Eight Adhyaya, Tenth Khanda (4 mantras)

Mantra 8.10.1.

1. Then Prajāpati said, “He who is glorified (by the Devas of the Senses) in dream; causes (the Jīva to perceive) all dream objects, (He, the Lord of dream) is the Ātman, He is Immortal, the Fearless, the Brahman.” Then Indra went away, satisfied in his heart. But before he had returned to the Devas, he saw this difficulty. Although it is true, that that self does not become blind, when the body becomes blind, that dream body does not become lame when this physical body becomes lame, and that this dream body does not become tainted with faults of the physical body.—568.

Mantra 8.10.2.

2. Nor is the dream body struck when the physical body is struck; nor does it become lame, when the physical body is lame; but it appears to be struck (like the physical body), it appears to be multilated [mutilated?] (like the dense body), it is conscious of unpleasant feeling, it appears to shed tears, therefore I see no good in this.—569.

Mantra 8.10.3.

3. Taking fuel in his hands Indra went again to Prajāpati. Prajāpati said to him “Maghavat you went away satisfied in heart, with what purpose have you come back again?” He replied, “though it is true, that that dream body does not become blind, when this body becomes blind; that it does not become lame, when this body becomes lame; and that body does not become tainted with the faults of this body.”—570.

Mantra 8.10.4.

4. Nor is the dream body struck when the physical body is struck, nor does it become lame when the physical body is lame; but it appears to be struck, it appears to be multilated [mutilated?], it is conscious of unpleasant feeling, it appears to shed tears. Therefore I see no good in this.

Prajāpati said.—“O glorious one, this is even indeed thus as thou sayest; but I shall explain it to thee more fully, according to thy capacity. But dwell thou here for another thirty-two years.” He lived there for another thirty-two years. And then Prajāpati said.—571.

Madhva’s commentary called the Bhāṣya:

An objector says: “the undeserving person Virocana had gone away, while the deserving Indra had come back for the true doctrine. But to Indra also Prajāpati taught in parables, telling him that the Self seen in dream was Brahman. Why did he teach Indra in such ambiguous phrases? Why did he not teach him more explicitly, as there was no danger of an Asura getting hold of the Doctrine.”

To this objection the Commentator replies:—

Brahmā also spoke, again and again, words capable of producing delusion, in order to show to all, that Indra was a fit person to be taught, because he always read the riddle of Brahmā. (The whole object of Brahmā was to show that the highest quality in a disciple was fitness to understand obscure teachings, through the development of intuitive faculties). Brahmā, the child of Ātman, therefore, taught Indra, in ambiguous phrases; in order to show that Indra was a fit person. He told that He who shows tlie Jīva dreams, and is worshipped by all the Devas; He is Viṣṇu. This was the purport of Brahma’s teaching. But Indra Purandara, acting as if he was possessed of Asuric brain, said “the being seen in dream appears to be slain, appears to be injured, therefore, this Jīva seen in dream cannot be the Supreme Hari.”

The masters of occultism always clothe their teachings in mystic phraseology, not that they love obscurantism, but because their object is to develope [develop?] the intuition of their disciples. They do not aim at developing intellect, but they have in view the evolution of that higher faculty called Buddhi or intuition. This can only be done by ‘dark savings’, capable of being interpretated in a two-fold sense, spiritual and material. If the person has got intuition, or, what Madhva calls, if he is a Yogya or elect, then he understands these sayings in their true sense. If he is not, then he puts a material garb on these teachings. Thus Brahmā said:—“the being glorified in dream is Brahman:” which may mean the astral body of the Jīva, seen in dream is Brahman or the producer of dream-state is Brahman. Indra acts, as if he understood the teaching in the first sense. But his intuition soon warns him and he comes back to Prajāpati with his objections and difficulties. Whether it was a more acting on the part of Indra, as Madhva holds it, or whether Indra really misunderstood Brahma’s teaching at first, and came back for further explanation, wo leave it to our readers to judge.