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

in the past to introduce a new rite? But since later authors, like those of
Vedic prose, came to use both forms indiscriminately, even then the other
interpretation (identification of the subjects) became soon possible.
Not infrequently, community of more or less striking characteristics led
the Vedic authorities to regard two figures or concepts as closely connected
or even to identify them. As is well known, Prajäpati is of ten characterized
as "being beyond verbal expression and defiryition" (anirukta) 39 (see, e. g.,
KB. 23, 2 (23,5,3 ff.); 23, 6 (23, 9, 8 ff.; SB. 5, 3, 5, 31; 6, 4,1,6).
This adjective is also used to express a striking quality of the ide~ of a
whole that is a unity or unified totality, viz. sarvam" o (see, e. g. , SB. 1,
3, 5, 10; 1, 4, 1, 21; 2, 2, 1, 3 and also 7, 5, 2, 38). Now, Prajäpati is more
than on ce explicitly stated to be (the) sarvam: see e. g. SB. 1, 3, 5, 10
and GB. 2, 1, 26. The double statement in SB. 12, 4, 2, 1 "Prajäpati is anirukta1)
and (the) All .. 1 is aniruktam" gives occasion to the observation that
the god and the All have their being beyond verbal definition in common.
Neither Prajäpati nor the All, Totality"z of which no parts are distinguishable,
can be described by words denoting phenomenal objects or concepts .
It seems worth noticing that in TU. 2, 7 dealing with the original self-developing
non-existence which in point of fact means the basis and origin
of all existence (Le. Bráhman) this is qualified as aniruktam. In later
(upani!?adic) texts Brahman is said to be sarvam idam, that is "the totality
of beings and objects that are here", which of ten , but not necessarily,
means "this (the) universe""3: see, e.g., ChU. 3,14,1 sarvam khalv idam
brahma; MaiU. 4, 6 brahma khalv idam vava sarvam. In SB. 10, 2, 4, 6 the
seven-syllabled Bráhman (Le. the complete fourfold Veda as Bráhman 's
manifestation) is said to be "this All" (etat sarvam). Elsewhere, however,
Brahman is identified or at least equalized with the idea expressed by sarvam
alone: BÄU. 2, 5, 1 "this (the atman) is free from death, this is Brahman,
this is sarvam" (cf. MNU. 14). Compare also 1,4,10 "in the beginning
Brahman was this (universe , idam); it knew only itself ... ; that is why
it became (abhavat) sarvam" (that means: sin ce Brahman was the totality
of phenomenal existence and was aware of nothing else, it proved to be
(the) AIl) ..... That the conclusion Prajäpati and Brahman are 'identical' was
actually drawn appears from BÄ U. 5, 3, 1 stating that the heart is Prajäpati
as well as Brahman; compare also MNU. 471 "you are Vi!?l).u, Brahman,
Prajäpati". Elsewhere, however, they are distinct but are closely connected:
according to BÄU. 5, 5, 1 the primaeval waters produced the real (satyam)
which is BrahlI!an, Brahman produced Prajäpati, Prajäpati the gods; in
BÄU. 6, 5, 4 (SB. 10, 6, 5, 9) Prajäpati received the teaching of this up a-
39 See L. Renou and L. Silburn, in Sarüpa-Bhäratï, Vol. L. Sarup, Hoshiarpur
1954, p. 68 ff.; J. Gonda, in Münchener St. z. Sprachw. 44 (1985), p. 59 ff. -
For nameless high gods see also Heiler, op. cit., p. 467; E. Dammann, Die Religionen
Afrikas, Stuttgart 1963, p. 28; J.F. Rock, The Nakhi Näga cult, Rome
1962, II, p. 279 ff.: "Unless the origin is related one should not speak about it";
R. Pettazzoni, The All-knowing god, London 1956, p. 371.
40 See J. Gonda, All, universe and totality in the Satapatha-BrähmaQa, JOIB 32
(1982), p. 1ff. ,
41 Not "everything" (J. Eggeling's translation in Sat. Br., V, p.183).
42 See, e. g. , M. Eliade, La nostalgie des origines, Paris 1971, p. 164 ff.
43 For texts, particulars etc. see Gonda, in JOIB 32, P ~ f. ,
44 Cf., e.g., BAU. 3, 7, 1 "he knowsBrahman ... , heknowsAll"; SB. 14,4,2,20
(BAU. 1, 4, 9).
47