Swami Krishnananda- Essence of Aitareya and Taittiriya Upanishads, en
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
THE ESSENCE OF THE
AITAREYA AND TAITTIRIYA
UPANISHADS
by
Swami Krishnananda
The Divine Life Society
Sivananda Ashram, Rishikesh, India
(
Internet Edition: For free distribution only
)
Website: www.swami-krishnananda.org
CONTENTS
Preface
3
Introduction
4
I - The Atman
11
II - Isvara And Jiva
14
III - Cosmology
20
IV - Ananda-Mimamsa
25
V - Some Light On Yoga Practice
36
VI - The Secret Of Sadhana
41
The Essence of the Aitareya and Taittirya Upanishad by Swami Krishnananda
1
PREFACE
The lectures on the Aitareya and Taittiriya Upanishads were delivered by the author a
few years back during the annual session of the Sadhana Week at the Headquarters. The
theme of these discourses centres round the cosmological narrative of the Aitareya
Upanishad and the psychological analysis of the Taittiriya Upanishad. The importance
of this revealing subject would be amply clear to anyone who recognises the significance
of the psychophysical structure of the human individual in relation to the universe or
creation as a whole. Thus, this detailed study forms not merely an entertaining journey
through the cosmos right from the point of its origin down to the lowest predicament of
human nature in its sociological associations and involvements, but also an acute
meditation on man’s divine relevance to the Supreme Being.
This publication is intended to serve as a positive spiritual guide to all seekers the world
over.
Shivanandanagar,
26th May, 1982.
THE DIVINE LIFE SOCIETY
The Essence of the Aitareya and Taittirya Upanishad by Swami Krishnananda
2
INTRODUCTION
The great issues of life, whether personal or social, hinge upon the concept of duty, -
what one ought to do in life. We know very well that the whole enterprise of mankind is
a struggle of duty towards a particular end, and it makes no difference what position a
person occupies in life in so far as the broad question of duty is concerned. The division
of duty may vary from person to person, or from condition to condition, but that there is
a duty of some sort cannot be denied, because duty is another name for the function that
one is expected to perform in a given location of one’s life. But what one ought to do
cannot be decided easily unless another question is answered; - what is it that one is
aiming at? Our aim will decide to a large extent the nature of our expectations, whether
in our individual capacity or in our capacity as units in human society. What is it that we
seek, finally? If this is clear to the mind, evidently what one ought to do, also, would be
clear. But, neither of these questions is easy to answer. And without properly conceiving
the background of our efforts in life we seem to be going headlong everyday, right from
the morning till the evening, taking for granted that everything is clear to our minds. In
fact, if there has been a proper clarity of thought in respect of one’s duty and the aim of
one’s life, there would be no such thing as conflict in life. Conflict or disharmony arises
among mankind due to the fact of missing the very purpose of life and, consequently,
missing the knowledge of the functions that one is supposed to perform in life. Often we
hear people saying “This is my duty, this not my duty.” But, on what grounds does one
make this statement? How do we know that this is our duty, or this is not our duty? Is it
because we have been born in a particular family, our father has been performing this
function, and therefore it is ours, or it is not ours; or is there any other logical
foundation for this concept of one’s having this to do or not to do. We, generally, do not
go deep into these matters. Mankind, unfortunately, is averse to go into the depths of
any question. We like to float on the surface in every kind of activity of ours. Whatever
be our walk of life, we seem to be content merely by glossing over things without going
into the profundity of the issues on hand. But no problem is merely a surface issue;
every problem is as wide as life itself. We can imagine how vast and how immense in
magnitude human life is and our concept of duty cannot be ‘smaller’ than that. There is
something in us which is vitally connected with everyone else. But for this fact there
would not be an endeavour to talk in terms of mankind or humanity. It is very strange
that we speak of mankind, as if there is some sort of relationship between oneself and
another in the group that we call humanity. The desire to form organisations,
institutions, bodies, etc., whether in the small unit of a family or the larger ones like the
nation, or an international organisation, - whatever be the concept of the body that we
form - the hidden desire seems to be to form a harmonious whole out of the little
ingredients we call human individuals. This desire is enough to indicate that there is
some purpose we are aiming at in life.
An organisation is a general term and it can apply to any kind of people coming
together. If two people join and harmoniously work, it is an organisation. If it is more
than two, it can be a thousand, it is still an organisation; and if the whole of humanity is
taken as a single body, that too is an organisation. Whatever it is, the point is that we
seem to be discontented merely by any form of isolated life that we may be compelled to
live. An individual is not always happy by being absolutely cut off from human society.
The Essence of the Aitareya and Taittirya Upanishad by Swami Krishnananda
3
There is an instinct inborn in our nature to come together with other people, we call it a
social instinct without understanding what it actually means. An instinct is an intelligent
seeking on our part for the purpose of the achievement of a goal. An instinct is not a
blind and chaotic urge that arises in ourselves; it is a rational, purposive movement
which is unintelligibly conducting itself towards a particular aim, and when we cannot
understand the rational background of the instinct, we call it irrational. But if we can
understand the purposive movement of the instinct, it becomes logical and there would
be then no distinction between these two. And why is it that we have an instinct for
social life? Why do we wish to come together and form bodies, whether it is a religious
body, or a social body, or a political body, whatever be that body? We have some
ununderstandable and inscrutable feeling within us from a part of ourselves which
speaks in its own language. There are depths in our personality which are deeper than
our conscious level, as we all know very well. This instinct for social collaboration does
not necessarily arise from a conscious deliberative thinking of the human individual. It
is automatic. “You feel.” Many people say: “I feel.” But this feeling arises not from the
conscious level. It is not a logically deduced conclusion arrived at by induction or
deduction. It is a feeling which has a reason of its own: which transcends ordinary
organisational thinking in logical terms. We have an aim behind our coming together.
Now, this necessity to come together, work together implies that we seek a common
purpose. Otherwise, there would be no point in such a longing. If each individual flies at
a tangent and there is absolutely no connection between the aim of myself and yourself,
there would be absolutely no meaning in our joining together, coming together, meeting
together or performing a work through a body or an organisation. It is taken for granted
that every organisation of human society, of whatever nature, has an implication behind
it, - that there is a common purpose behind human individuals. Otherwise, people
would not sit together or speak together in the same language. Stretching this argument
a little further, we are very fond of speaking in terms of “mankind” these days, -
humanity. We would be happy if there were no wars, no battles, would be happy if there
no quarrels; if there is a single government for the whole world. This is a great
aspiration, no doubt; but how does this aspiration arise, unless the whole mankind has a
single purpose or aim before it. If every individual is differentiated from every other,
there cannot be such an aspiration at all. That we seek such a possibility, whether it is
immediately practicable or not, is itself an indication of what humanity is basically made
of. It is substantially one. But for the fact of this substantial unity of the building-blocks
of mankind, there would be no such thing as a talk of universal government, etc. Even
this idea will not arise in one’s mind. We know that the effect cannot contain what is not
in the cause. The idea of universal government, or a single mankind, and human
solidarity etc., which arises as a kind of effect, a psychological product, from our minds
has a cause behind it. If we are logical thinkers, we would naturally accept that there
cannot be an effect without a cause. The very functioning of the human mind in terms of
universal collaboration and achievement is an indication that it is based on some cause
which is characterised by similar purposes.
So, our concept of duty in life is naturally dependent on the aim that we have before
ourselves, and, as was explained, the final aim of mankind does not seem to be
segregated internally, a fact that comes to high relief on account of our basic aspirations.
We feel happy if we see our own brothers. There is a feeling between man and man. It is
a common feeling, no doubt, arising on account of kinship of character and sympathy of
The Essence of the Aitareya and Taittirya Upanishad by Swami Krishnananda
4
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]