¡{_{ZaV
&
Dharmam Jai
mini
rat
a ev
a
III
.2.40 (358)
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
364

Jaim
ini thin
ks fo
r the
 sam
e re
aso
ns (v
iz., sc
riptu
ral au
tho
rity
and reasoning, on t
he same ground as stated in Sutras 38 and
39
) that re
ligio
us m
eri
t (is wh
at bri
ngs a
bo
ut the
 fruits
 of
actions).
Dharmam:
 practice of religious duties, reli
gious merit
s;
Jaiminih
:
 the
sage Jaimini;
At
a ev
a:
 for the same reasons.
An ob
jec
tion is raised to Sut
ras 38 and 39.
The view of t
he Sutras 38 and 39 is be
ing criti
cised.
Jaimini says that
 Dharma gives fruit
s of ac
tions as Sruti and rea
-
son sup
port such a view
.
Scrip
ture, Jaimini ar
gues, pro
claims in
junc
tions such as the fol
-
low
ing one ﬁHe who is de
sir
ous of the heav
enly world is to sac
ri
ficeﬂ. It

is ad
mit
ted that
 ev
ery scrip
tural in
junc
tion has an ob
ject. There
fore it
is rea
son
able to think t
hat the scrip
ture it

self brings about the fruit or
the re
sult, i.
e., t
he at
t
ain
ment of t
he heav
enly world. I
f this were not
so, no
body would per
form sac
ri
fices and thereby scrip
tural in
junc
-
tions would be ren
dered pur
pose
less.
But it
 may be ob
jected that an ac
tion can
not pro
duce a re
sult at
a fu
ture time as it
 is de
stroyed.
Jaimini says: A
 deed can
not pro
duce re
sult at some fu
ture time,
un
less be
fore p
ass
ing away
, it giv
es birth to some un
seen re
sult. W
e,
there fore,
as sume
that
there
ex ist
s
some
ex tra or di nary
prin ci ple
called Apurva which is pro
duced by the Karma be
fore it is de
stroyed.
The re
sult is pro
duced at some fu
ture time on ac
count of this A
purva.
This hy
poth
e
sis re
moves all dif

fi cul
ties. But
 on the con
trary it i
s
im
pos
si
ble that t
he Lord should ef

fect the fruit
s of Kar
mas. Be
cause
one uni
form cause (Isvara) can
not cause va
ri
ety of
 ef

fects. He will
have p
ar
tial
ity and cru
elty;
 and Karma will be
come pur
pose
less, i.e.,
 if
the deed it

self can not bring about it
s own fruit, it
 would be use
less to
per
form it at
 all.
For all these rea
sons the re
sult springs from the ac
tion only
,
whether mer
i
to
ri
ous or non-mer
i
to
ri
ous. (This is the view of
 Jaimini).
nydª V
w ~mX
am`
Umo hoV
wì`n
Xoem
Purv
am Baadaray
ano hetuv
y
ap
adesat
III
.2.41 (359)
Bu
t Baa
dara
yana
 think
s the
 forme
r (i.e
., the
 Lord
 to b
e th
e
cause o
f the fr
uits of action)
 on account of His being declared
to be the cause
 (of the actions t
hemselve
s).
Purvam:
 the former
, i. e.
, the Lord as the giv
er of the fruit
s of actions;
Tu
:
 but;
Baadaray
anah:
 Baadarayana, t
he framer of the S
utras
(holds);
Hetuv
y
ap
adesat:
 on account of His being declared the
cause (of the actions themselv
es).
The view of Jaimi
ni ex
pressed in Su
tra 40 is re
futed by
 cit
ing a
con trary
one.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 2
365

The word ‚T
u™
 (but) re
futes the v
iew of Su
tra 40. It
 set
s aside the
view of t
he fruit be
ing pro
duced ei
ther by the m
ere ac
tion or the mere
Apurva.
The sage Baadarayana holds the f
or
mer
, i.e.
, the Lord is the
Dis
penser of the fruit
 of ac
tions. The S
ruti clearly st
ates that all
 re
-
wards whether heaven or un
ion with the Lord come from Him
, ﬁHe
t
akes one to a purer world by vir
tue of one™
s pi
etyŠ
Punyena punyam
lokam nayati
ﬂ. Also Kat
ha Up
anishad (I.2.23) de
clares ﬁHe gives Him
-
self away to whom
so
ever He choosesŠ
Y
amevaisha vrinute tena
labhyah
ﬂ.
Baadarayana says that
 the Lord be
stows the fruit
s of deeds be
-
cause Sruti says that t
he Lord in
duces the do
ing of ac
tions and gives
the fruit
s thereof. A
s the Lord act
s ac
cord
ing to the v
a
ri
ety of
 Kar
mas,
he can pro
duce and give a va
ri
ety of
 re
sult
s and has no par
tial
ity and
cru
elty
, and Karma will not
 be
come pur
pose
less.
The Lord is the causal agent with ref
er
ence to all ac
tions
whether good or evil. K
aushit
aki Upani
shad (III.
8) de
clares ﬁHe
makes him whom He wishes to lead up from these worlds do a good
deed and the same makes him whom He wishes to lead down from
these worlds do a bad deed.ﬂ
The same is said in Bhagavad Git
a (VII.
21-22), ﬁWhich
ever di
-
vine form a dev

o tee wishes to wor
ship with fait
h, to t
hat form I
 ren
der
his faith steady
. Hold
ing that f
aith he striv
es to pro
pi
ti
ate the de
ity and
ob
t
ains from it t
he ben
e
fit
s he de
sires, as or
dained by Me.
ﬂ
More
over all V
edant
a text
s de
clare that the Lord is the onl
y
cause of all cre
ations. The Lord cre
ates all be
ings in forms and con
di
-
tions cor
re
spond
ing to and re
trib
u
tive of
 their for
mer Kar
mas. Hence
the Lord is the cause of all f
ruit
s of ac
tions. As t
he Lord has re
gard for
the merit and de
merit of t
he souls, the ob
jec
tions raised above that
 a
uni
form cause is in
ca
p
a
ble of pro
duc
ing var
i
ous ef

fects, etc., are wit
h
-
out any f
oun
da
tion.
T
o sum up, the na
ture of the S
u
preme Brah
man has been de
-
scribed. Brah
man has been shown to be form
less, self-lu
mi
nous and
with
out dif

fer ence. It has been es
t
ab
lished through ﬁNeti-Netiﬂ ﬁnot
this, not t
hisﬂ doc
trine that
 Brah
man is one with
out a sec
ond. It
 has
been con
clu
sively prov
ed that t
he Lord is the Dis
penser of the fruit
s of
Kar
mas of the peo
ple.
Thus ends the Sec
ond Pada (Sec
tion II) of the Third Adhy
ay
a
(Chap
ter III) of the Brahma Sutras
 or the V
edant
a Phi
los
o
phy
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
366

CHAPTER III
SECTION 3
INTRODUCTION
In the pre
vi
ous Sec
tion (Pada 2) it
 has been shown that the Jiva
(Tvam Pada of
 the T
at-Tvam-A
si Mahavakya) is iden
ti
cal with Brah
-
man (T
at Pada of
 T
at-Tvam-A
si Mahavakya). B
rah
man has been
shown to be Ekarasa (of ho
mo
ge
neous or un
chang
ing na
ture). W
e
have ex
plained the na
ture of the ob
ject of cog
ni
tion, i.
e., B
rah
man.
The au
thor of the B
rahma Sutras now set
s him
self to as
cer
t
ain
the end and aim of
 the V
idyas (med
i
t
a
tions of Up
asanas) as pre
-
scribed in the Srutis.
The Srutis pre
scribe var
i
ous kinds of V
idyas or med
i
t
a
tions to
en
able the as
pi
rant to at
t
ain the knowl
edge of iden
tity
. It
 is ex
tremely
dif

fi cult or rather im
pos
si
ble for the or
di
nary man to hav
e a com
pre
-
hen sive
un der st
and ing
of
the
In fi nit
e,
which
is
tran scen dent,
ex
-
tremely sub
tle and be
yond the reach of t
he senses and gross
un
dis
ci
plined in
tel
lect. There
fore the Srut
is or the sa
cred scrip
tures
pre
scribe easy meth
ods of Saguna med
i
t
a
tion for ap
proach
ing the In
-
fi
nite or the A
b
so
lute. They
 pres
ent var
i
ous sym
bols of Brah
man
(Pratikas) such as V
aisvanara or V
irat, S
un, Akasa, Food,
 Prana and
mind for the neo
phyte or the be
gin
ner to con
tem
plate on. These sym

-
bols are props for t
he mind to lean upon in t
he be
gin
ning. The gross
mind is ren
dered sub
tle, sharp and one-pointed by
 such Saguna
forms
of
med i t
a tion.
These
dif
 fer ent
meth ods
of
ap proach ing
the
Im per sonal
Ab so
-
lute are known as V
idyas or Up
asanas.
This Sec
tion dis
cusses these var
i
ous V
idyas by means of
 which
the Jiva or the i
n
di
vid
ual soul at
t
ains Brah
man or the Su
preme Soul.
Sim
i
lar V
idyas are de
scribed dif

fer ently i
n dif

fer ent recensions of the
V
edas. Now the ques
tion arises nat
u
rally whether these sim
i
lar
V
idyas are one and the same or dif

fer ent, whether sim
i
lar V
idyas
have to be com
bined into a sin
gle Up
asana or med
i
t
a
tion or to be
t
aken sep
a
rately
. It
 is de
cided here which V
idyas are the same and
have to be com
bined into one and which V
idyas are dif

fer ent de
spite
cer t
ain
sim i lar
fea tures.
The aim and ob
ject of all V
idyas is the at
t
ain
ment of B
rah
man or
the Im
per
ish
able. Brah
man alone is the only
 liv
ing Re
al
ity
. Brah
man
alone is T
ruth. Brah
man is Sat or Ex

is tence Ab
so
lute. Hence it m
ay
be ad
van
t
a
geous and help

ful to com bine the p
ar
tic
u
lars of the same
V
idya men
tioned in dif

fer ent recensions or Sakhas as they have been
367

found
highly
ef
 fi ca cious
and
im mensely
ben e fi cial
by
the
fol low ers
of
those Sakhas.
He who med
i
t
ates on Brah
man as mind as is t
aught in the
T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad, Bhrigu V
alli, must
 col
late all t
he at
trib
utes of the
mind not only
 from his own p
ar
tic
u
lar V
e
dic Sakha, but f
rom other
Sakhas also where med
i
t
a
tion on Brah
man in the form
 of mind is
t
aught. I
n med
i
t
at
ing on Brah
man as mind, he must not
 bring to
gether
at
trib
utes not be
long
ing to mind such as those of f
ood, though B
rah
-
man is t
aught to be med
i
t
at
ed upon as food also. In f
act only t
hose at
-
trib
utes are to be sup
plied from other S
akhas which are taught
 about
the
p
ar ti c u lar
ob ject
of
med i t
a tion,
and
not
any
at trib ut
e
in
gen eral.
In this Sec
tion Sri V
yasa the framer of
 the Brahma S
utras con
-
cludes that most of
 the V
idyas pre
scribed in the Srutis have f
or their
ob
ject the knowl
edge of Brah
man or Brahma-Jnana. They di
f

fer onlyin form but not
 in sub
st
ance. Their fi
nal goal is the at
t
ain
ment of ev

er -
last ing
peace,
eter nal
bliss
and
im mor t
al ity
.
One
med i t
a tion
or
Up
asana or V
idya is as good as an
other for at
t
ain
ing the fi
nal eman
ci
-
p
a tion.
Sruti t
eaches us to med
i
t
ate on Brah
man ei
ther di
rectly or
through the me
dium of some Prat
ikas or sym
bols, such as the sun,
Akasa, food, m
ind, Prana,
 the Purusha re
sid
ing in the ey
e, the empt
y
space (Daharakasa) within the heart,
 Om or Pranava and t
he like.
Y
ou will have to search Brah
man and adore Him in and through
the sym
bols, but these sym

bols must not usurp His place. You must
con
cen
trate and fi
x the mi
nd on these sym
bols and think of His at
trib
-
utes
such
as
Om nip o tence,
Om ni science,
Om ni pres ence,
Sat-Chit-A
nanda,
pu rity
,
per fec tion,
free dom,
etc.
The V
idyas ap
pear to be dif

fer ent only f
rom the view-point
 of dif

-
fer
ence in the sym
bols but the goal ev

ery where is the same. Re
mem
-
ber this point al
ways. Bear thi
s in mind con
st
antly
.
Some at
trib
utes of Brah
man are found com
mon in some of the
V
idyas. Y
ou should not con
sider your
self as a dis
tinct en
tity
 from
Brah
man. This is a fun
da
men
t
al or vi
t
al point.
In all the V
idyas three thi
ngs are com
mon. The fi

nal goal is theat
t
ain
ment of et
er
nal bliss and im
mor
t
al
ity
, through the reali

sa tion of
Brah
man with or with
out the aid of
 the sym
bols or Pratikas. The at
trib
-
utes which are found in com
mon in all the V
idyas such as bliss
ful
-
ness,
pu rity
,
per fec tion,
knowl edge,
im mor t
al ity
,
Ab so lute
Free dom
or
Kaivaly
a,
Ab so lute
In de pend ence,
eter nal
sat is fac tion
and
the
like
must be in
vari
ably as
so
ci
ated with t
he con
cep
tion of B
rah
man. The
medit
ator must think him

self iden ti
cal with Brah
man and must wor
-
ship Brah
man as his Im
mor
t
al At
man.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
368

SYNOPSIS
Adhikaranas I and II:
 (Sutras 1-4; 5) are con
cerned with the
ques
tion whether those V
idyas which are met with in i
den
ti
cal or sim
i
-
lar form in more than one sa
cred text,
 are to be con
sid
ered as con
sti
-
tut
ing sev
eral V
idyas or one V
idya only
. The V
idyas with iden
ti
cal or
sim
i
lar form met wit
h in the scrip
tures or in dif

fer ent recensions of the
scrip
tures, are one V
idya. P
ar
tic
u
lars of iden
ti
cal V
idyas men
tioned in
dif

fer ent places or Sakhas are to be com
bined with one med
i
t
a
tion.
Adhikarana III
:
 (Sutras 6-8) dis
cusses the case of V
idyas which
are sep
a
rate on ac
count of dif

fer ent sub
ject-mat
ter
, al
though in other
re spects
there
are
sim i lar i ties.
The
ex am ples
se lected
are
the
Udgitha V
idyas of t
he Chhandogya Up
anishad (I.1.3) and t
he
Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad (I.3.1).
 Al
though they
 in
di
cate cer
t
ain
sim
i
lar
i
ties such as bear
ing the same name and the Udgit
ha be
ing in
both iden
ti
fied with P
ranaŠyet t
hey are to be held ap
art, be
cause the
sub
ject of the Chhandogy
a V
idya is not t
he whole Udgitha but only
 the
sa
cred syl
la
ble OM while Brihadarany
aka Upanishad rep
re
sent
s the
whole Udgitha as the ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion.
Adhikarana IV
:
 (Su
tra 9). In t
he p
as
sage, ﬁLet one med
i
t
ate on
the syl
la
ble ‚OM™
 (of) the Udgithaﬂ (Chh. Up. I
.1.1), t
he Omkara and
the Udgitha st
and in the re
la
tion of one spec
i
fy
ing the other
. The
mean
ing is ﬁLet one med
i
t
ate on that
 Omkara whichﬂ etc.
Adhikarana V
:
 (Su
tra 10) in
ti
mates that t
here should be no mis
-
t
ake in the iden
tity
 of the P
rana V
idya as t
aught in Chhandogya,
Brihadaranyaka and Kaushit
aki. It de
ter
mines the unity
 of the
Prana-V
idyas and the con
se
quent com
pre
hen
sion of the dif

fer ent
qual
i
ties of the P
rana, which are men
tioned in the di
f

fer ent tex
t
s
within
one
med i t
a tion.
Adhikarana VI:
 (Sutras 1
1-13) in
ti
mates that t
he es
sen
tial and
un
al
ter
able at
trib
utes of Brah
man such as Bliss and knowl
edge are to
be t
aken into ac
count ev
ery
where while those which ad
mit of i
n
-
crease and de
crease as for in
st
ance the at
trib
ute of hav

ing joy for it
s
head, men
tioned in the T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad are con
fined to spe
cial
med i t
a tions.
Adhikarana VII
:
 (Sutras 14-15) teaches that the ob
ject of Kat
ha
Up
anishad (III.
10, 1
1) is one only
, viz.
, to in
di
cate that t
he Su
preme
Self is higher t
han ev
ery
thing, so that
 the p
as
sage forms one V
idya
only
.
Adhikarana VII
I:
 (Sutras 16-17) in
ti
mates that t
he Self re
fer
red
to in Ait
areya Aranyaka (II
.4.1.
1) is not a lower form of t
he self
(Sutratman or Hiranyagarbha),
 but the S
u
preme Self.
369

Adhikarana IX:

(Su
tra 18) dis
cusses a mi
nor point con
nected
with the Prana-samv
ada. Rins
ing the mouth
is not en
joined in the
Prana-V
idya, but
 only thi
nk
ing the wa
ter as the dress of Prana.
Adhikarana X:
 (Su
tra 19) de
clares that the V
idyas in the same
Sakha which are iden
ti
cal or sim
i
lar have to be com
bined, for t
hey are
one.
Adhikarana XI:
 (Sutras 20-22). In Brihadarany
aka Upanishad
(V
.5), Brah
man is rep
re
sented first as abid
ing in the sphere of the sun
and then as abid
ing within the right
 eye. The nam
es ﬁAharﬂ and
ﬁAhamﬂ of the S
u
preme Brah
man abid
ing in the sun and in the right
eye re
spec
tivel
y can
not be com
bined, as these are two sep

a rate
V
idyas.
Adhikarana XII
:
 (Su
tra 23). At

trib utes of Brah
man men
tion
ed in
Ranayaniya-Khi
la are not to be t
aken into con
sid
er
ation in other
Brahma-V
idyas, e.
g., t
he Sandilya V
idya, as t
he for
mer is an in
de
-
pend
ent V
idya ow
ing to the dif

fer ence of Brah
man™
s abode.
Adhikarana XII
I:
 (Su
tra 24) point
s out that t
he Purusha-V
idya of
Chhandogya is quite dif

fer ent from t
he Purusha-V
idya of T
ait
tiriya
though they
 p
ass by the same name.
Adhikarana XIV
:
 (Su
tra 25) de
cides that cer
t
ain de
t
ached
Mantras like ﬁPierce the whole body of
 the en
emyﬂ etc.,
 and sac
ri
fices
men
tioned at t
he be
gin
ning of cer
t
ain Up
anishadsŠas for in
st
ance, a
Brahmana about t
he Mahavrat
a cer
e
mony at t
he be
gin
ning of the
Ait
areya-Aranyaka, do,
 not
with
st
and
ing their po
si
tion which seems to
con
nect them with t
he Brahma-V
idya, not
 be
long to the lat

ter, as they
show
un mis t
ak able
signs
of
be ing
con nected
with
sac ri fi cial
act
s.
Adhikarana XV
:
 (Su
tra 26) treat
s of the p
as
sage st
at
ing that t
he
man dy
ing in the pos
ses
sion of true knowl
edge shakes of
f all his good
and evil deeds and af

firms that a state
ment made in some of
 those
p
as
sages, only to t
he ef

fect that the good and evil
 deeds pass over t
o
the friends and en
e
mies of the de
ceased, is valid for all
 the p
as
sages.
Adhikarana XVI
:
 (Sutras 27-28) de
cides that the shak
ing of the
good and evil deeds t
akes place not as the Kaushit
aki Upani
shad
st
ates on the road to B
rahmaloka or the world of Brah
man but at t
he
mo
ment of t
he soul™
s de
p
ar
ture from the body
.
Adhikarana XVI
I:
 (Sutras 29-30) in
ti
mates that t
he knower of the
Saguna Brah
man alone goes by the p
ath of t
he gods af

ter death andnot the knower of the Nirguna B
rah
man. The soul of hi
m who knows
the Nirguna Brah
man be
comes one with it with
out mov
ing to any
other place.
Adhikarana XVI
II:
 (Su
tra 31) de
cides that the road of t
he gods is
fol
lowed not only by
 those who know the V
idyas which spe
cially men
-
tion the go
ing on that road but
 all who are ac
quainted with t
he Saguna
V
idyas of Brah
man.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
370

Adhikarana XIX
:
 (Su
tra 32) de
cides that, al
though the gen
e
ral
ef

fect of true knowl
edge is re
lease from all forms of
 body
, yet
 even
per
fected souls may be re
born for the ful
fil
ment of some di
vine mis
-
sion.
Adhikarana XX:
 (Su
tra 33) teaches that t
he neg
a
tive at

tri b
utes
of Brah
man men
tioned in some V
idyas such as it
s be
ing not gross,
not sub
tle, et
c., are to be com
bined in all med
i
t
a
tions on Brah
man.
Adhikarana XXI
:
 (Su
tra 34) de
ter
mines that K
athop
anishad
(III.
1), and Mundaka (III
.1), con
sti
tute one V
idya only
, be
cause both
p
as
sages re
fer to the hi
gh
est Brah
man.
Adhikarana XXI
I:
 (Sutras 35-36) main
t
ains that the t
wo p
as
-
sages (Bri. Up. III
.4 and II
I.5), con
sti
tute one V
idya only
, the ob
ject of
knowl
edge be
ing in both cases Brah
man viewed as the I
n
ner Self of
all.
Adhikarana XXI
II:
 (Su
tra 37) de
cides that the p
as
sage in
Ait
areya Aranyaka (II
.2.4.
6) con
sti
tutes not one but
 two med
i
t
a
tions.
The Sruti en
joins re
cip
ro
cal med
i
t
a
tion and not m
erely one way
.
Adhikarana XXI
V
:
 (Su
tra 38) de
ter
mines that t
he V
idyas of t
he
T
rue (Satya B
rah
man) con
t
ained in Bri. Up.
 (V
.4.1 and V
.5.2) is one
only
.
Adhikarana XXV
:
 (Su
tra 39) de
cides that the at

trib utes men
-
tioned in Chh. Up. (V
III
.1.1) and Bri.
 Up. (IV
.4.32) are to be com
bined
on ac
count of a num
ber of com
mon fea
tures in both the t
ext
s.
Adhikarana XXV
I:
 (Sutras 40-41) main
t
ains that Pranagnihot
ra
need not be ob
served on days of fast
.
Adhikarana XXV
II:
 (Su
tra 42) de
cides that those med
i
t
a
tions
which are con
nected with cer
t
ain sac
ri
fices are not p
art
s of them and
there fore
not
in sep
 a ra bly
con nected
with
them.
Adhik
ara
na XXVIII:
 (Su
tra 43) teaches that in a B
ri. Up. p
as
sage
and a sim
i
lar Chh. Up. p
as
sage, med
i
t
a
tions on V
ayu and Prana are
to be kept sep

a rate in spite of t
he es
sen
tial one
ness of these two.
Adhikarana XXI
X:
 (Sutras 44-52) de
cides that the f
ire-al
t
ars
made of mind et
c., which are men
tioned in the A
gnirahasya of the
Brihadaranyaka are not p
art of the sac
ri
fi
cial act, but con
sti
tute a sep

-
a rate
V
idya.
Adhikarana XXX
:
 (Sutras 53-54) de
ter
mines that t
he self is a
sep
a
rate en
tity
 dis
tinct from t
he body
.
Adhikarana XXX
I:
 (Sutras 55-56) de
cides that Up
asanas or
med i t
a tions
con nected
with
sac ri fi cial
act
s,
e.g.,

the
Udgitha
Up
asana, are valid f
or all Sakhas.
Adhikarana XXX
II:
 (Su
tra 57) de
cides that the V
aisvanara
Up
asana of Chh. Up. (V
.1
1) is one en
tire Up
asana. V
aisvanara Agni is
to be med
i
t
ated upon as a whole, not in hi
s sin
gle p
art
s.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
371

Adhik
ara
na XXXIII:
(Su
tra 58) de
cides that var
i
ous V
idyas like
the Sandily
a-V
idya, Dahara-V
idya and so on, are to be kept
 sep
a
rate
and not com
bined into one en
tire Up
asana.
Adhikarana XXX
IV
:
 (Su
tra 59) teaches that t
hose med
i
t
a
tions
on Brah
man for which the tex
t
s as
sign one and the same fruit,
 are op
-
tional, t
here be
ing no rea
son for their be
ing cu
mu
lated.
Any one V
idya should be se
lected ac
cord
ing to one™
s choice.
Adhikarana XXX
V
:
 (Su
tra 60) de
cides that those med
i
t
a
tions on
the other hand which re
fer to spe
cial de
sires may or may not be com
-
bined ac
cord
ing to choice or lik
ing.
Adhikarana XXX
VI:
 (Sutras 61-66) de
cides that med
i
t
a
tions
con
nected with mem
bers of sac
ri
fi
cial act
s, such as the Udgitha may
or may not be com
bined ac
cord
ing to lik
ing.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
372

Sarv
av
edant
apraty
ay
adhikaranam
: T
opic 1 (Sutras 1-4)
The V
idyas having identical or the same f
orm
found in scriptures constitute one V
idya
gd©doX
mÝVàË``§
 MmoX
ZmÚ{deo
Sarv
av
edant
apraty
ay
am chodanady
av
iseshat
III.3.1 (
360
)
(T
he Vidyas or the Upasanas) described in the various Ve
danta
tex
ts (are
 not d
iffe
ren
t, are
 ide
ntica
l) on
 acc
ou
nt of the
non-
diffe
ren
ce
 of inj
unc
tion, e
tc., (i.e
., con
ne
ctio
n, form
 and
name
).
Sarv
av
edant
apraty
ay
am:
 exposition of
 Brahman in all t
he V
edant
a
texts;
 Chodanady
av
iseshat:
 as there is no dif
ference in the
injunctions, et
c., (i.e.
, con
nection, form and n
ame). (
Sarv
a:
 all;
V
eda:
the V
edas;
Ant
a:
 the settled conclusion;
Praty
ay
am:
 the knowledge,
realisation;
Chodanadi:
 or the injunction and ot
hers;
A
v
iseshat:
 as
there is no dif
ference.)
Can Srutis de
clare dif

fer ent Up
asanas in re
spect of one en
tity
?
If we say t
hat one Sruti
 is cor
rect and oth
ers are in
cor
rect, dis
be
lief in
Srutis as a whole will fol
low
. The Sruti
s which de
clare the na
ture of
Brah
man are not com
mands. They only
 st
ate solid fact
s.
The au
thor of the S
utras now pro
ceeds to dis
cuss whether the
Up
asana (de
vo
tional) Srut
is are di
ver
gent and sep

a rate or not. S
crip
-
tures teach that li
ke Karma, Up
asanas have var
i
ous re
sult
s. Some of
them have v
is
i
ble re
sult
s, oth
ers un
seen re
sult
s. Some Up
asanas
cre
ate true knowl
edge and lead to Krama
mukti or grad
ual lib
er
a
tion
or re
lease by suc
ces
sive step
s. With a vi
ew to those med
i
t
a
tions,
there
fore, we may raise t
he ques
tion whether the i
n
di
vid
ual
V
edant
a-text
s teach dif

fer ent Up
asanas of Brah
man or not.
There are many ex
po
si
tions of Brah
man in Sruti.
 In some Sruti
He is de
scribed as V
aisvanara, in an
other He is de
scribed as Prana
and so forth. Now a doubt may
 arise as to whether these ex
po
si
tions
are dif

fer ent or they al
l aim at one and t
he same thing.
This Su
tra re
moves the doubt
. The ex
po
si
tions in all t
he Srutis
are the same. They
 all point t
o one and the same pur
pose of wor
ship
of Brah
man, though in
 dif

fer ent forms fit

ted to the ca
p
ac
ity of
 the
medit
ator
, be
cause there is no dif

fer ence in the in
junc
tions about
med
i
t
a
tion. A
ll the in
junc
tions in
ti
mate that
 Brah
man is to be med
i
-
t
ated upon. Hence the ob
ject of those ex

po si
tions and of med
i
t
a
tion is
one and the same.
The Up
asanas of Prana are de
scribed in one way in the
Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad and in a dif

fer ent way in t
he Chhandogya
Up
anishad. Now a doubt arises whether such Upasanas de
scribed
dif

fer ently i
n dif

fer ent Sakhas of the V
edas are dif

fer ent or the same.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
373

The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent main
t
ains that they
 are dif

-
fer
ent ow
ing to the dif

fer ence in form. This S
u
tra re
futes it and de
-
clares that such med
i
t
a
tions are one and the same ow
ing to the
non-dif

fer ence as re
gards in
junc
tions, con
nec
tion, name a
nd form of
these in dif

fer ent Sakhas.
Thus, as the Agnihot
ra though de
scribed in dif

fer ent Sakhas is
yet one,
 the same kind of hu
man ac
tiv
ity be
ing en
joined in all by
means of the words ﬁHe is to of

ferﬂ, so the in junc
tion met wit
h in the
Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad (VI.1.
1.). ﬁHe who knows the old
est and
the bestﬂ, et
c., is the same as that
 which oc
curs in the text
 of
Chhandogya ﬁHe who knows the first and the bestﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.1.1).
The Prana-V
idya in all t
he Sakhas is one and the same. There is
non-dif

fer ence as re
gards the fruit of
 the Up
asana in both tex
t
s. ﬁHe
who knows it to be such be
comes the first and best among hi
s peo
-
pleﬂ (Bri. Up. V
I.1.
1). Prana is the ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion in both t
ext
s.
The name of the m
ed
i
t
a
tion in both t
ext
s is Prana-V
idya. P
rana is de
-
scribed in both text
s as the old
est and the great
est. There
fore the two
V
idyas are not dif

fer ent, as there is no dif

fer ence in all re
spect
s. The
two V
idyas are one and the same. The same i
s true of Dahara-V
idya,
Panchagni-V
idya or the knowl
edge of the f
ive fi
res, V
aisvanara-V
idya
or the knowl
edge of the V
aisvanara, Sandil
ya-V
idya, et
c., de
scribed
in
var i ous
Sakhas.
^oXmÞo
{V Mo
Þ¡H$
Bhedanneti chennai
kasy
amapi
III.3.2 (
361
)
If it be said that th
e Vidyas are se
parate on account of
diffe
rence
 (in minor po
ints), we d
eny that, sinc
e e
ve
n in the
same Vidyas (there may be such minor differences).
Bhedat:
 on account of dif
ference;
Na:
 not;
Iti:
 as, s
o, this
;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 no, not;

Ekasy
am:
 in the one and the same (V
idya);
Api:
 also,
even.
An ob
jec
tion to t
he pre
ced
ing Su
tra is raised and re
futed.
The Su
tra con
sist
s of two p
art
s namely an ob
jec
tion and it
s re
-
ply
. The ob
jec
tion is ﬁ
Bhedanneti chet
ﬂ. The re
ply is ﬁ
Naikasyamapi
ﬂ.
If y
ou say that di
f

fer ence ex
ist
s, we say that it
 is not so, be
cause
such dif

fer ences can ex
ist even in t
he same Upasana or V
idya.
Doubt
less the V
ajasaneyins re
fer to a sixt
h Agni when re
fer
ring
to Panchagni V
idya or the doc
trine of f
ive fi
res ﬁThe fire be
comes his
fireﬂ (Bri. Up. V
I.2.
24), but the Chhandogy
as do not. ﬁBut
 he who
knows these five firesﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.10.10). B
ut this will not
 make them
sep
a
rate. The Chhandogyas also can add it i
f they
 like. Thus the
V
idya as st
ated in the t
wo Srutis Brihadaranyaka and Chhandogya,
 is
iden ti cal.
The pres
ence or ab
sence of a sixth fi
re can
not make a dif

fer -
ence as re
gards form, be
cause the Shodasi ves
sel may or may not
 be
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
374

t
aken in the same Ati
ratra sac
ri
fice. The name ﬁf
ive fi
resﬂ is no ob
jec
-
tion against t
his in
crease of num
ber
, be
cause the num
ber five is not
 a
fun
da
men
t
al p
art of the i
n
junc
tion. Dif

fer ences like this are found in
dif

fer ent chap
ters even in the same S
akha and in the same V
idya,
and yet t
he V
idya de
scribed in these dif

fer ent chap
ters is re
cog
nised
by all as one.
The Chhandogya Up
anishad also ac
tu
ally men
tions a sixth f
ire,
viz.,
 in the p
as
sage V
.9.2 ﬁWhen he has de
p
arted his friends carry
him, as ap
pointed, t
o the fire.
ﬂ
There
fore it is quit
e clear that the V
idyas of t
he same class are
one
and
not
dif
 fer ent
not with st
and ing
these
dif
 fer ences
in
dif
 fer ent
Sakhas.
The Purvap
akshin says: Then again in the con
ver
sa
tion be
-
tween the Pranas, t
he Chhandogyas men
tion in ad
di
tion to t
he most
im
por
t
ant Prana four ot
her Pranas viz., speech, t
he eye, t
he ear and
the mind, whil
e the V
ajasaneyins men
tion a fif
th one also. ﬁSeed in
-
deed is gen
er
a
tion. He who knows that be
comes rich in of
f
spring and
cat
tleﬂ
 (Bri
. Up. VI.1
.6).
W
e re
ply: not
h
ing st
ands in the way of some ad
di
tional qual
i
fi
ca
-
tion be
ing in
cluded in the V
idya con
cern
ing the col
lo
quy of t
he
Pranas.
The
ad di tion
or
omis sion
of
some
p
ar tic u lar
qual i fi ca ti
on
is
not able to cre
ate dif

fer ence in the ob
ject of knowl
edge and thereby in
the knowl
edge it

self, be cause the ob
ject
s of knowl
edge may dif

ferp
artly
, yet
 their greater p
art and at the same t
ime the know
ing per
son
are un
der
stood to be the same.
There
fore the V
idya also re
mains the same.
ñdmÜ`m`ñ` VW
mËdoZ {
h g_mMma
o@{
YH
$mam… gdd… V
Sv
adhy
ay
asy
a t
athatv
ena hi samach
are™dhikar
accha
 sav
av
accha
t
anniy
amah
III.3.3 (
362
)
(The rite
 of ca
rrying fire
 on the
 he
ad i
s co
nne
cte
d) wi
th the
study of th
e Ve
da (of the Atharvan
ikas), because
 in the
Samachara (
it is mentioned) as being such. And (th
is also
follo
ws) fro
m its b
ei
ng a q
ual
ifica
tion (
for the
 stud
en
ts of th
e
Atharva Veda) as in t
he case with the (seven) oblations (viz.,
Saurya etc.).
Sv
adhy
ay
asy
a:
 of the study
 of the V
edas;
T
athatv
ena:
 on account of
being such;
Hi:
 because;
Samachare:
 in the book named
Samachara cont
aining the rules for the perf
ormance of V
edic rites;
Adhikarat:
 on account of the qualif
ication;
Cha:
 and;
Sav
av
at:
 as in
the case of the seven oblat
ions (viz., S
aurya, etc.
);
Cha:
 and, also;
T
anniy
amah:
that rule.
An ob
jec
tion based on a st
ate
ment of t
he Mundaka Upani
shad
is ex
plained and re
futed.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
375

A
 fur
ther ob
jec
tion is raised. In t
he Mundaka Upani
shad which
deals with the knowl
edge of Brah
man, the car
ry
ing of fire on t
he head
by the stu
dent (Sirovrat
a) is men
tioned. The P
urvap
akshin or the op
-
po
nent main
t
ains that the V
idyas of t
he Atharvani
kas are dif

fer ent
from all other V
idyas on ac
count of this p
ar
tic
u
lar cer
e
mony which is
prac
tised by t
he fol
low
ers of the At
harva V
eda.
This Su
tra re
futes this and says t
hat the rit
e of car
ry
ing fire on
the head is an at
trib
ute not of
 the V
idya, but
 merely of t
he study of t
he
V
eda on the p
art of the A
tharvanikas. So i
t is de
scribed in the book
Samachara which treat
s of V
e
dic ob
ser
vances.
At t
he close of the Up
anishad more
over we have the f
ol
low
ing
sen
tence, ﬁA
 man who has not per
formed the rit
e (car
ry
ing fire on the
head) does not read thisﬂ (Mun. Up. II
I.2.
1
1). This clearly in
ti
mates
that it
 is con
nected with the study
 of the Up
anishad and not with the
V
idya.
The Su
tra adds an
other il
lus
tra
tive i
n
st
ance in the words ﬁas in
the case of the li
ba
tions there is lim
i
t
a
tion of t
hatﬂ. The rit
e of car
ry
ing
the fire is as
so
ci
ated only wit
h the study of
 that p
ar
tic
u
lar V
eda and
not oth
ers, like the seven ob
la
tions from the S
aurya li
ba
tion up to t
he
Sat
audana li
ba
tion, which are not con
nected with the f
ires t
aught in
the other V
edas, but only
 with those of A
tharva V
eda. The com
mand
is to those study
ing the Mundaka Up
anishad just as the com
mand to
per
form the seven S
avas is to them.
 The car
ry
ing of a fire-pot
 on their
head will not make the V
idya dif

fer ent.
There
fore there is unity
 of V
idya in all cases. The doc
trine of t
he
unity of
 the V
idyas thus re
mains un
shaken.
Darsay
ati cha
III.3.4 (
363
)
(T
he scripture) also instr
ucts (thus).
Darsay
ati:
 (Srut
i) shows, i
nstruct
s;
Cha:
 also.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 1 is given.
The V
eda also de
clares the iden
tity
 of the V
idyas, be
cause all
V
edant
a text
s rep
re
sent the ob
ject of knowl
edge, as one, e.g.
, Kat
ha
Up
anishad (I.2.15),
 ﬁThat word which all the V
edas de
clareﬂ; Ait
areya
Aranyaka (III
.2.3.
12) ﬁHim only the B
ahvrichas con
sider in the great
hymn, t
he Adhvaryus in t
he sac
ri
fi
cial fire, t
he Chhandogyas in the
Mahavrat
a
cer e mony
.ﬂ
T
o prove the unit
y of t
he V
idyas some other in
st
ances may be
quoted. K
athop
anishad (I.6.2) men
tions as one of the Lord™
s qual
i
ties
that He causes fear
. Now this very same qual

ity is re
ferred to in the
T
ait. Up.
 II.
7: ﬁFor if he makes but t
he small
est dis
tinc
tion in the S
elf,
there is fear for him.
 But t
hat fear is only
 for him who knows a dif

fer -
ence and does not know one
ness.ﬂ
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
376

The Im
per
sonal Ab
so
lute is the one pur
port of all t
he V
edant
a
text
s. Hence all V
idyas which per
t
ain to It
 must also be one. The med
i
-
t
a
tion on the S
aguna Brah
man as V
aisvanara, who is rep
re
sented as
ex
tend
ing from heaven t
o the earth in t
he Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad
is re
ferred to in the Chhandogy
a Up
anishad, ﬁBut he who adores that
V
aisvanara Self as ex

tend ing from heaven t
o the earthﬂ (Chh. Up.
V
.18.1). T
his clearly in
di
cates that all V
aisvanara V
idyas are one.
Nirguna Brah
man is one and not many
. Saguna B
rah
man also
is one and not many
. Hence p
ar
tic
u
lar V
idyas which per
t
ain to ei
ther
Saguna Brah
man or Nirguna Brah
man are also one and not many
.
This also fol
lows from the same hymns and t
he like en
joined in the
one place be
ing em
ployed in ot
her places for the pur
pose of de
vout
med i t
a tion
or
Up
asana.
The same rule ap
plies to other V
idyas also be
sides the
V
aisvanara V
idya. There
fore, V
idyas are not many
, though t
hey are
dif

fer ently de
scribed in dif

fer ent Sakhas. Al
l V
edantic tex
t
s in
ti
mate
iden
ti
cal de
vout med
i
t
a
tions. Thus the uni
ty of
 V
idyas is es
t
ab
lished.
Up
asamharadhi
karanam: T
opic 2
Particulars of ident
ical V
idyas mentioned i
n different
 Sakhas or
places are to be combined int
o one medit
ation
Cng§hma
mo@W
m©^o
Xm{Û{
Yeo
fdËg_mZo
Up
asamharo™
rthabhedadv
idhisesh
av
at
samane cha
III.3.5 (
364
)
And in the Upasanas of t
he same class (me
ntioned in diff
er
ent
Sakhas) a combination (
of all th
e particulars mentioned in all
Sakhas is to be made) as there is no difference
 in the object of
med
itation, just as (a com
bination of) all su
bsidiary rites
 of a
main sacrif
ice (mentioned in different Sakhas is made).
Up
asamharah:
 combination;
Arthabhedat
:
 as there is no dif
ference
in the object of
 medit
ation;
V
idhisesh
av
at:
 like the subsidiary rites of
a main sacrifice;
Samane:
 in the Up
asanas of the same class, in the
case of equality
, the f
orms of medit
ation being the same i
n ef
fect;
Cha:
 also, and. (
Artha:
 purpose;
Abheda:
 non-dif
ference;
V
idhi:
injunctions, of
 the duties enjoined by
 the scriptures.)
A
 de
duc
tion is made from t
he four pre
ced
ing Sutras. Thi
s Su
tra
st
ates the prac
ti
cal out
come of the dis
cus
sion car
ried on in the first
four Sutras.
The V
idyas de
scribed in dif

fer ent Sakhas will have t
o be com
-
bined in the Up
asana, be
cause their ob
ject is one and the fruit
 also is
the same, just as in t
he case of V
idhiseshas.
The p
ar
tic
u
lars that are men
tioned in other S
akhas than one™
s
own are also ef

fi ca
cious. There
fore one will have t
o com
bine all
these, just as one does in the case of sub
sid
iary rites like Agni
hotra
con
nected with a main sac
ri
fice, men
tioned in sev
eral Sakhas.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
377

Any
athatv
adhikaranam
: T
opic 3 (Sutras 6-8)
Those V
idyas with different
 subject-mat
ter are sep
arate,
even if there m
ay be some sim
ilarities
AÝ`WmË
d§ eã
Xm{X{
V MoÞm{
deofmV²
Any
athatv
am sabdadi
ti chennav
iseshat
III.3.6 (
365
)
I
f it be
 said
 (that the
 Udgi
tha Vi
dya
 of the
 Briha
dara
nyak
a
Upanisha
d and
 that of the C
hhando
gya Upanis
had) are
diffe
ren
t on a
cco
unt o
f (diff
ere
nce
 in) te
xts; w
e d
en
y this o
n the
grou
nd o
f the
ir non
-di
ffere
nce
 (as re
gard
s e
sse
ntials
).
Any
athatv
am:
 there is dif
ference;
Sabdat:
 on account of (dif
ference
in) text
s;
Iti:
 so;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not;
A
v
iseshat:
 on account of
non-dif
ference (as regards es
sentials).
This Su
tra rep
re
sent
s the view of t
he Purvap
akshin or the op
po
-
nent. The op
po
nent tries to es
t
ab
lish that t
he two V
idyas are one.
The Su
tra con
sist
s of two p
art
s namely
, a sup
posed ob
jec
tion to
the ob
jec
tor
™
s view and it
s ref
u
t
a
tion by t
he ob
jec
tor to strengthen hi
s
case. The sup
posed ob
jec
tion is ﬁ
Anyathatvam
 sabdaditi chet
ﬂ and
the re
ply is ﬁ
Naviseshat
ﬂ.
It is said in t
he V
ajasaneyaka (I.3.
1), ﬁThe Devas said, ‚W
ell, let
us de
feat t
he Asuras at the sac
ri
fices by means of t
he Udgitha!™
 They
said to speech: ‚sing for us.™
 The speech said ‚yes™.ﬂ
The speech and the other Pranas were pierced by the Asuras
with evil.
 They were not able t
o do what was ex
pected from them
.
There
upon the Devas ap
pointed the Chief
 Prana, and said to t
he
breath in the mout
h ‚sing for us™. The breath said ‚y
es™
 and sang.
There is a sim
i
lar story in Chhandogya Up
anishad I.2. T
he
Devas took the Udgitha.
 They thought
 they would ov
er
come the
Asuras with it. T
he other Pranas were pierced with evil and t
hus van
-
quished by the A
suras. There
upon the Devas went to t
he Chief
Prana. ﬁThen co
mes the Chief Prana.
 On that t
hey med
i
t
ated as
Udgitha.ﬂ
Both t
hese pas
sages glo
rify t
he chief Prana. Hence it f
ol
l
ows
that t
hey both are in
junc
tions of a med
i
t
a
tion on the P
rana. A
 doubt
arises now whether the two V
idyas are sep

a rate V
idyas or one V
idya
only
.
The Purvap
akshin holds that the t
wo V
idyas have t
o be con
sid
-
ered as one. It may
 be ob
jected that t
hey can
not be one on ac
count of
the dif

fer ence in text
s. The V
ajasaneyins rep
re
sent the chief v
i
t
al air
as the pro
ducer of the Udgitha,
 ﬁDo thou sing out for usﬂ; while the
Chhandogyas speak of it as it

self be ing the Udgitha,
 ﬁOn that they
med
i
t
ated as Udgithaﬂ. How can this di
ver
gence be rec
on
ciled with
the as
sump
tion of t
he unity of
 the V
idyas?
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
378

But t
his is not ac
cept

able be cause there is unity as re
gards a
great many point
s. Both t
ext
s re
late that
 the Devas and the A
suras
were fight
ing; both at
 first glo
rify speech and the ot
her Pranas in their
re
la
tion to t
he Udgitha and there
upon find
ing fault wit
h them p
ass on
to the chief P
rana; both tel
l how through the strength of
 the lat
ter
, the
Asuras were van
quished.
The dif

fer ence pointed out, i
s not im
por
t
ant enough to bring
about a sep

a ra
tion of t
he two V
idyas.
The text
 of the V
ajasaneyaka also co
or
di
nates the chief P
rana
and the Udgitha in t
he clause, ﬁHe is Udgithaﬂ (Bri. Up. I.
3.23). W
e
there
fore have to as
sume that in t
he Chhandogya also the chief
Prana has sec
ond
arily to be l
ooked upon as the pro
ducer of the
Udgitha.
The two tex
t
s thus con
sti
tute one V
idya only
. There is unity
 of
V
idyas on the grounds given i
n Su
tra III
.3.1.
Z dm àH
$aU^
oXmËna
modar`ñË
dm{XdV²
Na v
a prakaranabhedatp
arov
ariy
astv
adiv
at
III.3.7 (
366
)
Or rathe
r the
re i
s no
 (uni
ty of the
 Vid
yas)
 owin
g to the
diffe
ren
ce
 of su
bje
ct ma
tter e
ve
n as (
the
 me
dita
tion o
n the
Udgi
tha) a
s the
 highe
st and
 gre
ate
st (i.e
., Brah
man)
 (is
diffe
ren
t from the
 me
dita
tion o
n the
 Udgi
tha as
 abi
ding
 in the
eye et
c.
).
Na:
 not;
Va
:
 cert
ainly;
 Prakaranabhedat:
 on account of dif
ference in
subject matter;

Parov
ariy
astv
adiv
at:
 even as (the medit
ation on the
Udgitha) as the highest and great (B
rahman) (is dif
ferent).
The ob
jec
tion raised in the pre
ced
ing Su
tra is re
futed.
The Su
tra re
futes the f
or
mer view and es
t
ab
lishes that the t
wo
V
idyas, in spit
e of sim
i
lar
ity i
n many point
s, are dif

fer ent ow
ing to dif

-
fer
ence in sub
ject mat
ter
.
In the Chhandogya,
 Omkara is said to be a limit of
 Udgitha and
so such Omkara has to be re
garded as Prana. In the ot
her the singer
of Udgitha,
 the Udgatri is called Prana.
 There
fore the two V
idyas are
dif

fer ent just as the Up
asana of Udgitha as the In
fi
nite and Su
preme
(Parovariya) (Chh. Up. I
.9.2). ﬁThi
s is in
deed the high
est and great
-
estﬂ is dif

fer ent from t
he Up
asana of Udgitha as golden in form and as
be
ing in the ey
e and in the sun (Chh. Up. I.
6).
In the Chhandogya onl
y a p
art of the Udgit
ha (hymn), the sy
l
la
-
ble OM is med
i
t
ated upon as Prana ﬁLet one med
i
t
ate on the syl

la ble
OM of the Udgit
haﬂ (Chh. Up. I.1.
1). But i
n the Brihadaranyaka t
he
whole Udgitha hymn is med
i
t
ated upon as Prana (I.3.
2). Hence the
two V
idyas can
not be one ow
ing to this dif

fer ence in the ob
ject of
med i t
a tion.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
379

The spe
cial fea
tures of dif

fer ent V
idyas are not to be com
bined
even when the V
idyas be
long to one and the same S
akha; much less
then when they be
long to dif

fer ent Sakhas.
g§kmV
üoÎmXwº$_pñ
V Vw V
&
Samj
nat
aschet t
adukt
amasti tu t
adapi
III.3.8 (
367
)
I
f it be
 said
 (that the
 Vid
yas a
re o
ne
) on a
cco
unt o
f (the
 ide
ntity
of) name
; (we rep
ly that) that is explaine
d (alre
ady); more
ove
r
that (id
en
tity of n
ame
) is (
fou
nd in
 the
 cas
e o
f adm
itte
dly
separate Vidyas).
Samj
nat
ah:
 on account of the name (being same);
Chet:
 if;
Ta
t
:
 that;
Ukt
am:
 has already been answered;
Asti:
 is, e
xist
s;
Tu
:
 but;
Ta
t
:
that;
Api:
 even, also.
An ar
gu
ment against t
he pre
ced
ing Su
tra is re
futed.
The word ‚tu™
 (but), re
moves the doubt
 raised above.
Y
ou can
not call them i
den
ti
cal merely be
cause they have t
he
same name. The sub
ject mat
ter dif

fers. This has al ready been es
t
ab
-
lished in the last S
u
tra. For in
st
ance Agnihotra and Darsapurnamasa
are sep
a
rate and yet hav
e the same name, v
iz., Kat
haka as they are
de
scribed in the book called Kathaka. E
ven the Udgit
ha V
idya of Chh.

Up. I.6 and Chh.
 Up. I.9.
2 are dif

fer ent V
idyas.
V
y
apty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 4
It is appropriate t
o specialise OM by the term
 ‚Udgit
ha™
ì`m
áoü g_ÄOg
V
y
aptescha samanjasam
III.3.9 (
368
)
And because (OM) ext
ends (over t
he whol
e of th
e Vedas), (t
o
spe
cialise
 it by the te
rm ‚Udgitha™) is app
ropriate.
V
y
apteh:
 because (OM) extends (over the whole of t
he V
edas);
Cha:
and;
Samanj
asam:
 is appropriate, consistent,
 justifiabl
e.
Su
tra 7 is elab
o
rated here.
In the S
ruti ‚
Omit
yet
adaksharamudgitham
up
asit
a
™, the use of
the word Udgitha as V
iseshana, i.e.,
 ad
jec
tive of
 OM is ap
pro
pri
ate,
be
cause OM by it

self is per va
sive in all S
rutis and should not be un
-
der
stood here in it
s gen
eral sense.
In the p
as
sage ﬁLet a man med
i
t
ate on the syl

la ble OM as the
Udgithaﬂ, the t
wo words ‚Omkara™
 and ‚Udgitha™, are placed in co
or
di
-
na
tion. The ques
tion then arises whether the re
la
tion in which the
ideas con
veyed by
 these two words st
and to each other is the re
la
tion
of su
per
im
po
si
tion (Adhy
asa) or sublation (Ap
avada) or unity
(Ekatva)
or
spec i fi ca tion
(V
iseshana) .
The word ‚and™
 st
ands here in place of ‚but™
 and is meant to dis
-
card the three other al
ter
na
tives.
 The fourth is to be adopt
ed. The
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
380

fourth and cor
rect view is that t
he one is V
iseshana (an ad
jec
tive) t
o
the other as in the words Nila-Utp
ala (blue lo
tus). The p
as
sage
means that Udgitha i
s the V
iseshana of Omkara. The ap
pro
pri
ate
view of t
he Chhandogya p
as
sage is to t
ake the word Udgitha as spe
-
cial
is
ing the term ‚O
mkara™.
Sarv
abhedadhikaran
am: T
opic 5
Unity of the P
rana-V
idya
gdm©^oX
mXÝ`Ìo_o
Sarv
abhedadany
atreme
III
.3.10 (369)
On acc
ount o
f the non-
diffe
rence
 (of the
 Vidya) e
ve
rywhere
(i.e
., in all
 the
 tex
ts of th
e d
iffe
ren
t Sak
has wh
ere
 the
Prana-Vidya occurs) t
hese qu
alities (mentioned in two of t
hem
are
 to b
e i
nse
rted
) in the
 othe
r pla
ce
s (e
.g., the
 Kau
shita
ki
Upanisha
d).
Sarv
abhedat:
 on account of non-dif
ference everywhere;
Any
atra:
 in
the other places;
Ime:
 these (qualities are to be inserted).
A
 con
crete in
st
ance on the gen
eral prin
ci
ple of Su
tra 5 is cited.
In the col
lo
quy of t
he Pranas re
corded by the V
ajasaneyins and
the Chhandogyas, t
he Prana which is en
dowed with var
i
ous qual
i
ties
such as be
ing the best and so on, is rep
re
sented as the ob
ject of med
-
i
t
a
tion. V
ar
i
ous qual
i
ties such as be
ing the rich
est and the like are as
-
cribed to speech and the other or
gans. These lat
ter qual
i
ties are in
the end at
trib
uted to t
he Prana also. ﬁIf
 I am the rich
est thou art t
he
rich est.ﬂ
Now in other Sakhas also, as e.g.,
 that of
 the Kaushit
akins the
set of qual
i
ties such as be
ing the best and so on is at
trib
uted to t
he
Prana (Katha Up. I
I.14). B
ut the set of
 at
trib
utes, vi
z., be
ing the rich
est
and so on is not men
tioned.
The ques
tion is whether they
 are to be in
serted in the Kaushit
aki
also, where they are not m
en
tioned.
This Su
tra de
clares that they
 have to be in
serted, as the V
idya is
the same in all t
he three Up
anishads. At
trib
utes be
long
ing to one and
the same V
idya or sub
ject have t
o be com
bined wher
ever that V
idya
oc
curs al
though they
 may not be ex

pressly stated.
Anandady
adhikaranam
: T
opic 6 (Sutras 1
1-13)
Att
ributes like Bliss, et
c., of B
rahman have to be
combined int
o one medit
ation
AmZÝX
mX`– àY
Anandaday
ah pradhanasy
a
III.3.1
1 (3
70)
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
381

Blis
s and
 othe
r attrib
ute
s (whi
ch d
ep
ict the
 true
 natu
re)
 of the
Princ
ipa
l or the
 Sup
rem
e S
el
f, i.e
., Brah
man (h
ave
 to b
e
combin
ed from al
l places in
 the medit
ati
on on Br
ahman
).
Anandaday
ah:
 Bliss and other att
ributes;
Pradhanasy
a:
 of the
Princip
al, i.e.
, the S
upreme Self or B
rahman.
Brah
man is de
scribed as Bliss, Knowl
edge, all-per
vad
ing, the
Self of
 all, true,
 etc., in di
f

fer ent tex
t
s of dif

fer ent Sakhas. Al
l the at
trib
-
utes are not men
tioned in all pl
aces.
Now the ques
tion arises whether they hav
e to be com
bined in
the med
i
t
a
tion on Brah
man or not. This S
u
tra says that t
hey have t
o
be com
bined, as the ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion (Brah
man) is one and the
same in all Sakhas and there
fore the V
idya is one. The rea
son for this
con
clu
sion is the one given in S
u
tra 10.
The qual
i
ties at
trib
uted to B
rah
man in any one place hav
e to be
com
bined when
ever Brah
man is spo
ken of.
{à`{eañËdmÚ
àm{áénM`mnM`
Priy
asirastv
ady
apraptirup
achay
ap
achay
au
 hi
bhede
III
.3.12 (371)
(Quali
ties l
ike) joy bein
g His h
ead, etc.
, ar
e not t
o be taken
ever
yw
her
e, (
bei
ng
 su
bj
ect
 to
) i
nc
rea
se a
nd
 dec
rea
se (
ar
e
possib
le o
nly) if there is d
ifference
 (and not in Brahman in
which there
 is non-d
iffere
nce
).
Priy
asirastv
adi:
 qualities like joy
 being His head, etc.;

Apraptih:
 are
not to be t
aken everywhere;
Up
achay
ap
achay
au:
 increase and
decrease;
Hi:
 be
cause;
Bhede:
 (are possible) in dif
ference.
(
Up
achay
a:
 increase;
Ap
achay
a:
decrease.)
The dis
cus
sion com
menced in Su
tra 1
1 is con
tin
ued, st
at
ing
here as to which of the at
trib
utes are not to be culled and com
bined
to
gether in ev
ery form of m
ed
i
t
a
tion.
ﬁMoreﬂ and ﬁlessﬂ will ap
ply only
 if there is dif

fer en
ti
a
tion. Hence
the de
scrip
tions of Priy
asiras, etc., will
not ap
ply to B
rah
man. The de
-
scrip
tion of P
riyasiras (at
trib
utes like joy be
ing His head, etc.) in t
he
T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad are not Dharmas of Brah
man but the Dharmas of
the Ananda
maya-kosa or the bliss
ful sheath. T
he de
scrip
tions are
given to t
urn the mind to
wards Brah
man. Dif

fer ences of higher and
lower in Gunas can come in Upasanas of Sagu
na Brah
man but have
no ap
pli
ca
tion to Nirguna Brah
man.
The at
trib
utes of hav
ing joy f
or His head and such other at
trib
-
utes are not ac
cept

able in ev ery form of m
ed
i
t
a
tion on Brah
man be
-
cause at
trib
ut
ing limbs to B
rah
man would ren
der Him li
a
ble to
fluc tu a ti
on.
At
trib
utes like joy be
ing His head and so on men
tioned in the
T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad are not to be t
aken and com
bined in other places
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
382

where the Up
asana of Brah
man is en
joined be
cause the suc
ces
sive
terms, ﬁJoy is It
s headﬂ, ﬁsat
is
fac
tion is it
s right armﬂ, ﬁgreat sat
is
fac
-
tion is it
s left
 armﬂ, ﬁblis
s is His
 trunkﬂ, ﬁ
Brah
man is His
 t
ail, His su
p
-
portﬂ (II.5),
 in
di
cate qual
i
ties which have in
crease and de
crease with
re
gard to each other and to other enjoy
ers (in
di
vid
ual souls or Jivas)
and there
fore can ex
ist where there is dif

fer ence. Now for higher and
lower de
grees there is room only where there is plu
ral
ity or dif

fer ence
but Brah
man is with
out all plu
ral
ity or dif

fer ence, as we know from
many scrip
tu
ral p
as
sages (One only
, with
out a sec
ond). There
fore
these at
trib
utes can
not con
sti
tute t
he na
ture of Brah
man. They
 are to
be con
fined to t
he text
s which pre
scribe them and not t
aken to other
places.
More
over
, these qual
i
ties are at
trib
uted to t
he Su
preme Brah
-
man merely as means of f
ix
ing one™
s mind, not as them

selves be ing
ob
ject
s of med
i
t
a
tion. From t
his it fol
lows that they
 are not valid ev

ery -
where. The at
trib
utes men
tioned in any
 one are not valid f
or oth
ers.
The case is sim
i
lar to that
 of two wives min
is
ter
ing to one king;
one with a fan,
 the other with an um

brella. Here also the ob ject of thei
r
min
is
tra
tions is one, but t
he act
s of min
is
tra
tion them
selves are dis
-
tinct. T
hey have each thei
r own par
tic
u
lar at
trib
utes. Sim

i lar is the
case
un der
dis cus sion
also.
Qual
i
ties in which lower and higher de
grees can be dis
tin
-
guished be
long to the qual
i
fied Brah
man only in which there is plu
ral
-
ity
, not t
o the Su
preme Nirguna Brah
man which is above all
qual i fi ca ti
ons.
Such
at trib ut
es
as
hav ing
true
de sires
(Sat-Kama)
and
the like which are men
tioned in some p
ar
ti
c
u
lar place have no va
lid
ity
for other med
i
t
a
tions on Brah
man.
BVao
 ËdW©gm_
It
are tv
arthasamany
at
III
.3.13 (372)
Bu
t othe
r attrib
ute
s (li
ke
 Blis
s, e
tc., are
 to b
e c
omb
ine
d) o
n
accoun
t of
 identi
ty of
 purpor
t.
It
are:
 other attribut
es;
Tu
:
 but;
Arthasamany
at:
 because of common
purport, on account of ident
ity of
 purport. (
Artha:
 result, object,
purport;
Samany
at:
 on account of the equalit
y or sameness.)
The
pre vi ous
dis cus sion
is
con tin ued.
But at

trib utes like Bliss, knowl
edge, all-pervadingness, et
c.,
which de
scribe the na
ture of Brah
man, are to be com
bined as the ob
-
ject of such de
scrip
tions is the same, as they
 di
rectly re
late to B
rah
-
man and as they are in
her
ent at
trib
utes of Brah
man, as their pur
port
is
the
one
in di vis i ble,

un con di tioned
Brah man.
These at
trib
utes which scrip
ture set
s for the pur
pose of teach
-
ing the true na
ture of Brah
man are to be viewed as val
id for all p
as
-
sages which re
fer to Brah
man, be
cause their pur
port, i.
e., t
he
Brah
man whose na
ture is to be t
aught is one. These at
trib
utes are
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
383

men
tioned with a v
iew to knowl
edge of Brah
man only
, and not f
or
Up
asana.
Adhy
anadhikaranam
: T
opic 7 (Sutras 14-15)
Katha Up. I
.3.10-1
1 teaches merely that
 the Self
 is
higher than everything else
AmÜ`mZ
m` à`mo
OZm^mdmV²
Adhy
anay
a pray
ojanabhav
at
III
.3.14 (373)
(T
he passage
 in Kath
a Upanishad I.3.10 tells about the Self
only
 as the
 highe
st) fo
r the
 sak
e o
f pio
us m
ed
itatio
n, as th
ere
 is
no us
e (o
f the kno
wled
ge o
f the ob
jec
ts be
ing higher than the
senses and so
 on).
Adhy
anay
a:
 for the sake of medit
ation;
Pray
ojanabhav
at:
 as there
is no use, as there is no other necessity
. (
Pray
ojana:
 of any ot
her
purpose;
Abhavat:
 on account of the absence.)
The
pre vi ous
dis cus sion
is
con tin ued.
W
e read in the Kat
haka (I.3.10-1
1), ﬁHigher than the senses are
the ob
ject
s, higher than the ob
ject
s there is the mind,ﬂ et
c., ﬁhigher
than the A
t
man there is noth
ing, this is t
he goal, the high
est road.ﬂ
Here the doubt arises whether the pur
port of the p
as
sage is to
in
ti
mate that
 each of the things suc
ces
sively enu
mer
ated is higher
than the pre
ced
ing one, or only t
hat the A
t
man is higher than all of
them.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent holds the for
mer al
ter
na
tive
be
cause the text
 ex
pressly de
clares the ob
ject
s to be higher than the
senses, the mind higher than t
he ob
ject
s and so on. He main
t
ains that
these sen
tences are sep
a
rate and not one as re
fer
ring to the A
t
man
alone. There
fore the pur
pose of the tex
t is to teach t
hat the ob
ject
s
are su
pe
rior to the senses and so on.
This Su
tra re
futes it and de
clares that it is one sen
tence and
means that th
e At
man is su
pe
rior to all these.
The ob
ject of the S
ruti is not to say
 that each later cat
e
gory is
higher than the f
or
mer
, be
cause there is no spir
i
tual gain or any use
ful
pur
pose in such a dec
la
ra
tion. The ai
m is to de
clare that Brah
man is
higher than all, as such knowl
edge leads to Moksha.
The At
man alone is to be known, be
cause the Knowl
edge gives
free
dom or the fi
nal re
lease. The scrip
ture also says ﬁHe who has per
-
ceived that
, is freed from t
he jaws of deathﬂ (Katha Up.
 I.3.
15).
Fur
ther
, the t
ext in
ti
mates high
est rev
er
ence for the At

man byde
clar
ing that not
h
ing is higher than the A
t
man and that He is the
high
est goal and thereby shows that
 the whole se
ries of ob
ject
s is
enu
mer
ated only f
or the pur
pose of giv
ing in
for
ma
tion about t
he At
-
man. This in
for
ma
tion is given f
or the sake of med
i
t
a
tion on the A
t
man
which re
sult
s in the knowl
edge of it.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
384

AmË_e
ãXmü
Atmasabdaccha
III
.3.15 (374)
And on ac
count
 of t
he word At
man.
Atmasabdat:
 on account of the word ‚At
ma™;
Cha:
 and.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 14 is given.
The above con
clu
sion is con
firmed by t
he fact that
 the sub
ject of
dis
cus
sion is called the Self
 or At
man. ﬁThat S
elf is hid
den in all be
-
ings and does not shine forth, but
 it is seen by sub
tle seers through
their sharp and sub
tle in
tel
lectﬂ (Katha Up. I
.3.2). F
rom this we con
-
clude that the t
ext wishes to rep
re
sent the other t
hings enu
mer
ated as
the non-Self
.
ﬁA
 wise man should keep down speech and mindﬂ (Katha Up.
I.3.
13). This p
as
sage en
joins pi
ous med
i
t
a
tion as a means of the
Knowl
edge of the S
u
preme Self.
 It t
hus fol
lows that the S
ruti in
di
cates
var
i
ous excellences in the case of the At

man only and not in that of
the other thi
ngs enu
mer
ated.
The text
 ﬁHe reaches the end of his jour
ney and that
 is the high
-
est place of V
ishnuﬂ sug
gest
s the ques
tion as to who is the end of
 the
jour
ney and we there
fore con
clude that the enu
mer
a
tion of t
he
senses, ob
ject
s, etc., has merely
 the pur
pose of teach
ing the high
est
place of V
ishnu and not of teach
ing any
thing about t
he re
la
tion of t
he
senses, ob
ject
s and so on.
But t
he enu
mer
a
tion of t
he senses is not al
to
gether use
less. It
en
ables the as
pi
rant to turn t
he out
go
ing mind to
wards the In
ner Self
or the At
man. This sub
tle At

man can not be at
t
ained with
out ab
strac
-
tion,
in tro spec tion
and
pro found
med i t
a tion.
Atmagrihi
ty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 8 (Sutras 16-17)
The Self m
entioned in Ai
t. Up. I
.1. is the S
upreme Sel
f
and the att
ributes of the S
elf given elsewhere
should be combined with t
his medit
ation
AmË_J¥
hr{V[aVa
dXwÎ
Atmagrihi
tirit
arav
adutt
arat
III
.3.16 (375)
(I
n the
 Aita
rey
a Upa
nisha
d I
.1.) the
 Sup
rem
e S
el
f is me
ant, as
in oth
er te
xts (
de
aling
 with cre
atio
n) be
cau
se
 of the
subse
quent qualification.
Atma
grihit
ih:
 the Supreme S
elf is meant;

It
arav
at:
 as in other text
s
(dealing with creation);
Utt
arat:
 because of the subsequent
qualificati
on.
W
e read in the Ait
areya Up
anishad ﬁV
er
ily in t
he be
gin
ning all
this was the Self
, one only;
 there was noth
ing else what

so everﬂ (I.1).
Here the doubt arises whether the term ﬁSel
fﬂ de
notes the Su
preme
Self or some other be
ing such as Hiranyagarbha.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
385

It re
fers to the S
u
preme Self,
 even as the word ﬁSelfﬂ in ot
her
text
s which treat of cre
ation re
fers to It
, and not t
o Hiranyagarbha.
ﬁFrom the Self
 ether was pro
ducedﬂ (T
ait. Up.
 II.
1). Why? Be
cause in
the sub
se
quent tex
t of t
he Ait
areya we have ﬁIt
 thought shall I
 send
forth worlds? It sent
 forth these worldsﬂ (Ait.
 Up. I.1.
2). This qual
i
fi
ca
-
tion, v
iz., that
 ﬁIt thought
ﬂ be
fore cre
ation is ap
plied to Brah
man in the
pri
mary sense in other Sruti
 p
as
sages. Hence we con
clude from this
that t
he Self re
fers to the S
u
preme Self or P
ara Brah
man and not to
Hiranyagarbha, or any ot
her Be
ing.
AÝd`m{X
{V Mo
Ëñ`mXdY
maUmV²
Anv
ay
aditi chet
sy
adav
adharanat
III
.3.17 (376)
I
f it be
 said
 that b
ec
aus
e o
f the
 con
tex
t (the
 Sup
rem
e S
el
f is no
t
me
ant) (w
e re
ply th
at) it is
 so (
i.e
., the
 Sup
rem
e S
el
f is me
ant)
on a
cco
unt o
f the
 de
finite
 state
me
nt (that the
 Atma
n alo
ne
ex
isted
 in the b
eginning).
Anv
ay
at:
 because of connection, because of the contex
t;
Iti:
 this
, so;
Chet:
 if;
Sy
at:
 it might
 be so;
A
v
adharanat:
 on account of the defi
nite
st
ate ment.
An ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 16 is raised and re
futed.
The Su
tra con
sist
s of two p
art
s namely an ob
jec
tion and it
s re
-
ply
. The ob
jec
tion is ‚
Anvayaditi chet
™
 the re
ply is
‚S
yad-avadharanat™
.
The ref
er
ence is to Para Brah
man or the High
est Self.
 The word
ﬁAsitﬂ shows that the ref
er
ence is to Para Brah
man alone, be
cause
He alone ex
isted be
fore all cre
ation. The Lokasrishti or cre
ation of t
he
world is only af

ter the Mahabhutasrishti or cre
ation of t
he five great
 el
-
e ment
s.
The Purvap
akshin says: ﬁIn the Ai
t
areya Up
anishad (I.1), it
 is
st
ated that
 Brah
man cre
ated the f
our worlds. But it i
s said in the
T
aittiriy
a and other text
s that Brah
man cre
ated ether
, air
, fire,
 wa
ter
and earth, the f
ive el
e
ment
s. It is only
 Hiranyagarbha that cre
ates the
world with the aid of t
he el
e
ment
s cre
ated by t
he High
est Self.
 Hence
the Self
 in the Ait
areya Up
anishad can
not mean the S
u
preme Self but

only Hiranyagarbha or the K
arya-Brah
man.ﬂ
This Su
tra re
futes it and de
clares that on ac
count of the st
ate
-
ment ﬁV
er
ily
, in the be
gin
ning all this was the Sel
f, one only
ﬂ (Ait. Up.
I.1.
) which in
ti
mates that t
here was one only with
out a sec
ond, it can
only re
fer to the High
est Self or P
ara Brah
man and not to
Hiranyagarbha, the K
arya-Brah
man. The High
est Self cre
ated the
four worlds af

ter cre at
ing the el
e
ment
s as de
scribed in other Sakhas.
The at
trib
utes of Para B
rah
man or the High
est Self which are men
-
tioned in other places are to be com
bined in the Ai
t
areyaka med
i
t
a
-
tion.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
386

Kary
akhy
anadhikaranam
: T
opic 9
Only thinking water to be t
he dress of Prana is
enjoined in the P
rana-V
idya
H$m`m©
»`mZmXny
d©_²
Kary
akhy
anadapurv
am
III
.3.18 (377)
On a
cco
unt o
f (the
 rinsin
g of the
 mou
th with wa
ter re
fer
red
 to
in the Prana Vidya)
 being a reiteration of an act
 (already
ordai
ned by th
e Smri
ti)
, wh
at h
as not
 been so ordain
ed
els
ewh
ere (
is
 her
e enj
oi
ned
 by
 th
e Sr
ut
i)
.
Kary
akhy
anat:
 on account of being a st
atement of
 an act (already
enjoined by t
he Smriti);

Apurvam:
 which has not been so enjoined
elsewhere.
In re
gard to Prana Up
asana, Achamana is or
dained only as re
it
-
er
a
tion of what
 is st
ated else
where. What is or
dained is only med
i
t
a
-
tion on wa
ter as cov
er
ing food. What
 is en
joined in Prana V
idya
Up
asana of Chhandogya Up
anishad is not the Achamana,
 as such.
Achamana is en
joined by t
he Smritis and is com
mon to all.
 What is or
-
dained is Anagnat
atchint
ana i.e.,
 med
i
t
at
ing that t
he food is cov
ered
by wa
ter
.
In the Chhandogya Up
anishad (V
.2.2) and the B
rihadaranyaka
(VI.1.
14) there is a ref
er
ence to the rins
ing of the mou
th with wa
ter be
-
fore and af

ter meal, think
ing that t
hereby that P
rana is dressed.
These text
s in
ti
mate two t
hings, rins
ing of the mo
uth and med
i
-
t
a
tion on the breat
h as dressed. A
 doubt arises whether the tex
t
s en
-
join both these mat

ters or only the rins ing of the mout
h, or only t
he
med
i
t
a
tion on breath as dressed.
This Su
tra st
ates that t
he act of rins
ing the mouth
 is al
ready or
-
dained on ev
ery one by t
he Smriti and t
he act of think
ing the wa
ter as
the dress of Prana is alone en
joined by t
he Sruti.
 The act of rins
ing the
mouth is not a new one and there
for re
quires no V
e
dic in
junc
tion.
Samanadh
ikaranam: T
opic 10
V
idyas of the same S
akha which are identical
should be combined, i
n medit
ation
g_mZ Ed§ M
m^oXmV
Samana ev
am chabhedat
III
.3.19 (378)
In the same
 (Sakha also) it i
s thus (i.
e., there is unity of Vi
dya,)
owin
g to no
n-d
iffe
ren
ce
 (of the
 ob
je
ct of m
ed
itatio
n).
Samana:
 in the same Sakha;
Evam:
 every
, (it is) like this
;
Cha:
 and,
also;
Abhedat:
 owing to non-dif
ference.
A
 cor
ol
lary to S
u
tra 5 is proved.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
387

In the A
gnirahasya in the V
ajasaneyi Sakha there is a V
idya
called Sandily
a V
idya, i
n which oc
curs the pas
sage ﬁLet him med
i
t
ate
on the Self
 which con
sist
s of mind, which has the P
rana for it
s body
,
and light for it
s formﬂ (Sat. B
r
. Madhy
. 10.6.
3.2). Agai
n, in the
Brihadaranyaka (V
.10.6) which be
longs to the same Sakha we have
ﬁThat per
son con
sist
ing of mind,
 whose be
ing is light,
 is within the
heart, small li
ke a grain of rice or bar
ley
. He is the ruler of all,
 the Lord
of allŠHe rules all thi
s what

so ever ex
ist
s.ﬂ
A
 doubt here pres
ent
s it

self whether these two pas
sages are to
be t
aken as one V
idya in which the p
ar
tic
u
lars men
tioned in ei
ther text

are to be com
bined or not. A
re they one V
idya or dif

fer ent V
idyas?
This Su
tra de
clares that, they
 are one V
idya, as t
he ob
ject of
med
i
t
a
tion (Up
asya) is the same in both.
 The ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion in
both is the Sel
f con
sist
ing of mind.
 The com
bin
ing of the p
ar
tic
u
lars of
a sim
i
lar V
idya in t
he same Sakha is the same as in the case of such
V
idyas which oc
cur in dif

fer ent Sakhas. Al

though the two p
as
sages
be
long to one and the same S
akha, they y
et con
sti
tute t
he V
idya only
and their p
ar
tic
u
lars have to be com
bined into one whole. T
he for
mer
di
rect
s wor
ship, by means of such V
idya. The l
at
ter gives it
s Gunas
(fea tures).
Though there is some dif

fer ence in mi
nor de
t
ails, the t
wo de
-
scrip
tions of the S
andilya V
idya in t
he two Srutis are prac
ti
cally the
same. So, a p
ar
tic
u
lar point men
tioned in one Srut
i in con
nec
tion with
the Sandily
a V
idya has to be in
cor
po
rated with the ot
her
, if it
 be not
men
tioned in the l
at
ter
.
There
fore the Sandi
lya V
idya is one.
Samband
hadhikaranam
: T
opic 1
1 (Sutras 20-22)
The names ‚
Ahar
™
 and ‚A
ham™
 of Brahm
an occurring in
Bri. Up. V
.5.1-2 cannot be com
bined
gå~ÝYmXo
Samband
hadev
amany
atrapi
III
.3.20 (379)
T
hus in other cases also, on account of t
he connection (of
particular
s with one and the same Vidya).
Sambandhat:
 on account of the connection;

Evam:
 thus, like thi
s;
Any
atra:
 in other cases;
Api:
 also.
An in
fer
ence on the anal
ogy of t
he pre
ced
ing Su
tra is drawn by
way of ob
jec
tion.
This Su
tra is a Purvap
aksha Su
tra. It
 set
s forth the v
iew of the
op po nent.
W
e read in the Brihadaranyaka (V
.5.1-2), ﬁSat
ya (the trut
h) is
Brah
man. That which is Sat
ya is that
 SunŠthe be
ing who is in that
orb and the be
ing who is in the right ey
eﬂ. This gives the abode of
 the
Saty
a Brah
man with re
spect to the gods and the body
. The tex
t
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
388

teaches the two se
cret names of the Sat
ya Brah
man in con
nec
tion
with these abodes. ﬁIt
s se
cret name is ‚Ahar
™
 with ref
er
ence to the
gods, and it
s se
cret name is ‚Aham™
 with ref
er
ence to the body
.ﬂ
A
 doubt here arises whether these two se
cret names are both to
be ap
plied to the Dev
a-abode of Brah
man as well as to it
s bodily
abode, or only one name t
o each.
Now on the anal
ogy of t
he Sandilya
V
idya, t
he p
ar
tic
u
lars must
be com
bined as the ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion, v
iz., the S
atya B
rah
man is
one. There
fore both the nam
es ‚Ahar
™
 and ‚Aham™
 have to be com
-
bined with re
spect to Saty
a Brah
man.
Both t
he se
cret names equally be
long to the A
ditya as well as to
the per
son within the eye.
Z dm {deo
Na v
a v
iseshat
III
.3.21 (380)
Rathe
r not (s
o) o
n acc
ou
nt of the
 diffe
ren
ce
 (of p
lace
).
Na:
 not, not
 so;
 Va
:
 or
, but;

V
iseshat:
 because of dif
ference. (
Na v
a:
rather not.)
The con
clu
sion ar
rived at in t
he pre
ced
ing Su
tra is set aside.
This is the Siddhant
a Su
tra.
This Su
tra re
futes the v
iew of the pre
vi
ous Su
tra. As t
he so
lar
orb and the eye-ball are too di
s
t
ant and dis
t
ant abodes for the wor
ship
of Brah
man, the t
wo sig
nif
i
cant names ‚Ahar
™
 and ‚Aham™
 re
ferred to
in the pre
vi
ous Su
tra, should not bot
h be em
ployed in t
he same form
of med
i
t
a
tion. E
ach name re
fers to a dif

fer ent lo
cus of Upasana.
Though the V
idya is one, sti
ll on ac
count of dif

fer ence in places
the ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion be
comes dif

fer ent. There
fore there are dif

fer -
ent names. Hence these can
not be ex
changed or com
bined.
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent raises an ob
jec
tion. He
says: The per
son within the orb of t
he sun and the per
son within the
eye are one only
, be
cause the text
 teaches that both are abodes of
the one true Brah
man.
T
rue, we re
ply
, but as each se
cret name is t
aught only wit
h ref
er
-
ence to the one Brah
man and con
di
tioned by a p
ar
tic
u
lar st
ate, t
he
name ap
plies to Brah
man only in so far as it
 is in that st
ate. Here is an
anal
ogy
. The teacher al
ways re
mains the teacher; y
et those kinds of
ser
vices which the pu
pil has to do to t
he teacher when sit
ting have not

to be done when he st
ands and vice versa.
The com
p
ar
i
son given by t
he op
po
nent is not well cho
sen as the
du
ties of the di
s
ci
ple to
wards his teacher de
pend on the lat
ter
™
s char
-
ac
ter as teacher and that is not changed by
 his be
ing ei
ther in the v
il
-
lage or in the for
est.
There
fore, the t
wo se
cret names ‚Ahar
™
 and ‚Aham™
 have to be
held ap
art. They
 can
not be com
bined.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
389

Darsay
ati cha
III
.3.22 (381)
(T
he scripture) also declares (that).
Darsay
ati:
 (Sruti) shows, indicates, declares;
 Cha:
 also, and.
An ad
di
tional ar
gu
ment is given t
o re
fute S
u
tra 20.
The scrip
ture dis
tinctly
 st
ates that t
he at
trib
utes are not to be
com
bined, but kept ap
art; be
cause it com
p
ares the two per
sons, the
per
son in the sun and the per
son within the eye.
 If it
 wanted the p
ar
tic
-
u
lars to be com
bined, it would not
 make such a com
p
ar
i
son.
The con
clu
sion, there
fore, is that
 the two se
cret names are to be
kept ap
art.
Sambhri
ty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 12
Att
ributes of Brahm
an occurring in the Ranayaniya Khila
constitute an independent
 V
idya
g§^¥
{VÚw
ì`mßË`{
Sambhritidy
uv
y
apty
api chat
ah
III
.3.23 (382)
For the same reason (as in the previous Sutra) th
e supp
ort
ing
(of t
he worl
d) and perv
ading
 the sky (
att
ribut
ed to Brah
man i
n
the Rana
yaniya Khila) a
lso (are
 not to be
 includ
ed
 in othe
r
Vidyas or Upasanas of Brah
man).
Sambhr
iti:
 supporting the world;
D
yu
vya
p
t
i
:
 pervading the sky;

Api:
also;
Cha:
 and;
At
ah:
 for the same reason (as in the previous Sut
ra).
(
Dy
u:
 the sky
, all the sp
ace, heaven).
A
 re
stric
tion to S
u
tra 5 is made.
In a sup
ple
men
t
ary text
 of the Ranayani
yas we meet with a p
as
-
sage, ﬁThe pow
ers, which were col
lected to
gether
, were pre
ceded by
Brah
man; the pre-ex
is
tent B
rah
man in the be
gin
ning per
vaded the
whole sky
.ﬂ
Now these two qual
i
ties ‚Sambhrit
i™
 and ‚Dyuvy
apti™
 are not to be
in
serted or in
cluded in the Sandil
ya V
idya and other V
idyas for the
same rea
son as is given in the last S
u
tra, vi
z., dif

fer ence of abode. In
the Sandily
a V
idya, B
rah
man is said to have it
s abode in the heart ﬁHe
is the Self
 within the heart
ﬂ (Chh. Up. III
.14.3). T
he same st
ate
ment is
made in the Dahara-V
idya ﬁThere is the p
al
ace, the small lo
tus of the
heart, and in it
 that small et
herﬂ (VIII.
1.1). In t
he Up
akosala-V
idya,
again, Brah
man is said to abide within t
he eye ﬁThat per
son that is
seen in the eyeﬂ (IV
.15.1).
Fur
ther these qual
i
ties and those men
tioned in other V
idyas like
the Sandily
a V
idya are of such a na
ture as to ex
clude each other and
are not sug
ges
tive of
 each other
. The mere fact of
 cer
t
ain V
idyas be
-
ing con
nected with Brah
man does not con
sti
tute t
heir unity
. It
 is an es
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
390

t
ab
lished fact that
 Brah
man, al
though one only
, is ow
ing to the
plu
ral
ity of
 it
s pow
ers med
i
t
ated upon in many
 ways, as shown un
der
Su tra
7.
The con
clu
sion, there
fore, is that
 the at
trib
utes of hold
ing to
-
gether it
s pow
ers (Sambhriti and Dyuv
yapti) are not t
o be in
serted in
the Sandily
a and sim
i
lar V
idyas, and t
hat the Up
asana re
ferred to in
this Su
tra is an in
de
pend
ent V
idya by i
t

self. The Sandilya V
idya re
fers
to the wor
ship of At
man in the heart and t
he Up
akosala-V
idya re
fers
to the wor
ship of the At

man in the eye, whereas the above at
trib
utes
re
late to t
he mac
ro
cosm.
Purushav
idy
adhikaranam: T
opic 13
The Purusha V
idya in the Chhandogya and the T
aittiriya
are not to be com
bined
nwéf
{dÚm`m{_
d MoVa
ofm_Z
måZmZmV²
Purushav
idy
ay
amiv
a chet
areshamanam
nanat
III
.3.24 (383)
And (as the qualities) as (mentioned) in the Purusha-Vidya (of
the C
hhando
gya) are
 not me
ntione
d (in that) of the
 othe
rs (i.e.,
in the
 Taittiriya)
 (the
 two P
uru
sha-
Vid
yas a
re n
ot o
ne
; are
 not
to be combin
ed).
Parushav
idy
ay
amiv
a:
 as in the Purusha-V
idya (of t
he
Chhandogya);
Cha:
 and;
It
aresham:
 of the ot
hers;
Anamnanat:
because of not being menti
oned (in the T
aittiriy
a).
The Purusha V
idya of t
he Chhandogya Up
anishad and that of
the T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad are now ex
am
ined.
In the Rahasya-Brahmana of
 the T
andins and the Paingins (the
Chhandogya) there is a V
idya treat

ing of man in which man is iden ti
-
fied with t
he sac
ri
fice, the t
hree pe
ri
ods of his life wit
h the three li
ba
-
tions ﬁMan is the sac
ri
ficeﬂ.
In the T
aittiriy
a Aranyaka (X.64) also oc
curs a sim
i
lar V
idya ﬁFor
him who knows thus the self of t
he sac
ri
fice is the sac
ri
ficer
, fait
h
(Sraddha) is the wife of t
he sac
ri
ficer
,ﬂ etc.
The doubt here arises whether the two V
idyas are one, whether
the p
ar
tic
u
lars of the man-sac
ri
fice given in t
he Chhandogya are to be
in
serted in the T
aittiriy
a or not.
The fun
da
men
t
al at
trib
ute re
ferred to is that
 man is iden
ti
fied
with sac
ri
fice in both.
 This Su
tra de
clares that in spite of
 this, the t
wo
V
idyas are not one, be
cause the de
t
ails dif

fer. The char
ac
ter
is
tics of
the Purusha-Y
ajna of the Chhandogy
as are not re
cog
nised in the
T
aittiriy
a text
. The T
aittiriy
a ex
hib
it
s an iden
ti
fi
ca
tion of man wit
h the
sac
ri
fice in which the wife,
 the sac
ri
ficer
, the V
eda, the V
edi, the sac
ri
-
fi
cial grass, the post, t
he but
ter
, the sac
ri
fi
cial an
i
mal, the priest
 etc.,
are men
tioned in suc
ces
sion. These p
ar
tic
u
lars are not men
tion
ed in
the Chhandogya.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
391

The two tex
t
s agree in iden
ti
fi
ca
tion of t
he A
vabhritha cer
e
mony
with death.
 There are greater num
ber of dis
sim
i
lar
i
ties. The T
aittiriy
a
does not rep
re
sent man as the sac
ri
fice as the Chhandogya does.
More
over the re
sult of the V
idya in t
he T
aittiriy
a is the at
t
ain
ment
of the great
ness of Brah
man: ﬁHe ob
t
ains the great
ness of Brah
manﬂ.
The re
sult of the V
idya in Chhandogya i
s long life, ﬁHe who knows this
lives on to a hun
dred and six
teen years.ﬂ
There
fore, the t
wo V
idyas are sep

a rate. ﬁThe p
ar
tic
u
lars can
not
be com
bined in the two places. The
 p
ar
tic
u
lars men
tioned in the
Purusha-V
idya of Chhandogy
a, such as for
mu
las of prayer
, Mantras
and so on are not to be com
bined with the T
aittiriy
a text
 of the V
idya.
V
edhady
adhikaranam
: T
opic 14
Unconnected Mantras and sacrifices mentioned in cert
ain
Up
anishads do not belong to Brahm
a-V
idya
doYmÚ
W©^oXm
V
edhady
arthabhedat
III
.3.25 (384)
Because
 the matter (of certai
n Mantr
as) such as piercing and
so o
n is d
iffe
ren
t (from
 the
 matte
r of the
 app
rox
imate
 Vid
yas)
,
(the
 forme
r are
 not to
 be
 com
bine
d with
 the
 latte
r).
V
edhadi:
 piercing etc.;
Arthabhedat
:
 because they have a dif
ferent
meaning.
Cer
t
ain ex
pres
sions oc
cur
ring at the be
gin
ning of an Up
anishad
of the A
tharva-V
eda are t
aken up for dis
cus
sion.
At t
he be
gin
ning of the Up
anishad of the At
harvanikas we have
ﬁPierce the whole (body of t
he en
emy), pierce his heart,
 crush his
veins, crush his headﬂ etc. At
 the be
gin
ning of the Up
anishad of the
T
andins we have the Man
tra ﬁO God Savi
t
a! pro
duce the sac
ri
ficeﬂ. At
the be
gin
ning of Kat
has and the T
aittiriy
aka we have ﬁMay Mit
ra be
pro
pi
tious to us and V
aruna etc.ﬂ At t
he be
gin
ning of that
 of the
Kaushit
akins we have ﬁBrah
man in
deed is the Agnistom
a, Brah
man
is that day
; through Brah
man they p
ass into Brah
man, Im

mor t
al
ity
,
those reach who ob
serve that day
.ﬂ
The ques
tion is whether these Mant
ras and the sac
ri
fices re
-
ferred to in the B
rahmanas in close prox
im
ity t
o the Up
anishads are to
be com
bined with the V
idyas pre
scribed by these Up
anishads.
The op
po
nent holds that t
hey are to be com
bined, be
cause the
text
 ex
hib
it
s them in prox
im
ity t
o the Up
anishad-por
tions of the
Brahmanas whose chief con
tent
s are formed by the V
idyas. I
n the
case of Mantras we can al
ways imag
ine some mean
ing which con
-
nect
s them with the V
idyas. The f
irst Man
tra quoted glo
ri
fies the
heart, be
cause the heart is of

ten rep re
sented in the V
idyas as abode
of med
i
t
a
tion. There
fore Mantras which glo
rify t
he heart may con
sti
-
tute sub
or
di
nate mem
bers of those V
idyas.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
392

This Su
tra de
clares that they
 are not to be com
bined be
cause
their mean
ing is dif

fer ent, as they
 in
di
cate act
s of a sac
ri
fice and so
have
no
as so ci a tion
or
re la tion ship
with
the
V
idyas.
The Mantras might be so em
ployed if
 their whole con
tent
s were
glo
ri
fi
ca
tion of t
he heart, but t
his is not the case. The Man
tra first
quoted clearly ex

presses en mity
 to some
body and is there
fore not to
be con
nected with the V
idyas of t
he Up
anishads, but with some cer
e
-
mony meant
 to de
stroy one™
s en
emy
.
Other
Mantras
are
sub or di nate
to
cer t
ain
sac ri fi cial
ac tions.
They can
not, be
cause they oc
cur in the Up
anishads, be con
nect
ed
with the V
idyas on the ground of m
ere prox
im
ity
.
For this rea
son the men
tioned Mantras and act
s are not on the
ground of mere tex
tual col
lo
ca
tion to be v
iewed as sup
ple
men
t
ary to
the V
idyas of t
he Up
anishads.
Hany
adhikaranam
: T
opic 15
The st
atem
ent that
 the good and evil deeds of a person go
respectively to his friends and enemies is t
rue for text
s
that m
ention discarding of such actions by him
hmZm¡ V
ynm`Zeã
XeofË
dmËHw
$emÀN>
ÝXñVw
Ë`wnJmZd
ÎmXw
º$_
² &
Hanau tup
ay
anasabdaseshatv
at
 kusacchandastuty
up
aganav
att
adukt
am
III
.3.26 (385)
But whe
re o
nly the ge
tting rid (of the
 good
 and e
vil) is
mentio
ned
 (the o
btaining o
f this good
 and e
vil by o
thers has
 to
be add
ed) be
cause the stateme
nt about acceptance is
sup
ple
me
ntary (to
 the
 state
me
nt abo
ut the
 ge
tting rid
 of) a
s in
the case of the Kusas, metres, praise and hymns or r
ecitations.
This (i.e
., the
 rea
son
 for this
) has
 be
en
 state
d (b
y Jaim
ini in
Purvamimamsa).
Hanau:
 where only the gett
ing rid (of good and evil
) is mentioned;
Tu
:
but;
Up
ay
anasabdaseshatv
at:
 on account of the word ‚accept
ance™
being supplement
ary to the word ‚get
ting rid™;
Kusacchandastuty
up
aganav
at:
 like K
usa-st
icks, m
etre
s, pra
ises
and hymns;
Ta
t
:
 that;
Ukt
am:
 has been st
ated (by Jaimini).
(
Up
ay
ana:
 accept
ance;
Sabda:
 on account of the st
atement of
 the
word;
Seshatv
at:
 on account of being supplement
ary to.)
Here is a dis
cus
sion on the shak
ing of
f of v
ir
tues and vices by
the re
leased soul at death and thei
r ac
cep
t
ance by his friends and en
-
e mies.
Jaimini has said that st
ate
ment
s with re
spect to Kusas, met
res,
praises and hymns have to be com
pleted from ot
her text
s. It is said in
the Kaushit
aki Sruti that
 Kusa sticks are to be col
lected from trees
with
out any spec
i
fi
ca
tion as to what sort of
 tree; but i
n the Sat
yayana
branch it is said that t
he Kusas are of the Udumbara tree. T
his lat
ter
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
393

ex
pres
sion is to be ac
cepted as com
ple
men
t
ary to the f
or
mer ex
pres
-
sion of the Kaushit
aki Sruti. T
he first Srut
i will have t
o be com
pleted in
the light of
 the other
.
There is in a Sruti an in
junc
tion to say
 a prayer com
posed in
metre with
out any spec
i
fi
ca
tion of t
he kind of metre, but
 in an
other
place there is men
tion of t
he Deva-metre to be em
ployed in such a
case. There
fore the Deva-met
re is to be un
der
stood in the pre
vi
ous
case also.
There is in
struc
tion in one Srut
i to ut
ter praises for the sac
ri
fi
cial
ves
sel ‚Shodasi™
 with
out spec
i
fy
ing the tim
e as to when it should be
per
formed; but
 in an
other Sruti i
t is t
aught to be per
formed when the
sun has risen. Here the lat
ter in
struc
tion is to be ac
cepted as sup
ple
-
men
t
ary to the f
or
mer
.
As re
gards the hymn it
 is not def
i
nitely
 st
ated which of the f
our
priest
s is to join in the sing
ing of the pray
er in a sac
ri
fice; but t
his
doubt has been cleared up by a p
ar
tic
u
lar text
 which says that the
Adhvaryu wil
l not join in t
he sing
ing. Put
t
ing the two st
ate
ment
s to
-
gether
, the con
clu
sion is that all t
he priest
s ex
cept the Adhv
aryu will
join.
This prin
ci
ple is here ap
plied to the ef

fects of the ac
tions of a lib
-
er
ated sage in con
nec
tion with t
he V
idyas men
tioned in the
Up
anishads. In the t
ext of
 the T
andins we find ﬁshakes of
f all ev
il as a
horse shakes his
 hair
, and shak
ing of
f the body
 as the moon frees
her
self from the m
outh of Rahu, I
 ob
t
ain the uncreated world of B
rah
-
manﬂ (Chh. Up. VII
I.13). A
gain in Mundaka Up
anishad (III.
1.3) we
read ﬁThen know
ing shak
ing of
f good and evil
, he reaches the high
est
one
ness, free from p
as
sion.ﬂ These Srutis are si
lent on the point
 as to
who ac
cept
s his good and evil deeds.
In the S
atyay
ana branch of Sruti it
 is said ﬁHis sons ob
t
ain his in
-
her
i
t
ance, his friends the good, hi
s en
e
mies the evil
 he has done.ﬂ In
the Kaushit
aki Upani
shad (I.4) we find ﬁHe shakes of
f his good and
his bad deeds. His be
loved re
la
tions ob
t
ain the good, his un
be
loved
rel
a
tives t
he evil he has done.ﬂ
This Su
tra de
clares that the ob
t
ain
ing of the good and ev
il by his
friends and en
e
mies has to be in
serted or nec
es
sar
ily added in t
he
Chhandogya text
 and Mundaka text
 ac
cord
ing to Jaimini™
s prin
ci
ple
ex plained
above.
The Purvap
akshin raises an
other ob
jec
tion. He ar
gues that the
verb ‚Dhu™
 in the tex
t of t
he Chhandogya and Kaushit
aki may be in
ter
-
preted as ‚trem
bling™
 and not as ‚get
ting rid of™. It would mean there
-
fore that good and ev
il still cling t
o a per
son who at
t
ains Knowl
edge,
al
though their ef

fects are re
t
arded on ac
count of the K
nowl
edge.
This Su
tra de
clares that such a mean
ing is in
cor
rect, be
cause
the sub
se
quent por
tion of t
he text
 in
di
cates that oth
ers ob
t
ain the
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
394

good and evil.
 This is cer
t
ainly not
 pos
si
ble un
less the per
son who at
-
t
ains Knowl
edge aban
dons them.
Good and evil deeds can
not be said to ‚t
rem
ble™
 in the lit

eralsense of the word like flags in the wind,
 as they are not of
 a sub
st
an
tial
na
ture. Though ‚Dhu™
 in ‚V
idhuya™
 may be said to sig
nify ‚
shak
ing™
 and
not ‚cast
ing of
f
™, yet
 as oth
ers are de
scribed as tak
ing the lib
er
ated
sage™
s mer
it
s and sins, it means ‚cast
ing of
f
™.
Samp
aray
adhikaranam
: T
opic 16 (Sutras 27-28)
The shaking off of good and evil by t
he man of
 Knowledge
occurs only at the tim
e of his death
gmånam`o VÎ
m©ì`m^mdmÎ
Samp
aray
e t
artt
av
y
abhav
att
athahy
any
e
III
.3.27 (386)
(He who at
tai
ns kn
owledge gets
 rid of
 his g
ood and evil
 deeds)
at the
 time
 of d
ea
th, the
re b
ei
ng no
thing to
 be
 attain
ed
 (by h
im
on the
 way to
 Brah
malo
ka th
rou
gh tho
se
 work
s); fo
r thus
othe
rs (d
ec
lare
 in the
ir sac
red
 tex
ts).
Samp
aray
e:
 at the t
ime of death;

T
artt
av
y
abhav
at:
 there being
nothing to be at
t
ained;
T
atha:
 in this way
, so;
Hi:
 because, for;
Any
e:
others.
This Su
tra de
cides when the in
di
vid
ual soul shakes of
f his good
and evil deeds.
The ques
tion now arises as to when the in
di
vid
ual soul get
s rid
of his good and evil deeds.
 In the K
aushit
aki Upani
shad (I.4) we find
ﬁHe co
mes to the riv
er V
iraja and crosses it by the mind alone,
 and
there he shakes of
f good and evil
.ﬂ On the strength of
 this tex
t the
Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent main
t
ains that the good and ev
il deeds
are dis
carded on his way to Brahmaloka and not at
 the time o
f de
p
art
-
ing from the body
.
This Su
tra re
futes it and de
clares that the lib
er
ated sage frees
him
self from the ef

fects of good and evil works at the t
ime of death
through the strength of
 his knowl
edge.
Though the Kaushit
aki Sruti re
fers to the dis
card
ing of good and
evil on t
he Devayana way or t
he way to Brahmal
oka, af

ter cross ing
the V
iraja river
, the good and ev
il deeds are cast of
f at deat
h, be
cause
there is noth
ing to be at
t
ained through them af

ter death, there re
main
-
ing noth
ing to be en
joyed by hi
m through his good and evil works. The
good and evil works are no lon
ger of any use to him
 and not fit
 to be
re
t
ained by him t
here
af

ter.
The Sanchit
a Karma or ac
cu
mu
lated works are de
stroyed as
soon as one at
t
ains knowl
edge of Brah
man. Prarabdha is de
stroyed
at death.
 So he is freed from t
he ef

fects of all his mer
it
s and sins at the
time of deat
h.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
395

As the re
sult
s of his good and evil deeds are con
trary to t
he re
-
sult of knowl
edge, they
 are de
stroyed by t
he power of the lat
ter
. The
mo
ment of t
heir de
struc
tion is that
 mo
ment in which he set
s out to
-
wards the fruit of hi
s knowl
edge, i.e.
, the world of B
rah
man.
More
over it is not
 pos
si
ble to cast of
f the ef

fects of good and evil
deeds on the way to B
rahmaloka be
cause the soul has no gross body
and so it can
not t
ake re
course to any prac
tice that can de
stroy them.
Fur
ther one can
not cross the river V
iraja un
less he is freed from
all good and evil.
The Sruti de
clares ﬁshak
ing of
f all ev
il as a horse shakes of
f his
hair
sﬂ
 (Ch
h. Up
. VIII.13.1
).
There
fore the set
tled con
clu
sion is that all good and ev
il works
are cast of
f at t
he time of de
ath.
N>ÝX
V C^`m{da
moY
Chhandat
a ubhay
avi
rodhat
III
.3.28 (387)
(The in
terp
reta
tion th
at the
 indi
vid
ual
 sou
l pra
ctisi
ng
Yama-Niyama) according
 to his likin
g (discards good and evil
works whil
e living is reasonable) on account of there being
harmony i
n that
 case be
tween the two (viz.,
 cause and e
ffect,
as we
ll as be
twee
n the C
hhando
gya and a
nothe
r Sruti).
Chhandat
ah:
 according to his liking;
Ubhay
avi
rodhat:
 on account of
there being harmony bet
ween the two. (
Ubhay
a:
 of either;
A
v
irodhat:
 there being no contradiction.
)
The view is cor
rect be
cause vol
un
t
ary per
for
mance of Y
ama,
Niyma, et
c., to get
 rid of Karma is pos
si
ble only be
fore death, and be
-
cause it is op
posed to all tex
t
s. The above v
iew is in agree
ment or uni
-
son with all Sruti
s.
If t
he soul frees him
self from his good and evi
l deeds on the way
af

ter hav ing de
p
arted from the body
 and hav
ing en
tered on the way of

the gods (Devayana), we land our
selves in im
pos
si
bil
i
ties, be
cause
af

ter the body has been left be
hind, he can
not prac
tise ac
cord
ing to
his lik
ing self-re
straint and pur
suit of knowl
edge which can ef

fect de -
struc
tion of his good and ev
il deeds. There
fore there can
not be an
ni
-
hi
la
tion of his good and ev
il works.
It does not cer
t
ainly st
and to rea
son that the ef

fect is de layed ti
ll
some time af

ter death when the cause is there al ready
. When there is
a body it i
s not pos
si
ble to at
t
ain Brahmaloka. There is no dif

fi culty in
dis
card
ing good and evil.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
396

Gaterarthav
attvad
hikaranam
: T
opic 17 (Sutras 29-30)
The knower of Saguna Brahm
an alone goes along Devayana,
and not the knower of Nirguna Brahm
an
JVoaW
©dÎd_
w^`WmÝ`
Wm {h {da
Gaterarthav
attvam
ubhay
athany
atha hi v
irodhah
III
.3.29 (388)
(The sou
l™s) jo
urne
y (along the
 path of the
 gods
, De
vayana) i
s
applic
able in a
 two-
fold m
ann
er, ot
herwi
se there woul
d be
con
tradi
ctio
n (of s
crip
ture
).
Gateh:
of the journey
 of the soul (af
ter death), along t
he p
ath of t
he
gods;
Arthav
atv
am:
 utility;
Ubhay
atha:
 in two ways;
Any
atha:
otherwise;
Hi:
 for
, cert
ainly;

V
irodhah:
 contradiction.
Here is a side is
sue of Su
tra 27.
In some scrip
tural tex
t
s the dead man™
s go
ing on the p
ath of t
he
gods is men
tioned in con
nec
tion with his f
ree
ing him
self from good
and evil.
 In other tex
t
s it is not men
tioned. The doubt
 now arises
whether the two thi
ngs go to
gether in all cases or only in cer
t
ain
cases.
The Purvap
akshin holds that the t
wo are to be con
nected in all
cases, just as the man™
s free
ing him
self from his good and evi
l works
is al
ways fol
lowed by their p
ass
ing over to his f
riends and en
e
mies.
This Su
tra de
clares that the wor
ship
per of Saguna Brah
man
only t
akes jour
ney af

ter death along the Devayana. T
he go
ing on that
p
ath has a sense in the case of Saguna Up
asana only and not in wor
-
ship
pers of Nirguna Brah
man. Brahmaloka is lo
cated else
where in
space.
 The Saguna Up
asaka has to move and at
t
ain that abode.
There is ac
tual go
ing through which an
other place is reached. There
-
fore, the j
our
ney has a mean
ing in his case only
. The Prana of
Nirguna Upasaka is ab
sorbed in Brah
man. He is one with the I
n
fi
nite
or the Ab
so
lute. Where will he mov
e? The lib
er
ated sage who is free
from all de
sires and ego
ism does not go to an
other place. He does
not move.
 The Su
preme Brah
man is not to be reached by t
he lib
er
-
ated sage. He need not t
rans
port him
self to an
other lo
cal
ity
. There is
no mean
ing at all in j
our
ney for such a sage who is ab
sorbed in
Nirguna Brah
man. His ig
no
rance is de
stroyed by t
he dawn of knowl
-
edge of Brah
man. He be
comes iden
ti
cal with the Su
preme Self.
 If
there is jour
ney for him al
so, then it would con
tra
dict Sruti t
ext
s like
ﬁShak
ing of
f good and evil
, free from p
as
sions, he reaches the High
-
est Self,
 or Para-Brah
manﬂ (Mun. Up. II
I.1.
3).
How can the lib
er
ated sage who has be
come one with the Su
-
preme Brah
man who is secondless, who is all-per
vad
ing, who is In
fi
-
nite, who is with
out mo
tion, go t
o an
other place by Devay
ana? He has
al
ready at
t
ained his goal or un
ion with Brah
man. The jour
ney along
the Devayana i
s mean
ing
less for him.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
397

There
fore, he who has real
ised the Saguna Brah
man, he who
wor
ship
s Saguna Brah
man alone goes by the Dev
ayana.
CnnÞñVëb
jUmWm}n
bãY
obm}
H$dV²
Up
ap
annast
allakshanartho
p
alabdherl
okav
at
III
.3.30 (389)
(T
he two-
fold v
iew ta
ken above) is j
usti
fied because we observe
a pu
rpo
se
 chara
cte
rise
d the
reb
y (i.e
., a pu
rpo
se
 of the
 goin
g)
as in ordinary life
.
Up
ap
annah:
 is reasonable;
T
allakshanartho
p
alabdheh:
 for th
e
characteristics which render s
uch journey possible are seen;
Lokav
at:
 as is seen in the world, as is the ordinary experience.
 (
Ta
t
:
that;
Lakshana:
 mark, characteristic features;
Artha:
 object;
Up
alabdheh:
 being known, on account of the obt
aining.)
The
pre vi ous
dis cus sion
is
con tin ued.
The med
i
t
a
tions on Saguna or qual
i
fied Brah
man, such as the
Paryankavidy
a of the K
aushit
aki Upani
shad, there is a rea
son for the
man™
s pro
ceed
ing on the p
ath of t
he gods (Devayana); be
cause the
text
 men
tions cer
t
ain re
sult
s which can be at
t
ained only by
 the man
go
ing to dif

fer ent places, such as his mount
ing a couch, his hold
ing
con
ver
sa
tion with B
rah
man seated on a couch, his ex
pe
ri
enc
ing var
i
-
ous odours and so on.
On the con
trary go
ing on the p
ath of t
he gods has noth
ing to do
with per
fect knowl
edge. No pur
pose is served by such a jour
ney in the
case of a lib
er
ated sage or Nirguna Upasaka in whom ig
no
rance has
been de
stroyed by t
he dawn of knowl
edge of Brah
man or the Im
per
-
ish
able. He has at
t
ained one
ness or unity with the S
u
preme Self.
 All
his de
sires have been ful
filled.
 All his Kar
mas have been de
stroyed.
He is only wait
ing for the dis
so
lu
tion of t
he body
.
The de
struc
tion is sim
i
lar to what is ob
served in or
di
nary life.
 If
we wish to reach some vil
lage we have to pro
ceed on a p
ath lead
ing
there, but no m
ov
ing on a p
ath is needed when we want to at
t
ain free
-
dom from a dis
ease.
Aniy
amadhikar
anam: T
opic 18
The p
assage of the soul by Devayana applies equally
to all V
idyas of Saguna Brahm
an
A{Z
`_– gdm©gm_
{damo
Y– eã
XmZw_
mZmä`m_²
A
niy
ama
h sar
v
asa
mav
irodhah s
abdanum
anabhy
am
III
.3.31(390)
There is no
 restriction (
as to the
 going on the
 path of the
 gods
for any V
idya). T
here is no contradiction as i
s see
n from t
he
Sruti a
nd Sm
riti.
Aniyamah:
 (there is) no restriction;
Sarv
asam:
 of all;
A
v
irodhah:
there is no contradiction;
Sabdanumanabhy
am:
 as is seen from
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
398

Sruti
 and
 Smriti
. (
Sabdah:
 the word, i.e.
, the reveal
ed scripture or
Sruti
;
Anumana:
 inference or Smriti.
)
The jour
ney of t
he soul who knows Brah
man is con
tin
ued.
W
e have shown that t
he go
ing on the p
ath of t
he gods is valid
only for t
he V
idyas of Sagun
a Brah
man, not f
or the knowl
edge of
Nirguna Brah
man which is de
void of al
l qual
i
ties.
Now we ob
serve that t
he go
ing on the p
ath of t
he gods to
Brahmaloka is men
tioned only
 in some of the qual
i
fied V
idyas such as
the Paryanka V
idya, t
he Panchagni V
idya, t
he Up
akosala V
idya, t
he
Dahara V
idya, but
 it is not men
tioned or ex
pressly st
ated in oth
ers
such as the Madhu V
idya, t
he Sandilya V
idya, t
he Shodasakala
V
idya, t
he V
aisvanara V
idya.
The doubt now arises whether the go
ing on the p
ath of t
he gods
is to be con
nected with those V
idyas in which it is ac
tu
ally men
tioned
or gen
er
ally with al
l V
idyas of t
hat kind.
This Su
tra de
clares that all wor
ship
pers of the Saguna B
rah
-
man, what
ever their V
idyas may be,
 go af

ter death by this p
ath. This is
seen from the Srut
i and Smriti
. ﬁThose who med
i
t
ate thus through
Panchagni V
idya and also those who un
der
st
and other V
idyas and
also those who med
i
t
ate in the f
or
est with fait
h and aus
teri
ties, on
Saguna Brah
man through any ot
her V
idya pro
ceed on the p
ath of t
he
god
sﬂ
 (Ch
h. Up
. V
.10.1
.); (Br
i. Up
. VI.2.15
).
Bhagavad Git
a also de
clares, ﬁLight and dark
ness, these are
thought t
o be the world™
s ev
er
last
ing p
aths; by t
he one he goes who
does not re
turn, by t
he other he re
turns againﬂ (VIII
.26).
The term ﬁThe T
rueﬂ in the p
as
sage ﬁThose who in the for
est,
with fait
h, wor
ship the T
rueﬂ, i.e.,
 Brah
man, is of

ten em ployed to de
-
note Brah
man.
Thus it is quite clear that
 the go
ing on the p
ath of gods is not
con
fined to t
hose V
idyas in which it is ac
tu
ally men
tioned or ex
pressly
st
ated.
Y
av
adadhikaradhi
karanam: T
opic 19
Perfected souls m
ay t
ake a corporeal existence for divine mission
`mdX{Y
H$ma
_dpñ
W{Vam{
YH
$m[aH$
Y
av
adadhikaram
av
asthitiradhi
karikanam
III
.3.32 (391)
Of tho
se
 who h
ave
 a mis
sio
n to fu
lfil (th
ere
 is co
rpo
rea
l)
ex
istence
, so long as the
 mission is no
t fulfilled.
Y
av
adadhikaram
:
 so long as the mission is not fulf
illed;
A
v
asthitih:
(there is corporeal) existence;
Adhikarikanam
:
 of those who have a
mission in
 life to fulfil. (
Y
av
ad:
 as long as;
Adhikaram:
 mission,
purpose to be fulfil
led.)
A
 plau
si
ble ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 31 is re
futed.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
399

The Purvap
akshin says: Rishi Ap
ant
arat
amas, a teacher of t
he
V
edas was by the or
der of V
ishnu, born on this earth as V
yasa or
Krishna Dvaip
ayana. S
im
i
larly V
asishtha, the son of B
rahma™
s mind
hav
ing p
arted from for
mer body in con
se
quence of the curse of Nimi,
was on the or
der of Brahma, agai
n pro
cre
ated by Mi
tra and V
aruna.
Bhrigu and other sons of Brahma™
s mind were again born at the sac
ri
-
fice of V
aruna. Sanatkumara also, who li
ke
wise was a son of
Brahma™
s mind, was in con
se
quence of a boon be
ing granted to
Rudra, born again as Skanda. Daksha, Narada and other Rishis were
born again. It
 is st
ated that
 some as
sumed a new body af

ter the oldbody had per
ished, some as
sumed through their su
per
nat
u
ral pow
-
ers var
i
ous new bod
ies while the old body re
mained in
t
act all the
while.
Now these Rishis had knowl
edge of Brah
man or the Ab
so
lute
and yet t
hey had to be re
born. If t
his is the case what is the use of
such knowl
edge of Brah
man? The knowl
edge of Brah
man may ei
ther
be or not be the cause of fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion or free
dom.
The Su
tra re
futes it and de
clares that or
di
narily a per
son is not
re
born af

ter at t
ain
ing knowl
edge of the A
b
so
lute. B
ut the case of
those who have a di
vine mis
sion to ful
fil is dif

fer ent. They
 may have
one or more births till t
heir mis
sion is ful
filled,
 af

ter which they are notborn again. They are en
trusted with t
he of

fices con du
cive to t
he sub
-
sis
tence of the world such as the pro
mul
ga
tion of t
he V
edas and the
like. They as
sume new bod
ies of their own free will and not
 as the re
-
sult of Karma.
 They p
ass from one body to an
other
, as if from one
house into an
other in or
der to ac
com
plish the du
ties of thei
r of

fices.They pre
serve all the t
rue mem
ory of thei
r iden
tity
. They cre
ate for
them
selves, through t
heir power over the ma
te
rial of the body
 and the
sense or
gans, new bod
ies and oc
cupy them ei
ther all at once or in
suc ces sio
n.
Smriti t
ells us that Sul
abha, a woman who had knowl
edge of
Brah
man, wanted t
o en
ter into dis
cus
sion with Janaka. She lef
t her
own body
, en
tered into t
hat of Janaka, car
ried on a dis
cus
sion with
him and again re
turned into her own body
.
ﬁ
T
at Tvam
 Asi
ﬂ (That thou art) does not mean ﬁ
T
at Tvam
 Mrito
Bhavishyasi
ﬂ (they will be
come That af

ter death). It can
not be in
ter
-
preted to mean ﬁThou wilt
 be that af

ter thou hast dead.ﬂ An
other text
de
clares that the fruit
 of Knowl
edge viz.,
 un
ion with Brah
man springs
up at the mo
ment when the com
plete knowl
edge of Brah
man is at
-
t
ained. The Rishi V
amadeva saw and un
der
stood it sing
ing, ﬁI was
Manu, I was the sun.ﬂ
But t
hey never come un
der the sway of A
vidya or ne
science
even though t
hey may be born.
 The case is sim
i
lar to that
 of a lib
er
-
ated sage. A
 Jivanmukt
a con
tin
ues his phys
i
cal ex
is
tence even af

terat
t
ain
ing Brahma Jnana or Knowl
edge of the A
b
so
lute as long as the
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
400

Prarabdha Karma last
s. The di
vine mis
sion of these Rishis like Sri
V
yasa, V
asishtha, Ap
ant
arat
amas, can be com
p
ared to the
Prarabdha Karma of Jiv
anmukt
as.
For all these rea
sons it is es
t
ab
lished that t
hose who are en
-
dowed with true and per
fect knowl
edge at
t
ain in all cases fi
nal eman
-
ci p
a tion.
Aksharadhy
adhikaranam
: T
opic 20
The negative att
ributes of Brahm
an ment
ioned in various text
s
are to be combined i
n all m
edit
ations on Brahm
an
Aja{
Y`m§ Ë
ddamoY
– gm_mÝ`VØmdmä`m_
m¡ngXdÎ
mXwº
$_²
Aksharadhiy
am tv
av
arodhah
 samany
at
adbhav
abhy
amaup
asadav
att
adukt
am
III
.3.33 (392)
Bu
t the
 con
ce
ptio
ns o
f the
 (ne
gativ
e)
 attrib
ute
s of th
e
Imperisha
ble (Bra
hman
) ar
e to be combined (f
rom di
ff
erent
tex
ts whe
re th
e I
mpe
risha
ble
 Brah
man is
 de
alt with
, as the
y
form o
ne
 Vid
ya), b
ec
aus
e o
f the
 simi
larity (
of d
efi
ning the
Im
pe
rishable
 Brahman throu
gh de
nials) and
 the o
bje
ct (the
Impe
rishable Brahman)
 being the same, as in the case of the
Upasad
 (offerings). This has bee
n ex
plaine
d (by Jaimini in the
Purvamimamsa).
Aksharadhiy
am:
 of the medit
ation of negat
ive att
ributes belonging to
the Imperishable;

Tu
:
 but, indeed;

A
v
arodhah:
 combination;
Samany
at
adbhav
abhy
am:
 because of the similarity
 (of denying
Brahman through denials) and the object
 (viz., I
mperishable
Brahman) being the same;
Aup
asadav
at:
as in the case of the
Up
asad (of
fering) like the hy
mn or the Mantra in connection wit
h the
Up
asada rite;
Ta
t
:
 that;
Ukt
am:
 has been explained (by Jaimini
 in the
Purvamimamsa)
.
The
neg a tive
at trib ut
es
of
the
Im per ish able
are
now
ex am in ed,
as the pos
i
tive at

trib utes were ex
am
ined in Su
tra 1
1 of this Sec
tion.
W
e read in the Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad, ﬁO Gargi! The
Brahmanas or the knowers of Brah
man call this Akshara or the Im
-
per
ish
able. It
 is nei
ther gross nor sub
tle, nei
ther short nor longﬂ (Bri.
Up. III
.8.8). A
gain the Mundaka says, ﬁThe S
u
preme Knowl
edge is
that by
 which the Im
per
ish
able (Akshara) is at
t
ained.ﬂ ﬁThat which is
imperceivable, ungrasp
able, which has no fam
ily and no casteﬂ etc.
(Mun. Up. I.
1.5-6). In ot
her places also the high
est Brah
man, un
der
the name of A
kshara is de
scribed as that of which all qual
i
ties are to
be de
nied.
A
 doubt arises now as to whether the neg
a
tive qual

i ties in the
above two tex
t
s are to be com
bined so as to form one V
idya or they
are to be treated as two sep

a rate V
idyas.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
401

The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that each de
nial is valid onl
y for
that p
as
sage in which the text
 ac
tu
ally ex

hib it
s it, and not f
or other
places. These neg
a
tive at

trib utes do not di
rectly in
di
cate or spec
ify
the na
ture of Brah
man like the pos
i
tive at

trib utes, Bli
ss, Peace,
Knowl
edge, T
ruth, Pu
rity
, Per
fec
tion, E
ter
nity
, etc. Hence the prin
ci
-
ple st
ated in Su
tra III
.3.1
1 does not ap
ply here, be
cause no pur
pose is
re
ally served or gained by
 such a com
bi
na
tion.
This Su
tra re
futes this and de
clares that such de
ni
als are to be
com
bined be
cause the method of t
each
ing Brah
man through de
nial
is the same and the ob
ject of in
struc
tion is also the same, v
iz., the I
m
-
per
ish
able Brah
man (Akshara). The rule of Su
tra III
.3.1
1 ap
plies here
also. In Su
tra III
.3.1
1 pos
i
tive at

trib utes of Brah
man were dis
cussed.
Here we are con
cerned with neg
a
tive at

trib utes which teach Brah
-
man by an in
di
rect method. The case is sim
i
lar to the Up
asad of

fer -
ings. The Mantras for giv

ing these of

fer ings are found only in t
he
Sama V
eda. But
 the priest
s of the Y
ajur V
eda use this Man
tra given in
the other V
eda. The hym
ns which oc
cur in the Sama V
eda are re
cited
by the A
dhvaryu af

ter the time of the Y
ajur V
eda. This prin
ci
ple has
been es
t
ab
lished by Jaimini in P
urvamimamsa (II
I.3.
 9).
Sim
i
larly the neg
a
tive at

trib utes have to be com
bined here also
in
the
med i t
a tion
on
the
Im per ish able
Brah man
(Akshara).
The
con cep tion
of
the
neg a tive
at trib ut
es
of
the
In de struc ti ble
(Akshara) as stated i
n the Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad is to be re
-
t
ained in the med
i
t
a
tions on the In
de
struc
ti
ble ev
ery
where (i.e., in ev

-
ery Akshara V
idya) be
cause the same Akshara is re
cog
nised in ev
ery
Akshara V
idya and also be
cause those neg
a
tive at

trib utes are pre
-
sup
posed to be in
cluded among His es
sen
tial at
trib
utes.
Iy
adadhikaranam
: T
opic 21
Mundaka III.
1.1 and Kat
ha I.3.
1 constitute one V
idya
B`Xm_ZZ
Iy
adamananat
III
.3.34 (393)
Because
 (the same thing)
 is described
 as such and such.
Iy
at:
 so much only
, this much;
Amananat:
 on account of being
men
tioned in the scripture.
W
e read in the Mundaka Up
anishad ﬁT
wo birds of beau
ti
ful
plum
age, in
sep
a
ra
ble friends, cling t
o the same tree. One of
 them
eat
s the sweet and bit
ter fruit
s there of, t
he other looks on with
out eat
-
ingﬂ (Mun. Up. II
I.1.
1). The same Man
tra is found in the t
ext of
Svet
asvat
ara Upani
shad (IV
.6).
Again we have,
 ﬁThere are the two en
joy
ing the fruit
s of their
good deeds, en
tered into t
he cave, dwell
ing on the high
est sum
mit.
Those who know Brah
man call them shade and light
, like
wise those
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
402

house
hold
ers who per
form the T
rinachiket
a sac
ri
ficeﬂ (Katha Up.
I.3.1)
.
The doubt here arises, do we have in these t
wo text
s two dif

fer -
ent V
idyas or one only?
The Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent main
t
ains that these are two
V
idyas, be
cause there are dif

fer ent ob
ject
s of med
i
t
a
tion. The
Mundaka text
 de
clares that only one eat
s the fruit,
 while the other
does not. Kat
ha text
 says that bot
h of them en
joy the f
ruit
s of their
good ac
tions. So t
he ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion is not t
he same. As the ob
-
ject
s of knowl
edge dif

fer in char ac
ter
, the V
idyas them
selves must be
looked upon as sep
a
rate.
This Su
tra re
futes it and de
clares that they
 form one V
idya, be
-
cause both de
scribe the same Lord as ex
ist
ing thus and thus, i.
e. in
the form of
 the in
di
vid
ual soul. The pur
pose or aim of the two S
ruti
p
as
sages is to teach about the High
est Self or P
ara Brah
man and
show the iden
tity
 of the Jiv
a and Para Brah
man.
As the word Dvau, i.
e., t
wo is used in the two Srutis we must
real
ise that they
 re
fer to the same V
idya. Though t
he Mundaka text
says that one bird (the i
n
di
vid
ual soul) eat
s the fruit
s of ac
tions and
the other bird looks on with
out eat
ing and though the lat

ter pas
sage
re
fers to the t
wo as eat
ing fruit
s, the V
idyas are the same as they
 re
fer
to the same en
tity
. Just as when in a group one car
ries an um
brella
we say um
brella-hold
ers go, even so the Para B
rah
man also is de
-
scribed as eat
ing fruit
s. The con
text
 re
fers clearly to t
he eter
nal and
Su preme
Brah man
(
Aksharam brahm
a yat p
aram
).
The Katha Up
anishad text
 in
ti
mates the same high
est Brah
man
which is above all de
sires. As it is men
tioned to
gether with the en
joy
-
ing
in di vid ual
soul,
it
is
it
 self
met
 a phor i cally
spo ken
of
as
en joy ing,
just as we speak of the ‚men with t
he um
brella™
 al
though only one out
of sev
eral car
ries an um
brella. All
 this has been ex
plained at lengt
h
un der
I.2.
1
1.
There
fore, the V
idyas are one only
, as the ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion
or Knowl
edge is one.
Ant
aratv
adhikaranam
: T
opic 22 (Sutras 35-36)
Brihadaranyaka III.
4.1 and II
I.5.
1 constitute one V
idya
AÝVam ^
yVJ«
m_dËñdmË_
Ant
ara bhut
agramav
at
sv
atmanah
III
.3.35 (394)
As the
 Self is
 within all, as in the
 case
 of the a
ggregate
 of the
elem
ent
s,
 (t
her
e is
 on
enes
s o
f V
id
ya
).
Ant
ara:
 as being innermost of all,
 inside, the st
atus of being the
inmost;
Bhut
agramav
at:
 as in the case of the aggregate of
 the
element
s;
Sv
atmanah:
 of one™
s own self.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
403

T
wo p
as
sages from the Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad are t
aken
up for dis
cus
sion to show that they
 re
late to t
he same V
idya.
In the B
rihadaranyaka Up
anishad Ushasta ques
tions
Y
ajnavalkya,
 ﬁEx
plain to me t
he Brah
man which is pres
ent to in
tu
i
tion,
not hid
denŠthis At

man or Self which is within allﬂ (Bri. Up. I
II.
4.1).
Y
ajnavalkya re
plies, ﬁThat which breathes through P
rana is your self,
that is withi
n all.ﬂ
In the same Up
anishad Y
ajnavalkya giv
es an an
swer to the
same ques
tion put by
 Kahola, ﬁThat
 which tran
scends hun
ger and
thirst, grief
 and de
lu
sion, de
cay and death, know
ing this very
 selfﬂ etc.
(Bri
. Up. III.5
.1).
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that these t
wo are sep
a
rate
V
idyas, be
cause the re
plies given be
ing dif

fer ent, t
he ob
ject
s re
ferred
to must also be dif

fer ent.
This Su
tra re
futes this and de
clares that the ob
ject is one, the
High
est Self or P
ara Brah
man, be
cause it is im
pos
si
ble to con
ceive
two selves be
ing si
mul
t
a
neously in
ner
most of all i
n the same body
.
At
man alone is t
aught in the t
wo text
s as be
ing ul
ti
mately
 im
ma
-
nent just as At

man is also taught as be
ing im
ma
nent in the el
e
ment
s.
The two p
as
sages re
fer only t
o one V
idya, be
cause there could be
only one At

man, who is Sarvantara, i.e.
, ul
ti
mately
 im
ma
nent. A
mong
the el
e
ment
s wa
ter is im
ma
nent in earth,
 fire in wa
ter and so on. But
none has ul
ti
mate im
ma
nency
. Ev
en so there is only one ul
ti
mate im
-
ma nent
en tity
.
Rel
a
tivel
y one el
e
ment can be in
side the other
. But
 none of the
five el

e ment
s which con
sti
tute t
his phys
i
cal body can be truly t
he in
-
ner
most of all.
 Sim
i
larly two selv
es can
not be si
mul
t
a
neously the in
-
ner
most of all i
n the same body
. Ev
en so one self alone can be the
in ner most
of
all.
There
fore, the same self
 is t
aught in both t
he re
plies of
Y
ajnavalkya.
In both t
he cases the sub
ject-mat
ter of the ques
tion and the an
-
swer is Brah
man. This is emphasised by t
he sage Y
ajnavalkya him

-
self, when he re
peat
s ﬁThat soul of thine i
s the in
ner
most soul of
in di vid u als.
ﬂ
The
dif
 fer ent
ex po si tions
of
Y
ajnavalkya
re fer
to
the
one
and the same ob
ject of wor
ship, viz.,
 Brah
man.
As both tex
t
s equally de
clare the self to be wit
hin all, t
hey must
be t
aken as con
sti
tut
ing one V
idya only
. In bot
h p
as
sages ques
tion
and an
swer equally re
fer to a Sel
f which is within ev
ery
thing. For in
one body
, there can
not be two selves, e
ach of which is in
side ev
ery
-
thing else. One S
elf only
 may be withi
n ev
ery
thing. W
e read in the
Svet
asvat
ara Upani
shad ﬁHe is the one God, hid
den in all be
ings,
all-per
vad
ing, the S
elf within al
l be
ings.ﬂ As this Man
tra re
cords that
one Self li
ves within the ag
gre
gate of all be
ings, the same holds good
with re
gard to the two p
as
sages of the Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
404

As the ob
ject of Knowl
edge or the ob
ject of wor
ship is one, the
V
idya also is one only
.
AÝ`Wm ^
oXmZw
nn{Îm[a
{V Mo
ÞmonXo
emÝVadV²
Any
atha bhedanup
ap
attiriti chenn
op
adesant
arav
at
III
.3.36 (395)
I
f it be
 said
 (that the
 two V
idya
s are
 se
para
te, fo
r) othe
r
wise
 the

rep
eti
tion c
anno
t be
 acc
ou
nte
d fo
r, we
 rep
ly no
t so; (
it is)
 like
(the re
pe
tition) in anothe
r instruction (in the
 Chhando
gya).
Any
atha:
 otherwise;
Bhedanup
ap
attih:
 the repetit
ion cannot be
account
ed for
, no justif
ication for the v
ariety in t
he wording of the two
replies;
Iti:
 so, th
is;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 no, not so;
Up
adesant
arav
at:
 as will
be seen from other teachings, as in t
he teaching of another V
idya,
mode of medit
ation, namel
y the S
atya V
idya in t
he Chhandogya.
(
Bheda:
 dif
ference;
Anup
ap
attih:
 not obt
aining.)
The op
po
nent says that
 un
less the sep

a rate
ness of the two
V
idyas be ad
mit
ted, t
he sep
a
ra
tion of t
he two st
ate
ment
s can
not be
ac
counted for
. He re
marks that un
less the two text
s re
fer to two dif

fer -
ent selves the rep
e
ti
tion of t
he same sub
ject would be mean
ing
less.
This Su
tra says that i
t is not so. The rep
e
ti
tion has a def
i
nite pur
-
pose or aim. It hel
p
s the as
pi
rant to com
pre
hend the sub
ject
s more
clearly and deeply f
rom dif

fer ent view point
s. The rep
e
ti
tion does not
jus
tify
 us to t
ake that two dif

fer ent selves are t
aught here. In
Chhandogya Up
anishad the in
struc
tion con
veyed in t
he words ﬁThat
is the Self
, Thou art That
 (
T
at Tvam
 Asi
), O Svet
aketuﬂ, is re
peated
nine times, and y
et the one V
idya is not t
hereby split int
o many
. Sim
i
-
larly is this case also.
The in
tro
duc
tory and con
clud
ing clauses in
di
cate that all
 those
p
as
sages have the same sense. There also the Up
akrama (be
gin
-
ning) is the same. So i
s the con
clu
sion (Upasamhara). I
t says, ﬁEv

ery -
thing else is per
ish
able. Ev

ery thing else is of ev
il.ﬂ
In the ear
lier Brahmana, A
t
man is t
aught as be
ing sep

a rate from
the body and t
he senses. In the later B
rahmana, At

man is taught as
not hav
ing hun
ger
, etc. B
ut the V
idya is the same.
The for
mer sec
tion de
clares the ex
is
tence of the S
u
preme Self
which is nei
ther cause nor ef

fect, while the lat
ter qual
i
fies it as that
which tran
scends all the rel
a
tive at

trib utes of the S
amsara st
ate, such
as hun
ger
, thirst and so on. T
he sec
ond an
swer tells some
thing spe
-
cial about the S
elf.
The two sec
tions, there
fore, form one V
idya only
.
V
y
atiharadhikar
anam: T
opic 23
The Sruti prescribes reciprocal medit
ation in Ai
t. A
r
. II
.2.4.
6
ì`{Vhmamo {dqefp
V
y
atiharo v
isim
shanti hit
arav
at
III
.3.37 (396)
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
405

T
her
e is
 exc
ha
ng
e (o
f m
edi
ta
ti
on
),
 bec
au
se t
he t
ext
s
distin
guish (tw
o meditations); as in
 other cases.
V
y
atiharah:
 exchange; reciprocity (of
 medit
ation);
V
isimsha
nti:
 (the
scriptures) explain clearly
, distinguish;

Hi:
 because, for;
It
arav
at:
 as
in other cases.
The Ait
areya Aranyaka says with ref

er ence to the per
son in the
sun
, ﬁWh
at I am, th
at He
 is; w
hat H
e is
, that a
m Iﬂ (
Ait. Ar
. II.2.4.6
).
A
 doubt arises here whether the med
i
t
a
tion is to be of
 a re
cip
ro
-
cal na
ture, a dou
ble one by means of ex

change, i.e., iden
ti
fy
ing the
wor
ship
per with the be
ing in the sun, and t
hen in
versely
, iden
ti
fy
ing
the be
ing in the sun with t
he wor
ship
per; or only in t
he for
mer man
ner
.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that the m
ed
i
t
a
tion is to be prac
-
tised in the f
or
mer man
ner only and not in t
he re
verse way also. He
ar
gues that the soul would be ex

alted by the for
mer med
i
t
a
tion and
the Lord be low
ered by the lat

ter one! There is a mean ing in the fi
rst
kind of med
i
t
a
tion but t
he sec
ond kind of med
i
t
a
tion is mean
ing
less.
The pres
ent Su
tra re
futes this v
iew and de
clares that the med
i
-
t
a
tion is to be prac
tised in both ways be
cause such a s
t
ate
ment would
be purportless. Ex
change, or re
verse med
i
t
a
tion is ex
pressly re
-
corded in the Sruti f
or the pur
pose of med
i
t
a
tion, just
 as other qual
i
-
ties of the S
elf such as it
s be
ing the self of
 all, Sat
yasankalp
a, etc.,
 are
re
corded for the same pur
pose. For both tex
t
s make the dis
tinc
tive
dou
ble enun
ci
a
tion ﬁI am Thouﬂ and ﬁThou art
 I.ﬂ Now the dou
ble
enun
ci
a
tion has a sense only if a t
wo
fold med
i
t
a
tion is to be based
upon it; ot
h
er
wise it would be de
void of m
ean
ing; since one st
ate
ment
would be all that i
s needed.
This will not in any
 way lower Brah
man. Ev
en in that way
, only
the unity
 of the S
elf is med
i
t
ated upon. B
rah
man who is bodi
less can
be adored or med
i
t
ated even as hav
ing a form. The dou
ble st
ate
ment
is merely meant t
o con
firm the one
ness of the Self
. It
 gives force or
em
pha
sis to the iden
tity
.
There
fore, a two
fold med
i
t
a
tion has to be ad
mit
ted, not
 a sin
gle
one. This con
firms the unit
y of t
he Self.
 The dou
ble re
la
tion enounced
in the Srut
i text
 has to be med
i
t
ated upon, and is to be
trans
formed to
other V
idyas also which treat of t
he same sub
ject.
Saty
ady
adhikaranam
: T
opic 24
Brihadaranyaka V
.4.1 and V
.5.3 t
reat of one V
idya
about Sat
ya Brahman
Saiv
a hi saty
aday
ah
III
.3.38 (397)
T
he same (Satya Vidya is taugh
t in both places), because
(attrib
ute
s lik
e)
 Satya
 etc
., (are
 se
en
 in bo
th pla
ce
s).
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
406

Sa ev
a:
 the same (Saty
a V
idya);
Hi:
 because;
Saty
aday
ah:
(attributes like) Sat
ya etc.
W
e read in the Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad ﬁHe who knows
 this
great, glo
ri
ous, first born (Be
ing) as the Saty
a Brah
man, con
quers
these worldsﬂ (V
.4.1). A
gain we read ﬁThat which is Satya i
s that Sun
the be
ing who is in that orb and the be
ing who is in the right ey
e...
 he
de
stroys evilsﬂ (V
.5.3).
Now a doubt arises whether these two Saty
a V
idyas are one or
dif
 fer ent.
The Purvap
akshin holds that the V
idyas are two; be
cause the
text
 de
clares two dif

fer ent re
sult
s, one in the ear
lier p
as
sage ﬁHe con
-
quers these worldsﬂ(V
.4.1), t
he other one later on ﬁHe de
stroys evil
and leaves itﬂ (V
.5.3).
The Su
tra de
clares that they
 are one, be
cause the sec
ond text
re
fers to the S
atya of
 the ear
lier text
, ﬁThat which is Sat
ya,ﬂ etc.
In re
al
ity t
here is only one re
sult in both cases. The st
ate
ment of
a sec
ond re
sult merely has the pur
pose of glo
ri
fy
ing the new in
struc
-
tion giv
en about Sat
ya or the T
rue, viz.,
 that it
s se
cret names are
‚Ahar
™
 and ‚Aham™.
There
fore, the con
clu
sion is that the t
ext re
cords only one V
idya
of the T
rue (Satyam),
 dis
tin
guished by such and such de
t
ails and that
hence all the qual
i
ties men
tioned such as T
ruth and so on are to be
com
pre
hended in one act of med
i
t
a
tion.
Some com
men
t
a
tors think that t
he above Su
tra re
fers not to t
he
ques
tion whether Bri.
 Up. V
.4,1 and V
.5.3 f
orm one V
idya or one med
-
i
t
a
tion but t
o the ques
tion whether the B
rihadaranyaka text
 about the
per
sons in the sun and in the eye and t
he sim
i
lar Chhandogya text
(I.6.6),
 ﬁNow that golden per
son who is seen within the sunﬂ etc. con
-
sti
tute one V
idya or not.
They come to t
he con
clu
sion that they
 con
sti
tute one V
idya and
that hence trut
h and the other qual
i
ties men
tioned in the
Brihadaranyaka are to be com
bined with the Chhandogy
a text
 also.
But
this
in ter pre t
a tion
of
the
Su tra
is
ob jec tion able,
be cause
the
Chhandogya V
idya re
fers to the Udgit
ha and is thus con
nected with
sac
ri
fi
cial rites. The marks of thi
s as
so
ci
a
tion are seen in the be
gin
-
ning, the mi
d
dle and the end of t
he V
idya. W
e read at the be
gin
ning,
ﬁThe Rik is the earth, the S
aman is fireﬂ, in t
he mid
dle, ﬁRik and
Saman are his joint
s, and there
fore he is the Udgitha,
ﬂ and in the end,
ﬁHe who knows
 this sings as a Samanﬂ (Chh. Up. I.
6.1).
In the B
rihadaranyaka, on the con
trary
, there is ver
ily
, noth
ing to
con
nect the V
idya with t
he sac
ri
fi
cial rites. As t
he sub
ject mat
ter is dif

-
fer
ent, t
he V
idyas are sep

a rate and the de
t
ails of the t
wo V
idyas are to
be held sep

a rate.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
407

Kamady
adhikaranam
: T
opic 25
Att
ributes ment
ioned in Chh. Up. VI
II.
1.1 and Bri.
 Up. IV
.4.22 are to
be combined on account of several com
mon f
eatures in both text
s
H$m_
mXrVaÌ VÌ M
m`VZm{Xä
Kamadit
aratra t
atra chay
at
anadibhy
ah
III
.3.39 (398)
(Qualitie
s like
 true) de
sire e
tc., (mentione
d in the C
hhandogya
Upa
nisha
d are
 to b
e i
nse
rted
) in the
 othe
r (i.e
., in the
Brihada

ranyaka) and (those
 mentio
ned
) in the o
ther (i.e
., in
the Brihad
aranyaka a
re als
o to be
 inse
rted in the
 Chhando
gya)
on acc
ount
 of t
he abode, etc.
, (bein
g th
e same in bot
h).
Kamadi:
(Satyasankalp
adi) (T
rue) desire etc.;
 It
aratra:
 in the other
,
elsewhere, in the Brihadarany
aka Upanishad;

T
atra:
 there, in t
he
Chhandogya Up
anishad;
Cha:
 also;
A
y
at
anadibhy
ah:
 on account of
the abode etc.
Dahara V
idya of t
he Chhandogya and the Brihadarany
aka
Up
anishads is now dis
cussed.
In the Chhandogya Up
anishad (VIII
.1.1) we read, ﬁThere is this
city of
 Brah
man and in it t
he p
al
ace, the small lo
tus and in it t
he small
ether; that
 is the Self
.ﬂ W
e read in the Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad
(IV
.4.22) ﬁThat great
 un
born self who con
sist
s of Knowl
edge, who is
sur
rounded by the Pranas lies in t
he ether that i
s within the heart.
ﬂ
A
 doubt here arises whether the two con
sti
tute one V
idya and
there
fore the p
ar
tic
u
lars are to be com
bined or not.
The pres
ent Su
tra de
clares that they
 form one V
idya and the
qual
i
ties men
tioned in each are to be com
bined in the other
, be
cause
many point
s are com
mon in both.
ﬁWishes and so on,ﬂ i.e., ﬁThe qual
ity of
 hav
ing true wishes and
so on.ﬂ The word ‚Kama™
 st
ands for ‚Saty
akama™
 just as peo
ple oc
ca
-
sion
ally say Dat
t
a for Devadatt
a and Bhama for S
atyabhama.
 This
qual
ity and t
he other qual
i
ties which the Chhandogya at
trib
utes to the
ether within t
he heart, have t
o be com
bined with the B
rihadaranyaka
p
as
sage, and vice versa, i.
e., t
he qual
i
ties men
tioned in the
Brihadaranyaka such as be
ing the ruler of all,
 have also to be as
-
cribed to the Self
 free from sin, de
scribed in the Chhandogya.
The rea
son for this is that t
he two p
as
sages ex
hibit a num
ber of
com
mon fea
tures. Com
mon to both is t
he heart re
garded as abode.
Com
mon again is the Lord as ob
ject of knowl
edge or med
i
t
a
tion.
Com
mon also is the Lord be
ing re
garded as a bank pre
vent
ing these
worlds from be
ing con
founded. A
nd there are sev
eral other point
s
also.
But an ob
jec
tion is raised. There are also dif

fer ences. In the
Chhandogya the at
trib
utes are as
cribed to the ether wit
hin the heart,
while in the Brihadarany
aka they are at
trib
uted to B
rah
man abid
ing in
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
408

the ether
. This ob
jec
tion has no force. It
 can
not cer
t
ainly st
and. W
e
have shown un
der I.3.14 t
hat the t
erm ether in the Chhandogya des
-
ig nates
Brah man.
There is, how
ever
, one dif

fer ence be
tween the two t
ext
s. The
Chhandogya treat
s of Saguna Brah
man while the Brihadarany
aka
treat
s of Nirguna Brah
man or the Su
preme Brah
man des
ti
tute of
 all
qual
i
ties. Y
ajnavalkya say
s to Janaka ﬁFor that per
son is not at
t
ached
to any
thing. That
 Self is t
o be de
scribed by No, NoŠ
neti, net
i
ﬂ (Bri.
Up. IV
.3.14
).
But as the qual
i
fied Brah
man is fun
da
men
t
ally one with t
he un
-
qual
i
fied Brah
man we must con
clude that the S
u
tra teaches the com
-
bi
na
tion of t
he qual
i
ties for glo
ri
fy
ing Brah
man and not for t
he pur
pose
of
de vout
med i t
a tion
or
Up
asana.
Adaradhikaranam
: T
opic 26 (Sutras 40-41)
Pranagnihotra need not be observed on days of fast
AmXa
mXbmo
Adaradalop
ah
III
.3.40 (399)
On acc
ount o
f the re
spe
ct shown (to
 the P
ranagnihotra b
y the
Sruti) there
 can be
 no omi
ssion (o
f this act) (e
ve
n when the
eatin
g of f
ood is omi
tt
ed).
Adarat:
on account of the respect shown;
Alop
ah:
 there can be no
omission
.
This Su
tra gives the v
iew of the Pu
rvap
akshin or the op
po
nent.
Be
cause there is lov
ing em
pha
sis on Pranagnihotra in Jabala
Sruti,
 such Pranagnihotra should not be omit

ted.In the V
aisvanara V
idya of t
he Chhandogya Up
anishad, the
wor
ship
per is asked first be
fore he t
akes his meals to of

fer food toeach of the Pranas, say

ing ﬁTo Prana I of

fer thisﬂ. The Sruti at
t
a
ches
much im
por
t
ance to this Pranagnihot
ra. The Sruti en
joins that f
ood
must be of

fered to the Pranas even be
fore en
ter
t
ain
ing guest
s.
Now the ques
tion is whether the P
ranagnihotra is to be ob
-
served even on days of f
ast
ing.
The Su
tra de
clares that there should be no omis
sion of it ev
en
on days of fast

ing, as the Sruti at
t
a
ches much im
por
t
ance to it. T
he
Jabala Sruti says it
 must be ob
served even on days of f
ast
ing by sip
-
ping at least a f
ew drops of
 wa
ter
.
T
o this Purvap
aksha the next S
u
tra gives a re
ply
.
Up
asthite™t
ast
adv
achanat
III
.3.41 (400)
When e
ating is taking p
lace
 (the P
ranagnihotra has
 to be
pe
rforme
d) fro
m that (i
.e.,
 the
 foo
d firs
t ea
ten
), for s
o (the
 Sruti)

declares.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
409

Up
asthi
te:
 being present, being near
, when food is served;
At
ah:
from that
, on that
 account;
T
adv
achanat:
 for so (the Sruti) declares.
This Su
tra re
futes the v
iew ex
pressed in the last Su
tra, and de
-
clares that Pranagnihotra,
 need not be per
formed on fast
ing days, be
-
cause the Sruti ex
pressly de
clares, ﬁThere
fore the fi
rst food which
co
mes is meant for Homa. A
nd he who of

fers that first ob
la
tion should
of

fer it to Prana, say
ing Svahaﬂ (Chh. Up. 19.
1).
The first por
tion of t
he food should be of

fered to the Pranas on
those days when it is t
aken. The Sruti gi
ves im
por
t
ance to this only
and not that
 it should be ob
served even on days of f
ast
ing.
T
annirdharanadhikaranam: T
opic 27
Up
asanas mentioned in connecti
on with sacrifices
are not their p
art
s, but sep
arate
V{ÞYm©
aUm{Z
`_ñVX²
Ñï>
o– n¥W
½¿`à
{V~ÝY
– \$b_²
T
annirdharan
aniy
amast
addrishteh
 prithagghy
apratibandhah
phalam
III
.3.42 (401)
There
 is no
 rule
 abo
ut the
 invio
lab
ility o
f that (i.e
., Upas
a
nas
con
ne
cte
d with
 ce
rtain s
acrifi
ce
s) tha
t is se
en
 (from
 the
 Sruti
itse
lf); for a
 se
para
te fru
it (be
long
s to the
 Upas
anas
), viz.,
non-
ob
struc
tion (
of the
 res
ults
 of the
 sac
rifice
).
T
annirdharananiy
amah:
 no rule, about t
he inviolabil
ity of
 that;
T
addrishtih:
 that being seen (from t
he Sruti);
Prith
ak:
 separat
e;
Hi:
because;
Apratibandhah:
 non-obstruction;
Phalam:
 fruit
, reward,
result.
This Su
tra st
ates that a med

i t
a
tion or Up
asana pre
scribed in
con
nec
tion with a cer
e
mo
nial rite is not com
pul
sory
.
W
e have the di
rec
tion to make a cer
t
ain Up
asana as an Anga
(el
e
ment or limit
) of Karma (Karmangav
abaddhop
asti). Is it
 an in
dis
-
pens
able el
e
ment? No. I
f it is per
formed there will be great
er fruit.
Even if
 it is not done t
he Karma will be com
plete. Thi
s is clear from the
Chhandogya Up
anishad.
W
e now en
ter into an en
quiry whether cer
t
ain Up
asanas men
-
tioned with some sac
ri
fices are p
art of those sac
ri
fices and there
fore
in sep
 a ra ble
and
per ma nently
con nected
with
them.
The pres
ent Su
tra de
clares that Up
asanas do not con
sti
tute a
p
art of the sac
ri
fice, be
cause there is no rule as to their in
sep
a
ra
bil
ity
.
The Sruti ex

pressly de clares that the sac
ri
fice can be done with or
with
out the Up
asanas. ﬁThe ig
no
rant man, as well as the wise man
may both en
gage in the Udgitha wor
ship; both per
form the sac
ri
ficeﬂ
(Chh. Up. I.1.
10). This shows that the Udgit
ha wor
ship may be per
-
formed, t
he med
i
t
a
tion or Up
asana part
 be
ing lef
t out.
 That which is
per
formed with med
i
t
a
tion, f
aith and knowl
edge be
comes all the more
ef
 fec tiv
e.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
410

There is no fixed rule f
or com
pul
sory per
for
mance of Udgitha
med
i
t
a
tion and the li
ke in cere
moni
als, be
cause per
for
mance of the
med
i
t
a
tion on ‚OM™
 is lef
t op
tional to t
he per
former and also be
cause
the fruit
 in each case is quite dis
tinct, i
f the per
for
mance of the rite i
s
not in any way
 ob
structed, be
cause it is clear that the med
i
t
a
tion is
sure to pro
duce it
s own ef

fect in de
pend
ently of
 the rite but
 the rite is li
-
a ble
to
in ter rup tion
and
ob struc tion.
If,

how ever
,
the
med i t
a tion
and
the rite be con
joined, fruit
 be
comes dou
bly ef

fec tive.
The Chhandogya Sruti
 (I.1.10) in
di
cates that the rit
e can be
done even with
out med
i
t
a
tion or Up
asana and that to per
form the rit
e
with med
i
t
a
tion is to make it
 more ef

fec tive.
 Hence the Udgitha med
i
-
t
a
tion and all ot
h
ers per
formed in con
nec
tion with cer
e
mo
nial rite
(Karmanga Up
asana), are not com
pul
sory and are to be done by
those only who wish to at
t
ain greater fruit
s.
The orig
i
nal sac
ri
fice brings it
s own re
wards but the Up
asana in
-
creases its re
sult
s. There
fore, the Up
asana does not con
sti
tute a p
art
of the sac
ri
fice. There
fore, it
 may or may not
 be done ac
cord
ing to the
sweet will of the sac
ri
ficer
.
The Up
asana pre
vent
s any ob
struc
tion to t
he re
sult
s of the sac
-
ri
fice. This does not make it
 a p
art of the cer
e
mo
nial rite. T
he re
wards
of the sac
ri
fice may be de
layed on ac
count of the in
ter
ven
tion of an
evil Karm
a of the sac
ri
ficer
. The Up
asana an
ni
hi
lates the ef

fect of this
evil deed and has
tens the at
t
ain
ment of t
he fruit
s of the sac
ri
fice. That
is all. The sac
ri
fice does not rely upon t
he Up
asana for it
s re
wards.
There
fore, the Up
asana does not form a p
art of the sac
ri
fice and
is, there
fore, op
tional.
Pradanadhi
karanam: T
opic 28
Medit
ations on V
ayu and Prana are to be kept sep
arate
notwithst
anding the essential oneness of these t
wo
àXmZ
dXod VX
wº
$_²
Pradanav
adev
a t
adukt
am
III
.3.43 (402)
As in the case of the offerings (Vay
u and Prana must be held
apart).
 T
his has been e
xplained (in the Purvamimamsa Sutra)
.
Pradanav
at:
 as in the case of the of
ferings of the ‚P
radana, oblation™;
Eva:
 exactly
;
Ta
t
:
 that;
Ukt
am:
 has been st
ated.
The sec
tion of t
he Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad which be
gins
ﬁV
oice held, I shall speakﬂ (Bri. Up. I
.5.21) de
ter
mines Prana to be the
best amomg the or
gans of the body and V
ayu to be t
he best among
the Devas.
In the Chhandogya Up
anishad V
ayu is said to be the gen
eral
ab
sorber of the Devas, ﬁV
ayu in
deed is the ab
sorberﬂ (IV
.3.1); P
rana
is said to be the gen
eral ab
sorber of the or
gans of the body
, ﬁBreath
in
deed is the ab
sorberﬂ (IV
.3.3).
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
411

In the S
amvarga V
idya of t
he Chhandogya Up
anishad, med
i
t
a
-
tion on Prana with ref

er ence to the body and on V
ayu with ref
er
ence
to the gods is pre
scribed.
Many Srut
i text
s say that Prana and V
ayu are one in es
sence.
There
fore, the P
urvap
akshin main
t
ains that the t
wo med
i
t
a
tions can
be com
bined and that V
ayu and Prana are non-sep

a rate be
cause in
their true na
ture they do not
 dif

fer. And as their t
rue na
ture does not
dif

fer they must not be med
i
t
ated upon sep

a rately
. In some places we
have even a di
rect iden
ti
fi
ca
tion of t
he two, ﬁWhat Prana is t
hat is
V
ayuŠ
Y
ah pranah sa vayuh
.ﬂ
The pres
ent Su
tra re
futes the abov
e view and de
clares that they

are to be kept ap
art de
spite the non-dif

fer ence in na
ture of Prana and
V
ayu, be
cause their func
tions on ac
count of their dif

fer ent abodes are
dif

fer ent. A
l
though there may
 be non-dif

fer ence of true na
ture, yet
there may be dif

fer ence of con
di
tion giv

ing rise to dif

fer ence of in
-
struc
tion, and t
hrough the lat
ter to dif

fer ence of med
i
t
a
tion.
The Su
tra com
p
ares the case un
der dis
cus
sion to a p
ar
al
lel one
from the K
armakanda by means of the clause ﬁas in the case of t
he of

-
fer ingsﬂ.
As an il
lus
tra
tion we may t
ake Pradhana where Purodasa (ob
la
-
tions) is given sep

a rately t
o Raja Indra (the Ruler), Adhiraja I
ndra (the
mon
arch or the over-ruler), and Svaraja I
ndra (the sov
er
eign or the
self-ruler) ac
cord
ing to his dif

fer ent ca
p
ac
i
ties, though I
ndra is es
sen
-
tially
 one, though he is one god.
Hence, though the V
idya is one from t
he Adhyat
mic point of
view
, there is sep

a rate
ness from the Adhidaiv
at
a point of v
iew
. So t
he
med
i
t
a
tions on Prana and V
ayu have t
o be kept ap
art. This prin
ci
ple is
es
t
ab
lished by Jaimini,
 in Purva
mimamsa (Sankarsha alias Devat
a
Kanda).
Lingabhu
y
astv
adhikaranam
: T
opic 29 (Sutras 44-52)
The fires in Agnirahasya of the
Brihadaranyaka are not p
art
of the sacrificial act,
 but form
 an independent V
idya
{bﬁ
^y`ñË
dmÎm{Õ
 ~br`ñVX
Lingabhuy
astvat t
addhi baliy
ast
adapi
III
.3.44 (403)
On a
cco
unt o
f the
 majo
rity of i
ndic
atory
 mark
s (the
 fire
s of th
e
mind, speech, etc., in t
he Agnirahasya of
 the Vajasaneyins do
not fo
rm pa
rt of the
 sac
rifice
), for i
t (the
 indi
cato
ry mark
) is
strong
er (
than the
 con
tex
t or the
 ge
ne
ral su
bje
ct matte
r). This
also (has bee
n explained in the Purvamimamsa Sutras by
Jaimini).
Lingabhuy
astvat:
because of an abundance of distinguishing
marks;

Ta
t
:
 that,
 the distinguishing mark;
Hi:
 because;
Baliyah:
 is
stronger;
Ta
t
:
 that;
Api:
 also.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
412

In the A
gnirahasya of the V
ajasaneyins (Sat
ap
atha Brahmana)
cer
t
ain fires named af

ter mind, speech, eyes, etc., are men
tioned.
A
 doubt arises whether these form p
art of the sac
ri
fice men
-
tioned therein or f
orm an in
de
pend
ent V
idya.
The pres
ent Su
tra de
clares that in spite of
 the
prima f
a
cie
 view
which arises from the con
text
, these form a sep

a rate V
idya be
cause
there are many indicat
ory marks to show that these f
ires form an in
de
-
pend ent
V
idya.
The indicatory marks are of greater f
orce than the con
text
 or the
lead
ing sub
ject mat
ter (Prakarana). This has been ex
plained in the
Purvamim
amsa (III.
3.14).
The ref
er
ence in the Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad t
akes a man™
s
age to be one hun
dred years, i.e.
, 36,000 day
s and de
scribes each
day™
s men
t
al
ity as an Agn
ichayana or fire sac
ri
fice. The p
as
sage oc
-
curs in a por
tion re
lat
ing to Karma or cer
e
mo
nial ac
tion. I
f you say t
hat
such a med
i
t
a
tion is an Anga or el
e
ment in the
cer
e
mo
nial be
cause it
oc
curs in a pas
sage re
lat
ing to Karma,
 we say that t
he ma
jor
ity of
indicatory marks is oth
er
wise, e.g.,
 the Sruti
 says that such Chayana
goes on even in sleep. A
 spe
cific rea
son given in a p
as
sage has a
greater weight or force than mere con
text
.
nyd©{
dH$ën– à
H$a
UmËñ`mV²
 {H«
$`m_mZgdV²
Purv
av
ikalp
ah prakaranat sy
at kriy
amanasav
at
III
.3.45 (404)
(The fire
s sp
ok
en
 of in th
e p
rev
iou
s Su
tra are
) alte
rnativ
e fo
rms
of the
 one
 me
ntion
ed
 first, (i
.e
., the
 actu
al sa
crific
ial fi
re)
 on
acc
ou
nt of the
 con
tex
t; (the
y) ou
ght to b
e p
art of the
 sac
rifice
like
 the ima
ginary drink o
r the Ma
nasa-c
up.
Purv
av
ikalp
ah:
an alternativ
e form of t
he already menti
oned first;
Prakaranat:
 on account of the contex
t, as can be understood from
the subject matt
er of the chapter;
Sy
at:
 there may be,
 ought to be;
Kriy
amana sav
at:
 ceremonial act, like the act
 of medit
ation, li
ke the
imaginary drink, as in t
he case of ment
al operation in the
soma-sa
crifi
ce.
An ob
jec
tion is raised to the pre
ced
ing Su
tra.
The Purvap
akshin raises a fresh ob
jec
tion. On t
he tenth day
 of
the Soma sac
ri
fice a Soma drink is of

fered to Prajapati wherein the
earth is re
garded as the cup and the sea as the Soma. T
his is a men
-
t
al act only
, and yet
 it forms a p
art of the sac
ri
fice.
The same then holds good with re
gard to the quasi-agnis made
of mind and so on though t
hese fires are men
t
al, i.e.
, imag
i
nary
, yet
they f
orm p
art of the sac
ri
fice and not an in
de
pend
ent V
idya, be
cause
of the con
text
. They are an al
ter
nate form of
 the ac
tual fire men
tioned
firs
t.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
413

Y
ou may say t
hat it is only
 Arthavada and t
hat a mere Arthav
ada
can
not over
ride the con
text
 and that such med
i
t
a
tion is p
art of the
Karma as is the case in the Dasaratra Karma.
A{VXo
Atidesascha
III
.3.46 (405)
And
 on a
cco
unt o
f the
 ex
ten
sio
n (of th
e a
ttribu
tes
 of the
 actu
al
fire
 to the
se
 imag
inary fi
res
).
Atidesat:
 on account of the ex
tension (of the at
tributes of™
 the first t
o
these fires);
Cha:
 and.
Ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 44 is con
tin
ued by pre
sent
ing an
other ar
gu
-
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 45.
The Purvap
akshin gives an
other rea
son to sup
port his view
.
The Sruti in t
hat p
as
sage as
cribes all the at
trib
utes of the ac
tual fire t
o
these imag
i
nary fires. There
fore, they
 are p
art of the sac
ri
fice.
{dÚ¡d V
w {ZY
m©aUmV
V
idy
aiv
a tu nirdharanat
III
.3.47 (406)
Bu
t (the
 fire
s) rath
er c
ons
titute
 the
 Vid
ya, b
ec
aus
e (
the
 Sruti)
asserts it.
Vi
d
ya
:
 V
idya, f
orm of medit
ation or worship, Knowledge;
Eva:
 alone,
indeed;
Tu
:
 verily
, undoubtedly
, but;

Nirdharanat:
 because the Sruti
assert
s it.
Ob
jec
tions raised in Sutras 45 and 46 are now re
futed.
The word ‚T
u™
 (but) set
s aside the Purvap
aksha. It re
futes the
op po nent.
The pres
ent Su
tra de
clares that the fi
res form an in
de
pen
d
ent
V
idya, be
cause the text
 as
sert
s that ﬁThey are built
 of knowl
edge
(V
idya) onlyﬂ,
 and that ﬁBy
 knowl
edge they are built
 for him who thus
knowsﬂ.
Darsanaccha
III
.3.48 (407)
And
 be
cau
se
 (in the
 tex
t indi
cato
ry mark
s of th
at are
) se
en
.
Darsanat:
 it being seen in the scriptures, because it i
s clearly st
ated
in Sruti,
 because (of the indicatory marks) seen;
Cha:
 and.
The indicatory marks are those re
ferred to in Su
tra 44. In f
act
the in
ter
nal in
di
ca
tions show that it
 is a V
idya and not a K
armanga.
lwË`m{
X~br`ñ
Ëdm… Z ~mY
Sruty
adibali
y
astv
accha na badhah
III
.3.49 (408)
(The vie
w that the Agni
s or fire
s cons
titute a
n inde
pe
nde
nt
Vid
ya) c
anno
t be
 refu
ted
, owin
g to the
 gre
ate
r force
 of the
 Sruti
etc
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
414

Sruty
adibali
y
astv
at:
 on account of the greater f
orce of the Sruti
 etc.;
Cha:
 and;
Na:
 no, cannot;
Badhah:
 refut
ation.
Ob
jec
tions raised in Sutras 45 and 46 are fur
ther re
futed.
There is no ne
ga
tion of t
his view on the ba
sis of the con
text
, be
-
cause of the greater strength of
 Sruti,
 etc.
Our op
po
nent has no right to de
ter
mine on the ground of
Prakarana that the A
gnis are sub
or
di
nate to t
he sac
ri
fi
cial ac
tion and
so to set aside our view ac
cord
ing to which they a
re in
de
pend
ent. For
we know from the Purvami
mamsa that di
rect enun
ci
a
tion (Sruti
),
indicatory mark (Lin
ga) and syn
t
ac
ti
cal con
nec
tion (V
akya) are of
greater force than lead
ing sub
ject mat
ter (Prakarana) and all those
three means of proof are seen to con
firm our view of
 the Agnis be
ing
in de pend ent.
Mere con
text
 is of no force against ex
press Sruti, Lin
ga, etc. The
Sruti used the word ‚Ev
a™
 where there is an im
per
a
tive t
ense, etc.,
used, a mere Up
adesa can be treated as an Arthavada,
 be
cause
there is also an ex
press com
mand. Where there is no such in
di
ca
tion,
an Up
adesa must be treated as a V
idhi. There
fore what we have here
is an in
de
pend
ent V
idya and not a K
armanga.
The Sruti di
rectly says, ﬁA
ll these fires are kin
dled with knowl
-
edge alone. The indicat
ory mark is this.ﬂ All
 be
ings kin
dle these fires
for him, ev
en when he is asleep. This con
ti
nu
ity of
 the fire shows that
they are men
t
al ones. An ac
tual sac
ri
fice is not con
tin
ued dur
ing
sleep.
The
syn t
ac ti cal
con nec tions
ﬁThrough
med i t
a tion
alone
these
fires of the wor
ship
per are kin
dled.ﬂ These three are more forc
ible
than mere con
text
.
AZw~ÝY
m{Xä`– àkmÝVan¥
W−ËddX²Ñï
>ü VXw
º$_²
Anubandhadibhy
ah prajnant
araprithaktvav
at
 drisht
ascha
t
adukt
am
III
.3.50 (409)
On acc
ount o
f the co
nnec
tion and s
o on (the
 fires b
uilt of mind
,
etc., form a
n inde
pe
nde
nt Vidya), in the
 same
 way as o
ther
Vidyas (like Sandilya Vidya) ar
e se
parate; and it is seen (that
 in
spi
te o
f the
 con
tex
t a sa
crific
e i
s tre
ate
d as
 inde
pe
nde
nt). This
has bee
n explained
 (in th
e Purvamimamsa Sutras by Jaimi
ni).
Anubandhadibhy
ah:
 from the connection and so on;
Prajnant
araprithaktv
av
at:
 even as the other V
idyas are sep
arate;
Drisht
ah:
 (it is) seen;
Cha:
 and;
Ta
t
:
 that;
Ukt
am:
 is st
ated (in the
Purvamimamsa by Jaimin
i).
The ar
gu
ment in ref
u
t
a
tion of S
utras 45 and 46 is con
tin
ued.
This Su
tra gives ad
di
tional rea
sons in sup
port of the v
iew set
forth in S
u
tra 47.
In
de
pend
ence has, against the gen
eral sub
ject mat
ter
, to be as
-
sumed for the fire-al
t
ars built of mind and so on,
 be
cause the text
 con
-
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
415

nect
s
the
con stit u ent
mem bers
of
the
sac ri fi cial
ac tion
with
ac tiv i t
ies
of the mind.
 The text
 con
nect
s for the pur
pose of Samp
ad Up
asana
(med
i
t
a
tions based on re
sem
blance) part
s of a sac
ri
fice with men
t
al
ac
tiv
i
ties, e.g.
, ﬁThese fires are st
arted men
t
ally
, the al
t
ars are set up
men
t
ally
, the cup
s are t
aken men
t
ally
, the Udgatris are praised men
-
t
ally
, the Hotris are re
cited men
t
ally
, ev
ery
thing con
nected with this
sac
ri
fice is done men
t
ally
.ﬂ This is pos
si
ble only if
 there is a sharp dif

-
fer
ence be
tween things which re
sem
ble each other
.
The Sruti men
tions in re
gard to such men
t
al wor
ship all the
great
ness of a Karmanga. There
fore Ati
desa (sim
i
lar
ity) ap
plies even
on the foot

ing of the con text
 re
fer
ring to an in
de
pend
ent V
idya which
is sep
a
rate from a Karmanga.
The fires con
sti
tute an in
de
pend
ent V
idya, j
ust as the Sandily
a
V
idya, Dahara V
idya, f
orm sep

a rate V
idyas, al
though men
tioned
along
with
sac ri fi cial
act
s.
A
 sim
i
lar thing is seen in A
veshti be
ing done as an in
de
pend
ent
cer
e
mony in t
he Rajasuya sac
ri
fice. It
 is ob
served in the sac
ri
fi
cial
por
tion of t
he V
edas, that t
hough the sac
ri
fice A
veshti is men
tioned
along with the Rajasuya sac
ri
fice, it
 is yet con
si
d
ered as an in
de
pend
-
ent sac
ri
fice by Jaimini
 in the Purv
a
mimamsa Sut
ras.
Z gm_mÝ`mXß
`wnbã
Yo_
©¥Ë
`wdÞ {h b
moH$
Na samany
adapy
up
alabdherm
rity
uv
anna hi
 lokap
attih
III
.3.51 (410)
I
n sp
ite
 of the
 res
em
bla
nce
 (of the
 fire
s to th
e i
magi
nary d
rink,
they do) not (consti
tute part of t
he sacrificial
 act) because it is
se
en (fro
m the re
asons
 give
n, and on the
 ground
 of Sruti that
the
y form
 an ind
ep
en
de
nt Vid
ya) a
s in the
 cas
e o
f de
ath; fo
r the

wor
ld does not
 become (fir
e, because it r
esembles fir
e in some
point
s).
Na:
 not;
Samany
adapi:
 in spite of t
he resemblance, because of
common
ness, on the ground of their resemblance to sacrificial
 fire;
Up
alabdheh:
 for it is seen;
Mri
ty
uv
at:
 just as in the case of death;

Na
hi lokap
attih:
 for the world does not become (fire on account of
cert
ain resemblances).
The ar
gu
ment in ref
u
t
a
tion of S
utras 45 and 46 is con
tin
ued.
Though be
ing a men
t
al act, there is an el
e
ment of sim
i
lar
ity
, it is
not a Karmanga be
cause it is st
ated to hav
e a sep
a
rate fruit.
 This is
clear from the il
lus
tra
tions re
lat
ing to Mrity
u and de
scrib
ing the earth
as fire.
The re
sem
blance cited by the P
urvap
akshin has no force. It
can
not cer
t
ainly st
and be
cause on ac
count of the rea
sons al
ready
given, v
iz., the S
ruti, indicat
ory mark, etc.,
 the fires in ques
tion sub
-
serve the pur
pose of man only
, and not t
he pur
pose of some sac
ri
fi
-
cial ac
tion.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
416

Mere re
sem
blance can hardly jus
tify
 the con
trary view
. Any

thing in
deed may re
sem
ble any
thing in some point
 or other; but in spit
e of
that t
here re
mains the in
di
vid
ual dis
sim
i
lar
ity of
 each thing from all
other things.
The case is anal
o
gous to that of
 ‚death™. T
he re
sem
blance cited
is like the com
mon ep
i
thet ‚deat
h™
 ap
plied to fi
re and the be
ing in the
sun. ﬁThe be
ing in that orb is deat
h in
deedﬂ (Sat. B
r
. X.
5.2.3). ﬁFi
re in
-
deed is deathﬂ (T
ait. S
amh. V
.1.10.
3). This re
sem
blance can
not make
fire and the be
ing in the same one.
Again we have ﬁThis world is a fire in
deed, O Gaut
ama, the sun
is it
s fuelﬂ etc., (Chh.
 Up. V
.4.1). Here it
 does not fol
low from the sim
i
-
lar
ity of
 fuel and so on that t
he world does not ac
tu
ally be
come fire.
Thus also in our case. Hence from the fact that
 the Manaschit
a
Agni (fire) is a men
t
al act like the Manasagraha which is a Karmanga,
you can
not on that
 ground of such sim
i
lar
ity al
one ar
gue that it
 also is
a Karmanga.
naoU
 M eãX
ñ` Vm{ÛÜ
`§ ^y
`ñËdmÎdZ
w~ÝY
Parena cha sabdasy
a t
adv
idhy
am
 bhuy
astvattv
anubandhah
III.3.52
 (41
1)
And
 from the
 sub
se
que
nt (Bra
hmana
) the
 fact o
f the
 tex
t
(unde
r discu
ssion) b
eing s
uch (i.e
., enjo
ining an inde
pe
nde
nt
Vidya) (
is kno
wn). But the
 conne
ction (o
f the fancifu
l Agnis o
r
imag
inary fi
res
 with the
 actu
al fire
 is) o
n acc
ou
nt of the
abu
nda
nce
 (of the
 attrib
ute
s of th
e l
atte
r that are
 imag
ine
d in
the
se
 fire
s).
Parena:
 from the subsequent (Brahmana),
 by the subsequent
expression, by t
he st
atement
s immediately
 following;
Cha:
 and;
Sabdasy
a:
 of Sru
ti, of the
 text, of the
 wor
d;
T
advi
dhy
am:
 the fact of
being such;
Bhuy
astv
at:
 because of abundance;
Tu
:
 but;
Anubandhah:
 connection.
In a sub
se
quent Brahmana we have ﬁB
y knowl
edge they as
-
cend there where all wishes are at
t
ained. Those skilled in words do
not go there, nor t
hose who des
ti
tute of
 knowl
edge do pen
anceﬂ. This
verse de
pre
ci
ates mere works and praises V
idya or know
l
edge. A
 for
-
mer Brahmana also viz.,
 the one be
gin
ning ﬁWhere that orb leadsﬂ
(Sat. B
r
. X.
5.2.23) con
cludes with a st
ate
ment of t
he fruit of
 knowl
-
edge ﬁIm
mor
t
al be
comes he whose self is deathﬂ and thereby shows
that works are not the chief t
hing. Hence we con
clude that the i
n
junc
-
tion of t
he Sruti is that
 the fires con
sti
tute an in
de
pend
ent V
idya.
The con
nec
tion of t
he fires with the ac
tual fire is not
 be
cause
they con
sti
tute p
art of the sac
ri
fice but be
cause many of the at

trib utes
of the real f
ire are imag
ined in the fi
res of the V
idya, i
n the Agnis built
of mind. T
he st
ate
ment of t
he fires built of
 mind along with t
he or
di
-
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
417

nary sac
ri
fi
cial fire is due to an abun
dance of com
mon mat
ters with
the lat
ter
.
All thi
s es
t
ab
lishes the con
clu
sion that the f
ire-al
t
ars built of
mind and so on con
sti
tute an in
de
pend
ent V
idya.
Aikatmy
adhikaranam
: T
opic 30 (Sutras 53-54)
Atm
an is an entity distinct
 from t
he body
EH$ A
mË_Z– ea
rao ^
Eka atmanah sari
re bhav
at
III
.3.53 (412)
Some (maintain t
he non-existence
) of a separate self (besi
des
the body)
 on accoun
t of
 the exist
ence (of t
he self) w
here a body
is (only).
Eka:
 some (maint
ain the non-exist
ence);
 Atmana
h:
 of a sep
arate
self (besides the body);
 Sarire
:
 in the body;

Bhav
at:
 because of
existence.
In this topi
c the ex
is
tence of an At

man apart from the body
 is
t
aken up for dis
cus
sion. Un
less there is a soul apart
 from the body
there is no use of the scrip
ture teach
ing lib
er
a
tion. Nor can there be
any scope for eth
i
cal com
mands which are the means of at
t
ain
ment
of heaven or for t
he teach
ing that t
he soul is Brah
man.
There must be a soul ap
art from the body
 who can en
joy the
fruit
s of the Up
asana or V
idyas, ot
h
er
wise of what avail i
s Upasana? If

there is no soul all Up
asanas be
come use
less.
At pres
ent we will prove t
he ex
is
tence of a soul dif

fer ent from t
he
body in or
der to es
t
ab
lish thereby t
he qual
i
fi
ca
tion of t
he self for bond
-
age and re
lease. For if t
here were no selves dif

fer ent from t
he body
,
there would be no room for in
junc
tion that
 have the ot
her world for
their re
sult, nor could it be t
aught of any

body that Brah
man is his Self.
This Su
tra gives the v
iew of the Charvakas or Lokayatikas (ma
-
te
ri
al
ist
s) who deny the ex
is
tence of an At

man dif

fer ent from t
he body
.
They say t
hat con
scious
ness is a mere ma
te
rial prod
uct and that t
he
body is the soul. T
hey de
clare that con
scious
ness is seen to ex
ist
only when there is a body and t
hat it is no
where ex
pe
ri
enced in
de
-
pend
ent of t
he body
. There
fore con
scious
ness is only an at
trib
ute or
qual
ity of
 the body
. There is no sep

a rate self or soul in this body
.
They say man is only
 a body
. Con
scious
ness is the qual
ity of
 the
body
. Con
scious
ness is like the in
tox
i
cat
ing qual
ity which arises when
cer t
ain
ma te ri als
are
mixed
in
cer t
ain
pro por tions.
No
sin gle
ma te rial
has
the
in tox i
 cat ing
ef
 fect.
Al
though con
scious
ness is not ob
served in earth, and t
he other
ex
ter
nal el
e
ment
s, ei
ther sin
gle or com
bined, yet
 it may
 ap
pear in
them when trans
formed into t
he shape of a body
. Con
scious
ness
springs from them. No soul is found af

ter the body dies and that hence
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
418

as both are pres
ent or ab
sent to
gether
, con
scious
ness is only an at
-
trib
ute of t
he body just as light
 and heat are at
trib
utes of fire.
As life,
 move
ment
s, con
scious
ness, re
mem
brances and so on,
which are re
garded as qual
i
ties of the A
t
man by those who main
t
ain
that t
here is an in
de
pend
ent At

man apart from the body
, are ob
served
only within t
he bod
ies and not out

side the bod ies, and as an abode of
those at
trib
utes dif

fer ent from t
he body can
not be proved, i
t fol
lows
that t
hey must be at

trib utes of the body
 only
.
There
fore, the S
elf is not dif

fer ent from t
he body
.
The next S
u
tra gives a re
ply to t
his con
clu
sion of the Charvakas
or
Lokayatikas
(ma te ri al ist
s).
ì`{Vao
H$ñV
Ømdm^m{dËdmÞ V
ynbp
ãYdV
V
y
atirekast
adbhav
abhav
itv
anna tup
alabdhi
v
at
III
.3.54 (413)
But n
ot (s
o); a
 self or
 soul separ
ate (f
rom t
he body does exist)
,
because
 (Consciousness) doe
s not exist eve
n when there is the
bo
dy (a
fter d
ea
th), as
 in the
 cas
e o
f cog
nitio
n or p
er
ce
ptiv
e
consciousness.
V
y
atirekah:
 separat
ion;
T
adbhavabhav
itv
at:
 for (consciousness
)
does not exist ev
en when there is the body;

Na:
 not (so);
Tu
:
 but;
Up
alabdhiv
at:
 as in the case of knowledge or cognition.
The st
ate
ment in the pre
ced
ing Su
tra is re
futed.
The soul is sep
a
rate be
cause even when the body ex
ist
s the
soul goes away
. They are sep

a rate just as sub
ject and ob
ject are sep

-
a rate.
The view ex
pressed by the op
po
nent in the pre
vi
ous Su
tra is
cer
t
ainly wrong, be
cause the Atma-Dharma such as Chait
anya (con
-
scious
ness), etc., are not f
ound af

ter death, though the body ex

ists.
Con
scious
ness can
not be an at
trib
ute of t
he body
, be
cause we do not
find con
scious
ness in a body af

ter a per son dies.
This con
scious
ness is an at
trib
ute of some
thing which is dif

fer -
ent from t
he body and which abides in the body
.
The sub
ject and the ob
ject can
not pos
si
bly be iden
ti
cal. Fire
can
not burn it

self. The ac ro
bat can
not st
and upon his own shoul
der
.
Can form sense form? Can sound hear sound? No. Con
scious
ness is
eter
nal, as it is of
 the same iden
ti
cal qual
ity al

ways. Can you say that
con
scious
ness is a qual
ity of
 the light,
 be
cause light is nec
es
sary to
see forms? Even so con
scious
ness is not a qual
ity of
 the body
. More
-
over con
scious
ness func
tions in dreams even with
out the aid of
 the
body
.
The Charvakas ac
cept that t
he cogniser is dif

fer ent from t
he
thing cog
nised. So the ex
periencer of this body
, he who cog
nises this
body must be dif

fer ent from t
he body
. He who cog
nises this body is
the Self
.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
419

There
fore, con
scious
ness is an at
trib
ute of t
his Self,
 rather it
s
very es
sence of na
ture.
As con
scious
ness con
sti
tutes the char
ac
ter of the S
elf, t
he Self
must be dis
tinct from t
he body
. That con
scious
ness is per
ma
nent fol
-
lows from the uni
for
mity
 of it
s char
ac
ter and we, there
fore, may
 con
-
clude that the con
scious Self is per
ma
nent also. That
 con
scious
ness
is the na
ture of the S
elf, t
hat it is per
ma
nent, f
ol
lows from the fact t
hat
the Self
, al
though con
nected with a dif

fer ent st
ate, re
cog
nises it

selfas the con
scious agent a rec
og
ni
tion ex
pressed in judg
ment
s such as
ﬁI saw thisﬂ and from the f
act of re
mem
brance and so on be
ing pos
si
-
ble.
There
fore, the v
iew that t
he Self is some
thing sep

a rate from the
body is free from al
l ob
jec
tions.
Angav
abaddhadhi
karanam: T
opic 31 (Sutras 55-56)
Up
asanas connected with sacrificial act
s, i.e.,
Udgitha Up
asana are valid for all schools
Aﬁmd~
ÕmñVw
 Z emImgw {
h à{
VdoX_
Angav
abaddhastu na sakhasu hi
 prativ
edam
III
.3.55 (414)
But (the Upasanas or meditati
ons connected with parts)
 (of
sacrifi
cial acts ar
e) not (restrict
ed) to (particular)
Sakhas,
accor
ding
 to t
he Veda (to w
hich
 they belon
g),
 (but t
o all i
ts
Sakhas because
 the same Upasana is describe
d in all).
Angavabaddhah:
 (Upasanas) connected p
art
s (of sacrificial act
s);
Tu
:
 but;
Na:
 not;
Sakhasu:
 to (p
articular) Sakhas;
Hi:
 because;
Prativ
edam:
 in each V
eda, according to the V
eda.
There is no rule that the A
ngavabaddha (Karmanga) Up
a
sana
in each Sruti Sakha is sep

a rate and should be con
fined to it
 alone.
The above said in
ter
ven
ing or oc
ca
sional dis
cus
sion is over
.
Now we pur
sue the main theme.
 In Udgitha,
 etc., v
ar
i
ous Karmanga
Up
asanas are taught
. From this y
ou could not say that
 each Upasana
in each Sruti Sakha is dif

fer ent, on ac
count of the prox

im ity of
 text
 and
the dif

fer ence in Svaras or sounds. All such Up
asanas may be t
aken
to
gether
, be
cause the Udgitha Sruti i
s more pow
er
ful than mere prox

-
im
ity of
 con
text
 or di
ver
sity of
 Svara.
There are cer
t
ain Up
asanas men
tioned in con
nec
tion with sac
ri
-
fi
cial act
s, as for ex
am
ple the med
i
t
a
tion on ‚OM™
 which is con
nected
with the Udgitha as P
rana, or the med
i
t
a
tion on the Udgit
ha as the
earth and so on. ﬁLet a man med
i
t
ate on the syl

la ble ‚OM™
 as the
Udgithaﬂ (Chh. Up. I.
1.1). ﬁLet a man m
ed
i
t
ate on the f
ive-fold S
aman
as the fiv
e worldsﬂ (Chh. Up. II.2.
1).
A
 doubt here arises whether the med
i
t
a
tions or V
idyas are en
-
joined with ref
er
ence to the Udgitha and so on as be
long
ing to a cer
-
t
ain Sakha only or as be
long
ing to all S
akhas. The doubt arises
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
420

be
cause the Udgitha and so on are chanted dif

fer ently i
n dif

fer ent
Sakhas, be
cause the ac
cent
s, etc., di
f

fer. There
fore, they
 may be
con sid ered
dif
 fer ent.
Here the Purvap
akshin holds that the V
idyas are en
joined only
with ref
er
ence to the Udgitha and so on which be
long to the p
ar
tic
u
lar
Sakha to which the V
idya be
longs. Why? Be
cause of prox
im
ity
.
The pres
ent Su
tra re
futes the v
iew that t
hey are so re
stricted,
be
cause the text
 speaks of these Upasanas in gen
eral and so they
are all one in all the branches.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) dis
cards the prima fa
cie view or the vi
ew of
the Purvap
akshin. The Up
asanas are not re
stricted to thei
r own
Sakhas ac
cord
ing to the V
eda to which they be
long but are vali
d for all
Sakhas, be
cause the di
rect st
ate
ment
s of the tex
t about t
he Udgitha
and so on enounce no spec
i
fi
ca
tion. Di
rect st
ate
ment has greater
force or weight than prox
im
ity
.
There is no rea
son why the V
idya should not be of
 gen
eral ref
er
-
ence. W
e, there
fore, con
clude that, al

though the Sakhas dif

fer as toac
cent
s and the like, the V
idyas men
tioned re
fer to the Udgit
ha and
so on be
long
ing to all S
akhas, be
cause the text
 speaks only of the
Udgitha and so on in gen
eral.
_ÝÌm{Xd
Ûm{damo
Mantradivadv
avi
rodhah
III
.3.56 (415)
Or e
lse
, the
re i
s no
 con
tradi
ctio
n (he
re)
, as in
 the
 cas
e o
f
Mantras an
d the like.
Mantradiv
at:
 like Mantras, etc.
;
Va
:
 or else;
A
v
irodhah:
 there is no
contradiction.
The dis
cus
sion com
menced in Su
tra 33 is con
tin
ued.
Just as Mantras, etc.,
 men
tioned in only
 one Sakha, are used in
an
other Sakha, with re
spect to that p
ar
tic
u
lar rite, so also the
Up
asanas con
nected with p
ar
tic
u
lar rites in one Sakha of t
he V
eda
can be ap
plied to the ot
her Sakhas.
As for ex
am
ple the Man
tra ﬁKut
arurasiﬂ (thou art the grind
ing
stone), pre
scribed in one Branch of the V
edas for t
ak
ing stone to grind
rice, is ac
cept

able in that rite ev
ery
where; even so the Up
asana
(med
i
t
a
tion) pre
scribed in one Branch of the V
edas may be trans
-
ferred or ap
plied to other S
akhas or Branches with
out ap
pre
hend
ing
any
im pro pri ety
.
W
e find that
 Man
tra and Guna and Karma in one S
akha are
t
aken into an
other Sakha, just as t
he mem
bers of sac
ri
fi
cial ac
tions
on which cer
t
ain V
idyas rest are valid ev

ery where, so the V
idyas
them
selves also which rest on those mem
bers are valid for all Sakhas
and V
edas.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
421

Bhumajy
ay
astv
adhikaranam
: T
opic 32
V
aisvanara Upasana is one entire Up
asana
^yåZ– H«
$VwdÁÁ`m`ñËd§ VWm {h X
Bhumnah kratuv
ajjy
ay
astv
am t
atha hi darsay
ati
III
.3.57 (416)
I
mpo
rtance
 (is gi
ve
n to the
 me
dita
tion)
 on the
 en
tire
 form (
of
Vaisvanara)
 as in th
e case
 of sacrif
ice; for th
us (the Sruti)
shows.
Bhumnah:
 on the entire f
orm;
Kratuv
at:
 as in the case of sacrifice;
Jy
ay
astv
am:
 prominence, pre-eminence, import
ance;
T
atha:
 so;
Hi:
be
cause, for
, as;
Darsay
ati:
 (the Sruti) shows.
The V
aisvanara V
idya is dis
cussed here.
In the Chhandogya Up
anishad (V
.1
1.8) there is the V
aisvanara
V
idya, t
he med
i
t
a
tion on the cos
mic form of t
he Lord. The medit
ator
should think that His head is the heav
en, His eye the sun and so on.
Dif

fer ent fruit
s are men
tioned for each p
art of the Up
asana. For ex
am
-
ple, the f
ruit of med
i
t
at
ing on His head as the heaven is ﬁHe eat
s food,
be
holds his be
loved ones and has V
e
dic glory in his houseﬂ (Chh. Up.
V
.12.2).
Now a doubt arises whether the Sruti here speaks of one
Up
asana on the en
tire cos
mic form or Up
asana of each p
art of
V
aisvanara.
The pres
ent Su
tra says that t
he Sruti speaks of one Up
asana on
the whole form of
 V
aisvanara or the cos
mic form of t
he Lord.
The Sruti giv
es su
pe
ri
or
ity t
o the med
i
t
a
tion on V
aisvanara as a
whole, as in the case of Krat
u or sac
ri
fice. Though t
he Sruti de
clares
fruit
s for Up
asana or wor
ship of each p
art of V
aisvanara, yet
 it
emphasises the wor
ship of the en
tire V
aisvanara with the uni
verse as
His body
, just as in sac
ri
fices like Darsa-Purnamasa all the Angas
have to be com
bined.
The sep

a rate fruit
s men
tioned for med
i
t
a
tion on p
art
s of
V
aisvanara must be com
bined into one whole with m
ed
i
t
a
tion.
The text
 informs us that six
 Rishis, Prakinasala, Uddalaka, etc.
,
be
ing un
able to reach a firm foun
da
tion in the K
nowl
edge of
V
aisvanara, went t
o the King A
svap
ati Kaikey
a; goes on to men
tion
the ob
ject of each Rishi™
s med
i
t
a
tion, v
iz., the sky and so on;
 de
ter
-
mines that t
he sky and so on are only the head and so on of
V
aisvanara. Asv
ap
ati said ﬁThat is but
 the head of t
he self,ﬂ and re
-
ject
s all med
i
t
a
tions on V
aisva
nara in his p
ar
tial form.
 He said ﬁY
our
head would have fall
en if you had not
 come to meﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.12.2).
As this tex
t dis
cour
ages par
tial wor
ship of V
aisvanara, it
 is quite clear
that it
 rec
om
mends the en
tire Up
asana on the whole V
aisvanara.
More
over the sec
tion be
gins thus: ﬁwhich is our own self, which
is Brah
manﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.1
1.1). This in
di
cates that the en
tire Brah
man
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
422

is the ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion. I
t ends thus ﬁof that
 V
aisvanara Self
Sutejas is the headﬂ et
c. (Chh. Up. V
.18.2). T
his clearly in
ti
mates that
only the en
tire Up
asana is in
tended.
For all these rea
sons, the view ac
cord
ing to which the tex
t en
-
joins a med
i
t
a
tion on the en
tire V
aisvanara only is cor
rect.
Sabdadibhedadhikaranam: T
opic 33
V
arious V
idyas like the Sandilya V
idya, Dahara V
idya and so on are
to be kept sep
arate and not com
bined into one enti
re Upasana
ZmZm eãX
m{X^o
Nana sabdadibhedat
III
.3.58 (417)
(The V
idya
s are
) se
para
te,
 on a
cco
unt o
f the
 diffe
ren
ce
 of wo
rds
and the
 like
.
Nana:
 dif
ferent, v
arious;
Sabdadibhedat:
 on account of dif
ference of
names of words, etc. (
Bhedat:
 due to variet
y
.)
In the pre
vi
ous Su
tra we have ar
rived at t
he con
clu
sion that a
med
i
t
a
tion on V
aisvanara as a whole is the pre-em
i
nent mean
ing of
the tex
t, al
though spe
cial fruit
s are stat
ed for med
i
t
a
tions on p
art
s
such as Sutejas and so on.
The Purvap
akshin fol
lows this line of ar
gu
ment and says that
 we
must com
bine all the dif

fer ent V
idyas like Sandily
a V
idya, Dahara
V
idya, S
atya V
idya, and so on int
o one com
pos
ite med
i
t
a
tion or more
gen
eral med
i
t
a
tion on the Lord,
 as the ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion is the one
Lord.
The pres
ent Su
tra re
futes this and de
clares that the V
idyas are
sep
a
rate, al
though the ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion is on the one Lord, on ac
-
count of the dif

fer ence of words and the like. For the t
ext ex

hib it
s a dif

-
fer
ence of words such as ﬁ
He knows.ﬂ
ﬁLet him med
i
t
ateﬂ, ﬁLet him
 form the ideaﬂ (Chh. Up. I
II.
14.1).
This dif

fer ence of terms is ac
knowl
edged as a rea
son or test of dif

fer -
ence of act
s, ac
cord
ing to Purv
a
mimamsa Sut
ras, II.
2.1.
ﬁAnd the likeﬂ or ﬁetc.ﬂ re
fers to other rea
sons like the dif

fer ence
in
qual i ties.
The Lord in
deed is the only ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion, but
 ac
cord
ing
to it
s gen
eral pur
port each p
as
sage teaches dif

fer ent qual
i
ties of the
Lord. Al
though one and the same Prana is t
he ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion in
the other se
ries of p
as
sages, yet one of
 his qual
i
ties has to be med
i
-
t
ated upon in one place and an
other in an
other place. From dif

fer ence
of con
nec
tion there t
hus fol
lows dif

fer ence of in
junc
tion and from t
he
lat
ter we ap
pre
hend the sep

a rate
ness of the V
idyas.
Though the ob
ject of med
i
t
a
tion is the one Lord, y
et He is dif

fer -
ent on ac
count of the dif

fer ence in qual
i
ties that are im
ag
ined in dif

fer -
ent Up
asanas. Fur
ther it is not pos
si
ble at all t
o com
bine all the
var
i
ous V
idyas into one.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
423

There
fore, the di
f

fer ent V
idyas are to be kept sep

a rate and not
com bined
into
one
com pos ite
or
gen eral
med i t
a tion.
Though the V
idya (what is to be known) is one, each Up
asana
which is de
scribed by such words as
 Up
asit
a, etc.,
 is dif

fer ent. I
n each
Up
asana cer
t
ain spe
cial at
trib
utes of the Lord and cer
t
ain spe
cial re
-
sult
s are stat
ed.
The forms of med
i
t
a
tion such as the Sandily
a V
idya, t
he Saty
a
V
idya, t
he Dahara V
idya, t
he V
aisvanara V
idya, are dif

fer ent ow
ing to
dif

fer ence of names and pro
cesses, the di
rec
tory words and the at
-
trib
utes, yet
, each of them
 teaches the wor
ship of the same Lord; but
un der
a
p
ar tic u lar
as pect
med i t
a tions
have
been
pre scribed
in
var i
-
ous names and forms so as to suit dif

fer ent medit
ators.
The Su
tra, there
fore, rightl
y de
clares the sep
a
rate
ness of the
V
idyas.
V
ikalp
adhikaranam
: T
opic 34
Any one of the V
idyas should be selected
according to one™
s own option or choice
{dH$
ënmo@
{d{eï
>\$bË
V
ikalpo™
v
isisht
aphalatv
at
III
.3.59 (418)
T
here is option (with r
espe
ct to th
e se
veral Vidyas), because
the result (of all t
he Vidyas) is the same.
V
ikalp
ah:
 option;
V
isisht
aphalatv
at:
 on account of (all V
idyas)
having the same result.
The most im
por
t
ant V
idyas are: Sandil
ya V
idya, B
huma V
idya,
Sat V
idya, Dahara V
idya, Up
akosala V
idya, V
aisva
nara V
idya,
Udgitha V
idya, A
nandamaya V
idya, A
kshara V
idya.
One may fol

low any Vidya ac
cord
ing to his op
tion, and sti
ck to it
till he reaches the goal,
 as the re
sult of all V
idyas or the goal is the
same, namely t
he reali
sa
tion of S
elf or Brah
man. If
 we adopt many
,
the mind will get
 dis
tracted and the spir
i
tual prog
ress will be re
t
arded.
When the Brah
man is real
ised through one med
i
t
a
tion, a sec
ond
med i t
a tion
would
be
pur pose less.
There
fore, one must se
lect one p
ar
tic
u
lar V
idya and stick to it
and re
main in
tent on it
 till t
he fruit of
 the V
idya is at
t
ained through the
in tu iti
on
of
the
ob ject
of
med i t
a tion.
Kamy
adhikaranam
: T
opic 35
V
idyas yielding p
articular desires may or may not
 be
combined according to one™
s liking
H$må`mñV
w `WmH
$m_§
 g_w…
r`oaÞ dm ny
d©ho
Kamy
astu y
athakamam sam
ucchiy
eranna v
a
 purv
ahetvabhav
at
III
.3.60 (419)
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
424

But Vi
dyas f
or par
tic
ular
 desires may
 be combined or
 not
according to one™s desires on account of the absence
 of the
previous r
eason (ment
ioned in t
he previous S
utr
a).
Kamy
ah:
 V
idyas adopted f
or some sensuous des
ires;
Tu
:
 but;
Y
atha kamam:
 according to one™
s desire or liking;
Samucchi
y
eran:
may be combin
ed;
Na:
 not;
Va
:
 or;
Purva:
 the former;
Hetu:
 reason;
Abhavat
: on account of the absence of.
This Su
tra shows an ex
cep
tion to t
he pre
vi
ous Su
tra that m
ore
V
idyas than one may
 be com
bined where the ob
ject is other than t
he
reali sa tion
of
Brah man.
In the pre
vi
ous Su
tra it was st
ated that
 any one of t
he V
idyas
about Brah
man should be t
aken up, and that m
ore than one at a ti
me
should not be t
aken up, be
cause each V
idya was quite suf

fi cient to
t
ake to the goal or Self
-reali
sa
tion and more than one V
idya would
pro
duce dis
trac
tion of t
he mind.
W
e have on the ot
her hand, V
idyas con
nected with p
ar
ti
c
u
lar
de
sires, e.g., ﬁHe who knows that the wind i
s the child of the re
gions
never weep
s for his sonsﬂ (Chh. Up. III.15.
2). ﬁHe who med
i
t
ates on
name as Brah
man, walks at will as far as name reachesﬂ (Chh. Up.
VII.1.5)
.
The ques
tion arises whether one is to re
strict one
self to only
one of these V
idyas or can t
ake up more than one at a ti
me.
The pres
ent Su
tra de
clares that one can prac
tise more than one
V
idya or not ac
cord
ing to one™
s lik
ing, as the re
sult
s are dif

fer ent un
-
like that of
 the Brahma-V
idyas. He may
 prac
tise more than one V
idya
or not, on ac
count of the ab
sence of the for
mer rea
son, i.e.,
 be
cause
there is not the rea
son for op
tion which was st
ated in the pre
ced
ing
Su tra
.
Y
athasray
abhav
adhikaranam
: T
opic 36 (Sutras 61-66)
Medit
ations connected with m
embers of sacrificial act
s
may or m
ay not be combined according to one™
s liking
Aﬁo
ew `Wml
Angeshu y
athasray
abhav
ah
III
.3.61 (420)
With re
gard
 (to m
ed
itatio
ns) c
onne
cte
d with
 me
mbe
rs (o
f
sacrifici
al acts) it
 is as with
 (the membe
rs) wit
h which
 they are
conne
cted
.
Angeshu:
 with regard (to medit
ations) connected with members (of
sacrif
icial
 act
s);
Y
athasray
abhav
ah:
 it is as with (
members)
 with
which they are connected.
Of the six
 Sutras which are con
t
ained in this Adhi
karana, the
first four S
utras are Purvap
aksha Sutras and the last two S
utras are
Siddhant
a Sutras.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
425

Dif

fer ent in
struc
tions con
nected with a sac
ri
fice are st
ated in the
dif

fer ent V
edas. The scrip
tures say that al
l these mem
bers men
tioned
in the dif

fer ent V
edas are to be com
bined for the due per
for
mance of
the
prin ci p
al
one.
The ques
tion now is, which is the rule to be f
ol
lowed with re
gard
to the med
i
t
a
tions or Up
asanas con
nected with these mem
bers.
The pres
ent Su
tra de
clares that the same rule which ap
plies to
the mem
bers ap
plies also to the Up
asanas con
nected with them.
 It is
ac
cord
ing to the abodes. A
s the abid
ing places of those med
i
t
a
tions,
viz.,
 the S
totra and so on are com
bined for the per
for
mance of the
sac
ri
fice, so those med
i
t
a
tions or Up
asanas also; for a med
i
t
a
tion is
sub
ject to what it
 rest
s on. All t
hese Upasanas are to be com
bined.
Just as the S
totras, et
c., are com
bined when per
form
ing Kar
-
mas, so also the Up
asanas which are Angas of Karma
(Angavabaddha Up
asana) should be com
bined.
{eï>oü
Sishtescha
III
.3.62 (421)
And
 from the
 inju
nctio
n of the
 Sruti.
Sisht
eh:
 from the injunct
ion of the S
ruti;
Cha:
 and.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of the ob
jec
tion raised in Su
tra 61 is ad
-
duced.
That is be
cause the Upasanas de
pend on the S
totras.
As the S
totra and the ot
her mem
bers of the sac
ri
fice on which
the med
i
t
a
tions un
der dis
cus
sion rest are t
aught in the t
hree V
edas,
so also are the med
i
t
a
tions rest
ing on them.
 Just as the mem
bers are
scat
tered in the dif

fer ent V
edas, so also are the med
i
t
a
tions con
-
nected with them.
 There is no dif

fer ence as re
gards the in
junc
tion of
the Sruti
 with ref
er
ence to these med
i
t
a
tions.
There is no dif

fer ence be
tween the mem
bers of a sac
ri
fi
cial act
and
the
med i t
a tions
re fer ring
to
them.
g_mhmamV²
Samaharat
III
.3.63 (422)
On a
cco
unt o
f the
 rec
tifica
tion.
Samaharat:
 on account of the rectif
ication.
A
 fur
ther rea
son is given by th
e op
po
nent. A
n
other ar
gu
ment in
sup
port of Su
tra 61 is ad
duced.
There is also in
di
ca
tion in the S
ruti about such com
bi
na
tion.
Such com
bi
na
tion is seen when the Udgatri per
forms the Hautra
Karma de
scribed in an
other V
eda for re
mov
ing the ef

fects of er
ror in
the dis
charge of his func
tion.
Chhandogya Up
anishad de
clares ﬁWhat is Udgitha is OM or
Pranava and what is OM i
s Udgitha. This med
i
t
a
tion on the one
ness
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
426

of the Udgit
ha and OM mends the Udgitha de
filed by
 any mis
t
ake
com
mit
ted even on t
he p
art of the Hot
ri, the hy
mn-re
cit
ing priest in
rec
i
t
a
tion of t
he Udgithaﬂ (Chh. Up. I.
5.5).
Here it is said that t
he mis
t
akes com
mit
ted by t
he Udgatri or
chant
ing priest of the S
ama V
eda are rec
ti
fied by t
he rec
i
t
a
tion of t
he
Hotri or in
vok
ing priest of the Rigv
eda. This in
di
cates that though t
he
med
i
t
a
tions are given in t
he dif

fer ent V
edas they are yet
 inter
linked.
Hence all of them hav
e to be ob
served.
The p
as
sage ﬁFrom the seat of the Hot
ri, he set
s right any mis
-
t
ake com
mit
ted in the Udgit
haﬂ (Chh. Up. I.5.
5), de
clares that ow
ing to
the force of t
he med
i
t
a
tion on the unit
y of P
ranava and Udgitha, t
he
Hotri rec
ti
fies any mis
t
ake he may com
mit in his work, by m
eans of
the work of the Hotri.
Now
, as a med
i
t
a
tion men
tioned in one V
eda is con
nected with
what is men
tioned in an
other V
eda, in the same man
ner as a thing
men
tioned in an
other V
eda, the abov
e p
as
sage sug
gest
s the con
clu
-
sion that all m
ed
i
t
a
tions on mem
bers of sac
ri
fi
cial act
s, in what
ever
V
eda they may
 be men
tionedŠhave t
o be com
bined.
A
 thing be
long
ing to the Rigv
eda, viz.
, Pranava i
s, ac
cord
ing to
the Chhandogya tex
t, con
nected with the S
ama V
eda med
i
t
a
tion on
the Udgitha.
 Hence med
i
t
a
tions also which be
long to dif

fer ent V
edas
may be com
bined; be
cause there is no dif

fer ence be
tween them and
things as far as con
nec
tion is con
cerned.
JwUgmY
maÊ`lw
Voü
Gunasadharany
asrutescha
III
.3.64 (423)
And from
 the Sruti d
ec
laring ‚OM
™ which is a
 commo
n featu
re
(of t
he Udgi
tha
 Vidya
) to be comm
on to a
ll t
he Vedas.
Gunasadharany
asruteh:
 from the S
ruti declaring the feat
ure of ‚OM™

as being common to all t
he V
edas;
Cha:
 and.
An
other ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 61 is ad
duced.
Fur
ther Pranava (Omkara) is com
mon to all t
he Up
asanas and
links them up.
It is found i
n Sruti t
hat OM is the com
mon prop
erty of al
l the
V
edas.
There fore,
it
is
an
in sep
 a ra ble
con com i t
ant
of
the
sac ri fi cial
rites, pre
scribed in the V
edas. Hence the V
idyas also, be
ing de
pend
-
ent on OM, are concomit
ant
s of the sac
ri
fi
cial rites. Chhandogya
Up
anishad de
clares ﬁThrough this (‚OM™) the V
e
dic V
idya pro
ceeds.
With OM the A
dhvaryu giv
es or
ders, with OM the Hot
ri re
cites, with
OM the Udgatri singsﬂ (Chh. Up. I.
1.9). This is st
ated with re
f
er
ence to
OM, which is com
mon to all t
he V
edas and all the Up
asanas in them.
This in
di
cates that as the abode of
 all V
idyas, v
iz., OM,
 is com
mon, so
the V
idyas that
 rest in it are com
mon also. There
fore, all of
 them are to
be ob
served.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
427

Z dm VËgh^
mdmlwV
o–
Na v
a t
at
sahabhav
asruteh
III
.3.65 (424)
(T
he med
itati
ons connected with membe
rs of th
e sacrificial
acts
 are
) rathe
r not (to
 be
 com
bine
d) a
s the
 Sruti d
oe
s no
t state

their go
ing toge
ther.
Na:
 not;
Va
:
 rather;
T
at
sahabhav
asruteh:
 their correlation not being
mentioned by
 the Sruti
. (
Ta
t
:
 their;
Sahabhav
a:
about being toget
her;
Asruteh:
 because there is no such injunction in Sruti).
The words ‚
Na va
™
 ‚rather not™
 dis
card the Purvap
aksha. This
Su
tra re
futes the con
ten
tion raised in Sut
ras 61-64.
This and the fol
low
ing Su
tra give t
he con
clu
sion.
There is no Sruti com
mand
ing such com
bi
na
tion of t
he
Karmanga Up
asanas. No Sruti re
fers to such com
pul
sory com
bi
na
-
tion of t
he Up
asanas. So they
 can be done sin
gly or in com
bi
na
tion as
we like.
There is no bind
ing rule that t
he V
idyas, de
pend
ing on the
Pranava or on any p
art of a sac
ri
fi
cial rite, is a nec
es
sary con
com
i
t
ant
of the sac
ri
fice. It
 may be dis
pensed with or re
t
ained at the op
tion of
the per
former
. But
 there is this dif

fer ence. If V
idyas be as
so
ci
ated with
the rites greater good will ac
crue.
Though the ut
ter
ance of the Pranav
a or the Udgitha hym
n has
been en
joined by t
he Sruti t
o be nec
es
sary for the sac
ri
fi
cial per
for
-
mance, yet
 Sruti does not in
sist that t
he V
idya (med
i
t
a
tion) por
tion of
the per
for
mance is a nec
es
sary ad
junct to the m
ind. It
 is not ab
so
-
lutely

nec es sary
for
the
ful fil
 ment
of
ex ter nal
sac ri fices.
A

sac ri fice
may be per
formed even wit
h
out the V
idya (med
i
t
a
tion) merely by
 ut
-
ter
ance of Mantras, sing
ing of the Udgit
ha hymns, pour
ing of the clar
i
-
fied but
ter into t
he sa
cred fire and the like ex
ter
nal rites, in or
der to
at
t
ain p
ar
tic
u
lar de
sired ob
ject
s, but the V
idya or med
i
t
a
tion on Brah
-
man leads to reali
sa
tion of B
rah
man.
The
rule
for
com bin ing
the
in struc tions
re gard ing
sac ri fices
that
are scat
tered in all the V
edas can
not be ap
plied with re
gard to the
med
i
t
a
tions (Up
asanas) con
nected with them.
 If t
he in
struc
tions re
-
gard
ing the sac
ri
fices are not com
bined, the sac
ri
fice will it

self fail. But
it is not t
he case if the Up
asanas are not prac
tised, be
cause
Up
asanas only in
crease the fruit
s of the sac
ri
fice (V
ide III
.3.42).
Up
asanas are not in
sep
a
ra
ble from the sac
ri
fice.
There
fore, Up
asanas (V
idyas, med
i
t
a
tions) may or may
 not be
prac tised.
Darsanaccha
III
.3.66 (425)
And becau
se the Sruti (scri
pture) says so (shows it)
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
428

Darsanat:
 because the Sruti says so, shows it from S
ruti;
Cha:
 and,
also.
This Su
tra is ad
duced in sup
port of Su
tra 65.
This may also be in
ferred from Sruti
.
Chhandogya Up
anishad de
clares ﬁThe Brahmana (su
per
in
-
tend
ing chief priest) who pos
sesses s
uch knowl
edge saves the sac
ri
-
fice, the sac
ri
ficer and all the priest
s, just as the horse saves the
horse
manﬂ (Chh. Up. IV
.17.10).
This shows that the scrip
tures do not in
tend that
 all the med
i
t
a
-
tions should go to
gether
. For
, if all
 med
i
t
a
tions were to be com
bined,
all priest
s would know them all and the tex
t could not spe
cially an
-
nounce that the B
rahmana, chief su
per
in
tend
ing priest, pos
sess
ing a
cer
t
ain knowl
edge thereby saves the ot
h
ers.
The med
i
t
a
tions, there
fore, ac
cord
ing to one™
s lik
ing may or may

not be com
bined.
Thus ends the Third Pada (Sec
tion 3) of the Third A
dhy
ay
a
(Chap
ter III) of the Brahma Sutras
 or the V
edant
a Phi
los
o
phy
.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 3
429

CHAPTER III
SECTION 4
INTRODUCTION
In the last S
ec
tion the V
idyas or Up
asanas (med
i
t
a
tions) which
are the means to the knowl
edge of Brah
man were dis
cussed.
In this Sec
tion the S
utrakara en
ters into an en
quiry whether the
knowl
edge of Brah
man is con
nected with rit
u
al
is
tic work through one
who is en
ti
tled to per
form the works or is an in
de
pend
ent means to
ac
com
plish the pur
pose of man.
Sri Baadarayana,
 the Sut
rakara, be
gins by st
at
ing the fi
nal view
in the first S
u
tra, ﬁThenceﬂ etc. He is of opin
ion that t
hrough the in
de
-
pend
ent Knowl
edge of Brah
man en
joined in the V
edant
a-text
s the
pur
pose of man is ef

fected.In the pres
ent Sec
tion it wil
l be shown that Knowl
edge of Brah
-
man is in
de
pend
ent of K
arma and that is not
 sub
or
di
nate to sac
ri
fi
cial
act
s.
Baadarayana es
t
ab
lishes that the at

tain
ment of t
he fi
nal eman
-
ci
p
a
tion is the di
rect re
sult of Brahma V
idya of knowl
edge of Brah
-
man, that
 works or s
ac
ri
fices are only in
di
rect aids to con
tem
plat
ing
by pu
ri
fy
ing the heart,
 that K
arma does not di
rectly lead t
o the fi
nal be
-
at
i
tude, t
hat the seeker of Brah
man may ev
en do away with Karma
and may at
t
ain free
dom solely by
 con
tem
pla
tion on Brah
man and that
even in that
 case he should not aban
don the du
ties en
joined by t
he
scrip tures.
430

SYNOPSIS
Adhikarana I:
 (Sutras 1-17) proves that the knowl
edge of Brah
-
man is not Kratv
artha, i.
e., sub
or
di
nate to ac
tion (sac
ri
fi
cial act
s) but
in de pend ent.
Adhikarana II:
 (Sutras 18-20) con
firms this con
clu
sion that
Sannyasa is pre
scribed by the scrip
tures, that
 the st
ate of t
he
Pravrajins is en
joined by t
he sa
cred law and that for them
 Brahma
V
idya only
 is pre
scribed, and not ac
tion.
Adhikarana III
:
 (Sutras 21-22) de
ter
mines that cer
t
ain clauses
form
ing p
art of V
idyas are not mere glorif
icatory p
as
sages (Srutis or
Arthavadas) but t
hem
selves en
join the med
i
t
a
tion.
Adhikarana IV
:
 (Sutras 23-24) The sto
ries re
corded in the
Up
anishads are not to be used as sub
or
di
nate mem
bers of act
s. They
do not serve the pur
pose of Pariplavas and do not
 form p
art of the rit

u -
al
is
tic act
s. They are meant
 to glo
rify t
he V
idya t
aught in them.
 They
have the pur
pose of glo
ri
fy
ing as Arthavadas th
e in
junc
tions with
which they are con
nected.
Adhikarana V
:
 (Su
tra 25) For all these rea
sons the Sannya
sin
need not ob
serve rit
u
al
is
tic act
s as knowl
edge serves their pur
pose.
They re
quire no ac
tions but only
 knowl
edge.
Adhikarana VI:
 (Sutras 26-27) Nev
er
the
less the ac
tions en
-
joined by scrip
ture such as sac
ri
fices, con
duct of cer
t
ain kinds, etc.,
are use
ful as they
 are in
di
rect means of knowl
edge.
Adhikarana VII
:
 (Sutras 28-31) Cer
t
ain re
lax
ations al
lowed by
scrip
ture of the l
aws re
gard
ing food, are meant
 only for cases of ex
-
treme need. Re
stric
tions as re
gards food may be aban
doned only
when life is in dan
ger
.
Adhikarana VII
I:
 (Sutras 32-35) The du
ties of the A
sramas are
to be per
formed by ev
en one who does not strive af

ter lib er
a
tion or
who is not de
sir
ous of knowl
edge.
Adhikarana IX:
 (Sutras 36-39) Those who stand m
id
way be
-
tween two Asramas are also en
ti
tled to knowl
edge. Those also who
ow
ing to pov
erty and so on, are Anasramins,
 have claims to V
idya.
Adhikarana X:
 (Su
tra 40) A
 Sannyasi who has t
aken the vow of
life-long cel
i
bacy can
not re
voke his vow
. He can
not re
vert back to his
for
mer st
ages of life.
Adhikarana XI:
 (Sutras 41-42) Ex
pi
a
tion of t
he fall of an
Urdhvaret
a, of one who trans
gresses the vow of life-long cel
i
bacy
.
Adhikarana XII
:
 (Su
tra 43) Ex
clu
sion of the fal
len Urdhva
ret
as
or life-long cel
i
bate. He must be shunned by
 So
ci
ety
.
431

Adhikarana XII
I:
 (Sutras 44-46) Those med
i
t
a
tions which are
con
nected with sub
or
di
nate mem
bers of the sac
ri
fice are the busi
-
ness of the priest, not
 of the Y
ajamana or sac
ri
ficer
.
Adhikarana XIV
:
 (Sutras 47-49) Bri. Up. I
II.
5.1 en
joins Mauna or
med
i
t
a
tion as a third in ad
di
tion to B
alya (child-like st
ate) and
Pandity
a
(schol ar ship
or
er u di tion).
Adhikarana XV
:
 (Su
tra 50) By B
alya or child-like st
ate is to be
un
der
stood a child-like in
no
cent st
ate of mind,
 be
ing free from p
as
-
sion, an
ger
, etc.
Adhikarana XVI
:
 (Su
tra 51) in
ti
mates that t
he fru
ition of knowl
-
edge may t
ake place even in this lif
e if there be no ob
struc
tion to it
 (the
means adopted).
Adhikarana XVI
I:
 (Su
tra 52) de
clares that there is no dif

fe r
ence
in lib
er
a
tion, i.
e., in t
he reali
sa
tion of B
rah
man. It
 is of one kind in all
cases.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
432

Purusharthadh
ikaranam: T
opic 1 (Sutra 1-17)
Knowledge of Brahm
an is independent of sacrificial act
s
nwéf
mWm}@
VíeãX
m{X{V ~
Purushartho™t
ah sabdaditi baadaray
anah
III.4.1 (
426
)
From thi
s (Brahma Vidya or
 Brahma Jn
ana results) th
e
purpose or t
he chief obj
ect of pur
suit
 of man
, because th
e
scriptures state so; th
us (holds) the sage Baadarayana.
Purusharthah:
purpose of man, object of
 human pursuit, here the
chief object, i
.e.,
 salvation;

At
ah:
 from this, f
rom Brahma V
idya;
Sabdat:
 from the scriptures, because the scriptures st
ate so, from
Sruti;
 Iti:
 so thus (says), this is the opinion of
;
Baadaray
anah:
 the
sage Baadarayana, (holds).
The re
sult or fruit of
 Brahma V
idya is st
ated.
The Sutrakara Sri V
yasa now pro
ceeds to show that Brahma
Jnana leads not to Karma,
 but to t
he at
t
ain
ment of t
he high
est
Purushartha, i.
e., Moksha or the fi

nal eman ci
p
a
tion. That
 is
Baadarayana™
s teach
ing.
The four Purusharthas are: Dharma (dis
charge of re
li
gious
duty), A
rtha (ac
qui
si
tion of wealt
h, worldly pros
per
ity),
 Kama (en
joy
-
ment), and Moksha (sal
va
tion). K
nowl
edge of Brah
man is not merely
con
nected with sac
ri
fi
cial act
s by af

ford ing to the agent
 a cer
t
ain qual
-
i
fi
ca
tion. I
t def
i
nitely
 p
aves the way f
or the at
t
ain
ment of t
he fi
nal re
-
lease or free
dom from births and deat
hs.
Whence is this known? From the scrip
ture.
Baadarayana bases his ar
gu
ment
s on the Sruti t
ext
s, such as
ﬁThe knower of At
man goes be
yond griefŠ
T
arati sokamat
mavit
ﬂ
(Chh. Up. III
.4.1). ﬁHe who knows the high
est Brah
man be
comes
even Brah
manŠ
Brahmavit
 brahmaiva bhavati
ﬂ
(Mu
n. Up
. III.2.9)
.
ﬁHe who knows
 Brah
man at
t
ains the High
estŠ
Brahmavidapnot
i
Param
ﬂ (T
ait. U
p. II.1)
.
ﬁFor him who has a teacher there is de
lay only
 so long as he is
not de
liv
ered; then he will be per
fectﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
.14.2). ﬁHe who has
searched out and un
der
stood the Self
 which is free from sin, etc.
, ob
-
t
ains all worlds and all de
siresﬂ (Chh. Up. VIII
.7.1). ﬁThe A
t
man is to
be seenﬂ etc., up to ﬁThus far goes im
mor
t
al
ityﬂ (Bri.
 Up. IV
.5.6-15).
These and sim
i
lar text
s em
phat
i
cally de
clare that Knowl
edge of
Brah
man ef

fects the high
est pur
pose of man or Su
preme
Purushartha.
Against thi
s the Purvap
akshin raises his ob
jec
tion as fol
lows.
Here Jaimini co
mes for
ward with his fol
low
ing ob
jec
tions.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
433

eofËdmËnw
éfmW©
dmXmo `WmÝ`o
pîd{
V O¡
{_{Z
Seshatv
atpurusharthav
ado y
athany
eshv
iti jai
mini
h
III.4.2 (
427
)
Because
 (the self) is suppleme
ntary
 (to sacrif
icial acts)
, (th
e
fruits
 of the
 Knowl
ed
ge
 of the
 Se
lf) are
 me
re p
raise
 of the
 age
nt,
as in other cases; thus J
aimini opines.
Seshatv
at:
 because of being supplement
ary (to sacrificial act
s);
Pusushar thav
adah:
 are mere praise or the agent;
Y
atha:
 as;
Any
eshu:
 in other cases;
Iti:
 thus (says);
Jaiminih
:
 Jaimini (ho
lds).
Sutras 2 to 7 are Purv
ap
aksha Sutras and Sutras 8 to 17 are
Siddhant
a Sutras.
Jaimini thinks that
 the Sruti
 text
s merely praise the doer of
Karma and that
 Brahmajnana is only an ac
ces
sory of Karma
(Karmanga).
He is of the opin
ion that t
he V
edas merely pre
scribe works
 to at
-
t
ain cer
t
ain pur
poses in
clud
ing eman
ci
p
a
tion. He holds that
 the
knowl
edge of Brah
man has no in
de
pend
ent fruit
 of it
s own be
cause it
st
ands
in
a
sub or di nate
re la tion
to
sac ri fi cial
ac tion.
This
re la tion
is
med
i
t
ated by t
he Self,
 the ob
ject of knowl
edge, which is the agent in
all works and, there
fore, it

self stands in a sub
or
di
nate re
la
tion to ac
-
tion. The agent
 be
comes qual
i
fied for ac
tions, the f
ruit of which will
only ap
pear af

ter death by know ing that his self
 will sur
vive t
he body
.
A
 man un
der
t
akes a sac
ri
fi
cial act only when he is con
scious
that he is dif

fer ent from t
he body and that
 af

ter death he will go to
heaven when he will en
joy the f
ruit
s of his sac
ri
fice.
The qual
i
fi
ca
tion the self
 thus ac
quires is sim
i
lar to that
 which
the rice-grains ac
quire by be
ing sprin
kled with wa
ter; be
cause they
be
come fit t
o be used in the sac
ri
fice, only
 through this lat
ter act of
cer e mo nial
pu ri fi ca tion.
As the knowl
edge of the S
elf has no in
de
pend
ent po
si
tion, it
can
not have an in
de
pend
ent fruit
 of it
s own. There
fore the p
as
sages
which st
ate such fruit
s can
not be t
aken as in
junc
tions of fruit
s, but
merely as Arthav
adas (or glorificatory p
as
sages), like other
Arthavadas re
lat
ing to the sub
st
ance (Dravya) or to the pu
ri
fi
ca
tion of
the sub
st
ance (Samskara) or to sub
or
di
nate act
s them
selves
(Karma), mak
ing some ad
di
tional st
ate
ment about t
he fruit
s of the
sac
ri
fi
cial ac
tions to which the knowl
edge of the S
elf is aux
il
iary
.
Jaimini main
t
ains that the st
ate
ment that
 the re
ward of Brahma
Jnana is the high
est good does not mean that
 such knowl
edge of the
Self by
 it

self yields any real fruit but
 the st
ate
ment is only an ex

hor t
a
-
tion to t
he per
for
mance of the sac
ri
fices. He says that t
he knowl
edge
of the self i
s use
ful only
 so far as it pro
duces in the per
former a be
lief
in his ex
tra-mun
dane ex
is
tence to en
able him to en
joy the re
wards of
his sac
ri
fices. The st
ate
ment that
 it yi
elds any fruit
 by it

self is only anex hor t
a tion
to
pu ri fi ca tion
of
the
sac ri ficer
.
The
pu ri fi ca tion
of
the
sac
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
434

ri ficer
is
a
nec es sary
con com i t
ant
fac tor
like
other
ma te rial
req ui sites
of a sac
ri
fice; be
cause with
out this pu
ri
fi
ca
tion he would not be as
-
sured of his sur
viv
ing the body and en
joy
ing the fruit
 of his sac
ri
fices
in a higher world af

ter death.AmMma
Xe©Z
Acharadarsanat
III.4.3 (
428
)
Because we fin
d (fr
om th
e script
ures such
) condu
ct (
of men of
realisatio
n).
Acharadarsanat:
because of the conduct found (from t
he
scriptures).
The ob
jec
tion raised in Su
tra 2 is strength
ened.
Janaka the king of the V
idehas per
formed a sac
ri
fice in which
gif
t
s were freely dis
trib
uted (Bri. Up.
 III
.1.1). ﬁS
irs, I am go
ing to per
-
form a sac
ri
ficeﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.1
1.5). These and sim
i
lar p
as
sages in
di
-
cate that t
hose who know Brah
man are con
nected with sac
ri
fi
cial
ac tion.
Janaka and Asvap
ati were knowers of Brah
man. If
 they had at

-
t
ained the fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion by knowl
edge of Brah
man there was no
ne
ces
sity f
or them to per
form sac
ri
fices. If
 mere knowl
edge could ef

-
fect the pur
pose of man, why should t
hey per
form sac
ri
fices trou
ble
-
some in many re
spect
s? If a man would fi
nd honey in the A
rka tree
why should he go to the f
or
est? But t
he two text
s in
ti
mate that
 they did
per form
sac ri fices.
This proves that one at

tains the fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion through sac
-
ri
fices or works alone and not through the knowl
edge of Brah
man, as
the V
edantins main
t
ain.
VÀN®>Vo
–
T
acchruteh
III.4.4 (
429
)
Because
 scripture directly declares that (viz
., t
hat knowledge
of Brahman st
ands in a subordinate relation to sacr
ificial
acts.)
Ta
t
:
 that,
 that knowledge is subsidiary and supplement
ary to
sacrif
ice;

Sruteh:
 from Sruti
, because the scriptures directly declare.
The Sruti also says t
hat V
idya is an Anga of
 Karma.
If one does Karma wit
h knowl
edge there will be greater ef

fi -
ciency
. ﬁWhat a man does with knowl
edge, fait
h and med
i
t
a
tion is
more pow
er
fulﬂ (Chh. Up. I.
1.10). This tex
t clearly in
di
cates that
knowl
edge is a p
art of the sac
ri
fi
cial act. This p
as
sage di
rectly st
ates
that knowl
edge is sub
or
di
nate to work and from thi
s it fol
lows that
mere knowl
edge can
not ef

fect the pur pose of man.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
435

g_Ýdmaå^U
Samanv
arambhanat
III.4.5 (
430
)
Because the tw
o (know
ledge and w
ork) g
o toget
her (w
ith
 the
de
parti
ng so
ul to
 give
 fruits
 of ac
tions
).
Samanv
arambhanat:
 because of the accomp
anying toget
her
, as
they joi
ntly f
ollow the sacrificer to produce their ef
fect
s on account of
their t
aking hold together or being toget
her
.
The ob
jec
tion be
gun in Su
tra 2 is con
tin
ued.
Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad (IV
.4.2) says ﬁThe de
p
art
ing soul is
fol
lowed by knowl
edge and work.ﬂ This pas
sage in
di
cates that knowl
-
edge and work go to
gether with the soul and be
gin to
gether to man
i
-
fest their f
ruit
s. There
fore, it
 fol
lows that knowl
edge is not
in
de
pend
ent. I
t is not able t
o pro
duce any such ef

fect in de
pend
ently
.
It is con
cluded that knowl
edge is not in
de
pend
ent of works or sac
ri
fi
-
cial a
ct
s.
VÛVmo {
dYmZmV²
T
advato v
idhanat
III.4.6 (
431
)
Because (th
e script
ures) enj
oin (
wor
ks) f
or such
 (onl
y wh
o
underst
and t
he purpor
t of
 the Vedas)
.
T
adv
at
ah:
 for such (as know the purport of the V
edas);
V
idhanat:
be
cause (the scriptures) enjoin (work
).
The ob
jec
tion, be
gun in the Su
tra 2, is con
tin
ued.
Fur
ther Karma is en
joined for one who re
cites and stud
ies the
V
edas. ﬁHe who has learnt i.e., read t
he V
edas from a fam
ily of
 teach
-
ers, ac
cord
ing to the sa
cred in
junc
tion in the l
ei
sure time lef
t from t
he
du
ties to be per
formed for the Guru;
 who af

ter hav ing re
ceived his dis
-
charge has set
tled in his own house, study

ing his sa cred text
s in
some sa
cred spotﬂ (Chh. Up. VIII
.15.7). S
uch pas
sages also in
di
cate
that t
hose who know the pur
port of the whole V
eda are qual
i
fied for
sac
ri
fi
cial act
s and that hence knowl
edge does not in
de
pend
ently
pro
duce any re
sult.
Niy
amaccha
III.4.7 (
432
)
And on ac
count
 of pr
escribed rul
es.
Niy
amat:
on account of prescribed rules, because of compulsory
injunction;
Cha:
 also, and.
The ar
gu
ment be
gun in Su
tra 2 is con
cluded here.
Do
ing Karma is a Niyama or li
fe-long com
mand
ment. ﬁP
er
form
-
ing works here (i.e., in this lif
e), let a man wish to l
ive a hun
dred yearsﬂ
(Isa. Up. 2). ﬁAgni
hotra is a sac
ri
fice last
ing up to old age and deat
h;
for through old age one is freed f
rom it or through deathﬂ (Sat
. Br
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
436

XII
.4.1.
1). From such def
i
nite rules also it f
ol
lows that Knowl
edge is
merely sup
ple
men
t
ary to works, or st
ands in a sub
or
di
nate re
la
tion to
work .
The Sutrakara (Sri V
yasa) up
holds his view in the f
ol
low
ing Su
-
tra against all t
hose ob
jec
tions.
A{YH$mon
Xoem
Îmw ~m
Xam`
Uñ`¡d
§ VÔe
©ZmV
Adhikop
adesaattu baadarayanasy
aiv
am t
addarsanat
III.4.8 (
433
)
Bu
t be
cau
se
 (the
 scrip
ture
s) te
ach (
the
 Sup
rem
e S
el
f to b
e)
other (than
 the agent), Baadarayan
a™s view is correct (or valid)
for th
at is seen thus (in scri
ptural passages).
Adhikop
adesat:
 because (the sriptures) teach (the Supreme Self t
o
be) something over and above;

Tu
:
 but;
Baadaray
anasy
a:
 of
Baadarayana;
Evam:
 thus, such (is the opinion);
T
addarsanat:
 for
that is seen (from the scrip
tures). (
Adhika:
 Supreme Being,
 more
dif
ferent;
Up
adesat:
 from the st
atement in S
ruti, owing t
o the
teaching about.)
Ob
jec
tions raised in Sutras 2 to 7 are now be
ing re
futed one by
one. This Su
tra re
futes Su
tra 2.
Sutras 2-7 give t
he view of t
he Mimamsakas which is re
futed in
Sutras 8-17.
The Sruti de
clares Isvara as higher than the in
di
vid
ual soul. So
Baadarayana™
s doc
trine as st
ated in Su
tra 1 is cor
rect. The Sruti
shows this. The real na
ture of the soul is di
vin
ity
.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) dis
cards the Purvap
aksha. The V
edant
a text
s
do not teach the li
m
ited self which is the agent
. What the V
edant
a
text
s re
ally t
each as the ob
ject of Knowl
edge is some
thing dif

fer ent
from the em
bod
ied self, v
iz., the non-t
rans
mi
grat
ing Lord who is free
from all at
trib
utes of trans
mi
grat
ing ex
is
tence such as agency and the
like and dis
tin
guished by free
dom from sin and so on, the S
u
preme
Self.
The knowl
edge of such a self does not only not
 pro
mote ac
tion
but rather put
s an end to all ac
tions. Hence the vi
ew of the re
vered
Baadarayana which was st
ated in Su
tra 1 re
mains valid and can
not
be shaken by fal
la
cious rea
son
ing about the sub
or
di
na
tion of knowl
-
edge to ac
tion and the li
ke.
That the V
edant
a text
s teach the Su
preme Self is clear from
such text
s as the fol
low
ing: ﬁHe who per
ceives all and knows allﬂ
(Mun. Up. I.
1.9). ﬁFrom ter
ror of it the wind bl
ows, from ter
ror the sun
risesﬂ (T
ait. Up.
 II.
8). ﬁIt is a great t
er
ror
, a raised thun
der
boltﬂ (Katha
Up. II.
6.2). ﬁBy
 the com
mand of that
 Im
per
ish
able one, O Gargiﬂ (Bri.
Up. III.8
.9). ﬁ
It thou
ght, ma
y I be ma
ny
, may I gr
ow fo
rth. It s
ent fo
rth
fire
ﬂ (C
hh. VI.2
.3).
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
437

Vwëm
ÝVw Xe
T
uly
am tu darsanam
III.4.9 (
434
)
But t
he declara
tion
s of t
he Sr
uti equal
ly suppor
t bot
h view
s.
T
uly
am:
 the same, simil
ar
, equal;
Tu
:
 but;
Darsanam:
 declaration of
the Sruti
.
This Su
tra re
futes the v
iew ex
pressed in Su
tra 3. It
 is a re
ply to
the third S
u
tra.
There are equal Srutis which show that V
idya is not K
armanga.
The Sruti shows that V
idya is not K
armanga.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) is used in or
der to re
move the i
dea that V
idya
is sub
or
di
nate to K
arma. There is equal au
thor
ity i
n the scrip
tures
from the prop
o
si
tion that
 V
idya is not sub
or
di
nate to K
arma, that
 for
one who has at
t
ained knowl
edge there is no work. Thus there are
scrip
tural p
as
sages such as
: know
ing this the Rishis de
scended from
Kavasa said: ﬁFor what pur
pose should we study the V
edas, for what
pur
pose should we sac
ri
fice? Know
ing this in
deed the an
cient ones
did not of

fer the Agnihotraﬂ, and ﬁwhen Brahmanas know that self and
have risen above the de
sire for sons, wealth and worlds, they wan
der
about as men
di
cant
sﬂ (Bri. Up. II
I.5).
Thus the sages called Kavaseyas did not
 care for Karma, nor
did Y
ajnavalkya,
 who aban
don
ing all Kar
mas went to for
est. ﬁThis
much in
deed is the means of Im

mor t
al
ity
, my dear
, say
ing this
Y
ajnavalkya lef
t homeﬂ (Bri. Up.
 IV
.5.15). T
hus we find ex
am
ples of
em i nent
men
de voted
to
V
idya,
re nounc ing
all
cer e mo nial
ac tions.
There
fore, scrip
tural tex
t
s are not all one-sided, in fa
vour of Kar
mas,
but there are p
as
sages to the con
trary also. The ex

am ples of per
sons
like Janaka and oth
ers in
di
cate that t
hese men fol
lowed Karma as an
ex
am
ple to man
kind, so that t
he so
cial or
der may be pre
served. Their
work was c
har
ac
ter
ised by non-at
t
ach
ment and there
fore it was prac
-
ti
cally no work at all. Hence the ar
gu
ment of t
he Mimamsakas is
weak.
There are in
deed found in Srut
is in
st
ances of sac
ri
fices be
ing
per
formed by en
light
ened souls like Janaka, but there are also dec
la
-
ra
tions of equal weight
 to the ef

fect that per
for
mance of sac
ri
fices is
quite use
less and re
dun
dant for the en
light
ened, i.e.
, those who have
known Brah
man.
So it can
not be as
serted on the strength of
 the in
st
ances of
Janaka and oth
ers like him, that
 knowl
edge is to be con
sid
ered as
sec ond ary
to
the
sac ri fice.
With ref
er
ence to the indicatory
 sign as to the de
pend
ence of
knowl
edge to work, which is im
plied in the p
as
sage ﬁSirs, I am go
ing
to per
form a sac
ri
ficeﬂ we say
, that
 it be
longs to a sec
tion which treat
s
of V
aisvanara.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
438

Now the text
s may de
clare that a V
idya of B
rah
man as lim
it
ed by
ad
junct
s is ac
com
p
a
nied by works; but all t
he same the V
idya does
not st
and in a sub
or
di
nate re
la
tion to works as the lead
ing sub
ject
mat
ter and the other means of
 proof are ab
sent.
The au
thor or Sutrakara (Baadarayana) next
 an
swers the ob
-
jec
tion raised in the S
u
tra 4.
Agmd©{
ÌH$s
Asarv
atriki
III
.4.10 (435)
(The s
crip
tural
 de
clara
tion re
ferre
d to
 in Su
tra 4)
 is no
t of
universal application.
Asarv
atriki:
not universal,
 not applicable every
where.
The ref
u
t
a
tion of t
he ob
jec
tions is con
tin
ued. This Su
tra spe
-
cially re
futes Su
tra 4.
The st
ate
ment of t
he Sruti re
ferred to in Su
tra 4 to the ef

fect thatthe
com bi na tion
of
med i t
a tion
and
sac ri fice
makes
the
sac ri fice
ef
 fec
-
tive i
s not ap
pli
ca
ble ev
ery
where. The above-men
tioned st
ate
ment of
the Sruti
 does not re
fer to med
i
t
a
tions in gen
eral, but only
 to the
Udgitha V
idya which forms the sub
ject mat
ter of the di
s
course con
-
cerned.
The dec
la
ra
tion of t
he Sruti t
hat Knowl
edge in
creases the fruit of
the sac
ri
fice does not re
fer to all knowl
edge (all V
idyas), as it is con
-
nected only with t
he Udgitha (Udgitha V
idya) which is the topic of
 the
sec
tion ﬁLet a man m
ed
i
t
ate on the syl

la ble OM as the Udgitha.
ﬂ
The text
 says that if
 this Udgitha V
idya is re
cited by a per
son
with knowl
edge, then it
 is more fruit

ful than if it is re
cited with
out such
V
idya.
There
fore, V
idya is not an aux

il iary to work in ev
ery in
st
ance.
The au
thor next an
swers the ob
jec
tion raised in II
I.4.
5.
{d^mJ– eVdV²
V
ibhagah sat
av
at
III.4.1
1 (4
36)
T
here is di
visi
on of kn
owledge an
d wor
k as in
 the cas
e of a
hundr
ed (divided betw
een two perso
ns).
V
ibhagah:
 (there is) division of knowledge and work;
Sat
av
at:
 as in
the case of a hundred (divided bet
ween two persons).
This Su
tra spe
cially re
futes Su
tra 5.
Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad de
clares ﬁThe de
p
art
ing soul is fol
-
lowed by V
idya (Knowl
edge) and Karma (work) and past ex

pe ri
-
encesﬂ (IV
.4.2). Here we have t
o t
ake knowl
edge and work in a
dis
trib
u
tive sense. I
t means the knowl
edge fol
lows one and work an
-
other
. Just as when we say
, ﬁGive Rs. 100 t
o Rama and Krishnaﬂ it
means ﬁGive Rs. 50 to Rama and Rs. 50 t
o Krishnaﬂ, the abov
e p
as
-
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
439

sage means that the V
idya re
lates to the souls seek
ing eman
ci
p
a
tion
and Karma to ot
her souls. There is no com
bi
na
tion of t
he two.
The text
 quoted re
fers only to knowl
edge and work which con
-
cern the soul that trans
mi
grates but not t
he soul which is about to ob
-
t
ain fi
nal re
lease. Be
cause the p
as
sage, ﬁThus does the man who
de
sires to trans
mi
grateﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
.4.6) in
di
cates that the pre
vi
ous
text
 re
fers to the soul that
 trans
mi
grates. The Sruti
 de
clares of the
soul who is about to be re
leased, ﬁBut t
he man who never de
sires
never trans
mi
gratesﬂ (Bri. Up. IV
.4.6).
The next S
u
tra re
futes the S
u
tra 6.
AÜ``Z
_mÌdV–
Adhy
ay
anamatrav
at
ah
III
.4.12 (437)
(The scripture
s e
njoin work)
 on those
 who have
 mere
ly read
the Vedas.
Adhy
ay
anamatrav
at
ah:
 of one who has merely read the V
edas.
This Su
tra spe
cially re
futes Su
tra 6.
He who has read the V
edas and known about the sac
ri
fices is
en
ti
tled to do sac
ri
fice. But
 no work is pre
scribed for one who has
knowl
edge of Brah
man (Brahma Jnana).
Zm{deo
Nav
iseshat
III
.4.13 (438)
There be
ing no spe
cification (the rule
 doe
s) not (spe
cially app
ly
to him who k
nows, i.e
., a Jnani).
Na:
 not, compulsion does not appl
y;
A
v
iseshat:
on account of the
absence of any specification,
 because there is no special mention.
This Su
tra spe
cially re
futes Su
tra 7.
The Sruti ﬁ
Kurvanneveha
ﬂ ﬁper
form
ing works here let a man
liveﬂ etc.
, of t
he Isavasya Up
anishad does not spe
cially ap
ply to a
Brahma Jnani. It
 is gen
eral in it
s terms. There is no spe
cial men
tion in
it that
 it is ap
pli
ca
ble to a Jnani also. I
t is not bind
ing on a Jnani when
there
is
no
spec i fi ca tion.
The Sruti of
 the Isavasy
a does not lay down any such re
stric
tive
rule that ev
en the il
lu
mined sage must per
form Karma t
hrough
out his
life. Why
 so?
A
viseshat
. Be
cause there is no spec
i
fi
ca
tion. A
ll that i
t
says is ﬁLet one per
form Kar
mas through
out his lifeﬂ.
 There is noth
ing
to show to which class of peo
ple, that
 p
ar
tic
u
lar rule is ad
dressed. On
the other hand there are ex

press texts of the Srut
is which show that
im
mor
t
al
ity i
s not to be ob
t
ained by Kar
mas, but by
 knowl
edge alone.
Mahanarayana Up
anishad of the T
ait. A
r
. X.
5 de
clares ﬁNot by
Kar
mas (sac
ri
fices), not by
 prog
eny
, nor by wealth can one ob
t
ain im
-
mor
t
al
ity
. It
 is by re
nun
ci
a
tion alone that
 some great souled be
ings
have
ob t
ained
im mor t
al ity
.ﬂ
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
440

The ap
p
ar
ent con
flict in t
he two Sruti t
ext
s is to be rec
on
ciled by
giv
ing them dif

fer ent scopes. One is ad
dressed to Karma-nishtha
dev
o
tees, the ot
her to the Jnana-nishtha
devotees.
ñVwV`
o@Zw_{Vd
S
tut
ay
e™numatirv
a
III
.4.14 (439)
Or rathe
r the
 pe
rmiss
ion (
to d
o wo
rk) is
 for the
 glori
ficati
on (o
f
knowl
edge).
S
tut
ay
e:
 for the purpose of glorif
ication (of knowledge);
Anumatih:
permission;
Va
:
 or
, rather
.
This Su
tra also re
futes Su
tra 7.
The p
as
sage ﬁper
form
ing works hereﬂ may be treated in an
other
way also. The in
junc
tion to do work for the knowers of Brah
man or the
il
lu
mined sages is for eulogising this knowl
edge. A
 Brahma Jnani or
knower of the Self
 may work all his life but
 he will not be bound by
 it
s
ef

fects, on ac
count of the power of knowl
edge. Knowl
edge nul
li
fies
the ef

fect of Karma. ﬁNo work clings to the man.ﬂ This clearly glo
ri
fies
Knowl edge.
H$m_am
&
Kamakarena chaike
III
.4.15 (440)
And some acc
ordin
g to t
heir ow
n li
king
 (hav
e abandoned all
works
).
Kamakarena:
 according to their own liking;
Cha:
 and;
Eke:
some.
The ar
gu
ment in ref
u
t
a
tion of Jaimi
ni™
s views is con
tin
ued.
In Su
tra 3 it was st
ated that
 Janaka and oth
ers per
formed sac
ri
-
fices even af

ter at t
ain
ing knowl
edge of Brah
man. This Su
tra says that
some have aban
doned all works ac
cord
ing to their own lik
ing. Some
may like to work to set an ex

am ple to oth
ers af

ter at t
ain
ing knowl
-
edge, while oth
ers may aban
don all works. There is no com
pul
sion on
the knowers of Brah
man or lib
er
ated sages as re
gards work.
A
 scrip
tural tex
t of t
he V
ajasaneyins runs as fol
lows: ﬁKnow
ing
this the peo
ple of old did not
 wish for of
f
spring. What shall we do with
of
f
spring, they said,
 we who have this self and thi
s worldﬂ (Bri. Up.
IV
.4.22). F
rom this it f
ol
lows that know
l
edge is not sub
or
di
nate to ac
-
tion and that
 the scrip
tural st
ate
ment
s as to the fruit of
 knowl
edge
can
not be t
aken in any but t
heir true sense.
Up
amardam ch
a
III
.4.16 (441)
And
 (scri
ptu
re te
ache
s that the
) de
struc
tion (
of al
l
quali
fi
cati
ons f
or wor
k result
s fr
om know
ledge).
Up
amardam:
 complete destruction,
 putting an end t
o all actions;
Cha:
 and.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
441

The
pre vi ous
ar gu ment
is
con tin ued.
Fur
ther
, such knowl
edge brings the reali
sa
tion that
 ev
ery
thing is
At
man or Brah
man. How then can the knower act?
Again, f
ar from be
ing a p
art of work, knowl
edge put
s an end to
all works, all oblig
a
tory du
ties. Mundaka Up
anishad de
clares, ﬁBrah
-
man in both His su
pe
rior and in
fe
rior as
pect
s be
ing real
ised, the knot
of the heart (ego
ism, etc.) is cut down,
 all doubt
s are dis
pelled and
works are de
stroyedﬂ (Mun. Up. I
I.2.
9).
Knowl
edge of Brah
man an
ni
hi
lates all ig
no
rance and it
s ef

fects
like agent, deed and f
ruit, ﬁBut
 when to the Knower of B
rah
man ev
ery
-
thing has be
come the Self
, then what should one see and through
what?ﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
.5.15). T
he know
l
edge of Brah
man is an
t
ag
o
nis
tic
to all ac
tions. Hence it can
not be sub
sid
iary to work. It
 is in
de
pend
ent.
D$Üd©aoV
–gw M
 eãXo {h
Urdhv
aret
assu cha sabde hi
III
.4.17 (442)
And (kn
owledge belongs
) to t
hose who obs
erve perpetual
celibacy, because
 in script
ure (that st
age of life is mentioned).
Urdhv
aret
assu:
 to those who observe perpetual celibacy
, in those
st
ages of life where the sex
ual energy has an upward flow;
Cha:
 and;
Sabde:
 in the Srut
i;
 Hi:
 because.
The
pre vi ous
ar gu ment
is
con tin ued.
Fur
ther the Srut
i de
clares Jnana in re
la
tion to S
annyasins.
Knowl
edge is said to be in Sanny
asins. They have not
 to do any K
ar
-
mas. Such Sanny
asa can be t
aken even with
out go
ing through the
house holder
™
s
life.
Scrip
ture shows that knowl
edge is valid also for t
he st
ages of life
for which per
pet
ual cel
i
bacy is pre
scribed. Now in their case knowl
-
edge can
not be sub
or
di
nate to work, be
cause work is
 ab
sent, be
-
cause the works pre
scribed by V
edas such as the Agnihotra are not
per
formed by men who hav
e reached those st
ages. T
o a Sannyasin
there is no work pre
scribed ex
cept en
quiry of B
rah
man and med
i
t
a
-
tion on the S
u
preme Self.
 So how can knowl
edge be sub
or
di
nate to
work?
W
e find from t
he Sruti t
ext
s that there is a st
age of life call
ed
Sannyasa. ﬁThere are three branches of duty
ﬂ (Chh. Up. II.
23.1).
ﬁThose who in the for
est prac
tise fait
h and aus
ter
ityﬂ (Chh. Up.
V
.10.1). ﬁThose who prac
tise pen
ance and faith in t
he for
estﬂ (Mun.
Up. I.10.
1
1). ﬁWish
ing for that
 world only
, men
di
cant
s re
nounce their
homes and wan
der forthﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
.4.22). ﬁLet
 him wan
der forth at
once from the st
ate of student
ship.ﬂ ﬁAll these at

tain to the worlds of
the vir
tu
ous; but only
 one who is fi
nally es
t
ab
lished in Brah
man, at
-
t
ains im
mor
t
al
ity
.ﬂ (Chh. Up. II
.23.1-2).
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
442

Ev
ery
one can t
ake to this lif
e, with
out be
ing a house
holder etc.
This
in di cates
the
in de pend ence
of
knowl edge.
Thus, the the
ory of Jaimini t
hat Knowl
edge is sub
or
di
nate to
Karma has no legs to st
and upon, and has been re
futed.
Paramarsadh
ikaranam: T
opic 2 (Sutras 18-20)
Sannyasa is prescribed by the scr
iptures
nam_eª O¡{_{ZaMmoXZm Mm
&
Paramarsam
 jaim
iniracho
dana chap
av
adati hi
III
.4.18 (443)
Jaim
ini (c
ons
ide
rs that s
crip
tural
 tex
ts me
ntion
ing tho
se
stages of life in whi
ch celibacy is obligatory,
 contain) a
refe
ren
ce
 (onl
y to tho
se
 stage
s; the
y are
 not in
junc
tions
;
because
 other (script
ural texts) condemn (those stages).
Paramarsam
:
 a p
assing allusion, mere reference;
Jaiminih
:
 Jaimini;
Achodana:
 there is no clear injunction;
Cha:
 and;
Ap
av
adati:
condemns;
Hi:
 because, clearly
, cert
ainly
.
An ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 17 is raised.
Jaimini says that
 in the tex
t quoted in t
he last Su
tra (Chh. Up.
II.
23.1), there is no word in
di
cat
ing that S
annyasa is en
joined on man.
It is a mere ref
er
ence only but not
 an in
junc
tion.
The Brihadaranyaka tex
t quoted in t
he last Su
tra de
clares that
some per
sons do like Sannyasa. Srut
i here makes a st
ate
ment of
fact. I
t does not en
join Sannyasa.
Thus there is no di
rect Sruti f
or Sannyasa though t
here are
Smritis and A
chara (us
age). But i
f we say that
 there is no Sruti f
or the
house
holder
™
s life, he (Jaimini) would re
ply that
 Kar
mas like
Agnihotra are en
joined by Srut
i.
Fur
ther
, the t
ext here glo
ri
fies stead
fast
ness in Brah
man. ﬁBut
only one who is firmly
 es
t
ab
lished in Brah
man at
t
ains Im
mor
t
al
ity
.ﬂ
Sac
ri
fice, study
, char
ity
, aus
ter
ity
, student
ship and life-long con
ti
-
nence be
stow the fruit
 of ob
t
ain
ing heaven. B
ut Im
mor
t
al
ity i
s at
t
ained
only by one who is f
irmly es
t
ab
lished in Brah
man.
More
over
, there are other Srut
i p
as
sages which con
demn
Sannyasa. ﬁHav
ing brought to y
our teacher his proper re
ward, do not
cut of
f the line of
 chil
drenﬂ (T
ait. Up.
 I.1
1.1). ﬁT
o him who is with
out a
son this world does not be
long; all beast
s even know thatﬂ (T
ait. B
r
.
VII.13.1
2).
AZw
îR>
o`§ ~
mXam`U– gmå`l
wVo
Anushthey
am baadaray
anah samy
asruteh
III
.4.19 (444)
Baadarayana (holds t
hat San
nyasa) also must be gone
throu
gh, be
cau
se
 the
 scrip
tural
 tex
t (qu
ote
d) re
fers
 eq
ual
ly to
all the four Asram
as or stages of lif
e.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
443

Anushtheyam
:
 should be practised;
Baadaray
anah:
 Baadarayana,
the author of t
he Sutras;
Samy
asruteh:
 for the scriptural tex
t refers
equally t
o all the four A
sramas.
The ob
jec
tion raised in Su
tra 18 is re
futed.
In the t
ext quot
ed sac
ri
fice re
fers to the house
holder
™
s life, aus
-
ter
ity t
o V
anaprastha, student
ship to Brahmacharya,
 and one who is
firmly
 es
t
ab
lished in Brah
man to Sanny
asa. So the t
ext re
fers equally
to all the f
our st
ages of life.
 The text
 that re
lates to the f
irst three
st
ages re
fers to what is en
joined else
where. So also does the tex
t that

re
lates to Sanny
asa.
There
fore, Sanny
asa also is en
joined and must be gone
through by all.
Baadarayana holds that
 Sannyasa is an ap
pro
pri
ate Asrama
like Grihastha Asrama (house
holder
™
s life), be
cause both are re
ferred
to in Srut
i. The word T
ap
as re
fers to a dif

fer ent Asrama in which the
pre dom i nant
fac tor
is
T
ap
as.
{d{Y
dm© Yma
V
idhirv
a dharanavat
III
.4.20 (445)
Or rather (there
 is an) injunction (in this tex
t) as in the case
 of
carryi
ng (of t
he sacrificial w
ood).
V
idhih:
 injunction;
Va
:
 or rather;
Dharanav
at:
 as in the case of
carry
ing (of the sacrificial wood).
The ar
gu
ment com
menced in Su
tra 19 to re
fute t
he ob
jec
tion
raised in Su
tra 18 is con
tin
ued.
This Su
tra now tries to es
t
ab
lish that t
here is an in
junc
tion about
Sannyasa in th
e Chhandogya text
 quoted. The p
as
sage is rather to
be un
der
stood as con
t
ain
ing an in
junc
tion, not
 a mere ref
er
ence.
The case is anal
o
gous to that of
 ‚car
ry
ing™. There is a scrip
tural
text
 re
lat
ing to the A
gnihotra which forms p
art of the M
ahapitriyaj
na
which is per
formed for the m
anes. ﬁLet him ap
proach car
ry
ing the
sac
ri
fi
cial wood be
low the la
dle hold
ing the of

fer ing; for abov
e he car
-
ries it to the gods.
ﬂ Jaimini in
ter
pret
s the last clause as an in
junc
tion
al
though there is no word in it t
o that ef

fect, for such an in
junc
tion is
no
where else to be found in the scrip
tures. Fol
low
ing this ar
gu
ment,
this Su
tra de
clares that there is an in
junc
tion as re
gards Sannyasa
and not a mere ref
er
ence in Chh. Up. II
.23.1,
 as it is not en
joined any
-
where else.
Even if
 in the Srut
i there is only A
nuvada (dec
la
ra
tion) of ot
her
Asramas, the Purv
amimamsika rules show that we must in
fer a V
idhi
(in
junc
tion) of S
annyasa from the por
tion: ﬁ
Brahma-
samstho™
mrit
atvamet
i
ﬂ, be
cause there is no other sep
a
rate in
junc
tion
just as there is no com
mand that t
he Samit should be kept
 on the up
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
444

per por
tion of t
he Sruk and yet t
he Purvamim
amsa says that such
com
mand should be in
ferred.
In the pres
ent case also the same rule of con
struc
tion should be
ap
plied. Fur
ther
, even if
 there is only a dec
la
ra
tion and not an in
junc
-
tion as re
gards the other Asramas, we must in
fer an in
junc
tion about
Sannyasa as it has been spe
cially glo
ri
fied.
Fur
ther there are Sruti p
as
sages which di
rectly en
join
Sannyasa, ﬁOr else he may
 wan
der forth from t
he stu
dent™
s life, or
from the house, or f
rom the for
estﬂ (Jabala Upanishad 4). Hence the
ex
is
tence of Sanny
asa Asrama is un
de
ni
able.
The word T
ap
as in the Sruti re
fers to V
anaprastha whereas the
spe
ci
al
ity of
 Sannyasa is con
trol of t
he senses (Indriya Samyam
a).
The Sruti dif

fer en
ti
ates Sannyasa and says that
 those be
long
ing to
the other three A
sramas go to the Puny
a Lokas whereas the
Sannyasin
at t
ains
Amrit
atva
(Im mor t
al ity
).
Jaimini him
self says that ev
en glo
ri
fi
ca
tion must be in a com
pli
-
men
t
ary re
la
tion to an in
junc
tion. I
n the tex
t, stead
fast de
vo
tion to
Brahma is em
ployed. Hence it has an in
junc
tive v
alue. ﬁBrahma
Samsthaﬂ means med
i
t
at
ing al
ways on Brah
man. It
 is a st
ate of be
ing
grounded in Brah
man to the ex

clu sion of all other ac
tiv
i
ties. In t
he
case of other Asramas: that
 is not pos
si
ble as they hav
e their own
Kar
mas. But i
t is pos
si
ble to Sanny
asins as they have aban
doned
Kar
mas. Their Sama (se
ren
ity) and Dama (self-re
straint) help them
to
wards it and are not ob
st
a
cles.
Sannyasa is not pre
scribed only for those who are blind, lam
e,
etc., and who are, t
here
fore, not f
it for per
form
ing rit
u
als. Sannyasa is
a means for the reali
sa
tion of B
rah
man. It
 must be t
aken in a reg
u
lar
pre
scribed man
ner
. The Sruti
 de
clares, ﬁThe wan
der
ing men
di
cant,
with or
ange-col
oured robe, shaven, wife
less, pure, guile
less, liv
ing
on alms, ac
cept
ing no gif
t
s, qual
i
fies him
self for the reali
sa
tion of
Brah
manﬂ (Jabali Sruti).
There
fore, Sanny
asa is pre
scribed by the scrip
tures. As knowl
-
edge is en
joined on Sanny
asins, it is in
de
pend
ent of works.
S
tutimatradhi
karanam: T
opic 3 (Sutras 21-22)
Scriptural text
s as in Chh. Up. I.1.
3. which refer to V
idyas are not
mere praises but them
selves enjoin the medi
t
ations
ñVw{
V_mÌ_w
nmXmZm{X
{V Mo
Þmnyd©Ë
S
tutimatramup
adanaditi chennapurvatv
at
III
.4.21 (446)
If it be said that (texts such as the one about the Udgitha are)
me
re g
lorifi
catio
ns o
n acc
ou
nt of the
ir re
fere
nce
 (to p
arts o
f
sacrifices), (
we say) not so, on account of t
he newness (o
f what
they teach, if
 viewed as injunctions).
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
445

S
tutim
atram
:
 mere praise;
Up
adanat:
 on account of their reference
(to p
art
s of sacrificial act
s);
Iti:
 thus, so;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
 not so;
Apurv
atv
at:
 on account of it
s newness. (
Iti ch
et:
 if it be said).
This Su
tra con
sist
s ot two p
art
s, namely an ob
jec
tion and it
s re
-
ply
. The ob
jec
tion por
tion is: ‚
S
tutim
atramup
adanaditi chet
™, and the
re
ply por
tion is: ‚
Na apurvatvat
™.
ﬁThat Udgitha (OM) is the best of
 all es
sences, the high
est,
hold
ing the high
est place, the eight
hﬂ (Chh. Up. I.1.
3). ﬁThis earth is
the Rik, the f
ire is Samanﬂ (Chh. Up. I.
6.1). ﬁThis world in truth i
s that
piled up fire-al
t
arﬂ (Sat. Br
. X.
1.2.2). ﬁThat
 hymn is truly
 that earthﬂ
(Ait. Ar
. II.1.2.1
).
A
 doubt arises whether these p
as
sages are meant to glo
rify t
he
Udgitha or to en
join de
vout med
i
t
a
tions.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that these are mere praise and no
in
junc
tion to med
i
t
ate on ‚OM™
 and so on. These p
as
sages are anal
o
-
gous to p
as
sages such as
 ﬁThis earth is the la
dleﬂ. ﬁThe sun is the tor
-
toise.ﬂ ﬁThe heav
enly world is the Ahav
aniyaﬂ which sim
ply glo
rify t
he
la
dle and so on.
The lat
ter half of
 the pres
ent Su
tra re
futes the v
iew of the op
po
-
nent.
In the S
ruti p
as
sage ﬁThat Udgitha (OM) is the best es
sence of
the es
sencesﬂ etc., the de
scrip
tion is not mere praise but i
s a V
idhi,
and it tell
s us some
thing which is new
.
The anal
ogy is in
cor
rect. Glorifi
catory p
as
sages are of use in so
far
as
en ter ing
into
a
com pli men t
ary
re la tion
to
in junc tive
p
as sages,
but the p
as
sages un
der dis
cus
sion are not ca
p
a
ble of en
ter
ing into
such a re
la
tion to t
he Udgitha and so on which are en
joined in al
to
-
gether dif

fer ent places of the V
edas and would be pur
pose
less as far
as the glo
ri
fi
ca
tion is con
cerned. Pas
sages such as
 ﬁThis earth is the
la
dleﬂ are not anal
o
gous be
cause they st
and in prox
im
ity t
o in
junc
tive
p
as
sages, and so they can be t
aken as praise.
There
fore, the t
ext
s such as those un
der dis
cus
sion have an in
-
junc
tive pur
pose. On ac
count of the new
ness, these are not mere
praise but an in
junc
tion.
^mdeãX
Bhav
asabdaccha
III
.4.22 (447)
And t
here being w
ords expressi
ve of in
junct
ion.
Bhav
asabaat:
 from words indicative of
 existence of inj
unction in
Sruti
;
Cha:
 and, also, moreov
er
.
The ar
gu
ment com
menced in Su
tra 21 is con
cluded.
ﬁLet one med
i
t
ate on OM or the Udgit
haﬂ (Chh. Up. I.1.
1). W
e
have a very
 clear in
junc
tion to med
i
t
ate on OM in t
his p
as
sage. On the
face of this we can
not in
ter
pret the tex
t quoted in t
he last Su
tra as
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
446

mere praise of OM. The ex

pres sion ﬁThis is the best of all t
he es
-
sencesﬂ in the pas
sage cited un
der the pre
ced
ing Su
tra is not a mere
glorificatory
 ex
pres
sion, but it
 amount
s to an in
junc
tion for t
he Udgitha
med i t
a tion.
Paripl
av
adhikaranam
: T
opic 4 (Sutras 23-24)
The stories ment
ioned in the Up
anishads do not serve the purpose
of Pariplavas and so do not form
 p
art of the rit
ualistic act
s.
They are meant t
o euloisge the V
idya t
aught in them
n[aßb
dmWm© B{
V MoÞ {
deo{fV
Paripl
av
artha iti chenna v
iseshit
atv
at
III
.4.23 (448)
I
f it be
 said
 (that the
 stori
es
 told
 in the
 Upa
nisha
ds)
 are
 for the
purpose
 of Pariplava (only,
 we say) not so, because
 (certain
stor
ies above) ar
e specified (by
 the S
rut
i for
 thi
s purpos
e).
Paripl
av
arthah:
 for the purpose of Paripl
avas;
Iti:
 so;
Chet:
 if;
Na:
not so;
V
iseshit
atv
at:
 because of specification, on account of
(cert
ain stories alone) being specified. (
Iti ch
et:
 if it be said.
)
The pur
pose of nar
ra
tion of sto
ries in the Up
anishads is stat
ed
in this Su
tra and in the nex
t one.
This Su
tra con
sist
s of two p
art
s namely
, an ob
jec
tion and it
s re
-
ply
. The ob
jec
tion por
tion is ‚
Pariplavartha iti
 chet
™. And t
he re
ply is:
‚
Na viseshit
atvat
™.
In the A
svamedha sac
ri
fice the priest re
cites sto
ries to the king
who per
forms the Asv
amedha sac
ri
fice, and his rel
a
tives at
 in
ter
vals
dur
ing the per
for
mance of the sac
ri
fice. These are known as
Pariplavas and form
 p
art of the rit

u al
is
tic act
s.
The ques
tion is whether the sto
ries of the Up
anishads such as
those re
lat
ing to Y
ajnavalkya and M
aitreyi (B
ri. Up. IV
.5.1),
Prat
ardana (Kau. Up. II
I.1), Janasruti (Chh. Up.
 IV
.1.1), and so on
also serve this pur
pose in which case they be
come p
art of the rit
es,
and the whole of Jnana Kanda be
comes sub
or
di
nate to K
arma
Kanda.
The Purvap
akshin holds that those sto
ries of the Up
anishads
serve the pur
pose of Pariplava,
 be
cause they are sto
ries like oth
ers
and be
cause the tell
ing of sto
ries is en
joined for the P
ariplava. From
this it f
ol
lows that the Up
anishadic sto
ries and V
edant
a text
s do not
chiefly aim
 at knowl
edge, be
cause like Mantras they st
and in a com
-
pli men t
ary
re la tion
to
sac ri fi cial
act
s.
VWm M¡
H$dm−`Vmo
n~ÝYmV²
T
atha chaikav
aky
atop
abandhat
III
.4.24 (449)
And
 so (
the
y are
 me
ant to i
llus
trate
 the
 ne
are
st Vid
yas)
, be
ing
conne
cted
 as one
 cohe
rent whole
.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
447

T
atha:
 so, similarly;
Cha:
 and;
Ekav
aky
atop
abandhat:
 being
connected as one whole. (
Ekav
aky
a:
 unity of
 construction or of
st
atement
s or that of sense;
Up
abandhat:
 because of connection.)
The dis
cus
sion com
menced in Su
tra 23 is con
cluded here.
There
fore, it
 is for the pur
pose of praise of V
idya be
cause only
then there would be unit
y of idea i
n the con
text
. Only such a vi
ew will
lead to har
mony of t
he con
text
.
The sto
ries of the Up
anishads are to be re
garded as es
sen
tial
p
art
s of Brahma V
idya. They
 are in
tro
duced only to f
a
cil
i
t
ate an in
tel
li
-
gent group
ing of the sub
ject. The sto
ries are in
tended to in
tro
duce the
V
idyas. The story
 form cre
ates more at
ten
tion and in
ter
est on the p
art
of the as
pi
rant. Their ob
ject is to make it clear t
o our un
der
st
and
ing in
a con
crete form, t
he V
idyas t
aught in other por
tions of the
Up
anishads in the ab
stract.
Why do we say so?
Ekavakyatop
abandhat
. Be
cause of their
syn
t
ac
ti
cal con
nec
tion with t
he V
idyas t
aught in the suc
ceed
ing p
as
-
sages.
Thus in the story be
gin
ning with ﬁY
ajnavalkya had t
wo wivesﬂ,
etc., we f
ind im
me
di
ately f
ol
low
ing in that v
ery sec
tion, t
he V
idya
t
aught about t
he At
man in these words ﬁThe At
man is ver
ily t
o be
seen, to be heard of,
 to be med
i
t
ated upon.ﬂ As t
hese sto
ries are im
-
me
di
ately pre
ceded or suc
ceeded by in
struc
tions about Brah
man, we
in
fer that t
hey are meant t
o glo
rify t
he V
idyas and are not Pariplav
a
sto
ries. The sto
ries are told in or
der to fa
cil
i
t
ate the un
der
st
and
ing of
these ab
struse sub
ject
s and they are em
i
nently f
it
ted to sub
serve that
pur pose.
Agnindhanady
adhikaranam: T
opic 5
Sannyasins need not observe ritualistic act
s,
as Brahma V
idya or knowledge serves
 their purpose
AV Ed Mm½
ZrÝYZmÚ
At
a ev
a chagnindh
anady
anapeksha
III
.4.25 (450)
And
, the
refo
re,
 the
re i
s no
 ne
ce
ssity
 of the
 lighti
ng of th
e fi
re
and so on
.
At
a ev
a:
therefore, only
, for thi
s reason only;
Cha:
 and, also;
Agni:
fire
;
Indhanadi:
 fire-wood, and so on, kindling f
ire and performing
sacrif
ices,
 etc.
;
Anapeksha:
 no need, has not to be depended upon.
(
Agni-indhanadi-anapeksha:
 no necessity of light
ing fires, etc.
)
This Su
tra st
ates that t
he seeker of Brah
man may dis
pense with
sac r
i fi cial
rites.
Brahma V
idya has no need for fi
re, fire-wood, etc.
 It is by
 it

selfthe cause of eman
ci
p
a
tion.
In Su
tra III
.4.1 it
 was stat
ed that t
he knowl
edge of Brah
man re
-
sult
s in the at
t
ain
ment of t
he high
est Purushartha or goal of lif
e. The
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
448

ex pres sion
ﬁ
At
a Eva
ﬂ (for this rea
son alone) must be viewed as t
ak
ing
up Su
tra III
.4.1 be
cause thus a sat
is
fa
c
tory sense is es
t
ab
lished. For
this very same rea
son, i.e.,
 be
cause knowl
edge serves the pur
pose
of Sanny
asins, the light

ing of the sac ri
fi
cial fire and sim
i
lar works
which are en
joined on the house
hold
ers, etc., need not
 be ob
served
by them.
Thus the Sutrakara sums up the re
sult of thi
s first Adhikarana,
in
tend
ing to make some fur
ther re
marks.
As a Sannyasin,
 de
voted t
o the med
i
t
a
tion on Brah
man is st
ated
in Sruti t
o at
t
ain im
mor
t
al
ity and not
 any of t
he re
wards aris
ing from
sac
ri
fi
cial rites, he is not re
quired to have re
course to sac
ri
fi
cial works
to be per
formed with f
ire, fire-wood and so on. Chhandogya
Up
anishad de
clares, ﬁ
Brahmasam
stho™
amrit
a tvamet
i
ŠOne de
voted
to Brah
man at
t
ains Im
mor
t
al
ityﬂ (Chh. Up. I
I.23.
1).
The the
ory or doc
trine that
 knowl
edge and work must be com
-
bined in or
der to pro
duce Mukti or sal
va
tion is hereby set aside.
Brahma V
idya or Knowl
edge of Brah
man is suf

fi cient for that
 pur
pose.
Sarv
apekshadhikaranam
: T
opic 6 (Sutras 26-27)
Works pres
cribed by the scriptures are means
to the at
t
ainment
 of knowledge
gdm
©nojm
 M `km{
X lwVoaœ
&
Sarv
apeksha cha y
ajnadi sru
terasv
av
at
III
.4.26 (451)
And there is the nece
ssity of al
l works because
 the scriptures
prescribe sacrifices, etc., (as means to the att
ainment of
knowledge
) eve
n as the horse (is used to draw a chariot,
 and
not f
or ploug
hin
g).
Sarv
apeksha:
 there is the necessity of
 all works;
Cha:
 and;
Y
ajnadisru
teh:
 for the scriptures prescribe sacrifices, etc., (as
means to knowledge);
Asv
av
at:
 like a horse, as in the case of the
horse.
The Su
tra says that sac
ri
fi
cial works and the like are nec
es
sary
for orig
i
na
tion of knowl
edge of Brah
man.
W
e may con
clude from the pre
vi
ous Su
tra that works are al
to
-
gether use
less.
This Su
tra says that al
l these works are use
ful for orig
i
na
tion of
knowl
edge. Ev
en the scrip
tures pre
scribe them as they serve an in
di
-
rect means to the at
t
ain
ment of knowl
edge. Brihad
aranyaka
Up
anishad de
clares, ﬁBrahmanas seek to know Brah
man by the
study of t
he V
edas, by scrip
tures, gif
t
s, pen
ance and re
nun
ci
a
tionﬂ
(Bri. Up. I
V
.4.22). S
im
i
larly the p
as
sage, ﬁwhat peo
ple call sac
ri
fice
that is re
ally Brahm
acharyaﬂ (Chh. Up. VII
I.5.
1), by con
nect
ing sac
ri
-
fices and so on with Bra
hmacharya which is a means of knowl
edge,
in
ti
mates that sac
ri
fices, etc.,
 also are means of knowl
edge. Again
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
449

the p
as
sage ﬁThat word which all the V
edas re
cord, which all pen
-
ances pro
claim, de
sir
ing which men live as re
li
gious stu
dent
s, that
word I tell t
hee briefly
, it is OMﬂ (K
atha Up. I.
2.15), like
wise in
ti
mates
that t
he works en
joined on the Asramas are means of knowl
edge.
When knowl
edge once is at
t
ained re
quires no help from ex
ter
-
nal works for the pro
duc
tion of t
his re
sult namely
, Lib
er
a
tion. The
case is anal
o
gous to a horse, whose help is re
quired un
til the pl
ace of
des
ti
na
tion is reached but it m
ay be dis
pensed with af

ter the jour ney
has been ac
com
plished.
When Atma-Jnana is at
t
ained it does not need any
 other ac
ces
-
sory to bring about sal
va
tion, but
 Karma is needed for At
ma-Jnana.
Just as a horse is not used to drag a plough but is used to drag a car
,
so the Asrama Kar
mas are not needed for the f
ru
ition of Jnana but
 are
needed for Jnana.
The fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion re
sult
s only from knowl
edge of Brah
man
and not from work. W
ork pu
ri
fies the mind and knowl
edge dawns in a
pure mind.
Hence works
 are use
ful as they
 are an in
di
rect means to knowl
-
edge.
If knowl
edge be orig
i
nated by sac
ri
fices, gif
t
s, pen
ance and fast
-
ing, what is the ne
ces
sity of
 other qual
i
fi
ca
tions like Sama (se
ren
ity)
and Dama (self-re
straint)? T
o this the au
thor re
plies in the next
 Su
tra.
e_X_mÚwno
V– ñ`mÎmWm{n Vw V{Û
YoñVX
ﬁV`m
Vofm_
dí`mZw
îR>
o`ËdmV²
Samadam
ady
upet
ah sy
at t
athapi tu t
adv
idhest
adangat
ay
a
 teshamav
asy
anushthey
atv
at
III
.4.27 (452)
But all the
 same
 (ev
en tho
ugh the
re is no
 injunctio
n to do
sacrifici
al acts to at
tain knowledge in the Brihadaran
yaka text)
one must posse
ss serenity, self-contr
ol and the like, as these
are enjoi
ned as auxi
liar
ies to kn
owledge an
d ther
efore hav
e
neces
sarily t
o be p
ractised.
Samadam
ady
upet
ah sy
at:
 one must possess serenity
, self-control
and the like;
T
athapi:
 still, al
l the same, ev
en if it be so;

Tu
:

verily;
T
advi
dheh:
 as they are enjoined;
 T
adangat
ay
a:
 on account of their
being a p
art, as help
s to knowledge;
T
esham:
 their;
A
v
asy
anushthey
atv
at:
 because it being necessary to be practised.
(
A
v
asy
a:
 necessarily;
Anushtheyatv
at:
 because they must be
practised.)
Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad de
clares, ﬁThe Brahmanas seek to
know Brah
man through the study
 of the V
edas, sac
ri
fices, char
ity
,ﬂ
etc. (Bri.
 Up. IV
.4.22). I
n this p
as
sage there is no word to in
di
cate that
sac
ri
fice is en
joined on one who want
s to know Brah
man.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
450

So the P
urvap
akshin main
t
ains that there is no ne
ces
sity at
 all
for work for one who as
pires af

ter knowl edge.
This pres
ent Su
tra says that ev
en should this be so. The seeker
for knowl
edge must pos
sess calm
ness of mind, must sub
due his
senses and so on; be
cause all this is en
joined as a means of knowl
-
edge in the fol
low
ing scrip
tural p
as
sage, ﬁThere he who knows this,
hav
ing be
come calm, sub
dued, sat
is
fied, p
a
tient and col
lected sees
Self in
 Selfﬂ
 (Bri
. Up. IV
.4.23
).
What is en
joined must nec
es
sar
ily be car
ried out. The in
tro
duc
-
tory word ‚there
fore™
 (T
asmat) which ex
presses the praise of the sub
-
ject un
der dis
cus
sion makes us un
der
st
and that t
he p
as
sage has an
in
junc
tive char
ac
ter
, be
cause if there were no in
junc
tion, t
he praise
would be mean
ing
less.
Fur
ther the Madhy
andina Sruti uses the word ﬁp
asyetﬂ let hi
m
see and not ‚he sees™. Hence calm
ness of mind, etc.
, are re
quired
even if sac
ri
fices, etc.,
 should not be re
quired.
As these qual
i
ties are en
joined, they
 are nec
es
sar
ily t
o be prac
-
tised. Sam
a, Dama etc.,
 are prox
i
mate or di
rect means of knowl
edge
(Ant
aranga-Sadhana). Y
ajnas or sac
ri
fices, etc.,
 are re
mote or in
di
-
rect means of knowl
edge (Bahiranga-Sadhana).
The word ‚Adi™
 (and the rest) men
tioned in the S
u
tra, in
di
cates
that t
he as
pi
rant af

ter Brahma Vidya must pos
sess all these qual
i
fi
ca
-
tions
of
truth ful
 ness,
gen er os ity
,
as cet i cism,
cel i bacy
,
in dif
 fer ence
to
worldly
ob ject
s,
tol er ance,
en dur ance,
faith,

equi lib rium,
com p
as sion
etc.
Sarv
annanumaty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 7 (Sutras 28-31)
Food-restrictions may be given up only when life i
s in danger
gdm©ÞmZw
_{Vü
 àmUmË``o
 VÔe©ZmV
Sarv
annanumati
scha pranaty
ay
e t
addarsanat
III
.4.28 (453)
Only when life
 is in dange
r (there is) p
ermissio
n to take
 all food
(i.e
., take
 foo
d ind
iscri
mina
tel
y) be
cau
se
 the
 Sruti d
ec
lare
s
that.
Sarv
annanumatih:
 permission to t
ake all sort
s of food;
Cha:
only;
Prana ty
ay
e:
 when life is in danger;
T
addarsanat:
 because the Sruti
declares that.
This and the sub
se
quent three Sut
ras in
di
cate what kind of food
is to be t
aken.
Chhandogya Up
anishad de
clares, ﬁFor one who knows this,
there is noth
ing that is not
 foodﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.2.1). T
he ques
tion is if
such Sarvannanumati (de
scrip
tion of all
 as his food) is a V
idhi or
V
idhyanga or a Sruti
 (praise).
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
451

The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that it
 is en
joined on one who med
-
i
t
ates on Prana on ac
count of the new
ness of the st
ate
ment. I
t has an
in
junc
tive v
alue, as such st
ate
ment is not f
ound any
where else.
The Su
tra re
futes it and de
clares that it is not
 an in
jun
c
tion, but
only a st
ate
ment of f
act. W
e are not jus
ti
fied in as
sum
ing an in
junc
-
tion, where the i
dea of an in
junc
tion does not arise. I
t is not V
idhi or in
-
junc
tion as no man
da
tory words are found. Can a man eat
 and di
gest
all things? No. P
ro
hi
b
ited food may
 be eaten only when li
fe is in dan
-
ger
, when one is dy
ing of hun
ger as was done by the sage
Chakrayana (Ushasti) when he was
 dy
ing for want of f
ood. Sruti
 de
-
clares this.
Sage Ushasti was dy
ing of hun
ger on ac
count of fam
ine. He ate
the beans half-eaten by
 a keeper of el
e
phant
s but re
fused to drink
what had been of

fered by the lat
ter on the ground of it
s be
ing a mere
leav
ing. The sage jus
ti
fied his con
duct by say
ing, ﬁI would not
 have
lived,
 if I had not
 eaten the beans, but
 wa
ter I can do with
out at pres
-
ent. I
 can drink wa
ter wher
ever I like.
ﬂ
From this it f
ol
lows, that t
he p
as
sage ﬁFor one who knows
 thisﬂ
etc., is an A
rthavada.
A~mY
Abadhaccha
III
.4.29 (454)
And becau
se (thus) (the script
ural stat
eme
nts wi
th respect to
food) a
re not
 cont
radi
cted.
Abadhat:
 becausc of a non-contradiction, as there is no contrary
st
ate
ment anywhere in S
ruti;
Cha:
 and, also, moreov
er
, on account of
non-sublation.
The topic com
menced in Su
tra 28 is con
tin
ued.
And thus those scrip
tural p
as
sages which dis
tin
guish law
ful and
un
law
ful food such as ﬁWhen the food is pure the whole na
ture be
-
comes pureﬂ (Chh. Up. VII.
26.2) are non-sub
lat
ed. The st
ate
ment of
the Chhandogya Up
anishad will not be con
tra
dicted only if
 the ex
pla
-
na
tion giv
en is t
aken, and not oth
er
wise.
Only then ot
her Srutis will have un
hin
dered ap
pli
ca
tions. Only
 in
this view will t
he Sruti ﬁWhen the f
ood is pure the mind be
comes pureﬂ
have
ap pli ca tion.
Clean food should gen
er
ally be t
aken as there is no con
trary
st
ate
ment any
where in Sruti to t
he pu
ri
fy
ing ef

fect of clean food.
There is no
where any p
as
sage in Sruti, con
tra
dict
ing the p
as
sage of
the Chhandogya Srut
i which de
clares that clean food makes our na
-
ture pure.
Un
law
ful food as a gen
eral rule clogs the un
der
st
and
ing and ob
-
struct
s the clear works of the in
tel
lect. But
 in the case of the sage,
whose heart is al
ways pure and in
tel
lect keen, the t
ak
ing of such food
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
452

does not ob
struct the work
ing of his brain, and his knowl
edge re
mains
as pure as ever
.
Api cha smary
ate
III
.4.30 (455)
And
 more
ove
r the
 Smritis
 say s
o.
Api:
 also;
Cha:
 moreover;
Smary
ate:
 the Smrit
i says so, it is seen in
the Smritis, it is pres
cribed
 by Smriti.
The pre
vi
ous topic is con
tin
ued.
Smriti al
so st
ates that when lif
e is in dan
ger both he who has
knowl
edge and he who has not can t
ake any food. ﬁHe who eat
s food
pro
cured from any
where when life is in dan
ger
, is not t
ainted by sin,
as a lo
tus leaf is not wet

ted by wa ter
.ﬂ
On the con
trary many
 p
as
sages teach that un
law
ful food is t
o be
avoided. ﬁThe B
rahmana must per
ma
nently f
orego in
tox
i
cat
ing li
-
quorﬂ. ﬁLet them pour boil
ing spir
it
s down the throat of a B
rahmana
who drinks spir
it
sﬂ. ﬁS
pirit-drink
ing worms grow in the mouth of t
he
spirit-drink
ing man, be
cause he en
joys what is un
law
ful.ﬂ
From this it i
s in
ferred that gen
er
ally clean food i
s to be t
aken ex
-
cept in the case of ex
treme st
ar
va
tion or in tim
es of dis
tress only
.
When the Up
anishad says that the sage may
 eat all kinds of
food, it
 must be in
ter
preted as mean
ing that he m
ay eat all
 kinds of
food, in t
imes of dis
tress only
. The tex
t of t
he Up
anishad should not be
con
strued as an in
junc
tion in fa
vour of eat
ing un
law
ful food.
eãXü
mVmo@H
$m_H
Sabdaschato™kam
akare
III
.4.31 (456)
And he
nce
 the sc
ripture
 prohib
iting lice
nse
.
Sabdah:
 the scriptural p
assage;
Cha:
 and;
At
ah:
 hence;
Akamakare:
 to prevent undue l
icense, prohibiting license, as t
o
non-proceeding according to liking.
The pre
vi
ous topic is dis
cussed and con
cluded here.
There are scrip
tural p
as
sages which pro
hibit one from do
ing ev
-
ery
thing just as he pleases, which for
bid man to t
ake un
due lib
erty in
the mat
ter of food and drink.
 ﬁThere
fore a Brahmana must not
 drink li
-
quorﬂ (Kathaka Sam.).
 Per
fect spir
i
tual dis
ci
pline is ab
so
lutely
 nec
es
-
sary for con
trol
ling the mind and t
he senses and at
t
ain
ing knowl
edge
or Self-reali
sa
tion. S
uch Sruti tex
t
s are meant for this dis
ci
pline.
There
fore, it
 is es
t
ab
lished that t
he Sruti does not en
join on one
who med
i
t
ates on Prana to t
ake all kinds of food in
dis
crim
i
nately
.
As there is Sruti which f
or
bids li
cense in food and drink, the Srut
i
re
ferred to above in S
u
tra 28 is an Arthav
ada.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
453

The per
mis
sion to t
ake all kinds of food is con
fined to t
imes of
dis
tress only when one™
s life is in dan
ger
. One must strictl
y ob
serve
the in
junc
tions of the scrip
tures in or
di
nary times.
Asramakarmadhi
karanam: T
opic 8 (Sutras 32-35)
The duties of A
srama are to be perform
ed by
even one who is not desirous of salvation
{d{hVËdm…
ml_H
$_m©
V
ihit
atv
acchasramakarm
api
III
.4.32 (457)
And th
e duties of t
he Asram
as (ar
e to be perform
ed also by h
im
who does n
ot desir
e emancipat
ion)
 because they a
re enjoin
ed
(on him b
y the sc
ripture
s).
V
ihit
atvat:
 because they are enjoined;
Cha:
 and;
Asrama-karma:
duties of the A
srama, or order of life;

Api:
 also.
This and the sub
se
quent three Sut
ras show who ar
e re
quired to
per
form sac
ri
fices and do other pre
scribed du
ties.
Un
der Su
tra 26 it has been proved t
hat the works en
joined on
the Asramas are means to knowl
edge. The ques
tion arises now
, why
should one who does not de
sire knowl
edge or fi
nal re
lease do these
works?
The pres
ent Su
tra de
clares that since these du
ties are en
joined
on all who are in these Aramas or or
ders of life, v
iz., stu
dent-life,
house
holder
™
s life, and her
mit lif
e, one should ob
serve them.
In the case of a man who keep
s to the Asramas but does not
seek lib
er
a
tion, t
he Nityakarmas or the per
ma
nent oblig
a
tory du
ties
are in
dis
pens
able. The Srut
i says ﬁ
Y
avajjivam agnihot
ram juhot
i
Šas
long as his life last
s, one is to of

fer the Agnihotra.ﬂ
ghH$m[a
ËdoZ M
Sahakaritv
ena cha
III
.4.33 (458)
And (t
he duties ar
e to be perfor
med also) a
s a means
 to
knowl
edge.
Sahakaritv
ena:
 as, an auxiliary
, on account of cooperativ
eness, as
means to knowledge;
Cha:
 and.
The topic com
menced in Su
tra 32 is con
tin
ued.
The du
ties or works are help
ful in pro
duc
ing knowl
edge but not
it
s fruit, v
iz., eman
ci
p
a
tion. I
n the for
mer case the con
nec
tion be
-
tween Karma and fruit
 is in
sep
a
ra
ble (Nitya-Sam
yoga), but i
n the lat
-
ter case it is sep

a ra
ble (Anity
a-Samyoga). S
al
va
tion or Moksha is
at
t
ain
able only t
hrough knowl
edge of Brah
man or Brahma-Jnana.
W
orks (Kar
mas) are an aid to V
idya or knowl
edge of Self
. Those
who are de
sir
ous of eman
ci
p
a
tion should also per
form re
li
gious rites
as a help to en
light
en
ment. B
rahma V
idya is in
de
pend
ent in pro
duc
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
454

ing it
s re
sult
s. Karma is merely t
he hand
maid and co
op
er
a
tor of
V
idya. W
orks are means for the orig
i
na
tion of knowl
edge.
gd©Wm{n V
 Edmo^`{
bﬁmV²
Sarv
athapi t
a ev
obhay
alingat
III
.4.34 (459)
In all cases the same
 duties (have to be
 performed), because
 of
the
 twofo
ld i
ndic
atory
 mark
s.
Sarv
atha:
 in all cases, in every respect,
 under any circumst
ance;
Api:
 also;
T
a ev
a:
 the same duties (have t
o be performed);
Ubhay
alingat:
 because of the twofold i
nferential signs. (
Ta
:
 they
, the
sacrif
icial
 works;
Eva:
 cert
ainly
.)
The pre
vi
ous topic is con
tin
ued.
The word ‚Api™
 in the Su
tra has the force of ‚in
deed™, ‚ev
en™. The
words ‚Sarvatha Api
™
 are equal to ‚Sarv
atha Ev
a™.
The ques
tion arises whether the works per
formed as en
joined
on the Asramas, and those done as aux
il
ia
ries to knowl
edge are of
two
dif
 fer ent
kinds.
The pres
ent Su
tra de
clares that in ei
ther case, whether viewed
as du
ties in
cum
bent on the A
sramas or as co
op
er
at
ing with knowl
-
edge, the v
ery same Agnihot
ra and other du
ties have t
o be per
-
formed, as is seen from the S
ruti and the S
mriti tex
t
s.
Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad de
clares, ﬁHim the Brahmanas
seek to know through the study of
 the V
edas, sac
ri
fices etc.ﬂ (Bri. Up.
IV
.4.22). T
his text
 in
di
cates that sac
ri
fices etc., en
joined in
Karmakanda for dif

fer ent pur
poses are to be per
formed as means to
knowl edge
also.
The Smriti
 also says the same thing,
 ﬁHe who per
forms oblig
a
-
tory works with
out aim
ing at the f
ruit of workﬂ etc. (Git
a VI.
1). Those
very
oblig a tory
du ties
sub serve
the
orig i na tion
of
knowl edge
also.
More
over the Sm
riti p
as
sage ﬁHe who is qual
i
fied by t
hat
forty-eight
y purificat
ionsﬂ etc., re
fers to the purif
ications re
quired for
V
e
dic works, with a view to the orig
i
na
tion of knowl
edge in him who
has un
der
gone these purifications.
In ev
ery re
spect, whether viewed as du
ties in
cum
bent on a
house holder
or
as
prac tices
aux il iary

to
knowl edge
or
il lu mi na t
ion,
the sac
ri
fi
cial works, pre
scribed to be per
formed, are re
cog
nised to
be the same and not dif

fer ent, be
cause they are in
dis
pens
able req
ui
-
sites for both or
ders of life, as per
ma
nent du
ties for a house
holder
and as aux
il
iary aids to med
i
t
a
tion for a S
annyasi.
The Sutrakara, there
fore, rightl
y emphasises the non-dif

fer ence
of the works.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
455

Anabhibhav
am cha darsay
ati
III
.4.35 (460)
And th
e script
ure also decla
res (t
hat
 he who i
s endowed wit
h
Brahmachar
ya) is not overpowered (by passion, anger, etc.).
Anabhibhavam:
 not being overpowered;
Cha:
 and;
Darsay
ati:
 the
scrip
ture shows, the Srutis declare.
The pre
vi
ous topic is con
cluded here.
This Su
tra point
s out a fur
ther indicatory m
ark strength
en
ing the
con clu sion
that
works
co op er ate
to wards
knowl edge.
Scrip ture
also
de
clares that he who is en
dowed with such means as Brahmacharya,
etc.. is not
 over
pow
ered by such af

flic tions as p
as
sion, an
ger and the
like. ﬁFor that S
elf does not per
ish which one at
t
ains by
Brahmacharyaﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
II.
5.3). This p
as
sage in
di
cates that like
work, Brahmacharya, etc.
, are also means to knowl
edge. He who is
en
dowed with cel
i
bacy is not over
come by an
ger
, p
as
sion, jeal
ousy
,
ha
tred. His mind is ever peace
ful. A
s his mind is not ag
i
t
ated, he is
able to prac
tise deep and con
st
ant med
i
t
a
tion which leads to the at

-
t
ain
ment of knowl
edge.
It is thus a set
tled con
clu
sion that works are oblig
a
tory on the
Asramas and are also means to knowl
edge.
V
idhuradhi
karanam: T
opic 9 (Sutras 36-39)
Those who st
and midway bqualif
ied for knowledgeetween two
Asramas also are
AÝVam Mm
{n Vw VX²Ñï>o–
Ant
ara chapi tu t
addrishteh
III
.4.36 (461)
And (persons standing) i
n betwee
n (tw
o Asramas) are also
(qu
alifi
ed
 for k
nowl
ed
ge
), for tha
t is se
en
 (in sc
riptu
re)
.
Ant
ara:
 (persons standing) in bet
ween (two Asramas);
Cha:
 and;
Api
tu:
 also;
T
addrishteh:
 such cases
 being seen, (as it is seen in Sruti,
because it is so seen).
Wid
ow
ers who have not mar
ried again, per
sons who are too
poor to marry and those who are forced by cir
cum
st
ances not to en
ter
into wed
lock and have not re
nounced the world come un
der the pur
-
view of S
utras 36-39.
The word ‚tu™
 is em
ployed in or
der to re
fute t
he Purvap
aksha
that K
arma is nec
es
sary for the orig
i
na
tion of knowl
edge of Brah
man.
The force of the word ‚cha™
 is to show cer
t
ainty
.
A
 doubt arises whether per
sons in want who do not pos
sess
means, etc.,
 and, there
fore, are not able t
o en
ter into one or the ot
her
of the A
sramas, or who stand m
id
way be
tween two Asramas as for
ex
am
ple, a wid
ower
, are qual
i
fied for knowl
edge or not.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
456

The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that they
 are not qual
i
fied, as they
can
not per
form the works of any A
srama which are means to knowl
-
edge.
The pres
ent Su
tra de
clares that they
 are en
ti
tled, be
cause such
cases are seen from the scrip
tures. Scrip
tural p
as
sages de
clare that
per
sons of that class such as Raikva and Gargi, the daugh
ter of
V
achaknavi had the knowl
edge of Brah
man (Chh. Up. IV
.1 and Bri.
Up. III.6
.8).
V
idura, a man who had no wife,
 did not adopt t
he V
anaprastha
Asrama, and who had no Asrama, was ex
pert in Brahma V
idya. He
had knowl
edge of Brah
man.
Ant
ara (who stand out

side) are those per sons who do not be
-
long to any or
der or Asrama and con
se
quently do not
 per
form the du
-
ties of any
 Asrama. They are born in t
his life with di
s
crim
i
na
tion and
disp
assion ow
ing to the per
for
mance of such du
ties in their pre
vi
ous
birth. Their mi
nds have been pu
ri
fied by t
ruth, pen
ance, prayers, etc.,
per
formed in their p
ast lives. I
f a man has duly dis
charged the du
ties
of his Asrama in pre
vi
ous birth, but ow
ing to some ob
st
a
cles or
Pratibandhas Brahma-Jnana did not arise in hi
m in that l
ife, and he
dies be
fore the dawn of knowl
edge, then he is born in the pres
ent life
ripe for knowl
edge. Brahma-Jnana man
i
fest
s in him in all it
s glory by
mere con
t
act with a sage. There
fore such a man does not per
form
any Kar
mas or rather does not st
and in any need of per
form
ing any
du
ties of Asramas.
Api cha smary
ate
III
.4.37 (462)
This is stated in Smriti also.
Api:
 also, too;
Cha:
 moreover
, and;
Smary
ate:
 is stated in Smriti, t
he
Smriti records such cases.
The pre
vi
ous topic is con
tin
ued.
More
over
, it is st
ated also in Smrit
i that per
sons, not be
long
ing
to any one of
 the four pre
scribed or
ders of life, ac
quire
Brahma-Jnana.
It is re
corded in the Itihasas (Mahabharat
a) also how Samvart
a
and oth
ers who paid no re
gard to the du
ties in
cum
bent on the
Asramas went na
ked and af

ter wards be
came great Y
ogins or saint
s.
The great Bhishma is also an in
st
ance in point.
Manu Samhit
a de
clares ﬁThere is no doubt that a Brahmana at

-
t
ains fi
nal suc
cess only by prac
tice of con
tin
u
ously re
peat
ing the
Japa.
 It mat

ters lit tle whether he per
forms other pre
scribed du
ties or
not. One who is friendly
 to all, i
s re
ally a Brahm
anaﬂ (II.87).
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
457

But t
he in
st
ances quoted from scrip
ture and Smrit
i fur
nish
merely indicatory
 marks. What then is the f
i
nal con
clu
sion? That con
-
clu
sion is st
ated in the nex
t Su
tra.
{deofmZ
wJ«h
V
iseshanugrahasch
a
III
.4.38 (463)
And t
he promot
ion (
of know
ledge is bestow
ed on th
em)
through
 special acts.
V
isesha:
 special;
Anugrahah:
 favour;
Cha:
 and. (
V
iseshanu-
grahah:
 special advant
age, advant
age or favour accruing from
extraordinary good works done in the previ
ous life.)
The pre
vi
ous topic is con
tin
ued.
More
over knowl
edge of Brah
man may be at

tained by the spe
-
cial grace of the gods due to Jap
a, fast
ing and wor
ship of gods. Or it
may be that
 Asrama Kar
mas might have been
 done in pre
vi
ous births.
A
 wid
ower who is not a house
holder in the proper sense of the
term, can at
t
ain knowl
edge of Brah
man through spe
cial act
s like
Japa,
 fast
ing, prayer
, which are not op
posed to the con
di
tion of t
hose
who do not be
long to any A
srama.
The Smriti
 says ﬁBy mere prayer no doubt
 the Brahmana per
-
fect
s him
self. May
 he per
form other works or not, the kind-hearted
one is called Brahmanaﬂ (Manu Samhit
a II.
87).
This p
as
sage in
di
cates that where the works of the Asramas are
not pos
si
ble, prayer qual
i
fies for knowl
edge.
Smriti al
so de
clares ﬁPer
fected by m
any births he fi

nally goes tothe high
est st
ateﬂ (Bhagavad Git
a VI.
45). This p
as
sage in
ti
mates that
the
ag gre gate
of
the
dif
 fer ent
mer i to ri ous
works
per formed
in
pre vi
-
ous births pro
motes knowl
edge.
There fore,
there
is
no
con tra dic tion
in
ad mit ti
ng
qual i fi ca ti
on
for
knowl
edge on the p
art of wid
ow
ers and the like.
AVp
ñËdVaÁÁ
`m`mo {b
At
astv
it
arajjy
ay
o ling
accha
III
.4.39 (464)
Be
tter t
han thi
s is th
e o
the
r (state
 of b
el
ongi
ng to a
n As
rama
)
on a
cco
unt o
f the
 indi
cato
ry mark
s (in th
e S
ruti a
nd the
Smriti).
At
ah:
 from this, t
han this, than t
he intermediate st
ate mentioned
above;
Tu
:
 but;
It
arat:
 the other
, the st
ate belonging to a prescribed
order of life;

Jy
ay
ah:
 better
, superior;
Lingat:
 because of the
indicatory marks, from such indicati
ons in the scripture, from
indication, signs, i
n
ferences;
Cha:
 and.
The pre
vi
ous topic is con
cluded here.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) is em
ployed in or
der to re
move the doubt
.
The word ‚cha™
 (and) is used in the sense of ex
clu
sion.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
458

Though it is pos
si
ble for one who st
ands be
tween two Asramas
to at
t
ain knowl
edge, yet
 it is a bett
er means to know
l
edge to be
long to
some Asrama. He who be
longs to an Asrama has better means of
 at
-
t
ain
ing knowl
edge of the S
elf or Brah
man, be
cause the fa
cil
i
ties are
greater in the lat

ter con di
tion.
This is con
firmed by t
he Sruti and S
mriti ﬁThe Brahmanas seek
to know Brah
man through sac
ri
ficesﬂ etc. (Bri. Up.
 IV
.4.22). ﬁOn t
hat
p
ath goes who
ever knows Brah
man and who has done holy works as
pre
scribed for the Asramas and ob
t
ained splen
dourﬂ (Bri. Up. IV
.4.9).
Smriti de
clares, ﬁLet not a Brahmana st
ay for a day ou
t

side theAsrama; hav
ing st
ayed out

side for a year he goes to ut ter ruin.ﬂ
T
adbhut
adhikaranam: T
opic 10
He who has t
aken Sannyasa cannot
revert back to his former st
ages of life
VX²^
yVñ` Vw
 ZmVØmdmo
 O¡{
_Zo
a{n {Z
`_mVÐÿ
>
T
adbhut
asy
a tu nat
adbhavo j
aiminerapi
 niy
amat
adrup
abhavebhy
ah
III
.4.40 (465)
Bu
t for o
ne
 who ha
s be
com
e th
at (i.e
. en
tere
d the
 highe
st
Asra
ma, i.e
., Sanny
asa
) the
re i
s no
 rev
erti
ng (to
 the
 pre
ce
d
ing
ones) on a
ccount
 of r
estri
cti
ons pr
ohibi
tin
g such
 reversi
on or
de
sce
nding to a lowe
r order. Jaimini also
 (is of this opinio
n).
T
adbhut
asy
a:
of one who has become that, f
or one who has att
ained
that (highest A
srama);
Tu
:
 but;
Na:
 no;
At
adbhavah:
 lap
se from that
st
age, falli
ng away from that
;
Jaimine
h:
 according to Jaimini, of
Jaimini (is
 this opinion)
;
Api:
 also, even;
Niy
amat
adrup
abhav
ebhy
ah:
 on account of the restrictions
prohibiting such reversion. (
Niyamat:
 because of the strict rule;
At
adrup
dbhavebhy
ah:
 because there is no st
atement permi
tting it
,
and because it is against custom;
Abhavebhy
ah:
 because of the
absence of that.)
The ques
tion whether one who has t
aken Sannyasa can go
back to the pre
vi
ous Asrama is now con
sid
ered.
The pres
ent Su
tra de
clares that he can
not go back to the pre
vi
-
ous Asrama. This is the opin
ion of Jaimini also.
There are no words in the Sruti al
low
ing such a de
scent. The
Sruti ex

pressly for bids it, ﬁHe is to go t
o the for
est, he is not t
o re
turn
from thereﬂ.
It is also against ap
proved cus
tom or us
age.
The Up
anishad de
clares ﬁHav
ing been dis
missed by the
teacher he is to fol
low one of the f
our Asramas ac
cord
ing to rule, up t
o
re
lease from the body
ﬂ (Chh. Up. II.
23.1). There are tex
t
s which teach
of the as
cent to higher Asramas. ﬁHav
ing com
pleted the
Brahmacharya st
ate he is to be
come a house
holder
. He may wan
der
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
459

forth from t
he Brahmacharya st
ate,ﬂ but t
here are no text
s which treat
of the de
scent to lower Asramas.
Dharma is what is en
joined for each and not what each is ca
p
a
-
ble of do
ing.
Scrip
ture de
clares, ﬁOnce re
turn
ing to the f
or
est, one should
never re
turn to house
hold life.
ﬂ A
 Sannyasi should not st
ir up the
house
hold fire again af

ter hav ing once re
nounced it.ﬂ
There
fore, one can
not go back from Sanny
asa.
Adhikaradhi
karanam: T
opic 1
1 (Sutras 41-42)
Expiation f
or one who has broken the vow of Sannyasa
Z Mm{Y
H$m[aH
$_{n n
VZmZw_
mZmÎmX`mo
Na chadhikarikam
api p
at
ananumanatt
aday
ogat
III
.4.41 (466)
And there is no fitness for expiation in
 the case of a Naishthika
Brahmachar
in (wh
o is immoral),
 because
 a fall (i
n his case) is
infe
rred
 from the
 Smriti a
nd b
ec
aus
e o
f the
 ine
fficac
y (in hi
s
case) of the ex
piatory ceremony.
Na:
 not;
Cha:
 and;
Adhikarikam
:
 (expiation) ment
ioned in the
chapter that deals with t
he qualificati
on;
Api:
 also, even;
Pat
ananumanat:
 because of a fall (in his case) is inferred from the
Smriti;
T
aday
ogat:
 because of it
s (of the expiat
ory ceremony)
inef
ficiency in his case.
The
pre vi ous
dis cus sion
is
con tin ued.
The pres
ent Su
tra ex
presses the view of the Purv
ap
akshin.
The op
po
nent main
t
ains that there is no ex

pi a
tion for such
trans
gres
sion in the case of a Naishthika Brahmacharin who has
t
aken the vow of lif
e-long cel
i
bacy
, be
cause no such ex
pi
a
tory cer
e
-
mony is men
tioned with re
spect to him. T
he ex
pi
a
tory cer
e
mony
which is men
tioned in Purv
amimamsa VI
.8.22,
 re
fers to or
di
nary
Brahmacharins and not to Naishthika Brahm
acharins.
Smriti de
clares that such sins can
not be ex
pi
ated by him
 any
more than a head once cut of
f can again be fix
ed to the body
, ﬁHe who
hav
ing once en
tered on the du
ties of a Naishthika again lap
ses from
them, f
or him a slayer of t
he Self,
 I see no ex
pi
a
tion which might m
ake
him clean againﬂ (Agneya X
VI.
5.23).
Fur
ther the ex
pi
a
tory cer
e
mony re
ferred to in Purv
amimamsa is
not ef

fi ca
cious in his case, be
cause he will have to light
 sac
ri
fi
cial fire
and there
fore have to m
arry
. In t
hat case he will cease to be a
Naishthika Brahmacharin there
af

ter.
But t
he Up
akurvana (i.e.,
 who is a Brahmacharin for a cer
t
ain
pe
riod only
, not f
or life, one who is a Brahmacharin t
ill mar
riage) about
whose sin Smriti makes no sim
i
lar dec
la
ra
tion, may
 pu
rify him

self bythe cer
e
mony men
tioned. I
f he is im
moral there is ex
pi
a
tion.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
460

Cnn
yd©_{n
 ËdoHo$ ^
md_
eZd
&
Up
apurv
amapi tv
eke bhav
amasanav
att
adukt
am
III
.4.42 (467)
Bu
t som
e (
con
sid
er th
e s
in) a m
inor o
ne
 (and
 the
refo
re c
laim
)
the existence
 (of expiation for th
e Naishthika Brahmachar
in
also); as in t
he case o
f eating (of
 unlawful f
ood). Th
is has been
exp
lained (in the Purvamimamsa).
Up
apurvam
:
 (Upapurv
aka-pat
akam, Up
ap
at
akam) a minor sin;
Api
tu:
 but, however;

Eke:
 some (say);
Bhav
am:
possibility of
 expiati
on;
Asanav
at:
as in the eating (prohibit
ed food);
Ta
t
:
 this
;
Ukt
am:
is
explained (in Purv
amimamsa).
The
pre vi ous
dis cus sion
is
con tin ued.
Some teach
ers, how
ever
, are of opin
ion that t
he trans
gres
sion
of the v
ow of chas
tity
, even on t
he p
art of a Naishthika is a mi
nor sin,
not a ma
jor one ex
cept
ing cases where the wife of the teacher is con
-
cerned and so can be ex
pi
ated by proper cer
e
mo
nies just as or
di
nary
Brahmacharins who t
ake pro
hib
ited food such as honey
, wine, f
lesh,
are again pu
ri
fied by ex

pi a
tory cer
e
mo
nies. They plead t
hat that
 sin is
not any
where enu
mer
ated among the deadl
y ones (Mahap
at
aka)
such as vi
o
lat
ing a teacher
™
s bed and so on. They claim t
he ex
pi
a
tory
cer
e
mony to be v
alid for the Naishthi
ka as well as the Upakurvana.
Both are Brahmacharins and have com
mit
ted the same of

fence.It is only
 sex
ual in
ter
course with the wife of t
he Guru or spir
i
tual
pre
cep
tor that i
s a Mahap
at
aka (ma
jor sin). That Up
ap
at
aka, a mi
nor
sin is an expiable sin has been ex
plained in the P
urvamimamsa of
Jaimini in Chap. I
.3.8.
The Smriti
 p
as
sage which de
clares that there is no ex
pi
a
tion for
the Naishthika must be ex

plained as aim ing at the orig
i
na
tion of se
ri
-
ous ef

fort on the part of Naishthika Brahmacharins. I
t put
s him in mind
of the se
ri
ous re
spon
si
bil
ity on hi
s part
 so that he may
 be ever alert
and vig
i
lant and strug
gle hard in main
t
ain
ing strict un
bro
ken
Brahmacharya and thus achiev
ing the goal or
sum m
um
bonum
 of life
,
i.e.,

Self-reali sa ti
on.
Sim
i
larly in t
he case of the her
mit and the S
annyasin. The S
mriti
does pre
scribe the pu
rif
i
ca
tory cer
e
mony for bot
h the her
mit
(V
anaprastha) and the men
di
cant (Sannyasi). When t
he her
mit has
bro
ken his vows, un
der
goes the Kricchra-pen
ance for twelve night
s
and then cul
ti
vates a place which is full of
 trees and grass. The
Sannyasi also pro
ceeds like the her
mit, wit
h the ex
cep
tion of cul
ti
vat
-
ing the Soma pl
ant, and un
der
goes the purifications pre
scribed for his
st
ate.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
461

Bahiradhikar
anam: T
opic 12
The life-long celibat
e who fails to keep up his vow
must be excluded by society
~{hñVy^`Wm
{n ñ_¥VoamMmam
Bahistubhay
athapi smri
teracharaccha
III
.4.43 (468)
Bu
t (the
y are
 to b
e k
ep
t) ou
tsid
e th
e s
oci
ety
 in e
ithe
r cas
e, o
n
account of th
e Smriti an
d custom.
Bahih:
 out
side;
Tu
:
 but;
Ubhay
atha:
 in either case, whether it be a
grave sin or a minor sin;
Api:
 also, even;

Smrite
h:
 on account of the
state
ment o
f the Smr
iti, fro
m the Sm
riti;
Acharat:
 from custom;
Cha:
and.
The
pre vi ous
dis cus sion
is
con cluded
here.
Whether the lap
ses be re
garded as ma
jor sins or mi
nor sins, in
ei
ther case good peo
ple (Sisht
as) must shun such trans
gres
sors, be
-
cause the Smriti and good cus
tom both con
demn them.
Smriti de
clares, ﬁhe who touches a Brahmana who has bro
ken
his vow and fallen f
rom his or
der
, must un
dergo the Chandrayana
pen
ance.ﬂ Ap
proved cus
tom also con
demns them, be
cause good
men do not sac
ri
fice, study
, or at
tend wed
dings with such per
sons.
Sv
amy
adhikaranam
: T
opic 13 (Sutras 44-46)
The medi
t
ations connected with the subordinat
e mem
bers of
sacrificial act
s (Y
ajnangas) should be observed by
 the priest
and not by the sacrificer
ñdm{_Z
– \$blw
Vo[aË`mÌ
Sv
aminah p
halasruterity
atrey
ah
III
.4.44 (469)
To the sacrific
er (b
elo
ngs the a
gentship
 in me
ditations
)
be
cau
se
 the
 Sruti d
ec
lare
s a fru
it (fo
r it): thu
s Atre
ya (ho
lds
).
Svaminah:
 of the master
, of t
he sacrificer or Y
ajamana;
Phalasruteh:
from the declaration i
n Sruti of
 the result
s;
Iti:
 so, thus;
Atrey
ah:
 the sage Atrey
a (holds).
This is the view of
 the Purvap
akshin or the op
po
nent.
A
 doubt arises as to who is to ob
serve the med
i
t
a
tions con
-
nected with the sub
or
di
nate mem
bers of sac
ri
fi
cial act
s (Y
ajnangas),
whether it is the sac
ri
ficer (Y
ajamana) or the priest (Ritv
ik).
The op
po
nent, rep
re
sented by the S
age Atreya,
 main
t
ains that it

is to be ob
served by the sac
ri
ficer
, as the Srut
i de
clares a spe
cial fruit
for
these
med i t
a tions.
ﬁThere is rain for him and he brings rain for oth
ers who thus
know
ing med
i
t
ates on the fiv
e-fold Saman as rainﬂ (Chh. Up. I
I.3.
2).
Hence the sac
ri
ficer only is the agent
 in those med
i
t
a
tions which
have a fruit
. This is the opin
ion of the t
eacher Atreya.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
462

AmpËd
©Á`{_Ë
`m¡Sw>bm
o{_ñVñ
_¡ {h n[
aH«$s`V
Art
vijy
amityaudulomist
asma
i hi p
arikr
iy
ate
III
.4.45 (470)
(They a
re)
 the
 du
ty of the
 Ritvik
 (prie
st), this
 is the
 vie
w of
Audulomi
, because he is pa
id for
 tha
t (i
.e.,
 the perf
orma
nce of
the
 en
tire
 sac
rifice
).
Art
vijy
am:
 the duty
 of the Rit
vik (priest);
Iti:
 thus;
Audulomih:
 the
sage Audulomi (thinks);
T
asmai:
 for th
at;
Hi:
 because;
Parikri
y
ate:
he is p
aid.
The pre
vi
ous topic is con
tin
ued.
The
as ser tion
that
the
med i t
a tions
on
sub or di nate
mem bers
of
the sac
ri
fice are the work of the sac
ri
ficer (Y
ajamana) is un
founded.
But Au
dulomi says that
 they are to be done by
 the priest (Ritv
ik),
be
cause he is en
gaged (lit
er
ally bought
) for the sake of the K
arma. As
the priest is p
aid for all his act
s, the fruit
 of all his act
s, is as it were,
pur
chased by the Y
ajamana (sac
ri
ficer). There
fore the med
i
t
a
tions
also fall withi
n the per
for
mance of the work, as they
 be
long to the
sphere of that t
o which the sac
ri
ficer is en
ti
tled. They
 have to be ob
-
served by the priest and not
 the sac
ri
ficer
.
This is the view of
 the sage Audulomi.
Srutescha
III
.4.46 (471)
And because th
e Srut
i (so)
 declares.
Sruteh:
 from
 the Sr
uti;
Cha:
 and.
The pre
vi
ous topic is con
cluded here.
The Ritvik is t
o make the Anga Up
asana. But t
he fruit goes to t
he
Y
ajamana.
ﬁWhat
ever bless
ing the priest
s pray for at the sac
ri
fice, they
pray for the good of
 the sac
ri
ficerﬂ (Sat. B
r
. I.
3., I
.26). ﬁThere
fore an
Udgatri who knows this may say: what wish shall I
 ob
t
ain for you by
my sing
ingﬂ (Chh. Up. I.7.
8). The scrip
tural p
as
sages also de
clare
that t
he fruit of
 med
i
t
a
tions in which the priest is the agent
, goes to the
sac ri f
icer
.
All thi
s es
t
ab
lishes the con
clu
sion that the m
ed
i
t
a
tions on sub
or
-
di
nate p
art
s of the sac
ri
fice are the work of the priest.
There
fore, Audul
omi™
s view is cor
rect, be
ing sup
ported by the
Sruti
 texts.
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
463

Sahakary
ant
arav
idhy
adhikaranam
: T
opic 14 (Sutras 47-49)
In Bri.
 Up. III
.5.1 m
edit
ation is enjoined besides the
child-like st
ate and scholarship
ghH$m`©
ÝVa{d{
Y– njo
U V¥Vr`§
 VÛVmo {
dÜ`m{XdV
Sahakary
ant
arav
idhih
 p
akshena tritiy
am
 t
advato
v
idhy
adiv
at
III
.4.47 (472)
There
 is the
 inju
nctio
n of s
ome
thing e
lse
, i.e
., me
dita
tion,
coo
pe
ration (towa
rds kno
wled
ge) (
which is) a
 third thing (with
regard to Balya or st
ate of a child and Pandity
a or scholarsh
ip),
(which injunctio
n is give
n) for the ca
se
 (of pe
r
fect k
nowle
dge
not ye
t having arise
n) to him who is s
uch (i.e
., the Sannyasin
posse
ssing knowledge); as in the case of injunctions,
 and the
like
.
Sahakary
ant
arav
idhih
:
 a separat
e auxiliary
 injunction;
Pakshena:
as an alternativ
e;
T
ritiyam:
 the third;

T
adv
at
ah:
 for one who
possesses
 it, (i.
e., knowledge);
V
idhy
adiv
at:
 just as in the case of
injunctions and the like.
This Su
tra ex
am
ines a p
as
sage of the Brihadarany
aka
Up
anishad and con
cludes that con
tin
u
ous med
i
t
a
tion is also to be
con
sid
ered as en
joined by Srut
i for the reali
sa
tion of B
rah
man. This
and the fol
low
ing two Sutras show that t
he scrip
ture en
joins the four
or
ders of life.
Mauna (Nididhyasa or med
i
t
a
tion) is en
joined as an aid. The
third, i.
e., Mauna is en
joined for a Sanny
asi in case his sense of cos
-
mic di
ver
sity is per
sis
tent,
 just as Y
ajnas are en
joined for one de
sir
-
ous of heaven.
ﬁThere
fore, a knower of Brah
man, hav
ing done with schol
ar
-
ship, should re
main like a child (free from p
as
sion, an
ger
, etc.);
 and
af

ter hav ing fin
ished with this st
ate and with er
u
di
tion he be
comes
med
i
t
a
tive (M
uni)
ﬂ (Br
i. Up
. III.5.1)
.
A
 doubt arises now whether the med
i
t
a
tive st
ate is en
joined or
not.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that it
 is not en
joined, as there is
no word in
di
cat
ing an in
junc
tion. Though t
he im
per
a
tive m
ood oc
curs
in re
gard to Baly
a or child-like st
ate, t
here is no such in
di
ca
tion in re
-
gard to the Muni.
 The text
 merely says that
 he be
comes a Muni or
med
i
t
a
tive whereas it ex

pressly en joins ﬁOne should re
mainﬂ etc.,
with re
spect to the st
ate of child and schol
ar
ship.
Fur
ther schol
ar
ship re
fers to knowl
edge. There
fore, it
 in
cludes
Muniship which also re
fers to knowl
edge. As there is no new
ness
(Apurva) with re
spect to Muniship in the t
ext it
 has no in
junc
tive v
alue.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
464

This Su
tra re
futes this v
iew and de
clares that Muniship or medi
-
t
a
tive
ness is en
joined in the t
ext as a thi
rd req
ui
site be
sides child-like
st
ate and schol
ar
ship.
ﬁMuniﬂ means a per
son who con
st
antly m
ed
i
t
ates on Brah
man.
So con
st
ant med
i
t
a
tion is the t
hird aux
il
iary ob
ser
vance for one who is
al
ready pos
sessed of Panditya (er
u
di
tion) and Baly
a (child-like st
ate);
and as such con
st
ant med
i
t
a
tion is en
joined to be ob
served like the
in
junc
tions about sac
ri
fice and con
trol of t
he senses and so on.
This Su
tra re
fers to a p
as
sage of the Brihadarany
aka
Up
anishad, where in re
ply to a ques
tion by one K
ahola, the sage
Y
ajnaval
kya en
joins first, schol
arly at
t
ain
ment
s, the child-like sim
plic
-
ity
,
and
then
thirdly
,
con tin u ous
med i t
a tion
co op er at ing
with
the
two
pre
vi
ous con
di
tions, with a v
iew to reali
sa
tion of B
rah
man. Though
there is no verb of im

per a
tive or in
junc
tive f
orce in the case of this
third st
ate, t
here is to be in
ferred an in
junc
tion to be un
der
stood like
the in
junc
tions in the ot
her cases.
Muniship
is
con tin u ous
con tem pla tion
on
Brah man.
There fore,
it is dif

fer ent from schol
ar
ship. It i
s a new thing (Apurva). I
t has not
been re
ferred to be
fore. Hence the tex
t has in
jun
c
tive v
alue. In
ces
-
sant med
i
t
a
tion is highly
 ben
e
fi
cial for a Sannyasin who has not y
et
at
t
ained one
ness or unity of Sel
f and who ex
pe
ri
ences plu
ral
ity on ac
-
count of p
ast ex
pres
sions or the pre
vail
ing force of the er
ro
ne
ous idea
of
mul ti plic ity
.
Munihood is en
joined as some
thing help

ful to knowl edge.
H¥$
ËñZ^mdmÎ
mw J¥{
hUmong§
Krit
snabhavattu grihinop
asamharah
III
.4.48 (473)
On acc
ount o
f his be
ing all, howe
ve
r, there
 is winding
 up with
the hous
eholder.
Krit
snabhav
at:
 on account of the householder
™
s life including all;

Tu
:
verily;
 Grihina:
 by a householder
, with t
he householder;
Up
asamharah:
 the conclusion, the goal,
 salvation,
 (the Chapter)
ends. (
Krit
sna:
 of all (duties);
Bhav
at:
 owing to the ex
istence;
Grihin
op
asamharah:
 conclusion with the case of the householder
.)
The Sruti winds up with t
he house
holder as he has all the du
ties.
He has to do dif

fi cult sac
ri
fices and has also to ob
serve Ahim
sa,
self-con
trol, et
c. As the house
holder
™
s life in
cludes du
ties of all t
he
other st
ages of life,
 the Chap
ter ends with the enu
mer
a
tion of t
he du
-
ties of the house
holder
.
The Chhandogya Up
anishad con
cludes with the house
holder
™
s
st
age, be
cause of the fact t
hat this st
age in
cludes all the oth
ers. ﬁHe,
the house
holder
, con
duct
ing his life in t
his way
, con
cen
t
rat
ing all his
senses upon the self, and ab
st
ain
ing from in
jury to any
 liv
ing be
ing
through
out his life,
 at
t
ains the world of Brahma and has not t
o re
turn
again to this worldﬂ (Chh. Up. V
III
.15.1).
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
465

The word ‚tu™
 is meant to lay
 stress on the house
holder be
ing ev
-
ery
thing. He has to do many
 du
ties be
long
ing to his own Asrama
which in
volve a great
 trou
ble. At
 the same time t
he du
ties of the ot
her
Asramas such as ten
der
ness for all liv
ing crea
tures, re
straint of t
he
senses and study of scrip
tures, and so on are in
cum
bent on him also
as far as cir
cum
st
ances al
low
. There
fore, there is not
h
ing con
tra
dic
-
tory in t
he Chhandogya wind
ing up with the house
holder
.
The house
holder
™
s life is very i
m
por
t
ant. Grihasthasrama in
-
cludes more or less the du
ties of all A
sramas. The Sruti enu
mer
ates
the du
ties of the B
rahmacharin and then those of t
he house
holder
and there it ends with
out re
fer
ring to Sanny
asa in or
der to lay stress
on the life of
 the house
holder
, to show it
s im
por
t
ance, and not be
-
cause it is not one of t
he pre
scribed Asramas.
_m¡Zd
{XVaof
m_ß`wn
Xoem
Maunav
adit
areshamapy
up
adesat
III
.4.49 (474)
Be
cau
se
 the
 scrip
ture
 en
join
s the
 othe
r (stag
es
 of life
, viz.,
Brahmachar
ya and Vanaprasth
a), just as it
 enjoins the state of
a Muni (Sa
nnyasi).
Maunav
at:
 just as silence, like const
ant medit
ation, li
ke the st
ate of a
Muni (Sannyasi);

It
aresham:
 of the ot
hers, of the ot
her orders of life;
Api:
 even, also;

Up
adesat:
 because of scriptural injunction.
This Su
tra st
ates that t
he scrip
ture en
joins the ob
ser
vance of
the du
ties of all t
he or
ders of life.
Just as the Sruti en
joins Sannyasa and house
holder
™
s life, so
also it en
joins the lif
e of a V
anaprastha (her
mit) and that
 of a stu
dent
(Brahmacharin). For we have al
ready pointed abov
e to p
as
sages
such as ﬁAus
ter
ity i
s the sec
ond, and to dwell as a stu
dent in the
house of a teacher is the third.
ﬂ As thus the four A
sramas are equally
t
aught by t
he scrip
ture, they
 are to be gone through in se
quence or al
-
ter nately
.
That the S
u
tra uses a plu
ral form (of the ‚
oth
ers™) when speak
ing
of two or
ders only
, is due to it
s hav
ing re
gard ei
ther to the di
f

fer ent
sub-classes
 of those two or to t
heir dif

fi cult du
ties.
Anav
ishkaradhi
karanam: T
opic 15
Child-like st
ate m
eans the st
ate of innocence,
being free from
 egoism,
 lust, anger
, etc.
AZm{
dîH
w$d©
Anav
ishkurv
annanv
ay
at
III
.4.50 (475)
(The child-like
 state me
ans) without manifes
ting himself,
accor
ding
 to t
he cont
ext.
Anav
ishkurv
an:
 without manif
esting himself;

Ananv
ay
at:
 according
to the contex
t.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
466

This Su
tra says that t
he per
ver
sity of
 a child is not meant by
 the
word ‚Balyena™
 (by the child-like st
ate), in t
he p
as
sage of the
Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad quoted un
der Su
tra 47.
In the p
as
sage of the Brihadarany
aka quoted in the Su
tra 47,
the child-like st
ate is en
joined on an as
pi
rant af

ter knowl edge. ﬁThere
-
fore, a Brahmana af

ter he has done with learn ing should re
main like a
child.ﬂ What is ex
actly meant
 by this?
Does it mean to be like a child wit
h
out any idea of
 pu
rity and im

-
pu
rity
, freely
 at
tend
ing to the calls of
 na
ture with
out any re
spect of
place, etc.,
 be
hav
ing, t
alk
ing and eat
ing, ac
cord
ing to one™
s lik
ing and
do
ing what
ever one likes, or does it mean in
ward pu
rity
, i.e.
, ab
sence
of cun
ning
ness, ar
ro
gance, sense of ego
ism, force of t
he sen
sual
p
as
sions and so on as in the case of a child?
The pres
ent Su
tra says it is the l
at
ter and not the f
or
mer
, be
-
cause that is det
ri
men
t
al to knowl
edge. It
 means that one should be
free from guile,
 pride, ego
ism, etc. He should not
 man
i
fest the un
de
-
sir
able evil t
rait
s. He should not man
i
fest by a di
s
play of knowl
edge,
learn
ing and vir
tu
ous
ness. Just as a child whose sen
sual pow
ers
have not y
et de
vel
oped them
selves does not at
tempt t
o make a dis
-
play of hi
m
self be
fore oth
ers, he must not pub
lish and pro
claim his
learn
ing, wis
dom and good
ness. Such mean
ing only is ap
pro
pri
ate to
the con
text
, pu
rity and in
no
cence be
ing help

ful to knowl edge.
Then only the
 p
as
sage has a con
nec
tion with t
he en
tire chap
ter
on the ground of co
op
er
at
ing to
wards the prin
ci
p
al mat
ter
, namely
,
the reali
sa
tion of B
rah
man. Be
ing free from os
ten
t
a
tion is nec
es
sary
,
be
cause only then there will be A
nvaya or con
cor
dance of doc
trine.
The Smriti
 writ
ers have said, ﬁHe whom no
body knows ei
ther as
no
ble or ig
no
ble, as ig
no
rant or learned, as well as well-con
ducted or
ill-con
ducted, he is a Brahmana.
 Qui
etly de
voted t
o his duty
, let t
he
wise man p
ass through life un
known, let him step on t
his earth as if he
were blind, un
con
scious, deaf.ﬂ An
other Smrit
i p
as
sage is ﬁWith hid
-
den na
ture, hid
den con
duct,ﬂ and so on.
Aihikadhi
karanam: T
opic 16
The tim
e of the originat
ion of knowledge
when Brahma V
idya is practised
Eo{hH$
_ß`àñ
VwVà{
V~ÝYo VÔe©
Aihikam
apy
aprastut
apratibandhe t
addarsanat
III
.4.51 (476)
In this life
 (the origination of k
nowled
ge take
s place
) if there b
e
no obst
ruct
ion t
o it (
the mean
s adopted),
 because it i
s so seen
from th
e s
crip
ture
s.
Aihik
am:
 in this life;
Api:
even;
Aprastut
apratibandhe:
 in the
absence of an obstruction to it
 (the means adopted);
T
addarsanat:
CHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
467

as it is seen in Sruti.
 (
Aprastut
a:
 not being present;
Pratibandhe:
obstruction;
Ta
t
:
 that;
Darsanat:
 being declared by the scriptures.)
This Su
tra st
ates whether the con
se
quence of Brahma V
idya,
which is the reali
sa
tion of B
rah
man, is pos
si
ble in this lif
e or will wait
till deat
h.
Be
gin
ning from Su
tra 26 of the pres
ent Pada (Sec
tion) we have
dis
cussed the var
i
ous means of knowl
edge.
The ques
tion now is whether knowl
edge that re
sult
s from these
means co
mes in this life or in t
he life to come.
The pres
ent Su
tra de
clares that knowl
edge may come in thi
s life
only if
 there is no ob
struc
tion to it
s man
i
fes
t
a
tion from ex

tra ne
ous
causes. When the fru
ition of knowl
edge is about to t
ake place, it is
hin
dered by the fruit
 of some other pow
er
ful work (Karma), which is
also about to ma
ture. When such an ob
struc
tion t
akes place, then
knowl
edge co
mes in the next
 life.
That is the rea
son why the scrip
ture also de
clares that it is dif

fi -
cult to know the Sel
f, ﬁHe of whom many
 are not even able t
o hear
,
whom many even when t
hey hear of him do not
 com
pre
hend; won
-
der
ful is a man when found who is able t
o teach him; won
der
ful is he
who com
pre
hends him when t
aught by an able t
eacherﬂ (Katha Up.
I.27)
.
The Git
a also says, ﬁThere he re
cov
ers the char
ac
ter
is
tics be
-
long
ing to his for
mer body
, and with t
hat he again striv
es for per
fec
-
tion, O Joy
 of the K
urusﬂ (VI.43). ﬁThe Y
ogin striv
ing with as
si
du
ity
,
pu ri fied
from
sin,
grad u ally
gain ing
per fec tion,
through
man i fold
births, then reaches the Su
preme Goalﬂ (VI.45).
Fur
ther scrip
ture re
lates that V
amadeva al
ready be
came Brah
-
man in his mother
™
s womb and thus shows that knowl
edge may
spring up in a later form of ex

is tence through means pro
cured in a for
-
mer one; be
cause a child in a womb can
not pos
si
bly pro
cure such
means in it
s pres
ent st
ate.
It,
 there
fore, is an es
t
ab
lished con
clu
sion that knowl
edge orig
i
-
nates ei
ther in the pres
ent or in a fu
ture life,
 in de
pend
ence on the ev
-
a nes cence
of
ob st
a cles.
Muktiphal
adhikaranam
: T
opic 17
Liberation is a st
ate without
 difference. I
t is only one.
Ed§ _w
{º$
\$bm{Z
`_ñVXdñ
WmdY¥
VoñVX
dñWmdY¥
Ev
am mukti
phalani
y
amast
adav
asthav
adhrites-
 t
adav
asthav
adhriteh
III
.4.52 (477)
No
 suc
h de
finite
 rule
 ex
ists w
ith re
spe
ct to e
manc
ipa
tion, th
e
fruit (o
f kno
wle
dge
), be
cau
se
 the
 Sruti a
sse
rts that s
tate
 (to b
e
immutable
).
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
468

Evam:
 thus, like thi
s;
Muktiphal
aniy
amah:
 there is no rule with
respect to the final
 emancip
ation, t
he fruit (of knowledge);
T
adav
asthav
adhriteh:
 on account of the assertions by t
he Sruti as to
that conditi
on. (
Mukti:
 salvation;
 Phala: f
ruit;
Aniyamah:
there is no
rule;
Ta
t
:
 that;
A
v
astha:
 condition;
A
v
adhriteh:
 because the Sruti
has ascertained so.
)
In the pre
vi
ous Su
tra it was seen that knowl
edge may re
sult in
this life or t
he next ac
cord
ing to the ab
sence or pres
ence of ob
struc
-
tions and the in
ten
sity of
 the means adopted.
Sim
i
larly a doubt m
ay arise that t
here may be some rule with re
-
spect to the fi

nal eman ci
p
a
tion also, which is the f
ruit of knowl
edge. A
doubt may arise whether sal
va
tion can be de
layed af

ter knowl edge,
and whether there are de
grees of knowl
edge ac
cord
ing to the qual
i
fi
-
ca
tion of t
he as
pi
rant, whether there ex

ists a sim
i
lar def
i
nite dif

fer -
ence with re
gard to the fruit
 char
ac
ter
ised as fi
nal re
lease, ow
ing to
the
su pe rior
or
in fe rior
qual i fi ca ti
on
of
the
per sons
know ing.
This Su
tra de
clares that no such rule ex
ist
s with re
gard to re
-
lease. Be
cause all V
edant
a text
s as
sert the st
ate of f
i
nal re
lease to be
of one kind only
. The st
ate of f
i
nal re
lease is noth
ing but Brah
man and
Brah
man can
not be con
nected with dif

fer ent forms since many scrip
-
tural p
as
sages as
sert it to hav
e one na
ture only
.
ﬁThe knower of Brah
man be
comes Brah
man.ﬂ There can be no
va
ri
ety in i
t, as Brah
man is with
out qual
i
ties.
There is no such di
ver
gence in the fruit of
 Mukti, be
cause of the
af

fir ma
tion of it
s iden
ti
cal na
ture. There may
 be dif

fer ences in the po
-
tency of t
he Sadhana lead
ing to knowl
edge or Brahma V
idya. B
rahma
V
idya it

self is of the same na ture, though i
t may come early
 or late ow
-
ing to the power of t
he Sadhana. There is no dif

fer ence in the na
ture
of Mukti (lib
er
a
tion) which is at
t
ained by Brahma V
idya. There would
be dif

fer ence of re
sult
s in Kar
mas and Upasanas (Saguna V
idyas)
but Nirguna V
idya is but one and it
s re
sult viz.,
 Mukti is iden
ti
cal in all
cases.
Dif

fer ence is pos
si
ble only when there are qual
i
ties as in the
case of the Saguna Brah
man. There may
 be dif

fer ence in the ex
pe
ri
-
ences ac
cord
ing to dif

fer ence in V
idyas but with re
gard to Nirguna
Brah
man it can be one only and not
 many
.
The means of knowl
edge may
, per
hap
s, ac
cord
ing to their in
di
-
vid
ual strength, im

part a higher or lower de
gree to their re
sult, v
iz.,
knowl
edge, but not
 to the re
sult of knowl
edge, viz.
, Lib
er
a
tion. B
e
-
cause lib
er
a
tion is not some
thing which is to be brought about
, but
some
thing whose na
ture is per
ma
nently es
t
ab
lished, and is reached
through knowl
edge.
Knowl
edge can
not ad
mit of l
ower or higher de
gree be
cause it is
in it
s own na
ture high only and would not
 be knowl
edge at all if
 it were
low
. Al
though knowl
edge may dif

fer in so far as it orig i
nates af

ter aCHAPT
ER IIIŠSECT
ION 4
469

long or short time, i
t is im
pos
si
ble that li
b
er
a
tion should be dis
tin
-
guished by a higher or lower de
gree. From the ab
sence of dif

fer ence
of knowl
edge also there fol
lows ab
sence of def
i
nite dis
tinc
tion on the
p
art of the re
sult of knowl
edge, viz.
, Lib
er
a
tion.
There can
not be any de
lay in t
he at
t
ain
ment of em
an
ci
p
a
tion af

-
ter knowl
edge has dawned, be
cause knowl
edge of Brah
man it

self iseman ci p
a tion.
The rep
e
ti
tion of t
he clause, ﬁ
T
adavasthavadhriteh
ﬂ ﬁbe
cause
the Sruti
 as
sert
s that st
ateﬂ in
di
cates that the Chap
ter ends here.
Thus ends the Fourth Pada (
Sec
tion 4) of the Third A
dhy
ay
a
(Chap
ter III) of the Brahma Sutras
 or the V
edant
a Phi
los
o
phy
.
Here ends Chap
ter III
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
470

CHAPTER IV
PHALA-ADHY
A
Y
A
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
In the Third Chap
ter
, the S
adhanas or the means of knowl
edge
re
lat
ing to Para V
idya (higher knowl
edge) and Ap
ara V
idya (lower
knowl
edge) were dis
cussed. The Fourth Chap
ter treat
s of Phala or
the Su
preme Bliss of at
t
ain
ment of B
rah
man. Other t
op
ics also are
dealt with in i
t. I
n the be
gin
ning, how
ever
, a sep

a rate dis
cus
sion con
-
cerned with the means of knowl
edge is dealt with in a f
ew
Adhikaranas. The re
main
der of the pre
vi
ous dis
cus
sion about
Sadhanas is con
tin
ued in the be
gin
ning. As the m
ain topic of t
his
Chap
ter is that of
 the re
sult
s or fruit
s of Brahma V
idya, i
t is called
Phala Adhy
aya.
471

SYNOPSIS
Adhikarana I:
 (Sutras 1-2) The med
i
t
a
tion on the A
t
man en
-
joined by scrip
ture is not an act to be ac
com
plished once only
, but is
to be re
peated again and again ti
ll knowl
edge is at
t
ained.
Adhikarana II:
 (Su
tra 3) The medit
ator en
gaged in med
i
t
a
tion on
Brah
man is to view or com
pre
hend It as iden
ti
cal with his own self.
Adhikarana III
:
 (Su
tra 4) In Prati
kopasanas where sym
bols of
Brah
man are used for med
i
t
a
tion as for in
st
ance ﬁ
Mano
Brahmet
yupasit
a
ﬂ, the medit
ator is not to con
sider the Pratika or sym
-
bol as iden
ti
cal with him.
Adhikarana IV
:
 (Su
tra 5) In the P
ratikop
asanas, the Pratikas or
sym
bols are to be viewed as Brah
man and not in t
he re
verse way
.
Adhikarana V
:
 (Su
tra 6) In med
i
t
a
tions on the mem
bers of sac
ri
-
fi
cial act
s, the idea of di

vin ity i
s to be su
per
im
posed on the mem
bers
and not
vice versa
. In t
he ex
am
ple quoted for in
st
ance the Udgitha is
to be viewed as Adit
ya, not
 Adity
a as the Udgitha.
Adhikarana VI:
 (Sutras 7-10) One is to carry on his med
i
t
a
tions
in a sit
ting pos
ture. Sri S
ankara main
t
ains that the rule does not
 ap
ply
to those med
i
t
a
tions whose re
sult is Samy
ag-darsana but the Su
tra
gives no hint t
o that ef

fect.Adhikarana VII
:
 (Su
tra 1
1) The med
i
t
a
tions may be car
ried on at
any tim
e, and in any pl
ace, if fa
vour
able to con
cen
tra
tion of mi
nd.
Adhikarana VII
I:
 (Su
tra 12) The med
i
t
a
tions are to be con
tin
ued
un
til death.
 Sri Sankara again holds that
 those med
i
t
a
tions which lead
to Samy
ag-darsana are ex
cepted.
Adhikarana IX:
 (Su
tra 13) Knowl
edge of Brah
man frees one
from the ef

fects of all p
ast and fu
ture evil deeds.
Adhikarana X:
 (Su
tra 14) Good deeds like
wise cease to af

fectthe knower of Brah
man.
Adhikarana XI:
 (Su
tra 15) W
orks which have not be
gun to yiel
d
re
sult
s (Anarabdhakarya) are alone de
stroyed by knowl
edge and not
those which have al
ready be
gun to yiel
d fruit
s (Arabdhakarya).
Adhikarana XII
:
 (Sutras 16-17) From the rule enun
ci
ated in
Adhikarana X are ex
cepted such sac
ri
fi
cial per
for
mances as are en
-
joined per
ma
nently (Nit
ya, obli
g
a
tory works), as for in
st
ance the
Agnihotra,
 be
cause they pro
mote the orig
i
na
tion of knowl
edge.
Adhikarana XII
I:
 (Su
tra 18) Sac
ri
fi
cial works not com
bined with
knowl
edge or med
i
t
a
tions also help in the orig
i
na
tion of knowl
edge.
Adhikarana XIV
:
 (Su
tra 19) On the ex
haus
tion of P
rarabdha
work through en
joy
ment, t
he knower of Brah
man at
t
ains one
ness
with It
. The Bhoga or en
joy
ment of t
he Su
tra is, ac
cord
ing to Sankara,
472

re
stricted to the pres
ent ex
is
tence of the seeker
, since the com
plete
knowl
edge ob
t
ained by him de
stroys the ig
no
rance which oth
er
wise
would lead to fu
ture em
bodi
ment
s.
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 1
473

A
v
ritty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 1 (Sutras 1-2)
Medit
ation on Brahm
an should be continued
till knowledge is att
ained
Amd¥{Îm
agH¥$X
wnXoem
A
v
rittirasakrid
up
adesat
IV
.1.1 (478)
The re
pe
tition
 (of he
aring, re
fle
ctio
n and
 me
dita
tion o
n
Brahman is n
ece
ssary) on account
 of the repeate
d instruct
ion
by the
 scrip
ture
s.
A
v
ritti
h:
 repetition,
 practice of medit
ation on Brahman (is
necessary);
Asakrit:
 not only once,
 many ti
mes, repeatedly
;
Up
adesat:
 because of instruction by t
he scriptures.
This Su
tra st
ates that con
st
ant prac
tice of med
i
t
a
tion is nec
es
-
sary
.
Fre quent
prac tice
of
med i t
a tion
on
Brah man
is
nec es sary
as
there is in
struc
tion to t
hat ef

fect in the Sruti.
ﬁV
er
ily
, the S
elf is to be seen, t
o be re
flected upon, and m
ed
i
-
t
ated uponﬂ (Bri. Up. I
I.4.
5). ﬁThe in
tel
li
gent as
pi
rant know
ing about
Brah
man should at
t
ain Brahma-Sakshatkara or di
rect Self-reali
sa
-
tionﬂ (Bri. Up.
 IV
.4.21). ﬁThat
 is what we must search out, that
 is what
we must try t
o un
der
st
andﬂ (Chh. Up. VII
I.7.
1).
A
 doubt arises whether the men
t
al ac
tion (re
flec
tion and med
i
t
a
-
tion) re
ferred to in them
 is to be pre
formed once only or re
peat
edly
.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that it
 is to be ob
served once only
as in the case of Prayaja of

fer ings and the like.
ﬁLet us then re
peat ex
actly as the scrip
ture says, i.
e., let
 us hear
the self once, let
 us re
flect on it
 once, let us med
i
t
ate on it once and
noth ing
moreﬂ.
The pres
ent Su
tra re
futes this v
iew and says that hear
ing, etc.,
must be re
peated till
 one at
t
ains knowl
edge of Brah
man or di
rect
Self-reali
sa
tion, just
 as paddy
 is husked till we get rice. There is the
ne
ces
sity of
 rep
e
ti
tion til
l there is dawn of knowl
edge of Brah
man.
The
rep e ti tion
of
men t
al
act
s
of
re flec tion
and
med i t
a tion
even tu all
y
leads to di
rect Self-reali
sa
tion. Rep
e
ti
tion is to be per
formed be
cause
scrip ture
gives
re peated
in struc tion.
Thus in the Chh. Up. V
I.8.
7 the teacher re
peat
s nine times
the
say ing,
ﬁT
at Sat
yam Sa A
tm
a T
at-Tvam-A
si Svet
aketo
ŠThat T
ruth,
That At

man, That thou art, O Sv
et
aketu!ﬂ Here Svet
aketu is t
aught the
mys
tery about B
rah
man nine times be
fore he un
der
stood it.
The anal
ogy of t
he Prayaja is faul
ty
. It
 is not to the poi
nt at all be
-
cause there is the Adrisht
a which is the re
sult gives fruit
 at some p
ar
-
tic
u
lar fu
ture time in t
he next world. B
ut here the re
sult is di
rectly
real
ised. Di
rect in
tu
ition of t
he Self is a v
is
i
ble re
sult to be gained in
this very l
ife. There
fore, if
 the re
sult is not there,
 the pro
cess must be
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
474

re
peated, t
ill the re
sult is real
ised. Such act
s must be re
peated, be
-
cause they sub
serve a seen pur
pose.
When we speak of the Up
asana of the Guru or the king or of t
he
wife think
ing about her ab
sent hus
band, we do not mean a sin
gle act
of ser
vice or thought but
 a con
tin
u
ous se
ries of act
s and thought
s. W
e
say in or
di
nary life t
hat a per
son is de
voted t
o a teacher or a king if he
fol
lows him with a mind steadil
y set on him,
 and of a wife whose hus
-
band has gone on a jour
ney we say that
 she thinks of him only
 if she
steadily re
mem
bers him with long
ing.
In V
edant
a, V
id (know
ing) and Up
asati (med
i
t
at
ing) are used as
iden
ti
cal. That ‚know
ing™
 im
plies rep
e
ti
tion fol
lows from the fact t
hat in
the V
edant
a text
s the terms ‚know
ing™
 and ‚med
i
t
at
ing™
 are seen to be
used one in the place of the ot
her
. In some p
as
sages the term ‚know
-
ing™
 is used in the be
gin
ning and the term ‚
med
i
t
at
ing™
 in the end: t
hus,
e.g.,
 ﬁHe who knows
 what he knows is thus spo
ken of by meﬂ and
ﬁteach me sir
, the de
ity which y
ou med
i
t
ate onﬂ (Chh. Up. IV
.1.4;
 2.2).
In other places the tex
t at f
irst speaks of ‚med
i
t
at
ing™
 and later on of
‚know
ing™; thus e.
g., ﬁLet a m
an med
i
t
ate on mind as Brah
manﬂ and
ﬁHe who knows
 this shines and warms through his ce
leb
rity
, fame and
glory of coun
te
nanceﬂ (Chh. Up. III.
18.1, 6).
Med i t
a tion
and
re flec tion
im ply
a
rep e ti tion
of
the
men t
al
act.
When we say ﬁHe med
i
t
ates on itﬂ the con
ti
nu
ity of
 the act of re
mem
-
brance of the ob
ject is im
plied. Si
m
i
lar is the case with re
flec
tion also.
From this it f
ol
lows that rep
e
ti
tion has to be prac
tised there also,
where the text
 gives in
struc
tion once only
. Where, again, t
he text
gives re
peated in
struc
tion, re
peated per
for
mance of the men
t
al act
s
is
di rectly
in ti mated.
When the scrip
ture speak
ing about the rice for t
he sac
ri
fice
says, ﬁThe rice should be beatenﬂ the sac
ri
ficer un
der
st
ands that the
in
junc
tion means ﬁThe rice should be beaten over and ov
er again, till
it is free from huskﬂ for no sac
ri
fice can be per
formed with t
he rice with
it
s husk on. So when the scrip
ture says, ﬁThe Self
 must be seen
through
hear ing,
re flec tion
and
med i t
a tionﬂ
it
means
the
rep e ti tion
of
these men
t
al pro
cesses, so long as the Self is not seen or real
ised.
&
Lingaccha
IV
.1.2 (479)
And on a
ccount
 of t
he indi
cator
y mar
k.
Lingat:
 because of the indicatory m
ark or sign;
Cha:
 and.
The same topic is con
tin
ued.
An indicatory m
ark also shows that rep
e
ti
tion is re
quired. In t
he
Sruti t
here is a teach
ing of re
peated med
i
t
a
tion. I
t says that
 one son
will be born if there is a sin
gle act of med
i
t
a
tion whereas many sons
will be born if there are many
 and re
peated act
s of med
i
t
a
tion. ﬁRe
-
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 1
475

flect upon the ray
s and you will have many
 sonsﬂ (Chh. Up. I.5.2). I
n
the Sec
tion treat

ing of med i
t
a
tion on the Udgit
ha the tex
t re
peat
s the
med
i
t
a
tion on the Udgit
ha viewed as the sun, be
cause it
s re
sult is one
son only and the clause ﬁRe
flect upon his raysﬂ en
joins a med
i
t
a
tion
on his man
i
fold rays as lead
ing to the pos
ses
sion of many sons. Thi
s
in di cates
that
the
rep e ti tion
of
med i t
a tion
is
some thing
well
known.
What holds good in this case holds good for other med
i
t
a
tions also.
In the case of fi
rst class type of as
pi
rant with in
tense pu
rity
,
disp
assion,
dis crim i na tion
and
ex tremely

sub tle
and
sharp
in tel lect,

a
sin
gle hear
ing of that
 great sen
tence ﬁ
T
at-Tvam-A
si
ﬂ Mahavakya will
be quite suf

fi cient. Rep
e
ti
tion would in
deed be use
less for him who is
able to real
ise the true na
ture of Brah
man even if
 the Mahavaky
a
ﬁ
T
at-Tvam-A
si
ﬂ is enounced once only
. But
 such ad
vanced souls are
very rare. Or
di
nary peo
ple who are deeply at
t
ached to the body and
ob
ject
s can
not at
t
ain reali
sa
tion of T
ruth by a sin
gle enun
ci
a
tion of it
.
For such per
sons rep
e
ti
tion is of use. T
he er
ro
ne
ous no
tion ﬁI am t
he
bodyﬂ can be de
stroyed only t
hrough con
st
ant med
i
t
a
tion or re
peated
prac
tice. Knowl
edge can dawn only when there is in
ces
sant and fre
-
quent
med i t
a tion.
Rep e ti tion
has
the
power
of
an ni hi lat ing
this
er ro ne ous
idea
grad
u
ally
. Med
i
t
a
tion should be con
tin
ued till t
he last trace of body
idea is de
stroyed. When the body
 con
scious
ness is to
t
ally an
ni
hi
-
lated, B
rah
man shines It

self in all It
s pris
tine glory and pu
rity
. The
medit
ator
and
the
med i t
ated
be come
one.
In di vi
d u al ity

van ishes
in
toto.
If rep
e
ti
tion is not nec
es
sary
, the Chhandogya Up
anishad would
not have t
aught the t
ruth of the great
 sen
tence ﬁThou art Thatﬂ re
peat
-
edly
.
In the T
aittiriy
a Up
anishad III.
2 we find that
 Bhrigu goes sev
eral
times to his f
a
ther V
aruna and asks him again and again, to be t
aught
the na
ture of Brah
man.
Bhrigu V
aruni went to his fa
ther V
aruna say
ing, ﬁSir
, teach me
Brah
man.ﬂ He told him t
his, viz.,
 food, breath,
 the eye,
 the ear
, mind
and speech. Then he said again to him ﬁThat
 from whence these be
-
ings are born, that by
 which when born they live,
 that int
o which they
en
ter at thei
r death, try
 to know that.
 That is Brah
man.ﬂ
This in
junc
tion about rep
e
ti
tion is meant f
or those only who lack
in pu
rity and sub
tle un
der
st
and
ing and in whom a sin
gle enun
ci
a
tion
is not suf

fi cient to giv
e them the di

rect cog ni
tion of B
rah
man.
The in
di
vid
ual soul is t
aught step by st
ep to be sub
tler than t
he
body
, etc.,
 till it
 is real
ised as pure Chait
anya. When we have t
he
knowl
edge of the ob
ject only
, we can have full knowl
edge of the af

fir -
ma
tion about it
. In t
he case of those who have ig
no
rance or doubt or
wrong
knowl edge,
the
af
 fir ma tion
(
T
at-Tvam-A
si
) can
not bring on im
-
me
di
ate reali
sa
tion but t
o those who have no such ob
struc
tion there
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
476

will be reali
sa
tion. Hence re
it
er
a
tion with rea
son
ing is only for lead
ing
us to full V
achyartha Jnana.
W
e ob
serve that men by
 re
peat
ing again and again a sen
tence
which they
, on the f
irst hear
ing, had un
der
stood im
per
fectly
 only
,
grad
u
ally rid t
hem
selves of all mi
s
con
cep
tions and ar
rive at a f
ull un
-
der
st
and
ing of the t
rue sense.
All thi
s es
t
ab
lishes the con
clu
sion that, i
n the case of cog
ni
tion
of the S
u
preme Brah
man, the in
struc
tion lead
ing to such reali
sa
tion
may be re
peated.
Atmatv
op
asanadhikaranam
: T
opic 2
He who medit
ates on the Suprem
e Brahman
must com
prehend It as identical wit
h himself
AmË_o{
V Vyn
JÀN>
pÝV J
«mh`
&
Atmeti tup
agacchanti grahay
anti cha
IV
.1.3 (480)
Bu
t (the
 Sruti te
xts)
 ack
nowl
ed
ge
 (Bra
hman)
 as the
 Se
lf (of
 the
meditator) and also teach oth
er (to realise It as such).
Atmeti
:
 as the Self;

Tu
:
 but;
Up
agacchanti:
 acknowledge, approach,
realise;
Grahay
anti:
 teach, make others comprehend, instruct;

Cha:
also.
This Su
tra pre
scribes the pro
cess of med
i
t
a
tion.
A
 doubt arises whether Brah
man is to be com
pre
hended by the
Jiva or the in
di
vid
ual soul as iden
ti
cal with it or sep

a rate from it
.
The op
po
nent main
t
ains that Brah
man is to be com
pre
hended
as dif

fer ent from t
he in
di
vid
ual soul ow
ing to their es
sen
tial dif

fer ence,
be
cause the in
di
vid
ual soul is sub
ject to p
ain, sor
row and mis
ery
,
while the other is not.
The pres
ent Su
tra re
futes the v
iew that Brah
man is to be com
-
pre
hended as iden
ti
cal with one™
s self. The in
di
vid
ual is es
sen
tially
Brah
man only
. The Jivahood is due t
o the lim
it
ing ad
junct, the i
n
ter
nal
or
gan or Ant
ahkarana. The Jivahood is il
lu
sory
. The Jiva is in re
al
ity
an em
bodi
ment of bli
ss. It ex

pe ri
ences pain and m
is
ery on ac
count of
the
lim it i
ng
ad junct,
Ant
ahkarana.
The Jabalas ac
knowl
edge it ﬁI am in
deed Thou, O Lord, and
Thou art in
deed my
self.ﬂ Other scrip
tural tex
t
s also say the same
thing, ﬁI
 am Brah
man:
Aham
 Brahma A
smi
ﬂ (Br
i. Up
. I.4.10
). ﬁT
hy se
lf
is this which is within allﬂ (Bri.
 Up. III
.4.1). ﬁHe is thy
 self, the ruler
with
in, the
 im
mor

talﬂ
 (Bri
. Up. III.7
.3). ﬁ
That i
s the
 T
rue
, that is
 the Se
lf,
That thou art
ﬂ (Chh. Up. VI.
8.7). The t
ext
s are to be t
aken in their pri
-
mary and not sec
ond
ary sense as in ﬁThe mind is Brah
manﬂ (Chh.
Up. III
.18.1), where the t
ext pres
ent
s the mind as a sym
bol for med
i
t
a
-
tion.
There
fore we have to med
i
t
ate on Brah
man as the Self
.
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 1
477

Y
ou can
not say that
 these mean only a f
eel
ing or emo
tion of
one
ness, just as we re
gard an idol as V
ishnu.
In the lat

ter case we have only a sin gle st
ate
ment. B
ut in the
Jabala Sruti we have a dou
ble af

fir ma
tion, i.
e., t
he iden
tity
 of Brah
-
man with the in
di
vid
ual soul with Brah
man. The seem
ing dif

fer ence
be
tween Jiva and Brah
man is un
real. There is Jivahood or
Samsaritv
a for the in
di
vid
ual soul till reali
sa
tion is at
t
ained.
Hence we must fix our minds on Brah
man as be
ing the Self
.
Pratikadhi
karanam: T
opic 3
The symbols of B
rahman should not be m
edit
ated upon
as identical with t
he medit
ator
Z àVrH
o$ Z {
Na pratike na hi sah
IV
.1.4 (481)
(The meditato
r is) not (to se
e the
 Self) in the s
ymbol, be
cause
he is
 not (that).
Na:
 not;
Pratike:
 in the symbol (such as Akasa, the sun, t
he mind,
etc.)
;
Na:
 not;
Hi:
 because;
Sah:
 he.
This and the fol
low
ing two Sutras ex

am ine the val
ue of a Prati
ka
or sym
bol in wor
ship.
Pratikas, sym
bols, would not be re
garded as one with us. The
medit
ator can
not re
gard them as be
ing one with him,
 as they are sep

-
a
rate from him.
Chhandogya Up
anishad III.
18.1 de
clares ﬁThe mind is Brah
-
manﬂ.
A
 doubt arises whether in such med
i
t
a
tions where the mind is
t
aken as a sym
bol of Brah
man, the m
edit
ator is to iden
tify
 him
self with
the mind, as in t
he case of the med
i
t
a
tion: ﬁI
 am Brah
manŠ
Aham
Brahma A
smiﬂ
.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that he should, be
cause the mind
is a prod
uct of Brah
man and as such it is one with It.
 So the medit
ator
,
the in
di
vid
ual soul, is one with Brah
man. There
fore, it
 fol
lows that the
medit
ator also is one with the mi
nd, and hence he should see his Self
in the mind in t
his med
i
t
a
tion also.
The pres
ent Su
tra re
futes this.
 W
e must not at
t
ach to sym
bols
the idea of B
rah
man. Be
cause the medit
ator can
not com
pre
hend the
het
er
o
ge
neous sym
bols as be
ing of the na
ture of the S
elf.
W
e must not re
gard Pratikas (sym
bols or im
ages) as be
ing our
-
selves. They are dif

fer ent from our
selves and can
not be re
garded as
be
ing iden
ti
cal with our
selves. Nor can we say that t
hey be
ing de
riv
a
-
tives of
 Brah
man and Brah
man be
ing one with At

man, they are also
to be treated as one wit
h the At

man. They can be one with Brah
man
only if
 they go abov
e name and form and when they
 go above name
and form, t
hey will not be P
ratikas.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
478

At
man is Brah
man only when freed f
rom Kartritv
a (doership).
T
wo gold or
na
ment
s can
not be iden
ti
cal but both can be one with
gold.
If t
he sym
bol mind is real
ised as iden
ti
cal with Brah
man, then it
is no lon
ger a sym
bol, just as when we real
ise an or
na
ment as gold, it
ceases to be an or
na
ment. I
f the med
i
t
at
ing per
son real
ises his iden
-
tity
 with Brah
man, then he i
s no lon
ger the Jiva or the in
di
vid
ual soul,
the medit
ator
. The dis
tinc
tions of medit
ator
, med
i
t
a
tion and the m
ed
i
-
t
ated ex
ist in the be
gin
ning when one
ness has not been real
ised.
When
ever there is the dis
tinc
tion be
tween the medit
ator and the med
-
i
t
ated there is the pro
cess of med
i
t
a
tion. Where there is con
scious
-
ness of dif

fer ence, di
ver
sity or plu
ral
ity
, the medit
ator is quite dis
tinct
from the sym

bol.For these rea
sons the self is not med
i
t
ated in sym
bols. The
medit
ator is not to see his self in t
he sym
bol.
Brahmadrish
ty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 4
When medit
ating on a symbol,
 the symbol should be considered
as Brahman and not
 Brahman as t
he symbol
~«÷Ñ{
ï>éË
H$fm©V²
Brahmadrish
tirutkarshat
IV
.1.5 (482)
(T
he symbol) is to be vie
wed as Brahman (and not in
 the
rev
ers
e w
ay), o
n acc
ou
nt of the
 ex
altati
on (o
f the
 symb
ol
the
reb
y).
Brahmadrishtih:
the view of
 Brahman, t
he view in the li
ght of
Brahman;
Utkarshat:
 on account of superiority
, because of
super-eminence.
The same dis
cus
sion is con
tin
ued.
In med
i
t
a
tions on sym
bols as in ﬁThe mind is Brah
manﬂ, ﬁThe
sun is Brah
manﬂ, the ques
tion is whether the sym

bol is to be con sid
-
ered as Brah
man, or Brah
man as the sym
bol.
This Su
tra de
clares that the sym
bols, the mind,
 the sun, etc.,
 are
to be re
garded as Brah
man and not in t
he re
verse way
. Be
cause you
can at
t
ain el
e
va
tion or prog
ress by look
ing upon an in
fe
rior thing as a
su
pe
rior thing and not in t
he re
verse way
. As you hav
e to be
hold
Brah
man in ev
ery
thing and free y
our
self from the i
dea of dif

fer en
ti
a
-
tion and di
ver
sity
, you hav
e to con
tem
plate on these sym
bols as
Brah man.
T
o view the sym

bol as Brah man is quite proper
, but by
 re
vers
ing
the or
der to view Brah
man in the light
 of the sym

bol is not jus ti
fi
able,
be
cause of super-em
i
nence of Brah
man over the sym

bol.It would not
 serve any pur
pose to think of B
rah
man in the light
 of
a lim
ited thing;
 be
cause it would be only to de
grade the In
fi
nite Lord to
the st
a
tus of a fi
nite thing.
 The sym
bol should be raised higher in
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 1
479

thought t
o the level
 of Brah
man but Brah
man should not be brought
down to the lev
el of the sy
m
bol.
Adity
adimaty
adhikaranam
: T
opic 5
In m
edit
ation on the m
embers of sacrificial act
s the idea of divinit
y
is to be superimposed on the m
embers and not in t
he reverse way
.
Am{X
Ë`m{X_
V`ümﬁ
 CnnÎmo
Adity
adimat
ay
aschanga up
ap
atteh
IV
.1.6 (483)
And t
he ideas of t
he sun,
 etc.,
 are to be superi
mposed) on t
he
subordinate membe
rs (of sacr
ificial act
s), because
 (in th
at way
alo
ne
 the
 state
me
nt of the
 scrip
ture
s wo
uld
 be
) co
nsis
ten
t.
Adity
adimat
ay
ah:
 the idea of t
he sun, etc.;
Cha:
 and;
Anga:
 in a
subordinate member (of the sacrificial act
s);
Up
ap
atteh:
 because of
consistency
, because of it
s reasonableness.
A
 p
ar
tic
u
lar in
st
ance is cited to con
firm the pre
ced
ing Su
tra.
ﬁHe who burns up these (s
un), let a man m
ed
i
t
ate upon that
which shines yon
der as the Udgithaﬂ (Chh. Up. I.
3.1). ﬁOne ought t
o
med
i
t
ate upon the S
aman as five
foldﬂ (Chh. Up. II
.2.1). ﬁLet
 a man
med
i
t
ate on the seven
fold Saman i
n speechﬂ (Chh. Up. II.8.
1). ﬁThis
earth is the Rik, fi
re is Samanﬂ (Chh. Up. I.
6.1).
In med
i
t
a
tions con
nected with sac
ri
fi
cial act
s as given in the
text
s quoted, how is the med
i
t
a
tion to be per
formed? Is the sun t
o be
viewed as the Udgitha or t
he Udgitha as the sun? Be
tween the
Udgitha and the sun there is noth
ing to in
di
cate which is su
pe
rior
, as
in the pre
vi
ous Su
tra, where Brah
man be
ing pre-em
i
nent, t
he sym
bol
was viewed as Brah
man.
The pres
ent Su
tra de
clares that the mem
bers of sac
ri
fi
cial act
s
as the Udgitha are to be v
iewed as the sun and so on, for the fruit
 of
the sac
ri
fi
cial act is in
creased by so do
ing. The sac
ri
fi
cial work be
-
comes suc
cess
ful. A
 scrip
tural p
as
sage, viz.,
 Chh. Up. I.
1.10 ﬁWhat
-
ever one per
forms with knowl
edge, fait
h and Up
anishad is more
pow
er
fulﬂ ex
pressly de
clares that knowl
edge causes the suc
cess of
sac r
i fi cial
work
.
If we vi
ew the Udgitha as the sun, it
 un
der
goes a cer
t
ain cer
e
-
mo
nial pu
ri
fi
ca
tion and thereby
 con
trib
utes to the A
purva or Adrisht
a,
the in
vis
i
ble fruit of
 the whole sac
ri
fice, which leads to Karm
a
Samriddhi (the f
ulness of the Karma). I
f the sun is viewed as Udgitha
in the re
verse way the pu
ri
fi
ca
tion of t
he sun by this med
i
t
a
tion will not
con
trib
ute to t
he Apurva, as t
he sun is not a mem
ber of the sac
ri
fi
cial
act.
The mem
bers of the sac
ri
fi
cial act
s are to be viewed as the sun,
etc., if
 the dec
la
ra
tion of t
he scrip
tures that t
he med
i
t
a
tions in
crease
the re
sult of the sac
ri
fice is to come true.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
480

The sun, etc.,
 are higher (Utkarsha) than Udgitha be
cause the
sun, etc., are t
he fruit
s at
t
ained by Karma.
 There
fore, the rule of
Utkarsha-buddhi re
ferred to above needs that
 we must re
gard and
wor
ship Udgitha, etc.
, as the sun, etc.
If y
ou say that i
f we re
gard the sun, etc.,
 as the Udgitha, t
he for
-
mer be
ing of the na
ture of Karma wil
l give t
he fruit,
 that would be
wrong be
cause Upasana it

self is a Karma and will give the fruit
.
The Udgitha should be raised higher in thought
 to the lev
el of
the sun, but not
 the sun brought down to that
 of the Udgit
ha.
In this way a m
edit
ator should raise him
self to the l
evel of B
rah
-
man by thi
nk
ing him
self as Brah
man, but should not
 bring Brah
man
down to the lev
el of the in
di
vid
ual soul.
Asinadhikaran
am: T
opic 6 (Sutras 7-10)
One is to m
edit
ate sitti
ng.
AmgrZ– gå^
dmV² &
Asinah sambh
av
at
IV
.1.7 (484)
Sitting (a man is to med
itate) on ac
count of the
 possib
ility.
Asinah:
 sittin
g;
Sambhav
at:
 on account of the possibilit
y
.
The pos
ture of the m
edit
ator while en
gaged in med
i
t
a
tion is now
dis cussed
.
In Karmanga Up
asanas there is no ques
tion as to whether t
hey
should be done sit
ting or st
and
ing as they de
pend on the p
ar
tic
u
lar
Karma. I
n pure reali
sa
tion or per
fect in
tu
ition there could be no such
ques
tion as it de
pends on the ob
ject of reali
sa
tion. I
n other Up
asanas
sit ting
is
nec es sary
for
med i t
a tion.
The Purvap
akshin here main
t
ains that as the med
i
t
a
tion is
some
thing men
t
al there can be no re
stric
tion as to the at

ti tude of t
he
body
.
This Su
tra says that one has t
o med
i
t
ate sit
ting, be
cause it is not
pos
si
ble to med
i
t
ate while st
and
ing or ly
ing down. Sit

ting is nec es
sary
for med
i
t
a
tion be
cause Upasana is the con
ti
nu
ity of
 men
t
al st
ate and
such con
ti
nu
ity will
 not ex
ist when one walks or runs be
cause then the
mind will at
tend to t
he body and can
not con
cen
trate, or when one lies
down be
cause then he will be soon over
pow
ered by sleep.
In Up
asana one has to con
cen
trate one™
s mind on a sin
gle ob
-
ject. This is not pos
si
ble if one is st
and
ing or ly
ing. The mind of
 a
st
and
ing man is di
rected on main
t
ain
ing the body i
n an erect po
si
tion
and there
fore in
ca
p
a
ble of re
flec
tion on any sub
tle mat
ter
.
A
 sit
ting per
son may eas
ily av
oid these sev
eral oc
cur
rences
and is, there
fore, in a po
si
tion to carry on his med
i
t
a
tion. The sit

tingpos
ture con
trib
utes that com
po
sure of mind which is the
sine qua non
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 1
481

of med
i
t
a
tion. Med
i
t
a
tion is to be prac
tised in a sit
ting pos
ture, as in
that
case
only
med i t
a tion
is
prac ti ca ble.
Dhy
anaccha
IV
.1.8 (485)
And on a
ccount
 of medit
ati
on.
Dhy
anat:
 on account of medit
ation;
 Cha:
and.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 7 is ad
duced.
Fur
ther
, such con
ti
nu
ity of
 thought is Dhy
ana or med
i
t
a
tion. I
t
can come only when the limbs are not ac
tive and t
he mind is calm.
Up
asana (wor
ship) be
ing mainly of
 the na
ture of con
cen
tra
tion,
should be prac
tised in a sit
ting pos
ture, which is con
du
cive to con
cen
-
tra tion.

Con cen tra tion
be ing
an
un in ter rupted
and
unintermitt
ent
cur
-
rent of thought
 sent to
wards a par
tic
u
lar ob
ject, the sit

ting pos ture
be comes
in dis pens able.
The word ‚Upasana™
 also de
notes ex
actly what m
ed
i
t
a
tion
means, that i
s con
cen
trat
ing on a sin
gle ob
ject with a fi
xed look, and
with
out any mov
e
ment of t
he limbs. This is pos
si
ble only in a sit

tingpos ture.
Med
i
t
a
tion de
notes a length
ened car
ry
ing of the same t
rain of
ideas. W
e as
cribe thought

ful ness to those whose mind is con
cen
-
trated on one and the same ob
ject while their look is fi
xed and their
limbs do not mov
e. W
e say that S
ri Ramakrishna is thought

ful. Nowsuch thought

ful ness is easy for those who sit. The wife sit
s and thinks
deeply over her hus
band gone on a dis
t
ant jour
ney
.
Dhy ana
or
med i t
a tion
is
think ing
on
one
sub ject
con tin u ously
,
with
out the in
rush of ideas in
con
gru
ous with the sub
ject of thought
.
Such med
i
t
a
tion is pos
si
ble in a sit
ting pos
ture only and not
 while ly
-
ing down or st
and
ing etc. There
fore, a sit
ting pos
ture should be
adopted both f
or prayers as well as for med
i
t
a
tion.
The dis
trac
tion of mi
nd is mini
mised when one med
i
t
ates in a
sit ting
pos ture.
W
e, there
fore, con
clude herefrom also that med
i
t
a
tion is the oc
-
cu
p
a
tion of a sit

ting per son.
AMb
Ëd§ Mmno
Achalatv
am chapekshy
a
IV
.1.9 (486)
And
 with re
fe
ren
ce
 to im
mob
ility (
the
 scrip
ture
s as
crib
e
me
dita
tive
ne
ss to
 the
 ea
rth).
Achalatv
am:
immobility
, st
ability
, steadiness
;
 Cha:
 and, indeed;
Apekshy
a:
referring to, aim
ing at, point
ing to.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 7 is con
tin
ued.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
482

The word ‚cha™
 has the force of ‚in
deed™. In t
he Chhandogya
Up
anishad the root ‚Dhy
ana™
 or med
i
t
a
tion is em
ployed in t
he sense
of
mo tion less ness.
With ref
er
ence to the im
mo
bil
ity of
 the earth in or
di
nary eye, t
he
scrip
ture fan
cies the earth as be
ing en
gaged in con
cen
tra
tion, as if
 it
re
mains fixed i
n space in t
he act of pi
ous med
i
t
a
tion. I
t sug
gest
s that
such a steady ap
pli
ca
tion of t
he mind can be at
t
ained by med
i
t
at
ing
only in a sit
ting pos
ture.
If t
he body is at rest,
 there is rest for the mind al
so; if the body
 is
in mo
tion, i.
e., rest
less, the mind t
oo be
comes rest
less.
In the p
as
sage, ﬁThe earth med
i
t
ates as it wereﬂ, medi
t
a
tive
-
ness is at
trib
uted to earth on ac
count of it
s im
mo
bil
ity or steadi

ness.This also help
s us to in
fer that m
ed
i
t
a
tion is pos
si
ble in one when he is
sit
ting and not while st
and
ing or walk
ing.
S
teadi ness
ac com pa ni
es
med i t
a tion.
S
teadi ness
of
body
and
mind is pos
si
ble only while sit

ting and not while stand
ing or walk
ing.
ñ_apÝV M
Smaranti
 cha
IV
.1.10 (487)
T
he Smriti passages also say (th
e same
 thing
).
Smaranti
:
 the Smrit
i text
s say
, it is ment
ioned in the Sm
ritis;
Cha:
also.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 7 is con
cluded.
Au
thor
i
t
a
tive au
thors also teach in their Sm
ritis that a sit

tingpos
ture sub
serve the act of m
ed
i
t
a
tion, e.
g., ﬁHav
ing made a firm seat
for one™
s self on a pure spotﬂ (Bhagavad Git
a VI.
1
1).
For the same rea
son the Y
oga-Sastra teaches dif

fer ent pos
-
tures, viz.
, Padmasana, S
iddhasana, etc.
Ekagrat
adhikaranam
: T
opic 7
There is no restriction of place with regard to m
edit
ation
`Ì¡H
$mJ«Vm VÌ
m{deof
Y
atraikagrat
a t
atraviseshat
IV
.4.1
1 (488)
Whe
rev
er c
onc
en
tratio
n of mi
nd (i
s atta
ine
d), the
re (
it is to
 be
practised), th
ere be
ing no specificati
on (as to place).
Y
atra:
 where, wherever;
Ekagrat
a:
concentration of mind;

T
atra:
there;
A
v
iseshat:
 for want of any
 specification, it
 not being
specifically ment
ioned, as there is no special direction in S
ruti.
There are no spe
cific rules about the t
ime or place of med
i
t
a
tion.
When
ever and wher
ever the mind at

tains con
cen
tra
tion, we should
med
i
t
ate. The S
ruti says ﬁ
Mano™
nukule
ﬂŠwhere the mind feels fa
-
vour able.
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 1
483

Any place is good if
 con
cen
tra
tion is at
t
ained in that pl
ace. The
scrip
tures say
, ﬁLet a man med
i
t
ate at what
ever time,
 in what
ever
place and fac
ing what
ever re
gion, he may
 with ease man
age to con
-
cen
trate his mind.
ﬂ
But places that
 are clean, free from peb
bles, fire, dust
, noises,
st
and
ing wa
ter
, and the like are de
sir
able, as such places are con
ge
-
nial
to
med i t
a tion.
But t
here are no fixed rules to place,
 time and di
rec
tion.
Apray
anadhikaranam
: T
opic 8
Medit
ations should be continued til
l death
Am à
m`UmÎmÌm{n
 {h Ñï
>_²
Aa pray
anat t
atrapi hi dr
isht
am
IV
.1.12 (489)
Till death (till one a
ttains Moksha) (m
ed
itations have
 to be
rep
ea
ted
); for the
n als
o it i
s thu
s se
en
 in sc
riptu
re.
Aa pray
anat:
 till death, till Mukti;
T
atra:
there, then;

Api:
 also, even;
Hi:
 because;
Drisht
am:
 is seen (in the Sruti).
This Su
tra says Up
asana (med
i
t
a
tion, wor
ship) is to be ob
-
served till deat
h.
W
or
ship is to be con
tin
ued till deat
h, till
 one get
s Mukti, be
cause
it is found in S
ruti, t
hat the wor
ship
per
, con
tin
u
ing so till deat
h, at
t
ains
the world of Brah
man af

ter death.The first topi
c of the pres
ent Chap
ter has es
t
ab
lished that t
he
med
i
t
a
tion on the A
t
man or Brah
man en
joined by t
he scrip
tures is to
be re
peated till
 knowl
edge dawns.
The ques
tion is now t
aken up about other med
i
t
a
tions which are
prac tised
for
at t
ain ing
cer t
ain
re sult
s.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that such med
i
t
a
tions can be
stopped af

ter a cer t
ain time.
 They should still gi
ve fruit
s like sac
ri
fices
per
formed only once.
The pres
ent Su
tra de
clares that they
 are to be con
tin
ued up to
death, be
cause the Sruti and Sm
riti say so. ﬁWit
h what
ever thought
he p
asses away from this worldﬂ (Sat. B
r
. X.
6.3.1). ﬁRe
mem
ber
ing
what
ever form of be
ing he in the end leav
es this body
, into t
hat same
form he even p
asses, as
sim
i
lated it
s be
ingﬂ (Bhagavad Git
a VII
I.6).
ﬁAt the t
ime of death wit
h un
moved mindﬂ (Bhagav
ad Git
a VII
I.10).
ﬁLet a man at t
he time of
death, t
ake ref
uge with this triadﬂ (Chh. Up.
III
.17.6). ﬁWhat
ever his thought at
 the time of
 death with t
hat he goes
into Prana and t
he Prana united wit
h light, t
o
gether with the i
n
di
vid
ual
self, leads on to t
he world as con
ceived at t
he mo
ment of deat
hﬂ
(Pras. Up. IV
.2.10). T
his also fol
lows from the com
p
ar
i
son to the cat
-
er
pil
lar (Bri. Up. I
V
.4.3) or leech. The leech t
akes hold of an
other ob
-
ject be
fore it leav
es an ob
ject.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
484

One can
not en
ter
t
ain such a thought at t
he time of d
e
p
ar
ture of
Prana from thi
s body with
out prac
tice for the whole li
fe.
There
fore, med
i
t
a
tions must be prac
tised up to death.
T
adadhigamadhikaranam: T
opic 9
Knowledge of Brahm
an frees one from al
l p
ast and future sins.
VX{Y
J_ CÎma
nydm©K
`moaí
bof{
dZmem¡ VX
²>ì`n
XoemV²
T
adadhigam
a utt
arapurv
aghay
orasleshav
inasau
 t
adv
y
ap
adesat
IV
.1.13 (490)
On the
 attain
me
nt of thi
s (vi
z., Bra
hman)
 (the
re ta
ke
s pl
ace
)
the no
n-clinging and
 the d
es
truction o
f later and
 ea
rlier sins
;
because
 it is so declared by the scriptures.
T
adadhigama:
 when that is realised;
Utt
arapurvaghay
oh:
of the
subsequent and the previous sins;
Asleshav
inasau:
 non-clinging
and destruction;
T
adv
y
ap
adesat:
 because Sruti has declared so.
The re
sult of knowl
edge of Brah
man or the st
ate of Jiv
anmukti is
now dis
cussed.
The sup
ple
ment to t
he Third Chap
ter is fin
ished here
with. Wit
h
the last Adhi
karana the top
ics con
nected with the Thi
rd Chap
ter have
come to an end. From t
his Adhikarana the Fourth Chap
ter proper be
-
gins. The Fourth Chap
ter is the Phaladhy
aya, i.
e., t
he Chap
ter re
lat
-
ing to the f
ruit
s of Brahma V
idya.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that eman
ci
p
a
tion is at
t
ained in
spite of knowl
edge, only af

ter one has ex pe
ri
enced ef

fects of one™
s
sins
com mit ted
be fore
en light en ment

be cause
the
Smritis
de clare
ﬁKarma is not de
stroyed be
fore it has yi
elded it
s ef

fects.ﬂ The law of
Karma
is
un re lent ing.
This Su
tra says that when a per
son at
t
ains knowl
edge all his
p
ast sins are de
stroyed and fu
ture sins do not cling to him.
Karma has doubt
less it
s power of bring
ing it
s ef

fects but that
power can be nul
li
fied and over
come by knowl
edge of Brah
man.
Prayaschitt
as (ex
pi
a
tory act
s) have the power of cleans
ing sin.
Saguna-Brahma-V
idya cleanses all sins. Nirguna-Brahma-V
idya
put
s an end to agency or doership and de
stroys all sins. Hence no fu
-
ture doership can come to him and the ef

fects of the en
tire p
ast
doership van
ish when knowl
edge dawns. Oth
er
wise there will be no
lib
er
a
tion as Karma is Anadi
 (beginningless). If it
 is said that eman
ci
-
p
a
tion is caused like the fruit
s of Karma, it
 will be tran
sient and not
eter nal.
Fur
ther
, the re
sult
s of Jnana must be di
rect and im
me
di
ate. S
o
all sins van
ish when one at
t
ains knowl
edge of Brah
man or Self-reali
-
sa tion.
The scrip
ture de
clares that fu
ture sins which might be pre
-
sumed to cling to t
he agent do not cling t
o him who knows. ﬁAs wa
ter
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 1
485

does not cling to lo
tus leaf, so no ev
il deed clings to him who knows
thisﬂ (Chh. Up. IV
.14.3). S
im
i
larly scrip
ture de
clares the de
struc
tion of
pre
vi
ous ac
cu
mu
lated evi
l deeds. ﬁAs the fi
bres of the Ishika reed
when thrown into the f
ire are burnt, thus all sins are burntﬂ (Chh. Up.
V
.24.3). T
he ex
tinc
tion of works the fol
low
ing p
as
sage also de
clares:
ﬁThe fet
ter of the heart
 is bro
ken, all doubt
s are solved, all his works
are de
stroyed when He who is high and low is seenﬂ (Mun. Up. II.
2.8).
As re
gards the verses which say that no Karma is de
stroyed,
but by pro
duc
ing it
s ef

fects, that holds good in t
he case of or
di
nary
men who are in ig
no
rance and who have no knowl
edge of Brah
man. It

does not hold good in the case of t
hose en
light
ened sages who have
knowl
edge of Brah
man.
The knower of Brah
man feels and real
ises thus: ﬁThat Brah
man
whose na
ture it is to be at
 all times nei
ther agent not enj
oyer
, and
which is thus op
posed in be
ing to the soul™
s pre
vi
ously es
t
ab
lished
st
ate of agency and en
joy
ment that
 Brah
man am I;
 hence I nei
ther
was an agent, nor an enjoyer at any
 pre
vi
ous time, nor am I
 such at
the pres
ent time,
 nor shall I be such at any fu
ture time.
ﬂ
In this way only
 the fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion is pos
si
ble; for ot
h
er
wise,
i.e.,
 if the chain of
 works which has
 been run
ning on from eter
nity
could not be cut short, li
b
er
a
tion could never t
ake place. Eman
ci
p
a
-
tion can
not de
pend on lo
cal
ity
, time and spe
cial causes, as the fruit of
works is; be
cause there
from it would f
ol
low that t
he fruit of
 knowl
edge
is
non-per ma nent.
There
fore, it
 is an es
t
ab
lished con
clu
sion that there re
sult
s the
ex
tinc
tion of all
 sins on at
t
ain
ing Brah
man.
It
arasamsleshad
hikaranam
: T
opic 10
Sim
ilarly good work do not affect t
he knower of Brahman.
BVañ
`mß`
od_g
§íbof– n
mVo V
It
arasy
apy
ev
amasamsl
eshah p
ate tu
IV
.1.14 (491)
Thus in the sam
e wa
y, there
 is non-c
linging of the
 othe
r (i.e.,
Punya
 or vi
rt
ue, good w
orks)
 also;
 but at
 death (
libera
tion
, i.
e.,
Videha-Mukti is certain).
It
arasy
a:
of the ot
her;
Api:
 also;
Evam:
 thus, in the same way
;
Asamsleshah:
 non-clinging;
Pate:
 at death;

Tu
:
 but, indeed.
Dis
cus
sion on the con
se
quence of Brahma Jnana (the knowl
-
edge of Brah
man) is con
tin
ued.
As in the case of sin, so merit
 or vir
tue can
not at
t
ach to the
knower of Brah
man. Oth
er
wise such merit will be an ob
struc
tion to
lib
er
a
tion. When doership goes, merit
 must go like sin. The re
sult of
merit is be
low that of
 Jnana. Merit and sin have t
o be lef
t be
hind.
When both are tran
scended, lib
er
a
tion is sure at death.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
486

A
 knower of Brah
man has no idea of agency
. He is not touched
by good works also. He goes be
yond vir
tue and vice.
 ﬁHe over
comes
both
ﬂ (Br
i. Up
. IV
.4.22
).
Even t
here where the text m
en
tions evil deeds only
, we must
con
sider good deeds also to be im
plied therein, be
cause the re
sult
s
of the lat

ter also are in fe
rior to the re
sult
s of knowl
edge.
Merit also is a cause of bond
age and st
ands in the way of l
ib
er
a
-
tion. For a knower of Brah
man all his ac
cu
mu
lated mer
it
s and de
mer
-
it
s are de
stroyed. Thus his mer
it
s and sins be
ing to
t
ally in
op
er
a
tive,
his
sal va tion
nec es sar ily
fol lows
at
death.
Anarabdhadhikaranam: T
opic 1
1
Works which hav
e not begun to yield result
s are alone destroyed by
knowledge and not those which have already begun to bear fruit
s.
AZma
ãYH
$m`} Ed Vw
 nyd} V
XdYo
Anarabdhakary
e ev
a tu purv
e t
adav
adheh
IV
.1.15 (492)
Bu
t only
 thos
e fo
rme
r (work
s) who
se
 effe
cts ha
ve
 not ye
t be
gun
(ar
e destroyed by kn
owledge; because th
e script
ure sta
tes)
that (i.e
., the
 de
ath o
f the
 bo
dy) to
 be
 the
 term
.
Anarabdhakary
e:
 in the case of those works, the ef
fect
s of which
have not begun t
o operate, i.
e., t
o yield f
ruit
s or results;

Eva:
 only;
Tu
:
but;
Purve:
 forme
r works;
T
adav
adheh:
 that (death) being t
he limit,
because of waiting til
l death.
Dis
cus
sion on the con
se
quence of Brahma Jnana is con
tin
ued.
In the last t
wo Adhikaranas (top
ics) it has been st
ated that
 all the
p
ast works of a knower of Brah
man are de
stroyed. P
ast works are of
two kinds, viz.,
 Sanchit
a (ac
cu
mu
lated works) those which have not
yet be
gun to yiel
d re
sult
s and Prarabdha, i.e.
, those works whose ef

-
fect
s have al
ready be
gun to op
er
ate and have pro
duced the body
through which the as
pi
rant has at
t
ained Brahma Jnana or knowl
edge
of Brah
man.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that both t
hese are de
stroyed, be
-
cause the Mundaka Upani
shad says that all his works are de
stroyed.
ﬁHe thereby over
comes bothﬂ. This re
fers to all works with
out any dis
-
tinc
tion, all
 works what
ever must be re
garded to un
dergo de
struc
tion.
Fur
ther the sage who has at
t
ained Self-reali
sa
tion is a
non-doer
. He has no idea or feel
ing of agency
. His idea of
non-doership is the same with ref
er
ence to Sanchit
a or Prarabdha.
Hence both these works are de
stroyed when one at
t
ains knowl
edge
of Brah
man or the Su
preme Self.
This Su
tra re
futes this v
iew and de
clares that only S
anchit
a Kar
-
mas or ac
cu
mu
lated works whose fruit
s have not yet
 be
gun to op
er
-
ate are de
stroyed by knowl
edge but not t
he Prarabdha. Prarabdha
Kar
mas are de
stroyed only by
 be
ing worked out. Those works whose
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 1
487

ef

fects have be
gun and whose re
sult
s have been half en
joyed, i
.e.,
those very works to which there is due the pres
ent st
ate of ex

is tence
in which the knowl
edge of Brah
man arises and not de
stroyed by t
hat
knowl
edge. This view is f
ounded on the scrip
tural p
as
sage ﬁFor him
there is de
lay only
 as long as he is not de
liv
ered from this body
, and
then he is one with Brah
manﬂ (Chh. Up. VI.
14.2), which fix
es the
death of t
he body as the term of
 the st
ate
ment of t
he at
t
ain
ment of f
i
-
nal re
lease.
If it
 were not so, then there would be no t
each
ers of knowl
edge.
There
fore, the P
rarabdha Kar
mas are not de
stroyed by knowl
-
edge.
If it
 is said that fi
re must de
stroy all seeds, the re
ply is that
 what
has be
gun to op
er
ate, like a pot

ter™
s wheel, must have it
s op
er
a
tion.
Mithy
a Jnana (the er
ro
ne
ous knowl
edge of mul
ti
plic
ity) t
hough ne
-
gated by Jnana, will
 per
sist for a while (Badhit
anuvritt
i).
Each man™
s in
ner reali
sa
tion can
not be de
nied or dis
puted by
an
other
. This truth i
s de
clared by the de
scrip
tion of t
he S
thit
aprajna in
the Bhagav
ad Git
a.
The Knowl
edge of Brah
man in a knower or a sage can
not check
the Prarabdha Karma,
 just as an ar
cher has no con
trol over the ar
-
rows al
ready dis
charged, which co
mes to rest only when it
s mo
men
-
tum is ex
hausted. The lib
er
ated sage must keep up this body as long
as the mo
men
tum of P
rarabdha Kar
mas last
s. When the Prarabdha
Kar
mas are worked out or ex
hausted the body f
alls of
f and he at
t
ains
V
ideha-Mukti
or
dis em bod ied
sal va tion.
The fi
nal dis
cus
sion, there
fore, is that
 knowl
edge ef

fects the de
-
struc
tion of t
hose works only whether good or evil, whose ef

fects
have not y
et be
gun to op
er
ate.
Agnihotrady
adhikaranam
: T
opic 12 (Sutras 16-17)
Permanent
 obligatory works enjoined by the V
edas
for diff
erent Asramas are not t
o be given up.
A{¾hmoÌm{X
 Vw VËH$m`m©`¡
Agnihotradi
 tu t
atkary
ay
aiv
a t
addarsanat
IV
.1.16 (493)
Bu
t the
 Agni
hotra
 and
 the
 like
 (te
nd) to
ward
s the
 sam
e e
ffec
t,
knowl
edge (libera
tion
), becaus
e that
 is seen fr
om th
e
scrip
ture
s.
Agnihotradi:
 daily Agni
hotra, etc.
, daily
 of
fering of oblat
ions to the
perpetually m
aint
ained fire;
Tu
:
 but;
T
atkary
a:
 tend towards the same
result as that (knowledge);
Eva:
 only;
T
addarsanat:
 that being seen
from the scriptures.
W
orks of per
ma
nent ob
li
ga
tion (Nity
a Kar
mas) en
joined by t
he
V
edas such as Agnihotra tend to
wards the same ef

fect, i.e., hav
e the
same ef

fect as knowl edge. Be
cause this is de
clared by the tex
t
s such
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
488

as the fol
low
ing, ﬁBrahmanas seek to know him by t
he study of t
he
V
edas, by sac
ri
fices, by gif
t
sﬂ (Bri. Up. IV
.4.22).
But an ob
jec
tion is raised as knowl
edge and works have dif

fer -
ent ef

fects, it is not pos
si
ble that t
hey should have one and t
he same
ef
 fect.
It is ob
served, we re
ply
, that
 curd and poi
son whose or
di
nary ef

-
fect
s are fe
ver and death hav
e for their ef

fects sat
is
fac
tion and a flour
-
ish
ing st
ate of t
he body
, if t
he curd is mixed with sugar and the poi
son
t
aken while cer
t
ain Mantras are re
cited. Ev
en so works if joined with
knowl edge
may
ef
 fect
fi nal
eman ci p
a tion.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that ev
en oblig
a
tory works (Nitya
Kar
mas) such as Agnihotra which do not give any f
ruit
s but which are
en
joined by t
he scrip
tures as a sort of dis
ci
pline are de
stroyed by t
he
dawn of knowl
edge, just as other works done with de
sires, be
cause
the idea of non-agency of
 the knower of Brah
man is the same with re
-
spect to both.
This Su
tra re
futes this v
iew and de
clares that the reg
u
lar oblig
a
-
tory works are not de
stroyed.
Oblig a tory
du ties
ex er cise
a
pu ri fy ing
in flu ence
on
the
heart
and
are help

ful to the orig
i
na
tion of knowl
edge. They con
trib
ute in
di
rectly
to
knowl edge
i.e.,

lib er a tion.
They
sub serve
fi nal
eman ci p
a tion
im me
-
di
ately
. There
fore, thei
r re
sult
s per
sist till deat
h.
AVmo@Ý
`m{
n øoHo$
fm_w^
`mo–
Ato™ny
api hi ekeshamubhay
oh
IV
.1.17 (494)
For (there is) also (a class of g
ood works) other than t
his,
acc
ord
ing to
 som
e.
 (There
 is ag
ree
me
nt) of b
oth (te
ache
rs,
Jaimini
 and Baadarayana) (as t
o the fate of those works).
At
ah:
 from
 this
;
Any
a:
 dif
ferent;
Api:
also;
Hi:
because, indeed;
Ekesham:
 of some (Sakhas);
Ubhay
oh:
 of both.
There is also a class of good works
 dif

fer ent from works of per
-
ma
nent ob
li
ga
tion (Nity
a Kar
mas like the daily
 Agnihotra and t
he like)
which are per
formed with a v
iew to a fruit
. The fol
low
ing st
ate
ment of
some Sakhas is made with ref
er
ence to these: ﬁHis friends get his
good works and en
e
mies his evil ac
tions.ﬂ
Both t
each
ers, Jaimini and Baadarayana,
 are of the opin
ion that
works per
formed for the f
ul
fil
ment of some spe
cial de
sire do not con
-
trib
ute to
wards the orig
i
na
tion of t
rue knowl
edge.
V
idy
ajnanasadhanad
hikaranam
: T
opic 13
Sacrificial works not combined wit
h knowledge or medit
ation
also help in the originat
ion of knowledge
`Xod {dÚ`
Y
adev
a v
idy
ay
eti hi
IV
.4.18 (495)
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 1
489

Bec
au
se t
he t
ext
 ﬁw
ha
tev
er h
e does
 wi
th
 kn
ow
led
geﬂ
 in
ti
ma
tes
this.
Y
adev
a:
 whatever;
Vi
d
ya
ya
:
 with knowledge;
Iti:
 thus
, this
, so;
Hi:
because.
Nitya K
ar
mas (reg
u
lar oblig
a
tory works) which help the orig
i
na
-
tion of knowl
edge are of two kinds, vi
z., those com
bined with med
i
t
a
-
tions
and
those
un ac com pa ni
ed
by
knowl edge
or
med i t
a tions.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that work com
bined with med
i
t
a
-
tions help
s the orig
i
na
tion of knowl
edge as it is su
pe
rior to work done
with out
med i t
a tion.
The pres
ent Su
tra re
futes it and say
s that in the st
ate
ment ﬁThat
alone which is per
formed with knowl
edge be
comes more pow
er
fulﬂ
(Chh. Up. I.1.
10) the com
p
ar
a
tive de
gree in
di
cates that works done
with
out knowl
edge, not com
bined with med
i
t
a
tions are not al
to
gether
use
less, though the ot
her class is more pow
er
ful.
Even or
di
nary Agnihot
ra has V
irya (power) but Agnihotra con
-
firmed by V
idya (Up
asana) is more po
tent (V
iryavat
t
ara). Agnihotra if
ac com pa ni
ed
by
knowl edge
pos sesses

a
greater
ca pa bi
l ity

of
orig i
-
nat
ing knowl
edge and, there
fore, is of su
pe
rior causal ef

fi ciency with
re
gard to the reali
sa
tion of t
he self, while t
he same works if de
void of
knowl edge
pos sess
no
such
su pe ri or ity
.
It
arakshap
anadhikaranam
: T
opic 14
Af
ter enjoying the fruit
s of Prarabdha Karm
a
the knower becomes one with Brahm
an
^moJo
ZpËdVa
o jn{`Ë
Bhogenatv
it
are kshap
ay
itv
a samp
ady
ate
IV
.1.19 (496)
But having e
xhaus
ted b
y enjo
yment the
 other two wo
rks (viz.,
good and evil
 works
, t
hat
 have begun t
o yield f
ruit
s),
 he
be
come
s one
 with Brahman.
Bhogena:
 by enjoym
ent;
 Tu
:
 but;
It
are:
 of the ot
her two works (merit
and demerit);
Kshap
ay
itv
a:
 having exhaust
ed;
Samp
ady
ate:
becomes united with Brahman,
 becomes one with Brahman, obt
ains,
joins.
This Su
tra con
cludes with the an
swer to the ques
tion ﬁWhat be
-
comes of the Prarabdha por
tion of t
he il
lu
mined soul™
s work, which
has brought his pres
ent life i
nto ex
is
tence.ﬂ
It has been shown that all
 good and evil deeds whose ef

fects
have not y
et be
gun are de
stroyed by t
he power of knowl
edge of Brah
-
man. ﬁThe two ot
h
ers on the other hand, i.
e., t
hose good and evil
works whos
e ef

fects have be
gun, a man has at f
irst to ex
haust by the
fru
ition of t
heir con
se
quences, and then he be
comes one with Brah
-
man.ﬂ This ap
pears from scrip
tural p
as
sages such as
 ﬁfor him there is
de
lay so long as he is not de
liv
ered from the body
, then he will be
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
490

come one with Brah
manﬂ (Chh. Up. VI.
14.2), and ﬁBe
ing Brah
man he
goes to Brah
manﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
.4.6).
The Purvap
akshin ar
gues that the knower of B
rah
man will con
-
tinue to see di
ver
sity ev
en af

ter death, just as he sees plu
ral
ity while
liv
ing; anal
o
gously to t
he vi
sual ap
pear
ance of a dou
ble moon which
may con
tinue even af

ter it has been cog nised as false. He does not
at
t
ain one
ness with Brah
man even af

ter death.This Su
tra re
futes it and de
clares that the Prarabdha works are
de
stroyed through en
joy
ment. Though t
he knower of Brah
man has to
re
main in this world as a lib
er
ated sage or Jivanmukt
a, yet
 he at
t
ains
one
ness with Brah
man at death.
When the Prarabdha Kar
mas are ex
hausted by be
ing worked
out, he no lon
ger be
holds any plu
ral
ity on ac
count of the ab
sence of
any cause like the Prarabdha. He cer
t
ainly be
comes one with Brah
-
man as all works in
clud
ing Prarabdha are de
stroyed at deat
h.
Thus Brahma Jnana de
stroys Kar
mas (Sanchit
a) which have
not be
gun to bear fruit.
 Those which have be
gun to bear fruit
(Prarabdha) must be worked out by en
joy
ment. There is no es
cape
even on the p
art of the en
light
ened soul from the op
er
a
tion of t
he law
of Prarabdha.
The Purvap
akshin again ar
gues that a new ag
gre
gate of works
will orig
i
nate a new fru
ition. Not
 so, we re
ply; t
he seed of all such fru
-
ition is de
stroyed. What on t
he death of t
he body
, could orig
i
nate a
new pe
riod of fru
ition, i
s only a new set of works and works de
pend on
false knowl
edge. But
 such false knowl
edge is to
t
ally de
stroyed by
per
fect knowl
edge of Brah
man.
When, there
fore, the works whose ef

fects have be
gun are de
-
stroyed, t
he lib
er
ated sage who knows Brah
man nec
es
sar
ily en
ters
into the st
ate of per
fected iso
la
tion or Ab
so
lute Kaiv
alya.
Thus ends the First Pada (
Sec
tion 1) of the Four
th Chap
ter
(Adhy
ay
a IV) of the Brahma Sutras
 or the V
edant
a Phi
los
o
phy
.
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 1
491

CHAPTER IV
SECTION 2
INTRODUCTION
In the pre
vi
ous Sec
tion it was shown that one at

tains Jivanmukti
when the Sanchit
a Kar
mas or the ac
cu
mu
lated works which have not
as yet be
gun to bear fruit
s are de
stroyed, and V
idehamukti at deat
h
when the Prarabdha Karma is de
stroyed.
This Sec
tion is de
voted t
o the mode of de
p
ar
ture of the en
light
-
ened and the un
en
light
ened souls at the tim
e of leav
ing the body
. The
p
ath of t
he gods, the Devay
ana, by which the knower of t
he Saguna
Brah
man trav
els af

ter death, is de
scribed. The Sutrakara be
gins by
ex
plain
ing on the ba
sis of scrip
tural st
ate
ment
s the suc
ces
sive step
s
by which the soul p
asses out of the body at
 death. The de
p
ar
ture of
the soul is the same in the case of hi
m who pos
sesses the lower
knowl
edge and of him who is des
ti
tute of
 all knowl
edge.
492

SYNOPSIS
Adhikarana I:
 (Sutras 1-2) At the t
ime of death
 of the knower of
Saguna Brah
man, the f
unc
tions of the or
gans get merged in mind.
Adhikarana II:
 (Su
tra 3) At t
he time of deat
h of the knower of
Saguna Brah
man, the f
unc
tion of t
he mind is merged in the P
rana.
Adhikarana III
:
 (Sutras 4-6) At the t
ime of death
of the knower of
Saguna Brah
man, the f
unc
tion of P
rana is merged in the in
di
vid
ual
soul or Jiva.
Adhikarana IV
:
 (Su
tra 7) The mode of de
p
ar
ture from the body
up to the way i
s com
mon to both a knower of S
aguna Brah
man and
an or
di
nary man. B
oth p
ass through the same st
ages up to the en
-
trance of the soul to
gether with the sub
tle el
e
ment
s and so on into the
Nadis.
Adhikarana V
:
 (Sutras 8-1
1) The merg
ing of fire,
 etc., of
 death in
the High
est De
ity i
s not ab
so
lute merg
ing. A
 com
plete ab
sorp
tion of
the el
e
ment
s t
akes place only when fi
nal eman
ci
p
a
tion is at
t
ained.
Adhikarana VI:
 (Sutras 12-14) The Pranas of a knower of the
Nirguna Brah
man do not de
p
art from the body
 at death.
Adhikarana VII
:
 (Su
tra 15) The or
gans of the knower of the
Nirguna Brah
man get merged in I
t at deat
h.
Adhikarana VII
I:
 (Su
tra 16) The Kalas of t
he knower of the
Nirguna
Brah man
at t
ain
ab so lute
non-dis tinc tion
with
Brah man
at
death.
Adhikarana IX:
 (Su
tra 17) The soul of the knower of t
he Saguna
Brah
man co
mes to the heart at
 the time of
 death and thence goes out
through the Sushumna.
 The soul of the ig
no
rant man goes out by
means of some other Nadi.
Adhikarana X:
 (Sutras 18-19) The de
p
art
ing soul of a knower of
the Saguna B
rah
man fol
lows the rays of the sun af

ter death which ex -
ist at night
 as well as dur
ing day
, and goes to Brahmaloka.
Adhikarana XI:
 (Sutras 20-21) The soul of the knower of the
Saguna Brah
man goes to Brahmaloka even i
f he dies dur
ing the
south
ern course of the sun (Dakshinayana).
493

V
agadhikaranam
: T
opic 1 (Sutras 1-2)
At t
he tim
e of death t
he functions of t
he organs
are merged in the m
ind.
dmL²>_
Z{g Xe©
ZmÀN>ã
V
angmanasi
 darsanacchabdaccha
IV
.2.1 (497)
Sp
eech
 is
 mer
ged
 in
 mi
nd
, b
eca
us
e it
 is
 so
 seen
, a
nd
 th
ere a
re
scrip
tural
 state
me
nts (to
 that e
ffec
t).
V
ak:
 speech;
Manasi:
 in the mind;

Darsanat:
 because it is so seen or
observed, because of the scriptural declaration;

Sabdat:
 because of
the word of the V
edas, because of the st
atement of
 the Smrit
i;
Cha:
also, and.
This Su
tra says that speech merges in the mi
nd at death.
T
ill now Jivanmukti or li
b
er
a
tion while liv

ing is de scribed. Now
the at
t
ain
ment of B
rahmaloka by go
ing along the p
ath of gods
(Devayana) af

ter death is go ing to be de
scribed.
About t
he pro
cess of dy
ing we have the f
ol
low
ing p
as
sage,
ﬁWhen a man de
p
art
s from here his speech merges in his mind, his
mind in Prana, P
rana in fire and fire in t
he High
est De
ityﬂ (Chh. Up.
VI.6.1)
.
Now a doubt here arises whether the or
gan of speech as such
get
s merged in the mind or only i
t
s func
tion.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that the or
gan it

self is merged inthe mind as there is no men
tion in the t
ext about
 the func
tion of
speech get
ting merged.
The pres
ent Su
tra re
futes this v
iew and de
cides that only t
he
func
tion of t
he or
gan of speech is merged in the mind.
The merg
ing is al
ways of the ef

fect in the cause. Speech is not
an ef

fect of the mind. There
fore, the or
gan of speech can
not merge in
the mind. B
ut V
rittis (func
tional man
i
fes
t
a
tions) can merge in some
-
thing which is not it
s cause. For in
st
ance, heat which is the func
tion of
fire orig
i
nates from fuel and
ex
tin
guished in wa
ter
.
W
e see the man
i
fes
t
a
tion of speech ceas
ing in a dy
ing man,
though his mind is still
 func
tion
ing. None sees the or
gan of speech
be
ing merged in the mind.
So ex
pe
ri
ence also teaches that the f
unc
tion of speech and not
the or
gan it

self gets merged in mind.
AV Ed M gdm©
At
a ev
a cha sarv
any
anu
IV
.2.2 (498)
And for th
e same
 reason all (sense-organs) follow (mi
nd, i.e.,
ge
t the
ir func
tions
 me
rge
d in i
t).
At
a ev
a:
hence;
Cha:
and, also;
Sarv
ani:
 all (organs);
Anu
(Anugacchant
i):
 af
ter (follow).
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
494

This Su
tra in
ti
mates that t
he func
tions of all t
he or
gans merge in
the mind at t
he time of de
ath.
For
the
same
rea sons
(gen eral
ex pe ri ence
and
cor rob o ra tive
st
ate
ment of S
ruti) as st
ated in Su
tra 1, the f
unc
tions of all t
he other
sense-or
gans fol
low
, i.e.
, get merged in t
he mind. ﬁThe fi
re is ver
ily
the Udana, for he whose light
 has gone out co
mes to a new birth with
his senses merged in the mindﬂ (Pras. Up. II
I.9).
Like the speech it is ob
served that t
he eye and other senses dis
-
con
tinue their f
unc
tions, while t
he mind con
tin
ues to act. Be
cause the
or
gans them
selves can
not be ab
sorbed, and be
cause the text
 ad
mit
s
of that
 in
ter
pre
t
a
tion we con
clude that the di
f

fer ent or
gans fol
low af

ter,
i.e.,
 are merged in the mind only
 as far as their func
tions are con
-
cerned.
Mano™dhikaranam: T
opic 2
The function of
 mind i
s merged in Prana.
VÝ_Z– à
mU CÎma
T
anmanah pran
a utt
arat
IV
.2.3 (499)
T
hat min
d (is merged) in Prana (as is seen) from th
e
subsequ
ent clause (of the Sruti cit
ed).
T
at:
that;
Manah:
 mind;
Prana:
 in the Prana;

Utt
arat:
 from
 the
subsequent clause (of the Sruti).
It has been shown that t
he p
as
sage ﬁspeech is merged in mindﬂ
means a merg
ing of the f
unc
tion only
. A
 doubt here arises whether the
sub
se
quent clause ﬁmind is breathﬂ also means to in
ti
mate a merg
ing
of the f
unc
tion only
 or of that t
o which the func
tion be
longs.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that here it i
s mind it

self and not its
func
tion that
 get
s merged in Prana, as Prana can be said to be the
ma
te
rial cause of mind. I
n sup
port of his st
ate
ment he quotes t
he fol
-
low
ing text
: ﬁMind con
sist
s of food, P
rana of wa
terﬂ (Chh. Up. VI.
6.5);
ﬁW
a
ter sent forth eart
hﬂ (VI.2.
4). When mind, t
here
fore, is merged in
Prana, it
 is the same thing as earth be
ing merged in wa
ter
, for mind is
food or earth, and P
rana is wa
ter
, causal sub
st
ance and ef

fect be ing
non-dif

fer ent. Hence the S
ruti here speaks not of the func
tion of t
he
mind, but of
 mind it

self get ting merged in Prana.
This Su
tra re
futes this v
iew
. For the same rea
son it is the men
t
al
V
rittis (func
tions) that get
 merged in Prana, be
cause in deep sleep
and in ap
proach
ing death, we see the men
t
al func
tions stop
ping while
the Prana (breath) is ac
tive.
 The mind is not de
rived from P
rana, and
hence can
not merge in it.
 Breath or Prana is not t
he causal sub
st
ance
of mind. T
he re
la
tion of cau
sal
ity by
 an in
di
rect pro
cess does not suf

-
fice to show that m
ind is re
ally merged in P
rana. W
ere it so, then mi
nd
would also be merged in earth, earth in wa
ter
, breath in wa
ter
. Nor is
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 2
495

there on the al
ter
na
tive con
tem
plated any proof
 of mind hav

ing orig i
-
nated from t
hat wa
ter which has passed over int
o breath.
There
fore, mind can
not it

self be merged in Prana. The func
tion
of the mind o
nly is merged in Prana.
Adhy
akshadhikaranam
: T
opic 3 (Sutras 4-6)
The function of
 Prana is merged in t
he Jiva.
gmo@Ü
`jo VXw
nJ_m{Xä
So™dhy
akshe t
adup
agamadibhy
ah
IV
.2.4 (500)
That
 (Prana) is me
rged in the
 ruler (indiv
idual so
ul or Jiva) o
n
account of the (stat
eme
nts as to t
he Pranas) coming to it
 and
so on.
Sah:
 that (Prana);
Adhy
akshe:
 in the ruler (the Jiva);
T
adup
agamadibhy
ah:
 on account of the (st
atement
s as to the
Pranas) coming to it and so on.
ﬁPrana is merged in fireﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
.8.6). A
 doubt arises now
whether ac
cord
ing to the word of t
he scrip
ture, the f
unc
tion of P
rana
is merged in fire or in the in
di
vid
ual soul which is the ruler of the body
and senses.
Ac
cord
ing to the P
urvap
akshin we must con
clude that Prana is
merged in fire only
.
The pres
ent Su
tra jus
ti
fies it
s view be
cause stat
e
ment
s about
Pranas com
ing to the Jiv
a, etc.,
 are found in scrip
tural p
as
sages.
ﬁAll the P
ranas ap
proach the de
p
art
ing man at th
e time of dea
thﬂ
(Bri. Up. I
V
.3.38). A
n
other p
as
sage again spe
cially de
clares that the
Prana with it
s five f
unc
tions fol
lows the in
di
vid
ual soul. Af

ter him thusde
p
art
ing the Prana de
p
art
s, and that t
he other Pranas fol
low that
Prana. ﬁAnd af

ter the Prana thus de
p
art
ing all the ot
her Pranas de
-
partﬂ (Br
i. Up
. IV
.4.2)
.
The text
 cited in Su
tra 1, ﬁWhen the man de
p
art
s from here, his
speech merges in mind, mind in Prana,
 Prana in fire and f
ire in the
High
est De
ityﬂ (Chh. Up. V
I.8.
6), does not, how
ever
, con
tra
dict this
view
, as the fol
low
ing Su
tra in
di
cates.
^yVofw V
ÀN®>Vo–
Bhuteshu t
acchruteh
IV
.2.5 (501)
In the
 (subtle
) ele
ments (is me
rged) (the
 Jiva with the Pranas)
as it i
s se
en
 from the
 Sruti.
Bhuteshu:
 in the element
s;
T
at sruteh:
 as that can be understood
from Sruti
, from t
he Sruti t
ext
s to that ef
fect, t
here being a V
edic
st
atement about
 that.
This
Su tra
am pli fies
the
pre vi ous
one.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
496

The soul among with Prana rest
s in the sub
tle el
e
ment
s
(Bhut
a-sukshma). This is clear from the Sruti ﬁ
Pranastejasi
ﬂ.
The soul united with t
he Prana t
akes up it
s abode within the sub
-
tle el
e
ment
s which ac
com
p
any fire and f
orms the seed of the f
u
ture
gross body
. This we con
clude from the clause, ﬁPrana in heat
ﬂ. But
this p
as
sage in
ti
mates that t
he Prana t
akes up it
s abode and not that
the soul to
gether with the P
rana t
akes up it
s abode.
W
e re
ply
, it does not m
at
ter
. The pre
ced
ing Su
tra in
ter
ca
lates
the soul in the in
ter
val be
tween Prana and fire.
 W
e may say shortly
 of
a man who first trav

els from Haridwar to Ayodhya and t
hen from
A
yodhya t
o Benares that he t
rav
els from Haridwar to Benares. The
p
as
sage un
der dis
cus
sion, there
fore, means that
 the soul to
gether
with the Prana abid
es in the el
e
ment
s as
so
ci
ated with f
ire. The Prana
is first merged in the i
n
di
vid
ual soul and then the soul wit
h the Prana
t
akes it
s abode in the fine es
sence of the gross el
e
ment
s, fire etc.,
 the
seed of the fu
ture body
.
But how are you en
ti
tled to draw in t
he other el
e
ment
s also,
while the tex
t only speaks of that
? T
o this ques
tion the nex
t Su
tra
gives an an
swer
.
The Prana join
ing the soul, merged not
 only in T
ejas but at the
same time in ot
her el
e
ment
s too. This can be un
der
stood from Srut
i. It

is said to merge only in T
ejas, be
cause T
ejas (fire), is the pre
dom
i
nat
-
ing fac
tor there. ﬁThat
 soul is united with t
he es
sence of the earth, of
the wa
ter
, of t
he air
, of t
he Akasa, of the f
ireﬂ (Bri. Up. IV
.4.5).
Z¡H$pñ_Z
² Xe©`V
&
Naikasmin
 darsay
ato hi
IV
.2.6 (502)
(The soul
 with Prana is me
rged
) not in one
 ele
ment o
nly, for
bo
th (the
 Sruti a
nd Sm
riti) d
ec
lare
 this (o
r de
clare
 so)
.
Na:
 not;
Ekasmi
n:
 in one;
Darsay
at
ah:
 (both the Srut
i and Smriti
)
declare so, both the Srut
i and Smriti
 show;
Hi:
 as, for
, because.
When the soul leaves one body at
 the time of
 death and goes in
from an
other
, it t
o
gether with the sub
tle body abi
des in the sub
tle es
-
sence of all the gross el
e
ment
s and not in fire only
, be
cause all the el
-
e
ment
s are needed for a fu
ture body
. The new body con
sist
s of
var
i
ous el
e
ment
s. This mat
ter is de
clared in the ques
tion and an
swer
about the wa
ters called man (Chh. Up. V
.3.3). V
ide III
.1.2.
When the soul at
t
ains an
other body he does not rest in P
rana
alone, but goes with t
he sub
tle por
tions of all t
he el
e
ment
s. The ques
-
tion and an
swer in the Sruti show his.
A
 p
as
sage in the Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad de
clares that the
soul™
s em
bodi
ment is due to K
arma, for the abode con
sist
ing of Graha
(Indriyas or senses) and Atigraha (V
ishayas or ob
ject
s) is the ef

fect of Karma. Here the sub
tle el
e
ment
s are called the abode be
cause they
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 2
497

are the stuf
f of which the new body
 is made. These two vi
ews or pas
-
sages do not con
tra
dict each other
.
Asrity
up
akramadhi
karanam: T
opic 4
The mode of
 dep
arture from
 the body up to the way is comm
on to
both the knower of the S
aguna Brahman and an ordinary m
an.
g_mZm Mmgw
Ë`wnH
«$_
mX_¥
VËd§ MmZ
wnmoî
Samana chasrity
up
akramadamr
it
atv
am chanuposhya
IV
.2.7 (503)
And comm
on (i
s th
e mode of depart
ure at t
he tim
e of death f
or
both the
 knowe
r of the Sag
una Bra
hman and the
 ignorant) up
to the
 be
ginnin
g of the
ir ways
; and
 the
 immo
rtality (
of the
knowe
r of the Sa
guna B
rahman is o
nly rela
tive)
 without
having bu
rnt (ignorance
).
Samana:
 common;
Cha:
 and;
Asrity
up
akramat:
 up to the beginning
of their ways;

Amrit
atvam:
 immort
ality;
Cha:
 and;
Anuposhy
a:
without burning,
 without dissoluti
on.
There is no de
p
ar
ture for the knower of Nirguna Brah
man. His
Pranas are ab
sorbed in Brah
man.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that the m
ode of de
p
ar
ture from
the body f
or the knower of Saguna Brah
man and the ig
no
rant or the
or
di
nary man ought t
o be dif

fer ent, be
cause they at
t
ain dif

fer ent
abodes af

ter death. The knower of Saguna Brah
man goes to
Brahmaloka while the or
di
nary man is re
born in this world.
The pres
ent Su
tra says that t
he knower of the Saguna Brah
man
en
ters the Sushumna Nadi at deat
h and then goes out of t
he body
and then en
ters the Devayana or t
he p
ath of t
he gods while the or
di
-
nary ig
no
rant man en
ters some other Nadi and goes by an
other way
to have re
birth.
But t
he mode of de
p
ar
ture at death i
s com
mon to both t
ill they
en
ter on their re
spec
tive way
s.
Chhandogya Up
anishad VIII
.6.6 and K
athop
anishad II.3.
16 de
-
clare ﬁThere are a hun
dred and more Nadis in the in
te
rior of the heart,
of which only one leads from t
he heart to the head;
 by that
, pro
gress
-
ing
up wards,
the
de p
art ing
soul
at t
ains
im mor t
al ity
,
i.e.,

eman ci p
a
-
tion; all
 the other Nadis are for the egress of the or
di
nary peo
ple for
un
der
go
ing bond
age of fre
quent births and deaths.ﬂ
Samsarav
y
ap
adesadhikaranam
: T
opic 5 (Sutras 8-1
1)
The dissolution of f
ire etc., at
 the tim
e of death
in the Suprem
e Deity is only relative.
VXmnrVo– g§
gmaì`nXo
T
adapiteh samsarav
y
ap
adesat
IV
.2.8 (504)
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
498

That (fine
 bo
dy la
sts) u
p to
 the
 attain
me
nt of B
rahma
n
(th
rough
 knowl
edge), because (t
he scri
ptur
es) declare t
he
state
 of re
lativ
e e
xis
ten
ce
 (till the
n).
T
at:
that,
 aggregate of the el
ement
s, the sum tot
al of the subtl
e
element
s;
Apiteh
:
 till t
he att
ainment of B
rahman (through
knowledge);
Samsarav
y
ap
adesat:
 because (scr
iptures) declare the
st
ate of relat
ive exi
stence.
In the t
ext cit
ed in Su
tra 1, we have ﬁAnd f
ire is merged in the
High
est De
ityﬂ.
 The mean
ing is that t
he fire of t
he dy
ing man to
gether
with the in
di
vid
ual soul, the P
rana, the ag
gre
gate of t
he or
gans and
the other el
e
ment
s is merged in Brah
man.
W
e now have to con
sider of what kind that m
erg
ing is.
The Purvap
akshin holds that it is an ab
so
lute ab
sorp
tion of
things merged, as it i
s proved that t
hose things have the High
est De
ity
for their causal mat
ter
. For it has been es
t
ab
lished that t
he De
ity i
s the
causal sub
st
ance of all things,
 that hav
e an or
i
gin. There
fore that
p
ass
ing into the st
ate of non-sep

a ra
tion is an ab
so
lute one. Thi
s is the
fi nal
dis so lu tion.
Ev ery one
at t
ains
the
fi nal
eman ci p
a tion
at
death.
This Su
tra says that t
his merg
ing is not ab
so
lute merg
ing. Al
-
though Brah
man is the causal sub
st
ance of those el
e
ment
s, they are
at the t
ime of death,
 as in the case of deep sleep and a Pralaya of
 the
world, merged in it only
 in such a way as to con
tinue to ex

ist in a sem i
-
nal con
di
tion or seed st
ate. Only
 the func
tions of these el
e
ment
s are
merged and not the el
e
ment
s them
selves.
Those sub
tle el
e
ment
s, fire and so on, which form t
he abode of
hear
ing and the other or
gans per
sist up to fi
nal re
lease from the
Samsara, which is caused by per
fect knowl
edge, be
cause the scrip
-
tures de
clare that til
l then the Jiv
a or the in
di
vid
ual soul is sub
ject to
rel
a
tive ex

is tence. ﬁSome souls en
ter the womb for em
bod
ied ex
is
-
tence as or
ganic be
ings; oth
ers go into in
or
ganic mat
ter
, ac
cord
ing to
their work and ac
cord
ing to their knowl
edgeﬂ (Katha Up. II
.5.7).
Oth
er
wise the lim
it
ing ad
junct
s of ev
ery soul would at the t
ime of
death be ab
sorbed and the soul would en
ter into ab
so
lute un
ion with
Brah
man. Ev

ery dy ing per
son will reach Brah
man. This would ren
der
all scrip
tural in
junc
tion and scrip
tural doc
trine equally
 use
less.
Bond
age which is due to wrong knowl
edge, can
not be dis
solved
but through per
fect knowl
edge (Samyag Jnana). I
f the merg
ing at
death were ab
so
lute, t
hen there could be no re
birth.
gyú_
§ à
_mUVü
 VWmonb
ãYo
Sukshmam
 pramanat
ascha t
athop
alabdheh
IV
.2.9 (505)
(This fin
e b
ody) is su
btle (b
y nature) and
 size, be
cause
 it is so
observed.
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 2
499

Sukshmam
:
 subtle;
Pramanat
ah:
 as regards size;
Cha:
 and;
T
atha:
thus, so;
Up
alabdheh:
 because it is experienced, it
 being observed.
The el
e
men
t
ary mat
ter of fi
re and the other el
e
ment
s which form
the sub
stra
tum of t
he soul, when p
ass
ing out of t
his body
, must be
sub
tle in it
s na
ture and ex
tent.
 This fol
lows from the scrip
tural p
as
-
sages, which de
clare that it p
asses out by the Nadis and so on.
It
s thin
ness ren
ders it ca
p
a
ble of p
ass
ing out through t
he thin
and sub
tle Nadi and it
s trans
p
ar
ency is the cause of it
s not be
ing
stopped or ob
structed by any gross sub
st
ance, and not be
ing seen by
the by-st
anders when it p
asses out at death.
Zmon_
X}ZmV
–&
Nop
amardenat
ah
IV
.2.10 (506)
T
herefor
e, (t
his s
ubtle body i
s) not
 (destr
oyed) by t
he
destruc
tion
 (of t
he gros
s body).
Na:
 not;
Up
amardena:
 by the destructi
on;
At
ah:
 therefore, because
of this reason.
On ac
count of this great sub
tlety
 the sub
tle body i
s not de
-
stroyed by what de
stroys the gross body
, viz.
, burn
ing and the like.
Añ`¡d
 Mmonn
Îmoaof D$
Asy
aiv
a chop
ap
atteresha ushma
IV
.2.1
1 (507)
And t
o thi
s (subt
le body) al
one does thi
s (bodil
y) h
eat belong
,
because
 this (onl
y) is possible.
Asy
a:
 of the subtle body
;
 Eva:
 verily
, cert
ainly
, alone;
Cha:
 and, also;
Up
ap
atteh:
 it being possible, because of possibilit
y;
Esha:
 this
;
Ushma:
 (bodily) heat.
T
o that same sub
tle body be
longs the warmth which we per
-
ceive in the li
v
ing body
, by means of
 touch. That bodi
ly heat i
s not felt
in the body af

ter death, while such qual
i
ties as form, col
our and so on,
con
tinue to be per
ceived. The bodil
y heat is f
elt as long as there is life.

It f
ol
lows from this that
 the heat re
sides in some
thing dif

fer ent from
the body
, as or
di
narily known. The sub
tle body i
m
p
art
s it
s own heat to
the gross body and keep
s it warm as long as it re
mains alive.
 Scrip
-
ture also says, ﬁHe is warm if go
ing to liv
e; cold if go
ing to die.ﬂ
Pratishedhad
hikaranam
: T
opic 6 (Sutras 12-14)
The Pranas of the knower of Brahm
an
do not dep
art at the t
ime of
 death.
à{VfoYm{X{V MoÞ em
&
Pratishedhad
iti chenna sari
rat
IV
.2.12 (508)
If it
 be said (t
hat
 the Pr
anas
 of one w
ho know
s Bra
hman
 do not
depart)
 on acc
ount
 of t
he denial m
ade by th
e Srut
i, (
we say)
 not
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
500

so, (
be
cau
se
 the
 scrip
ture
 de
nie
s the
 de
partu
re o
f the
 Pran
as)
fr
om th
e indivi
dual soul
 (and n
ot f
rom t
he body).
Pratishedhat:
 on account of the denial;

Iti:
 so;
Chet:
 if (if it be
argued);
Na:
not so, you cannot
 say so;
 Sarira
t:
 from the indiv
idual
soul.
This Su
tra con
sist
s of two p
art
s, viz.,
 an ob
jec
tion and it
s re
ply
.
The ob
jec
tion por
tion is ‚
Pratishedhaditi
 chet
™. The re
ply por
tion is ‚
Na
sarirat; Sp
ashto hyekesham
™.
This Su
tra gives the v
iew of the Pu
rvap
akshin while the thir
-
teenth and f
our
teenth S
utras st
ate the S
iddhant
a or cor
rect doc
trine.
Brihadaranyaka Up
anishad de
clares, ﬁBut as to the m
an who
does not de
sire, who not de
sir
ing, freed f
rom de
sires, is sat
is
fied in
his de
sires, or de
sires the Self only
, of him,
 the vi
t
al airs (Pranas) do
not de
p
artﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
.4.6). F
rom this ex
press de
nial, form
ing p
art of
the higher knowl
edge, it f
ol
lows that the P
ranas do not p
ass out of the
body of him
 who knows Brah
man. This Srut
i p
as
sage re
fers to one
who knows the Nirguna Brah
man. It
 de
clares that his Pranas do not
de
p
art at death.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that the p
as
sage quoted does not
deny the de
p
ar
ture of the P
ranas from the body but
 from the in
di
vid
ual
soul. If t
he Pranas do not de
p
art from the body
 there will be no death
at all. T
his is made clear from the Madhy
andina recension which says
ﬁFrom him the v
i
t
al spir
it
s do not de
p
art.ﬂ
There
fore, the soul of
 a knower of Brah
man p
asses out of the
body with t
he Pranas.
The next S
u
tra re
futes this v
iew
.
ñnï>
mo øoH
S
p
ashto hy
ekesham
IV
.2.13 (509)
For (
the
 de
nial o
f the
 sou
l™s
 de
partu
re)
 is cl
ea
r (in the
 tex
ts) o
f
some schools.
S
p
asht
ah:
 clear;
Hi:
 for;
Ekesham:
 of some Sakhas or schools; the
st
atement of
 some Srutis.
The Pranas do not de
p
art from the body
 in the case of a lib
er
-
ated sage. This is made clear from t
he Sruti t
ext
s like: ﬁY
ajnavalkyaﬂ
said Art
abhaga, ﬁwhen the lib
er
ated man dies, do his P
ranas go up
from him or do they
 not?ﬂ ﬁNoﬂ re
plied Y
ajnavalkya,
 ﬁthey merge in
him o
nlyﬂ (
Bri. U
p. III.2.1
1).
If t
he Pranas de
p
art with the soul f
rom the body
, then t
he soul
will surely t
ake a re
birth. Hence there will be no eman
ci
p
a
tion.
There
fore, the P
ranas do not de
p
art from the body
 in the case of
one who knows Brah
man.
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 2
501

ñ_`©V
Smary
ate cha
IV
.2.14 (510)
And Smrit
i also says that
.
Smary
ate:
 the Smrit
i says, it i
s mentioned in the S
mritis;
Cha:
 and.
In the Mahabharat
a also it is said that t
hose who know Brah
man
do not go or de
p
art. ﬁHe who has be
come the Self
 of all be
ings and
has a com
plete in
tu
ition of al
l, at his way t
he gods them
selves are per
-
plexed, seek
ing for the p
ath of him who has no p
athﬂ (Mahabharat
a:
XII.270
.22)
.
V
agadilay
adhikaranam
: T
opic 7
The Pranas (organs) and element
s of the knower of the
Nirguna Brahman get
 merged in I
t at deat
h.
Vm{Z nao
T
ani p
are t
atha hy
aha
IV
.2.15 (51
1)
T
ho
se (
Pr
an
as
, el
emen
ts
) (
ar
e mer
ged
) i
n t
he S
upr
eme
Brah
man, fo
r thus
 the
 (scri
ptu
re)
 says
.
Ta
n
i
:
 those;
Pare:
 in the Supreme B
rahman;
T
atha:
 thus, so;
Hi:
because;
Aha:
 (the Sruti) says.
Those, i.e.
, sense-or
gans de
noted by t
he term ‚Prana™
 and the
el
e
ment
s of him who knows the Su
preme Brah
man are merged when
he dies in the same Su
preme Brah
man. Why? B
e
cause scrip
ture de
-
clares that ﬁThus these six
teen p
art
s of this wit
ness, the Purusha,
hav
ing their goal in Him are dis
solved on reach
ing Him in Himﬂ (Pras.
Up. VI.5
).
But an
other text
 which re
fers to him who knows teaches that the
p
art
s also are merged in some
thing dif

fer ent from t
he High
est Self.
ﬁThe fif

teen part
s en
ter into t
heir el
e
ment
sﬂ (Mun. Up. III
.2.7). No,
 we
re
ply
. This lat
ter p
as
sage is con
cerned with the or
di
nary view of t
he
mat
ter
. It
 in
ti
mates the end f
rom a rel
a
tive st
and-point, ac
cord
ing to
which the whole ag
gre
gate of t
he p
art
s of him who knows the Su
-
preme Brah
man is merged in Brah
man only
, just as the il

lu sory snake
is merged in the rope.
There is thus no con
tra
dic
tion.
Though or
di
narily the senses and the el
e
ment
s merge in their
causal sub
st
ances, yet in t
he case of the Jnani they m
erge in Brah
-
man.
A
v
ibhagadhikaranam: T
opic 8
The Kalas of t
he knower of the Nirguna Brahman at
t
ain
absolute non-distinction wit
h Brahman at
 death
A{d^
mJmo dMZmV
A
v
ibhago v
achanat
IV
.2.16 (512)
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
502

(Absolut
e) non-di
sti
nct
ion (
wit
h Br
ahma
n of t
he part
s merged
take
s pl
ace
) acc
ord
ing to
 the
 state
me
nt (of th
e s
crip
ture
s).
A
v
ibhagah:
 non-distinction;
V
achanat:
 on account of the st
atement
(of the scriptures).
ﬁThus these six
teen con
stit
u
ent
s or Kalas, viz.,
 eleven senses
and five sub
tle el
e
ment
s, be
long
ing to the seer
, i.e.
, the lib
er
ated
sage who at
t
ains the Su
preme Brah
man loses his dis
tinc
tion and dis
-
ap
pears in Him. There names and forms are de
stroyed; and peo
ple
speak of the Purusha only
. Then he be
comes part
less and death
lessﬂ
(Pra
s. U
p. VI.5)
.
The Kalas in the case of t
he knower of Brah
man get ab
so
lutely
merged in the High
est Brah
man. In t
he case of an or
di
nary per
son it is
not so. They
ex
ist in a fine po
ten
tial st
ate, t
he cause of fu
ture birth.
When p
art
s or Kalas that are the ef

fects of ig
no
rance are dis
-
solved through knowl
edge it is not pos
si
ble that a re
main
der be lef
t.
The p
art
s, there
fore, get m
erged ab
so
lutely
 in Brah
man. There is no
chance for them for crop
ping up again.
T
adoko™dhikaranam: T
opic 9
The soul of the knower of the S
aguna Brahman com
es to the heart
at the t
ime of
 death and then goes out t
hrough the Sushum
na Nadi.
VXmoH
$mo@
J«Ádb
Z§ VËà
H$m{
eVÛmamo
{dÚmgm_Ï`m©
ÎmÀN>
ofJË`Zw
ñ_¥
{V`moJm…
 hmXm©Z
wJ¥h
rV– eV{Y
T
adoko™graj
v
alanam t
atprakasit
adv
aro
 v
idy
asamarthy
att
accheshagaty
anusmri
tiy
ogaccha
 hardanugrihit
ah
sat
adhikay
a
IV
.2.17 (513)
When the
 sou
l of a kno
wer o
f the Sagu
na Brahman i
s abo
ut to
de
part fro
m the
 bo
dy, the
re ta
ke
s pl
ace
) a lig
hting u
p o
f the
front o
f its (s
ou
l™s
) ab
od
e (
viz., the
 he
art); the
 do
or (o
f its e
gre
ss)
being i
llumi
ned ther
eby; owi
ng t
o the power
 of know
ledge and
the
 app
lica
tion o
f me
dita
tion to
 the
 way whi
ch is
 part o
f that
(know
ledge); t
he soul f
avoured by Hi
m in
 the hear
t (v
iz.
,
Brahman) (
passes u
pward) by the one that excee
ds a hundred
(i.e
., the
 hund
red
 and
 first N
adi
).
T
adoko agrajv
alanam:
 the illumi
ning of the t
op of it
s (soul™
s) abode
(the heart);
T
atprakasit
adv
arah:
 with the p
assage illumined by t
his
light;
V
idy
asamarthy
at:
by the power of his knowledge;
Ta
t
seshagaty
anusmri
tiy
ogat:
 because of the application of
 medit
ation
to the way which is p
art of that
 knowledge;
Cha:
 and;
Hardanugrihit
ah:
 being favoured by
 Him who dwells in the heart;
Sat
adhikay
a:
 by one that
 exceeds a hundred. (
Ta
t
:
 of tha
t;
Okah:
abode, the heart;

Agrajv
alanam:
 the forep
art or the end of t
he heart
being illumined;

Ta
t
:
 by the Lord dwelling in t
he heart;
Prakasit
a:
illumined;
Dv
arah:
 door
, the root f
rom which the hundred and first
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 2
503

Nadi has it
s origin;
Sesha:
 remainder;
Gati:
 p
ath, t
he way;
Anusmritiy
ogat:
 because of the application of
 the remembrance or
const
ant thought
;
Harda:
 the Lord who dwells in the heart;
Anugrihit
ah:
 being favoured by
.)
The dis
cus
sion about the Para V
idya (Higher Knowl
edge) is
over
. The Sut
rakara now pur
sues the dis
cus
sion of the Ap
ara V
idya,
i.e.,
 Up
asana (lower knowl
edge).
It has been al
ready st
ated in Su
tra 7 that up t
o the be
gin
ning of
the way the de
p
ar
ture of a knower of the S
aguna Brah
man and an ig
-
no
rant man is the same. T
he pres
ent Su
tra now de
scribes the soul™
s
en
ter
ing on the way
. The Brihadarany
aka text de
scribes the death of
a per
son ﬁHe t
ak
ing with him t
hose el
e
ment
s of light de
scends into
the heartﬂ (Bri. Up.
 IV
.4.1). T
hen again it says, ﬁThe poi
nt of his heart
be
comes lighted up, and by
 that light
 the self de
p
art
s, ei
ther through
the eye or through t
he skull or through other places of the bodyﬂ (B
ri.
Up. IV
.4.2). T
he soul to
gether with the or
gans co
mes to the heart at
the time of
 death.
The ques
tion arises whether the de
p
ar
ture is the same for a
knower of Saguna Brah
man and an or
di
nary man.
The exit of
 the or
di
nary man is dif

fer ent from t
hat of t
he knower
of Saguna B
rah
man. The for
mer goes out from any p
art of the body
 at
death (eye, ear
, nose, anus, etc.
). But t
he lat
ter goes out only t
hrough
the Sushumna Nadi and out of
 the Brahmarandhra in the head.
 If he
goes out by any ot
her way he can
not at
t
ain the Su
preme Abode.
By v
ir
tue of knowl
edge and ow
ing to the ap
pli
ca
tion of con
st
ant
thought of
 Brah
man the point o
f the heart which is the abode of
 the
de
p
art
ing soul is il
lu
mined and through the grace of t
he su
preme soul
res
i
dent therein,
 the door of egress, the mout
h of the Nadi lead
ing
from the heart t
o the head as st
ated in Su
tra 7 is thrown open. The
soul p
asses into the Nadi num
bered one hun
dred and one. This Nadi
is the gate
way of the re
lease. The other one hun
dred Nadis lead to
bond age.
The scrip
ture says in a chap
ter treat
ing of the knower of Brah
-
man dwell
ing in the heart:
 ﬁThere are a hun
dred and one Nadis of the
heart; one of t
hem pen
e
trates the crown of the head;
 go
ing up along
that one at

tains Im
mor
t
al
ity;
 the oth
ers serve for de
p
ar
ture in dif

fer ent
di
rec

tions)ﬂ (
Chh
. Up. VIII.6
.5).
Al
though equal
ity f
or him who does know and him who does not
know
, the point
 of the heart be
comes shin
ing and the door of egress
thereby is light
ed up, yet
 he who knows de
p
art
s through the skull only
,
while the oth
ers de
p
art from other places. Why
 so? On ac
count of the
power of knowl
edge. If
 also he who knows de
p
art
s like all oth
ers, from
any place of t
he body
, he would be un
able to reach an ex
alted sphere
and then all knowl
edge would be mean
ing
less.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
504

ﬁAnd on ac
count of the ap
pli
ca
tion of med
i
t
a
tion on the way
form
ing a p
art of that
.ﬂ In dif

fer ent V
idyas there is en
joined med
i
t
a
tion
on the soul™
s trav
el
ling on the way con
nected with the Nadi t
hat
p
asses through the skull, which way forms p
art of those V
idyas. Now
it is proper to con
clude that he who med
i
t
ates on that way
 should af

ter death pro
ceed on it.
There
fore, he who knows be
ing fa
voured by Brah
man dwell
ing
in the heart,
 on which he had med
i
t
ated and thus be
com
ing like it in
na
ture de
p
art
s by the Nadi which p
asses through the skull which is
the hun
dred and first. The souls of ot
her men p
ass out by other Nadis.
Rasmy
adhikaranam
: T
opic 10 (Sutras 18-19)
The soul of one who knows Saguna Brahman f
ollows
the rays of the sun af
ter death and goes to B
rahmaloka.
aíå`Zw
Rasmy
anusari
IV
.2.18 (514)
(The sou
l of a kno
wer o
f the Sagu
na Brahman whe
n he d
ies
)
follo
ws the
 rays (
of the
 sun
).
Rasmi:
 the rays;
Anusari:
 following.
The de
scrip
tion of t
he prog
ress of the re
leased soul is con
tin
-
ued.
Chhandogya Up
anishad de
clares ﬁWhen he thus de
p
art
s from
this body
, then he de
p
art
s up
wards by those very rays.
 By t
hat mov
ing
up
wards he reaches
 im
mor
t
al
ityﬂ (Chh. Up. V
III
.6.5).
From this we un
der
st
and that t
he soul p
ass
ing out by t
he hun
-
dred and first Nadi (Sushumna) fol
lows the rays of the sun.
A
 doubt here arises as to whether the soul of one who dies by
night as well as of him who dies by day
 fol
lows the rays, or the soul of
the lat
ter only
.
As scrip
ture men
tions no dif

fer ence, the Su
tra teaches that t
he
souls fol
low the rays in both cases.
{Z{e Zo{
V MoÞ gå~ÝYñ` `mdÔoh^
Nisi neti chen
na sambandhasy
a
 y
av
addehabhav
itv
addarsay
ati
cha
IV
.2.19 (515)
If it be
 said (that the so
ul do
es) no
t (follow the rays) in the
night
, we say (not so) because the
 connection (of Nadis and
rays) cont
inues as long as the body lasts; th
e Sruti also
declares (this).
Nisi:
 at night,
 in the night;

Na:
 not;
Iti:
 so;
Chet:
 if (if it
 be objected);
Na:
 not (the objection i
s not valid);

Samband
hasy
a:
 of the relat
ion;
Y
av
addehabhav
itv
at:
 as long as the body last
s;
Darsay
ati:
 the Sruti
shows or declares
 (this);
Cha:
and, also. (
Y
av
ad:
 as long as;
Bhav
itv
at:
 because of the existence.
)
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 2
505

An ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 17 is raised and re
futed.
This Su
tra con
sist
s of two p
art
s, namely an ob
jec
tion and it
s re
-
ply
. The ob
jec
tion por
tion is ‚
Nisi neti chet
™
 and the re
ply por
tion is ‚
Na
sambandhasya yavaddehabhavitvad darsayati cha
™.
It might
 per
hap
s be said that the Nadis and rays are con
nected
dur
ing the day
, and so the soul of a per
son who dies dur
ing the day
may fol

low those rays but not the soul of one who dies by night,
 when
the con
nec
tion of t
he Nadis and the rays bro
ken.
But t
his is an er
ro
ne
ous no
tion, f
or the con
nec
tion of ray
s and
Nadis last
s as long as the body ex
ist
s. Hence it is im
ma
te
rial whether
the soul p
asses out by day or by night
.
Fur
ther we ob
serve that t
he rays of the sun con
tinue to ex

ist inthe night
s of the sum
mer sea
son, be
cause we feel their warmth and
other ef

fects. Dur
ing the night
s of the other sea
sons they are dif

fi cult
to per
ceive, be
cause then few only con
tinue to ex

ist, just as dur ing
the cloudy day
s of the cold sea
son. The Sruti al
so de
clares, ﬁEven by
night the sun sheds his rays.ﬂ
W
e can
not pre
de
ter
mine the mov
e
ment of deat
h. If
 such de
p
ar
-
ture to the su
preme abode is de
nied to the per
son dy
ing in the night
,
no one will t
ake to Up
asana. The re
sult of knowl
edge can
not be made
to de
pend on the ac
ci
dent of deat
h by day or night
.
If again a m
an dy
ing at night should wait
 for the dawn to mount
up
wards, it might hap
pen that,
 ow
ing to the ac
tion of t
he fu
neral fire
etc., his body
 would at the t
ime of day
-break, not be ca
p
a
ble of en
ter
-
ing into con
nec
tion with t
he rays. The scrip
ture more
over ex
pressly
de
clares that he does not wait.
 ﬁAs quickly as he sends of
f the mind
he goes to the sunﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
II.
6.5).
For all these rea
sons the soul fol
lows the rays by night
 as well
as by day
.
Dakshinay
anadhikaranam
: T
opic 1
1 (Sutras 20-21)
Even if the knower of t
he Saguna Brahm
an dies in
Dakshinayana, he still goes to Brahm
aloka.
AVüm`
Zo@{n X{
&
At
aschay
ane™pi d
akshine
IV
.2.20 (516)
And f
or t
he same reason
 (th
e departed soul f
ollow
s th
e rays)
also dur
ing
 the sun
™s south
ern cour
se.
At
ah:
for this very
 reason, therefore, f
or the same reason;
Cha:
and;
A
y
ane:
 during the sun™
s course;
Api:
 also, even;

Dakshine:
 in the
southern.
This Su
tra is a cor
ol
lary drawn from the pre
ced
ing Su
tra.
The Purvap
akshin raises an ob
jec
tion and main
t
ains that the
soul of the knower of Brah
man who p
asses away dur
ing
Dakshinayana or the south
ern course of the sun does not fol
low the
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
506

rays to Brahmaloka.
 The Sruti and t
he Smriti de
clare that only
 one
who dies dur
ing Utt
arayana or the north
ern course of the sun goes to
Brahmaloka.
Fur
ther it is also writ
ten that
 Bhishma waited f
or the north
ern
course of the sun to leave t
he body
.
This Su
tra says that f
or the same rea
son as men
tioned in the
pre vi ous
Su tra,
i.e.,

the
un rea son able ness
of
mak ing
the
re sult
of
knowl
edge de
pend on the ac
ci
dent of deat
h hap
pen
ing at a p
ar
tic
u
lar
time, t
he knower of Saguna Brah
man goes to Brahmaloka even i
f he
dies dur
ing the south
ern course of the sun.
For the same rea
son, viz.,
 be
cause wait
ing is im
pos
si
ble, and
be
cause the fruit of knowl
edge is not merely ev
en
tual one, and be
-
cause the time of deat
h is not fix
ed, also he who has true knowl
edge,
and who dies dur
ing the south
ern course of the sun ob
t
ains the fruit of

his knowl
edge.
In the t
ext ﬁThose who know thus go by light
, from light
 to day
,
from day t
o the bright half
 of the mont
h, and from t
hat to t
he six
months of the n
orth
ern course of the sunﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.10.1), t
he
point
s in the north
ern course of the sun do not re
fer to any di

vi sion of
time but t
o de
i
ties as will be shown un
der IV
.3.4.
The Devayana p
ath can be trod
den by those who die in t
he
Dakshinayana.
Bhishma waited f
or the Utt
arayana, be
cause he wanted to up
-
hold an ap
proved cus
tom and to show that
 he could die at will ow
ing
to his fa
ther
™
s boon.
`mo{
JZ–
 à{V M ñ_`
©Vo ñ_m
&
Y
oginah prati
 cha smary
ate smarte chaite
IV
.2.21 (517)
And
 (the
se
 time
s or d
eta
ils)
 are
 rec
ord
ed
 by Sm
riti with
refe
rence
 to the Y
ogins and
 these
 two (Yoga
 and Sank
hya) and
classed as Smritis (onl
y).
Y
oginah prati:
 with respect to the Y
ogi;
Cha:
 and;
Smary
ate:
 the
Smriti declares
;
Smarte:
 belonging to the class of S
mritis;
Cha:
and;
Ete:
these two.
The ar
gu
ment in the t
wo pre
ced
ing Sutras is strength
ened here
by
fur ther
ex po si tion.
The Purvap
akshin says: W
e have the f
ol
low
ing Smriti
 text
, ﬁThat
time wherein go
ing Y
ogins re
turn not, and al
so that wherein go
ing
forth they
 re
turn, that
 time shall I
 de
clare to thee, O P
rince of the
Bharat
asﬂ (Git
a VII
I. 23-24). Thi
s de
ter
mines spe
cially that
 to die by
day and so on causes the soul not to re
turn. How then can he who
dies by night or dur
ing the sun™
s south
ern course de
p
art not to re
turn?
The de
ci
sion of the pre
vi
ous Su
tra can
not be cor
rect.
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 2
507

This Su
tra re
futes the ob
jec
tion and says that
 these de
t
ails as to
time men
tioned in the G
it
a ap
ply only
 to Y
o
gis who prac
tise Sadhana
ac
cord
ing to Y
oga and Sankhya sys
tems. These two are Sm
ritis, not
Srutis. There
fore, the l
im
i
t
a
tions as to the t
ime men
tioned in them
 do
not ap
ply to t
hose who med
i
t
ate on the S
aguna Brah
man ac
cord
ing to
the Sr
uti texts.
Y
oga and Sankhya are mere Smrit
is. They are not of
 spir
i
tual
char
ac
ter
. As it has a dif

fer ent sphere of ap
pli
ca
tion, and is based on
a spe
cial kind of au
thor
ity
, the S
mriti rule as to t
he time of d
y
ing has no
in
flu
ence on knowl
edge based on scrip
ture.
But an ob
jec
tion is raised. W
e have such p
as
sages as ﬁFire,
light, t
he day
, the bright
 half of t
he month, t
he six months of t
he north
-
ern p
ath, smoke, night
, the dark half of
 the month,
 the six mont
hs of
the south
ern p
athﬂ (Git
a VII
I. 24-25), in which t
hough be
long
ing to
Smriti we re
cog
nise the p
ath of t
he fa
thers as de
ter
mined by scrip
-
ture.
Our ref
u
t
a
tion, we re
ply
, of t
he claims of Smrit
i ap
plies only to
the con
tra
dic
tion which may arise from t
he teach
ing of Smrit
i re
gard
-
ing the le
git
i
mate tim
e of dy
ing, ﬁI will t
ell you t
he time,ﬂ et
c. In so far as
Smriti al
so men
tions Agni and t
he other di
vin
i
ties which lead on the
de
p
arted soul, there is no con
tra
dic
tion what

so ever
.
What ap
pears to re
fer to ti
me in the abov
e p
as
sage re
fers only
to the de
i
ties pre
sid
ing over the day
-time and the bright
 half of t
he
month and the Ut
t
arayana and over the ni
ght time,
 and the dark half of
the month and t
he Dakshinayana.
Thus ends the Sec
ond Pada (Sec
tion 2) of the Four
th Chap
ter
(Adhy
ay
a IV) of the Brahma Sutras
 or the V
edant
a Phi
los
o
phy
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
508

CHAPTER IV
SECTION 3
INTRODUCTION
In the pre
vi
ous Sec
tion the de
p
ar
ture of a knower of the S
aguna
Brah
man by the p
ath of t
he gods (Devayana) has been de
scribed.
Now the pres
ent Sec
tion treat
s of the p
ath it

self. It de
scribes the jour
-
ney of t
he re
leased soul on the way to B
rah
man and t
akes up the
thread of the st
ory at the poi
nt where it was lef
t in the pre
ced
ing Sec
-
tion.
509

SYNOPSIS
Adhikarana I:
(Su
tra 1) The p
ath con
nected with de
i
ties be
gin
-
ning with that
 of light i
s the only p
ath to B
rahmaloka.
Adhikarana II:

(Su
tra 2) The de
p
art
ing soul reaches the de
ity of
the year and then t
he de
ity of
 the air
.
Adhikarana III
:
 (Su
tra 3) Af

ter reach ing the de
ity i
den
ti
fied with
light
ning the soul reaches the world of V
aruna.
Adhik
ara
nas
 I, II, III
(Sutras 1-3) rec
on
cile the dif

fer ent ac
count
s
given in t
he Up
anishads as to the st
a
tions on the way which leads the
Up
asaka to Saguna Brah
man.
Adhikarana IV
:
 (Sutras 4-6) Light, et
c., re
ferred to in the t
ext de
-
scrib
ing the p
ath of t
he gods mean de
i
ties iden
ti
fied with t
he light, et
c.,
which lead the soul st
age af

ter stage till B
rahmaloka is reached.
Adhikarana V
:
 (Sutras 7-14) The Brah
man to which the de
-
p
arted souls go by the p
ath of t
he gods is the Saguna Brah
man. This
is the opin
ion pro
pounded in Sutras 7-1
1 by Baadarayana.
 In Sut
ras
12-14 Jaimini de
fends the op
po
site view ac
cord
ing to which the soul
of the Up
asaka goes to the High
est Brah
man, not t
o the Karya B
rah
-
man (Saguna Brah
man). Jaimini™
s view is a mere Purvap
aksha, while
Baadari™
s opin
ion rep
re
sent
s the Siddhant
a.
Adhikarana VI:
 (Sutras 15-16) Only those who have wor
shipped
the Saguna B
rah
man with
out a sym
bol at
t
ain Brahmaloka.
510

Archirady
adhikaranam
: T
opic 1
The p
ath connected with the dei
ties beginning with t
hat of light
is the only p
ath that
 leads to Brahm
aloka.
&
Archiradin
a t
atprathiteh
IV
.3.1 (518)
On the
 path co
nnec
ted
 with light (the d
ep
arted
 sou
l of the
knower of Saguna Brahman
 travels to Brahmal
oka after
de
ath), that be
ing well
-kno
wn (from the Sru
ti).
Archiradina:
 by the p
ath of t
he rays, etc.,
 by the rays of
 light and so
on, on the p
ath connected with deit
ies, beginning with t
hat of light
;
T
atprath
iteh:
 that being well-known (from t
he Sruti).
It has been ex
plained that up t
o the be
gin
ning of the way
 the de
-
p
ar
ture is the same. I
n the last sec
tion it was st
ated that
 the knower of
the Saguna B
rah
man trav
els to Devayana or t
he p
ath of t
he gods to
Brahmaloka. But
 dif

fer ent tex
t
s make dif

fer ent dec
la
ra
tions about the
way it

self.One p
as
sage de
scribes it as con
sti
tuted by
 the junc
tion of t
he
Nadis and rays: ﬁThen he mount
s up
wards by just those raysﬂ (Chh.
Up. VII
I.6.
5). An
other p
as
sage de
scribes it as be
gin
ning with light
.
ﬁThey go to t
he light, f
rom light to day
ﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.10.1). A
n
other way
is de
scribed in Kaushit
aki Upani
shad I.3: ﬁHav
ing reached the p
ath of
the gods, he co
mes to the world of A
gni.ﬂ An
other way is de
scribed in
Bri. Up. V
.10.1:
 ﬁWhen the per
son goes away from this world he co
-
mes to the wind.ﬂ A
n
other way is de
scribed in Mun. Up. I.
2.1
1: ﬁFree
from p
as
sion they de
p
art through the gat
e of the sun.ﬂ
A
 doubt here arises whether these ways are dif

fer ent from each
other or whether there is only one p
ath, t
he p
ath of t
he gods of which
the
dif
 fer ent
text
s
men tion
dif
 fer ent
p
ar tic u lars,
or
give
dif
 fer ent
de
-
scrip tions.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that these t
ext
s re
fer to dif

fer ent
p
aths to Brahmaloka.
The pres
ent Su
tra re
futes this v
iew and de
clares that all the
text
s re
fer to one p
ath only and gi
ve only di
f

fer ent p
ar
tic
u
lars of the
same p
ath, t
he p
ath con
nected with de
i
ties be
gin
ning with that
 iden
ti
-
fied with li
ght. Why so? On ac
count of it
s be
ing widely known, from
the Sruti
 text
s that this is t
he p
ath for all knowers of Brah
man.
The text
 ﬁThose who know this (Panchagni V
idya) and those
who in the for
est med
i
t
ate with f
aith and aus
ter
ity reach the de
ity i
den
-
ti
fied with li
ghtﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.10.1), ex

pressly states that t
he p
ath con
-
nected with de
i
ties be
gin
ning with that
 of the f
lame be
longs to all
knowers of Brah
man what
ever be the V
idya by which t
hey have at

-
t
ained that knowl
edge.
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 3
511

The goal, vi
z., Brahmaloka,
 is the same in all cases. Some p
art
of the p
ath is re
cog
nised in all tex
t
s. All t
he fol
low
ing p
as
sages de
-
clare one and the same re
sult, v
iz., the at

tain
ment of t
he world of
Brah
man. ﬁIn t
hese worlds of Brah
man they dwell
 for ever and everﬂ
(Bri. Up. V
I.2.
15). ﬁThere he dwells eter
nal yearsﬂ (Bri. Up. V
.10.1).
ﬁWhat
ever vic
tory
, what
ever great
ness be
longs to Brah
man, that
 vic
-
tory he gains, t
hat great
ness he reachesﬂ
 (Kau. Up. I
.2). There is no
jus
ti
fi
ca
tion to re
gard the p
ath as dif

fer ent on ac
count of it
s be
ing dealt
with in dif

fer ent chap
ters.
Hence we have to con
clude that all t
he text
s re
fer to the same
p
ath but giv
e dif

fer ent p
ar
tic
u
lars which have all to be com
bined for a
full de
scrip
tion of t
he p
ath.
Though var
i
ous Srutis re
fer to the p
ath by such words as Archis
(light), S
urya (sun), V
ayu (wind), etc.,
 yet t
hey all re
fer only t
o dif

fer ent
por
tions of one and the same way
, viz.
, Archiradi-marga or Devayana
which leads to Brahmaloka. Each S
ruti gives us some
thing indicatory
of the p
ath and we have to com
bine the di
verse p
ar
tic
u
lars.
V
ay
v
adhikaranam
: T
opic 2
The dep
arting soul reaches the deity of t
he year
and then the deit
y of the air
.
dm`w_ã
XmX{deo
f{deof
V
ay
umabdadav
iseshav
iseshabhy
am
IV
.3.2 (519)
(T
he departed soul
) (of
 a know
er of t
he Sag
una Br
ahma
n goes)
from the
 de
ity of th
e y
ea
r to the
 de
ity of th
e a
ir on a
cco
unt o
f
the absence
 and prese
nce of spe
cificati
on.
Va
y
u
m
:
 the deity
 of the air;

Abdat:
 from the deit
y of t
he year;
A
v
iseshav
iseshabhy
am:
 because of non-specification and
specification, because it i
s st
ated in general in one Srut
i and in det
ail
in another
.
The de
scrip
tion of t
he p
ath of t
he gods is con
tin
ued.
The Su
tra fix
es the or
der of the st
ages. The Kaushit
aki
Up
anishad de
scribes the pat
h as fol
lows: ﬁThe Up
asaka or the wor
-
ship
per
, hav
ing reached the p
ath of t
he gods co
mes to the world of
Agni (fire), t
o the world of V
ayu (air), to t
he world of V
aruna, to the
world of Indra, t
o the world of Prajap
ati, and t
hen to the world of
Brahmaﬂ (Kau. Up. I
.3).
Now the world of Agni means the same as light
, as both terms
de
note burn
ing, and we, t
here
fore, need not wit
h re
gard to them
search for the or
der in which they are to be com
bined.
Again the Chhandogy
a Up
anishad (V
.10.1) de
scribes the pat
h
as fol
lows: ﬁThey reach the de
ity i
den
ti
fied with t
he light, f
rom him to
the de
ity of
 the day
, from him
 to the de
ity of
 the bright half
 of the
month, f
rom him to t
he de
i
ties iden
ti
fied with six
 months of t
he north
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
512

ern p
ath of t
he sun, from them
 to the de
ity of
 the year
, from him
 to the
de
ity of
 the sun, from him
 to the de
ity of
 the moon, f
rom him to t
he de
-
ity of
 the light
ningﬂ. Here V
ayu is not men
tioned in the p
ath be
gin
ning
with light.
 There is ab
sence of spec
i
fi
ca
tion.
In the B
rihadaranyaka Up
anishad V
ayu is men
tioned be
fore
Adity
a. ﬁWhen the per
son goes away from this world he co
mes to
V
ayu. Then V
ayu makes room for him like t
he hole of a wheel, and
through it he mount
s higher
, he co
mes to Adit
ya.ﬂ On ac
count of this
spec
i
fi
ca
tion which shows V
ayu to come be
fore Adit
ya, V
ayu must be
in
serted be
tween the year and A
ditya.
 W
e should con
clude that the
soul goes to V
ayuloka be
fore go
ing to the sun.
The Brihadaranyaka tex
t (V
.10.1) fi
xes that ai
r co
mes im
me
di
-
ately be
fore the sun, be
cause there is reg
u
lar or
der of suc
ces
sion.
But as re
gards air com
ing af

ter the de ity of
 fire there is no spec
i
fi
ca
-
tion but sim
ply a st
ate
ment ﬁHav
ing reached the p
ath of t
he gods he
co
mes to the world of A
gni, to t
he world of V
ayu.ﬂ
The V
ajasaneyins in their t
ext re
cord ﬁFrom the de
i
ties iden
ti
fied
with the six m
onths in which the sun trav
els north
wards he reaches
the de
ity i
den
ti
fied with t
he world of the godsﬂ (Bri. Up. V
I.2.
15). Here
in or
der to main
t
ain the im
me
di
ate suc
ces
sion of the de
ity i
den
ti
fied
with V
ayu (air) and that iden
ti
fied with t
he sun (Aditya) we must un
der
-
st
and that t
he soul p
asses from the de
ity of
 the world of the gods t
o
the de
ity of
 air
.
Again in the t
ext
s of the Chhandogya and t
he Brihadaranyaka
the de
ity of
 the world of the gods is not m
en
tioned in the f
or
mer and
the de
ity of
 the year in t
he lat
ter
. Bot
h text
s are au
thor
i
t
a
tive.
 Both
have to be in
cluded in the full
 de
scrip
tion of t
he p
ath. A
s the year is
con
nected with the mont
hs, the de
ity of
 the year pre
cedes the de
ity of
the world of the gods.
Hence the se
quence is Archis (rays), Ahas (day), Suklap
aksha
(bright half of
 the month),
 six months when the sun trav

els to thenorth, year
, the world of t
he gods, the world of V
ayu, t
he sun, the
moon, the li
ght
ning, the world of
 V
aruna, the world of I
ndra, the world
of Prajap
ati and the world of
 Brahma.
T
adidadhikaranam: T
opic 3
Af
ter reaching the deity ident
ified with l
ightning,
the soul reaches the world of V
aruna.
V{S>Vmo
@{Y dé
T
adito™dhi v
arunah sambandhat
IV
.3.3 (520)
After (re
aching) the
 de
ity of lightning (the
 sou
l reac
hes
)
Varuna, o
n acco
unt of the
 conne
ction (b
etwe
en the
 two).
T
adit
ah adhi:
 af
ter the deit
y of li
ghtning;
V
arunah:
 (comes) V
aruna
(rain god);
Sambandhat:
 on account of connection.
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 3
513

The enu
mer
a
tion of t
he st
a
tions of the j
our
ney is con
tin
ued.
In the Chhandogya t
ext we fi
nd, ﬁFrom the sun to t
he moon,
from moon to l
ight
ning.ﬂ In t
he Kaushit
aki Upani
shad we find, ﬁFrom
V
ayu (wind) to V
aruna.ﬂ Com
bin
ing the two t
ext
s we have to place
V
aruna af

ter light ning, on ac
count of the con
nec
tion be
tween the two
(light
ning and V
aruna). The broad lightnings dance forth f
rom the
womb of the clouds with t
he sound of deep thun
der and then wa
ter
falls down. ﬁIt
 light
ens, it thun
ders, it will rainﬂ (Chh. Up. V
II.
1
1.1).
V
aruna is the god of rain and light

ning pre cedes rain. So af

ter light -
ning co
mes V
aruna.
Af

ter Varuna come Indra and Prajap
ati for t
here is no other
place for them. T
he Kaushit
aki text
 also put
s them there.
The com
plete enu
mer
a
tion of t
he st
ages of the p
ath of t
he gods
is as fol
lows: first the de
ity of
 fire, t
hen the de
ity of
 the day
, the de
ity of
the bright half
 of the mont
h, the de
i
ties of the six
 months when the sun
trav
els to the north,
 the de
ity of
 the year
, the de
ity of
 the world of gods,
the de
ity of
 the air
, the sun, t
he moon, the de
ity of
 light
ning, the world
of V
aruna, the world of I
ndra, the world of P
rajap
ati, and f
i
nally
Brahmaloka.
Ativ
ahikadhi
karanam: T
opic 4 (Sutras 4-6)
Light, et
c., referred to in t
he text describing the p
ath of t
he gods
mean deit
ies identifi
ed with light,
 etc., who conduct the soul
st
age af
ter st
age till B
rahmaloka is reached.
Am{Vdm{
hH$mñ
V{ëb
Ativ
ahikast
alli
ngat
IV
.3.4 (521)
(T
hese are) deit
ies conduct
ing
 the soul
 (on t
he path
 of t
he
god
s), o
n acc
ou
nt of in
dic
atory
 mark
s to th
at e
ffec
t.
Ativ
ahikah:
 conductors, deities conducting the dep
arted soul;
T
ad-lingat:
on account of indicatory m
arks to that ef
fect.
The de
scrip
tion of t
he p
ath of t
he gods is con
tin
ued.
With re
gard to those be
gin
ning with light
 a doubt arises whether
they are marks of the road,
 or places of en
joy
ment, or con
duc
tors of
the
trav el li
ng
souls.
The Purvap
akshin says: Light and so on are marks of the road,
be
cause the in
struc
tion has that char
ac
ter
. In or
di
nary life a m
an who
wishes to go to a vil
lage or a town is told ﬁGo from here t
o that hill
,
from there to a ban
yan tree, f
rom that t
ree to a river
, from t
hat to a v
il
-
lage, af

ter that you will reach the town.ﬂ So here also t
he text
 says,
ﬁFrom light to day
, from day
 to the wax
ing half of t
he month,ﬂ et
c.
Or else light and so on may be v
iewed as places of en
joy
ment.
Be
cause the text
 con
nect
s Agni and so on with the ﬁworldﬂ ﬁHe co
mes
to the world of A
gni.ﬂ Now the term ﬁworldﬂ de
notes places of en
joy
-
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
514

ment of li
v
ing be
ings, as when we say ﬁthe world of menﬂ, ﬁthe world of

fa
thersﬂ, ﬁthe world of godsﬂ.
There
fore, light
 and the rest are not con
duc
tors. Fur
ther they
can
not be con
duc
tors as they are with
out in
tel
li
gence. In or
di
nary life,
in
tel
li
gent men only
 are ap
pointed by t
he king to con
duct trav
el
lers
over
dif
 fi cult
roads.
The pres
ent Su
tra re
futes this.
 They must be t
he con
duc
tors.
They re
ceive the de
p
arted souls and con
duct them on t
heir way to
Brahmaloka. That
 con
duc
tors are meant here and not marks or
places of en
joy
ment is in
di
cated by the t
ext of
 the Chhandogya which
ends thus, ﬁFrom the moon t
o the light
ning. Then a be
ing who is not a
man leads them to B
rah
manﬂ (Chh. Up. IV
.15.5;
 V
.10.1). T
his text
shows that un
like the pre
vi
ous guides or con
duc
tors who were more
or less hu
man, this p
ar
tic
u
lar guide or con
duc
tor is not a hu
man in na
-
tureŠﬁ
Am
anava
ﬂ.
C^`ì`m_mo
hmÎmp
ËgÕo
Ubhay
avy
amohat t
at
siddheh
IV
.3.5 (522)
(That de
itie
s or d
ivine
 guid
es
 are
 me
ant in th
es
e te
xts, th
ey
 are
personal conductors) is established, because
 both (i.e.,
 the
path and th
e traveller) beco
me unconscious.
Ubhay
a:
 both (the p
ath and the t
raveller);
V
y
amohat:
 because of
unconsciousness
;
T
at-siddheh:
 that is est
ablished.
This Su
tra is an ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 4.
The de
p
arted souls are not ca
p
a
ble of guid
ing them
selves as
their or
gans are with
drawn in the mind. The l
ight, et
c., are with
out in
-
tel
li
gence. Hence they are equally
 in
ca
p
a
ble and can
not guide the
souls.
Hence
it
fol lows
that
the
p
ar tic u lar
in tel li gent

de i ties
iden ti fi
ed
with the light
, etc.,
 guide the souls to Brahmal
oka. In or
di
nary life al
so
drunken or sense
less peo
ple fol
low a road as com
manded by oth
ers.
Again light
 and the rest can
not be t
aken for marks of the p
ath or
road, be
cause they are not al
ways pres
ent.
Fur
ther the de
p
arted souls can
not en
joy as their or
gans are
with
drawn into the mind.
 Hence light and the rest can
not be worlds
where they en
joy
.
Al
though the wan
der
ers or the de
p
arted souls do not en
joy any
-
thing, t
he word ﬁworldﬂ may be ex
plained on the ground that
 those
worlds are places of en
joy
ment for ot
her be
ings dwell
ing there.
The con
clu
sion, there
fore, is that
 he who has reached the world
of Agni is led on by
 Agni and he who has reached the world ruled by
V
ayu is led by V
ayu.
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 3
515

d¡ÚwV
oZ¡d V
VñVÀ
&
V
aidy
utenaiv
a t
at
ast
acchruteh
IV
.3.6 (523)
From
 thenc
e (the souls
 are led or g
uided) by t
he very sa
me
(sup
erhu
man) pe
rson who c
ome
s to lightning, that be
ing
known from
 the Sruti.
V
aidy
utena:
by the (superhuman) guide connected with light
ning, by
the superhuman being who t
akes his charge from the god of lightni
ng;
Eva:
 alone, only
, indeed;
T
at
ah:
from thence;
T
at sruteh:
 that being
known from the Sruti
, as Sruti st
ates so, because of the V
edic text
.
The dis
cus
sion on the jour
ney is con
tin
ued.
ﬁFrom thence, i.e.
, af

ter they have come to the light

ning they goto the world of B
rah
man, be
ing led through the worlds of V
aruna and
the rest by t
he per
son, not a man (Ama
nava-purusha) who fol
lows im
-
me
di
ately af

ter the light

ning. When they have reached the place of
light
ning, a per
son, not a man,
 leads them to t
he world of Brah
manﬂ
(Bri
. Up. VI.2
.15)
.
V
aruna and the rest only f
a
vour the souls ei
ther by not ob
struct
-
ing or help
ing them in some way
.
There
fore, it
 is well es
t
ab
lished that li
ght and so on are the gods
who act as con
duc
tors or guards.
Kary
adhikaranam
: T
opic 5 (Sutras 7-14)
The dep
arted souls go by the p
ath of gods to S
aguna Brahman.
H$m`ª
 ~mX[aañ
` JË`wnnÎ
Kary
am baadari
rasy
a gaty
up
ap
atteh
IV
.3.7 (524)
To the Karya Brahm
an or Hiranya
garbha o
r Saguna B
rahman
(th
e departed souls a
re led);
 (th
us opin
es) th
e sage Baadar
i on
account
 of t
he possibil
ity
 of it
s being t
he goal (
of t
heir j
ourney)
.
Kary
am:
 the relativ
e Brahman or Hiranyagarbha;
Baadarih:
the
sage Baadari (holds);
Asy
a:
 his;
Gati-u
p
ap
atteh:
on account of the
possibility of
 being the goal.
A
 dis
cus
sion is now t
aken up whether the soul is con
ducted to
the Nirguna Brah
man or the Saguna B
rah
man.
In the pre
vi
ous Su
tra the way was dis
cussed.
Now from this Su
tra on
wards the dis
cus
sion is about the goal
reached.
The Chhandogya tex
t de
clares, ﬁThen a be
ing who is not a man
(Amanava P
urusha) leads them to Brah
manﬂ (Chh. Up. V
.10.1).
A
 doubt arises whether the Brah
man is the Saguna B
rah
man or
the Su
preme Nirguna Brah
man. The opin
ion of the t
eacher Baadari is
that t
he per
son, who is not a man, leads t
hem to the lower qual
i
fied,
ef

fected Brah man (Saguna or Karya B
rah
man); be
cause it is pos
si
ble
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
516

to go to t
hat. B
e
cause Saguna Brah
man which oc
cu
pies a def
i
nite
place, which has a spe
cial abode and which is fi
nite can be the goal of

a jour
ney
. But
 it is not pos
si
ble with re
spect to the Nirguna Brah
man
which is In
fi
nite and all-per
vad
ing. With t
he High
est Nirguna Brah
man
on the other hand, we can
not con
nect the ideas of one who goes, or
ob
ject of go
ing or act of go
ing; be
cause that Brah
man is pres
ent ev
-
ery
where and is the in
ner Self of
 all.
V
iseshit
atv
accha
IV
.3.8 (525)
And on a
ccount
 of t
he quali
fic
ati
on (w
ith
 respect t
o thi
s
Brahman in a
nothe
r text).
V
iseshit
atv
at:
 because of being specified in Sruti
, on account of the
qualificati
on;
Cha:
 and.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 7 is ad
duced.
Be
cause the word Brah
man is qual
i
fied by t
he word ‚lokam™.
ﬁHe leads them to the worlds of B
rah
man; in these worlds of
Brah
man they l
ive for ev
er and everﬂ (Bri. Up. V
I.2.
15). The plu
ral
num
ber is not pos
si
ble with re
spect to the Su
preme In
fi
nite Brah
man
which may abide in dif

fer ent con
di
tions.
gm_rß`mÎ
mw VX²
ì`nXoe
Sami
py
attu t
adv
y
ap
adesah
IV
.3.9 (526)
But on ac
count of the near
ness (of the Saguna Brah
man to the
Su
preme Brah
man it is) des
ig
nated as that (S
u
preme Brah
man).
Samipyat:
 because of the nearness or proximity
;
Tu
:
 but;
Ta
d
:
 that;
V
y
ap
adesah:
 designation.
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 7 is con
tin
ued.
The word ‚tu™
 (but) set
s aside any doubt that
 may arise on ac
-
count of the word ‚B
rahma™
 be
ing used for the Saguna B
rah
man in the
Chhandogya text
.
This Su
tra says that t
his des
ig
na
tion is on ac
count of the prox

-
im
ity of
 the Saguna B
rah
man to the su
preme Brah
man or the Ab
so
-
lute.
The man
i
fested Brah
man also can be called Brah
man as it is in
the clos
est prox
im
ity t
o the Unmanifested P
ara Brah
man. The Para
Brah
man as
sumes ab
so
lutely
 pure lim
it
ing ad
junct
s such as mind,
etc., t
o be
come an ob
ject of de
vo
tion and med
i
t
a
tion, i.
e., t
he lower
Brah
man or Karya Brah
man or Saguna Brah
man.
H$m`m©
Ë``o VXÜ
`joU ghmV
– na_{
^YmZ
Kary
aty
ay
e t
adadhy
akshena sahat
ah
 p
aramabhidhanat
IV
.3.10 (527)
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 3
517

On the dissolution of the Brahmal
oka (the souls attain) along
with the
 rule
r of tha
t world
 what is
 highe
r than tha
t (i.e
., the
Supreme Bra
hman
) on ac
count
 of t
he declarat
ion of
 the Sr
uti.
Kary
aty
ay
e:
 on the dissolution of
 the Brahmaloka (
Kary
a:
of the
ef
fect, i.
e., t
he universe, the relat
ive Saguna B
rahman);
Ta
d
:
 of that
;
Adhy
akshena:
 with the ruler-president, i
.e.,
 Hiranyagarbha or the
four-faced Brahma;
Saha:
 with
;
At
ahp
aram:
 higher than that
, i.e.
, the
Supreme Brahman;

Abhidhanat:
 on account of the declaration of
 the
Sruti
.
The in
di
vid
ual soul™
s fi
nal ab
sorp
tion in the P
ara Brah
man or the
Ab
so
lute is now st
ated.
The Purvap
akshin says: If t
he souls who go by the p
ath of t
he
gods reach the Saguna Brah
man, then how can st
ate
ment
s like,
ﬁThey who pro
ceed on that p
ath do not re
turn to the l
ife of manﬂ (Chh.
Up. IV
.15.6); ﬁFor t
hem there is no re
turn hereﬂ (Bri. Up. VI
.2.15);
ﬁMov
ing up
wards by that a man reaches im
mor
t
al
ityﬂ (Chh. Up.
VII
I.6.
5), be made with re
spect to them,
 as there is no per
ma
nency
any
where apart
 from the High
est Brah
man?
The Su
tra de
clares that at the di
s
so
lu
tion of B
rahmaloka the
souls, which by that t
ime have at

tained knowl
edge, along with t
he
Saguna Brah
man at
t
ain what is higher than the S
aguna Brah
man,
i.e.,
 Para Brah
man or the pure high
est place of V
ishnu. This is called
Kramamukti
or
suc ces s
ive
(pro gres sive)
lib er a tion
or
re lease
by
suc
-
ces
sive step
s. So the S
ruti tex
t
s de
clare.
&
Smri
tescha
IV
.3.1
1 (528)
And on a
ccount
 of t
he Smr
iti
 (text
s suppor
tin
g th
is vi
ew).
Smrite
h:
 on account of the st
atement of
 the Smrit
i, as Smrit
i agrees
with the v
iew
, according to the Sm
riti;
Cha:
 and.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 10 is ad
duced.
The view ex
pressed in the pre
ced
ing Su
tra is cor
rob
o
rated by
Smriti al
so, ﬁWhen the Pralaya has come and when the f
irst per
son
(Hiranyagarbha) co
mes to His end, then t
hey all,
 to
gether with Brah
-
man, with pu
ri
fied minds en
ter the high
est place.ﬂ
The above are the S
iddhant
a Sutras. The f
i
nal con
clu
sion
(Siddhant
a), there
fore is that t
he go
ing of the souls of which scrip
ture
speaks, has for it
s goal the Karya B
rah
man or Saguna Brah
man.
The Purvap
aksha is stat
ed in Sutras 12-14.
na§ O¡{_{Z
_©w»`Ë
dmV
Para
m jaiminirmu
khyatvat
IV
.3.12 (529)
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
518

To the highest (Brahman) (the
 souls a
re le
d); Jaimini opine
s,
on acc
ount o
f that be
ing the p
rimary me
aning (of the
 word
‚Brahman™).
Param:
 the Supreme (Brahman);

Jaiminih
:
 the sage Jaimini (opines
or holds);
Mukhy
atv
at:
 on account of that bei
ng the primary meani
ng
(of the word ‚Brahman™).
Sutras 12-14 give a
prima f
a
cie
 view of t
he mat
ter
. An ob
jec
tion
to Su
tra 7 is ad
duced by pre
sent
ing an op
po
site view
.
Jaimini is of opin
ion that t
he word ‚Brah
man™
 in the Chhandogya
text
 ﬁHe leads them to Brah
manﬂ re
fers to the High
est Brah
man, as
that is the pri
mary mean
ing of the word.
Darsanaccha
IV
.3.13 (530)
And becau
se the Sruti declares that.
Darsanat:
 on account of the Srut
i text
s;
Cha:
 and, also.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Jaimini i
s ad
duced.
The text
 ﬁGo
ing up
wards by that he reaches im
mor
t
al
ityﬂ (Chh.
Up. VII
I.6.
6) (Katha Up. II
.6.16) de
clares that im
mor
t
al
ity i
s at
t
ained
by go
ing. But
 im
mor
t
al
ity i
s pos
si
ble only in t
he Su
preme Brah
man,
not in the S
aguna Brah
man, be
cause the lat
ter is tran
si
tory
. So scrip
-
ture says, ﬁWhere one sees some
thing else, t
hat is lit
tle, t
hat is mor
-
t
alﬂ
 (Ch
h. Up
. VIII.24.1
).
Ac
cord
ing to the t
ext of
 the Kat
hop
anishad also the go
ing of the
soul is to
wards the su
preme Brah
man. The soul which p
asses out of
the body by
 the Sushumna Nadi reaches im
mor
t
al
ity
. This can be at
-
t
ained only in t
he Su
preme Brah
man.
&
Na cha kary
e pratip
atty
abhisandhi
h
IV
.3.14 (531)
And
 the
 de
sire
 to atta
in Bra
hman c
anno
t be
 with re
spe
ct to th
e
Saguna B
rahman.
Na:
 not;
Cha:
 and;
Kary
e:
 in the Saguna B
rahman;
Prati
p
atti:
realisation of B
rahman;
Abhisandhih:
 desire. (
Prati
p
atti-
abhisandhih:
 the desire to att
ain or realise Brahman.)
The ar
gu
ment in sup
port of Su
tra 12 is con
tin
ued.
ﬁI en
ter the hall of
 Prajap
ati, t
he houseﬂ (Chh. Up. VIII
.14.1),
can
not have t
he lower or Saguna Brah
man for it
s ob
ject. This de
sire
to en
ter the ‚hall™
 or the ‚house™
 can
not be with re
spect to the Saguna
Brah
man. It
 is ap
pro
pri
ate with re
gard to the High
est Brah
man (Para
Brah man).
Be cause
the
im me di atel
y
pre ced ing
p
as sage
in ti mat
es
ﬁAnd that wit
hin which these (names and forms) are con
t
ained is
Brah
man.ﬂ The p
as
sage ﬁI am the glory of
 the Brahmanasﬂ rep
re
-
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 3
519

sent
s ﬁthe soul as the self of allﬂ.
 ‚Glory™
 is the name of t
he su
preme
Brah
man. ﬁThere is no like
ness of him whose name is great gloryﬂ
(V
ajasaneya Samhit
a: XXX
II.
3). Here the Su
preme Brah
man is re
-
ferred to.
Sutras 12-14 give t
he view of t
he Purvap
akshin against what
has been said in Sutras 7-1
1. The ar
gu
ment
s of Sutras 12-14 are re
-
futed t
hus:
The Brah
man at
t
ained by those who go by t
he p
ath of t
he gods
(Devayana) can
not be the S
u
preme Brah
man (Nirguna Brah
man).
They at
t
ain only t
he Saguna Brah
man. Para B
rah
man is all-per
vad
-
ing. He is the In
ner Self of
 all. He can
not be at
t
ained as He is the In
-
ner
most Self
 of ev
ery
one.
W
e do not go to what i
s al
ready reached. Or
di
nary ex
pe
ri
ence
rather tells us that a per
son goes to some
thing dif

fer ent from him
.
Jour
ney or at
t
ain
ment is pos
si
ble only where there is dif

fer ence,
where the att
ainer is dif

fer ent from t
he at
t
ained.
The Su
preme Brah
man can
not be as
sumed to pos
sess any dif

-
fer
ences de
pend
ing on time,
 or space or any
thing else and can
not,
there
fore, be
come the ob
ject of go
ing.
In the reali
sa
tion of t
he Su
preme Brah
man the vei
l of ig
no
rance
is re
moved and the seeker knows his es
sen
tial di
vine na
ture. He real
-
ises his iden
tity
 with the Su
preme Brah
man. When the ig
no
rance is
re
moved Brah
man man
i
fest
s it

self. That is all. There is no go
ing or at
-
t
ain
ing in such a reali
sa
tion.
But t
he at
t
ain
ment of B
rah
man spo
ken of in the tex
t
s con
nected
with the p
ath of t
he gods is not merely the re
moval of
 ig
no
rance but
ac tual.
The p
as
sage ﬁI en
ter the hall of
 Prajap
ati, t
he houseﬂ, can be
sep
a
rated from what pre
cedes and be con
nected with the S
aguna
Brah man.
The fact that
 Chh. Up. VI
II.
14.1 says ﬁI am t
he glory of t
he
Brahmanas, of t
he kingsﬂ can
not make it re
fer to the Nirguna B
rah
-
man, be
cause the Saguna Brah
man can also be said to be the self of
all, as we find in t
ext
s like ﬁHe, to whom all works, all de
sires be
longﬂ
(Ch
h. Up
. III.14.2
).
The ref
er
ence to the jour
ney to B
rah
man which be
longs to the
realm of rel
a
tive or qual
i
fied knowl
edge in a chap
ter which deals with
the High
est Knowl
edge is only by way
 of glo
ri
fi
ca
tion of t
he lat
ter
.
For all these rea
sons the view of Baadari as set f
orth in Sut
ras
7-1
1 is the cor
rect one.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
520

Apratikalamb
anadhikaranam
: T
opic 6 (Sutras 15-16)
Only those who have t
aken recourse to the worship of Brahman
without a sym
bol att
ain Brahm
aloka.
Aà
VrH$mb
å~ZmÞ`Vr{V ~
mXam`U C^
`WmXmof
mÎmËH
«$Vw
Apratikalamb
anannay
atiti baadaray
ana
 ubhay
athadoshatt
atkratuscha
IV
.3.15 (532)
Baadarayana holds th
at (th
e supe
rhuman being) leads (to
Brah
maloka
 only
) th
ose who do n
ot t
ake recourse t
o a sym
bol
of B
rahma
n in the
ir me
dita
tion; th
ere
 be
ing no
 faul
t in the
twofold re
lation (resu
lting from this opinion) and (it be
ing
con
strue
d o
n the
 do
ctrine
) as i
s the
 me
dita
tion o
n that (i.e
.,
Brah
man)
 so does one become.
Apratikalamb
anat:
 those who do not have recourse to the sym
bols
for the medit
ation of B
rahman;
Nay
ati:
 (the superhuman being) leads
or t
akes;
 Iti Baadaray
anah:
 so says Baadarayana;
Ubhay
atha:
 both
ways;

Adoshat:
 there being no defect
s;
T
at-kratuh:
 as is t
he
medit
ation on that
, (so does one become);
Cha:
 and.
The dis
cus
sion com
menced is Su
tra 6, whether the soul i
s
t
aken to the Su
preme Brah
man or the Saguna B
rah
man is con
cluded
in this and the f
ol
low
ing Su
tra.
A
 doubt here arises whether all wor
ship
pers of the Saguna
Brah
man go to Brahmaloka be
ing led by t
he su
per
hu
man be
ing men
-
tioned in Chh. Up.
IV
.15.5 or only
 some of them?
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that all go t
o Brahmaloka what
ever
may be thei
r Upasana.
This Su
tra de
clares that only t
hose wor
ship
pers of the Saguna
Brah
man who do not t
ake re
course to any sym
bol in their med
i
t
a
tion
on Brah
man go there. This is t
he opin
ion of the t
eacher Baadarayana.
This, how
ever
, does not con
tra
dict what is said in II
I.3.
31 if we un
der
-
st
and that by
 ‚all™
 is meant all t
hose wor
ship
pers who do not t
ake re
-
course to any sym
bol in their med
i
t
a
tion on Brah
man.
Only Brahma Up
asakas are taken by t
he Amanava P
urusha to
the Brahmaloka. T
he form of med
i
t
a
tion gov
erns the re
sult. In t
he
case of sym
bols like the Salagrama stone,
 there is no feel
ing that it
 it

-
self is Brah
man. No doubt in t
he case of Panchagni-V
idya, t
he Sruti
says that t
he wor
ship
per is led to Brahmaloka. B
ut we can
not ex
tend
the re
sult to the wor
ship
pers of ex
ter
nal sym
bols where there is no di
-
rect scrip
tural st
ate
ment, we hav
e to un
der
st
and that only
 those who
med
i
t
ate on Brah
man go to Brahmaloka,
 not oth
ers.
He whose med
i
t
a
tion is fix
ed on Brah
man reaches Brahmaloka.
This view is sup
ported by Srut
i and Smriti
. ﬁIn what
ever form they
med
i
t
ate on Him, t
hat they
 be
come them
selves.ﬂ In t
he case of sym
-
bols on the other hand, t
he med
i
t
a
tion is not f
ixed on Brah
man, the
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 3
521

sym
bol be
ing the chief el
e
ment in the
med
i
t
a
tion. Hence the wor
ship
-
per does not at
t
ain Brahmaloka.
{deof#m M Xe©
V
isesham cha d
arsay
ati
IV
.3.16 (533)
And the scripture declares a difference
 (in th
e case
 of
meditat
ion on
 symbol
s).
V
isesham:
 dif
ference;
Cha:
 and;
Darsay
ati:
 the scripture declares.
An ar
gu
ment in sup
port of the con
clu
sion ar
rived at by
Baadarayana, i
s ad
duced here.
With ref
er
ence to med
i
t
a
tions on sym
bols such as name and so
on, that
 oc
cur in Chhandogya Up
anishadic text
s, the Srut
i speaks of
dif

fer ent re
sult
s ac
cord
ing to dif

fer ence in the sym
bols. ﬁOne who
med
i
t
ates upon name as Brah
man be
comes in
de
pend
ent so far as
name reachesﬂ (Chh. Up. VII.
1.5). ﬁOne who med
i
t
ates upon speech
as Brah
man be
comes in
de
pend
ent so far as speech reachesﬂ (
Chh.
Up. VII.2
.2).
Now the dis
tinc
tion of re
wards is pos
si
ble be
cause the med
i
t
a
-
tions de
pend on sym
bols, while there could be no such dif

fer ence in
re
sult
s, if they
 de
pend on the one non-dif

fer ent Brah
man.
Hence it is quite clear that
 those who use sym
bols for their med
i
-
t
a
tion can
not have t
he same re
ward as oth
ers. They can
not go to
Brahmaloka like those who med
i
t
ate on the S
aguna Brah
man.
Thus ends the Third Pada (Sec
tion 3) of the Four
th Chap
ter
(Adhy
ay
a IV) of the Brahma Sutras
 or the V
edant
a Phi
los
o
phy
.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
522

CHAPTER IV
SECTION 4
INTRODUCTION
The at
t
ain
ment of B
rahmaloka by the wor
ship
pers of the
Saguna Brah
man has been treated in t
he last Sec
tion. Thi
s Sec
tion
deals with the reali
sa
tion of t
he High
est Brah
man by it
s wor
ship
pers.
523

SYNOPSIS
Adhikarana I:
(Sutras 1-3) the re
leased soul does not ac
quire
any
thing new but merely
 man
i
fest
s it

self in its true na
ture.
Adhikarana II:
 (Su
tra 4) de
ter
mines that re
la
tion in which the re
-
leased soul st
ands to Brah
man is that of
 A
vibhaga, non-sep

a ra
tion.
Adhikarana III
:
 (Sutras 5-7) dis
cuss the char
ac
ter
is
tics of the
soul that has at
t
ained the Nirguna Brah
man. Ac
cord
ing to Jaimini t
he
re
leased soul, when man
i
fest
ing it

self in its true na
ture, pos
sesses
the at
trib
utes which in Chh. Up. VI
II.
7.1 and other places are as
cribed
to Brah
man, such as Ap
ahat
ap
apmatva (f
ree
dom from sin),
Saty
asankalpat
va (true vo
li
tion) and Aisvary
a (Om
ni
science) etc.
Ac
cord
ing to Audulom
i the only
 char
ac
ter
is
tics of the re
leased
soul is Chait
anya or pure in
tel
li
gence.
Ac
cord
ing to Baadaray
ana the two vi
ews can be com
bined. The
two views de
scribe the re
leased soul from two dif

fer ent st
and

points,
viz.,
 rel
a
tive and t
ran
scen
den
t
al and so there is no con
tra
dic
tion be
-
tween the two.
Adhikarana IV
:
 (Sutras 8-9) The soul which has at
t
ained the
Saguna Brah
man ef

fects it
s de
sires by mere will.
Adhikarana V
:
 (Sutras 10-14) A
 re
leased soul which has at
-
t
ained Brahmaloka can ex
ist with or with
out a body ac
cord
ing to it
s lik
-
ing.
Adhikarana VI:
 (Sutras 15-16) The re
leased soul which has at
-
t
ained the Saguna B
rah
man can an
i
mate sev
eral bod
ies at the same
time.
Adhikarana VII
:
 (Sutras 17-22) The re
leased soul which has at
-
t
ained Brahmaloka has all the lordly
 pow
ers ex
cept the power of cre
-
ation, et
c. There is no re
turn to thi
s world for these re
leased souls.
524

Samp
ady
av
irbhav
adhikaranam
: T
opic 1 (Sutras 1-3)
The liberated soul does not acquire anything new
but only m
anifest
s it
s essential or true nature.
gånÚm{d^m©
d– ñdoZ eã
Samp
ady
av
irbhav
ah sv
ena sabdat
IV
.4.1 (534)
(When the
 Jiva or the
 individ
ual so
ul) has a
ttained
 (the highe
st
light) the
re i
s man
ife
statio
n (of i
ts own
 rea
l natu
re)
 as we
 infe
r
from th
e w
ord
 ‚o
wn™.
Samp
ady
a:
 having att
ained;
A
v
irbhav
ah:
 there is manifest
ation;
Sv
ena sabdat:
 from the word ‚own™. (
Sv
ena:
 by one™
s own;
Sabdat:
inferred from the word.)
The Chhandogya tex
t says ﬁNow this se
rene and happy be
ing,
af

ter hav ing risen out of thi
s body and hav
ing at
t
ained the high
est
light, m
an
i
fest
s it

self by its own na
tureﬂ (Chh. Up. VII
.12.3).
The Purvap
akshin holds that the Jiv
a or the in
di
vid
ual soul
which has freed it

self from iden ti
fi
ca
tion with t
he three bod
ies at
t
ains
eman
ci
p
a
tion af

ter real is
ing Brah
man. Re
lease also is a fruit like
other fruit
s, e.g.,
 Svarga or heaven.
 Man
i
fes
t
a
tion means as much as
orig
i
na
tion. Lib
er
a
tion was not a pre-ex
is
tent t
hing. It
 is some
thing
that is newly ac
quired like heaven, as the word ‚reaches™
 in the tex
t
clearly in
di
cates. There
fore eman
ci
p
a
tion is some
thing new that
 is
ac
quired by the in
di
vid
ual soul. If
 the man
i
fes
t
a
tion took place only
through the self™s own na
ture, it
 would al
ready ap
pear in the self
™
s for
-
mer st
ates, be
cause a thing™
s own na
ture is never ab
sent in it.
The pres
ent Su
tra re
futes this v
iew and says that t
he word ‚own™
in di cates
that
eman ci p
a tion
was
a
pre-ex is tent
thing.
The
in di vid ual
soul man
i
fest
s it
s own, es
sen
tial di
vine na
ture which was so long cov
-
ered by ig
no
rance (A
vidya).
 This is his at
t
ain
ment of t
he fi
nal be
at
i
-
tude or re
lease. It i
s cer
t
ainly not
h
ing that is newly
 ac
quired.
_wº
$– à{
VkmZmV²
Mukt
ah pratijnanat
IV
.4.2 (535)
(T
he self whose true nature has manifested itself is) released
;
accor
ding
 to t
he promi
se (made by scr
iptur
e).
Mukt
ah:
 the liberated one,
 released, freed;
Prat
ijnana
t:
 according to
the promise.
The
pre vi ous
Su tra
is
fur ther
elu ci dated.
Eman
ci
p
a
tion is a ces
sa
tion of all
 bond
age and not the ac
ces
-
sion of some
thing new
, just as health i
s merely the re
moval of
 ill
ness
and not a new ac
qui
si
tion.
If re
lease is noth
ing new that is ac
quired by the in
di
vid
ual soul,
then what is it
s dif

fer ence from bond
age? The Jiva was st
ained in the
st
ate of bond
age by the t
hree st
ates, i.e.
, the st
ate of wak
ing, dream
-
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 4
525

ing and dream
less sleep. Ac
cord
ing to Chhandogya Up
anishad VIII
.
9-1
1, ﬁIt i
s blindﬂ ﬁIt weep
s as it wereﬂ ﬁIt goes to ut
ter an
ni
hi
la
tionﬂ. I
t
imag
ines it

self to be fi

nite. It iden
ti
fies it

self with the il
lu
sory ve
hi
cles or
Up
adhis and ex
pe
ri
ences plea
sure, p
ain, joy
 and sor
row
. Af

terSelf-reali
sa
tion it real
ises it
s true na
ture which is ab
so
lute bliss. I
t is
freed from all er
ro
ne
ous no
tions and mis
con
cep
tions. It
 is freed from
A
vidya or ig
no
rance and it
s ef

fects. It is per
fect, f
ree, in
de
pend
ent.
This is the dif

fer ence.
An ni hi la t
ion
of
ig no rance
is
sal va tion.

Erad i ca tion
of
all
er ro ne
-
ous no
tions or mis
con
cep
tions is lib
er
a
tion. De
struc
tion of t
he veil of
ig
no
rance, that sep

a rates the in
di
vid
ual soul from the S
u
preme Soul,
is
eman ci p
a tion
or
the
fi nal
be at i tude.
But how is it known that
 in it
s pres
ent con
di
tion the soul is re
-
leased? On ac
count of the prom
ise made in the scrip
tures, says the
Su tra
.
The Chhandogya Up
anishad says, ﬁI will ex

plain It to you fur
-
ther
ﬂ (C
hh. U
p. VIII.9.3
; VIII.10.4
; VIII.1
1.3)
. Her
e the
 Sruti
 pro

poses
to ex
pound that S
elf which is free from all
 im
per
fec
tions. It
 be
gins
thus, ﬁThe Self
 which is free from sinﬂ (Chh. Up. VII
I.7.
1). ﬁIt be
ing
with
out the body
, is not touched by
 plea
sure and painﬂ (Chh. Up.
VII
I.12.
1), and con
cludes ﬁBy his own na
ture he man
i
fest
s him
self.
That is the high
est per
son. The se
rene be
ing rises above it
s body
,
reaches the high
est light and ap
pears in it
s own true na
tureﬂ (Chh.
Up. VIII.1
2.3)
.
AmË_m à
H$a
Atma prakaranat
IV
.4.3 (536)
(The light into which the individua
l soul e
nters is) the Su
preme

Se
lf; owi
ng to th
e s
ub
je
ct ma
tter o
f the
 chap
ter.
Atma:
 the Supreme S
elf;
Prakaranat:
 on account of the subject
matter of
 the discourse or context.
This Su
tra says that t
he in
di
vid
ual soul re
cov
ers his own Self
(the Su
preme Self) as st
ated in Su
tra 1.
The Purvap
akshin holds: How can the soul be called ﬁlib
er
atedﬂ
con
sid
er
ing that t
he clause ﬁ(hav
ing en
tered into) the hi
gh
est lightﬂ
speaks of it as within the sphere of what i
s a mere ef

fect? Be cause
the word ‚light™
 in com
mon p
ar
lance de
notes phys
i
cal light. No one
who has not tran
scended be
yond the sphere of ef

fects can be lib
er
-
ated, as what
ever is an ef

fect is tainted with ev
il.
W
e re
ply: t
his ob
jec
tion is with
out force. I
t can
not st
and; for in
the p
as
sage re
ferred to in the Chh.
 Up. VII
I.3.
4 the word ‚light™
 de
-
notes the Self
 Su
preme, in ac
cor
dance with the sub
ject mat
ter of the
Chap
ter and not any phy
s
i
cal light.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
526

The word ‚Jyotih™
 (light) in the p
as
sage re
fers to the A
t
man
which is de
scribed as sin
less, undecaying and death
less (
Y
a Atma
ap
ahat
ap
apma vijaro vim
rityuh
ŠCh
h. Up
. VIII.7.1)
.
W
e, there
fore, may
 not all at once p
ass over to phys
i
cal light in
-
cur
ring thereby the f
ault of aban
don
ing the topic un
der dis
cus
sion
and in
tro
duc
ing a new one.
The word ‚light™
 is also used to de
note the S
elf in the t
ext
s like
ﬁThe gods med
i
t
ate on the im
mor
t
al Light of al
l light
s as lon
gev
ityﬂ
(Bri. Up. I
V
.4.16). W
e have dis
cussed this in de
t
ail un
der I.3.40.
A
v
ibhagena drisht
atvadhikaranam: T
opic 2
The released soul remains insep
arable from t
he Supreme S
oul.
A{d^
mJoZ Ñï
A
v
ibhagena drisht
atvat
IV
.4.4 (537)
(T
he Jiva in the state of release e
xists) as inseparable (from
Brahman),
 because
 it is so seen from the scriptur
es.
A
v
ibhagena:
 as inseparable;

Drisht
atv
at:
 for it is so seen from the
scriptures.
A
 doubt arises whether the in
di
vid
ual soul in the st
ate of eman
ci
-
p
a
tion ex
ist
s as dif

fer ent from B
rah
man or as one with and in
sep
a
ra
-
ble from It
.
The pres
ent Su
tra de
clares that it ex

ists as in
sep
a
ra
ble from
Brah
man, be
cause the Sruti tex
t
s de
clare so. ﬁThou art That,
Ta
t
Tvam
 Asi
ﬂ (C
hh. U
p. VI.8.7
). ﬁ
Aham
 Brahma A
smi
, I am B
rah
manﬂ
(Bri. Up. I
.4.10). ﬁWhere he sees noth
ing elseﬂ (Chh. Up. VII
.24.1).
ﬁBe
ing but Brah
man, he is merged in Brah
manﬂ (Bri. Up. I
V
.4.6). A
ll
these Sruti p
as
sages de
clare that the eman
ci
p
ated soul is iden
ti
cal
with Brah
man.
Such p
as
sages as ﬁJus
t as pure wa
ter poured into pure wa
ter
re
mains the same, t
hus O Gaut
ama, is the self
 of a thinker who
knowsﬂ (Katha Up. II.
4.15), whose ob
ject is to de
scribe the na
ture of
the re
leased soul, de
clare that there is non-sep

a ra
tion only
. The
same fol
lows from the com
p
ar
i
son of the soul en
ter
ing Brah
man to
rivers fall
ing into the sea.
Pas
sages which speak
 of dif

fer ence have to be ex
plained in a
sec ond ary
sense,
ex press ing
non-sep a ra t
ion
or
unity
.
Brahmadhikar
anam: T
opic 3 (Sutras 5-7)
Characteristics of the soul that
 has att
ained the Nirguna Brahm
an.
~«m÷
oU O
¡{_
{ZénÝ`
Brahmena jai
mini
rup
any
asadibhy
ah
IV
.4.5 (538)
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 4
527

(T
he rele
ased sou
l exists) as possesse
d of (the attr
ibutes of)
Brahman; (thus
) Jaimini (o
pine
s) on ac
cou
nt of the re
fere
nce
etc
.
Brahmena:
 as possess
ed of the at
tributes of B
rahman;
Jaiminih
:
Jaimini (ho
lds);
Up
any
asadibhy
ah:
 on account of the reference etc.
The view of t
he sage Jaimini is st
ated in this con
nec
tion.
It has been st
ated that
 the re
leased soul at
t
ains Brah
man. Brah
-
man has two as
pect
s, viz.,
 one the un
con
di
tioned as
pect as pure con
-
scious
ness and the other as de
scribed in the Chhandogya
Up
anishad VIII
.7.1:
 ﬁThe At
man which is free from evil
, undecaying,
un
dy
ing, free f
rom sor
row
, hun
ger and thirst, wit
h true de
sires
(Satyakama) and t
rue vo
li
tions (Saty
asankalpa).
ﬂ
A
 doubt arises now
, which as
pect does the re
leased soul at
t
ain?
Jaimini main
t
ains that the l
ib
er
ated soul at
t
ains the con
di
tioned as
-
pect. Why? B
e
cause this is known from ref
er
ence to the na
ture of the
self as be
ing such in the text
 cited. The qual
i
ties of Om
ni
science and
Om
nip
o
tence are men
tioned. Hence Jaimini opines t
hat the re
leased
soul at
t
ains the con
di
tioned as
pect of Brah
man.
{M{V
VÝ_mÌoU
 VXmË_H
$Ëdm{XË
`m¡S
w>b
mo{_
Chitit
anmatrena t
adatmakatv
adity
audulom
ih
IV
.4.6 (539)
(T
he rele
ased sou
l exists) solely as pure consciousne
ss or
I
nte
llige
nce
, that b
ei
ng its tru
e n
ature
 or e
sse
nce
; thus
Audulomi (
thi
nks).
Chitit
anmatrena:
 solely as pure consciousness
 (
T
anmatrena:
solely);
T
adatmakatv
at:
 that being it
s true nature or essence;
 Iti:
thus, so;
Audulomih:
Audulomi (thi
nks).
The view of sage Audul
omi is st
ated in this con
nec
tion.
This Su
tra gives an
other view about t
he st
ate of eman
ci
p
a
tion.
This is the view of
 the sage Audulomi.
 Audulomi says t
hat it is t
he
reali
sa
tion of t
he soul™
s es
sen
tial na
ture as pure Chait
anya (knowl
-
edge, con
scious
ness or in
tel
li
gence). The soul is solely of t
he na
ture
of Pure Con
scious
ness. It ex

ists as such in the stat
e of re
lease.
This con
clu
sion will also agree with other scrip
tural tex
t
s such
as Bri. Up. IV
.5.13:
 ﬁThus this Self has nei
ther in
side nor out

side, butis al
to
gether a mass of knowl
edgeﬂ.
Al
though the t
ext enu
mer
ates dif

fer ent qual
i
ties such as free
-
dom from sin, et
c., these qual
i
ties rest only on f
an
ci
ful con
cep
tions
due to dif

fer ence of words; be
cause what the text
 in
ti
mates is only ab
-
sence in gen
eral of all qual
i
ties such as sin and the rest.
Ed_ß`w
nÝ`mgmV² ny
d©^mdmX{
damoY
§ ~mXa
Ev
amapy
up
any
asat purvabhav
adavi
rodham
 baadaray
anah
IV
.4.7 (540)
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
528

Thus als
o, o
n acc
ou
nt of the
 ex
iste
nce
 of the
 forme
r qua
litie
s
adm
itte
d o
wing to
 refe
ren
ce
 and
 so o
n, the
re i
s no
contradict
ion (betwee
n the two);
 (so thinks) Baadaray
ana.
Evam:
 thus;
Api:
 even;
Up
any
asat:
 on account of reference;
Purv
abhavat:
 owing to att
ribution of properti
es mentioned before;
A
v
irodham:
 there is no contradiction;
Baadaray
anah:
 Baadarayana
(thinks).
The au
thor
™
s own view is now st
ated.
Baadarayana rec
on
ciles both and says that t
he af

fir ma
tion of
the di
vine at
trib
utes of Om
ni
science and Om
nip
o
tence is from the
point of v
iew of God™
s na
ture when the soul is bound, while t
he af

fir -
ma
tion of t
he soul™
s na
ture as pure knowl
edge is from the point
 of
view of it
s re
leased st
ate.
Al
though it is ad
mit
ted that
 in
tel
li
gence con
sti
tutes the t
rue na
-
ture of the S
elf, also t
he for
mer na
ture, i.
e., lordly
 power like that of
Brah
man, which is in
ti
mated by ref

er ence and the rest is with a view
to the world of ap
pear
ances not re
jected. Hence there is no con
tra
dic
-
tion. Thi
s is the opin
ion of the t
eacher Baadarayana.
Sankalp
adhikaranam
: T
opic 4 (Sutras 8-9)
The soul which has att
ained the Saguna B
rahman
effect
s it
s desire by mere will.
g‚>ënmXo
d Vw VÀN
®>Vo
Sankalp
adev
a tu t
acchruteh
IV
.4.8 (541)
But by
 mere wil
l (t
he libera
ted souls a
tt
ain t
heir pur
pose),
because
 scriptures say so.
Sankalp
at:
 by the ex
ercise of will;
Eva:
 only;
Tu
:
 but;
T
at-sruteh
:
because Sruti says so.
The pow
ers and priv
i
leges which a lib
er
ated soul ac
quires are
st
ated here.
In the med
i
t
a
tion on Brah
man within the heart
 we read as fol
-
lows: ﬁIf he de
sires the world of the fa
thers (Pitriloka) by his mere will
they come t
o himﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
II.
2.1).
A
 doubt here arises whether the will alone is the cause to get
 the
re
sult, or the will
 com
bined with some other op
er
a
tive cause.
The Purvap
akshin holds that al
though scrip
ture says ﬁby his
mere willﬂ some other cause must be sup
posed to co
op
er
ate as in or
-
di
nary life.
 Be
cause, as in or
di
nary ex
pe
ri
ence the meet
ing with one™
s
fa
ther is caused by one™
s will, and in ad
di
tion by t
he act of go
ing and
so on, so it will be with t
he case of the lib
er
ated soul also.
This Su
tra says that by
 mere will the re
sult co
mes, be
cause the
Sruti so de
clares. If any
 other cause were re
quired, the di
rect scrip
-
tural st
ate
ment
s ﬁby his will onlyﬂ would thereby
 be con
tra
dicted.
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 4
529

The will of t
he lib
er
ated soul is dif

fer ent from t
he will of or
di
nary
men. It
 has the power of pro
duc
ing re
sult
s with
out any op
er
a
tive
cause.
AV Ed MmZ
Ý`m{Yn{
At
a ev
a chanany
adhip
atih
IV
.4.9 (542)
And for th
is very same reason (the rele
ased sou
l is) wit
hout
anothe
r Lord.
At
a ev
a:
 for the very
 reason, therefore, so;
Cha:
 and;
Anany
adhip
atih:
 without any
 other Lord.
The pre
vi
ous topic is con
tin
ued.
For the very same rea
son, i.e.,
 ow
ing to the f
act of the will
 of the
re
leased per
son be
ing all-pow
er
ful, he who knows has no other Lord
over him
self. Be
cause not even an or
di
nary per
son when form
ing
wishes, will, if he can help i
t, wish him
self to be sub
ject to an
other
mas
ter
. Ev
en in this world no one could will
ingly hav
e mas
ter to lord
over him. S
crip
ture also de
clares that a re
leased soul is mas
ter of
him
self. ﬁFor them t
here is free
dom from all worldsﬂ (Chh. Up.
VIII.1.6)
.
Abhav
adhikaranam
: T
opic 5 (Sutras 10-14)
A
 liberated soul who has att
ained Brahm
aloka can exist
with or without a body according to his liking.
A^md§
 ~mX[aamh
 øod_²
Abhav
am baadari
raha hy
ev
am
IV
.4.10 (543)
T
here is abse
nce (of body and organs, in
 the case of the
liberated souls) (asserts) Baadari, for
 thus script
ure says.
Abhavam:
 absence (of body and organs);
Baadarih:
 the sage
Baadari (assert
s);
Aha:
 (the Sruti) says;

Hi:
because;
Evam:
 thus.
There fol
lows a dis
cus
sion whether the lib
er
ated soul pos
-
sesses a body or not.
The p
as
sage ﬁBy his mere will the f
a
thers riseﬂ shows that the
lib
er
ated soul pos
sesses a mind, whereby he wills. A
 doubt arises
whether he pos
sesses a body and the or
gans.
The teacher Baadari says that
 he does not, be
cause the scrip
-
ture de
clares so, ﬁAnd it is by means of
 the mind th
at he sees the de
-
sires and re
joicesﬂ (Chh. Up. VIII
.12.5). T
his clearly in
di
cates that he
pos
sesses only the mind and not t
he or
gans, etc. There are nei
ther
body nor sense-or
gans in the st
ate of eman
ci
p
a
tion.
^md§ O
¡{_
{Z{d©
H$ënm_
Bha
vam jaiminirvikalp
amana
nat
IV
.4.1
1 (544)
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
530

Jaimini (
asserts that
 the liberated soul) po
ssesse
s (a body and
the organs) because the scriptures de
clare (the capacity on t
he
part of such a soul t
o assume) various forms.
Bhav
am:
 existence;
Jaiminih
:
 Jaimini (ho
lds);
V
ikalp
a-mananat:
because the scripture declares (the capacity
 to assume) divine forms.

(
V
ikalp
a:
 option, div
ersity in manif
est
ation;
Amananat:
 from
st
atement in S
ruti.)
A
 con
trary view t
o Su
tra 10 is ad
duced.
The teacher Jaimini is of t
he opin
ion that t
he lib
er
ated soul pos
-
sesses a body and or
gans as well as a mind. the Chhandogya
Up
anishad de
clares ﬁHe be
ing one be
comes three, fiv
e, seven, ni
neﬂ
(Chh. Up. VII
.26.2). T
his text
 says that a lib
er
ated soul can as
sume
more than one form.
 This in
di
cates that the re
leased soul pos
sesses
be
sides the mind, a body
 and the or
gans
ÛmXemhdX
w^`{
dY§ ~
mXam`Umo
Dv
adasahav
adubhay
av
idham b
aadaray
ano™t
ah
IV
.4.12 (545)
For this r
eason Baadarayana opines that the released
 person
is of both kinds as in t
he case o
f the twelve days™ sacrifice.
Dv
adasahav
at:
 like the twelv
e days™
 sacrifice;
Ubhay
avi
dham:
 (is)
of both kinds;
Baadaray
anah:
 Baadarayana (thinks);
At
ah:
so,
therefore, f
rom this, from
 this very reason.
A
 de
ci
sion is given on the con
flict
ing views noted abov
e.
Baadarayana af

firms from the two
fold dec
la
ra
tions of the t
wo
scrip
tures that a lib
er
ated soul who has at
t
ained Brahmaloka can ex
-
ist both ways, wit
h or with
out a body
, ac
cord
ing to his lik
ing. It
 is like
the twelv
e days™
 sac
ri
fice, which is called a Sat
ra as well as an Ahina
sac ri f
ice.
VÝd^mdo gÝÜ
`dXwnnÎ
T
anv
abhav
e sandhy
av
adup
ap
atteh
IV
.4.13 (546)
In the absenc
e of a body (
the f
ulfi
lment
 of desir
es is possibl
e)
as in dreams, as thi
s is reasonable.
T
anv
abhav
e:
 in the absence of a body;

Sandhy
avad:
 just as in
dreams (which stand mi
dway between waking and deep sleep);
Up
ap
atteh:
this being reasonable.
An in
fer
ence is drawn from the con
clu
sion ar
rived at in S
u
tra 12.
When there is no body or sense-or
gans, the wished for ob
ject
s
are ex
pe
ri
enced by the lib
er
ated souls just as em
bod
ied per
sons ex
-
pe
ri
ence joy in dreams.
^mdo O
mJ«X²
Bhav
e jagradv
at
IV
.4.14 (547)
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 4
531

When the b
ody e
xists (the fu
lfilment of de
sires is) a
s in the
waking stat
e.
Bhav
e:
 when the body exi
st
s;
 Jagradv
at:
just as in the waking st
ate.
When there are the body and sense-or
gans, the wished for ob
-
ject
s are ex
pe
ri
enced by the lib
er
ated souls, just as em
bod
ied per
-
sons ex
pe
ri
ence joys in the wak
ing st
ate.
Pradip
adhikaranam
: T
opic 6 (Sutras 15-16)
The liberated soul which has att
ained the Saguna B
rahman
can animat
e several bodies at the same t
ime.
àXrndX
mdoeñVW
m {h Xe©
Pradip
av
adav
esast
atha hi darsay
ati
IV
.4.15 (548)
T
he en
ter
in
g (
of
 th
e rel
eas
ed s
oul
 in
to
 sev
era
l b
odi
es)
 li
ke (
th
e
mult
iplic
ati
on of)
 the f
lame of a
 lamp because th
us th
e
scripture declares.
Pradip
av
at:
 like the flam
e of a lamp;
A
v
esah:
 entering, animat
ing;
T
atha:
 thus, so;
Hi:
 because;
Darsay
ati:
 the scripture shows (or
declares).
This Su
tra shows the pos
si
bil
ity of
 the lib
er
ated soul of si
mul
t
a
-
neously pos
sess
ing sev
eral bod
ies other than his own.
In Su
tra 1
1 it has been shown that a re
leased soul can as
sume
many bod
ies at the same ti
me for en
joy
ment.
A
 doubt arises whether the bod
ies which the re
leased cre
ate for
them
selves when ren
der
ing them
selves three
fold and so on are soul
-
less like wooden fig
ures or an
i
mated by souls like t
he bod
ies of men.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that as nei
ther the soul nor the
mind can be di
vided, t
hey are joined with one body
 only
, while other
bod
ies are soul
less. Other bod
ies are life
less pup
pet
s. En
joy
ment is
pos
si
ble only in t
hat body in which t
he soul and mind ex
ist.
This Su
tra re
futes this v
iew and says, ﬁLike the flam
e of a lamp
in their en
ter
ingﬂ i.e.,
 just as the one flam
e of a lamp can en
ter into dif

-
fer
ent wicks lighted from it
, the re
leased soul, al
though one only
, mul
-
ti
plies it

self through its lordly power and en
ters into all t
hese bod
ies. It
cre ates
bod ies
with
in ter nal
or gans
cor re spond ing
to
the
orig i nal
in
-
ter
nal or
gans and be
ing lim
ited by t
hese di
vides it

self as many. There
-
fore, all t
he cre
ated bod
ies have a soul which ren
ders en
joy
ment
through all of t
hese bod
ies pos
si
ble. Scrip
ture de
clares that in this
way one may be
come many
. ﬁHe is onefold, he is t
hree
fold, f
ive
fold,
seven
foldﬂ (Chh. Up. VI
I.6.
2).
The Y
oga Sastras also make the same af

fir ma
tion.
ñdmß``g§
nÎ`mo
aÝ`Vamno
j_m{dî
H¥$
V§ {h
Sv
apy
ay
asamp
attyor
any
at
arapekshamav
ishkrit
am hi
IV
.4.16 (549)
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
532

(T
he de
clarati
on of absence o
f all cogni
tion is made) having
 in
vie
w e
ithe
r of the
 two s
tate
s, viz
., de
ep
 sle
ep
 and
 abs
olu
te
union (with B
rahman), for this is m
ade
 cle
ar (by the
scrip
ture
s).
Sv
apy
ay
asamp
atty
oh:
 of deep sleep and absolute union (with
Brahman);
Any
at
arapeksham:
 having in v
iew either of t
hese two;
A
v
ishkrit
am:
 this is made clear (by the S
ruti);
Hi:
 because.
(
Sv
apy
ay
a:
 deep sleep;
Any
at
ara:
either
, any of
 the two;
Apeksham:
 with reference to, wit
h regard to.)
The range of knowl
edge of the lib
er
ated soul is now dis
cussed.
The Purvap
akshin holds: How can lordly power
, en
abling the re
-
leased soul to en
ter into sev
eral bod
ies and en
joy be ad
mit
ted if we
con
sider the dif

fer ent scrip
tural tex
t
s which de
clare that the soul in
that st
ate has not any spe
cific cog
ni
tion? e.g.
, ﬁWhat should one know
and through what?ﬂ (Bri. Up. I
I.4.
14). ﬁBut t
here is not the sec
ond
thing sep

a rate from it
 which it can knowﬂ (Bri. Up. IV
.3.30). ﬁI
t be
-
comes like wa
ter
, one, wit

ness and with out a sec
ondﬂ (Bri. Up.
IV
.3.32
).
This Su
tra says that t
hese text
s re
fer ei
ther to the st
ate of deep
sleep or to that of
 fi
nal re
lease in which the soul at
t
ains ab
so
lute un
ion
with the Nirguna Brah
man.
Those p
as
sages on the other hand, which de
scribe lordly power
re
fer to an al
to
gether dif

fer ent con
di
tion which like the heav

enlyworld, is an abode where knowl
edge of Saguna B
rah
man pro
duces
it
s re
sult
s.
W
e have been dis
cuss
ing in the pre
vi
ous Sutras about one who
has not at
t
ained ab
so
lute un
ion with Nirguna Brah
man but only
Brahmaloka. There is cog
ni
tion in Brahmal
oka. There is en
joy
ment
also in heaven. The di
f

fer ence be
tween heaven and Brahmal
oka is
that one does not re
turn to thi
s world from Brahmaloka whereas one
re
turns to this uni
verse from heaven when the re
sult
s of his vir
tu
ous
deeds have been ex
hausted.
Jagadv
y
ap
aradhikaranam
: T
opic 7 (Sutras 17-22)
The liberated soul which has att
ained Brahm
aloka
has all the lordly powers except the power of creation.
OJX²
ì`mnadOª
 àH
$aUmXg{
>
Jagadv
y
ap
arav
arjam prakar
anadasannihit
attv
accha
IV
.4.17 (550)
(T
he libera
ted soul at
tai
ns al
l lor
dly pow
ers) except t
he power
of cre
atio
n, e
tc., on
 acc
ou
nt of (th
e L
ord
 be
ing) the
 sub
je
ct
matte
r (of a
ll te
xts w
he
re c
rea
tion, e
tc., are
 refe
rred
 to) a
nd (th
e
libera
ted souls)
 not b
eing m
ention
ed (in t
hat
 conn
ection
).
Jagadv
y
ap
arav
arjam:
 except the power of creati
on, etc.,
Prakaranat:
(on account of the Lord being) the subject mat
ter
,
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 4
533

because of the general topic of t
he chapter;
Asannihit
attvat:
 on
account of (liberated souls) not being ment
ioned on account of
non-proximity
;
Cha:
 and. (
Jagat:
 world;

V
y
ap
ara:
 creation etc.;
V
arjam:
excepted.)
The lim
i
t
a
tions of the re
leased souls™
 power are stat
ed here.
A
 doubt here pres
ent
s it

self whether those who through med i
t
a
-
tion on the S
aguna Brah
man en
ter Brahmaloka pos
sess un
lim
ited
lordly power or power lim
ited to some ex

tent.The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains that thei
r pow
ers must be un
lim
-
ited, be
cause we meet with text
s such as ﬁThey can roam at will in all
the worldsﬂ (Chh. Up. VII
.25.2;
 VII
I.1.
6). ﬁHe ob
t
ains self-lord
shipﬂ
(T
ait. S
am. I.
6.2). ﬁT
o him all the gods of

fer wor shipﬂ (T
ait. S
am. I.
5.3).
ﬁFor him there is free
dom in all worldsﬂ (Chh. Up. VII
I.1.
6).
This Su
tra says that t
he lib
er
ated souls at
t
ain all lordly pow
ers
such as Anima, ren
der
ing one
self to atom
ic size, etc., ex

cept thepower of cre
ation, et
c. Cre
ation, pres
er
va
tion and de
struc
tion, on t
he
other hand can be
long to the ev

er last
ingly per
fect Lord only
. Why so?
Be
cause the Lord is the sub
ject mat
ter of all t
he text
s deal
ing with cre
-
ation, et
c., while the re
leased souls are not men
tioned at all
 in this
con nec tion.
Fur
ther
, this would lead t
o many Isv
aras. If t
hey have t
he power
of cre
ation of t
he uni
verse they may
 not be of one mi
nd. There may be
con
flict of
 wills with re
spect to cre
ation, et
c. One may de
sire to cre
ate,
and an
other to de
stroy
. Such con
flict
s can only be avoided by
 as
sum
-
ing that t
he wishes of one should con
form to t
hose of an
other and
from this it
 fol
lows that all ot
her souls de
pend on the High
est Lord.
Hence the pow
ers of the re
leased souls are not ab
so
lute but
lim
ited and are de
pend
ent on the will of
 the Lord.
àË`jmo
nXoem{
X{V Mo
Þm{YH
$m[aH$
_ÊS>
bñWmo
ºo
Pratyakshop
adesadi
ti ch
ennad
hikari
kamandal
astho
kteh
IV
.4.18 (
551)
If it
 be said th
at t
he libera
ted soul at
tai
ns abs
olute power
s on
acc
ou
nt of d
ire
ct te
achi
ng of the
 scrip
ture
s, we
 say no
;
becaus
e the scriptures de
clare that t
he liberated so
ul attain
s
Him w
ho e
ntrusts
 the
 sun
, etc
., with the
ir offic
es
 and
 abi
de
s in
th
os
e sp
her
es.
Praty
akshop
adesat:
 on account of direct teaching;

Iti:
 so, thus;
Chet:
 if; (
Iti ch
et:
 if it be said);

Na:
 not;
Adhikarikam
andala-
sthokteh:
 because the scripture declares that the soul att
ains Him
who entrust
s the sun, etc.,
 with their of
fices and abodes in those
spheres. (
Adhikarika:
 the master of a world,
 a world-ruler;
Mandalastha:
 existing in spheres, i.
e., t
hose abiding in the spheres,
of those entrusted wit
h the special functions;
Ukteh:
 as it is cle
arly
st
ated in Srut
i.)
An ob
jec
tion to S
u
tra 17 is raised and re
futed.
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
534

This Su
tra con
sist
s of two p
art
s, namely an ob
jec
tion and it
s re
-
ply
. The ob
jec
tion por
tion is, ﬁ
Pratyakshop
adesat
ﬂ; the re
ply por
tion is
ﬁ
Nadhikarikamandalasthokteh
ﬂ.
ﬁHe be
comes the Lord of him
selfŠ
Apnoti svarajyam
ﬂ (T
ait.
 Up.
I.6). F
rom the di
rect teach
ing of the S
ruti the P
urvap
akshin main
t
ains
that t
he lim
ited soul at
t
ains ab
so
lute pow
ers.
This pres
ent Su
tra re
futes this and says t
hat his pow
ers de
pend
on the Lord, be
cause the text
 cited fur
ther on says, ﬁHe at
t
ains the
Lord of the mind,
 the Lord who dwells in spheres like the sun, etc.,
and en
trust
s the sun, etc.,
 with of

fices.ﬂThere
fore, it
 is quite clear from thi
s lat
ter p
art of the t
ext t
hat the
lib
er
ated soul ob
t
ains it
s pow
ers from the Lord and de
pends on Him.
Hence it
s pow
ers are not un
lim
ited. He at

tains pow
ers as the gif
t of
the Su
preme Lord who is in the sun, etc.,
 and who be
stows the func
-
tion of con
trol
ling the orb of t
he sun, on the sun-god.
{dH$
mamd{V©
 M VWm {h
 pñW{
V
ikarav
arti cha t
atha hi sthitim
aha
IV
.4.19 (552)
And (t
here is a f
orm of
 the Supr
eme Lord) w
hich
 is beyond a
ll
created things (because, so the scripture de
clares) (His)
existence
 (in a tw
o-fold form unmani
fest and manif
est).
V
ikarav
arti:
 which is beyond all ef
fected things,
 becomes incapabl
e
of transformat
ion by birth,
 decay
, death,
 etc.;
Cha:
 and;
T
atha:
 so;
Hi:
because;
S
thit
im:
 st
atus, condition,
 existence;
Aha:
 (Sruti) declares.
The de
scrip
tion of t
he st
a
tus of the li
b
er
ated soul is con
tin
ued.
Ac
cord
ing to scrip
ture, there is also an in
ter
nal form of t
he Su
-
preme Lord, which does not abide in ef

fects. He is not only t
he rul
ing
soul of the spheres of the sun and so on which lie within t
he sphere of
what is ef

fected.The text
 de
clares this abid
ing in a two-fold f
orm as fol
lows:
ﬁSuch is the great
ness of it; greater t
han that is the P
urusha; one foot
of Him is all be
ings; His other three feet
 are what is im
mor
t
al in
heavenﬂ (Chh. Up. II
I.12.
6).
This text
 in
ti
mates that t
he High
est Lord abides in two forms, t
he
tran scen den t
al
and
the
rel a tive.
He who med
i
t
ates on the Lord in His rel
a
tive as
pect does not at
-
t
ain the tran
scen
den
t
al as
pect. He who wor
ship
s the Lord as hav
ing
form can
not at
t
ain the form
less Brah
man, be
cause of the law of pro
-
por
tion of f
ruit to de
sire. The Sruti de
clares ﬁAs one med
i
t
ates upon
That, so he be
comes.ﬂ
As the medit
ator on the rel
a
tive as
pect
s of the Lord is un
able to
com
pre
hend it full
y
, he at
t
ains only lim
ited pow
ers and not un
lim
ited
pow
ers like the Lord Him
self.
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 4
535

Xe©`V
ü¡d§ àË`
jmZ
&
Darsay
at
aschaiv
am praty
akshanumane
IV
.4.20 (553)
And t
hus perc
eption a
nd in
ference sh
ow.
Darsay
at
ah:
 they bot
h show;
Cha:
 and;
Evam:
 thus;
Praty
aksha-anumane:
Pratyaksha and Anumana
, perception and
inference.
This Su
tra de
clares that the tran
scen
den
t
al as
pect of the Lord is
es
t
ab
lished by both t
he Sruti and S
mriti. S
ruti and Smrit
i both de
clare
that t
he high
est light does not abi
de within ef

fected thing, ﬁThe sun
does not shine there, nor the m
oon and the st
ars, nor these lightnings
and much less this fireﬂ (Mun. Up. I
I.2.
10). ﬁThe sun does not il
lu
mine
it, nor t
he moon, nor fireﬂ (Bhagav
ad Git
a, XV
.6).
^moJ_
mÌgmå`{bﬁ
Bhogamatrasamy
alingacch
a
IV
.4.21 (554)
And because of t
he indi
cati
ons (i
n th
e script
ures) of
 equalit
y (of

the
 libe
rate
d so
ul wi
th the
 Lord
) onl
y with re
spe
ct to
enjo
yment.
Bhogamatra:
 with respect to enjoym
ent only;

Samy
a:
 equality
;
Lingat:
 from the indicat
ion of Srut
i;
Cha:
 also, and.
That the pow
ers of the lib
er
ated soul are not un
lim
ited is also
known from the in
di
ca
tion in the S
ruti that
 the equal
ity of
 these souls
with the Lord is only wit
h re
gard to en
joy
ment and not wit
h re
spect to
cre ation,
etc.
ﬁAs all be
ings hon
our that De
ity
, so do all be
ings hon
our him
who knows thatﬂ (Bri. Up. I.
5.20). ﬁThrough it he at

tains iden
tity
 with
the De
ity
, or lives in t
he same world with itﬂ (Bri. Up.
 I.5.
23).
All these t
ext
s de
scribe equal
ity onl
y with re
gard to en
joy
ment.
They do not m
en
tion any
thing with ref

er ence to cre
ation, et
c.
AZmd¥
{Îm– eã
XmXZmd¥
{Îm– eã
Anavrittih sabdadanav
rittih sabdat
IV
.4.22 (555)
(There
 is) no
 retu
rn (for th
es
e l
ibe
rate
d so
uls
), on a
cco
unt o
f
the
 scrip
tural
 state
me
nt (to th
at e
ffec
t).
Anav
ritti
h:
no return;
Sabdat:
 on account of the scriptural st
atement.
The dis
cus
sion on the priv
i
leges of the lib
er
ated soul is con
-
cluded here.
The Purvap
akshin main
t
ains: If t
he pow
ers of the lib
er
ated souls
are lim
ited, t
hen they t
oo will come to an end like all l
im
ited mor
t
al be
-
ings. There
fore, the l
ib
er
ated souls will have t
o re
turn to thi
s world
from Brahmaloka.
This Su
tra re
futes this and says t
hat those who go to
Brahmaloka by t
he p
ath of t
he gods do not re
turn from there.
 Be
cause
BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
536

scrip
tural p
as
sages teach that they
 do not so re
turn. ﬁGo
ing up by that

way
, one reaches im
mor
t
al
ityﬂ (Chh. Up. V
III
.6.6). ﬁThose who pro
-
ceed on that p
ath do not re
turn to the l
ife of manﬂ (Chh. Up.
 IV
.15.6).
ﬁHe reaches the world of Brah
man and does not re
turnﬂ (Chh. Up.
VII
.15.1). ﬁThey
 no more re
turn to thi
s worldﬂ (Bri. Up. VI.
2.15).
The rep
e
ti
tion of t
he words ﬁNo re
turnﬂ, etc.,
 in
di
cates that the
book is fin
ished.
Thus ends the Fourth Pada (
Sec
tion 4) of the Four
th Chap
ter
(Adhy
ay
a IV) of the Brahma Sutras
 or the V
edant
a Phi
los
o
phy
of Sri Baadaray
ana or Sri
 V
eda-V
y
asa or
Sri Krish
na-Dv
aip
ay
ana, the A
v
at
ara of Lord Sri
 Hari.
May
 His bless
ings be upon y
ou all.
HARI OM T
A
T
 SA
T
Sri Sadguru Param
atman
e Nam
ah
Om
 Sri V
edavyasaya Nam
ah
Om Purnamadah Purnamidam P
urnat Purnamudachyate,
Purnasya Purnamadaya Purnamevavasishyat
e.
Om Santi
h Santih Santih!
CHAPT
ER IVŠS
ECT
ION 4
537

INDEX
T
o Im
por
t
ant T
op
ics dis
cussed in the Brahma Sutras
Adhikari f
or Know
l
edge, 456
Air orig
i
nates f
rom Et
her
, 246
Akasa of
 Chh. Up. 1.
9 is
Brah
man, 39,
 91
Aja of Sv
et. Up.
 does not
mean Pradhana,
 121
Akshara i
s Brah
man, 84
Ashrama D
harma to be
fol
low
ed by even those not
de
sir
ous of Mok
sha, 454
At
man is dis
tinct
 from t
he
body
, 418
At
man to be seen (
Bri. U
p.
II.
4.5) is B
rah
man, 133
A
vyakt
a of Kat
ha Up. does
not re
fer t
o Sankhya T
attv
a, 1
16
Brah manŠabi
d ing
w
ith
the
el
e
ment is t
he cre
ative
prin ci ple,

250
Births
 and deaths are not
 of
soul, 254
Brah man
and
in di vid ual
soul
re
side in the hear
t, 59
Brah
manŠcause of
 sun,
moon, et
c.,
 130
,,Š
cre
ates no evil
, 166
,,ŠDef i
 ni ti
on,
13
,,Š
ef
 fi cient

and
ma te ri
al
  cause
of
the

w
orld, 138,
 149, 171
,,Š
en
quiry of, 12
,,Š
first
 cause, 21,
 126
,,Šfull
 of bl
iss, 3
0
,,Š
has no or
i
gin, 246
,,Š
is abode of eart
h and
  heaven,
78
,,Š
is equipped w
ith full
  pow

ers, 175
,,Š
is high
est ob
ject of

med i ta tion,
86
,,Š
is the un
seen, 67
,,Š
is one w
ith
out
  a
sec
ond,
359
,,Šit
s at
trib
utes
 to be
  com
bined
in

med i ta tion,
381
,,Š
its na
ture,
 344
,,Š
Light of li
ghts, 94
,,Š
nei ther
p
ar tial
  nor
cruel,
178
,,Š
the In
ner Ruler
, 65
,,Š
w
ay of reali
sa
tion, 16
Bhuma is Br
ah
man, 82
Char ac ter
 is tic
s
of
the
soul
w
hich has at
tained Nirguna
Brah man,

527
Child-like s
tate, 466
Cre
ationŠt
he fi
nal end of,  176
Dahara is Br
ah
man, 87
Devas en
ti
tled to s
tudy of
V
edas
and
med i ta tion,
97
Dis so lu t
ionŠpro ces
s
of

252,
253
539

BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
540
Earth is
 cre
ated fr
om w
a
ter
,  249
Eater is
 Brah
man, 58
Ether is
 not eter

nal, 237Ex pi a tion
for
vi o lat ing
the
Sannyasa or
der
, 460
Fate of
 souls af
ter deat
h w
ho are
not en
ti
tled to go t
o
Chandraloka,
  317
Five
fold
-five
 of Bri
. Up. IV
.4.17
does not re
fer t
o Sankhyan
cat e go ries
,
124
Food re
stric

tions can be given up
only w
hen life is in dan
ger
, 451
Good and evil deeds
 of a man of
Know
l
edge are shared by his
friends and en
e
mies, 393,
 395
In di vid ual
soul
de pend ent
on
the
Lord, 274
In
di
vid
ual soul is agent
 w
hen lim
ited
by ad
juncts, 273
In di vid ual
soulŠna tur
e
of,
257
In di vid ual
soul
not
pro duced
but
eter nal,

255
In di vid ual
soul™
s
re la tion s
hip
to
Brah man,

276
In di vid ual
soulŠsiz
e
of,
259
Know
er of Br
ah
man merges
 in
Brah
man at deat
h, 490
Know
er of Saguna B
rah
man de
p
arts
through Sus
humna Nadi
at death,
 503
Know
er of Saguna B
rah
man
goes to Br
ahmaloka, 505
Know
er of Saguna B
rah
man goes to
Brahmalok
a even though
he dies in Dakshinayana, 505
Know
er of Saguna B
rah
man goes
along the path of Devayana,
397, 398
Know
l
edge of Brah
man frees
 one
from al
l sins past and
fu
ture,
 485, 486
Know
l edgeŠits
orig i na tion,

467,
489
Lib er ated
soul
can
an i mate
sev eral
bod
ies at once,
 532
Lib er ated
soul
man i fests
its
es sen tial

na ture,

525
Lib er ated
soul
re mains
inseparable
from S
u
preme Soul,
 527
Lib
er
ated soul w
ho has
at
tained Brahmaloka can re
main
w
ith or with
out body
, 530
Lib
er
ated soul w
ho has
at
tained Brahmaloka has all
lordly pow

ers, 533Light is Br
ah
man, 41,
 109
Mahat of
 Katha Up.
 does not
re
fer t
o Sankhya T
attv
a, 1
16
Manomaya is Brah
man, 52
Med i ta tions
in
sac ri f
i cial
acts,
425, 462
Med
i
ta
tion is en
joined even for
 a
Muni, 464,
 483
Med i ta tion,
its
tech nique
and
rules,
477, 478, 479,
 480, 481, 483
Med i ta tion
es sen tial

till
know
l edge
is at
tained, 474
Merg
ing of func

tions of or
gans at
death, 494
Mode of de
p
ar
ture at
 death, 498

INDEX
541
Namarupa cre
ation of t
he Lord and
not of t
he Jiva, 302
Na
ture of
 Mukti,
 468
Na
ture of
 sw
oon, 342
Neti-Net
i ex
plained, 351
Nityakarmas en
joined in V
edas
should not be giv
en up, 488
Om and Udgit
ha, 380
Path t
o Brahmalok
a, 51
1, 512, 513,
514, 516
Per
fect
ed souls may take birth to
ful
fil the di

vine mis sion, 399
Per
son in the eye is Brah
man, 61
Prana dis
tinct
 from ai
r
and senses,
 292
Prana has als
o an or
i
gin from
Brah man,

291
Prana is Br
ah
man, 40,
 45, 108
Prana is m
erged in Jiva,
 496
Prana is m
in
ute, 296
Prana of a k
now
er of Br
ah
man does
not de
p
art,
 500, 502
Prana V
idyaŠUnity
 of, 381
Prarabdha not
 de
stroyed by
know
l edge,
487
Purusha is
 of the s
ize of t
he
thumb,
 95
Re cip ro cal
med i ta tion,
405
Rec on cil i a t
ion
of
V
idyas,
402,
403,
406, 408, 41
1, 412
Ref u ta tion
of
Atomic

the ory
,
199
Ref u ta tion
of
Bauddha
Ide al ists,
218
Ref u ta tion
of
Bauddha
Re al ists,
205
Ref u ta tion
of
Gautama
and
Kanada, 158
Ref u ta tion
of
Jaina
doc trine,

223
Ref u ta tion
of
Pancharat
ra,
230
Ref u ta tion
of
Pasupat
a,
226
Ref u ta tion
of
Sankhyan
the ory
,
189
Ref u ta tion
of
V
aiseshika,

197
Ref u ta tion
of
Y
oga,
148
Re
turn of
 soul from
 deep sleep, 340
Saguna Brah
man in cre
ation, 180
Sannyasa is pre
scribed in
scrip t
ures,
443
Sannyasin can
not re
vert bac
k to
for
mer stages of lif
e, 459
Self con
sist
ing of know
l
edge is
Brah man,

1
10
Self is hi
gher than ev
ery
thing, 384
Self is S
u
preme, 385
Senses are el
even, 289
Senses
are
in de pend ent
prin ci ples,

300
Senses are m
in
ute, 291
Senses have t
heir or
i
gin from
Brah man,

286
Senses not
 func
tions of
 Prana, 300
So
cial boy
cott
 by so
ci
ety of a
Naishthik
a Brahmachar
in
fail
ing to keep up cel

i bacy
,  462
Soul™
s de
scent f
rom
Chandraloka,
 323
Soul de
scend
ing from
 heaven, 313
Soul™
s en
try into plants, 324
Soul in deep sleep,
 337
Soul in dream s
tate, 332
Soul™
s time f
or de
scent t
o the
earth,
 323
SoulŠtr
ans mi gra t
ion
of,
307

BRAHMA SU
T
RAS
542
Soul at
tain
ing Saguna Brah
man
ef
 fects
de sires
by
mere w
ill, 529
S
to
ries in Upanishads eulo
gise the
V
idyas t
aught in them
, 447
Sudras™

el i gi bil ity
to
study
of
V
edas, 105
Un con nected
Mantras

in
cer
tain Up
anishads do not be
long
to Brahm
a-V
idya, 392
Up
asanas, 420,
 422, 423, 424
V
aisvanara is
 Brah
man, 69
V
idyasŠtheir
con sti t
u tion,
373
V
idyasŠtheir place in
med i ta tion,
377,
387,
445
W
a
ter is pr
o
duced from
 fire,
 249
W
orksŠm
eans to
know
l edge,
449
W
orld is non-dif
fer
ent fr
om
Brah man,

160