III, 3, 23

23. And for the same reason the holding together and the pervading the sky (attributed to Brahman in the Rāṇāyanīya-khila) (are not to be inserted in other vidyās).

In the khilas (supplementary writings) of the Rāṇāyanīyas we meet with a passage, 'Held together are the powers among which Brahman is the best; the best Brahman in the beginning stretched out the sky^[1],' which mentions certain energies of Brahman, such as holding together its powers, entering into the sky, &c. And in the Upaniṣad of the same (i.e. the Rāṇāyanīyas) we meet with vidyās of Brahman among which the Sāṇḍilya-vidyā is the first.--The question then arises whether the energies of Brahman just mentioned are to be inserted in those Brahma-vidyās or not. To the pūrvapakṣa view that they are to be so inserted because they are connected with Brahman, the Sūtrakāra replies that the holding together and pervading the sky are not to be inserted in the Sāṇḍilya-vidyā and other vidyās, for the same reason, i.e. on account of their being connected with different abodes. In the Śāṇḍilya-vidyā, Brahman is said to have its abode in the heart, 'He is the Self within the heart' (Ch. Up. III, 14, 3); the same statement is made in the dahara-vidyā, 'There is the palace, the small lotus (of the heart), and in it that small ether' (VIII, 1, 1). In the Upakośala-vidyā again, Brahman is said to reside within the eye, 'That person that is seen in the eye' (IV, 15, 1). In all these vidyās Brahman is described as residing within the body; it is therefore impossible to insert into them the energies of Brahman which the khila of the Rāṇāyanīyas mentions, and which are connected with the Devas (i.e. external nature).--But the vidyās of the Chāndogya likewise mention such powers of Brahman as are connected with the Devas; cp. e.g. III, 14, 3, 'He is greater than the heaven, greater than these worlds;' IV, 15, 4, 'He is also Bhāmanī, for he shines in all worlds;' VIII, 1, 3, 'As large as this ether is, so large is that ether within the heart. Both heaven and earth are contained within it.' And again there are other vidyās of Brahman, such as the one which represents Brahman as comprising sixteen parts, in which not any special abode is mentioned.--True; but there is a special reason why the attributes stated in the Rāṇāyanīya-khila cannot be introduced into the other vidyās. Particulars mentioned in one place can indeed be inserted in vidyās met with in another place if the latter are suggested to the mind by containing some reference to agreeing particulars; the qualities of holding together, however, on one side and those mentioned in the Sāṇḍilya-vidyā, &c., on the other side are of such a nature as to exclude each other, and therefore do not mutually suggest each other. The mere circumstance of all the particulars being connected with Brahman does not suffice to suggest vidyās occurring in other places; for even in vidyās which are avowedly separate, all the particulars may be connected with Brahman. And it is an established fact that Brahman, although one only, is, owing to the plurality of its powers, meditated upon in more than one way, as shown under Sūtra 7.--The conclusion therefore is that the attributes of holding together its powers and so on are not to be inserted in the Sāṇḍilya. and similar vidyās.