Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1—$—————— eee ee ‘I have left out the restriction as to the accent of the vowels, because they are disregarded in the Upanishad. It should be observed that this peculiar Sandhi occurs in the Upanishad chiefly before iti. INTRODUCTION. xlix IIT, 5, etair abhibhita iti. IV, 1, vidyata iti. VI, 4, pravava iti; bhdmyadaya eko. VI, 6, Aditya iti; a4havaniya iti; sdry4 iti; ahankara iti; vyana iti. VI, 7, bharga iti. VI, 7, sannivish@a iti. VI, 23, deva onkaro. VI, 30. prayata iti. VI, 30, vinirgata iti. Il. Final e before initial vowels becomes a4. For instance: I, 4, drzsyata iti. II, 2, nishpadyata iti. III, 2, Apadyata iti. III, 2, pushkara iti. [V, 1, vidyata iti. VI, 10, bhunkta iti. VI, 20, asnuta iti. VI, 30, eka ahur. liven pragrzhya c is changed to a in— VI, 23, eta upasita, ie. ete uktalakshave brahmavi. In VI, 31, instead of te etasya, the commentator seems to have read te va etasya. III. Final as before 4, u. and au becomes a, and is then contracted. For instance: I. 4, vanaspatayodbhita, instead of vanaspataya udbhita. (Comm. Sandhis kAandaso va, ukdéro vatra lupto drash¢avyat.) II, 6, devaushvyam, instead of deva aushvyam. (Comm. Sandhis ##4ndasa%.) VI, 24, atamavishéam, instead of atama-avishZam (Comm. Sandhis £#andasah); cf. Khand. Up. VI, 8, 3, asanayeti (Comm. visarganiyalopaz). IV. Final e before i becomes a, and is then contracted. For instance : VI, 7, atma ganiteti for ganita iti. (Comm. ganite, ganati.) VI, 28, avaéaiva for avata iva. (Comm. Sandhivriddhi k/4ndase.) V. Final au before initial vowels becomes 4. For instance : II, 6, yena va eta anugrzhita iti. VI, 22, asa abhidhyata. On abhibhiyamAanay iva, see p. 295, note 2. V, 2, as4 Atma (var. lect. asav 4tmé). (15)
2] UPANISHADS. i RRM 2 2 5 RE VI. Final o of atho produces elision of initial & . For instance : III, 2, atho ’bhibhatatvat. (Comm. Sandhis khandasak.) Various reading, ato ’bhibhatatvat. VI, 1, so antar is explained as sa u. VII. Other irregularities: VI, 7, 4po py4yanat, explained by pyayanat and Apydyanat. Might it be, apo ’py ayanat? VI, 7, Atmano tma neta. II, 6, so tmanam abhidhyatva. VI, 35, dvidharmondham for dvidharmandham. (Comm. &#andasa.) VI, 35, tegasendham, i.e. tegasd-iddhan. (In explaining other irregular compounds, too, as in I, 4, the commentator has recourse to a £#andasa or pramadika licence.) VI, 1, hirazyavasthat for hiravydvasthat. Here the dropping of a in avasthat is explained by a reference to Bhaguri (vash¢i Bhagurir allopam avapyor upasargayok). See Vopadeva III, 171. VIII. Vislish¢apatha : VII, 2, brahmadhiyaélambana. (Comm. vislishZapathas £4Andasah.) VI, 35, apyay ankura for apy ankura. (Comm. yakaérak pramadapa/fitaz.) On the contrary VI, 35, vliyante for viliyante. If on the grounds which we have hitherto examined there seems good reason to ascribe the Maitrayaza-brahmazaupanishad to an early rather than to a late period, possibly to an ante-PAzinean period, we shall hardly be persuaded to change this opinion on account of supposed references to Vaishvava or to Bauddha doctrines which some scholars have tried to discover in it. As to the worship of Vishzu, as one of the many manifestations of the Highest Spirit, we have seen it alluded to in other Upanishads, and we know from the Brahmamas that the name of Vishzu was connected with many of the earliest Vedic sacrifices.
3INTRODUCTION. li area As to Bauddha doctrines, including the very name of Nirvaxa (p. xlvi, 1. 19), we must remember, as I have often remarked, that there were Bauddhas before Buddha. Brzhaspati, who is frequently quoted in later philosophical writings as the author of an heretical philosophy, denying the authority of the Vedas, is mentioned by name in our Upanishad (VII, 9), but we are told that this Brhaspati, having become Sukra, promulgated his erroneous doctrines in order to mislead the Asuras, and thus to insure the safety of Indra, i.e. of the old faith. The fact that the teacher of King Brzhadratha in our Upanishad is called Sakayanya, can never be used in support of the idea that, being a descendant of Saka}, he must have been, like SAkyamuni,a teacher of Buddhist doctrines. He is the very opposite in our Upanishad, and warns his hearers against such doctrines as we should identify with the doctrines of Buddha. As I have pointed out on several occasions, the breaking through the law of the Asramas is the chief complaint which orthodox Brahmans make against Buddhists and their predecessors, and this is what SAakayanya condemns. A Brahman may become a SannyAsin, which is much the same as a Buddhist Bhikshu, if he has first passed through the three stages of a student, a householder, and a V4naprastha. But to become a Bhikshu without that previous discipline, was heresy in the eyes of the Brahmans, and it was exactly that heresy which the Bauddhas preached and practised. That this social laxity was gaining ground at the time when our Upanishad was written is clear (see VII, 8). We hear of people who wear red dresses (like the Buddhists) without having a right to them ; we even hear of books, different from the Vedas, against which the true Brahmans-are warned. All this points to times when what we call Buddhism was in the air, say the sixth century B.C., the very time to which I have always assigned the origin of the genuine and classical Upanishads. The Upanishads are to my mind the germs of Buddhism,
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1—$—————— eee ee ‘I have left out the restriction as to the accent of the vowels, because they are disregarded in the Upanishad. It should be observed that this peculiar Sandhi occurs in the Upanishad chiefly before iti. INTRODUCTION. xlix IIT, 5, etair abhibhita iti. IV, 1, vidyata iti. VI, 4, pravava iti; bhdmyadaya eko. VI, 6, Aditya iti; a4havaniya iti; sdry4 iti; ahankara iti; vyana iti. VI, 7, bharga iti. VI, 7, sannivish@a iti. VI, 23, deva onkaro. VI, 30. prayata iti. VI, 30, vinirgata iti. Il. Final e before initial vowels becomes a4. For instance: I, 4, drzsyata iti. II, 2, nishpadyata iti. III, 2, Apadyata iti. III, 2, pushkara iti. [V, 1, vidyata iti. VI, 10, bhunkta iti. VI, 20, asnuta iti. VI, 30, eka ahur. liven pragrzhya c is changed to a in— VI, 23, eta upasita, ie. ete uktalakshave brahmavi. In VI, 31, instead of te etasya, the commentator seems to have read te va etasya. III. Final as before 4, u. and au becomes a, and is then contracted. For instance: I. 4, vanaspatayodbhita, instead of vanaspataya udbhita. (Comm. Sandhis kAandaso va, ukdéro vatra lupto drash¢avyat.) II, 6, devaushvyam, instead of deva aushvyam. (Comm. Sandhis ##4ndasa%.) VI, 24, atamavishéam, instead of atama-avishZam (Comm. Sandhis £#andasah); cf. Khand. Up. VI, 8, 3, asanayeti (Comm. visarganiyalopaz). IV. Final e before i becomes a, and is then contracted. For instance : VI, 7, atma ganiteti for ganita iti. (Comm. ganite, ganati.) VI, 28, avaéaiva for avata iva. (Comm. Sandhivriddhi k/4ndase.) V. Final au before initial vowels becomes 4. For instance : II, 6, yena va eta anugrzhita iti. VI, 22, asa abhidhyata. On abhibhiyamAanay iva, see p. 295, note 2. V, 2, as4 Atma (var. lect. asav 4tmé). (15)
2] UPANISHADS. i RRM 2 2 5 RE VI. Final o of atho produces elision of initial & . For instance : III, 2, atho ’bhibhatatvat. (Comm. Sandhis khandasak.) Various reading, ato ’bhibhatatvat. VI, 1, so antar is explained as sa u. VII. Other irregularities: VI, 7, 4po py4yanat, explained by pyayanat and Apydyanat. Might it be, apo ’py ayanat? VI, 7, Atmano tma neta. II, 6, so tmanam abhidhyatva. VI, 35, dvidharmondham for dvidharmandham. (Comm. &#andasa.) VI, 35, tegasendham, i.e. tegasd-iddhan. (In explaining other irregular compounds, too, as in I, 4, the commentator has recourse to a £#andasa or pramadika licence.) VI, 1, hirazyavasthat for hiravydvasthat. Here the dropping of a in avasthat is explained by a reference to Bhaguri (vash¢i Bhagurir allopam avapyor upasargayok). See Vopadeva III, 171. VIII. Vislish¢apatha : VII, 2, brahmadhiyaélambana. (Comm. vislishZapathas £4Andasah.) VI, 35, apyay ankura for apy ankura. (Comm. yakaérak pramadapa/fitaz.) On the contrary VI, 35, vliyante for viliyante. If on the grounds which we have hitherto examined there seems good reason to ascribe the Maitrayaza-brahmazaupanishad to an early rather than to a late period, possibly to an ante-PAzinean period, we shall hardly be persuaded to change this opinion on account of supposed references to Vaishvava or to Bauddha doctrines which some scholars have tried to discover in it. As to the worship of Vishzu, as one of the many manifestations of the Highest Spirit, we have seen it alluded to in other Upanishads, and we know from the Brahmamas that the name of Vishzu was connected with many of the earliest Vedic sacrifices.
3INTRODUCTION. li area As to Bauddha doctrines, including the very name of Nirvaxa (p. xlvi, 1. 19), we must remember, as I have often remarked, that there were Bauddhas before Buddha. Brzhaspati, who is frequently quoted in later philosophical writings as the author of an heretical philosophy, denying the authority of the Vedas, is mentioned by name in our Upanishad (VII, 9), but we are told that this Brhaspati, having become Sukra, promulgated his erroneous doctrines in order to mislead the Asuras, and thus to insure the safety of Indra, i.e. of the old faith. The fact that the teacher of King Brzhadratha in our Upanishad is called Sakayanya, can never be used in support of the idea that, being a descendant of Saka}, he must have been, like SAkyamuni,a teacher of Buddhist doctrines. He is the very opposite in our Upanishad, and warns his hearers against such doctrines as we should identify with the doctrines of Buddha. As I have pointed out on several occasions, the breaking through the law of the Asramas is the chief complaint which orthodox Brahmans make against Buddhists and their predecessors, and this is what SAakayanya condemns. A Brahman may become a SannyAsin, which is much the same as a Buddhist Bhikshu, if he has first passed through the three stages of a student, a householder, and a V4naprastha. But to become a Bhikshu without that previous discipline, was heresy in the eyes of the Brahmans, and it was exactly that heresy which the Bauddhas preached and practised. That this social laxity was gaining ground at the time when our Upanishad was written is clear (see VII, 8). We hear of people who wear red dresses (like the Buddhists) without having a right to them ; we even hear of books, different from the Vedas, against which the true Brahmans-are warned. All this points to times when what we call Buddhism was in the air, say the sixth century B.C., the very time to which I have always assigned the origin of the genuine and classical Upanishads. The Upanishads are to my mind the germs of Buddhism,
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.