II, 4, 3

3. On account of that (word which indicates origin) being enunciated at first (in connexion with the prāṇas).

That the scriptural statement about the origin of the prāṇas is to be taken in its literal sense just as the statements about the ether, &c., appears from that circumstance also that the one word which (in the passage from the Mu. Up.) indicates origination, viz. 'is born' (jāyate in the first place connected with the prāṇas and has afterwards to be joined with ether, &c., also ('from him is born breath, mind, and all organs of sense, ether, air,' &c.). Now as it is a settled matter that the phrase 'is born' must be taken in its primary sense with reference to ether and so on, it follows that the origin of the prāṇas also to which the same word is applied must be understood as a real origin. For it would be impossible to decide that a word enunciated once only in one chapter and one sentence, and connected with many other words, has in some cases to be taken in its primary sense, and in others in a secondary sense; for such a decision would imply want of uniformity.--So likewise in the passage, 'He sent forth prāṇa, from prāṇa śraddhā (Pr. Up. VI, 4), the phrase 'he sent forth' which the text exhibits in conjunction with the prāṇas has to be carried on to śraddhā the other things which have an origin.--The same reasoning holds good in those cases where the word expressing origination occurs at the end and has to be connected with the preceding words; as e.g. in the passage ending 'all beings come forth from the Self,' where the word 'come forth' must be connected with the prāṇas, &c., mentioned in the earlier part of the sentence.