NEW LIGHT ON THE VEDIC GOD, SAVITR
There has been considerable difference of opinion, among Vedic scholars, in respect of the exact interpretation of the character and personality of the Vedic god, Savitr. This fact naturally enbances our interest in the study of the Vedic mythology concerning that god A critical approach to the problem regarding the essential nature of Savitr is expected greatly to clanfy our views in the matter of Indo-European (IE ) mytho logy in general and Vedic mythology in particular.
OLDENBERG is strongly of the opinion that the concept underlying the god Savitr cannot, under any circumstances be taken back to the indogermanic poriod? Savitr is comparatively a younger member of the Vedic pantheon, this fact is amply corroborated by the very name of that god, that is, Savitr, which is directly derived from the Vedic root su (to stimulate, to vivify), as well as by the manner in which that god has actually come joto being The genesis of Sants, according to OLDENBERG, clearly indicates a very late phase in the evolution of the Vedic religious thought? The earlier and morc important gods of the Rgieda (RV) like Varuṇa, Mitra, Indra, etc, are believed mainly to represent the personifications of patural phenomena In the descriptions of these gods, the naturalistic element often becomes quite apparent. They consequently possess a sort of concrete ness about their nature and character A natural step further In the evolution of the religious thought was to go from the external concrele form of natural phenomcon to the inner abstract spirit which was supposed to be working behind those pheno mega The most outstanding characteristic of the whole universal Iifc is the manifold motion or movement’ (Bcwegung) which is clearly percepuble everywhere Every phenomenon of nature as well as cvery activity of human beings has some form of movement’ involved in it the sun rises and sets; Aśvinau go on their usual rounds, the rivers flow, men start working — all these happenings presuppose some kind of sti mulation’ or ‘vivification’ from withip It is only as the result of that stimulation that the whole world order is kept eternally going The physical fact of movement’ and ‘motion’, thus, logically led to its spiritual counterpart of stimulation It was this concept of stimulation’, as the result of which the whole universal order was set into motion, that was believed to have been deified in the later phase of the evolution of the Vedic reli gious thought A definite and independent god came to be looked upon as being mainly and exclusively responsible for this ‘stimula. tion’, and that god was Savitr He was the ‘god stimulator’. The origin of Savitr therefore, belongs, according to OLDENBERG, to a period when abstract concepts were deified and added to the Vedic pantheon Trātr, Dhātr, Netr, even Prajapati, are some of the other gods who belong to this category The gram matical form of the name Savitr also is quite noteworthy Here a present participle is made to represent a distinct Vedic god, as in the case of Dhātr, Netr, etc The Vedic poet does not any longer restrict himself, while naming a god, to the physical function of that god, such as Varuṇa, the ‘pervader’, or Indra, the kindler, etc, but he now refers to the deeper spiri tual function of that god The god Savitr is often described as stretching out his huge golden hands in order to direct’ move ment in the world
- Helcondes lado, 63 Idd, co
- 3 OLDENBERG, ZDAIG 51, 473 ff 59, 253 f However, Savits 18 includ cd among the divinities of the evening Soma pressing
OLDENBERG further believes that the fact that Savitr is a later Vedic god can be clearly proved by the consideration of the position of that god in Vedic ritual Savitr has no Soma libation dedicated to him 3 At the beginning of big sacrifices, Savitr is honoured by being mentioned in the formula often employed by the priests when they want to take hold of any ritual object, with the words derasya savituh prasave This position given to Savitr was obviously an afterthought A place was specially made for that god, since he did not have it in the original scheme of the carlier Vedic ritual IIc was, therefore, glorified just at the beginning of the ritual
OLDENBERG puts forth still another viewpoint regarding the nature of Saystr It was generally observed that the sun god was mainly responsible for the most enormous movement in the universe and that all other movements were apparently dependent upon him Ultimately, therefore, the sun-god came to be regarded as the stimulator’ par excellence, and the epithet, savitr, was, in many passages, employed with reference to Surya This consequently led to the usual misconception that Sayitr was Originally conceived of as being identical with Surya OLDEN BERG has strongly – and, as will be shown, in detail, later on, fightly — opposed this idea of the identifieation of these two Vedic gods, Surya and Savits 4 In the eleven entire hymns addressed to Savit, as well as in the several references made in the Veda to that god, the solar character of that god is hardly brought forth with any prominencc Sayitr 15, without doubt, associated in Vedic hymns with light’ and ‘splendour (IY 62, 132, 142, VII 76 1), he is said to stimulate splendour in the east (X 139 1), he illumides the mid region and the heaven and the earth (I 35 9-11), he brings blessings to man, with all seasons, by day and in the night (IV 53 7), he is the father of Suryā, indeed the whole hymn, V 81, seems particularly to em phasisc thc suplıke character of Savitr But these references do not indicate, as will be shown later, the ‘solar sources of the origin of Savitr The evidence against the identification of Savits with Surya is, indeed, quite overwhelming
4 ZDAG 51, 473 #
OLDENDERC has mus arived at mitt important contra sions regarding the nature of Savitr
- (1) The god Sayitr belongs to a late phase in the evolution of the Vedic religious thought - to a phase when abstract concepts came to be defied Savitt represents an abstraction of the idea of ‘stimulation’
- (2) Savitr is, therefore, clearly a later addition to the pantheon of Vedic gods. The study of the evolution of Vedic mythology and the consideration of the position of Savitr in Vedic ritual corroborate this viewpoint
- (3) The identification of Savitr with Surya is a gross mis conception The essential’ in the nature of Savity is not the idea of the sun god in general or of the sun god in any of his particular aspects, the essential’ in his nature is definitely the deification of the idea of stimulation
As regards OLDENBERG’s first conclusion, it must be said that there is available abundant evidence to show that Savitr cannot be regarded merely as an ‘abstraction divinity: The descriptions of Savitr in Vedic hymns are so pictorial that one is definitely inclined to believe that the Vedic poet must have thought of some concrete personality’ as being represented by that god The RV describes Sayits as possessing golden arms (I 35 9-10, VI 71 1,4,5, VII 45 2) He is broad handed (11 38 2), he has beautiful hands (111 33 6), he wears a tawny garment (IV 53 2), his omniform car is golden (1 35 2,3,5) and is driven by two radiant steeds (I 35 2-5) Savits raises aloft his two strong arms in order to bless all beings and set them working ( 38 2, IV 53 4, VI 71 1,5) He is once called apam napät (1 226) All these descriptions go to prove convincingly that the Vedic poet thought of Sayitr as possessing a positively concrete personality and not as representing merely an abstract conception A comparison of the descriptions of Savitr on the one hand and those of purely abstract divinities like Trātr, Netf, Dhātr, etc, on the other, will prove very suggestive 10 this connection As MAX MULLER has aptly observed, the gwr and brightness of Savute siga fcantiy contrast with the pale and shadowy features of deities like Dhatr, Trāts, etc, which are included by OLDENBERG in the same category as Savit.
- Alax MULLER, Contributions to the Science of Mythology, pp 819
These latter divinities have no concrete personality behind them, and so the personification of abstract concepts represented by them is lifeless and unconvincing The case of Savitr, on the other hand, is quite different There is considerable anthropo morphism to be seen in the personality of that god, the acti vities of that god are described, by the Vedic poets, as if they are human in character The Vedic poets seem to have actually visualised by means of their divine poetic eye, ārsa caksu, the majestic personality of Savits raising alost his huge golden hands in order to direct and set in motion the affairs of the world
OLDENBERG bas further put too great ad emphasis on the significance of the formula, devasya tvā savituh prasave , often repeated at the beginning of the Vedic ritual He maintains that the fact that Savitç is mentioned just at the beginning of the ritual indicates that the place given to him io the Vedic ritual is an afterthought and that the formula, devasja savituh prasave , brings forth prominently the nature of Savitr as representing the abstract conception of stimulation. But it must be remembered that that formula continues with the words aśvinor bāhubhyam pusno hastabhjām This fact would show that the whole formula was stereotyped and did not possess any specific significance of its own. On the other hand, Savitr is regularly referred to in the Agaistoma and mention is often made of the sāutra graha dedicated to him In the Altareja Br (III 30), the Rbhus arc associated with Savits and are called his anterāsāh The RV (1,110 2-3, 161 11) describes the Rbhus as living in the house of Savity for twelve days This latter reference clearly presupposes a specific personal character of the Vedic god Savit Savitç is bere undoubtedly the name of a distinct mythological personality Savitr is again called agohja in these RV passages, Sāyana explains the word agohya as aditya This implied conocction of Savity with Aditya makes Savits possibly a member of the Varuṇa-Aditya-mythological circle Io the Tarttırıza Samuta (1 1 9), Savity is associated with fetters, which fact again goes against bis being merely an abstraction-divinity on the whole, the position of Savitç in Vedic ritual, contrasted with that of Dhatr, Netf, etc, proves conclusively that Savit belongs to quite a different category from that of the latter dividitics The Vedic ritualists, like the Vedic poets, looked upon Savits as possessing a clearly concretc personality
The second conclusion of OLDENBERG, namely, that Savits is a later addition to the pantheon of Vedic gods, is based upon his first conclusion and must, therefore, needs fall to the ground with it The conception of a god, who stimulates and directs the huge world order, cannot be said to belong exclusively to a later phase of Vedic mythology The evolution of the Aryan religious thought may be briefly stated as follows It was first of all the infinite vastness, brilliance, and bounty of nature, which strongly impressed the mind of the people They defied this infinite vastness and glorified it in the divine form of Father Dyauh (Zeus)-Dyauh Pitar (Jupiter) This may, indeed, be regarded as one of the oldest religious conceptions of the IE mythology The Aryans, however, do not seem to have developed the mytho logical concept of Dyauh to the extent to which the concepts of Zeus and Jupiter have been developed They laid stress on ano ther observation of theirs in this connection, namely, that this infinitely vast nature was not an uncontrolled chaos The sun rose and set punctually, the rivers flowed in their well defined courses, the stars shone with undisturbed regularity, every acti vity in the universe was regulated in a perfect but incomprehenst ble manner All this must be due to a certain law’ or ‘order’ which worked behind all the world phenomena This view, which, as suggested above, had developed particularly promi pently and more or less exclusively among the proto Aryans, gave rise to the conception of rta, cosmic order, and its mytho logical counterpart, Varuṇa in RV, the sovereign lord, samrāt, whose function it was to see that this world-order’ remained undisturbed and unbroken The sovereign lord Varuṇa super vised, controlled, and driected every movement’, big or small, from the enormous daily rounds of the sun god to the slightest winking of the eye in the case of an ordinary mortal The abstract idea of stimulation and its divine counterpart Savitr, both of which are so closely related to the Varuṇa-rla conception, need not, therefore, be regarded as necessarily belonging to a late phase in the evolution of the Vedic religious thought OLDEN BERG has jncluded Savitr in the category of dividities like Dhātr, Nets, etc, which latter are obviously later creations of the Vedic poets The very fact, however, that eleven entire hymns are addressed to Savit; and that about 170 referenccs arc made to that god, should be sufficient to disprove the contention of OLDENBERG No other divinity belonging to that late category suggested by OLDENBERG has been so much glorified and sung in the Vedic hymns OLDENBERG has not been able to explain why only one god, Savitr, in preference to the other gods be longing to the same late group and category, should have been raised so high and be placed, in the Vedic hymps themselves, on the same level as the older and more important Vedic gods The association of Savits with the greater and older gods of the RV is such as would definitely go against the possibility of his being a younger member of the Vedic pantheon The fact that Savitr plays a comparatively small and unim portant role in the Vedic situal does not at all prove, as OLDEN BERG avers, that he is a later Vedic god For, similar is the case with Varuṇa, who cannot, under any circumstances, be regarded as a younger member of the Vedic pantheon On the oilier hand, Prajapati, who clearly belongs to a late phase of the Vedic religious thought, is very prominent in the Vedic ritual I shall try to show later on that, though the name of this god, Savitr, may be of purely lodian origin, the main characteristics and functions represented by that god may, in some form, be traced back to the proto Aryan ideology OLDENBERG vehemently opposes the proposition that the Vedic god Savitç was originally conceived of as an aspect of the sud god HILLEBRANDT? and L VON SCHROEDERS have, indeed, identified Savitr with Surya It will be necessary, at thus stage, to consider critically and in detail the view of HILLEBRANDT 6 7 8 DVG 59 253 f l’edischs Nythologie (VAT) II, 100-120. Ansche Hag on II, 7 ff VEDIC MYTHOLOGICAL TRACTS regarding the essential nature of Savitr HILLCBRANDT first of all takes into consideration the position of Suvits in the Vedic ritual There is in the Tarija Br (III 10 1) a reference, in connection with agnlciti, to an altar of Savitr, namely, sarvatah parimandalam rathacakramatranı suntram parılıkhya Accor ding to HILLEBRANDT, this description clearly indicates the solar nature of Savit Further he points out that the possible connection of Savate with Aditya implıcd 151 RY (1 110 2, 161. 11 ) supports the assumption that Savity is identical with the sun god in the Aśvamedha sacrifice there arc offerings to be made to Savit, on cach day, during the year, which fact suggests the pature of that god as the lord of the year. And this lord of the year’ cannot be any other than the sun god These arguments, based on the study of the Vedic ritual and brought forth by HILLEDRANDT in order to support his proposed identi fication of Sayıts with Surya, are far from being convincing it must be remembered that the original personality of a Vedic god is often changed considerably when that god is transferred to the ritual Varuṇa, who played such an important role in the Vedic mythology, is, for example, rarely the central figure in the Vedic ritual To try to ascertain the nature of a Vedic god primarily from the study of the position of that god in the Vedic ritual is, therefore, not the correct method The main characteristics of a god usually fall into the background and his minor features, which alsord some scope for ritualistic employment, are greatly. magnified The original personality of a god is thus often distorted for the sake of the contingencies of the ritual Moreover the arguments put forth by HILLEBRANDT regarding the nature of Savits, on the strength of the position of that god in the Vedic ritual, do not prove anything positively except that the Vedic ritualists had known Savitr as possessing a concrete personality The peculiar form of the savitra altar, which, according to HILLE BRANDT, represents the solar orb, may as well be suggestive of the conception of motion in the world order which is kept eternally going as a consequence of the stimulation given by 9. HALLEBRANDT, Ritualiteratur, 150 THE VEDIC GOD SAVITR Savit Further, the implication that Savits is one of the Adityas does not prove that Savits is the sun god, since the Adityas originally belong to the Varuṇa sta mythological complex Moreover, several gods besides Surya are glorified as “lords of the year’ About Varuṇa, for instance, it is said in RV (1 25 8) ieda maso dhrlarrato dadaśa prajaratah/seda ja upajaj ale There are, on the other hand other ritualistic details about Savit, which positively go against his being identified with Surya In the Tanda Sam (119) Savitr is associated with fetters, which fact rather leads to the possible identity of Varuṇa and Savit The pasas are a more or less exclusive feature of the Varuṇa mythology In RV (VI 715), Savitr is compared with the Upavakts This Upavaktī is in later ritual, called Maitravaruna, thus perhaps suggesting Savits affinity to the Varuṇa Mitra mythology There is not the slightest hint, in the Vedic ritual, that Savitz is identical with Surya Had Savitr and Surya been identical with each other, they could have intercbanged their places in the ritual, one could have been substituted for the other As a matter of fact, however, each of them is mentioned at distinct stages in the course of the ritual and the parts which they are made to play in the ritual are also quite distinct When HILLEBRANDT refers to the descriptions of Savitrin the RV 10 he is on firmer ground His views in this connection may be briefly summarised as follows In a large number of RV passages, Savity is predominantly descnbed as the lord of light and splendour) These descriptions very clearly bring out the solar pature of that god The mandalas which afford the most obvious indication of the identity of Savitr and Surya are the fourth and the fifth The hymn IV 53, will be perfectly unintelligible without the assumption of the identity of these two gods The idea of stimulation is no doubt often emphasised 10 the RV But the conention of OLDENBERG that Savits, as the god representing the abstract conception of vivification, IS 10 VAI II, 106 ff 10 VEDIC MYTHOLOGICAL TRACTS older than Savits, faintly and secondarily possessing the charactc. ristics of the sun god, cannot stand Indeed, we find both these ideas in one and the same hymn For instance, präsāvid bharam dripade cafuspade (V 81 2) utefise prasavasya riani cha it (V 815 nahamahliyal sawla varenja ’nu prazananıysaso u rijall (V 81 2) As regards the fast reference, namely u nukam , it should be noted that there is hardly any difference between this description of Savits and the usual descriptions of Surya and Agni Can OLDENBERG prove, HILLEBRANDT seems to ask, that versc 5 in V 81 is older than verse 2, or that V 82, where the stimula. tion idea is more prominenily expressed, is older than y, 81 ? The following passages in the RV rcferring to Sürya, pamely, (11 115 4 madhyā hartor vitaram sam jabhāra, (2) 1 115 4: iadedayukta harital sadhasthad, (3) X 37 9 Jasja le vista bhuvananı hefuina (4) VIII 25 19 udu sja sarane dno, and (5) VII 791 susamdrgbhiruk sabhurbhanumasret , may be compared respectively with the following Vedic passages referr ing 10 Sayıts, namely, (1) 11 38 4 punah samavjad vitaram vay antı, (2) II 38 3 nunamariramadaramanam cideroh, (3) I 35 2 a hrsnena rojoso yoriamanah , (4) VII 76 1 ud u jyotiramrtam viśiajanyam , and (5) VII 72 4 ürdinam bhānum sayılā devo afrek The ideas expressed in these passages are similar, the literary expressions too are almost similar The only natural conclusion, according to HILLEBRANDT, therefore, 1s that Surya and Savitr were, to the mind of the Vedic poet, identical with each other They are often spoken of indiscri mipately in the RV 11 One is described in terms usually applied to the other, and therefore, it becomes hardly possible to keep the two gods apart With reference to these arguments of HILLEBRANDT in favour of identifying Savitr with Surya, it may be said, at the outset, that the learned Vedic scholar has taken into consideration only 11 MACDONELL, Vedic Mythology, 33 THE VEDIC GOD SAVITR 11 Very general characteristics of Savitr Such divine characteristics as being the lord of light and splendour, spreading rays of light everywhere, moving in golden chariot, etc, are the common property of the Vedic poets They employ these features with reference to any Vedic god, irrespective of his intrinsic pature Association with light and splendour and other kindred features is the most common device used by the Vedic poet for the glo rification of each and every divinity Further, in a few passages quoted by HILLEBRANDT, Sayıt seems to have been brought in close connection with Surya, because the predominant function of Savits, pamely, that of stimulating directing, and control ling the world phenomepa, is the peculiar feature, if but in a restricted sense, of the nature of Surya also What Savitr is to the whole UDIerse including the sun god, Surya is to a few happenings in the world This fact naturally gave rise to the misconception regarding the identity of these two Vedic gods A closer and more critical examination of the personality of Savitr clearly indicates that that god definitely transcends the limitations implied by the nature of the sun god Savitr agd Surya may appear from somc Vedic passages to be more or less identified, but they are more often differentiated from each other The contents of the Savitr hymns differ substantially from those of the Surya hymns The Surya hymns are usually restricted merely to the descriptions of ’tisung illumining light , while the Sayitr hymans put conspicuous emphasis upop the nature of that god as the “stimulator, controller, and director of the world order It is said of Savitr, in contrast with Surya, that he regulates, ceaselessly and with care, the various phenomena, clearly defining their limus Let us bring together a few features of the sun god, which are prominently described in the hymns addressed to him agd which are, at the same time, never mentioned with reference to Savitr Surya is the eye of Mitravarunau (1 115 I, VI 51 1, VII 61 ) or the eye of gods (VII 77 3) while, Savitr is hi seif described as sur) araśn (X 139 1) Surya is the spy of the world (IV 13 3), his chariot is drawn by seven steeds (V 45 9% 12 VEDIC MYTHOLOGICAL TRACTS as against the two radiant steeds of Sayitr (1 35 3) The path of Surya is prepared for him by Varuṇa (1 248, VII 87 1) or by Adityas, Mitra, Varuṇa, and Aryaman (VII 60 4), while Savitr himself lays down courses for all (II 38 7, 9) Surya’s father is Dyauh (X 37 1), and he is said to be god born (X 37 1), the mention is often made of Surya having been produced and placed in heaven by several gods – by Indra (II 12 7), by Indravisnu (VII 994), by Mitrāvarunau (IV 13 2, V 63 4), by Indravarunau (VII 82 3), and by Dhats (X 190 3) This is a feature which clearly distin guishes Surya from Savitr, for, it is Savitr who is said to have produced and set in motion other natural powers (Il 38 7,9) Surya is further described as a bird (X 177 1), or a bull (X 189 1 ), or a steed ( VII 77 3 ), while in many other passages he is even spoken of as an inanimate object (V 62 2,63 4, VII 63 4), this is again a feature, which can never be thought of with reference to Savits who is the stimulator of all objects, azimate as well as inanimate Saut is often described, unlike Surya, as vivifying Väyu and Pusan (X 64 7, 139 1) Other features which clearly differentiate the functions of these two gods are the following Waters obey the ordinance of Savitr (IT 38 I), with his hands Savitr leads the rivers onwards (III 33 6), water and wind obey the law of Sayitr (II 38 2), Savitç is prasavità as well as niveśanah (IV 53 6) The above discussion will be sufficient to prove how the Vedic poets thought of Surya and Savit; as two quite distinct divinities with quite distinct functions Another feature which clearly distinguishes these two gods from each other is the fact that Savitr is a god of morning as well as of evening, while Surya is exclusively the god of morning Descriptions like a krsnena rajaså vartamāno niesa; annamrfam martyam ca (I 35 2) and asthad ratham santa citrabhānuh krsna rajansi tavisim dadhanah (1 35 4 ) can hardly be reconciled with the nature of, Surya, who is the lord of light and morning and who is said to be travelling on an illuminated path even after sunset It may be incidentally noted that the western direction is assigned to Savitr in the THE VEDIC GOD SAVITR 13 śatapatha Br (III 2 3 18 ), - significantly enough, it is else where assigned to Varuṇa - thus again suggesting the distinction between Surya and Savitt Another exclusive feature of Savity is his association with amati, the mighty splendour or form This amatı has something magical in it (III 38 8, VII 38 1, 2, 45 3) It is a supernatural miracle, something like the māja of Indra or Varuṇa No such magical power is ever attributed to the sun god The part plaved by Savitr in connection with the funeral rites (X 17 4, AV XII 2 48), his being raised to the status of Prajapati 10 RV (IV 53 2) and in later brahmanical literature ( śatapatha By XII 3 5 1, also cf Taittirija Br I 64 1) and of Brbaspati (Tatlırija Sam IV 17 3,2 8 1), his being preeminently called asura (IV 53 ) these are still other characteristics of the personality of Savitr, which clearly distinguish him from Surya Savitr unlike Surya, controls the working of all other gods (II 38 7,9), no god dare resist his will (V 82 2), Savits bestows immortality not only on the Rbhus (1 110 2, 3), but also on other gods (IV 54 2) Do such references even remotely suggest the identity of Surya and Savitr? Do they not indicate, beyond doubt, that the persona lity of Savit transcends that of the sun god and that the functions of Savıls are far more comprehensive and inclusive than those of Surya? The frequent juxtaposition of these two gods again proves nothing if not the clear cut distinction between them The references such as that Savit declares men sinless to Surya (1 123 3) or that Savitç combines with the rays of Surya (V 81 4 ) go to show that Surya is clearly distinct from and subordidate to Savity Indeed, the whole hymn, V 81, is impor tant from this point of view In vir 35, where distinctive characteristics of different Yovie gods seem to have been mention cd, Surya and Sayat are clearly distinguished In scveral other passages (1 35 9, 123 3, 157 1, V 81 4, VII 45 2, X 149 3 ) Savits and Surya appear side by side The activity of Saustr is sometimes connected at the setting of the sun (1 35 2, 11 38 2-5) How can this be cxplained if Surya and Sauts are identical ? Sayitt is said to bring forth night (11 38 3 IT ), which description is unthinkable with reference to 14 VEDIC MYTHOLOGICAL TRACTS Surya It is further said that even Surya himself makes his activity subserve Savitr (VII 45 2 ) and that Srvits impels Surya (I 35 9 ) Savitr the asura is said to be surveying the mid region in the evening and in that connection (1 35 7 ) the poet asks Where is Suryn now? Such references unequivocally suggest that Savitr was regarded in the RV as the controller of all the activities of the sun god It is therefore, more than certain that the Vedic poets distinguished very clearly between the Vedic gods Surya and Savits, and that they looked upon Savits as a god who is responsible for stimulating and directiog all the phenomena of the world including the one connected with the sun god MACDONELL thinks that Savitr was originally a general epithet of Indian origin applied later on in a restricted manner, to the sun god as the typ cal stimulator 1: THOMAS13 seems to corroborate MACDONELL S view that Savitr is the divine power of Surya personified These seem to be merely attempts to bring about a knd of compromise between the views of OLDENBERG and HILLEBRANDT The word sautr may have been in some cases used as an epithet of Deva (god) in general This fact would perhaps merely indicate a stage when the present participle from the root su had not been completely transformed into a proper name of a definite god It should be remembered that the descriptions of Savitr are not of a general character so that they can be appled to any god in his capacity of a stimulator As MAX MULLER has said the name Savitr may be of the nature of a general title but it is never on that account appl ed to any enlivener whether rain or moon or wind 14 It will be presently shown that the characteristics of Savitr are indicative of a distinct Vedic god in his aspect of the stimulator of theworld order ROTH corupares Saxitc with Greel. Hermes who is the usherer of day and night 15 But he does not seem to have taken 12 Vedc Alythology 34 alo JRAS 27 951 2 13 E J THO Las Vedc Hymns 43 14 Op af 822f 15 ZDMG 24 306 Inc dentally t may be pointed out that KEITH (RPVU I 107) emphas ses the smlar ty of Puan to Hermes Also see SCHROEDER Asche Rel gon II 11THE VEDIC GOD SAVITR 15 into consideration the other distinctive characteristics of Savitr, Even after a long discussion, BERGAIGNE does not arrive at any definite conclusion regarding the essential personality of Savitr.16 He, however, says that the nature of Savit; cannot be explained in terms of solar functions. The distinction that Sürya represents the physical orb of the sun-god, while Savits represents the inner presiding divinity of the sun-god is, according to BERGAIGNE, not correct. He refers to the implied identity of Savitr with Bhaga (IV, 55. 10; V. 82.3; VI. 50.13), and to the close copnec tion between Savitr and Prajāpati (IV. 53. 2), between Savitz and Tvaṣtı (IX. 81. 4; X. 10. 5), between Savitr aod Pūṣan (IX. 81.4), and between Soma and Savitr (IIJ. 56. 6; X. 149. 5). DERGAIGNE further emphasises the hermaphrodite nature of Savits ( III. 38. 8) remarking that Sayıts combines in himself the characteristics of both sexes. These are, however, merely stray references, which obviously do not indicate the true nature of Savitr. It may be that Savitr, in his different capacities, as the benefactor who distributcs wealth, as the creator of the universe and the sustainer of the world-order, as the pourisher of the crea tures, etc., has been brought into close association with several Vedic gods. This fact shows that the sature of Savits is not identical exclusively with the nature of any one of these gods but that it definitely includes and transcends the distinctive features of all these gods, The above discussion will clcarly indicate how the cxplana lions regarding the true nature of Savitr proposed by OLDEN BERG, HILLCORANDT, MACDONELL, THOMAS, ROTH, and BERGAIGNE arc cither one-sided and incomplete or definitely beside the mark.” A critical consideration of the views of these scholars has, honcycr, lcd us so far to the following main conclusions : 16. A. BERAMICNE, Le reluctan védique darts kes hyrines du Rig Veda, III, 39-61 17. Y. VZYKATARAMAIC (Pr. Da, May 1911) Identific S117 with Aurora Lorcalist 16 VEDIC MYTHOLOGICAL TRACTS (1) Sayitr is not merely an abstraction divinity of the type of Dhātr, Netr etc It is, therefore, not necessary to assume that Savitr belongs to a later phase of the Vedic religious thought and that, therefore, the conception underlying that god cannot be taken back beyond the Vedic mythology (2) The view that Savitr was originally conceived of as being identical with Surya is a misconception, which has originated on account of the fact that the main function of Savitr, namely, stimulation’, is seen to have been attributed, to a restricted extent, also to the sun god As a matter of fact, however, the Vedic poets have clearly differentiated between these two gods (3) The word savitr is not always an epithet of a general character, so that it can be applied to any god in his capacity of enlivener’ More commonly, there is a specific divine persona lity possessing its own essential nature which is presupposed by the name Savitr What then is the essential nature of Savits? In order to understand it correctly, we have to analyse the eleven entire hymns addressed to that god and the 170 references made to him 10 the RV in such a way that only those characteristics of his personality are brought together which clearly distinguish him from other Vedic gods It is an indisputable fact that the Vedic poets are often in the habit of using stock phrases with reference to any and every god This their propensity has given rise to the innumerable repetitions in the Veda pointed out by BLOOM FIELD These common poetic formulas do not usually help us in estimating the character of a particular Vedic god We have, therefore, to base our views regarding the true and intrinsic nature of any god on the study of the nivids or the exclusive characteristics mentioned in connection with that god A very prominent feature of the nature of Savitr is that the concept of the world order - rta - is often predominantly associa ted with his personality Savitr is the god who supports and sustains the whole world - jarha visvam bhuvanam dhārayisyatı (IV 54 4) He is said to be mainly responsible for maintaining THE VEDIC GOD SAVITR 17 the world order and the ethical laws, so much so that he is regarded as setting the standard in that connection triparicásah krilatı vāla esim deia na santā sat, adharma (X 34 8 ) or deva la savita saty adharmendro na fasthau saniare dhanänām (X 139 3 Waters are subject to the ordinance of Savitr āpas cid asja vrata a minirgra (II 38 2), that achievement of Savizr is, indeed, inestimable (III 38 8), the wind stops in his movement in obedience to Savitr’s vrata ajan cd valo ramate paruman (II 38 2), Savitr has fixed the erstwhile flying moun tains ( IV 54 5), all great gods have to act up according to his law na zasy endro varuņo na mitro yratamaryamã na minanti rudral (II 38 9), Savitr assigns to Indra and other gods their abodes in mountajas (IV 54 5), other gods follow Savity s lead, no god dare resist his ordinance (11 38 7.9, V 82 2), various gods carry out their distinctive functions only under the stimula tion given by Sayitr (V 81 X 139 1) Whatever Savitr, the god of beautiful hands, orders cannot be contravened or trans gressed, his law stands as eternal truth na pramiye sayur daivyasja tad yatha viśvam blunanam dharaj isyan / yat prthvja jarinanna svangurir varsman doch smati satyam asya tat // (IV 54 4) Sayıts is the lord of what moves and what is stationary (IV 536) He is the supporter of the heavens (IV 53 2, X 149 4) and is once said to have fixed the earth with bonds and made the sky firm in the raftcrless space (X 149 1) It is again Saviti who sets in motion the chariot of Asvins (I 34 10 ) It is also under his bchest that several affairs of the world, huge and small, are set going (1 124 1, II 38 I ff) The Athanaveda clearly ordajas (VI 23 3) derasja savituh save karma krnianti nānusah. These references to Savits in various Vedic passages provide us with a definite starting point for ascertaining the true nature and personality of that Vedic god Io a very large number of passages, Savitr is associated with the concept of rta It has been indicated above that already a stage had been reached in the 18 VEDIC MYTHOLOGICAL TRACTS evolution of what may be called the proto-Aryan religious thought when it was positively assumed that this vast and infinite universe was not a lawless chaos, but that it presupposed a well defined cosmic order operating behind all world phenomena The proto-Aryans had also developed a mythological counterpart of that concept – a god who was responsible for seeing that this rta functioned regularly and without break That god was consequently looked upon as the sovereign lord of the universe, as the ruler, who sustained the law-cosmic and ethical - and who directed and regulated the world phenomena He held the whole world bound down by ineans of his fetters, so that it should not go astray from its regular well defined course, and when he found that his ordinance was broken, he punished the offender also by means of his fetters The working of the cosmic order was, however, beyond the ken of human beings The god, who controlled that cosmic order and made it function in an exceedingly perfect but incomprehensible manner, was, therefore, naturally regarded as the greatest magician and was usually associated with majestic magic power, māya or amati It is, indeed suggested that many ancient mythologies have this concept of the world order and more particularly of the magician sovereign lord who sees that that cosmic order works without hindrance or break Just as in the RV we have Varuṇa, and in the Avesta Ahura Mazda, so, in germanic religions, we find this world sovereign represented as Odin Similarly the Lappish have conceived of a sort of · Welten mann’, in whom we may see a counterpart of Vedic Varuṇa A god of the Thrakians is called Darzales—god of bondage’ as the name suggests-and both in name and function he reminds one of Varuṇa The attributes of the world sovereign, such as upholding the cosmic order, magical power, giving of orders, and binding by means of fetters, are common to various ancient mythologies 18 The view regarding the essential nature and personality of Savitr, which I find acceptable, may now be stated as follows 18 See A GUYTERT, De Grische Theltkong und Herland, Halle (Saale), 1923, 97 ff , 154, 407, cte THE VEDIC GOD SAVITR 19 Savitr possesses, as has been shown above, all the characteristics of a god who stimulates, controls, and directs the cosmic order He is very often associated with the main implications of the concept of rta The Vedic poet must have originally thought of Savits as the god who was responsible for stimulating directing, and controlling the world phenomena In other words, Savitr was, for Vedic poets, only another aspect of god Varuṇa A comparison of the characteristics of Savitr with those of Varuṇa, which will be attempted presently would clearly indicate that these two gods are, according to the Vedic poet, identical with each other The sovereign lord Varuṇa was viewed by the Vedic poets from a particular standp int, and special emphasis was put by them on certain of Varuṇa s peculiar functions It was ander such definite circumstances that Varuṇa was glorified in the form of Savitr It may be suggested that the word sautr derived from the root sy was originally used in a very general adjectival sense, and, at this stage of usage, the word was employed with reserence to several gods like Surya, Bhaga, Tvastr, etc It was only in later times that the epithet, which had then become almost a proper noun, was restricted to an aspect of Varuṇa But two facts definitely go against such a hypothesis With this hypothesis, Savitr will have to be placed in the category of Dhātr, Netr, etc, which possibility, however, has already been shown to be out of the question Secondly the connection of Savitr with other older gods of the RV is such as would favour his being regarded as an essentially old and prominent member of the pantheos of Vedic gods, - pamely as an aspect of Varuṇa The association of Savits with the concept of rta and conscqucntly his implied identily with Varuṇa seem to be quite original in Vedic mythology What is the peculiar aspect of the world sovereign, Varuṇa which is represented by Savitr? Before an attempt was made to answer this question it would be better to bring together the various features which are, in the Veda common to both Varuṇa and Sayitr To begin with, it should be noted that in some Vedic passages Sauitf and Varuṇa have been mentioned in such a 20 VEDIC MYTHOLOGICAL TRACTS manner as would clearly bring out the identity of those two gods ! for instance, pra tvä muñcanı varunasya pāśad jena tābadhnat sanitā suśerah (X 85 24 ) Here the word Sayita is used almost as another name of Varuṇa The same is the case as regards III 54 11, where Savitr is mentioned directly after Mitra and Varuṇa (III 54 10.) thus suggesting a close connection among these divinities The functions of Savitr in his capacity as a stimulator and director of the world order and the preserver of the cosmic ethical law (II 38 2, III 33 6, IV 53 4, X 34 8, 139 3) are entirely similar to those of Varuṇaa (VI 70 1; VII 86 1, VIII 41 10,42 1) Savitr is again closely associa ted with other members of the circle of the Varuṇa mythology, namely, Aditi, Mitra, Aryaman Bhaga etc (Vil 38 4, 66 1-4) By reason of his laws Savitr is said to become Mitra (V.81 4) He is also often referred to as promoting rta (VII 38 2) Savitr plays a double role he sets in motion and also puts to rest all worldly activities, he is both prasavita and nn esanah (IV 536) This unique feature of Savitr’s character indicates in a convincing manner, that the word savits was not merely an epithet suggesting the idea of stimulation In that case the two fold nature of Savits would be quite inconsis tent It is thus certain that the Vedic poet thought of Savitr as a distinct god wielding complete control over all the phenomena of the world The usual exclusive epithet of Varuṇa, namely asura is employed in a very significant - and not merely conven tional - manner with reference to Savitr also (I 35 7, 10, IV 53 1) The word asura (asu + possessive termination ra) had originally the special sense of a god possessing the greatest magical power tubstance The epithet was, accordingly, origina lly restricted to the magician sovereign lord of the world Varuṇa When Varuga was glorified in his peculiar aspect as Savits, the epithet asura also was naturally transferred to the latter The chariot of Varuṇa (and Mitra) is prominently described as shining like the sun (I 122 15 ) and as traversing the highest heaven (V 63 1) The omniform chariot of Savitr also is golden bright (I 35 2-3) and travels to the bright reaims of the TIHE VEDIC GOD SAVITR 21 heaven where he is united with the rays of the sun (V 81 3-4) Savits puts on a tawny garment (IV 53 2), which may be compared to the golden glistening mantle of Varuṇa (1 25 13) Varuṇa and Sants are both connected with the nocturnal heaven (VII 88 2, I 35 2) As a moral governor Varuṇa staads far above any other desty The spies of Varuṇa are often mentioned (1 25 13, VII 87 3) The sun is Varuṇa’s eye and is said to be reporting to him the decds of men (VII 60 1) Savitr also is sūr; arasnii (X 139 1 ), and he declares mca sinless to the sun (1 123 3) Varuṇa is the dispeller of falschood (I 152 1, VII 60 S) and removes sin (II 28 5, V 85 7, 8, VII 86 5) Similar are the characteristics of Savitr, who makes men Staless (IV 54 3 ) and drites away evil spirits (I 35 10, VII 38 7) In this connection 31 15 cry instructive to compare IV 54 3 referring to Savitr acili yac calrma daivi e jane dinair dal ṣaih prabluri pūrusan ata/ dcießu ca sanitar manusc$u ca nam no atra siarad anagasah // with VII 89 5 addressed to Varuṇa, jar him cedam raruna dairje jane ‘bludroham niantsjaścaramasi/ acinu jat jara dharnia juopima mia nas tasmadenaso desa ririsah // Ilere hc scc that the tratts of Varuṇa and Savite in the matter of the removal of guilt are quite similar, so too are the etpres sions similar This fact scems to indicate that the identity of Varun and Savu 25 chat in the mwds of the Vedre ports Simular (catures of S3sts are also mentioned in other passages (1 35 11, VI 71 3, VII 38 3,45 4, VIII 27 12) Varuṇa 15 often called a king (1 24 7), he is king of all both gods and men (11 27 10, 132 4) of the whole world (V 85 3), and of all that crists (VII 876) Much more frequently is Varuṇa called a universal monarch, santur The signs of sovereignty are not abscat csCS 12 Saves Thematic of Savite and the basses VEDIC MYTHOLOGICAL TRACTS Sürya It is further said that even Surya himself makes his activity subserve Savitr (VII 45 2) and that Savitr impels Surya (I 35 9 ) Savitr, the asura, is said to be surveyiog the mid region in the evening, and in that connection (I 35 7) the poet asks “Where is Surya, now? · Such references unequivocally suggest that Savitr was regarded, in the RV, as the controller of all the activities of the sun god it is, therefore, more than certain that the Vedic poets distinguished very clearly between the Vedic gods, Surya and Sayits, and that they looked upon Sayıts as a god who is responsible for stimulating and directing all the phenomena of the world, including the one connected with the sun god MACDONELL thinks that Savitr was originally a general epithet of Indian origin, applied later on, in a restricted manner, to the sun god as the typical stimulator 12 THOMASIS seems to corroborate MACDONELL’S view that Şavitç is the divine power of Surya personified These seem to be merely attempts to bring about a kind of compromise between the views of OLDENBERG and HILLEBRANDT The word savitr, may have been, in some cases, used as an epithet of Deva (god) in general Tbis fact would perhaps merely indicate a stage when the present participle from the root sū had not been completely transformed into a proper name of a definite god It should be remembered that the descriptions of Sayitr are not of a general character, so that they can be applied to any god in his capacity of a stimulator As MAX MULLER has said, the name Savitr may be of the nature of a general uitle, but it is never, on that account, applied to any enlivener, whether rain or moon, or wind 14 It will be presently shown that the characteristics of Savitr are indicative of a distinct Vedic god in his aspect of the stimulator of theworld order ROTH compares Savitr with Greek Hermes, who is the usherer of day and night 15 But he does not seem to have taken 12 Vedic Asthology 34, also JRAS 27,951 2 13 E J THOMAS Vedic Hymns, 13 14 Opat, 822ff 15 2DAIG 24 306 Incidentally it may be pointed out that KEITH (RPVV 1 107) emphas ses the similarity of Puṣan to Hermes Also sec SCIROEDER, Arsuche Religion 11, 11 THE VEDIC GOD SAVITR 15 into consideration the other distinctive characteristics of Savitr Even after a long discussion, BERGAIGNE does not arrive at any definite conclusion regarding the essential personality of Savits 16 He, however, says that the nature of Savitr cannot be explained in terms of solar functions The distinction that Surya represents the physical orb of the sun god, while Savitr represents the inner presiding divinity of the sun god is, according to BERGAIGNE, not correct He refers to the implied identity of Savitr with Bhaga (IV 55 10, V 82 3, VI 50 13), and to the close connec tion between Sayitr and Prajāpatı (IV 53 2), between Savits and Tyastr (IX 81 4, X 10 5), between Savitr and Pusan (IX 81 4), and between Soma and Savite (III 56 6, X 149 5) BERGAIGNE further emphasises the hermaphrodite nature of Sayitr (III 38 8) remarking that Savitr combines in himself the characteristics of both sexes These are however, merely stray references, which obviously do not indicate the true nature of Savits. It may be that Savitr in his different capacities, as the benefactor who distributes wealth as the creator of the universe and the sustaider of the world order, as the nourisher of the crea tures, etc, has been brought into close association with several Vedic gods This fact shows that the nature of Savits is not identical exclusively with the nature of any one of these gods but that it definitely includes and transcends the distinctive features of all these gods The above discussion will clearly indicate how the explana tions regarding the true nature of Savitr proposed by OLDEN BERG, HILLEBRANDT, MACDONELL, THOMAS, ROTH, and BERGAIGNE are either one sided and incomplete or definitely beside the mark 17 A critical consideration of the views of these scholars has, however, lcd us so far to the following main conclusions 16 A. BERCAICNE La religion tedique daprès les hymnes du Rg Veda, III, 39-61 17 Y VEXKATARAVIAII (Pr Bh, May 1941 ) dentifics Savity with Aurora Boreal s 16 VEDIC MYTHOLOGICAL TRACTS (1) Sayitr is not merely an abstraction dividity of the type of Dhātr, Netr etc It is therefore, not necessary to assume that Sayitr belongs to a later phase of the Vedic religious thought and that, therefore, the conception underlying that god cannot be taken back beyond the Vedic mythology (2) The view that Savitr was originally conceived of as being identical with Surya is a misconception, which has originated on account of the fact that the main function of Savitr, namely, * stimulation , is seen to have been attributed, to a restricted extent, also to the sun god As a matter of fact, however, the Vedic poets have clearly differentiated between these two gods (3) The word sayitr is not always an epithet of a general character, so that it can be applied to any god in his capacity of * enlivener’ More commonly, there is a specific divine persona lity possessing its own essential nature which is presupposed by the name Savitr What then is the essential nature of Savit? In order to understand it correctly, we have to analyse the eleven entire hymns addressed to that god and the 170 references made to him in the RV in such a way that only those characteristics of his personality are brought together which clearly distinguish him from other Vedic gods It is an indisputable fact that the Vedic poets are often in the habit of using stock phrases with reference to any and every god This their propensity has given rise to the innumerable repetitions in the Veda pointed out by BLOOM FIELD These common poetic formulas do not usually help us in estimating the character of a particular Vedic god We have, therefore, to base our views regarding the true and intrinsic nature of any god on the study of the nrvids or the exclusive characteristics mentioned in connection with that god A very prominent feature of the nature of Savite is that the concept of the world order-rta – 15 often predominantly associa ted with his personality Sayıts is the god who supports and sustains the whole world – Jatha viśian bhuanan dharaj ısjali (IV 54 4) He is suid to be mainly responsible for maintainingTHE VEDIC GOD SAVITR 17 the world order and the ethical laws, so much so that he is regarded as setting the standard in that connection ripoñcásah krilatı yrata esan dena na sana sarjadharmā (X 34 8) or dera na sauta satyadharmendro na tasthau samare dhananām (X 139 3) Waters are subject to the ordinance of Savit. ápas cid asja vrata â nimrgrā (II 38 2), that achievement of Savır is, indeed, idestimable (III 38 8), the wind stops in his movement 10 obedience to Savitr’s Tralo ay am cid võio ramale paruman (11 38 2), Savitr has fixed the erstwhile flying moun tains (IV 54 5), all great gods have to act up according to his law na jasj endro iarno na mitro vratamaryamā no minantı rudrah (II 38 9), Savits assigns to Indra and other gods their abodes in mountains (IV 54 5), other gods follow Savitr’s lead; no god dare resist his ordinance (II 38 7,9, V 82 2), various gods carry out their distinctive functions only under the stimula 1100 given by Savitr (V 81, X 139 1) Whatever Savitr, the god of beautiful hands, orders cannot be contravened or trans gressed, his law stands as eternal truth na pramiye sautur darjassa tad jarhā visvam bhwanam dhārazisyan / yat prihma jarimanna svangurir varsman dnah sualı satz am asja taill (IV 54 4) Savitr is the lord of what moves and what is stationary (IV 53 6) He is the supporter of the heavens (IV 53 2, X 149 4) and is once said to have fixed the earth with bonds and made the sky firm in the rafterless space (X 149 1 ) It is again Savitr who sets in motion the chariot of AsvIDS (I 34 10 ) It is also utet hus bebest that several aftues of the WOTA, huge 21 small, are set going (1 124 I, II 38 lff) The Atharigveda clearly ordains (VI 23 3) de asja savluh save karma krmantu manusah These references to Sayitr in various Vedic passages provide us with a definite starting point for ascertaining the true nature and personality of that Vedic god In a very large number of passages, Savitç is associated with the concept of rta It has beco indicated above that already a stage had been reached in the 18 VEDIC MYTHOLOGICAL TRACTS evolution of wbat may be called the proto-Aryan religious thought when it was positively assumed that this vast and infinite universe was not a lawless chaos, but that it presupposed a well defined cosmic order operating behind all world plienomena The proto Aryans had also developed a mythological counterpart of that concept - a god who was responsible for seeing that this rta functioned regularly and without break That god was consequently looked upon as the sovereign lord of the universe, as the ruler, who sustained the law–cosmic and ethical - and who directed and regulated the world phenomena He held the whole world bound down by means of his fetters, so that it should not go astray from its regular well defped course, and when he found that his ordinance was broken, he punished the offender also by means of his fetters The working of the cosmic order was, however, beyond the ken of human beings The god, who controlled that cosmic order and made it function in an exceedingly perfect but incomprehensible manner, was therefore, naturally regarded as the greatest magician and was usually associated with majestic magic power, maja or amati It is, indeed suggested that many ancient mythologies have this concept of the world order and more particularly of the magician sovereigo lord who sees that that cosmic order works without hindrance or break Just as in the RIP we have Varuṇa, and in the Avesta Ahura Mazda, so in germanic religions, we find this world sovereign represented as Odin Similarly the Lappish have conceived of a sort of Welten mann’, in whom we may see a counterpart of Vedic Varuṇa A god of the Thrakians is called Darzales— god of bondage’ as the name suggests—and both in name and function he reminds one of Varuṇa The attributes of the world sovereign, such as upholding the cosmic order, magical power, giving of orders, and binding by means of fetters, are common to various ancient mythologies 18 The view regarding the essential nature and personality of Savitr which I find acceptable, may now be stated as follows 18 Sce H GUNTERT Der arsche Il eltkon g und Herland Halle (Saale), 1923, 97 f 154, 407, etc THE VEDIC GOD SAVITR Sayitr possesscs, as has been shown above, all the characteristics of a god who stimulates, controls, and directs the cosmic order He is very often associated with the malo implications of the concept of rta The Vedic poet must have originally thought of Savits as the god who was responsible for stimulating, directing, and controlling the world phenomena In other words, Savitr was, for Vedic poets, only another aspect of god Varuṇa A comparison of the characteristics of Savitt with those of Varuṇa, which will be attempted presently would clearly indicate that these two gods are, according to the Vedic poet, identical with each other The sovereign lord Varuṇa was viewed by the Vedic poets from a particular standp jot, and special emphasis was put by them on certain of Varuṇa’s peculiar functions It was noder such definite circumstances that Varuṇa was glorified in the form of Savitr It may be suggested that the word saut derived from the root su was originally used in a very general adjectival sense, and, at this stage of usage, the word was employed with reference to several gods like Surya, Bhaga, Tvastr, etc It was only fa later times that the epithet, which fad then become almost a proper noun, was restricted to an aspect of Varuṇa But two facts definitely go against such a hypothesis With this hypothesis, Sayıts will have to be placed in the category of Dhātr, Nets, etc, hich possibility, however, has already been shown to be out of the question Secondly tlie connection of Savitr with other older gods of the RV is such as would favour his being regarded as an essentially old and prominent member of the pantheon of Vedic gods, - namely as an aspect of Varuṇa The association of Savitr with the concept of ria and consequently his implied identity with Varuṇa seem to be quite original in Vedic mythology What is the peculiar aspect of the world sovereign Varuṇa which is represented by Savitr? Before an attempt was made to answer this question it would be better to bring together the various features which are in the Veda common to both Varuṇa and Savits To begin with, it should be noted that in some Vedic passages Savitr and Varuṇa have been mentioned in such a VEDIC MYTHOLOGICAL TRACTS manner as would clearly bring out the identity of those two gods: for instance pra nā muñcamı varunassa pasād jena nibadhnat sautā suserah (X 85 24) Here the word Savitā is used almost as another name of Varuṇa The same is the casc as regards III 54 11 where Sayitr is mentioned directly after Mitra and Varuṇa (III 54 10 ) thus suggesting a close connection among these dividities The functions of Savitś in his capacity as a stimulator and director of the world order and thc preserver of the cosmic ethical law (II 38 2, III 33 6, IV 53 4; X 34 8; 139 3 ) are entirely similar to those of Varuṇaa (VI 70 1; VII 86 1, VIII 41 10, 42 1) Suit is again closely associa ted with other members of the circle of the Varuṇa mythology, namely, Aditi, Mitra, Aryaman, Bhaga, etc (Vil 38 4, 66 1-4) By reason of his laws Savitr is said to become Mitra (V 81 4) He is also often referred to as promoting rta (VII 38 2) Savitr plays a double role he sets in motion and also puts to rest all worldly activities, he is both prasavita and nivesangh (IV 53 6 ) This unique feature of Savitr’s character indicates in a convincing manner, that the word savitr was not merely an epithet suggesting the idea of stimulation In that case the two-fold nature of Sayitr would be quite inconsis tent It is thus certain that the Vedic poet thought of Savitr as a distinct god wielding complete control over all the phenomena of the world The usual exclusive epithet of Varuṇa, namely asura, is employed in a very significant - and not merely conved tional - manner with reference to Savitr also (1 35 7, 10, IV 53 1) The word asura (asu + possessive termination ra) had originally the special sense of a god possessing the greatest magical power rubstance The epithet was, accordingly, origina lly restricted to the magician sovereign lord of the world, Varuṇa When Varuṇa was glorified in bus peculiar aspect, as Saxe, the epithet asura also was naturally transferred to the latter The chariot of Varuṇa (and Mitra) is prominently described as shiping like the sun (I 122 15 ) and as traversing the highest heaven (V 63 1) The omniform chariot of Savitr also is golden bright (I 35 2-3) and travels to the bright realms of the THIC VEDIC GOD SAVITR 21 heaven where he is united with the rays of the sun (V 81 3-4) Sauts puts on a tawny garment (IV 53 2), which may be compared to thc golden glistening mantle of Varuṇa (1 25 13) Varuṇa and Savits are both connected with the nocturnal heaven (VII 88 2, I 35 2) As a moral governor Varuṇa stands far aboic any other detty The spics of Varuṇa are often mentioned (1 25 13, VII 87 3) The sun is Varuṇa s cyc and is said to be reporting to him the deeds of men (VII 60 1) Savitr also 15 Süryaraśni (X 139 1 ), and he declares men sinless to the sun (1 123 3) Varun? 15 the dispeller of falschood (I 152 1, VSL 60 5) and removes sin (Il 28 5, V 85 7,8, VII 86 5) Simular are the characteristics of Savitr, who makes her sinless (IV 54 3) and drives away cul spirits (I 35 10, VII 38 7) In this connection it is very instructive to comparc IV 54 3 referring to Savitr acifil sac calenia dane jane dinair dal saih prabinul purusan ala / doieșu ca sawar mämiseșu ca nam no aira sinarud anagasali II with VII 89 5 addressed to Varuṇa, jarhom cedant rarupa daltje jane ‘bhidroham manis juscaramasi/ acint jai lata dharni yuyopima ma nas (asmadenaso dura ririsah // Ilcrc wc sec that the traits of Varuṇa and Savitr in the matter of the removal of guilt an quite similar so too arc the expres sions similar Thuis fact seems to indicate that the identity of Varuṇa and Savitr was clear in the minds of the Vedic poets Similar features of Sans are also mentioned in other passages ( 35 11. v 1 3. v 38 3. 45 . VIII 27 12) Varuṇa is often called a ling (1 24 7), hc 13 king of all both gods and men (Il 27 10, X 132 %) of the wholc world (V 85 3), and of all that custs (VII 876) Much more frequently is Varuṇa called a unncrsal monarch, santai The signs of sovereignty are 001 absent cica in Sant The mantle of Savity and the badges 22 VEDIC MYTHOLOGICAL TRACTS which he is said to be bearing in his hand ( IV 53 2, 132, 14 2) are surely indicative of his royalty Savits bestows immortality and other blessings not only on the Rbhus (1 110 3), but also on other gods (IV 54 2, 5, 6, V 81 1) Varuṇa is also called the wise guardian and bestower of immortality (VIII 42 2) The descriptions of Savitr as leading the dead to their respective places (X 17 4) and his mention in connection with funeral rites (AV XII 2 48 Satapatha Br XIII 8 3 3 ) would remind one of the close association of Varuṇa with Yama ths god of the dead (X 14 7) Further Sayitr 16 like Varuṇa, the dispeller of bad dreams (V 82 4 ) Two more features of the essential nature of Savity remind us of Varuṇa’s personality Varuṇa, as the sovereign lord of the universe and as the preserver of 19w, is usually associated with pāśas or fetters He uses them in a two fold manner He binds down the world by means of these fetters, so that it should not Swerve from its well defined course, he also binds, with these fetters, the offenders who break his law (1 24 15, 25 21, VI 74 4, X 85 24) Savits is similarly described as binding down the world with fetters in order that the cosmic order should be preserved intact savita yantraih prthivimaramnad ashambhane sanitā dyam adrmhat / asvamı ādhuk sad dhun mantarih sam atürle baddham sayita samudram I (X 149 1) It has already been pointed out that the Tant Sam (I 19) also speaks of the fetters of Savitr It should be noted that no god who does not belong to the Varuṇa rta mythological com plex, is normally associated in the Veda, with fetters The mention of the bondage by Swift (X 149 )) should therefore, in itself be sufficient proof of his identity with Varuṇa Another significant feature of the Savile mythology is the frequent mention of amart The word amati is used in a special sense with refe rence to Savits Out of the nine places where that word occurs in the RV, in four places it is directly connected with Savitr (ITI 38 8, VII 38 1,2, 45.3) It occurs also in AV (VII 14.2) THE VEDIC GOD SAVITR 23 The Nighantu gives the word amatı as a synonym of rūpa, 19 GELDNER 20 and NEISSER" understand it in the sense of “pecu har form, pattern, or structure” The word rūpa bas retained, in later literature, the sense of a mystical, occult form’ A critical study of the passages, where the word amatı occurs, leads one to the conclusion that, to the Vedic poet, anatı denoted some mighty splendour - a magical form - sometbing almost like the mājā of Mitrāvarunau (V 63 4 ) 22 It is very often descri bed as a supernatural miracle Thus fact brings Savitr and Varuṇa quite close to each other Varuṇa, like Savits, is said to be possessing such magical power (III 61 7, Y 85 5), by means of which he and Mitra make the sun cross the sky and obscure it with cloud and rain (V 63 4) So the epithet, maym, is primarily applied to Varuṇa among the gods (VI 48 14, VIL 28 4, X 99 10) The concepts of amat and mayā are quite Similar and belong primarily to the Varuṇa mythology The counterparts of Varuṇa in other ancient mythologies are also invested with such magical power This magical power, amatı or māya, is a necessary constituent of the whole rla ideology BERGAIGNA has pointed out,23 in this connection, that the acti. vity suggested by the root sū is very often (X 99 7, 137 4, AV VI 119 3, VIL 53 6) characterised by some form of mystical or magical power The root su denotes not just ordinary stimu lation, but stimulation which has some form of magic underlying it — a sort of magical charging’ The root sű is sometimes used in this sense also with reference to Varuṇa himself (11 28 9) Savitr, whose activity is described by the employment of several forms of the root sū, is, therefore, clearly the world magician, whose ways regarding the direction and control of the world order are entirely impenetrable to the human mind It ibus becomes abundantly clear that Savity is only an aspect of Varuṇa, a Hypostase’ of Varuṇa He represents the 19 Aichoniu 1117 20 CELDNER, RV in Ausu ahl i Glossar, 13 21 Nesser, Zum IVorterbuch des Rgreda 1, 76-77 22. IVZKA 13, 320 23 Opal, III, 41-44 VEDIC MYTHOLOGICAL TRACTS world sovereign Varuṇa as seen from a distinct point of view and in a distinct attitude What is this peculiar aspect of Varuṇa, which is so much glorified by the Vedic poets through the hymns addressed to Savitr ? An analysis of the Vedic hymns addressed to Savitr brings forth very prominently one unique feature of the personality and activity of that god In the descriptions of Savitr, the movement of his hands and fingers is particularly emphasised by the Vedic poets la the case of no other Vedic god is this feature so conspi cuously noticeable Savitr raises aloft bis strong golden arms which extend to the ends of the whole world ( II 38 2, IV 14 2, 53 4, VI 71 5, VII 45 2) His arms are golden (1 35 9-10), broad (II 8 2), and beautiful (III 33 6) By his out stretched hands Savitr blesses and enlivens all beings and directs all movement in the world The raising of arms by Savits is so characteristic that a similar action on the part of other gods is often compared with it Agni raises his arms like Savitr (1 95 7), Usas extends light as Savitr extends his arms (VII 79 2), Brhaspati is implored by means of hymns of praise upraised like the arms of Savitr (I 190 3) Savitr is supānı (III 33 6), prthupanı (11 38 2), hiranyapanı (I 35 9), hıranyahusta (1 35 10), svangur (IV 54 4), etc In the Tautt Sam (IV 1 6 3) too it is said devastya savito ’d vapalu supanih svangurih subalur uta sakty This peculiar gesture of Savitr by means of his huge golden hands was so deeply rooted in the mind of the Vedic poet that, even in the later brahmanic literature the constellation hasta was regarded as sacred to Savitr presumably in accordance with the bandhuta ideology 24 BERGAIGNE rightly observes that the raising of the arms by Sayitr does not represent merely the spreading of the rays of the sun This gesture on the part of Sayitr, which is so often and so promigently described, must have had some special and deeper significance By his widely stretched out arms Savitr gathers together the beings and then lets them 24 III 1 Cf l lla Tarth San IV 4 10 2 Rasto naksatrana sav ta debata ), Taiff Bt 25 Opat, III, 46, THE VEDIC GOD SAVITR 25 free He distributes life and motion among all beings The great sovereign of the universe spreads out, every morning and every evening his gigantic hands and thus sets the whole cosmic order working This peculiar gesticulation of Savit; is typical, on the one hand, of the commandant of the universe giving orders, and, on the other hand, of the great world magician producing his magnificent magic The Vedic poets were so thoroughly impressed by the sovereignty and the magic power of the world sovereigo Varuṇa that they glorified them through this most profound imagcry The Vedic pocts bclicved that they could see, every morning and every evening the otherwise invisible and imperceptible world magician actually in the action of giving orders and producing magic by means of his out stretched majestic hands Continually from day to day, when light and darkness change places, one sees the giant hands of the comman dant of the universe stretched out to the ends of the sky in the peculiar gesticulation of a magician overlord At the beckoning of Savits, the sun is set into motion in the morning Asvins take up to their paths mcn get up and start their activilies In the evening however when the order is given by the comman dant magician – the peculiar gesticulation of his gigatic out stretched hands being then seen in the west – the sun leaves his routine the night draws together the threads of darkness and puts them like a veil over the earth the moon comes out as the watchmap of the night, and the stars in the east hasten up to obcy thc behest of Savits 38 Savitf is further said to be raising his voice in order to establish firmly bis law - a feature which is also indicative of the same essential character of that god apra rajansı diyanı pārthna Slokar devah krnude svaya dharmane / pra bahu asrak santa sas unani mieśajan prasuvannahfublur jagat // (IV 53 3) The visible occult gesture of the majestic hands of the magt can sovereigo Jord Savitr, thus brings about the interchange of 26 W GUNTEBT, Op al, 160 26 VEDIC MYTHOLOGICAL TRACTS the grandest contrasts an nature - of day and night, of ligiit and darkness of activity and rest, of motion and static condition (II 38 i ff) The sovereign of the world, Varuṇa, is by nature utterly incomprehensible He is, however described in his particular aspect of giver of orders and producer of magic That is Savit; of the Ry - a representation of Varuṇa in his special gesture as the commandant and the magician of the world a gesture which is easily the most impressivc and at the same time the most expressive of the essential personality and nature of that god (The concept of the world sovereign, with the gaiat hands reaching to the ends of the sky upraised in a gesticulation of ordering and producing magic cannot be said to have been restricted only to the Vedic mythology According to GUNTERT, it may be discovered in other ancient mythologies also lo this connection, he has set forth the evidence derived from nordic rock paintings 27 These paintings show a manly form with an axe in the right hand, which he raises up together with his left hand (a rock painting from Backa near Brastad) A similar figure is also represented in a rock painting from Kinnekule By the side of the figure there is the wheel of the sun’ and the ‘foot print’ In this representation, the right hand appears so very big when compared with the left that one is inclined to think that the representation must be that of some mythological figure The two gigantic bands in an upraised position, with particularly distinctive five fingers on each of them, are to be seen in a prehistoric figure of a god represented in a painting from Brecke Dear Brastad in a painting from Tanum one sees the god with both the gaint hands upraised, the right one bearing a spear The spear seems to be indicative of power and soverei gnty It is undoubtedly a representation of a god who gives orders in this peculiar attitude Similar figures of the god ‘with majestic hands’ are also discovered in Southern Russia and the Caucasus region On a rock painting from Backa near Brastad 27 Op cut, 162–169THE VEDIC GOD SAVITR in Bohuslān, the god with big hands is represented as holding a long rope in his bands This feature is clearly indicative of the fact that the god of huge majestic hands - prihupanı Sayır – is identical with the god possessing a long rope - that is, Varuṇa with his fetters It is thus suggested that the mythological concept of Vedic Savitr is represented pictorially on the nordic rock-paintings belonging to the ancient bronze age 21 First pablished clails of the Landarlar Onental Revertrch Inshtute ( ABORI 20, 1910 23–316. Reprinted 1p s revised form slalpanyasa (Rajeshvara Sastri Dravid Fel. Vol ), Allahabad, 1971, Englsh Section, 1-21 ] 28 According to GUTTERT (Opcu, 165) one may visualızc, on the strength of the evidence of this common Tel gious hentage of the indogermanic peoples in the form of the god with bg hands, the prehistoric locality of those peoples comprising the abodes of the Nordics in the west and extending over the Thralian region to the abodes of the Aryans in the cast GUNTERT further suggests (166-67 ) that the Avestan counterpart of the Vedic Savity may be seen in the demoniac, yawn produc ng, long hadded, golden female divinity (once in 11 18.2 also represented as male ) Bugyast? It is pointed out that Savitr, like Indra, is transforined into a demon in the Atesta and that only onc of his activities, namely, putting people to rest (sleep), 13 exclusively stressed there