पृथिव्यै चैनमग्नेश्च दैवी वागाविशति; सा वै दैवी वाग्यया यद्यदेव वदति तत्तद्भवति ॥ १८ ॥
pṛthivyai cainamagneśca daivī vāgāviśati; sā vai daivī vāgyayā yadyadeva vadati tattadbhavati || 18 ||
18. The divine organ of speech from the earth and fire permeates him. That is the divine organ of speech through which whatever he says is fulfilled.
How does this take place? This will be explained in this and the next two paragraphs. The Śruti itself has shown that the son, rites and meditation lead respectively to the world of men, of the Manes and of the gods. Here some prattlers (the Mīmāṃsakas) ignorant of the particular import of the Śruti say that the means such as the son lead to liberation. The Śruti has thus gagged them: Beginning with the statement that rites with five factors are undertaken with material ends, in the passage, ‘Let me have a wife,’ etc. (I. iv. 17), it has, among other things, concluded by connecting the son and the rest with their respective results. Therefore it is proved that the Śruti text referring to the (three) debts applies to an ignorant man and not one who has realised the Supreme Self. It will also be stated later on, ‘What shall we achieve through children, we who have attained this Self, this world?’ (IV. iv. 22).
Others say that the winning of the worlds of the Manes and the gods means turning away from them. And if one has a son and at the same time performs rites and meditation together, one turns away from these three worlds, and through the knowledge of the Supreme Self attains liberation. Hence, they say, the means such as the son lead indirectly to liberation itself. To silence them also, this portion of the Śruti sets itself to show the results attained by a man who has a son to whom he has entrusted his own duties, who performs rites and who knows the meditation on the three lands of food as identical with himself. And one cannot say that this veiy result is liberation, for it is connected with the three kinds of food, and all the foods are the effects of meditation and rites, since the father is stated to produce them again and again, and there is the statement about decay, ‘If he does not do this, it would be exhausted’ (I. v. 2). Thus only would the mention of the effect and instrument in the words, ‘body’ and ‘luminous organ’ (I. v. 11-13), be appropriate. Besides, the topic is concluded by a representation of the foods as consisting of name, form and action: ‘This (universe) indeed consists of three things,’ etc. (I. vi. 1). And it cannot be deduced from this one sentence in question (I. v. 16) that these three means being combined lead to liberation in the case of some, and identity with the three kinds of food in the case of others, for the sentence only admits of a single interpretation, viz. that means such as the son lead to identity with the three kinds of food.
The divine organ of speech, that which relates to the gods, from the earth and fire permeates him, this man who has entrusted this duties to his son. The divine organ of speech, consisting of the earth and fire, is the material of the vocal organs of all. But (in an ignorant man) it is limited by attachment and other evils pertaining to the body. In the case of the sage, these evils being eliminated, it becomes all-pervading, like water, or like the light of a lamp, when its obstruction has been removed. This is expressed by the text, ‘The divine organ of speech from the earth and fire permeates him.’ And that is the divine organ of speech, devoid of the evils of falsehood etc. and pure, through which whatever he says about himself or others is fulfilled. That is, his speech becomes infallible and irresistible.