The Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and Upanishads v2.c40.s1.21

v2.c40.s1.21

The view of the word taken by Deussen³ differs from that adopted above, which sees in it a natural counterpart to the term Āraṇyakas, and derives it from the tradition of the Vedic school teaching, in that it assumes a break in the development of the thought of India. For that view it should be observed that there is the advantage of continuity: the Brāhmaṇas shade off imperceptibly into the Āraṇyakas, the Āraṇyakas shade off into the Upaniṣads without violent change of any kind. But on the theory of Deussen we are not to adopt the view that secret import on the subjective, and secret instruction on the objective side, were the meanings developed from the secret teaching in the forest. On the contrary we are to believe that, at this point at a time when the Brahmans were still bent on the study of the ritual, the warrior class developed a new and striking philosophy,⁴ which they expressed in secret formulae like *tajjalān*,¹ called Upaniṣads, because the essence of their character was secret communications, and that these doctrines were accompanied by secret explanations, from which in the course of time arose the first Upaniṣads. We must, it is claimed and has been argued by Garbe² with great emphasis, accept the view that it was not to the Brahmans, but to the warriors, to the princes, and the nobles, and to the wisdom of kings that India owed its philosophy.