in the fourth place, the scriptural rule about the upanayana-ceremony annul their title; for that ceremony merely subserves the study of the Veda, and to the gods the Veda is manifest of itself (without study).  That the gods, moreover, for the purpose of acquiring knowledge, undergo discipleship, and the like, appears from such scriptural passages as ’One hundred and one years Indra lived as a disciple with Prajapati’ (Ch.  Up.  VIII, 11, 3), and ’Bh/ri/gu Varu/n/i went to his father Varu/n/a, saying, “Sir, teach me Brahman"’ (Taitt.  Up.  III, 1).—­And the reasons which have been given above against gods and rishis being entitled to perform religious works (such as sacrifices), viz. the circumstance of there being no other gods (to whom the gods could offer sacrifices), and of there being no other rishis (who could be invoked during the sacrifice), do not apply to the case of branches of knowledge.  For Indra and the other gods, when applying themselves to knowledge, have no acts to perform with a view to Indra, and so on; nor have Bh/ri/gu and other rishis, in the same case, to do anything with the circumstance of their belonging to the same gotra as Bh/ri/gu, &c.  What, then, should stand in the way of the gods’ and rishis’ right to acquire knowledge?—­Moreover, the passage about that which is of the size of a thumb remains equally valid, if the right of the gods, &c. is admitted; it has then only to be explained in each particular case by a reference to the particular size of the thumb (of the class of beings spoken of).

27.  If it be said that (the corporeal individuality of the gods involves) a contradiction to (sacrificial) works; we deny that, on account of the observation of the assumption (on the part of the gods) of several (forms).

If the right of the gods, and other beings superior to men, to the acquisition of knowledge is founded on the assumption of their corporeality, &c., we shall have to admit, in consequence of that corporeality, that Indra and the other gods stand in the relation of subordinate members (a@nga) to sacrificial acts, by means of their being present in person just as the priests are.  But this admission will lead to ‘a contradiction in the sacrificial acts,’ because the circumstance of the gods forming the members of sacrificial acts by means of their personal presence, is neither actually observed nor possible.  For it is not possible that one and the same Indra should, at the same time, be present in person at many sacrifices.

To this we reply, that there is no such contradiction.—­Why?—­On account of the assumption of several (forms).  For it is possible for one and the same divine Self to assume several forms at the same time.—­How is that known?—­From observation.—­For a scriptural passage at first replies to the question how many gods there are, by the declaration that there are ‘Three and three hundred, three and three thousand,’ and subsequently, on the question