Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c95: Section IX

History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c95

Language
English

Contents

Section IX

v7.c95.1

COSMOLOGY

v7.c95.2

All writers on Dharmaśāstra are agreed on the existence of God. They rarely enter upon the task of adducing arguments for the existence of God. Christian theologians for hundreds of years put forward various arguments pointing to the existence of God. They are briefly summarised in William James' 'Varieties of religious experience' p. 437 (ed. of 1920). The cosmological argument reasons from the ordered universe to a First Cause which must be conceived as God who must at least possess whatever perfection the universe itself contains The argument from purpose or design (teleological argument) bases itself on the evidence of purpose or design in Nature and concludes that the First Cause (God) must be a creative intellect or mind. Then there are other arguments also such as the 'moral argument' (viz. the moral law presupposes a law-giver), the argument *ex consensu gentium* (viz. there is widespread belief in God all over the world and it should carry weight).²⁴²⁹

v7.c95.3

²⁴²⁹ Vide also F. W. West-way's 'Obsessions and convictions of the human intellect' (Blackie & Son, 1938), which adds a fifth to James' four viz., ontological argument (the very idea or concept of God makes the existence of God requisite) pp. 378-80. W. James in 'Pragmatism' (p 109, ed 1910) states that the evidence for the existence of God lies primarily in inner personal experience Mr Westway (on p 374) gives a definite answer that there is no proof of the existence of God, but (on p. 387) he admits that the argument from design carries an extremely high degree of probability and that he believes that the Universe is not merely a chance-made affair as some philosophers believe. The argument from design (for God's existence) is held to have been shattered by the theory of evolution. If everything has a cause, it is also argued, why should God not have a cause? And it is said by some that there is no reason to suppose that the world had a beginning at all This is the view of famous Mīmāṁsakas like Kumārila. Vide above pp 1209-1210 and note 1963. H. G. Wells in his 'You can't be too careful' (London 1942. p. 282) holds that the idea of God's omniscience, omnipresence and omnipotence must be *(Continued from last page)* abandoned, since, according to him, these are preposterous absolutes'. On the other hand Dr. F. W. Jones in his work 'Design and purpose' (London, 1942) puts forward the view that many people are in danger of losing sight of the truth that the Cosmos is an ordered entity and that many have lost belief in the purpose of human life (p 13). The teleological argument may strengthen the faith of a person who already believes in God, but it appears that it cannot create faith in God in the case of one who does not subscribe to that view Abel Jones in 'In search of truth' (1945) holds that the three main arguments for the existence of God are cosmological, teleological and ontological.

v7.c95.4

The Upaniṣads speak of the Absolute *brahman* as the creator, preserver and destroyer of the *bhūtas* (beings or elements or both). For example, the Tai. Up. III. 1 (Bhṛgu²⁴³⁰ is instructed by his father Varuṇa) 'desire to know that from which all *bhūtas* spring, by which, after being created, they live (are sustained) and to which they return and are absorbed therein; that is *brahma*'. This is the basic text on which V. S. I. 1. 2 (janmādyasya yataḥ) is based. This means 'from which the creation (sustenance and dissolution) of this (world) proceed' (that is *brahma*). Another passage of the Tai. Up. (II. 1) states that 'from this Ātman Ākāśa sprang, from ākāśa Vāyu, from Vāyu Agni, from Agni waters, from waters the earth, from earth plants, from plants food, from food man'. A passage of the Chān. Up. states²⁴³¹ 'all this, indeed, is brahma; a man, cultivating restraint of the mind, should meditate on that (world) as springing from, ending in and breathing on account of that (brahma)'. This is the basis of V. S. I. 2. 1 (*sarvatra prasiddhopadeśāt*). Here the three attributes of brahma are creator, preserver and destroyer of the universe.

v7.c95.5

²⁴³⁰ यतो वा इमानि भूतानि जायन्ते येन जातानि जीवन्ति यत्प्रयन्त्यभिसंविशन्ति तद् विजिज्ञासस्व । तद् ब्रह्मेति । तै. उप. III. 1.

v7.c95.6

²⁴³¹ सर्वं खल्विदं ब्रह्म तज्जलानिति शान्त उपासीत। छा उप. III 14. 1. The word तज्जलान् applied to brahma is peculiar, it is explained by शङ्कराचार्य as follows: तज्जलानिति । तस्माद् ब्रह्मणो जातं तेजोबन्नादिक्रमेण सर्वम् । अतस्तज्जम् । तथा तेनैव जननक्रमेण प्रतिलोमतया तस्मिन्नेव ब्रह्मणि लीयते तदात्मतया श्लिष्यते इति तल्लम् । तथा तस्मिन्नेव स्थितिकाले अनिति प्राणिति चेष्टते इति । *Vide also* छा. उप I. 9. 1 सर्वाणि ह वा इमानि भूतान्याकाशादेव समुत्पद्यन्त आकाशं प्रत्यस्तं यन्त्याकाशो ह्येवेभ्यो ज्यायान् । आकाशः परायणम् ।.

v7.c95.7

The Vedāntasūtra of Bādarāyaṇa further says that śāstras (sacred canon or texts) are the source of the correct knowledge of *brahma*.²⁴³² To the objection that the Veda is concerned with rites, that some portions of it are meant for the praise of rites, that the Vedic mantras only remind the performer about the various ingredients of sacrifice, that, therefore, the Vedānta texts either serve no purpose at all or at the most give information about the soul of the sacrificer or the deity to be worshipped in sacrifices, the reply is given by the Vedāntasūtra I. 1. 4 (*tat-tu samanvayāt*), which means that all Vedānta texts are agreed that their purport is to establish that *brahma*, which has been postulated (in V. S. I. 1. 2) as the creator, preserver and absorber of the world has that character and is omniscient and omnipotent.

v7.c95.8

²⁴³² शास्त्रयोनित्वात् । वे. सू I 1. 3; शाङ्करभाष्य । यथोक्तमृग्वेदादिशारूत्रं योनिः कारणं प्रमाणमस्य ब्रह्मणो यथावत्स्वरूपाधिगमे । तत्तु समन्वयात् । वे सू. I 1 4, भाष्य ‘तद् ब्रह्म सर्वज्ञं सर्वशक्ति जगदुत्पत्तिस्थितिलयकारणं वेदान्तशास्त्रादेवावगम्यते । कथम् समन्वयात् । सर्वेषु हि वेदान्तेषु वाक्यानि तात्पर्येणैतस्यार्थस्य प्रतिपादकत्वेन समनुगतानि ।.’

v7.c95.9

That the argument from design also was present to the minds of the propounders of Vedānta follows from the fact that the Vedāntasūtra (II. 2. 1, racanānupapatteśca nānumānam) denies that the *Pradhāna* of the Sāṅkhya (that is postulated as *acetana*) can be inferred as the cause of the universe.²⁴³³

v7.c95.10

²⁴³³ अतो रचनानुपपत्तेश्च हेतोर्नाचेतनं जगत्कारणमनुमातव्यं भवति । शाङ्करभाष्य on वे सू II. 2. 1.

v7.c95.11

It may be noted here that, according to Śaṅkarācārya, the detailed²⁴³⁴ statements on the doctrine about creation contained in the Upaniṣads are not to be taken literally, that no special purpose dependent thereon can be found nor is such a purpose laid down by Śruti (Veda), but all those statements are intended to lead on to the knowledge of *brahma* and to expound the non-difference of the world from *brahma*.²⁴³⁵ From early times most philosophers oscillate between the doctrine of the First Principle as immanent in the universe and the doctrine that God is the creator and is transcendent. The Ṛgveda and Upaniṣads appear to postulate the first doctrine according to which the Absolute enters into it when it creates the Universe (Tai. Up. II. 6 'tat sṛṣṭvā tad-evānuprāviśat'), Chān. Up. VI. 2. 1, VI 3. 2, Bṛ. Up. I. 4. 10. They also speak of God as ruling the Universe (antaryāmin) as in Bṛ. Up. III 7. Kauṣītaki Up. III. 8. At that time there was no atomic theory. Early Greek thought also wavered between the two doctrines. Later on came the rival theory of cosmology in which atoms played a great part, that was adumbrated by Democritus (died about 370 B. C. acc. to William James in 'Some Problems', and explained by Lucretius. In India also the Vaiśeṣikas put forward the theory that the world is paramāṇus (atoms). Kaṇāda or Kaṇabhuk (lit. one who assumes or subsists on kaṇas, very subtle particles) is the reputed founder of the Vaiśeṣika system. He does not expressly say anything about God. But later medieval writers on Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika combined the two doctrines of God and atoms. As the Tarkadīpikā²⁴³⁶ puts the theory it is as follows: when God desires to create, activity is produced among the atoms, two atoms join, dvyaṇuka (dyad) is produced, tryaṇuka is produced from three dvyaṇukas and in the end the great earth is produced; of things created when God desires to bring about dissolution an activity is produced in the atoms. The atoms are eternal and infinite in number.

v7.c95.12

²⁴³⁴ न ह्ययं सृष्ट्यादिप्रपञ्चः प्रतिपिपादयिषितः । न हि तत्प्रतिबद्धः कश्चित्पुरुषार्थो दृश्यते श्रूयते वा । न च कल्पयितुं शक्यते, उपक्रमोपसंहाराभ्यां तत्र तत्र ब्रह्मविषयैर्वाक्यै साकमेकवाक्यताया गम्यमानत्वात् । दर्शयति च सृष्ट्यादिप्रपञ्चस्य ब्रह्मप्रतिपत्त्यर्थताम् — 'अन्नेन सोम्य शुङ्गेनापो मूलमन्विच्छ .. सन्मूलमन्विच्छ ' (छा VI. 8 4) इति । मृदादिदृष्टान्तैश्च कार्यस्य कारणेनानन्यत्वं वदितुं सृष्ट्यादिप्रपञ्च. श्राव्यत इति गम्यते । शाङ्करभाष्य on वे सू I 4. 14. For मृदादिदृष्टान्त, vide छा उप VI. 3 4–6 यथा सोम्यैकेन मृत्पिण्डेनः सर्व मृन्मयं विज्ञातं स्यात् । वाचारम्भण विकारो नामधेयं मृत्तिकेत्येव सत्यम् ॥ Again on V S IV. 3. 14 Śaṅkarācārya remarks: मृदादिदृष्टान्तैर्हि सतो ब्रह्मण एकस्य सत्यत्वं विकारस्य चानृतत्वं प्रतिपादयच्छारूत्रं नोत्पत्त्यादिपरं भवितुमर्हति । .. एवमुत्पत्त्यादिश्रुतीनामे-कात्म्यावगमपरत्वान्नानेकशक्तियोगो ब्रह्मणः ॥

v7.c95.13

²⁴³⁵ The following works may be read for cosmology of Vedic texts : H. W. Wallis on 'Cosmology of the Ṛgveda' (1887); 'Vedic mythology by A. A. Macdonell pp. 8-15, Deussen's 'Philosophy of the Upanishads' translated into English by A S Geden (1906) pp. 180-253; 'Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and the Upanishads' by A B. Keith, pp. 570-584. A recent work 'Theories of the Universe' by Milton K. Munitz (pub. by Free Press, Glencoe, Illinois, 1957) deals with the cosmologies of several countries from Babylonian myth to modern science (but omits the Indian material)

v7.c95.14

²⁴³⁶ ईश्वरस्य चिकीर्षावशात्परमाणुषु क्रिया जायते। ततः परमाणुद्वयसंयोगे सति द्वयणुकमुत्पद्यते त्रिभिर्द्वयणुकैस्त्रसरेणुकम्। एवं चतुरणुकादिक्रमेण महती पृथिवी ... वायुरुत्पद्यते। ... एवमुत्पन्नस्य कार्यद्रव्यस्य संजिहीर्षावशात् परमाणुषु क्रिया। तर्कदीपिका p 9 (Athalye's 2nd ed. of 1918).

v7.c95.15

Though there was almost universal agreement about the existence of God among the Dharmaśāstra writers, there was (as in the²⁴³⁷ West) divergence about the names, nature and attributes of God. Most were agreed that God is one without a second, is spiritual (and not physical, though several people worshipped Him in the form of Śiva or Viṣṇu or Devī), immutable, omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent, creator, holy, good and just &c. Difficult questions arise about belief in God. One or two may be mentioned: Is God omniscient in the completed and strictest sense viz whether he could do anything whatever as he likes or whether there are certain things which he cannot do. Another question is whether all existing things other than himself have been created by him or whether there are some things whose existence is as ultimate as God's. All religions are faced with difficulties and therefore religion is a matter of faith.

v7.c95.16

²⁴³⁷ In the West, Jeans in 'Mysterious Universe' (Cambridge 1931) goes so far as to say (on p. 134) 'the great Architect of the Universe ... *(Continued from last page)* begins to appear as a pure mathematician' Einstein, the greatest scientist of modern times, is reported to have cabled back to Rabbi H. S Goldstein of New York (who asked by wire 'Do you believe in God) that 'I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of all beings, not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of men.' In 'Out of my later years' he holds that the main conflict between science and religion lies in the concept of a personal God Vide Viscount Samuel's address in the symposium 'In search of faith' edited by E W Martin p. 78, where four views on the relation of God and the world are mentioned.

v7.c95.17

Though the Ṛgveda is full of the deeds of and prayers to individual Gods (such as Agni, Indra, Mitra, Varuṇa, Soma), the Ṛgveda contains several hymns and verses to the effect that the original Principle is only one, that it creates the world out of itself, enters into it and inspires it. In Ṛg. I. 164 46 the sage says 'the wise speak of the One existing (principle) under various names, they call it Agni, Yama, Mātariśvan (wind god)'. This is not a solitary verse. There are similar verses in the Ṛgveda. For example, Ṛgveda VIII. 58. 2 (a verse from the Vālakhilya hymns) says 'The one fire is kindled in many places, the one Sun appears in the whole world, the one Dawn shines over all this world and the One (Principle, Spirit) became all this'. In Ṛg. X. 90. 2, it is declared 'all this universe is (in reality) the Puruṣa alone, (both) what has been and what will come into existence in future'. In Ṛg. II. 1. 3-7 Agni is identified with Indra, Viṣṇu, Brahmā, Varuṇa, Mitra, Aryaman, Tvaṣṭṛ, Rudra, Draviṇodas, Savitṛ and Bhaga. All these verses establish that ultimately all plurality is only a play of words, a mere name ('Vācārambhaṇam vikāro nāmadheyam' as the Chān. Up. VI. 1. 4 states) and that unity is the only Reality and that the fundamental teaching of the Upaniṣads appears in germ in the Ṛgveda.

v7.c95.18

In the Ṛgveda there are several hymns about the creation of the world in the 10th Maṇḍala (X. 72, X. 81 and 82, X. 90, X. 121, X. 129). For reasons of space all these cannot be set out at length, but some important texts will be mentioned. The main purpose of the hymn (X. 72) is to describe the birth of eight Ādityas. Ṛg. X. 72. 2 states²⁴³⁸ that Brahmaṇaspati brought about the (births of) gods like a smith (that works with bellows) and that in the primeval ages of the Gods' *sat* was produced from *asat*. In Ṛg. X 72. 4-5 and 8 it is said that Dakṣa was born from Aditi and Aditi from Dakṣa, that the gods were born after her (Aditi) and that from Aditi eight sons were born. The two hymns X. 81 and 82 refer to Viśvakarman who fashioned the worlds. X. 81. 2 and 4 ask questions 'what was the base²⁴³⁹ (from where he created the world), what was the material (out of which he fashioned the earth), what was the forest and the tree from which heaven and earth were chiselled out' and the third verse describes the one God as follows 'The one God who sees all round, whose face is turned in all directions, who has hands and feet everywhere, who when creating heaven and earth sends them forth with his (two) hands as with bellows and with wings' (as a bird is propelled). Ṛgveda X. 90 (containing 16 verses) is the famous hymn called Puruṣasūkta and postulates a supreme creator as a Puruṣa (called Ādīpuruṣa by Sāyaṇa) with a thousand heads, eyes and feet, asserts that all this that has come into being and that is yet to come is Puruṣa, that from Puruṣa arose Virāj, from whom arose (what we may call the second) Puruṣa (Hiraṇyagarbha) whom the gods offered as *havis* (oblation or *paśu*) in a symbolical sacrifice in which the three seasons, Vasanta, Grīṣma and Śarad were respectively the ghee, the fuel and the *havis* This hymn was probably composed at a time when, it appears, there was a firm belief (as in Śat Br. V. 2 4. 7, VI. 1 1. 3 and Tai. S. VII. 4. 2. 1) that nothing great can be accomplished without *yajña* or *tapas*. The hymn then proceeds to say that from that primeval *yajña* all animals (horses, cows &c), the four *varṇas*, the Sun, the Moon, Agni, Indra, the Veda, heaven and earth were produced. In the Atharvaveda XIX. 6 also there are 16 verses of which the first fifteen correspond with the first 15 verses of the Puruṣasūkta, but the order of verses is different and some of the words also are slightly changed. The Vāj. S. 31 has all the 16 verses of the Puruṣasūkta but it contains five more verses and a prose passage at the end. Ṛg. X. 121. 1 declares²⁴⁴⁰ that in the beginning Hiraṇyagarbha (the Golden Egg) was born; and verse 10 identifies him with Prajāpati and verses 8 and 10 declare that waters were produced by him from which issues forth Hiraṇyagarbha (the Golden egg), which was Prajāpati Himself. The second verse is quoted in n. 1440. Ṛg. X. 125 is a hymn placed in the mouth of Vāk (speech), wherein speech is portrayed as a power even beyond the gods and as creative. Three (1, 6, 8) out of the eight verses may be rendered here 'I move along with the Rudras and Vasus, with the Ādityas and Viśvedevas; I support both Mitra and Varuṇa, Indra and Agni and the two Aśvins. I stretch the bow of Rudra in order to kill the enemy, the hater of *brahma* (sacred prayer); I cause war for men; I entered heaven and earth. I blow like the wind, producing all the worlds; I am beyond heaven and beyond this earth; by my greatness (power) I have become such a one'. Here one must hold that the sage is not referring to ordinary speech or language but to the conception that word has creative power and that it is one with God or was the thought uttered by *brahman*.

v7.c95.19

²⁴³⁸ ब्रह्मणस्पतिरेता सं कर्मार इवाधमत् । देवानां पूर्व्ये युगेऽसतः सदजायत ॥ ऋ X. 72 2. Here 'Asat' must be taken to mean 'undeveloped' (*Avyakta*) and not as meaning 'non-existent'. The Br Up (I. 4. 7) states 'all this was then (before creation began) undeveloped and it was developed by name and form' Similarly, in the Tai. Up II. 7 it is said असद्वा इदमग्र आसीत् ततो वै सदजायत But the Chān. Up. (VI. 3. 1-3) emphatically asserts "in the beginning there was that only which was 'sat', one only without a second; some say 'in the beginning there was that only which is *asat*, from which arose *sat*'; but how could it be thus, how would *sat* (that which is) spring from *asat* (that which is not)? It is sat only that was at the beginning, one without a second. It reflected 'may I be many, may I produce', it created fire &c" Śaṅkarācārya on V. S I 4 15 refers to Tai Up II. 7 'asad vā idam-agra āsīt' and Chān. Up III. 19. 1 'asad-evedam-agra āsīt' and explains what is meant by *asat* in such passages viz 'नामरूप-व्याकृतवस्तुविषयः प्रायेण सच्छब्दः प्रसिद्ध इति तद्व्याकरणाभावापेक्षया प्रागुत्पत्ते सदेव ब्रह्मासदिवासीदित्युपचर्यते; and points out that in such passages Śruti itself adds words which give the go by and refute the words 'asad-evedam' &c In Ṛg X. 72. 4 (aditer dakṣo ajāyata) Prof Velankar (Pro of All I. O. Conference, 17th Session in 1953) holds 'aditeh' to be in the genitive case (p 62) and not in the ablative case, to avoid the riddle how Dakṣa and Aditi were born of each other, but that breaks the symmetry of the words, such as 'asataḥ', 'uttānapadah', 'bhuvaḥ' that precede and are taken as ablatives The present author demurs to this explanation offered by Prof. Velankar.

v7.c95.20

²⁴³⁹ किं स्विादासीदधिष्ठानमारम्भणं कतमत्स्वित्कथासीत् । यतो भूमिं जनयन्विश्वकर्मा वि द्यामौर्णोन्महिना विश्वचक्षो ॥ विश्वतश्चक्षुरुत विश्वतोमुखो विश्वतो बाहुरुत विश्वतस्पात् । सं बाहुभ्या धमति सं पतत्रैर्द्यावाभूमी जनयन्देव एकः ॥ किं स्विद्वनं क उ स वृक्ष आस यतो द्यावापृथिवी निष्टतक्षु । मनीषिणो मनसा पृच्छतेदु तद्यदध्यतिष्ठद्भुवनानि धारयन् ॥ ऋ X. 81. 2-4: The half verse किंस्विद्वनं occurs in Ṛg X. 31. 7 also सायण explains कथासीत् in the first verse as 'कथमभूत् किं स्वयं सदसद्वा भवेदित्यर्थः । उभयमपि नोपपद्यते । सच्चें- दहैतद्भङ्गमसङ्ग.। असच्चेत् सदात्मकयोर्द्यावापृथिव्योरुपादानानईत्वात्। नान्यत्किंचन मिषत् इति श्रुतेश्चेत्यभिप्रायः ।" The तै ब्रा (II 8. 9. 3 ff) repeats all the verses of Rg X. 129 except the 3rd verse and in II 8 9 6 states that the answer to the question किं स्विद्वनं (Rg. X. 81. 4) is ब्रह्म वनं ब्रह्म स वृक्ष आसीद्यतो द्यावापृथिवी निष्टतक्षुः । मनीषिणो मनसा विब्रवीमि वो ब्रह्माध्यतिष्ठद्भुवनानि धारयन् ॥ 'Brahma was the forest and the tree from which they chiselled heaven and earth (and worlds)'.

v7.c95.21

²⁴⁴⁰ हिरण्यगर्भः समवर्तताग्रे भूतस्य जातः पतिरेक आसीत्। ऋ. X. 121. 1. The तै सं. V. 5. 1. 2 provides 'हिरण्यगर्भः समवर्तताग्रे इत्याधारमाधारयति प्रजापतिर्वै हिरण्यगर्भः प्रजापतेरनुरूपत्वाय ' य आत्मदा बलदा यस्य विश्व उपासते प्रशिषं यस्य देवाः। यस्य छायामृतं यस्य मृत्युः कस्मै देवाय हविषा विधेम ॥ ऋ X. 121 2 'He gives life and strength, his commandments are honoured by all the Gods, whose shadow is immortality and also death; who is this God whom we worship with other offerings (or to what God we may offer worship with *havis*?).

v7.c95.22

Ṛg. X. 129 (called Nāsadīya-sūkta from the opening words) is a unique hymn.²⁴⁴¹ Several passages of his hymn are yet very obscure in spite of the labour bestowed upon it by eminent scholars. In this hymn the First Principle or Creator is not given any name but is simply spoken of as 'tad-ekam', as done in the Upaniṣads in 'Tat-tvam-asi' or 'ekam-evādvitiyam' (Chān. Up. VI. 2.1-2.). The important and tolerably clear passages are translated here: "There was then neither 'asat' (what is not, non-being) nor 'sat' (what is); there was no sky nor the heaven which is beyond; what was it that covered all? Where was it and under whose shelter? Was there deep unfathomable abyss of waters?; (2) There was no death, hence nothing immortal; there was no consciousness (distinction) of night and day; that one breathed by its own nature (power) without there being any air, really nothing other than that existed; (4) desire came into being, that was the first flow (seed, offspring) of the mind: (6) who knows directly, who can proclaim it here whence this creation came into being, (7) He from whom arose this creation, whether he made it or did not make it, the Highest seer in the highest heaven, he indeed knows or even he does not know?

v7.c95.23

²⁴⁴¹ नासदासीन्नो सदासीत्तदानीं नासीद्रजो नो व्योमा परो यत्। किमावरीवः कुह कस्य शर्मन्नम्भः किमासीद्गहनं गभीरम् ॥ न मृत्युरासीदमृतं न तर्हि न रात्र्या अह्न आसीत् प्रकेतः। आनीदवातं स्वधया तदेकं तस्माद्धान्यन्न परः किं चनास॥ तम आसीत्तमसा गूळ्हमग्रेऽप्रकेतं सलिलं सर्वमा इदम्। ... कामस्तदग्रे समवर्तताधि मनसो रेतः प्रथमं यदासीत्। ... को अद्धा वेद क इह प्रवोचत् कुत आजाता कुत इयं विसृष्टिः। ... इयं विसृष्टिर्यत आबभूव यदि वा दधे यदि वा न। यो अस्याध्यक्षः परमे व्योमन् सो अङ्ग वेद यदि वा न वेद ॥ ऋ X. 129. 1-7. The शतपथब्राह्मण (X. 5 3. 1-2) makes an interesting reference to this hymn: 'नैव वा इदमग्रेऽसदासीन्नैव सदासीत्। आसीदिव वा इदमग्रे नेवासीत्तद्ध तन्मन एवास। तस्मादेतदृषिणायुक्तम्। नासदासीन्नो सदासीत्तदानीमिति। नैव हि सन्मनो नेवासत् तदिदं मनः सृष्टमाविरबुभूषत्।' This Br makes it clear that this (Universe) was as it were neither non-existent nor existent and it further says 'in the beginning this (Universe) as it were existed and did not exist, there was then only the mind and that mind as it were was neither existent nor non-existent.' It may be noted that the Bhāgavatapurāṇa speaks of the Lord as importing the esoteric (guhya) Truth in verses 32-36 of II. 9, verse 32 which reminds us of Ṛg. X 129. 1 is अहमेवासमेवाग्रे नान्यद्यत्सदसत्परम्। पश्चादहं यदेतच्च योऽवशिष्येत सोऽस्म्यहम्॥

v7.c95.24

It would be noticed that the sage, who was a poet and philosopher, proclaimed that there was that one Being, raised high above all gods, conditions and limitations; he, the sage, gives expression to what he conceived to be the state before the creation of the universe. Night and day, death and immortality are opposites These exist only when there is manifestness or creation and therefore he says 'there was no death, nor anything immortal' The hymn does not say that there was non-being out of which being grew. What he means is that That One alone breathed, the opposites, being and non-being, did not exist. For translations and remarks on this hymn, vide Max-Müller's 'History of ancient Sanskrit Literature' (1859) pp. 539-566, and 'Six systems of Indian Philosophy' (1919 ed.) pp. 49-52, Dr. Radhakrishnan's 'Indian Philosophy' (1923), vol I. pp. 100-104 Prof Whitney (Proceedings of American Oriental Society Vol. XI p. CXI.), in his characteristic supercilious manner referred to above on p 512, remarked that the praises bestowed on this hymn were nauseating. Deussen, long after Whitney's diatribe, said 'in its noble simplicity, in the loftiness of its philosophic vision, it is possibly the most admirable bit of the philosophy of olden times' and that 'no translation can ever do justice to the beauty of the original' (vide Bloomfield's 'The religion of the Veda,' p. 234, ed. of 1908). Vide Keith's 'Religion and philosophy of the Veda and Upanisads.' Vol. II. pp. 435-436. In many other passages of the Ṛgveda, different gods are referred to as creators God Prajāpati is said to have created heaven and earth, the wide, deep, well formed and to have pushed them by his power without support (IV. 56. 3). Indra is said to have created the Sun and Uṣas (Ṛg II. 12 7) and to have established heaven without any beam to support, supported and spread the earth (Ṛg. II. 15. 2).

v7.c95.25

The creation hymns refer to a stage when there was no generally accepted theory about the origin of the world. But this much is clear that in the most ancient times, at least some of the Vedic sages had arrived at the theory that there was only one Principle or Spirit, though called by various names and that it willed to create the world and created it from itself.

v7.c95.26

Apart from the above-mentioned hymns that may be called creation hymns, the Ṛgveda contains many references to the creation or the support²⁴⁴² of heaven and earth by several gods and also creation of other things. In Ṛg. X 89. 4 Indra is said to have made from heaven and earth on all sides as the axle does the wheels. Ṛg. I. 154. 4 refers to Viṣṇu who single-handed supports the three, viz. the earth, the heaven (and antarikṣa) and all the worlds. Mitra is said to support heaven and earth (Ṛg. III. 59. 1) and to bear all gods (Ṛg. III. 59. 8)²⁴⁴³. Brahmanaspati (Lord of Prayer, Bṛhaspati) is said to have sent forth (blazed) the births of gods like a blacksmith and that in the primeval times of the gods *sat* was born from *asat*. Soma is said (Ṛg. VI. 47. 4) to have made the width of the earth and the loftiness of the heaven and supported the wide antarikṣa (mid regions) and in Ṛg. II. 40 (which is addressed jointly-to Soma-Pūṣan) it is said that one of them (Soma) produced all worlds and the other (Pūṣan, the Sun) goes overseeing or marking, the doings of the whole world (verse 5).

v7.c95.27

²⁴⁴² य उ त्रिधातु पृथिवीमुत द्यामेको दाधार भुवनानि विश्वा। ऋ 1.154 4 The word त्रिधातु occurs at least two dozen times in the Ṛgveda, but the meaning is not certain. In Ṛg VIII 40 12 we have 'tridhātunā śarmaṇā pātamasmān' (protect us with a three-fold protection) and it is difficult to say what 'tridhātu' protection is.

v7.c95.28

²⁴⁴³ ब्रह्मणस्पतिरेता ०सदजायत। ऋ X. 72. 2 एता refers to जाना (जन्मानि) in the first verse (देवानां नु वयं जाना प्रवोचाम विपन्यया). For the meaning of सत् and असत् vide note 2438 above.

v7.c95.29

In Ṛg. VII. 78. 3 dawns (plural) are said to have created the Sun, Yajña and Agni. This is metaphorical, since after each dawn the Sun rises, sacrificial fire is kindled into flames and sacrifice is offered. In Ṛg. I 96. 2 Agni is said to be the progenitor of men. In Ṛg. II. 35. 2 (apām napāt, grandson of waters i. e. Agni) is said to have created all worlds.

v7.c95.30

Heaven and earth (as dual divinities) have six hymns addressed to them in the Ṛg. viz. I. 159-160, 185, IV. 56, VI. 70, VII. 53) and they are called 'rodasī' and sisters (Ṛg. I. 185. 5). They are also called parents of the gods (Ṛg. VIII. 97. 8, X. 2. 7).

v7.c95.31

The word 'antarikṣa' (atmospheric region) occurs at least a hundred times in the Ṛgveda. Sometimes we have phrases like (*tisraḥ pṛthvīḥ*) meaning the three worlds including the earth (Ṛg I. 34. 8), while in other passages reference is made to lower, middle and highest pṛthivī as in Ṛg. I. 108. 9 (*yad indrāgnī avamasyām pṛthivyām madhyamasyām paramasyām uta sthaḥ*) meaning thereby the earth, antarikṣa and heaven. Antarikṣa is often called 'rajas' as the region of dust, mists and clouds in Ṛg. I. 35. 2 and 9).

v7.c95.32

In Ṛg. I. 35. 6 it is said 'there are three *dyaus* (i. e. heaven, antarikṣa and earth), two are on the lap of Savitṛ (i. e. heaven and earth) and one (antarikṣa) is in the world of Yama. The sage explains in Ṛg. X. 88 15 'I have heard of two paths viz of the pitṛs and of the gods and also of men; the whole world that moves reaches that (region) which is between the father (heaven) and the mother (the earth)'.

v7.c95.33

Varuṇa is said to have spread antarikṣa on forests, spread the Sun in heaven and Soma on mountains (Ṛg V. 85. 2). Even in the times of the Ṛgveda speculation had begun about the distance between heaven and earth. In Ṛg. I. 155. 5 the poet says that no one dare soar up to the third step of Viṣṇu (i. e. heaven), not even the birds flying on their wings. In the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa the distance between the earth and heaven is put at one thousand days' journey for a horse ²⁴⁴⁴

v7.c95.34

²⁴⁴⁴ सहस्रसंवत्स्ये स्वर्गकामस्य सहस्राश्वीने वा इत. स्वर्गो लोकः। ऐ. ब्रा (7th अ, 7th खण्ड or 2nd पञ्चिका 17).

v7.c95.35

In the Taittirīya Saṁhitā Prajāpati is frequently mentioned as creating the gods and asuras (III. 3. 7. 1), as creating yajñas (I. 6. 9. 1), as creating people (II. 1. 2 1) and animals (I. 5. 9. 7) and desiring to create *prajā* and performing tapas for that (III. 1. 1. 1). Tai. S. (V. 6. 4. 2) states that all this in the beginning was water, a sea and that Prajāpati becoming wind floated rapidly on a lotus leaf.

v7.c95.36

The Atharvaveda has some hymns on creation. But they are verbose, repetitive and do not possess the depth, philosophy and terse style of the hymns of the Ṛgveda cited above In hymns 7 and 8 of the 10th *kāṇḍa* it puts forward Skambha as the base and as identified with Prajāpati, as the creator and supporter of all worlds and as having all the thirty-three gods in himself; it asks 'by how much did Skambha enter the manifold forms of the highest, lowest and middling type that Prajāpati created; how much is that in which he (Skambha) did not enter'? In Ṛg. IX. 86. 46 Soma made for sacrifice is spoken of as Skambha. Hymn 8 of kāṇḍa X (of Atharvaveda) is styled 'description of Jyeṣṭha-brahma' (the highest or oldest brahma). Two verses from it may be cited 'Obeisance to that *Jyeṣṭha Brahma* that governs all, whether produced or to be produced, and to whom alone heaven pertains. These two, heaven and earth, stand supported by Skambha; all this that has *Ātman*, that breathes and blinks is Skambha Skambha literally means 'support' or 'pillar'. The verbal form '*Skabhnāti*' occurs in Ṛg X. 6. 3 and the word 'Skambha' occurs several times in the Ṛg. but not in the sense of 'creator'. In Atharva X. 8. 2 Skambha is mentioned twice, while in X. 7²⁴⁴⁵ (of 44 verses) it occurs many times. Atharva X. 2 is called Brahmaprakāśana hymn (of 33 verses). Numerous questions are asked in verses one to 19. In verses 20, 22, 24 questions are asked and verses 21, 23, 25 give replies to them. One question and answer may be set out 'By whom was this earth made (or arranged), by whom was the high heaven placed, by whom was the sky placed above and crosswise and in various directions'? 'Brahma made the earth, brahma is the heaven placed high, it is brahma that is the sky placed above, cross-wise and in various directions.' Verse 27 of Atharva X. 8 is the same as Śv. Up. IV. 3 and identifies the creator with young and old, men and women and boy and girl. In Atharva X. 8 several other deities also are mentioned but they are deemed to be comprehended in the Supreme Entity. In Atharva IX. 2 (25 verses) there is apotheosis of Kāma, in the first eighteen verses of which there are prayers to Kāma for vanquishing and driving away enemies, the last quarter of each of the verses 19 to 24 ends 'tasmai te Kāma nama it kṛnomi' (I offer obeisance to you, O Kāma'). These six verses declare that Kāma appeared first, that neither the gods, nor pitṛs nor men reached Kāma who is greater than heaven and earth, waters, Agni, the directions, all beings that blink their eyes, the sea; Vāta, Agni, the Sun and the Moon do not reach Kāma.

v7.c95.37

²⁴⁴⁵ यस्मिन् स्तब्ध्वा प्रजापतिर्लोकांत्सर्व्वाँ अधारयत् । स्कम्भं तं ब्रूहि कतमः स्विदेव सः ॥ यत्परममवमं यच्च मध्यमं प्रजापतिः ससृजे विश्वरूपम् । कियता स्कम्भ प्रविबेश तत्र यन्न प्राविशत्कियत्तद् बभूव ॥ यस्य त्रयस्त्रिंशद्देवा अङ्गे सर्वे समाहिताः । स्कम्भं तं ब्रूहि कतमः स्विदेव सः ॥ अथर्व X. 7. 7, 8, 13. केनेयं भूमिविहिता केन द्यौरुत्तरा हिता। केनेदमूर्ध्वं तिर्यङ् चान्तरिक्षं व्यचो हितम् ॥ ब्रह्मणा भूमिविहिता ब्रह्म द्यौरुत्तरा हिता। ब्रह्मेदमूर्ध्वं तिर्यक्चान्तरिक्षं व्यचा हितम् । अथर्व० X. 2. 24-25.

v7.c95.38

Atharva XIX. 52 is a hymn²⁴⁴⁶ of five verses addressed to Kāma, who is said to have appeared in the beginning and was the first flow of the mind.

v7.c95.39

²⁴⁴⁶ कामस्तदग्रे समवर्तत मनसो रेतः प्रथमं यदासीत्। स काम कामेन बृहता सयोनी रायस्पोषं यजमानाय घेहि॥ अथर्व० XIX 52 1 For मनसो रेतः, compare Ṛg. X. 129. 4 quoted above in n 2441, प्राणाय नमो यस्य सर्वमिदं वशे। यो भूतः सर्वस्येश्वरो यस्मिन्सर्वं प्रतिष्ठितम्॥ प्राणो विराड् प्राणो देष्ट्री प्राणं सर्वं उपासते। प्राणो ह सूर्यश्चन्द्रमाः प्राणमाहुः प्रजापतिम्॥ अथर्व० XI. 4. 1 and 12. काले तपः काले ज्येष्ठं काले ब्रह्म समाहितम्। कालो ह सर्वस्येश्वरो यः पितासीत्प्रजापते ॥ कालः प्रजा असृजत कालो अग्रे प्रजापतिम् । स्वयंभूः कश्यपः कालात्तपः कालादजायत ॥ अथर्व XIX 53. 8 and 10, कालादापः समभवन् कालाद् ब्रह्म तपो दिशः। कालेनोदेति सूर्यः काले नि विशते पुनः॥ अथर्व० XIX. 54. 1.

v7.c95.40

Atharvaveda XI. 4 (26 verses) is addressed to Prāṇa, the first verse being 'obeisance to Prāṇa under whose domination is all this (world); he is the Lord of all and in him everything is centred (or established)' and verse 12 is 'Prāṇa is Virāj, Prāṇa is the directing power, all offer worship to Prāṇa, Prāṇa is indeed the Sun, the Moon and they (the sages) call him Prajāpati'.

v7.c95.41

In hymns 53 (10 verses) and 54 (5 verses) of Kāṇḍa 19 the Atharvaveda appears to put forward Kāla (*time*) as the first principle. Three of these are here translated. '*Tapas* is placed in Kāla, also the Jyeṣṭha Brahma, Kāla is the Lord of all, he was the father of Prajāpati; Kāla created people, in the beginning Kāla created Prajāpati, Svayambhū (Brahmā), Kaśyapa and *tapas* sprang from Kāla; from Kāla were born waters, *brahma, tapas* and directions, sun-rise is due to Kāla and it is merged in Kāla (at night).'

v7.c95.42

The Śat. Br. in many places speaks of creation. A few passages only can be referred to here. The Śat Br. (in VI. 1. 1) starts by saying that 'in the beginning there was here the non-existent' and asserts that the non-existent was the sages, the vital airs and then it postulates Prajāpati (made from seven vital airs) who desired 'May I be more, may I have progeny'. 'He toiled and practised *tapas*, and being tired, he created first of all the *Brahman*, the triple lore (the three Vedas), that Prajāpati then created waters from Vāk that is the world; that he (Prajāpati) entered the waters with the triple lore and that thence an egg arose; he touched it, then earth was produced and so on.

v7.c95.43

In XI. 1. 6. 1 ff. the Śat. Br. states "In the beginning this was water, only a sea The waters desired 'How shall we have progeny?' They toiled and practised austerities; while they were doing this a golden egg was produced, which floated for about a year, in about a year's time a Puruṣa, Prajāpati, was born; he broke. open the egg; he created the Gods by (the breath of) his mouth, he created Agni, Indra, Soma" &c.

v7.c95.44

In XI. 2. 3. 1-2 the Śat Br. says—In the beginning this (universe) was *brahma*, it created the gods, Agni, Vāyu, Sūrya; then a reference is made to name and form (nāma rūpe) by which he descends into the worlds and it is said 'these two (nāmarūpe) are the great manifestations of *brahma*'.

v7.c95.45

This myth about a golden egg of the universe is developed from Ṛg. X. 129 3 and X. 121. 1 (Hiraṇyagarbhaḥ samavartatāgre) in the Ch Up. III. 19 1-2 'In the beginning this universe was *asat* (not unfolded), it became *sat* (began to unfold), it was born (i e it took form); then an egg was evolved, it lay (in waters) for the period of a year; then it broke up, the two halves were one of silver and the other of gold, the silver half is this earth and the golden half is heaven'. This is followed in Manusmṛti as will be shown later on.

v7.c95.46

It is stated in the Śat Br. X. 4 2. 22-23 that Prajāpati arranged the Ṛgveda in such a way that the number of syllables in the Ṛgveda come to 12000 Bṛhatī metres (each Bṛhatī has 36 syllables).

v7.c95.47

The Tai. Br. states "Prajāpati created Gods and asuras (II. 2. 3) but he did not create Indra; the Gods said to him 'create Indra for us'; just as I created you by means of *tapas* in the same way you create Indra, they practised tapas and they saw Indra (abiding) in themselves (i e in their hearts) they said to him 'be born'". In II. 2. 9 1 the Tai.²⁴⁴⁷ Br. states "this universe was nothing at all in the beginning; there was no heaven nor earth nor mid region; that non-existent created Mind with the thought 'let me be'". In II. 6. 2 3 the same Brāhmaṇa says "Prajāpati created by the help of Veda the two forms 'sat' and 'asat'". The Tai Br. in II. 8. 8 9-10 cites as Puronuvākyā and Yājyā of puroḍāśa and puronuvākyā of 'havis' as follows: 'Brahma produced the Gods and all this world;

v7.c95.48

²⁴⁴⁷ इदं वा अग्रे नैव किंचनासीत्। न द्यौरासीत्। न पृथिवी। नान्तरिक्षम्। तदसदेव सन् मनोऽकुरुत स्यामिति। तै ब्रा II 2 9. 1, ब्रह्म देवानजनयत् ब्रह्म विश्वमिदं जगत्। ब्रह्मणा क्षत्रं निर्मितम्। ब्रह्म ब्राह्मण आत्मना॥ अन्तरस्मिन्निमे लोका। ब्रह्मैव भूतानां ज्येष्ठम्। तेन कोर्हति स्पधितुम्॥ ब्रह्मन्देवास्त्रयस्त्रिंशत्। ब्रह्मन्निन्द्रप्रजापती। ब्रह्मन्ह विश्वा भूतानि। नावीवान्तः समाहिता॥ तै ब्रा II. 8. 8 9-10.

v7.c95.49

the kṣatriyas were produced from brahman and brahma transformed its form into brāhmaṇas; (Yājyā) 'these worlds abide inside *brahman*, similarly all this world is inside it; brahma is the best among all bhūtas; who vie or compete with it, brahman is thirty-three Gods, and all bhūtas, all placed inside it as in a boat'

v7.c95.50

In the Kausitaki Brāhmaṇa there are brief allusions to Prajāpati. In VI. 1 it is stated 'Prajāpati, desirous of progeny, practised *tapas*; while he was thus practising tapas five were born, viz. Agni, Vāyu, Āditya, the Moon and Uṣas as fifth;' in VI 10 it is said 'Prajāpati practised tapas; after having practised tapas, he produced this world (the earth) from *prāṇa*, the mid regions from *apāna* and the yonder world (heaven) from *vyāna*; he then created Agni, Vayu and Āditya respectively from the earth, mid regions and heaven, and he produced *ṛk* verses from Agni, *yajus* texts from Vāyu and *sāman* texts from Āditya; in XIII. 1 it is asserted 'Prajāpati is indeed yajña, in which all desires, all immortality are centered'; in XXVIII. 1 it is said 'Prajāpati created yajña, the gods worshipped by means of yajña, when it was created and thereby obtained all desired objects'²⁴⁴⁸

v7.c95.51

²⁴⁴⁸ प्रजापतिर्वै यज्ञस्तस्मिन्सर्वे कामा सर्वममृतत्वम् । कौषी. ब्रा XIII. 1 (Lindner's ed Jena, 1887). प्रजापतिर्ह यज्ञं ससृजे तेन ह सृष्टेन देवा ईजिरे तेन हेष्ट्वा सर्वान्कामानापु । *ibid* XXVIII. 1.

v7.c95.52

The chief aim and purpose of the Brāhmaṇas of the Veda are to prescribe the acts and parts of the ritual of various sacrifices, to set out some myths and legends for their origin and to postulate various rewards on the performance of numerous sacrifices.

v7.c95.53

Prajāpati, who is mentioned very rarely in the Ṛgveda (IV. 53 2 where Savitṛ is called Prajāpati, IX. 5 9 where Soma is called Prajāpati, X. 85 4 where in the marriage hymn Prajāpati is prayed to bestow offspring, X. 169. 4 where Prajāpati is invoked to bestow good cows, X. 184 1 where Prajāpati along with other gods and goddesses is invoked for the blessing of conception in a married woman, X. 121 10 (already referred to above on p 1490), becomes the most prominent god in the Brāhmaṇas. The Ait Br. narrates the story that after Indra killed Vṛtra he wanted to be great and honoured in place of Prajāpati, that then Prajāpati said (if you are to be great) 'who am I going to be' (koham-iti) and thereby Prajāpati came to be called 'Ka'.²⁴⁴⁹

v7.c95.54

²⁴⁴⁹ In Ṛg. X. 121 the last quarter of the first 9 verses is ''*Kasmai devāya haviṣā vidhema*'' (to what god shall we offer *havis*?). Then the 10th and last verse addresses Prajāpati with the words 'there is no God other than you who encompassed all these creations.'. It is probably due to this that from '*kasmai*' (in the first nine verses) Prajāpati came to be called 'Ka'.

v7.c95.55

The Ait. Br. states that Prajāpati desiring to propagate and to be many and having practised *tapas* created the three worlds, earth, mid region and heaven from which arose three lights (*jyotis*), Agni, Vāyu and Āditya, from which arose the three Vedas &c.

v7.c95.56

The Vedic Saṁhitās and Brāhmaṇas show that the popular belief about the individual self was that by good deeds the soul reaches heaven, becomes immortal and enjoys various joys and pleasures. Vide Ṛg. IX. 113. 7-11, I. 125. 4-6, Atharva IV. 34. 2 and 5, VI. 120. 3. There was also the idea of retribution and recompense for evil or harmful acts done by one person to another. For example, the Śat Br. says (XII. 9. 1. 1) 'for whatever food a man eats in this world, by the very same is he eaten again in the other world.' Vide also Śat. Br XI 6. 1 But when we come to the Upanisads, the whole intellectual atmosphere is changed The Upanisads frequently assert that Ātman is the only reality, that there is nothing else and that the Ātman can only be described as 'not this-not this' i. e. the Ātman is unknowable. This is the first and foremost aspect of Vedānta. But this lofty metaphysical conception clashed with the ideas of common people who thought that a real universe existed apart from the Creator. The higher philosophic minds had to concede the reality of the universe for common people. They were prepared to say that the universe exists, in truth, however, it is nothing but the Ātman entered into the universe. They said that the world was phenomenal, not false or nothing, but the world had the Ātman behind it This was the good aspect of the Vedānta viz. that the universe evolved from the first principle, *brahma*. They distinguished between *saguṇa* (qualified) *brahman* that was for prayer and worship (*upāsanā*), and for practical purposes (*vyavahārāvasthā*) and *nirguṇa* (unqualified) *brahma*. But the higher thought also insisted that the highest truth (*pāramārthikasatya*) is that *brahman* is one, that everything in the world (men, animals, inorganic matter)

v7.c95.57

is brahman ('*sarvaṃ khalvidaṃ brahma*' Chān. Up. III. 14. 1, '*ahaṃ brahmāsmīti tasmāt tatsarvam-abhavat*' Bṛ. Up I. 4. 10). The Ait Up. quoted below is most emphatic about the identity²⁴⁵⁰ of the first principle with men, beasts, motionless beings and other passages do the same As regards the elements the Bṛ. Up. has a long passage²⁴⁵¹ (III. 7. 2-23) in which Yājñavalkya propounds to Uddālaka Āruṇi the sublime doctrine viz. that the Ātman residing in the earth and other elements is inside them, whom they (the elements) do not know, whose body is the earth and other elements, who rules from within the earth and others, that that Ātman is the soul of thee (and of mine and others), is the inner ruler and is immortal. The last part of this passage is 'the ruler within is unseen but seeing, unheard but hearing, unperceived but perceiving, unknown but knowing, there is no other seer but he, there is no other hearer but he, that is no other perceiver but he, there is no other knower but he. This is the Self, the ruler within, the immortal. Everything else is distress' This whole section called antaryāmi-brāhmaṇa has a parallel in Bṛ. Up. II. 5 (Madhuvidyā). The ordinary man's conception of *brahman* as the creator was not, however, entirely given up by the thinkers in the Upaniṣads, though it was said that that concept was due to *avidyā* (ignorance about Reality). Brahman conceived as creator was called Īśvara (a personal God), though the worshipper might know that brahman in essence is above all conditions and limitations of personality. This is theism, which acknowledges three entities viz. a real world, the Paramātman (creative Ātman) and the individual self dependent on Paramātman. But the real thought of the Upaniṣads is centred round the non-difference of *brahman* and *ātman* and the physical world. This thought that *brahman* entered into what are called individual souls and also the material universe is the third aspect of Vedānta. On V. S II 3 43 Śaṅkarācārya quotes passages from the Brahmasūkta belonging to the Atharvaveda²⁴⁵² and from the Śv. Up. expressive of the identity with *brahman* of fishermen, slaves, gamblers, of men and women, of boys and girls and old men tottering on a staff The faith that the same Spirit animates the universe, from the stone, worms and beasts to man, is an elevating one, may make one feel that all creatures are brethren seeking the Creator and may, in a world dominated by egoism and urged to activities for individual prosperity and benefit, introduce some sweetness and consolation. Deussen in 'The philosophy of the Upanishads' (translated by A. S. Geden, Edinburgh, 1906) pays a glowing tribute to the sages of the Upanishads in the following eloquent passage 'It was here that for the first time the original thinkers of the Upanishads, to their immortal honour, found it (key) when they recognized our *ātman*, our inmost individual being, as the *Brahman*, the inmost being of universal nature and of all her phenomena' (p. 40). Vide also J. Royce in 'The world and the individual', First series of Lectures, particularly pp. 156-175 for the exposition of Chān. Up. III. 14 and VI. 2-15 and the Bṛ. Up dialogue between Yāj. and Maitreyī

v7.c95.58

²⁴⁵⁰ आत्मा वा इदमेक एवाग्र आसीन्नान्यत्किंचन मिषत्। स ईक्षत लोकान्नु सृजा इति। स इमाँल्लोकानसृजताम्भो मरीचीर्मरमाप.। . स ईक्षत इमे नु लोका । लोकपालान्नु सृजा इति। सो ऽद्भ्य एव पुरुषं समुद्धृत्यामूर्च्छयत् । ... स ईक्षत कथं न्विदं महते स्यादिति। स ईक्षत कतरेण प्रपद्या इति। ... स एतमेव सीमानं विदार्यैतया द्वारा प्रापद्यत। ऐ. उप I 1-3, I. 3 11-12 This passage is dealt with in V. S III 3. 16 which establishes that here the word Ātman stands for Paramātman, अम्भ, मरीची-, मरं, आपः stand for heaven, mid-region, earth and waters below the earth.

v7.c95.59

²⁴⁵¹ य. पृथिव्या तिष्ठन् पृथिव्या अन्तरो यं पृथिवी न वेद यस्य पृथिवी शरीरं या पृथिवीमन्तरो यमयत्येष त आत्मान्तर्याम्यमृत. । ... अदृष्टो द्रष्टाऽश्रुतः श्रोताऽमतो मन्ताऽविज्ञातो विज्ञाता ।. एष त आत्मान्तर्याम्यमृतः। अतोऽन्यदार्तम्। बृह उप III. 7 3 and 23; compare with this last, बृह उप III. 4. 2 कतमो याज्ञवल्क्य सर्वान्तरः । न दृष्टेर्द्रष्टारं पश्ये. .. एष त आत्मा सर्वान्तरः । अतोऽन्यदार्तम् and III. 5 2 शंकराचार्य in his भाष्य on the last passage explains अतोऽन्यदार्तं as 'एतदेवैकमनार्तमविनाशि कूटस्थम्' and so आर्त means liable to sorrow, infatuation, old age and death, as appears from the question and answer in बृह उप III 5. 1 कतमो याज्ञवल्क्य सर्वान्तरः। योऽशनायापिपासे शोकं मोहं जरा मृत्युमत्येति ।. After quoting this passage Rene Grousset in 'Sum of History' tr. into English by A and H. Temple Patterson (1951) pays a handsome compliment to it (on p. 95) 'what better introduction to Christianity is there than the conception of the sanctity of the human individual and of the universe as temples of God' In ऐ उप III 2 we are given 17 words that are said to be names of Prajñāna (i e *brahman*) and then ऐ उप III 3 runs 'एष ब्रह्मा, एष इन्द्र., एष प्रजापति, एते सर्वे देवा., इमानि च पञ्च महाभूतानि पृथिवी वायुराकाश आपो ज्योतींषि, एतानीमानि च क्षुद्रमिश्राणीव बीनानीतराणि चेतराणि चाण्डजानि च जारुजानि स्वेदजानि चोद्भिज्जानि चाश्वा गाव. पुरुषा हस्तिनो यत्किंचेदं प्राणि जङ्गमं च पतत्रि च यच्च स्थावरं सर्वं तत्प्रज्ञानेत्रं प्रज्ञाने प्रतिष्ठितम् । प्रज्ञानेत्रो लोकः । प्रज्ञा प्रतिष्ठा । प्रज्ञानं ब्रह्म ।। This carries to its logical conclusion the idea in the Puruṣasūkta X 90 6, 8, 10.

v7.c95.60

²⁴⁵² एके शाखिनो दाशकितवादित्वभावं ब्रह्मण आमनन्त्याथर्वणिका ब्रह्मसूक्ते-'ब्रह्म दाशा ब्रह्म दासा ब्रह्मैवेमे कितवा'-इत्यादिना । इति हीनजन्तूदाहरणेन सर्वेषामेव नामरूपकृतकार्यकरणसङ्घाताप्रविष्टानां जीवानां ब्रह्मत्वमाह । तथान्यत्रापि ब्रह्मप्रक्रियायामेवाशमर्थं प्रपञ्चयते। त्वं स्त्री त्वं पुमानसि त्वं कुमार उत वा कुमारी। त्वं जीर्णो दण्डेन वञ्चसि त्वं जातो भवसि विश्वतोमुख । इति ।. The last is अथर्व० X. 8 27 and श्वेता उप. 4 3

v7.c95.61

The Upaniṣads are full of theories of creation and of the nature of the First Principle A few passages may first be cited about creation The Bṛ Up. I. 4 (in 3-4, 7) has an original and significant passage on creation Some part of it is set out here ‘In the beginning this was Ātman alone in the form of Puruṣa; He (being alone) found no pleasure; he desired to have a second (a companion), he became of the extent of a male and a female in close embrace, he made this very Ātman fall aside in two parts that became husband and wife; from them were born men and he produced lower animals up to ants; this (universe) was then undeveloped (or not unfolded), it was then developed in names and forms, that (Ātman) entered into this up to the finger tips, just as a razor remains hidden in a sheath or just as the all supporting (fire) is not seen in wood’. In this passage the popular idea of the creation of the world is taken up and related to the one reality, Ātman, and the emphasis appears to be placed on the theory that the sole reality is Ātman, under the phantasmagoria of world phenomena. In Ch. Up VII. 10 1 it is said ‘this earth, mid regions, heaven, gods and men, beasts and birds. grass and herbs, animals including insects, butterflies, ants. These are all nothing but waters in solid form.’ The Chān. Up. (VI. 2. 3–4 and VI. 3. 2–3) states “in the beginning *Sat* alone was existent, one without a second; it thought ‘I shall become many, I shall have progeny”; it created heat (tejas), from tejas waters were produced, from water food; that divinity proposed ‘I shall enter into these three divinities (heat, water and food) with this living self and unfold name and form’. Here reference is made to three elements only viz *tejas*, water, and earth (*anna* is produced from plants which spring from the earth). It is not, however, proper to hold that only three were then recognized, these three were the most obvious and the other two Vāyu and Ākāśa mentioned in Ait. and Tai. Up. are elusive. The Ait. Up. (quoted in note 2451) begins “In the beginning there was here this Ātman alone, there was nothing else that was active (lit. that opened and closed eyes); He reflected’ I shall create worlds’. He created these worlds, the *ambhas* (water above heaven), marīci ‘rays’ (i e.) atmospheric region, death, waters”. Then the Up. proceeds: He created guardians of worlds and proposed to produce food for them. Then he reflected ‘how can this frame subsist apart from me? Then he reflected ‘by what way shall I enter into it?’ Then it is stated that he split open the crown of the head and entered by that door. The Tai Up. II. 6 says “He (the Ātman) desired ‘May I become many, I shall have progeny’; having practised tapas, he created all this (universe) whatever it is; after having created it he entered into it" and again in II. 7 'in the beginning this was *asat* (not unfolded), then it became *sat* (developed), it unfolded itself'. This is the basis of V. S I. 4. 26 (ātmakṛteḥ pariṇāmāt) which establishes that brahman is both *kartṛ* (agent) and *karma* (object) of creation. The same Up. in II. 1 speaks of the creation of ākāśa from the Ātman, of Vāyu from ākāśa, of Agni from Vāyu, of waters from Agni and of the earth from waters Here we have five elements instead of three (as in the Chān Up). The Ait. Up. III. 3 names the five elements and calls them Mahābhūtāni (though the usual order is not followed), so do Praśna VI. 4, Śv. Up. II. 12, Kaṭha III. 15 (where the five guṇas, śabda, sparśa, rūpa, rasa and gandha, each peculiar to the five elements from ākāśa to pṛthvī, are mentioned).²⁴⁵³

First 61 of 395 passages. Read on

Linked texts (47)