उपदेशसाहस्री (आदि शङ्कराचार्य - गद्य व पद्य भाग)

56 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS self-existent. As Pure Consciousness, the Self, is self- existent no one can disprove Its independence of other things inasmuch as It never ceases to exist." ननु व्यभिचारो दर्शितो मया, सुषुप्ते न पश्यामीति ॥ ९२ ॥ 92. Disciple.—" But I have shown ¹ an exception,² namely, I have no consciousness in deep sleep." न । व्याहतत्वात् । कथं व्याघातः ? पश्यतस्तव न पश्यामि इति व्याहतं वचनम् । नहि कदाचित् भगवन्, सुषुप्ते मया चैतन्यं अन्यद्वा किंचित् दृष्टम् । पश्यन् तर्हि सुषुप्ते त्वम् । यस्मात् दृष्टमेव प्रतिषेधसि, न दृष्टिम् । या तव दृष्टिः तत् चैत- न्यमिति मयोक्तम् । यया त्वं विद्यमानया न किंचित् दृष्टमिति प्रतिषेधसि, सा दृष्टिः त्वच्चैतन्यम् । तर्हि सर्वत्र अव्यभिचारात् कूटस्थनित्यत्वं सिद्धं स्वत एव, न प्रमाणापेक्षम् । स्वतःसिद्धस्य हि प्रमातुः अन्यस्य प्रमेयस्य परिच्छित्तिं प्रति प्रमाणापेक्षा । या तु अन्या नित्या परिच्छित्तिः अपेक्ष्यते, अन्यस्य अपरि- च्छित्तिरूपस्य परिच्छेदाय, सा हि नित्यैव कूटस्था स्वयं- ज्योतिःस्वभावा । आत्मनि प्रमाणत्वे प्रमातृत्वे वा न तां प्रति प्रमाणापेक्षा, तत्स्वभावत्वात् । यथा प्रकाशनं उष्णत्वं वा लोहोदकादिषु परतः अपेक्ष्यते अग्न्यादित्यादिभ्यः, अतत्स्व- भावत्वात्, न अग्न्यादित्यादीनां तदपेक्षा, सर्वदा तत्स्वभाव- त्वात् ॥ ९३ ॥ 93. Teacher.—" No, you contradict yourself." Disciple—" How is it a contradiction ? " ¹ See para 90 above. ² To the persistence of Pure Consciousness .

THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE CHANGELESS 57 Teacher.—“You contradict yourself by saying that you are not conscious when, as a matter of fact, you are so.” Disciple.—“But, Sir, I was never conscious of con- sciousness or anything else in deep sleep.” Teacher.—“You are then conscious in deep sleep. For you deny the existence of the objects of Knowledge (in that state), but not that of Knowledge. I have told you that what is your consciousness is nothing but absolute Knowledge. The Consciousness owing to whose presence you deny (the existence of things in deep sleep) by saying, ‘I was conscious of nothing’ is the Knowledge, the Consciousness which is your Self. As It never ceases to exist, Its eternal immutability is self-evident and does not depend on any evidence ; for an object of Knowledge different from the self-evident Knower depends on an evidence in order to be known. Other than the object the eternal Knowledge that is indispensable in proving non-conscious things different from Itself, is immutable ; for It is always of a self- evident nature. Just as iron, water, etc., which are not of the nature of light and heat, depend for them on the sun, fire and other things other than themselves, but the sun and fire themselves, always of the nature of light and heat, do not depend for them on anything else ; so, being of the nature of pure Knowledge It does not depend on an evidence to prove that It exists or that It is the Knower.” अनित्यत्वे एव प्रमा स्यात्, न नित्यत्वे इति चेत् ॥ ९४ ॥

58 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS 94. Disciple.—“But it is transitory knowledge only that is the result¹ of a proof and not eternal Know- ledge.”² न। अवगतेः नित्यत्वानित्यत्वयोः विशेषानुपपत्तेः। न हि अवगतेः प्रमात्वे अनित्या अवगतिः प्रमा, न नित्या इति विशेषः अवगम्यते ॥ ९५ ॥ 95. Teacher.—“No. There cannot reasonably be a distinction of perpetuity or otherwise in Knowledge. For it is not known that transitory Knowledge is the result of a proof and not eternal Knowledge, as Know- ledge³ Itself is such a result.” नित्यायां प्रमातुः अपेक्षाभावः। अनित्यायां तु यत्नान्तरित- त्वात् अवगतिः अपेक्ष्यत इति विशेषः स्यादिति चेत् ॥ ९६ ॥ 96. Disciple.—“But eternal Knowledge does not depend on a knower⁴ while transitory knowledge does so as it is produced by an intervening effort. This is the difference.”⁵ सिद्धा तर्हि आत्मनः प्रमातुः स्वतःसिद्धिः, प्रमाणनिरपेक्ष- तयैवेति ॥ ९७ ॥ 97. Teacher.—“The Knower⁶ which is the Self is then self-evident as It does not depend on any evidence (in order to be proved).” 1 True Knowledge is due to sense-perception, inference, testimony, etc., when we see a jar, for example, with our eyes, we have what is called the true Knowledge of the jar. It is produced and there- fore transitory. That is what the disciple thinks. ² Pure Knowledge which is the Self. ³ Pure Knowledge Itself. See paras 103 and 108 of this Chapter. ⁴ One who applies a proof. ⁵ Between Knowledge eternal and transitory. ⁶ Eternal Knowledge. See para 93 above.

THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE CHANGELESS 59 अभावेऽपि अपेक्षाभावः, नित्यत्वात् इति चेत् । न । अव- गतेरेव आत्मनि सद्भावादिति परिहृतमेतत् ॥ ९८ ॥ 98. Disciple.—"(If the Knowledge of the Self be independent of an evidence on the ground that It is eternal) why should the absence ¹ of the result ² of an evidence with regard to the Self be not so on the same ground ? " Teacher.—" No, it has been refuted on the ground that it is pure Knowledge that is in the Self." ³ प्रमातुश्चेत् प्रमाणापेक्षासिद्धिः, कस्य प्रमित्सा स्यात् ? यस्य प्रमित्सा स एव प्रमाता अभ्युपगम्यते । तदीया च प्रमित्सा प्रमेयविषयैव, न प्रमातृविषया । प्रमातृविषयत्वे अन- वस्थाप्रसङ्गात् प्रमातुः तदिच्छायाश्च, तस्याप्यन्यः प्रमाता, तस्याप्यन्य इति । एवमेव इच्छायाः प्रमातृविषयत्वे । प्रमातु- रात्मनः अव्यवहितत्वाच्च प्रमेयत्वानुपपत्तिः । लोके हि प्रमेयं नाम प्रमातुः इच्छा-स्मृति प्रयत्न-प्रमाणजन्मव्यवहितं सिद्ध्यति, नान्यथा अवगतिः प्रमेयविषया दृष्टा । नच प्रमातुः प्रमाता स्वस्य स्वयमेव केनचित् व्यवहितः कल्पयितुं शक्यः इच्छादी- नामन्यतमेनापि । स्मृतिश्च स्मर्तव्यविषया, न स्मर्तृविषया । तथा इच्छायाः इष्टविषयत्वमेव, न इच्छावद्विषयत्वम् । स्मर्त्रि- ¹ The disciple thinks that the Self does not exist as It is not known by an evidence. ² True Knowledge. See foot-note 1, para 94 above. ³ i.e., the Self is of the nature of pure Know- ledge and so It exists independent of every evidence. See paras 93 and 97 above.

60 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS च्छावद्विषयत्वेऽपि हि उभयोः अनवस्था पूर्ववदपरिहार्या स्यात् ॥ ९९ ॥ 99. " Whom will the desire (to know a thing) belong to if the Knower depends on an evidence in order to be known? It is admitted that one who is desirous of knowing a thing is the Knower. His desire of knowing a thing has for its object the thing to be known and not the Knower. For, in the latter case, there arises a regressus ad infinitum with regard to the Knower and also with regard to the desire to know the Knower inasmuch as the knower of the knower and so on (are to be known) ; and such is the case with regard to the desire of knowing the knower. Moreover, there being nothing intervening, the Knower, the Self cannot fall into the category of the known. For a thing to be known¹ becomes known when it is distanced from the knower by the birth of an intervening desire, memory, effort or an evidence on the part of the knower. There cannot be the knowledge of an object in any other way. Again it cannot be imagined that the knower himself is distanced from himself by anyone of his own desire etc. For memory has for its object the thing to be remember- ed and not one who remembers it ; so has desire for its object the thing to be desired and not one who desires it. There arises, as before, an inevitable regressus ad infinitum ¹ i.e., a thing to be known is distanced by the birth of an evidence before it is known ; a thing to be desired is distanced by the birth of a desire before it is desired ; a thing to be remembered is distanced by the birth of a memory before it is remembered ; and a thing to be accomplished is distanced by an effort before it is accomplished.

THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE CHANGELESS 61 if memory and desire have their own agents for their objects. ननु प्रमातृविषयावगत्यनुत्पत्तौ अनवगत एव प्रमाता स्या- दिति चेत् ॥ १०० ॥ 100. Disciple.—“But the Knower remains unknown if there is no knowledge which has for its object the Knower.” न, अवगन्तुः अवगतेः अवगन्तव्यविषयत्वात् । अवगन्तृ- विषयत्वे च अनवस्था पूर्ववत् स्यात् । अवगतिश्च आत्मनि कूटस्थनित्यात्मज्योतिः अन्यतः अनपेक्षैव सिद्धा, अग्न्यादि- त्याद्युष्णप्रकाशवत्, इति पूर्वमेव प्रसाधितम् । अवगतेः चैत- न्यात्मज्योतिषः स्वात्मनि अनित्यत्वे आत्मनः स्वार्थतानुपपत्तिः, कार्यकारणसंघातवत् संहतत्वात् परार्थ्यं दोषवत्त्वं च अवोचाम । कथम् ? चैतन्यात्मज्योतिषः स्वात्मनि अनित्यत्वे स्मृत्यादि- व्यवधानात् सान्तर्गतत्वम् । ततश्च तस्य चैतन्यज्योतिषः प्रागु- त्पत्तेः प्रध्वंसाच्चोर्ध्वं आत्मन्येव अभावात्, चक्षुरादीनामिव संह- तत्वान्, परार्थ्यं स्यात् । यदा च तत् उत्पन्नं आत्मनि विद्यते, न तदा आत्मनः स्वार्थत्वम् । तद्भावाभावापेक्षा हि आत्माना- त्मनोः स्वार्थत्वपरार्थत्वसिद्धिः । तस्मात् आत्मनः अन्यनिर- पेक्षमेव नित्यचैतन्यज्योतिष्ट्वं सिद्धम् ॥ १०१ ॥ 101. Teacher.—“No. The knowledge of the knower has for its object the thing to be known. If it have for its object the knower there arises a regressus ad infinitum

62 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS as before.¹ It has already ² been shown that, like the heat and light of the sun, fire and other things, the Knowledge which is changeless, eternal and self-effulgent ³ has an existence in the Self entirely independent of everything else. I have already ⁴ said that, if the self-effulgent Knowledge which is there in the Self were transitory,⁵ it would become unreasonable that the Self existed for Itself, and, being a combination, It would get impuri- ties and have an existence for the sake of another like the combination of the body and the senses. How ? (Reply) If the self-effulgent Knowledge in the Self were tran- sitory It would have a distance ⁶ by the intervention of memory etc. It would then be non-existent in the Self before being produced and after being destroyed, and the Self, then a combination, would have an existence for the sake of another like that of the eye etc. produced by the combination of certain things. The Self would have no independent existence if this Knowledge were produced before it was in It. For it is only on account of the absence or presence of the state of being com- bined that the Self is known to exist for Itself and the non-Self for another. It is, therefore, established that the Self is of the nature of eternal and self-effulgent Knowledge not dependent on anything else." ननु एवं सति, असति प्रमाश्रयत्वे कथं प्रमातुः प्रमातृ- त्वम् ॥ १०२ ॥ ¹ See para 99 above. ² See para 93 above. ³ Br. U., 4. 3. 9. ⁴ See paras 64 to 73. ⁵ And therefore producible. ⁶ See para 99.

THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE CHANGELESS 63 102. Disciple.—“ How can the Knower be a Knower if he is not the seat of the knowledge produced by evidences ?” उच्यते—प्रमायाः नित्यत्वे अनित्यत्वे च रूपविशेषाभावात् । अवगतिर्हि प्रमा । तस्याः स्मृतीच्छादिपूर्विकायाः अनित्यायाः, कूटस्थनित्याया वा, न स्वरूपविशेषो विद्यते । यथा धात्वर्थस्य तिष्ठत्यादेः फलस्य गत्यादिपूर्वकस्य अनित्यस्य अपूर्वस्य नित्यस्य वा, रूपविशेषो नास्तीति तुल्यो व्यपदेशो दृष्टः—तिष्ठन्ति मनुष्याः, तिष्ठन्ति पर्वताः इत्यादि, तथा नित्यावगतिस्व- रूपेऽपि प्रमातरि प्रमातृत्वव्यपदेशो न विरुध्यते, फलसामान्या- दिति ॥ १०३ ॥ 103. The teacher said, “ The knowledge ¹ produced by an evidence does not differ in its essential nature whether one calls it eternal or transitory. Knowledge (though) produced by an evidence is nothing but know- ledge. The knowledge preceded ² by memory, desire, etc. and supposed to be transitory, and that which is eternal and immutable do not differ in their essential nature. Just as the result of the transitory actions of standing etc., the meanings of roots, preceded by motion etc. and that of the permanent ones not so preceded do not differ in their essential nature, and there are, therefore, the identical predicates in the state- ments, ‘ People stand ’, ‘ Mountains stand ’, etc. ; so, the Knower, though of the nature of eternal Knowledge, ¹ True knowledge as opposed to delusion, See note 1, para 94 above. ² See para 99 above.

64 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS is called a Knower without contradiction inasmuch as eternal Knowledge is the same ¹ as one produced by an evidence (as regards Its essential nature).” अत्राह शिष्यः—नित्यावगतिस्वरूपस्य आत्मनः अविक्रिय- त्वात् कार्यकरणैः असंहत्य, तक्षादीनामिव वास्यादिभिः, कर्तृत्वं नोपपद्यते, असंहतस्वभावस्य च कार्यकरणोपादाने अनवस्था प्रसज्येत । तक्षादीनां तु कार्यकरणैः नित्यमेव संहतत्वमिति वास्याद्युपादाने नानवस्था स्यादिति ॥ १०४ ॥ 104. Here the disciple starts an objection : “ It is not reasonable that the Self which is changeless and of the nature of eternal Knowledge and not in contact with the body and the senses should be the agent ² of an action like a carpenter in contact with an adze and other instruments. A regressus ad infinitum arises if the Self unconnected with the body, the senses, etc. were to use them as Its instruments. As carpenters and others are always connected with bodies and senses there is no regressus ad infinitum when they use adzes and other instruments.” इह तु असंहतस्वभावस्य करणानुपादाने कर्तृत्वं नोपपद्यत इति करणं उपादेयम्, तदुपादानमपि विक्रियैवेति तत्कर्तृत्वे करणान्तरमुपादेयम्, तदुपादानेऽपि अन्यदिति प्रमातुः स्वात- न्त्र्ये अनवस्था अपरिहार्या स्यात् इति । न च क्रियैव आत्मानं कारयति, अनिर्वर्तितायाः स्वरूपाभावात् । अथ अन्यत् आत्मानं उपेत्य क्रियां कारयतीति चेत् । न । अन्यस्य स्वतःसिद्धत्वा- ¹ See para 108. ² Br. Sû., 2. 3. 33, 40.

THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE CHANGELESS 65 विषयत्वाद्यनुपपत्तेः । न हि आत्मनः अन्यत् अचेतनं वस्तु स्वप्र- माणकं दृष्टम् । शब्दादिसर्वमेव अवगतिफलावसानप्रत्ययप्रमितं सिद्धं स्यात् । अवगतिश्चेदात्मनोऽन्यस्य स्यात्, सोऽपि आत्मैव असंहतः स्वार्थः स्यात्, न परार्थः । न च देहेन्द्रिय- विषयाणां स्वार्थतां अवगन्तुं शक्नुमः, अवगत्यवसानप्रत्ययापेक्ष- सिद्धिदर्शनात् ॥ १०५ ॥ 105. Teacher.—(Reply) "Agency is not possible without the use of instruments. Instruments, therefore, have to be assumed. The assumption of instruments is, of course, an action. In order to be the agent of this action, other instruments have to be assumed. In assuming these instruments still others have to be assumed. A regressus ad infinitum is, therefore, inevit- able if the Self which is not joined with anything were to be the agent.¹ "Nor can it be said that it is an action ² that makes the Self act. For an action, not performed, has no existence. It is also not possible that something (previously existing) makes the Self act as nothing (except the Self) can have an independent existence and be a non-object. For things other than the Self must be non-conscious and, therefore, are not seen to be Self-existent. All things including sound ³ etc. come to exist when they are proved by mental functions resulting in the reflection of the Self. ¹ Br. Sû., 2. 3. 33, 40. The Self is not really an agent but only apparently so. ² As the Mîmâmsakas hold. ³ Sound, touch, sight, taste and smell. 5

66 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS “One,¹ (apparently) different from the Self, and possessed of consciousness, must be no other than the Self that is free from combination with other things and existing for Itself only. “Nor² can we admit that the body, the senses and their objects exist for themselves inasmuch as they are seen to depend for their existence on mental modifica- tions resulting in the reflection of the Self.” ननु देहस्यावगतौ न कश्चित् प्रत्यक्षादिप्रत्ययान्तरं अपे- क्षते ॥ १०६ ॥ 106. Disciple.—“But no one depends on any other evidence such as sense-perception etc. in knowing the body.” बाढं, जाग्रति एवं स्यात् । मृतिसुषुप्त्योस्तु देहस्यापि प्रत्यक्षादिप्रमाणापेक्षैव सिद्धिः । तथैव इन्द्रियाणाम् । बाह्या एव हि शब्दादयो देहेन्द्रियाकारपरिणता इति प्रत्यक्षादिप्रमाणा- पेक्षैव हि सिद्धिः । सिद्धिरिति च प्रमाणफलं अवगतिं अवो- चाम, सा च अवगतिः कूटस्था स्वयंसिद्धात्मज्योतिःस्वरू- पेति च ॥ १०७ ॥ 107. Teacher.—“Yes, it is so in the waking state. But at death and in deep sleep the body also depends on evidences such as sense-perception etc. in order to be known. Similar is the case with the senses. It is the external sound and other objects that are transformed into the body and the senses ; the latter, therefore, ¹ The Naiyâyikas hold that Isvara is different from the individual soul. This view is refuted here. ² It is the position of the Chârvâkas.

THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE CHANGELESS 67 also depend on evidences like sense-perception etc. in order to be known. I have said that Knowledge,¹ the result produced by evidences, is the same ² as the self-evident, self-effulgent and changeless Self. That is which I mean by knowledge." अत्राह चोदकः—अवगतिः प्रमाणानां फलं, कूटस्थनित्या- त्मज्योतिःस्वरूपेति च विप्रतिषिद्धम् । इत्युक्तवन्तमाह—न विप्रतिषिद्धम् । कथं तर्हि अवगतेः फलत्वम् ? कूटस्था नित्यापि सती प्रत्यक्षादिप्रत्ययान्ते लक्ष्यते, तादर्थ्यात् । प्रत्यक्षादिप्रत्ययस्य अनित्यत्वे अनित्येव भवति । तेन प्रमाणानां फलं इति उपचर्यते ॥ १०८ ॥ 108. The objector (the disciple) says, “It is contra- dictory to state that Knowledge is the result of evidences and (at the same time) it is the self-effulgent Self which is changeless and eternal.” The reply given to him is this : “It is not a con- tradication.” “How then is knowledge a result ?” “(It is a result in a secondary sense :) though change- less and eternal, It is noticed in the presence of mental modifications called sense-perception etc. as they are instrumental in making It manifest. It appears to be transitory as mental modifications called sense-percep- tion etc. are so. It is for this reason that It is called the result ³ of proofs in a secondary ⁴ sense.” ¹ Knowledge, according to the Chârvâkas, is an effect produced in the body, a combination of the elements, like the effect of a chemical combination. ² See paras 103 and 108. ³ See para 103 above. ⁴ The same pure Consciousness is thus called, in a secondary sense, a knower, an agent, or the result of proofs. This is the gist of the paragraphs from 94 onwards.

68 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS यद्येवं भगवन्, कूटस्थनित्यावगतिः आत्मज्योतिःस्वरूपैव स्वयंसिद्धा, आत्मनि प्रमाणनिरपेक्षत्वात्, ततोऽन्यत् अचेतनं संहत्यकारित्वात् परार्थम् । येन च सुखदुःखमोहप्रत्ययावगतिरूपेण पारार्थ्यं, तेनैव स्वरूपेण अनात्मनः अस्तित्त्वं, नान्येन रूपा- न्तरेण, अतो नास्तित्वमेव परमार्थतः । यथा हि लोके रज्जुसर्प- मरीच्युदकादीनां तदवगतिव्यतिरेकेण अभावो दृष्टः, एवं जाग्र- त्स्वप्नद्वैतभावस्यापि तदवगतिव्यतिरेकेण अभावो युक्तः । एवमेव परमार्थतः भगवन्, अवगतेः आत्मज्योतिषः नैरन्तर्यभावात् कूट- स्थनित्यता, अद्वैतभावश्च सर्वप्रत्ययभेदेषु अव्यभिचारात् । प्रत्ययभेदास्तु अवगतिं व्यभिचरन्ति । यथा स्वप्ने नीलपीताद्या- कारभेदरूपाः प्रत्ययाः तदवगतिं व्यभिचरन्तः परमार्थतो न सन्तीत्युच्यन्ते, एवं जाग्रत्यपि नीलपीतादिप्रत्ययभेदाः तामेवाव- गतिं व्यभिचरन्तः असत्यरूपा भवितुमर्हन्ति । तस्याश्चावगतेः अन्यः अवगन्ता नास्तीति न स्वेन स्वरूपेण स्वयं उपादातुं हातुं वा शक्यते, अन्यस्य च अभावात् ॥ १०९ ॥ 109. Disciple.—“Sir, if this is so, independent of evidences regarding Itself eternal and changeless Know- ledge, the Consciousness of the Self, is surely self- evident, and, all things, different from It and there- fore non-conscious, have an existence only for the sake of the Self as they combine to act for one another (in order that the events of the universe may continue uninterruptedly). It is only as the Knowledge ¹ of the ¹ The substratum of the mental modifications by which they are known (illumined).

THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE CHANGELESS 69 mental modifications giving rise to pleasure, pain and delusion that the non-Self serves the purpose of another.¹ And it is as the same Knowledge and noth- ing else that it has an existence.² So it does not really exist at all. Just as a rope-snake, the water in a mirage and such other things are found to be non-existent except only as the Knowledge by which they are known ; so, the duality experienced during waking and dream has reasonably no existence except as the Know- ledge by which it is known. So, having a continuous ³ existence pure Consciousness, the Self, is eternal and immutable, and, never ceasing ³ to exist in any mental modification. It is one without a second. The modifica- tions themselves cease to exist, the Self continuing to do so. Just as in dream the mental modifications appearing to be blue, yellow, etc. are said to be really non-existent as they cease to exist while the Knowledge by which they are known has an uninterrupted con- tinuous existence ; so, in the waking state also they are reasonably really non-existent as they cease to exist while the very same Knowledge continues to do so. As that Knowledge ⁴ has no ⁵ other knower it cannot be accepted or rejected by Itself. As there is nothing else (except Myself the aim of my life is fulfilled by your grace).”

¹ Consciousness, the Self. ² The non-Self has no existence in- dependent of knowledge unlike that of Prakriti (the material cause of the universe) spoken of in the Sânkhya philosophy. ³ In all experiences such as ‘ jar consciousness ’, ‘ cloth con- sciousness ’, etc., consciousness persists and is therefore real while jar, cloth, etc. do no persist and so are unreal. ⁴ The Self. ⁵ Because It is Self-evident.

70 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS तथैवेति । एषा अविद्या, यन्निमित्तः संसारो जाग्रत्स्वप्न- लक्षणः । तस्या अविद्यायाः विद्या निवर्तिका । इत्येवं त्वं अभयं प्राप्तोऽसि । नातःपरं जाग्रत्स्वप्नदुःखमनुभविष्यसि, संसारदुःखा- न्मुक्तोऽसीति ॥ ११० ॥ 110. Teacher.—“It is exactly so. It is Ignorance ¹ due to which the transmigratory existence consisting of waking and dream is experienced. It is Knowledge that brings this Ignorance to an end. You have thus attained Fearlessness.² You will never again feel ³ pain in waking or in dream. You are liberated from the misery of this transmigratory existence.” ओमिति ⁴ ॥ १११ ॥ 111. Disciple.—“Yes, Sir.” ¹ See para 49 of this chapter. ² Brahman. Br. U., 4. 2. 4. ³ See para 48 above and foot-note. ⁴ This word, not translated, indicates that the chapter is at an end.

परिसंख्यानप्रकरणम् ॥ ३ ॥ CHAPTER III REITERATION AND REFLECTION¹ मुमुक्षूणां उपात्तपुण्यापुण्यक्षपणपराणां अपूर्वानुपचयार्थिनां परिसंख्यानमिदमुच्यते । अविद्याहेतवो दोषाः वाङ्मनःकाय- प्रवृत्तिहेतवः, प्रवृत्तेश्च इष्टानिष्टमिश्रफलानि कर्माणि उपचीयन्ते, इति तन्मोक्षार्थम् ॥ ११२ ॥ 112. This method of repetition is described for those who aspire after supreme tranquillity of the mind by destroying accumulatad sins and virtues and refraining from accumulating new ones. Ignorance causes defects.² Defects produce efforts of the body, mind and speech. And through these efforts are accumulated actions having desirable, undesirable and mixed results. (This method is described here) so that there may be a cessation of all these. तत्र शब्दस्पर्शरूपरसगन्धानां विषयाणां श्रोत्रादिग्राह्यत्वात् स्वात्मनि परेषु वा विज्ञानाभावः, तेषामेव परिणतानां यथा ¹ See Sankaracharya's Vâkyavritti 49. ² Desire and aversion.

72 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS लोष्टादीनाम्। श्रोत्रादिद्वारैश्च ज्ञायन्ते। येन च ज्ञायन्ते सः ज्ञातृ- त्वात् अतज्जातीयः। ते हि शब्दादयः अन्योन्यसंसर्गित्वात् जन्मवृद्धिपरिणामापक्षयनाशसंयोगवियोगाविर्भावतिरोभाववि- कारविकारिक्षेत्रबीजाद्यनेकधर्माणः, सामान्येन च सुखदुःखाद्य- नेककर्माणः। तद्विज्ञातृत्वादेव तद्विज्ञाता सर्वशब्दादिधर्मवि- लक्षणः ॥ ११३ ॥ 113. As they are perceived by the ear and the other senses the objects called sound, touch, sight, taste and smell have no knowledge of themselves or of other things. Transformed (into the body and other things) they, like brickbats, are (known to lack in the said knowledge). Moreover, they are known through the ear etc. Being the knower that by which they are known is quite of a different nature. For, connected with one another those sound and other objects are possessed of various properties such as, birth, growth, change of condition, decline, death, contact, separation, appear- ance, disappearance, cause, effect and sex. All of them produce various effects like pleasure, pain and so on. The knower¹ of sound and the like is of a nature different from theirs as It is the knower. तत्र शब्दादिभिः उपलभ्यमानैः पीड्यमानो विद्वान् एवं परि- संचक्षीत ॥ ११४ ॥ शब्दस्तु ध्वनिसामान्यमात्रेण, विशेषधर्मैर्वा षड्जादिभिः, प्रियैः स्तुत्यादिभिः इष्टैः, अनिष्टैश्च असत्यबीभत्सपरिभवाक्रो- ¹ The Self.

REITERATION AND REFLECTION 73 शादिभिर्वचनैः, मां दृक्स्वभावं असंसर्गिणं अविक्रियं अचलं अनिधनं अभयं अत्यन्तसूक्ष्मं अविषयं गोचरीकृत्य स्प्रष्टुं नैवा- र्हति असंसर्गित्वादेव माम् । अत एव न शब्दनिमित्ता हानिः वृद्धिर्वा । अतो मां किं करिष्यति स्तुतिनिन्दादिप्रियाप्रियत्वा- दिलक्षणः शब्दः । अविवेकिनं हि शब्दं आत्मत्वेन गतं प्रियः शब्दो वर्धयेत्, अप्रियश्च क्षपयेत्, अविवेकित्वात् । नतु मम विवेकिनो वालाग्रमात्रमपि कर्तुमुत्सह्त इति । एवमेव स्पर्शसा- मान्येन, तद्विशेषैश्च शीतोष्णमृदुकर्कशादिज्वरोदरशूलादिल- क्षणैश्च अप्रियैः, प्रियैश्च कैश्चित् शरीरसमवायिभिः बाह्यागन्तु- कनिमित्तैश्च, न मम काचित् विक्रिया वृद्धिहानिलक्षणा अस्प- र्शत्वात् क्रियते, व्योम्न इव मुष्टिघातादिभिः । तथा रूपसामा- न्येन, तद्विशेषैश्च प्रियाप्रियैः स्त्रीव्यञ्जनादिलक्षणैः, अरूपत्वात् न मम काचित् हानिः वृद्धिर्वा क्रियते । तथा रससामान्येन, तद्विशेषैश्च प्रियाप्रियैः मधुराम्ललवणकटुतिक्तकषायैः मूढबुद्धिभिः परिगृहीतैः, अरसात्मकस्य मम न काचित् हानिः वृद्धिर्वा क्रियते । तथा गन्धसामान्येन, तद्विशेषैः प्रियाप्रियैः पुष्पाद्यनु- लेपनादिलक्षणैः, अगन्धात्मकस्य न मम काचित् हानिः वृद्धिर्वा क्रियते । 'अशब्दमस्पर्शमरूपमव्ययं तथाऽरसं नित्यमगन्धवच्च यत्' इति श्रुतेः ॥ ११५ ॥ 114, 115. Distressed by sound and other things experienced, the knower of Brahman will thus practise repetition : "I who am of the nature of Consciousness, not attached to anything, changeless, immovable, imperish- able, free from fear, extremely subtle and not an object,

74 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS cannot, for the very fact of my being not attached, be made an object and touched by sound in general or by its special forms such as, the notes of the gamut, praise, etc. which are pleasant and desirable, and also false, terrible, insulting and abusive words which are undesirable. So there is no loss or gain due to sound. Therefore what can sound, pleasant or un- pleasant, consisting of praise or blame do to me? Pleasant or unpleasant sound regarded as belonging to the Self glorifies or injures an ignorant man on account of indiscrimination. But it cannot do even the slightest good or evil to me who am a man of knowledge. (These ideas should thus be repeated.) “Similarly, no change consisting of gain or loss can be produced in me by touch in general or by its special forms such as fever, colic pain, etc., coldness, hotness, softness or roughness which are unpleasant. Again, pleasant touches connected with the body or brought into existence by external and adventitious causes can likewise produce no change in me inasmuch as I am beyond touch like the ether which, when struck with one's fist, does not meet with any change whatever. “Likewise, as I am entirely unconnected with sight no good or harm is done to me by it either in its general form or in its special forms pleasant or unpleasant, such as, ugly sights. “Similarly, Independent of taste I am not harmed or benefited by it either in its general form or in its special forms ‘such as, sweetness, sourness, saltiness,

REITERATION AND REFLECTION 75 pungency, bitterness and astringency, though accepted as pleasant or unpleasant by the ignorant. "Thus I who do not consist of smell cannot be harmed or benefited by it either in its general form or in its special forms such as, flowers, fragrant pastes, etc. considered to be pleasant or unpleasant. For the Śruti¹ says that I am one who am 'eternally devoid of sound, touch, sight, taste and smell'. किंच य एव बाह्याः शब्दादयः ते शरीराकारेण संस्थिताः, तद्ग्राहकैश्च श्रोत्राद्याकारैः अन्तःकरणद्वयतद्विषयाकारेण च, अन्योन्यसंसर्गित्वात् संहतत्वाच्च सर्वक्रियासु । तत्र एवं सति विदुषो मम न कश्चित् शत्रुः मित्रं उदासीनो वा अस्ति । तत्र यदि कश्चित् मिथ्याज्ञानाभिमानेन प्रियं अप्रियं वा प्रयुयुङ्क्षेत क्रियाफललक्षणं, तन्मृषैव प्रयुयुङ्क्षते सः । तस्य अविषयत्वा- न्मम—'अव्यक्तोऽयमचिन्त्योऽयं' इति स्मृतेः । तथा सर्वेषां पञ्चानामपि भूतानां अविकार्यः, अविषयत्वात् । 'अच्छेद्योऽय- मदाह्योऽयं' इति स्मृतेः । यापि शरीरेन्द्रियसंस्थानमात्रमुपलक्ष्य मद्भक्तानां विपरीतानां च क्रियाक्रियादिप्रयुयुङ्क्षा, तज्जा च धर्माधर्मादिप्राप्तिः, सा तेषामेव, न तु मयि अजरे अमृते अभये, ‘नैनं कृताकृते तपतः’, ‘न कर्मणा वर्धते नो कनीयान्’, ‘सबाह्याभ्यन्तरो ह्यजः’, ‘न लिप्यते लोकदुःखेन बाह्यः’ इत्यादिश्रुतिस्मृतिभ्यः । अनात्मवस्तुनश्च असत्त्वात् इति परमो हेतुः । आत्मनश्च अद्वयत्वविषयाणि, द्वयस्यासत्त्वात्, यानि सर्वाणि उपनिषद्वाक्यानि, विस्तरशः समीक्षितव्यानि समीक्षित- व्यानीति ॥ ११६ ॥ ¹ Kath. U., 3. 15.