Though agreeing in the main points of their doctrine, it is easily understood that works of this nature, ranging over different periods of Hindu religion, will also differ from oue another both in the manner and detail in which they deliver their subjeet•mat ter, and in the degree of completeness with which they treat of it. Thus, in some, the legendary narrative, and even ritual detail, are still considerably blended with the theo sophical speculation—and these stand nearest, therefore, the Aran'yakas, probably also in time in others, more philosophical, the nature of Brahman and the human soul is the only subject of inquiry, in others, the process of creation is also enlarged upon, with detail which harmonizes more or less either with the ulterior views of the Vedanta (q.v.) or those of the Sa'nkliya (q.v.) philosophy; some Upanishads, again, especially empha size the inefficiency, for the attainment of eternal bliss, of the performing religious acts and of worldly studies—the knowledge of Brahman being the only means that leads to this end; others, on the contrary, in conformity with the Yoga (q.v.) doctrine, assign a prominent place to the exterior means, by using which the soul would qualify itself for union with the supreme spirit; while the sectarian Upanishads, which identify this spirit with Vislin'u and Siva, have, besides, the tendency of reconciling the popular with the philosophical creed.
Of the older Upanishads, a typical instance is furnished in the Chhandogya Upani shad of the Sam•veda, the framework of which is legendary throughout, and its contents allegorical and mysthial. Other shorter Upanishads. freer from narratives and allusions to the mysterious import of ritual acts, aim at a more intelligible exposition of the doc trine of the soul. Of their mode of treatment, the following passage from the Ifdl'halza Upanishads will serve as an example; Nachiketas, the son of Vajas'ravas, having come to the abode of Varna, the judge of the dead, and obtained from him the grant of three boons, asks of him, for his third boon, an answer to the following question; ''There is this doubt: some say that (the soul) exists after the death of a man (in connection with another body than this); others say that it does not. This I should like to know, instructed by thee." And Lama, after, some hesitation, explains to him that the soul and Brahman are one, but that a man attains immortality only by under3tanding this unity, and that, to arrive at this understanding, he must free his mind from sensual desires, and get a correct knowledge both of the nature of Brahman and of the soul. " Know the soul as the rider, and the body as the car; know intellect as the charioteer, and manas (the organ of volition) as the rein. The senses, they say, are the horses, the objects (their) roads; and the enjoyer (i.e., the rider) is (the soul) endowed with body, senses, and manes. Thus say the wise. If lie (the charioteer) is unwise, and his maims is always unbridled, his senses are uncontrolled like vicious horses; but if lie is wise, and his minas is always bridled, his senses are controlled like good horses. He who, always impure, is unwise, and whose manes is unbridled, does not attain that abode (of immortality), but comes'to the world (of birth and death), he, however, who, always pure, is wise, and whose maims is bridled, he attains that abode whence he is not born again. The man who has a wise charioteer, and whose mantis is bridled, reaches the
other shore of the road (of the world), the highest abode of Vishdu. Higher (i.e., sub tler), indeed, than the objects are the senses; higher than the senses is manas; higher than mamas, intellect; and higher than intellect, the great one, the soul. Higher than the great one is that which is unmanifested, and higher than the unmanifested is Puru sha, the supreme spirit. But higher than Purusha there is nothing; he is the goal, the highest resort. This highest spirit is the soul hidden in all created beings; it is not manifest, but is beheld by those who can see what is subtle with an attentive, subtle intellect." The coincidence between the allegory, in the foregoing passage, and that in Plato's Phcedrus, imparts an additional interest to this Upanishad, which is valuable, moreover, on account of the evidence it affords as to points of agreement and difference between its views of the development of the world and those expounded in the Sankhya (q.y.). The Mun'daka Upanishad is important for the relative position which it assigns to the teaching of the Vedas, and the doctrine of the Uppanishads, " Two sciences," it says, the knowers of Brahman tell us, " must be known, the higher and the inferior. The inferior is (the knowledge of) the R'igveda, the Yajurvcda, the Sainaveda, and the Atharvaveda, the knowledge of pronunciation, the ritual, grammar, explanation of Vedic texts, prosody, and astronomy. But the higher knowledge is that by which that imperishable Brahman is comprehended. That which is invisible, unseizable, without descent (or origin), without either color, eye, or ear, without hand or foot, eternal, mani fold (in creation), all-pervading, very subtle, undecaying—the wise behold it as the cause of created beings." And in another place the performers of the sacrificial rites ordained by the Veda are said to attain, indeed to Indra's heaven in virtue of their pious work; but this state of bliss is declared to be unstable and perishable, and these "fools . . . . drop (from their heaven) as soon as this heaven (the reward of their acts) has faded away. Fancying that pious acts, ordained by the Vedas and codes of law, are the highest (object of man), these ignorant people do not know that there is something else which leads to eternal bliss. Having enjoyed (the reward of their deeds) on the happy summit of para dise, they enter again this world, or one that is (even) lower. Those, on the contrary, who practice penance and faith, and, with subdued desire, live in the forest, under the vow of a religious mendicant, they, free from sin, enter through the sun to that abode where resides that immortal spirit, that spirit, indeed, of undecaying nature." The Talavalara, or Lena, Upanishad, which, being one of the shortest, is in form one of the most philosophical treatises of this kind, puts in clearer language, perhaps, than any other Upanishad, the doctrine that the true knowledge of the supreme spirit consists in the consciousness which man acquires of his incapacity to understand it, since the human mind being capable only to comprehend finite objects, cannot have a knowl edge of what is infinite.