Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Studies in the Origins of Buddhism c13: Chapter VIII. Review of the Vedic Background

Studies in the Origins of Buddhism c13

Language
English

Contents

Chapter VIII. Review of the Vedic Background

c13.2

The Significance of Pre-Vedic Civilisation.—Anthropology, philology, and archaeology reveal to us that from prehistoric times India has been the home of many races and cultures, whose conflicts have provided the principal challenge of her social history. The continuing vitality of Indian society has been ever dependent on the success with which she has responded to this challenge. Her cultural life thus displays from the most ancient times the character of a progressive synthesis, seeking unity in the midst of an unending and bewildering diversity, and peace and harmony in the midst of struggles and conflicts.

c13.3

The discovery of Indus Civilisation has revolutionised our perspective of Indian cultural origins somewhat in the same way as the discovery of Aegean Civilisation revolutionised the perspective of Greek history. We can no longer regard the course of Indian history as the career of a victorious Aryan civilisation contaminated increasingly by the force of indigenous barbarism. On the contrary, the Aryan invasion of India must be regarded as "the arrival of barbarians into a region already highly organised into an empire based on a long-established tradition of literate urban culture."¹ This is a veritable Copernican revolution!

c13.4

¹ Piggott, Prehistoric India, pp. 257-58.

c13.5

The remnants of the Indus Civilisation have been found over a large area extending from Rupar, at the foot of the Simla hills to Sutkagen-dor, near the coast of the Arabian Sea, 300 miles west Karachi.² Excavations at Rangpur, district Jhalawar, Saurashtra have left no doubt of their association with the Harappan tradition.³ Thus, the Indus Civilisation can "claim a larger area than any other of the known pre-classical civilisations."⁴ The chronology of this civilisation is still uncertain but it appears that it was fully developed in the time of Sargon of Agade who is now placed a little before 2300 B.C. Wheeler, thus, dates the Indus Civilisation between 2500 and 1500 B.C.⁵ This, however, is impossible to accept because it leaves too little time for the evolution of Vedic culture. Nor can it be reconciled with the evidence of the Boghaz-köi inscriptions (c. 1400 B.C.) which seem to refer to Vedic Indian deities, not to the Indo-Iranian.⁶ It seems that the Aryan Invasion of India can not be placed much later than 2000 B.C.⁷ Now if we regard 2300 B.C. as the mean date in the career of the Indus Civilisation, which was then "in full flower", we get the period 2800 B.C.—1800 B.C. as the possible date of this civilisation. This will harmonize with the evidence of Archaeology, Vedic philology, Ancient Indian history, and ancient Near-Eastern history.

c13.6

² Wheeler, The Indus Civilisation, p. 2.

c13.7

³ Indian Archaeology, A Review 1953-54 pp. 6-7.

c13.8

⁴ Wheeler—loc. cit.

c13.9

⁵ Wheeler, op. cit., p. 4; Ib. pp. 84-93. cf. Piggott, op. cit., p. 211, 214 ff., 240-41.

c13.10

⁶ Winternitz I, p. 305. cf. The Vedic Age (ed. R. C. Majumdar) p. 204; CHI I, pp. 72-73. On Varuṇa as an Indian deity see below.

c13.11

⁷ On the date of the earliest hymns of the RS see Winternitz I, p. 310.

c13.12

As to the relation between the Vedic and the Indus Civilisations, it is surely fantastic to regard the former as earlier than the latter or to ascribe the authorship of the Indus Civilisation to the Aryans.⁸ Sir John Marshall has conclusively shown that the Indus Civilisation was quite distinct from and earlier than the Aryan Vedic Civilisation.⁹ Formerly, there seemed to be a wide gulf in time between the Pre-Vedic and Non-Aryan Indus Civilisation on the one hand, and the Aryan Vedic Civilisation on the other. But the tendency of modern Archaeological progress is to bridge the gulf between the two increasingly (See e.g., Indian Archaeology, A Review 1953-4 loc. cit.).

c13.13

⁸ Cf. The Vedic Age, pp. 194-95; L. Sarup in IC IV.

c13.14

⁹ Marshall, MIC. For a criticism of Dr. Sarup’s view, see Pt. K. Chattopadhyaya, Presidential address in the Vedic Section of the Ninth AIOC, Trivandrum.

c13.15

It has been suggested that the Indus Civilisation perished through the violence of insurgent Aryans. The Rg-Vedic references to the destruction of ‘pur’s have been taken to be references to the walled-cities and forts of the Pre-Aryans.¹⁰ The fight of Indra with ‘dāsas’ and ‘dasyus’ is interpreted as the struggle of the Aryans against the Non-Aryans.¹¹ Piggott has even seen in Indra’s exploit of releasing the waters a reference to the Aryan destruction of the bunds built to protect the Harappa cities from flood.¹² Pt. K. Chattopadhyaya has, however, conclusively shown that ‘dāsa’ and ‘dasyu’ refer to demons as traditionally understood, not to Non-Aryan human beings.¹³ Indra as a god naturally fights against demons who are as naturally conceived to be foes of Rite, dark and mis-shapen, of strange speech, and evil. Their ‘forts’ and ‘cities’ are nothing but a poetic and fanciful representation of clouds in the interests of myth. Of course, it may be conceded that the Aryan invasion must have created for some time a picture of confused struggles and perhaps even the myth and fancy of the conflicts between gods and demons may contain an indirect and imaginative echo of a more actual and historical conflict. But it is clear that the RS contains no direct reference to the fight of the Aryan race against a ‘dark-skinned’, ‘snub-nosed’, aboriginal people called Dāsas and Dasyus. There is no doubt of the existence of a highly civilized non-Aryan people in India at the time of the Aryan invasion and of the conflicts which must have ensued between the two subsequently, but we do not on that account need to turn myth directly into history. The fact of the matter is that prior to the discovery of Indus Civilisation, the modern historians of India were inclined to picture her pre-Aryan inhabitants as dark and savage—very much like ‘demons’!—so that in the description of demons they readily discerned their own picture of the pre-Aryan aborigines of India! As to the racial composition of the Indus Valley people it is difficult to generalize at present. They appear to have been a mixed population, including Proto-Australoids, Mediterraneans, and Mongoloids.¹⁴ The description of the Indus Civilization as Dravidian, as is sometimes done,¹⁵ does not seem to have any positive evidence in its favour as yet.

c13.16

¹⁰ Wheeler, op. cit. p. 90; Piggott, op. cit. pp. 261-63.

c13.17

¹¹ CHI I, pp. 84, 86; Keith, RPV. I, p. 234; Macdonell, VM. p. 157; Piggott; loc. cit.

c13.18

¹² Piggott, loc. cit.

c13.19

¹³ See Pt. K. Chattopadhyaya: Dāsa and Dasyu in the Rgveda (Proceedings of the Nineteenth International Congress of Orientalists held at Rome.)

c13.20

¹⁴ Wheeler, op. cit. pp. 51-52. Cf. S. K. Chatterji in Vedic Age pp. 145 ff.

c13.21

¹⁵ S. K. Chatterji, op. cit. pp. 156-8; C. Kunhan Raja in History of Philosophy, Eastern and Western (Ed. S. Radhakrishnan) -p. 38.

c13.22

Of the high degree of material culture which these Pre-Aryans possessed there is no doubt at all. Their attainments in the realm of spirit are, however, not equally known to us, mainly because of the paucity of written records and our ignorance of the script. "But paradoxically it would appear that the Indus Civilization transmitted to its successors a metaphysics that endured, whilst it utterly failed to transmit the physical civilization which is its present monument."¹⁶ It is undeniable that some of the most important elements of the religious life of latter-day India go back to the Indus Civilization. Among these may be mentioned the worship of a proto-type of Śiva, who is represented as Paśupati, Yogī, and perhaps Naṭarāja; of the Mother-Goddess, of the pipal tree, and of the bull and some other animals associated with the gods.¹⁷ Phallic worship and the great sanctity that has ever been attached to water in India may also go back to the Indus Civilization.¹⁸ Most important, the definite occurrence of a cross-legged posture with the out-stretched palms placed on the knees,¹⁹ and the probable occurrence of what looks remarkably like the Śāmbhavī Mudrā²⁰ seem to suggest that the beginnings of Yogic practice in India may also belong to the Indus Civilisation.²¹ The worship of gods in personal and iconic form, as a kind of ‘pūjā’, has been traced back in India to pre-Aryan sources,²² which ought to include the Indus Civilisation too. In the light of this pre-Vedic background it is clear that cultural development in the Vedic Age must be understood as a growing fusion of Aryan and Non-Aryan elements, which produced towards the close of the period a veritable revolution in religious ideas. After the initial stages of confused warfare, the distinction between the Aryan and the Non-Aryan must have been increasingly blurred, as the Aryans tended to settle down, through the almost inevitable process of racial miscegenation which is reflected in the growth of caste²³ and in the changes which came over the Aryan language.²⁴ Thus, in the later Vedic period the sense of racial separation and colour prejudice tend to disappear. The very collection and classification of the Vedas is now attributed to Vyāsa in whom the presence of Non-Aryan blood is beyond all doubt.²⁵ It is interesting to note that the Bṛ. Up. prescribes orthodox Vedic magic for obtaining a son having a dark complexion and red eyes,²⁶ which may be contrasted with the reference of Patañjali to the characteristic complexion of a Brāhmaṇa as fair and ruddy with blonde hair.²⁷ This racial mixture between the Aryans and the Pre-Aryans and the consequent creation of a composite society must have proceeded apace as the Aryans reached North-Eastern India in the later Vedic Age. Piggott says, “clearly after the first drastic Aryanisation of the Punjab some sort of modus vivendi was arrived at; if not there, eastwards in the Ganges Basin as the frontier receded eastward, and Harappa ideas permeated the religious thought of the Brāhmaṇas.”²⁸ Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa contains a well-known reference to this eastward passage of the Aryans when they crossed the Sadānīrā and colonised Videha beyond Kośala, Sadānīrā forming the boundary between the two.²⁹ Videha soon became the centre of a mighty intellectual ferment as is clear from the glimpse we obtain of the age of Janaka in the Bṛ. Up., and from Buddhist and Jaina references. It seems thus that by the later Vedic Age the evolution of Aryan society and thought had reached a point where it felt the full impact of Pre-Vedic and Non-Aryan ideas. These ideas appear to have been represented by wandering ascetics and yogīs surviving from pre-Vedic times and called ‘Munis’ in Vedic literature and ‘Śramaṇas’ in the age of Buddha and Mahāvīra.³⁰

c13.23

¹⁶ Wheeler, op. cit. p. 95.

c13.24

¹⁷ Marshall, MIC 1 pp. 77-8; Mackay, The Indus Civilisation, pp. 96-7; Wheeler, op. cit. pp. 67, 83-4; Piggott. op. cit. pp. 201-3.

c13.25

¹⁸ Mackay, op. cit. pp. 77-8, 85; Wheeler, op. cit. p. 83; Piggott. loc. cit. On the śiśnadevas of RS. see Proceedings & Transactions of OC, Patna, 1930, pp. 501-2; K. Chaṭṭopādhyāya, Pravāsī, 37, 2, p. 559, fn. 2.

c13.26

¹⁹ Esp. on the three seals from the same site (see Wheeler, op. cit. p. 79), is represented the figure which Marshall identified with Paśupati (Marshall, op. cit. I. p. 70). Wheeler speaks of its "brooding, minatory power" (op. cit. p. 83) K. A. Nilakanta Sastri is sceptical of Marshall's identification, but admits the antiquity of Yoga, and adds that "the yogic posture....occurs also in a statue of a male figure and in a small faience sealing where a deity in the same attitude is apparently worshipped by a kneeling nāga." (The Cultural Heritage of India II p. 22). See also the stone figure, apparently seated in a yogic posture, represented in Wheeler, op. cit. Pl. XVII A.

c13.27

²⁰ Wheeler, op. cit. Pl. XVI. Śāmbhavī Mudrā is thus described “Antarlakṣyam bahirdṛṣṭirnimeṣonmeṣavarjitā.” (cf. Gheraṇḍa-Saṃhitā. 3. 64). Wheeler doubts the yogic significance of the ‘narrowed eyes’—(Wheeler, op. cit. p. 64).

c13.28

²¹ Cf. Pt. K. Chattopadhyaya: Pravāsī, Bhāga 37, Khaṇḍa 2, pp. 557 ff; R. P. Chanda, Indo-Aryan Races, pp. 99ff, 148ff.

c13.29

²² S. K. Chatterji, Vedic Age, pp. 160-1.

c13.30

²³ See below.

c13.31

²⁴ CHI I p. 110, S. K. Chatterji, op. cit. p. 157.

c13.32

²⁵ Cf. S. K. Chatterji, Bhāratīya Āryabhāṣā Aur Hindī, pp. 53-4. (Rajkamal, 1954)

c13.33

²⁶ Bṛ. U p. 6. 4. 16: “Atha ya icchetputro me śyāmo lohitākṣo jāyeta, trīnvedānanubruvīta, sarvamāyuriyāditi, udaudanam pācayitvā sarpriṣmantamaśnīyātām īśvarau janayitavai.”

c13.34

²⁷ Mahābhāṣya on Pāṇini II, 2.6: “gauraḥ śucyācāraḥ kapilaḥ piṅgalakeśa ity enān apyabhyantarān brāhmaṇye guṇān kurvanti.”

c13.35

²⁸ Piggott, op. cit. p. 286.

c13.36

²⁹ SB. 1.4.1.10-17.

c13.37

³⁰ ṚS. X. 136.

c13.38

Munis and Sramanas in the Vedic Age.—The Keśi-Sūkta of the ṚS³¹ delineates for us the strange figure of the ‘Muni’ who is described as long-haired, clad in dirty, tawny-coloured garments, walking in the air, drinking poison, delirious with ‘Mauneya’ and inspired. The reference is rare in the ṚS, and the description seems to show that the author was filled with a certain sense of wonder at the sight of the ‘Muni’ performing miracles, whom he ignorantly thought to be delirious. There can hardly be a doubt that the ‘Muni’ was to the Ṛgvedic culture an alien figure. As will become clear below, asceticism is directly opposed to the entire Weltanschauung of the ṚS. In the AB occurs another ‘mad’ muni-Aitaśa.³² The TA. speaks of Śramaṇas who were called ‘Vātaraśanāḥ’. They led a celibate life, could disappear at will and teach to brahmanas the way beyond sin.³³ The Tāṇḍ. B.³⁴ speaks of “Turo devamuniḥ”, with which may be compared the “Airammadodevamuniḥ” who ‘saw’ appropriately enough the Sūkta on Araṇyānī in the ṚS.³⁵ The AS³⁶ too speaks of the divine Muni and the ṚS mentions Indra as the friend of the Munis,³⁷ and at another place refers to the ‘shaking’ of the Muni.³⁸ Tāṇḍ. B. again speaks of a place called ‘Munimaraṇa,³⁹ and also speaks of the ‘Yatis’ as enemies of Indra.⁴⁰ Later, ‘Yati’ definitely meant an ascetic, e.g., Muṇḍ. up. 3.2.6. ŚB addresses Tura Kāvaṣeya as ‘Muni’.⁴¹ It may be recalled that his father ‘Kavaṣa-Ailūṣa’ was driven out from the sacrifice on the Sarasvatī with the words “O, Son of a female slave, you are a rogue and not a Brāhmaṇa.”⁴² TĀ makes obeisance to the munis of Gaṅgā and Yamunā (Namo Gaṅgāyamunayor munibhyaḥ).⁴³ Discipline in the Āruṇaketuka necessitated poverty and begging, and a Bhikṣu Āṅgirasa is mentioned as the seer of ṚS X. 117. The word Śramaṇa occurs once in the Upaniṣads,⁴⁴ although the Muṇḍakopaniṣad has obvious reference to the shaven-headed ascetics who reviled the Vedas.

c13.39

³¹ Cf. S. K. Dutt—Early Buddhist Monachism, pp. 51ff.

c13.40

³² Vedic Index II. p. 167. Etaśa is mentioned as one of the seven “vātaraśanā munayaḥ” in connection with ṚS. X. 136.

c13.41

³³ TĀ. I. pp. 87; 137-8.

c13.42

³⁴ Tāṇḍ. B. II. p. 601.

c13.43

³⁵ ṚS. X. 146.

c13.44

³⁶ AS. VII. 74.1.

c13.45

³⁷ ṚS. VIII. 17. 14.

c13.46

³⁸ ṚS. VII. 56. 8.

c13.47

³⁹ Tāṇḍ. B. II. p. 96.

c13.48

⁴⁰ Ib. I. p. 208.

c13.49

⁴¹ ŚB. II. p. 1041. Śaṅkarācārya quotes a Śruti according to which the Kāvaṣeya seers did not see the point of Vedic study and sacrifice (comy. on BS. III. 4. 9.).

c13.50

⁴² AB. 8. 1.

c13.51

⁴³ TĀ. I. p. 166.

c13.52

⁴⁴ Bṛ. Up. 4. 3. 22. (See Mrs. Rhys Davids, Sakya p. 42.)

c13.53

According to the Vedic Index, it would be unwise “to conclude from the comparative rareness of the Muni in the Vedic texts that he was an infrequent figure in Vedic times; he was probably not approved by the priests who followed the ritual, and whose views were essentially different from the ideals of a muni, which were superior to earthly considerations such as the desire for children and dakṣiṇās.”⁴⁵ Thus, we can discern in the Vedic period, outside the strictly Vedic pale, wandering groups of ascetics sometimes styled as Munis who were “the precursors of the strange ascetics of later India.”⁴⁶

c13.54

⁴⁵ Vedic Index II. pp. 167-8.

c13.55

⁴⁶ Ib.

c13.56

Fuller information about these Muni-Śramaṇas is to be had from early Jaina and Buddhist literature. Here they are placed by the side of the Brāhmaṇas but distinguished from them. The Brāhmaṇas are here depicted as treating the Śramaṇas with scant courtesy, calling them ‘muṇḍakas’ and ‘vasalas’. As late as the 4th cent. B.C. the Greeks noted the distinction between Brāhmaṇa and Śramaṇa, whom, still later, Patañjali described as eternal opponents.⁴⁷ The independence of the Śramaṇas from the Vedic tradition comes out also from a consideration of the early history of the Jaina faith. The analysis of the origins of Sāṅkhya and Yoga also shows that these were doctrines of the tawny-clad ascetics—the Kapilas, who were not indebted to the strictly Vedic tradition.⁴⁸

c13.57

⁴⁷ Patañjali ad Pāṇini II. 4. 9.

c13.58

⁴⁸ See below.

c13.59

“Śramaṇa” beliefs and practices are considered in detail in a subsequent chapter, but the general nature of the Śramaṇa world-view may be summarized here in order to see clearly its relationship to Brāhmaṇa thought. Practically all the Śramaṇa sects held towards the world an attitude of ascetic pessimism, disbelieved in a personal cause or creator of the universe, accepted a plurality of souls and an ultimate distinction between soul and matter, regarded the world of common sense as real and as due to one or more real factors at least partly independent of the soul, and consequently regarded as indispensable for salvation some form of strenuous practical discipline aiming at effecting a real alteration in the situation of things. We might loosely say that these Śramaṇas⁴⁹ were, in general, ascetic, atheistic, pluralistic and “realistic”. The essential basis of this world-view seems to have been the idea of saṃsāra—of Karman and transmigration. This comes out clearest from a consideration of the earliest faith of the Jainas—one of the oldest surviving sects of the Munis!

c13.60

⁴⁹ See below.

c13.61

We find, thus, that in the Vedic period there existed two distinct religious and cultural traditions—the strictly orthodox and Aryan tradition of the Brāhmaṇas, and, on the fringe of their society, the straggling culture of the Munis and Śramaṇas, most probably going back to pre-Vedic and pre-Aryan origins. Towards the close of the Vedic period, the two streams tended to mingle and the result was that great religious ferment from which Buddhism originated.

c13.62

Śaṅkarācārya has observed that the Vedic religion is two-fold—Pravṛtti dharma and Nivṛtti-dharma.⁵⁰ The fact of the matter is that the orthodox Aryan Vedic tradition was in the beginning essentially Pravṛtti-dharma, but later on, partly through inner evolution and more through the influence of the Muni-Śramaṇas it developed Nivṛtti-dharma as a tendency within its fold. We propose to review the development of Vedic religion from this standpoint and analyse the fateful revolution which occurred within it in the later Vedic Age and led to important consequences for the subsequent development of Indian religion and thought.

c13.63

⁵⁰ Comy. on the BG. Introduction.

c13.64

The Evolution of Vedic Society.—We may begin by reviewing briefly the evolution of Vedic society. In the early Vedic period we find the Aryans settled mainly in the north-west of India. Their geographical horizon extends from the Kubhā in the west to Gaṅgā and Yamunā in the east. It is, however, the rivers of the Punjab which mark the principal scene of their activity. Particularly important is the region later called ‘Brahmāvarta’ between the two divine rivers, Sarasvatī and Dṛṣadvatī. Later on, the region of Kuru-Pañcāla in Western U. P. became the chief centre of Aryan orthodoxy. That remained so even when the Aryans, crossing the Sadānīrā, had advanced from Kośala to Videha. As Fick has shown, even in the age of Buddha, the Brāhmaṇas looked to the north and the north-west for their inspiration. The region of Magadha was looked down upon as impure and the Licchavis were described as Vrātyas. It seems, thus, that the passage of the Aryans towards the east, particularly into the region of Bihar, was felt to be associated with the growth of heterodoxy. This harmonises well with the fact that Buddhism and Jainism both arose in this eastern area.

c13.65

The early Vedic Aryans led a life of mixed pastoral and agricultural economy. The growth of the importance of agriculture was soon reflected in the sanctity which came to be attached to the cow who was declared ‘aghnyā’.⁵¹ Society was organised in villages or ‘grāmas’ and tribes or ‘janas’ ruled by kings with the assistance of the assemblies called ‘sabhās’ and ‘samitis’. As the tribes settled down, the first territorial states or ‘janapadas’ came into existence. Side by side with this economic and political development, there was a growing division of labour in society. The rulers and the priests⁵² were the two classes that first distinguished themselves from the mass of the people called ‘Viśaḥ’. In the later Vedic period, a fourth class, the Śūdras comes into view. The predominance of the non-Aryan element in their composition can hardly be doubted.⁵³ Economically, they were the most primitive class and yet their recognition as a distinct caste is seen to come last in the evolution of Vedic social order. This suggests that their emergence represents, not a growing division of labour which led to the rise of a yet newer and more specialised functional class, but the entrance into the fold of Vedic society of a new people or community.⁵⁴ In the older period, miscegenation had been freer but by now social organisation was tending to become rigid,⁵⁵ and so, with firmer lines of social demarcation, that part of the community which was predominantly non-Aryan, particularly in its cultural traits, tended now to be segregated, and served as the general receptacle for any new non-Aryan tribes which, in the course of the expansion and settlement of the Aryans, might be socially amalgamated with them. This would also elucidate the otherwise inexplicably low status which is assigned to the Śūdras.⁵⁶ It is not necessary in this connection to appeal exclusively or even principally, to the sense of racial discrimination. The feeling of cultural difference is sufficient to account for the peculiar rules governing the status of the Śūdras. For example, it seems fairly clear that the ‘Śvapākas’ were held in abhorrence because of their custom of cooking dogs, as their name implies.⁵⁷

c13.66

⁵¹ Cf. C. H. I. I. p. 102. (A similar protest, it may be recalled, was lodged against cow-killing by Zoroaster in Iran).

c13.67

⁵² D. D. Kosambi suggests that “the Brahmans were associated with the rich pre-Aryan Indus Valley Culture”. (JBBRAS. 1946. p. 41). Cf. Piggott. op. cit. p. 286.

c13.68

⁵³ CHI. I. pp. 86, 128-9; Vedic Age, pp. 386-7, cf. Churye, Caste and Race in India, Ch. VII. Risley's theory suffers from undoubted exaggeration and fails as a general explanation of caste, but it does serve to bring out the significance of anthropometric data.

c13.69

⁵⁴ Cf. R. P. Chanda, Indo-Aryan Races, p. 36.

c13.70

⁵⁵ C. H. I. I. pp. 126f.

c13.71

⁵⁶ See P. V. Kane, History of Dharmaśāstra II pt. I pp. 33 ff.

c13.72

⁵⁷ JBBRAS. 1951. p. 183, fn. 6.

c13.73

Further, the yogic idea of invisible influences emanating from every person and tending to uplift or corrupt others according to the character of their source, implies that to every cultural community corresponds a definite spiritual environment which is not the less real for its intangibility.⁵⁸ This naturally put a premium on the primitive and tribal taboos relating to food, physical contact etc., between persons belonging to widely different cultural groups.⁵⁹ The evolution of caste thus implies that Vedic society became gradually more complex and composite. It remained, however, almost wholly rural, and, even towards the close of the period, had not advanced much beyond the tribal stage. We have to note that it was at first an expanding, pioneering society exhibiting some of the characteristics of a frontier civilisation—its sense of insecurity and robust optimism, its premium on "success", and its reliance on religion as means unto that.⁶⁰ Under such circumstances, priests and warrior-kings were naturally in the fore and led society. Towards the close of the period, however, pioneering become a difficult task involving advance into the more inaccessible regions of the north-east and those beyond the Vindhyas. This period of decelerated pioneering was bound to witness a change in social perspective, the beginning of doubt about the bounty of Nature and its Gods, of pessimistic reflection. In these changing circumstances, the more thoughtful naturally felt the force of that pessimistic weltanschauung which, as already indicated, was held and preached by the Muni-Śramaṇas.

c13.74

⁵⁸ Cf. J. H. Hutton, Caste in India. pp. 181, 183 ff.

c13.75

⁵⁹ Ib.

c13.76

⁶⁰ Cf. H. J. Laski—The American Democracy Chap. I-II, where the psychological role of an expanding economy and a frontier civilisation are lucidly indicated.

c13.77

Thus, just as Vedic society became increasingly mixed racially and culturally and changing from a vigorous colonizing and pioneering stage came to have the aspect of a complex society with an old tradition where men were beginning to doubt old ways and reflect over the meaning of life and seek new ways, Vedic religion evolved pari passu from the pre-eminence of gods and the happy co-operation of gods and men through sacrifice to a veritable “Götterdämmerung” and the jettisoning of Rite in favour of Right and Gnosis. Vedic religion advanced from pursuing the world to transcending it, from propitiating gods to seeking the Self. But this change was only beginning yet and affected only a few thoughtful persons. It came principally through the influence of the Munis, although changed material circumstances and the inner dialectic of thought prepared the way for it.

c13.78

Gods and Men.—The older portions of ṚS constitute the chief source of information for the religion of the first Aryans in India. Our knowledge is consequently fullest about the beliefs of the priestly class.⁶¹ There are traces also of a more popular religion for which, however, we must, in the main, go to the AS. The core of the priestly religion consisted in belief in many gods and a few goddesses who were worshipped, primarily for secular welfare, by means of prayer and food-offerings. Many of these gods represented the phenomena of nature.⁶² The degree of their anthropomorphization varied, and they did not possess, in general, sharply defined individualities. This has misled some scholars to recognize here a monotheism,⁶³ and others to advance the hypothesis of Henotheism or Kathenotheism.⁶⁴ Polytheism, in fact describes the situation correctly; only it has to be remembered that Vedic gods are not exclusive like the Baals,⁶⁵ or defined individuals as in the Olympian pantheon.⁶⁶ There also were Sondergötter,⁶⁷ and later some abstract deities. Pari passu, animistic beliefs held sway, as ever.⁶⁸

c13.79

⁶¹ Cf. Keith, RPV I pp. 55 ff.

c13.80

⁶² For the later conceptions of the Devatā-tattva in India see Yāska, Nirukta (Daivata-Kāṇḍa); BS. I. 3. 26-33 and

c13.81

Indra.—As already indicated the Indians of the ṚS were on the whole an active, warrior people engaged in struggle with the aborigines and among themselves but were, in the main, prosperous and contented with life. The character of the people is reflected in the tone of their great gods and, for the earlier period, in no case better than in that of Indra who is the victorious warrior, the jovial and human god, a great drinker and a mighty eater.⁶⁹ He is the most individualized and anthropomorphic of the Ṛgvedic pantheon, with the largest amount of mythology to his share.⁷⁰ He is gene-

c13.82

Śaṅkara's comy. thereon; BG VII. 20-23; YS, I. 28; Ib. II. 44. where the Tāntrika conception of Devatā is foreshadowed. Cf. Sri Aurobindo's mystic interpretation of the Vedic Devatās—Hymns to the Mystic Fire. Foreword. (Second ed. 1952). ⁶³ See Schmidt—The Origin and Growth of Religion—pp. 172 ff. esp. p. 187. For a general criticism see Karsten—The Origins of Religion, pp. 179 ff. ⁶⁴ This theory of Max Müller has now been generally rejected—see Oldenberg, RV p. 102—fn. 1; Macdonell, VM p. 10 f; Keith, RPV—I, pp. 88-9. ⁶⁵ Cf. CAH I p. 200. ⁶⁶ Cf. Gilbert Murray—Five Stages of Greek Religion, p. 64. ⁶⁷ See Oldenberg, RV pp. 60-63; Keith RPV. I p. 64. ⁶⁸ Keith, RPV. I. pp. 71 ff. ⁶⁹ Keith RPV. I. p. 243. ⁷⁰ Cf. Ib. I. p. 124ff.

c13.83

rally believed to have been a god of thunderstorm.⁷¹ Pt. K. Chaṭṭopādhyāya, however, believes that Indra was originally the god of strength and war. The name is probably Indo-European;⁷² the deity is clearly as old as the Indo-Iranian times, since the Verethraghna of the Avesta and the Vahagn of the Armenians are clearly the same as the Vṛtrahan of the ṚS.⁷³ Verethraghna is known to have been the god of victory.⁷⁴ As to the Avestan reference to the demon Indra, it occurs in fact only once, not twice, in the very late text of the Vendidad⁷⁵ and is not evidence for the state of affairs contemporaneous with the ṚS. The connection of Indra with war and might is plain in the ṚS.⁷⁶ and “Indriya” was even in early Buddhist texts, synonymous with “Bala”.⁷⁷ The transmutation of Indra into a rain-god, effected within the ṚS, appears to have been the result of two facts: lightning—Vajra—was a symbol of strength and the storm-gods—Rudra, Maruts, Apām Napāt—were considered on that account mighty. Indra clearly, being the mighty par excellence, must possess the Vajra. Further as the need of a war-god became less prominently felt, the other aspects of the war-god—Indra—were more attended to.

c13.84

⁷¹ Macdonell, VM. p. 54.

c13.85

⁷² See Jacobi (KZ. XXI.—p. 317) cf. the Celtic goddess Andraste—see Macculoch—The Rel. of the Anct. Celts pp. 41-2; John Rhys—Hibbert Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Rel. as Illustrated by Celtic Heathendom—p. 200.

c13.86

⁷³ Oldenberg, RV p. 132; RPV I. p. 133.

c13.87

⁷⁴ VM. p. 66.

c13.88

⁷⁵ See Pt. K. Chaṭṭopādhyāya in Proc. & Transac. of the Fourth O. C. (Allahabad) Vol. II. p. 14 & fn. 1.

c13.89

⁷⁶ See e.g. VM. p. 54. On the etymological connection of Indra with “manliness” see Jacobi—op. cit., pp. 316-9. On Vṛtra=Enemy see K. Chaṭṭopādhyāya op. cit. pp. 15-16.

c13.90

⁷⁷ See Chap. on the Way to Nirvāṇa.

c13.91

Surya, Agni and Bṛhaspati.—Sūrya, Agni and Bṛhaspati were other prominent gods of this period. The first two probably go back to Indo-European times.⁷⁸ Agni is closely connected with the home, with the ancestors and with sacrifice.⁷⁹ He is the priest among gods, and carried the righteous dead to their after-life abode in heaven.⁸⁰ Bṛhaspati is the god representing the power of prayer,⁸¹ and as such very important from the priestly standpoint.

c13.92

⁷⁸ Cf. the words Helios and Sol with Sūrya; and, Ignis, Agni (Icelandic), and Ugnis (Lithuanian) with Agni.

c13.93

⁷⁹ Macdonell, VM pp. 95 f.

c13.94

⁸⁰ Ib.

c13.95

⁸¹ Ib. p. 101 f.

c13.96

Varuna.—The ethical sublimity and the almost monotheistic tone of the hymns addressed to Varuna⁸² have justly attracted the attention of scholars. The nature of this god has not been, however, satisfactorily explained. Some have proposed to see in him the moon-god,⁸³ while the more generally accepted opinion regards him to have been the sky-god.⁸⁴ Pt. K. Chaṭṭopādhyāya would interpret him as the Night-sun. The equation Varuna—Ouranos is, according to him, untenable since the two words diverge in two independent features—vowel sounds, and accent.⁸⁵ Varuna, in fact, is of the same form as the Ṛgvedic Dharuṇa, Aruṇa, etc., and appears to have been a purely Indian word. Similarity of characteristics is, further, no sufficient ground for connecting Varuna with Ahur Mazda.⁸⁶ The ṚS presents the real and close associate of Varuṇa in Mitra. The association is indeed so close as to warrant the supposition that the two are but aspects of the same fundamental deity, which can only be the sun. Now Varuṇa is found associated with the night also⁸⁷ which suggests the forementioned thesis. This would explain a number of other facts. The sun-god has ever been the guardian of morals, and since night and darkness have an obvious association with sin and crime, what would be more natural than to expect Varuṇa—the sun during the night to be the chiefest of the gods of righteousness? The connection of Varuṇa with water also becomes hereby transparent, for the sun sets in the west and the Aryans first knew the ocean to have been in the West.⁸⁸ This also explains how the “Vāruṇī dik” came to mean the West in later literature.

c13.97

⁸² e.g. AS IV 16.

c13.98

⁸³ Oldenberg, RV pp. 189-90; Hillebrandt agrees. Ib. 189. fn. 2.

c13.99

⁸⁴ VM. p. 27 f; RPV. I. p. 102.

c13.100

⁸⁵ Cf. VM. p. 28; RPV. I. p. 100; Bloomfield defends the correctness of the equation vigorously—Bloomfield, RV p. 136f.

c13.101

⁸⁶ Bloomfield, RV pp. 120 ff; ORV pp. 184 ff.

c13.102

⁸⁷ Cf. VM., p. 25; RPV., I. p. 97; see RS I, 115. 4-5.

c13.103

⁸⁸ Cf. AS I. 33.2. which says plainly “Yāsāṃ rājā Varuṇo yāti madhye satyānṛte avapaśyan janānām”. The reference clearly points to the setting sun.

c13.104

Further, there seems to be no force in the view that Varuṇa was ousted by Indra towards the end of the Ṛgvedic period.⁸⁹ The comparative silence of the tenth book of the ṚS about Varuṇa must be set by the side of the fact that in the seventh book, which also contains much late material, Varuṇa is prominent. In the Brāhmaṇas Varuṇa can hardly be said to have declined. He is there the most important figure where Prāyaścitta is concerned. That his functions became narrower and better defined illustrates a frequent enough form of historical development. One may compare the case of the Greek god Poseidon.⁹⁰

c13.105

⁸⁹ Cf. VM. pp. 65-6. The view was advanced by Roth and Whitney.

c13.106

⁹⁰ See Cook-Zeus, I, p. 717 fn. 2.

c13.107

The growth of moral consciousness.—Viṣṇu is another solar deity who became prominent towards the close of Ṛgvedic Age and in the Brāhmaṇas.⁹¹ The increase in the importance of solar deities, in fact, suggests that the growth of moral consciousness represented a marked trend in the evolution of early Vedic religion.

c13.108

⁹¹ Cf. VM. p. 37.

c13.109

The growth of abstract deities.—Another trend was the growth of abstract deities. Two classes can be distinguished within these: of those gods who are simply the personifications of abstract ideas, and of those whose names denote primarily either an agent or designate some attribute.⁹² Of these the members of the first class at least are on the whole very late. The origin of Aditi is still obscure, but the hypothesis of Macdonell that it lies in the hypostatization of Aditi from such expressions as "Aditeḥ putrāḥ" appears to be plausible.⁹³ The goddess has no definite physical features; she is implored to grant freedom from guilt or sin and lent herself quite easily to mystical identifications.⁹⁴

c13.110

⁹² VM. p. 115.

c13.111

⁹³ Ib. p. 122.

c13.112

⁹⁴ Cf. VM. p. 121; RPV I. pp. 215f.

c13.113

Viśvakarman is a Seer, a priest, our father. He is the highest apparition (paramā saṃdṛk), the dhātṛ and the Vidhātṛ.⁹⁵ He seems to have represented the One God, whose conception was then being evolved, in his architectonic aspect.

c13.114

⁹⁵ RS X. 81, 82.

c13.115

Later, Viśvakarman was expressly identified with Prajāpati, who is clearly adumbrated in the ṚS as the One God—the creator of heaven and earth, the first born and the sole lord of all.⁹⁶ He embraces with his arms the whole world and all creatures.

c13.116

⁹⁶ RS. X. 121.

c13.117

Manyu, Kāma,⁹⁷ Śraddhā, Kāla, Skambha, and Prāṇa appear to have been other deified abstractions that came into being towards the end of this epoch.⁹⁸ Kāla is prominent in the Brāhmaṇas and still later in the Mbh.⁹⁹ Prāṇa too stands for the highest principle at places in the Brāhmaṇas and in the Upaniṣads.¹⁰⁰

c13.118

⁹⁷ Cf. AS. IX. 2; XIX. 52. ⁹⁸ VM. p. 120; RPV. I. p. 209. ⁹⁹ Cf. Chap. on Religious conditions in the Age of Buddha. Cf. AS XIX. 53-54. ¹⁰⁰ Set below. ¹⁰¹ VM. pp. 126ff. ¹⁰² Thus Agni repels demons by fire, but Indra performs the feat with the thunderbolt—RPV. I. 88.

c13.119

Monotheistic and Pantheistic trends.—A marked tendency in the RS is the growing perception of unity between the various gods and the consequent rise of monotheistic and, more important, pantheistic ideas. From the beginning it was clear that the gods, generally speaking, shared very much the same attributes of might, light, goodness and wisdom. Frequently pairs of gods were formed,¹⁰¹ and the attribution to the pair of the feats of either led naturally to the association of one god with exploits which were not his in the beginning. Another factor leading to the assimilation of deities was the similarity of the functions which they performed, though in their own ways.¹⁰² The close connection in nature of the elements which the gods often represented strengthened the tendency to syncretism. Further, many of the important gods were easily seen to be the representatives of either the same elements or of different forms of the same elements. Along these lines and under the stress of the peculiarly Aryan genius of philosophical speculation the idea that the various gods were but aspects and names of the same God was increasingly realized.¹⁰³

c13.120

¹⁰³ RS V. 3. 1-2; I. 164. 46; X. 114. 5; I. 89. 10; X. 121 esp. ṛc. 8: "Ye deveṣvadhi deva eka āsīt...." It may be observed that the 10th ṛc of this sūkta is probably later than the rest since there is no "padapāṭha" corresponding to it.

c13.121

But philosophical speculation followed another direction too. In Greece as well as in India philosophy began in the same way—with cosmology. The two kindred enquiries were—out of what source has the cosmos sprung? And, who fashioned it? There is implicit in the one an evolutionist, in the other a creationist attitude. The primary object of search in the first case is Primordial Matter;¹⁰⁴ in the second, it is the Primordial Person.

c13.122

¹⁰⁴ Cf. the Phusis of the early Greek cosmologists, and the Arché of Aristotle (cf. Burnet—Early Greek Phil. pp. 12-14).

c13.123

In the ṚS the first enquiry is quite minor and ever subordinate to the second. The gods are often conceived architectonically.¹⁰⁵ They partake in the fashioning of the universe after the manner of the carpenter. It is then asked "what was the wood, what the tree out of which they fashioned heaven and earth?"¹⁰⁶ At one place the answer is given that the cosmos emanated in stages from the primal Asat through the power of Brahmaṇaspati.¹⁰⁷

c13.124

¹⁰⁵ Cf. Macdonell, VM. p. 11.

c13.125

¹⁰⁶ RS X. 31. 7; Ib. 81. 2, 4.

c13.126

¹⁰⁷ RS X. 72; Cf. X. 82.

c13.127

A pantheistic answer to the query is, however, clearly to be discerned at places in the ṚS. Thus the Nāsadīya sūkta traces the universe to the Original One, and the Puruṣasūkta contains explicitly the germ of the monistic idea later elaborated in Vedānta that the sentient principle is at once the material as well as the efficient cause of the universe.

c13.128

Eschatology.—The eschatological beliefs of this period appear¹⁰⁸ to have been few and vague. The doctrine of rebirth is unknown.¹⁰⁹ At death the body is doubtless destroyed but apparently not in any final manner; the righteous dead, with the assistance of Agni, Pūṣan and Savitṛ go to the heaven of Yama.¹¹⁰ There with a perfected body they enjoy a very secularly imagined blessed existence in the company of the Fathers and the gods.¹¹¹ The wicked are either destroyed at death, or, what is perhaps more likely, fall in the subterranean abyss of darkness.¹¹² The soul is the breath—Prāṇa, Ātman, or life—Asu, or mind—manas.¹¹³ Personal identity is apparently preserved in afterlife.¹¹⁴

c13.129

¹⁰⁸ See VM. p. 165ff.

c13.130

¹⁰⁹ RPV. II. p. 570; VM. p. 166.

c13.131

¹¹⁰ RS. X. 14-18.

c13.132

¹¹¹ RS. IX. 113; I. 154 where the germs of the later idea of "Goloka" may be discerned.

c13.133

¹¹² VM. p. 169.

c13.134

¹¹³ Ib. p. 166.

c13.135

¹¹⁴ Ib.

c13.136

On the conceptions about righteousness, the information is meagre. But to the most advanced ethical speculation of the times the ideas of truth and order seem to have appeared basic to morality.¹¹⁵

c13.137

¹¹⁵ Cf. Bloomfield, RV. pp. 125-9.

c13.138

Ritual and its development.—The ritual was originally a simple affair.¹¹⁶ It consisted of the addressing of hymns of prayer by a priest to a deity accompanied by the offering of food to him. But in the course of time complexity set in. Many varieties of sacrifices were invented, and the services of several priests became necessary. Details increased and the procedure tended to be rigid. This development benefitted the priests directly, and so we notice that the chief lines of evolution during the Middle Vedic Period are the growth of ritualistic practice and associated mythology. Incidentally the beginnings of several sciences were laid, and the Brāhmaṇas became a very self-conscious and proud caste.

c13.139

¹¹⁶ On Ṛgvedic ritual cf. RPV. I. pp. 252-6.

c13.140

The nature of sacrifice.—Anthropologists have interpreted the essential nature of sacrifice diversely—as ancestor worship, as gift offering, as a fertility rite, as communion with deity etc.¹¹⁷ It seems possible to bring together some evidence in support of each of these from the Brāhmaṇas,¹¹⁸ which show the sacrifice in a very complex stage of evolution. Originally distinct strands have become by now intricately involved, and a simple and categorical answer about the nature of middle Vedic sacrifice is apt to be one-sided and misleading.

c13.141

¹¹⁷ See RPV. I. 257 ff.

c13.142

¹¹⁸ Thus the Piṇḍapitṛyajñas have an obvious connection with ancestor-worship, the practice of “Idābhakṣaṇa” clearly contains the idea of communion with deity, the Aśvamedha preserves traces of fertility rites etc.

c13.143

Classes of sacrifices.—Traditionally the Śrauta sacrifices have been divided into Haviryajñas and Soma. The former consist of Agnihotra, Darśa-Pūrṇamāsa, the Cāturmāsyas, Āgrayaṇa, animal sacrifice, Sautrāmaṇī, and the Piṇḍapitṛyajña. Soma sacrifices are also divided into seven: Agniṣṭoma, Atyagniṣṭoma, Ukthya, Ṣoḍaśī, Vājapeya, Atirātra and Āptoryāma.¹¹⁹ They are further classified into Ekāhas, Ahīnas and Sattras. Aśvamedha and Rājasūya were among the most important Soma sacrifices. Towards the end of the middle Vedic period the construction of elaborate “citis” as part of some soma sacrifices seems to have come into prominence.

c13.144

¹¹⁹ Gaut. Dh. S. VIII. 18. According to AB “Sa eṣa yajñaḥ pañcavidhognihotram darśapūrṇamāsau cāturmāsyāni paśuḥ somaḥ” (quot. Kāt. Śraut. S. Intro. p. 30. Acyutagranthamālā) cf. ŚB. II. 184.

c13.145

Agnihotra.—The nature and purpose of Agnihotra are much debated within the Brāhmaṇas. It is clearly recognized to have been at least partly intended as an aid to the rising sun.¹²⁰ It led to freedom from sin¹²¹ and was the veritable ship to heaven.¹²² The evening Agnyupasthāna was held by some to be primarily desirable for the sake of asking for gifts.¹²³ The sun was believed to enter the fire at evening,¹²⁴ and this occasioned much speculation.¹²⁵ The various elements of Agnihotra were symbolically interpreted,¹²⁶ while a Janaka is credited with having attempted to trace the working of Agnihotra in the atmosphere, heaven, earth, man and woman.¹²⁷ Agnihotra has here become an immanent objective principle which is to be philosophically comprehended.

c13.146

¹²⁰ ŚB. I. p. 178; cf. TB. I. p. 40; cf. RPV. II. p. 318.

c13.147

¹²¹ ŚB. loc. cit.

c13.148

¹²² Ib. p. 190.

c13.149

¹²³ Ib. 191 f.

c13.150

¹²⁴ Ib. p. 178.

c13.151

¹²⁵ Ib. II. 1195f.

c13.152

¹²⁶ Ib. 1174ff.

c13.153

¹²⁷ Ib. 1196-7.

c13.154

Darsa and Purnamasa.—The New-moon and Full-moon sacrifices have been recognized as the Prakṛti of all other Iṣṭis.¹²⁸ Agni and Indra are the central deities in the former, while Agni and Soma are the main deities in the latter. The peculiarity of the conjunction of Agni and Soma has been noted.¹²⁹ Some appear to have believed that the New-moon offering helped the moon to be reborn and wax.¹³⁰

c13.155

¹²⁸ Kāt. Śraut. S. Introduction, p. 34.

c13.156

¹²⁹ Oldenberg, RV p. 439 fn. 2.

c13.157

¹³⁰ ŚB. I. 96-7.

c13.158

Caturmasyas.—The seasonal character of the Cāturmāsyas is apparent. The Varuṇapraghāsa clearly brings out the connection of Varuṇa with sin offering.¹³¹ The Śunāsīrīya is evidently an agricultural rite for ploughing.¹³² At one place we are told that the Vaiśvadeva sacrifice leads to Sāyujya and Salokatā with Agni, Varuṇapraghāsa to that with Varuṇa, while Sākamedha takes one to Indra.¹³³ The meaning of the Āgrayaṇa Iṣṭi is transparent enough.

c13.159

¹³¹ RPV. II. 322.

c13.160

¹³² Ib. 323.

c13.161

¹³³ ŚB. I. 250.

c13.162

Pasu.—The animal sacrifice, though an integral part of the Soma sacrifice, may be performed independently also. The consumption of the Iḍā was doubtless important, but there is no question of the death and eating of a divinity.¹³⁴ The cruelty involved in the killing of the animal became noticed and the priests sought to mitigate it by mystical and quasi-magical operations.¹³⁵

c13.163

¹³⁴ See RPV. I. pp. 270 ff.

c13.164

¹³⁵ e.g. ŚB. I. 379, 384.

c13.165

Sautramani.—The Sutrāmaṇī though classed as a Haviryajña in sūtras is perhaps more akin to the soma sacrifices.¹³⁶ It involves the offering of animals and surā. Hillebrandt regards it as a remodelled non-Brāhmaṇical rite, which is criticized by Keith as insufficiently evidenced.¹³⁷

c13.166

¹³⁶ RPV. II. p. 352.

c13.167

¹³⁷ Ib. pp. 353 f.

c13.168

Pitryajnas.—In the case of the offerings to the dead the similarity between the domestic and the Śrauta ritual is marked.¹³⁸ Another fact clearly indicated is the difference of attitude towards the dead and the gods.

c13.169

¹³⁸ Ib. p. 431.

c13.170

Soma sacrifices.—The soma sacrifices are chiefly remarkable for their complexity which reached enormous proportions in such sacrifices as Vājapeya, Rājasūya, and Aśvamedha. Vājapeya appears to have been originally a ksatriya rite for the sake of victory in war.¹³⁹ Iṣuprāsana, Ājidhāvana, Dundubhivādana and Madhugrahasamarpaṇa are perhaps the nuclear elements. Features like the Yūpārohaṇa appear to be later additions. The Horse-sacrifice shows clear traces of solar and fertility rites.¹⁴⁰ It might have originally celebrated the advent of the spring sun, the cause of fertility.

c13.171

¹³⁹ Cf. ŚB. I. 5.19-50 where two inconsistent views are juxtaposed, that Vājapeya is for the priest as Rājasūya is for the king, and again that the former is for the king as much as for the priest, leading the king to Sāmrājya.

c13.172

¹⁴⁰ Cf. ŚB. II. 1343, 1355f; Keith, RPV. II. 346.

c13.173

The philosophy of sacrifice.—The chiefest idea which the priests repeatedly stress is that of the majesty of sacrifice. Sacrifice is indeed identified with Viṣṇu¹⁴¹ and with Prajāpati.¹⁴² It is the nave of the universe.¹⁴³ It is essential for creation, and on it the gods depend.¹⁴⁴ It is almost lauded into a super-divine cosmic principle.¹⁴⁵ Its potency is incalculable,¹⁴⁶ and through its help the sacrificer was assured not only a celestial after-life, but¹⁴⁷ safety, longevity, progeny, prosperity and fame in this life.¹⁴⁸

c13.174

¹⁴¹ TS VIII, p. 4630; TB. III, p. 1258.

c13.175

¹⁴² ŚB. I. 3. 30; TB. 1.7.1.4; AB. 7.4.1; TS. 1.6.10.

c13.176

¹⁴³ TS VIII, p. 4630; TB. III, p. 1358.

c13.177

¹⁴⁴ ŚB. I. 32; RPV. II. loc. cit.

c13.178

¹⁴⁵ ŚB. I. 656; "Yajñapuruṣa" is the final essence (Rasa) of all creation—Ṣaḍ. B., pp. 141-2.

c13.179

¹⁴⁶ Engaged in sacrifice one becomes more than man ŚB. I. 137; RPV. II. 454 ff.

c13.180

¹⁴⁷ ŚB. I. 127; II. 797.

c13.181

¹⁴⁸ ŚB. I. 116; Ib. 7; II. 1054.

c13.182

Morals and the values of life.—The fundamentally secular character of the values of the early Vedic age remains intact. One thought this world fair, and wished the next to be fairer.¹⁴⁹ Kāma, Bhoga, Bhūti—these expressed values. Life, it was felt, had much to offer that was clear, and so one imagined even celestial existence after the same manner.¹⁵⁰ It was, however, now realized that abstinence in diet, and chastity were essential for spiritual vigour.¹⁵¹ The touch of death polluted.¹⁵² Sin is darkness, death. It is sometimes described as if quasi-physical¹⁵³ or a person.¹⁵⁴ It could be inflicted on another. But it was realized to be connected with deliberate volition.¹⁵⁵ One may be sinful at heart.¹⁵⁶ Confession¹⁵⁷ and penance did good. Truth was the greatest virtue as untruth was the greatest sin.¹⁵⁸ Gods were distinguished by truth, and it was perceived how difficult the ideal was for mortals.¹⁵⁹ Eyes were regarded the great source for the knowledge of truth,¹⁶⁰ although it was frequently emphasized that the gods love what is hidden. The theory of Four Obligations had been formulated.¹⁶¹

c13.183

¹⁴⁹ "Ayaṃ vāva loko bhadrastasmādasāveva lokaḥ śreyān" (AB. I. 53). A utopian picture—ŚB. II. 1310-1.

c13.184

¹⁵⁰ TB. III. 1245; Ib. 1385ff; Ib. 1418; TA. I. 98-9; ŚB. I. 134ff; Ib. I. 567; Ib. II. 783, 788, Cf. Oldenberg, WB., p. 101, TS. VI. 2493—Tāṇd. B. I. 16.

c13.185

¹⁵¹ TB. I. 55.

c13.186

¹⁵² TS. 6. 1. 1.

c13.187

¹⁵³ Cf. TS. I. 198; TB. III. 1214; ŚB. I. 171, 178; Ib. 657-8.

c13.188

¹⁵⁴ Cf. the role of Nirṛti—ŚB. I. 577, TB. I. 291, ŚB. II. 779.

c13.189

¹⁵⁵ Cf. ŚB. I. 503.

c13.190

¹⁵⁶ ŚB. I. 500.

c13.191

¹⁵⁷ ŚB. I. 221.

c13.192

¹⁵⁸ ŚB. I. 1; TS. 2.2.2.20; ŚB. I. 2; Ib. 168, 194.

c13.193

¹⁵⁹ AB. I. 31.

c13.194

¹⁶⁰ AB. I. 31, and Sāyaṇa's quotation from the Taittirīyas; Ib. 40; ŚB. I. 37.

c13.195

¹⁶¹ ŚB. I. 102.

c13.196

Change among gods.—Ad hoc mythology has grown, but the influence of the gods is declining due to a twofold cause. on the one hand, prayers and ritual acts are increasingly regarded potent ‘en soi’; on the other, the priestly tendency to discover underlying identities has led to the clear recognition of a supreme deity, usually called Prajāpati and often given an impersonal turn by being identified with Yajña.¹⁶² Both in the Mīmāṃsā which followed the former line of thought and in the Vedānta, which evolved partly at least from out of the latter, “gods” play quite a subordinate role. The one makes the Word the source of all power,¹⁶³ the other an impersonal Absolute.

c13.197

¹⁶² Agni as all the gods—TB. I. 387; TB. III. 1352-3; the various gods are only the rays of the supreme light which is Prajāpati or Indra—ŚB. I. 178, 401; Sūrya as Parā devatā (ŚB. I. 123): Prajāpati as father and mother—ŚB. I. 566. On Prajāpati see RPV. II. 112 ff, Ranade & Belvalkar, Creative Period 343ff. The highest point of this trend is reached in a way in the dialogue of Śakalya and Yājñavalkya where a systematic attempt is made to reduce the gods to a unity—ŚB. II. 1198-9.

c13.198

¹⁶³ Cf. ŚB. I. 40: “Vāco vā idaṃ sarvam prabhavati;” ŚB. I. 158. “vāgvai Brahman”; TB. III. 1258: “Brahma vai vācaḥ paramam vyoma”; AB. I. 203 “Vāg hi Brahma”.

c13.199

“Symbolism”, Vidya, and Upasana.—It appears that alongside the growth of the practice of Agnicayana there was a great vogue of symbolic interpretation.¹⁶⁴ This was in fact the only way left to the priests along which they could offer an at least seemingly rational explanation of the ritual. It proved, however, to be a suicidal step, for, if the rite was really symbolical, was not knowledge of greater account than outward acts? If one grasped the idea behind a sacrificial act, where was the

c13.200

¹⁶⁴ ŚB. I. 654 ff; Ib. 648; II. 1157 ff; II. 1005; Ib. 1043-5, Ib. 812-3; Ib. 865-6; Ib. 879, 891, 909; Ib. 1106-10; TB. III, 1426.

First 199 of 426 passages. Read on

Linked texts (49)