25. This great, unborn Self, undecaying, undying, immortal, fearless, is indeed Brahman. Fearless is Brahman, and he who knows this becomes verily the fearless Brahman.

Footnotes

^173:1 See section 17, before.

^173:2 Sankara seems to take ukkhvasi as a noun. He writes: yatraitad bhavati; etad iti kriyaviseshanam urdhvokhhvasi yatrordhvokkhvasitvam asya bhavatityarthah.

^173:3 In the Kaush. Up. III, 3, we read yatraitat purusha arto marishyan abalyam etya sammohati. Here abalyam should certainly be abalyam, as in the commentary; but should it not be abalyam, as here. See also Brih. Up. III, 5, 1, note.

^174:1 Kakshusha purusha is explained as that portion of the sun which is in the eye, while it is active, but which, at the time of death, returns to the sun.

^174:2 Ekibhavati is probably a familiar expression for dying, but it is here explained by Sankara, and probably was so intended, as meaning that the organs of the body have become one with the Self (lingatman). The same thoughts are found in the Kaush. Up. III, 3, prana ekadha bhavati.

^174:3 The point where the nadis or veins go out from the heart.

^174:4 When his knowledge and deeds qualify him to proceed to the sun. Sankara.

^174:5 When his knowledge and deeds qualify him to proceed to the Brahma-world.

^175:1 This is an obscure passage, and the different text of the Madhyandinas shows that the obscurity was felt at an early time. The Madhyandinas read: Samgnanam anvavakramati sa esha gnah savignano bhavati. This would mean, 'Consciousness departs after. He the knowing (Self) is self-conscious.' The Kanvas read: Savignano bhavati, savignanam evanvavakramati. Roer translates: 'It is endowed with knowledge, endowed with knowledge it departs;' and he explains, with Sankara, that the knowledge here intended is such knowledge as one has in a dream, a knowledge of impressions referring to their respective objects, a knowledge which is the effect of actions, and not inherent in the self. Deussen translates: 'Sie (die Seele) ist von Erkenntnissart, und was von Erkenntnissart ist, ziehet ihr nach.' The Persian translator evidently thought that self-consciousness was implied, for he writes: 'Cum quovis corpore addictionem sumat . . . . in illo corpore aham est, id est, ego sum.'

^175:2 This acquaintance with former things is necessary to explain the peculiar talents or deficiencies which we observe in children. The three words vidya, karman, and purvapragna often go together (see Sankara on Brih. Up. IV, 3, 9). Deussen's conjecture, apurvapragna, is not called for.

^175:3 See Brih. Up. IV, 3, 9, a passage which shows how difficult it would be always to translate the same Sanskrit words by the same words in English; see also Brahmopanishad, p. 245.

^175:4 See Brih. Up. IV, 3, 9, and IV, 3, 13