God's Living Bible - The Third Testament - Research Library - The Upanishads
p. 161
THIRD BRÂHMANA III
1. Yâgñavalkya came to Ganaka Vaideha, and he did not mean to speak with him 1. But when formerly
p. 162
[paragraph continues] Ganaka Vaideha and Yâgñavalkya had a disputation on the Agnihotra, Yâgñavalkya had granted him a boon, and he chose (for a boon) that he might be free to ask him any question he liked. Yâgñavalkya granted it, and thus the King was the first to ask him a question.
2. 'Yâgñavalkya,' he said, 'what is the light of man 1?'
Yâgñavalkya replied: 'The sun, O King; for, having the sun alone for his light, man sits, moves about, does his work, and returns.'
Ganaka Vaideha said: 'So indeed it is, O Yâgñavalkya.'
3. Ganaka Vaideha said: 'When the sun has set, O Yâgñavalkya, what is then the light of man?'
Yâgñavalkya replied: 'The moon indeed is his light; for, having the moon alone for his light, man sits, moves about, does his work, and returns.'
Ganaka Vaideha said: 'So indeed it is, O Yâgñavalkya.'
4. Ganaka Vaideha said: 'When the sun has set, O Yâgñavalkya, and the moon has set, what is the light of man?'
Yâgñavalkya replied: 'Fire indeed is his light;
p. 163
for, having fire alone for his light, man sits, moves about, does his work, and returns.'
5. Ganaka Vaideha said: 'When the sun has set, O Yâgñavalkya, and the moon has set, and the fire is gone out, what is then the light of man?'
Yâgñavalkya replied: 'Sound indeed is his light; for, having sound alone for his light, man sits, moves about, does his work, and returns. Therefore, O King, when one cannot see even one's own hand, yet when a sound is raised, one goes towards it.'
Ganaka Vaideha said: 'So indeed it is, O Yâgñavalkya.'
6. Ganaka Vaideha said: 'When the sun has set, O Yâgñavalkya, and the moon has set, and the fire is gone out, and the sound hushed, what is then the light of man?'
Yâgñavalkya said: 'The Self indeed is his light; for, having the Self alone as his light, man sits, moves about, does his work, and returns.'
7. Ganaka Vaideha said: 'Who is that Self?'
Yâgñavalkya replied: 'He who is within the heart, surrounded by the Prânas 1 (senses), the person of light, consisting of knowledge. He, remaining the same, wanders along the two worlds 2, as if 3 thinking, as if moving. During sleep (in dream) he transcends this world and all the forms of death (all that falls under the sway of death, all that is perishable).
8. 'On being born that person, assuming his body,
p. 164
becomes united with all evils; when he departs and dies, he leaves all evils behind.
9. 'And there are two states for that person, the one here in this world, the other in the other world, and as a third 1 an intermediate state, the state of sleep. When in that intermediate state, he sees both those states together, the one here in this world, and the other in the other world. Now whatever his admission to the other world may be, having gained that admission, he sees both the evils and the blessings 2.
'And when he falls asleep, then after having taken away with him the material from the whole world, destroying 3 and building it up again, he sleeps (dreams) by his own light. In that state the person is self-illuminated.
10. 'There are no (real) chariots in that state, no horses, no roads, but he himself sends forth (creates) chariots, horses, and roads. There are no blessings there, no happiness, no joys, but he himself sends forth (creates) blessings, happiness, and joys. There
p. 165
are no tanks there, no lakes, no rivers, but he himself sends forth (creates) tanks, lakes, and rivers. He indeed is the maker.
11. 'On this there are these verses:
'After having subdued by sleep all that belongs to the body, he, not asleep himself, looks down upon the sleeping (senses). Having assumed light, he goes again to his place, the golden person 1, the lonely bird. (1)
12. 'Guarding with the breath (prâna, life) the lower nest, the immortal moves away from the nest; that immortal one goes wherever he likes, the golden person, the lonely bird. (2)
13. 'Going up and down in his dream, the god makes manifold shapes for himself, either rejoicing together with women, or laughing (with his friends), or seeing terrible sights. (3)
14. 'People may see his playground 2 but himself no one ever sees. Therefore they say, Let no one wake a man suddenly, for it is not easy to remedy, if he does not get back (rightly to his body)."
'Here some people (object and) say: "No, this (sleep) is the same as the place of waking, for what he sees while awake, that only he sees when asleep 3."
p. 166
No, here (in sleep) the person is self-illuminated (as we explained before).'
Ganaka Vaideha said: 'I give you, Sir, a thousand. Speak on for the sake of (my) emancipation.'
15. Yâgñavalkya said: 'That (person) having enjoyed himself in that state of bliss (samprasâda, deep sleep), having moved about and seen both good and evil, hastens back again as he came, to the place from which he started (the place of sleep), to dream 1. And whatever he may have seen there, he is not followed (affected) by it, for that person is not attached to anything.'
Ganaka Vaideha said: 'So it is indeed, Yâgñavalkya.
p. 167
[paragraph continues] I give you, Sir, a thousand. Speak on for the sake of emancipation.'
16. Yâgñavalkya said: 'That (person) having enjoyed himself in that sleep (dream), having moved about and seen both good and evil, hastens back again as he came, to the place from which he started, to be awake. And whatever he may have seen there, he is not followed (affected) by it, for that person is not attached to anything.'
Ganaka Vaideha said: 'So it is indeed, Yâgñavalkya. I give you, Sir, a thousand. Speak on for the sake of emancipation.'
17. Yâgñavalkya said: 'That (person) having enjoyed himself in that state of waking, having moved about and seen both good and evil, hastens back again as he came, to the place from which he started, to the state of sleeping (dream).
18. 'In fact, as a large fish moves along the two banks of a river, the right and the left, so does that person move along these two states, the state of sleeping and the state of waking.
19. 'And as a falcon, or any other (swift) bird, after he has roamed about here in the air, becomes tired, and folding his wings is carried to his nest, so does that person hasten to that state where, when asleep, he desires no more desires, and dreams no more dreams.
20. 'There are in his body the veins called Hitâ, which are as small as a hair divided a thousandfold, full of white, blue, yellow, green, and red 1. Now
p. 168
when, as it were, they kill him, when, as it were they overcome him, when, as it were, an elephant chases him, when, as it were, he falls into a well, he fancies, through ignorance, that danger which he (commonly) sees in waking. But when he fancies that he is, as it were, a god, or that he is, as it were, a king 1, or "I am this altogether," that is his highest world 2.
21. 'This indeed is his (true) form, free from desires, free from evil, free from fear 3. Now as a man, when embraced by a beloved wife, knows nothing that is without, nothing that is within, thus this person, when embraced by the intelligent (prâgña) Self, knows nothing that is without, nothing that is within. This indeed is his (true) form, in which his wishes are fulfilled, in which the Self (only) is
p. 169
his wish, in which no wish is left,--free from any sorrow 1.
22. 'Then a father is not a father, a mother not a mother, the worlds not worlds, the gods not gods, the Vedas not Vedas. Then a thief is not a thief, a murderer not a murderer 2, a Kândâla 3 not a Kândâla, a Paulkasa 4 not a Paulkasa, a Sramana 5 not a Sramana, a Tâpasa 6 not a Tâpasa. He is not followed by good, not followed by evil, for he has then overcome all the sorrows of the heart 7.
23. 'And when (it is said that) there (in the Sushupti) he does not see, yet he is seeing, though he does not see 8. For sight is inseparable from the
p. 170
seer, because it cannot perish. But there is then no second, nothing else different from him that he could see.
24. 'And when (it is said that) there (in the Sushupti) he does not smell, yet he is smelling, though he does not smell. For smelling is inseparable from the smeller, because it cannot perish. But there is then no second, nothing else different from him that he could smell.
25. 'And when (it is said that) there (in the Sushupti) he does not taste, yet he is tasting, though he does not taste. For tasting is inseparable from the taster, because it cannot perish. But there is then no second, nothing else different from him that he could taste.
26. 'And when (it is said that) there (in the Sushupti) he does not speak, yet he is speaking, though he does not speak. For speaking is inseparable from the speaker, because it cannot perish. But there is then no second, nothing else different from him that he could speak.
27. 'And when (it is said that) there (in the Sushupti) he does not hear, yet he is hearing, though he does not hear. For hearing is inseparable from the hearer, because it cannot perish. But. there is then no second, nothing else different from him that he could hear.
28. 'And when (it is said that) there (in the Sushupti) he does not think, yet he is thinking, though he does not think. For thinking is inseparable from the thinker, because it cannot perish.
p. 171
[paragraph continues] But there is then no second, nothing else different from him that he could think.
29. 'And when (it is said that) there (in the Sushupti) he does not touch, yet he is touching, though he does not touch. For touching is inseparable from the toucher, because it cannot perish. But there is then no second, nothing else different from him that he could think.
30. 'And when (it is said that) there (in the Sushupti) he does not know, yet he is knowing, though he does not know. For knowing is inseparable from the knower, because it cannot perish. But there is then no second, nothing else different from him that he could know.
31. 'When (in waking and dreaming) there is, as it were, another, then can one see the other, then can one smell the other, then can one speak to the other, then can one hear the other, then can one think the other, then can one touch the other, then can one know the other.
32. 'An ocean 1 is that one seer, without any duality; this is the Brahma-world 2, O King.' Thus did Yâgñavalkya teach him. This is his highest goal, this is his highest Success, this is his highest world, this is his highest bliss. All other creatures live on a small portion of that bliss.
33. 'If a man is healthy, wealthy, and lord of others, surrounded by all human enjoyments, that
p. 172
is the highest blessing of men. Now a hundred of these human blessings make one blessing of the fathers who have conquered the world (of the fathers). A hundred blessings of the fathers who have conquered this world make one blessing in the Gandharva world. A hundred blessings in the Gandharva world make one blessing of the Devas by merit (work, sacrifice), who obtain their godhead by merit. A hundred blessings of the Devas by merit make one blessing of the Devas by birth, also (of) a Srotriya 1 who is without sin, and not overcome by desire. A hundred blessings of the Devas by birth make one blessing in the world of Pragâpati, also (of) a Srotriya who is without sin, and not overcome. by desire. A hundred blessings in the world of Pragâpati make one blessing in the world of Brahman, also (of) a Srotriya who is without sin, and not overcome by desire. And this is the highest blessing 2.
'This is the Brahma-world, O king,' thus spake Yâgñavalkya.
Ganaka Vaideha said: 'I give you, Sir, a thousand. Speak on for the sake of (my) emancipation.'
Then Yâgñavalkya was afraid lest the King, having become full of understanding, should drive him from all his positions 3.
34. And Yâgñavalkya said: 'That (person), having enjoyed himself in that state of sleeping (dream),
p. 173
having moved about and seen both good and bad, hastens back again as he came, to the place from which he started, to the state of waking 1.
35. 'Now as a heavy-laden carriage moves along groaning, thus does this corporeal Self, mounted by the intelligent Self, move along groaning, when a man is thus going to expire 2.
36. 'And when (the body) grows weak through old age, or becomes weak through illness, at that time that person, after separating himself from his members, as an Amra (mango), or Udumbara (fig), or Pippala-fruit is separated from the stalk, hastens back again as be came, to the place from which he started, to (new) life.
37. 'And as policemen, magistrates, equerries, and governors wait for a king who is coming back, with food and drink, saying, "He comes back, he approaches," thus do all the elements wait on him who knows this, saying, "That Brahman comes, that Brahman approaches."
38. 'And as policemen, magistrates, equerries, and governors gather round a king who is departing, thus do all the senses (prânas) gather round the Self at the time of death, when a man is thus going to expire.'
Footnotes161:1 The introduction to this Brâhmana has a very peculiar interest, as showing the close coherence of the different portions which together form the historical groundwork of the Upanishads. Ganaka Vaideha and Yâgñavalkya are leading characters in the Brihadâranyaka-upanishad, and whenever they meet they seem to converse quite freely, though each retains his own character, and Yâgñavalkya honours Ganaka as king quite as much as Ganaka honours Yâgñavalkya as a Brâhmana. Now in our chapter we read that Yâgñavalkya did not wish to enter on a discussion, but that Ganaka was the first to address him (pûrvam paprakkha). This was evidently considered not quite correct, and an explanation is given, that Ganaka took this liberty because on a former occasion Yâgñavalkya had granted him permission to address questions to him, whenever he liked. It might be objected that such an explanation looks very much like an after-thought, and we find indeed that in India itself some of the later commentators tried to avoid the difficulty by dividing the words sa mene na vadishya iti, into sam enena vadishya iti, so that we should have to translate, 'Yâgñavalkya came to Ganaka intending to speak with him.' (See Dvivedaga?ga's Comm. p. 1141.) This is, no doubt, a very ingenious conjecture, which might well rouse the envy of European scholars. But it is no more. The accents decide nothing, because they are changed by different writers, according to their different views of what the Pada text ought to be. What made me prefer the reading which is supported by Sa?kara and Dvivedaga?ga, though the latter alludes to the other padakkheda, is that the tmesis, sam enena vadishye, does not occur again, while sa mene is a common phrase. But the most interesting point, as I remarked before, is that this former disputation between Ganaka and Yâgñavalkya and the permission granted to the King to ask any question he liked, is not a mere invention to account for the apparent rudeness by which Yâgñavalkya is forced to enter on a discussion against his will, but actually occurs in a former chapter. In Satap. Br. XI, 6, 2, 10, we read: tasmai ha Yâgñavalkyo varam dadau; sa hovâka, kâmaprasna p. 162 eva me tvayi Yâgñavalkyâsad iti, tato brahmâ Ganaka âsa. This would show that Ganaka was considered almost like a Brâhmana, or at all events enjoyed certain privileges which were supposed to belong to the first caste only. See, for a different view, Deussen, Vedânta, p. 203; Regnaud (Matériaux pour servir à l'histoire de la philosophie de l'Inde), Errata; and Sacred Books of the East, vol. i, p. lxxiii.
162:1 Read kimgyotir as a Bahuvrîhi. Purusha is difficult to translate. It means man, but also the true essence of man, the soul, as we should say, or something more abstract still, the person, as I generally translate it, though a person beyond the Ego.
163:1 Sâmîpyalakshanâ saptamî, Dvivedaga?ga. See Brih. Up. IV, 4, 22.
163:2 In this world, while awake or dreaming; in the other world, while in deep sleep.
163:3 The world thinks that he thinks, but in reality he does not, he only witnesses the acts of buddhi, or thought.
164:1 There are really two sthânas or states only; the place where they meet, like the place where two villages meet, belongs to both, but it may be distinguished as a third. Dvivedaga?ga (p. 1141) uses a curious argument in support of the existence of another world. In early childhood, he says, our dreams consist of the impressions of a former world, later on they are filled with the impressions of our senses, and in old age they contain visions of a world to come.
164:2 By works, by knowledge, and by remembrance of former things; see Brih. Up. IV, 4, 2.
164:3 Dividing and separating the material, i.e. the impressions received from this world. The commentator explains mâtrâ as a portion of the impressions which are taken away into sleep. 'Destroying' he refers to the body, which in sleep becomes senseless, and 'building up' to the imaginations of dreams.
165:1 The Mâdhyandinas read paurusha, as an adjective to ekahamsa, but Dvivedaga?ga explains paurusha as a synonym of purusha, which is the reading of the Kânvas.
165:2 Cf. Susruta III, 7, 1.
165:3 I have translated this according to the commentator, who says: 'Therefore the Self is self-illuminated during sleep. But others say the state of waking is indeed the same for him as sleep; there is no other intermediate place, different from this and from the other world.... And if sleep is the same as the state of waking, then is this Self not separate, not cause and effect, but mixed with them, and the Self therefore not self-illuminated. What he means p. 166 is that others, in order to disprove the self-illumination, say that this sleep is the same as the state of waking, giving as their reason that we see in sleep or in dreams exactly what we see in waking. But this is wrong, because the senses have stopped, and only when the senses have stopped does one see dreams. Therefore there is no necessity for admitting another light in sleep, but only the light inherent in the Self. This has been proved by all that went before.' Dr. Roer takes the same view in his translation, but Deussen (Vedânta, p. 205) takes an independent view, and translates: I Therefore it is said: It (sleep) is to him a place of waking only, for what he sees waking, the same he sees in sleep. Thus this spirit serves there for his own light.' Though the interpretations of Sa?kara and Dvivedaga?ga sound artificial, still Dr. Deussen's version does not remove all difficulties. If the purusha saw in sleep no more than what he had seen before in waking, then the whole argument in favour of the independent action, or the independent light of the purusha, would go; anyhow it would be no argument on Yâgñavalkya's side. See also note to paragraph 9, before.
166:1 The Mâdhyandinas speak only of his return from svapnânta to buddhânta, from sleep to waking, instead of his going from sainprasâda (deep sleep) to svapnâ (dream), from svapnâ to buddhânta, and from buddhânta again to svapnânta, as the Kânvas have it. In § 18 the Kânvas also mention svapnânta and buddhânta only, but the next paragraph refers to sushupti.
167:1 Dvivedaga?ga explains that if phlegm predominates, qualified by wind and bile, the juice in the veins is white; if wind predominates, qualified by phlegm and bile, it is blue; if bile predominates, qualified by wind and phlegm, it is yellow; if wind and phlegm p. 168 predominate, with little bile only, it is green; and if the three elements are equal, it is red. See also Ânandagiri's gloss, where Susruta is quoted. Why this should be inserted here, is not quite clear, except that in sleep the purusha is supposed to, move about in the veins.
168:1 Here, again, the commentator seems to be right, but his interpretation does violence to the context. The dangers which a man sees in his sleep are represented as mere imaginations, so is his idea of being of god or a king, while the idea that he is all this (aham evedam sarvah, i.e. idam sarvam, see Sa?kara, p. 873, l. 11) is represented as the highest and real state. But it is impossible to begin a new sentence with aham evedam sarvam, and though it is true that all the preceding fancies are qualified by iva, I prefer to take deva and râgan as steps leading to the sarvâtmatva.
168:2 The Mâdhyandinas repeat here the sentence from yatra supto to pasyati, from the end of § 19.
168:3 The Kânva text reads atikkhandâ apahatapâpmâ. Sa?kara explains atikkhandâ by atikkhandam, and excuses it as svâdhyâyadharmah pâthah. The Mâdhyandinas read atikkhando, but place the whole sentence where the Kânvas put âptakâmam &c., at the end of § 21.
169:1 The Kânvas read sokântaram, the Mâdhyandinas asokântaram, but the commentators arrive at the same result, namely, that it means sokasûnyam, free from grief Sa?kara says: sokântaram sokakkhidram sokasûnyam ityetak, khokamadhyaman iti vi; sarvathâpy asokam. Dvivedaga?ga says: na vidyate soko 'ntare madhye yasya tad asokântaram (ra, Weber) sokasûnyam.
169:2 Bhrûnahan, varishthabrabmahantâ.
169:3 The son of a Sûdra father and a Brâhmana mother.
169:4 The son of a Sûdra father and a Kshatriya mother.
169:5 A mendicant.
169:6 A Vânaprastha, who performs penances.
169:7 I have translated as if the text were ananvâgatah punyena ananvâgatah pâpena. We find anvâgata used in a similar way in §§ 15, 16, &c. But the Kânvas read ananvâgatam punyena ananvâgatam pâpena, and Sa?kara explains the neuter by referring it to rûpam (rûpaparatvân napumsakali?gam). The Mâdhyandinas, if we may trust Weber's edition, read ananvâgatah punyenânvâgatah pâpena. The second anvâgatah may be a mere misprint, but Dvivedaga?ga seems to have read ananvâgatam, like the Kânvas, for he says: ananvâgatam iti rûpavishayo napumsakanirdesah.
169:8 This is the old Upanishad argument that the true sense is the Self, and not the eye. Although therefore in the state of profound sleep, where the eye and the other senses rest, it might be said that the purusha does not see, yet he is a seer all the time, though he does not see with the eye. The seer cannot lose his character p. 170 of seeing, as little as the fire can lose its character of burning, so long as it is fire. The Self sees by its own light, like the sun, even where there is no second, no object but the Self, that could be seen.
171:1 Salila is explained as salilavat, like the ocean, the seer being one like the ocean, which is one only. Dr. Deussen takes salila as a locative, and translates it 'In dem Gewoge,' referring to Svetâsvatara-upanishad VI, 15.
171:2 Or this seer is the Brahma-world, dwells in Brahman, or is Brahman.
172:1 An accomplished student of the Veda.
172:2 See Taitt. Up. II, 8, p. 59; Khând. Up. VIII, 2, 1-10; Kaush. Up. I, 3-5; Regnaud, II, p. 33 seq.
172:3 Sa?kara explains that Yâgñavalkya was not afraid that his own knowledge might prove imperfect, but that the king, having the right to ask him any question he liked, might get all his knowledge from him.
