Please see description

¶ … ta and what role does it play in Vedic society?

According to Zaehner, the term "?ta" signifies "right order" and "truth" in the Vedas. In the later writings, "?ta" will be called "dharma." The word captures an essential aspect of Hinduism: the idea of the existence of a cosmic, general order on which the human order depends. The Vedas emphasize the correspondence between the microcosm and the macrocosm or between the world of men and the absolute world of the gods. The concept is crucial for the understanding of the roots of the four Indian casts or social classes, namely the priests or ?shis, the warriors or Kshatriyas, the peasants or Vai-yas and the servants or?

udras '. As Zaehner notes, this fourfold structure of the human society is reflected in a similar classification of the gods, highlighting thus the importance of the idea of an universal order that structures the world. The god Varuna is preserver of ?ta, as cosmic law or truth. Thus, essentially, ?ta is at once the supreme law that governs the universe, the law that operates in sacrifices and rituals, and the moral law that governs the world of men.

2. Explain the significance of the Purushas-kta hymn in the Rig-Veda.

Purushas-kta is the hymn that describes a very important myth of creation in the Rig-Veda: the creation of the world through the self-sacrifice of a primordial being- Purusha, the giant man. According to this myth, the world is not created by a god through the ordering of previously existent matter, but by the self-immolation of Purusha, who divides his own self, forming everything that exists. In this myth, as Zaehner observes, god and matter are one and the same thing. The importance of the myth lies again in the correspondence between the parts and the whole, between the individual man and the plenitude of the universe. The myth directly links the human microcosm with the macrocosm. Another very important element is the idea of the primordial sacrifice, which is the basis of Hindu sacred rituals. Zaehner shows that the sacrifices performed in ritual symbolize the "repetition of the creative act"(43). Differing from other religions that also involved sacrifice as a propitiatory act, Hinduism attributes cosmic importance to the sacrifice, which points to the correspondence between the one, the individual and the many. The human order also springs from this sacrifice, as the four classes of men are shown to originate in different members or body parts of the primordial, giant man, thus: the Br-hmans came from his mouth, the Kshatriyas or warriors from his arms, the Vai-yas or husbandmen from his thighs, and the ?dras or serfs from his feet. The rest of the world, with its physical coordinates is also formed from different parts of Purusha.

Why does the Taittir-ya Upanishad describe Brahman as food?

Brahman is a central concept in Hindu thought: it is matter and spirit at the same time, the absolute and the manifest. As such, Zaehner shows that Brahman is conceived of as breath and food at once, the breath being the life or the spirit that animates everything and the food the living matter. Breath is thus dependent on food, on the matter that sustains it. The beings in the world are not only the eaters of food but also the food eaten by others. This emphasizes again the relationship between the parts and the whole: to be eaten by others is to be integrated in the whole, to be one with the plenitude of the world: "O rapture, O rapture, O rapture! / I am food, I am food, I am food! / I am an eater of food, I am an eater of food, I am an eater of food!" (52) This conception of the world, advocating the union and communion with the whole, is essentially different from that classical Yoga, in which the supreme truth is to be attained through detachment of the self from the whole.

4. Define the doctrine of rebirth or transmigration. How is it associated with the doctrine of Karma?

The doctrine of transmigration constitutes one of the most striking differences between the Semitic religions and Hinduism. Hinduism thus holds that, after death, soul is carried away by Agni, the god of fire, who burns the material cover, leaving the spirit free to be reincarnated in another being, which can be a man, an animal or a plant. There are three categories of souls: the soul that can perceive ?tman, the soul that performs its duties of sacrifice and asceticism and the soul that is ignorant of both. The first is liberated from rebirth, the second returns to this world in human form, while the third is condemned to the life of an insect or reptile. Thus, it is obvious that there is a very strong relationship between the concept of transmigration and that of 'karma' or act, as men are reincarnated according to their acts in the previous life. Every sacred act produces its appropriate result or 'fruit'. Thus, the basic idea is that there are certain appropriate acts for every category of people, for example, the act appropriate to a Br-hman is sacrifice and the study of the Veda, but the act appropriate to a Kshatriya is the waging of war, that of a Vai-ya is to till the soil, while that of a?

dra is the service of the other castes. As Zaehner shows, the doctrine of karma is inextricably connected with that of transmigration because it is held to explain the inequalities of birth as well as the suffering of the innocent.

5. How is the concept of Samsara related to the Hindu notion of time?

Samsara is held to define life itself, as an endless cycle of rebirths and suffering, therefore as something evil from which liberation or moksha is sought. Zaehner explains the meaning of this concept and its relation to the Hindu notion of time by citing a parable, according to which a man who hovers over a great pit (that symbolizes the endless chain of sufferings and rebirths) tries to cling to a tree, but then observes that its roots are being nibbled away by white and black mice, which symbolize the days and nights of the all-consuming time. Man is thus caught in the endless cycle or rebirths, in which nothing is permanent except change and decay. Therefore, life with its three goals k-ma, artha, and dharma-'desire or pleasure, the acquisition of wealth- has to be transcended through moksha.

6. Using the example of Yudhishthira in the Great Epic, describe the apparent tension between dharma and moksha.

Dharma, as the concept defining righteousness in the real world is in obvious contradiction with moksha, which represents a transcending of life itself, and therefore of dharma as well. In Mahabharata, Yudhishthira is the dharma-r-ja or, 'King of Righteousness', and thus the very embodiment of dharma. Nevertheless, he is constantly forced by Krishna to do actions that are contrary to his dharma, among these being the extremely bloody battle described in the poem, which is meant to give him back the throne of his kingdom. In spite of his righteousness and superiority, Yudhishthira cannot attain moksha yet precisely because he is still concerned with the opposition between good and evil and with dharma, or the right conduct, while moksha lies beyond these things. Thus, the king is not ready to transcend his own karma, and therefore he cannot relinquish his dharma yet either, but must wait to be "ripe" for that. Even the righteous persons have to go a long way before the final liberation from samsara and the attainment of moksha.

7. Why is Samkhya considered dualistic? Discuss in detail the Samkhya system.

The Samkhya, literally meaning 'enumeration', divides existence into twenty-five categories, of which twenty-four are evolutes of prak-ti or Nature, all of them thus subject to change, and the twenty-fifth is purusha, the 'person' who is indestructible and not subject to change. The system is therefore considered dualistic because it perceives the world as both natural and absolute at the same time. The Samkhya is a monadic system, from which the doctrine of the Yoga sprang later. As opposed to the Upanishads that emphasized the union of the self with the whole, the Samkhya proposes the contrary: moksha can only be attained through total isolation of the self from the rest of the world, to the point that it can become an independent entity that imitates the absolute unity of the divinity. Thus, for the S-mkhya, purusha, the spiritual essence, and prak-ti are entirely distinct. Furthermore, nature is a feminine element, while purusha is here the masculine spirit. As Zaehner points out, the twenty-four categories of Nature are, besides Nature herself, mahat, the 'great', also called buddhi, 'consciousness' or 'intellect'; akhamk-ra, the 'ego-principle'; manas or 'mind'; the five sensory organs (sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch), the five 'motor' organs (speech, handling, walking, evacuation, and reproduction), the five 'subtle' elements which correspond to the five sensory organs (the objects of sight, hearing, etc.), and the five gross elements which are said to proceed from the five subtle elements (ether or space from sound, air from touch, fire from sight, water from taste, earth from smell). (68) Nature is further divided into three essential gunas, sattva, rajas, and tamas or 'the quality of being, energy, and darkness'. These elements enumerated by the Samkhya will be considered fundamental in the later literature.

8. How does one attain the highest goal of Samadhi in Samkhya-Yoga?

The Samadhi or the state of absolute 'concentration' of the soul into the soul, or of the self in its own self, can be achieved by the Yogin under the direction of a competent Guru, as a state of pure isolation from everything in the world, and even from God himself. The complete detachment can lead to an isolation of the "I" or the individual consciousness in everything, and a pure dwelling of the self in its own essence. According to Zaehner, this state can also be described as a "sleepless sleep." Also, this state requires more than mere omniscience, in which one knows and is everything at the same time: it is therefore even beyond what is usually seen as supreme knowledge.

9. What is the doctrine of Maya and how does it relate to the monistic concept of moksha in Advaita Vedanta?

The term maya literally means 'illusion' or 'appearance.' According to Zaehner, it was introduced by ?ankara and it was meant to describe the apparent relationship between the one and the many. There is a very telling simile usually used to illustrate the concept of maya: that of a rope which one may take for a snake in the dark. The 'snake' is imposed on the rope through the creative 'ignorance' of the person who perceives it. In a similar way, men confuse the real things and the essences, for their appearances or the objects that surround us in the real world. Maya defines the phenomenal world as a dream, an illusion shared by the entire collectivity of people, who have not yet attained liberation. God himself is the author of m-y?. The m-y? Of the Advaita corresponds exactly to the prak-ti or Nature of the Samkhya but the difference is that prak-ti is a separate principle independent of soul while m-y? In the Advaita is a collective hallucination. If it weren't for maya, all the souls would realize that they are one and not many, not a multiplicity. The Advaitin, therefore, does not mean that the 'soul merges into Brahman as a river merges into the sea, but that it realizes itself as it eternally is, that is, as the One Brahman- ?tman.' (75) the liberation or moksha is thus achieved only through isolation of the self, of the unity or individuality into its own essence.

10 R.H. Zaehner explains that Shaiva Siddhanta tradition holds that people suffer from the three fetters. What are they? Briefly explain each one.

The Shaiva Siddhanta is, according to Zaehner, nearer to Christianity than any of the Hindu systems, since it represents God as love, and holds that all the actions of God spring from his love for all the creatures and for the world itself. In the ?aiva Siddh-nta existence is divided into pati, pa-u and p?

a, that is, the Lord, his cattle and the fetters with which the latter are bound. These fetters are three in number, as Zaehner explains, and are as follows: m-y? which is real and without beginning in time, karma, the acts of individual souls and their good and evil 'fruits', again without beginning, and ?nava, literally 'the quality of being minute' which, being the principle of individuation, keeps the soul shut up within itself. The last of the principles mentioned is antagonistic to God, and prevents the ultimate liberation. The soul is seen as totally dependent on the divine will, without which it cannot act, being permanently fettered into the world of the real.

11. According to Zaehner, the Bhagavad-Gita revolutionized the concept of dharma. Why does he say that?

The Gita is one of most important Indian writings. Moreover, as Zaehner puts forth, the Gita represents a downright decisive turn in the history of Hindu thought. Before it, man believed that the best course was to act according to his dharma, while at the same time keeping his mind focused on the eternal being or Brahma. The Gita brings a new conception of the way to truth: the steps enumerated so far form only a preliminary stage during the accession to truth: the real way is fulfilled not through detachment or indifference, but through a loving communion with God: "Give up all the things of dharma, turn to me only as thy refuge. I will deliver thee from all evil. Have no care." The purpose therefore is actually to relinquish the dharma itself and strive to become Brahman so as to be able to draw near to God. The love of God and the total devotion of the self to God is the essence of the "secret doctrine," as the teaching is called at the end of the Bhagavad-Gita.

12. Highlight Zaehner's conception of Shiva as depicted in the Upanishads and the Mahabharata.

Zaehner points out that the word ?iva means 'mild' or 'auspicious', but oddly, this attribute is not among the most prominent ones for this god. Unlike Vishnu, ?iva is wrathful and unpredictable. As a favorite activity, Zaehner shows, Shiva loves to haunt the cremation-ground, clad in elephant-hide or tiger-skin, his neck encircled with a necklace of skulls, with serpents in his hair.(84) He is extremely austere, and one of its most important attribute is the third eye of wisdom, situated above the bridge of his nose. He is wedded to Parvat?, the 'lady of the mountains', precisely because she too performs the fiercest austerities. Another side of his character though, might describe this peculiar god as the opposite: is also the natar-ja, the 'Lord of the dance." The dance symbolizes first of all the very joy of creation and of existence. However, Shiva also performs a dance that represents the destruction of the world. Thus, Shiva is in fact reconciliation of all opposites: he is the creator, but he also breeds destruction, he is gentle but also terrible, he is evil and he is good at the same time. Moreover, in him, the masculine and feminine principles are united. Thus, Shiva is a contrastive god, with many attributes and many opposite features, representing precisely this fusion between opposites.