Verse 8

Saḥ = the aforesaid Self. paryagāt = went round; i.e. he is pervading like space. sukram = white, i.e. radiant, bright. akāyam = bodiless i.e. without the subtle body, avraṇam = not to be wounded. snāva = vein; therefore asnāviram means ‘veinless’. The last two (epithets) deny the gross body; śuddham = without the stain of nescience. This denies the causal body. apāpaviddham = unsmitten by evil (which term is meant to include) both merits and demerits [1] . The words beginning with sukram are to be changed to the masculine form, because the verse starts with saḥ (a masculine form) and ends likewise with kaviḥ and manīṣī (which also are masculine in form). kaviḥ = seeing what is past [2] , i.e. witness of all, according to the text— “There is no seer other than He” (Brih. Up. III, vii, 23), manīṣī = the controller of the mind i.e., the all-knowing Lord. paribhūḥ means ‘who is above (pari = upari) everything’. svayambhūh = self-begotten. This signifies that what is above everything as well as what is everything are both the Self. Such a Lord, always free, being all-knowing, has allotted duties (arthān) according to past deeds which are instrumental in yielding fruit (in this life) i.e. has appropriately distributed (them). Yāthātathyataḥ, being derived from yathātathā, means ‘according to facts’. śāśvatībhyaḥ = permanent; samābhyaḥ i.e. among Creators going by the name of ‘Time’*

The first point taught here in Verse 1 is (exclusive) devotion to true knowledge after giving up desires of all kinds. The second point—taught in verse 2,—is that as this devotion to self-knowledge is not possible to the ignorant who seek to live (in the ordinary way) they should devote themselves to karma. The distinctness of the two courses referred to in these verses (belonging to the Suklayajurvèda saṃhitā) is also indicated in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka (which forms part of the Suklayajurvèda brāhmaṇa). (Thus we understand) from the passage beginning with “He desired, ‘Let me have a wife’ etc” (Bṛh.. Up. I, iv, 17) that all karma is for the ignorant actuated by worldly desires. And the statement, (in the same passage) “To him the mind is the Self; speech, wife; &c [ 1 ] makes it clear that ignorance and covetousness characterise the person devoted to karma. Its result is accordingly the creation of the seven kinds of food and (thereafter) identifying with them oneself (and one’s interests) [ 2 ] . Again, as opposed to adherence to karma, exclusive devotion to the Self, in its reality, through renunciation of the three kinds of desire for wife &c., is taught to knowers of the Self in the passage beginning with “What have we to do with offspring—we to whom this Self is the desired end (world)?” (Br̥h. Up. IV, iv, 22.)

* For this sense of Samvatsara see Bṛhadāraṇyaka. Up. I, v, 14 and Pr. Up. i. 9. Like everything else Time also is born of the Creator. Hence ‘Time’ is ‘Creator’ taking the effect for the cause.

In verses 3—8, by first showing, disparagement of the ignorant, the real nature of the Self has been explained to such as devote themselves, after renunciation, to Self-realisation; for it is the knowers and not the worldly-minded that are qualified for it (Self-realisation). The same has been distinctly stated in the Śvetāśvatara Upanishad (vi, 21)—“To those in the highest religious stage, he well explained the sacred truth followed by many sages” The following verses are (now) addressed to the worldly-minded who, devoting themselves to karma, desire to live a life of activity. How is it to be known (that they are addressed to such alone) and not to all? The reply is—None but the deluded would associate with karma or with other kinds of knowledge, that knowledge of Self-unity, which arises from the destruction of all difference between end and means as taught to the unworldly in verse 7. In what follows the dispraise of the ignorant is with a view to associate Karma with vidyā. (Hence we should understand that) only such (knowledge) is meant here as can, with reason or in accordance with śāstra, be combined with karma. That knowledge is knowledge of deities (upāsanā or meditation), known as ‘divine wealth’ which is taught here as co-existent with karma, and not the knowledge of the supreme Self, for a specific result is known to follow (from a knowledge of deities) from the text—“The world of the gods through meditation” (Br̥h. Up. I, v, 16). The separate practice of meditation and karma is condemned here with a view to (inculcate their) simultaneous practice and not for altogether deprecating (either); for specific results are known (from the Veda) to follow from each. Compare—‘That, They ascend through meditation’; ‘The world of the gods through meditation’ ‘Those who take the southern path do not go there’; ‘The world of the manes by karma’. Nothing that śāstraprescribes can possibly be blameworthy.—

[ 1 ]: Believing mind to be the Self is an indication of nescience.

[ 2 ]: See Br̥h. Up. I, v. 1.