INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

VEDAS AND UPANISHADS SUMMARY

Sem. Fernando Paul J. Castro

Growth of a Monotheistic tendency; Prajâpati, Vis'vakarma.

Prajâpati or the supreme Lord of all beings was recognized as a separate deity or god, the
highest and the greatest of all their gods. Hiranyagarbha is the only recognized Lord of all
existence. He is equivalent to our God the Father in Christianity who settled the earth and
established the heaven. The one who gives them breath and strength. The one obeyed and
worshipped by all creatures. Visvakarma or the All-creator is said to be father and procreator of
all beings, though himself uncreated. He generated the primitive waters. It is to him that the sage
says, who is our father, our creator, maker, who every place doth know and every creature, by
whom alone to gods their names were given, to him all other creatures go to ask him.

Brahma
The conception of Brahman which has been the highest glory for the Vedanta philosophy of later
days had hardly emerged in the Rig Veda from the associations of the sacrificial mind. But it is
only in the Satapatha Brahmana that the conception of Brahman has acquired a great
significance as the supreme principle which is the moving force behind the gods.  Thus, the
Satapatha says, "Verily in the beginning this (universe) was the Brahman. It created the gods;
and, having created the gods, it made them ascend these worlds: Agni this (terrestrial) world,
Vayu the air, and Surya the sky.... Then the Brahman itself went up to the sphere beyond. In
another place Brahman is described as being the Svayambhu (self-born) performing austerities,
who offered his own self in the creatures and the creatures in his own self, and thus compassed
supremacy, sovereignty and lordship over all creatures. The conception of the supreme man
(Purusha) in the Rig Veda also supposes that the supreme man pervades the world with only a
fourth part of Himself, whereas the remaining three parts transcend to a region beyond. He is at
once the present, past and future.

Sacrifice; the First Rudiments of the Law of Karma.

The offerings at a sacrifice were not dictated by a devotion with which we are familiar under
Christian or Vaisanava influence. The sacrifice taken as a whole is conceived as "to be a kind of
machinery in which every piece must tally with the other," the slightest discrepancy in the
performance of even a minute ritualistic detail, say in the pouring of the melted butter on the fire,
or the proper placing of utensils employed in the sacrifice, or even the misplacing of a mere
straw contrary to the injunctions was sufficient to spoil the whole sacrifice with whatsoever
earnestness it might be performed. The performance of the rituals invariably produced certain
mystic or magical results by virtue of which the object desired by the person was fulfilled in due
course like the fulfilment of a natural law in the physical world. The sacrifice was believed to
have existed from eternity like the Vedas. The creation of the world itself was even regarded as
the fruit of a sacrifice performed by the Supreme Being.  It exists "as an invisible thing at all
times and is like the latent power of electricity in an electrifying machine, requiring only the
operation of a suitable apparatus in order to be elicited." 
Artha
The first recognition of a cosmic order or law prevailing in nature under the guardianship of the
highest gods is to be found in the use of the word Artha (literally the course of things). This
word was also used to denote the "'order' in the moral world as truth and 'right' and in the
religious world as sacrifice or 'rite' and its unalterable law of producing effects

Cosmogony--Mythological and philosophical.

The cosmogony of the Rig-Veda may be looked at from two aspects, the mythological and the
philosophical. The mythological aspect has in general two currents, "The one regards the
universe as the result of mechanical production, the work of carpenter's and joiner's skill; the
other represents it as the result of natural generation.
Again, there are other hymns in which the Sun is called the soul (Atman) of all that is movable
and all that is immovable. There are also statements to the effect that the Being is one, though it
is called by many names by the sages. The Supreme Being is sometimes extolled as the supreme
Lord of the world called the golden egg (Hiranyagarbha). In some passages it is said
"Brahmanaspati blew forth these births like a blacksmith. In the earliest age of the gods, the
existent sprang from the non-existent. In the first age of the gods, the existent sprang from the
non-existent: thereafter the regions sprang, thereafter, from Uttanapada." 
The most remarkable and sublime hymn in which the first germs of philosophic speculation with
regard to the wonderful mystery of the origin of the world are found is the 129th hymn of Rig
Vedas. 
1. Then there was neither being nor not-being. The atmosphere was not, nor sky above it.
What covered all? And where? By what protected? Was there the fathomless abyss of
waters? 
2. Then neither death nor deathless existed; of day and night there was yet no distinction.
Alone that one breathed calmly, self-supported, Other than it was none, nor aught above
It. 
3. Darkness there was at first in darkness hidden; the universe was undistinguished water.
That which in void and emptiness lay hidden Alone by power of fervour was developed. 
4. Then for the first time there arose desire, which was the primal germ of mind, within it.
And sages, searching in their heart, discovered In Nothing the connecting bond of being.
5. Who is it knows? Who here can tell us surely from what and how this universe has risen?
And whether not till after it the gods lived? Who then can know from what it has arisen? 
 6. The source from which this universe has risen, and whether it was made, or uncreated, He
only knows, who from the highest heaven Rules, the all-seeing lord--or does not He
know? 
In the Brahmanas, however, we find that the cosmogonic view generally requires the agency
of a creator, who is not however always the starting point, and we find that the theory of
evolution is combined with the theory of creation, so that Prajapati is sometimes spoken of as
the creator while at other times the creator is said to have floated in the primeval water as a
cosmic golden egg.
Eschatology: the Doctrine of Atman
There seems to be a belief in the Vedas that the soul could be separated from the body in
states of swoon, and that it could exist after death, though we do not find there any trace of
the doctrine of transmigration in a developed form. In the Satapatha Brâhmana it is said that
those who do not perform rites with correct knowledge are born again after death and suffer
death again. 
In a hymn of the Rig Veda, the soul of a man apparently unconscious is invited to come back
to him from the trees, herbs, the sky, the sun, etc. In many of the hymns there is also the
belief in the existence of another world, where the highest material joys are attained as a
result of the performance of the sacrifices and also in a hell of darkness underneath where the
evil-doers are punished. 

In Taittirya Aranyaka Ihowever, it is said that Prajapati after having created his self (as the
world) with his own self entered into it. In Taittîrya Brâhmana the Atman is called
omnipresent, and it is said that he who knows him is no more stained by evil deeds. Thus we
find that in the pre-Upanishad Vedic literature Atman probably was first used to denote "vital
breath" in man, then the self of the world, and then the self in man. It is from this last stage
that we find the traces of a growing tendency to looking at the self of man as the omnipresent
supreme principle of the universe, the knowledge of which makes a man sinless and pure.

CHAPTER III THE EARLIER UPANISHADS (700 B.C.-600 B.C.)

The place of the Upanishads in Vedic literature. Though it is generally held that the Upanishads
are usually attached as appendices to the Aranyaka which are again attached to the
Brahmanas, yet it cannot be said that their distinction as separate treatises are always
observed. Thus we find in some cases that subjects which we should expect to be discussed
in a Brahmanas are introduced into the Aranyaka and the Aranyaka materials are sometimes
fused into the great bulk of Upanishads teaching. This shows that these three literatures
gradually grew up in one process of development and they were probably regarded as parts
of one literature, in spite of the differences in their subject-matter. 

The names of the Upanishads; Non-Brahmanic influence

 The Upanishads are also known by another name Vedanta, as they are believed to be the last
portions of the Vedas (veda-anta, end); it is by this name that the philosophy of the
Upanishads, the Vedanta philosophy, is so familiar to us. The Upanishads approach the
classical Sanskrit; the ideas preached also show that they are the culmination of the
intellectual achievement of a great epoch. As they thus formed the concluding parts of the
Vedas they retained their Vedic names which they took from the name of the different
schools or branches (Sakha) among which the Vedas were studied. Thus the Upanishads
attached to the Brahmanas of the Aitareya and Kausitaki schools are called respectively
Aitareya and Kausitaki Upanishads. Those of the Tanadins and Talavakaras of the Samaveda
are called the Chandogya and Talavakara (or Kena) Upanishad’s. Those of the Taittirïya
School the Yajurveda form the Taittirîya and Mahanarayana, of the Katha school the
Kathaka, of the Maitrayani School the Maitrayani. The Borhadaranyaka Upanishad forms
part of the Satapatha Brahmanas of the Vajasaneyi schools. The Isa Upanishad also belongs
to the latter school. But the school to which the Svetasvatara belongs cannot be traced, and
has probably been lost. The presumption with regard to these Upanishads is that they
represent the enlightened views of the particular schools among which they flourished, and
under whose names they passed

The meaning of the word Upanishad.

The word Upanishad is derived from the root sad with the prefix ni (to sit), and Max Muller says
that the word originally meant the act of sitting down near a teacher and of submissively
listening to him. In his introduction to the Upanishads he says, "The history and the genius of the
Sanskrit language leave little doubt that Upanishad meant originally session, particularly a
session consisting of pupils, assembled at a respectful distance round their teacher." Deussen
points out that the word means "secret" or "secret instruction," and this is borne out by many of
the passages of the Upanishads themselves. Max Muller also agrees that the word was used in
this sense in the Upanishads. There we find that great injunctions of secrecy are to be observed
for the communication of the doctrines, and it is said that it should only be given to a student or
pupil who by his supreme moral restraint and noble desires proves himself deserving to hear
them. 
The earliest and most important are probably those that have been commented upon by Sankara
namely Barhadâranyaka, Chandogya, Aitareya, Taittiriya, Isa, Kena, Katha, Prasna, Mundaka
and Mandukya. It is important to note in this connection that the separate Upanishads differ
much from one another with regard to their content and methods of exposition. Thus, while some
of them are busy laying great stress upon the monistic doctrine of the self as the only reality,
there are others which lay stress upon the practice of Yoga, asceticism, the cult of Siva, of Visnu
and the philosophy or anatomy of the body, and may thus be respectively called the Yoga, Saiva,
Visnu and Sarira Upanishads. These in all make up the number to one hundred and eight. 

Revival of Upanishad studies in modern times.

How the Upanishads came to be introduced into Europe is an interesting story Dara Shiko the
eldest son of the Emperor Shah Jahan heard of the Upanishads during his stay in Kashmir in
1640. He invited several Pandits from Benares to Delhi, who undertook the work of translating
them into Persian. In 1775 Anquetil Duperron, the discoverer of the Zend Avesta, received a
manuscript of it presented to him by his friend Le Gentil, the French resident in Faizabad at the
court of Shuja-uddaulah. Anquetil translated it into Latin which was published in 1801-1802.
This translation though largely unintelligible was read by Schopenhauer with great enthusiasm. It
had, as Schopenhauer himself admits, profoundly influenced his philosophy. Thus he writes in
the preface to his Welt als Wille und Vorstellung,
Through Schopenhauer the study of the Upanishads attracted much attention in Germany and
with the growth of a general interest in the study of Sanskrit, they found their way into other
parts of Europe as well.
The study of the Upanishads has however gained a great impetus by the earnest attempts of our
Ram Mohan Roy who not only translated them into Bengali, Hindi and English and published
them at his own expense, but founded the Brahma Samaj in Bengal, the main religious doctrines
of which were derived directly from the Upanishads.

The Upanishads and their interpretations.

Before entering into the philosophy of the Upanishads it may be worthwhile to say a few words
as to the reason why diverse and even contradictory explanations as to the real import of the
Upanishads had been offered by the great Indian scholars of past times. The Upanishads, as we
have seen, formed the concluding portion of the revealed Vedic literature, and were thus called
the Vedanta. It was almost universally believed by the Hindus that the highest truths could only
be found in the revelation of the Vedas.

The quest after Brahman: the struggle and the failures.

The fundamental idea which runs through the early Upanishads is that underlying the exterior
world of change there is an unchangeable reality which is identical with that which underlies the
essence in man. If we look at Greek philosophy in Parmenides or Plato or at modern philosophy
in Kant, we find the same tendency towards glorifying one unspeakable entity as the reality or
the essence. I have said above that the Upanishads are no systematic treatises of a single hand,
but are rather collations or compilations of floating monologues, dialogues or anecdotes. There
are no doubt here and there simple discussions but there is no pedantry or gymnastics of logic.
Even the most casual reader cannot but be struck with the earnestness and enthusiasm of the
sages. They run from place to place with great eagerness in search of a teacher competent to
instruct them about the nature of Brahman. Where is Brahman? What is his nature? We have
noticed that during the closing period of the Samhita there were people who had risen to the
conception of a single creator and controller of the universe, variously called Prajapati,
Visvakarman, Purusha, Brahmanaspati and Brahman. But this divine controller was yet only a
deity. The search as to the nature of this deity began in the Upanishads.Many visible objects of
nature such as the sun or the wind on one hand and the various psychological functions in man
were tried, but none could render satisfaction to the great ideal that had been aroused. When we
look merely to this quest, we find that we have not yet gone out of the Aranyaka ideas and of
symbolic (pratika) forms of worship. _Prana_ (vital breath) was regarded as the most essential
function for the life of man, and many anecdotes are related to show that it is superior to the
other organs, such as the eye or ear, and that on it all other functions depend. This recognition of
the superiority of prana brings us to the meditations on prana as Brahman as leading to the most
beneficial results. So also, we find that owing to the presence of the exalting characters of
omnipresence and eternality _akasa_ (space) is meditated upon as Brahman. So also manas and
Aditya (sun) are meditated upon as Brahman. Again side by side with the visible material
representation of Brahman as the pervading Vayu, or the sun and the immaterial representation as
akasa, manas or prana, we find also the various kinds of meditations as substitutes for actual
sacrifice.