Although we admit, the purvapakshin resumes, that the chapter about the pra/n/a does not furnish any instruction regarding some outward deity, since it contains a multitude of references to the interior Self; still we deny that it is concerned with Brahman.--For what reason?--Because it mentions characteristic marks of the individual soul on the one hand, and of the chief vital air on the other hand. The passage, 'Let no man try to find out what speech is, let him know the speaker,' mentions a characteristic mark of the individual soul, and must therefore be held to point out as the object of knowledge the individual soul which rules and employs the different organs of action such as speech and so on. On the other hand, we have the passage, 'But pra/n/a alone, the intelligent Self, having laid hold of this body makes it rise up,' which points to the chief vital air; for the chief attribute of the vital air is that it sustains the body. Similarly, we read in the colloquy of the vital airs (Pra. Up. II, 3), concerning speech and the other vital airs, 'Then pra/n/a (the chief vital air) as the best said to them: Be not deceived; I alone dividing myself fivefold support this body and keep it.' Those, again, who in the passage quoted above read 'this one (masc.), the body[132]' must give the following explanation, Pra/n/a having laid hold of this one, viz. either the individual soul or the aggregate of the sense organs, makes the body rise up. The individual soul as well as the chief vital air may justly be designated as the intelligent Self; for the former is of the nature of intelligence, and the latter (although non-intelligent in itself) is the abode of other pra/n/as, viz. the sense organs, which are the instruments of intelligence. Moreover, if the word pra/n/a be taken to denote the individual soul as well as the chief vital air, the pra/n/a and the intelligent Self may be spoken of in two ways, either as being non-different on account of their mutual concomitance, or as being different on account of their (essentially different) individual character; and in these two different ways they are actually spoken of in the two following passages, 'What is pra/n/a that is praj/n/a, what is praj/n/a that is pra/n/a;' and, 'For together do these two live in the body and together do they depart.' If, on the other hand, pra/n/a denoted Brahman, what then could be different from what? For these reasons pra/n/a does not denote Brahman, but either the individual soul or the chief vital air or both.