Pure Joy Research Articles

The Upanisads: What do They Seek, and Why?

truth for the pure joy of knowing it? Let those believe it who may. For my part, such an opinion would seem to me strangely blind, in view of the overwhelming mass of contrary evidence. No: the philosopher of this passage seeks of the essence of the universe for the same reason all the men of his time (and even of much later times in India) sought it: because he believes if he knows One, and identifies it with his own true self, he can by knowledge control all cosmic forces, and therefore his own destiny. His that art thou is motivated in the same way as the Brhad Aranyaka's I am Brahman. He who knows he is mystically the All, partakes of its essence, is at one with It, and therefore cannot be subject to any outside influence which might cause any fear, danger, sorrow, or unsatisfied desire. That for once the author does not say so in definite terms means only to him it was a perfectly obvious matter of course.36 It went without saying. It is really surprisingly lucky practically all other similar passages do take the trouble to state it so definitely. This belief in the power of knowledge gives us the clue to the employment of the term braihman as a name for the ultimate, First Principle, about which there has been such endless discussion. Brahman means simply holy knowledge , or, concretely, a Vedic hymn or incantation, is, a concrete expression of this mystic wisdom; the Vedic mind feels no difference between the abstract and the concrete sides of this concept. Moreover, all knowledge is, to the Vedic mind, holy, mysterious, religious or magical knowledge. It always possesses this magic power. The wise man and the priest or religious (magical) practitioner (vipra, WM'ui brahmndn mase., etc.) are completely identical from the Vedic 3a As in BrhU. 2. 1 it is also not stated, but clearly must be understood, for the reasons explained in footnote 28, above. Apart from these two, 1 can find no other early Upanisad statement of this doctrine (the unity of the human soul with the world-principle) which does not make clear the fruit or benefit to be derived from knowing it. Certainly the YAjfiavalkya dialog, BrhU. 3, is not an exception. It not only indicates at various points in its course (e. g. 3. 1 passim, see p. 102 above; 3. 2. 12 = MAdhy. 11; 3. 3. 2; 3. 5 Madhy. 4; 3. 8. 10) knowledge of its mysteries is to bring fruition of desires; but it concludes with the climactic statement Understanding, bliss, the Brahman, the highest goal of the giver of bounty, belong to him who stands steadfast in knowledge of this (3. 9.

Style

The subject of the paper which I have the honour to submit to the members of the Association this afternoon is so intimately entwined about our art, extends over so large an area, and is of such deep personal interest to musicians of every degree, that I venture to hope it will elicit copious observations from the members present. It were easy from a subject of such magnitude to fill a volume, but I have carefully condensed my remarks, and dealt only with the salient features, those from which the art is likely to gain the most by discussion. On this theme most of the master minds in art have eloquently discoursed, and not the least, Goethe. There is the real ring of downright affection for art in his words—“It is our bounden duty to hold style in highest honour, to reverence a term which should imply the noblest and worthiest that art has ever achieved, or ever can achieve. Only to have the power to recognise it is a happiness. To discourse on it with fellow intelligences is a pure joy.” It is in this spirit that I approach my paper.