Mantra 2

In plain words

Intending to show that the fruit of Vedic knowledge and ritual action—which has just been lauded and which culminates in the state of Prajāpati—still does not transcend the painful realm of worldly saṃsāra, the scripture declares:

He was afraid. That Prajāpati, described earlier as this first embodied human-formed entity, was afraid—frightened just like ordinary mortals. Because this embodied being, equipped with bodily instruments, harbored the false notion that the self could perish, he was afraid; and for this very reason, even today, an isolated person feels afraid. Furthermore, the antidote to the false perception that causes fear is the direct realization of the Self as it truly is. This Prajāpati reflected: 'Since there is no second hostile entity apart from myself, and no cause for self-destruction, of what should I be afraid?' Through that very realization of his true nature, his fear vanished entirely. That his fear was born purely of ignorance—and has no place once supreme reality is perceived—is why the text asks: 'For why should he have feared?' Why did he feel terror? When ultimate truth is examined, fear is simply impossible. For fear always arises from a second entity, and that second entity is nothing other than a projection of ignorance. An unseen second can never be the source of fear, as the Vedic text confirms: 'Where is delusion, what sorrow, for one who sees oneness?' That the vision of unity dispelled his fear is entirely fitting; why? Because fear truly arises from a second, and when that second is wiped out by the realization of oneness, fear has no ground left to stand upon.

Close to the Sanskrit

The text states this, intending to demonstrate the meaning: that this fruit of knowledge and action prescribed in the ritual section, which has been lauded and which is characterized by Prajāpatihood, did not at all transcend the sphere of saṃsāra.

He was afraid. That Prajāpati, who was explained as this first embodied person-formed [entity], was afraid, being frightened just like us and others. Since this embodied one, equipped with bodily instruments, feared due to possessing false vision regarding self-destruction, therefore, by that commonality, even today a solitary person is afraid. Moreover, the means to dispel false perception which is the cause of fear is the direct vision of the Self as it is. This Prajāpati performed contemplation: 'Since there is no other entity apart from me, a hostile rival, in the absence of any cause for the destruction of the self, why should I fear?' From that very realization of the Self as it is, the fear of this Prajāpati vanished completely. That the fear of that Prajāpati was caused solely by ignorance and is untenable upon the realization of the ultimate truth—[the text] states: 'For why should he have feared?' Why was he frightened? In the inquiry into ultimate truth, fear is certainly untenable, is the intent. Because fear truly arises from a second entity, and a second entity is projected solely by ignorance. For an unperceived second is not the cause for the birth of fear, according to the scriptural passage: 'Where is delusion, what sorrow, for one who sees oneness?' And that which dispelled fear through the vision of oneness is appropriate; why? Because fear truly arises from a second entity; that perception of a second has been eradicated by the vision of oneness, hence it does not exist.

In plain words

Here an objection is raised: How did Prajāpati attain the realization of non-duality? Who taught him? If it arose without a teacher, the same logic would apply to ordinary people like us. If it was due to latent impressions from past lives, then striving for knowledge would become meaningless. Just as conditional effects in everyday life have diverse contributory causes—for instance, nocturnal animals perceive forms in the dark without external light through mere sensory contact, yogis perceive them through the mind alone, while ordinary people require a combination of senses, light, and varying conditions of illumination—so too, the awakening to the non-dual Self may arise from past karma, as in Prajāpati's case. Elsewhere, austerity is the cause, as the scripture says: 'Seek to know Brahman through austerity.' And scriptures declare that faith, prostration, and having a qualified teacher are contributory causes of knowledge because they clear away impurities like demerit. When obstacles such as sin are removed, the mind and the Self naturally awaken to reality through the hearing, reflection, and meditation on the Vedānta. Therefore, practices like faith and prostration are not the direct mechanical causes of illumination itself.

Close to the Sanskrit

Here they raise an objection: How did Prajāpati's realization of oneness arise? Or who instructed him? Alternatively, if it appeared uninstructed, the same contingency applies to us as well. Or if it is caused by latent impressions from past lives, it would render the pursuit of the vision of oneness pointless. Just as various alternative and combined causes are conceived for conditional effects originating from past births—for instance, in nocturnal animal perception of form in darkness without light, sensory contact alone serves as the cause, while for yogis the mind alone is the cause, but for us, combined contributory causes exist alongside sensory contact and light, and further distinctions arise through the superior or inferior nature of the light—similarly, in the realization of the unity of the Self, sometimes past karma serves as the cause, as in the case of Prajāpati; sometimes austerity is the cause, according to the scriptural text: 'Desire to know Brahman through austerity'; sometimes based on śruti and smṛti statements such as: 'A person who has a teacher knows', 'One endowed with faith gains knowledge', 'Know that by prostration', 'Indeed from a teacher', 'He is to be known, to be seen, to be heard'—faith and other practices act as contributory causes for attaining supreme knowledge because they remove obstacles like adharma, and because hearing, reflection, and meditation on Vedānta have reality as their direct object, and upon the destruction of impediments like sin, the mind and the Self naturally tend toward the knowledge of actual truth. Therefore, faith and prostration are never the absolute direct causes of knowledge.