Light is one of the all-pervasive themes of Sanātana Dharma.
Indeed, of the Ancient Indian mind.
Undoubtedly, it shall be contended that the concept of Light has captivated all great minds, and has a central position in all great cultures.
Agreed.
But Indians today must understand the love that Indians had, for Light, and the concept of Light, in their own ancient culture {or even medieval culture, for that matter}.
In the previous post, I passingly referred to the glorification of Kṛṣṇa in the Viṣṇu Purāṇa – as the “Supreme & Inconceivable Light”.
Wilson has translated “acintya” as “Inscrutable”.
I don’t think we can be absolutely sure what was meant by “acintya” 2,000 years ago, when the Purāṇa was written {encapsulating concepts which were understood & codified 1,000 or 2,000 years before that time}.
“acintya” mundanely means that which is beyond all thought, all words, all exposition.
But the very fact that we say that something is beyond words & description, means that some-thing about it can be conceived & conveyed in words.
It probably means the Light of Brahman, or the Light of Ātman, which is not like the Light of the Sun, Moon, or Fire, or from any astronomical body – a point which is stressed by the Upaniṣads, and by Kṛṣṇa in the Bhagavad Gītā {as noted by Shankarāchārya in his Commentary, below}.
Of course, not even the Light of the Intellect, or Buddhi, is like that of any fiery, material body – {there is a definitive link in Indian thought, between the Sun & the Buddhi, as there is, between Sūrya or Āditya, and the eye, cakṣus} – but the fact that the word “Supreme” (“paraṃ”) is also mentioned alongside “acintya”, means reference is not to the light of the Buddhi {also known as Vijñāna}.
Though there are several meanings of the words translated as Light, the Ātman has definitely been understood as the Ultimate Light, the Light of all Lights.
“This Ātmā (or the Self of Puruṣa) is Hiraṇyajyotis (or golden or effulgent Light) into which all the universe is absorbed” – says the Subala Upaniṣad.
The Ṛg Veda is all about Light – the worship of Agni, Indra, Sūrya, Mitra & Varuṇa, Pūṣan, Aryaman, Bhaga, Uṣas, and Sarasvatī – are all evidence, the demonstration, and the supreme, delightful expression, of the rapture of the experience of light.
Call it Light, call it Effulgence, call it Lustre, call it Lambence, call it Luminousness, call it Radiance – the theme of light is an overpowering theme in Vedic literature.
It is also noteworthy that many words which denote Light or Effulgence, also denote Energy, Strength, Glory, Majesty, Purity, Beauty, and Splendor, even the Semen Virile of the Male.
{In Indian thought, radiance of the countenance comes from the proper regulation & control of the sexual energy, and the discharge of semen, in the Male.}
“Let no one here debar me from enjoying the golden light which Savitar diffuses.
He covers both all-fostering worlds with praises even as a woman cherishes her children” – Ṛg Veda 3.38.8.
Wilson notes that Savitṛ here refers to Indra.
Sūrya is called Jyotiṣkṛt – the Maker of Light – in 1.50.4.
Indra finds “the Light of Heaven” (“suvar vidam”) – in 1.52.1, or 3.51.2.
Indra “makes the lights of heaven shine forth secure, he bids, exceeding wise {sukratu}, the floods flow for his worshipper” – 1.55.6.
His battle with Vṛtra & the Dasyus, is the battle for Light – suvar-mīḷha (for e.g. 1.63.6, or 4.16.15).
This has also been interpreted as the “fight for sunlight” – say, in 6.33.4.
In 3.34.4 we read:
“Indra, light-winner, days’ Creator, conquered, victorious, hostile bands with those who loved him.
For man the days; bright ensign he illumined, and found the light for his joy & gladness.”
Man’s yearning for Light is eternal & universal, and his undying thirst for the Radiance of Truth & Knowledge & Wisdom is articulated with ecstatic passion when he calls Indra vidvān – Full of Knowledge – and says (6.47.8): “Do thou, Indra, who art wise, conduct us to the spacious world (of heaven) {uru loka}, to a blessed state of happiness, light {jyoti}, and fearlessness {abhaya}; may we recline in the graceful, protecting, and mighty arms of thee, the ancient one”.
Bṛhaspati, the apratīta – one who cannot be attacked – irresistible – also “strives” for the Light {suvar} – say, in 6.73.3.
The All-Seeing Eye, i.e. Sūrya, is said to diffuse the Light of Mitra & Varuṇa (7.61.1) {combining Giffith & Wilson’s translation}:
“O Varuṇa and Mitra, Sūrya spreading the beauteous light of you Twain Gods ariseth.
He who beholdeth all existing beings observeth well the acts of mortals.”
The hymns to Agni are an absolutely ecstatic experience:
“Up springs the imperishable {ajara} flame, the flame of the Refulgent One
Most bright, with blazing jaws, and glory in his train.
Skilled in fair sacrifice, extolled, arise in Godlike loveliness,
Shining with lofty splendour, with effulgent light.”
{Ṛg Veda 8.23.4-5}
Agni Vaiśvānara is also called “The Finder of Light” {suvar-vid} – in 3.26.1.
In 6.9.4, Agni is called “amṛta jyoti” – “the immortal light” – strange appellation for the visible, material, burning fire of the sacrificial altar!
He is, in the very next verse, called “dhruvaṃ jyoti” – an immovable light, or steady light – which, as Wilson says in a Footnote, is Brahma seated in the heart.
Even the chariot {ratha} of the Aśvins, is said to “find the light” {suvar-vid} (7.67.3)
The number of instances can be multiplied greatly.
One of the most famous refrains from Ancient Indian literature is the prayer in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad (1.3.28):
“asato mā sad gamaya
tamaso mā jyotir gamaya
mṛtyor mā amṛtaṁ gamaya”
“From Unreality {or Evil} lead me to Truth {or Good},
From Darkness lead me to Light,
From Death lead me to Immortality”.
With all due respect to all other great cultures of the world, Indians, at least, don’t have to look elsewhere, to find inspiration for being good.
The celebrated prayer of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad finds a direct echo – or perhaps an interpretation, in the Mahābhārata, when it says, in Chapter 190 of the Shānti Parva:
“Untruth (anṛta) is only another form of Darkness (tamas).
It is Darkness that leads downwards.
Those who are afflicted by Darkness {tamo-grasta} and covered by it {tamas-āvṛta} fail to behold the lighted regions of heaven {prakāśa – are unable to see the light – the light of knowledge, jñāna, says the Hindi translation}.
It has been said that Heaven {svarga} is Light {prakāśa} and that Hell is Darkness.
The creatures that dwell in the universe may obtain both heaven and hell.
In this world also, truth {satya} and untruth {anṛta} lead to opposite courses of conduct and opposite indications, such as
· Righteousness and Unrighteousness {dharma-adharma},
· light and darkness {prakāśa-tamas},
· pleasure and pain {sukha-dukha}.
Amongst these,
- that which is Truth is Righteousness {Satya is Dharma};
- that which is Righteousness is Light {Dharma is Prakāśa}; &
- that which is Light is Happiness {Prakāśa is Sukha}.
Similarly, that which is Untruth is Unrighteousness; that which is Unrighteousness is Darkness; and that which is Darkness is Sorrow or Misery.”
What more inspiration does Man need?
This subject is a very long one, the examples can be almost innumerable, and the fascination with Light a very complex, sophisticated, & intriguing subject.
Arjuna calls Kṛṣṇa “the Supreme Abode” – paraṃ dhāma – in the Bhagavad Gītā, Chapter 10, Verse 12:
“paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma
pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān
puruṣaṁ śāśvataṁ divyam
ādi-devam ajaṁ vibhum”
Kṛṣṇa, thus, is the Supreme Brahma, the Supreme Abode, the Supreme Purifier, the Puruṣa, the Primal or Original God {ādi-deva} etc.
Shankarāchārya has interpreted paraṃ dhāma as “Supreme Light” in his Commentary.
In other words, just as Kṛṣṇa has been eulogized as “the Supreme & Inscrutable Light” in the Viṣṇu Purāṇa, he is adored as “the Supreme Light” in the Bhagavad Gītā.
There are many many epithets pertaining to Light, Effulgence, and the peculiar combination & correlation of Beauty, Strength, Energy, and Radiance, which are applied to both Viṣṇu {& his incarnations} and Śiva, in Indian literature.
As I said in the earlier post, Viṣṇu is called Jyoti, The Light, in the Viṣṇu Sahasranāma (No. 877).
But this is not all.
He is also called Bhānu – No. 284 – which also means Light, Lustre, Splendor.
He is not only called Bhānu, He is also called Bṛhat-Bhānu (No. 333): The Great Splendor, or the Immense Effulgence.
To think of the Supreme Being as the Immense Effulgence, is exalted indeed.
It is not mere poetry, not mere configuration of words – it’s a way of thinking, a type of spirit, a specific kind of consciousness – of a way of looking at existence – exalted, lofty, full of rapture.
He who conceives the whole universe as springing from an immense, infinite, immeasurable effulgence – from a gigantic light beyond all proportion & description – He who conceives of the essence of his being, the core of his existence, being Pure Light – is already on a different psychological plane.
I have not yet gone into the Shaivite literature, so I shall refrain from lengthening this post and load it with more posts.
It must be understood that this spirit pervades Indian literature.
Effulgence – a thundering, vibrating, & blazing energy – comparisons to the radiance of lightning or fire or the Sun – are actually quite common, and an astonishing number of our literary figures are described in truly glowing terms, pun intended.
Nobody is quite singled out as especially radiant.
Nor is it quite limited to Hinduism: this is a feature of the Indian mind itself.
We read, in the 6th Chapter of the incomparable Buddhist text, Lalita-Vistāra:
“In the same way that a lightning bolt illumines everything as it emerges from a mass of clouds, so the Bodhisattva dwelling in his mother’s womb also illuminated the innermost chamber of the precious temple through his splendor, brilliance, and color.
When that was illuminated, he illuminated the middle chamber of the fragrant temple.
When the second level of the fragrant temple was illuminated, the light went farther & illuminated the outer chamber of the fragrant temple.
Then, as the third level of the fragrant temple was bathed in light, his mother’s entire body became filled with light.
The light then went farther and illuminated the seat upon which his mother was seated.
Gradually the light streamed forth and brightened the entire palace.
The light rays rose beyond the palace and illuminated the east.
Likewise, while the Bodhisattva was residing in the womb of his mother, the glory, brilliance, and color of the Bodhisattva illuminated the south, the west, and the north, below and above.
In fact all the ten directions were bathed in light for several miles in each direction.”
The names of the Goddess – Śrī and Lakṣmī – also mean the same things: Light, Lustre, Effulgence, Beauty, Glory, Splendor, Majesty.
Śrī & Lakṣmī invariably refer to the Consort of Viṣṇu – but, strictly speaking, philosophically they’re distinct tattvas of Hindu metaphysics.
In the Lalitā-Sahasranāma – the 1,000 Names of the Great Goddess Lalitā Mahātripura-Sundarī – one of the names of the Goddess is Kāntī (No. 449), which again means Effulgence, or Luminousness – yet another is Kāntimatī (No. 465) – Full of Effulgence – and since She is associated with the color red, we have a stunningly beautiful name, “Nija-aruṇa-prabhā-pūra-
However, one must keep in mind that Indian literature is totally philosophical – metaphysical & spiritual – and poetry subserves metaphysics, so one can come across concepts to which the modern mind, with its rather simplistic, linear thinking about God & Soul, is unused to.
What follows below is a passage from the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.3.7) about the effulgent or luminous, or rather self-luminous nature of the Ātmā, and a portion of Shankarāchārya’s Commentary on it.
The Ātmā is truly the Light of the World, the Light of all Lights – it is that which makes all perception, all conception, all conceptualization, all cognition, all vision – possible.
It is the source & the basis of all intelligence, of all awareness, of self-awareness, of all intellection.
Hence, it is the Supreme Light, the Supreme Effulgence.
“Which is the Ātman?”
“This infinite entity {Puruṣa} that is
· identified with the intellect {vijñāna-maya} and
· in the midst of the organs {prāṇeṣu},
· the (self-effulgent) light within the heart (intellect) {hṛdaya-antar-jyoti}.”
‘Though the self has been proved to be other than the body and organs, yet, owing to a misconception caused by the observation that things which help others are of the same class as they, Janaka cannot decide whether the self is just one of the organs or something different, and therefore asks: ‘Which is the self!’
The misconception is quite natural, for the logic involved is too subtle to grasp easily.
Or, although the self has been proved to be other than the body,yet all the organs appear to be intelligent, since the self is not perceived as distinct from them; so I ask
you: Which is the self?
Among the body, organs, vital force and mind, which is the self you have spoken of – through which light, you said, a man sits and does other kinds of work?
Or, which of these organs is ‘this self identified with the intellect’ that you have
meant, for all the organs appear to be intelligent?
As when a number of Brāhmaṇas are assembled, one may ask, ‘They are all highly qualified, but which of these is versed in all the six branches of the Vedas?’
...
The locative case in the term ‘in the midst of the organs’ indicates that the self is different from the organs, as ‘a rock in the midst of the trees’ indicates only nearness; for there is a doubt about the identity or difference of the self from the organs.
‘In the midst of the organs’ means ‘different from the organs,’ for that which is in the midst of certain other things is of course different from them, as ‘a tree in the midst of the rocks.’
...
“Within the heart”:
One may think that the intellect {buddhi}, which is of the same class as the organs, is meant, as being in the midst of the organs.
This is refuted by the phrase ‘within the heart.’ ·
‘Heart’ is primarily the lotus-shaped {puṇḍarīka-ākāra} lump of flesh; here it means the intellect {buddhi}, which has its seat in the heart.
The expression therefore means ‘within the intellect.’
The word ‘within’ indicates that the self is different from the modifications of the intellect.
The self {ātman} is called light {jyoti}, because it is self-effulgent{bhāsa-ātmaka}, for through this light, the self-effulgent Ātman, this aggregate of body and organs sits, goes out and works, as if it were sentient, as a jar placed in the sun (shines).
Or as an emerald or any other gem, dropped for testing into milk etc., imparts its lustre to them, so does this luminous self {atma-jyoti}, being finer {sūkṣma} than even the heart or intellect, unify and impart its lustre to the body and organs, including the intellect etc., although it is within the intellect; for these have varying degrees of fineness or grossness in a certain order, and the self is the innermost of them all.
The intellect {buddhi}, being transparent {svaccha – pure, clear} and next to the self, easily catches the reflection {? praticchāyā} of the intelligence of the self {ātma-caitanya-jyoti}.
Therefore even wise men happen to identify themselves with it first;
next comes the Manas, which catches the reflection of the self through the intellect;
then the organs, through contact with the Manas; and
lastly the body, through the organs.
Thus the self successively illumines with its own intelligence the entire aggregate of body and organs.
It is therefore that all people identify themselves with the body and organs and their modifications indefinitely according to their discrimination.
The Lord also has said in the Gītā,
“As the one sun {ravi}, O Arjuna, illumines the whole world {“kṛtsnaṁ lokam”}, so the self, the owner of the field of this body {kṣetrī}, illumines the whole body {kṣetra}” (G. 13. 33);
also,
“(Know) the light of the sun {āditya-gataṁ tejaḥ} {which illumines the entire world, to be Mine),” etc. (G. 15. 12).
{The complete verse is:
yad āditya-gataṁ tejo
jagad bhāsayate ’khilam
yac candramasi yac cāgnau
tat tejo viddhi māmakam
“The splendor of the sun, which illuminates te entire world, comes from Me.
And the radiance of the moon {candramas} and the effulgence of fire {agni} are also from Me.”}
The Kaṭha Upaniṣad also has it,
“Eternal in the midst of transitory things, the intelligent One (cetana) among all intelligent beings (cetana)” (Ka. 2.2.14);
also, “It shining, everything else shines; this universe shines through Its light” (Ka. 2.2.16)
{Sk. originl” “tameva bhāntamanubhāti sarvaṃ tasya bhāsā sarvamidaṃ vibhāti”}.
The Mantra also says,
“Kindled by which light, the sun shines” (Tai. B. 3.12.9.7).
Therefore the self is the “light within the intellect,” “Puruṣa” i.e. infinite entity, being all-pervading {sarvagatatva} like the ether {ākāśavat}.
Its self-effulgence is infinite, because it is the illuminer of everything, but is itself not illumined by anything else.
This infinite entity {puruṣa} of which you ask, “Which is the self {ātman}?” is self-effulgent {jyoti-svabhāva}.’
Note added later:-
The translation of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad {with the Shankarāchārya Commentary} is that of Swami Madhavananda.
The translation of the Lalita-Vistāra is by the Dharmachakra Translation Committee available online.
The Ṛg Veda verses are mostly from Ralph T.H. Griffith & H.H. Wilson – I have changed a word here or there, simply replacing it with a synonym, perhaps.
Neither Griffith nor Wilson have any clue what the Ṛg Veda is all about – and this kind of knowledge is not available to the public.
It is not even available to the elite, alas.
But Griffith is poetic {as far as the English language goes}, and Wilson follows the Indian Commentators {notably Sāyaṇa} more closely than Griffith – and they’re the English translations I know of, so I’ve used them.
Nobody can get a proper, coherent, convincing idea of Indian metaphysics by reading these translations – {Sāyaṇa’s work seems to be just about as incomprehensible, more like an exoteric gloss or cover-up} – but the verses, as translated by these gentlemen, serve their own purpose – do give some idea of the spirit & beauty of the sentiments, the faith, the fundamental concerns {ideas, images, symbols, forms & figures}, the devotion, & the basic concepts which intrigued the Ancient Indian Vedic mind, and which it dwelt upon with love & intelligence.
Thus, it is very obvious that the Vedic seer loved Light, Fire, & the Sun – and was intensely fascinated with – and full of awe, reverence, & love for, – the terrible tempests, foaming rivers rushing down mountains, & thundering clouds of the sky.
These are all symbols, yes – but even the choice of symbols & the phrasing of one’s deepest, most cherished, more important thoughts in poetic metaphors & similes – is very important.
Wilson, despite his condescending attitude towards Ancient Indian thought, and his unnecessary skepticism, and fetish with the “Aryan-invasion” theory – gives many interesting, valuable Footnotes & Comments.
Thus – yes, even Griffith & Wilson’s translations have their value.
We neither need to follow every word of theirs, or agree with them on everything – they had their own views, their own perspective, and based their translations on the inputs they had – so we may use them when we need to, and reject them when we think appropriate.
I honestly cannot remember where are the other translations from.
I think I’ve used my words in some places, sometimes as poetic license, conscientiously not changing the meaning of the original.
I’m not making any money through this blog, and nothing done here has any commercial purpose, so I think we’re okay :)
