COSMOGONY

Q.1. Has this universe proceeded from God or from something else?
A.-God is the efficient cause of this universe, but the material cause is prakriti - the primordial
elementary matter.
 "He who has created this multiform universe, and is the cause of its sustenance as well as
dissolution, the Lord of the universe in whom the whole world exists, is sustained and then
resolved into elementary condition, is the Supreme Spirit. Know Him, O man, to be your
God and believe in no other as the Creator of the Universe." RIG VEDA 10: 126, 8.
 "In the beginning the whole was enveloped in utter darkness. Nothing was discernible. It was
like a dark night, Matter was in its very elementary form. It was like ether. The whole
universe, completely overspread by darkness, was insignificantly small compared with the
Infinite God who thereafter, by His omnipotence, evolved this cosmic world - the, effect -
out of the elementary matter - the cause.* RIG VEDA 10: 129, 3
 "Love and worship that Supreme Spirit, O men, Who is the support of all the luminous
bodies (such as the sun), the one Incomparable Lord of the present as well as of the future
worlds, Who existed even before the world came into being, and has created all things that
exist in space between the earth and heaven.*"RIG VEDA 10:121, 1.

Q.2. Has not prakriti emanated from God?

A.- No, it is beginningless.
 "O Men, that All-pervading Being alone is the Lord of the imperishable prakriti - the
material cause of the world - and of the soul and is yet distinct from both. He is the Creator
of universe - the past, present and the future." YAJUR VEDA 21: 2
 "That Supreme Spirit, form Whom all things proceed and in Whom they live and perish, is
the All-pervading God. Aspire, O men, to know Him." TAITREYA UPANISHAD
BHRIGU, 1.
 "That Great God should be sought after, Who is the cause of the creation, the sustenance and
dissolution of the universe." VEDAANT SHAASTRA I. 1,2.

Q.3. How many entities are eternal or beginningless

A.- Three - God, the soul, and the prakriti (matter).
Q.3.1 What are your authorities for this statement?
A.-
 "Both God and the soul are eternal, they are alike in consciousness and such other
attributes. They are associated together - God pervading the soul - and are mutual
companions. The prakriti (matter), which is likened to the trunk of a tree whose branches
are the multiform universe which is resolved into tis elementary condition at the time of
dissolution is also eternal. The natures, attributes and characters of these three are also
eternal. Of the two - God and the soul - the latter alone reaps the fruits of this tree of the
universe - good or evil - whilst the former does not. He is the All-glorious Being who
shines within, without and all around." RIG VEDA I, 164, 20.
  "The Great God - the King - revealed all kinds of knowledge to the human soul - His
eternal subjects - through the Veda." YAJUR VEDA, 50, 8.
 "The prakriti, the soul and God, all of them, are uncreated. They are the cause of the whole
universe. They have no cause of the whole universe. They have no cause and have been
existing eternally. The eternal soul enjoys the eternal matter and is wrapped up in it whilst
God neither enjoys it, nor, is He wrapped up in it." SHWETA SHWATER UPNISHAD, 4:
5.
 The attributes of God and the soul have been described iin the last chapter. Here we shall
treat of the properties of prakriti (matter).
 "That condition of matter in which the intellect-promoting (satva - high), passion-exciting
(rajas - medium) and stupidity producing (tamas - low)qualities are found combined in
equal proportions is called prakriti. From prakriti emanated the principle of wisdom
(Mahaatava), and from the latter proceeded the principle of Individuality (Ahakaara) from
which emanated the five subtle entities and the ten principles of sensation and action, and
the manas, i.e., the principle of attention. From the five subtle entities issued forth the five
gross entities, such as solids, liquids, etc. These twenty-four entities and the purush, i.e., the
spirit - human and Divine - form a group of twenty-five noumena." SANKYA
SHASTRA,1: 61. [Of all these twenty-four, the prakriti is uncreated, the principle of
wisdom, the principle of Individuality, and the five subtle entities are the products of the
prakriti and are in their turn the cause of the ten principles of sensation, and action and of
the principle of attention. The purush - i.e., the spirit - is neither the cause (material) nor the
effect of anything.]

Q.4. Is this whole universe nothing but God

Q.4.1 But it is said in the Chhaandoya Upanishad, "Before Creation the universe was existent";
whilst the Taitreya Upanishad says, " It was non-existent or nothing." Again the
Vrikadaaranyaka Upanishad (Chapt. I,4,1) says "It was all spirit" and lastly the
Shatapatha Brahmanad (Chapt. 11: 1, 11, 1) says, "It was all God (Brahma)" and again
"by His Own will the Great God transformed Himself into this multiform universe." In
another Upnishad it is written "Sarvam Khalu, etc.", which means "Verily this whole
universe is God, all other things are nothing but God."
A._ Why do you pervert the meanings of these quotations? For those very Upanishads it is said:-
 "Oshwetketo, proceed thou from effects to causes and learn that prithivi (solids) proceed
from liquids, apah (liguids) from teja - that condition of matter whose properties are heat
and light, ectc., - and teja from the uncreated prakriti. This prakriti - the true existence - is
the source, abode and support of the whole universe." What you have translated
 As "this universe was non-existent" means that it was non-existent as universe in their
gross physical and visible form. But it existed in essence or in elementary form as the
eternal prakriti. It was not nothing, God and the soul also were existent. Your quotations
which begins with "Sarvam khualu" is nothing but a pot-pouri, for, you have taken parts of
two verses from two different Upanishads and put them together and formed them into one
sentence. "Sarva Khalu", etc., is tiken form the Chhaandogya Upanishad ( chapt III: 14, 1)
and Nehanaanaaa, from the Katha Upnishad (chapt. II:4,11).
Just as the limbs of the body are of use only so long as they form part of it, but become useless as
soon as they are separated or cut off form it, similarly you can get sense out of words or sentences
when in their proper places in conjunction with what has gone before and what follows them, but
they become meaningless as soon as they are dislocated from their proper places and joined to
others.
 Now mark carefully the true meaning of the above quotation.
 "Worship, thou, O soul, that Great Being Who is the Creator, the Support, and the Life of
the Universe. It is by His power that the whole universe come into being and is sustained,
and it is in Him that it exists, Worship Him alone and no other. He is an Indivisible,
Immutable, Conscious Being. There is no admixture of different things in Him, though all
things with their distinct individual existence have their being in Him and are sustained by
Him."

Q.5. How many causes are there of the Universe

A.- Three - The efficient , the material and the common. The efficient cause is the one by whose
directed activity a thing is made, and by the absence of whose directed activity nothing is made. It
does not change itself, though it works changes in other things. The material cause is one without
which nothing can be made. It undergoes changes, is made and un-made. The common cause is one
that is an instrument in the making of a thing, and is common to many things. The efficient cause is of
two kinds:-
 The Primary efficient cause is the Supreme Spirit - the Governor Of all, Who creates the
universe out of the prakriti (matter), sustains it, and then resolves it into its elementary
form.
 The secondary efficient cause is the soul. It takes different materials out of the universe
created by God and moulds them into different shapes.
 The material cause is the prakiti which is the material used in the making of the universe.
Being devoid of intelligence it can neither make nor unmake itself, but is always mad or
unmade by a conscious intelligent being; though here and there even one kind of dead
matter (but those changes are never ordered).
Let us take an illustration. God made seeds (of different kinds), when they fall into a suitable soil and
get the proper amount of water and nourishment, they develop into trees; but if they come in contact
with fire they perish. All ordered changes in material things depend for their occurrence on God and
the soul. All such means as knowledge, strength and hands, and instruments, time and space, that are
required for the making of thing constitute its common cause.
Now take for illustration a pot. The potter is its efficient cause clay its material cause, whilst the rod,
the wheel and other instruments, time, space, light, eyes, hands (of the pttter), knowledge and the
necessary labour, etc., constitute its common cause. Nothing can be made or unmade without these
three causes.
The Neo-Vedantists* look upon God as the efficient as well as the material cause of the universe, but
they are absolutely in the wrong. "Just as a spider does not take in anything from outside, but draws
out filaments from its body with which it spins its web and sports about in it, so does God evolve the
world out of His Own self, becomes metamorphosed into it, and enjoys Himself." MUNDAKA
UPANISHAD, I:1, 7.
Q.6. Why is not the universe God?
Q.6.1 "So Brahma desired and willed 'Let me assume diverse forms, in other words, become
metamorphosed into the universe' and by the mere act of willing He became transformed
into the universe."THE TAITREYA UPANISHAD, BRAHM, 6.
Q.6.2 It is said in the Metrical Commentary of Gaurpaada (on the Vedant Aphorisms). "Whatever
did not exist in the beginnning and will cease to exist in the end, does not exist in the
present age." THE GAURPA DHEYA KARIKA, 31.
Q.6.3 In the beginning the world did not exist but Brahma did. After the dissolution the world
will no longer exist, but Brahma will. Therefore, the world does not exist even in the
present, it is all Brahma. Why is not the universe Brahma then?
A.- If, as you say, Brahma (God) were the material cause of the universe, He would become
transformable, conditioned and changeable. Besides, the natures, attributes and characteristics of a
material cause are always transmitted to its effect.
 Says the Vaisheshika Darshana. I: 1,24 "The effect only reveals whatsoever pre-existed in
the (material) cause." How could then Brahma and the material world be related as
(material) cause and effect? They are so dissimilar in their natures, attributes and
characteristics. Why! Brahma is the Personification of true existence, consciousness and
bliss, whilst the material universe is ephemeral, inanimate and devoid of bliss. Brahma is
Uncreated, Invisible, whilst the material world is created, divisible and visible. Had the
material objects, such as solids, bee evolved out of Brahma He would possess the same
attributes as the material objects. Just as solids and other material things are dead and inert,
so would Brahma be, or the material objects would possess consciousness just as Brahma
does. Moreover the illustration of a spider and its web does not prove your contention.
Instead it disproves it, because the material body of the spider is the material cause of the
filaments, whilst the soul within is the efficient cause.* In the same way, the All-pervading
God has evolved this gross visible universe out of the subtle, visible prakriti that resided in
Him. He pervades the universe and witness all, and is perfect bliss. The text you have
translated into "God desired and willed 'Let me assume diverse forms, etc.," really means
that God mentally saw, contemplated and willed 'Let me create the multiform universe and
become revealed'; because it is only after the world has been created that God becomes
contemporaneous with the various gross physical objects and is revealed to the human
souls in their meditations, thoughts, knowledge, preachings and hearings.
At the same time of Dissolution no one except Himself and the emancipated souls know Him. The
aphorism, you have quoted, is erroneous; because, though it is true that before Creation, the universe
did not exist in this gross visible condition, nor will it exist in this form the Dissolution onwards till
the beginning of the next creation, yet it was not nothing, nor will it be. Before Creation it existed in
a subltel invisible elementary form, so will it be after Dissolution.
 Says the Rig Veda:- "In the beginning it was all darkness", the whole universe was
enveloped in utter darkness." RIV VEDA10: 126,3. Again says Manu, " In the beginning
this universe was enshrouded in darkness. It was neither definable, nor discoverable by
reason. Neither did it possess any physical signs, nor was it, therefore, perceptible by the
senses." MANU 1: 5. Nor shall it be after the beginning of, or, during the period of
dissolution. But the present time it is definable, possessed of visible signs and
characteristics, and therefore perfectly discernable by the senses, and yet that commentator
declared the non-existence of the world in the present, which is absolutely invalid. Because
whatever a person knows on the authority of direct cognition and other evidences cannot be
nothing.
Q.7. What object had God in creating the world?
A.- What object could He have in not creating it?
Q.7.1 Had He not created it, He would have lived in happiness? Besides, the souls would have
remained free from pleasure and pain and the like.
A.- These are the ideas of the lazy and the indolent, but not of men of energetic and active habits.
What happiness could the souls enjoy during the period of Dissolution? If the happiness and misery
of this world were compared, it will be found that the happiness is many times greater than the
misery. Besides, many a pure soul that adopts the means of obtaining salvation attains final
beatitude; whilst during the period of Dissolution the souls simply remain idle as in deep sleep.
Moreover had He not created this world, how could He have been able to award souls their deserts,
and how could they have reaped the fruits of their deeds - good and evil - done in the previous cycle
of Creation.*
If you were asked what is the function of the eyes, you can only say 'sight of course'. In the same
way of what use could the knowledge, activity, and power of creating the world be in God other
than that of creating? Nothing else. The attributes of God, such as justice, mercy, the power of
sustaining the world, can have significance only when He makes the world. His Infinite power bears
fruit only when it is applied to the creation, sustenance, government and dissolution of the universe.
Just as sight is the natural function of the eye, so are the creation of the world, the free gift of all
things to the souls and promoting the well-being of all the natural attributes of God.

Q.8. Was the seed made first or the tree?

A.- The seed; because, the seed, cause, Hetu (source), Nidaana Mimitta (origin), etc., are all
synonymous terms. The cause, being also called the see, must precede the effect.

Q.9. God being Omnipotent can he not create matter and soul?
Q.9.1 God being Omnipotent, He can also create prakriti - the primordial matter - and the soul.
If He cannot, He cannot be called Omnipotent.
A.- We have explained the meaning of the word Omnipotent before. But does Omnipotent mean one
who can work even the impossibilities. If there be one who can do even such impossible things as
the prduction of an effect without a cause, then can He make another God, Himself die, suffer pain,
become dead and inert, inanimate, unjust, impure and immoral or not? Even God cannot change the
natural properties of things as heat of the fire,
Fluidity of liquids and inertness of earth, etc. His laws being true and perfect, He cannot alter them.
Omnipotence, therefore, only means that He possesses the power of doing all His works without any
help.
Q.9.2 Is God formless or embodied? If He be formless, how could He create the world without
bodily organs? Of course an objection like this cannot be urged if He be embodied.
A.- God is formless. He cannot be God who possesses a body; because he would then have finite
powers, be limited by time and space, be subjected to hunger and thirst, heat and cold, wounds and
injuries, pain and disease. Such a being may possess the attributes or powers of the soul, but no
Divine attributes could be ascribed to him; since incarnate God could never grasp and control the
primordial elementary matter - prakriti - atoms and molecules, nor could he create the world out of
those subtle elements, just as we, being embodied in flesh, cannot grasp or control them.
God does not possess a physical body of bodily organs, such as hands and feet, though he does
possess Infinite power, Infinite energy and Infinite activity, by virtue of which He does all those
 works that neither matter nor the soul can do. It is only because He is even more subtle than the soul
and the prakriti, and pervades them, that He can grasp them and transform them into this visible
universe.

Q.10. Is God formless or embodied?

Q.10.1 If God be formless, this world created by Him should also be formless, just as in the case
of other living beings, such as men, - children have bodies like their parents. Had they been
formless, their children would have been the same.
A.- What a childish question! We have already stated that God is not the material cause of the
universe. He is only its efficient cause. It is prakriti and paramanus - the premordial elementary
matter and atoms, - which are less subtle than God, that are the material cause of the world. They
are not altogether formless but are subtler than other material objects, while less subtle as compared
to God.

Q.11. If God be formless, this world created by Him should also be

formless
A.-No; because that which does not exist (in any form) cannot be called into existence. It is absolutely
impossible. It is as much as impossible for an effect to be produced without its cause as the story of a
man, who would brag in the following way, to be true. "I saw a man and a woman being married
whose mothers never bore any children. They had boys made of human horns, and wore garlands of
ethereal flowers. They bathed in the water of mirage and lived in a town of angels where it rained
without clouds, and cereals and vegetables grew without any soil, etc.," or " I had neither father nor
mother and yet came into being. I have no tongue in my mouth and lo! I can speak. There was no
snake in the hole and yet one came out of it. I was nowhere, nor were these people, and yet we are all
here." Only lunatics can believe and say such things.

Q.12. Cannot God create an effect without cause?

Q.12.1 If there can be no effect without a cause, what is the cause of the first cause then?
A.- Whatsoever is an absolute cause, can ever be an effect of another, but that which is the cause of
one and the effect of another is called a relative cause. Take an example. The earth is the cause of a
house but an effect of liquids (Liquids are the causes of solids as they precede them in the order of
formation. The earth is solid), but the first cause, prakriti (matter) has no other cause, viz., it is
beginningless or eternal. Says the Saankhya Darshana, 1: 67 "The first having no cause is the cause
of all effects." Every effect must have three causes before it comes into existence; just as before a
piece of cloth can be made, it must have three things - the weaver, the thread and machinery, in the
same way the creation of the world pre-supposes the existence of God, the prakriti, the souls, time
and space which are all uncreated and eternal. There would be no world if even one ot them were
absent. The various objections of atheists are answered below:
Q.13. If there can be no effect without a cause, what is the cause of the
first cause?
Q.13.1 Is it not then the Shoonya (not or nothing) is the one true reality. In the beginning there
was nothing but nothing, and nothing will survive in the end; because whatever now exists
will cease to exist and become nothing.
A.- The ether, an invisible substance (such a prakriti), the space and a point are also called nothing. It is
inanimate and all things invisibly exist in it. Lines are made up of points, while circle, squares, etc., are
made of lines. Thus has God, by the might of His creative power, evolved the earth, mountains and objects
of all other shapes and forms out of a point or nebula - nothing. Besides, He who knows nothing cannot be
nothing. [Hence shoonya (nothing) does not here mean nothing but a point or a nebula.]

Q.14. Can something come out of nothing?

Q.14.1 Something can come out of nothing , just as a seed does not germinate and send forth a
sprout until it is split, but when you break a seed an look into it, you do not find any sprout
in it. It is clear then that the sprout comes out of nothing.
A.- That which splits a seed before it germinates, must have already been present in the seed,
otherwise what causes the see to split? Nor would it have come out had it not been there.

Q.15. Do we sow what we reap?

Q.15.1 It is not true 'As you sow so shall you reap,' Many an act is seen that does not bear fruit;
therefore it is right it infer that it entirely rest with God to punish or reward a man for his
deeds. It absolutely depends upon His wish.
A.- If it were so, why does not God reward or punish a man for deeds he has never done? It follows,
therefore, that God gives every man his due according to the nature of his deeds. God does not
reward or punish men according to the caprice of his Will. On the other hand, He makes a man reap
only what he has sown.

Q.16. Can effects can be produced without a cause?

Q.16.1 Effects can be produced without a cause just as the sharp thorns of Acacia Arabica
spring out of the branches that are not at all sharp and pointed but are soft and smooth. It
is clear from this illustration, therefore, that in the beginning of Creation all material
objects and bodies of living beings come into being without (first) cause.
A.- Whatever a thing springs from, is its cause. Thorns do not come out of nothing. They come out
of a thorny tree, therefore, that tree is their cause. Hence the world was not created without a cause.
Q.16.2 All things have been created and are liable to decay. They are all ephemeral. The Neo-
Vedantis put forward objections like this, because they say, "Thousands of books support
the doctrine that Brahma alone is the true reality., the world is a delusion and the soul is
not distinct from Brahma (God). All else is unreal."
A.- All can not be unreal if the fact of their being unreal is real.
Q.16.3 Even the fact of their being unreal is unreal. Just as fire not only burns other things and
thus destroys them, but is itself destroyed after others have been destroyed.
A.- That which is perceptible by the senses cannot be unreal or nothing, nor can the extremely subtle
matter - the material cause of the world - be unreal or perishable. The Neo-Vedantis hold Brahma as
the (material) cause of the universe; He - the cause - being real, the world - the effect - cannot be
unreal. If it were said that the material world is only a material conception and, therefore, unreal like
the objects seen in a dream or life a piece of rope seen in the dark and mistaken for a snake, it
cannot be true; because a conception or an idea is something abstract which cannot remain apart
from the noumenon wherein it resides.
When one that conceives (viz., the soul) is real, the conception cannot be unreal, otherwise you will
have to admit that the soul is also unreal. You cannot see a thing in a dream unless you have seen or
heard of it in the wakeful state, in other words, when the various objects of this world come in
contact without senses, they give rise to percepts called knowledge by direct cognition - which leave
impressions on our souls, it is these impressions which are recalled by, and become vivid to the soul
in dreams. If it be possible for a man to dream of things of which he has had no impressions in his
mind, a man born blind, should dream of colours which is not the case. It follows, therefore, that in
the mind are retained impressions and ideas of external things that exist in the outside world. And
just as external things continue to exist even after a man ceases to have any consciousness of them
as in sound sleep, so does prakriti- the material cause of the world - continue to exist ever after
Dissolution.

Q.17. Why not believe that the external things seen in the wakeful state
is unreal?
Q.17.1 As the external objects pass out of our consciousness in slumber and those seen in a
dream in the state of profound sleep, i.e., perish as far as we are concerned, in the same
way why not believe that the external things seen in the wakeful state are also unreal?
A.- No, we cannot believe that; because both in slumber and profound sleep the external objects
only pass out of our consciousness. They do not cease to exist, just as different things lying behind
us are simply invisible to us but are there, and have not ceased to exist. Therefore, what we have
said before, that God , the soul and the prakriti - the material cause - are real entities, is alone true.

Q.18. If the five states of matter is eternal why isn't the world eternal?
Q.18.1 The five bhuts - five states of matter as Prithivi (solids), Apah (liquid) etc., - being
eternal, the whole world is eternal or imperishable.
A.- No, it is not true; because if all those objects, the cause of whose formation or disintegration is
seen every day, be eternal, the whole material visible world with all such perishable things as the
bodies of men and animals, houses, and their furniture and the like would be eternal, which is
absurd. Therefore, the effects can never be eternal.

Q.19. Are all things distinct from each other?

Q.19.1 All things are distinct from each other, There is no unity in them. Whatever we see
precludes another.
A.-The whole exists in its parts. Time, ether, space, God, and Order and Genus, though separate
entities, are yet common to all. There is nothing that can exist separate from or without them. Hence
 all these are not separate from each other, though they are different by nature. Thus there is unity in
variety.
Q.19.2 All things exclude each other, and are therefore non-existent, just as a cow is not a horse,
nor is a horse a cow. Therefore, both the horse and the cow are non-existent. Similarly, all
things are as if non-existent.
A.- Though it is true that the 'relation of one thing excluding others does exist in all things, but a
thing does not exclude itself. For example, a cow is not a horse, nor is a horse a cow; but a cow as a
cow and a horse as a horse do exist. If things were non-existent how could you ever speak of this
Itretaraabhaava relation i.e., 'the relation of one thing excluding others from itself'. [Hence the world
and things contained therein do exist. They are not non-existent.]

Q.20. There can be no creator.

Q.20.1 The world comes into being by virtue of the fact that it is in the nature of things to
combine together and produce different things. Just as maggots are produced the coming
together of food, moisture and by decomposition setting in; or as vegetables begin to grow
when the seed, water, and soil are brought together under favourable conditions; or as the
wind blowing on the sea is the cause of waves that in turn produce merchaum, which mixed
with turmeric, lime and lemon juice forms what is called concrete, so does this world come
into being by virtue of the natural properties of the elements. There is no Creator.
A.-If formation be the natural property of matter, there would be no dissolution or disintegration;
and if you say that disintegration is also a natural property of matter, there could then be no
formation. But if you say that both formation and disintegration are the natural properties of matter,
there could then be neither formation nor disintegration. If you say that an efficient agent is the
cause of the creation and dissolution of the world, it must be other than and distinct from the objects
that are subject to formation and disintegration.
If formation and disintegration be the natural properties of matter, they may happen at any and every
moment. Besides, if there is no Maker and the world came into being by virtue of the natural
properties inherent in matter, why do not other earths, suns and moons come into existence near our
earth? Moreover, whatever now grows or comes into being, does so by virtue of the combination of
different substances - made by God. Just as plants grow wherever the water, soil and the seed come
in contact under favourable conditions, and not otherwise; in the same way in the manufacture of
concrete its components such as turmeric, lime, lemon juice and merchaum do not come together by
themselves, but are mixed up together by some one, nor dot hey produce concrete unless mixed in
their right proportion. Similarly, the prakriti and atoms, until they are properly combined by God
with the requisite knowledge and skill, cannot by themselves produce anything. It follows, therefore,
that the world did not come into being by itself, i.e., by virtue of the natural properties of matter, but
was created by God.

Q.21. It was never created nor shall it ever perish.

Q.21.1 This world has had no Creator, nor is there one at present, nor, shall there ever be one. It
has been eternally existing as such. It was never created nor shall it ever perish.
A.- No action or thing - which is the product of action - can ever come into existence without an
agent. All objects to this world such as the earth, are subject to the processes of formation, that is,
are the product of definite combination. They can never be eternal, because a thing which is the
product of combination can never exist after its component parts come as under. If you do not
believe it, take the hardest rock or a diamond or a piece of steel and smash it into pieces, melt or
roast it and see for yourself if it is composed of separate particles, called molecules and atoms, or
not. If it is, then surely a time will come when those molecules will come apart.
Q.22. Can the highly exalted soul become God?
Q.22.1 There is not Eternal God, on the other hand a highly exalted soul, that by the practice of
yoga attains such power as the control of atoms, etc., and omniscience, becomes God.
A.- Had there been not Eternal God, the Creator of the universe, Who would have made the bodies,
the sense organs and all objects of this world, the very support and means of subsistence of the yogi,
by means of which he comes to possess such wonderful powers? Without their help no one can
endeavour to accomplish anything. The endeavour being impossible how could he have acquired
those wonderful powers? Whatsoever efforts a man may make, whatsoever means he may employ,
whatsoever powers he may acquire, he can never equal God in His natural - in contradistinction to
the soul's acquired - Everlasting or Eternal powers which are infinite and manifold; because, the
knowledge of the soul, even if it were to go on improving till eternity, will still remain finite and his
powers limited. Its power and knowledge can never become infinite. Mark, no yogi has ever been
able to subvert the laws of nature as ordained by God, nor ever shall. God - the Eternal Seer -
possessed of wonderful powers has ordained that eyes shall be the organs of sight, and ears the
organs of hearing. The human soul can never become God.

Q.23. In different cycles of Creation does God make the universe of a

uniform or a different
Q.23.1 In different cycles of Creation does God make the universe of a uniform or a different
character?
A.- Just as it is now, so was it in the past, so will it be in the future. It is said in the Veda, "Just as
God created the sun, the earth, the moon , the electricity, the atmosphere in the previous cycles, so
has He done in the present and so will He do in the future." RIG VEDA 10: 190, 3. God's works,
being free from error or flaw, are always of uniform character. It is only the works of one who is
finite and whose knowledge is subject to increase or decrease that can be erroneous or faulty, not
those of God.

Q.24. Do the Vedas and the Shastras harmonize with or contradict one
another ?
Q.24.1 Do the Vedas and the Shastras harmonize with or contradict one another on the subject
of creation?
A.- They harnonize.
Q.24.2 If they harmonize, why is it that in the TAITREYA UPANISHAD BRAHMANAND 1,
creation is described in the following manner? Out of prakriti - elementary material cause
of the world - God first created Akasha.* Then was evolved Vayu - gaseous or vaporous
condition of matter; out of Vayu proceeded Agni - matter which gives out heat, light and
electricity - out of Agni proceeded Liquids; and out of liquids came solids (such as earth);
out of solids issued forth vegetables which yielded food. Food produced the reproductive
element which is the cause of the physical body and bodily organs." In Chhaandoyga it is
written that Creation begins with Agni, in the Aitreya Upanishad that it begins with
Liquids. In the Veda itself in some places Purush (God), while in others Hiranyagarbha
(God) has been described as the cause of the Universe; whilst in the mimaansaa action or
application, in Vaisheshika time, in Niyaaya paramaanus (atoms) in Yoga conscious
exertion, in Sankhya prakriti - the primordial elementary matter, - Vedaanta, God. Now out
of all these which is right and which is wrong?
A.- They are all right, not one of them is wrong. He is in the wrong who misunderstands them. God
is the efficient cause and prakriti the material cause of the universe. After Mahaapralaya - Grand
dissolution - the next Creation starts A'kaash. In Minor dissolution (cycles) when disintegration does
not reach the stage of Vaayu (gas) and A'kash but reaches only that of Agni (electricity or fire) the
next creation begins with Agni. But when after dissolution in which even agni - electricity - is not
disintegrated, the next creation begins with Liquids.
In other words the next Creation starts at where the previous dissolution ends. Purush and
Hiranyagarbha, as we have described in the first chapter, are names of God. Nor is there contrariety
in the description of creation given in the six Shaastraas, because what is contrariety but
contradiction of statements when the subject under discussion is the same. Now mark how the
descriptions of the six shaastraas harmonize with each other.
 The Mimaansaa says, "Nothing in this world can be produced without proper application."
 TheVaisheshika says, "Nothing can be done or made without the expenditure of time."
 The Niyaaya says, "Nothing can be produced without the material cause."
 The Yoga says, "Nothing can be made without the requisite skill, knowledge and thought."
 The Saankhya says, "Nothing can be made without the definite combination of atoms."
 The Vedaanta says, "Nothing can be made without a Maker."
This shows that the Creation of the world requires six different causes which have been described
separately one by each separate Shaastra. There is no contradiction in these descriptions. The six
Shaastras together serve to explain the phenomenon of Creation in the same way as six men would
help each other to put a thatch on the roof of a house. A man took six men - five of them blind an
the sixth possessed of dim sight - and showed them each a different part of the body of an elephant.
And then asked them what they thought the animal was like. The first one answered 'like a pillar',
the second 'like a fan', the third 'like a big pestle', the fourth 'like a broomstick', the fifth 'like
somethingflat', and the sixth one said 'something dark like four pillars supporting the body of a
buffalo'. Similar to these six men is the condition of those men who, instead of studying the books
of rishis - the true seers of nature - read the current Sanskrit or vernacular books written by narrow-
minded men of little understanding who malign each other and wrangle over triflings. Why should
they not suffer who are the blind followers of the blind? The lives of half-educated, selfish, sensual
and ease-loving men of to-day help to ruin and debase the world.
Q.25. Why should ‘a cause not have a cause’, if there can be no effect
without cause?
A.~ O ye simple bretheren! Why do you not use your common sense a little? Mark, there are only two
things in this world, a cause and an effect. Whatsoever is a cause (absolute) can never be an effect;
and whatsoever is an effect can never be a cause at the same time. As long as a man does not
thoroughtly understand the science of Creation, he can never have a true conception of the universe.
"That condition of matter in which intellect-promoting (satva), passion -exciting (rajas) and stupidity-
producing (tamas) qualities are found combined in equal proportions is the uncreated, imperishable
prakriti. The first combination of the highly subtle, indivisible separately-existing particles called
paramanus (atoms or electrons) derived from the prakriti, is called the Beginning (of Creation). The
various combinations of atoms in different proportions and ways give rise to various grades and
conditions - subtle and gross - of matter till it reaches the gross visible multiform stage called srishti -
the universe."
Now that which enters into the first combination and brings it about, existed before the combination,
and shall exist after the component parts are pushed as under is called the cause. Whilst that which
comes into existence after the combination, and ceases to exist after it has come to an end is called the
effect. He who wants to know the cause of a cause, the effect of an effect, the maker of maker, the
agent of an agent, the act of an act, is blind though he sees, is deaf though he hears, and ignorant
though well-read. Can ther ever be the eye of an eye, the lamp of a lamp, and the sun of a sun? That
out of which something is made is called a cause. Whatever is made from another is called an effect.
Whoever produces an effect out of a cause is called the maker.
"Nothing can ever become something, nor can something ever become nothing. These two principles
have been rightly ascertained by the true seers of nature." GITA 2: 16. How can prejudiced,
sophisticated, insincere, and ignorant minds understand them so easily? He who is neither well-read
nor associate with the good and the learned, nor meditates on these abstruse subjects with profound
attention, remains immersed in doubt and ignorance. Blessed are they who studiously endeavour to
understand the principles of all sciences and having mastered them, teach others honestly.
It is clear, therefore, that he who believes this world to have been created without a cause really
knows nothing.

Q.26. The slow and gradual scientific creation of the Universe.

A.- When the time of Creation comes, God gathers those extremely subtle particles (called
Paramaanus). The first principle that is produced out of the highly subtle elementary prakriti, is called
Mahaatatva - theprinciple of wisdom - which is one degree less subtle than the prakriti. Out of the
Mahaatatva is evolved Ahankaara - the principle of individuality - which is still less subtle and in its
turn gives rise to the five subtle principles, called Bhuts, besides the five principles of sensation and
five principles of action and the principle of attention which are all a little less subtle than the
principle of individuality. The five subtle bhuts, by passing through various stages of less subtle
conditions of matter, are finally transformed into five least subtle states of matter, such as solids,
liquids, etc. From the latter spring up various kinds of trees, plants, etc., which are the source of food,
and out of food is produced the reproductive element which is cause of the body.
But the first creation (of bodies) was not the result of sexual intercourse; because it is only after the
male and female bodies have been created by God and souls put into them that the Maithuni (sexual
intercourse) creation begins.
Q.27. The wonderful creation of the physical body.
A.- Behold the wonderful organization of the body!
How the learned are wonder-struck with it? First there is the osseous frame-work girt with a net-work
of vessels - veins, arteries and nerves, etc., - invested with flesh and the whole covered by skin with
its appendages - nails and hairs. Then how beautifully are the different organs, such as the heart, the
liver, the spleen and the lungs - ventilating apparatus - laid out. The formation of the brain, of the
optic nerve with the most reticulate formation of the retina, the demarking of the paths of indryas - the
principles of sensation and action - , the linking of the soul with the body, the assigning of definite
places to it for wakeful state, slumber and deep sleep, the formation of different kinds of dhaatus -
tissues and secretions, such as muscle, bone-marrow, blood, reproductive elements - and the
construction of various other wonderful structures and mechanisms in the body who but God could
have caused.

Q.28. The wonderful creation of the earth.

A.- The earth studded with various kinds of precious stones and metals, the seeds of trees of a
thousand different kinds* with their wonderful exquisite structures, leaves with myriads of different
colours** and shades, flowers, fruits, roots, rhizomes and cereals with various scents and flavours***
none but God could create. Nor could any one except God create myriads of earths, suns, moon and
other cosmic bodies, and sustain, revolve the regulate them.
An object when perceived produces two kinds of knowledge in the mind of the observer, viz., of the
nature of the object itself and of its maker. For example, a man found a beautiful ornament in a jungle.
On examination he saw that it was made of gold and that it must have been made by a clever
goldsmith. In the same way, the wonderful workmanship and execution of this wonderful universe
prove the existence of its Maker
Q.28.1 What was first created, man or earth, etc.?
A.~ The earth, etc., because without them where could man live and how could he maintain his life?

Q.29. Was one man created in the beginning of Creation or more than
one?
A.~ More than one; because souls, that on account of their previous good actions deserve to be born in the
Aishwari - not the result of sexual intercourse - Creation, are born in the beginning of the world. It is said in
the Yajur Veda, "(In the beginning) there were born many men as well as rishis, i.e.., learned seers of
nature. They were progenitors of the human race." On the authority of this Vedic text it is certain then that
in the beginning of Creation hundreds and thousands of men were born. By observing nature with the aid of
reason we come to the same conclusion, viz., that men are descended from many fathers and mothers (i.e.,
not from one father and one mother).

Q.30. In the beginning of Creation were men created as children, adults

or old people or in all conditions?
A.~ They were adults, because had God created them as children they would have required adults to
bring them up, and had created them as old men, they would not have been able to propagate the race,
therefore He created them adults.
Q.31. Does creation ever had a beginning?
A.~ No; just as the night follows the day and the day follows the night, the night precedes the day and
day precedes the night, so does Creation follows Dissolution and Dissolution follows Creation,
Dissolution precede Creation, and Creation precede Dissolution. This alternate process has been
eternally going on. It has neither a beginning, nor an end, but just as the beginning and end of a day or
of a night are seen, so do Creations and Dissolutions have beginnings as well as ends. God, the soul
and prakriti - the primordial elementary matter - are eternal by nature, whilst Creation, and
Dissolution are eternal by pravah -i.e., they follow each other in alternate succession - like the flow of
a river which is not continuous throughout the whole year. It dries up and disappears in summer, and
reappears in the rainy season. Jus as the nature, attributes, and character of God are eternal, so are His
works - the Creation, Sustenance, and Dissolution (of the world).

Q.32. Does not the belief of souls in lower beings impute partiality?
Q.32.1 God put some souls in human bodies, while others he clothed with bodies of ferocious
animals such as tigers, others with those of cattle, such as cows, others with those of birds
and insects, other still with those of plants. Does not this belief impute partiality to God?
A.~ No, it does not impute any partiality, because He put souls into the bodies they deserved
according to deeds done in the previous birth. Had He done so without any consideration as to the
nature of their deeds, He would have been unjust indeed.

Q.33. Where was man first created?

A.~ In Trivishtap otherwise called Tibet.
Q.33.1 Were all men of one class or divided into different classes at the time of Creation?
A.~ They all belonged to one class, viz., that of man, but later on they were divided into two main
classes, - the good and the wicked. The good were called Aryas and the wicked Dasyus. Says the
Rig Veda, "Do ye know (there are) two classes of men - Aryas and Dasyus." The good and learned
were also called Devaas, while the ignorant and wicked, such as dacoits (robbers), were called
Asura. TheAryas were again divided into four Classes, viz., Braahmana (teachers), Kshatriya (rulers
or protectors), Vaishya (merchants) and Shuudra (labourers). Those who belonged to the first three
classes being educated and bearing good character, were called Dwijas - twice born; whilst the
fourth Class was so named because of being composed of ignorant and illiterate persons. They were
also called Anaryas - not good. This division into Aryas and Shudras is supported by the Atharva
Veda wherein it is said "Some are Aryas, others Shuudras.

Q.34. How did they happen to come here (to India) then?
A.~ When the relations between the Aryasand Dasyus, or between Devas and Asuraas, (i.e., between
the good and learned, and the ignorant and wicked) developed into a constant state of warfare, and
serious troubles arose, the Aryas regarding this country as the best in the whole earth emigrated her
and colonized it. For this reason it is called Aryavarta - the abode of the Aryas.
Q.34.1 What are the boundaries of Aryavarta?
A.~ "It is bounded on the North by the Himalayas, on the South by the Vindyachal mountains, on the
East and West by the sea. It has also on its West the Sarasvati River (Sindh or Attock) and on the East
the Dhrisvati river also called the Brahmaputra which rises from the mountain east of Nepal, and
passing down to the east of Assam and the west of Burma, falls into the Bay of Bengal in the Southern
 Sea (Indian Ocean). All the countries included between the Himalaya on the North and Vindhyachal
mountains on the south as far as Rameshwar are called Aryavarta, because they were colonized and
inhabited by Devas (the learned) and Aryas - the good and the noble." Manu 2: 22, 17.
Q.34.2 What was the name of this country before that , and who were its oboriginal inhabitants?
A.~ It had no name, nor was it inhabited by any other people before the Aryas(settled in it) who
sometime after creation came straight down here from Tibet and colonized this country.
Q.34.3 Some people say that they came from Iran (Persia) and hence they were called Aryas.
Before the Aryas came to this country it was inhabited by savages whom the Aryas called
Asuraas and Raakshasas as (demons), while they called themselves Devatas (gods). The
wars between the two were called by the name Devaasura Sangraam as in the historical
romances. Is this true?
A.~ It is absolutely wrong. The Veda declares what we have already repeated, i.e., "The virtuous,
learned, unselfish, and pious men are called Aryas, while the men of opposite character such as
docoits, wicked, unrighteous and ignorant persons are called Dasyus."RIG VEDA 2: 51, 8. Besides ,
"The Dwijaas ( the twice-born) - Braahmanaas, Kshatriyas, Vaishyaas - are called Aryas, while the
Shuudraas are called Anaaryas, or Non-Aryas."ATHARVA VEDA19:62. In the face of these Vedic
authorities how can sensible people believe in the imaginary tales of the foreigners. In the
Devaasura wars, Prince Arjuna and King Dashratha and others of Aryavartaused to go to the
assistance of the Aryas in order to crush the Asuras. This shows that the people living outside
Aryavarta were called Dasyus and Malechhaas; because whenever those people attacked Aryas
living on the Himalayas, the kings and rulers of Aryavarta, went to help the Ayas of the north, etc.
But the war which Ram Chandra waged in the south against Ravan - the king of Ceylon - is called
not by the name of Devaasura war but by that of Raama-Raavana war or the war between the Aryas
and Raakhasas. In no Sanskrit book - historical or otherwise - it is recorded that the Aryas emigrated
here from Iran, fought with and conquered the aborigines, drove them out, and became the rulers of
the country. How can then these statements of the foreigners be true? Besides, Manu also
corroborates our position. He says, "The countries other than Aryavarta are called Dasyusand
Malechha countries."MANU 10:45, 2:23. The people living in the north-east, north, north-west were
called Raakshasas. You can still see that the description of Raakshasas given therein tallies with the
ugly appearance of the negroes of today. The people living in the antipodes of Aryavarta were called
Nagas, and their country Pataalabecause of being situated under the feet (of those living in
Aryavarta). Their kings belonged to the Naaga dynasty taking their name from that of the founder
who was called Naga. His daughter Ulopi was married to Prince Arjuna. From the time of kshvaaku
to that of Kauravaas and Paandavaas, the Aryas were the sovereign rulers of the whole earth, and the
Vedas were preached and taught more or less even in countries other than Aryavarta.
Brahma was the first of the literati. His son was called Virat whose son was Manu who had ten sons,
Marichi etc., who were progenitors of seven kings beginning with Swayambhava whose off-springs
were the kings beginning with Ikshvaaku. This Ikshvaaku colonized Aryavarta and was its first
king. At the present moment, let alone governing foreign countries, the Aryas through indolence,
negligence and mutual discord and ill-luck do not possess a free, independent, uninterrupted and
fearless rule even over their own country. Whatsoever rule is left to them, is being crushed under the
heel of the foreigner.
There are only a few independent states left. When a country falls upon evil days, the natives have
to bear untold misery and suffering. Say what you will, the indigenous native rule is by far the best.
A foreign government, perfectly free from religious prejudices, impartial towards all - the natives
and the foreigners - kind, beneficent and just to the natives like their parents though it may be, can
never the people perfectly happy. It is extremely difficult to do away with the differences in
language, religion, education, customs and manners, but without doing that the people can never
fully effect mutual good and accomplish their object. It behoves all good people to hold in due
respect the teachings of the Veda and Shaastraas and ancient history.
Q.35. How much time has elapsed since the creation of the world?
A.~ One billion, nine hundred sixty millions and some hundred thousand years have passed since the
creation of the world and the revelation of the Vedas. For detailed exposition of this subject the
readers should consult our book called "An introduction to the Exposition of the Vedas."
(1,960,852,999 years old). The orderly devolopment of the subtle ether (matter) to that of the stage of
solid.
The minutest particle of matter that cannot be divided any further is called a Paramaanu (atom).
 60 Paramaanus make one Anu (molecule).
 2 Anus make one Dvyanak, which enters into the composition of the ordinary physical Vayu
(air).
 3 Dvyanaks make one Trasarenu that forms Agni - that condition of matter whose property is
light, and heat.
 4 Dvyanaks form Jala (liquids).
 5 Dvyanaks form Prithvi (solids).
 3 Dvyanaks make one Trasarenu, by doubling which earth and visible objects are formed. It
is in this way - i.e., by the process of combining Paramaanuus and Anus and so on till the
visible things are produced - that the earth and other planets have been made of God.

Q.36. What supports this earth?

Q.36.1 What supports this earth? One man says that it rests on the head of Shesha - a thousand-
hooded snake, another says that it is supported on the horns of a bull, a third says that it
rests on nothing, a fourth one says that it is supported by the solar attraction, and sixth one
says that being heavy the earth is going down and down in space. Out of all of these
different theories which shall we believe to be true?
A.~ Those, who say that it rests on the head of Shesha (a snake) or on the horns of a bull, should be
asked, on what the earth rested in the time of the parents of the shesha or of the bull before it was
born and what supported it. The followers of the bull theory will be at once silenced. But the
advocates of the shesha theory willsay that the shesha rest on a kurn ( a tortoise) which rests on
water, and the water on Agni and the Agni on air and air rests on A'kaasha (space). They should be
asked on what all of them rested. They will have say "on God". If you ask them again whose
children the shesha and bull were, they will tell you that the bull was the son of a cow and the
shesha that of kurma (a tortoise), the son of Marichi who was the son of Manu, the son of Virat, who
was the son of Brahma.
This Brahma was born in the beginning of creation. Six generations had thus passed before the
shesha was born, who had sustained the earth till then? What did it rest on at the time of the birth of
Kashyapa (the tortoise)? They will have nothing further to say* and will, therefore, begin to quarrel.
What it really means is that shesha is another name for the remainder (that is, what is left behind in
subtracting one sum from another). Some poet said: "The earth rests on shesha." Some ignorant
man, not understanding the poet, invented this tale of the snake. What the poet really meant was that
the earth was supported by God - the one Unchangeable Being in the midst of Creation and
Dissolution, the One permanent element that undergoes no change during Creation or Dissolution.
In the whole world He is the only one that remains unchanged. He stands aloof from change. "That
God who is unaffected by time, and is imperishable sustains the sun and the earth and all other
planets." ATHARVA VEDA 14:1, 1.
There is passage in the Rig Veda which means "Ukshaa sustains the moon and earth." Some
ignorant person seeing the word ukshaa invented the story of the bull supporting the earth, because
 ukshaa does also mean a bull, but never entered the head of that idiot as to how a bull could be
powerful enough to support such a planet. Ukshaa her means the sun, because it waters the earth
through rain. It sustains this earth by solar attraction. But there is none besides God Who sustains
the sun.

Q.37. How could God sustain such big planets s the sun and the earth?
A.~ Just as these big planets are nothing compared to the infinite ( in which they exist) - (they are not
even as big as a drop in the ocean), - similarly compared with the Infinite, Almighty God, these
myriads of planets are not even as big as an atom. He pervades everything within and without. "He is
the Supreme Spirit who created all things and sustains them." YAJUR VEDA. Had He not been an
All-pervading God (just as the Puranics, the Muslims and the Christians say). He could never sustain
this world, because no one can support a thing without being present there. If some one says, "All
these planets are supporting each other by mutual attraction, where then is the necessity for God to
sustain them?"
He should be asked if the universe is finite or infinite. If he answers that it is infinite it cannot be true -
since a thing possessing a form can never be infinite; and if he says that it is finite, we ask whose
attraction supports what is beyond or outside its limits. Things when spoken of collectively ar called
smashti and individually Vyashti*. If all the worlds were collectively called the universe, there is no
one but God who attracts and sustains it as it is said in the Yajur Veda, "God it is Who creates and
sustains luminous bodies, (such as the sun) as well as the non-luminous (such as the earth)."YAJUR
VEDA 13:4. As He pervades all. He is the Creator and sustainer of the universe.
Q.37.1 Do the earth and other planets revolve or are they stationary?
A.~ They revolve.
Q.37.2 Some say that it is the sun that moves, not the earth, while others say just the reverse.
Now who are right?
A.~ They are both half grown; because it is written in the Veda, "This earth with all it waters
revolves round the sun." YAJUR VEDA 3, 6. This shows that the earth revolves. Again says the
Veda, "The Glorious , resplendent sun, that gives life and energy to al the world, - animate and
inanimate - through rain and solar rays, and makes all physical objects visible, attracts all other
planet and rotates in its own orbit, but does not move round other planets." YAJUR VEDA 33:43.
In each solar system there is one sun that gives light to all the planets (such as the earth).
Says the Veda, "As the moon is illuminated by the sun, so are other planets ( such as the earth)
illuminated by the light of the sun." ATHARVA VEDA14: 1.
But the day, and the night are constantly present. It is day in that part of the earth which in its
revolutions round the sun confronts it, whilst it is night in the other half which is hidden from it. In
other words, the sunrise, the sunset, the twilight, the mid-day and the mid-night, etc,. are always
present in different countries at the same time; thus when it is sunrise in India, it is sunset in
America and vice versa; when it is mid-day or mid-night in America and vice-versa. Those, who say
that the sun moves round the earth which is stationary are all ignorant; because, had it been so, one
day and one night would have lasted thousands of years, since the sun is called Bradhna, which
means that it is a hundred thousand times bigger than the earth, and millions of miles distant from it;
consequently it would require much longer time for the sun to go round the earth than for the latter
to go round the former. Just as if a mountain were to go round a mustard seed, it would take much
longer time when the latter would go round the former.
Those who say that the sun is stationary are ignorant of Astronomy; because had it been so, how
could it move form one zodiac to another; besides, a heavy body like the sun could never remain in
space without rotating constantly. The Jainees, who say that the earth does not move, but on the
other hand is going down and down in space, and that in one Jamboo Island alone there are two suns
 and two moons, are like one suffering from Delirium Tremens the result of over-intoxication with
cannabis Indica.
If the earth were going down and down, it would smash into pieces from want of support of the air
which could no longer encircle it. The people living on the top (uppermost) should have more air
than those below, it being unequally distributed. Had there been two suns and two moons there
would have been no night and no dark half of the month. Therefore, there is only one moon for our
planet and one sun amidst many planets.

Q.38. What are the sun, the moon and the stars?
Q.38.1 Are they inhabited by man and other living creatures or not?
A.~ They are worlds inhabited by men and other living beings, The Shatpatha Braahman 14:6, 9, 4.
says., "The earth, the water, the heated bodies, the space, the moon, the sun, and other planets are all
called Vasus or abodes, because they are abodes of living beings as well as of inanimate objects."
When the sun, the moon and other planets are abodes like our earth, what doubt can there be in their
being inhabited? When this little earth of God is full of men land other living beings, can it ever be
possible that all other worlds are void? How can myriads of other worlds be of any use unless they
are inhabited by man and other beings? It follows, therefore, that they are inhabited.

Q.39. Do they have the same bodies?

Q.39.1 Would men and other living beings in the other worlds have the same kind of bodies and
bodily organs as they have here or different?
A.~ Most likely there is some difference in their form and the like, just as you see some difference
in form, countenance, appearance and complexion among people of different countries as the
Ethiopeans, Chinese, the Indians and the Europeans. But the creation of the same class or species on
this earth and other planets is identical. The class or species that has its sense organs (as eyes) in
some definite place in the body here (on this planet), will have them in the same place other planets;
for it is said in the Veda, "Just as God created the sun, the moon, the earth, and other planets and the
objects therein in the previous cycles of Creation, the same has He done in the present Creation."
RIG VEDA 10: 190. He does not make any alteration.

Q.40. Are the same Vedas revealed in the other worlds as in this?
A.~ Yes. Just as the policy of a king is the same in all the countries under his rule, so is the Vedic
system of Government of the King of kings identically the same in all the worlds over which He rules.

Q.41. Why should we have control of matter and soul?

Q.41.1 When you hold that the soul and the Prakriti (matter) are eternal and were never created
by God, why should He have any control over them, as they are independent?
A.~ Just as a king and his subjects live contemporaneously and yet they are subject to him, so are
the soul and the prakriti under the control of God. Why should not the soul, with its finite powers
and the dead inert matter be subject to His powers when He creates the whole universe, awards
souls the fruits of their deeds, protects and sustains all, and possess infinite powers. It is clear,
therefore, that the soul is free to act, but is subject to the laws of God in reaping the fruits of its acts,
while the Almighty God is the Creator, Protector and Sustainer of, the universe.