Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A History of Indian Literature v1.c8.s7: The Brāhmaṇas

A History of Indian Literature v1.c8.s7

Language
English

The Brāhmaṇas

v1.c8.s7.1

¹ Cf. L. von Schroeder, I.L.C., pp. 127-167, 179-190. Sylvain *Lévi*, La doctrine du sacrifice dans les Brāhmaṇas (Bibliothèque de l'école des hautes études), Paris, 1898. H. Oldenberg, Vorwissenschaftliche Wissenschaft, die Weltanschauung der Brāhmaṇa-Texte, Göttingen, 1919, endeavours to do justice to the thoughts contained in the Brāhmaṇas. What Oldenberg calls "pre-scientific knowledge," should, however, be more correctly called "priestly pseudo-science." For the prose of the Brāhmaṇas, s. *Oldenberg*, Zur Geschichte der altindischen Prosa, pp. 13 ff., 20 ff.

v1.c8.s7.2

Of the Brāhmaṇas, the second great class of works belonging to the Veda, Max Müller once said: "However interesting the Brāhmaṇas may be to students of Indian literature, they are of small interest to the general reader. The greater portion of them is simply twaddle, and what is worse, theological twaddle. No person who is not acquainted beforehand with the place which the Brāhmaṇas fill in the history of the Indian mind, could read more than ten pages without being disgusted."²

v1.c8.s7.3

² Max Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, Vol. I.

v1.c8.s7.4

Indeed, it is even truer of these works than of the Yajurveda, that they are unpalatable as reading, but indispensable to the understanding of the whole of the later religious and philosophical literature of the Indians, and highly interesting for the general science of religion. The Brāhmaṇas are as invaluable authorities to the student of religion, for the history of sacrifice and of priesthood, as the Saṃhitās of the Yajurveda are for the history of prayer.

v1.c8.s7.5

The word Brāhmaṇa³ (neut.) means first a single "explanation or utterance of a learned priest, of a doctor of the science of sacrifice, upon any point of the ritual." Used collectively, the word means, secondly, a collection of such utterances and discussions of the priests upon the science of sacrifice. For although the Brāhmaṇas fortunately contain much that has only a distant reference to the sacrificial cult, for instance, cosmogonic myths, ancient legends and narratives, yet the sacrifice is the one and only theme from which all the discussions start, on which everything hinges. For the Brāhmaṇas deal consecutively with the great sacrifices, with which we have become acquainted above in the contents of the Vājasaneyi-Saṃhitā,¹ and give instructions on the separate rites and ceremonies, attaching to them observations upon the relations of the separate sacrificial acts to each other and to the spells and prayers, partly quoted literally and partly quoted in abbreviated form.² To these are added symbolical interpretations and speculative reasons for the ceremonies and their connection with the prayer formulæ. Where, as is often the case, the views of the learned men differ on certain points of ritual, the one view is defended and the other rejected. Also there is sometimes talk of differences of the ceremonies in different districts, also of modifications of certain sacrificial rites in particular circumstances. The mention of what exactly constitutes the priests' payment, the dakṣiṇā, at every sacrificial act, is never omitted. In the same way it is explained to the sacrificer what advantages, whether in this life or in the life beyond, he can gain by means of the various sacrificial rites. In short, if the use of the word "science" may be permitted with reference to theological knowledge then we can best designate the Brāhmaṇas as texts which deal with the "science of sacrifice."

v1.c8.s7.6

³ The derivation of the word is doubtful. It can be derived either from bráhman (neut.) in the sense of "sacred speech, prayer, sacred knowledge," or from brahmán (masc.) "priest" in general or "Brahman priest," or also from brāhmaṇa (masc.) "the Brahman, the member of the priestly caste, the theologian."

v1.c8.s7.7

¹ Pp. 172-176

v1.c8.s7.8

² In several places in the Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa, the word bandhu, "connection, relationship," *i.e.* "explanation of the deeper connection, the actual significance," occurs, whereas in later passages the word brāhmaṇa is used in the same sense. *Cf.* Weber, *HIL.*, p. 11; Ind. Stud., 5, 60; 9, 351; *Oldenberg*, Vorwissenschaftl. Wissenschaft, p. 4.

v1.c8.s7.9

Very many such texts must have existed. Of this we are assured by the Indians themselves, and it is also confirmed by the many quotations from lost Brāhmaṇas, which we find in our texts. However the number of even those Brāhmaṇas which are still preserved is by no means small, and moreover, all of them should be classed among the more extensive works of Indian literature. According to the four Vedic Saṃhitās with which we have become acquainted, the four Vedas, as we know, were distinguished, and to each of the latter several Brāhmaṇas usually belong, which issued from various schools (śākhās). We have seen that the Saṃhitās of the Black Yajurveda already contained, besides the mantras or prayers, also declarations of opinions and discussions on the purpose and meaning of the sacrifice. In these Brāhmaṇa-like parts of the Yajurveda-Saṃhitās we shall see the beginning of the Brāhmaṇa-literature. It was these very directions for the performance of the sacrificial ceremonies and the discussions on the meaning of the ritual, which in the Saṃhitās of the Black Yajurveda were directly connected with the Mantras themselves, it was just these which one Vedic school after another made the subject of individual works. Soon it was regarded as a rule that every Vedic school must possess a Brāhmaṇa. This explains on the one hand the large number of Brāhmaṇas, and on the other hand the circumstance that some works were designated as Brāhmaṇas, which deserve this name neither for their contents nor for their extent, and which belong to the latest productions of Vedic literature. Of this type are many so-called 'Brāhmaṇas' of the Sāmaveda, which are nothing but Vedāṅgas,¹ also the Gopatha-Brāhmaṇa of the Atharvaveda. The latter is one of the latest works of the whole of Vedic literature. There was obviously no Brāhmaṇa at all belonging to the Atharvaveda in early times. It was not until a later period, when a Veda without a Brāhmaṇa could not be imagined, that an attempt was made to fill this gap.¹

v1.c8.s7.10

¹ See Chapter on the Vedāṅgas.

v1.c8.s7.11

¹ For detailed treatment of the Gopatha-Brāhmaṇa see M. *Bloomfield*, The Atharva-veda ("Grundriss," II. 1 B.), pp. 101-124. The Gopatha-Brāhmaṇa has been edited by D. *Gaastra*, Leyden, 1919. Whilst *Bloomfield* considers the Gopatha-Brāhmaṇa later than the Vaitānasūtra (Der Atharvaveda, 101 ff., GGA. 1912, No. 1), *Caland* (WZKM 18, 1904, 191 ff.) and Keith (JRAS, 1910, 934 ff.) consider it earlier.

v1.c8.s7.12

The most important of the old Brāhmaṇas may here be enumerated.

v1.c8.s7.13

To the Ṛgveda belongs the Aitareya-Brāhmaṇa. It consists of forty Adhyāyas or "lessons," which are divided into eight Pañcakas or "fifths." Tradition names Mahīdāsa Aitareya as the author of the work. In reality he was probably only the compiler or editor of it. This Brāhmaṇa deals chiefly with the Soma-sacrifice, besides which with only the fire-sacrifice (Agnihotra) and the feast of the consecration of a king (Rājasūya). It is supposed that the last ten sections are of later origin.²

v1.c8.s7.14

² Edited and translated into English by Martin *Haug*, Bombay, 1863. A much better edition with extracts from Sāyaṇa's commentary by Th. *Aufrecht*, Bonn, 1879. Edited with Sāyaṇa's commentary in ĀnSS No. 32. Translated into English by A. B. *Keith*, HOS, Vol. 25, 1920. According to Keith (l. c., pp. 44 ff.) the Aitareya-Brāhmaṇa is probably older than the Brāhmaṇa parts of the Taittirīya-Saṃhitā, and certainly older than the Jaiminīya-and Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa. On the language of the Ait-Br. see *Liebich*, Pāṇini, pp. 23 ff. On Mahīdāsa Aitareya s. *Keith*, Aitareya Āraṇyaka, Introd., pp. 16 f.

v1.c8.s7.15

In the closest relationship with this Brāhmaṇa is the Kauṣītaki or Sāṅkhāyana-Brāhmaṇa, also belonging to the Ṛg-veda, and consisting of thirty Adhyāyas or "lessons." The first six Adhyāyas deal with the food-sacrifice (fire-laying, fire-sacrifice, new and full moon sacrifices and the sacrifices of the seasons), while Adhyāyas VII to XXX deal with the Soma-sacrifice fairly agreeing with the Aitareya- Brāhmaṇa.¹ The Kauṣītaki-Brāhmaṇa is later than the Aitareya-Brāhmaṇa. However, while the latter is not the work of one hand and of one period, the Kauṣītaki-Brāhmaṇa is a uniform work.

v1.c8.s7.16

¹ The Kauṣītaki-Brāhmaṇa is edited by B. *Lindner*, Jena, 1887, also in ĀnSS No. 65, translated into English by A. B. *Keith*, HOS, vol. 25, 1920; chapter X translated into German by R. *Löbbecke*, Ueber das Verhältnis von Brāhmaṇas und Śrautasūtren, Leipzig, 1908. Āpastamba mentions the Kauṣītakins, but his quotations from a "Bahvṛca-Brāhmaṇa," that is "a Brāhmaṇa of the Ṛgvedins" do not occur either in the Aitareya or in the Kauṣītaki-Brāhmaṇa; they must therefore refer to another Ṛgveda-Brāhmaṇa which has not come down to us (Keith, l. c., p. 48). For critical and exegetical notes on Ait. Br. and Kauṣ. Br. see W. *Caland*, ZDMG 72, 1918, 23 ff.

v1.c8.s7.17

To the Sāmaveda belongs the Tāṇḍya-Mahā-Brāhmaṇa,² also called Pañcaviṃśa, *i.e.* "Brāhmaṇa consisting of twenty-five books." This is one of the oldest Brāhmaṇas and contains some important old legends. Of special interest are the Vrātyastomas, and the description of sacrificial ceremonies by means of which the Vrātyas were received into the community of the Brahmans.³ The Ṣaḍviṃśa-Brāhmaṇa, *i.e.* "the twenty-sixth Brāhmaṇa,"⁴ is only a completion of the Tāṇḍya which consists of twenty-five books. The last part of the Ṣaḍviṃśa is the so-called "Adbhuta-Brāhmaṇa," a Vedāṅga-text on miracles and omens.⁵ (The Jaiminīya-Brāhmaṇa of the Sāmaveda is even older than the Tāṇḍya-Mahā-Brāhmaṇa. This work is of special interest for the history both of religion and legend, but unfortunately the manuscript material is so fragmentary that it cannot be edited. Hitherto only portions of it have been made known.¹

v1.c8.s7.18

² Edited in Bibl. Ind. 1870-1874. An analysis of it has been given by E. W. *Hopkins*, "Gods and Saints of the great Brāhmaṇa" (Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, vol. 15, 1909, pp. 20-69). Critical notes on it by *Caland*, ZDMG 72, 1918, 19 ff.

v1.c8.s7.19

³ See above p. 154, and Weber, HIL, pp. 67 f.

v1.c8.s7.20

⁴ Edited by H. F. *Eelsingh*, Leyden, 1908, and the first Prapāṭhaka by Kurt *Klemm*, with extracts from Sāyaṇa's commentary, and a German translation (Gütersloh 1894). *Liebich* (Indogermanische Forschungen, Anzeiger, 1895, pp. 30 f.) has shown that the language of the Ṣaḍviṃśa is pre-pāṇinean.

v1.c8.s7.21

⁵ Edited and translated into German by A. *Weber*, "Zwei vedische Texte über Omina und Portenta," ABA 1858.

v1.c8.s7.22

¹ A selection from the Jaiminīya-Brāhmaṇa, texts with German translations, has been edited by W. *Caland* (Verhandelingen der kon. Akad. van Wetenschappen te Amsterdam, Afd. Lett. Deel I, N. R. D. XIX, No. 4) 1919. Legends from the Jaim. Br. have been made known before by A. C. *Burnell* and W. D. *Whitney*, Ind. Ant. 13, 1884, 16 ff., 21 ff., and by H. *Oertel* in JAOS, vols. 14, 15, 18, 19, 23, 26, 28, in OC XI, Paris 1897, I, 225 ff. and in Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, vol. 15, 1909. See also *Caland*, WZKM 28, 1914, 61 ff. and "Over en uit het Jaiminīya-Brāhmaṇa" (Verslagen en Mededeelingen der kon. Akademie van Wetensch., Afd.-Lett., 5, 1) Amsterdam, 1914. The Śāṭyāyana-Brāhmaṇa of the Sāmaveda is only known by quotations (especially in Sāyaṇa's Ṛgvedabhāṣya), see H. *Oertel*, JAOS 18, 1897, pp. 15 ff.

v1.c8.s7.23

The Taittirīya-Brāhmaṇa of the Black Yajurveda is nothing but a continuation of the Taittirīya-Saṃhitā,² for the Brāhmaṇas were already included in the Saṃhitās of the Black Yajurveda. The Taittirīya-Brāhmaṇa, therefore, contains only later additions to the Saṃhitā. We find here only a description of the Puruṣamedha, the symbolical "human sacrifice;"³ and the fact that the sacrifice is missing in the Saṃhitā is one of the many proofs that it is only a rather late production of the science of sacrifice.

v1.c8.s7.24

² Editions in Bibl. Ind. 1855-1890, and ĀnSS No. 37. For the contents of the Taitt. Br., see *Keith*, HOS, vol. 18, pp. lxxvi ff.

v1.c8.s7.25

³ See above, pp. 174 f.

v1.c8.s7.26

To the White Yajurveda belongs the Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa, "the Brāhmaṇa of the Hundred Paths," so called because it consists of one hundred Adhyāyas or "lessons." This is the best known, the most extensive, and doubtless, also on account of its contents the most important of all the Brāhmaṇas.⁴ As in the case of the Vājasaneyi-Saṃhitā, there are two recensions of this Brāhmaṇa, that of the Kāṇvas and that of the Mādhyandinas. In the latter the hundred Adhyāyas are distributed among 14 books (Kāṇḍas). The first nine books are simply a continuous commentary on the first eighteen sections of the Vājasaneyi-Saṃhitā. They are decidedly older than the last five books. Probably also Books I to V are more closely connected. In them Yājñavalkya, who at the end of Book XIV is called the author of the whole Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa, is often mentioned as the teacher whose authority is conclusive. On the other hand, in Books VI to IX, which deal with the fire-altar building (Agnicayana), Yājñavalkya is not mentioned at all. Instead of him another teacher, Śāṇḍilya, is quoted as an authority; and the same Śāṇḍilya is also regarded as the proclaimer of the Agnirahasya, *i.e.* of the "fire-altar mystery," which forms the contents of Book X. Books XI to XIV, besides appendices to the preceding books, also contain a few interesting sections on subjects which are otherwise not dealt with in the Brāhmaṇas, thus upon the Upanayana, the initiation of a pupil or the taking of the pupil to the teacher who is to instruct him in the sacred texts (XI, 5, 4), upon the daily Veda study (svādhyāya),¹ which is looked upon as a sacrifice to the god Brahman (XI, 5, 6-8), and upon the death-ceremonies and the raising of a burial mound (XIII, 8). The horse-sacrifice (Aśvamedha), the "human sacrifice (Puruṣamedha) and the "sacrifice of all" (Sarvamedha) are dealt with in Book XIII, and the Pravargya ceremony in Book XIV. At the close of this extensive work is the old and important Bṛhadāraṇyaka-Upaniṣad with which we shall become acquainted in the next chapter.

v1.c8.s7.27

⁴ The text was published by A. *Weber* (The White Yajurveda, Part II. The Çatapatha-Brâhmaṇa. Berlin and London, 1855). There is an excellent English translation with important introductions and notes, by Julius Eggeling in five volumes. (SBE, Vols. 12, 26, 41, 43 and 44). The Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa is generally considered as one of the latest Brāhmaṇas; see *Keith*, HOS, Vol. 18, pp. cii f. According to *P. Oltramare* 'L'histoire des idées théosophiques dans l'Inde," I, p. 96, many passages in the Śatapatha-Br. show the trace of the influence of the doctrines of the Upaniṣads. *Wackernagel*, Altind. Grammatik I, p. xxx declares that as to language, the Śatapatha-Br and the Aitareya-Br. too is "comparatively modern," whilst he considers the Pañcaviṃśa-Br. and the Taittirīya-Br. as the most ancient Brāhmaṇas. (For the opposite view, see *Keith*, HOS, Vol. 25, pp. 46 f.). *Oldenberg*, "Zur Geschichte der altindischen Prosa," pp. 20 ff., gives the examples illustrating the "earlier" Brāhmaṇa period from the Taittirīya-Saṃhitā, and those for the "later" period from the Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa.

v1.c8.s7.28

¹ ) The "learning" or reciting of the Veda by the Indians as a religious duty has an exact parallel in the Thora-reading or "learning" of the Jews.

v1.c8.s7.29

The difference between the Brāhmaṇas which belong to the separate Vedas lies chiefly in the fact that the Brāhmaṇas of the Ṛgveda, in the presentation of the ritual, emphasize that which is of importance to the Hotar-priest, who has to recite the verses and hymns of the Ṛgveda, while the Brāhmaṇas of the Sāmaveda are chiefly concerned with the duties of the Udgātar, and those of the Yajurveda with the sacrificial acts to be performed by the Adhvaryu. In the essentials of their contents the Brāhmaṇas all agree fairly well with one another. In the main the same subjects are always dealt with; and all these works bear the same stamp. This is the more noticeable, as we are compelled to assume a period of several centuries for the origin and propagation of this literature. If we could believe the tradition which, in the so-called Vaṃśa¹ or "Genealogies," specifies genealogical trees of teachers with fifty to sixty names, then not even a thousand years would suffice to locate all the generations of teachers whose names are mentioned. These genealogies have indeed the object of tracing back the origin of the sacrifice theory to some deity or other—Brahman, Prajāpati or the Sun—but they also contain so many names which have certainly the appearance of being genuine family-names, that it is difficult to look upon them as pure fiction. However, even quite apart from these lists of teachers, there still remain the numerous names of teachers who, in the Brāhmaṇas themselves, are quoted as authorities, and the fact remains that the collectors and compilers of the Brāhmaṇas shift the beginnings of the science of sacrifice as laid down in them, back to a far-distant past. This sacrifice-science itself, however, requires centuries for its development.)

v1.c8.s7.30

¹ Connected with the Sāmaveda, there is a special so-called "Brāhmaṇa," the Vaṃśa-Brāhmaṇa (edited and explained by A. Weber, Ind. Stud. 4, 371 ff.) which contains only a list of 53 teachers, the last of whom, Kaśyapa, is said to have received the tradition from god Agni. There are four different Vaṃśas in the Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa. The one given at the conclusion of the work begins with the words: "We have this from the son of Bhāradvājī, the son of Bhāradvājī from the son of Vātsīmāṇḍavī," etc. Then follow 40 teachers, all only mentioned by their maternal names. Only as the 45th in the list does Yājñavalkya appear. Uddālaka, who is known to us from the Upaniṣads, being mentioned as his teacher. The last (55th) human teacher is Kaśyapa Naidhruvi, to whom the Brāhmaṇa is said to have been revealed by Vāc (the goddess of speech). She is said to have received it from Ambhiṇī (the voice of thunder) and the latter from Āditya (the sun).

v1.c8.s7.31

If we ask in which period we are to locate these centuries of the development of the Brāhmaṇa literature, there can be as little question of any definite dates as there is in determining the period of the Saṃhitās. The only certainty is, that the Saṃhitā of the Ṛgveda was already concluded and that the hymn-poetry already belonged to a far-distant past, when prayers and sacrifices were first made the subject of a special "science." (It is probably certain, too, that the great majority of magic incantations, spells and formulae of the Atharvaveda and of the Yajurveda, as well as the melodies of the Sāmaveda, are much older than the speculations of the Brāhmaṇas.) On the other hand it is likely that the final compilation of the Saṃhitās of the Atharvaveda and of the liturgical Saṃhitās was about contemporaneous with the beginnings of the Brāhmaṇa literature, so that the latest portions of these Saṃhitās might be of the same date as the earliest portions of the Brāhmaṇas. (At least the geographical and cultural conditions indicate this, as they are represented to us on the one hand in the Saṃhitās of the Atharvaveda and Yajurveda, and on the other hand in the Brāhmaṇas, in comparison with those of the Ṛgveda. We have seen how, in the period of the Atharvaveda-Saṃhitā, the Aryan tribes of the Indus land, the home of the Ṛgveda, had already spread themselves further east into the region of the Ganges and the Jamnā. The region which is indicated by the Saṃhitās of the Yajurveda as well as by all the Brāhmaṇas, is the land of the *Kurus and Pañcālas*, those two tribes whose mighty battles form the nucleus of the great Indian epic, the Mahābhārata. *Kurukṣetra*, "the land of the Kurus," in particular, is regarded as a holy land, in which, as it is frequently put, the gods themselves celebrated their sacrificial feasts. This land Kurukṣetra lay between the two small rivers Sarasvatī and Dṛṣadvatī in the plain to the west of the Ganges and Jamnā: and the neighbouring region of the Pañcālas stretched from the north-west to the south-east between the Ganges and Jamnā. This part of India, the Doab between Ganges and Jamnā from the neighbourhood of Delhi to as far as Mathurā, is still in a later period, regarded as the actual "Brahman land" (Brahmāvarta), whose customs according to the brahmanical law-books should be adopted for the whole of India. This region is not only the land of the origin of the Saṃhitās of the Yajurveda and of the Brāhmaṇas, but also the home of the whole of brahmanical culture, which first spread from here over the whole of India.

v1.c8.s7.32

The religious and social conditions have changed very much since the time of the Ṛgveda. The old gods of the Ṛgveda still appear in the Yajurveda-Saṃhitās and in the Brāhmaṇas, just as in the Atharvaveda. But their significance has wholly faded, and they owe all the power they possess to the sacrifice alone. Furthermore, some gods who still play a subordinate part in the Ṛgveda, step into far greater prominence in the liturgical Saṃhitās and in the Brāhmaṇas, as *Viṣṇu*, and especially *Rudra* or *Śiva*. Paramount importance now also attaches to *Prajāpati*, "the lord of creatures," who is regarded as the father of the gods (devas) as well as of the demons (asuras). The word *Asura*,¹ which, corresponding to the Avestic Ahura, in the Ṛgveda still has the meaning of "endowed with miraculous powers" or "God," and appears especially often as an epithet of the god Varuṇa, henceforth has exclusively the meaning of "demon" which it always has in later Sanskrit, and again and again mention is made in the Brāhmaṇas of the battles between Devas and Asuras. Yet there is nothing titanic about these battles, as, for instance, the battle between Indra and Vṛtra in the Ṛgveda, but the gods and Asuras exert themselves to surpass each other by means of sacrifices. For in these Brāhmaṇas the gods actually have to make sacrifices if they wish to accomplish anything. Nothing is more significant for the Brāhmaṇas than the tremendous importance which is ascribed to the sacrifice. The sacrifice is here no longer the means to an end, but it is an aim in itself, indeed, the highest aim of existence. The sacrifice is also a power which overwhelms all, indeed, a creative force of Nature. Therefore the sacrifice is identical with Prajāpati, the creator. "Prajāpati is the sacrifice" is an oft-repeated sentence in the Brāhmaṇas. "The soul of all beings, of all gods is this, the sacrifice." "Truly, he who consecrates himself for the sacrifice, he consecrates himself for the All, for only after the sacrifice follows the All; in making the preparations for the sacrifice, for which he consecrates himself, he creates the All out of himself.¹) Equally endowed with magic power and equally significant is everything which is connected with the sacrifice, the sacrificial utensils no less than the prayers and formulae, the verses and their metres, the chants, and their melodies. Every single sacrificial act is treated with the greatest circumstantiality: enormous importance is attached to the most trivial circumstances, to the least details. Whether an action is to be performed to the left or to the right, whether a pot is to be put in this or in that spot on the place of sacrifice, whether a blade of grass is to be laid down with the point to the north or to the north-east, whether the priest steps in front of the fire or behind it, in which direction he must have his face turned, into how many parts the sacrificial cake is to be divided, whether the ghee is to be poured into the northern or the southern half or into the centre of the fire, at which instant the repetition of a certain spell, the singing of a certain song has to take place,¹—these are questions upon which generations of masters of the art of sacrifice have meditated, and which are treated in the most searching manner in the Brāhmaṇas. Upon the correct knowledge of all these details does the weal and woe of the sacrificer depend. “Such, indeed, are the wilds and ravines of sacrifice, and they (take) hundreds upon hundreds of days’ carriage-drives; and if any venture into them without knowledge, then hunger or thirst, evil-doers and fiends harass them, even as fiends would harass foolish men wandering in a wild forest; but if those who know this do so, they pass from one deity to another, as from one stream into another, and from one safe place to another, and obtain well-being, the world of heaven.”²

v1.c8.s7.33

¹ See above, p. 78.

v1.c8.s7.34

¹ Śat., XIV, 3, 2, 1. III, 6, 3, 1.

v1.c8.s7.35

¹ Eggeling (SBE., Vol. 12, p. X) recalls the fact that among the Ancient Romans, too, the *Pontifices* gained their power and influence through being the only people who understood all the details of the sacrificial ceremonial, which details, though small, had yet been declared tremendously important. It happened in Ancient Rome, that a sacrifice had to be repeated thirty times, because some little mistake had been made at one of the ceremonies; and in Ancient Rome, too, a ceremony was regarded as null and void, if a word was mispronounced or an act was not performed quite correctly, or if the music did not cease playing at the right moment. Cf. *Marquardt* and *Mommsen*, Handbuch der römischen Altertümer, VI, pp. 172, 174, 213.

v1.c8.s7.36

² Śat. XII, 2, 3, 12. Translated by J. *Eggeling*, SBE., Vol. 44, p. 160.

v1.c8.s7.37

But “those who know,” the guides through the wilderness of sacrificial art, are the priests, and it is no wonder that the claims of the *priestly caste*—for of such a caste we must now speak, as the caste system is already fully developed—in the Brāhmaṇas (as already in some parts of the Atharvaveda) exceed all bounds. Now the Brahmans are frequently declared to be gods. “Yes, they are the very gods, the Brahmans.”³ One Brāhmaṇa states plainly enough:

v1.c8.s7.38

³ Taittirīya-Saṃhitā, I, 7, 3, 1.

v1.c8.s7.39

"Two kinds of gods there are, indeed, namely the gods are the gods, and the learned and studying ¹ Brahmans are the human gods. Between these two is the sacrifice divided: the sacrificial gifts are for the gods, the presents (Dakṣiṇās) for the human gods, the learned and studying Brahmans: by means of sacrificial gifts he pleases the gods, by presents he pleases the human gods, the learned studying Brahmans: these *two* kinds of gods transfer him, when they are satisfied, into the blessedness of heaven." ²

v1.c8.s7.40

¹ Literally:—"who have heard and who repeat (recite what they have heard).

v1.c8.s7.41

² Śat. II, 2, 2, 6; IV, 3, 4, 4.

v1.c8.s7.42

Four duties has the Brahman: Brahmanic descent, corresponding conduct, fame (attained through erudition) and "ripening of the people" (*i.e.* offering of sacrifices, by means of which people are made ripe for the Beyond). But the "ripened" people also have four duties towards the Brahmans: They must show them honour, give them presents, may not oppress and not kill them. The property of a Brahman may under no circumstances be touched by the king; and if a king gives his whole country with all that is in it, to the priests as a sacrificial fee (dakṣiṇā), then it is always understood that the property of Brahmans is excepted. A king can certainly oppress a Brahman, but if he does so, evil will befall him. At the consecration of a king the priest says "this man, ye people, is your king; Soma is the king of us Brahmans," to which the Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa observes: "By this formula he makes the whole nation as food for the king; ³ the Brahman alone he excepts; therefore the Brahman must not be utilised as food; for he has Soma as his king." ⁴ Only the murder of a Brahman is real murder. In a quarrel between a Brahman and a non-Brahman the judge must always decide in favour of the Brahman, for the Brahman may not be contradicted.⁵

v1.c8.s7.43

³ *i.e.* the king lives by the people, who have to pay him taxes.

v1.c8.s7.44

⁴ Śat. XI, 5, 7, 1; XIII, 5, 4, 24; XIII, 1, 5, 4; V, 4, 2, 3.

v1.c8.s7.45

⁵ Śat. XIII, 3, 5, 3; Taittirīya-Saṁhitā, II, 5, 11, 9.

v1.c8.s7.46

Everything which for some reason or another is taboo, which one may not touch, and cannot use otherwise, as, for example, the stone and earthenware vessels of a deceased person or a cow (intended for the Agnihotra milk) which becomes stubborn or ill, must be given to the Brahman, especially the remains of sacrifices and food which are taboo for others, for “nothing injures the stomach of a Brahman.”¹

v1.c8.s7.47

¹ Taittirīya Saṃhitā II, 6, 8, 7. *Cf.* Goethe, Faust:

v1.c8.s7.48

Thus, at last, the conclusion is arrived at, that the Brahman is no longer a “human god” *by the side* of the heavenly gods, but that he raises himself *above* the gods. Already in the Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa² it is said: “The Brahman descended from a Ṛṣi indeed *is* all deities,” *i.e.* in him all deities are incorporated. This presumption on the part of the priests, the beginnings of which we meet with in the Brāhmaṇas, is not only of the greatest interest for the history of culture as an example of priestly arrogance, but it is also the precursor of a phenomenon which we can trace through the whole of Indian antiquity, and which, I think, is deeply rooted in the life of the Indo-European mind. While, for instance, the Hebrew poet says: “What is man, that Thou art mindful of him, and the son of man that Thou visitest him?” and adds “Man is like unto nothingness,” a *Greek* poet uttered the great saying: “There is much that is powerful, but the most powerful is man.” And a *German* poet—the same who created the super-man³ Faust, who knocks violently

v1.c8.s7.49

² XII, 4, 4, 6. Later it is said in the law-book of Manu: “A Brahman, be he learned or unlearned, is a great deity,” and immediately afterwards, “The Brahman is the highest deity.” Manu, IX, 317, 319.

v1.c8.s7.50

³ “What awful horror seizes thee, O Super-man!”

v1.c8.s7.51

“The Church has a good digestion,
Has eaten up whole lands
And yet never over-eaten herself.”

v1.c8.s7.52

at the gates of the spirit-world—has sung the song of Prometheus, who calls to the gods:

v1.c8.s7.53

“I know nothing poorer
Under the sun, than ye, O gods!”

v1.c8.s7.54

And in India we see how, already in the Brāhmaṇas, the priest exalts himself over the gods through the *sacrifice*; in the epics we read countless stories of ascetics who, through *asceticism* attain to such ascendancy that the gods tremble upon their thrones. In Buddhism, however, the divine beings, with Indra the prince of gods, have fully dwindled into quite insignificant beings, who differ from ordinary mortals only in that they are somewhat better situated, and even that only so long as they remain devout Buddhists; and infinitely high above these gods stands not only the Buddha himself, but every man who, through *love for all beings* and through renunciation of the world, has become an Arhat or saint.¹

v1.c8.s7.55

¹ See A. *Weber*, SBA. 1897, 1, 594, ff.

v1.c8.s7.56

Thus already in the Brāhmaṇas the way is prepared for that great movement to which Buddhism owes its origin: for it cannot be questioned that the old and genuine Brāhmaṇas belong to the Pre-Buddhist period. While in the Brāhmaṇas not the least trace is shown of any acquaintance with Buddhism,² the Buddhist texts pre-suppose the existence of a Brāhmaṇa literature. We can therefore say upon good grounds that the centuries in which the Liturgical Saṁhitās and the Brāhmaṇas originated, must fall into the period *after* the conclusion of the hymn-composition and the Ṛgveda-Saṁhitā and *before* the appearance of Buddhism.

v1.c8.s7.57

² It is significant that, in the list of human sacrifices in the Vājasaneyi-Saṁhitā, XXX (*cf.* above, pp. 147 f.) there is no mention of either monks or nuns, or of Buddhists at all. And yet this list is probably later than the oldest Brāhmaṇas.

v1.c8.s7.58

As regards the actual contents of these works, a few examples will suffice to give the reader an idea. The Indians themselves usually arrange the contents of the Brāhmaṇas in two principal categories, which they call *Vidhi* and *Arthavāda*. Vidhi means "rule, precept," Arthavāda "explanation of meaning." For the Brāhmaṇas first give rules for the performance of the single ceremonies, and to these the interpretations and explanations of the purpose and meaning of the sacrificial acts and prayers are afterwards attached. Thus, for example, the Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa begins with the precepts upon the vow of abstinence, which the sacrificer has to make on the day before the new-moon and full-moon sacrifice. There we read:

v1.c8.s7.59

"He who is about to enter on the vow, touches water, whilst standing between the Āhavanīya and Gārhapatya fires, with his face turned towards east. The reason why he touches water is, that man is (sacrificially) impure on account of his speaking untruth; and because by that act an internal purification (is effected),—for water is indeed (sacrificially) pure. 'After becoming sacrificially pure, I will enter on the vow,' thus (he thinks); for water is indeed purifying. 'Having become purified through the purifying one, I will enter on the vow,' thus (he thinks, and) this is the reason why he touches water."¹

v1.c8.s7.60

¹ Śat. I, 1, 1, 1. Translated by J. Eggeling, SBE. Vol 12, pp. 2 f.

v1.c8.s7.61

To such simple explanations there are often attached discussions of the views of various teachers upon some question of ritual. Thus here the controversy is raised whether, at the making of the vow in question, one should fast or not, and it is said:

v1.c8.s7.62

"Now then of the eating (or) fasting. And on this point Āshāḷha Sāvayasa, on the one hand, was of opinion that the vow consisted in fasting. For assuredly (he argued), the gods see through the mind of man; they know that, when he enters on this vow he means to sacrifice to them next morning. Therefore all the gods betake themselves to his house, and abide by (him or the fires, upa-vas) in his house: whence this (day) is called upa-vasatha. [7]
Now, as it would even be unbecoming for him to take food, before

v1.c8.s7.63

men (who are staying with him as his guests)¹ have eaten; how much more would it be so, if he were to take food before the gods (who are staying with him) have eaten : let him therefore take no food at all. [8]

v1.c8.s7.64

¹ The sentences in brackets have been completed from the context. It is impossible to render the original accurately in English without such completions. The Brāhmaṇas are not *written for readers*, but *spoken to hearers*, hence much is omitted which the speaker can express by means of emphasizing certain words, manual gestures, and so on.

v1.c8.s7.65

Yājñavalkya, on the other hand, said : “If he does not eat, he thereby becomes a sacrificer to the Fathers;² and if he does eat, he eats before the gods have eaten : let him therefore eat what, when eaten, counts as not eaten.” For that of which no offering is made, even though it is eaten, is considered as not eaten. When he therefore eats, he does not become a sacrificer to the Fathers; and by eating of that of which no offering is made, he does not eat before the gods have eaten. [9]

v1.c8.s7.66

² Because fasting is ordained for sacrifices to the fathers.

v1.c8.s7.67

Let him therefore eat only what grows in the forest, be it forest plants or the fruit of trees.”³

v1.c8.s7.68

³ Śat. I, 1, 1, 1, 7-10. Translated by J. Eggeling, SBE., Vol. 12, pp. 4 f.

v1.c8.s7.69

*Etymologies*, such as that of Upavasatha in the above-quoted place, are exceedingly frequent in the Brāhmaṇas. Moreover, it is regarded as a special advantage if an etymology is not quite accurate, for “the gods love that which is hidden.” Thus, for instance, the name of the god *Indra* is derived from *indh*, “to kindle,” and it is said : he is, therefore, actually named *Indha*, and he is called “Indra” only because the gods love what is concealed. Or the word “*ulūkhala*,” which means “mortar,” is derived from *uru karat*, “it shall make wide,” and “ulūkhala” is declared to be a mystical designation for “urukara.”⁴ Like the etymologizing, *identifying* and *symbolizing* play an even greater part in the Brāhmaṇas than in the Yajurveda-Saṁhitās:⁵ the most dissimilar things being put together and associated with one another. On every page of the Brāhmaṇas we find explanations like the following:

v1.c8.s7.70

⁴ Śat. VI, 1, 1, 2; VII, 5, 1, 22, *cf.* above, p. 184.

v1.c8.s7.71

⁵ See above, p. 181. On identifications in the Brāhmaṇas see *Oldenberg*, Vorwissenschaftliche Wissenschaft, pp. 110 ff.

v1.c8.s7.72

“He now strews sacrificial grass all round (the fires), and fetches the utensils, taking two at a time, *viz.* the winnowing basket and the Agnihotra ladle, the wooden sword and the potsherds, the wedge and the black antelope skin, the mortar and the pestle, the large and the small mill-stones. These are ten in number; for of ten syllables consists the Virāj (metre), and radiant (virāj) also is the sacrifice; so that he thereby makes the sacrifice resemble the Virāj. The reason why he takes two at a time is, because a pair means strength; for when two undertake anything, there is strength in it. Moreover, a pair represents a productive copulation, so that a productive copulation (of those respective objects) is thereby effected.”¹

v1.c8.s7.73

¹ Śat. I, 1, 1, 22. Translated by J. Eggeling, SBE., Vol. 12, pp. 10 f.

v1.c8.s7.74

“Now the sacrifice is the man. The sacrifice is the man for the reason that the man spreads (performs) it; and that in being spread it is made of exactly the same extent as the man:² this is the reason why the sacrifice is the man. [1]

v1.c8.s7.75

² Because, in measuring the sacrificial place, such measurements as “man’s length,” “arm’s length,” “span” and so on, are employed.

v1.c8.s7.76

The juhū³ (spoon) further belongs to that (man-shaped sacrifice and so does the upabhṛt³; and the dhruvā³; represents its trunk. Now it is from the trunk that all these limbs proceed, and for this reason the entire sacrifice proceeds from the dhruvā. [2]

v1.c8.s7.77

³ Names of different sacrificial spoons. [^4): With this spoon (Sruva) the ghee is taken out of the ghee-pot and poured into the sacrificial spoons with which it is served. [^5): “He” means Puruṣa, ‘man.’ But Puruṣa also means “spirit” and designates the “Great Spirit” too, which is one with Prajāpati, the creator of the universe. Hence the sacrifice is not only identified with man (the sacrificer) but also with the Universal Spirit and Prajāpati. *Cf.* above, p. 184, note 2.

v1.c8.s7.78

The dipping-spoon[^4) (sruva, masc.) is no other than the breath. This breath passes through (or, goes to) all the limbs, and for that reason the dipping-spoon goes to all the offering-spoons (sruc, fem.). [3]

v1.c8.s7.79

That juhū further is to him[^5) no other than yonder sky, and the upabhṛt this atmosphere, and the dhruvā this same (earth). Now it is from this (earth) that all the worlds originate: and from the dhruvā, therefore, the whole sacrifice proceeds. [4]

v1.c8.s7.80

The dipping-spoon then is no other than that blowing one (the wind); it is this that sweeps across all these worlds: and for that reason the sruva goes to all the offering-spoons.”[^1) ]

v1.c8.s7.81

In countless places in the Brāhmaṇas the *sacrifice* is identified with the god *Viṣṇu* and equally frequently with the creator *Prajāpati*. But the *year*, too, is identified with Prajāpati countless times, while on the other hand *Agni*, as the fire-altar, is also regarded as the *year*, because the building of the fire-altar takes a whole year. Thus we read: “Agni is the year, and the year is these worlds,” and immediately afterwards: “Agni is Prajāpati, and Prajāpati is the year.” Or, “Prajāpati, indeed, is the sacrifice and the year, the new moon night is its gate, and the moon is the bolt of the gate.”[^2) ] A prominent part is here played by the symbolism of figures. Thus we read, for example:

v1.c8.s7.82

“With *four* (verses) he takes (some of the ashes); he thereby supplies him (Agni) with *four-footed* animals; and animals being food, it is with food he thus supplies him. With *three* (verses) he takes (the ashes) down (to the water),—that makes *seven*, for of seven layers consists the fire-altar, seven seasons are a year, and the year is Agni: as great as Agni is, as great as his measure, so great does this become.”[^3) ]

v1.c8.s7.83

Here and there these barren explanations gain a little interest through the fact that they throw some light upon the moral views and social conditions of the period to which the Brāhmaṇas belong. Thus, for example, at the soma-sacrifice one of the soma-libations is dedicated to Agni Patnīvat, *i.e.* “Agni accompanied by his wives.”[^4) ] This libation differs in certain details from other soma-gifts, and these deviations in the offering of the same are explained by

v1.c8.s7.84

[^1) ]: Śat. I, 3, 2, 1-5. Translated by J. Eggeling, SBE. Vol. 12, p. 78 f. [^2) ]: Śat. VIII, 2, 1, 17-18; XI, 1, 1, 1. [^3) ]: Sat. VI, 8, 2, 7. Translated by J. Eggeling, SBE., Vol. 41, p. 295. [^4) ]: *Cf.* above, p. 88.

v1.c8.s7.85

reference to the weakness and helplessness of the female sex:

v1.c8.s7.86

“With the remains of ghee left over in the sacrificial spoon he mixes (the soma). Other soma-libations he makes strong, by mixing them, but he weakens this one; for ghee is indeed a thunderbolt, and with the thunderbolt, the ghee, did the gods beat and weaken their wives; and thus beaten and weakened they had no right whatever either to their own bodies or to an heritage. And likewise he now beats and weakens the wives with the thunderbolt, the ghee, and thus beaten and weakened, the wives have no right whatever either to their own bodies or to an heritage.” (Śat. IV, 4, 2, 13.)

v1.c8.s7.87

This, then, would be a ritual argument for the bondage of woman.¹ In another place the relationship of the wife to the husband appears in a slightly pleasanter light. Namely, at the Vājapeya-sacrifice, the following ceremony occurs. A ladder is leaned against the sacrificial stake, and the sacrificer, with his wife, ascends it:

v1.c8.s7.88

¹ We also read in the Brāhmaṇas such sentences as: “Verily, the sacrifice is right and truth, woman is something wrong” (Maitrāyaṇīya-Saṃhitā, I, 10, 11), “Nirṛti (*i.e.* Evil personified) is woman.” (Maitr. I, 10, 16), “Woman, the Śūdra, the dog, and the blackbird (the crow) are something wrong.” (Śat. 14, 1, 1, 31), etc. See *Lévi*, La doctrine du sacrifice dans les Brāhmaṇas, pp. 156 ff.; *Oldenberg*, Vorwissenschaftliche Wissenschaft, pp. 44 f.; and *Winternitz*, Die Frau in den indischen Religionen, I, pp. 4 f., 10 ff., 43.

v1.c8.s7.89

“When he is about to ascend, he addresses his wife in the following words: ‘Wife, let us ascend to heaven,’ and the wife answers: ‘Yes, let us ascend.’ The reason why he addresses his wife thus is this: She the wife, is indeed his own half; therefore as long as he has no wife, so long he does not propagate his species, so long he is no complete individual; but when he has a wife, then he propagates his species, then he is complete. ‘As a complete individual will I go this way (to heaven),’ he thinks; therefore he addresses his wife in this manner.” (Śat. V, 2, 1, 10.)

v1.c8.s7.90

The place of sacrifice or the altar (Vedi, fem.) is represented in the symbolism of the Brāhmaṇas as a woman. The following rule for the erection of the altar gives us information upon the ancient ideal of feminine beauty:

v1.c8.s7.91

"It (the altar) should be broader on the west side, contracted in the middle, and broad again on the east side; for thus shaped they praise a woman: 'broad about the hips, somewhat narrower between the shoulders, and contracted in the middle (or, about the waist).' Thereby he makes it (the altar) pleasing to the gods."¹

v1.c8.s7.92

¹ Śat. I, 2, 5, 16. Translated by J. *Eggeling*, SBE., Vol. 12, p. 63.

v1.c8.s7.93

A glaring light is thrown upon the sexual morality of that period by a brutal sacrificial custom which occurs at one of the sacrifices of the seasons, and is described as follows:

v1.c8.s7.94

"Thereupon the Pratiprasthātṛ² returns (to where the sacrificer's wife is seated). When he is about to lead the wife away,³ he asks her, 'With whom holdest thou intercourse?' Now when a woman who belongs to one (man) carries on intercourse with another, she undoubtedly commits a (sin) against Varuṇa. He therefore thus asks her, lest she should sacrifice with a secret pang in her mind; for when confessed the sin becomes less, since it becomes truth; this is why he thus asks her. And whatever (connection) she confesses not, that indeed will turn out injurious to her relatives."⁴

v1.c8.s7.95

² One of the priests, an assistant of the adhvaryu.

v1.c8.s7.96

³ Namely to the altar, where she is to offer a gift to Varuṇa.

v1.c8.s7.97

⁴ Śat. II, 5, 2, 20. Translated by J. *Eggeling*, SBE., Vol. 12, pp. 396 f.

v1.c8.s7.98

This, by the way, is one of the few places in the Brāhmaṇas where morality is thought of. It is only very occasionally that we come across moral reflections, as for instance, when the Asuras defeated the gods by falsehood, but the gods gained the ascendancy in the end, we are told that in like manner when men speak the truth, they may suffer adversity at first, but will prosper ultimately, while though the liars may have success for a time, they will surely perish in the end.⁵ Generally speaking, however, it is very characteristic of these texts that there is hardly any mention of morality in them at all. The Brāhmaṇas are a splendid proof of the fact that an enormous amount of religion can be connected with infinitely little morality. Religious acts, sacrifices and ceremonies, are the one and only subject of all these extensive works, but morality is a thing with which these works have nothing to do.¹ On the contrary, sacrificial acts are not only performed in order that the gods may fulfil the very materialistic wishes of the sacrificer, but also very frequently in order to injure an enemy. Indeed, the Brāhmaṇas give directions for the priests, how, by means of the sacrifice, they can injure the sacrificer himself by whom they are employed, if, for instance, he does not give them enough presents. They need only perform the prescribed ceremonies in reverse order, or employ spells at the wrong place, and the fate of the sacrificer is sealed.

v1.c8.s7.99

⁵ Śat. IX, 5, 1, 16 f. *Oldenberg* (Vorwissenschaftliche Wissenschaft, pp. 19 ff., 124 ff., 184 ff.) has taken great pains to collect all that can be found on ethical ideas in the Brāhmaṇas. It does not amount to much.

v1.c8.s7.100

¹ "Morals have found no place in this system: the sacrifice which regulates the relationship of man with the gods is a mechanical operation which acts by its innermost energy; hidden in the bosom of nature, it only emerges under the magic action of the priest." "It is indeed difficult to conceive of anything more brutal or more material than the theology of the Brāhmaṇas; the notions, which custom has slowly refined and clothed with a moral aspect, surprise us by their savage realism." Sylvain Lévi, La doctrine du sacrifice, p. 9; *cf.* 164 ff.

v1.c8.s7.101

But enough of this intricate science of sacrifice which forms the chief contents of the Brāhmaṇas. Fortunately, one of the component parts of the Arthavāda or the "explanation of meaning," consists of the so-called *Itihāsas*, *Ākhyānas* and *Purāṇas*, *i.e.* narratives, myths and legends, which are narrated in order to explain the reason for some ritual act or other. As in the Talmud, to which the Brāhmaṇas have some similarity, the blooming garden of the Hagada (so beautifully described in song by Heine) stands beside the theological jugglery of the Halacha, so also in the Brāhmaṇas the desert of desolate theological speculation is now and then pleasantly relieved by an oasis, in which the flower of poetry, a poetical narrative or a deeply thoughtful legend of the creation, blossoms.

v1.c8.s7.102

The very old myth, already known to the singers of the Ṛgveda, of Purūravas and Urvaśī, narrated in the Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa,¹ is such an oasis in the desert. It is there related how the nymph (Apsaras) Urvaśī loved the king Purūravas, how she stated her conditions when she became his wife, and how the Gandharvas caused him to violate one of these conditions. Then she eluded him, and Purūravas, wailing and lamenting, wandered throughout the whole of Kurukṣetra until he came to a lotus-pond, where nymphs were swimming about in the form of swans. Among them was Urvaśī and there ensued the dialogue which is already known to us from the dialogue verses of the Ṛgveda.

v1.c8.s7.103

¹ XI, 5, 1. Translated by *Eggeling*, SBE, Vol. 44, pp. 68 ff., German translation by K. *Geldner*, Vedische Studien, I, 244 ff. See above, pp. 103 f.

v1.c8.s7.104

"Then her heart took pity on him. She said, 'Come here the last night of the year from now: then shalt thou lie with me for one night, and then this son of thine,² will have been born.' He came there on the last night of the year, and lo, there stood a golden palace! They then said to him only this (word), 'Enter!' and then they bade her go to him.

v1.c8.s7.105

² Literally: "This thy son here." One of the many expressions which are only explicable in the oral presentation. Similarly, "this here" in the Brāhmaṇas often means "earth," "that yonder" means "sky," and so on.

v1.c8.s7.106

She then said, 'To-morrow morning the Gandharvas will grant thee a boon, and thou must make thy choice.' He said, 'Choose thou for me!' She replied, 'Say, "Let me be one of yourselves!"' In the morning the Gandharvas granted him a boon; and he said, 'Let me be one of yourselves!'"³

v1.c8.s7.107

³ Translated by J. *Eggeling*, SBE., Vol. 44, pp. 72 f.

v1.c8.s7.108

Thereupon, the Gandharvas taught him a particular form of fire-sacrifice, through which a mortal becomes changed into a Gandharva. To the description of this sacrifice we owe the insertion in the Brāhmaṇa of the old wonder-tale from which not even the doctors of the sacrificial art could strip all the magic of poetry.

v1.c8.s7.109

(In the Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa we also find the Indian legend of the flood, which in all probability is derived from a Semitic source, in its oldest form:

v1.c8.s7.110

“ In the morning they brought to Manu water for washing just as now also they (are wont to) bring (water) for washing the hands. When he was washing himself, a fish came into his hands. (1)

It spake to him the word, ‘ Rear me, I will save thee ! ’ ‘ Wherefrom wilt thou save me ? ’ ‘ A flood will carry away all these creatures : from that I will save thee ! ’ ‘ How am I to rear thee ? ’ (2)

It said, ‘ As long as we are small, there is great destruction for us : fish devours fish. Thou wilt first keep me in a jar. When I outgrow that, thou wilt dig a pit and keep me in it. When I outgrow that, thou wilt take me down to the sea, for then I shall be beyond destruction.’ (3)

It soon became a jhasha (a large fish); for that grows largest (of all fish). Thereupon it said, ‘ In such and such a year that flood will come. Thou shalt then attend to me (*i.e.* to my advice) by preparing a ship ; and when the flood has risen thou shalt enter into the ship, and I will save thee from it.’ (4)

After he had reared it in this way, he took it down to the sea. And in the same year which the fish had indicated to him, he attended to (the advice of the fish) by preparing a ship ; and when the flood had risen, he entered into the ship. The fish then swam up to him, and to its horn he tied the rope of the ship, and by that means he passed swiftly up to yonder northern mountain. (5)

It then said, ‘ I have saved thee. Fasten the ship to a tree ; but let not the water cut thee off, whilst thou art on the mountain. As the water subsides, thou mayest gradually descend ! ’ Accordingly he gradually descended, and hence that (slope) of the northern mountain is called ‘ Manu’s descent.’ The flood then swept away all these creatures, and Manu alone remained here.¹)

First 110 of 189 passages. Read on

Linked texts (24)