________________
158
THE INDIAX ANTIQUARY
( AUGUST, 1927
free from suspicion. And that was exactly the strong point of the Vedanta. The Vedanta recognised the system of Jaimini, even quoted from him and the texts on which his system was based; but at the same time, exposed its limitations. Besides, the Vedanta gave full weight to the Upanisads. It thus included more of the Vedic lore within its scope than any other system.
In the Vodánta-sútrus, the more or less unbroken continuity of interpretation of the Upanigads has found a perfect form of expression. This is why all subsequent system-builders of the Vedanta School, instead of going straight to the original sources in the Upanipads,
-which they knew well enough,--preferred to build on the common and undisputed foun. dation of the Sütms.
· The prestige of these Sútras of Bådarayaņa was unique. The authoritative character of his interpretation of the Upanirads is further evidenced by the fact that even those who did not, strictly speaking, belong to the Vedanta School, considered him well worth quoting. And his authority was sometimes enough for a philosophica! tenet. In the Bhakti-sútras of Sândilya, we find copious references to the Satras of Bådarayana. Thus, Sandilya i. 1. 4, i. 2. 17, ii. 1. 4, and iii. 1. 7 refer respectively to Vedanta-sútras i. 1.7, i. 1. 1, iv. 1.3, and i. 1. 2. Besides, Svapneśvara, the commentator of Sândilya, quotes several other Sätras of Bådara. yana in the course of elucidating his author. Original Srutis also are quoted; but Bådarayana's authority is not only never challenged, but his interpretation is quoted approvingly; and this, in spite of the fact that his Sutras were not considered ' Apauruşeya' or as of non-human origin. This shows the unshakeable position that the Sútras had established for themselves.
It is no doubt true that by no stretch of imagination can the Sútras be understood to refer to all the Upanixada, But that in itself ought to be a warning to us against taking the liberty of forming any group that we like of the Upanigads and then basing a philosophy upon it. If the Súlras have avoided reference to any of the Upanigads, the question ought to be decided first how far they are entitled to our consideration at all, before admitting their claim to contribute to a philosophy of the Upaniads. It is an admitted fact that a large number of the Upanigads owe their origin to sectarian movements—that is to say, to a recrudescence or innovation of sect-deities and their cults. And some of the Upanixads again are but off-shoots of the original texts of Brahma-vidyd. These latter say very little that is original, i.e., very little that is not found in the earlier and more authentic Upanigads. (Cf. Deussen, op. cit., p. 9.) For instance, the Mahavákya-upanigad, as the very name signi. fies, is only an elucidation of the experience implied in the great saying' (mahdvdkya) of Uddalaka in Ch. Up. vi. 8, viz. "Tattvamasi "-'That thou art'. Upanisads of this class have little to contribute towards building up a philosophy of the Upanigads. And as to those that are unmistakeably sectarian, obviously they have no right to take a share in the construction of a philosophy of Brahma-vidyd. For instance, what right has the Rudraksa-jábalaupanigad, -which, as the very name implies, is but a dissertation on the efficacy of wearing a rudrákra (the berry of the Eleocarpus), a peculiar kind of seed, which is worn on the arm or neck or ear by certain orthodox people-what right has such a book as this to be considered in connection with the construction of a philosophy of the Upanigads?
Evidently some of the Upanixads have to be excluded from our consideration in build. ing up & philosophy of the Upanillads. As to which should be excluded and which not, the Sútrar, we contend, are our best and most authentic guide. Our choice is practically limited to the Upanigads, to which the Sútras have been or can be understood to have referred.
Now, that being so, is there any other philosophy of the Upanigads but what is contained in the Sutras of Badarayaņa ? Is there anything in the Upanigads which has not been
