Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The System of the Vedanta according to Badarayana's Brahma-Sutras and Cankara's Commentary c6.s5: XI. The Brahman as Cosmic and at the same time Psychic Principle

The System of the Vedânta according to Bâdarâyana's Brahma-Sûtras and Çankara's Commentary c6.s5

Language
English

Contents

XI. The Brahman as Cosmic and at the same time Psychic Principle

c6.s5.1

THE Brahman is identical with the soul;—the power which creates and supports all the worlds, the eternal principle of all Being lives whole and undivided in each one of us. This doctrine of the Vedânta, great and worthy of admiration as it is (cf. St. John 14, 20. Gal. 4, 19. 2, 20), is expressed in a further series of Vedic texts cited by Bâdarâyaṇa, which we bring together in this chapter.

1. Brahman as the very Small and very Great

c6.s5.t1.1

(a) Sûtram 1, 2, 1—8.

c6.s5.t1.2

The section Chând. 3, 14 (cf. Çatap. Br. 10, 6, 3) contains the much quoted “Doctrine of Çâṇḍilya” (Çâṇḍilya-Vidyâ), which runs as follows:

c6.s5.t1.3

“Verily this universe is Brahman; as *Tajjalân* [in it becoming, ceasing, breathing] it is to be worshipped in silence.”

c6.s5.t1.4

“Truly of Will (*kratu*) is man formed; according as his will is in this world, after its likeness is born the man, when he has departed hence; therefore should a man strive after [good] Will.”⁷⁶

c6.s5.t1.5

⁷⁶ *Kratu* p. 168, 1 is explained by *saṃkalpa*, *dhyânam*, in the Commentary to Chând. 3, 14, 1 by *niçcaya*, *adhyavasâya*, *avicala pratyaya*, to Bṛh. 4, 4, 5 by *adhyavasâya*, *niçcayo yad-anantarâ kriyâ pravartate*; cf. Bṛh. 4, 4, 5: “Man is altogether formed of desire (*kâma*); according as his desire is, so is his will (*kratu*), according as his will is, so he does the work (*karman*), according as he does the work, so does it befall him.”

c6.s5.t1.6

“Spirit is its material, life is its body, light its form; its resolve is truth, its self is endlessness [literally: the ether];

c6.s5.t1.7

“all-working is he, all-wishing, all-smelling, all-tasting, com-
prehending the All, silent, ungrieved:—this is my soul (âtman)
in the innermost heart, smaller than a grain of rice, or of
barley, or of mustard-seed, or of millet, or a grain of millet’s
kernel;—this is my soul in the innermost heart, greater than
the earth, greater than the atmosphere, greater than
heaven, greater than these worlds.—The all-working, all-wish-
ing, all-smelling, all-tasting, embracing the all, silent, un-
grieved, this is my soul in the innermost heart, this is Brah-
man, into Him shall I enter on departing hence.—He who
has gained this, he, verily, doubts no more.”
“Thus spoke Çāṇḍilya, Çāṇḍilya.”

c6.s5.t1.8

In this passage, as Çaṅkara at great length explains, the highest Âtman is spoken of, as whose being the ether is mentioned, because, like the ether, He is omnipresent (p. 170, 12). Because He is the being of all, for this reason the qualities belonging to the individual soul, Spirit (manas), Life, etc. are ascribed to him (p. 171, 2), just as the Scripture says (Çvet. 4, 3 = A. V. 10, 8, 27):

c6.s5.t1.9

“The woman thou art, and the man,
“The maiden and the boy,
“And born thou growest everywhere,
“As old man on a staff.”

c6.s5.t1.10

which refers to Brahman (p. 171, 3). For, so far as He is represented as possessing attributes (sagunam), such individual properties as wish, breath and the like can be ascribed to Him, while of the attributeless Brahman it is said (in the passage quoted above p. 132) “the breathless, wishless, pure” (p. 171, 7). Although in our passage it is said of Brahman that He is also in the body, yet the individual soul is not therefore to be understood, for it is distinguished from Brahman by being only in the body (p. 172, 6). A distinction is pointed out between them in our passage by the words: “Into Him shall I enter” (p. 172, 12), as also in the parallel passage Çatap. Br. 10, 6, 3, 2, where in the words “thus lives this golden spirit in the inner soul” the highest soul stands in the nominative, the individual in the locative (p. 173, 5); as also in the Smṛiti passage Bhag. G. 18, 61. Of course only the highest soul really exists, and only the ignorant conceive it as limited by Upâdhis: body, senses, Manas, and Buddhi, that is, as the individual soul, just as space, in the vessels, limited through the Upâdhis [of the sides of the vessels] is apparently different from cosmic space. Yet the illusion only endures until identity with the highest soul is known by the sentence "tat tvam asi," whereby the whole standpoint of practical life with bondage and liberation [destroying bondage] comes to an end (p. 173, 16).—The objection that the human heart is too narrow a dwelling for the highest soul, is not valid; what is in one particular place cannot be everywhere, but what is everywhere can also be in one particular place (cf. p. 1060, 2: the soul is God, but God is not the soul); he who is lord of the whole earth, is lord also of the city of Ayodhyâ (p. 174, 12). Therefore, as space is also in the eye of a needle, so is Brahman also in the heart (p. 175, 2), and is specially there pointed out, in order to concentrate attention upon Him; as Vishnu is in a Çâlagrâma stone (p. 174, 16; the same comparison also p. 188, 12. 253, 12; cf. 860, 10. 1058, 13. 1065, 12. 1059, 6). If anyone should here object, that Brahman, if He dwells in the different hearts, as parrots in different cages, must Himself be either manifold or divided, he may be reminded that the relations here spoken of have no reality in the highest sense (p. 175, 5). In this also lies the answer to the objection, that the Brahman, if He dwells in the heart, must also take part in pleasure and pain: this is precisely the difference between the individual and the highest soul, that the former is the doer of right and wrong, the enjoyer of pleasure and pain, (p. 176, 2), while the latter, on the contrary, is free from all evil, and although present when one suffers, has as little share in the suffering as space has in the burning, when bodies filling it burn (p. 176, 5). Certainly the scripture teaches the identity of the individual soul with Brahman, but for him who has perfectly, and not only half, understood this teaching, with the entrance into full knowledge, the enjoyments and sufferings of the individual soul also cease (p. 176, 12), since both rest only on a vain illusion (p. 177, 3).

c6.s5.t1.11

(b) Sûtram 1, 3, 24—25.

c6.s5.t1.12

In the Kâthaka-Upanishad (4, 12—13) it is said:

c6.s5.t1.13

“And in the midst, a thumb-breadth high,
“The Spirit (*purusha*) in the body dwells,
“Lord of the past, and what shall be,
“Therefore no fear approaches him,
“Verily, this is that.”

c6.s5.t1.14

“The Spirit (*purusha*), but a thumb-breadth high,
“Is as a flame devoid of smoke,
“Lord of the past and what shall be,
“To-morrow even as to-day.
“Verily, this is that.”

c6.s5.t1.15

Here, says Çankara, where a certain measure is given, it would certainly be simplest to think of the individual soul, of which the Smriti, (Mahâbh. 3, 16763) relates, that Yama (the god of death) “tore it forth, of the length of a thumb, by force from the body” of Satyavant (p. 276, 8); however, not it but Brahman is to be understood here, because it is said “the lord of all that was, and is to be,” and also because of the words *etad vai tad* “verily, this is that” [occurring as a refrain, and with the same meaning as the recurring *tat tvam asi* in Chând. VI], that is, this [the world, the soul] is that Brahman, of which thou hast asked me, in the words (Kâth. 2, 14):

c6.s5.t1.16

“From good and evil free, free from effect and cause,
“From past and future free,—that tell me, what it is.”

c6.s5.t1.17

The Paramâtman seems here limited, just as limitless space is, when anyone says: “the space in this tube is an ell long” (p. 277, 8); and this, because it is necessary to direct people’s attention to it (p. 278, 1). It is true that the Spirit thumb-breadth high is first of all the individual soul, but it is precisely the aim of the Vedânta to teach this,—on the one side, the being of Brahman, and, on the other, its identity with the individual soul (p. 279, 2). The latter doctrine occurs in the Kâthaka-Upanishad, as is to be seen from its concluding words (6, 17):

c6.s5.t1.18

“A thumb-breadth high, in every creature’s heart,
“The Spirit ever dwells as inner soul;
“Then from the body draw it forth with care,

c6.s5.t1.19

“As from the reed bank one draws forth a reed, “This know thou as the immortal, as the pure.”

c6.s5.t1.20

(c) Sûtram 1, 2, 24–32.

c6.s5.t1.21

To the attempt to transform the names and cult of the old Vedic nature-gods into the religion of Brahman, belongs the Doctrine of Âtman vaiçvânara in Chândogya-Up. 5, 11–24. — Vaiçvânarâ “who dwells in all men” is originally an epithet of Agni, but here becomes a name of the all-animating Brahman, and, in conformity with this, in the place of the fire-sacrifice (agni-hotram) offered to Agni and through him to the gods, stands a sacramental feeding of one’s own body, in which Brahman dwells.

c6.s5.t1.22

Six rich and learned Brahmans are engaged on the question: “What is our soul, what is Brahman?” and go with it to king Açvapati, who, when he rises in the morning, can say:

c6.s5.t1.23

“In all my kingdom not one thief,
“None covetous, no drunkard dwells,
“Not one who sacrifice or knowledge shuns,
“And none who breaks the holy marriage vow.”

c6.s5.t1.24

He begins to teach his guests, who ask him to impart to them the doctrine of Âtman vaiçvânara, by asking what they imagine Âtman to be. The answers in order are, that Âtman is heaven, the sun, the wind, the ether, the water, the earth. After the king has pointed out the insufficiency of these ideas of Âtman, since heaven is only its head, the sun its eye, the wind its breath, the ether its body, the water its belly, the earth its feet, he says to all his six pupils: “As individual, as “it were (prithag iva), ye all know the Âtman vaiçvânara, “and eat your food; but he who knows this Âtman thus,—as “a span long,—and adores it as immeasurably great,⁷⁷ he eats “food in all worlds, in all bodies.” Then after the above named divisions of nature have further been mentioned as parts of the Âtman under mystical names, as also the sacrificial bed, the sacrificial grass, and the three sacrificial fires, there follows an interpretation which substitutes, for the cult of the fire-sacrifice, the feeding of the body as a sacrifice for the Âtman; this feeding is divided into five offerings, by which the five vital spirits, and through them the five organs of sense (the fifth is omitted), five pairs of nature-gods and nature-elements, with all that lies under their sovereignty, and lastly the person of the offerer, are satiated. "He who, not knowing this, offers the fire-sacrifice, with him is it as though he had raked the coals away, and sacrificed in the ashes; but he who knowing this thus offers the fire-sacrifice [that is, the substitute mentioned], he has sacrificed in all worlds, in all beings, in all bodies. As the pith of a rush, thrown into the fire, burns away, so burn away all the sins of him, who, knowing this, consummates the fire-sacrifice. And should he who knows this give what remains over even to a Caṇḍāla, he [asya, by the Commentator less suitably joined to ātmani vaiçvānare] would thereby have offered it in the Âtman vaiçvānara. This is said by the verse:

c6.s5.t1.25

⁷⁷ Abhivimâna; as the different attempts at explanation p. 223, 3 shew, the scholiasts themselves no longer knew what this word meant. The above explanation, suggested by the Petersburg Dictionary in accordance with the etymology, is acceptable from the habit of the Upanishads to emphasize the greatness side by side with the smallness of Brahman. Perhaps, as Weber suggests, we should read ativimâna. For a different opinion cf. our Upanishads, p. 145 ff.

c6.s5.t1.26

"As hungry children round their mother sit,
"All beings sit around the sacrifice."

c6.s5.t1.27

It is true, says Çankara, that the words ātman and vaiçvānara have many meanings. Vaiçvānara can mean fire, as in Rigv. X, 88, 12, or, as in Rigv. I, 98, 1, the God of fire, or, as in Bṛih. 5, 9, 1, the fire of digestion in the body; in the same way by Âtman can be understood as well the individual as the highest soul (p. 211—212). Here only the latter is to be understood by Âtman vaiçvānara, for the reason that to it only can apply the saying that heaven is its head, etc., and at the same time that it is the inner soul (p. 213, 1), and that the sins of him who knows it are burnt away (p. 213, 6); also it only is the subject of the question raised at the beginning (p. 213, 7). The fire-element cannot be thought of, because its being is limited to burning and lighting (p. 217, 4); nor the god of fire, because his power depends on that of the highest God (p. 217, 7). The fire of digestion also, as such, cannot be meant, on account of the indication that heaven is its head (p. 216, 2), and because in the parallel passage Çatap. Br. 10, 6, 1, 11 the Âtman vaiçvânara is termed "the Purusha (spirit) in the inward part of the Purusha (man)," (p. 216, 6).—Therefore the highest Âtman is to be understood here, whether in the quality or under the symbol of the fire of digestion (p. 215, 13. 217, 10), or, with Jaimini, directly and without symbols. It is called Vaiçvânara, which means the same as Viçvânara, like Râkshasa and Rakshas, Vâyasa and Vayas (p. 219, 3), because He is common to all men, or all men are common to Him (p. 219, 1), in that He animates all. The Vedânta teachers are not at one as to why it is said to be "a span long;" Âçmarathya believes it is to indicate the heart as the place of the perception (p. 219, 11), Bâdari, because it is an object of memory for Manas, which dwells in the heart a span large (p. 220, 2); Jaimini, because it is true of it, that it is a span large, in that Çatap. Br. 10, 6, 1, 10—11 from the point of view of psychology (adhyâtmam) compares its parts with those of the face, allegorically (p. 221, 1), as, lastly, the Jâbâlas (Jâbâla-Up. 2, p. 438ff., ed. Bibl. Ind.) give, as the dwelling place where it is enthroned, the point of union between the nose and eyebrows (p. 223, 1).

c6.s5.t1.28

(d) Sûtram 1, 3, 14—18.

c6.s5.t1.29

After the esoteric teaching has been put forward in the sixth and seventh parts of Chândogya-Up., there follows, at the beginning of the eighth part, a kind of direction for the teacher, as to how he is to help pupils who hold the exoteric standpoint. This is introduced by Çankara in his Commentary on Chândogya-Up. with the following words:

c6.s5.t1.30

"Even though Brahman has been recognised as free from spatial, temporal and other distinctions, in the sixth and seventh lectures, by the words: 'Being is it, One only and without a Second,' (Chând. 6, 2, 1)—'Soul only is all this world' (Chând. 7, 25, 2), yet the intellect (buddhi) of the slow spirits is such that it perceives Being as affected with differences of space etc., and cannot be brought immediately to an intuition of the highest reality. Now as without know-

c6.s5.t1.31

ledge of Brahman the goal of man cannot be reached, therefore Brahman, in order to be known, must be spatially pointed out in the lotus of the heart. For even if the essence of Âtman consists of Being, as it alone is object of the perfect knowledge and without attributes, yet, because the slow spirits demand that it shall be possessed of attributes, it is to be taught with the attributes ‘wishing truth’ etc. Further, even if the knowers of Brahman of themselves abstain from objects of sensual enjoyment, as women etc., yet the thirst (trishṇâ) caused by being addicted to sensuality in different births cannot at once be converted, and therefore the different means, such as life as Brahman pupils [in a condition of chastity] etc., are to be applied. Further: if even for those who know the unity of the Âtman, no goer, or going, or object to which one goes, exists [cf. above p. 109], and on the other hand, after the cause for the persistance of a residuum of Ignorance etc. [in them] has been removed, liberation is only an entering into one’s own Self, like lightning in atmosphere, or the wind which has risen [cf. Chând. 8, 12, 2, translated above p. 51], or the fire, when the wood is burnt out, yet for those whose understanding is saturated with ideas of goer, going etc., and who adore Brahman as spatial in the heart, and possessed of attributes, a going to Brahman through the carotid artery (mûrdhanyâ nâḍî) is to be taught. To this end serves this eighth part. For a Brahman that is free from space, attributes, going, rewards, and differences, in the highest sense Being and without a second, seems to the slow spirits no more than non-Being. Therefore the scripture thinks: let them first find themselves on the path of ‘the Existent,’ then I shall gradually bring them also to an understanding of ‘the Existent’ in the highest sense.”

c6.s5.t1.32

With these words, in which perhaps more clearly than anywhere else, the motive of the exoteric teaching is disclosed, Çañkara goes on to consider the following passage (Chândogya-Up. 8, 1):

c6.s5.t1.33

The Master speaks:

c6.s5.t1.34

"Here in this city of Brahman [the body] is a house, a small lotus-flower [the heart]; therein is a small space; what is in this must be investigated, this, verily, should one seek to know."

c6.s5.t1.35

The Pupil speaks:

c6.s5.t1.36

"Here in this city of Brahman is a house, a small lotus-flower; therein is a small space; what is then in this, that must be investigated, that one should seek to know?"

c6.s5.t1.37

The Master speaks:

c6.s5.t1.38

"Verily, as great as the Universe, so great is this space inwardly in the heart; in it both heaven and earth are included; both fire and wind, both sun and moon, the lightning and the stars, and what is in the world, and what is not in the world [past and future], all that is included therein."

c6.s5.t1.39

The Pupil speaks:

c6.s5.t1.40

"If all this is included in the city of Brahman, and all beings and all wishes, if now old age overtakes it, or corruption, what then remains over from it?"

c6.s5.t1.41

The Teacher speaks:

c6.s5.t1.42

"This in us ages not with old age; nor is it reached by weapons; it is the true city of Brahman, in it are the wishes included; that is the Self (the soul), the sinless, free from age, free from death, free from suffering, without hunger and without thirst; its wish is true, true is its resolve."

c6.s5.t1.43

"For just as mankind here below, as though by command, aim at the goal, that each one strives after, whether it be a kingdom or a field, and only live for that—[thus in striving after heavenly reward, are they also the slaves of their wishes;] and just as here below the enjoyment, which has been won by work, vanishes away, thus also in the Beyond vanishes away the reward that is won by good works."

c6.s5.t1.44

"Therefore he who departs hence, without having known the soul and those true wishes, in all worlds his part is a life of unfreedom; but he who departs hence, after he has “known the soul and those true wishes, in all worlds his part “is a life of freedom.”

c6.s5.t1.45

As the context of this passage shews, the Ignorant is called unfree, because he is dependent on his wishes. In contrast to this heteronomy stands the autonomy of him who knows. He is free, because he knows in himself the Âtman, which embraces the world, and with it the totality of all desires. Therefore, as is stated more fully in the sequel (Chând. 8, 2) the sage possesses and enjoys within himself the fulfilment of every wish. Should he long for intercourse with the departed, with fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, friends, if his senses demand sweet savours and garlands, food and drink, song, music or women,—“whatsoever goal he longs for, whatever he “may wish, that arises for him at his wish, and becomes his “share, in which he rejoices.”

c6.s5.t1.46

In contrast with the nothingness of all satisfactions brought to men from without, the wishes of him who has become conscious of his “I” as the totality of all Being, are called “true” or “real” (satya). In reality this is true of all men, only that, with the exception of those who know, they are not conscious of it, since their true wishes are “covered up” by untruth, that is, by the outer world and the pursuit of it, as is profoundly developed in the sequel.

c6.s5.t1.47

“These true wishes are covered up by untruth, [in the “Ignorant]. They are there, in truth, but untruth covers “them over; and when one of his friends departs hence, the “man sees him no more. But [it is so in truth, that] all his “friends, who are alive here, and those who have departed, “and whatever else he longs for and reaches not,—all this “he finds when he enters here [into his own heart]; for here “his true wishes are, which untruth covered up.—But just as “he who knows not the place, finds not a hidden treasure of “gold, even though he should walk over it many times, so all “these creatures find not this world of Brahman, although “they daily enter it [in dreamless sleep]; for by untruth are “they forced away.—Truly this Âtman is in the heart! And “this is the interpretation of it: hṛidi ayam (in the heart is “he) therefore it is called hṛidayam (the heart). Verily, he “who knows this, daily enters into the heavenly world.— “And what this perfect peace is (*samprasâda*), that rises from “this body, ascends to the highest light, and appears in own “form; that is the soul,—thus the Master spoke,—that is the “immortal, the fearless, that is Brahman.”

c6.s5.t1.48

In what follows, Brahman is explained with reference to the name *Satyam* (the Real) in its etymological meaning, as that which binds the mortal and immortal together; then again as the bridge (the boundary, *setu*) which keeps asunder the two: “The Âtman is the bridge (the boundary), which keeps “these worlds asunder that they may not blend. This bridge “day and night traverse not, nor old age, nor death, nor “sorrow, nor good work, nor evil work, all sins turn back from “it, for sinless is that world of Brahman. Therefore, verily, “he who being blind has crossed over this bridge, regains his “sight, he who is maimed, becomes whole again, he who is “sick, becomes well. Therefore, verily, night, when it passes “this bridge, changes into day, for, once and for all, this “world of Brahman is light.”

c6.s5.t1.49

After this the different obligations of the Brahmans (sacrifice, offerings, the great Soma festival, silence, fasts, life in a hermitage) receive a new etymological interpretation in the sense of the Brahmavidyâ which leads to Brahmaloka and the renunciation (*brahmacâryam* = *strî-vishaya-trishnâ-tyâga*) connected with it, there follows at the end of the section the doctrine, indicated by Çankara in the introduction to the section as wholly propaedeutic, of the entering of the soul of him who dies as *Saguna-vid* (knowing exoterically) into Brahman through the carotid artery and the sun, which are united by a sunbeam, as two cities by a road. Of this further in our last part (Chap. XXXIX, 2).

c6.s5.t1.50

It might be thought, so Çankara says in the Commentary to the Brahmasûtras on this passage, that by the “small “space in the lotus of the heart,” space properly so called is to be understood (p. 249, 12), or perhaps the individual soul, because to it belongs the “city of Brahman,” that is the body, since it has acquired this body through its works (in an earlier existence), (p. 250, 6), because the heart is commonly held to be the seat of Manas, which is a limitation of it (p. 250, 9), because it is called Çvet. 5, 8 "large as the point of an awl" (p. 250, 10), or because, what is in it is still distinguished from the space, that is, the highest soul is still different from the individual soul (p. 250, 13).—But the natural space is not to be thought of here, because making the space in the heart equivalent to cosmic space would not agree with this (p. 251, 10), and just as little would it suit the individual soul limited by Upâdhis (p. 253, 2). On the contrary everything points to the fact that, by the small space in the heart, the highest soul, and nothing else, should be understood. The description of God as space (ether) is also found elsewhere (p. 258, 11), while it never occurs in the case of the individual soul (p. 258, 13). It is true that God is also called "greater than space" (Çatap. Br. 10, 6, 3, 2), (p. 252, 4), but here it was only intended to accentuate His greatness in the universe in contrast with His smallness in the heart (p. 252, 6). Of Him alone can it rightly be said that he is sinless, without age, death, etc. (p. 252, 9), and the city of Brahman, the body, is, indeed, the dwelling in which he can be perceived (p. 253, 9), in which sense he is called (Praçna 5, 5. Bṛih. 2, 5, 18) the puruṣa purīṣaya (p. 253, 10); with Him only, also, can truly be connected the promises, which, in our passage, are connected with a knowledge of Him (p. 254, 5). But concerning the subtle expression of the Opponent, that it is not the small space, but what is in it, that is enquired about, it is to be remarked that it is in fact heaven and earth, but that it is not about these, but precisely about the small space that the question is raised (p. 254, 14). To Brahman we are also pointed by the expression, that all beings enter day by day the world of Brahman, to wit, in deep sleep; of whoever is in this condition it is said, even popularly: "he is with Brahman," is brahmībhūta, brahmatām gata (p. 256, 6). The "world of Brahman" is not the world of Brahman the popular god (Kamalāsana), but "Brahman as the world," for only of the latter can it be said that it is entered day by day (p. 256, 11). Also the term the bridge, which keeps asunder the world and its content, such as castes, Āçramas, etc., that they may not blend, suits Brahman only (p. 258, 1). On the other hand, Perfect Peace (*samprasâda*) in our passage means, not the condition of deep sleep, but the individual soul when in that condition, and, thus, entering into the highest Brahman as into its own proper nature (p. 259, 6); but the individual soul, as already remarked, is not to be understood by space (p. 260, 1).

c6.s5.t1.51

2. Brahman as Joy (*kam*) and as Amplitude (*kham*). Sûtras 1, 2, 13-17.

c6.s5.t1.52

Not gloomy asceticism characterises the knower of Brahman, but the joyous hopeful consciousness of unity with God. This appears to be the fundamental thought of the Upakosavidyâ in Chând. 4, 10-15, which runs as follows:

c6.s5.t1.53

"Upakosala, the son of Kamala, lived as pupil (*brahmacârin*) with Satyakâma, the son of Jabâlâ [cf. note 38]. Twelve years had he tended for him the sacrificial fires; then he dismissed the other pupils, but him he would not dismiss. Then his wife said to him: 'The pupil grieves; he has tended the fires well; look to it, that the fires do not speak to him instead of thee [Comm.: speak evil of thee], teach him the doctrine.'—But he would not teach it to him, but set out on a journey. Then the pupil fell ill, and would not eat. Then the teacher's wife said to him: 'Eat, pupil; why eatest thou not?'—But he said: 'Alas! In men there are so many desires! I am quite full of disease; I care not to eat.'—Then the fires said among themselves: 'The pupil grieves, yet he has tended us well. Come then! let us teach him the doctrine!'—And they said to him: 'Brahman is Life, Brahman is Joy, Brahman is Amplitude.'—But he said: 'I know that Brahman is Life; but the Joy and the Amplitude know I not.'—But they said: 'Verily, the Amplitude is the Joy, and the Joy is the Amplitude.' And they explained to him how Brahman was the Life and wide space.

c6.s5.t1.54

"Then the fire, that is called Gârhapatya, taught him: 'The earth, fire, food, and the sun [are my forms]. But the

c6.s5.t1.55

‘man who is seen in the sun, I am he, and he is I.’ [Chorus of the Fires:] ‘He who, knowing this, worships this [Fire], he puts away evil deeds, he becomes world-possessing, he comes to full age, he lives long, his race fails not, him help we in this world and in the other world, who, knowing this fire worships it.’

c6.s5.t1.56

‘Then the second fire, which is called Anvāhāryapacana, taught him: ‘The water, the regions of the world, the stars and the moon [are my forms]. But the man who is seen in the moon, I am he, and he is I.’ [Chorus of the Fires:] ‘He who, knowing this fire worships it,’ etc., as before.

c6.s5.t1.57

‘Then the third fire, which is called Āhavanīya, taught him: ‘Breath, the ether, heaven, the lightning [are my forms]. But the man who is seen in the lightning, I am he, and he is I.’ [Chorus of the Fires:] ‘He who, knowing this fire worships it’ etc., as before.

c6.s5.t1.58

‘And they said to him: ‘Now knowest thou, Upakosala, dear one, the doctrine about us, and the doctrine about the Ātman. But the way to Him will the teacher point out to thee.’

c6.s5.t1.59

‘Now, his teacher when he returned, spoke thus to him: ‘Upakosala!’—And he answered and said: ‘Master!’—But he said: ‘Thy face shines, dear one, as the face of one who knows Brahman. Who, then, has taught thee?’—And he answered evasively: ‘Who should teach me? Of a truth these here look as they do, and also differently;’ thus he spoke, pointing to the fires.—‘What have they said to thee, dear one?’—And he answered him: ‘Thus and thus.’—Then the teacher said: ‘They have only told thee its dwelling-places; but I will tell thee its own self; as the water clings not to the lotus-petal, so no evil deed clings to him who knows this.’—And he said: ‘Let the master teach it to me!’

c6.s5.t1.60

‘And he said to him: ‘The man who is seen in the eye, he is the Ātman, said he, he is the immortal, the fearless, he is Brahman. Therefore also, when grease or water comes into the eye, it flows off to the edges. Him they call love’s treasure, for he is a treasure of what is dear. He is a treasure of what is dear, who knows this. He is also called “‘the prince of love [literally: the herald of love], for all that “‘is dear, he leads; he leads all that is dear, who knows this. “‘He is also called the prince of radiance, for he is radiant “‘in all worlds; in all worlds is he radiant, who knows this. “‘Therefore [when such as these die], whether funeral rites “‘are performed or not, they enter into a flame [of the funeral “‘fire], from the flame into the day, from the day into the “‘light half of the month, from the light half of the month “‘into the half-year in which the sun goes northwards, from “‘that half-year into the year, from the year into the sun, “‘from the sun into the moon, from the moon into the light- “‘ning;—there is a man who is not as a human being; he “‘leads them in to Brahman. That is the way of the Gods, “‘the way of Brahman. They who go that way, for them “‘thus is no returning to the earth, no returning.’”

c6.s5.t1.61

In this narrative, so explains Çankara, by “the man who is seen in the eye,” neither a form mirrored in the eye, nor the individual soul, nor the god of light, but the highest Brahman is to be understood, for this only is, in a true sense, “the Âtman,” only this is “the immortal, the fearless,” who is spoken of here (p. 187, 8). To Brahman only can refer the unstained purity, which is expressed by the grease and water flowing to the edges (p. 187, 10), as also the names “love’s treasure,” “love’s herald,” “prince of radiance” (p. 187, 12 ff.). We should not stumble at the fact that a place of Brahman is spoken of; this could only be objected to, if Brahman were said to be in this place only, and not, by other passages of scripture, in many other places as well (p. 188, 3). But as a matter of fact, to the end of the worship of the attribute-possessing Brahman, manifold places, names, and forms are ascribed to it, although it is in reality without attributes or any of these (p. 188, 10). This happens, in order to make it perceptible, like Vishṇu in a Çâlagrâma stone (p. 188, 12). Also only in Brahman can be found the union of joy and amplitude. In the case of amplitude alone, it is true, we might think of space, as the symbol of Brahman (p. 189, 6), in the case of joy alone, of sensual pleasure (p. 189, 9), but in conjunction the two ideas mutually particularise each other (itara-itara-viçeshitau) and mean that Brahman which in its own nature consists of pleasure (sukham), (p. 189, 12). Also the fact that the fires say that they have not only explained the teaching about themselves, but also that about Âtman (p. 190, 6), so that no sin attaches to him who knows this, as no water clings to the lotus-petal (p. 191, 1), can only apply to Brahman, the entering into which, for him who has heard the Upanishad, by the way of the gods, is set forth at the conclusion (p. 191, 6). In our passage, the form mirrored in the eye cannot be understood, because it is not always in it (p. 192, 13), and precisely at the time of worship, is not there (p. 192, 16), and because according to Chând. 8, 9, 2 it passes away with the body (p. 192, 18); nor the individual soul, either because it has its dwelling, not in the eye only, but in the whole body (p. 193, 3), because not it but the highest soul is "immortal and fearless," in that ignorance of it imposes mortality and fear (p. 193, 7), and because it does not possess lordship (aiçvaryam), so that the names "love's treasure," "love's herald," "prince of radiance" cannot apply to it (p. 193, 8); lastly it is also not the deity of the sun either although according to Bṛih. 5, 5, 2 it rests in the eye by means of the rays (p. 193, 9), because it is not the Âtman, but an outer form (p. 193, 10), and because it is not immortal, for the immortality of the gods means only existence for a long time (p. 193, 12), just as their aiçvaryam is not self-dependent, but depends on the Îçvara, through fear of whom they perform their duties (p. 193, 14).

3. Brahman as the Light beyond Heaven and in the Heart

c6.s5.t2.1

Sûtras 1, 1, 24--27.

c6.s5.t2.2

With strange allegorical embroidery the theme of the present chapter is treated in the section Chând. 3, 12--13, which compares the world, the macrocosm, to the body as microcosm, and this again to the heart, on the basis of the harmony ruling in all three, as which Brahman is regarded in all three, and that by means of the symbol of the Gâyatrî, —a Vedic metre, consisting of three feet, to which, as we shall see, yet a fourth, imaginary foot is added. In order to grasp this glorification of Brahman as *Gâyatrî*, we must remember the eternity and original dignity of the Word of the Veda (discussed above p. 71). As this is, as it were, borne and controlled by the metre, as representative of which the *Gâyatrî* appears here, so Brahman, as the earth, hears and controls all beings, as the organs of sense (*prâṇa*) the body, as vital spirits (*prâṇa*, unless there is a mistake in the repetition of the same word) the heart (the principle of life).

c6.s5.t2.3

Thus we are to understand, when, in the text, on the basis of the common bearing and controlling of beings, sense-organs, and vital spirits, it is said: "What the earth is, the body is, "what the body is, the heart is." For this reason also the *Gâyatrî* is called sixfold, because it symbolically represents the three things named and their respective contents (cf. p. 149, 8 *bhûta-pṛthivî-çarîra-hṛdaya-vâk-prâṇa* and on Chândogya-Up. p. 184, 10: *vâg-bhûta-pṛthivî-çarîra-hṛdaya-prâṇa*). But further it has *four feet*, that is, the three actual and a fourth, imagined, which is also mentioned Bṛh. 5, 14.⁷⁸ For the rest, the Bṛhadâraṇyakam *loc. cit.* follows its own course; how, in our passage, the four feet are to be understood, must be deduced from the verse (Rigv. X, 90, 3) quoted on this occasion:

c6.s5.t2.4

⁷⁸ As in this passage the right of each of the three first feet to the necessary eight syllables is vindicated, we must not with the "apara" (Brahmasûtra p. 150, 10) and *Max Müller* (Upanishads I, p. 45) divide the 24 syllables of the *Gâyatrî* into four times six, in order to explain the *catushpadâ shaḍvidhâ gâyatrî*.

c6.s5.t2.5

"However great is Nature's majesty,
"The Spirit is yet higher raised by far,
"Of it, but one foot do all beings make,
"Three feet are immortality in heaven."

c6.s5.t2.6

It would be simple to conclude that, for the author of our Chândogya-passage, the three immortal feet or quarters of Purusha are represented by the three real feet of the *Gâyatrî*, the beingless phenomenal world, on the contrary, by its imaginary foot. With this agrees what immediately follows:

c6.s5.t2.7

"Therefore, verily, that which is called Brahman, that is certainly that which this space outside the man is; but the space which is outside the man is certainly that which this space inside the man is; but this space inside the man is certainly that which this space inside the heart is: this is that Perfect, Unchangeable [a definition, which Bṛh. 2, 1, 5 is found to be inadequate]; perfect, unchangeable happiness he gains, who knows this."

c6.s5.t2.8

Further on, the five gates of the gods in the heart, or, as they later appear personified, "the five warriors of Brahman and doorkeepers of the heaven-world" are described, as which, corresponding to the triplicity running through the whole passage, appear five vital spirits, five sense-organs, and five nature-gods, of which one vital spirit, sense organ and nature-god are always put as identical.⁷⁹ Then it is said further:

c6.s5.t2.9

⁷⁹ In the last Triad âkâça should be omitted and before vâyu an organ, probably tvac, inserted.

c6.s5.t2.10

"Now, however, the light that gleams there beyond the heavens, at the back of all, at the back of each, in the highest world, the highest of all, that is certainly this light inward here in man; its perception is, that when anyone here in the body feels it, he perceives a warmness; its audition is, that when anyone thus [note 12] closes his ears, he hears, as it were, a humming, as though it were the noise of a burning fire. This is to be honoured as its perception and audition. He will be perceived and heard, who knows this."

c6.s5.t2.11

Against the objections of the Opponent, who wishes to understand by "the light beyond the heavens" the natural light (p. 142, 11), by "the light inwardly in man" the light of the belly (that is, probably, the fire of digestion), (p. 144, 7) Śaṅkara proves that the one and the other can only mean Brahman, on account of the feet, which cannot be attributed to any natural light (p. 145, 5), but, in harmony with the verse quoted from the Ṛigveda, can be attributed to Brahman (p. 146, 1), who is likened to light, because, in virtue of His spirituality, He lightens the whole world (p. 147, 2); that a place beyond the heavens is ascribed to Him, is done for the purpose of worship (p. 147, 6), just as Brahman is elsewhere indicated locally in the sun, in the eye, in the heart, although He is spaceless (*nishpradeça*), (p. 147, 8); and He also is to be understood by the symbol of the light of the belly (p. 147, 14). That the fruits of this worship mentioned at the end are only slight, is no obstacle to its referring to Brahman; only the knowledge of the attributeless Brahman has, as its one fruit, liberation (p. 148, 4), while the fruit of worship by means of attributes or symbols is manifold, although limited to Samsâra (p. 148, 5). That Brahman is indicated as the *Gâyatrî* happens (so Çaṅkara says, departing from the interpretation which we have set forth above), in order to fix the thoughts on Him (p. 149, 16); the metre itself, as a mere grouping of syllables (p. 150, 1) is not to be thought of here, because it is said: "this world is the *Gâyatrî*" and because beings etc. are indicated as its feet,⁸⁰ and also because our passage expressly names Brahman and the warriors of Brahman (p. 152, 4). That it is first said *paro divas* (beyond heaven) and then again *divi* (in heaven) is no contradiction: just as one can say of a falcon, which is sitting upon a tree, he is sitting "on the top of the tree," and he is sitting "on the tree" (p. 153, 4).

c6.s5.t2.12

⁸⁰ The Sûtram 1, 1, 26 has *bhûta-âdi-pâda*, that is, beings and the three heavenly feet, while Çaṅkara (evidently falsely and not in conformity with p. 149, 8) understands: beings, earth, body and heart (p. 151, 8).

4. Brahman and the Soul dwelling together in the Heart

c6.s5.t3.1

Sûtras 1, 2, 11—12.

c6.s5.t3.2

The transition to the Chapter which is to teach us to know Brahman as the Soul itself, may be formed by an isolated passage, in which the highest and the individual soul appear as united together in the heart; it is found in the Kâthaka-Up. 3, 1:

c6.s5.t3.3

“Drinking fulfilment of their deeds in life,
“The two have gone into the secret cave,
“In the highest, that one half is of the highest [that is in the heart];
“He calls these Light and Shade who Brahman knows.”

c6.s5.t3.4

For the theme of the Kāṭhaka-Up. Śaṅkara firstly infers that “the two” here either the organs of knowledge with Buddhi at their head and the individual soul, or the individual and the highest soul are to be understood (p. 179—181), then, that only the latter is permissible; for that which drinks fulfilment for its previous deeds, is undoubtedly the individual soul; and side by side with it only a kindred nature, therefore the highest soul, could be mentioned (p. 182, 3); that this dwells in the heart, is so often said in other places (p. 182, 5); that of it also it is said, it drinks, must not be taken literally, just as if it were said: “the people are carrying a parasol,” when only one of them is carrying it (p. 180, 12. 182, 9, and 3, 3, 34, p. 921, 7, where the subject is once more explained); they are called shadow and light, because the one is subject to Saṃsāra, the other being free from it, Saṃsāra itself existing only through Ignorance (p. 182, 11). The same contrast is found again not only in other passages of the Kāṭhaka-Up., but also in the verse [taken with changed meaning from Ṛigv. 1, 164, 20] of the Muṇḍaka-Up. 3, 1, 1 (= Śvet. 4, 6. 7):

c6.s5.t3.5

“Know thou two friends fair-feathered,
“Tied to a single tree;
“One eats at the sweet berry,
“Not eating, one looks on.”

c6.s5.t3.6

Here, by the one that eats, the individual soul is to be understood, by the one that looks on, the highest soul (p. 183, 12), as also in the verse that follows:

c6.s5.t3.7

“To such a tree sunk down, the spirit
“Is perplexed and sorrowful, without a lord;
“But when the lord is sought and found by him
“In majesty, then sorrow flees away.”

c6.s5.t3.8

In conclusion Śaṅkara mentions a view of the Paiṅgi-rahasya-brāhmaṇam (also quoted p. 889, 10, and, as Paiṅgi-Upanishad, p. 232, 12) according to which by the two are to be understood the sattvam (that is, the antaḥkaraṇam) and the individual soul, the latter, however, so far as it is raised above Saṃsāra and has gained unity with Brahman (p. 184—185).

Linked texts (14)