Translation and Notes

Introduction

"I expound the 'Vajrasuchi' which is a doctrine that dispels ignorance,

Brings disrepute to those who are devoid of (spiritual) knowledge

And is an ornament to those who see with the eye of (spiritual) knowledge". || 1 ||

Exegetical notes: The opening lines indicate that the esoteric doctrine of this text is potent and precious and should be granted only to the select few who are spiritually inclined. If this doctrine is debased by bestowal to an unworthy, the recipient comes to harm and is not able to derive any benefit from it

The Central Question


"Brahmin (priests), Kshatriya (soldiers and kings), Vaishya (merchants and agriculturists) and Shudras (artisans and farmers)- these are the four castes.

Amongst these castes, Brahmins indeed are the supreme (pradhana)- this accords with the statements of the Vedas and is stated by the Smritis also.

In this regard, the following enquiry is made:

Who indeed has the designation 'Brahmin'? Is he the individual soul (jiva)? Is he the body? Is it the class based on birth or one’s lineage (that is responsible for Brahminhood)? Is it the (spiritual) knowledge (that is responsible for Brahminhood)? Is it the ritualistic karma or fruits thereof (that is responsible for Brahminhood)? Is he the performer of meritorious acts (dharmika)?" || 2 ||

Exegetical notes: The text is clear.

Is Jiva the Brahmin?



"Of these options, if the first i.e. 'the designation Brahmin applies to the Jiva' is considered, then no (i.e., this cannot be true) because the nature (rupa) of the Jiva remains the same in the bodies it assumed in previous lives and also in the future bodies.

Impelled by the fruit of its actions, the Jiva attains numerous bodies (in different births) and in all these bodies, the nature of the Jiva remains the same.

Therefore, the designation 'Brahmin' cannot apply to the Jiva." || 3 ||

Exegetical notes: The passage does not consider the possibility that the nature of the Jiva itself changes from one life to another because it is a fundamental dogma of the Vedic philosophies that the Jiva or the individual soul is immutable and changeless. In fact, it is the non-Vedic philosophies that often hold the opposite teaching about the Jiva.

Is Body the Brahmin?

"Then, if it is said that the body has the designation 'Brahmin', then no (i.e., this cannot be true),

Because the bodies of all human beings down to the chandalas (=outcastes) have the same nature since they are composed of the same 5 elements;

Because features like death, birth, vice and virtue are seen in all bodies;

Because of the absence of the rule that Brahmins are white, Kshatriyas are red, Vaishyas are yellow and Shudras are black.

Because upon cremating the corpses of their fathers/elders and others , one would get tainted with the sin of Brahminicide.

Because of these reasons, the body cannot bear the designation 'Brahmin'." || 4 ||

Exegetical notes: Murder of a Brahmin is considered one of the greatest sins in Hindu scriptures. The author therefore argues that if it is the body that is the Brahmin, then cremation of that 'Brahmin' body upon the death of the person will be akin to the sin of killing a Brahmin.

Familial Lineage and Caste:

"Then, if is said that the class by birth (or familial lineage or genus) bears the designation 'Brahmin', then no (i.e., this cannot be true), because there are several non-human species from whom numerous great Sages emerged.

We hear from the sacred texts that

- Sage Rsyasrnga was born of a deer,

- Sage Kausika of the Kusa grass,

- Sage Jambuka from a jackal,

- Sage Valmiki from white termite hill,

- Sage Vyasa from a fisher woman,

- Sage Gautama from the back of a hare,

- Sage Vasishtha from Urvashi- the celestial nymph

- Sage Agastya from a pitcher.

Amongst these, there have been many Sages who have been amongst the foremost of men that have demonstrated spiritual realization.

Therefore, it is not one's class by birth that can be taken as (the determinant of the designation) ‘Brahmin'." || 5 ||

Exegetical notes: The passage takes recourse to several unscientific, popular fables about the origin of Sages but its logic is not untenable. Many of Hinduism's greatest sages have had humble origins. See Appendix B.

Spiritual Knowledge and Brahminhood


"Then, if it be said that spiritual knowledge is (the cause of) Brahminhood, no (i.e., this cannot be true), because amongst Kshatriyas and others, there are many who have realized the Supreme Reality and have attained Wisdom. Therefore knowledge does not determine Brahminhood.” || 6 ||

Exegetical notes: An example of Kshatriyas who were spiritually realized sages are King Janaka of Videha. An example of a Vaishya who was a realized Sage is the Rigvedic seer Bhalandana. Likewise, Matanga, the son of a Vaishya father and a Shudra mother became a realized Sage. See Appendix B for more details.

Religious Rituals (Karma) and Brahminhood


"Then, if it is said that performance of karma or the fruits thereof (makes one) a Brahmin, no (i.e., this cannot be true), Because association with karma that has been commenced, karma done in the past and karma that will be done, is seen common to all creatures.

(Moreover) good men perform karmas, impelled by (the effects) their past karma.

Therefore, karma does not (make) one a Brahmin.” || 7 ||

Exegetical notes: The text means that the performance of karma or rituals in this life does not form the basis of Brahminhood. Why? Because man, or his soul, is associated or tainted not only with the karma performed in this very life, but also with the unseen karmas performed in previous lives. Moreover, who knows what and how many karmas one will perform in future lives. Since man’s net karma is the sum of all the past, present (and future), is it justified to assign him a caste merely on the basis of his present karma? No! Moreover, we see that all men are not inclined equally to the performance of karma. It is stated in the scriptures that inclination to perform good karma in this life itself is a fruit of good karma performed in previous lives. On the other hand, a man who performed good karmas might yet willingly shun them in this life, contrary to his nature. Therefore, when we assign a caste to someone on the basis of his current life’s karma, we are belittling the importance of his past and future karma wrongly. I have not translated ‘karma’ in this passage as ‘virtuous deeds’ and have adopted the rather restricted meaning of the word because the next passage encompasses the broader meanings of karma. Therefore, assuming the broader meaning of karma here itself would result in the fault of useless repetition by the text.

Meritorious Acts and Brahminhood


“Then, if it is said that (performance of) meritorious deeds (makes one) a Brahmin, no (i.e., this cannot be true), because there have been many Kshatriyas and others (Vaishyas and Shudras) who have (done meritorious deeds like having) gifted gold (to Brahmins, to religious institutions etc.).

Therefore, the performer of meritorious deeds is not (automatically) the Brahmin.” || 8 ||

Exegetical Notes: The passage clarifies that performance of acts of piety alone does not make one a Brahmin.

Who is a Brahmin?

“Who indeed then bears the designation Brahmin?

He (indeed) who, after having all his desires fulfilled as a result of perceiving (realizing) directly, as an amalaka fruit in one’s hand-- The Atman that is One without a second (or is beyond compare), (That is) bereft of (distinctions of) clan and (is not composed of) the constituents of Prakriti (guNa-hInaM), and actionless, (That is) free of all defects like the six infirmities (viz. old age, death, sorrow, delusion, hunger and thirst) and the six states of existence/transformations (viz. birth, existence, growth/development, transformation, waning and perishing), (That is) of the nature of Immutable Reality, of Consciousness, Blissful and Infinite/Eternal, (That is) an Independent Entity (not deriving its existence and properties from anything else), (That is) devoid of determinations, but (itself) the support of infinite determinations, (That is) present in all living and non-living beings as the immanent Soul, (Who) pervades the interior and envelopes the exterior of everything as ether, (That is) possesses the attribute of perfect and complete (akhanda) Bliss, (That is) incomparable, (That is) known only through one’s own (spiritual) experience (and not through reading of books or teaching by others) and is inferred only indirectly (because of It cannot be perceived by the senses);

Becomes free of the defects of desire, attachment and the like, becomes endowed with the (positive) qualities like tranquility etc., becomes free of (negative) behaviors like jealousy, greed, expectations, delusion etc., and leads a life in which the mind is not tainted pretensions, ego and the like.



He alone, who possesses the aforementioned characteristics, is a Brahmin- such is (indeed) the import of Sruti, Smriti, Itihasa and the Puranas.

There is no other way of attaining Brahminhood.



Meditate upon Brahman, the Atman, (That is) of the nature of Immutable Reality, of Consciousness, Blissful and One without a second (or is beyond compare! Meditate upon Brahman!



Such is this Upanishad (secret/exalted) doctrine!” || 9 ||

Exegetical Notes: The concluding section of the Upanishad makes it clear that not until a man has realized the Supreme Being can he be called a Brahmin. This is but logical, because the Brahmin is considered the most exalted caste in human being, and realization of the Supreme Being is considered the supreme goal of all souls. Therefore, a Brahmin, who has not reached this supreme state an imperfect Brahmin, or is a Brahmin only in name because he has not done justice to the teachings of the scriptures and to the social status that is accorded to him.

The passage, in defining the attributes of a true Brahmin, also lists the attributes of Brahman, or the Supreme Being or God in Hinduism.

The words “as an amalaka fruit in one’s hand” is idiomatic Sanskrit usage meaning “clearly in the front {of oneself}”

The words “Meditate upon Brahman” are repeated to signify the end of the text.

The teaching of this section is not novel but is found in numerous Hindu texts. See Appendix A for some parallel passages.