CHAPTER SEVEN
The Upanishadic Dharma
7.1: Uncertain times
As we read earlier, the post-Vedic period of 1000-400 B. C. was one of great tumult, uncertainty, and insecurity. The situation was something like the uncertainties we are experiencing in 21st century related to global warming, ice caps and glaciers melting, sectarian terrorism, religious conflicts, rampant pollution of air, water and land, rapid globalization, deep economic recession, political corruption, business leaders committing fraud and the like. There was much political and social instability in the land. Kings were being dethroned, kingdoms were being swallowed-up, and tribes were breaking up. Old orders were being replaced with new ones. There was a deep sense of disillusionment and insecurity in the air. The world was seen as a miserable place to live. During this period numerous great texts known as the Upanishads were composed by some great thinkers, most certainly many of them royal sages (BG 4:1-2; 9:2; Chandogya Upanishad: 5:11:5-7; Brahadāranyaka Upanishad: 2:1:1-15; 6:2:1). No one knows the exact meaning of this term, but scholars think it means “sitting devotedly near” an enlightened Guru. The Upanishads, later came to be known as confidential discourses or secrets (Rahasyam 4:3) mainly because the Brāhmanism considered them as anti-establishment rhetoric. Reflecting the uncertain and disillusioning mood of the time the Maitrāyani Upanishad (1:4) went so far as to say:
“What is the use of the enjoyment of pleasures in this offensive, pithless body -a mere mass of bones, skin, sinews, marrow, flesh, seed, blood, mucus, tears, phlegm, ordure, water, bile, and slime! What is the use of enjoyment of pleasures in this body which is assailed by lust, hatred, greed, delusion, fear, anguish, jealousy, separation from what is loved, union with what is not loved, hunger, thirst, old age, death, illness, grief and other evils! ……There is drying up of other great oceans, falling of mountains, the moving of pole-star, cutting of wind-ropes (that hold the stars), submergence of the earth, and the departure of the gods from their place… In such a world as this, what is the use of the enjoyment of pleasures, if he who has fed on them is seen to return again and again. We are all like a frog in the dry well!”
7.2: Intellectuals question Brahmanic doctrines
As can be discerned from the above shlokas, the intellectuals began to see the world as a miserable place for people to live in (BG: 9:33). They saw around them people who suffered from the mental fever (BG 3:30) of Dwandwam due to their preoccupation with wealth, power, heaven and pleasure, no different than what is happening now in modern India. They concluded that being born again and again as per the doctrine of Karma was more a curse than a blessing. They must somehow find a way to end mental stress (Dwandwam), decay, pain, death, grief, and find a way to end the cycle of birth, death and birth, known as Samsāra, and attain immortality. Disgusted intellectuals of India, especially Kshatriya philosophers (Chandogya Up: 1:9:2-4), were not satisfied by the mindless and intellectually sterile Kāmya Karma as a panacea for all the ills and miseries of life as claimed by Brāhmanic ritualists (BG 2:42). Gradually it dawned on them that the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma of Brāhmanism, as symbolized by Kāmya Karma, themselves had a terribly corrupting influence on the society:
Mundaka Upanishad: 1:2:5-10: If a man performs his sacred works (Yajnas) when these flames are shining, and oblations follow at the right time, then they lead him as sun-rays to where the one Lord of the Devas (Indra) dwells (BG: 9:20). “Come hither, come hither!” the brilliant oblations say to him, and carry the sacrificer on the rays of the sun, while they utter speech and praise him, saying, “This is Brahma-world (Svarga, heaven), gained by the good works (Yajnas).” But frail, in truth, are those boats, the sacrifices, the eighteen, in which this lower ceremonial has been told. Fools who praise this as the highest good, are subject again and again to old age and death (BG: 9:21). Fools dwelling in darkness, wise in their own conceit, and puffed up with vain knowledge (of the Vedas) (Kathā Up: 2:1:5; BG 2:42), go round and round staggering to and fro, like blind men led by the blind. Children, when they have long lived in ignorance, consider themselves happy. Because those who depend on their good works are, owing to their passions, improvident, they fall and become miserable when their life (in the world which they had gained by sacrifices) is finished. Considering sacrifices and good works as the best, these fools know no higher good, and having enjoyed (their reward) on the height of heaven, gained by good works, they enter again this world or a lower one (BG: 9:21).
They concluded that the world being so full of misery, being born again and again as per the doctrine of Karma was more a punishment than reward. For one not to be born again and again, he must give up unmindfulness and impure thought (desire and attachment) (Kathā. Up: 1:3:7). For one to be eternal he must know Atmān: Kathā Up: 1:3:15: He who has perceived that (Brahman) which is without sound, without touch, without form, without decay, without taste, eternal, without smell, without beginning, without end, beyond the Great, and unchangeable, is freed from the jaws of death.
7.3: Focus shifts from the mindless ritual to the spiritual
The intellectuals of India frantically searched for new solutions for pressing life-problems. They began to contemplate on the structure and functions of the mind. They came up with the idea of the Self, Atmān, the indestructibe essence or spirit of man. They claimed that Atmān is nothing but a portion of Brahman, the all-pervading Universal Spirit, within the body (BG 8:3). They concluded that the Self is a part of one’s body and mind: Kathā Upanishad: 1:3:10: Beyond the Senses there are (sense) objects; beyond the objects there is the mind; beyond the mind there is the intellect, the Great Self is beyond the Intellect (BG: 3:42). Using the metaphor they are most familiar with, they compared the mind to a horse-drawn chariot, metaphor befitting the Gita: Kathā Upanishad: 1:3:3-4: Know the Self to be sitting in the chariot, the Body to be the chariot, the Intellect (Buddhi) the charioteer, and the Mind the reins. The Senses they call the horses, the objects of the Senses their roads. When He (the Highest Self) is in union with with the body, the Senses, and the Mind, then the wise people call him the Enjoyer (Self-realized).
7.4: The Upanishads versus the Vedas
Many of the Upanishads were blatantly skeptical about or hostile to Brāhmanism in general and sacrifices in particular in the prevalent spirit of the day. Some of them even ridiculed the greedy priests mercilessly. Chāndogya Upanishad (1:12:1-5) compared the orthodox priests to a procession of dogs holding the tail of the dog in front chanting piously: “Om, let us eat! Om, let us drink! Om, may divine Varuna, Prajāpati, Sāvitri bring us food! Lord of food, bring hither food, bring it, Om!”
The Upanishadic seers relegated Vedic knowledge to lower level than the Knowledge of Atmān (Mundaka Upanishad: 1:4). They branded indulgence in Vedic sacrifices as a sign of ignorance (Avidya) and delighting in Vedic knowledge (BG 2:42) led to greater darkness (Brahadāranyaka Upanishad: 4:4:10; Isopanishad: 9, 12). They condemned desire-driven sacrifices in no uncertain terms (Mundaka Upanishad: 1:2-10). They declared that Atmān cannot be attained by the Vedas (Mundaka Upanishad: 3:2:3; Svetāsvatara Upanishad: 3:13; Maitrāyani Upanishad: 2:5; Kathā Upanishad: 1:2:23). When a person has attained Atmān, he is no longer concerned about one’s Varna or Kula or status in life (Brahadāranyaka Upanishad: 4:3:22; Chandogya Up. 4:4:1-5).
7.5: The Upanishadic remedy
There is no doubt that the Upanishadic doctrines arose in reaction to decadence of Brāhmanism. The Upanishadic seers had no quarrel with the fact that the Gunas are the cause of all action (BG 3:5) by their influence on Karmendriyas (Organs of Action such as hands, feet, mouth, genitals, etc.). However, the problem with the Gunas, they said, was that by means of the Senses, they promote desire for, attachment to and possessiveness of sense objects such as power, people, wealth and heaven, and induce people to hanker after them. This creates three problems: 1. All actions, except for Yajnas performed selflessly, earn one Karmaphalam (3:9), and therefore, the Gunas promote the cycle of birth, death and rebirth (Samsāra) hereafter. 2. When the mind comes into contact with sense objects and gets attached to them, it suffers from Dwandwam (stress) of mind (2:14; 3:28-29): I like this, I hate this; this makes me feel good, this makes me sick; I got it, I lost it. In other words, people who are into money, power, title, honor, wealth, etc. have neither peace of mind nor happiness here on earth (2:66). 3. When the mind becomes entangled with sense objects, it loses touch with Atmān within. This results in one suffering from Shokam (grief) when someone they are attached to dies.
So they concluded that the solution for all the three miseries (Tāpatraya) on earth -Shōkam (grief), Dwandwam (stress) and Karmaphalam resulting in Samsāra (cycle of birth, death and rebirth)- was to eliminate the doctrine of the Gunas, which promotes Kāma (desire), Sangas (attachment), Mōha (delusion) for sense objects; and cancel-out doctrine of Karma, which promotes desire for fruits (Sankalpa) when one acts. They realized that to counter the force of the Gunas, they must offer people a force greater than the Gunas. The force they came up with was Atmān (BG 3:43). To counter desire for, attachment to and possessiveness of sense objects, they concluded, they must come up with a technique. The technique to overcome the force of the Gunas and eliminate Karmaphalam when one acts, was Yoga. The technique of Yoga conisists of withdrawing the Senses (desire, attachment, possessiveness) by girdling the mind with Buddhi (Intellect, Wisdom). This eliminates Dwandwam immediately. When one acts without desire for fruits (Sankalpa) and with steadiness of mind, he avoids earning both good and bad Karmaphalam (BG 2:50-51). Furthermore, they claimed, once one intuitively gains the knowledge that Atmān is eternal and deathless, he becomes immune to Shōkam (2:25). Thus Yoga became the tool to end Shōkam and Dwandwam here on earth; and eliminate Karmaphalam and thus end Samsara hereafter. This is how Knowledge of Atmān and Buddhiyoga became the fundamental doctrines of the Upanishads.
7.6: The doctrine of the Knowledge of Atmān and Brahman: That thou art
In contrast to the ritual-oriented Vedas, Upanishads were thought-provoking discourses that dealt with truly mind-boggling concepts of all-pervading Brahman, the Imperishable Universal Spirit and Atmān, the Self, the indestructible essence of that spirit in man’s heart (Kathā Upanishad 2:6:1-15). Brahman was described as an immortal “terrifying force like a drawn sword” before which all the Vedic gods ran away in terror (Katha Up. 2:6:1-3). Superiority of Brahman over Vedic gods was conveyed in the two coded shlokas in the Bhagavad Gita: 2:23-24: Weapon (Indra) cannot cleave Atmān, fire (Agni) cannot burn It, water (Varuna) cannot wet It, wind (Vayu) cannot dry it. Brahman, being distinct from the Senses (desires and attachment, the cause of grief), was identified as the seat of Absolute Bliss (Sukham) (BG: 5:21, 24-26) and was without any Gunas (Nirguna BG:13:31). Brahman was beyod pain, grief, decadence, death, estruction and mutation. He cannot be perceived by the Senses. Because Brahman was beyond the reach of the Senses, It could only be described in negative terms: Not this, not this: Naeti, Naeti: (Brahadāranyaka Upanishad: 4:4:22). The central theme of the Upanishads was “Tat tvam asi” (Chāndogya Upanishad: 6:9:4): That thou art, meaning the Atmān within the body and all-pervading Brahman are one and the same. Another way of putting this was: “Aham Brahmāsmi”: I am Brahman (Mundaka Upanishad: 3:2:9). Brahman could be obtained only through abstinence from sense objects (Chāndogya Upanishad: 8:5:1-3); and by truth and penance (Mundaka Upanishad: 3:1:5). Unlike Prakriti (the body and the Gunas) Brahman was free from old age, death, pain, grief, desire, etc. (Chāndogya Upanishad: 8:7:3; BG:14:20) and he who knows Brahman obtains everything (Chāndogya Upanishad: 8:7:3). He who knows Atmān overcomes Shōkam (Chāndogya Upanishad: 7:1:3). Those who know Atmān become immortal (Svetāsvatara Up.:4:20). The ultimate goal of Atmān was Nirvāna -end of Samsāra - by means of merger with Brahman. How can one achieve this goal?
7.7: The doctrine of Yoga: The disconnection of Mind from the Senses and sense objects
The root word for Yoga is yoke. Yoga consists of arduous practice by which one controls his Senses and yokes his mind to his Buddhi (Intellect). Thus stabilized, the mind becomes immune to Dwandwam. This is known as Buddhiyoga. What is the ultimate goal of Buddhiyoga? To obtain the bliss of Brahman. Katha Upanishad describes the basic idea of Buddhiyoga (2:6:10-11): When the five instruments of knowledge (Senses) stand still together with the Mind, and when Intellect does not move, that is called the highest state (Buddhiyoga). This, the firm holding back of the Senses (from its desire for and attachment to sense objects) is called (Buddhi)Yoga. How can one achieve the immortality of Brahman? Kathā Up. 2:6:14-15: When all desires that dwell in his heart cease, then the mortal becomes immortal, and obtains Brahman. When all ties of the heart are severed here on earth, then the mortal becomes immortal -here ends the teaching (of Yoga) (Also BG: 2:55-59).
7.8: The Gunas are the cause of Shōkam and Dwandwam
If Atmān resides in the body, why is it that we do not know It? Well, the Upanishadic seers blamed it on the force of the Gunas (Natural Qualities) (Maitrāyani Upanishad: 3:2). The best way to explain this force is that it is like gravity. Just as gravity of earth attracts all objects to it, Guna attracts Atmān and binds it to the body (BG:14:5). By means of the same magnetic attraction, the Gunas induce the Mind to get attracted to sense objects and get attached to them (BG: 3:27-28). The Mind’s attachment to sense objects creates the following problems:
1. Dwandwam: When the Senses become entangled with sense objects (people, money, power, etc.) the Mind experiences pairs of opposites such as likes and dislikes, pleasure and pain, gain and loss, honor and dishonor, etc. The term Dwandwam also has many other meanings: doubt, mood swings, obsession, loss of judgment, and the like. When the mind becomes entangled with sense objects it becomes disconnected from Wisdom and suffers from unsteadiness, loss of judgment, doubt and other symptoms of stress (Maitrāyani Upanishad:3:3; BG: 2:14). A person who experiences the Dwandwam of pain and pleasure has not found Brahman (Chandogya Up. 8:12:2). The upper oval in the picture below shows a restless and unsteady mind. The lower oval shows a steady (Buddhiyukta mind)
2. Shōkam: Once the mind becomes deluded by its entanglement with sense objects, it becomes ignorant of Atmān in the body. When one loses awareness of the immortal nature of Atmān, he suffers Shōkam (Grief) upon the death of loved one by failing to recognize that Atmān is deathless (Maitrāyani Upanishad:3:2). He who knows Atmān grieves no more (Kathā Upanishad:2:4:4; Brahadāranyaka Upanishad: 4:3:21; BG:2:25).
7.9: Doctrine of Karma promotes Karmaphalam and Samsāra
3. Karmaphalam: The doctrine of Karma (Chandogya Upanishad: 5:10:7) evolved over several centuries before the Original Gita was composed. Whereas Brāhmanic Dharma encouraged the upper classes to earn as much Karmaphalam as possible to enjoy wealth and lordship here on earth and heaven hereafter (BG:2:43), the Upanishadic Dharma claimed that earning Karmaphalam merely promoted the cycle of birth-death-rebirth ( Kathā Up: 5:10:3-5; BG:9:21). The goal of life should be to enjoy peace of mind here on earth (BG: 5:21) and Nirvāna hereafter (BG: 6:15), meaning ending the cycle of Samsāra once and for all. The Upanishads declared that whereas the study of the Vedas and practice of charity (Dāna) and austerity (Tapas) might obtain one heaven, to attain immortality one must know Brahman (Chandogya Upanishad 2:23:1-2).
7.10: Two elements of Buddhiyoga: Sanyāsa and Tyāga
1. Sanyāsa means giving up desire for, attachment to and possessiveness of sense objects. This is exactly opposite of what the Gunas do. In practice this meant giving up performing Kāmya Karma (18:2). When one achieves this goal, his mind connects with Buddhi, his inner wisdom, and becomes Buddhiyukta (BG:2:49-51). Because detachment from sense objects connects the mind to its inner wisdom (Buddhi), this Yoga is known as Buddhiyoga or Yoga of Wisdom. The mind thus stabilized by wisdom (Buddhiyukta mind) not only overcomes Dwandwam, but also gains Knowledge of Atmān after all desire is conquered (2:55-59). Knowledge that Atmān is eternal and deathless counters Shōkam. In practice, Sanyāsa countered Kāma (hankering for hefty fees) evident in the priests officiating Kāmya Karma (18:2). In Chapter Four of the Bhagavad Gita Lord Krishna assigned Sanyāsa, also known as Jnānayoga, to the Kāma-ridden Brāhmin class, in an attempt to wean them away from Kāmya Karma.
2. Tyāga means renouncing fruits of action (BG: 18:2). All selfless actions earn neither good nor bad Karmaphalam, and thus they break the bonds of Karma (2:39-40). In practice, Tyāga countered Sankalpa, the desire for fruits (6:1-4), evident in Kshatriyas sponsoring Kāmya Karma. In Chapter Three of the Bhagavad Gita, Tyāga, also known as Karmayoga, was given by Lord Krishna to the Sankalpa-obsessed Kshatriyas (3:3) in an attempt to wean them away from Kāmya Karma.
The Upanishadic seers proposed a combination of philosophy of Sānkhya (Knowledge of Atmān) and practice of Yoga to replace the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma: “He who has known that Cause (Atmān) which is to be apprehended by Sānkhya philosophy and discipline of Yoga, he is freed from all fetters of (Samsāra)( (Svetasvatara Up:6:13). It is this philosophy of Sānkhya and practice of Yoga which was revealed by Guru Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita: 2:39: This wisdom (Knowledge of Atmān) has been given to you as per the philosophy of Sānkhya (by which you can overcome the doctrine of the Gunas and attain Knowledge of Atmān); now hear from me how by the arduous practice of Buddhiyoga you can break the bonds of (doctrine of) Karma.
The reader should note here that neither Jnānayoga nor Karmayoga had any relevance to Arjuna’s predicament. No one can go to war with an attitude that he is detached from sense objects and he is not desiring victory and honor. These two Yogas were meant for corrupt Brāhmins and greedy Kshatriyas of Brāhmanic Dharma in the historical context, who had corrupted Brāhmanism beyond repair by indulging in Kāmya Karma. Lord Krishna gives a hint to this effect by addressing Arjuna as “sinless” in 3:3 in which he divides Buddhiyoga into Jnānayoga and Karmayoga. Furthermore, these two Yogas are mighty difficult for ordinary people in the modern world to practice.
Basic tactics of the Upanishadic revolution
The Upanishadic seers chose their words carefully in launching the revolution. They used various tactics to express their views, leaving room for ambiguity. Most of their revolutionary shlokas superficially appear to be applicable to Arjuna’s predicament. As we will read in the next chapter, deeper analysis would prove this not to be the case. This gave Brāhmanic scholars enough room to save face. We will study all these tactics in detail when we review each chapter.
1. Clever use of multiple meanings of words Karma and Dharma: These words have multiple meanings, depending upon the context and intent of their use (4:15).
2. Using metaphors to convey the message (2:22-24; 4:37; 15:1-4).
3. Double entendre: Using the same shloka to give dual meanings, one with reference to the Mahābhārata context and the other the Historical (2:47-49). As we will read later, their shlokas did not fit the Mahābhārata context as well as they did the Historical context.
4. Using pun (2:29; 52-53) to convey the hidden message. They used words such as Karma, Dharma, Shruthi, Nirveda and Veda in such a way that the discerning reader would know their hidden, anti-Brāhmanism intent.
5. Pretending as if the anti-Brāhmanic shlokas were meant for Arjuna when, in fact, they were meant for errant ritualists (2:38; 18:63). They gave a clue to this fact by addressing Arjuna as ‘sinless’ (3:3; 15:20), and a person with divine qualities (16:5) meaning, these shlokas did not apply to him. It is a like a good scolding given by a father to his noble son within the earshot of his errant nephew. The scolding given was meant for the waywardly nephew, not for the noble son.
Is there a scientific basis for the Upanishadic theory of the Gunas as the source of human weaknesses?
The question may arise here if there is any scientific basis for the claim by the Upanishadic theory that common human weaknesses arise from the Gunas. I believe there is. The Gunas can be roughly compared to Id, the aggressive and sexual impulses. Guna-rooted human weaknesses that civilized society shuns such as Kāma (lust), Krōdha (jealous rage), Mada (arrogance), Mōha (delusion), Mātsarya (envy), Lōbha (greed) and Bhaya (fear/insecurity) were essential survival tools once upon a time on man’s evolutionary path. As man evolved in the wilderness over millions of years Mother Nature, Prakriti, gave him many survival tools: fear for his safety, lust for food and sex, hatred for his enemies, arrogance to dominate others, possessiveness and greed to ensure his survival in lean times and jealousy that forced him to compete with others for the same natural resources such as food and water. Over millions of years these survival tools became hard-wired into the brain and embedded into the genes of all humans. The basic goal of these survival tools was to further man’s personal safety and interests in the harsh environment of wilderness. In other words, the primitive man was basically a “Me, I and Mine” person.
When man gradually became civilized about ten thousand years ago, in order to bring peace and order in human society he attempted to control these traits by means of laws (Dharma), morals (Neethi), social etiquettes (Niyama), traditions (Sampradāya) etc. Man was forced to suppress his basic survival instincts and tools in return for being part of the peaceful, civilized society. In other words, man was forced to give up his selfishness and other negative traits as the price for belonging to the society. He was forced comply with the dictates of Dharma and to work (perform Karma) not only for himself but also for the welfare of the society in return for the privilege of belonging to the society. Paying taxes is an example. Every person’s Karma was ordained by the dictates of his Dharma. In the Brāhmanic society of ancient India the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma dictated a man’s Dharma as well as his Karma as dictated by it. This is the basis of Brāhmanic dictum, “Duty above all else.” The problem was that one was more or less straight-jacketed into his Guna/Karma destiny. The lower classes performed their obligatory duty to serve the upper classes. Those who opposed the system were hooted down with the label of Ahamkāra.
These ancient hard-wired survival tools remain just under the surface within the modern man’s mind as defects or personality weaknesses such as Bhaya (fear, insecurity), Kāma (lust), Krōdha (jealous rage), Mada (arrogance); Mōha (delusion), Lōbha (greed) and Mātsarya (jealousy). The more recently cultivated (soft-wired) laws, moral values, social etiquettes and noble virtues, all of which represent Buddhi (Superego/Wisdom), merely cover up these hard-wired survival tools. Under right circumstances these relics of our prehistoric past, rooted deeply into our Nature, resurface in the mind and excite the Senses and Organs of Action both of which are the functions of the Gunas. The civilized man then behaves like the primitive man. This is exactly what happened to people performing Kāmya Karma. In modern times, we see this behavior in all crooked businessmen who rip off their clients; CEOs of various banks and financial institutions who loot the shareholders; politicians and bureaucrats who take bribes and steal public funds. Once the mind becomes entangled with money, power and women, it becomes disconnected from the wisdom and one begins to do stupid things (2:62-63). Once these Guna-rooted drives became manifest in them, the upper classes of Brāhmanism became that “Me, I and Mine” primitive persons and began to indulge in evil acts (3:37-40). It is the contention of the Upanishadic Gita that in the civilized society there is no room for “Me, I and Mine” as exemplified by Kāmya Karma. Detachment from sense objects (Jnānayoga, 4:23) and selflessness in action (Karmayoga), especially by the ruling classes (3:19-21), is the Upanishadic Gita’s antidote to man’s attachment to sense objects and selfish acts rooted in primitive instincts and impulses we call the Gunas. Recognizing the deleterious role of Guna-based human weaknesses in the society, the Bhagavad Gita repeatedly exhorts (2:45; 14:19-20) one to “cross over all three Gunas.” In fact, the main purpose of Yoga is to control the power of the Gunas and withdraw the Senses; detach the mind from sense objects and to perform all action selflessly.
We will study every shloka of Chapters Two to Six in the next five chapters to expose the Upanishadic revolution.
7.11: The Upanishadism versus Brāhmanism
1. Whereas Brāhmanism worshipped many Vedic gods, Upanishadism worshipped only one divinity: Atmān/Brahman.
2. Whereas Brāhmanism worshipped Vedic gods by means of Yajna seeking sense objects, Upanishadism worshipped Brahman by means of Yoga seeking Atmān.
3. Whereas Brāhmanism promoted attachment to lordship and wealth here on earth, Upanishadism promoted detachment from these sense objects.
4. Whereas Brāhmanism promoted hierarchal class system, Upanishadism promoted equality of all people.
5. Whereas Brāhmanism promoted action in accordance with one’s social class to gain wealth, honor and status in the society, the Upanishadism advocated doing the right thing after appropriate reflection regardless of gain or loss; honor or dishonor; and success or failure.
6. Whereas Brāhmanism promoted Samsāra in which one’s Atmān was born again and again based on the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma (BG:2:26; 18:42), the Upanishads condemned Samsāra and promoted Nirvāna (15:1-4).
7. Whereas Brāhmanism looked upon the Vedas as the ultimate religious authority, Upanishadism looked upon the Vedas as the “lower knowledge” when compared to the Upanishads (BG:2:46).
8. Whereas Brāhmanism considered Brāhmins superior to all other classes, Upanishadism considered Brāhmins as equal to common animals and dog-eating outcaste (5:18).
9. Whereas Brāhmanism considered ignorance (of the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma) as caused by one’s Ahamkāra, Upanishadism declared that ignorance of Knowledge of Atmān was caused by the Gunas themselves.
10. Whereas Brāhmanism considered Vedic ritualists as the most enlightened of all classes of people, Upanishadism considered them as ignorant, fools, crass, greedy and fallen men.
7.12: The Upanishads pose a grave threat to sacrifice-obsessed Brāhmanism
Intellectually, these Upanishadic insights were eons ahead of the sterile and mindless sacrificial rites promoted by Brāhmanism. However, to the Yajna-addicted Brāhmins and Kshatriyas, it was easier to admit that their practice of Brāhmanism was imperfect (3:35; 18:47) than to give up their mindless rituals performed against the ordinances of ancient scriptures (16:21-24; 17:1-4). To them the very intent (Sankalpa, 6:1-4) of performing various Yajnas was to earn Karmaphalam (4:12). The Upanishadic teachings of detachment from sense objects; selfless Karma, and freedom from Shōkam, Dwandwam, and Karmaphalam (2:47-51) struck at the very root of the Brāhmanic doctrines of the Gunas and Karma, and they posed grave internal threat to its very existence. For once Brāhmanism was confronted with both external (Buddhism, Jainism, Asceticism and Lokāyata) and internal (the Upanishadic Dharma) threats.
7.13: Brāhmanism declares the Upanishads as “Top Secret.”
Brāhmanism could do little to thwart the external threat except to declare that Buddha was born to mislead nonbelievers to hell. In order to neutralize the internal threat from Kshatriya intellectuals the clever Vedic priests did to the Upanishads what modern businesses do to whistle-blowers: promote them to oblivion and declare their discovery a Rahasyam or ‘Top Secret.’ First they declared the Upanishads as integral part of the Vedas even though the Vedic and Upanishadic doctrines were diametrically opposed to each other, and the latter were meant to replace doctrines of the Gunas and Karma. Then they interpolated into the texts of the Upanishads whatever pro-sacrifice stuff that served their purpose (Traittiriya Up: 1:1-9). Incredible amounts of obscure, irrelevant and inappropriate materials (E.g. Brahadāranyaka Upanishad: 4:4:2-10) were added to the original texts till no ordinary person could comprehend what was already a rather complex concept. The essential elements of the Upanishadic philosophy were buried in the avalanche of irrelevant garbage. Then they incorporated them into the Vedic corpus as the Vedānta, the end of the Vedas, and gave them the sacred status of Shruthi, that which was heard. The net result was that the Upanishads became, more or less, that which you won’t hear any more. This was how the explosive new thought, diametrically opposed to Brāhmanism, was contained and kept under wraps away from any busybody curious to know more about it. Even though the literal meaning of the word Upanishad was “sitting near devotedly,” it came to mean “a Rahasya no one should hear” (4:3). This is no different from a corrupt government classifying some damning information adverse to it as “Top Secret.” Witholding essential information from general public is still the hallmark of greedy politicians and corrupt bureaucrats in today’s India.
7.14: Lord Krishna reveals the Upanishadic secret in the Bhagavad Gita
It is this Royal (Kshatriya) Secret -Knowledge of Atmān and Buddhiyoga- that was finally revealed by some bold Upanishadic and Bhāgavatha seers in the modified Original Gita, a Smriti, which could be heard and studied by anyone, including a Sudra. It was like someone putting on the front page of a popular newspaper that the emperor, in fact, wore no clothes. They elevated Prince Krishna to the position of Upanishadic Guru (2:7) and then the Lord of beings (4:6). Once the secret was revealed by Lord Krishna in a Smriti, no one could declare it a secret anymore.
4:1-2: This imperishable (Buddhi)Yoga, I (the Upanishadic Lord of beings) declared to Vivasvat (the Sun god); Vivasvat taught it to Manu; Manu told t to Ikshvaku (the king). Thus transmitted in regular succession the royal sages knew it. This Yoga, by long efflux of time (being stashed away as a secret) decayed in this world, O scorcher of foes. 4:3: The same ancient Yoga (of the Upanishads) has been today told you by Me, for you are My devotee and friend; and this secret is supreme indeed. 9:1-3: To you who do not cavil, I shall surely declare this, the most profound knowledge combined with realization by knowing which you will be liberated from sin (bad Karmaphalam of Kāmya Karma and consequent Samsāra). The sovereign (Kshatriya) science, the sovereign secret, the supreme purifier is this; directly realizable, in accord with (My) Dharma, very easy to practice and imperishable. Men devoid of faith in this Dharma do not attain Me (Mōksha), O oppressor of the foes, but return to the path of the mortal world (Samsāra, as per Brāhmanic doctrines of the Gunas and Karma).
How earnest and thrilling are His words! It is significant to note here that Lord Krishna repeatedly asserts that the secret of the Upanishads was known by the royal sages -Kshatriyas (4:2; 9:2), not Brāhmanic priests. The Upanishads also give the credit for these doctrines to the Kshatriyas. In the Bhagavad Gita, Lord Krishna claims that He is the author of the Vedānta (15:15) but not that of the Vedas, which were composed by Brāhmanic priests. He distances Himself from the Vedas by simply stating that He is the knower of the Vedas. Elsewhere, He openly downgrades the Vedas (2:46, 52-53; 8:28; 11:48, 53).
7.15: How Brāhmanic seers destroyed the Upanishads in the Bhagavad Gita
As we will study in Chapter Fifteen of this book, Brāhmanic seers continued to destroy the essence of the Upanishads even in the Bhagavad Gita while declaring that the Gita was an Upanishad. Not only did Brāhmanic seers add pro-Brāhmanism shlokas embellishing the Gunas and Yajna (Karma) (Chapters Fourteen, Seventeen and Eighteen), but also they assigned Gunas to all aspects of Knowledge of Atmān and Buddhiyoga (18:1-39), completely disregarding the fact that the very purpose of these two Upanishadic doctrines was to overcome the destructive effects of the Gunas (2:45; 3:28-29; 3:43; 14:19-20).
Brāhmanic Swāmis, such as Sri Shankarāchārya, continued this practice in their commentaries while claiming the Gita as an Upanishad. A case in point: In Chapter Three, the Upanishadic Lord Krishna attempts to make Brahman the focus of all Yajnas just as He did in 4:24 when he was reforming Brāhmins. The purpose both Chapter Three and Four was to replace Vedic Devas with Brahman as the object of worship, and to replace Yajna with Yoga as the mode of worship. He starts by explaining in 3:10-11 how Prajāpti (Brahma) created people and Yajnas so that they could cherish the Devas and be cherished by them in return. In 3:12-13 He scolds greedy Kshatriyas as thieves and sinful because they have kept the fruits of Yajna for themselves. Then in 3:14-15 the Upanishadic Lord Krishna explains the revolving wheel of Yajna: Brahman (all-pervading imperishable Supreme Deity) gives rise to Brahma (Prajāpati, the Vedic Lord of beings); Brahma creates Yajna; Yajna brings on rains; rain produces food; food gives rise to people; people worship Brahman with selfless Yajna (Yoga). In 3:16 he once again scolds ritualists who do not follow this wheel made up of Brahman-Brahma-Karma-Yajna-rain-food-people-Brahman, as living a sinful and vain life, because they are “rejoicing in the senses (3:16)” instead of worshiping Brahman. They are committing sinful acts by making satisfaction of their vanity the main goal of Yajna rather than thanking Brahman.
The exact words of 3:15: are as follows: Karma (Yajna) Brahmodbhavam (arose from Brahma, that is Prajāpati) viddhi (know); brahmāksharasamudbhavam (Brahma arose from the Imperishable)/ Tasmāt (therefore) sarvagatam (all-pervading) Brahma (Brahman) nityam (ever) yajnye (Yajnas) pratistitham (established)//
Note a small but crucial mistake in the above shloka. The original author of this shloka says that Brahma, the Vedic Lord of beings arose from Imperishable, meaning all-pervading Brahman. Then he goes on to say that all pervading Brahma is ever centered on Yajna. He should have said, “All-pervading Brahman” and not Brahma. The phrase “all-pervading” applies only to Brahman. Either the original author made a crucial mistake, or some later author played mischief with this shloka. Here is how Sri Shankaracharya plays even greater mischief in translating this shloka: 3:15: Know that this work is born of the Vedas, and that the Vedas are born of the Imperishable Reality. Therefore, the all-pervading Veda is eternally rooted in sacrificial work. He goes on to comment, “Work is born of Brahman, Brahman is the Veda!” The real purport of this shloka is: Know that Yajna arose from Brahma (Prajapati 3:10); Brahma arose from the Imperishable (Brahman). Therefore, the all-pervading Brahman (not the Devas) should ever be at the center of all Yajna. Far from being “all pervading,” the Upanishads considered the Vedas as “lower knowledge” by which Brahman cannot be obtained. How do we know that this is the correct interpretation? Lord Krishna follows this shloka by saying: 3:17-18: For a man who delights solely in the Self (Atmān/Brahman), who is content with the Self, who finds satisfaction in the Self alone, there is no need to perform any sacrificial rites. He has nothing to gain from doing such rituals nor lose by not doing them; nor has he to depend on anybody (Devas or their brokers, the priests) for anything. Both the Upanishadic Lord Krishna and the Bhāgavatha Lord Krishna repeatedly declare that one cannot obtain Brahman (8:28) or Lord Krishna (11:48, 53) by the Vedas, Yajna, Dāna or Tapas. Incredible amount of duplicity, misinterpretation, misrepresentation and obfuscation such as the above are found throughout every Brāhmanic commentary on the Bhagavad Gita available in bookstores.
7.16: Misdeeds of the upper classes yield bad Karmaphalam
Pretty soon the misdeeds of the ritualist Brāhmins and Kshatriyas began to yield Karmaphalam here on earth. As the bloody sacrifices flourished, anti-Brāhmanism sentiment in society mounted; abandonment of Brāhmanism escalated; heterodox Dharmas flourished; and Brāhmanism slipped into a moribund condition. In spite of these developments, the sacrifice-obsessed Vedic Brāhmins and Kshatriyas kept performing Kāmya Karma, blissfully indifferent to the graffiti on the walls.