chers, namely (_a_) adhyayas 1 and 2, (_b_)
adh. 3 and 4, (_c_) adh. 5 and 6. The lists are not quite the same,
which indicates some slight difference between the sub-schools which
composed the three parts, and a lengthy passage occurs twice in an
almost identical form. The Upanishad is clearly composed of two separate
collections with the addition of a third which still bears the title of
_Khila_ or supplement. The whole work exists in two recensions.]
[Footnote 178: The Eleven translated in the _Sacred Books of the East_,
vols. I and XV, include the oldest and most important.]
[Footnote 179: Thus the Aitareya Brahmana is followed by the Aitareya
Aranyaka and that by the Aitareya-Aranyaka-Upanishad.]
[Footnote 180: R.V. X. 121. The verses are also found in the Atharva
Veda, the Vajasaneyi, Taittiriya, Maitrayani, and Kathaka Samhitas and
elsewhere.]
[Footnote 181: R.V. X. 129.]
[Footnote 182: IV. 5. 5 and repeated almost verbally II. 4. 5 with some
omissions. My quotation is somewhat abbreviated and repetitions are
omitted.]
[Footnote 183: The sentiment is perhaps the same as that underlying the
words attributed to Florence Nightingale: "I must strive to see only God
in my friends and God in my cats."]
[Footnote 184: It will be observed that he had said previously that the
Atman must be seen, heard, perceived and known. This is an inconsistent
use of language.]
[Footnote 185: Chandogya Upanishad VI.]
[Footnote 186: In the language of the Upanishads the Atman is often
called simply Tat or it.]
[Footnote 187: _I.e._ the difference between clay and pots, etc. made of
clay.]
[Footnote 188: Yet the contrary proposition is maintained in this same
Upanishad (III. 19. 1), in the Taittiriya Upanishad (II. 8) and
elsewhere. The reason of these divergent statements is of course the
difficulty of distinguishing pure Being without attributes from not
Being.]
[Footnote 189: The word union is a convenient but not wholly accurate
term which covers several theories. The Upanishads sometimes speak of
the union of the soul with Brahman or its absorption in Brahman (_e.g._
Maitr. Up. VI. 22, _Sayujyatvam_ and _asabde nidhanam eti_) but the soul
is more frequently stated to be Brahman or a part of Brahman and its
task is not to effect any act of union but simply to _know_ its own
nature. This knowledge is in itself emancipation. The well-known simile
which compares the soul to a river flowing into the sea is fou
|