The Upanishad - An overview strudy

[Guest guest]

Namaste Nurcarnationji,

 

Welcome back Nurcarnation !!

 

In furtherance to our discussion this article would a good overview

of the litreature in hand . I hope you would read this entire

valuable text as some of our future discussion would relate to the

details share herein;

 

The words 'Upanishat' occurs in apposition to the word 'Nishat' as

early as in Rigveda Khila. According to Max Mueller, Upanishad

literally means "sit down near" (Upa - near, ni - down, shad - sit)

which meant that the spiritual aspirant had to sit devotedly near the

teacher to learn the doctrine. This suggestion has caught on rapidly,

and is accepted by many modern scholars like Dr. Sarvapalli

Radakrishnan. However, many traditional scholars frown upon this

etymology and point out that it is ungrammatical. The earliest

definitions of the word 'Upanishad' are available in the extant

fragments of Vakyakara, Brahmandin and Bhashyakara Dramidacharya -

two pre Shankaracharya commentators on Vedaanta who are quoted

profusely by later Vedaantins like Sudarshana Suri. Following are

these fragments:

Vakyakara: "Upanisannatvad upanisat"- "The term Upanishad derives

from the fact that it is put down."

 

Dramidabhasyakara: Gahane hiyam vidya samnivista"- "For this

meditation is contained in the Mysterious One (that it is called

Upanishad)"

These definitions are not very far from what Max Mueller has

proposed, but certainly highlight the 'mysterious' or the 'esoteric'

nature of their doctrine. In other words, the doctrine was secret

(rahasyam) and was taught only to a chosen few. In fact, the

word 'Upanishad' has been used in the sense of 'secret' by Panini in

his Ashtadhyaayi.

ENUMERATION OF THE UPANISHADS

The total number of extant Upanishads exceeds 200. Most of these

texts are clearly late, and are not considered authoritative by all

Hindus. The Muktika Upanishad, a text dating to around 1000 C.E.,

lists 108 Upanishads.

By tradition, fourteen are considered as the principal Upanishads.

They are Isha, Kena, Katha, Prashna, Mundaaka, Maandukya, Taiitriya,

Aitreya, Chaandogya, Brhadaaranyaka, Shvetaashvatara, Kaushitaki,

Mahaanaaraayana and Maitri. Recently, the following ancient

Upanishads have been discovered in manuscript and have been

published: Arsheya, Chhagaleya, Shaunaka, Pranava, Katha Shiksha and

Baskhalamantra. The last even has a commentary attached to it, which

closely resembles the other commentaries of Shri Shankaracharya.

It is noteworthy that there are several other texts embedded in the

Vedas and elsewhere that resemble the Upanishads very closely in

their thought. Examples are: The Brahmasukta of the Atharvaveda, the

Adhyatma Patala of the Apastamba Dharmasutra and so on.

While many of these Upanishads present Vedaantic thought, some late

ones are sectarian, or are inclined towards Yoga and Sannyasa.

Apparently, these texts were named as Upanishads because the word had

acquired an aura or simply because these texts represent the

esoteric, secret spiritual doctrines of their respective sects.

RELATIONSHIP OF UPANISHADS WITH VEDIC LITERATURE

It is generally believed that the mantras, the Braahmanas and parts

of the Aranyakas constitute the karma kaanda or the works section of

the Vedas, the Upanishads are the jnaana kaanda or the knowledge

section. In reality however, the mantras are ancient collections

covering a wide range of topics including rituals, ethics,

spirituality, cosmology and so on. The Braahmanas are theological

treatises, largely dealing with Vedic ritual, and rubricating these

mantras in the rituals expounded. Often appended to these Braahmanas

are esoteric texts called the Aranyakas. And in these Aranyakas, are

embedded the Upanishads. However, many Upanishads are stand alone

texts which might not have been integral with the Aranyakas. While

the subject of the karma kaanda is dharma, the subject of the jnaana

kaanda is Brahman or reality. The Upanishads are also called the

Vedaanta (Veda - scripture, anta - end of) or the end of the Veda

i.e., the final purport of the Vedas. This is because of two reasons:

They generally occur at the end of the Samhita-Braahmana-Aranyaka

literature; and because they represent a culmination or the 'final

view, or essence' (siddhanta) of the Vedic philosophy.

All extant Upanishads are traditional classified under one of the 4

Vedas. Sometimes, this classification is opposed to the correct

ancient placement of the Upanishads in the Vedic cannon, and in the

case of late Upanishads, such a classification often appears

artificial. Appendix 1 groups the various ancient Upanishads under

different Shakhas of the Vedas.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE UPANISHADIC DOCTRINE

The modern theory voiced in some quarters that the Upanishads

represent the revolt of the critical minded kshatriya against the

ritualistic brahmin, finds little support in the texts themselves.

For not only do brahmin teachers outnumber kshatriya teachers in the

Upanishads, it was only the brahmins who fully developed the

teachings of the Upanishads as presented in the various schools of

Vedaanta. A kshatriya teaching brahma vidhya or knowledge of reality

to a brahmin, is no argument, since tradition allowed all the three

top castes to learn Vedaanta and it is not unusual for a spiritually

inclined kshatriya to possess higher knowledge of Brahman than the

average brahmin. And again such cases are exceptions and not the

norm.

Another modern assertion that the Upanishads are against the

sacrificial religion of the Braahmanas is not wholly true. As noted

before the Vedas are a whole spiritual package and each section - the

hymns, the sacrifices, the philosophical discussions - have their

validity and usefulness at a certain stage. The sacrificial religion

served the religious needs of the masses and also helped in the

purification of oneself. At the householder stage they're the main

source of revenue for the brahmin. No orthodox thinker would object

to that, which has so much social, spiritual and religious utility.

So the Upanishads are not against the sacrifices per se, but only

against their ultimate validity i.e., their ability or rather the

lack of it, to effect liberation. While the sacrificial religion is

to be practiced in the householder stage, when one moves to the

forest dweller stage one is supposed to meditate on the symbolism and

spiritual value of the sacrifices. During the samnyaasin stage one's

life (worldly life with all its attachments) itself is said to be the

sacrifice.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE UPANISHADS

The Upanishads are truly the fount of all Indian philosophy. All the

BrAhmanical schools derive their philosophies from the Upanishads and

show an almost pathetic eagerness to find common ground between their

doctrines and the Upanishads. Not only is Jainism with its duality of

matter and Selves influenced by the Upanishads, even the Buddhist

doctrines of annata, kshanikavaada, shunyavaada, vijnaanavaada and

the two levels of reality are all derived from the Upanishads.

Numerous scholars have felt compelled down the ages to compose their

own commentaries or sub-commentaries on the Upanishads. The

commentaries of Shankaracharya are the most ancient available ones,

and also the most popular. These are written from an Advaita Vedaanta

perspective. The commentaries of Purnapraajna Anandatirtha (also

called Madhvacharya) are written from a Dvaita Vedaanta perspective,

whereas Rangaramanuja has written his commentaries from a

Vishishtadvaita Vedaanta perspective. A partial list of these

commentaries in Appendix B will give an idea of how prolific their

commentarial tradition has been.

PHILOSOPHY OF THE UPANISHADS

The Upanishads do not represent systematic philosophy. They represent

teachings of the sages who experienced or rather became reality

(brahma vid brahmaiva bhavati - the knower of Brahman becomes

Brahman). The purpose of the Upanishads is not mere intellectual

satisfaction, but a practical solution to the ultimate problems of

life. It is best expressed in the dialogue between Yama and

Nachiketas in the Katha Upanishad. Nachiketas, a braahmana boy

questions Yama (the God of Death) as to what happens to one's self

after death. Does one exist or does he not, then? Yama tries to

dissuade the boy from seeking an answer to a question, which even

Gods find difficult to understand. Instead he offers a wide array of

earthly comforts : long life, wealth, gold, elephants, horses, land,

beautiful women etc. Nachiketas turns them down saying that all these

are transient and only serve to wear out the senses of men. And when

one has seen him i.e., Yama or death, how could anybody enjoy these

things of sense? And having understood the transience of objects of

sense and the implicit suffering contained in them, who would wish

for a longer life?

As all phenomena are transient in nature worldly life ultimately

leads to disappointment and suffering. Death puts an end to all our

hopes and ridicules our achievements in life. To be born again is

only to go through the same grind. So the end of suffering is not to

be born at all and to become immortal. This according to the

Upanishads can be achieved when we know the true nature of our Self

(Atman).

The teaching of the Upanishads can be best understood under the

following three categories :

1. the Self or essence of man - Atman

2. the Self or essence of the world - Brahman

3. the relation between Atman and Brahman

According to the Upanishads when knowledge of one's Self (Atman) is

acquired, knowledge of the essence (Self) of the world (Brahman) as

well as the relationship between Atman and Brahman is known.

ATMAN

We find a clear exposition of the doctrine of the Atman and the

practical path leading to it in the dialogue between the sage

Prajaapathi and Indra in the Chaandogya Upanishad. Indra, the king of

Gods and Virochana, the king of demons both approached Prajaapathi to

learn the doctrine of the Self. Prajaapathi first teaches them that

the Self is unborn, uncreated, eternal, cannot be destroyed and

beyond suffering. Then he identifies the Self with the body. While

Virochana returns home satisfied, Indra is not convinced. How can the

immortal Self be the body, which is prone to change, decay and

destruction? So he approaches Prajaapathi again and tells him of his

confusion. Prajaapathi next identifies the Self with the subject of

the dream state. Indra is again not convinced. How could the subject

of the dream state be the eternal Self? Though devoid of defects of

the body, it still experiences emotions in dreams - it is happy, sad,

terrified, conscious of pain etc The Self being eternal cannot be

subject to such limitations. So again he goes back to Prajaapathi and

tells him his doubts. Prajaapathi now tells him that the enjoyer of

the deep sleep state is the Self. But Indra is unconvinced by this

too, for in deep sleep, there's no conscious or awareness. We neither

feel anything, nor know anything, nor will anything. So what good is

there in such a state?

When he approaches Prajaapathi again, the sage well pleased with his

discriminatory powers says : Dear Indra! The body and the subject of

the dream state are not the Self though they exist for the Self. The

Self is not an abstract principle of the deep sleep state too. Yet it

is something, which persists through these three states or else we

would not have the unity of experience through the three states. The

body, the senses, the mind, the presentation continuum, the

consciousness - are all mere instruments and objects of the Self.

Though the Self is the ground for the waking, dream and deep sleep

states, it transcends them all. The Self is immortal, self-luminous

and self-proved. It is the ultimate subject, which can never become

an object and is necessarily presupposed by all knowledge. It is

satchitAnanda (sat - existence, chit - knowledge, Ananda - bliss).

But if we are in truth the eternal Atman, why do we not know it?

The Upanishads say that it is due to our ignorance (avidya) that

we're not aware of the true nature of ourselves. When ignorance is

removed with right knowledge, the Self shines forth in its true

nature. In fact, acquisition of spiritual knowledge is the supreme

purpose of human existence. Human beings are superior to other forms

of life only because they can sufficiently discriminate between the

real and the unreal, between the ephemeral and the eternal, between

darkness and light. A man who does not strive to make good of this

opportunity and remains lost in materialism has, as if, committed

suicide. The 3rd verse of Ishavasya Upanishad therefore declares:

"The immutable soul is the real nature of man, and not his mortal

frame.

Because the soul endures from one life to the next,

whereas the body changes every moment and perishes with death.

But the materialistic people, enveloped with ignorance, vanity or

pride,

deny the very existence of the soul.

They say- 'Only that exists which can be perceived with the senses.

There is nothing beyond, there is no yonder world after death.

Verily, man is but an agglomeration of the elements,

born of the lust of his parents.

We are born with our physical birth, and cease to exist after our

death.

Indeed, there is no connection between actions and their fruits.

There no vice or virtue. So eat, drink and be merry.'

Denying their own true essence,

these deluded men have killed their own souls in this very life."

Right knowledge is not mere bookish knowledge. In fact the Upanishads

equate even the sacred Veda with lower knowledge, while knowledge of

the Self (Atmajnaanam) is the highest knowledge. This knowledge

sought is more intuitive than intellectual. It is the knowledge of

the subject, which can never be known like an object. Right knowledge

is obtained with the practice of faith, purity, introversion and

meditation. Two ways of meditation are suggested - meditation on the

mystic syllable "OM" and meditation on the heart center.

Recourse to Spirituality does not mean that one can forget his

worldly duties. The Upanishads stress again and again that 'faith

without works is dead." As an example, quote the 2nd verse of the

Ishavasya Upanishad:

"Seek not the Truth by abandoning this world

Or by renouncing all your bounden duties.

This is indeed not the path of salvation.

Rather, desire ye to live a full life of a hundred years,

Actively engaged in the selfless perfromance

of your duties and enjoined actions at all times.

Verily, this is the only way enjoined for man's salvation,

And not the opposite.

All actions bear fruit- good or bad.

And these fruits taint his soul, causing him to be reborn!

But the fruits of actions- good or otherwise, don't taint that wise

man,

who performs his duties selflessly, as an offering to God,

Just as a lotus leaf is not tainted by water, even though touching it.

But he, who through ignorance, shirks away from his duties,

Merely deludes himself by thinking- 'I am performing any action!'

Aye! no man can desist from action for even a single moment."

BRAHMAN

If the true Self of man is the Atman or reality, what about matter

and the psychological mechanism?

The Upanishads are very clear that Brahman is the origin and the end

of the world. It is the material cause of the world and the world is

a manifestation of Brahman. Brahman made the world out of itself. The

Brahmasukta of Atharveda (Paippalada Shakha) states

"(It is) The Supreme Being (Who) first spread out the mighty powers

collected in Him

(It is) The Supreme Being (Who) first spread out the heavenly lights

everywhere

Verily, The Supreme Being was born as first Lord of all that exists

Who, then is fit to be this Supreme Being's rival" VIII.9.1

 

"These Heaven and Earth are Supreme Being,

The seven currents are The Supreme Being

All the Adityas are Supreme Being

(Verily) All the divine beings contemplate upon the Supreme Being."

VIII.9.2

In the Chaandogya Upanishad it is said :

In the beginning the world was just Being, one only, without a second.

Then it thought to itself : "Would that I were many. Let me procreate

myself".

Again :

All this is verily Brahman. Brahman is that from which everything

proceeds, that in which everything breathes and that in which

everything is finally dissolved.

A theory of evolution is presented in the doctrine of the pancha

kosha or the five sheaths in the Taiitriya Upanishad. The lowest

level is the annamaya kosha or the plane of matter. Matter is jada or

devoid of consciousness and must evolve to life. So the second stage

is praanamaya kosha or the plane of life. Vegetables are an example

of this kosha. From life evolves perceptual consciousness and thus we

have the manomaya kosha or the mental plane. But this is still

instinctive consciousness and can be related to that of animals. From

instinctive consciousness evolves consciousness, which is self

conscious or rational. This is vijnaanamaya koshas or the plane of

self-conscious reason. This is the base for moral life and that,

which distinguishes man from animal. This is also the plane where the

empirical trinity of knower, known and knowledge exist. When the

trinity of the knower, known and knowledge become fused in a

transcendental unity we have the highest state of evolution - the

Anandamaya kosha or non-dual bliss.

So does this evolution mean that the original Brahman is lost?

No. The Upanishads are firm that all such evolution is only in the

level of name and form and the original nature of reality is never

lost. Analogies equating Brahman to clay in a clay pot or gold in an

ornament are used to bring home the point. Though name and form might

vary, the essence remains the same. All the stages of evolution are

but manifestations of Brahman, which is the soul of all matter and

life (sarvabhutaantaraatmaa). It pervades all phenomena and is the

inner controller (antaryaamin) of all. "For fear of him fire burns,

for fear of him the sun shines and for fear of him the winds, the

clouds and death perform their office".

In its very opening verse, the Ishavasya Upanishad reminds us that

Brahman is the essence of existence:

"All sentinent and insentinent objects in this ever changing Universe

are ephermal and pass away with time.

But the Lord Who is immanent in everything, and controls it in

multifarious ways, is Eternal and Imperishable.

Seek to realize this Eternal Truth and do not get entangled in this

world.

Enjoy the bounties of Nature, but with a sense of reunuciation.

Do not hanker too much after riches and do not get obsessed with them.

To whom does all this belong? Certainly not to any man,

for we do not bring anything with us, nor do we take anything along.

But He, the Underlying Reality, owns all this, and we are mere

guardians of His Divine riches."

ATMAN AND BRAHMAN

When the whole world is the manifestation of Brahman, even the Atman

must be Brahman too. The Mahaavaakyas or the great statements of the

Upanishads proclaim : "Tat tvam asi - you are that" and "Aham

Brahmaasmi - I'm Brahman". Both identify Brahman to one's own self

(Atman). But what's the exact nature of their relationship? (This is

the focal point of difference between the various schools of

Vedaanta).

Are they one and the same? The Advaita school of Vedaanta takes this

stand and gives forth a full fledged non-dualistic Absolutism. But if

the Atman is eternal and unchanging, what about the changes

experienced in the world? According to Advaita Vedaanta, the changes

in the world are unreal (mithya) and an illusion (maaya).

Is Brahman and Atman related in the way of part to whole or quality

to object? This is the theory of the VisishtAdvaita school of

Vedaanta which teaches qualified non-dualism ie the world and the

Selves are qualities of Brahman.

Are Brahman and Atman totally different? This cannot be, for it is

explicitly taught in the Upanishads that Brahman is the material

cause of the world and the world is the manifestation of Brahman. But

still the Dvaita school of Vedaanta argues from this angle and

presents a scheme where God, Selves and matter are totally distinct

and independent realities.

Actually the dualistic interpretation of the Upanishads as presented

by the Dvaita school of Vedaanta is not a new phenomenon. The other

five Braahmanical schools - Saamkhya, Yoga, Nyaaya, Vaishesika and

Purva Mimaamsaa - all claiming to be the correct interpreters of the

Upanishads too propound a dualistic view of the universe.

Excerpts from two remarkable passages from the Upanishads are

presented below - one from the Brhadaaranyaka Upanishad and the other

from the Chaandogya Upanishad. The first is the famous dialogue

between the greatest of Indian sages, Yaagnavalkya and his wife

Maitreyi regarding the nature of the Atman. The second is the equally

famous dialogue between the sage Uddhaalaka Aruni and his son

Shvetaketu, where the relationship between Brahman and Atman is

taught. The translation is free and not exact.

Brhadaaranyaka Upanishad

Yaagnavalkya had two wives - Maitreyi and Katyaayani. While Maitreyi

was a discourser of Brahma Vidhya, Katyaayani possesed only such

knowledge as women have. When Yaagnavalkya wished to move on to the

forest dweller (vaanaprastha) stage,

"Maitreyi", said Yaagnavalkya, "I'm getting away from this state of

householder. So let me make a settlement for you and that

Kaatyaayani".

"My Lord", said Maitreyi, "even if the riches of the world were mine,

would it make me immortal?

"No", said Yaagnavalkya, "your life will only be like the life of

people with plenty of wealth. But there's no hope of immortality

through wealth".

Then Maitreyi said, "What shall I do with that by which I do not

become immortal? Please, venerable sir, explain to me whatever you

know of immortality".

Then Yaagnavalkya said, "You were always dear to me Maitreyi, but now

you've become dearer. So as you wish I shall explain it to you. But

as I expound, seek to meditate on it".

Then he said, "Verily, not for the sake of the husband is the husband

dear, but for the sake of the self is the husband dear. Verily not

for the sake of the wife is the wife dear, but for the sake of the

self is the wife dear. Verily not for the sake of the sons …

wealth …

cattle … braahmana … kshatriya … worlds … Gods …

Veda … beings … all

… is each dear, but for the sake of the self is each dear. Verily

Maitreyi, the self is to be seen, to be heard, to be reflected on, to

be meditated upon; when verily the self is seen, heard, reflected on

and known, then all else is known".

"Braahmanahood deserts him who knows Braahmanahood in anything else

than the self. Kshatrid deserts him who knows Kshatrid in

anything else than the self. The worlds desert him … the Gods

desert

him … the Vedas desert him … the beings desert him … all

deserts him

who knows all in anything else than the self. This Braahmanahood,

this Kshatrid, these worlds, these Gods, these Vedas, all these

beings, this all are the Self".

"As from a fire kindled with damp fuel different kinds of smoke

issues forth, so verily from this great being has been breathed forth

the Rg Veda, the Yajur Veda, the Sama Veda, the hymns of the Atharvan

and Angirasas, legend, ancient lore, sciences, sacred teachings,

verses, aphorisms, explanations, commentaries, sacrifices, oblation,

food, drink, this world and the other and all beings".

"As a mass of salt is altogether a mass of taste, without inside or

outside, so is the self altogether a mass of intelligence, without

inside or outside. Having arisen out of these elements, it vanishes

again in them. When it has departed there's no more separate or

particular consciousness".

Then Maitreyi said, "Here indeed, venerable sir, you've caused me to

reach utter bewilderment. I do not at all understand this Self".

Yaagnavalkya replied, "I do not say anything bewildering. The Self

verily is imperishable and of indestructible nature".

"For where there's duality, there one sees another, one smells

another, one tastes another, one speaks to another, one hears

another, one thinks of another, one touches and knows another. But

when everything has become one's own Self, by what and whom should

one see, by what and whom should one smell, taste, speak, hear,

think, touch and know? By what should we know him by whom all this is

known? Indeed by what would one know the knower? The Self is to be

described as not this, not this (neti, neti). He is incomprehensible,

indestructible, unattached, unfettered. He does not suffer. Thus you

have the instruction expounded to you, O Maitreyi. Such verily is

life eternal".

Having said this Yaagnavalkya went away into the forest.

Chaandogya Upanishad

"As when the bees collect honey from different trees, mix them up and

reduce them to a unity and the essences are not able to discriminate

that, "I'm the essence of this tree", "I'm the essence of that tree",

even so all creatures though they reach Being in deep sleep, they do

not know it".

"That which is the finest essence - that this whole world has as its

Self. That is Atman. That is Reality. That art thou (tat tvam asi),

Shvetaketu".

"As the various rives which flow into the ocean and become the ocean

itself, losing their individuality they know not that, "I'm this

river", "I'm that river". Likewise though all creatures here in this

world have come forth from Being they do not know that they have come

forth from Being".

"That which is the finest essence - that this whole world has as its

Self. That is Atman. That is Reality. That art thou (tat tvam asi),

Shvetaketu".

"Bring a fruit from that nyagrodha tree there, Shvetaketu".

"Here it is, sir".

"Break it open".

"It is open, sir".

"What do you see there?".

"These fine seeds, sir".

"Break open a seed".

"It is open, sir".

"What do you see now?".

"Nothing, sir".

Then Uddhaalaka said to him, "Verily my dear son, that subtle essence

which you do not perceive, verily my dear, from that the great

nyagrodha tree exists. Believe me, dear".

"That which is the finest essence - that this whole world has as its

Self. That is Atman. That is Reality. That art thou (tat tvam asi),

Shvetaketu".

We conclude with a beautiful litany from the Brahmasukta of

Atharvaveda (Paippalada Shakha)

"The Supreme Being are the fishermen,

The Suprme Being are the servants,

The Supreme Being indeed are these gamblers.

Man as well as woman originate from the Supreme Being

Women are God and so are men." VIII.9.10

 

"The Supreme Being is in the highlands, the Supreme Being is in the

lowlands, (indeed)

the Supreme Being envelops from all directions.

Trees, mountains and in shrubs or creepers,

(Verily) The Supreme Being abides in these all.

The Earth and the Heavens

The Supreme Being abides in both" VIII.8.11

 

"These Heaven and Earth are Supreme Being,

The seven currents are The Supreme Being

All the Adityas are Supreme Being

(Verily) All the divine beings contemplate upon the Supreme Being."

VIII.9.3

 

"The Brahamanas speak of (the glories of) the Supreme Being (during

the day)

(But) The Supreme Being verily is present (also) in the night.

>From The Supreme Being is born the {light} (of the Sun that brightens

the day),

By the Supreme Being does fire shine with great splendour (at night).

VIII.9.4

 

"The Supreme Being abides in food producing plants

And it is He who causes the rains (which give life to these plants)

to descend.

(Indeed) The Supreme Being is inner animating Soul of all this

As long as the sun shines bright." VIII.9.5

 

"The Supreme Being is the priest who recites the chants during the

ritual,

The Supreme Being is (also) the ritual

As well as the chants being recited with great precision.

>From the Supreme Being arises the priest who pours the oblation into

the fire

{Within} the Supreme Being {is present} the oblation." VIII.9.6

 

"The Supreme Being is the fire altar, brimming with clarified butter,

The Supreme Being are the bulls possessing the beneficient seed,

The Supreme Being are the cows, that yield the oblation going into

the ritual fire,

The Supreme Being is he who, seated in the divine chariot, attains

the well performed magnificent ritual." VIII.9.7

 

"By the (will of the) Supreme Being the inert (thing) moves (and thus

becomes dynamic)

By the (will of the) Supreme Being does the body unite (with life).

By the (will of) Supreme Being does the outward breath return to the

man with great trembling." VIII.9.8

Appendix 1

Ancient Upanishads of the Veda

I. Shakala Charana of Rigveda

1. Aitreya Upanishad (2nd Aranyaka of the Aitreya Aranyaka).

2. Asyavaamiya Sukta (Rigveda 1,164,1-64)

3. Purusha Sukta (Rigveda X, 90)

4. Nasadiya Sukta (Rigveda X, 129)

5. Hiranyagarbha Sukta (Rigveda X,121,1-10)

6. Vac Sukta (Rigveda)

7. Mudgala Upanishad of Mudgala Shakha

8. Galava Upanishad of Galava Shakha

II. Bashkala Charana of Rigveda

1. Bashkalamantra Upanishad

III. Mandukeya Charana of Rigveda

1. Bavrucha Upanishad

IV. Shankhayana Charana and Kaushitaki Charana of Rigveda

1. Kaushitaki Brahamana Upanishad in the Shankhayana Aranyaka

2. Samhita Upanishad in the Shankhayana Aranyaka

V. Taittiriya Charana of Krishna Yajurveda

1. Taittiriya Upanishad (Taittiriya Aranyaka prapathaka VII-IX)

2. Yajniki or Mahanarayana Upanishad (Taittiriya Aranyaka

prapathaka X)

VI. Kathaka Charana of Krishna Yajurveda

1. Kathakamantra or Kathaka or Katha Upanishad

2. Kathashruti Upanishad

3. Kanthashruti Upanishad

4. Shivasamkalpa Brahamana

5. Katha Shiksha Upanishad

VI. Maitrayaniya Charana of Krishna Yajurveda

1. Maitrayaniya Upanishad or Maitrayainiya Aranyaka or

Brihadaranyaka of Maitrayaniya Shakha (the Charaka Aranyaka

manuscript is almost identical to this text)

2. Chhagaleya Upanishad of the Chhagaleya Shakha

3. Shvetashvatara Upanishad of the Shvetashvatara Shakha

VII. Vajasneya Shakhas or Shukla Yajurveda Shakhas

1. Vajasneyi Samhita Upanishad or Isha or Ishavasya Upanishad

(Madhyandina and Kanva recensions).

2. Brihadarnyaka Upanishad (Madhyandina and Kanva recensions).

3. Agnirahasya section in book X of Shatapath Brahman

4. Jabala Upanishad of Jabala Shakha

5. Subala Upanishad

6. Mandala Brahamana Upanishad

7. Tadeva Upanishad (in Yajurveda Samhita)

8. Rudrasukta (In Yajurveda Samhita)

VIII. Jaiminiya or Talavakara Shakha of Samaveda

1. Jaiminiya Braahmana Upanishad or Talavakara Aranyaka

2. Kena Upanishad in the Talavakara Aranyaka

3. Shatyayana Gayatri Upanishad in the Talavakara Aranyaka

4. Pranagnihotra in the initial sections of the Jaiminiya

Brahman

IX. Kauthuma and Ranayaniya Shakhas of Samaveda

1. Chhandogya Upanishad or Tandya Rahasya Upanishad

X. Shaunaka Shakha of Atharvaveda

1. Atharvana Upanishad or Mantra Upanishad of Atharvaveda or

Mundaka Upanishad

2. Pranava Upanishad ( in Gopatha Braahmana)

3. Skambha Sukta

4. Ucchishta Sukta

5. Prana Sukta

6. Gayatri Upanishad (Gopatha Brahamana I, 32-33)

7. Brahma Sukta

XII. Paippalada Shakha of Atharvaveda

1. Prashna Upanishad

2. Brahma Upanishad

3. Garbha Upanishad

4. Samhita Upanishad or Brahma Sukta (Paippalada Atharvaveda

VIII, 9, 1-12)

XIII. Atharva Veda Upanishads of Unknown Shakhas or not belonging to

any Shakha

1. Chulika Upanishad

2. Mandukya Upanishad

3. Brahmabindu Upanishad

4. Nadabindu Upanishad

5. Dhyanabindu Upanishad

6. Amritabindu Upanishad

7. Tejobindu Upanishad

8. Atharvashiras Upanishad

9. Atharvashikha Upanishad

10. Kaivalya Upanishad

XIV. Upanishads whose Vedic Shakha is not known or which do not

belong to any Shakha

1. Shaunaka Upanishad

2. Arsheya Upanishad

Appendix B

Commentatorial Tradition of Upanishads

Prasnopanishad

1. Bhasya of Sri Samkaracharya

2. Tika of Anandajnaana: This is merely a subcommentary on # 1

above

3. Bhasya of Sri Madhvacharya

4. Bhasya of Jayathirtha: This is a subcommentary on # 3 above

5. Aloka of Sri Vijnaana Bhiksu

6. Vivarana of Narayanendra Saravati, the disciple of Jnanendra

and the grand-disciple of Kaivalyendra Sarasvati: This is a sub-

commentary on # 1 above

7. Bhasya of Rangaramanuja Muni

8. Dipika of Narayana Bhatta, son of Ratnakara Bhatta

9. Dipika of Samkarananda Bhagvat, the disciple of Acharya

Anandatma

10. Commentary by Damodara Sastri

11. Upanisadabrahmayogin (Paramadvaita): Manuscript at Central

Library at Baroda

12. Hindi Bhasya of Damodara Satavalekara

Mundaka Upanisad

1. Samkaracarya (Advaita)

2. Bhaskara Bhatta: Manuscripts mentioned by Oppert. It is clear

which Bhatta Bhaskara this is since several scholars of this name are

known in Hindu history

3. Anubhutisvarupacarya: A sub-commentary on # 1 above

4. Madhvacarya (Dvaita)

5. Anandagiri: A sub-commentary on # 1 above

6. Jayatirtha: A subcommentary on # 4 above

7. Aloka of Vijnaana Bhiksu

8. Rangaramanuja (Visistadvaita)

9. Dipika of Narayana Bhatta, son of Ratnakara Bhatta

10. Nrsimhacaryya Chhalari (Dvaita)

11. Nigudhartha Prakasika of Damodara Sastri

12. Dipika of Samkarananda Bhagavat, the disciple of Acharya

Anandatma

13. Upanisadabrahmayogin (Paramadvaita): Manuscript at Central

Library at Baroda

14. Damodara Satavalekara

Mandukya Upanishad

1. Karikas if Gaudapadacharya

2. Bhasya of Sri Samkaracharya on the Upanishad and the Karikas

3. Bhasya of Sri Madhvacharya

4. Tika of Anandagiri (on #2 above)

5. Tika of Jayatirtha (on # 3 above)

6. Aloka of Sri Vijnaana Bhiksu

7. Bhasya of Rangaramanujamuni

8. Dipika of Samkarananda Bhagvat, the disciple of Acharya

Anandatma

9. Dipika of Narayana Bhatta, son of Ratnakara Bhatta

Aitreya Upanisad (Comprising Aranyakas 2-3 of the Aitreya Aranyaka).

Also called Atmashatakopanishad because it is often divided into 6

khandas in traditional commentaries.

1. Samkaracharya. Only the commentary on Aranyaka 3.4-6 is

normally printed. Manuscripts at CalcuttA

2. Bhasya of Sri Madhvacharya

3. Tika by Anandagiri on # 1 above

4. Tika of Anantandagiri

5. Tika on # 2 above by Vyasatirtha (Visistadvaita)

6. Sayanacharya

7. Tika of Visvesvara

8. Bhasya Tippana by Jnaanamrta Yati, the disciple of Uttamamrta

9. Vivarana on Samkaracarya's comment on A.A. 3.4-6 by Abhinava

Narayanendra Sarasvati, the disciple of Jnanendra Sarasvati and grand

disciple of Kaivalyendra Sarasvati (Manuscript at RAS, Calcutta #214)

10. Nigudarthaprakasanam of Damodara Sastri

Chhandogya Upanisad

1. Vakyakara Braahmanandin: A brief comment, called the 'Vakya'.

Lost but citations in the works of later Vedaantins are seen.

2. Bhasyakara Dramidacarya: A commentary on # 1 above: The work

is lost but citations in the works of later Vedaantins are seen.

3. Samkaracarya (Advaita):

4. Bhaskara Bhatta (Bhedabheda): Lost, but profuse citations in

the Tippana of Narendra Puri (# 5 below)

5. Narendra Puri: A brief comment ('Tippana') on # 3 above

6. Madhvacarya (Dvaita)

7. Anandagiri: A gloss on # 3 above)

8. Sayanacarya (Advaita): It has been published

9. Jayatirtha: A sub-commentary on # 6 above

10. Rangaramanuja (Visistadvaita)

11. Raghavendra Yati (Dvaita)

12. Mitaksara of Nityananda Asrama (Advaita Vedaanta)

13. Nigudhartha Prakasana of Damodara Sastri

14. Damodara Satavalekara

15. Pundit Shiva Shankara Kavyatirtha

Kena Upanisad

1. Bhavatrata (unkown): Portion of a commentary on the entire

Talavakara Aranyaka - manuscript preserved at the Vishvesvaranand

Vedic Research Institute at Hoshiarpur, India

2. Samkaracarya (Advaita): Wrote two commentaries- the more

extensive 'Padabhasya' and the shorter 'Vakyabhasya'.

3. Anandagiri: Sub-commentaries on # 2 above

4. Madhvacarya (Dvaita)

5. Jayatirtha: A sub-commentary on # 4 above

6. Rangaramanuja (Visistadvaita)

7. Dipika of Samkarananda Bhagvat

8. Nigudhartha Prakasika by Damodara Sastri

9. Upanisadbrahmayogin (Paramadvaita): Manuscript preserved at

Central Library at Baroda

10. Damodara Satavalekara

Commentators of the Katha Upanisad

1. Bhartrprapanca (Bhedabheda)

2. Samkaracarya (Advaita)

3. Anandagiri: Sub-commentary on # 2 above

4. Gopalayatindra or Gopalayogi: Sub-commentary on # 2 above

5. Rangaramanuja (Visistadvaita)

6. Madhvacarya (Dvaita)

7. Jayatirtha: Sub-ommentary on # 6 above

8. Aloka of Vijnaana Bhiksu

9. Nigudhartha Prakasika by Damodara Sastri

10. Upanisadbrahmayogin -manuscript in Central Library- Baroda

(Paramadvaita)

11. Damodara Satavalekara (Vaidik): In Hindi

Commentaries on Kanva Brhadaaranyaka Upanishad

1. Samkaracarya (Advaita): This and all others subsequently are

on the Kanva version of the text

2. Suresvaracharya: A voluminous commentary in approximately

12,000 verses. It is a Varttika

3. Bhasya of Madhvacharya

4. Anandagiri's commentary on the Varttika of Sri

Suresvaracharya

5. Anandagiri's independent commentary on the Upanishad

called 'Nyayamrita'

6. Tippana on # 3 by Jayatirtha

7. Aloka of Sri Vijnaana Bhiksu

8. Bhasya of Rangaramanuja Muni

9. Bhasya of Upanishad Brahmayogin

10. Hindi Bhasya by Pt. Satavalekara

Commentaries of Isavasya Upanishad

1. Bhartrprapanca (Bhedabheda Vedaanta: Was probably on

Madhyandina recension of Yajurveda. No longer extant. Extensive

quotations are found in the Bhasyas of Sri Samkaracharya, Sri

Suresvacharya, Anandagiri and Anandapurna Muni

2. Samkaracarya (Advaita Vedaanta): This is on Kanva recension

of Yajurveda

3. Uvata (Vaidik commentary): This is a part of the commentary

on the entire Yajurveda (Madhyandina recension)

4. Kuranarayana (Visistadvaita Vedaanta)

5. Tippana of Narendra Puri

6. Madhvacarya (Dvaita Vedaanta)

7. Tippana by Anubhutisvarupacharya (manuscript at Bikaner)

8. Anandagiri: Sub-commentary on # 2 above

9. Venkatanatha (Visistadvaita Vedaanta)

10. Sayanacarya (Advaita Vedaanta): Manuscript at Central Library

at Baroda

11. Vijnaanabhiksu (Samkhya-Vedaanta)

12. Jayatirtha: Sub-commentary on # 7 above

13. Anantabhatta: part of his commentary on Kanva Yajurveda

Samhita

14. Mahidhara: Vaidik commentary. This is a part of the

commentary on the entire Yajurveda (Madhyandina Sakha) Samhita.

15. Chintamani by Sadananda

16. Bhashya of Appaya Dikshita

17. Dipika of Raghavendra Yati (Dvaita Vedaanta)

18. Dipika of Samkarananda, the disciple of Acharya Anandatma, on

#2 above

19. Dipika of Balakrishnananda

20. Bhashya by Kika, the son of Narayana (date unknown)

21. Bhashya by Gopalananda, disciple of Sahajananda (date

unknown)

22. Chandrika by Hridayarama (date unknown)

23. Tippana by Jnaanananda (date unknown)

24. Manuprabha commentary by Amaradasa (date unknown)

25. Viveka by Sridharananda (date unknown)

26. Upanisadbrahmayogin (Paramadvaita Vedaanta): Manuscript at

Central Library, Baroda

27. Commentary by Damodararya (date unknown)

28. Commentary by Narasimha (date unknown)

29. Vrtti by Devendranatha Thakur (1862)

30. Commentary by Gangadhara Kaviratna Kaviraja

31. Vimala by Taracharana Tarkaratna (1880)

32. Vyakhya and Rahasyavrtti by Ramachandra Pandit, son of

Siddheshvara

33. Dayanand Saraswati: Vaidik commentary. Part of the commentary

on the entire Yajurveda (Madhyanadina Sakha) Samhita

34. Vivarana by Swami Prakashananda

35. Commentary by Gobhila published by Suddha Dharma Mandala

36. Damodara Satavalekara: Vaidik commentary. In Hindi

37. Rajvira Shastri- Hindi gloss comparing the commentaries of

Shankaracharya and Dayanada Saraswati

Commentaries on Brhadaaranyaka Upanisad (Madhyandina)

1. Bhartrprapancha

2. Disciples of Bhartraprapancha: In his Varttika, Suresvara

refers to interpretations of # 1 by disciples of Bhartrprapanca

3. Hariswami: Portion of a commentary on the entire Satapatha

Brahman. The relevant portion is lost

4. Mukhyartha Prakasika of Dviveda Ganga, the son of Narayana

5. Vasudeva Brahma

6. Nilakantha: The author Nilakantha was the son of Ranganatha

Saiva and Laksmi. His teachers were Kasinatha and Sridhara. He

referred to the previous commentaries by Sri Samkaracharya and Sri

Suresvaracharya on the Kanva version but omitted to comment on the

first two Braahmanas although they were commented upon by Sri

Samkaracharya. Nilakantha gives a reason for this omission and states

that these two Braahmanas strictly belong to Asvamedha Karmakaanda

and are dealt with in the 10th prapathaka of Madhyandina Satapatha

Braahmana. Therefore, they should not be dealt with in a commentary

on the Upanisad.

7. Mitaksara of Nityanandasrama, the disciple of

Purusottamasrama

Chulika Upanishad

1. Bhasya of Rangaramanuja Muni

2. Dipika of Narayana Bhatta, son of Ratnakara Bhatta

3. Dipika of Narayanashramin

4. Dipika of Shankarananda

5. Commentary of Mukunda

6. Vivarana of Upanishadbrahmayogin

Svetasvatara Upanishad

1. Commentary ascribed to Sri Samkaracharya: considered spurious

by many scholars

2. Aloka of Vijnaana Bhiksu

3. Commentary by Vijnaanatman, the disciple of Jnanottama

Narayana Upanishad

1. Bhatta Bhaskara

2. Sayanacharya

3. Bhasya of Kesava, a disciple of Sri Madhvacharya: It follows

the Andhrapatha of the text.

4. Dipika of Narayana Bhatta, son of Ratnakara Bhatta

 

Jai Maa!!!