The Religions of India Part 40

[Footnote 80: _Karm[=a]ntaram up[=a]santas, i.e., vir[=a]mak[=a]lam upagacchantas_.]

[Footnote 81: II. 36. 3 ff. The phraseology of vs. 5 is exactly that of [Greek: _ton etto ldgon kreitto poithnsi_], but the Pundit's arguments are 'based on the law.']

[Footnote 82: See above. In a later period (see below) the question arises in regard to the part played by Creator and individual in the workings of grace, some claiming that man was pa.s.sive; some, that he had to strive for grace.]

[Footnote 83: Perhaps ironical. In V. 175. 32, a woman cries out: "Fie on the Creator for this bad luck," conservative in belief, and outspoken in word.]

[Footnote 84: III. 30. 17. The _gosava_ is a 'cow-sacrifice.' The _pu[n.][d.]ar[=i]ka_ is not explained (perhaps 'elephant-sacrifice').]

CHAPTER XV.

HINDUISM (CONTINUED).--VISHNU AND cIVA.

In the epic the later union of the sectarian G.o.ds is still a novelty.

The two characters remain distinct enough. Vishnu and civa are different G.o.ds. But each in turn represents the All-G.o.d, and consequently each represents the other. The Vishnu-wors.h.i.+p which grew about Krish[n.]a, originally a friend of one of the epic characters, was probably at first an attempt to foist upon Vedic believers a sectarian G.o.d, by identifying the latter with a Vedic divinity. But, whatever the origin, Krishna as Vishnu is revered as the All-G.o.d in the epic. And, on the other hand, civa of many names has kept the marks of Rudra. Sometimes one, sometimes another, is taken as the All-G.o.d. At times they are compared, and then each sect reduces the G.o.d of the other to an inferior position. Again they are united and regarded as one. The Vishnu side has left the best literary representation of this religion, which has permeated the epic. It is pantheism, but not an impersonal pantheism. The Blessed Lord is the All. This is the simple base and crown of its speculation. It is like the personal development of Vedantic philosophy, only it is here degraded by the personality of the man-G.o.d, who is made the incarnate All-G.o.d. The Krishna of the epic as a man is a sly, unscrupulous fellow, continually suggesting and executing acts that are at variance with the knightly code of honor. He is king of Dv[=a]rak[=a] and ally of the epic heroes. But again, he is divine, the highest divinity, the _avatar_ of the All-G.o.d Vishnu. The sectaries that see in civa rather than in Vishnu the one and only G.o.d, have no such representative to which to refer. For civa, as the historical descendant of the Vedic Rudra,--although even in his case there is an intrusion of local wors.h.i.+p upon an older Vedic belief,--represents a terror-G.o.d, either the lightning, the fairest of the G.o.ds, or, when he appears on earth, a divine horror, or, again, "a very handsome young man."[1] These two religions, of Vishnu as Krishna and of civa alone, are not so much united in the epic as they are super-imposed upon the older wors.h.i.+p of Brahm[=a], and indeed, in such a way that civa-wors.h.i.+p, in a pantheistic sense, appears to be the latest of the three beliefs that have influenced the story.[2]

The personal pantheism of the older Vishnuism has in its form and teachings so close a resemblance to the Christian religion that it has always had a great attraction for occidental readers; while the real power of its "Divine Song" gives the latter a charm possessed by few of the scriptures of India. This Divine Song (or Song of the Blessed One) is at present a Krishnaite version of an older Vishnuite poem, and this in turn was at first an unsectarian work, perhaps a late Upanishad. It is accepted by Vishnuites as a kind of New Testament; and with the New Testament it has in truth much in common. It must be pointed out at the outset that there is here the closest connection with the later Upanishads. The verse, like that of the Katha Upanishad (quoted above), which stands almost at the beginning of the Song, is typical of the relation of the Song to the Upanishad. It will be noticed how the impersonal 'That,' _i.e_., absolute being, _brahma_, changes almost at once to the personal He (_[=a]tm[=a]_ as Lord). As shows the whole Song, _brahma_ throughout is understood to be personal.[3] The caste-position of the priest in the Git[=a] is owing to the religious exaltation of the poem; and the precedence of S[=a]man is not unusual in the latest portions of the epic (see below).]

To understand the religion which reaches its culmination in the epic no better course could be pursued than to study the whole of the Divine Song. It is, however, too long a production to be introduced here in its entirety; but the following extracts give the chief features of the work, than which nothing in Hindu literature is more characteristic, in its sublimity as in its puerilities, in its logic as in its want of it. It has shared the fate of most Hindu works in being interpolated injudiciously, so that many of the puzzling anomalies, which astound no less the reader than the hero to whom it was revealed, are probably later additions. It is a medley of beliefs as to the relation of spirit and matter, and other secondary matters; it is uncertain in its tone in regard to the comparative efficacy of action and inaction, and in regard to the practical man's means of salvation; but it is at one with itself in its fundamental thesis, that all things are each a part of One Lord, that men and G.o.ds are but manifestations of the One Divine Spirit, which, or rather whom, the Vishnuite re-writer identifies with Krishna, as Vishnu's present form.

The Divine Song, as it is revealed in the epic by Vishnu (-Krishna) to his favorite knight, Arjuna, begins thus: "Know that the 'That' in which is comprised the 'This' is indestructible. These bodies of the indestructible Eternal One have an end: but whoso knows Him as slayer, and whoso thinks Him to be slain, these two have not true wisdom. He slays not and is not slain. He is not born, he does not die at any time; nor will He, having been born, cease to be. Unborn, everlasting, eternal, He, the Ancient One, is not slain when the body is slain. As one puts away an old garment and puts on another that is new, so He, the embodied (Spirit), puts away the old body and a.s.sumes one that is new. Everlasting, omnipresent, firm, unchanging is He, the Eternal; indiscernible is He called, inconceivable, unchangeable."[4]

The Song now turns into a plea that the warrior who is hearing it should, as one born to be a soldier, be brave and fight, lest his sorrow for the slain be taken for fear; since "nothing is better for a warrior than a just fight," and "loss of fame is worse than death."

Then follows (with the usual inconsequential 'heaven') "If thou art slain thou wilt obtain heaven, and if thou art victorious thou shalt enjoy earth; therefore, careless of pleasure and pain, get ready for the fight, and so thou wilt not incur sin. This is the knowledge declared in the S[=a]nkhya; hear now that of the Yoga," and the Divine Lord proceeds:

"Some are pleased with Vedic words and think that there is nothing else; their souls are full of desires; and they think that going to heaven is the chief thing. Yet have the Vedas reference only to the three qualities (of which all things partake). Be free from the three qualities (do not care for rewards). In action, not in fruit, is the chief thing. Do thy work, abiding by serene devotion (Yoga), rejecting every tie; be indifferent to success and failure. Serene devotion is called indifference (to such things). Action is lower than devotion of mind. Devotion is happiness. Do thou, wise in devotion, abandon the fruit that is sprung from action, and, freed from the bonds of birth, attain a perfect state."

S[=a]nkhya here means the philosophy of religion; Yoga is the philosophical state of mind, serene indifference, religious _sang-froid_ the practical result of a belief in the S[=a]nkhya doctrine of the indestructibility of the spirit. In the following there is Vedantic teaching, as well as Sankhyan in the stricter sense.

On the warrior's asking for an explanation of this state of equipoise, the Deity gives ill.u.s.trations of the balanced mind that is free from all attachments, serene, emanc.i.p.ated from desires, self-controlled, and perfectly tranquil. As the knight is astonished and confused at the contradiction, action and inactivity both being urged upon him, the Deity replies that there is a twofold law, that of S[=a]nkhyas consisting in knowledge-devotion, and that of Yogis in action-devotion. Idleness is not freedom from action. Freedom from attachment must be united with the accomplishment of such acts as should be performed. The deluded think that they themselves perform acts, but acts are not done by the spirit (self); they are done only by nature's qualities (this is S[=a]nkhya doctrine). "One should know the relation between the individual and Supreme Spirit, and with tranquil mind perform good acts. Let the deluded ones be, who are erroneously attached to action. The wise man should not cause those of imperfect knowledge to be unsettled in their faith, but he should himself not be attached to action. Each man should perform his own (caste) duties. One's own duty ill done is better than doing well another man's work."

The knight now asks what causes one to sin. The Deity answers: "Love and hate; for from love is born hate; and from anger, ignorance in regard to right and wrong; whence comes lack of reason, and consequently destruction. The knowledge of a man is enwrapped with desire as is fire with smoke. Great are the senses; greater, the mind; greater still, the understanding; greatest of all is 'That'"

(_brahma_; as above in the _Ch[=a]ndogya)._ The Deity begins again:[5]

"This system of devotion I declared to Vivasvant (the sun); Vivasvant declared it to Manu, and Manu to kingly seers." (The same origin is claimed for itself in Manu's lawbook.) The knight objects, not yet knowing that Krishna is the All-G.o.d: "How did'st thou declare it first? thy birth is later than the sun's." To whom the Deity: "Many are my births, and I know them all; many too are thine, but thou knowest them not; unborn and Lord of all creatures I a.s.sume phenomena, and am born by the illusion of the spirit. Whenever there is lack of righteousness, and wrong arises, then I emit (create) myself.[6] I am born age after age for the protection of the good, for the destruction of the wicked, and for the sake of establis.h.i.+ng righteousness. Whoso really believes in this my divine birth and work, he, when he has abandoned his body, enters no second birth, but enters Me. Many there are who, from Me arising, on Me relying, purified by the penance of knowledge, with all affections, fear, and anger gone, enter into my being. As they approach Me so I serve them.[7] Men in all ways follow after my path. Some desire the success that is of action, and wors.h.i.+p G.o.ds; for success that is born of action is speedy in the world of men. Know Me as the maker of the four castes, know Me as the unending one and not the maker. Action stains Me not, for in the fruit of action I have no desire. He that thus knows Me is not bound by acts.[8] So he that has no attachment is not bound by acts. His acts become naught. _Brahma_ is the oblation, and with _brahma_ is it offered; _brahma_ is in the fire, and by _brahma_ is the oblation made. Sacrifices are of many kinds, but he that sacrifices with knowledge offers the best sacrifice. He that has faith has knowledge; he that has knowledge obtains peace. He that has no knowledge and no faith, whose soul is one of doubt, is destroyed. Action does not destroy him that has renounced action by means of indifference. Of the two, renunciation of action and indifference, though both give bliss, indifference in action is better than renunciation of action.

Children, not Pundits, proclaim S[=a]nkhya and Yoga to be distinct. He that is devoted to either alone finds the reward of both. Renunciation without Yoga is a thing hard to get; united with Yoga the seer enters _brahma_. ... He is the renouncer and the devotee who does the acts that ought to be done without relying on the reward of action, not he that performs no acts and builds no sacrificial fires. Through his self (spirit) let one raise one's self. Conquer self by self (spirit).

He is the best man who is indifferent to external things, who with equal mind sees (his spirit) self in everything and everything in self (G.o.d as the Spirit). Such an one obtains the highest bliss, _brahma_.

Whoso sees Me in all and all in Me I am not destroyed for him, and he is not destroyed for Me."

The knight now asks how it fares with a good man who is not equal to the discipline of Yoga, and cannot free himself entirely from attachment. Does he go to destruction like a cloud that is rent, failing on the path that leads to _brahma_? The Deity replies: "Neither in this world nor in the beyond is he destroyed. He that acts virtuously does not enter an evil state. He obtains the heaven that belongs to the doers of good, and after living there countless summers is reborn on earth in the family of pure and renowned men, or of pious devotees. There he receives the knowledge he had in a former body, and then strives further for perfection. After many births he reaches perfection and the highest course (union with _brahma_). There are but few that strive for perfection, and of them only one here and there truly knows Me. Earth, water, fire, air, s.p.a.ce, mind, understanding, and egoism (self-consciousness)--so is my nature divided into eight parts.[9] But learn now my higher nature, for this is my lower one. My higher nature is alive, and by it this world is supported. I am the creator and destroyer of all the world. Higher than I is nothing. On Me the universe is woven like pearls upon a thread. Taste am I, light am I of moon and sun, the mystic syllable _[=O]m_ ([)a][)u]m), sound in s.p.a.ce, manliness in men; I am smell and radiance; I am life and heat. Know Me as the eternal seed of all beings. I am the understanding of them that have understanding, the radiance of the radiant ones. Of the strong I am the force, devoid of love and pa.s.sion; and I am love, not opposed to virtue. Know all beings to be from Me alone, whether they have the quality of goodness, of pa.s.sion, or of darkness (the three 'qualities' or conditions of all things). I am not in them; but they are in Me. Me, the inexhaustible, beyond them, the world knows not, for it is confused by these three qualities (conditions); and hard to overcome is the divine illusion which envelops Me, while it arises from the qualities. Only they pa.s.s through this illusion who come to Me alone. Wicked men, whose knowledge is taken away by illusion, relying on a devilish (demoniac) condition, do not come to Me. They that have not the highest knowledge wors.h.i.+p various divinities; but whatever be the form that any one wors.h.i.+ps with faith I make his faith steady. He obtains his desires in wors.h.i.+pping that divinity, although they are really bestowed upon him by Me.[10] But the fruit of these men, in that they have little wisdom, has its end. He that sacrifices to (lesser) G.o.ds goes to those G.o.ds; but they that wors.h.i.+p Me come to Me. I know the things that were, that are, and are to be; but Me no one knoweth, for I am enveloped in illusion. I am the supreme being, the supreme G.o.dhead, the supreme sacrifice, the Supreme Spirit, _brahma_."

The knight asks "What is _brahma_, the Supreme Spirit, the supreme being, the supreme sacrifice?" The Deity: "The supreme, the indestructible, is called _brahma_. Its personal existence is Supreme Spirit (self). Destructible existence is supreme being (all except _[=a]tm[=a]_). The Person is the supreme G.o.dhead. I myself am the supreme sacrifice in this body."

Then follow statements like those in the Upanishads and in Manu, describing a day of _brahma_ as a thousand ages; worlds are renewed; they that go to the G.o.ds find an end of their happiness with the end of their world; but they that go to the indestructible _brahma_, the Deity, the ent.i.ty that is not destroyed when all else is destroyed, never again return. There are two roads (as in the Upanishads above), one, the northern road leading to _brahma_; one, the southern road to the moon, leading back to earth. At the end of a period of time all beings reenter the divine nature (Prakriti[11]), and at the beginning of the next period the Deity emits them again and again (they being without volition) by the volition of his nature. "Through Me, who am the superintendent, nature gives birth to all things, and for that cause the world turns about. They of demoniac nature recognize me not; they of G.o.d-like nature, knowing Me as the inexhaustible source, wors.h.i.+p Me. I am the universal Father, the Vedas, the goal, the upholder, the Lord, the superintendent, the home, the asylum, the friend. I am the inexhaustible seed. I am immortality and death. I am being and not-being. I am the sacrifice and he that offers it. Even they that, with faith, sacrifice to other G.o.ds, even they (really) sacrifice to Me. To them that ever are devout and wors.h.i.+p Me with love (faith), I give the attainment of the knowledge by which they come to Me" (again the doctrine of special grace). "I am the beginning, the middle, and the end of all created things. I am Vishnu among sun-G.o.ds; the moon among the stars; Indra among the (Vedic) G.o.ds; the S[=a]man among the Vedas; among the senses, mind; among created beings, consciousness; among the Rudras I am civa (cankara); among army-leaders I am Skanda; among the great sages I am Bhrigu (who reveals Manu's code); among the Siddhas[12] I am Kapila the Muni.... I am the love that begets; I am the chief (V[=a]suki and Ananta) among the serpents; and among them that live in water I am Varuna; among the Manes I am Aryaman; and I am Yama among controllers;[13] among demons I am Prahl[=a]da ...; I am R[=a]ma; I am the Ganges. I am among all sciences the highest science (that in regard to the Supreme Spirit); I am the word of the speakers; I am the letter A among the letters, and the compound of union among the compounds.[14] I am indestructible time and I am the Creator. I am the death that seizes all and I am the origin of things to be. I am glory, fortune, speech, memory, wisdom, constancy, and mercy.... I am the punishment of the punisher and the polity of them that would win victory. I am silence. I am knowledge.

There is no end of my divine manifestations."

The knight now asks to see the real form of the deity, which was revealed to him. "If in heaven the glory of a thousand suns should appear at once, such would be his glory."

After this comes the real animus of the Divine Song in its present shape. The believer that has faith in this Vishnu is even better than the devotee who finds _brahma_ by knowledge.

The philosophy of knowledge (which here is anything but Vedantic) is now communicated to the knight, in the course of which the distinction between nature and spirit is explained: "Nature, Prakriti, and spirit, Purusha (person), are both without beginning. All changes and qualities spring from nature. Nature is said to be the cause of the body's and the senses' activity. Spirit is the cause of enjoyment (appreciation) of pleasure and pain; for the Spirit, standing in nature, appreciates the nature-born qualities. The cause of the Spirit's re-birth is its connection with the qualities, (This is S[=a]nkhya doctrine, and the same with that propounded above in regard to activity.) The Supreme Spirit is the Support and great Lord of all, the _[=a]tm[=a]_, while _brahma_ (=_prakriti_) is the womb in which I place My seed, and from that is the origin of all things. The great _brahma_ is the womb, and I am the seed-giving father of all the forms which come into being. The three 'qualities' (conditions, attributes), goodness, pa.s.sion, and darkness, are born of nature and bind the inexhaustible incorporate (Spirit) in the body. The quality (or attribute) of goodness binds the soul with pleasure and knowledge; that of pa.s.sion (activity), with desire and action; that of darkness (dulness), with ignorance. One that has the attribute of goodness chiefly goes after death to the highest heaven; one that has chiefly pa.s.sion is born again among men of action; one that has chiefly darkness is born among the ignorant. One that sees that these attributes are the only agents, one that knows what is higher than the attributes, enters into my being. The incorporate spirit that has pa.s.sed above the three attributes (the origin of bodies), being released from birth, death, age, and pain, obtains immortality. To pa.s.s above these attributes one must become indifferent to all change, be undisturbed by anything, and wors.h.i.+p Me with devotion.... I am to be learned from all the Vedas; I made the Ved[=a]nta; I alone know the Vedas. There are two persons in the world, one destructible and one indestructible; the destructible one is all created things; the indestructible one is called the Unchanging one. But there is still a third highest person, called the Supreme Spirit, who, pervading the three worlds, supports them, the inexhaustible Lord. Inasmuch as I surpa.s.s the destructible and am higher than the indestructible, therefore am I known in the world and in the Veda as the Highest Person."

The references to the S[=a]nkhyas, or S[=a]nkhya-Yogas, are not yet exhausted. There is another in a following chapter (vi. 18. 13) which some scholiasts say refers to the Ved[=a]nta-system, though this is in direct contradiction to the text. But the extracts already given suffice to show how vague and uncertain are, on the whole, the philosophical views on which depends the Divine Song. Until the end of these citations one hears only of nature and spirit, the two that have no beginning, but here one finds the Supreme Spirit, which is as distinct from the indestructible one as from the destructible.

Moreover, 'nature' is in one place represented as from the beginning distinct from spirit and entirely apart from it, and in another it is only a transient phase. The delusion (illusion) which in one pa.s.sage is all that exists apart from the Supreme Spirit is itself given up in favor of the S[=a]nkhya Prakriti, with which one must imagine it to be identified, although from the text itself it cannot be identical. In a word, exactly as in Manu, there are different philosophical conceptions, united without any logical basis for their union. The 'system' is in general that of the S[=a]nkhya-Yogas, but there is much which is purely Ved[=a]nta. The S[=a]nkhya system is taught elsewhere as a means of salvation, perhaps always as the deistic Yoga (i. 75. 7: "He taught them the Sankhya-knowledge as salvation"). It is further noticeable that although Krishna (Vishnu) is the ostensible speaker, there is scarcely anything to indicate that the poem was originally composed even for Vishnu. The Divine Song was probably, as we have said, a late Upanishad, which afterwards was expanded and put into Vishnu's mouth. The S[=a]nkhya portions have been redressed as far as possible and to the illusion doctrine is given the chief place. But the Song remains, like the Upanishads themselves, and like Manu, an ill-a.s.sorted cabinet of primitive philosophical opinions. On the religious side it is a matter of comparative indifference whether that which is not the spirit is a delusive output of the spirit or indestructible matter. In either case the Spirit is the goal of the spirit. In this personal pantheism absorption is taught but not death.

Immortality is still the reward that is offered to the believer that is wise, to the wise that believes. Knowledge and faith are the means of obtaining this immortality; but, whereas in the older Upanishads only wisdom is necessary (wisdom that implies morality), here as much stress, if not more, is laid upon faith, the natural mark of all sectarian pantheism.

Despite its occasional power and mystic exaltation, the Divine Song in its present state as a poetical production is unsatisfactory. The same thing is said over and over again, and the contradictions in phraseology and in meaning are as numerous as the repet.i.tions, so that one is not surprised to find it described as "the wonderful song, which causes the hair to stand on end." The different meanings given to the same words are indicative of its patchwork origin, which again would help to explain its philosophical inconsistencies. It was probably composed, as it stands, before there was any formal Ved[=a]nta system; and in its original shape without doubt it precedes the formal S[=a]nkhya; though both philosophies existed long before they were systematized or reduced to Sutra form. One has not to imagine them as systems originally distinct and opposed. They rather grew out of a gradual intensification of the opposition involved in the conception of Prakriti (nature) and M[=a]y[=a] (illusion), some regarding these as identical, others insisting that the latter was not sufficient to explain nature. The first philosophy (and philosophical religion) concerned itself less with the relation of matter to mind (in modern parlance) than with the relation of the individual self (spirit) to the Supreme Spirit. Different explanations of the relation of matter to this Supreme Spirit were long held tentatively by philosophers, who would probably have said that either the S[=a]nkhya or Ved[=a]nta might be true, but that this was not the chief question.

Later came the differentiation of the schools, based mainly on a question that was at first one of secondary importance. In another part of the epic Krishna himself is represented as the victim of 'illusion' (iii. 21. 30) on the field of battle.

The doctrine of the Bhagavad G[=i]t[=a], the Divine Song, is by no means isolated. It is found in many other pa.s.sages of the epic, besides being imitated in the Anug[=i]t[=a] of the pseudo-epic. To one of these pa.s.sages it is worth while to turn, because of the form in which this wisdom is enunciated. The pa.s.sage immediately following this teaching is also of great interest. Of the few Vedic deities that receive hymnal homage chief is the sun, or, in his other form, Agni.

The special form of Agni has been spoken of above. He is identified with the All in some late pa.s.sages, and gives aid to his followers, although not in battle. It will have been noticed in the Divine Song that Vishnu a.s.serts that the Song was proclaimed to the sun, who in turn delivers it through Manu to the king-seers, the sun being especially the kingly G.o.d.[15] In the third book there is an hymn to the sun, in which this G.o.d is addressed almost in the terms of the Divine Song, and immediately preceding is the doctrine just alluded to. After the explanation is given that re-birth affects creatures and causes them to be born in earth, air, or water, the changes of metempsychosis here including the vegetable world as well as the animal and divine worlds,[16] the very essence of the Divine Song is given as "Vedic word," viz., _kuru karma tyajeti ca_, "Perform and quit acts," _i.e._, do what you ought to do, but without regard to the reward of action (iii. 2. 72, 74). There is an eightfold path of duty, as in Buddhism, but here it consists in sacrifice, study, liberality, and penance; truth, mercy, self-control, and lack of greed. As the result of practicing the first four, one goes on the course that leads to the Manes; as the result of practicing the last four, one goes on the course that leads to the G.o.ds. But in practicing any virtues one should practice them without expectation of reward (_abhim[=a]na_, arriere pensee). The Yogi, the devotee, who renounces the fruit of everything, is the greatest man; his powers are miraculous.

There follows (with the same light inconsistency to be found in the Divine Song) the appeal for action and the exhortation to pray to the sun for success in what is desired. For it is explained that the sun is the father of all creation. The sun draws up clouds with his heat, and his energy, being trans.m.u.ted into water, with the help of the moon, is distilled into plants as rain, and in this way the food that man eats is full of solar energy, and man and all that live by food must regard the sun as their father. Preliminary to the hymn to the sun is given a list of his hundred and eight names,[17] among which are to be noticed: Aryaman, Soma, Indra, Yama, Brahm[=a], Vishnu, civa, Death, Time, Creator, the Endless One, Kapila, the Unborn One, the Person (Purusha; with which are to be compared the names of Vishnu in the Divine Song), the All-maker, Varuna, the Grandfather, the Door of Heaven, etc. And then the Hymn to the Sun (iii. 3. 36 ff.):[18]

"Thou, O Sun, of creatures art the eye; the spirit of all that have embodied form; thou art the source of all created things; thou art the custom of them that make sacrifice; thou art the goal of the S[=a]nkhyas and the hope of the Yogis; the course of all that seek deliverance ... Thou art wors.h.i.+pped by all; the three and thirty G.o.ds(!) wors.h.i.+p thee, etc.... I think that in all the seven worlds[19]

and all the _brahma_-worlds there is nothing which is superior to the sun. Other beings there are, both powerful and great, but they have no such glory as the sun's. Father of light, all beings rest in thee; O Lord of light, all things, all elements are in thee. The disc of Vishnu was fas.h.i.+oned by the All-maker (one of the sun's names!) with thy glory. Over all the earth, with its thirteen islands, thou s.h.i.+nest with thy kine (rays)....[20] Thou art the beginning and the end of a day of Brahm[=a].... They call thee Indra; thou art Rudra, Vishnu, the Father-G.o.d, Fire, the subtile mind; thou art the Lord, and thou, eternal _brahma_."

There is here also a very significant admixture of Vedic and Upanishadic religion.

In Krishna, who in the Upanishads is known already by his own and his mother's name, pantheism is made personal according to the teaching of one sect. But while the whole epic is in evidence for the spuriousness of the claim of Krishna to be regarded as incarnate Vishnu (G.o.d), there is scarcely a trace in the original epic of the older view in regard to Vishnu himself. Thus in one pa.s.sage he is called "the younger brother of Indra" (iii. 12. 25). But, since Indra is at no time the chief G.o.d of the epic, and the chapter in which occurs this expression is devoted to extolling Krishna-Vishnu as the All-G.o.d, the words appear to be intended rather to identify Krishna with Vishnu, who in the Rig Veda is inferior to Indra, than to detract from Vishnu's glory. The pa.s.sage is cited below.

What now is the relation of Vishnu-Krishna to the other divinities?

Vishnuite and civaite, each cries out that his G.o.d includes the other, but there is no current ident.i.ty of Brahm[=a], Vishnu, civa as three co-equal representations of one G.o.d. For example, in iii. 189. 5, one reads: "I am Vishnu, I am Brahm[=a], and I am civa," but one cannot read into this any trinitarian doctrine whatever, for in context the pa.s.sage reads as a whole: "I am N[=a]r[=a]yana, I am Creator and Destroyer,

I am Vishnu, I am Brahm[=a], I am Indra, the master-G.o.d, I am king Kubera, Yama, civa, Soma, Kacyapa, and also the Father-G.o.d." Again, Vishnu says that the Father-G.o.d, or grandparent of the G.o.ds, is 'one-half of my body," and does not mention civa (iii. 189. 39). Thus, also, the hymn to civa in iii. 39. 76 ff. is addressed "to civa having the form of Vishnu, to Vishnu having the form of civa, to the three-eyed G.o.d, to carva, the trident-holder, the sun, Ganeca," but with no mention of Brahm[=a]. The three G.o.ds, Brahm[=a], Vishnu, civa, however, are sometimes grouped together (but not as a trinity) in late pa.s.sages, in contrast to Indra, _e.g._, ix. 53. 26. There are many hymns to Vishnu and civa, where each is without beginning, the G.o.d, the uncreated Creator. It is only when the later period, looking back on the respective claims of the sects, identifies each G.o.d with the other, and both with their predecessor, that one gets even the notion of a trinity. Even for this later view of the pseudo-epic only one pa.s.sage will be found (cited below).

The part of Brahm[=a] in the epic is most distinctly in process of subordination to the sectarian G.o.ds. He is holy and eternal, but not omniscient, though wise. As was shown above, he works at the will of Vishnu. He is one with Vishnu only in the sense that all is one with the All-G.o.d. When Vishnu 'raises the earth' as a boar, Brahm[=a] tells the G.o.ds to go to him.[21] He councils the G.o.ds. His heaven is above Indra's, but he is really only an intermediary divinity, a pa.s.sive activity, if the paradox may be allowed. Not like Indra (to whom he is superior) does he fight with All-G.o.ds, or do any great act of his own will. He is a shadowy, fatherly, beneficent advisor to the G.o.ds, his children; but all his activity is due to Vishnu. This, of course, is from the point of view of the Vishnuite.

But there is no Brahm[=a]ite to modify the impression. There existed no strong Brahm[=a] sect as there were Vishnu and civa sects.

Brahm[=a] is in his place merely because to the preceding age he was the highest G.o.d; for the epic regards Creator, Praj[=a]pati, Pit[=a]maha, Brahm[=a] as synonymous.[22] The abstract _brahma_, which in the Upanishads is the same with the Supreme Spirit, was called personally Brahm[=a], and this Brahm[=a] is now the Brahmanic Father-G.o.d. The sects could never get rid of a G.o.d whose being was rooted alike in the preceding philosophy and in the popular conception of a Father-G.o.d. Each age of thought takes the most advanced views of the preceding age as its axioms. The Veda taught G.o.ds; the Br[=a]hmanas taught a Father-G.o.d above the G.o.ds; the Upanishads taught a Supreme G.o.dhead of which this Father-G.o.d was the active manifestation. The sects taught that their heroes were incarnations of this Supreme, but they carried with them the older pantheon as well, and, with the pantheon, its earlier and later heads, Indra and Brahm[=a]. Consequently each sect admits that Brahm[=a] is greater than the older Vedic G.o.ds, but, while naturally it identifies its special incarnation first with its most powerful opponent, and thus, so to speak, absorbs its rival, it identifies this incarnation with Brahm[=a] only as being chief of lesser divinities, not as being a rival. One may represent the att.i.tude of a Krishna-wors.h.i.+pper in the epic somewhat in this way: "Krishna is a modern incarnation of Vishnu, the form which is taken in this age by the Supreme Lord. You who wors.h.i.+p civa should know that your civa is really my Krishna, and the chief point is to recognize my Krishna as the Supreme Lord. The man Krishna is the Supreme Lord in human form. Of course, as such, being the One G.o.d in whom are all things and beings, he is also all the G.o.ds known by names which designate his special functions. Thus he is the head of the G.o.ds, the Father-G.o.d, as our ancestors called him, Brahm[=a]; and he is all the G.o.ds known by still older names, who are the children of the secondary creator, Brahm[=a], viz., Agni, Indra, S[=u]rya, etc. All G.o.ds are active manifestations of the Supreme G.o.d called Vishnu, who is born on earth to-day as Krishna." And the civaite says: "civa is the manifestation of the All-G.o.d," and repeats what the Vishnuite says, subst.i.tuting civa for Vishnu,[23] but with the difference already explained, namely, that the civa-sect has no incarnation to which to point, as has the Vishnuite. civa is modified Rudra, and both are old G.o.d-names. Later, however, the civaite has also his incarnate G.o.d. As an example of later civa-wors.h.i.+p may be taken Vishnu's own hymn to this G.o.d in vii. 80. 54 ff.: "Reverence to Bhava, carva, Rudra (civa), the bestower of gifts, the lord of cattle, the terrible, great, fearful, G.o.d of three wives;[24] to him who is peace, the Lord, the slayer of sacrifices (_makhaghna_)[25] ... to the blue-necked G.o.d; to the inventor (or author) ... to truth; to the red G.o.d, to the snake, to the unconquerable one, to the blue-haired one, to the trident-holder; ... to the inconceivable one ... to him whose sign is the bull; ... to the creator of all, who pervades all, who is wors.h.i.+pped by all, Lord of all, carva, cankara, civa, ... who has a thousand heads a thousand arms, and death, a thousand eyes and legs, whose acts are innumerable." In vii. 201. 71, civa is the unborn Lord, inconceivable, the soul of action, the unmoved one; and he that knows civa as the self of self, as the unknowable one, goes to _brahma_-bliss. This also is late civaism in pantheistic form. In other words, everything said of Vishnu must be repeated for civa.[26]

As an example of the position of the lowest member of the later trinity and his very subordinate place, may be cited a pa.s.sage from the preceding book of the epic. According to the story in vi. 65. 42 ff., the seers were all engaged in wors.h.i.+pping Brahm[=a], as the highest divinity they knew, when he suddenly began to wors.h.i.+p "the Person (Spirit), the highest Lord"; and Brahm[=a] then lauds Vishnu as such: "Thou art the G.o.d of the universe, the All-G.o.d, V[=a]sudeva (Krishna). Therefore I wors.h.i.+p thee as the divinity; thou, whose soul is devotion. Victory to thee, great G.o.d of all; thou takest satisfaction in that which benefits the world.... Lord of lords of all, thou out of whose navel springs the lotus, and whose eyes are large; Lord of the things that were, that are, that are to be; O dear one, self-born of the self-born ... O great snake, O boar,[27] O thou the first one, thou who dwellest in all, endless one, known as _brahma_, everlasting origin of all beings ... destroyer of the worlds! Thy feet are the earth ... heaven is thy head ... I, Brahm[=a], am thy form ... Sun and moon are thy eyes ... G.o.ds and all beings were by me created on earth, but they owe their origin to thy goodness." Then the creation of Vishnu through Pradyumna as a form of the deity is described, "and Vishnu (Aniruddha) created me, Brahm[=a], the upholder of the worlds; so am I made of Vishnu; I am caused only by thee."

While Brahm[=a] is represented here as identical with Vishnu he is at the same time a distinctly inferior personality, created by Vishnu for the purpose of creating worlds, a factor of inferior G.o.dliness to that of the World-Spirit, Krishna-Vishnu.

It had been stated by Holtzmann[28] that Brahm[=a] sometimes appears in the epic as a G.o.d superior to Vishnu, and on the strength of this L. von Schroeder has put the date of the early epic between the seventh and fourth centuries B.C, because at that time Brahm[=a] was the chief G.o.d.[29] von Schroeder rather exaggerates Holtzmann's results, and a.s.serts that "in the original form of the poem Brahm[=a]

appears _throughout_ as the highest and most revered G.o.d, while the wors.h.i.+p of Vishnu and civa as great G.o.ds is apparently a later intrusion" (_loc. cit._). This a.s.severation will have to be taken _c.u.m grano_. Had von Schroeder said 'pantheistic G.o.ds' he would have been correct in this regard, but we think that both Vishnu and civa were great G.o.ds, equal, if not superior to Brahm[=a], when the epic proper began. And, moreover, when one speaks of the original form of the poem he cannot mean the pseudo-epic or the ancient legends which have been woven into the epic, themselves of earlier date. No one means by the 'early epic' the tales of Agastya, of the creation of Death, of the making of ambrosia, but the story of the war in its earliest shape; for the epic poem must have begun with its own subject-matter. Now it is not true that Brahm[=a] is regarded 'throughout' the early poem as a chief G.o.d at all. If one investigate the cases where Vishnu or civa appears 'below' Brahm[=a] he will see, in almost every case that Holtzmann has registered, that this condition of affairs is recorded not in the epic proper but in the Brahmanic portions of the pseudo-epic, or in ancient legends alone. Thus in the story of the winning of ambrosia, of Agastya drinking ocean, and of R[=a]ma, Brahm[=a] appears to be above Vishnu, and also in some extracts from the pseudo-epic. For the real epic we know of but two cases that can be put into this category, and neither is sufficient to support the hypothesis built upon it.

For Krishna, when he ingeniously plots to have Bh[=i]ma slay Jar[=a]sandha, is said to have renounced killing Jar[=a]sandha himself, 'putting Brahm[=a]'s injunction before him' (ii. 22. 36), _i.e._ recalling Brahm[=a]'s admonition that only Bh[=i]ima was fated to slay the foe. And when Krishna and S[=a]tyaki salute Krishna's elder brother they do so (for being an elder brother Baladeva is Krishna's _Guru_) respectfully, 'just as Indra and Upendra salute Brahm[=a] the lord of _devas_' (ix. 34. 18). Upendra is Indra's younger brother, _i.e._, Vishnu (above). But these pa.s.sages are scanty proof for the statement that Brahm[=a] appears throughout the early epic as the highest G.o.d;[30] nor is there even so much evidence as this in the case of civa. Here, too, it is in the tale of the churning of ocean, of Sunda and Upasunda, of the creation of the death-power, and in late didactic (Brahmanic) pa.s.sages, where Brahm[=a] makes civa to destroy earth and civa is born of Brahm[=a], and only in such tales, or extracts from the Book of Peace, etc, that Brahm[=a] appears as superior. In all other cases, in the real action of the epic, he is subordinate to Vishnu and civa whenever he is compared with them. When he is not compared he appears, of course, as the great old Father-G.o.d who creates and foresees, but even here he is not untouched by pa.s.sion, he is not all-knowing, and his role as Creator is one that, with the allotment of duties among the G.o.ds, does not make him the highest G.o.d. All the old G.o.ds are great till greater appear on the scene. There is scarcely a supreme Brahm[=a] in the epic itself, but there is a great Brahm[=a], and a greater (older) than the sectarian G.o.ds in the old Brahmanic legends, while the old Brahmanhood rea.s.serts itself sporadically in the c[=a]nti, etc, and tells how the sectarian G.o.ds became supreme, how they quarrelled and laid the strife.

Since the adjustment of the relations between the persons of the later trinity is one of the most important questions in the theology of the completed epic, it will be necessary to go a little further afield and see what the latest books, which hitherto we have refrained as much as possible from citing, have to say on the subject. As it seems to be true that it was felt necessary by the civaite to offset the laud of Vishnu by ant.i.thetic laud of civa,[31] so after the completion of the Book of Peace, itself a late addition to the epic, and one that is markedly Vishnuitic, there was, before the Genealogy of Vishnu, an ant.i.thetic Book of Law, which is as markedly civaitic. In these books one finds the climax of sectarianism, in so far as it is represented by the epic; although in earlier books isolated pa.s.sages of late addition are sporadically to be found which have much the same nature.

Everywhere in these last additions Brahm[=a] is on a plane which is as much lower than that of the Supreme G.o.d as it is higher than that of Indra. Thus in viii. 33. 45, Indra takes refuge with Brahm[=a], but Brahm[=a] turns for help to civa (Bhava, Sth[=a]nu, Jishnu, etc.) with a hymn sung by the G.o.ds and seers. Then comes a description of cankara's[32] (civa's) war-car, with its metaphorical arms, where Vishnu is the point of Civa's arrow (which consists of Vishnu, Soma, Agni), and of this war-car Brahm[=a] himself is the charioteer (_ib._ 34. 76). With customary inconsistency, however, when civa wishes his son to be exalted he prostrates himself before Brahm[=a], who then gives this youth (_k.u.m[=a]ra_), called K[=a]rtikeya, the 'generals.h.i.+p'

over all beings _(s[=a]in[=a]patyam_, ix. 44. 43-49). There is even a 'celebration of Brahm[=a],' a sort of harvest festival, shared, as the text tells, by all the castes; and it must have been something like the religious games of the Greeks, for it was celebrated by athletic contests.[33] Brahm[=a], as the old independent creator, sometimes keeps his place, transmitting posterity through his 'seven mind-born sons,' the great seers (iii. 133; xii. 166. 11 ff.). But Brahm[=a]

himself is born either in the golden egg, as a secondary growth (as in xii. 312. 1-7), or, as is usually the case, he is born in the lotus which springs from the navel of musing[34] Vishnu (iii. 203. 14). In this pa.s.sage Brahm[=a] has four faces (Vedas) and four forms, _caturm[=u]rtis_ (15), and this epithet in other sections is transferred to Vishnu. Thus in vii. 29. 26, Vishnu(Vishu in the original) says _caturm[=u]rtir aham_, "I have four forms," but he never says _trim[=u]rtir aham_ ('I have three forms'). There is one pa.s.sage, however, that makes for a belief in a trinity. It stands in contrast to the various Vishnuite hymns, one of which may well be reviewed as an example of the regular Vishnuite laudation affected by the Krishna sect (iii. 12. 21 ff.): "Krishna is Vishnu, Brahm[=a], Soma, the Sun, Right, the Creator ('founder'), Yama, Fire, Wind, civa, Time, s.p.a.ce, Earth, and the cardinal points. Thou, Krishna, art the Creator ('emitter'); thou, chief of G.o.ds, didst wors.h.i.+p the highest; thou, Vishnu called, becamest Indra's younger brother, entering into sons.h.i.+p with Aditi; as a child with three steps thou didst fill the sky, s.p.a.ce, and earth, and pa.s.s in glory.... At the end of the age thou returnest all things into thyself. At the beginning of the age Brahm[=a] was born from thy lotus-navel as the venerable preceptor of all things (the same epithet is in vs. 22 applied to Vishnu himself); and civa sprang from thy angry forehead when the demons would kill him (Brahm[=a]); both are born of thee, in whom is the universe." The following verses (45 ff.) are like those of the Divine Song: "Thou, Knight Arjuna, art the soul of Krishna; thou art mine alone and thine alone am I; they that are mine are thine; he that hates thee hates Me, and he that is for thee, is for Me; thou art Nara ('man') and I am N[=a]r[=a]yana ('whose home is on the waters,' G.o.d);[35] we are the same, there is no difference between us." Again, like the Divine Song in the following verses (51-54) is the expression 'the sacrifice and he that sacrifices,' etc, together with the statement that Vishnu plays 'like a boy with playthings,' with the crowds of G.o.ds, Brahm[=a], civa, Indra, etc. The pa.s.sage opposed to this, and to other identifications of Vishnu with many G.o.ds, is one of the most flagrant interpolations in the epic. If there be anything that the Supreme G.o.d in civaite or Vishnuite form does not do it is to extol at length, without obvious reason, his rivals' acts and incarnations, Yet in this clumsy pa.s.sage just such an extended laudation of Vishnu is put into the mouth of civa. In fact, iii. 272, from 30 to 76, is an interpretation of the most nave sort, and it is here that we find the approach to the later _trim[=u]rti_ (trinity): "Having the form of Brahm[=a] he creates; having a human body (as Krishna) he protects, in the nature of civa he would destroy--these are the three appearances or conditions (_avasth[=a]s_) of the Father-G.o.d". (Praj[=a]pati).[36]