A History of Indian Literature v1.c8.s2.57

v1.c8.s2.57

To me both these opinions seem exaggerated, and the truth, in my opinion, here as in all the debateable questions regarding the interpretation of the Ṛgveda, lies midway. Let us remember that the hymn-collection of the Ṛgveda is composed of earlier and later portions. Just as there are hymns in the Saṃhitā, which belong to different periods of time, so also in contents the hymns are of greatly varying value and of different origin. There is no doubt that a great number of these hymns arose independently of all sacrificial ritual, and that in them the breath of genuine primeval religious poetry is felt.¹ Even if many of these hymns were used later on for sacrificial purposes, that does not in the least prove that they were originally written for this purpose. On the other hand it is equally certain that very many portions of the Ṛgveda-Saṃhitā were from the first intended for nothing but sacrificial songs and litanies, and were glued together in a rather workmanlike fashion by priestly singers. It is also certainly exaggerated when W. D. Whitney² once said: "The Vedas appear rather like an Indo-European than an Indian record." But just as certainly is it an exaggeration when Pischel and Geldner (with H. H. Wilson) state that the Indians at the time of the Ṛgveda, had already attained a degree of culture, which was little different from that which Alexander the Great found in existence at the time of his invasion of India.³