Dear J,
I saw a letter from a reader who said that he got clarity during the teaching of the Upanishads in your class. I have had that kind of experience myself. The texts I read said that ‘God is everywhere’ is the meaning of the line ‘Eso Vasyam Itam Sarvam’ in a flat manner. But I find your meaning that ‘beauty, order, goodness, and oneness are present in everything as a core’ to be a beautiful vision.
My question is this: why is there so much difference when studying the Upanishads? Which is the correct Upanishad education?
Keerthidharan
Dear Kirthidaran,
Even a hundred years ago, the Upanishads and the Gita were philosophical texts of the Vedanta tradition. Their content is the pure vision of Brahman. When the Upanishads were translated into English and became available to everyone, all schools of Hinduism tried to interpret them in their own way. In particular, the attempt to interpret the Upanishads based on devotion has emerged as a significant movement and continues to this day. Whenever they interpret the Upanishads based on devotion, they assert that Brahman is God. The Upanishads present Brahman as a boundless cosmos and beyond the cosmos. But the devotional school interprets it as the God who creates and manages the world. They present it as a punishing force and as a king who bestows blessings if worshipped. As a result, they distort the very essence of the Upanishads. The Upanishads should be approached only from a pure Vedanta perspective, and that alone will provide the correct understanding. If you approach it with devotion, you will get a distorted form.
Jeyamohan
