Brahmanism.
§ 1. Our Knowledge of Brahmanism. Sir William Jones.
§ 2. Difficulty of this Study. The Complexity of the System. The Hindoos
have no History. Their Ultra-Spiritualism.
§ 3. Helps from Comparative Philology. The Aryans in Central Asia.
§ 4. The Aryans in India. The Native Races. The Vedic Age. Theology of
the Vedas.
§ 5. Second Period. Laws of Manu. The Brahmanic Age.
§ 6. The Three Hindoo Systems of Philosophy,--the Sánkhya, Vedanta, and
Nyasa.
§ 7. Origin of the Hindoo Triad.
§ 8. The Epics, the Puranas, and Modern Hindoo Worship.
§ 9. Relation of Brahmanism to Christianity.
§ 1. Our Knowledge of Brahmanism. Sir William Jones.
It is more than forty years since the writer, then a boy, was one day
searching among the heavy works of a learned library in the country to
find some entertaining reading for a summer afternoon. It was a library
rich in theology, in Greek and Latin classics, in French and Spanish
literature, but contained little to amuse a child. Led by some happy
fortune, in turning over a pile of the "Monthly Anthology" his eye was
attracted by the title of a play, "Sácontala,[30] or the Fatal Ring; an
Indian Drama, translated from the original Sanskrit and Pracrit. Calcutta,
1789," and reprinted in the Anthology in successive numbers. Gathering
them together, the boy took them into a great chestnut-tree, amid the
limbs of which he had constructed a study, and there, in the warm,
fragrant shade, read hour after hour this bewitching story. The tale was
suited to the day and the scene,--filled with images of tender girls and
religious sages, who lived amid a tropical abundance of flowers and
fruits; so blending the beauty of nature with the charm of love. Nature
becomes in it alive, and is interpenetrated with human sentiments.
Sákuntalá loves the flowers as sisters; the Késara-tree beckons to her
with its waving blossoms, and clings to her in affection as she bends over
it. The jasmine, the wife of the mango-tree, embraces her lord, who leans
down to protect his blooming bride, "the moonlight of the grove." The holy
hermits defend the timid fawn from the hunters, and the birds, grown tame
in their peaceful solitudes, look tranquilly on the intruder. The demons
occasionally disturb the sacrificial rites, but, like well-educated
demons, retire at once, as soon as the protecting Raja enters the sacred
grove. All breathes of love, gentle and generous sentiment, and quiet joys
in the bosom of a luxuriant and beautiful summer land. Thus, in this poem,
written a hundred years before Christ, we find that romantic view of
nature, unknown to the Greeks and Romans, and first appearing in our own
time in such writers as Rousseau, Goethe, and Byron.
He who translated this poem into a European language, and communicated it
to modern readers, was Sir William Jones, one of the few first-class
scholars whom the world has produced. In him was joined a marvellous gift
of language with a love for truth and beauty, which detected by an
infallible instinct what was worth knowing, in the mighty maze of Oriental
literature. He had also the rare good fortune of being the first to
discover this domain of literature in Asia, unknown to the West till he
came to reveal it. The vast realm of Hindoo, Chinese, and Persian genius
was as much a new continent to Europe, when discovered by Sir William
Jones, as America was when made known by Columbus. Its riches had been
accumulating during thousands of years, waiting till the fortunate man
should arrive, destined to reveal to our age the barbaric pearl and gold
of the gorgeous East,--the true wealth of Ormus and of Ind.
Sir William Jones came well equipped for his task. Some men are born
philologians, loving _words_ for their own sake,--men to whom the devious
paths of language are open highways; who, as Lord Bacon says, "have come
forth from the second general curse, which was the confusion of tongues,
by the art of grammar." Sir William Jones was one of these, perhaps the
greatest of them. A paper in his own handwriting tells us that he knew
critically eight languages,--English, Latin, French, Italian, Greek,
Arabic, Persian, and Sanskrit; less perfectly eight others,--Spanish,
Portuguese, German, Runic, Hebrew, Bengali, Hindi, Turkish; and was
moderately familiar with twelve more,--Tibetian, Pâli, Phalavi, Deri,
Russian, Syriac, Ethiopic, Coptic, Welsh, Swedish, Dutch, and Chinese.
There have been, perhaps, other scholars who have known as many tongues as
this. But usually they are crushed by their own accumulations, and we
never hear of their accomplishing anything. Sir William Jones was not one
of these, "deep versed in books, and shallow in himself." Language was his
instrument, but knowledge his aim. So, when he had mastered Sanskrit and
other Oriental languages, he rendered into English not only Sákuntalá, but
a far more important work, "The Laws of Manu"; "almost the only work in
Sanskrit," says Max Müller, "the early date of which, assigned to it by
Sir William Jones from the first, has not been assailed." He also
translated from the Sanskrit the fables of Hitopadesa, extracts from the
Vedas, and shorter pieces. He formed a society in Calcutta for the study
of Oriental literature, was its first president, and contributed numerous
essays, all valuable, to its periodical, the "Asiatic Researches." He
wrote a grammar of the Persian language, and translated from Persian into
French the history of Nadir Shah. From the Arabic he also translated many
pieces, and among them the Seven Poems suspended in the temple at Mecca,
which, in their subjects and style, seem an Arabic anticipation of Walt
Whitman. He wrote in Latin a Book of Commentaries on Asiatic Poetry, in
English several works on the Mohammedan and Civil Law, with a translation
of the Greek Orations of Isæus. As a lawyer, a judge, a student of natural
history, his ardor of study was equally apparent. He presented to the
Royal Society in London a large collection of valuable Oriental
manuscripts, and left a long list of studies in Sanskrit to be pursued by
those who should come after him. His generous nature showed itself in his
opposition to slavery and the slave-trade, and his open sympathy with the
American Revolution. His correspondence was large, including such names as
those of Benjamin Franklin, Sir Joseph Banks, Lord Monboddo, Gibbon,
Warren Hastings, Dr. Price, Edmund Burke, and Dr. Parr. Such a man ought
to be remembered, especially by all who take an interest in the studies to
which he has opened the way, for he was one who had a right to speak of
himself, as he has spoken in these lines:--
"Before thy mystic altar, heavenly truth,
I kneel in manhood, as I knelt in youth.
Thus let me kneel, till this dull form decay,
And life's last shade be brightened by thy ray,
Then shall my soul, now lost in clouds below,
Soar without bound, without consuming glow."
Since the days of Sir William Jones immense progress has been made in the
study of Sanskrit literature, especially within the last thirty or forty
years, from the time when the Schlegels led the way in this department.
Now, professors of Sanskrit are to be found in all the great European
universities, and in this country we have at least one Sanskrit scholar of
the very highest order, Professor William D. Whitney, of Yale. The system
of Brahmanism, which a short time since could only be known to Western
readers by means of the writings of Colebrooke, Wilkins, Wilson, and a few
others, has now been made accessible by the works of Lassen, Max Müller,
Burnouf, Muir, Pictet, Bopp, Weber, Windischmann, Vivien de Saint-Martin,
and a multitude of eminent writers in France, England, and Germany.[31]
§ 2. Difficulty of this Study. The Complexity of the System. The Hindoos
have no History. Their Ultra-Spiritualism.
But, notwithstanding these many helps, Brahmanism remains a difficult
study. Its source is not in a man, but in a caste. It is not the religion
of a Confucius, a Zoroaster, a Mohammed, but the religion of the Brahmans.
We call it Brahmanism, and it can be traced to no individual as its
founder or restorer. There is no personality about it.[32] It is a vast
world of ideas, but wanting the unity which is given by the life of a man,
its embodiment and representative.
But what a system? How large, how difficult to understand! So vast, so
complicated, so full of contradictions, so various and changeable, that
its very immensity is our refuge! We say, It is impossible to do justice
to such a system; therefore do not demand it of us.
India has been a land of mystery from the earliest times. From the most
ancient days we hear of India as the most populous nation of the world,
full of barbaric wealth and a strange wisdom. It has attracted conquerors,
and has been overrun by the armies of Semiramis, Darius, Alexander; by
Mahmud, and Tamerlane, and Nadir Shah; by Lord Clive and the Duke of
Wellington. These conquerors, from the Assyrian Queen to the British
Mercantile Company, have overrun and plundered India, but have left it the
same unintelligible, unchangeable, and marvellous country as before. It is
the same land now which the soldiers of Alexander described,--the land of
grotto temples dug out of solid porphyry; of one of the most ancient Pagan
religions of the world; of social distinctions fixed and permanent as the
earth itself; of the sacred Ganges; of the idols of Juggernaut, with its
bloody worship; the land of elephants and tigers; of fields of rice and
groves of palm; of treasuries filled with chests of gold, heaps of pearls,
diamonds, and incense. But, above all, it is the land of unintelligible
systems of belief, of puzzling incongruities, and irreconcilable
contradictions.
The Hindoos have sacred books of great antiquity, and a rich literature
extending back twenty or thirty centuries; yet no history, no chronology,
no annals. They have a philosophy as acute, profound and, spiritual as any
in the world, which is yet harmoniously associated with the coarsest
superstitions. With a belief so abstract that it almost escapes the grasp
of the most speculative intellect, is joined the notion that sin can be
atoned for by bathing in the Ganges or repeating a text of the Veda. With
an ideal pantheism resembling that of Hegel, is united the opinion that
Brahma and Siva can be driven from the throne of the universe by any one
who will sacrifice a sufficient number of wild horses. To abstract one's
self from matter, to renounce all the gratification of the senses, to
macerate the body, is thought the true road to felicity; and nowhere in
the world are luxury, licentiousness and the gratification of the
appetites carried so far. Every civil right and privilege of ruler and
subject is fixed in a code of laws, and a body of jurisprudence older far
than the Christian era, and the object of universal reverence; but the
application of these laws rests (says Rhode) on the arbitrary decisions of
the priests, and their execution on the will of the sovereign. The
constitution of India is therefore like a house without a foundation and
without a roof. It is a principle of Hindoo religion not to kill a worm,
not even to tread on a blade of grass, for fear of injuring life; but the
torments, cruelties, and bloodshed inflicted by Indian tyrants would shock
a Nero or a Borgia. Half the best informed writers on India will tell you
that the Brahmanical religion is pure monotheism; the other half as
confidently assert that they worship a million gods. Some teach us that
the Hindoos are spiritualists and pantheists; others that their idolatry
is more gross than that of any living people.
Is there any way of reconciling these inconsistencies? If we cannot find
such an explanation, there is at least one central point where we may
place ourselves; one elevated position, from which this mighty maze will
not seem wholly without a plan. In India the whole tendency of thought is
ideal, the whole religion a pure spiritualism. An ultra, one-sided
idealism is the central tendency of the Hindoo mind. The God of Brahmanism
is an intelligence, absorbed in the rest of profound contemplation. The
good man of this religion is he who withdraws from an evil world into
abstract thought.
Nothing else explains the Hindoo character as this does. An eminently
religious people, it is their one-sided spiritualism, their extreme
idealism, which gives rise to all their incongruities. They have no
history and no authentic chronology, for history belongs to this world,
and chronology belongs to time. But this world and time are to them wholly
uninteresting; God and eternity are all in all. They torture themselves
with self-inflicted torments; for the body is the great enemy of the
soul's salvation, and they must beat it down by ascetic mortifications.
But asceticism, here as everywhere else, tends to self-indulgence, since
one extreme produces another. In one part of India, therefore, devotees
are swinging on hooks in honor of Siva, hanging themselves by the feet,
head downwards, over a fire, rolling on a bed of prickly thorns, jumping
on a couch filled with sharp knives, boring holes in their tongues, and
sticking their bodies full of pins and needles, or perhaps holding the
arms over the head till they stiffen in that position. Meantime in other
places whole regions are given over to sensual indulgences, and companies
of abandoned women are connected with different temples and consecrate
their gains to the support of their worship.
As one-sided spiritualism will manifest itself in morals in the two forms
of austerity and sensuality, so in religion it shows itself in the
opposite direction of an ideal pantheism and a gross idolatry.
Spiritualism first fills the world full of God, and this is a true and
Christian view of things. But it takes another step, which is to deny all
real existence to the world, and so runs into a false pantheism. It first
says, truly, "There is nothing _without_ God." It next says, falsely,
"There is nothing _but_ God." This second step was taken in India by means
of the doctrine of _Maya_, or _Illusion. Maya_ means the delusive shows
which spirit assumes. For there is nothing but spirit; which neither
creates nor is created, neither acts nor suffers, which cannot change, and
into which all souls are absorbed when they free themselves by meditation
from the belief that they suffer or are happy, that they can experience
either pleasure or pain. The next step is to polytheism. For if God
neither creates nor destroys, but only seems to create and destroy, these
_appearances_ are not united together as being the acts of one Being, but
are separate, independent phenomena. When you remove personality from the
conception of God, as you do in removing will, you remove unity. Now if
creation be an illusion, and there be no creation, still the _appearance_
of creation is a fact. But as there is no substance but spirit, this
_appearance_ must have its cause in spirit, that is, is a _divine_
appearance, is God. So destruction, in the same way, is an appearance of
God, and reproduction is an appearance of God, and every other appearance
in nature is a manifestation of God. But the unity of will and person
being taken away, we have not one God, but a multitude of gods,--or
polytheism.
Having begun this career of thought, no course was possible for the human
mind to pursue but this. An ultra spiritualism must become pantheism, and
pantheism must go on to polytheism. In India this is not a theory, but a
history. We find, side by side, a spiritualism which denies the existence
of anything but motionless spirit or Brahm, and a polytheism which
believes and worships Brahma the Creator, Siva the Destroyer, Vischnu the
Preserver, Indra the God of the Heavens, the Sactis or energies of the
gods, Krishna the Hindoo Apollo, Doorga, and a host of others, innumerable
as the changes and appearances of things.
But such a system as this must necessarily lead also to idolatry. There is
in the human mind a tendency to worship, and men must worship something.
But they believe in one Being, the absolute Spirit, the supreme and only
God,--Para Brahm; _him_ they cannot worship, for he is literally an
unknown God. He has no qualities; no attributes, no activity. He is
neither the object of hope, fear, love, nor aversion. Since there is
nothing in the universe but spirit and illusive appearances, and they
cannot worship spirit because it is absolutely unknown, they must worship
these appearances, which are at any rate _divine_ appearances, and which
do possess some traits, qualities, character; _are_ objects of hope and
fear. But they cannot worship them as appearances, they must worship them
as persons. But if they have an inward personality or soul, they become
real beings, and also beings independent of Brahm, whose appearances they
are. They must therefore have an outward personality; in other words, a
body, a shape, emblematical and characteristic; that is to say, they
become idols.
Accordingly idol-worship is universal in India. The most horrible and
grotesque images are carved in the stone of the grottos, stand in rude,
block-like statues in the temple, or are coarsely painted on the walls.
Figures of men with heads of elephants or of other animals, or with six or
seven human heads,--sometimes growing in a pyramid, one out of the other,
sometimes with six hands coming from one shoulder,--grisly and uncouth
monsters, like nothing in nature, yet too grotesque for symbols,--such are
the objects of the Hindoo worship.
§ 3. Helps from Comparative Philology. The Aryans in Central Asia.
We have seen how hopeless the task has appeared of getting any definite
light on Hindoo chronology or history. To the ancient Egyptians events
were so important that the most trivial incidents of daily life were
written on stone and the imperishable records of the land, covering the
tombs and obelisks, have patiently waited during long centuries, till
their decipherer should come to read them. To the Hindoos, on the other
hand, all events were equally unimportant. The most unhistoric people on
earth, they cared more for the minutiæ of grammar, or the subtilties of
metaphysics, than for the whole of their past. The only date which has
emerged from this vague antiquity is that of Chandragupta, a contemporary
of Alexander, and called by the Greek historians Sandracottus. He became
king B.C. 315, and as, at his accession, Buddha had been dead (by Hindoo
statement) one hundred and sixty-two years, Buddha may have died B.C. 477.
We can thus import a single date from Greek history into that of India.
This is the whole.
But all at once light dawns on us from an unexpected quarter. While we can
learn nothing concerning the history of India from its literature, and
nothing from its inscriptions or carved temples, _language_, comes to our
aid. The fugitive and airy sounds, which seem so fleeting and so
changeable, prove to be more durable monuments than brass or granite. The
study of the Sanskrit language has told us a long story concerning the
origin of the Hindoos. It has rectified the ethnology of Blumenbach, has
taught us who were the ancestors of the nations of Europe, and has given
us the information that one great family, the Indo-European, has done most
of the work of the world. It shows us that this family consists of seven
races,--the Hindoos, the Persians, the^ Greeks, the Romans, who all
emigrated to the south from the original ancestral home; and the Kelts,
the Teutons, and Slavi, who entered Europe on the northern side of the
Caucasus and the Caspian Sea. This has been accomplished by the new
science of Comparative Philology. A comparison of languages has made it
too plain to be questioned, that these seven races were originally one;
that they must have emigrated from a region of Central Asia, at the east
of the Caspian, and northwest of India; that they were originally a
pastoral race, and gradually changed their habits as they descended from
those great plains into the valleys of the Indus and the Euphrates. In
these seven linguistic families the roots of the most common names are the
same; the grammatical constructions are also the same; so that no scholar,
who has attended to the subject, can doubt that the seven languages are
all daughters of one common mother-tongue.
Pursuing the subject still further, it has been found possible to
conjecture with no little confidence what was the condition of family life
in this great race of Central Asia, before its dispersion. The original
stock has received the name Aryan. This designation occurs in Manu (II.
22), who says: "As far as the eastern and western oceans, between the two
mountains, lies the land which the wise have named Ar-ya-vesta, or
_inhabited by honorable men_." The people of Iran receive this same
appellation in the Zend Avesta, with the same meaning of _honorable_.
Herodotus testifies that the Medes were formerly called Ἄριοι (Herod. VII.
61). Strabo mentions that, in the time of Alexander, the whole region
about the Indus was called _Ariana_. In modern times, the word _Iran_ for
Persia and _Erin_ for Ireland are possible reminiscences of the original
family appellation.
The Ayrans, long before the age of the Vedas or the Zend Avesta, were
living as a pastoral people on the great plains east of the Caspian Sea.
What their condition was at that epoch is deduced by the following method:
If it is found that the name of any fact is the same in two or more of the
seven tribal languages of this stock, it is evident that the name was
given to it before they separated. For there is no reason to suppose that
two nations living wide apart would have independently selected the same
word for the same object. For example, since we find that _house_ is in
Sanskrit _Damn_ and _Dam_; in Zend, _Demana_; in Greek, Δόμος; in Latin,
_Domus_; in Irish, _Dahm_; in Slavonic, _Domu_,--from which root comes
also our English word _Domestic_,--we may be pretty sure that the original
Aryans lived in houses. When we learn that _boat_ was in Sanskrit _Nau_ or
_nauka_; in Persian, _Naw, nawah;_ in Greek, Ναῦς; in Latin, _Navis_; in
old Irish, _Noi_ or _nai_; in old German, _Nawa_ or _nawi_; and in Polish
_Nawa_, we cannot doubt that they knew something of what we call in
English _Nau_tical affairs, or Navigation. But as the words designating
masts, sails, yards, &c. differ wholly from each other in all these
linguistic families, it is reasonable to infer that the Aryans, before
their dispersion, went only in boats, with oars, on the rivers of their
land, the Oxus and Jaxartes, and did not sail anywhere on the sea.
Pursuing this method, we see that we can ask almost any question
concerning the condition of the Aryans, and obtain an answer by means of
Comparative Philology.
Were they a pastoral people? The very word _pastoral_ gives us the answer.
For _Pa_ in Sanskrit means to watch, to guard, as men guard cattle,--from
which a whole company of words has come in all the Aryan languages.
The results of this method of inquiry, so far as given by Pictet, are
these. Some 3000 years B.C.,[33] the Aryans, as yet undivided into
Hindoos, Persians, Kelts, Latins, Greeks, Teutons, and Slavi, were living
in Central Asia, in a region of which Bactriana was the centre. Here they
must have remained long enough to have developed their admirable language,
the mother-tongue of those which we know. They were essentially a
pastoral, but not a nomad people, having fixed homes. They had oxen,
horses, sheep, goats, hogs, and domestic fowls. Herds of cows fed in
pastures, each the property of a community, and each with a cluster of
stables in the centre. The daughters[34] of the house were the
dairy-maids; the food was chiefly the products of the dairy and the flesh
of the cattle. The cow was, however, the most important animal, and gave
its name to many plants, and even to the clouds and stars, in which men
saw heavenly herds passing over the firmament above them.
But the Aryans were not an exclusively pastoral people; they certainly had
barley, and perhaps other cereals, before their dispersion. They possessed
the plough, the mill for grinding grain; they had hatchet,[35] hammer,
auger. The Aryans were acquainted with several metals, among which were
gold, silver, copper, tin. They knew how to spin and weave to some extent;
they were acquainted with pottery. How their houses were built we do not
know, but they contained doors, windows, and fireplaces. They had cloaks
or mantles, they boiled and roasted meat, and certainly used soup. They
had lances, swords, the bow and arrow, shields, but not armor. They had
family life, some simple laws, games, the dance, and wind instruments.
They had the decimal numeration, and their year was of three hundred and
sixty days. They worshipped the heaven, earth, sun, fire, water, wind; but
there are also plain traces of an earlier monotheism, from which this
nature-worship proceeded.
§ 4. The Aryans in India. The Native Races. The Vedic Age. Theology of the
Vedas.
So far Comparative Philology takes us, and the next step forward brings us
to the Vedas, the oldest works in the Hindoo literature, but at least one
thousand or fifteen hundred years more recent than the times we have been
describing. The Aryans have separated, and the Hindoos are now in India.
It is eleven centuries before the time of Alexander. They occupy the
region between the Punjaub and the Ganges, and here was accomplished the
transition of the Aryans from warlike shepherds into agriculturists and
builders of cities.[36]
The last hymns of the Vedas were written (says St. Martin) when they
arrived from the Indus at the Ganges, and were building their oldest city,
at the confluence of that river with the Jumna. Their complexion was then
white, and they call the race whom they conquered, and who afterward were
made _Soudras_, or lowest caste, blacks.[37] The chief gods of the Vedic
age were Indra, Varuna, Agni, Savitri, Soma. The first was the god of the
atmosphere; the second, of the Ocean of light, or Heaven; the third, of
Fire;[38] the fourth, of the Sun; and the fifth, of the Moon. Yama was the
god of death. All the powers of nature were personified in turn,--as
earth, food, wine, months, seasons, day, night, and dawn. Among all these
divinities, Indra and Agni were the chief.[39] But behind this incipient
polytheism lurks the original monotheism,--for each of these gods, in
turn, becomes the Supreme Being. The universal Deity seems to become
apparent, first in one form of nature and then in another. Such is the
opinion of Colebrooke, who says that "the ancient Hindoo religion
recognizes but one God, not yet sufficiently discriminating the creature
from the Creator." And Max Müller says: "The hymns celebrate Varuna,
Indra, Agni, &c., and each in turn is called supreme. The whole mythology
is fluent. The powers of nature become moral beings."
Max Müller adds: "It would be easy to find, in the numerous hymns of the
Veda, passages in which almost every single god is represented as supreme
and absolute. Agni is called 'Ruler of the Universe'; Indra is celebrated
as the Strongest god, and in one hymn it is said, 'Indra is stronger than
all.' It is said of Soma that 'he conquers every one.'"
But clearer traces of monotheism are to be found in the Vedas. In one hymn
of the Rig-Veda it is said: "They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni;
then he is the well-winged heavenly Garutmat; that which is One, the wise
call it many ways; they call it Agni, Yama, Matarisvan."
Nothing, however, will give us so good an idea of the character of these
Vedic hymns as the hymns themselves. I therefore select a few of the most
striking of those which have been translated by Colebrooke, Wilson, M.
Müller, E. Bumont, and others.
In the following, from one of the oldest Vedas, the unity of God seems
very clearly expressed.
RIG-VEDA, X. 121.
"In the beginning there arose the Source of golden light. He was the
only born Lord of all that is. He established the earth, and this sky.
Who is the God to whom we shall offer our sacrifice?
"He who gives life. He who gives strength; whose blessing all the
bright gods desire; whose shadow is immortality, whose shadow is death.
Who is the God to whom we shall offer our sacrifice?
"He who through his power is the only king of the breathing and
awakening world. He who governs all, man and beast. Who is the god to
whom we shall offer our sacrifice?
"He whose power these snowy mountains, whose power the sea proclaims,
with the distant river. He whose these regions are, as it were his two
arms. Who is the god to whom we shall offer our sacrifice?
"He through whom the sky is bright and the earth firm. He through whom
heaven was stablished; nay, the highest heaven. He who measured out the
light in the air. Who is the god to whom we shall offer our sacrifice?
"He to whom heaven and earth, standing firm by his will, look up,
trembling inwardly. He over whom the rising sun shines forth. Who is
the god to whom we shall offer our sacrifice?
"Wherever the mighty water-clouds went, where they placed the seed and
lit the fire, thence arose he who is the only life of the bright gods.
Who is the god to whom we shall offer our sacrifice?
"He who by his might looked even over the water-clouds, the clouds
which gave strength and lit the sacrifice; _he who is God above all
gods_. Who is the god to whom we shall offer our sacrifice?
"May he not destroy us,--he the creator of the earth,--or he, the
righteous, who created heaven; he who also created the bright and
mighty waters. Who is the god to whom we shall offer our
sacrifices?"[40]
The oldest and most striking account of creation is in the eleventh
chapter of the tenth Book of the Rig-Veda. Colebrooke, Max Müller, Muir,
and Goldstucker, all give a translation of this remarkable hymn and speak
of it with admiration. We take that of Colehrooke, modified by that of
Muir:--
"Then there was no entity nor non-entity; no world, no sky, nor aught
above it; nothing anywhere, involving or involved; nor water deep and
dangerous. Death was not, and therefore no immortality, nor distinction
of day or night. But THAT ONE breathed calmly[41] alone with Nature,
her who is sustained within him. Other than Him, nothing existed
[which] since [has been]. Darkness there was; [for] this universe was
enveloped with darkness, and was indistinguishable waters; but that
mass, which was covered by the husk, was [at length] produced by the
power of contemplation. First desire[42] was formed in his mind; and
that became the original productive seed; which the wise, recognizing
it by the intellect in their hearts, distinguish as the bond of
non-entity with entity.
"Did the luminous ray of these [creative acts] expand in the middle, or
above, or below? That productive energy became providence [or sentient
souls], and matter [or the elements]; Nature, who is sustained within,
was inferior; and he who sustains was above.
"Who knows exactly, and who shall in this world declare, whence and why
this creation took place? The gods are subsequent to the production of
this world: then who can know whence it proceeded, or whence this
varied world arose, or whether it upholds [itself] or not? He who in
the highest heaven is the ruler of this universe,--he knows, or does
not know."
If the following hymn, says Müller, were addressed only to the Almighty,
omitting the word "Varuna," it would not disturb us in a Christian
Liturgy:--
1. "Let me not yet, O Varuna, enter into the house of clay; have mercy,
almighty, have mercy.
2. "If I go along trembling, like a cloud driven by the wind, have
mercy, almighty, have mercy!
3. "Through want of strength, thou strong and bright god, have I gone
to the wrong shore; have mercy, almighty, have mercy!
4. "Thirst came upon the worshipper, though he stood in the midst of
the waters; have mercy, almighty, have mercy!
5. "Whenever we men, O Varuna, commit an offence before the heavenly
host; whenever we break thy law through thoughtlessness; have mercy,
almighty, have mercy!"
Out of a large number of hymns addressed to Indra, Müller selects one that
is ascribed to Vasishtha.
1. "Let no one, not even those who worship thee, delay thee far from
us! Even from afar come to our feast! Or, if thou art here, listen to
us!
2. "For these who here make prayers for thee, sit together near the
libation, like flies round the honey. The worshippers, anxious for
wealth, have placed their desire upon Indra, as we put our foot upon a
chariot.
3. "Desirous of riches, I call him who holds the thunderbolt with his
arm, and who is a good giver, like as a son calls his father.
4. "These libations of Soma, mixed with milk, have been prepared for
Indra: thou, armed with the thunderbolt, come with the steeds to drink
of them for thy delight; come to the house!
5. "May he hear us, for he has ears to hear. He is asked for riches;
will he despise our prayers? He could soon give hundreds and
thousands;--no one could check him if he wishes to give."
13. "Make for the sacred gods a hymn that is not small, that is well
set and beautiful! Many snares pass by him who abides with Indra
through his sacrifice.
14. "What mortal dares to attack him who is rich in thee? Through faith
in thee, O mighty, the strong acquires spod in the day of battle."
17. "Thou art well known as the benefactor of every one, whatever
battles there be. Every one of these kings of the earth implores thy
name, when wishing for help.
18. "If I were lord of as much as thou, I should support the sacred
bard, thou scatterer of wealth, I should not abandon him to misery.
19. "I should award wealth day by day to him who magnifies; I should
award it to whosoever it be. We have no other friend but thee, no other
happiness, no other father, O mighty!"
22. "We call for thee, O hero, like cows that have not been milked; we
praise thee as ruler of all that moves, O Indra, as ruler of all that
is immovable.
23. "There is no one like thee in heaven and earth; he is not born, and
will not be born. O mighty Indra, we call upon thee as we go fighting
for cows and horses."
"In this hymn," says Müller, "Indra is clearly conceived as the Supreme
God, and we can hardly understand how a people who had formed so exalted a
notion of the Deity and embodied it in the person of Indra, could, at the
same sacrifice, invoke other gods with equal praise. When Agni, the lord
of fire, is addressed by the poet, he is spoken of as the first god, not
inferior even to Indra. While Agni is invoked Indra is forgotten; there is
no competition between the two, nor any rivalry between them and other
gods. This is a most important feature in the religion of the Veda, and
has never been taken into consideration by those who have written on the
history of ancient polytheism."[43]
"It is curious," says Müller, "to watch the almost imperceptible
transition by which the phenomena of nature, if reflected in the mind of
the poet, assume the character of divine beings. The dawn is frequently
described in the Veda as it might be described by a modern poet. She is
the friend of men, she smiles like a young wife, she is the daughter of
the sky." "But the transition from _devî_, the bright, to _devî_, the
goddess, is so easy; the daughter of the sky assumes so readily the same
personality which is given to the sky, Dyaus, her father, that we can only
guess whether in every passage the poet is speaking of a bright
apparition, or of a bright goddess; of a natural vision, or of a visible
deity. The following hymn of Vashishtha will serve as an instance:--
"She shines upon us, like a young wife, rousing every living being to
go to his work. The fire had to be kindled by men; she brought light by
striking down darkness.
"She rose up, spreading far and wide, and moving towards every one. She
grew in brightness, wearing her brilliant garment. The mother of the
cows (of the morning clouds), the leader of the days, she shone
gold-colored, lovely to behold.
"She, the fortunate, who brings the eye of the god, who leads the white
and lovely steed (of the sun), the Dawn was seen, revealed by her rays;
with brilliant treasures she follows every one.
"Thou, who art a blessing where thou art near, drive far away the
unfriendly; make the pastures wide, give us safety! Remove the haters,
bring treasures! Raise wealth to the worshipper, thou mighty Dawn.
"Shine for us with thy best rays, thou bright Dawn, thou who
lengthenest our life, thou the love of all, who givest us food, who
givest us wealth in cows, horses, and chariots.
"Thou, daughter of the sky, thou high-born Dawn, whom the Vasishthas
magnify with songs, give us riches high and wide: all ye gods, protect
us always with your blessings!"
"This hymn, addressed to the Dawn, is a fair specimen of the original
simple poetry of the Veda. It has no reference to any special sacrifice,
it contains no technical expressions, it can hardly be called a hymn, in
our sense of the word. It is simply a poem expressing, without any effort,
without any display of far-fetched thought or brilliant imagery, the
feelings of a man who has watched the approach of the Dawn with mingled
delight and awe, and who was moved to give utterance to what he felt in
measured language."[44]
"But there is a charm in these primitive strains discoverable in no other
class of poetry. Every word retains something of its radical meaning,
every epithet tells, every thought, in spite of the most intricate and
abrupt expressions, is, if we once disentangle it, true, correct, and
complete."[45]
The Vedic literature is divided by Müller into four periods, namely, those
of the Chhandas, Mantra, Brâhmana, and Sûtras. The Chhandas period
contains the oldest hymns of the oldest, or Rig-Veda. To that of the
Mantras belong the later hymns of the same Veda. But the most modern of
these are older than the Brâhmanas. The Brâhmanas contain theology; the
older Mantras are liturgic. Müller says that the Brâhmanas, though so very
ancient, are full of pedantry, shallow and insipid grandiloquence and
priestly conceit. Next to these, in the order of time, are the Upanishads.
These are philosophical, and almost the only part of the Vedas which are
read at the present time. They are believed to contain the highest
authority for the different philosophical systems, of which we shall speak
hereafter. Their authors are unknown. More modern than these are the
Sûtras. The word "Sûtra" means _string_, and they consist of a string of
short sentences. Conciseness is the aim in this style, and every doctrine
is reduced to a skeleton. The numerous Sûtras now extant contain the
distilled essence of all the knowledge which the Brâhmans have collected
during centuries of meditation. They belong to the non-revealed
literature, as distinguished from the revealed literature,--a distinction
made by the Brâhmans before the time of Buddha. At the time of the
Buddhist controversy the Sûtras were admitted to be of human origin and
were consequently recent works. The distinction between the Sûtras and
Brâhmanas is very marked, the second being revealed. The Brâhmanas were
composed by and for Brahmans and are in three collections. The Vedângas
are intermediate between the Vedic and non-Vedic literature. Pânini, the
grammarian of India, was said to be contemporary with King Nanda, who was
the successor of Chandragupta, the contemporary of Alexander, and
therefore in the second half of the fourth century before Christ. Dates
are so precarious in Indian literature, says Max Müller, that a
confirmation within a century or two is not to be despised. Now the
grammarian Kâtyâyana completed and corrected the grammar of Pânini, and
Patanjeli wrote an immense commentary on the two which became so famous as
to be imported by royal authority into Cashmere, in the first half of the
first century of our era. Müller considers the limits of the Sûtra period
to extend from 600 B.C. to 200 B.C. Buddhism before Asoka was but modified
Brahmanism. The basis of Indian chronology is the date of Chandragupta.
All dates before his time are merely hypothetical. Several classical
writers speak of him as founding an empire on the Ganges soon after the
invasion of Alexander. He was grandfather of Asoka. Indian traditions
refer to this king.
Returning to the Brâhmana period, we notice that between the Sûtras and
Bârahmanas come the Aranyakas, which are books written for the recluse. Of
these the Upanishads, before mentioned, form part. They presuppose the
existence of the Brâhmanas.
Rammohun Roy was surprised that Dr. Rosen should have thought it worth
while to publish the hymns of the Veda, and considered the Upanishads the
only Vedic books worth reading. They speak of the divine SELF, of the
Eternal Word in the heavens from which the hymns came. The divine SELF
they say is not to be grasped by tradition, reason, or revelation, but
only by him whom he himself grasps. In the beginning was Self alone. Atman
is the SELF in all our selves,--the Divine Self concealed by his own
qualities. This Self they sometimes call the Undeveloped and sometimes the
Not-Being. There are ten of the old Upanishads, all of which have been
published. Anquetil Du Perron translated fifty into Latin out of Persian.
The Brâhmanas are very numerous. Müller gives stories from them and
legends. They relate to sacrifices, to the story of the deluge, and other
legends. They substituted these legends for the simple poetry of the
ancient Vedas. They must have extended over at least two hundred years,
and contained long lists of teachers.
Müller supposes that writing was unknown when the Rig-Veda was composed.
The thousand and ten hymns of the Vedas contain no mention of writing or
books, any more than the Homeric poems. There is no allusion to writing
during the whole of the Brâhmana period, nor even through the Sûtra
period. This seems incredible to us, says Müller, only because our memory
has been systematically debilitated by newspapers and the like during
many generations. It was the business of every Brahman to learn by heart
the Vedas during the twelve years of his student life. The Guru, or
teacher, pronounces a group of words, and the pupils repeat after him.
After writing was introduced, the Brahmans were strictly forbidden to read
the Vedas, or to write them. Cæsar says the same of the Druids. Even
Pânini never alludes to written words or letters. None of the ordinary
modern words for book, paper, ink, or writing have been found in any
ancient Sanskrit work. No such words as _volumen_, volume; _liber_, or
inner bark of a tree; _byblos_, inner bark of papyrus; or book, that is
beech wood. But Buddha had learnt to write, as we find by a book
translated into Chinese A.D. 76. In this book Buddha instructs his
teacher; as in the "Gospel of the Infancy" Jesus explains to his teacher
the meaning of the Hebrew alphabet. So Buddha tells his teacher the names
of sixty-four alphabets. The first authentic inscription in India is of
Buddhist origin, belonging to the third century before Christ.
In the most ancient Vedic period the language had become complete. There
is no growing language in the Vedas.
In regard to the age of these Vedic writings, we will quote the words of
Max Müller, at the conclusion of his admirable work on the "History of
Ancient Sanskrit Literature," from which most of this section has been
taken:--
"Oriental scholars are frequently suspected of a desire to make the
literature of the Eastern nations appear more ancient than it is. As to
myself, I can truly say that nothing would be to me a more welcome
discovery, nothing would remove so many doubts and difficulties, as
some suggestions as to the manner in which certain of the Vedic hymns
could have been added to the original collection during the Brâhmana or
Sûtra periods, or, if possible, by the writers of our MSS., of which
most are not older than the fifteenth century. But these MSS., though
so modern, are checked by the Anukramanis. Every hymn which stands in
our MSS. is counted in the Index of Saunaka, who is anterior to the
invasion of Alexander. The Sûtras, belonging to the same period as
Saunaka, prove the previous existence of every chapter of the
Brâhmanas; and I doubt whether there is a single hymn in the Sanhitâ
of the Rig-Veda which could not be checked by some passage of the
Brâhmanas and Sûtras. The chronological limits assigned to the Sûtra
and Brâhmana periods will seem to most Sanskrit scholars too narrow
rather than too wide, and if we assign but two hundred years to the
Mantra period, from 800 to 1000 B.C., and an equal number to the
Chhandas period, from 1000 to 1200 B.C., we can do so only under the
supposition that during the early periods of history the growth of the
human mind was more luxuriant than in later times, and that the layers
of thought were formed less slowly in the primary than in the tertiary
ages of the world."
The Vedic age, according to Müller, will then be as follows:--
Sûtra period, from B.C. 200 to B.C. 600.
Brâhmana period, " " 600 " 800.
Mantra period, " " 800 " 1000.
Chhandas period, " " 1000 " 1200.
Dr. Haug, a high authority, considers the Vedic period to extend from B.C.
1200 to B.C. 2000, and the very oldest hymns to have been composed B.C.
2400.
The principal deity in the oldest Vedas is Indra, God of the air. In Greek
he becomes Zeus; in Latin, Jupiter. The hymns to Indra are not unlike some
of the Psalms of the Old Testament. Indra is called upon as the most
ancient god whom the Fathers worshipped. Next to India comes Agni, fire,
derived from the root Ag, which means "to move."[46] Fire is worshipped as
the principle of motion on earth, as Indra was the moving power above. Not
only fire, but the forms of flame, are worshipped and all that belongs to
it. Entire nature is called Aditi, whose children are named Adityas. M.
Maury quotes these words from Gotama: "Aditi is heaven; Aditi is air;
Aditi is mother, father, and son; Aditi is all the gods and the five
races; Aditi is whatever is born and will be born; in short, the heavens
and the earth, the heavens being the father and the earth the mother of
all things." This reminds one of the Greek Zeus-pateer and Gee-mêteer.
Varuna is the vault of heaven. Mitra is often associated with Varuna in
the Vedic hymns. Mitra is the sun, illuminating the day, while Varuna was
the sun with an obscure face going back in the darkness from west to east
to take his luminous disk again. From Mitra seems to be derived the
Persian Mithra. There are no invocations to the stars in the Veda. But the
Aurora, or Dawn, is the object of great admiration; also, the Aswins, or
twin gods, who in Greece become the Dioscuri. The god of storms is Rudra,
supposed by some writers to be the same as Siva. The two hostile worships
of Vishnu and Siva do not appear, however, till long after this time.
Vishnu appears frequently in the Veda, and his three steps are often
spoken of. These steps measure the heavens. But his real worship came much
later.
The religion of the Vedas was of odes and hymns, a religion of worship by
simple adoration. Sometimes there were prayers for temporal blessings,
sometimes simple sacrifices and libations. Human sacrifices have scarcely
left any trace of themselves if they ever existed, unless it be in a
typical ceremony reported in one of the Vedas.
§ 5. Second Period. Laws of Manu. The Brahmanic Age.
Long after the age of the elder Vedas Brahmanism begins. Its text-book is
the Laws of Manu.[47] As yet Vishnu and Siva are not known. The former is
named once, the latter not at all. The writer only knows three Vedas. The
Atharva-Veda is later. But as Siva is mentioned in the oldest Buddhist
writings, it follows that the laws of Manu are older than these. In the
time of Manu the Aryans are still living in the valley of the Ganges. The
caste system is now in full operation, and the authority of the Brahman is
raised to its highest point. The Indus and Punjaub are not mentioned; all
this is forgotten. This work could not be later than B.C. 700, or earlier
than B.C. 1200. It was probably written about B.C. 900 or B.C. 1000. In
this view agree Wilson, Lassen, Max Müller, and Saint-Martin. The Supreme
Deity is now Brahma, and sacrifice is still the act by which one comes
into relation with heaven. Widow-burning is not mentioned in Manu; but it
appears in the Mahabharata, one of the great epics, which is therefore
later.
In the region of the Sarasvati, a holy river, which formerly emptied into
the Indus, but is now lost in a desert, the Aryan race of India was
transformed from nomads into a stable community.[48] There they received
their laws, and there their first cities were erected. There were founded
the Solar and Lunar monarchies.
The Manu of the Vedas and he of the Brahmans are very different persons.
The first is called in the Vedas the father of mankind. He also escapes
from a deluge by building a ship, which he is advised to do by a fish. He
preserves the fish, which grows to a great size, and when the flood comes
acts as a tow-boat to drag the ship of Manu to a mountain.[49] This
account is contained in a Brahmana.
The name of Manu seems afterward to have been given by the Brahmans to the
author of their code. Some extracts from this very interesting volume we
will now give, slightly abridged, from Sir William Jones's
translation.[50] From the first book, on Creation:--
"The universe existed in darkness, imperceptible, undefinable,
undiscoverable, and undiscovered; as if immersed in sleep."
"Then the self-existing power, undiscovered himself, but making the
world discernible, with the five elements and other principles,
appeared in undiminished glory, dispelling the gloom."
"He, whom the mind alone can perceive, whose essence eludes the
external organs, who has no visible parts, who exists from eternity,
even he, the soul of all beings, shone forth in person.
"He having willed to produce various beings from his own divine
substance, first with a thought created the waters, and placed in them
a productive seed."
"The seed became an egg bright as gold, blazing like the luminary with
a thousand beams, and in that egg he was born himself, in the form of
Brahma, the great forefather of all spirits.
"The waters are called Nárá, because they were the production of Nara,
or the spirit of God; and hence they were his first ayana, or place of
motion; he hence is named Nara yana, or moving on the waters.
"In that egg the great power sat inactive a whole year of the creator,
at the close of which, by his thought alone, he caused the egg to
divide itself.
"And from its two divisions he framed the heaven above and the earth
beneath; in the midst he placed the subtile ether, the eight regions,
and the permanent receptacle of waters.
"From the supreme soul he drew forth mind, existing substantially
though unperceived by sense, immaterial; and before mind, or the
reasoning power, he produced consciousness, the internal monitor, the
ruler.
"And before them both he produced the great principle of the soul, or
first expansion of the divine idea; and all vital forms endued with the
three qualities of goodness, passion, and darkness, and the five
perceptions of sense, and the five organs of sensation.
"Thus, having at once pervaded with emanations from the Supreme Spirit
the minutest portions of fixed principles immensely operative,
consciousness and the five perceptions, he framed all creatures.
"Thence proceed the great elements, endued with peculiar powers, and
mind with operations infinitely subtile, the unperishable cause of all
apparent forms.
"This universe, therefore, is compacted from the minute portions of
those seven divine and active principles, the great soul, or first
emanation, consciousness, and five perceptions; a mutable universe from
immutable ideas.
"Of created things, the most excellent are those which are animated; of
the animated, those which subsist by intelligence; of the intelligent,
mankind; and of men, the sacerdotal class.
"Of priests, those eminent in learning; of the learned, those who know
their duty; of those who know it, such as perform it virtuously; and of
the virtuous, those who seek beatitude from a perfect acquaintance with
scriptural doctrine.
"The very birth of Brahmans is a constant incarnation of Dharma, God of
justice; for the Brahman is born to promote justice, and to procure
ultimate happiness.
"When a Brahman springs to light, he is born above the world, the chief
of all creatures, assigned to guard the treasury of duties, religious
and civil.
"The Brahman who studies this book, having performed sacred rites, is
perpetually free from offence in thought, in word and in deed.
"He confers purity on his living family, on his ancestors, and on his
descendants as far as the seventh person, and he alone deserves to
possess this whole earth."
The following passages are from Book II., "On Education and the
Priesthood":--
"Self-love is no laudable motive, yet an exemption from self-love is
not to be found in this world: on self-love is grounded the study of
Scripture, and the practice of actions recommended in it.
"Eager desire to act has its root in expectation of some advantage; and
with such expectation are sacrifices performed; the rules of religious
austerity and abstinence from sins are all known to arise from hope of
remuneration.
"Not a single act here below appears ever to be done by a man free from
self-love; whatever he perform, it is wrought from his desire of a
reward.
"He, indeed, who should persist in discharging these duties without any
view to their fruit, would attain hereafter the state of the immortals,
and even in this life would enjoy all the virtuous gratifications that
his fancy could suggest.
"The most excellent of the three classes, being girt with the
sacrificial thread, must ask food with the respectful word Dhavati at
the beginning of the phrase; those of the second class with that word
in the middle; and those of the third with that word at the end.
"Let him first beg food of his mother, or of his sister, or of his
mother's whole sister; then of some other female who will not disgrace
him.
"Having collected as much of the desired food as he has occasion for,
and having presented it without guile to his preceptor, let him eat
some of it, being duly purified, with his face to the east.
"If he seek long life, he should eat with his face to the east; if
prosperity, to the west; if truth and its reward, to the north.
"When the student is going to read the Veda he must perform an
ablution, as the law ordains, with his face to the north; and having
paid scriptural homage, he must receive instruction, wearing a clean
vest, his members being duly composed.
"A Brahman beginning and ending a lecture on the Veda must always
pronounce to himself the syllable óm; for unless the syllable óm
precede, his learning will slip away from him; and unless it follow,
nothing will be long retained.
"A priest who shall know the Veda, and shall pronounce to himself, both
morning and evening, that syllable, and that holy text preceded by the
three words, shall attain the sanctity which the Veda confers.
"And a twice-born man, who shall a thousand times repeat those three
(or óm, the vyáhrĭtis, and the gáyatri) apart from the multitude, shall
be released in a month even from a great offence, as a snake from his
slough.
"The three great immutable words, preceded by the triliteral syllable,
and followed by the gáyatri, which consists of three measures, must be
considered as the mouth, or principal part of the Veda.
"The triliteral monosyllable is an emblem of the Supreme; the
suppressions of breath, with a mind fixed on God, are the highest
devotion; but nothing is more exalted than the gáyatri; a declaration
of truth is more excellent than silence.
"All rites ordained in the Veda, oblations to fire, and solemn
sacrifices pass away; but that which passes not away is declared to be
the syllable óm, thence called acshara; since it is a symbol of God,
the Lord of created beings.
"The act of repeating his Holy Name is ten times better than the
appointed sacrifice; an hundred times better when it is heard by no
man; and a thousand times better when it is purely mental.
"To a man contaminated by sensuality, neither the Vedas, nor
liberality, nor sacrifices, nor strict observances, nor pious
austerities, ever procure felicity.
"As he who digs deep with a spade comes to a spring of water, so the
student, who humbly serves his teacher, attains the knowledge which
lies deep in his teacher's mind.
"If the sun should rise and set, while he sleeps through sensual
indulgence, and knows it not, he must fast a whole day repeating the
gáyatri.
"Let him adore God both at sunrise and at sunset, as the law ordains,
having made his ablution, and keeping his organs controlled; and with
fixed attention let him repeat the text, which he ought to repeat in a
place free from impurity.
"The twice-born man who shall thus without intermission have passed the
time of his studentship shall ascend after death to the most exalted of
regions, and no more again spring to birth in this lower world."
The following passages are from Book IV., "On Private Morals":--
"Let a Brahman, having dwelt with a preceptor during the first quarter
of a man's life, pass the second quarter of human life in his own
house, when he has contracted a legal marriage.
"He must live with no injury, or with the least possible injury, to
animated beings, by pursuing those means of gaining subsistence, which
are strictly prescribed by law, except in times of distress.
"Let him say what is true, but let him say what is pleasing; let him
speak no disagreeable truth, nor let him speak agreeable falsehood;
this is a primeval rule.
"Let him say 'well and good,' or let him say 'well' only; but let him
not maintain fruitless enmity and altercation with any man.
"All that depends on another gives pain; and all that depends on
himself gives pleasure; let him know this to be in few words the
definition of pleasure and pain.
"And for whatever purpose a man bestows a gift, for a similar purpose
he shall receive, with due honor, a similar reward.
"Both he who respectfully bestows a present, and he who respectfully
accepts it, shall go to a seat of bliss; but, if they act otherwise, to
a region of horror.
"Let not a man be proud of his rigorous devotion; let him not, having
sacrificed, utter a falsehood; let him not, though injured, insult a
priest; having made a donation, let him never proclaim it.
"By falsehood the sacrifice becomes vain; by pride the merit of
devotion is lost; by insulting priests life is diminished; and by
proclaiming a largess its fruit is destroyed.
"For in his passage to the next world, neither his father, nor his
mother, nor his wife, nor his son, nor his kinsmen will remain his
company; his virtue alone will adhere to him.
"Single is each man born; single he dies; single he receives the reward
of his good, and single the punishment of his evil deeds."
From Book V., "On Diet":--
"The twice-born man who has intentionally eaten a mushroom, the flesh
of a tame hog, or a town cock, a leek, or an onion, or garlic, is
degraded immediately.
"But having undesignedly tasted either of those six things, he must
perform the penance sántapana, or the chándráyana, which anchorites
practise; for other things he must fast a whole day.
"One of those harsh penances called prájápatya the twice-born man must
perform annually, to purify him from the unknown taint of illicit food;
but he must do particular penance for such food intentionally eaten.
"He who injures no animated creature shall attain without hardship
whatever he thinks of, whatever he strives for, whatever he fixes his
mind on.