Chapter L: Death of Vidūratha 477 (2)

The specific property of the minuteness of the soul or universal spirit, that it is minuter than the minutest (अण रणीयान्). By thinking himself as such, the yogi by a single expiration of air, makes his whole body assume a lank and lean appearance, and penetrates his soul into all bodies.

[Sidenote: 2. Macrocosm or _Mahimá_.]

This also is a special quality of the soul that it fills the body, and extends through all space and encloses it within itself (महतो महीयान्); by thinking so, the yogi by a mere respiration of air makes his body round and turgid as a frog, and comprehends the universe in himself.

[Sidenote: 3. Lightness or _Laghimá_.]

From thinking on the lightness of the soul, the yogi produces a diminution of his specific gravity by swallowing large draughts of air, and thereby keeps himself in an aerial posture both on sea and land. This the Sruti says as (लघोर्लघीयान्).

[Sidenote: 4. Gravity or _Garimá_.]

This practice is opposed to the above, and it is by the same process of swallowing great draughts of air, and compressing them within the system, that the yogi acquires an increase of his specific gravity or _garimá_ (गुरोगरीयान्). Krishna is said to have assumed his बिश्बम्भर मूर्त्ति in this way, which preponderated all weights in the opposite scale.

[Sidenote: 5. Success or _Prápti_.]

This is the obtaining of desired objects and supernatural powers as by inspiration from above. The yogi in a state of trance acquires the power of predicting future events, of understanding unknown languages, of curing divers diseases, of hearing distant sounds, of divining unexpressed thoughts of others, of seeing distant objects, or smelling mystical fragrant odours, and of understanding the language of beasts and birds. Hence the prophets all dived into futurity, the oracles declared future events, Jina understood _pasubháshá_, and Christ healed diseases and infirmities. So also Sanjaya saw the battles waged at Kurukshetra from the palace of king Dhritaráshtra.

[Sidenote: 6. Overgain—_PraKámya_]

Prakámya is obtaining more than one’s expectations, and consists in the power of casting the old skin and maintaining a youth-like appearance for an unusual period of time, as it is recorded of king Yayáti (Japhet or Jyápati); and of Alcibiades who maintained an unfading youth to his last. By some writers it is defined to be the property of entering into the system of another person; as it is related of Sankaráchárya’s entering the dead body of prince Amaru in the Sankara Vijaya.

[Sidenote: 7. Subjection _Vasitwam_.]

This is the power of taming living creatures and bringing them under control. It is defined also to be the restraint of passions and emotions as रागादि बशित्वं, and likewise the bringing of men and women under subjection. This made Orpheus tame the wild animals and stop the course of rivers by the music of his lyre, and gave Pythagoras (who derived it from India) the power of subduing a furious bear by the influence of his will or word, as also of preventing an ox from eating his beans, and stopping an eagle in its flight. It was by this that Prospero subdued the elements and aerial spirits with his magic wand, and Draupadi and Mahommed obtained the powers of stopping the courses of the sun and moon. The Magis of Persia are said to have derived their magical powers from the Máyis of India who first cultivated the magical art.

[Sidenote: 8. Dominion or _Ishitwam_.]

It is the obtaining of universal dominion either in this life or next by means of yoga, as it is recorded of Rávana, Mándhátá and others in the traditions. It is also said to be the attainment of divine powers, when the yogi finds himself in a blaze of light.

XV. THE STATE OF A PERFECT YOGI.

[Sidenote: Authority of H. H. Wilson]

When the mystic union is effected, he (the yogi) can make himself lighter than the lightest substance, and heavier than the heaviest; can become as vast or as minute as he pleases; can traverse all space, can animate any dead body by transferring his spirit into it from his own frame. He can render himself invisible, can attain all objects, become equally acquainted with the present, past and future, and is finally united with Siva, and consequently exempted from being born again upon earth. (See Wilson’s Hindu Religion p. 131).

[Sidenote: Ditto of Plato.]

We find the same doctrine in Plato’s Phaedrus where Socrates delivers a highly poetical effusion respecting the partial intercourse or the human soul with eternal intellectual _Realia_. He says moreover that, all objects which are invisible can be apprehended only by cogitation (yoga); and that none but philosophers (yogis), and a few of them can attain such mental energy during this life (जीबन्मुक्ति); nor even they fully and perfectly in the present state. But they will attain it fully after death; if their lives have been passed in sober philosophical training (ध्यानज्ञान). And that all souls enjoyed it before birth, before junction with the body, which are forgotten during childhood, but recalled in the way of reminiscence by association. The revival of the divine elements is an inspiration of the nature of madness (trance or ecstasy of the yoga). The soul becoming insensible to ordinary pursuits, contracts a passionate tendency to the universal. (Baine on Realism. pp. 6 and 7).

[Sidenote: Authority of Plotinus.]

“It is ecstasy the faculty by which the soul divests itself of its personality. In this state the soul becomes loosened from its material prison, separated from individual consciousness, and becomes absorbed in the Infinite Intelligence from which it emanated. In this ecstasy it contemplates real existence; and identifies itself with that which it contemplates.” (Lewes. Hist. of Philosophy Vol. I. p. 389).

XVI. CRITICISM ON YOGA PRACTICE.

[Sidenote: Disbelief in yoga.]

Notwithstanding all that we have said and the authorities we have cited in the preceding article on the efficacy of yoga, we find some scholars in Europe and many educated men in this country, are disposed to discredit the efficiency of yoga to effect supernatural results or to be good for any thing. We shall state some of these objections which will be found to bear their own refutation on the grounds of their misrepresentation and self-contradiction.

[Sidenote: Its painful practices.]

Professor Monier Williams says that, “yoga system appears, in fact, to be a mere contrivance of getting rid of all thought, or at least of concentrating the mind with the utmost intensity upon nothing in particular. It is a strange compound of mental and bodily exercises consisting of unnatural restraint, forced and painful postures, twistings and contortions of the limbs, suppression of breath and utter absence of mind”. (Indian wisdom p. 103) (so also Wilson’s Hindu Religion p. 132).

[Sidenote: Its questionable Features.]

He then starts the question, “How is it that faith in a false system can operate with sufficient force upon the Hindu, to impel him to submit voluntarily to almost incredible restraints, mortifications of the flesh and physical tortures? How is it that an amount of physical endurance may be exhibited by an apparently weakly and emaciated Asiatic, which would be impossible to a European, the climate and diet in one case tending to debilitate and in the other to invigorate?” (Ibid p. 104).

[Sidenote: Their Illegitimacy.]

Professor Monier’s statement of the existence of the aforesaid self mortifications and voluntary contortions of the limbs of the yogis for two thousand years or since the invention of yoga philosophy, is open to refutation on the ground of there being no mention of them in the old systems of yoga inculcated either in the Vedánta or Patanjali’s philosophy, or even in the yoga Vásishtha, as it is evident from the practices and processes of yoga we have already given before. Those processes are seen to be simply moral restraints, and no physical torture of any kind, and such moral restraints must be acknowledged on all hands, to be indispensable to the concentration of the mind on any subject of far less importance than the contemplation of the inscrutable nature of the Divinity.

[Sidenote: Abuses of Hatha yoga.]

The abuses he speaks of must be those of the arduous practices of the Hatha yoga, which have been in vogue with pseudo yogis of the later times, from their superstitious belief in bodily tortures as their best penance and only means, (as the author himself avows), “of their fancied attainment of extraordinary sanctity and supernatural powers.” (Ibid). But such practices as have degenerated to deceptive tricks in this country, and are carried on by the cheating and cheated fools under the false name of yoga, present their counterparts also in the trickeries of the fanatics and fakirs under every form of faith on earth, without affecting the true religion or creating any misconception of the yoga doctrine.

[Sidenote: Sacrifice of the spirit.]

In vindication of our spiritual yoga we have to say that it is no exoteric religion, and requires no bodily mortification or sacrifice in any shape whatever, as it is the usual practice of all forms of religion among mankind. The yoga is the speculative training of the human soul, and concerns the castigation of the spirit and not the mortification of flesh. It has nothing to do with the body which is of this earth, and which we have to leave here behind us.

[Sidenote: Sacrifice of the Body.]

The universal doom of death pronounced on the original guilt of man, is not to be averted by physical death or any deadly torture of the body, as it is commonly believed by the bulk of mankind, to consist in bodily mortifications and sacrifices; but in the contrition and penitence of the spirit, and sacrifice of the soul as the only sin-offering for the atonement of our original and actual transgressions. The _Purusha medha_ sacrifice of the Veda which is misunderstood for the offering of a _male-being_, a man, a horse, a bull or a he-goat or male of any animal, meant originally the sacrifice of the human soul, or self-immolation of the _purusha_ or embodied intelligence to the Supreme Spirit, by means of its concentration into the same through the instrumentality of yoga abstraction. Dr. K. M. Banerjia’s interpretation of the _Purusha medha_ as typical of the crucifixion of Christ, is more conformable with his Christian view of the mysticism, than the spiritual sense of _self-sacrifice_, in which it is generally understood by the speculative Yogi and the philosophical Vedantist.

THE OM TAT SAT.

[Sidenote: 1. Preamble of Om tat sat.]

After consideration of Yoga the title of our work, and all its component parts tending to the exercise of meditation, together with an investigation into the nature of _Átman_ or soul, as the agent of the act of meditating and procuring its salvation, we are led by a natural and coherent train of thought to an inquiry into the nature of that grand object of our holy and profound meditation, which is the only means of our emancipation, and which is presented at once to our view in the exordium of the work in the mystical characters of _Om Tat Sat = On Id Est_.

[Sidenote: 2. Ambiguity of the word _Om_.]

The word _Om_ forming the initial of the said epigraph standing prominent at the top of the opening page of the work, and being more than a multinymous term and ambiguous in its acceptations, requires to be treated at some length, in order to discover the hidden meaning lying buried under that mystic emblem of the grand arcanum of Brahmanical and Universal religion, from amidst a variety of significations which are heaped upon it in the sacred writings and holy speculations of the early sages of India.

THE SRUTI SAYS:—

[Sidenote: 3. In the beginning was the word _Om_.]

ॐमित्येवमग्रमासीत् । प्रथम मोङ्कारात्मकमासीत् । तस्माच्च निःसृताः सर्ब्बे, प्रलीयन्ते तत्रवै । So saith the Holy scripture:—

“In the beginning was the word, the _word_ was with God, and the _word_ was God. All this was made by him, and without him was not anything made, that was made and” St. John 1.1-3.

[Sidenote: Om, the light of the world.]

And again says the Sruti दीप्यतोँ ज्योतिः । तत्तेजोऽनेनैवोमित्येव तदुद्बुध्न्यति । मैत्री उप ७ ।११

“That _Om_ shone forth as light, but they received it not, and hid it in darkness.” So the Scripture:—

“That was the light of the world, and the light shone upon the world, but the world knew it not &c.” St. John, Ch 1, V. 5. 9. 10.

[Sidenote: 5. Its Revelation to mankind.]

Again says the Scripture:—“God sent one to bear witness of the light, that all men through him might believe.” Id 1.7. So Brahmá the god revealed its meaning to his first begotten son _Atharvan_, and Atharvan, the Prajápati, gave instruction on the subject to _Pippaláda_, _Sanatkumára_ and _Angira_ (Weber A. S. L., p. 164). Again _Angiras_, who communicated it to _Saunaka_, had obtained it from Bharadvája Satyaváha, and the latter again from _Ángira_, the pupil of _Atharvan_, to whom it was revealed by _Brahmá_ himself (Weber A. S. L., p. 158).

[Sidenote: 6. Works on its Disquisition.]

Hence it is the _Atharva Sikhá Upanishad_ in which the investigation of the sacred word _Om_ is principally conducted apart from those of the _Mándukya_, _Maitrí_ and _Táraka_ Upanishads. (Web. Id., p. 164). These together with their Bháshyas by Sankara, the Kárikás of _Gaudapáda_, and the commentaries of _Ánandagiri_ on them, are chiefly devoted to the scrutiny of the sacred syllable, beside the partial disquisition of every other Upanishad and theological work into the hidden sense of this mystic word. Weber points out the Saunaka and Pranava Upanishads among the number (A. S. L., p. 165).

[Sidenote: 7. Mode of our Investigation.]

We shall proceed in this prolegomena first to investigate into the orthographical character and structure of this syllable, and then to inquire into the designations and etymological synonyms or the word, with the lexical meanings that we can get of them, and lastly to treat of the many mystical interpretations which this single word is made to bear as a common emblem of them.

II. ORTHOGRAPHY OF OM.

[Sidenote: 1. The letter ॐकारः]

Firstly: Om with respect, to its name and utterance is called Onkára, that is, the nasal _On_ in combination with the adjunct kára (signifying a sound) and meaning the letter _On_. For all sounds whether vocal (स्वरबर्ण) or sonant (व्यञ्जन), nasal (सानुनासिक) or not-nasal (निरनुनासिक), articulate (ब्यक्तस्फुट) or onomatopoeia (अब्यक्तास्फुट), are denominated letters; as the letters _a_ &c. (अकारादि) are called vowels, the letters Ka &c. (ककारादि) consonants; so the nasals _Án_, _in_ (आं इँ) &c., as also the inarticulate ones (फङ्कार) &c., are all letters; but the Onkára is the root of all; thus ॐकारेण सर्ब्बबाक् सस्तणोति । माण्डुक्योपनिषद् । Manu calls it a letter in the passage:—“This one letter is the emblem of the Most High”. II.83. _Vide_ Dr. Mitra’s Ch’hánd Up, p. 4.

[Sidenote: 2. A conjunct Letter युक्ताक्षरः]

But here a question is raised as to whether a conjunct vowel or consonant may with propriety be styled a single letter or not. To this says Dr. R. L. Mitra in a foot-note to his translation of the _Ch’hándogya_ Upanishad that—“It is true that this emblem conveys two sounds, that of _O_ and _m_, nevertheless it is held to be one letter in the above sense; and we meet with instances even in the ancient and modern languages of Europe that can justify such privileges, such as _xi_ and _psi_, reckoned single letters in Greek, and Q. W. X. in English and others.” (Ch 1. Sec. 1. p. 4). So is _lámálif_ in Persian &c. The Sanskrit conjunct _ksha_ (क्ष) is considered a single consonant, when they say, ककारादि क्षकारान्तं ब्यञ्जनं परिकीर्त्तितं ।

[Sidenote: 3. The Syllable Om ओमक्षरं ।]

It is also like every other single or conjoint letter of the alphabet (युक्तायुक्त बर्ण) termed an _akshara_ (अक्षर) or syllable, which forms either a word by itself when standing alone, or part of a word followed by an adjunct as ॐ, ॐकार, ओमक्षर &c.; where the first is a word of one syllable or monosyllabic term एकाक्षर, and the others as dissyllabic and trisyllabic words (द्ब्यक्षर, त्र्यक्षर शब्द), according as they are uttered by the help of one or more articulations of the voice. _Om akshara_ apart from its other signification of the _Imperishable_ and the like, and its symbolism of the Supreme Spirit, is also used in the sense of a syllable in the original writings and their translations. Thus says the _Kathopanishad_; एतद्ध्येबाक्षरंब्रह्म एतद्ध्येबाक्षरंपरं । एतद्ध्येबाक्षरं ज्ञात्वा ब्रह्मलोकेमहीयते ।

* * * * *

Manu says:—“That which passeth not away is declared to be the syllable om, thence called _akshara_.” He calls it also a triliteral monosyllable. II. 84. So says Mon. Wm: “_Om_ is a most sacred monosyllable significant of the Supreme Being.” (Indian Wisdom p. 103 note 1).

* * * * *

[Sidenote: 4. The character Om ॐकार ।]

_Omkára_ likewise indicates the written character _Om_, because the suffix _Kára_ like _Ákára_ is used to signify its written form or sign (आकार चिह्न), and in this sense the Bengali ও, corresponds with Greek character w _omega_ the inverted ও, or the _Omikron_ = English O, and Oao Persian, and likens to the Sanskrit _bindu_ O, which is but another name of _Om_ (ओंकारः ब्रह्मबिन्दुः). But the ও is formed by the union of two dots or cyphers (O bindu) like Greek Omega of two omicrons and the English w of two u’s. So says the Gáyatrí Tantra, ॐकारो ब्रह्म बिन्दुर्बिन्दुद्वय बिनिर्म्मतः । अधोर्द्ध बिन्दुरित्यादि । And again: समनुः परमाराध्या संयुक्ता ब्रह्म बिन्दुना. “It is the union of two circlets, one being the symbol of one’s own divinity and the other that of Brahma.” This character by itself is regarded with high veneration as an emblem of the Infinite, independent of its meaning or utterance, and is marked on the forehead of every devotee in the form of a spot or crescent.

* * * * *

[Sidenote: 5. The Symbol ॐ बिन्दुः । ]

The symbolical _Om_ is represented by four cyphers as placed over one another अधोर्द्धबिन्दु चतुष्टयं, and each designated by a different name in the aforesaid Tantra, and supposed to form the cavities of the heart and mouth of Brahm, चतुर्वर्ग प्रदा बिद्या चतुर्बिन्द्वात्मिकासदा । आद्यन्ते प्रणवंदत्वा गायत्रीं प्रजपेद्दिज । बामाधर्म्म प्रदा बिन्दुर्ज्येष्ठा अर्थ प्रदा तथा । रौद्रीकाम प्रदाबिन्दुः श्रीबिन्दुः मोक्षदायिनी ॥ महेश्वर बदनं बिन्दुः श्रीबिष्णोः हृदयंतथा ॥ मोक्षदाताच श्रीबिन्दुः चतुर्बिन्दु बिनिर्णयः ॥ These _bindus_ or cyphers are differently named in the Vedánta, as we shall shortly come to see under the denominations of _omkára_. (No. IV).

[Sidenote: 6. Symbolized as Jagannátha.]

The best representation of _Om_ is the image of the god Jagannátha, which is said to be an incarnation of the mystic syllable प्रणबाबतार, or made in the form of _Om_, and not in that of Buddha, as some of our antiquarians have erroneously supposed it to be. There is a learned dissertation on the subject of Jagannátha’s representation of _Onkára_ to be found in one of the early articles of the Asiatic Society’s Researches, where the reader will get much more light on this mysterious subject.

[Sidenote: 7. Comparison of _om_ and _on_.]

It will further be found on comparison that ॐ bears not only a great resemblance to the Greek _on_ written as ȣ with the nasal above the O, but their perfect agreement with each other in sense will leave no ground of suspecting their identity with one another, as it will be fully treated of afterwards.

III. THE ORTHEOPY OR ANALYSIS OF _Om_.

[Sidenote: 1. A Monad.]

We have already seen that the circular form of the letter O in _Om_, called a _bindu_ dot or cypher, was used like a geometrical point to denote a monad without parts, and represent the Supreme Being subsisting as the central point of the great circle of Universe, and filling the infinity of its circumference with his own life and light. The Vedas and the early theology of the Upanishads invariably understood the _Om_ as synonymous with _One_, and expressive of the unity of the God-head; as in the motto ओमेकमेबाद्वितीयं ब्रह्म । ओमेकामेवैतत् । of the Vedantists, corresponding with the monotheistic creed of Christians and Mahomedans “God is one” and “without an equal” “_Wahed Ho la Sharik laho_” “The unity of the God-head is the dictum of the Koran and Vedánta.” (Mon. Wm’s. Hindu Wisd. p. XLI. 1).

The Manduka and similar Upanishads describe the majesty of the one. (Weber, p. 161). “That _one_ breathed breathless by itself” &c. Max Müller’s A. S. Lit. p. 560.

[Sidenote: 2. Om a Duad.]

Formerly the letter _O_ of _om_, _on_, and _One_ was considered a pure and simple sound, and made to represent a monad or Unity; but in course of time and with the progress of language it was found out to be a compound letter (सन्ध्यक्षर), formed by the union of a + u = o (अ + उ = ओ), and two _o’s_ in w omega or two _u’s_ in w. (See. S. Gr. & Baine’s grs). Then the perfect figure of the great circle was considered to be composed of two semicircles which the _w_ = उ was made to represent. This gave rise to the conception of a duality in the divine person, and hence grew the theory of the male and female पुरुष प्रकृति in the original androgyne of the _Sankhya_ and _Hara Gauri_ (हर गौरी and उमा महेश्वर) of the Tantra. Hence it is said; अनइत्यक्षरं ब्रह्म शब्द प्रकृति कुण्डली । अनन्यं हिबिनाब्रह्मनास्ति कुत्रापि सुन्दरि । इति गायत्री तन्त्रं ।

The syllable ov = on is a word for Brahma (God), and the other cypher represents nature (the world). There is no Brahma, but ov = ॐ or ओम् । The dualism of Sankhya yoga is too well known to require an explanation.

[Sidenote: 3. Om a Triad.]

At a later period and posterior to the dualistic doctrines of the aforesaid Tantra and Pátanjala yoga systems, the _Om_ branched out into a Triad by the union of the nasal letter _m_ or _n_ with the उ or w, and forming the conjoined character ॐ and wn in Sanskrit and Greek. Henceforward _Onkára_ is regarded as a triliteral word composed of _a_+_u_+_m_ to represent a triplicate deity. Thus says Monier Williams:—

“_Om_ is supposed to be composed of three letters _A_, _U_, _M_, which form a most sacred monosyllable (एकाक्षर), significant of the Supreme Being as developing himself in the Triad of gods, Brahmá, Vishnu and Siva” (Indian Wisdom p. 103 note I). So we have in Manu II. 83 and 84:—

अकारञ्चाप्युकारञ्च मकारञ्च प्रजापतिः ।
बेवदत्रयाग्निरुदहत भूर्भुबः स्वरितीति ॥
अकारो विष्णुरुद्दिष्टः उकारस्तु महेश्वरः ।
मकारउच्यते ब्रह्मा प्रणबेन त्रयोमतः ॥

So also the Bhagavad Gitá. VIII. 13.

Here the two halves of the circle उ comprise Vishnu and Siva as joined in the bipartite body of _Hari Hara alias_ Hara Hari, adored by the dualists called द्वैतवादिनः, or more fully as हरिहराद्वैतवादिनः and Brahmá the god of Manu, is placed in the circlet above the great circle of his created world. We need but hint to our readers in this place, to observe how the original word _Om_ or Ov and One developed itself into the existing faith of trinity. The Tántrica Sivites however place their god Siva in the upper semicirclet formed by म = m the initial of Maheswara (महेश्वर), and say:—

ॐकारपूर्ब्बमुद्धृत्य ब्रह्मबिष्णुशिबात्मकं ।
अधोबिन्दु ब्रह्मबिष्णुरुर्द्धबिन्दु शिबात्मकं ॥

This is more reasonable to believe from both the letter _m’s_ and its god Siva’s amalgamation with the early Aryan duality to form the present faith of triality at a much later period.

[Sidenote: 4. Om the Tetrad.]

We next see a further progress of _Om_ in its development from the triliteral to a quadriliteral form, by its assumption of a crescent or half circlet (कुण्डली) according to the Tantra, or a half _Mátrá_ (अर्द्ध मात्रा) of the Vedánta. The Tantra says तदूर्द्ध कुण्डलीकारा शक्तिः । The Maitrí Upanishad mentions only of the three _Mátrás_ of _Om_ (Ch. vi Sec. 3).

“But the Mundak Upanishad” says Weber, “refers to the half _Mátrá_ (mora), to which the word _Om_ here appearing in its full glory, is entitled in addition to its three _Mátrás_ (morae) a. u. m. This is evidently a later addition by some one who did not like to miss the mention of the subject in the Atharvana Upanishad in which it occurs.” p. 160. Again says he—“The Mándukya Upanishad which treats of the three and half _Mátrás_ of the word _Om_, is to be looked upon as the real Mándukya, all the rest is the work of the _Gaudapáda_, whose pupil _Govinda_ was the teacher of Sankaráchárya about the seventh century A. D.”

[Sidenote: 5. Om the Pentad.]

We find next a quinquiliteral figure of _Om_ in its component parts of the three mátrás, m, and the _bindu_ or चन्द्र बिन्दु the fifth.

[Sidenote: 6. Om the Hexad.]

And then again with a sextuple or Hexaliteral _Om_ composed of the sixth member of _Náda_ (नाद) over and above the aforesaid five parts.

[Sidenote: 7. Om the Heptad.]

The septuple Om is described in the Ramatápaniya upanishad as consisting of अ, उ, म, नाद, बिन्दु, शक्ति and नम । Weber’s A. S. Lit. p. 312.

[Sidenote: 8. Om the Octad.]

This consists of the aforesaid seven parts, which together with Sánti called in Persian Sákat complete the number, Weber. Id. p. 315.

IV. THE DIFFERENT DENOMINATIONS OF OM.

[Sidenote: 1. The Initial of the Veda.]

The _om_ is denominated the heading of the Veda (बेदशिरः) as the Gáyatrí hymn is termed to be its parent (बेदमाता). It stands at the top (शिरस्) of every book (मण्डल), chapter (अष्टक), and hymn (ऋच्) of every Veda either alone by itself or two or three _oms_ put together, as ओमग्निमीले _on ignem aiede_ of the Rigveda, ॐ त्रिसप्ता _On triseptem_ &c. of the Atharvan; again ॐ ॐ ॐ ऋग्वेदाय स्वाहा _on_ I salute thee O Rigveda &c.

It is hence used at the head (शिरस्) of every book on any branch of knowledge (बिद्या) which is a paronym of and derived from the same root (बिद् Video) with Veda (बेद्). The Tantra calls it as the heading of the Gáyatrí which begins with the syllable;

तसेतन्महा गुह्यं गायत्र्याः शीर्षमुच्यते ।
ॐ भूर्भुबः स्वरित्यादिः । गायत्रीतन्त्रं ॥

[Sidenote: 2. The sacred Syllable. पूर्णाक्षरं]

It is called the sacred syllable because it is used in sacred writings and in the sacred Vedic and Sanskrit languages only, and never in the popular vernacular tongues, which are known as unsacred and impure (असंस्कृतं). Moreover it is used in sacerdotal functions of the sacerdotal class (संस्कारेसंस्कृतात्मनां ) or regenerate classes of men, and never by the impure Súdra on pain of damnation (ॐकारोच्चारणाद्धोमात् श्रुद्रोहिनरकंब्रजेत्), unless he is sacrified by investiture of the sacred or sacrificial thread, (यज्ञोपवीतं). Thus says the Sástra; श्रुद्रोऽपि अधीकारीस्यात् यज्ञसूत्रप्रदानतः । गायत्री तन्त्रं, ४र्थ पटलः ।

The sacredness of the word _Om_, as the expression for the eternal position of things, is specially emphasised in the Katha Upanishad (Weber. p. 158).

[Sidenote: 3. The Holy syllable पबित्रं]

It is held as the most holy syllable being an appellation of the Most High, and must not be uttered in unholiness even by the holy orders of men: so says the Katha Up;—“This is the most holy syllable, this the supreme syllable, whosoever knoweth this syllable getteth whatever he desireth.” (Cowell’s Maitrí Upanishad. Ch. VI. S. 4) note.

[Sidenote: 4. The Mystic Syllable गुह्यं]

This is styled the mystic syllable because the most recondite and abstruse doctrines of Brahmanical theism are hidden under its symbolical garb, and form the foundation of those wonderful structures of the mystic poetry and philosophy of nations, which have been beautifully illustrated by Sir W. Jones in his “Mystic Poetry of the Hindus, Persians, and Greeks.” It was this mysticism which invited a Pythagoras of old to India. Manu says;—“He knows the Veda, who distinctly knows the mystic sense of this word.” Chap XI. 266.

These senses are recommended to be deeply studied by the Upanishads themselves, saying;—“The _om_ is a subject of deep study” (Web. p. 163), and forms of itself “as another triple Veda.” (Manu XI. 265). It is enjoined to be carefully kept in secrecy by the Tantras and Smritis.

तत्त्वमेतन्महा गुह्यं गायत्र्याः कुक्षिरुच्यते ।
तदेन्महामन्त्रं गोप्यं गोप्यं हि यत्नतः ॥

[Sidenote: 5. The Mysterious syllable गूढ़ाक्षर]

_Om_ again as a symbol of the eternal position of things प्रकृतिः कुण्डालाकारा, presents to us a mysterious round of the mystic dance of myriads of spheres, emitting an inaudible sound reaching beyond its utmost limit to the unknown One who sitteth above the circumference of its visible horizon; or as the sacred writer expresses it; “He that sitteth on the circle of the earth.” Isaiah. Chap. X. 1. The Tantra speaks of its encompassing the world; ब्यापकत्वादि तत्त्वाच बिन्दुस्तेनैब कथ्यते, अनुस्वारस्वरूपासा बिन्दुरुपाचिदाकृतिः । गायत्रीतन्त्रं ।

[Sidenote: 6. The sphere of sound नादबिन्दुः]

That _om_ contains within it the whole sphere of sounds (नाद) is beautifully illustrated in twenty slokas or stanzas in an Upanishad of that name the नादबिन्दूपनिषद् । (Weber, p. 165). It shows how the eternal sound _om_ emitted by _Brahma_ pervaded throughout the Universe, and the manner in which all other sounds are propelled by continual vibrations of air like curves upon the surface of water (बीचितरङ्गन्यायेन) to the auditory of the other. The _Vindu_ is a _Mudrá_ in Tantra ब्यपकत्त्वाद्बिन्दुमुक्तं । कुण्डलिनी स्वार सर्ब्ब ब्यापिनी । Compare the Pythagorean music of the spheres.

[Sidenote: 7. The Focus of light तेजो बिन्दुः ।]

The _Tejovindu Upanishad_ describes _Om_ as the source and focus of light in fourteen slokas, and the empyrean above it as the abode of pure ineffable light (परं ज्योतिः) of God that illumines the other spheres. (Web. p. 165). This light is viewed in the orb of the sun and in fire by their worshippers. Compare Milton’s hymn to light; “Hail holy light” &c.

[Sidenote: 8. The spot of immortality अमृत बिन्दुः]

Again _Om_ is termed the reservoir of immortality or endless life in the Amritavindu Upanishad which describes it in thirty stanzas, to be the eternal fountain of the infinity of lives that fills all animated nature, and is drawn back to it. Its circumference extends to the regions of light and life, and beyond it is the region of death and darkness. “In this word there is light and life” (John 1) ॐज्योतिश्च प्राणश्च । इति तत्र ६ । ४ see Weber’s A. S. Lit. pp. 69, 154, 165.

[Sidenote: 9. The centre of Meditation ध्यान बिन्दुः]

Therefore _Om_ is called the centre of meditation in the _Dhyánavindu Upanishad_ of twenty one stanzas, which direct the concentration of our thoughts to that centre for the attainment of perpetual light and life which flow from it. (Weber p. 165). The Tantra takes a चक्र or मुद्रा and the Buddhist a chink in the wall to fix the sight in meditation.

[Sidenote: 10. The Position of Brahma ब्रह्म बिन्दुः]

And lastly _Om_ is styled the receptacle of the great God, whose essence fills, pervades, and encompasses the whole orbit of the Universe, as it is described in twenty two slokas of the Brahma Vindu-Upanishad. It is called Brahma Mudrá in the Tantra. (Weber, p. p. 99, 158, 165).

V. ETYMOLOGY OF THE WORD _Om_.

[Sidenote: 1. Etymology of the _Om_. ॐ शब्द]

Having thus far seen the mysterious nature of the letter and syllable _Om_ in its Orthography, we shall now consider it as a word, and see that not a less but much greater mystery is attached to its etymology than has been hitherto thought of by any, and which will be found upon examination to be more inscrutable in its nature than the mysteries of Eleusis and the inexplicable hieroglyphics of the Egyptian priests.

[Sidenote: 2. Its symbolism of Brahmanism तद्ब्रह्मण्य ।]

These secret and sacred treasures of Brahmanic enigmas and symbols, have been carefully preserved by the Brahmahood in their cabalistic writings of the Tantras, which serve to be a secure safeguard of their religion amidst the ravages of foreigners in their liberty and literature, and require to be diligently searched into for a thorough mastery of these mysticisms.

[Sidenote: 3. Its derivation तदुत्पत्तिः]

_Om_ is denominated a word (शब्द) in the Veda and other sacred scriptures, and explained as a noun also (संज्ञा) in the Nirukta and other lexicons. It is derived in the Koshas from the root _aba_ or _ava_ to protect, or save (रक्षणे) with the _Unadi_ suffix मन् an anomalous formation into _om_ to denote “protection.” Dr. Mitra too derives it from the radical अब “to preserve” with the suffix मन to denote the Most High according to Manu and Gítá. (Translation of Ch’hándogya Up. p. 4).

[Sidenote: 4. Its Primary sense धात्वर्थः]

Apart from the symbolical significations of _Om_ (of which there are several as we shall come to notice afterwards), its primary and literal sense would make us give different interpretations of it according to the derivation of the term both in its verbal and nominal forms. अव as a verb in the imperative mood means “save” as मातरब, त्रातरब, दबऽब &c. in the _Mugdhabodha_, corresponding with the expressions, _Ave Maria_, salve salvator, salve Deus, save O God &c.

[Sidenote: 5. Its Nominal sense ब्युत्पत्यर्थ]

But _aba_ to protect or preserve gives us the nominal (कृदन्त) forms of aba, ába, ábu, and ábuka (अब, आब, आबु, आबुक), meaning a father or preserver in the Prákrit Speech of Sanskrit dramas, and these are found to agree in both respects of sound and sense with the words _áb_, _ábá_, _ábu_, _ábuka_, _abi_ as _ábuka_ &c. in Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac and Arabic languages. This gives us the original meaning of अब of which ॐ is a derivative form, and shows the close affinity which the Aryan root bears to the Semitic, both in its sound and signification of “Father” (पाता and पिता) applied to the Great God.

[Sidenote: 6. The word Om ॐ शब्दः ।]

But our question being _Om_ and not the root अब, we ought to know to what part of speech it belongs and what sense we are to give of it here. It is said to be a word indicative of auspiciousness when used at the beginning; (आदौ ॐ शब्द प्रयोगो माङ्गलिकः). But whether as a verb or noun or any other part of speech, we know nothing of, and we are utterly at a loss what word to substitute for it in its translation. This is the reason why the word _Om_, is used by itself in the translations of Sanskrit works by Europeans and our countrymen also for want of a proper term, as it is seen in the English versions of Vedas and Upanishads.

[Sidenote: 7. An aptot noun अब्यय शब्दः ।]

_Om_ is enlisted as an indeclinable word in grammar having no inflection of its own in gender, number, case or person, and agreeing with all words in its unchanged state, as in the examples:— ओमीश्वर, ॐ दुर्गा, ॐ ब्रह्मन्, ॐ देबेभ्यो जुहोमि, ओमुपेत्वा ऊर्जेत्वा &c. It is included in the (स्वरादिगण) as an aptot noun, and with indeclinable particles (निपातन), as an adverb, conjunction and interjection also with various significations.

[Sidenote: 8. The initial _Om_ आद्योमार्थः ।]

The anomalous and multinymous particle _Om_ was first discovered by Ram Mohun Roy to be no other than the participal noun _on_=_being_ which as Max Müller says is _to on ontws_ the Being of Beings A. S. Lit. pp. 321 _et passim._ The Latin _ens_ and the French _on_ as _t’on_, bear close affinity to On and ॐ both in their sound and sense.

[Sidenote: 9. The Final _Om_ अन्त्योमार्थ ।]

Dr. Rájendra Lála Mitra has in one of his works pointed out the Vedic _Om_, to correspond with the Hebrew “Amen,” and this will be found so true of the final _Om_ of Brahmanical prayers, that its corresponding word _Amin_ invariably forms the last word of every prayer in Arabic, Persian and all other Mahomedan and Semitic languages. Thus it is to be seen how intimately are both of these grand families of mankind connected with each other in the main point of their different creeds.

VI. LEXICAL MEANINGS OF _Om_.

[Sidenote: Adverbial Meanings. आभिधानिक निपातनार्थः ।]

After the etymological and philological interpretations that we have been given of the word _Om_, it is worthwhileto attend to its meanings given in the current lexicons for the information of the majority, with whom the evidence of the history of philology is of little weight and value. Táranáth’s Sanskrit dictionary (वाचस्पत्याभिधान) presents us with following adverbial meanings of the word.

[Sidenote: 1. An Inceptive Particle. आरम्भार्थकः ।]

The Medinikosha says he, expounds it as an inchoative particle (आरम्भार्थक शब्द) to mean the beginning of a thing (उपक्रम), and we find it accordingly used in the form of a proemial monogram at the exordium of a book or Vedic hymn, sacred rite or lecture, in the Sanhitas, Bráhmanas and Upanishads according to the passage quoted by Táránátha in his dictionary;तस्मादोमित्युदाहृत्य कृता बेदवादिनाम । यज्ञाद्याक्रिया शास्त्रोक्ताः सततं सम्प्रबर्त्तिते ॥ It answers the अथ of the Purána and the words _now_ and _then_ in English as in the passage of the Kathavalli; ॐ उशन् हवै बाजश्रबस इत्यादि ।

It is synonymous with beginning (आदि) in the Ch’hándogya Upanishad, whereupon the poet has well said. आसीत् महीक्षितामाद्यः प्रणवश्छन्दसा मिब । रघुवंशः । १ सर्गः ।

[Sidenote: 2. Illustrations of Ditto तदुदाहरणानि ।]

Krishna (under the conception of the identity of his soul with that of the Divine), speaks of himself in the Bhágavadgítá that, he was the letter _a_ of the alphabet, and the _Om_ of words (वर्णानामकारोऽहं शब्दानाञ्चोङ्कारः). This is shown in the latest English translation of the work to be a doctrine derived from Christianity and corresponds with the passage “I am Alpha &c.” in the book of Revelations (Ch. I. V. 8). There is a similar passage in the Koran which says “He (God) is the first; _Ho al awl_ corresponding with the Greek” _Ho esten arche_; and this passage and sometimes its initial Ὁ (Gr.) and our ॐ, is used by Moslems at the top and commencement of their books and other writings. Again like _Alpha_ of the holy Scripture we find the use of Alif upon the head of all writings in Urdu, Persian, Arabic and Hebrew in daily practice. Hence it is hard to say who is the borrower, though every one will boast itself to be the lender. (_Vide_ Weber’s paper on the Rám Tap Up. pp. 276, and 360).

[Sidenote: 3. An Initiatory Particle मङ्गलार्थ ।]

The Kosha adds the sense of auspiciousness and prosperity (मङ्गलेशुभे) to the above, and this as we have already observed forms like the names of gods, the initiatory vocable of meritorious undertakings (आदाबोम शब्दः माङ्गलिकः). “_Om_” says the Ch’hándogya, “is also prosperity” (I, 8.) To this the scholiast Sankara says; “the letter _Om_ is called prosperity, because it is possessed of the property and attribute of prosperity. The prosperous alone can pass the word _Om_” (Chh. up. Ch. 1, p. 8).

Its use is not confined to the sacred and antiquated language of Vedic writing and the liturgy, but is to be met with in the classic Sanskrit of ancient bards and modern poets. Thus we have in the Rámáyana of our author (रामायण ५ ।८१ ।११ । प्राज्यस्वर्विजयोङ्कारश्चक्रे). In this sense we discover a curious affinity of the Aryan _Om_ with the Semitic _Áman_ _Amán_ and _Aiman_, as in the Persian phrase _Aiman buád_ corresponding with ॐ or शुभं भूयात् ।

[Sidenote: 4. Gratulatory, Particle नमस्कारार्थः ।]

The word has been rendered in our translation by the salutatory term “Hail”, from a supposed similarity of its meaning with that of _namo_ नमस् which is used by women and Súdras in lieu of the sacred _Om_ in their salutations to gods and superior beings, owing to the denunciation pronounced upon their utterance of the sacred syllable (स्त्रीशूद्रयोः प्रणवं नेच्छन्ति). We find its use in the same sense in Dr. Roer’s Translation of the Aitareya Upanishad, where it is rendered by “salutation to the Supreme Soul” and by “adoration” in Cowell’s version of the Maitrí Upanishad. We are however at a loss of authority to warrant our adoption of _namo_ as a synonym of _Om_. We meet with instances of the use of _Om_ and _namo_ together to mean salutation, as, ॐन्नमः शिबाय and शिबायोँ न्नमः in the Mugdhabodha, where _namo_, expresses obeisance and governs शिबाय in the dative, and not _Om_ which has no governing power.

[Sidenote: 5. Invocatory particle सम्बोधनार्थ ।]

_Om_ in the sense of invocation is an absolute monoptot like भोः, भगो, अघो, अहो &c., without the power of governing the following word, as ॐ नारायणा, and its double use as ॐ हरिः ॐ in the Aitareya Upanishad (1); so भो रक्ष, भगोरक्ष in the Mugdhabodha; but नमो and its synonyms स्वाहा, स्वाघा, बषट्, श्रौषट govern the dative as नमो हरये, स्वाहाग्नये, स्वघा पित्रे, &c. The invocatory _Om_ is synonymous with the interjections O, ओ, अहो, हो and all other single vowels whether nasal or not (सानुनासिकनिरणुनासिकाः), all of which are ungoverning particles in this sense.

[Sidenote: 6. A Laudatory particle प्रणबः ।]

_Om_ is usually termed as _pranava_ प्रणबः or praise or word of praise, from the root _nu_ (प्र + नु + अप) to laud, and in this sense it might mean the glorification of Te Deum. Thus “_Om_ is the _pranava_ or initial word of the Rigveda priests, and it is termed the Udgítha (उद्गीथः) of Sáma Veda choristers सामगा who chaunt it”. (छन्दोग्यउपनिषद् १ । ३). But it is made to signify the object of the verb, or the Being that is lauded (यंनौति); and in this sense it means, “The Purusha or spirit who is unaffected by works, affections &c., and having the appellation of Pranava” (see Monier Williams’ Wisdom of the Hindus p. 103), so says Gaudapáda in his Káriká. In the former sense, Pranava corresponds with _halleluyas_ and _hosannas_ of Christians, and _hamd o Salaut_ of Moslems, which are deemed sacred by their votaries. The Káriká has the following stanzas on it:—प्रणबोह्यपरं ब्रह्म प्रणबश्च परः स्मृतः । प्रणबं हीश्वरं बिद्यात् सर्ब्बस्य हृदि संस्थितः ॥ युञ्जीतप्रणवे चेतः प्रणवे ब्रह्मनिर्भयं । प्रणवे नित्ययुक्तस्यनभयं बिद्यते क्वचित ॥

[Sidenote: 7. A Permissive Particle अनुमत्यर्थः ।]

It is used in a permissive sense both in Vedic and classic Sanskrit, and expressed in English by the words “on” “go on” and the like. We have an instance of it in the Mágha Kávya, in the passage: ओमित्युक्तबतोथशार्ङ्गिनः इतिब्याहृत्यबाचंनमः ।

[Sidenote: (_a._) An Injunctive अनुज्ञार्थः ।]

“Verily this is an injunctive term (अनुज्ञाक्षरं), signifying injunction, order, and whatever is enjoined, and ultimately the letter _Om_.” (Ch’hándogya Upanishad). The scholium (भाष्य) explains it by saying that, “Whatever is enjoined by the learned or wealthy regarding learning and wealth, it is done by saying “Om”.” (Ibid I. 8. p. 8.)

[Sidenote: 8. A Particle of assent अङ्गीकारः ।]

It bears also the sense of assent and consent (अङ्गीकारश्वीकारौ) meaning “ay” “aye” “yea” and “yes”, and in Bengali and Vernaculars हाँ and हुं. So says Sankaráchárya:—“Whatever is assented to by the learned and wealthy, it is done by saying “_Om_”.” Thus in the Vedic tradition; Yájnavalkya having been asked by Sákalya as to how many gods there were, said; “Thirty-three.” Sákalya assented by saying “Om.” Among modern writings, the Sáhitya Darpana cites the following instance of _Om_ being used in this sense:—भ्रातर्द्विरेफ भवता भ्रमता समन्तात् । प्राणाधिका प्रियतमा ममबीक्षिता किं । ब्रुतेकिमोमित्यादि ।

[Sidenote: 9. A Particle of Repulse. अपाकृतिः ।]

It is used as the interjectional particle हुँकार expressive of repelling or driving off another from one like “Avaunt” in English. We meet with an instance of its use in this sense in the Vetála Panchavinsati of Lassen (VI.) Thus, कृतोङ्कार बेतालेत्यादि ।

[Sidenote: 10. Do. of Ratifying. दृढीकरणे ।]

It occurs in the sense of confirmation at the end of hymns and prayers in the Vedic writings, and corresponds with the words “Amen” and “Amin” at the conclusion of Christian and Moslem sermons and prayers as we have said long before. We have a verse of Hafiz to this effect, where he says _bishnow O Ámin bogo_ _i. e._ “Hear and say amen.” There are many instances of it in the Upanishads, such as शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ओं हरिः ओं, and so in the Gáyatrí hymn which begins and ends with _Om_, agreeably to the precept which says; आद्यन्ते प्रणबं दत्त्वा गायत्रीं प्रजपेद्द्विजः । चतुर्बर्ग प्रदा बिद्या चतुर्बिद्यात्मिका सदा । गायत्री तन्त्रं ।

VII. THE NOMINAL MEANINGS OF _Om_.

[Sidenote: 1. Nominal Meanings of _Om_. संज्ञार्थः ।]

Besides the meanings already given of _Om_ as a particle, there are many other nominal significations attached to it as a significant noun or rather symbol to express certain attributes belonging to the nature of the Deity, that bear little or no connection with the etymology of the word.

[Sidenote: 2. _Om_ the Creator जगत् स्रष्ठा ।]

_Om_ is used to denote the creative power of God in Sankara’s scholium. This sense is had from the primordial word _logos_ the ov = _be_ or _fiat_ भुयात् _buad_ uttered by God in his creation of the world, as we have in the scripture. “And god said, “Let there be” and there was”. Latin _Fiat-et-fit_; and Arabic _Kom fa Kána_.

[Sidenote: 3. Om is _God_ ईश्वरः भिधानं ।]

Pátanjala takes it as denotative of God himself तस्येश्वर वाचकतेति पातञ्जलः; and others as a denotation of the Supreme God ॐ परमेश्वरेच । एतद्ध्येबाक्षरं परं । इति कठः । तारानाथ वाचस्पत्याभिधानं ।

[Sidenote: 4. Om is Brahma. ब्रह्म । ]

_Om_ is the verbal symbol of Brahma signifying the Universal spirit ॐ ब्रह्मणि च । ब्रह्मणः नामबिशेषः तारानाथः so says the Katha Upanishad एतद्ध्येबाक्षरं ब्रह्म । This meaning is obtained from ॐ = om signifying _being_ or existence, and referring to the totality of existence expressed by the word Brahma (formed of बृह + मन) _universal pervasion_.

[Sidenote: 5. Greatness of Brahma ब्रह्मत्वं बृहत्वञ्च ।]

Om is used also to denote the vast magnitude of Brahma (ब्रह्मत्वं बाबृहत्वं) in the Maitrí Upanishad, which says “_Om_ is the greatness of Brahman, says one who continually meditates thereon.” (See Cowell’s Translation of Id. IV. 4. p. 253). This idea is naturally suggested by the infinity of the Universe pervaded and encompassed by the spirit of God. सर्ब्बं बिन्दु गतं ह्यैतत् ब्रह्माण्डञ्चापिकोटिशः । गायत्री तन्त्रं । The Ch’hándogya Upanishad speaks of the greatness and effects of _Om_ (I. 9). To this the scholium raises the question, what are its greatness and effects? Then answers it by saying;—“by the greatness of _Om_ is implied the existence of priests, the institutions of sacrifices &c. &c. Therefore is its greatness.”

[Sidenote: 6. Om is the way to Brahma ब्रह्मज्ञानोपायः ।]

“_Om_,” says the Mándukya Upanishad, “is the means (symbol) leading to Brahma,” as a hieroglyphic character to its significate. Here says the commentator Ánandagiri (p.336.) ओङ्कारो ब्रह्म वुद्ध्योपास्य मानो ब्रह्म प्रतिपत्युपायो भबतीति । आनन्दगिरि टीका । “It is known in all the Vedántas as the best means towards the accomplishment of one’s adoration.” (Ch’hándogya Upanishad p. 5 note.)

[Sidenote: 7. Immutable & Imperishable ॐ अक्षरः ।]

It is immutable, undecayable, imperishable, indestructible and immortal (अक्षरं). Thus in the Mándukya; ओमित्येतदक्षरमिदं बिकार रहितमित्यादि । The circle of O is considered the most perfect of all geometrical figures, as it was held by the Pythagoreans to be the best symbol to represent the perfections of the Supreme Being. It is the sign of divine immutability from the fact of every other figure changing its shape by its constant rotation round the centre and becoming a spheroid which is no more susceptible of change. Such is the changeable nature of all things until they become one with the Divinity.

[Sidenote: Om Knowable. ज्ञेयं ।]

_Om_ the symbol of God is said to be the knowable, because every part of its circumference is equidistant from the central observer. So is God said to be knowable (ज्ञेय) in Yoga philosophy for his knowableness to every one by means of meditation. Hence the Yoga system is called gnosticism contrary to the unknowableness of agnosticism.

[Sidenote: 8. Eternity नित्यं ।]

_Om_ is called eternal (नित्यं), because its circular form is the representation of eternity, having neither its beginning nor end (अनाद्यनन्तं): so it is the symbol of infinity, the circle being described by an infinite line. Thus Gaudapáda; अपूर्व्वोऽनन्तरोऽनन्तः नपरः प्रणबाब्यय । इति माण्डुक्य कारिकायां । १६ ।

[Sidenote: 9. The First and Last.]

Again Om is said to be the first and last of all things, because, says Táránátha, every thing proceeds from its centre as its source, and returns to that centre as its reservoir. तस्मान्निःसृताः सर्व्वेप्रलीयन्त तत्रबै । वाचस्पत्याभिधानं; or that every thing like the line of the circle meets at the same point from where it is drawn and stretched. Moreover Om as has been already said, is used both as the initial and final word of Mantras and prayers, so it is understood to be the beginning and end of all motions and utterances. In these senses it answers the _Alpha_ and _Omega_ of the Revelation, and the _initium_ and _finem_—_Hoal awl Hoal ákher_ of the Koran.

[Sidenote: 10. The First, Last and Midst. आद्यन्त मध्यं ।]

But _Om_ is declared again to be the first, last and midst of things, from its being uttered in the beginning, middle and end of prayers and recitals of sacred hymns according to the ordinance which says that, _Om_ is to be repeated thrice at every recital in the beginning, middle and end:—प्रशस्तं ब्राह्मणे नित्यं प्रणवत्रय संयुतं । मध्येच प्रणवं गुप्तंचाकारानुमं प्रिये । इति गायत्री तन्त्रं । This rule is said to bear reference to the triple state of the progression of mortal beings,—their evolution, sustentation and dissolution. यतोबाइमानि भूतानि जायन्ते येन जातानि । जीबन्ति यत् प्रयन्त्यभिसम्बिशन्ति तद्ब्र्ह्मेति ॥ The triple utterance of _Om_ has given rise to the triplicate invocation of Hari, आदाबन्तेच मध्येच हरिः सर्ब्बत्र गीयते, and with what Milton has expressed in his glorious hymn in the Paradise Lost.

“Him first, Him last, Him midst, and without end.”

The reverend Gaudapáda enjoins the same ordinance in his versified commentary or Káriká to the Mándukya Upanishad, where he says (verse 27):—सर्ब्बस्य प्रणबो ह्यादिर्मध्यमान्तस्तथैबच । एवं हि प्रणवं ज्ञात्वा ब्यश्नुते तदनन्तरं ।

VIII. APPLICATION OF _Om_
IN THE VEDAS AND VEDANTA.

[Sidenote: 1. Pranava = Adorable.]

“O venerable, let me enter thee (viz. the word Om)—the sheath of Brahmá, swáhá. O venerable do thou enter me, swáhá. O venerable, I shall be purified by thee.” (Taittiríya Up. IV. 3).

[Sidenote: 2. The Burden of song.]

“Om, the hymns of the Sáma Sing, _Om_, Som, the hymns proclaim.”

[Sidenote: 3. Commanding and assenting.]

“By Om, the Adhwarju gives his reply:—By Om the Brahmá commands;—By Om he gives his orders for the burnt offering” (Ibid VIII. Anuvák).

[Sidenote: 4. Beginning.]

“_Om_, says the Bráhman, when he commences to read the Veda.” (Ibid).

[Sidenote: 5. Om is Multinymous.]

“Om is Brahman, it is immortal, it is light, it is truthful, and a portion of holy light.”

“It is the sun, the truthful, the Yajur, devotion, fire, wind and air.”

“It is the moon, strength, immortality, and the means of attaining Brahma” (Maitrí Upanishad VI. 35.) ॐ ब्रह्म अमृतं ज्योतिस्तेज सोहंश मात्रं । आदित्य मध्ये उदुत्वा मयूखे भबतः । ॐकारानुज्ञापणात् ॥ एतत् सवित् सत्यधर्म्म एतद्यजुरेतत्तयः एतदग्निरेतद्वायुरेतदापः । एतच्चन्द्रमा एतच्छुक्रमेतदमृतमेतद्ब्रह्म बिषयं ॥

[Sidenote: 6. It is all significant.]

But apart from all the particular objects to which this word is severally applied, _Om_ is found from its general sense of “a being” at large, to be significant of “all things,” as its archetype Brahman is made to stand for universal existence both collectively as well as singly (_in toto et per singulatim_), as it is said in the Mándukya Upanishad, ओमित्येतदक्षरमिदं सर्ब्बं तस्योपव्याख्यानं भूतं भविष्यदिति सर्ब्बमोङ्कार एव, यच्चान्यत् त्रिकालातीतं तदप्योङ्कार एव ॥

[Sidenote: 7. Om includes all things.]

“Om” says the Sruti, “is immortal.” Its explanation is “this all”; what was, what is, and what will be, all is verily the word “Om”; and every thing else which is beyond the three-fold time is also verily the word “Om.” For this all (represented by “Om”) is Brahma, and Brahma is “all.” (Mándukya Upanishad Bháshya verse 1 and 2). ओमिति ब्रह्मएबेदमोङ्कारः सर्ब्बमित्यादिश्रुतिभ्यः । अभिधानस्यचोङ्कारव्यतिरेकादोङ्कार एबेदं सर्ब्बं ।

[Sidenote: 8. Scholium on the above.]

According to Sankara’s explanation the rendering would be as follows:—“Om” this sound (or immortal) is this “All,” and its explanation is “what was, what is, and will be, all is verily the word “Om”.” (Sankara’s Bháshya of the above). Ánandagiri’s explanation is to the same purport; thus says he:—

सर्ब्बास्पदत्वादोङ्कारस्य ब्रह्मणश्च तथात्वादेक लक्षणत्वादन्यत्वासिद्धेरोङ्कार प्रतिपत्ति ब्रह्म प्रतिपत्तिरेबेति ॥

IX. THEOLOGY OF OM IN THE MONADS OF MONOTHEISTIC CREEDS.

[Sidenote: 1. Monads or Unities. एकार्थकः ।]

We have seen that _Om_ expresses all things (Sarvamonkára), by virtue of the word like its kindred Greek and Latin _on_ and _ens_ (B. _haon_), signifying “a being” by synecdoche (_laxaná_) of a part for the whole. And this is done of all things whether concrete or discrete and taken either singly or by groups of two or more things together; as it is said—“_Ekasadvisastrisas_” &c., _i. e._ _Singulatim_, _dualiter_, _pluraliter_ &c. We shall first come to see the monads expressed by _Om_ and leave it to the reader to discover the relation which the significates may bear to the symbol, or rest satisfied with the idea of their being meaningless or arbitrary.

[Sidenote: 2. Om is speech or voice बाक् ।]