Bhashya
इत्युपासते, तेषां च इत्थंविद्भिः सह अर्चिरादिना गमनं वक्ष्यति, पारिशेष्यादग्निहोत्राहुतिसंबन्धाच्च गृहस्था एव गृह्यन्ते-इत्थं विदुरिति ।ननु ब्रह्मचारिणोऽप्यगृहीता ग्रामश्रुत्या अरण्यश्रुत्या च अनुपलक्षिता विद्यन्ते, कथं पारिशेष्यसिद्धिः ? नैष दोषः ।पुराणस्मृतिप्रामाण्यात् ऊर्ध्वरेतसां नैष्ठिकब्रह्मचारिणाम् उत्तरेणार्यम्णः पन्थाः प्रसिद्धः, अतः तेऽप्यरण्यवासिभिः सह गमिष्यन्ति ।उपकुर्वाणाकास्तु स्वाध्यायग्रहणार्था इति न विशेषनिर्देशार्हाः ।ननु ऊर्ध्वरेतस्त्वं चेत् उत्तरमार्गप्रतिपत्तिकारणं पुराणस्मृतिप्रामाण्यादिष्यते, इत्थंवित्त्वमनर्थकं प्राप्तम् ।न, गृहस्थान्प्रत्यर्थवत्त्वात् ।ये गृहस्था अनित्थंविदः, तेषां स्वभावतो दक्षिणो धूमादिः पन्थाः प्रसिद्धः, तेषां य इत्थं विदुः सगुणं वा अन्यद्ब्रह्म विदुः, ‘अथ यदु चैवास्मिञ्छव्यं कुर्वन्ति यदि च नार्चिषमेव’ इति लिङ्गात् उत्तरेण ते गच्छन्ति ।ननु ऊर्ध्वरेतसां गृहस्थानां च समाने आश्रमित्वे ऊर्ध्वरेतसामेव उत्तरेण पथा गमनं न गृहस्थानामिति न युक्तम् अग्निहोत्रादिवैदिककर्मबाहुल्ये च सति ; नैष दोषः, ‘अपूता हि ते-शत्रुमित्रसंयोगनिमित्तौ हि तेषां रागद्वेषौ, तथा धर्माधर्मौ हिंसानुग्रहनिमित्तौ, हिंसानृतमायाब्रह्मचर्यादि च बहुशुद्धिकारणमपरिहार्यं ते-षाम्, अतोऽपूताः ।अपूतत्वात् न उत्तरेण पथा गमनम् ।हिंसानृतमायाब्रह्मचर्यादिपरिहाराच्च शुद्धात्मानो हि इतरे,शत्रुमित्ररागद्वेषादिपरिहाराच्च विरजसः ; तेषां युक्त उत्तरःपन्थाः ।तथा च पौराणिकाः-- 'ये प्रजामीषिरेऽधीरास्तेश्मशानानि भेजिरे ।ये प्रजां नेषिरे धीरास्तेऽमृतत्वं हिभेजिरे' इत्याहुः ।इत्थंविदां गृहस्थानामरण्यवासिनां चसमानमार्गत्वेऽमृतत्वफले च सति, अरण्यवासिनां विद्यान-र्थक्यं प्राप्तम् ; तथा च श्रुतिविरोधः--'न तत्र दक्षिणा यन्तिनाविद्वांसस्तपस्विनः' इति, 'स एनमविदितो न भुनक्ति'इति च विरुद्धम् ।न, आभूतसंप्लवस्थानस्यामृतत्वेन विव-क्षितत्वात् ।तत्रैवोक्तं पौराणिकैः-- 'आभूतसंप्लवं स्थान-ममृतत्वं हि भाष्यते' इति ।यच्च आत्यन्तिकममृतत्वम्, तद-पेक्षया 'न तत्र दक्षिणा यन्ति' 'स एनमविदितो न भुनक्ति'इत्याद्याः श्रुतयः-- इत्यतो न विरोधः ।'न च पुन-रावर्तन्ते' इति 'इमं मानवमावर्तं नावर्तन्ते' इत्यादि-श्रुतिविरोध इति चेत्, न ; 'इमं मानवम्' इति विशेषणात्'तेषामिह न पुनरावृत्तिरस्ति' इति च ।यदि हि एकान्तेनैवनावर्तेरन्, इमं मानवम् इह इति च विशेषणमनर्थकं स्यात् ।इममिह इत्याकृतिमात्रमुच्यत इति चेत्, न ; अनावृत्तिशब्दे-तत्त्वमेति' इति सगुणब्रह्मोपासकस्य प्राणैः सह नाड्या गम-नम्, सापेक्षमेव च अमृतत्वम्, न साक्षान्मोक्ष इति गम्यते,'तदपराजिता पूस्तदैंरं मदीयं सरः' इत्याद्युक्त्वा 'तेषामे-वैष ब्रह्मलोकः' इति विशेषणात् ॥
In plain words
Thus do they meditate. The scripture will presently speak of how these individuals journey along the northern path beginning with light, alongside those who possess this knowledge. By the process of elimination and through their connection with agnihotra oblations, it is householders alone who are designated as those who 'know thus.' An objection is raised: are there not also celibate students who are unmentioned by texts pertaining to village or forest life, and remain unclassified? How then can elimination hold? There is no such flaw. On the authority of traditional lore, the northern path of Aryaman is well established for lifelong celibates; therefore they too will travel along with forest-dwellers. Students completing temporary studies, however, are dedicated solely to acquiring the Veda and do not warrant a separate designation. If lifelong celibacy alone were accepted as the sole cause for attaining the northern path based on tradition, knowing thus would be rendered redundant. Not so, for knowledge serves a definite purpose for householders. Householders who lack this knowledge naturally follow the southern path of smoke; but those among them who know thus, or who realize qualified brahman or another aspect of reality—as indicated by the scriptural sign 'and whether they perform funeral rites for him or not, by flame indeed'—travel by the northern path. One might object: since householders and lifelong celibates share the status of an order of life, and householders abound in Vedic ritual actions, why should travel by the northern path belong only to ascetics and not to householders? This is no fault. Householders are unpurified because their likes and dislikes spring from entanglements with friends and enemies, their merits and demerits arise from harming and helping, and the extensive purificatory disciplines required to counteract violence, untruth, illusion, and broken vows are unavoidable for them; hence they are impure. Lacking purity, they do not take the northern path. Conversely, forest dwellers are pure-minded because they have abandoned violence, falsehood, illusion, and failure of celibacy, and they are free from passion because they have cast off the attachments and aversions of friend and enemy; for them, the northern path is fitting. Thus declare the authorities on tradition: 'Those unsteady ones who desired progeny went to cremation grounds. Those steady ones who transcended progeny attained immortality indeed.' Since householders and forest dwellers who possess this knowledge share the same path and the same fruit of immortality, one might argue that the forest dweller's knowledge becomes useless, leading to a contradiction with texts such as 'Those who give sacrificial fees do not go there, nor do ignorant ascetics' and 'This one does not protect him when unknown.' This is not so, because the realm lasting until cosmic dissolution is metaphorically spoken of as immortality. As the traditionalists themselves state: 'The state lasting until cosmic dissolution is indeed declared to be immortality.' Relative to ultimate, absolute immortality, texts like 'not there go sacrificial givers' and 'this one does not protect him when unknown' find their proper place, so there is no contradiction. If it is argued that this contradicts texts stating 'and they do not return' and 'they do not return to this human whirlpool', we reply: no, because the specific limitation 'this human, here' is used, indicating 'for them there is no return to this world.' If they never returned under any circumstance anywhere, specifying 'this human, here' would be entirely pointless. If one claims 'this here' merely denotes a general form, we say no; expressions of non-return such as 'he attains truth' coupled with descriptions of the qualified brahman worshipper ascending with the vital breaths through the subtle channel indicate that this immortality is relative and conditioned, not direct, final liberation—especially since the text speaks of 'that unconquered city, that golden lake' and concludes by specifying, 'this is indeed the world of Brahma for them.'
Close to the Sanskrit
Thus they worship; and the scripture will declare the departure of those along with ones knowing thus, by the path beginning with light; by process of elimination and connection with agnihotra oblations, householders alone are taken as those who know thus. Now, are not celibates also found, ungrasped by village-text and forest-text, uncharacterized; how is establishment by elimination valid? This is not a fault. From authority of traditional lore, for lifelong celibates, the northern path of Aryaman is well-known; hence they too will go along with forest-dwellers. Temporary students however are for the purpose of acquiring study, hence not worthy of special designation. Now, if the state of lifelong celibate is desired as the cause of attaining the northern path on the authority of traditional lore, the state of knowing thus is rendered meaningless. No, because it has purpose regarding householders. Those householders who do not know thus, for them naturally the southern path of smoke is well-known; those among them who know thus, or know qualified brahman or other brahman, by the inferential mark 'and whether they perform funeral rites for this person or not, by flame indeed', they go by the northern. Now, when householders and lifelong celibates are equal in having an order of life, that going by the northern path belongs to lifelong celibates alone and not to householders, and when abundance of Vedic ritual action is present; this is not a fault: 'unpurified indeed are they'—for them, attachment and aversion have enemy-friend association as cause, and merit and demerit have violence and favor as cause, and violence, falsehood, illusion, celibacy, etc., are extensive purification causes unavoidable for them, hence unpurified. Due to impurity, no going by the northern path. From the abandonment of violence, falsehood, illusion, celibacy, etc., the others are pure-minded, and from the abandonment of enemy, friend, attachment, aversion, etc., they are free from passion; for them the northern path is proper. And thus traditionalists declare: 'Those who desired progeny, unsteadfast, they resorted to cremation grounds. Those who led progeny away, steadfast, they resorted to immortality indeed.' When householders who know thus and forest-dwellers have equal path and fruit of immortality, the knowledge of forest-dwellers becomes meaningless; and thus scriptural contradiction: 'Not there go those who give sacrificial fees, not ignorant ascetics', and 'This one does not protect him when unknown'—thus contradicted. No, because the place of cosmic dissolution is intended as immortality. Right there it is spoken by traditionalists: 'The place until cosmic dissolution is indeed spoken of as immortality.' And whatever is absolute immortality, in relation to that 'not there go sacrificial givers', 'this one does not protect him when unknown', such scriptures—hence no contradiction. If the objection of scriptural contradiction 'and they do not return', 'they do not return to this human whirlpool' is raised, no; because of the specification 'this human', 'for them there is no return here'. If indeed they would not return absolutely, the specification 'this human, here' would be meaningless. If 'this here' is said to mean mere form, no; by the words of non-return 'attains truth', the ascent of the qualified brahman worshipper along with vital breaths through the channel, and immortality being relative, not direct liberation, is understood, having stated 'that unconquered city, that golden lake', and specifying 'this is indeed the world of Brahma for them.'