The Great Epic of the Bhārata dynasty 3.180

3.180.1

yudhiṣṭhira iti ||

3.180.4

prāṇavān vāyubhakṣaḥ sarpa iva na tu sarpaḥ ||

3.180.10

kimāhṛtya viditvā veti svasya sarvaśaktimattvaṃ sarvajñatvaṃ ca sūcayati ||

By [the words] "having brought or having known" (kim āhṛtya viditvā vā), he indicates his own omnipotence and omniscience.

3.180.17

nahuṣastu jñānameva puruṣārtha iti matvā 'na cānyadapi kāmaye' iti svasya jñānādanyatra vairāgyapradarśanakāmaḥ praśnameva vṛṇoti praśnāniti ||

Nahuṣa, however, thinking that knowledge alone is the goal of human life, and wishing to demonstrate his dispassion toward anything other than knowledge with the words 'nor do I desire anything else', chooses only questions, [as indicated by the word] 'questions' (praśnān).

3.180.19

brāhmaṇeneti ghaṭaṃ karotītivadbhāvinīṃ vṛttimāśritya abrāhmaṇe'pi mumukṣau brahmavidvācibrāhmaṇaśabdaprayogaḥ | śrutau 'amaunaṃ ca maunaṃ ca nirvidyātha brāhmaṇaḥ' iti śravaṇamananātmakamamaunaṃ nididhyāsanātmakaṃ maunaṃ ca nirvidya niṣpādya brāhmaṇo brahmavidbhavatīti darśanāt | kevalaṃ nirviśeṣaṃ vetti puruṣārthatvena jānāti cettarhi tadvakṣyāmi matisaṃvādāya ||

"By a brāhmaṇa": just as [one says] "he makes a pot" by having recourse to a future state, so even with respect to a non-brāhmaṇa seeker of liberation, the word "brāhmaṇa", which denotes a knower of Brahman, is used. For it is seen in the Śruti: "having completely attained non-silence and silence, then [one becomes] a brāhmaṇa" (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 3.5.1)—meaning that having completely attained, that is, accomplished, "non-silence" which consists of hearing (śravaṇa) and reflecting (manana), and "silence" which consists of profound meditation (nididhyāsana), one becomes a "brāhmaṇa", a knower of Brahman. If he knows, understands [Brahman] as the ultimate human goal to be "pure", that is, without distinctions, then I shall explain that in order to confirm [his] understanding.

3.180.20

tatra yānyeva brahmavilakṣaṇāni tāni brahmavidyāsādhakānīti manvāno brahmavido lakṣaṇaṃ brahmasvarūpaṃ ca pṛcchati | brāhmaṇa iti ||

Here, thinking that the very characteristics distinct from Brahman are the means to accomplish the knowledge of Brahman, he asks about the characteristics of the knower of Brahman and the essential nature of Brahman with [the word] "brāhmaṇaḥ".

3.180.21

satyaṃ yathārthamahiṃsraṃ ca vacanam | ānṛśaṃsyamanaiṣṭuryam | tapaḥ svadharmācaraṇam | ghṛṇā kṛpā ||

Truth is speech that corresponds to reality and causes no harm. Non-cruelty is absence of harshness. Austerity is the practice of one's own duty. Tenderness is compassion.

3.180.22

paraṃ nirviśeṣam | saviśeṣasya vāṅmanasagocarasya śrutyaivābrahmatvokteḥ | 'yanmanasā na manute yenāhurmano matam | tadeva brahma tvaṃ viddhi nedaṃ yadidamupāsate' ityādinā | brahma trividhaparicchedaśūnyaṃ vastu | tatra paramate paramāṇornityatvāt kālataḥ paricchedābhāve'pi deśato vastutaśca paricchedo'sti | tathā''kāśasya nityatvādvibhutvācca kālato deśataśca tada‌bhāve'pi vastutaḥ paricchedo'styeva | ayamapi trividhaḥ | 'vṛkṣasya svagato bhedaḥ patrapuṣpaphalāditaḥ | vṛkṣāntarāt sajātīyo vijātīyaḥ śilāditaḥ' ityukta lakṣaṇaḥ | sa eva paramate īśvarasya nityajñānādibhya ātmāntarākāśādibhyaścāstīti tasyāpyabhāvo'trābhipretaḥ | ata eva sukhādidharmavanna bhavati | yatra akhaṇḍaikarase gatvā na śocati śokāyatanasya hṛdayasyaivābhāvāt | punaḥ saṃsāraṃ na prāpnotītyarthaḥ | evaṃ svamatamuktvā paramataṃ jijñāsate bhavataḥ kiṃ vivakṣitamiti ||

The "supreme" (param) means devoid of distinctions (nirviśeṣam), because the śruti itself states that what possesses distinctions and is accessible to speech and mind is non-Brahman, by such passages as: "That which one does not think with the mind, by which, they say, the mind is thought—know that alone to be Brahman, not this which people worship here." Brahman is the entity devoid of the threefold limitation. There, in the opponent's view, although an atom is devoid of limitation in terms of time due to being eternal, it still has limitation in terms of space and entity. Likewise, although ether (ākāśa), because of its eternity and omnipresence, lacks [limitation] in terms of time and space, it certainly has limitation in terms of entity. This [difference] is also threefold, defined as stated: "A tree has internal difference (svagata) from its leaves, flowers, fruits, etc.; homogenous difference (sajātīya) from another tree; and heterogeneous difference (vijātīya) from stones, etc." Since, in the opponent's view, this [difference] exists for Īśvara in relation to eternal knowledge and the like, as well as to other selves, ether, and so forth, the absence even of that is intended here. Therefore, it does not possess attributes such as pleasure. "Where"—having reached which impartible entity of single essence—"he does not grieve," because of the very absence of the heart, the abode of grief; the meaning is that he does not enter saṃsāra again. Having thus stated his own view, he inquires into the other's view: what do you wish to say?

3.180.23

sarpastu brāhmaṇapadena jātimātraṃ vivakṣitvā śudre tallakṣaṇaṃ vyabhicārayati | cāturvarṇyamiti sārddhena | caturṇāṃ varṇānāṃ hitam | satyaṃ pramāṇaṃ ca dharmavyavasthāpakaṃ brahma śūdravedaḥ | śūdrācārasmṛterapi vedamūlatvāt sarvo'pyācārādiḥ śrutimūlaka ityarthaḥ | evaṃ ca satyādikaṃ yadi śūdre'pyasti tarhi so'pi brāhmaṇa eva syādityāha | śūheṣvapīti ||

The snake, however, intending by the word “Brahmin” merely birth [or caste], shows the failure of that definition [of a Brahmin] in a Śūdra with the verse and a half beginning with “the four classes” (cāturvarṇyam). [“Beneficial” means] beneficial to the four classes (varṇa). Truth is an authoritative means of knowledge (pramāṇa), and the settling principle of dharma is the Veda, which is [itself] the Veda for the Śūdra. Because the traditional codes of conduct (smṛti) for the conduct of a Śūdra are also rooted in the Veda, the meaning is that all conduct and the like is rooted in the Śruti. And in this way, if truth and the like also exist in a Śūdra, then he too would indeed be a Brahmin; thus he says: “Even among Śūdras…” (śūdreṣv api).

3.180.24

sukhaduḥkhātītaṃ padameva nāstītyuktarūpaṃ brahmāpyākṣipati | vedyamiti | padaṃ padanīyaṃ prāpyasthānam ||

[The opponent] raises an objection even against Brahman characterized as described above, thinking, "There is simply no state that is beyond pleasure and pain," [with the word] *vedyam* ("to be known"). *Padam* means that which is to be attained, the destination.

3.180.25

itarastu brāhmaṇapadena brahmavidaṃ vivakṣitvā śudrāderapi brāhmaṇatvamabhyupagamya pariharati śudretviti | śūdralakṣma kāmādikaṃ na brāhmaṇe'sti, nāpi brāhmaṇalakṣma śamādikaṃ śūdre'stītyarthaḥ | śūdro'pi śamādyupeto brāhmaṇa eva | brāhmaṇo'pi kāmādyupetaḥ śūdra evetyarthaḥ ||

The other, however, intending by the word “brāhmaṇa” a knower of Brahman, and accepting the state of being a brāhmaṇa even for a śūdra and others, resolves [the objection with the words beginning] “śūdre tu” (in a śūdra, however). The meaning is: the characteristic of a śūdra, such as desire and the rest, does not exist in a brāhmaṇa; nor does the characteristic of a brāhmaṇa, such as tranquility and the rest, exist in a śūdra. The meaning is: even a śūdra endowed with tranquility and the rest is indeed a brāhmaṇa; even a brāhmaṇa endowed with desire and the rest is indeed a śūdra.

3.180.27

yadapyuktaṃ sukhaduḥkhātītaṃ padaṃ nāsti tadapi anuvādapūrvakamabhyupagamenaiva pariharati sārdhena yatpunarati | padaṃ padanīyaṃ prāgaprāptaṃ satkarmaṇā prāpyaṃ sthānaṃ tat sukhaduḥkhābhyāṃ hīnaṃ nāsti | brahmalokasthānāmapyaiśvaryatāratamyakṛtaṃ duḥkhamastyeva kiṃ punarlokāntarasthānām ||

As for what was said—that there is no state beyond pleasure and pain—he refutes that as well with a verse and a half, beginning with "yat punar", precisely by conceding it after reiterating it. A "state" (pada) is that which is to be attained (padanīya), a station previously unreached that is to be attained by good action; that [state] is not devoid of pleasure and pain. Even for those residing in the world of Brahmā, there certainly is suffering caused by the gradation of sovereignty, not to speak of those residing in other worlds.

3.180.28

etadeva dṛṣṭāntenāpavada‌ti | yatheti | yathā śītalasya jalasya madhye'bhyantare uṣṇamagnirnāsti | nāpyuṣṇe'gnau śītatāyuktaṃ jalaṃ tayoḥ parasparavirodhena saṃyogāyogāt ||

He explains this very point by an illustration: [with the words] yathā [‘as’], and so forth. Just as within, that is, inside cold water, there is no hot fire, nor is there water possessing coldness in hot fire, because their union is impossible due to their mutual contradiction.

3.180.29

evaṃ padaṃ padanīyaṃ jñeyaṃ vastu kvaciddeśe kāle vā sukhaduḥkhābhyāṃ hīnaṃ prāptaṃ nāsti | ādhyāsikayoḥ sukhaduḥkhayoradhiṣṭhānena jñeyavastunā saha sarpasya rajjveva kālatraye'pi sambandho nāstītyarthaḥ | 'ohāṅ gatau' asya 'oditaśca' iti niṣṭhātasya naḥ | 'ghumāsthā-' iti sūtreṇa āta ītvam | hāṅaḥ padyateśca gatyarthatvāt jñānārthatvācca hīnaṃ prāptamiti padaṃ jñeyamiti ca vyākhyātam | anyathā tu praśnottarayorekarūpatvādeṣā mama matiriti vākyaśeṣe svamateḥ pṛthakkaraṇaṃ nopapadyate | anye tu siddhānte tābhyāṃ hīnaṃ padaṃ kiṃ nāsti ? api tu astyeveti kākvā vyācakṣate | ayaṃ bhāvaḥ - yat karmaprāpyaṃ sthānaṃ tat sukhaduḥkhavarjitaṃ kadācidapi nāsti | yattu jñeyaṃ vastu nityaprāptaṃ pramāṇasāmarthyāt kaṇṭhagatavismṛtacāmīkaravat tatra kaṇṭhe cāmīkaraṃ tvameva brahmeti ca vākyaikasiddhamajñānāpanayanamātramapekṣate | na tatra sukhaduḥkhasambandho'sti | akarmajatvāttatprāteḥ | ata eva ca tasyānityatvamapi na ajanyatvāditi ||

Thus, the 'state' (pada), that is, the object of knowledge that is to be attained (padanīya), is not found (hīna, here explained as prāpta, 'attained') anywhere in place or time devoid of pleasure and pain. The meaning is: just like a snake with a rope, the superimposed pleasure and pain have no connection at all with the substratum, the knowable reality, in any of the three times. From the verbal root *ohāṅ* meaning 'to go' (gatau), by the rule *oditaś ca*, the *ta* of the past participle becomes *na*. By the rule *ghumāsthā-*, the long *ā* becomes *ī*. Because both *hāṅ* and *pad* have the sense of 'going' and therefore of 'knowing', *hīna* is explained as 'attained' (prāpta) and *pada* as 'knowable' (jñeya). Otherwise, since the question and the answer would have the identical form, the distinction of one's own opinion made in the remainder of the sentence, 'such is my opinion' (eṣā mama matiḥ), would not be tenable. Others, however, explain this according to the established conclusion (siddhānta) with an interrogative intonation (kāku): 'Is there not a state devoid of those two? Indeed, there certainly is.' This is the purport: whatever realm is attained through action (karma) is never devoid of pleasure and pain. But that knowable reality which is eternally attained by the power of the means of valid knowledge—like a forgotten gold ornament on one's own neck—requires merely the removal of ignorance accomplished solely by the statement 'the gold ornament is on your neck' or 'you are Brahman'. There is no connection with pleasure and pain there, because its attainment is not produced by action. For this very reason, it is also not impermanent, because it is unproduced.

3.180.30

prathamapraśnasyottaramākṣipati yadīti ||

[The speaker] raises an objection against the answer to the first question with [the words beginning with] "if" (yadīti).

3.180.31

uttaramāha | jātiriti ||

He states the reply [with the words]: “jātiḥ…” [“birth/caste…”].

3.180.32

vāgādīnāmiva maithunastyāpi sādhāraṇyājjātidurjñeyā | tathā ca śrutiḥ - 'na caitadvidmo brāhmaṇāḥ smo vayamabrāhmaṇā vā' iti brāhmaṇye saṃśayamupanyasyati ||

Because sexual intercourse is common [to all], just like speech and the other faculties, caste is difficult to discern. And likewise scripture presents a doubt concerning Brahminhood: 'Nor do we know this, whether we are Brahmins or non-Brahmins.'

3.180.33

nanu jātyaniścaye kathaṃ brāhmaṇo'hamityādyabhimānapuraḥsaraṃ yāgādau pravartetetyāśaṅkyāha | idamārṣamiti | atra 'ye yajāmaha' ityanena ca ye vayaṃ smo brāhmaṇā anye vā te vayaṃ yajāmahe iti brāhmaṇye'navadhāraṇaṃ darśitam | mantraliṅgamapi - 'ya evāsmi sa sanyaje' iti | nanvevaṃ svasyābrāhmaṇatvapakṣe yajñasyāniṣṭakaratvamāpatatītyāśaṅkya tatparihārāya yāge yajamānasya pravaravaraṇaṃ kriyate yājñikaiḥ | taccāgnirhoteti mantre gautamavadayāsyavada‌ṅgirovadbrāhmaṇavaditi kurvanti | tasya ca prayojanamabrāhmaṇasyāpi yajamānasya brāhmaṇatvasampādanaṃ tasmādācāra eva brāhmaṇyaniścaye heturvedaprāmāṇyādityupasaṃharati | tasmāditi | pradhānaṃ ca tadiṣṭaṃ ceti karmadhārayaḥ ||

Now, one might object: if caste is undetermined, how could one engage in sacrifices and other rites preceded by the self-conception 'I am a Brahmin'? Anticipating this, he says: [the verse beginning] 'idam ārṣam' ('This [conduct] of the rishis...'). Here, by the formula 'ye yajāmahe' ('we who sacrifice'), an absence of determination regarding Brahmin status is shown, meaning: 'Whoever we are—Brahmins or others—as such we sacrifice.' There is also the textual indication in a mantra: 'Whoever I am, being such, I sacrifice.' If it is objected that, under the alternative that one is not a Brahmin, the sacrifice would result in undesirable consequences, then to avert that, the ritualists perform the recitation of ancestral rishis (pravara-varaṇa) for the sacrificer in the sacrifice. And that they perform with the mantra 'agnir hotā...' ('Agni is the Hotṛ...'), adding 'like Gautama, like Ayāsya, like Aṅgiras, like a Brahmin.' And its purpose is the accomplishment of Brahmin status even for a sacrificer who is not a Brahmin; therefore, conduct alone is the cause for determining Brahmin status on the authority of the Veda—so he concludes: 'tasmāt' ('therefore...'). 'Pradhāneṣṭam' is a karmadhāraya compound: that which is both principal (pradhāna) and desired (iṣṭa).

3.180.34

karmaiva brāhmaṇyaheturityāha prāgiti | nābhivardhanāt nālacchedanāt ||

[Saying] that ritual action alone is the cause of Brahminhood, he states: *prāk* ["before"], etc. *Nābhivardhanāt* means from the cutting of the umbilical cord.

3.180.35

jāyate saṃyujyate | vedasaṃyogānantarameva brāhmaṇyamudeti | tadvatpratraraṇenāpīti bhāvaḥ | dvaidhe jātau saṃśaye sati ||

“Is born” [means] becomes conjoined. Brahminhood arises only immediately upon conjunction with the Veda. The meaning is that [it arises] likewise even by crossing over [samsāra / the ritual]. “When there is duality” means when doubt has arisen.

3.180.36

vṛttaṃ vaidikasaṃskāro yadi na vidyate tarhi sarvāḥ prajāḥ kṛtakṛtyāḥ śūdratulyāḥ | tathā ca smṛtiḥ - ’na śūdre pātakaṃ kiñcinna ca saṃskāramarhati’ iti teṣāṃ saṃskārānarhatvaniṣpāpatvābhidhānāt kṛtakṛtyatvaṃ darśayati | tadvat traivarṇikā api syurityarthaḥ | atra vṛttābhāve ||

If [proper] conduct, [namely] Vedic purificatory rites, does not exist, then all creatures would have fulfilled their obligations, being equal to Śūdras. And likewise the Smṛti says: "There is no sin in a Śūdra, nor does he deserve a purificatory rite"; by stating their unfitness for rites and freedom from sin, it demonstrates their state of having fulfilled their obligations. The meaning is that the members of the three higher classes would also become like that. "Here, in the absence of [proper] conduct" [is the sense].

3.180.37

upasaṃharati yatreti ||