The Upanishads

THE UPANISHADS The Upanishads form the concluding portions of the Veda and are therefore called Vedanta or the end of the Veda. Their aim is not so much to reach philosophical truth as to bring peace and freedom to the anxious human spirit. They represent free and bold attempts to find out the truth without any thought of a system. Notwithstanding the variety of authorship and the period of time covered by them, we discern in them a unity of purpose and a vivid sense of spiritual reality. They are distinguished from the Vedic hymns and the Brahmanas by their increased emphasis on monistic suggestions and subjective analysis as well as their indifference to Vedic authority and ceremonial piety.

Metaphysics.

The Taittiriya Upanishad (III.) gives us an account of the gradual evolution of our ideas regarding the ulti mate basis of things. The seeker tries to find out the one com prehensive principle from which "all things are born, by which they are sustained and into which they return at death." His first answer that matter (annam) is the basic principle is dis carded in view of its inadequacy to vital phenomena. The second answer of life (prana) is found unsatisfactory when sentient en tities are considered. The third suggestion of mind (manas) is incapable of accounting for logical phenomena and the fourth formula of logical intelligence (vijiiana) cannot be regarded as the highest reality, since there are aspects of being which cannot be reduced to intellectual terms. Thought as ordinarily under stood deals with objects viewed as beyond or other than the process of thinking. Reality can be reached in the state of highest immediacy which transcends thought and its distinctions, which is ananda or bliss. Ananda is Brahman.

Subjective Analysis.

Atman. —The Chnndogya Upanishad (VIII. 3. 12) institutes an enquiry into the nature of the self. The body which is born, grows up, decays and dies cannot be the true self which persists throughout the changes of birth and death. The dreaming self, subject as it is to the accidents of experience, must not be confused with the true self. The self is not the unity of the evergrowing and changing mental experi ences. The self in dreamless sleep cannot satisfy our need, since it is empty of all content and is a bare abstraction. The true self is said to be the universal consciousness existing both in itself and for itself. The Mandukya Upanishad observes that the three states of the soul—waking, dreaming and sleeping—are included in a fourth (turiya) which is intuitional consciousness, where there is no knowledge of objects, internal or external. It is the unchanged and persistent identity which continues in the midst of all change. It is the Atman.

Brahman and Atman are one. The inmost being of universal nature is the same as our innermost self. Tat tvam asi: "that art thou." The nature of this ultimate reality cannot be defined. It can be grasped, however, through intuition. This intuition is not objective like perceptual experience or communicable to others like inferential knowledge. We cannot give a formal exposition of it. To any suggested definition of reality we can only say, "not this," "not this" (neti, neti. Brh. IV. 2. 4). Contradictory accounts are given to show that negative descriptions do not mean negation of all being but only the poverty of intellect.

We cannot, however, remain long at this high level. We insist on framing intellectual pictures of the absolute. When the Atman is identified with the self-conscious individual, Brahman is de scribed as a personal being (Itvara). When the Atman is identi fied with the mental and the vital self, Brahman becomes the cosmic soul (Hiranyagarbha). When the Atman is taken for the body, Brahman is taken for the cosmos (Virat). Brahman is the sole and the whole explanation of the world, its material and efficient cause. The metaphors of the spinning of the web by the spider, the bearing of the child by the mother, the production of notes from musical instruments point to the oneness of Brahman and the world. There is, however, no logical deduction of the world of multiplicity from the ultimate cause. At the theistic level the world is regarded as the self-limitation of the supreme. The power of self-expression possessed by the personal Isvara (God) is sometimes called Maya.

The Doctrine of Maya.

There is hardly any suggestion in the Upanishads that the entire universe of change is a baseless fabric of fancy. The dominant note of pantheism goes against this view. The assertion of the sole reality of Brahman denies duality and traces all change to Brahman but does not suggest that change is illusion. The frequent emphasis on the oneness of the world and Brahman need not be repudiated as a mere con cession to common-sense ideas. The texts which declare that the variegated universe is due to the development of name and f orm from out of the one Brahman warn us against getting lost in the world of multiplicity. The passing semblance of life is in no wise its immortal truth. The theory of the world-illusion is incon sistent with the conception of degrees of reality, or, to be more accurate, unreality which is found in the Aitareya Aranyaka (II.

3. 2

et seq.). When Yajnavalkya contends that duality is neces sary for empirical consciousness and suggests that the world of duality is not real by the use of the particle `iva' (Brh. Up. II.

4. 14 ; IV. 3. 31), he refers to the non-ultimate character of the world of duality.

Ethics. Moksa

is release from the bondage to the sensuous and the individual. The morality of the Upanishads is, in a sense, individualistic as it emphasises self-realization. The term "indi vidualistic," however, ceases to have any exclusive meaning. To realize oneself is to identify oneself with a good that is not private to any one. Insistence on the knowledge of God (jnana) is tempered by the recognition of the need for moral life.

When the moral striving ends in religious realization the indi vidual is said to be freed from all moral laws. This does not mean that the free can do what they choose with perfect impunity. Laws and regulations are necessary for those who do not naturally conform to the dictates of morality. For those who have risen above the selfish ego and who have died to sin morality is the very condition of their being.

Those who have not reached the highest perfection will have other chances for striving. Saiitsdra offers a succession of spiritual opportunities. The hypothesis of rebirth is formulated in this period (Chan. V. 3. 1o; Brh. VI. 2.), though there are still com promises with the Vedic views. Good and evil actions experi ence a twofold retribution, once in the other world and again by a renewed life on earth.

Moral striving is governed by the law of karma. Our life carries within it a record that time cannot blur or death erase. The soul that sinneth, it shall die. Though we cannot efface the results of our acts on the outer universe, its effects on us can be wiped away by strenuous exertion. Karma emphasizes individual responsibility. It is more favourable to self-culture and medita tion than to prayer and petition.

In every sphere the Upanishads indulged in inconsistent com promises with the Vedic views. The chaos of the Brahmanical religion reached its climax in the post-Upanishad or pre-Buddhist period when truth hardened into tradition and morality stiffened into routine. The need for reconstruction was felt by the think ing minds.