Prajapati's relations with Brahman, Brhaspati and Brahma - DWC

VI
Prajapati and Bráhman
Proceeding now to discuss the relation bet ween Prajäpati and the impersonal
concept Bráhman I draw, by way of introduction , attention to the
considerable diversity in opinions implicitly held or explicitly expressed
on this point by the ancient authorities. At times the personal god and
Bráhman are clearly distinct; then again they are different but similar ;
here it is Prajäpati who creates Bráhman or possesses Bráhman; there
Bráhman is the ultimate principle. There is a tendency to identification,
and the supposition seems warranted that this has been a process of some
stages, which cannot, it would appear, be ascertained according to the
principles of chronologyl. Advocates of an evolutionistic and intrinsically
pseudo-historical approach to problems of Vedic religion have of ten disregarded
some characteristic peculiarities of more or less arc ha ic systems
of categories and classification designed for organizing the perception of
the world: these are not necessarilyfree from significant simultaneous differences
of opinion, disagreement and inconsistencies 2.
Brahman and Prajäpati occur (almost) side by side in the enumerations
of the deities honoured (satiated) or worshipped on the occasion of the
close of Vedic study (SG. 4, 9, 3; in ÄsvG. 3, 4, 1 the very long series of
the names begins with Prajäpati, Brahman, the Vedas, the gods ... )3. At
the opening of Vedic study PGS. 2, 10, 3 ff. enjoins that offering is to be
made to Brahman, the metres, Prajäpati, the gods and so on. However, in
the brief but adapted formula used when the annual course of study is
opened (ÄsvG. 3, 5, 4) Prajäpati's name does not occur. - On other occasions
bali offerings should be made to Brahman, Prajäpati, the deities
of the house and others (PGS. 2, 9, 2).
At the beginning of the ceremony to secure the union of the king with
HiraI].yagarbha the oblations are consecrated with formulae addressed to
1 . Nevertheless, there is no difference of opinion with regard to their high place
in the hierarchy. A. Minard, Trois énigmes sur les Cent Chemins, 11, Paris 1956,
p. 69 draws attention to the fact that the verb ik~- in the sen se of "to consider" is
mainly used of divine or superior beings including bráhman (e. g. SB. 11, 2, 3,
3). Formulations such as the following may run the risk of being anachronistic
and are likely to create serious misunderstandfug: "The most important epiphany
of Brahman is found in his Prajäpati aspect. As early as the J!,V. he (i.e. Bráhman)
is styled Prajäpati ... " (Bhattacharji, Theo~ony, p. 322).
2 See Gonda. Prajäpati 's rise, Epilogue, p. 195.
3 From this place Macdonell, Vedic mythology. p. 119; and Keith, Religion and
philosophy. p. 207 erroneously conclude that "in the sütras Prajäpati is specifically
identified with Brahman".
38