Studies in the Epics and Puranas c12.59

c12.59

Following the lead of Sir R. G. Bhandarkar it has been argued that Kṛṣṇa and Vāsudeva were originally different personages who were later merged into a single personality. There is absolutely no foundation in fact for this view. According to Bhandarkar,³⁸ the cowherd Kṛṣṇa of the Purāṇas is distinct from the Vṛṣṇi prince Vāsudeva of the Mahābhārata. Bhandarkar holds that Vāsudeva was not originally a patronymic but the name of a member of the Sātvata or Vṛṣṇi race, who was worshipped as a Supreme Being, and the tradition of Kṛṣṇa as a sage is seen from the time of the Ṛgveda and the Chāndogya Upaniṣad. The conception of Vasudeva as father, according to Bhandarkar, arose afterwards, and Vāsudeva was identified with the Vedic sage Kṛṣṇa and a genealogy was given to him in the Vṛṣṇi race through Śūra and Vasudeva. Now, the name Vāsudeva occurs once in Vedic literature as a name of Viṣṇu.³⁹ The *Bhagavadgītā*, the *Jātakas*, the *Mahābhārata* and the Jain *Uttarādhyayana Sūtra* state that Vāsudeva was a scion of the Vṛṣṇi family. The *Mahābhārata* further states that true Vāsudeva was Kṛṣṇa of Yādava, Vṛṣṇi or Sātvata family of Mathurā.⁴⁰ The *Mahābhāṣya*, the *Jātakas* and the Greek records also point to the fact of Kṛṣṇa being the son of Vasudeva and Devaki (i.e. of his being Vāsudeva). The *Mahābhāṣya* passages असाधुर्मानुले कृष्णः, जघान कंसं किल वासुदेवः, and प्रहारा दृश्यन्ते कंसस्य च कृष्णस्य च clearly show that Kṛṣṇa and Vāsudeva were the names of one and the same individual.⁴¹ According to the *Ghaṭa Jātaka*, Vāsudeva receives the epithet Kaṇha (i.e. Kṛṣṇa).⁴² Megasthenes and Arrian refer to Herakles as one held in special honour by the Sourasenoi, an Indian tribe who possessed two large cities Methora and Kleisobora.⁴³ Herakles has been identified by Bhandarkar with Vāsudeva and Sourasenoi with Śūrasenas or Sātvatas.⁴⁴ Lassen, McCrindle and Hopkins state that Methora and Kleisobora are respectively Mathurā and Kṛṣṇapura.⁴⁵ The mention of Vāsudeva, Kṛṣṇa and Śūrasenas or Sātvatas together in one context is a certain indication of the early and inseparable connection between these. The fact seems to be that Vāsudeva and Kṛṣṇa were one and the same person, and the deification of Vāsudeva Kṛṣṇa and his identification as an incarnation of Viṣṇu were complete before the period of the Mahābhāṣya. It has been contended that the mention of Kṛṣṇa as Devakīputra without mentioning the name of his father shows that his father's name has later been developed from his very name Vāsudeva.⁴⁶ But in old days, metronyms were used to distinguish between the sons of different wives, e.g. Kṛṣṇa and Balarāma, though both Vāsudeva (i.e. son of Vasudeva), were respectively Devakīputra and Rauhiṇeya. Keith is indeed right when he states that "the separation of Vāsudeva and Kṛṣṇa it is impossible to justify".⁴⁷