the space within a person is. Verily, what the space within a person is that is the same as what the space here within the heart is. That is the Full, the Non-moving' (Chānd. 3. 12. 7-9).

Longer descriptions of Atman as the basis of the unity implied in the usual correlations of the not-self and the self, are the two following: Atman is the person in the earth and the person in the body; in the waters and in the semen; in fire and in speech; in wind and in breath; in the sun and in the eye; in the quarters and in the ear and in the echo; in the moon and in the mind; in lightning and in heat; in thunder and in sound; in space and in the space of the heart; in law and in virtuousness; in truth and in truthfulness; in humanity and in a human; in the Self and in the self. All these are just Atman (Bṛih. 2. 5). Bṛih. 3. 9. 10-17 similarly presents this idea of the one Person immanent in and including the self and the not-self: the person in the earth and in fire is also the person in the body; the person in the sun is also the person in appearances and in the eye; the person in space is also the person in the ear and in hearing; the person in darkness and in the shadow is also the person in the heart; the person in the waters is also the person in semen and in the heart. And finally he is Atman, the Self, the Soul.

So, as Yajnavalkya explained to Ushastas: 'He who breathes in with your breathing in is the Soul (Atman) of yours which is in all things. He who breathes out with your breathing out is the Soul of yours which is in all things. He who breathes about with your breathing about is the Soul of yours which is in all things. He who breathes up with your breathing up is the Soul of yours which is in all things' (Bṛih. 3. 4. 1). The inner essence, then, of the objective and the subjective is one Being, and that, too, of the nature of a Self, by reason of the reality of the directly known self which necessarily constitutes a part of that ground of all being.

But by a different course of speculation and (as was natural with the earlier) one which had regard more especially to the objective, the conception of a single world-ground and then of the actual being of the world itself had been that of Brahma. An objective entity though this Brahma was, the unity of being which it was intended to signify could not disregard the

existence and activities of the self, which surely were as real as the sun, moon, waters, space, and so forth that had been the prominent facts to be grounded in the unitary being of the world of Brahma. An approachment to Brahma as underlying the self also was being made, as was shown in the exposition of the development of the conception of Brahma. But, differently from the realistic procedure with Brahma, a more personal and self-like ground was necessary for effecting the union of the psychologically viewed subjective and objective. For this purpose the old conception of a cosmic Person was more serviceable; and it was developed away from its first materialistic and corporeal connections to that of a more spiritual Atman, who is immanent in self and not-self and who constitutes the unity expressed in their correlation.

Yet finally these two world-grounds, Brahma and Atman, are not different and separate. Their essential oneness, as aspects of the same great Being, was at first only hinted at, but was later explicitly stated. The suspicion that these two theories, which were becoming current and which people desired to understand more fully, were both of the same Being, was manifested by the form in which learners who came to recognized philosophers for instruction put their questions. Thus, Ushastas came to Yājñavalkya and said: 'Explain to me him who is the Brahma, present and not beyond our ken, him who is the Soul (Atman) in all things' (Bṛih. 3. 4. 1). Likewise the five householders who came to Aśvapati were first discussing among themselves' Who is our Atman (Soul)? What is Brahma?' (Chānd. 5. II. 1).

Then we find it directly stated: 'Verily, that great unborn Soul, undecaying, undying, immortal, fearless, is Brahma' (Brih. 4. 4. 25). 'He [i. e. Atman] is Brahma' (Ait. 5. 3). 'Him [i. e. Brahma] alone know as the one Soul (Atman). Other words dismiss' (Mund. 2. 2. 5). "The Soul (Atman), which pervades all things..., this is Brahma ' (Śvet. 1. 16). Before the identification of Brahma and Ātman was formally made, the two terms were hovering near each other as designations of the ultimate world-ground, as in Bṛih. 2. 5. I, where to emphasize a point the phrases are used in succession: This Soul (Atman), this Immortal, this Brahma, this All.' After

6

the identification was made the two became interchangeable terms, as in Chand. 8. 14. 1: ... Brahma, that is the immortal, that is the Soul (Atman),' and Mund. 2.2.9: 'Brahma, that which knowers of the Soul (Atman) do know' (through the whole of this section, where the Imperishable is being described, the terms Brahma and Atman are used indifferently). So the two great conceptions-Brahma, reached first realistically, the unitary cosmic ground, with outreachings towards a cosmo-anthropic ground; and Atman, the inner being of the self and the not-self, the great world-spirit—were joined, the former taking over to itself the latter conception and the two being henceforth to a considerable degree synonymous. Here the quest for the real,1 for the unity of the diversified world, for the key to the universe, reached a goal. That which Svetaketu did not know, though he had been away from home studying twelve years and had studied all the Vedas and thought himself learned, even that 'whereby what has not been heard of becomes heard of, what has not been thought of becomes thought of, what has not been understood becomes understood' (Chand. 6. 1. 1-3); that for instruction in which Saunaka, the great householder, came to Angiras (Mund. I. I. 3); that which Narada knew not, though he knew eighteen books and sciences, and for lack of the knowledge of which he was sorrowing (Chand. 7. I. 1-2); that for complete instruction in which Indra remained with Prajapati as a pupil for one hundred and one years-that supreme object is just this Brahma, this Ātman, who is in the world, who is the great Self, the ground of oneself. He is the highest object of knowledge, whom one should desire to know.

'By knowing Him only, a wise

Brahman should get for himself intelligence.' (Brih. 4. 4. 21.) He is the key to all knowledge. 'Verily, with the seeing of, with the hearkening to, with the thinking of, and with the under

1 Beautifully expressed, in a different connection, by the three verses of Brih. 1. 3. 28:

'From the unreal lead me to the real.

From darkness lead me to light.

From death lead me to immortality.'

The earnestness of the search for truth is one of the delightful and commendable features of the Upanishads.

standing of the Soul, this world-all is known' (Bṛih. 2. 4. 5). 'Verily, he who knows that thread and the so-called Inner Controller knows Brahma, he knows the worlds, he knows the gods, he knows the Vedas, he knows created things, he knows the Soul, he knows everything' (Bṛih. 3. 7. 1). This is the knowledge the Brahmans know. Thereby I know what is to be known' (Bṛih. 5. 1. 1). 'As, when a drum is being beaten, one would not be able to grasp the external sounds, but by grasping the drum or the beater of the drum the sound is grasped; as, when a conch-shell is being blown, one would not be able to grasp the external sounds, but by grasping the conch-shell or the blower of the conch-shell the sound is grasped; as, when a lute is being played, one would not be able to grasp the external sounds, but by grasping the lute or the player of the lute the sound is grasped '—so by comprehending Ātman or Brahma everything is comprehended (Brih. 2. 4. 7-9).

So the unity which has been searched for from the beginning of Indian speculation was reached. As all the spokes are held together in the hub and felly of a wheel, just so in this Soul all things, all gods, all worlds, all breathing things, all selves are held together' (Bṛih. 2. 5. 15). Pantheism now is the ruling conception of the world, for the world is identical with Atman. Atman alone is the whole world' (Chand. 7. 25. 2). This Brahmanhood, this Kshatrahood, these worlds, these gods, these beings, everything here is what this Soul is (Bṛih. 2. 4. 6; 4. 5. 7). 'Who is this one?' is asked in Ait. 5. 1, and the reply is: 'He is Brahma; he is Indra; he is Prajapati; [he is] all the gods here; and these five gross elements, namely earth, wind, space, water, light; these things and those which are mingled of the fine, as it were; origins of one sort or another: those born from an egg, and those born from a womb, and those born from sweat, and those born from a sprout; horses, cows, persons, elephants; whatever breathing thing there is here whether moving or flying, and what is stationary.' As the later metrical Śvetāśvatara expresses the thought:

'That God faces all the quarters of heaven.

Aforetime was he born, and he it is within the womb.
He has been born forth. He will be born.' (Śvet. 2. 16.)

And again, with more indefiniteness, concerning the pantheistic 'That'::

That surely is Agni (fire). That is Aditya (the sun).

That is Vayu (the wind),

and That is the moon.

That surely is the pure. That is Brahma.

That is the waters.

That is Prajapati (Lord of Creation).

Thou art woman. Thou art man.

Thou art the youth and the maiden too.

Thou as an old man totterest with a staff.

Being born, thou becomest facing in every direction.

Thou art the dark-blue bird and the green [parrot] with red

eyes.

Thou hast the lightning as thy child.

and the seas.

Thou art the seasons

Having no beginning, thou dost abide with all-pervadingness,
Wherefrom all beings are born.'

(Śvet. 4. 2-4.)

And most important of all, as Uddālaka nine times repeated to Śvetaketu (Chānd. 6. 8-16): 'That art thou.'

CHAPTER VI

THE REALISTIC CONCEPTION OF THE ULTIMATE UNITY, AND THE DOCTRINE OF ILLUSION

WHAT, now, is the nature of that single all-encompassing pantheistic Being that has been discovered? It must possess as many qualities as there are in the whole of the real world which it constitutes. This attribution of all possible qualities to the Being of the world is made in the famous Sāṇḍilya section of the Chandogya (3. 14). 'Verily, this whole world is Brahma.... He who consists of mind, whose body is life, whose form is light, whose conception is truth, whose soul (atman) is space, containing all works, containing all desires, containing all odors, containing all tastes, encompassing this whole world, the unspeaking, the unconcerned,... smaller than a grain of rice, or a barley-corn, or a mustard-seed, or a grain of millet, or the kernel of a grain of millet,... [yet] greater than the earth, greater than the atmosphere, greater than the sky,