1The chief object is to show the different ways on which people proceed after death. One of these ways, the Devapatha that leads to Brahman and from which there is no return, has been described, IV, 15. The other ways for those who on earth know the conditioned Brahman only, have to be discussed now.

2The same fable, the prânasamvâda or prânavidyâ, is told in the Brihadâranyaka VI, 1, 1-14, the Aitareya Âr. II, 4, the Kaush. Up. III, 3, and the Prasna Up. II, 3. The last is the simplest version of all, but it does not follow therefore that it is the oldest. It would be difficult to find two fables apparently more alike, yet in reality differing from each other more characteristically than this fable and the fable told to the plebeians by Menenius Agrippa.

1Padvîsa, fetter, πέδη, pedica, a word now well known, but which Burnouf (Commentaire sur le Yaçna, Notes, CLXXIV) tried in vain to decipher.

2Burnouf rightly preferred pratishthâsi to pratishtho 'si, though the commentary on the corresponding passage of the Brihadâranyaka seems to favour tatpratishtho 'si.

3Ana, breather, more general than pra-ana = prâna, forth-breather, and the other more specified names of breath.

4They rinse the mouth before and after every meal.

5We expect, 'He who knows this' instead of prâna, but as p. 75 prâna may apply to every individual prâna, the usual finishing sentence was possibly dropt on purpose.

1The oblation here described is called mantha, a mortar, or what is pounded in a mortar, i. e. barley stirred in some kind of gravy. See Gaim. N. M. V. P. 406.

2Not the real dîkshâ, which is a preparatory rite for great sacrifices, but penance, truthfulness, abstinence, which take the place of dîkshâ with those who live in the forest and devote themselves to upâsana, meditative worship.

3What is here called sampâtam avanayati is the same as samsravam avanayati in the Brih. Âr. VI, 3, 2. The commentator says: Sruvâvalepanam âgyam mantham samsrâvayati.

1Cf. Brih. Âr. I, 1, 3, 22.

2This story is more fully told in the Brihadâranyaka VI, 2, Satapatha-brâhmana XIV, 8, 16.

3Samiti, or parishad, as in the Brih. Âr.

4He is the same Kshatriya sage who appeared in I, 8, 1, silencing the Brâhmans.

1That of the fathers. Comm.

2Or, according to others, why the water has a human voice; purushavâkah in Brih. Âr. XIV, 9, 3.

3I doubt whether the elliptical construction of these sentences is properly filled out by the commentator. In the Brihadâranyaka the construction is much easier. 'You know me well enough to know that whatever I know, I told you.'

4I read avedishyam, though both the text and commentary give avadishyam. Still viditavân asmi points to an original avedishyam, and a parallel passage, VI, 1, 7, confirms this emendation.

5Cf. Kh. Up. V, II, 5.

1He answers the last question, why water in the fifth libation is called Man, first.

2The sacrificers themselves rise through their oblations to heaven, and attain as their reward a Soma-like nature.

3Hrâduni, generally explained by hail, but here by stanayitnusabdâh, rumblings.

1The water, which had assumed the nature of Soma, now becomes rain.

2Tasyâ upastha eva samid, yad upamantrayate sa dhûmo, yonir arkir, yad antah karoti te 'ṅgârâ abhinandâ vishphuliṅgâh.

1The doctrine of the five fires, and our being born in them, i. e. in heaven, rain, earth, man, and woman.

2Cf. Kh. Up. IV, 15, 5.

3Instead of mânava, human, or amânava, not human, the Brih. Âr. reads mânasa, mental, or created by manas, mind.

4This passage has been translated, 'They are the food of the gods. The gods do eat it.' And this is indeed the literal meaning of the words. But bhag (to enjoy) and bhaksh (to eat) are often p. 81 used by theosophical writers in India, in the more general sense of cherishing or loving, and anna in the sense of an object of desire, love, and protection. The commentators, however, as the use of bhaksh in this sense is exceptional, or as it has no support in the use of the ancients, warn us here against a possible misunderstanding. If those, they say, who have performed sacrifices enter at last into the essence of Soma, the moon, and are eaten by the Devas, by Indra, &c., what is the use of their good works? No, they reply, they are not really eaten. Food (anna) means only what is helpful and delightful; it is not meant that they are eaten by morsels, but that they form the delight of the Devas. Thus we hear it said that men, women, and cattle are food for kings. And if it is said that women are loved by men, they are, in being loved, themselves loving. Thus these men also, being loved by the Devas, are happy and rejoice with the Devas. Their body, in order to be able to rejoice in the moon, becomes of a watery substance, as it was said before, that the water, called the Sraddha libation, when offered in heaven, as in the fire of the altar, becomes Soma, the king (Kh. Up. V, 4, 1). That water becomes, after various changes, the body of those who have performed good works, and when a man is dead and his body burnt (Kh. Up. V, 9, 2), the water rises from the body upwards with the smoke, and carries him to the moon, where, in that body, he enjoys the fruits of his good works, as long as they last. When they are consumed, like the oil in a lamp, he has to return to a new round of existences.

1But only to a certain point.

1In this manner all the five questions have been answered. First, why in the fifth oblation water is called man; secondly, to what place men go after death, some by the path of the Devas, others by the path of the fathers, others again by neither of these paths; thirdly, how they return, some returning to Brahman, others returning to the earth; fourthly, where the paths of the Devas and the fathers diverge, viz. when from the half-year the path of the Devas goes on to the year, while that of the fathers branches off to the world of the fathers; fifthly, why that world, the other world, does never become full, viz. because men either go on to Brahman or return again to this world.

Many questions are raised among Indian philosophers on the exact meaning of certain passages occurring in the preceding paragraphs. First, as to who is admitted to the path of the Devas? Householders, who know the secret doctrine of the five fires or the five libations of the Agnihotra, as described above, while other householders, who only perform the ordinary sacrifices, without a knowledge of their secret meaning, go by the path of the fathers. Secondly, those who have retired to the forest, and whose worship there consists in faith and austerities, i. e. Vânaprasthas and Parivrâgakas, before they arrive at a knowledge of the true Brahman. The question then arises, whether religious students also enter the path of the Devas? This is affirmed, because Purânas and Smritis assert it, or because our text, if properly understood, does not exclude it. Those, on the contrary, who know not only a conditioned, but the highest unconditioned Brahman, do not proceed on the path of the Devas, but obtain Brahman immediately.

Again, there is much difference of opinion whether, after a man p. 83 has been in the moon, consuming his works, he can be born again. Birth is the result of former works, and if former works are altogether consumed, there can be no new birth. This, however, is shown to be an erroneous view, because, besides the good sacrificial works, the fruits of which are consumed in the moon, there are other works which have to be enjoyed or expiated, as the case may be, in a new existence.

The great difficulty or danger in the round of transmigration arises when the rain has fructified the earth, and passes into herbs and trees, rice, corn, and beans. For, first of all, some of the rain does not fructify at once, but falls into rivers and into the sea, to be swallowed up by fishes and sea monsters. Then, only after these have been dissolved in the sea, and after the sea water has been attracted by the clouds, the rain falls down again, it may be on desert or stony land. Here it may be swallowed by snakes or deer, and these may be swallowed by other animals, so that the round of existence seems endless. Nor is this all. Some rain may dry up, or be absorbed by bodies that cannot be eaten. Then, if the rain is absorbed by rice, corn, &c., and this be eaten, it may be eaten by children or by men who have renounced marriage, and thus again lose the chance of a new birth. Lastly, there is the danger arising from the nature of the being; in whom the food, such as rice and corn, becomes a new seed, and likewise from the nature of the mother. All these chances have to be met before a new birth as a Brâhmana, Kshatriya, or Vaisya can be secured.

Another curious distinction is here made by Saṅkara in his commentary. There are some, he says, who assume the form of rice, corn, &c., not in their descent from a higher world, as described in the Upanishad, but as a definite punishment for certain evil deeds they have committed. These remain in that state till the results of their evil deeds are over, and assume then a new body, according to their work, like caterpillars. With them there is also a consciousness of these states, and the acts which caused them to p. 84 assume this or that body, leave impressions behind, like dreams. This is not the case with those who in their descent from the moon, pass, as we saw, through an existence as rice, corn, &c. They have no consciousness of such existences, at least not in their descent. In their ascent to the moon, they have consciousness, as a man who climbs up a tree knows what he is about. But in their descent, that consciousness is gone, as it is when a man falls down from a tree. Otherwise a man, who by his good works had deserved rewards in the moon, would, while corn is being ground, suffer tortures, as if he were in hell, and the very object of good works, as taught by the Veda, would be defeated. As we see that a man struck by a hammer can be carried away unconscious, so it is in the descent of souls, till they are born again as men, and gain a new start for the attainment of the Highest Brahman.

1Let him despise it. Comm.

2Evidently an old Trishtubh verse, but irregular in the third line. See Manu XI, 54.

1The same story is found in the Satapatha-brâhmana X, 6, 1,1.

2Âtman and Brâhman are to be taken as predicate and subject.

1The commentator explains that the king, seeing that they would not accept his presents, and thinking that they did not consider him worthy of bestowing presents on them, made these remarks.

2When they still refused his presents, he thought the presents he had offered were too small, and therefore invited them to a sacrifice.

3He was satisfied with the humility of the Brahmans, who, being Brahmans, came to him, who was not a Brahman, as pupils. Generally a pupil has first to pass through several initiatory rites before he is admitted to the benefit of his master's teaching.

1Soma is said to be suta in the Ekâha, prasuta in the Ahîna, âsuta in the Sattra-sacrifices.

1The two words prâdesamâtra and abhivimâna are doubtful. The commentator explains the first in different ways, which are all more or less fanciful. He is measured or known (mâtra) as Self, by means of heaven as his head and the earth as his feet, these being the prâdesas; or, in the mouth and the rest, which are instruments, he is known as without action himself; or, he has the length from heaven to earth, heaven and earth being called prâdesa, because they are taught. The interpretation, supported by the Gâbâlasruti, that prâdesa is the measure from the forehead to the chin, he rejects. Abhivimâna is taken in the same meaning as abhimâna in the Vedânta, seeing everything in oneself. Vaisvânara is taken as the real Self of all beings, and, in the end, of all Selfs, and as thus to be known and worshipped.

1The object now is to show that to him who knows the Vaisvânara Self, the act of feeding himself is like feeding Vaisvânara, and that feeding Vaisvânara is the true Agnihotra.

1Cf. V, 18, 1.