Madhuvidya

Author(s): S D Laddu, T N Dharmadhikari, Madhvi Kolhatkar, Pratibha Pingle
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 50

MEHENDALE: Satyam Eva Jayate Nanstam
409
puruşam brahmayonim,3.1.3; tatas tu tam paśyate nişkalaṁ dhyāyamānaḥ, 3. 1.8. Even jayate is used unmistakably in the active sense in the Mundaka : taṁ tam lokam jayate tāmś ca kāmān, 3.1.10. So there should be no objection if in our passage jayate is taken in the active sense with satyam as object and rşi as the subject supplied. Secondly the reason for the use of jayate instead of jayati appears to be in the metre of this Upanişad. From the analysis of the tristubh metre of the Mundaka done by Hertel' it become clear that if of the three parts of a quarter the first one has four syllables and the middle one three, then the latter has never all three short syllables. They are either -----, or ... Therefore when in our instance the line opens with the first division of four syllables (satyameva), we cannot have the middle part with all short syllables. Hence we find the use of jayate( ) instead of jayati( ).Ifthen the use of jayate for jayati is metri causa, there should be no difficulty in understanding the middle form for the active form and take satyam as the object of jayati. Moreover, since this quarter is metrically defective, in the opinion of Hertelone syllable at the end has probably been lost. He suggests to read the quarter as satyam eva jayate, nănrtaṁ sah (pp. 59 and 44). If this is correct, obviously satyam has to be taken as object, and in that case our view will be supported. But we
need not rely only on this evidence since it involves emendation.
second objection could be that since in the first quarter of the verse jayate is used in the singular number,'* the subject rșiḥ to be supplied has also to be in the singular. But in the third quarter of this verse we find rşayaḥ in the plural. Therefore it would not be proper to assume a subject in the singular number in the first quarter. But such differences in number are not altogether rare. In the Mundaka itself we notice them in the following verses:
sa vedaitat paramam brahmadhäma yatra visvam nihitam bhāti śubhram/
upāsate purauşam ye akāmās te śukram etad ativartanti dhiräh// 3.2.1
etair upāyair yatate yas tu vidvāṁs tasyaiņa ātmā visate brahmadhämal
samprāpyainam rşayo jñānatrptāḥ kstātmāno vitarāgah prașāntāḥ// 3.2.4-5.
Thirdly a point may be raised that in the Upanișads we do not come across elsewhere an expression like rșir brahma jayati. This is true. But instead of jayati we find verbs like Vlabh-, V vind-, Vāp-, Vas- used in expressions such as satyena labhyaḥ ... ātmā (Mund 3.1.5); nāyam ātmā pravacanena labhyo (Mund. 3.2.3); tasmād vidyayā ... upalabhyate brahma (Maitri 4.4); brahmacaryena... ātmānam anuvindate (Chånd. 8.5); tad ya evaitam brahmalokam brahmacaryeņānuvin
12 Mundaka Upanişad,p. 28.
"I now withdraw my earlier suggestion of 13 This is also true of tam tam lokam jayate, Mund.
ragardingjayate as a possible plural form.Cf.Ind. 3.1.10.
Linguistics, 17.23. Madhu Vidya/25