The Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and Upanishads v2.c40.s3.19

v2.c40.s3.19

This is a brilliant and attractive theory, and it, of course, affords a far more rational ground for the historical comprehension of the Upaniṣads than does that of Çaṅkara with its contrast of the two kinds of knowledge, and its wholly incredible suggestion² that the authors of the views found in the Upaniṣads really were making this distinction between the higher and the lower forms of knowledge, when it is plain to the reader that they are simply doing their best to express their philosophic beliefs for what they were worth. Nevertheless, the idea that the different stages of view are related in the form given by Deussen is one impossible to accept: the obvious history of the Upaniṣads,³ if we are not led astray by the belief in the opening up of new ideas by the warrior class, would suggest that the cosmogonic is the oldest form of the doctrine of the Brahman or Ātman. The Vedic cosmogonism is the natural standpoint: we have there the first principle, the first creation or emanation of that principle, and the entry of that principle into the creation. The tendency of the Veda is throughout to treat creation, not as something which is developed by the mere will of the creator, but as something lying in his nature *ab initio*: creation is rather development than the bringing into being of something hitherto not existing in any way. Hence the way is paved for the doctrine of identity in the Ātman:¹ the principle is manifested in the whole world, as in the myth Puruṣa by his sacrifice becomes the whole world, and the further step of identifying the spiritual principle in each man with the spiritual principle which is the *prius* of the world, is an obvious and easy one. The pantheism of the Brāhmaṇas is thus inseparably connected with their cosmogonism: it would be unwise to seek to establish for the Upaniṣads any real distinction between these ideas.