-all for the glory of that syllable. The threefold knowledge (the sacrifice) proceeds by the greatness of that syllable (the vital breaths), and by its essence (the oblations) 1.

10. Now therefore it would seem to follow, that both he who knows this (the true meaning of the syllable Om), and he who does not, perform the same sacrifice2. But this is not so, for knowledge and ignorance are different. The sacrifice which a man performs with knowledge, faith, and the Upanishad is more powerful. This is the full

account of the syllable Om.

1 These are allusions to sacrificial technicalities, all intended to show the importance of the syllable Om, partly as a mere word, used at the sacrifices, partly as the mysterious name of the Highest Self. As every priest at the Soma-sacrifices, in which three classes of priests are always engaged, has to begin his part of the ceremonial with Om, therefore the whole sacrifice is said to be dependent on the syllable Om, and to be for the glory of that syllable, as an emblem of the Highest Self, a knowledge of whom is the indirect result of all sacrifices. The greatness of the syllable Om is explained by the vital breaths of the priest, the sacrificer, and his wife; its essence by rice, corn, &c., which constitute the oblations. Why breath and food are due to the syllable Om is explained by the sacrifice, which is dependent on that syllable, ascending to the sun, the sun sending rain, rain producing food, and food producing breath and life.

2 He who simply pronounces the syllable Om as part of his recitation at a sacrifice, and he who knows the hidden meaning of that syllable, both may perform the same sacrifice. But that performed by the latter is more powerful, because knowledge is better than ignorance. This is, as usual, explained by some comparisons. It is true that both he who knows the quality of the harîtakî and he who does not, are purged alike if they take it. But on the other hand, if a jeweller and a mere clod sell a precious stone, the knowledge of the former bears better fruit than the ignorance of the latter.

• Upanishad is here explained by yoga, and yoga by devatâdivishayam upâsanam, meditation directed to certain deities. More

SECOND KHANDA 1.

1. Whent he Devas and Asuras 2 struggled together, both of the race of Pragâpati, the Devas took the udgitha (Om), thinking they would vanquish the Asuras with it.

3

3

2. They meditated on the udgitha (Om) as the breath (scent) in the nose, but the Asuras pierced it (the breath) with evil. Therefore we smell by the breath in the nose both what is goodsmelling and what is bad-smelling. For the breath was pierced by evil.

3. Then they meditated on the udgîtha (Om) as speech, but the Asuras pierced it with evil. Therefore we speak both truth and falsehood. For speech is pierced by evil.

4. Then they meditated on the udgîtha (Om) as the eye, but the Asuras pierced it with evil. There

likely, however, it refers to this very upanishad, i.e. to the udgîthavidyâ, the doctrine of the secret meaning of Om, as here explained.

1 A very similar story is told in the Brihad-âranyaka I, 1, 3, 1. But though the coincidences between the two are considerable, amounting sometimes to verbal identity, the purport of the two seems to be different. See Vedânta-sûtra III, 3, 6.

2 Devas and Asuras, gods and demons, are here explained by the commentator as the good and evil inclinations of man; Pragâpati as man in general.

3

Udgîtha stands, according to the commentator, for the sacrificial act to be performed by the Udgâtri, the Sâma-veda priest, with the udgîtha hymns; and as these sacrificial acts always form part of the Gyotish/oma &c., these great Soma-sacrifices are really intended. In the second place, however, the commentator takes udgîtha in the sense of Udgâtri, the performer of the udgîtha, which is or was by the Devas thought to be the breath in the nose. I have preferred to take udgîtha in the sense of Om, and all that is implied by it.

They asked that breath should recite the udgîtha. Comm.

fore we see both what is sightly and unsightly. For the eye is pierced by evil.

5. Then they meditated on the udgîtha (Om) as the ear, but the Asuras pierced it with evil. Therefore we hear both what should be heard and what should not be heard. For the ear is pierced by evil.

6. Then they meditated on the udgitha (Om) as the mind, but the Asuras pierced it with evil. Therefore we conceive both what should be conceived and what should not be conceived. the mind is pierced by evil.

For

7. Then comes this breath (of life) in the mouth'. They meditated on the udgîtha (Om) as that breath. When the Asuras came to it, they were scattered, as (a ball of earth) would be scattered when hitting a solid stone.

8. Thus, as a ball of earth is scattered when hitting on a solid stone, will he be scattered who wishes. evil to one who knows this, or who persecutes him; for he is a solid stone.

9. By it (the breath in the mouth) he distinguishes neither what is good nor what is bad-smelling, for that breath is free from evil. What we eat and drink with it supports the other vital breaths (i. e. the senses, such as smell, &c.) When at the time. of death he does not find that breath (in the

1 Mukhya prâna is used in two senses, the principal or vital breath, also called sreshtha, and the breath in the mouth, also called âsanya.

2 According to the commentator, the assemblage of the other vital breaths or senses is here meant. They depart when the breath of the mouth, sometimes called sarvambhari, all-supporting, does no longer, by eating and drinking, support them.

mouth, through which he eats and drinks and lives), then he departs. He opens the mouth at the time of death (as if wishing to eat).

10. Angiras meditated on the udgîtha (Om) as that breath, and people hold it to be Angiras, i. e. the essence of the members (angânâm rasah);

II. Therefore Brihaspati meditated on udgîtha (Om) as that breath, and people hold it to be Brihaspati, for speech is brihati, and he (that breath) is the lord (pati) of speech;

12. Therefore Ayâsya meditated on the udgîtha (Om) as that breath, and people hold it to be Ayâsya, because it comes (ayati) from the mouth (âsya);

13. Therefore Vaka Dâlbhya knew it. He was the Udgâtri (singer) of the Naimishiya-sacrificers, and by singing he obtained for them their wishes.

14. He who knows this, and meditates on the syllable Om (the imperishable udgitha) as the breath of life in the mouth, he obtains all wishes by singing. So much for the udgîtha (Om) as meditated on with reference to the body 2.

The paragraphs from 10 to 14 are differently explained by Indian commentators. By treating the nominatives angirâs, brihaspatis, and ayâsyas (here the printed text reads ayâsyam) as accusatives, or by admitting the omission of an iti after them, they connect paragraphs 9, 10, and 11 with paragraph 12, and thus gain the meaning that Vaka Dâlbhya meditated on the breath in the mouth as Angiras, Brihaspati, and Ayâsya, instead of those saints having themselves thus meditated; and that he, knowing the secret names and qualities of the breath, obtained, when acting as Udgâtri priest, the wishes of those for whom he sacrificed. Tena is difficult to explain, unless we take it in the sense of tenânusishtah, taught by him.

• Adhyatma means with reference to the body, not with reference to the self or the soul. Having explained the symbolical

THIRD KHANDA.

I. Now follows the meditation on the udgîtha with reference to the gods. Let a man meditate on the udgitha (Om) as he who sends warmth (the sun in the sky). When the sun rises it sings as Udgâtri for the sake of all creatures. When it rises it destroys the fear of darkness. He who knows this, is able to destroy the fear of darkness (ignorance).

2. This (the breath in the mouth) and that (the sun) are the same. This is hot and that is hot. This they call svara (sound), and that they call pratyâsvara (reflected sound). Therefore let a man meditate on the udgîtha (Om) as this and that (as breath and as sun).

3. Then let a man meditate on the udgitha (Om) as vyâna indeed. If we breathe up, that is prâna, the up-breathing. If we breathe down, that is apâna, the down-breathing. The combination of prâna and apâna is vyâna, back-breathing or holding in of the breath. This vyâna is speech. Therefore when we utter speech, we neither breathe up nor down.

4. Speech is Rik, and therefore when a man utters a Rik verse he neither breathes up nor down.

meaning of Om as applied to the body and its organs of sense, he now explains its symbolical meaning adhidaivatam, i.e. as applied to divine beings.

1 As applied to breath, svara is explained by the commentator in the sense of moving, going out; pratyâsvara, as applied to the sun, is explained as returning every day. More likely, however, svara as applied to breath means sound, Om itself being called svara (Kh. Up. I, 4, 3), and prasvâra in the Rig-veda-prâtisâkhya, 882. As applied to the sun, svara and pratyâsvara were probably taken in the sense of light and reflected light.