Upanishadic Hinduism: Quest for Ultimate Knowledge 

(This is my summary of a chapter in a book I often used in university classes:  Thirteen

Theories of Human Nature.) 

While Hinduism is incredibly diverse (consider also that there are about
41,000 denominations of Christianity worldwide1) and there is no way to adequately capture
that diversity in a few pages. In response, the authors will focus on the Upanishads, the most
foundational texts of Hinduism. Unlike Confucianism, Hinduism is a metaphysical philosophy
whose “overall theme is one of ontological unity.” [Roughly the idea that all being is one. In
fact, in non-dualist Vedanta, only Brahman is real.]

Theory of the Universe – All reality is one, in other words (philosophical) Hinduism a type of
monism. This ultimate ground of all being [a phrase later adopted by 20th-century Christian
theologians like Paul Tillich and John T. Robinson] is called Brahman. Brahman is a force,
power, or energy that “sustains the world;”an ultimate reality that causes or grounds
existence, an essence which pervades all reality. Ultimately all of reality is one; all is Brahman.

But why then is it (or does it appear) that reality is a plurality composed of many things? A
possible answer lies in the Hindu creation myth. All originates in nothingness [as it does in
contemporary quantum cosmologies] except for Brahman [this is similar to creation “ex
nihilo” in Christianity.] Being lonely Brahman divided into female and male and from this the
entire plurality of the elements of the universe came into being. [It is hard to reconcile this
story with the non-personal nature of Brahman.] However, “the original unity is never lost; it
simply takes on the appearance of multiple forms.” [So multiplicity is ultimately an illusion—
there is really only Brahman.]

This also implies that Braham is both immanent and transcendent—it both within and
outside all reality. [This view is called panetheism, “… a belief system which posits that the
divine (be it a monotheistic God, polytheistic gods, or an eternal cosmic animating force)
interpenetrates every part of nature and timelessly extends beyond it.”2] These are the two
aspects of Brahman. It is both all the changing things of the world and the unchanging
ground of all things. This is the one ultimate reality seen from different perspectives. [Think of
a gestalt picture like the faces/vases or young woman/old woman. One picture, two
perspectives from which to see it.] But in the end, there is only Brahman. Finally, there is a
tension in Hinduism between those who believe Brahman is ineffable and impossible to
conceptualize, and those who disagree, identifying Brahman with everything.

Theory of Human Nature – We are all one and thus radically interconnected with all being.
The self or soul within all, the Atman, is connected (identical?) with all other selves. We are
like spokes all connected to a central hub or, more radically, what we are is identical to all of
reality. Thus Hinduism distinguishes the transitory self as ego or I or persona (ahamkara),
with the eternal, immortal self, the Atman. This true self is identical with Brahman. [Thus
Atman is Brahman or, as it appears in the Vedas Tat Tvam Asi (Sanskrit: तत् त्वम् असि or
तत्त्वमसि), … translated variously as “That art thou,” “That thou art,” “Thou art that,” “You
are that,” or “That you are,” or, for western ears, “you are god.”]

Atman is not an object of consciousness but the subject of consciousness—it is consciousness

itself and thus cannot be known like other objects. [This distinction is important in
contemporary, western philosophy of mind.] Our true selves are identical with the
consciousness which animates all consciousness. We are not transient egos inside bodies but
identical ultimately with all reality. Again Atman is (ultimately) Brahman. [You are identical
with whatever power, force or energy animates all reality; you are (non-personal) god.]
Moreover this true self migrates from body to body. [To make reincarnation plausible,
consider that people die and other people are born, in other words, Atman/Brahman
continues. Remember this is a very brief, general description of Hinduism and there is a lot of
disagreement in Hinduism like there is in any religion. For example, some believe in Saguna
Brahman, a personal god with attributes as opposed to Nirguna Brahman, transpersonal
without attributes. Some Hindus are completely non-dualistic, there is only one reality;
others are dualistic, etc.]

Diagnosis – The main problem of human existence is ignorance regarding the nature of

ultimate reality. Most do not recognize the reality of infinite Brahman and thus identify with
the transitory objects of consciousness which all fade away. Since Atman is Brahman this
ignorance is also ignorance of our true selves. [As we proceed into metaphysics one wonders
how we know if any of this is true. Through experience? Meditation? The power of the
arguments? Or could this all be speculation designed to comfort us at the thought of life’s
transitory nature? How do we decide?] We identify with the phenomenal world instead of
with Brahman. We concern ourselves with our little egos and small threats of offenses to
them, rather than recognizing that our egos are essentially illusory, and we are identical to all
reality. We are alienated from ourselves, from others, and from all reality. We are isolated and
lonely.

This (misguided) individualism is caused by karma. [This is simply a moral law of cause and
effect.] This means that our actions are not free but determined by past desires and actions.
We are in psychological bondage to previous actions and the desires that caused them.
[Consider the binding nature of previous gambling, smoking, eating junk food, aggression,
etc.] Hindu meditation in large part is an attempt to get in touch with our true nature and free
us from egoistic desires.

Prescription – Hinduism is generally optimistic about attaining freedom from desire and discovery
our true nature. This is done by multiple paths. The beginning of freedom though is a special kind of
knowledge. [The basic ways (or yogas) are the paths of: 1) knowledge; 2) love; 3) work; and 4)
psychological exercises. The way one chooses depends on their personality.]

Upanishadic Hinduism: Quest for Ultimate Knowledge

(I am teaching the course “Philosophy of the Human Person” at a local university. These are
my notes from the primary text for the course, Twelve Theories of Human Nature.)

Divergent Interpretations – Hindus disagree regarding whether ultimate reality is personal

or non-personal, (and whether the world is real or not.) Two seminal thinkers who espouse
different views are Shankara (sometimes called the” Thomas Aquinas” of Hinduism) and
Ramanuja.

Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta – This is a highly philosophical form of Hinduism. (The kind you
would probably find in Vedanta centers in the US, especially those run by the Ramakrishna
order of monks, a highly intellectual branch of Hinduism somewhat like the Jesuits are to
Catholicism.) Shankara was interested in big philosophical questions like: “what is the
relationship between Brahman and the world as it appears to our senses?” and “what is the
relationship between Brahman and atman?” This is a philosophy of total unity. “For
Shankara, Brahman is the only truth, the world is ultimately unreal, and the distinction
between God and the individual is only an illusion.” Brahman is the only reality, and it is
without attributes [it is not omnipotent, omniscient, personal, fatherly, etc.] To fully realize
Brahman all distinctions between subjects and objects fade away [since there is only one
reality]. Shankara concludes that the phenomenal world is false—it is Maya, it is illusory.

Maya is the process through which we perceive multiplicity, even though reality is one. The
world as it appears to our senses is not Brahman, and thus not ultimately real. This does not
mean the world is imaginary; it is real; it exists. But it is not ultimate or absolute reality. [It is
derivative from Brahman. This parallels Plato’s notion that things in this world are derivative
from forms, which are more real.] The world of the senses exists in relation to Brahman the
way a dream stands in relation to being awake. We may think that a rope in dim light is a
snake, even though in good light we could tell the difference. [The parallels with Plato’s
allegory of the cave in Shankara’s philosophy are striking.] By analogy, the world of
multiplicity is superimposed on Brahman in the way the snake might have been
superimposed on the rope.  [Modern science has confirmed that humans are pattern-seekers
who superimposed order when there is none. They see the face of a man on Mars, Jesus in
grilled cheese sandwiches, or destiny in sporting events that were really decided randomly by
statistical fluctuation.] The experience of the world is finally revealed as false when one
comes to the knowledge of Brahman.

The idea of a personal god [Saguna Brahman] with attributes is ultimately an illusion since
Brahman is not limited by attributes. Such a being plays a role for those “still enmeshed in the
cosmic illusion of Maya.” In other words, the notion of a personal god [who you can talk to
and listen to] helps most people begin to leave behind the attachments of this world. But
ultimately [Nirguna] Brahman is transpersonal, and without attributes. [Some philosopher
said he preferred the personal god because the impersonal god seemed like a bowl of tapioca
pudding.]

And Shankara also rejects the individual soul. Positing an individual soul is better than being
attached to one’s ego and body, but the final realization is that the true self is Atman, or pure
consciousness. Thus the world, god, and the individual soul are merely apparent reality—the
ultimate and only reality is Brahman. Atman is Brahman. This realization is the ultimate one
in Hinduism; it is the goal of spirituality. There is no ultimate distinction between subjects
and objects [for there are no multiplicities that can be distinguished.] We are like drops of
water trying to understand that we are ultimately united in one big ocean of being. This
describes the quest for ultimate knowledge.

A necessary step in this spiritual journey is the realization that desire [especially for the things
and activities of this world] must be eradicated. The highest spiritual path consists then
of renunciation of the world followed by a lifetime of meditation designed to confirm the
insight that “I am Brahman.” [If this sounds strange consider the typical vows of “poverty,
chastity, and obedience” of priests and nuns and monks. All designed to turn one’s back on
this world and focus—in different ways—on a more real spiritual world.]

Ramanuja’s Vishishta Adviata Vedanta – For Ramanuja the divine is personal, and different
things are real, although they are still attributes of Brahman. Brahman is the sole reality but
with different aspects or qualities. Ramanuja thus accepts a personal god—a god with
personality and qualities—and rejects Brahman as “undifferentiated consciousness,
contending that if this were true, any knowledge of Brahman would be impossible, since all
knowledge depends on a differentiated “object.” [He is presupposing that knowledge
consists of subjects knowing objects and that knowledge of oneself—like being able to see
your own eye without a mirror—is impossible.] The love of God entails a subject knowing and
loving an object. Ramanuja wants to taste sugar not be sugar. [I suppose the theologians who
wrote this centuries ago didn’t realize that sugar is bad for you!]

And the physical world is real for Ramanuja. It was created from divine love and is the
transformation of Brahman, similar to the way that milk transforms into cheese. In this view,
the world is not something to be overcome but something to be appreciated as the product
of Brahman’s creativity. Maya refers not to illusion, but to this creative process. Thus the
world is God’s body. [Here we find echoes of pantheists like Spinoza.] The world is an
attribute of the eternal god analogously to how the body is an attribute of the soul.
The soul is also part of God; it is both different and not different from god. [This “paradoxical
logic” can be hard for Westerners. But the idea is that truth is often found in paradox.] The
soul separates from Brahman at creation and returns to Brahman at dissolution. Yet the soul
is still somehow both separate and eternal. [This probably sounds more familiar to those
raised in Western monotheistic religions.]

The path to freedom for Ramanuja consists of action “that avoids both the attachment to the
results of action and the abandonment of action.” [Do your homework and the results will
take care of themselves.] We will be more effective if we are not overly concerned with the
results of our actions. After all, the world is Lila, or god’s play, and we are actors, not the
playwright. There is so much beauty in the world that if we do our duty we will be fulfilled. We
need not renounce the world but revel in it. As for worshipping various manifestations of the
gods, Ramanuja believes this helps most people as it appeals to their emotions. [Think of
veneration of saints in Roman Catholicism.] The goal of these devotional acts is a feeling of
the presence of gods, not oneness with a god. Finally, the book notes that for the majority of
Hindus “devotional practices in temples and home shrines dominate the Hindu tradition.
[Something similar could be said about almost all religious traditions, they emphasize the
emotional and devotional rather than the abstract and intellectual.]