Development of Vedanta in the Vedas and Upanishads
Of the four Vedas - the Rig Veda, Yajur Veda, Sama Veda and Atharva Veda - the first (i.e. Rig Veda) is the main work, resource, and the other three mostly contain the hymns of the Rig Veda, arranged (arranged) in one way or another, convenient for their performance at sacrifices. The hymns of the Rig Veda consist mainly of prayers addressed to many deities: Agni, Mithra, Varuna, Indra, and others. The hymns sing the power and noble deeds of various gods and contain prayers calling for their help and mercy. Sacrifices to the gods consisted of the libation of refined cow butter and other substances (for example, soma) into the sacrificial fire, accompanied by hymns and chants in their honor. These deities were considered realities, certain entities that determine all natural phenomena and govern them (i.e., the elements), such as fire, sun, wind, rain, etc., on which such important moments as life, agriculture depend. and well-being. Nature, although inhabited by various deities, was considered subordinate to some basic law (called rita, and later - dharma), which rightly governs the whole world - objects of nature, as well as living beings. The function of this law is not only to maintain order and order among planets and other objects, but also to establish justice.
Belief in many gods is called polytheism; therefore it is very often said that the Vedas are polytheistic. But Vedic ideas have such features that call this point of view into question. Each god, when addressed with prayer, is extolled in the hymn as the supreme God, the creator of the universe and the Lord of all gods. Therefore, Oxford professor Max Müller argues that the name "polytheism" is not suitable for this faith, and suggests another - "henotheism" or "catenotheism". But whether the Vedic faith is polytheism or henotheism depends largely on how we explain this phenomenon, that is, on a subjective factor. The Vedas can be called polytheistic if the exaltation of each god in them to the degree of the supreme Deity is considered not an indicator of a real belief in the superiority of such a god, but only a deliberate exaggeration, poetic hyperbole. But if the Vedic Kawi poets really believed what they were talking about, then henotheism would be a better name. The latter point of view is more than probable, since in the Rig Veda we find places where it is clearly stated that different deities serve only as manifestations of the One underlying Reality. "The One Reality is called by the sages in different ways: Agni, Yama, Matarishva…" (Ekam sad vipra bahudha vadanti…). Therefore, it becomes possible to regard each deity as supreme.
According to many researchers of this subject, Vedic thinking has evolved, and the idea of God gradually developed from polytheism through henotheism to monotheism, that is, to faith in one God (Tad Ekam). This hypothesis may be correct. But henotheism is not just a transitive (temporary) phenomenon; even in its most advanced form, Indian monotheism retains the belief that although God is one, it manifests itself, manifests itself in many gods, and each of them can be worshiped as a form of the supreme Deity. Even at the present time in India there are various cults - Shaivism, Vishnuism, etc. - flourishing next to each other. Almost every one of them is based on the philosophy of one supreme God, often even one all-encompassing Reality.
Feature of Indian monotheism
Indian monotheism in its living forms, from the Vedic period to the present day, is based rather on the belief in the synthetic Unity of the gods in the person of a single transcendent God-Brahman, than on the denial of many gods for the sake of a single (personal) God. Thus, Vedantic monotheism has a feature that distinguishes it favorably from the orthodox Christianity or Mohammedanism. These features of Indian religion are not simply past phases of the religion of the Vedic period. The conviction about the Unity of all gods, which we meet in the Rig Veda, is an organic part of a more general great idea, which we also find here in a clear form - the idea of the Unity of all that exists. And all the sages of the East and West, sooner or later, came to this amazing conviction.
The unity of all things
In the famous hymn "Purusha-sukta" (10.90.), Which is still pronounced every day by every devout Brahmin, the Vedic prophet, perhaps for the first time in the history of mankind, expressed the idea of the organic Unity of the entire Universe. Here are some verses of this hymn: "The Purusha has a thousand heads, a thousand eyes, a thousand hands; It covers the Earth on all sides and extends ten fingers beyond it. Purusha is all that is, and all that was and that will be; endowed with immortality, He is all that grows (increases) thanks to food. Such is His unparalleled greatness; and the Purusha is even greater: this whole world is only a fourth of Him, and three-quarters of Him are immortal in Heaven. For three-quarters of the Purusha goes up: but one-fourth of Him remains here, and then spreads everywhere through the living and lifeless world."
Transcendence and Immanence of God
Everything that exists - the Earth, Heaven, planets, gods, living and inanimate objects - is understood here as part of one great divine Essence (Purusha), which penetrates, permeates the whole world, and at the same time always remains outside it. In Purusha, everything that is, was and will be is one. This hymn is the fruit of an incredible poetic-metaphysical insight that reveals not only the Universe as a single organic whole, but also the supreme Reality, both immanent and transcendent; God permeates the whole world with Himself, but at the same time He is not exhausted by the world and remains outside of it. In Western theology, this concept is called panentheism (pan - everything, en - in, theos - god) - not to be confused with pantheism - not all the same to God, but everything is in God, who is even greater than everything. With great art and inspiration, this universal view is being developed in the Bhagavad Gita. The brightest flash of prophetic imagination, manifested in the hymn quoted above, shows us all the wealth of ideas that inspired the best Vedic minds - monism, panentheism and the organic concept of an interconnected world.
Impersonal Absolute
In another well-known hymn called Nasadiya-sukta (10.129.), We are introduced to the Vedic concept of the impersonal Absolute. The Reality underlying all existence, all life, is the primordial Reality from which everything comes; this transcendental Reality, as it is said in this hymn, cannot be described either as non-existent, or as existing (i.e., She is neither asat nor sat). Here we have, perhaps, the first glimpse of the concept of the indefinable Absolute, Parabrahman, which is the Reality underlying all things, but not amenable to description. The hymn begins like this: "Then there was neither that which is (sat), nor that which is not (asat); there was no sky, no Heaven, which is higher." This hymn ends with striking words: "He, from whom all creation originated, - whether He created it or not, - is the highest prophet in the highest Heavens, - He truly knows (everything about everything), and maybe even He does not know?"
Regarding the connection between the understanding of the primary Reality as a divine personality and as an indefinite Absolute, it should be said that in the description of Reality as a person there is a mention of its transcendental aspect, which defies description within the framework of objects of experience and, thus, is indefinable (inexpressible). Hence, the personal and impersonal understanding of God is considered to be two aspects of the same Reality. Although many of the important elements of Vedanta can be found in this way in the Rig Veda, they are expressed there in a rather vague poetic form. The method by which the sages arrive at these views is not mentioned, nor are the arguments given to substantiate them. True philosophy should be based mainly on clear thinking and convincing argumentation. Therefore, strictly speaking, there is no real philosophy in the Vedas. The first attempt at consistent philosophical reasoning is found in the Upanishads, where the most important problems of "I" (ie individual self-consciousness), God and the world are clearly posed and considered. But even here, the philosophical method of obtaining a conclusion based on accurate argumentation is only partially manifested (used). Some of the Upanishads, written in verse, contain, like the Rig Veda, inspired sayings on philosophical matters. Similar philosophical sayings are also found in other prose Upanishads. Only in a few Upanishads can one find an approximation to the philosophical method of presentation, when in dialogues, by means of questions and answers, an attempt is made to lead, step by step, a skeptical student to a certain conclusion. But despite the lack of precise forms of argumentation, the Upanishads are enchantingly charming and attractive. This is because they combine the sublimity of ideas, the depth of penetration, the magical appeal to everything that is virtuous and sublime in man, and the irresistible force with which they defend their ideas, as if they were generated by direct contemplation of Truth. The great German thinker Schopenhauer, who was greatly impressed by the Upanishads, declared that "In the whole world there is no teaching so beneficial and so exalting the Soul as the teaching of the Upanishads." He called them the consolation of his life and even his death.
Questions illuminated by the Upanishads
In the Upanishads, we mention the following most significant problems: What is the Reality from which all things originate, thanks to which everything lives and in which everything disappears (dissolves) after destruction? What is That (TAT), with the help of the cognition of which everything can be cognized? What is That, through the knowledge of which the unknown becomes known? What is That, through the knowledge of which you can achieve immortality? Who is Brahman? Who is Atman? The very nature of these questions suggests that the thinkers of the Upanishads were quite sure of the existence of some all-pervading Reality underlying (i.e., in the form of a substrate) of all things arising from It, existing in It and returning to It, and that that there is some Reality through the cognition of which immortality (amritatva) can be achieved. This Reality is sometimes called Brahman (God), sometimes Atman (I), sometimes just Sat (pure being). “In the beginning there was only Atman,” says Aitareya (1.1) and Brihadaranyaka (1.4.1). “All this is Atman”, says Chandogya (7.25.2). “If the Atman is cognized, everything is cognized,” says again in the “Brihadaranyaka” (4.5,6). We also read: “In the beginning there was only being (Sat); it was one without a second” (“Chandogya”, 6.2.1). Further, "All this is Brahman" (Mundaka, 2.2.11, and Chandogya, 3.14.1). In these different contexts, the terms Brahman and Atman are used synonymously. In some places it is clearly said: “This I (Self) is Brahman” (Brihadaranyaka, 2.5.19); “I am Brahman” (ibid. 1.4.10). The Upanishads transfer the focus of attention from the Vedic gods to the I (i.e., to the inner consciousness) of a person. They analyze the Self, distinguishing between the outer shell of a person and his inner, true Reality. The body (deha), feelings (indriyas), mind (manas), intellect (buddhi), and the short-term pleasures generated by them (from contact with objects of the material world) lend themselves to sensation (being objects) and are considered transient, changing modes-properties, and not the constant Essence of I. The outer sheaths (kosha), so to speak, the veils, hide the inner, constant, Reality, which cannot be identified with anything, although everything is rooted in It and is Her manifestation. The real "I" is pure consciousness (chaitanya), and any particular consciousness of the objects of being is its limited manifestation. Not limited by any object, this pure consciousness is also unlimited. The real "I" is called Atman. As an infinite, conscious Reality (satyam, jnanam, anantam), the “I” of a person is identical with the “I” of all beings (sarva-bhutatma) and, therefore, God, Brahman. The Katha Upanishad says: “This I (ie Atman) is hidden in all things, and therefore does not seem to be there (ie, as if absent there), but it is perceived by a particularly perceptive person with the help of an acute, pure, all-perceiving intellect" (3.12).
Self-knowledge is the highest knowledge
Everything possible is done to help a person discover this real Self. Knowledge of the Self (Atma-Vidya, or Atma-Jnana) is considered the highest knowledge (Para-Vidya); all other knowledge and study is considered inferior to him (apara-vidya). The method of self-knowledge is carried out through yogic control over the lower self (i.e. body consciousness), over its deeply rooted interests and impulses through the study of Vedanta under the guidance of an enlightened Teacher, reflection and natural concentration-meditation (shravana, manana, nididhyasana) until then, until the forces of past habits and thoughts (i.e. samskaras and vasanas) are completely overcome by firm faith in the Truth being studied. This is a difficult path, which can only be embarked on by one who is so strong and wise that for the sake of virtue (sreyas) he can reject the pleasant (preyas).
Rituals are insufficient
The Vedic belief in sacrifice was seriously shaken by the Upanishads, who boldly declared that sacrifices (i.e. karmic activities) cannot achieve the highest Goal (Paramagatim) - immortality and freedom from suffering. The Mundaka Upanishad says that these sacrifices are like rafts that have leaked (that is, they are useless in the ocean of worldly suffering), and those fools who consider them the best remedy suffer death throes in old age and die. At best, performing rituals can provide a temporary stay in heaven (svarga), but when the merit-reward (punya) deserved in this world is exhausted, then a new birth (punarjanma) occurs in this mortal world. A deeper meaning, however, is given to sacrifice when the worshiper is identified with the worshiped gods. That is, only those sacrificial acts are not condemned, in the process of performing which the worshiper (sacrificer) and the objects of worship (devatas) are recognized as internally identical, i.e. having the same spiritual nature of Brahman. Thus, the ceremonies of sacrifice to the gods should be considered only as external acts of significance to the uninitiated, who does not understand the innermost secrets of the universe.
Cognition of the inner I, or God, is a means of achieving the highest Good
The sacrifice intended for the Self - i.e. Brahman is immeasurably higher than sacrifice to the deities. Only through cognition of the I, i.e. Brahman, - rebirth in samsara can be stopped, and with it all misery and suffering. He who truly understands his Oneness with the Immortal Brahman, realizes immortality (i.e., becomes immortal). The Upanishads present Brahman not only as the pure basis of all Reality and consciousness, but also as the primary source of all joy and all happiness. Worldly pleasures are just distorted fragments of this joy, just as the objects of the world are limited manifestations of this Reality. One who can plunge into the deepest recesses of his Self, not only realizes his identity with Brahman, but also reaches the heart (core) of Infinite Joy. Sage Yajnavalkya says to Maitreya: “The proof that I am the source of all joy lies in the fact that it (i.e. Atman) is the most precious thing for every person. Every person loves another person or thing because he identifies himself with this person or thing, considering them as his own I”. “Nothing is precious in itself,” says Yajnavalkya. A wife is not dear because she is a wife; a husband is not dear because he is a husband; a son is not dear because he is a son; wealth is not precious for the sake of wealth itself. Everything is expensive due to the fact that it is I. That the Self in itself is bliss can also be proved by the fact that during dreamless sleep (sushupti) a person forgets about his connection with the body, senses, mind and external objects, and plunges, thus, into Himself, into his inner "I", dwelling in peace, not disturbed by either pleasures or sufferings. Modern biology claims that self-preservation is the basic instinct inherent in all living things. But why is it I, or life, so dear to us? The Upanishads answer this: because life is joy. Who would love to live if life was not joy? The joy that we experience in everyday life, no matter how limited and no matter how darkened, supports our desire to live (i.e. the so-called will to live, abhinivesha). But in fact, leaving your inner Self (Atman) into the world of material things does not bring great and lasting joy. The desire for objects turns out to be fetters connecting us with the mortal world, with the vicious circle of birth, death and new birth, full of suffering, and so on. Desire forces by themselves distract us from the Self and the natural conditions of our spiritual existence. And the more we give up our craving (trishna) for objects and try to realize our identity (abheda) with the true Self (Atman), or God (Brahman), the more we realize true happiness. To feel your oneness with I means to be in oneness with the Infinite God, with Immortality and Unlimited Joy. Then nothing will remain unattained, nothing will remain desired. Therefore, in the Katha Upanishad it is written that a mortal can achieve immortality and oneness with Brahman even in this life if his mind is purified and his heart is freed from all desires.
If Atman-Brahman is the Reality underlying the entire Universe, then the question may arise about the nature of the relationship between Brahman and the world. The descriptions of the creation of the world given in various Upanishads do not quite coincide. However, all these descriptions unanimously state that Atman (or Brahman, or Sat) is both the creator and the material cause of the world. In most of these descriptions, the starting point of the creation of the world is depicted something like this: first there was a Soul; she thought, "I'm alone. Why don't I become a multitude?", "I have to create worlds." The description of the subsequent stages-stages at which all objects-objects were created varies: it is sometimes asserted that first the subtlest element akasha (ether) arose from the Atman, and then gradually all physical objects; in other cases, a different picture is drawn. As we will see later, there is nothing reprehensible in these discrepancies, for the world exists forever, and stories about its creation should be understood figuratively, and not literally. Cosmogonic theories express truth not directly, but allegorically.
Denial of plurality
If you believe these descriptions, then the creation of the world should be real, and God should be its real creator (that is, the absolute Soul). But in a number of places it is indicated that there is no plurality (neha nana asti kinchan) and that one who sees many here is doomed to death (mrtyoh sam mrityum apnoti iha naneva pashyati). There is no multiplicity in Reality. To explain the oneness of all things that appear to be multiple, the following examples are given: Just as different gold items are actually the same gold, which is their only real substance, and their different names and forms (nama-rupa), which make they seem to be many - these are only ephemeral verbal differences - and all objects in general are the same as Reality, and their differences are purely verbal. The separate, independent existence of objects in the world is denied. Brahman (or Atman) in many places is also viewed not as a creator, but as a Reality that defies description, being not only ineffable in words, but even inaccessible to thought. Brahman cannot even be an object of worship. Thus, the Kena Upanishad says: "This (Brahman) is something else, something that is known and beyond that that is unknown. What is inexpressible by speech, but due to which speech itself is expressed, is known as Brahman, but he is not one who is worshiped as Brahman." Blind idolatry is condemned here.
Is the creation of the world real?
These two different statements about the world and God are naturally perplexing. Is God the real creator of the world and, therefore, is the world real, or was there really no creation and the world of objects is just a mere appearance, a chimera? Is God a determinable, knowable Reality that can be described with the proper attributes, or is God something indefinite, unknowable? What is the real point of view of the Upanishads? These problems are attempted by the Vedantists in all subsequent Vedantic treatises. As already noted, Badarayana's Brahma Sutra attempts to establish and systematize the real views of the sacred texts of Shruti. But the extremely short statements (sutras) available per se admit different interpretations. The Mandukya-Karika Gaudapada, which is actually the basic text (manifesto) of Vedanta, differs in a much clearer and more definite presentation of the principles of Vedanta. Badarayana himself, by the way, mentions in his sutras about the other seven Masters of Vedanta. Subsequent commentators on the Brahma Sutras give their own detailed interpretations of the Upanishads and Sutras. Of the various competing schools that have arisen in this way, the most famous is the Shankar-Acharya school. What people now accept as Vedanta and sometimes even Indian philosophy in general is in fact the Advaita-Vedanta of the Shankara school. The next most popular is the Vishishta Advaita of the Ramanuja Acharya school.