The Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and Upanishads v1.c15.33

v1.c15.33

The case of Indra and Varuṇa indicates faintly the existence of different standpoints among the tribes which shared in greater or less degree the Vedic civilization. That there was uniformity of belief among the tribes it would be absurd to expect; we hear of their struggles, especially of the great battle of the ten kings, and we need not assume that accusations of being without gods, without sacrifice, without Indra, necessarily always apply to non-Aryan foes. It is reasonable also to believe that families of priests had special affections for certain deities. What, however, is the fact is that in the Rigveda as we have it, it is hard to discover any certain evidence of preferences, tribal or otherwise. Hillebrandt's failure to elicit any secure results of much importance illustrates this proposition. The view¹ that book vi of the Rigveda places the Bharadvāja family in Arachosia, while iii and vii show the Viçvāmitras and the Vasiṣṭhas in the Punjab, under Sudās, a descendant of the Divodāsa celebrated by the Bharadvājas, cannot successfully be maintained, and much of his evidence for preferences is founded on equally inadequate foundations. It is, however, interesting to note² that Tvaṣṭṛ, in whose service the Neṣṭṛ priest stands, has but a slight hold in the Rigveda, while the ceremonial rituals in connexion with fertility magic in which this priest engages and his connexion with the Surā, not the Soma, suggest that the god was derived from a different *milieu*, not necessarily un-Aryan, from the bulk of the text. Again, the Gandharva, normally a friendly creature, is in two hymns of the eighth book treated as hostile, while in the Atharvaveda we find a distinctly different conception of the Gandharvas.³ The connexion of Indra with the Maruts⁴ as his aiders is distinctly conspicuous in book iii, of the Viçvāmitra family; in book v the Atris seem rather to treat the Maruts in the guise of priestly adorers of the god, while they are on Hillebrandt's view marked out also by preferring to regard Çuṣṇa as the chief foe of Indra in lieu of Vṛtra. Save for one hymn (66) the Bharadvājas of book vi take little note of the Maruts or Rudra, the Vasiṣṭhas of book vii make little of the Indra legend or the Maruts, Vṛtra appears normally merely as a generic term for a foe, and Indra is united with the Vasus in one place instead of with the Rudras. The Ṛbhus are most prominent in book iv.⁵ The Bharadvājas are markedly less interested in Varuṇa than the Vasiṣṭhas, as is natural since Vasiṣṭha claims descent from Mitra and Varuṇa.⁶ The pale figure of Aryaman is hardly recognized in the Family books, especially iii and viii.⁷ The Viçvāmitras are marked by offering food to Indra’s bays,¹ the Bharadvājas lay stress on the worship of Pūṣan,² the Vasiṣṭhas take more note of Viṣṇu than normally.³ The Gṛtsamadas of book ii and the Bharadvājas seem comparatively indifferent to the Açvins, who on the other hand are favoured by the Atris and the Vasiṣṭhas.⁴ The latter family seems to have been less addicted to the Soma cult than the others, possibly under the influence of devotees of the Surā⁵ from the eastern lands, who favoured the cult of the Surā-drinking Açvins. The Çatapatha Brāhmaṇa⁶ assures us that Rudra was styled Çarva among the eastern folk, Bhava among the Bāhīkas of the west, and in the Pāli⁷ texts we have adequate evidence of the contrast between east and west which is already attested in the Vedic tradition by the dislike of the man from Magadha.