Purusha Suktam

For the past few years I have been devoting much of my time in verifying whether the Hindu religion has any great plus points (compared to other religions of the world) as is often touted by many nowadays. The more I have delved into this matter, the more disappointed I have been, and I have been constantly reminded of a popular Malayalam film song, whose lines translate somewhat as follows:

"Man created religionsReligions created GodsMan, religions and Gods togetherdivided Man's mind and the land."

Here I try to give the results of some of my enquiries into Hindu sacred books and some pertinent points which expose the lack of logical clarity.

As the first attempt, the famous "Purusha Suktam" has been taken. To facilitate the reader, I am giving first the English transliteration of the Sukta containing sixteen Riks as per the Saakala samhita.

OM

sahasRa SeershA purusha: | sahasrAksha: sahasrapAth |sa bhUmim viSvathO vRthvA | athyathishTad daSAngulam || 1 ||

purusha evEdaG^M sarvam | yad bhUtham yach cha bhavyam |

uthAmRthathvasyeSAna: | yad annenAthirOhathi || 2 ||

ethAvAn asya mahimA | atho jyAyAG^mScha pUrusha: |pAdO ƒsya viSvA bhUthAni | thRipAdasyAmRtham divi || 3 ||

thripAd Urdhva udait purusha: | pAdo ƒsyEhAbhavathpuna: |thatho viSvang vyakrAmath | sASanAnaSane abhi || 4 ||

thasmAth virAD ajAyatha | virAjo adhipUrusha : |sa jAthO athyarichyatha | paSchAd bhUmimathhO pura: || 5 ||

yathpurushENa havishA | devA yajnam athanvatha |vasanthO asyAseed Ajyam | greeshma idhma: Saraddhavi: || 6 ||

tham yajnam barhishi proukshan | purusham jAtham agratha: | thEna dEvA ayajantha | sAdhyA RshayaS cha ye || 8 ||

thasmAd yajnAth sarvahutha: | sambhRtham pRshadAjyam |pashUG^ms thAG^mS chakre vAyavyAn | AraNyAn grAmyAs cha ye || 8 ||

thasmAd yajnAth sarvahutha: | R^cha: sAmAni jajnire |chandAG^Msi jajnire thasmAth | yajus thasmAd ajAyatha || 9 ||

thasmAdaSvA ajAyantha | ye ke chObhayAdatha: |gAvOha jajnire thasmAth | thasmAjjAthA ajAvaya: || 10 ||

yath purusham vyadadhu: | kathidhA vyakalpayan |mukham kimasya kau bAhU | kavUrU pAdA uchyethe || 11 ||

brAhmaNo asya mukhamAseeth | bAhU rAjanya: kRtha: |UrU thadasya yad vaiSya | padbhyAm SUdro ajAyatha || 12 ||

chandramA manasO jAtha: | chakshO sUryo ajAyatha |mukhAdindraschAgnischa | prANAdvAyurajAyatha || 13 ||

nAbhyA Aseedanthariksham | SeerSHNau dyau: samavarthatha |padbhyAm bhUmir diSa: SrOthrAth | thathhA lokAG^m akalpayan || 14 ||

sapthAsyAsan paridhaya: | thri: saptha: samidha: kRthA: |deva yad yajnam thanvAnA: | abadhnan purusham paSum || 15 ||

yajnEna yajna-mayajantha devA: | thAni dharmANi prathhamAnyAsan |thEha nAkam mahimAna: sachanthe | yathra pUrve sAdhyA: santhi devA: || 16 ||

In the samhitha these Rks come under the eighth ashTaka, fourth adhyAya, varga 17-18-19. Like many other parts of the vEda, this sUktha has also no connection to the preceding or subsequent portion and stands separate. Hence it is not possible to come to any conclusion about the circumstances in which the said sacrifice (yajna) of the purusha happened except what is contained in the sUktha itself.

There is slight rearrangement and addition of two new stanzas in the thaiththiriya yajurvEda, which is the most followed version of this sUktha. In practice, people recite six additional slOkas called ‘anuvAka’ after the purusha sUktha, so that there is a total of 24 stanzas in the popular version. The additions/changes in the Yajurvedic version do not contribute much to the internal consistency of this sUktha and hence I am confining my observations to the original RgvEda version.

The Rshi of the sUktha is nArAyaNa and the dEvatha is purusha. Ordinarily, the dEvatha of a sUktha is the deity to whom the worship in the hymn is addressed. Hence it looks somewhat strange that the victim who was sacrificed as per

this hymn, himself has been elevated to the status of the dEvatha for the sUktha.

We will now consider the stanzas one by one.

sahasRa SeershA purusha: | sahasrAksha: sahasrapAth |sa bhUmim viSvathO vRthvA | athyathishTad daSAngulam || 1 ||

The first stanza states that the purusha with many heads, eyes, feet, etc., pervades (manifests, according to some commentators) this world and the universe, yet He remains ten ‘amgulas’ (thumb breadth) above. In what form, matter or energy or something else, does He so exist (ten angulas above the universe) is not stated; while all commentators uniformly interpret the word ‘sahasra’ in this stanza as ‘many’, most give the meaning of the word ‘daSa’ as ten. One interesting comment was that ‘daSAmgulam’ refers to the ten fingers and when the purusha is thus ten thumb-widths away, we should take it to mean that He is beyond our counting or calculation, since counting is done with the fingers. If ‘sahasra’ could mean many and countless, the same adjective could have been used here.

purusha evEdaG^M sarvam | yad bhUtham yach cha bhavyam |uthAmRthathvasyeSAna: | yad annenAthirOhathi || 2 ||

In the second stanza, we are told that whatever we had, have or will have here (idam sarvam) is that purusha; also He is the ruler or sovereign of immortality. ‘yad annEna athirohathi’ has been translated in many ways, such as, ‘since (or when) by food He expands’, ‘He grows by nourishment’, ‘that which shows (itself) as food’ etc. There seems to be no unanimity, but attempts have been made to find a logical relation between the two statements, ‘and He is the sovereign of immortality’ in the first half, and, ‘which

by means of food, grows or goes up’, but without much of a success.

ethAvAn asya mahimA | atho jyAyAG^mScha pUrusha: |pAdO ƒsya viSvA bhUthAni | thRipAdasyAmRtham divi || 3 ||

Now we are told about the greatness of the purusha. All that is seen here, or this universe, is His majesty; the purusha is, however, far superior, greater, for, this constitutes only a quarter of His might, the other three quarters are in the heavens, where they are eternal. Some commentaries interpret the word ‘divi’ as ‘in self-luminous effulgence’, assuming the verb-root ‘div’ as the basis but the former interpretation appears to be more forthright.

thripAd Urdhva udait purusha: | pAdo ƒsyEhAbhavathpuna: |thatho viSvang vyakrAmath | sASanAnaSane abhi || 4 ||

The fourth stanza sort of further explains the third, and it states that the three-fourth part of purusha is high above (went up, as per another commentary), only a quarter of Him became, manifested, came here again; the word ‘puna:’ in this stanza is taken to mean ‘puna: puna:’ i.e., again and again. But the idea of cyclical creation and subsequent destruction does not find a place in Rgvedic cosmology. From that (thathO) this universe (viSvang) proceeded out (vyakrAmath) over things that eat food and those which do not.

thasmAth virAD ajAyatha | virAjo adhipUrusha : |sa jAthO athyarichyatha | paSchAd bhUmimathhO pura: || 5 ||

From that (thasmAth) came virAd. Over this virAd (was) purusha. That (sa), after birth (jAthO), grew very large (athi arichyatha) before (pashcAd) this earth (bhUmim) and then (atho) behind (pura:). The meaning of ‘behind’ for the sanskrit word pura: is the most appropriate, especially after ‘pashcAd’ just preceding, some have taken its meaning as

‘and then’, etc., in order to make this Rk correspond to the later philosophic doctrines like advaitha, viSishTAdvaitha, etc.

yathpurushENa havishA | devA yajnam athanvatha |vasanthO asyAseed Ajyam | greeshma idhma: Saraddhavi: || 6 ||

(For) That yajna or rite which the dEvAs performed with the purusha as the havis or oblation, spring season (vasantha:) became the ghee, summer season (greeshma ) the fuel stick, autumn season the offering (havi: ). When nothing at all had been created how could there be the three seasons?

Various commentaries have tried their best to make highly esoteric and high-flown explanations of this absurd statement. I am of the view that the mind of the Rgvedic Aryan was so enamoured of explaining everything through the mechanism of the best and most mystical of his accomplishments, viz., the yajna or fire sacrifice ritual and he adopted the same to explain the abstruse subject of Original Creation and got himself entangled into many a logical inconsistency.

tham yajnam barhishi proukshan | purusham jAtham agratha: | thEna dEvA ayajantha | sAdhyA RshayaS cha ye || 8 ||

For that yajna (tham yajnam ) (they) sprinkled (proukshan ) with the sacrificial grass, the purusha who was the first-born. With him they performed the yajna, the devas and those who were the sAdhyAs.

From where did the sAdhyAs and R^shis (sAdhyA: RshayaS cha) emanate, if even Indra and the like were born only after the Purusha was immolated (see stanza 13 below)? (As far as I could search, this is the only reference to sAdhyAs in the RgvEda. No further details can be gleaned from the Rk samhitha. However, sAdhyAs are referred to in chhAndOgya and munDaka Upanishads as well as in some of the Puranas which are all posterior to the Rgveda. In the Upanishads, sAdhyAs are semi-divine, celestial beings. When we come to the Puranas, their role becomes yet more different and they are a class of dEvathas who are, a) born from the virAT purusha [M. Bh. Adi-1-35], b) children of dharmadEva by his wife named sAdhyA, who was one of daksha's 60 daughters [Vishnu P.1-15], c), sAdhyAs were defeated by garuDa on his way to the heaven for fetching nectar [M. Bh. Adi-32-16], d), sAdhyAs were the storekeepers in the marriage of king maruththa's daughter [M. Bh. Santi-29-23], etc. It should be evident from these references that the notion of sAdhyAs taking part in the very first sacrifice of creation must have come subsequent to the time of Mahabharata.) There is a case, therefore, that this purusha sUktha could be a later interpolation into the vedic samhitha, after some ideas about sAdhyAs were incorporated in to the religious texts.

thasmAd yajnAth sarvahutha: | sambhRtham pRshadAjyam |pashUG^ms thAG^mS chakre vAyavyAn | AraNyAn grAmyAs cha ye || 8 ||

thasmAd yajnAth sarvahutha: | R^cha: sAmAni jajnire |chandAG^Msi jajnire thasmAth | yajus thasmAd ajAyatha || 9 ||

thasmAdaSvA ajAyantha | ye ke chObhayAdatha: |gAvOha jajnire thasmAth | thasmAjjAthA ajAvaya: || 10 ||

The three subsequent stanzas, 8,9 and 10 list the items which originated from (as a result of) the aforesaid yajna

called sarvahuth. From it were gathered (sambhRtham) the ghee-and-curd mixture (pRshadAjyam). Various animals (pashUG^ms thAG^mS) living in the air, in the forests and in the villages (i.e., domesticated) were created (chakre). [There is one interpretation for this stanza to the effect that ghee-and-curd mixture is a euphemism for semen, the basis for all life. This, however, is not acceptable since there are other direct references to the word ‘rEtha:’ in the same sense elsewhere in the Rigveda itself.]

In the ninth stanza we are told, again with the words, ‘from that yajna called sarvahuth’, were born (ajAyatha ) the Rks, sAmans, chhandases and yajus. The tenth stanza says that from the same yajna were born horses, animals with two rows (upper & lower) of teeth (ubhayAdatha:), cows, goats and sheep.

yath purusham vyadadhu: | kathidhA vyakalpayan |mukham kimasya kau bAhU | kavUrU pAdA uchyethe || 11 ||

Now, a question is raised by the hymn-maker himself; he asks, “when the puruSHa was cut-up, how did they shape him? What became of his mouth? What of his hands, thighs, feet?

brAhmaNo asya mukhamAseeth | bAhU rAjanya: kRtha: |UrU thadasya yad vaiSya | padbhyAm SUdro ajAyatha || 12 ||

And, he then proceeds to answer somewhat elaborately. (This is one of the most important and basic hymns on the basis of which the notorious caste system was built up.) brAhmaN was His mouth, kshathriya, His hands, His thighs were the vaiSya and SUdra was born from his feet.

Note:Whereas the brAhmaN, kshathriya and vaiSya are covered by the verb Aseeth and kRtha: (was and made, respectively), Sudra came out of,or was born from, (ajAyatha) the feet of the victim. There is thus a subtle attempt in this basic hymn itself, to give an impression that the three former categories constituted some specified limbs of the purusha and so

continued to have a closeness to the purusha, which the Sudra did not enjoy. Probably the distinction was deliberate and the hymn-maker wanted to depict the three higher castes as co-eval with the divine purusha while the Sudra did not have that status.

chandramA manasO jAtha: | chakshO sUryo ajAyatha |mukhAdindraschAgnischa | prANAdvAyurajAyatha || 13 ||

nAbhyA Aseedanthariksham | SeerSHNau dyau: samavarthatha |padbhyAm bhUmir diSa: SrOthrAth | thathhA lokAG^m akalpayan || 14 ||Moon originated from His mind, sun from the eye, Indra and Agni from His mouth, Vayu from His prANa (breath); the realm in-between earth and heaven (called anthariksham) from His navel or centre, and sky from His head were established. From His feet was created the earth, from His ears the directions, and the worlds were given shape to.

saptAsyA san paridhaya: | thri: saptha: samidha: kRthA: |dEvA yad yajnam thanvAnA: | abadhnan purusham paSum || 15 ||

Note:

This r^k is given as the seventh in the thaiTHireeya AraNyaka. That seems a slightly better arrangement since the action of binding, tying the sacrificial victim would, naturally, precede the results of the sacrifice.

Seven were the sacred enclosing sticks (paridhaya:), three-times seven (twenty-one) fuel sticks (samidha:) made. The paridhi: is a fence and seven such fences are prescribed by the later brAhmaNa texts. The Rk does not give any idea about what made up the seven paridhaya: and twenty-one samidha:. Commentarians have used their own imagination to fill the gap. Talking about a sacrifice for original creation itself is a logical inconsistency since nothing could have

existed before such creation and no one would have been there to recount it. Some commentators have tried to get over this difficulty by assuming that what has been described by this sUktha is not the “original creation” but the beginnings of a new cycle of creation after a praLaya. Even granting that for argument’s sake, one is at a loss to understand as to how 1) the characters like Rshis and sAdhyAs who are stated to have performed this yajna, and, 2) the various accessories listed such as the three seasons – spring, summer and autumn -, the seven paridhaya:, the twenty-one samidha:, the medium (whatever it might have been) used by the performers of the sacrifice to tie (bind) the victim, etc., could have sprung into existence of their own! If these entities could do so come into existence, why was it at all necessary to perform an elaborate yajna for the rest of creation? There is no answer to this fundamental doubt.It is relevant to look at another hymn of the RgvEda, the nAsadeeya sUktha, which also deals with the subject of what there was in the very beginning of the universe. This sUktha which is also fairly well-known among the scholars (but not among the ordinary, practising Hindus) is given, with very simple English translation, for the reader’s convenience as Appendix.

yajnEna yajnam ayajantha devA: | thAni dharmANi prathhamAnyAsan |thEha nAkam mahimAna: sachanthe | yathra pUrve sAdhyA: santhi devA: || 16 ||

By this sacrifice the dEvAs worshipped sacrifice (yajna ) itself and those laws (of sacrifice) became the first and the most important. Those great (people) who (worship in the same manner) achieve heaven where the ancient dEvAs and sAdhyAs exist (live).

Thus the primacy of the laws of sacrifice is what is emphasized by the sUktha and heaven is guaranteed for those who follow those rules. Under the dispensation of the

caste system the right to perform sacrifice was made exclusively that of brAhmaNa ; while the kshathriya and vaiSya could get sacrifices performed in order to get the benefits/rewards promised in the hymn, the Sudra was completely kept out of this. Does this not show that the purport of the sUktha was to create and establish, firmly, the caste hierarchy and a clever ruse was utilised towards achieving that aim by inserting this hymn in the RgvEda so that authority could be gained from that. This is especially relevant since the RgvEda contains the nAsadeeya sUktham which is, by all counts, a much better and more profound speculation on the creation.

Additional Comments :1. There is inconsistency is in the very beginning of the

sUktha itself. "sahasRa SeershA purusha: " defines one purusha, who, it is further explained, "sa bhUmim viSvathO vRthvA athyathishTad daSAngulam". This purusha, then, is the total of the four "pAdA: ". Thereafter, the dEvAs and the sAdhyAs tied up purusha himself and offered Him as the sacrifice. Whether the victim of the sacrifice was the purusha in his entirety with his three-fourth parts above “this all” or, whether it was the virAD who emanated out of the one-quarter below, has not been stated anywhere. This has given rise to some Indian writers criticising the Western scholars for confusion in their writings. If, on the other hand, the victim was the entire purusha Himself, the description about His three-fourths being above, ten finger-breadths higher, etc., would appear superfluous.

2. In stanza 5, if one goes by the meaning of 'pura:'=bodies, one will have to answer how the supreme purusha ,which, either of its own conscious decisions or according to some law (necessarily superior to itself!), could manifest itself as this 'bhUmim', i.e., this universe and the bodies which are composed of the seven 'dhAthus'-including the dEvAs, the seasons vasantha:, greeshma: and Sarath, the sAdhyAs and the Rshi s, had to stop at that point and wait

for the sAdhyAs and Rshi s to bind the purusha, (the one-fourth part referred to earlier) and immolate Him in order to create relatively ordinary things like curd-and-ghee mixture (pR^shad Ajyam) various animals living in the air, in the forests and the domesticated ones, horses and similar animals with two (upper and lower) rows of teeth, cows, goats and sheep, and special items like the Rks, the sAman, the yajus and the chhandases.

3. Up to this point there is no mention of how, or from which part/s of the sacrficial victim's body, each item was generated by the sacrificers. It is only when the hymn-maker comes to the castes, does he commence the system of relating the parts to which each one is related (limb from which each item originated).

4. It is interesting to note that even the sun and the moon came after the sacrifice but the sacrificers had at the start of the sacrifice itself made use of the seasons vasantha: (the spring), greeshma: (the summer), Sarath (autumn) as ghee, fuel sticks or logs and oblation respectively, for the very same sacrifice. If so, there was some avoidable duplication of the work of creation!

4. When indra, agni, vAyu etc., came out of the body of the Purusha,

who were the other "dEva"s who took part in the sacrifice itself? ['dEvAyajnam athanvatha']

5. Then some questioner asks as to how many parts the Purusha was cut

up into (divided), what was formed out of each part, what became his

mouth, his hands, thighs, feet? Various commentators have tried to "polish" the meaning of the whole sukta itself by interpreting "uchyEthE" as "was called", thereby concluding that the sacrificers were only imagining a virATPurusha etc. However, as the answer to these queries proceeds, we come to the words "padbhyAm SUdrOajAyatha" meaning, 'the sudra sprang out of his feet'. Hence enthough the sacrifice might have been in the minds and imagination of the saadhyaas & R^shis who are stated to have performed the 'yajna' or of the creators of the hymns, such imagination could have been nothing other than that of a gory human sacrifice.

It is relevant, in this context, to note that the sudra alone is represented as having sprung (born from) the feet of the Purusha; the three higher castes are represented by using the verb 'aaseeth'= was. The difference in the narration shows that from the very creation of the hymn, the author/s wanted to depict the three higher castes as a category higher and distinct from that of the sudra; while the brahmin, kshatriya and vaisya made themselves into the Purusha's limbs (thus they were co-eval with the Purusha and lived as his parts), sudra sprang out from the feet, thus advocating relative nearness of the former to the Purusha!

*** *** ***

Appendix

nAsadeeya sUktham

RgvEda 10th. maNDala, sUktha-120 [VIII-7-17]

1. nAsad Aseed nO sad Aseeth thadAneen-na Aseed rajO nO vyOmAparOyathkim Avareeva: kuha kasya Sarman-ambha: kim Aseed gahanangabheeram

Before creation there was neither untruth (the state of not being, non-existence) nor sat (the state of being, existence). The different worlds above (sky) and below (the earth) were not there. What covered “That” and where? What was covered? Was there water of unfathomed depth?

2. na mR^thyurAseed amR^tham na thaRhi na rAthRyA ahna Aseeth pRakEtha:

Aneeth avAtham svadhayA thadEkam thasmAdha anyan na para: kim cha nAsa

Then there was no death nor immortality, the difference between day and night. That One existed without motion; apart from It there was nothing else.

3. thama Aseeth thamasAgULham agrE-apRakEtham salilam sarvamAidamthuchchhyEna Abhvapihitham yad Aseeththapasa: than mahinA jAyathaikam

Darkness there was covered by darkness in the beginning; all this was concealed in shapeless, indistinct, inconstant chaos. The One that was then, concealed (covered) with nothing (emptiness), arose through the great power of heat.

4. kAmasthadagre samavarthathAdhi manasO rEtha: pRathhamam yad Aseeth sathO bandhum asathi niravindan hR^di pRatheeshyA kavayO maneeshA

In That one which was in the beginning, arose desire, the seed of mind. Wise men (seers) seeking in their heart found the bond between existence and non-existence.

5. thiraScheeno vithatho raSmi: EshAm adha: svid Aseed upari svid Asee(th)- rEthOdhA Asan mahimA na Asan svadhA avasthAth pRayathi: parasthAth

Transverse extended their (severing) cord extended; what then was below (it), what then was above? Seed-placers were (there), powers were (there); below was impulse, giving forth above.

6. kO addhA vEda ka iha pravOchath kutha AjAthA kutha iyam visR^shTi:arvAg dEvA asya visarjanEnaathhA kO vEda yatha AbabhUva

Who really knows? Who here can tell properly? Whence was this born? Whence came this creation? The devas are later than this creation. Who then knows whence it came to be?

7. iyam visR^shTi: yatha AbabhUva yadi vA dadhE yadi vA na yO asyAdhyaksha: parame vyOman sO anga vEda yadi vA na vEda

That from which this creation has come about, whether it holds (supports) it or does not, He who surveys it in the highest heaven, He verily knows or may be He does not!

When we compare the grandness of the speculation and the ultimte scepticism shown therein, the treatment of the very same subject matter by the purusha sUktha looks frivolous. ---------------------------