Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Philosophy of the Upanishads c9.s3.t2: 2. Brahman as Prâna and Vâyu

The Philosophy of the Upanishads c9.s3.t2

Language
English

2. Brahman as Prâna and Vâyu

c9.s3.t2.1

No natural phenomenon bears so ambiguous a character, none appears to be derived so immediately from the most intimate essence of things and so fully to reveal it, as the phenomenon of life, manifested in the activity of all the vital organs (*prânas*), but above all in the process of breathing (*prâna*) which determines the life itself. Hence as early as the Brâhmana period the central significance of *prâna* (breath or life) was discussed together with its superiority to the other *prânas* (vital forces, as the eye, ear, speech, *manas*), and its identity with *Vâyu*, the god of the wind as the vital breath of the universe, was discussed. All these discussions are continued in the Upanishads, especially in the older texts, which yet are unable to apprehend the first principle of the universe otherwise than in its most obvious phenomenal forms; until the *prâna*, whether by a process of subordination or identification, retires more and more behind the âtman, and appears only as an occasional synonym for it.

c9.s3.t2.2

That the body of all (organic) beings can be sustained only as long as the *prâṇa* inhabits it, is taught in a passage frequently misunderstood, Chând. 1. 11. 5:—*sarvâṇi ha vâ' imâni bhûtâni prâṇam eva abhisamvis'anti, prâṇam abhyujjihate*. This does not mean, as S'ankara and many with him explain it, that beings enter (at death) into *prâṇa*, and are thence born anew, but rather the contrary:—"All these creatures enter with the breath (into the body), and with the breath they again depart out." The best illustration is furnished by the metaphor Pras'na 2. 4, which contains possibly a reminiscence of our passage, and by Brahma Upanishad 1, which is dependent upon it. The illustration is employed, it is true, not of living beings, but of the individual organs in their relation to the *prâṇa*. "Just as the bees all follow the queen bee when she comes forth, and so long as she tarries all tarry, so also speech, manas, eye, and ear." The *prâṇa* is the fundamental and constant part of the sixteen of which man consists. In Bṛih. 1. 5. 14 this is illustrated in mythological language by the example of Prajâpati, who loses a sixteenth part each night with the waning of the moon:—"And after that at new moon he has entered with the sixteenth part into everything which has breath, thereupon is he born on the following morning (as the crescent of the new moon)." Here Prajâpati, after the loss of his fifteen changeable parts, continues to exist at the new moon with his sixteenth "unchangeable" (*dhruva*) part solely as *prâṇa* in all living beings. From a physiological point of view this thought is explained in Chând. 6. 7; man consists of sixteen parts, of which after a fifteen days' fast only one, the *prâṇa*, survives. An enumeration of these sixteen parts is undertaken in Pras'na 6. 3-4:—"He (purusha) reflected, 'With the departure of what shall I myself depart, and with the remaining of what shall I remain?' Accordingly he created the *prâṇa*"; from which, as the passage goes on to declare, the fifteen other parts originate. Here, in harmony with the later date of the composition, the prâṇa is dependent on the purusha, i.e. the âtman, but is still at the same time its empirical representative. As such, as the bhûman brought within the circle of experience (in the distinction of subject and object), the prâṇa makes its appearance already in the beautiful description of Chând. 7. 15:—“As the spokes are inserted into the nave of the wheel, so everything is inserted into this life (prâṇa). The life advances by the life (the breath), the life (breath) gives the life, it becomes the life. The life is father and mother, the life is brother and sister, the life is teacher and Brâhman. Therefore if a father or mother or brother or sister or teacher or Brâhman is used roughly, men say of you, Fie, you are a parricide, a matricide, a murderer of brother or sister, of teacher or Brâhman. Should he, however, strike even these with a spear, after the life has departed (on the funeral pyre) and they are burnt to the last hair, then it is not said, ‘You are a parricide, a matricide, a murderer of brother or sister, of teacher or Brâhman’; for the life only is all this.” The comparison that occurs here of the prâṇa to the nave of a wheel, in which all the spokes meet, is found again: (1) of the prâṇa, in Pras’na 2. 6, in the hymn to the prâṇa here inserted, though derived from an earlier period, and which recalls not only Vâj. Saṁh. 34. 5, but also in many ways Atharvav. 11. 4; (2) of the prâṇa, which is already identified in the second place with Prajñâtman in Kaush. 3. 8 (for which is substituted, in Kaush. 4. 20, the figure of the chieftain and his people); (3) of the âtman, in Bṛih. 2. 5. 15, cp. 1. 5. 15 Muṇḍ. 2. 2. 6 Pras’na 6. 6, and interpreted in S’vet. 1. 4, in terms of Sâṅkhyan thought.

c9.s3.t2.3

The superiority of the prâṇa to the other vital organs (eye, ear, speech, manas, etc.) is illustrated by the parable of the rivalry of the organs, which forms a favourite theme of the Upanishads. In order to test which of them is the most essential, the prāṇas (eye, ear, speech, etc.) one after another leave the body, which nevertheless still continues to exist; but when the prāṇa proposes to depart, they become conscious that none of them can exist without it. This narrative, known by the name of prāṇasaṃvāda, is found in Chând. 5. 1. 6–12, Bṛih. 6. 1. 7–13, Kaush. 2. 14, cp. 3. 3, Ait. Ār. 2. 1. 4, Pras'na 2. 2–4.¹ The most original form is preserved unquestionably in Chând. 5. 1. 6–12. The vital organs (only speech, eye, ear, and manas are mentioned besides prāṇa) come to Prajāpati, contending for precedence. His decision is given :—" That one amongst you, after whose departure the body finds itself in the worst condition, has the precedence among you." Thereupon in succession speech, eye, ear, and manas depart, without the body on that account ceasing to exist. "Thereupon the prāṇa proposed to go forth ; but as a noble steed (if he breaks loose) tears away the foot-ropes that hold fast his feet, so he tore away with him the other vital breaths. Then they all came to him and said :—' Worthy sir, thou art he ; thou hast the precedence over us, only go not forth.'" Bṛih. 6. 1. 7–13 relates the story almost in the same words, but with the substitution of Brahman for Prajāpati, the addition of a sixth organ, and the further elaboration of the illustration of the steed. All these variations are in favour of the originality of the version of the Chândogya. Kaush. 3. 3 supplies only an argument which assumes the narrative in the form indicated. Kaush. 2. 14 represents all the organs as going forth together, but returning separately; on the return of the prāṇa the body revives. Here the motive for the united departure is wanting. Ait. Âr. 2. 1. 4 twice brings to a settlement the question which of the prâṇas is *uktham*, by the collapse of the body on the departure of the prâṇa, and again by its revival when the prâṇa returns. In this case an inferior impression is created both by the doubling of the proof of superiority, and by the application of the story to the glorification of the *uktham*. Pras'na 2. 2-4 represents the prâṇa indignant at the behaviour of the others preparing forthwith to depart, whereupon speech, manas, eye, and ear are carried away with it, and beg the prâṇa to remain. This is clearly an abbreviated form of the original narrative; what is new is only the substitution of the illustration of the queen bee for that of the steed. These relations are of interest, since they supply a foundation for the chronology of the corresponding texts.

c9.s3.t2.4

¹ A further recension, according to Weber's statement, occurs in Kaush. Ar. 9. On Bṛih. 1. 5. 21, cp. also infra.

c9.s3.t2.5

Connected with this narrative of the dispute of the organs for precedence is another of the strife of the gods, *i.e.* the organs, against the demons. We limit ourselves to a comparison of the two chief recensions, Bṛih. 1. 3 and Chând. 1. 2.¹ Of these two, Bṛih. 1. 3 is unquestionably the more original. In order to vanquish the demons the gods, *i.e.* the organs, speech, smell, eye, ear, manas, and prâṇa, instruct one of their number to sing the *udgîtha*. Speech essays the task, but while singing is overcome with evil by the demons. A similar fate overtakes in succession smell, eye, ear, and manas. Finally prâṇa undertakes it, and the assailing demons are scattered before him like a clod of earth when it falls on a stone. Thereupon prâṇa leads the others away beyond the reach of evil and death, whereby speech goes to Agni, smell to Vâyu, the eye to Âditya, the ear to the heavenly regions, the manas to the moon. All these deities then, in order to enjoy food, enter again as speech, smell, eye, ear, and manas into the prâṇa. The same idea is found in Ait. 1-2, adapted to the conception of the purusha as the primeval man. To these legends Bṛih. 1. 3. 19 attaches a glorification of the prâṇa as Ayâsya Âṅgirasa, as Bṛihaspati and Brahmanaspati, as Sâman and even as Udgîtha. Previously he sang the udgîtha, now he is the udgîtha. It is quite clear that we have here an amalgamation of two texts originating from different points of view. We now understand the strange version of our story in Chând. 1. 2, where the gods in their strife against the demons approach the individual organs, not for the purpose of securing that the udgîtha shall be sung by them, but in order to worship them as udgîtha. The author of this section found the story of the strife followed already (just as is the case still in the Bṛihad.) by a worship of the prâṇa as udgîtha. Both pieces, though radically different, and only by accident standing side by side, were blended into one whole, whereby the narrative entirely lost its original character.¹

c9.s3.t2.6

¹ Other discussions of the same theme will be found in Talav. Up. Br. 1. 60, 2. 1-2, 2. 3, 2. 10-11.

c9.s3.t2.7

¹ See further, Deussen, Upan., p. 66 ff.

c9.s3.t2.8

The last-quoted legend suggests already that the prâṇa is not merely a psychical but also a cosmical principle, that it is not only the breath of life in men, but also the universal breath of life which prevails throughout the whole of nature. This transition is very natural. Among the most diverse peoples, from the purusha of the hymn Ṛigv. X. 90 to the giant Ymir of the Edda, we meet with the tendency to regard mankind as a microcosm, and vice versâ the universe as a makranthropos. This thought depends, in the first instance, upon the fact that that which is manifested in nature as a whole, with all its phenomena, finds its most definite and complete expression in man. But in detail also the human organism enters into manifold relations with the external world. By means of its various organs and functions it extends itself, as it were, over-against the surrounding phenomena of nature, and accommodates itself to them. The organs of nutrition correspond to the constitution of food, the breathing organs to the atmosphere; the structure of the feet corresponds to the earth, upon which they will have to move; and in the curvature of the head the vaulting of the heaven seems to be reproduced.¹

c9.s3.t2.9

¹ cp. Plat. Tim. 44 D.

c9.s3.t2.10

It is perhaps due to considerations of this nature that as early as the hymn of the purusha,² describing the transformation of the primeval man into the universe, his head becomes the heaven, his navel the atmosphere, his feet the earth, his eye the sun, his manas the moon, his mouth Indra and Agni (fire), his ears the heavenly regions, and his prâṇa the wind. In general, precisely as we were led to recognise in prâṇa the central organ of life, as explained above, so that which corresponds to it in the universe, the wind, must become the vital principle of nature, whether we regard it merely as the prâṇa that pervades the whole universe, as in the hymns elsewhere quoted,³ or contrast vâyu and prâṇa as cosmical and psychical analogies, as is the case in the following passages.

c9.s3.t2.11

² Ṛigv. X. 90. 13-14.

c9.s3.t2.12

³ Atharvav. 11. 4 and Pras'na 2. 5-13; cp. Deussen, Upan., p. 562.

c9.s3.t2.13

In Bṛih. 1. 5. 21-23 the narrative of the rivalry of the organs appears in a new form, in so far as side by side with the psychical organs, speech, eye, ear, and prâṇa, their cosmical equivalents also, fire, sun, moon, and vâyu, come forward in mutual rivalry. Since these last cannot be said to depart from the body, this feature of the narrative is necessarily omitted, and there is substituted for it in the case of the psychical organs exhaustion, in the case of the cosmical a temporary entrance into repose.

c9.s3.t2.14

Only prāṇa and vāyu do not become exhausted; accordingly the others take refuge in them, and at the close it is said that the sun rises and sets in the (cosmical) prāṇa. A similar conception lies at the foundation of the magnifying of the wind in Bṛh. 3. 3. 2:—"The wind therefore is the particular (uyashti), and the universal (samashti)." In another version of the same narrative, Bṛh. 3. 7, the wind (cosmical and psychical) is celebrated as the thread of the universe (sūtram) which holds together all beings:—"By the wind as thread, O Gautama, this world and the other world and all creatures are bound together. For this very reason, O Gautama, it is said of a dead man, 'his limbs have been relaxed'; for by the wind as thread, O Gautama, were they bound together."¹ Just as the prāṇa binds things together from without, so, as is explained in the following words of Bṛh. 3. 7. 3-23, the Antaryāmin (inner guide), i.e. the ātman, rules them from within. The connecting together prāṇa and antaryāmin is part of the attempt, thus early made, to advance from the symbolical method to that of abstract conception, of which more will later be said.

c9.s3.t2.15

¹ Bṛh. 3. 7. 2.

c9.s3.t2.16

Since it has been already shown in Ait. Br. 8. 28 in the brahmaṇaḥ parimaraḥ, the "dying (of the foes) around the magic spell (uttered by the king)," how the natural phenomena, lightning, rain, sun, moon, and fire, become extinct in the wind and emerge from it again, Kaush. 2. 12-13 proceeds to teach the daivaḥ parimaraḥ, the "dying of the gods around (the prāṇa)." The cosmical divinities (fire, sun, moon, lightning), and the corresponding psychical divinities (speech, eye, ear, manas) do not die, when their brahman (here, their phenomenal form) vanishes; their brightness only they deliver over to other gods, while they themselves with their prāṇa enter, the cosmical into vāyu, the psychical into prāṇa, which in essence are one :—" All these divinities therefore enter into the prâṇa, and die in the prâṇa ; they are not, however, lost when they enter in, but arise again from him." Here *vâyu-prâṇa* appears as the true first principle of the universe, while the "brahman" is to be interpreted as only its manifestation in natural phenomena, and therefore is apparently subordinated to the prâṇa.

c9.s3.t2.17

The entrance of all the gods of nature into vâyu, and of all the gods of the senses into the prâṇa which is identical with it, is also the theme of a discussion which is frequently met with, but occurs in its best and probably most original form in S'atap. Br. X. 3. 3. 5–8. There inquiry is made for "the fire, which is this universe," and the answer is given,—" In truth, the prâṇa (breath, life) is this fire. For when a man sleeps, his speech enters into the prâṇa, the eye enters into the prâṇa, the manas enters into the prâṇa, the ear enters into the prâṇa ; and when he awakes, from the prâṇa are they reborn. Thus far in relation to the self. Next in relation to the gods. In truth, Agni is that which this speech is here, yonder Âditya is this eye, yonder moon this manas, and the heavenly regions this ear. But yonder vâyu (wind), which purifies there as it blows, is this prâṇa (breath). When now the fire (agni) is extinguished, it is blown out in the wind ; therefore we say, it has been blown out, for it is blown out in the wind. And when the sun (âditya) sets, it enters into the wind ; and similarly the moon and the heavenly regions are dependent on the wind ; and from the wind they are reborn. He therefore who departs from this world knowing this enters with his speech into the fire, with his eye into the sun, with his manas into the moon, with his ear into the heavenly regions, with his prâṇa into vâyu ; for from them he has arisen, and from these divinities, whom he ever loves, united to them he finds rest." This speculation was later on associated with the legend of S'aunaka and Abhipratârin, who during a meal were importuned by a brahmac'ârin, who proposed to them a riddle on this subject. In this form, which is apparently no longer preserved, the narrative became again the groundwork of Talav. Up. Br. 3. 1-2, where the text is further elaborated and expounded, and also of Chând. 4. 2-3, which seems to be more faithful to the original form. The whole discussion, however, together with the legend, is comprised within a second legend, while (quite incongruously) both the discussion and the story of the beggar student are put into the mouth of Raikva as he gives instruction to Jânas'ruti.¹

c9.s3.t2.18

¹ cp. Deussen, *Upan.*, pp. 117-120.

c9.s3.t2.19

Conceptions such as those referred to account for the fact that in the Upanishads we frequently meet with the explanation that Brahman, whose nature it is sought to ascertain, is the prâṇa, the breath of life that pervades both the universe and the human body. This is the case in the definition of Bṛih. 4. 1. 3, judged by Yâjñavalkhya to be inadequate, *prâṇo vai brahma*; or Bṛih. 5. 13, where *uktham*, *yajus*, *sâman*, and *kshatram* (i.e. probably the four Vedas, as the sum of all that was originally denoted by *brahman*) are explained as the prâṇa. We shall meet later on with other passages of this character, in which the prâṇa is recognised as a first principle, but immediately set aside, as for instance Chând. 4. 10. 5, *prâṇo brahma, kam brahma, kham brahma*; and we propose to cite here two more passages only, Kaush. 2. 1 and 2. 2, in which a beginning seems to be made towards such a superseding of prâṇa. Both passages, the one on the authority of the Kaushîtaki, the other on that of the Paingya, explain the prâṇa as brahman. Both draw thence the inference that he who knows himself as the prâṇa that fills all things does not need to beg for food (na yâc'et is his “upanishad”), since he enjoys nourishment in all beings. According to the first passage, speech, eye, ear, and manas are the servants of prâṇa; according to the second, they encompass it, speech around the eye, this again around the ear, this around the manas, and this around the prâṇa. But of the last also it is said, He is set around (ârundhate). Around what is not stated. But in this may be found the first intimation of the great truth formulated in Taitt. 2. 2, that the prâṇamaya âtman also is not the kernel, but only the innermost sheath.

Linked texts (16)