In Krishna, who in the Upanishads is known already by his own and his mother’s name, pantheism is made personal according to the teaching of one sect.  But while the whole epic is in evidence for the spuriousness of the claim of Krishna to be regarded as incarnate Vishnu (God), there is scarcely a trace in the original epic of the older view in regard to Vishnu himself.  Thus in one passage he is called “the younger brother of Indra” (iii. 12. 25).  But, since Indra is at no time the chief god of the epic, and the chapter in which occurs this expression is devoted to extolling Krishna-Vishnu as the All-god, the words appear to be intended rather to identify Krishna with Vishnu, who in the Rig Veda is inferior to Indra, than to detract from Vishnu’s glory.  The passage is cited below.

What now is the relation of Vishnu-Krishna to the other divinities?  Vishnuite and Civaite, each cries out that his god includes the other, but there is no current identity of Brahm[=a], Vishnu, Civa as three co-equal representations of one God.  For example, in iii. 189. 5, one reads:  “I am Vishnu, I am Brahm[=a], and I am Civa,” but one cannot read into this any trinitarian doctrine whatever, for in context the passage reads as a whole:  “I am N[=a]r[=a]yana, I am Creator and Destroyer,

I am Vishnu, I am Brahm[=a], I am Indra, the master-god, I am king Kubera, Yama, Civa, Soma, Kacyapa, and also the Father-god.”  Again, Vishnu says that the Father-god, or grandparent of the gods, is ’one-half of my body,” and does not mention Civa (iii. 189. 39).  Thus, also, the hymn to Civa in iii. 39. 76 ff. is addressed “to Civa having the form of Vishnu, to Vishnu having the form of Civa, to the three-eyed god, to Carva, the trident-holder, the sun, Ganeca,” but with no mention of Brahm[=a].  The three gods, Brahm[=a], Vishnu, Civa, however, are sometimes grouped together (but not as a trinity) in late passages, in contrast to Indra, e.g., ix. 53. 26.  There are many hymns to Vishnu and Civa, where each is without beginning, the God, the uncreated Creator.  It is only when the later period, looking back on the respective claims of the sects, identifies each god with the other, and both with their predecessor, that one gets even the notion of a trinity.  Even for this later view of the pseudo-epic only one passage will be found (cited below).

The part of Brahm[=a] in the epic is most distinctly in process of subordination to the sectarian gods.  He is holy and eternal, but not omniscient, though wise.  As was shown above, he works at the will of Vishnu.  He is one with Vishnu only in the sense that all is one with the All-god.  When Vishnu ‘raises the earth’ as a boar, Brahm[=a] tells the gods to go to him.[21] He councils the gods.  His heaven is above Indra’s, but he is really only an intermediary divinity, a passive activity, if the paradox may be allowed.  Not like Indra (to whom he is superior) does he fight with All-gods, or do any great act of his own will.  He is a shadowy, fatherly, beneficent advisor to the gods, his children; but all his activity is due to Vishnu.  This, of course, is from the point of view of the Vishnuite.