यत्ते कश्चिदब्रवीत्तच्छृणवामेति; अब्रवीन्मे जित्वा शैलिनिः, वाग्वै ब्रह्मेति; यथा मातृमान्पितृमानाचार्यवान् ब्रूयान्, तथा तच्छैलिरब्रवीद्वाग्वै ब्रह्मेति, अवदतो हि किं स्यादिति; अब्रवीत्तु ते तस्यायतनं प्रतिष्ठां? न मेऽब्रवीदिति; एकपाद्वा एतत्सम्राडिति; स वै नो ब्रूहि याज्ञवल्क्य । वागेवायतनम्, आकाशः प्रतिष्ठा, प्रज्ञेत्येनदुपासीत; का प्रज्ञता याज्ञवल्क्य? वागेव सम्राडिति होवाच । वाचा वै सम्राड्बन्धुः प्रज्ञायते, ऋग्वेदो यजुर्वेदः सामवेदोऽथर्वाङ्गिरस इतिहासः पुराणं विद्या उपनिषदः श्लोकाः सूत्राण्यनुव्याख्यानानि व्याख्यानानीष्टं हुतमाशितं पायितम्, अयं च लोकः, परश्च लोकः, सर्वाणि च भूतानि वाचैव सम्राद् प्रज्ञायन्ते; वाग्वै सम्राद् परमं ब्रह्म; नैनं वाग्जहाति, सर्वाण्येनं भूतान्यभिक्शरन्ति, देवो भूत्वा देवानप्येति, य एवं विद्वानेतदुपास्ते । हस्त्यृषभं सहस्रं ददामीति होवाच जनको वैदेहः । स होवाच याज्ञवल्क्यः, पिता मेऽमन्यत नाननुशिष्य हरेतेति ॥ २ ॥
yatte kaścidabravīttacchṛṇavāmeti; abravīnme jitvā śailiniḥ, vāgvai brahmeti; yathā mātṛmānpitṛmānācāryavān brūyān, tathā tacchailirabravīdvāgvai brahmeti, avadato hi kiṃ syāditi; abravīttu te tasyāyatanaṃ pratiṣṭhāṃ? na me’bravīditi; ekapādvā etatsamrāḍiti; sa vai no brūhi yājñavalkya | vāgevāyatanam, ākāśaḥ pratiṣṭhā, prajñetyenadupāsīta; kā prajñatā yājñavalkya? vāgeva samrāḍiti hovāca | vācā vai samrāḍbandhuḥ prajñāyate, ṛgvedo yajurvedaḥ sāmavedo’tharvāṅgirasa itihāsaḥ purāṇaṃ vidyā upaniṣadaḥ ślokāḥ sūtrāṇyanuvyākhyānāni vyākhyānānīṣṭaṃ hutamāśitaṃ pāyitam, ayaṃ ca lokaḥ, paraśca lokaḥ, sarvāṇi ca bhūtāni vācaiva samrāṭ prajñāyante; vāgvai samrāṭ paramaṃ brahma; nainaṃ vāgjahāti, sarvāṇyenaṃ bhūtānyabhikśaranti, devo bhūtvā devānapyeti, ya evaṃ vidvānetadupāste | hastyṛṣabhaṃ sahasraṃ dadāmīti hovāca janako vaidehaḥ | sa hovāca yājñavalkyaḥ, pitā me’manyata nānanuśiṣya hareteti || 2 ||
2. ‘Let me hear what any one of your teachers may have told you.’ ‘Jitvan, the son of Śilina, has told me that the organ of speech (fire) is Brahman.’ ‘As one who has a mother, father and teacher should say, so has the son of Śilina said this—that the organ of speech is Brahman, for what can a person have who cannot speak? But did he tell you about its abode (body) and support?’ ‘No, he did not.’ ‘This Brahman is only one-footed, O Emperor.’ ‘Then you tell us, Yājñavalkya.’ ‘The organ of speech is its abode, and the ether (the Undifferentiated) its support. It should be meditated upon as intelligence.’ ‘What is intelligence. Yājñavalkya?’ ‘The organ of speech itself, O Emperor,’ said Yājñavalkya, ‘through the organ of speech, O Emperor, a friend is known; the Ṛg-Veda, Yajur-Veda, Sāma-Veda, Athar-vāṇgirasa, (Vedic) history, mythology, arts, Upaniṣads, verses, aphorisms, elucidations and explanations, (the effects of) sacrifices, (of) offering oblations in the fire and (of) giving food and drink, this world and the next, and all beings are known through the organ of speech alone, O Emperor. The organ of speech, O Emperor, is the Supreme Brahman. The organ of speech never leaves him who knowing thus meditates upon it, all beings eagerly come to him, and being a god, he attains the gods.’ ‘I give you a thousand cows with a bull like an elephant,’ said Emperor Janaka. Yājñavalkya replied, ‘My father was of opinion that one should not accept (wealth) from a disciple without fully instructing him.’
‘But let me hear what any one of your teachers—for you serve several of them —may have told you.’ The other said, ‘My teacher Jitvan, the son of Śilina, has told me that the organ of speech, i.e. its presiding deity (fire), is Brahman.’ Yājñavalkya said, ‘As one who has a mother adequately to instruct him in his childhood, a father to instruct him after that, and a teacher to instruct him from his initiation with the holy thread up to the completion of his studies, should say to his disciple, so has Jitvan, the son of Śilina, said this—that the organ of speech is Brahman. One who has had the advantage of these three sources of purification is a teacher in the primary sense of the word, and never fails to be an authority himself. For what can a person have who cannot speak?—he achieves nothing either in this life or in the next.
‘But did he tell you about the abode and support of that Brahman?’ ‘Abode’ means the body; ‘support’ is permanent resort. Janaka said, ‘No, he did not.’ Yājñavalkya said, ‘If so, this Brahman is only one-footed, and lacking the remaining three feet, it will not produce any effect, even though meditated upon.’ ‘Then you tell us, Yājñavalkya, for you know (about them),’ Yājñavalkya said, ‘The organ of speech is its abode, or the body of the deity of the organ of speech (fire), which is a form of Brahman, and the ether known as the Undifferentiated its support at its origin, during its continuance and at its dissolution. Itshould be meditated upon as intelligence. The secret name of intelligence is the fourth quarter of Brahman; one should meditate upon this Brahman as intelligence.’
‘What is intelligence, Yājñavalkya? Is intelligence itself meant, or its effect (speech)? Is it different from the organ of speech, like the body and support?’ ‘No.’ ‘What is it then?’ ‘The organ of speech itself, O Emperor,’ said Yājñavalkya, ‘is intelligence: Intelligence is not different from the organ of speech.’ How is it? The reply is being given: Through the organ of speech, O Emperor, a friend is known, when somebody says, ‘He is our friend.’ Likewise the Ṛg-Veda etc. Sacrifices mean the spiritual effects produced by them; the same with offering oblations, as well as giving food and drink. This world, the present life, the next world, the life to come, and all beings are known through the.organ of speech alone, O Emperor. Therefore the organ of speech, O Emperor. is the Supreme Brahman. The organ of speech never leaves him, the knower of the Brahman described above, who knowing thus meditates upon it, all beings eagerly come to him with offerings etc., and being a god in this very life, he attains the gods, is merged in them after death. ‘I give you a thousand cows with a bull like an elephant,’ said Emperor Janaka, as a return for the instruction received. Yājñavalkya replied, ‘My father was bf opinion that one should not accept wealth from a disciple without fully instructing or satisfying him. I too hold that view.’