1

The

The Upanishads are a collection texts of spiritual teachings, inspirational writing, poetry and where as we might recognise it is first really described. They were written over a long period, approximately 800 - 500 BCE. They were inspired by the inner vision aspect of the but reflect a shift in approach to spirituality whereby the ritual and sacrifice element of the Vedas became less important, and was even denigrated as unimportant, and and inner exploration started to be emphasised as the source of true knowledge and understanding. This is perhaps a continuation of the strand of meditative inquiry that archeologists and historians speculate existed in the Indus valley civilisation before the more ritual and sacrifice orientated arrived from the West.

An Upanishad is essentially a ‘teaching’ that has its origins in the of direct teacher- student transmission. Its literal translation is something like ‘sitting beside the teacher’. During Vedic times, these teachings weren’t as publicly available as they are now and it was necessary to actively seek out a teacher to hear them. The word is also sometimes described as meaning ‘removing ignorance by revealing truth’ or ‘revealing what is hidden’ or even as ‘secret doctrine’

They are not really philosophy in some respects as they are not presented as logical arguments – they are more presented as meditative insight, inquiry and traditional questions and answers designed to help understand the nature of reality and produce a radical shift in perspective. The view expressed is that there is one underlying reality pervading everything as the creative and sustaining source of all life.

Philosophically this view of unity and oneness is known as Advaita or non- dualism ( in Western philosophy ) . As opposed to dualism which would tend to separate out spirit and matter and/or energy and matter.

There are many Upanishads but 10 or 11 main ones that are generally agreed upon as the most important; these are the ones usually collected together in books as representing the essence of the teachings.

The flavour of the Upanishads in general is anti-orthodoxy, anti-ritual, anti-intellectual and pro–experiential carrying the message that the truth at the heart of life cannot be known intellectually or through ritual practices but only through direct perception, inner experience and yoga practices. That said, some of the teachings presented are in the form of questions and answers between a student and a teacher, but with the overall intention to illustrate a vision rather than provide an intellectual answer. This represented something of a shift from the where much power was with the priests and their knowledge of rituals and sacrifices to a more empowering idea of individual yoga practice and direct perception available to anyone.

The Upanishads are the first texts to clearly mention yoga and begin to describe its practice suggesting that some yogic practices that we would recognise today had already been around for some time. Yoga is primarily described as pranayama and meditation. If there was an ancient practice it was probably something pretty different to the modern day. 2

There is little obviously systematized yoga instruction in the Upanishads though some of traditional yoga theory is described. The Maitri Upanishad lists what has become known as the six steps path of Yoga, a precursor to the later more clearly systematized eight steps instruction in ’s Yoga . In the the basic idea of the 5 (5 bodies) theory is laid out which again is explained more clearly in later texts such as the Hatha Yoga Pradipika. Some of list like and clearly structured yoga/meditation instruction and philosophy as we might more easily recognise it did not really appear in text form until the teaching of the Buddha and Patanjali at a later date.

The Advaita Vedanta, non dualist, teachings that are still current today in and beyond were more fully developed in 800 ACE by Sankara. The core ideas were the same but further insights and explanations from the Buddhist tradition seem to have been included.

There are four main styles of expression in the Upanishads:

1. Dialogues with questions and answers. 2. Narration and stories. 3. Similes, metaphors and illustrations. 4. Symbolism.

Main ideas, meanings and terms in the Upanishads.

The two most central terms in the Upanishads are and ATMAN.

Brahman – translates as something like eternal universal spirit; the underlying force or intelligence behind all of life; whatever it is that is the source or spark of life; truth; love or god. It is essentially the holy grail of philosophers and physicists - ‘the underlying stuff of life’. It is perhaps what the physicists at the Hadron Collider in Switzerland are looking for.

Atman- or Self (often represented in English as capital S Self as opposed to small s ‘self’ which is our personality made up from our conditioning). Atman is essentially indistinct from Brahman - it is our own inherent direct connection to Brahman that can only be realised in non-conceptual states of mind. The type of language used to describe it is that it is our own personal connection to truth, our core identity, the centre of our personal spiritual being, perhaps our soul. It is symbolically represented in the Upanishads as a flame living in the heart area; many spiritual traditions speak of the heart as being the seat of our soul or where our essence lies. Some Asian languages have a word meaning heart/mind and meditation is sometimes described as a journey from the head to the heart. In relation to Brahman/Atman a nice analogy comes from T S Elliot and his poem ‘cats’ in which he says all cats have 3 names – one given to them by their owner, one given to them by themselves and one so secret that even the cat herself does not know what it is.

In other yogic/Buddhist traditions the same/similar concept is variously described as (Patanjali ) , Buddha-nature or luminous mind ( ) , Rigpa or Clear 3

View (Dzogchen in ) . quotes from the Upanishads in his book The Perennial Philosophy , claiming them as part of an underlying common strand running through the world’s spiritual traditions.

Characteristics of Atman/Brahman

So when we have seen through our conditioning and delusions, and connected with our Atman, are we left with an empty space with no characteristics or a full space with characteristics? The characteristics of Atman/Brahman traditionally described are clear seeing and understanding combined with an all-inclusive unconditional love and , so full in other words.

The central point is that Brahman and Atman are one and the same – Brahman is the universal principle and Atman is our personal connection to the universal

Neti-neti – literally ‘not this and not that’. This is a very important concept in generally, and is important in relation to the description of the nature of Brahman. It is often translated as something like ‘not really tangible’ or ‘not fully explainable’. This is important in that it takes away the possibility of the nature of Brahman/Atman being described in a concrete way as some kind of finite entity.

The use of neti-neti in relation to Upanishadic concepts means that non-conceptual meditative experiences cannot be placed in overly black and white terms; so no overly entrenched positions can be taken philosophically which tends to remove fundamentalist type attitudes.. (The practice of yoga tends not to produce fundamentalists). This approach has, on the whole, made dialogue and openness a welcome characteristic in this area of Indian culture, spirituality and philosophy with a number of slightly varying viewpoints happily co-existing without too much problem.

We can also consider the later approach of the Buddha when it comes to defining the nature of ultimate reality. He had likely been influenced by teachers of Advaita Vedanta on his own journey. He essentially ducked questions asking for definitions of the nature of reality by saying that they were unanswerable and therefore not really worthy of our intellectual time and effort. Perhaps his point was a clever teaching method and essentially a request to stop trying to conceptualise and prove everything and get on with some practice based on what we do know. (We may know some people like this!).

Karma and rebirth. Liberation in the future or now?

Karma

The interconnected, never ending knot of karma.

4

The Upanishads are where the concepts of karma and rebirth appear properly formed for the first time (pre Upanishads the trend was that death meant joining your ancestors). Karma is in essence a cause and effect mechanism operating on many levels including the moral realm – a sophisticated, web-like, holistic process which determines our state of mind/being and creates the filter through which we experience the world and to some extent how the world responds to us. It includes our prior conditioning whether from a previous life and/or the conditions that have come together to form us in this life.

In essence positive actions arising out of clear understanding and a positive intention ( i.e. in alignment with how things work/reality/Brahman) produce a positive result, i.e. peace of mind, happiness and a healthy attitude towards life; while a negative action arising out of ignorance/confusion will result in mental suffering, malcontent and a potentially more negative attitude to life. There is both an inner and an outer aspect to the effect of our motivations, thoughts, speech and actions; some outcomes more obviously have a negative or positive effect on our own well-being or state of mind, some on others’ well-being or state of mind; but on closer examination all thought, speech and actions are having an effect in both inner and outer ways.

In the context of the time of the Upanishads some felt that Karma determined the conditions of this life arising from a previous life, and set those for our next life; but even at that time there were different viewpoints with some considering the idea of rebirth important and some not. Given that the idea of rebirth is an unknown for most of us we can decide whether we think that karma adequately explains our current existential situation and is a helpful empowering concept or not.

Liberation

The underlying premise of the Upanishads is that the transcendental ground of the world, Brahman, is identical with the ultimate core of the human being, Atman. Realising this fully and then living as if we know it is the traditional goal of yoga and from the traditional Indian perspective the purpose of life from which everything else relating to living a good life can manifest.

The traditional belief was/is that due to delusion/ignorance/confusion – not understanding the essential underlying unity of life and its characteristics of love and compassion – we at times act out of alignment with reality and therefore create karma (causes and effects and fluctuations in our experience). This creation of karma creates the conditions for us to continue to be reborn in one view or in the here and now in the conditions of this life for the same types of experiences, moods and relationship to life to keep reoccurring.

Dependant on previous actions we can be reborn in various realms such as godly, human, animal or hell realms or from the perspective of the here and now we experience states such as godly, human, animal or hell within our own minds. Only when we have gained an understanding of our true nature within the greater scheme of things, and live in alignment with that understanding are we free from these cycles of either rebirth or repeat scenarios in this life (or both!).

We don’t need to believe in rebirth for these ideas to help us. Many modern forms of , psychology and secular mindfulness practice operate from a 5 repackaged version of these ideas. We can observe for ourselves whether the law of karma seems to work anyway within the context of one life in the here and now. It would be difficult to refute that our conditioning, motives, thoughts, speech and action determine our destiny and our current and future states of mind. What we experience within our own minds and hearts is an accumulation of our conditioning, motives, thoughts, speech and actions over time. In this way yoga, in large part, is about learning to live with greater awareness and in relation to what has influenced and conditioned us and what we then think, say and do and how this determines where our lives go next. Viewed this way the idea of karma is empowering and gives us responsibility for our life.

Aum

The chant and symbol or AUM is a regular feature of the Upanishads, particularly the . Essentially it comes from the Vedic idea of sound corresponding to form, except in this case it is sound corresponding to the formless i.e. Brahman/Atman. OM is said to be the vibration underpinning life, the cosmic sound, the root that precedes all other . The chanting of Om as a meditation practice has effects via resonance and vibration and is thought to attract the mind back towards its source (i.e. Atman).

The sound represents the cosmic sound and the vibration and the origin of the universe, or the Big OM rhather than the Big Bang if you like..

The symbol also represents four layers of consciousness useful to think about which also forms the basis of the practice of (yogic sleep) :

1. The normal conditioned everyday waking state of personality and the relative world. 2. The state 3. The deep sleep state 4. The transcendent state.

It is considered that in the deep sleep state with all our conditioning switched off we are essentially connected to Atman/Brahman , a deeply restful and restorative state. But this experience is not transformative because we are not aware of it. The practice of yoga nidra is designed to take us to a deep sleep type state but to remain aware of it .

The Witness

One generally helpful idea presented in the Upanishads, is the idea of the Atman as an aspect of consciousness known as ‘the witness’. The witness is experienced as an inner faculty we have that is able to observe thoughts, feelings, emotions and body sensations in a non-biased or non-attached type of way. The logical process 6 presented that follows this is that if it is possible to observe thoughts, emotions etc in this way then they cannot be what we really are, and that then perhaps the mind is no more what we are than the body? And if that is the case then who or what is it that is the witness or the knower or observer and does it have a voice?

Maya – the veil of illusion and the two levels of truth.

Also arising from the Upanishads and the Advaita Vedanta tradition is the idea of two levels of truth - an idea possibly borrowed from the Buddha by the later 9th Century teacher of the Upanishads and Advaita Vedanta, Sankara. Essentially he said there is a relative level of truth - that is the self (personality) and the material world of apparent multiplicity and division, and an ultimate level of truth – the Self, Brahman the unified underlying source.

We need the language of the relative world to basically get on in daily living – as you can imagine trying to organise anything only on the ultimate level of truth could get silly. In addition it’s important ( in my opinion, and not just me ) that the self or personality is not perceived as a ‘bad’ thing and can/should be developed in a positive way and that this process may be enhanced by the consideration that our conditioned personality may not be the whole story of what we are. One possible aspect of our conditioned personality is that it can be viewed as a vibrant individual expression of the oneness.

Arguably once we have a proper perspective of the place of personality/conditioning and the roles we play in life, we can understand this area of life as more like a game we play with the accompanying relief that we needn’t take our ‘selves’ ( small ‘s’ )too seriously. The possibility to inhabit both the relative and ultimate worlds simultaneously or to move between the two at will is arguably a yogic or life skill we can develop that would remove much of the stress of life.

Maya - is the veil of illusion (traditionally described as ignorance or confusion) that clouds our perception of reality. According to Vedanta our ignorance is that we tend to hold the relative level of truth and our conditioned personality to be all that exists. This is not to say that there isn’t a relative level of , just that we won’t find objective truth there (which explains why there are so many differing opinions in the world!).

Maya is sometimes described as literally a hallucination leading us to believe in the permanent truth of the relative world as we see it superficially. The traditional Indian teaching on this is that when we see a coiled rope at dusk we can mistake it for a snake. We all will have had an experience of visually perceiving something incorrectly – but it seems exactly as we see it - including all the physiological responses to it - until we realise or someone points it out; then our whole response to it changes and we can’t imagine how we ever saw it like we did! For example we may have approached or spoken to someone who looks exactly like a friend as if it was – and then realised as we see them face to face that it isn’t. Or in a dream, our physiology lives the dream as if it were really happening, until we wake up. In the same way we can perhaps ‘wake up’ from our normal waking state and its confusions. In the Om symbol Maya is represented by the small crescent below the dot, blocking the view of the dot which represents transcendental reality.

7

Ethics - In later Yoga texts an ethical base for any kind of spiritual development is emphasised as the ground work to help guide people towards an understanding of the law of karma and how to live in alignment with truth. In the Upanishads ethics are implied rather than stated. We can consider how an inner understanding of oneness would likely profoundly affect how we relate to ourselves, others and life in general as opposed to the feeling that we are somehow separate. Centrally a direct understanding and feeling of oneness would mean that violence or harm to others is then also to ourselves, and we would feel that in the heart.

The motivation for an ethical life is then more born more from a matured understanding than from any kind of fear, more because it ‘feels right’ and creates a sense of ease with life more than any sense of ‘ought’ or ‘should’ type of ethical motivation could.

Source Reading

Eknath Eswaran - The Upanishads 2007 Juan Muscaro - The Upanishads 2005

Questions for our inquiry - we will look at some of these questions in our small groups, so have a think about them in advance.

1 a Do the concepts of Atman and Brahman strike anything within you one way or another? What is your response both intellectually and in your heart to these ideas? P.2

1 b Atman/Brahman as ‘the Witness’ – is there some aspect of us that knows what is going on even if we don’t always listen/pay attention to it? In meditation what is it that is conscious when the thoughts quieten down? What is your experience of this? Do you have any explanations whether spiritual, psychological or secular scientific ? P.3

1 c Can you live happily with a degree of uncertainty as to the exact characteristics of ‘ the true nature of things’ ? Is a lack of certainty intellectually alright for you? Why or why not? P.3

1 d What do you think about OM as the transcendent sound? P.5

1 e What do you think about the 4 states of consciousness breakdown of OM on P. 5 ?

2 a Two levels of truth - What do you think about the two levels of truth as a description of our existential condition?

2 b Karma and Rebirth – What do you think about Karma and the idea that our motivations, thoughts, speech and actions have a direct influence on our resultant mental/emotional states? And how we relate to the world? And how it relates back to us ?

2 c On what basis do we make ethical decisions? 8

3 Do you feel some of the types instruction you might use for Savasana might help students to make a connection to some of the teachings of the Upanishads? If so which teachings? What kind of instruction might you use?

Have you practiced yoga nidra ? Any comments, experiences ?