Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Ancient Indian Education (Brahmanical and Buddhist) c11.s6: Courts of Kings as Centres of Learning

Ancient Indian Education (Brahmanical and Buddhist) c11.s6

Language
English

Courts of Kings as Centres of Learning

c11.s6.1

Besides the noted seats of sacrifice which were also, on the view taken here, the seats of learning, we are able to trace some definite Schools in the sense of circles or associations of learned men, of teachers and pupils, flourishing independently or in connection with the courts of kings. Proceeding from the periphery of Brahmanical culture in the east, we find a centre of learning in the court of Ajātaśatru, king of *Kāśī*, associated with the famous scholar, the proud Bālāki Gārgya, whose fame was spread through the entire land of the Uśīnaras, Satvat-Matsyas, Kuru-Pañchālas, and Videhas. Bhadrasena Ajātaśatrava who was a contemporary of Uddālaka and was defeated by him in argument was probably a son or descendant of the Kāśī king.

c11.s6.2

Another easterly centre of learning was the court of King Janaka of *Videha*. Janaka himself was the centre of a distinguished literary circle. Many learned scholars of the day revolved round him like satellites, among whom are mentioned Yājñavalkya, Śvetaketu, Jītvan Śailini, Udaṅka Śaulbāyana, Barku Vārshṇa, Gardabhīvibhīta Bhāradvāja, Satyakāma Jābāla, and Vidagdha Śākalya. The learned men of the *Kuru-Pañchāla* country were also associated with the court of Janaka through the tournaments of debate accompanying his horse-sacrifice, and we have the names of their representatives who took part in that debate, viz. Aśvala, Jāratkārava Ārtabhāga, Bhujyu Lāhyāyani, Ushasta Chākrāyaṇa, Kahoḍa Kaushītakeya, Gārgī Vāchaknavī.

c11.s6.3

Next to Videha, we have *Kosala* also figuring as a seat of culture. The Prince of Kosala (with his capital called Kosala, i.e. Ayodhyā) was a learned man who sought instruction from the Ṛishi Sukeśin Bhāradvāja. We have also seen that another Kosala king Para Āṭnāra Hairaṇyanābha performed Aśvamedha.

c11.s6.4

In the country of the *Pañchālas* the court of King Pravāhaṇa Jaivali was another centre of culture on account of the wisdom of the king himself, which attracted to him scholars like Śvetaketu Āruṇeya, and his father, Śilaka Śālāvatya, and Chaikitāyana Dālbhya.

c11.s6.5

Similarly, the court of King Aśvapati Kaikeya was another such centre in the far north. The circle of scholars that gathered round that learned king included the famous Uddālaka, Prāchīnaśāla, Sātyayajña, Indradyumna, Jana, and Buḍila. If the kingdom of Kekaya is to be placed between the Vitastā and Sindhu, the court of Aśvapati must be deemed to have been far-famed as a seat of learning to attract thither scholars from the distant Kuru-Pañchāla country.

c11.s6.6

The north was also famous for other renowned teachers and centres of learning. For we find Patañchāla Kāpya as a famous teacher in the land of the *Madras* and round him gathered an association of scholars from distant parts like Uddālaka Āruṇi and Bhujyu Lāhyāyani.

c11.s6.7

The centre of another circle of learned scholars in the north¹ was the famous Svaidāyana Śaunaka, the champion of northern scholars, whose superiority was acknowledged by the great scholar of the Middle Country named Uddālaka who went to him to test his knowledge, just as the superiority of the great eastern scholar, Yājñavalkya, was admitted by him.

c11.s6.8

¹ In this connection we may recall the evidence already cited regarding the reputation of the northerners or *Udīchyas* for learning and scholarship. In the *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa* [iii, 2, 3, 15] we have a reference to the speech of the north as being similar to that of the Kuru-Pañchālas. Indeed, the Northerners’ speech was so well known for its purity that, according to the *Kaushītaki Brāhmaṇa* [vii, 6], scholars from other parts used to go to the north for linguistic studies. According to Franke [*Pāli and Sanskrit*, 88, 89], Sanskrit was specially developed in Kāśmīra. It may be also noted that Takshaśīlā (in Gandhāra) was one of the most famous centres of learning in India according to Buddhist and Brahmanical texts.

c11.s6.9

Lastly, we have scholars of the eminence of Yājñavalkya, Uddālaka, or Pippalāda who were institutions by themselves. The circles of scholars that gathered round them and the contributions they made to the advancement and diffusion of culture have been already indicated in the notices of their respective careers given above.

c11.s6.10

**Sylvan Schools.** In this connection a reference may also be made to the type of schools implied in the literature of the *Āraṇyakas.* According to Sāyaṇa,¹ the *Āraṇyakas* are so called because they had to be read in the forest. In another place, Sāyaṇa defines an *Āraṇyaka* as a Brāhmaṇa appointed for the vow of the anchorite. Oldenberg [*Prolegomena*, p. 291] holds that the *Āraṇyaka* is so called because the mysterious or mystical character of its contents requires that it should be imparted to the pupil in the solitude of the forest (*araṇye*) outside the busy haunts of men and far from the madding crowd's ignoble strife. Perhaps an instance of this may be found in the *Bṛihadāraṇyaka* [iii, 2, 13] where Yājñavalkya with reference to the discussion of a secret doctrine with another scholar in a public meeting says: "Take my hand, my friend. We two alone shall know of this; let this question of ours not be discussed in public." "Then these two went out and argued." [Cf. the terms *rahasyam*, *upanishad* as explained above.] Deussen accepts the second interpretation of Sāyaṇa because, as he states, the *Āraṇyakas* consist mainly of all kinds of explanations of the ritual and allegorical speculations embodied in the *Brāhmaṇas* which would serve as a substitute in the life of the forest for the actual sacrificial observances. Max Müller also opines that it might almost seem as if the *Āraṇyakas* were intended for the *Vānaprasthas* only, people who, after having performed all the duties of a student and a householder, retire from the world to the forest to end their days in the contemplation of the Divine, as Yājñavalkya is said to have done in the *Bṛihadāraṇyaka* [iv, 5]. Indeed, it is even explicitly stated in the *Āruṇikopanishad* that the *Sannyāsin*, the man who no longer recites the Mantras, and no longer performs sacrifices, is bound to read, out of all the Vedas, only the Āraṇyaka or the Upanishad.

c11.s6.11

¹ Araṇye'eva pāṭhyatvāt Āraṇyakam (Preface to *Aita. Āraṇyaka*). Araṇyavratarūpaṁ Brāhmaṇam (ib.). Again: "Araṇyādhyayanāt etat Āraṇyakam iti" [*Taitti. Āra.*]. Also: "Etat Āraṇyakaṁ sarvam nāvrati śrotumarhati" [ib.]. Pāṇini [iv, 2, 129] uses the word *āraṇyaka* in the sense of "a man living in the forest", but the author of the *Vārttikas* remarks that the same word is also used in the sense of "that which is *read* in the forest"

c11.s6.12

Keith [*Ait. Ār.*, p. 15], however, holds this view as far-fetched, for originally the *Āraṇyaka* was meant to give secret explanations of the ritual and hence presupposed that the ritual was still in use and known. The tendency was of course for the secret explanation to grow independent of the ritual until the stage is reached where the Āraṇyaka passes into the Upanishad, and, by that time too, there grew up the order of dividing the life of the Hindu into the four stages or Āśramas.

c11.s6.13

Thus the *Āraṇyaka* represents the "forest-portion" of the *Brāhmaṇa* and points to the development of forest life as an institution by itself in the social life of the community. It is to this forest-life and to the solitary little sylvan seats of learning that, as Weber so rightly points out, we must chiefly ascribe the depth of speculation, the complete absorption in mystic devotion by which the Hindus are so eminently distinguished, and, accordingly, we find the *Āraṇyakas* bear this character impressed upon them in a most marked degree. In harmony with their prevailing purpose, to offer to the Vānaprastha an equivalent for the sacrificial observances, for the most part no longer practicable, they indulge in mystical interpretations of these, which are then followed up in some of the oldest Upanishads. It should, however, be remembered that, as Max Müller points out, as sacrifices were performed long before a word of any *Brāhmaṇa* or *Sūtra* had been uttered, so metaphysical speculations were carried on in the forests of India long before the names of *Āraṇyaka* or *Upanishad* were thought of.¹

c11.s6.14

¹ Cf. Max Müller: "The very fact that the *Āraṇyakas* are destined for a class of men who had retired from the world in order to give themselves up to the contemplation of the highest problems shows an advanced . . . society. . . . The problems, indeed, which are discussed in the *Āraṇyakas* and the old *Upanishads* are not in themselves modern. They had formed the conversation of the old and the young, of warriors and poets, for ages. But in a healthy state of society these questions were discussed in courts and camps: priests were contradicted by kings, sages confounded by children, women were listened to when they were moved by an unknown spirit. This time, which is represented to us by the early legends of the *Āraṇyakas*, was very different from that which gave rise to professional anchorites, and to a literature composed exclusively for their benefit. . . . We must carefully distinguish between a period of growth and a period which tried to reduce that growth to rules and formulae. . . . The generation which became the chroniclers of those Titanic wars of thought was a small race; they were dwarfs, measuring the footprints of departed giants."

c11.s6.15

**Education of Castes other than Brāhmaṇa.** An account of the education of the *Brāhmaṇa* period will not be complete without a reference to the position of the castes other than the Brāhmaṇa in respect of same. But, unfortunately, as the literature of the period from which we have to derive our evidence is almost exclusively religious in its character and, as such, is only concerned with that caste to which society committed the care and ministrations of its religion, we can hardly expect to find much evidence on the subject. Macdonell and Keith frankly admit [*Vedic Index*, i, 207] that "of the training and education of Kshatriya we have no record". The education of a caste in those days was necessarily determined to a large extent by the particular occupations and functions assigned to it in society. But the degree of the separation of castes did not in the earlier stages quite correspond to that of the separation of functions. Accordingly, in the earlier literature, we find sometimes a variety of occupations for each caste. The most glaring instance of such variety in respect of the Brāhmaṇa caste is given by a Rigvedic passage [ix, 112] already cited, where the author of the hymn says he is a poet, his father a physician (Bhishaj), and his mother a grinder of corn (Upala-prakshiṇī). This would seem to show that a Brahman could practise medicine while his wife would perform the ordinary household duties. So we find a Purohita accompanying the king in battle, and, like the medieval clergy, not unprepared to fight as Vasishṭha and Viśvāmitra seem to have done and as priests do even in the Epic from time to time [*JAOS.*, 13, 184], while Dīrghaśravas in the Rigveda [i, 112, 11] is taken as the example of a Brahmin turning merchant through poverty. All this, however, does not by any means establish that the priests normally fought or that they were normally agriculturists [cf. Brahmachārin tending cattle of his teacher (*Chhānd.*, iv, 4, 5; *Ait. Ār.*, iii, 1, 6)] and merchants, though they could on occasions turn to agricultural or mercantile pursuits. The Brahmin represented the intellectual and spiritual interests of the community and "was required not merely to practise individual culture but also to give others the advantage of his skill either as a teacher or as a sacrificial priest [at least for the more important (śrauta) rites] or as a purohita guiding the king in secular, political matters. Similarly, the normal duties of the Kshatriya were administration and war. The bow is his special attribute, as shown in a number of passages in Vedic literature.¹ There is hardly any reference to Kshatriyas engaging in agriculture, trade, or commerce. We have already discussed the question how far the evidence regarding the exercise of the priestly or Brahminical functions of learning and teaching or officiating as Purohita justifies the theory advanced by some scholars that the distinction between the Kshatriya caste and Brāhmaṇa was not yet. The stories of such priestly functions assumed by the Kshatriyas refer only to a few selected Kshatriyas of high rank, while there is no evidence that the average Kshatriya was concerned with intellectual pursuits when there were other engrossing duties connected with the protection of the people to absorb his attention. It is thus a fair deduction that the royal caste did not much concern itself with the sacred lore of the priests, though it is not unlikely that individual exceptions occurred.

c11.s6.16

¹ The *Vedic Index* gives the following references on the point: *Av.*, xviii, 2, 60; *Kāṭh. Saṁ.*, xviii, 9; xxxvii, 1; *Śat. Br.*, v, 3, 5, 30 ("the bow truly is the nobleman's strength"); *Taitt. Ār.*, vi, 1, 3. In the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa* [vii, 19], the list is longer—chariot, breastplate (*kavacha*), bow and arrow (*ishu-dhanvan*)—and in the prayer for the prosperity of the Kshatriya (*rājanya*) at the Aśvamedha, the Rājanya is to be an archer and a good chariot-fighter [*Taitt. Saṁ.*, vii, 5, 18, 1; *Maitr. Saṁ.*, iii, 12, 6; *Kāṭh Saṁ.*, Aśvamedha, v, 14; *Vājas. Saṁ.*, xxii, 2].

c11.s6.17

Thus the Kshatriya was normally and primarily concerned with those subjects of study which would give him a training in the occupations he had to follow. In the lists of subjects of study referred to in the literature of the period (as discussed above), those termed *Kshatravidyā* (the science of the ruling class, of polity or administration), *Ekāyana* (as interpreted by Śaṅkara, viz. *Nīti-śāstram*) or *Dhanur-veda* were therefore suitable for the Kshatriya. But it would appear from the evidence that the Kshatriya had to depend upon Brahmin teachers even for instruction in those subjects. Nārada, when he approaches Sanatkumāra for instruction, informs him of his mastery of those subjects [*Chhānd.*, vii, 1], while the Brahmin priest is elsewhere [*Śatap. Br.*, xiii, 4, 3] represented as teaching the people (irrespective of classes and castes) even such subjects as Sarpa-vidyā, Magic, Devajanavidyā or fine arts.

c11.s6.18

The admittedly close connection between the Brahmins and the Kshatriyas of the highest rank—the kings—rested on a community of culture and intellectual equipment. The link of connection was of course the sacrifice. The sacrifices special for kings were the Rājasūya, Vājapeya, and Aśvamedha in which they had naturally to take an active part with the officiating priests and this participation implied their knowledge of the sacred lore which enabled them to utter the various Mantras used by the priests in the performance of the sacrifices.

c11.s6.19

The Vaiśya plays singularly little part in Vedic literature, which has so much to say of Kshatriya and Brāhmaṇa. Accordingly, there is hardly any evidence to show how he was educated. And yet the definite and important part he played in the economic life of the community implies that he must have received the required training for it. Agriculture was his chief pursuit. The goad of the plougher was the mark of a Vaiśya in life [*Kāṭh. Saṁ.*, xxxvii, 1] and in death [*Kauśīika Sūtra*, lxxx]. Probably the trade of the country was in his hands, for the *Vaṇij* is known to the Rigveda [i, 112, 11; v, 45, 6] and later [*Av.*, iii, 15, 1; *Śat. Br.*, i, 6, 4, 21; *Pañch. Br.*, xvii, 1. 2 (vāṇijya)]. He also took part in wars under Kshatriya leaders, for in several passages of the Rigveda there is a reference to the people (*viś*) fighting [i, 69, 3; 126, 5; iv, 24, 4; vi, 26, 1; vii, 79, 2; viii, 18, 18; 96, 15; vii, 33, 6 (*Tṛitsūnām viśaḥ*, the subject-peoples of the Tṛitsu princes); cf. also *Av.*, ix, 7, 9, where the people are designated as *balam* which in later literature is the term for armed force]. But his chief ambition in life was to attain to the position of a *Grāmaṇī*, or village headman, which he regarded as the summit of his prosperity [*Taitt. Saṁ.*, ii, 5, 4, 4 (*gataśrī*); *Maitr. Saṁ.*, i, 6, 5]. There is no evidence to show that he played any part in the intellectual life of the times, as did the Kshatriya king.

c11.s6.20

Similarly, there is but little evidence regarding the character of the education that the Śūdras received, although there is much evidence pointing to the undoubted results of such education in the economic development of the country as regards agriculture, pasture, cattle-rearing, and the numerous arts and crafts of civilized life.¹ In the list of subjects, too, for the period, we find mention of one termed *Deva-jana-vidyā* which, according to Śaṅkara, included some of the fine arts like dancing, singing, playing on musical instruments, perfumery, dyeing and the like, and, therefore, just the subjects in which the Śūdra was interested. The evidence seems also to point out that the teachers of those subjects were the Brahmins themselves, for the *Chhāndogya* mentions Nārada as a master of same, while, in the *Śatapatha* passage already referred to, the Brahmin is stated to be teaching similar secular subjects to circles of pupils that included even usurers (probably Vaiśyas), fishermen, snake-charmers, bird-catchers (Śūdras), and men unlearned in the scriptures.

c11.s6.21

¹ See my *Hindu Civilization* for an account of economic life in Vedic India.

c11.s6.22

It may be finally noted that it was probably the culture and importance of the Vaiśya and Śūdra alike which entitled them to a place in the ceremony of Ratnahavīṁshi or jewel-offerings in connection with the Rājasūya. Among the recipients of these offerings (the Ratninaḥ) we find the *Grāmaṇī*, the *Go-nikartana* (Superintendent of games and forests), and the *Pālāgala* (*Courier*) [*Śatapatha. Br.*, v, 3, 1, 3, etc.], or the *Vaiśya-grāmaṇī* and *Taksha-rathakārau* (the carpenter and the chariot-maker) [*Maitr. Saṁ.*, ii, 6, 5; iv, 3, 8], along with the other principal officers of the State (lit. the "jewels" in the crown of sovereignty) such as the *Senānī* (commander-in-chief), the *Purohita*, the queen-consort (*Mahishī*), the *Sūta* (court minstrel and chronicler), the *Kshattṛi* (chamberlain), the treasurer (*Saṁgrahītṛi*), the collector *Bhāgadugha*), and the superintendent of dicing (*Akshāvāpa*). The Atharvaveda [iii, 5, 7] gives a list of the *Rāja-kartṛis* or *Rāja-kṛits* who, not themselves kings, aided in the consecration of the king and these were the *Sūta*, the *Ratha-kāra* (the representative of the industrial population), the *Grāmaṇī* and the *Viśaḥ* (the people generally).

c11.s6.23

We have now concluded our account of education in the *Brāhmaṇa* period, and it may be well to sum up here some of its general and principal features. The Brāhmaṇas were the real intellectual leaders controlling education. We must assume among them a very stirring intellectual life which really accounts for the supremacy established and exercised by them over the rest of the people. Wide was the scope of their intellectual interests and activities; it embraced the whole range of Brahmanical theology, extending in like manner to questions of worship, dogma, and philosophical speculation, all of which were closely interwoven with each other. Not merely did they teach fixed groups of students settled in their homes as "*internal*" students (to use a modern expression), but they also had to admit "*external*" students pursuing advanced ("post-graduate") studies after completing their normal period of studentship. There were circles formed around them of *travelling* scholars, who made pilgrimages from one teacher to another according as they were attracted and led by the fame of the special learning they were seeking. Nor did the military caste hold aloof from the intellectual activities of the time when they had already earned for themselves a time of repose from external warfare. Neither did the women, who are found to be partners of their husbands in every department of life. We have here, indeed, a close correspondence to the scholastic period of the Middle Ages in Europe; "sovereigns whose courts form the centres of intellectual life; Brāhmaṇas who, with lively emulation, carry on their inquiries into the highest questions the human mind can propound; women who with enthusiastic ardour plunge into the mysteries of speculation impressing and astonishing men by the depth and loftiness of their opinions. . . As to the quality of their solutions (of philosophical problems) and the value of all these inquiries generally, that is another matter: . . It is only the striving and the effort which ennobles the character of any such period" [Weber, *Ind. Lit.*, p. 22].

c11.s6.24

**Summary.** We shall now sum up the principal features of Education and Culture in this most important period in the history of Indian Civilization, the period of the Brāhmaṇas and Upanishads.

c11.s6.25

**The Twofold Path.** The Upanishads tell of the twofold path pursued by man in life, the Path of *Preyas*, of worldly life, pleasure, and prosperity, to be achieved by *Karma* and *Dharma*, deeds and rituals, the fruits of which will accrue to him in this life and extend beyond it to its later incarnations in other worlds. The other Path is the Path of *Śreyas* by which Man seeks the sole and ultimate Reality, the everlasting Good, in a life of sustained and strenuous meditation on the *Ātman*. We have already seen that there is no inherent conflict between the two Paths, between *Karma* or *Dharma*, and *Jñāna*, in the Vedic scheme of life, as the one Path leads to the other, and *Jñāna* or realization of the Ātman is the fruit of Dharma and Karma. Ultimately, as the *Kaivalya Upanishad* puts it, "neither through rituals (*Karma*) nor through progeny or wealth, but renunciation alone, persons attain to Immortality."

c11.s6.26

The two Paths only imply the two phases of life, social and spiritual. There is the outer and external life of man as a member of society which imposes upon it its rules and regulations, conventions and obligations, ultimately based on morality. But behind this external, social life, there is the inner life of man as an individual, his spiritual life, which is regulated and shaped in the Upanishads by *Upāsanā* (worship) and *Yoga* (psychic control) whereby *Anubhūti* and *Moksha* are attained.

c11.s6.27

**Morality.** There is a view that morality or ethics has no place in the teaching of the Upanishads, which concentrate only on the Ātman or the Absolute as the sole Reality, whereas ethics implies social relationships, a world of plurality. This is mistaking the truth of the Upanishads which always take morality as the only foundation of spirituality. The *Muṇḍaka*, for instance, states that "spiritual truths can be imparted only to the pupil who approaches the teacher with proper respect, whose thoughts are not deflected by desire and are completely composed" [i, 2, 13]. Similarly, the discussion between Yama and Nachiketas shows that Yama considered Nachiketas as fit for the highest knowledge only when the pupil proved to him that he was above all desire, desire for "hundred sons and grandsons, many cattle, elephants, gold, and horses, wealth and long life, lovely maidens with chariots, with lyres—whatever desires are hard to get in the mortal world", which Yama promised him to No. 2.—The ascetic, clad in birch bark, with his matted hair bound up into a knot, leaning and grieving over his dead pet antelope.

c11.s6.29

wean him away from the pursuit of Truth. Nachiketas answered Yama: "Thine be the vehicles (*vāha*), the dance and song, ephemeral things!" We have also seen how the Upanishads are always insisting that the pupil must be *śānta*, *dānta*, *uparata*, possessed of *dama*, *dāna*, *dayā*, *śraddhā*, and *satyam*, the essential virtues. Besides, the very doctrine of the One Ultimate Reality is the strongest support and foundation of morality and the social sense or feeling. As the *Bṛihadāraṇyaka* points out [ii, 4, 5], "all others are dear to us not for their sake but for our own sake. It is the love of the Self that causes love of husband, wife, son, love of all beings. Not for love of all is all dear, but for love of the Self, all is dear." Thus, as Patañjali states in his *Yoga-Sūtras* [ii, 36], spiritual life is to be built up on the basis of "these universal moral practices which are not confined to any particular people, country, time, or age". The position is thus clenched in the *Chhāndogya* [viii, 5, 1]: "Continence is the only *yajña* and the only worship (*ishṭa*) through which one can attain Brahma."

c11.s6.30

Āśrama. The Upanishads know of the four *Āśramas* of life, as already indicated. The Brahmacharya-āśrama has been fully described. The duties of the Gṛihastha are detailed in the *Taittirīya* [i, 2, 1–7] already cited. As regards the third Āśrama, that of Vānaprastha, we may recall the example of King Bṛihadratha who, "establishing his son in the kingdom, went forth into the forest where he performed extreme austerities" [*Maitri*, 1, 2]. As an example of the fourth Āśrama, we may cite the case of Yājñavalkya who renounced the world and embraced *sannyāsa*, or the life of a *parivrājaka* [*Bṛihad.*, ii, 4, 1; iv, 5, 1], declaring that "Brāhmaṇas knowing the Ātman overcome the desire for sons, for wealth, for worlds, and live the life of mendicants". The words, however, do not indicate clearly whether they refer to the third or fourth *āśrama*.

c11.s6.31

Varṇa. The Upanishads know of what is called *Varṇāśrama-dharma*, the system of Caste and Āśrama. As we have seen, Caste is first adumbrated definitely in the Purusha-sūkta of Rigveda [x, 90] where the four castes are described as the four limbs of the Purusha, related to one another as parts of a common organism. This idea is fully developed in the *Bṛihadāraṇyaka* [i, 4, 11 f.]: "Verily, in the beginning, this world was Brahma, one only. Being One, He did not flourish. He projected an excellent form, the Kshatriya, gods like Indra, Varuṇa, Rudra, Īśāna. Yet He did not flourish. He projected the Vaiśya, even gods like the Vasus, the Ādityas, the Viśvadevas. He did not yet flourish. He then created the Śūdra caste, Pūshan. This earth is Pūshan, for she 'nourishes' (root *push*) everything that is." This passage shows that the completeness of social life requires a variety of groups and functions, all of which are necessary for it. The Śūdra is aptly called Pūshan, as he is a child, a thorough-bred, of the soil, rooted in the mother-earth, supporting society by production of food. The tiller of the soil is the foundation of the social structure and remains so to this day. Thus *Śruti* or Veda does not differentiate between the different castes but treats them, as equally indispensable as members of the social organism, like the limbs of the body. Even the gods could not complete creation till the Pūshan was forthcoming, springing out of the mother-earth, to lay the foundations of economic and social life in agriculture. The paramount conception of functions in Caste without any suggestion of social inequalities in status or dignity is also indicated in other significant passages. In the *Chhāndogya* [vi, 1, 1], Uddālaka Āruṇi reprimands his son Śvetaketu Āruṇeya for his disinclination for learning, the prescribed function of a Brāhmaṇa, saying, "Verily, my dear, from our family there is no one who is not learned (*ananūchya*) and is a Brāhmāṇa by mere birth (*Brahmabandhu*)." In the same strain, the *Brihadāraṇyaka* [ii, 4, 6] states that "Brāhmaṇahood deserts him who knows Brāhmaṇahood in aught else than the Self." Again [iii, 5, 1]: "By what means would he become a Brāhmaṇa? By that means by which he does become such a one." Further [iii, 8, 10]: "If one performs sacrifices and worship and undergoes austerity in this world for many thousands of years, but without knowing that Imperishable, limited, indeed, is that work of his."

c11.s6.32

**Process of Knowing.** Broadly speaking, the Upanishads prescribe *Upāsanā* and *Yoga* as the means of acquiring the highest knowledge. the knowledge of the Ātman. *Upāsanā* or worship refers itself to the *Saguṇa* aspect of Brahma as distinguished from *Nirguṇa*. The conception of these two aspects of Brahma is indicated in the *Bṛihadāraṇyaka* in the discussion between the Brahman scholar, Dṛiptabālāki Gārgya, and Ajātaśatru, King of Benares. Bālāki defined Brahma by His manifestations like the Sun, Moon, Lightning, Space, Wind, Fire, Water, Sound, and the like. Ajātaśatru stated that there were two aspects of Brahma, one with form (*Mūrta*) and the other without any form (*Amūrta*), mortal and immortal, sta ionary and moving. Wind and atmosphere is formless Brahma, while the sun is Brahma in form. Brahma the Formless can only be indicated by a negative process of elimination to the effect that It is "Not thus! Not so!" (*Neti Neti*).

c11.s6.33

But the Upanishads recognize the steps by which the mind can fix itself on *Nirguṇa* Brahma, the need of *Upāsanā* or worship of symbols of God. This is called the *Pratīka-upāsanā*. Various symbols are prescribed to suit persons in different stages of spiritual progress. As many as twenty such symbols were suggested by Sanatkumāra in teaching Nārada the knowledge of Brahman, starting with meditation on Name as Brahman, and ending with meditation on the Great (*Bhūman*), the Supreme Bliss, as Brahman.

c11.s6.34

The most important of such symbols is the mystic syllable *Om*. The syllable is made up of three parts, *a*, *u*, *m*, corresponding to the three states of consciousness, waking, dreaming, and deep sleep, which have for their objects the gross, the subtle, and the causal world. Through the meditation of these three parts is reached the highest plane, the fourth (*Turīya*) "which is imperceptible, not subject to any development, is blissful, without a second." The *Om* thus meditated upon is "verily the Self. He who knows this, with his self, enters the Self" [*Māṇḍūkya*, 12]. The process of this meditation is further described in *Muṇḍaka*: "*Om* is the bow, the self is the arrow, Brahma is its mark. It is to be hit by a man whose thoughts are composed. Then, as the arrow becomes one with the target, he will become one with Brahma."

c11.s6.35

This *Pratīka-upāsanā* includes the worship of God in the forms of different deities like Brahmā, Vishṇu, Rudra, Prajāpati, Agni, Varuṇa, or Vāyu as mentioned in the *Maitreyī Upanishad* v, 1. In such prayers may be seen the beginnings of the Bhakti cult.

c11.s6.36

The Upanishads also pave the way of the worship of *Saguṇa* Brahma merging in the meditation of *Nirguṇa* Brahma. This is effected by the direction that he who worships God must think of Him as his own self in the spirit of the doctrine, *Tat Tvam Asi*, or the other doctrine, *Ayam Ātmā Brahma* or *Aham Brahmāsmi*. The Upanishad condemns the worshipper who keeps up a sense of duality in *Upāsanā*: "Now if a man worships another deity, thinking the deity to be one, and himself another, he does not know."

c11.s6.37

**Yoga.** It has been already indicated in a general way that the system of discipline for which the Upanishads stand is based upon that of *Yoga* as has been elaborated later in the *Yoga-sūtras* of Patañjali, of which some of the most important concepts and terms are derived from the Upanishads.

c11.s6.38

A start is made with the statement that it is the *Chitta* alone which is *Saṁsāra* (*Maitreyī. Up.*, i, 5). Again: "What-ever his *chitta* thinks, of that nature a man becomes" [ib.]. Further: "If his *chitta* is so fixed on Brahman as it is on things of the world, who would not then be freed from bondage?" [ib., i, 7]. This means that the process of Yoga is *chittavṛitti-nirodha*, as defined by Patañjali, to detach the mind from the objects of senses so as to inhibit all its creative ideations and concentrate it on God.

c11.s6.39

Much of Yoga psychology is anticipated in the Upanishads. *Kaṭha*, iii, 3, 6, 10, 13 defines the terms Ātmā, Śarīra, Buddhi, Manas, and Indriya. The *Ātmā* is described as riding in the chariot of *Śarīra*, of which the driver is *Buddhi*, the horses are the *Indriyas*. *Manas* as the reins, and the objects of sense what the horses range over. When *Purusha* is joined to *Indriya*, and *Manas* becomes the *Bhoktā*, the *Indriyas*, out of control, are like the vicious horses of a chariot-driver.

c11.s6.40

Thus, according to this analysis, higher than the senses are the object of sense (*Artha*); higher than these is *Manas*; higher than mind is *Buddhi*; higher than *Buddhi* is the great Self.

c11.s6.41

*Kaṭha*, vi, 10, 11 defines Yoga as firm control of the senses (*Taṁ yogaṁ iti manyante sthirāṁ indriyadhāraṇam*). The Yogī is *Apramatta*, undistracted.

c11.s6.42

"When one ceases the five kinds of knowing through the senses, together with the mind, and Buddhi (intellect) also is inoperative (*na vicheshṭate*), that is called the highest course (*Paramā gati*)."

c11.s6.43

*Prāṇāyāma* is referred to in *Bṛihadāraṇyaka*, i, 5, 23. Again, the same Upanishad [iv, 4, 23] uses the following significant terms of Yoga, viz. *Śānta-dānta-uparata-titikshā-samāhita*.

c11.s6.44

*Chhāndogya* [vi, 8] uses the term *Pratyāhāra* and defines it as making all the senses rest in *Ātmā* (*Ātmani sarvendriyāṇi sampratishṭhāpya*).

c11.s6.45

*Muṇḍaka* [ii, 2, 3, 4], as already cited, describes *Praṇava* as the bow, *Ātmā* the arrow, *Brahma* the mark (*Laskhya*). One should shoot undistracted (*Apramatta*) at the mark and be merged in it like the arrow and the mark (*śaravat tanmayo bhavet*).

c11.s6.46

*Maitri* [vi, 18] refers to Shaḍaṅga-yoga as comprising Āsana (posture), Prāṇāyāma (Restraint of breath), Pratyāhāra (Withdrawal of the senses), Dhyāna (Meditation), Dhāraṇā (Concentration), Samādhi (absorption).

c11.s6.47

The process of Yoga is further described in vi, 19–29. Yoga (joining) is defined as oneness of mind and the senses.

c11.s6.48

“ If a man practises yoga for six months,
And is constantly freed [from the senses],
The infinite, supreme, mysterious Yoga is perfectly produced.

But if a man is afflicted with Passion (rajas) and Darkness (tamas),
Enlightened as he may be—
If to son and wife and family
He is attached—for such a one,

No, never at all ! ”

c11.s6.49

The *Śvetāśvatara* [ii] describes how the Yogī acquires lightness of body, freedom from diseases, calm of mind, radiant countenance (*varṇaprasāda*), and pleasant voice (*svarasoushṭava*), anticipating the *Bibhūti-pāda* of *Yogasūtras*.

c11.s6.50

The same Upanishad mentions how the pursuit of Yoga should be undertaken in a congenial physical environment which it thus describes: “ In a clean (*śuchau*) level (*same*) spot, free from pebbles (*śarkarā*), fire (*vahni*), and gravel (*bālukā*), by the sound of water and other propinquities favourable to meditation (*manonukūle*), and not offensive to the eye (*na chakshupīḍane*). in a hidden retreat, one should practise Yoga (*prayojayet*).

Linked texts (25)