I thought it would be a good idea to create a thread specifically to discuss the ideas of Atman and Brahman in the primary Upanisads. As far as I know, they are the earliest extensive source that goes into the details of these foundational concepts of Hinduism (as well as reincarnation) and hence serves as a cornerstone for all orthodox and even heterodox traditions that arise in the subsequent centuries. I won't go into the Upanisads verse by verse, but rather pick out those sections that have attracted my attention. Others here can do the same.
I will first look at the Brihad-Aranyaka upanisad, considered the largest and oldest of them all. I will look at Section 2.1 where King Ajatasatru converses with Drpta-Balaki of the Gargya clan on the nature of Brahman.
LINK (page 18)
The narrative flows as this:-
Balaki says he will instruct the King about Brahman. Then he points to various aspects of the observable world and says that the Being (or Purusha) within that is Brahman. Ajatasatru always replies that he already knows and worships that Being as a chief God with attributes and that he wants to know of a more fundamental Brahman.
So in 2.1.2 the narrative goes:-
Gargya then said: "It is the person (purusha) up there in the sun that I venerate as Brahman."
Ajatasatru replied: " Don't start a discussion with me about him! I venerate him only as the most eminent of all beings, as their head and king. Anyone who venerates him this way will become the most eminent of all beings; he will become their head and king."
Similarly in 2.1.7:-
Gargya then said : "It is the person here in the fire that I venerate as Brahman."
Ajatasatru replied: "Don't start a discussion with me about him! I venerate him only as the irresistible one. Anyone who venerates him this way will become irresistible, and so will his children."
And so it goes for many such instances.
Interestingly Gargya Balaki eventually also identifies the person in the self as Brahman, but Ajatasatru says the same thing.
2.1.13
Gargya then said: " It is the person here in the self that I venerate as Brahman."
Ajatasatru replied : " Don't start a discussion with me about him!" I venerate him only as the one possessing a self. Anyone who venerates him in this way will come to possess a self, and so will his children."
While Ajatasatru's meaning is not quite clear, it appears to me that he is denying the idea that the "I-awareness" that I have and the feeling of I possessing myself (free-will etc.) are the features of the person (purusha) present in myself and is still not the fundamental level of Brahman.
At this Gargya falls silent. It will now be Ajatasatru's turn to instruct Gargya Balaki.
However, before going there, what do you guys think of the passages 2.1.1-2.1.13? What do these people mean by the person (purusha) in the sun, the moon, the fire etc.? Did they think them to be gods? How should we think of them in a modern terminology while keeping their meaning intact.
I am also linking an English translation of Sankara's commentary on these verses if its useful.
Relative Aspects of Brahman [Section I]
I will first look at the Brihad-Aranyaka upanisad, considered the largest and oldest of them all. I will look at Section 2.1 where King Ajatasatru converses with Drpta-Balaki of the Gargya clan on the nature of Brahman.
LINK (page 18)
The narrative flows as this:-
Balaki says he will instruct the King about Brahman. Then he points to various aspects of the observable world and says that the Being (or Purusha) within that is Brahman. Ajatasatru always replies that he already knows and worships that Being as a chief God with attributes and that he wants to know of a more fundamental Brahman.
So in 2.1.2 the narrative goes:-
Gargya then said: "It is the person (purusha) up there in the sun that I venerate as Brahman."
Ajatasatru replied: " Don't start a discussion with me about him! I venerate him only as the most eminent of all beings, as their head and king. Anyone who venerates him this way will become the most eminent of all beings; he will become their head and king."
Similarly in 2.1.7:-
Gargya then said : "It is the person here in the fire that I venerate as Brahman."
Ajatasatru replied: "Don't start a discussion with me about him! I venerate him only as the irresistible one. Anyone who venerates him this way will become irresistible, and so will his children."
And so it goes for many such instances.
Interestingly Gargya Balaki eventually also identifies the person in the self as Brahman, but Ajatasatru says the same thing.
2.1.13
Gargya then said: " It is the person here in the self that I venerate as Brahman."
Ajatasatru replied : " Don't start a discussion with me about him!" I venerate him only as the one possessing a self. Anyone who venerates him in this way will come to possess a self, and so will his children."
While Ajatasatru's meaning is not quite clear, it appears to me that he is denying the idea that the "I-awareness" that I have and the feeling of I possessing myself (free-will etc.) are the features of the person (purusha) present in myself and is still not the fundamental level of Brahman.
At this Gargya falls silent. It will now be Ajatasatru's turn to instruct Gargya Balaki.
However, before going there, what do you guys think of the passages 2.1.1-2.1.13? What do these people mean by the person (purusha) in the sun, the moon, the fire etc.? Did they think them to be gods? How should we think of them in a modern terminology while keeping their meaning intact.
I am also linking an English translation of Sankara's commentary on these verses if its useful.
Relative Aspects of Brahman [Section I]