Verse 1.22 [Creation of the Gods]

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

कर्मात्मनां च देवानां सोऽसृजत् प्राणिनां प्रभुः ।
साध्यानां च गणं सूक्ष्मं यज्ञं चैव सनातनम् ॥ २२ ॥

karmātmanāṃ ca devānāṃ so'sṛjat prāṇināṃ prabhuḥ |
sādhyānāṃ ca gaṇaṃ sūkṣmaṃ yajñaṃ caiva sanātanam || 22 ||

For the sake of living beings intent upon action, he created the eternal sacrifice; as also the host of Gods and the subtile multitude of the lesser divinities, the Sādhyas.—(22)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Living beings intent upon action’—stands for human beings intent upon the performance of actions; for the accomplishment of the purpose of these, ‘he created the sacrifice.’ Those men are called ‘intent upon action’ who, not giving themselves up to the worship of Brahman, still hanker after such results as the obtaining of sons and cattle, etc., and accepting the philosophy of Dualism, engage themselves in the performance of actions.—The Genitive ending also (in the words ‘Karmātmanām prāṇinām) signifies ‘for the sake of’; hence the meaning is that ‘he created the sacrifice for the sake of the said beings.’—‘The hosts of gods’ also he created for the sake of sacrifices.—The particle ‘ca’ is misplaced after ‘Karmātmanām’; its proper place is after ‘devānām’; the meaning thus being—‘He created the sacrifice, and for the sake of the due fulfilment of the sacrifice, he created also the hosts of gods, such as Agni, Agni-Soma, Indra-Agni and so forth.—He also created the multitude of the divinities called ‘Sādhyas’ —the word ‘gaṇam’ being construed with ‘Sādhyānām’ also. The Sādhyas are mentioned apart from the ‘Gods,’ because they are not entitled to partake of the sacrificial offerings,—they being entitled only to having hymns addressed to them. That the Sādhyas form a particular class of divinities is shown by such passages as ‘In the beginning there were the gods named Sādhyas’ (Ṛgveda 10.90.16).—Or the separate mention of the ‘Sādhyas’ may be explained on the analogy of such expressions as ‘brāhmaṇa-parivrājaka’ and the like [the ‘Parivrājaka’, ‘wandering renunciate’ is a ‘Brāhmaṇa’ with some qualifications; similarly the Sādhyas are Devas with the further qualification that they are not entitled to a share of the offerings],—‘Subtile’—the multitude of Sādhyas is Subtile in comparison to such deities as the Maruts and the Rudrāṅgirases.—The mention of the Sādhyas is meant to include all those deities that have no connection with sacrificial offerings, such, for instance, as Veno, (?) Sunīti (?) and so forth.

[Another explanation of the verse.]

Some people construe ‘Karmātmanām-devānām-prāṇimām’ together, taking them as co-extensive. The ‘gods’ being called ‘Karmātmānaḥ’ in the sense that they are of the nature of actions, actions form the very essence of their nature; they are so called, because they help in the accomplishment of sacrificial acts, or because they constitute the most important factor in the sacrificial act. Among the gods there are some who arc described in the Itihāsas, in connection with sacrifices, as possessed of distinctive forms; to this class belong the gods, Indra, Rudra and Viṣṇu; there are others who are gods, not in their own forms, but only at sacrifices; to this class belong the ‘Akṣa’ (wheel-axle), ‘Grāvan’ (Pebbles) and the Rathāṅga (the wheels, or the constituent parts of the chariot). As regards Indra &c., we find in the Mahābhārata descriptions of such deeds of theirs as fighting with Vṛttra and other Asuras; but there is no description of any such acts in connection with the Wheel-axle &c.; and yet in the Vedic hymns connected with sacrificial offerings we find these latter spoken of as ‘deities’; for instance, the wheel-axles are referred to as deities in the hymn ‘prāvepāmā &c’; (Ṛgveda, 10.34.1); the Pebbles are spoken of as deities in the hymn ‘praite vadantu &c.’ (Ṛgveda, 10.94.1)—the Wheels are spoken of as deities in the hymn ‘vanaspate vīdvaṅgu &c.’ (Ṛgveda 6.47.26).—It is in view of (with a view to exclude) these latter (which are inanimate) that we have the epithet ‘prāṇinām’ (Animate). There are two kinds of gods; some are animate, others inanimate; e.g., Indra and others are described in the ‘Purāṇa’ as having human bodies and endowed with life; but the wheel-axle &c. are not found so described. All this conception of the creation of things is based upon Itihāsas. An additional ‘ca,’ also, has to be taken as understood; the meaning being ‘animate and also the inanimate.’ According to the Nirukta also there are three kinds of deities—Horses, mentioned in the hymn ‘mā no mitra &c.’ (Ṛgveda, 1.162.1), Birds mentioned in the hymn ‘Kanikradat &c.’ (Ṛgveda 5.83.1), and Bulls mentioned in the hymn ‘āgāvo agman’ &c. (Ṛgveda, 6.28.1);—all these deities are animate; and the inanimate ones have been already described.

The epithet ‘eternal’ qualifies the ‘sacrifice’; the sacrifice having existed in the previous cycle also, there is a continuity of tradition in regard to it; and it is on this ground that it is regarded as eternal.—(22)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

The meaning of this verse, which Buhler attributes to Medhātithi, is one that the latter has not put forward at all. His explanation is somewhat different, as will be clear from the translation. He has however noted an explanation by ‘others’, which is rightly rendered by Buhler as—‘The Lord created the multitude of the gods whose nature is sacrifice and of those endowed with life.’—According to Rāghavānanda it means—‘The Lord created among beings endowed with life the (to us) invisible multitude of the gods who, by the result of their acts, have obtained their divine station, or who subsist on offerings.’