Page images
PDF
EPUB

garment, (saying), • Obtain the worlds of heaven, thy desires.' If the father recover, let him live in his son's control, or let him wander about (as an ascetic). If, however, he die, let them provide for him, as he should be provided for.! (15.)

Adhyāya V. Pratardana Daivodāsi went to Indra's loved abode through war and courage. Indra said to him, “Pratardana, choose a boon.' Pratardana said, 'Do thou choose for me what boon thou thinkest best for man. Indra said to him, “The superior 2 chooses not for the inferior. Choose thyself.' Then hast thou no boon 3 for me,' said Pratardana. Then Indra deviated not from truth, for Indra is truth. Indra said to him, ‘Me only know. That I deem best for man that he should know me. The offspring of Tvastr,4 the three-beaded, I slew ; I gave to the wolves the devotees, the Arunmukhas; breaking many a compact, I crushed the Prahlādiyas in heaven, the Paulomas in the atmosphere, the Kālakāñjas on the earth, and then not a hair of me was harmed. He who knows me, his life to come is harmed by no deed whatsoever, neither by theft, nor slaying the babe unborn, nor by slaying his mother, nor by slaying his father. Nor when he has done l evil does the bloom leave his face.' (1.)

1 The reference is, I think, to the funeral rites, as taken by Max Müller. Cowell renders receive the tradition’; Deussen, 'the powers of the father take possession of him. Sankarānanda seems to have read enam samūpayati.

2 The scholiast's recension has varaḥ parasmai, and the Berlin MS, has varo parasmai. The true reading is, I think, not varo 'varasmai, but varo 'parasmai.

3 Deussen inverts the names Indra and Pratardana, and so can render 'thou art lower than I' possible in Indra's mouth. Cowell gives as alternatives, Let not the inferior choose' and 'Let not the boon become no boon. Max Müller has, 'No one who chooses, chooses for another ; choose thyself ... that boon to choose is no boon for me. I take meti as an irregular contraction for ma iti ; cf. udgīthopao in iii, 5. A-vara must, I think, contain a reference to some appeal to Indra's love of truth; hence my rendering.

4 For the following, cf. Sāyaṇa on RV., V, 34, 4; Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, vii, 28; and other passages in Weber, Ind. Stud., i, 410 seq. ; iii, 464, 465; xii, 191 seq. The mythological sense, if any, is hopelessly lost, except in the case of Tvāstra, Macdonell, Vedic Mythology, p. 160. Îndra's kilbisāni are famed in the Brāhmaṇa period. The Berlin MS. has arunmukhān.

5 Not slaying a Brāhmaṇa,' as Weber, Cowell, with the scholiast, and Max Müller. The scholiast's recension has a clause more.

He said, 'I am breath. Worship me as the intelligent self, as life, as immortality. Life is breath ; breath is life, for as long as breath dwells in the body, so long does life. For by breath he obtains immortality in this ? world, by intelligence, truth, and will. He, who worships me as life and immortality, enjoys full length of days in this world and obtains immortality and imperishableness in the world of heaven.' 4 Some say, • The breaths become one. For else no one could at one time make known a name by speech, a form by the eye, a sound by the ear, a thought by the mind. The breaths having become one make known all these one by one. When speech speaks, all the breaths speak after it; when the eye sees, all the breaths see after it; when the ear hears, all the breaths hear after it; when the mind thinks, all the breaths think after it; when the breath breathes, all the breaths breathe after it.' ‘Even so it is,' said Indra; “there is, however, a highest of the breaths.' (2.)

One lives though deprived of speech, for we see the dumb. One lives though deprived of sight, for we see the blind. One lives though deprived of hearing, for we see the deaf. One lives though deprived of mind, for we see infants. One lives though one's arms are lost, or when one's legs are lost, for we see it so. Breath alone is the intelligent self.

i Veti cannot be correct, for does not mean "go away.' Read vyeti as in Taittiriya Samhitā, iii, 1, 1, 2, nāsya nīlam na haro vyeti. The cakrșo of Sankarānanda and the edd. is impossible. The Berlin MS, has cakşuso, and the correct reading is obviously cakrușo; so Deussen and two of the Anand. MSS. The Berlin MS. adds cana. The substantial immorality of this doctrine remains a fatal difficulty in Vedāntism as in the Sāmkhya.

? The scholiast's recension reads in the other'; so Max Müller. That recension has, ‘Breath is life, breath too is immortality,' which Max Müller adopts and expands.

3True resolve,' Cowell ; 'true knowledge,' Deussen and Max Müller.

4 Sankarānanda makes Pratardana commence here to speak. This seems unnecessary, though adopted by Cowell, Deussen, and Max Müller, who at the end suggests prāṇasya for the plural, but it is not necessary.

5 Apparently a reference to mutilation as a punishment. Cf. Hopkins, J.A.0.8., xii, 134. The mind' sentence is omitted in the scholiast's recension in some MSS.

[ocr errors]

Encompassing the body it raises it up; therefore should one worship it as the hymn? (uktha). Thus is everything to be won in breath. What breath is, that is intelligence; what intelligence is, that is breath. This is its insight, its true knowledge. When then a man in sleep dreams no dreams, then his breath becomes one; 2 then speech with all names enters it; sight with all forms enters it; hearing with all sounds enters it ; mind with all thoughts enters it. When he awakes, just as from a burning fire sparks leap to all the quarters, so from that self the breaths rise up according to their places; from the breaths the deities arise; from the deities the worlds. This breath 3 alone is the intelligent self. Encompassing the body it raises it up; therefore should one worship it as the hymn. Thus is everything to be won in breath. What breath is, that is intelligence; what intelligence is, that is breath. This is its insight, its true knowledge. When then a man, ill, on the point of death, and very weak, falls into a faint, they say, “His thought has departed; he hears not, he sees not, he speaks not, he thinks not.' Then his breath becomes one; then speech with all names enters it ; sight with all forms enters it; hearing with all sounds enters it; mind with all thoughts enters it. When he leaves the body he leaves it with all of these. (3.)

Speech and all names are deposited in him. By speech he obtains all names. Smell 4 and all odours are deposited in him. By smell he obtains all odours. Sight and all forms are deposited in him. By sight he obtains all forms. Hearing and all sounds are deposited in him. By hearing he obtains all sounds. Mind and all thoughts are deposited in him.

i Uktha from ut-thāpayati. The reference is, of course, to the Mahad Uktha of i and ii.

2 Or he becomes one in breath'; cf. vi, 20; S.B.E., xlviii, 378 seq. So Cowell, Deussen, and Max Müller (doubtfully). The scholiast's recension omits in the beginning of the sentence “This . . . breath,' and adds “They dwell together and depart together; this is its insight.'

3 Omitted in the scholiast's recension.

4 The usual variation in MSS. between prāna and ghrāna. Sankarānanda has, "Speech dismisses all names, etc., and he inserts above, "When he awakes,' etc., over again. Max Müller has, ‘Speech gives up' or 'takes away'all names.

By mind he obtains all thoughts. Together1 they dwell in the body; together they depart.

Now we will explain how all beings become one for this intelligence. (4.)

Speech is taken out ? as one portion of it; to correspond with it a rudimentary element, the name, was placed outside. Smell was taken out as one portion of it; to correspond with it a rudimentary element, the odour, was placed outside. Sight was taken out as one portion of it; to correspond with it a rudimentary element, form, was placed outside. Hearing was taken out as one portion of it; to correspond with it a rudimentary element, sound, was placed outside. The tongue was taken out as one portion of it; to correspond with it a rudimentary element, the savour of food, was placed outside. The hands were taken out as one portion of it; to correspond with them a rudimentary element, action, was placed outside. The body was taken out as one portion of it; to correspond with it a rudimentary element, pleasure and pain, was placed outside. The organ was taken out as one portion of it; to correspond with it a rudimentary element, joy, dalliance, and offspring, was placed outside. The feet were taken out as one portion of it; to correspond with them a rudimentary element, motion, was placed outside. Mind 3 was taken out as one portion of it; to correspond with it a rudimentary element, thought and desires, was placed outside. (5.)

Having mounted on speech with intelligence, he obtains, through speech, all names. Having mounted on smell with intelligence, he obtains, through smell, all odours. Having mounted on sight with intelligence, he obtains, through sight, all forms. Having mounted on hearing with intelligence, he obtains, through hearing, all sounds. Having mounted on the tongue with intelligence, he obtains, through the tongue, all the savour of food. Having mounted on the hands with intelligence, he obtains, through the hands, all actions. Having mounted on the body with intelligence, he obtains, through the body, pleasure and pain. Having mounted on the organ with intelligence, he obtains, through the organ, joy, dalliance, and offspring. Having mounted on the feet with intelligence, he obtains, through the feet, motions. Having mounted on the mind? with intelligence, he obtains through the mind, all thoughts. (6.)

1 This is preceded in the scholiast's recension by "Thus is everything to be won in breath. What breath is, that is intelligence. What intelligence is, that is breath.' Cf. v, 3.

2 We must read udülham (as Deussen and Max Müller) or adūduhat throughout (cf. J.R.A.S., 1908, p. 388). There seem to have been early two readings, udūlham and adūduhat, and possibly the second is merely a gloss on the first. Adülham is a meaningless contamination. The sense is, from intelligence come the five organs (=their activities, the two being identified) and their objects.

3 The scholiast's recension has, 'Intelligence as one part was taken out from it; to correspond with it a rudimentary element, thought, what is to be known, desires, was placed outside.'

For, bereft of intelligence, speech could not make known any name. “My mind has been somewhere else,' it says, “I have not perceived that name. For, bereft of intelligence, smell could not make known any odour. “My mind has been somewhere else,' it says, “I have not perceived that odour.' For, bereft of intelligence, sight could not make known any form. “My mind has been somewhere else,' it says, “I have not perceived any form. For, bereft of intelligence, hearing could not make known any sound. My mind has been somewhere else,' it says, “I have not perceived that sound.' For, bereft of intelligence, the tongue could not make known any savour of food. “My mind has been somewhere else,' it says, “I have not perceived that savour of food. For, bereft of intelligence, the hands could not make known any action. Our mind has been somewhere else,' they say, • we have not perceived that action. For, bereft of intelligence, the body could not make known any : pleasure or pain. “My mind has been somewhere else,' it says, *I have not perceived pleasure or pain.' For, bereft of intelligence, the organ could not make known any joy, dalliance, or offspring. “My mind has been somewhere else,' it says, “I have not perceived joy, dalliance, or offspring.'

Sankarānanda has, Mounting on thoughts with intelligence, he obtains, through intelligence, thoughts, wbat is to be known, desires.''

? Sankarānanda keeps throughout the singular, “One says,' and Deussen and Max Müller follow him.

3 The na inserted in Cowell's MS. D is not necessary.

« PreviousContinue »