The Philosophy of the Upanishads c9.s3.t3.1.2

c9.s3.t3.1.2

strictly speaking, space conceived as a material element) as a symbol of Brahman (for an alternative and parallel explanation of it as Brahman can only be intended to be understood symbolically), no doubt on account of the omnipresence of space; just as a passage often quoted by Śankara but not yet identified says of Brahman that he is âkâśavat sarvagataś ca nityaḥ “omnipresent like space, eternal,” and Newton designated space the sensorium of God, while Kant a century later showed the god, whose sensorium space is, to be the intellect (manas) in our inner self. In older texts of the Upanishads, âkâśa (space) is frequently explained to be Brahman, without any clear consciousness that this representation is merely symbolical. Chând. 1. 9. 1:— “It is the âkâśa, out of which all these creatures proceed, and into which they are again received, the âkâśa is older than they all, the âkâśa is the ultimate end.” Bâdarâyaṇa is right in asserting¹ that by the âkâśa here Brahman is to be understood, “because his characteristics” are found. So also in Bṛih. 5. 1. 1, in an appendix containing much that is old:—“Om! the firmament is Brahman, the primeval, air-filled firmament.” And again probably in Chând. 3. 12. 7-9:—“This so-called Brahman is the same as yonder space without man; and yonder space without man is the same as this space within man; and this space within man is the same as this space within the heart.