Bhashya
श्रुतेरिदं वचः- युक्तमिदं वागादिभिर्मुख्यं प्राणं प्रत्यभिहि-तम् ; यस्मान्न वै लोके वाचो न चक्षूंषि न श्रोत्राणि न मनां-सीति वागादीनि करणान्याचक्षते लौकिका आगमज्ञा वा ; किंतर्हि, प्राणा इत्येव आचक्षते कथयन्ति ; यस्मात्प्राणो ह्येवैतानिसर्वाणि वागादीनि करणजातानि भवति ; अतो मुख्यं प्राणंप्रत्यनुरूपमेव वागादिभिरुक्तमिति प्रकरणार्थमुपसंजिहीर्षति ॥ननु कथमिदं युक्तं चेतनावन्त इव पुरुषा अहंश्रेष्ठतायै वि-वदन्तः अन्योन्यं स्पर्धेरन्निति ; न हि चक्षुरादीनां वाचं प्रत्या-ख्याय प्रत्येकं वदनं संभवति ; तथा अपगमो देहात् पुनः प्रवे-शो ब्रह्मागमनं प्राणस्तुतिर्वोपपद्यते ।तत्र अग्न्यादिचेतनावद्दे-वताधिष्ठितत्वात् वागादीनां चेतनवत्त्वं तावत् सिद्धमागमतः ।तार्किकसमयविरोध इति चेत् देहे एकस्मिन्ननेकचेतनवत्त्वे, न,ईश्वरस्य निमित्तकारणत्वाभ्युपगमात् ।ये तावदीश्वरमभ्युपग-च्छन्ति तार्किकाः, ते मनआदिकार्यकरणानामाध्यात्मिकानांबाह्यानां च पृथिव्यादीनामीश्वराधिष्ठितानामेव नियमेन प्रवृ-त्तिमिच्छन्ति- रथादिवत् ।न च अस्माभिः अग्न्याद्याश्चेतना-वत्योऽपि देवता अध्यात्मं भोक्त्यः अभ्युपगम्यन्ते ; किं तर्हि,कार्यकरणवतीनां हि तासां प्राणैकदेवताभेदानामध्यात्माधिभू-ताधिदैवभेदकोटिविकल्पानामध्यक्षतामात्रेण नियन्ता ईश्वरो-ऽभ्युपगम्यते ।स ह्यकरणः, ‘अपाणिपादो जवनो ग्रहीता पश्य-त्यचक्षुः स शृणोत्यकर्णः’ इत्यादिमन्त्रवर्णात् ; ‘हिरण्यगर्भंपश्यत जायमानम्’ ‘हिरण्यगर्भं जनयामास पूर्वम्’ इत्यादिच श्वेताश्वतरीयाः पठन्ति ।भोक्ता कर्मफलसंबन्धी देहे तद्वि-लक्षणो जीव इति वक्ष्यामः ।वागादीनां च इह संवादः कल्पि-तः, विदुषोऽन्वयव्यतिरेकाभ्यां प्राणश्रेष्ठतानिर्धारणार्थम्—यथा लोके पुरुषा अन्योन्यमात्मनः श्रेष्ठतायै विवदमानाः कं-चिद्गुणविशेषाभिज्ञं पृच्छन्ति को नः श्रेष्ठो गुणैरिति ; तेनोक्ताएकैकश्येन अदः कार्यं साधयितुमुद्यच्छत, येनादः कार्यं सा-ध्यते, स वः श्रेष्ठः—इत्युक्ताः तथैवोद्यच्छन्तः आत्मनोऽन्यस्यवा श्रेष्ठतां निर्धारयन्ति—तथेमं संव्यवहारं वागादिषु कल्पि-तवती श्रुतिः— कथं नाम विद्वान् वागादीनामेकैकस्याभावे-ऽपि जीवनं दृष्टं न तु प्राणस्येति प्राणश्रेष्ठतां प्रतिपद्येतेति ।तथा च श्रुतिः कौषीतकिनाम्— ‘जीवति वागपेतो मूकान्हिपश्यामो जीवति चक्षुरपेतोऽन्धान्हि पश्यामो जीवति श्रोत्रा-पेतो बधिरान्हि पश्यामो जीवति मनोपेतो बालान्हि पश्या-मो जीवति बाहुच्छिन्नो जीवत्यूरुच्छिन्नः’ इत्याद्या ॥
In plain words
This is what the sacred text declares: it is entirely fitting that this teaching is addressed to the primary prāṇa through the imagery of speech and the other senses. For in ordinary life, people and those versed in tradition do not refer to the individual faculties of speech, sight, hearing, or mind as separate entities called 'prāṇas'; rather, they speak of them simply as 'prāṇas,' because prāṇa itself constitutes the entire aggregate of all these sensory instruments. Therefore, the text concludes its section by showing how these descriptions aptly point to the principal prāṇa. Now, an objection is raised: How can this dialogue be appropriate, as if conscious persons were arguing with one another out of a desire to prove their own supremacy? Speech and the other senses cannot function in isolation by discarding speech itself, nor would the departure from the body, the return, the attainment of Brahman, or the praise of prāṇa make sense without a unifying principle. To this we reply: since the senses are governed by conscious deities like Agni, their conscious agency is already established by scripture. If an objector claims this conflicts with the logician's view against multiple conscious entities in one body, we say no, because we accept the Lord as the efficient cause. Those logicians who acknowledge God maintain that even external and internal instruments like earth function regularly only when presided over by the Lord, much like a chariot is driven. Furthermore, we do not view conscious deities like Agni as the ultimate subjective enjoyers within the body; rather, the Lord is understood as the supreme controller of these deities—who possess senses and instruments—merely through His overarching supervision of all the subjective and cosmic manifestations of the one prāṇa. The Lord Himself is devoid of physical instruments, as scriptural texts declare: 'Handless and footless, He is swift and grasps; He sees without eyes, He hears without ears.' Followers of the Shvetashvatara Upanishad likewise chant: 'He who beholds Hiranyagarbha being born... He brought forth Hiranyagarbha in the beginning.' We will explain later that the individual soul, the experiencer tied to the fruits of action within the body, is entirely distinct from this prāṇa and body. The dialogue among the senses depicted here is an imaginative device designed to help the wise seeker determine the supremacy of prāṇa through the logical methods of presence and absence. Just as people in the world, arguing over who is superior, consult an expert judge and test themselves by trying to perform a task—recognizing that whoever successfully accomplishes the vital work is the best among them—so too the scripture frames this transaction among the senses. Through it, the wise person realizes that while life continues even when individual senses like speech are lost, life does not continue without prāṇa, thus fully comprehending the supreme preeminence of the vital breath. And thus confirms the scripture of the Kaushitakis: 'A person lives though bereft of speech, for we see mutes; a person lives though bereft of sight, for we see the blind; a person lives though bereft of hearing, for we see the deaf; a person lives though bereft of full mind, for we see children; a person lives with arms severed, lives with thighs severed,' and so on.
Close to the Sanskrit
Of śruti this is the word: this is appropriate, addressed to the principal prāṇa through speech and other organs; because not indeed in the world do people or knowers of tradition designate speech, eyes, ears, or minds as 'speeches', but rather they designate them as 'prāṇas'; because prāṇa indeed becomes all these speech and other instrument-groups; hence it wishes to conclude the section-meaning that it was stated appropriately with speech and other organs referring to the principal prāṇa. Now, how is this appropriate, that conscious-like persons, disputing for the sake of I-am-bestness, should compete with one another? For speech and others cannot speak individually dismissing speech; nor is departure from the body, re-entry, attaining Brahman, or the praise of prāṇa appropriate. Regarding that, because the senses are presided over by conscious deities like Agni, the conscious nature of speech and others is established in the beginning from scripture. If it is said there is a conflict with the logician's doctrine regarding the presence of multiple conscious entities in a single body, no, because of the acceptance of the Lord as the efficient cause. Those logicians who indeed accept the Lord desire the regular activity of internal and external effect-instruments such as earth to be presided over by the Lord alone—like a chariot. Nor are Agni and other deities, even though conscious, accepted by us as subjective experiencers; rather, the Lord is accepted as the controller of those deities—who possess effects and instruments—merely through supervision of the subjective, objective, and cosmic alternative categories of the single prāṇa-deity. He indeed is without instruments, on account of scriptural passages like: 'Handless and footless, he is swift and a grasper; he sees without eyes, he hears without ears'; and the followers of Shvetashvatara recite: 'He who sees Hiranyagarbha being born... Hiranyagarbha he brought forth formerly', and so on. We will explain that the experiencer—connected with the fruits of action in the body—is distinct from that [the prāṇa and body]. And the dialogue here among speech and others is framed for the wise person to determine the supremacy of prāṇa through agreement in presence and absence—just as in the world, persons disputing mutually for their own preeminence ask someone expert in special qualities: 'Who among us is the best in qualities?' Instructed by him, they successively undertake to accomplish that work; by whomever that work is accomplished, he is the best among you—having been thus addressed, striving precisely thus, they determine the preeminence of themselves or another—thus the scripture framed this transaction among speech and others: how indeed a wise person, even upon the absence of each of speech and others, sees that living continues but not of prāṇa, might thereby understand the supremacy of prāṇa. And thus is the scripture of the Kaushitakis: 'The organ of speech lives, bereft of speech we see mutes; the eye lives, bereft of sight we see the blind; the ear lives, bereft of hearing we see the deaf; the mind lives, bereft of mind we see children; a person lives with arms cut off, lives with thighs severed', and such others.