The period in which the poetry of the Vedic Sam?hitas arose was followed by one which produced a totally different literary type—the theological treatises called Brahma?as. It is characteristic of the form of these works that they are composed in prose, and of their matter that they deal with the sacrificial ceremonial. Their main object being to explain the sacred significance of the ritual to those who are already familiar with the sacrifice, the descriptions they give of it are not exhaustive, much being stated only in outline or omitted altogether. They are ritual text-books, which, however, in no way aim at furnishing a complete survey of the sacrificial ceremonial to those who do not know it already. Their contents may be classified under the three heads of practical sacrificial directions (vidhi), explanations (arthavada), exegetical, mythological, or polemical, and theological or philosophical speculations on the nature of things (upanishad). Even those which have been preserved form quite an extensive literature by themselves; yet many others must have been lost, as appears from the numerous names of and quotations from Brahma?as unknown to us occurring in those which are extant. They reflect the spirit of an age in which all intellectual activity is concentrated on the sacrifice, describing its ceremonies, discussing its value, speculating on its origin and significance. It is only reasonable to suppose that an epoch like this, which produced no other literary monuments, lasted for a considerable time. For though the Brahma?as are on the whole uniform in character, differences of age are traceable in them. Next to the prose portions of the Yajurvedas, the Panchavim?Ça and the Taittiriya are proved by their syntax and vocabulary to be the most archaic of the regular Brahma?as. This conclusion is confirmed by the fact that the latter is, and the former is known to have been, accented. A more recent group is formed by the Jaiminiya, the Kaushitaki, and the Aitareya Brahma?as. The first of these is probably the oldest, while the third seems, on linguistic grounds at least, to be the latest of the three. The Çatapatha Brahma?a, again, is posterior to these. For it shows a distinct advance in matter; its use of the narrative tenses is later than that of the Aitareya; and its style is decidedly developed in comparison with all the above-mentioned Brahma?as. It is, indeed, accented, but in a way which differs entirely from the regular Vedic method. Latest of all are the Gopatha Brahma?a of the Atharva and the short Brahma?as of the Samaveda.

In language the Brahma?as are considerably more limited in the use of forms than the Rigveda. The subjunctive is, however, still employed, as well as a good many of the old infinitives. Their syntax, indeed, represents the oldest Indian stage even better than the Rigveda, chiefly of course owing to the restrictions imposed by metre on the style of the latter. The Brahma?as contain some metrical pieces (gathas), which differ from the prose in which they are imbedded by certain peculiarities of their own and by a more archaic character. Allied to these is a remarkable poem of this period, the Supar?adhyaya, an attempt, after the age of living Vedic poetry had come to an end, to compose in the style of the Vedic hymns. It contains many Vedic forms, and is accented, but it betrays its true character not only by its many modern forms, but by numerous monstrosities due to unsuccessful imitation of the Vedic language.

A further development are the Ara?yakas or “Forest Treatises,” the later age of which is indicated both by the position they occupy at the end of the Brahma?as and by their theosophical character. These works are generally represented as meant for the use of pious men who have retired to the forest and no longer perform sacrifices. According to the view of Professor Oldenberg, they are, however, rather treatises which, owing to the superior mystic sanctity of their contents, were intended to be communicated to the pupil by his teacher in the solitude of the forest instead of in the village.

In tone and content the Ara?yakas form a transition to the Upanishads, which are either imbedded in them, or more usually form their concluding portion. The word upa-ni-shad (literally “sitting down beside”) having first doubtless meant “confidential session,” came to signify “secret or esoteric doctrine,” because these works were taught to select pupils (probably towards the end of their apprenticeship) in lectures from which the wider circle was excluded. Being entirely devoted to theological and philosophical speculations on the nature of things, the Upanishads mark the last stage of development in the Brahma?a literature. As they generally come at the end of the Brahma?as, they are also called Vedanta (“end of the Veda”), a term later interpreted to mean “final goal of the Veda.” “Revelation” (Çruti) was regarded as including them, while the Sutras belonged to the sphere of tradition (sm?iti). The subject-matter of all the old Upanishads is essentially the same—the doctrine of the nature of the Atman or Brahma (the supreme soul). This fundamental theme was expounded in various ways by the different Vedic schools, of which the Upanishads were originally the dogmatic text-books, just as the Brahma?as were their ritual text-books.

The Ara?yakas and Upanishads represent a phase of language which on the whole closely approaches to classical Sanskrit, the oldest Upanishads occupying a position linguistically midway between the Brahma?as and the Sutras.

Of the two Brahma?as attached to the Rigveda, the more important is the Aitareya. The extant text consists of forty chapters (adhyaya) divided into eight books called panchikas or “pentads,” because containing five chapters each. That its last ten chapters were a later addition appears likely both from internal evidence and from the fact that the closely related Çankhayana Brahma?a contains nothing corresponding to their subject-matter, which is dealt with in the Çankhayana Sutra. The last three books would further appear to have been composed at a later date than the first five, since the perfect in the former is used as a narrative tense, while in the latter it still has its original present force, as in the oldest Brahma?as. The essential part of this Brahma?a deals with the soma sacrifice. It treats first (1–16) of the soma rite called Agnish?oma, which lasts one day, then (17–18) of that called Gavamayana, which lasts 360 days, and thirdly (19–24) of the DvadaÇaha or “twelve days’ rite.” The next part (25–32), which is concerned with the Agnihotra or “fire sacrifice” and other matters, has the character of a supplement. The last portion (33–40), dealing with the ceremonies of the inauguration of the king and with the position of his domestic priest, bears similar signs of lateness.

The other Brahma?a of the Rigveda, which goes by the name of Kaushitaki as well as Çankhayana, consists of thirty chapters. Its subject-matter is, on the whole, the same as that of the original part of the Aitareya (i.–v.), but is wider. For in its opening chapters it goes through the setting up of the sacred fire (agni-adhana), the daily morning and evening sacrifice (agnihotra), the new and full moon ritual, and the four-monthly sacrifices. The Soma sacrifice, however, occupies the chief position even here. The more definite and methodical treatment of the ritual in the Kaushitaki would seem to indicate that this Brahma?a was composed at a later date than the first five books of the Aitareya. Such a conclusion is, however, not altogether borne out by a comparison of the linguistic data of these two works. Professor Weber argues from the occurrence in one passage of IÇana and Mahadeva as designations of the god who was later exclusively called Çiva, that the Kaushitaki Brahma?a was composed at about the same time as the latest books of the White Yajurveda and those parts of the Atharva-veda and of the Çatapatha Brahma?a in which these appellations of the same god are found.

These Brahma?as contain very few geographical data. From the way, however, in which the Aitareya mentions the Indian tribes, it may be safely inferred that this work had its origin in the country of the Kuru-Panchalas, in which, as we have seen, the Vedic ritual must have been developed, and the hymns of the Rigveda were probably collected in the existing Sam?hita. From the Kaushitaki we learn that the study of language was specially cultivated in the north of India, and that students who returned from there were regarded as authorities on linguistic questions.

The chief human interest of these Brahma?as lies in the numerous myths and legends which they contain. The longest and most remarkable of those found in the Aitareya is the story of Çunah?Çepa (Dog’s-Tail), which forms the third chapter of Book VII. The childless King HariÇchandra vowed, if he should have a son, to sacrifice him to Varu?a. But when his son Rohita was born, he kept putting off the fulfilment of his promise. At length, when the boy was grown up, his father, pressed by Varu?a, prepared to perform the sacrifice. Rohita, however, escaped to the forest, where he wandered for six years, while his father was afflicted with dropsy by Varu?a. At last he fell in with a starving Brahman, who consented to sell to him for a hundred cows his son Çunah?Çepa as a substitute. Varu?a agreed, saying, “A Brahman is worth more than a Kshatriya.” Çunah?Çepa was accordingly bound to the stake, and the sacrifice was about to proceed, when the victim prayed to various gods in succession. As he repeated one verse after the other, the fetters of Varu?a began to fall off and the dropsical swelling of the king to diminish, till finally Çunah?Çepa was released and HariÇchandra was restored to health again.

The style of the prose in which the Aitareya is composed is crude, clumsy, abrupt, and elliptical. The following quotation from the stanzas interspersed in the story of Çunah?Çepa may serve as a specimen of the gathas found in the Brahma?as. These verses are addressed by a sage named Narada to King HariÇchandra on the importance of having a son:—

To the Aitareya Brahma?a belongs the Aitareya Ara?yaka. It consists of eighteen chapters, distributed unequally among five books. The last two books are composed in the Sutra style, and are really to be regarded as belonging to the Sutra literature. Four parts can be clearly distinguished in the first three books. Book I. deals with various liturgies of the Soma sacrifice from a purely ritual point of view. The first three chapters of Book II., on the other hand, are theosophical in character, containing speculations about the world-soul under the names of Pra?a and Purusha. It is allied in matter to the Upanishads, some of its more valuable thoughts recurring, occasionally even word for word, in the Kaushitaki Upanishad. The third part consists of the remaining four sections of Book II., which form the regular Aitareya Upanishad. Finally, Book III. deals with the mystic and allegorical meaning of the three principal modes in which the Veda is recited in the Sam?hita, Pada and Krama Pa?has, and of the various letters of the alphabet.

To the Kaushitaki Brahma?a is attached the Kaushitaki Ara?yaka. It consists of fifteen chapters. The first two of these correspond to Books I. and V. of the Aitareya Ara?yaka, the seventh and eighth to Book III., while the intervening four chapters (3–6) form the Kaushitaki Upanishad. The latter is a long and very interesting Upanishad. It seems not improbably to have been added as an independent treatise to the completed Ara?yaka, as it is not always found in the same part of the latter work in the manuscripts.

Brahma?as belonging to two independent schools of the Samaveda have been preserved, those of the Ta??ins and of the Talavakaras or Jaiminiyas. Though several other works here claim the title of ritual text-books, only three are in reality Brahma?as. The Brahma?a of the Talavakaras, which for the most part is still unpublished, seems to consist of five books. The first three (unpublished) are mainly concerned with various parts of the sacrificial ceremonial. The fourth book, called the Upanishad Brahma?a (probably “the Brahma?a of mystic meanings”), besides all kinds of allegories of the Ara?yaka order, two lists of teachers, a section about the origin of the vital airs (pra?a) and about the savitri stanza, contains the brief but important Kena Upanishad. Book V., entitled Arsheya-Brahma?a, is a short enumeration of the composers of the Samaveda.

To the school of the Ta??ins belongs the Panchavim?Ça (“twenty-five fold”), also called Ta??ya or Prau?ha, Brahma?a, which, as the first name implies, consists of twenty-five books. It is concerned with the Soma sacrifices in general, ranging from the minor offerings to those which lasted a hundred days, or even several years. Besides many legends, it contains a minute description of sacrifices performed on the Sarasvati and D?ishadvati. Though Kurukshetra is known to it, other geographical data which it contains point to the home of this Brahma?a having lain farther east. Noteworthy among its contents are the so-called Vratya-Stomas, which are sacrifices meant to enable Aryan but non-Brahmanical Indians to enter the Brahmanical order. A point of interest in this Brahma?a is the bitter hostility which it displays towards the school of the Kaushitakins. The Sha?vim?Ça Brahma?a, though nominally an independent work, is in reality a supplement to the Panchavim?Ça, of which, as its name implies, it forms the twenty-sixth book. The last of its six chapters is called the Adbhuta Brahma?a, which is intended to obviate the evil effects of various extraordinary events or portents. Among such phenomena are mentioned images of the gods when they laugh, cry, sing, dance, perspire, crack, and so forth.

The other Brahma?a of this school, the Chhandogya Brahma?a, is only to a slight extent a ritual text-book. It does not deal with the Soma sacrifice at all, but only with ceremonies relating to birth and marriage or prayers addressed to divine beings. These are the contents of only the first two “lessons” of this Brahma?a of the Sama theologians. The remaining eight lessons constitute the Chhandogya Upanishad.

There are four other short works which, though bearing the name, are not really Brahma?as. These are the Samavidhana Brahma?a, a treatise on the employment of chants for all kinds of superstitious purposes; the Devatadhyaya Brahma?a, containing some statements about the deities of the various chants of the Samaveda; the Vam?Ça Brahma?a, which furnishes a genealogy of the teachers of the Samaveda; and, finally, the Sam?hitopanishad, which, like the third book of the Aitareya Ara?yaka, treats of the way in which the Veda should be recited.

The Brahma?as of the Samaveda are distinguished by the exaggerated and fantastic character of their mystical speculations. A prominent feature in them is the constant identification of various kinds of Samans or chants with all kinds of terrestrial and celestial objects. At the same time they contain much matter that is interesting from a historical point of view.

In the Black Yajurveda the prose portions of the various Sam?hitas form the only Brahma?as in the Ka?ha and the Maitraya?iya schools. In the Taittiriya school they form the oldest and most important Brahma?a. Here we have also the Taittiriya Brahma?a as an independent work in three books. This, however, hardly differs in character from the Taittiriya Sam?hita, being rather a continuation. It forms a supplement concerned with a few sacrifices omitted in the Sam?hita, or handles, with greater fulness of detail, matters already dealt with. There is also a Taittiriya Ara?yaka, which in its turn forms a supplement to the Brahma?a. The last four of its ten sections constitute the two Upanishads of this school, vii.–ix. forming the Taittiriya Upanishad, and x. the Maha-Naraya?a Upanishad, also called the Yajniki Upanishad. Excepting these four sections, the title of Brahma?a or Ara?yaka does not indicate a difference of content as compared with the Sam?hita, but is due to late and artificial imitation of the other Vedas.

The last three sections of Book III. of the Brahma?a, as well as the first two books of the Ara?yaka, originally belonged to the school of the Ka?has, though they have not been preserved as part of the tradition of that school. The different origin of these parts is indicated by the absence of the change of y and v to iy and uv respectively, which otherwise prevails in the Taittiriya Brahma?a and Ara?yaka. In one of these Ka?haka sections (Taitt. Br. iii. 11), by way of illustrating the significance of the particular fire called nachiketa, the story is told of a boy, Nachiketas, who, on visiting the House of Death, was granted the fulfilment of three wishes by the god of the dead. On this story is based the Ka?haka Upanishad.

Though the Maitraya?i Sam?hita has no independent Brahma?a, its fourth book, as consisting of explanations and supplements to the first three, is a kind of special Brahma?a. Connected with this Sam?hita, and in the manuscripts sometimes forming its second or its fifth book, is the Maitraya?a (also called Maitraya?iya and Maitri) Upanishad.

The ritual explanation of the White Yajurveda is to be found in extraordinary fulness in the Çatapatha Brahma?a., the “Brahma?a of the Hundred Paths,” so called because it consists of one hundred lectures (adhyaya). This work is, next to the Rigveda, the most important production in the whole range of Vedic literature. Its text has come down in two recensions, those of the Madhyam?dina school, edited by Professor Weber, and of the Ka?va school, which is in process of being edited by Professor Eggeling. The Madhyam?dina recension consists of fourteen books, while the Ka?va has seventeen. The first nine of the former, corresponding to the original eighteen books of the Vajasaneyi Sam?hita, doubtless form the oldest part. The fact that Book XII. is called madhyama, or “middle one,” shows that the last five books (or possibly only X.–XIII.) were at one time regarded as a separate part of the Brahma?a. Book X. treats of the mystery of the fire-altar (agnirahasya), XI. is a sort of recapitulation of the preceding ritual, while XII. and XIII. deal with various supplementary matters. The last book forms the Ara?yaka, the six concluding chapters of which are the B?ihadara?yaka Upanishad.

Books VI.–X. of the Çatapatha Brahma?a occupy a peculiar position. Treating of the construction of the fire-altar, they recognise the teaching of Ça??ilya as their highest authority, Yajnavalkya not even being mentioned; while the peoples who are named, the Gandharas, Salvas, Kekayas, belong to the north-west. In the other books Yajnavalkya is the highest authority, while hardly any but Eastern peoples, or those of the middle of Hindustan, the Kuru-Panchalas, Kosalas, Videhas, S?injayas, are named. That the original authorship of the five Ça??ilya books was different from that of the others is indicated by a number of linguistic differences, which the hand of a later editor failed to remove. Thus the use of the perfect as a narrative tense is unknown to the Ça??ilya books (as well as to XIII.).

The geographical data of the Çatapatha Brahma?a point to the land of the Kuru-Panchalas being still the centre of Brahmanical culture. Janamejaya is here celebrated as a king of the Kurus, and the most renowned Brahmanical teacher of the age, Aru?i, is expressly stated to have been a Panchala. Nevertheless, it is clear that the Brahmanical system had by this time spread to the countries to the east of MadhyadeÇa, to Kosala, with its capital, Ayodhya (Oudh), and Videha (Tirhut or Northern Behar), with its capital, Mithila. The court of King Janaka of Videha was thronged with Brahmans from the Kuru-Panchala country. The tournaments of argument which were here held form a prominent feature in the later books of the Çatapatha Brahma?a. The hero of these is Yajnavalkya, who, himself a pupil of Aru?i, is regarded as the chief spiritual authority in the Brahma?a (excepting Books VI.–X.). Certain passages of the Brahma?a render it highly probable that Yajnavalkya was a native of Videha. The fact that its leading authority, who thus appears to have belonged to this Eastern country, is represented as vanquishing the most distinguished teachers of the West in argument, points to the redaction of the White Yajurveda having taken place in this eastern region.

The Çatapatha Brahma?a contains reminiscences of the days when the country of Videha was not as yet Brahmanised. Thus Book I. relates a legend in which three stages in the eastward migration of the Aryans can be clearly distinguished. Ma?hava, the king of Videgha (the older form of Videha), whose family priest was Gotama Rahuga?a, was at one time on the Sarasvati. Agni VaiÇvanara (here typical of Brahmanical culture) thence went burning along this earth towards the east, followed by Ma?hava and his priest, till he came to the river Sadanira (probably the modern Gandak, a tributary running into the Ganges near Patna), which flows from the northern mountain, and which he did not burn over. This river Brahmans did not cross in former times, thinking “it has not been burnt over by Agni VaiÇvanara.” At that time the land to the eastward was very uncultivated and marshy, but now many Brahmans are there, and it is highly cultivated, for the Brahmans have caused Agni to taste it through sacrifices. Ma?hava the Videgha then said to Agni, “Where am I to abide?” “To the east of this river be thy abode,” he replied. Even now, the writer adds, this river forms the boundary between the Kosalas (Oudh) and the Videhas (Tirhut).

The Vajasaneyi school of the White Yajurveda evidently felt a sense of the superiority of their sacrificial lore, which grew up in these eastern countries. Blame is frequently expressed in the Çatapatha Brahma?a of the Adhvaryu priests of the Charaka school. The latter is meant as a comprehensive term embracing the three older schools of the Black Yajurveda, the Ka?has, the Kapish?halas, and the Maitraya?iyas.

As Buddhism first obtained a firm footing in Kosala and Videha, it is interesting to inquire in what relation the Çatapatha Brahma?a stands to the beginnings of that doctrine. In this connection it is to be noted that the words Arhat, Çramana, and Pratibuddha occur here for the first time, but as yet without the technical sense which they have in Buddhistic literature. Again, in the lists of teachers given in the Brahma?a mention is made with special frequency of the Gautamas, a family name used by the Çakyas of Kapilavastu, among whom Buddha was born. Certain allusions are also suggestive of the beginnings of the Sankhya doctrine; for mention is several times made of a teacher called Asuri, and according to tradition Asuri is the name of a leading authority for the Sankhya system. If we inquire as to how far the legends of our Brahma?a contain the germs of the later epic tales, we find that there is indeed some slight connection. Janamejaya, the celebrated king of the Kurus in the Mahabharata, is mentioned here for the first time. The Pa??us, however, who proved victorious in the epic war, are not to be met with in this any more than in the other Brahma?as; and Arjuna, the name of their chief, is still an appellation of Indra. But as the epic Arjuna is a son of Indra, his origin is doubtless to be traced to this epithet of Indra. Janaka, the famous king of Videha, is in all probability identical with the father of Sita, the heroine of the Ramaya?a.

Of two legends which furnished the classical poet Kalidasa with the plots of two of his most famous dramas, one is told in detail, and the other is at least alluded to. The story of the love and separation of Pururavas and UrvaÇi, already dimly shadowed forth in a hymn of the Rigveda, is here related with much more fulness; while Bharata, son of Duh?shanta and of the nymph Çakuntala, also appears on the scene in this Brahma?a.

A most interesting legend which reappears in the Mahabharata, that of the Deluge, is here told for the first time in Indian literature, though it seems to be alluded to in the Atharva-veda, while it is known even to the Avesta. This myth is generally regarded as derived from a Semitic source. It tells how Manu once came into possession of a small fish, which asked him to rear it, and promised to save him from the coming flood. Having built a ship in accordance with the fish’s advice, he entered it when the deluge arose, and was finally guided to the Northern Mountain by the fish, to whose horn he had tied his ship. Manu subsequently became the progenitor of mankind through his daughter.

The Çatapatha Brahma?a is thus a mine of important data and noteworthy narratives. Internal evidence shows it to belong to a late period of the Brahma?a age. Its style, as compared with the earlier works of the same class, displays some progress towards facility and clearness. Its treatment of the sacrificial ceremonial, which is essentially the same in the Brahma?a portions of the Black Yajurveda, is throughout more lucid and systematic. On the theosophic side, too, we find the idea of the unity in the universe more fully developed than in any other Brahma?a work, while its Upanishad is the finest product of Vedic philosophy.

To the Atharva-veda is attached the Gopatha Brahma?a, though it has no particular connection with that Sam?hita. This Brahma?a consists of two books, the first containing five chapters, the second six. Both parts are very late, for they were composed after the Vaitana Sutra and practically without any Atharvan tradition. The matter of the former half, while not corresponding or following the order of the sacrifice in any ritual text, is to a considerable extent original, the rest being borrowed from Books XI. and XII. of the Çatapatha Brahma?a, besides a few passages from the Aitareya. The main motive of this portion is the glorification of the Atharva-veda and of the fourth or brahman priest. The mention of the god Çiva points to its belonging to the post-Vedic rather than to the Brahma?a period. Its presupposing the Atharva-veda in twenty books, and containing grammatical matters of a very advanced type, are other signs of lateness. The latter half bears more the stamp of a regular Brahma?a, being a fairly connected account of the ritual in the sacrificial order of the Vaitana Çrauta Sutra; but it is for the most part a compilation. The ordinary historical relation of Brahma?a and Sutra is here reversed, the second book of the Gopatha Brahma?a being based on the Vaitana Sutra, which stands to it practically in the relation of a Sam?hita. About two-thirds of its matter have already been shown to be taken from older texts. The Aitareya and Kaushitaki Brahma?as have been chiefly exploited, and to a less extent the Maitraya?i and Taittiriya Sam?hitas. A few passages are derived from the Çatapatha, and even the Panchavim?Ça Brahma?a.

Though the Upanishads generally form a part of the Brahma?as, being a continuation of their speculative side (jnana-ka??a), they really represent a new religion, which is in virtual opposition to the ritual or practical side (karma-ka??a). Their aim is no longer the obtainment of earthly happiness and afterwards bliss in the abode of Yama by sacrificing correctly to the gods, but release from mundane existence by the absorption of the individual soul in the world-soul through correct knowledge. Here, therefore, the sacrificial ceremonial has become useless and speculative knowledge all-important.

The essential theme of the Upanishads is the nature of the world-soul. Their conception of it represents the final stage in the development from the world-man, Purusha, of the Rigveda to the world-soul, Atman; from the personal creator, Prajapati, to the impersonal source of all being, Brahma. Atman in the Rigveda means no more than “breath”; wind, for instance, being spoken of as the atman of Varu?a. In the Brahma?as it came to mean “soul” or “self.” In one of their speculations the pra?as or “vital airs,” which are supposed to be based on the atman, are identified with the gods, and so an atman comes to be attributed to the universe. In one of the later books of the Çatapatha Brahma?a (X. vi. 3) this atman, which has already arrived at a high degree of abstraction, is said to “pervade this universe.” Brahma (neuter) in the Rigveda signified nothing more than “prayer” or “devotion.” But even in the oldest Brahma?as it has come to have the sense of “universal holiness,” as manifested in prayer, priest, and sacrifice. In the Upanishads it is the holy principle which animates nature. Having a long subsequent history, this word is a very epitome of the evolution of religious thought in India. These two conceptions, Atman and Brahma, are commonly treated as synonymous in the Upanishads. But, strictly speaking, Brahma, the older term, represents the cosmical principle which pervades the universe, Atman the psychical principle manifested in man; and the latter, as the known, is used to explain the former as the unknown. The Atman under the name of the Eternal (aksharam) is thus described in the B?ihadara?yaka Upanishad (III. viii. 8, 11):—

Here, for the first time in the history of human thought, we find the Absolute grasped and proclaimed.

A poetical account of the nature of the Atman is given by the Ka?haka Upanishad in the following stanzas:—

The place of the more personal Prajapati is taken in the Upanishads by the Atman as a creative power. Thus the B?ihadara?yaka (I. iv.) relates that in the beginning the Atman or the Brahma was this universe. It was afraid in its loneliness and felt no pleasure. Desiring a second being, it became man and woman, whence the human race was produced. It then proceeded to produce male and female animals in a similar way; finally creating water, fire, the gods, and so forth. The author then proceeds in a more exalted strain:—

In one of the later Upanishads, the ÇvetaÇvatara (iv. 10), the notion, so prominent in the later Vedanta system, that the material world is an illusion (maya), is first met with. The world is here explained as an illusion produced by Brahma as a conjuror (mayin). This notion is, however, inherent even in the oldest Upanishads. It is virtually identical with the teaching of Plato that the things of experience are only the shadow of the real things, and with the teaching of Kant, that they are only phenomena of the thing in itself.

The great fundamental doctrine of the Upanishads is the identity of the individual atman with the world Atman. It is most forcibly expressed in a frequently repeated sentence of the Chhandogya Upanishad (vi. 8–16): “This whole world consists of it: that is the Real, that is the Soul, that art thou, O Çvetaketu.” In that famous formula, “That art thou” (tat tvam asi), all the teachings of the Upanishads are summed up. The B?ihadara?yaka (I. iv. 6) expresses the same doctrine thus: “Whoever knows this, ‘I am brahma’ (aham brahma asmi), becomes the All. Even the gods are not able to prevent him from becoming it. For he becomes their Self (atman).”

This identity was already recognised in the Çatapatha Brahma?a (X. vi. 3): “Even as the smallest granule of millet, so is this golden Purusha in the heart.... That self of the spirit is my self: on passing from hence I shall obtain that Self.”

We find everywhere in these treatises a restless striving to grasp the true nature of the pantheistic Self, now through one metaphor, now through another. Thus (B?ih. Up. II. iv.) the wise Yajnavalkya, about to renounce the world and retire to the forest, replies to the question of his wife, Maitreyi, with the words: “As a lump of salt thrown into the water would dissolve and could not be taken out again, while the water, wherever tasted, would be salt, so is this great being endless, unlimited, simply compacted of cognition. Arising out of these elements, it disappears again in them. After death there is no consciousness;” for, as he further explains, when the duality on which consciousness is based disappears, consciousness must necessarily cease.

In another passage of the same Upanishad (II. i. 20) we read: “Just as the spider goes out of itself by means of its thread, as tiny sparks leap out of the fire, so from the Atman issue all vital airs, all worlds, all gods, all beings.”

Here, again, is a stanza from the Mu??aka (III. ii. 8):—

In a passage of the B?ihadara?yaka (III. vii.) Yajnavalkya describes the Atman as the “inner guide” (antaryamin): “Who is in all beings, different from all beings, who guides all beings within, that is thy Self, the inward guide, immortal.”

The same Upanishad contains an interesting conversation, in which King AjataÇatru of KaÇi (Benares) instructs the Brahman, Balaki Gargya, that Brahma is not the spirit (purusha) which is in sun, moon, wind, and other natural phenomena, or even in the (waking) soul (atman), but is either the dreaming soul, which is creative, assuming any form at pleasure, or, in the highest stage, the soul in dreamless sleep, for here all phenomena have disappeared. This is the first and the last condition of Brahma, in which no world exists, all material existence being only the phantasms of the dreaming world-soul.

Of somewhat similar purport is a passage of the Chhandogya (viii. 7–12), where Prajapati is represented as teaching the nature of the Atman in three stages. The soul in the body as reflected in a mirror or water is first identified with Brahma, then the dreaming soul, and, lastly, the soul in dreamless sleep.

How generally accepted the pantheistic theory must have become by the time the disputations at the court of King Janaka took place, is indicated by the form in which questions are put. Thus two different sages in the B?ihadara?yaka (iii. 4, 5) successively ask Yajnavalkya in the same words: “Explain to us the Brahma which is manifest and not hidden, the Atman that dwells in everything.”

With the doctrine that true knowledge led to supreme bliss by the absorption of the individual soul in Brahma went hand in hand the theory of transmigration (sam?sara). That theory is developed in the oldest Upanishads; it must have been firmly established by the time Buddhism arose, for Buddha accepted it without question. Its earliest form is found in the Çatapatha Brahma?a, where the notion of being born again after death and dying repeatedly is coupled with that of retribution. Thus it is here said that those who have correct knowledge and perform a certain sacrifice are born again after death for immortality, while those who have not such knowledge and do not perform this sacrifice are reborn again and again, becoming the prey of Death. The notion here expressed does not go beyond repeated births and deaths in the next world. It is transformed to the doctrine of transmigration in the Upanishads by supposing rebirth to take place in this world. In the B?ihadara?yaka we further meet with the beginnings of the doctrine of karma, or “action,” which regulates the new birth, and makes it depend on a man’s own deeds. When the body returns to the elements, nothing of the individuality is here said to remain but the karma, according to which a man becomes good or bad. This is, perhaps, the germ of the Buddhistic doctrine, which, though denying the existence of soul altogether, allows karma to continue after death and to determine the next birth.

The most important and detailed account of the theory of transmigration which we possess from Vedic times is supplied by the Chhandogya Upanishad. The forest ascetic possessed of knowledge and faith, it is here said, after death enters the devayana, the “path of the gods,” which leads to absorption in Brahma, while the householder who has performed sacrifice and good works goes by the pit?iya?a or “path of the Fathers” to the moon, where he remains till the consequences of his actions are exhausted. He then returns to earth, being first born again as a plant and afterwards as a man of one of the three highest castes. Here we have a double retribution, first in the next world, then by transmigration in this. The former is a survival of the old Vedic belief about the future life. The wicked are born again as outcasts (cha??alas), dogs or swine.

The account of the B?ihadara?yaka (VI. ii. 15–16) is similar. Those who have true knowledge and faith pass through the world of the gods and the sun to the world of Brahma, whence there is no return. Those who practise sacrifice and good works pass through the world of the Fathers to the moon, whence they return to earth, being born again as men. Others become birds, beasts, and reptiles.

The view of the Kaushitaki Upanishad (i. 2–3) is somewhat different. Here all who die go to the moon, whence some go by the “path of the Fathers” to Brahma, while others return to various forms of earthly existence, ranging from man to worm, according to the quality of their works and the degree of their knowledge.

The Ka?haka, one of the most remarkable and beautiful of the Upanishads, treats the question of life after death in the form of a legend. Nachiketas, a young Brahman, visits the realm of Yama, who offers him the choice of three boons. For the third he chooses the answer to the question, whether man exists after death or no. Death replies: “Even the gods have doubted about this; it is a subtle point; choose another boon.” After vain efforts to evade the question by offering Nachiketas earthly power and riches, Yama at last yields to his persistence and reveals the secret. Life and death, he explains, are only different phases of development. True knowledge, which consists in recognising the identity of the individual soul with the world soul, raises its possessor beyond the reach of death:—

The story of the temptation of Nachiketas to choose the goods of this world in preference to the highest knowledge is probably the prototype of the legend of the temptation of Buddha by Mara or Death. Both by resisting the temptation obtain enlightenment.

It must not of course be supposed that the Upanishads, either as a whole or individually, offer a complete and consistent conception of the world logically developed. They are rather a mixture of half-poetical, half-philosophical fancies, of dialogues and disputations dealing tentatively with metaphysical questions. Their speculations were only later reduced to a system in the Vedanta philosophy. The earliest of them can hardly be dated later than about 600 B.C., since some important doctrines first met with in them are presupposed by Buddhism. They may be divided chronologically, on internal evidence, into four classes. The oldest group, consisting, in chronological order, of the B?ihadara?yaka, Chhandogya, Taittiriya, Aitareya, Kaushitaki, is written in prose which still suffers from the awkwardness of the Brahma?a style. A transition is formed by the Kena, which is partly in verse and partly in prose, to a decidedly later class, the Ka?haka, IÇa, ÇvetaÇvatara, Mu??aka, Mahanaraya?a, which are metrical, and in which the Upanishad doctrine is no longer developing, but has become fixed. These are more attractive from the literary point of view. Even those of the older class acquire a peculiar charm from their liveliness, enthusiasm, and freedom from pedantry, while their language often rises to the level of eloquence. The third class, comprising the PraÇna, Maitraya?iya, and Ma??ukya, reverts to the use of prose, which is, however, of a much less archaic type than that of the first class, and approaches that of classical Sanskrit writers. The fourth class consists of the later Atharvan Upanishads, some of which are composed in prose, others in verse.

The Aitareya, one of the shortest of the Upanishads (extending to only about four octavo pages), consists of three chapters. The first represents the world as a creation of the Atman (also called Brahma), and man as its highest manifestation. It is based on the Purusha hymn of the Rigveda, but the primeval man is in the Upanishad described as having been produced by the Atman from the waters which it created. The Atman is here said to occupy three abodes in man, the senses, mind, and heart, to which respectively correspond the three conditions of waking, dreaming, and deep sleep. The second chapter treats of the threefold birth of the Atman. The end of transmigration is salvation, which is represented as an immortal existence in heaven. The last chapter dealing with the nature of the Atman states that “consciousness (prajna) is Brahma.”

The Kaushitaki Upanishad is a treatise of considerable length divided into four chapters. The first deals with the two paths traversed by souls after death in connection with transmigration; the second with Pra?a or life as a symbol of the Atman. The last two, while discussing the doctrine of Brahma, contain a disquisition about the dependence of the objects of sense on the organs of sense, and of the latter on unconscious life (pra?a) and conscious life (prajnatma). Those who aim at redeeming knowledge are therefore admonished not to seek after objects or subjective faculties, but only the subject of cognition and action, which is described with much power as the highest god, and at the same time as the Atman within us.

The Upanishads of the Samaveda start from the saman or chant, just as those of the Rigveda from the uktha or hymn recited by the Hot?i priest, in order, by interpreting it allegorically, to arrive at a knowledge of the Atman or Brahma. The fact that the Upanishads have the same basis, which is, moreover, largely treated in a similar manner, leads to the conclusion that the various Vedic schools found a common body of oral tradition which they shaped into dogmatic texts-books or Upanishads in their own way.

Thus the Chhandogya, which is equal in importance, and only slightly inferior in extent, to the B?ihadara?yaka, bears clear traces, like the latter, of being made up of collections of floating materials. Each of its eight chapters forms an independent whole, followed by supplementary pieces often but slightly connected with the main subject-matter.

The first two chapters consist of mystical interpretations of the saman and its chief part, called Udgitha (“loud song”). A supplement to the second chapter treats, among other subjects, of the origin of the syllable om, and of the three stages of religious life, those of the Brahman pupil, the householder, and the ascetic (to which later the religious mendicant was added as a fourth). The third chapter in the main deals with Brahma as the sun of the universe, the natural sun being its manifestation. The infinite Brahma is further described as dwelling, whole and undivided, in the heart of man. The way in which Brahma is to be attained is then described, and the great fundamental dogma of the identity of Brahma with the Atman (or, as we might say, of God and Soul) is declared. The chapter concludes with a myth which forms a connecting link between the cosmogonic conceptions of the Rigveda and those of the law-book of Manu. The fourth chapter, containing discussions about wind, breath, and other phenomena connected with Brahma, also teaches how the soul makes its way to Brahma after death.

The first half of chapter v. is almost identical with the beginning of chapter vi. of the B?ihadara?yaka. It is chiefly noteworthy for the theory of transmigration which it contains. The second half of the chapter is important as the earliest statement of the doctrine that the manifold world is unreal. The sat by desire produced from itself the three primary elements, heat, water, food (the later number being five—ether, air, fire, water, earth). As individual soul (jiva-atman) it entered into these, which, by certain partial combinations called “triplication,” became various products (vikara) or phenomena. But the latter are a mere name. Sat is the only reality, it is the Atman: “Thou art that.” Chapter vii. enumerates sixteen forms in which Brahma may be adored, rising by gradation from naman, “name,” to bhuman, “infinity,” which is the all-in-all and the Atman within us. The first half of the last chapter discusses the Atman in the heart and the universe, as well as how to attain it. The concluding portion of the chapter distinguishes the false from the true Atman, illustrated by the three stages in which it appears—in the material body, in dreaming, and in sound sleep. In the latter stage we have the true Atman, in which the distinction between subject and object has disappeared.

To the Samaveda also belongs a very short treatise which was long called the Talavakara Upanishad, from the school to which it was attached, but later, when it became separated from that school, received the name of Kena, from its initial word. It consists of two distinct parts. The second, composed in prose and much older, describes the relation of the Vedic gods to Brahma, representing them as deriving their power from and entirely dependent on the latter. The first part, which is metrical and belongs to the period of fully developed Vedanta doctrine, distinguishes from the qualified Brahma, which is an object of worship, the unqualified Brahma, which is unknowable:—

The various Upanishads of the Black Yajurveda all bear the stamp of lateness. The Maitraya?a is a prose work of considerable extent, in which occasional stanzas are interspersed. It consists of seven chapters, the seventh and the concluding eight sections of the sixth forming a supplement. The fact that it retains the orthographical and euphonic peculiarities of the Maitraya?a school, gives this Upanishad an archaic appearance. But its many quotations from other Upanishads, the occurrence of several late words, the developed Sankhya doctrine presupposed by it, distinct references to anti-Vedic heretical schools, all combine to render the late character of this work undoubted. It is, in fact, a summing up of the old Upanishad doctrines with an admixture of ideas derived from the Sankhya system and from Buddhism. The main body of the treatise expounds the nature of the Atman, communicated to King B?ihadratha of the race of Ikshvaku (probably identical with the king of that name mentioned in the Ramaya?a), who declaims at some length on the misery and transitoriness of earthly existence. Though pessimism is not unknown to the old Upanishads, it is much more pronounced here, doubtless in consequence of Sankhya and Buddhistic influence.

The subject is treated in the form of three questions. The answer to the first, how the Atman enters the body, is that Prajapati enters in the form of the five vital airs in order to animate the lifeless bodies created by him. The second question is, How does the supreme soul become the individual soul (bhutatman)? This is answered rather in accordance with the Sankhya than the Vedanta doctrine. Overcome by the three qualities of matter (prak?iti), the Atman, forgetting its real nature, becomes involved in self-consciousness and transmigration. The third question is, How is deliverance from this state of misery possible? This is answered in conformity with neither Vedanta nor Sankhya doctrine, but in a reactionary spirit. Only those who observe the old requirements of Brahmanism, the rules of caste and the religious orders (aÇramas), are declared capable of attaining salvation by knowledge, penance, and meditation on Brahma. The chief gods, that is to say, the triad of the Brahma?a period, Fire, Wind, Sun, the three abstractions, Time, Breath, Food, and the three popular gods, Brahma, Rudra (i.e. Çiva), and Vish?u are explained as manifestations of Brahma.

The remainder of this Upanishad is supplementary, but contains several passages of considerable interest. We have here a cosmogonic myth, like those of the Brahma?as, in which the three qualities of matter, Tamas, Rajas, Sattva, are connected with Rudra, Brahma, and Vish?u, and which is in other respects very remarkable as a connecting link between the philosophy of the Rigveda and the later Sankhya system. The sun is further represented as the external, and pra?a (breath) as the internal, symbol of the Atman, their worship being recommended by means of the sacred syllable om, the three “utterances” (vyah?itis) bhur, bhuvah?, svar, and the famous Savitri stanza. As a means of attaining Brahma we find a recommendation of Yoga or the ascetic practices leading to a state of mental concentration and bordering on trance. The information we here receive of these practices is still undeveloped compared with the later system. In addition to the three conditions of Brahma, waking, dreaming, and deep sleep, mention is made of a fourth (turiya) and highest stage. The Upanishad concludes with the declaration that the Atman entered the world of duality because it wished to taste both truth and illusion.

Older than the Maitraya?a, which borrows from them, are two other Upanishads of the Black Yajurveda, the Ka?haka and the ÇvetaÇvatara. The former contains some 120 and the latter some 110 stanzas.

The Ka?haka deals with the legend of Nachiketas, which is told in the Ka?haka portion of the Taittiriya Brahma?a, and a knowledge of which it presupposes. This is indicated by the fact that it begins with the same words as the Brahma?a story. The treatise appears to have consisted originally of the first only of its two chapters. For the second, with its more developed notions about Yoga and its much more pronounced view as to the unreality of phenomena, looks like a later addition. The first contains an introductory narrative, an account of the Atman, of its embodiment and final return by means of Yoga. The second chapter, though less well arranged, on the whole corresponds in matter with the first. Its fourth section, while discussing the nature of the Atman, identifies both soul (purusha) and matter (prak?iti) with it. The fifth section deals with the manifestation of the Atman in the world, and especially in man. The way in which it at the same time remains outside them in its full integrity and is not affected by the suffering of living beings, is strikingly illustrated by the analogy of both light and air, which pervade space and yet embrace every object, and of the sun, the eye of the universe, which remains free from the blemishes of all other eyes outside of it. In the last section Yoga is taught to be the means of attaining the highest goal. The gradation of mental faculties here described is of great interest for the history of the Sankhya and Yoga system. An unconscious contradiction runs through this discussion, inasmuch as though the Atman is regarded as the all-in-all, a sharp contrast is drawn between soul and matter. It is the contradiction between the later Vedanta and the Sankhya-Yoga systems of philosophy.

According to its own statement, the ÇvetaÇvatara Upanishad derives its name from an individual author, and the tradition which attributes it to one of the schools of the Black Yajurveda hardly seems to have a sufficient foundation. Its confused arrangement, the irregularities and arbitrary changes of its metres, the number of interpolated quotations which it contains, make the assumption likely that the work in its present form is not the work of a single author. In its present form it is certainly later than the Ka?haka, since it contains several passages which must be referred to that work, besides many stanzas borrowed from it with or without variation. Its lateness is further indicated by the developed theory of Yoga which it contains, besides the more or less definite form in which it exhibits various Vedanta doctrines either unknown to or only foreshadowed in the earlier Upanishads. Among these may be mentioned the destruction of the world by Brahma at the end of a cosmic age (kalpa), as well as its periodic renewal out of Brahma, and especially the explanation of the world as an illusion (maya) produced by Brahma. At the same time the author shows a strange predilection for the personified forms of Brahma as Savit?i, IÇana, or Rudra. Though Çiva has not yet become the name of Rudra, its frequent use as an adjective connected with the latter shows that it is in course of becoming fixed as the proper name of the highest god. In this Upanishad we meet with a number of the terms and fundamental notions of the Sankhya, though the point of view is thoroughly Vedantist; matter (prak?iti), for instance, being represented as an illusion produced by Brahma.

To the White Yajurveda is attached the longest, and, beside the Chhandogya, the most important of the Upanishads. It bears even clearer traces than that work of being a conglomerate of what must originally have been separate treatises. It is divided into three parts, each containing two chapters. The last part is designated, even in the tradition of the commentaries, as a supplement (Khila-ka??a), a statement fully borne out by the contents. That the first and second parts were also originally independent of each other is sufficiently proved by both containing the legend of Yajnavalkya and his two wives in almost identical words throughout. To each of these parts (as well as to Book x. of the Çatapatha Brahma?a) a successive list (vam?Ça) of teachers is attached. A comparison of these lists seems to justify the conclusion that the first part (called Madhuka??a) and the second (Yajnavalkya-ka??a) existed during nine generations as independent Upanishads within the school of the White Yajurveda, and were then combined by a teacher named AgniveÇya; the third part, which consists of all kinds of supplementary matter, being subsequently added. These lists further make the conclusion probable that the leading teachers of the ritual tradition (Brahma?as) were different from those of the philosophical tradition (Upanishads).

Beginning with an allegorical interpretation of the most important sacrifice, the AÇvamedha (horse-sacrifice), as the universe, the first chapter proceeds to deal with pra?a (breath) as a symbol of soul, and then with the creation of the world out of the Atman or Brahma, insisting on the dependence of all existence on the Supreme Soul, which appears in every individual as his self. The polemical attitude adopted against the worship of the gods is characteristic, showing that the passage belongs to an early period, in which the doctrine of the superiority of the Atman to the gods was still asserting itself. The next chapter deals with the nature of the Atman and its manifestations, purusha and pra?a.

The second part of the Upanishad consists of four philosophical discussions, in which Yajnavalkya is the chief speaker. The first (iii. 1–9) is a great disputation, in which the sage proves his superiority to nine successive interlocutors. One of the most interesting conclusions here arrived at is that Brahma is theoretically unknowable, but can be comprehended practically. The second discourse is a dialogue between King Janaka and Yajnavalkya, in which the latter shows the untenableness of six definitions set up by other teachers as to the nature of Brahma; for instance, that it is identical with Breath or Mind. He finally declares that the Atman can only be described negatively, being intangible, indestructible, independent, immovable.

The third discourse (iv. 3–4) is another dialogue between Janaka and Yajnavalkya. It presents a picture of the soul in the conditions of waking, dreaming, deep sleep, dying, transmigration, and salvation. For wealth of illustration, fervour of conviction, beauty and elevation of thought, this piece is unequalled in the Upanishads or any other work of Indian literature. Its literary effect is heightened by the numerous stanzas with which it is interspersed. These are, however, doubtless later additions. The dreaming soul is thus described:—

Then follows an account of the dreamless state of the soul:—

With regard to the souls of those who are not saved, the view of the writer appears to be that after death they enter a new body immediately and without any intervening retribution in the other world, in exact accordance with their intellectual and moral quality.

But the vital airs of him who is saved, who knows himself to be identical with Brahma, do not depart, for he is absorbed in Brahma and is Brahma.

The fourth discourse is a dialogue between Yajnavalkya and his wife Maitreyi, before the former, about to renounce the world, retires to the solitude of the forest. There are several indications that it is a secondary recension of the same conversation occurring in a previous chapter (II. iv.).

The first chapter of the third or supplementary part consists of fifteen sections, which are often quite short, are mostly unconnected in matter, and appear to be of very different age. The second chapter, however, forms a long and important treatise (identical with that found in the Chhandogya) on the doctrine of transmigration. The views here expressed are so much at variance with those of Yajnavalkya that this text must have originated in another Vedic school, and have been loosely attached to this Upanishad owing to the peculiar importance of its contents. The preceding and following section, which are connected with it, and are also found in the Chhandogya, must have been added at the same time.

Not only is the longest Upanishad attached to the White Yajurveda, but also one of the very shortest, consisting of only eighteen stanzas. This is the IÇa, which is so called from its initial word. Though forming the last chapter of the Vajasaneyi Sam?hita, it belongs to a rather late period. It is about contemporaneous with the latest parts of the B?ihadara?yaka, is more developed in many points than the Ka?haka, but seems to be older than the ÇvetaÇvatara. Its leading motive is to contrast him who knows himself to be the same as the Atman with him who does not possess true knowledge. It affords an excellent survey of the fundamental doctrines of the Vedanta philosophy.

A large and indefinite number of Upanishads is attributed to the Atharva-veda, but the most authoritative list recognises twenty-seven altogether. They are for the most part of very late origin, being post-Vedic, and, all but three, contemporaneous with the Pura?as. One of them is actually a Muhammadan treatise entitled the Alla Upanishad! The older Upanishads which belong to the first three Vedas were, with a few exceptions like the ÇvetaÇvatara, the dogmatic text-books of actual Vedic schools, and received their names from those schools, being connected with and supplementary to the ritual Brahma?as. The Upanishads of the Atharva-veda, on the other hand, are with few exceptions like the Ma??ukya and the Jabala, no longer connected with Vedic schools, but derive their names from their subject-matter or some other circumstance. They appear for the most part to represent the views of theosophic, mystic, ascetic, or sectarian associations, who wished to have an Upanishad of their own in imitation of the old Vedic schools. They became attached to the Atharva-veda not from any internal connection, but partly because the followers of the Atharva-veda desired to become possessed of dogmatic text-books of their own, and partly because the fourth Veda was not protected from the intrusion of foreign elements by the watchfulness of religious guilds like the old Vedic schools.

The fundamental doctrine common to all the Upanishads of the Atharva-veda is developed by most of them in various special directions. They may accordingly be divided into four categories which run chronologically parallel with one another, each containing relatively old and late productions. The first group, as directly investigating the nature of the Atman, has a scope similar to that of the Upanishads of the other Vedas, and goes no further than the latter in developing its main thesis. The next group, taking the fundamental doctrine for granted, treats of absorption in the Atman through ascetic meditation (yoga) based on the component parts of the sacred syllable om. These Upanishads are almost without exception composed in verse and are quite short, consisting on the average of about twenty stanzas. In the third category the life of the religious mendicant (sannyasin), as a practical consequence of the Upanishad doctrine, is recommended and described. These Upanishads, too, are short, but are written in prose, though with an admixture of verse. The last group is sectarian in character, interpreting the popular gods Çiva (under various names, such as IÇana, MaheÇvara, Mahadeva) and Vish?u (as Naraya?a and N?isim?ha or “Man-lion”) as personifications of the Atman. The different Avatars of Vish?u are here regarded as human manifestations of the Atman.

The oldest and most important of these Atharvan Upanishads, as representing the Vedanta doctrine most faithfully, are the Mu??aka, the PraÇna, and to a less degree the Ma??ukya. The first two come nearest to the Upanishads of the older Vedas, and are much quoted by Badaraya?a and Çankara, the great authorities of the later Vedanta philosophy. They are the only original and legitimate Upanishads of the Atharva. The Mu??aka derives its name from being the Upanishad of the tonsured (mu??a), an association of ascetics who shaved their heads, as the Buddhist monks did later. It is one of the most popular of the Upanishads, not owing to the originality of its contents, which are for the most part derived from older texts, but owing to the purity with which it reproduces the old Vedanta doctrine, and the beauty of the stanzas in which it is composed. It presupposes, above all, the Chhandogya Upanishad, and in all probability the B?ihadara?yaka, the Taittiriya, and the Ka?haka. Having several important passages in common with the ÇvetaÇvatara and the B?ihannaraya?a of the Black Yajurveda, it probably belongs to the same epoch, coming between the two in order of time. It consists of three parts, which, speaking generally, deal respectively with the preparations for the knowledge of Brahma, the doctrine of Brahma, and the way to Brahma.

The PraÇna Upanishad, written in prose and apparently belonging to the Pippalada recension of the Atharva-veda, is so called because it treats, in the form of questions (praÇna) addressed by six students of Brahma to the sage Pippalada, six main points of the Vedanta doctrine. These questions concern the origin of matter and life (pra?a) from Prajapati; the superiority of life (pra?a) above the other vital powers; the nature and divisions of the vital powers; dreaming and dreamless sleep; meditation on the syllable om; and the sixteen parts of man.

The Ma??ukya is a very short prose Upanishad, which would hardly fill two pages of the present book. Though bearing the name of a half-forgotten school of the Rigveda, it is reckoned among the Upanishads of the Atharva-veda. It must date from a considerably later time than the prose Upanishads of the three older Vedas, with the unmethodical treatment and prolixity of which its precision and conciseness are in marked contrast. It has many points of contact with the Maitraya?a Upanishad, to which it seems to be posterior. It appears, however, to be older than the rest of the treatises which form the fourth class of the Upanishads of the Atharva-veda. Thus it distinguishes only three morae in the syllable om, and not yet three and a half. The fundamental idea of this Upanishad is that the sacred syllable is an expression of the universe. It is somewhat remarkable that this work is not quoted by Çankara; nevertheless, it not only exercised a great influence on several Upanishads of the Atharva-veda, but was used more than any other Upanishad by the author of the well-known later epitome of the Vedanta doctrine, the Vedanta-sara.

It is, however, chiefly important as having given rise to one of the most remarkable products of Indian philosophy, the Karika of Gau?apada. This work consists of more than 200 stanzas divided into four parts, the first of which includes the Ma??ukya Upanishad. The esteem in which the Karika was held is indicated by the fact that its parts are reckoned as four Upanishads. There is much probability in the assumption that its author is identical with Gau?apada, the teacher of Govinda, whose pupil was the great Vedantist commentator, Çankara (800 A.D.). The point of view of the latter is the same essentially as that of the author of the Karika, and many of the thoughts and figures which begin to appear in the earlier work are in common use in Çankara’s commentaries. Çankara may, in fact, be said to have reduced the doctrines of Gau?apada to a system, as did Plato those of Parmenides. Indeed, the two leading ideas which pervade the Indian poem, viz., that there is no duality (advaita) and no becoming (ajati), are, as Professor Deussen points out, identical with those of the Greek philosopher.

The first part of the Karika is practically a metrical paraphrase of the Ma??ukya Upanishad. Peculiar to it is the statement that the world is not an illusion or a development in any sense, but the very nature or essence (svabhava) of Brahma, just as the rays, which are all the same (i.e. light), are not different from the sun. The remainder of the poem is independent of the Upanishad and goes far beyond its doctrines. The second part has the special title of Vaitathya or the “Falseness” of the doctrine of reality. Just as a rope is in the dark mistaken for a snake, so the Atman in the darkness of ignorance is mistaken for the world. Every attempt to imagine the Atman under empirical forms is futile, for every one’s idea of it is dependent on his experience of the world.

The third part is entitled Advaita, “Non-duality.” The identity of the Supreme Soul (Atman) with the individual soul (jiva) is illustrated by comparison with space, and that part of it which is contained in a jar. Arguing against the theory of genesis and plurality, the poet lays down the axiom that nothing can become different from its own nature. The production of the existent (sato janma) is impossible, for that would be produced which already exists. The production of the non-existent (asato janma) is also impossible, for the non-existent is never produced, any more than the son of a barren woman. The last part is entitled Alata-Çanti, or “Extinction of the firebrand (circle),” so called from an ingenious comparison made to explain how plurality and genesis seem to exist in the world. If a stick which is glowing at one end is waved about, fiery lines or circles are produced without anything being added to or issuing from the single burning point. The fiery line or circle exists only in the consciousness (vijnana). So, too, the many phenomena of the world are merely the vibrations of the consciousness, which is one.