UNIVERSITY OF CALIC UTsdeuoc.ac.in/sites/default/files/sde_videos/Classical...The most ancient...

Cl

lass

CALICUT

sical

BA

UNIVSCHO

T UNIVERS

al IndCOR

A PHI

IV SE

VERSITOOL OF DITY PO, MA

dianE COUR

For

ILOSO

EMEST

Admiss

TY OFISTANCE ALAPPURAM

n philRSE

OPHY

TER

CALICEDUCATIOM, KERALA

iloso

Y

CUT ON A, INDIA ‐ 6

soph

673 635

hy

(2019 sion Onwards)

SDE

Typewritten text

PHL4 B05

SDE

Rectangle

SDE

Typewritten text

19505

School of Distance Education

Classical Indian Philosophy

UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT

SCHOOL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION

STUDY MATERIAL

Core Course

B A Philosophy

IV Semester

CLASSICAL INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

Dr. Smitha .T. M, Assistant Professor, Department of Philosophy, Maharajas College, Ernakulam.

Module II,III & IV Smt. Jayasree.K, Assistant Professor, Department of Philosophy, University of Calicut.

Scrutinised by: Dr. V. Prabhakaran, (Co-ordinator), Principal, EKNM Govt. College, Elerithattu, Kasargod.

Prepared by

Module I

Copy @ Reserved

SDE

Typewritten text

PHL4 B05



CONTENTS PAGES

UNIT - I - INTRODUCTION 5

UNIT - II - VEDAS 12

UNIT - III - UPANISADS 19

UNIT - IV - THE BHAGAVAD GITA 30



UNIT I

INTRODUCTION

The Upanisads are the foundation of Indian Philosophy, which teach spiritual monism and mysticism. The systems of Indian philosophy are systematic speculations on the nature of the Reality in harmony with the teachings of the Upanisads, which contain various aspects of the truth. They aim at the knowledge of the Reality with a view to transforming and spiritualizing human life. Philosophical knowledge does not aim at merely satisfying our theoretical and speculative interest, but also at realizing the highest truth in life.

Indian philosophy is essentially spiritual. Philosophy and religion are intimately connected with each other in India. Religion is not a system of dogmas, but a living experience. It is a practical realization of the spiritual truth. Philosophy is the theory of the Reality. It is an insight into the nature of the Reality, which leads to liberation. Indianphilosophy is not idle theorizing, but a spiritual quest.

Philosophy is called Darsana, which means vision. Philosophy is the vision of the Reality as a whole. It is an insight into the nature of the whole Reality.

The most ancient Indian philosophy is contained in the four Vedas -Rg. Veda, Yajur Veda, Sama Veda and Atharva Veda. The Sanskrit word véda "knowledge, wisdom" is derived from the root vid- "to know". This is reconstructed as being derived from the Proto-Indo-European root *u�eid-, meaning "see" or "know". The Vedas are a large body of texts originating in ancient India. The Vedas are apauru�eya ("not of human agency"). They are supposed to have been directly revealed, and thus are called

Objectives:-

1. To explain nature of Indian Philosophy 2. To identify the systems of Indian Philosophy

Meaning and scope of Indian Philosophy

5. To describe the Law of Karma 6. To explain the concept of Liberation 7. To describe the means of liberation explained by different systems of Indian thought .

3. To explain the importance of Vedas in Indian Philosophy4.To analyse the spiritualistic nature of Indian Philosophy



śruti ("what is heard"), distinguishing them from other religious texts, which are called sm�ti ("what is remembered"). The period of Vedas is debated but can be dated to 4000B.C. or even earlier. Each Veda has four parts—Samhita, Brahmans, Aranyakas and Upanishads. The seed of philosophical knowledge is sown in Rig Veda hymns. They are the forerunners of monastic system as is evident in the Upanishads. Samhitas are hymns or prayers. Brahmanas are mostly prose treatise, discussions on rituals and are devoted to sacrificial duties. Aranyakas provide ritual guidance to the retired seniors in seclusion (vanaprastha). The Upanishads are deep rooted in philosophical thoughts of the realized seers. Poets composed the hymns, priests the Brahmanas and the seers the Upanishads.

Indian philosophy is based on logical reason subordinate to the authority of the Vedas, which are believed to embody to embody the intuitions of the seers of truth. The authority of the Vedas is that of intuition. Logical reason is subordinate to intuition. So Indian philosophy is based on rational speculation in harmony with the Vedas, and consciously aims at achieving the highest perfection (moksa) attainable in human life.

THE SCHOOLS OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

It is customary to divide the schools of Indian philosophy into two broad classes, viz., orthodox (astika) and heterodox (nastika). The orthodox schools recognize the authority of the Vedas. The heterodox schools do not recognize their authority. The Carvaka, the Bauddha, and the Jaina are the heterodox schools. They are called heterodox not because they are atheists, but because they reject the authority of the Vedas. The Nyaya, the Vaisesika, the Samkhya, the Yoga, the Mimamsa, and the Vedanta are the orthodox schools. They believe in the authority of the Vedas. Among, those the Samkhya and the Mimamsa are atheists. The Nyaya, the Vaisesika, the Yoga, and the Vedanta are theists. The Samkhya advocates dualism of prakrti and purusas or individual selves. The Vedanta advocates spiritualistic monism, and recognizes the reality of Brahman or the Absolute. It regards the world and the individual selves as their appearances, or parts, or attributes, modes or accessories of Brahman. The Nyaya and Vaisesika advocate the reality of God, plurality of individual souls, and the world of diverse objects. They consider the world to be composed of the eternal atoms of earth, water, fire, and air existing in self-existent and eternal time and space. The Mimamsa recognizes the reality of individual selves and the self-existent material world, and rejects the concept of God as the creator of the world. The Yoga grafts the notion of God on the Samkhy’s dualism of prakrti and purusas, and makes it theistic. So it is called the theistic Samkhya.



SALIENT FEATURES OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

1. Spiritualism

Indian philosophy is essentially spiritual. Philosophy and religion are intimately connected with each other in India. Religion is not a system of dogmas, but a living experience. It is a practical realization of the spiritual truth. Philosophy is the theory of the Reality. It is an insight into the nature of the Reality, which leads to liberation. Indian philosophy is not idle theorizing, but a spiritual quest. Indian philosophy is therefore a religious tradition. The pride of the Indian philosophy again lies in that magical blend of the concept of reality or in that absolute reality with that of the existence of personal God which ultimately leads to a meaningful life. This immense fusion further crafts Indian philosophy as the most tolerant religions. Ishvara is the very core of Indian Philosophy.

Ishvara in Sanskrit means, the Lord. In Indian philosophy therefore Ishvara is reckoned as the ultimate Ruler, the supreme power and is indeed the preternatural Being of the Cosmos.

"The whole of this Universe is pervaded by me in my Unmanifested form. I am thus the support of all the manifested existences, but I am not supported by them" - this eternal law is the very basis of Indian philosophy and is also the main concept of spiritualism in India.

God is the creator, the preserver and the destroyer of the cosmos. He is the divinity and this very idea is the crux of Indian philosophy. The concept of Brahman in Indian philosophy again offers a rather spiritual facet to Indian philosophy; as according to Krishna " . ...Into Brahman I plant the seed giving birth to all living beings..." Brahman therefore remains as the logo of the Divine essence of the cosmos. The reference of Brahman is there also in Mundaka Upanishad, which structures the base of the Indian philosophy.

The ideal harmonization of spiritualism and religiosity in Indian beliefs makes the Indian philosophy a never-ending journey in understanding the "Knowledge" of that perpetual contentment. God is the ultimate reality; the unchallengeable, the huge, the brightest light who is there almost everywhere -even in the green grass, in the bight fire, in the living air, in the round ocean, in the blue sky and finally in the mind of man. To experience His immortality, to feel His presence and to sense His enigmatic immensity the pious man plunges into the ocean of consciousness whilst praying.

"Lead me from the unreal to the Real. Lead me from darkness unto Light. Lead me from death to Immortality."



2. Vedic Authority

All orthodox schools of philosophy recognize the authority of the Vedas. They cite the authority of the Upanisads in support of their views, and build up their systems of philosophy on rational speculation in harmony with the teachings of the Vedas. Reason cannot yield unquestionable certainty in respect of supersensible entities. Reason is overthrown by reason. It cannot land us in the solid foundation of truth. Reason is subordinated to the authority of the Vedas, which is regarded as the authority of intuition. Intuition is the immediate apprehension of the reality, which transcends discursive thought. It is supra-intellectual direct apprehension. Reason (tarka) is regarded as subordinate to intuition (anubhava). Intuition can override reason, but reason cannot overthrow intuition. Reasoning should be carried on under the guidance if intuition. But the different schools of Indian philosophy are not mere elaborations of the teachings of the Upanisads with the help of reason. They invent different theories of the Reality by systematic logical reasoning, appeal to those texts of the Upanisads which are in favour of their conclusions, and consider those opposed to their theories as spurious or explain them away. Even the different schools of the Vedanta build their theories of the Reality on logical reason and philosophical speculation, and endeavor to harmonize the relevant texts of the Upanisads with one another in the light of their preconceived theories. The Nyaya, the Vaisesika, the Samkhys, the Yoga, the Mimamsa and the Vedanta widely diverge from one another in their philosophical speculations, though they all accept the authority of the Vedas. They all regard consciousness as the ultimate court of appeal in knowing anything to be real.

3. The law of Karma

All schools of Indian philosophy except the Carvaka believe in the Law of Karma. As we sow, so we reap. The right action inevitably produces a good consequence. A wrong action inevitably produces a bad consequence. Performance of a duty or a prescribed action produces a merit (punya) or virtue (dharma) in the soul. Violation of a duty or commission of a forbidden action produces a demerit (papa) or vice (adharma) in it. Merit or virtue produces happiness, demerit or vice produces misery. Merit and demerit are unseen agencies (adrsta) which mature in course of time and bear fruits either in this life or in a future life. They are predisposing causes of happiness and misery while external objects are their exciting causes. There is no escape from the consequences of actions. Their fruits must be reaped in this life or in a future life. There is no destruction of the fruits of right and wrong actions (krtapranasa). One can never reap the fruits of actions undone (akrtabhyagama). The Law of Karma is the inexorable law of moral causation.

The Buddihist, the Jaina, the Samkhya and the Mimamsa believe in an impersonal Law of Karma which adjusts the realm of nature to the realm of spirits—the physical order to the moral order. It adjusts physical objects to the souls’ happiness and



misery in accordance with their merits and demerits. But the other systems believe in God who is the dispenser of the Law of Karma. He creates the physical objects out of atoms or prakrti or His own nature and adjusts them to the unseen agencies in the individual souls.

Merits and demerits are called Karmas. At a particular time we have accumulated karmas of the past births (prarabdha karma) and karmas which are being acquired in this birth (sanciyamana karma) to which will be added karmas which will be acquired in future (anarabdha karma). They determine the kind of birth, length of life, and enjoyments and sufferings. The Jaina regards karmas as infra-sensible particles of matter generated by passions and evil actions, which encrust the soul and obscure its innate qualities.

Transmigration.—Metempsychosis or transmigration of the soul is a corollary of the Law of Karma, which demands that right actions have good consequences and that wrong actions have bad consequences. Merits and demerits produced by right and wrong actions determine the kinds of birth. Excessive merits transport the souls to heaven, and make them celestial beings. Excessive demerits make them assume the bodies of beasts, birds and insects. Well-balanced merits and demerits make them transmigrate into human bodies. The souls are eternal. They are neither born nor destroyed. Their birth is association with bodies. Their death is dissociation from bodies. They survive the death of their bodies and assume other bodies, superhuman, human or subhuman, which are appropriate to the moral deserts acquired by them in the present births. They reincarnate in the bodies which will be the fit vehicles for enjoying the consequences of their actions in this life. The same soul continues through different births. Transmigration presupposes the permanence and continuity of the soul which assumes different bodies. All orthodox schools believe in the permanence and transmigration of the soul.

The Carvakas do not admit the reality of the soul as distinct from the body, and so do not believe in its transmigration. The bauddhas do not recognize the permanence of the soul. They regard it as a flux of ever-changing psychoses. But still they believe in its transmigration. The last psychosis embodying the dispositions of all past psychoses in the stream of consciousness assumes a body appropriate to it, and produces the initial consciousness in the new fetus. There is continuity of the same series of consciousness in its different births. There is ‘transmigration of character’ from the present birth to the future birth as Rhys Davids says. Though the Buddhists deny the permanence of the soul, they believe in the transmigration of the same series of cognitions. The Jainas recognize the reality of the permanent soul and its transmigration. The idea of transmigration is common to all systems of Indian philosophy except the Carvaka school.



4. Liberation (moksa).

The idea of liberation (moksa) is common to all systems of Indian philosophy. Only the Carvaka materialist does not believe in it. He regards dependence as bondage, and independence as release. Buddhism regards complete extinction of suffering as nirvana. Joy, sorrow, anger, fear and lust are passions which are compared to fire. Nirvana is complete extinction of the fire of passions. Some Buddhists regard it as a state of positive bliss. Others regard it as an ineffable state beyond empirical pleasure and pain. The Jaina considers complete destruction of karma-matter investing the soul and realization of its infinite perception, infinite knowledge, infinite bliss and infinite power as release.

The Nyaya and the Vaisesika look upon the existence of the self in its natural condition as liberation. It consists in absolute cessation of pain. It consists in complete destruction of the qualities of the soul,--cognition, pleasure, pain desire, aversion, volition, impression, merit and demerit. The Mimamsa also considers complete destruction of merit and demerit and absolute extinction of pain as release. In release the self is divested of all experience, and remains in its pure essence. The Samkhya considers absolute negation of threefold suffering as release. In the state of release there is complete isolation of the self from the mind-body-complex, which is a modification of prakrti. There is complete destruction of mental functions and dispositions. The Yoga also considers complete isolation (kaivalya) of the self from the mind (buddhi) and its modes and dispositions are release. In the state of release the self abides in its essential nature, and realizes its intrinsic nature. The Advaita Vedanta regards the intuitive realization of identity of the individual self with Brahman as release which is a state of infinite bliss. The Visistadvaita Vedanta regards similarity of the self with God in essence as release, which is a blissful state. So the idea of liberation is common to all systems of Indian philosophy.

The means to Liberation.—The different systems of Indian philosophy lay down the means to the attainment of liberation. Yoga facilitates the attainment of true knowledge. It consists in sense-restraints, moral observances, bodily posture, breath-control, and withdrawal of the sense-organs from their objects, fixation of mind, meditation, and trance. When the mind meditates on the self, and is absorbed in it, it dissolves, as it were, in the self, which manifests itself in its real nature. Yoga is a method of acquiring knowledge of the self, which is regarded as a means of release. Morality is an indispensable preliminary to meditation and trance. Non-injury, non-stealing, truthfulness, sex-restraint and non-covetousness are the restraints (yama). Purity of body and mind, contentment, penance, study of the scriptures, and meditation on God are the moral observances (niyama). They are included in the eightfold yoga. The Advaita Vedanta regards discrimination of the eternal and the non-eternal, dispassion for enjoyment of happiness on earth and in heaven, sense-control, mind-control, endurance, withdrawal of the senses from their objects, faith in the Atman or Brahman,



and desire for release as auxiliary to enquiry into the nature of Brahman. True knowledge depends upon the conquest of the lusts of the flesh and passions and desires of the mind, purity of body and mind, freedom from selfishness and egoism, tolerance of spirit, universal good-will and selflessness. Morality is an indispensable element to the acquisition of true knowledge. Knowledge (jnana) is considered to be the chief means of release. The Nyaya-Vaisesika considers true knowledge of the reality the world, the self and God as the means of liberation. True knowledge destroys false knowledge, which generates attachment, aversion and delusion, which are the springs of action. The samkhya-Yoga regards discrimination of the self from the not-self or prakrti and its modifications as the case of release. The Advaita Vedanta considers the intuitive knowledge of identity of the jiva with Brahman as its cause. The knowledge of difference is ignorance (avidya). The knowledge of identity is true knowledge (vidya), which leads to life eternal. The Visistsdvaita Vedanta considers the disinterested performance of duties (niskama karma), devotion and self-surrender to God, taking shelter in Him, and knowledge of the self’s dependence on God as the means of release. It looks upon essential similarity with God as liberation. Moksa is a state of transcendental purity beyond empirical morality. There is complete transcendence of virtue and vice in it.



UNIT II

VEDAS

INTRODUCTION

The etymological meaning of the word philosophy is ‘love of learning’. The Sanskrit terms for philosophy are ‘darsanas’ and ‘tattva’, which means ‘vision of truth and reality’. ‘Know the self’ (Atmanam Viddhi) is the key note of all Schools of Indian Philosophy. And this is the reason why most of the Schools of Indian Philosophy are also religious sects. Annihilation of the three kinds of pain-adhyatmika, adhibhavtika and adhidvaivika- and realization of supreme happiness is the end and Sravana Manama and nididhyasana are the means- in almost all Schools of Indian Philosophy.

According to the Hindu tradition the various philosophical ideas that were developed in the philosophical systems originated in the Vedas. The Vedas are probably the oldest (1500-800 Bc.) scriptures in the recorded history of man. The veda is etymologically related to ‘vid’ meaning knowledge. To the orthodox, it means knowledge par excellence, the sacred or revealed knowledge. Concretely, however, the word stands for a vast body of literary compositions the whole of which must have taken nothing less than two millennia to came into existence. The Vedas are regarded by Hindus as divine in origin and not the work of human authors accordingly, they are looked upon as timeless and eternal. This is not to deny that at a certain time in human history the vedas acquired a specific verbal form, oral or written, it only means that the truths proclaimed by the Vedas are regarded as eternal truths and in no way dependent upon the manner, time, and place of their recording.

Each veda consists of four parts known as mantras, Brahmanas, Aranyakas and the Upanisads. The earliest of these are orally composed songs by the Aryans and transmitted to the later generations by a method of sheer retentive memory, and hence also called sruti, ‘that which is heard’. These immensely old oral compositions are traditionally called the mantra, one great decision of the veda, the other being the Brahmana, which is in prose and is much later. The appendages to these Brahmanas are called Aranyakas mainly because they were composed in the calmness of the forests. The concluding portions of the Aranyakas are called the Upanisads.

VEDIC LITERATURE

Mantras

Mantras or metrical hymns composed by the Aryans after they had settled in their new Indian home. The mantras in its present form dates from 600 B.C. Mantra means a hymn addressed to some god or goddess. The collection of the mantras is



called ‘Samhita’. There are four Samhitas- RK, Sama,Yajuh, and Atharva. These are said to be compiled for the smooth performance of the vedic sacrifices. A vedic sacrifice needs four main priests-Hota, who addresses hymns in praise of the gods to invoke their presence and participation in the sacrifices. Udgata who sings the hymns in sweet musical tones to entertain and please the gods; Adhvayu, who performs the sacrifice according to the strict ritualistic code and gives offerings to the gods: and Brahma, who is the general supervisor well-versed in all the Vedas. The four Samhitas are said to be compiled to fulfil the needs of these four main priests – RK for the Hota, sama for the udgata, yaguh, for the Adhvaryu and Atharva for the Brahma. Sometimes the veda, are referred to only as “Trayi’, omitting the Atharva. RK means a verse, sama means a song, Yajuh means a prose passage. Thus we see that the Samhita-bhaga or the mantra-portion of the veda is the Hymnology addressed to the various gods and goddesses. RK samhita is regarded as the oldest and also the most important. The Rsis of the Vedas are not the authors, but only the ‘Seers’ of the mantras.

BRAHMANAS

The Brahmans, unlike the mantras, are written in prose. They are the elaboration of the complicated ritualism of the Vedas. Brahmanas are guide books for the performance of sacrificial rites. They deal with the rules and regulations laid down for the performance of the rites and the sacrifices. Their names, ‘Brahmana’ is derived from the word ‘Brahma’ which originally means a prayer. There is little philosophy in these, though some philosophical ideas flash here and there in the course of some speculative digressions.

ARANYAKAS AND THE UPANISADS

The Aranyakas give philosophical interpretations of the rituals and also prescribe modes of meditation for those who live detached lives in the forests. We find here a mystic interpretation of the Vedic sacrifices. The Upanisads contain teachings about the ultimate reality and the means of realizing it. These are intensely philosophical and spiritual and may be rightly regarded as the cream of the Vedic Philosophy. The hymns are the creation of the poets, the Brahmas are the work of the priests, and the Upanishads the meditations of the philosophers. The religion of nature of hymns, the religion of law of the Brahmans and the religion of spirit of the Upanishads, correspond in a very close way to the three great divisions in the Hegelian conception of the development of religion.

The mantras and the Brahmanas are called the Karma-Kanda or the portion dealing with the sacrificial actions, and the Aranyakas and the Upanishads are called the Jnana-Kanda or the portion dealing with knowledge. Since people include the Aranyakas in the karma-Kanda. Really speaking, they represent a transition from the Karma-Kanda to the Jnana-Kanda. The Upanishads are also known as ‘Vedanta’ or the ‘the end of the Veda’. Firstly because they are literally the concluding portion, the end of the Vedas, and secondly because they are the essential, the cream, the height, of the Vedic Philosophy.



VEDIC RELIGION

In the vedic hymns, we find religion and philosophy more or less intermixed. The essence of the Vedic hymns is the philosophy of spiritualistic monism. But along with it we also find a kind of religious worship, namely, naturalistic polytheism. The mantras inculcate a form of nature worship. The ancient Indians personified the various aspects of nature in an anthropomorphic form and worshipped them as gods. In this religion, the various, powers of Nature like fire(Agni),Wind(Vayu) and the Sun(Surya) were personified. The hymn were prayers addressed to deified powers of nature. These gods were regarded as responsible for the governance of the world. They maintain the physical order of the cosmos known as rta. The word rta sometimes later came to stand not merely for physical order as well. The gods were thus conceived as preserving the world from physical and moral disorder.

POLYTHEISM

When the early Vedic Aryans who were primitive, if not semi-civilised and semi-barbarious, settled down and began to wonder at the charming and the tempting and to fear the terrible and the destructive aspects of nature, they personified them in an anthropomorphic fashion and called them gods and goddess and began to worship them. This was the stage of naturalistic and anthropomorphic polytheism. A superficial render of the vedic hymns may find only an unrefined religion of nature worship. But a deeper study will reveal that even this early religion of the Vedas contains excellent philosophical insights as well. Agni, for instance, stand, nor merely for the visible fire kindled at the sacrificial altar but also for the divine fire awakened in the individual as a result of spiritual discipline known as tapas. It is the fire of wisdom or illumination; which consumes the lower impulses in man and transforms them into higher spiritual powers. The import of the well-known gayatri mantra addressed to savitr is the need for philosophical wisdom by the illumination of the intellect. Varuna who is, responsible for cosmic order is also the guardian of the moral law, and indra is conceived as the god who vanquishes evil. These are clear evidences of the philosophical quest of the ancient Indian seers. In vedic polytheism natural occurrences are attributed to supernatural causes. The philosophically significant aspect here is the conviction that no event can take place without a sufficient cause. It shows that the human mind from the very beginning had believed that every event requires a sufficient cause to account for it. It is also true that the order of the invisible physical world is determined by the subtle power-units inherent in it. The only difference is the early people personified and worshiped the subtle powers of Nature believing that there were also conscious entities like human beings. But here lies the germ of the great philosophical wisdom of monism which eliminates the dualism between subject and object, this is, spirit and matter and reduces the which of existence ultimately into one spiritual entity. Polytheism yielded place to monotheism and the later to monism. Max Muller introduces henotheism as a transitional stage from polytheism to monotheism.



Heonothesm means ‘belief in one only God’. The Vedic Aryans regarded any god they were praising as the most supreme and the only god. According to MacDonnel henotheism is an appearance rather than a reality, an appearance produced by the indefiniteness due to undeveloped anthropomorphism. But whether we call it henotheism or mere exaggeration of the powers of the deity in question, it is obvious that this stage can neither be properly called polytheistic nor monotheistic but one which had a tendency towards both of them.

MONOTHEISM (Personal Theism)

Now let us see the stages of development of thought from polytheism to monotheism in the early parts of the Vedas. First, attempts have been made to bring the different gods under the supremacy of one god. This presiding god possessed qualities of great strength, knowledge and moral excellence. The vedic thinker is no longer satisfied with the idea of a multiplicity of gods. He now strives to discover the one God that controls and rules over all other gods. When polytheism leads to monotheism, the most powerful god among the hierarchy of gods is enthroned as the ruler of this universe. In monotheism, Varuna at one time and Indra at another were treated as the supreme. The supreme can only be one. We can not have two supreme and unlimited beings. Everywhere the question was asked whether a god was himself the creation of another. A creator god is no god at all with the growing insight into the working of the world and nature of god head the many gods tended to melt into one. The perception of unity realized in the idea of Rta waked in support of monotheism. Trust in natural law means faith in one God. Rg Veda declares that reality is one and that sages call it by many such as Agni, Yama etc.s

MONISM (Absolutism)

Experiments on the concept of God continued and now monotheism gives way to monism because the seers were not satisfied with an anthropomorphic or personalistic conception of the God head. This tendency towards the one culminates in monism. In monotheism many Gods were reduced to one God, but in monism the whole of existence is reduced to one fundamental reality, which the wise regard him as many. This reality is no more conceived in personalistic terms, it is called merely as That(Tat). There are mantras in the Vedas which allude to monism eg: sat is one. To Israel the same revelation came: “The Lord, thy God, is one”. Plutarch says: “ There is one sun and one sky over all nations and one Deity under many names”.

Thus the highest spiritual truth is thus expressed in two forms in vedic hymns-personal theism(monotheism) and absolutism(monism). Theism here means the belief in a personal deity where as absolutism is the view that recognizes an absolute impersonal reality as the ground for all existence. The hymn where absolutism appears in all its splendor is the well-known a Nasadiya-sukta. The ultimate reality here is the unlimited absolute which cannot be described in human terms. All things are traced to this one



principle. Every plurality and the binaries like being and non-being, life and death, night and day are shown to be the unfolding of this one. How the one appears as the many is a mystery. Thus we may note in the Nasadiya hymn the foundation of Advaita the doctrine that the ultimate reality is one and that the world of plurality is an appearance or maya.

PERIODS OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

Indian philosophy has had a long and complicated development. A chronological history is, however, difficulty to present because of the lack of concern of the ancient Indian to chronology and historical perspective. From the time of the birth of Buddha, Indian chronology is on a better foundation.

The following are the broad divisions of Indian Philosophy.

The first period of Indain philosophy is called the Vedic period(1500 BC-600 BC) covers the age of the settlement of the Aryans and the gradual expansion and spread of the Aryan culture and civilization. This is the age of the assimilation of the great Vedas, culminating in the Aranyakas and Upanishads. The Indian thought process has been profoundly influenced by the Upanishads and has remained so ever since. They are the foundations on which most of the later philosophers and religions of Indian rest “there is no important from of Hindu thought heterodox Buddhism included, which is not rooted in the Upanishads”. The views put forward in this age are not philosophical in the technical sense of the term. It is the age of groping, where superstition and thought are yet in conflict. Yet to give order and continuity to the subject, it is necessary for us to begin with an account of the outlook of the hymns of the Rgveda and discuss the views of the Upanishads.

The second period of Indian philosophy is called the Epic period(600 BC to AD 200) extends over the development between the early Upanishads and the darsanas or the systems of philosophy. This was a fertile period in the philosophical development of the world in general. The great works in China, Greece and Persia coincides with this period of Indian philosophical development. Not only the great epics of Mahabharata and Ramayana were written during this period but also the early development of Buddhism,Jainism, Shaivism and Vaishanavism took place simultaneously. Bhagavad-Gita, which is a part of Mahabharata ranks as one of the three most authoritative texts of Indian Philosophical literature(The Upanishads, the Brahma sutra and the Gita) belong to this age. The philosophies of skepticism, naturalism and materialism arose and the orthodox systems of Hinduism took shape. Systematic treaties were written that brought into focus the unorthodox systems of Buddhism, Jainism and Carvaka during the Epic period. In addition the codes of conduct, social and ethical philosophy were complied in the Dharmashastras.



The third period is called the sutra period (from AD 200). Most of the sutras in short enigmatic aphorism were written as treatises to the earlier School of Philosophical thoughts. This helped in organizing the various doctrines in a systematic, orderly form and the systems took a basic form in which they were to be preserved. This six Hindu systems, collectively called the darshana literature developed during this period. Among the systems themselves, we cannot say definitely what are earlier and which later. There are cross-references throughout. The Yoga accepts the Samkhya athe Vaisesika recognizes both the Nyaya and the Samkhya. Nyaya refers to the Vedanta and the Samkhya. Mimamsa directly or indirectly recognizes the pre-existence of all others. So does the Vedanta. The sutra period cannot be sharply distinguished from the scholastic period of the commentators. The two between them extend up till the present day.

The fourth period of Indian philosophy is called the scholastic period(from AD 200). It is not possible for us to draw a hard and fast line between this and the previous one. Yet it is to this that the great names of Kumarila, Sankara, Sridhara Ramaniya, Madhva, Vacaspati, Udayana,Bhaskara, Jayanta, Vijjanabhiksu and Raghunatha belong. During this period commentaries were written on the sutras and commentaries were written on original commentaries. Literature from this period, which lasts from the sutra period to the 17th century, is mainly explanatory. It is also controversial and often argumentative and noisy. Some of them, however, are invaluable. Sankara’s commentary on the Vedanta sutra is thought of more highly than the original sutra written by Badarayana. Various scholars wrote commentaries on Brahma sutra according to their own interpretation. Chief among them were Sankaracharya, Ramanucharya and Madhavacharya. Incidentally, three schools of Vedanta were developed. Sankaracharya’s Advaita Vedanta, Ramanucharya’s Vishistadvaita Vedanta and Madhvacharya’s Dvaita Vedanta.

RTA – THE VEDIC CONCEPT OF COSMIC ORDER

The law of which varuna is the custodian is called the Rita. Rta literally means “the cause of things”. It stands for law in general and the immanence of justice. This concepts must have been originally suggested by the regularity of the moments of sun, moon, the stars, the alternations of day and of night and of the seasons. Rta denotes the order of the world. Everything that is ordered in the universe has Rta for its principle. It corresponds to the universals of Plato. The world of experience is a shadow or reflection of the Rta, the permanentreality which remains unchanged in all the welter of mutation. The universal is prior to the particular, and so the vedic seer thinks that Rta exists before the manifestation of all phenomena. The shifling series of the world are the varying expressions of the constant Rta. So Rta is called the father of all. The tendency towards the mystic conception of an unchanging reality shows its first signs here. The real is unstable show, an imperfect copy. The real is one without parts and changes, while the many shift and pass.



After the emergence of Rta as a cosmic order it is also supposed as the settled will of a supreme god, the law of morality and righteousness as well. Even the gods cannot transgress it. We see in the conception of Rta a development from the physical to the devine. Rta originally meant the ‘established route of the world, of the sun, moon and stars morning evening, day and night”. Gradually it became the path of morality to be followed by man and the law of righteounesss observed even by gods.

OBJECTIVES

1. To introduce the beginnings of Indian philosophy

2. To introduce the religion and philosophy of the Vedas.

3. To introduce the concept of rta

SUMMARY

The oldest record of philosophical thinking is found in the Vedas. There are four Vedas. Rg veda, Yajur veda, Sama veda and Atharva –Veda. The essence of the Vedic hymns is the philosophy of spiritualistic monism. The ancient Indians personified the various aspects of nature in an anthropomorphre form, and worshipped them as gods. These gods were regarded as responsible for the governance of the world. They maintain the physical order of the cosmos known as rta.

FAQS

1. What is monotheism.

The vedic thinker is no longer satisfied with the idea of a multiplicity of gods. He now strives to discover the one God that controls and rules over all other gods. In monotheism, Varuna at onetime and Indra at another were treated as the supreme.

2. Bring out the philosophy of monism

In monotheism, many gods were reduced to one God, but in monism the whole of existence is reduced to one fundamental reality. This reality is no more conceived in personalistic terms’ it is called merely as ‘that’(Tat).

Glossary

Rta - The course of things

Tat - That

References

1. C.D Sharma - A critical survey of Indian philosophy

2. Dr.S.Radha Krishnan - Indian philosophy(Vol. I)

3. D.P.Chattopadhyaya - Indian philosophy a popular introduction



UNIT III

UPANISADS

The Upanishads form the concluding parts of the Vedas and are therefore called the Veda-anta or the end of the veda, a denominations which suggests that they contain the essence of the vedic teaching. They are the foundations on which most of the later philosophies and religions of India rest. “there is no important form of Hindu thought, heterodox Buddhism included which is not rooted in the upanisads” . The word “Upanisads” is derived from the root “sad” which means (i) to sit down (ii)to destroy (iii)to loosen. “Upa” means nearby and ‘ni’ means ‘devotedly. The word therefore means the sitting down of the disciple near his teacher in a devoted manner to receiving instruction about of the highest reality which loosens all doubts and destroys all ignorance of the disciple. Gradually the word came to signify any secret teaching about reality and it is used by the upanisads in this sense(rahasya or guhya vidya ). The muktikopanisad gives the number of the upanisads as 108. But ten or eleven upanisads are regarded as important and authorities on which Shankaracharya has commented. They are as follows: Isa, Kena, Katha, Prasna, Mundaka, Mandukhya, Chandogya, Brahadaranyaka, Aitereya and Taittiriya. We cannot assign any exact date to them. The earliest of them are certainly pre-Buddhistic, a few of them are after Buddha. It is likely that they were composed between the completion of the vedic hymns and the rise of Buddhism. The accepted date for the early upanisads are 1000 Bc to 300 Bc. Some of the later upanisads on which Samkare has commented, are post-Buddhistic, and belong to about 400 or 300 B.c. About the thinkers of the upanisads nothing much can be said. A few like yajnavalkya and uddalaka figure prominently, each with a definite set of teachings influencing a group of pupils.

It is not easy to decide what the upanisads teach. The central theme of the upanisads is the problem of philosophy. It is the search for what is true. The traditional view holds that the upanisads as revealed tests teach the same doctrine. But there has been extremely wide difference in their interpretation. The problems discussed in them as well as their unique style make them liable to many interpretations. All their teachings are not equally prominent. Some are mere flashes of thought, some are only hinted at, some are slightly developed, some are mentioned by the way; while some are often repeated, emphasized and thoroughly dealt with. There is an essential unity of purpose in them. They emphasize the same fundamental doctrines which may be called monistic idealism or idealistic monism. These poetic philosophic works are full of grand imagery, extremely charming and lucid expression abounding in crystal clarity. To the mind, they bring sound philosophical doctrines and to the heart, peace and freedom. They are full of Ananda or supreme joy out of which all things arise, by which they live and into which they return again. Passionate yearning for knowledge restless striving after truth, and a ceaseless search for reality have found a most touching expression in them.



The Upanisads develop the monistic ideas scattered in the samhitas. During the Brahmana period, these scattered philosophical ideas were almost overlooked and emphasis was laid on merely the rigorous ritualistic sacrifices. The Aranyakas mark the shifting of the emphasis from the ritualistic to the philosophical thought which work was completed by the upanisads. The Upanisads tell us that the Vedas have been breathed forth from Him(Brahman); but they regard the Karma-Kanda as secondary, being only a help to purify the mind by which purification one is made fit to receive the real teaching about Brahman. Thus we find the sage Narada telling Sanatkumara,” I know the Rig-veda, Sir, the Yajuh, the Sama, with all these I know only the Mantras and the sacred books, I do not know the self…. I have heard from persons like you that only he who knows the self goes beyond sorrow’. The Mundaka tells us: “ Two kinds of knowledge must be known, the higher and the lower. The lower knowledge is that which the Rig Veda, Sama,Atharva,ceremonial, Grammas give. .. but the higher knowledge is that by which the immortal Brahman is known!

THE NATURE OF REALITY

Brahman and Atman are the terms used in the upanisads to stand for the ultimate reality. It manifests itself as the subject as well as the object and transcends them both. The same reality is called from the subjective side as ‘Atman’ and from the objective side as ‘Brahman’. The two terms are used as synonyms. “ he who is this Brahman in man, and who is that in the sun, those are one’. The transcendent conception of god held in the Rig-Veda is here transformed into an immanent one. The true self has been the main topic of investigation in the Upanisads.

ATMAN

There are two currents of thought in the upanisads one aimed at discovering the primacy principle of the cosmos and the other searching for the innermost essence of man. This is found in the eternal principle behind the body and mind. It is termed ‘Atman’. The etymology of this word is observe. In the Rig-Veda it means breath or the vital essence. Gradually it acquired the meaning of soul or self and spirit. Sankaracarya quotes the verse giving the different connotations of the word ‘Atman’. The verse says that ‘Atman’ means that which pervades all, which is the subject and which knows, experiences and illuminates the objects, and which remains immortal and always the same.

In a dialogue between the teacher Prajapati and the pupil Indra, narrated in the chandogya Upanisad, we find a progressive development in the definition of self through the four stages of 1) the bodily self or the waking 2) the empirical self or the dreaming 3) the transcendental self or deep dreamless sleep and 4) the absolute self or turiya. What is the nature of the self of man, his central being? “ the self which is free from sin, free from old age, from death and grief, from hunger and thirst, which desires nothing but what it ought to desire and imagines nothing but what it ought to imagines



, that it is which we must try to understand”. The gods and the demons, the dialogue tells us, sent Indra and Virochana respectively, to Prajapati to learn the teaching about the self. The teacher asked them to undergo penance for thirty two years to qualify themselves to receive the teaching. After fulfilling the prescribed condition, both come to prajapati who teaches them that the self in indeed he who is seen when, you look into another’s eye or a pail of water or a mirror. It is suggested that we observe a picture even to the very hairs and nails. To indicate that it is not the self, Prajapati asks Indra to adorn himself put on the best clothes and look again into the water and the mirror, and he sees his likeness well adorned with best clothes and clean. Virochana was satisfied and went away. But Indra began to think thus. How can the self be the reflection of the body? Or , how can it be identified with the body, itself? “ As this self in the shadow or the water is well adorned when the body is well adorned, well dressed when the body is well dressed, well cleaned when the body is well cleaned, that self will also be blind if the body is blind, lame if the body is lame, crippled if the body is crippled, and perish, if fact, as soon as the body perishes. I see no good in this”. Indra approaches his teacher Prajapati, and after another long interval is told “ he who moves about happy in dreams is the self”. The true self is not the body which is exposed to all suffering and imperfections, which is a material phenomenon. The body is only an instrument used by consciousness, while consciousness is not the product of the body. And now Indra is told that the dreaming subject is the self, but he feels another difficulty. “Though it is true that self is not rendered faulty by faults of body, not struck when it is struck nor lamed when it is lamed, yet it is as if they struck him in dreams, as if they chased him. He becomes even conscious as it were of pain and sheds tears, therefore I see no good in this”. Indra again returns to prajapati and tells him his doubts, and after a long time is taught. “ when a man being asleep, reposing and at perfect rest, sees no dreams, that is the self”. Indra has to be taught that the object of experience require a permanent subject by which they could be experienced. To enable Indra to realize that the self is the subject of all experiences, Prajapati employs the method of abstraction which has its own disadvantages. Prajapati tries to bring out the absolute supremacy of the subject over the object, the truth of yajnavalkya’s statement that even when all objects are extinguished, the subject persists in its own light. “when the sun has set, when the moon has set, and when the fire is put out, the self alone is his light”. Indra felt that this self, freed from all bodily experience, from the shapeless mass of dreams, etc, this object less self, is a barren fiction. If the self is not what it knows , feels and reacts upon, if it is divorced from it and thus emptied of its content, what remains? “Nothing”, said Indira. “To be free from everything is to be nothing”. The self, he thinks, in deep sleep reduces itself to mere abstraction. There are no objects to be felt, to be known to be enjoyed. This self appears to be absolutely unconscious-knowing nothing feeling nothing, willing nothing. It is a zero, a cipher I see no good in this. Indra shows the risks in conceiving the self as a transcendental one. The self must be shown to be the true life of the whole, and not a mere abstraction. And again he approaches prajapati and tells him his doubts. The teacher



is now very much pleased with the ability of the disciple and now follows the real teaching. Dear Indra. The body is not the self, thou it exists for the self. The dream-experiences are not the self, though they have a meaning only for the self. The self is not an abstract formal principle of deep sleep too. The eye, the body, the mental states, the presentation continuum, the stream of consciousness are all mere instruments and objects of the self. The self is the ground of waking, dream and sleep states and yet it transcends them all. The self is universal, immanent as well as transcendent. The whole universe lives and moves and breathes in it. It is immortal, self luminous, self proved and beyond doubts and denials, as the very principle which makes all doubts, denials and thoughts possible. It is the ultimate subject which can never become an object and which is to be necessarily presupposed by all knowledge. “There is no second outside it, no other distinct term”. The self is the whole. “Indeed am this whole universe”. This fundamental identity, which is the presupposition of both self and not- self is called the Atman. None can doubts it reality.

The Mandukhya Upanisads gives us an analysis of consciousness leading to the same conclusion. The soul has three condition which are all included in a fourth. They are waking, dreaming, sleeping, and what is called turiya. The first condition is that of wakefulness, where the self is conscious of the common world of external objects. It enjoys the gross things. Here the dependence on the body is predominant. It is called Vishva. The second condition is that of dreaming, where the self enjoys subtle things, fashions for itself a new world of forms with the materials of its waking experience and is called Taijasa. The third is the condition of sound sleep, where we have neither dreams nor desires. It is called susupti. The soul is said to become temporarily one with Brahman and enjoy bliss. Here the self is called ‘prajna’. The mandukya upanisad prints out that the highest is not this dreamless sleep, but another, a fourth state of the soul, a pure intuitional consciousness, where there is no knowledge of objects internal or external. It is called Turiya. ‘The fourth is not that which is conscious of the subjective, nor that which is conscious of objective nor that which is conscious of both, nor that which is simple consciousness, nor that which is an all –sentient mass, nor that which is all darkness. It is unscen, transcendent, in apprehensible, uninferable, unthinkable, indescribable, the sole essence of the consciousness of self, the completion of the world, the ever peaceful, all blissful, the one unit, this indeed is the Atman’. It is symblised by the Aumkara, with its parts of A-U-M, the waking, the dreaming and the sleeping states. This self is the common ground of all these states. It manifests, itself in these three states and yet in its own nature it transcends them all.

BRAHMAN

We may now proceed to define the ultimate reality from the objective side, when it is called Brahman. The word is derived from the root ‘Brh’ which means to grow or to evolve. In the beginning it meant sacrifice, then prayer and then it acquired its present meaning of ultimate reality which evolves itself as this world. Brahman is that



which spontaneously bursts forth as nature and soul. It is the ultimate cause of this universe. In the chandogya, it is cryptically described as Tajjalan,- as that(tat) which the world arises(ja), into which it returns (la), and by which it is supported and it lives(an). In the taittiriya upanisad in chapter iii the Brahman is defined as “that from which these beings are born, that in which when born they live, and that into which they enter at their death, that is Brahman”. The evolution of the elements is given in this order. From Brahman arises ether, from ether air, from air fire, from fire water and from water earth. But the real theory of evolution is given in the doctrine of five sheaths (koshas) in the Taittiriya. The lowest level is that of matter. Annam Brahma(annamaya) matter is unconscious and dead and cannot account for life. It is purely on the physical plane. Brahman cannot rest content with matter. The purpose of matter is fulfilled only when life is evolved. The highest state of matter is therefore life. Though matter cannot account for life, yet there can be no life without matter. The inorganic matter must be transformed into organic life. Hence the second state of evolution is life. Prana is Brahma(pranamaya). Now we are on the biological plane. The vegetable life emerges first but the vegetable life must lead to the animal life. The vegetable products must be transformed into living animal cells. Life provides the universe and binds man with the rest of creation. But the destiny of life is fulfilled only when consciousness is evolved. Hence the third state of evolution is mind or perceptual consciousness. Manas is Brahma(manomaya). Here we are on the mental or psychological plane. This state is shared by lower animals with man. Even this will not suffice, for there are intellectual facts which mere perceptual consciousness does not take into account. Hence the fourth state of evolution is self-conscious reason. Vijnana or intelligence is Brahma(vijnanamaya). Here we are on the metaphysical plane. This state is the sole monopoly of human beings. Reason becomes self-conscious only at this state and this fact distinguishes human beings from lower animals. The empirical trinity of knower, knowledge and known has been evolved. But even this will not suffice. There must be something higher than mere intellect, where existence is no longer formulated in terms of knowledge. The unity of existence requires that we must transcend the intellectual level. Reality is different from thought, and can be reached in the turiya state of highest immediacy, which trcenscends thought and its distinctions, where the individual coincides with the central reality. The fifth and the highest state of evolution, therefore, is the non-dual bliss. Ananada is Brahma(anandamaya). Here we are on the mystic plane. The empirical trinity of knower, known and knowledge has been fused into a transcendental unity. Here philosophy terminates, the suggestion being that there is nothing higher than ananda. From it all things flow. By it all things are sustained, and into it all things are dissolved. As all spokes are contained in the axle and the wheel, so all beings, all gods, all world, all organs are contained in the universal self the Brahman.



This Brahman is described in two ways in the upanisads. Cosmic and acosmic. It is called cosmic, all-comprehensive, full of all good qualities-saprapaneha, saguna, and savisesa. And it is also called acosmic, quality less, indeterminate, indescribable. Nisprapancha, Nirguna, Nirvisesa and Anirvacaniya. This distinction is the root of the celebrated distinction made by sankaracharya between God and the absolute. The former is called lower Brahman(apara Brahma) or Isvara, and the latter higher Brahman (para Brahma) or the absolute.

The cosmic Brahman is regarded as the cause of production, maintenance and destruction of this universe. All beings arise from Him, live in Him and are absorbed in Him. The mandukya calls Him ‘the Lord of all, the knower of all, the inner controller of all. Like sparks arising from fire, like earthen-ware arising out of earth, like gold ornaments being made out of gold, like cob-web coming out of a spider, like the musical sound coming out of a flute, the entire creation arises out of Brahman. Just as when clay is known everything made out of clay becomes known, for it is only name and form similarly when Brahman, the cause is known, everything , being a mere effect, becomes known, for the effects are only names and forms, the reality is Brahman alone.

The acosmic Brahman is the transcendental absolute, the Turiya or the fourth, the Amatra or the measureless, the Anirvachaniya or the indescribable. The absolute can be best described only in a negative way, though it is not itself negated by it. Yajnavalkya describes it thus. “This is the imperishable, O Gargi, which wise people adore and not gross, not subtle, not short, not long, without shadow, without darkness without air, without space, without attachment without taste, without smell, without sight, without ears without speech, without mind, without light, without breath, without mouth, and without either inside or outside. It does not eat anything nor can anything eat it”. The negative description of Brahman does not mean that it is a blank nothingness. It only signifies that the absolute cannot adequately be represented by the categories known to human thought. ‘It is not this, not this’(Netineti). The best possible description gives is succidanada(sat- cit -ananda). Sat means ‘existence’ which points to the eternal nature of the absolute compared to things of temporal existence. Cit means ‘consciousness’ which shows that it is spiritual. The last epilthet ananda stands for the blissful nature of the reality. The terms are interpreted also as satyam(truth), jnanam(knowledge) and anantam(infinite) respectively. The Brhadaranyaka describes Brahman as “the Real of the real”(Satyasya Satyam).

THE INDIVIDUAL SELF OR SOUL

The Upanisads make out that of finite objects the individual self or soul has the highest reality. The individual soul is called ‘jiva’ from the root ‘jiv’ which means “to live”. Both according to the cosmic and the acosmic views, the individual is not different in essence from the absolute spirit. The analogy of the two birds is given, not to teach the jiva and Brahman are different , but to show what make for their apparent



difference. “Two birds, akin and friends, cling to the self-same tree, one of them eats the sweet berry, but the other gazen upon him without eating. In the same tree- the world tree-man dwells along with God with troubles over whelmed, he faints and grieves at his own helplessness. But when he sees the other, the Lord in whom he delights-ah, what glory is his, his troubles pass away”. The Kalha upanisad compares the supreme self and the individual soul to light and shade respectively. The prasna says, “from the Atman this life is born just as there is this shadow in the case of a person, so is this connected there with (i.e the Atman). Thus it will be seen that what makes for the state of jiva is the apparent conditioning of the self by a complex of body and mind. It is these latter that account for the soul’s transmigration and travail.

In the Taittiriya doctrines of Kosas, five sheaths of the soul are mentioned annarasamaya, which is the outer most sheath made of food viz the physical body. Pranamaya the sheaths of vital airs manomaya, the sheaths of mind, vijnanemaya the sheaths of intellect and anandamaya, the sheaths of bliss. In later Vedanta, the first is also known as the grossbody(sthirta-sariga), the next three constitute the subtle body(saksma sarira), and the last is called the causal body(karma sarira) viz. ignorance or nescience(avidya). These together constitute “the empirical home” of the soul. Being conditioned by these, the soul becomes the subject of experience and enjoyment. The katha upanisads compares the self to the lord of the chariot, the body to the chariot, the intellect to the charioteer, the mind to the reins, the senses to the horses, and the sense-object to the roads, and it adds that the individual soul as associated with the body, the senses and mind, is the experiment or enjoyer(bhoktr). In all experience and enjoyment, the mind or manas, of course, is the central factor. The body and the breath, which are graded below manas, are respectively the physical basis of the soul’s activity and enjoyoment, and the principle of life which makes for the animation of the body. The Vijnannamaya and the anandamaya which are higher than the manomaya represent the moral and the supra moral levels of experience.

The soul, in the view of the Upanisads, is not born with the body, nor does it perish therewith. “The wise one(i.e. the soul) is not born, nor does it die. This one has not came from any where, nor has it become any one. Unborn, constant, external, primeval, this one is not slain when the body is slain”. What happens at death is only the decease of the physical body. The soul migrates from life to life, being conditioned by the cause of such migration, viz ignorance and by the instrument which enables it to migrate, viz the subtle body. The Mundaka Upanisad analyses three states of existence of the jive-waking, dream and deep sleep. In the waking state, the mind and the sense organs are fully active and the jiva is in contact with the external world. This state of existence is known as Jagrat and the jiva in this state is known as Vaisvanasa. In the dream state, the sense organs are at rest, only the mind functions and this state is known as svapna. The jiva in this state is known taijasa. In deep sleep or dreamless sleep known as swapti, both the mind and the senses are at rest. In this stat the jiva enjoys bliss, but avidya is not destroyed, and in this state the jiva is known as prajna.



THE PRACTICAL TEACHINGS

The practical teaching of the Upanisads is devised to bring about Brahman realization. It aims at the rectification of our thoughts and of our deeds. Broadly speaking, the course of discipline prescribed comprises two states. Cultivation of detachment(Vairagya) and acquisition of knowledge(Jnana).

1. Cultivation of detachment(Vairagya)

The prime object of Upanisadic discipline is the removal of aham-kara, which is the basis of all evil, and vairagya is the name given to the attitude towards the world which results from the successful eradication of the narrow selfish impulses for which it stands. Its accomplishment necessarily presupposes a large course of training through the three asramas or disciplinary stages-those of the religious student (brahma-carya), the house holder(garhasthya) and the anchorite(vanaprastha)-so far as they were understood at the time. As the very word asrama(toil) means, they are stages of strife when selfreshness is slowly but steadily rooted out. This training leads to samanyasa but we should remember that the term does not yet bear in the Upanisads its present significance of a formal stage in the spiritual ascent of man. It there means only the transcending of the triple mode of asrama life and is regarded as a consequence of Brahma-knowledge rather than a means of attaining it. In the latter sense, Samnyasa appears comparatively late. The Upanisads, while fully recognizing the value of this preparatory training, do not ordinarily dwell at length upon it. They rather take it for granted and address themselves to such as have already successfully undergone that training and have acquired vairagya.

2. Acquisition of Knowledge (jnana)

Evil being due to a misconception of the nature of reality, its removal can be only through right knowledge and if the cultivation of detachment is also laid down as necessary, it is only to render the acquisition of such knowledge possible. Detachment is a precondition of right knowledge. The training of this second stage is three fold: Sravana,Manana and Nididhyasana.

Sravana stands for the study of the Upanisads under a proper guru. ‘He that has a teacher knows’. It defines the place of precept and tradition in the training. It also means that the influence of an ideal is never so great on us as when we are brought into personal contact with one who is a living embodiment of that ideal. Though necessary, sravana is not enough, so it is supplemented by manana or continued reflection upon what has there been learnt with a view to get an intellectual conviction regarding it. This training is to be further supplemented by Nididhyasana or meditation, which assists directly in the realization, within oneself of the unity underlying the multiplicity of the Universe. Nididhyasa is the highest form of meditation and is possible only after considerable practice in concentration of thought. Hence the Upanisads prescribe



several meditative exercises of a preliminary character. They are called upasanas. In upasana, the thought may be directed wholly out wards and two selected objects, both external may be mentally identified as in the meditation of the universe as a ‘horse’ alluded to above, or only one external object may be chosen and it may be thought of as identical with the contemplative’s own self. There is one important difference between the two forms of meditation while the former affords exercise only in concentration, the latter gives scope in addition, to the cultivation of sympathetic imagination. The power to place oneself in the portion of another. It accordingly serves as a more direct aid to Brahman-realization, where in also what is contemplated, viz Brahman is to be identified with the contemplative’s self. Again the objects of contemplation may be real object or only symbols. Among real objects which the disciple is asked to think of as one with Brahman, we often find conceptions which were once taken for ultimate reality itself, but which in course of time, as philosophic thought progressed, were superseded by higher conceptions. Such for insistence is the cases with prana, which marked an actual stage in the evolution of the conception of the absolute. Among the symbols used for Brahman may be mentioned the famous OM, the mystic syllable which finds a very important place in the upanisads. Whatever form these meditations may take, they prepare the disciple for the final m ode of contemplation as Aham Brahmaasmi(I am Brahman). When a person that has morally purified himself and has after formal study and reflection convinced himself intellectually of the truth of unity succeeds through nididhyasana in transforming. What was here to fore known only meditatively into an immediate certainty, he attain the spiritual goal. It is however, only a very few that can achieve this goal. The Upanisads themselves refer to a knower of Brahman as a rarity.

MOKSA OR RELEASE

Moksa or Release is the goal of every man, and release consist in the soul’s freedom from the need to be reborn. There are two views in the Upanisads regarding the nature of the goal. One view is that Moksa is attainable only after death that is, Videha mukti. The other view is that it can be attained while one is alive. It is known as jivanmuki. According to this view, since moksa is the state in which ignorance is dispelled by knowledge of the true self, and for this one need not wait until the death of the body.

Is the highest state of religious realization, the atonement with the supreme god head, a mere vanishing into nothingness? The upanisad view is that there is in the highest condition a disintegration of individuality, a giving up of selfish isolation, but it is not a mere nothing or death. “As the flowing rivers disappear in the sea, losing their name and form thus a wise man, freed from name and form, gives to the divine person who is beyond all”. The liberated condition must be looked upon as the fullest expression of the self.



The highest is a state of rapture and ecstasy, a condition of ananda, where the creature as creature is abolished, but becomes one with the creator, or more accurately realises his oneness with Him. We cannot describe this perfection adequately we use symbols. The nature of eternal life is a condition of ananda or freedom, a state of joyous expansion of the soul, where heaven and earth are felt to flow together.

There are passages where the individual is said to become one with the highest. “ The pranava is the bow, the Atman is the arrow, and the Brahman is said to be its mark. It should be hit by one who is self-collected, and that which hits becomes like the arrow, one with the mark, that is Brahman”. Here absolute identity between the soul and Brahman is asserted. Aham Brahmaasmi. The knower of Brahmanbecomes Brahman. ‘Brahmavid Brahmaivabhavati. There is no sense of individuality, and there is no possibility of action in the highest state when Yajnavalkya explains it to Maitreys in the words. “As a lump of salt which is thrown into the water dissolves and cannot be gathered up again, but wherever water is drawn, it is salty, so truly is it with this great being, the endless, the unlimited, the fullness of knowledge from these beings it came into view and with them it vanishes. There is no consciousness after death”. According to the chandogya, immortality is lifting oneself up to the region of the deity Mundaka holds it to be the companionship with God. Absolute likness with God is also suggested.

All most all Indian thinkers are agreed that moksa is release from birth and death. Union with God is another name for becoming eternal. When ‘eternity’ is translated into the terms of the phenomenal world, it becomes birth lessness and death lessness.

OBJECTIVES

1. To introduce the main teachings of the Upanisads

2. To introduce the concepts Atman and Brahman

3. To introduce the concept of jiva

4. To introduce the concept moksa

SUMMARY

The teaching of the Upanisads represents the final aim or goal of the Vedas. The Upanisads are the foundation on which several of the later philosophies and religions of India rest. Brahman and Atman are the terms used in the Upanisads to stand for the ultimate reality. In the Upanisads, we have not only religious and metaphysical ideas about the ultimate reality but also ways and means of attaining them. The practical teaching of the Upanisads is devised to bring about Brahman realization.



FAQS

1. Elucidate the nature of jiva

The individual soul is called jiva. Both according to the cosmic and acosmic views, the individual is not different in essence from the absolute spirit. The Katha Upanisads compares the supreme self and the individual soul to light and shade respectively. In its empirical condition, the jiva has an out fit of three bodies. Sthula, Suksma and Karana Sarira. A more elaborate analysis of the soul is found in the Taittiriya as the doctrines of Kosas(sheaths)- Annmaya, pranamaya, manomaya, vijnanamaya and Aandamaya.

2. Explain the practical teaching of the Upanisads

The practical teaching of the Upanisads is devised to bring about Brahm realization. The course of life that a man should adopt in order to attain moksa is out lined in the Upanisads. The course of discipline prescribed comprises two states. The first requirement is detachment (vairagya) and the second requirement is a high degree of ethical culture or moral purity. It is renunciation or tyaga or wordly desires and pursuits. But the direct means of liberation in jnana. The actual training which directly aims at self realization consists of three steps, namely, sravana, manana and nidhidhyasana..

REFERENCES

1. C.D.Sharma - A Critical Survey of Indian philosophy

2. Dr.S.Radhakrishnan - Indian philosophy(Vol. I)

3. M. Hiriyanna - Out lines of Indian philosophy

GLOSSARY

1. Moksa - Liberation

2. Vairagya - Detachment

3. Avidya - Ignorance

4. Jiva - Soul

5. Ananda - Bliss

UNIT IV

THE BHAGAVAD GITA

INTRODUCTION



Bhagavad-Gita is more a religious classic than philosophical treaties. It gives answers and directions to the aspirations of the pilgrims of all sects who seek their inner way to the city of God. The teaching of the Gita is not presented as a metaphysical system thought out by an individual thinker or school of thinkers. It is set forth as a tradition which has emerged from the religious life of mankind. The Bhagavad-Gita is later than the great movement represented by the early Upanisads and earlier than the period of the development of the philosophic systems and their formulation in sutras. Its date may be assigned to the fifth century B.C. though the text may have received many alterations in subsequent times. We do not know the name of the author of the Gita. The authorship of the Gita is attributed to Vyasa, the legendary compiler of the Mahābhārata. The eighteen Chapters of the Gita are from the chapters 23-40 of the Bhismaparva of the Mahābhārata. Mahābhārata belongs to the Bhāgavatā group of Vaisnava religion. It is said that the Bhagavad-Gita must have been a separate poem of Vaisnavism and latter adopted or added to the Mahābhārata.

The Bhagavad Gita consists of eighteen chapters. They are as follows.

1. The Hesitation and despondency of Arjuna

2. Samkhya theory and yoga practice

3. Karma yoga or the method of work

4. The way of knowledge

5. True Renunciation

6. The true yoga

7. God and the world

8. The course of cosmic evolution

9. The lord is more than his creation

10. God is the source of all, to lawn Him is to know all

11. The Lord’s Transfiguration

12. Worship of the personal Lord is better than meditation of the absolute

13. The body called the held, the soul called the knower of the field and discrimination between them.

14. The mystical father of all beings

15. The tree of life

16. The nature of the God like and the Demoniac mind



17. The Three modes applied to religious phenomena

18. Conclusion

Bhagavad gita literally means ‘The “lord’s song ie. The philosophical discourse of Lord Krishna to persuade the reluctant Arjuna to fight. It is said to be “the most beautiful, perhaps the only true philosophical song existing in any known tongue”. The poet makes the teacher the very God descended into humanity. He is supposed to address Arjuna, the representative man, at a great crisis in his life. In the beginnings we find Arjuna horrified at the thought that he has to fight with his relatives and friends and he says to Krishna that he can foresee no advantage in killing relatives and he flatly refuses to fight. The mood of despair in which Arjuna is found in the first chapter of the Gita is what the mystics call the dark night of the soul, an essential step in the up word path. The further stages of illumination and realization are found in the course of the dialogue. From the second chapter onwards we have a philosophical analysis. The essential thing in man is not the body or the sense but the changeless spirit. The mind of Arjuna is switched on to a new path. The life of the soul is symbolized by the battle –fields of Kuruksetra, and the Kauravas are the enemies who impede the progress of the soul. The opening chapter shown great insight into the heart of man, its conflict of motives, the force of selfishness and the subtle whisperings of the Evil one. As the dialogue proceeds the dramatic element disappears. The echoes of the battle field die away, and we have only an interview between God and man. The chariot of war becomes the lonely cell of meditation, a corner of the battle-field where the Voices of the world are stilled, a fit place for thoughts on the supreme.

Some people have tried to read in the Gita a ‘cult of murder’. But this simply shows to what extent a noble worked can be misinterpret . To fight against evils is the duty of man. To make the situation poignant relatives and beloved friends and revered elders stand on both sides and Arjuna has to vindicate his claim, he has to follow his Svabhava and Svadharma. It is a significant fact that though Lord Krishna in the beginning repeatedly asks Arjuna to fight, in the end when the teaching has been imparted to him, the lord simply says “Do as yo please’. Krishna undertakes to remove Arjuna’s narrowness of out look born out of ignorance by giving him the light of knowledge. The teaching is not for him alone. Treating Arjuna’s predicament as an occasion, the Lord expounds his message to the whole of humanity.

Some argue that Gita has no central teaching as such for it gives very many spiritual principles and moral cords without any focus. But it is not true. The aim of the Bhagavad-Gita was to show a definite and clear path to Arjuna. After hearing the Gita he admitted that all his doubts were removed. If so, how can it be said that the Gita has no central teaching? Very many scholars agree that the central teaching of the Gita is Karmayoga, particularly Niskāmakarmayoga i.e., self-less activity.



The central teaching of the Bhagavad gita is the same as that of the Upanisads. Sankara in his commentary on the Gita, describes the text as containing the quintessence of all vedic teachings. A popular verse compares the Upanisads to the cows, Shri Krishna to the cow-herd, Arjuna to the calf, the Gita to the celestial milk and good people to be partakers of the milk. The central teaching of the Gita can be beautifully summarized in this sentence of Annie Besant. “it is meant to lift the aspirant from the lower levels of renunciation, where objects are renounced, to the loftier highest where desires are dead, and where the yogi dwells in calm and ceaseless contemplation, while his body and mind are actively employed in discharging the duties that fall to his lot in life . The gita tries to build up a philosophy of karma based on Jnana and supported by Bhakti in a beautiful manner.

The Gita represent a unique synthesis of action, Devotion and knowledge. Man is a complex of intellect, will and emotion, he is a being who thinks wills and feels. Intellect has given rise to the philosophy of knowledge, will to the philosophy of Action, and emotion to the philosophy of devotion. Modern psychology teach us that these three aspects of mind are distinguishable by in thought and not divisible in reality. There is no water tight division separating one from the rest. The teaching of the Gita is in keeping with this view. To quote Dr.S.Radhakrishnana ‘The absolute reveals itself to those seeking for knowledge as the eternal light, clear and radiant as the sun at noon-day; to those struggling for virthue as the Eternal Righteousness, stead fast and impartial, and to those emotionally inclined as Eternal Love and Beauty of holiness. Different people attain the same goal of salvation by these three different paths of knowledge, action and devotion.

‘KARMA – YOGA’

To understand what exactly is meant by the expression karma-yoga, it is necessary to consider the two terms constituting it: ‘karma’ and ‘yoga’. ‘Karma” literally means ‘What is done’ or a’a deed’ and it is from the root ‘kri’. This is the general meaning of the term. But it also signifies that particular form of activity which is taught in the liturgical portion of Vedic literature, that is, sacrifice. But the most common significance by which this term is ued is to denote those duties that are in accordance with custom and tradition. That is to say, the duties pertaining to each individual, according to each one’s varna and āshrama. This would mean, fulfilling one’s social obligations. And again with a fourth meaning this term is used in the Gita,i.e divine worship and the devotional acts connected with it such as prayer. When the word karma is used in the context of the Gita all these meanings should be there in our mind, of course, with a special emphasis on social obligations. The word ‘yoga’ is from the root word ‘yuj’, which means ‘to join’ or ‘the act of joining’. It means, joining together or yoking together or combining together the parts so that by the combined effort some higher purpose may be achieved. Thus the word karma-yoga would mean, ‘adjoin oneself to the discharge of obligations so that some higher result is



obtained’. This would popularly mean ‘devotion or commitment to the discharge of social obligations’. Now the meaning karma yoga has got two parts and which need explanation:.

1)What is the nature of social obligations to which one has to commit oneself? 2) How one should commit oneself in the doing of his social obligations? As the answer for the first question the Gita explains theory of svadharma, and for the second question niskāmakarma.

SVADHDARMA

The term ‘sva-dharma’ means ‘duties of one’s own’, the specific duties according to one’s varna-social class-and ashrama-stages of life. But though the general meaning implies both varna and ashrama, the Gita uses this term to indicate varna-system alone. It does not mean that by karma the Gita mean only varna dharma, but rather it gives special emphasis and explanation for varna dharma. Duties of ashramas and those which are common to everyone, which is known as samanya dharma also are included here. Thus svadharma means, duties assigned to each class of the society. The society was divided in to four classes: Brahmana, Ksatirya, Vaisya and Sudra. Those included in the group of Brahmana are men of learning and who has to perform rituals and sacrifices for the society. Ksatriyas are suppose to be the people of great dynamism and courage and their dutyis to protect the country from enemies and thus to rule the country. Vaisyas are business men and they have to take care of the economic well fare of the society. Sudras are those who do the manual work. The Gita has dealt varna system as one of the principal themes and has given adequate and reasonable explanation for its institution. Though many Hindu scriptures makes mention of them, all of then agree with the Gita.

SCRIPTURAL SANCTION FOR VARNA DHARMA –DIVISION OF SOCIETY

The origin of the concept of varnadharma and the division of the society accordingly is found in the Vedas, - in Purusa Sukta of the Rig Veda- though it later underwent much transformation in the hands of the Hindu law givers. The Bhagavad-Gita says that the Lord Himself divided human beings into four groups, determined by their actions and virtues. It advocates very much of the following of it. At a very start it has spoken of the duty, rule and function of the Ksatriya as Arjuina’s own law of action, varnadharma; it has proceeded to lay it down with a striking emphasis that own one’s duty or function should be observed and followed. One’s own natural work is better even if it looks from some other point of view defective. One does not incur sin or stain when one acts in the true spirit of work and in agreement with the law of one’s own nature.

VARNADHARMA AND SVABHAVA



Now let us see the meaning of the term svabhava. Sva-bhava means one’s won nature. One of the important teachings of the Gita with regard to svadharma is that it is based on svabhabva. That is to say, the division as four classes is not determined by birth or heredity but is based on the character or the very nature of each one. Every person is unique. Everyone has got inborn inequalities. The varna system recognizes this fact of inevitable difference in svabhava and thus formulates its division of society. Now we have seen that the nature(svabhava) of every individual is different or unique. What is the reason for such an inborn inequality or uniqueness”. The reason provided by the Gita is that the difference in the character of every person is determined by the difference in the proportion of three gunas(qualities), i.e., satva, rajas and thamas.

According to Hindu principle, especially for Samkhya philosophy, there are there fundamental qualities or ‘gunas’ which is present in every individual. Those are satva, rajas and thamas. These three gunas are the constituents of prakrti, which is the material stuff of the universe out of which everything in the universe-of course, including the human beings is created. Satva is the principle of all that is positive, and rajas is the principle of dynamism and thams is that of dullness. The difference in the character and personality of every individual is due to the varying proportion of these qualities. Due to this we find different type of character and action. As per Sankara’s elaboration (Sankara, The Gitabhasya) those in whom satva is predominant is grouped and named as Brahmana. Those in whom rajas is predominant and satva is secondary are given a collective name Ksatriya. Those in whom rajas predominates and tamas occupies the secondary position are Vaisya. The group in whom tamas predominates and rajas is secondary in Sudra. The leaving of some guna or gunas unmentioned in each case, is not that they are totally absent, but they are present only minimally. The three gunas are the constituent of prakriti, the primal matter, and nothing worldly can remain devoid of any one of them.

The nature(svabhava) of an individual, belonging to any varna, is determined by his guna complex. Thus the nature, or natural property, of a Brahmana who is satva dominated, is tranquility(santhi), that of a Ksatriya, who is rajas dominated with satva is subordinated to his rajasika nature is lordliness, that of a Vaisysa, who is rajas dominated to his thamasika nature, industriousness, and that of a Sudra who is tamas dominated with rajas subordinated to his tamasika nature dullness. The duties of the individuals of the each varna is determined in accordance with their nature.

Now a deeper question remains. Why at all there is difference in the proportion of gunas in the self? What is the reason for such a difference in the distribution of gunas among the individual human selves? The Gita’s answer to this question is the doctrine of karma. According to the Indian theory of karma, which the Gita recognizes, a man’s inborn nature and course of life are essentially determined by his own past lives. According to the merit one has acquired during his past life he will get a better self with satva dominated or worse self which is dominated by rajas or thamas. Thus



uniqueness of the person, whether positive or negative, cannot depend solely on the material factor of his ancestry, parentage, physical birth. The person himself is responsible for his present state of self.

If this is the case, another problem has to be settled. If the nature of every person is pre-determined, he cannot but act the other way than his nature which is already determined demands from him. It becomes merely his fate to be condemned in this way or that way to behave. Thus all moral responsibility should cease and self-effort becomes meaningless.

But Hindu philosophy gives adequate answer to it. In considering this object, it is necessary to remember that every deed that we do leads to double result. It not only produces what may be termed its direct result- the pain or pleasure following from it but it also establishes in us a tendency to repeat the same deed in the future. This tendency is termed samskara, and the direct fruit of the karma is known as its phala. Every deed is bound to yield its phala; even the gods cannot prevent it from doing so. But that is all the necessity involved in the karma theory. As regards the samskaras, on the other hand, we have within us the full power of control so that we may regu.ate them as they tend to express themselves in action. There is thus nothing in the doctrine which either eliminates responsibility or invalidates self effort. The necessity that governs the incidence of the direct fruit or phala and renders escape from it impossible , so far form unnerving us should stimulate us exertion. It must enable us to work for the future with confidence, unmindful of what may happen in the present as the result of our past actions over which we have no longer any control. The important point about the karma doctrine then is that paradoxical though it may seem, it inspires us with hope and resignation towards what may occur in the present.

Thus from the two points discussed above it is clear that it is not the birth that determined to which group one includes, but rather it is the inner nature or svabhava. Gita speaks indeed that the inclusion of a person in a particular class and the work born assigned to him are sahajam karma(the word sahaja means that which is born with us). The work or function of a man is determined by his svabhava, svabhavajam karma, and regulated by his svabhava. This emphasis on the inner quality of and spirit which finds expression in work, function and action is the whole sense of the Gita’s idea of karma.

VARNADHARMA: INDIVIDUAL AND SOCIAL ASPECTS

So far we have been trying to explain what is meant by svadharma, and svabhava and their interrelations. Now it has got a double application with its double aspects: personal(individual) and social.



We have already seen that the varnadharma is the innate character of the very being of individual. One can attain perfection if he is in harmony with his inner nature. Competing against the fundamental nature will never produce self-satisfaction but rather inner dispute and dissatisfaction. Thus a man who devotes himself to his own natural work in life acquires spiritual perfection. The Gita’s injunction is to worship the Divine by our own work, sarva- karmanan; necessarily means our offering must be the works determined by our own law of being and nature. Because it is the divine will of god operated through the law of karma that has determined our nature and thus each one’s class. To worship him with our karma is to make our whole life a sacrifice of work to the highest is to prepare ourselves to become one with him in all our will and substance and nature. Our work should be in accordance with the truth within us. It should not be an accommodation with outward and artificial standards: it must be a living and sincere expression of the soul and its inborn powers Svadharma, as we have seen is a classification of the society based on differing nature of the individual. This varna system, of applied with right motive, will become one of the best principle for an ideal society. Now let us explore its further social significance.

SVABHAVA AND SOCIAL NEED

Thus on the one side there are individuals of differing temperaments, and on the other, are the various types of functions in society- each one requiring distinct qualities. To the extent the above two needs are organically related, there is the securing of the individuals’ efficient performance of duties.

The varna classification seems to be based on the division of human beings in to four distinct categories- each one comprehending individuals with similar qualities. The classification represents the dominant and not the exclusive characteristics of the individuals comprising the group. The possession of the various qualities indicates the aptitudes of the individuals for specific duties. The recognition of the fundamental differences in the qualities and abilities of men provides ample evidence of the deep psychological insight that the Hindu philosophers possessed for classifying human beings.

VARNADHARMA FOR SOCIAL UNITY AND WELFARE

In the Vedas the four castes have their own special superiority. No caste is inferior to any other. In the Vedas the four castes are described as four important parts of the body of the Cosmic Person; the head, the arms, the thigh, and the feet. This analogy suggests the interdependence of the four castes for the common welfare of all; it also suggests that the exploitation of one by another undermines the strength of the whole of society. Hence it is not only that every section of society is important but also indispensible for the welfare of the society as such. Though the different groups carryout different functions, they are bound by a sense of unity and brotherhood since



each group is not working for its own sake but is contributing its fruits of its labor to society.

NISKĀMAKARMA

Now let us come to the second question. How one should commit oneself in the doing of his social obligations? Towards answering the question how one has to apply himself in his obligations, Gita would say ‘do your duties without any selfish motive’; without seeking any reward from what you have done, which termed as Niskāmakarma-karma (nis=not, or without, kāma-desire, karma =action) which is in opposition to sa-kāma-karma. Our devotion should be to the duties alone and never to its phala. An important consequence of following this principle of action is that one can act with complete equanimity. Desire or self-interest when allowed to have a sway over us may blind us to what is right. This teaching, that we ought to engage ourselves in our work as members of social order in the usual way and yet banish from our mind all thoughts of deriving any personal benefit, is the meaning of karma yoga and constitutes the specific message of the Gita. In karma-yoga the idea of the result must be totally dismissed from the mind of the doer before as well as during the act.

To understand the importance of the teaching of niskāmakarma, one would be aware of the social context and the prevalent ideals at the time of the formation of the Gita. There were two opposing views; one is the negative ideal of renunciation, which is known as nivrti and the other is positive one of active life, known as pravrti. Nivrti advocated giving up of all karma and withdrawing from the world. Pravrti recommended living in the midst of society undertaking all the obligations implied thereby; but it did not exclude the element of selfishness altogether . The object of Gita is to discover the golden mean between the two ideals of pravrti and nivrti, or action or contemplation, preserving the excellence of both. Karma yoga is such a mean. While it does not abandon activity, it reserves the spirit of renunciation. Thus it discards neither idea, but by combining them refines and ennobles both. In other words the Gita teaching stands not for ‘renunciation of action’(naiskarma) but for ‘renunciation in action’(niskāmakarma).

Do the duty without any motive (disinterested activity). But, actually is it possible? Disinterested activity in the literal sense of the expression is a psychological impossibility, to insist upon it in the name of morality is to reduce life to a meaningless drudgery. A specific feature of all voluntary deeds is that, they are proceeded by a desire for something, which is described as their motive or phala. In the beginning of the war the aim of Arjuna was limited to the acquisition of kingdom. That is why he makes his rejection by telling how he could kill his kith and kin merely for the enjoyment of kingdom, which is a selfish and wordly motive.

If disinterested activity is not possible as we have seen, then in what sense the Gita advocates Niskamakarma? For Gita any activity, of course, which is natural to



man. If not properly guided, will become the means of obscuring from him the higher end for which he exists. Karma yoga is disinterested only so far as it turns our mind from selfish and inferior results and sets it on the path leading to the true goal of superior motive which leads to divine union or betterment of our spiritual nature ie spiritual union with the ultimate.

According to Gita a Niskamakarmayogi can attain self –realization or the perfected state even in this life. The Gita requires man to continue to work even in this perfected state. He has to work for the well being of the society-lokasamgraha in a purely detached manner. Lord himself, though he has nothing to accomplish for himself, acts for the benefit of the humanity. He who performs action in a detached manner thinking himself to be a mere instrument of God, is not contaminated by sin like the lotus leaf, though living in water, yet not being contaminated by it.

JNANA- YOGA

Jnana-yoga aims at self-realization or realization of the true nature of the self. The yogi’s ideal is self-realization which cannot be attained without knowledge. Even the devotees are granted knowledge by the Lord so that they may realize the goal. Yoga, benefit of knowledge, is an impossibility. The discipline of Jnana –yoga is two –fold (i) withdrawal from everything that is material and objective, and (ii) meditation upon the true nature of the self.) We may weaken the power of the senses by fasting and abstaining from necessities, but unless we rise above the relish and the desire, the psychological attachment to the sense-objects, we are not true yogis. And this relish can go away only with the rise of true knowledge. The Gita declares that even the most sinful can cross over the ocean of Samsara(wordly life) by means of the boat of knowledge alone. As a fire well-kindled reduces fuel to ashes, so the fire of knowledge reduces all actions to ashes. The culmination of action is in knowledge. Having attained knowledge, one soon embraces peace. There is nothing purer than knowledge. The knower is identified by the Lord with his own self.

BHAKTI – YOGA

Bhakti-yoga is for the man of emotional nature who wants to love God. Devotion to any form of god is called Bhakti. Bhakti or devotion is defined as disinterested service to God. So it is a form of Karma. And disinterested action, as we have seen, is not possible without knowledge. Hence Bhakti too, like Niskama karma can be performed only by a true jnani. The ideal devotee is one who is dedicated to the service of God. For him, absolute dependence, surrender and faith are necessary. The devotee is confident of the guarantee given by the Lord; “O, Arjuna, know firmly that my devotee is never ruined. He who does my work, who yields himself upto me, who is devoted to me, void of attachment, without hatred to any one, O Arjuna, comes to me’.



The object of devotion is the personal God, the purusottama on whose mercy the devotee has to throw himself utterly. Absolute dependence and utter faith are very necessary. The Lord Himself lifts up his devotees from the ocean of birth-and- death. The love of God is the supreme love and every other from of it is an imperfect manifestation of this supreme love. There are four kinds of devotees. They are the suffering (arta), the seeker for truth(jijnasa), the self-interested(artharthi), and the wise(jnani). Out of the four kinds of devotees the last one is the best. He comes to know that the Lord pervades the entire universe. He sees the Lord in everything and everything is Lord.

STHITHA PRAJNA

To satisfy Arjuna’s curiosity regarding the state of the perfect soul, Krsna enumerates the following qualities. The perfected soul is the ideal yogi who has curbed his passions and maintains calmness is cold and heat, in joy and sorrow in honour and dishonor. As a lamp flickers not in a windless place, that is the simile for the yogi who curbs his thoughts and yields himself entirely to absorption. He is known as sthitaprajna or ‘man-of-steady-wisdom’. The sthitaprajna is firmly rooted in the higher self and is unmoved by the pairs of opposites. The liberated state is the one in which seeing the self by the self one is satisfied on oneself. Here one experiences absolute bliss, known only to higher consciousness, but ever beyond the senses. A yogi never deviates from the truth and considers no other gain greater than truth; such a state free from all misery is the state of the liberated soul.

Sthithaprajna is the jivam mukta, liberated which alive. He is fee from the petty desires that bind the soul. He does not have the sense of being the agent or the enjoyer of an action, for he has ceased to identify himself with the mind, body organism. His happiness is not derived from the objects of sense. He does good to the world but without any sense of egoity. His actions are the spontaneous expressions of his innate goodness. The lord Himself, though he has nothing to accomplish for Himself, acts for the benefit of humanity. The perfect man, like wise, asks for the good of the word (loka-sangraha) in the spirit of perfect detachment. The very existence of such a person is a blessing to the world. Having attained the final goal of self-realization he is not born again.

OBJECTIVES

To introduce the three paths to the realization of absolute truth

1. To introduce the concept swadharma

2. To introduce the concept sthethapraja



SUMMARY

The essential teaching of the Bhavavad Gita is identical with that of the Upanisads. As to the practical teaching Gita advocates the path of Knowledge of devotion and of action. All leads to the same, namely moksa or liberation. The theory of action, which the Gita teaches, is known as Niskama karma(renunciation in action). It is performance of action without selfish desire for the fruits of it. The liberated soul is known as sthithaprajna or a man of steady wisdom.

FAQS

1. What are the characteristics of sthithiprajna?

Sthitiprajna means man- of steady-wisdom. The stitheprajna is firmly rooted in the higher self and is unmoved by the pairs of opposites. Such as cold and heat, honour and dishonour and joy and sorrow

2. Explain the doctrine of Niskama karma

The central message of Gita is Nismaka karma. The Gita teaching stands not for renunciation of action. True renunciation is not the giving up of activity but it is detachment from self interest. Such detached activity is known as Niskamam karma.

GLOSSARY

Bhakti -devotion Karma -deed Kama -desire Svadharma -duties of one’s own Varna -caste

REFERENCES

1. C.D. Sharma - A critical survey of Indian philosophy

2. Dr.S.Radhakrishnan - Indian Philosophy Vol.I

3. Dr.S.Radhakrishnan -The Bhagavad Gita

UNIVERSITY OF CALIC UTsdeuoc.ac.in/sites/default/files/sde_videos/Classical...The most ancient...

Documents

Transcript of UNIVERSITY OF CALIC UTsdeuoc.ac.in/sites/default/files/sde_videos/Classical...The most ancient...