tvaj-jātāḥ
kalitotpātāḥ
mat-prāṇāḥ santy amitra-bhit
etān śādhi
tathā deva
yathā sat-patha-gāminaḥ
“O Supreme Personality of Godhead, O destroyer of enemies, my life-breaths, which are born from You, have left the path of virtue. O Lord, please bring them under control and push them on the path that is right.”
In the Third Pāda, contradictory scriptural passages describing the elements were harmonized. In the Fourth Pāda contradictory passages describing the prāṇas [life-force and senses] will be harmonized.
Viṣaya [thesis or statement]: The prāṇas are of two kinds: primary and secondary. The secondary prāṇas are the eleven senses, beginning with the eyes. The primary prāṇas are the five life-airs, beginning with apāna.
First the secondary prāṇas will be examined. In the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad [2.1.3] it is said:
etasmāj jāyate prāṇo manaḥ sarvendriyāṇi ca
“From this are born prāṇa, mind, and all the senses.”
Saṁśaya [doubt]: Is this description of the creation of the senses metaphorical, like the description of the creation of the individual souls, or literal, like the description of the creation of ether and the other elements?
Pūrvapakṣa [the opponent speaks]: This is explained in the following words of the Śruti-śāstra:
asad vā idam agra āsīt tad āhuḥ kiṁ tad āsīd iti ṛṣayo vāva te asad āsīt tad āhuḥ ke te ṛṣaya iti prāṇā vāva ṛṣayaḥ.
“He said: ‘In the beginning was non-being.’ They said: ‘What was that non-being?’ He said: ‘The non-being was many sages.’ They said: ‘Who were those sages?’ He said: ‘Those sages were the prāṇas.’ ”
This passage from the Śruti-śāstra clearly shows that the the senses, which are here called prāṇas or sages, existed before the creation of the material world. Therefore the senses are like the individual spirit souls, and the scriptures’ descriptions of the creation of the senses are only allegories.
Siddhānta [conclusion]: In the following words the author of the sūtras gives His conclusion.
tathā prāṇāḥ
tathā – so; prāṇāḥ – the prāṇās.
The praṇas are like that.
As ether and the other elements were manifested from the Supreme Personality of Godhead, so the prāṇas and the senses were also manifested from Him. That is the meaning here. In the beginning of creation the ingredients of the material world were merged together into one. Then the different ingredients were manifested. This is described in Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad [2.1.3]:
etasmāj jāyate prāṇo manaḥ sarvendriyāṇi ca
“From this are born prāṇa, mind, and all the senses.”
The creation of the material senses is not like the creation of the conscious individual spirit souls, because the souls are free from the transformations that are always present in matter: conception, gestation, birth, growth, production of byproducts, dwindling and death. When they describe the creation of the individual spirit souls, the words of the scriptures are all allegories, but when they describe the creation of the senses, the words of the scriptures are literal descriptions. This is so because the senses are by nature material. This being so, the words prāṇa and ṛṣi [sages] in this passage refer to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This is so because both these words are names of the all-knowing Supreme Person.
Here someone may object: “Is it not so that because the words prāṇāḥ and ṛṣayaḥ [sages] are both plural, it is not possible that they can here be names of the Supreme Personality of Godhead?”
In the following words the author of the sūtras answers this objection.
gauṇy asambhavāt
gauṇī – secondary meaning; asambhavāt – because of impossibility.
This must be a secondary use of the word, because the primary use is impossible.
The use of the plural in this passage from the Śruti-śāstra must be a secondary usage of the plural. Why is that? Because there is only one God and not many Gods, the plural cannot be used to describe Him. Still, the plural may be applied to Him to refer to His many different manifestations. Although the Supreme Lord is one, He appears in His many incarnations like an actor assuming different roles, or a vaidūrya jewel displaying different colors. In this secondary sense the plural is appropriate in relation to Him. This is confirmed by the following words of the Śruti-śāstra:
ekaṁ santaṁ bahudhā dṛśyamānam
“Although He is one, the Supreme Personality of Godhead is seen to be many.”
The Smṛti-śāstra also explains:
ekāneka-svarūpāya
“Although He is one, the Supreme Personality of Godhead appears in many forms.”
tat prāk śruteś ca
tat – that; prāk – before; śruteḥ – from the Śruti-śāstra; ca – and.
Because the Śruti-śāstra declares that He existed before the creation.
Because in the beginning of creation the varieties of material nature were not yet manifested, and thus the material world was all one, it is also not proper to accept the use of the plural here in a literal sense. This is so because the Śruti-śāstras declare that in the beginning of material creation only the Supreme Personality of Godhead existed. Therefore the plural here must be used in a secondary sense.
In the following words the author of the sūtras gives another reason why the word prāṇa should be interpreted as a name of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
tat-pūrvakatvād vācaḥ
tat – that; pūrvakatvāt – because of being before; vācaḥ – speech.
Because speech existed before the material creation.
The word vācaḥ [speech] here means “the names of things other than the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the master of many spiritual potencies.” This speech existed before the pradhāna, the mahat-tattva, and the other features of the material world were created. Because the names and forms of the various material features were not yet created, and because the material senses also were not yet created at that time in the beginning of creation, the word prāṇa here must be used as a name of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad [1.4.7] explains:
tad dhedaṁ tarhi
“In the beginning they were not manifested. Only later were the material forms and names manifested.”
This explains that in the beginning of the material creation the material names and forms were not yet manifested. Thus at that time the material senses as well as the elements beginning with ether, were not yet manifested.
Viṣaya [thesis or statement]: After refuting this false idea about the senses, an idea that contradicts the descriptions in Śruti-śāstra, the author of the sūtras refutes a false idea about how many senses there are.
In the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad [2.1.8] it is said:
sapta prāṇāḥ prabhavanti
tasmāt
saptārciṣaḥ samadhiḥ sapta-homāḥ
sapteme lokā
yeṣu sañcaranti
prāṇā guhāśayā nihitā sapta sapta
“From Him come the seven prāṇas, the seven arcis, the seven homas, and the seven lokas. These seven are placed in every heart.”
However, in the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad [3.9.4] it is said:
daśeme puruṣe prāṇā ātmaikadaśa
“In the living entity there are ten prāṇas. The soul is the eleventh.”
Saṁśaya [doubt]: Are the prāṇas seven or eleven?
Pūrvapakṣa [the opponent speaks]: The pūrvapakṣa speaks the following sūtra.
sapta-gater viśeṣitvāc ca
sapta – of seven; gateḥ – because of going; viśeṣitvāt – because of the specific description; ca – also.
Because of the departure of seven and also because of a specific description.
The prāṇas are seven. Why is that? Because that is the opinion of scripture. In the Śruti-śāstra it is said:
saptānām eva jīvena saha sañcāra-rupāyā gateḥ
“Accompanied by the seven prāṇas, the soul leaves the body.”
In the Kaṭha Upaniṣad [6.10] it is said:
yadā pañcāvatiṣṭhante
jñānāni
manasā saha
buddhiś ca na viceṣṭeta
tām āhuḥ paramāṁ
gatim
“The sages say that the supreme goal is attained when the five knowers are at peace, and the mind and intelligence are no longer active.”
This passage describes the condition of the senses in the state of yogic trance. This passage describes five senses, which begin with the ears. To them are added the mind and intelligence. In this way the living entity has seven senses. The Śruti-śāstra also describes five working instruments, beginning with the voice and hands, but these cannot be called senses in the primary meaning of the word because these instruments do not accompany the soul when he leaves the material body and also because these instruments are less useful to the soul than the seven primary senses.
Siddhānta [conclusion]: If this is said, the author of the sūtras replies with the following conclusion.
hastādayas tu sthite ‘to naivam
hasta – the hands; ādayaḥ – beginning with; tu – but; sthite – situated; ataḥ – therefore; na – not; evam – like that.
But when he is situated in that way, the hands and other instruments are also present. Therefore it is not like that.
The word tu [but] is used here to begin the refutation of the pūrvapakṣin’s objection. Although they are not included among the seven, the instruments beginning with the hands are to be considered among the prāṇas. Why is that? Because as long as the soul is situated in the material body these instruments help in experiencing various things and in performing various tasks. In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad it is said:
hastau vai grahaḥ sarva-karmaṇābhigraheṇa gṛhītāḥ hastābhyāṁ karma karoti.
“The hands are a sense, for with the hands one grasps things and performs actions.”
There are more than seven senses: there are five knowledge-acquiring senses, five working senses, and the mind. In this way there are eleven senses. In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad [3.9.4] it is said:
ātmaikādaśa
“The ātmā is the eleventh sense.”
The word ātmā here means the mind. In this way it should be understood. There are five objects of perception: sound, touch, form, taste, and smell. To perceive these objects there are five knowledge-acquiring senses: ears, skin, eyes, tongue, and nose. There are five kinds of action: speech, grasping, moving, excretion, and reproduction. To perform these actions there are five working senses: voice, hands, feet, anus, and genital.
To co-ordinate the actions of all these and to take consideration of the three phases of time [past, present and future], there is the mind. Sometimes the mind is considered to have four aspects. In this way the actions of the mind are: desiring, coming to conclusions, understanding one’s identity, and thinking. To perform these actions the mind is divided into the heart [manaḥ], intelligence [buddhi], false ego [ahaṅkāra] and thinking [citta]. In this way there are eleven senses.
Next the author of the sūtras considers the question of the nature and size of the senses.
Saṁśaya [doubt]: Are the senses all-pervading or are they atomic?
Pūrvapakṣa [the opponent speaks]: The senses must be all-pervading, for things can be seen or heard from far away.
Siddhānta [conclusion]: In the following words the author of the sūtras gives his conclusion.
aṇavaś ca
aṇavaḥ – atoms; ca – and.
They are also atoms.
The word ca [also] is used here to indicate certainty. The eleven senses are atomic in size. This is so because the Śruti-śāstra declares that the senses leave the material body. Things can be heard from far away and in other ways be perceived from far away because the quality or power of the senses extends beyond the senses themselves. As the individual spirit soul is all-pervading within the material body, although he is situated within the heart, so the senses can also act at a distance. In this way the theory of Saṅkhya philosophers, that the senses are all-pervading, is refuted.
Viṣaya [thesis or statement]: In the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad [2.1.3] it is said:
etasmāj jāyate prāṇaḥ
“From Him the prāṇa [life-force] is born.”
Here the word prāṇa means “the principal prāṇa.”
Saṁśaya [doubt]: Is the principal prāṇa [life-force] created in the same way the individual spirit soul is ‘created,’ or is this prāṇa created in the same way ether and the other elements are created?
Pūrvapakṣa [the opponent speaks]: The Śruti-śāstra declares:
naiṣa prāṇa udeti nāstam eti
“This prāṇa is never born and never dies.”
The Smṛti-śāstra also declares:
yat-prāptir yat-parityāga
utpattir
maraṇaṁ tathā
tasyotpattir mṛtiś caiva
kathaṁ
prāṇasya yujyate
“Birth and death come and go. How can birth and death affect the prāṇa?”
Therefore it is concluded that the principal prāṇa is created in the same way the individual spirit soul is created.
Siddhānta [conclusion]: In the following words the author of the sūtras gives His conclusion.
śreṣṭhaś ca
śreṣṭhaś – the principal one; ca – also.
The principal one also.
The principal prāṇa [life-force] is created in the same way ether and the other elements are created. This is confirmed in the words of the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad [2.1.3]:
jāyate prāṇaḥ
“The prāṇa was created.”
In its pratijñā statement the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad declares:
sa idaṁ sarvam asṛjata
“He created everything.”
To avoid contradicting these words, it must be accepted that the principal prāṇa was also created. For this reason the scriptural passages stating that the prāṇa was never created should be understood allegorically and not literally. One prāṇa is called the principal prāṇa because it maintains the material body. So its meaning can be carried into the next sūtra, this sūtra is given separately and not joined to the previous sūtra.
Viṣaya [thesis or statement]: Now the nature of the principal prāṇa [life-force] will be examined.
Saṁśaya [doubt]: Is the principal prāṇa air alone, the vibration of air, the activities of air or a condition of air when it goes to another place? Which is it?
Pūrvapakṣa [the opponent speaks]: It is the external element of air. This is confirmed in the following statement of Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad [3.1.5]:
yo ‘yaṁ prāṇaḥ sa vāyuḥ
“The prāṇa is air.”
Or, perhaps the principal prāṇa is the activities of air, the inhalation and exhalation of breath. In this way it is proved that the principal prāṇa is air.
Siddhānta [conclusion]: In the following words the author of the sūtras gives His conclusion.
na vāyu-kriye pṛthag upadeśāt
na – not; vāyu – air; kriye – action;pṛthak – different; upadeśāt – because of the teaching.
It is neither air nor the activities of air, because the teaching is that it is different.
The principal prāṇa [life-force] is neither air nor the movements of air. Why is that? The sūtra explains: “Because the teaching is that it is different.” The previously quoted passage of the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad [2.1.3] said that both air and prāṇa are born from the Supreme. In this way it should be understood that air and prāṇa are different, for they are mentioned separately. If air and prāṇa were identical, then there would be no need to mention them separately in this passage. If prāṇa were the movement of air, then there would also be no need to mention them both in this way. It is seen that the movements of fire and the other elements are not separately mentioned in this passage. The statement of the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad that “Prāṇa is air,” means that prāṇa is a specific kind of air, and that prāṇa is not a separate element like fire and the other elements. That is the meaning here.
In the Kapila-sūtra [2.31] it is said:
sāmānya-karaṇa-vṛttiḥ prāṇādyā vāyavaḥ pañca
“The five airs, beginning with prāṇa, perform the actions of the senses in general.”
Thus the Saṅkhya philosophers claim that prāṇa performs the actions of all the senses. This cannot be, for it is not possible for the single prāṇa to perform all the actions of all the senses.
Viṣaya [thesis or statement]: In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad it is said:
supteṣu vāg-ādiṣu prāṇa eko jāgarti. Prāṇa eko mṛtyunānāptaḥ. prāṇaḥ samvargo vāg-ādīn samvṛṅkte. prāṇa itarān prāṇān rakṣati māteva putrān.
“When speech and the other senses sleep, prāṇa alone remains awake. Prāṇa alone is untouched by death. Prāṇa controls speech and the other senses. As a mother protects her children, so one prāṇa protects the other prāṇas.”
Saṁśaya [doubt]: Is this principal prāṇa identical with the independent spirit soul residing in the material body or is this principal prāṇa an instrument that assists the spirit soul?
Pūrvapakṣa [the opponent speaks]: Because the Śruti-śāstra describes this prāṇa as having many powers and glories, therefore this principal prāṇa is the independent spirit soul.
Siddhānta [conclusion]: In the following words the author of the sūtras gives His conclusion.
cakṣur-ādi-vat tu tat saha śiṣṭhyādibhyaḥ
cakṣuḥ – the eyes; ādi – beginning with; vat – like; tu – indeed; tat – that; saha – with; śiṣṭhyā – teaching; ādibhyaḥ – because of beginning with.
Indeed, it is like the eyes and other senses, because it is taught along with the senses.
Here the word tu [indeed] is used to dispel doubt. The prāṇa [life-force] is an instrument used by the individual spirit soul. It is like the eyes or the other senses. Why is that? The sūtra explains: “Because it is taught along with the senses.” The prāṇa is described along with the eyes and senses. Things of a like nature are generally described together. As example of that is the Bṛhadratha meters, which are described together. This is also confirmed by the use of the word ādi [beginning with] in the sūtra.
That the prāṇa is here grouped with the senses is seen in the following passage:
yatra vāyaṁ mukhyaḥ prāṇaḥ sa evāyaṁ madhyamaḥ prāṇaḥ
“There is a principal prāṇa and there is a secondary prāṇa.”
In this way the idea that the prāṇa is the independent spirit soul is refuted.
Here someone may object: “Is it not so that if it is to be counted among the senses, the principal prāṇa must have a function to perform where it assists the soul? The principal prāṇa has no such function. Also, if the principal prāṇa is one of the senses, then the senses, beginning with the eyes, would be twelve in number.”
In the following words the author of the sūtras answers this objection.
akaraṇatvāc ca na doṣas tathā hi darśayati
akaraṇatvāt – because of not having a sepcific function; ca – and; na – no; doṣaḥ – fault; tathā – so;hi – indeed; darśayati – shows.
Also, there is no fault in not having a function, for the scriptures show it.
The word ca [also] is used to answer the previous objection. The word karaṇa here means “activity.” It is not a defect on the part of the prāṇa that is has no specific function to assist the soul, for it does have an important function in that it is the support and the resting place of the physical senses. That is the meaning here. In the following passage, the Chāndogya Upaniṣad [5.1.1] shows this:
atha ha prāṇā aham śreyasi vyūdire. . . .
“The senses argued among themselves. Each one said: `I am the best.’ They then approached their father, Lord Brahmā, and asked him, ‘O lord, who among us is the best?’ Brahmā replied, ‘He whose departure causes the greatest calamity for the body is the best.
“Then the voice departed from the body and stayed away for an entire year. When he returned, he asked: ‘How is it that you were able to live without me?’ Although it could not speak, still the body could breathe with the prāṇa, see with the eyes, hear with the ears, and think with the mind. Then the voice again entered the body.
“Then the eyes departed from the body and stayed away for an entire year. When they returned, they asked: ‘How is it that you were able to live without me?’ Although it could not see, the body could breathe with the prāṇa, speak with the voice, hear with the ears, and think with the mind. Then the voice again entered the body.
“Then the ears departed from the body and stayed away for an entire year. When they returned, they asked: ‘How is it that you were able to live without us?’ Although it could not hear, still the body could breathe with the prāṇa, see with the eyes, speak with the voice, and think with the mind. Then the ears again entered the body.
“Then the mind departed from the body and stayed away for an entire year. When he returned, he asked: ‘How is it that you were able to live without me?’ Although it could not think, still the body could breathe with the prāṇa, see with the eyes, speak with the voice, and hear with the ears. Then the mind again entered the body.
“When the prāṇa was about to depart it began to uproot all the senses. It became like a spirited horse uprooting the posts to which it is tethered. Then the other senses appealed to the prāṇa, ‘Please do not go. Please stay with us. You are the best of all of us.’”
In this way it is seen that the principal prāṇa has an important function to perform in relation to the spirit soul. The soul is the enjoyer and the performer of actions. The soul is like a king, the senses his royal attendants, and the principal prāṇa his prime minister, who helps attain the king’s objectives. In this way the prāṇa is the most important of the soul’s instruments. However, the prāṇa is still not independent of the soul itself.
Viṣaya [thesis or statement]: In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad [1.5.3] it is said:
sa eṣa vāyuḥ pañca-vidhaḥ prāṇo ‘pāno vyāna udānaḥ samānaḥ
“The prāṇa is air. There are five prāṇas: prāṇa, apāna, vyāna, udāna, and samāna.”
Saṁśaya [doubt]: Are these five, beginning with apāna, different from prāṇa, or are they merely different functions of prāṇa?
Pūrvapakṣa [the opponent speaks]: Because they have different names and functions, therefore they are different.
Siddhānta [conclusion]: In the following words the author of the sūtras gives his conclusion.
pañca-vṛttir mano-vad vyapadiśyate
pañca – five; vṛttiḥ – functions; manaḥ – the mind; vat – like; vyapadiśyate – is said.
Like the mind, it is said to have five functions.
The prāṇa is one, although it assumes five different functions when present in the different places in the body, such as the heart. In this way the prāṇa is described. In this way these are different functions of prāṇa and not different prāṇas themselves. Because these functions are different, therefore different names are employed. Still there is no difference in their natures. In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad [1.5.3] it is said:
prāṇo ‘pāno vyāna udānaḥ samāna iti. etat sarvaṁ prāṇa eva.
“There are five prāṇas: prāṇa, apāna, vyāna, udāna, and samāna. These five are all one prāṇa.”
In this way prāṇa is like the mind. In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad [1.5.3] it is said:
kāmaḥ saṅkalpo vikalpo vicikitsā śraddhā dhṛtir adhṛtir hrīr dhīr bhīr ity etat sarvaṁ mana eva.
“The mind’s functions are: desire, determination, doubt, error, faith, steadfastness, unsteadiness, shame, intelligence and fear. All these are mind.”
All these have different functions and different names, but they are not different from mind itself. They are the various functions of the mind. In the yoga-śāstra also it is said that the mind has five functions. This is the meaning of the scriptures, either hinted at or explicitly shown in the texts.
Saṁśaya [doubt]: Is the principal prāṇa atomic or all-pervading?
Pūrvapakṣa [the opponent speaks]: In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad [1.3.22] it is said:
sama ebhis tribhir lokaiḥ
“Prāṇa is equal to the three worlds.”
This and other passages of Śruti-śāstra declare that prāṇa is all-pervading.
Siddhānta [conclusion]: In the following words the author of the sūtras gives his conclusion.
aṇuś ca
aṇuḥ – atomic; ca – also.
It is also atomic.
The principal prāṇa is also atomic in size. This is so because the Śruti-śāstras declare that the principal prāṇa leaves the material body at the time of death. Scriptural passages describing the principal prāṇas as atomic should be understood to mean that living entities everywhere are dependent on the principal prāṇa.
Viṣaya [thesis or statement]: In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad it is said:
supteṣu vāg-ādiṣu prāṇa eko jāgarti.
“When speech and the other senses sleep, prāṇa alone remains awake. Prāṇa alone is untouched by death. Prāṇa controls speech and the other senses. As a mother protects her children, so one prāṇa protects the other prāṇas.”
In this way the function of the principal prāṇa is described. The functions of the secondary prāṇas are described in the following passage:
sapteme lokā yeṣu sañcaranti
“The prāṇas move in seven realms.”
Thus the secondary prāṇas move among the senses.
Saṁśaya [doubt]: Do the secondary prāṇas move by their own power among the senses, or does something else create the movement of the prāṇas? Are the prāṇas moved by the demigods, the individual spirit soul or the Supreme Personality of Godhead?
Pūrvapakṣa [the opponent speaks]: Endowed with the power of action, the prāṇas move themselves. Or perhaps the demigods move them. In the Aitareya Upaniṣad [2.4] it is said:
agnir vāg bhūtvā mukhaṁ prāviṣad
“Becoming speech, Agnideva entered the mouth.”
Or perhaps the individual spirit soul moves the prāṇas. This may be so because the prāṇas are instruments the soul uses to attain enjoyment.
Siddhānta [conclusion]: In the following words the author of the sūtras gives His conclusion.
jyotir-ādy-adhiṣṭhānaṁ tu tad āmananāt
jyotiḥ – effulgence; ādy-adhiṣṭhānam – the supreme ruler; tu – indeed; tat – that; āmananāt – because of the description.
Indeed, light is the controller, because that is the description.
The word tu [indeed] is used here to dispel doubt. The word jyotiḥ [light] here means “the Supreme Personality of Godhead.” He is the mover [adhiṣṭhānam] of the prāṇas. The affix lyuṭ in the word adhiṣṭhānam makes it mean “the mover.” Why is the Supreme Personality of Godhead the mover of the prāṇas? The sūtra explains: “Because that is the description.” This means “Because it is understood that the Supreme Personality of Godhead, as the all-pervading Supersoul, moves the prāṇas and senses. In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad [3.7.16] it is said:
yaḥ prāṇeṣu tiṣṭhan
“The Supersoul stays in the midst of the prāṇas and moves them.”
That the demigods and the individual spirit soul may also move the prāṇas is not disputed here, but the prāṇas cannot move themselves, for they are only inert matter. Hoping to enjoy, the individual spirit soul also moves the prāṇas. That is described in the next sūtra.
prāṇavatā śabdāt
prāṇavatā – by the person who possesses the prāṇas; śabdāt – because of the Śruti-śāstra.
By the person who possesses the prāṇas, because of the Śruti-śāstra.
The word prāṇavatā [the person who possesses the prāṇas] refers here to the individual spirit soul. Hoping to enjoy, the spirit soul moves the prāṇas and senses. Why is that? The sūtra explains, śabdāt: “Because of the Śruti-śāstra.” In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad [2.1.18] it is said:
sa yathā mahā-rājo jānapadān gṛhītvā sve janapade yathā- kāmaṁ parivartate evam evaiṣa etat prāṇān gṛhītvā sve śarīre yathā-kāmaṁ parivartate.
“As a great king rules the subjects in his kingdom, so the individual spirit soul rules the prāṇas in his body.”
This is the gist of the matter: The Supreme Personality of Godhead is the supreme ruler of the prāṇas and the demigods and the individual spirit soul also rule the senses. The former [the demigods] rule the prāṇas and senses by enabling them to act, and the latter [the individual spirit souls] rule the prāṇas and senses with the hope of attaining enjoyment. By exerting their wills, the individual souls thus move the prāṇas.
There is no alternative to this description. This the author of the sūtras explains in the following words.
tasya ca nityatvāt
tasya – of this; ca – and; nityatvāt – because of eternality.
Because this is eternal.
Because He has an eternal relationship with them, the all-powerful Supersoul is the actual controller and mover of them. He should be considered the primary mover and controller. This is confirmed in the words of the Antaryāmi-brāhmaṇa [Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 3.7].
In this subject another doubt is raised.
Saṁśaya [doubt]: Are the principal prāṇa and the other prāṇas also senses?
Pūrvapakṣa [the opponent speaks]: Because they assist the individual spirit soul, all the prāṇas are considered to be senses.
Siddhānta [conclusion]: In the following words the author of the sūtras gives His conclusion.
ta indriyāṇi tad vyapadeśād anyatra śreṣṭhāt
te – they; indriyāṇi – senses; tat – that; vyapadeśāt – because of the description; anyatra – otherwise; śreṣṭhāt – from the best.
They are senses, for that is the description. Only the principal one is not.
With the sole exception of the principal prāṇa, the prāṇas are all senses. Why is that? The sūtra explains: “For that is the description.” In the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad [2.1.3] it is said:
etasmāj jāyate prāṇaḥ
manaḥ
sarvendriyāṇi ca
“From the Supreme Personality of Godhead are born the principal prāṇa, the mind and the senses.”
In this way, with the sole exception of the principal prāṇa, the prāṇas are the senses, such as the ears and the others. In the Smṛti-śāstra it is said:
indriyāṇi daśaikaṁ ca
“There are eleven senses.”
In another place in the Śruti-śāstra it is said:
prāṇo mukhya sa tv anindiriyam
“The principal prāṇa is not a sense.”
Here someone may object: “Is it not so that in the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad [1.5.21] it is said:
hantasyaiva sarve rūpam asāmetyetasyaiva sarve rūpam abhavat.
“The senses then assumed the form of the principal prāṇa. They all assumed his form.”
Because the secondary prāṇas are senses and because the secondary prāṇas are merely functions of the principal prāṇa, therefore the principal prāṇa is also a sense. How can you claim, then, that the principal prāṇa is not a sense?”
To the this objection the author of the sūtras gives the following reply.
bheda-śruteḥ
bheda – difference; śruteḥ – from Śruti-śāstra.
Because the Śruti-śāstra says it is different.
In the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad [2.1.3] it is said:
prāṇo manaḥ sarvendriyāṇi
“From the Supreme Personality of Godhead are born the principal prāṇa, the mind and all the senses.”
In this way, because it is mentioned apart from the senses in this passage, the principal prāṇa is clearly different from the senses. That is the meaning here.
Here someone may doubt: “The mind is also mentioned apart from the senses in this passage. It must be that the mind is not a sense.”
This doubt is answered by the following words of Bhagavad-gītā [15.7]:
manaḥ ṣaṣṭhīndiyāni
“The mind is one of the six senses.”
Lord Kṛṣṇa also declares [Bhagavad-gītā 10.22]:
indriyāṇāṁ manaś cāsmi
“Of the senses I am the mind.”
vailakṣaṇyāc ca
vailakṣaṇyāt – because of different qualities; ca – also.
Also because of different qualities.
During sleep the principal prāṇa is active, but the ears and other senses are not. The principal prāṇa supports the body and senses, but the senses are only instruments for perception and work. In these ways the principal prāṇa and the senses have different qualities. Thus it is said that as the individual spirit souls are dependent on the Supreme Personality of Godhead, so the senses are dependent on the principal prāṇa.
Viṣaya [thesis or statement]: The scriptures declare that the material elements, the senses, everything else in the material world, and the individual spirit souls also, are all manifested from the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Now we will consider the question: Who created the individual forms [vyaṣṭi] of this world? After describing the creation of fire, water, and earth, the Chāndogya Upaniṣad [6.3.2-4] explains:
seyam devataikṣata hantāham imās tisro devatā anena jīvenātmanānupraviśya nāma-rūpe vyākaravāṇi tāsāṁ tri-vṛtam ekaikaṁ karavāṇīti. Seyaṁ devatemās tisro devatā anena jīvenātmanānupraviśya nāma-rūpe vyākarot tāsāṁ tri-vṛtaṁ tri-vṛtam ekaikām akarot.
“After creating the splendid elements of fire, water, and earth, the Supreme Personality of Godhead thought, `Now I shall enter these three splendid elements with the individual souls and thus I shall create names and forms. One by one, I shall make them three.’ Then the Supreme Personality of Godhead entered those three splendid elements with the individual souls, created names and forms, and, one by one, made the splendid elements into three.”
Saṁśaya [doubt]: Is this creation of names and forms the work of the Supreme Personality of Godhead or an individual spirit soul?
Pūrvapakṣa [the opponent speaks]: It is the work of an individual spirit soul. In the Chāndogya Upaniṣad the Lord says, “With an individual soul I shall create.” The instrumental case here is not used in the sense of “with.” When the meaning of an agent is possible in this case it is not reasonable to accept a meaning that carries the sense of a preposition. Neither is the meaning of an instrument possible here, for the Supreme Personality of Godhead can do anything simply by His will, and therefore He has no need is employ an individual spirit soul to do anything. Neither can it be said that in this situation the entrance into the creation is done by an individual spirit soul and the creation of names and forms is done by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, for the use of the indeclineable past participle here indicates that the entrance and the act of creation were both performed by the same agent. Neither is the use of the first-person in the verb vyākaravāṇi [I shall create] inappropriate here, for it is like saying, “With a spy I will enter the enemy army and see it.” Neither is all this merely my own idea, for the Śruti-śāstra declares:
viriñco vā idaṁ virecayati vidadhāti brahmā vāva viriñca etasmād dhīme rūpa-nāmanī
“The demigod Brahmā is called viriñca because he organizes [virec] the material universe. From him have come the names and forms of the material universe.”
The Smṛti-śāstra also declares:
nāma-rūpe ca bhūtānām
“The demigod Brahmā created the names and forms of the creatures in the universe.”
Therefore the creation of names and forms was done by an individual spirit soul.
Siddhānta [conclusion]: In the following words the author of the sūtras gives His conclusion.
saṁjñā-mūrti-kḷptiś ca tri-vṛt kurvata upadeśāt
saṁjnā – names; mūrti – forms; kḷptiḥ – creation;ca – and; tu – but; tri-vṛt – in three parts; kurvate – does; upadeśāt – from the teaching.
But the creation of names and forms in groups of three is done by the creator, for that is the teaching.
The word tu [but] is used here is begin the refutation of the opponent’s argument. Here the word saṁjñā-mūrti means “names and forms” and the word kḷptiḥ means “creation.” The words tri-vṛt kurvataḥ [done by the creator] indicate that this creation was done by the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself and not by an individual spirit soul. Why is that? The sūtra explains, upadeśāt: “Because that is the teaching.” Thus the scriptures affirm that this creation was done by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Thus the creation of threes and the creation of names and forms were both done by the same creator. That is the meaning.
The creation of threes was effected in the following way:
trīṇy ekaikaṁ dvidhā
kuryāt
try-ardhāni vibhajed dvidhā
tat-tan-mukhyārdham
utsṛjya
yojayec ca tri-rūpatā
“The creator divides in half each of the three elements. Three of these halves He then divides in half again. Then He joins the smaller halves to the larger halves. In this way the compound elements, made of three parts, are created.”
This is like the process called pañcī-karaṇa. It cannot be said that this creation of threefold compound elements is within the power of the demigod Brahmā. That is so because Brahmā was born after the universal egg had been created from these threefold compound elements made of fire, water, and earth. This is corroborated by Manu-saṁhitā [1.9]:
tasminn aṇḍe ‘bhavad brahmā sarva-loka-pitāmahaḥ
“Brahmā, the grandfather of all the worlds, was born in the egg of the universe.”
Therefore the creation of names and forms and the creation of threefold compound elements were both done by the same creator. It should not be thought, because of the sequence apparently described in the text, that the creation of names and forms preceded the creation of threefold compound elements. The creation of threefold compound elements came first, and only after that creation the creation of name and forms was effected. The universal egg cannot be created by the elements of fire, water and earth before those elements are compounded in the three ways. That this is not possible is described in the following words of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam [2.5.32-33]:
yadaite ‘saṅgatā
bhāvā
bhūtendriya-mano-guṇāḥ
yadāyatana-nirmāṇe
ne
śekur brahma-vittama
“O Nārada, best of the transcendentalists, the forms of the body cannot take place as long as these created parts, namely the elements, senses, mind, and modes of nature, are not assembled.”
tadā saṁhatya
canyonyaṁ
bhagavac-chakti-coditāḥ
sad-sattvam
upādāya
cobhayaṁ sasṛjur hy adaḥ
“Thus when all these became assembled by the force of the energy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, this universe certainly came into being by accepting both the primary and secondary causes of creation.”
The process of pañcī-karaṇa is also described here. In this way the creation should be understood. In the process of pañcī-karaṇa each of the five elements is divided in half, half of the halves are again divided in half, and the smaller halves are then joined with the larger in compound elements. In Chāndogya Upaniṣad [6.5.1] it is said:
annam aśitaṁ tridhā vidhīyate
“When food is eaten it is transformed in three ways.”
This transformation is completely different from the threefold combination of earth and the other elements previously described. Therefore this passage cannot be used to support the theory that the individual spirit soul is the creator of the names and forms of this world. The scriptural passage uses the phrase ātmanā jīvena. By thus placing these two words in apposition, it is clear that the word jīva [individual soul] here means “by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, whose potency is the individual spirit souls.” In a similar way the passage beginning with the words virñco vā is also explained.
Understood in this way the indeclineable past participle praviśya and the third-person verb following it can be understood in their primary meanings without any difficulty. In this way it is easily seen that the two actions described by the words praviśya and vyākaravāṇi are certainly performed by the same agent. Therefore it is certainly the Supreme Personality of Godhead who performed the act of creation described in the verb vyākaravāṇi. This is corroborated by the following words of Taittirīya Araṇyaka [3.12.16]:
sarvāṇi rūpāṇi vicitya
dhīro
nāmāni kṛtvābhivadan yad āste
“The all-knowing Supreme Personality of Godhead created all forms and names.”
Viṣaya [thesis or statement]: Now the nature of the material body, which is called by the name mūrti will be examined. In the Bṛhad-ārayaṅka [3.2.13] it is said that the material body is made of earth:
śarīraṁ pṛthivīm apy eti
“The material body becomes earth.”
However, in the Kauṇḍinya-śruti it is said that the material body is made of water:
adbhyo hīdam utpadyate āpo vāva māṁsam asthi ca bhavanty āpaḥ śarīram āpa evedaṁ sarvam.
“From water the material body is created. Water becomes transformed into flesh and bones. The entire body is water.”
Another text of the Śruti-śāstra claims that the material body is made of fire:
saḥ agner deva-yonyāḥ
“The demigods’ bodies are made of fire.”
Saṁśaya [doubt]: What is the truth here?
Pūrvapakṣa [the opponent speaks]: One text says the material body is made of earth, another says it is made of water, and another that it is made of fire. Because the scriptures give these three differing explanations, the truth cannot be ascertained.
Siddhānta [conclusion]: In the following words the author of the sūtras give His conclusion.
māṁsādi bhaumaṁ yathā-śabdam itarayoś ca
māṁsa – flesh; ādi – beginning with; bhaumam – earth; yathā – as; śabdam – the Śruti-śāstra; itarayoḥ – of the other two; ca – also.
As the Śruti-śāstra says, the flesh and other ingredients are made of earth. It also so for the other two.
Flesh and other ingredients are made of earth. However, blood is made of water, and bones are made of fire. This is described in the Śruti-śāstra [yathā-śabdam]. In the Garbha Upaniṣad it is said:
yat kaṭhiṇaṁ sā pṛthivī yad dravaṁ tad āpo yad uṣṇaṁ tat tejaḥ
“What is hard in the body is made of earth, what is liquid is made of water, and what is hot is made of fire.”
In this way it is proved that all material bodies are made of these three elements.
Here someone may object: “If the material elements are all compounded of three elements, none of the elements pure, but all of them mixtures of elements, then why do the scriptures say, ‘This part of the body is made of fire, this part is made of water, and this part is made of earth’?”
To this objection the author of the sūtras gives the following reply:
vaiśeṣāt tu tad-vādas tad-vādaḥ
vaiśeṣāt – because of the specific nature; tu – but; tat – of that; vādaḥ – statement; tat – of that; vādaḥ – statement.
Because of its specific nature, thus it is so said. Thus it is so said.
The word tu [but] is used to dispel doubt.
Everywhere in the material world the elements are arranged in threefold compounds with one element predominating. The elements are therefore named according to the predominating element. The word tad-vādaḥ is repeated to indicate the end of the chapter.
vardhasva kalpāga samaṁ
samantāt
kuruṣva tāpa-kṣatim
āśritānām
tvad-aṅga-saṅkīrṇi-karāḥ parās tā
hiṁsrā
lasad-yukti-kuṭhārikābhiḥ
“O tree that fulfills all desires, please extend yourself in all directions. To they who take shelter of you please give the shade that stops all troubles. The glistening axes of logic have now cut away the underbrush that choked you.”