Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c27.s2: The Paulastyas

Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c27.s2

Language
English

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 (13)