VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY

A Survey of the Work of some Western Scholars In 1805, Henry Thomas COLEBROOKE published his essay, " On the Vedas, or Sacred Writings of the Hindus,’“1 and thereby became entitled to the distinction of being perhaps the first Western scholar ever to write at some length about the Veda.” In this essay, COLEBROOKE deals with what may be called the * externals’ of the Vedic literature rather than with its contents. He gives, mainly on the strength of the manuscripts coliccted by himself, the first sketch, in any European language, of the Rgreda (RV) and, to a smaller cxtent, of the other three Vedas. He also speaks of the Vedic rṣis, the various Vedic schools, and the Vedic commentaries, and incidentally touches upon the question of the authority of the Veda. He further refers to the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, tre Sarikhāyana-Brīlimana, and the Sarapatha-Brālt mana. From among the Vedangas, hc mentions the Sūtras only in passing, but he emphasises the importance of the Nirukta and evinces special interest in Jyotiṣa. About the Vedic religion and mythology as such he has hardly anything to say. Whatever information about the Veda COLEBROOKE has given in his essay is generally correct, but his writing also shows that he had not made any deep study of the Veda. Indeed, COLEBROOKE cannot be said to have even formed a proper estimate of the Veda. He says that the Vedas are far too extensive to be trans lated in entirety and that the ancient dialect in which they are written is exceedingly difficult and obscure, and further adds that their contents are such as would render such translation bardly rewarding either to the reader or to the translator, COLEBROOKE’s attitude towards the Veda was thus somewhat resigned’, and,

1. As. Res. 8, 369-476.
2. COLEDROOKE was at that time a member of the Superior Court of Appcal in Calcutta and Professor of Sanskrit in the College of Fort William. 22 170 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY accordingly, his essay did not prove particularly conducive to further Vedic research Franz BOPP, who must be regarded as the real father of San skrit philology and comparative linguistics in Europe, reproduces in his work, Uber das Conjugationssysteni der Sanskritsprache, some specimens from the Vedas and a few episodes from the Rāmajana and the Mahābhārata în German translation, but, his interest in the Veda being linguistic and grammatical, he bas completely igoored the subject of the religion and mythology of the Veda Even Viasa, the German journal which was founded by Othmar FRANK in 1826 for the study of the philosophy, mythology, literature and language of the Hindu," did not carry any article on the Vedic religion and mythology Io 1830 was published VON BOHLEN’s Das alle Indien mit besonderer Ruck sicht auf Aegypten 5 In this book the author does mention the four Samhras of the Veda, but what he seems to have kpows about them is, indeed, very little In the section on religion and colt, a reference to the Vedic religion is wholly absent, and Jadra, Varuṇa, and Agni appear only as Lokapalas According to VON BOHLEN, 10 India, as in Egypt, religion had its beginning in the worship of the suo god Even in BENFEY’s long article entitled “Indien”. Vedic sources have remained conspicuously uputilised Later, however, BENFEY produced some remarkable work in the field of Vedic studies, such as the edition of the Samoyeda,? the glossary of which might be regarded as the first attempt to the direction of a Vedic dictionary, the monographs on Vedic grammar and accent, and the translation of RV which has come up to I 130 As for the Vedic mythology, BENFEY accepts the suggestion that Sarameyau in RV are to be related to Greek 3 Frankfurt a N1, 1816 4 The translation of the episodes from the cpics us mctrical 5 O FRANK has also written a monograph about the Indian connections with L-gypt with particular reference to anythology O l’ublished in 1840 in the Allgemeine Enzyklopad. der 11 issenschaften und Kansle ed led by Lascil and GRUBER
3. Lcipzig, 1818. VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 171 Kerberos. Further, according to him, Dionysos is to be under stood as Dyu and Niś or day and night.& Incidentally, both BENFEY and MAX MÜLLER derive frat in the word fraddhi — obviously wrongly – from the root śru. Friedrich ROSEN was a devoted pupil of BOPP (about whom it is said that he, being himself great in research work, accomplished more through his power of stimulating others than by systematic instruction), and his work Radices Sanscritae clearly reflected the influence of the master. But ROSEN’s true genius was revealed in the bold plan which he had conceived of publishing the entire RV-Samhuta with Latin translation and notes. In 1830, he published his Rig-Vedae Specimen for which he had utilised Yaska, Pūnini, and Sayana. His work on the edition of RI’ was, however, interrupted by his untimely death, and the part of it, which is now available, was published only posthumously,10 This part contains the text of the first 121 hymns with translation ( which is, to a large cxtent, based on Sāyana’s commentary). The exegetical notes cover the portion only up to RV I. 31.6. This edition of RV, sadly incomplete as it bad been, served as the basis of Vedic philology in Europe for a pretty long time. A new branch of Xnowledge was, as it were, taking shape, albeit falteringly, out of this edition. What is, however, significant in the context of the present study is that ROSEN’s work affords a few glimpses in what later on developed into comparative mythology. He it was, for instance, who, in connection with the legend of the Panis and the cows, first drew attention to the comparable myth of Cacus and Evander. Eugène BURNOUF (1801-1852) was essentially a pioneer and pathmaker,’ and, though he himself wrote little about the Veda, bis lectures on the subject at Paris proved a veritable source of inspiration to his many pupils, among whom may be specially mentioned ROTH, MAX MULLCR, REGNIER, and NEVE, B. MAX MUELLER accepts this identlication. 9. Berlin, 1827. 10. London, 1838. 172 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY ROTH’s first work, Zur Litteratur und Geschichte des IVeda," written at the age of twenty-five, is truly epoch-making. Verily it was this monograph which, small as it was, must be said to have inaugurated the era of critical Vedic scholarship. The monograph consists of three sections dealing respectively with the Sanhitā, the Prātsakhya, and the history in RV 1% It would be interesting to compare ROTH’s work with that of COLEBROOKE, As against the latter’s counsel of despair, for ROTH, the Veda offered a very rich and fertile field for research In his view, for the history of Orient - indeed, for the entire history of anti quity, there was perhaps nothing more important than the study of the Veda ROTH was interested more in the contents of the Veda thad in its form - his work was ‘pbilological’ rather than linguistic, lexical’ rather than grammatical He believed that the hymns of RV were not the creation of a theological speculation, nor did they grow out of minute liturgical practice (which, according to him, definitely belonged to a later age). Their language, religion, and cult were more indigenous than those of the subsequent periods. The Indian commentators did not possess a key to these - they were overpowered by prejudice and did not have a sense of historical development. ROTH’S slogan, therefore, was: ‘Away from Sāyana’ He insisted that the RV-exegesis must seek to make the texts yield their own sepse, One must bring together and study comparatively all the passages which are related to one another verbally or from the point of view of contents ROTH further emphasised that RV and the Brahiranas had to direct connection, that there was a considerable gulf between the two.13 Incidentally it may be : Rosen’s edition of material (lie hadi of such
4. Sruttgart, 1846.
5. It is certainly amazing usat Roth could produce a book of such fundamental value in spite of the paucity of material (he had before him. only COLENROOKF’s 08.3), ROSEN’s edition of the first ostaka of RY, and Stevensov’s edition of the Sumaceda which, however, he did not recognuc as authoritative; for le monograph, Roti depended almost entirely on his study of manuscripts), bus young age, and the short period of his training 13, Ron’s excgcucal methoda ruiuited in an wolared trcatment of RV, a tendency to multiply the meanings of a word, and textual cmtndauons. Jo connection with the last, Rotu scems to basc depended largely on hu ntuitiot. & tendency to muli sclical method, us short period of VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 173 pointed out that, through his cssay, “Geschichtliches im Rigweda: Vasishthas Kampf mit Viçsamitra,""!! ROTH has made the first truly critical attempt towards a historical estimate of RM 1 Excn in the field of religion and mythology, which arc our chief concern here, ROTII’s contributions are truly classical in character and mark the beginning of a new cra. llc insisted that thc Rgcdic religion was by no means the outcome of priestly cunning, and tricd to establish its human-natural character. His general attitude was cthical-acsthetic as against the ethnological scientific of the subscqucnt periods. He spoke fcclingly of the Richymns with shich the ancestors of the Indians, living on the banks of the sesen riscos, inyolcd the blessings of their gods for themschics and their linsmen, worshipped the rising sun and dawn, sang of the wars between the thunderbolt-bearing God and the demon of darkness, and called for the help of the heavenly powers in their own battles. His “Zur Geschichte der Religion cn “16 consisted of three essays : 1. Dic Brahma-religion, 2. Dic Buddha-Religion, and 3. Dic Ormuzd-Religion. In the first essay, and, to some extent, also in the third, lic deals with the Vedic religion and mythology. His other cssay, “Die höchsten Gotter der arischen Volkcroi, he has devoted mainly to the consideration of Varuṇa and Adityas. ROTI believed that Varuņa personified the all-encompassing brilliant vault of the sky. This sky-god was once the supreme god of the Aryans (beforc the Indians and the Iranians had separated), but in RI, he was being gradually represented as a dethroned’ sos creign. ROTII identificd Adityas with Amesha Spontas and Varuṇa with Ahura Mazdah, and sought to explain the connection of this ancient sky god with the god of the occan. Aditi sas for him the personifi.
6. This is the thurd scction in Rotui’s zur Litteraler und Geschichte das It’eda.
7. Rotis’s monumental work on the editions of the Virufta and the Atharvareda as also in connection with the famous l’elersbwr Dictionary further marks him out as tlic grandsırc of Vedic #tudies
8. Published in Theologisches Jahrbuch 5, 316-63, 6, 175-30; 0, 281-27. 17, ZDAIC G, 67-77. 174 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY cation of infinity According to him Aßvins were the two bright streaks of the heaven ushering in Usas — the two harbingers of light in the morning sky The shining other belonged to Indra Some other minor points of mythological interest made by ROTH were that bralıman (which word he derived from the root brh) symbolised the stirring up of thought and the fullness of feeling for God that Sarinyu was the storm cloud and that only heaven, as the abode of the righteous was referred to in RV the existence of the wicked havipg ended with death From among the two other pupils of BURNOUF, the approach to the study of the Veda of the one was grammatical, while that of the other was mythological Adolphe REGNIER’S Etude sur l Idiome des Vedas et les Origines de la Langue Sonscrites constitutes the first critical and exact study of the Vedic language as such, wbile 10 lus comprehensive monograph, Essai sur le mythe des Ribhavas 19 Felix Neve treats critically of the mythology relating to Rbbus which according to bim, represents the first apotheosis in the Veda and incidentally of the whole Vedic mythology so general 20 NEVES work is spoken of approvingly by Adalbert KUHN " who is regarded as perhaps the most enthusiastic sponsor of coniparative mythology The basis of KUHN s comparative mythology was threefold KUHN believed that just as the Indo European peoples had since Urrell, a common language they also had not a few religious and mythological concepts (as also customs and manners) 10 common He further believed that the etymologies of the names of the various Vedic gods provided ample matern for the study of these common religious and mythological concepts In other words, comparative linguistics and comparative mythology had to proceed hand in hand And finally he believed that most of the 18 Ft l’art Paris 1855 19 Pas 1817 20 Nevais axen led to l s monograph the Sanskrit text (wuh Sayndas com nentary) and the French translaton of the rhymns to Rb w 21 2 4 103VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 175 Vedic (and, therefore, Indo-European ) gods were personifications of natural powers and phenomena, particularly the meteorological phenomena. In his “Zur altesten Geschichte der indogermanis. chen Volker,“92 KUHN first applied his comparative study of Indo-European (IE) languages – particularly Vedic, Greek, and Germanic - to the reconstruction of Indo-European antiquity. But his priocipal work in the field of comparative mythology is Die Herabkunft des Feuers und des Gortertranks.23 Here he points to the traces, among the various le peoples, of a common pantheon of gods and a common mythology. These traces he discovers mainly in legends and folk-tales.” For this purpose, he has brought together a considerable amount of material, suggesting a large number of etymological equations (which are, however, not always acceptablc) and mythological comparisons. He seems to think of the Vedic mythology not as an Indian’ mythology, but merely as an aspect of the boundless IE mytho logy. All that the Veda docs for him is to provide materials for comparison. This has resulted in the undue prominence which he has given to such figures as Saranyū and Sārameya, whose counterparts, according to him, may be easily found in Erinys and Hermeias respectively. Uṣas reminds him of Brunhild. He identifies Rbhus with Greek Orpheus - even with Germanic Elben - and the Gandharvas with Kentauren. In his above mentioned book, Die Herabkunft des Feuers, KUHN has studied, among others, the legend of Purūravas and Urvasi and of Cyavana from the point of view of comparative mythology. His papers on " Pitars as phenomena of light,” " Dwarfs as souls of the dead”, and " Dwarfs as phenomena of light “are included in the second volume of Mythologische Studien non Adalbert Kuhn.25 In the same volume he has dealt with “Cows in Indogermanic
9. Ind. Stud. 1, 321-63. 23. Gutersloh, 1859.
10. It may be pointed out that Ku had already published a paper catuled “Uber die Vrhaddevat " in Ind Stud 1 (1850). This would indicate that he took special interest in Indian mythology almost from the very beginning of his scholarly career.
11. Gutersloh, 1912 (published after his death, by his son ). 176 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY mythology " According to him, they represent clouds and rays of light He believes that the Panis, who are said to have stolen the cows, are mythological beings, and emphasises their connec tion with Asura Vall A reference may be made here to the linguistic and mytho logical investigations made by W SONNE with special reference to RV I 50,26 which reveal the unmistakable influence of KUHN’S approach and methodology Speaking of Asyins and Dioscuri, SONNE points out that two parallel rafters tied together by means of pieces of wood placed crosswise are the symbol of Dioscuri, 37 and are referred to in the Veda as the contrivance with the help of which Asvins rescued Bhujyu In bis Indische Altertumskunde, Vol 1,29 Christian LASSEN has represented the gods of RV mainly on the basis of ROTH’, . Zur Geschichte der Religionen,” resorting to much false etymology In the second edition of that volume,29 however, he has made ample use of the findings of comparative mythology, particularly as set forth by KUHN whose Herabkunft he has cited quite frequently Albrecht WEBER was one of the most prolific Sanskritists 10 Germany His interests extended over various branches of Sapskrit and Prakrit philology, but he has written comparatively little on the Vedic religion and mythology as such 30 However, at a very early stage in his career, he bad directed his attention to a critical study of Vedic legends As enrly as 10 1850, he 26 KZ 12 15 27 Odyss 12,431 H 28 Bonn 1817 29 Published in 1867 30 Reference may be incidentally made to WEBCR S editions of the Vajasaney: Samhild (Madhyamdina aid Kanva recensions, with Mabidhara’s commentary) the Satapatha Bralmand (Madhyamdina recension, with extracts from the commentaries of Sāyana, Harisvamin, and Dyedaganga ), and the Karya yang Srautas tra (with cxtracts from die commentaries of Karka and Yajnikadeva ), 1852 1859, to lis editions of the Taultrija Samhita (1871-72 ), the Adbhuta Brahmone of the Samaveda and the Adbhuldigaya of the laufika Sula, to the research oral Indrek Smd m pauhsaed by him to his H skory U Indian Literature, and to his studies relating to the Prakrits and the Jamna Iteraturc VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 177 published in the first volume of his journal, Indische Studien, a paper on the two legends from the Satapatha-Brāhmaṇa, namely, the legend of Manu and the Deluge and the legend of Videgha Mātbava. This latter legend, according to WEBER, clearly referred to the migration of the Vedic Aryans from the region of the river Sarasvati to that of the Sadānīrā in Kosala-Videha. Later, WEBER also dealt with other legends, such as those of the rejuvination of Cyavana, the revengeful requital after death, Vāmadeva’s two mares, and Purūravas and Urvaśī. Of course, in the course of his profuse writing, WEBER had many occasions to discuss the nature of the Vedic gods. While doing so, he has depended, to a large extent, on the etymologies of the names of these gods. At one place, for instance, he has identified Asvins with the Gemini stars and has added that they were called Nāsatyau because they appeared like nose (or island) in the ocean of the morning sky.’ Elsewhere he has accepted the equation, Sárameyau - Kerberos. He has also referred appro vingly to the identification of Dyauṣ-pitā with Zeus Pater and Jupiter and of Surya with Helios and Sol. The principal achievement of Theodor AUFRECHT in the field of Vedic studies was that it was he who published the first complete edition of RV 31 This edition, which gave the text transcribed in Roman characters, must be said to have exercised, for a pretty long time, by far the greatest influence on the Vedic studies in Germany. As for the Vedic religion, AUFRECHT believed that Savitr, Varuṇa, Dyauh, and Viṣou were the oldest gods, and that, in RV, the worship of these gods seemed to be superseded by the worship of newer gods. About the same time
12. Die Hymnen des Rigveda (published as volumes 6 and 7 of WEBER’S Indische Studien), Berlin, 1861-63. Of course, the first volume of MAX MUELLER’S edition of RV was published in 1849, but it took that edition another quarter of a century to complete. In the preface to the second volume of his edition, AUFRECIIT gratefully acknowledges the inspiration which he had received for his work from Roses and Ron, A mention may be made here also of AUFRECHY’s edition (1879) of the Attareya Brāhmaṇa, with extracts from Sāyana’s commentary, glossary, index of verses from RV, and notes. 23 178 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY when AUFRECHT’s edition of RV was nearing completion, that is to say, in 1863, Émile BURNOUF, the nephew of Eugène BURNOUF, published his Essai sur le Veda, 32 which as the subtitle indicated, consisted of studies on the religion, literature, and social organization of India from the early times to the brahmanic period. In this book, the younger BURNOUF has dealt, among others, with such topics as the origin of caste, the absence of any hierarchy among the Brāhmanas, the Vedic ritual, and the origin of gods and their symbolic nature.33 His treat ment of the Vedic religion was oriented by comparative linguistics and comparative mythology, but his general approach was essen tially speculative. According to him, the Vedic ritual was but an abridged representation of the grand working of nature. For him, Agni personified the principle of fire as also of life. Many of Émile BURNOUF’s ideas about the Vedic religion and mythology seem to have been later adopted and developed by BERGAIGNE. In the field of Vedic studies, the pame of Friedrich MAX MULLER is celebrated as that of the scholar who gave to the Vedists the Editio Princeps of the RV-Samhita with the commen tary of Sāyana. But MAX MÜLLER must also be regarded as the first scholar who roused genuine interest for the Veda among the generally educated people of the West. He did not write only for the specialists, and yet his expert knowledge of the facts of the Veda invested his writings with a kind of authority. It was while attending E. BURNOUF’s lectures in Paris that MAX MÜLLER received the inspiration for the edition of RV with
13. Paris, 1863. 33 On the ono hand this book served as a complement, and more parucularly as a corrective, to von BOHLEN’S Das alle Indien (1830), and, on the other, it found its complement and corrective in 2IWER’s Alrindisches Lebm (1079).
14. It was Max MUELLER’ popular’ writings which prompted the *pecialists in the field to look upon him as a mere dilettante. On the other hand, Mat VUELLER also had some personal prejudices. For instance, he was disappointed with Lopp because the latter cad’ hus lccturts in the class. Similarly be entertained a kind of aversion to ROTI ever since hc and Ratu bad beca together in Paris attending BCRNOUF’s lcctures VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY, 179 Sāyana’s commentary. The first volume of this edition was published in 1849 and the last in 1874. As for Vedic exegesis as such, MAX MULLER has not done much except perhaps his English translation of the Hymns to Maruts.35 His main concern seems to have been the religion of the Veda.38 MAX MULLER believed that the true history of mankind was the history of man’s religion. And he further believed that from no other source did one understand the origin and development of religion so thoroughly as from the Indian scriptures.s? “While Hesiod gives us,” he writes, as it were, the past bistory of a theogony, we see in the Veda the theogony itself, the very birth and growth of the gods, i, e. the birth and growth of the words for god.“938 He did not approve of the tendency to study the mythology of the Veda as isolated from the religion of the Veda. According to him, myth-buildjog was something morbid; a mythological religion always presupposed a healthy religion. Another favou. rite contention of MAX MULLER was that religion was closely connected with language, and that, therefore, the approach to the science of religion should be similar to that to the science of language. 39 MAX MULLER started his discussion of the Vedic religion with certain firm assumptions. All religions, according to him, had some common basic elements, such as the realisation of the Divine in the actual, the feeling of human weakness and depen dence, the faith in the divine ordering of the world, the conscious ness of good and bad, and the hope for a higher and better life. Again, all religions, howsoevermuch they might differ in other respects, agreed in one point, namely that their evidence was not 35, SBE, 32.
15. MAX MUELLER’s views on the subject of the Vedic religion are very well represented in lus Hibbert Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion (as allustrated by the religions of India ), delivered in London in 1878.
16. Of course, Max MUELLER hastened to add that this did not mean that religion developed in the same way everywhere.
17. Hibbert Lectures, 197.
18. However, he often asserted that religious history was far more imp tant than linguistics 180 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY entirely supplıcd by sensuous perception If, then, all religious ideas transcended the limits of sensuous perception, to what did they owe thesr ongia? Two possibilities could be suggested in this connection Firstly one might think of some kind of external revelation Or one might assume that man possessed a religious instiact by which he, alone of all other living creatures, was enabled to perceive the infinite, the invisible, the divine MAX MULLER was not inclined to subscribe to any of these two views in entirety, though 10 connection with the Vedic religion, he does seem to have accepted an Uroffenbarung-an original revelation as implied by the word sruti. Proceeding further in his own peculiar way MAX MULLER pointed out that, by a simpl psychological analysis, one could discover “three classes of things which we can perceive with our senses, but which leave in us three very distinct kinds of impression of reality 10 (1) Tangible objects, such as stones, shells, and bones, which were supposed to have been the earliest objects of religious worship by the religion historians who held fetishism to be the first beginning of all religion, 41 (2) Semi tangible objects, such as trees, moun tains rivers, the sea, and the earth, and (3) Intangible objects, such as the sky, the stars, the sun, the dawn, and the moon The testimony of the Veda, Max MULLER further pointed out, showed that out of the three foregoing classes of objects, the first was’ hardly represented at all among the so called deities of the Rig Veda “12 In other words, there were no traces of fetishism in RV, though, according to MAX MULLER, they began to appear is more modern hymns, particularly those of the Atharvaveda As for the semi tangible objects, each one of them could be met with among the deities of the Veda MAX MULLER has characterised such deities as semi deities in the intangible objects could be discovered the germs of what might be called full deities Indeed the various objects belonging to the second and 40 Hbbert Lectures, 180 41 MAX MUELLER defin tely discountenanced this view and asserted that fet sh sm was not a primary form of rel gon 42 Hbbert Lectures 198 VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 181 the third classes were the windows through which the ancient Vedic Aryans first looked into infinitude - into divinity, i This, then, is a brief, but certainly not quite adequate, sketch of MAX MULLER’s view regarding the origin of the Vedic religion. MAX MULLER’s conception of the Vedic religion was essentially naturalistic. He believed that the Vedic poets always sought to perceive the divine ‘, the supernatural’, the infinite,’ behind the natural’. All divinities, except those which, like the sky, the sun, etc, were actually visible, were anthropomor pbised. And, usually, a name was given to a god, which denoted the special characteristic of the nature (or form) of that god, such as Indra (from indu = drop) the rainer, Rudra the howler, Maruts the thrusters, and Varuṇa the all-encompasser 43 MAX MULLER was a comparative religionist and a comparative mythologist, and he raised the superstructure of his theories pertaining to the subject of religion and mythology on the three basic assumptions, namely, the assumption of a common IE pantheon of gods and a common IE mythology, the assumption that most of the mythology was made up of natural phenomena translated into the laoguage of myths and legends, and the assumption that etymologising the names of the Vedic gods helped, on the one hand, to illumine their character, and, on the other, to establish their relationship with their counterparts in other IE mythologies.44 He accepts, for instance, the identifica tion of Sārameyau with Hermeias ( as suggested by KUHN) and of Dyu-Niś with Dionysos (as suggested by BENFEY). Saramā is compared with Helena, and consequently with Uṣas. Vivasvat and Saranyū (Erionys ) personify the sky and the dawn. Urvasi also is Usas or the dawn. Aditi, implying infinitude or immorta lity, is one of the oldest names of the dawn, that is, of that portion of the sky whence every morning the light and life of the world flash forth. She personifies the golden sea behind the dawn. Asvinau represent the day and the night, and Yama is
19. These etymologies arc, of course, not always convincing.
20. KUIN, MAX MUELLER, HARDY, and SCHROEDER were among the chic protagonists of comparative mythology. 182 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY the setting sun Other linguistic and mythological equations accepted by MAX MULLER are Parjanya and Perkupas (Lith), Dyauh and Zeus Usas and Eos, Nakta and Nyx Surya and Helios, Agni and Ignis, Bhaga and Bogu (old Slav ) Varuṇa and Ouranos, Vata and Wotan, and Vāk and Vox Brahman is connected with Latin verbum (which is, of course, evidently wrong) MAX MULLER also speaks of the struggle for supremacy between Dyauh, the old primeval god, and Indra, the more modern and personal god In the name Maruts can be seen the seeds of the Italian war god Mars Prometheus may have been the counterpart of Pramantha, Orpheus of Rbhu, and Pan of Pavana in the word asura, meaning originally endowed with breath, and afterwards god, one may recognise the first attempt at what has sometimes been called animism in later religion Two essential concepts of the Vedic religion, apart from the sem dividities and the full divinities mentioned above are those of Aditi ( infinity and Rta (from the root r = go the path of the sun, therefore, order) MAX MULLER thipks that, side by side with śraddha, 45 there are, in RV, traces of atheism or disbelief in god But, according to him, atheism is a relative concept so the Veda It will be seen that a distinctive feature of MAX MULLER S view of the Vedic mythology is that, in his naturalistic conception of that mythology, he always emphasized a solar interpretation 48 One did not need to wonder, he said why so much of the old mythology the daily talk, of the Aryans was solar In his inimitably eloquent way he wrote “What else could it have been? The names of the sun are endless and so are his stories, but who he was whence he came and whither he went remained a mystery from beginning to end man looked up to the sun, yearning for the response of a soul, and though that response never came, though his senses recoiled, dazzled and blinded by an 45 With BENFEY MAX MUELLER derives frat in graddha - wrongly-from the root $16 46 It may be recalled that KUHN la d stress on a meteorological inter pretation VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 183 effulgence wbich he could not support, yet he never doubted that the invisible was there, and that, where his senses failed him, where he could neither grasp nor comprehend, he might still shut his eyes and trust, fall down and worship.“47 It should, however, be remembered that solarisation of many Vedic divinities marked but a subsequent stage in the evolution of the Vedic mythology, and that MAX MULLER’s solar interpretation might refer only to that particular stage. MAX MÜLLER’s special contribution to the study of the Vedic religion is his theory of henotheism in RV. The earliest form of the religion of the Veda, he says, is neither polytheism nor monotheism; it is what he prefers to call henotheism or kathenotheism, that is to say, “a successive belief in single supreme gods,” It is to be clearly distinguished “from that phase of religious thought which we commonly call polytheism, in which the many gods are already subordinated to one supreme god, and by which therefore the craving after the one without a second has been more fully satisfied. In the Veda one god after another is invoked. For the time being, all that can be said of a divine being is ascribed to him. The poet, while addressing him, seems hardly to know of any other gods,“48 To identify Indra, Agni, and Varuṇa is one thing; it is syncretism.49 To address either Indra or Agai or Varuṇa as, for the time being, the only god in existence with an entire forgetfulness of all other gods is quite another. It is this latter tendency, the henotheistic ten dency, which is fully developed and predominantly reflected in the hymns of RV.50 By way of traciog the further development
21. Hibbert Lectures, 207–08.
22. Hibbert Lectures, 271. Elsewhere Max MUELLER says: There is a monotheisrn that prcccdes the polytlicism of the Veda. Whereas the Semitic nations relapsed from time to time into polytheism, the Aryans of India seca to have relapsed into monotheism. The Aryans possessed an instinctive monotheism.
23. According to Max NIUELLER, syncretism marks a stage between polytheism and benotheism.
24. MAX MUELLER regards honotheison as the dialectic period of religion. It is not restricted only to India. It is naturil, and therefore universal. Only, onc docs not scc it anywhere so clearly in its very growth as in the Veda, 184 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY of Vedic honotheism, MAX MULLER refers to the tendency of identifying onc god with another, to the formation of dual divinities, to thc concept of Visic-Dcych, the All-gods in their collective capacity, and finally to the crpedient of making one of the gods supreme above all the rest Ilc mentions three main directions of development - towards organized polytheism, to wards exclusivc monotheism, and towards athicism,” Speaking of the Vedic religion as a whole and correlating the different stages in its growth with the different periods or Vedic literature, MAX MULLCR says that the majority of the hymns of RL represen! the childhood of that religion, the Brühmianas, with their sacri. ficial, domestic, and moral ordinances, its busy manhood, and the Upan/sads its maturity and old agc fla The Italian scholar, Angclo de GUBERNATIS, was a compa. rativc mythologist, and, though he had been a pupil or WEBER, he mostly followed KUHIN, MAX MULLER, and George Cox, He wrote his principal work on the animals in the Indo-European mythology in Italian, but it was Srst published in an English translation under the file Zoological Mythology. In this book, GUBERNATIS has dealt with the animals under three calcgories, namely, the animals of the land (the bull and the cow being the most prominent among these), the animals of the mid-region, and the animals of water, and the starting point of the treatment 10 cach chapter is RV. The relationship between the gods and the animals is variously cxpressed. A god is compared with an animal, as, for instance, when Indra is called ursabha; or a dividity is represented as assuming the form of an animal, as, for instance, when Aditi is represented as a cow; or animals arc said to drive the vehicle of a divinity and thereby reflect its
25. The otheum of the ancient llindus, such as it was, would, according to Max MUELLER, be more correctly called Adevum, or a denial of the old Devas. 510 Tor a tribute to Max MUELLER on hu 150th birth anniversary, by DANDEKAB, BC CASS Stadus 2, 179-187, 3, 161-169.
26. George Cox was an expert in Greek mythology. 53. London, 1873VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 18$ character and power. GUBERNATIS’s interpretation of mytho logy is paturalistic; he believes that the myths based on the phenomena relating to the sky are brought down to the earth and carried forward in the form of fables, legends, and fairy-tales in ever newer variations. Accordiogly, whatever has been said about animals in mythology he traces back to the sun and the 1000, the thunderbolt, the lightning, the dawn, the clouds, the night and the darkness, and explaios it in the light of the mutual connections between these natural phenomena. He further points out that a large qumber of myths have originated out of contradictions’ and ‘antetheses,’ that is to say, out of the contrasting forms in which these heavenly phenomena appear to one and the same observer, let alone, to different observers. Aurora is the morning and the evening twilight, but she appears also during the night, which fact explains why there is a reference to her slightiy demoniac character in some cases. Indra is the god of rain and thunder, but he is also the socturnal sup. About the two Aśvins, GUBERNATIS says that one of them represents the white moon and the other the sun, or he identifies them with the morning twilight and the evening twilight respectively. He further adds that Rāma and Laksmana are the epic representa tives of the Vedic Asyins. Among other identifications in zoolo gical mythology, suggested by GUBERNATIS, may be mentioned the following: The ass is the steed of the sun during the night; the goat is the sun; the stag represents the resplendent phenomena which appear in the cloudy or nocturnal forest; and the fox is the ruddy negotiator between the bright day and the dark night, In another of his works, namely, Letture sopra la Mitologia Vedıca,51 GUBERNATIS treats of the Vedic gods, beginning with Dyauh and ending with Rudra, in a more or less elementary manner, He compares the Vedic myths variously with Christian concepts. Elsewhere,55 he has characterised RV as the Bible of the Aryans. The folk-religion of the Aryans, according to him,
27. Tirenze, 1874. 55. Fonto pediche dell’Epopea, Firenze, 1867. 186 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY is born out of their observation of natural phenomena The hero of the bright phenomena is god, that of the dark ones is satan. GUBERNATIS asserts that mythology and epopea ’ are necessarily interdependent At the same time, epopea’ without war is unthinkable Therefore, in mythology, the concept of heavenly war must predominate Following this line of argument, GUBER NATIS discusses the different representations of this heavenly war in all the mandalas of RV one after another 50 For him, Vasistha, Visvämstra, and Sudās are all mythical characters 87 Even the essential basis of the Ramayana is, according to him, mythical Lanka is the cloud or the night, Rama is Visou or Indra, that is, the sun, Sitā is Usas or the dawn, the monkeys are the rays of the sun In this connection, it must be pointed out that the etymologies suggested by GUBERNATIS are not always sound and that his mythological equations are often bold and farfetched 58 A kind of reaction against the approach to the Vedic mytho logy exclusively from the point of view of comparative mytho logy - an approach which was so enthusiastically sponsored by KUHN and MAX MULLER - was but quite patural, and became evident, to a certain extent, 18 Jobo MUIR’s Origmal Sanskrit Texts, so particularly in the fifth volume in the series. Volume 5 of MUIR’s work has the subtitle, “Contributions to a knowledge of the Cosmogony, Mythology, Religious Ideas, Life and Manners 56 From this point of view, this work of GUBERNATIS may be regarded as dealing with the Vedic sources of the epics 57 On this point, GUBERNATIS has criticised MUIR, who, following Rotit, considers th-se three to be historical personages 58 Incidentally, a reference may be made to GUBERNATES’: contributions on “Indra s hfc and muracies in RV (Stud rir, 1866 ) and “The Indian hermaphrodite lla’ (GSAIT) GUBERNATIS has also written a book ( 1878 82 ) on Botanical Mythology, which constitutes a comparative history of the cult of plants Another interesting book produced by hun is a kind ol cultural encyclopaedia of India in which he refers briefly to Indian gods, beroes r$us, etc 59 Volumes 1-4 London 1858 63. Vol 5, London, 1872 NOIR entered Bengal Civil Service in 1028 and served in India for nearly a quarter of a century VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 187 of the Indians in the Vedic Age,” and provides, perhaps for the first time, through its rich but discerning collection of pertinent Vedic sources, a firm and efficient basis for a decper and more Critical study of the Vedic religion and mythology & This effort of MUIR, 10 a sense, implies his insistence that the Vedic religion and mythology ought to be studied primarily from the Vedic sources, the comparative methods being utilised only secondarily It may, honever, be pointed out that MUIR himself has not renounced comparative mythology altogether. He accepts the identification of Varuṇa with Ouranos, and consequently describes the former as representing the all-encompassing sky He cites ROTH and WCSTERGAARD in connection with the development of Varuṇa’s character from the ancient sky god to the god of the ocean He also discusses the relationship between Varuṇa and Ahura Mazdah 61 As for Adili, MUIR considers her to be ‘a personification of universal, all-embracing Nature, or Belog, while ROTH and MAX MULLER, on whom he normally depends, see in her the personification of infinity He refers to the view of GOLDSTUCKER, who distinguishes between the cosmic and the human or historical clements in the Aśvin-myth, and suggests that, like Rbhus, Aśvins were originally renowned mortals, who, 10 course of time, were translated into the companionship of gods.63 60 MUIR’s work contraucs to be important from thus point of view even to this day Though the various studıcs on individual Vedic drinilies which bave been published since then, such as the one on Asvins by MYRIANTIEUS, on Dyaus Asura by von BRADKE, and on Aditi and Varuṇa by HnLEDRANDT, 31 also the comprehenove tecatist on tlue Vedic religion and mythology by LAEGI, OLDENDERO and MACRONELL lavc tended to supersede MUIR : Onginal Sansknt Texts, their authors haic, not infrequently, depended upon the material collected by MUIR 61 Roti bel eved that Varura was worshipped by the Aryans beforc the separation of the Indians and the Iranians According to VITITNEY also, Ahura Mazdah had developed out of Varuṇa SPIEGEL and WINDISCIMANN, on the other hand, regarded this as doubtful, and suggested that Ahura Mazdah was purely an Iranian divinity 62 Incidentally, mention may be made of the matrical sketches of Varuṇa, Indra, and other gods, composed by M[uir and appended to his work 188 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY If AUFRECHT was the first scholar to bring out a complete edition of RV, Alfred LUDWIG was the first to publish a complete German translation of that Veda. Actually two German transla tions-one by LUDWIG and the other by Hermann GRASSMANN appeared about the same time. The first part of GRASSMANN’S translation of RV ( mandalas 2-8), with critical and exegetical notes, was issued at Leipzig in 1876, and the second part (manda las 1, 9, and 10 ) in 1877,63 LUDWIG’s work was planned on a grander scale 61 It consisted of six volumes - volumes 1 and 2 contained a complete translation of the RV-Sanihita; volume 3 was intended to be a kind of an exhaustive iatroduction; volumes 4 and 5 constituted a detailed commentary: and volume 6 consisted of a register of citations, an index of conjectures, a glossary, and a material and grammatical repertory. The third volume of LUDWIG’s work is entitled Die Mantralitteratur und das alle Indien, als Eilertung zur Übersetzung. In it, LUDWIG has brought together and supplemented through his own resear ches the findings in Vedic philology of ROTH, MAX MULLER, and MUIR, among others. it is, indeed, a rich storehouse of materials. So far as the Vedic mythology, religion, and philo sophy are concerned, it may be pointed out that LUDWIG has, among other things, commented upon such concepts as ta. brahman, saija, and mayã. He has rejected the identification of Varuṇa with Ouragos. Varuṇa, according to him, was not the sky-god in the elementary sense of the word; Dyauh was the proper sky-god. More or less similar to, but perhaps more systematically written than, LUDWIG’s third volume is Heinrich ZIMMER’S Altindisches Leben.66 Curiously enough, ZIMMER 63 A mention may be made here also of GRASSMANN’S Wörterbuch LUT Rig Veda, Leipzig, 1873.
28. Der Rigueda oder die heiligen Hymnen der Brāhmaṇa, Prague, 1875-88.
29. GRASSMANN’s foreword to the first part of his translation was dated April 1876, while Ludwra’s foreword to the first volume of his big work was dated end of 1875, That was why Ludwic’s work could carry the super scripture : “translated into German i full for the first time.’ Tbc two translations, it should be noted, reflected two cssentrally divergent approaches and points of vicw.
30. Strasburg, 1879. VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 189 has not at all dealt with mythology and ritual, though he has included in his book some sections on cosmology and astronomy, where his main authority is WEBER. Friedrich BOLLENSEN is particularly well known as a critical editor of Sanskrit dramas, but he has also made a few interesting contributions to Vedic philology. In one of his “Beiträge zur Kritik des Veda,“67 he has dealt with the Vedic gods, Mitra, Varuṇa, Aryaman, and Indra. He depends largely on the etymologies of the names of these gods, but his etymologising is not always convincing. For instance, he derives mitra from the root smi which means to be bright, ito emit rays of light.’ According to him, Varuṇa originally represented the day-light. He connects the word varuna with the root var, which, he says, often implies the same thing as the root vas ( - to shine). He understands devaḥ aryaḥ in RV VII. 64. 3 as referring to Aryaman, who, in his view, is the proper Deus Aricus. On the other hand, Indra (derived from the root indh), says BOLLENSEN, is the national god in the religious context. Aśvios are, for him, the morning star and the evening star. A mention may be made at this stage of the rather peculiar views about the Veda of Hermann BRUNNHOFER. BRUNNHO FER begins by emphasizing that, as the first step towards a proper understanding of the Veda, one must free oneself from ROTH’s interpretation of it. His own starting point is the study of the names of persons and places occurring in the Veda. Depending mainly on phonetic similarities, he connects these pames with the names of persons and places in ancient Iran, and asserts that the original home of the Indian Sanskrit-Aryans’ was Iran and Turan, His principal work is entitled Iran und Turan,and comprises his historical-geographical and ethnologi cal investigations about the oldest scene of Indian ur-history. His methodology, based on phonetic equations, is fully illustrated in this book. He had already suggested that sakapūta in RV X. 67, 2DMG 41 (1887), 494-507, 68. Leipzig, 1889. 190 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY 132 5 was saka-putra (son of Saka), an Iranian poet of RV. Similarly he understands Dębhika (RV II 14 3) to be the representative of the Iranian family of Derbiks, and Nahus to be identical with the old Persian naga, which is used in cuoneiform inscriptions with reference to Persian emperors King Abhyavartin (RV VI 27 5,8) is connected with the city Abivard in Khorasan Rsi Agastya, connected with old Persian Asharagata, was an Iranian whose mastery over Sanskrit was not perfect Sunahấepa also must have been of Iranian origin, for, “only the people who were mad about dogs, like the Iranians, could think of such a name” Pethuparsaval (VII 83 1 ) are undoubtedly identical with the Parthians and the Persians, so too are Pārthavāh (VI 27 8 ) the Parthians Tura Kāvaseya of the Satapatha Brāhmanals is an Iranian from Turan, and the river Kārotl, on whose banks to have offered a sacrifice to the gods, is to be identified with the Iranian Haraquantı O Perhaps the most phantastic suggestion of BRUNNHOFER’s is that one has to see in the words apāmnām sedla (X 98 12) 4 reference to the city Apamela on the Caspian passes Samudra in RV, he further says, almost always denotes the Caspian sea The rivers Oxus and Jaxartes are more akin to RV than the lodus 71 BRUNNHOFER has no doubt whatsoever about the Iranian provenance of most of the important RV-hymns He even goes to the extent of asserting that “mapy Vedic rois dot only never set foot on the Indian soil, but they presumably did not even know India” In connection with mythology also, BRUNNHOFER has put forth some equally unrestrained views At one place, he com pares Indra with Andreas, while, at another, he discovers the reflection of India’s battle with Varcin in the battle between 69 18 5 2, 15 70 This reference occurs in the Sandılsa portion of Uie Solapatha Brāhmaṇa, which according to BRUNNHIQTER, 11 of Iranian orgin 71 KERN I as drawn attention to the very close relationship between the Ved c language and the Bactrian language Indeed, he characteriscs tic latter as a dialect of the former 72 Arische Urzeit, Forschungen auf dem Gebiet des allesten Vorder und Zentral astens nebst Osteuropa, Bern, 1910, VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 191 Anderman and Gurgin described in the Shahnamah Usas, whose chariot was shattered by ladra (IV 30 & ff ), is, for BRUNNHO FER, queen Semiramıs of Babylon who had accomplished a victorious campaign in the region of the Indus The ornaments and weapons of Maruts remind him of the Central Asian cuirassiers of antiquity, namely the Parthians 73 In Cumur, he finds traces of the Sake queen Tomyris He surmises that Divo dasa was a Hittite Cappadocian 74 Varuṇa, who according to BRUNNHOFER, was the god of the starry night-sky and the unending ocean, was transformed from the lord of the universe to Vr̥tra, the enemy of the universe On the strength of RV VII 96 1, BRUNNHOFER characterises Sarasvati as the ‘assyrian among the rivers 75 He accepts the identification of the Gandhar vas with Centauros, and, connecting the word kandarpa with gandharia, further suggests that Kandarpa, the god of love, may have been Gandharva who has survived from antiquity Similarly, by a very bold stretch of imagination, he connects moki (night) with Baukis of the Philomon Baukis legend It will be thus seen that BRUNNHOFER’s Vedic Iranism and Turanism has a very wide (and also wild ) connotation and application Abel BERGAIGNE must be said to represent a distinct land mark 10 the history of the study of the Vedic religion and mytho logy Indeed, he was the first Western scholar to have devoted a whole book76 exclusively to the consideration of the religion of the Veda Both in the fields of Vedic exegesis and Vedic religion, he 73 BRUYNITOFER suggests that the Sanskrit Aryans of RV must have already known gun powder 74 That BAUNNHOFER sees in Ajanidha a reference to the common clan father of the Aryans (aja = ärya ) is a gross instance of phonetic anachronum 75 A pet theory of BRUNYHOFERS 25 that parti in RV (V 19 1 ) (Bawrı) is to be ideat fied wth Babylon BRUNNITOFER further suggests a babylonian or gin for the Nasad ya Sakta ( 129 ) “11c Miranyagarbha Sakla ( 121 ) 13 of Iranian origin, wbilc ghic famous I aruna-Sylta in the Atharva reda (IV 16) which lic comparcs with Psalm 139, 15 of Medish ongın 76 La region téd que d après les hymnus du Rig Veda (three volumes), Paris 1878-83 Though essentially I mited to the hymns of RV tbs book bears the character of a veritable thesaurus of religious and mythological materials 192 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY sought to cut new paths. As against the lexical efforts of ROTH and GRASSMANN, BERGAIGNE insisted that, as far as possible, the meaning assigned to a Vedic word should be such as would be found adequate in all the passages where that particular word occurred Similarly, by way of a reaction against the methods of comparative mythology which had been, in a sense, overworked by KUHN and MAX MULLER, he restricted himself only to RV and tried to reconvey the profuse and apparently complex mythology of the Veda in a simple system which could be expressed in a few formulas. According to him, RV was full of priestly rhetoric, subtleties, and paradoxes,?? Mythology and cult were rigorously interdependent - one could not be properly explained without the aid of the other. The rsis of RV were themselves quite conscious of this interdependence. The religion and mythology of RV, as systematised’ by BERGAIGNE in the form of what OLDENBERG calls algebraic’ formulas, may be set forth, in broad outlines, as follows: The mythology of the Vedic Aryans is closely connected with their sacrificial cult. This latter, by the very rites which constitute it, or at least by the greater part of the formulas in which these rites are described, appears at once to be an imitation of certain celestial phenomena. These phenomena are of two kinds: (1) those which accompany the rising of the sun (solar phenomena ) and (2) those which accompany the fall of rain after a long drought (meteorological phenomena ). In both these kinds of phenomena, Vedic mythology distinguishes between male and female elements. The male element in the first group is the sun and the female element is the dawn (or dawns); the male and female elements in the second group are respectively lightning
31. According to OLDENBERG (Vedaforschung ), BERCAIGNE regarded RP as a product of bizarre rhetoric. OLDENBERC further says that BERCAIGNE did not bother to thunk of anything other than RV, he apparently pissed the point that the literature immediately following RV dealt with the same sacrificiar ritual for which the RV-hynns had been composed, and that, therefore, 115 literature could be regarded as a kind of commentary on RV, OLDENBERG adds that BERCAIONC rcalised the importance of this literature only in a last days. VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 193 and cloud (or waters). These different elements can be represen. ted differently in the framework of mythological anthropomor phism and zoomorphism.78 The supposed relationships among these elements are consequently reflected in the mythological connections among these beings of two sexes whether in human or animal form. For instance, the concomittance, priority, and posteriority of the patural phenomena are expressed in terms of sexual union or collateral kinship, paternity or maternity, and filialation of the mythical beings, respectively. Of course, these relationships can be confounded or reversed according to the different or manifold points of view. This would explain the incest between brother and sister, and father and daughter, referred to in the Veda, as also such descriptions as the daughter has given birth to the father the son has begotten his mothers.’ The sun is represented as the son or the lover or the father of Usas; and the celestial waters are said to be either the mothers or the daughters of lightning. This mythological idiom is reproduced also in the description of the Vedic ritual. The Vedic ritual can be thought of as comprising two principal stages, namely, the stage of the preparation of the oblation and the stage of the oblation being offered into the sacred fire. Here, too, BER GAIGNB points to the male and the female elements. The male element is the fire and the female element is the oblation or the prayers, and both these are represented as corresponding to the male and the female elements of the celestial phenomena.79 One of the most basic assumptions of BERGAIGNE is that the sacrificial ritual is the true reproduction on earth of the cosmic happenings, that is to say, of the acts which are accom plished in heaven.80 The elements of the ritual are not mere
32. The most frequently occurring figures of animals are: (males) - bird, borse ( winged or otherwise ), bull, call, (females) - mare, cow. 79 The correspondence between the ritual and the natural phenomena is, according to BERCAIGNE, nowhere more evident than in the formulas which consecrate the relation of the prayers to the firc zad the consecrated beverage.
33. It may be recalled that this point had been adumbrated in thc writing of BURNOUF (Junior), some years before BERGAICNE wrote his book. 25 194 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY symbols of the elements of the celestial phenomena; they are, verily, identical with them in nature, and, like them derive their origin from heaven. Vedic sacrifice, it is emphasised, is not a mere imitation - it is actually accomplished by means of the elements borrowed from heaven by men who claimed origin from heaven, On the other hand, the natural phenomena are themselves regarded as sacrifice. BERGAIGNE explains that the real sigpi ficance of a sacrifice being conceived as a replica of the celestial phenomena is that, under the particular form of naturalistic worship, the sacrificial practice produces in effigy that which it is desired should take place in reality. It is a kind of symbolic magic which is common to most of the primitive peoples and continues even up to a well-advanced state of civilisation.1 BERGAIGNE further explains that the Vedic sacrifice, which is regulated according to the seasons of the year and even according to the hours of the day, has for its object the maintenance of the natural order of the world, in solar as well as meteorological phenomena It can prove efficacious enough even to fasten rain fall when needed. BERGAIGNB’s conception of the Vedic mythology is, in the main, naturalistic. He accepts from his predecessors the sugges tion that the principal phenomena of nature drawn upon by the Vedic mytbology are suprise and thunder. The various relations of heaven and earth are viewed as directly naturalistic 63 BER GAIGNE, however, hastens to add that the Vedic mythology also knows of other deities besides those which directly represent the clements, or the worlds in which these elements operate. In this connection, he mentions Pusap and Viṣṇu 81 As for Indra, that god does derive his attributes from the elements over which he 81, MACDONELL complained that BERGAIGNE did not sufficiently destin guish sacrifice from magic 82 BERCAIGNE says that do ut des is a sufficiently exact formula of the relations established by Vedic worship between heaven and easti. 83 Vedic gods are generally regarded as mere masks, behind them appear in reality the powers of nature, and between the reality and the appearance plays the bizarre rhetoric of the Vedic poets
34. Pusan is related to the sun and Soma, and Vaṣnu to Agni and SomaVEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 195 rules. But he also has the character of a warrior-god.85 Accord ing to BERGAIGNE, Indra is the god who makes the sun rise after the dawn, and who, armed with the thunderbolt, makes the celestial waters flow. It is, however, pointed out that, in the case of Indra, the sacrificial magic becomes effective in respect of the celestial phenomena oply in an indirect way; Indra is said to be achieving his exploits, when intoxicated with Soma, In the context of Indra, BERGAIGNE makes a very significant observation. He speaks of a twofold conception of the order of the world in the Vedic mythology. In the Indra-mythology, this conception is dualistic’, while in the mythology relating to Varuṇa and Adityas, it is unitarian.’ Both ‘good’ and ’evil’ are involved in the Indra-mythology - the former being represented (in the physical sense ) in the form of light and rain and the latter in the form of darkness and drought. The ‘good’ is related to Indra, the evil’ to Vr̥tra. As against this, Varuṇa (and Adityas) are sovereign gods. They rule over the world ‘unopposed’, while Indra has to wage constant wars. In the unitarian conception of the world-order in the Varuṇa-mythology, ‘good’ and evil’ are referred to one and the same god. Accordingly, Varuṇa’s character has a double aspect - propitious and penal, while Indra is exclusively benevolent. Indra is always a friend, while Varuṇa acts like a judge. The study of the sovereign gods like Varuṇa leads Ber GAIGNE to the consideration of the Vedic ideas about morality. He asserts that the RV-hymns are not the work of moralists. The purpose of these hymns is essentially ceremonial and ritua listic. The poets of RV have never sought to formulate morality in precepts. There may be, if at all, only vague generalisations regarding the vices to be supped and the virtues to be fostered.88
35. Agni and Soma, as the sun and the lightning, are also martial gods; they are conqucrors of night and drought, of dawns and waters. But the difference between these two and Indra lies in the degree of personifica. tion of the natural powers
36. BERCAICNE further clarifies this point by pointing out that, as against the RV.poctry, which naturalistic and liturgical and which throws light (Conhoued on the next page) 196 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY The primary obligation which the Vedic Aryans owed to their gods is in respect of ritual An omission or a mistake in it is an offence, but the nature of this offence is cosmic ethical’ rather than merely ‘moral’ Io this connection, BERGAIGNE speaks of a threefold concept of law (rta) - natural, sacrificial, and moral 87 The lead given by BERGAIGNE In the matter of writing comprehensive treatises on the Vedic religion and mythology was enthusiastically followed by a number of well known Vedıṣıs A KAEGI’s Der Rig Veda dre alteste Litteratur der Inder88 is a kid of general introduction to RV, and, to respect of Vedic exegesis, conforms largely to the ideas of ROTH ’ According to KAEGI, the majority of the hymns of RV which he characterises as the premier intellectual monument of our race,” mainly comprise invocations and glorifications of deities which are, in most cases, personifications of natural phenomepa They are prayers to the Eternal Ones and constitute perhaps the best specimens of vigor ous primeval poetry " Les religions de l’Inde by A BARTH91 is a Cordelicated and has ble formuand myabdi.Bercard (Continued from the precious pago) postly on the formation of myths and ancicat rcligious belief, the Homeric poctry presents a picture of the morality of a primitive society in action 87 It would be scen that though BERGAICNE Started with a view to presenting the Vedic religion and mythology as a suaple system consistiog of a few casily satellig ble formulas, he actually succceded in producing only s complicated and essentially schematic pattern As OLDENBERG points out (Vedaforschung) BERGAIGNE discovers in the simple, stirring nature-poetry of RV a somewhat arid collection of rhetoric subtleues He further adds that the French sadant bas correct gumpscg of few details, but, on account of the lack of an instinct for religion history and relgion psychology, his conception of the Vedic religion as a whole has tended to be deficient 88 Lepzig 1878–79 89 The German translation of Seventy Hymns of RV, prepared by KAEDT and GELDNER, clearly belongs to the school of ROTH 90 H ZINNER who also faithfully followed ROTA, described (1879) the Vedic pcople as “a people young and full of confidence in their gods, used to modesty, morality and respect for women About the poetry of RY, BRUNVHOFER says. The poetry of RV * the integral poetry of a man of naturc par excellence, it is the lark s song of humanity which was wide awake and conscious of its grandeur 91 Paris 1879 An English translation of this work by WOOD was published in 1882 Attention way be draws also to BARTH Other writing (Continued on the next page) VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 197 more solid work and contains many original ideas. BARTH has divided his book into two parts; in the first part he deals with the religion of the Veda, apd in the second with Brahmanism, that is, with the ritual and the philosophical speculations, and the decline of religion.92 The Veda, according to this scholar, is pre-eminently a ‘sacerdotal’ literature - it can in no sense be called ‘popular.’ Not even in the oldest hymos can one discover primitive natural simplicity. BARTH further asserts that to speak of a Vedic people’ as such is quite unwarranted. We cannot think in terms of any such specific people whose ideology is reflected in the Veda. The hymns of RV not only constitute just a portion of the great thesaurus of the ancient Aryan poems, but they do not even represent the entire religious poetry of the early Vedic age. An important point stressed by BARTH is that, at the time of the RV-hymns, side by side with the hierarchical Vedic religion, there must have also existed several popular religious cults - cults such as those out of which Vaisnavism and Saivism arose in later times. Another point made by him is that, in RV, Varuṇa caa by no means be said to appear in a state of decay’ (as suggested by ROTH) BARTH also says - and quite rightly-that it will not be proper for ope to seek to discover profound thought in every hymn of RV. In this connection, he deciares that the Vedic poets often strive to be unintelligible’ and manifest afisc tation and indolence. 93 198 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY far as the correct understanding of RV is concerned He also discards the interpretations of most of the Western Vedists 5 He asserts that the hymns of RV contain neither the invocations to gods nor any mythology of gods, but that, almost exclusively and in ever newer variations, they describe sacrificial ritual This does not, of course, mean that they deal with the details of any specific sacrifice, but sacrifice in general is invariably their main concern They speak mainly of Agni and Soma, which latter, according to REGNAUD, is not a drink prepared from the juice of some plant, but an oil or a spirituous liquid with which the sacrificial fire is nourished Trying to determine the meanings of the words of RV through etymology, REGNAUD offers absolutely new inter pretation of many Vedic hymns For instance, he says that the two hymns to Usas (RV I 123, 124 ), the translation of which he has given in his monograph, do not celebrate the natural phenomena of the sun and the dawn, but that, under these symbols, they describe the sacrificial offering, the flame of Agni, and the flaming and inflammable liquid, Soma Similarly, in connection with his translation of RV IV 26 and 27, he gives his own interpretation of the myth of the advent of Soma » By and large, REGNAUD’s approach to the Veda may be said to have been oriented by three assumptions, namely, that there is a complete break of tradition between RV and the later Sanskrit literature, 97 that, so far as RV is concerned, the readings are certain, the vocabulary uncertain, and the contents for the most part not properly understood, and that (and this is particularly important ) a large majority of Vedic words mean nourishment,’ sacrificial offering ‘98 In support of this last assumption, 95 In REGNAUD 8 opinion, only BERCAICNE S researches show some distinct progress REGNAUD severely criticises those who are inclined to underestimate the antiquity and importance of RV 96 Of course he differs from KUHN in most of the details 97 Class cal Sanskrit vocabulary, he sasy, if not altogether worthless, is at least misleading for the RV exegesis 98 In thts context, one is reminded of y K RAJWADE who sought to prove that a majority of Vedic nouns meant wealth’ and a majority of Vedic Yerbs meant to give. VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 199 REGNAUD shows, by means of his peculiar etymologising, that āji does not mean . battle, but that it is connected with ajya and ‘means ’nourishment.’ Similarly, prstha does not mean back,” but liquid; prthivi is the sacrificial liquid which widens’ in the course of its flow, and dyauh is the libation.’ The ascription of such meanings to various Vedic words is obviously intended to confirm the hypothesis that RV is essentially a Veda of sacrifice. E. W. HOPKINS has himself confessed that in writing his books’ he had not desired to compete with BARTH book under the same title’ However, it must be conceded tha the scope of the work of HOPKINS is larger than that of BARTH. HOPKINS first deals with the sources and methods and then gives a general description of India. He follows this with a statement (but not a critical discussion) about the pantheon of Vedic divinities and about the Brahmanic ritual and the Upaniṣadic speculations. The concluding part of his book is devoted to the consideration of popular Brahmanism, the Grhya-Sūtras, and the ‘Dharma-Sūtras. HOPKINS’s treatment of Vedic gods is conserva tive and cautious so far as the different schools of Vedic inter pretation are concerned. He divides these gods into three classes *upper,’ middle,’ and ’lower.’ This classification is obviouly too vague, and cannot be said to be warranted by the facts of the Veda. Indeed, this entire section of HOPKINS’s book betrays a lack of definite criteria on the part of the author. His treatment of the Vedic ritual also is deficient in the sense that many signifi caat concepts and practices have not found adequate exposition at his hands. HOPRINS does not have any specific theory of his Own regarding the Vedic religion, nor does he present that religion in its historical development. He is conscious of the various problems arising out of the complex nature of the Vedic religion, 1co but he seems to fight shy of tackling them squarely. Compared to HOPKINS’s book, E. HARDY’s Die vedische-brah manische Periode der Religion des alten Indiens,201 which was
37. The Religions of India, Boston, 1895. 100. This is indicated by his India Old and Now, 101, (nach den Quellen dargestellt ), Munster, 1893, 200 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY published a couple of years before, may be said to contain a little fuller and more systematic treatment of the Vedic religion 132 HARDY deals with the Vedic gods under different categories such as the sun and the moon gods, Varuṇa, Agni, Soma, Indra, the Taip and the wind gods, newer divinities, and genii, demons, aod spirits He has also devoted a few sections to the consideration of legends. sacrificial rites, religious practices, and theosophy But even HARDY’s book is of the nature of a straightforward statement rather than of a critical exposition The real compeers of BERGAIGNE in the field of Vedic religious and mythological studies and research are Alfred HILLEBRANDT and Hermann OLDENBERG Like BERGAIGNE, HILLEBRANDT also firmly believed that the Vedic mythology and the Vedic ritual were essentially inscparable The extension of the Vedic mythology to the Vedic cult was a vital feature of his work 103 His study of the Vedic ritual was very deep - perhaps deeper than that of BERGAIGNE He was thus eminently equipped for the task which he had undertaken, but his expert knowledge of the Vedic ritual itself proved- not unoften - a serious handicap so far as a balanced estimate of the Vedic mythology was concerned 101 A prominent characteristic of HILLEPRANDT’S mythology was a philological interpretation of the Vedic texts He sought to interpret the Veda as much as possible from itself He losisted on the essential distinction between Vedic and classical Sanskrit being properly appreciated As for Pall, he felt sure that it would not help much in the understanding of the Vedic mythology As a matter of fact, Pall had, according to him, already caused a good deal of misunderstanding It was HILLE BRANDT’s contention that RV necessarily contained much that 102 Reference may be mnade here also to HARDY’s Indische Religionsges chic te Leipzig, 1898 103 Vedische Mythologie, 3 volumes, Breslau, 1891, 1899, and 1902, second cdiuon (in 2 volumes ) 1927 and 1929 104 It was said that HILLEORANDT did not possess the brilliance of BERGAICNE and OLDENBERO, nor perhaps the extreme critical acumen of L’iscriel and GELDNER, but that he posscascd a most excellent capacity of common ins VEDIC RELIGION AND NİYTHOLOGY 201 could not be called ‘Indiad. He said that, on the assumptioa of a restricted Indian provenance of Rr, much of it would remain upintelligible. A considerable portion of RV had its origin outside India. For instance, the eighth mandala showed un mistakable traces of the lands tying to the west and to the aorth of India. In this sense, RV’ had to be regarded as being more alin to the Avesta than to classical Saoskrit literature. HILLE BRANDT sought very little help from comparativc mythology. Similarly he was exceedingly wary in accepting the validity of etymology in mythological matters. Etymology, cven if correct (and one could not be too sure of its correctness !), was mytho logically uscless because the meaning which it furnislied was so general that it might designate a number of different things and consequently give no clue to the individual character of the god in question,103 A rcference may be made here also to HILLE BRANDT’s confidence in his own methods and conclusions regarding the Vedic mythology. In spite of the severe criticisms and discussions of the thicories which he had set forth in the first edition of his Vedische Mythologie, he did not think it necessary to revise any of them substantially in the second edition which was published a quarter of a century after the first, HILLEBRANDT adopted the view that most of the Vedic gods were personifications of natural phenomena. He believed that there was general agreement among Vedic scholars as to the gecessity of deriving most of the old Indian deities from physical phenomega,’ but he was also aware that there was considerable difference of opioion among scholars about the specific natural phenomenon which a particular god was supposed to servesert 194 Further he was quite definite that the mythological materials in RV did not warrant the recognition of any abstract. deities, 107 or
38. P. von BrAPRE once wrote : " Mythological and etymological hypo theses can be good servants, but they are bad masters.” 106 The simple formula of the earlier periods was : Vedic gods personified natural phenomena As to which natural phenomena they personificd was to be determined on the basis of the etymologies of thcir numes.
39. OLDENBERG was a firm believer in the existence of such deities in RV. 26 202 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY of any euhemeristic traces Ancestor-worship, he further said, had certainly been one side of ancient mythology, but it was not the only or even the most prominent one. The great lights of heaven, which regulated the course of time, created the summer and the winter, and dispelled the darkness of pight, could not have influenced the mind of the primitive man less than the belief In the power of the deceased or in maligo spirits HILLEBRANDT pointed out that the Vedic Aryans, whether herdsmen or husband men, were not entirely troglodytes, they felt more than we did the influence of these forces which governed their daily life – the sun and the moon, the storm and the weather Fetishism too, according to him, must be assigned but a very limited share in the Vedic mythology HILLEBRANDT interpreted the ladra-Vr̥tra myth as reflecting the conflict between the demon of winter (Vr̥tra) and the sun of the spring season (Indra) He further pointed out that the Vedic tribes must have brought this myth to ladia from far away He did not accept the theory that lodra was a rais god and Vr̥tra a cloud demon. According to him, clouds did not play any sigpifi cant role in RV. Varuṇa was, for him (as for OLDENBERG), the moon god, but he completely rejected OLDENBERG’s other observations about the Varuṇa mythology 108 Aditi meant imperishableness, and not omnipresence or infinitude. According to HILLEBRANDT, brahman meant growth’. and Brhaspati. Brabmanaspat) was the lord of growth (that is, growth of plants) - the moon Indra, he added in this connection, was the Ksatriya among the gods and had developed from the physical phenomenon of the spring sun into a god warrior, Bphaspati was the heavenly Brāhmaṇa and purohita and took his origin from the moon as the presiding deity of the Brāhmanas 109 The most striking feature of HILLEBRANDT s exposition of the Vedic mythology is his assumption of the unique spiritual character imputed by the Vedic poets to the moon Indeed, he went to the 108 See the scquel 109 HILLEDRANDT rcfers, in this copnection, to the statement candran Manasojalah (RV X 90 13) VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 203 extent of asserting that the moon was the very centre of the Vedic religious ideology 110 Io the Indian belief, the sun occupied but a subordinate position HILLEBRANDT firmly maintained that, in the Veda, Soma was and had always been identical with the moon, the heavenly well of amrta 111 He insisted that the equa. tion, Soma = the moon, held good in every one of the Vedic contexts. He stoutly defended his lunar theory against various attacks When, for instance, it was argued that the reference in RV to the roaring’ of Scd would go against his lunar theory, he instantly retorted that there was nothing to be surprised at in such a reference, for, certain primitive peoples did actually speak of the moon as roanog ‘1: A major part of HILLEBRANDT’S writings was devoted to the reiteration that Soma, as the moon, dominated the entire Vedic religion and mythology Later on, he slightly modified this assertion by stating that, with Agni, Soma dominated the Vedic thought. But even Agoi was, accord ing to him, an aspect of the moon The same natural pheno menon underlay the conceptions of Agni and Brhaspati - 10 One case the fire form of the moon and in the other the nectar form of the mood 113 The aerial Agn was the moon, so was Apām Napāt the moon HILLEBRANDT was of the view that RV knew the three srauta fires the ahavanija was connected with Surya and the bearen, the garhapaly a with the terrestrial Agnt and the earth, and the dah sina with the aerial Agni and the mid region He further suggested that the semi-circular shape of the fire-place for the dah sina fire clearly symbolised the moon 114 Incidentally. 110 This is why HILLEBRAYDT 1 often referred to as the Moon mythologue.’ 111 Soma was originally the name of a ritual plant, the juice of which was ted in Vedic sacrificc Its localization in and identification with the DOON u obnously an after thought HOLEERANDT, on the other hand, suggest ed that the plant was a symbolical representation of the lumipan 112 Presumably, however the roaring of Soma has to be regarded as a hy crbolical descnpuon of the sound of the flowing Soma juce 113 It may be pointed out that, in the first edition of bus work HILLE BRANDT had discussed Brhaspata in the Sora sccuon, in the sccond, he dis cussed Brbaspat in the Agai-section. 114 HILLEBRANDT also suggested that the square of the thavaniya fire (Continued on the next page) 204 EXERCISCS IN INDOLOGY it may be pointed out at this stage, that HILLEBRANDT did not accept the threefold classification of the Vedic gods into celestial, atmospheric and terrestrial He thought that, though such classification was useful from the practical point of view, it was Open to several theoretical objections For one thing, the limits between these classes would be constantly shifting in accordance with the varying interpretation of the characters of the gods About Rudra HILLEBRANDT said that he was neither the chief of the souls of the dead nor the lord of the mountains, but that he was the god of the hot and rainy season which was the most dangerous time of the year in ladia Usas, according to HILLEB RANDT was not only the dawn of the single day, but she also personified the beginning of the year Usas represented the commencement of the ritual year and Rudra its conclusion 113 Surya was a mythological synonym of Usas, she was not the sun in female form in a sense Sarama also was mythologically equivalent to Usas In the Atharia eda, Usas was represented as Viraj whose two cales rose out of the sea and who was brought into connection with sacrifice HILLEBRANDT believed that anthropology often offered the most essential kind of aid to tbe understanding of Vedic mytho logy and ntual 116 Particularly in the Vedic ritual could be discovered remnants of the primitive way of thought and life il Speaking of the sacrifice to Jumbaka in connection with the tance HILLEBRANDT pointed out that, in that sacrifice in conjunction with the Sunahsepa legend, we had a relic of the primitive practice of slaying the aged and word-out (Cont nued from the last page) place iud cated the heaven and the circle of the gårhapatya fire place the carth Incidentally according to HILLESRANDT the Ang rases were a real historical family assoc ated wth the fire-cult 115 The cows of Ufas HILLEBRANDT believed d d not mean the morning clouds un AV 116 Accord ngly he drew cons derably upon the works of TYLOR FRAZER MANNHARDT LONG and WILKTY 117 At the back of the Icdc prest there always lurked the prime mag can med cinemasVEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 205 king at stated intervals. In another connection, he asserted that human sacrifice was the source of RV X. 18.8; 85, 21-22. Had human sacrifice not been an actual fact, the Brālmanas would not have preserved a record of it. As for animal sacrifice, HILLE BRANDT stated that, in the selection or avoidance of certain animals for sacrifice, no trace of totemism or theriomorphism could be found.118 He further said that the Indian conception of sacrifice was opposed to the Semitic in so far as the latter was an act of communion in which god and worshipper joined in partaking of the flesh of the animal, 119 OLDENBERG’s Die Religion des Vedal20 certainly constitutes one of the most remarkable contributions to the study of Vedic religion and mythology. This book falls into two main parts - the first deals with the Vedic mytbology and the second with the Vedic cuit. Like BERGAIGNE, OLDENBERG fully realises the importance of the Vedic ritual for the proper understanding of the Vedic religion as a whole.121 He says that, without the background of the Vedic ritual, all discussion about the Vedic religion will lack the essential local colour. As for the scope of OLDENBERG’s work, while BERGAIGNE bas restricted himself only to the hymns of RV, OLDENBERG covers the whole field of the Vedic literature, for, he believes tbat the literature immediately following RV deals with the same sacrificial ritual for which the hymns of RV are composed. OLDENBERG generally adheres to the naturalistic interpretation of the Vedic mythology. He says that the higher gods, that is to say, those gods which are not of a semi-divine or fetishistic nature,122 of the Vedic, and certainly also of the IE period, are without exception the deified represen tations of the entities in nature or of the forces which are active 118 Tiert und Gütler,p 5.
40. OLDENBERG and HOPKINS seem to agree with HILLEBRANDT in this view, while KLITH differs from himn.
41. Berlin, 1891, second ed., 1917; third ed , 1923.
42. OLDENBERG points out that, in the history of Vedic philology, Vedic mnythology came to the forefront before Vedic cult and religion
43. OLDENBERO belicves that Adıtı, as conceived in RV, is derived from cow-fcush,’ a 206 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY in the great phenomena of nature Ilc, hovcicr, hastens to sound a note of warning agiinst the acceptance of the simpla formuln to which the carior schools of naturalists had reduced their viens in this connection It is necessary to remember he adds that between the prototype of nature ( wherever such a one cxists) and its mythological counterpart manifold and complex dciclopments take place There are changes in the proportions of individual constituent clcmcnts there is a fading up or cyen an outright disappearance of some clements and there is the penetration of new clements There also occurs in many cases the filling in of empts forms with new contents 113 These and Similar other desclopments som-limes make the recognition of the correct naturalistic basis of a mythological concept almost impossible OLDCNRCRG further roints out that besides the naturalistic aspect of thc Vedic mythology, there exists an other cqually signif cant aspect of it namely the dcification of abstract concepts OLDENBERG also accepts albeit in a restricted sense, the methods of comparative mythology He insists that the attempt to tracc individual Vedic rods back to their It forms is certainly not unwarranted He however, cautions that onc must frec oneself from the realm of mere etymology and pass into the free atmosphere of reality Similarly one can ill afford to ignore the dimension of historical perspec tive The Vedic religion is essentially an Indian religion But at the same time, it is related very closely to the ancient Iranian religion and less closely to other IE religious traditions 13 The larger anthropological and cthoological factors have also played a significant part in the development of that religion OLDENBERG has put forth in his writings a number of origi nal ideas and theories about the Vedic religion and mythology 123 OLDENBERG speaks n the connect on of primary or ol le elements wh ch a e preser cd better nr ual than in poctry ani secondary or newer elements who lead to be ascr puion to the gods of inadeatal character such as that of b ngers of 1ht or uplolders of the cosmic order 124 OLDENBERO CE c ses Pascoel and GELDNER for lav ng completely overlooked this point VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 207 A reference will, however, be made here only to the more impor tant ones from among them. One of such theories relates to the Varuṇa-mythology. OLDENBERG begins by pointing out that Varuṇa, Mitra, and Adityas constitute a homogeneous mythological unit in the Veda. This unit corresponds, in almost all respects, with the Avestan mythological unit comprising Ahura Mazdah, Mithra, and Amesha Spentas The ancient Iranian Mithra is universally recognized as the sud-god Conse quently his Vedic counterpart, Mitra, also must be regarded as representing the sun. Arguing further in this vein OLDENBERG suggests that Varuṇa, who is often associated with Mitra very closely but as being operative in a sphere opposite to that in which Mitra operates,125 has to be regarded as representing the moon 126 It would then naturally follow that Adityas represent the planets.127 The other point made by OLDENBERG in connection with the Varuņa-mythology is still more striking. He points out that Varuṇa, Mitra, and Adityas are specifically Indo Iranian divinities, that they do not have counterparts in other IE mythologies. At the same time, the Indo-Iranians already had a sun-god (Sürya ) and a moon-god (Candranas) endowed with more distinct characters. It is, therefore, suggested that the Indo-Iranians must have borrowed the conception of the addit10-’ nal sun-god (Mitra) and moon-god (Varuṇa) from some neighbouring people. These people, it may be surmised, were the Akkadians (the Babylonians) who were particularly interested: in the planets128 and presumably had in their mythology a compact group of gods representing the sun, the moon, and the planets. Two other considerations would, according to OLDEN BERG, seem to confirm this surmise : firstly, that the Akkadians 125 Such as day and night, white and black, bght and darkness, etc. 126 OLDENBERC rejects the identificatian of Varuṇa with Ouranos Identifications based on phonetic similarities, he says, teod to force together concepts which are totally disconnected
44. Correspondingly, Ahura Mazdah 15 the moon god, and Amcsha Spentas the planets.
45. The Vedic and the Avestas Aryans originally had very line interest in the plancts, 208 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY speak of their moon god cxactly as the Vedic Indians speak of Varuṇa, and, secondly, that an ethical god like Varuṇa can have been borrowed by the Indo Iranians from a people like the Akkadians who had adopted an ethical way of life before the Indo Europeans 129 Another special contribution of OLDENBERG’s to the study of the Vedic mythology is his assumption regarding the existence in RV of what may be called abstract divinitics The deities in RV which admit of being regarded as abstractions are of three types (1) deities resulting from purely allegorical personiGcations of abstract ideas like Manyu and Sraddhā, 130 (2) deities in whose case the attributes or epithets are transformed into individual names, such as Prajapati, Brhaspati, etc , 131 and (3) deities whose names originate from the particular spheres of their activities - each such name having the form of a nomen agentis, Ike Savitr (impeller), Viṣnu (wanderer). Tvast (fashioner), and Pusan ( nourisher) As has been already pointed out HILLEBRANDT takes a strong objection to OLDENBERG’s con ception of abstract divinities He says that they do not seem to be the gods of a rational and realistic people He caustically observes that such dividities would show that the Vedic poets worked not in nature but in a study room According to OLDENBERG, Indra is a storm god who bears certain pre lodian features He emphasises the point that, in RY, Indra is nowhere spoken of as ‘raining’ He agrees with HILLEBRANDT’s observation that clouds as such do not play any great role in that Veda OLDENBERG accordingly thinks that the RV poets understood the release of waters by Indra pot as the release of celestial waters but as the setting free of terrestrial waters from terrestrial mountains He explains Indra’s winning 129 OLDENBERG lays great stress on the consp cuous contrast between Indra who is a truly IE god and Varuṇa who is adopted by the lodo Iranians from a Semic people 130 These are scanty in RV but arc developed in later Samhlrlds 131 Bghaspat Bromabaspali according to OLDENBERG the celestial embodiment of priesthood VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 209 of light metaphorically as the attainment of bright goods after overcoming terrible dangers ’ 132 OLDENBERG accepts the identification of Parjanya with Perkunas and suggests that that god definitely goes back to the IE period. For him, Apām Napāt does not personify lightning; he rather personifies ’the fire in all water, especially rivers and ponds’. Similarly, Rudra is not the storm-god; he is a demon of disease coming from forest and mountain, like Mars Silvanus. OLDENBERG, following MANNHARDT, regards Aśvinau as representing the morning star and the evening star. He points out, in support of this assumption, that the morning star is the only light beside the morning fire, the dawn, and the sun, that the time of Aśvinau, theic luminous nature, and their course around the heavens are applicable to the star, that the star of the evening is naturally asso ciated with the morning star, and that the evidence of comparative mythology favours such an assumption 183 As for Soma, OLDEN BERG severely criticises HILLEBRANDT’s view that, throughout RV, Soma stands for the moon. He has no doubt that, in a large majority of passages, Soma clearly personifies a special ritual plant and its juice. The identification of Soma with the moon begins to occur only in later literature. In RV, the moon is nowhere said to be the food of gods. In RV X. 85, the lunar character of Soma is referred to as a secret knovo only to the Brāhmanas. This would show that such character was but incipient. In some cases, again, the identification of Soma and the moon has to be regarded just as the result of poetic imagery. OLDENBERG also adversely criticises MAX MÜLLER’s theory of henotheism, that is to say, the theory of the Vedic belief in individual gods alternately regarded as the highest. 5131 He points out that, on the one hand, hymos addressed to Viśve Devas are frequent, in which all deities, even the lesser ones, are praised in
46. MACDONELL obscrves that OLDENBCRC explains one point too literally and another too figuralıvely.
47. Incidentally, OLDENBERG refers to the possibility of Asvins having been originally represented as horscs.
48. This theory is rejected by WHITNEY and Hopatys a toong others, 27 210 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY succession, and, on the other, the technical priest cannot but have koown the exact relative position of each god in the Soma ritual, for which the great mass of Vedic hymns are composed and which includes the worship of almost the entire pantheon Henotheism is, therefore, rather an appearance than a reality The indefinite ness of outline in the Vedic gods and the natural exaggeration of the poet priest in extolling the attributes of the god he is addressing seem to have been the main factors operative in this congection OLDENBERG’s discussion of the Vedic ritual is quite illumi nating in the course of this discussion he has profusely drawn upon anthropological and ethnological materials He points out that the Vedic ritual indicates predominantly the benevolent character of the principal Vedic gods 135 The oldest Vedic ritual, he states, knows of seven priests with distinct functions - the brahman priest having been non-existent in the oldest portions of RV 156 Comparatively speaking, the element of thanksgiving is mostly absent in Vedic sacrifice 137 Similarly the magical element also is not very conspicuous in the early Vedic ritual 139 The Vedic people, however, had in their ritual the rite of initiation (diksā) in common with the most diverse primitive peoples The object of this rite was to bring about an intercourse between the sacrificer and the gods by inducing a kind of ecstatic condition. OLDENBERG recognises the existence of only certain traces of human sacrifice in the Vedic ritual, as, for instance, in the rite connected with the agnicayana, wherein man is one of the five 135 Occasions like the warding off of the malevolent Rudra are, accord ing to him, rarc 136 IIc adds that the Avesta knows of cight priests, the Zaotar being the chief amongst them The sacerdotal actions of the Vedic and the Avestan priesta are to a large extent, muar 137 OLDENDERC po nts out that there is no proper word for ’thanks id the Vedic language ( indeed, even in Sanskrit) 198 The element becarne prominent in the Brahmanes where the pricat came to be looked upon as more important than the divinity OLDENBERO regarded sacrifice and magic as two originally separate spheres wbich were mixed up in course of time “The dahin a fire, according to hum, comprised the features of both the magic firc agd the ritual fire VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 211 sacrificial victims. Howcver, the Satapatha-Brāhmana already refers to the human sacrifice as a thing of the past, and substitutes are already seen to have begun to be cmployed. As has been pointed out elsewhere, OLDENBERG agrees with HILLCBRANDT in assuming that the Indian conception of sacrifice is opposed to the Semitic in so far as the latter is an act of communion in which god and worshipper join in partaking of the flesh of the animal.139 A distinguished English contemporary of HILLEBRANDT and OLDENBERG was Arthur A. MACDONELL. The nature and extent of MACDONELL’s famous book, Vedic Afythology,140 were perhaps determined, to a certain extent, by the series in which it was published, namely, “Grundriss der indo-arischen Philologic und Altertumstunde.” As required by the Grundriss, MACDO NELL’S Vedic Alythology is characterised by a careful and intel. ligent collation and lucid exposition of all relevant material relating to the subject. In this book, the author has attempted a detailed but discerning statement about Vedic gods and heroes catirely on the basis of original texts. Accordingly, as was expected, the book constitutes a most valuable source-book for the study of the Vedic mythology 11 MACDONELL begins by stating the general problems connected with the Vedic religion and mythology and outlining the method to be pursued in tackling those problems. He then makes a few observations regarding the Vedic conceptions of the world and its origin. Then comes the main part of the book embodying the description of the Vedic gods who are considered under various categories, such as celestial gods, atmospheric gods, terrestrial gods, abstract divinities, 139 Incidentally, reference may be made here to two more points : Firstly OLDENBERG does not doubt the existence of totemism in the Vedic religion He further suggests that, in view of the existence of totemin also in Greece and Italy, totemism must be regarded as IC. Secondly, he thinks (10 opposition to Rotu) that RP refer, though indirectly, to a belief in hell 140 Strassburg, 1897. 141. In a sense, MacDOVELL’s work is comparable to MIUIR’S OST, vol. 5. 212 EXCRCISCS IN INDOLOGY goddesses, dual diuinitics, groups of divities, and lower divinities This is followed by sections dcaling with pricsts and herocs, animals and objects, demons, and eschatolosy So far as the description of tlic Vedic gods is concerned, MACDONELL first gives the characteristic (catures of cach god, independent of any critical spierprctation, and then adds at the end a cry brief scvic of the different victs which huc been put forth by scholars in connection with the personality and character of that particular god It will be seen from the scheme of MACDONCLL’s book, as set forth above, that, in bus itcaiment of the Vedic mytholos), the author, unlike BCRGAIGNE, HILLCHRANDT, and OLDENBERO, has kept aside the subject of Vedic ritual almost catirely flis classification of the Vedic gods most of whom he regards as personifcations of natural powers and phenomena, is far 100 schematic, and, though perhaps useful (rom the practical point of VICW, 15 theoretically not sound Again, in his brok, MACDO NELL has not sought cither to enunciato any original theories of his own or to subject to a critical cxamination the theories of other scholars Altogether, his book is esscntially retrospective’ in character It is, hoxcrcr, possible to denle some of MACRONELL’S salicnt views on the various aspects of the Vedic mythology from his other writings and critical revicus Tor instance, he took strong objection to OLDENBERG’s suggestion that the waters released by Indra were understood by the Vedic pocis to haic been thc terrestrial waters set free from the terrestrial mountains MACDONELL felt certain that the Indra-Vr̥tra fight basically reflected an atmospheric phenomenon, and that by the waters set free by Indra were meant the waters released from the clouds. Indra was the rain god, and, though he was nowhere in RW referred to as ‘raining, the stercotyped mythological terms used to describe the phenomenon hardly Ict any doubt about the character of that god At the basis of the identification of Varuṇa with Ouranos, MACDONCLL saw not only 1 phonclic equation but also a fundamental equation of conceptions He hesitated to accept the suggested correspondence between the VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 213 Vedic Adityas and the Avestan Amesha Spentas.142 He pointed out that OLDENBERG’s theory that Adityas personified the seven planets was not at all convincing. For one thing, the number seven was scarcely characteristic of Adityas – pot more than six were mentioned in RV, while in the Athanaveda eight Adityas were mentioned. Incidentally, he asserted that the moon had always bees regarded in India as a lesser divinity than the sup.243 Accord ingly, the great Asura Varuṇa could hardly be said to have personified the moon, MACDONELL found HILLEBRANDT’S suggestion that Soma was the moon-god throughout RV too dogmatic. Soma originally personificd the ritual plant, and, even in bis subsequent cosmic aspect, be was more akin to the sun than to tåe moon. In RV, he was described in words applicable to the sun and was never expressly connected with the moon. How was it, MACDONELL asked, that none of the Vedic commentators, in whose time Soma and the moon were believed to be one, ever mentioned that Soma was the moon-god also in RV? The later identification of Soma with the moon, according to him, went hand in hand with the separation of the world of gods associated with the sun from the world of Pitars conaccted with the moon. BỊhaspati, MACPONELL pointed out, was originally an epithet representing sacerdotal side of Agoi’s nature. which had already at the beginning of the RV-period acquired an independent character. He, therefore, regarded Byhaspati as a terrestrial divipity. There was no doubt that Apām Napāt was connected with lightning Referring to OLDENBERG’s suggestion that Apám Napāt was the fire in all water, especially in rivers and ponds.” MACDONELL asked how such extinguished fire could shine forth’and that too in the highest place. He did not also agree with HILLEBRANDT who had suggested that the semi-circular shape of the fire-place of the dakṣına fire symbolised the soon. According to him, it rather denoted the arch of the mid-recian 14 214 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY MACDONELL was inclined to accept GOLDSTUCKER’s view that Asvins represented the inseparable duality of light and darkness which constituted the morning twilight 145 Savits was clearly the sun god MACDONELL took OLDENBERG to task for having unnecessarily invcrted the probable order of the cvolution of the personality of that god by suggesting that Sayitr originally repre sented a pure abstraction, but later attracted a large body of solar traits. HILLCBRANDT’s characterisation of Rudra as the god of the most dangerous scason of the year did not accord with the Rgvedic mode of thought Nor could one accept OLDEN BERG’s comparison of Rudra with Mars Silvanus Maruts were the children of Rudra How could Rudra’s character be so different from that of his children? MACDONELL thought that the evidence of RV was not sufficient to indicate what natural substratum Rudra had It would, however, appear that Rudra was the storm god in whom the balcful nature of lightning was prominent, as against its action which was wholly beneficial to man in the case of Indra MACDONELL further pointed out that one widely diffused primitive conception which the Indo Europeans must have inlierited from an carlier stage was the notion of heaven and earth having been the universal parents jf. through his Vidic My thology, MACDONELL provides a fairly comprehensive and useful catalogue of facts about the Vedic mythology, Maurice BLOOMFIELD, in his The Religion of the Veda, 140 presents a very readable account of the development of the Vedic religion from RV to the Upanisads BLOOMFIELD deals in his lectures147 with such topics as India the land of religions, the priestly religion, the pre historic gods of lodia and the beginnings of Hindu theosophy, and his exposition is unle formly clear and consistent His general attitude towards the 145 The moro ng star pnd the evening star, with which OLDENDERO identified Asying could hardly be regarded as a pair in the sense in which Asvins formed an inseparable pair 146 New York, 1908 147 The book cons sts of the lectures delivered by BLOOMFIELD in 1906-07 as the seventh Series of American Lectures on the History of ReligionVEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 215 interpretation of the Vedic mythology is said to be onc of wise conservatism. This becomes evident in his third lecture wherein under the title " The Pre-historic Gods of India,” he has treated of Vedic and IE mythology. Ile sticks to the identification of Varuṇa with Ouranos, in spite of the lunar theories newly advo cated by HILLEBRANDT and OLDENBERG. It may, however, be pointed out that BLOOMFIELD seems to agree with HILLE BRANDT in his assumption that, in RV, Soma uniformly personifies the moon.god, though he rejects that scholar’s sugges tion that the worship of the moon dominates the religious thought of RV. He is also not inclined to accept HILLEBRANDT’S interpretation of the Indra-Vr̥tra myth as reflecting the conflict between the winter-demon and the spring-sun. BLOOMFIELD favours the methods of comparative mythology and refers with approval to such equations as Sārameyau = Cerberus. He does not find any clear traces of totemism in the Veda, though he thinks that some of the Vedic gods may have been originally represented in the form of animals, which later became the vehicles of those gods. In this connection he suggests that Asyins were presumably reckoned as flamingos. BLOOMFIELD is rather reluctant to admit any settled intel lectual religious consciousness’ in RV. He is aware that, while singing of the wonderful achievements of their gods, the poets of RV do grow truly warm and feel their theme - that sometimes they are really carried away by it-, but he does not believe that either the greatness and majesty or the incomprehensibleness of the gods have produced a permanent impression of their superio rity and perfection. He further points out that the so-called henotheism in RV does not have quite the true riog - it is perfunctory. God after god is glorified as the highest, they each in tura establish the heavens and the earth, they start the sun on his course, almost indifferently well. It would, however, seem that it was the rotation of the gods in the Vedic ritual, rather than the forgetfulness of the virtues of the preceding god, which was at the bottom of hepotheism. Henotheism, says BLOOM FIELD, is " polytheism grown cold in service, and unnice in its 216 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY distinctions, leading to an opportunist monotheism in which every god takes hold of the sceptre apd none keeps it.” Two other significant points made by BLOOMFIELD in the course of his discussion of the Vedic religion and philosophy relate respectively to the doctrine of the Ātman and the doctrine of Bhakti. He entirely discountedances the theory143 that the Atman-doctrine originated among the Ksatriyas. He also holds that the Bhakti ideology is fairly ancient in India and has grown side by side with and within the same circles of thought as the colder monism of the Upanıṣads. According to BLOOMFIELD, Yājõavalkya does not intend to expound to Maitreyi “the extremes of supersensual rationalism.” In effect, the Upanıṣadıc seer expresses the ideal of union with the supreme being, which is really the kernel of the doctrine of Bhakti, He wants to suggest that the knowledge of the Supreme is but a preparation for the love of God. Leopold von SCHROEDER may be said to have revived the school of comparative mythology which had, to a certain extent, fallen into disrepute in the intervening period. His Arische Religion149 does not contain much new material on the subject. There is evident in that book the same old tendency to advance mythological equations, often on the basis of bad etymologies. Trita Āptya is, for instance, identified with Athena Tritonis, Sārameya with Hermes, and Panis with Priam.150 Apollo is said to be closely akin to Agai, while Aegis is understood to represent the dark thunder-cloud However, SCHROEDER’S carlier work161 is more interesting from the point of view of Vedic folklore and popular religion. The central theme of the book is the so-called dialogue-hymns in RV. In these dialogue-hymns, SCHROEDER discovers the texts of ancient mysteries and mimes, relics of a drama which died out later (the later Samhitas and the Brāhmanas having nothing parallel to it) agd which is not histori
49. Sponsored by DEUSSEN, GARBE, and “INTERNITZ. 149. Two volumes, Leipzig, 1914 and 1916.
50. Scuxoeder finds in the legend of Troy a parallel to thic myth of Sarama and Pagus,
51. Afrstren und Mfumus im Rigveda, Leipzig, 1900. VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 217 cally connected with the later drami though the latter sprang from the same roots 151 He further connects thosc dramatic pieces with the Vedic vegetation ritual. He finds clear traces of this latter in such myths as of Agastya and Lopamudrā, Yama apd Yami, and Vpsühap: 153 Similarly, according to SCHROE DER, Vedic Maruts shou really charactcristic features of an ancient vegetation-ritual In this connection he points out that, in the IE tribes, the youth among the people performed, at certain scasons of festival, dances at wluch arms were borne and 10 which the performers represented the souls of the dead 154 SCHROEDER suggested that the decay of the ritual drama in Vedic times was due to the opposition of the priesthood to phallic ritual M WINTERNITZ saw in RV a mythology in the making 15 He believed that, in that Veda, originally, natural phenomena were glorified as such Gradually these natural phenomena were transformed into mythological figures The names of gods such as Indra, Varuṇa, etc, originally indicated certain natural pheno mena and natural beings In course of time, the epithets, which at first emphasized a particularly important side of a natural being, became god’s names and new gods. One could thus see gods arising, as it were, before one’s eyes In his Le Vedisme, 156 L de LA VALLÉ POUSSIN contests this view of WINTERNITZ He asserts that the Vedic mytliology as represented in RV is already a fully accomplished fact - it is a system whosc origins are already far past. He points out that the Vedic religion is of a very complex nature and would defy any attempt to reduce it to 152 Hertel and LÉvi also fnd dramı in these hymns and connect it with the later Sanskrit drama SCIROEDER rejects the uklyana thicory of OLDENBERG (Also sce’ The Sarvadasakta in tlc Atharvavcda’ published elscwhere in this Volume) 153 SCITROEDER belicves that the Gandharvas and the Apsarases represent the genu of fccundity 154 SCITROEDER comparcs Vacuts with horybantes in Greece 155 Gosch chte der indischen Lallaralur, erster Band, Leipzig 1908 Inci. dentally, WINTERNITZ has dedicated this volunic to SCITROEDER 156 Not ons sur les religions de l’Inde lo vedisme, Paris, 1909

218 EXERCISCS IN INDOLOGY a simple formula. For instance, the peculiar ideology associated with Varupa cannot be logically derived from the simple myth of the sky by night. Similarly the ethical conception of fla cannot be derived merely from the observance of physical order. LA VALLÉE POUSSIN believes that, in this connection, the reminis cences of an ancient philosophy must have been operative. He further points out that the IE sky-god, Dyaub, cagnot lave been a primitive bigh god. According to him, the character of Rudra is made up of Aryan and Hindu elements. LA VALLÉE POUSSIN admits the presence of fetishism 10 the Vedic religion, The fetishistic use of animal and material objects in the Vedic ritual caq by no means be denied. But such use need not be regarded as the most primitive. It will be seen that the sacrificer clearly distinguishes between the god and the temporary presence of the divine spirit in the animal or the jostruments,167 Inciden tally, one of the interesting observations made by LA VALLÉE POUSSIN is that the Atharvaveda, with all its degradation, is an aristocratic Veda. An emphatically Indian orientation given to Vedic research this was the most essential feature of the work of Richard PISCHEL and Karl F. GELDNER. It is clear from the maior part of their writings158 that these scholars were mainly occupied with the Vedic exegesis rather than with the Vedic mythology. But it must be remembered that the study of the Vedic mythology had developed and in hand with Vedic word-philology and that, therefore, the two were almost inseparable. PISCHEL and GELDNER started with the firm belief that RV was an Indian, and exclusively an Indian, literature. Therefore, in order to under stand RV adequately, one had to understand India thoroughly. Linguistics, which connected India’s languages with the European languages, was a dangerous guide. It was decessary to recognise that the gulf between the earliest culture of the European Aryans and that of the Vedic age was such that no amount of phonetic 157. LA VALLÉE POUSSIN tbısks ( as against OLDENZERC) that the concept of Aditt in RV has not onginated from a ‘cow fetish’. 158. Particularly Vedische Studien, 3 volumes, Stuttgart, 1889, 1892, 1901. VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 219 equations could bridge it. The most dependable guide in the matter of the understanding of RV was the totality of the later Indian literature. For, in their thinking and feeling, the people of India had ever remained " basically an Indian people with an Indian spirit”. One could see them as such as clearly in the hymns of Vasistha and Visvamitra as in the Kadambari of Bāņa, This attitude of PISCHEL and GELDNER obviously reflected a strong reaction against the work of comparative linguisticians and comparative mythologists - against, that is to say, the “joteria tional generalities ” jo which the scholars of the earlier periods had indulged. PISCHEL and GELDNER also represented a strong reaction against ROTH’s school of Vedic interpretation, whose slogan was: Away from Sayana. These two scholars asserted equally vehemently that Sāyana had comprehended the true chara cter of RV far more adequately than the European Vedists. They declared that the Veda - its language, its religion, and its moral ideas - must be interpreted with the help of the later Hindu litera ture. The key to the understanding of the Vedic literature was to be found in the critical analysis of the post-Vedic Jiterature.159 Indeed, these scholars sought to prove that beneath the words and phrases of RV lay ideas which subsequently " found expression in the Brālimanas, the later religious hand-books, the epics, and even the belles lettres of the classical period.” As in Vedic exegesis so in Vedic mythology the main empha sis of PISCHEL and GELDNER was on the specifically Indian current of thought. The Vedic mythology, they said, must be expounded in the light of the later Indian mythology and not of IE mythological concepts. It was their contention that the entire mythology of RV manifested a distinctly Indian stamp. For an adequate understanding of the Vedic mythology, one had, there fore, to derive help from the classical Hindu mythology and even the contemporary Indian folk-religion, 160 Accordingly, PISCHEL 159. Which Rota and his school had contemptuously rejected from their purview. 160. It may be pointed out in this context that A. L.YALL actually fiads in AV certain features of the living folk-religion of Central India, 220 CXLRCISLS IN INDOLOGY and GELDNER maintained that the basic character of Varuṇa 10 RV was the same as that in the classical llindu mythology, namcly of the god of occan " Just as these two veterans rcjected the crira Indiin emphasis of comparatic linguistics and compara tive mythology as well as the cxegetical methods sponsored by ROTII, they also rejected the exclusively naturalistic interpretation of the Vedic mythology ror them, Assins did not personify any natural phenomena thcy CTC rather two beneficent hcrocs of yorc who came to be dcificd in course of time It was a case of history being transformed into mythology It had ever been the attempt of PISCILL and GELDNLR to present the Vedic mytho logy (Indeed, thic cntirc Vedic culture) as somcthing lising and tangible Thcy therefore, sought to put flesh and blood Info what had been reduced by some of the carlier Vedists to a dry as dust system At the same time they also wanted to put an end oncc for all, to the faisc idcalısm which had developed in the carlier periods of the history of Vedic researches in the rest Accordingly, thicy did not mince words while speaking of the crufuiness of the Vedic priests who tried to catch gods " like mouse with bacon " It was their vice that RV revealed a fairly advanced culture That culture was the result of a long previous devclop ment, which, they insisted, had been specifically Indian in charac ter And perhaps the most characteristic fcatures of that culture were an infinite longing for wealth and a highly refined courtezan 111c Races and beautiful women were their chic interests - & tendency which could be seen to have persisted even in the clas sical times The reaction against the naturalistic interpretation of the Vedic mythology, which was reflected in the work of PISCHIEL 161 OI DENNERO strongly critis se! (I edaforsch me) DISCHIEL an I GELDNER for tl cır generally unhistor cal approach Hc po nted out that these two scholars complctely ignored tlc lapse of time between ancient Aryandom and later Iliaduism Simuarly tl cy underesumated the significance of tlc close alTn ty between the Vcd c and the extra Indian (part cularly ancient Iranian languages and ideolog cs While defining the character of Varuda in the Ight of the later H adu mythology, they altogether lost sght of his csxcntial • Vedic character Ight of the late Sooses While defining the part cularly ancient Irinan) VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 221 and GELDNER, seems to have become more pronounced in the subsequent periods. Sten KONOW, for instance, unequivocally declared in his The Aryan Gods of the Mitan People162 that the conception of Vedic religion as a worship of nature and natural phenomena was fundamentally wrong.163 Another tendency which had become prominent besides this anti-naturalista was the more marked awareness of the prevalence in the Vedic religion of what might be called the ideology of primitive magic. In this context, mention may be made of the marvellous work of W. CALAND. CALAND concerned himself more or less exclusively with a critical study of the literature and practices of the Vedic ritual. He fully realised that the Vedic ritual was for the most part a Zauber Ritual, and that, in order adequately to understand that ritual it was necessary to have a fair knowledge of the magic-ritual thought and practices of other primitive peoples. He specially stressed the point that, to be able to expound the Vedic ritual correctly, a philologist had to be a competent ethnologist and an ethnologist a qualified philologist. It was, however, not only in the Vedic ritual that the element of magic had been so conspicuous. The primitive magic-ideology dominated the Vedic mythology also. As typifying the two-fold tendency of anti-naturalism and emphasis on the magic-ideology may be mentioned Hermann GÜNTERT’S remarkable book, Der arische Weltkonig und Heiland,161 This book is a veritable thesaurus of ingenious ideas and suggestions. GUNTERT seeks to investigate, mainly in the light of linguistics, the origin in the remotest prehistoric times, the growth, and the transformations of certain religious and ethical concepts of the IE-speaking peoples. In a sense, his work pertains to the questions of historical semasiology. Making the 162 Christiania, 1921. IG3 Kovow thinks that the gods mentionrd on the Boghazhoci tablet are Indian in the sense that they are delics worsluipped by tliose Aryans who reaclied India and coniposed RV. Cisewhere, he tries to trace the development of the asuta-conception and incidentally points out that the Varuṇa-religion, which represents an etlucal religious law, is greatly influenced by the vicissi. tudes in the political life of the Aryans (Garbe Comm. Vol., 1927). ĮG4. Ilalle (Saale), 1923. 222 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY gods of the Boghazkoi tablet his starting point, GUNTERT traces the concepts underlying those gods westwards and eastwards 168 scrupulously steering himself clear of “Berliner comparative mythology’ and “moon mythology’ and believes to be thereby able to define what he calls “a gradual and uninterruptedly ascending line of the evolution of the Aryan mythological think ing’ The basic motif of this thinking is, according to him, that of magical bondage and release This he tries to illustrate through a most illuminating and original discussion about the personality and character of Asura Varuṇa the world sovereign and cosmic magician He shows how the various concepts connected with the Varuṇa mythology, such as Mitra, rta Aditi, Adityas maya, and pāśas as also the name Varuṇa itself, are linguistically derived from roots meaning “to bind ” Further, 10 support of his the ories he produces a considerable amount of archaeological an thropological and ethnological evidence In the second part of his book, GUNTERT deals with the Vedic saviour gods and divine intermediaries among whom he chiefly counts Aśvins Viṣnu and Agni He also stresses the cosmogonical significance of the self mmolation of Yama All that one may say about H D GRISWOLDS The Religion of the Rigvedal66 is that it is a kind of popular, well written text book on the subject As required by the Religious Quest of India Series 187 in which the book is published GRISWOLD possesses in ample measure the three attributes namely, full sympathy for things Indian, abiding faith in Christianity, and adequate scholarship Though the author calls his book “The Religion of the Rigveda,’ he restricts himself almost exclusively to the consideration of the principal Vedic gods practically ignoring the subject of the Vedic ritual His approach to the Vedic 16 GUFNTERT part cularly tnkes into accot nt thc arci cxtcad og from Germany tl fough the Thracophrys an area to the Indo Iranian reg ons 166 New York, 1923 167 Tic purpose of the Ser es was to create a more sympatbrtc under standing of Ind an rel gous ideas on the part of the Christians and Christian ty on the part of the Ind ans VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 223 mythology is quite conventional; he adheres to the view that the Vedic divinities are manifestations of various forces of nature. However, he speaks of Varuṇa as the lord of the ethical law, of Indra as the lord of the cosmic law, and of Agoi as the lord of the ritual order, asserting that each of these gods has his own rta. He further adds that Iodra is also the god of heroic action, that he represents an apotheosis of the traits “which the Aryans lost more or less through the influence of climate and the fusion with the aborigines.” It may be incidentally pointed out that GRISWOLD’s writing occasionally betrays a tendency to interpret (obviously in a forced manner) the names and functions of the Vedic gods according to his own fundamental notions and to read, into Vedic passages, the ideas of later times as, for instance, in his discussion of the Vedic conception of sin. One also wonders whether the concluding chapter, in which the author deals with the religion of RV as a preparation for Christianity, does not detract from the generally sober outlook of the book.169 If HILLEBRANDT was the moon-mythologist, Johannes HERTEL may be said to have been the fire-mythologist. The essence of HERTEL’s conception of Vedic religion and mythology was that they revolved round the central theme of light and fire.169 He believed that fire surrounded the world and pervaded every individual being. Fire was thus a universal power in macrocosm and microcosm. He further believed that, in the Veda, fire was identified with vaderstanding (wisdom, reason, prudence) and power. Indeed, he also believed that these two ideas were not restricted only to the Veda, but that they had already been Aryan (Indo-Iranian), and, in all probability, even todogermanic. HERTEL firmly stuck to his doctrine that brahman ( which word he connected with phlegma) originally denpted the cosmic fire which streamed forth into the world, through the fifts in its covering, in 168 For instance, GRISWOLD suggests a parallel between Agni and Jesus Cbrist. 169. Die ansche Feuerlehre, Leipzig, 1925 Also Dre Methode der anischen Forschung, Leipzig, 1924, and other volumes in the series, “Indo Iranische Quellen und Forschungen” 224 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY the form of the sun the moon, and other constellations 1"0 He pointed out that the Aryans regarded both Somn and milk as the liquid form of this heavenly firet and imagined that by drinking them they absorbed that fire into their hearts He even suggested that the cremation of the dead was actually meant to facilitate the passage from the mortal to the fiery (spiritual) body HERTEL sought to establish these peculiar theories of his regard ing the early Indo Irndian Weltanschauums on the basis of a critical examination of such words as saksa dhena and vasu Re insisted that these words Originally denoted light and fire, and that that primitive meaning was bot only suitable but was also necessary in the various Vedic (and Avestan) passages where those words occurred His discussion in this connection was however obviously one sided and clearly smacked of dogmatism HERTEL often referred to the dualism between the powers of light and fire (whose incarnations were the Devas who were the givers of rain and fire and who likewise were the embodiments of the highest wisdom and power and the powers of darkness This dualism also was Indogermanic, and did not begia, as had been generally supposed with Zoroastrianism According to HERTEL the Indogermanic Deva religion was represcnted in its purest form in RV and in its next best form in the older Yasts Among other striking ideas put forth by HERTEL may be men tioned his identification of Ahura Mazdah with Bphaspati He suggested that both these divinities represented the God of heaven who had been deprived of all naturalistic attributes but in whom the concept of heavenly fire had been preserved Then there is his assumption of the conflict between the Indra worshipping tribesVEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 225 and the Mithra-adoring tribes the Mazda yasnians). He believed that a reference to the condlict occurred in RV X. 22. The Kayis mentioned in the tenth stanza of that hymn were, according to him, the Avestan tribes of East Iran. They were there characte rised as naksatraśaras, that is, as “deriving divine fire or inspira tion (saras) from the stars,“1”? because the East Iranians looked upon the constellations Tistrya and Satavaēsa, and, above all, upon Mithra (= the starry heaven), as being pecularly endowed with this divine fire. Rudolf OTTO is one of the few scholars who has approached Vedic religion and mythology not as a philologist or an Indologist, but from the point of view of the psychology and evolution of reli gion as such.173 Actually what he has sought to do in his Gottheit und Gottheiten der Anerl7t is to apply to the Vedic religion his theory about the origin of the conception of divinity 175 His starting point is that the genesis of the Vedic gods (or, for the matter of that, of any gods ) cannot be traced back to the effects produced on men’s minds by the great phenomena of nature, such as the sun, the sky, the storm, thc winds, ctc. It is the specific and a priori faculty of apperception of a power, which may best be termed a ’numer’, that is at the bottom of all consciousness of divinity. OTTO tries to define aumen negatively by pointing out that it does not signify mere terror or mere wonder. It is a complex entity, and among its constituents may be mentioped a consciouspess of might which involves respect, a feeling of the presence of power which may be expressed as wrath (manyu) or as glowing flame, and a kind of victorious majesty. It reveals itself through a natural dualism of wrath and mercy. Further, this numen may exist within man himself,178 or outside man in 172. It may be pointed out that the word is also read as nia ksatrafar asam, 173. It may be recalled that MAX MUELLER has made a more or less similar attempt in his Hibbert Lectures 174 Giessen, 1932. 175, CC, Otto’s other books such as Das Herlige, Munchen 1932, and Das Gefuhl des Uberueltlichen, Munchen, 1932. 176. As examples of humans bearing the aumen within themselves, Otto mentions Ktsın (RV X. 136 ), the Atharvans, and the Angirases. 29 226 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY nature or the animal world or cycn in the world of ideas However, OTTO hastens to cmphasise that these substrata arc by no means to be regarded as the causes of numen (much less of the conception of divinity - they mercly serve as suitable occasions for its manifestation OTTO then tries to illustrate bus theory of the numinous origin of the conception of divinity by analysing the nature of various Vedic gods 177 Vedic Varuṇa, for instance, is not the sky god (nor, as a matter of fact, any nature god) He is born of the puminous apperception of disease 10 man and beast Further, on account of the natural dualism of aspect referred to above, Varuṇa is regarded as a sender of disease as well as its remover Later, consequent upon the changes 10 the social environments and conditions of the Aryan communities, this same twofold primitive character of Varuṇa developed into that of the chastiser of sin and the upholder of moral las Vedic Viṣnu also does not represent any natural phenomenon 15 constituted of various numina which assume diflerent forms** OTTO derives the name Viṣṇu either from the root vis (because the Visau bumen.enters into various objects) or Iro vis because Viṣṇu assumes various iesas or outer appearance Similarly he traces the name Rudra, meaning .howler,’ to illusory strange sounds which a person having the consciousoess of a numen believes to be hearing 181 In connection with Kuors. OTTO further points out that the myth of the incest of the god with his daughter182 is the result of the misapprehension “l the ancient Dravidian concept of a hermaphrodite from WDOLI of calaras on the basis of this 177 This analysis is, of course, tendentious 178 In this context, OTTo connects Apollo as A 18 context, OTTo connects Apollo as Apopellon With Varuk. 179 OTTO interprets the doctrine of apalaras on the basi assumption 180 In this connection, OTTO mentions Salagrima - Vinu s appellations like naranarottama nirayana etc, can be explained only on thug assumption Sipivista, it is pointed out 13 immanent in thc organ of geacration cataly it may be pointed out that for the elucidation of ** theory, Orto lays great store upon the Safarudrya 182 She is supposed to be Uṣas OTTO suggests that $21 characterised as dakst0 #, reappears as Dakkhini 10 Buddhist texts calions Salagrima He thinks that Nitayana etc, can be satisfactorily 1912, at 15 pointed out is the pumen OTTO suggests that Uṣas, who is VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 227 world originates. This bisexual bejog is Rudra or Mahādeva or Mahi Dyauh. According to OTTO, the Aryans (or the Indo Europeans) did not have a sky.god. Dyauh is not the sky-god, but denotes simply a god.183 Mahi Dyauh mentioned in RV X. 133. 5 is the precursor of Mahādeva.18€ Speaking of Maruts, OTTO rejects the usual suggestion that they are the storm.gods. He thinks that men living close to nature are not likely to be so affected by the natural phenomena as to be inclined to ascribe to Maruts the characteristics of anger and fury which are assigned to them in RV. Maruts are, indeed, conceived not merely as dreadful but also as demoniac. In this connection, OTTO makes an important point. He says that the idea of ‘demoniacness’ does not arise in man’s mind after he has come across the storm. winds; it is already there in his mind. He only projects it, as it were, and finds a suitable substratum for it in the storm-winds. The Aryans have apperceived the numinous also in such animals as the horse and the ox, as is testified by the mythological concepts of Dadhikrā,185, Dadhyar, aad Aśvins. OTTO connects AŚvins with the primitive yoke of cattle, 186 in which the pastoral people located a numen. The idea was subsequently transferred to steeds. Aśvins came to be eventually regarded as saviour-gods because they were originally supposed to aid man with the homely products derived from the ox and the cow. The most significant contribution of J. PRZYLUSKI to the study of the Vedic mythology was that he drew pointed attention to what might be called the non-Aryan (non-IE) elements in that mythology. In this connection, he mainly thought of the Austro Asiatic culture-complex. PRZYLUSKI believed that the Aryans 183. The tendency to associate gods with the sky is, according to OTTO, late. 181. OTTO explains eladya (RV VIII. 80. 10) as a reverer of one god, devotee of an ista-dedata.’ 185. Dadhikra is the stallion who brings about tbe production of milk in the mares. Later, this figure is given the name of Dadhikrāvan - no longer a borse, but a subject which possesses horse or mare. The name significs the development of a numen. 186. He thinks that nasata refers to the broad noses of cattle in India. 228 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY had come into contact with the Austro-Asiatic people at various points in the course of their wanderings and colonisation activities, and had thereby been substantially influenced in their way of life and thought By way of a striking example of such influence he mentioned the Vedic Varuṇa-mythology 187 The concept of Varuṇa, he asserted, was borrowed by the Vedic Aryans from the neighbouring Austro Asiatic people These latter worshipped the god of sea as their greatest god The realm of this god lay beneath the waters of the sea The Aryans, having come into contact with the Austro Asiatic people, borrowed from them their great god in his original character as the god of sea That was Varuṇa PRZYLUSKI agreed with PISCHEL and KRETSCH MER188 10 their assumption that Vedic Varuṇa was originally the god of ocean According to him, the introduction of this new god into the Aryan mythology marked the weakening of the Brahmanic orthodoxy and the entry upon the scene of the recently assimilated population PRZYLUSKI suggested that, just as the concept of Varuṇa was derived from the Austro Asiatic mythology, the name Varuṇa also was derived from the Austro Asiatic language The name Varuṇa was connected with the Austro Asiatic word baru (bharu) which meant ‘sea’ However, PRZYLUSKI went on to point out, siace, for the continental Aryans, the sea did not have the same impor tance as for the maritime Austro-Asiatic people, in the Vedic religion, the sovereign god could not be regarded as residing at the bottom of the ocean He had to be elevated and enthroned in the highest heaven, on the top of the world-mountain Varuṇa thus first came to be attached to Asura, the god of the sky, and was eventually identified with him Nevertheless, a section from among the Aryans always remained faithful to the Austro Asiatic Varuṇa, the god of sea 180 187 “Varuṇa, god of the sca and the sky’, JRAS 1931 188 Sec foot note 189 below 189 P KretscITVER thinks (” Varupa und die Urgeschichte der Inder, 11 ZAA133, 1926 ) that Varuda u derived from Halute Aruna, the god of sca { Continued on the next poge) VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 229 The concepts of Aditi and Asvios provided, according to PRZYLUSKI, further evidence of the non-Aryan elements in the Vedic mothology,190 PRZYLUSKI found for Aditi a prototype in the Great Goddess of the early religions of Western Asia.191 A special feature of the ritual connected with chis Great Goddess was flagellation, the main purpose of which was the renewal of the life of the creatures, the augmentation of their vigour, and the stimulation of their power of reproduction. Some traces of the idea of flagellation could be discovered in the Adıtı-mythology in the Veda. In a passage in the Atharvaveda (IX. 1), Aditi was frequently referred to as madhukaśa;18% and, in the primitive ideology, both madiu ( honey) and kaśā (whip) were the princi pal constituents of the ritual of flagellation. PRZYLUSKI further pointed out that Aśvins too were closely connected with madhu. This conceptual affinity between Aditi and Asvigs was but a (Continued from the last page ) That is to say, caruga u the Indian scd form of the West Asian word, aruna, which means ‘sca! He further says. The religion of the Aryans developed in the opposite directions One section adopted the Hittite Arupa, god of the sca, these were the ancestors of the Indians, who, during the post Vedic times, continued to recognise in Varuṇa a sea god As for the Indians who adherep to the Vedic relgion, they amalgamatcd Aruna and Asura, the god of the sea and the god of the sky. The worshippers of Varuda, the sca-god, regarded those, who made Varuṇa the Asura, as hercucs, and in the end the belich of the former prevaucd after the Vedic epoch. According to KRETSCHNER, all Indiang had to pass through a sorc-Asiatic epoch, which left clear traces in their religion, language, and culturc Like Varuda, Indra also was traced back to the Hittite mythology KRETSCHMER connects Indra with the Hittito god Inaras (” Zum Ursprung des Gottes Indra,” Wien, 1927, and “Indra vad der heilutische Gott Ioaras,” KT I, 1928). KRETSCHMER further suggests that the concept of Kubera and the game of dico, among other things, are borrowed by the Indians from the Hittite and the Mitannians 190 “Adits – the Great Mother,” HJAS 1, 1936, “Les Afvin et la Grande Décsse, HJAS 1, 1936. 191. Other variants of this Grcat Goddess were, according to PRZYLUSKI, Anābita in Iran, Anat in Palestine, Nans, Napai, and Tanais in Syna and Asia Minor 192 KEITHI points out that, in this passage, Adit cannot be said to have been directly described as madhukasa Madhukasā 15 described as the motbc of Adityas, among other things. 230 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY reflection of the West Asian mythology relating to the Great Goddess attended by two cavaliers (originally by two animals, by two horses) 193 In the Veda, Asvins were sometimes represented as the attendants of Aditi The original non-Aryan character of Asyins seems to have been indicated by their other name Nāsatyau This latter name was presumably an Aryanısed form of some Austro Asiatic word satja might be connected with Austro Asiatic sadam which means horse, “194 while na might be regarded as just an affix 195 Asvins were originally divine horses and later became divine cavaliers PRZYLUSKI put forth two other suggestions in connection with the Vedic Great Goddess firstly, that, in the Vedic period, the Great Goddess and her attendants were sometimes represented under the form of a divine tree surmouoted by two birds,196 and, secondly, that, in the Vedic religion, as in the religion of Syria, the Great Goddess came to be transformed into the sun (Surya) He believed that the three stages of human evolution were the economic, the social, and the spiritual, and that, in the first stage, the Great Goddess was the Mistress of Animals, in the second, she became the wife of two men (an idea indirectly represented in the mythology of Aditi and Aśvins), and in the third, she became the wife of one husband (as suggested by the myth of Surya, the wife of the two Asyins, becoming the wife of one Soma) 107 A mention may be made in this context of another of PRZYLUSKI’s propositions, namely, that Vedic Viṣṇu, who had no counterpart in IE mythology, was to be connected with non Aryan Vith, a race living in Vethadipa in the Deccan 198 Among the Western scholars who have written about the Vedic religion and mythology, A Berriedale KEITH 15 perhaps 193 lo thus connect on, PRZYLUSKI refers to the Thasos relief where the Mother Goddess is shown 23 supported by two horsemen 19: In modern Munia sadam mcans horse 195 As in baru baru na taruna 196 Cf RV 114 3, I 164 20 197 La grande deesse Paris 190 198 La donn du deu Virou ct la legende de hrana, Arch Or 4, 1932 PRZYLUSN also connects Vithal-Vithobe with this race VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 231 “the most prolific as well as the most encyclopaedic. One may say without any fear of contradiction that in the two sumptuous volumes of The Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and Upani shads,199 KEITH provides ample evidence of his thorough acquain tance with almost everything that had been published on the subject till then. His genius, however, is essentially negative. His forte may be said to consist in trying to show how the theories advanced by other scholars are deficient. His own approach to the subject is usually unimaginative; his attitude is over-cautious - he shrinks from setting forth any positive views. His motto seems to have been : Confession of ignorance, however tantalizing, is better than assumption of knowledge. Notwith standing all this, it must be conceded that, in The Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and Upanishads, he has presented a very competent survey of all – or, almost all – existing knowledge about a wide range of topics relating to the Vedic religion and philosophy. In that book, he begins with a study of the sources, and then, in its four major divisions, he deals in great detail respectively with the gods and demons of the Veda, Vedic ritual, the spirits of the dead, and the philosophy of the Veda. In the Appendix, he takes up for critical discussion such topics as the age of the Avesta and RV, the sacrifice of Purusa and the origin of the world,200 the Aryan conception of the heaven,201 the drink of immortality,202 the IE fire-cult, cremation and burial, and the Dravidian element in Indian thought. KEITH’s work thus constitutes a comprehensive digest on Vedism.203 So far as the Vedic mythology is concerned, KEITH is by no means a heretic - he is usually joclined to adhere to what are generally regarded as conventional veiws on the subject. Like BLOOMFIELD, he adopts, in this connection, the policy of “wise 199. Harvard Oriental Series, Vol. 31 and 32, 1925. 200. Particularly the views of GUENTERT regarding Yama. 201. With special reference to HERTEL’s theorics. 202. Dumézil’s views are here subjected to a critical examination. 203. Apart from RPVU, reference must needs be made to Kerri’s numerous other articles and critical reviews, 232 EXERCISCS IN INDOLOGY conservatism llc baleses that ri is the one and thc unisersal document concerning the chic religion and mythology ile further bclicics that most of the Vedic gods are personifications of thc srcat pouces of nature though on rare occasions h admits that many gods are not gods of nature and much myth may well bc duc to ritual le has no sympathy for OTTO S thcory regarding reig on bring the result of the working of the numinous fancy of the primitive man ic agrees uith L. de LA VALLÉE POUSSIN in rajecting WINTERNITZ & Suggestion that RI presents a mythology in thc making. According to bin, most of the gods appear in the Veda as already cstablished cntities with a long previous history Again most of them liase alrcady developed complex characters a phenomenon, which he asserts can be satisfactorily cxplained only on the assumption of syncretism kritul acccpts the identification of Varuṇa with Ouranos cien though he thinks that there are certain phonetic dil culties involved in such identification Both Varung and Ouranos represent the all encompassing vault of the sky *** Mitra is undoubtedly the sun KEITH criticises the view of KRETSCHIMER that Vedic Varuṇa was derived from Hittite Aruna and that therefore, he was originally the god or occan He points out that the Aryans already had from the most ancient period a god of the shy who subscquently became Asura There is indeed no reason for assuming (as KRETSCHMER does) the twofold divergence in the Varuṇa mythology - the schism that is to say, between the cult of Varuṇa (Aruna) the sea god and that of Varuṇa (Asura) the sly god Further h iTUI pertinently ashs whether there actually was a little god called Aruns KEITH also views with d sfavour PRZYLUSKIS theory about Varun He thinks that the main plank on which PRZYLUSKI has sought to raise his superstructurc namely the assumption ol Austro Asiatic origin for a number of Vedic (Sanskrit) words 15 deplorably weak The Austro Asiatic forms mentioned by PRZY LUSKI in this connection are of a palpably late date Moreover PRZYLUSKI has not been able to explain satisfactorily when and 20+ Kerti rejects the lunar theory of OLDENBERO and IIALEBRANDT VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 233 where the Aryans encountered the Austro-Asratic people and how the concept of Varuṇa came to be borrowed by the former from the latter And, finally, KEITH asks in his dominant mood of wise conservatism Is it not simpler to accept that Varuṇa is identical with Ourapos? He also argues that the development of Varuṇa the sky god into Varuṇa the sea god is quite natural in view of Varuṇa’s connection with the waters of the heaven In spite of the new theories regarding the original characters of Pusan and Viṣṇu,20- KEITH still sticks to the orthodox view that they are sun gods Aśvios are connected with patural phenomena. KEITH controverts PRZYLUSKI’s suggestion about the mythology of the Great Goddess ( Aditi) and the two cavaliers (Asyins) hav 10g been adopted by the Vedic Indians from the Westerp Asian religious complex Indeed, there are very few points of contact between Aditi and Asyios as represented in the Veda KEITH also doubts that Aśvins were originally horses He does not understand how an ancient pame like Nāsatya can be connected with a later Munda word like sadam He thinks that Nāsatya means “ healer ” It is surely strange that KEITH 18 inclined to accept the historical existence of Indra’s foes but not of Indra himself He does not believe that there is any connection between Rudra-Śiva and the Vrātyas 296 He regards Gandharva as a heavenly being As for the concept of brahman, KEITH says that the word brahman already occurs in RV as an established term with a long history. Accordingly, its origin is difficult to deter mige While discussing in a lengthy article the “Modern theories of religion and the Veda, 207 KEITH points out that the possible 205 In this context, a special reference may be made to the original VICWs put forth by I. P JOILANSSON ( Solfaegeln Indien, Uppsala, 1910 Veber de aliud sche Gonn Dhisapa und Veru andies Uppsala 1919) JOHANSSON laya great stress on the wide prevalence of fertility cult in ancient India He has also put forth some startling yiews about Varuṇa Through his Trilogie der altındischen Alachte und Feste, Zurich 1937, MEYER offers a comprehensive study of ancient Indian cults of vegetation and fertility 206 As suggested by E ARB\AN in his remarkable book, Rudra Unter. suchungen zum allinduschen Glauben und Kultus, Uppsala, 1922 207 JRAS, 1907. 30. 234 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY occurrence of totemism in the Vedic religion cannot be denied But he hesitates to accept as convincing the evidence usually put forth in this connection, such as the names of tribes like Matsyas, Ajas, Māndūkeyas, and Vatsas, and the reference in the Salapatha Brāhmana to Kūrma (Kaśyapa ) being the father of the bumao race. At the same time, he believes, as against HILLEBRANDT, that traces of totemism may be seen in the selection or avoidance of certain animals for sacrifice In this connection, he quotes Pärashara Grhjasūtra III 11 10 which says “At a sacrifice directed to a special deity, the animal belonging to that deity should be offered” He concludes that “totemism merely accounts for the rare ceremonial eating of the slain god and not for the numerous instances of animal sacrifice found in early Vedic religion " Totemism must have been 10 an advanced stage of decay wbea the practices in question were in vogue KEITH does not agree with HILLEBRANDT (and OLDENBERG aod HOPKINS) in his views regarding the difference between the Vedic conception of animal sacrifice and the Semitic conception He thinks that, while, according to both the conceptions, the animal is chosen because of its close connection with the god, and, in the actual sacrifice, it is filled with that god’s divinity, the Indian does not see in the death of the victim the death of the god Similarly, the victim is not regarded as a close kis by the Indian sacrificer as by the Semitic As for human sacrifice, KEITH’s view is that the Vedic Indians cannot have failed to practise a rite of which instances are found in many religions But it must have been a rare offering -“seldom, if at all, put 10 force” So little notice is taken of it in ancient Indian literature According to KEITH, the sacrifice to Jumbaka on the head of a man of repulsive appearance is not a relic of the Vedic practice of slaying the aged and worn out king The man is clearly a scapegoat, and the purpose of the offering is to remove the guilt of the village outcastes KEITH considers the analogies between Vedic sacrifices and Greek mysteries208 to be precipitate About SCHROEDER’s theory regarding mysteries and mimes in RV, he 208 As suggested by JACKSON, FRAS, 1908VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 235 opines that there is no doubt that drama represents the outcome of a vegetation ritual; but vegetation rituals are not characteristic of the Indian Aryan religion, and there is no evidence of any drama proper having been evolved in Vedic times. J. CHARPENTIER was an ardent critic of the methods and most of the conclusions of KEITH,209 He was a confirmed anti naturalist. He beld that the moon was not impersonated in the austere and majestic figure of Varuṇa, nor was the sun the nature substratum of Viṣnu. Indra was not the god of thunder or summer-heat; he was “the heroic and somewhat grotesque chief of a flock of early knights-errant,“210 who was, in course of time, transformed into their god by a “rustic, semi-Domadic, strong, and half-barbarous people.” On the other hand, Varuṇa and Mitra must have originated in a society where law and order were regarded as particularly important. Varuṇa was the king in “a well-ordered city-state.” In a society which had not quite settled down, such a superhuman enforcer of law and order was bound to present a somewhat sinister aspect. This would account for the darker features of Varuṇa’s character. The concepts of Varuṇa and Mitra implied a much higher civilization than the Indo-Iranian civilization. It was, therefore, not unlikely, accord ing to CHARPENTIER, that those two gods had been borrowed by the Indo-Icanians from some other people. As regards Asvins. CHARPENTIER accepted the view of the Aitihäsıkas and saw in those divinities two beneficent saviour-princes of yore. Furtber, he suggested that the mysterious qualities accorded to the smith in ancient tales might account for part of the character of Rbhus.212 It might be remembered that, in the IE period, a prominent position was generally assigned to the wainwright. 209 CC BSOS 4. Indeed, this attitude was reciprocal in the case of these two scholars. 210. According to CILARPENTIER, the localization of the conflicts between this burly chicstan and his various cncmies, as suggested by Konow and BARNETT, was not convincing 211, ile believed that comparative philology did not offer much liep in conncction with these divine forms. 236 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY According to CHARPENTIER, the early and close connection between Rbhus and the Rathakāras could be taken as well esta blished Their rival was Tvastr, who presumably represented the old fashioned craftsmanship as against the new techniques evolved by Röhus CHARPENTIER understood the word apsaras in the sepse of “body less,” i form less”, Apsaras was a being, who could, at her own sweet will, assume different forms In his noteworthy monograph Brahman,212 CHARPENTIER undertook a thorough, critical study of the concept of brahman from the linguistic, exegetical, and religio historical points of view He accepted HILLEBRANDT’S proposition that the Vedic brahman and the Avestan barasian were closely related to each other and originally denoted a bunch of sacrificial grass 213 He then showed how that original conception of brahman later on developed in the directions of magical power, hymn or spell, and the ultimate principle of the universe Another noteworthy contribution of CHARPENTIER to the study of the Vedic mytho logy was Die Suparna-Sage 21€ In this monograph, CHAR PENTIER analysed the various motifs of the Suparna legend, and thereby also threw light on several problems connected with Indian legends in general In his posthumously published magnum opus, Varuṇa,” Hernrich LUDERS deals with such topics as the position of Varuga as a resident of water and a denizen of heaven the relation between the terrestrial and the celestial seas and rivers, Indra’s combat with Vstra, and the role of Soma He considers Varupa’s essential character to be that of the god of oathi Adverting to the concept of ra, LUDERS points out that the German word Wahrheit covers the exact and whole meaning of rta Ria subsequently came to be regarded as a cosmic principle Betty HEIMANN felt that, in the early Yeda. Varuṇa was not 212 Uppsala 1932 213 According to CHIARPENTIER, a Brahmacurin was one who had a gurdic of sacrificial grass 214 Uppsala, 1921 215 Vol 1, Gottingen, 1951, Vol II, Gottingen, 1959 VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 237 represented as an entirely independent god; he was only the instrument of rta.218 In RV, the concept of Varuṇa was simul taneously macrocosmic and microcosmic. Varuņa also became the extended cosmic representation of an earthly kingship. Further, according to HEIMANN, the idea of a primary mono theism was in no way reflected in RV. She thought that W. SCHMIDT’s view that all polytheism was a distortion of an original Ur-gott - of original monotheism - was not valid for Vedic mythology.217 Similarly, pantheism’ or ’theopanism was not an adequate characterisation of the Vedic religion. HEIMANN sought to provide a philosophical rationalisation for Vedic henotheism.218 She also insisted that the henotheism of RV must be viewed together with the later concepts of ista devatā and bhakti. Her treatment of the supra-personal process of the Vedic sacrifice210 fits in well with her general conception of the ancient Indian Weltanschauung. This longish survey may now be concluded with a brief reference to the work of some of the contemporary Western scholars. To begin with Georges DUMÉZIL, his basic dogma pertains to the tripartite ideology of the Indo-Europeans. According to DUMÉZIL, it is possible to deduce from a critical and comparative study of the oldest Indo-Iranian, Celtic, Italian, and Greek sources that the Indo-Europeans had the conception of a social structure based on the distinction and hierarchisation of three fuoctions, namely of priests, warriors, and producers, This conception gave rise to their tripartite mythology 220 DUMÉZIL divides the Aryan gods into three main classes - moral, military, and economic. So far as the Vedic religion and mytho logy are concerned, the two antithetical but complementary divine rulers Mitra and Varuṇa are the representatives of the first class, 216. Kant Stud. 30. 217. The idea of ur-nonotbcism, as a starting primitive conception, does not seem convincins; it comes at the end of prima uve thought. 218. ADORI 28, Deltalkar Felicitation l’ol, 1937, 219. RSO 32. 220. L’idiologie Inpartie des Indo-Ewopéens, Brussels, 1958. 238 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY Indra ( Or Vayu) of the second class and Asvins of the third class 2*1 As for Varuṇa, DUMÉZIL asserts that there is a very close affinity between Varuṇa and Ouranos - both linguistically and conceptually 22 The two words, varuna and ouranos, are to be derived from the root *uer which means to fasten,” to bind. The idea of bondage is clearly expressed through the paśas of Varuṇa Bondage is a primary feature also of the character of Ouranos He is the master of the bond” the fetterer of his foes Filial rivalry is common to both these mytho logies Ouranos as sovereign is threatened by his sons, while Varuṇa’s son Bhrgu regards tumself as superior to his father 123 Another common point is the impotence brought upon these two gods In this connection, Ouranos was the victim of the machinations of his wife Gara and Kronos DUMÉZIL finds 11 AV IV 4 1 a mention of the loss of Varuṇa’s virility Further, he adverts in this context, to the Rajasuya sacrifice of which Varuṇa is the god It is suggested that, after Varuṇa had been consecrated as the first world sovereign, he was deprived of his maply vigour, probably on account of the sprinkling over him of the waters of coasecration This loss of manly vigour on Varuṇa’s part resulted in the fructification of pature Much stress is laid by DUMEZIL upon the close connection between the king and vegetation Iife There existed in ancient times a primitive practice according to which in order to renew the worn out life in nature it was necessary for the king to immolate himself, or, at his consecration, to offer in sacrifice to Varuṇa his own son or at least a substitute The legend of Sunahśepa is regarded as particularly significant in this connection DUMEZIL also seeks to explain the concept of brahman in the light of this Baune barton may be 221 DUMEZIL mentions Jupiter Mars and Quirinus on thus very conncc ton He also refers to other aspects of this tr part t on such as injustice war famine barm ng by charmg phys cal violence theft u ree types of m d cinc etc Antent on may be drawn to BROUCH & crit que of DUMEZIL S dogma (BSOAS 22) THEME (Mira and Aryaman New Haven 1957) rejects DUMEZIL : threefold classificat on of the Indo Iran an gods 222 Ou anos Varuṇa Pars 1934 223 Ja min ya-Bahmana I 44 However Dumezit appears to be stretch ing this allus on too far Mi tra anche Indo Ir to DRON old Class ( n VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 239 practice.324 According to him, the word brahman is to be traced back to IE *blielgh, which had a religio-magical sense. Greek pharmakos and Latin flanien are also to be connected with bhelgh. Thus brahman, like flamen, originally means a scape goat. DUMÉZIL contends that Brāhmanas achieved historical importance mainly as substitutes for the royal victim, who, according to the primitive belief, bad to be sacrificed for reviving life in nature. Kings were in the habit of majotaining men to act as substitutes during the periods of epidemics, famines, or other occasions for reviving the life of nature, when " royal blood had to be spilled for public good.” Such men (Brahman. Brāhmanas ) were treated with formal deference, and would take part in the sacrificial offering of one of their number thereby acquiring a sombre prestige. DUMÉZIL adds that the magical conception of a scape-goat underwent a parallel development in India, Greece, and Rome. DUMÉZIL accounts for Varuṇa’s close congection with waters in two ways: Varuņa is the guardian of the ritual order, and waters are a great ritual agency; that is why Varupa is so closely connected with waters. There is affinity between Varuṇa and waters also because both of them are responsible for fecundity in nature. Mitra, says DUMÉZIL, is the Aryan god of contracts. He analyses the double sovereignty of Mitra-Varuṇa by pointing out that Mitra represents the clear, calm, benevolent, sacerdotal aspect while Varuṇa represents the assailant, sombre, ipspiring, violent, terrible, warlike aspect.225 Mitra is brahman, Varuņa is rāj.226 DUMÉZIL regards Aryaman as representing the third aspect of sovereignty.229 He emphasises the great similarity, both 224, Flemm-Brahman, Paris, 1935. 225. Mfxtra-J’arpa, Paris, 1918. ThedE (op. cit ) accepts MEILLET’S view that Mitra in RV TXTsonifics contract exclusively. He or not agree withi Duszzil in his assumption of the distinction in tic roles of Mitra and Varuca. Varuṇa, according to him, significs truc speech,’ 226. DUTEZIL juxta poscs rd)-brahman and ex-flamen, 227. L troisiéme souterain, Paris, 1919. Incidentally, Duwezil interprets an as “average fellow-countryman.” According to THENE (op. a.), ari mcans “strapger” and Aryaman is God IIospitality. 240 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY ZIL from the points of view of mythical function and activity, between Aryaman of the Indo Iranian mythology and Heros Eremon of the Irish folk legends 2374 Among other Vedic divinities, DU considers Viṣṇu and Maruts particularly with reference to the Zoroastrian reform 223 DUMEZIL has, so to say, revived compa rative mythology laying greater stress on conceptual rather than linguistic equations For instance, he draws pointed attention to the parallelism between the fundamental structure of the ancient Roman religion and that of the Vedic religion “ According to him Roman Mater Matuta is identical with Usas, it being possible to explain the rites connected with the former by reference to the myths connected with the latter Similarly Roman goddess Angerona is equated with the goddess of short drys (RV V 40 5 8), Fortuna Primigenia with Aditi, and Lua Mater with Nirfti in her divipe character At the same time, DUMEZIL also emphasises the connection of the Pandava heroes with the Vedic divinities 230 He suggests that Vayu (Dhima) is perhaps earlier than Indra (Arjuna ) as war god He further suggests that the Krsna Arjuna conflict perhaps reflects the conflict between the ancient Indo Iranian solar mythology and the later Vedic Indra mythology 231 In his Religions of India,232 Louis RENOU devotes two chapters to the consideration of the Vedic religion He regards RV as a " literary anthology drawn from family traditions " He also assumes the existence of an Ur Veda, which existed before the emergence of the Vedic schools and which incorporated 10 itself the mythology and the ritual which had arisen in the original Vedic conimunity According to RENOU, there is in 2270 for a crtcsm of DuMÉZIL SI cws 8cc DANDERAR Vad c Afytholog cal Tracts Pp 321 22 356 61 228 14 241 229 Deesses latines et mythes ved ques Brussels 1956 230 Oental a Succana 1954 and 1957 He connects Dl arma with M tra Bhlima w th Dyauh and hyna wit! Vippu 231 Itsa who benefits by Indra s intervention aga nst Strya is often referred to as Arjunya in RV (1 112 23 IV 261 VII 192) Also sco f n 2279 232. London 1953 VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY the Vedic religion, a blend of ritual and mythology, each of which needs to be explained with the aid of the other. RENOU generally accepts the views of BERGAIGNE - he seems to be particularly in sympathy with the view that all mythological portrayals in the Veda are but variants of the sacred fire and the sacred drink.283 However, RV cannot be regarded as a mere ancillary to ritual. The function of sacrifice, says RENOU, Is to bring together all uncoordinated phenomena and build them up into an organic whole. He adds that the Upanisads carry the speculations of the Mantra and the Brāhmana to their logical conclusion. As for the relation between the Indus valley civilisa tion and the Vedic civilisation, RENOU suggests that one does not owe anything to the other. He, however, thinks that some form of Hinduism already existed in Vedic times (and certainly went back to the Indus valley civilisation) and that the esoterism of Taptra can be traced back to the Veda itself. Elsewhere RENOU has treated in some detail the Vedic god Indra.254 Referring to Indra’s epithet vstrahan, he points out that, both in the Avestan and the Vedic mythology, Výtrahan originally repre sented the rather abstract concept of a god who destroyed resistances (vītrani) Later on, that god came to be absorbed by the hero Indra who had been transformed into a god. RENOU points out that, in the Atharvaveda, Indra is represented more concretely and in a more life-like manner.235 233. H. LOMEL bas attempted a study of Soma and Agni in “Konig Soma,” Numen 2. Soma, according to him, is the fluid principle of the conti aunty of life. 234. E. BENVENISTE and L. Renou, Vilsa a Vythragna, Paris, 1934. V. MACHEK auggests ( Arch Or, 28) that Virou may have been the original Verethragna. There is a reference to the latter’s goaldras. Incidentally, mention may be made of MACEK’s views tbat Asvios arc indigenous IE deitics (and not two Indian princes) ( Arch. Or. 15), that Rudra is the divine shepherd - the manager of cattle in the aristocratic court of heaven, and tbat Papan » the second’ or younger shepherd (Arth. Or. 22). 235 NIA 8. LOWEL says that there are three fields of Indra’s activity - those connected with the sun, the tempest, and the battle (Der arische Krugs golf, Frankfurt, 1939). Maciek thinks that indra is an IE adjcctive meaning *atroag,’ . vode,’ and u used merely as an epithet of the Vedic god.’ 314 242 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY Like KEITH. Jan GONDA is a prolific and versatile writer on Vedism, having a firm command over an impressive array of bib liographical material; but, unlike KEITH, GONDA has a definite view-point of his own, which has oriented all his writings. He contends that " for a more complete (or rather, a less incomplete) understanding of RV, a deeper understanding of primitive and semi-primitive culture, a deeper insight into the thought, inner life, religion, literature, etc., of the primitive man is necessary.” For the primitive man, a close contact, a parallelism, a mutual influence between nature and the world of man are always extant. GONDA tries to illustrate this point by a detailed study of the Manduka-Sukta in RV (VII. 103 ).236 He thinks that it is wrong to speak of secular’ hymns in RV, for, broadly speaking, there is nothing exclusively secular’ or ‘profane’ (in the modern sense of the words ) in RV. Io the Vedic society, characterised by the primitive aspects of the human mind and human culture, the religious - or, to be more precise, the magico-religious - element cannot be detached from other domains of human thought. GONDA ayers that, in Vedic times. religion’ and magic’ are inextricably interlaced. Accordingly, he emphasises the magico-religious significance of various Vedic concepts. For instance, he studies words like alamkāra and bhūsati and shows how they basically imply “magically causing one to become more complete, stronger, more beautiful, and more honour. able” or “investing with magical power.” Speaking of the Purohita, GONDA says that the Purohita is so called because, like several divinities who are called purohita, he holds as shield in front of the person to be protected “the strength of the magical potence attaching to his own person.” The sacrifi cial daksinā is by no means conceived as the salary or fee of the priest; rather, by paying it the sacrificer magically buys himself loose from the priest. According to GONDA, religious festivals (and sacrifices ) were the means employed by the primitive man to simulate or resuscitate the vital powers of nature. This can 236. Orientalia Neerlandica, 1948. VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY “243 be seen from the original sense of the word utsava 237 GONDA has similarly stressed the magico-religious significance of many other words and concepts like guru, miya, pratisthā, and amhas. Subjecting to a critical examination all the carlier views about brahman,23he concludes that the potion behind brahman is that of a vast but not unspecific power of support and foundation, which in the speech of the Vedic priest-poets was especially articulated as “ritual, sacred, or magical utterance.” . lo his Aspects of Early Viṣnuism,219 GONDA discusses the question of how Visou, who had held a subordinate position in the Rgvedic pantheon, came to be elevated to supreme godhead in the later mythology. In that connection he considers such separate topics as Viṣṇu and fertility, Viṣou and Indra, Viṣnu aod sajra, Viṣṇu and the mountains, Viṣṇu and yūpa, and Visgu and Logship, pinpointing those characteristics of the Vedic deity “which have persisted and reached maturity in the subsequent period and which enable us to gain an insight into those factors which helped, or even predisposed, him to gain the high position which he occupies 10 Hinduism.” He points out that the ancient Indian views regarding Viṣṇu show a remarkable’ degree of consistency, and that the two most prominent characteristics of Visou are his " pervasiveness” and his identification with sacrifice. In the course of his discussion, GONDA has made several points of religio-historical significance. For instance, he says that one cannot deny the existence of a form of worship among the Vedic Aryans or characterise it as autochthonous because RV is silent about it. Similarly, an Aryan, Austric, or Dravidian name does not necessarily indicate a religious cult of exclusively Aryan, Austric, or Dravidian origio The existence of a particular god 237. Utsaba means “generating, stimulating, producing (power) “; its other cognates are sanir and prasara The notions expressed in RV by the words utsava and ajı are, according to GOVDA, closely related. 238 Notes on Brahman, Utrecht, 1950 Among the vicws so examined are . OSTHOFT ( brohman-bricht, magıt), OLDENBERC ( mantra ), HERTEL ( Flegma, firebrand), CHARPENTIER (baresman), DUMÉZIL (llamen); RENOU (cosmic enigma), and THIEME (formation citlier of an embryo or of a poem). 239 Utrecht, 1954, 244 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY or cult among the primitive non-Aryan tribes docs not exclude the possibility of an independent evolution of a similar god of cult within the original Aryan community. The nature of Vedic Agni forms one of the many subiccts treated in GONDA’s Some Obsenations on the Relations between Gods and Powers.240 With reference to Agai’s epithet sahasah sūnuh, GONDA suggests that, by establishing a filial relationship between an entity and a power, the entity in question becomes a representative of that power - it actually becomes that power.**1 He further suggests that the designation of Agni as ‘son’ may be connected with the concep tion that the churning out of the fire represents a sexual act. GONDA’s recent publication, Dle Religionen Indiens 1: Veda und alterer Hinduismus, 212 may be said to contain a conspectus of his typical views regarding the Vedic religion and mythology. In the first four chapters of this treatise, the author presents an illumi. nating and thought-provoking survey of the religious ideology of the Veda, 243 under such headings as the Veda, Brāhmanas, and Powers, the Gods, the Rites, and the Religious and Philosophical Speculations. GONDA’s peculiar magico-religious vicw-point 19 unmistakably reflected throughout the treatment of the subject, as evince such dicta as “knowledge implies power and becomes efficacious through ritual operations ( which are ineffective with out the corresponding knowledge)”,“the power of knowledge often manifests in the old · magical’ way”, and “esoteric know ledge is a source of practically applicable power.“211 [First published : JUPHS, No. 21, 1965, 1–53. ] 240. ’s-Gravenhage, 1957. 241. According to GONDA, sahas means “overwhelmiog. victorious power.” It may be mentioned in this context that GONDA interprets the Vedic word ojas as denoting a magic-religious power-substance (creative of vital power). In the later Veda, the word began to suggest also the idea of power of fertility. 242. Stuttgart, 1960. 243. In the introduction, GONDA bricfly describes the pre-Vedic religious tendencies 244. For a critical discussion of many of the views mentioned in this paper, sce: DANDEKAR, Veduc Mythological Tracts, Delhi, 1979. (Continued on the next page)VEDIC RELIGION AND MYTHOLOGY 245 (Continued from the last page) A mention may be usefully made here of some of DANDEKAR’s other jurvey articles relating to Vedic studies and research “Twenty five yean of Vedic studies’ in Progress of Indic Studes, Poona, 1942, pp 1-68, “Some recent theorics about thc Indo Europeans,” Pratyavani 1, 1944 pp 93-99, “Vedic studies retrospect and prospect,’ PAIOC (14th Session), Part II, 1952, pp 1-22, “Recent researches relating to the Veda,’ Pr Bh. 61, 1955, PP 104-109, “Vedic, Sanskrit, and Prakrit Studies,’ in Oriental Studies in India, New Delhi, 1964, pp 1-38, “A decade of Vedic studies in India and abroad,” ABORI 56, 1975, pp 1-25, “Some recent German contributions to Vedic philology,’ in V G Parangbe Comm Vol, Delhi, 1977, pp 12-23