English
^ Oupnekhat, id est, Secretum tegendum : opus ipsa in India rarissimum continens antiquam et arcanam, seu theologicam et philosophicam doctrinam, e quatuor sacris Indorum libris, Rak T 3 826 UPANISHADS* work which contains the translation of fifty Upani- shads from Persian into Latin. [The author of this Persian translation is supposed to be D&rA Shakoh, the eldest son of Shah JehaUj and pupil of Babu Lai ; but in reality the work seems to have been per- formed by several Pandits, whom that enlightened prince called from Benares to Delhi, ordering them to translate some of their sacred works into Persian. Three years after the accomplishment of their work, their patron was put to death by his brother Aurung- beid, Djedjer baid, Sam baid, Athrban baid, excerptam ; ad yer- bum, e Fersico idiomate, Samskreticis vocabulis intermixtOy ia Latinum conversum; Dissertationibus et Annotationibus diffici- liora explanantibus, illastratam : studio et opera Anquetil Do- perron, IndicopleustSB. Aj^entorati, typis et impensis fratrum Levrault, yoL i. 1801 : vol. ii. 1802. Duperron received a MS. of the Persian translation of the Upanishads from M. Gentil, the French resident at the court of Soudjaeddaulah. It was brought from Bengal to France hj M. Bemier, in the year 1775. Duperron, after receiving another MS., collated the two, and translated the Persian into French (not published) and into literal Latin. The Persian translation, of which several other MSS. exist, bears the following title in Duperron's translation : " Hanc inter- pretationem ruv Oupneknathai quorumvis quatuor librorum Beid, quod, designatum cum secreto magno (per secretum magnum) est, et integram cognitionem luminis luminum, hie Fakir sine tristitia (Sultan) Mohammed Dara Schakoh ipse, cum significatione recta, cum sinceritate, in tempore sex mensium, (postremo die, seoundo rov Schonbeh, vigesimo^) sexto mensis tov Ramazzan, anno 1067 Tov Hedjri (Christi, 1667) in orbe Delhi, in mansione nakhe nou- deh, cum absolutione ad finem fecit pervenire." The MS. was copied by Atma Ram in the year 1767 a-d. Duperron adds : Absolutum est hoc Apographnm versionis Latinss ru/v quinquaginta Oupnekhatha, ad verbum, e Persico idiomate, Samscreticis vocabulis intermixto, factao, die 9 Octobris> 1795, 18 Brumaire, anni 4. BeipubL Gall. Parisiis. UPANISHADS. 327 zeb.^] Secondly, there is Colebrooke's Essay on the Yedas, which gives a more complete enumeration of the Upanishads. Thirdly, Weber's Analysis of Duper- ron's translation of the Upanishads, in his ^^ Indian Studies." Fourthly, an article by Mr. W. Elliot in the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1851, giving an account of Upanishads known in the South of India, among the Telugu Brahmans. Fifthly, Dr. Eoer's introductions to the various Upanishads, edited and translated by him in the volumes of the Bibliotheca Indica. There are other works, the well- known pamphlets of Rammohun Roy, the Essays of Pauthier, Foley, d'Eckstein, Windischmann, and the publications of the Tattvabodhinl Society, all of which had to be consulted in drawing up our own alphabetical list. The names of the authors of the principal Upa* nishads^ are unknown. This is owing to the very character of these works. They contain authorita- tive statements on the highest questions, and such statements would lose all authority if they were re- presented to the people at large as the result of human reasoning and imagination. They, in a higher degree than any other part of the Yedas, must ^ Elphinston^ History of India, ii. 446. An earlier instance of a translation of the Upanishads is mentioned in Elliot's His- torians of India, i. 260. '^ Abdul Kadir, author of the Tarikh- badaum, who died at the close of the 16th century, says that he was called upon to translate the Atharvana-veda from the Hindi, which he excused himself from doing on account of the exceeding difficulty of the style and abstruseness of meaning ; upon which the task devolved on Haji Ibrahim Sirhindi, who accomplished it satisfactorily." ^ Some of the most modem Upanishads are confessedly the works of Gaudapada, Sankara, and other more recent philosophers. T 4 328 UFAKISHADS. have been considered from the very beginning as re- velation, and as directly communicated to the world by the Supreme Spirit. This sentiment is clearly expressed in the beginning of the Mundaka-upanishad: " Brahman (masc.), the creator of the universe, the preserver of the world, appeared first among the gods. He taught the knowledge of Brahman (neuter), the foundation of all knowledge, to Atharvan, his eldest son. Atharvan long ago imparted the knowledge of Brahman, which Brahman had explained to him, to Angis ; he told it to Satyav&ha Bh&radv&ja, Bh&rad- vdja in succession to Angiras. Saunaka, the great lord, approached Angiras respectfully, and asked: ^ What is it through which, if known, all this becomes known?' "^ It is stated that the text of the Upa- nishads, after it had once been revealed, was never affected by differences, arising from the oral tradition of various Sd,kh&s ; and in one instance where various texts of the same Upanishad have been noted by the Brahmans, they are ascribed to various localities, but not to various Sdkhllfi. Each S&kh&, however, was supposed to be possessed of an Upanishad, and the Muktikd. states boldly that, as there are 1180 l§d.kh&s, there ought properly to be as many [Jpanishads. Another reason why we never hear of the authors of Upanishads as we hear of the Rishis of hymns is that in many instances the Upanishads are mere compilations from other works. Verses from the hymns are incorporated into various Upanishads, and stories originally propounded in the Br&hmanas, are enlarged upon by the compilers of these philo- sophical tracts. ^ See Mundaka-up. ed. Boer. bkihadIbanyakas. 829 In cases only where the XJpanishads form part of an Aranyaka, the reputed authors of the larger works might likewise be considered as the authors of the XJpanishads. This authorship, however, is dif- ferent from the authorship of a Gaudap&da and San- kanu As the Brihad&ranyaka forms part of the l§atapatha-br&hmana, Ydjnavalkya, the reputed au- thor of the Br&hmana, might weU be considered as the author of the Upanishad known by the name of Brihad&ranyaka. It forms the last five Prap&thakas of the 14th book of the Satapatha-br&hmana in the Mddhyandina-6&khd^ whereas in the E&nva*6&kh& the whole of the 17th book is comprised under the name of Upanishad. Y&jnavalkya Y&jasaneya is mentioned towsurds the end of the Brihad&ranyaka as the person who received the whole of the White Yajur-veda from Aditya or the Sun. His influential position at the court of Janaka, king of Yideha, is alluded to several times, and one portion of the Brihad&ranyaka is called the Ysljnavalkiyam E&ndam, as specially celebrating the victories gained by that sage over all his rivals. But even if we accept the traditional opinion that Y&jnavalkya was the author of the Br&hmana and the Aranyaka, such a supposition would be of very little help to us in determining the probable age of the Upanishad portion of the Satapatha-br&hmana. We need not enter at present into the question whether the supposed authorship of Y&jnavalkya implies that he actually composed, or only that he collected and arranged the sacred code of the Vfijasaneyins. That code is, no doubt, in some peculiar sense, considered as Ydjnavalkya's own work. At the time of P&nini it was called by a name which, by its very character, indicated that the 330 BRIHADARANYAKAS. datapatha-br&hmana was a work due to the exertion of one indiyidual, and that it was not, like other Br&hmanas, simply proclaimed by him (prokta), or formed the traditional property of an ancient Vedic j§&kh& bearing his name. This, together with a re- mark in the V&rttika to Pdaini, iv. 3. 105., may be interpreted as indicating the more modem date of this Br&hmana and its Aranyaka, as compared with the Br&hmanas and Aranyakas of other Yedas. But beyond this, the name of Ydjasaneya Y&jnavalkya, as the reputed author of these works, will not help us in fixing the age of the V^jasaneyi-br^hmana- upanishad. Attempts have been made to fix the age of Yft- jnavalkya, as the author of a Law-book, and to trans- fer this date to the author of the Vedic works, just mentioned. The versifier, however, of these laws is as distinct from the original Y&jnavalkya, as the poetical editor of the Laws of the M&uavas is from the mythic Manu, the founder of the Md.nava-^kh&.