अथेत्यभ्यमन्थत् ।स मुखाच्च योनेर्हस्ताभ्यां चाग्निमसृजत ।तस्मादेतदुभयमलोमकमन्तरतः ।अलोमका हि योनिरन्तरतः ।तद्यदिदमाहुरमुं यजामुं यजेत्येकैकं देवमेतस्यैव सा विसृष्टिः ।एष उ ह्येव सर्वे देवाः ।अथ यत्किञ्चेदमार्द्रं तद्रेतसोऽसृजत ।तदु सोम ।एतावद्वा इदं सर्वमन्नं चैवान्नादश्च ।सोम एवान्नमग्निरन्नादः ।सैषा ब्रह्मणोऽतिसृष्टिः ।यच्छ्रेयसो देवानसृजताथ यन्मर्त्यः सन्नमृतानसृजत तस्मादतिसृष्टिर् ।अतिसृष्ट्यां हास्यैतस्यां भवति य एवं वेद ॥बृह. १,४.६ ॥
In plain words
Then he rubbed thus, and from his mouth as from a womb, and from his hands, he brought forth fire. Therefore both these are hairless within, for the womb is hairless within. And when men say, "Sacrifice to this god, sacrifice to that god," these are all his creation, and he alone is all the gods. Then whatever is moist here he brought forth from seed, and that is Soma. All this is only so much: food and the eater of food. Soma is food and fire is the eater of food. This is the surpassing creation of Brahman: that he brought forth the gods, who are better than he, and that, being mortal, he brought forth the immortals. Therefore it is a surpassing creation. He who knows this comes to be in this surpassing creation of his.
The commentators
Bṛhadāraṇyakopaniṣadbhāṣyam· Leaf 8.111· bhāṣya
णमप्युक्तवदुपसंहरति सृष्टिसाकल्यानुकीर्त्यै । यथेयं श्रुति- र्व्यवस्थिता तथा प्रजापतिरेव सर्वे देवा इति निश्चितो- ऽर्थः ; स्रष्टुरनन्यत्वात्सृष्टानाम्, प्रजापतिनैव तु सृष्ट्वा- देवानाम । अथैवं प्रकरणार्थे व्यवस्थिते तत्स्तुत्यभिप्रा- येणाविद्वन्मतान्तरनिन्दोपन्यासः । अन्यनिन्दा अन्यस्तुत- ये । तत् तत्र कर्मप्रकरणे, केवलयाज्ञिकां यागकाले, यदिदं वच आहुः—‘ अमुमग्निं यजामुमिन्द्रं यज ’ इत्यादि—ना- मशस्त्रस्तोत्रकर्मादिभिन्नत्वाद्विन्नमेवाग्न्यादिदेवमेकैकं मन्य- माना आहुरित्यभिप्रायः—तन्न तथा विद्यात् ; यस्मादेतस्यैव प्रजापतेः सा विसृष्टिर्देवभेदः सर्वः ; एष उ ह्येव प्रजापति- रेव प्राणः सर्वे देवाः ॥ अत्र विप्रतिपद्यन्ते—पर एव हिरण्यगर्भ इत्येके; संसा- रीत्यपरे । पर एव तु मन्त्रवर्णात्—‘ इन्द्रं मित्रं वरुणमग्नि- माहुः ’ इति श्रुतेः ; ‘ एष ब्रह्मैष इन्द्र एष प्रजापतिरेते सर्वे देवाः ’ इति च श्रुतेः ; स्मृतेश्च—‘ एतमेके वदन्त्यग्निं मनु- मन्ये प्रजापतिम् ’ इति, ‘ योऽसावतीन्द्रियोऽग्राह्यः सूक्ष्मो- ऽव्यक्तः सनातनः । सर्वभूतमयोऽचिन्त्यः स एव स्वयमु- द्बभौ ’ इति च । संसार्येव वा स्यात्—‘ सर्वान्पाप्मन औ- षत् ’ इति श्रुतेः ; न ह्यसंसारिणः पाप्मदाहप्रसङ्गोऽस्ति ; भयारतिसंयोगश्रवणाच्च ; 'अथ यन्मर्त्यः सन्नमृतानसृजत' इति च, 'हिरण्यगर्भं पश्यत जायमानम्' इति च मन्त्रवर्णात् ; स्मृतेश्च कर्मविपाकप्रक्रियायाम्—'ब्रह्मा विश्वसृजो धर्मो महानव्यक्तमेव च । उत्तमां सात्त्विकीमेतां गतिमाहुर्मनीषिणः' इति । अथैवं विरुद्धार्थानुपपत्तेः प्रामाण्यव्याघात इति चेत्—
In plain words
The scripture concludes this section in the same manner, in order to praise the complete unity of creation. According to this established scriptural teaching, the settled truth is that Prajapati is indeed all the gods. This is because the created world is not separate from its creator, and because Prajapati himself, after projecting them, became those very gods. Now, since this is the established meaning of the text, the scripture introduces a criticism of the ignorant view solely to praise this non-dual truth—for the censure of one view serves to glorify the other. Thus, in the ritual portion of the Vedas, during sacrifices, the mere ritualists declare: 'Offer sacrifice to this Agni, offer sacrifice to this Indra,' and so forth. They speak this way because they believe each deity is entirely separate, misled by differences in names, hymns, and ritual acts. But one must not understand it in this dualistic way. All this diverse creation of gods is the projection of Prajapati alone; for he indeed is Prajapati, he is the cosmic life-force, and he is all the gods. On this point, thinkers disagree: some maintain that Hiranyagarbha is the supreme Self, while others argue he is a transmigrating soul. The first view holds that he is the supreme Self, citing the Vedic mantra: 'They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuna, and Agni,' and the Upanishadic text: 'He is Brahma, he is Indra, he is Prajapati, he is all these gods.' This is supported by traditional Smriti texts: 'Some call him Agni, others Manu, and others Prajapati,' and 'He who is beyond the senses, ungraspable, subtle, unmanifest, eternal, the essence of all beings, and unthinkable—he alone shone forth.' Conversely, the other view argues he must be a transmigrating soul, pointing to the scripture: 'He burnt all his evils,' since a non-transmigrating, supreme Self cannot be subject to the burning of sins. Furthermore, scripture describes him as experiencing fear and loneliness, and mantras declare: 'Though mortal, he created the immortals,' and 'Behold Hiranyagarbha being born.' The Smriti also states in the section on the fruits of action: 'Sages call this state of Brahma, the creators of the universe, Dharma, the Great, and the Unmanifest, the highest state of purity.' If one objects that such contradictory scriptural statements destroy the very authority of the sacred texts—
Close to the Sanskrit
The scripture concludes this also in the manner stated, for the sake of praising the completeness of creation. Just as this scriptural text is established, so also the settled meaning is that Prajapati indeed is all the gods; because the created things are not different from the creator, and because Prajapati indeed, having created, became the gods. Now, this being the established meaning of the section, for the purpose of praising that, there is the introduction of the censure of the other view of the ignorant. The censure of another is for the praise of the other. Therefore, there in the section on rituals, at the time of sacrifice, the mere ritualists say this word—'Sacrifice to this Agni, sacrifice to this Indra,' etc.—thinking each deity like Agni to be different indeed, because of the difference in names, weapons, hymns, and actions; this is the intention—one should not know it thus; because all this creation, the variety of gods, is of this Prajapati alone; for he indeed is Prajapati, he is Prana, he is all the gods. Here they disagree—some say Hiranyagarbha is the supreme Self indeed; others say he is a transmigrating soul. He is the supreme Self indeed, because of the mantra text: 'They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni,' and from the Sruti: 'He is Brahma, he is Indra, he is Prajapati, he is all these gods'; and from the Smriti: 'Some call him Agni, others Manu, others Prajapati,' and 'He who is beyond the senses, ungraspable, subtle, unmanifest, eternal, consisting of all beings, unthinkable, he himself shone forth.' Or he must be a transmigrating soul indeed, because of the Sruti: 'He burnt all evils'; for there is no possibility of burning evils for one who is not a transmigrating soul; and because of the hearing of his connection with fear and discontent; and from the mantra texts: 'Now, since he, being mortal, created the immortals,' and 'Behold Hiranyagarbha being born'; and from the Smriti in the section on the ripening of actions: 'Sages call this state of Brahma, the creators of the universe, Dharma, the Great, and the Unmanifest, the highest state of Sattva.' Now, if it be objected that because of such contradictory meanings, there is a contradiction in the authority of scripture—
Bṛhadāraṇyakopaniṣadbhāṣyam· Leaf 8.112
न, कल्पमान्तरोपपत्तेरविरोधात् । उपाधिविशेषसंबन्धाद्विशेषकल्पनान्तरमुपपद्यते । 'आसीनो दूरं व्रजति शयानो याति सर्वतः । कस्तं मदामदं देवं मदन्यो ज्ञातुमर्हति' इत्येवमादिश्रुतिभ्यः उपाधिवशात्संसारित्वम्, न परमार्थतः । स्वतःऽसंसार्यैव । एवमेकत्वं नानात्वं च हिरण्यगर्भस्य । तथा सर्वजीवानाम्, 'तत्त्वमसि' इति श्रुतेः । हिरण्यगर्भस्तूपाधिशुद्धयतिशयापेक्षया प्रायशः पर एवेति श्रुतिस्मृतिवादाः प्रवृत्ताः । संसारित्वं तु क्वचिदेव दर्शयन्ति । जीवानां तूपाधिगताशुद्धिबाहुल्यात्संसारित्वमेव प्रायशोऽभिलप्यते । व्यावृत्तकृत्स्नोपाधिभेदापेक्षया तु सर्वः परत्वेनाभिधीयते श्रुतिस्मृतिवादैः ॥
तार्किकैस्तु परित्यक्तागमबलैः अस्ति नास्ति कर्ता अकर्ता इत्यादि विरुद्धं बहु तर्कयद्भिराकुलीकृतः शास्त्रार्थः । तेना- रणधर्मिणो देवान्, कर्मज्ञानवर्द्धिना सर्वानात्मनः पाप्मन ओषित्वा, असृजत ; तस्मादियमतिसृष्टिः उत्कृष्टज्ञानस्य फलमित्यर्थः । तस्मादेतामतिसृष्टिं प्रजापतेरात्मभूतां यो वेद, स एतस्यामतिसृष्ट्यां प्रजापतिरिव भवति प्रजापतिवदेव स्रष्टा भवति ॥
In plain words
No, because different conceptions are possible without contradiction. A specific view is justified when we consider the connection with various limiting adjuncts. Texts like 'Sitting still he travels far, lying down he goes everywhere; who other than me can know that radiant, paradoxical deity?' show that worldly bondage comes from conditioning factors, not from ultimate reality. By its true nature, the self is entirely free. Both unity and multiplicity belong to Hiranyagarbha in this way, and likewise to all living beings, as declared by the text 'Thou art that.' Because of his exceptionally pure adjuncts, Hiranyagarbha is generally described in scriptures as the supreme reality, with only occasional references to worldly traits. For ordinary souls, however, heavy impurities of conditioning lead scriptures to speak mostly of their bondage. Yet when all conditioning factors are completely set aside, every soul is declared by scripture to be the supreme reality.
Logicians who abandon the authority of sacred texts only confuse the true import of scripture with endless, contradictory arguments about existence, non-existence, agency, and non-agency. Having consumed all impurities through the power of knowledge and action, he brought forth the gods. Thus, this extraordinary projection is the true fruit of supreme knowledge. Whoever realizes this supreme projection as none other than the self of Prajapati becomes identified with Prajapati within it, becoming a creator just as he is.
Close to the Sanskrit
No, because of the possibility of alternative conceptions and lack of contradiction. Another specific conception is justified due to connection with special limiting adjuncts. From such shrutis as: 'Sitting still he goes far, lying down he goes everywhere; who other than me can know that exhilarated and unexhilarated deity?', transmigratory existence is due to limiting adjuncts, not in absolute reality. By nature [the self] is free from transmigration indeed. Thus both oneness and multiplicity belong to Hiranyagarbha. Similarly for all living beings, on the authority of the shruti text 'Thou art that'. Hiranyagarbha, because of the superior purity of his adjuncts, is mostly spoken of as supreme by shruti and smriti texts. Transmigratory existence is shown only in certain contexts. For living beings, due to the abundance of impurities belonging to their adjuncts, only transmigratory existence is mostly spoken of. However, when all distinctions of limiting adjuncts are set aside, everyone is spoken of as supreme by shruti and smriti texts.
By logicians, however, who have abandoned the strength of sacred texts, the scriptural meaning has been rendered confused by much contradictory reasoning about 'is', 'is not', 'doer', 'non-doer', and so on. Having burnt away all the sins of the self through the cultivation of action and knowledge, he created the gods; therefore this extraordinary creation is the meaning of the fruit of supreme knowledge. Therefore, whoever knows this extraordinary creation as being the very self of Prajapati, he becomes like Prajapati in this extraordinary creation; he becomes a creator just like Prajapati.