The Philosophy of the Upanishads c9.s3.t3.1.3

c9.s3.t3.1.3

That is the perfect, the immutable.” It was soon, however, felt that the representation of Brahman as âkâśa could only be tolerated in a symbolical sense. Gârgya, in Bṛih. 2. 1. 5,² explains the spirit in space as Brahman, and the answer is given (obviously directed against the passage from Chând. 3. 12. 9 just cited), that it is only “the full, the immutable.” In Chând. 4. 10. 5 kham (space) is playfully identified with kam (= ânanda, bliss). In Chând. 3. 18. 1, âkâśa is, as we saw, only in a symbolic sense together with manas admitted as Brahman as an object of worship. Thus in Chând. 7. 12 the âkâśa appears as a mere symbol, beyond which there is a greater; and in Chând. 8. 1. 1, characteristically diverging from the above quoted passage Chând. 3. 12. 7–9, it is no longer a question of regarding space in the universe as Brahman, or space in the heart, but that which is within this space (tasmin yad antar). We are unable therefore to agree with Bâdarâyaṇa when, in the student's benediction Chând. 8. 14, he proposes to understand Brahman by the âkâśa. The meaning rather is, perhaps intentionally, directed against such an interpretation :—The âkâśa is that (only) which holds asunder name and form; that which is in these two (te yad antarâ), that is Brahman, that is the immortal, that is the âtman. That is to say, Brahman has been expanded into names and forms, according to Chând. 6. 3. 3. The most decided polemic however against a confusion of âkâśa and Brahman is in Bṛih. 3.