Spiritual Authority and Temporal Power in the Indian Theory of Government c2.s1.14.3

c2.s1.14.3

and the royal power (= *kṣatra*) of him called the Lord (= *īśvara*) by which he controls all things" (Philo as cited by Brehier, *Les idées . . . de Philon d'Alexandre*, 1925, pp. 113-114). "*God was not Lord* until he had a creature subject to himself" (St. Thomas Aquinas, *Sum. Theol.*, I. 13. 7. *ad* 6). The "two selves" are the "two forms" of Brahma (BU. II. 3, etc.), the "dual nature" (*dvaitībhāva*) of the "Great Self" (*mahātman*) in accordance with which he participates in both the "true" and the "false" (*satyānṛtopabhogārthaḥ*, MU. VII. 11. 8), or, as this might have been otherwise expressed, in virtue of which he is the common source of Devas and Asuras, that is, participates both in divine and human experience, the Gods being the Truth and men Untruth (ŚB. III. 9. 4. 1). The trace of the divine biunity appears in the two selves of the man who is *dvyātman* (JB. I. 17, etc., see note 54). Thus the Purohita is "the half of the self of the Kṣatriya" (*ardhātmo ha vā eṣa kṣatriyasya*, AB. VII. 26), as are Sky and Earth (AA. III. 1. 2) and as is the man of the woman (ŚB. X. 5. 2. 8, BU. 1. 4. 4), and neither is complete without the other (ŚB. VIII. 6. 1. 12, cf. also V. 2. 1. 10), as also holds for Kṛṣṇa and Arjuna (Mbh. II. 20. 3 and 14). Hence the use of *sārdham*, literally "plus a half," in connection with any complementary union, as in JUB. I. 48. 7 where Prajāpati *sārdhaṁ samait*, i. e. "coupled with" Vāc.