In the Madhukāṇḍa, which predominates in scriptural statements, the truth about Brahman has been ascertained. In the chapters relating to Yājñavalkya, which predominate in reasoning, by setting up opposing sides, the same subject has been discussed more by way of a debate. In the fourth chapter, by means of questions and answers between the teacher and his disciple, it has again been discussed at length and brought to a conclusion. Now the present Section relating to Maitreyī is being introduced as a conclusion of the proposition regarding the same topic. And this is the method adopted by the authorities on logic, as stated in the following definition, ‘The restatement of a proposition after stating the reason is conclusion’ (Gau. N. I. i. 39). Or it may be like this: That Self-knowledge together with renunciation which has been described as the means of immortality in the Madhukāṇḍa, is also established as such by argument, for the chapters relating to Yājñavalkya preponderate in that. Therefore it is decided by both scripture and argument that Self-knowledge together with renunciation is the means of immortality. Hence those seekers after immortality who believe in the scriptures should adopt this means, for a thing that is ascertained by the scriptures and reasoning deserves credence on account of its proving universally true. As for the explanation of the words in this section, it is to be understood the same as in the second chapter. We shall explain only those portions that have not been explained.
अथ ह याज्ञवल्क्यस्य द्वे भार्ये बभूवतुः—मैत्रेयी च कात्यायनी च; तयोर्ह मैत्रेयी ब्रह्मवादिनी बभूव, स्त्रीप्रज्ञैव तर्हि कात्यायनि; अथ ह याज्ञवल्क्योऽन्यद्वृत्तमुपाकरिष्यन् ॥ १ ॥
atha ha yājñavalkyasya dve bhārye babhūvatuḥ—maitreyī ca kātyāyanī ca; tayorha maitreyī brahmavādinī babhūva, strīprajñaiva tarhi kātyāyani; atha ha yājñavalkyo’nyadvṛttamupākariṣyan || 1 ||
1. Now Yājñavalkya had two wives, Maitreyī and Kātyāyani. Of these Maitreyī used to discuss Brahman, (while) Kātyāyanī had then an essentially feminine outlook. One day Yājñavalkya, with a view to’embracing another life—
The word ‘now’ (Atha) indicates sequence after the furnishing of reasons, for the preceding portion predominates in reasons. Then in this section relating to Maitreyī, which consists mainly of scriptural statements, the theme put forward in the preceding portion is concluded. The particle ‘ha’ (meaning, it is said) refers to a past incident. The sage Yājñavalkya, it is said, had two wives: one was named Maitreyī, and the other, Kātyāyanī. Of these two wives, Maitreyī used to discuss Brahman, (while) Kātyāyanī had then an essentially feminine outlook, minding household needs. One day Yājñavalkya, with a view to embracing another life from the householder’s life that he was then living, i.e. the monastic life—