[On the Parabrahm of the Upanishads]
Theosophist, February, 1883
Selection from letter to the editor “Is Brahmoism True Hinduism”
by “A Member of the Adi B. Samaj | Note by H.P.B.
In your issue of December, Mr. a. Sankariah, B.A., President-Founder, Hindu Sabha, of Madras, in a latter commenting on Baboo Raj Narain Bose’s “Superiority of Hinduism,” asks as to who improved, developed, and corrected Hindiusm into Brahmoism. The following sloka from the Mundukupanishad will be a sufficient answer to his query:
“The inferior knowledge is the Rig Veda, Yajur Veda, Sama Veda, Atharva Veda, Tikha (Pronunciation), Kalpa (Ritual), Byakarna (Grammar), Nirukta (Vedic Glossary), Chandas (Versification), Jyotish (Astronomy). The superior knowledge is that by which the UNDECAYING (God) is known.”1
1. The term “Undecaying” may, or may not, have meant “God,” as translated by the writer, in the mind of the author of Mundukupanishad, but we have every reason for doubting the correctness of the meaning given. No Upanishad mentions anywhere a personal god, and we believe such is the God of the Brahmos—since he is endowed with attributes in themselves all finite. The “Undecaying” means in the Upanishads—the eternal unborn, uncreated, infinite principle or Law—Parabrahm in short, not Brahm which is quite another thing.