The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c13.s1.27

c13.s1.27

So far we have seen that the festival’s pivotal issue is atonement and that this is worked out in a conflict and its resolution between two parties that seem to be linked with each other through connubium. But before we can round off the picture, one more question remains to be answered. What is the sin, the guilt, that has to be expiated? In a way the guilt seems to lie in the strife between the two parties. When Prajāpati created the *prajāḥ*, ‘‘the beings,’’ through the preceding seasonal sacrifice, they treated him with disdain and left him. Prajāpati, becoming Varuṇa, seized them;⁴⁰ alternately, it is said that, when created, they or Prajāpati’s sacrifice were attacked by the Maruts.⁴¹ Here it would seem that guilt indeed lies in strife, for it is difficult to see why the prajāḥ should have to expiate the aggressiveness of the Maruts. Unless, of course, as seems quite probable, the prajāḥ and the Maruts are actually the same; the prajāḥ fall out with Prajāpati, and the Maruts are said to rob Prajāpati’s sacrificial viands. Both prajāḥ and Maruts seem equally guilty,⁴² and both are in the position of viś. The nature of the original sin is, however, explained in clearer terms by the *Śatapatha*: when created, the prajāḥ ate Varuṇa’s barleycorn, and because of that Varuṇa seized them.⁴³