YOHANAN GRINSHPON


THE UPANIS: ADIC STORY AND THE HIDDEN VIDY A;
PERSONALITY AND POSSESSION IN THE

BR: HADARAN :
YAKOPANIS: AD

1. For many generations, the Upanis. adic literature has attracted atten-
tion mostly because of its “philosophy” and speculations about man’s
metaphysical core and its relation with the Absolute. However, the
Upanis. ads contain so much which cannot, generally speaking, count
as abstract, speculative speech-acts. Such are the numerous stories of
the Upanis. ads. These stories have traditionally been taken to be the
mere “occasion” for the exposition of the Upanis. adic vidya.  Although
destined for inferiority in relation to the wonderful, bold and imagi-
native mystical and metaphysical theories and visions, the Upanis. adic
story may itself sometimes contain a “hidden vidya”  of some interest.
Such is the case, we argue, of the story about Yajn~avalkya and the
sages who questioned him in the course of the competition initiated by
Janaka, the king of Videha.
2. The underlying theme – the“hidden vidya”  – of the entire third
section of Br. hadaran. yakopanis. ad is Yajn~avalkya’s personality, and the
nature and meaning of his self-confidence and self-transformation. This
vidya competes with the one explicitly present in Yajn~avalkya’s abstract
and beautiful speeches. The story contains references to the “recurring
awakening” of this sage, in the course of his seeking answers to the
questions addressed to him.
3. The most conspicuous feature of the story is Yajn~avalkya’s
outstanding self-confidence. Yajn~avalkya’s teachings are embedded
within the story about his self-possession during a fateful competition.
The opening scene of the story brings to light most clearly the under-
lying theme of the narrative. Janaka, the king of Videha, held a big
sacrifice in which many gifts were given to the brahmins. The spiritual
king had a desire for knowledge aroused in him. He asked (himself)
about the brahmin most well-versed in the Veda (anuc  anatama).
 He then
put aside one thousand cows with gold on their horns. He addressed
the brahmins assembled there: “Let the best brahmin (brahmis. .tha)
take these cows.” The brahmins present did not dare speak (te ha
brahman. a na dadhr. s. uh. ). Then came forth Yajn~avalkya and ordered

Journal of Indian Philosophy 26: 373–385, 1998.
c 1998 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.
374 YOHANAN GRINSHPON

his disciple Samasrava to take the cows home. Yajn~avalkya does not
wait for the end of the forthcoming competition. He seemingly con-
siders his superiority a fait accompli. The other sages are frustrated
and angry at Yajn~avalkya; “how come he says he is the best brahmin?”

(te ha brahman . as cakrudhuh. . katham no brahmis. th. o bruv ıteti). One
of the sages, Asvala, dared address Yajn~avalkya directly. “You say,
Yajn~avalkya, indeed, that you are the best brahmin among us” (tvam nu
khalu no yaj  n~avalkya brahmist. h. o ‘s ıti). This statement seems to express
an obvious sense of challenge and threat.1 Yajn~avalkya’s response to
Janaka’s official Hotr. is breathtaking indeed: “Let the best brahmin be
honored. We just wanted the cows” (namo vayam  kurmo
. brahmis. .thaya
go-kam a eva vayam . sma iti).
4. Yajn~avalkya beats Asvala.2 He knows the relevant connections
(upanis. ad) whereby the yajamana  attains immortality and transcends
time. Did he have this knowledge at his disposal even before Asvala’s
questioning? Or, did he rise to the occasion and discover this truth in
the course of a self-transforming quest after the “right answer”? We are
not sure about the answers to such questions. In the case of Asvala’s
questions, we do not have a good enough clue.
4.1 But there are other cases, more revealing in this respect. The most
conspicuous ones are Yajn~avalkya’s encounters with Bhujyu Lahyayani
(BU 3.3) and Uddalaka Arun 
. i (BU 3.7). In these cases, it is obvious that
the Upanis. adic definition of the situation is such that Yajn~avalkya does
not know the answers when he is asked by his opponents. However, he
seems to know his potential for finding truth. This knowledge could
be the source of his truly outstanding self-confidence.
5. The two great exponents of the Upanis. adic tradition, Yajn~avalkya
and Uddalaka Arun  3
. i, meet and bitterly confront each other, according
to a remarkable episode related in the most “classical among all the
Upanis. ads”,4 the Br. hadaran. yakopanis. ad. In BU 3.7.1 Uddalaka tells
of an occurrence of the distant past, when he was apparently much
younger. He and some of his brahmin-colleagues were travelling in
the country of Madra, eager for Vedic knowledge. The host’s wife was
possessed by a Gandharva (gandharva-gr. hıta),  a non-human being by

the name of Atharvan a Kabandha. The sages were apparently taking
.
advantage of the presence of the supra-human source of knowledge;
they addressed him, and he responded. The Gandharva then introduced
two questions: What is “the string on which this world and the next, as
well as of all beings, are strung together?”5 “Who is the inner controller

(antar-yamin)?” The sages present at the host’s house did not know.
The narrative suggests that they also could not know the answers to
 THE UPANIS 
: ADIC STORY AND THE HIDDEN VIDYA 375

the Gandharva’s questions. Indeed, in his bhas 

. ya on BU 3.3 Sankara
proposes that the Gandharva’s knowledge was perhaps inaccessible to
the brahmins.6
5.1 Consequent upon the telling of the story from the past, Uddalaka
asks Yajn~avalkya the same questions, the answers to which had once
been impossible for humans to know. At this point Uddalaka’s challenge
to Yajn~avalkya becomes an open threat; if you pretend to know without
really knowing, your head will shatter apart!7 In the episode told at
BU 3.7.1, Uddalaka challenges Yajn~avalkya with respect to the core
of the Vedic scholar’s self-understanding and esteem. Y ajn~avalkya, a
Yajurvedic sage of great renown, is accused of being one who pretends
to know while in reality he does not. He is put to trial for his preten-
sions under the most unfavorable of circumstances; he is required to
know what only a non-human being such as a Gandharva could know.
The animosity, ridicule and contempt on Uddalaka’s part are hardly
concealed; “everyone can say ‘I know, I know’. If you know, then say
what you know”.8
5.2 Uddalaka and Yajn~avalkya are the two sages most prominent in
the Upanis. adic tradition. Though affiliated with different offshoots of
the Veda,9 they share very similar interests. Both are well-known experts

on the sacrifice. Uddalaka is depicted in the Satapatha-Br 
ahman. a as a
10
much-feared sage, approached with reverence and awe. Indeed, as far
as the knowledge of the agnihotra is concerned, Uddalaka stands out
most conspicuously. According to SB  11.5.3 he brilliantly answers an
unusually long series of 41 questions11 about the agnihotra. His answers
to the minute questions reveal the depth and skill of his interpretation.12
Uddalaka is portrayed as a true seeker of truth, humble enough to admit
that he does not know. Thus, for example, in the famous episode from
the BU 6.2, repeated also in the ChU 5.3-10,13 he seeks secret knowledge
of the fate of the dying man from a Ks. atriya. He cannot tolerate empty
pretensions to knowledge. He believes in being a true brahmin, who
really knows. We are not brahmins by name only (brahma-bandhu),

he says to his son Svetaketu. 14

5.3 Like Uddalaka, Yajn~avalkya is keenly interested in, and knowl-

edgeable about the agnihotra. Knowledge of this sacrifice is very
important to him, and he also seeks to be taught by a Ks. atriya.15
According to SB  11.6.2.6 Janaka tells Y ajn~avalkya about the fate of
the two agnihotra fires, a fate which significantly resembles the fate
of the dead man as told to Uddalaka.16
5.4 Thus, Yajn~avalkya and Uddalaka are both featured in the
Upanis. adic literature as true seekers of knowledge. They are will-
376 YOHANAN GRINSHPON

ing to receive knowledge from a Ks. atriya, they are interested in subtle
questions of meaning and significance pertinent to the sacrifice – and
in particular the agnihotra – and they are open to questions concerning
subtle matters such as the nature of the Self, etc.17
5.5 Uddalaka and Yajn~avalkya share some of their spiritual interests
as well as – most likely – much of their knowledge. They are represented
as essentially equal, the two prominent personalities of the Upanis. adic
literature. “Who, expounding the Absolute, can stand much higher than
Yajn~avalkya? Who can transcend Uddalaka Arun 
. i’s ‘That are thou’ as
the final answer to the question ‘what is man?’?”18
5.6 The encounter of Yajn~avalkya and Uddalaka, as it is told in the
BU 3.7, is thus of obvious interest. The meeting of these two heroes
is particularly attractive to follow, since the rare meeting of such
philosophers could serve as an occasion for the Upanis. adic authorities
to explore some of the more important topics in the mental world
which Uddalaka and Yajn~avalkya share. Such a topic is the origins of
knowledge possible for man. In this context, Yajn~avalkya’s personality
and self-confidence are particularly significant. The Upanis. adic story,
we argue, is an indispensable means to bring home the “hidden vidya” 
about man’s potential for self-transformation and truth.
6. The entire narrative that unfolds in the third section of the
Br. hadaran. yakopanis. ad is a combination of a dramatic story with some
of the most impressive mystico-philosophical reflections on the human
condition and its transcendence. The series of encounters between
Yajn~avalkya and his opponents and colleagues19 is the occasion for
some of the most beautiful expressions of the Upanis. adic vidya.  The
two components of the Vedanta-text, the vidya and the narrative which
provides the occasion for its exposition or transmission, are mostly
distinguishable. Janaka’s address to the assembled brahmins about the
most learned brahmin, the sages’ submissive (or reluctant) silence,
Yajn~avalkya’s boastful (or assertive) taking away of the cows, Asvala’s
rise to challenge Yajn~avalkya, the sub-stories of the various encounters
of Yajn~avalkya with the sages – including Bhujyu’s and Uddalaka’s
telling of their journey to Madra – the meeting of the brahmins – in the
past – with the Gandharva, Uddalaka’s threat to Yajn~avalkya, etc. are
all parts of the “story”. The Upanis. adic teaching which Yajn~avalkya
imparts in the course of his being questioned by the brahmins is the
vidya.
6.1 But is the clear-cut distinction between vidya and “story” always
fully justified? How are the narrative and the “philosophical speech”
related?
 THE UPANIS 
: ADIC STORY AND THE HIDDEN VIDYA 377

7. In his Brahmasutrabhas. ya 3.4.23–24, Sa  nkar

_ 
acarya reflects on the
place of the Upanis. adic story in relation to the Vedantic message (vidya) 
expressed in the “philosophical speech”. The purva-paks  . in asserts that
the Upanis. adic stories are available for certain uses (such as recitation)

in the course of certain rituals such as the pariplava.  nkara
Sa _ maintains
against his Mımam . saka p 
urva-paks
. in that the Upanis. adic story is an
integral part of the teaching of Vedanta, independent of the ritual-
use. The stories within which the teaching of Vedanta is embedded
are significantly specific, “not the same”, and must consequently be
assessed according to their function and contribution to the knowledge
(philosophical speech) transmitted “in their proximity”.
7.1 However integral a part of the Upanis. adic text, Sa  nkara
_ accords
to the narrative only a secondary role within the overall structure of the
Vedanta texts. The Upanis. adic story is conducive to the “stimulation”
(prarocana)  of the listener, and it also promotes the “smoothness”

(saukarya) of transmission and absorption of the liberating knowledge

(vidya). 20 The Upanis. adic stories “are meant to bring nearer to our
understanding the approximate vidyas with which they are seen to form
connected wholes; so they serve to render the latter more acceptable and
facilitate their comprehension”.21 The key-concept in Sa  nkara’s
_ . ya
bhas

is thus the integrity and unity (ekavakyat  of the Upanis. adic text, which
a)
contains both the story and the vidya.  However, the narrative, according
 nkara’s
to Sa _ theory, does not seem to have an intrinsic – thematic –

relationship to the vidya-portion, but is meant primarily to prepare

the listener in terms unrelated to the vidya-contents expounded in the
Vedanta text. The stories affect only the psychological aspects (such
as “faith” or “motivation” (sraddha),  stimulation (prarocana),  etc.) of
the knowledge-transmission. But the thematic relationship of the story
with the vidya expounded “in its proximity” (within its boundaries) is
not touched upon by Sa  nkara.
_
 nkara
7.3 Sa _ picks up certain examples of Upanis. adic narratives, in
order to illustrate the function and place of the Upanis. adic story in the
Vedanta-texts. He mentions three good stories from the Br. hadaran. yaka,
Chandogya and the Kaus.ıtaki Upanis. ads.
7.4 In the BU 4.5.1 there is the famous story of Yajn~avalkya’s teaching
to his wife Maitreyı who – unlike the teacher’s other wife, Katyayanı
– is eager to learn about atman  (rather than be rich). Obviously, this
story “stimulates the listener”, makes him appreciate the forthcoming
vidya, enhances his eagerness to hear about the atman  which makes
one “eternal”.
378 YOHANAN GRINSHPON

7.5 In the ChU 4.1 we find the story of Janasruti, a pious, very
generous man. He has built many hospices, thinking “people are going
to eat my food everywhere”. One night, he overhears two geese talking
about himself and a certain person by the name of Raikva-of-the-cart.
Though the geese think very highly of Janasruti, they consider Raikva
much superior, in particular because of his knowledge. Now, Janasruti
sends his charioteer away to look for Raikva. Finally he is found under
his cart, scratching his itches. He declines presents such as cows and
riches. However, he is fascinated by Janasruti’s wife’s face, and is
willing to teach Janasruti the vidya.
 The vidya,  in this case, concerns
the two “gatherers”, the wind and the breath, into which everything
dissolves. This story, although complex and attractive to the point of
almost overshadowing the vidya expounded by Raikva, is still within
 nkara
the limits set by Sa _ to the Upanis. adic story. The reader of the
story wishes to be acquainted with Raikva’s vidya,  the knowledge which
makes Raikva so outstanding and worthy of the arduous and costly
search for him.
7.6 In the KauU 3.1 there is the story of Pratardana, who asks Indra
to choose a boon for himself. Indra declines Pratardana’s request. He
insists that a superior should not choose a boon intended for an inferior.
Pratardana says he renounces the boon altogether. Indra changes his
mind, and suggests – not without some characteristic arrogance – that
Pratardana should know him (Indra). “When a man perceives me,
nothing that he does – whether it is stealing, or performing an abortion,
or killing his own father or mother – will ever make him lose a single
hair of his body. And when he has committed a sin, his face does
not lose its colour”.22 Having demonstrated thus the high benefits of
knowing him, Indra proceeds to teach Pratardana the vidya. 
7.7 Indeed, the choice of the examples brought forth by Sa  nkara
_ is
commensurate with his theory of the Upanis. adic story as it was outlined
above (according to BSBh 3.4.23–24). The stories are complex enough
and interesting as narratives, and yet the transmission of the vidya
can qualify as the climax of the entire text. Moreover, the stories do
promote some eagerness in the reader’s mind to know the – always
somewhat secret and hard to obtain – vidya.  The urgency to know and
the renunciation of worldly riches on Maitreyı’s part do help to create
a certain predisposition in the listener’s mind. The art of story-telling
seems to stimulate the growth of the right frame of mind in the recipient
or the reader. Even information of seemingly lesser significance could
be presented as conducive to the build-up of the occasion for an efficient
transmission of vidya. Thus, the Maitreyı-story presents the other wife
 THE UPANIS 
: ADIC STORY AND THE HIDDEN VIDYA 379

– Katyayanı – as inferior in the eyes of the spiritual hero, Yajn~avalkya.

Her ordinary and “womanly” frame of mind, bound apparently for
material goods, is a useful background for Yajn~avalkya’s relationship
with Maitreyı. There is closeness and love between husband and wife.
The mutual respect is apparent, and the transmission of the vidya
seems a well-integrated climax of the story; one is made ready for the
disclosure of the teaching: “The atman,  my lady, should be seen”. Once
the transmission of the vidya is discharged, Yajn~avalkya leaves for the
forest.
7.8 Likewise, the beautiful story of Janasruti and Raikva is both
complex and interesting in itself as well as reaching climax in Raikva’s
teaching. It stimulates the listener’s curiosity. The reader identifies with
Janasruti, shares in the yearning to find Raikva, is partially taken aback
at Raikva’s somewhat insulting refusal to relay the vidya,  and is finally
relieved when Raikva starts talking about the wind and the breath.
7.9 The story of Pratardana in the Kaus. itakı Upanis. ad is also both
a very good story and useful in its extolling the superior value of
knowledge.
7.10 It is obvious that Sa  nkara
_ is primarily interested in the vidya- 
section of the Upanis. ads. The controversy with his purva-paks  . in –
the Mımam . saka – over the role of the Upanis. adic story is part of the
more general controversy over the primacy of the Jn~ana-k  . d. a and
an
the karma-kan  nkara
. d. a of the Veda. Sa _ suggests that the Mımam . saka’s
position with respect to the Upanis. adic story is a reflection of this

general controversy. “The purva-paks . in maintains that those scriptural

stories subserve the pariplava because they are stories like others, and
because the telling of stories is enjoined for the pariplava.  And from
this it follows that the Vedanta-texts do not chiefly aim at knowledge,
because like mantras they stand in a complementary relation of sacrificial
performances”.23
7.11 According to Sa  nkara’s
_ theory there is a clear-cut distinction
between the “story” (akhy  ana)
 and the “knowledge” (vidya).  This
distinction enables him to express his basic interest in the vidya.  The
Upanis. adic story – as well as the karma-kan . d. a of the Veda – subserves
the abstract teaching of the Vedanta-texts. The Upanis. adic story is a
kind of arthavada  in relation to the vidya-portion.

 nkara’s
7.12 Sa _ 
assertion against the purva-paks . in, introduced in BSBh
3.4.23, could also be levelled against Sankara  _ himself. For Sa nkara,
_ as
we have seen, all the stories are alike in the sense that they provide an
“occasion” for the transmission of the Upanisadic “teaching”. Sa  nkara
_
does not introduce a theory intended to account for the relationship of
380 YOHANAN GRINSHPON

the specific story-contents with the accompanying vidya.  In the absence

of such a theory, one can say that many stories – in their capacity to
arouse motivation and curiosity – are interchangeable with other stories
in the Vedanta texts. Cannot one embed the teaching of Yajn~avalkya
to his wife Maitreyı in the occasion (or “textual environment”) of the
Janasruti-story? (Raikva would say, in this case, that the atman
 should
be seen).
7.13 The basic definition of the Upanis. adic story – as conceived
by Sa nkara
_ – implies the existence of two parties; one eager – or
made eager – to learn, the other transmitting the vidya.  The one who
knows enlightens the one who does not. The applicability of Sa  nkara’s
_
definition of the Upanis. adic narrative depends entirely on this condition,
namely, the existence of two parties, unequal in their knowledge.
8. Is the tale of the competition between Yajn~avalkya and his brahmin-
colleagues according to BU 3 similar to the ones mentioned above,
the narratives selected by Sa  nkara
_ as characteristic of the Upanis. adic

story? The stories of Maitreyı, Janasruti and Pratardana are certainly
characteristic of a large sample of the Upanis. adic stories. Indeed, many
other stories – such as, for example, the famous teaching of Udd alaka

to his son Svetaketu, 24 or Yama’s teaching the vidya  to Naciketas25 do
 _
essentially fit Sankara’s theory of the Upanis. adic story. As suggested
above, all the stories of this kind share one essential characteristic; the
transmission of the vidya is made from one who knows to one who
does not.
8.1 The narrative that unfolds in the third section of the
Br. hadaran. yakopanis. ad is often significantly different. Clearly, according
to BU 3.7.1, Uddalaka as well as Yajn~avalkya know the string upon
which all beings are strung, and also the identity of the inner controller.
Thus, there is no thirst for knowledge on the part of one of the parties
to the competition. The listener or reader of the story is not encouraged
to know the vidya,  but rather to find out who the winner in the fateful
competition is. Thus, the contents of the Upanis. adic knowledge are
withdrawn into the background, making room for a new focus of atten-
tion. The conflict between Yajn~avalkya and Uddalaka seems possibly
to represent not only an inter-personal clash, but a controversy as well.
Thus, new questions seem to be asked, substantially different from,
and competing with those focused on the contents of the vidya. 
8.2 At least with regard to Uddalaka and Bhujyu (who received their
knowledge from a Gandharva) it is obvious that Yajn~avalkya shares
precisely in the same knowledge as they have. Thus, in the case of BU
 THE UPANIS 
: ADIC STORY AND THE HIDDEN VIDYA 381

3.3.1–2 and BU 3.7 there is no transmission of knowledge at all. The

party which receives the teaching knows it already.
8.3 Some of the sub-stories then, told in BU 3, cannot be understood

simply as an occasion for the vidya-transmission. The questions pertinent
to this context do not concern the contents of the vidya,  but rather
Yajn~avalkya’s capability to answer them. Will Yajn~avalkya prevail?
Will he find the right answer? Will he discover the vidya imparted by
the Gandharva (and thus known already to Uddalaka and Bhujyu)?
Need one be possessed by a non-human being such as a Gandharva in
order to find truth? In fact, such are the questions which come to mind
with respect to most of Yajn~ avalkya’s encounters with the brahmins in
the BU 3.26

8.4 Thus, the occasion of the vidya-pronouncement becomes the

foreground, and the vidya-contents the background. The Upanis. adic
story in this case can hardly be said to “subserve the vidya”  in the
 _
sense in which Sankara’s choice of Upanis. adic stories could be said to
do so. On the contrary, the “story” (akhy ana)
 seems to substitute for
the vidya explicit in Yajn~avalkya’s abstract speeches another “hidden
 This second vidya is implied and reflected upon primarily in
vidya”.
and by the story itself.
9. In fact, the narrative of Yajn~avalkya and his colleagues strongly
suggests that from a certain point of view, the teacher who is about
to expound the vidya (Yajn~avalkya) is the one who does not know.
For most of the sages present at the conference initiated by Janaka,
Yajn~avalkya pretends to know, and consequently does not know. Even
Vidagdha S  akalya, Yajn
~avalkya’s adversary at the end of the series of
challengers in the BU 3, still seems to preserve and express – at his own
risk – the basic presupposition concerning Yajn~avalkya’s ignorance.27
9.1 In his anxiety over, and hunger for knowing the answer to the
basic question – will Yajn~avalkya prevail? – the listener/reader of
the story moves from curiosity over the contents of the vidya to the
wish to know of Yajn~avalkya’s success. In this sense, the listener –
whether present at the competition or reader of the story – identifies with
Yajn~avalkya’s predicament and ignorance. When Uddalaka addresses
Yajn~avalkya, he is sure Yajn~avalkya does not know. For how could
he? the Gandharva did not tell him.
9.2 In the course of the competition, however, Yajn~avalkya finds out
the answers to the challenging questions addressed to him. Thus, the
story of Yajn~avalkya is that of his self-transformation, from a person
who – initially – does not know into a sage who does.
382 YOHANAN GRINSHPON

9.3 The underlying theme – the “hidden vidya”  – of the entire third
section of Br. hadaran. yakopanis. ad is Yajn~avalkya’s personality and –
implicitly – self-transformation. This vidya competes with the explicit
one visibly present in Yajn~avalkya’s abstract and beautiful speeches.
The astonishing fact and thus center of the story is that Yajn~avalkya
knows, not what he knows. Can Yajn~avalkya know truths such as that
about the string upon which all the creatures are strung? Can he know
the inner controller? Can he find out the place to which the Parıks. its
had gone?28 Can he tell the atman  29 in clear-cut, direct and descriptive

terms? Can he know how many gods there are?30 Can he know how
the yajamana overcomes death and reaches beyond time?31
9.4 The questions addressed to Yajn~avalkya are interesting indeed.
The vidya expressed in the answers is not commonplace. Yajn~avalkya’s
exposition of the secret of immortality and nature of the Self, the
peculiar difficulty – or impossibility – of approaching the Self, etc., in
BU 3, are among the most beautiful in the Upanis. adic literature. And
yet, given the structure and features of the story, the “primary”, explicit
vidya is of secondary importance. Yajn~avalkya’s power of finding truth
is the center of the story.
10. Each encounter of Yajn~avalkya’s with his brahmin-colleagues
involves a story and a vidya.  Some of the sub-stories seem to fit Sa  nkara’s
_
definition of the Upanis. adic story. These are the cases in which the
brahmin who is Yajn~avalkya’s colleague seeks to be enlightened, to
know something he does not know. Thus, for example, the encounter

of Yajn~avalkya with Artabh aga (BU 3.2) includes a very short teaching
(vidya) 
 and a story. Artabh aga asks about the fate of man after he dies.
Yajn~avalkya says that this is a secret, not to be told in the presence

of all the others. Yajn~avalkya and Artabh 
aga exit. Now comes the
exposition of the vidya.  Yajn ~avalkya tells a certain truth about karma.
A man becomes good by good deeds, and bad by bad deeds (pun. yo vai
pun. yena karman. a bhavati, papah  . papeneti). Obviously, the sub-story

of Artabh aga’s secretive meeting with Y ajn~avalkya may be seen as an
occasion for the transmission of the vidya.  The listener is motivated
and prepared for an enhanced openness and reception of the vidya, 
 _
much in accordance with Sankara’s definition of the Upanis. adic story.
Other sub-stories seem significantly different. Obviously, Uddalaka’s
encounter with Yajn~avalkya is such a case.
10.1 Thus, there are apparently some sub-stories in which
Yajn~avalkya’s party to the dialogue knows the answer, and some in

which he does not (in the latter cases, he truly seeks knowledge rather
than Yajn~ avalkya’s defeat). It seems likely, that the hostile opponents
 THE UPANIS 
: ADIC STORY AND THE HIDDEN VIDYA 383

of Yajn~avalkya do know the answers to the questions they address to

Yajn~avalkya, while the others – the more “innocent sages” – do not
know the answers to the questions they ask. Asvala, Bhujyu, Uddalaka
and S  akalya belong to the first group. Artabh
 
aga, Us. asta and Kahola
belong to the second. 32

11. All the sub-stories in BU 3 focus on Yajn~avalkya’s character.

Beginning with Janaka’s question about the most learned brahmin,
through the sages’ non-assertive behavior, Uddalaka’s vicious attack on
Yajn~avalkya, Gargı’s clear-cut assertion of Yajn~avalkya’s superiority,33
up to the hostile encounter with S  akalya (who lost his head as a
result of his defeat), Yajn~avalkya’s character and particularly his self-
confidence loom large as the central theme of BU 3. Even the cases where
 nkara’s
Sa _ definition of the Upanis. adic story seem to hold, Yajn~avalkya’s
personality competes with the vidya as the true center of the story. Take
for example the two beautiful dialogues, with Us. asta Cakrayan. a34 and
Kahola Kausıtakeyi.35 These dialogues, however attractive the vidya
included therein, present Yajn~avalkya as the calm and powerful teacher
at the center of the narrative. Although the vidya transmitted to Us. asta
and Kahola is most probably new to them, Yajn~avalkya’s method of
instruction is the prominent issue of BU 3.4-5.
12. Thus, the two definitive features of the Upanis. adic story and vidya
unfolded in BU 3 are clear by now. The story exemplifies Yajn~avalkya’s

personality and self-confidence; the vidya-contents recede to the back-
ground. How are these two features related?
12.1 Confronting Uddalaka who relies on the Gandharva-possessed
woman, Kapya’s wife, and Bhujyu Lahyayani – who retrieves the
knowledge transmitted by the Gandharva-possessed daughter of Kapya
– Yajn~avalkya is mysteriously original in his methods to obtain
knowledge.36 He resorts to the Veda, of course. He shares the mental
culture of the other sages. However, throughout the story of BU 3 he
is literally original – knowledge partially but significantly originates
in him – as no other scholar is. Indeed, in his intellectual fight with
Uddalaka, Yajn~avalkya’s originality comes through most explicitly.
Uddalaka outlines the premises of the controversy by telling the story
of the Gandharva, for how else could he have obtained the Gandharva’s
inaccessible knowledge? If we accept Uddalaka’s definition of the situ-
ation, Yajn~avalkya had to find by himself, or discover anew (by his
own resources) the at first inaccessible truth.
12.2 Yajn~avalkya is presented as a Vedic scholar of a certain inde-
pendence; active, self-transforming, tapping his resources to obtain
knowledge. In this there seems to lie the root of his self-confidence.
384 YOHANAN GRINSHPON

He, apparently, can seek and find truth “by himself”. This capability of
Yajn~avalkya’s is the underlying theme of the entire BU 3. And thus,
 nkara,
unlike the stories selected by Sa _ the circumstances of knowledge-
transmission become more important than the vidya transmitted. The
story reflects on Yajn~avalkya as a revolutionary sage of the Upanis. adic
culture.
13. The nature of the knowledge is – in correspondence with the
nature of the “knower” – also transformed. Rather than being “given”,
it is “discovered” and “found”. Such self-discovered knowledge inspires
confidence and assertiveness on the part of this boastful knower,
Yajn~avalkya. Unlike Sa nkara’s
_ definition of the Upanis. adic story as
subservient to a given, pronounced and abstract vidya,  the story of
Uddalaka, the possessed woman and Yajn~avalkya is suggestive of a
vidya embedded in the story itself. The story of BU 3 contains this
hidden vidya about the possible transition (transformation) of one great
sage from being dependent on some external source for truth into being
self-possessed and self-confident.

NOTES
1 
As Sankara  a (BUBh 3.2).
comments: plutir bhartsanarth
2
BU 3.1.
3
This seems to be the only verbal exchange between Yajn~avalkya and Uddalaka
in the Upanis. ads.
4
H. Oldenberg, The Doctrine of the Upanis. ads and the Early Buddhism. Trans. by
S.B. Srotrı, rep. 1991, p. 40.
5
See P. Olivelle, Upanis. ads, p. 41.
6 
Sankara suggests, that one of Yajn~avalkya’s interrogators, Bhujyu Lahyayani, thinks
that since the Gandharva is a supra-human (divya) being, one who had not received
this knowledge from such a source cannot know certain truths. The Gandharva told
the brahmins secrets inaccessible to humans, and since Yajn~avalkya had not been
present at the moment, he cannot know these truths (sa ca gandharvah. sarvam
asmabhyam abravıt. Tena divyebhyo maya labdham . jn~anam.
 
Tat tava nasti. Ato
nigr. hıto ‘sıty abhiprayah
 . ).
7
tac cet tvam  n~avalkya sutram
. yaj  avidvam. s tam 
. cantar-y 
aminam 
. brahma-gavir
udajase murdha te vipatis. yati.
8 
This is how Sankara interprets Uddalaka’s bitter remonstration to Yajn~avalkya’s
praise of himself (“I know, I know”) (veda vedeti atm  anam
 . slaghayan).
 
Sankara
paraphrases Uddalaka’s harsh words as: What is all this boast for? You should rather
show your wisdom by deed (kim tena garjitena? Karyam  darsaya).
9
Uddalaka is the spiritual hero of the Chandogyopanis. ad, an offshoot of the Sama-
Veda. Yajn~avalkya is the outstanding sage of the “White (sukla) Yajurveda, of which
the Br.hadaran. yakopanis. ad is an offshoot. See P. Olivelle, Upanis. ads, p. 31.
10
See SB 11.4.1. Some brahmins of northern India identify Uddalaka as a particularly
gifted brahmin, who could undermine their authority. They choose one of them to
be the leader in the forthcoming brahmodya.
 THE UPANIS 
: ADIC STORY AND THE HIDDEN VIDYA 385
11 
After Uddalaka answers 31 questions, his interrogator (Sauceya) asks 10 more
questions.
12
The questions presented to Uddalaka in this context focus on the “meaning” of the

details of the agnihotra. Thus, Sauceya asks about the “real nature” or significance of
the cow, the calf, the milk, spoon, etc. and also of the significance of the sacrificer’s
motions such as the pouring of water, wiping the spoon or looking in a certain
direction.
13
See W. Halbfass, Tradition and Reflection, 1991, pp. 323–28.
14
ChU 6.1.1.
15 
SB 11.6.1.
16
According to ChU 5.3-10 and BU 6.2.
17
For a comparison of the teaching of Yajn~avalkya and Uddalaka, see Th.J. Hopkins,
The Hindu Religious Tradition, pp. 42–45.
18
P.D. Mehta, Early Indian Religious Thought, 1956, p. 87.
19
The eight persons who meet Yajn~avalkya according to the story in BU 3 differ
in their attitude to their rival, Yajn~avalkya. Some are apparently hostile (Asvala,
Bhujyu, Uddalaka, Sakalya). Others are more accepting (Artabh  agı, Gargı). Others
(Us. asta Cakrayan. a, Kahola Kausitakeyi) seem to challenge Yajn~avalkya but to be
willing to receive important – and new – teaching from him.
20
BSBh 3.4.24: tatra tatra samnihit

abhir ekavakyat a dr. syate prarocanopayogat
 pratipatti-saukaryopayogac  ca.
21
Thibaut’s translation of BSBh 3.4.23.
22
P. Olivelle, Upanis. ads, p. 216.
23
Thibaut’s translation of BSBh 3.4.23.
24
ChU 6.
25
KathU.
26 
The case of BU 3.2, where Yajn~avalkya reveals to Artabh aga the secret of karma
is different. See below.
27
See BU 3.9.
28
This is Bhujyu’s question to Yajn~avalkya, according to BU 3.3.1-2.
29
See Us. asta Cakrayan. a’s demand for such a description in BU 3.4.
30
See Sakalya’s famous questions in BU 3.9.
31
See Asvala’s question in BU 3.1.
32
As to Gargı Vacaknavı (BU 3.6 and BU 3.8), I am not sure. But it seems likely
that she is a judicious sage, who undergoes a change of heart (transformation), from
being one of Yajn~avalkya’s challengers (BU 3.6) to being a sage who recognizes
his greatness (BU 3.8).
33
BU 3.8.
34
BU 3.4.
35
BU 3.5.
36
We do not know how – according to the story-telling – Yajn~avalkya tapped his
own resources.

Tel-Aviv University
Tel-Aviv
Israel