Eight Adhyaya, Seventh Khanda (4 mantras)

Mantra 8.7.1.

1. Prajāpati proclaimed:—“the Ātman, who is free from sins, free from old age, free from death, free from grief, free from hunger, free from thirst, He whose desires are true, whose will is true, He ought to be searched out, He ought to be understood. He, who has known that Ātman indirecty [indirectly?] and has also realised Him, attains all worlds and all desires”—556.

Mantra 8.7.2.

2. Then both, the Devas and the Asuras attempted to understand this and said (to Indra and Virocana respectively) “well we, wish to know the Ātman, by knowing whom one obtains all worlds and all desires.” Indra went out to get this knowledge, in order to teach the Devās, and Virocana in order to teach the Asuras. These two, without communicating with each other, approached Prajāpati, with fuel in their hands.—557.

Mantra 8.7.3.

3. The two dwelt there for thirty-two years, observing the vow of celibacy. Then Prajāpati asked them—“for what purpose have you both dwelt here.” They replied “the Devas and the Asuras desire to know that Self about whom you have said ‘the Self who is free from sin, free from old age, free from death, free from grief, free from hunger, free from thirst, whose desires are true, and whose will is true, that Ātman we must search, that Ātman we must understand. He obtains all worlds, he obtains all desires, who having intellectually conceived this Atman realises him directly.’ Now we both have dwelt here because we wish to know that Self.”—558.

Mantra 8.7.4.

4. Prajāpati said to them.—“The person that is seen in the eye, that is the Self. This is what I have said. This is the immortal, the fearless, this is Brahman.” Virocana said.—‘Sir, he who is seen in the water, he who is seen in a mirror, who is He?’ He replied.—‘He Himself indeed is seen in all these.’—559.

Note.—Prajāpati meant by the words “that person who is seen in the eye,” the Lord as the Maker of the condition of waking. This aspect of the Lord is called Viśva. It is in this condition that He gives the power of vision to all Jīvas, to seo external objects. Virocana, however, takes it to mean the reflection seen in the pupil of the eye. He, therefore asks ‘is the reflection seen in the water and in the mirror also Brahman?’ Indra gives assents to the same question but in the sense, “is the Lord seen in the water and in the mirror by a sage, whose interior vision is open the Lord Brahman? To this Prajāpati replies, “the Lord is every where and is seen in all these. This reply is perfectly true when taken in its highest sense; but it is misleading, if taken to mean, that the reflection seen in the water or in the mirror is the Lord Viṣṇu.

Madhva’s commentary called the Bhāṣya:

In the previous chapter it was taught that Brahmacarya—the Divine Wisdom is the means of attaining release. The next question is; Does it give release to all who aspire to this knowledge and try to practise it, or only to some of them who arc the elect (from eternity). The Śruti answers this by the parable of Indra and Virocana, showing that the eligible, the elect, only gets mukti, the preordained damned soul can never understand Brahma-Vidyā, even if lie hears it.

Therefore the Commentator says:—

Indra and Virocana were both taught by Brahmā; but Indra got the perfect knowledge of Viṣṇu, whose form is all-bliss and who is the person in the eye; while Virocana understood it in a contrary way.

The words “whose form is all-bliss” are an explanation of the word Ātman, which literally means “adeyam māti”.

But if Indra, on hearing of the person in the eye, understood it to refer to Viṣṇu, why did he ask, who is he who is seen in the water and in the mirror? For he at least knew that the Supremo Self was not the reflection.

To this the Commentator answers:—

Indra, though he understood rightly, spoke as Virocana spoke, in order to delude him.

Admitted that Indra asked him the question, along with Virocana merely to keep up appearances with the latter, why did Prajāpati give the elusive reply: “He, Brahman is seen in all these.” He at least ought to have spoken the truth.

To this the Commentator replies:—

Prajāpati Brahmā spoke in the (ambiguous) words as he did, in order that Virocana should never come to know easily Viṣṇu; and his (Brahma’s) words should also be not untrue.

But where was the harm if Virocana came to know Viṣṇu? or if the words of Brahmā were not true?

To this the Commentator says:—

Because the Asuras are non-eligible to receive wisdom; and false-hood also should never be uttered, (therefore Prajāpati spoke words which were true, but not plain).

But if all Asuras are non-eligible, how is it that Prahlāda got the wisdom? To this the Commentator replies

Prahlāda and others temporarily got Asuric conditions, through the curse pronounced by me (Brahmā)—their soul was not innately Asuric. But this Virocana is verily a true Asura, so I shall give the teaching in such words that Virocana might not be enlightened and my words should not also be unture. While Indra owing to the purity of his mind (Bhāva) will certainly come back again to me for further knowledge. Thus intending, Brahmā taught that Hari was in the eye. Virocana, on account of his non-eligibility understood the doctrine to mean that the picture in the eye was Brahman, and thus wrongly understanding, he asked “is the reflection seen in the water and in the mirror also the Ātman?” To that question, the Four-faced, replied “yes, that which is seen there, is verily Brahman, in the sight of the True-knower” this he said, referring, to Viṣṇu; for Brahmā thought of Viṣṇu when he said so: for the wise see Him everywhere.