Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The System of the Vedanta according to Badarayana's Brahma-Sutras and Cankara's Commentary c6.s6.t2: 2. Brahman as Prâna (Breath, Life)

The System of the Vedânta according to Bâdarâyana's Brahma-Sûtras and Çankara's Commentary c6.s6.t2

Language
English

2. Brahman as Prâna (Breath, Life)

c6.s6.t2.1

(a) Sûtras 1, 1, 28—31.

c6.s6.t2.2

Brahman as the principle of life is the subject of the third Adhyâya of the Kaushîtaki-Upanishad, which in Cowell's edition exists in two recensions p. 73—102 and p. 129—134,⁸¹ and the actual contents of which are as follows:

c6.s6.t2.3

⁸¹ Çañkara appears, as we found above (p. 31) to follow a third recension whose readings in general agree with those of Cowell's first; yet he reads 3, 2 p. 78, 4 with the second prajñâtmâ tam (p. 154, 8); 3, 5 p. 89, 3 he has contrary both recensions, adûduhat (p. 164, 2); at 3, 3 p. 83, 1 he remarks that some read imam çarîram (p. 161, 6), which would be an instance of çarîra as masculine, as Çañkara's construction imam (jîvam), parigrihya çarîram, utthâpayati is hardly possible. Çañkara has a very noteworthy reading 3, 2 p. 82, 2, where he reads astitve ca instead of asti tv eva (p. 158, 7).

c6.s6.t2.4

1. Pratardana comes to the abode of Indra, who allows him to choose a boon. Pratardana begs the god to choose for him what he deems to be the best thing for mankind. After some hesitation Indra speaks: "Then know me; for this "I deem to be the best thing for a man, that he should "know me.... Who knows me, his place [in heaven] is not "diminished by any deed, neither by theft nor by slaying the “fruit of the body, nor by matricide nor by parricide; and “even if he has committed (cakrusho) evil [previously, before “the knowledge of Brahman], yet the colour fades not from “his face [no fear makes him pale].”

c6.s6.t2.5

2. “I am the breath (prâna), I am the Self of knowledge “(prajñâtman); as this, as immortal life worship me. Life is “breath and breath is life; for as long as the breath remains “in this body, so long remains the life; only through breath “is immortality [continuance of life] gained in this world, and “through knowledge, true wishes [wishes that are directed to “the Eternal, cf. above p. 161]. He who worships me as im“mortal life, comes to full life in this world, he gains im“mortality, imperishability in the heavenly world.”—Further it is developed that all the life-organs (speech, ear, eye, etc.) go back to a unity (ekabhûyam gacchanti), through the power of which each organ performs its function, so that, in each special manifestation of life, all organs [in virtue of their centralisation in life] work together. “Thus it is,” adds Indra, confirming the theory quoted, “and the well-being of the life“organs lies in what they are [astitve, that is, in Brahman, “not in what they do].”

c6.s6.t2.6

3. “The organs are not essential to life; for the dumb, “blind, deaf, imbecile (bâla) and crippled live; but verily the “life only, the Self of knowledge, surrounds the body and “supports it (utthâpayati, literally: raises it up), therefore it “is to be worshipped as the support (uktham, literally: hymn). “This is the penetration of all [organs] in the life. Verily, “life is knowledge, and knowledge is life.”—According to this identification, carried out all through, of life (prâna) and knowledge (prajñâ), which is based on the fact that Brahman, as the principle of life, as shewn above (p. 134 ff.), must also be pure intelligence, are depicted the nature of deep sleep and death. In both, the life-organs (speech, eye, ear, etc.), along with the things and relations of the outer world dependent on them (name, form, tone, etc.), enter into the life; on awaking, as sparks arise from the fire, so the organs arise from the life, from them the gods (that is, the powers of nature), and from the gods the worlds, go forth again; in death, on the contrary, life, with the organs merged in it, wanders forth from the body.

c6.s6.t2.7

4. It is further shewn how all external relations are poured (*abhivisrijyante*) into the life, by means of the life-organs (as speech, eye, ear, etc.).

c6.s6.t2.8

5. The life-organs, as separate members or parts, are drawn out of the life [*udûlham*; or with Çañkara *adûduhat*, the organs each milk a part out of the life]; but the things of the outer world are only the element of being of the organs projected outwards (*parastât prativihitâ bhûtamâtrâ*).

c6.s6.t2.9

6. By means of intellect [*prajñâ*, which was identified above with life] the man mounts the organs [like a car] and so reaches outer things.

c6.s6.t2.10

7. For in themselves and without intellect (*prajñâ*) the organs cannot know and notify outer things. (In this passage *prajñâ* takes the place of *manas*, which elsewhere appears as the central organ of the life-organs, but is here ranged along with them.)

c6.s6.t2.11

8. Not objects, but the subject, should be investigated, not speech, smell, form, tone, etc., but that which speaks, smells, sees, hears, etc.—"The ten elements of being are related to Cognition, and the ten elements of Cognition to being; for if the elements of being were not, then the elements of Cognition also would not be, and if the elements of Cognition were not, then the elements of being would not be either. For through the one [without the other] no appearance (*rûpam*) comes into existence; yet this is not a plurality [of outer things and organs], but as, in the case of a car, the felloes are fastened to the spokes, and the spokes to the nave, so these elements of being are fastened to the elements of Cognition, and the elements of Cognition to the *Prâna* (Life). This *Prâna* alone is the self of Cognition (*prajñâ-tman*), and bliss, it does not grow old and dies not. He becomes not higher through good works, or lower through evil [abstains from all works], for He alone causes him to do good works, whom He will raise above these worlds, and He alone causes him to do evil works, whom He will lead downwards; He is the guardian of the worlds, the ruler of “the worlds,—He is my soul, this is to be known, He is my “soul, this is to be known!”

c6.s6.t2.12

In this section of the Kaushîtaki-Upanishad, as Çañkara develops it, by Prâna neither breath, nor the god Indra, nor the individual soul are to be understood, although there are characteristics which point to all three of them, but on the contrary the highest Brahman (p. 155, 2 read: *param brahma*), for of it only can it be said, that a knowledge of it is the highest good for man (p. 156, 2), and that he who has known it is stained by no sins, in that, after knowledge of Brahman, all works vanish away (p. 156, 7); only to Brahman applies the description as Self of Cognition,⁸² as bliss, as also that it does not grow old and dies not, performs no works and predestines the deeds of beings (p. 156, 8—17).—The god Indra, in whose mouth the whole dissertation is placed, is not to be thought of, because in this passage occur a mass of relations, those mentioned and many others, which compel us to understand the highest soul (p. 158, 2), with which Indra is here identified, just as Vâmadeva is with Manu and Sûrya (Rigv. 4, 26, 1; cf. Brih. 1, 4, 10), in virtue of a gift of seership extending to the life before birth, occurring in the canon of scripture;⁸³ therefore also the heroic deeds of Indra are only mentioned to the end of glorifying the knowledge of Brahman, connected with them, because he who possesses this knowledge, remains unscathed like Indra in all his battles (p. 160, 5).—No more than Indra can the individual soul or the *Mukhya prâna* (the central organ of unconscious life) be understood, although to the former would apply the distinction between subject and object (p. 160, 13), to the latter, the support of the body (p. 161, 3), while the indication as Self of knowledge and the separation between *prâṇa* and *prajñâ* would lend itself to this interpretation (p. 161, 8. 11). The most essential reason why not these but Brahman are to be understood, lies in the words of the Sûtram 1, 1, 31: *upâsâtraividhyâd, âçritatvâd, iha tad-yogât*, which either mean: "because, if *Jîva* and *Mukhya* *prâṇa* as well as Brahman were to be understood, a triplicity of worship would of necessity arise (p. 161, 15); because elsewhere also the word *Prâṇa* refers to Brahman (p. 162, 7); and because here it is connected with marks of Brahman (p. 162, 8),"—or, according to another explanation of the Sûtram: "Brahman is to be understood, because a triplicity of worship of Brahman, namely as *prâṇa*, as *prajñâ*, and as *brahman* is taught here (p. 164), because elsewhere also worship of Brahman is taught by means of limiting qualities (*upâdhi-dharma*) (p. 165, 5), and this is taking place here also (p. 165, 6)."

c6.s6.t2.13

⁸² As Kaush. 3, 2 so in Çañkara's work also *prajñâtman* means only the highest (p. 156, 8. 157, 12. 158, 5; on the other hand = *jîva* p. 161, 8 in the Pûrvapaksha), and *vijñânâtman* means only the individual soul (p. 134, 7. 181, 12. 183, 2. 12; 120, 15. 388, 14. 393, 11). In the same way, *prâjna*, for Bâdarâyana (1, 4, 5. 2, 3, 29) and Çañkara (p. 273, 7. 8. 275, 4. 331, 5. 9. 347, 4. 5. 14. 350, 10. 11. 351, 11. 12. 352, 1. 9. 353, 5. 13. 354, 2. 475, 1. 662, 12. 780, 5. 6. 10. 785, 1. 8. 793, 11. 828, 13. 829, 3. 8) and also *prâjna âtman* (p. 271, 12. 272, 7. 9) always means the highest soul.—This is the more to be accentuated, as in the Vedântasâra, § 53 ff., *prâjna* has become a term for the individual soul.

c6.s6.t2.14

⁸³ *ârshena darçanena yathâçâstram*, as Çañkara p. 159, 9 explains the *çâstradrishti* of the Sûtram; cf. however *drishti* in the Sûtram 1, 2, 26 with Çañkara's interpretation p. 215, 11.

c6.s6.t2.15

(b) Sûtras 1, 4, 16–18.

c6.s6.t2.16

As a variation of the theme just treated of, we may consider the conversation between *Gârgya*, the son of *Balâka*, and *Ajâtaçatru*, which forms the fourth Adhyâya of the Kaushitaki-Upanishad, and, with important divergencies in detail, recurs in *Bṛih*. 2, 1. *Çaṅkara* adheres to the Kaushitaki recension,⁸⁴ according to which the main contents are as follows.

c6.s6.t2.17

⁸⁴ Here also *Çaṅkara's* readings diverge in many ways from both forms in which the text is printed by Cowell; thus he reads (p. 380, 7) *saṃvadishṭhâḥ* instead of *saṃvâdayishṭhâḥ* and *samavâdayishṭhâḥ* Kaush. 4, 19, p. 117, 3 and 138, 20.

c6.s6.t2.18

*Gârgya*, a renowned authority on the Veda, comes to king *Ajâtaçatru* and offers to explain Brahman to him. After he has determined Brahman in a series of sixteen definitions, as the spirit (*purusha*) in the sun, in the moon, in lightning, etc., and these explanations have one after the other been rejected by Ajātaçatru as inadequate, Gârgya becomes silent, and the king speaks to him: "In vain therefore hast thou challenged "me to a disputation, in order to explain Brahman to me; "for, verily, he who has made those spirits [named by thee], "and whose work this [world] is, he, verily, is to be investigated." —Now Ajātaçatru undertakes to teach Gârgya. He leads him to one in deep sleep, who does not wake when they speak to him, but only after they have pushed him with a stick. Ajātaçatru asks Gârgya: "Where lay this spirit, where was "he, whence did he come?"—As Gârgya does not know it, the king explains to him how, in deep sleep, all organs, together with the corresponding things of the outer world, enter into the life (*prâṇa*) and dwell with it in the arteries that go out from the heart and surround the pericardium; on awaking, as sparks rise from the fire, so from the *Âtman* the organs go forth, from them go forth the gods (who rule them), and from them the worlds. "This *Prâṇa*, the *Prajñâtman*, "has entered into the body as into its Self, even to the hair, "even to the nails. As a knife pushed into the sheath, or "fire into a fire-vessel, so has the *Prajñâtman* entered into "the body as into its own Self, even to the hair, even to the "nails. On this Self depend those selves [the organs] as a "people on their chief. As the chief nourishes himself (*bhuñkte*). "through his people, as the people nourish (*bhuñjanti*) the "chief, so does this Self of Cognition nourish itself through "those selves, so do those selves nourish this Self of Cognition... "All evil he puts away, chieftainship over all beings, independence, sovereignty does he gain, who knows thus."

c6.s6.t2.19

In this passage, as Çaṅkara explains, not the *Mukhya prâṇa* or the individual soul, but Brahman is to be understood, since at the very beginning it is said: "I will explain "Brahman to thee" (p. 380, 5); in harmony with this, in the case of the words "whose work this is," we are not to think of the nutrition of the body, which is the work of the *Mukhya prâṇa* (p. 378, 6), or of good and bad works, as they are performed by the individual soul (p. 379, 2), but of this world which was made by Brahman (p. 381, 5). To the objection that marks of the *Mukhya prâṇa* and *Jîva* (the individual soul) are also met with, a reply is to be made in the words of the Sûtram 1, 1, 31: *upâsâtraividhyât* etc. (explained by us in the preceding section, above p. 181) (p. 382, 8). For that only Brahman can be meant, appears from the concluding words, and from the unsurpassable fruit promised in them (p. 382, 13).—To this is added, as *Jaimini* remarks, that in the passage concerning deep sleep, in both question and answer, the individual soul is distinguished from Brahman, into which it enters, and from which it comes forth again (p. 383, 10), and in the Vâjasaneyi recension (Brih. 2, 1, 16) on this occasion it is expressly indicated as the *vijñânamayaḥ puruṣaḥ* (p. 384, 9); from this it is clear, that that from which it goes forth, must be something different from itself, namely the highest Brahman (p. 385, 4).

Cites (4)