Thread by @shrikanth_krish

There is a tendency within Hindu society to view the Shruti as internally consistent

In this traditionalist view, the Upanishads are not a historical development that arose in reaction to the ritualism of the earlier period, but works that are consistent with the karmakAnDa

Endorsed this view in the past.

And that's defensible given that modern Hindu practice regards both the ritualism of the Veda and the brahma vidya of Upanishads as sacrosanct

But a counterpoint can be made for a historicist interpretation

Nowhere is this counterpoint more easily made than by examining the contents of the famous MuNDaka upaniShad मुण्डक-उपनिषद्

One of the principal Upanishads, though not quite among the oldest. Usually dated to the period post Buddha

Now this Upanishad is famous because one of the mottos of the Indian Republic - "Satyam Eva Jayate" (Truth alone triumphs) is borrowed from this text

It is a text that is usually regarded as a part of the Atharva Veda

But today, I came across several verses in it (through a thread from @RangaTheDude ) that are curiously critical of karmakAnda

This raises questions on whether traditionalists overstate the "internal consistency" argument w.r.t. the Shruti

Let's take some extracts from the muNDaka upaniSad that do betray this critical spirit

तस्मै स होवाच। द्वे विद्ये वेदितव्ये इति ह स्म यद्ब्रह्मविदो वदन्ति परा चैवापरा च।।1.1.4।।

Here's the translation - "There are two kinds of knowledge to be acquired - the higher and the lower - this is what the knowers of the import of the Vedas say"

Here's Shankara's commentary on it -

The very next statement is more intriguing -

तत्रापरा ऋग्वेदो यजुर्वेदः समावेदोऽथर्ववेदः शिक्षा कल्पो व्याकरणं निरूक्तं छन्दो ज्योतिषमिति। अथ परा यया तदक्षरमधिगम्यते।।1.1.5।।

Here's Shankara's commentary again -

What I find intriguing here is the explicit attempt to distinguish "lower" and "higher" knowledge, and the almost direct declaration that the 4 Vedas (presumably the brAhmaNas and saMhitas constitute "lower" knowledge.

It suggests a spirit that is somewhat critical of KarmakAnda

A few statements later we find this -

इष्टापूर्तं मन्यमाना वरिष्ठं नान्यच्छ्रेयो वेदयन्ते प्रमूढाः। नाकस्य पृष्ठे ते सुकृतेऽनुभूत्वेमं लोकं हीनतरं वा विशन्ति।।1.2.10।।

Translation -

Here's Sankara's commentary on the same

I found these statements to be very fascinating as they represent one of the few instances possibly where the Upanishads are not taking too favorable a view of the earlier layers of Vedic religion

A possible nAstika cultral influence critical of Vedic ritual? Maybe

Reference -

upanishads.iitk.ac.in/mundaka?langua…