2Z1

CHAPTLfi VI

VAC WITH OTHER SENSE ORGANS

Vac is celebrated in the RV as the Holy Speech, and so,

many times the word Vac means ’a prayer’. But sometimes the

word is used in the sense of one of the hurrvAn faculi»<4. Vac is

invariably mentioned in the list of the sense organs. In the

Mai.S. vac comes first and then follow the breath, the eye

and the ear. These formulae are used at the time of washing

the limbs of the killed victim in an animal sacrifice. The

Adhvaryu washes the limbs while the wife of the Sacrificer

pours the water -/ J _ » / 1 . ml

vacam asya ma himsih pranam asya ma himsis/ * i s *caksur asya ma himsih srotram asya ma hiriisir/ I , ! 1 / / /yat te kruram yad asthitam tad etena sundnasva /

Mai.S. 1.2.16.

"Do not harm his speech, do not harm his breath, do not harmhis eye, do not harm his ear. Whatever is inauspicious,

whatever is fallen into you, make that pure." The sense of / >

’vacam asya ma himsih’ is obviously symbolic, as it is said about the killed victim. Vac occupies the first place in the

list and is followed by the breath which is described to be

very closely connected with her.

333

In a formula for placing ’disya’ bricks it is said - /• ■*/ W m iayur me pani pranam me pahy apanam me pahi vyanam

m l m i l m lme pahi caksur me pahi srotram me pahi mano me- .. - - - 1pinva vacam me jinva atmanam me pahi.../

Mai.S. II.8.3.

Here in case of life, vital airs, eye and ear only the

protection is asked. But it is, as it ware, not sufficient

to have mind and speech well-protected. So the request is,

’Swell (or make full - ’pinva’) my mind and quicken (or

enliven - ’jinva’) my speech’.

In the enumeration of ’Furusa’,'vac'is said to be the seventh. In the preparation of the Chariot-race in the

Vajapeya Sacrifice, the Adhvaryu scoops the Soma in seventeen

cups for Prajapati, and the Pratiprasthatr scoops the Sura

in the seventeen Upay^a-vessels for Prajapati. To explain

why these ’grahas’ are seventeen, it is said -

saptadasa va ete dvaya grahah prajapatyah

saptadas^ purusah prajapatyas catvary angani

sirogrivam atma v ^ saptami dasa prana ange. I I m i l / / .’nge vai purusasya papmopaslisto yad vyatisajan

1. also Tai.S. IV.3.6.2; Vaj. 14-17; Kath.S. 17.3. The Mai.S. III.12.9 also mentions the same list in the same sequence.

233

grahan grhnaty angad^arigad evainam papmano

muncati / Mai.S. 1.11,6; Kath.S. I4.6.

"These two (types of) 'grahas' belonging to Prajapati are

seventeen. Seventeenfold is the man belonging to Prajapati, four limbs (i.e. two hands and two feet) head with the neck,

itman (or body), seventh (is) speech, ten breaths; sin clings

to every limb of a man. As he takes the cups alternately, thereby he releases the sin from the limbs.” Thus here'Vac’

is referred to as the seventh in the list of the constituents

of human body. Again Vac' is followed by ’franas’. The poet of the AV XI.3 also mentions speech with other faculties when

he thinks about the constitution of a man -. _ > / / / / / / / /pranapanau caksuh srotram aksitis ca ksitis

m . . i l l I J L mca ya / vyanodanau van manas te va akutim /avahan / AV XI.8.4.

’’Breath and expiration, sight and hearing, indestructibleness

and destruction, out-breathing and in-breathing, speech, mind, they verily brought design." The poet means that these organs

and their functions coming together constitute manness in man.

It is not clear why the ’aksiti' and 'ksiti’ are counted in the list of these organs and their faculties. Perhaps they

refer to the growth and destruction of body.

Vac is also described as one of the components of the

fourfold head; as ’caturvidham hi sirah pranas caksiih /

srotram vak’, Mai.S. III.2.9* The Tan.Br. XXII.9*6 also

2G0

describes'vac'as a part of the head in the similar way -/siro vai agre sambhavatah sambhavati caturdha

vihitam vai sirah pranas caksuh srotram vag

atma vai prsthani yat prsthany upaiti sira eva

atmanam anu samdadhati / Tan.Br. XXII.9*6.

”0f the individual who comes to the existence, the head first

comes to the existence {at birth), fourfold is the head, breath, eye-sight, hearing and speech. The Prstha (S^ans)

are trunk. In that he undertakes (or applies) PrsthafSamans),

he puts the trunk together after the head.” The Tai.Up.

1 .7 . 1 also,describes the fivefoldness of an individual -

athadhyatmam [ prano vyano 'pana udanah samanah/ «i ‘ Ml • •caksuh srotram mano vak tv.ak / carma mamsam

snavasthi majja / etad adhividhaya rsir avocat /

panktarfi va idam sarvam / Tai.Up. 1.7.1.

”Now with regard to oneself (adhy-atma) Pranabreath, Vyana°,

Apana°, Udana°, Samana°, Sight,hearing, mind, speech, touch, skin, flesh, muscle bone marrow. Having analysed in this

manner, a seer has said: 'Fivefold, verily is this whole

world.” Thus Vac is always mtT\ti'or>ed in the list of sense organs or of the components of the body.

In the hymn on the Skambha or ’the frame of creation',

the poet of the AV X.? asks -

2d 1

yasmai hastabhyam padabhyara vaca srotrena m t m / /caksusa / yasmai devah sada balim prayacchanti• f t I m /vimite ‘mitara skambham tarn bruhi katamah svld

eva sah / AV X.7.39.

”Unto which with the two hands, with the two feet, with

speech, with hearing, with sight; unto which the gods

continually render (praV^yam) tribute, unmeasured in the measured out - that Skambha tell me: which forsooth is he?"

Here the limbs and the faculties are mentioned in reference

to the gods. After hands and feet, in the list of sense organs, Vac comes at the first place. It is possible that

only those j«.<-(Ajfi'esand limbs which, in one way or the other,

take part in the activity of giving the offering are mentioned. ’Vac* ’Caicsu’ and ’Srotra’ are the jactJKey which

are usefial for the sacrificial act. So if the author of the

Mai.S. wants to be brief and wants to mention only the major h u m a n h e mentions only Vac, Gaksu, and Srotra, as -

/ / / / Jvisna urukramaisa te somas tarn raksasva ma tvadabhan duscaksaste mavaksadayan vasuh purovasur

- / . / /vakpa vac am me patv ayairi vasur vidaavasus/ • /caksuspas caksur me patv ayam vasuh sam yad

* * / J / /vasuh srotrapah srotram me patu / Mai.S. I.3»9.

”0 Visnu, wide striding, this ts thy Soma, guard it. May it not harm thee, may not an evil eyed one espy this. This

wealth, who has wealth before him, who guards the speech,

2G2

may guard my speech. The wealth, who wins wealth, who

guards the eye, may guard my eye. The wealth who controlled the wealth, who guards the ear, may guard my ear.” In a

Sukta for relief from sin and distress the poet of the

AV ¥1.96.3 requests Soma to purify the sin committed by speecn, eye and mind. It is natural that the place of

’srotra' is taken here by mind,because some action is referred

to. The verse reads as -/ / . / _ / /yac caksusa manasa yac ca vacoparima jagrato yat

/ I i / - «svapantah / somas tani svadhaya nah punatu /

AV VI.96.3.»

2”If (yat) with eye, with mind, and if with speech we have offended (upaV r) , waking, if sleeping, let Soma purify those

things for us with Svadha."

In the AV XII.5.7 speech is mentioned with force,

brilliancy etc.// / / / / / /Ojas ca tejas ca sahas ca balam ca vak

/ / i t cendriyam ca sris ca dharmas ca / AV ill.5*7.

"Both force and brilliancy and power and strength and speech

and sense (indriya) and fortune and virtue (etc. all these

2. Say. takes Vac as representing 'karmendriyas’ in general *yac ca papam vaca / karmendriyan^ upalaksanam etat / vagadi^^karmendriyena kamacaravadadina upagat^ smah / ’ etc.

depart from the ksatriya ^ho takes to himself the Brahman

cow, who scathes the Brahman).” Here Vac is listed among

the cherished personal qualities of a warrior. When the poet of the AV XIi.60.1 prays for physical abilities he first thinks of speech, as -

m / / » / / / / / >van ma asan nasoh pranas caksur aksnoh srotram• • • • * *

/ / m l i m i t , , ! . . Ikarnayoh / apalitah kesa asona danta bahu

bahvor balam / AV XIX.60.1.

’’Speech in mouth, breath in my nostrils, sight in my eyes,

hearing in my ears, my hair not gray, ray teeth not brocken,

much strength in my arm.” These are the sigt(ns of physical

fitness. The wish is that all the sense powers should be

properly functioning or active at their proper dwelling/place. The Prasn.Up. II.2 includes speech in the list of

powers that support the body. Here Bhargava Vaidarbhi asks

Paippalada - ’How many powers support a creature ? How many illumine this body ?’ -

tasmai sa hovaca akaso ha va esa devo vayur agnir apah prthivi van manas caksuh srotram ca /

te prakasyabhivadanti vayam etad b ^ a m

avastabhya vidharayamah / Prasn.Up. II.2.

»*To him then he (Paippalada) said; ’Space (akasa) verily is

such a power (devah) - wind, fire, water, earth, speech,

3. The Tai.S. V.5.9.3. is similar.

264

mind, sight and hearing too. These having illumined it,

declare: ’We uphold and support this trunk (bana)

In the chapter on the Sautr^ani the Sat.Br. tells us

that the remaining portion is poured into the Sarasvata cup

from the Asvina cup and from Sarasvata cup into the Aindra

cup. This action is explained by identifying these cupswith

sense organs mystically, and it is further said that all the

vital airs are established on speech. The passage reads as -/ m m / / / m / m i <mcaksur va asvino grahah / pranah sarasvato vag

/ m / w M / / Maindra asvinat sarasvate ’vanayati caksur evasya/ . / / . . . 1 I ^ Jtat pranaih samdadhati sarasvatad aindre prananN i m J I m / „ m •evasya tad vac a samdadtiaty atho pranmi evasyaI I I . / . / m 1 m ^tad vaci pratisthapayati tasmat sarve prana vaci

pratisthit^ / Sat.Br. XII.8.2.25.

"The Asvina cup, indeed is the eye, the Sarasvata one theml ,vital air, and the Aindra one speech. From the Asvina (cup)

he pours (the-remains) into the Sarasvata one, whereby he

combines his eye with the vital airs, from the S^asvata (cup)

into the Aindra one, whereby he combines his vital airs with

his speech, and also establishes his vital airs in (the channel of) speech; whence all the vital airs are established

2G3

on speech.”^

So far we have seen the passages where speech isoicmt

mentioned with the othor sense organs. Now let us turn to

the organs of speech. The AV X.2, called ’Parsnisukta*

speaks about the wonderful structure of a man. The seventh verse reads as -

/ t m l m m tm J m m lhanvor hi jihvam adadhat purucim adha mahim adhiI m L / J - /sisraya vacam / sa a varivarti bhuvanesv antar

apo vasanah ka u tac ciketa / AV X.2,7.

"Since in his jaws he put his ample (puruci) tongue, then

attached (adni \Tsri) {to it) great speech; ne rolls greatly

on among existences clothing himself in the waters. Who indeed understands that.” The poet here is impressed with

the wonderful and complicated structure of the human body,

and he describes how the faculty of speech is originated in man. He is aware of the importance of the tongue in the

whole process of uttering speech. It seems that of the

different organs of speech tongue is designated as the

4. The importance of speech is also asserted when the Go.Br. says - 'sa yad aha mayi bharga iti prthivimevaital lokan^ aha agnim d e v a n ^ -- vacamindriyanam / ’ Go.Br. 1.5-16."And when he said, ’In me be light, he said to the earth among these worlds, to Fire among the gods.^.. to speech among the sense organs.'*

2 r fy 1)0

articulator, while others are points of articulation. So

tongue is rightly qualified as ’ample’. The poet also

thinks that speech is as though attached to the tongue. In

the AV IV.1 3,7 alsg importance of the tongue is suggested by

using the expression ’purogavi'. (The hymn is for healing.)/ /

i m m s / 4 m m m m m Jhastabhyam dasasakhabhyam jihva vacah purogavi //

anamayitnubhyam hastabhyam tabhyam tvabhi

krsamasi // AV IV. 13.7.

’’With two ten branched hands - the tongue (is) forerunner of speech - with two disease removing hands - with them do we

touch thee." Here is a spell to heal someone suffering from

disease. The expression ’vacah porogavi’ suggests that they were conscious about the activity of the tongue in the process

of speech. The verse means, ’We touch you (i.e. the patient)

with two hands with the fingers and with speech’. To touch with speech means to utter some spell when touching.

The Tai.Up. 1.3 describes the mystic meaning (upanisad)

of the combination (samhita) under five heads, the last one

with regard to one’s self (adhyatmam). In that some of the

organs of speech are referred to -

atha adhyatmam / adhara hanuh purvarupam /

uttara hanur uttararupam / vak sandhih j jihva sandhanam / ity adhyatmam / Tai.Up. 1.3.4.

O0

"Now vjith regard to oneself - The lower jaw is the prior

form; the upper jaw the latter form. Speech is their

conjunction; the tongue the connexion thus with regard to oneself.” Here Vac is imagined to be the ’union’ of the two

jaws,and tongue the instrument which brings about the union.

In the Soma Sacrifice, in an animal offering at the

incision of the limbs, the Adhvaryu cuts off the portions for

offering, from the heart, tongue etc. This act is described

as -/ m / I I I Ihrdayasyavadyati manasa eva tenavadhyaty athoj - / // / ./yavan eva pasus tasyavattam bhavati jihvaya

/ I 1 / Javadyati vaca eva tenavadyaty atho etaya hy/ « / / m i magra osadhinam rasam prasnati / Mai.S. III.10.3.

"He cuts (a portion) from the heart, thus he cuts (the

portion) from the mind. Thereby he cuts of the whole animal.

He cuts a portion from the tongue. Thereby he cuts the portion of the speech. With (tongue) before, the animal tastes the essence of trees,” From such expressions, we can

see that according to the seer of the Mai.S. the heart was

the dwelling place of the mind or thought, and the tongue was the place of speech. Tongue is supposed to be the residence of speech because of the role it plays in the

utterance of articulated speech.

In the following two passages the word Vac is used in

the sense of a tongue -

ta asadhayai velayopadadhati / vag va asa^am /rasa esa vaci tad rasam dadhati tasmat

sarvesam anganam vacaivannasya rasam vijanati //Sat.Br. VIII.5.4.1.

"He lays them down on the range of the Asa(toa; for the Asadha is speech, and this (set of bricks) is the essence

(of food) : he thus lays into speech the essence of food;whence it is through (the channel of) speech (i.e. tongue)

that one distinguishes the essence of food for all the

l i m b s , T h e second passage from the same Brahmana wherethe word vac is used in the sense of tongue reads as -

/ / / / / / / / «sa etaih suptah / na kasya cana veda na manasa

sankalpayati na vacannasya rasam vijanati na

pranena gandham vijanati na caksusa pasyati na/ / / / \ I a/_ /srotrena srunoty etam hy ete tadapita bhavanti /

Sat.Br. X,.5.2.1 5.

"And when he is asleep, he does not, by means of them, know of anything. Whatever, nor does he form any resolution with

his mind, or distinguish the taste of food with (the channel

of) his speech (i.e. tongue) or distinguish any smell with (the channel of) his breath; neither does he see with his eye,

nor hear with his ear, for those vital airs have taken

possession of him.”

5. Say. also rightly observes -• ’vaca tu jihva laksyate / ’

We have seen the passages where the word vac is used in the sense of a tongue. More commonly we come across the

passages identifying Speech yjtU Sarasvati. So the

identification of tongue with Sarasvati in the following passage is inkeeping with the idea of using the word Wac' in

the sense of a tongue’-

prana evendrah / jihva sarasvati nasike asvinauI m / J m / / y _ /yad vai pranenannam atman pranayate tat pranasya

* ^ / m m / m / m m mpranatvam jihvaya vannasya rasam vijanati nasike

u vai pranasya panth^ / Sat.Br. XII.9.I.I4.

’’Indra, assuredly, is the breath, Sarasvati the tongue, and the two Asvins the nostrils; and inasmuch as through (the

channel of) the breath (prana) one introduces (pr^i) food

into himself, that is the reason of its being (called)‘prana! By means of the tongue one distinguishes the essence

(taste) of food, and the nostrils, indeed, are the path of

the breath

In the chapter on the preparation of the (Ahavaniya)

Fire-altar, the word Vac is used in the sense of mouth -J \ / m / „ 1 { m t , m / /vag gha tveva vamabhrt prana vai vamam vaci vai

pranebhyo ’nnam dhlyate tasmad vag vamabhrt /

Sat.Br. VII.4.2.3 5.

’’But speech i.e. mouth also indeed is the bearer of what is

desirable; for desirable are the vital airs, and for (the

270

channels of) the vital airs food is put into the mouth:

therefore speech is the bearer of what is desirable.” Thus

the word Vac here is used in the sense of mouth^ which bears

food for all Pranas i.e. alJ sense organs.

Vac and Manas

Language has both physical and psychological aspect.

Manas is the psychological aspect which operates before the

actual utterance and directs and controls speech. One can say, ’manas’ is the spiritual authority governing the

temporal power of speech i.e. Vac. Ancient Indian thinkers

were aware of this close relationship between ’manas’ and ’Vac', as is seen in the AV VII.1.1 -

> J . / / m I J / . . /dhiti va ye anayan vaco agram manasa va ye/ / /M m’vadan rtani / trtiyena brahmana vavrdl'ianas

J 1 L ituriyen^anvata nama dhenoh / AV VII. 1.1.

’’They, who either by meditation made (led) the beginning

(’agra’) of speech, or who mentally spoke the truths (rta) -

they gaining (the strength) with the third brahman (i.e. the actual formulation of the mantra) perceived (Vman) with the

fourth, the name of the milch-cow.” Thus the righteous

6. Say. also observes -’vak sabdena vagindriyasthanam mukham laksyate / ’

271

utterance is related to the mind. The mental activity is

supposed to be consisting of two parts - the first part i.e.

‘ dhiti’ ’thought ’ or ’nianasaVvad' ’speech in mind’, precedes

the second part, which consists of the actual formulation of7the mantra and its utterance.

In a formula for the Diksa offering in the ftajasuya

sacrifice, the Mai.S. records all the previous mental

activities required for the well thought out speech as -^ * i

m m t / • » • / • /akutam agnim prayujam svaha mano medham agnim // • M M / « / 'Nm M / / •prayujam svaha cittam vijnatam agnim prayujam

t /« « « . / / / / M Msvaha vaco vidhrtam agnim prayujam svaha

/ /prajapataye manave svaha .../ Mai.S. 11,7.7.

"Purpose, Agni, impulse hail I Mind, intellect (wisdom)

Agni, impulse hail I Thought (reason), knowledge, Agni

impulse hail I Speech discrimination, Agni impulse hail I- 8Prajapati, to Manu (or to mind) hail I’* Here Agni is put in

apposition with different ideas as Akuta, Manas, Medha,

Citta and Vijnata. It seems that these are the previous

stages of speech. It is noteworthy that here the stage of

7. Manas and dhi are combined also in the Sat.Br. III.5.3.11.

8. The Tai.S. IV.1.9.1; the Kath. 16.7; the Vaj.S. 11.66 etc. are similar.

2-m f-%

'citta and vijnata’ is put between ’Manas-Medha' ando

’V a c - V i d h r t a ' T h e last stage, 'vidhrta', suggests the complete and manifested form of speech. Thus manas is the predecessor of speech,

V<e come across many passages in the Vedic literature,

where mind is described as the fore-runner of speech. A

passage from the Ai,Br. clearly shows how the mind being the

forerunner of speech impels Vac to speak agreeably. In the Pasuyaga, when the fire is carried round the sacrificial

animal, they ask: Why does the Maitravaruna proceed to give

orders if, otherwise the Adhvaryu orders the Hotr to recite the appropriate mantras ? The answer is -

mano vai yajnasya maitravaruno, vag yajnasyahota manasa va isita vag vadati y ^ hy

anyamana vacam vadaty asurya vai sa vagadevajusta tad yan maitravaruna upapraisam

pratipadyate manasaiva tad vacam irayati

tanmanaseritaya vaca devebhyo havyam

sampadayati / Ai.Br. II.1,5.

”The Maitravaruna is the mind of the sacrifice. The Hotr is• * the speech of the sacrifice. For speech speaks only ifdriven by the mind, because if the other minded (i.e, if mind

9. cf. ’dhrta vac’ mentioned in the Sat,Br.111.2,4.11. The passage is referred to later on.

2-0i o

and speech are unconnected), one speaks the speech of the Asuras, which is not agreeable to the gods. If the

Maitravaruna proceeds to give the orders, he stirs up speech by means of mind. Thus he secures the offering to the gods

(by preventing the Asuras from taking possession of it).”/Similar thought is found in the Sat.Br. 111,2.4,11. This

passage also states that the mind holds the speech^^ and in

the absence of mind ,it will be impossible for a man to speak

consistently. The text reads as follows -1 , , / . J . i idhrta manaseti / manasa va iyam vag dhrta mano

J / / , \

va idam purastad vacah / ittham vada maitad/

m m i 4 m /vadir iti / alaglam iva ha vai vag vaded yan// „ t I m /mano na syat / tasmad aha dhrta manaseti j

sat.Br. III.2.4,11,

"Dontrolled by the Mind’ - this speech of ours is indeed

controlled by the mind; the mind infact goes before speech.(It tells her -) ’Speak thus; do not speak this ’ For if

there was no mind, speech would indeed talk in an unconnected

way." The Sat.Br. IV.6.7-19 identifies‘res' and‘spans’with

speech, and lajus - formulas with the mind. Explaining the

use of ftc, S^an and lajus the passage comes to the conclusion

that speech speaks only that which is thought out by mind -

10. The Go.Br. 1,38 also says that speech is established in mind.

274

/ * mvag evarcas ca samani ca, mana eva yajumsi // - I tsa ya rca ca samna ca caranti - vak te bhavanti /

atha ye yajusa caranti - manas te bhavanti //

tasman nanabhipresitam adhvaryuna kim canaN S J 'kriyat€ / yadaivadhvaryur aha - 'anubruhi’ ’yaja'

I t / ! J titi / athaiva te kurvanti ya rca kurvanti / • 1 i Jyadaivadhvaryur aha - somah pavata upavartadhvam

iti / athaiva te kurvanti - ye samna kurvantiN / / m m /no hy anabhigatam manasa vag vadati /

Sat.Br. IV.6.7.19.

"The Kcs and S^ans, forsooth, are speech, and the Yajus- verses are the mind; and so those who perform with Rc and

Saman are speech, and those who perform with the Yajus are

the mind. Hence nothing whatever is done, unless ordered by the Adhvarya* Wlien the Adhvaryu says, 'Recite (the

invitatory prayers)I Pronounce the offering prayer I’ then

those who perform with the Rc perform it. And when the Adhvaryu says, ’Soma becometh pure: turn ye back then

those who perform with Saman perform it - for speech speaks

not but what is conceived by the mind.” Here Rc, S^an and Yajus seem to stand for the activities of the Hotr, Udgatr,

and Adhvaryu giving directions like mind, respectively.

According to the Kau.Up. III.7 also the presence of mind is considered to be indispensable for the conscious speech -

275

na hi prajnapeta van nama kimcana prajnapayet /

anyatra me mano 'bhud ity aha / naham etan nama prajnasisam iti / Kau.Up. III.7.

"For truly apart from intelligence (prajna) speech would not

make cognizant (pra + jna) of any name vfhatsoever. ’My mind

was elsewhere', one says, ’I did not cognize that name'.”H

Thus the presence of mind is always considered as the necessity for the proper utterance of speech and also for

proper understanding of speech.

Naturally mind is considered to be superior to speech. In the process of creation ’manas’ is said to have created

speech (Sat.Br. X.5.3.4) -I / / J )tan mano vacam asrjata /

Mind vjas considered to be superior to speech. So speech is always described as following mind. Speech speaks

whatever mind thinks. According to the Sat.Br. III.9.1.13

speech establishes a link between the activities of mind and

ears -/ / m l m i ! I {mana evendrah / vaic sarasvati srotre asvinau

f I/ / / « - iyad vai manasa dhyayati tad vaca vadati yad vaca vadati tat karnabhyam srunoti .../

Sat.Br. XII.9-1.13.

11. It seems that here ’prajna’ is equated with the mind.

2 * o/O

"Indra assuredly is the mind, Sarasvsti speech, and two $

Asvins are ears. Now whatever one thinks in his mind, of

that he speaks with his speech, and what he speaks with his speech that one hears with one's ears." The idea, that

speaking of speech is preceded by thinking of mind, is also

found in the Tan.Br. XI.1.3. It is said that in the Bahispavamana-laud the verses containing the word ’old’

are yoked before those containing the word ’upon’ -

raanas tat purvam vaco yujyate mano hi yad dhi

manasa ’bhigacchati tad vaca vadati /

Tan.Br. XI.1.3.

’’Thereby the mind is yoked (ranged) before the speech; for

the mind comes before the speech; for all that has been thought out (first) by the mind, is afterwards uttered by

the speech."

Not only that the speech follows mind but the thought that whatever one does not do with speech, or is not able to do with speech can be done with the mind, establishes

the superiority of mind over speech once more. The Tan.Br.

IV.9.9; 10.says -

manasa him karoti manasa prastauti manasodgayati

manasa pratiharati manasa nidhanam upayanty

12. The Tai.S. V.l.3.3 is similar.

/ i

asamaptasya samaptyai / yad vai vaca na

samapnuvanti manasa tat saraapayanti /Tan.Br. IV.9.9; 10.

’'Mental3.y he (the Udgatr) makes Him, raentall.y he (the

Prastotr) sings the Prastava, mentally he (the Udgatr) sings

the Udgitha, mentally he (the Pratihartr) sings the Pratihara;

mentally (the three chanters together) sing the finale, for

the sake of reaching the unreached. What they (the

participants of ’Satra') do not reach by means of speech,that they make them reach by means of the mind.”

/ 'In the Sat.Br. 11.2.7.6 the kindling verses are

identified with different deities as the Earth, Agni, Vayu, Antariksa, Dyaus, Aditya, Chandramas, Manas, Vac, Tapas and Brahman. Here also speech comes after wind.

The mind is often described to be quicker than the

speech -

jigharmi agnim manasa ghrteneti mano vai vacah

ksepiyo manasaiv^iutim apnoti / Kath.S. 19.3* (.10) •

moisten Agni with mind and ghee’ (thus he recites).

Mind is quicker than the speech. Thus* he obtains the

offering by mind.”

In the Chan.Up. in the section on the instruction to

Narada by Sanatkumara, we read the discussion about the progressive worship of Brahman upto the Universal soul.

278

In that Narada asks - *Is there, Sir, anything more than

speech ?’ And the teacher Sanatkumara answers -

mano vava vaco bhuyah / yatha vai dve va

'malake dve va kole dvau va *ksau mustir• • •anubhavaty evam vacam ca nama ca mano ’nubhavati /

sa yada manasa manasyati mantran adhiyiyety

athadhite j karmani kurviyety atha kurutem % J / Ai 4 /putrams ca pasums ceccheyety athecchate /

imam ca lokam a»am ceccheyety athecchate /

mano hy atma / mano hi lokah / mano hi

brahma / mana upasveti / Chan.Up. VII.3.1.

’’Mind assuredly (is) more than the speech. Verily, as the

closed hand compasses two acorns or two kola-berries, or two

dice-nuts, so Mind compasses both Speech and Name. When

through mind one has in mind. "l wish' to learn the secred

sayings (mantra)’ , then he learns them; ’I wish to perform

secred works (karma)’, then he performs them; 'I would

desire sons and cattle* , then he desires them; *I would desire

this world and the yonder' , then he desires them. Truly the

self is Mind. Truly the world (loka) is Mind. Truly Brahma is Mind. Reverence Mind.” Thus Manas is glorified here and

it is suggested that mind is responsible for our each and

every action. Manas encompasses with Vac and Naman. It is interesting to note that haman is conceived here as something

different from Vac.

2 /

When we think about the relative positions of ’manas' and ’Vac', the Mai.S. tells us that both of them are of the same kind, the difference in them is only of degree -

/ /akutam cakutis ca jf iti yajno va akutam

/ I I /daksina^kutih jj cittam ca cittis ca / itiI I ^ ^

mano vai cittam vak cittih // adhitam cadhitis* t t /

ca iti praja va adhitam pasava adhitih /

Mai • S. I»if.® 1 4*

Before the Svistakrt offerings he- offers twelve ’Jaya’

offerings with these formulas. These are the offerings

advised for one who desires to undertake Darsa and

Purnamasa Sacrifices. ’cittam ... etc.’ is the second of

these ’Jaya-offerings’. 'citta' is the ’reflecting’ and

’citti’ is the ’reflection’ or ’citta’ is ’noticed’ and ’citti’ is ’notice’ (one is p.p. and the other is action

n o u n ) ’manas' is identified with ’cittam’ and speech with

’cittih’ and thus it is suggested that the difference between mind and speech is only of degree. It is further thought

that mind, being the previous stage in the process of

expression, is vague in nature. Comparatively speech is considered to be^concrete than ’manas’. In the section on the

Pranlta waters the Mai.S. says -

1 3. V cit and Vkit express the same meaning. In some cases the palatalization occxired and in some cases it did not occur.

28G

yo vai sraddham analabhya yajate papiyan bhavatyI / / •.apo vai sraddna na vaca grhyante na yajusati vaI t », 1 , 1 / / «eta vacam nedanty ati vartram manas tu natinedanti

t I m m m / J m _ /yarhy apo grhniyad imam tarhi manasa dhyayed iyam/ /*./ M-V / «va etasam patram anayaivaina agrahin sraddham

alabhya yajate na papiyan bhavati / Mai.S. 1,4.10.

"He,who offers a sacrifice without faith ,becomes worse. The

waters are faith. They are not taken with speech nor with

Yajus. They foam over the barrier, they foam over speech.

But over mind they do not foam. When the waters are taken,

he should contemplate on this (speech) with the mind. This (speech) is as it were their pot. He took them (waters) with

this (speech). One who offers with faith does not become

worse." Here it is suggested that 'mind' is superior to speecn, so waters cannot rise over it. But speech is thought

of here as something concrete as opposed to 'manas'. Waters

cannot reach manas but they can reach speech, as speech is looked upon as 'patra- 'something concrete'.

In the process of communication speech plays an important

role. One can understand others only if they speak out; but

it is not possible to understand what is going on in the minds of others, if they do not speak. The Sat.Br. tells us

the same thing in the sacrificial context -

vag evarcas ca samani ca / mana eva yajurasi sayatreyam vag asit sarvam eva tatr^riyata sarvam

281

/ /»,>.« « / / ■••• \ / / /,prajnayatatha yatra mana asin naiva tatra kimcanaknyata na prajnayata no hi manasa

m It i 'dhyayatah kas canajanati / $at.Br, IV.6.7.5-

"Both the Rks and the S^ans are speech, and the lajus are the mind. Now wherever this speech was, everything was done,

everything was known; but wherever mind was, there nothing

whatever was done, nothing was known, for no one knows (or understands) those who think in their mind." The passage

tells us that the working of the mind is made clear by speech.

The sacrificial formulas are likened to mind, while the 8c

and Saman which accompany the acts of ritual are likened to

speech.M /In the twelfth kanda of the Sat.Br. speech is described

to be nothing but the manifestation of the mind. While describing ’Sautr^ani’ as a human body it is said -

I L 4 m I m L / /sa va esa atmaiva yat sautramani / mana eva /i m m i m / « | N /pratyaksad vag yajamanah tasyatmeva vedih /

Sat.Br. XII.9.1.11.

’’Verily the Sautramani is the body (of man) the Sacrificer is

the mind, (that is) speech manifestly; the Vedi is the

trunk*’ etc.

The constant association of Mind and Speech and the idea

that speech is subordinate to Mind led the speculative minds

of the authors of the Brahmanas to think that Speech and Mind,

2B2

as it were, form a couple ('mithuna*)• Woman was always

supposed to be under the control of a man. In the same way

Speech is considered to be under the control of Mind. The

Ai.Br., when dealing with the Sarparajni formula, states the relation between Vac and Manas as 'devanam mithunam' -

at t m mm mvak ca vai manas ca devanam mithunam devanam eva tan Hiithunena mithunam avarundhate devanam

mithunena mithunam prajayante prajatyai prajayate

prajaya pasubhir ya evam veda / Ai.Br. V.4.2 3.

"Speech and mind are the pairing of the gods, verily thus by

the pairing of the gods they win a pairing, by a pairing of

the gods they are propagated in pairing; (verily it serves)

for propagation; he is propagated with offspring and cattle who knows this.” The Ai.Br. IV.4,28 expresses in the same manner that Brhat (i.e. manas) and Rathantara (Vac) are the

parents of Vairupa -« af to M Mbrhac ca va idam agre rathant^m ca *stam vab

ca vai tan manas ca ’stam vag vai rathantaram

mano brhat tad brhat purvam sasrjanam rathantaram atyamanyata tad rathantaram garbham adhatta tad vairupam asrjata / Ai.Br. IV.4.28.

”In the beginning there were here the Brhat and the

Rathantara. They were Speech and Mind; the Rathantara Speech

the Brhat Mind, the Brhat as first born despised the

Rathantara, the Rathantara conceived and produced that

Vairupa.”

2 8

The Sat.Br. VIII.6.3*22 also sees Vac and Manas as the

parents -I I

/ / m / m / a / / /punah krnvana pitara yuvaneti vak ca vai manas

ca pitara yuvana / Sat.Br. VIII.6.3.22.

’’’Making the parents young again’, the young parents doubtless

are Speech and Mind.” In the same Brahmana Mind is described

to be the male with the female Speech -/ / / m J / ttasmad etasya yajnasya vratam eva diksa vrso vai

/ // « / / m / m S mvratam yosa diksa vrsa satyam yosa sraddha vrsa/ / « « / • / i m / mmano yosa vag vrsa patnyai yajamanas tasmad

mm / / /yatraiva patis tatra jayatho yajnamukha eva tan

mithunani karoti prajatyai / Sat.Br. XII.8.2.6.

"Therefore at this sacrifice (i.e. the Sautramani) the fast -r

observance is the initiation. Now the fast-observance is a male, and initiation a female, and the truth is a male, and

faith a female, and the mind is a male and speech female; and the Sacrificer is the male to his wife, whence wherever there

is a husband there is a wife; and at the very outset of the sacrifice he thus sets up couples with a view to production.”

Incidentally ’vratam’, ’satyam’ and ’manas’ which are called

here ’male’ have grammatically neut.gender and not masc.

The idea of seeing male and female in Manas and Speech/

led the seers to some other identifications. The Sat.Br.

VII.5.1 .3 1 identifies Manas with Sarasvan and Vac with

Sarasvati -

284

/ / m I I / / -sarasvatau tvotsau pravatam iti mano vai sarasvani / / -vak sarasvaty etau sarasvata ’utsau /

Sat.Br. VII.5.1.31.

"May the two Sarasvata.wells cheer thee, Sarasvan is the Mind and Sarasvati is Speech.

The idea that Vac and Manas form a couple is also found in the Go.Br. Here Glava Maitreya requested to Maudgalya,

’Teach me, Sir, v;hat is Savitr and what is Savitri ?’ {As the answer Maudgalya gives a long list of such pairs identified with Savitr and Savitri) -

mana eva savita vak savitri / yatra hy eva manas tad vag yatra vai vSs tan mana ity ete dve yoni

ekaiii mithunam j Go.Br. 1.33*

”Mind is Savitr, Speech is Savitri. Wherever there is Mind

there is Speech, and wherever there is Speech there is Mind.Thus there are two sources and one pair.”

Manas and Vac are identified with some other pairs/which go together. The Sat.Br. XI.2.3 .0 reads as -

/ / / / / « / / •sa yam manasa agharayati mano vai rupam manasa/ / -/ / / - / « / /hi vededam rupam iti tena rupam apnoty atha yam

/ I I I !

vaca agharayati vag vai nama vaca hi naraa grhnati

teno namapnoty etavad va idam sarvam yavad rupam caiva nama ca tat sarvam apnoti / Sat.Br. XI.2.3 .6.

1 4. Mind and Speech are equated with Sarasvan and Sarasvati also in the Sat.Br. XI.2.6.3*

2 r >G O

’’Now when he makes litation to Mind, form being Mind, inasmuchas it is by mind that one knows, ’This is form.* - thereby

obtains Form; and when he makes the libation to Speech,' Name

being speech, inasmuch as it is by speech that he seizes

(mentions) the name - he thereby obtains Name - as far as

there are Form and Name, so far, indeed, extends this whole

(universe); all this he obtains.” Here Mind and Speech areidentified with Name and Form. They are identified with ’the

/full moon’ and ’the new moon’ in the Sat.Br. XI.2.4.7 -

mana eva purnamah / purnam iva hidam mano vag eva/ / // . 1 / J m /darso dadrsa iva hiyajn vak tad etav adhyatmam

pratyaksam darsapurnamasau /

’’The full moon is the Mind, for full as it were is the Mind;

the new moon is Speech, for this speech appears as it were. Thus these two are clearly the full moon and new moon as

regards the body.** Incidentally here again it is suggested

that the scope of Mind is wider than that of Speech.

1 5. Similarly the Go.Br. V.I5 also suggests that the sphere of the Mind is wider than that of Speech -

’vag eva bhargah prana eva mahtas caksur eva yaso mana eva sarvam / ’ -’’Light indeed in Speech, might is the vital airs, glory the eye and everything (else ?) is Mind.”

2 r oo o

/In the Sat.Br. XII.8.2,4 Mind is described to be the form

of the Sacrificer and Vac to be the form of the sacrifice

itself. The passage is the answer by Pratidarsa Aibhavata to

the question of Supla Sarnjayah -I // - // - / / / - -sa hovaca siro va etad yajnasya yad vratam atma

' . I I / - / . / / /diksaitat khalu vai vratasya rupam yat satyam etad- / / I s / - - / .diksayai yat sraddha mano yajamanasya rupam vag

yajnasyeti / Sat.Br. III.8.2.4.

”He (Pratidarsa Aibhavata) replied, ’The observance of the

fast, assuredly, is the head of the sacrifice, and the initiation its body. And the truth, doubtless, is of the form of the fast-observance, and faith of that of the

initiation. And Mind is of the form of the Sacrificer, and Speech of that of the Sacrifice."

A passage from the Sat.Br. establishes a sort of

identity between Mind and Speech -m S / / / / Mlvag indro balam / yad aindro bhavati vacamJ . / / > / /evasmims tad balam dadhati, atho manah /

samanam hi vale ca manas ca / Sat.Br* XII*7*2*o.

"Indra is Speech, strength; and inasmuch as there is (a victim) sacred to Indra, he bestows speech, strength, on this (Sacrificer); and Mind also, for one and the same are Speech

and Mind.” Thus the act of bestowing speech itself implies the bestowing of Mind. The fact that speech can be effective

23’

only when mind is there to prompt^^ and so the extremely

close relation between Mind and Sj-'eech seems to be the basis

of this identity between the two. But the Sat.Br. I,4.4.8

states that though Mind and Speech are one and the same,

stil], in a way they are also distinct from each other -/ m m i t m I t Jsa yad ubhayata agharayati tasmad idam manas ca

/ / // Ivak ca samanam eva san naneva siro ha vai

yajnasyaitayor anyatara agharayor mulam

anyatarah / Sat.Br. I.4.4.g.

"Viihen he makes libation on each side (of the fire, north and south) this (pair), Mind and Speech though indeed joined

together, become separate: for one of the two libations is

the head of the sacrifice and the other is its root.” Thusthe libation to Mind is called the head of the sacrifice,

and the libation to Speech is called the root of the sacrifice,

Root and head cannot be one and the same. Therefore though

Mind and Speech are closely connected with each other, as if

they are equal, they cannot be taken as one and the same./ // / « ml I t fThe expression ’manas ca vak ca samanam eva san naneva’ is

also found in the Sat.Br. I.4.4.14 and II.3.1.17.

Many times Vac and Manas are looked upon as having equal

status. They are described as two roads of the sacrifice,

16. cf. the Sat.Br. III.2.4.H which is already quoted.

288

which carry the oblation to the proper deity. When discussing

the office of the Brahman-priest, and explaining his silence

diiring all principAl ceremonies, the Ai.Br. says -

ayam vai yajno yo ’yam pavate tasya vak ca manas

ca vartanyau vaca ca hi manasa ca yajno vartataiyam vai vag ado manas tad vaca trayya

vidyayaikam paksaih samskurvanti manasaiva brahma

saifiskaroti / Ai.Br, ¥.5.33.

"He who blows (vayu ?) is the Sacrifice. He has two roads

viz. Speech and Mind. By their means (vaca, manasa), the

sacrifice is performed. (In the sacrifice there are both)

Speech and Mind required. By means of Speech the three

priests of the threefold science perform one part assigned

to Vac; but Brahman priest performs his duty by mind only.”

Thus the silence of Brahman priest is explained as, he is as

if performing the duties of the Mind which works silently.

The San.Br, VI,11 makes this thought more clear as -

dve vai yajnasya vartani vaca ’nya samskriyate

manasa ’nya sa ya vaca samskriyate tam anya

rtvijan samskurvanty atha ya manasa tam brahma

tasmad yavad rca yajusa samna kuryus tusnlm tavad bratima ’sitardham hi tad yajnasya

samskaroti / San.Br, VI.ll.’

"There are two tracks of the sacrifice; one is performed with

239

speech, the other with the mind; that v/hich is performed

with speech the other priests do; that which (is performed)

with the mind, the Brahman does; therefore so long as they

perform with the Re, the Yajus, the S^ian, so long should

the Brahman sit silent, for he performs a half of the

Sacrifice.” */In the Sat.br. I.4.4.I Mind and Speech are described as

two yoked horses carrying the sacrifice to the gods -/ / / i 1 m /tasmin ete eva prathame ahuti juhoti manase

// « / i t / « /caiva vace ca manas ca haiva vak ca yujaudevebhyo yajnam vahatah /

"In it (i.e. in tne Ahavaniya fire) indeed he makes these

two first oblations to Mind and Speech; for Mind and Speech

when yoked together convey the sacrifice to the gods.” Thus

Mind and Speech are treated here as equal . In spite of this

the superiority of Mind over Speech is not overlooked. The

Sat.Br. I.4,4,7 suggests a way to make Mind and Speech of the

equal level, obviously in connection with a sacrificial

action -

asinas tam agharayati yam manasa agharayati/ . / . _ / / / itisthams tam yam vace manas ca ha vai vak ca

1 7. The Go.Br. III.2 and the Ghan.Up. IV.16.1 also state that Mind and Speech are the two paths of the sacrifice.

230

yujau devebhyo yajnam vahato yataro vai yujor/ ■ » / / . / /hrasiyan bhavaty upavaham vai tasmai kurvanti /

m S i / » / / /vag vai manaso hrasiyasy aparimitataram iva hiI >1 / » / ' /manah parimitatareva hi vak tad vaca evaitad

/ i i / ' N . / .upavaham karoti te sayujau devebhyo yajnam

vahatas tasmat tisthan vaca agharayati /Sat.Br,

"Sitting he makes that libation which he makes for lAind,

standing (he makes) that (libation) which he makes for Speech;

Mind and Speech when yoked together, assuredly convey the

sacrifice to the gods - when one of two yoke-fellows is18smaller they give him a shoulder piece. - Now Speech is

indeed smaller than Miind; for mind is by far the more

unlimited, and speech is by far the more limited (of the

two); hence he thereby (by standing) gives a shoulder piece to speech, and as well-matched yoke - fellows these two now

convey the sacrifice to the gods: for speech, therefore, he

sprinkles while standing.” Here he is making libation to Mind while sitting and to Speech while standing. His

standing here seems to be symbolic of his raising Vac to the

status of Manas.

18. Say. explains ’upavaha' as a piece of wood inserted under the yoke (and on the neck of an ox) in order to make it level with the height of the yoke-fellow.

2S1

Mind and Speech are expected to be efficient and be

directed towards the sacrifice. The Tai.S. I.7.9.2 says

mano yajnena kalpatara vag yajnena kalpat^i

atma yajnena kalpat^ /

"May Mind accord with the Sacrifice; may Speech accord with

the Sacrifice, may soul (or self) accord with the Sacrifice.”

The Speech in accord with the sacrifice obviously refers to

the mantras. For the proper use of the mantras the mind alsomust be in accord with the sacrifice. The verb ’kalpat^’

suggests that mind and speech should not do anything which19is not suited to the sacrifice.

The pair of mind and speech should be inseparable/according to the Sat.Br. XII,1.1.5. It is said that if both

of them do not go hand in hand, people will perish -t/ m S • M /athadhvaryum pratiprasthata diksayati / mano

i i Im / « / . . / / «va adhvaryur vag hota manas ca tad vacam ca

samdadhati tasmad etav antarenanyo na dikseta

19. The wish that speech (with some other sense organs) should be in accord with the sacrifice is often expressed but in all the cases speech is not invariably preceded by manas. For instance in the Tai.S. IV.7,10.2 Speech is preceded by ’srotra' and followed by ’ayu’. We find the same sequence in the Kath.S. 1 4.1 ; 18.2. But in the Vaj.S. 18.19; 23.33 Speech is preceded by ’srotra’ and followed by mind.

232

• • > m • m t tsa yad dhaitav antarenanyo dikseta manas ca- J - * - 'tad vacam ca nana kuryat pramayuka ha syus

tasmad etav antarenanyo na dikseta / kt.Br. XII.1.1.5.

"The Pratiprasthatr then initiates the A-dhvaryu. Now, the

Adhvaryu is the Wind, and the Hotr is Speech: he thus

connects mind and speech with one another. Therefore no

other person should be initiated between those two; for

assuredly, were any one else to be initiated between these

two, he would separate Wind and Speech, and (people) would be

liable to perish; let therefore no other person be initiated

between these two.” It is suggested here that speech

separated from mind will go astray and the person virtioally

will perish.

Vie come across a peculiar epithet of Vac in the

Ai.Br. II.1.10 which again emphasizes the close relation20between speech and mind. Speech along with Gau and Agni

is called ’manota’ of gods -

tisro vai devanam manotas tasu hi tesam

manamsy otani vag vai devanam manota tasy^

hi tes ^ manamsy otani... / Ai.Br. II.1.10.

20. These two are Manotas, perhaps because Gau is the source of oblation and fire is the carrier of oblations.

. »■> o

"Three are the Maxiotas of the goas, for in them are their minds

woveE. Speech is the wanota of tne goas; for in it are their

minds woven.” Here in the ritual context Vac is called ’manota’

of the gads because of the utterance of the mantra is necessary

act in the sacrifice.

The dispute between Speech and Mind to decide thesuperiority over each other is one of the popular themes from

the old times. In the Mai.S. IV.6.4 we come across some suchstory which tells that Speech and Mind were involved in adispute. Speech insisted that nothing was done which was not

said by her. Mind argued that nothing was done which was not

touched by it, so it was superior to Speech. They went toPrajapati to settle the matter. He decided in favour of Mind.

So whatever offering is given to Prajapati is given with mind21(i.e. silently) and not with Speech. The Tai.S. II,$.11,4; 5

gives us a similar story with the only difference that these

both, Speech and Mind were disputing with each other to carry22 •the oblations to the gods. The Sat.Br. also gives

VIS an interesting legend with similar contents and adds some2 3more details. ^

After going through the passages describing the relation

between Speech and Mind following points seem to arise -

21. Appendix. Legend No. 12.

22. Appendix. Legend No. 13.2 3. Appendix. Legend No. I4.

2 B 4

1. Manas is the forerunner of Speech.2. Manas is the controller of Speech.

3. Manas is the immediate source of Speech.

Vac and Prana

Vac depends on Prana for the physical existence. Various legends about the dispute among the sense organs always end

with the establishment of the superiority of Prana over all the sense organs, of course alon<2 witk S p e e c h . B u t in the

process of creation Vac is said to be the predecessor of

Prana. One of the formulas in the Mai.S. to be used for "placing the bricks towards the end of the Fire-altar reads

as -

vag asi janmana vasa sa pranam garbham adhatthah J / _ /sa maya sambhava / Mai.S. 11.13.15•

"You are the speech by birth, a lowing cow, that carried

vital airs as an embryo. That one take birth with me." Thus

here Prana is said to be the embryo of speech. Speech, as

it were, is the creator of the vital airs. This relationship

of Vac and Prana is supported by the Sat.Br. X.5.3.5 where25again Speech is said to have created Prana.

24. The Brh.Up. No 1^L I . I /

25. sa vak pranam asrjata / Sat.Br. X.5»3»5.

2r> rr

>je come across quite a few passages in the Vedic

literatiire where the observations about the role of Prana in the utterance of speech are recorded. The Kath.S. when

explaining the sequence of the cups, says -

prana upamsur apano ’ntaryamo vag aindravayavoM « / M M Myad upamsv antaryama aindravayavo ’nugrhyate

pranapanayor eva vacam uparistad dadhati

tasmat pranyapanya puruso vacam vadati /

Kath.S. 2 7.3 .

"The in-breath is Upamsu cup, the out-breath is Antary^a cup, the speech is a cup for Indra and Vayu. As a cup for

Indra and Vayu is taken after the Upamsu° and Antaryama^, he puts speech on the in-breath and out-breath. Therefore

having breathed in and breathed out man speaks speech.”

Thus if the person stops breathing, he will not be able to

talk. At the same time one has to note that breathing and

speaking are not simultaneous actions. The passage mentioned

above suggests that having breathed-in and breathed-out one

can speak, but one cannot speak while breathing. It is a

matter of our experience which is observed by the Kau.Up. as -

athatah samyamanam pratardanam anantaram agnihotram

iti cacaksate / yavad vai puruso bhasate na tavat

pranitum saknoti / pranam tada vaci juhoti /

yavad vai purusah praniti na tavad bhasitum

saknoti / vacam tada prane juhoti / Kau.Up. II.5*

295

"Wow next the matter of self-restraint (s^yamana) according

to i^ratardana or the 'Inner Agnihotra Sacrifice’ as they

call it. As long, verily, is the person is speaking, he is not able to breathe. Then he is sacrificing breath (Prana)

in Speech. As long, verily, as a person is breathing, he is9 Anot able to speak. Then he is sacrificing speech in breath.”

An attempt, to give some explanation, why the two acts

of speaking and breathing are not simultaneous, is found

also in the Ghan.Up. when it tells us of various

identifications of the Udgitha and of its syllables -

atha khalu vyanam evodgitham upasita / yad vai

praniti sa pranah / yad apaniti so ’panah /

atha yah pranapanayoh sandhih sa vyanah / yo

vyanah sa vak / tasraad apranann anapanan vacam

abhivy^.arati / Ghan.Up. 1.3.3.

’’But one should also reverence the diffused breath (vyana)

as an Udgitha. When one breathes in - that is the in-breath

(Frana). When one breathes out - that is the out-breath

(apana). The junction of the in-breath and out-breath is the

diffused breath. Speech is the diffused breath. Therefore one utters speech without in-breathing, without out-breathing.**

The Sat.Br. observes one more detail about the utterance of

speech -

26. Saiikaracarya comments - ’siddham hi vadan na svasiti svasan na brute ceti sarvajanlnam / ’

29

yad ahanibhrstam asiti vaco bandhur iti yavad/ - / - / m m lvai pranesv apo bhavanti tavad vaca vadatit m m i I / / ^tasmad aha vaco bandhur iti / Sat.Br. V.3*5.1fc>.

-a"When he says, ’not down fallen...’, he means to say, 'the

friend of speech’, as long as there is water in the vital airs, so long man speaks with speech. Therefore he says,

’the friend of speech’.” The vital airs should be

moisturous for the utterance of speech. For this reason only

water is called the ’friend of speech’.• /Speech is said to be based on Prana. The Sat.Br. tells

us a story that once the Prana went out from Prajapati. He requested Agni to restore him (the Prana) and to set him on

’hita’. What is ’hita’ is explained as -/ - / / / / / * - / /tad ahuh kim hitam kirn upahitam iti prana eva

f . *\ * “ l — M l # . . / •hitara vag upahitam prane hiyam vag upeva hita

pranas tv eva hitam angany upahitam prane

himany angany upeva hitani / Sat.Br. '5L.1.2.15.

”As to this they say, ’What is ’hita’ and what is ’upahita’? The vital air forsooth is the ’hita’ and speech is the

’upahita’; for it is on the vital air that the speech is

based - ’upahita’.” Here ’upahita’ is perhaps better understood as ’placed near’ and not placed on (the latter

2 7. ’anibhrstam asi vaco bandhus tapojah / ’’Not down fallen the friend of Speech born of Keat..

2S8

would be 'adhihita’)* In any case, the passage shows the

close relationship between Speech and Vital airs./According to the Sat.Br. VII.1.2.13 the vital air in

'uras’ is the base for speech -I i I m i « •tasya sira evahavaniyah / atha ya ahavaniye

/ / I / _ / - \ / / /'gnir ya evayam sirsan pranah so 'sya tad yat saS m i / M \ •paksapucchavan bhavati paksapucchavan hy ayam

/ m / m i l l II / . / /Sirsan pranas caksuh siro daksinam srotramit . / /daksinah paksa uttaram srotram uttarah paksah

/ / m i * m mm m t m /prano madhyamatma vak pucchara pratistha tad

I J . J J I "yat prana vacannara jagdhva pratitisthanti/ /

/ « M / • /tasraad vak pucchani pratistha / Sat.Br. VII.1.2.13.

”The Ahavariiya truly is head and the fire on Ahavaniya is that vital air of his in the head. And why the (the

Ahavaniya) has wings and tail, it is because vital air in

the head has wings and tail; - the eye is its head, the right ear its right wings, the left ear its left wing, the

vital air its centrsQ. body, and speech is the tail (and)

the foundation (the feet): inasmuch as the vital airs

subsist by eating food with speech, speech is tail, the

foundation.” So speech is the tail, the foundation. Thus

for speech the vital air in ’uras’ is the base; but for the

vital air in the head, speech is the base. Here Prana is

thought of as an animal sitting on its tail. In this way

again the interdependence of Prana and Speech is asserted.

22d

We see that a sort of dependence of Vac on Pra^ is

often shown. Similar dependence of Vac on Manas/is also mentioned many times. But since Manas in sanskrit is neut.

and i^rana.masc, the relationship between Vac and Prana is

looked upon as a couple more aptly than the relationship between Vac and Manas. Because of the linguistic fact that

• pg the word Vac is fem. Vac is often looked upon as a woman,

28. Because of the feminine gender of the word ’Vac’ the speculative minds of the seers indulged in depicting Vac as a vjoman. In the Ai.Br.IV.1.1 two syllables which are left over when the Sodasin is made into an• • •

Anustubh are said to be the two breasts of Speech -m /dve va aksare atiricyete sodasino ’nustubham• • • •

abhisampannasya vaco vava tau stanau satyanrte vava te / Ai.Br. IV.1.1.

”Two syllables are left over (SV.II.302) when the /Sodasin is made into an Anustubh; these are the two breasts of speech; these are truth and falsehood.”This is said in connection with the rc ’indrajusasva...’ which is having sixteen syllables in the first half and eighteen syllables in the second half. Thus the latter half is having two syllables more than the first half. As Anustubh is often identified with the Speech; the extra two syllables are said to be her two breasts. (cf. Say, who explains - ’tatha hi

■■ » / mm ^ msutrakaro vihrtasyety upakramya sakhantariya indrajusasvetyadika rcah pathitavan / tasyah purvasmin

/ - * * « * * - /ardharce sodasaksarany uttarardhe ca astadasa tato ’ksaradvayadhikyam vag va anustub iti srutyantare sa vaco ’nustubavayavatvat tadatmikaya vagdevataya strirupaya adhik^sararupau stanau sampadyete

300

and the Prana - Vac relationship is considered as that of

male and female. This favourite idea of a couple, to show

the intimacy between Vac and Pr^a, is found in the Sat.Br.

X.1.1.10 as - /

esatrapitih / apy ahaivam mithuna ittham ha tv/ // I m mevapi mithuno vag eveyam yo ’yam agnis cito vaca

I m I / N / / _ /hi ciyate 'tha yas cite ’gnir nidhiyate sa pranah>/ / ./ / • I / I /prano vai vaco vrsa prano mithunam vag vevayam

f.n. 28 continued.

In a similar context, the Go.Br. II.;.19 alsodescribes the two left over syllables as the twobreasts of Speech. In various Vac - legends, Vacis always looked upon as a woman. In the cosmogonicalstories she is said to be the female partner ofPrajapati and thus taking part in the process ofcreation. In Soma - legends of the Br^.manas she islooked upon as an attractive woman with whom gods couldbarter Soma from the Gandharvas, who are fond of women./The author of the Sat.Br. also comments in a Soma - legend (i.e. III.2.4.1) that she turned to the Gods from the Gandharvas vainly. So even to this day women are given to vain things; and it is to him who dances and sings that they most readily take a fancy. (see Legend No. A.) . The Sat.Br. III.2.1.18 also tells us a story where the Sacrifice is looked upon as the wooer of Speech. The Sacrifice, impelled by the gods, made silent signals to her. S»he at first showed contempt towards him from a distance. But the Sacrifice persisted. At last she called him to her; hence a woman at last calls a man to her. - No-

301

atmatha ya atman pranas tan raithunam so ’nena/ t / / /mithunenatmanaitam mithunam agnim apyeti /

Sat.Br. X.1.1.9.

’’This then is the entering therein - even thus Agni consists

of the pairs. But in this v/ay also Agni consists of the pairs

- the fire-altar here built up is no other than his speech,

for with speech it is built up and the fire which is placed

on the built (altar) is the breath, and the breath is the male

and mate of speech. And indeed this body is Speech and the

Prana which is in the body is its mate, liith this mated body

that (vital fluid) thus enters into the mated Agni.”^^ We

find that a similar idea underlies the following passage.

The passage gives us the reason why they use offering and

dipping spoon -/ / - > / S f >sruvascatra sruk ca prayujyete / vag vai srxik

! /- / / - - > • t •pranah sruvo vaca ca vai pranena caitad agre devaht J . , 1 m . / / / /karmanvaicchams tasmat sruvas ca sruk ca / yad

veva sruvas ca sruk ca / yo vai sa prajapatir1 m I I • - / ' / - /asit esa sa sruvah prano vai sruvah pranah

i I I m J I m i ' • t 1prajapatir atha ya sa vag asit esa sa srug yosa

vai vag yosa srug atha yas ta apa ayan vaco lokadI I • > > , ,» M W •> ta ' »etas ta yam etam ahutim juhoti / Sat.Br.VI.3tl.8; 9*

29. Prana is called a male mate of speech also in the Sat.Br. VIi.3.1 . 7 as - ’prano vai vaco vrsa / ’

3i2

” (In Ajyahoma) both the offering spoon and dipping spoon are

used thereat; for the offering spoon is speech and the

dipping spoon is breath, and with speech and breath the godssought this sacred rite at the beginning. Hence there are

both spoons. And again why there are offering spoon and

dipping spoon - what Prajapati was, that indeed is thisdipping spoon, for the dipping spoon is the breath, and the

breath is Prajapati. And what speech was that is the

offering spoon; for Vac is a female and offering spoon(sruc.fem.) is a female, and those waters which went forth from

hethe world of Vac (speech) they are this (^ee) which offers

(in) this libation." All this justification seems to be based

on the linguistic fact that ’Vac’ and ’sruc’ are of fern.gender

and ’Prana* and ’sruva' have mas.gender. Perhaps the activity

of the dipping spoon urges on the activity of the offering spoon which seems to give some sense to this identification.

In the Brh.Up. 1.3 read the famous story establishing

the superiority of Prana over other sense organs. At the

end of that legend it is said -

esa u eva brhaspatir vag vai brhati tasya esa

patis tasmad u brhaspatih / Brh.Up. 1.3.20.

"And it (Prana) is also Brhaspati. The Brhati is Speech.

He is her lord (’pati’) and is therefore Brhaspati.”

303

Brhati is the name of a metre used in the RV. Here it

signifies the RV. itself. Vac is here identified vjith the

RV indirectly and Prana is said to be her lord.

An interesting etymology of the v/ord ’sama’, as recorded in the Chan.Up. may throw some light on the relationship

between Vac and Prana -

athadhyatmam / vag evark / pranah sama / tad

etad etasy^ rcy adhyudhairi sama / tasmat rcy

adhyudham sama giyate / vag eva sa / prano

'mah / tat sama / Chan.Up. 1.7.1*

"Now with reference to the self. The rc is Speech; the saman

is Breath. This saman rests upon the rc. Therefore the

saman is sung as resting upon the rc ’Sa’ is Speech; ’ama’ is

Breath, that makes s^a.” The idea is more clear in the Ghan.Up. 1.1.$ -

vag evark j pranah sama / om ity etad aksaram

udgithah / tad va etan mithunam yad vak ca

pranas carkca sama ca / Chan.Up. 1.1.5.

’'The rc is Speech. The s^an is Breath. Udgitha is the syllable ’Om*. Verily this is a pair - namely Speech and

Breath and also the Rc and S^-an." Here Speech and Breath as a couple are meant to be the sources of rc and saman

respectively.

30. Thus adds Hume in the f.n. of his tr.

304

In the beginning of the second Adhyaya of the Kau.Up.,

Prana is identified with Brahma and the other sense-organs are said to be the attendents of Prana. Speech is described as his handmaid -

prano brahmeti ha smaha kausitakih / tasya ha va

etasya pranasya brah-mano mano dutam / vak parivestri / caksur gotram / Kau.Up. II.1.

” 'The Breath is Brahma.’, thus indeed said Kausitaki* •

Of this same Breath as Brahma, verily indeed the mind is the messenger, Speech the handmaid, the Eye the Watchman...”

Cowel] translates Wsk parivestri' as ”The Speech the/ « M fli ^ **tirewoman.” According to Samkaranandadipika, ’parivestri’

means ’a. trustworthy woman who serves food to the king’.^^

If the word means 'one who serves food’. Vac may be so called

because oblations are given with the mantra.

In the Mai.S. 1.9.2 Speech is said to be the wife of Wina. The relation of Wind and Prana is obvious -

9 t f f fvag vayoh patnT pathya pusnah ... / Mai.S. I.9-2.

The relationship between Vac and Prana is so close that the

Mai.S. III.2.8 identifies Vac and Prana./ // / / i m I mtrisv a rocane diva iti savanani vai trim• •

- / / I •rocanani savanacitam evainam akar anustub va

3 1 . ’parivestri parivesanasya kartri maharajasya visvasaniya yosid iva / ’ Samkaranandadipika'.

305

/ / m l f m / • /esa vag va anustuj, prano vai vag yad esa sarva

/ - /. - / / -istaka anusamcarati tasmat pranah sarvany

angany anusamcarati / Mai.S. III.2.8.

” (He recites) ^trisv a...etc.' The (three; bright pressings

are the three shining (heavens). He thus made him a'savanacita’ (’one who piles the pressings'). This rc is in

anustubh (metre). The speech is Anustubh. The vital airs are

Speech. Because this rc (in anustubh = Vac = Pranas) embraces32all these bricks, the vital airs embrace all the limbs.

In the Kath.S. 10.11 ’Marutas* are described as the

kinsmen of the speech -

“ . • ^ ' 1' marutam praiyangavairi carum nirvapet prsnya augdiriesajatak^ah prsnya vai maruto jata vaco vasya va

prthivya marutas sajata etan m-arutam svam payo yat

priyangavas svenaivainan payasacchaiti yatha vatsa

udho ’bhyayacchaty evam enam sajata abhyayacchanti /

Kath.S. 10.11.

”One who wants to have kinsmen, should offer ^t'caru’of. /*priyangu’ to Maruts in the milk of 'prsni'. Maruts are

32. Vac and Prana are identified with some other thingsalso. The Sat.Br. VI.1.2.28 identifies Vac with Agni and Prana with Indra respectively. Prana and Vac are identified with Prayaniya and Arambhaniya resp'ectively, in the Sat.Br. 111,2,4.1.

IK, o

born of ’prsni*. Marutas are the kinsmen of speech or of this earth, 'what are ’priyavigus' that is the own milk of

the Maruts. He approaches them with their own milk;as the

calf goes towards the udder, in the same way the kinsmen go to him.” Marutas, Vac and ttie earth are called ’sajata’

i.e. their origin is one and the same. The relation between

the Marutas and the speech has some bearing on the relation between Vac and Prana. Whatever is related to the Maruts

(Marutah), these are the kinsmen of Vac or the earth. Here

’Friyangus’ are shown as related to the Maruts. Thereby they are related to Speech also.

The Tand.Br. XVIIT.8.7 identifies Vac with Vayu -

vayo sxikro ay^ita iti vayavya pratipad bhavati

vag vai vayuh vacam evasya yajnamukhe yunakti / tayabhisicyate sarvasya eva vacah suyate sarva

enam vaco rajeti vadanti / Tand.Br. XVIU.8.7.

"(The tristich beginning) ’0 Vayu, the bright (Soma) has been

offered unto thee} in the opening (tristich of the out-of-doors

laud), containing the word Vayu (^ind). The wind is the

speech; he yokes the speech -for him at the beginning of the

sacrifice, and by it (i.e. by that speech) he is sprinkled

(i.e. inaugurated). (In the midst) of the whole speech he

is consecrated; all speeches proclaim him as a king.”

Because Vac is connected with Prana she is connected with

Vayu.

3r;

In the Tai.S. speech is called the highest of the breaths -

visve devasya netur ity anustubhottamaya jiihoti- / / / « m j‘ m . J 1vag vai anustup tasmat prananam vag uttama /

Tai.S. V.1.9.1.

"’Let every man of the god that leads’, with the final

anustubh he offers. The Itnustubh is speech; therefore the

speech is the highest of the breaths." It seems that speech

is called ’uttama’ because breath finally comes out as speech.

Speech is described as the light of the Pranas in the Tai.S. V.3.2.3.

/ / M / / ■ » / m ^ idasa pranabhrtah purastad upa dadhati nava vait t I *

t m m m t m m m / / ^puruse prana nabhir dasami pranan eva purastad/

i m i m / «■dhatte tasmat purastat prana jyotismatim» / * • S m /uttamam upa dadhati tasmat prananam vag jyotir /

uttama / Tai.S. V.3.2,3.

” Ten breath-supporters he places in the east, the breaths in man are nine, the navel is the tenth. Verily he places the

breaths in front; therefore the breaths ai’e in front. He puts

down the last with the word ’light’, therefore speech is the

highest light of the breaths.”

Speech is also described as the ’Sri’ of the vital airs - / /

ek^y aindram yajamano bhaksayati / ekadha va / / /

esa prananam srih / yad v ^ / ekadhaiva vacam

303

I m •• \ m /sriyam atman dhatte / tasraat sautramany ejana

ekadha svanam srestho bhavati / Sat.Br. XII.8.2.28.

"Singly the Sacrificer drinks the Aindra (cup) for single

is that distinction of the vital airs, speech. Singly and

solely to himself does he take that distinction, speech; whence

he who has performed the Sautr^ani becomes singly and solely

the most distinguished among his own people.” Here speech

is conceived as an important or distinguished characteristic, glory (sri) of a man. Vac is also looked upon as the glory

of all the Pranas on whom she depends.

After going through all these passages describing the

relationship between Vac and Prana one can conclude that -

1. in the process of creation Speech is said to have

created Prana;

2. in spite of that, Vac, for her physical existence

depends on Prana. Prana plays an important role

in actual utterance of Vac;

3. being the foremost among all the sense organs

Prana is always considered superior to Vac;

4. through Prana one can explain the relationship '

between Vac and Vayu.

309

V ac. Manas and Prana— II .1 I .J ■■ ■■ — I. ^

On one iaand Vac is connected with the Manas and on theother hand she is connected with the Prana. So these three

are often mentioned together, in the Upanisads. Prajapati is said to have made this triad for himself -

triny atmane ’kuruteti / mano vacam pranam tanym / / Matmane ^kuruta / yah kas ca sabdo vag eva sa /

esa hy antam ayattaisa hi na / prano *pano vj -ana

udanah samano 'na ity etat sarvam prana eva /

etanmayo vo ayam atma / vanmayo manomayah

pranamayah / Brh.Up. 1.5.3.

"Three he made for himself. Mind, Speech, Breath - these he

made for himself ... Whatever sound there is, it is just

Speech. Verily, it comes'to an end (as human speech); Verily, it does not (as the heavenly voice). The in-breath, the out-

breath, the diffused breath, the up-breath, the middle-breath

all this is just breath. Verily, the self (Atman) consists of Speech, Mind and Breath."

In the passage immediately following the one mentioned

above, Speech, Mind and Breath are identified with various

things -

trayo loka eta eva / vag evayam loko mano

’ntariksalokah prano ’sau lokah jj trayo veda

eta eva vag evargvedo mano yajurvedah pranah

310

samavedah / devah pitaro manusya eta eva vag

eva deva manah pitarah prano manusyah fj pita

mata prajaita eva mana eva pita van mata pranah

praja / Brh.Up. 1.5.4; 5; 6; 7.

"These same are the three worlds. This (terrestrial) world is Speech. The middle (atmospheric) world is Mind. That

(celestial) world is Breath. These same are the three Vedas.

The Rgveda is Speech. The Yajurveda is Mind. The Samaveda is Breath. The same are the gods, manes, and men. Gods are

Speech. The Manes are Mind. Men are Breath. The same are

father, mother and offspring. The father is Mind. The mother is Speech, the offspring is B r e a t h , T h u s the triad is

equated with various things.

But the Upanisadic seers did not maintain any fixed ideas

about tne relationship of Speech, Mind and Breath. In the passage mentioned above Mind is called the father of the Breath. But in the following passage Mind and Breath seem to

have interchanged their roles. Breath is called the male bull

and Mind is the offspring* Obviously Vac, identified with a

cow, plays the female role -

33. The similar relationship is mentioned in the Brh.Up.1 ,4 ,1 7 as - ’mana evasyatma vag jaya pranah praja.../’ -

’’(Now the completeness of the self is as follows.) His mind truly is his self (atman) ; his speech is his wife; his breath is his offspring.**

311

vacam dhenum upasita / ... tasy^ pranarsabho mano vatsah / Brh.Up. V.8.1.

"One should do reverence to Speech as a milch - cow. ...

The Breath is her bull. The Mind her calf."

In the dialogue between ’ vetaketu and Uddalaka in the Chan.Up. we read -

purusam somyotopatapinam jnatayah paryupasate janasi mam janasi m ^ iti / tasya yavan na

van manasi sampadyate manah prane pranas tejasi

tejah parasyam devatay^ tavaj janasi / atha

yada 'sya van manasi sampadyate manah prane

pranas tejasi tejah parasyam devatayam atha na janati / Chan.Up. VI.15.2 (also VI.8.6).

"Also my dear, around a (deathly) sick person his kinsmen

gather, and ask, 'Do you know me ?' 'Do you know me ?' So long as his speech does not go to his mind, his mind into

his breath, his breath into heat, the heat into the highest

divinity - so long he knows. Then when his speech goes into his mind, his mind into his breath, his breath into heat,

the heat into the highest divinity - then he knows not.”

Here is a statement of the order of the cessation of the functions at the approach of death. Speech and others are

described as going back to their original place, after the

312

death of a person. Speech goes to Mind and Mind goes to

Prana. Thus it is suggested that the original place of Speech is Mind and of Mind is Breath.

Prana, Vac and Manas represent the three genders, the

masc.; the fern,; and the neu. respectively. Therefore these

three are said to be helping in obtaining the names in their respective genders -

tam aha - kena me paumsnani namany apnositi /

praneneti bruyat / kena strin^aniti /

vaceti / kena napumsakaniti / manaseti /

Kau.Up. 1 .7 .

”He (brahmat) says to him; ’Wherewith do you acquire (Vapj

my masculine names ?' 'With the vital breath (’prana’,

masc.), he should answer ’Wherewith feminine names ?’ ’With

Speech (Vac, fern.)’ ’Wherewith neuter ones ?’ ’With theI )mind (’manas’, neut.)’.

Vac and Caksu— — ■— I*........ II 0

It will be rather improper if we bypass the relationship

of Vac with Calcsu in this chapter. Though the passages referring to these two sense organs are very few and far

between they are sufficient to establish the superiority of

Caksu over Vac in point of establishing the truth. Obviously

313

here the usual meaning of the word ’Vac’ i.e. a mantra,

is not meant. In the Mai.S, 111.6.3? in the chapter on

the Sacrificer’s consecration (Diksa) , the Adhavryu is described as applying the collyrium to the Sacrificer’s

eye. This action is justified by saying -' • I / m mindro vai vrtram ahans tasya kaninikaI m 1 I /parapatat sa trikakubham agacchat tad-

I m % ^anjanam traikakubham ankte satyam vai/ • m '/ I m /caksur naiva vace sraddadhati satyamml - -evalabhya diks^ upaiti / Mai.S. 111,6,3.

’*Indra slew Vrtra. His pupil fell away. It went to

’Trikakubh’ (mountain). (It became collyrium.) He applies

that collyrium from 'Trikakubh'. The eye indeed is truth. Nobody believes in the speech. Thus having secured the truth

(in the form of collyrium) he approaches the consecration'*.

Thus whatever is seen with the eye is more trustworthy than whatever is reported through Speech.