The Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and Upanishads v1.c27.s6.20

v1.c27.s6.20

The Vedic ritual, however, is long past the period when the use of fire originated: the Çrauta ritual demands not one but three fires, and the time when the three were the mere expansion of the one is far behind the Rigveda: we find already there a distinction between the ordinary fire and the three fires of the more elaborate ritual.⁵ Each householder is bound by the ritual texts, if he be pious, to keep one fire and in it each day to perform the cult of the house: the rich, nobles and princes, and even men of lower status, who can afford it, maintain in the same way a set of three fires, and with them a number of priests who are essential to the carrying on of the cult. In both cases certain ceremonies may be performed, and indeed ought to be performed, the offering night and morning of the Agnihotra, the new and full moon sacrifices, and the difference in the two modes of performance is one only of elaboration. Many other kind of cereal and animal offerings are also available for performance in both ways, but the family rites proper, those deeply affecting private matters, are only allowed to be performed in the domestic fire, while on the other hand the Soma sacrifice cannot be performed without the whole of the three fires. The great sacrificer therefore has the three fires beside the domestic fire: the older position that on great occasions the domestic fire was divided into three is suggested quite irresistibly by the name of the one of the three fires, which occurs in the Rigveda, the Gārhapatya, which means clearly the fire of the householder, and must have derived its name from the domestic fire, but it had disappeared before the tradition begins. It is a natural conjecture that it was in the Soma ritual that the origin of the fires developed, but it is not capable of proof.¹ Nor is there any evidence at all that the three fires represent an amalgamation of different forms of fire worship.² The number suggests such a conclusion, but the mere fact of the number is of course not sufficient evidence and of other proof none is forthcoming.