of all beings.  We therefore conclude that the source of all beings is the highest Lord, not either of the other two.—­But wherefrom do you conclude that the quoted declaration of form refers to the source of all beings?—­From the general topic, we reply.  The word ‘he’ (in the clause, ’He is indeed the inner Self of all things’) connects the passage with the general topic.  As the source of all beings constitutes the general topic, the whole passage, from ‘From him is born breath,’ up to, ’He is the inner Self of all beings,’ refers to that same source.  Similarly, when in ordinary conversation a certain teacher forms the general topic of the talk, the phrase, ’Study under him; he knows the Veda and the Veda@ngas thoroughly,’ as a matter of course, refers to that same teacher.—­But how can a bodily form be ascribed to the source of all beings which is characterised by invisibility and similar attributes?—­The statement as to its nature, we reply, is made for the purpose of showing that the source of all beings is the Self of all beings, not of showing that it is of a bodily nature.  The case is analogous to such passages as, ’I am food, I am food, I am the eater of food’ (Taitt.  Up.  III, 10, 6).—­Others, however, are of opinion[151] that the statement quoted does not refer to the source of all beings, because that to which it refers is spoken of as something produced.  For, on the one hand, the immediately preceding passage (’From him is born health, mind, and all organs of sense, ether, air, light, water, and the earth, the support of all’) speaks of the aggregate of beings from air down to earth as something produced, and, on the other hand, a passage met with later on (’From him comes Agni, the sun being his fuel,’ up to ’All herbs and juices’) expresses itself to the same purpose.  How then should all at once, in the midst of these two passages (which refer to the creation), a statement be made about the nature of the source of all beings?—­The attribute of being the Self of all beings, (which above was said to be mentioned in the passage about the creation, ‘Fire is his head,’ &c., is not mentioned there but) is stated only later on in a passage subsequent to that which refers to the creation, viz.  ’The Person is all this, sacrifice,’ &c. (II, 1, 10).—­Now, we see that sruti as well as sm/ri/ti speaks of the birth of Prajapati, whose body is this threefold world; compare Rig-veda Sa/m/h.  X, 121, 1, ’Hira/n/ya-garbha arose in the beginning; he was the one born Lord of things existing.  He established the earth and this sky; to what God shall we offer our oblation?’ where the expression ‘arose’ means ‘he was born.’  And in sm/ri/ti we read, ’He is the first embodied one, he is called the Person; as the primal creator of the beings Brahman was evolved in the beginning.’  This Person which is (not the original Brahman but) an effect (like other created beings) may be called the internal Self of all beings (as it is called in II, 1, 4), because in