Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Orion, or Researches into the Antiquity of the Vedas c11: Chapter VII. Ribhus and Vrishakapi

The Orion, or Researches into the Antiquity of the Vedas c11

Language
English

Contents

Chapter VII. Ribhus and Vrishakapi

c11.2

Knowledge of astronomy in Vedic times—The seasons and the year—The *ayanas*—The zodiacal belt or *rita*—Observation of a total eclipse of the sun in the Rigveda—Knowledge of the planets—Shukra and Manthin—Venus and Vena, Shukra and Kupris—The legend of the Ribhus—Their identification with the Ritus or the seasons of the year—Their sleep or rest in Agohya's (sun's) house for 12 intercalary days—said to be awakened by dog (Rig. i. 161. 13) at the end of the year—Indicates the commencement of the year with the dog star—Nature and character of Vrishakapi—His identification with the sun at the autumnal equinox—The hymn of Vrishakapi in the Rigveda x. 80—Its Meaning discussed verse by verse—Cessation and commencement of sacrifices on the appearance and disappearance of Vrishakapi in the form of a Mriga—Indra cuts off his head and sets a dog at his ear—Orion (Mrigashiras) and Canis—Meaning of *nediyas* in the Vedic literature—When Vrishakapi enters the house of Indra, his Mriga becomes invisible (Rig x. 86. 22)—Points to the vernal equinox in Orion or Mriga—Leading incidents in the story stated and explained

c11.3.1

It is said that we cannot suppose that the Vedic bards were acquainted even with the simplest motions of heavenly bodies. The statement, however, is too general and vague to be criticised and examined. If it is intended to be understood in the sense that the complex machinery of observation which the modern astronomers possess and the results which they have obtained thereby were unknown in early days, then I think there cannot be two opinions on that point. But if by it is meant that the Vedic poets were ignorant of everything except the sun and the dawn, ignorant of the Nakshatras, ignorant of month, *ayanas*, years and so on, then there is no authority or support for such a supposition in the Rigveda. On the contrary, we find that some of the Nakshatras are specifically named, such as *Arjunî* and *Aghâ* in Rig. x. 85. 13, while the same hymn speaks generally of the Nakhatras, and the motions of the moon and the sun as causing the seasons. In Rig. i. 164 we have again several references to the seasons, the year and the number of days contained in it (verse 48) and according to Yâska, perhaps to the *ayanas* (Nirukta 7. 24). I have in a previous chapter referred to the passages in the Rigveda, which mention the Devayâna and the Pitriyâna, the old names of the *ayanas* beginning with the vernal equinox; and there is, therefore, no objection to understand the above verse (i. 164. 48) as alluding to the black or the Pitriyâna. The intercalary month is mentioned in Rig. i 25.

c11.3.2

8. while in i 24. 8 Varuna is said to have constructed a broad path for the sun, which appears evidently to refer to the Zodiacal belt. I am further inclined to think that the path of *rita* (Rig. i. 41. 4) which is mentioned several times in the Rigveda, where the Âdityas are said to be placed (x. 85. 1), and wherein Saramâ discovered the cows of Indra (v. 45. 7, 8) refers to the same broad belt of the Zodiac which the luminaries, as observed by the Vedic bards, never transgressed. It was so to speak their 'right' way, and therefore called *rita*, which though literally derived from *ri* to go, soon came to mean the 'right,' path the *circle* of which exists for ever, or rather exists and ex sts (*varvarti*) in the vault of the heavens (Rig. i. 164. 11). Prof. Ludwig goes further and holds that the Rigveda mentions the inclination of the ecliptic with the equator (i. 110. 2) and the axis of the earth (x. 89. 4). It is now generally admitted that the seven *rikshas* were also known and named at this time. The mention of a hundred physicians in Rig. i. 24. 9 may again be taken to represent the asterism of *Shata-bhishak* or *Shata-tārakā*, presided over by Varuṇa according to the later lists of the Nakshatras in the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa. The fortieth hymn in the fifth Mandala of the Rigveda is still more important in this connection.

c11.3.3

It shows that an eclipse of the sun was then first observed with any pretensions to accuracy by the sage Atri.∗ It is thus that I understand the last verse in the hymn which, after describing the eclipse, says, "Atri alone knew him (the sun) none else could." This observation of the solar eclipse is noticed in the Sānkhyāyana (24. 3) and also in the Tāṇḍya Brāhmaṇa (iv. 5. 2; 6. 14), in the former of which it is said to have occurred three days previous to the *Vishūvan* (the autumnal equinox). The observation thus appears to have attracted considerable attention in those days. It seems to have been a total eclipse of the sun, and the stars became visible during the time, for I so interpret the expression, *bhuvanāni adīdhayuh* in verse 5. In verse 6 we are told that "Atri knew (the eclipsed sun) by turîya brahma," and Sâyaṇa interprets the last two words to mean "the fourth verse or mantra." But the verse wherein these words occur is itself the sixth, and Sâyaṇa has to explain that by "fourth" is to be understood the "fourth, if we count from the sixth. i. e., the tenth verse!" The explanation may be good from the ritualistic point of view, but it appears to me to be quite unsatisfactory otherwise. I would rather interpret turîyeṇa brahmaṇâ to mean "by means of turîya." Turîya is mentioned in modern astronomical works as a name for an instrument called quadrant (Siddhânta Shiromaṇi x.

c11.3.4

15), and though we may not suppose the same instrument to have existed in the old Vedic days, yet there seems to be no objection to hold that it may have meant some instrument of observation. The word brahma is no doubt used to denote a mantra, but it may also mean knowledge or the means of acquiring such knowledge. In Rig. ii. 2. 7 Sâyaṇa has himself interpreted brahma to mean some "act or action;" and I see no reason why we should not understand the phrase turîyeṇa brahmaṇâ in the above hymn to mean "by the action of turîya," or, in other words, "by means of turîya," and thus give to the whole hymn a simple and natural appearance, rather than endeavour to interpret it after the manner of the Red Indians, who believed that Columbus averted the calamity of the eclipse by prayers. The peasants of the Vedic times, some scholars might argue, cannot be considered to be more civilized than the Red Indians; but in so arguing they forget the fact that there must be a Columbus, who would, by his superior capacity, inspire the feelings of awe and reverence for him. When the bards, therefore, tell us that Atri knew of the eclipse by turîya brahma, we can now easily see what it means.

c11.4

∗ Prof. Ludwig has tried to deduce the date of the hymn from this circumstance. But the attempt is a failure as shewn by Prof. Whitney (see the Proceedings of the American Oriental Society, Vol XIII. pp. 17 22) As the eclipses recur in the same order after a certain period, we cannot use such facts for chronological purposes without knowing the geographical position of the place where the eclipse occurred, and even then the conclusion will be correct only if it can be shown on independent grounds that such a phenomenon did not occur at that place during several centuries before or after the date we determine. I, therefore, simply use the hymn for the purpose of showing that an eclipse of the sun was observed in those days in such a way as to leave a record behind. It would be difficult to deduce any other reliable conclusion from it even upon the assumption, not known and hence not used by Prof. Ludwig, that the vernal equinox was then in Orion and that the eclipse occurred three days before the autumnal equinox as described in the Brāhmaṇas. I cannot, however, accept the suggestion that the hymn may be understood as referring to the obscuration of the sun by clouds.

c11.5.1

Sāyaṇa's explanation, as I have above observed, may be good from the ritualistic standpoint; but we cannot, for other purposes, accept an interpretation which makes the 'fourth' to mean the 'tenth' verse of the hymn! Thus understood the hymn clearly indicates that at the time when the observation was taken the Vedic priests were tolerably well acquainted with the elementary astronomical facts. It is, however, suggested that the planets were unknown in these days. I am unable to accept even this statement. It is impossible to suppose that the Vedic poets, who constantly watched and observed the various Nakshatras in the Zodiac, should not have noticed planets like Venus, Jupiter, or Saturn, which outshine many of the Nakshatras in brilliancy. The periodical appearance of Venus in the west and the east, and especially its rising only to a certain altitude followed by its regress, are facts too striking to remain unnoticed even by the superficial observers of the heaven. But we must not go on mere probabilities. The hymns of the Rigveda are before us, and though probabilities may serve the purpose of determining the direction of our search, yet if we cannot find any reference to the planets in the Vedic works themselves we must give up the notion that they were known to the poets of these hymns. There is no question that planets were known in the days of the Brāhmaṇas. In the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa (iii. 1. 1.

c11.5.2

5) we are told that Brihaspati (Jupiter) was first born* near the asterism of Tishya, and to this day the conjunction of Tishya and Jupiter is considered as highly auspicious in the astrological works. We have, however, to look for any allusion to the planets in the Rigveda itself. The mention of the five bulls in Rig. i. 105. 10 may not be considered as sufficiently explicit to denote the five planets ;* but what shall we say to the mention of Shukra and Manthin together in Rig. iii. 32. 2 and ix. 46. 4? They seem to be evident references to the vessels called Shukra and Manthin used in sacrifices and have been so interpreted by the commentators. But as I have before observed, the vessels in the sacrifice themselves appear to have derived their names from the heavenly bodies and deities known at the time. It is generally conceded that the sacrificial arrangements more or less represent the motions of the sun† and the chief events of the year. In other words, the yearly sacrifice is nothing but a symbolical representation or rather imitation of the sun's yearly course. If so, it is natural to suppose that some of the sacrificial vessels at least were named after the Nakshatras and the planets. In the Taittirîya Sanhitâ iii 1. 6. 3. the vessels are spoken of as 'the vessels of Shukra,' 'the vessels of Manthin,' and so on, which indicates that Shukra and Manthin were not used as adjectives of the vessels.

c11.5.3

The only other explanation is to suppose that Shukra, Manthin, Âgrayana, &c, were the names of Soma juice, and that the vessels used for holding that juice in its various capacities, were described as the vessels of Shukra, &c. There is, however, no authority in the sacrificial literature for holding that Soma really had so many and such different capacities; and I therefore conclude that the mention of Shukra and Manthin, as applied to vessels, in the Rigveda is a clear indication of the planets being then discovered. There is, however, in my opinion, a more explicit reference to a planet in the Rigveda which does not seem to have yet been noticed. In the tenth Mandala we have a hymn (123) dedicated to Vena which according to Yâska denotes a deity of the middle region. Yâska (Nirukta 10. 38) derives the word from ven 'to love,' 'to desire,' and explains it as denoting, as his commentator Durgâchârya says, "loved by all;"* while the hymn itself contains such expressions as the "son of the sun," "on the top of rita," "comes out of the ocean like a wave," † &c., which have been variously interpreted by the commentators. But from all these facts I think we have herein the original Aryan name of Venus.

c11.5.4

The word, or rather the meaning I have here proposed, is entirely lost in the Sanskrit literature, but considering the fact that the Latins named the planet as Venus, while the word cannot be satisfactorily derived from any Latin root,‡ there can be no objection to identify Venus with the Vena (nom. sin. Venas) in the Vedic works. In the Latin mythology Venus is the goddess of love, and this we can now easily account for, as the name of the Vedic deity is derived from a root which means "to desire," "to love." I may again point out that the hymn of Vena in the Rigveda, is used in sacrifices at the time, when the priest takes up the vessel Shukra in the sacrificial ceremonies. Kâtyâyana, indeed, mentions the optional use of the hymn for taking up the vessel of Manthin.† But that does not much alter the position, for, when the meaning of the word was utterly forgotten the hymn might come to be used for a different purpose in addition to the previous one. The fact, that the Vena hymn was used in taking up the Shukra vessel is, therefore, an important indication of its old meaning, and when we find the name actually preserved till now indicating the planet Venus, and that this name cannot be satisfactorily derived in any other way, we might fairly infer that Vena of the Rigveda is Venus of the Latin mythology.

c11.5.5

As regards the change of gender we need not consider it to be a serious objection inasmuch as not only Venus, but also the moon has changed in gender in its passage to Europe. As a further proof of the statement that the planets, or at any rate Shukra, was discovered and named in the primitive period, I refer to the Greek word *Kupris* (Latin *Cypris*) which means Venus. The word can be easily identified with Sanskrit *Shukra* which, according to the well-established phonetic rules, becomes *Kupros* in Greek, the initial *sh* being changed to *k*, as in Sk. *shvan*, Gk. *kuon* and the medial *kr* to *pr* by labialisation, cf. Gk.

c11.6

∗ बृहस्पतिः प्रथमं जायमानः तिष्यं नक्षत्रं प्रादुर्भवू । This reminds us of Rig. iv. 50. 4, where similar wording occurs, thus:— बृहस्पतिः प्रथमं जायमानोमहः ज्योतिषः परमे व्योमन् ।

c11.7

∗ Cf. Rig. i. 162. 18; x. 55.

c11.8

⁸ Also see Kaegi's Rigveda ( translated by Arrowsmith ), p. 20, and note 67 on page 115. I hold that the planets were not only known, but some of them at least had already received their names by this time.

c11.9

† See Dr. Haug's Intr. Ait. Br., p. 46.

c11.10

∗ See Mahîdhara on Vaj. San. 7. 16. Some consider that the root is Vin and not Ven.

c11.11

† This reminds one of the tradition of Aphrodite who, in Greek mythology, is said to be sprung from the foam of the sea.

c11.12

‡ In Dr White's Latin English Dictionary the word is derived from Sanskrit van to love; but if it is to be derived from a Sanskrit root why not derive it from vin or ven to desire or love, and so connect it with Vena of the Rigveda.

c11.13

∗ See Durgâchârya on Nirukta 10. 39. शुक्रो ग्रहोऽनया गृह्यते.

c11.14

† The Sûtrâs of Kâtyâyana bearing on this point are as follows:-- (See Kât. Shr. Su. ix. 6. 11—13) शुक्रं वैश्वेन वा तं प्रलयेति । अयं वेन इत्येके । मंथिनमयं वेन इति । Thus he first lays down that the Shukra vessel be taken by reciting the hymn तं प्रलया &c. (Vaj San. 7. 12) or according to some the hymn अयं वेनः &c. (Vaj. San 7. 16. Rig x. 123). He then observes that this latter hymn is used in taking up the Manthin vessel.

c11.15

priamai, Sk. kri-ṇāmi, I purchase. As Venus was supposed to be a feminine deity in Europe Kupros was naturally changed into Kupris. Thus, both the Latin and the Greek names of the deity may be traced back to the Vedic Vena and Shukra, and we may therefore hold that the planet was discovered and named before these races separated. I know that European lexicologists derive Kupris from Kupros the Greek name of the island of Cyprus where Venus was said to be much worshipped and that Cyprus again is supposed to have received its name from the trees, in which it abounds! But the explanation, which gives no derivation for the name of the tree, seems to me to be quite unsatisfactory. If Aphrodite was known to the Greeks in the primitive times it is more natural to derive the name of the island from the name of the deity. In course of time this original connection between the name of the deity and that of the island may have been forgotten, and Greek writers regarded Kupris as born in Cyprus. But we must receive these derivations of Greek mythological proper names with great caution as most them have been suggested at a time when comparative Philology and comparative Mythology were unknown. Latin cuprum meaning ‘copper’ is again said to be derived from Cyprus (Gk. Kupros), but it does not affect our argument, for whatever be the reason for giving the name to the island, once it was named Cyprus or Kupros, many other words may be derived from it without any reference to the reasons for which the island was so called.

c11.16

Some of the reasons given above may be doubtful, but on the whole I am inclined to hold that the Vedic Ṛishis were not as ignorant of the broad astronomical facts as they are sometimes represented to be. They seem to have watched and observed the sun and the moon during their yearly course, noted the bearing of the motions on the division of time, fixed the length of the solar year and endeavoured to make the lunar correspond with it. The Nakshatras and their rising and setting also appear to have been duly observed. It was perceived that the sun and the moon and such of the planets as they had discovered never travelled out of a certain belt in the heavens, called *rita*; while the eclipses of the sun and the moon also received due attention and notice. Men, who were acquainted with these facts, would naturally be able to fix the beginning of the months and the year by the stars that rose at the time, and though we cannot suppose the Vedic bards to have been in the possession of any accurate astronomical instruments, yet it was not difficult for them to decide roughly by simple observation when the day and the night were equal, or when the sun turned to the north, either from the solstitial or from the equinoctial point. The knowledge implied by these observations may appear to be too much for a Vedic poet in the opinion of those who have formed their notions of primitive humanity from the accounts of savages in Africa or the Islands of the Pacific. But as observed before we must give up these *a priori* notions of primitive humanity in the face of evidence supplied by the hymns of the Rigveda. It is on this evidence that we have to form our judgment of the primitive Aryan civilization, and if that evidence is found conflicting with our prepossessions the latter must be given up. In what follows I shall therefore assume the capacity of a Vedic bard to make the simple observations above mentioned.

c11.17

We shall now take up the verse in the Rigveda, referred to several times previously, the verse, which declares that a dog awakened the Ribhus at the end of the year. (Rig i. 161. 13); and the first question that arises in this connection is, who are the Ribhus? Referring to Nirukta (11. 15 and 16) we find that native scholars consider that the three Ribhus—Ribhu, Vibhvan and Vâja—were the sons of Sudhanvan and that having rendered wonderous services to the Gods they gained divine honors and a share in the sacrifice and immortality.* But even Yâska does not seem to be satisfied with this explanation. There are several hymns in the Rigveda wherein the deeds of the Ribhus are described (Rig. iv. 33-37; i. 20. 110. 111 and 161), and in most of them the Ribhus are spoken of as working in close connection with the year (samvatsam or samvatsara). Thus in the Rigveda i. 110. 4. they are said to have commenced work at the end of the year, and in iv. 33. 4. they are described as engaged, for the whole year (samvatsam), in reviving the cows (the rays of the sun). The Ribhus are further mentioned as resting in the house of Agohya, the "unconcealable" sun-god for twelve days at the end of their course (Rig. iv. 33. 7). In Ait. Br. iii. 30 they are described as sun's neighbours or pupils (ante vâsâs); while in Rig. iv. 51. 6 their work is said to be done by the dawn. Yâska therefore considers that the Ribhus also represented the rays of the sun, and in this he is followed by Sâyaṇa. But the explanation does not account for the number of the Ribhus who are said to be three brothers. We must therefore go a step further and hold that the Ribhus did not merely represent the rays of the sun generally, but the three seasons, as connected with them, as several European scholars have suggested.† In the Rigveda iv. 34. 2, the Ribhus are told to rejoice with the seasons (Ritus) and this supports the latter view. In Rig. i. 15. 10, Draviṇodâ is said to be the *fourth* companion of the seasons and the Shatapatha Brâhmaṇa (xiv. 1. 1. 28) expressly states that there are three seasons. It is therefore generally believed that this was the old division of the year, and that the number of the seasons was increased as the Aryas travelled further from their original home.* The three Ṛibhus, representing the three seasons, may thus be said to be engaged, throughout the whole year, in doing wonders for the gods and received as guests in the house of Agohya at the end of their course. "Here they spend twelve days in enjoyment; then the course begins anew, and anew the earth brings forth fruit, the streams flow; plants cover the heights, and waters the depths."† And now comes the verse (Rig. i. 161. 13) on which I rely:—

c11.18

∗ Also compare Brihad-devatâ iii. 81. 88; p. 82, Cal. Ed., where the same story is given.

c11.19

† See Kaegi's Rigveda, p. 37, and note 127 on page 133. Particularly see Ludwig's Rig. iii., pp. 187 9.

c11.20

† This is in substance a translation of Rig. i 161. 11 and iv. 33.

c11.21

सुषुप्वांसं ऋभवस्तदपृच्छतागोह्य क इदं नौ अबूबुधत्। श्वानं वस्तो बोधयितारमब्रवीत्सं वत्सर इदमया व्यख्यत॥

c11.22

Here the Ṛibhus, awakened from their sleep and rest for twelve days, ask "Agohya! Who is it that awakened us?"‡ The goat (the sun) replies that it is the "hound." Sâyaṇa understands *shvânam* to mean 'wind,' but there is no authority for it and the meaning is perfectly unnatural. In fact Sâyaṇa may be said to have failed to interpret the verse correctly. Ludwig and Grassmann both translate it by ‘hound,’ but neither of them explains what it signifies. There is again some difference of opinion as to whether the word *samvatsare* should be taken with *bodhayitâram* or with *vyakhyata*. But whichsoever construction we adopt the meaning remains the same, since it is the same thing if the Ribhus are said to be awakened at the end of the year and then commenced their course, or they awakened and then looked up at the beginning of the new year, or in other words, commenced their new-year’s course. Practically, therefore, all agree in holding that the awakening of the Ribhus here referred to is their awakening at the end of the year, after they have enjoyed sound sleep and rest in the house of Agohya for twelve (intercalary) days, and the only question that remains is, who is the hound or the dog that awakens them? We have seen that the Ribhus were the genii of the seasons and that as companions of the sun they worked wonders during the whole course of the year. But as it was a lunar year, 12 days were intercalated at the end of each year to make it correspond with the solar year. These 12 days belonged neither to the old nor to the new year, and the Ribhus were therefore naturally believed to suspend work during this *neutral* period and spend it in rest and enjoyment in the house of Agohya. When the whole legend has thus a chronological signification it is natural to hold that the hound, here alluded to, must be some constellation in the heavens, and if so, after what has been said in the previous chapters about it, what could it be except Canis Major or the Dog-star? The end of the year here referred to is evidently the end of the three seasons, represented by the three Ribhus, and we must, therefore, take it to mean the end of the equinoctial year or the beginning of Vasanta, the first of the seasons. Durgâchârya in his commentary on Nirukta 11. 16 explains the phrase samvatsare (in Rig. i. 110. 4) in the same way. As I have already discussed the subject before,* I do not here repeat the grounds on which I hold that the year, in primitive times commenced with the vernal equinox. Prof. Ludwig has made a happy suggestion that âbhogaya, which the Ribhus are said to desire (Rig i. 110. 2) before they commence their career and reach the house of the sun, should be interpreted in its ordinary sense to mean the bend or the inclination of the ecliptic with the equator. Our investigation based upon independent facts leads us to the same conclusion. In short, the whole story of the Ribhus, as we find it recorded in the Rigveda, directly establishes the fact that at the time when this legend was formed the year commenced with the vernal equinox in Canis Major or the Dog-star. It is highly improbable, if not impossible, to give any other reasonable interpretation to the verse in question, whether we understand the Ribhus to mean the three seasons of the year or the rays of the sun as Yâska and Sâyaṇa have done. With the vernal equinox near the Dog-star, the winter solstice would fall on the full-moon in Phâlguna and Mṛigashiras would head the list of the Nakshatras. Our interpretation of the verse in question is, therefore, fully warranted by the traditions about the ancient year beginnings given in the Taittirîya Sanhitâ and the Brâhmaṇas.

c11.23

∗ Kaegi's Rigveda, p. 116, note 68, where he quotes Zimmer to the same effect.

c11.24

⁴ See Kaegi's Rigveda, p 37.

c11.25

‡ *Idam* in the first line is not the object of *abubudhat* as Sâyaṇa and Mr. S. P. Pandit suppose. It should be taken either in apposition with *tat*, or as an adverb meaning 'now,' 'here,' &c.

c11.26

Let us now examine the too much and too long misunderstood or rather not-understood hymn of Vṛishâkapi in the tenth Mandala of the Rigveda. As there is only one hymn in the Rigveda which gives the story, it is not so easy, as in the case of the Ribhus, to determine the nature of the deity, and hence various conjectures have been made by scholars as to its origin, character and meaning The deities appear both in the masculine and in the feminine form, Vrishâkapi and Vrishâkapâyî. Amara* considers that Vrishâkapi means either Vishnu or Shiva, and Vrishâkapâyî either Lakshmî or Gaurî. In the Brihad-devatâ Vrishâkapi is said to represent the setting sun, and Vrishâkapâyî the gloaming.† Yâska (12. 27) would derive the word so as to mean the sun who shakes (the world) with his rays, and his commentator observes that the god showers mist or dew and shakes the animate world. Modern speculations about the derivation and the meaning of the name may be found in Bhânu Dîkshita's commentary on Amara (iii. 3. 130). Prof. Max Müller, in one place,† observes that "it is difficult, on seeing the name of Vrishâkapi, not to think

c11.27

∗ Amara iii. 3, 130 and 156. हरो विष्णुर्वृषाकपिः । and वृषाकपायी श्रीगौर्योः ।

c11.28

† Brihat-Devatâ ii, 9. and 10:—

c11.29

† Lectures on the Science of Language Vol. II., p. 539.

c11.30

वृषाकपायी सूर्योषाः सूर्यस्यैव तु पलयः ।
पुरोदयात्तामुषसं सूर्योमध्यदिने स्थिते ।
वृषाकपायी सूर्यास्तकाल आहुः स्तुतिष्वृचि ॥

c11.31

And, again futher on in ii. 69 and 70.

c11.32

वृषैव कपिलो भूत्वा यज्ञकमधिरोहति ।
वृषाकपिरसौ तेन विश्वस्मादिंद्र उत्तरः ॥
रंश्मिभिः कंपयते वृषा वर्षिष्ठ एव सः ।
सायाह्नकाले भूतानि स्वापयन्नस्तमेति च ।
वृषापिरितो वा स्यादिति मंत्रेषु दृश्यते ॥

c11.33

of Erikapaeos, an Orphic name of Protogonos and synonymous with Phanes, Helios, Priapos, Dionysos," but, says he, "the original conception of Vrishâkapi (Vrishan, bull, irrigator; Kapi, ape, tremulous) is not much clearer than that of Erikapaeos." However, if the comparison be correct, we may, I think, take it as confirming the identification of Vrishâkapi with the sun proposed by several scholars, native and European. In fact, there seems to be a general agreement that Vrishâkapi represents the sun in one form or the other. But this alone does not account for all the incidents recorded in the hymn. I would, therefore, further suggest that Vrishâkapi be understood as representing the sun at the autumnal equinox, when he may be rightly said to shake off the rains, inasmuch as the equinox falls at the end of the rainy season. I have previously shown that the conception of Vishnu and Shiva can be traced to the Vedic Vishnu and Rudra, and these latter may be taken as the types or the embodiments of the mild and terrible aspects of nature at the vernal and the autumnal equinox. If Vrishâkapi in later mythology has therefore come to denote Vishnu and Shiva, according to Amara, the meanings are consistent with the supposition that in the Vedas Vrishâkapi represents the sun at the equinoxes. In the hymn itself, Vrishâkapi is said to have assumed the form of a yellow antelope whose head Indrânî is described to have cut off. This circumstance serves to guide us in at once fixing the position of Vrishâkapi in the heavens. It is the same antelope's head that has given rise to so many myths. When the position of Vrishâkapi is thus fixed, it would not be difficult to understand the various incidents described in the hymn. But without further anticipating what I have to say in the explanation of the hymn, I now proceed to examine the hymn itself. We shall then see whether the assumption which we have made regarding the character and attributes of Vrishâkapi gives us a simple, natural, and above all, intelligible explanation of the story given in the hymn, which, as explained at present, is nothing but a bundle of disconnected, if not mutually inconsistent, statements. I shall first quote the original hymn.

c11.34

वि हि सोतोरस्रक्षत नेन्द्रं देवममंसत ।
यन्मामददृशार्कपिरयं पुष्टेषु मत्सखा विश्वस्मादिद्र उत्तरः ॥ १ ॥
परा ह्यं धावासि वृषाकपेरति व्यथिः ।
नो अह प्र विन्दस्यन्यत्र सोमपीतये विश्व० ॥ २ ॥
किमयं त्वां वृषाकपिश्कार हरितो मृगः ।
यस्मा हरस्यसीदु न्वर्यो वा पुष्टिमद्रसु विश्व० ॥ ३ ॥
यमिमं त्वं वृषाकपिं प्रियमिन्द्राभिरक्षसि ।
धा न्वस्य जंभ्षदपि कर्णे वराहयुविश्व० ॥ ४ ॥
प्रिया तष्टानें मे कपिर्व्यददूषत ।
शिरो न्वस्य राविषं न सुगं दुष्कृतं भुवं विश्व० ॥ ५ ॥
न मस्त्री सुंभसत्तरा न सुयाश्रुतरा भुवत् ।
न ममतिश्चयवीयसी न सख्यधुर्मयसी विश्व० ॥ ६ ॥
उवे अंब सुलाभिके यथैवांग भविष्यति ।
भन्समै अंब सख्थि मे शिरो मे वीव हष्यति विश्व० ॥ ७ ॥
किं सुबाहु स्वंगुरे पृथुष्टो पृथुजाघने ।
किं शूरपत्न नहवमभ्यमीषि वृषाकपि विश्व० ॥ ८ ॥
अवीरामिव मामयं शशरुभि मन्यते ।
उताहमस्मि वीरणीद्रपत्नी महत्सखा विश्व० ॥ ९ ॥
संहोनं स्म पुरा नारी समर्नं वावं गच्छति ।

c11.35

वेधा ऋतस्य वीरणीद्वत्नी महीयते विश्वं० ॥ १० ॥

c11.36

इंद्राणीमासु न रिपु सुभगामहमेश्रवं ।

c11.37

नहस्या अपरं चन जरसा म्रते पतिर्विश्वं० ॥ ११ ॥

c11.38

नाहमिंद्राणि रारण सख्युर्वृषाकपेर्ऋते ।

c11.39

यस्येदमन्यं हविः प्रियं देवेषु गच्छति विश्वं० ॥ १२ ॥

c11.40

वृषाकपायि रेवति सुपुत्र आदु सुस्नुषे ।

c11.41

धत्त इंद्र उक्षणः प्रियं काचिकं हविर्विश्वं० ॥ १३ ॥

c11.42

उक्षणो हि मे पंचदश साकं पचंन्ति विंशतिं ।

c11.43

उताहर्माद्व पीव इदुभ' कुक्षी पृणति मे विश्वं० ॥ १४ ॥

c11.44

वृषभो न तिग्मशृंगोन्तर्यूथेपु रोषवत् ।

c11.45

मंतस्त इंद्र शं हृदे यं तै सुनोति भावयुविश्वं० ॥ १५ ॥

c11.46

न सेशे यस्य रंबतंतरा सथ्या ३ कपुत् ।

c11.47

सेदीशे यस्य रोमशं निषेदुषौ विजृंभते विश्वं ॥ १६ ॥

c11.48

न सेशे यस्य रोमशं निषेदुषौ विजृंभते ।

c11.49

सेदीशे यस्य रंबतंतरा सथ्या ३ कपुद्विश्वं० ॥ १७ ॥

c11.50

अथमिंद्र वृषाकपिः परस्वंतं हतं विदत् ।

c11.51

असिं सुनां नवं चरुमादेधस्यान आचितं विश्वं० ॥ १८ ॥

c11.52

अयमैनि विचार्कशद्विचन्वन्दासमायै ।

c11.53

पिबामि पाकसुत्वनोभि धीरंमकाश विश्वं० ॥ १९ ॥

c11.54

धन्वं च यत्कृतंतं च कातिश्चित्ता वि योजना ।

c11.55

नेदीयसो वृषाकपेस्तमेहिं गृहौ उप विश्वं० ॥ २० ॥

c11.56

पुनरेहि वृषाकपे सुविता कल्पयावहै ।

c11.57

य एषः स्व॒म॒न॑श॒नोस्त॑मे॒र्षि प॒था पु॒नर्विश्व॑० ॥ २१ ॥ यदु॒द॑ञ्चो वृषाकपे गृ॒हमि॑न्द्र॒ज॑गंतन । क॒ ऽस्य पु॑ल्व॒घो मृ॒गः क॒र्मग॑ज्ञनयोप॒नो विश्व॑० ॥ २२ ॥ प॒शुर्ह नाम॑ मान॒वी साकं॑ स॒सूव॑ विं॒शति॑ । भ॒द्रं भ॑ल॒ त्यस्या॑ अ॒भ्य॑स्या उ॒दर॑मामय॒द्विश्व॑० ॥ ३२ ॥

c11.58

There are twenty-three verses in the hymn; and of these 3, 4, 5 and 20, 21 and 22 have a direct bearing on the question we are discussing. But to understand these verses properly, it is necessary to discuss most of the other verses in the hymn, and I shall therefore examine the hymn verse by verse. I have already remarked that the hymn is one of those which have not yet been properly understood. Some of the verses have been explained by Yâska, but he has nowhere tried to give us the bearing of the whole story described in the hymn. Sâyaṇa's commentary is very often simply verbal, and in many places he too is not certain about the meaning, while the Anukramaṇî has been several times disregarded by Sâyaṇa himself. On the other hand, Ludwig, Grassmann, and several other European scholars have tried in their own way to explain the legend or the story embodied in the hymn, and the latest attempt of the kind is that of Piscel and Geldner in their Vedic studies, Vol. VII., Part I.∗ These scholars hold that the hymn narrates a legend current in old days. In other words, they take it, and I think rightly, to be a historic hymn. But the question, what does the legend signify, or how did it originate, still remains unsolved. Piscel and Geldner understand the hymn to mean that Vrishâkapi went down to the south and again returned to the house of Indra. But even then the bearing of the legend is but imperfectly explained. The occurrence of such words as *dâsa*, *ârya* and *parshu* in the hymn have led some to suppose that the hymn records the story of a struggle between the Aryan and the non-Aryan races. But the hypothesis hardly explains the various incidents in the story, and the legend may therefore be said to be but still imperfectly understood. Under such circumstances any suggestion which explains the hymn better is at least entitled to a hearing. It is admitted that the hymn is a dialogue between Indra, Indrânî, and Vrishâkapi, a son of Indra as they call him.* But there is a great divergence of opinion in assigning different verses to their deities. I shall examine these points while discussing the verses.

c11.59

∗ I am indebted for this information to Dr. R. G. Bhândârkar, who kindly undertook to explain to me the views of German scholars on this point.

c11.60

∗ Kâtyâyana in his Sarvânukramanî says—वि हित्पधिकैन्द्रो वृषाक-पिरिन्द्रार्णीश्च समूदिरे । Upon this the Vedârtha dîpikâ by Shadguru-shishya has,—वृषाकपिनिर्मेन्द्रस्य पुत्रः शचीसपत्न्यां जातः इन्द्राणीन्द्रपत्नीन्द्रश्च स्वयमिति त्रयः समूदिरे सहत्योदिरे विवादं कृतवंतः । The verses of the hymn are then distributed amongst the speakers as follows :—Indra, 1, 8, 11, 12, 14, 19, 20 21, 22; Indrânî, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 18; and Vrishâkapi, 7, 13, 23. The same distribution is given in the Brihad-devatâ by Shaunaka. Piscel and Geldner introduce Vrishâkapâyî in the dialogue and distribute the verses somewhat differently thus, Indra, 1, 3, 8, 12, 14, 19, 20; Indrânî 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, 16, 21; Vrishâkapi 7, 10 13; and Vrishâkapâyî, 11, 15, 17, 18. Verses 22 and 22 are supposed to be addressed by a stranger, the narrator.

c11.61

VERSE 1.—The verse has been differently interpreted by different writers. Yâska (13. 4.) interprets it as referring to the rays of the sun, which (the rays) deem themselves perfectly independent of the luminary by which they were sent out. Sâyaṇa ascribes it to Indra who says "that sacrificers, allowed by me to sacrifice to Vrishâkapi, have disregarded me, but are praising the lord Vrishâkapi who is delighted, as my friend, in the sacrifices, where plenty of Soma is used; [but notwithstanding] this Indra is superior to all." Mâdhava Bhaṭṭa, whom Sâyaṇa mentions with respect, however, thinks otherwise. He considers that the verse is addressed by Indrâṇî to Indra, when she perceived that the sacrificers have ceased to sacrifice on account of the oblations being spoiled by an animal representing Vrishâkapi. He would, therefore, thus interpret the verse. Says Indrâṇî, "In places of plenty where lord Vrishâkapi revels, sacrificers have give up sacrificing and disregarded Indra. My friend Indra is superior to all."

c11.62

When the very first verse is thus interpreted in three different ways, one can easily attribute the difference to an imperfect perception of the bearing of the whole hymn. To me Mâdhava Bhaṭṭa alone appears to have taken into consideration the verses that follow. Thus the fifth verse of the hymn states that the things of Indrâṇî were spoilt by Vrishâkapi in the form of an animal, and consequently he was beheaded. I should, however, like to refer to verse 21, wherein Vrishâkapi is told that when he appears again, sacrifices would be performed. This evidently implies that they were stopped before and were to be commenced again on the re-appearance of Vrishâkapi. The first verse therefore must be interpreted to mean that "the sacrifices are stopped." The root *srij* with *vi* may mean either to abandon or to allow, but the former is its natural meaning, and when verse 21 in the same hymn can be easily explained by taking the former meaning of srij with vi, it would be straining the words if we put a different interpretation on them. I am, therefore, disposed to interpret the verse after the manner of Mâdhava Bhaṭṭa, except the last sentence.

c11.63

But why should sacrifices be stopped? What has Vṛiṣhâkapi to do with them? These are very important questions, and I am sure that had they been properly answered, there would have been no difficulty in interpreting the hymn. In verse 3 we are told that Vṛiṣhâkapi spoken of in this hymn, has the form of a yellow antelope. In verse 5 Indrâṇi is prepared to cut off his head, because he offended her, and in the preceding verse (4th) a dog is said to be let loose upon him. These facts—an antelope with the head cut off, and a dog closely following him—are quite sufficient for the purposes of identification. They shew that the whole story is based upon the "antelope's head" we have previously discussed; and had Yâska and Sâyaṇa known that there is a constellation called dog in the heavens by the side of Mṛigashiras, I feel certain that they would not have hesitated to recognize in Vṛiṣhâkapi, the sun as represented by the constellation of Orion. But all traces of the dog, as a constellation, having been lost in the Sanskrit literature, neither Yâska nor Sâyaṇa could find any clue to the true meaning of the hymn. This is not, however, the only place where Yâska has been obliged to invent extraordinary interpretations. Not knowing that the dog represented a star, he has proposed (Nirukta 5. 20), that Vrika should be understood to mean "the moon," while usually it means a wolf or a wild dog, and it appears to me that a similar mistake has been also committed here. Comparative Mythology and Greek Astronomy have, however, thrown further light on the subject, and we must now try to interpret the hymn accordingly. Vrishākapi must, therefore, be taken to represent the sun in Orion.

c11.64

But even supposing that Vrishākapi thus represents the sun in Orion, why should the sacrifices be stopped on his account? The identification of Vrishākapi with Orion at once furnishes us with a solution of this question. We have already seen that the dog is said to commence the new year in Rig i. 161. 13; and since Canis and Orion are close to each other, Orion may also be said to have commenced the year. The Devayāna, therefore, extended in those days from the heliacal to the acronycal rising of Orion; that is, when Orion rose with the sun, it was the vernal equinox, the beginning of the Devayāna, and six months after, when it rose at the beginning of night, it was the autumnal equinox, the end of the Devayāna. Now all Deva-ceremonies and sacrifices could be begun and performed only during the Devayāna,* or, as we find it in later traditions, only in the Uttarāyana. The acronycal rising of Orion was thus a signal to stop such ceremonies, and oblations could properly be said to have been spoilt by the appearance of this constellation at the beginning of night.† But above all the burden of the song "Indra is uttara of all," becomes specially appropriate in this case. The word uttara does not here mean superior, but " upper " implying that Indra is in the upper or the northern portion of the universe, though the sun or Vrishâkapi may go down. I would therefore translate the first verse thus :—" Where my friend Vrishâkapi rejoiced in the wealth of the Aryans, they gave up sacrificing and did not respect Indra. Indra is (however) in the upper (i. e., northern) part of the universe."*

c11.65

∗ Jaimini Mim. Dar. vi. 8. 23, and other authorities cited in Chap. II.

c11.66

† If Vritra is correctly identified with the constellation of Mrigashiras, we may on the same theory also explain why he is called Makhasyu in Rig. x. 73. 7. The appearance of Mriga, at the beginning of night indicated the commencement of the Dakshināyana when sacrifices were stopped. Vritra alias Mriga might thus come to be regarded as a destroyer of the sacrifices.

c11.67

VERSE 2.—Indra is here reproached for following up Vrishâkapi, though he has offended Indrânî. Says she to Indra : " O Indra! (how is it that) you run down fast after Vrishâkapi and do not go anywhere else to drink soma. Indra is, &c."

c11.68

The word *parâ* in this verse seems to denote the region where Vrishâkapi has gone. *Parâvat* is often said to be the place in the distant or lower portion of the sphere, and is thus contrasted with *arvâvat* (Rig. viii. 13. 15). In Rig. viii. 33. 10 Indra is said to be Vrishâ in the *parâvat* and also in the *arvâvat* regions. Indra is again very often spoken of as going to distant regions to see whether Vritra is duly killed. The same fact appears to be here expressed in a different form

c11.69

VERSE 3.—Sâyana following the Anukramanî, understands the verse as addressed by Indrânî to Indra. Ludwig and Grassmann, on the other hand, take it to be addressed by Indra to Indrânî: and this construction seems better than that of Sâyana. It may, however, be here, once for all, remarked that though scholars thus differ in assigning verses to different deities, yet it does not, on the whole, materially alter the legend incorporated in the hymn.

c11.70

∗ If Vrishâkapâyî is to be at all introduced in the dialogue, we may assign this verse to her. The phrases, " my friend " and " did not respect Indra," would be more appropriate in her mouth than in that of Indra or Indrânî.

c11.71

Says Indra: "What has this Vrishākapi, in the form of a yellow antelope, done to thee that you are so much angry with him? Was it the rich possession (wealth) of the Aryans? Indra, &c."

c11.72

The form, in which Vrishākapi is here said to have appeared, should be specially noted. *Harita* means yellow, and yellow animals (*Haritah*) are said to be yoked to the carriage of Āditya in Nighaṇṭu (1. 15). There the word is, however, understood to be the plural of *Harit*, by the commentators in conformity to Rig. i. 115. 3 and v. 45. 9, where the sun is said to have seven horses yoked to his carriage. But I think that the same idea may give rise to the conception that the sun is represented by a single yellow animal, and we may take the passage in the Nighaṇṭu as referring also to the verse under consideration. I have previously alluded to the fact that the dog at the Chinvat bridge in the Parsi traditions is described as *zaritem*, that is, of the same colour as the antelope in the third verse. But the question of colour cannot be taken as finally settled until we first definitely decide what animal is represented by Mriga.*

c11.73

VERSES 4 & 5.--Sāyaṇa is literally correct, but again misses the spirit, or rather has missed it throughout the hymn. Indra was reproached in the second verse for his partiality or over-kindness to Vrishākapi. But Indrāṇī was not satisfied with it, and if Indra failed to punish the Kapi, she took the matter in her own hand. Says she: "O Indra! as you (thus) protect this (your) favourite Vrishākapi, let the dog, eager (to chase) a hog (*varāha*), bite him at his ear. The Kapi spoilt my favourite things.† I shall, therefore, cut off his head, in order that an evil-doer may not enjoy happiness. Indra is in the upper (portion) of the universe." Here Indrâṇî is herself prepared to punish Vṛiṣhâkapi by setting the dog at his ear, and cutting off his head. I have in a previous chapter shown how the figure of Mṛiga's head is to be obtained in the sky. Taking the three stars in the belt of Orion as the top of the head, the dog is close by the right ear of Mṛiga and may properly be said to bite it. The word *varâha* also points out the place where we may expect to find the dog. In Rig. i. 61. 7, *varâha** is said to be killed by Viṣhṇu beyond a mountain, which, in all probability, is the same story as that of Indra killing Vṛitra. A dog chasing *varâha* is therefore no other than Canis Major following the constellation of Orion, or the "antelope's head" representing Vṛitra. Sâyaṇa and Yâska and even European scholars are silent as to who this dog is. The verses, in fact, may be said to have remained altogether unexplained hitherto, though the words themselves are simple enough and have caused no difficulty.

c11.74

∗ See Dr. Rajendralal's Indo-Aryans, Vol. II., p. 303. † The word in the original is *taṣṭani*, which literally means made, shaped, &c. Mādhava Bhaṭṭa understands it to mean

c11.75

VERSE 6.—This verse presents no difficulty. Thus satisfied, Indrâṇî speaks of herself as the best of women, best in every way.

c11.76

VERSES 7 & 8.—Indra now tries to conciliate her. Sâyaṇa, following the Anukramaṇî, supposes that the seventh verse is addressed by Vṛiṣhâkapi and the eighth by Indra. The only reason I can find for such an interpretation is the

c11.77

oblations offered to Indrâṇî. I translate it by things generally. Whatever meaning we may adopt, it is quite evident that the Kapi's interfering with them has offended Indrâṇî.

c11.78

∗ In Rig. x. 99. 6, Indra is said to have killed Trishirshan, and with his aid Trita killed *varâha*.

c11.79

occurrence of the word ambā, which means "mother," and this cannot be supposed to be used by Indra. But though we avoid one difficulty in this way, we are launched into another, for the verse speaks of Indrāṇī being pleasing "to me;" and if Vṛishākapi is the speaker "me," cannot refer to him, as Indrāṇī is his mother and, consequently, "me" has to be interpreted to mean "my father," and this Sāyaṇa has done. I prefer taking ambā as an affectionate and respectful mode of address, as in modern Sanskrit, and the verse presents no difficulty. We can then take both the 7th and the 8th verse together and give them a natural interpretation. I translate thus "O auspicious lady! what you say is true . . . . . . you are pleasing to me . . But oh! hero-wife, with beautiful arms, pretty figure, profuse hair, and broad hips, why should you be so angry with our Vṛishākapi? Indra is in the upper (part) of the universe."

c11.80

VERSE 9.—Indrāṇī replies, "This mischievous (Vṛishākapi) considers me to be avīri (i. e., without a brave husband or son), while I am the wife of Indra, the mother of the brave, and the friend of Maruts. Indra, &c."

c11.81

VERSES 10 & 11.—Pischel and Geldner suppose that the first is addressed by Vṛishākapi to Indrāṇī, and the second by Vṛishakapāyī. Sāyaṇa understands them to be addressed by Indra. Whichsoever construction we adopt, the meaning remains the same. Indrāṇī is here told that she is highly respected everywhere; she is the blessed of all women, and that her husband never suffers from old age. This is obviously intended to pacify her.

c11.82

VERSE 12.—Indra says "O Indrāṇī! I am not delighted without my friend Vṛishākapi, of whom these favourite watery oblations reach the gods. Indra is in the upper (part) of the universe."

c11.83

VERSE 13.—This seems to be also addressed by Indra to Indrânî, who is here called Vrishâkapâyî. This latter name has caused a difference of opinion, some considering Vrishâkapâyî to be the mother, some the wife of Vrishâkapi.* I do not see how the wife of Vrishâkapi, as such, could be introduced in the song, unless Vrishâkapi is understood to be the name of Indra himself. Commentators, who take Vrishâkapâyî to mean the wife of Vrishâkapi, accordingly adopt the latter view. Pischel and Geldner think that the verse is addressed by Vrishâkapi to his wife Vrishâkapâyî. The verse means, "O rich Vrishâkapâyî! having a good son and a daughter-in-law, let Indra swallow the bulls, your favourite and delightful oblation. Indra, &c." There has been much speculation as to who could be the son and the daughter-in-law of Vrishâkapâyî. But if Vrishâkapâyî be understood to mean the wife of Indra, it causes no such difficulty. The adjectives "having a good son," &c., are simply complimentary, corresponding to the statement of Indrânî, that she was the "mother of the brave" in verse 9. Indra accepting her statements, asks her to allow him to swallow the watery oblations said to come from Vrishâkapi in the last verse. The words priyam and havis are the same in both the verses, and I think that both of them refer to the same oblations

c11.84

VERSE 14.—Indra, satisfied with the prospect of getting the oblations, describes his appetite: "Twenty and fifteen oxen are being cooked for me; I shall eat them and be fat. Both the sides of my belly will be filled up. Indra, &c."

c11.85

∗ See Max Müller's Lectures on the Science of Language, Vol. II., 538.

c11.86

The practice of sacrificing bulls to Indra seems to have been out of date even at the time of the Rigveda (cf. i. 164. 43, where it is said to be an old custom). But the old custom could not be entirely forgotten, and if real bulls were not offered to Indra, poets supposed that clouds or stars might answer the same purpose. The number 35 mentioned in the verse may thus refer to the Nakshatras (28), and planets (7). But this explanation is doubtful and I cannot suggest a better one.

c11.87

VERSES 15, 16 & 17.—The fifteenth and the sixteenth seem to be addressed to Indra by Indrânî, and the seventeenth to Indrânî by Indra. In the fifteenth Indrânî, according to Sâyâna, asked Indra to sport with her just as a bull, with pointed horns, roars amongst a number of cows. The next two verses do not appear to be relevant to our purpose. We may therefore pass these over, and resume the thread of the story. Pischel and Geldner suppose that the 17th and 18th verses are addressed by Vrishakapâyî.

c11.88

VERSES 18 & 19.—Indrânî is now conciliated, and says that she has not killed Vrishâkapi but some one else. The verse thus means, "O Indra! let Vrishâkapi get the slain animal—an animal which was quite different from Vrishâkapi's. Let him at once have a knife, a fire-place, a new vessel, and a cart-load of firewood (to cook the killed animal). Indra, &c." Thus by the intercession of Indra, Indrânî was moved, and at last undid or rather explained away her previous act of decapitation. Pischel and Geldner translate the verse very nearly as I have done. They, however, consider it to be addressed by Vrishakapâyî and translate *parasvantam* by 'wild.' This does not explain what dead animal is here referred to. It is, I think, more natural to suppose that the dead animal here spoken of is the same as that described in verse 5, and one whose head Indrânî is there said to be ready to cut off. Indrânî now says that this dead animal should be given to Vrishâkapi, especially as Indra has already got his oblations of bulls. I have already shown that there were several legends about the "antelope's head." It seems that Indrânî, referring to some of them, assures Indra that it was not Vrishâkapi in the form of the antelope which she killed, but some one else (literally *parasvantam* = representing another than Vrishakapi, as Sâyaṇa takes it.) Thereon Indra, having thus saved Vrishâkapi by his intercession, observes, "Thus do I go seeing and discriminating between a *dâsa* and an *ârya*; I take my drink from those that prepare Soma juice and cook the oblations, and thus behold or protect the intelligent sacrificers." In another word, Indra is glad that he has saved an Ârya, and triumphantly declares that he is always careful to distinguish between an Ârya and a Dâsa, the latter of whom he would punish and kill, *e. g.*, Vritra, who is said to be a Dâsa. Vrishâkapi being thus saved Indra, in the following verses, bids him a farewell, wishing for a safe journey and speedy return. These verses are very important for our present purpose, and I shall therefore examine them singly.

First 94 of 117 passages. Read on

Linked texts (15)