Shankara’s Introduction

The Chāndogya Upaniṣad is a treatise comprising eight chapters, beginning with the words ‘Om iti etat akṣaram. For the benefit of persons seeking to know its purport in brief, this easy and brief Essay is set forth.

The context of the treatise is as follows:—The entire course of Action has been duly comprehended as, by itself, conducive to the attainment of the regions of the Moon through the Path of ‘Smoke’,—and as conducive to the attainment of Brahman through the Path of ‘Light’, when accompanied by a full comprehension of the nature of such deities as Prāṇa and the rest. It has also been explained that for those who have followed the bent of their natural inclinations and have deviated from both of the said Paths, there is fall downwards into a painful state;—through neither of the said two paths there can be absolute fulfilment of the highest aim of man. Hence, it becomes necessary to expound the Science of the Self without a Second, which, apart from all Action, directly puts an end to the cause of the entire process of births and rebirths as represented by the said three Paths. It is for this purpose that the Upaniṣad has been promulgated.

Nor is the Absolute Highest Good attainable by any other means save the ‘Science of the secondless Self: The Upaniṣad itself is going to declare that ‘those who know otherwise than this and worship others go to peífehable regions; one proceeding on the other path attains Self-sovereignty’; similarly, for one who believes in the false doctrine of ‘Duality’, there is bondage; just as for the man who has committed theft who holds the red-hot axe (in course of his trial by ordeal), there is burning followed by imprisonment; and the said believer in Duality also falls into the pangs of Birth and Rebirth;—having said this, the texts go on to explain that for one who has firm belief in the true doctrine of the ‘Secondless Self’, there is cessation of the pangs of Birth and Rebirth and also the attainment of Final Liberation; just as for one who has not committed theft, there is neither burning nor imprisonment when he holds the red-hot axe (in course of his trial).

From this it follows that the ‘Vision of the Secondless Self’ cannot go hand-in-hand with the Path of Action; because there is no possibility of there being any notions subversive of the notions derived from such declarations as ‘The Real Entity is one without a second’, “All this is Self alone’, which are subversive of all distinctions of Action, Instrument and Effect. [Which distinctions are presupposed by the Path of Action, and are inconsistent with the ‘Science of the Secondless Self’.]

It might be argued that “the knowledge of the (Vedic) Injunction of Action (would provide the notion subversive of the said notions (of this Secondless Self”).

That, however, is not possible; because the injunction of Actions is meant for those persons who are imbued with the common idea of such distinctions as those relating to the ‘doer’ and the ‘experiencer’, and who are beset with the evils of attachment and aversion to the effects of Actions resulting from the said essentially wrong ideas. [ And the Injunction is not applicable to one who has realised the truth and is no longer under the influence of any false ideas and distinctions.]

The Opponent argues—“As a matter of fact, the Injunction of Actions is meant for one who has read and understood the sense of the whole Veda; action therefore must be meant also for that person who has attained the knowledge of the ‘Secondless Self’ (who is included among those who have read and understood the Veda).”

That cannot be, we reply; because the ordinary common notions of ‘doer’, ‘experiencer’ and the like,—which alone can render a person capable of doing an act,—are entirely sublated by the realisation of the truth embodied in such texts as ‘the Existent Secondless Self’, ‘The Self indeed is all this’ and the like.

From all this it follows that Actions have been enjoined only for one who is still beset with the evils of Ignorance and the rest; and not for one who has realised ‘non duality’. It is to this end that the text is going to declare—“All these persons attain the purer regions, only the man centred in Brahman attains immortality.”

Thus though this treatise deals mainly with the ‘Science of Non-duality’, yet herein are described several fprms of Meditation and Worship, which are conducive to several desirable ends; because these forms of meditation and worship bring about results nearly as good as Liberation, and appertain to slightly modified forms of the One Pure Brahman, which have been spoken of as ‘Consisting of the Mind’, ‘having the Life-breath for its Body’ and so forth; all this meditation and worship brings about the fulfilment of Actions and is related to the auxiliaries of those Actions. There is a similarity also between the Meditations and the Cognition of the One,—in that both are esoteric in their character and both fall within the perview of the Mind; just as the Cognition of One without a second is a function of the Mind, so also are the other forms of Meditation and Worship mere functions of the Mind.

Question:—“What then is the difference between the ‘Cognition of the One and the other forms of Worship and Meditation?’

Answer:—The ‘Cognition of the One is subversive of all such common-place notions of diversity as those of the ‘Doer’ and other agencies of action, the Action itself and the effect of the actions,—all which notions of diversity are imposed upon the Self, which (by itself) is entirely devoid of activity; in the same way as the cognition of the real nature of the Rope brought about by light, is subversive of the wrong notion of serpent which is of the nature-of an imposition (upon the piece of rope). As regards the forms of Meditation and Worship, on the other hand, these also are vouched for by the Scriptures, but are based upon some sort of a substratum (in the shape of an adorable object) and help to concentrate the collected Mind upon that substratum and prevent its interruptions by notions heterogeneous thereto.—Such is the difference between the two.

These forms of Meditation and Worship bring about the purity of mind and character and thereby become illuminative of the real nature of things; to this extent, they are helpful in bringing about the Cognition of the One without a second. In as much as they are based upon a substratum, they are also easier of accomplishment. It is for these reasons that the Upaniṣad first of all sets forth these forms of Meditation and Worship. There, too, in as much as it is the performance of Action to which people are accustomed,—and a relinquishment of Action would make the concentrating of the Mind upon any form of Meditation or Worship extremely difficult,—the text introduces, at the outset, only such forms of Worship and Meditation as appertain to certain factors that go to make up the Action (of Sacrifice).

Thus ends Śaṅkara’s Introduction.