23 None

23. (The stories told in the Upanishads) are for the purpose of the pāriplava; we deny this on account of (certain stories only) being specified.

‘Yājñavalkya had two wives, Maitreyī and Kātyāyani’ (Br̥. Up. IV, 5, 1); ‘Pratardana, forsooth, the son of Divodāsa came to the beloved abode of Indra’ (Kau. Up. III, 1); ‘There lived once upon a time Jānaśruti Pautrāyaṇa, who was a pious giver, giving much and keeping open house’ (Cḥ. Up. IV, 1, 1); with regard to these and similar stories met with in the Vedānta portions of scripture there arises a doubt whether they are meant to subserve the performance of the pāriplava ¹, or to introduce the vidyās standing in proximity to them.

The pūrvapakshin maintains that those scriptural stories subserve the pāriplava because they are stories like others, and because the telling of stories is enjoined for the pāriplava. And from this it follows that the Vedānta-texts do not chiefly aim at knowledge, because like mantras they stand in a complementary relation to sacrificial performances.

This conclusion we deny ‘on account of the specification.’ Under the heading ‘he is to recite the pāriplava,’ scripture specifies certain definite stories such as that of ‘Manu Vivasvat’s son the king.’ If, now, for the reason that all tales as such are alike, all tales were admitted for the pāriplava, the mentioned specification would be devoid of meaning. We therefore conclude that those scriptural stories are not meant to be told at the pāriplava.