Sexual Life in Ancient India: A Study in the Comparative History of Indian Culture v2.c21: Appendix: Additions and Corrections
Sexual Life in Ancient India: A Study in the Comparative History of Indian Culture v2.c21
- Language
- English
Appendix: Additions and Corrections
v2.c21.1
P. 8, n. 3. At Draupadī's choosing of her husband her mother had no joy whatever, for her only thought was: "What kind of husband will she get?" K., i, 200.20.
v2.c21.2
P. 11, n. 1. Since the maiden, particularly the virgin (kumārī), is a lucky object, she is also called in for divining by dice, but not as the "substitute of the faithful wife", as Lüders holds ("Das Würfelspiel im alten Indien," *Abhandlungen d. königl. Gesellsch. d. Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, phil.-hist.* Klasse, Bd. ix, p. 9). He is mistaken also when in the same place he believes that Nala is determined to play, because Damayantī is looking on, and thus by her presence ensures him success. It is rather in the first place the inciting presence of woman, especially the beloved one. See p. 534. But it is to be noted that the magical help of the wife, especially the chaste wife, has a powerful influence on the man's luck. Cp. Meyer, *Isoldes Gottesurteil*, note 104; Elsie Clews Parsons, *The Old-Fashioned Woman*, 1913, p. 61 ff.
v2.c21.3
P. 13, l. 31. Devayānī says: "Why art thou taking my clothes, my disciple?" She is, or has been, teaching Çarmiṣṭhā, as teachers' daughters in India often have women-disciples.
v2.c21.4
P. 15, l. 17 from end. According to K., Çukra becomes anxious at Devayānī staying away too long, and he sends the nurse off after her. The nurse finds the poor girl in tears and quite worn out under a tree, and makes her tell her what has happened (72.29-34).
v2.c21.5
P. 18, l. 10. The reading in K., mahākavim, is smoother: "Vṛṣaparvan spoke to the great wise man."
v2.c21.6
P. 19, l. 8 from end. Devayānī says: "Thy semblance is like a king's, and yet thou speakest the speech of the Brahmans." In his mouth, then, this speech is something unusual. Devayānī's ill-humoured words are made easier to understand in K.: There in several çlokas he praises the wonderful loveliness of Çarmiṣṭhā, and declares that D.'s charms are not to be compared with those of her slave-girl (75.14-17). Here çl. 24 betrays to us that Yayāti's secret reason in rejecting D. is that he wants Ç. for his wife.
v2.c21.7
P. 29, l. 14 from end. K. reads probably better "gehe suvihitaḥ", well quartered (provided, treated) in thy house.
v2.c21.8
P. 32, ll. 18 ff. It is probably safer to keep to the usual meaning of kare gṛhītvā: "How could I then, who am now so alarmed, make a headlong marriage, and perform the giving of myself away, which lies not with me, out of my own full powers?"
v2.c21.9
P. 34, n. 2. P. 33, l. 9 must be: "be a maid again (wieder)." "Still (noch)" is what I put in when reading the proofs (when the primary text was not by me) for an original "again" (punar), since I thought the reading was kanyaiva tvam bhaviṣyasi, as immediately follows ("thou wilt be a maid"). For this expression is the usual one, and it is often hard to decide whether it means "to be still a maid unharmed" or "to become a maid again". That these two conceptions were not distinguished is shown e.g. by the following passages: Satyavatī bore Vyāsa as a virgin (kanyaiva, i, 60.2). So, too, K., i, 114.32 makes Parāçara say to her: Garbham utsṛjya māmakam . . . kanyaiva tvam bhaviṣyasi (cp. B., i, 105.13). But in the next çloka we find: Kanyātvam ca dadau prītaḥ punar, etc. And to Mādhavī the Brahman says: Kanyaiva tvam bhaviṣyasi (v, 116.11), and then we are told of her kumārī kāmato bhūtvā (116.21), and kanyā bhūtvā (118.1), which can hardly mean anything but: "having become a maid again." Kuntī herself says: punar eva tu kanyābhavam (xv, 30.16).
v2.c21.10
P. 34, n. 1. As to sādhayāmas (sādhayiṣyāmi, etc.) with prasthita following with the same meaning cp. i, 3.126; iii, 206.47 with 207.5; 294.32 with 294.33; see e.g. also xiii, 85.27.
v2.c21.11
P. 40, l. 11. "On the other shore." So according to K. B.(64.114) has: "on both shores," and this is found also in the interpolation in K., 114.7.
v2.c21.12
P. 47, l. 15. As Svāhā takes the shapes of women desired by Agni, so does Anna Perenna take that of Nerio beloved by Mars, and she, too, has success.
v2.c21.13
P. 47, l. 36. According to 99.19 f. a mortal who drinks the milk of the wonderful cow lives for 10,000 years with no loss of youthful power.
v2.c21.14
P. 48, bottom. Pratīpa’s son is, of course, the re-embodiment of that same Mahābhisha. K. here not only describes in a dozen çlokas what a paragon of a ruler Çantanu was, but also sets before our eyes in pleasing colours that are almost modern a picture of how Gaṅgā, who has just bathed, and is combing her loosened hair with her fingers, shows off the wealth of her wanton charms, and makes all kinds of voluptuous movements (103.31 ff.). Cp. how Hiḍimbā entices Bhīmasena (K., i, 164.24-32); also B., v, 9.9 ff., and who knows how many other passages.
v2.c21.15
P. 50, l. 4. “She so delighted the king that he found the utmost delight,” sounds strange, of course. Perhaps sā is to be read instead of saḥ : “As she with her . . . gave pleasure to the king, so she herself found pleasure” (98.10). K. has yathā rajyeta sa prabhuḥ (204.16).
v2.c21.16
P. 61, l. 14. Bhīshma after the Indian custom calls Bālhika his father. He was his father’s brother (e.g. : i, 94.61-62; v, 149.15 ff.). Some lines below (“Therewith is judgment, too,” etc.) we could also have: “For the greedy, the evil-minded, the decision may lie therein (in buying and selling),” etc.
v2.c21.17
P. 73, l. 36 would be literally: Because of the want of foundation in the nature (of women). But perhaps far better would be: “Because, indeed, the attributes (of the wooer) give no grounds.” As the scholiast reminds us, in love women give no heed to heroism, learning, etc.
v2.c21.18
P. 75, l. 4. Baladeva probably wants to make all the Kauravas pay at once for Arjuna’s crime.
v2.c21.19
P. 76, n., l. 30. K., i, 238 ff. relates: Arjuna hears through Gada of the lovely and most excellent Subhadrā, falls in love, and goes as a Yati with three staves, a water-pitcher, a wreath of roses, etc. to her home, to see the fair one with his own eyes, and to sound Vāsudeva’s feelings in the matter. During the rainy season (or : a rain) he stays in a hollow tree, and thinks of Vāsudeva. V. is lying with Satyabhāmā in bed, through his divine knowledge is aware of all, and laughs. S. wants to know the reason, and Kṛiṣhṇa enlightens her. He goes to the Yogi Arjuna, and comes with him to the mountain Raivataka. It is now essentially the same as in B., 218.3 ff. But next morning Kṛiṣhṇa dismisses A. who is still disguised as a Yati. A. sits down on a stone outside the city in the forest, and thinks sorrowfully of Subhadrā. The Yādavas with Baladeva at their head see the holy man on their way back from the festival of Raivataka, and do him reverence. A conversation takes place; they welcome him as a stranger in the place (deçātithi), and bid him to stay during the four rainy months. Kṛṣṇa also comes up now; the guest is entrusted to him by Baladeva. It is Baladeva who first advises that the penitent be housed in the maidens’ abode; but the cunning Kṛṣṇa rejects this idea in the first moment, as being dangerous with so handsome and excellent a Yati. But he then quickly agrees to it. Subhadrā has already heard of Arjuna through Kṛṣṇa and others, and has long been in love with him on hearsay. The rest is then as in the note. But not only Kṛṣṇa, but the other kinsfolk, too, purposely give Arjuna free play with Subhadrā during that thirty-four days’ island festival. They have long known, indeed, about the matter. For Devakī, Rukmiṇī, and other women have been let into the secret, and have helped. Nay, even Subhadrā’s father himself, and the whole council of state have long ago discussed the matter, and resolved on a splendid wedding. The carrying off is therefore here no more than a romantic pretence. It is with the woman’s own consent that the carrying off is often brought about in Old India, too, and then it is thus a seduction. So iii, 224.1-4. And Rukmiṇī indeed was agreed that Kṛṣṇa should carry her off, although she was already betrothed to Çiçupāla. It is several times pointed out in the Epic that it is wrong to carry off an unwilling woman. Even the splendid Svayaṃvara sometimes appears only as a means whereby the girl may get him whom she secretly loves. So with Damayantī. Ambā, the daughter of the king of Kāçi has secretly betrothed herself to the king of the Çalvas, and this marriage is also after her father’s will (otherwise on p. 381). Together with her younger sisters she holds a choosing of a husband, but with the arrangement that she shall choose the Çalva (i, 103.61 f.). This plan is upset by Bhīshma. And Drupada, too, at the Svayaṃvara of his daughter is bent on thus getting Arjuna as a son-in-law (i, 185.8 ff.). It is true that possibly this is a later falsification, in spite of i, 193.12-20, where the same underlying thought may well be. Cp. 195.8 ff. But love marriages without some such embroidering seem, therefore, among the nobles not to have been quite “seemly”. Arjuna’s fight for Subhadrā is found also in B. According to iii, 80.28 he had first overcome all the Yādavas before he took his beloved with him; and iv, 49.6 even says that on this occasion he challenged Kṛṣṇa to fight.
v2.c21.20
P.78, l.6. Çiçupāla carried off this girl not for himself, but for another man. She was the daughter of the ruler of Viçālā, and according to K., ii, 68.21 had been chosen for his bride by Kṛṣṇa’s father. This explains Kṛṣṇa’s moral wrath, who even charges Çiçupāla with having
v2.c21.21
tried to win Rukminī by a trick. Yet she was Ҫiçupāla’s betrothed! His horror, indeed, is not only towards the robber Kṛishṇa, but likewise towards the shameless man that takes a woman who is no longer looked on as a maid (ii, 45.17-19). Cp. p. 44.
v2.c21.22
P. 82, l. 6 from end. In iv, 14.18 also amçu has the meaning “moonbeam”. Cp. the more usual hamsenduvarṇa.
v2.c21.23
P. 84, n. 1. In chapters i, 187-194 all that is written in çlokas belongs to a later version of the material, and all such passages are interpolations, often very clumsy withal, alike whether these verses were already to hand, or whether they were composed *ad hoc*. If all the çlokas are discarded, then we have a good account in the trishtubhs, complete in all essentials. Çlokas 191.11-16 alone seem hard to dispense with. There probably trishtubhs of like content originally stood.
v2.c21.24
P. 86, note. I have made a mistake—the nobody announces himself. K. in an interpolated passage (203.18-20) makes Dṛishṭadyumna expressly proclaim: “Brahmans or Kshattriyas, Vaiçyas or even Ҫūdras—whoever strings the most excellent bow, to him shall my sister be given.” In fact it was felt that in the foolish account such an assurance was very needful. The trishtubh passage in B., i, 193.23 f. is more important. But probably as elsewhere, so here also Yudh. does not shrink before distortion, where personal aims are at stake.
v2.c21.25
P. 93, n. With Stone-breaker Hans’s saying cp. the fine essay of L. von Schroeder, *Reden u. Aufsätze*, p. 185 ff.
v2.c21.26
P. 103, ll. 19 ff. It is true that in K. (i, 107.86, 88, cp. 107.101) the fisherman expressly calls the succession to the throne the çulka of Satyavatī, as does Bhīshma in B., 103.14. How greatly the purchase price stood, or anyhow had once stood in the foreground is probably shown also by the usual word vīryaçulkā, and e.g. by i, 190.4: The mighty bow with which Arjuna wins Draupadī is called çulkāvāpta “wrested as the purchase price”, and in harmony therewith Draupadī herself is called pradiṣṭaçulkā (i, 193.23 f.). In note 3, p. 103, it should be remarked: In spite of the agreement with Citrāṅgadā’s father, Arjuna looks on the son thus begotten as also the Pāṇḍavas’ (i, 217.33).
v2.c21.27
P. 105, l. 20. The children of the first wife, it would therefore seem, cannot offer up the ancestral sacrifices.
v2.c21.28
P. 111, mid. K. inserts between the adhyāyas corresponding to B., 196-7 two others (212-13). They tell the tale of Indrasenā (Mahendrasenā) Nālayani (Nārāyaṇī, B., iv, 21.10 ff.), whom L. v. Schroeder has awakened again to so full a life (*Mysterium u. Mimus im Rigveda*, p. 346 ff.): Indrasenā is the wife of the old penitent Maudgalya. This hloy man not only has a spiteful and covetous disposition, but is also a leper, nothing but skin and bones, full of wrinkles, bald-headed, and "reeking with a smell that is very different from a perfume". But the young wife serves him with the greatest faithfulness. One day the leper's thumb falls off, and right into her food. She calmly picks this out this nasty addition, and goes on eating. This so pleases him that he tells her he is not really so bad or so old. He tells her to choose herself a favour. She answers: "Do me the pleasure of dividing thyself into five." He does so, and now leads a life of delight by her side, climbing with her in his various shapes into the sun, to the heavenly Gaṅgā, into the moon, to the gods, and so on, turning into a tree which she winds round as a creeper, and doing other things of this kind. Thus for her with the five-fold husband did years go by like a moment. Then the holy man turned away from the delights of the senses, and left her. The sorrowing woman fell senseless to earth, and made lament that she was not yet sated with joys. Because of her unseemly words he laid the curse on her of becoming in her future life Drupada's daughter, and having five husbands. Then she practised the sternest penance. The rejoicing Ҫiva came; and now follows the well-known and here very needless tale of the words five times spoken: "Give me a husband." As Ҫiva keeps to his decision, she utters the wish that in her union with each of the five she may at least keep her maidenhead.
v2.c21.29
P. 124, l. 12. Or: "looked on him as one that gave the lie to the firmly laid down order" (frustrated, destroyed, harmed vitathamaryāda, i, 104.27; cp. bhinnamaryāda in the following ҫl.).
v2.c21.30
P. 126. Perhaps also xii, 207.40 speaks of the introduction of marriage. The passage might be translated: In the Dvāpara Age it was that the usage of copulation arose among creatures; then in the Kali Age mankind came to pairing (dvandvām āpedire). Cp. e.g., xii, 301.37, which has dvandvānām viprayoga, where Nil. is undoubtedly right in saying: dvandvānām dampatinām. Thus: while in the Dvāpara there was simply sexual union, it was only in our evil age that mankind took to marriage. [From Melanesia for a time when the true sexual act was not yet
v2.c21.31
known cp. the tale and notes in G. C. Wheeler, *Mono-Alu Folklore*, pp. 42-3, 242-3 (Translator).]
v2.c21.32
P. 130, l. 32. "Here the philosopher has the word": It is significant that K., i, 128 after Pāṇḍu's words that "hetæristic" conditions are a favour towards women puts in several çlokas describing the insatiable sexual greed of woman (8-11). According to Nil., MBh., ii, 27.16 speaks of seven peoples in the Himālaya who had no marriage, but woman and man came together and then parted just like cattle.
v2.c21.33
P. 131, note 5. With Kshemendra Yudhishṭhira is in agreement in iii, 189.31-32.
v2.c21.34
P. 132, n. 2. According to MBh., v, 109.9-10 King Raivata on coming back home finds his wives and ministers dead, and his kingdom in other hands; so he goes off into the forest to lead a pious life.
v2.c21.35
P. 149, n. 1. Here mention may be made also of MBh., i, 229.5 ff.: Mandapāla lived wholly chaste, and was great in holy knowledge and asceticism. But after his death he found himself ill rewarded in the other world. He then asked why, and was given the answer: Man has to wipe away on earth a three-fold guilt by sacrifices, by chastity and Veda study, by offspring (read sutaiḥ for çrutaiḥ). Thou art rich in asceticism, and one that makes sacrifice, but thou hast no children. Hand thy blood on, and thou shalt enjoy glorious worlds.
v2.c21.36
P. 160, l. 17. Kalmāshapāda's substitution in marriage by Vasishṭha, his Purohita (i, 177.38-39), is to be found in i, 177.32 ff. The curse is the same as in Pāṇḍu's case.
v2.c21.37
P. 163, middle. That Pāṇḍu is to beget sons by his Yoga power is perhaps not altogether certain. Kuntī's expressions (121.3-5), and her recital seem to invite him to actual union. Tapoyogabalānvitāḥ would then mean: Since thou art endowed with the might of the penitent's Yoga, thou wilt be able to do it in spite of the curse. Manasā, it is true, can be so explained only at the cost of some violence. By means of thy mind, that is, because thou hast such a great manas, perfected furthermore through asceticism? Or: if thou only wilt (through thy wish)?
v2.c21.38
P. 163, n. 1. "Go of his own will into heaven" is venturesome. What indeed seems to be meant is only the journey to the brahmaloka, which is spoken of in B., i, 120, and K., 125, or Pāṇḍu’s resolve to win heaven through penance (120.2 = K., 125.2).
v2.c21.39
P. 164, near end. As to Kuntī’s fear of moral stain cp. in the interpolated adhy. in K., i, 213, çl. 20-21: In “misfortune” and when authorized, there is for the woman according to the holy tradition one other besides the husband; but to a third man she must not go, otherwise she must atone for it. If there is a fourth the woman loses her caste, and if a fifth then she becomes a vardhaki (is the reading bandhaki? Or is it from vardh to cut? Cp. chinnā in Milindap., p. 122; Jāt., ii, 114, line 3; chinnāla “a loose fellow” (chinna + suff. āla); Uttarajjh., xxvii, 7; Deçīnāmam., 3.27; ZDMG, 58, p. 372; Charpentier in ZDMG, Bd. 70, p. 243. Skt. chinnā, according to the lexicographers “loose woman”).
v2.c21.40
P. 165, ll. 6-8. These words are said by Dhṛtarāṣṭra to Vidura (i, 127.4). Duryodhana, be it said, reckons the Pāṇḍavas among those who are not of particularly good blood (i, 137.11-16).
v2.c21.41
P. 168, n. 1. Dārāmç ca kuru dharmaṇa of course only means: Take thyself a wife, as the holy law bids. There is probably no suggestion of a marriage with Vicitravīrya’s widows. Satyavatī makes two requests of him: (1) Raise up offspring for thy brother; (2) Found a household, and have thyself consecrated king (for a king must come to the land). Probably it is a case of either the first or the second of these. For instead of caiva in 103.11 a better reading probably would be vaiva; c and v indeed are always being confused. Nil., it must be said, even takes caiva = eva vā. But his caiva, too, is probably a mistake in copying. Bhīṣma answers: “I have taken an oath not to have offspring, and that I keep to.” Now she throws herself with all her strength onto the first part only of her words (i, 103, 21 f.). She wished probably to tell herself that the sons begotten in Niyoga were held to be not Bhīṣma’s but Vicitravīrya’s children. Bhīṣma takes his oath literally: That also will not do; but I recommend thee a better substitute: a Brahman. Satyavatī then seems to have become reconciled with his strait view also (105.34-35).—The Khaças are according to MBh., i, 175.37 ff. Mlecchas, just as the Kirātas, Çabaras, etc.
v2.c21.42
P. 172, l. 8. Therefore the man who sows seed in another’s field is one among the seventeen arch-fools who beat the air with their fist (v, 37.1 ff.); while Brahma declares: Yasya bījam phalam tasya (xiii, 85.120).
v2.c21.43
P. 173, l. 23, and earlier. Cp. the statements on p. 314 on the *Jus primae noctis*.
v2.c21.44
P. 191, n. 1. The Ṛishi Bharadvāja burns himself in the fire that is devouring the body of his only son (iii, 137.14).
v2.c21.45
P. 212, n. 2. Further iii, 270.18–19; iv, 19.37–40; K., iv, 4.14. Subhadrā is just as loving to Draupadī’s sons (iii, 183.27, 235.10 ff.).
v2.c21.46
P. 223. Furthermore L. v. Schroeder in *Mysterium und Mimus* has shown that already in primitive Aryan belief the departed souls are likewise fructifying spirits, just as their leader is likewise the god of procreative life (and of the storm; Rudra in India, Wotan among the Germans; etc.).
v2.c21.47
P. 225. If the menstruating woman comes into contact with the sacrificial fire, then as atonement a fixed offering must be made to a form of Agni (iii, 221.27).
v2.c21.48
[P. 231, n. 1. For the flatus in Melanesia cp. G. C. Wheeler, *Mono-Alu Folklore* (London, 1926), pp. 42, 244. (Translator).]
v2.c21.49
P. 232, middle. For Agastya and Lopamudrā cp. Sieg, *Sagenstoffe des Rigveda*, i, 120 ff.; Schroeder, *Myst. und Mimus*, 156 ff.
v2.c21.50
P. 232, l. 22. Like Phyllis with Aristoteles, the fair one while picking flowers makes her way herself into the king’s neighbourhood. He has himself carried home together with her in a comfortable litter (çibikā avaghoṭitā), and then gives himself up so earnestly to the joys of love with her that he no longer admits anyone to himself (K. says more clearly : ramamāno na kāmçcid apaçyat, 15). The first minister naturally wants to put an end to this. He asks the women who wait on the couple : “What is the matter here? (kim atra prayojanam. According to Nil. : “What is there to be done here?” This seems not to fit so well). They answer : “We notice the strange thing that no water is brought.” The minister, cleverly guessing, now has the pond made so that the king, too, believes there is no water whatever in it (cp. how Duryodhana is tricked in ii, 47.3 ff.). The prince’s request to his wife is therefore jestingly meant. Cp. Hertel, *Indische Märchen*, pp. 33; 369.
v2.c21.51
P. 236. The tale of Pāṇḍu’s and Mādrī’s death is found in i, 125. Cp. 95.58–68.
v2.c21.52
[P. 242. For sexual perversion in Melanesia cp. G. C. Wheeler, *Mono-Alu Folklore*, pp. 44-5, 196-7, 42-3, 242. (Translator).]
v2.c21.53
[P. 251, nn., l. 9 from end. For adultery through speech only in Melanesia cp. G. C. Wheeler, “The poele . . . among the Mono people,” *Anthropophyteia*, x, p. 313. (Translator).]
v2.c21.54
P. 271, l. 10. For reasons of state-craft and his personal dislike for Duryodhana Kṛṣṇa, indeed, does not make any use of these rest-houses (v, 85.18).
v2.c21.55
P. 310, n. 1. To the translation: “Mine house and my women’s apartment . . . allotting all to thee (putting at thy disposal), I have come at all speed”—to this translation the foregoing çloka also points. The use of uddiçya, it is true, is not then the usual one.
v2.c21.56
P. 314, n. A noteworthy case of the *jus primae noctis* from Old India is to be found in Chavannes, *Cinq cents contes et apologues*, iii, 95: The people of a newly founded kingdom induce a strong man, who has done them a great benefit, to be the first to lie with every newly wedded woman among them. They wish thus to get fine children, and, secondly, to show him their gratitude. Later a wife makes them see they are all women, and they are revolted with the custom.
v2.c21.57
P. 316, l. 22. “Chambermaids are unprotected in the world, they are slave-girls, O Bhārata.” So according to B. K., iv, 4.31 is probably more right with: sairandhryo rakṣitā strīṇām bhujishyāḥ santi, Bh. = “Chambermaids are the protected servants of women.” They have a higher standing than other strolling women, as both texts hint in what follows (K., ekapatnyaḥ striyaç caitā iti lokasya niçcayaḥ).
v2.c21.58
P. 324, n. 1. These kalpavṛksha also were probably a kind of maypole like the Indradhvaja; and the festival in honour of the mountain Raivata also may have been a fertility festival, or anyhow one held at the same time as the other.
v2.c21.59
P. 325, n. 2. The kind of merrymaking that went along with the sacrificial festivals of Vedic times has been described by Schroeder in his great work *Mysterium u. Mimus im Rigveda* in various places.
v2.c21.60
P. 334, n. 1. The transl. given in this note for v, 33.55 is probably the right one. K. even reads: mūrkhāḥ pūjitapūjakāḥ (çl. 62).
v2.c21.61
P. 346, n. 1. The saying that the service of the husband is for the woman the only religious means to favour (nāsti strīṇām) is found also in xiii, 46.13; K., iv, 20.47; and probably elsewhere in the Epic.
v2.c21.62
As religious duties falling especially to the house-wife, iii, 233.34 f. names: bhikshā (to give to beggars), bali, çrāddha, sthalipāka (on the Parvan days), mānyānām mānasatkāra, as also the niyama.
v2.c21.63
P. 351, n. 2. Arjuna first stays three years (according to K., however, only three months) with Citrāṅgadā, then visits the tīrtha in the south, comes back to her for a short while, and hands over the son begotten with her as a çulka to her father. As he has neither house nor home, he leaves her with her father, but arranges for her to come to Indraprastha, when the thirteen years shall be over (215.27; 217.23 ff.).
v2.c21.64
P. 356, l. 15 from end. “Indra had slain Vṛitra, and thereby burdened himself with the guilt of Brahman-murder. He therefore crept away at the edge of the world into the water” (according to xii, 342.42 ff. into the lake Mānasa). This is in agreement with v, 13.12-13, but should perhaps rather be as follows: “Indra had maliciously slain Vṛitra, and moreover through slaying the pious demon Triçiras—in the MBh. a Veda-learned brandy-hero—had burdened himself with the guilt of ‘Brahman-murder.’” The reminder may here be made that Apollo, too, appears as a murderer, and like Indra has to flee and make atonement, because he has killed the python. Schroeder, *Mysterium und Mimus*, p. 213, after Aug. Mommsen, *Delphika* (Lpzg., 1876), p. 296 f. Odin also has to flee from his kingdom into banishment; another comes to his throne, and takes his rule for himself, until the god captures his place once more. W. Golther, *Mythologie der Germanen*, p. 304; E. H. Meyer, *Mythologie der Germanen*, p. 377. His wife is not faithful to him (Golther, 433). The name itself of Triçiras (“the three-headed one”) seems to point to an original snake spirit. Vṛitra is a dragon.
v2.c21.65
P. 370, at top. K., i, 98.32 lays it down: The children (or: the sons putrās) are like the father in their bodily characters, while those of the soul arise through their contact with the outward world (through intercourse, the world around) (teshām çilaguṇācārās tatsamparkāc chubhāçubhāt. Tatsamparka is probably hardly that fortunate or unfortunate mingling of the parents for the purpose of begetting). K., i, 99.39-40 on the other hand gives besides some bodily ones a whole set of mental characters.
v2.c21.66
P. 374. Birth from the mother’s side is, of course, quite well known. So already in the Veda Indra comes into the world after having too long tarried in his mother’s womb. See Sieg, *Sagenstoffe des Rigveda*, i, 79 ff.; Pischel, *Vedische Studien*, ii, 42 ff.
v2.c21.67
P. 390, last l. of text. Moreover, others know about it, too, for in v, 50.34 Samjaya gives a short account of the whole thing before the state assembly, and evidently as being well-known, too.
v2.c21.68
P. 391, last l. text. Perhaps this is the place for a more detailed account of the demons that are especially dangerous to children according to iii, 230.16 ff. The six Kṛttikā (Pleiades), Skanda’s nurses, in various shapes torment and eat children, but also protect them, if they are given worship; a horrible demon sprung from Skanda’s body is called Skandāpasmāra, and would seem to cause convulsions in children; Pūtanā (Çitapūtanā) carries off the fruit of the womb; Diti, the mother of the foes of the gods, as also all the youthful male and female beings born from Skanda’s body, and the husbands of these latter (Kumāra and Kumārī, cp. 228.1 ff.) have a taste for children’s flesh. On Surabhi, the first mother of cows, rides the foremother of birds and Garuḍa’s mother, Vinatā, and together with her eats children. In the very womb Saramā, the first of bitches, steals the tender forms; the mother of trees also, who dwells in the tree Karañja, and is worshipped there to get children, is dangerous to them, but becomes very friendly if she is shown fitting honour. These graha, who all like flesh and honey (cf. p. 240, note 1), stay for ten days in the lying-in room. The mother of the Gandharvas, and the mother of the Apsarases carry away the fœtus. The daughter of the “red sea” (cp. iii, 226.28; 231.11), who is worshipped in the kadamba-tree, and takes the same high place for women as does Rudra for men, is also one of the demons who show their maliciousness towards pregnant women and children; but also she bestows well-being, if service is rendered to her, as do all the other male and female beings that surround Skanda (cp. 228.1–9). For making these favourable or to ward them away praçamana (appeasing rites), snāna (bathing), dhūpana (incense), añjana (annointing), upahāra (dedicatory gifts) are used. Then they bestow powers of life and manhood. People, be it said, are children up to the sixteenth year. In 231.16, too, we are told of man-eating female genii of growth, called Vṛddhikā, who have their birth-place and probably abode in trees, and must be worshipped by those who wish for offspring. These spirit-beings are therefore nearly all clearly marked out as being demons of plant life and of fruitfulness. The Indian “Mars”, Skanda, usually the son of the procreative godheads Çiva and Pārvatī, is himself a phallic being. One of his faces, and indeed that which his “mothers” like best, is that of a ram, his weapon is the spear, known as a phallic symbol; his mothers and his often half-animal following are likewise spirits that have a connection with growth and procreation. This following according to iii, 231.11–12 arises from trees. He is
v2.c21.69
lord of the bhūta, the ghosts of the dead that grant the blessing of children, and also do harm to them (xii, 122.34). His names also may point to the phallus: Skanda, “the springer”, taken from the spurting seed; Kumāra, “the boy” (as our old German story-tellers call the man’s member); Guha, “the hidden one”. Indeed, Çiva, who is of the same nature as he, is called Praskanda, Bindu, and Visarga as a discharge of the seed (xiii, 17.63). The following also, among other things, seems to point in the same direction: Skanda’s wife is called Shashṭhī and Sinīvalī, both being godheads of fruitfulness and birth (iii, 229.50 ff.; 232.6); he is kanyābhartar (husband of girls?), and has everything in red (clothing, banner, etc., 229.2, 32; 231.19, 93); his creature and plaything is the sexually lusty cock, which often is found as a symbol of fertility (225.24-25; 226.14-15; 229.33; 232.16). On Skanda much that is important is furthermore given in ix, 44-46. But I am thinking of bringing out a separate work, “Die Kindlifresser”. Here, therefore, I give only a few suggestions.
v2.c21.70
The Yakshas, already marked as genii of plant life and fruitfulness through the fact of their abiding in trees and water, likewise eat children, at any rate the female ones do, as we are shown especially in Buddhistic literature. The Rākshasī Jarā is painted on walls as youthful and surrounded by children, and is worshipped with flowers, incense, perfumes and food. If this is done, then well-being holds sway in the house; otherwise it fares ill (ii, 18.1 ff.). In Magadha a festival was held for her (çl. 10). Now the souls of the dead in Indo-Germanic belief further the growth of plants and fruitfulness; and in India the Pretas, like the Rākshasas, dwell in trees (e.g. K., i, 163.28), and from trees there comes, indeed, in India, as is well-known, the blessing of children. Cp. my notes on pp. 158 and 223.
v2.c21.71
The Rākshasas likewise are among the ghostly figures of the dead, and like the Yakshas, with whom in Buddhistic literature especially they are near akin, among the genii of fruitfulness. Also the Gandharvas, so important for women’s life and for conception, really represent, according to Schroeder’s account, the souls of the departed (*Die Wurzeln der Sage vom heil. Gral*, p. 84, and passages there quoted). Cp. in J. J. Meyer, *Über das Wesen d. altind. Rechtsschriften u. ihr Verhältnis zu einander u. zu Kauṭilya* (Leipz., 1927), the passages given under “gandharva”. But in view of the original singular this is probably hardly the older belief. Anyhow, the Gandharvas (or: the Gandharva) are indeed found as the possessors of woman before marriage, and undoubtedly causing fruitfulness, just like the moon (Soma), the “lord of plants” or god of growth (and houser of the blessed), and like the fire god—this last probably here as life-bringing warmth, as a form of Kāma or the genius of Love, hardly as Agni of the hearth and warden of the ṛta, which binds the daughter to the father’s house. Cp. my notes on pp. 227 and 312.
v2.c21.72
We have therefore no lack of kindly supernatural powers, although in certain circumstances they are also highly dangerous. It is no wonder then that the ideal Indian wife lets only an interval of one year come between the different children (i, 221.86; K., i, 134.1 ff.; etc.).
v2.c21.73
P. 404, n. Majjh., i, 190, speaks with emphatic and quite unmistakable words: Seyyathā pi āvuso suṇisā sasuraṃ disvā saṃvijjati, saṃvegam āpajjati, evam-eva, etc., “just as the daughter-in-law, when she sees her father-in-law, is disconcerted, is abashed, so, etc.” This comparison is also found elsewhere in the Majjh. I have only just seen the short communications on Indian examples by M. Winternitz and B. Liebich, WZKM, xxvi, 237 ff.; xxvii, 474 ff.
v2.c21.74
P. 405. Draupadī, as queen, did not pound her own sandalve (udvartana), but Kuntī’s (iv, 20.23).
v2.c21.75
P. 431. So, too, to Iseult one who likewise is not in love with her says: “As this day raises daylight from the dead Might not this face the life of a dead man?” Swinburne, “Tristram of Lyonesse,” Poems, Lond., 1904, p. 20.—In K. several verses have been interpolated which explain v, 116.2 ff., and give further happiness-bringing charms of woman. We find: the two hips, the forehead, the thighs, and the nose—these six arched (unnata, 116.3). On the other hand strophe 7 states: chest, neighbourhood of the girdle (kaksha, that is, probably, hips, pubic region, and buttocks), nails, nose, shoulders, and the region between them (or: loins? amsatrika)—these are the six unnata. According to str. 6 these must be long: jaws, eyes, arms, thighs, nose.
v2.c21.76
P. 444. “Coward” and “dull” is my translation for alpacetas, of small insight? of little courage? (ii, 67.25; cp. v, 105.28; vii, 72.50).
v2.c21.77
P. 445, 1st strophe: (“Loud cries”). The text is in disorder. The second half of 67.33 must be put before the first at least. But what is still more likely is that for vikroçati Yajñasenī we must read: vikroça hi (vikroçahi? vikroça tu?), Yajñaseni (or: vikroçatu Yajñasenī). Cp. viii, 86.18. The passage in other ways, too, will thus be far better: “Then spoke he to Kṛṣṇā, hotly holding her fast by her ravishing black locks: ‘Cry to Kṛṣṇa, Jiṣṇu, Hari, Nara, That he may save thee, Yajñasenī.’” The second half of the trishṭubh in the text has probably been thoughtlessly transplanted here from 68.46. Duḥçāsana uvāca must now naturally be struck out. K., indeed, has not got this at all (89.45-46).
v2.c21.78
P. 446, n. 4. Yudh. has over and above this taken the special vow never to refuse when he is challenged to play (ii, 58.16; 59.18; 76.4, 20).
v2.c21.79
P. 450, n. 1. The “three lights” are after all, it would seem, only the well-known trinity: sacrifice, offspring, and Veda study (cp. p. 150, note). Also K., i, 107.73.
v2.c21.80
P. 471, middle. Here we give a few more details throwing light on the life and standing of woman in the Epic. v, 59 = K., 47.17 ff. relates: Saṃjaya is led to Kṛṣṇa and Arjuna in the women’s part of the dwelling. There the two heroes are sitting, splendidly adorned and bewreathed, drunk with sweet intoxicating drink, both on a great golden seat, adorned with precious stones, and bespread with many kinds of rugs; Kṛṣṇa is using the lap of his wife Satyabhāmā as a pillow, and his feet are lying on the lap of his friend Arjuna. (So K. According to B., Arjuna’s feet are resting on Draupadī’s and Satyabhāmā’s lap.) The envoy Saṃjaya now brings forward his most weighty business of state. This voluptuous Eastern picture, however, probably comes from a later time. In any case this section does not belong to the older body of the poem. Adhy. 49-61, which arouse suspicion at once from the much too woeful and effeminate words of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, have been put in at some time or other. If we reject this whole set of çlokas, and go at once from the triṣṭubhs in 48 to the triṣṭubhs 62.1 ff., then we get a smoothly running recital. Another proof is the unskilful tacking on in the last çl. of 61: Dhṛtarāṣṭra is made out to have spoken earlier, but it was Duryodhana! v, 67.1 ff. is more pleasing: Gāndhārī at Saṃjaya’s request is called into the sabhā, when the decision is to be taken as to war or peace with the Pāṇḍavas. Then too in ii, 58.26 ff.: Yudhishṭhira and his friends have come to Hāstinapura to dice. First of all they greet Gāndhārī, and only then King Dhṛtarāṣṭra, her husband. They are welcomed by all the Kauravas, and called upon in their temporary abode, and this with Draupadī and the other women there. The daughters-in-law of Dhṛtarāṣṭra also come, and are vexed at Kṛṣṇa’s loveliness. The heroes first converse with the ladies, then they enjoy themselves with bodily exercises. If this description so far reminds us of knighthood’s days, on the other hand we are told that it is an honour for the woman if a stranger asks of her, who asks no questions, her name, family, husband, etc. (iii, 265.4-5). But how often this honour is done to the fair in Old India is shown countless times in the Epic. Thus King Jayadratha, who is on the way to the Çalvas to find a bride there, sees Draupadī in the forest, is quite lost, now wants her only, and without further ado sends a king from among his followers to find out more about her. As a woman dwelling there alone she should really not have spoken to this messenger, but she does so, first, because no one else is there to speak with him, and secondly, because the messenger is not unknown to her. She therefore invites them all to enjoy Yudhishṭhira’s hospitality (iii, 266). But Jayadratha carries her off, her that is already wedded. Since we find an offence of this kind now and then only appearing as such if the woman is unwilling (or does not love the man carrying her off, akāmā, ii, 45.10; cp. note 1, p. 490), so this, just like the commandment which holds for the maiden-lifter, to leave her alone who loves elsewhere, is an indication that the woman’s inclination had something to say. A maiden taken in the fight must be left alone a full year before she is asked (as to marriage, doubtless). xii, 96.5. But intimacies before marriage are looked on as shameful (iv, 72 : esp. 4-7). In the marrying of a child, particularly a daughter, the mother in Indian literature as a whole has an important, not seldom the first, voice; and the men in the Epic take counsel, as so often on other important things, so especially on this, with the wife.
v2.c21.81
The relation, too, between sister and brother comes to us in a bright and beautiful light. Subhadrā is married to Arjuna in Indraprastha. Her brother (really her half-brother) Kṛṣṇa comes there on a visit, and, when he leaves again, directly he has taken leave of the high personages Yudhishṭhira and Kuntī he goes to his sister. “When Hṛṣīkeça had come to the sweet Subhadrā of the sweet speech the holy and august one, shedding tears for love of her, spoke to her deep, true, wholesome words, that flowed easily and pleasantly, and without compare.” She entrusts him with greetings and messages to her own people, and again and again shows him honour. When he has taken his leave of her, he at once goes to Draupadī, just as in the Epic he is ever showing the most friendly marks of attention to this lady (ii, 2.4-7; cp., too, 24.54 f.). Then when the Pāṇḍavas go off into banishment, he comes and takes Subhadrā and her son home with him for the thirteen years, as Dhr̥ṣṭaketu takes his sister, Nakula’s wife, from Cedi. Draupadī herself, indeed, shares the fortunes of her lords and masters. But her children are brought by her brother into his own city; from there they go later, it is true, to Dvāraka (iii, 22.47-50; 183.14, 24 ff.; 235.10 ff.; iv, 72.21 f.). The natural abode of the woman that has no children (and no husband) is with her brother (v, 33.70). Such things are, indeed, good Indo-European customs.
v2.c21.82
P. 474, l. 12 ff. fr. end. The same wise man, indeed, seems to be of opinion that jealousy is the natural way of woman, just as intrigue is.
v2.c21.83
He goes on to say: Even the pattern of a good wife, Arundhatī, did angrily suspect her noble, faithful husband, Vasisṭha, one who was wholly pure, and thought only of what was for her good and dear to her; therefore she now twinkles down as though with but one eye, the other being shut like that of one taking aim, smoky-red, ugly, and only slightly to be seen (nimittam iva paçyati; nimitta probably here means: (1) target in shooting; (2) mark, proof, of the husband's wrong-doing, for which she keeps a sharp look-out. MBh., i, 233.27 ff.). Arundhati is the small, weak star Alcor, Vasisṭha one of the seven Ṛishis that make up the Great Bear.
v2.c21.84
[P. 476, n. 2. For jealousy between wives in Melanesia cp. G. C. Wheeler, Mono-Alu Folklore, pp. 26-7, 189-92 (Translator).]
v2.c21.85
P. 547, n., (II). I have already in my Daçakumāracaritam, pp. 4-5, given it as my opinion that in an earlier version, which can be inferred from the MBh., the love which is kindled by the royal maiden Çāntā in the wholly innocent and truthful youth, brings down the longed-for moisture. A new, and not only surprising but also convincing light is thrown on the matter by the newer treatment of the Rishyaçṛinga legend by Schroeder (Mysterium u. Mimus im Rigveda, p. 292 ff.; Wurzeln d. Sage vom hl. Gral, 76 ff.; Reden u. Aufsätze, 410, 413). All these writings, I am sorry to say, I did not read till I was going through the proofs of the last sheets. Schroeder sees here a " generation rite "—the sexual union of the two in itself brings about rain. This undoubtedly exposes the root of the matter. Quite rightly the Buddhistic versions make the rain to fall so soon as the youthful penitent has carried out the copulation. Other, more polished versions have probably put love in the place of the procreative magic: the MBh. seems to show traces of this. Here also the absolute purity of body and soul is necessary for the miracle, and it is, indeed, several times given in the MBh. as the very reason (cp. besides iii, 110.24, espec. 110.47-48, also i, 2.168).
v2.c21.86
My translation on p. 542, ll. 15-16, is not the most obvious one. This would be: "There respectful greeting is no right of mine." This is also how the passage is understood, indeed, by the following çloka (iii, 12), an interpolated one, however. In spite of all the unsuspecting simplicity of heart in the youth, however, the hetæra could not help being afraid of betraying herself. Or is his stupidity to be stressed? That would be too clumsy. Rishyaçṛinga, indeed, has asked pressingly about the newcomer's particular form of ascetic piety (vrata). The fair one would say: So much in earnest do I take my self-denial that I decline the honourable show of politeness which other penitents are glad to accept. Rishyaçṛiṅga understands her, indeed, far better than the foolish interpolator (112.13).
v2.c21.87
In German we have, besides the fine version of the old tale in J. V. Widmann's *Buddha* (Song 9), the pleasing version by Isolde Kurz: "Die Büsser" (*Gedichte* 2, p. 168 ff.). The tale of the woman on horseback has been given a fresh life by Rudolf Baumbach.
v2.c21.88
[P. 371, l. 16. From Melanesia for Cæsarean birth cp. G. C. Wheeler, *Mono-Alu Folklore*, pp. 54-5, 178-80 (Translator).]
Linked texts (5)
- Mahābhārata — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
- Jātaka — Pāli
- Majjhimanikāya — Pāli
- Milindapañha — Pāli
- Uttarajjhayaṇa — Ardhamāgadhī Prakrit