IV. The Kaushîtaki-Brâhmana-Upanishad
THE Kaushîtaki-upanishad, or, as it is more properly called, the
Kaushîtaki-brâhmana-upanishad, belongs, like the Aitareya-upanishad, to
the followers of the Rig-veda. It was translated into Persian under the
title of Kokhenk, and has been published in the Bibliotheca Indica,
with Sankarânanda's commentary and an excellent translation by
Professor Cowell.
Though it is called the Kaushîtaki-brâhmana-upanishad, it does not
form part of the Kaushîtaki-brâhmana in 30 adhyâyas which we possess,
and we must therefore account for its name by admitting that the
Âranyaka, of which it formed a portion, could be reckoned as part of
the Brâhmana literature of the Rig-veda (see Aitareya-âranyaka,
Introduction, p. xcii), and that hence the Upanishad might be called
the Upanishad of the Brâhmana of the Kaushîtakins[68].
From a commentary discovered by Professor Cowell it appears that the
four adhyâyas of this Upanishad
were followed by five other adhyâyas, answering, so far as we can
judge from a few extracts, to some of the adhyâyas of the
Aitareya-âranyaka, while an imperfect MS. of an Âranyaka in the Royal
Library at Berlin (Weber, Catalogue, p.20) begins, like the
Aitareya-âranyaka, with a description of the Mahâvrata, followed by
discussions on the uktha in the second adhyâya; and then proceeds in
the third adhyâya to give the story of Kitra Gângyâyani in the same
words as the Kaushîtaki-upanishad in the first adhyâya. Other MSS.
again adopt different divisions. In one MS. of the commentary (MS. A),
the four adhyâyas of the Upanishad are counted as sixth, seventh,
eighth, and ninth (ending with ityâranyake navamo 'dhyâyah); in another
(MS. P) the third and fourth adhyâyas of the Upanishad are quoted as
the fifth and sixth of the Kaushîtakyâranyaka, possibly agreeing
therefore, to a certain extent, with the Berlin MS. In a MS. of the
Sânkhâyana Âranyaka in the Royal Library at Berlin, there are 15
adhyâyas, 1 and 2 corresponding to Ait. Âr. 1 and 5; 3-6 containing the
Kaushîtaki-upanishad; 7 and 8 corresponding to Ait. Âr. 3[69]. Poley
seems to have known a MS. in which the four adhyâyas of the Upanishad
formed the first, seventh, eighth, and ninth adhyâyas of a
Kaushîtaki-brâhmana.
As there were various recensions of the Kaushîtaki-brâhmana (the
Sânkhâyana, Kauthuma, &c.), the Upanishad also exists in at least two
texts. The commentator, in some of its MSS., refers to the various
readings of the Sâkhâs, explaining them, whenever there seems to be
occasion for it. I have generally followed the text which is
presupposed by Sahkarânanda's Dîpikâ, and contained in MSS. F, G
(Cowell, Preface, p. v), so far as regards the third and fourth
adhyâyas. According to Professor Cowell, Vidyâranya in his
Sarvopanishadarthânubhûtiprakâsa followed the text of the commentary,
while Sankarâkârya, if we may trust to extracts in his commentary on
the Vedânta-sûtras, followed the other text, contained in MS. A
(Cowell, Preface, p. v).
The style of the commentator differs in so marked a manner from that
of Sankarâkârya, that even without the fact that the author of the
commentary on the Kaushîtaki-upanishad is called Sankarânanda, it would
have been difficult to ascribe it, as has been done by some scholars,
to the famous Sankarânanda. Sankarânanda is called the teacher of
Mâdhavâkârya (Hall, Index, p. 98), and the disciple of Ânandâtma Muni
(Hall, Index, p. 116).
I have had the great advantage of being able to consult for the
Kaushîtaki-upanishad, not only the text and commentary as edited by
Professor Cowell, but also his excellent translation. If I differ from
him in some points, this is but natural, considering the character of
the text and the many difficulties that have still to be solved, before
we can hope to arrive at a full understanding of these ancient
philosophical treatises.