From August Wilhelm Schlegel, Über die Sprache und Weisheit der Indier, Heidelberg, 1808. [Click on 'continue reading' below to read the original German. Expanded translation and explanatory notes to follow]
Pantheism is the system of pure reason, and to this extent it already brings about the transition from Oriental to European philosophy. It flatters the self-obscurity of man, as well as his indolence. As soon as this great discovery is made --this all-encompassing, all-denying, and yet so simple system of knowledge and rational wisdom--, that all is one, then no more seeking and inquiring is needed; everything that others know or believe by other paths is simply error, fallacy, and weakness of the understanding, just as all change and all life is empty appearance.
Of course, if power and depth of feeling are still present, and the
doctrine is truly put forth in full seriousness, then it takes on
another, wholly different and fruitful character: there then appear
those men, not uncommon in India, and so hard to comprehend by cold
observers, the martyrs of the yogis and the sannyāsis, who destroy their
own spirits of their own free will, setting up the goal of
self-annihilation as their highest good. For colder or more weakened
natures, however, this leads on the contrary to the conviction that all
evil is only fallacy, and that everything, to the extent that it is
One, is also entirely equal, a conviction that brings with it a false
appearance of exhiliration and contentment.
Perhaps however it was only in China, where pantheism arose long before
the religion of the Buddha was introduced, that something of the sort
was adopted. In other lands we find much in the generally very mixed
doctrine that comes from the worship of Śiva; hitherto the more
horribly distorted image of a terrible and destructive divinity has
been noticed among the Buddhist Tatars. In Tibet, Turner found
celebrations of Kali, the adoration of Kārthikeya and Gaṇeśa: the
entire entourage of Śiva...
If pantheism is not merely thought and disposition, as with many yogis and sannyāsis, but
rather comes forth as a more or less scientific system, then it is
never anything more than... a game of combination, which advances
according to a mere mechanism of reason, from a positive and a negative
[principle], which is fundamentally better represented by a number
symbolism such as [Chinese numerology] than words are able to do. Now
since this is found in this most ancient form of pantheism [i.e., that of China], it is very
possible that this itself arose out of dualism, through later
reinterpretation and elaboration. As soon as the doctrine of the two
principles was no longer religion, but rather system, the thought of
the two basic powers could be united in something higher...
That the spirit of the Sāṃkhya teachings is thoroughly pantheistic can at least not be doubted from the Bhagavad Gītā... In the
Bhagavad Gītā, as presumably in all of the works attributed to Vyāsa,
it is the doctrine of Vedānta, of which he was the founder, that
prevails. Thus it is this that we know best of all Indian philosophies.
That it is nothing other than a pure, perfect pantheism can easily
be seen by anyone from the translation [contained in this volume]. In the philosophical
determinateness of the original text many passages are even stronger. Yet it was, as the name 'Vedānta' [i.e., 'appendix to the Vedas'] shows, simply a
reinterpretation of the old Indian system that had been worshipped in
the Vedas.
The old text will thus leave the old conception standing, yet with
the new sense inserted, to the extent possible, and everything referring
back to that great One --the highest, Brahmā, or the object of
knowledge-- which here is defined as indifference between being and
non-being, between sat and asat. Yet there are also many passages that
go fairly clearly against the Vedas. From the immoderate praise that
the author everywhere gives to the Sāṃkhya philosophy, there seems to
emerge a true agreement in the manners of thinking [between the Vedas
and the Bhagavad Gītā].
Some authors, meanwhile, maintain that Sāṃkhya is the physics, as Mīmāṃsā is the moral teaching, and Nyāya the dialectics, while others
in contrast describe them each as different philosophies and systems,
in which connection Nyāya deserves particular attention, which along
with Mīmāṃsā is alone mentioned in Manu's Book of Laws, and along with it is classified among the Upangas.
The moral spirit of Mīmāṃsā, and the speculative consistency of Sāṃkhya, agree with the place that we have ascribed to them in the
ordering of the systems. Soon a more certain determination will be able
to be made, as we come to learn of more original Indian texts. For now
it is already a great deal that we know the oldest Indian beliefs,
which underlie the entire corpus, fairly comprehensively from Manu's Book of Laws, and we know sufficiently the doctrine of Vedānta, which
finishes off the entire system as the most recent branch of Indian
literature, and determines the fundamental character of the Bhagavad Gītā.
In general we can divide the entirety of Indian literature, for the
sake of easy overview, preliminarily into four epochs: the oldest epoch
includes the Vedas and what follows immediately after these, such as
Manu's Book of Laws. That the Veda's were here and there falsified
through particular additions is strongly confirmed by the fact that so
long ago there were already dictionaries to aid in the comprehension of
the Vedas. To the Rig Veda and the Yajurveda, which are written in
prose, is ascribed variously a cosmogonical, a magical, and a
liturgical content; to that of the Sāmaveda, which is written is
verse, is ascribed a moral content, though presumably with many
mythical and historical admixtures...
Another great epoch is constituted from all of those works that are
attributed to Vyāsa: the eighteen Purāṇas, the Mahābhārata, and the
Vedānta philosophy. Although there are more works here than a single
person could ever possibly touch, all of themare characterized by the
same doctrines and beliefs, and give no sign of differences of style,
though theirs is already so different from that of Manu's Book of Laws.
