Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c27: Chapter XXII. Agastyas, Paulastyas, Paulahas, and Kratus

Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c27

Language
English

Contents

Chapter XXII. Agastyas, Paulastyas, Paulahas, and Kratus

Agastyas

c27.s1.1

THERE is no genealogy of the Agastyas, and the Matsya alone (202) gives a list of gotras, which it calls their vaṃśa. ‘Agastya’ appears in various stories at various times from the earliest age down to the Pāṇḍavas’ time,¹ and there is great indefiniteness about the Agastyas.

c27.s1.2

¹ e. g. with king Nahuṣa, MBh v, 16, 520-1 : xiii, 99 f. (fable). With Rāma Jāmadagnya, MBh xiii, 84, 3967-9. With Bhīṣma, id. 26, 1761. All fables.

c27.s1.3

Fable, which has been noticed in connexion with Vasiṣṭha Maitrāvaruṇa (chapter XVIII), gives ‘Agastya’ an origin with ‘Vasiṣṭha’ in making them both born in a water-jar, sons of the two gods Mitra and Varuṇa, ‘Agastya’ being thus ‘Vasiṣṭha’s’ younger brother.² Hence ‘Agastya’ had the patronymic Maitrāvaruṇi,³ and the names Kumbhayoni,⁴ Kumbhajanman⁵ and other synonyms.⁶ Maitrāvaruṇi really meant ‘son (or descendant) of Mitrāvaruṇa’, but was taken to mean ‘son of Mitra and Varuṇa’⁷ (as explained in chapter XVIII), and so the common patronymic of ‘Vasiṣṭha’ and ‘Agastya’ led to the fable that they were begotten together; and it is noteworthy that no reason is given why ‘Agastya’ was so born, such as is given for ‘Vasiṣṭha’.

c27.s1.4

² Also Mat 61, 19: Pad v, 22, 20-1; 33, 121.

c27.s1.5

³ MBh iii, 103, 8776: xii, 344, 13216: xiii, 99, 4771: &c. Vedārth on Rigv i, 166. Shortened to Vāruṇi, MBh iii, 103, 8774-5; 105, 8805-7.

c27.s1.6

⁴ Mat 61, 50. Pad v, 22, 56. MBh iii, 98, 8595-6: xii, 344, 13216.

c27.s1.7

⁵ Raghuv xii, 31.

c27.s1.8

⁶ Cf. Bḍ iii, 35, 42, 53.

c27.s1.9

⁷ MBh xii, 208, 7595: xiii, 150, 7113; 165, 7666.

c27.s1.10

Kumbhayoni may have been a real name, for queer names were not uncommon, as witness Tṛṇabindu, Śunaḥśepa and many others, and it can be matched with Urjayoni, the name of a son of Viśvāmitra.⁸ If so, it would naturally have led to the allegation that he was born in a jar, just as Vasiṣṭha’s name Kuṇḍina did (*ante*); but it seems more likely to have been coined out of the fable, thus—‘Vasiṣṭha’ and ‘Agastya’ were both Maitrāvaruṇa, interpreted as ‘son of Mitra and Varuṇa’. ‘Vasiṣṭha’ was Kuṇḍina, interpreted to mean ‘connected with a jar’, therefore Agastya must also have been their son born at the same time and in the same way, and so was Kumbha-yoni. This is illustrated by Droṇa, whose name gave rise to a precisely similar explanation,¹ whence he also is styled Kumbhayoni² and Kumbhasambhava.³ Hence the name would seem to have been devised out of the fable, and it may be noted that ‘Vasiṣṭha’ is never called Kumbhayoni, because he had the name Kuṇḍina; and the fable was also utilized to explain Mānya, the patronymic of an Agastya.

c27.s1.11

⁸ MBh xiii, 4, 258.

c27.s1.12

¹ MBh i, 63, 2434-5; 130, 5102-6; 137, 5433; 166, 6328-32.

c27.s1.13

² MBh vii, 157, 6947; 185, 8364, 8367.

c27.s1.14

³ MBh vii, 157, 6956; 193, 8823.

c27.s1.15

As noticed above, the stories in which ‘Agastya’ is introduced at various times are generally brahmanic stories, unsupported otherwise, and worthless chronologically. The only Agastya, to whom a genuine historical position is assigned, is the rishi who married Lopāmudrā, and whose place has been fixed above (p. 168). He is sometimes called Kumbhayoni and Maitrāvaruṇa.⁴ Their son was, it is said, Dṛḍhasyu, who was called Idhmavāha also.⁵ Dṛḍhasyu’s name is variously given as Dṛḍhāsya, Dṛḍhāyus and Dṛḍhadyumna; and Idhmavāha as Vidhmavāha and Indrabāhu.⁶ They were however different persons,⁷ because the former is no doubt Dṛḍhacyuta,⁸ the reputed author of Rigveda ix, 25; and Idhmavāha was his son, for as the reputed author of ix, 26 he is called Dārḍhacyuta. ‘Agastya’ and these two are said to have been the most famous Agastis.⁹

c27.s1.16

⁴ Mat 61, 50, 53.

c27.s1.17

⁵ MBh iii, 99, 8640-2.

c27.s1.18

⁶ Mat 145, 114; 202, 8, 11.

c27.s1.19

⁷ So treated in Mat loc. cit.; Bd ii, 32, 119-20.

c27.s1.20

⁸ He seems to be referred to in Vedārth on Rigv ix, 5.

c27.s1.21

⁹ Mat 145, 114-15.

c27.s1.22

The Veda throws very little light on the Agastyas because it mentions them only by their family name Agastya. ‘Agastya’ is said to be the author of hymns i, 165 to 191, but this is only the family name and no doubt includes several Agastyas, for, while to the Agastya who married Lopāmudrā would belong hymn 179, the author of hymn 185 apparently calls himself Sumedhas (verse 10), and the Sumedhases were a gotra among the Agastyas.¹⁰ Āgastyas are alluded to sometimes,¹ but very few are mentioned by name besides those noticed above.² One was Māna, for the author of hymn 189 calls himself Māna’s son; the Mānas are mentioned and the patronymic Mānya occurs.³ Māndārya is probably another patronymic pointing to a Mandāra, and Māna and Mandāra were in the same line of descent because the author of hymns 165 and 166 calls himself Māndārya Mānya,⁴ and it is said that Mānya was Maitrāvaruṇi, son (or descendant) of Mitrāvaruṇa.⁵

c27.s1.23

¹⁰ Mat 202, 2.

c27.s1.24

¹ MBh iii, 26, 971 : xii, 344, 13216 (Calc. edition). ² One Śarmin, MBh xiii, 68, 3400. ³ Rigv i, 177, 5; 184, 4, 5. ⁴ As Kakṣīvant is styled Dairghatamasa and Auśija (p. 161). ⁵ Anukramaṇī and Vedārth on Rigv viii, 67. ⁶ Rām iii, 11, 78–84; Br 84, 8; 118, 6, 8. Raghuv iv, 44. ⁷ Mat 61, 51 (Laṅkā). ⁸ MBh iii, 130, 10541. ⁹ Br 118, 2; 158, 11: Hv 117, 6591. ‘Conqueror,’ Rām vi, 117, 14. ¹⁰ Mat 61, 37. Pad v, 22, 40. Vā 48, 20–3. Rām iv, 41, 15–16. ¹¹ MBh iii, 104. Br 118, 2–8. ¹² MBh iii, 96, 8543–52; 99, 8615–32; 206: xii, 141, 5389. Rām iii, 11, 55 f. ¹³ Pad v, 19, 160 f.; 22, 40 f. Many in MBh. ¹⁴ MBh iii, 88, 8344. ¹⁵ MBh i, 216, 7839–46; 217, 7877. ¹⁶ MBh iii, 88, 8339: probably 118, 10217. ¹⁷ MBh iii, 87, 8314–17; 96, 8540; 99, 8645–6; 161, 11794: &c. ¹⁸ Vā 108, 53–6; 111, 53.

c27.s1.25

There is nothing to show when or how the Agastyas arose. The fable noticed above connects ‘Agastya’ with ‘Vasiṣṭha’, but that seems merely a fabrication from the fact that a Vasiṣṭha and an Agastya both had the same patronymic Maitrāvaruṇa. Tradition generally connects ‘Agastya’ with the southern region⁶ and even with Ceylon.⁷ Thus ‘Agastya’ met Lopāmudrā at the great tīrtha on the river Sindhu,⁸ that is the Sindh, a southern tributary of the Jumna. ‘Agastya’ is called ‘lord of the southern region’,⁹ and is sometimes said to dwell on Mt. Malaya¹⁰ at the extreme south. Canopus, the brightest star in the southern hemisphere, bears his name. Fables also connect ‘Agastya’ with the south, such as his altering the height of the Vindhya Mts.,¹¹ the story of Ilvala and Vātāpi,¹² and others.¹³ He had a hermitage apparently near Mt. Vaidūrya¹⁴ (the western part of the Satpura range), another called Saubhadra on the southern ocean,¹⁵ and another among the Pāṇḍyas.¹⁶ But the Agastyas spread elsewhere, and so mention is made of ‘Agastya’ in connexion with the Jumna, Prayāga and other places,¹⁷ and Gayā appropriated some of the fame of Agastya and Lopāmudrā.¹⁸

The Paulastyas

c27.s2.1

An account which professes to give an historical explanation of Pulastya’s offspring is found in five Puranas.¹ It derives them from the royal line of Vaiśālī. Nariṣyanta, son of Marutta, had a son Dama (p. 147). His (eighth) successor was Tṛṇabindu, who was king at the third mouth of the Tretā age (p. 178). Tṛṇabindu’s daughter was Ilavilā and he gave her to Pulastya. Their son was the rishi Viśravas Ailavila.² Viśravas had four wives, a Bṛhaspati’s³ daughter Devavarṇinī, Mālyavant’s daughters Puṣpotkaṭā and Vākā, and Mālin’s daughter Kaikasī. Viśravas’s son by Devavarṇinī was Kubera Vaiśravaṇa,⁴ and Kubera had four sons Nalakūbara, Rāvaṇa,⁵ Kumbhakarṇa, and Vibhīṣaṇa and a daughter Śūrpaṇakhā. Kaikasī bore Daśagrīva and other sons; Puṣpotkaṭā bore Khara and other sons; and Vākā various sons. Pulastya’s offspring (putting aside Kubera) were Rākṣasas, and the Matsya says (202, 12–13) that Pulastya, seeing that, adopted Agastya’s son (who is not named)⁶ and so the Paulastyas were Āgastyas.

c27.s2.2

¹ Vā 70, 29–56. Bd iii, 8, 34–62. Lg i, 63, 55–66. Kūr i, 19, 7–15. Pad vi, 269, 15–19 and Bhāg ix, 2, 31–2, partially. Cf. MBh iii, 273, 15881 to 274, 15896 : differently, Rām vii, 2 to 5 and 9; see iii, 22.

c27.s2.3

² He dwelt on R. Narmadā, MBh iii, 89, 8357–8. This, if true, would make the Paulastyas begin there, in the NW. Dekhan.

c27.s2.4

³ He is called ācārya of the gods, being identified with the semi-mythical Bṛhaspati (chap. XVI).

c27.s2.5

⁴ Called Ailavila, MBh v, 138, 4717–8 : ix, 48, 2753.

c27.s2.6

⁵ As regards Rāvaṇa’s relations, see also Rām iii, 48, 2–5 ; 50, 9 ; 68, 16 : iv, 58, 19 : v, 23, 6–8 : vi, 19, 10 ; 35, 6.

c27.s2.7

⁶ Mārk 52, 22–3 says Pulastya’s son was Dattoli, who was known as Agastya in the Svāyambhuva manvantara. Cf. Ag 20, 13.

c27.s2.8

The account continues. These Āgastyas were thus classed along with the great body of Rākṣasas, and they together with another group called Vaiśvāmitras or Kauśikas were reckoned Paulastya Rākṣasas.⁷ How the Vaiśvāmitras or Kauśikas came to be treated as such is not explained (but see chapter XXI, note). The Paulastyas thus comprised three groups, Pulastya’s own descendants, the Āgastyas and the Vaiśvāmitras or Kauśikas; and Kubera was king of all the Yakṣas and of the Āgastyas and Vaiśvāmitras, who were Paulastya Rākṣasas, cruel brahma-rākṣasas,¹ who studied the Veda and performed austerities and religious exercises.² There were four other groups who were reckoned Rākṣasas, three of which were active in the day time, but the Paulastyas, Agastyas, Kauśikas and Nairṛtas were active at night.³ Wise Agastya brahma-rākṣasas are said to attend on Kauberaka (Kubera?) on Hiraṇyaśṛṅga.⁴

c27.s2.9

⁷ It is perfectly clear that Rākṣasa here does not mean demon, but uncivilized non-Aryan tribes.

c27.s2.10

¹ This appears to be an epithet of the Agastyas and Vaiśvāmitras, and to mean Rākṣasas who had been or were descended from brahmans, or brahmans who had allied themselves with Rākṣasas. Cf. also Vā 69, 195–6; Bd iii, 7, 162–3. Rām i, 8, 17 and 12, 18 speak of ‘wise brahma-rākṣasas’.

c27.s2.11

² This is noteworthy with reference to chap. XXI, note. Paulastya yātudhānas are mentioned, MBh vii, 156, 16372. Their Veda might be the Atharvaveda.

c27.s2.12

³ These words seem to mean, from the preceding description, that these degraded brahmans performed their religious rites at night.

c27.s2.13

⁴ Vā 47, 60–1, Bd ii, 18, 63–4.

c27.s2.14

It is noteworthy that all the Paulastyas (except Kubera, who was reckoned a god) belonged to S. India and Ceylon, and that Pulastya is made a contemporary of Tṛṇabindu, whose position has been fixed (p. 178), so that Pulastya was not a primaeval rishi, and a definite time is assigned for the origin of the Paulastyas.⁵ As already shown, Viśvāmitra and Agastya existed before that time, so Vaiśvāmitras and Agastyas could have been incorporated among the Paulastyas. At the same time it must be noted that some passages connect these Paulastya Rākṣasas with the Himalayan region also,⁶ and Kubera with Ceylon⁷ as well as with that region.⁸

c27.s2.15

⁵ This does not harmonize with the story that, when Arjuna Kārtavīrya captured ‘Rāvaṇa’ and imprisoned him at Māhiṣmatī, Pulastya appealed for leniency, and Arjuna then released ‘Rāvaṇa’; for Arjuna was much earlier than Tṛṇabindu: Vā 94, 35–6; Bd iii, 69, 35–7; Hv 33, 1876–8; Br 13, 184–7; Mat 43, 37–9; Pad v, 12, 136–8. Fancifully elaborated, Rām vii, 31 to 33. Rāvaṇa is probably not a personal name, but a Sanskritized form of the Tamil word ireivan or iraivan, ‘God, king, sovereign, lord’ (JRAS, 1914, p. 285); and if so, Arjuna may have captured a Dravidian rāvaṇa or king, and Pulastya may have been introduced afterwards (Viṣ iv, 11, 6 says nothing about Pulastya), when the Rāvaṇas were confused.

c27.s2.16

⁶ e. g. MBh iii, 274, 15901: v, 110, 3830. Rām iii, 32, 14–16. Pad vi, 269, 20–1.

c27.s2.17

⁷ e. g. Rām vii, 3, 22–33. MBh iii, 274, 15920–1.

c27.s2.18

⁸ e. g. MBh v, 110, 3830–1, 3840: xiii, 19, 1412 f.; 110, 4860.

c27.s2.19

*Paulahas.*

c27.s2.20

Pulaha’s fabulous progeny has been noticed (chapter XVI), but the Matsya says (202, 10–11) that Pulaha had three sons (who are not named ¹) and, not being pleased with them, adopted Agastya’s son Dṛḍhāsya (that is, Dṛḍhacyuta, *ante*), and so the Paulahas were Āgastyas. The Padma says (vi, 218, 62–3) that he begot a son Dambholi, who had been Agastya formerly.² No further particulars are given of the Paulahas.

c27.s2.21

¹ Mārk 52, 23–4 calls them Kardama, Arvavīra and Sahiṣṇu. Cf. Ag 20, 13.

c27.s2.22

² Compare eleventh note above.

c27.s2.23

*Kratus.*

c27.s2.24

Kratu has been noticed (chapter XVI), and the Matsya says (202, 8–9) that he adopted ‘Agastya’s’ son Idhmavāha (*ante*), and the Kratus therefore were Āgastyas.

Linked texts (16)