A new approach to the Vedas : an essay in translation and exegesis

A NEW APPROACH TO THE VEDAS

as we have seen, his mode is modeless, in that he breathes without breath: a similar conception is met with in Rg Veda, 1, 164, 4, where That “which supports Him who is by way of being the first born embodiment,” prathamam jaya-manam-asthanvantam . . . vibharti, is itself “‘ bodiless,” or more literally, ‘“‘ boneless,” anastha, that is to say, ‘structureless.’”’ ‘ That” is not yet “ Selfed ” (atmanvi)—“ before creatures were, God was not God, albeit he was Godhead,” Eckhart, I, 410. Tamas (as in Maitri Up., V. 2), apraketa salila, gahanam gambhira, etc., are all terms naturally designating the undifferentiated, unintelligible Godhead, ‘“‘ which is as though it were not,’ Eckhart, I, 381: asat, non-existent, giilha, hidden, there where ‘“‘ darkness reigns in the unknown known unity,” Eckhart, 1, 368, Cf. p. 6 and Note 21.

‘“What covered o’er?’’ That is, what and where was the world? dvarivar being from vav?, intensive reduplicated form of vy, “ to cover,” “ veil.” The world is thought of as veiling the ultimate reality, cf. Rg Veda, V, 19, 1, “state after state is generated, veil (vavri) from veil appears,’ hence also the prayer, Maitri Up., VI, 35, with respect to the Sun, “ That face do thou unveil (apavynu)” or “ That door do thou open.”

Our hymn is by no means necessarily an expression of scepticism : it is rather wonder than a wondering that is suggested. “ Who knows” is no more “ sceptical ” than Kabir’s tasuka sot santa janat, “‘ who are the Comprehensors thereof ?”’ or Blake’s ‘“‘ Did he who made the lamb make thee?” ‘‘He knows or knows not,’ if understood to mean “‘ he knows and knows not ’’ would be sound theology. In the last stanza, alternative theories of “emanation ”’ and of ‘‘ creation by design” are propounded.1? In any case, the very form of the various statements and questions proves that sound ontological speculation was by no means a new thing, for it is inconceivable that such questions had been correctly

58