Satyarth Prakash

by Swami Dayanand

Chapter 8

The Creation , Sustenance and Dissolution of The Universe.


"It is perfectly certain that India never saw a more learned Sanskrit scholar, a deeper metaphysician, a more wonderful orator, and a more fearless denunciator of any evil, than Dayanand, since the time of Sankarcharya."

Contents of Page:
Has this universe proceeded from God or from something else?
Has not prakriti (matter) emanated from God?
How many entities are eternal or beginningless?
Is this whole universe nothing but God?
How many causes are there of the Universe?
Why is not the universe God?
What object had God in creating the world?
Was the seed made first or the tree?
God being Omnipotent can he not create matter and soul?
Is God formless or embodied?
If God be formless, this world created by Him should also be formless
Cannot God create an effect without cause?
If there can be no effect without a cause, what is the cause of the first cause then?
Why not believe that the external things seen in the wakeful state are also unreal?
Can something come out of nothing?
Do we sow what we reap?
Can effects can be produced without a cause?
Why not believe that the external things seen in the wakeful state is unreal?
If the five states of matter is eternal why isn't the world eternal?
Are all things distinct from each other?
There can be no creator.
It was never created nor shall it ever perish.
Can the highly exalted soul become God?
In different cycles of Creation does God make the universe of a uniform or a different character?
Do the Vedas and the Shastras harmonize with or contradict one another on the subject of creation?
Why should a cause not have a cause, if there can be no effect without cause?
The slow and gradual scientific creation of the Universe.

The wonderful creation of the physical body and our planet.
The wonderful creation of the earth.
Was one man created in the beginning of Creation or more than one?
In the beginning of Creation were men created as children, adults or old people or in all conditions?
Does creation ever had a beginning?
Does not the belief of souls in animals/insects/plants and humans impute partiality to God
Where was man first created
Were all men of one class or divided into different classes at the time of Creation?
How did they happen to come here (to India) then?
How much time has elapsed since the creation of the world?
What supports this earth?
The orderly devolopment of the subtle ether (matter) into that of the stage of solid.
What supports the earth.
How could God sustain such big planets s the sun and the earth?
Do the earth and other planets revolve or are they stationary?
Are sun, moon and stars and other planets inhabited by man and other living creatures or not

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


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.


  • bhasya :: rigveda || yajurveda || samveda || atharvaveda


    Contact Us:
    Aryasamaj Nr. Khambhalia gate Aryasamaj Marg, Jamnagar, Gujarat , India 361 005 Phone No. :+ 91-288-550220,
    91-288-670671, 91-288-670211 email: [email protected]

    Site designed and developed by Imagewebsolutions
    [email protected]

    Back to top of Page