The Philosophy of the Upanishads c5.s1.1.2

c5.s1.1.2

The connecting-link is never wanting where the written tradition of a S’âkhâ has been handed down unbroken (as is not the case with the Kâṭhaka, S’vetâs’vatara, Maitrâyaṇîya), for both the Aitareyins and Kaushîtakins of the Ṛigveda and the Taittirîyakas and Vâjasaneyins of the Yajurveda possess together with the Saṃhitâ their Brâhmaṇa with Âraṇyaka and Upanishad. Even then, if in the schools of the Sâmaveda the name Âraṇyaka is not employed, yet there also the introductions to the Upanishads¹ bear throughout the character of Âraṇyakas. This succession of ritual allegorical and philosophical texts, which is really the same in all the S’âkhâs, may be due partly to the order of thought adopted for the purposes of instruction, in which the Saṃhitâ would naturally be followed immediately by the Brâhmaṇa (so far as this was generally taught, cp. Oldenberg, Prol., p. 291); the deep mysterious meaning of the ceremonies would then be unfolded in the Âraṇyaka; and finally the exposition of the Upanishads would close the period of Vedic instruction. As early, therefore, as S’vet. 6. 22 and Muṇḍ. 3. 2. 6, and thenceforward, the Upanishads bore the name Vedânta (i.e. “end of the Veda”). On the other hand it is not to be denied that the order of the texts within the canon of each S’âkhâ corresponds generally to their historical development, and that the position of the several parts affords an indication of their earlier or later date.