Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c7: Chapter II. Tradition, Its Preservers and the Origin of the Puranas

Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c7

Language
English

Chapter II. Tradition, Its Preservers and the Origin of the Puranas

c7.2

THE Vāyu and Padma Puranas tell us how ancient genealogies, tales and ballads were preserved, namely, by the sūtas, and they describe the sūta’s duty. Their statements are different versions of the same original. The Vāyu (1, 31-2) says¹—‘The sūta’s special duty as perceived by good men of old was to preserve the genealogies of gods, rishis and most glorious kings, and the traditions of great men, which are displayed by those who declare sacred lore in the Itihāsas and Puranas.’ The Padma (v, 1, 27-8) says similarly,² but in a later and inferior version—‘This is the sūta’s duty from primaeval time as perceived by good men, to compose the genealogies of gods, rishis and most glorious kings and the eulogies of great men, who are seen as declarers of sacred lore in the Itihāsas and Puranas.’ In the Vāyu’s statement śruta obviously means ‘tradition’ and not ‘celebrated’, as the corresponding word stuti in the Padma version shows, and the meaning ‘celebrated’ yields poor sense. The sūtas would have, as bards have generally, preserved ballads and songs as well as genealogies. Śruta here does not mean ‘sacred tradition’, but simply ‘tradition’, for it is often used so in the Puranas, as will be shown. Stuti in the Padma would generally mean a ‘ballad in praise of’, and eulogies of and ballads about great men of the past would naturally be one subject of tradition.³ Eulogistic ballads are found, as those in praise of Arjuna Kārtavīrya,¹ Alarka,² Devāvṛdha ³ and others. Further the word *brahma* in both versions does not necessarily mean Vedic or brahmanic lore, but means Puranic lore, both because of the subjects mentioned and because the Puranas assert themselves to be *brahma* ⁴ and place themselves on an equality with the Veda, as will be shown at the end of this chapter. The Vāyu’s statement is the older and appears to be the more trustworthy version, yet both come to practically the same effect for the present purpose.

c7.3

¹ Sva-dharma eva sūtasya sadbhir dṛṣṭaḥ purātanaiḥ devatānām ṛṣīṇām ca rājñām cāmita-tejasām vamśānām dhāraṇam kāryam śrutānām ca mahātmanām itihāsa-purāṇeṣu diṣṭā ye brahma-vādibhiḥ. Ye appears to refer to vamśa and śruta, and to be in the masc., in agreement with vamśa; but it might refer to mahātmanām.

c7.4

² Eṣa dharmas tu sūtasya sadbhir dṛṣṭaḥ sanātanaḥ devatānām ṛṣīṇām ca rājñām amita-tejasām tad vamśa-kāraṇam * kāryam stutīnām ca mahātmanām itihāsa-purāṇeṣu dṛṣṭā ye brahma-vādinaḥ
* Some copies read dhāraṇam as in Vā.

c7.5

³ Cf. MBh xiii, 104, 5104. Stuti-Purāṇa-jña, xii, 53, 1898.

c7.6

¹ Bḍ iii, 69, 19 f. Vā 94, 19 f. Mat 43, 23 f. Br 13, 170 f. Pad v, 12, 125 f.

c7.7

² Bḍ iii, 67, 70–1. Vā 92, 66–7. Br 11, 51–3. Hv 29, 1588–90.

c7.8

³ Vā 96, 13–16. Br 15, 41–44.

c7.9

⁴ *Param brahma sanātanam*, Bḍ i, 1, 11. *Brahma-vidyā*, Pad iv, 110, 400. Cf. *brahma sanātana*, Bḍ ii, 26, 65. Vā 55, 68. See Vā 1, 196.

c7.10

The sūta mentioned here is not the caste that was described as the offspring of a kṣatriya father and brahman mother; ⁵ that was a later application of the term. This sūta was a bard, like the māgadha, and the origin of both is placed in the time of a primaeval king Pṛthu, son of Vena.⁶ It is explained by a fable, which says the first sūta and māgadha came into existence at his sacrifice, and gives a fanciful explanation of the names. What is noteworthy is that the story says Pṛthu assigned the Anūpa (or Sūta) country to the sūta and Magadha to the māgadha ;⁷ and this discloses that the māgadhas were really inhabitants of Magadha and the sūtas inhabitants of the Anūpa country which appears to mean Bengal here, or of the Sūta country, the district east of Magadha. The story clearly distinguishes between these sūtas and the later class sprung from kṣatriya fathers and brahman mothers which also was called sūta, and explains that the latter received this name because they observed the same duty as the original sūtas, while they were also allowed two other inferior occupations, namely, secondly, employment with a kṣatriya in connexion with chariots, elephants and horses, and lastly, medicine.¹ The original sūtas seem to have been gradually superseded by the latter class.

c7.11

⁵ Manu x, 11, 17. MBh xiii, 48, 2571–3 : &c.

c7.12

⁶ The whole account is narrated in Vā 62, 137–48, and Bḍ ii, 36, 158–73. Less fully in Vā 1, 33–8: Pad ii, 27, 65–86; v, 1, 29–35: Br 4, 60–8: Hv 5, 324–9. Noticed, Kūr i, 1, 6; 14. 12: Śiv vii, 56, 30–1: MBh xii, 59, 2233–4: Br 2, 24–5; Hv 2, 78: Ag 18, 15–16.

c7.13

⁷ Vā 62, 147. Bḍ ii, 36, 172. MBh xii, 59, 2234. Br 4, 67. Hv 5, 325. Pad v, 1, 31. But Pad ii, 27, 86–7, says wrongly Mahodaya to the sūta, māgadha and vandin, and Kaliṅga to the cāraṇa. Mahodaya = Kānyakubja, Pad v, 35, 1, 193. Rām (ed Gorr.) i, 35, 5, 35.

c7.14

¹ The passages in second note above, collated, run thus— yac ca kṣatrāt samabhavad brāhmaṇyām hīna-yonitaḥ sūtaḥ pūrveṇa sādharmyāt tulya-dharmaḥ prakīrtitaḥ madhyamo hy eṣa sūtasya dharmaḥ kṣatrôpajīvanam ratha-nāgâśva-caritam jaghanyam ca cikitsitam. So used, MBh xiv, 72, 2087. Cf. Manu x, 47. This statement helps to elucidate the brahmanical information about the sūta in the Vedic Index.

c7.15

The sūtas are often classed with māgadhas and vandins, even in descriptions of ancient times,² and distinctions are sometimes made between these three classes. One statement makes the sūta a *paurānika*, the māgadha a genealogist (*vamśa-śamsaka*), and the vandin a eulogist (*stāvaka*).³ Another makes the two latter eulogists and says much the same of the sūta also.⁴ A third passage says that from Pṛthu’s time the sūtas and māgadhas, who both came into existence then, were royal panegyrists, and they and the vandins awakened the king in the morning with their blessings.⁵ The Mahābhārata has other expressions.⁶

c7.16

² Hv 107, 5964; 113, 6324. MBh viii, 1, 12.

c7.17

³ Garga Saṃhitā, Goloka-khaṇḍa, 12, 36. Quoted in Indian Antiquary, 1893, vol. xxii, p. 253, note: and the commentator on Rām ii, 6, 6 says the same.

c7.18

⁴ Pad ii, 27, 71-2, and 85-6. MBh iii, 256, 15325: xiv, 64, 1896: xv, 23, 624.

c7.19

⁵ Bd ii, 36, 172-3. Vā 62, 148. Cf. MBh iii, 235, 14750: xv, 38, 1061: Rām ii, 65, 1-4.

c7.20

⁶ MBh xiii, 48, 2571-3.

c7.21

The distinction between the original sūtas and māgadhas and the two later mixed castes which were dubbed sūta and māgadha is clearly noticed in the Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra. When dealing with pratiloma offspring it says that the offspring of a vaiśya and women of the two higher castes are the māgadha and vaidehaka; and that of a kṣatriya and a brahman woman is the sūta.⁷ Then it adds, ‘But the sūta who is mentioned in the Puranas is different, and so also is the māgadha who is mentioned there, from brāhmaṇa-kṣatriya offspring by a *real* distinction’:⁸ that is, in the Puranas the sūta is different from the sūta who is the offspring of a brahman woman by a kṣatriya, and the māgadha from the māgadha who is the offspring of a kṣatriya woman by a vaiśya. Here the Paurāṇika sūta and māgadha are clearly distinguished from the pratiloma sūta and māgadha; and the reference to them as Paurāṇika plainly suggests that they were only known from the Puranas in Kauṭilya’s time and had ceased to exist then, in the fourth century B.C.

c7.22

⁷ Book iii, chap. 7 (p. 165). See Manu x, 11, 16 f. MBh xiii, 48, 2571 f.; 49, 2622-3.

c7.23

⁸ Ibid. line 7—Paurāṇikas tv anyas sūto māgadhaś ca brahma-kṣatrād viśeṣataḥ. R. Shama Sastri translates this thus, ‘But men of the names, Sūta and Māgadha, celebrated in the purāṇas, are quite different and of greater merit than either Brahmans or Kṣatriyas’—where the last assertion is surely staggering. Brahma-kṣatra means sometimes ‘brahmans and

c7.24

A remote antiquity was thus assigned to the original sūtas, who were royal and other bards and held an honourable position; and that is true because bards existed in various countries in the earliest times and were highly esteemed. It was thus their duty to preserve the genealogies of gods, rishis and famous kings and the ballads about celebrated men¹—which were all matters of ancient tradition; and this statement of their duty refers obviously to the earliest times before the Purana was compiled, because there would have been no genealogies or ballads to collect and fashion into the Purana, unless they had been preserving such ancient traditions all along. The genealogies of kings and rishis are referred to as really existing and as well known to those who were learned in ancient lore.² The sūta had no duty with regard to the Vedas.³

c7.25

¹ So the sūta is called vaṃśa-kuśala, Vāyu 4, 2.

c7.26

² MBh iii, 200, 13482-5; 88, 8329-30.

c7.27

³ Vā 1, 33. Pad v, 1, 29.

c7.28

Tradition is cited by various expressions. Smṛta, ‘remembered,’ is the most common, and often has little force, but sometimes its use is emphatic, as in the statements that Viśvāmitra was remembered as having had the (kṣatriya) name Viśvaratha,⁴ and that Śukra-Uśanas had the name Kāvya.⁵ Similarly anuśuśruma, ‘we have heard it handed down,’ occurs fairly often.⁶ Abundant is the

c7.29

⁴ Br 10, 56: Hv. 27, 1459; 32, 1766.

c7.30

⁵ Vā 65, 75. Other instances, Mat 49, 75-6; Vā 99, 190-1; Hv 20, 1081-2; Bḍ ii, 32, 122.

c7.31

⁶ e.g. Vā 62, 174; 96, 123. Bḍ ii, 36, 201; iii, 71, 124. Hv 1, 47. Br 4, 95. MBh i, 94, 3740: xii, 227, 8267.

c7.32

kṣatriyas’, e.g. MBh xii, 65, 2430; Mat 47, 32; 273, 61, 63; Vā 99, 443, 446; Br 45, 35; 123, 6: and with reference to the Aila race which being kṣatriya gave rise to kṣatriyan brahmans and brahmans, Mat 50, 88; Vā 99, 278. Sometimes it means a blending of the two, as where kṣatriya kings became brahmans, e.g. Vā 57, 121 (cf. Mat 143, 37); Hv 27, 1469; 32, 1773; Br 10, 63: or where a brahman became practically a kṣatriya, like Rāma Jāmadagnya, Vā 65, 94; Bḍ iii, 1, 98.

c7.33

use of the phrase *iti naḥ śrutam*,¹ ‘so we have heard,’ or shortly *iti śrutam*,² and its equivalent occurs often, *iti śrutiḥ*,³ ‘such is the tradition,’ where *śruta* and *śruti* refer to secular tradition.

c7.34

¹ Vā 2, 15; 62, 192; 65, 42; 88, 153; 90, 3, 10, 24; 95, 2; 99, 175. Other Puranas similarly.

c7.35

² Vā 94, 51, &c. Cf. Mat 35, 4.

c7.36

³ Vā 18, 3, 11, 14; 59, 73; 65, 43; 83, 127; 85, 7; 88, 28, 182; 89, 8, 15; 92, 70; 94, 4; 99, 200, 231. Mat 35, 5; 36, 2. Br 7, 6. Hv 10, 619. Kūr i, 22, 24. Pad iv, 17, 70; 111, 35. Lg i, 27, 50. Bḍ in various passages, that correspond to those cited from Vā, reads *iti śrutaḥ* or *viśrutaḥ* instead, e.g. iii, 63, 29, 182; 64, 8, 15; 67, 74: but in iii, 1, 43 it has *iti śrutiḥ*. Its variations are probably editorial.

c7.37

*Śruti* generally means ‘sacred text’ or ‘sacred tradition’, but in the Puranas very often means ordinary tradition and not sacred tradition, because the phrase *iti śrutiḥ* occurs too often to be a clerical mistake, and because matters on which it is cited do not appear to be mentioned or even alluded to in the Vedic literature. For instance, the Vāyu (88, 28) says, ‘Bṛhadaśva’s son was Kuvalāśva, such is the *śruti*’; and both the Brahma (8, 68) and Harivaṃśa (15, 802) say, one of king Sagara’s two wives brought forth a gourd (out of which developed 60,000 sons), such is the *śruti*: but these citations are wholly unknown to Vedic literature.⁴ Again the Matsya (47, 186) says that Devayānī was born from Kāvya, such is the *śruti*, and the Rāmāyaṇa says of king Asita of Ayodhyā (called Bāhu in the Puranas), ‘his two wives were with child, such is the *śruti*,’⁵ though Vedic literature knows nothing about either statement.

c7.38

⁴ Not found in Vedic Index.

c7.39

⁵ Rām i, 70, 30; ii, 110, 18.

c7.40

Those notices refer to genealogical matters,⁶ and *śruti* is found used similarly regarding other matters. Thus the Padma (v, 11, 69–71) quotes a long-enduring *śruti*, that a son who goes to Gayā will please his seven paternal ancestors and also others of his maternal grandfathers. The Brahma (175, 35) declares Umā is queen of the three worlds and mother of the world, such is the well-known *śruti*. The former is not known to Vedic tradition, nor apparently is the latter.

c7.41

⁶ So also many of the references in third note above.

c7.42

The phrase *iti śrutiḥ* is also the authority adduced for many statements of various kinds, which do not appear to come from sacred tradition, such as these: that Viṣṇu is infinite;⁷ that the Purana should be heard daily;⁸ that Yayāti attained to heaven a second time;¹ that there is no unrighteousness greater than theft;² and others.³

c7.43

⁷ Mat 247, 39.

c7.44

⁸ Pad iv, 111, 35.

c7.45

¹ Mat 35, 5. ² Lg i, 90, 12. ³ MBh viii, 33, 1394 : xiii, 155, 7267. Mat 111, 6; 247, 7, 8, 39, 44. Lg i, 90, 14-15. Var 13, 10. Vā 53, 108. Bḍ ii, 24, 133. Br 213, 32. Hv 42, 2226. ⁴ So defined, Mat 145, 32 : Vā 59, 31 : Bḍ ii, 32, 35. *Śruti-vettā purohitaḥ*, Mat 230, 9. ⁵ Br 161, 15, 33, 35; 174, 4, 5. ⁶ Vā 59, 51. Bḍ ii, 32, 56. Mat 52, 12; 144, 7; 145, 52. Pad iv, 17, 25 : vi, 250, 55; 256, 6; 280, 35-6. ⁷ e. g. Br. 221, 170; 223, 56. Pad i, 51, 50 : vi, 277, 49. ⁸ Br 175, 78. *Purāṇaṃ Veda-śruti-samāhitam*, Br 213, 167 and 31 (where for deva read Veda). Vā 100, 33 has Vede śrutau Purāṇe ca, but Bḍ iv, 1, 30 for śrutau reads smṛtau. ⁹ e. g. Mat 95, 2; Br 75, 21. ¹⁰ e. g. Vā 91, 104. Bḍ iii, 66, 76. Pad v, 19, 337; 49, 105. So *śrutavant*, Br 224, 33; 226, 28. ¹¹ e. g. Lg ii, 52, 1. ¹² e. g. Br 111, 85; 113, 18; 164, 41. ¹³ Br 99, 1; 101, 1; 152, 1; 164, 53-4. ¹⁴ Br 174, 29. ¹⁵ Lg i, 29, 46 : ii, 8, 8. Pad vi, 224, 42, 43; 238, 7.

c7.46

This meaning of *śruti* does not, I believe, occur in later brahmanic additions nor in the latest Puranas that are frankly sectarian. In passages enunciating purely brahmanic matter, which are later additions, *śruti* appears in its ordinary brahmanic sense and is generally restricted to ‘sacred text or tradition’,⁴ as for instance in the brahmanic māhātmya of the river Godāvarī called Gautamī Gaṅgā,⁵ and when it is contrasted with *smṛti*,⁶ and in other brahmanic passages;⁷ also it is used at times with the word *Veda*, seemingly as meaning sacred tradition.⁸ Sometimes its precise import is not quite clear.⁹

c7.47

Similar remarks apply to the word *śruta* in such connexions, where it has its brahmanic sense generally.¹⁰ *Iti naḥ śrutam* is then applied to late mystic doctrine.¹¹ *Śrutam* and *iti śrutam* are used sometimes in tales and fables about tīrthas in order apparently to give them a semblance of ancient tradition,¹² just as Veda-vids are cited as vouching for the sanctity of tīrthas on the Godāvarī;¹³ and it is even asserted that that river was celebrated by rishis in the Veda as well as in the Purana.¹⁴ *Iti śrutaḥ* is similarly used in this latter way.¹⁵

c7.48

The use of *śruti* for ordinary tradition is thus well-established in the earlier parts of the Puranas and especially in those containing kṣatriya tradition. When there was need to distinguish Vedic tradition, it was cited as *Vaidikī śruti*;¹ and so also Vedic *gāthās*² and Vedic *mantras*³ were distinguished from ordinary *gāthās* and Puranic *mantras* by the same epithet. Sometimes the word *laukika* was added to distinguish ordinary or popular matters from Vedic, as in the cases of *dharma*,⁴ *vidyā*⁵ and *śabda*.⁶

c7.49

¹ Vā 30, 4. Bḍ ii, 13, 4. Mat 19, 3; 142, 9; 248, 1. Pad v, 10, 37; 13, 319. Var 17, 23. Kūr i, 1, 91. Similarly *Atharvaṇī śruti*, Viṣ vi, 5, 65.

c7.50

² Br 120, 3.

c7.51

³ Mat 70, 54. Pad vi, 233, 80.

c7.52

⁴ Br 220, 206.

c7.53

⁵ Br 95, 27.

c7.54

⁶ Pad vi, 281, 25. Cf. Br 130, 7.

c7.55

The phrase *iti śrutaḥ* is common.⁷ The words *śrūyate*⁸ and *śrūyante*⁹ are used of tradition. This use of *śrūyate* is set against *śrūyate* in brahmanical works; thus, it is often used in the Vedārthadīpikā and always of statements quoted from Vedic literature, but never, I believe, of non-sacred tradition, which is cited simply as an ‘*itihāsa*’, or by the word *smaryate* in its notice of Rigveda i, 65.

c7.56

⁷ e.g. Vā 88, 206; 89, 12. Bḍ ii, 30, 39: iii, 63, 206; 64, 12. Br 13, 155. Hv 33, 1845. Cf. MBh xii, 20, 614.

c7.57

⁸ Bḍ ii, 36, 207, 209: iii, 69, 16. Mat 10, 1; 19, 12. Pad v, 8, 1; 27, 5. Br 214, 3. Var 37, 7. MBh i, 223, 8098: iii, 121, 10291: xii, 33, 1184. Hv 19.2, 11098.

c7.58

⁹ Vā 24, 3; 57, 121; 94, 16. Mat 143, 37. MBh i, 66, 2570: xii, 227, 8267.

c7.59

The Vāyu, Brahmāṇḍa and Viṣṇu give an account, how the original Purana came into existence;¹⁰ and the Bhāgavata also gives an account,¹¹ which however is different and, being late and untrustworthy, need not be noticed. Those three Puranas say—Kṛṣṇa Dvaipāyana divided the single Veda into four and arranged them, and so was called Vyāsa. He entrusted them to his four disciples, one to each, namely Paila, Vaiśampāyana, Jaimini and Sumantu.¹² Then with tales, anecdotes, songs and lore that had come down from the ages he compiled a Purana,¹³ and taught it and the Itihāsa to his fifth disciple, the sūta Romaharṣaṇa or Lomaharṣaṇa.¹⁴

c7.60

¹⁰ Bḍ ii, 34, 12–16. Vā 60, 12–16. Viṣ iii, 4, 7–10.

c7.61

¹¹ Bhāg xii, 7, 4–7.

c7.62

¹² Cf. MBh i, 63, 2418: xii, 342, 13025–7; 329, 12337–8.

c7.63

¹³ Bḍ ii, 34, 21; Vā 60, 21; and Viṣ iii, 6, 16 say—

c7.64

¹⁴ Bḍ ii, 34, 16 and Vā 60, 16: Viṣ iii, 4, 10 similarly but showing it is late because it makes the sūta a *mahā-muni*. Also Kūr i, 52, 13.

c7.65

ākhyānais câpy upākhyānair gāthābhiḥ kalpa-jôktibhiḥ*
purāṇa-saṃhitāṃ cakre purāṇārtha-viśāradaḥ

c7.66

* where Viṣ reads *kalpa-śuddhibhiḥ* and Vā *kulakarmabhiḥ*. Cf. also Vā 103, 51; 104, 20.

c7.67

After that he composed the Mahābhārata.¹ The epic itself implies that the Purana preceded it. It says that Vyāsa, just after he had composed it, declared that he had already made the Itihāsas and Puranas manifest.² It also asserts that a Vaiṣṇava may gain the same merit by listening to it that is gained by listening to the eighteen Puranas³—a statement which (however much we discount the number eighteen) would hardly have suggested itself, if the epic was believed to be prior to all the Puranas. The epic has also borrowed from the Puranas,⁴ more often I think than they cite it.

c7.68

¹ Mat 53, 70 says—

c7.69

² MBh i, 1, 54-64. Cf. viii, 34, 1498.

c7.70

³ MBh xviii, 6, 304.

c7.71

⁴ e. g. MBh i, 65, 2560; 196, 7265: v, 179, 7073: xiii, 84, 3990. Also third note above.

c7.72

This account mentions the materials⁵ from which the Purana was compiled. As explained above, the sūtas had from remote times preserved the genealogies of gods, rishis and kings, and traditions and ballads about celebrated men, that is, exactly the material—tales, songs and ancient lore—out of which the Purana was constructed. Whether or not Vyāsa composed the original Purana or superintended its compilation, is immaterial for the present purpose. What is important is that there was abundant tradition of various kinds, which could and would naturally have been used in its construction, and of the very kinds that went to its construction. The ancient tales were topics of real interest to kings, people and rishis, as both the epics and the Puranas by their very structure proclaim, and they were also matters to which men of intelligence gave their attention.⁶ Allusions in the Veda itself show the same.⁷ It would be quite natural that, after the religious hymns were formed into the Veda, the ancient secular tales and lore should have been collected in a Purana.

c7.73

⁵ The terms used are considered in chap. III.

c7.74

⁶ Mat 53, 63 and 73.

c7.75

⁷ e. g. i, 112, 116 and 117: x, 39.

c7.76

What the next development of the Purana was is described in the Brahmāṇḍa and Vāyu, and similarly though less fully in the Viṣṇu.⁸ Romaharṣaṇa made that Purāṇa-saṃhitā into six versions and taught

c7.77

⁸ Bd ii, 35, 63-70 and Vā 61, 55-62, which have a common text. Viṣ iii, 6, 17-19. Ag 270, 10-13. The two former texts collated suggest the following version:—

c7.78

aṣṭādaśa Purāṇāni kṛtvā Satyavatī-sutaḥ
Bhāratâkhyānam akhilam cakre tad-upavṛṃhitam

c7.79

where the mention of eighteen Puranas accords with a later theory, see the end of this chapter. Cf. Viṣ iii, 4, 5.

c7.80

them to his six disciples, Ātreya Sumati, Kāśyapa Akṛtavraṇa, Bhāradvāja Agnivarcas, Vāsiṣṭha Mitrayu, Sāvarṇi Somadatti, and Suśarman Śāṃśapāyana. Three of them, Kāśyapa, Sāvarṇi and Śāṃśapāyana, made three separate saṃhitās, which were called by their names. Romaharṣaṇa’s saṃhitā and those three were the ‘root-compositions’ (mūla-saṃhitā). They consisted of four divisions (pāda) and were to the same effect but differed in their diction. All except Śāṃśapāyana’s contained 4,000 verses.

c7.81

Those versions do not exist now;¹ still some of those persons, besides Romaharṣaṇa, appear as inquirers or narrators in some of the Puranas and also in the Mahābhārata.² Thus Sāvarṇi,³ Kāśyapeya⁴ and Śāṃśapāyana⁵ appear in the Vāyu and Brahmāṇḍa, which are two of the oldest Puranas and were one originally. The passages in which those persons appear may be remnants of those old Puranas incorporated in these two, especially as Śāṃśapāyana not seldom appears without announcement. Moreover these two Puranas alone have the old fourfold division spoken of in the above

c7.82

¹ Mat calls itself a Purāṇa-saṃhitā (290, 20); so Viṣ (i, 1, 30, 34) and Lg (i, 1, 11, 13). Ādi-Purāṇas are referred to, Mat 164, 16; Pad v, 36, 14.

c7.83

² Akṛtavraṇa, iii, 115, 11027 f., &c.

c7.84

³ Vā 21, 1.

c7.85

⁴ Kāśyapeyaḥ sanātanaḥ, Vā 7, 1 : Kāpeyaḥ saṃśayāyati, Bḍ ii, 6, 1. Read in both Kāśyapaḥ Śāṃśapāyanaḥ?

c7.86

⁵ As inquirer, Vā 49, 97; 56, 1-2; 57, 86, 88; 60, 33; 62, 1; 65, 1; 71, 2; 72, 24; 89, 16 : and Bḍ ii, 15, 1; 19, 99; 28, 2; 30, 1, 5; 34, 34; 36, 1: iii, 1, 1. As narrator, Vā 103, 67. Read probably Śāṃśapāyana in Vā 69, 34.

c7.87

ṣaṭsaḥ kṛtvā mayāpy uktam Purāṇam ṛṣi-sattamāḥ
Ātreyaḥ Sumatir dhīmān Kāśyapo hy Akṛtavraṇaḥ
Bhāradvājo ’gnivarcāś ca Vāsiṣṭho Mitrayuś ca yaḥ
Sāvarṇiḥ Somadattis tu Suśarmā Śāṃśapāyanaḥ
ete śiṣyā mama proktāḥ Purāṇeṣu dhṛta-vratāḥ 5
tribhis tatra kṛtās tisraḥ saṃhitāḥ punar eva hi
Kāśyapaḥ saṃhitā-kartā Sāvarṇiḥ Śāṃśapāyanaḥ
māmikā ca caturthī syāc catasrā mūla-saṃhitāḥ *
sarvās tā hi catuṣpādāḥ sarvārtha-vācikāḥ
pāṭhāntare pṛthag-bhūtā veda-śākhā yathā tathā 10
catuḥ-sahasrikāḥ sarvāḥ Śāṃśapāyanikām ṛte
Lomaharṣaṇikā mūla tataḥ Kāśyapikāparā
Sāvarṇikā tṛtīyāsau ṛju-vākyārtha-maṇḍitā
Śāṃśapāyanikā cānyā nodanārtha-vibhūṣitā
sahasrāṇi ṛcam aṣṭau ṣaṭ śatāni tathaiva ca 15
etāḥ pañcadaśānyāś ca daśānyā daśabhis tathā.

c7.88

Where * Vā reads sā caiṣā pūrva-saṃhitā.

c7.89

passage,¹ and their four pādas are called Prakriyā, Anuṣaṅga, Upodghāta and Upasaṃhāra.² The others have either no divisions, as the Matsya³ and Brahma, or have a different number with other terms than pāda, as the Viṣṇu and Padma, Kūrma and Harivaṃśa.

c7.90

¹ Vā 32, 67: catuṣpādam Purāṇaṃ tu Brahmaṇā vihitam purā.

c7.91

² Vā says these are the four pādas (4, 13; 103, 44–5). Bḍ is plainly so divided. The pādas in the Vā are (1) ch. 1–6; (2) ch. 7–64; (3) ch. 65–99; and (4) ch. 100–112: but 58, 126 suggests that its Anuṣaṅga ended there once.

c7.92

³ Mat appears to have a memory of it, since for avāpodghāta read probably atrōpodghāta (last line).

c7.93

After the original Purana was composed, by Vyāsa as is said, his disciple Romaharṣaṇa taught it to his son Ugraśravas,⁴ and Ugraśravas the sauti appears as the reciter in some of the present Puranas;⁵ and the sūtas still retained the right to recite it for their livelihood.⁶ But, as stated above, Romaharṣaṇa taught it to his six disciples, at least five of whom were brahmans. It thus passed into the hands of brahmans, and their appropriation and development of it increased in the course of time, as the Purana grew into many Puranas, as Sanskrit learning became peculiarly the province of the brahmans,⁷ and as new and frankly sectarian Puranas were composed. How they dealt with these subjects is explained thus—‘Wise men, extracting valuable matters everywhere from the multitude of ancient stories (or the Puranas), have described things in many ways in various Puranas.’⁸ This also acknowledges that the Puranas grew up in various localities.

c7.94

⁴ Bd iv, 4, 67. Pad v, 1, 2, 14. MBh i, 5, 863, 867.

c7.95

⁵ Hv 1, 11, 16. Pad v, 1, 11 f. BV i, 1, 2 f. MBh i, 4, 851 f.

c7.96

⁶ Kūr i, 14, 15.

c7.97

⁷ Mat 164, 16 refers to the Adi-purāṇas and Vedas being recited by brahmans. Lg i, 39, 61 says the Itihāsas and Puranas became separate kāla-gauravāt.

c7.98

⁸ Pad vi, 219, 37.

c7.99

This account of the origin of the Purana is supported by copious direct allusions to ancient tradition in the Puranas. These might be cited from many Puranas, but will be taken here chiefly from the Vāyu and Brahmāṇḍa, which have the oldest version in such traditional matters, and also from the Matsya, Brahma and Harivaṃśa, which have the next best versions.

c7.100

There are many allusions to matters that were handed down from very ancient times, long before the original Purana was compiled, such as old songs (gāthās) sung by Yayāti,¹ and songs eulogizing the famous kings, Māndhātṛ,² Arjuna Kārtavīrya (p. 16), Alarka (p. 16), Rantideva,³ Nṛga,⁴ and others.⁵

c7.101

¹ Bḍ iii, 68, 96–103. Vā 93, 94–101. Br 12, 39–46. Hv 30, 1638–45. Viṣ iv, 10, 8–15. Lg i, 67, 15–24. MBh i, 75, 3173–7; 85, 3510–15 : vii, 63, 2299–2300 : xii, 26, 780–3. Mat 34, 10–12.

c7.102

² Bḍ iii, 63, 69–70. Vā 88, 67–9.

c7.103

³ MBh vii, 67, 2369–73.

c7.104

⁴ MBh iii, 88, 8329–30.

c7.105

⁵ e. g. Aitareya Brāhm viii, 4, 21. Śatapatha Brāhm xiii, 5, 4, 3 f. quotes many. MBh v, 101, 3515.

c7.106

That there were men whose business it was to know the ancient genealogies and tales is proved by various expressions often met with, for nothing less than this can be implied by the frequent references to them as authoritative exponents of ancient events and by the many terms used to describe them. Thus, first, as regards ancient tradition generally, we find the term purā-vid, designating those who sang an ancient genealogical verse about the famous Yādava king Śaśabindu,⁶ those who sang the songs of the pitṛs,⁷ and others.⁸ Its use was extended to later minstrels in additions made to the Puranas, and so the Vāyu in its description of the dynasties of the Kali age applies it to those who sang about the last Paurava king,⁹ the Mahābhārata to those who sang about gifts,¹⁰ and the late Bhāgavata to those who sang about Kṛṣṇa.¹¹

c7.107

⁶ Vā 95, 19: where Bḍ (iii, 70, 20), Mat (44, 19) and Pad (v, 13, 4) have equivalent expressions.

c7.108

⁷ Bḍ iii, 19, 9. Vā 83, 10.

c7.109

⁸ MBh i, 121, 4692. Also Raghuv. xviii, 23. Vedārth on Rigv iii, 53 quotes an itihāsa declared by purā-vids.

c7.110

⁹ Vā 99, 278 with the significant word vipra.

c7.111

¹⁰ MBh xiii, 62, 3136.

c7.112

¹¹ Bhāg xii, 2, 33.

c7.113

Other terms, such as purāṇa-jña,¹² purāṇa-vid,¹³ paurāṇika,¹⁴ and purāṇika,¹⁵ often mean merely ‘one who knows the Purana (or Puranas)’ and are found so used;¹ as also the precise expressions, Purāṇa-vettṛ,² Purāṇa-vācaka,³ and others.⁴ But at other times purāṇa-jña, purāṇa-vid and paurāṇika imply more and can only mean ‘one who knows the ancient tales’. Thus, as regards purāṇa-jñas, vaṃśa-vids are cited as quoting an old verse sung by purāṇa-jñas as older authorities about Māndhātṛ⁵; paurāṇikas are cited as quoting an old verse sung by purāṇa-jñas about Datta Ātreya;⁶ and a verse about king Devāvṛdha is repeated as well known from a genealogy recited by purāṇa-jñas.⁷ This term is applied even to maharṣis,⁸ when it cannot reasonably mean merely ‘knowing the Purana’.⁹ Similarly purāṇa-vid janas are quoted as singing a song about Rāma Dāśarathi of Ayodhyā,¹⁰ about king Rantideva,¹¹ and about king Vyuṣitāśva of Ayodhyā,¹² and others.¹³ Paurāṇika generally refers to the Puranas and means ‘one who knows the Puranas’,¹⁴ yet it appears sometimes to mean ‘those who know the purāṇas or ancient stories’,¹⁵ as in the old kṣatriya ballad about king Satyavrata Triśaṅku, in which the Vāyu and Brahmāṇḍa quote verses more ancient than themselves as having been recited by paurāṇika janas.¹⁶

c7.114

¹² Mat 55, 3; 273, 38 (with śrutarṣi); end, 11, 17. Pad iv, 102, 41; 109, 26, 29; 110, 397, 461 (with dvija), &c.; 111, 1, 3, 7, &c. Applied to Romaharṣaṇa, Vā 101, 70: Bḍ iv, 2, 69. Itihāsa-purāṇa-jña, Pad v, 18, 50.

c7.115

¹³ Mat 60, 1. Pad iv, 111, 46, 50. Perhaps Br 121, 1: MBh ii, 40, 1472.

c7.116

¹⁴ Bḍ iii, 63, 69, 168. Vā 88, 67, 168. Pad iv, 110, 419, 462 (with dvija), &c.; 111, 6, 49, 50: vi, 81, 43. MBh i, 51, 2021. Applied particularly to Romaharṣaṇa, Vā 45, 71; 65, 15; 101, 72; &c.: Bḍ iv, 2, 71: Pad i, 1, 12: and so called Paurāṇikottama, Vā, 1, 15: Lg i, 71, 6; 99, 3: &c. Paurāṇika also his son, Mat 114, 3: MBh i, 1, 2; 4, 851–2: &c.

c7.117

¹⁵ Pad iv, 111, 5.

c7.118

¹ Especially where the context shows a brahman is meant. ² Mat 16, 9 (a brahman); 265, 2. ³ Mat, end, 22-3. Pad iii, 25, 32. ⁴ Pad iv, 110, 398, 463; 111, 28. Br 174, 4. ⁵ Vā 88, 69. Distinguished perhaps from the Paurāṇikas of verse 67. ⁶ Vā 70, 76-7. Bd iii, 8, 83. ⁷ Vā 96, 13. Bd iii, 71, 14. Mat 44, 57. Br 15, 41. Hv 38, 2010. Lg i, 60, 5. Pad v, 13, 42. ⁸ Hv 202, 11445. Pad v, 37, 3. So Vasiṣṭha, Pad iv, 111, 9. To surarṣis, MBh xiii, 16, 1054. ⁹ Parāśara is called itihāsa-purāṇa-jña, Viṣ i, 1, 4—apparently by an anachronism. ¹⁰ Bd iii, 63, 192. Vā 88, 191. Br 213, 152. Hv 42, 2352. ¹¹ MBh vii, 67, 2369. ¹² MBh i, 121, 4692. ¹³ e.g. MBh vii, 57, 2203. ¹⁴ See sixth note above. MBh vi, 12, 483. ¹⁵ Sūtas, MBh i, 214, 7777. ¹⁶ Vā 88, 114. Bd iii, 63, 113; see 8, 83-4. JRAS, 1913, p. 897. ¹⁷ e. g. kavis, MBh i, 74, 3024: Vasiṣṭha, v, 107, 3773: vṛtti, xv 26, 677: &c. So also purāṇa rishis, Hv 59, 3291. ¹⁸ e. g. MBh i, 2, 543; 223, 8097-8: xii, 349, 13525.

c7.119

Paurāṇa often means ‘ancient’,¹⁷ but sometimes ‘belonging to, connected with or mentioned in the Purana (or Puranas)’.¹⁸ The word purātana is used, denoting sometimes men not really ancient, such as the brahmans who treated of the dynasties of the Kali age¹ not earlier than about the sixth century B.C., but sometimes men more ancient as those who sang about Saśabindu² and Alarka.³

c7.120

¹ Vipraiḥ purātanaiḥ, Mat 50, 88; 271, 15. ² Bd iii, 70, 20: where Vā (95, 19) uses purā-vid. ³ Bd iii, 67, 70. Br 11, 51. Hv 29, 1588. Cf. Vā 92, 66. ⁴ Vā 83, 98-9. Lg i, 65, 1. Also vamśa-kuśala, Vā 4, 2. ⁵ Very common, e.g. Vā 66, 39. Bd iii, 3, 38. Mat 72, 44; 96, 21. MBh xii, 344, 13241. ⁶ Mat 274, 37. ⁷ Vā 83, 98-9. Bd iii, 19, 66. Br 234, 2; 238, 2. Lg i, 8, 86; 9, 62. Pad v, 36, 5. ⁸ Mat 142, 15. Vā 57, 20; 70, 46. ⁹ e.g. Rgveda-vid and Sāma-vid, Mat 274, 39. Yajur-vid, Mat 58, 35; 93, 129; 274, 39. Mantra-vid, Mat 93, 41; 102, 2; 240, 27; Lg i, 25, 16. Also brahma-vid, sūtra-vid, nyāya-vid, &c. ¹⁰ Vā 99, 432. Bd iii, 74, 245. Mat 273, 53. ¹¹ Vā 88, 169. Bd iii, 63, 169. ¹² Br 85, 2. Pad v, 29, 11: vi, 248, 23 (ironical?). So also brahma-vittama, Pad v, 26, 35: Vā 71, 48: Lg ii, 55, 26. ¹³ See second note above.

c7.121

The way in which these terms are introduced shows that they do not refer to the present Puranas and hardly even to the original Purana, but more probably to ancient minstrels, because no songs could have been handed down unless there had been a succession of minstrels, as is natural; and the verses that are quoted are scraps of song, evidently the remains of larger ballads, for there are always pieces of ancient poetry surviving.

c7.122

Next, as regards genealogical lore, expressions are used, which prove that genealogies were specially studied, just as the Veda and other subjects were studied. Thus vamśa-vid⁴ occurs, denoting ‘one who had acquired knowledge of genealogies’, just as Veda-vid⁵ meant ‘one who had learnt the Veda’, and Vedānta-vid,⁶ yoga-vid⁷ and even saṅkhyā-vid,⁸ besides many similar expressions which imply thorough knowledge.⁹ Vamśa-vids are mentioned as quoting from more ancient purāṇa-jñas (p. 26), and in particular Soma-vamśa-vids¹⁰ are referred to. The character of these men is emphasized by the superlative vamśa-vittama,¹¹ showing that there were men specially learned in genealogies, just as Veda-vittamas¹² are alluded to; and these special genealogists were ancient and are cited as earlier authorities by paurāṇikas.¹³

c7.123

The same fact is proved by the word cintaka, which in vamśa-cintaka¹ proves that men did give thought to ancient genealogies, just as it shows in Veda-cintaka² that men gave thought to the Veda, as is well known. Similarly are used the terms vamśa-purāṇa-jña³ and anuvamśa-purāṇa-jña,⁴ meaning either ‘one who knew the genealogies and Purana’, or better ‘one who knew the ancient tales connected with the genealogies’. It thus appears that ancient genealogies and tales were matters of study as well as the Veda, but the brahmans, with the growing pretensions of their caste and doctrines, and through the political vicissitudes that befell North India, exalted the Vedic literature to the undue deprecation of non-religious lore.

c7.124

¹ Br 8, 77. Hv 15, 812.

c7.125

² Vā 83, 100. Cf. MBh xii, 344, 13241.

c7.126

³ Vā 88, 171. Bḍ iii, 63, 171.

c7.127

⁴ Lg i, 69, 5.

c7.128

In this connexion two expressions may be noticed, which occur rarely, yet seem to indicate that genealogies were not accepted blindly but were scrutinized in order to ascertain the true or most trustworthy version. One is icchanti, which appears to mean ‘men prefer’, ‘men approve’, as if the statement to which it is applied was approved after inquiry;⁵ and it is used somewhat similarly elsewhere.⁶ The other is śamsanti, which does not mean ‘extol’ in the passages where it occurs, because Antara (Uttara, Uttama) is unknown otherwise, but it appears to mean ‘men announce’, in an emphatic way as if settling some difference of opinion.⁷

c7.129

⁵ Bḍ iii, 70, 16. Vā 95, 15. Br 15, 1. Hv 37, 1969:— Vārjinīvatam icchanti Svāhiṃ svāhāvatāṃ varam. Also Hv 37, 1977: but cf. Br 15, 9; Mat 44, 17 and Lg i, 68, 23. Cf. apparently iṣṭa in Vedārth on Rigv ii, 29.

c7.130

⁶ Cf. Vā 32, 37; 66, 39; 76, 21. Bḍ iii, 3, 38; 12, 23: Pad iv, 100, 123.

c7.131

⁷ Bḍ iii, 70, 23. Mat 44, 22. Br 15, 5. Hv 37, 1973. Also Vā 95, 22 (cf. Lg i, 68, 26, confusedly):— Śamsanti ca purāṇajñāḥ Pārthaśravasam Antaram.

c7.132

The genealogists and students of ancient tales are often mentioned without any allusions to their status, and are sometimes called by the general word jana⁸ added to the various appellations mentioned above; but at other times the description ‘brahmans’ (dvija,⁹ vipra,¹ and even śrutarṣi² and maharṣi³) is applied to those who knew the old tales. They were sūtas in the most ancient times, though Court brahmans may have possessed such knowledge, for the Rāmāyaṇa makes Daśaratha’s priest Vasiṣṭha declare the royal genealogy of Ayodhyā twice,⁴ while king Janaka himself sets out his own genealogy.⁵

c7.133

⁸ e. g. Vā 88, 69, 114, 168, 191. MBh i, 121, 4692; vii, 67, 2369.

c7.134

⁹ e. g. Vā 88, 67; 96, 13; and Bḍ iii, 63, 69; 71, 14; as regards paurāṇikas and purāṇa-jñas.

c7.135

¹ e.g. Vā 99, 278; and Mat 50, 88; 271, 15; with reference to the Pauravas and Aikṣvākus of the Kali age.

c7.136

² Purāṇa-jñaiḥ śrutarṣibhiḥ, with reference to the Bhaviṣya, at the close of the dynasties of the Kali age, Mat. 273, 38.

c7.137

³ Purāṇa-jñāḥ ... maharṣayaḥ, Hv 202, 11445.

c7.138

⁴ Rām i, 70, 18 f.; ii, 110, 1 f.: wrongly, see chap. VIII.

c7.139

⁵ Rām i, 71, 1 f.

c7.140

But in later times, and certainly after the compilation of the Purana and its passing into the hands of Romaharṣaṇa’s brahman disciples, the sūtas appear to have gradually lost this particular connexion with these matters, which became in time a speciality of certain brahmans, who thus developed into students and expounders of the Puranas. It is to this class that the description, noticed above, of Purāṇa-jñas, Paurāṇikas, &c., refers when they are brahmans. By devoting themselves especially to the Puranas, they would naturally have tended to diverge from those who studied the Vedas and to form a separate class, for they would very rarely have been able to combine proficiency in both wide fields of literature. The difference between the two classes is noticed, for mention is made of the brahmans who knew the Puranas, as already cited, and brahmans who were wise in the Veda;⁶ and Vedic literature itself discloses that the latter class knew little of Puranic tradition, as many an article in the Vedic Index shows when compared with information to be gathered from the Puranas. The priestly brahmans would have regarded the Purana-knowing brahmans as having fallen away from the highest brahmanic standard, and on the other hand the latter would naturally have magnified their own office and extolled the Puranas, and have enhanced both by incorporating distinctly brahmanic teaching and practice into the Puranas. Accordingly the Puranas, expressly or impliedly comparing themselves with the Vedas, claim superlative praise for themselves and assert the dignity of the brahmans who recited and expounded them.

c7.141

⁶ MBh xii, 342, 13023-4. Also Br 225, 46, 57. Pad iv, 112, 58.

c7.142

There was in fact clear rivalry on the part of the Puranas with the Vedas. First as regards antiquity, Vyāsa is said to have arranged the Veda and formed the four Vedas, and the Puranas, putting aside the account of their origin given above, say he divided the one original Purana into the existing eighteen,¹ thus placing themselves in the same chronological rank with the Vedas. Further, the brahmans asserted that the Veda had existed from everlasting, and the Puranas, while acknowledging its primaeval antiquity, claimed for themselves even prior antiquity. Thus five at least declare that at the beginning of things Brahmā remembered the Purana first of all the scriptures before the Vedas issued from his mouths.²

c7.143

¹ Mat 53, 9–11. Pad v, 1, 49–51. Kūr i, 52, 18.

c7.144

² Vā 1, 60–1. Bd i, 1, 40–1. Mat 3, 3–4; 53, 3. Pad v, 1, 45–7. Śiv v, 1, 27–8. Cf. Mārk 45, 20–1 : Br 161, 27–8.

c7.145

Next, as regards their character, the Puranas place themselves on an equality with the Veda, for many of them assert that they are Veda-sammita, or Vedaiḥ sammita,³ ‘of equal measure with the Veda’; and even a single story is so estimated.⁴ The title Veda is sometimes given to them,⁵ and so the Vāyu (1, 18) calls itself Purāṇa-Veda. Śruti is applied to their tradition as shown above, and the word ṛc⁶ and also apparently sūkta⁷ to their verses. The brahmans extolled the Veda in the highest degree, yet the Puranas exalt themselves even more highly.⁸ Consequently they distinguished themselves from smṛti.⁹ The hymns of the Rigveda were ‘seen’ by rishis, but all the Puranas except two (the Nāradīya and Vāmana) declare that they were originally delivered by some god,¹⁰ thus claiming a divine authorship, higher than that of rishis; and the Padma even asserts that it is Viṣṇu himself.¹¹

c7.146

³ Vā 1, 11, 194, 202; 4, 12; 21, 3. Br 1, 29; 245, 4, 21, 27, 39. Viṣ i, 1, 3 : vi, 8, 12. Pad vi, 1, 8; 282, 116. The Bhāg is brahma-sammita, Pad vi, 190, 73. Veda-sammita is sometimes toned down to Veda-sammata, Vā 103, 51 : or to śruti-sammata, Vā 4, 5; Bd i, 3, 1 : or to Vedaiḥ samita, MBh i, 62, 2298, 2329; 95, 3842. Cf. MBh xii, 341, 12983; 349, 13457, 13528.

c7.147

⁴ So the story of Pṛthu Vainya, Br 4, 26; Hv 4, 290. Other portions, Br 48, 3; Pad vi, 223, 50; 281, 57.

c7.148

⁵ Cf. Śatapatha Brāhm xiii, 4, 3, 12–13. Śaṅkhāyana Śr Sūtra xvi, 1. Āśvalāyana Sūtra x, 7. Vā speaks of its nirukta (1, 203; 103, 55), and so also Bd (i, 1, 173; iv, 4, 55) and Pad (v, 2, 54).

c7.149

⁶ p. 22, note 8, last line but one.

c7.150

⁷ Vā 1, 19.

c7.151

⁸ Br 245, 16–40. Pad v, 2, 49–51. Cf. Viṣ vi, 8, 3.

c7.152

⁹ Br. 121, 10; 158, 32; 175, 10. Pad vi, 263, 86, 90.

c7.153

¹⁰ Vā 1, 196; 2, 44; 4, 12. Bd i, 1, 172; 2, 47. Mat 1, 28. Br 1, 30. Lg i, 2, 1. Mārk, conclusion, 2–3, 7. Viṣ vi, 8, 42.

c7.154

¹¹ Pad i, 62, 8.

c7.155

Thirdly, as regards their teaching and authority, they claim divine sanction, and freely introduce gods as dramatis personae, who give instruction upon all kinds of subjects, thus placing their teaching beyond cavil.¹ Also the strongest censure is passed on those who regarded or treated the recital of the Purana disrespectfully.² In late additions the sūta Romaharṣaṇa is called a muni and extolled,³ and even his son Raumaharṣaṇi is lauded fulsomely, and called jagad-guru.⁴

c7.156

¹ e.g. Brahmā speaks of geography, the sun, &c., Br 27-40; about tīrthas and the māhātmya of Gautamī Gaṅgā (the Godāvarī), id., 41-177. Most of the Mat and Var is declared by Viṣṇu himself as the Fish or the Boar. Śiva is often introduced as giving instruction to Pārvatī.

c7.157

² Mat, conclusion, 3-19. Pad iii, 1, 11.

c7.158

³ Viṣ iii, 4, 10.

c7.159

⁴ Pad vi, 219, 14-21 (in 21 preferably read Romaharṣaṇa).

c7.160

Fourthly, as regards their value and efficacy. The brahmans asserted a supreme position for the Veda, to dispute which was blasphemy, but the Puranas claimed even higher merit for themselves; thus, to give only a few instances, it is said the Purana destroys all sin;⁵ it gives every blessing and even final emancipation from existence;⁶ it bestows union with Brahmā;⁷ it raises one to Viṣṇu: ⁸ that is, in short, the Puranas gave blessings equal, or rather superior, to anything the Vedas could give.⁹ It is said that the Purana should be heard even by brahmans who attained the utmost bounds of sacred knowledge (brahma-para),¹⁰ and that even tales in the Purana would make a brahman know the Veda.¹¹

c7.161

⁵ Vā 103, 55, 58. Viṣ vi, 8, 3, 12, 17 &c. Mat 290, 20; 291, 29, 32. Var 112, 63, 75. Br 175, 89, 90; 245, 6, 14, 16 &c. Pad i, 62, 10: ii, 125, 18 f.: vi, 28, 56-60; 31, 64. Even the sins of gods and rishis, Bd i, 2, 47-8.

c7.162

⁶ Br 245, 32-3. Viṣ vi, 8, 28-32. Pad i, 62, 20-23: v, 2, 52-4. Mat, conclusion, 20. Pad vi, 191, 26-39 passim: 193, 42 as to the Bhāg.

c7.163

⁷ Vā 103, 57. Kūr ii, 45, 133.

c7.164

⁸ Mat 291, 32. Viṣ vi, 8, 55. Pad vi, 1, 17; 191, 75. Var 112, 75.

c7.165

⁹ Equal, Lg ii, 55, 40-1. Superior, Pad iv, 111, 42: Mārk (my translation), 137, 14-16, 25-7, 31-2.

c7.166

¹⁰ Br 245, 17. Cf. Kūr ii, 45, 125.

c7.167

¹¹ Pad ii, 60, 28.

c7.168

Further the brahmans arrogated to themselves the monopoly of revelation and religious ceremonies and ritual. The Puranas, while acknowledging their great privileges, yet inculcated much teaching that virtually superseded brahmanic doctrine in extolling the superlative efficacy of tīrthas,¹ religious devotion (*yoga*),² exercises (*vrata*),³ and loving faith (*bhakti*),⁴ whereby a man can obtain every blessing, remission of every sin and final emancipation from existence.⁵ The Padma goes so far as to say, ‘enough of vratas, tīrthas, yogas, sacrifices and discourses about knowledge, faith (*bhakti*) alone indeed bestows final emancipation.’⁶ Some Puranas do not hesitate to introduce the sacred gāyatrī into a spell,⁷ and even to modify and almost parody it.⁸

c7.169

¹ Pilgrimages to tīrthas are extolled everywhere. They are equal to the Vedas, Pad i, 43, 48; and better than sacrifices, Pad i, 11, 17.

c7.170

² e.g. Vā 13. Kūr ii, 2, 30 f.

c7.171

³ e.g. Mat 62 f. Pad vi, 35 f.

c7.172

⁴ Praising Kṛṣṇa is more efficacious than the Veda or anything else, Pad vi, 228, 39-41. Cf. Viṣ vi, 2, 39.

c7.173

⁵ Even a specially munificent gift confers greater blessings than the Puranas, Vedas and sacrifices, Mat 83, 2-3.

c7.174

⁶ Pad vi, 190, 22. Cf. ibid. 256, 69-70; 257, 152-3: Br 178, 186.

c7.175

⁷ Lg ii, 22, 9; 51, 18.

c7.176

⁸ Lg ii, 27, 48, 50, 245, 254, 265; 28, 61; 48, 5-26. Pad v, 75, 97; 76, 11: vi, 72, 115, 118-121; 85, 19; 88, 33.

c7.177

Lastly as regards the dignity of the brahmans who recited or expounded the Puranas, the Vāyu, Padma and Śiva assert that a brahman was not really wise if he did not know the Purana (p. 1),⁹ thus making knowledge of the Purana the crown of all learning; and the laudation is carried farthest in the Padma, which gives directions about reciting the Purana and has much to say about the brahman who knew and expounded the Puranas,¹⁰ proclaiming that—the brahman who declares the Puranas is superior (*viśiṣyate*) to every one; even sin committed by him cannot adhere to him; the Purana destroys the sins of every one else; and if a believer in the Puranas esteems the declarer of them as a guru who gives knowledge of sacred science (*brahma-vidyā*), all his sins disappear.¹¹ The Matsya imprecates a curse on those who reviled the Purāṇa-jñas.¹² Those who recited the Purana were worthy of signal honour,¹³ but various faults disqualified them.¹⁴

c7.178

⁹ Vā also proclaims (79, 53) the superiority of the brahman who knew the itihāsa as well as the four Vedas.

c7.179

¹⁰ Pad iv, 109, 25 f.; 111, 21 f., 40-9, 63-5. See p. 26 for terms: also VN 9, 100; Kūr ii, 45, 120-35.

c7.180

¹¹ Pad iv, 110, 398-402.

c7.181

¹² Conclusion 11.

c7.182

¹³ Pad iii, 25, 32-6: iv 109, 26; 111, 26-30, 51-8: vi, 29, 25 f.; 125, 91-3.

c7.183

¹⁴ Pad iv, 111, 59-62.

c7.184

The Mahābhārata puts forward similar claims for itself; thus it declares it is the chief of all śāstras,¹ it is a Veda² and outweighs the four Vedas,³ it cleanses from sin,⁴ it enables a man to attain to Brahmā’s abode⁵ and Viṣṇu’s abode,⁶ and it procures final emancipation from existence.⁷ These claims are not however quite as thoroughgoing as those that the Puranas assert for themselves, and moreover it seems that the Puranas were first with their claims and the epic followed and copied them (p. 22). The Rāmāyaṇa, being a brahmanical production, is less assertive, and claims but to be equal to the Veda and to free from sin.⁸

c7.185

¹ xviii, 6, 298.

c7.186

² i, 1, 261 ; 62, 2300. Equal, cf. vii, 52, 2027 ; 203, 9647.

c7.187

³ i, 1, 264-6. Cf. i, 62, 2314, 2329.

c7.188

⁴ i, 1, 247 ; 62, 2301-2, 2313, 2319-21 : xviii, 6, 219, 310.

c7.189

⁵ i, 62, 2297.

c7.190

⁶ xviii, 6, 305, 310.

c7.191

⁷ xviii, 6, 298.

c7.192

⁸ vii, 111, 4-6.

Linked texts (27)