Katha Upaniṣad (1-3)

02/10/2026 · Tue/Thu 10:30-11:45 AM · Brad Bannon · Boston College

📄 Synopsis

This session serves as a keystone for the course, bridging early Vedic rituals with the wisdom of the Upanishads and preparing students for the Bhagavad-Gītā. The class explores the narrative of Naciketas, a young seeker who is sent to Death (Yama) by his father, Vajashrava. Through the dialogue between Naciketas and Yama, the instructor highlights the distinction between shreya (the eternal good) and preya (the transient pleasant), noting that while they are not always mutually exclusive, the wise person chooses the path that leads to the permanent. The discussion also examines the symbolic 're-membering' of the cosmos through the construction of a hawk-shaped fire altar, which represents putting back together the primal person (Purusha) who was divided at the beginning of time. The instructor emphasizes that the desire for wisdom is itself a sign of wisdom, as seen in Naciketas' rejection of temporary worldly boons in favor of understanding the nature of the Self.

⚡ Key Takeaways

The Katha Upanishad acts as a keystone text that connects early Vedic concepts like the Purusha Sukta to the later teachings of the Bhagavad-Gītā.
Shreya represents the eternal good that leads to spiritual growth, while preya refers to the temporary pleasures that often distract the seeker.
Wisdom in the Upanishads is frequently portrayed as being held by the young, such as Naciketas, rather than the elderly, reversing traditional social assumptions.
The three boons granted to Naciketas represent the fulfillment of existential debts to parents, ancestors, and the ultimate quest for the nature of death.
The fire sacrifice is interpreted as 're-membering' the cosmos, symbolically putting back together the primal person (Purusha) who was divided at the beginning of time.
The construction of the hawk-shaped altar serves as a symbolic act of gathering the many pieces of the universe back into a unified whole.
Moksha involves a realization of the enduring and permanent reality that exists in the midst of constant transformation and change.
The dialogue between Yama and Naciketas illustrates that the pursuit of wisdom requires both a capable teacher and a disciplined, sincere student.
The text distinguishes between the transiency of material objects, which last only until tomorrow, and the permanent nature of the ultimate reality.

🎤 Transcript Tap any timestamp to jump the audio player

Opening Breath and Meditation

Brad

Alrighty. Let's take a moment, put screens and things away. Take a moment to just be.

Student

It.

Brad

Let's take a breath together. Go ahead and breathe in and out. Word. I don't know about you, but I found myself breathing in sync with the beeping, which was nice because it was about 60 beats per minute. So right on target. Let's. Let's get, you know, more circular. So move the tables, move everything. It. ⚠

Student

Are you more likely to see me here if I sit over there?

2:06

Administrative Notes and Quiz Update

Brad

You're fine either way they see you, Andrew. All right, We're. We're not. We're not doing a quiz today for various reasons. One, this is a little bit longer reading and I don't know, I feel like a quiz is mainly intended to focus your attention on the most important things. But every freaking thing in this chapter seems super important to me. As you know, Advaita this class many times over the past decade and change, and they've all been a little bit different. But in some of them, I've used the Katha Upanishads and in some of them, I haven't. And every time that I haven't, I've regretted it. So I feel like this is a really keystone text. I kind of, in fact, kind of organized this chapter around the Katha Upanishads I mean, this unit around the Katha Upanishads. And this. The Katha really, really has a huge impact on how we should read the Bhagavad Gita. And really, this course this semester is all about reading the Gita and the Gospel of Mark. So everything before spring break is just geared towards preparing you to read those texts well.

4:21

Introduction to the Katha Upanishad

Brad

And this is one of those texts you can't really read and understand what's going on in the Gita. I feel like without this text and this text, I think to really understand it well, you have to know the Purusha Sukta and the Aitory of Ramana and the text that we've already read. So it's kind of a. You know what I mean by keystone, right? Keystone is like if you're building an archway, then keystone is like the one in the top, right. That kind of keeps. If you don't have the keystone, it all falls down, right? So you need that keystone. But it's also a little bit of a turning point. So yajna I. Yeah, let's. Let's dive in. Let's give you a chance in your small teams just to kind of get things talking, to get things moving a little bit, you know? Kind of get the juices flowing and the words flowing and the conversation flowing. So let's take a few minutes in your teams or just people around you. It doesn't have to be your teams, but kind of organize your thoughts and figure out what you want to say. ⚠

Brad

And then we'll kind of go more or less through this chapter, maybe even start with the introduction. But obviously most of our attention will be on the Katha Upanishad itself. So. Yeah, I don't know. Take. Take five minutes or so and organize your thoughts. Yeah, go for it.

Student

Just.

9:06

Student-Led Discussion: Shreya (The Good) vs. Preyas (The Pleasant)

Brad

Yes. And then he was just like, wait, this is still, like, maybe temporary. Already. Shall we. Shall we hear from our leaders for today? Who wants to get us started? Maybe something on either the intro or on volume one? Yeah, Andrew. Well, go ahead. Whatever you want to. What do you want to bring up? I was talking about how it was ⚠

Student

kind of interesting about when they were talking about how you would do the sacrifice, like building the altar. It's kind of like putting together that, like, primal person that split apart in the very beginning. I just thought that was interesting to talk about.

Brad

Okay. Yeah. Great. Yep. Definitely connected. Yeah. Others. Yeah. Brent.

Student

I was very interested in the point about the shreya, the good versus the pleasant.

Brad

Okay.

Student

Where that reminded me of a point I read in Perspectives last year where Plato is like, you have the form of the good and the good itself, where you can be working towards something good that might not actually be good or might be temporary, or you have the thing that is, like, truly eternal and always good. And I just thought it was an interesting way to think in parallel to other things that other cultures are talking about, too. ⚠

Brad

Okay. Yeah, Good. There's also a shrutis allegory in that. Phaedrus. Yep.

Student

Kind of going on that point. I thought it was interesting that they said performing an action that's shreya will always be preyas person. And that kind of goes back to the Rambachan point that one will always never highlight satisfaction in materials and never have satisfaction in the preyas, but we'll always have satisfaction in shreya, because that's not, like, temporary.

Brad

Yeah, well, so let's. Let's interrogate that a little bit. So they're not mutually exclusive for sure. Right. But does that mean that something is. If something is shreya, it's automatically preya. So can we think of examples where. Let's start with things that are both. Right. Can you think of examples that are both shreya and Freya? Anyone? Yeah, Luca, maybe like family, like you

Student

Know, it's pleasant to be around your family and kind of share in the joy, but it is also, like, good because it's like they're not. They're both together at the time.

Brad

Same.

Student

Because it is also something kind of noble and almost. I don't want to say holy in a sense, but kind of holy in a sense.

Brad

Okay. All right. Even more concretely thinking about actions. So, like, can you think about particular actions that might be both helping people, uplifting people who, like, need help? I think that's, like, good, but it also feels good.

Student

Feels pleasant to, like, help people.

Brad

Okay, can you be a little bit more specific? Like, give an example of helping people or giving food to the homeless person. Okay, so if you're giving food, then you're sacrificing food, so you don't have the food. Presumably you're going to keep some food. Right. So, like, you have enough food for yourself, but you're giving away. So then eating food is obviously preyas. Right. It's obviously, you got to eat food or you die. So. And if it's good food, then it's pleasurable. But giving food to somebody who's hungry is obviously shreya. Right. Because then that's not benefiting you, it's benefiting that person. So on the one hand, I mean, if you're. As long as you aren't giving away all of your food, then it can be both. Right? Yeah. And so there's something that feels good about helping people. So that's also preyas. Right. So good example. Can you think of an example that would be only. Well, I mean, we can think of lots of things that are only preyas. Right. What's a thing that's only preyas and not shreya? ⚠

Student

Yeah, like just relating back to this weekend, to super bowl, like winning the super bowl full preyas. You don't really get any stray out of that. You're not helping the greater good by winning a championship.

Brad

Yeah. I mean, pretty much doing anything that, like, you enjoy doing, that doesn't help anybody and doesn't harm anybody. It's just a thing you like doing. Right. Watching football, watching Super Bowl. It doesn't. It doesn't. It doesn't harm anybody. It doesn't help anybody, but it's enjoyable. Right, so clear example of preyas. That's not shreya. Can we give an example of something that's shreya but not preyas? Yeah, Pierre.

Student

I mean, I guess, like, maybe if you're volunteering, like, you're not physically getting it like material satisfaction. You're not going to get enough money or payment for that, but you're helping others. Like that is for the common good. And also like you might get some sort of internal satisfaction, but it's not any immaterial.

Brad

Okay, so that's coming back to kind of like what Luke was saying. Right. So it's still. You still makes you feel good. Right. So there's still an aspect of prayer there. Yeah. Think back to your analogy about food. It's.

Student

If you didn't have any food in

Brad

reserve, like if you just did it for the sake of the action, that you lose the, I guess the pleasure

Student

of having your own food to like

Brad

fill your own body. Yeah. Or. Yeah. Or if I was. I don't know if there was a hungry lion. Right. And I need to feed the lion. I didn't have anything around except for me. And just feed myself to the lion. That would not be preyas, but I guess shreya. I don't know. Can you think of other less weird examples? I guess what I'm going for is like if you're. If you sacrifice yourself. Right. If you give up your own life for the sake of somebody else. Yeah, Anna, Sure. Especially if it's like an organ that you need to stay alive. Right. So like giving up. I don't know. Yeah. If I were to sacrifice myself in order to. Have you ever seen the movie? I think it's £7 or something like that. It's Will Smith where he gives up. Yeah. He basically commits suicide in order to donate all of his organs to a bunch of people in need. That would be sort of. shreya. That's not. Still get in prayer, but you remember like the stage of your life where you're a forest dweller or whatever, and then. Okay. ⚠

Student

Kind of just give everything away.

Brad

Okay, sure.

Student

And I guess you can benefit wisdom from that, but you've given away a

Brad

lot more than like, you g. Okay. Yeah, definitely. So, I mean, you're right. You're giving up everything. But there is the benefit that. That hopefully comes out of that stage is moksha. So. So you're going off into the forest, you're giving up everything. That's absolutely right. But then hopefully you're going there in order to sort of attain wisdom or to attain enlightenment. So there is a benefit there. But. Yeah, I like that. Yeah, good. There's that settlement of sacrifice there. All right, good. We can keep thinking about this. We don't have to come up with more examples, but I think really important that they're not mutually exclusive and they're not identical either. So an action could be one or the other. Good. We kind of jumped to volley two. We want to go back to a little bit to volley one. So what is the situation here? If I only gave you the Katha Upanishad and not any introduction, I think you'd be pretty confused about what's going on in the text. 8. So let's. So what it. What's the. What's the story? Can somebody give us sort of a story? Yeah, Katie. ⚠

17:14

Analysis of Nachiketas, Yama, and the Three Boons

Student

So you said it's similar to that and that N. Yeah.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

So his father's doing a ritual where you have to like, give up everything good. But he's trying to cheat the way and he's trying to cows that like cats at its last meal and like, things that aren't like, pure good. So he kept asking his father, like, oh, like, where are you going to send me? Where you going to send me? And like, I was anger. The father was like, oh, I'm going to send you the death.

Brad

Yeah, he.

Student

I have a question. Like, does he kind of just like, accept that?

Brad

Yeah, he seems to just. Absolutely. He's like, okay, yeah. All right.

Student

And then he goes to Yama, which is death, and then he stays for three nights and then they're like, oh, it's a bombing guest. And he's like, oh, wow, like, I didn't like, take care of you or like, give you food, so I'm going to give you three boons, like, in replace of that. And so Nachiketta like, asks for the three boons. The first one being like, reconciliation with his father when he like, goes back. The second one being the fire sacrifice, being like, oh, what happens after that? Or like, what is like beyond that.

Brad

Yep.

Student

And then Yama kinda explains like, oh, like, are you sure you don't want, like, wealth and like, other tangible things?

Brad

Tries to talk him into other things. Yep.

Student

He's like, no, like, this is what I want.

Brad

Yeah, excellent. Great. Yeah. Lots of things to unpack there and to add into there. But that was great, Katie. Thank you. Others. Yeah. Lauren

Student

Is something that takes a lot of action and thought towards because his father kind of doesn't understand or believe in what he's doing. It's kind of like an empty sacrifice.

Brad

Yeah. There is a. Thank you. Yeah. There's a really common trope in, in many of the. Many of the Hindu stories, like this one, which is especially in the jnana marga, which is what we're doing sort of the Path of knowledge and wisdom. Whereas that wisdom we normally. In our everyday sort of assumptions, we tend to attribute wisdom or wisdom seems to go with age. Right. People that are older tend to be viewed as wiser. People that are younger tend to be viewed as more naive. Right. Is this a common assumption? But very frequently in these. In these texts that. That will be reversed. And so here we have Naciketas who's quite young, you know, how old? I don't know. I think of him like 18, 19, something like that. Like a college freshman, sophomore, that sort of thing. Whereas his dad is. Well, not that. Right. His dad's quite a bit older, but his dad does not have the wisdom that Naciketas has. Naciketas is the one with the wisdom. Obviously. Yama, he still has a teacher, right? So he's still. He's not. He doesn't know everything, but he's. He has a wisdom.

Brad

You know, wisdom is different than knowledge. Right. So he has a deep wisdom. He has a deep appreciation. And part of, like, what Katie was saying, where Yama is trying to talk him into these other things, like, don't you want this? Don't you want lots of hot women? Don't you want lots of wealth? Don't you want to be like master Lord, you know, like kids, king of a huge valley and. Right. Ask for normal things, man. Like a PS5 or something. Right. Like, what do you. Why are you asking for wisdom? Right. But he already has wisdom, so he's. The wisdom that he has enables him to pursue more wisdom. Right. And so even the desire for wisdom is already a sign of wisdom, if that makes sense. Right. So as Socrates said, right. If I am wiser than other people, it's because I know my own ignorance. Right. So he knows the limitations. So Naciketas likewise knows his own ignorance. Good. Other things. Yeah. ⚠

Student

Kellen, going back to that, like, the idea of the kid is the more wise one.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

And the flipping rules is that to almost inspire other children reading this or like how you said you had to memorize, like, one of the sections when

Student

you were growing up.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

Is that to kind of inspire that wisdom or like. Because that's. That's how I interpret it when we were talking about it in our group.

Brad

Yeah, I think so. I mean, the way I tend to read almost all of the scriptures, but especially the ones that. That we're reading right now, most all scriptures are taught by parents to children. Right. And you're teaching these texts to your children because you want your children to have Certain attributes, you want them to have certain characteristics. You want them to be good, virtuous people. Right. So you're trying to teach your children what to value and what not to value. Right. And so I. Would you. Yeah, that's how I read it. Right. So you want your kid to hear this story and say, I want to be like Naciketas Yeah.

Student

Is there an aspect, too, of, like, if you are a parent teaching it to your kid, is there an aspect of, like, oh, like, humility to Uddalaka not automatically more wise than the person I'm teaching this to?

Brad

Is that. Yeah, for sure. I think there's a certain arrogance in Vajashrava, the father. Right. So Vajashrava is like, I. I can. I can. Right. He's trying to cheat the system. He's trying to. And there's a certain arrogance in that. Right. And. And definitely a good deal of humility in Naciketas So. Yeah. Good. Others. Yeah. Anna, I have a question.

Student

Like, why is it that Naciketas like, has this, like, wisdom? And, like, his father goes and, like, is he, like, chosen to have this wisdom? Like, how does he just, like, have this, like, want for more, just, like, pleasures?

Brad

Yeah. Great question. I mean, I don't. I don't think that we can get an answer from the text on that question. Definitely. That's something that different people would answer different ways. But what is it about Naciketas that makes him wise? Because I think we could say it ain't his father. Right. So he doesn't learn it from his dad. So what is it? And there's no mention of mom anywhere around here. So. Yeah. So it's not clear what makes him wiser than other people. Yeah.

Student

Yeah. So back to the, like, the beginning of the story itself. I was trying to read it, like, without your introduction at first. And I think the only thing that actually helped me is, like, the beginning that shows the actual, like, gap between understanding what is, like, religious form and what is the religious truth. So I think the Naciketas he's, like, he shows his wisdom from the beginning by understanding the religious truth and not like his father, who understands only four.

Brad

Okay, yeah, great. I love that. So what is the truth that he understands here, particularly about sacrifice? What's the truth of sacrifice? What?

Student

I think he understands that you need to be, like. It needs to be, like, quality.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

If you're about quality, you know? So, yeah, he says that his dad wants to give cows that have drunk their last water eating Their last grass yielded their last milk. So he considers it as a, like, poor kind of sacrifice. And it's not an actual, like, voice of gods and so on.

Brad

Exactly. Right. So I mean, to sacrifice is to give up something that's valuable. And if so, when I take my trash out right at the end of the week, that's not sacrificing. I'm not sacrificing my trash to the garbage can. Right. Which is basically what he's trying to do. He's like, hey, I'm giving up all my trash and calling it a sacrifice. Right. Whereas Naciketas is like, well, you ain't got anything valuable except me. Right. So to whom are you giving the actual valuable thing? Yeah. Good. Others, Let's look at these. Verse 1.5 and 1.6. So maybe one of our leaders maybe reads those two verses. Yeah. Callan, go for it.

Student

Of many, I go as the first. Of many, I go as the middle. What work of Yama is there that he will accomplish through me today? Look back to those who came before. Look forward to those who came after. A mortal ripens like corn, and like corn he is born again.

Brad

Okay, great. So thank you. So, yeah, so let's try to unpack that, especially verse the first half of verse five. So of many, I go as the first. Of many, I go as the middle. Anybody have any insights about what you think that might mean?

Student

Yeah, this is one that's coming for a bit. I kind of took it as him accepting death. Like, of many people, I'll be the first one to die.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

But for another group of people, I'll be the middle person. I'm just almost an insignificant significant spec.

Brad

Yeah, excellent. Yeah, absolutely. 100%. Anybody want to add a little bit to that? So. Yeah. Or just explain it a little bit more. So then of the many, I go, definitely I go to death. Right. So it's about death. So of many, I go to death as the first. So who are the many that. Yeah, Brent.

Student

Well, he's young, so he's like 21, 22. So in that age group, like, that's. He's probably going to be one of the first people in his age group to die. Obviously, there was shorter life expectancy back then, but that's still a young death.

Brad

Yep. Good. Yep. On the right track, for sure. It doesn't even have to be that age group, but it could just be. Yeah, go ahead.

Student

Even if that age group or not, like, people always die before. So it's like, why I'm gonna Die eventually. Might as well now. Might as well make this sacrifice. I think it's very much expected that death happens. And it's like, why not now?

Brad

Yeah, exactly. So when he says of many, I'm the first, it's like, of many, we're all. I mean, all of us, spoiler alert. Are going to die. Right. We're not hopefully going to die at the same time. Right. So if I were to die right now, I would be the first of many. Meaning y' all are going to die too. I just went first. Right. And of. But then what about the last one? The second one then? So of many, I go as the middle. Yeah.

Student

Brent, People died before and people die after.

Brad

It's the same thing. Right. Just sort of like I'm the first one among the people that are alive, but I'm not the first one ever. Right. So I'm not the first, I'm not the last. Everybody dies. And so he's pretty chill about the whole dying thing, right? I mean, of course he comes back. So it's easier to be chill about dying if you're gonna come back, if it's a round trip, but good, you know. Anything else on folly one?

Student

Yeah, I think it's verse 110 in my notes.

Brad

At least.

Student

Nachi Pisa is using a third of his brooms or the first.

Brad

Sorry. Yeah.

Student

And he uses it to ask for his father's peace and joy and his father to recognize him.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

Comes back. And that reminded me of what we talked about at the very end of last class and how there's the three deaths.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

And it kind of reminded me of

Student

the first debt to his parent.

Brad

Yeah. Because.

Student

Because he's using something really big. Obviously he can do anything with that boon, but he's doing it to repay his father for, like, raising him for, you know, even for sacrificing him to Yama. So I felt like it was a good example of a different path.

Brad

Not paying it forward, but paying it right on. Almost like I intentionality taught that to prepare you to read this text, right? Yeah. Crazy good coincidence. Great catch for sure. So you've got the. So the three debts, right? The debt to parents. And so here he's like, bro, I have to say this, right? So, like, I maybe didn't have the same college experience as a lot of you. Meaning I barely got through. I just. I was kind of like, I had. I enjoyed the hell out of college yajna What does it have to do? Naciketas Let me say it this way, Naciketas Would. I mean, I was in a fraternity. He was. He would not have gotten a bid, right? So he's like, not the guy that you want to invite to, you know, to Walsh on Saturday night. And he's like. He'd be the guy that. Be like, hey, guys, I think we should turn the music down. And, hey, I don't think you should smoke that here. That kind of thing, right? So he's like the. You know what I mean? He's like the, hey, dad, you're not doing the sacrifice, right? ⚠

Brad

Like, he's a little bit of. You know what I mean? Yeah. You know, people like that. So I don't know. You know, God gives you three. Get three wishes. Like, you could wish for anything that you want. What would you ishvara? Honestly? Like, what would you wish for if you could. If you had three wishes? You can't wish for infinite wishes, but you can wish for whatever else. What would you wish for that your asshole of a dad that just sent you to hell would be happy? Like, nobody would wish for that, right? No. And so. Yeah, but he fills this debt, right? So, okay. Gotta repay that debt. Right? And then what was the other debts? So debt to parents, debt to.

Student

Yeah, ancestors and teachers.

Brad

Ancestors and teachers. So does that relate to these other boons? What is this? Fire sacrifice. He wants to do this fire sacrifice, right? You know that fire sacrifice which leads to heaven? Explain it to me, for I'm full of faith. So this is a sacrifice that involves paying tribute to the ancestors, right? So you're performing this sacrifice? Pretty much. I mean, most sacrifices are for the sake of the ancestors, right? So you've got to give these gifts to someone. You've got to pay homage to your grandparents, Great grandparents. You know, the people, the founders, the creator, creators and that kind of stuff. Right, the people, your ancestors. All the way we explained ancestors the other day. And one of the way you pay honor. You pay homage or honor the ancestors is through, you know, ritual. So rituals like, you know, so you could look in other traditions, like Day of the Dead, Dia de los Muertos, or. I mean, so many other things where you commemorate your ancestors, remember your ancestors. I mean, President's Day, right? Martin Luther King Day. I mean, these are times when we're set aside to honor our ancestors. Right? ⚠

Brad

So in this case, though, what is the. And we have to read between the lines, which means reading the commentaries. Right? So the Hindu theologians who comment on the text, how do they describe this sacrifice? I think I have it there in eight, one, two. Yeah.

Student

Kaylin, it's like a remembering of the universe. Like if the Crusoe was a dismemberment of the universe, this is like the altar is, like, built brick by brick, and it's supposed to represent, like, time in the cosmos. And so you're putting the universe back together.

Brad

Exactly. Right, yeah. So then in that dismembering, we said, right, The. The milk becomes the curds. Right? The one becomes the many. But. So it's no longer one, but it still is the many. But this is a symbolic or literal act of remembering, putting those pieces, those members, back together again. Right? And. Yeah, absolutely. Well said. Right. So this. The cycle continues then. Right? So the one becomes the many by ceasing to be one. And yet there is a way, isn't there? Right. Like, we are many different. We're all different, right? We're many different bodies. We're many different people. We're many different individuals. Right. Those that cannot be divided into two. But could we work together? Are we working together right now? Thinking together? Right. If we're working. If you're on a team, right. Then you can work as a team together, right? So that's the many becoming one, Right. Whether you're on a financial analyst team, or you're on a surgical team, or you're in a volleyball team. Right? So that many working together, many doesn't have to work together. Right. You could just all be doing your own thing. Right? Zero sum game. ⚠

Brad

Screw everybody else. I'm going to get mine. Right? Or you can work together as one. So the many coming together or remembering the different pieces. Right? As one. See what's going on there? Right? So the one and the many again, coming back, as we saw in Rambachan. And so many. So many of these texts. Excellent. Okay. It's. It's. It's kind of cool that it's. That's in the shape of an eagle, isn't it? Kind of, yeah. Actually, it's usually translated as hawk, but I found one translation that said eagle, and I just grabbed onto that because, you know, I don't know. Boston College. The mascot here is an eagle. So cool. Should we shift to volley two? Oh, wait, well, we didn't talk about the third boon. Okay. No, Volley two is where we get to the third boon. Yeah. Others, Anybody? Any team leaders we haven't heard from yet? Anybody that just wants to dive in here, jump in here? Yeah. Anna, I have a question. Yeah? ⚠

Student

Comes in. How does he know that he's going to come back and that he's going

Student

to Be messed up.

Brad

I mean there doesn't seem to be any doubt in his mind, right? Yeah, I mean I. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I mean but based on the story, based on what you just read, it doesn't seem like he has any doubt in his mind, right? Yeah.

Student

Like I thinking like maybe he thinks like when he comes back like in a different form. Cuz like before this he says like immortal R is like corn. Like corn. He is born again.

Brad

So he's not saying like as he

Student

comes back like as his physical, like his same like self, like as something else. Like he's welcomed by his father again.

Brad

Yeah. Word. Yes. Yeah, yeah.

Student

I forgot to mention the like when brahmana guest enters a house like fire. So basically brahmana stays without food for three nights.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

And it shows discipline that the text later demands when for example Nachikita, he refuses to take any like of those, let's say like prayer.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

Stuff. And he said like these things last only until tomorrow. So it's again he shows his discipline but at the same time wisdom and.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

I think it's just interesting.

Brad

Yes, good. The transiency, Right. The temporary versus the permanent. Right. And so yeah, we talked a couple chapters ago about the conservation of, you know, conservation of energy. And so matter and energy are neither created nor destroyed but in constant transformation. Right? So from when you kind of samhita, everything stays the same, right? So there's a permanency in the, There's a permanency in the midst of change, right. So there's sort of the changing. Hey, everything comes and goes, right. Kind of like on Anna's point about like is he going to be noticing again or is he just going to be another union a huge. Of the spirit and the matter. Right. But so on the one hand the same spirit, the same purusha. Because there's only one. Right. But on the other hand not this guy anymore. Right. So then we could see, you know, John Gere's like being your body, your everything that makes you you as I mean finite. Right. You have a beginning and an end. But maybe something about, I mean your atoms and molecules, what makes you up, that's not going to go away.

Brad

The energy that you, you know, just transforms. Right. So then, so whatever it transforms into the form is temporary but the thing that's being transformed is permanent. Right. So then it's trying to get at the distinction between that which is temporary, subject to change. Right. Versus what is more permanent and enduring. Yeah. Excellent. Yeah.

40:28

Theological Investigation of Advaita, Atman, and the Knower

Student

Katie, in the second reading, I thought what was interesting was how the Yama says, or it says that is brahm and that the ultimate like goal is like. It's not like out there, it's like within yourself, that's present in everyone. But it's like with the right discipline, like he said, the right mindset, you need a good teacher and you also need to be a capable student yourself to be able to want that. So I thought that was interesting that like. Like how I got it was like. I feel like technically anyone could do it or find it. If you have the right senses and like the right discipline, everything.

Brad

Absolutely. This is open to anybody. Right. To a matter of realization or understanding or wisdom. Right. Which anybody can attain. It's not. Yeah.

Student

And I have like a slight question. So it says that like the ultimate reality, it's like. Or like the self, it's like not like. Like something tangible. So like. And like the reading we have for the nature of the otment, is it kind of like that when it says like rather than like bliss, meaning like happiness? It's more like have, like having the source that allows you to be content or in control of that feeling. Or is it not like that?

Brad

Okay, I think I got lost in the question. Just ask it in.

Student

So it says that like the self, it's not like more so being like, oh, you're happy. It's more like you're kind of like. It's like. It's like soundless, it's touchless. It's like that.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

Is it like you kind of have that, like contentments of like, that's not really like bliss happy?

Brad

Yeah, the bliss partial. I mean, it's. I almost wish he hadn't included that section because it's so technical. But no, no, you're on the right track. It's a good question. Let's dig into. And I don't mean to avoid it. So try and get the simplest version. Is that what he's trying to say is that bliss is not happiness because happiness has an opposite. Right. So happiness is defined by its not being sadness or something. Right. So happy and sad are mutually constitutive correlates. You can't have one without the other. They're opposites. Right. Whereas bliss is non dual. So it can't have an opposite, so it can't be opposed to anything. Does that make sense? So that's kind of what he's trying to say. So from. I mean, going back to Jean Guerre's point. Right. So then if there's something enduring, something permanent, something unchanging. We'll call that, you know, the one. Right. And then there's the constant transformation, matter into energy, energy into matter, form into this form transformation, all those kind of things. Milk into curd, all that kind of stuff. Right. Then let's given that. Right. ⚠

Brad

Then this one person, the purusha that became the many, and the Purusha Sukta that we read a couple of weeks ago is that one still. Does it still exist

Student

in many forms?

Brad

Maybe. So, yeah, I think that's the Right. I think that's. I mean, you can answer it simply. Right. So you can't strictly say yes or no. You can say like yes, but in many forms. Right. So it doesn't exist as one, but can maybe be understood, you know, from a wisdom perspective as one. So it can be. But when you realize that, that you are that one, I mean, when you realize the non duality of that one, you also realize that you are that one. Right. So like you are the 10th person. Right? Is that, See where that goes? Yeah. Lauren.

Student

Yeah, I thought it was like interesting with that, like wisdom was kind of revealing what has like already been there and like always was there.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

And then I thought, I wasn't sure how mo was not attaining something new, but was proving ignorance around. I think we talked about earlier this semester, how do you panishize when things would block you from seeing it? ⚠

Brad

Yes.

Student

And this is the example. That's an example of how.

Brad

Yes, good. So one of the things I emphasize, especially when we read Rambhachand, the class after we read Rambochan, was that Adoita is really about epistemology. Right. So it's really about the relationship between the knower and the known. So. So the knower cannot be known. That's just grammar. Right. Grammar, logic. The knower cannot be known. Right. Brent's a knower, Brad's a knower. I can't know Brent as a knower. I can only know Brent as an object of my knowledge. I can say Brent's a knower, but I can't know Brent as a knower because if I could know Brent as a knower, I'd be Brent. Right. Does that make sense? samhita samhita yeah.

Student

What if you are Brent?

Brad

Does he know himself as the knower? Okay, so I can't answer that question simply either. Right. So if there is only one knower. So from Ajta's perspective, the self is the knower, period. The knower, one singular. Right. One knower. And so from one Perspective. The knower is Brad. Brad is not the knower. The knower is Brent. Brent is not the knower. No, I said that backwards, didn't I? Brent is the knower. The knower is not Brent. Yeah, that's correct. Brent is the knower, but the knower is not Brent. Brad is the knower, but the knower is not Brad. A square is a rectangle, but a rectangle is not a square. Yeah. Fear.

Student

So you're saying that, like, the knower is partially within all of us.

Brad

Like, we each have, like, a part

Student

of it, but, like a part of that warm whole. But, like, doesn't mean that I'm the knower. Doesn't mean that the knower is me. But each of us having a part of the knower within us.

Brad

Very, very, very close. There's. So there's a huge debate within it why whether or not there's a reason they don't teach it as part and whole. But I think any student on the path to understanding it is going to eventually be like, okay, so it's a part and whole. So it's a little bit different than part and whole. Right. In the same way that, like, your. Your foot isn't just a part of you. Right. I mean, lost your feet, you'd be slight. You'd be more than a little bit different. Right. So you're like, your feet aren't just a part of you. They are you. Right. But you aren't your feet. Your feet are you, but you aren't your feet. It's really close to part and whole. If part and whole gets you, part and whole will get you. Yeah, that's what my gurus used to say. Like, part and whole will get you 90% of the way there. Yeah, Brett. ⚠

Student

So if I'm a knower, can I also, like, can I also know myself? Because in the reading, I feel like the atman, like the first step to moksha, is understanding who you are. So it's like, can you know yourself as the knower too?

Brad

Yeah, I think so. Yeah. So you can only know yourself as a knower, but what we usually experience ourselves as a knower is, is as a knower opposite or opposed to everything else. Right? There's I and then not I. Right. I and then God I and then not I. Right. So then I know myself as the knower, as the I. Right. But the I only makes sense in opposition to the not I. The knower only exists in opposition to the known. Right. So if we take it ontologically right, we Talked about like the coin example. Right. The top and bottom of a coin. So the top and the bottom of a coin are not the same thing, but they're also not two different things. Right. So then you could say Brent and the knower are not two different things because you are the knower, but you're also not the same thing because Brent and Aiden are not the same. Getting there, right? We're getting there. We got. We. We're get. We're making progress. Yeah. Others questions or anything? Yeah. ⚠

Student

I wanted to point out the one thing that stood out to me. It's like, comes in the beginning and overall it shows that the whole text is like redefine success, I would say. So even heaven, which would be like the ultimate goal, in earlier Veda religion, it is treated as temporary.

Brad

Yes, it's very important. Yes.

Student

So Nachikera, he's not rejecting pleasure because it's like bad. I think he rejects it because it's just limited. And the text, overall, it seems to argue that anything that is conditioned by time, it just cannot be the final and ultimate goal.

Brad

Really important. Really important. Thank you. Yes. So one of the significant differences maybe between at least some forms of Christian theology and some forms of Hindu theology is that, at least in this tradition, it's very. It's insisted quite frequently that finite actions can only have finite consequences. No finite action can have infinite consequences. So finite actions have finite consequences. And so there's. What do you call it? Every action has an equal and opposite reaction, right? So I can't do something, let's say I can't do something that has infinite consequences, right? So. So if I do go to heaven, if there's a heaven like after death, then that's only going to be temporary, right? Because, like I'm this much good, so I go to heaven for this much time, or I go to hell for this much time to pay for my sins, but still those are finite, right? So then it's just seen as another part of the cycle, Right. So then it doesn't lead towards the ultimate, it doesn't lead towards the infinite, because it's just fine. Exactly what you said. Really?

Student

Yeah, Kellen, but then if you're actively doing things to unlock that seeing, then wouldn't that still be finite? Because you're doing actions to reach that goal, Even if you're thinking about it, even if you have the wisdom, aren't you still actively thinking about it to reach that infinite goal?

Brad

So if I'm understanding you right, then based on what I just said, Finite actions can only have finite consequences. So therefore there is no action that I could take that would lead to the infinite. Is that kind of what you're saying? Right. So then, yeah, if we. Yeah, let's actually go back to the introduction here where I have this thing on chakra. Right. So it's just, it's super short, but chakra gives these two, these two different etymologies to the word Upanishads And actually these are kind of reversed. He really says the primary meaning is that Upanishads means completely destroying ignorance of the self. Right. So it doesn't give knowledge of the self, it destroys ignorance of the self. Right. So those are two very different things. Right. So yeah, what did I say here for Shankara? One cannot possibly have knowledge of the self because the self is the knower. And. And the knower cannot be an object of knowledge for those reasons. Right. Because that requires a distinction between subject and object. So then what I would need to do then is negate.

Brad

So then that leads us to process of negation which we'll continue to talk about more and more this semester. But then. So it's more of an unsaying or a negation. And apophases is the technical term. So that I'm destroying. Let's think about that term. Ignorance. Right. It's chosen with great care. So what does it mean to ignore something? I mean, yeah, if you don't take

Student

it into account, you kind of just

Brad

don't. Attention. Yeah, attention is a good, is a good word here. Yeah.

Student

Dan, you can also sometimes choose to

Student

be ignorant to something or ignore something like you know it's there and you

Student

know, it could be a big deal or be a game Shankara in whatever situation, but you could choose to ignore

Student

it and push it off to the side.

Brad

And in fact, if you're doing science or something, right. You really have to ignore everything. I'm going to focus my attention on this slide or petri dish or whatever. Right. And I'm going to literally ignore everything else. Right. Cut out all the distractions so that I can focus on it. Yeah. Others. Yeah. To just act like it doesn't exist. Right. So I'm just going to focus my attention on this thing that's in front of me. Yeah. Others. Yeah, yeah.

Student

I think this is like very important point. So when it starts to talk about knowledge in this text, it shows that it's. It's not only about like learning more information, it's about more like removing ignorance. And this explains why Yama, he said that the self isn't attained through study or intelligence and liberation. It will happen only when false attachment or like identification with the physical body and the senses, it just goes away.

Brad

Yeah, so identification is an important word there. Right? So then again, like, I am not identical with my body, right? So who I am, I mean, that's not to say that my body is not me, Right? I mean, it is, but it's just not identical. Right. So then there's more to me than just my body. And that more to me is the self, the self of all beings. Right? So the self that is Jongir and the self that is Brad is the same self. And to the extent that I identify myself with my body, to that extent I'm ignoring the self as Rangir. Right? And then so in order to. So what the Upanishads does is destroy the ignoring. So I'm ignoring the fact that. That the self is Zhangir. Right. So then the Upanishads doesn't tell me Djangir is the self. It tells me to stop ignoring the fact that Zhangir is the self. Does that kind of.

Student

Yeah, this makes sense, actually.

Brad

Word. Yeah.

Student

Logan, in 3.5 and 3.6 and 3.7, it says, he who is without stimulation, his senses are unmanageable and he is who is full of discrimination. The mind is always controlled and he was without discrimination, stuck in the samskara So that doesn't that kind of go against the thing about breaking down ignorance,

Student

the whole key point?

Student

But it isn't implying it in a way of like, you need to have ignorance enough to get rid of the majority of your ignorance in that sense, like, you have to have ignorance of what's going on around you in order to have awareness of the self. Or is it meaning discrimination in the way of conviction?

Brad

I'm not totally sure if all of the question, but let me. Do you want to try again or. Yeah, yeah.

Student

Is it like. Is it saying that the discrimination is like, you need to have a certain semblance of ignorance of maybe what's going on around you in order to be aware of your.

Brad

Yourself?

Student

Or is it saying that discrimination is like, you have to have a strong conviction of like, your. What your goals are for wisdom or obtaining them.

Brad

Okay, I think. I think I got it. So then let's say I wanted to know. Say I wanted to teach somebody what Boston College is, right? So then somebody comes up to me and like, they, like, what is Boston College? Right? They come up here in this room, right? And they're like, what is Boston College. What would you do? So they were like, show me Boston College. And you'd probably do something like, this is Boston College. Right. So then you try to point, and they'd be like, what are you pointing at? Right? And I'd be like, well, that. I mean, is that that table in the center? Is that Boston College? Colin saying no. Eve saying no. Anybody say yes? I mean, is it Fordham or Lasalle? It's not, right? Yeah. It's one part of Boston College. Right. So it's neti neti Boston College. Can we say that it's neti neti Boston College, but Boston College is not that. So then if I were to say. All right, so I want to. I want you to focus on Boston College.

Brad

I want, you know, in order to explain what Boston College is, I'm going to say, well, it's that table is Boston College, but Boston College is not that table. Right. So you kind of need both of those sentences. But then I wouldn't want more. Right. Then what if I say, well, that clock is Boston College, but Boston College is not the clock. Yeah, but what if I say. Point to Iona and say, Iona is Boston College is Iona. Boston College shouldn't be in this room if you're not. Right. So. But Boston College is not Iona. See what we're getting? Right? So then if you were to say Boston College, and you were to go and you were to take somebody on a tour of Boston College and you show them every single part Boston College, but you don't point to yourself. Trying to lead you to sort of the 10th person parable. Remember the parable of the 10th person? Right. So then, like, who are the 10? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. And then the woodcutter laughs. Right. And says, you are the 10th. Right.

1:00:07

The Chariot Allegory (Shrutis) and Sense Control

Brad

Starting to put the pieces together here. Word. I definitely want to turn our attention to the shrutis allegory since we're running out of time. So let's shift our focus. I mean, I definitely want to answer any questions, too, if there's any questions, but it's obviously not unrelated, though, so. Yeah. Anybody want to get us started? Yeah.

Student

One part that I thought was really interesting is how the shrutis was then. That was then turned into the fact that we are the fire altar.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

And how the ultimate goal is to control your senses, which are the horses in the shrutis so yourself is able to get home and reach the knowledge of the self is how I perceived it. And that's done through the practice the.

Brad

Of yoga. Yeah, Yoga. Yep. So, like, yoga is. I first Introduced yoga, sort of that. I used the horses analogy. Right. So, like, you've got two horses. In this case, we've got five. And the five horses are, you know, seeing, smelling, your five senses. Right. But they're kind of yoked together, and they're yoked by the mind to. To yourself or your intellectual. Right. Yeah. Great. Others. Yeah. Callum.

Student

I thought it was a good analogy from the sense that in order to fully know the self, you have to make sure everything's in order. Like, if the horses aren't in order, you'll fall off the shrutis You won't go where you have to go if the shrutis not right, that you'll break, the horses won't even be able to pull you.

Brad

Right.

Student

It was a good. Good collective. Everything is important to each other.

Brad

Word. Yep.

Student

In a similar sense, it's not directly the same, but kind of at the end of the reading, like, talking about kind of the harmonizing of all the different kind of things, like, if you play everything kind of out of tune, it doesn't sound right, and. Which is kind of the same thing. Like, you know, if you have one or two of your senses in check, it's not going to work. Once you have everything kind of working

Brad

together, you kind of have your senses going in all different directions. Right. To your point, like, my hearing is going over here and my eyes are going over here. And, you know, just your attention could be divided in a lot. Right. That's add. It's like my existence. Right. So then, like. So if you had five horses, Anybody do horse riding or shrutis Anybody drive chariots or shrutis racing? No, it's not such a common experience. Yeah. But if you can imagine. Right. How do you think you would do if you've never had any experience with horses? If I put you in a shrutis and handed you reins, that went to five. Five horses. Right. And you had to control five horses just using some reins, how do you think you would do? Not great. Yeah. Where do you think the horses would go? Would they go where you want them to go? Where would they go?

Student

Different ways.

Brad

Wherever the hell they want to go. Right. Yeah. So this is the point. Right? So then the. The objects of the senses are the paths that they range. Right. So 3.4. The senses, they say, are the horses, and the objects of the senses are the paths that they range over. Right. In other words, like, you see something or you smell something that smells good. Right. Then you go towards that thing that smells good. Right. If you see something that's attractive to you, Then you go towards that thing, right? If you, you get the idea, right. So we're drawn or attracted towards things that smell good or taste good or look good or whatever. Right? So but you can control that, Right? So then you can control your mind, control your senses. So the mind is a way to control the senses. It doesn't control what you see, but it controls where you go. Right? And then so that leads us to the intellect as the charioteer. So I guess we can this case imagine the charioteer holding the reins, right? So the charioteer can either just.

Brad

If you're a bad charioteer then you go wherever the horses want to go. And the horses are going to go towards whatever they're attracted to. Right? So good smelling things, good looking things, good sounding things, you know, whatever is going to fill that sort of temporary attraction, temporary forms. Right. But there's something else curious about this shrutis Anybody are familiar with the Phaedrus dialogue? The shrutis allegory? Plato's shrutis allegory from the Phaedrus dialogue. That one I teach in my philosophy class and that one has two horses, horse of logic and the horse of desire. Eros. And then the charioteer is still the intellect, so that part's identical. And so in Plato's allegory sometimes you go towards where you logically discern or logically reason that you should go. Sometimes you go towards whatever you feel like doing at the moment. Right? Like if I want to be healthy then I should eat a salad. Right? But most of the time at the end of the day I just want to smoke a salad. So like those sort of things, right? So there's the temporary desire and then there's the longer term logic or whatever. Right?

Brad

That's Plato's allegory. But here we've got not two horses, not logic and desire, but we've got five horses, right? The five senses still got the charioteer, the one that's making decisions, the intellect, the Buddhi in this case. But then we've also got what, one other piece? Well two significant, another significant difference is the body. Plato's shrutis doesn't have the body. Plato doesn't care. At least Socrates not a big fan of the body. But here the shrutis is the body. Yeah, Shangir. Yeah.

Student

I think like this shift from like altar then to the shrutis is like key because the earlier Vedic religion it just focuses on arranging the cosmos through ritual. And here that same order is like recreated more internally through like discipline of the mind. And then it's just like the sacrifice moves from the like, outside world or into our world. And this is the idea that you've mentioned at the end, I think that the method is just he turns inward to the self.

Brad

Yep.

Student

Yeah. And I noted for myself the first pretend. I think this is like, most important part that actually shows that Rachel turns, like, inward. And instead of like, offering objects into fire, it just shows the awareness that is like, progressively goes away.

Brad

Yeah, good. I mean, progressively, progressively goes away. I like that. Yeah. So we could think of these beyonds as kind of negations. Right. So like saying this, but beyond this. Boston College is the table, but Boston College is more than the table. Boston College is beyond the table. Right. And then so you get bigger and bigger and bigger. You could even say Boston College isn't just every person and everything on the campus. Even if we were to take the totality of everything that is here right now, Boston College is still beyond that. Right. Because none of the things and people here now were here when Boston College was founded, for example. Right. Even maybe Gassenhall. I don't know. You know. But you get the point. Right? So there's a temporal aspect that isn't captured in the here and now. So we can kind of move this as a series of. Yeah, apophatic, to use that word again. Transcendent. Right. Going higher. Right. So beyond the senses are the objects. I think here we have to understand objects as a phenomenon. Right. So phenomenon, object. Not the thing itself, but the phenomenon of the thing itself.

Brad

Right. So beyond the senses, meaning, like my eyes is the visual image, the phenomenon and, you know, visual cortex. Beyond that is the mind. Beyond that is the intellect, the decision maker. And beyond that is the great self. But let's. So then connected with that. Right? Let's go back to verse three, about three. So. So know the self, the atman, as the. I never really know what to do with this word here. This here is translated as master of the shrutis Ratan is the word in Sanskrit, which can also mean like the owner of the shrutis Yeah, I kind of like owner better. But. But we've got. The point is it's not the intellect, right? So if we think of the intellect as the I that decides, oh, I like this better than that, I choose this over that. The discriminatory, right. I that makes Callin Kalan and fear. Fear and Anna. Anna. Right. That's different than the self that's there. Right. So if we could. We could go back to the part. Whole analogy, right. Like I said, it gets us most of the way there. Then we could understand. Okay. ⚠

1:10:31

Closing and Leadership Recognition

Brad

The self of all beings, then is that rider. Another, sometimes ratan is translated as the rider in the shrutis So we've got. My point is, in this image that we've got here, right, you got five horses reigns going to the charioteer, but then you got this other person in there. Right? So you've got the intellect with the hands on the reins, but then the self that's just sort of like hanging out there. Right. So it's like two people in the shrutis Right. This is super important for. I mean, it's super important for understanding this text, of course, because it's in this text. But it's going to be even more important when we get to the Bhagavad Gita, which is a discourse that happens in a shrutis Right. So it's a discourse between two people in the shrutis one representing the self of all beings and one representing your individual self. Right. The I that is the decider, that is the intellect. Right. At least. Yeah. Questions? Cool. All right, let me make sure I got all of our leaders. Right. So was it Andrea? I had you down for Thursday. Last Thursday.

Brad

Who was the leader last Thursday? Okay, my bad. And. Yeah, Cullen. And so your group today, was it Manny? Yeah. And then. Oh, Logan. Katie. Of course it was Katie. Right. Logan. I. Are each country. My bad. That's why I asked. Right. And then Caroline. No. Kat. Yeah. And Lauren. Brent and Sean. Gear. Yeah. So for. So for Thursday, we're switching gears. Finally going to do Christian texts for Thursday. And then that'll wrap up unit two. And I'm sure you're all eager to go get in the queue for the NoCond tickets. Is that right? Is that what everybody's doing now? ⚠