Page:A Comprehensive History of India Vol 2.djvu/57

 Chap. II.] HINDOO MYTHOLOGY. 21

sages accosted him, is explained by commentators to have been the supreme ad. - God, and must not be confounded with Brahma, who had not a formal exist- ence till he was bom as a divine male in the mundane egg. If born, he was not Monotheism himself the "self-existing power," "the first cause," "without beginning or end." Braiimim To whom, then, or what do these epithets apply? The answer is. Not to Brahma, '"^ '^^^'^ who at first male, afterwards subdivides so as to become female ; but to Brahm, an antecedent mysterious essence not possessed of any gender, and therefore usually described as neuter. The existence of Brahm as the one sole universal Lord is undoubtedly taught in the Vedas as a fundamental article of the Hindoo creed, and the Brahmins, who claim to be the exclusive expounders of this creed, confidently appeal to this article when they would prove that they are mono- theists and not idolaters. This much may be conceded to them — that if they are idolaters, they sin against a clearer light, for it would be easy to produce pas- sages in which the divine perfections are described in terms which even a Christian need not repudiate. Take the following specimen quoted by Sir William Jones, from a learned Brahmin: — " Perfect truth ; perfect happiness; without equal; immortal; absolute unity; whom neither speech can describe, nor mind comprehend ; all-pervading ; all-transcending ; delighted with his own boundless intelligence ; not limited by space or time ; without feet moving swiftly ; without hands grasping all worlds ; without eyes, all-surveying ; with- out ears, all-hearing ; without an intelligent guide, undei'standing all ; without cause, the first of all causes; all -ruling; all-powerful; the creator, preserver, transformer of all things ; such is the Great One."

Striking as the above passage is, there is a very serious defect in it. The nefeminits

-. . . . p. 1 • 1 n 1 conception

description is true so lar as it goes, but it does not go far enough. It speaks of theattri only of the natural perfections of God, and says nothing of His moral perfec- Deity ° tions, though it is by these alone that any practical relation between the Creator and his creatures is established. This is not an accidental omission, but forms an essential feature in Hindoo theology ; and hence, the only inference that can be drawn from its loftiest descriptions of deity is, that it would be vain to wor- ship him. Seated at an immeasurable distance, and wholly absorbed in his own perfections, he regards the actions of men with perfect indifference. It is even doubtful if he has any proper personality, for when the language in which he is described is strictly analyzed, many of the attributes ascribed to him prove to be abstract qualities and imaginary potentialities existing in some inexpli- cable manner apart from any essence. The universe itself, instead of being the voluntary production of Brahm, thus becomes identified with him, and the theory of monotheism is set aside to make way for that of pantheism.

The practical result is that, while individuals of a philosophical and con- templative turn of mind profess to adhere to the original doctrine of the Vedas, the great mass of the population have rushed headlong into idolatry of the most extravagant and grovelling description. Every thing animate and inanimate,