10. sa yathārdra-edhāgner abhyāhitāt pṛthag dhūmā viniścaranti, evaṁ vā are'sya mahato bhūtasya niḥsvasitam, etad yad ṛgvedo yajurvedaḥ sāmavedo'tharvāṅgirasa itihāsaḥ purāṇam vidyā upaniṣadaḥ ślokāḥ sūtrāny anuvyākhyānāni vyākhyānāni: asyaivaitāni sarvāṇi niḥśvasitāni.

Now, the next passage tells us everything proceeds from the Absolute, proceeds in a very peculiar manner, not easily understandable by individual minds. So, the manner in which things are supposed to proceed from the Supreme Being can be explained only through certain analogies, by comparisons, by visible examples. All knowledge is a partial aspect of the Supreme Absolute, which is Knowledge Itself. It is not knowledge in the sense of an information about things, but the very existence of all things which is inseparable from the knowledge of things. And so, any knowledge or wisdom that is worth mentioning is a fraction, a spark, a ray, of the Supreme Absolute. Even the highest geniuses of the world cannot be compared with a ray of that eternal profundity of knowledge. Everything comes from that. How does it come? We cannot understand how anything can come from the Absolute. We can only give some analogical comparative illustrations, and the Upaniṣhad employs here the comparison of smoke arising from fire. Sa yathārdra-edhāgner abhyāhitāt pṛithag dhūmā viniścaranti: Just as when you burn wet fuel, smoke may arise from its burning process, everything may be said to proceed in this manner, as it were, from the Supreme Being - a continuous emanation. It has to be called a curious emanation, as that which emanates has the potential character of that from which it emanates. We are always to remember what we have studied earlier, that the nature of the cause is always present in the existence of the effect. So, the effect, which is knowledge, is a fraction of the appearance of the plenum of wisdom which is the Para-Brahman, the Absolute. Everything comes from That.

Evaṁ vā are'sya mahato bhūtasya niḥsvasitaṁ: From the aspiration, as it were, of this eternal, infinite Reality, all the knowledge of this world has come. Just as when you breathe out there is a breath coming from your nostrils, the Absolute breathes, as it were, this wisdom of all His creation. And, all this wisdom of the world put together cannot be equated with a fraction of It. It will be another aspect of this mystery which is mentioned in the following passages.

The wisdom of the Veda, which is regarded as eternal knowledge, can be compared to the aspiration of the Absolute. Etad yad ṛgvedo yajurvedaḥ   sāmavedo'tharvāṅgirasa itihāsaḥ purāṇam vidyā upaniṣadaḥ, etc: All the four Vedas and all that is contained in them; anything that is implied in the Vedas, the eternity that is embosomed in the Vedas - all these things are emanations from the Absolute. And what else? Everything that is of that nature and everything that is capable of being connected with Vedic knowledge, such as the Itihāsās, Purāṇas, Vidyā, all arts and all branches of learning, secret teachings, verses and poetic compositions, aphorisms, commentaries, anything that you can call knowledge, in whatever way, whatever manner, whatever form - all that is contained there. Everything has come from there.

Asyaivaitāni sarvāṇi niḥśvasitāni: The substantiality of all that can be regarded as of highest value in the world is the substantiality of that magnificent Being - Mahato bhūtasya niḥsvasitam. The breath, as it were, of this eternal, breathless Reality is this vast manifestation. As everything that can be considered as an effect is located in the cause in some way or the other, so are all things located in the Absolute in some way or the other. This is interestingly stated in a longish passage that follows.

11. sa yathᾱ sarvᾱsᾱm apᾱm samudra ekᾱyanam, evaṁ sarveṣᾱṁ sparśᾱnᾱm tvag ekᾱyanam, evaṁ sarveṣᾱm sarveṣᾱṁ gandhᾱnᾱṁ nᾱsike ekᾱyanam, evaṁ sarveṣᾱṁ rasᾱnᾱṁ jihvᾱ ekᾱyanam, evaṁ sarveṣᾱṁ rῡpᾱṇᾱṁ cakṣur ekᾱyanam, evaṁ sarveṣᾱm sarveṣᾱṁ śabdᾱnᾱṁ śrotram ekᾱyanam, evaṁ sarveṣᾱṁ saṁkalpᾱnᾱṁ mana ekᾱyanam, evaṁ sarvᾱṣᾱṁ vidyᾱnᾱṁ hṛdayam ekᾱyanam, evaṁ  sarvᾱṣᾱṁ karmaṇᾱṁ hastᾱv ekᾱyanam, evaṁ sarvᾱṣᾱṁ  ᾱnandᾱnᾱm upastha ekᾱyanam, evaṁ  sarveṣᾱm sarveṣᾱṁ visargᾱṇᾱm pᾱyur ekᾱyanam, evaṁ sarveṣᾱṁ adhvanᾱm pᾱdav ekᾱyanam, evaṁ sarveṣᾱṁ vedᾱnᾱṁ vᾱg ekᾱyanam.

Sa yathᾱ sarveṣᾱm apᾱm samudra ekᾱyanam: The ocean is the repository of all waters. Every water can be found in the ocean. Evaṁ sarveṣᾱṁ sparśᾱnᾱm tvag ekᾱyanam: The touch-sense and everything that we regard as meaningful from the point of view of tangibility is located in the skin. Evaṁ sarvᾱsᾱṁ rasᾱnᾱṁ jihvᾱ ekᾱyanam: Every kind of taste can be located ultimately in the structural pattern of the tongue, or the palate. Evaṁ sarvᾱsᾱṁ gandhᾱnᾱṁ nᾱsike ekᾱyanam: Every smell, every odour, every type of fragrance is located in the structure of the nostrils. Evaṁ sarvᾱsᾱṁ rῡpᾱṇᾱṁ cakṣur ekᾱyanam: Every colour, every form, everything that is visible, is located in the structure of the eyes. Evaṁ sarvᾱsᾱṁ śabdᾱnᾱṁ śrotram ekᾱyanam: Every sound, whatever it be, is located in the structure of the ears. Evaṁ sarvᾱsᾱṁ saṁkalpᾱnᾱṁ mana ekᾱyanam: Every thought, every feeling, anything that is cogitated is ultimately located in the mind. Evaṁ sarvᾱsᾱṁ vidyᾱnᾱṁ hṛdayam ekᾱyanam: Every feeling, every kind of intimation connected with the knowledge of things, is in the heart of a person. Evaṁ sarvᾱsᾱṁ karmaṇᾱṁ hastᾱv ekᾱyanam: Every action, the capacity to grasp things, is located in the energy of the hands of a person. Other organs also are mentioned in this manner, making out that all activities of the senses are capable of being traced back to the structure of the senses, so that if you know the nature of the sense-organs concerned in any particular action, whether it is the action of knowledge or merely of locomotion, etc., you can know everything connected with that particular organ. Likewise, you can know all things if you can locate their origin, from where they proceed.

Again, we have to recapitulate what we have said previously, that it is not an easy affair to go back to the final cause of things, because you may be able to perceive the immediate cause of any particular phenomenon, but the ultimate cause cannot be easily discovered, as we are limited by the capacity of the mind and the sense-organs. Whatever the mind can think and the senses can cognise or perceive - these only are the realities to us as human beings. So, even the minutest investigation into the nature of the cause of any phenomenon, or event, or object, cannot be regarded as ultimate, because the ultimate cannot be comprehended by the mind or the senses due to their own limitations in space and time. But, if it could be possible in some mysterious manner, if the ultimate cause could be discovered, then we would be at once in the presence of a flash of illumination wherein everything is presented before the mind's eyes instantaneously, at one stroke, as it were.

12. sa yathᾱ saindhava-khilya udake prᾱsta udakam evᾱnuvilīyeta, na hᾱsya udgrahaṇᾱyeva syᾱt, yato yatas tv ᾱdadīta lavaṇam eva, evaṁ vᾱ ara idam mahad bhῡtam anantam apᾱraṁ vijñᾱna-ghana eva; etebhyo bhῡtebhyaḥ samutthᾱya, tᾱny evᾱnuvinaśyati; na pretya saṁjñᾱsti, iti are bravīmi, iti  hovᾱca yᾱjñavalkyaḥ.

Sa yathᾱ saindhava-khilya udake prᾱsta udakam evᾱnuvilīyeta: Another illustration is given here to make out the nature of the Supreme Being from whom all knowledge proceeds. If you dissolve a little piece of salt in water, what happens? The salt becomes one with the water. You may take any part of that water, it will taste salty, and you cannot find out where the salt is. It has become one with the water; it is everywhere in the water.

Na hᾱsya udgrahaṇᾱyeva syᾱt, yato yatas tv ᾱdadīta lavaṇam eva evaṁ vᾱ ara idam mahad bhῡtam anantam apᾱraṁ: Just as any part of that water in which salt is dissolved will taste of salt only, because of the pervasive character of the salt that has got dissolved into the water, so is the Infinite Being. How? Idam mahad bhūtam anantam apāraṁ vijñāna-ghana eva: It is a mass of knowledge; it is a solidity of wisdom; it is a substantiality of what we regard as the highest Consciousness; that is this ultimate Reality. Wherever you touch, it is that which is touched, and wherever you taste anything you are tasting that only, and anything that is seen anywhere is naturally that only. Whatever be the corresponding object of a particular sense-organ, it is the form of That which is seen. And the mind thinks nothing but That, not knowing it is so doing - vijñᾱna-ghana eva.

Etebhyo bhῡtebhyaḥ samutthᾱya, tᾱny evᾱnuvinaśyati; na pretya saṁjñᾱsti: This consciousness which is solid Reality ultimately, the substantiality of the whole universe, appears to localise itself in the body of individuals by entering into the process of permutation and combination of the elements earth, water, fire, air, ether, etc. A particular combination in some percentage of these five elements becomes a body, an embodiment. When consciousness enters this particular formation of the elements, it is what we call the individual, the Jīva, or a particular finite body. It arises in this form and dissolves itself in this form, as it were, as long as it is connected to this formation of the elements. The birth of the individual and the death of the individual are described here as being the consequence of the association of consciousness with the formation of the five elements in a certain proportion. It is the elements, the five elements which combine in certain ways, under different conditions, that are responsible for the objects of sense, as we call them. Animate or inanimate, whatever may be - all the objects, all the bodies are really the elements in some shape, colour and tangibility. They appear to have a value, a worth, and meaning, because of the entry of consciousness into them. And when the formations change, when there is a different type of formation of the elements, that is called the death of the individual. It is not a death really; it is a transformation, a reformation of the particular form into which these elements have been cast by the need of that unit of consciousness which is called the Jīva. When this consciousness gets entangled in the forms of the elements, it is called birth. When it is freed from them, it is called liberation. When it is freed from the elements, it will not be conscious of any particular thing - na pretya saṁjñᾱsti.

Yājñavalkya tells Maitreyī that when there is total isolation of consciousness from all its associations in the form of these permutations and combinations of elements called the body, there would be no particular consciousness. There would be no feeling, hearing, touching, smelling, - nothing particular whatsoever, no consciousness at all. So bluntly says Yājñavalkya, without commenting on the meaning of this statement, "After dissolution, there is no awareness." This is what is meant by this pithy statement - na pretya saṁjñāsti. Iti are bravīmi, iti hōvāca yajñavalkyaḥ: "Maitreyī, this I tell you. Try to understand it."

13. sa hovᾱca maitreyī, atraiva mᾱ bhagavᾱn amῡmuhat, na pretya saṁjṇᾱstīti. sa hovᾱca, na va are'ham mohaṁ bravīmi, alaṁ vᾱ are idaṁ vijñᾱnᾱya.

Maitreyī is surprised: "How is it? You are saying that It is an ocean of wisdom, a mass of knowledge, substantiality of everything that is consciousness, and now you say there is no consciousness! When there is an absorption of consciousness into itself and freedom from its entanglement with the elements, you say It knows nothing. How is it possible that It knows nothing, while It is All-knowledge?" "You do not understand what I say," tells Yājñavalkya to Maitreyī. "I have not confused you by saying this, nor have I mystified you in this contradictory statement. Your idea of knowledge is misconstrued. You have your own definition of knowledge, and from that point of view, from that standard of judgment of knowledge, you seem to perceive a contradiction in my statement, that after freedom from entanglement there is no consciousness in spite of the fact that it is an ocean of Consciousness."

Our concept of knowledge is well known. It is not real knowledge; it is the ass's knowledge; it is the donkey's knowledge; it is the animalistic perception that we usually call knowledge. The contact of the mind with objects in a particular manner, under given conditions, is called knowledge. But, this knowledge comes and goes according to the circumstances of the objects of particular knowledge of the senses. So, to us, knowledge means knowledge of something. This connecting link 'of' is very important. Whenever we speak of knowing, we always say 'knowing what'. So, there must be something which is known, and we speak of knowledge of something, studying something, awareness of something, illumination of something. Everything is 'of' something. Thus, we are always accustomed to connect knowledge with a content or object which is apparently external to knowledge. This strange relationship between object and the knowledge of that object is the subject of a philosophical controversy known as the conflict between the idealistic and realistic theories. How does knowledge arise, is a very great subject - 'philosophy'. Whether it arises by the location of the object in a particular manner, or is it the object that is responsible for the knowledge of the object, or whether it is the mind that knows the object that is responsible for the knowledge of the object, that, however, is another subject altogether.

So, Yājñavalkya tells us: Your notion of knowledge is involved in the concept of the isolation of the object of knowledge from knowledge, so that there cannot be knowledge unless there is an object; and when I tell you that there is no such thing as knowledge of an object in that condition where consciousness is absolved completely from all contact with the formation of the elements, you are not able to understand what I am saying. Why?

14. yatra hi dvaitam iva bhavati, tad itara itaraṁ jighrati, tad itara itaram paśyati, tad itara itaram śrṇoti, tad itara itaram abhivadati, tad itara itaram manute, tad itara itaraṁ vijᾱnᾱti. yatra tv asya sarvam ᾱtmᾱivᾱbhῡt, tat kena kaṁ jighret, tat kena kam paśyet, tat kena kaṁ śṛṇuyat, tat kena kam abhivadet, tat kena kam manvīta, tat kena kaṁ vijᾱnīyᾱt? yenedam sarvaṁ vijᾱnᾱti, taṁ kena vijᾱnīyᾱt, vijñᾱtᾱram are kena vijᾱnīyᾱd iti.

Where there is an object of knowledge, well, naturally it can be known. Where there is something other than the eye, the eye can see. Where there is something outside the nose, the nose can smell, that is true. Where the sound is outside the ear, the ear can hear the sound. Where the spoken word is outside the speech itself, one can speak about something. Where the thought is different from the object that is thought, it is possible to think. Where the object of understanding is different from understanding, it is possible to understand that object.

Where there is an object of knowledge, well, naturally it can be known. Where there is something other than the eye, the eye can see. Where there is something outside the nose, the nose can smell, that is true. Where the sound is outside the ear, the ear can hear the sound. Where the spoken word is outside the speech itself, one can speak about something. Where the thought is different from the object that is thought, it is possible to think. Where the object of understanding is different from understanding, it is possible to understand that object.

Yatra tv asya sarvam ātmāivābhūt: "But where understanding only is, and the object of understanding is not there, what is it that you understand? If this situation could be envisaged for the time being, if a condition can be conceived of where the object of knowledge has melted into the knowledge itself, what could be the knowledge which one can be endowed with? That which is to be known has melted into the knowledge itself; it has become part of the knowledge, so knowledge is filled with the substance of the object which it knows, so much so, there is no more an object as such - how can you then say that there is the knowing of anything? Because that 'anything' which you speak of as the object of the knowledge has become knowledge itself, so there is then no such thing as knowing 'anything', and therefore it is, O Maitreyī, that I said no such thing as knowing exists there and it does not know anything." Sarvam ātmāivābhūt: Where everything is the Self of knowledge, what does that Self know, except its own Self? Tat kena kaṁ jighret, tat kena kam paśyet, tat kena kaṁ śṛṇuyat, tat kena kam abhivadet, tat kena kam manvīta, tat kena kaṁ vijᾱnīyᾱt? Who is to see what, where the object of perception has become a part and parcel of the process of perception itself?

Yenedam sarvaṁ vijᾱnᾱti, taṁ kena vijᾱnīyᾱt: Everything is known by the knower, but who is to know the knower? If the knower is to be known, there must be a second knower to that knower, and the second knower can be known by a third knower, the third by a fourth, the fourth by a fifth, and so on. You go on scratching your head, you cannot know the knower. How can the knower be known? We have already designated the knower as the 'Knower' and you cannot now call it the 'known'. Therefore there is no such thing as knowing of Knowing, or knowing of Knower. Knowing of objects only is there before liberation. With liberation, that object has become part of knowing itself; It has become one with the Knower. The Knower alone is; there is no such thing then as 'knowing'. Therefore, as I told you, Maitreyī, it is not possible to have cognition and perception and mentation and understanding, in the usual sense, in that Absolute which is Supernal Felicity of Plenum - vijñᾱtᾱram are kena vijᾱnīyᾱd iti.

Now, this subject is continued later on in the Yājñavalkya Kanda of the same Upaniṣhad. It abruptly stops here, and takes up a new subject which has some remote connection but not immediate connection. The immediately connected passage will come later on: Yad vai tan-na paśyati, paśyam vai tan-na paśyati, etc. Yājñavalkya will be speaking to the Emperor Janaka where he says: "When I tell you that It does not see anything, it does not mean that It does not see anything, It sees everything. While It does not know anything, It knows everything; while It does not see anything, It sees everything," etc. This will be mentioned later on as a part of the exposition of this mystical statement of Yājñavalkya in the particular Brᾱhmaṇa known as the Maitreyā rᾱhmaṇa. 

Now a subject that is in a way connected with this topic is taken up in the subsequent section. The reason why you cannot have perceptual knowledge or cognitional awareness in the totality of things is because of the fact that everything is connected with everything in that knowledge. You cannot look upon something and judge a thing independently in a condition where everything is connected with everything. You cannot have a standard of judgment in a situation where that which is judged has become one with the standard of judgment itself. This interdependence of things and interconnectedness of values is discussed in a very famous aspect of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka knowledge called the Madhu-Vidyā, which is supposed to be given by Sage Dadhyaṅṅ.