The Philosophy of the Upanishads c6.s2.23

c6.s2.23

The striking preference for the Chândogya suggests that an earlier work due to the school of this Upanishad was already in the hands of Bâdarâyaṇa, into which he or one of his predecessors worked sixteen extracts of importance derived from another S'âkhâ, being guided further by the principle that the original order of the extracts should be maintained. Besides the Upanishads named, Bâdarâyaṇa may with some confidence be shown to have used the S'vetâs'vatara,¹ Aitareya,² and perhaps Jâbâla.³ With regard, however, to the formula of imprecation quoted in Sût. 3. 3. 25, which according to S'ankara should find a place “at the beginning of an Upanishad of the Âtharvaṇikas,” and which is nowhere known to exist, I would now suggest (since throughout their works Bâdarâyaṇa and S'ankara make use only of the Muṇḍaka and Pras'na from the Atharva Upanishads, consequently recognise none but these, and since they appear to recognise the authority of the Upanishad that follows the imprecation formula), that the suspected formula may once have stood at the beginning of one of these two, perhaps of the Muṇḍaka Upanishad; somewhat after the manner in which the S'ânti formulas precede the Upanishads in some manuscripts, and in others are wanting.