Chapter 1
30 verses
Section 130 verses
1बहिःप्रज्ञो विभुर्विश्वो ह्यन्तःप्रज्ञस्तु तैजसः ।घनप्रज्ञस्तथा प्राज्ञ एक एव त्रिधा स्थितःThe purport of the verse is this: The transcendence of the three states by the Self, Its unity, purity, and unrelatedness (to anything) are proved by the fact of Its existence in the three states in succession and of Its being interlinked by memory as 'I'. This is borne out by the illustration of the great fish and others in the Vedic texts. ['As a great fish swims alternately to both the banks (of a river), eastern and western, so deos this infinte being move to both these states-the dream and waking states' (Br.IV.iii. 18). 'As a hawk or a falcon flying in the sky becomes tired, and stretching its wings is bound for its nest, so does this infinite being fun for this state, where falling asleep he craves no desires and sees no dreams' (Br. VI. iii. 19).]
2दक्षिणाक्षिमुखे विश्वो मनस्यन्तस्तु तैजसः ।आकाशे च हृदि प्राज्ञस्त्रिधा देहे व्यवस्थितःThis verse aims at discovering how all the three, starting with Visva, are experienced in the waking state itself. Visva, the witness of gross objects, is primarily experienced [By the adepts in meditation.] in the daksina-aksi, right eye, that is his mukha, mouth (or place of experience); and this is in accordance with the Vedic text, 'This being who is in the right eye is named Indha' (Br. IV. ii. 2). He who is India or Vaisvanara, possessed of effulgence-the Virat Self (identifying Itself with the cosmic gross body) that is within the sun-and he who is the (individual) Self (i.e. Visva) in the (right) eye are identical.
Objection: Hiranyagarbha is different, and different also (is the soul that) is the knower of the body and senses, that exists in the right eye as the controller of the eyes, that is the cognizer, and that is the master of the body.
Answer: Not so, for in reality no difference is admitted, in accordance with the Vedic text, 'One effulgent being hidden in all creatures' (Sv. VI. 11), and the Smrti texts, 'O scion of the Bharata dynasty, know me, again, as the knower of the bodies and senses, in all the bodies' (G. XIII. 2), 'Indivisible, and yet existing in all beings, as though divided' (G. XIII. 16). [Virat is essentially identical with Hiranyagarbha, and so is the Prajna with them both.]
Though Visva exists eally in all the organs, he is specially referred to as existing in the right eye, for in the right eye is noticed the clarity of his (Visva's) perception. The soul, with its abode in the right eye, perceives some form; and then closing the eyes and recollecting that very form sees it manifested, manasi antah, inside the mind, in the form of impressions as in a dream. [This is how Taijasa is met with in the waking state. And Visva and Taijasa are the same; for the same entity that sees as Visva, recollects as Taijasa.] As it is the case here, so is it in dream. Therefore, though Taijasa is within the mind, he is really the same as Visva. On the cessation of the activity called memory, Prajna, sitting akase ca hrdi, in the space within the heart, becomes free from the diversity (of objects and their perceiving subject) and continues to be a mere mass of consciousness, for then there is no functioning of the mind. [This is how Prajna is met with in the waking state. When the mind ceases to act, the same entity assumes the characteristics of Prajna.] Perception and recollection are merely vibrations of the mind; in the absence of these, there is mere existence in an unmanifested state, in the heart, in identification with the vital force, as is said in the Vedic text, 'It is the vital force indeed that engulfs all these' (Ch. IV. iii. 3). Taijasa is the same as Hiranyagarbha because of existing in the mind, [Taijasa is conditioned by the individual mind, and Hiranyagarbha by the cosmic mind. But the individual and cosmic minds are the same; and so Taijasa and Hiranyagarbha, though conditioned by them, must be the same.] as is declared by the Vedic texts: '(Being attached, he, together with the work, attains that result to which his) subtle body or mind (is attached)' [Hiranyagarbha, as possessed of the power to act, is the soul within the subtle body (linga); and linga is eated with mind in the Vedic texts. Therefore Taijasa and Hiranyagarbha are the same] (Br.IV.iv.6),, 'This Purusa identified with the mind, [Hiranyagarbha is but a special manifestation of the Purusa identified with the mind. And Taijasa's chief adjunct is the mind. Therefore they are the same.] (and resplendent, is realized within the heart)' (Br. V. vi. 1), and so on.
Objection: The vital force is a manifested (i.e. perceptible) reality in deep sleep and the organs merge into it. [People sitting by a sleeping man clearly perceive the activities of the vital force (Prana). And an additional argument proving that Prana is a manifested entity is provided by the fact that the organs become identified with it in sleep. 'Unmanifested' means 'devoid of the limitations of time, space, and things'. Prana is not so in deep sleep.] How can the vital force be unmanifested,
Answer: That is no defect; for an undifferentiated thing is characterized by absence of any distinction of time and space. Among those who think themselves to be intimately connected with the individualized vital force, [They may think, 'This is my Prana', 'That is his' and so on.] although the vital force appears to be differentiated so long as (individual) identification with Prana persists still, since the self-identification with any specially resulting from the delimitation of the body is absent in the vital force during deep sleep, the vital force is then surely undifferentiated. [Though to others it may appear to be manifested, to the sleeping man it is unmanifested, because for him the Prana is then unassociated with any particular time or space.] Just as in the case of people identifying themselves with individualized vital force, the vital force becomes unmanifested after death, similar, too, is the unmanifestedness in the state of absence of distinctions (in deep sleep) in the case of those who identify themselves with the vital force, and similar also is its potentiality to produce effects. And the witness in the state of unmanifestedness and deep sleep is the same (Consciousness). [Consciousness underlines the two entities conditioned by the unmanifested states on the divine and human planes.] Moreover, since the individuals who identfy themselves with limitations, or witness those states, appear as identical with the Unmanifested, the foregoing attributes, 'in whom everything becomes undifferentiated', 'who is a mass of consciousness', etc., become appropriate with regard to him [Not only are the sleeper and the Unmanifested one from the standpoint of absence of distinction, but they are also one even when conditioned by limiting adjuncts.] (i.e. Prajna in deep sleep, identifying himself with Prana). And there is also the reason adduced earlier. [The unity of the entity manifest on the divine and human planes]
Objection: Why should the Unmanifested be called Prana (Vital Force),
Answer: Becuase of the Vedic tex, 'O good-looking one, (the individual soul conditioned by) the mind is surely tethered to (that is to say, has for its goal) the Prana' (Ch. VI. viii. 2).
Objection: In that text the word Prana means Brahman that was introduced as Existence in the sentence, 'O good-looking one, in the beginning this was Existence alone' (Ch. VI. ii. 1).
Answer: That is no valid objection, for Existence was assumed there to be the seed (of creation). Though in that sentence the Existence-Brahman is denoted by the word Prana, still that Existence(-Brahman) is called Prana as well as Existence without ruling out Its being the source of the emergence of individual beings. Had the seedless (non-causal) state of Brahman been meant, the text would have declared, 'Not this, not this' (Br. IV. iv. 22; IV. v. 15), 'From which speech turns back' (Tai. II. 9), 'That (Brahman) is surely different from the known, and, again, It is above the unknown' (Ke. I. 4), and so on, as it is also stated by the Smrti, 'It is called neither existence nor nonexistence' (G. XIII. 12). If Brahman in Its seedless (non-causal) state be meant there, then the individuals that merge in It in deep sleep and dissolution cannot reasonably re-emerge, and [If anybody can re-emerge from sleep or dissolution, conceived of as nothing but identity with the pure Brahman, then৷৷.] there, will be the possibility of the freed souls returning to take birth again, for in either case, the absence of cause is a common factor. Besides, in the absence of any seed (of the worldly state) to be burnt by the knowledge (of Brahman), knowledge itself becomes useless. Hence Existence is referred to as Prana (in the Chandogya Upanisad), and in all the Upanisads It is spoken of as the cause in all the Upanisads by assuming It (for the time being) to be the seed of others. And it is because of this that It is referred to-by refuting Its causal state-in such Vedic texts as, 'Superior to the (other) superior imperishable (Maya) (Mu. II. i. 2), 'From which speech turns back' (Tai. II. 9), 'Not this, not this' (Br. IV. iv. 22), etc. That supremely real state-free from causality, relation with body etc. and modes of waking etc.-of that every entity that is called Prajna, will be spoken separately in its aspect as the Turiya (Fourth). The causal state, too, is verily experienced in the body, inasmuch as an awakened man is seen to have such a recollection as, 'I did not know anything (in my deep sleep).' Hence it is said, 'Tridha dehe vyavasthitah-existing in three ways in the body'.
3विश्वो हि स्थूलभुङ् नित्यं तैजसः प्रविविक्तभुक् ।आनन्दभुक्तथा प्राज्ञस्त्रिधा भोगं निबोधतThe two verses need no explanation.
4स्थूलं तर्पयते विश्वं प्रविविक्तं तु तैजसम् ।आनन्दश्च तथा प्राज्ञं त्रिधा तृप्तिं निबोधतthe two verses need no explanation.
5त्रिषु धामसु यद्भोज्यं भोक्ता यश्च प्रकीर्तितः ।वेदैतदुभयं यस्तु स भुञ्जानो न लिप्यतेTrisu dhamasu, in the three states, of waking and the rest; there is but one bhojyam, object of enjoyment, that appears in triple form, known as gross, subtle, and bliss. And the entity known by the names of Visva, Taijasa, and Prajna, is prakirtitah, declared to be; the one bhokta, enjoyer, because of their being unified together as one through the single concept of 'I am that', and becuase there is no distinction so far as cognition (by them) is concerned. he who veda, knows; etat ubhayam, both these, as diversified multifariously into enjoyers and the things of enjoyment; sah, he; na lipyate, does not become affected; bhunjanah, even while enjoying, because all that is enjoyable belongs to a single enjoyer. For nothing is added to or deducted from one's nature by one's own objects (of enjoyment or awareness)-as in the case of fire, which does not lose or gain (in its essential nature) by consuming its own fuel.
6प्रभवः सर्वभावानां सतामिति विनिश्चयः ।सर्वं जनयति प्राणश्चेतोंशून्पुरुषः पृथकPrabhavah, origination, in their own respective apparent appearances consisting of names and forms created by ignorance; sarvabhavanam satam, belongs to all the entities that exist [Exist in their own substratum on which they are superimposed. In the sixth paragraph of the Upanisad, 'in this one is verily the place of origin', it was said that Prajna is the source of the phenomenal world. The estion now is: 'Is he a producer of entities or nonentities,' The answer is that he produces entities which are a sort of reflection of Reality and are true so long as their substratum is kept in view.] in their different modes of Visva, Taijasa, and Prajana. It will be said later on, '৷৷৷৷.a barren woman's son is born neither through Maya nor in reality' (Karika), III. 28). For, if birth really belongs to nonentities themselves, then Brahman, which is beyond all empirical relations, will be left without any ground of cognition, [Logical ground of inference. If the effect is true, the cause can be inferred to be so; but if the effect is non-existing, the cause will be eally so. The inference with regard to Brahman will be like this: 'This world is produced from Existence (Brahman), for it is a superimposed thing like the snake on a rope.'] and may be eated with nonentity. But as a matter of fact, it is seen that the snake and such other things created by ignorance and sprouting from the seed of Maya, and appearing as a rope etc., have their existence as the rope etc. (which are their substrata). For nobody perceives anywhere a rope-snake or a mirage if there is no substratum. Just as the snake surely had its existence as the rope before its illusory appearance as the snake, so also all positive entities, before their manifestation, certainly had their existence in the form of their cause, Prana. [Prana is Brahman considered as an unknown entity but identified with Existence and serving as the source of all.] And it is therefore that the Upanisad, too, says, 'All this (that is in front) is but Brahman' (Mu. II. ii. 11), 'In the beginning this (universe) was but the Self' (Br. I. iv. 1). Pranah janayati, Prana creates; sarvam, all. Purusah janayati, Purusa creates; prthak, separately; cetomsun, the rays of Consciousness, that issue out (from Purusa) like rays from the sun, that are the modes of the intelleigence of Purusa who is by nature Consciousness, that are comparable to the reflections of the sun on water, and that appear divergently as Visva, Taijasa, and Prajna in the different bodies of gods, animals, and others-(Purusa creates) all these rays of Consciousness that possess the characterisics of living creatures, that differ from what has assumed the appearance of objects, and that are similar (to Purusa) just as the sparks of fire (are to fire), or the reflections of the sun on water (are to the sun). But Prana, or the Self in the causal state, creates all other entities [Existing in the form of objects, as opposed to the subjects.] as shown in the Vedic texts: 'As a spider (spreads and withdraws its thread' (Mu. I. i. 7), and 'as from fire tiny sparks fly in all directions' (Br. II. i. 20).
7विभूतिं प्रसवं त्वन्ये मन्यन्ते सृष्टिचिन्तकाः ।स्वप्नमायासरूपेति सृष्टिरन्यैर्विकल्पिताSristicintakah, poeple steeped in the thought (or theories) of creation; manyante, consider; that creation is a vibhuti, exuberance, (a demonstration of the superhuman power), of God. The idea implied is that for people who think of the supreme Reality there is no interest in estions regarding creation, (which is illusory) as is declared in the Vedic text, 'Indra (the Lord), on account of Maya, is perceived as manifold' (Br. II. v. 19). For those who who observe a magician throw up a rope into the sky, ascend it bearing arms and vanish out of sight, and engage in a fight in which he is cut to pieces and falls to rise up again, do not evince any interest in deliberating on the reality of the magic and its effect conjured up by him. So also, analogous to the spreading out of the rope by the magician, is this manifestation of deep sleep, dream, and so on; comparable to the magician who has climbed up the rope are the Prajna, Taijasa, and the rest in those states; and different from the rope and the man who has climbed up it is the real magician. Just as that very magician stands on the ground, invisible because of his magical cover, similar is the supreme Reality called Turiya. Therefore the noble people, aspiring to liberation, evince interest in the contemplation of that Turiya alone, but not so in that of creation which serves no purpose. Hence these theories are advanced only by those who cogitate about creation. This fact is stated in svapnamayasarupa, of the same nature as dream and magic. [This differs from the Vedantic position in believing that dream is true so far as it reflects the phenomenal realities of the waking state, and that the incantations etc., conjuring up magical illusions, are themselves empirical true, though the magical objects are false.]
8इच्छामात्रं प्रभोः सृष्टिरिति सृष्टौ विनिश्चिताः ।कालात्प्रसूतिं भूतानां मन्यन्ते कालचिन्तकाःSrstih, creation; is icchamatram, a mere will; prabhoh, of the Lord, because His will is unfailing. A pot, for instance, is a mere thought (of the potter), and it is nothing beyond thought. Some think that creation is from time alone.
9भोगार्थं सृष्टिरित्यन्ये क्रीडार्थमिति चापरे ।देवस्यैष स्वभावोऽयमाप्तकामस्य का स्पृहा इतिOtheres think that srstih, creation; is bhogartham, for the sake of enjoyment; (and) kridartham, for the sake of disport. These two views are refuted by 'devasya esah svabhavah ayam, of the Effulgent Being this is the nature' [Nature, otherwise known as Maya, is without any beginning though it is directly perceived. This being so, no motive for creation should be sought.] etc., by basing the argument on the Nature (of God). Or, all the points of view [Presented in the verses 7 and 8, and the first line of verse 9.] are refuted by asserting, 'Aptakamasya ka sprha, what desire can One have whose desire is ever fulfilled,' For apart from the fact that the rope etc. are constituted by natural ignorance, [Ignorance about the rope etc. that are the substrata of the illusory things like snake etc.] no cause can be ascertained for their appearing as snake etc.
Here occur these verses (of Gaudapada) :
10निवृत्तेः सर्वदुःखानामीशानः प्रभुरव्ययः ।अद्वैतः सर्वभावानां देवस्तुर्यो विभुः स्मृतःNivrtteh, in the matter of eradication; sarvaduhkhanam, of all sorrows represented by Visva, Taijasa, and Prajna; the Self that is Turiya is isanah, the ordainer. 'Prabhuh, Lord's is an explanation of the word isanah. The idea is that He is the Lord capable of ordaining the cessation of sorrow; for sorrow ceases as a result of His knowledge. (He is) avyayah, unchanging, that is to say, does not deviate from His nature. Why is this so, Because He is advaitah, nondual, on account of the falsity of all objects, like the snake on a rope. He who is this devah, effulgent One, so called because of His self-effulgence; smrtah, held to be; turiyah, the Fourth; and vibhuh, the Omnipresent (source). [Turiya is vibhu, becuase the three different (vividha) states issue (bhavanti) from Him-A.G.]
For determining the ture nature of Turiya, the generic and specific characteristics of Visva and the rest are being ascertained:
11कार्यकारणबद्धौ ताविष्येते विश्वतैजसौ ।प्राज्ञः कारणबद्धस्तु द्वौ तौ तुर्ये न सिध्यतःKarya, derived in the sense of anything produced, means the state of being the effect. Karana, derived in the sense of anything that acts, means the causal state. Those two, viz visva-taijasau, Visva and Taijasa, as described earlier; isyete, are held to be; (karya-karana-baddhau), bound by, conditioned by, the states of seed and fruit, consisting in the non-apprehension and misapprehension of Reality. But Prajna is bound by the causal state alone. The non-apprehension of Reality alone is the cause of bringing about the state of Prajna. Therefore tau dvau, both these two-the causal and the resultant conditions, the non-apprehension and misapprehension of Reality, resectively -na sidhyatah turye, do not exist, that is to say, are not possible, in Turiya.
12नात्मानं न परं चैव न सत्यं नापि चानृतम् ।प्राज्ञः किंचन संवेत्ति तुर्यं तत्सर्वदृक्सदाHow, again, is Prajna conditioned by the causal state, and how are the bondages of non-apprehension and misapprehension impossible in the case of Turiya, Since unlike Visva and Taijasa, Prajna na samvetti, does not apprehend; kincana, anything, any external duality that is different from the Self and is born of the seed of ignorance, therefore he is conditioned by the darkness of non-perception of Reality, which is the seed of false perception. Since tat, that; Turiya is sada, for ever; sarva-drk, all (sarva) that there is as well as its witness (drk), there being nothing besides Turiya; therefore the seed consisting in nonperception of Reality does not exist there (in the Turiya). And just because of this there is also the absence in Turiya of false perception resulting from non-perception; for in the sun, which is ever resplendent, there is no possibility of the opposite, darkness, or shining in any way other than that of the sun-in conformity with the Vedic text, 'for the vision of the witness can never be lost' (Br. IV. iii. 23). Or, Turiya is said to be the 'sarva-drk, seer of everything' for ever, because it is but Turiya who, by existing in all beings during the dream and the waking states, seems to be the seer of everything. For the Upanisad says, 'There is no other witnes but This' (Br.III.viii.11).
13द्वैतस्याग्रहणं तुल्यमुभयोः प्राज्ञतुर्ययोः ।बीजनिद्रायुतः प्राज्ञः सा च तुर्ये न विद्यतेThis verse is meant to remove the doubt arising from another source. 'The non-perception of duality being similar, why should Prajna alone be conditioned by causality and not Turiya,'-this doubt that may arise is being refuted. The reason is that Prajna is bija-nidra-yutah; nidra, sleep, consists in the non-perception of Reality, and that itself is the bija, seef of the birth of the cognition of varieties; and Prajna is yutah, endued by this bijanidra, sleep that is a causal state. That sleep, consisting in the non-perception of Reality, na vidyate, does not exist; turye, in Turiya, because of His being by nature a constant witness. Therefore in Him there is no bondage of the causal state. This is the purport.
14स्वप्ननिद्रायुतावाद्यौ प्राज्ञस्त्वस्वप्ननिद्रया ।न निद्रां नैव च स्वप्नं तुर्ये पश्यन्ति निश्चिताःSvapna, dream, consists in false perception, like that of a snake on a rope. Nidra, sleep, has been spoken of as darkness, consisting in non-perception of Reality. By these two-dream and sleep-are endued Visva and Taijasa; and this is why they have been referred to as conditioned by the states of cause and effect (Karika, I. 11); whereas Prajna is conditioned by sleep alone, unassociated with dream; and hence, he has been referred to as conditioned by the causal state. Niscitah, those with firm conviction, the knowers of Brahman; na pasyanti, do not see, both these in Turiya, these being of an opposite nature, like darkness with regard to the sun. Therefore it has been said that Turiya is not conditioned by the states of cause and effect.
It is being shown when one becomes firmly rooted in Turiya:
15अन्यथा गृह्णतः स्वप्नो निद्रा तत्त्वमजानतः ।विपर्यासे तयोः क्षीणे तुरीयं पदमश्नुतेSvapnah, dream; comes to one grhnatah, who cognizes Reality; anyatha, falsely, like the cognition of a snake on a rope, in the states of dream and waking. Nidra, sleep- belonging to one ajanatah tattvam, not cognizing Reality-is eally present in all the three states. Dream and sleep being the common features of both Visva and Taijasa, they are treated a one. Since in these two states sleep is of secondary importance owing to the predominance of false perception, the error (in these states) is eated with dream. But in the third state the error takes the form of sleep alone, consisting in non-perception of Reality. Therefore when tayoh, of these two (Visva-Taijasa and Prajna), existing in the states of effect and cuase; viprayase, the two errors, consisting in false perception and non-perception, and constituting the two bondages in the form of effect and cause; ksine, are eradicated on the cognition of the supreme Reality; then one asnute, attains; turiyam padam, the state of Turiya. The idea is that, as he does not perceive both kinds of bondages there, he becomes firmly rooted in Turiya.
16अनादिमायया सुप्तो यदा जीवः प्रबुध्यते ।अजमनिद्रमस्वप्नमद्वैतं बुध्यते तदाThis one, the jivah, the transmigrating individual soul; that is suptah, asleep; while seeing in both the (waking and dream) states such dreams as 'This is my father', 'This is my son', 'This is my grandson', 'This is my field', 'These are my animals', 'I am their master', 'I am happy, miserable', I am despoiled by this one, and I have gained through this one', and so on, under the influence of dream that is but Maya whose activity has no beginning and which has the two facets of non-perception of Reality or the causal state, and false perception of Reality. Yada, when by a most gracious teacher, who has realized the Truth that forms the purport of the Upanisads, he (the individual) is awakened through the teaching, 'Thou art not a bundle of causes and effects, but Thou art That', then that individual understands thus. How, (Thus) : (He knows the) ajam, birthless, which is called so since in It there is no external or internal mutation, starting with birth, that positive objects are heir to; the idea is that It is externally and internally devoid of all mutationss that phenomenal objects are subject to. (He knows the) anidram, sleepless (Turiya), since in It there is no sleep or the causal state, consisting in the darkness of ignorance that is the cause of birth and so on. Since that Turiya is sleepless, therefore (he realizes) It is asvapnam, dreamless, false perception (svapna) being based on non-perception (nidra). Since It is sleepless and dreamless, therefore the individual, tada, then; budhyate, realizes the birthless, non-dual Turiya as his Self.
17प्रपञ्चो यदि विद्येत निवर्तेत न संशयः ।मायामात्रमिदं द्वैतमद्वैतं परमार्थतःIf one is to be awakened by negating the phenomenal world, how can there be non-duality so long as the phenomenal world persists, The answer is: Such indeed would be the case yadi prapancah vidyeta, if the phenomenal world had existence. But being superimposed like a snake on a rope, it does not exist. Na samsayah, there is no doubt; that if it had existed, nivarteta, it would cease to be. Certainly, it is not that the snake, fancied on the rope through an error of observation, exists there in reality and is then removed by correct observation. Verily, it is not that the magic conjured up by a magician exists in reality and is then removed on the removal of the optical illusion of its witness. Similarly, mayamatram idam dvaitam, this duality that is nothing but Maya, and is called the phenomenal world; is paramarthatah, in supreme Truth; advaitam, non-dual, just like the rope and the magician. Therefore the purport is that there is no such thing as the world which appears or disappears.
18विकल्पो विनिवर्तेत कल्पितो यदि केनचित् ।उपदेशादयं वादो ज्ञाते द्वैतं न विद्यतेHow can such fancies as instruction, instructor, and the instructed disappear, To this the answer is: Vikalpah, diversity; vinivarteta, would discontinue; yadi, if; it had been kalpitah, imagined; kenacit, by anybody. Just as this phenomenal world is analogous to magic or a snake superimposed on a rope, so also such fancies as the differences of the instructed and so on are there only before enlightenment, upadesat, for the sake of instruction; hence ayam vadah, this talk-of instructor, instruction, and instructed-is for the sake of instruction. When the effect of instruction is accomplished, jnate, on the realization of the supreme Reality; dvaitam na vidyate, duality ceases to exist.
Here occur these verses (of Gaudapada) :
19विश्वस्यात्वविवक्षायामादिसामान्यमुत्कटम् ।मात्रासंप्रतिपत्तौ स्यादाप्तिसामान्यमेव चWhen the identity visvasya, of Visva; with a, with the mere letter a, is intended; then, according to the reasoning adduced, samanyam, the similarity; of being the adi, first; is seen as utkatam, abvious. This is the idea. The clause 'when the identity with a is intended' is explained by matrasampratipattau, which means 'when Visva's identity with a alone is apprehended'. After 'apti-samanyam eva ca, the similarity of all-pervasiveness', the word 'utkatam, (is seen as) abvious' is understood because of the use of 'ca, and'.
20तैजसस्योत्वविज्ञान उत्कर्षो दृश्यते स्फुटम् ।मात्रासंप्रतिपत्तौ स्यादुभयत्वं तथाविधम्Taijasasya utva-vijnane, in the matter of knowing Taijasa as the letter u, when it is intended to be identified with u; utkarsah, excellecne; drsyate, is see; sphutam, clearly. This is the meaning. Ubhayatvam, intermediacy, is also clear. All this is to be explained as before.
21मकारभावे प्राज्ञस्य मानसामान्यमुत्कटम् ।मात्रासंप्रतिपत्तौ तु लयसामान्यमेव चThe idea is that, in the matter of Prajna's identity with the letter m, measurement and absorption are excellent points of similarity.
22त्रिषु धामसु यस्तुल्यं सामान्यं वेत्ति निश्चितः ।स पूज्यः सर्वभूतानां वन्द्यश्चैव महामुनिःSah, he, the knower of Brahman; who niscitah, with the firm conviction, 'This is certainly so'; vetti, knows; in the three states, mentioned above; tulyam samanyam, the common analogies spoken of ; is pujyah, adorable; and vandyah, worthy of salutation, in the world.
23अकारो नयते विश्वमुकारश्चापि तैजसम् ।मकारश्च पुनः प्राज्ञं नामात्रे विद्यते गतिः इतिAkarah, the letter a; nayate, carries-him who, after resorting to Om, meditates on it by indentifying the arters of the self with the letters of Om through the foregoing common features; visvam, to Visva; makes him attain Visva. The idea is that he who meditates on Om with (emphasis on) a, becomes identified with Vaisvanara (Virat). Similarly, ukarah, the letter u; takes him taijasam, to Taijasa. Ca, and; makarah, the letter m; punah, again; prajnam, to Prajna. the verb 'leads' is to be understood from the use of the word 'ca, and'. But when m, too, disappears-when the causal states gets destroyed in Om; amatre which is free from the letters (and parts)-then, na vidyate, there does not remain; any gatih, attainment. [A represents the gross universe, the waking state, and Visva; u represents the subtle universe, dream, and Taijasa; and m represents the causal state, sleep, and Prajna. The earlier ones merge into the latter ones. In this way everything is reduced to Om. While engaged in this meditation of Om as all, there flashes in the aspirant's mind the teacher's instruction that everything is but the absolute Brahman. Then all the phenomenal world, merged in Om, disappears in Brahman, and there remains no goal to attain. Though the meditations in the three stages relate to the same Om, the results are different is accordance with the emphasis laid on its constituents.]
Just as before, here occur these verses:
24ओंकारं पादशो विद्यात्पादा मात्रा न संशयः ।ओंकारं पादशो ज्ञात्वा न किंचिदपि चिन्तयेत्Because of the aforesaid similarity, the arters are the letters, and the letters are the arters. Therefore vidyat, one should know; onkaram, the syllable Om; padasah, arter by arter. This is the meaning. When the syllable Om is known thus, na cintayet, one should not think of; kim cit api, anything whatsoever, serving any seen or unseen purpose; for he has got all his desires fulfilled.
25युञ्जीत प्रणवे चेतः प्रणवो ब्रह्म निर्भयम् ।प्रणवे नित्ययुक्तस्य न भयं विद्यते क्वचित्Yunjita, one should concentrate; cetah, the mind; pranave, on Om, as explained, which is essentially the supreme Reality; for pranavah, Om; is brahma nirbhayam, Brahman beyond fear; because for one who is ever fixed in it, na bhayam vidyate kvacit, there can be no fear anywhere, in accordance with the Vedic text, 'The enlightened man is not afraid of anything' (Tai. II. ix).
26प्रणवो ह्यपरं ब्रह्म प्रणवश्च परं स्मृतः ।अपूर्वोऽनन्तरोऽबाह्योऽनपरः प्रणवोऽव्ययःPranavah, Om, is both the superior and inferior Brahman. When the arters and letters disappear, from the highest standpoint, Om becomes verily the supreme Self that is Brahman. Therefore it is apurvah, without any cause preceding it. There is nothing inside it that is of a different class; therefore it is anantarah, without inside. Similarly, there is nothing existing outside; Therefore it is abahyah, without outside. There is no effect (aparam) of it; therefore it is anaparah, without effect. The idea implied (as a whole) is that it is coextensive with all that is inside or outside; it is verily birthless; and it is a mass of Consciousness, homogeneous like a lump of salt.
27सर्वस्य प्रणवो ह्यादिर्मध्यमन्तस्तथैव च ।एवं हि प्रणवं ज्ञात्वा व्यश्नुते तदनन्तरम्Just like the magician and others, (Om is the) begining (adi), middle (madhya), and end (anta)-the origination, continuance, and dissolution; sarvasya, of all-of the whole phenomenal universe, consisting of space and the rest which originate like a magic elephant, a snake superimposed in a rope, a mirage, a dream, etc. (From the magician and the rest). Evam hi, in this way indeed; jnatva pranavam, having known Om, which is the Self and comparable to the magician and the rest; vyasnute, one attains-identity wiht the Self, at that very moment. This is the idea.
28प्रणवं हीश्वरं विद्यात्सर्वस्य हृदये स्थितम् ।सर्वव्यापिनमोंकारं मत्वा धीरो न शोचतिVidyat, one should know; pranavam, Om; as isvaram, God; existing hrdi, in the heart-the seat of memory and perception-of all living beings. Matva, having meditated on (i.e. realized); onkaram, Om, which is the Self beyond the worldly state; and sarvavyapinam, all-pervasive, like space; dhirah, the intelligent man; na socati, does not grieve; for no cause of grief can be possible (then)-in accordance with such Vedic texts as, 'A knower of the Self transcends sorrow' (Ch. VII. i. 3).
29अमात्रोऽनन्तमात्रश्च द्वैतस्योपशमः शिवः ।ओंकारो विदितो येन स मुनिर्नेतरो जनःAmatrah, (Om) beyond measures, is Turiya. Matra, derived in the sense of that by which anything is measured, signifies dimension; that which has infinite (ananta) dimension is anantamatrah; the idea is that its extension cannot be determined. It is sivah, auspicious, holy, because it is the state of negation of all duality. Sah yena, he by whom; onkarah, Om, as explained; viditah, is known; is a munih, sage (lit. a meditator), because of his meditating on the supreme Reality. Na itarah janah, not any other man, even though he may be learned in the scriptures. This is the idea.
30इति प्रथममागमप्रकरणं संपूर्णम् ।।