Section 1.8 (eighth khaṇḍa) (eight texts)

Upaniṣad text:

There were three persons who were experts in Udgītha—Śilaka-Śālāvatya, Caikitāna-Dālbhya and Pravāhaṇa-Jaibali.—They said—“We are experts in Udgītha: let us carry on a discussion on Udgītha”.—(1)

Commentary (Śaṅkara Bhāṣya):

The syllable ‘Om’ lends itself to being meditated upon in several ways; hence the Text has introduced another method of meditation, calculated to bring its reward in the shape of the quality of being the highest and best— The story has been brought in for the purpose of making the subject easily comprehensible.—‘Three’—persons three in number;—the particle ‘ha’ indicates the fact that such is the popular belief,—were ‘Experts’.—well-versed;—‘in Udgītha’,—in the science of Udgītha;—that is, among persons who had gathered together for some purpose, at a particular time and place; certainly, it is not possible that in the whole world there should be only three persons, well-versed in Udgītha and the related subjects; in fact, we hear of many such persons as Uṣasti, Jānaśruti, Kaikeya and others who were well-nigh omniscient.—The Text next mentions who these three experts were: (1) Śilaka, by name, the ‘Śālāvatya’, i.e., the son of Śalāvat;—(2) ‘Caikitāyana the son of Cikitāyana, of the gotra of Dalbha; or he may have been the son of both Cikitāyana and Dalbha (being the body-born son of one and the adopted son of the other);—and (3) Pravāhaṇa, by name, the ‘Jaibali’, the son of Jībala;—these were the three.—They said to each other—“We are known to be experts—well-versed—in Udgītha; hence, well,—if you agree,—let us carry on discussion,—debate, through the system of setting forth the two sides of the question,—the correct view and its contrary,—on Udgīthā,—i.e., on the science, relating to the Udgītha; and such discussion among persons knowing the subject leads to the rejection of the wrong view and the establishment of the correct view, not quite well known before, and also the setting aside of all doubts on the subject. For this reason, persons conversant with the subject should be brought together;—such is the teaching meant to be conveyed by the story;—the sense being that, that the said results have followed from discussions is found to have been a fact in the case of the said sages, Śilaka and the rest.—(1)

Upaniṣad text:

Having said Be it so, they sat down. Then Pravāhaṇa Jaibali said—“You revered Sirs, speak first; I shall listen to the talk of two Brāhmaṇas conversing.”—(2)

Commentary (Śaṅkara Bhāṣya):

Having said ‘Be it so’, they sat down.—So it it said. Where they had sat down, inasmuch as the Kṣattriya is by his very nature, more forward, Pravāhaṇa Jaibali said to the other two—“You revered Sirs,—you who deserve all honour,—speak first—before others.—The term ‘to two Brāhmaṇas’ is indicative of the fact that the speaker himself was a Kṣattriya.—“While you two Brāhmaṇas are conversing, I shall listen to your conversation.” Some people explain the qualifing term ‘vācam’, ‘talk, to mean mere words without much sense,—(2)

Upaniṣad text:

‘Thereupon, Śilaka Śālavatya said to Caikitāyana-Dālbhya—“Well, may I question you?”—“Do question” said the other.’—(3)

Commentary (Śaṅkara Bhāṣya):

On the two men being thus addressed, Śilaka- Śālāvatya said to Caikitāyana Dālbhya—“Well, if you will permit, I may question you.”—Being thus addressed, the other said “Do question.”—(3)

Upaniṣad text:

“What is the essence of Sāma?—Answer—“Accent.”—“What is the essence of accent?”—Answer—‘Breath “What is the essence of Breath?”—

Answer—“Food.”—“What is the essence of Food?”—Answer—“Water.”—(4)

Commentary (Śaṅkara Bhāṣya):

Having obtained permission, he said—“Of Sāma”,—which stands here for Udgītha, which forms the subject-matter of the discourse; it is Udgītha as^:to be meditated upon which forms the subject-matter of the discourse; the text also is going to declare “Udgītha is the highest and best”,—what is the essence,—the substratum, the ultimate basis?”—

Being thus’ questioned, Dālbhya answered—“Accent’; because Sāma is made up of accent; when one thing is made up of another, it is said to have that for its essence, its ultimate basis; as for instance, the Jar and other objects made of clay (have clay for their essence).—

“What is the essence of accent?”—

Answer—“Breath”; it is through Breath that Accent is produced; hence Breath is the essence of Accent.—

“What, is the essence of Breath?”—

Answer—“Food”; as Breath is supported by Food; as declared by the Śruti texts.—“Breath dries up without food” and “Food is the string.”—

“What is the Essence of food?”—

Answer—“Water”,—as Food is produced out of Water.—(4)

Upaniṣad text:

“What is the essence of Water?”—Answer—“That other Region.”—“What is the essence of that other Region?”—Answer—“One should not carry the Region of Heaven; we base the Sāma on the Region of Heaven too far; because Sāma has been eulogised as Heaven.”—(5)

Commentary (Śaṅkara Bhāṣya):

“What is the essence of Water?”—“That other Region’; because it is from that other Region that rain proceeds.—On being asked—“What is the essence of that other Region?”—Dālbhya said—“One should not carry—Sāma—too far—beyond, to any other substratum than,—that Region of Heaven. It is for this reason that we also base the

Sāma on the Region of Heaven; that is, we regard Sāma as based upon the Heavenly Region. Because Sāma has been eulogised as Heaven,—i.e., it is as Heaven that Sāma has been eulogised as declared in the Śruti text—“The Region of Heaven is Sāma—Veda”.—(5)

Upaniṣad text:

Śilaka Śālāvatya said to Caikitāyana Dālbhya—“Verily, O Dālbhya, your Sāma is not well-established. If, now, some one were to tell you, your head shall fall, surely your head would fall.”—(6)

Commentary (Śaṅkara Bhāṣya):

Thereupon, the other person, Śilaka Śālāvatya said to Caikitāyana Dālbhya—“Your Sāma verily is not well-established,—that is, not securely based upon an ultimate substratum and hence established as the highest and best”. The particle ‘vā’, as also the particle ‘ca’ indicates the scripture bearing upon the point. “O Dālbhya, as you put it, the Sāma is not well-established.”—If some one, knowing the true character of Sāma, were to take offence at your representation of it, and were, at this time, to say to one whose idea of Sāma is wrong, and who may be committing the serious offence of misrepresenting the insecurely established Sāma as well-established, that ‘your head shall fall,—shall fall off completely’,—then this head of yours,—who have committed the said offence,—would surely fall; there can be no doubt.—I do not say this to you, however,—this is what is meant.’

Objection—“If the man has really committed the offence for which the head should fall,—it should fall off, even without his being told so; and if the offence is not one for which the offender’s head should fall off, then, it would not fall, even on his being told so. Otherwise (if one’s head were to fall off simply because of some one telling him it would fall, then there would be the incongruity of something accruing to the man which he had not earned by his deeds, and also his being deprived of what he had earned.”

Answer—This does not affect our position; as a matter of fact, the actual accruing of the results of one’s good and bad deeds is dependent upon the conditions of place, time and other accessory causes. Such being the case, even though the offence of Ignorance be the cause of the falling of the head, yet its actual occurrence may be dependent upon some one uttering the imprecation.—(6)

Upaniṣad text:

“Well then, may I learn this from you, revered Sir?”—“Learn”, he said.—“What is the Essence of that other Region?”—“This Region”, he said.—“What is the Essence of this Region?”—He said, “One should not carry too far the Base of this Region of stability. We locate the Sima on the base of this Region; because the Sāma has been eulogised as the Base.”—(7)

Commentary (Śaṅkara Bhāṣya):

Being addressed as above, Dālbhya said—“Well, then, may I learn this from you, revered Sir,—on what Sāma is based?”—Being thus addressed, Śālāvatya answered—“Learn”, he said.—Being asked by Dālbhya—“What is the Essence of that other Region?”—Śālāvatya said.—“This Region”, he said. The sense is that this Region (of Human beings) supports the other Region (of Heaven) through sacrifices, gifts, libations and such acts. The Śruti texts have declared that ‘the Deities live upon offerings from this world.’ It is perceptible also that the Earth is the support of all things; hence it is only right that the Earth should be the support, ultimate basis, of Sāma also.—Being ashed—“What is the essence of this Region?—Śālāvatya said—“One should not carry too far—the Sāma—beyond the Base of this Region”. It is for this reason that “we locate the Sāma on the base of this Region; because Sāma has been eulogised as the Base”; i.e. Sāman has been praised as being the Base. Says the Śruti-text—“This is Rathaṇtara (Sāma)”.—(7)

Upaniṣad text:

Pravāhaṇa-Jaibali said to him—“Verily, Śālavatya, your Sāma would have an end; if, now, some one were to tell you that your head shall fall, your head would surely fall.”—“Well then, may I learn it from you, revered Sir?”—“Learn”, he said.—(8)

Commentary (Śaṅkara Bhāṣya):

When Dālbhya had said this, Pravāhaṇa Jaibali said—“Your Sāma, O Śālāvatya, would have an end etc. etc.”—as before.—Then Śālāvatya said—“Well then, may I learn it from you, revered Sir?”—He said “Learn”.—Being thus permitted the other said (as follows in the next text).—(8)

End of Section (8) of Discourse I.