Shri Shankara’s Introduction

OM TAT SAT.

Adoration to the Brahman. The mantra beginning with “Brahma Devanam” is one of the Atharvana Upanishads. The Upanishad at its very commencement says how the knowledge therein contained was transmitted from preceptor to disciple and does this for the purpose of praising it. By showing how and with what great labour this knowledge was acquired by great sages as a means to secure the highest consummation, it extols knowledge to create a taste for it, in the minds of the hearers; for, it is only when a taste for knowledge is created by praising it, they would eagerly seek to acquire it. How this knowledge is related to emancipation, as a means to its end, will be subsequently explained in the passages commencing with ‘Bhidyate,’ etc. Having first stated here that the knowledge, denoted by the word “Apara Vidya” such as Rig Veda, etc., and consisting merely of mandatory and prohibitory injunctions, cannot remove faults like ignorance, etc., which are the cause of Samsara, i.e., embodied existence and having, by the passages beginning with “Avidyayam antar vartamana”, etc., shown a (marked) division of Vidya into Para and Apara, it explains in the passages beginning with ‘Parikshya lokan,’ etc., the knowledge of Brahman (Brahmavidya) which is a means to the attainment of the highest (Para) and which can be attained only by the grace of the preceptor, after a renunciation of the desire for all objects whether as means or ends. It also declares often the fruits of this knowledge in the passages “He who knows Brahman becomes Brahman itself” and “Having become Brahman while yet alive, all are freed.” Although knowledge is permitted to all in any order of life, it is the knowledge of Brahman in a Sannyasin that becomes the means of emancipation; not the knowledge combined with karma. This is shown by such passages as “Living the life of a mendicant” and “Being in the order of the Sannyasin,” etc. This also follows from the antagonism between knowledge and karma; it is well-known to be impossible that the knowledge of the identity of self with Brahman can be made to co-exist, even in a dream with karma (i.e., action). Knowledge being independent of time and not being the effect of definite causes cannot be limited by time.

If it be suggested that knowledge and karma can possibly co-exist as indicated by the fact that sages in the house-holder’s order have handed down knowledge, we say that this mere indication (linga) cannot override an obvious fact; for the co-existence of light and darkness cannot be brought about even by a hundred rules, much less by mere indications (linga) like these. A short commentary is now commenced of the Upanishad, whose relation to the end desired and whose result have been thus pointed out. This is named Upanishad; it may be either because it lessens the numerous evils of conception, birth, old age, disease, etc., in persons who take kindly to this knowledge of Brahman and approach it with faith and devotion; or, because it makes them reach Brahman; or, because it totally destroys the cause of Samsara, such as ignorance, etc.; thus from the several meanings of the root shad preceded by upani.