PAGE
242
1.
Has this universe proceeded from God or from something
else?
Back to contents
A.-God is the efficient cause of this universe, but the
material cause is prakriti - the primordial elementary
matter.
"He
who has created this multiform universe, and is the
cause of its sustenance as well as dissolution, the
Lord of the universe in whom the whole world exists,
is sustained and then resolved into elementary condition,
is the Supreme Spirit. Know Him, O man, to be your God
and believe in no other as the Creator of the Universe."
RIG VEDA 10: 126, 8.
"In
the beginning the whole was enveloped in utter darkness.
Nothing was discernible. It was like a dark night, Matter
was in its very elementary form. It was like ether.
The whole universe, completely overspread by darkness,
was insignificantly small compared with the Infinite
God who thereafter, by His omnipotence, evolved this
cosmic world - the, effect - out of the elementary matter
- the cause.* RIG VEDA 10: 129, 3
"Love
and worship that Supreme Spirit, O men, Who is the support
of all the luminous bodies (such as the sun), the one
Incomparable Lord of the present as
*
It is remarkable that modern science is slowly but surely
coming round to what the Vedas teach. The atomic theory
is losing ground and the Vedic doctrine gaining ground
day by day. Mark what one of the modern most scientists,
M. Bernard Brunlhes says:- "Matter which seems to give
us the imaage of stability and repose only exists, then,
by reason of the rotatory movement of its particles so
that when atoms have radiated all their energy in the
form of luminous, calorific, electric and other forms
of vibrations, they return to the primitive ether." Rama
Deva.
PAGE
243
well
as of the future worlds, Who existed even before the
world came into being, and has created all things that
exist in space between the earth and heaven.*"RIG VEDA
10:121, 1.
2.
Has not prakriti emanated from God?
Back to contents
A.- No, it is beginningless.
"O
Men, that All-pervading Being alone is the Lord of the
imperishable prakriti - the material cause of the world
- and of the soul and is yet distinct from both. He
is the Creator of universe - the past, present and the
future." YAJUR VEDA 21: 2
"That
Supreme Spirit, form Whom all things proceed and in
Whom they live and perish, is the All-pervading God.
Aspire, O men, to know Him." TAITREYA UPANISHAD BHRIGU,
1.
"That
Great God should be sought after, Who is the cause of
the creation, the sustenance and dissolution of the
universe." VEDAANT SHAASTRA I. 1,2.
3.
How many entities are eternal or beginningless
Back to contents
A.- Three - God, the soul, and the prakriti (matter).
Q.What are your authorities for this statement?
A.-
"Both God and the soul are eternal, they are alike in
consciousness and such other attributes. They are associated
together - God pervading the soul - and are mutual companions.
The prakriti (matter), which is
*Literally the sun. -Tr.
PAGE
244
Likened
to the trunk of a tree whose branches are the multiform
universe which is resolved into tis elementary condition
at the time of dissolution is also eternal. The natures,
attributes and characters of these three are also eternal.
Of the two - God and the soul - the latter alone reaps
the fruits of this tree of the universe - good or evil
- whilst the former does not. He is the All-glorious
Being who shines within, without and all around." RIG
VEDA I, 164, 20.
"The
Great God - the King - revealed all kinds of knowledge
to the human soul - His eternal subjects - through the
Veda." YAJUR VEDA, 50, 8.
"The
prakriti, the soul and God, all of them, are uncreated.
They are the cause of the whole universe. They have
no cause of the whole universe. They have no cause and
have been existing eternally. The eternal soul enjoys
the eternal matter and is wrapped up in it whilst God
neither enjoys it, nor, is He wrapped up in it." SHWETA
SHWATER UPNISHAD, 4: 5.
The
attributes of God and the soul have been described iin
the last chapter. Here we shall treat of the properties
of prakriti (matter).
"That condition of matter in which the intellect-promoting
(satva - high), passion-exciting (rajas - medium) and
stupidity producing (tamas - low)qualities are found
combined in equal proportions is called prakriti. From
prakriti emanated the principle of wisdom (Mahaatava),
and from the latter proceeded the principle of Individuality
(Ahakaara) from which emanated the five subtle entities
and the ten principles of sensation and action, and
the manas, i.e., the principle of attention. From the
five subtle entities issued forth the five gross entities,
such as
PAGE
245
solids,
liquids, etc. These twenty-four entities and the purush,
i.e., the spirit - human and Divine - form a group of
twenty-five noumena." SANKYA SHASTRA,1: 61.
Of
all these twenty-four, the prakriti is uncreated, the
principle of wisdom, the principle of Individuality,
and the five subtle entities are the products of the
prakriti and are in their turn the cause of the ten
principles of sensation, and action and of the principle
of attention. The purush - i.e., the spirit - is neither
the cause (material) nor the effect of anything.
4.
Is this whole universe nothing but God
Back to contents
But it is said in the Chhaandoya Upanishad, "Before
Creation the universe was existent"; whilst the Taitreya
Upanishad says, " It was non-existent or nothing." Again
the Vrikadaaranyaka Upanishad (Chapt. I,4,1) says "It
was all spirit" and lastly the Shatapatha Brahmanad (Chapt.
11: 1, 11, 1) says, "It was all God (Brahma)" and again
"by His Own will the Great God transformed Himself into
this multiform universe." In another Upnishad it is written
"Sarvam Khalu, etc.", which means "Verily this whole universe
is God, all other things are nothing but God."
A._
Why do you pervert the meanings of these quotations?
For those very Upanishads it is said "Oshwetketo, proceed
thou from effects to causes and learn that prithivi
(solids) proceed from liquids, apah (liguids) from teja
- that condition of matter whose properties are heat
and light, ectc., - and teja from the uncreated prakriti.
This prakriti - the true existence - is the source,
abode and support of the whole universe." What you have
translated
PAGE
246
As
"this universe was non-existent" means that it was non-existent
as universe in their gross physical and visible form.
But it existed in essence or in elementary form as the
eternal prakriti. It was not nothing, God and the soul
also were existent. Your quotations which begins with
"Sarvam khualu" is nothing but a pot-pouri, for, you
have taken parts of two verses from two different Upanishads
and put them together and formed them into one sentence.
"Sarva Khalu", etc., is tiken form the Chhaandogya Upanishad
( chapt III: 14, 1) and Nehanaanaaa, from the Katha
Upnishad (chapt. II:4,11).
Just
as the limbs of the body are of use only so long as
they form part of it, but become useless as soon as
they are separated or cut off form it, similarly you
can get sense out of words or sentences when in their
proper places in conjunction with what has gone before
and what follows them, but they become meaningless as
soon as they are dislocated from their proper places
and joined to others.
Now
mark carefully the true meaning of the above quotation.
"Worship, thou, O soul, that Great Being Who is the
Creator, the Support, and the Life of the Universe.
It is by His power that the whole universe come into
being and is sustained, and it is in Him that it exists,
Worship Him alone and no other. He is an Indivisible,
Immutable, Conscious Being. There is no admixture of
different things in Him, though all things with their
distinct individual existence have their being in Him
and are sustained by Him."
5.
How many causes are there of the Universe
Back to contents
A.- Three - The efficient , the material and the common.
The efficient cause is the one by whose directed
activity a thing is made, and by the absence of whose
directed activity nothing is made. It does not change
itself, though it works changes in other things. The material
cause is one without which nothing can be made. It
undergoes changes, is made and un-made.
The common cause is one that is an instrument in
the making of a thing, and is common to many things. The
efficient cause is of two kinds:-
The Primary efficient cause is the Supreme Spirit
- the Governor
PAGE
247
Of
all, Who creates the universe out of the prakriti (matter),
sustains it, and then resolves it into its elementary
form.
The
secondary efficient cause is the soul. It takes
different materials out of the universe created by God
and moulds them into different shapes.
The
material cause is the prakiti which is the material
used in the making of the universe. Being devoid of
intelligence it can neither make nor unmake itself,
but is always mad or unmade by a conscious intelligent
being; though here and there even one kind of dead matter
(but those changes are never ordered). Let us take an
illustration. God made seeds (of different kinds), when
they fall into a suitable soil and get the prper amount
of water and nourishment, they develop into trees; but
if they come in contact with fire they perish. All ordered
changes in material things depend for their occurrence
on God and the soul.
All
such means as knowledge, strength and hands, and instruments,
time and space, that are required for the making of
thing constitute its common cause.
Now
take for illustration a pot. The potter is its efficient
cause clay its material cause, whilst the rod, the wheel
and other instruments, time, space, light, eyes, hands
(of the pttter), knowledge and the necessary labour,
etc., constitute its common cause. Nothing can be made
or unmade without these three causes.
The
Neo-Vedantists* look upon God as the efficient as well
as the material cause of the universe, but they are
absolutely in the wrong. "Just as a spider does not
take in anything from outside, but draws out filaments
from its body with which it spins its web and sports
about in it, so does God evolve the world out of His
Own self, becomes metamorphosed into it, and enjoys
Himself." MUNDAKA UPANISHAD, I:1, 7.
*i.e., the modern exponents of
the Vedaant Philosophy. -Tr.
PAGE
248
6.
Why is not the universe God?
Back to contents
"So Brahma desired and willed 'Let me assume diverse
forms, in other words, become metamorphosed into the universe'
and by the mere act of willing He became transformed into
the universe."THE TAITREYA UPANISHAD, BRAHM, 6.
It
is said in the Metrical Commentary of Gaurpaada (on
the Vedant Aphorisms). "Whatever did not exist in the
beginnning and will cease to exist in the end, does
not exist in the present age." THE GAURPA DHEYA KARIKA,
31.
In the beginning the world did not exist but Brahma
did. After the dissolution the world will no longer
exist, but Brahma will. Therefore, the world does not
exist even in the present, it is all Brahma. Why is
not the universe Brahma then?
A.-
If, as you say, Brahma (God) were the material cause
of the universe, He would become transformable, conditioned
and changeable. Besides, the natures, attributes and
characteristics of a material cause are always transmitted
to its effect. Says the Vaisheshika Darshana. I: 1,24
"The effect only reveals whatsoever pre-existed in the
(material) cause." How could then Brahma and the material
world be related as (material) cause and effect? They
are so dissimilar in their natures, attributes and characteristics.
Why! Brahma is the Personification of true existence,
consciousness and bliss, whilst the material universe
is ephemeral, inanimate and devoid of bliss.
Brahma
is Uncreated, Invisible, whilst the material world is
created, divisible and visible. Had the material objects,
such as solids, bee evolved out of Brahma He would possess
the same attributes as the material objects. Just as
solids and other material things are dead and inert,
so would Brahma be, or the material objects would possess
consciousness just as Brahma does. Moreover the illustration
of a spider and its web does not prove your contention.
Instead it disproves it, because the material body of
the spider is the material cause of the filaments, whilst
the soul within is the efficient cause.* In the same
way, the All-pervading
*It also illustrates the wonderful
creative power of God that the soul cannot draw out filaments
from the bodies of other creatures.
PAGE
249
God
has evolved this gross visible universe out of the subtle,
visible prakriti that resided in Him. He pervades the
universe and witness all, and is perfect bliss. The
text you have translated into "God desired and willed
'Let me assume diverse forms, etc.," really means that
God mentally saw, contemplated and willed 'Let me create
the multiform universe and become revealed'; because
it is only after the world has been created that God
becomes contemporaneous with the various gross physical
objects and is revealed to the human souls in their
meditations, thoughts, knowledge, preachings and hearings.
At
the same time of Dissolution no one except Himself and
the emancipated souls know Him. The aphorism, you have
quoted, is erroneous; because, though it is true that
before Creation, the universe did not exist in this
gross visible condition, nor will it exist in this form
the Dissolution onwards till the beginning of the next
creation, yet it was not nothing, nor will it be. Before
Creation it existed in a subltel invisible elementary
form, so will it be after Dissolution.
Says
the Rig Veda:-
"In the beginning it was all darkness", the whole universe
was enveloped in utter darkness." RIV VEDA10: 126,3.
Again says Manu, " In the beginning this universe was
enshrouded in darkness. It was neither definable, nor
discoverable by reason. Neither did it possess any physical
signs, nor was it, therefore, perceptible by the senses."
MANU 1: 5. Nor shall it be after the beginning of, or,
during the period of dissolution. But the present time
it is definable, possessed of visible signs and characteristics,
and therefore perfectly discernable by the senses, and
yet that commentator declared the non-existence of the
world in the present, which is absolutely invalid. Because
whatever a person knows on the authority of direct cognition
and other evidences cannot be nothing.
7.
What object had God in creating the world?
Back to contents
A.- What object could He have in not creating it?
Q.Had
He not created it, He would have lived in happiness?
Besides, the souls would have remained free from pleasure
and pain and the like.
PAGE
250
A.-
These are the ideas of the lazy and the indolent, but
not of men of energetic and active habits. What happiness
could the souls enjoy during the period of Dissolution?
If the happiness and misery of this world were compared,
it will be found that the happiness is many times greater
than the misery. Besides, many a pure soul that adopts
the means of obtaining salvation attains final beatitude;
whilst during the period of Dissolution the souls simply
remain idle as in deep sleep. Moreover had He not created
this world, how could He have been able to award souls
their deserts, and how could they have reaped the fruits
of their deeds - good and evil - done in the previous
cycle of Creation.*
If
you were asked what is the function of the eyes, you
can only say 'sight of course'. In the same way of what
use could the knowledge, activity, and power of creating
the world be in God other than that of creating? Nothing
else. The attributes of God, such as justice, mercy,
the power of sustaining the world, can have significance
only when He makes the world. His Infinite power bears
fruit only when it is applied to the creation, sustenance,
government and dissolution of the universe. Just as
sight is the natural function of the eye, so are the
creation of the world, the free gift of all things to
the souls and promoting the well-being of all the natural
attributes of God.
Was
the seed made first or the tree?
Back to contents
A.- The seed; because, the seed, cause, Hetu (source),
Nidaana Mimitta (origin), etc., are all synonymous terms.
The cause, being also called the see, must precede the
effect.
9.
God being Omnipotent can he not create matter and soul?
Back to contents
Q - God being Omnipotent, He can also create prakriti
- the primordial matter - and the soul. If He cannot,
He cannot be called Omnipotent.
A.-
We have explained the meaning of the word Omnipotent
before. But does Omnipotent mean one who can work even
the impossibilities. If there be one who can do even
such impossible things as the prduction of an effect
without a cause, then can He make another God, Himself
die, suffer pain, become dead and inert, inanimate,
unjust, impure and immoral or not? Even God cannot change
the natural properties of things as heat of the fire,
*That is, one preceding the last
Creation.
PAGE
251
Fluidity
of liquids and inertness of earth, etc. His laws being
true and perfect, He cannot alter them. Omnipotence,
therefore, only means that He possesses the power of
doing all His works without any help.
Q.
Is God formless or embodied? If He be formless, how
could He create the world without bodily organs? Of
course an objection like this cannot be urged if He
be embodied.
A.-
God is formless. He cannot be God who possesses a body;
because he would then have finite powers, be limited
by time and space, be subjected to hunger and thirst,
heat and cold, wounds and injuries, pain and disease.
Such a being may possess the attributes or powers of
the soul, but no Divine attributes could be ascribed
to him; since incarnate God could never grasp and control
the primordial elementary matter - prakriti - atoms
and molecules, nor could he create the world out of
those subtle elements, just as we, being embodied in
flesh, cannot grasp or control them.
God
does not possess a physical body of bodily organs, such
as hands and feet, though he does possess Infinite power,
Infinite energy and Infinite activity, by virtue of
which He does all those works that neither matter nor
the soul can do. It is only because He is even more
subtle than the soul and the prakriti, and pervades
them, that He can grasp them and transform them into
this visible universe.
10.
Is God formless or embodied?
Back to contents
Q - If God be formless, this world created by Him should
also be formless, just as in the case of other living
beings, such as men, - children have bodies like their
parents. Had they been formless, their children would
have been the same. A.- What a childish question!
We have already stated that God is not the material cause
of the universe. He is only its efficient cause. It is
prakriti and paramanus - the premordial elementary matter
and atoms, - which are less subtle than God, that are
the material cause of the world. They are not altogether
formless but are subtler than other material objects,
while less subtle as compared to God.
11.
If God be formless, this world created by Him should
also be formless
Back to contents
A.-No; because that which does not exist (in any form)
cannot be called into existence. It is absolutely impossible.
It is as
PAGE
252
much
as impossible for an effect to be produced without its
cause as the story of a man, who would brag in the following
way, to be true. "I saw a man and a woman being married
whose mothers never bore any children. They had boys
made of human horns, and wore garlands of ethereal flowers.
They bathed in the water of mirage and lived in a town
of angels where it rained without clouds, and cereals
and vegetables grew without any soil, etc.," or " I
had neither father nor mother and yet came into being.
I have no tongue in my mouth and lo! I can speak. There
was no snake in the hole and yet one came out of it.
I was nowhere, nor were these people, and yet we are
all here." Only lunatics can believe and say such things.
12.
Cannot God create an effect without cause?
Back to contents
Q. If there can be no effect without a cause, what
is the cause of the first cause then?
A.-
Whatsoever is an absolute cause, can ever be an effect
of another, but that which is the cause of one and the
effect of another is called a relative cause. Take an
example. The earth is the cause of a house but an effect
of liquids (Liquids are the causes of solids as they
precede them in the order of formation. The earth is
solid), but the first cause, prakriti (matter) has no
other cause, viz., it is beginningless or eternal. Says
the Saankhya Darshana, 1: 67 "The first having no cause
is the cause of all effects." Every effect must have
three causes before it comes into existence; just as
before a piece of cloth can be made, it must have three
things - the weaver, the thread and machinery, in the
same way the creation of the world pre-supposes the
existence of God, the prakriti, the souls, time and
space which are all uncreated and eternal. There would
be no world if even one ot them were absent.
The
various objections of atheists are answered below:
13.
If there can be no effect without a cause, what is the
cause of the first cause then
Back to contents
(i) Shoonya (nought or nothing) is the one true reality.
In the beginning there was nothing but nothing, and nothing
will survive in the end; because whatever now exists will
cease to exist and become nothing.
*quids are the causes of solids
as they precede them in the order of formation. The earth
is a solid.
PAGE
253
A.-
The ether, an invisible substance (such a prakriti),
the space and a point are also called nothing. It is
inanimate and all things invisibly exist in it. Lines
are made up of points, while circle, squares, etc.,
are made of lines. Thus has God, by the might of His
creative power, evolved the earth, mountains and objects
of all other shapes and forms out of a point or nebula
- nothing. Besides, He who knows nothing cannot be nothing.
[Hence shoonya (nothing) does not here mean nothing
put a point or a nebula.]
15.
Can something come out of nothing?
Back to contents
(ii) Q. Something can come out of nothing , just as
a seed does not germinate and send forth a sprout until
it is split, but when you break a seed an look into it,
you do not find any sprout in it. It is clear then that
the sprout comes out of nothing.
A.-
That which splits a seed before it germinates, must
have already been present in the ee, otherwise what
causes the see to split? Nor would it have come out
had it not been there.
16.
Do we sow what we reap?
Back to contents
(iii) Q.> It is not true 'As you sow so shall you
reap,' Many an act is seen that does not bear fruit; therefore
it is right it infer that it entirely rest with God to
punish or reward a man for his deeds. It absolutely depends
upon His wish.
A.-
If it were so, why does not God reward or punish a man
for deeds he has never done? It follows, therefore,
that God gives every man his due according to the nature
of his deeds. God does not reward or punish men according
to the caprice of his Will. On the other hand, He makes
a man reap only what he has sown.
17.
Can effects can be produced without a cause?
Back to contents
(iv) Q. Effects can be produced without a cause just
as the sharp thorns of Acacia Arabica spring out of the
branches that are not at all sharp and pointed but are
soft and smooth. It is clear from this illustration, therefore,
that in the beginning of Creation all material objects
and bodies of living beings come into being without (first)
cause.
PAGE
254
A.-
Whatever a thing springs from, is its cause. Thorns
do not come out of nothing. They come out of a thorny
tree, therefore, that tree is their cause. Hence the
world was not created without a cause.
(v)
Q. All things have been created and are liable to
decay. They are all ephemeral. The Neo-Vedantis put
forward objections like this, because they say, "Thousands
of books support the doctrine that Brahma alone is the
true reality., the world is a delusion and the soul
is not distinct from Brahma (God). All else is unreal."
A.-
All can not be unreal if the fact of their being unreal
is real.
Q.
Even the fact of their being unreal is unreal. Just
as fire not only burns other things and thus destroys
them, but is itself destroyed after others have been
destroyed.
A.-
That which is perceptible by the senses cannot be unreal
or nothing, nor can the extremely subtle matter - the
material cause of the world - be unreal or perishable.
The Neo-Vedantis hold Brahma as the (material) cause
of the universe; He - the cause - being real, the world
- the effect - cannot be unreal. If it were said that
the material world is only a material conception and,
therefore, unreal like the objects seen in a dream or
life a piece of rope seen in the dark and mistaken for
a snake, it cannot be true; because a conception or
an idea is something abstract which cannot remain apart
from the noumenon wherein it resides.
When
one that conceives (viz., the soul) is real, the conception
cannot be unreal, otherwise you will have to admit that
the soul is also unreal. You cannot see a thing in a
dream unless you have seen or heard of it in the wakeful
state, in other words, when the various objects of this
world come in contact without senses, they give rise
to percepts called knowledge by direct cognition - which
leave impressions on our souls, it is these impressions
which are recalled by, and become vivid to the soul
in dreams. If it be possible for a man to dream of things
of which he has had no impressions in his mind, a man
born blind, should dream of colours which is not the
PAGE
255
case.
It follows, therefore, that in the mind are retained
impressions and ideas of external things that exist
in the outside world. And just as external things continue
to exist even after a man ceases to have any consciousness
of them as in sound sleep, so does prakriti- the material
cause of the world - continue to exist ever after Dissolution.
18.
Why not believe that the external things seen in the
wakeful state is unreal?
Back to contents
As the external objects pass out of our consciousness
in slumber and those seen in a dream in the state of profound
sleep, i.e., perish as far as we are concerned, in the
same way why not believe that the external things seen
in the wakeful state are also unreal?
A.-
No, we cannot believe that; because both in slumber
and profound sleep the external objects only pass out
of our consciousness. They do not cease to exist, just
as different things lying behind us are simply invisible
to us but are there, and have not ceased to exist. Therefore,
what we have said before, that God , the soul and the
prakriti - the material cause - are real entities, is
alone true.
19.
If the five states of matter is eternal why isn't the
world eternal?
Back to contents
(vi)Q. The five bhuts - five states of matter as Prithivi
(solids), Apah (liquid) etc., - being eternal, the whole
world is eternal or imperishable.
A.-
No, it is not true; because if all those objects, the
cause of whose formation or disintegration is seen every
day, be eternal, the whole material visible world with
all such perishable things as the bodies of men and
animals, houses, and their furniture and the like would
be eternal, which is absurd. Therefore, the effects
can never be eternal.
20.
Are all things distinct from each other?
Back to contents
(vii)Q. All things are distinct from each other, There
is no unity in them. Whatever we see precludes another.
A.-The
whole exists in its parts. Time, ether, space, God,
and Order and Genus, though separate entities, are yet
common to all. There is nothing that can exist separate
from or without them. Hence all these are not separate
from each other, though they are different by nature.
Thus there is unity in variety.
PAGE
256
(viii)
Q. All things exclude each other, and are therefore
non-existent, just as a cow is not a horse, nor is a
horse a cow. Therefore, both the horse and the cow are
non-existent. Similarly, all things are as if non-existent.
A.-
Though it is true that the 'relation of one thing excluding
others does exist in all things, but a thing does not
exclude itself. For example, a cow is not a horse, nor
is a horse a cow; but a cow as a cow and a horse as
a horse do exist. If things were non-existent how could
you ever speak of this Itretaraabhaava relation i.e.,
'the relation of one thing excluding others from itself'.
[Hence the world and things contained therein do exist.
They are not non-existent.]
21.There
can be no creator.
Back to contents
(ix)Q. The world comes into being by virtue of the
fact that it is in the nature of things to combine together
and produce different things. Just as maggots are produced
the coming together of food, moisture and by decomposition
setting in; or as vegetables begin to grow when the seed,
water, and soil are brought together under favourable
conditions; or as the wind blowing on the sea is the cause
of waves that in turn produce merchaum, which mixed with
turmeric, lime and lemon juice forms what is called concrete,
so does this world come into being by virtue of the natural
properties of the elements. There is no Creator.
A.-If
formation be the natural property of matter, there would
be no dissolution or disintegration; and if you say
that disintegration is also a natural property of matter,
there could then be no formation. But if you say that
both formation and disintegration are the natural properties
of matter, there could then be neither formation nor
disintegration. If you say that an efficient agent is
the cause of the creation and dissolution of the world,
it must be other than and distinct from the objects
that are subject to formation and disintegration.
If
formation and disintegration be the natural properties
of matter, they may happen at any and every moment.
Besides, if there is no Maker and the world came into
being by virtue of the natural properties inherent in
matter, why do not other earths, suns and moons come
into existence near our earth? Moreover, whatever now
grows or comes into being, does so by virtue of the
combination of different substances - made by God. Just
as plants grow wherever the water,
PAGE
257
soil
and the seed come in contact under favourable conditions,
and not otherwise; in the same way in the manufacture
of concrete its components such as turmeric, lime, lemon
juice and merchaum do not come together by themselves,
but are mixed up together by some one, nor dot hey produce
concrete unless mixed in their right proportion. Similarly,
the prakriti and atoms, until they are properly combined
by God with the requisite knowledge and skill, cannot
by themselves produce anything. It follows, therefore,
that the world did not come into being by itself, i.e.,
by virtue of the natural properties of matter, but was
created by God.
22.
It was never created nor shall it ever perish.
Back to contents
Q. This world has had no Creator, nor is there one
at present, nor, shall there ever be one. It has been
eternally existing as such. It was never created nor shall
it ever perish.
A.-
No action or thing - which is the product of action
- can ever come into existence without an agent. All
objects to this world such as the earth, are subject
to the processes of formation, that is, are the product
of definite combination. They can never be eternal,
because a thing which is the product of combination
can never exist after its component parts come as under.
If you do not believe it, take the hardest rock or a
diamond or a piece of steel and smash it into pieces,
melt or roast it and see for yourself if it is composed
of separate particles, called molecules and atoms, or
not. If it is, then surely a time will come when those
molecules will come apart.
23.
Can the highly exalted soul become God?
Back to contents
Q. There is not Eternal God, on the other hand a highly
exalted soul, that by the practice of yoga attains such
power as the control of atoms, etc., and omniscience,
becomes God.
A.-
Had there been not Eternal God, the Creator of the universe,
Who would have made the bodies, the sense organs and
all objects of this world, the very support and means
of subsistence of the yogi, by means of which he comes
to possess such wonderful powers? Without their help
no one can endeavour to accomplish anything. The endeavour
being impossible how could he have acquired those wonderful
powers? Whatsoever efforts a man may make, whatsoever
means he may employ, whatsoever powers he may acquire,
he can never equal God in His natural - in contradistinction
to the soul's acquired - Everlasting or Eternal powers
which are infinite and manifold; because, the knowledge
of
PAGE258
the
soul, even if it were to go on improving till eternity,
will still remain finite and his powers limited. Its
power and knowledge can never become infinite. Mark,
no yogi has ever been able to subvert the laws of nature
as ordained by God, nor ever shall. God - the Eternal
Seer - possessed of wonderful powers has ordained that
eyes shall be the organs of sight, and ears the organs
of hearing. The human soul can never become God.
24.
In different cycles of Creation does God make the universe
of a uniform or a different
Back to contents
Q. In different cycles of Creation does God make the
universe of a uniform or a different character?
A.-
Just as it is now, so was it in the past, so will it
be in the future. It is said in the Veda, "Just as God
created the sun, the earth, the moon , the electricity,
the atmosphere in the previous cycles, so has He done
in the present and so will He do in the future." RIG
VEDA 10: 190, 3. God's works, being free from error
or flaw, are always of uniform character. It is only
the works of one who is finite and whose knowledge is
subject to increase or decrease that can be erroneous
or faulty, not those of God.
25.
Do the Vedas and the Shastras harmonize with or contradict
one another ?
Back to contents
Q. Do the Vedas and the Shastras harmonize with or
contradict one another on the subject of creation?
A.-
They harnonize.
Q.If
they harmonize, why is it that in the TAITREYA UPANISHAD
BRAHMANAND 1, creation is described in the following
manner? Out of prakriti - elementary material cause
of the world - God first created Akasha.* Then was evolved
Vayu - gaseous or vaporous condition of matter; out
of Vayu proceeded Agni - matter which gives out
*A'kaasha is here said to be created,
it only means that by the gathering together of all the
pervading elements A'kaasha as well as space becomes manifest.
In reality A'kaasha is never created, because of there
were no A'kaasha and space, wherein could the prakriti
exist?
PAGE
259
heat,
light and electricity - out of Agni proceeded Liquids;
and out of liquids came solids (such as earth); out
of solids issued forth vegetables which yielded food.
Food produced the reproductive element which is the
cause of the physical body and bodily organs." In Chhaandoyga
it is written that Creation begins with Agni, in the
Aitreya Upanishad that it begins with Liquids. In the
Veda itself in some places Purush (God), while in others
Hiranyagarbha (God) has been described as the cause
of the Universe; whilst in the mimaansaa action or application,
in Vaisheshika time, in Niyaaya paramaanus (atoms) in
Yoga conscious exertion, in Sankhya prakriti - the primordial
elementary matter, - Vedaanta, God. Now out of all these
which is right and which is wrong?
A.-
They are all right, not one of them is wrong. He is
in the wrong who misunderstands them. God is the efficient
cause and prakriti the material cause of the universe.
After Mahaapralaya - Grand dissolution - the next Creation
starts A'kaash. In Minor dissolution (cycles) when disintegration
does not reach the stage of Vaayu (gas) and A'kash but
reaches only that of Agni (electricity or fire) the
next creation begins with Agni. But when after dissolution
in which even agni - electricity - is not disintegrated,
the next creation begins with Liquids.
In
other words the next Creation starts at where the previous
dissolution ends. Purush and Hiranyagarbha, as we have
described in the first chapter, are names of God. Nor
is there contrariety in the description of creation
given in the six Shaastraas, because what is contrariety
but contradiction of statements when the subject under
discussion is the same. Now mark how the descriptions
of the six shaastraas harmonize with each other.
- The
Mimaansaa says, "Nothing in this world can be produced
without proper application."
- TheVaisheshika
says, "Nothing can be done or made without the expenditure
of time."
- The
Niyaaya says, "Nothing can be produced without the
material cause."
- The
Yoga says, "Nothing can be made without the requisite
skill, knowledge and thought."
- The
Saankhya says, "Nothing can be made without the definite
combination of atoms."
- The
Vedaanta says, "Nothing can be made without a Maker."
This
shows that the Creation of the world requires six different
causes which have been described separately one by each
separate Shaastra. There is no contradiction in these
descriptions. The six Shaastras together serve to explain
the phenomenon of Creation in the same way as six men
PAGE
260
Would
help each other to put a thatch on the roof of a house.
A man took six men - five of them blind an the sixth
possessed of dim sight - and showed them each a different
part of the body of an elephant. And then asked them
what they thought the animal was like. The first one
answered 'like a pillar', the second 'like a fan', the
third 'like a big pestle', the fourth 'like a broomstick',
the fifth 'like somethingflat', and the sixth one said
'something dark like four pillars supporting the body
of a buffalo'. Similar to these six men is the condition
of those men who, instead of studying the books of rishis
- the true seers of nature - read the current Sanskrit
or vernacular books written by narrow-minded men of
little understanding who malign each other and wrangle
over triflings. Why should they not suffer who are the
blind followers of the blind? The lives of half-educated,
selfish, sensual and ease-loving men of to-day help
to ruin and debase the world.
26.
Why should a cause not have a cause if there can be
no effect without cause?
Back to contents
A.~ O ye simple bretheren! Why do you not use your common
sense a little? Mark, there are only two things in this
world, a cause and an effect. Whatsoever is a cause (absolute)
can never be an effect; and whatsoever is an effect can
never be a cause at the same time. As long as a man does
not thoroughtly understand the science of Creation, he
can never have a true conception of the universe.
"That
condition of matter in which intellect-promoting (satva),
passion -exciting (rajas) and stupidity-producing (tamas)
qualities are found combined in equal proportions is
the uncreated, imperishable prakriti. The first combination
of the highly subtle, indivisible separately-existing
particles called paramanus (atoms or electrons) derived
from the prakriti, is called the Beginning (of Creation).
The various combinations of atoms in different proportions
and ways give rise to various grades and conditions
- subtle and gross - of matter till it reaches the gross
visible multiform stage called srishti - the universe."
PAGE
261
Now
that which enters into the first combination and brings
it about, existed before the combination, and shall
exist after the component parts are pushed as under
is called the cause. Whilst that which comes into existence
after the combination, and ceases to exist after it
has come to an end is called the effect. He who wants
to know the cause of a cause, the effect of an effect,
the maker of maker, the agent of an agent, the act of
an act, is blind though he sees, is deaf though he hears,
and ignorant though well-read. Can ther ever be the
eye of an eye, the lamp of a lamp, and the sun of a
sun? That out of which something is made is called a
cause. Whatever is made from another is called an effect.
Whoever produces an effect out of a cause is called
the maker.
"Nothing
can ever become something, nor can something ever become
nothing. These two principles have been rightly ascertained
by the true seers of nature." GITA 2: 16. How can prejudiced,
sophisticated, insincere, and ignorant minds understand
them so easily? He who is neither well-read nor associate
with the good and the learned, nor meditates on these
abstruse subjects with profound attention, remains immersed
in doubt and ignorance. Blessed are they who studiously
endeavour to understand the principles of all sciences
and having mastered them, teach others honestly.
It
is clear, therefore, that he who believes this world
to have been created without a cause really knows nothing.
27.
The slow and gradual scientific creation of the Universe.
Back to contents
When the time of Creation comes, God gathers those extremely
subtle particles (called Paramaanus). The first principle
that is produced out of the highly subtle elementary prakriti,
is called Mahaatatva - theprinciple of wisdom -
which is one degree less subtle than the prakriti. Out
of the Mahaatatva is evolved Ahankaara - the principle
of individuality - which is still less subtle and
in its turn gives rise to the five subtle principles,
called Bhuts, besides the five principles of sensation
and five principles of action and the principle
of attention
PAGE
262
which
are all a little less subtle than the principle of
individuality. The five subtle bhuts, by passing
through various stages of less subtle conditions of
matter, are finally transformed into five least subtle
states of matter, such as solids, liquids, etc. From
the latter spring up various kinds of trees, plants,
etc., which are the source of food, and out of food
is produced the reproductive element which is cause
of the body.
But
the first creation (of bodies) was not the result of
sexual intercourse; because it is only after the male
and female bodies have been created by God and souls
put into them that the Maithuni (sexual intercourse)
creation begins.
28.
The wonderful creation of the physical body.
Back to contents
Behold the wonderful organization of the body!
How the learned are wonder-struck with it? First there
is the osseous frame-work girt with a net-work of vessels
- veins, arteries and nerves, etc., - invested with flesh
and the whole covered by skin with its appendages - nails
and hairs. Then how beautifully are the different organs,
such as the heart, the liver, the spleen and the lungs
- ventilating apparatus - laid out. The formation of the
brain, of the optic nerve with the most reticulate formation
of the retina, the demarking of the paths of indryas -
the principles of sensation and action - , the linking
of the soul with the body, the assigning of definite places
to it for wakeful state, slumber and deep sleep, the formation
of different kinds of dhaatus - tissues and secretions,
such as muscle, bone-marrow, blood, reproductive elements
- and the construction of various other wonderful structures
and mechanisms in the body who but God could have caused.
29.
The wonderful creation of the earth.
Back to contents
The earth studded with various kinds of precious stones
and metals, the seeds of trees of a thousand different
kinds* with their wonderful exquisite structures, leaves
with myriads of different colours** and shades, flowers,
fruits, roots, rhizomes and cereals with various scents
and flavours*** none but God could create. Nor could any
one except God create myriads of earths, suns, moon and
other cosmic bodies, and sustain, revolve the regulate
them.
An
object when perceived produces two kinds of knowledge
in the mind of the observer, viz., of the nature of
the object itself and of its maker. For example, a man
found a beautiful ornament in a jungle. On examination
he saw that it was made of gold and that
*Such as Banyan tree, etc.
**Such as maroon, white , yellow,
dark, be-spotted and other mixed colours.
***Such as sweet, alkaline, saltish,
bitter, astringent, sharp and acid.
PAGE
263
it
must have been made by a clever goldsmith. In the same
way, the wonderful workmanship and execution of this
wonderful universe prove the existence of its Maker
Q.What
was first created, man or earth, etc.?
A.~
The earth, etc., because without them where could man
live and how could he maintain his life?
30.
Was one man created in the beginning of Creation or
more than one?
Back to contents
A.~ More than one; because souls, that on account of their
previous good actions deserve to be born in the Aishwari
- not the result of sexual intercourse - Creation, are
born in the beginning of the world. It is said in the
Yajur Veda, "(In the beginning) there were born many men
as well as rishis, i.e.., learned seers of nature. They
were progenitors of the human race." On the authority
of this Vedic text it is certain then that in the beginning
of Creation hundreds and thousands of men were born. By
observing nature with the aid of reason we come to the
same conclusion, viz., that men are descended from many
fathers and mothers (i.e., not from one father and one
mother).
31.
In the beginning of Creation were men created as children,
adults or old people or in all conditions?
Back to contents
A.~ They were adults, because had God created them as
children they would have required adults to bring them
up, and had created them as old men, they would not have
been able to propagate the race, therefore He created
them adults.
32Does
creation ever had a beginning?
Back to contents
A.~ No; just as the night follows the day and the day
follows the night, the night precedes the day and day
precedes the night, so does Creation follows Dissolution
and Dissolution follows Creation, Dissolution precede
Creation, and Creation precede Dissolution. This alternate
process has been eternally going on. It has neither a
beginning, nor an end, but just as the beginning and end
of a day or of a night are seen, so do Creations and Dissolutions
have beginnings as well as ends. God, the soul and prakriti
- the primordial elementary matter - are eternal by nature,
whilst Creation, and Dissolution are eternal by pravah
-i.e., they follow each
PAGE
264
other
in alternate succession - like the flow of a river which
is not continuous throughout the whole year. It dries
up and disappears in summer, and reappears in the rainy
season. Jus as the nature, attributes, and character
of God are eternal, so are His works - the Creation,
Sustenance, and Dissolution (of the world).
33.
Does not the belief of souls in lower beings impute
partiality?
Back to contents
God put some souls in human bodies, while others he
clothed with bodies of ferocious animals such as tigers,
others with those of cattle, such as cows, others with
those of birds and insects, other still with those of
plants. Does not this belief impute partiality to God?
A.~
No, it does not impute any partiality, because He put
souls into the bodies they deserved according to deeds
done in the previous birth. Had He done so without any
consideration as to the nature of their deeds, He would
have been unjust indeed.
34.
Where was man first created?
Back to contents
A.~ In Trivishtap otherwise called Tibet. Q. Were all
men of one class or divided into different classes at
the time of Creation?
A.~
They all belonged to one class, viz., that of man, but
later on they were divided into two main classes, -
the good and the wicked. The good were called Aryas
and the wicked Dasyus. Says the Rig Veda, "Do
ye know (there are) two classes of men - Aryas and
Dasyus." The good and learned were also called
Devaas, while the ignorant and wicked, such as
dacoits (robbers), were called Asura. TheAryas
were again divided into four Classes, viz., Braahmana
(teachers), Kshatriya (rulers or protectors), Vaishya
(merchants) and Shuudra (labourers). Those who belonged
to the first three classes being educated and bearing
good character, were called Dwijas - twice born;
whilst the fourth Class was so named because
of being composed of ignorant and illiterate persons.
They were also called Anaryas - not good. This
division into Aryas and Shudras is supported
by the Atharva Veda wherein it is said "Some are Aryas,
others Shuudras.
35.
How did they happen to come here (to India) then?
Back to contents
A.~ When the relations between the Aryasand Dasyus,
or between Devas and Asuraas, (i.e., between
the good and learned, and the ignorant and wicked) developed
into a constant state of
PAGE
265
warfare,
and serious troubles arose, the Aryas regarding
this country as the best in the whole earth emigrated
her and colonized it. For this reason it is calledAryavarta
- the abode of the Aryas.
Q.
What are the boundaries of Aryavarta?
A.~
"It is bounded on the North by the Himalayas, on the
South by the Vindyachal mountains, on the East and West
by the sea. It has also on its West the Sarasvati River
(Sindh or Attock) and on the East the Dhrisvati river
also called the Brahmaputra which rises from the mountain
east of Nepal, and passing down to the east of Assam
and the west of Burma, falls into the Bay of Bengal
in the Southern Sea (Indian Ocean). All the countries
included between the Himalaya on the North and Vindhyachal
mountains on the south as far as Rameshwar are called
Aryavarta, because they were colonized and inhabited
by Devas (the learned) and Aryas - the
good and the noble." Manu 2: 22, 17.
Q.
What was the name of this country before that , and
who were its oboriginal inhabitants?
A.~
It had no name, nor was it inhabited by any other people
before the Aryas(settled in it) who sometime
after creation came straight down here from Tibet and
colonized this country.
Q.
Some people say that they came from Iran (Persia) and
hence they were called Aryas. Before the Aryas
came to this country it was inhabited by savages whom
the Aryas called Asuraas and Raakshasas
as (demons), while they called themselves Devatas
(gods). The wars between the two were called by
the name Devaasura Sangraam as in the historical
romances. Is this true?
A.~
It is absolutely wrong. The Veda declares what
we have already repeated, i.e., "The virtuous, learned,
unselfish, and pious men are called Aryas, while
the men of opposite character such as docoits, wicked,
unrighteous and
PAGE
266
ignorant
persons are called Dasyus."RIG VEDA 2: 51, 8.
Besides , "The Dwijaas ( the twice-born) - Braahmanaas,
Kshatriyas, Vaishyaas - are called Aryas,
while the Shuudraas are called Anaaryas, or
Non-Aryas."ATHARVA VEDA19:62. In the face of these
Vedic authorities how can sensible people believe in
the imaginary tales of the foreigners. In the Devaasura
wars, Prince Arjuna and King Dashratha and others
of Aryavartaused to go to the assistance of the
Aryas in order to crush the Asuras. This
shows that the people living outside Aryavarta were
called Dasyus and Malechhaas; because whenever
those people attacked Aryas living on the Himalayas,
the kings and rulers of Aryavarta, went to help
the Ayas of the north, etc.
But
the war which Ram Chandra waged in the south against
Ravan - the king of Ceylon - is called not by the name
of Devaasura war but by that of Raama-Raavana
war or the war between the Aryas and Raakhasas.
In no Sanskrit book - historical or otherwise - it is
recorded that the Aryas emigrated here from Iran,
fought with and conquered the aborigines, drove them
out, and became the rulers of the country. How can then
these statements of the foreigners be true? Besides,
Manu also corroborates our position. He says,
"The countries other than Aryavarta are called
Dasyusand Malechha countries."MANU 10:45,
2:23. The people living in the north-east, north, north-west
were called Raakshasas. You can still see that
the description of Raakshasas given therein tallies
with the ugly appearance of the negroes of today. The
people living in the antipodes of Aryavarta were called
Nagas, and their country Pataalabecause
of being situated under the feet (of those living in
Aryavarta). Their kings belonged to the Naaga
dynasty taking their name from that of the founder who
was called Naga. His daughter Ulopi was
married to Prince Arjuna. From the time of kshvaaku
to that of Kauravaas and Paandavaas,
the Aryas were the sovereign rulers of the whole
earth, and the Vedas were preached and taught
more or less even in countries other than Aryavarta.
PAGE
267
Brahma
was the first of the literati. His son was called Virat
whose son was Manu who had ten sons, Marichi
etc., who were progenitors of seven kings beginning
with Swayambhava whose off-springs were the kings
beginning with Ikshvaaku. This Ikshvaaku
colonized Aryavarta and was its first king. At
the present moment, let alone governing foreign countries,
the Aryas through indolence, negligence and mutual
discord and ill-luck do not possess a free, independent,
uninterrupted and fearless rule even over their own
country. Whatsoever rule is left to them, is being crushed
under the heel of the foreigner.
There
are only a few independent states left. When a country
falls upon evil days, the natives have to bear untold
misery and suffering. Say what you will, the indigenous
native rule is by far the best. A foreign government,
perfectly free from religious prejudices, impartial
towards all - the natives and the foreigners - kind,
beneficent and just to the natives like their parents
though it may be, can never the people perfectly happy.
It is extremely difficult to do away with the differences
in language, religion, education, customs and manners,
but without doing that the people can never fully effect
mutual good and accomplish their object. It behoves
all good people to hold in due respect the teachings
of the Veda and Shaastraas and ancient
history.
36.
much time has elapsed since the creation of the world?
Back to contents
A.~ One billion, nine hundred sixty millions and some
hundred thousand years have passed since the creation
of the world and the revelation of the Vedas. For detailed
exposition of this subject the readers should consult
our book called "An introduction to the Exposition of
the Vedas." (1,960,852,999 years old).
The
orderly devolopment of the subtle ether (matter)
to that of the stage of solid.
Back to contents
The
minutest particle of matter that cannot be divided any
further is called a Paramaanu (atom).
60 Paramaanus make one Anu (molecule).
2 Anus make one Dvyanak, which enters
into the composition of the ordinary physical Vayu
(air).
3 Dvyanaks make one Trasarenu that forms
Agni - that condition of matter whose property
is light, and heat.
4 Dvyanaks formJala (liquids).
5 Dvyanaks form Prithvi (solids).
PAGE
268
Three
Dvyanaks make one trasarenu, by doubling
which earth and visible objects are formed. It is
in this way - i.e., by the process of combining Paramaanuus
and Anus and so on till the visible things
are produced - that the earth and other planets have
been made of God.
37.
What supports this earth?
Back to contents
Q. What supports this earth? One man says that it
rests on the head of Shesha - a thousand-hooded
snake, another says that it is supported on the horns
of a bull, a third says that it rests on nothing, a
fourth one says that it is supported by the solar attraction,
and sixth one says that being heavy the earth is going
down and down in space. Out of all of these different
theories which shall we believe to be true?
A.~
Those, who say that it rests on the head of Shesha
(a snake) or on the horns of a bull, should be asked,
on what the earth rested in the time of the parents
of the shesha or of the bull before it was born and
what supported it. The followers of the bull theory
will be at once silenced. But the advocates of the
shesha theory willsay that the shesha rest on a kurn
( a tortoise) which rests on water, and the water
on Agni and the Agni on air and air rests on A'kaasha
(space). They should be asked on what all of them
rested. They will have say "on God". If you ask them
again whose children the shesha and bull were, they
will tell you that the bull was the son of a cow and
the shesha that of kurma (a tortoise), the son of
Marichi who was the son of Manu, the son of Virat,
who was the son of Brahma.
This
Brahma was born in the beginning of creation. Six
generations had thus passed before the shesha was
born, who had sustained the earth till then? What
did it rest on at the time of the birth of Kashyapa
(the tortoise)? They will have nothing further to
say* and will, therefore, begin to quarrel. What it
really means is that shesha is another name
for the remainder (that is, what is left behind in
subtracting one sum from another). Some poet said:
"The earth rests on shesha." Some ignorant man, not
understanding the poet, invented this tale of the
snake. What the poet really meant was that the earth
was supported by God - the one Unchangeable Being
in the midst of Creation and Dissolution, the One
permanent element that undergoes no change during
Creation
*Literally 'thy silence adn
my silence.' It is an Indian proverb.-Tr.
PAGE
269
or
Dissolution. In the whole world He is the only one
that remains unchanged. He stands aloof from change.
"That God who is unaffected by time, and is imperishable
sustains the sun and the earth and all other planets."
ATHARVA VEDA 14:1, 1.
There
is passage in the Rig Veda which means "Ukshaa
sustains the moon and earth." Some ignorant person
seeing the word ukshaa invented the story of
the bull supporting the earth, because ukshaa
does also mean a bull, but never entered the head
of that idiot as to how a bull could be powerful enough
to support such a planet. Ukshaa her means
the sun, because it waters the earth through rain.
It sustains this earth by solar attraction. But there
is none besides God Who sustains the sun.
38.
How could God sustain such big planets s the sun and
the earth?
Back to contents
A.~ Just as these big planets are nothing compared to
the infinite ( in which they exist) - (they are not
even as big as a drop in the ocean), - similarly compared
with the Infinite, Almighty God, these myriads of planets
are not even as big as an atom. He pervades everything
within and without. "He is the Supreme Spirit who created
all things and sustains them." YAJUR VEDA. Had He not
been an All-pervading God (just as the Puranics, the
Muslims and the Christians say). He could never sustain
this world, because no one can support a thing without
being present there. If some one says, "All these planets
are supporting each other by mutual attraction, where
then is the necessity for God to sustain them?"
He
should be asked if the universe is finite or infinite.
If he answers that it is infinite it cannot be true
- since a thing possessing a form can never be infinite;
and if he says that it is finite, we ask whose attraction
supports what is beyond or outside its limits. Things
when spoken of collectively ar called smashti
and individually Vyashti*. If all the worlds
were collectively called the universe, there is no
one but God
*For example, a group of trees
would be called Smashti,while each tree individually
Vyashti.
PAGE
270
Who
attracts and sustains it as it is said in the Yajur
Veda, "God it is Who creates and sustains luminous
bodies, (such as the sun) as well as the non-luminous
(such as the earth)."YAJUR VEDA 13:4. As He pervades
all. He is the Creator and sustainer of the universe.
Q.
Do the earth and other planets revolve or are they
stationary?
A.~
They revolve.
<1>Q.
Some say that it is the sun that moves, not the earth,
while others say just the reverse. Now who are right?
A.~
They are both half grown; because it is written in
the Veda, "This earth with all it waters revolves
round the sun." YAJUR VEDA 3, 6. This shows that the
earth revolves. Again says the Veda, "The Glorious
, resplendent sun, that gives life and energy to al
the world, - animate and inanimate - through rain
and solar rays, and makes all physical objects visible,
attracts all other planet and rotates in its own orbit,
but does not move round other planets." YAJUR VEDA
33:43.
In
each solar system there is one sun that gives light
to all the planets (such as the earth).
Says
the Veda, "As the moon is illuminated by the sun,
so are other planets ( such as the earth) illuminated
by the light of the sun." ATHARVA VEDA14: 1. But the
day, and the night are constantly present. It is day
in that part of the earth which in its revolutions
round the sun confronts it, whilst it is night in
the other half which is hidden from it. In other words,
the sunrise, the sunset, the twilight, the mid-day
and the mid-night, etc,. are always present in different
countries at the same time; thus when it is sunrise
in India, it is sunset in America and vice versa;
when it is mid-day or mid-night in America and vice-versa.
Those, who say that the sun moves round the earth
PAGE
271
which
is stationary are all ignorant; because, had it been
so, one day and one night would have lasted thousands
of years, since the sun is called Bradhna,
which means that it is a hundred thousand times bigger
than the earth, and millions of miles distant from
it; consequently it would require much longer time
for the sun to go round the earth than for the latter
to go round the former. Just as if a mountain were
to go round a mustard seed, it would take much longer
time when the latter would go round the former.
Those
who say that the sun is stationary are ignorant of
Astronomy; because had it been so, how could it move
form one zodiac to another; besides, a heavy body
like the sun could never remain in space without rotating
constantly. The Jainees, who say that the earth does
not move, but on the other hand is going down and
down in space, and that in one Jamboo Island alone
there are two suns and two moons, are like one suffering
from Delirium Tremens the result of over-intoxication
with cannabis Indica.
If
the earth were going down and down, it would smash
into pieces from want of support of the air which
could no longer encircle it. The people living on
the top (uppermost) should have more air than those
below, it being unequally distributed. Had there been
two suns and two moons there would have been no night
and no dark half of the month. Therefore, there is
only one moon for our planet and one sun amidst many
planets.
39.
What are the sun, the moon and the stars?
Back to contents
Q. Are they inhabited by man and other living creatures
or not?
A.~
They are worlds inhabited by men and other living
beings, The Shatpatha Braahman 14:6, 9, 4. says.,
"The earth, the water, the heated bodies, the space,
the moon, the sun, and other planets are all called
Vasus or abodes, because they are abodes of
living beings as well as of inanimate objects." When
the sun, the moon and other planets are abodes like
our earth, what doubt can there be in their being
inhabited? When this little earth of God is full of
men land other living beings, can it ever be possible
that all other worlds are void? How can myriads of
other worlds be of any use unless they are inhabited
by man and other beings? It follows, therefore, that
they are inhabited.
PAGE
272
40. Do they have the same bodies?
Would men and other living beings in the other
worlds have the same kind of bodies and bodily organs
as they have here or different?
A.~
Most likely there is some difference in their form
and the like, just as you see some difference in
form, countenance, appearance and complexion among
people of different countries as the Ethiopeans,
Chinese, the Indians and the Europeans. But the
creation of the same class or species on this earth
and other planets is identical. The class or species
that has its sense organs (as eyes) in some definite
place in the body here (on this planet), will have
them in the same place other planets; for it is
said in the Veda, "Just as God created the sun,
the moon, the earth, and other planets and the objects
therein in the previous cycles of Creation, the
same has He done in the present Creation." RIG VEDA
10: 190. He does not make any alteration.
41.
Are the same Vedas revealed in the other worlds
as in this?
Back to contents
A.~ Yes. Just as the policy of a king is the same
in all the countries under his rule, so is the Vedic
system of Government of the King of kings identically
the same in all the worlds over which He rules.
42.
Why should we have control of matter and soul?
Back to contents
Q. When you hold that the soul and the Prakriti
(matter) are eternal and were never created by God,
why should He have any control over them, as they
are independent?
A.~
Just as a king and his subjects live contemporaneously
and yet they are subject to him, so are the soul
and the prakriti under the control of God. Why should
not the soul, with its finite powers and the dead
inert matter be subject to His powers when He creates
the whole universe, awards souls the fruits of their
deeds, protects and sustains all, and possess infinite
powers. It is clear, therefore, that the soul is
free to act, but is subject to the laws of God in
reaping the fruits of its acts, while the Almighty
God is the Creator, Protector and Sustainer of,
the universe.
END
OF CHAPTER 8.
|
