According to the derivation of the word, they are ‘sittings under [a teacher]’; in the actual usage of the Upanishads themselves, ‘mystic teachings.’
On the position of the Upanishads in the history of philosophy and the estimate of them in East and West at the present day, see pp. 1-9, 71-72.
‘They represent a time probably from the 8th to the 6th century [ bc ].’—Garbe, Die Samkhya Philosophie, p. 107. ‘The earliest of them can hardly be dated later than 600 bc ’—Macdonell, History of Sanskrit Literature, p. 226.
‘I have no doubt that future translators will find plenty of work to do.’ ( Lectures on the Vedânta Philosophy, p. 119.) ‘Each one [of the previous translators] has contributed something, but there is still much left to be improved. In these studies everybody does the best he can; and scholars should never forget how easy it is to weed a field which has once been ploughed, and how difficult to plough unbroken soil.’ ( Sacred Books of the East, vol. 1, American ed., preface, p. f.)
See the Bibliography, p. 464 below.
From A Catechism of Hinduism, by Sris Chandra Vasu, Benares, 1899, p. 3.
See Deussen, Die Philosophie der Upanishad’s, pp. 22-25; English tr., pp. 22-26 (cf. the Bibliography, p. 501 below). See also Macdonell, History of Sanskrit Literature, London, 1900, p. 226.
See Hopkins, ‘Notes on the Çvetāçvatara, etc.,’ JAOS. 22 (1901), pp. 380-387, where he controverts Deussen on this very point.
Translated by Col. Jacob in his Manual of Hindu Pantheism, London, 1891, pp. 76-78. Text published by him in Bombay, 1894, and by Bohtlingk in his Sanskrit-Chrestomathie.
See the Sarva-darśana-saṁgraha, a later summary of the various philosophers, translated by Cowell and Gough, p. 227 (2nd ed., London, 1894).
Deussen, The Philosophy of the Upanishads, tr. by Geden, p. viii, Edinburgh, 1906.
Max Muller, Lectures on the Vedānta Philosophy, p. 39.
The Upanishads, by Mead and Chaṭṭopādhyāya, p. 5, London, Theosophical Publishing Society, 1896. See also The Theosophy of the Upanishads (anonymous), London, Theosophical Publishing Society, 1896, and The Upanishads with Śankara’s Commentary, a translation made by several Hindus, published by V. C. Seshacharri, Madras, 1898 (dedicated to Mrs. Annie Besant).
Parerga, 2, § 185 ( Werke, 6. 427).
Printed as a pamphlet, Bombay, 1893, and also contained in his Elements of Metaphysics, English translation, p. 337, London, 1894.
Royce, The World and the Individual, 1. 156-175, New York, 1900.
Regnaud, Matériaux pour servir à l’histoire de la philosophie de l’Inde, 2. 204, Paris, 1878.
‘That which is hidden in the secret of the Vedas, even the Upanishads.’—Śvetāśvatara Upanishad 5. 6.
Technically, the older Upanishads (with the exception of the Īśā, which is the last chapter of the Saṁhitā of the White Yajur-Veda) form part of the Aranyakas, ‘Forest Books,’ which in turn are part of the Brāhmaṇas, the second part of the Vedas.
Later a distinct class of independent Upanishads arose, but even of several of the classical Upanishads the connection with the Brāhmaṇas has been lost. Only the thirteen oldest Upanishads, which might be called classical and which are translated in this volume, are here discussed.
Kern, SBE. 21, p. xvii.
See on this point the interesting testimony adduced by Foucher, Étude sur l’iconographie bouddhique de l’Inde, Paris, 1900.
Such as Bṛih. 1. 2. 7; 1. 3. 22; 1. 4. 1; 3. 9. S-9; Chānd. 1. 2. 10-12; 6. 8. 1.
In his notes to Colebrooke’s Miscellaneous Essays, 1. 257, London, 1873. But see more especially Professor Hopkins, JAOS. 22. 380-387.
In Kaush. 4, which is evidently another version of the same dialogue, there are sixteen conceptions, ‘the person in the quarters of heaven’ being omitted from the Bṛihad-Āraṇyaka list and there being added the person in thunder, in the echo, the conscious self by whom a sleeping person moves about in dreams, the person in the right eye, and the person in the left eye—conceptions which are supplemented respectively by the soul of sound, the inseparable companion, Yama (king of the dead), the soul of name, of fire, of light, and the soul of truth, of lightning, of splendor.
Bṛihad-Āranyaka, Chāndogya, Taittirīya, Aitareya, Kaushītaki, and Kena 14-34 (the prose portion) are regarded as forming the group representative of the earlier Upanishadic philosophy. The others are later and dogmatic, presupposing a considerable development of thought and not infrequently quoting the earlier ones.
Beautifully expressed, in a different connection, by the three verses of Bṛih. 1. 3. 28:—
The earnestness of the search for truth is one of the delightful and commendable features of the Upanishads.
Thus Śaṅkara reconciled the opposition between the two Brahmas and the one Brahma, at the end of his commentary on the Vedānta-Sūtras, 4. 3. 14.
Gough, in his Philosophy of the Upanishads, maintains, in my judgment, an erroneous position, viz. that the Upanishads teach the pure Vedāntism of Śaṅkara, who flourished at least a thousand years after their date. Gough’s book is filled with explanations bringing in the similes of the rope and snake, the distant post seeming to be a man, the mirage on the sand, the reflection of the sun on the water, etc., all of which are drawn from Śaṅkara and even later Hindu philosophers, and not from the Upanishads.
‘All determining (describing or qualifying) is a negating.’
This is an ancient foreshadowing of the modern theory of the ‘project.’
‘In this Brahma-wheel the soul ( haṁsa ) flutters about, thinking that itself and the Actuator are different’ (Śvet. 1. 6).
Bṛih. 4. 3. 20 meets the same difficulty—that in a person’s dreaming sleep people seem to be killing him, they seem to be overpowering him, an elephant seems to be tearing him to pieces, he seems to be falling into a hole—with the explanation that ‘he is imagining through ignorance the very fear which he sees when awake’ and which by implication is illusory.
There is another almost identical occurrence of a part of this passage in Bṛih. 4. 3. 31.
The native commentator of later times thought he discovered a reference to it in RV. 1. 164. 32, bahu-prajaḥ, interpreting the word as ‘subject to many births.’ For a refutation see Monier Williams, Brahmanism and Hinduism, p. 18, note 2.
Hopkins, Religions of India, p. 175.
Monier Williams, Brahmanism and Hinduism, p. 41.
In the first chapter of his Philosophy of the Upanishads, where he cites the prevalence of the belief among semi-savage peoples, connected with animism.
It is noteworthy how the extreme valuation put upon both these kinds of knowledge produced a reaction within the period of the Upanishads themselves. The license to override the prescriptive usages of religion and custom which the possessor of knowledge claimed for himself, is distinctly denied in Maitri 4. 3, on the point of the four customary stages in the life of every orthodox Hindu, through disregard of which the revenues of the priests were seriously diminished.
As regards speculative knowledge of Ātman, its apprehension by means of human knowledge is opposed by the doctrine of prasāda, or ‘Grace’, in Katha 2. 20 (and, with a slight verbal change, in Śvet. 3. 20): ‘Through the grace of the Creator he beholds the greatness of Ātman.’ It is by means of this grace, according to Śvet. 1. 6, that an individual obtains release from illusion and reaches immortality:—
An even more explicit denial of the knowledge-doctrine is found at Katha 2. 23 (= Muṇḍ. 3. 2. 3), where a strict Calvinistic doctrine of election is anticipated.—
The similes contained in this and the three preceding passages are excellent illustrations of a method of reasoning characteristic of the Upanishads and of the Hindu mind in general. Analogies from nature that serve to illustrate a proposition are accepted with the force of an argument.
In spite of this non-attributability of moral qualities to the world-ground by theoretical reason, the affirmation of the practical reason in postulating a moral order at the heart of the universe is to be observed in two passages in the Upanishads, Chānd. 6. 16 and Śvet. 6. 6.
Among the many Kantian ideas which Deussen finds in the Upanishads there is a striking one in this connection, namely, that the final goal and perfect condition of the human soul is autonomy. See svarāj at Chānd. 7. 25. 2 and svārājya at Tait. 1. 6. 2. But the conception of autonomy there held is very different from the idea that an autonomous person is in such full control of self that he never by passion disobeys the moral law. As is indicated in the following sentence, ‘He has unchecked sway in all the worlds,’ the idea of autonomy is that of unhindered liberty to do what one wills, the same as the condition of perfect bliss described at Tait. 3. 10. 5—a condition in which the successful aspirant ‘goes up and down these worlds, eating what he desires, assuming what form he desires.’ Cf. also Chānd. 8. 1. 6.
An idea possibly based on the psychological fact that in sleep the moral sense appears greatly weakened.
It is interesting to note the opposition between this theory that desires are limitations, and the earlier theory in which one of the strongest practical inducements to knowledge was the sure means of obtaining all desires. Cf. Chānd. 1. 1. 7; 5. 1. 4; 7. 10. 2; 8. 2. 10; Bṛih. 1. 3. 28; 6. 1. 4; Tait. 2. 1; Kaṭha 2. 16. Similarly the former method of obtaining Brahma was to know Brahma; now it is to quench all desires. The change on this point is another instance of that transition from epistemological realism to idealism which has been previously traced.
The sacred syllable to be repeated until one passes into an unconscious stupor or ecstasy.
Evidenced, for example, in the recent establishment by a Hindu of Bombay of a valuable annual prize for the best exposition and defence of some doctrine of the Upanishads or of Śaṅkara.
This Brāhmaṇa occurs also as Śat. Br. 10. 6. 4.
The Aśva-medha, ‘Horse-sacrifice,’ the most elaborate and important of the animal sacrifices in ancient India (described at length in Śat. Br. 13. 1-5), is interpreted, in this and the following Brāhmana, as of cosmic significance—a miniature reproduction of the world-order. In the liturgy for the Horse-sacrifice (contained in VS. 22-25) there is a similar apportionment of the parts of the animal to the various parts of the world. Compare also a similar elaborate cosmic correlation of the ox at AV. 9. 7.
The vessels used to hold the libations at the Aśva-medha. Here they are symbolized cosmically by the Bay of Bengal and the Indian Ocean.
Different names for, and aspects of, this cosmic carrier.
This Brāhmaṇa is found also as a part of Śat. Br. 10. 6. 5.
Or ‘a body,’ ātman-vin.
Explained by Śaṅkara as northeast and southeast respectively.
Explained by Śaṅkara as northwest and southwest respectively.
Even as in the regular Aśva-medha the consecrated horse is allowed to range free for a year.
That is, the fire in the Horse-sacrifice.
The important Loud Chant in the ritual.
Name of a meter used in the Rig-Veda. Here it signifies the Rig-Veda itself.
Here referring particularly to the Yajur-Veda.
That is, ‘my.’—Com.
Less likely is Deussen’s interpretation: ‘Therefore is this [body] by itself ( sva = sve = ātmani ) like . . .’
The adverb is here used deictically.
Such is the traditional interpretation. If that is correct, the passage presents the earliest occurrence of a favorite simile of the later Vedānta; cf. for example, Śankara on the Brahma-Sūtras 3. 2. 6: ‘as fire is latent in firewood or in covered embers.’ But the meaning of viśvambhara is uncertain. Etymologically the word is a compound signifying ‘all-bearing.’ As such it is an unambiguous appellation of the earth at AV. 12. 1. 6. The only other occurrence of its adjectival use that is cited in BR. is AV. 2. 16. 5, where the commentator substantiates his rendering ‘fire’ by quoting the present passage. In both of these passages Whitney rejects the meaning ‘fire’ ( AV Tr. p. 60-61), and in his criticism of Böhtlingk’s translation of this Upanishad ( AJP. 11. 432) suggests that ‘ viśvambhara may perhaps here mean some kind of insect, in accordance with its later use,’ and ‘since the point of comparison is the invisibility of the things encased’ proposes the translation ‘or as a viśvambhara in a viśvambhara -nest.’ But Professor Lanman adds to Whitney’s note on AV. 2. 16. 5 ( AV. Tr. p. 60-61): ‘I think, nevertheless, that fire may be meant.’ The same simile recurs at Kaush. 4. 20.
In the above translation evam (‘thus’) is regarded as the complete apodosis of the sentence whose protasis is introduced by yathā (‘just as’). This arrangement of clauses involves an ellipsis, which, is supplied in full, might be ‘Just as, verily, one might find [cattle, the commentator explains] by a footprint, thus one finds this All by its footprint, the self ( ātman ).’
Another possible grouping would connect that protasis with the preceding sentence merely as an added simile, evam (‘thus’) being regarded as a resumptive introduction for the following sentence. The translation of the words thus grouped would be: ‘That very thing is the trace of this All—even this self ( ātman ); for by it one knows this All, just as, verily, one might find by a footprint. Thus he finds fame and praise who knows this.’
Neither arrangement of the clauses is entirely satisfactory. Of the two, the latter, however, would appear to be the less probable, for the reason that it prevents the concluding sentence from assuming the exact form—permitted by the arrangement adopted above—of the customary formula announcing the reward of knowing the truths which have been expounded.
RV. 4. 26. 1 a.
aty-asṛjata: ‘super-created.’
kṣatra: abstractly, power or dominion; specifically, temporal power: used to designate the military and princely class, as contrasted with the priestly class of Brahmans. See page 98, note 2.
The ceremonial anointing of a king.
Another Vedic divinity.
Cf. Chānd. 8. 2, where this thought is developed in detail.
This and the two preceding sentences are quoted at Maitri 6. 30.
In the analogy of a wheel.
Another description of a dying father’s benediction and bestowal upon his son occurs at Kaush. 2. 15.
The sense of this and the following paragraph seems to involve a play upon the double meaning of a word, a procedure characteristic of the Upanishads. The word lokya may here be translated ‘world-wise’ or ‘world-procuring.’ When properly instructed, a son is ‘world-wise’ in his own attainment of the world through knowledge. He is also ‘world-procuring’ for his father, in that he is able, through the discharge of appointed filial duties, to help the departed spirit of his father to attain a better world than would otherwise be possible.
Cf. Mānava Dharma Śāstra 9.138. ‘Because a son delivers ( trāyate ) his father from the hell called Put, therefore he is called putra (son) [i.e. deliverer from hell].’
Compare the similar conversation in Kaush. 4.
A very learned and liberal king.
Part of this paragraph recurs at Maitri 6. 32.
A very similar stanza is found at AV. 10. 8. 9.
Thus far the sentence recurs at Maitri 6. 3.
Instead of the general meaning ‘place,’ sthāna in this context probably has this more technical meaning, designating ‘stage in the life of a Brahman’ ( āśrama ); i.e. from being a ‘householder’ ( gṛhastha ) he is going on to be an ‘anchorite’ ( vanaprastha ) in the order of the ‘four stages.’
From the more simple, general conception of brahma as ‘devotion’ and ‘sanctity’ there became developed a more specific, technical application, ‘the priesthood’ or ‘the Brahman class.’ Likewise from the more simple, general conception of kṣatra as ‘rule’ was developed a more specific, technical application, ‘the ruling power’ or ‘the Kshatriya class.’
The trend of this process is discernible in the Rig-Veda at 1. 157. 2, the earliest instance where the two words are associated. Various stages may be noted in other passages where the two words are connected. In the Atharva-Veda at 12. 5. 8 they would seem to be used (unless, indeed, figuratively) in the primary, nontechnical sense, for they are mentioned along with other qualities of a Kshatriya. But the technical significance is evident in AV. 2. 15. 4 and 15. 10. 2-11; while in AV. 9. 7. 9 the social classes as such are unmistakably emphasized. Similarly in the Vājasaneyi-Saṁhitā:— in 19. 5 the primary meaning is dominant; in 5. 27; 6. 3; 7. 21; 14. 24; 18. 38 the more technical meaning is evident; while brahma and kṣatra are mentioned along with other caste terms at 10. 10-12 (with viś, ‘the people’); 18. 48; 20. 17, 25; 26. 2; 30. 5 (with vaiśya and śūdra ). Similarly in the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa where the two words are associated:— at 3. 11 and 7. 21, with the primary meaning dominant, there seems to be a touch of the technical significance; at 7. 22, 24 the social classes are designated, although it comes out clearly that they are such because characterized by the abstract qualities brahma and kṣatra respectively; they are mentioned as distinct classes at 2. 33 (along with the viś ) and at 7. 19 (along with vaiśya and śūdra ). Similarly in the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa where the two words are associated:— the primary conceptions are apparent in 11. 4. 3. 11-13 where brahma and kṣatra are qualities or characteristics co-ordinated with other objects desired in prayer; but these qualities are felt as characteristic of certain social classes, as also of certain gods (Bṛihaspati and Mitra respectively) correlated therewith (in 10. 4. 1. 5 Indra and Agni, in 5. 1. 1. 11 Bṛihaspati and Indra, in 4. 1. 4. 1-4 Mitra and Varuṇa respectively); brahma and kṣatra are also simply technical designations of the social classes in 1. 2. 1. 7; 3. 5. 2. 11; 4. 2. 2. 13; 9. 4. 1. 7-11; 12. 7. 3. 12; 13. 1. 5. 2. Still further advanced class differentiation is evidenced by the use of brahma and kṣatra along with viś as designations of the ‘priesthood,’ ‘nobility,’ and ‘people’ respectively at 2. 1. 3. 5-8; 2. 1. 4. 12. 10. 4. 1. 9; 11. 2. 7. 14-16.
This conspectus of usage furnishes corroboration to the inherent probability that here (in the Upanishad which forms the conclusion of the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa), especially in § 6, the words brahma and kṣatra are class-designations, pregnant, however, with the connotation of the respective qualities. Accordingly, the (hybrid) word ‘Brahmanhood’ can perhaps best express both ‘the Brahman class’ and the quality of ‘devotion’ or ‘sanctity’ characterizing the priesthood. Similarly the word ‘Kshatrahood’ is used to designate both ‘the Kshatriya class’ and the quality of ‘warrior-rule’ characterizing the nobility.
If this aorist is gnomic, the meaning would be simply ‘deserts’ or ‘would desert’; so also in all the following similar sentences. Cf. Bṛih. 4. 5. 7.
A designation of the Atharva-Veda.
This section recurs, with slight variations, at Maitri 6. 32.
Or the ellipsis might be construed: ‘It would not be [possible] to seize it forth . . . ’
RV. 1. 116. 12. The two Aśvins desired instruction from Dadhyañc. But the latter was loath to impart it, for Indra had threatened Dadhyañc that if he ever told this honey-doctrine to any one else, he (Indra) would cut his head off. To avoid this untoward result, the Aśvins took off Dadhyañc’s head and substituted a horse’s head. Then, after Dadhyañc had declared the honey-doctrine in compliance with their request and Indra had carried out his threat, the Aśvins restored to Dadhyañc his own head. This episode shows the extreme difficulty with which even gods secured the knowledge originally possessed by Indra.
RV. 1. 117. 22.
RV. 6. 47. 18.
Supplying ya evaṁ veda, as in 3. 3. 2 and 1. 2. 7.
A Mādhyamdina addition.
A Mādhyamdina addition. Cf. Chānd. 3. 16. 1.
Literally, ‘remover of burning coals’; ‘a cat’s-paw,’ as Muller suggests.
That is, those mentioned in sections 10-17.
For a similar comparison in Hebrew literature see Job 14. 7-10.
That is, what is self-evident, what any one might know. This rendering, it should be noted, takes the active brūyāt as if it were middle voice—a late epic usage.
A designation of the Atharva-Veda.
This same etymological explanation occurs at Śat. Br. 6. 1. 1. 2.
The connection seems to be broken here and the following paragraph appears to refer to the supreme Soul.
Dvivedaganga and Bohtlingk adopt the ingenious reading sam enena, ‘I will talk with him’ (instead of the text as translated, sa mene na ). But the historical situation referred to in Śat. Br. (see the following foot-note) explains Janaka’s forwardness in asking questions.
In the episode culminating at Śat. Br. 11. 6. 2. 10.
This section is lacking in the Mādhyaṁdina recension.
Taking vicchāyayanti from vi + √chā. If from √vich, it means ‘pressing him hard.’ Com. says ‘chase.’ Cf. Chānd. 8. 10. 2 and note.
Cf. Kaush. 3. 1.
An addition in the Mādhyaṁdina text.
An addition in the Mādhyaṁdina text.
This section is lacking in the Mādhyaṁdina recension.
Or, ‘has driven me to extremities.’
This paragraph is probably an intrusion. It is not contained in the Mādhyaṁdina text and does not fit in well with the context. Cf. 4. 3. 16.
Or, ‘into that does he become changed.’
Or ‘for action,’ or ‘because of his action.’
This stanza is found also at Kaṭha 6. 14.
This stanza is identical with Īśā 9.
Compare Katha 1. 3 a.
A variation of this stanza is found at Īśā 3.
Compare Kaṭha 4. 5 c, d; 4. 12 c, d; Īśā 6 d.
An addition in the Mādhyaṁdina text.
Another version, probably a secondary recension, of the same episode at 2. 4.
Besides this general meaning, brahma may also contain pregnantly something of the technical philosophical meaning of ‘Brahma.’
For the exact meaning, consult the foot-note on 2. 4. 1, page 98, note 1.
pra-vraj, the verb from which are formed the technical terms, pravrājin, pravrājaka, pravrajita, for ‘a religious mendicant.’
A designation of the Atharva-Veda.
So the Mādhyaṁdina text begins the list.
This stanza occurs with variations in AV. 10. 8. 29.
‘Truth’ is another meaning (beside ‘the Real’) of the word satyam.
Because, as the Commentator explains, the sound ti is contained in the word anrtam.
Four exclamations in the sacrificial ritual.
Recurs entire in Maitri 2. 6.
The word is here used deictically.
The words aśokam ahimam may also be translated ‘without sorrow, without snow.’
That is:—Is not he who has this knowledge of the nature of Brahma and food and life quite superior to benefit or injury from any other individual?
Namely, that the ultimate unity in which food and life are involved is renunciation, since the meaning of the compound verb vi-ram is ‘to renounce.’
The Recitation portion of the sacrificial ritual.
The prose portion of the sacrificial ritual.
The Chant.
The word kṣatra seems to be used in this paragraph in two meanings: abstractly, as ‘rule,’ and, specifically, as the ‘ruler,’ referring to the second or ruling class. In connection therewith, the first three items treated in this section may refer to the priestly class of Brahmans, who alone performed the ritual.
Referring to the Rig-Veda by designating the principal character of its contents.
Similarly referring to the Yajur-Veda.
Similarly referring to the Sāma-Veda.
That is, the Sun.
RV. 3. 62. 10:
Consisting of four eight-syllable lines.
Consisting of three eight-syllable lines.
This section recurs again as Īśā 15-18. See further foot-notes there.
This stanza = RV. 1. 189. 1 (the famous Cremation Hymn).
A parallel passage in simpler form is Chānd. 5. 1. 1-5.
Compare the other accounts of this episode at Chānd. 5. 1. 6 - 5. 2. 2; Kaush. 3. 3.
A parallel account is found in Chānd. 5. 3-10.
That is, between Father Heaven and Mother Earth.
That is, Gautama Āruṇi, the father.
That is, the funeral pyre.
Compare the ceremony for the ‘procuring of a special prize’ at Kaush. 2. 3 (2), where some of the same directions occur. Another parallel passage is Chānd. 5. 2. 4 - 5. 9. 2.
A part of the elaborate ceremonies which occur also at Āśvalāyana Gṛihya Sūtras 1. 3. 1 and at Pāraskara Gṛihya Sūtras 1. 1. 2.
With sacrificial grass—a part of the usual procedure in the sacrificial ceremony. So AV. 7. 99. 1; Śat. Br. 1. 1. 1. 22; 1. 7. 3. 28; Āśvalāyana Gṛihya Sūtras 2. 5. 2; Gobhila Gṛihya Sūtras 1. 7. 9; Kātyāyana Śrauta Sūtras 2. 3. 6.
This word, jātavedas, is a name for fire.
That is, in the preliminary vocalizing of the ritual.
This may be the meaning of āmaṁsi āmaṁhi te mahi. The words seem to bear some resemblance to the phrase which involves a play on words in the corresponding passage in Chānd. 5. 2. 6, amo nāmā ’si amā hi te sarvam idam, ‘Thou art He ( ama ) by name, for this whole world is at home ( amā ) in thee.’
The first line of the famous Sāvitrī Hymn, RV. 3. 62. 10a.
These three lines are found at RV. 1. 90. 6 and VS. 13. 27.
The second line of the Sāvitrī Hymn, RV. 3. 62. 10b.
These three lines are found at RV. 1. 90. 7 and VS. 13. 28.
The third line of the Sāvitrī Hymn, RV. 3. 62. 10c.
These last three lines are found at RV. 1. 90. 8 and VS. 13. 29.
A symbolic expression for ‘pre-eminent.’
That is, the tradition through the successive teachers.
A similar prohibition against promulgating esoteric knowledge occurs at Śvet. 6. 22 and Maitri 6. 29.
Deictically used.
These same items recur (though not altogether verbatim) in Kaṭha 1. 8 as possessions of which an offender is to be deprived by an offended Brahman.
This prohibition recurs verbatim in Pāraskara Gṇhya Sūtras 1. 11. 6; the last phrase also in Śat. Br. 1. 6. 1. 18.
‘Pot-of-cooked-food,’ one of the prescribed forms of oblation, namely a mess of barley or rice cooked with milk.
Originally and in general, the feminine personification of ‘Divine Favor,’ as in RV. 10. 59. 6; 10. 167. 3; VS. 34. 8, 9; AV. 1. 18. 2; 5. 7. 4; Śat. Br. 5. 2. 3. 2, 4. Specifically invoked, as here, to favor procreation at AV. 6. 131. 2; 7. 20 (21). 2. In the ritual, associated with the day of the full moon, Ait. Br. 7. 11.
Such is the meaning especially applicable in this context. Elsewhere, e.g. VS. 10. 28; Śat. Br. 5. 3. 3. 2; 13. 4. 2. 12, this epithet of Savitṛi is usually taken as from another √sū, with the meaning ‘whose is true impelling.’
A lecherous demon.
A loose quotation of RV. 10. 85. 22 a, c, d.
The above three quatrains are a loose quotation of the hymn RV. 10. 184. The first quatrain occurs also at AV. 5. 25. 5; the second (with slight alterations) at AV. 5. 25. 3.
Compare with this the invocation for successful parturition at RV. 5. 78. 7-8.
See the similar directions at Mānava Dharma Śāstra 2. 29.
Interpreted by the commentators as earth, atmosphere, and heaven, i. e. the world-all; or as Rig-Veda, Yajur-Veda, and Sāma-Veda, i. e. all knowledge.
Possibly with an added connotation, as vedo may be the nominative form also of vedas, ‘property, wealth.’
In later works this sacred ceremony of naming is found considerably elaborated. See Āśvalāyana Gṛihya Sūtras 1. 15. 3-8; Pāraskara Gṛihya Sūtras 1. 17. 1-4; Gobhila Gṛihya Sūtras 2. 8. 14-17; and Mānava Dharma Śāstra 2. 30-33.
RV. 1. 164. 49 with lines b and c transposed.
Or Iḍā, goddess of refreshment in the Rig-Veda.
Or, ‘To a hero she has borne a hero.’
That is, pure, unmingled (with Brāhmaṇa portions), orderly. Thus the White Yajur-Veda is distinguished from the Black Yajur-Veda.
As in the previous list.
The Sāma-Veda is the Veda to which this Chāndogya Upanishad is attached.
The word Om, with which every recital of the Vedas begins, is here set forth as a symbol representing the essence and acme of the entire ‘loud singing’ ( udgītha ).
Specifically, the Rig-Veda, the ‘Veda of Hymns.’
Specifically, the Sāma-Veda, the ‘Veda of Chants.’
With its meaning of ‘yes’ compare ‘Amen.’
Concerning the sacrificial procedure, which is conducted by three orders of priests employing selections from the three Vedas.
That is, the Adhvaryu priest of the Yajur-Veda.
That is, the Hotṛi priest of the Rig-Veda.
That is, the Udgātri priest of the Sāma-Veda. With the general reference to the sacrificial ritual here compare the more definite description at Tait. 1. 8.
A similar story, but with a different purport, occurs at Bṛih. 1. 3. There are numerous other episodes in the strife of the gods and the devils, e.g. Śat. Br. 3. 4. 4. 3 and Ait. Br. 1. 23.
An approximation to svar, ‘light.’
A Hymn of Praise in the Hindu ritual.
Perhaps a double meaning is intended here, for the word akṣara, which means ‘syllable,’ also means ‘imperishable.’
The fact that the Sāma-Veda is composed chiefly of extracts from the Rig-Veda is held in mind throughout this and the following sections which deal with the Ṛic and the Sāman.
The implication is that Pravāhana was not a Brahman. In 5. 3. 5 he is spoken of as one of the princely class ( rājanya ).
In order that this section may convey some meaning, the commentator Śaṅkara’s explanation of the basis of this series of identifications is added in brackets.
The preceding words of this section are a recurrent stereotyped expression found also at 1. 3. 7 and 2. 8. 3.
Still another meaning of the word sāman.
A third distinct meaning of the word sāman.
These are the five divisions of the fivefold Sāman.
Compare the similar identifications at AV. 9. 6. 47.
These are the names of the members of a sevenfold Sāman chant.
The preceding words of this section are a recurrent stereotyped expression found also at 1. 3. 7 and 1. 13. 4.
The commentator gives the explanation through the following curious calculation of the distance separating the sun from the earth: 12 months, 5 seasons, 3 world-spaces—then the sun is the twenty-first.
The word nākam is made to yield the epithet ‘sorrowless’ by an etymological pun, na-a-kam, ‘no lack of desire.’
For a somewhat different, but less probable, rendering see Whitney, AJP. 11. 413.
Inasmuch as they are the human representatives of divinity.
That is, Rig-Veda, Sāma-Veda, and Yajur-Veda.
That is, earth, atmosphere, and sky.
Fire, Wind, and Sun, regarded as regents of the three worlds. For another example of the collocation of this triad see 3. 15. 6.
That is, the three Vedas.
Representing earth, atmosphere, and sky.
The four stanzas contained in this Khaṇḍa are adapted to the purposes of the chant by the special prolongation (plutation) of some of the vowels and the occasional insertion of the interjectional words hum and ā.
The beam from which the honeycomb hangs.
A designation of the Atharva-Veda.
Adopting Bohtlingk’s emendation, nimumloca, for the impossible na nimloca.
RV. 10. 90. 3, with slight variations.
This same characterization is found at Bṛih. 2. 1. 5.
This section, which occurs also as Śat. Br. 10. 6. 3, constitutes the famous Śāṇḍilya-vidyā, or Doctrine of Śāṇḍilya.
Thus Śankara explains the threefold mystic epithet taj-ja-lān.
For one faces the east when one offers a sacrifice for oneself ( juhute ).
For it is the region of Yama, the god of the dead.
For it is the region of King ( rājan ) Varuṇa, or because of the red ( rāga ) of twilight.
For it is the region presided over by Kubera, the god of wealth.—These are Śaṅkara’s explanations of the four epithets.
Śaṅkara explains that the son’s name is here to be said three times.
That is, in wind, the breath of the world-all.
This same etymological explanation occurs at Bṛih. 3. 9. 4.
That is, who knows this doctrine of the 24 + 44 + 48 years.
The ceremonies which constitute a part of the Jyotiṣtoma (Praise of Light) form of the Soma sacrifice and during which the sacrificer is allowed a certain amount of food.
In this exposition of the similarities between man and the sacrifice these two words are used in a double signification. They mean also, in relation to the sacrifice: ‘He will press out [the Soma juice]! He has pressed [it] out!’
SV. 1. 1. 10, varying slightly from RV. 8. 6. 30.
VS. 20. 21, varying slightly from RV. 1. 50. 10.
Referring to RV. 10. 90. 3, already quoted at Chānd. 3. 12. 5.
Whose custom it is continually to flatter his master.
Literally, ‘for him’ ( asmai ).
Wind, fire, sun, moon, and water. Cf. 4. 3. 1, 2.
Breath, speech, eye, ear, and mind. Cf. 4. 3. 3.
The name of an early mythological representation of original matter; also the name of a meter of ten syllables.
This same way is described subsequently at 5. 10. 1-2.
That is, the wind.
That is, auspicious.—Śaṅkara.
The Brahman priest. That is, the Brahman is the leader of mankind. But Śaṅkara interprets: ‘Wherever it goes back (i. e. there is a defect in the sacrifice), thither the man (i. e. the Brahman) goes, to mend the defect with his knowledge.’ Deussen interprets these lines:
Max Müller suggests still another idea.
The word kurūn may also mean ‘the Kuru people.’
Adopting, as do BR. and Deussen, the reading śvā instead of aśvā, ‘a mare.’
The word might almost be translated ‘Senses’; but ‘Functions’ would perhaps more accurately represent the quaint old idea in the modern scientific terminology.—Cf. the other accounts of this rivalry at Bṛih. 6. 1. 7-14 and Kaush. 3. 3.
By sipping at the commencement of a meal and by rinsing out the mouth at the close of the meal—the familiar custom in India.
Or, ‘this world-all.’
RV. 5 82. 1.
With the instruction of Śvetaketu in Khaṇḍas 3-10 compare the parallel account at Bṛih. 6. 2.
That is, Gautama Āruṇi, the father.
That is, into the flame of the cremation fire.
This same way has already been described in 4. 15. 5-6.
That is, into the smoke of the cremation fire.
Such as flies, worms, etc.
Another version is found at Śat. Br. 10. 6. 1.
Deussen’s interpretation.
As a token of discipleship. Compare 4. 4. 5.
From earth to heaven—as Śaṅkara suggests.
Deictically.
abhi-vi-māna, a word of not altogether certain meaning, either from √mā ‘to measure,’ or from √man ‘to think,’ like the immediately preceding prādeśamātia, or perhaps pregnantly referring to both.
According to the Poona and Madras editions of the Chāndogya Upanishad the first part of this paragraph would read: ‘The Udāna breath being satisfied, the skin is satisfied. The skin being satisfied, wind is satisfied,’ etc.
As, for example, in 3. 19. 1 and Tait. 2. 7.
Literally ‘seeds’ ( bīja ).
‘Name and form’ is the Sanskrit idiom for ‘individuality.’
Compare Muṇḍ. 1. 1. 3.
In 6. 5. 1-4.
In an article entitled ‘Sources of the filosofy of the Upaniṣads,’ JAOS. 36 (1916), pp. 197-204, Edgerton translates as follows (p. 200, n. 5): ‘What that subtle essence is, a-state-of-having-that(- aṇimā )-as-its-essence is this universe, that is the Real, that is the Soul, that art thou, Śvetaketu.’
In deep sleep and in death.
Deictically.
Instead of abhi-pra-asya Bohtlingk and Roth ( BR. 1. 543 s.v.) read abhi-pra-asya, ‘add more unto it.’
This same statement of the order of the cessation of functions on the approach of death occurs in 6. 8. 6.
This sentence adhīhi bhagavo lacks but the word brahma to be the same as the request which Bhrigu Vāruṇi put to his father in a similar progressive definition in Tait. 3. 1: adhīhi bhagavo brahma, ‘Sir, declare Brahma.’
With this list, which recurs here and in the seventh Khaṇḍa, compare the somewhat similar enumerations at Bṛih. 2. 4. 10; 4. 1. 2; 4. 5. 11.
Literally ‘nights.’
In the cremation-pile.
For this same idea of the indefinite self-individuation of ultimate reality see Maitri 5. 2.
As, for example, Nārada, the instruction of whom by Sanatkumāra forms this entire Seventh Prapāṭhaka up to this point.
Meaning, etymologically, ‘the Leaper[-over].’ Perhaps the idea of this apparently later addition is, that the teacher of this Upanishadic doctrine, which ‘overcomes’ darkness, is compared to—indeed, is identified with—Skanda, god of war in later Hinduism, the leader of hosts.
Explained by Śaṅkara as ‘the body.’
Explained by Śaṅkara as ‘the heart.’
And not the body.
The apodosis of this comparison seems to be lacking. However, the general idea is doubtless the same as in the following prophecies. i. e. they who in this life are slaves to the dictates of desire like the slaves of a ruler, will continue unchanged in the hereafter. Whitney, in his review of ‘Bohtlingk’s Upanishads’ in the American Journal of Philology, vol. 11, p. 429, interprets the protasis somewhat differently: ‘ “For just as here subjects (of a king who leads them into a new territory) settle down according to order, [and] whatever direction their desires take them to, what region, what piece of ground, that same they severally live upon”—so, we are to understand, is it also in the other world; one’s desires determine his condition there.’
That is, the soul in deep sleep.
Another analytic explanation of the word satyam occurs at Brih. 5. 5. 1.
Perhaps on the ground that the sound ti is contained in the word martya, meaning ‘mortal’.
According to another possible division of the compound word which Śaṅkara seems to have adopted, a-nāśaka-ayana, it would mean ‘entrance into the unperishing.’
This stanza recurs at Kaṭha 6. 16.
In token of discipleship.
Or the text might be translated: ‘ “That Person who is seen in the eye—He is the Self,” said he. “That is the immortal, the fearless. That is Brahma.” ’ Such quite certainly is the translation of the very same words which have already occurred in 4. 15. 1.
Besides meaning ‘oneself,’ as it evidently does both in this paragraph and in the beginning of the following paragraph, the word ātman may also have the connotation ‘one’s body,’ which seems to be the meaning in the latter half of the following paragraph.
Reading vicchādayanti with all the texts, from √chad. However, the Com. explains as ‘they chase.’ The parallel passage in Bṛih. 4. 3. 20 has vicchāyayati ‘tear to pieces,’ from √chā.
Who received this instruction from Prajāpati through Indra, the chief of the Vedic gods.
Referring to the familiar idea that an eclipse is caused by the dragon Rāhu’s attempt to swallow the moon.
‘Name and form’ is the Sanskrit expression for the modern term ‘individuality.’
That is, at animal sacrifices.
That is, in reincarnation.
This stanza=RV. 1. 90. 9, a hymn to the All-Gods.
In the summary title of the chapter, which includes various instructions, the word śikṣā probably has its general meaning of ‘Instruction.’ But here—as also in Muṇḍ. 1. 1. 5—it has a specialized, technical meaning, ‘the Science of Pronunciation.’ As the first stage in the ‘instruction’ concerning the Vedas, this is elaborated as the formal discipline named Śikshā, the first of the six Vedāṅgas (‘Limbs of the Veda’).
That is, the teacher and the pupil.
If the reading should be ’ ciram instead of ciram, then ‘shortly.’ The two following lines, whose grammatical structure is not evident, seem to interrupt this sentence.
A name for the individual soul, as in Ait. 1. 3. 12, 14.
That is, the conditioned ( sa-guṇa ) Brahma, who may be worshiped. The absolute, unconditioned Brahma is the object of intellectual appreciation, i.e. of knowledge, not of worship.
A similar theory is expressed at Bṛih. 1. 4. 17.
Perhaps with a double meaning: both ‘sacred word’ and the philosophical ‘Brahma.’
In the ritual, the signal from the Adhvaryu priest for a response from the sacrificer.
That is, the person instituting the sacrifice.
That is, the Veda.—Com.
That is, of the Veda.—Com.
That is, ‘I am the feller of the tree of world-delusion ( saṁsāra )’ according to Śaṅkara. He also proposes, as a synonym for ‘mover,’ antaryāmin, ‘inner controller’—which suggests to Deussen the (less likely) interpretation. ‘I am the moving (or, animating) spirit of the tree of life.’
Literally ‘courser’; a reference here perhaps to the ‘honey in the sun’ of Chānd. 3. 1.—So Śaṅkara divides the words, vājinī ’va sv-amrtaṁ. But if vājinīvasv amṛtaṁ, as BR. suggest, then ‘the Immortal, possessing [possibly, ‘bestowing’—according to BR. ] power.’
amṛto ’kṣitaḥ. If amṛtokṣitaḥ, then ‘sprinkled with immortality (or, with nectar).’
Or, ‘Veda-repetition’ ( veda-anuvacana ). The whole paragraph is an obscure, mystical meditation, either a preparatory invocation for the study of the Vedas, or a summary praise of its exalting and enlightening effect.
Or, ‘in their presence not a word should be breathed by you.’
Or, ‘according to one’s plenty.’ BR. and MW.; hardly ‘with grace.’
With these exhortations on giving compare the ‘Ode on Liberality,’ RV. 10. 117.
Identical with the First Anuvāka, except for certain changes of tense which are appropriate here in the conclusion.
Deussen proposes to emend to ānanda, ‘bliss,’ in order to have the customary threefold definition of Brahma as sat-cit-ānanda, ‘being, intelligence, and bliss,’ and in order to introduce the great, culminating thought of the chapter.
A very common Vedic phrase for the abode of the gods.
These first four lines are quoted in Maitri 6. 11.
sarvauṣadham, literally ‘consisting of all sorts of herbs.’
The last four lines recur at Maitri 6. 12.
Possibly referring to the Brāhmaṇas, which contain ‘teaching’ concerning the sacrifices.
This theory is controverted at Chānd. 6. 2. 1-2.
Compare the saying ‘A person is a thing well done,’ Ait. 1. 2. 3.
But who really is not a knower. If the reading should be ’ manvānasya in accordance with Śaṅkara, then ‘. . . the fear of one who knows, but who is unthinking.’
A very similar stanza is Kaṭha 6. 3.
Similar hierarchies of bliss leading up to the bliss of Brahma occur at Bṛih. 4. 3. 33 K and Śat. Br. 14. 7. 1. 31-39 (= Bṛih. 4. 3. 31-39 M). Other gradations of worlds up to the world of Brahma occur at Bṛih. 3. 6. 1 and Kaush. 1. 3.
That is, in the self there are various selves, but the true knower must advance to the highest self.
This stanza has already occurred in 2. 4, with a verbal change in the last line.
Or, ‘What good have I failed to do! What evil have I done!’
Another course of instruction to Bhṛigu by his father Varuṇa occurs at Śat. Br. 11. 6. 1. 1-13.
That is, for the giver.
An incantation described in Ait. Br. 8. 28. A philosophical interpretation of ‘dying around Brahma’ occurs at Kaush. 2. 12.
The word bhrātrvya, ‘foes,’ is of sociological significance, because etymologically it means ‘cousin (father’s brother’s son).’
A phrase occurring more than once in both RV. and AV., e.g. RV. 10. 61. 19 and AV. 6. 122. 1.
Instead of meaning ‘here’ adverbially (as very frequently in the Brāhmaṇas and sometimes in the Upanishads), idam may be the neuter demonstrative with an ellipsis, thus: ‘Verily, this [universe] in the beginning was Ātman (Soul), one only, . . . .’ This sentence stands also at the beginning of Bṛih. 1. 4. 1.
Skt. arṇava: etymologically ‘the moving,’ ‘the stirring,’ ‘the agitated’; specifically, simply ‘sea,’ as in Chānd. 8. 5. 3, 4.
Reading api prajanīhi, instead of the (otherwise unquotable) compound abhiprajanīhi —according to Bohtlingk’s emendation in his translation, p. 166. This change brings the form of the question into uniformity with the similar question in § 1.
āvayat, imperfect causative of √av; exactly like the annam āvayat, ‘he consumed food’ of RV. 10. 113. 8, and also like AV. 4. 6. 3; 5. 19. 2; VS. 21. 44; Śat. Br. 1. 6. 3. 5; 5. 5. 4. 6. Possible, but unparalleled, would be the derivation from ā + √vī, ‘he overtook.’ An etymologizing on vāyu.
Probably accompanied with a deictic gesture.
That is, the sagittal suture; or perhaps less specifically ‘the crown.’
Śaṅkara explains that the right eye is the abode during the waking state, the inner mind ( antar-manas ) during dreaming sleep, the space of the heart ( hṛdayākāśa ) during profound sleep ( suṣupti ). He offers the alternative that the three abodes are ‘the body of one’s father,’ ‘the womb of one’s mother,’ and ‘one’s own body.’ Sāyaṇa and Ānandagiri understand the three abodes as ‘the right eye,’ ‘the throat,’ ‘the heart.’ With whatever significance, it would seem that the three demonstratives of the text must have been accompanied by explanatory pointings to certain parts of the body.
The three conditions of sleep (together with a fourth) are mentioned in the Māṇḍūkya Upanished even as they are explained by the commentators on this passage. It is in contrast with the desired condition of the metaphysically awakened self that the ordinary condition of waking is regarded as ‘sleep.’
Or, ‘What here would desire to speak of another?’ However, for this construction the neuter subject and the masculine object do not seem quite congruous. Or, ‘Why (or, how) here would one desire to speak of another?’ Or again, kim may be simply the interrogative particle: ‘Would one here desire to speak of another?’ In addition to these uncertainties of syntax, the form of the verb causes difficulty. Vāvadiṣat seems to contain unmistakable elements of the intensive and of the desiderative conjugations of √vad, ‘speak’; yet as it stands it is utterly anomalous. The Indian commentators furnish no help to a solution. BR. (vol. 6, column 650) proposes to emend to vāvadisyat, the future of the intensive. Bohtlingk, in his translation, pp. 169, 170, emends to vāva diśet, ‘(to see) whether anything here would point to another [than it].’ And in a note there he reports Delbrück’s conjecture, vivadiṣat, the participle of the desiderative, which would yield the translation: ‘What is there here desiring to speak of another?’ Deussen somehow finds a reflexive: ‘What wishes to explain itself here as one different [from me]?’
In spite of the verbal difficulties, the meaning of the passage is fairly intelligible: it is a pictorial statement of a philosophical idealism (i. e. that there is naught else than spirit) bordering on solipsism (i. e. that there is naught else than the individual self).
This phrase occurs verbatim in Bṛih. 4. 2. 2; Ait. Br. 3. 33 end; 7. 30 end; and almost verbatim in Śat. Br. 6. 1. 1. 2, 11.
That is, the Ātman, the subject of the entire previous part of this Upanishad. Or ayam may denote the indefinite ‘one,’ as probably in the last sentence of this paragraph.
The words asya prathamaṁ janma may denote either ‘his (i. e. the Self’s) first birth’ or ‘a self’s first birth (as a particular individual).’ Either interpretation is possible according to pantheistic theory.
Or perhaps ‘In that ( yat ) . . . .’
Quoted from RV. 4. 27. 1. In the original Rig-Veda passage (as indeed in every other of the three occurrences of the same compound in the Rig-Veda, 1. 34. 2b, 1. 164. 18b, and 10. 17. 5a) the preposition anu seems to have served no more than to strengthen the force of the verb ‘know.’ As such, it is translated here by ‘well’ (in accordance with Grassmann’s Worterbuch, BR., and MW. ) Yet it would be very possible—indeed, probable—that to the author of this Upanishad, who quotes the ancient passage as scriptural corroboration of his theory of various buths, that word anu conveyed a larger significance than it was originally intended to express. In accordance with its general meaning of ‘along toward’ he might understand it to intimate pregnantly that even from the embryonic stage the seer ‘fore-knew,’ anu-vid, all the births of the gods [of the various gods—be it noted—here applied to the successive births of the individual soul, ātman, from father to son]. As to such fine distinctions of meaning to be carefully observed in the prepositional compounds with verbs in the Upanishads, Professor Whitney (in his article on ‘The Upanishads and their Latest Translation’ in the American Journal of Philology, vol. 7, p. 15) has stated a noteworthy principle: ‘It may be laid down as a rule for the prose of the Brāhmaṇas and Upanishads that every prefix to a verb has its own distinctive value as modifying the verbal idea: if we cannot feel it, our comprehension of the sense is so far imperfect; if we cannot represent it, our translation is so far defective.’
With this consideration concerning the force of anu and with the glaringly wresting interpretation of śyeno in the last line, the present instance as a whole serves well to call attention to the applicability (or non-applicability) of many of the citations in the Upanishads. Frequently passages from the Rig-Veda and from the Atharva-Veda are quoted as containing, in cryptic expressions of deep significance, early corroboration of what is really a later and very different idea. This method of the Upanishads with respect to its prior scriptures is the same method as that employed by the later Hindu commentators on the Upanishads themselves. In the course of the developments of thought this method of interpreting earlier ideas from a larger point of view is very serviceable; practically and pedagogically it may be almost indispensable to the expounder of a philosophy or to the exhorter of a religion; yet by the scholar it is to be carefully discriminated from a historically exact exegesis of the primitive statements.
Reading adha, as in the Rig-Veda passage and in a variant of Śankara. But all editions of the text and of the commentators read adhaḥ, ‘down.’
The interpretation of ayam here is doubtless the same as in the opening sentence of the previous Adhyāya. See note 2 on p. 298.
All the published texts read ’ yam. But Muller and Bohtlingk emend to yam. With this reading and with another grouping of words the entire section might be rendered as forming consecutive queries, thus:
‘[Question:] Who is he whom we worship as the Self (Ātman)? Which one is the Self? [He] whereby one . . . . or . . . . or . . . . the unsweet?’
Then the remainder of the Adhyāya would form the answer.
That is, which one of the two selves previously mentioned? the primeval, universal Self? or the individual self?
Roer and the Bombay editions have here, in addition, rūpam, ‘form.’
Roer and the Bombay editions have here, in addition, śabdam, ‘sound.’
Literally, ‘seeds.’
This item may be a later addition to the other three, which are already similarly classified in Chānd. 6. 3. 1.
Throughout the notes to this Upanishad the character A designates the recension published in the Ānandāśrama Sanskrit Series, and B designates the recension published in the Bibliotheca Indica Series.
Other expositions of this subject occur at Chānd. 5. 3-10 and Bṛih. 6. 2.
Or Gārgyāyaṇi, according to another reading.
That is, as officiating priest.—Com.
So B, abhyāgataṁ; but A has, instead, asīnaṁ, ‘when he was seated.’
So A: putra ’sti; but B has the (less appropriate) reading putro ’si, ‘You are the son of Gautama’ Is there . . .’
Reading aparapakṣeṇa.
In A this item is lacking, and the order of the series is different.
That is, the moon.—Com.
upa-jāyamāna: or perhaps ‘re-born,’ a meaning which is used in the BhG. and MBh.
That is, the year.—Com.
‘This’ = brahma, according to the Com. The idea is perhaps: ‘A person’s life is either unto knowledge of the truth, or unto ignorance.’ Deussen interprets more specifically, with reference to ‘the two paths’ which are being expounded in this chapter, that ‘this’ refers to the devayāna, ‘the path to the gods,’ and ‘the opposite of this’ to the pitryāna, ‘the path to the fathers.’ Bohtlingk makes an ingenious text-emendation: saṁ tad vide ’ham, prati tad vide ’ham, instead of ’saṁ tadvide ’ham, pratitadvide ’ham. But the result, ‘I am conscious of this; I recollect this,’ does not seem as probable as the traditional reading, although that itself does not seem altogether correct. Bohtlingk’s article ‘Bemerkungen zu einigen Upanishaden’ contains on pp. 98-99 a rejoinder to Deussen on this same passage.
Here A adds ‘then to the world of Āditya (the Sun).’
The combined descriptions of the throne and of the couch are very similar to the description of Vrātya’s seat in AV. 15. 3. 3-9, and also of Indra’s throne in Ait. Br. 8. 12.
So B: bhāryāyai retas. A has instead bhāyā ( s ) etad, ‘ . . . produced—from light; thus [I am] the brilliance . . . ’
The passage from the last sentence in the preceding section through this stanza is not found in some manuscripts, is not commented on by Śaṅkarānanda, and therefore is very probably an interpolation.
Such is the order in A; but in B the items about ‘feminine names’ and ‘neuter names’ are transposed.
A variant in both A and B is ghrāṇa, ‘smell.’
The Com. explains āpas as meaning ‘the primary elements.’ But the word very probably has a double significance in this connection; beside its evident meaning, it refers also (though as an artificial plural of √āp ) to the preceding questions, ‘Wherewith do you acquire ( √āp ) . . . ’ The usual Upanishadic conclusion of such a series would very appropriately be formed if the word meant, summarily, ‘acquisitions.’
In A this item about ‘speech’ comes directly after ‘mind.’
This paragraph is lacking in A.
Or, ‘fast upon [the village].’ For the practice of ‘suicide by starvation’ see the article by Prof. Hopkins in JAOS. 21. 146-159, especially p. 159, where this very passage is discussed.
The idea would seem to be: ‘Such (i. e. the same) is true of the non-beggar who knows. Without his begging, however, he too receives.’ But, instead of the ayācatas of B, A has yācitas, i. e. ‘of the beggar.’ Then the idea would seem to be: ‘Such (i. e. as has been described) is the virtue of the beggar. He finally receives. He who knows, however—he, too, finally receives without begging solely because of his knowing.’ With either reading the meaning is not altogether explicit.
See note 4 on page 308.
This phrase is lacking in A.
This word is lacking in B.
The two last alternatives are lacking in B.
From the place of the oblations to the house of the possessor of the object.—Com.
Namely Speech, Breath, Eye, Ear, Mind, and Intelligence—enumerated in the previous section.
This phrase is lacking in B.
This word is lacking in B.
Compare the identification of the Uktha with Prāṇa at Bṛih. 5. 13. 1.
So B, aiṣṭikam; A has instead, aiṣṭakam, ‘that is related to the sacrificial bricks.’
So B. Instead of this sentence, A has: ‘And this is the soul of a person. Thus he becomes a soul who knows this.’
The preceding words of this sentence are lacking in A. That has simply ‘He would worship . . . ’
This probably is the earliest reference to the Indian religious custom of investing the twice-born with a sacred thread to be worn over the left shoulder.—Max Müller ( SBE. 1. 285, note 1).
Thus A: ācamya; B, instead, has ānīya, ‘having fetched.’
The preceding sentence is lacking in A.
This word, vṛttāyām, is lacking in A.
Instead of this phrase harita-trṇe vā praty-asyati, A has harita-trṇābhyāṁ vāk praty-asyati . . ., ‘with two blades of green grass speech casts toward . . . ’
So in B; but in A this stanza reads:—
The meaning of ‘ su-sīmaṁ ’ in the first line is uncertain. sīman, the base of this compound, is used (according to the references in BR. ) to mean either the line of the hair-part or the line of a boundary, i.e. out-line. In the case-form in which the compound occurs in this passage it must needs, apparently, agree with ‘heart’; and its meaning would involve the second-mentioned meaning of the base. Accordingly, in this poetical passage, it is rendered ‘of contour fair.’ This stanza recurs later, though in changed form, at 2. 10—there, as well as here, with variations in A and B. The form in 2. 8 B seems to be quoted (though incompletely and with additional lines) at Pār. Gṛihya Sūtra 1. 11. 9; and the form in 2. 10 A, similarly, at Āśy. Gṛihya Sūtra 1. 13. 7. In all those three other instances the person addressed is different, it being there a wife addressed by her husband, while here the moon by a worshiper. And in the adapted form of the stanza as a whole this particular word also is different: susīme, vocative singular feminine. Its meaning there, accordingly, would seem quite evidently to be ‘O thou (fem.) with fair-parted hair.’ Perhaps for the sake of uniformity with these three other occurrences of the same (adapted) stanza, BR. and BWb. propose to emend here likewise to susīme; and Deussen is inclined to favor this. It is a plausible, but not a necessary, emendation; a derivative compound may possess a double meaning as well as its base, and may be accordant therewith.
= RV. 1. 91. 16 a and 9. 31. 4 a.
= RV. 1. 91. 18 a.
= AV. 7. 81. 6 a with the exception of ādityās for devās; found also in TS. 2. 4. 14. 1 and MS. 4. 9. 27; 4. 12. 2.
The AV. chapter, a line of which was quoted just above, contains also (7. 81. 5) a petition similar to this one.
That is, toward the east, which is the special region of Indra. A instead has daivīṁ, ‘of the gods,’ here as well as in the parallel passage later, 2. 9.
Deussen understands this word to refer to Varuna and Indra, regents of the western and the eastern quarters respectively; and therefore supposes that in this ceremony the worshiper makes a complete turn around from east to west to east, as compared with the half turn from west to east in the previous paragraph. But there A has ‘of the gods’ instead of ‘of Indra,’ and other specifications the same as here. The necessary data for determining are insufficient; the conjecture may be possible for B, but not for A.
This stanza is adapted from 2. 8. Between the moon, which was addressed there, and the wife, who is addressed here and who as the bearer of progeny is pantheistically associated with Prajāpati, the Lord of Progeny, an intermediate connection is made at 2. 9 through the identification of the moon with Prajāpati. For variations in the two forms of the stanza consult page 312, note 6.
Instead of these last two verses according to B, A has
A has, instead, the masculine form of the pronoun.
These directions are incorporated in the Gṛihya Sūtras: Āśvalāyana 1. 15. 3, 9; Pāraskara 1. 16. 18; Khādira 2. 3. 13; Gobhila 2. 8. 21, 22; Āpastamba 6. 15. 12.
So B, abhi-jighret; A has, instead, abhi-mrśet, ‘touch.’ On the ‘sniff-kiss’ see the article by Prof. Hopkins, JAOS. 28. 120-134.
So B: putra nāma. Possibly, however, putranāma; if so, then
‘You are myself, by name my son!’
A has, instead, putra mā vitha:
‘You are myself! You’ve saved me, son!’
This conception accords with the later etymology of son as ‘savior from hell,’ puttra, Mānava Dharma Śāstra 9. 138.
This word ( asau ) is lacking in B.
Or, ‘A Brilliance, son, by name you are!’
This stanza, with ātmā instead of tejas in the third line, occurs in the Mādhyaṁdina recension of Bṛih. at 6. 4. 26 (= Śat. Br. 14. 9. 4. 26) and in Pār. Gṛihya Sūtra 1. 16. 18; with vedas instead of the tejas, it occurs, along with the two following Rig-Veda quotations, in Āśv. Gṛihya Sūtra 1. 15. 3.
This word ( asau ) is lacking in B.
This phrase is lacking in A.
This sentence is lacking in B.
This line = RV. 3. 36. 10 a with asme, ‘us,’ adapted to asmai, ‘him.’
= RV. 2. 21. 6 a.
mā chitthā ( s ) [—A; chetthā ( s )—B]. Compare, in the prayer ‘For some one’s continued life’ at AV. 8. 1. 4, mā chitthā ( s ) asmāl lokād . . .
mā vyathiṣṭhā ( s ). Occurs in BhG. 11. 34.
Compare a somewhat similar passage in Ait. Br. 8. 28 entitled ‘The Dying around Brahma,’ where also the wind is the ultimate in the regression of these same five phenomena (though in inverse order).
So A. B has the less appropriate diśas, ‘regions of heaven.’
That is, the Vindhyas and the Himālayas respectively.
Other accounts of the same allegory occur in Bṛih. 6. 1. 1-14; Chānd. 5. 1; and Kaush. 3. 3.
The words ‘not breathing, dry’ are lacking in A.
A has, instead, lokād, ‘world.’
So B: vāyu-praviṣṭa; but A has, instead, vāyu-pratiṣṭha, ‘established on the wind.’
The previous phrase is lacking in A.
The words ‘of all beings’ are lacking in B.
Another account of a ‘father-to-son transmission’ is found in Bṛih. 1. 5. 17-20.
So B: pitā śete. But A has, instead, svayam śyete. According to this reading, what was in the other reading a man verb is lost; and the sentences must be reconstructed: ‘A father . . . summons his son, having strewn . . . , having built . . . , having set down . . . dish, wrapped . . . garment, himself in white. The son, . . . ’
If the elision is of a locative, putre, instead of a nominative, putras, then without a grammatical impossibility (though with less probability as being an exceptional usage) the sentence might mean: ‘Upon the son when he comes (or, Upon the son’s coming) he lies . . . ’
So B; but A has, instead, ‘. . . sit in front of him.’
This word here designates ‘breath’ as ‘the function of smell,’ rather than as ‘the breath of life.’
This item of the series is lacking in A; but see next note.
So B; A has, instead, dhivo vijñātavyani kāmān, ‘thoughts, what is to be understood, and desires’—items which occur in a partially similar series in 1. 7.
This whole sentence is lacking in A.
This word, prāṅ, is lacking in B.
Here A has, in addition, ‘food to eat.’
pari + √vraj.
That is, with obsequies. Understood thus, the subject of the verb is indefinite; and the object is ‘the deceased father.’ Possibly (though less probably, it would seem), ‘the prāṇas of the father’ are intended as the subject; and the son is intended as the object—Deussen’s interpretation. The reading of A gives yet another meaning: ‘According as he [i.e. the father] furnishes him [i.e. the son], so ought he to be furnished—so ought he to be furnished.’
A has, instead, ‘a boon I would give you!’
This exploit of Indra’s is referred to at RV. 10. 8. 8, 9; 10. 99. 6; Śat. Br. 1. 2. 3. 2; 12. 7. 1. 1. Further accounts of this conflict between Indra and Viśvarūpa, as the son of Tvashtṛi is called, occur at Tait. Saṁhitā 2. 5. 1. 1 ff.; Śat. Br. 1. 6. 3. 1, 2; 5. 5. 4. 2, 3; and Kāthaka 12, 10 (cited in Weber’s Indische Studien, 3. 464).
The foregoing exploits of Indra are mentioned at Ait. Br. 7. 28.
Or, Prahrāda, a chief of the Asuras.
A troop of demons.
A tribe of Asuras.
Weber has an extensive discussion concerning the meaning of the foregoing names and the identity of the personages, together with numerous relevant literary references, in his Indische Studien, 1. 410-418.
This word, cana, is lacking in B.
That is, ‘he does not become pale.’
Professor Deussen’s note on this sentence ( Sechzig Upanishads, p. 44, note 1) is an acute and concise interpretation of the general Upanishadic theory: ‘Whoever has attained the knowledge of the Ātman and his unity with it, and thereby has been delivered from the illusion of individual existence, his good and evil deeds come to nought; they are no longer his deeds, simply because he is no longer an individual.’
So A. But B has, instead, prajñātmānam; accordingly the sentences must be reconstructed thus: ‘I am the breathing spirit ( prāṇa ). Reverence me as the intelligential self, as life, . . .’
This sentence is lacking in B.
So B; but A has, instead, ‘yonder.’
‘The Recitation of Praise’ in the ritual. The same identification occurs also at Bṛih. 5. 13. 1.
That is, ‘it is in (the individual) conscious spirit that all facts are obtained.’ This compact expression might possibly be understood to summarize the earlier practical teaching that ‘in Prāṇa a knower thereof obtains all things’; and also, pregnantly, the teaching (both earlier and later in this Upanishad) that ‘in the conscious Self all things do obtain [both ontologically and ethically—‘obtain’ being used in its intransitive meaning].’
This sentence is lacking in B.
The preceding three paragraphs (which have already occurred in this section) are lacking in A.
A has here in addition: ‘When he awakens—as from a blazing fire sparks would disperse in all directions, even so from this self the vital breaths disperse to their respective stations; from the vital breaths, the sense-powers; from the sense-powers, the worlds.’ But in the present context this sentence seems to be an inapt refrain from the previous paragraph.
So A: abhivisrjate.
So B: asmin.
On this word see p. 322, n. 2, above.
The previous sentence is lacking in B.
A has here, instead, ‘intelligence ( prajñā ).’
A has here, in addition, ‘what is to be understood ( vijñātavyam ).’
A has here, instead, dhī, ‘thought.’
A has here, in addition, ‘what is to be understood and desired.’
These singular forms of A seem preferable to the dual forms of the readings in B; similarly in the third sentence following, about ‘feet.’ Accordingly, the speaker in all these direct quotations is to be understood as indefinite rather than as the particular organ mentioned.
So B; but A has, instead, ‘the knower of form.’
So A: sarveśa; but B has, instead, lokeśa, ‘world-lord.’
Another narration of the same dialogue occurs at Bṛih. 2. 1.
Adopting the reading satvan-matsyeṣu in agreement with BR. s.v., Weber ( Indische Studien, 1. 419), and Deussen.
The modern Benares.
A king famed for his great knowledge.
This entire paragraph is lacking in some manuscripts. It is merely a list of clue-words summarizing the following conversation.
This phrase is lacking in B.
A has here, instead, ‘of brilliance.’
A inverts the order of sections from B.
Instead of the following portion of this paragraph, A has: ‘Neither he nor his offspring moves on ( pra-vartate ) before the time.’
So B: vā’ anyeṣu; but A has, instead, evā ’nv eṣa, ‘. . . , such a one in consequence becomes a vanquisher indeed.’
So B: tejasas; but A has, instead, ‘of name.’
Instead of this word, A has ‘the echo.’
That is, his wife.
In offspring.—Com.
Instead of this phrase, A has: ‘The sound that follows a person—that indeed . . .’
Strictly ‘the breath of life’; but A has, instead, āyu, ‘life,’ strictly ‘the duration of life.’ In either recension the conception of life seems to imply an active response to, and correspondence with, environment.
A has here, in addition, ‘neither he nor his offspring.’
Instead of this phrase, A has: ‘Him who is this shadow-person—.’
A has here, in addition, ‘neither he nor his offspring.’
A inverts the order from B.
A has here, instead, ‘This intelligent self whereby a person here, asleep . . .’
The following part of this sentence is lacking in A.
A has here, instead, ‘name.’
The sign of suppliant pupilship.
So B: manye; but A has, instead, syāt, ‘would be.’
prati-loma, literally ‘against the hair.’
This last word is lacking in B.
A has, instead, ‘of the heart.’
In A the previous sentence is lacking, and § 20 begins at this point.
For a discussion of the exact meaning of this phrase consult the foot-note to the parallel passage in Bṛih. 1. 4. 7.
This name of the Upanished is taken from its first word kena, ‘by whom.’ It is also known as the Talavakāra, the name of the Brāhmaṇa of the Sāma-Veda to which the Upanishad in one of its recensions belongs.
The first two and a half lines of this second stanza seem to form a direct answer to the query of the first stanza. But their metrical structure is irregular; that would be improved by the omission of sa u, ‘as also.’ And—more seriously—the grammatical structure of the phrases is apparently impossible; one phrase is certainly in the nominative, one certainly in the accusative, the other three might be construed as either. Moreover, in each of the five phrases it is the same word that is repeated (as in a similar passage at Bṛih. 4. 4. 18); accordingly, a strictly literal rendering of them would be, ‘the ear of the ear, the mind of the mind, the speech of speech, the breath of breath, the eye of the eye.’ However, very frequently in the Upanishads these words for the five ‘vital breaths’ are used either for the abstract function or for the concrete instrument of the function. Here, more evidently than in many places, the connotation seems to be double. But at Chānd. 8. 12. 4 and Ait. 2. 4 the distinction between the function and its sense organ is clearly conceived.
3 g and h recur, with slight variation, as Īśā 10 c and d, and Īśā 13 c and d.
Both renderings of the verse are permissible, and both are in harmony with the theory which is being expounded.
Or, ‘That with which one sees the eyes.’
What has been translated as two sentences might also be construed as one sentence, still a part of the teacher’s reproof to the undiscerning pupil:—‘So then I think that what is “known” by you is [still] to be pondered upon indeed.’
Perhaps ‘power [to know]; and with the knowledge [thus gained] one finds . . . .’
With a slight variation this line is found also at Bṛih. 4. 4. 14 b.
The Kena Upanishad consists of two quite distinct parts. The prose portion, §§ 14-34, is evidently the simpler and earlier. The portion §§ 1-13 (all in verse, except § 9) contains much more elaborated doctrine and would seem to be later in date of composition.
An account of the victory of the gods over the demons (Asuras) occurs at Bṛih. 1. 3. 1-7.
Meaning either ‘All-knower’ or ‘All-possessor.’
Com. allegorizes her as ‘Knowledge,’ who dispels Indra’s ignorance. In later mythology Umā is an epithet, along with Durgā, Kālī, and Pārvatī, for the wife of Śiva; and she is represented as living with him in the Himālayas. Weber, Indische Studien, 2. 186-190, has an extended discussion of the identity of this personage and of the divinities in this passage in their significance for later mythological and sectarian developments.
Deussen translates the word abhīkṣṇaṁ differently, and consequently interprets this section and the preceding very differently.
A mystical designation. Compare a similar compound at Chānd. 3. 14. 1, tajja-lan.
So the Com. interprets jyeye. Max Müller and Deussen would emend to ajyeye, ‘unconquerable.’
The narrative and dialogue at the opening of this Upanishad seem to be taken—with some variation, but with some identical language—from the earlier Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa, 3. 11. 8. 1-6. The old tradition of Naciketas in the realm of Death being in a position to return to earth with knowledge of the secret of life after death, is here used to furnish a dramatic setting for the exposition which forms the body of the Upanishad.
This line is found at Bṛih. 4. 4. 11 a K verbatim; with variant in the first word, at Īśā 3 a and Bṛih. 4. 4. 11 a M.
That is, Naciketas voluntarily offers himself in order to fulfil the vow which his father was paying so grudgingly. Thereupon the father, in anger at the veiled reproof, exclaims: ‘Oh! go to Hades!’
As in the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa narrative.
śāntim tasya; both words probably with a double significance, ‘extinguishment of fire’ and ‘appeasement of the Brahman’ by bringing water.
A Vedic epithet of Yama (Death).
śūnrtām, according to a strict etymology, might mean ‘good fellowship.’
If derived from √iṣ (instead of from √yaj ), iṣṭāpūrte might possibly (though less probably) mean ‘wishes and fulfilment.’
As it stands, prasrṣṭaḥ is nominative and must agree with the subject, ‘Auddālaki Āruṇi.’ But in such a connection it is hardly applicable; and in the previous stanza it was used with reference to Naciketas. To relieve the difficulty Bohtlingk (in his translation of the Kaṭha, Aitareya, and Praśna Upanishads, Berichte uber die Verhandlungen der Koniglich Sachsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, philologisch-historische Classe, 1890, pp. 127-197), p. 132, emends to prasrṣṭe, i. e. ‘toward one from me dismissed’; and Whitney (in his ‘Translation of the Katha Upanishad’ in the Transactions of the American Philological Association, 21. 88-112), p. 94, emends to prasrṣṭaṁ, and translates: ‘be cheerful [toward thee], sent forth by me.’ Śaṅkara solves the difficulty by giving the word a sense, ‘authorized,’ which is quite different from what it evidently has in the previous stanza.
That is, both death and old age.
Śaṅkara explains these as ‘father, mother, and teacher.’
Namely, ‘sacrifice, study of the scriptures, and alms-giving.’
brahma-ja-jña perhaps is a synonym of jāta-vedas, ‘the All-knower,’ a common epithet of Agni (Fire, here specialized as the Naciketas sacrifice-fire).
īdya, a very common Vedic epithet of Agni (Fire).
nicāyya may carry a double meaning here, i. e. also ‘by building [it, i. e. the Naciketas-fire].’
Half of the third line and the fourth line recur at Śvet. 4. 11.
Stanzas 16-18 are not quite apt here. They may be an irrelevant interpolation—as previous translators have suggested.
The word sṛnkā occurs nowhere else in the language—so far as has been reported—than in 1. 16 and here. Its meaning is obscure and only conjectural. Śaṅkara glosses it differently in the two places, here as ‘way.’
This stanza recurs with unimportant variants in Maitri 7. 9.
With a variation, this stanza recurs in Muṇḍ. 1. 2. 8; similarly in Maitri 7. 9.
That is, death, the great transition, mentioned at 1. 29.
With different grouping of words the first two lines may also mean:
That is, the Ātman is to be obtained only by a superior person, as is stated in Muṇḍ. 3. 2. 4.
Or perhaps, ‘. . . [because] being considered manifoldly,’ i. e. by the inferior man the Ātman is falsely ‘conceived of as a plurality,’ while in reality He is absolute unity.
Either (1) by another than an inferior man, i. e. by a proficient understander, or (2) by another than oneself, i. e. by some teacher.
Or perhaps ‘work.’
The word drṣṭvā is superfluous both logically and metrically.
Here, in contrast with the latter half of the line, the idea of dharma may be philosophical: i. e. ‘the qualified.’ In the next stanza it is certainly ethical.
Compare Muṇd. 3. 2. 4 d: ‘Into his Brahma-abode [i. e. that of a person qualified to receive Him] this Ātman enters.’ See also Chānd. 8. 1. 1.
Śaṅkara and all translators except Deussen regard the previous section as an utterance by Naciketas. Instead of assigning so pregnant an inquiry to a pupil still being instructed, the present distribution of the parts of this dialogue interprets it (in agreement with Deussen) as continued exposition, rhetorically put in the form of an interrogation by the teacher himself.
The word pada here doubtless is pregnant with some other of its meanings (twenty-two in all enumerated by Apte in his Sanskrit-English Dictionary ), particularly ‘way,’ ‘place,’ ‘goal,’ or ‘abode.’
The ideas and some of the language of this stanza recur in BhG. 8. 11.
The word akṣaram here may also be pregnant with the meaning ‘imperishable’ (Apte gives fourteen meanings in all). Thus:—
The word brahma ( n ) here may contain some of its liturgical meaning, ‘sacred word,’ as well as the philosophical meaning ‘Brahma.’ Thus:—
This stanza recurs with slight verbal variation in Maitri 6. 4.
Substantially this stanza is identical with BhG. 2. 20.
Substantially this stanza is identical with BhG. 2. 19.
This is an important passage, as being the first explicit statement of the doctrine of Grace ( prasāda ). The idea is found earlier in the celebrated Hymn of the Word (Vāc), RV. 10. 125. 5 c, d, and again in Muṇḍ. 3. 2. 3 c, d. This same stanza occurs with slight verbal variation as Śvet. 3. 20 and Mahānārāyaṇa Upanishad 8. 3 (= Taittirīya Āranyaka 10. 10. 1).
Inasmuch as this method of salvation ‘through the grace of the Creator’ is directly opposed to the general Upanishadic doctrine of salvation ‘through knowledge,’ Śaṅkara interprets dhātuh prasādāt as dhātu-samprasādāt, ‘through the tranquillity of the senses,’ according to the practice of the Yoga-method. There is this possibility of different interpretation of the word prasāda; for it occurs unquestionably in the sense of ‘tranquillity’ at Maitri 6. 20 and 6. 34; compare also the compounds jñāna-prasāda, ‘the peace of knowledge,’ at Muṇḍ. 3. 1. 8, and varṇa-prasāda, ‘clearness of complexion,’ at Śvet. 2. 13. In the Bhagavad Gīta there is the same double use:—‘peace’ or ‘tranquillity,’ at 2. 64; 2. 65; 18. 37, and ‘the grace of Kṛishṇa,’ at 18. 56; 18. 58; 18. 62; 18. 73; and ‘the grace of Vyāsa,’ at 18. 75.
The development of the doctrine of ‘salvation by grace’ by the Vishnuites proceeds through the Epic, culminating in the sharp controversy against this ‘Cat-doctrine’ by the ‘Monkey-doctrine’ of ‘salvation by works.’ Compare Hopkins, Religions of India, pp. 500, 501.
This stanza = Muṇḍ. 3. 2. 3.
The last line of this stanza = RV. 1. 22. 20 a, and also, with a slight change, RV. 1. 154. 5 d.
The commentators interpret ‘boons’ as referring to ‘teachers.’ But the word may imply ‘answers to your questions.’
madhv-ad, literally ‘honey-eater,’ i. e. the empirical self.
This stanza contains an ungrammatical form and impossible constructions. The text here, as also in § 7, is probably corrupt. The reference here is probably to the Sānkhyan Purusha, Person.
Traditionally interpreted as Prakriti, Nature.
This stanza = SV. 1. 2. 3. 7, and also, with slight variation, RV. 3. 29. 2.
With slight variation in line c this stanza = Bṛih. 1. 5. 23. Lines a and b also = AV. 10. 18. 16a, b.
Lines c and d = Bṛih. 4. 4. 19c, d.
Lines a and b = Bṛih. 4. 4. 19a, b with a verbal variation.
That is, the body, with its eleven orifices: two eyes, two ears, two nostrils, mouth, the two lower orifices, the navel, and the sagittal suture ( vidṛti —Ait. 3. 12). By the omission of the last two, the body is conceived of as a nine-gated city at Śvet. 3. 18 and BhG. 5. 13.
With the omission of the last word this stanza = RV. 4. 40. 5; exactly as here it = VS. 10. 24; 12. 14; TS. 3. 2. 10. 1; Śat. Br. 6. 7. 3. 11.
That is, in the middle of the body, and the devās are the bodily powers (or ‘senses,’ as not infrequently), according to Śaṅkara’s interpretation.
Line d = 4. 3 d.
As in 5. 3 a, b.
The last four lines recur again as 6. 1. c-f.
This stanza = Muṇḍ. 2. 2. 10 and Śvet. 6. 14.
This same simile of the world as an eternal fig-tree growing out of Brahma is further elaborated in BhG. 15. 1-3.
These last four lines = 5. 8. c-f.
A very similar stanza is in Tait. 2. 8.
The reading svargeṣu instead of sargeṣu would yield the more suitable meaning ‘in the heavenly worlds.’ At best, the stanza contradicts the general theory that perception of the Ātman produces release from reincarnation immediately after death. Consequently Śaṅkara supplies an ellipsis which changes the meaning entirely, and Max Muller hesitatingly inserts a ‘not’ in the first line. The present translation interprets the meaning that the degree of perception of the Ātman in the present world determines one’s reincarnate status.
These two lines recur at Śvet. 4. 20 a, b.
These two lines recur at Śvet. 3. 13 c, d and 4. 17 c, d.
Quoted in Maitri 6. 30.
Literally ‘yoking’; both a ‘yoking,’ i. e. subduing, of the senses; and also a ‘yoking,’ i. e. a ‘joining’ or ‘union,’ with the Supreme Spirit.
apramatta, a technical Yoga term.
Perhaps, of ‘the world’ of beings and experiences—here too, as in Mānḍ. 6, where the phrase occurs. That is ‘the world’ becomes created for the person when he emerges from the Yoga state, and passes away when he enters into it. Or perhaps the translation should be ‘an arising and a passing away’: i. e. is transitory—according to Śankara.
The same thought of the incomprehensibility of the ultimate occurs at Kena 3 a, b, and Muṇḍ. 3. 1. 8 a, b.
That is, both the affirmable, ‘He is’ and the absolutely non-affirmable ‘No! No!’ neti, neti of Bṛih. 2. 3. 6; both ‘being’ ( sad ) and ‘non-being’ ( asad ) of Muṇḍ. 2. 2. 1 d and Praśna 2. 5 d. Śankara interprets ‘both’ as referring to the ‘conditioned’ and the ‘unconditioned’ Brahma.
This stanza is found also at Bṛih. 4. 4. 7 a.
This stanza is found also at Chānd. 8. 6. 6. Cf. also Kaush. 4. 19 and Bṛih. 4. 2. 3.
So called from its first word; or sometimes ‘Īśāvāsyam’ from its first two words; or sometimes the ‘Vājasaneyi-Saṁhitā Upanishad’ from the name of the recension of the White Yajur-Veda of which this Upanishad forms the final, the fortieth, chapter.
Compare the persons called ‘devilish,’ āsura, at Chānd. 8. 8. 5. A variant reading here (accordant with a literalism interpreted in the following line) is a-sūrya, ‘sunless.’
The word nāma here might mean ‘certainly’ instead of ‘called.’
This idea is in sharp contrast with the doctrine of Kaṭha 2. 19 d (and BhG. 2. 19), where it is stated that ‘he [i.e. the Self] slays not, is not slain.’ The word ātma-han here, of course, is metaphorical, like ‘smother,’ ‘stifle,’ ‘completely suppress.’
The whole stanza is a variation of Bṛih. 4. 4. 11.
So Com. But apas may refer, cosmogonically, to ‘the [primeval] waters.’
The very same ideas as in this stanza, though not all the same words, recur at BhG. 13. 15 a, b, d.
This universal presence is claimed by Kṛishṇa for himself at BhG. 6. 30 a, b.
The indefinite word tatas may mean ‘from these beings,’ or ‘from this Self,’ or ‘from this time on,’ or pregnantly all these.—The whole line recurs at Bṛih. 4. 4. 15 d; Kaṭha 4. 5 d, 4. 12 d.
This stanza is identical with Bṛih. 4. 4. 10.
The point here made is that both knowledge and lack of knowledge are inadequate for apprehending the Ultimate.
A somewhat more concrete, and perhaps earlier, form of this stanza occurs as Kena 3 e-h.
This stanza occurs again in Maitri 7. 9.
The sun.
For the petitioner (who calls himself ‘ satya-dharma ’) to see through; or ‘For Him whose law is Truth (or, true) to be seen,’ [as, e. g., for Savitṛi in RV. 10. 34. 8; 10. 139. 3; or the Unknown Creator, RV. 10. 121. 9; VS. 10. 103; or Agni, RV. 1. 12. 7]; or, ‘For that [neuter] which has the Real as its nature [or, essence; or, law] to be seen.’
These lines occur with slight variations at Maitri 6. 35 and Bṛih. 5. 15. 1.
According to this translation the idea is entirely honorific of the effulgence of the sun. Or, with a different grouping of words, the meaning might possibly be the petition: ‘Spread apart thy rays [that I may enter through the sun (as well as see through—according to the previous petition) into the Real; then] gather [thy rays together again, as normal]. The brilliance which is thy fairest form, . . .’ At best the passage is of obscure mystical significance.
This formula recurs at Bṛih. 5. 15. The idea that at death the several parts of microcosmic man revert to the corresponding elements of the macrocosm is expressed several times in Sanskrit literature. With the specific mention here, compare ‘his spirit ( ātman ) to the wind ( vāta )’ in the Cremation Hymn, RV. 10. 16. 3a; ‘with his breath ( prāna ) to wind ( vāyu ),’ Śat Br. 10. 3. 3. 8; ‘his breath ( prāna ) to wind ( vāta ), Bṛih. 3. 2. 13; and even of the sacrificial animal, ‘its breath ( prāna ) to wind ( vāta ), Ait. Br. 2. 6.
Compare the statement in Chānd. 3. 14. 1, ‘Now, verily, a person consists of purpose ( kratu-maya ).’
Other prayers for freedom from sin ( enas, compare also āgas ) are at RV. 1. 24. 9 d; 3. 7. 10 d; 7. 86. 3 a, 4 d; 7. 88. 6 c; 7. 89. 5 c, d; 7. 93. 7 c, d; 8. 67 (56). 17; 10. 35. 3 a, c; 10. 37. 12; AV. 6 97. 2 d; 6. 115. 1, 2, 3; 6. 116. 2, 3; 6. 117; 6. 118; 6. 119; 6. 120.
This stanza is identical with RV. 1. 189. 1, and the second line also with AV. 4. 39. 10 b.
The very same knowledge which Yājñavalkya declared to Maitreyī, Bṛih. 2. 4. 5 (end).
Cf. Maitri 6. 22.
The six subsidiary Vedāṅgas, ‘Limbs-of-the-Vedas,’ later elaborated as explanatory of the Vedas.
A Sanskrit idiom for the modern term ‘individuality.’
A variant reading is viśva-rucī, ‘All-gleaming.’
Cf. ‘the seven-rayed Fire’ in RV. 1. 146. 1. Seven was an early sacrosanct number.
That is, the four Vedas, each including Saṁhitā, Brāhmaṇa, and Sutra, and in addition the six Vedāṅgas which are enumerated at Muṇḍ. 1. 1. 5.
With slight variation = Kaṭha 2. 5. and Maitri 7. 9.
Cf. ‘the uncreated Brahma-world,’ Chānd. 8. 13.
The token of pupilship.
That is, the world of the fathers, and the world of the gods, respectively; described in Chānd. 5. 10.
Śaṅkara explains these seven prāna as the seven organs of sense in the head (i. e. two eyes, two ears, two nostrils, and the mouth). They are compared to seven different sacrificial oblations. The enlightenments produced by their activity are the flames of the sacrifice; the objects which supply their action, the fuel. Each sense moves in an appropriate world of its own; but they are all co-ordinated by the mind ( manas ), which is located in the heart. These same seven flames are probably referred to in Praśna 3. 5, end. Compare the seven flames of the regular sacrifices named at Muṇd. 1. 2. 4.
With a double meaning, doubtless, in accordance with the great thought of metaphysical knowledge which is here being expounded. Besides being derivable from √vyadh, ‘to penetrate,’ viddhi means also ‘know.’
That is, ‘in the body,’ as in Chānd. 8. 1. 1.
From saṁ-ni-√dhā, with the same meaning as in Praśna 3. 4.
This stanza = Katha 5. 15 and Śvet. 6. 14.
This stanza is quoted from RV. 1. 164. 20; repeated at Śvet. 4. 6. Compare also Kaṭha 3. 1.
Repeated at Śvet. 4. 7.
The first three lines of this stanza are quoted at Maitri 6. 18.
As in Chānd. 7. 25. 2.
This stanza recurs at Kaṭha 2. 23.
That is, of the microcosm back into the macrocosm. Cf. Praśna 6. 5.
The Sanskrit idiom for ‘individuality.’
In the title to his Latin translation, ‘Oupnekhat,’ Anquetil Duperron set this sentence evidently as the summary of the contents of the Upanishads: ‘Quisquis Deum intelligit, Deus fit,’ ‘whoever knows God, becomes God.’
Identified with Prāṇa, ‘Life,’ in Praśna 2. 11. The reference, then, is probably to the mystical Prāṇāgnihotra sacrifice, in which ‘breath’ is symbolically sacrificed for an Agnihotra ceremony.
Śaṅkara explains this as ‘carrying fire on the head—a well-known Vedic vow among followers of the Atharva-Veda.’ But it is more likely to be ‘shaving the head,’ as Buddhist monks did later. This preliminary requisite to the study of the Upanishad doubtless gave it the title ‘The Shaveling Upanishad,’ or ‘The Upanishad of the Tonsured.’
That is, Question Upanishad.