The Brahma Sutra · Book 3: Sadhana

The chapter opens with this question: what is the jiva’s course as it leaves the body? Its basis is the panchagni-vidya of Chandogya 5.10, where, in answer to King Pravahana’s question, this mystery is unfolded in the form of five fires.

In sutra 3.1.1, “tadantara-pratipatti” means the passage between leaving one body and taking on the next. The jiva “ramhati,” it goes swiftly, and “samparishvakta,” it stays wrapped in the subtle elements of matter. This same subtle body becomes the seed of the new gross body in the coming birth.

Sutra 3.1.2 states that this subtle body is made of three elements (fire, water, and food). By 3.1.3, the movement of the pranas also goes with this same subtle body. In 3.1.4 comes the doubt that fire and the rest also travel, and the answer is that this is meant in a secondary sense. In 3.1.5, though the first fire is not directly heard of in the text, that very fire is established by reasoning. In 3.1.6 there is a mention of the awareness of those who perform ishtapurta and similar rites. In 3.1.7, the reason for the secondary sense is that they are not knowers of the atman.

Connection: Chandogya 5.3-10 (the panchagni-vidya), and Brihadaranyaka 4.4.1-6 (the account of the time of death).

The jiva dwells in heaven to enjoy the fruit of its meritorious deeds, but that stay is not endless. What happens once the merit is spent is the subject here.

In sutra 3.1.8, “kritatyaya” means the exhaustion of karma. The jiva then remains “anushayavan,” that is, some deeds, not yet enjoyed, are left over, and the new birth comes with them. By 3.1.9, the jiva returns in the reverse of the order by which it rose, in the form of faith and the elements of the yajna. In 3.1.10, Karshnajani holds that the word “charana” is used in the sense of an indicator. In 3.1.11, the doubt that this analysis is pointless is set aside, since everything rests on anushaya alone.

This considers the course reached by the evildoing jivas, those who perform no meritorious deeds.

In sutra 3.1.12, the teacher Badari holds that the only causes of rise and fall are good and evil deeds. In 3.1.13, the scripture is shown to mention evildoers as well. In 3.1.14, “samyamana” means their experience under the rule of Yama, along with ascent and descent for other jivas. In 3.1.15, smriti lends its support. In 3.1.16 there is a mention of the seven hells. In 3.1.17, there is no conflict with the workings of Yama. In 3.1.18 comes the topic of vidya and karma. By 3.1.19, this course does not lie in a third place apart from the world of the gods and the world of the ancestors. In 3.1.20 and 3.1.21, support comes from the memory of the world and from what is observed.

In sutra 3.1.22, the beings born of sorrow in the third place are ruled out on the strength of the scriptural word. In 3.1.23, smriti lends support. In 3.1.24, “tat-sabhavyapatti” means that the next body takes shape in keeping with the nature of past karma. By 3.1.25, the jiva does not linger long on the way. In 3.1.26, for bodies governed by another, the statement holds as before. In 3.1.27, the doubt that this passage is impure is answered by the authority of the scriptural word.

In sutra 3.1.28, through “retah-sik-yoga,” union with the one who casts the seed, the jiva enters the order of creation. By 3.1.29, the body is taken on from the mother’s womb. That is, as the last of the five fires, in the mother’s womb, the jiva takes up its new body.

Connection: Chandogya 5.10.6, “इह स्त्री वाव गौतमाग्निस्तस्या उपस्थ एव समिल्लोमानि धूमो योनिर्ज्वालो यदन्तःकरोति तेऽङ्गारा अभिनन्दा विस्फुलिङ्गाः।” This is the last of the five fires.

The pada opens with a consideration of the dream state. Its basis is the account of dream in Brihadaranyaka 4.3.

In sutra 3.2.1, “dyubhva-adi-ayatana” says that in dream the jiva fashions a second creation within itself, just as in waking it does outside. By 3.2.2, some branches call the jiva the “maker” of the dream, who fashions sons and the rest as well. In 3.2.3 comes Badarayana’s doctrine that this dream is maya alone, since in it the true nature of a thing does not fully appear. This same sutra holds the first use of the word “maya.”

By sutra 3.2.4, dreams are sometimes signs of the auspicious and the inauspicious, as the scriptures and those who know them say. In 3.2.5, “para-abhidhyana” teaches that the bondage and the liberation of the jiva come about through the power of Brahman alone. By 3.2.6, the jiva undergoes all this while dwelling in the body.

The Upanishad teaches that just as the creation fashioned in dream proves false on waking, so too the waking state is itself a kind of dream, one that dissolves once Brahman is directly realized.

Connection: Brihadaranyaka 4.3 (the dialogue of Yajnavalkya and Janaka, on the three states), and the Mandukya Upanishad (waking, dream, deep sleep, and the fourth).

Where the jiva rests in the state of deep sleep is the question here.

By sutra 3.2.7, the scripture says that at that time the absence of experience is in the nadis, or in the atman, that is, the jiva stays merged in Brahman. By 3.2.8, waking comes from this very state. In 3.2.9, “sa eva tu” says that on waking the same jiva returns, since karma, recollection, the scriptural word, and injunction all apply to it.

Deep sleep comes every day. In it we seem no longer to be, and then we return. This return is understood through the doctrine of merging into that same Brahman and emerging from it again.

“Mugdha” means one who has swooned. It is not deep sleep, and it is not death. It stands between the two. Badarayana calls it “ardha-sampatti,” a half-merging, since it is established once the remaining alternatives are ruled out.

This is a deeply central idea of Advaita Vedanta. Brahman is described in two ways: saguna, with qualities, and nirguna, without qualities. Which of these is truly real is the question.

By sutra 3.2.11, Brahman’s “ubhaya-linga,” its twofold mark, is everywhere and bound to no one place. In 3.2.12, the doubt of difference is set aside, since at each place there is a denial of the finite. In 3.2.13, some branches read it in just this way. In 3.2.14, “arupavat” says that Brahman is truly without form, and this is its principal nature. In 3.2.15 comes the illustration of light.

By sutra 3.2.16, it is pure being alone. In 3.2.17, both shruti and smriti show this. In 3.2.18 comes the “suryakadivat” illustration: just as one sun is reflected in water in many forms and yet is one, so is Brahman. By 3.2.19, this illustration of water has its limit, since Brahman is not grasped through any conditioning adjunct. By 3.2.20, the reflection in water waxes and wanes, while Brahman does not. In 3.2.21 comes support from shruti.

Sri Shankara’s doctrine is that the nirguna Brahman alone is truly real, and the saguna form is accepted for the sake of worship. Badarayana’s sutras reconcile both forms, and Shankara reads their meaning in favor of the primacy of the nirguna.

In sutra 3.2.22, “prakrita-etavattva” is the denial of the finite Brahman described earlier, and then the scripture says “bhuyah,” something further. That is, after the saguna description the scripture speaks of the nirguna as well. In 3.2.23, “avyakta” means the unmanifest Brahman. By 3.2.24, “samradhana” means that in deep worship it is directly experienced. In 3.2.25 comes its lack of distinction, like light. In 3.2.26, through practice in action. In 3.2.27, through the infinite. In 3.2.28 comes the “ubhaya-vyapadesha” illustration “ahi-kundalavat,” the snake and its coil, that a thing can be spoken of in both forms. In 3.2.29 comes the illustration of light and its ground. In 3.2.30, in the manner described earlier.

In this group there is again a reconciliation of the saguna and the nirguna. In sutra 3.2.31, the objection against the nirguna position is refuted. In 3.2.32, the supreme Brahman is set out through the mention of a bridge, a measure, a relation, and the like. In 3.2.33 comes the sight of scripture. In 3.2.34, for the purpose of understanding, it is spoken of as “padavat,” in a fourfold form. In 3.2.35, through a particular place. In 3.2.36, through reasoning. In 3.2.37, the denial of any other. In 3.2.38, from this the all-pervadingness of Brahman is established.

The pada closes with this question: who gives the fruit of action, the unseen force itself, that is, the impression left by karma, or Brahman?

By sutra 3.2.39, the fruit comes from Brahman alone, since otherwise it would not be possible. In 3.2.40 comes the authority of shruti. In 3.2.41, Jaimini holds that dharma, that is, action itself, gives the fruit. In 3.2.42, “purvam tu badarayanah” settles the doctrine that, by the mention of the cause, Brahman is the true source of the fruit.

The Advaita doctrine is that the giver of the fruit is ultimately Brahman alone, and karma is only its occasion. This is the ordaining of the fruit by Ishvara. It is no blind, mechanical determinism.

In this pada Badarayana considers the vidyas, the particular methods of worshiping Brahman. The main question is whether a single vidya is stated in different forms across different branches, or whether these are separate vidyas.

In sutra 3.3.1, “sarva-vedanta-pratyaya” says that all the Upanishads face toward one and the same knowledge of Brahman, since there is no difference in their injunctions and the rest. In 3.3.2, the doubt of difference is set aside, since this can happen even within a single branch. In 3.3.3 comes the proof from the rule of self-study. In 3.3.4, “salila-vat” means that just as all rivers meet in one and the same ocean, so do these. In 3.3.5 comes the sight of scripture.

Worth noting here is that this statement of Badarayana concerns the unity within the Upanishads, that is, all statements of Vedanta expound one and the same Brahman.

When one and the same vidya is found in different recensions across different branches, all of its features are gathered together. In sutra 3.3.6, “upasamhara” means gathering in brief. In 3.3.7, the doubt of difference is set aside, since there is no distinction. In 3.3.8, if there is difference from a difference of context, as in “parovariyastvadivat,” then they are separate. By 3.3.9, the name may differ, while the thing itself stays one. In 3.3.10, this fits through what is obtained.

By sutra 3.3.11, certain attributes, such as being real, being knowledge, and being infinite, run through every worship of Brahman. By 3.3.12, bliss and the rest are the essential attributes of the primary Brahman. In 3.3.13, subtle features such as “priya-shirastva” are confined to a particular worship alone. In 3.3.14, other attributes carry over by a common sense of purpose.

By sutra 3.3.15, when the Upanishad teaches meditation, then, in the absence of any other purpose, it is direct meditation on Brahman. In 3.3.16 comes support from “atma-shabda,” that is, wherever the word “atman” appears, it points to Brahman alone. In 3.3.17, “atma-grihiti,” the grasping of the atman’s true nature, comes in no other way. In 3.3.18, the settled sense follows from the connection.

In sutra 3.3.19, “karya-akhyana,” the description of the fruit, can be “apurva,” something not obtained before. By 3.3.20, when the subject is the same, there is unity through non-difference. In 3.3.21 comes support from the relation. In 3.3.22, alternatively, there is difference from a particular feature.

This is an extensive group in which Badarayana considers the unity and the difference of many vidyas. By sutra 3.3.23, the scripture itself shows this. In 3.3.24, “sambhriti” and “dyuvyapti” are particular forms of worship. In 3.3.25, as in the Purusha-vidya (Chandogya 3.16), others are not mentioned together. In 3.3.26 comes a difference of meaning from piercing and the like. In 3.3.27, from the remainder of the word “upayana.”

In sutra 3.3.28, “samparaya,” the time of death, has no “tartavya,” nothing that must be done. In 3.3.29, “chandatah” gives freedom from conflict on both sides. In 3.3.30 comes the meaningfulness of the passage. In 3.3.31 comes a worldly illustration.

From sutra 3.3.32 through 3.3.42, Badarayana settles the rules of the vidyas, such as the standing of one charged with an office, the holding of the imperishable, the fixed measure, the non-omission out of regard, and the presence. These are all subtle rules of worship, by which the vidyas of the Upanishad stay in good order.

These final twenty-six sutras of the pada set out the rules for applying the particular vidyas. Here we give an indication of the gist.

The main points are these. In sutra 3.3.43 comes a specific rule for a certain determination. In 3.3.45, “linga-bhuyastva,” the abundance of indicators, is the stronger proof. In 3.3.48, the vidya itself is primary, and the others are not its helpers. By 3.3.55, in one body there is a single atman, and experience is possible for this very reason. By 3.3.57, the vidyas bound to a limb run through all the Vedas and are not confined to any one branch. By 3.3.61 and 3.3.62, an option can be allowed, though usually it is not. From 3.3.63 through 3.3.68 come the scriptural teachings on dependence within the limbs, on instruction, on combination, and on the shared quality, all of them particular rules of application.

This pada is especially for scholars who practice Vedanta. By these very subtle rules the forms of worship in the Upanishads stay in ordered arrangement.

The main question of the pada is whether vidya, the knowledge of Brahman, is a limb of the ritual portion or an independent human aim. This is a weighty debate between Mimamsa and Vedanta.

In sutra 3.4.1, Badarayana says that vidya is an independent human aim, since the word of shruti tells us so. In 3.4.2, Jaimini holds that vidya too is a remainder, that is, a limb, of the ritual portion, and that any mention of a human aim in it is only for praise. In 3.4.3, from the sight of conduct, in Jaimini’s favor. In 3.4.4 comes the authority of shruti. In 3.4.5, from joint undertaking. In 3.4.6, from the injunction for the one who has it. In 3.4.7, from the rule.

In sutra 3.4.8, by “adhika-upadesha” Badarayana establishes that shruti holds such additional teachings as make vidya independent. This is the final doctrine of Vedanta.

According to Sri Shankara, liberation comes through knowledge alone, and action does not bring it. Badarayana’s sutras lean toward the independence of vidya, and Shankara reads their meaning as the independent efficacy of knowledge.

Connection: chapters three, four, and five of the Gita descend deep into this very theme.

In sutra 3.4.9, “tulya-darshana” offers proof in Jaimini’s favor as well. In 3.4.10, “asarvatriki,” it does not hold everywhere. In 3.4.11, “vibhaga shatavat,” distinction is possible in a hundred ways. In 3.4.12, “adhyayana-matravat,” for those who only study. In 3.4.13, “navisheshat,” there is no special distinction. In 3.4.14, permission for the sake of praise. In 3.4.15, “kama-kara,” self-prompted.

In sutra 3.4.16, “upamarda” is the refining of the earlier arguments. By 3.4.17, the celibate who is “urdhva-retas” and the other renunciate ashramas also have the fitness for the knowledge of Brahman, on the authority of the word. In 3.4.18, Jaimini holds that there it is only a reference, a mention, and not an injunction, so it is an exception. In 3.4.19 comes Badarayana’s answer that it is to be practiced, from the shruti of equality, that is, knowledge is possible in all the ashramas. In 3.4.20, alternatively, this is a “dharanavat” injunction.

Here is the well-known debate over whether the fitness for knowledge belongs only to the renunciate, or to seekers in all the ashramas. Badarayana’s doctrine is that this fitness rests in all the ashramas, so the path of knowledge lies open for the householder as well.

In sutra 3.4.21, the doubt that the vidya-statements are mere praise is set aside by “apurvatva.” In 3.4.22, from the word denoting existence. By 3.4.23, they are not merely “pariplava,” the narratives to be recited at a yajna, since they are specified. In 3.4.24, from the relation of unity of statement. By 3.4.25, on the path of knowledge there is no need for fire and fuel and the like. By 3.4.26, the need for the yajna and all the other means is “ashvavat,” just as horses are helpers in an action.

Sutra 3.4.27 is deeply important. The knower is to be endowed with calm, restraint, and the other virtues, and these virtues must certainly be practiced. This is the basis of the shat-sampatti, the seeker’s sixfold inner wealth.

By sutra 3.4.28, when life itself is in danger, there is permission to take food of every kind. In 3.4.29, from the absence of contradiction. In 3.4.30, from smriti. In 3.4.31, from the word, “akama-chara,” that is, this holds only in a time of distress and is no license for one’s own will.

This is the doctrine of apad-dharma, the law for times of distress. In ordinary conditions the rule is kept strictly, and in a crisis there is a measured relaxation.

By sutra 3.4.32, the action enjoined according to one’s varna and ashrama is also ordained by the shastra. By 3.4.33, these are helpers of knowledge. In 3.4.34, “ubhaya-linga,” proof from both directions. In 3.4.35, “anabhibhava,” knowledge is possible even while performing action. In 3.4.36, even in the intermediate state. In 3.4.37, from smriti. In 3.4.38, from the favor of the qualifier. In 3.4.39, “itarat jyayah,” that is, the path of knowledge free of action is the higher one.

The root question here is whether the householder, while carrying out his duties, can attain the direct realization of Brahman. Badarayana’s answer is yes, this is possible, though the renunciate’s path of knowledge stands a grade above.

By sutra 3.4.40, one who has become a renunciate stays firm in that same spirit of renunciation. By 3.4.41, he cannot become a householder again, since a fall is inferred in that. By 3.4.42, some branches allow this after the initial stage.

Here are subtle rules about the actions that assist vidya. By sutra 3.4.43, external actions go both ways, from smriti and from conduct. In 3.4.44, Atreya holds that this action belongs to the master, from shruti. In 3.4.45, Audulomi holds that it is “artvijya,” the work of the ritual priest. In 3.4.46, “sahakari-antara-vidhi,” a third position.

By sutra 3.4.47, through “kritsna-bhava,” all the stages are contained within the household ashrama. In 3.4.48, “maunavat,” like the state of silence, knowledge belongs to all the ashramas. In 3.4.49, “anavishkurvan anvayat,” without display, by mere following. In 3.4.50, “aihika,” in this very birth, in the absence of any obstruction.

This is the closing statement of the chapter, and its repetition signals the end of the chapter. “Evam mukti-phala-aniyama” says that there is no fixed time for the fruit of liberation, and “tad-avastha-avadhriti” says that it is attained only once the state of fitness is accomplished. Badarayana’s doctrine is that liberation is attained the moment knowledge dawns, and it is bound to no fixed order of time.

After this begins the fourth chapter, “Phala,” which considers the fruit of knowledge, the course after death, and liberation while living together with liberation once the body falls.