Author Topic: CHAPTER 6 - SECTION 4  (Read 423 times)


  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 341
    • View Profile
« on: April 07, 2019, 01:57:59 PM »
6.4.1. The process of making the gods three-fold that was spoken of is being cited as an example. An example is that which is cited for indicating the whole by exemplifying a part of it. (The Upanisad) speaks of it thus: The well-known rohitam rupam, red colour in the world; yat agneh, of that fire which has undergone the process of becoming three-fold; know tat, that; to be rupam, the colour; tejasah, of fire before it had been made three fold.

Similarly, yat suklam, that which is the white colour of fire itself; tat apam, that belongs to water before becoming three-fold. Yat krsnam, that which is the black colour of that very fire; know tat, that; to be annasya, of food, of earth before it has become three-fold. This being so, that which you think of as fire apart from the three colours, that which that agnitvam, firehood; agneh, of fire; apagat, vanishes now. The meaning is that the idea of fire which you had before the knowledge of the distinction of the three colours, that idea of fire has vanished; so also has vanished the word 'fire'.

A crystal seen in the proximity of redness (i.e. found in association with a red adjunct) causes the perception of it as possessed of the idea and name 'ruby', before the knowledge of the distinction between the crystal and the proximate thing (or adjunct). But in the case of the man who has that discriminating knowledge, the idea and the word denoting ruby cease when the distinction becomes known. Similar is the case here.

Objection: What do you gain here by imagining an idea and a word? It is quite reasonable that fire alone existed before the three colours were discriminated, and that firehood of fire vanished after the discrimination of the red colour etc. just as a cloth ceases to exist when the threads are removed.
Reply: It is not so. Indeed, fire is nothing but an idea and a word, for which reason the text says: The word fire which is vekarah, a transformation; vacaram-bhanam, has speech as its basis; and namadheyam, it is a name only. This is the meaning. So the idea of fire also is verily false. What is true there then? Iti, those which are; satyam, true; are the three rupam, colours; eva, alone. The meaning of the assertion (eva) is that, apart from the three colours nothing else is true even in the slightest degree.

6.4.2. The red colour of the sun is the colour of fire, the white the colour of water, the black the colour of earth. Thus vanishes from the sun what is commonly called the sun, the modification  being only a name, arising from speech, while the three colours  alone are true.

6.4.3. "The red colour of the moon is the colour of fire, the white the colour of water, the black the colour of earth. Thus vanishes from the moon what is commonly called the moon, the  modification being only a name, arising from speech, while the  three colours alone are true.

6.4.4. Similarly, yat, that which is; adityasya, of the sun; yat, that which is; candramasah, of the moon; yat, that which is vidyutah, of lightning--etc. are to be explained as before.
Objection: After having said, 'O good-looking one, know fully from me how each one of these three gods becomes three-fold and three-fold' (VI.III.4), the process of making three-fold has been shown in the case of fire only, with all the four examples of fire etc. But no illustration has been cited in the case of making water and earth three-fold.
Reply: This fault does not arise. The Upanisad thinks that illustrations in the cases of water and earth are also to be understood in this very way. The example of fire is cited synechdochically. (Moreover) since it possesses colour it is possible to present its meaning clearly. Smell and fluidity have not been cited because their existence is not possible in all the three. Indeed, smell and fluidity do not exist in fire. Touch and sound are not cited because they cannot be pointed out separately. If the whole universe be a result of the process of becoming three-fold as in the case of fire etc. and if the three colours alone be true, then, like the firehood of fire the universe as the universe will vanish. Similarly, since earth has got water as its source, therefore water alone is real. Earth has speech only as its basis. So also, since water has got fires as its source, therefore it has speech only as its basis. Fire alone is real. Since fire has got Existence as its source, therefore it also has speech only as its basis. Existence alone is real. This is the intended meaning.

Objection: However, since air and space are not included in fire etc. therefore they remain excluded without being made three-fold. Similarly smell, fluidity, sound, and touch also remain excluded. Hence, how can all other unknown things become known through the knowledge of Existence? Or, some other process has to be stated for the knowledge of them.
Reply: There is no such fault, since all are comprehended in a thing having colour.
Objection: How?
Reply: As to that, since there is perception of sound and touch as well in fire which is possessed of colour, therefore the existence of air and space, which are possessed of the qualities of touch and sound (respectively) can be inferred. Similarly fluidity and smell become included in water and earth which are possessed of colour. The Upanisad thinks that by pointing out the process of becoming three-fold in the cases of the three--fire, water, and earth--, which are possessed of colour, all things which, being the products of Existence are included in them, come to be known as the three colours. For by rejecting a concrete thing possessed of colour there can be no perception of air and space, or their qualities touch and sound, or of smell and fluidity. Or it may be that the Upanisad considers citing the process of becoming three-fold in the cases of things possessed of colour as an illustration only. But as in the process of making three-fold, what are real are the three colours alone, the same logic applies in the case of becoming five-fold also.

Therefore, all things being modifications of Existence, (therefore) when Existence becomes known all this becomes known. Hence it becomes surely established that Existence alone, which is one without a second, is Real. It has been well said that, when that One is known all this becomes known.

6.4.5. Ha sma vai, in days of yore; purve, the ancient; mahasalah, the great householders; maha-srotriyah, the great adepts in the Vedas; vidvamsah, who know; etat, which is such; ahuh, said--. What did they say? That is being answered. 'Na there is no one; adya, now; nah, of us, in the lineage of ours possessing this kind of knowledge; who udaharisyati, will speak of; kascana, anything; as asrutam, unheard of; amatam, unthought of; avijnatam, unknown.'

The idea implied is, 'To persons belongs to our lineage, surely all things remain known because of being possessed of the knowledge of Existence.'
How again, did they know everything? That is being said: Hi, since; ebhyah, through these, by knowing the colours, viz red etc. which had undergone the process of becoming three-fold; they vidancakruh, knew all the other remaining things also to be verily so (three-fold); therefore, they veritably became omniscient through the knowledge of Existence. This is the purport. Or the meaning is that they knew all other things ebhyah, through these, through the knowledge of the illustrations of fire etc.

6.4.7. How (did they know)? Whatever colour was in doubt, as in the case of the (variegated) colour of a pigeon yat rohitam iva abhut, whatever appeared as red (in that multitude of colours) to those ancient knowers of Brahman; tat, that; vidancakruh, they knew; as tejasah, rupam, colour of fire. Similarly, yat, whatever; suklam, iva abhut, appeared to be white when perceived; tat apam, that (was the colour) of water. yat, whatever; krsnam iva, appeared to be black when perceived; tat annasya, that (was the colour) of earth; thus vidancakruh, they knew. In this very way, yat, whatever; u, again; avijnatam iva, appeared as though unknown, appeared as very difficult to be perceived, which could not be perceived specially; that also vidancakruh, they knew; as samasah, the combination; of etasam eva, these very; three devatanam, gods.

In this way, to that extent, an external thing becomes known like fire etc. Similarly now, Somya, O good-looking one; vijanihi, know; me, from me; as to yatha, now; ekaika, each one; tisrah, devatah, of the three gods as mentioned; bhavati, becomes; trivrt trivrt and three-fold; prapya, after coming in contact; purusam, with a person who is characterized by head, hand, etc. and who is the combination of body and organs. After saying so he continued.

« Last Edit: April 10, 2019, 06:57:52 PM by Commentary »