7. And on account of (Brahman) being specified.
The text 'a person not human leads them to the worlds of Brahman' (Bri. Up. VI. 2, 15) by using the word 'world,' and moreover in the plural, determines the specification that the not-human person leads those only who meditate on Hiranyagarbha, who dwells within some particular world. Moreover, the text 'I enter the hall of Prajpati, the house' (Ch. Up. VIII, 14) shows that he who goes on the path beginning with light aims at approaching Hiranyagarbha. But if this is so, there is a want of appropriate denotation in the clause, 'There is a person not human, he leads them to Brahman'; if Hiranyagarbha is meant, the text should say 'He leads them to Brahm (Brahmnam).'
8. But on account of nearness there is that designation.
Hiranyagarbha is the first created being (as declared by the text 'he who creates Brahma'); he thus stands near to Brahman, and therefore may be designated by the same term (viz. Brahman). This explanation is necessitated by the reasons set forth in the preceding Stras (which show that the real highest Brahman cannot be meant).—But, if the soul advancing on the path of the Gods reaches Hiranyagarbha only, texts such as 'This is the path of the Gods, the path of Brahman; those who proceed on that path do not return to the life of man' (Ch. Up. IV, 15, 6), and 'moving upwards by that a man reaches immortality' (VIII, 6, 6), are wrong in asserting that that soul attains to immortality and does not return; for the holy books teach that Hiranyagarbha, as a created being, passes away at the end of a dviparrdha-period; and the text 'Up to the world of Brahman the worlds return again' (Bha. G. VIII, 16) shows that those who have gone to Hiranyagarbha necessarily return also.
9. On the passing away of the effected (world of Brahma), together with its ruler, (the souls go) to what is higher than that; on account of scriptural declaration.
On the passing away of the effected world of Brahma, together with its ruler Hiranyagarbha, who then recognises his qualification for higher knowledge, the soul also which had gone to Hiranyagarbha attains to true knowledge and thus reaches Brahman, which is higher than that, i.e. higher than the effected world of Brahm. This is known from the texts declaring that he who proceeds on the path of light reaches immortality and does not return; and is further confirmed by the text, 'They all, reaching the highest immortality, become free in the world of Brahman (Brahm) at the time of the great end' (Mu. Up. III, 2, 6).
10. And on account of Smriti.
This follows from Smriti also, which declares 'when the pralaya has come and the end of the Highest, they all together with Brahman enter the highest place.'—For all these reasons Bdari holds that the troop of the conducting deities, beginning with Light, leads the souls of those only who meditate on the effected Brahman, i e. Hiranyagarbha.
11. The Highest, Jaimini thinks; on account of primariness of meaning.
The teacher Jaimini is of opinion that those deities lead on the souls of those only who meditate on the highest Brahman. For in the text 'a person not human leads them to Brahman' the word Brahman is naturally taken in its primary sense (i.e. the highest Brahman); the secondary sense (i.e. the effected Brahman) can be admitted only if there are other valid reasons to refer the passage to the effected Brahman. And the alleged impossibility of the soul's going is no such valid reason; for although Brahman no doubt is present everywhere, Scripture declares that the soul of the wise frees itself from Nescience only on having gone to some particular place. That the origination of true knowledge depends on certain conditions of caste, srama, religious duty, purity of conduct, time, place, and so on, follows from certain scriptural texts, as e.g. 'Brhmanas desire to know him through the study of the Veda' (Bri. Up. IV, 4, 22); in the same way it follows from the text declaring the soul's going to Brahman that the final realisation of that highest knowledge which implies the cessation of all Nescience depends on the soul's going to some particular place. The arguments founded on texts alleged to declare that the soul of the wise does not pass out of the body at all we have refuted above. The argument that the specification implied in the text which mentions Brahman-worlds clearly points to the effected Brahman, i.e. Hiranyagarbha, is equally invalid. For the compound 'the Brahman-world' is to be explained as'the world which is Brahman'; just as according to the Prva Mmms the compound 'Nishda-sthapati' denotes a sthapati who is a Nishda (not a sthapati of the Nishdas). A thing even which is known as one only may be designated by a plural form, as in a mantra one girdle is spoken of as 'the fetters of Aditi.' And as to the case under discussion, we know on the authority of Scripture, Smriti, Itihsa, and Purna, that the wonderful worlds springing from the mere will of a perfect and omnipresent being cannot be but infinite.
12. And because Scripture declares it.
And Scripture moreover directly declares that the soul which has departed by way of the artery in the upper part of the head and passed along the path of the Gods reaches the highest Brahman: 'This serene being having risen from the body, having reached the highest light manifests itself in its own shape' (Ch. Up. VIII, 12, 3).—Against the contention that the text 'I enter the hall of Prajpati, the house' shows that he who proceeds on the path beginning with light aims at the effected Brahman, the next Stra argues.
13. And there is no aiming at the effected (Brahman).
The aim of the soul is not at Hiranyagarbha, but at the highest Brahman itself. For the complementary sentence 'I am the glorious among Brhmanas' shows that what the soul aims at is the condition of the universal Self, which has for its antecedent the putting off of all Nescience. For this appears from the preceding text, 'As a horse shakes his hairs and as the moon frees herself from the mouth of Rhu; having shaken off the body may I obtain—the uncreated Brahman-world' declares that the Brahman-world, which is the thing to be reached, is something non-created, and explicitly states that reaching that world implies freedom from all bondage whatsoever.—It is for these reasons that Jaimini holds that the deities speeding the soul on its way lead on him only who has the highest Brahman for the object of his meditation.
Now the Reverend Bdaryana declares his own view, which constitutes the final conclusion in this matter.
14. Those not depending on symbols he leads, thus Bdaryana thinks; there being a defect in both cases; and he whose thought is that.
Bdaryana is of opinion that the deities lead those not depending on symbols, i.e. all meditating devotees other than those depending on symbols. That is to say, the view that those are led who meditate on the effected Brahman cannot be upheld; nor is there an exclusive rule that those only should be led on who meditate on the highest Brahman. The truth is that those are led who meditate on the highest Brahman, and also those who meditate on the Self (soul) as different from matter (Prakriti) and having Brahman for its true Self. Souls of both these kinds are led on to Brahman. Those on the other hand whose object of meditation is such things as name and so on, which fall within what is a mere effect of Brahman—such things being viewed either under the aspect of Brahman, just as some valiant man may be viewed under the aspect of a lion (which view expresses itself in the judgment 'Devadatta is a lion '); or by themselves (without reference to Brahman)—all those are not led on to Brahman. Why so?' Because there is a defect in both cases,' i. e. in both the views rejected by Bdaryana. The view that those are led who meditate on the effected Brahman is in conflict with texts such as 'having risen from this body and reached the highest light' (Ch. Up. VIII, 12, 3)—for the nature of the fruit depends on the nature of the meditation; and the view that those only are led to the highest Brahman who meditate on the highest Brahman, would stultify texts such as the one which expressly declares Agni and the rest of the deities to lead on those who possess the knowledge of the five fires ('Those who know this, viz. the Vidy of the five fires, and those who in the forest meditate on faith and austerity go to light—there is a person not human, he leads them to Brahman,' Ch. Up. V, 10). Both these views thus being defective, we adhere to the conclusion that the deities lead on to Brahman the two classes of souls mentioned above.—This the Stra further declares in the words 'he whose thought is that' (tatkratuh), the sense of which is that he whose thought is that reaches that, i.e. that the nature of what is reached depends on the nature of the meditation. This argument is founded on the text, 'According to what his thought is (yath-kratuh) in this world, so will he be when he has departed this life' (Ch. Up. III, 14), which implies the principle that what a soul after death attains is according to its thought and meditation in this life; and moreover we have direct scriptural statements to the effect that those who possess the knowledge of the five fires proceed on the path of the Gods, and that those who proceed on that path reach Brahman and do not return. Analogous reasoning proves that meditation on the soul as free from matter and having Brahman for its true Self also leads to the highest Brahman. In the case of those, on the other hand, who rely on the symbols (in which they meditatively contemplate Brahman), beginning with name and terminating with prna. ('He who meditates on name as Brahman,' Ch. Up. VII, 1 ff.), the meditation is not proved by texts of the two kinds previously mentioned to lead to Brahman; it rather is contaminated by an element not of the nature of intelligence, and hence—according to the principle that the result of a meditation is the same in nature as the meditation itself— the soul of the inferior devotee practising such meditation does not proceed by the path of light and does not reach Brahman.—That this distinction is declared by Scripture itself, the next Stra shows.
15. And Scripture declares the difference.
The text, 'He who meditates on name as Brahman, for him there is movement as he wishes as far as name extends,' &c. (Ch. Up. VII, 1 ff.), declares that those who meditate on the series of symbols beginning with name and ending with prna attain to a result of limited nature and not depending on any particular path. Those therefore who meditate on the Intelligent either as mixed with the Non-intelligent or by itself, viewing it either under the aspect of Brahman or as separated from Brahman, are not led on by the conducting deities. On the other hand, it remains a settled conclusion that the deities speed on their way those who meditate on the highest Brahman and on the soul as separated from Prakriti and having Brahman for its true Self.—Here terminates the adhikarana of 'the effected.'
1. (On the soul's) having approached (the highest light) there is manifestation; (as we infer) from the word 'own.'
The Sras now proceed to consider the kind of superior existence (aisvarya) which the released souls enjoy.—The text says, 'Thus does that serene being, having risen from the body and having approached the highest light, manifest itself in its own form' (Ch. Up. VIII, 12, 3). Does this passage mean that the soul having approached the highest light assumes a new body, to be brought about then, as e.g. the body of a deva; or that it only manifests its own natural character?—The text must be understood in the former sense, the Prvapakshin holds. For otherwise the scriptural texts referring to Release would declare what is of no advantage to man. We do not observe that its own nature is of any advantage to the soul. In the state of dreamless sleep the body and the sense-organs cease to act, and you may say the pure soul then abides by itself, but in what way does this benefit man? Nor can it be said that mere cessation of pain constitutes the well-being of the soul which has approached the highest light, and that in this sense manifestation of its own nature may be called Release; for Scripture clearly teaches that the released soul enjoys an infinity of positive bliss, 'One hundred times the bliss of Prajpati is one bliss of Brahman and of a sage free from desires'; 'for having tasted a flavour he experiences bliss' (Taitt. Up. II, 7). Nor can it be said that the true nature of the soul is consciousness of the nature of unlimited bliss which, in the Samsra condition, is hidden by Nescience and manifests itself only when the soul reaches Brahman. For, as explained previously, intelligence which is of the nature of light cannot be hidden; hiding in that case would be neither more nor less than destruction. Nor can that which is mere light be of the nature of bliss; for bliss is pleasure, and to be of the nature of pleasure is to be such as to agree with the Self. But, if the Self is mere light, where is the being by which light is to be apprehended as agreeable to its own nature? (i.e. where is the knowing subject conscious of bliss?) He, therefore, who holds the Self to be mere light, can in no way prove that it is of the nature of bliss. If, moreover, that which the soul effects on approaching the highest light is merely to attain to its own true nature, we point out that that nature is something eternally accomplished, and that hence the declaration that 'it manifests (accomplishes) itself in its own nature' would be purportless. We hence conclude that on approaching the highest light the soul connects itself with a new form only then brought about. On this view the term 'accomplishes itself is taken in its direct sense, and the expression 'in its own shape' also is suitable in so far as the soul accomplishes itself in a nature specially belonging to it and characterised by absolute bliss.—This view the Stra rejects. That special condition into which the soul passes on having, on the path of the Gods, approached the highest light is a manifestation of its own true nature, not an origination of a new character. For this is proved— by the specification implied in the term 'own,' in the phrase 'in its own nature.' If the soul assumed a new body, this specification would be without meaning; for, even without that, it would be clear that the new body belongs to the soul.—Against the assertion that the soul's own true nature is something eternally accomplished, and that hence a declaration of that nature 'accomplishing itself would be unmeaning, the next Stra declares itself.
2. The released one; on account of the promise.
What the text says about the soul accomplishing itself in its own form refers to the released soul which, freed from its connexion with works and what depends thereon, i.e. the body and the rest, abides in its true essential nature.—That essential nature no doubt is something eternally accomplished, but as in the Samsra state it is obscured by Nescience in the form of Karman; the text refers to the cessation of such obscuration as 'accomplishment.'—How is this known?—'From the promise,'i.e. from the fact that the text promises to set forth such cessation. For Prajpati when saying again and again, 'I will explain that further to you,' does so with a view to throw light on the individual soul—first introduced in the clause 'that Self which is free from sin, &c.' (VIII, 7, 1)—in so far as freed from all connexion with the three empirical conditions of waking, dreaming and dreamless sleep, and released from the body which is due to Karman and the cause of joy and sorrow. When, therefore, he concludes 'that serene being, i.e. the soul, having risen from this body and having approached the highest light accomplishes itself in its true form,' we understand that such 'accomplishment' means the final release, i.e. the cessation of all bondage, which is gained by the soul, previously connected with Karman, as soon as it approaches the highest light.—The Prvapakshin had said that as in the state of deep sleep the manifestation of the true nature of the soul is seen in no way to benefit man, Scripture, if declaring that Release consists in a manifestation of the true nature of the soul, would clearly teach something likewise not beneficial to man; and that hence the 'accomplishment in its own form' must mean the soul's entering on such a new condition of existence as would be a cause of pleasure, viz. the condition of a deva or the like. To this the next Stra replies.
3. The Self, on account of subject-matter.
The subject-matter of the whole section shows that by the Self manifesting itself in its own form there is meant the Self as possessing the attributes of freedom from all evil and sin and so on. For the teaching of Prajpati begins as follows: 'the Self which is free from sin, free from old age, from death and grief, from hunger and thirst, whose desires and thoughts spontaneously realise themselves.' And that this Self which forms the subject-matter of the entire section is the individual Self we have shown under I, 3, 19. The manifestation of the true nature of the soul when reaching the highest light therefore means the manifestation of that Self which has freedom from sin and so on for its essential attributes-that nature being in the Samsra state obscured through Nescience. When therefore at the moment of Release those essential qualities assert themselves, the case is one of manifestation of what already exists, not one of origination. Thus the reverend Saunaka says, 'As the lustre of the gem is not created by the act of polishing, so the essential intelligence of the Self is not created by the putting off of imperfections. As the well is not the cause of the production of rain water, but only serves to manifest water which already exists—for whence should that originate which is not?—thus knowledge and the other attributes of the Self are only manifested through the putting off of evil qualities; they are not produced, for they are eternal.' Intelligence, therefore, bliss, and the other essential qualities of the soul which were obscured and contracted by Karman, expand and thus manifest themselves when the bondage due to Karman passes away and the soul approaches the highest light. On this view of 'manifestation' there remains no difficulty.—Here terminates the adhikarana of 'on approaching manifestation.'
4. In non-division; because that is seen.
Is the soul, when it has reached the highest light and freed itself from all bondage, conscious of itself as separate from the highest Self or as non-separate in so far as being a mere 'mode' (prakra) of that Self?— The former view is the right one. For Scriptural and Smriti texts alike declare that the released soul stands to the highest Self in the relation of fellowship, equality, equality of attributes, and all this implies consciousness of separation. Compare 'He attains all desires together with the all-knowing Brahman' (Taitt. Up. II, 1, 1); 'When the seer sees the shining maker, the Lord, the Person who has his source in Brahman; then, possessing perfect knowledge, and shaking off good and evil, free from all passions he reaches the highest equality' (Mu. Up. III, 1, 3); 'Taking their stand upon this knowledge they, attaining to an equality of attributes with me, are neither born at the time of a creation nor are they agitated when a pralaya takes place' (Bha. G. XIV, 2).—Against this view the Stra declares itself 'in non-division.' The released soul is conscious of itself as non-divided from the highest Brahman. 'For this is seen,' i.e. for the soul having reached Brahman and freed itself from the investment of Nescience sees itself in its true nature. And this true nature consists herein that the souls have for their inner Self the highest Self while they constitute the body of that Self and hence are modes (prakra) of it. This is proved by all those texts which exhibit the soul and Brahman in co-ordination—'Thou art that' 'this Self is Brahman'; 'In that all this has its Self'; 'All this in truth is Brahman'; and by other texts, such as 'He who dwells within the Self, whom the Self does not know, of whom the Self is the body,' &c.; and 'He who abides within, the ruler of creatures, he is thy Self; as explained by us under Stra I, 4, 22. The consciousness of the released soul therefore expresses itself in the following form: 'I am Brahman, without any division.' Where the texts speak of the soul's becoming equal to, or having equal attributes with, Brahman, the meaning is that the nature of the individual soul—which is a mere mode of Brahman—is equal to that of Brahman, i.e. that on putting off its body it becomes equal to Brahman in purity. The text declaring that the soul 'attains all its desires together with Brahman' intimates that the soul, together with Brahman of which it is a mode, is conscious of the attributes of Brahman. The different texts are thus in no conflict. Nor, on this view of the soul being non-divided from Brahman in so far as being its mode, is there any difficulty on account of what is said about the soul under S. IV, 4, 8; or on account of the doctrines conveyed in II, 1, 22; III, 4, 8.—Here terminates the adhikarana of 'non-division, on account of its being seen.'
5. In (a nature like) that of Brahman, thus Jaimini thinks; on account of suggestion and the rest.
Owing to the fact that different texts give different accounts, the question now arises of what character that essential nature of the Self is in which it manifests itself on reaching Brahman. Is that nature constituted by freedom from evil and sin and the rest (i.e. the attributes enumerated Ch. Up. VIII, 7, 1); or by mere intelligence (vijna); or by both, there being no opposition between intelligence and those other attributes?—The teacher Jaimini holds that the soul manifests itself in its Brahman character, i.e. in a character constituted by freedom from sin, and so on. These latter attributes are, in the text of the 'small lotus,' mentioned as belonging to Brahman (Ch. Up. VIII, 1, 5), and may hence be referred to as the 'Brahman' character. And that this Brahman character is the character of the released soul also follows from 'suggestion and the rest.' For freedom from all evil and the rest are, in the teaching of Prajpati, referred to as attributes of the soul (VIII, 7, 1). The 'and the rest' of the Stra refers to the activities of the released soul—laughing, playing, rejoicing, and so on (mentioned in VIII, 12, 3)—which depend on the power belonging to the soul in that state to realise all its ideas and wishes. It is for these reasons that Jaimini holds that mere intelligence does not constitute the true nature of the released soul.
6. In the sole nature of intelligence; as that is its Self. Thus Audulomi thinks.
Intelligence (consciousness; kaitanya) alone is the true nature of the soul, and hence it is in that character only that the released soul manifests itself; this is the view of the teacher Audulomi. That intelligence only constitutes the true being of the soul, we learn from the express statement 'As a lump of salt has neither inside nor outside, but is altogether a mass of taste; so this Self has neither inside nor outside, but is altogether a mass of knowledge' (Bri. Up. IV, 5, 13). When, therefore, the text attributes to the soul freedom from evil and the rest, it does not mean to predicate of it further positive qualities, but only to exclude all the qualities depending on avidy—change, pleasure, pain, and so on—For these reasons Audulomi holds that the released soul manifests itself as mere intelligence.—Next the teacher Bdaryana determines the question by propounding his own view.
7. Thus also, on account of existence of the former qualities (as proved) by suggestion, Bdarayana holds absence of contradiction.
The teacher Bdaryana is of opinion that even thus, i.e. although the text declares the soul to have mere intelligence for its essential nature, all the same the previously stated attributes, viz. freedom from all sin, and so on, are not to be excluded. For the authority of a definite statement in the Upanishads proves them to exist ('That Self which is free from sin,' &c.); and of authorities of equal strength one cannot refute the other. Nor must you say that the case is one of essential contradiction, and that hence we necessarily must conclude that freedom from sin, and so on (do not belong to the true nature of the soul, but) are the mere figments of Nescience (from which the released soul is free). For as there is equal authority for both sides, why should the contrary view not be held? (viz. that the soul is essentially free from sin, &c., and that the kaitanya is non-essential.) For the principle is that where two statements rest on equal authority, that only which suffers from an intrinsic impossibility is to be interpreted in a different way (i.e. different from what it means on the face of it), so as not to conflict with the other. But while admitting this we deny that the text which describes the Self as a mass of mere knowledge implies that the nature of the Self comprises nothing whatever but knowledge.—But what then is the purport of that text?—The meaning is clear, we reply; the text teaches that the entire Self, different from all that is non-sentient, is self-illumined, i.e. not even a small part of it depends for its illumination on something else. The fact, vouched for in this text, of the soul in its entirety being a mere mass of knowledge in no way conflicts with the fact, vouched for by other texts, of its possessing qualities such as freedom from sin and so on, which inhere in it as the subject of those qualities; not any more than the fact of the lump of salt being taste through and through—which fact is known through the sense of taste—conflicts with the fact of its possessing such other qualities as colour, hardness, and so on, which are known through the eye and the other sense-organs. The meaning of the entire text is as follows—just as the lump of salt has throughout one and the same taste, while other sapid things such as mangoes and other fruit have different tastes in their different parts, rind and so on; so the soul is throughout of the nature of knowledge or self-illuminedness.— Here terminates the adhikarana of 'that which is like Brahman.'
8. By the mere will; Scripture stating that.
Concerning the released soul Scripture states, 'He moves about there, laughing, playing, rejoicing, be it with women, or chariots, or relatives' (Ch. Up. VIII, 12, 3). The doubt here arises whether the soul's meeting with relatives and the rest presupposes an effort on its part or follows on its mere will—as things spring from the mere will of the highest Person.—An effort is required; for we observe in ordinary life that even such persons as kings and the like who are capable of realising all their wishes do not accomplish the effects desired without some effort.—Against this view the Stra says 'by the mere will.' For, in a previous passage, Scripture expressly says, 'He who desires the world of the Fathers, by his mere will the Fathers rise to receive him,' &c. (VIII, 2, 1). And there is no other text declaring the need of effort which would oblige us to define and limit the meaning of the text last quoted.
9. And for this very reason without another ruler.
Since the released soul realises all its wishes, it does not stand under another ruler. For to be under a ruler means to be subject to injunction and prohibition, and to be such is opposed to being free in the realisation of all one's wishes. Hence Scripture says, 'he is a Self- ruler' (Ch. Up. VII, 25).—Here terminates the adhikarana of 'wishes.'
10. The absence, Bdari holds; for thus Scripture says.
A doubt arises whether the Released has a body and sense-organs, or not; or whether he has them or not just as he pleases. The teacher Bdari holds that body and sense-organs are absent; since the text declares this. The text—'as long as he is embodied there is no freedom from pleasure and pain; but when he is free from the body then neither pleasure nor pain touches him' (Ch. Up. VIII, 12, 1)—declares that pleasure and pain are necessarily connected with embodiedness; and the text—'having risen from this body and reached the highest light he manifests himself in his own shape' (VIII, 12, 3)—declares that the Released one is without a body.
11. The presence, Jaimini holds; because the text declares manifoldness.
The teacher Jaimini holds that the Released one has a body and senses; because the text declares manifoldness—'He is onefold, he is threefold, he is fivefold, he is sevenfold' (Ch. Up. VII, 26, 2). The Self which is one and indivisible cannot be manifold, and the various forms of manifoldness of which the text speaks therefore must depend on the body. The text which speaks of the absence of a body refers to the absence of that body only which is due to Karman; for this latter body only is the cause of pleasure and pain. Next the Reverend Bdaryana decides this point by the declaration of his own view.
12. For this reason Bdaryana (holds him to be) of both kinds; as in the case of the twelve days' sacrifice.
'For this reason,' i.e. for the reason that the text refers to the wish of the Released, the Reverend Bdaryana is of opinion that the Released may, at his liking, be with or without a body. This satisfies both kinds of texts. The case is analogous to that of the twelve days' sacrifice which, on the basis of twofold texts—'Those desirous of prosperity are to celebrate the dvdasha,' and 'The priest is to offer the dvdasha for him who desires offspring'—belongs, according to difference of wish, either to the sattra or the ahna class of sacrifices.—The next Stra declares that the body and the sense-organs of the Released are not necessarily created by the Released himself.
13. In the absence of a body, as in the state of dream; that being possible.
As in the absence of a body and other instruments of enjoyment created by himself, the Released may undergo experiences of pleasure by means of instruments created by the highest Person, the Released, although capable of realising all his wishes, may not himself be creative. As in the state of dream the individual soul has experiences depending on chariots and other implements created by the Lord ('He creates chariots, horses,' &c., Bri. Up. IV, 3, 10); thus the released soul also may have experience of different worlds created by the Lord engaged in playful sport.
14. When there is a body, as in the waking state.
When, on the other hand, the released soul possesses a body created by its own will, then it enjoys its various delights in the same way as a waking man does.—In the same way as the highest Person creates out of himself, for his own delight, the world of the Fathers and so on; so he sometimes creates such worlds for the enjoyment of the released souls. But sometimes, again, the souls using their own creative will-power themselves create their own worlds, which however are included within the sphere of sport of the highest Person (so that the souls in enjoying them do not pass beyond the intuition of Brahman).
But it has been taught that the soul is of atomic size; how then can it connect itself with many bodies?—To this question the next Stra replies.
15. The entering is as in the case of a lamp; for thus Scripture declares.
Just as a lamp, although abiding in one place only, enters through the light proceeding from it into connexion with many places; so the soul also, although limited to one place, may through its light-like consciousness enter into several bodies. It may do this as well as in this life the soul, although abiding in one spot of the body only, viz. the heart, pervades the whole body by means of its consciousness and thus makes it its own. There is however the following difference between the two cases. The non-released soul has its intellectual power contracted by the influence of Karman, and hence is incapable of that expansive pervasion without which it cannot identify itself with other bodies. The released soul, on the other hand, whose intellectual power is non-contracted is capable of extending as far as it likes, and thus to make many bodies its own. For Scripture declares, 'That living soul is to be known as part of the hundredth part of the point of a hair divided a hundred times, and yet it is capable of infinity' (Svet. Up. V, 9). The non-released soul is ruled by Karman, the released one only by its will—this is the difference.—But, a new difficulty is raised, Scripture declares that when the soul reaches Brahman all its inner and outer knowledge is stopped: 'Embraced by the highest Self the soul knows nothing that is without, nothing that is within' (Bri. Up. IV, 3, 21). How then can it be said to know all things?—To this the next Stra replies.
16. It refers either to dreamless sleep or to union (sampatti); for this is manifested.
Texts as the one last quoted do not refer to the released soul, but either to deep sleep or to 'union' (sampatti), i.e. the time of dying; the latter in accordance with the text 'then his speech is united (sampadyate) with his mind,—heat with the highest divinity' (Ch. Up. VI, 15, 1). In both those states the soul attains to the highest Self and is unconscious. That in the states of deep sleep and dying the soul is unconscious and that the released soul is all-knowing, Scripture reveals. The text 'In truth he thus does not know himself that he is I, nor does he know anything that exists. He is gone to utter annihilation. I see no good in this' (Ch. Up. VIII, 11, 1) declares that the soul is unconscious in the state of deep sleep; and a subsequent text in the same section declares the released soul to be all-knowing, 'He seeing these pleasures with the divine eye, i.e. the mind, rejoices' (VIII, 12, 5). The same is clearly stated in the text,'He who sees this sees everything, and obtains everything everywhere' (VII, 2, 6, 2). That at death there is unconsciousness appears from the text, 'having risen from these elements he vanishes again in them. When he has departed there is no more knowledge' (Bri. Up. IV, 5, 13). From all this it follows that the text as to the soul being held in embrace by the prja Self refers either to deep sleep or death.—Here terminates the adhikarana of 'non- being.'
17. With the exception of world-energy; on account of leading subject- matter and of non-proximity.
The doubt here presents itself whether the power of the released soul is a universal power such as belongs to the Supreme Person, extending to the creation, sustentation, and so on, of the worlds; or is limited to the intuition of the Supreme Person.—The Prvapakshin maintains the former view. For he says Scripture declares that the soul reaches equality with the Supreme Person: 'Free from stain he reaches the highest equality' (Mu. Up. III, 1, 3); and moreover Scripture ascribes to the released soul the power of realising all its thoughts. And these two conditions are not fulfilled unless the soul possess the special powers of the Lord with regard to the government, &c., of the world.—To this the Stra replies, 'with the exception of world-energy.' The released soul, freed from all that hides its true nature, possesses the power of intuitively beholding the pure Brahman, but does not possess the power of ruling and guiding the different forms of motion and rest belonging to animate and inanimate nature.—How is this known?—'From subject-matter.' For it is with special reference to the highest Brahman only that the text mentions ruling and controlling power over the entire world. 'That from whence these beings are born, that through which they live when born, that into which they enter at death, endeavour to know that; that is Brahman' (Taitt. Up. III, 1, 1). If such universal ruling and controlling power belonged to the released soul as well, it would not be used—as the text actually uses it—for defining Brahman; for all definition rests on special individual attributes. Analogously many other texts speak of universal ruling and controlling power with exclusive reference to the Supreme Person—'Being only this was in the beginning, &c.—it thought, may I be many' (Ch. Up. VI, 2); 'In the beginning this was Brahman, one only—it created the most excellent Kshattra,' &c. (Bri. Up. I, 4, 11); 'In the beginning all this was Self, one only—it thought, let me send forth these worlds' (Ait. r. II, 4, 1, 1); 'There was Narayana alone, not Brahm, and so on.' 'He who dwelling within the earth,' &c. (Bri. Up. III, 7, 3).—This also follows 'from non-proximity'; for in all those places which speak of world-controlling power the context in no way suggests the idea of the released soul, and hence there is no reason to ascribe such power to the latter.
18. If it be said that this is not so, on account of direct teaching; we reply not so, on account of the texts declaring that which abides within the spheres of those entrusted with special functions.
But, an objection is raised, certain texts directly declare that the released soul also possesses 'world-energy.' Compare 'He becomes a self- ruler; he moves in all worlds according to his wishes' (Ch. Up. VII, 25, 2); 'He moves through these worlds, enjoying any food he wishes, and assuming any shape he wishes' (Taitt. Up. III, 10, 5). We cannot therefore accept the restriction laid down in the last Stra.—Not so, the latter half of the present Stra declares, 'on account of the texts declaring that which abides in the spheres of those entrusted with special functions.' The meaning of the texts quoted is that the released soul participates in the enjoyments connected with the spheres of Hiranyagarbha and other beings which are entrusted with special functions. The soul whose knowledge is no longer obstructed by Karman freely enjoys all the different worlds in which the power of Brahman manifests itself and thus is fully satisfied.—But if the released soul, no less than the soul implicated in the Samsra, experiences enjoyments belonging to the sphere of change, it follows that the sum of its enjoyments is finite and limited, and that hence the released soul is no better off than the soul in the state of bondage!—Of this doubt the next Stra disposes.
19. That which is not within change; for thus Scripture declares the abiding (of the soul).
That which is not within change, i.e. the highest Brahman which is free from all change and of an absolutely perfect and blessed nature—this, together with the manifestations of its glory, is what forms the object of consciousness for the released soul. The worlds which are subject to change thus form objects for that soul's experience, in so far as they form part of Brahman's manifestation. For Scripture declares that the released soul thus abides within, i.e. is conscious of the changeless highest Brahman, 'when he finds freedom from fear and an abode in that which is invisible, incorporeal, undefined, unsupported, then he obtains the fearless' (Taitt. Up. II, 7). And that the world is contained within Brahman as its manifestation is declared in the text, 'In that all the worlds abide, and no one goes beyond' (Ka. Up. II, 5, 8). The meaning of the text stating that the Released freely move in all worlds, and similar texts, therefore is only that the released soul while conscious of Brahman with its manifestations experiences also the enjoyments, lying within the sphere of change, which abide in the world of Hiranyagarbha and similar beings; not that it possesses the world- energies—creative, ruling, and so on—which are the distinctive attribute of the highest Lord.
20. And thus Perception and Inference show.
That the energies connected with the rule of the entire world are exclusive attributes of the highest Person, Scripture and Smriti alike declare. Compare scriptural texts such as 'From fear of him the wind blows,' &c. (Taitt. Up. II, 8, 1); 'By the command of that Imperishable one sun and moon stand, held apart' (Bri. Up. III, 9); 'He is the lord of all, the king of all beings, the protector of all beings' (Bri. Up. IV, 4, 22). And Smriti texts such as 'With me as Supervisor, Prakriti brings forth the Universe of the movable and the immovable, and for this reason the world ever moves round'; 'Pervading this entire Universe by a portion of mine I do abide' (Bha. G. IX, 10; X, 42). Scripture and Smriti likewise declare that of the bliss which is enjoyed by the released soul the highest Person alone is the cause—'For he alone causes blessedness' (Taitt. Up. II, 7); 'He who serves me with unswerving devotion, surpasses these qualities and is fitted for becoming one with Brahman. For I am the abode of Brahman, of infinite immortality, of everlasting virtue, and of absolute bliss' (Bha. G. XIV, 26-27). The exalted qualities of the soul—freedom from evil and sin and so on—which manifest themselves in the state of Release no doubt belong to the soul's essential nature; but that the soul is of such a nature fundamentally depends on the Supreme Person, and on him also depends the permanency of those qualities; they are permanent in so far as the Lord himself on whom they depend is permanent. It is in the same way that all the things which constitute the means of enjoyment and sport on the part of the Lord are permanent in so far as the Lord himself is permanent. It thus appears that the equality to the Lord which the released soul may claim does not extend to the world-ruling energies.
21. And on account of the indication of the equality of enjoyment only.
The previous conclusion is confirmed by the further fact that the text directly teaches the released soul to be equal to Brahman in so far only as enjoying direct insight into the true nature of Brahman. 'He reaches all objects of desire, together with the all-knowing Brahman' (Taitt. Up. II, 1, 1).—The conclusion thus is that we have to shape our ideas as to the powers of the released soul in accordance with what the texts say as to the Lord only possessing the power of ruling and controlling the entire world, and that hence the latter power cannot be attributed to the soul.—But if the powers of the released soul altogether depend on the Lord, it may happen that He, being independent in all his doings, may will the released soul to return into the Sawsara.—Of this doubt the next Stra disposes.
22. Non-return, according to Scripture; non-return, according to Scripture.
We know from Scripture that there is a Supreme Person whose nature is absolute bliss and goodness; who is fundamentally antagonistic to all evil; who is the cause of the origination, sustentation, and dissolution of the world; who differs in nature from all other beings, who is all- knowing, who by his mere thought and will accomplishes all his purposes; who is an ocean of kindness as it were for all who depend on him; who is all-merciful; who is immeasurably raised above all possibility of any one being equal or superior to him; whose name is the highest Brahman. And with equal certainty we know from Scripture that this Supreme Lord, when pleased by the faithful worship of his Devotees—which worship consists in daily repeated meditation on Him, assisted by the performance of all the practices prescribed for each caste and srama— frees them from the influence of Nescience which consists of karman accumulated in the infinite progress of time and hence hard to overcome; allows them to attain to that supreme bliss which consists in the direct intuition of His own true nature: and after that does not turn them back into the miseries of Samsra. The text distinctly teaching this is 'He who behaves thus all his life through reaches the world of Brahman and does not return' (Ch. Up. VIII, 15). And the Lord himself declares 'Having obtained me great-souled men do not come into rebirth, the fleeting abode of misery; for they have reached the highest perfection. Up to the world of Brahma the worlds return again, O Arjuna; but having attained to me, O son of Kunti, there is no rebirth' (Bha. Gi. VIII, 1, 5-16). As, moreover, the released soul has freed itself from the bondage of karman, has its powers of knowledge fully developed, and has all its being in the supremely blissful intuition of the highest Brahman, it evidently cannot desire anything else nor enter on any other form of activity, and the idea of its returning into the Samsra therefore is altogether excluded. Nor indeed need we fear that the Supreme Lord when once having taken to himself the Devotee whom he greatly loves will turn him back into the Samsra. For He himself has said, 'To the wise man I am very dear, and dear he is to me. Noble indeed are all these, but the wise man I regard as my very Self. For he, with soul devoted, seeks me only as his highest goal. At the end of many births the wise man goes to me, thinking all is Vsudeva. Such great-souled men are rarely met with' (Bha. G. VII, 17-19).—The repetition of the words of the Stra indicates the conclusion of this body of doctrine. Thus everything is settled to satisfaction.—Here terminates the adhikarana of 'with the exception of the world-energies.'
Here terminates the fourth pda of the fourth adhyya of the commentary on the Srraka Mmms, composed by the reverend teacher Rmnuja. This completes the fourth adhyya, and the whole work; and the entire body of doctrine is thus brought to a conclusion.
INDEX OF SANSKRIT WORDS
akshara, the Imperishable,
akhyti, the view that the attribute of one thing appears as that of another,
Agnirahasya, chapter in the Vjasaneyaka (Sat. Bra. X),
Agnividy, knowledge of the Fires (i.e. Ch. Up. IV, 11-13),
anga, subordinate matter,
angin, principal matter,
aj,'the unborn' principle, goat,
ajna, non-knowledge, Nescience,
anu, of atomic size,
ativdin, one who makes a final supreme declaration,
Aditi, the individual soul,
adrishta, supersensuous, transcendental, the unseen principle
advitya, without a second,
advaitin, he who holds the view of non-duality,
adhikarana, chapter, passim.
adhyavasya, the deciding,
anavasda, freedom from dejection,
antmatva, absence of selfhood,
anrabdhakrya, (works) the effects of which have not yet begun,
aniruddha, principle of egoity,
anuddharsha, absence of exultation,
anumati, favour, permission,
anuvda, reference to what is established by other means, explanatory comment,
antahkarana, internal organ,
antaram, difference, interval, break,
antariksha, ether, atmosphere,
antarymin, the inner Ruler,
anvaya, connexion, presence,
apara, secondary, lowest,
aparokshatva, being that which does not transcend the senses,
aprva, unprecedented, new, the supersensuous result of an action which later on produces the sensible result,
abhva, absence of something, non-existence,
amauna, non-mauna (see mauna),
arthavda, an additional statement,
avivkya, (day of Soma sacrifice),
avyakta, the Unevolved,
avykritam, unevolved matter,
asvatva, generic character of horses,
asatkryavda, the theory that the effect does not exist before its origination,
asatkhyti, the view that the non-existing appears as existing,
astikya, existing body,
ahamkartri, organ of Egoity,
ahamkra, the 'I,' egoity,
aham, 'I,' a secret name of Brahman,
ahar, a secret name of Brahman,
ahna, class of sacrifices,
tmakhyti, the view that the Self appears as a thing,
tmabhva, own being,
nandamaya, consisting of bliss,
numna, object of inference,
numnika, to be inferred,
rambhana that which is taken or touched,
rhata, a Jaina,
srama, stage of life,
itikartavyat, mode of procedure,
ksh, to think,
svara, the Lord,
utpatti, being originated,
upakurvna, a Brahmakrin who has completed his course of study and becomes a householder,
upalakshana, secondary mark,
upasad, certain offerings,
updna, material cause,
updhi, limiting adjunct,
ups, to meditate,
ha, a kind of cognitional activity,
ekavkyatva, syntactical unity,
aisvarya, lordly power, superior existence,
om, omkra, the syllable Om, aupdhika, limiting adjuncts,
karana, instrument, activity, action, the instrumental case,
karman, action, works, good and evil deeds,
kalpa, world period,
kalpaka, the shaping agent,
kalpana, formation, i.e.creation,
kalyna, virtuous conduct,
kma, desired thing,
krya, thing to be done,
kriy, action, works,
kshetraja, embodied soul,
khanda, a piece,
gati, the going,
guna, quality, attribute, secondary matter, details,
godohana, a sacrificial vessel,
karana, conduct, works,
kid-rpa, essentially intelligent,
gti, generic character,
giva, individual soul,
gva tm, living Self,
givanmukta, released in this life,
gvanmukti, release in this life,
gna., knowledge, consciousness, pl. forms of knowledge,
tatkratuh, according to what his thought is,
tattva of the Snkhyas,
tat tvam asi,
tan-maya, consisting of that,
tanmtra, the subtle matter,
tejas, fire or heat,
daharksa, small ether,
dksh, initiatory ceremony,
dosha, imperfection, a.
dvdasha, the twelve days' sacrifice,
dvaitavdin, (the Vaiseshika) who holds the view of duality,
dhyna, devout meditation,
dhyai, to meditate or to know,
nididhysitavya, to be meditated upon,
niyoga, i.e. aprva, supersensuous result of an action which later on products the sensible result,
nivra, wild rice,
naishhthika, a perpetual religious student observing the vow of chastity,
padrtha, a thing,
paramtman, higher Self,
paramesara, highest Lord,
paryya, particular states of substances
priplava, a performance of the Asvamedha sacrifice,
privrajaka, an ascetic,
privrjya, the wandering about as a mendicant,
putika, a plant,
purushavakas, to he designated by the term 'man,'
purushottama, the highest Person,
prvapaksha, prim facie view,
prvapakshin, he who holds the prim facie view, passim.
prakarana, leading subject-matter,
praks, to shine forth,
prakriti, primeval matter, originating principle, nature,
pranava, the syllable Om,
Pratardana-vidy (i.e. Kau. Up III),
pratj, initial statement,
pratlbuddha atma, the Self of intelligence,
pratyaksha, perception, presentative thought,
pratyakshat, immediate presentation,
pratyag-tman, the individual soul,
pratyhra, complete restraining of the senses from receiving external impressions,
prathiman, solid extension,
pradyumna, the internal organ,
pradhna, principal matter, non-sentient principle,
pradhna, a superior,
prayojana, final cause,
pralaya, destruction of the world,
prga, knowing, conscious, intelligent, the personal Self, the highest Self,
prna, breath, breathing out; soul; Breath, a name of Brahman,
prna, pl. organs and vital breath,
prnamaya, consisting of breath,
prpti, the being obtained,
pryaskitta, expiatory rite,
prerakatva, prompting quality,
phalavidhi, injunction of results,
blya, childlike state,
buddhi, internal organ, intellect,
brimh, root from which 'Brahman' is derived,
brahmagigns, enquiry into Brahman,
brahmavidy, knowledge of Brahman,
brahmasamstha, founded on Brahman,
bhakti, devotion, devout meditation,
bhagavat, the Lord, then a holy person,
bhkta, secondary or figurative,
bhtdi, originator of the elements,
bhman,'muchness,' fulness of bliss,
bhma-vidy (Ch. Up. VII, 2),
bhedbheda, view that there is difference and absence of difference at the same time,
bhrama, erroneous cognition, error,
madhu, 'honey,' the sun,
manas, internal organ, mind,
mantavya, to be reflected on,
-maya, consisting of, made of,
Mahat, the Great Principle (of the Snkhya),
mtr, mora (metrical unit),
mnasa, mental (offering of a Soma cup),
myin, possessing my,
mukhya prna, chief vital air,
mudr, a badge,
mauna, Muni-hood, state of a Muni,
yathkratub, according as his thought is,
yushmad-artha, the objective element,
yoga, mystic concentration of mind,
yogayug, practitioner of Yoga,
yogasiddha, perfected by Yoga,
yoni, female organ of generation,
rukaka = nishka,
rpa, form, character,
lakshan, implied meaning, implication,
linga, inferential mark,
vkya, syntactical connexion,
vkyabheda, split of a sentence,
vasan, a flow of ideas, states of consciousness,
vikra, effected thing, effect,
vikriti, being Modified,
vijna, understanding, knowledge, idea,
vijnamaya, consisting of understanding, (the soul in deep sleep).
vid, to know or to meditate,
vidy, form of meditation on Brahman,
vibhti, manifestation of power,
vimoka, freeness of mind,
vivrit, to manifest itself,
viseshana, determining attribute,
vaisvarpya, many-natured universe,
vyashti, discrete aspect (of the world),
vyvritti, individual difference,
sakti, power, potentiality,
srira, joined to a body,
sriraka (doctrine) of the embodied (self),
sstra, science, scriptural injunction,
sirovrata, vow of (carrying fire on the) head,
subhsraya, perfect object,
seshin, principal matter to be subserved by other things,
sraddhi, faith, belief,
sruti, scriptural statement, rg,
samvara, a kind of deep meditation,
samskriti, the being made ready,
samkarshana, the individual soul,
sattra class of sacrifices,
satyakma, realising its desire,
satyakmatva, power of realising one's desire,
sad-vidy, meditation on that which truly is (Kb. Up. VI, i ff.),
sapta-bhangi-nyya, the system of the seven paralogisms,
samavya, intimate relation, reciprocal inherence,
samavyi-karana, intimate cause,
samashti, collective aspect (of the world),
samashti-purusha, the aggregate soul,
samkra, a book of the tharvanikas,
sampad, to be combined,
sampta, yvat samptam,
skshtkra, immediate presentation,
skshin, the witnessing principle,
siddhi, proof, definite well-established knowledge,
sukarita, good conduct,
sushira, a hollow place,
skshma, the Subtle,
setu, bank or bridge,
svaclhyaya, one's own text,
svdhyya, essential, rgr.
hita, arteries so called,