The Philosophy of the Upanishads c9.s2.t3.1

c9.s2.t3.1

In a similar way, in Bṛih. 3. 9. 10–17, 26, Vidagdha S'âkalya attempts to define Brahman as forming the climax of all that the word âtman denotes (*sarvasya âtmanaḥ parâyaṇam*). After, however, having eight times in succession propounded a one-sided view that represents the earth, love, forms, ether, etc., as its basis, he is corrected by Yâjñavalkhya, who points out to him that that which he explains as the climax of all the word âtman denotes (*sarvasya âtmanaḥ parâyaṇam yam âttha*) is, on the contrary, only a subordinate purusha that rules in the bodily forms, in love, the sun, sound, etc. “He however,” Yâjñavalkhya proceeds in Bṛih. 3. 9. 26, “who oversteps these purushas (is superior to them), separating them one from another and turning them back (*i.e.* inciting them to activity and recalling them), this is the purusha of the Upanishad doctrine concerning which I ask thee.” S'âkalya is unable to name it, and for the error of having passed off a subordinate purusha as *sarvasya âtmanaḥ parâyaṇam* must atone by his death.¹