{"collection":"Hinduism","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/hin/sbe15/sbe15009.htm","path":"hin/sbe15/sbe15009.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe15/sbe15009.htm","text":"The Upanishads, Part 2 (SBE15), by Max M\u00fcller, [1879]\nIN the case of this Upanishad we must first of all attempt to settle its right title. Professor Cowell, in his edition and translation of it, calls it Maitri or Maitr\u00e2yan\u00eeya-upanishad, and states that it belongs to the Maitr\u00e2yan\u00eeya-s\u00e2kh\u00e2 of the Black Yagur-veda, and that it formed the concluding portion of a lost Br\u00e2hmana of that S\u00e2kh\u00e2, being preceded by the sacrificial (karma) portion, which consisted of four books.\nIn his MSS. the title varied between Maitry-upanishad and Maitr\u00ee-s\u00e2kh\u00e2-upanishad. A Poona MS. calls it Maitr\u00e2yan\u00eeya-s\u00e2kh\u00e2-upanishad, and a MS. copied for Baron von Eckstein, Maitr\u00e2yan\u00eeyopanishad. I myself in the Alphabetical List of the Upanishads, published in the journal of\nthe German Oriental Society, called it, No. 104, Maitr\u00e2yana or Maitr\u00ee-upanishad, i.e. either the Upanishad of the Maitr\u00e2yanas, or the Upanishad of Maitr\u00ee, the principal teacher.\nIn a MS. which I received from Dr. Burnell, the title of our Upanishad is Maitr\u00e2yan\u00ee-br\u00e2hmana-upanishad, varying with Maitr\u00e2yan\u00ee-br\u00e2hmana-upanishad, and Sr\u00eeyaguss\u00e2kh\u00e2y\u00e2m Maitr\u00e2yan\u00eeya-br\u00e2hmana-upanishad.\nThe next question is by what name this Upanishad is quoted by native authorities. Vidy\u00e2ranya, in his Sarvopanishad-arth\u00e2nubh\u00fbtiprak\u00e2sa 1, v. 1, speaks of the Maitr\u00e2yan\u00eeyan\u00e2mn\u00ee y\u00e2gush\u00ee s\u00e2kh\u00e2, and he mentions Maitra (not Maitr\u00ee) as the author of that S\u00e2kh\u00e2. (vv. 55,150).\nIn the Muktik\u00e2-upanishad 2 we meet with the name of Maitr\u00e2yan\u00ee as the twenty-fourth Upanishad, with the name of Maitrey\u00ee as the twenty-ninth; and again, in the list of the sixteen Upanishads of the S\u00e2ma-veda, we find Maitr\u00e2yan\u00ee and Maitrey\u00ee as the fourth and fifth.\nLooking at all this evidence, I think we should come to the conclusion that our Upanishad derives its name from the S\u00e2kh\u00e2 of the Maitr\u00e2yanas, and may therefore be called Maitr\u00e2yana-upanishad or Maitr\u00e2yan\u00ee Upanishad. Maitr\u00e2yana-br\u00e2hmana-upanishad seems likewise correct, and Maitr\u00e2yani-br\u00e2hmana-upanishad, like Kaush\u00eetaki-br\u00e2hmana-upanishad and V\u00e2gasaneyi-samhitopanishad, might be defended, if Maitr\u00e2yan\u00een were known as a further derivative of Maitr\u00e2yana. If the name is formed from the teacher Maitr\u00ee or Maitra, the title of Maitr\u00ee-upanishad would also be correct, but I doubt whether Maitr\u00ee-upanishad would admit of any grammatical justification 3.\nBesides this Maitr\u00e2yana-br\u00e2hmana-upanishad, however, I possess a MS. of what is called the Maitreyopanishad, sent to me likewise by the late Dr. Burnell. It is very short, and contains no more than the substance of the first Prap\u00e2thaka of the Maitr\u00e2yana-br\u00e2hmana-upanishad. I give\nthe text of it, as far as it can be restored from the one MS. in my possession:\nHarih Om. Brihadratho vai n\u00e2ma r\u00e2g\u00e2 vair\u00e2gye putram nidh\u00e2payitvedam as\u00e2svatam manyam\u00e2nah sar\u00eeram vair\u00e2gyam upeto 'ranyam nirgag\u00e2ma. Sa tatra paramam tapa 1 \u00e2dityam ud\u00eeksham\u00e2na \u00fbrdhvas tishthaty. Ante sahasrasya muner antikam \u00e2gag\u00e2ma 2. Atha Brihadratho brahmavitpravaram mun\u00eendram samp\u00fbgya stutv\u00e2 bahusah pran\u00e2mam akarot. So 'brav\u00eed agnir iv\u00e2dh\u00fbmakas tegas\u00e2 nirdahann iv\u00e2tmavid Bhagav\u00e2\u00f1 kh\u00e2k\u00e2yanya, uttishthottishtha varam vrin\u00eeshveti r\u00e2g\u00e2nam abrav\u00eet 3. Sa tasmai punar namaskrityov\u00e2ka, Bhagavan n\u00e2(ha)m\u00e2tmavit tvam tattvavik khusrumo vayam; sa tvam no br\u00fbhity etad vratam purast\u00e2d asakyam m\u00e2 prikkha pras\u00f1am Aikshv\u00e2k\u00e2ny\u00e2n k\u00e2m\u00e2n vrin\u00eeshveti S\u00e2k\u00e2yanyah. Sar\u00eerasya sar\u00eere (sic) karan\u00e2v abhimrisyam\u00e2no r\u00e2gem\u00e2m g\u00e2th\u00e2m gag\u00e2da. 1\nBhagavann, asthikarmasn\u00e2yumagg\u00e2m\u00e2msasuklasonitasreshm\u00e2srudashik\u00e2vinm\u00fbtrapittakaphasamgh\u00e2te durgandhe nihs\u00e2re 'smi\u00f1 khar\u00eere kim k\u00e2mabhogaih. 2\nK\u00e2makrodhalobhamohabhayavish\u00e2dersheshtaviyog\u00e2nishtasamprayogakshutpip\u00e2s\u00e2gar\u00e2mrityurogasok\u00e2dyair abhihate 'smi\u00f1 khar\u00eere kim k\u00e2mabhogaih. 3\nSarvam kedam kshayishnu pasy\u00e2mo yatheme damsamasak\u00e2dayas trinavan 4 nasyata yodbh\u00fbtapradhvamsinah. 4\nAtha kim etair v\u00e2 pare 'nye dhamarthar\u00e2s (sic) kakravartinah Sudyumnabh\u00fbridyumnakuvalay\u00e2svayauvan\u00e2svavaddhriy\u00e2sv\u00e2svapatih sasabindur hariskandro 'mbar\u00eesho nanukastvay\u00e2tir yay\u00e2tir anaranyokshasen\u00e2dayo marutabharataprabhritayo r\u00e2g\u00e2no mishato bandhuvargasya mahat\u00eem sriyam tyaktv\u00e2sm\u00e2l lok\u00e2d amum lokam pray\u00e2nti. 5.\nAtha kim etair v\u00e2 pare 'nye gandharv\u00e2surayakshar\u00e2kshasabh\u00fbtaganapis\u00e2koragrah\u00e2din\u00e2m nirodhanam pasy\u00e2mah. 6\nAtha kim etair v\u00e2nyan\u00e2m soshanam mah\u00e2rnav\u00e2n\u00e2m\nsikharin\u00e2m prapatanam dhruvasya prakalanam v\u00e2tar\u00fbn\u00e2m nimagganam prithivy\u00e2h sth\u00e2n\u00e2pasaranam sur\u00e2n\u00e2m. So 'ham ity etadvidhe 'smin sams\u00e2re kim k\u00e2mopabhogair yair ev\u00e2sritasya sakrid \u00e2vartanam drisyata ity uddhartum arhasi tyandodap\u00e2nabheka iv\u00e2ham asmin sam Bhagavas tvam gatis tvam no gatir iti. 7\nAyam 1 agnir vaisv\u00e2naro yo 'yam antah purushe yenedam annam pakyate yad idam adyate tasyaisha ghosho bhavati yam etat karn\u00e2v apidh\u00e2ya srinoti, sa yadotkramishyan 2 bhavati nainam ghosham srinoti. 8\nYath\u00e2 3 nirindhano vahnih svayon\u00e2v upas\u00e2myati. 9 4\nSa sivah so 'nte vaisv\u00e2naro bh\u00fbtv\u00e2 sa dagdhv\u00e2 sarv\u00e2ni bh\u00fbt\u00e2ni prithivyapsu pral\u00eeyate 5, \u00e2pas tegasi l\u00eeyante 6, tego v\u00e2yau pral\u00eeyate 7, v\u00e2yur \u00e2k\u00e2se vil\u00eeyate 8, \u00e2k\u00e2sam indriyeshv, indriy\u00e2ni tanm\u00e2treshu, tanm\u00e2tr\u00e2ni bh\u00fbt\u00e2dau vil\u00eeyante 9, bh\u00fbt\u00e2di mahati vil\u00eeyate 10, mah\u00e2n avyakte vil\u00eeyate 11, avyaktam akshare vil\u00eeyate 12], aksharam tamasi vil\u00eeyate 13, tama ek\u00eebhavati parasmin, parast\u00e2n na 14 san n\u00e2san na sad ityetan nirv\u00e2nam anus\u00e2sanam iti ved\u00e2nus\u00e2sanam.\nWe should distinguish therefore between the large Maitr\u00e2yana-br\u00e2hmana-upanishad and the smaller Maitreyopanishad. The title of Maitrey\u00ee-br\u00e2hmana has, of course, a totally different origin, and simply means the Br\u00e2hmana which tells the story of Maitrey\u00ee 15.\nAs Professor Cowell, in the Preface to his edition and translation of the Maitr\u00e2yana-br\u00e2hmana-upanishad, has discussed its peculiar character, I have little to add on that subject. I agree with him in thinking that this Upanishad has grown, and contains several accretions. The Sanskrit commentator himself declares the sixth and seventh chapters to be Khilas or supplementary. Possibly the Maitreya-upanishad, as printed above, contains the earliest framework. Then we have traces of various recensions. Professor Cowell (Preface, p. vi) mentions a MS., copied\nfor Baron Eckstein, apparently from a Telugu original, which contains the first five chapters only, numbered as four. The verses given in VI, 34 (p. 177), beginning with 'atreme slok\u00e2 bhavanti, are placed after IV, 3. In my own MS. these verses are inserted at the beginning of the fifth chapter 1. Then follows in Baron Eckstein's MS. as IV, 5, what is given in the printed text as V, 1, 2 (pp. 69-76). In my own MS., which likewise comes from the South, the Upanishad does not go beyond VI, 8, which is called the sixth chapter and the end of the Upanishad.\nWe have in fact in our Upanishad the first specimen of that peculiar Indian style, so common in the later fables and stories, which delights in enclosing one story within another. The kernel of our Upanishad is really the dialogue between the V\u00e2lakhilyas and Prag\u00e2pati Kratu. This is called by the commentator (see p. 331, note) a Vy\u00e2khy\u00e2na, i.e. a fuller explanation of the S\u00fbtra which comes before, and which expresses in the few words, 'He is the Self, this is the immortal, the fearless, this is Brahman,' the gist of the whole Upanishad.\nThis dialogue, or at all events the doctrine which it was meant to illustrate, was communicated by Maitr\u00ee (or Maitra) to S\u00e2k\u00e2yanya, and by S\u00e2k\u00e2yanya to King Brihadratha Aikshv\u00e2ka, also called Marut (II, 1; VI, 30). This dialogue might seem to come to an end in VI, 29, and likewise the dialogue between S\u00e2k\u00e2yanya and Brihadratha; but it is carried on again to the end of VI, 30, and followed afterwards by a number of paragraphs which may probably be considered as later additions.\nBut though admitting all this, I cannot bring myself to follow Professor Cowell in considering, as he does, even the earlier portion of the Upanishad as dating from a late period, while the latter portions are called by him comparatively modern, on account of frequent Vaishnava quotations. What imparts to this Upanishad, according to my opinion, an exceptionally genuine and ancient character, is the preservation in it of that peculiar Sandhi which,\nthanks to the labours of Dr. von Schroeder, we now know to be characteristic of the Maitr\u00e2yana-s\u00e2kh\u00e2. In that S\u00e2kh\u00e2 final unaccented as and e are changed into \u00e2, if the next word begins with an accented vowel, except a. Before initial a, however, e remains unchanged, and as becomes o, and the initial a is sometimes elided, sometimes not. Some of these rules, it must be remembered, run counter to P\u00e2nini, and we may safely conclude therefore that texts in which they are observed, date from the time before P\u00e2nini. In some MSS., as, for instance, in my own MS. of the Maitr\u00e2yana-br\u00e2hmana-upanishad, these rules are not observed, but this makes their strict observation in other MSS. all the more important. Besides, though to Dr. von Schroeder belongs, no doubt, the credit of having, in his edition of the Maitr\u00e2yan\u00ee Samhit\u00e2, first pointed out these phonetic peculiarities, they were known as such to the commentators, who expressly point out these irregular Sandhis as distinctive of the Maitr\u00e2yan\u00ee s\u00e2kh\u00e2. Thus we read Maitr. Up. II, 3 (p. 18), that tigmategas\u00e2 \u00fbrdhvaretaso, instead of tigmategas\u00e2, is evamvidha etakkh\u00e2kh\u00e2sa\u1e45ketap\u00e2thas kh\u00e2ndasah sarvatra, i.e. is throughout the Vedic reading indicatory of that particular S\u00e2kh\u00e2, namely the Maitr\u00e2yan\u00ee.\nA still stranger peculiarity of our S\u00e2kh\u00e2 is the change of a final t before initial s into \u00f1. This also occurs in our Upanishad. In VI, 8, we read sv\u00e2\u00f1 sar\u00eer\u00e2d; in VI, 2 7, ya\u00f1 sar\u00eerasya. Such a change seems phonetically so unnatural, that the tradition must have been very strong to perpetuate it among the Maitr\u00e2yanas.\nNow what is important for our purposes is this, that these phonetic peculiarities run through all the seven chapters of our Upanishad. This will be seen from the following list:\nI. Final as changed into \u00e2 before initial vowel 1:\nII, 3, tigmategas\u00e2 \u00fbrdhvaretaso (Comm. etakkh\u00e2kh\u00e2sa\u1e45ketap\u00e2thas kh\u00e2ndasah sarvatra).\nII, 5, vibodh\u00e2 evam. II, 7, avasthit\u00e2 iti.\nIII, 5, etair abhibh\u00fbt\u00e2 \u00eeti. IV, i, vidyat\u00e2 iti.\nVI, 4, pranav\u00e2 iti; bh\u00e2my\u00e2day\u00e2 eko.\nVI, 6, \u00e2dity\u00e2 iti; \u00e2havan\u00eey\u00e2 iti; s\u00fbry\u00e2 iti; aha\u1e45k\u00e2r\u00e2 iti; vy\u00e2n\u00e2 iti. VI, 7, bharg\u00e2 iti.\nVI, 7, sannivisht\u00e2 iti. VI, 23, dev\u00e2 o\u1e45k\u00e2ro.\nVI, 30, pr\u00e2y\u00e2t\u00e2 iti. VI, 30, vinirgat\u00e2 iti.\nII. Final e before initial vowels becomes \u00e2. For instance:\nI, 4, drisyat\u00e2 iti. II, 2, nishpadyat\u00e2 iti.\nIII, 2, \u00e2padyat\u00e2 iti. III, 2, pushkar\u00e2 iti.\nIV, i, vidyat\u00e2 iti. VI, 10, bhu\u1e45kt\u00e2 iti.\nVI, 20, asnut\u00e2 iti. VI, 30, ek\u00e2 \u00e2hur.\nEven pragrihya e is changed to \u00e2 in--\nVI, 23, et\u00e2 up\u00e2sita, i.e. ete uktalakshane brahman\u00ee.\nIn VI, 31, instead of te etasya, the commentator seems to have read te v\u00e2 etasya.\nIII. Final as before \u00e2, u, and au becomes a, and is then contracted. For instance:\nI, 4, vanaspatayodbh\u00fbta, instead of vanaspataya, udbh\u00fbta. (Comm. Sandhis kh\u00e2ndaso v\u00e2, uk\u00e2ro v\u00e2tra lupto drashtavyah.)\nII, 6, devaushnyam, instead of deva aushnyam. (Comm. Sandhis kh\u00e2ndasah.)\nVI, 24, atam\u00e2vishtam, instead of atama-\u00e2vishtam (Comm. Sandhis kh\u00e2ndasah); cf. Kh\u00e2nd. Up. VI, 8, 3, asan\u00e2yeti (Comm. visargan\u00eeyalopah).\nIV. Final e before i becomes a, and is then contracted. For instance:\nVI, 7, \u00e2tm\u00e2 gan\u00eeteti for gan\u00eeta iti. (Comm. g\u00e2nite, g\u00e2n\u00e2ti.)\nVI, 28, avataiva for avata iva. (Comm. Sandhivriddh\u00ee kh\u00e2ndase.)\nV. Final au before initial vowels becomes \u00e2. For instance:\nII, 6, yena v\u00e2 et\u00e2 anugrih\u00eet\u00e2 iti.\nVI, 22, as\u00e2 abhidhy\u00e2t\u00e2.\nOn abhibh\u00fbyam\u00e2nay iva, see p. 295, note 2.\nV, 2, as\u00e2 \u00e2tm\u00e2 (var. lect. as\u00e2v \u00e2tm\u00e2).\nVI. Final o of atho produces elision of initial short a. For instance:\nIII, 2, atho 'bhibh\u00fbatv\u00e2t. (Comm. Sandhis kh\u00e2ndasah.) Various reading, ato 'bhibh\u00fbtatv\u00e2t.\nVI, 1, so antar is explained as sa u.\nVII. Other irregularities:\nVI, 7, \u00e2po py\u00e2yan\u00e2t, explained by py\u00e2yan\u00e2t and \u00e2py\u00e2yan\u00e2t. Might it be, \u00e2po 'py ayan\u00e2t?\nVI, 7, \u00e2tmano tm\u00e2 net\u00e2.\nII, 6, so tm\u00e2nam abhidhy\u00e2tv\u00e2.\nVI, 35, dvidharmondharn for dvidharm\u00e2ndham. (Comm. kh\u00e2ndasa.)\nVI, 35, tegasendham, i. e. tegas\u00e2-iddhan. (In explaining other irregular compounds, too, as in I, 4, the commentator has recourse to a kh\u00e2ndasa or pr\u00e2m\u00e2dika licence.)\nVI, 1, hiranyavasth\u00e2t for hirany\u00e2vasth\u00e2t. Here the dropping of a in avasth\u00e2t is explained by a reference to Bh\u00e2guri (vashti Bh\u00e2gurir allopam av\u00e2pyor upasargayoh). See Vopadeva III, 171.\nVIII. Vislishtap\u00e2tha:\nVII, 2, brahmadh\u00eey\u00e2lambana. (Comm. vislishtap\u00e2thas kh\u00e2ndasah.)\nVI, 35, apyay a\u1e45kur\u00e2 for apy a\u1e45kur\u00e2. (Comm. yak\u00e2rah pram\u00e2dapathitah.)\nOn the contrary VI, 35, vl\u00eey\u00e2nte for vil\u00eeyante.\nIf on the grounds which we have hitherto. examined there seems good reason to ascribe the Maitr\u00e2yana-br\u00e2hmana-upanishad to an early rather than to a late period, possibly to an ante-P\u00e2ninean period, we shall hardly be persuaded to change this opinion on account of supposed references to Vaishnava or to Bauddha doctrines which some scholars have tried to discover in it.\nAs to the worship of Vishnu, as one of the many manifestations of the Highest Spirit, we have seen it alluded to in other Upanishads, and we know from the Br\u00e2hmanas that the name of Vishnu was connected with many of the earliest Vedic sacrifices.\nAs to Bauddha doctrines, including the very name of Nirv\u00e2na (p. xlvi, l. 19), we must remember, as I have often remarked, that there were Bauddhas before Buddha. Brihaspati, who is frequently quoted in later philosophical writings as the author of an heretical philosophy, denying the authority of the Vedas, is mentioned by name in our Upanishad (VII, 9), but we are told that this Brihaspati, having become Sukra, promulgated his erroneous doctrines in order to mislead the Asuras, and thus to insure the safety of Indra, i.e. of the old faith.\nThe fact that the teacher of King Brihadratha in our Upanishad is called S\u00e2k\u00e2yanya, can never be used in support of the idea that, being a descendant of S\u00e2ka 1, he must have been, like S\u00e2kyamuni, a teacher of Buddhist doctrines. He is the very opposite in our Upanishad, and warns his hearers against such doctrines as we should identify with the doctrines of Buddha. As I have pointed out on several occasions, the breaking through the law of the \u00c2sramas is the chief complaint which orthodox Br\u00e2hmans make against Buddhists and their predecessors, and this is what S\u00e2k\u00e2yanya condemns. A Br\u00e2hman may become a Sanny\u00e2sin, which is much the same as a Buddhist Bhikshu, if he has first passed through the three stages of a student, a householder, and a V\u00e2naprastha. But to become a Bhikshu without that previous discipline, was heresy in the eyes of the Br\u00e2hmans, and it was exactly that heresy which the Bauddhas preached and practised. That this social laxity was gaining ground at the time when our Upanishad was written is clear (see VII, 8). We hear of people who wear red dresses (like the Buddhists) without having a right to them; we even hear of books, different from the Vedas, against which the true Br\u00e2hmans are warned. All this points to times when what we call Buddhism was in the air, say the sixth century B. C., the very time to which I have always assigned the origin of the genuine and classical Upanishads. The Upanishads are to my mind the germs of Buddhism,\nwhile Buddhism is in many respects the doctrine of the Upanishads carried out to its last consequences, and, what is important, employed as the foundation of a new social system. In doctrine the highest goal of the Ved\u00e2nta, the knowledge of the true Self, is no more than the Buddhist Samyaksambodhi; in practice the Sanny\u00e2sin is the Bhikshu, the friar, only emancipated alike from the tedious discipline of the Br\u00e2hmanic student, the duties of the Br\u00e2hmanic householder, and the yoke of useless penances imposed on the Br\u00e2hmanic dweller in the forest. The spiritual freedom of the Sanny\u00e2sin becomes in Buddhism the common property of the Sa\u1e45gha, the Fraternity, and that Fraternity is open alike to the young and the old, to the Br\u00e2hman and the S\u00fbdra, to the rich and the poor, to the wise and the foolish. In fact there is no break between the India of the Veda and the India of the Tripitaka, but there is an historical continuity between the two, and the connecting link between extremes that seem widely separated must be sought in the Upanishads 1.\nF. MAX M\u00dcLLER.\nOXFORD, February, 1884.\nxliv:1 See Cowell, Maitr: Up. pref. p. iv.\nxliv:2 Calcutta, 1791 (1869), p. 4; also as quoted in the Mah\u00e2v\u00e2kya-ratn\u00e2val\u00ee, p. 2b.\nxliv:3 Dr. Burnell, in his Tanjore Catalogue, mentions, p. 35a, a Maitr\u00e2yan\u00ee-br\u00e2hmanopanishad, which can hardly be a right title, and p. 36b a Maitr\u00e2yan\u00eeya and Maitrey\u012dbr\u00e2hmana.\nxlv:1 One expects \u00e2sth\u00e2ya.\nxlv:2 This seems better than the Maitr\u00e2yana text. He went near a Muni, viz. S\u00e2k\u00e2yanya.\nxlv:3 This seems unnecessary.\nxlv:4 There may be an older reading hidden in this, from which arose the reading of the Maitr\u00e2yana B. U. trinavanaspatayodbh\u00fbtapradhvamsinah, or yo bh\u00fbtapradhvamsinah.\nxlvi:1 Maitr. Up. II, 6; p. 32.\nxlvi:2 kramishy\u00e2n, m.\nxlvi:3 Yadh\u00e2, m.\nxlvi:4 Maitr. Up. VI, 34; p. 178.\nxlvi:5 lipyate.\nxlvi:6 lipyante.\nxlvi:7 l\u00eeyyate.\nxlvi:8 l\u00eeyyate.\nxlvi:9 liyante.\nxlvi:10 liyyate.\nxlvi:11 lipyate.\nxlvi:12 liyyate.\nxlvi:13 liyyate.\nxlvi:14 t\u00e2nasann\u00e2.\nxlvi:15 See Kh\u00e2nd. Up. p. 623.\nxlvii:1 See p. 303, note 1; p. 305. note 1; p. 312, note 1.\nxlviii:1 I have left out the restriction as to the accent of the vowels, because they are disregarded in the Upanishad. It should be observed that this peculiar Sandhi occurs in the Upanishad chiefly before iti.\nli:1 S\u00e2k\u00e2yanya means a grandson or further descendant of S\u00e2ka; see Ganaratn\u00e2val\u00ee (Baroda, 1874), p. 57a.\nlii:1 As there is room left on this page, I subjoin a passage from the Abhidharma-kosha-vy\u00e2khy\u00e2, ascribed to the Bhagavat, but which, as far as style and thought are concerned, might be taken from an Upanishad: Uktam hi Bhagavat\u00e2: Prithiv\u00ee bho Gautama kutra pratishthit\u00e2? Prithiv\u00ee Br\u00e2hmana abmandale pratishthit\u00e2. Abmandalam bho Gautama kva pratishthitam? V\u00e2yau pratishthitam. V\u00e2yur bho Gautama kva pratishthitah? \u00c2k\u00e2se pratishthitah. \u00c2k\u00e2sam bho Gautama kutra pratishthitam? Atisarasi Mah\u00e2br\u00e2hmana, atisarasi Mah\u00e2br\u00e2hmana. \u00c2k\u00e2sam Br\u00e2hman\u00e2pratishthitam, an\u00e2lambanam iti vistarah. Tasm\u00e2d asty \u00e2k\u00e2sam iti Vaibh\u00e2shik\u00e2h. (See Brihad-\u00c2r. Up. III, 6, 1. Burnouf, Introduction \u00e0 l'histoire du Buddhisme, p. 449.)\n'For it is said by the Bhagavat: \"O Gautama, on what does the earth rest?\" \"The earth, O Br\u00e2hmana, rests on the sphere of water.\" \"O Gautama, on what does the sphere of water rest?\" \"It rests on the air.\" \"O Gautama, on what does the air rest?\" \"It rests on the ether (\u00e2k\u00e2sa).\" \"O Gautama, on what does the ether rest?\" \"Thou goest too far, great Br\u00e2hmana; thou goest too far, great Br\u00e2hmana. The ether, O Br\u00e2hmana, does not rest. It has no support.\" Therefore the Vaibh\u00e2shikas hold that there is an ether,' &c.","title":"The Upanishads, Part 2 (SBE15): Introduction: VII: Maitr\u00e2yana-Br\u00e2hmana-Upanishad","type":"page"}