Vedic Cosmogonies: The One, the Many, and the Cosmic Sacrifice

02/03/2026 · Tue/Thu 12:00-1:15 PM · Brad Bannon · Boston College

📄 Synopsis

In this session, the class explored the foundational creation hymns of the Rig Veda, specifically the Nāsadīya Sūkta and the Hiraṇyagarbha Sūkta. Students analyzed the ontological transition from a primordial state of 'That One' (Tad Ekam) to the manifest diversity of the universe. The discussion emphasized the concept of epistemic humility, noting that the Nāsadīya Sūkta suggests the origins of the universe might remain a mystery even to the gods. The instructor utilized several analogies, including the 'milk and curd' example of material causality and the 'physicist as the atom's way of knowing itself,' to explain how the One becomes the Many without losing its essential nature. The session concluded with the beginning of a discussion on the Puruṣa Sūkta, where creation is framed as a cosmic sacrifice (yajña) in which the deity is simultaneously the sacrificer, the victim, and the ritual itself.

⚡ Key Takeaways

The Nāsadīya Sūkta posits a primordial state that transcends the binary of existence and non-existence, suggesting that 'That One' (Tad Ekam) breathed without air.
Epistemic humility is a core Vedic value, as the hymns suggest that the ultimate source of creation might be unknown even to the highest deities who arrived after the fact.
Desire (kāma) is identified in the Rig Veda as the 'first seed of the mind,' acting as the initial impulse that bridges the gap between non-existence and existence.
The Hiraṇyagarbha Sūkta introduces the 'Golden Embryo' as the source of all life and the Lord of all beings, representing the potentiality of the universe before it unfolds.
The 'milk and curd' analogy illustrates the concept of material cause, where the cause must cease to exist in its original form for the effect to manifest.
The relationship between the One and the Many is often interpreted through the metaphor of the sun and its rays, where the source remains undiminished despite its diverse manifestations.
Vedic theology requires 'Shabda' (valid testimony) to be interpreted harmoniously, meaning a theologian must reconcile apparent contradictions between different hymns to maintain internal coherence.
An 'Astika' (transcribed as 'nastika' in the text) is defined by the instructor as a theologian who says 'yes' to the Veda and accepts its total validity.
The instructor uses the analogy of a folded and unfolded bedsheet to describe the relationship between the primordial being and the manifest world.
The class discussed how every act of creation requires an end to another, framing birth and death as transformations of ongoing existence.

🎤 Transcript Tap any timestamp to jump the audio player

Opening Meditation and Mindfulness

Brad

Alrighty. Have noon. Now, let's take a. A moment, please, to put away screens and just kind of close your eyes and take a moment to transition. Leave everything outside. Outside. It. Take a moment just to be strong. So. Let's take a breath together. Go ahead and breathe in and out. Word. All right, let's see, We're missing Mickey. Right. And Nathan. Teang. Jake. No. Jake. Gotcha. Hannah. Sorry, I'm just still learning names. Felipe. I would too, to be honest. Cool. Let's start with the quiz. Not that one. As before, as per usual. Just start with the face down until everybody gets one. I will by the end of the class. Yeah, don't worry, you're good. Yeah, just keep it FaceTime for a minute. While they're coming around. Just the way we're going to do today and probably most days to answer Olivia's question is we'll have the quiz and then after the quiz, we'll take, you know, at least five minutes with your teams, your teammates kind of getting in, you know, little circles. And the idea is that, you know, kind of prepare something to say to the bigger group, right. ⚠

3:24

Small Group Discussion Preparation

Brad

Kind of talk about whatever you're going to talk about with the bigger group and, you know, run it by your teammates, see what they have to say, kind of get some insights and that sort of stuff so that you can sort of represent your team in the discussion. We're going to go. We'll take the quiz and then we'll do about five minutes in groups and then we'll talk about the first hymn and then we'll do a little group and then second hymn and a little group and then second, third hymn. Yeah, so kind of like that. And that'll be pretty much our normal pattern for the rest of the semester thing. So we'll typically be more. This was more of a circle square, but then the last section was being very nice and moving the tables back to the nice. yeah everybody ready? All right, go ahead and flip them over. No notes or anything like that. And yeah, for the last question, don't write too much. Just want enough to, you know, just enough to answer the question. yeah. Yeah, you can. Yeah. Let me just give your best shot on this one. ⚠

Brad

And then. Looks like most folks are done. Just kind of round off your answers. Ready? Everybody remember their numbers? Put your number up there. Cool. And the gang, why don't you go ahead and pass them in there, please? All right, let's. Like I said, let's take, you know, at least five minutes or so in your small groups. Please try to keep your conversations relevant to why we're here. So just, you know, talk about the text. I find that if I go much longer than five minutes, conversation seems to veer off topic. So thank you. All right, cool. Go ahead. And as you're, as you're re situating yourself, let's try and get rid of this row and move this row kind of like, you know, more on the outside. All right, cool. Yeah, just so it's more like a circle just to kind of see everybody. Right, Go for it. Take five minutes. We're going to talk about the first of the hymns and we'll hear from the discussion leaders first. Yeah, I take it. Yeah, of course. That, That. I don't know, like weird. Like. It. Okay. Jaden, you're 43. For future efforts. That's okay. ⚠

Brad

You're 59. You're. You're 59. No worries. Not a big deal. Alrighty. Ideally, I would like everybody to be able to see each other, you know. Yeah. How can we move this? Let's adjust so that we can kind of. So that you can see each other. This, this process often turns into people talking to me and me talking to people and that's, you know, going to happen in the beginning, but hopefully ideally, right as the semester goes on, it's more of a, you know, class discussion. You know what I mean? So helpful if we can see each other. So let's, let's get started on. The first of our hymns. So the Nasadiya Sukta. Yeah, let's hear from our discussion leaders first. So which of our discussion leaders wants to get us started? Yeah, Ben, go for it. I know like I was thinking about

19:14

Class Discussion: The Creation Hymn (Nasadiya Sukta) and Epistemic Humility

Student

this and like me and my group especially, but like we understand like the difference between like that existence or non existence, like that darkness of what was there. And then like that time about like where God becomes like the One. But like, what is the point of including like the time between those two events? Like I get like, it's supposed to be like humans are like capable of like understanding what came before, like God, but like, what was the point? I think like including that in like the texts and scriptures.

Brad

Okay, what should we take away from that? I feel like good questions, good questions, others. Yeah, yeah.

Student

Kind of off that. We were also talking about the One in its relationship to later scriptures with

Brad

the,

Student

with the Lord of all beings and essentially like asking is that the same thing or are they separate and you know, does the One become God or like the brahman And essentially like what essentially was Meant by like without breath and like how that connects to non dualism. Because I understood at least what we were talking about this way is neither existing or existing. Like there is that they're both, they're not together, they're kind of separate and then they kind of join together. But I guess with the breath, like how that relates. ⚠

Brad

Yeah, great, good. So I mean we've got the, the temporal aspect and then we've got also this ontological aspect and, and breath in particular. Super important as well as we'll continue to see going forward. So great questions.

Student

Yeah, we talked a lot about how it says there's no distinction between possibility and actuality yet and how that kind of relates to the whole thing of state of non existence nor existence. And so we thought like maybe the possibility is that non existence by the actuality's existence. And how do we reconcile that? ⚠

Brad

Yeah, which. Great. Really important. So then really key for us to ask the question, what do we mean by existence? Does possibility exist? I mean this table actually exists, but it can't it actually exists unless it exists as a possibility. Do we understand possibility to exist in the same way that actuality exists? Right. So very fundamental questions there about existence and. Yeah, possibility actually. Yeah.

Student

Olivia, one thing that we were like taking from this is that it's kind of pushing us to like further the limits of our minds and approach things in a way that maybe we weren't like intended to or inclined to before. And really the idea that like the universe may be even a mystery to the gods and like the way that like how are we as humans supposed to approach something that like maybe a God or like the gods don't understand? I thought that that related really nicely to like the idea of existence and non existence and possibility and impossibility because it's just like this really hard concept to wrap your head around. And like the way that we're supposed to achieve that is like through reading these hymns and like going through that. So kind of, I guess the question would be like how to approach that in a way that's conceivable for like a human being.

Brad

Yeah, great. So then what are we supposed to take away from that? Is it saying something about the gods and what they know and don't know? Or is it saying something about knowledge and what does it mean to know or to not know? Great. Yeah.

Student

Like the point of view where like the uncertainty of it, like kind of relating to how humans just don't know how it happened, it's kind of like stressing that humility that, you know, humans should have and kind of ignoring that, you don't know everything.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

Realizing that and then kind of like, having that belief and faith that, like, you're part of this one thing that did create everything. So I. I think we thought that theme was pretty interesting.

Brad

Yeah. Great. So that idea of epistemic humility is. Yeah. Something I brought up on the first day and a few times, and certainly an important point here as well. Yeah.

Student

Brian, we were talking a lot about desire. I think it was verse four and how it was the first seed of the mind. But it's also something that we have to kind of transcend in order to, you know, realize that we are limitless and to be found in ourselves. So although it's something that kind of binds our existence and is the core to our. Our existence, we have to realize that. And we said. I mean, I like necessary evil. I don't know if evil is the right word, but it is just something that's really kind of the core to our being. But it's important, but we also have to go beyond it.

Brad

Yeah, great. Desire doesn't play a huge role in these three hymns, but, I mean, it doesn't come up very often. But we will see that desire. Desire will. Will be a significant factor in the future. And it does, as you point out here in verse four. Right. Desire descended upon it in the beginning. That was the first seed of the mind. Very important verse. Yeah. Thanks, Gina.

Student

We were kind of talking about how every act of creation requires an end to another. And, like, every new beginning comes from others, like, ends. So we kind of were just, like, wrapping our head around that. Like, how does the world kind of keep spinning? And that's kind of one of the reasons.

Brad

Okay. So recognizing that for there to be a birth, there needs to be some sort of death. Right. So birth and death become more about transformation, shifting from one form to another. And that. Yeah, existence, ongoing existence requires some sort of transformation. Right. Yeah. Great. Thanks, Dylan.

Student

I thought it was like. Like, one parallel I saw with, like, Christianity is, like, it talked about how desire, like, started it. And then, like, looking at, like, the garden of, like, Eden, like, how desire and, like, the pursuit of that knowledge, like, from the apple, kind of, like, descended upon, like, the rest of humanity. So I thought of, like, two starts, like, that began with desire.

Brad

So, like, parallel is also interesting. Okay, good. Yeah. Love me.

Student

Because, like, you brought up the, like, parallel between Christianity. One thing that we were kind of talking about is there's also, like, the Creation, him in the Bible, where it's like Genesis. And I just think it's so, like, interesting because they're so different. Like, in Christianity, the Bible, it's like, in the beginning, God made this. Everything that happened was original result of God's actions. But then, like, when you read the hymns, it's like, well, there's multiple gods. Things happen before the gods. It's not. Everything that happens isn't, like, a direct root of them. So I thought it was just so interesting, like, how those kind of compare. And, like, I've never, like, read the hymns before this, so I just thought that that was a really interesting perspective.

Brad

Yeah. So here. I mean, here we don't have a creator, in other words. Right. So there is no creator here, here at the beginning, which is. Which is a significant observation. Yeah, Gina.

Student

Like, I feel like I was kind of. Or like, you're kind of advaita like, God created all this, going off what you said, but then it's saying, like, even God might not know how the universe was created. So it's just kind of like. That kind of shocked me. I was like, okay.

Brad

Yeah. So the idea that they have. For the gods to exist, they already exist on this side of creation. Right. So. Yeah. Good. Yeah.

Student

We also found it really interesting how. I mean, in the Bible, there's two creation stories. They pretty much, like, align with each other, but here we have, like, three different ones that take such different perspectives.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

I know in the reading it said, like, two of them were ontological and the first one wasn't. But, like, it's still interesting, like, how, like, you know, one of them is, like, the godly tearing himself apart to create different things, and another one's just, like, you know, seed and the sun and, like, the egg.

Brad

yeah, it's. I don't know.

Student

We just thought that was really interesting.

Brad

yeah, really important observation that in the Bible, there's only a handful of creation stories, like Genesis 1 and then Genesis 2, 3, there's another one, job 37, and maybe John, depending on how you count them. But in these texts, I mean, I've given you three, but there's actually a lot more. Right. And then. So what do we. Yeah, what does that mean? Right. How do we reconcile the fact that there are different stories that address, you know, the beginning or the creation or that sort of thing. Excellent. Really important question. Yep. Isabelle, one. ⚠

Student

Another thing we were kind of talking about was the idea of, like, sages and, like, sages, like, creating, like, the existence. Like, there's, like, the chord and then like above there was impulse and below. Sorry, above there was offering and below there was impulse. So we're just kind of curious to, like, know more about that because I know that we were talking about how the readings were a bit out of context. So I guess just like, understanding, like that chord and like, what exactly is meant by like, impulse versus offerings? Is that kind of like two. Is that related to our desire and like our two poles, or is that just like how we're created? Like, I guess those two dimensions? ⚠

Brad

Yeah. Really, really important question. So we're gonna. We'll. We'll talk more about the sacrifices and the rituals going forward. But this is. These are key texts that are. I mean, we kind of have to have these texts in order to have those conversations. So we going to keep going back and forth between them. What's going on. There is a little bit of a technical aspect, so some technical details about the sacrifice. But going back to kind of what Brian said before, you can't have, or connecting to what Brian said before, you can't have. Well, no action really happens unless there's some motivation, some impulse. Right. So I think that's what's going on with this. Like, what is motivating it to happen. Right. So in most of the Vedic rituals, you know, I told you, like, you have to have certain qualifications in order to perform the ritual. And then if you meet those qualifications, you're expected to perform the ritual, whether you know those qualifications, whether you know you're qualified or not. Right. You're, you know, you're bound if you meet the description. Those descriptions usually include a description of desire. Right.

29:46

Theology of Sacrifice and Vedic Rituals

Brad

So if you're the kind of person that desires X, right. Then this is a ritual you're supposed to perform. The implication being that if you desire, I don't know, cows, Right? That's a big one. So if you desire cows, then you perform this ritual. The implication being if you perform this ritual, you get cows. But that's never promised. The idea is this is a ritual that's supposed to be performed by one who has this desire. So I think that's kind of what's going on here with the impulse and the other one. So the offering is really kind of what's put into the fire, what's being offered. Right. You can't sacrifice unless you're sacrificing something. Right. So what is the thing that's the offering. What's being offered in the. In the sacrifice? Great questions. Who's our discussion leader for 15? That'll be me. ⚠

Student

I'll Take it over.

Brad

Okay. All right. Yeah.

Student

Of echo what everyone else said, but also what we found very interesting was kind of the difference between the hymns here and the hymns in Christianity. Whereas the hymns here were very symbolic. We had the seed and the egg yolk and the seed representing the beginning. And you looked at Christianity, it was kind of God being very direct and saying, I made this and I did this. I moved this and I made this. So we liked how the hymns here are up for interpretation, where they allowed you to come of critically, think more and understand it versus kind of being told stuff in Christianity, in the hams of Christianity. ⚠

Brad

Okay, so good points. Yeah. And so are these communicating knowledge? Right. Or is it asking us to think, you know, critically reevaluate that sort of stuff? Is it just giving us information the way other books give us information or something else going on here? One thing I would just urge everybody is to kind of, you know, let's postpone the comparisons. I know it's super hard not to compare, but let's try and anchor our discourse in this canon of text. We'll definitely have space for comparison. Not decrying comparison in a comparative theology class. It's more about process. So just kind of focus on these texts then. Absolutely. We'll do the comparison. Yeah. Ben? Yeah? I mean, is it another comparison?

Student

Well, I was just gonna say, like, I kind of noticed the same thing. Like, kind of how you pointed Uddalaka, sifting for gold, like, how, like, you should commit these to your memory and, like, reflect upon it. Like, I thought that was very, like, present. Like, it was like, something you had to read, like, a couple times and, like, sit with it to, like, kind of, like, get really the point that they were trying to teach through you.

Brad

Yeah. Okay, good, good. So one of the things I mentioned near the beginning or a couple weeks ago was that in a traditional Hindu household or in this traditional orthodoxy, brahmacharya would memorize the entire Veda before you even begin learning Sanskrit. Right. So Sanskrit's not a spoken, everyday language. So the ide that, you know, it's like Latin, you know, kind of to make another comparison. But, you know, so it's. It's not an everyday spoken language. So the idea is you've learned. You've memorized all of the texts before. So you memorized all of these hymns. Right. And all their complexity and all their diversity before you start even analyzing or thinking about what any one of them means. So that's. Yeah, good. A John question.

Student

I know in the reading, you talked about, like, how everyone's going to have, like a different impression and interpretation. So, like, I'm going to read like one of the hymns and get something different out of it than, like, you would. And like, the fact that the hymn can never be incorrect, does that mean that we're incorrect or we're just like, not on the same wavelength? That was just kind of confusing me.

Brad

Okay, so if. If you're an nastika theologian, meaning you say yes to the Veda, Right. So you. If, if the Veda is Shabda, if it's a valid means of knowledge, a valid source of knowledge, then the whole thing is a valid source of knowledge. Right. And so. But in the same way that, like, I could be looking over there and I think I see smoke, but it's actually a cloud or water vapor or something like that. Right. It could be that I'm reading the text and I'm taking one meaning of it, and I think I've understood it and I think I've in interpreted it fair, but then I read some other text and my interpretation of that text conflicts with my interpretation of this text, then what does that mean? It either means that the text is wrong, but I already said that in order to be an nastika you have to accept the validity of the whole text. Right. So it's kind of all or nothing. So then if your interpretation of this hymn contradicts your interpretation of that hymn, the problem is with your interpretation. Yeah. That's your question. Yep. Good, good.

Brad

Important point. Yeah.

Student

In verse six, you know, it's all these questions and kind of made me think of the saying, you know, if a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it, did it actually make a sound?

Brad

Yeah.

Student

Because even if, you know, the gods came into after creation and who even knows, like, what was, you know, how everything was created, does it really matter? Because if even the gods don't know and they're the ones who are writing the Veda and that's who we're derived from, essentially, then maybe knowing how everything was created isn't actually important in finding our meaning and purpose. But then kind of going to what Olivia was saying, would that mean that if you don't know, like, if you have an interpretation that you think or that you have that conflicts, is it important that you then keep thinking about it until it doesn't conflict? Or are you just okay to say I don't know? And maybe that's the point.

Brad

I think if. Great question. I think if you're a Hindu theologian and these texts are of great meaning to you, and you're trying to attain moksha through knowledge, then you can't just sort of throw up your hands and say, I don't get it. Right. So, yeah, I think you are in some sense compelled to sort of go back. It doesn't mean that you're going to find the answer. Right? I mean, that's part of the point of that third stage of the third ashrama, right? The brahmacharya stage, student stage, grihastha householder stage. Then you go off into the forest. And the idea of going off into the forest for that vanaprastha stage is that you might be out there. I mean, you might be out there the rest of your life. You may never achieve sannyasa, you may never achieve enlightenment, which would be sort of like when the light bulb comes on and then all of your understandings of all of the texts click, Right? So it's not. There's no easy answer to that, but I guess, yeah. So you.

Brad

If the text is important to you, then you just keep at it until it kind of all makes sense, until you find a way to make sense of it, make systematic, harmonious sense of it. Yeah.

Student

Adorno, this might be a weird question, but from like a Vedic perspective, if the gods were incapable of understanding something themselves, then why are we expected to understand something that they couldn't exactly grasp their heads around?

Brad

Sure. Good question. Yeah. So then that could take us back again to the question of is it saying something about what the gods do or don't know? Or is it saying something more about epistemology and what is knowable and not knowable, or the nature of known and known, Knower and known. Right. Taking us back to that, to Rambha's text about knower, known perceiver, perceived, all those things we talked about last Thursday. Good, good questions. Anything else on the sound? Yeah, oh, yeah.

Student

With the one, is that like, synonymous with the praapi, or is it kind of like different interpretations? Like, is that, like, what's considered to be like, God in there, like in this sense? Or is it something different? Does it become God? Like, how does it all play? ⚠

Brad

I guess the Tad Ekam and the Prajapati. Yeah, yeah, really good question. And I think. I think as with many things, the answer is going to depend on kind of who you ask. Right, so then we've got these Shaddarshana, the six differing orthodox. They're all orthodox, they all are nastika They all care about the Veda. They all are concerned with answering this question, like how do we have a systematic, continuous non. No cognitive dissonance, no conflicting interpretations. And there are multiple valid interpretations of the scriptures. And so that's part of the point of the Sad Darshana is that there are literally at least six differing perspectives. And so they may answer those questions differently. Like Todd Akam refers to something different than Prajapati, but they're obviously super closely related. Right. So some theologians, like Shankara, he'll make these really super fine distinctions between tadekam and Prajapati and Viraja and runyagarpa and all those different things. And like they're not exactly synonymous but. But on another level they're pretty synonymous, you know what I mean? But other theologians may say no, they're actually quite different where they're entirely synonymous.

Brad

So I think for our purposes keep asking that question. Right. So the point isn't. Here's the right answer to that question. The point is that's an important question to ask. Yeah, yeah.

Student

I want to go back to the

Student

Source Hymn and they mentioned one quote from George Wall that he was saying that the physicist is the atom's way of knowing about atom.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

And basically like what we see here, that atom, in order to know something about itself, it needs to become a physicist. Yeah, but the physicist is a atom

Brad

made of atoms, right?

Student

Yeah, made of atoms.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

Like very comp. Reversal but very interesting of like the whole creation, the whole creation process that like we have some finite amount of infinite. Yeah, finite amount of like the factors that created. That can produce infinite amount of forms created.

Brad

Yeah. Excellent. Really important. I was, I was low key proud of that, that, that quote there, by the way, when I originally went to put that quote in, that quote came to mind and I was like, let me double check the source because I had always heard that I had always attributed it to Carl Sagan. It's very commonly attributed to Carl Sagan according to the interwebs. But it's actually not Carl Sagan, it's actually George Wald. Yeah, but I mean I think that there's a reason that, that came to mind when I was writing this. I think it's, it's again, back to Eduardo's, you know, question, Dylan's about epistemic humility rates that maybe the qu. Maybe it is more about epistemology and what can be known and how does knowledge work. Right. Can you have, I mean an atom can't know an atom unless it is a physicist. Right. I think it's. Yeah, I think it's a good on point quote. Excellent. Let's take a few minutes now and do small groups again. Now that we have this under our belt, let's shift our attention to the harunyagarba sukta. So Rig Veda121, this Golden Imprio. ⚠

42:19

Class Discussion: The Golden Embryo (Hiranyagarbha) and Ontological Origins

Brad

So again, just take a few minutes and then we'll hear. It doesn't just have to be from our group leaders, but. But, yeah,

Student

Everything that. It's not creating new. You're just reorganizing energy in such a way that.

Brad

All right, take another minute or two. I. Alrighty, who wants to get us started? Yeah, Gina.

Student

Okay, we're kind of a little bit, like, going back and forth because it says one grows into many. But, like, how. First of all, how are we here? And does this relate to atman, the reality?

Brad

Everything relates to atman. And I mean, he's from. From a perspective. Yeah. And that relationship. Yeah, the relationship between the one and the many is absolutely key, central. And the question is also, how do we relate? And I'm just kind of reiterating your question. I'm not exactly answering it. Do you have answers to it? No. Okay, good. Well, let's explore it. Yeah. Ben?

Student

Well, like, building off that, I think the thing that stuck out to us the most is, like, when we're reading about, like, the seed, like, it basically says, like, the one becomes the many, where the many becomes many more while maintaining being the one. It talks about, like, us as God's descendants. Like, who do we pray to? Like, that really stuck out to us.

Student

Like, who do we pray to?

Student

Like, are we all equal as, like, equal parts of God? Or like, if, say, someone, like, interpreted the text wrong, would they still, like, be that, like, representation, equal representation of God? They're like, devoting their life to, like, a wrong interpretation of the text. ⚠

Brad

Okay. There's actually two really good questions there in that. In that one is. Yeah. So are we all equal parts of the. The One, Right? Is that what. The one in the mid. That's definitely a possibility right there. We're all just sort of equal parts of the one or maybe inequal parts. Right. Both are possibilities. And then the second question, really important is, like, whether knowing that or not knowing that has any effect. Right. So if I am. If I am the One, right, then does knowing that have any effect or am I just the one, whether I know it or not? Right. Yeah. Really good. Eduardo.

Student

We thought this related super well to, like, the milk Kerdigra example where, like, the cause is non existent. As soon as the effect comes into existence.

Brad

Yes.

Student

And to relate it back to their point, like we have a question, like how do you reconcile like you know, the yolk becomes the chicken, but like the chicken has like a brain, eyes, feathers, like is the brain equal to the feathers or is like, is there like a, like a tier list kind of like what happened? How does that many sort itself, if

Brad

that makes sannyasa, absolutely. You can't have chicken without a brain and feathers. Right. By the way, did you know that? I mean, I don't know if you have chickens or not, but did you know that the chickens have more feathers on one side? What side of the chicken has the most feathers? The outside. Yeah, dad in the making right there. Yeah.

Student

Brian, you were talking a lot about kind of the semantic difference between the words that are used because especially in modern culture you become or create. I feel like they can be used synonymously. But also in this sense kind of unfolding suggests almost more of a derivative aspect. So when you don't know how we're all different or how the egg turned into the chicken, all the potential for the chicken is held within the egg and it's just like the energy and everything that comes with it is now redistributed from it. So you can't have the chicken without the egg, but at the same time, you know, the egg or the egg or the yolk itself is not the chicken without the energy. So I guess a lot of, you know, what is becoming is due to the potential for it to become excellent.

Brad

Yeah, really good. Yeah.

Student

Dylan, I think like, I mean, did you say not to compare it to like the previous text or like.

Brad

Oh, definitely compared to the text. Yeah.

Student

The first part was more about, you know, embracing that uncertainty and this one's trying to explain it more and I think there's a definite shift there. And then I, I kind of, I was a little confused on the fact that like, like they're asking the questions like do shift we you know, pray to like who should be praised. And I was wondering if they were actually like looking for that person. Like cuz I mean it's a polytheistic religion so like which specific one? Or if it was just, you know, playing on that uncertainty again, like since they're all like powerful, like maybe we should praise them all or like maybe praise none of them. Maybe like we are like them in a way, like we're all relate back to the one. I was just confused as like how literal they were being.

Brad

Yeah, I don't know about the polytheistic part, but in terms of the question. The question is really important. Yeah. So is it a sincere question, like, to which God shall we offer our oblation? Or is it, again, pointing to something more along the lines of, like, well, if this one became the many, and each part of the mini is the One, right, Then which. They're all equally. That one. Right. So then, should I worship this aspect or this unfolding this fold of the one more than this fold of the. Of the one. Right. So I don't know. Do you like my Nick Cannon thing? How many of you know Nick Cannon? Because I. I thought. I thought. Okay, good. More than the other section. And you know that he has, like, a lot of kids. That's, like. Was something you know about Nick Cannon. Yeah. Okay. Because, I mean, I read that part to my. My daughter. I was, like, super proud of it. And she was like, I don't know who Nick Cannon is. I don't know anything you're talking about, dad. Whatever. Yeah, yeah, Eduardo.

Student

And then, Olivia, we were a bit confused on, like, if. How do I phrase this? Like, again back to, like, the. The Creator ceases to exist once the creation exists. Like, if they're supposed to pray to a God or gods that have created them, but those gods are no longer there because they became the creation. Is it more of like a. Like a we thank them for the creation becoming us type of thing? Or, like, you're still trying to praise

Brad

them, like, retroactively, if that makes sannyasa, good questions. I'm gonna punt a little bit, but

Student

we'll come back to that.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

Olivia, I was just gonna say, like, something that was helping me to understand, like, the idea of, like, the One is when I asked, I think it was last week, maybe, like, last week, Tuesday, when you folded up that piece of paper and, like, you folded it and then you unfolded it, and, like, the different creases, like, we are still a part of, like, the same thing, like, eternal being. And also, like, going back to, like, purusha and Prakti Ki, the bed sheet example of, like, how it's just, like, an ongoing, like, eternal thing and how we are all made from that one. But, like, there's so many parts, like, to us. And then also, like, the idea of the same sun. Like, there's this energy, but then there's also, like, these rays. And, like, the sun is never depleting, but, like, there's one sun. I just thought that that, like, really helped me to internalize the idea of, like, there's many parts, but if you, like, funnel it down, it all Goes down to, like, the one.

Brad

Yeah. Excellent. And even as you're saying that, I was thinking, like, if you were. If you were, imagine you're laying on the beach, right. Have you ever laid on the beach and said something like, oh, I love the way the sun feels on my face? What does that mean? You feel the sun, but the sun is, like millions of miles away. Right. So how can you feel the sun if the sun is not there? Right. So again, it's like, was the sun one thing or am I feeling the sun? Right. Yeah. Excellent. And then. So we could also have. And the. Yeah, this is because I did the example in the previous class about the unfolding. That's a good point too. Isabella, did you have your hand up? ⚠

Student

Yeah, I guess, being that, like, we're getting from 1% of the data and they're talking specifically about, like, pod of the. And like that at the end being like a God. That interesting. If you should be following, there's different perceptions. Gods that they follow, or not necessarily different gods, but they look at it differently and kind of like the different perspectives. Because we noticed our group was talking a lot about how they're mentioning, like, God's plural and just how, like, the God was born. So the idea of, like, we mentioned, like, in the meaning, like, the sun is like creating life, but was it the sun that made the God, or was it like, is there multiple gods, I guess that mission. And it does it different between recensions. ⚠

Brad

In terms of the. Excellent question, in terms of the recensions, the short answer is actually no. So there's not. There's not. I mean, you've got indra in all the recensions. You've got prajapati in all the recensions. You've got. In fact, you have. You have similar version. You have sometimes identical versions of the hems. So some of these hems are. Are repeated just verbatim. Exactly in the other ascensions. And so, yeah, the differences between the recensions is not something super material. Actually. The idea behind the different recensions is like, you know, I went to your family to learn this recension and your family to learn this one. But it's not because one is better or the other. And it's just. Yeah. So most. But they're not. There aren't significant differences, at least between the three. Like the Rig Sama and Yajir. Atarava Veda has some little funky stuff in it, but for the most part, they're pretty synoptic. Not that I would use that word comparatively. But yeah. ⚠

Student

What's the interchangeability of the three parts? Like in the reading, it says, the yoke becomes the many. The seed unfolds into the many.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

Despite being, you know, also being the blueprint of the universe. And then the sun is just kind of the ray that shines and creates the diversity of all things.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

It begs the question what? Can you have one without the other?

Brad

Do you need.

Student

Are there three parts of a puzzle? Can you have one without the other? If you have two, you don't have one. Will you still have to be the one?

Brad

Yeah.

Student

What is the difference between the seed and the yolk?

Student

They sound similar.

Brad

They are. They're similar. But they're different, right? Yeah, they're similar. They're different. And I mean, I don't know, I say the same thing that I've said to some others, which is that those are the right questions to ask. Right. And so if I were to answer them, I mean, the only way I, as a scholar could answer them would be to say that, you know, Nyayas answer it this way and the Vedantans answer it another way. And even within the Vedantans, there's diversity. Right. So one can be an nastika theologian, you know, strict Hindu theologian, who accepts the Veda and answers those questions that you asked can answer them different ways. Right. So the question of whether or not you were a good theologian or not is not, did you answer it this way or did you answer it that way? But do all of your answers for all of the different scriptures kind of make sense together? Are they internally coherent? Right. So if you have logical contradiction, you're saying one thing, you're interpreting this text, you know, to be like the one. Like the two bed sheets. Right?

59:04

Theological Interpretations: Advaita Non-Dualism vs. Yoga Dualism

Brad

So the two bed sheets, that's yoga's interpretation, which is purusha and prakriti, are separate, distinct things. Right. advaita perspective would be like the. Here, let me just make this super straightforward. Right? So there's Sankhya, yoga, right? Two bed sheets. Then advaita would be, if I took the, you know, let's say the egg yolk or the seed. Right? So the egg yolk or the seed. You've got one homogenous, you know, Todd Akum, that one is homogenous like an egg yolk or kind of like a seed. Right. But then that one unfolds, Right. So it's no longer homogenous, but it's still one. Right. So like chicken before, you know, before it goes to McDonald's. Is like one thing. Right. With different parts. It's got a head and a beak and a tail and feathers and all those different parts. Right. Unlike the yoke, which is one but homogenous. Right. So you've got sort of the. We're going to go through the six systems. Right. So Sankhya, yoga, two bed sheets. I just did advaita. Right. And sort of unfolding of the one. And then the one we're missing is. Right. Atomism.

Brad

So then the one, you know, becomes mini. Right. So this is a different kind of mini than the unfolding. Right. I'm not saying I'm not answering your question exactly. I'm just kind of giving you like, here's at least three different ways to answer the questions. Does that make sannyasa, questions. You understood this? Yeah. Good. You have sort of. Yeah. So you've got ontological duality. Two. Right. Only two. purusha and prakriti. And then you've got the different ways that prusia and prakriti could unfold or become mental. Let's take. Let's take another couple of minutes on in your groups and then shift to shift our attention to the third, arguably the most most famous of these. It. Like that. This. ⚠

Student

Yeah, I think it's like splitting.

Student

We all are universe made by God,

Brad

but different parts of God. I. Yeah,

Student

I was just him as like a God. I feel like that's.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

Because all of like my notes are talking about like, oh, God. Or like, so does that mean that like I. That other people.

1:06:34

Class Discussion: The Hymn of the Person (Purusha Sukta) and Divine Sacrifice

Brad

All right, who wants to get us started this time? And feel free. If you're not one of our leaders, feel free to. To jump in here. Yep.

Student

Jenna, we didn't really know how to like, interpret the fact that like God is the sacrificer, the sacrifice and like the ritual itself. Like, we don't. We didn't know them.

Brad

Brian, that's a good question.

Student

What we were talking about is kind of with the non. Duality and how the universe is made by God from God self and that everything because of that, because it unfolded from God is not other than the Creator. So, you know, he is the ritual. The ritual and the one sacrifice. Because it's all from him, it's all from purusha because, you know, it's like the arms and the legs and the thighs. So it's all the same thing in different forms. That's how at least we looked at it.

Brad

Great. Yes.

Student

Sophia, thinking about like the milk curd example, if like God created us, like he's technically maybe within Us. And then it says he's like the Lord of immortality. So is that, like, referring to how, like, people will keep being born, but then typically he's just immortal. He's in everyone. ⚠

Brad

So, great questions. Yeah. Be careful with the word creator. Right. So creator. Creator gets us to ask the question between the relationship of creator and create. It. Right. Creator and creation. Then we could. Using the milk curd example, Right. We could say that the milk is the creator of the curds. Right. Miss. Materially, but only it only becomes the creator at the moment that it no longer exists. Right. So material cause is indicating something past. Right. So it only becomes the cause as the potential to be the cause. Let's think about, like, this, right? If you've got a bowl of. If you've got a cup of milk. Right. That milk exists actually. Right. But it could possibly become curd or it could possibly become a milkshake. Right. So both of those possibilities exist as possibilities in the actuality of the milk. But for the milk to become. The milk can either become the cause of the curd or it can become the cause of the milkshake. Can't become both. Right. So it only becomes the cause of either the curd or the milkshake at the moment that it's no longer milk. ⚠

Brad

I know milkshake is still a milk, but you got the. Yeah, yeah, Dylan.

Student

I mean, I kind of took it. I didn't really see it as only, like, a creation story.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

I saw it as, like, kind of a parable in a way. Because it's talking a lot about sacrifice.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

And I feel like it's, like, sacrificing the old self, like what existed before. And, like, if you relate it to humans, like, kind of sacrificing. Like, I remember in class we talked about, I guess, the sacrifice. Like, your. What's the word? Like, what you don't, like, don't know what. You misunderstand sacrifice, that way of life. And, like, be more enlightened, like, know yourself and kind of like, that process is a lot. He's, like, seen a lot in this. Yeah, I thought that was interesting. And then, like, I feel like the part of, like. Like one. Like it's a sacrifice. The sacrifice, sir. The sacrifice. ⚠

Student

Seat.

Student

I thought it was confusing at first, but then I kind of, like, thought about it and I thought, like, I was. I was assuming they're like, three different versions in different times. I don't know if you're talking about, like, at the same time, but, like, if you're saying it's at three different times. Like, the sacrifice is the process of, like, the one saying, okay, I'm gonna create the universe. And then, like, the sacrifices, like, in the future in a way where it's like, you're the one that sacrificed your previous self to create this. And then obviously, like, they got sacrificed in the process.

Brad

So many really good points there. Thank you, Dylan. Yeah. A few things I want to highlight there. One is that we could read these texts as having. As trying to teach us something about the past. Right. Telling us some past event or some historical thing or something about the past. Right. Or. But the way the Mimamsis, for example, would read it, as I said, they. Each one of the pramanas reveals something that can only be known by that brahman can't know it from any other source. Right. And the way the mimamsas interpret the Veda is that it tells us something that is to be done that's futural, not past. Right. So something that is to be brought into being, like the curd or the milkshake. Not the milk. Right. So then it tells us something. It also tells us something about who we are. Right. In our relationship to everything else. It can do both of those things at the same time. Right. So who I am is somebody that should be doing something for the future. Right. ⚠

1:10:50

Closing Synthesis: Meaning-Making and the Realm of Possibility

Brad

So then if I make this sacrifice, maybe I sacrifice something that is pleasurable to me in the moment, that leads to something beneficial or good for society in the future. Right. Then. Then the text isn't telling us something about the past at all, but instead telling us something about who we are right now and maybe even more importantly, what our ethical responsibility is to the future. Right. Then the text becomes far more meaningful than just, you know, a text that's telling us something about the past. Right. Excellent. Really good. Yeah.

Student

Can I go back to the Lord of the Community talks about how, like, all beings are, like, 1/4 and then, like, 3, 4 is immortal in heaven.

Brad

Yeah.

Student

Is there, like, a significance to that fraction or, like, a reason why? Like, that is, like, how it's explained in the text.

Brad

The short answer is everything in these. In this hymn is significant. The longer answer is what the significance is is going to differ from differing schools and differing interpretations. So that that detail is very significant. But how it gets interpreted. Yeah. Varies significantly. I think one easy, you know, sort of common interpretation that may, you know, go for all of them is whatever we have access here to, you know, if Ben knew everything that there was to know and was the most powerful person in this world still only one quarter of what exists. Right. So our experience, the world in which we live, is still not everything that there is. Right. You could also take it as like, this world that we live in right now is the world of actuality. And those three quarters could be symbolizing the possibility. Right. So we could create a future where possible, where everyone's equal, where everyone has equal opportunities and where justice is the law of the land. Right. Or we could create other possibilities are possible. Right.

Brad

So then we could see that the realm of possibility, whether we stick too strictly to the 3/4 versus 1/4, we can admit that the world of possibilities is far bigger. Right. Than the world of actuality. Yeah.

Student

I was going to ask, will different schools have different fractions then?

Brad

Well, so they won't have different fractions because they still have this text. Right. So this text is super. This is an anchor for all of the nastika schools. So they're still going to have that particular fraction, 1/4 and 3/4. But how they interpret it, whether they interpret it the way I did, like there's this world and then the world of the heavens, or there's this world and then there's all the future possibilities, those are just two of many different possibilities. Good gosh, we're out of time. Good job. Thank you to our leaders. And yeah, we'll do something similar on Thursday. It.