Index…

Brahma Sutra Explanation for

Kathopanishad Chapter 1 Valli 2 Mantra 25 and Valli 3 Manta 1

Attradhikaranam: Topic 2 (Sutras 9-10)

The eater is Brahman.
Atta characharagrahanat  (1.2.9)

The Eater (is Brahman), because both the movable and immovable (i.e. the whole world) is taken (as His food).

Atta: the Eater; Characharagrahanat: because the movable and immovable (i.e. the whole universe) is taken (as His food).

A passage from the Kathopanishad is now taken up for discussion. We read in Kathopanishad 1.2.25 “Who then knows where He is, to Whom the Brahmanas and Kshatriyas are (as it were) but food, and death itself a condiment?” This text shows by means of the words ‘food’ and ‘condiment’ that there is some eater. Who is this eater? Is it the fire referred to in as eater: “Soma indeed is food, and fire eater” Bri. Up. 1-4-6, or is it individual soul referred to as eater “One of them eats the sweet fruit” Mun. Up. III-1-1, or the Supreme Self?

We reply that the eater must be the Supreme Self because it is mentioned what is movable and what is immovable. The entire universe is re-absorbed in Brahman. All things movable and immovable are here to be taken as constituting the food of Brahman while Death itself is the condiment. The eater of the whole world, the consumer of all these things in their totality can be Brahman alone and none else. The Brahmanas and the Kshatriyas are mentioned as mere examples as they are foremost of created beings and as they hold a pre-eminent position. The words are merely illustrative. The whole universe sprinkled over by Death is referred to here as the food. Condiment is a thing which renders other things more palatable and causes other things to be eaten with great relish. Therefore the Death itself is consumed, being a condiment as it were, it makes other things palatable. Therefore the Eater of the entire world made palatable by Death, can mean only Brahman in His aspect of Destroyer. He withdraws the whole universe within Himself at the time of Pralaya or dissolution. Therefore the Supreme Self must be taken here as the Eater.

The opponent says: Brahman can not be an eater. The Sruti declares “The other looks on with out eating”. We say that this has no validity. The passage aims at denying the fruition of the results of works.

It is not meant to deny the re-absorption of the world into Brahman; be cause it is well-established by all the Vedanta-texts that Brahman is the cause of the creation, sustenance and re-absorption of the world. There fore the Eater can here be Brahman only.

Prakaranaccha  (1.2.10)

And on account of the context also the (eater is Brahman).
Prakaranat: from the context; Cha: also, and;

An argument in support of Sutra 9 is given. Brahman is the subject of the discussion. In the beginning Nachiketas asks Yama, “Tell me of that which is above good and evil, which is beyond cause and effect and which is other than the past and future” Katha Up. 1-2-14. Yama replies, “I will tell you in brief. It is OM” Katha Up. 1-2-15. This Atman is neither born nor does it die” Katha Up. 1-2-18. He finally includes “of whom the Brahmana and the Kshatriya classes are, as it were, food and Death itself a condiment or pickle, how can one thus know where that Atman is?”

All this obviously shows that Brahman is the general topic. To adhere to the general topic is the proper proceeding. Hence the Eater is Brahman. Further the clause “Who then knows where he is”, shows that realization is very difficult. This again points to the Supreme Self. The force of the word ‘Cha’ (and) in the Sutra is to indicate that the Smriti is also to the same effect, as says the Gita.
“Thou art the Eater of the worlds, of all that moves and stands; 
worthier of reverence than the Guru’s self, there is none like Thee”.

ami cha tvam dhritarashtrasya putrah
sarve sahaivavani-pala-sanghaih
bhishmo dronah suta-putras tathasau
sahasmadiyair api yodha-mukhyaih   — 11.26
vaktrani te tvaramana vishanti
danshtra-karalani bhayanakani
kechid vilagna dashanantareshu
sandrishyante churnitair uttamangaih  — 11.27

Adhikaranam: Topic 3 (Sutras 11-12)

The dwellers in the cave of the heart are the individual soul and Brahman.
Guham pravistavatmanau hi taddarsanat  (1.2.11)

The two who have entered into the cavity (of the heart) are indeed the individual soul and the Supreme Soul, because it is so seen.
Guham: in the cavity (of the heart); Pravishtau: the two who have entered; Atmanau: are the two selfs (individual soul and the Supreme Soul); Hi: indeed, because; Taddarsanat: because it is so seen.

An other passage of the Kathopanishad is taken up for discussion. In the same Kathopanishad 1-3-1 we read, “Having entered the cavity of the heart, the two enjoy the reward of their works in the body. Those who know Brahman call them shade and light: like wise those house holders who perform the Trināchiketa sacrifice”. The doubt arises here whether the couple referred to are the individual soul and Buddhi (intellect). In the passage under discussion, the couple referred to are the individual soul and the Supreme Self, for these two, being both intelligent Selfs, are of the same nature. We see that in ordinary life also whenever a number is mentioned, beings of the same class are under stood to be meant. When a bull is brought to us, we say ‘bring another, look out for a second’. It means an other bull, not a horse or a man. So, if with an intelligent self, the individual soul, an other is said to enter the cavity of the heart, it must refer to another of the same class i.e. to an other intelligent being and not to the intellect (Buddhi) which is in sentient.
Sruti and Smriti speak of the Supreme Self as placed in the cave. We read in Kathopanishad 1-2-12 “The ancient who is hidden in the cave, who dwells in the abyss”. We also find in Taittiriya Upanishad II-1 “He who knows him hidden in the cave, in the highest ether” and “search for the self who entered into the cave”. A special abode for the all-pervading Brahman is given for the purpose of conception and meditation. This is not contrary to reason. Sometimes the characteristics of one in a group are in directly applied to the whole group as when we say “The men with an umbrella” where only one has an umbrella and not the whole group. Similarly here also, though it is only one who is enjoying the fruits of actions both are spoken of as eating the fruits.
The word ‘pibantau’ is in the dual number meaning ‘the two drink while as a matter of fact, the Jiva only drinks the fruit of his works and not the Supreme Self. We may explain the passage by saying that while the individual soul drinks, the Supreme Self also is said to drink because he makes the soul to drink. The individual soul is the direct agent, the Supreme Self is the causal agent that is to say the individual self directly drinks while the Supreme Self causes the individual soul to drink. The phrases ‘shade’ and ‘light’ show the difference be tween the Infinite Knowledge of the Supreme Self and the finite knowledge of the Jiva, or that the Jiva is bound down to the chain of Samsara, while the Supreme Self is above Samsara. We, therefore, understand by the ‘two entered into the cave’, the individual soul and the Supreme Self. Another reason for this interpretation is given in the following Sutra.

Viseshanaccha  (1.2.12)

And on account of the distinctive qualities (of the two mentioned in subsequent texts).
Viseshanat: on account of distinctive qualities; Cha: and.

An argument in sup port of Sutra 11 is given. This is clear also from the description in other portions of the same scripture viz. Kathopanishad.
Further the distinctive qualities mentioned in the text agree only with the individual soul and the Supreme Soul. Because in a subsequent passage (I-3-3) the characteristics of the two that have entered the cavity of the heart are given. They indicate that the two are the individual soul and Brahman. “Know that the Self to be the charioteer, the body to be the chariot.” The individual soul is represented as a charioteer driving on through the trans migratory existence and final emancipation. Further it is said “He attains the end of his journey, that highest place of Vishnu” Katha Up. I-3-9. Here it is represented that the Supreme Self is the goal of the driver’s course. The two are mentioned here as the attainer and the goal attained i.e. the individual soul or Jiva and the Supreme Soul or Brahman. In the preceding pas sage (I-2-12) also it is said “The wise, who by means of meditation on his Self, re cog nises the Ancient who is difficult to be seen, who has entered into the dark, who is hidden in the cave of the heart, who abides in the abyss as God, he indeed leaves joy and sorrow far behind”. Here the two are spoken of as the meditator and the object of meditation. Moreover the Supreme Self is the general topic. It is therefore obvious that the passage under discussion refers to the individual soul and the Supreme Self.

Previous…                                                                                                                                                     Next…

 

Index…

Kathopanisad

Chapter 1 Valli 3 Mantra 1

Lecture

Mantra

TWO SELVES

ṛ̱tam pi̍bantau su̱kṛta̍sya loke
gu̱hām pra̍viṣṭau pa̱rame̍ parārdhe
chā̱yā-ta̱pau bra̱hma-vi̍do vada̱nti̱
pa̱ñcāgna̍yo ye ca tri̱-ṇāci̍ketāḥ

pibantau = [there are] two drinkers i.e., Experiencers of; ṛtam = truth, the results of one’s actions; sukṛtasya = of what is done by oneself; praviṣṭau = these two having entered; loke = within the realm i.e., The body; parame guhām [guhyāyām] = into the cavity, into the innermost part of one’s being; the intellect; parārdhe [para-ardhe] = into that which is the abode of brahman [being the space where Brahman is perceived]; brahma-vidaḥ = the knowers of Brahman, the theologians; vadanti = speak of [these two]; chāyā-tapau = as shade and sunlight; pañcāgnayaḥ = the worshippers of the five fires i.e., The householders; ye ca = and they also; tri-ṇāciketāḥ = who have thrice piled up the Nāciketas fire.

The two who enjoy the fruits of their good works being seated in the cavity of the heart, the Seat of the Supreme, the knowers of Brahman call them shadow and light; as also the performers of the Fivefold Fire and those who have propitiated three times the Nāciketa-Fire.

by Swami Chinmayananda:

In this section we have the famous and immortal metaphor of the chariot explaining the Atman and the Body. In the chariot sits the driver and the owner. In the body stays the Paramatman, the Self, and the Jivatman, the Ego, and the entire technique of the Adhyatma Yoga is explained.

To introduce these two factors, the Atma (Self) and the Jiva (Ego), we have here, in the very opening stanza of this Valli, declaration unanimously made by all the realized saints of Knowledge and endorsed by the faithful house-holder Pundits. All of them declare that though the body seems to be controlled and directed by these two factors, one of them is but the shadow replica of the other!!

The shadow or reflection has no independent existence of its own. It exists only with reference to the light or the illumined object.

Desire-prompted thoughts rise and fall in waves eternally in their own chyme and rhythm in the mental lake of an uncultured man-animal. In this mad death-dance of the rumbling thought waves, kicking about their pranks in front of the mind, a composite shadow forms ever trembling and changing.

The individual in his extrovertedness gazing on outwardly views this shadow and identifies himself with it. The shadow represents the (I~ego), the Samsarin, who suffers the mortal agonies of his physical pains, mental tortures, intellectual failures, and spiritual bankruptcy This shadow is called the Jivatman and the light that causes it, the I-Ego, the God Principle in us, is called the ‘Paramatman’,

“rtam” As a noun it is one of the most significant word in the Vedas and means a little more than mere  righteousness; it is something like “Divine Law” that connects actions and their fruits. The fruits of actions are enjoyed only by the individual soul (Jivatma), the “I~ego”. Dual number is here used, instead of the singular; hence, the Sruti statement comes to indicate that both the Supreme Soul and the individual soul are partners in enjoying the fruits of actions. This should not be understood in its literal word meaning, for, Sruti would be thereby contradicting herself her incessant declaration, oft-repeated and always maintained, that the Eternal, All-full Atman is neither a doer nor an enjoyer. He alone is the illuminator of all doings and enjoyments.

And yet, there is in the Mantra the usage of the dual number when it says, * the two enjoy the fruits of their good works.” This difficulty is solved by Sri Śaṅkaracharya in his commentary. He says that the shadow” I~ego has no existence at all without the presence of the Light principle, the I~Ego, and so, they are coupled together in a real way. Examples of this type of coupling are also seen often in our day-to-day transactions in life. When a crowd of people are moving on, and although there are some among them who have no umbrellas (nor Khadi-caps), we, in our general conversations, indicate them all together collectively as the umbrella carriers (the congressmen).

In a similar sense, because of the seeming co-existence of the Jivatman and the Paramatman, the “false-I” and the “Real-I”, the delusory enjoyment of the fruits of actions, which is the lot of the Jivatman, is coupled with the witnessing Eternal Light of Intelligence, the Paramatman. This is more clearly brought out in Mundakopanishad.

Both of them are explained here to be seated in the cavity of the heart, where intelligence resides. This idea of the intelligence being in the heart-space has been repeated before so often, that we need not pause here anymore to discuss it in detail.

by Swami Gurubhaktananda:

The Literal Scenario: At first reading, the literal meaning of this strange verse, is quite amusing:

Two drinkers? At once the picture pops up in our mind’s eye of two persons who, at the end of a hard day’s honest work, are sitting together relaxed, having a drink. A secret cave? This must be their remote meeting place. They cannot drink in the open, so they select a dark corner of the cave where they may not be disturbed in this pastime – least of all overheard by anyone! One of them is a regular drunkard, the other who always accompanies him  is a teetotaler! He is having only grape juice, but who would believe that? His association with his friend implicates him in the drinking without question.

What an exciting start to an Upanishadic drama! Our curiosity is aroused. we are tempted to read more. Is this the right book we have in our hands? Is this the Katha Upanishad, or is it some common novel we have accidentally picked up in its place? Sure, it is the right book. At this point we realize that the Upanishads need a qualified Teacher to explain their meaning to us. Sandeepany provides just that

The Figurative Scenario: Pibantau: “the two drinkers”. Poetry and drama aside, let us first identify the They are actually father and son. The Jiva or individual self is the son, and Atman, the Supreme Self, is the Father. In essence, the son is a chip of the old block; he has the likeness of his father. The father represents the role model, the Destination to be reached. The son is getting there slowly, he is the Traveler who will reach the destination eventually. The father is concerned with the difficulties the son is facing in reaching him, so he keeps a watchful eye on him. The son seems to have encountered some problems.

Ritam: “the drink”. What are they drinking? Literally, Ritam this means “the truth”, but in this case the truth is “the fruits of their actions”, i.e., their Karma. The word Truth is used because only by the fruits of actions can we truly know the motives with which they were performed. There is no clearer indicator of the truth of actions than their fruits. The drinking: this is the activity they are engaged in, a figurative way of expressing the ‘Enjoyership’ attached to the hard work the Jiva puts in. The daily grind at work has a singular motive, to enjoy some pleasure, whatever it may be. And ‘drinking’ symbolizes this enjoyment. This is the Jiva’s daily pastime, and the father is witnessing it at every moment.

Gūhām (the Bhashya corrects this to Gūhāyām): “in a dark, secret cave”. This is the secret meeting place where the drinking is taking place. Where is this cave? It is in the core of one’s heart, a common reference in the Upanishads. This heart is not the visible heart, but is actually the intellect. That is the meeting point of the two ‘drinkers’. In the intellect the Supreme Self gets reflected and the reflection is named the Jiva or Ego.

Pravishtau: “entering”. The Supreme Self is actually a teetotaler, meaning that He is aloof from all worldly happenings. He is untouched by our Upadhis or conditionings. Yet He cannot avoid being accused with the Jiva of being party to the enjoyment, however innocent we know He is. The Self, by the very fact of entering the gross body equipment gets contaminated by that body in the intellect and becomes the Jiva. The contaminated or reflected Consciousness (the Jiva) is the one who does and enjoys, but to all appearances the Self, too, gets implicated in the doing and the enjoying. The association is inevitable.

Śaṅkaracharyaji uses his own simile here to explain the association of the Self with the Jiva’s activities. The ‘Chatri’ or umbrella simile was well-known in those days. A procession going past had many in the group holding umbrellas, but not all. However, as the procession went by, it was common to hear it said, “There go the chatriwalas, the ‘umbrella-people’!” All in the procession get blanketed with the same epithet, including those who do not carry an umbrella. The Self, the teetotaler, is in the same situation; He cannot avoid being in the dock with the accused Jiva.

3a When it is said the two are different as shadow and light, it refers to the status of the Self and Jiva, the Self being the original light and Jiva being the reflected light and, it may be added a very poor version of it. The Jiva is limited, the Self is limitless; this is the wide gulf between them.

Connection With the Vedas: Three types of people accept the existence of these two as being apart from each other, yet related as father and son. Each type represents one of the three major divisions of the Vedas, as described under each of them below. They are:

3b i) Brahmavidah: “the knowers of Brahman”. They represent the Jnana Kanda of the Vedas. They are the wise, realized sages who know Brahman, know the truth of the Self’s innocence. They know by direct experience that the Self is untouched by the deeds or misdeeds of the Jiva, that the two are like ‘chalk and cheese’, or like shadow and light.

The other two types know about the Self and Jiva by knowledge at the intellectual level, not by direct experience. They accept the two on faith to obtain certain favors:

4a ii) Pancha-Agnayah: “performers of the ‘Five Fires’”, i.e., the householders. They represent the Karma Kanda of the Vedas. They perform these sacrifices in order to obtain certain desirable results from them on earth. Their commitment in doing these sacrifices is to align themselves with the Laws of Nature, that is, to obey Dharma and thereby make themselves worthy of what they desire. They look upon the Self as the Supreme Giver or Dispenser of the fruits of their actions.

4b iii) Tri-Nāchiketa: “those who perform the Nāchiketa Fire three times”, as earlier described, i.e., the worshippers or Upāsakas. They represent the Upāsana Kanda of the Vedas. This group wish to go to the heavenly worlds to enjoy a more refined lifestyle. They have seen through the shortcomings of the pleasures found on earth. They look upon the Self as something to be worshipped, from whom they will accumulate merits.

The connection of this verse to the whole Vedas as shown above, makes this verse a very significant one. Placed at the very start of the Chapter, it not only links this chapter to the previous two, but also sets the foundation for the Chariot simile that is to follow.

Connection With the Third Boon:

All three categories of people mentioned here are aware of the knowledge that the Jiva exists, and that it is quite different from the Self. This directly relates the verse to Nāchiketa’s third boon where the question arises. These three groups say, “He exists”.

Those who are ignorant of the existence of the Self, and who have not even been included on the menu of the Lord’s dinner in the last verse of the previous chapter, are the atheists, the materialists, etc., who simply live the animalistic life described in 2.24, giving no thought to their spiritual development. These groups say, “He does not exist”.

Previous…                                                                                                                                                     Next…