Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A Constructive Survey of Upanishadic Philosophy c9.s1: III—Practical Ethics

A Constructive Survey of Upanishadic Philosophy c9.s1

Language
English

III—Practical Ethics

c9.s1.1

16. We have discussed hitherto the theories of the Moral Standard and the Moral Ideal which have been advanced in the Upanishads. We shall now go on to a consideration of the practical side of Ethics, namely the enumeration and inculcation of certain virtues in the various Upanishads. And first, about the three cardinal virtues which are enumerated in the Bṛhadāraṇyakopanishad. There we are told how "once upon a time the gods, men, and demons all went to their common father, Prajāpati, and asked him to communicate to them the knowledge which he possessed. To the gods, Prajāpati communicated the syllable Da, and having asked them whether they had understood what he had said to them, received the answer that they had understood that they were asked to practice self-control (Dāmyata), upon which Prajāpati expressed satisfaction. To the men he also communicated the syllable Da, and after having asked them whether they had understood what he had said to them, received the answer that they had understood that they should practise charity (Datta), upon which Prajāpati said he was satisfied. To the demons likewise, Prajāpati communicated the syllable Da, and having asked them whether they had understood what he had said to them, received the answer that they had understood that they should practise compassion (Dayadhvam), upon which Prajāpati expressed satisfaction again" (S. 17. a). Even though thus Prajāpati gave the same instruction to the different inquirers, they understood the import of the instruction according to their different capacities, and learnt what was for them the right thing to do. We are told by the author of the Upanishad that "when the celestial voice, the Thunderbolt, repeats Da, Da, Da, it intends to communicate the three different sets of virtues, namely, Self-control, Charity, and Compassion." These, then, are the three cardinal virtues for people who are born with the Sāttvika, the Rājasa and the Tāmasa elements predominating in them. To those who, like the gods, occupy an elevated position, the divine voice says: "Be self-controlled, for otherwise, out of your elation, you might do acts of unkindness." To those who are in the position of men, equals among equals, the divine voice says: "Be charitable, and love your fellows." To those, again, who, like the demons, have in them the capacity of doing infinite harm, the divine voice says: "Be compassionate. Be kind to those with whom you would otherwise be cruel." Thus we are told in the above passage that Self-control, Charity, and Compassion constitute the three different cardinal virtues for the three different sets of people, each one of them having a certain predominating psychological temperament.

c9.s1.2

17. So far about the Bṛhadāraṇyakopanishad. In the Chhāndogya Upanishad we meet with a different list of virtues in the conversation between Ghora Āṅgirasa and Kṛishṇa, the son of Devaki.

c9.s1.3

Who this Krishna was, and what the purport of the instruction which Ghora Āṅgirasa imparted to Kṛṣṇa might be taken to be, we have had occasion to consider in a previous chapter. At present we are concerned merely with the list of virtues that are enumerated there, and their ethical significance. We are told that the chief virtues of man are austerity, charity, straightforwardness, harmlessness, and truthfulness : these according to Ghora Āṅgirasa constitute the chief virtues of man (S. 17. b). We have already seen the analogy which the enumeration of these virtues bears to the enumeration of a similar list of virtues in the Bhagavadgītā (XVI. 1. 2). Then, in the Chhāndogya Upanishad again, a little later on, we find the mention of the five chief different sins of which man is capable. We are told there that “he who steals gold, he who drinks wine, he who pollutes the bed of his teacher, he who kills a Brahmin, all these go down to perdition ; likewise also he, who even associates with them” (S. 17. c). In this passage we are told what were regarded, by the Upanishadic seers, the five chief different kinds of sin. The thief, the drunkard, the adulterer, the Brahmocide, and the man who associates with them, are all regarded as worthy of capital punishment : this is very much like the later injunctions in Manu and Yājñavalkya (III. 5. 227), where the same crimes are described as the greatest of all sins.

c9.s1.4

18. The Taittirīya Upanishad is evidently the most hortatory of all the Upanishads. It adopts a deliberately didactic tone, and impresses a number of virtues to be observed, the study and teaching of the Sacred Scriptures forming the burthen of the discourse. We are asked to respect the Law, to tell the Truth, to practise Penance, Self-control, and Tranquillity, to offer ceremonial as well as daily Oblations to the Fire, to receive guests with Hospitality, to practise Humanity, and to Increase and Multiply. We are also told the opinions of three different moralists, each of whom insisted upon a special virtue. The sage Satyavachas Rāthītara taught the virtue of Truth. The sage Taponitya Pauruśiṣṭi insisted upon the virtue of Penance. Finally, the sage Nāka Maudgalya said that there was no virtue higher than the Study and Teaching of the Sacred Books, for that, he said, constituted penance—that verily constituted penance (S. 18.). On the other hand, a little further on, we have in the same Upanishad a direct moral advice imparted by the teacher to the out-going pupil. When the pupil has finished the course of his studies at his master's house, the master by way of a parting advice, tells him to speak the Truth, to respect the Law, and not to swerve from the Study of the Vedas; after having offered to the preceptor the kind of wealth he would choose, he should go out into the world to marry and to produce children, so that the family lineage may not be broken. The pupil is further advised not to swerve from the duties that are due to the Gods and the Fathers; to regard the Mother as his god; to regard the Father as his god; to regard the Preceptor as his god; to regard the Guest as his god. In general, the pupil is advised only to perform those actions which might be regarded as faultless by the society. Those, says the Spiritual Teacher, who are higher than ourselves in Brahminhood, should be respected "by giving a seat"—an expression which is otherwise interpreted as implying also that "in the presence of such, not a word should be breathed by the disciple." Finally, the Teacher imparts to his disciple the various conditions of Charity : Charity should be practised with Faith, and not with Un-Faith, with Magnanimity, with Modesty, with Awe, and with Sympathy (S. 19). We thus see how the author of the Taittirīya Upanishad enumerates the different virtues that are necessary for practical life.

c9.s1.5

19. More, however, than any of the other virtues, Truth seems to find particular favour with the Upanishdic seers. Illustrations of this virtue are scattered in the various Upanishads. When audacious potentates speak from the viceregal chair that in Indian Scriptures there does not seem to be any consideration made of the supreme virtue of Truth, it were much to be wished that they had studied the Upanishads, where Truth is inculcated as the supreme virtue, before they made their daring statements. In a famous passage of the Chhāndogya Upanishad we are told how Satyakāma, the son of one Jabālā, who had led a wanton life in her youth, asked his mother when he came of age, as to who it was from whom he was born, how the mother answered that she could only tell him that he was born of her though she was not quite sure from what father he was born, how when Satyakāma went to his spiritual teacher in order to get himself initiated, he was asked by the teacher as to what family it was from which he had come, how the youth Satyakāma gave a straightforward reply saying that he did not really know from what family he had come, but that he only knew his mother’s name, and that she had told him that she did not know from what father he was born, herself having led a very wanton life in her youth. “Heigh!” exclaimed the spiritual teacher to Satyakāma, “these words could not come from a man who was not born of a Brahmin.

c9.s1.6

Come, I shall initiate you, because you have not swerved from the Truth" (S. 20). This story tells us how even the son of a wanton girl could be elevated to the position of a Brahmin merely for having told the pure and unadulterated Truth. Then, again, in that same Upanishad, we are told how Truth has the power of saving a man even from death, for Truth, we are told, is merely the counterpart of Reality. "When a man who has committed theft is brought handcuffed to the place of trial, they heat an axe for him, and if he has really committed the theft, then he covers himself with untruth, catches hold of the axe and is burnt to death. On the other hand, if he has not committed the theft, he covers himself with truth, catches hold of the axe, and is not burnt at all, but acquitted" (S. 21). This is how they used to distinguish the culprit from the true man in ancient times. Whatever may be said in modern times of the efficacy of such a trial, the fact remains that underlying the idea of this trial, there lies an unshakable belief in the power of Truth. Be true and fear not. Your strength would be as the strength of ten, if only your heart is pure. On the other hand, if you hide the canker of Untruth in your bosom, in mortal fear you shall walk even in the midday sun. Of like import is the utterance of Bhāradvāja in the Praśnopanishad where we are told that if a man may tell the Untruth he shall be dried up from the very roots; hence it is, he says, he dare not tell the Untruth (S. 22. a). On the other hand, the Muṇḍakopanishad tells us, that Truth alone becomes victorious in the world, and not a lie; by Truth is paved the path of the gods, by which travel the sages, who have all their desires fulfilled, to where lies the highest Repository of Truth (S. 22. b). This is how the practice of Truth as a moral virtue enables one to reach the Absolute. Finally, in the conversation between Nārada and Sanatkumāra, when Nārada had gone to his teacher to receive instruction from him in regard to the nature of Truth, the teacher answered it was only when a man had realised the Ultimate that he might be said to tell the Truth, while other truths were truths only by sufferance (S. 22. c). This is verily in the spirit of the jesting Pilate who asked what truth was, and would not stay for an answer. While, however, Pilate expressed a doubt as to the nature of truth, Sanatkumāra gives a more positive interpretation of it when he says that ultimate Truth is to be found only in the attainment of Reality. What people call truth is really no Truth at all. It is Truth only by sufferance. Thus we see how Truth is regarded by the Chhāndogya Upanishad as the ultimate moral correlate of the realisation of the Absolute.

c9.s1.7

20. We next come to the treatment of the problem of the Freedom of the Will. It may be easily admitted that a proper discussion of this problem requires a very high stage in the development of moral philosophy; hence there is not much wonder if the treatment of the problem of the Freedom of the Will in the Upanishads is but scanty. There are, however, a few remarks showing a rather acute insight in regard to the problem, and we must not fail to give the credit for them to the Upanishadic philosophers. The Bṛihadāraṇyakopanishad tells us that man is merely a conglomeration of desire, will, and action: "as his desire is, so is his will; as is his will, so is the action that he performs; as his action is, so is the fruit that he procures for himself"(S. 23). There is here a very clever discussion of the relation between desire, will, action, and the effect of action—a contribution indeed of the Upanishadic sages to the Psychology of the Moral Self. In the Kaushītaki Upanishad, again, we have the enunciation of a theological determinism, inasmuch as we are told there that man is but a puppet in the hands of God, who makes him do good actions if he wishes him to rise, and bad actions if he wishes him to fall (S. 24. a). This is a regular denial of the freedom of man, and we are told that man does not possess true freedom at all as moral philosophy understands that expression. On the other hand, in the Chhāndogya Upanishad, we are told that even though true freedom cannot be said to belong to man before the realisation of Ātman, still we can say that it does belong to him after that realisation. Man in the foolishness of the contemplation of his small success regards himself to be the lord of all he surveys; he believes that he may be the master of any situation in which he may be placed, and that he may compel nature any time to bend to his sovereign will; but events in life prove that these are after all false expectations, and that even though a little freedom may be granted to man in small matters, he is yet not free in the highest sense of the term. Pent up within the gaol, he thinks like a prisoner that he is free; but he is free only to drink and eat and not to move about. Like a falcon to whose foot a string is tied, he can only fly in the limited sphere described by the length of the tether, but he is bound beyond that region. Similarly, man may vainly imagine that he is free to do any actions he pleases, but his freedom is the freedom of the tethered falcon. The Chhāndogya Upanishad tells us that it is only when we have known the Ātman that there is freedom for us in all the worlds; but if we have not known the Ātman, there is no freedom for us at all (S. 24. b). The same Upanishad tells us again a little later, that when we have known the Ātman we can obtain any object we please, thus testifying to the sovereignty of man’s will over nature, which proceeds from the realisation of the Ātman (S. 24. c). Finally, even though there is no discussion in the early Upanishads of the conflict of motives which leads to the moral choice, still in the Muktikopanishad we have a passage where we are told that the river of desire runs between the banks of good and bad, but that, by the effort of our will, we should compel it to move in the direction of the good (S. 25)—a contribution, though a belated one, to the psychological aspect of the problem of freedom.

c9.s1.8

21. What is now the Ideal of the Upanishadic Sage? It may be seen by reference to the progress of the argument in the Chapter that moral values are by the Upanishadic seers almost invariably linked with mystical values and that just as there can be no true mysticism unless it is based upon the sure foundation of morality, so morality to be perfect must end in the mystical attitude. In the Upanishads, there is no mere moral agent whose morality does not consummate in mystical realisation. Thus, the Upanishadic Sage differs on the one hand from the Stoic Sage, who represents in himself the acme of moral perfection connected with an intellectual contemplation instead of a mystical realisation of the Absolute. On the other hand, he differs from the Christian Sage, who no doubt sticks rightly to the triadic norm of conduct, faith, hope, and charity, but who centres his hopes for mystical perfection in a *heteros*—Jesus Christ—and not in himself. The Upanishadic Sage believes in the possibility of greater or less mystical realisation for every being according to the greater or less worth of his character, belief, and endeavour: he sees the Ātman in all, and sees the Ātman alone. The Īśopanishad tells us that “for a man to whom all these beings have become the Ātman, what grief, what infatuation, can there possibly be, when he has seen the unity in all things?'' (S. 26. a). He has gone to the end of sorrow, and has torn asunder the ether-like skin of desire that had so long enveloped him in darkness and despair (S. 26.b). All his desires have been at an end, because he has attained to the fulfilment of the highest desire, namely the realisation of the Ātman (S. 26. c). As drops of water may not adhere to the leaf of a lotus, even so may sin never contaminate him (S. 26. d). There is no feeling of repentance for him : he never bethinks himself as to why it was that he did not do good actions, or why he did only evil ones (S. 26.e). He has come to learn of the nature of Reality, and has thus gone beyond the reach of these duals (S. 26. f). If ever anybody may intend evil to him, or try to persecute him, his hopes will be shattered, as anything dashing itself against an impenetrable rock may shatter itself to pieces, for, verily, the Sage is an impenetrable rock (S. 27). He has attained to eternal tranquillity, because as the Upanishad puts it, he has "collected" the Godhead (S. 28. a). All his senses along with the mind and intellect have become motionless on account of the contemplation of the Absolute in the process of Yoga (S. 28. b), and having realised the Ātman, he has found eternal happiness everywhere (S. 28. c). How this mystical perfection can be attained, and how morality may thus culminate in mysticism, will form the theme of our next Chapter.

c9.s1.9

1 यान्यस्माकं सुचरितानि तानि त्वयोपास्यानि नो इतराणि ।...। ये के चास्मच्छ्रेयांसो ब्राह्मणाः...। अथ यदि ते कर्मविचिकित्सा वा वृत्तविचिकित्सा वा स्यात्, ये तत्र ब्राह्मणाः... संमर्शिनः अलूक्षाः धर्मकामाः स्युः यथा ते तत्र वर्तेरन् तथा तत्र वर्तेथाः । एष आदेशः । एष उपदेशः । एषा वेदोपनिषत् । तै. I. 11.

c9.s1.10

2 महद्भयं वज्रमुद्यतं य एतद्विदुरमृतास्ते भवन्ति । भयादस्याग्निश्च तपति भयात्तपति सूर्यः । भयादिन्द्रश्च वायुश्च मृत्युर्धावति पञ्चमः ॥ क. II. 6. 2-3. भीषाऽस्माद्वातः पवते भीषोदेति सूर्यः । भीषाऽस्मादग्निश्च इन्द्रश्च मृत्युर्धावति पञ्चम इति ॥ तै. II. 8.

c9.s1.11

3 (a) मनो ब्रह्मेत्युपासीत । छां. III. 18. 1.
(b) मनो ह्यात्मा...मनो हि ब्रह्म मन उपास्स्वेति । छां. VII. 3. 1.

c9.s1.12

4 (a) अन्यच्छ्रेयोऽन्यदुतैव प्रेयस्ते उभे नानार्थे पुरुषं सिनीतः । तयोः श्रेय आददानस्य साधुर्भवति हीयतेऽर्थाद्य उ प्रेयो वृणीते ॥ श्रेयश्च प्रेयश्च मनुष्यमेतस्तौ संपरीत्य विविनक्ति धीरः । श्रेयो हि धीरोऽभिप्रेयसो वृणीते प्रेयो मन्दो योगक्षेमाद् वृणीते ॥ क. I. 2. 1-2.
(b) स त्वं प्रियान्प्रियरूपांश्च कामानभिध्यायन्नचिकेतोऽत्यस्राक्षीः । नैतां सृकां वित्तमयीमवाप्तो यस्यां मज्जन्ति बहवो मनुष्याः॥ क. I. 2. 3.

c9.s1.13

⁵ (a) अजीर्यताममृतानामुपेत्य जीर्यन्मर्त्यः क्वधस्थः प्रजानन् । अभिध्यायन्वर्णरतिप्रमोदानतिदीर्घे जीविते को रमेत ॥ क. I. 1.

c9.s1.14

²⁸ (b) भगवन्नस्थिचर्मस्नायुमज्जामांसशुक्रशोणितश्लेष्माश्रुदूषितविण्मूत्रवातपित्तकफसंघाते दुर्गन्धे निस्सारेऽस्मिञ्छरीरे

c9.s1.15

किं कामोपभोगैः । कामक्रोधलोभभयविषादेर्ष्याव्यसनवियोग- निष्टसंप्रयोगक्षुत्पिपासाजरामृत्युरोगशोकाद्यैरभिहतेऽस्मि- ञ्शरीरे किं कामोपभोगैः । सर्वे चेदं क्षयिष्णु पश्याम यथेमे दंशमशकादयस्तृणवनस्पतय उद्भूतप्रध्वंसिनः ... । अथ किमेतैर्वाऽन्यानां शोषणं महार्णवानां शिखरणां प्रपतनं ध्रुवस्य प्रचलनं वश्रनं वातरज्जूनां निमज्जनं पृथिव्याः स्थानादपसरणं सुराणां इत्येतद्विधेऽस्मिन्संसारे किं कामोपभोगैः । मै. I. 2-7.

c9.s1.16

6 (a) एतमेव प्रवाजिनो लोकमिच्छंतः प्रव्रजन्ति । एतद्ध स्म वै तत् पूर्वे विद्वांसः प्रजां न कामयन्ते किं प्रजया करि- ष्यामो येषां नोऽयमात्माऽयं लोक इति । ते ह स्म पुत्रै- षणायाश्च वित्तषणायाश्च लोकैषणायाश्च व्युत्थायाथ भिक्षा- चर्यं चरन्ति । बृ. IV. 4. 22.

c9.s1.17

(b) प्राणो ब्रह्मेति ह स्माह कौषीतकिः । तस्य ह वा एतस्य प्राणस्य ब्रह्मणो मनो दूतं, चक्षुर्गोप्तृ, श्रोत्रं संभाषयितृ, वाक्परिवेष्ट्री । तस्मै वा एतस्मै प्राणाय ब्रह्मण एताः सर्वा देवता अयाचमानाय बलिं हरन्ति । एवं हैवास्मै सर्वाणि भूतन्याचमानायैव बलिं हरन्ति य एवं वेद । तस्योप- निषन्न याचेदिति । तद्यथा ग्रामं भिक्षित्वाऽलब्धोपविशे- न्नाहमतो दत्तमक्षीयामिति त एवैनमुपमंत्रयन्ते ये पुरस्ता- त्प्रत्याचक्षीरन् । एष धर्मोऽयाचतो भवति । अश्दास्त्वैवैनं उपमंत्रयन्ते ददाम त इति । कौ. II. 1.

c9.s1.18

7 (a) एवं वै तमात्मानं विदित्वा ब्राह्मणाः पुत्रैषणायाश्च वितै- षणायाश्च लोकैषणायाश्च व्युत्थायाथ भिक्षाचर्यं चरन्ति ... । तस्माद् ब्राह्मणः निर्विद्य बाल्येन तिष्ठासेत् । बृ. III. 5. 1.

c9.s1.19

(b) तमेव धीरो विज्ञाय प्रज्ञां कुर्वीत ब्राह्मणः । नानुध्यायाद् बहून् शब्दान् वाचो विग्लापनं हि तत् । बृ. IV. 4. 21.

c9.s1.20

8 (a) तमेवैकं जानथात्मानं अन्या वाचो विमुंचथ अमृतस्यैष सेतुः । ओमित्येवं ध्यायथ आत्मानं स्वस्ति वः पराय तमसः

c9.s1.21

परस्तात् । तद्विज्ञानेन परिपश्यन्ति धीराः आनन्दरूपममृतं यद्विभाति ।

c9.s1.22

(b) तस्मादेवंविच्छान्तो दान्त उपरतस्तितिक्षुः समाहितो भूत्वा आत्मन्यात्मानं पश्यति । सर्वमात्मानं पश्यति । नैनं पाप्मा तरति, सर्वं पाप्मानं तरति, नैनं पाप्मा तपति, सर्वं पाप्मानं तपति, विपापो विरजोऽविचिकित्सो ब्राह्मणो भवति । बृ. IV. 4. 23.

c9.s1.23

(c) प्राणो ह्येष यः सर्वभूतैर्विभाति विजानन्विद्वान्भवते नातिवादी । आत्मक्रीड आत्मरतिः क्रियावानेष ब्रह्मविदां वरिष्ठः ॥ मुं. III. I. 4.

c9.s1.24

9 (a) कुर्वन्नेवेह कर्माणि जिजीविषेच्छतं समाः । एवं त्वयि नान्यथेतोऽस्ति न कर्म लिप्यते नरे ॥ ई. 2.

c9.s1.25

(b) अंधं तमः प्रविशन्ति येऽविद्यामुपासते । ततो भूय इव ते तमो य उ विद्यायां रताः ॥ अन्यदेवाहुर्विद्ययाऽन्यदाहुरविद्यया । इति शुश्रुम धीराणां ये नस्तद्विचचक्षिरे ॥ विद्यां चाविद्यां च यस्तद्वेदोभयं सह । अविद्यया मृत्युं तीर्त्वा विद्ययामृतमश्नुते ॥ ई. 9-11.

c9.s1.26

10 (a) मा नस्तोकं तनये मा न आयुषि मा नो गोषु मा नो अश्वेषु रीरिषः । वीरान्मा नो रुद्र भामिनोऽवधीर्हविष्मंतः सदमित्वा हवामहे । श्वे. IV. 22.

c9.s1.27

(b) सत्यान्न प्रमदितव्यम् । धर्मान्न प्रमदितव्यम् । कुशलान्न प्रमदितव्यम् । भूत्यै न प्रमदितव्यम् । तै. I. II. 1.

c9.s1.28

(c) तं होवाच " याज्ञवल्क्य, किमर्थमचारीः, पशूनिच्छन् अण्वन्तानिति " । उभयमेव सम्राडिति होवाच । बृ. IV. I. 1.

c9.s1.29

स होवाच याज्ञवल्क्यः । पिता मेऽमन्यत न अननुशिष्य हरेतेति । बृ. IV. I. 7.

c9.s1.30

11 सैषाऽनंदस्य मीमांसा भवति । युवा स्यात्साधुयुवा- व्यापकः । आशिष्ठो दृढिष्ठो बलिष्ठः । तस्येयं पृथिवी सर्वा वित्तस्य पूर्णा स्यात् । स एको मानुष आनंदः । ते ये शतं मानुषा आनंदाः । स एको मनुष्यगंधर्वाणामानंदः । श्रोत्रि- यस्य चाकामहतस्य । इत्यादि । तै. II. 8.

c9.s1.31

(a) तदेतत्प्रेयः पुत्रात्प्रेयो वित्तात्प्रेयोऽन्यस्मात्सर्वस्मादंतरतरं यदयमात्मा । स योऽन्यमात्मनः प्रियं ब्रुवाणं ब्रूयात् प्रियं रोत्स्यतीतीश्वरो ह तथैव स्यादात्मानमेव प्रियमुपासीत स य आत्मानमेव प्रियमुपास्ते न हास्य प्रियं प्रमायुकं भवति । बृ. I. 4. 8.

c9.s1.32

(b) तद्वा अस्यैतदाप्तकामं आत्मकामं अकामं रूपं शोकान्तरम् । बृ. IV. 3. 2.

c9.s1.33

योऽकामो निष्काम आप्तकाम आत्मकामः । बृ. IV. 4. 6.

c9.s1.34

सा होवाच मैत्रेयी "यन्नु म इयं भगोः सर्वा पृथिवी वित्तेन पूर्णा स्यात् कथं तेनामृता स्यामिति " । " नेति " होवाच याज्ञवल्क्यः " यथैवोपकरणवतां जीवितं तथैव ते जीवितं स्यात् अमृतत्वस्य तु नाशास्ति वित्तेनेति " । सा होवाच मैत्रेयी " येनाहं नामृता स्यां किमहं तेन कुर्याम् ।...।" स होवाच याज्ञवल्क्यः प्रिया बता रे नः सती प्रियं भाषस एहास्व व्याख्यास्यामि ते ।...। स होवाच न वा अरे पत्युः कामाय पतिः प्रियो भवति, आत्मनस्तु कामाय पतिः प्रियो भवति । जायायै पुत्राणां°, वित्तस्य°, ब्रह्मणः°, क्षत्रस्य°, लोकानां°, देवानां°, भूतानां°, सर्वस्य° । आत्मा वा अरे द्रष्टव्यः श्रोतव्यो मन्तव्यो निदिध्यासितव्यः । आत्म- नो वा अरे दर्शनेन श्रवणेन मत्या विज्ञानेनेदं सर्वं विदितम् । बृ. II. 4. 2-5.

c9.s1.35

यदा वै सुखं लभतेऽथ करोति, नासुखं लब्ध्वा करोति सुखमेव लब्ध्वा करोति, सुखं त्वेव विजिज्ञासितव्यम्... । यो वै भूमा तत्सुखं, नाल्पे सुखमस्ति । भूमा त्वेव विजि- ज्ञासितव्यः । यत्र नान्यत्पश्यति नान्यच्छृणोति, नान्य- द्विजानाति स भूमा । अथ यत्रान्यत्पश्यति, अन्यच्छृणोति, अन्यद्विजानाति तदल्पम् । यो वै भूमा तदमृतं अथ यदल्पं तन्मर्त्यम् । स ( भूमा ) भगवः कस्मिन्प्रतिष्ठित इति स्वे

c9.s1.36

महिम्नि यदि वा न महिम्नि इति । गोअश्वमिह महिमे- त्याचक्षते हस्तिहिरण्यं दासभार्यं क्षेत्राणायतनानीति । नाहमेवं ब्रवीमि । स एवाधस्तात्, स उपरिष्टात्, स पश्चात्, स पुरस्तात्, स दक्षिणतः, स उत्तरतः, स एवेदं सर्वं इत्य- थातोऽहंकारादेशः, अहमेवाधस्तात्, अहमुपरिष्टात्, अहं पश्चात्, अहं पुरस्तात्, अहं दक्षिणतो, अहमुत्तरतो, अह- मेवेदं सर्वमित्यथात आत्मादेशः । आत्मैवाधस्तात्, आत्मोपरिष्टात्, आत्मा पश्चात्, आत्मा पुरस्तात्, आत्मा दक्षिणतः, आत्मोत्तरतः, आत्मैवेदं सर्वमिति । स वा एष एवं पश्यन्नेवं मन्वान एवं विजानन् रतिरात्मक्रीड आत्म- मिथुन आत्मानन्दः स स्वराड् भवति तस्य सर्वेषु लोकेषु कामचारो भवति ।

c9.s1.37

छां. VII. 22-25.

c9.s1.38

15 (a) अन्यत्र धर्मादन्यत्राधर्मादन्यत्रास्मात्कृताकृतात् । अन्यत्र भूताच्च भव्याच्च यत्तत्पश्यसि तद्वद ॥

c9.s1.39

क. I. 2. 14.

c9.s1.40

अशरीरं वाव संतं न प्रियाप्रिये स्पृशतः ।

c9.s1.41

छां. VIII. 12. 1.

c9.s1.42

(b) यदा पश्यः पश्यते रुक्मवर्णं कर्तारमीशं पुरुषं ब्रह्मयोनिम् । तदा विद्वान्पुण्यपापे विधूय निरंजनः परमं साम्यमुपैति ॥

c9.s1.43

मुं. III. 1. 3.

c9.s1.44

16 (a) य एषोऽंतर्हृदय आकाशस्तस्मिञ्छेते सर्वस्य वशी सर्वस्ये- शानः सर्वस्याधिपतिः स न साधुना कर्मणा भूयान्नो एव असाधुना कनीयान् ।

c9.s1.45

बृ. IV. 4. 22.

c9.s1.46

(b) एष नित्यो महिमा ब्राह्मणस्य न वर्धते कर्मणा नो कनीयान् ।

c9.s1.47

बृ. IV. 4. 23.

c9.s1.48

17 (a) अथः प्राजापत्याः प्रजापतौ पितरि ब्रह्मचर्यमूषुर्देवा मनुष्या असुरा उषित्वा ब्रह्मचर्ये देवा ऊचुर्ब्रवीतु नो भवानिति तेभ्यो हैतदक्षरमुवाच द इति व्यज्ञासिष्टा ३ इति व्यज्ञा- सिष्मेति होचुर्दाभ्यतेति न आत्थेत्योमिति होवाच व्यज्ञा- सिष्मेति । अथ हैवं मनुष्या ऊचुर्ब्रवीतु नो भवानिति तेभ्यो हैतदेवाक्षरमुवाच द इति व्यज्ञासिष्टा ३ इति व्यज्ञासिष्मेति होचुर्दत्तेति न आत्थेत्योमिति होवाच व्यज्ञासिष्मेति । अथ

c9.s1.49

हैनमसुरा ऊचुरधीतु नो भवानिति तेभ्यो हैतदेवाक्षरमु- वाच द इति व्यज्ञासिष्टा ३ इति व्यज्ञासिष्मेति होचुर्दय- ध्वमिति न आत्थेत्योमिति होवाच व्यज्ञासिष्टेति तदेत- दैवैषा दैवी वागनुनदति स्तनयित्नुर्द द द इति दाम्यत दत्त दयध्वमिति तदेतत् त्रयं शिक्षेहमां दानं दयमिति॥ बृ. V. 2. 1-3.

c9.s1.50

(b) अथ यत्तपो दानमार्जबमहिंसा सत्यवचनमिति ता अस्य दक्षिणाः। छां. III. 17. 4.

c9.s1.51

(c) स्तेनो हिरण्यस्य, सुरां पिबंश्च, गुरोस्तल्पमावसन्, ब्रह्महा चैते पतन्ति चत्वारः पंचमश्चाचरस्तैरिति। छां. V. 10. 9.

c9.s1.52

18 ऋतं च स्वाध्यायप्रवचने च। सत्यं च°। तपश्च°। दमश्च°। शमश्च°। अग्नयश्च°। अग्निहोत्रं च°। अतिथयश्च°। मानुषं च°। प्रजा च°। प्रजननश्च°। प्रजातिश्च°। सत्यमिति सत्यवचा राथीतरः। तप इति तपनित्यः पौरुशिष्टिः। स्वाध्याय- प्रवचने एवेति नाको मौद्गल्यः। तद्धि तपस्तद्धि तपः। तै. I. 9.

c9.s1.53

19 वेदमूच्याचार्योऽन्तेवासिनमनुशास्ति। सत्यं वद धर्मं चर स्वाध्यायान्मा प्रमदः। आचार्याय प्रियं धनमाहृत्य प्रजातंतुं मा व्यवच्छेत्सीः। ... देवपितृकार्याभ्यां न प्रमदितव्यम्। मातृदेवो भव, पितृदेवो भव, आचार्यदेवो भव, अतिथि- देवो भव। यान्यनवद्यानि कर्माणि तानि सेवितव्यानि नो इतराणि। ... ये के चास्मच्छ्रेयांसो ब्राह्मणाः तेषां त्व- याऽऽसनेन प्रश्वासितव्यम्। श्रद्धया देयं, अश्रद्धयाऽदेयम्। धिया देयं, ह्रिया देयं, भिया देयं, संविदा देयम्। तै. I. 11. 1-3.

c9.s1.54

20 सत्यकामो ह जाबालो जाबालां मातरमामंत्रयांचक्रे ब्रह्मचर्यं भवति विवत्स्यामि किं गोत्रोऽहमस्मीति। सा हैनुमुवाच नाहमेतद्वेद तात यद्गोत्रस्त्वमसि बहुहं चरन्ती परिचा- रिणी यौवने त्वामलभे साऽमेतन्न वेद यद्गोत्रस्त्वमसि जबाला तु नामाहमस्मि सत्यकामो नाम त्वमसि स सत्य- काम एव जाबालो ब्रूवीया इति। स ह हारिद्रुमंतं गौतम- मेत्योवाच ब्रह्मचर्यं भगवति वत्स्याम्युपेयां भगवन्त मिति तं होवाच किं गोत्रो नु सोम्यासीति स होवाच नाहमेत- भेद भो यद्गोत्रोऽहमस्म्यपृच्छं मातरं सा मा प्रत्यब्रवीत् बह्वहं चरन्ती परिचारिणी यौवने त्वामलभे साहमेतद् वेद यद्गोत्रस्त्वमसि जबाला तु नामाहमस्मि सत्यकामो नाम त्वमसीति सोऽहं सत्यकामो जाबालोऽस्मि भो इति । तं होवाच नैतद्ब्राह्मणो विवक्तुमर्हति समिधं सोम्याहर त्वा नेष्ये न सत्यादगा इति । छां. IV. 4. 1-5.

c9.s1.55

21 पुरुषं सोम्योत हस्तगृहीतामानयन्त्यपहार्षीत्तत् परशुस्मै तपतेति स यदि तस्य कर्ता भवति तत एवानृतमात्मानं कुरुते सोऽनृताभिसंधोऽनृतेनात्मानमन्तर्धाय परशुं तप्तं प्रतिगृह्णाति स दह्यतेऽथ हन्यते । अथ यदि तस्याकर्ता भवति तत एव सत्यमात्मानं कुरुते स सत्याभिसंधः सत्ये- नात्मानमन्तर्धाय परशुं तप्तं प्रतिगृह्णाति स न दह्यतेऽथ मुच्यते । छां. VI. 16. 1-2.

c9.s1.56

22 (a) समूलो वा एष परिशुष्यति योऽनृतमभिवदति । तस्मान्मा- र्हामि अनृतं वक्तुम् । प्र. VI. 1.

c9.s1.57

(b) सत्यमेव जयते नानृतं सत्येन पन्था विततो देवयानः । येना- क्रमन्त्यृषयो ह्याप्तकामा यत्र तत्सत्यस्य परं निधानम् ॥ मुं. III. 1. 6.

c9.s1.58

(c) सत्यं भगवो विजिज्ञास इति ।...। यदा वै विजानात्यथ सत्यं वदति नाविजानन् सत्यं वदति विजानन्नेव सत्यं वदति । छां. VII. 16, 17.

c9.s1.59

23 अथो खल्वाहुः काममय एवायं पुरुष इति । स यथाकामो भवति तत्क्रतुर्भवति, यत्क्रतुर्भवति तत्कर्म कुरुते, यत्कर्म कुरुते तदभिसंपद्यते । बृ. IV. 4. 5.

c9.s1.60

24 (a) एष ह्येव साधु कर्म कारयति तं यमेभ्यो लोकेभ्य उज्जिनीषत एष उ एवासाधु कर्म कारयति तं, यमधो निनीषत, एष लोकपालः एष लोकाधिपतिरेष लोकेशः स म आत्मेति विद्यात् स म आत्मेति विद्यात् । कौ. III. 9.

c9.s1.61

(b) य इहात्मानमनुविद्य व्रजन्ति तेषां सर्वेषु लोकेषु अकाम- चारो भवति । य इहात्मानं अनुविद्य व्रजन्ति तेषां सर्वेषु लोकेषु कामचारो भवति । (c) यं यं अन्तं अभिकामो भवति यं यं कामयते सोऽस्य संक- ल्पादेव समुत्तिष्ठति तेन संपन्नो महीयते । छां. VIII. 2, 10.

c9.s1.62

25 शुभाशुभाभ्यां मार्गाभ्यां वहन्ती वासनासरित् । पौरुषेण प्रयत्नेन योजनीया शुभे पथि । अशुभेतु समाविष्टं शुभेष्वे- वावतारयेत् । सुक्ति II. 5, 6.

c9.s1.63

26 (a) यस्मिन् सर्वाणि भूतानि आत्मैवाभूद्विजानतः । तत्र को मोहः कः शोकः एकत्वमनुपश्यतः । ई. 7.

c9.s1.64

(b) यदा चर्मवदाकाशं वेष्टयिष्यन्ति मानवाः । तदा देवमवि- ज्ञाय दुःखस्यांतो भविष्यति ॥ श्वे. VI. 20.

c9.s1.65

(c) पर्याप्तकामस्य कृतात्मनस्तु इहैव सर्वे प्रविलीयंति कामाः । मुं. III. 2. 2.

c9.s1.66

(d) यथा पुष्करपलाश आपो न श्लिष्यंत एवमेवंविदि पापं कर्म न लिप्यते । छां. IV. 14. 3.

c9.s1.67

(e) एतं ह वाव न तपति किमंह साधु नाकरवम् । किमंह पापमकरवमिति । तै. II. 9.

c9.s1.68

(f) स य एवं विद्वान् एते आत्मानं स्पृणुते, उभे ह्येवैष एते आत्मानं स्पृणुते । तै. II. 9.

c9.s1.69

27 एवं यथाश्मानमखण ऋत्वा विध्वंसत, एवं हैव स विध्वं- सते य एवंविदि पापं कामयते यश्चैनं अभिदासति स एषोऽस्माखणः । छां. I. 2. 8.

c9.s1.70

28 (a) तमीशानं वरदं देवमीड्यं निचाय्येमां शान्तिमत्यंतमेति । श्वे. IV. 11.

c9.s1.71

(b) यदा पंचावतिष्ठंते ज्ञानानि मनसा सह । बुद्धिश्च न विचे- ष्टति तामाहुः परमां गतिम् । तां योगमिति मन्यंते स्थिरा- मिंद्रियधारणाम् । क. II. 6. 10-11.

c9.s1.72

(c) तमात्मस्थं येऽनुपश्यंति धीरास्तेषां सुखं शाश्वतं नेतरे- षाम् ।

c9.s1.73

CHAPTER VII

c9.s1.74

INTIMATIONS OF SELF-REALISATION

c9.s1.75

1. In a previous Chapter we have seen how the Upanishadic seers arrived at the conception of a unitary Ātman who fills the whole world of nature as of mind, from whom the world comes into being, in whom the world lives, and into whom the world is finally absorbed. It is this conception of Ātman which we saw to be the quintessence of the philosophical teachings of the Upanishads; it is this conception which enables us to bridge over the disputes between the various contending theological schools; and finally, it is this conception which gives a proper place to the various constructions of reality in the ultimate explanation of things. We also suggested in that Chapter that the Upanishads afforded a practical lesson for the realisation of Ātman. They are not content with merely constructing an intellectual explanation of Reality, but suggest means for the practical attainment of it. It is true that, in the very nature of things, the problem of Self-realisation could not be expected to be expounded in a deliberate fashion by the Upanishadic Seers. They only throw hints and suggest the way for realising the Self, only too cognizant of the fact that any description of the great mystic experience by word of mouth would fall short of reality, as much as any mediate, intellectual, or expressible knowledge would fall short of immediate, intuitive, first-hand experience. There is the same gulf between the expression of an experience and the enjoyment of it, as there is between knowledge and being. Nevertheless, mystic experience has itself to be suggested and communicated in a concealed fashion so as to enable the seekers after mystic life in their otherwise dark journey to know the lamp-posts on the mystic way. It is thus that we find in the various Upanishads mystical intimations of the realisation of the Self, which are hidden like jewels beneath an intellectual exterior, and which he alone who has the eye for them can discern to be of immeasurable value.

c9.s1.76

2. The Upanishadic seers fully realise the fact that no amount of mere intellectual equipment would enable us to intuitively apprehend Reality. They draw the same distinction between Aparā Vidyā and Parā Vidyā, between lower and higher knowledge, as the Greek philosophers did between Doxa and Epistemē, between opinion and truth. The Muṇḍakopanishad tells us that there are two different kinds of knowledge to be known, one the higher, the other, the lower knowledge. Of these the lower knowledge is the knowledge of the Vedas, of grammar, of etymology, of metre, of the science of the heavens; while the higher knowledge is that by which alone the imperishable Being is reached (S. 1. a). The same typical distinction between the way of knowledge and the way of realisation is brought out in a conversation between Nārada and Sanatkumāra, where Nārada, the spiritual disciple, goes to his Teacher to learn the science of realisation. Asked to say what branches of knowledge he has hitherto studied, Nārada tells Sanatkumāra that he has studied all the Vedas, as well as all history and mythology; he has studied the science of the manes, mathematics, the science of portents, the science of time, logic, ethics, the science of the gods, the science of Brahman, the science of the demons, the science of weapons, astronomy, as well as the science of charms, and fine arts. But he tells his master that grief fills him that so much knowledge is not competent to land him beyond the ocean of sorrow. He has studied only the different Mantras; but he has not known the Self. He has known erewhile from persons revered like his Spiritual Teacher that he alone is able to go beyond the ocean of sorrow who can cross it by the saving bund of Ātman. Would his Spiritual Teacher enable him to cross over the ocean of ignorance and grief? (S. 1. b). This passage brings into relief the distinction between the lower knowledge and the higher knowledge, and sets the knowledge of Self on such a high pedestal indeed that all intellectual knowledge seems to be merely verbal jugglery, or an utter weariness of the flesh, as contrasted with it. Finally, the extremely practical character of the Upanishadic Seers towards the problem of Self-realisation is exhibited in the Kenopanishad, where we are told that the end of life may be attained only if the Self were to be realised even while the body lasts; for if Self-knowledge does not come while the body lasts, one cannot even so much as imagine what ills may be in store for him after death (S. 2. a). The same idea is urged with a slightly different emphasis in the Kaṭhopanishad, where we are told that unless a man is able to realise the Self while the body lasts, he must needs have to go from life to life through a series of incarnations (S. 2. b).

c9.s1.77

3. The question now arises—if the Ātman is capable of being realised even while the body lasts, why is it that all people do not realise him in their life-time, or yet again, if he can be realised by some, what can we regard to be their qualifications for that realisation? The Upanishads abound in references to the qualifications necessary for the spiritual life. The first quality requisite for a spiritual aspirant is, the Kathopanishad tells us, introversion: "Our senses have been created by God with a tendency to move outwards. It is for this reason that man looks outside himself rather than inside himself. Rarely a wise man, who is desirous of immortal life, looks to his inner Self with his eye turned inwards" (S. 3. a). The same out-moving tendency of the senses is emphasised in the Śvetāśvataropanishad, where we are told that the individual self lives pent up in its citadel of nine doors with a tendency to flutter every time outside its prison-house (S. 3. b). In order to bend the wand to the other extreme, it thus seems necessary for the spiritual aspirant at the outset to entirely shut himself up to the outside world so as to be able to look entirely within himself. This is the stage of introversion. After "introversion" comes "catharsis." The Kathopanishad tells us that unless a man has stopped from doing wrong, unless he has entirely composed himself, it may not be possible for him, however highly-strung his intellect may be, to reach the Self by force of mere intellect (S. 4. a). The Muṇḍakopanishad insists upon truth and the life of penance, right insight and the life of celibacy, as essential conditions for the unfoldment of the Self within us (S.4.b). The Kathopanishad brings into relief the non-intellectual, in the sense of the super-intellectual, character of Self-realisation, when it declares that the Self can be reached neither by much discourse, nor by keen intellect, nor by polymathy (S. 4. c). The Īśāvāsyopanishad in a very famous passage inculcates the same logophobia as in the Kaṭhopanishad, when it tells us that knowledge is even more dangerous than ignorance, inasmuch as those who pursue the path of ignorance go after death to a region of pitchy darkness, while those who pride themselves upon their possession of knowledge go to greater darkness still (S. 4. d). The Muṇḍakopanishad points out that the Ātman can not be realised by a man who has not sufficient grip and tenacity to lead the severe life of spirituality, nor can he be reached by a man whose life is a bundle of errors (S. 4. e). The same Upanishad gives further characteristics of the life of Self-realisation. "Unless a man feels disgusted with the worlds to which his actions may bring him, and unless he believes firmly that the world which is beyond the reach of actions can never be obtained by any actions howsoever good," unless, in other words, he regards the life of Self-realisation as uniquely superior to the life of action, "he has no right to enter into the spiritual world, to seek which he must forthwith go in a humble spirit, fuel in hand, to a Spiritual Teacher who has realised the Self" (S. 4. f). We thus see that, for the realisation of the Self, the Upanishads inculcate a life of introversion, with an utter disgust for the world and catharsis from sins, a spirit of humbleness, and a life of tranquillity, truth, penance, insight, strength, and right pursuit. Unless these conditions are fulfilled, the aspirant after spiritual life may never hope to realise the Self.

c9.s1.78

4. When the equipment in moral virtues is thus being perfected, the next step in the path of Self-realisation is initiation by a worthy Spiritual Teacher. Time and oft have the Upanishads inisted upon the necessity of initiation by a Guru. Satyakāma in the Chhāndogya Upanishad is merely voicing the opinions of many when he tells his teacher that he has heard erewhile from people as revered as his own spiritual teacher that unless one be initiated by a Guru in the path of Self-realisation, one cannot attain the goal of mystic life (S. 5. a). The Kaṭhopanishad believing in the natural descent of spiritual knowledge from a higher to a lower level tells us that " unless the spiritual teacher be really of a superior calibre, spiritual knowledge would be hard of attainment, and again, that unless the initiation comes from a Spiritual Teacher who has realised his identity with the Self, There can be no knowledge of the subtle path which transcends all power of logic and argumentation. Let us not divert our intellect into wrong ways by mere logic-chopping; for, how can we hope to attain to the knowledge of Ātman unless we are initiated by another"? (S. 5. b). "Arise," says the same Upanishad in another passage, "Awake, and learn from those who are better than ye; for the path of realisation is as hard to tread as the edge of a razor. Very wisely have sages called it an inaccessible path" (S. 5. c). These and other passages make it clear that the knowledge of Self could not be attained by an individual striving for himself on his own behalf; for, we are told, the knowledge is so subtle and mystic that nobody could by his own individual effort ever hope to attain it. Secondly, it is necessary that the Teacher to whom we go to seek wisdom must have realised his identity with the ultimate Self. For, unless the Teacher has realised such an identity, unless, in other words, he stands on the lofty pedestal of unitive experience, the knowledge which he can impart can never be expected to be fructified in any individual who receives it. Doubt has oftentimes been expressed as to the necessity of having a spiritual teacher from whom to learn spiritual wisdom. Why, it is contended, may we not hope to attain it by reference to books ? Persons who put forth this objection must remember what Plato said about the comparative value of the knowledge to be obtained from books, and the knowledge to be obtained from a teacher by word of mouth. The first is entirely lifeless ; the second is the outcome of the full-fledged life of the master. This makes all the difference in the world ; for, books can never be expected to solve the actual difficulties in the path of Self-realisation, while a Teacher who has walked on the path may take his aspiring disciple from step to step on the ladder of spiritual perfection.

c9.s1.79

5. There is a very interesting parable in the Chhāndogya Upanishad to illustrate how the disciple is carried by his Spiritual Teacher from step to step on the path of Self-realisation. There we are told how a man was once led away from his country, namely the Gāndhāras, by some robbers who took him, with his eyes covered, to a very lonely and uninhabited place, and there left him to roam as best he might in any direction he pleased ; how, as he was piteously crying for help and instruction to be able to reach his original home, he was told by a person who suddenly happened to come there, " Go in that direction : in that direction are the Gāndhāras "; and how, thereupon, exercising his intelligence as best as he could, he asked his way from village to village on his return journey, and finally came back after much travail to his original home (S. 6). This parable of the blindfolded man is as full of spiritual wisdom as the parable of the cave in the Republic of Plato. It exhibits in a very typical fashion the whole process of the original benightment of the Soul and its later illumination. Our real country is the country of Brahman, from which we are led away by the thieves, namely, the passions, into the forest of utter ignorance, with our eyes blindfolded by lust for unreal things. Then we cry aloud and piteously that some help may come, which may give us more light and lead us back to Brahman. Suddenly, we meet with a Spiritual Teacher, probably as the consequence of our having previously performed meritorious actions. The Teacher imparts to us knowledge of the way to our original home, and then, exercising our faculties as best we may, we go from stage to stage in the spiritual path until we reach back the country of Brahman which was our original home.

c9.s1.80

6. There are, however, certain necessary precautions which must be observed by the Spiritual Teacher before he imparts the mystic knowledge to his aspiring disciple. The Muṇḍakopnishad tells us that unless a disciple has perfomed such a difficult task as that of carrying fire over his head, his Spiritual Teacher should not impart the knowledge of the mystic way to him (S. 7. a). The passage which gives this admonition is also otherwise interpreted as embodying the principle that no man has the right of entrance into the mystic path unless he is a "shaveling." This implies that only a Samnyāsin can be a worthy student of the spiritual science. We have no intention to discredit the order of Samnyāsa, but we may say that other passages from the Upanishads do not always describe Samnyāsa as being the only fit mode of life for receiving mystic wisdom. The Chhāndogya Upanishad tells us that "mystic knowledge may be imparted to either the eldest son, or to a worthy disciple who has lived with his master for a long time, but to none else. Not even a treasure which fills the whole sea-girt earth would be a sufficient recompense for communicating mystic knowledge" (S. 7. b). The passage from the Śvetāśvataropanishad which is a comparatively later passage, and which introduces the word "Bhakti" for the first time in Upanishadic literature, tells us that unless the disciple has absolute Faith (Bhakti) in God as in the Master, the spiritual secret should not be imparted to him (S. 7. c). We thus see how a Spiritual Teacher must be very jealous of imparting the knowledge of the mystic path. The Bhagavadgītā (XVIII. 67), taking up the same word Bhakti, later tells us that the mystic knowledge should not be imparted to one who does not make himself worthy of it by long penance, who has no faith either in God or the Master, who has no desire to listen to the spiritual wisdom, or else who harbours within himself an antagonism to spiritual knowledge.

c9.s1.81

7. The actual means of meditation which a Spiritual Teacher imparts to his disciple is described unanimously in the Upanishads as being the symbol Om. It is also to be noticed that Om is described as not merely the supreme means of meditation, but the goal to be reached by the meditation itself. The Om occupies in Indian philosophy the same position which the Logos occupies in Christology. The Upanishads repeat from time to time the efficacy of meditation by means of the supreme symbol. "The word which the Vedas declare and which is the subject of all austerities, desiring which men lead the life of religious studentship, that word, I tell thee, is briefly Om; that

Cites (15)