Chapter 4: Brahman is both material and efficient cause

आनुमानिकमप्येकेषामिति चेन्न शरीररूपकविन्यस्तगृहीतेर्दर्शयति च

ānumānikamapyekeṣāmiti cenna śarīrarūpakavinyastagṛhīterdarśayati ca

If it be said that for some the inferred Pradhana is named, no, for 'the unmanifest' there is taken from the simile of the body as a chariot, and scripture shows this. In the Katha, avyakta means the subtle body.

सूक्ष्मं तु तदर्हत्वात्

sūkṣmaṃ tu tadarhatvāt

But the subtle cause is meant, because it is fit to be called unmanifest. The body in its seed state, not yet manifest, deserves that name.

तदधीनत्वादर्थवत्

tadadhīnatvādarthavat

Being dependent on Him, it has a purpose. This subtle cause is not independent like Pradhana; it serves creation only under the Lord.

ज्ञेयत्वावचनाच्च

jñeyatvāvacanācca

And because it is not said to be something to be known. Sankhya says Pradhana must be known for release; the Katha never says that of the avyakta.

वदतीति चेन्न प्राज्ञो हि प्रकरणात्

vadatīti cenna prājño hi prakaraṇāt

If it be said the text does call it knowable, no, for the wise Self is meant, as the context shows. 'Knowing That, one is freed from death' refers to the Supreme.

त्रयाणामेव चैवमुपन्यासः प्रश्नश्च

trayāṇāmeva caivamupanyāsaḥ praśnaśca

And so only three are presented and questioned about. In the Katha, Nachiketa's questions concern only fire, the soul and the Supreme; Pradhana is not one of them.

महद्वच्च

mahadvacca

And as with 'the great'. Just as 'mahat' in the Katha means the great Self and not the Sankhya category, avyakta does not mean Pradhana.

चमसवदविशेषात्

camasavadaviśeṣāt

Like the bowl, because nothing specific is said. The 'unborn' (aja) of the Shvetashvatara cannot be fixed as Pradhana, just as a bowl with mouth below could be any bowl.

ज्योतिरुपक्रमा तु तथा ह्यधीयत एके

jyotirupakramā tu tathā hyadhīyata eke

But it begins with Light, for so some read it. The red, white and black aja is the elemental nature arising from Brahman, beginning with fire, as the Chandogya shows.

कल्पनोपदेशाच्च मध्वादिवदविरोधः

kalpanopadeśācca madhvādivadavirodhaḥ

And because of the teaching by figure, there is no conflict, as with the Madhu Vidya. Nature is pictured as a she-goat just as the sun is pictured as honey.

न संख्योपसंग्रहादपि नानाभावादतिरेकाच्च

na saṃkhyopasaṃgrahādapi nānābhāvādatirekācca

Not from the mention of number either, because of their diversity and excess. The 'five-fives' of the Brihadaranyaka are not Sankhya's twenty-five categories, which do not group into fives, and space and the Self are added.

प्राणादयो वाक्यशेषात्

prāṇādayo vākyaśeṣāt

They are breath and the rest, as the complementary passage shows. The five people are breath, eye, ear, food and mind.

ज्योतिषैकेषामसत्यन्ने

jyotiṣaikeṣāmasatyanne

For some recensions, where food is absent, light completes the five. The Kanva text lacks 'food', so the five are counted with light.

कारणत्वेन चाकाशादिषु यथाव्यपदिष्टोक्तेः

kāraṇatvena cākāśādiṣu yathāvyapadiṣṭokteḥ

And as the cause of space and the rest, Brahman is taught as described elsewhere. Though accounts of creation differ in order, all agree on Brahman as the cause.

समाकर्षात्

samākarṣāt

Because of the drawing in of the topic. 'Non-being was this in the beginning' draws on the preceding Brahman, so it means the unmanifest state, not utter nothing.

जगद्वाचित्वात्

jagadvācitvāt

Because it denotes the world. In the Kaushitaki, the one 'whose work is this' is Brahman, since 'this' means the whole world.

जीवमुख्यप्राणलिङ्गान्नेति चेत्तद्व्याख्यातम्

jīvamukhyaprāṇaliṅgānneti cettadvyākhyātam

If it be said the marks of the soul and chief breath forbid this, that has been explained already, in 1.1.31.

अन्यार्थं तु जैमिनिः प्रश्नव्याख्यानाभ्यामपि चैवमेके

anyārthaṃ tu jaiminiḥ praśnavyākhyānābhyāmapi caivameke

Jaimini holds the reference to the soul has another purpose, as question and answer show; some recensions say so too. It points beyond the soul to Brahman.

वाक्यान्वयात्

vākyānvayāt

Because of the connection of the passages. In Yajnavalkya's teaching to Maitreyi, the Self to be seen and heard is the Supreme, by which all is known.

प्रतिज्ञासिद्धेर्लिङ्गमाश्मरथ्यः

pratijñāsiddherliṅgamāśmarathyaḥ

Ashmarathya holds the soul is spoken of as Self because it fulfils the promise. Knowing the One being known, all is known, so the soul's non-difference is a sign of that promise.

उत्क्रमिष्यत एवं भावादित्यौडुलोमिः

utkramiṣyata evaṃ bhāvādityauḍulomiḥ

Audulomi holds it is because the soul, on departing, becomes such. The jiva, once freed from the body, becomes one with the Supreme.

अवस्थितेरिति काशकृत्स्नः

avasthiteriti kāśakṛtsnaḥ

Kashakritsna holds it is because the Supreme abides as the soul. Acharyas read these three views differently, but each explains why soul and Self are spoken of together.

प्रकृतिश्च प्रतिज्ञादृष्टान्तानुपरोधात्

prakṛtiśca pratijñādṛṣṭāntānuparodhāt

Brahman is also the material cause, so as not to contradict the promise and the illustrations. 'By knowing one lump of clay all clay is known' holds only if Brahman is the substance of the world too.

अभिध्योपदेशाच्च

abhidhyopadeśācca

And because of the teaching of will. 'He willed: may I be many' shows Brahman as both the one who wills and the material that becomes many.

साक्षाच्चोभयाम्नानात्

sākṣāccobhayāmnānāt

And because both are directly stated. Scripture says all beings arise from and return to Brahman alone.

आत्मकृतेः परिणामात्

ātmakṛteḥ pariṇāmāt

Because of acting upon itself, by transformation. 'That made itself' says the Taittiriya, so Brahman is both maker and material; acharyas explain this transformation in different ways.

योनिश्च हि गीयते

yoniśca hi gīyate

And because He is sung of as the womb. The Mundaka calls Him 'the source of beings' (bhutayoni), as the womb from which they come forth.

एतेन सर्वे व्याख्याता व्याख्याताः

etena sarve vyākhyātā vyākhyātāḥ

By this all the other views are explained, explained. Theories of atoms and the like are answered by the same reasoning; the repetition closes the first adhyaya.