III, 4, 9

9. But the declarations (of scripture) are equal (on the other side).

In reply to the averment made in Sūtra 3, we point out that there are declarations of scripture, of equal weight, in favour of the view that knowledge is not complementary to action. For there are scriptural passages such as, 'Knowing this the ṛṣis descended from Kavasha said: For what purpose should we study the Veda? for what purpose should we sacrifice? Knowing this indeed the Ancient ones did not offer the Agnihotra;' and 'When Brāhmaṇas know that Self and have risen above the desire for sons, wealth, and worlds, they wander about as mendicants' (Bṛ. Up. III, 5). Scripture moreover shows that Yājñavalkya and others who knew Brahman did not take their stand on works. 'Thus far goes immortality. Having said so Yājñavalkya went away into the forest' (Bṛ. Up. IV, 5, 15). With reference to the indicatory sign (as to the dependence of knowledge to work) which is implied in the passage, 'Sirs, I am going to perform a sacrifice,' we remark that it belongs to a section which treats of Vaiśvānara. Now, the text may declare that a vidyā of Brahman as limited by adjuncts is accompanied by works; but all the same the vidyā does not stand in a subordinate relation to works since 'leading subject-matter' and the other means of proof are absent.

We now reply to the averment made in Sūtra 4.