________________
I ADHYÂYA, I PÂDA, 28.
249 For this conclusion the next Satra supplies a further argument.
27. And thus also, because (thus only) the designation of the beings, and so on, being the (four) feet is possible.
The text, moreover, designates the Gayatri as having four feet, after having referred to the beings, the earth, the body, and the heart; now this has a sense only if it is Brahman, which here is called Gayatri.
28. If it be said that (Brahman is) not (recognised) on account of the difference of designation ; (we say) not so, on account of there being no contradiction in either (designation). .
In the former passage, three feet of it are what is immortal in heaven,' heaven is referred to as the abode of the being under discussion; while in the latter passage, 'that light which shines above this heaven,' heaven is mentioned as marking its boundary. Owing to this discrepancy, the Brahman referred to in the former text is not recognised in the latter.—This objection the Sätra disposes of by pointing out that owing to the essential agreement of the two statements, nothing stands in the way of the required recognition. When we say, 'The hawk is on the top of the tree,' and 'the hawk is above the top of the tree,' we mean one and the same thing.-The 'light,' therefore, is nothing else but the most glorious and luminous highest Person. Him who in the former passage is called four-footed, we know to have an extraordinarily beautiful shape and colour-(cp., e.g., 'I know that great Person of sunlike colour beyond the darkness ' (Svet. Up. III, 9)-, and as hence his brilliancy also must be extraordinary, he is, in the text under discussion, quite appropriately called light.'-Here terminates the adhikarana of 'light.'
It has been shown that the being endowed with supreme brilliance, called Light,' which the text mentions as something well known, is the highest Person. The Satrakara will now show that the being designated as Indra and
Digitized by
Digitized by Google
