The History of Indian Literature c8.114

c8.114

We have an interpretation of both Áraṇyakas, that is to say, of the second and third books of the Aitareya-Áraṇyaka, and of the third book of the Kaushítaki-Áraṇyaka in the commentary of Saṃkaráchárya, a teacher who lived about the eighth century a.d.,³⁸ and who was of the highest importance for the Vedánta school. For not only did he interpret all the Vedic texts, that is, all the Upanishads, upon which that school is founded, he also commented on the Vedánta-Sútra itself, besides composing a number of smaller works with a view to elucidate and establish the Vedánta doctrine. His explanations, it is true, are often forced, from the fact of their having to accommodate themselves to the Vedánta system; still they are of high importance for us. Pupils of his, Ánandajnána, Ánandagiri, Ánandatírtha, and others, in their turn composed glosses on his commentaries. Of most of these commentaries and glosses we are now in possession, as they have been recently edited, together with their Upanishads, by Dr. Roer, Secretary to the Asiatic Society of Bengal, in the *Bibliotheca Indica*, a periodical appearing under the auspices of that Society, and devoted exclusively to the publication of texts. Unfortunately the Kaushí-taki-Upanishad is not yet among the number, neither is the Maitráyaṇy-Upanishad, of which we have to speak in the sequel. It is, however, to be hoped that we shall yet receive both.³⁹—And may yet a third, the Váshkala-Upanishad, be recovered and added to the list of these Upanishads of the Ṛik! It is at present only known to us through Anquetil Duperron's *Oupnekhat*, ii. 366–371; the original must therefore have been extant at the time of the Persian translation (rendered into Latin by Anquetil) of the principal Upanishads (1656). The Váshkala-Śruti is repeatedly mentioned by Sáyaṇa. We have seen above that a particular recension of the Ṛik-Saṃhitá, which has likewise been lost, is attributed to the Váshkalas. This Upanishad is therefore the one sorry relic left to us of an extensive cycle of literature. It rests upon a legend repeatedly mentioned in the Bráhmaṇas, which in substance, and one might almost say in name also, corresponds to the Greek legend of Gany-Medes. Medhátithi, the son of Kaṇva, is carried up to heaven by Indra, who has assumed the form of a ram, and during their flight he inquires of Indra who he is. Indra, in reply, smilingly declares himself to be the All-god, identifying himself with the universe. As to the cause of the abduction, he goes on to say that, delighted with Medhátithi's penance, he desired to conduct him into the right path leading to truth; he must therefore have no further misgiving. With regard to the date of this Upanishad, nothing more definite can of course at present be said than that its general tenor points to a tolerably high antiquity.⁴⁰