2. But on account of (water) consisting of the three elements; on account of predominance.

Water alone could not produce a new body; for the text Ch. Up. VI, 3, 4, 'Each of these he made tripart.i.te,' shows that all the elements were'

made tripart.i.te to the end of producing bodies. That the text under discussion mentions water only, is due to the predominance of water; and that among the elements giving rise to a new body water predominates, we infer from the fact that blood and the other humours are the predominating element in the body.

3. And on account of the going of the pranas.

That the soul goes embedded in the subtle rudiments of the elements follows therefrom also that when pa.s.sing out of the old body it is said to be followed by the pranas, 'when he thus pa.s.ses out, the chief prana follows after him,' &c. (Bri. Up. V, 4, 2). Compare also Smriti: 'It draws to itself the organs of sense, with the mind for the sixth. When the Ruler (soul) obtains a new body, and pa.s.ses out of another, he takes with him those organs and then moves on, as the wind takes the odours from their abodes (the flowers)' (Bha. Gi. XV, 8). But the pranas cannot move without a substrate, and hence we must admit that the rudiments of the elements--which are their substrate--are also moving.

4. If it be said (that it is not so) on account of scriptural statement as to going to Agni and the rest; we say no, on account of the secondary nature (of the statement).

But the text, 'when the speech of the dead person enters into fire,' &c.

(Bri. Up. III, 2, 13). declares that when a person dies his organs go into fire, and so on; they cannot therefore accompany the soul. Hence the text which a.s.serts the latter point must be explained in some other way!--Not so, the Sutra replies. The text stating that the organs go to fire, and so on, cannot be taken in its literal sense; for it continues, 'the hairs of the body enter into herbs, the hair of the head into trees' (which manifestly is not true, in its literal sense). The going of speech, the eye, and so on, must therefore be understood to mean that the different organs approach the divinities (Agni and the rest) who preside over them.

5. Should it be said, on account of absence of mention in the first (reply); we say no, for just that (is meant), on the ground of fitness.

An objection is raised to the conclusion arrived at under III, 1, 1; on the ground that in the first oblation, described in Ch. Up. V, 4, 2, as being made into the heavenly world, water is not mentioned at all as the thing offered. The text says, 'on that altar the G.o.ds offer sraddha'; and by sraddha (belief) everybody understands a certain activity of mind.

Water therefore is not the thing offered.--Not so, we reply. It is nothing else but water, which there is called sraddha. For thus only question and answer have a sense. For the question is, 'Do you know why in the fifth libation water is called man?' and at the outset of the reply sraddha is mentioned as const.i.tuting the oblation made into the heavenly world viewed as a fire. If here the word sraddha did not denote water, question and answer would refer to different topics, and there would be no connexion. The form in which the final statement is introduced (iti tu pankamyam, &c., 'but thus in the fifth oblation,' &c.), moreover, also intimates that sraddha means water. The word 'iti,'

_thus_, here intimates that the answer is meant to dispose of the question, 'Do you know _how_?' &c. Sraddha becomes moon, rain, food, seed, embryo in succession, and _thus_ the water comes to be called man.

Moreover, the word sraddha is actually used in the Veda in the sense of 'water'; 'he carries water, sraddha indeed is water' (Taitt. Samh. I, 6, 8, 1). Aad what the text says as to king Soma (the moon) originating from sraddha when offered, also shows that sraddha must mean water.

6. 'On account of this not being stated by Scripture'; not so, on account of those who perform sacrifices and so on being understood.

But, a further objection is raised, in the whole section under discussion no mention at all is made of the soul; the section cannot therefore prove that the soul moves, enveloped by water. The text speaks only of different forms of water sraddha and the rest.--This, the Sutra points out, is not so, on account of those who perform sacrifices being understood. For further on in the same chapter it is said, that those who, while dest.i.tute of the knowledge of Brahman, practise sacrifices, useful works and alms, reach the heavenly world and become there of the essence of the moon (somarajanah); whence, on the results of their good works being exhausted, they return again and enter on a new embryonic state (Ch. Up. V, 10). Now in the preceding section (V, 9) it is said that they offer sraddha in the heavenly world, and that from that oblation there arises the king Soma--an account which clearly refers to the same process as the one described in V, 10. We herefrom infer that what is meant in V, 9 is that that being which was distinguished by a body of sraddha, becomes a being distinguished by a body of the nature of the moon. The word body denotes that the nature of which it is to be the attribute of a soul, and thus extends in its connotation up to the soul. The meaning of the section therefore is that it is the soul which moves enveloped by water and the other rudimentary elements.--But the phrase 'him the G.o.ds eat' (V, 10, 4) shows that the king Soma cannot be the soul, for that cannot be eaten!--To this the next Sutra replies.

7. Or it is metaphorical, on account of their not knowing the Self. For thus Scripture declares.

He who performs sacrifices, and so on, and thus does not know the Self, is here below and in yonder world a mere means of enjoyment for the devas. He serves them here, by propitiating them with sacrifices, and so on; and when the G.o.ds, pleased with his service, have taken him up into yonder world, he there is a common means of enjoyment for them (since they are gratified by the presence of a faithful servant). That those not knowing the Self serve and benefit the G.o.ds, Scripture explicitly declares, 'He is like a beast for the devas' (Bri. Up. I, 4, 10). Smriti also declares, that while those who know the Self attain to Brahman, those who do not know it are means of enjoyment for the devas, 'To the G.o.ds go the worshippers of the G.o.ds, and they that are devoted to me go to me' (Bha. Gi. VII, 23). When Scripture speaks of the soul being eaten by the G.o.ds, it therefore only means that the soul is to them a source of enjoyment. That eating the soul means no more than satisfaction with it, may also be inferred from the following scriptural pa.s.sage, 'The G.o.ds in truth do not eat nor do they drink; by the mere sight of that amrita they are satisfied.'--It thus remains a settled conclusion that the soul moves enveloped by the subtle rudiments of the elements.--Here terminates the adhikarana of 'the obtaining of another body.'

8. On the pa.s.sing away of the works, with a remainder, according to Scripture and Smriti; as it went and not so.

The text declares that those who only perform sacrifices and useful works ascend by the road of the fathers, and again return to the earth when they have fully enjoyed the fruit of their works, 'having dwelt there yavat sampatam, they return by the same way' (Ch. Up. V, 10, 5).

The question here arises whether the descending soul carries a certain remainder (a.n.u.saya) of its works or not.--It does not, since it has enjoyed the fruit of all its works. For by 'a.n.u.saya' we have to understand that part of the karman which remains over and above the part retributively enjoyed; but when the fruit of the entire karman has been enjoyed, there is no such remainder. And that this is so we learn from the phrase 'yavat sampatam us.h.i.tva,' which means 'having dwelt there as long as the karman lasts' (sampatanty anena svargalokam iti sampatah).

a.n.a.logously another text says, 'Having obtained the end of whatever deed he does on earth, he again returns from that world to this world to action' (Bri. Up. V, 4, 6).--Against this prima facie view the Sutra declares 'with a remainder he descends, on account of what is seen, i.e.

scriptural text, and Smriti.' The scriptural text is the one 'Those whose conduct has been good' (V, 10, 7), which means that among the souls that have returned, those whose karman is good obtain a good birth as Brahmanas or the like, while those whose karman is bad are born again as low creatures-dogs, pigs, Kandalas, and the like. This shows that the souls which have descended are still connected with good or evil karman.

Smriti also declares this: 'Men of the several castes and orders, who always stand firm in the works prescribed for them, enjoy after death the rewards of their works, and by virtue of a remnant (of their works) they are born again in excellent countries, castes and families, endowed with beauty, long life, learning in the Vedas, wealth, good conduct, happiness and wisdom. Those who act in a contrary manner perish'

(Gautama Dha. Su. XI, 29); 'Afterwards when a man returns to this world he obtains, by virtue of a remainder of works, birth in a good family, beauty of form, beauty of complexion, strength, apt.i.tude for learning, wisdom, wealth, and capacity for fulfilling his duties. Therefore, rolling like a wheel (from the one to the other), in both worlds he dwells in happiness' (Apast. Dha. Su. II, 1, 2, 3). The clause 'as long as his works last' (yavat-sampatam) refers to that part of his works only which was performed with a view to reward (as promised for those works by the Veda); and the same holds true with regard to the pa.s.sage 'whatever work man does here on earth' (Bri. Up. V, 4, 6). Nor is it possible that works, the fruit of which has not yet been enjoyed, and those the result of which has not been wiped out by expiatory ceremonies, should be destroyed by the enjoyment of the fruits of other works. Hence those who have gone to that world return with a remnant of their works, 'as they went and not so'--i.e. in the same way as they ascended and also in a different way. For the ascent takes place by the following stages--smoke, night, the dark half of the moon, the six months of the sun's southern progress, the world of the fathers, ether, moon. The descent, on the other hand, goes from the place of the moon, through ether, wind, smoke, mist, cloud. The two journeys are alike in so far as they pa.s.s through ether, but different in so far as the descent touches wind, and so on, and does not touch the world of the fathers, and other stages of the ascent.

9. 'On account of conduct'; not so, since (karana) connotes works; thus Karshnajini thinks.

In the phrases 'those whose works were good' (ramaniya-karanah), and 'those whose works were bad' (kapuya-karanah), the word karana does not denote good and evil works (i.e. not such works as the Veda on the one hand enjoins as leading to certain rewards, and on the other prohibits, threatening punishment), for, in Vedic as well as ordinary language, the term karana is generally used in the sense of akara, i.e. general conduct. In ordinary speech such words as akara, sila, vritta are considered synonymous, and in the Veda we read 'whatever works (karmani) are blameless, those should be regarded, not others. Whatever our good conduct (su-karitani) was, that should be observed by thee, nothing else' (Taitt. Up. I, 11, 2)--where 'works' and 'conduct' are distinguished. Difference in quality of birth therefore depends on conduct, not on the remainder of works performed with a view to certain results.--This prima facie view the Sutra sets aside, 'not so, because the scriptural term karana connotes works; thus the teacher Karshnajini thinks.' For mere conduct does not lead to experiences of pleasure and pain; pleasure and pain are the results of _works_ in the limited sense.

10. 'There is purposelessness'; not so, on account of the dependence on that.

But if conduct has no result, it follows that good conduct, as enjoined in the Smritis, is useless!--Not so, we reply; for holy works enjoined by the Veda depend on conduct, in so far as a man of good conduct only is ent.i.tled to perform those works. This appears from pa.s.sages such as the following: 'A man who is not pure is unfit for all religious work,'

and 'Him who is devoid of good conduct the Vedas do not purify.'

Karshnajini's view thus is, that the karana of the text implies karman.

11. But only good and evil works, thus Badari thinks.

As the verb a-kar takes karman for its object (punyam karma karati, &c.), and as the separate denotation (i.e. the use of apparently equivalent words, viz. akar and karman) can be accounted for on the ground that one of them refers to works established by manifest texts, and the other to texts inferred from actually existing rules of good conduct; and as, when the primary meaning is possible, no secondary meaning must be adopted; nothing else but good and evil works (in the Vedic sense) are denoted by the word karana: such is the opinion of the teacher Badari.

This opinion of Badari, the author of the Sutra states as representing his own. On the other hand, he adopts the view of Karshnajini in so far as he considers such items of virtuous _conduct_ as the Sandhya--which are enjoined by scriptural texts, the existence of which is inferred on the basis of conduct as enjoined by Smriti--to have the result of qualifying the agent for the performance of other works.--The conclusion therefore is that the souls descend, carrying a remnant of their works.-- Here terminates the adhikarana of 'the pa.s.sing of works.'

12. Of those also who do not perform sacrifices (the ascent) is declared by Scripture.

It has been said that those who perform only sacrifices, and so on, go to the moon and thence return with a remainder of their works. The question now arises whether those also who do not perform sacrifices go to the moon. The phrase 'who do not perform sacrifices' denotes evil- doers of two kinds, viz. those who do not do what is enjoined, and those who do what is forbidden.--These also go to the moon, the Purvapakshin maintains; for the text contains a statement to that effect, 'All who depart from this world go to the moon' (Ka. Up. I, 2)--where it is said that all go, without any distinction. So that those who perform good works and those who perform evil works, equally go to the moon.--This the next Sutra negatives.

13. But of the others having enjoyed in Samyamana, there is ascent and descent; as such a course is declared.

Of the others, i.e. those who do not perform sacrifices, and so on, there is ascent to the moon and descent from there, only after they have in the kingdom of Yama suffered the punishments due to their actions.

For the text declares that evil-doers fall under the power of Yama, and have to go to him, 'He who thinks, this is the world there is no other, falls again and again under my sway' (Ka. Up. I, 2, 6); 'the son of Vivasvat, the gathering place of men' (Rik Samh. X, 14, 1); 'King Yama,'

and other texts.