Actual Freedom – Mailing List ‘D’ Correspondence

There are seven stanzas (aka sloka), altogether, with each generally translated into English as having four lines (aka pada). It has been translated many times into several languages and what follows is the first line (pada), of the first stanza (sloka), as translated into English by more than forty different translators. Words in either parentheses or squared brackets are supplementary words (i.e. not literal), added by the translator, and words enclosed in curled brackets come from a later edition published by the same translator. Each first line (pada) is preceded by the Romanised Sanskrit for handy reference.

Viz.:

Mr. Ralph Griffith (1826-1906):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Then was not non-existent nor existent:
{Then was neither being nor non-being};

Mr. Sāyaṇa (ca. 1300-1387):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Nonentity was not, nor entity,

Mr. Henry Colebrooke (1765-1837):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Then was there no entity, nor nonentity;

Mr. Horace Wilson (1786-1860):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
The non-existent was not, the existence was not;

Mr. John Muir (1810-1882):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
There was then neither nonentity nor entity:

Mr. Monier Monier-Williams (1819-1899):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
In the beginning there was neither nought nor aught;

Mr. Max Müller (1823-1900):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
There was then neither what is nor what is not,

Mr. William Whitney (1827-1894):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Not the non-existent existed, nor did the existent exist, at that time:

Ms. Zenaide Ragozin (1835-1924):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Nor Aught nor Naught existed then;

Mr. Archibald Gough (1845-1915):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
It was not entity, nor was it nonentity.

Mr. Paul Deussen (1845-1919):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
In the beginning there was neither Non-Being nor Being,

Mr. Adolf Kaegi (1849-1923):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Then there was neither being nor not-being.

Mr. Arthur Macdonell (1854-1930):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
There was not the non-existent nor the existent then;

Mr. Maurice Bloomfield (1855-1928):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Nor being was there nor non-being;

Mr. Henry Wallis (1861-1887):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
The non-existent was not, and the existent was not at that time;

Mr. Narendranath Datta (1863-1902):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Existence was not then, nor non-existence,

Mr. Northcote Thomas (1868-1936):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Non-Being was not; Being was not yet;

Mr. Ananda Coomaraswamy (1877-1947):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Non-existence then was not, nor Existence;

Mr. Arthur Keith (1879-1944):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
In the beginning there was neither being nor not-being:

Mr. Franklin Edgerton (1885-1963):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Non-existent there was not, existent there was not then.

Mr. Norman Brown (1892-1975):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
There was not then either the Non-existent (ásat) or the Existent (sát).

Mr. Juan Mascaró (1897-1987):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
There was not then what is nor what is not.

Mr. Paul Thieme (1905-2001):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
There was not anything non-existing, nor was there anything existing at that time.

Mr. Jan Gonda (1905-1991):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
There was not the undifferentiated ‘chaos’ nor the reality of the‘cosmos’ then;

Mr. Robert Zaehner (1913-1974):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Then neither Being nor Not-being was,

Mr. Arthur Basham (1914-1986):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Then even nothingness was not, nor existence,

Mr. Raimundo Panikkar (1918-2010):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
At first was neither Being nor Nonbeing.

Mr. Abinash Bose (1st Publ. 1966):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
There was neither existence nor non-existence then,

Mr. Walter Maurer (1st Publ. 1973):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Not existent was it nor non-existent was it at that time;

Mr. Jean Le Mée (1st Publ. 1975):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Neither non-being nor being was as yet.

Mr. Antonio de Nicolás (1st Publ. 1976):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Neither Existence nor Non-Existence was as yet,

Mr. Satya Prakash (1st Publ. 1977):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Neither there was non-existent, nor the existent;

Ms. Wendy Dongier O’Flaherty (1st Publ. 1981):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
There was neither non-existence nor existence then.

Ms. Jeanine Miller (1st Publ. 1985):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
The Unmanifest was not then, or the Manifest;

Mr. Rangasami Kashyap (1st Publ. 1998):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Non-existence then was not, nor Existence;

Mr. Michael Myers (1st Publ. 1998):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
The non-existent was not; the existent was not at that time.

Mr. Joel Brereton (1st Publ. 1999):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
The non-existent did not exist, nor did the existent exist at that time.

Mr. Angirasa Muni (1st Publ. 1999):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
In the beginning, there was neither existence nor non-existence.

Mr. Subhash Kak (1st Publ. 2006):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Not non-existence was it nor existence was it then;

Mr. Sanderson Beck (1st Publ. 2006):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Beginning from non-being when nothing existed,

Mr. D. Krishna Ayyar (1st Publ. 2009):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
There was neither non-existence nor existence.

desitip.com (1st Publ. 2010):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Then there was neither existence nor non-existence.

Mr. Asheesh Goja (1st Publ. 2010):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
There existed no being, nor did any non-being then;

Mr. Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay (1st Publ. 2011):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Neither was there non-existence, nor was there existence then.

Translator Unknown:
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
So there was not the non-existent or existent,

Unnamed Translator:
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Before creation was not non-being nor the remaining.

en.wikipedia.org:
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
Not the non-existent existed, nor did the existent exist then.

Richard (1st Publ. 2013):
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ
At that/this time [there] was/is neither non-existence nor existence.
and/or:
At that/this time [there] was/is neither not-being nor being (aka ‘Being’).

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

What follows is that first line in its contextual setting (the first stanza), as translated into English by these different translators, followed thereafter by the 2nd stanza, the 3rd stanza, and so on, through to the 7th stanza. Each of the seven sets of stanzas are preceded by both the Sanskrit and the Romanised Sanskrit.

Viz.:

1st Stanza (Sloka):
नासदासींनॊसदासीत्तदानीं नासीद्रजॊ नॊ व्यॊमापरॊ य त् ।किमावरीव:।
 कुहकस्यशर्मन्नभ: किमासीद्गहनं गभीरम् ॥१॥
nāsad āsīn nó sád āsīt tadānīṃ nāsīd rájo nó vyòmā paró yát kím
āvarīvaḥ kúha kásya shármann ámbhaḥ kím āsīd gáhanaṃ gabhīrám

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Mr. Ralph Griffith (1826-1906):
Then was not non-existent nor existent: there was no realm of air nor sky beyond.
{Then was neither being nor non-being: there was no realm of air nor sky beyond.}
What covered it, and where? What sheltered it? Was water there, unfathomed depth of water?}

Mr. Sāyaṇa (ca. 1300-1387):
Nonentity was not, nor entity, no worlds were there, no sky above.
What covered? Where? In the receptacle of what? Was it water, the deep abyss?

Mr. Henry Colebrooke (1765-1837):
Then was there no entity, nor nonentity; no world, nor sky, nor aught above it:
nothing, any where, in the happiness of anyone, involving or involved: nor water, deep and dangerous.

Mr. Horace Wilson (1786-1860):
The non-existent was not, the existence was not; then the world was not, not the firmament, nor that which is above (the firmament).
How could there be any investing envelope, and where? Of what (could there be) felicity? How (could there be) the deep unfathomable water?

Mr. John Muir (1810-1882):
There was then neither nonentity nor entity: there was no atmosphere, nor sky above.
What enveloped [all]? Where, in the receptacle of what [was it contained]? Was it water, the profound abyss?

Mr. Monier Monier-Williams (1819-1899):
In the beginning there was neither nought nor aught; Then there was neither sky nor atmosphere above.
What then enshrouded all this teeming universe? In the receptacle of what was it contained? Was it enveloped in the gulf profound of water?

Mr. Max Müller (1823-1900):
There was then neither what is nor what is not, there was no sky, nor the heaven which is beyond.
What covered? Where was it, and in whose shelter? Was the water the deep abyss (in which it lay)?

Mr. William Whitney (1827-1894):
Not the non-existent existed, nor did the existent exist, at that time: not the room of air existed, nor the firmament that is beyond.
what enveloped? where? in whose protection? what was the ocean, the abyss profound?

Ms. Zenaide Ragozin (1835-1924):
Nor Aught nor Naught existed then; not the aerial space, nor heaven’s bright woof above.
What covered all? Where rested all? Was it water, the profound abyss?

Mr. Archibald Gough (1845-1915):
It was not entity, nor was it nonentity. No air was then, no sky above.
What shrouded all? where? in the receptacle of what? Was it water, the unfathomable abyss?

Mr. Paul Deussen (1845-1919):
In the beginning there was neither Non-Being nor Being, neither atmosphere nor sky beyond.
What enveloped all things? Where were they, in whose care? What was the ocean, the unfathomable depth?

Mr. Adolf Kaegi (1849-1923):
Then there was neither being nor not-being. The atmosphere was not, nor sky above it.
What covered all? and where? by what protected? Was there the fathomless abyss of waters?

Mr. Arthur Macdonell (1854-1930):
There was not the non-existent nor the existent then; there was not the air nor the heaven which is beyond.
What did it contain? Where? In whose protection? Was there water, unfathomable, profound?

Mr. Maurice Bloomfield (1855-1928):
Nor being was there nor non-being; there was no atmosphere and no sky beyond.
What covered all, and where, by what protected? Was there a fathomless abyss of the waters?

Mr. Henry Wallis (1861-1887):
The non-existent was not, and the existent was not at that time; there was no air nor sky beyond;
what was the covering in? And where? Under shelter of what? Was there water a deep depth?

Mr. Narendranath Datta (1863-1902):
Existence was not then, nor non-existence, The world was not, the sky beyond was neither.
What covered the mist? Of whom was that? What was in the depths of darkness thick?

Mr. Northcote Thomas (1868-1936):
Non-Being was not; Being was not yet; There was no vault of heaven, no realm of air,
Where was the ocean, where the deep abyss? What mantled all? Where was it, in whose care?

Mr. Ananda Coomaraswamy (1877-1947):
Non-existence then was not, nor Existence; neither Firmament, nor Empyrean there beyond:
What covered o’er all and where, or what was any resting-place? What were the Waters? Fathomless abyss.

Mr. Arthur Keith (1879-1944):
In the beginning there was neither being nor not-being: there was no atmosphere nor sky:
what covering there was? was there a fathomless abyss of the waters?

Mr. Franklin Edgerton (1885-1963):
Non-existent there was not, existent there was not then. There was not the atmospheric space, nor the vault beyond.
What stirred, where, and in whose control? Was there water, a deep abyss?

Mr. Norman Brown (1892-1975):
There was not then either the Non-existent (ásat) or the Existent (sát). There was no sky nor heavenly vault beyond it.
What covered all? Where? What was its protection? Was there a fathomless depth of the waters?

Mr. Juan Mascaró (1897-1987):
There was not then what is nor what is not. There was no sky, and no heaven beyond the sky.
What power was there ? Where ? Who was that power? Was there an abyss of fathomless waters?

Mr. Paul Thieme (1905-2001):
There was not anything non-existing, nor was there anything existing at that time. there was no space, nor was there a firmament beyond it.
What was there covering? Where, in whose protection was there anything? Was there water? A deep thicket (impenetrability)!

Mr. Jan Gonda (1905-1991):
There was not the undifferentiated ‘chaos’ nor the reality of the‘cosmos’ then; there was not space nor the firmament which is beyond.
What moved intermittently? Where? Under whose protection? Was there (the primordial) water, the unfathomable, deep?

Mr. Robert Zaehner (1913-1974):
Then neither Being nor Not-being was, Nor atmosphere, nor firmament, nor what is beyond.
What did it encompass? Where? In whose protection? What was water, the deep, unfathomable?

Mr. Arthur Basham (1914-1986):
Then even nothingness was not, nor existence, There was no air then, nor the heavens beyond it.
What covered it? Where was it? In whose keeping Was there then cosmic water, in depths unfathomable?

Mr. Raimundo Panikkar (1918-2010):
At first was neither Being nor Nonbeing. There was not air nor yet sky beyond.
What was wrapping? Where? In whose protection? Was Water there, unfathomable deep?

Mr. Abinash Bose (1st Publ. 1966):
There was neither existence nor non-existence then, Neither the world nor the sky that lies beyond it;
What lay enveloped? and where? and who gave it protection? Was water there, deep and unfathomable?

Mr. Walter Maurer (1st Publ. 1973):
Not existent was it nor non-existent was it at that time; there was not atmosphere nor the heavens which are beyond.
What existed? Where? In whose care? Water was it? An abyss unfathomable?

Mr. Jean Le Mée (1st Publ. 1975):
Neither non-being nor being was as yet. Neither was airy space nor heavens beyond;
What was enveloped? And where? Sheltered by whom? And was there water? Bottomless, unfathomed?

Mr. Antonio de Nicolás (1st Publ. 1976):
Neither Existence nor Non-Existence was as yet, Neither the world nor the sky that lies beyond it;
What was covered? and where? and who gave it protection? Was there water, deep and unfathomable?

Mr. Satya Prakash (1st Publ. 1977):
Neither there was non-existent, nor the existent; nor there was any realm or region,
How could there be existing this unfathomable profound plasma?

Ms. Wendy Dongier O’Flaherty (1st Publ. 1981):
There was neither non-existence nor existence then. There was neither the realm of space nor the sky which is beyond.
What stirred? Where? In whose protection? Was there water, bottomlessly deep?

Ms. Jeanine Miller (1st Publ. 1985):
The Unmanifest was not then, or the Manifest; spatial depths or heaven beyond were not.
What encompassed, where, who nurtured it? What ocean, profound, unfathomable, pervaded?

Mr. Rangasami Kashyap (1st Publ. 1998):
Non-existence then was not, nor Existence; neither the principle of movement, nor Empyrean there beyond.
What covered over all and where, or what was any resting-place? What were the waters? Fathomless abyss.

Mr. Michael Myers (1st Publ. 1998):
The non-existent was not; the existent was not at that time. The atmosphere was not nor the heavens which are beyond.
What was concealed? Where? In whose protection? Was it water? An unfathomable abyss?

Mr. Joel Brereton (1st Publ. 1999):
The non-existent did not exist, nor did the existent exist at that time. There existed neither the midspace nor the heaven beyond.
What stirred? From where and in whose protection? Did water exist, a deep depth?

Mr. Angirasa Muni (1st Publ. 1999):
In the beginning, there was neither existence nor non-existence. There was neither air nor space.
There was no water, deep and fathomless. There was nothing to envelope or protect.

Mr. Subhash Kak (1st Publ. 2006):
Not non-existence was it nor existence was it then; there was no air nor the heavens beyond.
What covered it? Where? By who sheltered? Was water there, an abyss unfathomable?

Mr. D. Krishna Ayyar (1st Publ. 2009):
There was neither non-existence nor existence. There was neither air nor space.
What is it that is covering and where? In whose protection? Was water there, unfathomable, deep?

desitip.com (1st Publ. 2010):
Then there was neither existence nor non-existence. There was no space (air?) nor sky beyond.
What covered everything? Where? In whose protection? Was there water, deep and bottomless?

Mr. Asheesh Goja (1st Publ. 2010):
There existed no being, nor did any non-being then; no air, no sky beyond that;
what was that which covered, and what, where; under whose protection; and was there that deep unfathomable water?

Mr. Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay (1st Publ. 2011):
Neither was there non-existence, nor was there existence then Neither was there land, nor the heaven/sky beyond that.
(In that case), what was the facade (or envelope)? Where? Encased in what? How could there be/was there, water, impenetrable and deep?

Translator Unknown:
So there was not the non-existent or existent, There was no ethereal space, Neither the sky that is beyond him.
What cover? Where? Under the protection of whom? Did the water, unfathomable deep?

Unnamed Translator:

Before creation was not non-being nor the remaining The air was not, nor heaven, which is beyond
What did it mean? Where was it? Under the cover? What was the water (there was water), unimaginably deep?

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

2nd Stanza (Sloka):

न मृत्युरासीदमृतं न तर्हि न रात्र्या।आन्ह।आसीत् प्रकॆत: ।
आनीदवातं स्वधया तदॆकं तस्माद्धान्यन्नपर: किंचनास ॥२॥
ná mṛtyúr āsīd amṛtaṃ ná tárhi ná rātryā áhna āsīt praketáḥ
ānīd avātáṃ svadháyā tád ékaṃ tásmād dhānyán ná paráḥ kíṃ canāsa

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Mr. Ralph Griffith (1826-1906):
Death was not then, nor was there aught immortal; no sign was there, nor day’s and night’s divider.
That One Thing {being}, breathless, breathed by its own nature: apart from it there was nothing else {nothing whatsoever}.

Mr. Sāyaṇa (ca. 1300-1387):
Death was not, then no immortality, no distinction between night and day.
That one breathed without afflation by the self-supported; other than that there was naught, beyond it nothing.

Mr. Henry Colebrooke (1765-1837):
Death was not; nor then was immortality; nor distinction of day or night.
But That breathed without afflation, single, with (Swad’há) her who is sustained within him. Other than him, nothing existed [which] since [has been].

Mr. Horace Wilson (1786-1860):
Death was not nor at that period immortality, there was no indication of day or night;
That One unbreathed upon breathed of his own strength, other than That there was nothing whatever.

Mr. John Muir (1810-1882):
Death was not then, nor immortality: there was no distinction of day or night.
That One breathed calmly, self-supported; there was nothing different from, or above, it.

Mr. Monier Monier-Williams (1819-1899):
Then was there neither death nor immortality; Then was there neither day, nor night, nor light, nor darkness
Only the Existent One breathed calmly, self-contained Nought else but he there was – nought else above, beyond.

Mr. Max Müller (1823-1900):
There was no death, hence was there nothing immortal. There was no light (distinction) between night and day.
That One breathed by itself without breath, other than it there has been nothing.

Mr. William Whitney (1827-1894):
Not death existed, nor what is immortal, then; there was no distinction of night from day;
Breathed, without wind, by inner power, It only; than It, truly, nothing whatever else existed besides.

Ms. Zenaide Ragozin (1835-1924):
Death was not then, nor immortality; there was no difference of day and night.
That One breathed breathless in Itself; and there was nothing other than It.

Mr. Archibald Gough (1845-1915):
Death was not then, nor immortality. There was no distinction of day or night.
That One breathed without afflation, self-determined: other than, and beyond it, there was naught.

Mr. Paul Deussen (1845-1919):
At that time there was neither mortal nor immortal, neither night nor day.
That being the only one, breathed without air in independence. Beyond it nought existed.

Mr. Adolf Kaegi (1849-1923):
Then neither death nor deathlessness existed: Of day and night there was yet no distinction.
Alone that One breathed calmly, self-supported. Other than It was none, nor aught above It.

Mr. Arthur Macdonell (1854-1930):
There was not death nor immortality then. There was not the beacon of night, nor of day.
That one breathed, windless, by its own power. Other than that there was not anything beyond.

Mr. Maurice Bloomfield (1855-1928):
Neither death was there nor immortality; there was not the sheen of night nor light of day.
That One breathed, without breath, by inner power; than it truly nothing whatsoever else existed besides.

Mr. Henry Wallis (1861-1887):
Death was not nor immortality then, there was no discrimination of night and day:
that one thing breathed without a wind of its own self; apart from it there was nothing else at all beyond.

Mr. Narendranath Datta (1863-1902):
Death was not then, nor immortality, The night was neither separate from day,
But motionless did That vibrate Alone, with Its own glory one – Beyond That nothing did exist.

Mr. Northcote Thomas (1868-1936):
Death was not known nor yet immortal life; Night was not born and day was not yet seen.
Airless he breathed in primevality The One beyond whom nought hath ever been.

Mr. Ananda Coomaraswamy (1877-1947):
Then was neither death nor life, nor any fetch of night or day:
That One breathed breathless by intrinsic-power, none other was, nor aught there-beyond.

Mr. Arthur Keith (1879-1944):
There was neither death nor immortality, nor night nor day.
There was nothing else in the world save the one which breathed, but without wind, of its own power.

Mr. Franklin Edgerton (1885-1963):
Nor death nor immortality (mortals nor immortals) was there then; there was no distinction of night or day.
That One breathed without breath by inner power; than it verily there was nothing else further.

Mr. Norman Brown (1892-1975):
There was neither death nor immortality. There was then the sheen neither of day nor night.
That One breathed, though uninspired by breath, by its own potentiality. Besides it nothing existed.

Mr. Juan Mascaró (1897-1987):
There was neither death nor immortality then. No signs were there of night or day.
The one was breathing by its own power, in deep peace. Only the one was: there was nothing beyond.

Mr. Paul Thieme (1905-2001):
There was no death, consequently no life either; there was no distinguishing mark of night and day (that is: neither darkness nor light).
There breathed without wind, by its own strength, that single one: beyond that there was certainly nothing else.

Mr. Jan Gonda (1905-1991):
There was not death (nor continuation of life) then. There was no appearance of day and night.
The One breathed without wind (breath) by its own nature. Other than that there was nothing else.

Mr. Robert Zaehner (1913-1974):
Neither death nor immortality was there then, No sign of night or day.
That One breathed, windless, by its own energy (svadhā): Nought else existed then.

Mr. Arthur Basham (1914-1986):
Then there was neither death nor immortality nor was there then the torch of night and day.
The One breathed windlessly and self-sustaining. There was that One then, and there was no other.

Mr. Raimundo Panikkar (1918-2010):
There was no death then, nor yet deathlessness; of night or day there was not any sign.
The One breathed without breath by its own impulse. Other than that was nothing at all.

Mr. Abinash Bose (1st Publ. 1966):
There was no death then, nor immortality, nor of night or day was there any sign.
The ONE breathed airless by self-impulse; other than THAT was nothing whatsoever.

Mr. Walter Maurer (1st Publ. 1973):
Neither mortal was there nor immortal then; not of night, of day was there distinction:
That alone breathed windless through inherent power. Other than That there was naught else.

Mr. Jean Le Mée (1st Publ. 1975):
Neither was there death nor immortality, Nor was there any sign then of night or day;
Totally windless, by itself, the One breathed; Beyond that, indeed, nothing whatever was.

Mr. Antonio de Nicolás (1st Publ. 1976):
Neither was there death, nor immortality, Nor any sign of night or day.
The ONE breathed without air by self-impulse; Other than that was nothing whatsoever.

Mr. Satya Prakash (1st Publ. 1977):
Neither there was death nor at that period immortality. There was no indication of day or night.
That breathless one breathed upon as if by its own automation. Apart from that one, there was nothing else whatever.

Ms. Wendy Dongier O’Flaherty (1st Publ. 1981):
There was neither death nor immortality then. There was no distinguishing sign of night nor of day.
That One breathed, windless, by its own impulse. Other than that there was nothing beyond.

Ms. Jeanine Miller (1st Publ. 1985):
Death was not then or immortality. Neither night’s nor day’s confine existed.
Undisturbed, self-moved, pulsated the One alone. And beyond that, other than that, was naught.

Mr. Rangasami Kashyap (1st Publ. 1998):
Then was neither death nor life, nor any sign of night or day.
That One breathless breathed by intrinsic-power. None other was, nor aught there beyond.

Mr. Michael Myers (1st Publ. 1998):
There was neither death nor immortality then. There was not distinction of day or night.
That alone breathed windless by its own power. Other than that there was not anything else.

Mr. Joel Brereton (1st Publ. 1999):
Death did not exist nor deathlessness then. There existed no sign of night nor of day.
That One breathed without wind through its inherent force. There existed nothing else beyond that.

Mr. Angirasa Muni (1st Publ. 1999):
There was neither death nor immortality. There was neither night nor day.
Only God breathed windless by his own power. Apart from God, there was nothing whatsoever.

Mr. Subhash Kak (1st Publ. 2006):
Neither death was there nor immortality then, not of night or day was there distinction.
That alone breathed without air by its own power; apart fro, that there was none else.

Mr. D. Krishna Ayyar (1st Publ. 2009):
Death then existed not. Yet, nor was there life immortal. There was no knowledge of day and night.
That which was the One breathed without air, by its own nature. Apart from It there was nothing whatsoever.

desitip.com (1st Publ. 2010):
There was neither death nor immortality then, There was no sign of night or day.
That One breathed all by self without any outside support, Other than that there was nothing else beyond.

Mr. Asheesh Goja (1st Publ. 2010):
There was no mortality, and hence no immortality; there was no indication of neither night, nor day;
He (that), alone, breathed with no wind, (but) with his own will-power; no other thing than that existed beyond.

Mr. Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay (1st Publ. 2011):
Neither was there death, nor immortality then. Neither was there any sight of night and day.
Motionless (it was) most definitely/assuredly. That One (became) a pulsating consciousness, by its own Self Nature. There was none other.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

3rd Stanza (Sloka):
तम।आअसीत्तमसा गूह्ळमग्रॆ प्रकॆतं सलिलं सर्वमा।इदम् ।
तुच्छॆनाभ्वपिहितं यदासीत्तपसस्तन्महिना जायतैकम् ॥३॥
táma āsīt támasā gūḷhám ágre apraketáṃ saliláṃ sárvam ā idám
tuchyénābhv ápihitaṃ yád āsīt tápasas tán mahinājāyataíkam

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Mr. Ralph Griffith (1826-1906):
Darkness there was: At first concealed in darkness {this} All was indiscriminate{d} chaos.
All that existed then was void and formless: by the great power of Warmth was born that Unit.

Mr. Sāyaṇa (ca. 1300-1387):
Darkness there was wrapped in darkness; in the beginning all this was undistinguishable water:
that which was full of unreality, that one by the power of contemplation came into being.

Mr. Henry Colebrooke (1765-1837):
Darkness there was; [for] this universe was enveloped with darkness, and was undistinguishable [like fluids mixed in] waters:
but that mass, which was covered by the husk, was [at length] produced by the power of contemplation.

Mr. Horace Wilson (1786-1860):
There was darkness covered by darkness in the beginning, all this (world) undistinguishable water;
that empty united (world) which was covered by a mere nothing, was produced through the power of austerity.

Mr. John Muir (1810-1882):
In the beginning darkness existed, enveloped in darkness. All this was undistinguishable water.
That One which lay void, and wrapped in nothingness, was developed by the power of fervour.

Mr. Monier Monier-Williams (1819-1899):
Then first came darkness hid in darkness, gloom in gloom; Next all was water, all a chaos indiscrete,
In which the One lay void, shrouded in nothingness. Then turning inwards, he by self-developed force.

Mr. Max Müller (1823-1900):
Darkness there was, in the beginning; all this was a sea without light;
the germ that lay covered by the husk, that One was born by the power of heat (tapas).

Mr. William Whitney (1827-1894):
Darkness existed, hidden by darkness, at the beginning; an undistinguished sea was this all;
the void that was covered with emptiness – that alone was born by the might of fervor.

Ms. Zenaide Ragozin (1835-1924):
In the beginning there was darkness in darkness enfolded, all was undistinguishable water.
That One, which lay in the empty space, wrapped in nothingness, was developed by the power of heat.

Mr. Archibald Gough (1845-1915):
Darkness there was, wrapped up in darkness. All this was undifferenced water.
That one that was void, covered with nothingness, developed itself by the power of self-torture.

Mr. Paul Deussen (1845-1919):
Darkness was there; by darkness enshrouded in the beginning, an ocean without lights was all this world;
but the pregnant germ which was enveloped by the husk was born by the strength of penitence.

Mr. Adolf Kaegi (1849-1923):
Darkness there was at first in darkness hidden: This universe was undistinguished water.
That which in void and emptiness lay hidden Alone by power of fervor was developed.

Mr. Arthur Macdonell (1854-1930):
Darkness was in the beginning hidden by darkness; indistinguishable, this all was water.
That which, coming into being, was covered with the void, that One arose through the power of heat.

Mr. Maurice Bloomfield (1855-1928):
Darkness there was, hidden by darkness at the beginning; an unillumined ocean was this all.
The living force which was enveloped in a shell, that one by the might of devotional fervour was born.

Mr. Henry Wallis (1861-1887):
Darkness there was, hidden in darkness, in the beginning, everything here was an indiscriminate chaos;
it was void covered with emptiness, all that was; that one thing was born by the power of warmth.

Mr. Narendranath Datta (1863-1902):
At first in darkness hidden darkness lay, Undistinguished as one mass of water,
Then That which lay in void thus covered A glory did put forth by Tapah!

Mr. Northcote Thomas (1868-1936):
Darkness prevailed at first, a chaos dread; ’Twas this great world, clad in its cloak of night.
And then was brought to being the germ of all, The One pent in this husk, by Tapas’ might.

Mr. Ananda Coomaraswamy (1877-1947):
In the beginning, Dark-Inert was hid by Dark-Inert. This all was fluid, indeterminate:
Void by void was overlaid: That One was born by the all-might of intension.

Mr. Arthur Keith (1879-1944):
There was darkness, and a moving ocean without light:
through the might of fervour, Tapas, was born a living force enveloped in a shell.

Mr. Franklin Edgerton (1885-1963):
Darkness there was, hidden by darkness, in the beginning; an undistinguished ocean was This All.
What generative principle was enveloped by emptiness – by the might of (its own) fervour That One was born.

Mr. Norman Brown (1892-1975):
There was darkness hidden by darkness at the beginning. This all was an unillumined flood.
The force which was hidden by a shell was born through the power of heat.

Mr. Juan Mascaró (1897-1987):
Darkness was hidden in darkness. The all was fluid and formless.
Therein, in the void, by the fire of fervour arose the one.

Mr. Paul Thieme (1905-2001):
There did exist, in the beginning, darkness covered by darkness; all this did exist as undifferentiated saltwater/brine;
that germ that did exist covered by emptiness was born by the mightiness of heart (i.e.: it was hatched like an egg).

Mr. Jan Gonda (1905-1991):
(There) was darkness. Hidden by darkness was this universe in the beginning, indistinguishable, something waving.
The virtual, viz. the One, which was covered by the void, assumed individual existence by the greatness of eternal heating.

Mr. Robert Zaehner (1913-1974):
In the beginning was darkness swathed in darkness; All this was but unmanifested water.
Whatever was, that One, coming into being, Hidden by the Void, Was generated by the power of heat (tapas).

Mr. Arthur Basham (1914-1986):
At first there was only darkness wrapped in darkness. All this was only unillumed water.
That One which came to be, enclosed in nothing, arose at last, born of the power of heat.

Mr. Raimundo Panikkar (1918-2010):
Darkness was there, all wrapped around by darkness, and all was Water indiscriminate, Then
that which was hidden by Void, that One, emerging, stirring, through power of Ardor, came to be.

Mr. Abinash Bose (1st Publ. 1966):
Darkness was concealed in darkness there, and all this was indiscriminate chaos;
That ONE which had been covered by the void through the might of Tapas was manifested.

Mr. Walter Maurer (1st Publ. 1973):
Darkness it was, by darkness hidden in the beginning: an undistinguished sea was all this.
The germ of all things which was enveloped in void, That alone through the power of brooding thought was born.

Mr. Jean Le Mée (1st Publ. 1975):
In the Principle darkness concealed darkness; Undifferentiated surge was this whole world.
The pregnant point covered by the form matrix, From conscious fervor, mightily, brought forth the One.

Mr. Antonio de Nicolás (1st Publ. 1976):
Darkness was concealed by darkness there, And all this was indiscriminate chaos;
That ONE which had been covered by the void Through the heat of desire (tapas) was manifested.

Mr. Satya Prakash (1st Publ. 1977):
Darkness there was; covered by darkness, a plasmic continuum, in which there was nothing distinguishable.
And thence, an empty (world), united under a causal covering came out on account of the austere penance (of that Supreme one).

Ms. Wendy Dongier O’Flaherty (1st Publ. 1981 ):
Darkness was hidden by darkness in the beginning, with no distinguishing sign, all this was water.
The life force that was covered with emptiness, that One arose through the power of heat.

Ms. Jeanine Miller (1st Publ. 1985):
Darkness there was; at first hidden in darkness this all was undifferentiated depth.
Enwrapped in voidness, that which flame-power (tapas) kindled to existence emerged.

Mr. Rangasami Kashyap (1st Publ. 1998):
Darkness hidden by darkness in the beginning was this all. This all was an ocean without mental consciousness.
All is hidden in the formless being owing to the fragmentation of consciousness. Out of it, One was born by the greatness of its energy.

Mr. Michael Myers (1st Publ. 1998):
Darkness was hidden by darkness in the beginning. All this was an indistinguishable sea.
That which becomes, that which was enveloped by the void, that alone was born through the power of heat.

Mr. Joel Brereton (1st Publ. 1999):
Darkness existed, hidden by darkness, in the beginning. All this was a signless ocean.
When the thing coming into being was concealed by emptiness, then was the One born by the power of heat.

Mr. Angirasa Muni (1st Publ. 1999):
Darkness prevailed everywhere before the creation of the universe. Yet there subsisted one glorious Being,
all intelligence, who created the universe by contemplation of what he wanted to do.

Mr. Subhash Kak (1st Publ. 2006):
Darkness it was, by darkness hidden in the beginning, an ocean without signs. Through the seed of all things
that was enveloped in void through the force of meditation thought was born.

Mr. D. Krishna Ayyar (1st Publ. 2009):
Darkness there was, at first concealed in darkness. All this was water unseen.
That which was covered by Void, that One stirred, by the might of Its tapas and came to be.

desitip.com (1st Publ. 2010):
There was darkness all wrapped around by darkness, and all was water then.
The life force which was covered with void arose through the power of heat (Tapas).

Mr. Asheesh Goja (1st Publ. 2010):
Darkness was that which darkness covered before; this all was water with no indication of it whatsoever;
that which was there to come about, was covered with void; THAT, alone, by power of heat (tapas), came into being.

Mr. Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay (1st Publ. 2011):
At first darkness lay hidden in darkness. (And/ thus) water was visible everywhere.
(From) the gigantic all pervading void/ emptiness (that) existed, With a mighty reverberation, the One was born, out of Contemplation.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

4th Stanza (Sloka):
कामस्तदग्रॆ समवर्तताधि मनसॊ रॆत: प्रथमं यदासीत् ।
सतॊबन्धुमसति निरविन्दन्हृदि प्रतीष्या कवयॊ मनीषा ॥४॥
kāmas tád ágre sám avartatādhi mánaso rétaḥ prathamáṃ yád āsīt
sató bándhum ásati nír avindan hṛdí pratīṣyā kaváyo manīṣā

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Mr. Ralph Griffith (1826-1906):
Thereafter rose Desire in the beginning, Desire, the primal seed and germ of Spirit.
Sages who searched with their heart’s thought discovered the existent’s kinship in the non-existent.
{Seers who searched their heart for wisdom discovered the kinship between the being and non-being}.

Mr. Sāyaṇa (ca. 1300-1387):
Desire arose in the beginning thereof; the first germ of the mind from which it came into being:
sages having searched with the intellect in the heart have found this the tie which binds entity to nonentity.

Mr. Henry Colebrooke (1765-1837):
First desire was formed in his mind: and that became the original productive seed;
which the wise, recognising it by the intellect in their hearts, distinguish, in nonentity, as the bond of entity.

Mr. Horace Wilson (1786-1860):
In the beginning there was desire, which was the first seed of mind;
sages having meditated in their hearts have discovered by their wisdom, the connexion of the existent with the non-existent.

Mr. John Muir (1810-1882):
Desire first arose in It, which was the primal germ of mind; [and which] sages, searching with their intellect,
have discovered in their heart to be the bond which connects entity with nonentity.

Mr. Monier Monier-Williams (1819-1899):
Of inner fervour and intense abstraction, grew. First in his mind was formed Desire, the primal germ
Productive, which the Wise, profoundly searching, say Is the first subtle bond, connecting Entity And Nullity.

Mr. Max Müller (1823-1900):
Love overcame it in the beginning, which was the seed springing from mind,
poets having searched in their heart found by wisdom, the bond of what is in and what is not.

Mr. William Whitney (1827-1894):
Desire arose in the beginning upon It, which was the first seed of mind (thought, intention).
The sages (or poets), by devotion, found the tie of the existent in the non-existent, seeking it in the heart.

Ms. Zenaide Ragozin (1835-1924):
Desire first arose in It – that was the primal germ of mind,
which poets, searching with their intellects, discovered in their hearts to be the bond between Being and Not-Being.

Mr. Archibald Gough (1845-1915):
Desire first rose in it, the primal germ:
this sages seeking with the intellect have found in the heart to be the tie of entity to nonentity.

Mr. Paul Deussen (1845-1919):
And forth went as the first-born Kâma (love) which was the primordial seed of mind.
Thus wise men meditating have found out the link of Non-Being and Being in the heart.

Mr. Adolf Kaegi (1849-1923):
Then for the first time there arose desire, Which was the primal germ of mind, within it.
And sages, searching in their heart, discovered In Nothing the connecting bond of Being.

Mr. Arthur Macdonell (1854-1930):
Desire in the beginning came upon that, (desire) that was the first seed of mind.
Sages seeking in their hearts with wisdom found out the bond of the existent in the non-existent.

Mr. Maurice Bloomfield (1855-1928):
Desire arose in the beginning in That; it was the first seed of mind.
The sages by devotion found the root of being in non-being, seeking it in (their) heart.

Mr. Henry Wallis (1861-1887):
So in the beginning arose desire, which was the first seed of mind;
the wise found out by thought, searching in the heart, the parentage of the existent in the non-existent.

Mr. Narendranath Datta (1863-1902):
First desire rose, the primal seed of mind, (The sages have seen all this in their hearts
Sifting existence from non-existence.) Its rays above, below and sideways spread.

Mr. Northcote Thomas (1868-1936):
And first of all from him proceeded love, Kâma, the primal seed and germ of thought.
In Non-existence was by sages found Existence’ root, when in the heart they sought.

Mr. Ananda Coomaraswamy (1877-1947):
In the beginning, Will arose therein, the primal seed of Intellect, that was the first:
Searching the heart throughly by thought wise-singers found there the kin of Existence in the Non-existent.

Mr. Arthur Keith (1879-1944):
Then there developed desire, Kāma, the first seed of mind:
the sages found the root of not-being in being, searching for it in the heart.

Mr. Franklin Edgerton (1885-1963):
Desire (creative, or perhaps sacrificial, impulse) arose then in the beginning, which was the first seed of thought.
The (causal) connection (bandhu) of the existent the sages found in the non-existent, searching with devotion in their hearts.

Mr. Norman Brown (1892-1975):
In the beginning desire grew in That (One), which became the first seed of mind.
The sages by their pious insight in their hearts found the relation of the Existent with the Non-existent.

Mr. Juan Mascaró (1897-1987):
And in the one arose love. Love the first seed of soul. The truth of this the sages found in their hearts:
seeking in their hearts with wisdom, the sages found that bond of union between being and non-being.

Mr. Paul Thieme (1905-2001):
In the beginning desire developed into this heat, [desire] that was the first seed (result) of thinking.
The poets found the origin of what exists in that what not exists, having searched in their heart with spiritual rapture.

Mr. Jan Gonda (1905-1991):
Desire in the beginning arose on that (viz. on the One), which was the first seed of manas (the seat of thought, feeling, will, consciousness).
The sages after having received (it) in their hearts with the inspired thoughts of their minds, found the bond of the reality of the ‘cosmos’ in the undifferentiated ‘chaos’.

Mr. Robert Zaehner (1913-1974):
In the beginning this [One] evolved, Became desire, first seed of mind.
Wise seers, searching within their hearts, Found the bond of Being in Not-being.

Mr. Arthur Basham (1914-1986):
In the beginning desire descended on it – that was the primal seed, born of mind.
The sages who have searched their hearts with wisdom know that which is, is kin to that which is not.

Mr. Raimundo Panikkar (1918-2010):
In the beginning Love arose, which was primal germ cell of mind.
The Seers, searching in their hearts with wisdom, discovered the connection of Being in Nonbeing.

Mr. Abinash Bose (1st Publ. 1966):
In the beginning there was desire, Which was the primal germ of the mind;
The sages searching in their hearts with wisdom found in non-existence the kin of existence.

Mr. Walter Maurer (1st Publ. 1973):
Upon That in the beginning arose desire, which was the first offshoot of that thought.
This desire sages found out to be the link between the existent and the non-existent, after searching with the wisdom in their heart.

Mr. Jean Le Mée (1st Publ. 1975):
In the Principle, thereupon, rose desire, Which of consciousness was the primeval seed.
Then the wise, searching within their hearts, perceived That in non-being lay the bond of being.

Mr. Antonio de Nicolás (1st Publ. 1976):
In the beginning there was desire, Which was the primal germ of the mind;
The sages searching in their own hearts with wisdom Found in non-existence the kin of existence.

Mr. Satya Prakash (1st Publ. 1977):
In the beginning, there was the Divine Desire, which was the first seed of the Cosmic Mind.
The sages, seeking in their hearts, have discovered by their wisdom the bond that operates between the existent and the non-existent.

Ms. Wendy Dongier O’Flaherty (1st Publ. 1981):
Desire came upon that One in the beginning, that was the first seed of mind.
Poets seeking in their heart with wisdom found the bond of existence and non-existence.

Ms. Jeanine Miller (1st Publ. 1985):
Desire, primordial seed of mind, in the beginning, arose in That.
Seers, searching in their heart’s wisdom, discovered it as the bond between the created and the uncreate.
{discovered the kinship of the created with the uncreate}.

Mr. Rangasami Kashyap (1st Publ. 1998):
In the beginning, desire arose therein. The primal seed of mind, that was the first.
The masters of wisdom found out in the non-existent that which builds up the existence. In the heart they found it by purposeful impulsion and by the thought-mind.

Mr. Michael Myers (1st Publ. 1998):
Upon that desire arose in the beginning. This was the first discharge of thought.
Sages discovered this link of the existent to the nonexistent, having searched in the heart with wisdom.

Mr. Joel Brereton (1st Publ. 1999):
Then, in the beginning, from thought there developed desire, which existed as the primal semen.
Searching in their hearts through inspired thinking, poets found the connection of the existent in the non-existent.

Mr. Angirasa Muni (1st Publ. 1999):
Thereafter rose Desire in the beginning, Desire, the primal seed and germ of Spirit.
Sages who searched with their heart’s thought discovered the existent’s kinship in the non-existent.

Mr. Subhash Kak (1st Publ. 2006):
Upon that in the beginning arose desire, which was the first impulse of that thought.
This desire the sages saw as the link between existence and non-existence, upon searching with the intuition of their heart.

Mr. D. Krishna Ayyar (1st Publ. 2009):
Desire, the first sprout of mind, arose.
Sages who searched within their hearts discovered the connection of sat in asat.

desitip.com (1st Publ. 2010):
Then arose desire (Love?) which was the primal seed of mind,
Seers searching for knowledge in their heart found existence in non-existence.

Mr. Asheesh Goja (1st Publ. 2010):
Desire was there in him before, the first seed of thought that it was;
in their hearts, searching with their wisdom, the sages found their bonds with being, in the non-being.

Mr. Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay (1st Publ. 2011):
Desire was first (created), by Its same-motion (vibration). This was the Primal seed (of desire) in the mind.
The relation/ connection/ join between existence and non-existence, they (the Seers) found out, by reflecting (on the matter) in their heart, and have accepted (this).

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

5th Stanza:
तिरश्चीनॊ विततॊ रश्मीरॆषामध: स्विदासी ३ दुपरिस्विदासीत् ।
रॆतॊधा।आसन्महिमान् ।आसन्त्स्वधा ।आवस्तात् प्रयति: परस्तात् ॥५॥
tiraścīno vítato raśmír eṣām adháḥ svid āsīd upári svid āsīt
retodhā āsan mahimāna āsan svadhā avástāt práyatiḥ parástāt

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Mr. Ralph Griffith (1826-1906):
Transversely was their severing line extended: what was above it then, and what below it?
There were {seminal} begetters, there were mighty forces, free action here and energy up yonder.

Mr. Sāyaṇa (ca. 1300-1387):
The ray which was stretched out, was it across these, was it above, or was it below?
There were generative beings, there were mighty things, the nutriment below, the energising love above.

Mr. Henry Colebrooke (1765-1837):
Did the luminous ray of these [creative acts] expand in the middle? Or above? Or below?
That productive seed at once became providence [or sentient souls], and matter [or the elements]:
she, who is sustained within himself, was inferior; and he, who heeds, was superior.

Mr. Horace Wilson (1786-1860):
Their ray was stretched out, whether across, or below, or above;
(some) were shedders of seed, (others) were mighty; food was inferior, the eater was superior.

Mr. John Muir (1810-1882):
The ray [or cord] which stretched across these [worlds], was it below or was it above?
There were there impregnating powers and mighty forces, a self-supporting principle beneath, and energy aloft.

{Their ray, obliquely extended, was it below, or was it above?}
{There were generative sources, and there were great powers, svadhā (nature) below, and effort above.}

Mr. Monier Monier-Williams (1819-1899):
[... missing ...]

Mr. Max Müller (1823-1900):
Their ray which was stretched across, was it below or was it above?
There were seed bearers, there were powers, self-power below, and will above.

Mr. William Whitney (1827-1894):
Crosswise [was] stretched out the ray (line) of them: was it forsooth below? was it forsooth above?
impregnators were, greatnesses were; svadhā below, offering beyond.

Ms. Zenaide Ragozin (1835-1924):
The ray of light which stretched across these worlds, did it come from below or from above?
Then seeds were sown and mighty forces arose, Nature beneath and Power and Will above.

Mr. Archibald Gough (1845-1915):
The ray stretched out across these, was it above or was it below?
There were generating forces, there were mighty powers; a self-determined being on this side, an energy beyond.

Mr. Paul Deussen (1845-1919):
They threw their plumbline across the universe. What was then below and what above?
There were seedbearers; there was mighty striving; independence beneath, exertion above.

Mr. Adolf Kaegi (1849-1923):
And straight across their cord was then extended: What then was there above? or what beneath it?
Life giving principles and powers existed: Below the origin, – the striving upward.

Mr. Arthur Macdonell (1854-1930):
Their cord was extended across: was there below or was there above?
There were impregnators, there were powers; there was energy below, there was impulse above.

Mr. Maurice Bloomfield (1855-1928):
[... untranslated ...]

Mr. Henry Wallis (1861-1887):
Their line was stretched across; what was above? What was below?
There were generators, there were mighty powers; svadhā below, the presentation of offerings above.

Mr. Narendranath Datta (1863-1902):
Creative then became the glory,
With self-sustaining principle below. And Creative Energy above.

Mr. Northcote Thomas (1868-1936):
When through the realm of Being their arc they spanned. What was beneath it, what was in their ken?
Germ-carriers beneath! Strivings above! The seeds of things were hid, the things were seen.

Mr. Ananda Coomaraswamy (1877-1947):
What trace was stretched across below, and what above?
Seed was, Allmight was; Intrinsic-power below, Purpose above.

Mr. Arthur Keith (1879-1944):
The sages drove a division through the universe and distinguished the upper and the lower,
the world of nature above, the principle of nature below.

Mr. Franklin Edgerton (1885-1963):
Straight across was stretched the (dividing-)cord of them; below (what) was there? above (what) was there?
Seed-bearers (male forces) there were, strengths (female forces) there were; (female) innate power below, (male) impellent force above.

Mr. Norman Brown (1892-1975):
A line of demarcation was extended horizontally for them. What was below it, what was it?
There were seed-depositers, there were powers; there was potentiality here below, there was emanation above.

Mr. Juan Mascaró (1897-1987):
[... missing ...]

Mr. Paul Thieme (1905-2001):
There was a rope stretched athwart those [poets] (hindering them to proceed further, stopping them).

Mr. Jan Gonda (1905-1991):
Their cord was extended across. Was there below, was there above?
There were semen-bearers, there were greatness. There was own nature (power) below; there was willingness above.

Mr. Robert Zaehner (1913-1974):
Their cord was extended athwart: Was there a below? Was there an above?
Casters of seed there were, and powers; Beneath was energy, above was impulse.

Mr. Arthur Basham (1914-1986):
And they have stretched their cord across the void, and know what was above, and what below.
Seminal powers made fertile mighty forces. Below was strength, and over it was impulse.

Mr. Raimundo Panikkar (1918-2010):
A crosswise line cut Being from Nonbeing. What was described above it, what below?
Bearers of seed there were and mighty forces, thrust from below and forward move above.

Mr. Abinash Bose (1st Publ. 1966):
Their dividing line extended transversely. What was below it and what was above?
There was the seed-bearer, there were mighty forces; impulse from below and forward movement beyond.

Mr. Walter Maurer (1st Publ. 1973):
Straight across was extended their line of vision: was That below, was That above?
Seedplacers there were, powers there were: potential energy below, impulse above.

Mr. Jean Le Mée (1st Publ. 1975):
Stretched crosswise was their line, a ray of glory. Was there a below? Was there an above?
There were sowers of seeds and forces of might; Potency beneath and from on high the Will.

Mr. Antonio de Nicolás (1st Publ. 1976):
Their dividing line extended transversely. What was below it and what above?
There was the seed-bearer, there were mighty forces! Who therefore knows from where it did arise.

Mr. Satya Prakash (1st Publ. 1977):
Their controls (rays or reins) were streteched out, some transverse, some below and others above.
Some of these were shedders of the seed and the others strong and superb – the inferior, the causal matter here, and the superior, the creator’s effort there.

Ms. Wendy Dongier O’Flaherty (1st Publ. 1981):
Their cord was extended across. Was there below? Was there above?
There were seed-placers, there were powers. There was impulse beneath, there was giving forth above.

Ms. Jeanine Miller (1st Publ. 1985):
Their vision’s rays stretched afar. There was indeed a below, there was indeed an above.
Seed-bearers there were, mighty powers there were; energy below, will above.

Mr. Rangasami Kashyap (1st Publ. 1998):
Their ray was extended horizontally. There was something above, there was something below.
Seed was, all-might was; intrinsic-power below, purpose above.

Mr. Michael Myers (1st Publ. 1998):
Their line [of vision] was extended across; what was below, what was above?
There were impregnators, there were powers: inherent power below, impulses above.

Mr. Joel Brereton (1st Publ. 1999):
Their cord was stretched across: Did something exist below it? Did something exist above?
There were placers of semen and there were powers. There was inherent force below, offering above.

Mr. Angirasa Muni (1st Publ. 1999):
Transversely was their severing line extended: what was above it then, and what below it?
There were begetters, there were mighty forces, free action here and energy up yonder.

Mr. Subhash Kak (1st Publ. 2006):
Transversely was their vision extended: what was above it, what was below?
They were givers of life, powers they were, linked to the above, with impulse for below.

Mr. D. Krishna Ayyar (1st Publ. 2009):
Their line (of vision) was extended across. What was above? What was below?
here were begetters; there were mighty forces, the material universe (swadha) below, impulse above.

desitip.com (1st Publ. 2010):
A ray of light energy cut across the dark and gloomy abyss. Was it beneath? Was it above? Who can answer this?
There were bearers of seed and mighty forces, Pushed from below and forward move above.

Mr. Asheesh Goja (1st Publ. 2010):
Their rays extending obliquely were below or above (no one knows);
the force of creation, the great vital energy, was there; above was the power of will, below was the discipline (svadhā).

Mr. Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay (1st Publ. 2011):
The cord (connection between existence and non-existence) cut accross and spread in all directions (in the middle or perhaps above).
It was insemination (of existence) by the Great Self, above and below.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

6th Stanza (Sloka):
कॊ ।आद्धा वॆद क।इह प्रवॊचत् कुत ।आअजाता कुत ।इयं विसृष्टि: ।
अर्वाग्दॆवा ।आस्य विसर्जनॆनाथाकॊ वॆद यत ।आबभूव ॥६॥
kó addhā veda ká ihá prá vocat kúta ājātā kúta iyáṃ vísṛṣṭiḥ
arvāg devā asyá visárjanenāthā kó veda yáta ābabhūva

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Mr. Ralph Griffith (1826-1906):
Who {verily} knows and who can say {can here declare it}, whence it was born and whence came this creation?
The Gods are later than this world’s creation. Who knows then whence it first came into being?

Mr. Sāyaṇa (ca. 1300-1387):
Who truly knows, who here shall declare whence it emanated, whence this diversified creation?
The gods are later than this evolution. Therefore who knows whence it emanated?

Mr. Henry Colebrooke (1765-1837):
Who knows exactly, and who shall in this world declare, whence and why this creation took place?
The gods are subsequent to the production of this world: then who can know whence it proceeded?

Mr. Horace Wilson (1786-1860):
Who really knows? Who in this world may declare it! whence was this creation, whence was it engendered?
The gods (were) subsequent to the (world’s) creation; so who knows whence it arose?

Mr. John Muir (1810-1882):
Who knows, who here can declare, whence has sprung, whence, this creation?
The gods are subsequent to the development of this [universe]; who then knows whence it arose?

{Who knows, who hath here declared whence this creation was produced, whence it came?}
{The gods were subsequent to the creation of this universe; who then knows whence it sprang?}

Mr. Monier Monier-Williams (1819-1899):
[... missing ...]

Mr. Max Müller (1823-1900):
Who then knows, who has declared it here, from whence was born this Creation?
The gods came later than this creation, who then knows whence it arose?

Mr. William Whitney (1827-1894):
Who truly knoweth? Who can here proclaim it? Whence hither born, whence cometh this creation?
Hitherward are the gods from its creating; Who knoweth, then, from whence it came to being?

Ms. Zenaide Ragozin (1835-1924):
Who indeed knows? Who proclaimed it here – whence, whence this creation was produced?
The gods were later than its production – who then knows whence it sprang?

Mr. Archibald Gough (1845-1915):
Who indeed knows? who can say out of what it issued, whence this creation?
The gods are on this side of its evolution: who then knows out of what it came into existence?

Mr. Paul Deussen (1845-1919):
But who knows and who can tell from where was born, from where came forth creation?
The gods came afterwards into existence. Who then can say from whence creation came?

Mr. Adolf Kaegi (1849-1923):
Who is it knows? Who here can tell us surely From what and how this universe has risen?
And whether not till after it the gods lived? Who then can know from what it has arisen?

Mr. Arthur Macdonell (1854-1930):
Who knows truly? Who shall here declare, whence it has been produced, whence is this creation?
By the creation of this (universe) the gods (come) afterwards: who then knows whence it has arisen?

Mr. Maurice Bloomfield (1855-1928):
Who truly knoweth? Who can here proclaim it? Whence hither born, whence cometh this creation?
On this side are the gods from its creating, Who knoweth then from whence it came into being?

Mr. Henry Wallis (1861-1887):
Who knoweth it forsooth? Who can announce it here? Whence it was born, whence this creation is.
The gods came by the creating of it (i.e. the one thing); who then knoweth whence it is come into being?

Mr. Narendranath Datta (1863-1902):
Who knew the way? Who there declared Whence this arose? Projection whence?
For after this projection came the gods. Who therefore knew indeed, came out this whence?

Mr. Northcote Thomas (1868-1936):
Whence sprang the universe? Who gave it form? What eye hath seen its birth? Its source who knows?
Before the world was made the gods were not; Who then shall tell us whence these things arose?

Mr. Ananda Coomaraswamy (1877-1947):
Who knows it aright? who can here set it forth? Whence was it born, whence poured forth?
These Angels are from its pouring-forth, whence then it came-to-be, who knows?

Mr. Arthur Keith (1879-1944):
The gods are later than the creation and cannot know of its origin:
whether the creation was made by itself or not,

Mr. Franklin Edgerton (1885-1963):
Who truly knows? Who shall here proclaim it – whence they were produced, whence this creation?
The gods (arose) on this side (later), by the creation of this; then who knows whence it came into being?

Mr. Norman Brown (1892-1975):
Who is there who knows, who here (ihá) can tell whence was the origin, and whence this creation?
The gods are this side of the creation. Who knows whence it came into being?

Mr. Juan Mascaró (1897-1987):
Who knows in truth? Who can tell us whence and how arose this universe?
The gods are later than its beginning: who knows therefore whence comes this creation?

Mr. Paul Thieme (1905-2001):
Who knows for certain, who will proclaim it here [for certain], from where this creation [is]:
On this side of the creation of the world are the gods (they being created themselves). Then, who knows from where (from which original beginning) it has come?

Mr. Jan Gonda (1905-1991):
Who knows for certain? Who will (can) declare here, whence it has arisen, whence is this creation-in-differentiation?
With the creation-in-differentiation of this (universe) the gods are at this side. Who then knows whence it has come into existence?

Mr. Robert Zaehner (1913-1974):
Who knows truly? Who can here declare it? Whence it was born, whence is this emanation.
By the emanation of this the gods Only later [came to be]. Who then knows whence it has arisen?

Mr. Arthur Basham (1914-1986):
But, after all, who knows, and who can say Whence it all came, and how creation happened?
The gods themselves are later than creation, so who knows truly whence it has arisen?

Mr. Raimundo Panikkar (1918-2010):
Who really knows? Who can presume to tell it? Whence was it born? Whence issued this creation?
Even the Gods came after its emergence. Then who can tell from whence it came to be?

Mr. Abinash Bose (1st Publ. 1966):
Who, really, knows? who can here declare it – whence was it born and whence come this creation?
The Devas are later than this world’s production; Then, who knows from where it came into being?

Mr. Walter Maurer (1st Publ. 1973):
Who, after all, knows? Who here will declare whence it arose, whence this world?
Subsequent are the gods to the creation of this world. Who, then, knows whence it came into being?

Mr. Jean Le Mée (1st Publ. 1975):
Who really knows, who could here proclaim Whence this creation flows, where is its origin?
With this great surge the Gods made their appearance. Who therefore knows from where it did arise?

Mr. Antonio de Nicolás (1st Publ. 1976):
Who really knows? Who can here say When was it born and from where creation came?
The gods are later than this world’s creation; Therefore, who knows from where it came into existence?

Mr. Satya Prakash (1st Publ. 1977):
Who really knows, who in this world can declare it, whence came out this creation? Whence was it engendered? Whence will it end?
Nature’s bounties came out much later, and hence who knows whence this creation came into manifestation?

Ms. Wendy Dongier O’Flaherty (1st Publ. 1981):
Who really knows? Who will here proclaim it? Whence was it produced? Whence is this creation?
The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe. Who then knows whence it has arisen?

Ms. Jeanine Miller (1st Publ. 1985):
Who knows the truth, who can here proclaim whence this birth, whence this projection?
The gods appeared later in this world’s creation. Who then knows how it all came into being?

Mr. Rangasami Kashyap (1st Publ. 1998):
Who knows it aright? Who can here set it forth? Whence was it born, whence poured forth.
These gods are from its pouring-forth, whence then it came-to-be, who knows?

Mr. Michael Myers (1st Publ. 1998):
Who knows truly? Who here will declare whence it arose, whence this creation?
The gods are subsequent to the creation of this. Who, then, knows whence it has come into being?

Mr. Joel Brereton (1st Publ. 1999):
Who really knows? Who shall here proclaim it? From where it was born, from where this creation?
The gods are on this side of the creation of this world. So then who does know from where it came to be?

Mr. Angirasa Muni (1st Publ. 1999):
We men do not really know. Who can therefore tell, how this universe was created and when?
Even the angels may have come into existence after the universe was created. No one can tell.

Mr. Subhash Kak (1st Publ. 2006):
Who this knows? Who here will declare whence it was born, whence this creation?
Later are the gods to the world’s creation. Who then knows whence it came into being?

Mr. D. Krishna Ayyar (1st Publ. 2009):
Who verily knows, who can declare whence it was born and whence comes this creation?
The gods are subsequent in the creation (even they cannot know); who knows then whence it first came into being?

desitip.com (1st Publ. 2010):
Who really knows? Who can confidently declare it? From which was it born? Who gave raise to this creation?
Even the Gods came subsequent to creation, Then who can reveal from whence it arose?

Mr. Asheesh Goja (1st Publ. 2010):
Who could know here for sure, who could further explain, whence this creation came about, and progressing to where on this side;
gods were born with its progression; who then knows from whence THIS came about.

Mr. Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay (1st Publ. 2011):
How can this be know with certainty? Who here can tell us? From where was it born? From where was it released/ projected?
The Gods came subsequent (to this creation). How then can the (birth of) this world/ universe (existence) be known?
(Who then knows (about the) birth of this world/ universe? (existence).

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

7th Stanza:
इयं विसृष्टिर्यत ।आबभूव यदि वा दधॆ यदि वा न ।
यॊ ।आस्याध्यक्ष: परमॆ व्यॊमन्त्सॊ आंग वॆद यदि वा न वॆद ॥७॥
iyáḥṃ vísṛṣṭir yáta ābabhūva yádi vā dadhé yádi vā ná
yó asyādhyakṣaḥ paramé vyòman só añgá veda yádi vā ná véda

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Mr. Ralph Griffith (1826-1906):
He, the first origin of this creation, whether he formed it all or did not {form it},
He who surveys it all from his highest heaven, he verily knows it, or perhaps even he does not!

Mr. Sāyaṇa (ca. 1300-1387):
This various creation, whence it came into being, whether He upholds or upholds it not, who knows?
He, who is its overseer in the highest heaven. He truly knows, none other knows.

Mr. Henry Colebrooke (1765-1837):
Or whence this varied world arose? Or whether it uphold [itself], or not?
He, who, in the highest heaven, is the ruler of this universe, does indeed know; but not another can possess that knowledge.

Mr. Horace Wilson (1786-1860):
He from whom this creation arose, he may uphold it, or he may not (no one else can);
he who is superintendent in the highest heaven, he assuredly knows, or if he knows not (no one else does).

Mr. John Muir (1810-1882):
From what this creation arose, and whether [any one] made it or not –
he who in the highest heaven is its ruler, he verily knows, or [even] he does not know.

{Whence this creation sprang, whether it was formed or not –}
{he who, in the highest heavens, is the overseer of this universe – he indeed knows, or he does not know.}

2nd Alternate Version:
{He from whom this creation sprang – whether he made it or not – }
{he who is the overseer of this universe, he knows, or he does not know}.

Mr. Monier Monier-Williams (1819-1899):
[... missing ...]

Mr. Max Müller (1823-1900):
He from whom this creation arose, whether he made it or did not make it,
the highest seer in the highest heaven, he forsooth knows, or does even he not know?

Mr. William Whitney (1827-1894):
This creation – from whence it came to being, Whether it made itself, or whether not –
Who is its overseer in highest heaven. He surely knoweth: or if he does not know?

Ms. Zenaide Ragozin (1835-1924):
He from whom this creation sprang, whether he made it or not,
the All-Seer in the highest heaven, he knows it – or he does not.

Mr. Archibald Gough (1845-1915):
This creation, whether any made it, or any made it not?
He that is the overseer in the highest heaven, he indeed knows, or haply he knows not.

Mr. Paul Deussen (1845-1919):
He from whom this creation proceeded, whether he created it or not,
He whose eye watches it in the highest heaven, He perhaps knows it – or perhaps he knows it not.

Mr. Adolf Kaegi (1849-1923):
The source from which this universe has risen And whether it was made, or uncreated
He only knows, who from the highest heaven Rules, the all-seeing lord, – or does not He know?

Mr. Arthur Macdonell (1854-1930):
Whence this creation has arisen; whether he founded it or did not:
he who in the highest heaven is its surveyor, he only knows, or else he knows not.

Mr. Maurice Bloomfield (1855-1928):
This creation – from whence it came to being, Whether it made itself, or whether not –
he who is its overseer in highest heaven, He surely knoweth – or perchance he knoweth not.

Mr. Henry Wallis (1861-1887):
Whence this creation (lit. emission) is come into being, whether it was ordained or not
he whose eye is over all in the highest heaven, he indeed knoweth it, or may be he knoweth it not.

Mr. Narendranath Datta (1863-1902):
This projection whence arose, Whether held or whether not,
He the ruler in the supreme sky, of this He, O Sharman! knows, or knows not He perchance!

Mr. Northcote Thomas (1868-1936):
He who hath moulded and called forth the worlds Whether he hath created it or not,
Who gazeth down on it from heaven’s heights, He knoweth it; or doth he know it not?

Mr. Ananda Coomaraswamy (1877-1947):
Whence outpoured this came to be, or whether one appointed it or not,
He who is Over-Eye thereof in uttermost Empyrean, he knows indeed, or knoweth not.

Mr. Arthur Keith (1879-1944):
The overseer of it in the highest space of heaven he knows of it, or perhaps he knows not.

Mr. Franklin Edgerton (1885-1963):
This creation, whence it came into being, whether it was established, or whether not –
he who is its overseer in the highest heaven, he verily knows, or perchance he knows not.

Mr. Norman Brown (1892-1975):
This creation, whence it came into being, whether spontaneously or not –
he who is its highest overseer in heaven, he surely knows, or perhaps he knows not.

Mr. Juan Mascaró (1897-1987):
Only that god who sees in highest heaven: he only knows whence comes this universe,
and whether it was made or uncreated. He only knows, or perhaps he knows not.

Mr. Paul Thieme (1905-2001):
From where this creation has come, whether it was done [by some agent] or not –
He who is the overseer of this world in highest heaven, he certainly knows, or does he not know?

Mr. Jan Gonda (1905-1991):
This creation-in-differentiation, whence it has come into existence, whether it is the result of an act of founding or establishing or not,
he who surveys it in the highest firmament, he only knows (it) – or else he (also) does not know (it).

Mr. Robert Zaehner (1913-1974):
Whence this emanation hath arisen, Whether [God] disposed (or, created) it, or whether he did not,
Only he who is its overseer in highest heaven knows. [He only knows,] or perhaps he does not know!

Mr. Arthur Basham (1914-1986):
Whence all creation had its origin, he, whether he fashioned it or whether he did not,
he, who surveys it all from highest heaven, he knows – or maybe even he does not know.

Mr. Raimundo Panikkar (1918-2010):
That out of which creation has arisen, whether it held it firm or it did not,
He who surveys it in the highest heaven, He surely knows – or maybe He does not!

Mr. Abinash Bose (1st Publ. 1966):
That from which this creation came into being, whether It had held it together or It had not,
He who surveys it in the highest region, He, truly, knows it, or maybe He does not know!

Mr. Walter Maurer (1st Publ. 1973):
This world – whence it came into being, whether it was made or whether not –
He who is its overseer in the highest heavens surely knows – or perhaps He knows not!

Mr. Jean Le Mée (1st Publ. 1975):
This flow of creation, from where it did arise, Whether it was ordered or was not,
He, the Observer, in the highest heaven, He alone knows, unless ... He knows not.

Mr. Antonio de Nicolás (1st Publ. 1976):
That from which creation came into being, Whether it had held it together or it had not
He who watches in the highest heaven He alone knows, unless ... He does not know.

Mr. Satya Prakash (1st Publ. 1977):
He from whom this creation arose – verily He may uphold it or He may not.
The one who is the sovereign in this highest heaven, He assuredly knows, or even He knows not.

Ms. Wendy Dongier O’Flaherty (1st Publ. 1981):
Whence this creation has arisen – perhaps it formed itself, or perhaps it did not –
the One who looks down on it, in the highest heaven, only He knows or perhaps even He does not know.

Ms. Jeanine Miller (1st Publ. 1985):
Whence this creation originated; whether He caused it to be or not,
He who in the highest empyrean surveys it, He alone knows, or else, even He knows not.

Mr. Rangasami Kashyap (1st Publ. 1998):
From what source did this creation came into being? or whether one appointed it or not.
He who is over-eye thereof in Supreme Ether, he knows indeed, or knows not (in advance).

Mr. Michael Myers (1st Publ. 1998):
Whence this creation has come into being; whether it was made or not;
he in the highest heaven is its surveyor. Surely he knows, or perhaps he knows not.

Mr. Joel Brereton (1st Publ. 1999):
This creation – from where it came to be, if it was produced or if not –
He who is the overseer of this world in the highest heaven, he surely knows. Or if he does not know ...?

Mr. Angirasa Muni (1st Publ. 1999):
Some people ask, ‘Did the elemental matter, from which this universe was built, always exist or was it also created by God?’
The One who built and who controls the universe alone knows. If He does not know, then who knows?

Mr. Subhash Kak (1st Publ. 2006):
This creation, whence it came into being, whether it was formed or whether not.
He who is its lord in the highest heavens surely he knows, or perhaps he knows not.

Mr. D. Krishna Ayyar (1st Publ. 2009):
He, the first origin of creation, whether he formed it or did not form it?
He who is presiding over it all indeed knows, or maybe He does not.

desitip.com (1st Publ. 2010):
That out of which creation arose, whether it formed by itself or it did not,
He who oversees it from the highest heaven, only he knows or maybe He does not.

Mr. Asheesh Goja (1st Publ. 2010):
From whence this creation arose; did he create, or did he not?
HE who presides over it in the highest heaven, HE alone for sure knows, or may be HE does not know.

Mr. Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay (1st Publ. 2011):
This creation of (this universal) existence (earth/ universe), perhaps He (the Great Self) placed (it there) or perhaps not.
The one who is the (Absolute) Lord of the Supreme Cosmos, He would definitely know (right?) ... or maybe even He does not.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

RETURN TO MAILING LIST ‘D’ INDEX

RICHARD’S HOME PAGE

The Third Alternative

(Peace On Earth In This Life Time As This Flesh And Blood Body)

Here is an actual freedom from the Human Condition, surpassing Spiritual Enlightenment and any other Altered State Of Consciousness, and challenging all philosophy, psychiatry, metaphysics (including quantum physics with its mystic cosmogony), anthropology, sociology ... and any religion along with its paranormal theology. Discarding all of the beliefs that have held humankind in thralldom for aeons, the way has now been discovered that cuts through the ‘Tried and True’ and enables anyone to be, for the first time, a fully free and autonomous individual living in utter peace and tranquillity, beholden to no-one.

Richard’s Text ©The Actual Freedom Trust: 1997-.  All Rights Reserved.