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 religions

Religions created Gods
Man, religions and Gods together
divided 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 vyOmAparOyath
kim 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 sarvamAidam
thuchchhyEna Abhvapihitham yad Aseeth
thapasa: 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 visarjanEna
athhA 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.
---------------------------