Prajapati

← Encyclopedia

At the far end of the oldest book, where the hymns turn from praise to puzzlement, a poet sets down a question and repeats it like a refrain. He has described a power that rose first of all things, that holds the sky from falling and the earth from sliding, that gives breath and gives strength, whose shadow is death and life alike — and after each verse he asks the same thing: kasmai devāya haviṣā vidhema, to which god shall we offer our oblation? The question is not rhetorical despair. It is the form of a hymn that does not yet know the name of the one it is praising, and only at the close supplies it. The being who rose first, the golden germ upon the waters, the one who measured out the worlds, is named in the final verse: Prajāpati, Lord of Creatures, none but him.

He is the latecomer among the great Vedic powers and, for a few centuries, the greatest of them. Where Indra smashes and Agni carries and Varuna watches, Prajāpati does the one thing none of the older gods quite does: he makes. And the manner of his making is unlike anything in the bright morning hymns. He makes the world by giving himself away, is emptied and broken in the act, and must be put back together by the very rite his creatures perform. The maker, the made, and the offering turn out to be one.

The god who arrives late

The body of the Rigveda — composed in the northwest of the subcontinent across the centuries around roughly 1500 to 1200 BCE, then transmitted for a millennium and more by mouth and ear alone, with a precision the much later manuscripts only confirm — does not know Prajāpati as a separate god. He belongs to the youngest stratum, the tenth and last maṇḍala, the book of riddles and cosmogonies where the seers stop singing only of the storm and the dawn and begin to ask where everything came from. There the word prajāpati, “lord of offspring, lord of creatures,” which had drifted as an epithet across several deities — attached to Savitṛ the impeller, to Soma, to others — settles at last onto a figure of its own.

His clearest Rigvedic appearance is the hymn of the golden germ, Rigveda 10.121, traditionally called the Ka hymn after the interrogative ka, “who.” In Ralph Griffith’s rendering its first verse runs: “In the beginning rose Hiraṇyagarbha, born Only Lord of all created beings. He fixed and holdeth up this earth and heaven.” Verse upon verse it builds the portrait — the one who gives soul and vigor, whom heaven and earth look to and tremble at, the measurer of the air and the sun — and verse upon verse it withholds the name behind the refrain, what god shall we adore with our oblation? Only the closing verse answers: Prajāpati, lord of created things, who alone embraces all these that have come to be.

That closing answer had a strange afterlife of its own. Later commentators, reading the refrain kasmai, “to whom,” took the dative pronoun Ka — “Who?” — as itself a divine name, so that the god of the hymn became, half in earnest, the god called Who. It is a fitting accident for a deity defined by a question.

Brahma the creator, the later form of the Lord of Creatures, in a hand-colored engraving from Frederic Shoberl, “The World in Miniature: Hindoostan” (London, 1820s). Wikimedia Commons, public domain.

The golden germ — hiraṇyagarbha, the golden womb or embryo — is the image the tradition fastened onto. Floating on the cosmic waters before there was a before, the germ contains all that will be; from it the Lord of Creatures comes forth, and from him the worlds. The waters, the seed, the single sovereign who arises and then fashions everything: this is the kernel that the ritual books will expand into a whole theology, and that the later cosmologies will retell as a golden egg cracking open. Prajāpati is, from the start, the one who is both the source and the first thing sourced — born of the germ and identical with it.

He is also, distinctively, the father of both sides. The seers make him the progenitor not only of the devas, the gods, but of the asuras, their rivals and opponents — the bright powers and the dark ones spring from the same creator. The ritual books give this a vivid physiology: from his upward breath, his exhalation into the light, came the gods and the day; from his downward breath, into the dark, came the asuras and the night. Day and night, gods and anti-gods, the upper world and the under: all of it issues from Prajāpati, who stands behind the division of things and is not himself on either side of it. The creator is the parent of the conflict that structures the cosmos, which is one reason he can never simply be a partisan god like Indra. He is the one from whom the contestants came.

There is a harder myth still, told in the same prose books, in which the creator’s desire for the creatures he has made turns toward his own daughter — the dawn, or the sky, in different tellings — and the act of generation shades into transgression, drawing the wrath of the gathered gods. The Vedic mind did not flinch from the cost of this idea: that to bring the many out of the One is itself a kind of violence done to the unity, a tearing that the rite must afterward answer for. Creation, in the world of Prajāpati, is never clean. It is always a giving-up, a coming-apart, a wound that the sacrifice is built to close.

Creation as self-sacrifice

When the Rigveda gives way to the prose books that explain the rite — the Brāhmaṇas, composed in the centuries after the hymns as the great commentaries on the sacrifice — Prajāpati moves to the center and stays there. “Prajāpati alone was all this in the beginning,” the texts repeat. He is the one who exists before the existent; everything that follows is a way of telling how the one became the many. And the way they tell it is the most consequential single idea the Vedic mind produced.

Prajāpati creates by tapas, the heat of ascetic effort, and by desire and by emission — he warms himself, he longs, he sends the worlds out of his own body. But the act costs him everything. Having poured himself into the creatures, the Lord of Creatures is spent. The Brāhmaṇas use a precise and physical word: he is vyasrasta, disjointed, his joints relaxed, his frame fallen apart. The creator, in the moment after creating, lies emptied and dismembered, his life-sap flowing out of him along the ground. The Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa tells it plainly: when that deity had fallen asunder, he flowed away in the form of his vital fluids, and the gods gathered him up again.

This is the teaching for which Prajāpati matters above all the others, and it inverts the ordinary logic of worship. In the bright hymns the human offers to the god and the god in return gives cattle, sons, victory. Here the god has already given — has given himself, has become the world and been undone by becoming it — and the human offering does not petition him but repairs him. Every sacrifice on the fire, in this understanding, gathers the scattered creator back into one, mends his loosened joints, restores the body that was poured out to make the cosmos. The rite does not flatter the maker. It rebuilds him. And because the maker is the world, rebuilding him renews the world, holds it together against the falling-apart that is its native tendency.

A folio of the Rigveda Samhita in Devanagari script with Vedic accents, Schoyen Collection MS 2097, early nineteenth century. The hymns that name Prajapati were carried for centuries by oral transmission before such manuscripts. Wikimedia Commons, public domain.

The supreme enactment of this is the building of the fire-altar, the agnicayana. Over many days the priests lay up a great altar in the shape of a bird with outstretched wings, from many hundreds of fired bricks, each laid with its own utterance, each a part of a body. For the altar is Prajāpati — his scattered limbs reassembled brick by brick, his form recomposed out of the chaos into which creation had let him fall. To build the fire is to put the creator back together; to put him back together is to make the year, the worlds, and the sacrificer himself whole. Here the three terms that will dominate everything downstream are first soldered into one: the sacrifice, the cosmos, and the self are the same structure. Prajāpatir yajñaḥ — Prajāpati is the sacrifice — is not a metaphor in these books. It is the literal architecture of the rite.

He is identified, too, with the year and with time. The creator who pours himself out and is gathered back is the year that runs down through its seasons and is renewed; the dismembered body and the turning calendar are one figure. The recurring rite that mends him is the recurring round of time that keeps the world from running out. To sacrifice is to wind the cosmos up again.

The cosmic Person beside him

The self-giving creator has a twin in the most famous of the late hymns, and the two faces belong together. Rigveda 10.90, the Puruṣa-sūkta, the hymn of the Person, sings of a cosmic giant with a thousand heads and a thousand eyes who covered the earth and stretched beyond it — and whom the gods, taking him as their offering, bound and dismembered upon the primal altar. From the parts of his sacrificed body the world was assembled: the moon from his mind, the sun from his eye, the wind from his breath, the sky from his head, the earth from his feet, and the orders of human society from his mouth and arms and thighs and feet. (That last apportioning — the priestly class from the mouth downward — became the scriptural charter, and the scriptural battleground, of the fourfold ranking of birth; the hymn’s own intent and its long use are not the same thing, and the social reading it was made to bear is debated to this day.)

The Person and the Lord of Creatures are not strictly the same figure, and the layers should be kept apart: the Puruṣa is sacrificed by the gods, while Prajāpati more often sacrifices himself or is the sacrifice. But they teach a single thing from two sides. Creation happens when a primordial fullness is given up, divided, offered — when the One consents to be broken so that the many can exist. The world is the body of a sacrifice. To live in it is to live inside an offering already made, and to renew it is to make the offering again. Few intuitions in the history of religion have proved so durable: that the cost of a world is the self-giving of its maker, and that the rite which remembers that giving is what holds the world up.

From creator to epithet, and the rare temple

What happened to Prajāpati afterward is a slow merger and a quiet demotion. The speculative books that grew out of the Brāhmaṇas — the Upanishads — kept him as a teacher of the deepest doctrine: it is Prajāpati who, in the Chāndogya, instructs the gods and the demons about the true self, the ātman, letting the lesson be misheard before it is understood. But the cosmic urgency of the Lord of Creatures, the god whose body was the universe and whose mending was the rite, did not survive intact into the classical age. As the formless absolute, Brahman, came to be named as the ground of all, and as the great theistic devotions to Vishnu and Shiva rose, the personal creator was folded into a new figure: Brahmā, the four-faced god, lotus-born, who in the later cosmologies sits on the flower that springs from Vishnu’s navel and faces the four directions with the four Vedas on his lips.

The Brahma temple at Pushkar, Rajasthan, the most prominent of the very few temples dedicated to the creator. Photograph by K.vishnupranay, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0.

The path of identification had in fact been opening for a long time. Even within the Rigveda’s late hymns the role of single creator was tried on by more than one figure — Viśvakarman, the all-maker who is the architect and craftsman of the worlds, and Hiraṇyagarbha himself, the golden germ — and the Brāhmaṇas freely glide the name Prajāpati across these and other powers, since the creator is not so much a personality as a function, the slot occupied by whoever stands at the origin. Daksha, “the skilled one,” among the early progenitors, would also be drawn into the cluster. When the classical Brahmā emerged, he did not displace Prajāpati so much as gather up everything the name had ever carried.

In that gathering the older name went two ways at once. Prajāpati became an epithet of Brahmā the creator — and, by a further turn, a plural: the Prajāpatis, a class of progenitor-sages and lords of creatures, the mind-born patriarchs through whom the populating of the world is delegated, their number reckoned variously at seven or ten, sixteen or twenty-one across the different texts. The god who had been the single source of everything dispersed, fittingly, into a company of fathers. And the creator himself, now Brahmā, was edged toward the margin of living worship. By the early medieval centuries his cult had thinned almost to nothing; the active devotion of the subcontinent flowed to the sustainer and the destroyer, and the maker, having made, was largely left alone.

He kept one great house. At Pushkar in Rajasthan, on a lake the legend says was formed where the petals of his lotus fell, stands the most prominent of the handful of temples to Brahmā anywhere in India — a rarity explained in story by a curse that the creator should go unworshipped everywhere but here. The four-faced image in its sanctum is the same Lord of Creatures, the golden germ’s god, under a later name and a thinner devotion. The hymn that asked to which god shall we offer had once answered with his name. The classical age, in a sense, kept asking the question and stopped giving that answer.

Yet the pattern he carried did not die with the cult. The creator who empties himself to become the world, who is broken in the making and rebuilt by the rite, who is at once the offerer and the offering and the thing offered — this remained one of the load-bearing intuitions of the whole tradition, surfacing wherever the sacrifice is read as the secret engine of the cosmos and the self. The name became an epithet and then a crowd. The teaching it once held stayed at the center.

→ In the library: The Upanishads (SBE I & XV), trans. F. Max Müller

→ Related: Rigveda · Yajna · Brahman · Brahmins Priesthood · The Rishis · Pushkar · Vishnu · Agni · Indra · Varuna · Soma · Yama · Ushas · Rudra · Hinduism · Upanishads · Historical Vedic Religion · Atman · Moksha · Mahabharata · Bhagavad Gita · The Indo Aryans · Surya God