A Constructive Survey of Upanishadic Philosophy c4.s3.2

c4.s3.2

16. Let us now turn to a brief discussion of the doctrines of the great philosophers that lived and thought in the Upanishadic period. We shall be considering the doctrines in detail in the later chapters of this work, where they would be found distributed according to problems. At this place, we have to content ourselves with merely a concise statement of them for fear of repetition of the material in the later chapters. It is also necessary for us to introduce our readers to the names of the great philosophers, each of whom made some contribution to the development of Upanishadic thought, and, in the case of the metaphysical philosophers especially, to exhibit the logical link between their doctrines in order to indicate the lines for a fuller and systematic study of them. We shall severely exclude from our present conspectus the names of unhistorical or mythological personages. The dialogue between Indra, Virochana and Prajāpati, for example, merely serves to bring out certain philosophical conceptions, without enabling us to attribute them to historical personages. Indra, Virochana and Prajāpati are all of them mythological personages, and hence we can attribute to neither of them the doctrines that have been advanced in that great story. It is unfortunate that the author of that story should have entirely hidden himself behind it. Similarly, in the dialogue between Indra and Pratardana in the Kaushītaki, between Bhṛigu and Varuṇa in the Taittirīya, and between Nachiketas and Yama in the Kaṭha, Indra, Varuṇa and Yama seem respectively to be unhistorical persons. Nachiketas may have been a historical personage; while there is not much objection to regard Pratardana and Bhṛigu as historical. Then, again, it must be remembered, that many of the doctrines of the Upanishads are entirely untraceable to their authors. Thus, for example, the doctrines of the Muṇḍaka cannot be traced to any particular author. The author must have been a great eclectic indeed; but it is unfortunate that we cannot trace his personality. The doctrines of the Śvetāśvatara, on the other hand, could be definitely attributed to the sage Śvetāśvatara, whose name has been mentioned towards the end of that Upanishad (VI. 21). While, therefore, we shall notice in the following short survey the names of the persons, which, without objection, may be regarded as historical, it is necessary to remember that there must have been many a philosopher who lived, and thought, and died unknown. His work has remained, though his personality has been lost.