English
Bhattacharyya’s ‘ Studies in Vedantism,’ where it is contended that ‘ every devata demands a loka. Psychologically put, an absolute unity, to be real, must be not only thought but realised in some sort of intuition. In aesthetic (visual) intui¬ tion, for example, we realise a devata, like the sun, the unity of seeing and the visible world.The distinction between the subject and object in ordi¬ nary knowledge appears in the absolute sphere as a distinction between loka and devata. Only in ordinary knowledge the subject takes the lead, whereas here the devata, which corresponds to the object, is the higher reality. What is from the lower standpoint my intuition of an object is from the higher standpoint, a devata shining, revealing himself in a loka.'-* * Studies in Vedantism, p. 19. 52 A SYSTEMATIC STUDY OF TfiB VEDANTA As already observed, the so-called ' polytheism ’ of the Bgveda does not stand for an unmitigated pluralism, without any redeeming grace either from the logical or the religious point of view. Properly speaking, it marks a phase of qualified pluralism in the gradual emergence of a growing sense of the One in the many. This first feature of Hindu theism is clearly evidenced by the concept of organic dependence in the way of major and minor (Vy HWyM PT.) among the gods in their relation to one another—by the concepts, in particular, of reciprocal inherence CqiqfcTTOr.) and reciprocal generation As against an anar¬ chical regime of the gods implied in the term * polytheism,’ the inherent unifying tendency of the Vedic religion exhibits itself, without detriment, however, to the individuality of the gods distributively, in the collective concept of sarvadevatd, or the one more commonly used vi&vedevah. What such a concept clearly stipulates for is a federated community of gods, without the suggestion either of an absolute or limited monarchy, if at all, only a divine sovereignty in a state of shifting equilibrium. Perhaps it would not be going too far to infer from the non-elision of the inflectional suffix in the collective term ‘ vttvedevah' that full concession has been made for the respec¬ tive rights of each god in the pantheon, just as in stressing the individuality of the component members of a collection or assembly, such as a ‘ jury/ for example, the term is always used in the plural. To what extent this divine collectivism was in- THE VEDANTA IN THE MAKING g3 fluenced and moulded by the social environment of the people of that age, it is not easy to determine. The Yedic pantheon might have been, for aught we know,* the replica of a particulate structure in ancient Indian polity, evolving from the asso¬ ciation of free men as the basis of the cor¬ porate life in tribal assembly and village com¬ munity and, through village government by such corporations as sabhas and samitis, exhibiting its typical character in centrifugal tendencies against the incidence of a Central state with sole sovereignty. It is, therefore, quite in the fitness of things that the priest should no longer appear in the vole of mediator, but only as the agent and representative of the Ydjflika or the congregation before the altar united in mind and purpose. Nowhere does it come out so pointedly as in the high-pitched strain of unison on which the Rgveda closest—“ united be your intentions, united (the wishes) of your hearts, united be your thoughts, so that there may be thorough union among you.” It would be carrying a philosophical interpretation to its breaking-point in trying, as some have done, to elicit from the suggested view of unity of purpose between different minds, the metaphysical creed of Advaitism with its doctrine of an existential oneness of souls. It is necessary to consider certain accessory phenomena contributory towards the emergence of ij * Vide Dr. B. N. Seal's Syllabus in Indian Philosophy . t writ nvvtfa'. mm w mm% ft wtwr vwwfii l 54 A SYSTEMATIC STUDY OP THE VEDANTA the next higher stage, namely, of monotheism. At the very outset one cannot help commenting on the doubtful wisdom of coining the term ' heno- theism ’ to designate a stage in the evolution of the religious consciousness of the race—a stage which is ever in a state of unstable equilibrium, and justi¬ fies itself only by a perpetual self-transcendence. The mental state that is supposed to have originated it clearly belies the' clear-cut neatness and definite¬ ness that such a coinage of a new term is suggestive of. It is pre-eminently a case of arrested develop¬ ment, the' accompanying mental state of the worshipper having only a transitive and not a substantive reality. While admitting that Heno- theism, as * an unconscious groping towards mono¬ theism ’ seems ‘ to be the result of the logic of religion,’ Prof. Radhakrishnan rightly observes that ‘ the whole position is a logical contradiction, where the heart showed the right path of progress and belief contradicted it.’* Indeed, such a rotatory monotheism satisfies neither the requirements of logical rigour nor of religious integrity. According¬ ly, there seems to be no exaggeration about Bloom¬ field’s description of it as ‘ polytheism grown cold in service, and unnice in its distinctions, leading to an opportunist monotheism, in which every god takes hold of the sceptre and none keeps it.’t The first thing that arrests our attention in this steady advance towards monotheism is the idea of * Indian Philosophy, Vol. I, p, 9. t The Religion of the Veda, p. 199. THE VEDANTA IN THE MAKING 55 a transcendent reality—a world of Forms or Essences—standing over .against the phenomenal world. This is clearly implied in the distinction that is consistently made between the two aspects or forms—one supreme or refined (trot*) and the other lower or gross —of each of the more im¬ portant gods, such as Agni, fire-god, Vayu, wind- god, Indra, the sovereign or champion god, the Indian Zeus, Soma, the moon-god, the god of inspiration or elixir of life, and Siirya, the sun-god. Accordingly, the gods have been characterised as the f twice-born ’ ( f fes w r p n:).* For example, Agni is in¬ voked, and the prayer runs thus : “0 Agni, we shall offer our homage unto thy higher ancestry, glorify with hymns thy lower or proximate place of bjrth. ”f Then, again, in the famous context in which mention is made of the last rite's of the dead and the belief entertained that the eyes relapse unto the sun and breath unto the wind, Agni comes in for a double-edged reception. Referring to the fire on the funeral pyre, the worshipper exclaims “ I repudiate this Agni which is the consumer of flesh; let this muck-carrier retire into the abode of Yama, the god of death. May the other Agni, who is here, knowingly carry the oblation unto the gods! ” ^ By way of precedence, therefore, that Agni is in¬ voked who is supposed to be the custodian of the * Ftgveda, VI. 60. ii. t fMfo * Tct <nnnnf, nv$—Ihid., II. 9. iii. t urorofir’ utWlfaf?, fturoi ifwifarcl X. 16. ix. 56 A SYSTEMATIC STUDY OP THE VEDANTA immortal part of the dead, and is importuned thus : " 0 Agni, do thou transport, by virtue' of that gracious appearance of thine, this departed soul into the abode of the virtuous.”* This invocation irresistibly reminds one of a kindred prayer in the H&wsyopanishad ,f addressed to Pusan, the solar god, and, what is more to the point, to Agni in the same context: ‘ * 0, Fire, lead us on by a virtuous path to our reward. 0 God, thou knowest all our deeds; take off the crooked things from us. We offer addresses in homage unto you.”f The point to be specially noted here is the investiture of Agni with an all-embracing knowledge and custodianship of the moral distinctions. Similarly, VAyu is sup¬ posed to possess a superior and an inferior form— in its superior form going by the name of. ‘ Matari6va.'§ In the case of Indra , Soma and SHrya (as sometimes also in the case of Agni), three and not merely two forms are recognised—the lower or gross, the higher or refined and the highest, supreme or eternal. Indra is held to sustain two orders of existence and the third abides eternal and immutable in heaven. || This is in substantial * wtff wmwwr i 5 ft i qwf fiwrcrit warn 'ffcni i— Ibid., X, 16. iv. t Already quoted and commented upon in Lecture I. liNitwixwWt qfiret * Wfa iRgveda, I. 168. i-vi; VII. 56. ii-xii; VII. 94. ii-x; X. 186. i-iii. || Ibid., VII, 51. iv and 52. vii. THB VBDXNTA IN THE MAZING 57 agreement with the ascription of ‘ * * * § three strides ’ one of them being designated the per* feet or the supreme locus standi (enrf qq{) reveal¬ ing itself to the wise and sustaining within it a fountainhead of nectar (iw ^q;).+ So far as Soma is concerned people think that they can partake of Soma by extracting the juice from the Soma-plant, but the wise alone know that the true Soma is beyond the reach of mortals, :J is the seer of all, and shining resplendent in his third abode (s?fcf HPr).§ Finally, in the well-known rk (No. 10) of the 50th sukta of the 1st Mandala, Surya appears as having three forms or levels of existence : one is the gross form (q) which dispels the darkness of the terrestrial region, the next higher is that of a god among the gods and finally the highest is that of supreme effulgence which is but the Supreme Being. || The other notable factor in promoting the ad¬ vance from polytheism to monotheism is the con¬ cept of Bta (qg 7 f) as the sustaining principle alike of the gods and the world. Standing, as it does inter alia , for an impersonal order or law, pervading the physical and the moral world, it may be said to have created a landmark in the history of Vedic * Ibid., I. 22. xvii, xx. t Ibid., I. 164. v. t Ibid., X. 86. iii. § Ibid., IX.