Know that action has its rise from Brahman: Brahman is the Veda, and that is the rise, the cause, the revealer, of action. And Brahman, named the Veda, has its rise from the Imperishable: the Imperishable, the supreme Self, is the rise of it. Since the Veda, Brahman, arose, like the breath of a person, from the Imperishable named the supreme Self, therefore, being the revealer of every purpose, it is all-pervading; and though all-pervading, it is ever set in sacrifice, since its chief content is the rules of sacrifice.

Action arises from Brahman. Here the word 'Brahman' denotes the body, which is a transformation of matter; for in 'thence is born this, name and form and food', the word 'Brahman' denotes matter, and here too it will be said, 'My womb is the great Brahman'. So 'action arises from Brahman' means that action arises from the body, which is a transformation of matter. In 'Brahman arises from the imperishable', the word 'imperishable' denotes the individual self; the body, presided over by the self made content by food, drink, and the rest, has the power for action, so the body, which is the means of action, arises from the imperishable. Therefore the all-pervading Brahman, the body present in every qualified being, is ever established in sacrifice, has sacrifice for its root. This is the meaning.

Action arises from Brahman, as the scriptures show, 'He indeed makes one do good action' (Kaushitaki Upanishad 3.9), 'the buddhi, the knowledge' (10.4), and the like. When the primary sense is possible, a figurative sense reached by some roundabout chain is not to be assumed. Insentient things have no activity of their own, as the scripture that declares the Lord to govern all says, 'at the command of this Imperishable' (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 3.8.9), and as 'substance, action and time' and the like say; and His power beyond thought has been spoken of. The living being, being a reflection, has its activity preceded by that of the original, since agency is denied to it in 'it is not the agent' (5.14) and the like. The 'akshara' are the well-known eternal letters, for from them the supreme Brahman is made manifest. Otherwise, who could know Brahman, beginningless and endless, beyond thought, and yet wholly full? It is not right to accept a derived sense while setting aside the conventional one; and from the force of the construction it follows that Brahman is all-pervading, for nowhere is a twofold thing spoken of by a single word used twice, without a text of difference. And those letters are eternal, as the texts show, 'with eternal speech of varied form, urge a fair hymn for the bull' (Rigveda 6.5.25; Taittiriya Samhita 5.6.11), 'speech, beginningless and endless, eternal, was sent forth by the Self-born' (Mahabharata 12.232.24), 'and therefore eternity' (Brahma-sutra 1.3.29), and by such scripture, tradition and word of the Lord. The fault in the Veda's being authored has been told. The letters did not arise without thought, since there is no proof of that; the word 'breathing-out' carries the sense of effortlessness, not the sense of arising without thought, as 'He desired' (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.2.4) and the like show, and because the breathing-out is mentioned together with the expanse of forms such as 'what is offered, what is sacrificed', and because it would conflict with the great purport; this was told before. There is no pre-eminence for the producer where there is no independence; and dependence comes from a thing's being preceded by another's thought, as diseases and the like, though born of the person, are not in his power. The statements of the Veda's origination are meant to convey its manifestation and concern the presiding deities, by the words 'eternal, sent forth'. There is also a statement of agency with regard to the one who manifests it, 'he made the whole Shatapatha'; for how could the Vedas, which abide in the sun, be made by him? The settled teaching of the Shariraka, resting on a text, is the stronger. 'That of which scripture is the source' is what is meant by the Lord's being the womb of scripture. When it is said 'that from which is the birth and the rest of this' (Brahma-sutra 1.1.2), a means of knowledge is what is required there, not that scripture is born, or that He is the cause of the Veda; for being the cause of the Veda is no ground for being the cause of the world. Creating the manifold world is not made impossible by the creating of the Veda, were the Veda a thing to be created, nor is it ruled out in respect of omniscience, for if the maker of the Veda were omniscient, why should the maker of the world not be omniscient? Hence what is meant here is only that scripture is the means of knowledge of Him. So the letters are eternal. Since Brahman is thus, through that chain, made manifest by sacrifice, therefore it is eternally established in sacrifice.