{"id":8998,"date":"2025-09-03T17:50:09","date_gmt":"2025-09-03T15:50:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/shakti.tattva.se\/?p=8998"},"modified":"2025-09-03T17:50:09","modified_gmt":"2025-09-03T15:50:09","slug":"kathopanishad-madhva-commentary-chapter-1-fourth-valli","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/shakti.tattva.se\/index.php\/kathopanishad-madhva-commentary-chapter-1-fourth-valli\/","title":{"rendered":"Kathopanishad (Madhva commentary) \u2014 Chapter 1 – Fourth Valli"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Mantra 4.1.<\/h2>\n

1. The Self-existent graciously subdued (and turned inwards the current of) the senses which goes outwards, therefore, the wise sees not the external objects, but is attached to the Inner Self. Some tranquil-minded sage sees the Pratyag-\u0100tman<\/a> with eyes turned inwards, desiring liberation.\u201472.<\/p>\n

Note<\/em>.\u2014The power of seeing the God within is given by the God Himself to main When He wants that the man should see him, he stops the outward flowing current of the senses and makes it turn inward, and thus the sage devoted to the Lord sees the Inner Self\u2014the God Within.<\/p>\n

Madhva\u2019s commentary called the Bh\u0101\u1e63ya:<\/h3>\n

The word vyat\u1e5b\u1e47a comes from the root \u201c\u221at\u1e5b\u1e47u k\u0101tkara\u1e47e\u201d \u2018to humiliate\u2019, \u2018to lay flat.\u2019<\/p>\n

Hence,the word means to subdue and make low. [It does not mean to hurt or injure or destroy: for no such meaning is given to \u221at\u1e5b\u1e47u<\/em> anywhere].<\/p>\n

Note<\/em>.\u2014The M\u0101yav\u0101dins, see in this Adhy\u0101ya<\/a> of the Upani\u1e63ad<\/a>, authority for their doctrine that the J\u012bva<\/a> and the is vara<\/a> are one: and they rely on the verse \u201cya ida\u1e43 madhvada\u1e43 veda<\/a> \u0101tm\u0101na\u1e43 jiva\u1e43<\/a> \u0101ntik\u0101t\u201d etc. (IV. 5) where, they say, the J\u012bva and the \u0100tm\u0101<\/a> arc read in the same case, and therefore the J\u012bva and the \u0100tman are identical. They also rely upon \u201cyadeveha tadabhu?[?]\u201d etc, (IV. 10.) But their interpretation of these verses is wrong. In the verse \u201cha\u1e43ta te kath\u0101yivy\u0101me[?]\u201d (V. 6) a clear difference is laid down between the J\u012bva and the<\/p>\n

Lord: and the explanations of the above verses given by the May\u0101v\u0101dins must, therefore, be incorrect. To prove this, the Commentator (Madhva<\/a>) takes up this verse V.6.<\/p>\n

Madhva\u2019s commentary called the Bh\u0101\u1e63ya:<\/h3>\n

\u201cNow I shall tell thee this secret Brahman<\/a>,\u201d says the \u015aruti<\/a> (V. 6): and then goes on to say: \u201cI shall also tell thee the condition of the J\u012bva after death.” This is said in order to indicate the difference between the J\u012bva and \u012a\u015bvara<\/a>.<\/p>\n

[This verse V. 6. containing a promise to teach should be read immediately before the verse \u201csvapn\u0101nta<\/em> [svapn\u0101nta\u1e43<\/em>]\u201d etc. IV. 4. and therefore that sentence is explained here first by the commentator. The word \u201cmara\u1e47a<\/a> [mara\u1e47am<\/em>]\u201d is explained there as mriyam\u0101na\u2014-the dying and not death: and the whole verse is shown as applying to the Lord. Here another explanation of the same verse is given. These are not contradictory, but complementary. The question of Naciketas<\/a> did not relate to the nature of Brahman or of J\u012bva. He did not ask what is Brahman, or what is J\u012bva. Why should then Yama<\/a> promise \u201cI shall now tell thee the nature of this mysterious Brahman and of the J\u012bva that dies?\u201d To this the commentator answers, the Yama says so in order to indicate that the J\u012bva and Brahman are not identical. The difference between the J\u012bva and \u012a\u015bvara cannot be known unless the essential natures (svar\u016bpa<\/a>) of these two are described.]<\/p>\n

The J\u012bva is that which experiences the fruits of action, and is subject to obscuration of consciousness in deep sleep, pralaya<\/a>, etc. The Supreme Brahman is the Lord Vi\u1e63\u1e47u<\/a> who remains awake when all the Jivas<\/a> are asleep in the deep sleep of Pralaya or Su\u1e63upti<\/a>, etc.<\/p>\n

[Thus V. 7. describes the J\u012bva in these words:\u2014\u201cSome, ready for rebirth, go into the womb in order to obtain a body, others enter into minerals, according to their Karma<\/a>, and according to their knowledge.” While the next verse (V. 8) shows the nature of Brahman thus: \u201cThat Person who is awake in those that sleep, and who builds all objects of desires, that indeed is the Pure One, that indeed is Brahman, Immortal He is called. In Him all worlds are contained. This is that. Verily nothing goes beyond Him.\u201d This shows that the Lord is awake in the Great Pralayic sleep of all J\u012bvas<\/a>: and He causes the Pralayic Dreams also by creating pleasant dream objects for these sleeping souls<\/a>. The souls of the highest type only dream<\/em> in the Pralaya Night\u2014such as Brahm\u0101<\/a>, &e. Their mind continues active in Pralaya, like the human mind in an ordinary dream. Thus the J\u012bvas are subject to dream and sleep, nor so the Lord. The J\u012bvas are subject to re-birth, not so the Lord. The J\u012bvas experience Karma-phala<\/a>, fruit of action, but not so the Lord. But why do you say the Lord is not born; for He being the Inmost self of the J\u012bva, must necessarily enter the womb, when the J\u012bva does so? To this the Commentator replies:]<\/p>\n

The Brahman is not affected by the J\u012bva\u2019s entering the womb when re-incarnating.<\/p>\n

[Though the Brahman is there, along with the J\u012bva in the womb also, and He enters the womb in order to control and regulate the J\u012bva: yet He does not get the body to experience any consequences of His action. The jailor enters the prison along with the prisoner, but only to watch and reform the prisoner, and does not himself suffer as the prisoner does. In V. 6. Yama promises to teach two<\/em> things\u2014the San\u0101tana<\/a> Guhya<\/a> Brahman\u2014the Eternal Hidden God, and the mara\u1e47ain\u2014the J\u012bva subject to death and rebirth; and the subsequent portion of the Upani\u1e63ad is an explanation of these two topics. But why should Yama teach the difference<\/em> between J\u012bva and \u012a\u015bvara, when Naciketas had not put that question? To this the commentator replies:]<\/p>\n

The Brahman is known rightly then only when He is known as separate from the J\u012bva.<\/p>\n

[But does not IV. 5 say \u0100tmanam, J\u012bvam antik\u0101t the Supreme Self is the J\u012bva? No. That verse should be construed as J\u012bvam antik\u0101t = J\u012bvasya antike \u201cnear to the J\u012bva.\u201d For if J\u012bva and Brahman were the same, we could not say \u201cBrahman who is so near to the J\u012bva\u2014for then it would be \u201cthe J\u012bva who is so near to the J\u012bva.\u201d A thing cannot be near or distant to itself. It is only in relation to another object that a thing is said to be near or distant.]<\/p>\n

Mantra 4.2.<\/h2>\n

2. Men of small understanding go after external desires, and they thus<\/em> fall into the wide-extended noose of Yama, therefore, the controlled in mind, having known liberation, do not here seek for the’ permanent in the unstable.\u201473.<\/p>\n

Mantra 4.3.<\/h2>\n

3. By Whom (one perceives) form, taste, and smell, sound, touch and love, even by that he knows (everything else.) Does that Lord remain here in mok\u1e63a<\/a> controlling the Jiva<\/a>? Yes: This verily is so. This verily is That.\u201474.<\/p>\n

Mantra 4.4.<\/h2>\n

4. The wise does not grieve when he understands the Supreme Self who is Great and Almighty, and by whose command he sees both these, viz<\/em>., the objects of dream and the objects of waking consciousness.\u201475.<\/p>\n

Mantra 4.5.<\/h2>\n

5. He who knows this Supreme Self, the Ruler of the Past and Future, the Experiencer of all Sweetness, always standing near the J\u012bva<\/p>\n

Mantra 4.6.<\/h2>\n

6. He who first produced the Unborn one (Brahm\u0101) before the Lord of tapas<\/a> (\u015aiva<\/a>) and the Lords of elements (Waters) who entering the cavity abides therein, and perceives<\/em> all things along with the elements; This is verily that.\u201477.<\/p>\n

Madhva\u2019s commentary called the Bh\u0101\u1e63ya:<\/h3>\n

\u201cThat Vi\u1e63\u1e47u verily dwells in the heart. He is the Great Warrior, who constantly sees Himself, seated in the cavity, surrounded by all the Lords of elements. He created the Four-faced the Unborn of yore, before the Elements called Waters and the lords thereof; yea, before even \u015aiva the Lord of Tapas.\u201d (Ibid).<\/p>\n

Brahm\u0101 is called purvam [p\u016brvam?] aj\u0101tam<\/em>\u2014the unborn from before\u2014because he is not like Indra<\/a> and Agni<\/a> and others, who once being born from the mouth of Brahman, are born again<\/em> from K\u0101\u015byapa<\/a>. Not so the Lord Brahma<\/a>. But never being born before, he is produced prior to \u015aiva and Waters.<\/p>\n

(This verse does not relate to Mumuk\u1e63u<\/a> but to Vi\u1e63\u1e47u. Naciketas did not ask the nature of Mumuk\u1e63u, but of the Lord. The phrase \u2018entering the cavity\u2019 is the specific attribute of the Lord and not of the J\u012bva. Waters or apas<\/a> is taken here as illustrative of all the Elements: and denotes also the presiding deities of elements. One p\u016brva<\/a> [p\u016brvam]<\/em> qualifies aj\u0101ta<\/a> [aj\u0101tam]<\/em>: the other is an adverb qualifying aj\u0101yata. The word aj\u0101yata generally means \u201cborn\u201d or \u201cself-born\u201d but here it has a causative meaning \u201cwas caused to be born or was produced or produced.\u201d Therefore the commentator says:\u2014)<\/p>\n

The word aj\u0101yata is to be taken in a causative sense, as in jaj\u00f1e bahuj\u00f1am.<\/p>\n

Mantra 4.7.<\/h2>\n

7. She who enters the cavity with the Spirit, She the Consumer, the best of all devatas<\/a>, who is concealed in the cavity of the heart and abiding therein, manifests herself also<\/em> through the elements (as various incarnations), This is that.\u201478.<\/p>\n

Madhva\u2019s commentary called the Bh\u0101\u1e63ya:<\/h3>\n

[The word Aditi<\/a> in this verse would prima facie<\/em> lead one to the view that the well-known Goddess Aditi, the Mother of all the Devas<\/a>, is described here. But that is not the case: because Naciketas asked no question about Aditi, therefore a description of Aditi would be irrelevant. Consequently, the verse is to be explained as applying to Vi\u1e63\u1e47u. Hence the commentator says:\u2014]<\/p>\n

\u201cVi\u1e63\u1e47u is called Aditi because Heis the Eater (ad<\/em>=to eat). He dwells in the cavity along with the Chief Pra\u1e47a<\/a>. He is the best of all devatas: and transforms Himself into various avataras<\/a> such as the Fish, the Tortoise, etc., from his seat in the cavity. This Supreme Self, the Great Vi\u1e63\u1e47u, in every age manifests Himself as Avataras surrounded by the lords of elements.\u201d (Ibid). The word Devat\u0101<\/a>-may\u012b means the best of Devatas. The pharse pr\u0101\u1e47ena sam vi\u015bati<\/em> means pr\u0101\u1e47ena sahito bhavati<\/a><\/em>=along with the Pr\u0101\u1e47a<\/a> enters or dwells. The Lord, entering the cavity and staying there, manifests Himself in various ways through the elements, as Incarnations.<\/p>\n

Note<\/em>.\u2014The words of this verse are in the Feminine gender and would prima facie<\/em> more appropriately apply to the Great Mother, Bhagavat\u012b<\/a>: but the context requires that the Mantra<\/a> be interpreted as applying to the Lord. Dwelling in the cavity, along with the Great Pr\u0101\u1e47a and the lords of Elements, He materialises, from time to time, into the outer world as Great Incarnations. As a spiritual medium, placed in the cabinet, projects or materialises from outside in a seance room, such is the case of the Lord in the cavity.<\/p>\n

Mantra 4.8.<\/h2>\n

8. The All-knower is concealed between the Guru<\/a> and \u015ai\u1e63ya<\/a>: like as the child in the womb is well-guarded by the mother; daily is this Agni adored by men who are awake and who offer Him sacrifices. This verily is That.\u201479.<\/p>\n

Madhva\u2019s commentary called the Bh\u0101\u1e63ya:<\/h3>\n

\u201cThe Omniscient Lord, Vi\u1e63\u1e47u, well-guarded between the Master and the Disciple, is always praised by those who know Him as the Highest Person.\u201d Ibid.<\/p>\n

That through the help of which two is perceived (aryate=j\u00f1\u0101yate) the Joy (\u1e47=\u0101nanda<\/a>) is called ara\u1e47\u012b<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Mantra 4.9.<\/h2>\n

9. In that Brahman, from whom the Sun arises in the beginning of the creation and in whom it merges in the dissolution thereof, all the gods are contained. No one verily can go beyond Him. This is indeed That.\u201480.<\/p>\n

Mantra 4.10.<\/h2>\n

10. That which is even here, the same is there; what is there, that verily is here. From Death to Death he goes who beholds even the slightest difference in these two.\u201481.<\/p>\n

Madhva\u2019s commentary called the Bh\u0101\u1e63ya:<\/h3>\n

[The Mayav\u0101dins, of course explain this verse as an. authority for holding that the J\u012bva and Brahman are identical, that the Man here below is the same as God above in Heaven. The Commentator answers the Advaitins thus]<\/p>\n

That Lord Vi\u1e63\u1e47u who exists in the manifested Form (Avat\u0101ra<\/a>) and in organised bodies on this earth, is verily the Root-Form, and the entire Lord N\u0101r\u0101ya\u1e47a<\/a> Himself. The Lord as the Root-Form in Heaven is verily also the Lord as existing in the manifested Form (Avat\u0101ra.) He who makes the slightest difference between these two (the Lord in Heaven and the Lord on Earth), whether as regards their attributes or essential nature, undoubtedly goes to blinding darkness after death. So also undoubtedly to darkness they go, who are bhed\u0101bhed\u0101v\u0101dins [bhed\u0101bhedav\u0101dins?], (who hold that the Avat\u0101ra is different from as well as identical with the Lord). (Ibid).<\/p>\n

Mantra 4.11.<\/h2>\n

11. Even through the purified mind this knowledge is to be obtained, that there is no difference whatsoever here. From death to death he goes, who beholds this here with difference.\u201482<\/p>\n

Madhva\u2019s commentary called the Bh\u0101\u1e63ya:<\/h3>\n

[This should be kept in one\u2019s mind; and not indiscriminately told to others. As those who see difference in the Root-form and the Incarnation-form go to blind darkness, so go they too who see difference in the various bodily members, etc. of the Lord.]<\/p>\n

\u201cSimilarly those who see the slightest difference, among each other, in the various bodily members, attributes and actions of the lord, or who see difference plus<\/em> identity (bhed\u0101bheda<\/a>) therein, go to blind darkness. There is not the slightest doubt in it.\u201d (Ibid),<\/p>\n

[The word iva<\/em> has three meanings (1) Like, as, a comparison, (2) a little, somewhat (3) like-and-unlike, Difference in identity. All these three meanings of iva have been shown in explaining the phrase \u201cn\u0101n\u0101<\/a> iva\u201d; i.e<\/em>,, (1) as<\/em> different, (2) the slightest, difference and non-difference. The commentator now gives his authority for giving this three-fold meaning to iva.]<\/p>\n

In the \u015aabda<\/a> Nir\u1e47aya<\/a> the following meanings are given to iva. \u201cThe word iva is used when two quite contradictory attributes are collocated together, or when comparison is intended, or when littleness is meant.\u201d<\/p>\n

Therefore, in the phrase nan\u0101<\/a> iva<\/em>, the iva has the force of denoting \u2018little,\u2019 and \u2018difference plus<\/em> non-difference.\u2019 In the verse \u201cya iha n\u0101neva pa\u015byati\u201d (IV. 10) the force of is to prohibit difference in the Svarupa<\/a> [Svar\u016bpa?] or essential nature of the lord (as manifested in the highest heaven or one earth). While in the verse under discussion (IV. 11) the force of the word Ki\u00f1cana in \u201cneha n\u0101n\u0101sti ki\u1e43cana<\/em>\u201d is to indicate that there is absolutely no difference in the various members, attributes and actions of the Lord; nor is there difference plus<\/em> identity.<\/p>\n

(The word Ki\u00f1cana being a Pronoun denotes substance. The substance of the body of the Lord is one and homogenous; not like those of the J\u012bvas, made up of different substances. Thus His body is such a homogenous one that \u201cHe sitting goes to all distant places, etc. Similarly His attributes are all uniform, as \u201cthe Almighty, the Lord, the Self, etc.\u201d Similarly His actions are one, as \u201cWho creates Brahm\u0101, the first unborn, before \u015aiva and lords of elements, etc.<\/p>\n

Lest one should mistakenly think that these two verses prohibit only difference-in-identity and not difference, the Mantra IV. 14 clearly shows that \u201cdifference\u201d is also to be condemned: for it says \u201cHe who sees the attributes as different goes to the downward incline.\u201d Thus there is danger if one sees any difference in the attributes of the Lord, in His bodily members, in His qualities, and in His action.<\/p>\n

Mantra 4.12.<\/h2>\n

12. He who so knows the Puru\u1e63a<\/a>, of the measure of a thumb, as dwelling in the cavity of one\u2019s body. The Ruler of the past and future, does not thenceforth fear. This is verily That.\u201483.<\/p>\n

Mantra 4.13.<\/h2>\n

13. The Puru\u1e63a, of the measure of a thumb, like to a smokeless fire is the Lord of the Past and Future; He is verily to-day and He will be so to-morrow.\u201484.<\/p>\n

Mantra 4.14.<\/h2>\n

14.As water falling on an inaccesible mountain top runs clown, thus, seeing qualities of the Lord as separate, a man runs down to Darkness.\u201485.<\/p>\n

Madhva\u2019s commentary called the Bh\u0101\u1e63ya:<\/h3>\n

As the rain water falling on the tops of hills quickly runs down, similarly he who sees the attributes of Vi\u1e63\u1e47u as separate from Him rims down quickly to Darkness.<\/p>\n

Mantra 4.15.<\/h2>\n

15. As pure water poured into pure water becomes like<\/em> that, O Gautama<\/a>, so the \u0100tma<\/a> of the Muni<\/a>, who knows, becomes like that (with Brahman).\u201486.<\/p>\n

Madhva\u2019s commentary called the Bh\u0101\u1e63ya:<\/h3>\n

Even the \u0100tman or V\u0101yu<\/a> of the liberated sage becomes like<\/em> into Him: but not identically the same: what to say of the non-liberated J\u012bvas. As says the Bhavi\u1e63ya Pur\u0101\u1e47a<\/a>:\u2014\u201cThe \u0101tmans<\/a> of all the Liberated J\u012bvas, whether men or Devas, attain similarity and specially the atman<\/a> of the eternally free V\u0101yu attains similarity<\/em> only with Vi\u1e63\u1e47u, and not identity<\/em> with Him; what to say of other non-liberated men and devas. All J\u012bvas are either direct reflections, or reflections of reflections of the god V\u0101yu.\u201d<\/p>\n

Note<\/em>.\u2014This verse shows that even the Mukta<\/a> J\u012bvas\u2014the Perfect Souls, the Liberated\u2014called here Pure Water\u2014do not get identity<\/em> with the Lord in the state of Mukti<\/a>, but similarity (t\u0101d\u1e5bk) only. The reason for this is that even the highest J\u012bva, the Great V\u0101yu, the Christ, is similar<\/em> only to God, and not God. V\u0101yu or Christ is the Master or Sw\u0101min of the Liberated Ones, he being the Great Saviour. The V\u0101yu is however different from God, though similar to Him.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Mantra 4.1. 1. The Self-existent graciously subdued (and turned inwards the current of) the senses which goes outwards, therefore, the wise sees not the external objects, but is attached to the Inner Self. Some tranquil-minded sage sees the Pratyag-\u0100tman with eyes turned inwards, desiring liberation.\u201472. Note.\u2014The power of seeing the God within is given by…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"wprm-recipe-roundup-name":"","wprm-recipe-roundup-description":"","_kad_post_transparent":"default","_kad_post_title":"default","_kad_post_layout":"default","_kad_post_sidebar_id":"","_kad_post_content_style":"default","_kad_post_vertical_padding":"default","_kad_post_feature":"","_kad_post_feature_position":"","_kad_post_header":false,"_kad_post_footer":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8998","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/shakti.tattva.se\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8998","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/shakti.tattva.se\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/shakti.tattva.se\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shakti.tattva.se\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shakti.tattva.se\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8998"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/shakti.tattva.se\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8998\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8999,"href":"https:\/\/shakti.tattva.se\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8998\/revisions\/8999"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/shakti.tattva.se\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8998"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shakti.tattva.se\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8998"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shakti.tattva.se\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8998"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}